TWS 6

Analysis of Student Learning Showcase Lesson (LO 1.1 & 1.2)

Student

Pre

During

Post

Loss/Gain

1. (low performer)
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8. (average performer)
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16
17.
18.
19.
20. (high performer)
21.
22.
Averages

0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
2
Absent
Absent
20% of
students
answered
preassessment
questions.

0
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
1
1
1
2
Absent
Absent
95% of students
answered duringassessment
questions.

7 out of 9
9 out of 9
9 out of 9
9 out of 9
8 out of 9
9 out of 9
9 out of 9
9 out of 9
8 out of 9
9 out of 9
9 out of 9
9 out of 9
9 out of 9
9 out of 9
9 out of 9
9 out of 9
9 out of 9
9 out of 9
9 out of 9
9 out of 9
Absent
Absent
Students scored a
class average of
87.7% on the
post-assessment.

+ 70%
+ 100%
+ 100%
+ 100%
- 80%
+ 100%
+ 100%
+ 100%
- 80%
+ 100%
+ 100%
+ 100%
+ 100%
+ 100%
+ 100%
+ 100%
+100%
+ 100%
+ 100%
+ 100%
x
x

Gain/Loss Key:
-

: showed a loss of information from pre to post assessments

+ : showed a gain of information from the pre to post assessments

0 : showed neither a gain nor loss of information from pre to post assessment
x

: showed 0s in all assessments

Overall, due to the numbers I collected, I would think this was a successful lesson.
Without the numbers in pre, during, and post assessments I am not sure I would say that this
lesson was successful. Although not every student answered a question during my preassessment, it was blatantly obvious to me and Ms. Corley which students were well prepared for
this review. Since this lesson was a review, I had the intentions that every students would have if
not gained knowledge at least would have stayed at the same level. Although these numbers
showed that not all students answered questions correctly during my pre and during assessment,
they still exceeded immensely during the post assessment which is great! This shows that
individually, students were able to work out review questions on their own individually.
However, the low performer student performed a 0 on the pre and during assessment; they still
received at 7 out of 9 on the post assessment. The average performer scored a 1 on the pre
assessment, 2 on the during assessment, and an 8 out of 9 on the post assessment. The one high
performer scored a 2 on the pre, a 2 on the during assessment, and a 9 out of 9 on the post
assessment. Students who scored a 1 or 2 on the pre assessment were able to answer the
questions that were asked before we began the review without hesitation. These students were
the first and only students to raise their hands during the pre-assessment.
The during-assessment scores were based on those students who raised their hands when
asked to answer a question during the review or before the questions was explained fully. The
average performer scored a 1 on the pre-assessment and a 2 on the during-assessment. Only one
student was not able to answer a pre-assessment or during-assessment when asked. 4 students
were able to answer more than 1 question during the during-assessment. Other students were
able to answer at least one question that was asked during the during-assessment.
The post-assessment went so much better than I had originally planned. These scored
compared to the scores for the pre-assessment and during-assessment were so much better. My
class average was an 87.5% out of 100 average.
For the gains and losses throughout this lesson, one student did not gain or lose any
knowledge due to not being able to answer anything during the pre and post-assessments. Two
students lost knowledge due to not doing as well during the post-assessment as they did in the
pre and during-assessments. This simply was due to the students rushing and making careless
errors.

Individual:
I chose three individual students to analyze their progress throughout this lesson. The
high performing student I choose was Student #20, the average performing Student was #8, and
the low performing Student was #1. It is important to understand the performance and learning
process of these three particular students because they each represent a different level of
learning. Each one of these students learns a different way and at their own pace; although one is

considered a high learner, medium learner and low learner each student is successful in their own
way. It is important to determine these factors so as teachers we are able to help each students
and meet the needs that they possess.
My low performing student scored a o on the pre-assessment, a 0 on the duringassessment, and a 7 out of 9 on the post-assessment. Although this student did not do terrible on
the post-assessment, they still could not answer questions to their best ability during the pre and
during-assessments without the help from me or other students. This student worked much better
individually and to themselves in complete silence rather than in a group effort. This student
scored the lowest on the post-assessment but I strongly feel that this is simply because he is not
putting forth the best effort possible and isnt as prepared and qualified as the other students.
My average performing student scored a 1 on the pre-assessment, a 2 on the duringassessment, and 9 out of 9 on the post-assessment. This student is exactly where they should be
with a little bit of leeway when careless errors appear. Although this student was clear prepared
due to their scores, they still were not the highest in the class when it came to getting a perfect
score on the pre-assessment, during-assessment, and post-assessment.
The high performing student scored a 2 on the pre-assessment, 2 on the duringassessment, and 9 out of 9 on the post-assessment. This student was expected to succeed further
than other students on the pre, during, and post-assessment than the other students because she is
very advanced in every subject, not just math. This student was able to help her fellow
classmates at their table along with encouraging other students to succeed further than what they
were putting forth.

Student 1:

Student 2:

Student 3: