Pre-assessments

Lesson 1: Habitats Big and Small (answered -/5 questions correctly) 4/5 5/5 3/5 Absent 3/5 5/5 4/5 4/5 3/5 0/5 4/5 3/5 4/5 5/5 5/5 5/5 3/5 4/5 4/5 4/5 3/5 3/5 0/5 0/5 4/5 3/5 Lesson 6 and 7: Dissecting and Sorting Owl Pellets (turn and talk participation)

Student #

Lesson 2: Changes in Habitats (turn and talk participation)

Lesson 3: Changes in Habitats (turn and talk participation) no participation no participation

Lesson 4 and 5: Researching Food Chains (answered -/5 questions correctly) 2/5 Absent 1/5 3/5 1/5 3/5 1/5 3/5 3/5 2/5 1/5 2/5 1/5 Absent 1/5 Absent 4/5 2/5 2/5 4/5 3/5 2/5 3/5 2/5 2/5 Absent

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26

High Performer

During Assessments
Low Performer Average Performer Lesson eight did not have a pre-assessment because it was a review lesson. Lesson nine did not have a pre-assessment because it was a summative assessment.

During assessments
Lesson 2: Changes in Habitats (participation in highlighting notes and answering questions)

Lesson 1: Habitats Big and Small (deer habitat drawing)

Lesson 3: Changes in Habitats (participation for independent work)

Lesson 4 and 5: Researching Food Chain Day 1 (participation in completing research)

Lesson 6 and 7: Dissecting and Sorting Owl Pellets (participation and cooperation in dissecting)

Lesson 8: Review of Unit (participation in review)

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26

Absent

Absent Absent Absent Absent

(behavioral issues)

Post-assessments

Student #

Lesson 1: Habitats Big and Small (answered -/5 correctly) 5/5 5/5 4/5 Absent 3/5 5/5 4/5 5/5 4/5 5/5 5/5 4/5 5/5 5/5 5/5 4/5 4/5 5/5 4/5 5/5 5/5 5/5 4/5 4/5 5/5 4/5

Lesson 2: Changes in Habitats (3 changes, 2 changes, 1 change, 0 changes)

Lesson 3: Changes in Habitats (completed work =, partially completed = x, not completed = x) x x x x x x x x x x X x X

Lesson 4 and 5: Researching Food Chains Day 2 (accuracy of information % out of 100) 100% 50% 25% 100% 0% 25% 88% 100% 88% 65% 88% 0% 100% 38% 50% 100% 0% 88% 100% 50% 50% 50% 88% 25% 75% 50%

Lesson 6 and 7: Dissecting and Sorting Owl Pellets (participation)

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26

3 3 0 3 0 3 1 3 2 1 1 1 0 3 2 1 3 3 3 3 1 3 3 2 3 3

Summative Assessment Grades

Student # 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26

Grade (% out of 100) 83 92 55 92 83 92 83 67 75 100 92 83 92 92 75 83 92 92 92 100 75 92 67 36 100 92

19% 42% 55 67 75 83 12% 8% 4% 4% 100 11% 92

Summative Assessment

36

Whole Class Analysis The first three charts display pre, during, and post-assessment scores for each lesson objective. Many of the pre-assessments were created to monitor participation in turn and talks. I chose to use turn and talks during my pre-assessments for some lessons because I wanted students to be able to share their connections with the objectives of the day with other students. I was able to transition throughout the classroom during these turn and talks and listen to students ideas. I was also able to initiate discussions for students that were not participating. I used a checklist to record if a student was or was not participating. In lesson three, students were instructed to turn and talk about any changes they knew that might affect a living organisms habitat. As students discussed this, I created a list of the changes that I heard throughout the room. In lesson one, four, and five, I created a pre-assessment in which students had to answer five questions. Students answered each question in the form of true, false, or not sure. I was able to see what information the student knew about each learning objective before the lesson began. There were three students out of the whole class that were not able to answer any of the questions correctly in the pre-assessment for lesson one. Five students out of the whole class answered all the questions correctly. In lesson two, all students were given a check for participation. For lesson three, two students did not participate in the turn and talk. These two students have to be encouraged on a daily basis to participate in classroom discussions and activities. In lessons four and five, there were no students that answered zero out of five questions correctly. There were also no students that answered all questions correctly. In the during assessments that were completed each day, students completed a variety of discussions and activities. I used checklists to record participation. All students participated, if present, in all of the during assessments.

