Analysis of Student Learning

Secondary Methods Assignment Cover Sheet

Title of Assignment: Analysis of Student Learning

Name: Katy Wood Date: 11/11/11

q Competency 009 – The teacher incorporates the effective use of technology to plan, organize, deliver, and evaluate instruction for all students.

q Competency 010 – The teacher monitors student performance and achievement; provides students with timely, high-quality feedback, and responds flexibly to promote learning for all students.

Justification Statement:

I wrote this artifact on November 11, 2011. This was written to compare and assess the performance of the different students of one high school Theatre Arts level one class. This artifact will be used in the future so that I will use technology to organize and evaluate instruction for all students. This artifact will be effective because it will give me the opportunity to monitor student performance and achievement. And after analyzing the data that I collect, I will be able to better my classroom and the students in it.

Analysis of Student Learning

Whole Class:

I set the passing criterion at 80% for my class because the information that they are learning, the areas of the stage, is very important knowledge they will need to be able to build their acting skills. After putting the numbers into the chart to get the score percentages of the students’ pre-assessment test, the class average was 33%. The average score after the post-assessment test was 92%. This is twelve points higher than the passing criterion, so the class average increased by fifty-nine points. Only two students scored higher than an eighty on the pre-test, and this increased to nineteen out of the twenty students after the post test. The following table represents the difference from pre-assessment to post-assessment for each student.

Looking at this table, it is easy to see that every student increased their scores from pre-assessment to post-assessment. It also shows a large increase in scores across the board. Every student, except for one, increased their score to well over 80%. Many of the students did not even get 50% correct for the pre-test, and now they have aced the post-test. The following chart breaks down the scores into points possible as well as student ethnicity.

Student	Ethnicity	Pre-Assessment Obj. 1	Test Score % (80% criterion)	Post Test Obj. 1	Test Score %
		18 points possible
1	W	0	0%	16	88%
2	W	10	55%	18	100%
3	H	0	0%	17	94%
4	W	0	0%	10	55%
5	H	2	11%	15	83%
6	H	1	5%	18	100%
7	W	5	27%	17	94%
8	W	10	55%	18	100%
9	W	4	22%	17	94%
10	W	0	0%	17	90%
11	H	10	55%	18	100%
12	W	13	72%	18	100%
13	W	2	11%	16	88%
14	W	6	33%	18	100%
15	H	18	100%	18	100%
16	H	0	0%	16	88%
17	W	13	72%	18	100%
18	W	2	11%	15	83%
19	W	6	33%	17	94%
20	AA	17	94%	18	100%

Subgroups:

The two subgroups I chose to analyze were the Hispanic students and the white students. I chose to compare these two groups because there were only six Hispanic students in the class, with all the rest but one being white. There is one African-American student in this class. The Hispanic scores were interesting to analyze next to the White scores. The White students in the class scored an average of 30% on the pre-assessment test and an average of 91% on the post-assessment test. This is an increase of sixty-one points. The Hispanic students scored an average of twenty-nine percent on the pre-assessment test and a 91% on the post-assessment test, with an increase in score of sixty-two points. I chose to focus on objective one for this comparison. I found it interesting how both groups scored almost exactly the same on the pre-test and post-test. My theory is that the information being taught for learning objective one is not ethnically based information. It revolves around theatre performers, so unless the students had any previous stage experience, they would not have known the information. Even after the instruction for learning objective one, both groups had very large, very significant number increases in their scores, leading me to believe that the information being taught was easy to comprehend. The graph below shows the increase in percentages among Whites and Hispanics.

Individuals:

The two students I chose to analyze more carefully were students number twenty and number four. I chose these two students because one of the students scored one hundred percent on both the pre-assessment and the post assessment, and the other student scored zero percent the first time and still did not pass the second time with a fifty five percent. Knowing that student number twenty has had many previous acting experiences in the past, it would make sense for this student to understand the information and score one hundred percent on both assessments. It is important to keep these students in mind because they will be able to teach other students in the class. Students generally understand content easier when a fellow classmate explains the information to them. The student that originally knew nothing about the stage during the pre-assessment still did not quite understand the information the second time around. This student is white and knows the English language very well, so the theory that his comprehension is stifled because of a language barrier is thrown out the window. This student does not participate in class very often, neither vocally or in written format like worksheets. The theory is that this student is taking a theatre class for the fine arts credit, so they are not seemingly interested in the subject matter. The solution would be to change their outlook or opinion of theatre. By making them enjoy the subject, they will become more curious and want to pursue it. The following graph displays these two students’ scores.