STEP Standard 6 - Analysis of Student Learning

Post-Test Data: Whole Class - Once you have assessed your students’ learning on the topic, collect and
analyze the post-test data to determine the effectiveness of your instruction and assessment.
Number of Students Number of Students
Pre-Test Post-Test
Highly Proficient
(90%-100%) 5 14

Proficient
(80%-89%) 5 #

Partially
Proficient
2 2
(70%-79%)

Minimally
Proficient
11 7
(69% and below)

Post-Test Analysis: Whole Class

The majority of the class improved with most aspects of the test. They all improved on L blend
words and high frequency words. They still have trouble with story sequencing and inflectional s.

Based on the whole class post-test data, write one paragraph analyzing the effectiveness of your
instruction and assessment and effect on student learning. Cite examples and provide evidence of
student learning to support this analysis.
I believe the effectiveness of my instruction was pretty good. Overall the scores improved drastically.
There is still a small group that didn’t quite grasp some of the concepts. By reviewing the basic concepts
every single day, most of the class were able to remember what they learned and apply it to the test. The
majority of them were able to recall the vocabulary word meanings. They were all able to identify at least
one L blend word. Most of them were able to identify the high frequency words and plural nouns. A few
of them got lost with the story sequencing and circled the wrong answers. 3 students forgot where a
period goes and 4 students were not able to identify plural nouns.
Post-Assessment Analysis: Subgroup Selection GIRLS

Using the information obtained in Standard 1, select one subgroup population to focus on for this
analysis. Provide a brief rationale for your selection (1-3 sentences).
I am choosing the girls because we only have one student with an IEP, no Ell’s and no
gifted.
Post-Assessment Data: Subgroup (Gender, ELL population, Gifted, students on IEPs or 504s, etc.)

Number of Students Number of Students

Pre-Test Post-Test
Highly Proficient
(90%-100%) 3 8

Proficient
(80%-89%) 2 #

Partially
Proficient
# 1
(70%-79%)

Minimally
Proficient
7 3
(69% and below)

Post-Assessment Analysis: Subgroup

Based on your analysis of the subgroup post-test data, what is your interpretation of the student
learning? Cite examples and provide evidence of student learning that helped you come to this
conclusion.
The majority of the girls improved with their test results and learning of the concepts. There were 3
that did not rise out of the minimally proficient and there were 4 that did rise out of it. There were 5
more girls that progressed into the highly proficient range.
Based on the subgroup class post-test data, write one paragraph analyzing the effectiveness of
your instruction and assessment and effect on student learning. If there is a student or group of
students who have not mastered the objectives, discuss what you will do in future days to aid
students' understanding with respect to the unit’s objectives. Cite examples and provide evidence
of student misconceptions to support this analysis.
As a whole group, the girls learned and applied their knowledge. The majority of them remembered
the vocab words, high frequency words, plural nouns, grammar and story sequencing. There were
still 3 girls stuck on several concepts especially the L blend words, high frequency words and plural
nouns. In the future I will continue to work with these girls on these concepts during our small
group intervention time on Wednesday and Fridays. The lower 3 girls are needing additional help
understanding L blends and identifying high frequency words. I suspect a couple of these girls have
learning disabilities so the co teacher and I are in the process of documenting every piece of work
and assessment they hand in. We are keeping track of observational assessments and documenting
those as well.
Post-Assessment Data: Remainder of Class
BOYS

Number of Students Number of Students

Pre-Test Post-Test
Highly Proficient
(90%-100%) 2 5

Proficient 2 2
(80%-89%)
Partially
Proficient
1 #
(70%-79%)

Minimally
Proficient
6 4
(69% and below)

Post-Assessment Analysis: Subgroup and Remainder of Class

Analyze the data of the subgroup as compared to the remainder of the class. In one paragraph,
describe the effectiveness of your instruction for this unit using the findings from your analysis.

The boys also progressed with their learning as compared to the girls. There were more boys that
stayed in the minimally proficient zone for pre and post test than girls. There were more girls that
got highly proficient in the pre and post test as compared to boys. As a whole class, the group
progressed with their learning. The students who were stuck in the minimal zone mainly had
problems with L blends, plural nouns and high frequency words. Most of them knew the
vocabulary words and more than half had correct story sequence. I believe that the boys scored
lower than the girls because it is harder for them to sit still and learn in first grade. They are more
prone to rush through their work and thus score lower on assessments.
Based on your analysis of student learning, discuss the next steps for instruction, including an
objective that would build upon the content taught in this unit of instruction.
The next steps for instruction are to help the lower scoring students understand the concepts through small
group instruction offered on Wednesdays and Fridays. There are also 2 students in the class that we are
documenting. We suspect there could be learning disabilities involved. We are assessing them throughout
the week through observations, informal and formal assessments. We keep all their work in files and will
start a CST process with them in 6 weeks.
For the rest of the class, my objective would be to continue working on L blend words and progress to s
and r blends. They will be able to read and identify consonant blend words with 70 percent accuracy
within the next 3 weeks.