Assessment Data and Analysis

1) The pre-assessment for this unit was worth 15 points. It consisted

of ten questions, two of which were worth multiple points, as there
were multiple parts to the answer. After the assessment, the test was
peer graded. Student passed the tests to the person behind them
(person in the back passed test all the way forward), the test were then
graded as we went over the answers in class together. Students were
allowed to suggest answers. After grading the tests were then passed
forward where I collected them, entered them into the grade book and
filed the data.
The post-assessment for this unit was worth 130 points. It consisted of
25 multiple choice questions worth 2 points each, 5 short answer
questions worth 3 points each, 10 fill-in-the-blank questions worth 1
point each, 3 essays worth 10 point each, 3 bonus question worth 1
point each, and a connections graphic organizer chart (completed at
home and used on exam) worth 25 points. Tests were passed out and
proctored. Students could use all 90 minutes to complete the exam.
After completion of the test I collected, scored, recorded, and analyzed
data.
2) When examining the results from the tests, we find that students
scored an average of 58% on the pre-assessment and an average of
70% on the post assessment. Let it be understood that this data would
show an even greater gain between pre- and post-assessments had
their not been an external component to the post-assessment;
students were to have turned in a graphic organizer with their postassessments that was worth 25 points, many students did not turn this
in, thus lowering their scores significantly.
The following graphs show the breakdown of scores on pre- and
post assessments in total as well as by gender.
Note: In the following two graphs, series 1 represents 3rd hour
class, while series 2 represents the 4th hour class.

Post Assessment Scores

140
120
100
80
Score

60
40
20
0
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10111213141516171819202122232425262728293031
Student

Pre-Assessment Scores
16
14
12
10
Scores

8
6
4
2
0
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10111213141516171819202122232425262728293031
Students

In the next two graphs, series 1 represents males, while series 2

represents females.

Post Assessment Scores Male vs. Female

140
120
100
80
Scores

60
40
20
0
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10111213141516171819202122232425262728
Students

Pre-Assessment Scores Male vs. Female

Scores

16
14
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
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 27 28
Students

3) In both the pre- and post-assessments a female scored the highest

score, with a 93% on the pre-assessment, and a 95% on the postassessment. Males held the low scores, with 26% on the preassessment, and a 39% on the post-assessment. Again, it should be
noted that the post-assessment had an external assignment attached,
which dropped many of grades because it was not turned in. The
average score for the pre-assessment was a 57%, while it was a 69%
for the post-assessment. In all categories growth and improvement
was shown from pre- to post-assessment.
4) The results of this data show that students did indeed learn material
between pre- and post-assessments. Overall averages show and
increase in scores of 12%; this figure is not entirely indicative of the
growth, as an external assignment that many did not turn in, was

made part of the post-assessment. Indeed this external assignment

variable skews the data to the lower end of the spectrum. If not for
this variable I would speculate the growth to be closer to 25%. Either
way, student learning and growth is made evident through the data
analysis.
5) The data in this report is supported by student journals, TODs,
classroom discussion and other forms of formative assessments.
Students showed clear growth and progress in content knowledge
from the beginning of the unit to the end. Students also showed
retention of this knowledge weeks later on a cumulative midterm
assessment.
6) Strengths of the assessment plan are in the repetition of preassessment questions on the post-assessment. This repetition shows
clear growth and proof of knowledge.
The weakness of the assessment plan was the external
assignment attached to the post-assessment; this skewed the data and
actually made growth seem less than it actually was. This could have
been easily remedied by making the external assignment autonomous
and thus, not part of the post-assessment scoring.