Madelaine Miller

Multiple Assessment Project 2017

Westminster College
 Miller 1

Multiple Assessment Project

During this multiple assessment project, I worked with a student named ​Pedro​. While

working with ​Pedro​, I assessed his ability to make simple predictions and inferences, conduct a

simple investigation, relate investigation to prior experiences, suggest causes for what is

observed, and relate learning to out of school situations. In addition to observing those things, I

observed how well ​Pedro​was able to work through the scientific process. The types of

assessments I used were observation and practical assessments (such as formative and

summative assessments). Every day I filled out a paper that assessed ​Pedro​’s inquiry. I used my

observations from the day to record that information. Throughout this process, it was my job to

assess ​Pedro​’s abilities and I did most of that through observing him and asking him questions.

Student Profile

As mentioned above, my science buddy was ​Pedro​. ​Pedro​loves science and on the first

day we met, he told me he wants to be a scientist when he grows up. He was really excited about

learning about the Great Salt Lake and he was especially eager to learn about brine shrimp. His

curiosity and interest in brine shrimp is what drove our experiment. Due to the fact that ​Pedro

wants to be a scientist, he had some prior knowledge about what scientists do and how they

conduct experiments.

Pre-Test

On the pre-test I gave ​Pedro​, I asked “What is your favorite subject in school? Why?”

and ​Pedro​wrote, “Sience because I want to grow to be a scientest”. As soon as I read that, I was

excited to be working with ​Pedro​because I knew he would be invested and interested in what we

were doing. From the pre-test, I learned that ​Pedro​has never been to the Great Salt Lake but he
 Miller 2

had prior knowledge about brine shrimp living there. He also had prior knowledge about being

able to float in the Great Salt Lake. Two other questions I asked on the pre-test were, “True or

False? Fish live in the Great Salt Lake” and “True or False? The Great Salt Lake is saltier than

the ocean”. ​Pedro​answered “true” for both of them.

Assessments of Inquiry

The assessments of inquiry were used as a formative assessment throughout my time

working with ​Pedro​. At the end of each Friday we were together, I would fill out a paper to

record how ​Pedro​did that day. ​Pedro​made progress in some areas, but not in all. One area he

made progress in was relating investigation to prior experiences. During the process of creating

and executing an experiment, ​Pedro​did not relate much of what we were doing to prior

experiences or outside of school situations. When asked guiding questions, ​Pedro​was sometimes

able to connect our investigation to prior experiences and outside of school situations, but he

rarely offered that information on his own. The growth I observed came on the last day during

the poster session. A teacher asked ​Pedro​what animals ate brine shrimp and ​Pedro​answered

“birds”. He then proceeded to tell the teacher about the type of beak the bird has. It was a very

proud moment for me because that showed me ​Pedro​learned and remembered something at

Lake Day when we did the bird beak activity. He was able to relate our investigation to prior

experiences and outside of school situations that he experiences.

 Miller 3

1 = Not seen; 2= Performed satisfactorily; 3= Performed well; 4 = Proficient

Ice Lake Experiment Experiment Experiment Poster

Experiment Day Design Day Finalization Session

1. Student is able to make

simple predictions and 3 2 2 2 2 N/A
inferences based upon
observations

2. Student conducts a simple

investigation. 3 2 2 2 3 N/A

3. Student relates
investigation to prior 1 2 1 1 1 3
experiences.

4. Student suggests causes

for what is observed. 3 2 1 2 2 3

5. Student relates learning to

out of school situations. 1 2 1 1 1 2

Concerns

One concern I had while working with ​Pedro​was during our brine shrimp experiment. I

told him to record his observations on chart I wrote up for him. Unfortunately, the chart was not

as detailed as it needed to be and I did not give clear enough instructions. When writing down his

observations, ​Pedro​did not specify which jars he was writing about; when I asked him about his

observations, it seemed like he was guessing which jar he was talking about. He also mentioned

how he had seen brine shrimp hatch in Jar A (the jar with only tap water) but “they must have

died” because he couldn’t see them anymore. Knowing that brine shrimp need salt to hatch, I

asked Mrs. Dolata and Kalani what I should do. I suggested to ​Pedro​that maybe it was dust that
 Miller 4

he saw because I didn’t see any brine shrimp in Jar A. He then told me it was because they died.

I continued to reinforce the idea that maybe it was the light playing tricks on his eyes, because

brine shrimp need salt to hatch. With much persuasion and guiding, ​Pedro​seemed convinced. To

avoid this situation, I could have made a chart that was more detailed. Instead of having ​Pedro

write down his general observations, I could have had him write down his observations for each

jar. I think that one of the reasons ​Pedro​said he saw brine shrimp in Jar A was because he did

not want to get his hypothesis - that brine shrimp can hatch in any kind of water - wrong. I think

using the language “reject” and “accept” instead of “wrong” and “right” helped ​Pedro​see that

being “wrong” isn’t a bad thing.

Poster Session

Prior to the poster session, I prepped with ​Pedro​to make sure he was ready to share our

experiment with others. He did a great job at remembering our hypothesis and stating why we

rejected it. During the poster session, ​Pedro​sometimes got off track - he would talk about how

he thought the brine shrimp in the jars died because they didn't have food, rather than talking

about them hatching only in salt water. I think it threw him off a little to have the extra jar of

Great Salt Lake water displayed. Students were really interested in looking at the jar with all the

brine shrimp and asked questions about why that jar had brine shrimp in it and the others didn’t.

This led to ​
Pedro​talking about how the brine shrimp that hatched in the other jars must have

died because they didn’t have food. While this may be a correct inference, ​Pedro​had trouble

focusing on the overall point of the experiment: whether or not brine shrimp could hatch in

different types of water. I would sometimes have to guide him and tell him “now share with

these students what our hypothesis was… and if we rejected or accepted it”. ​Pedro​did a great job
 Miller 5

at sharing that information when guided, but he easily became distracted and wanted to talk

about the brine shrimp dying. I felt a little bad because there were at least two times when he said

“I got my hypothesis a little bit wrong”, so I had to reinforce the idea that we rejected our

hypothesis.

Post-Test

On the post-test, ​Pedro​did a good job at demonstrating his knowledge of the Great Salt

Lake. He provided new information about what he knew about the Great Salt Lake. He answered

both of the True/False questions the same. ​Pedro​was right that the Great Salt Lake is saltier than

the ocean, but he was incorrect in thinking that fish live in the Great Salt Lake, for it is far too

salty for them to survive. It was interesting to see ​Pedro​answer “true” to both the questions

because one would think that if the Great Salt Lake was saltier than the ocean, then fish couldn’t

live in it. It was also interesting to see how ​Pedro​’s answers connected with his hypothesis, that

brine shrimp would hatch all the different types of water because they can survive in any water.

There seems to be some similarities in that thought-process - that brine shrimp and fish can both

live in any kind of water.

Conclusion

In conclusion, this was a great experience. ​Pedro​was a great student to work with and I

learned a lot about assessing students and guiding them through the scientific process. It was

important for me to be observant and record my observations right after being with ​Pedro

because it helped me reflect on how ​Pedro​was doing and what I could do to help him. The

formative assessments I used were my assessments of inquiry and those helped me know where

Pedro​was at and if he made any progress. The summative assessment was the poster session at
 Miller 6

the end where I was able to see ​Pedro​in action sharing our findings with other students. ​Pedro

did well at the poster session and even though he needed some guiding, he did a great job sharing

our experiment with other students.