There were a variety of post-assessments used for each lesson objective as well. The postassessments were used to see how much information students could recall from the lesson. In the post-assessment for lesson one, the students took the same quiz that they took in the preassessment. Seventeen students improved from the pre-assessment to the post-assessment by answering one or more questions correctly than they did on the pre-assessment. There were seven students that neither progressed nor regressed from the pre-assessment to the postassessment. There was one student that regressed by one point. By comparing the pre-assessment and the post-assessment for lesson one, 65 percent of students progressed. For lesson two, there were fourteen students that were able to list three or more things they learned during the lesson. There were three students that did not list anything that they learned. Nine students listed one to two things that they learned during the lesson. Students completed a worksheet during lesson three that was collected and graded for completion. Thirteen students completed this worksheet. There were ten students the partially completed the worksheet. Three students did not complete the worksheet at all or did not answer more than two questions on the worksheet. In lessons four and five, students were instructed to complete a worksheet that was graded for accuracy of information. Eleven students scored a 75 percent or higher on this worksheet. There were fifteen students that scored a 65 percent or below on the assessment. Most students that scored low on this assessment did not complete the assessment or did not list the correct information on the assessment. At the end of the unit, a summative assessment was given to students. The summative assessment included the same types of information that was one the daily assessments as well as the study guide that was given at the beginning of the unit. According to the pie chart above, eleven percent of students scored a 100 on the assessment. Forty two percent of students scored a

B on the assessment. Nineteen students scored a C on the assessment. Twelve percent of students scored a D, and sixteen percent of students made a U. After I graded the summative assessment, I reviewed each students test and identified that many of the students got the definitions for consumer, producer, and decomposer confused. I assessed students throughout the unit in order to monitor student learning. I also used these assessments to reflect on each lesson in order to develop ways to improve the next lesson. I believe I had a positive impact on student learning because, according to the summative assessment; over half of the class (53 percent) scored an A or B. This indicates that over half of the class answered all questions correctly or answered all but one question correctly. Nineteen percent of the class scored a C on the test which indicated they missed three out of twelve questions correctly. I also believe that students were positively impacted by working together and remaining engaged in hands-on activities throughout the unit. Analysis of Three Students At the beginning of the school year, my cooperating teacher and I discussed and chose three students that I would observe closely throughout my student teaching experience. I observed and noted information on each of these three students throughout my student teaching experience, and I ranked them as high performer, average performer, and low performer. I chose Student #26 as my high performer. She scored a B on her summative assessment which indicates that she missed one question. As I reviewed her test, I observed that she answered a question about what a decomposer was wrong. She scored a 50 percent on her research worksheet. I believe this was due to the fact that she did not have as long to work on it because she was absent on day one of the activity. She participated in all lessons except for the

day that she was absent. She was absent on the first day of lesson four and five. I believe being absent on this day impacted her learning of the objective of lesson four and five. This may have also influenced her grade on the summative assessment because the question she missed related to the food chain objective. I believe that this student attained all but one learning objective in this unit. I believe that her absence impacted her ability to achieve this objective. I chose Student #7 as my average performer. She scored a C on her summative assessment which indicates that she answered three questions incorrectly. She did not do well on the postassessment for lesson two. She was instructed to write down three things that she learned throughout the lesson. She did list one thing that she learned, but the other two things that she listed did not pertain to the objective of the day. She did not follow instructions during this postassessment. She scored an 88 percent on her research worksheet. She completed the worksheet but did not accurately answer one question. According to this students daily assessments and summative assessment, she did not attain all of the learning objectives in this unit. I chose Student #5 as my low performer. He scored a C on the final assessment. His summative assessment score was unreliable because he looked at his neighbors test in order to answer questions. This student struggles with reading and understanding what he is reading. He also does not participate in daily lessons. He attempted the post-assessment for lesson three, but it was illegible. He did not participate in many of the class discussions and turn and talks. I partnered him with a higher level performer to complete some of the activities. He did not complete the research worksheet even when he was partnered with the higher level student. Due to the fact that this student did not do well on many of the daily pre and post assessments as well as cheated on the summative assessment, I do not believe he was able attain many of the learning objectives.