Health Education Finalized Goal Progress

Checking for Learning

Agawam High School 9-12th Grade
Miss. Powell

Results of Students Average Scores For 8 Technology Assessments

100
Average scores of technology assessments

80

60

40

20

0
A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z
Axis Title

Agawam Students
Key for Student Learning Gains:

Low: Below 70%

Moderate: Between 70-90%

High: 90% or higher

Final Grade Class Average

97.9

Conclusion
There are a multitude of factors that could affect the scores of the technology
assessments. For the finalized implementation plan, 26 students completed 8 technology
assessments throughout the entity of my time spent at Agawam. Each technology assessment
was different. Some were assignments that they did using technology such as poster
assignments or online simulation worksheets. Other assessments were teacher based such as
me presenting a power point and them filling in notes leaving them behind as an exit slip or
completing a quiz through an interactive power point based on the information the day before
to serve as review.
The technology grading policy was purely based off objective grading because to receive
full credit the student had to complete the entire assignment and hand it in on time. The educator
made the grading rubric, so the technology assessments were graded as the educator sought fit
whether the students believed they met all criteria or not. Students were able to go back and
make corrections after grades were handed back because many of the students have 504 and IEP
plans. If a student did not hand the assignment in on time but did complete all information late
they could receive an 80%. A student could also get a score of 80% if they handed in the
assignment on time with missing information and went and made corrections the next day.
Students were given the grading policy for each assignment through a rubric. The educator made
sure to inform students of missing work verbally and via email. The educator made sure to inform
students that they could hand the assignment back in for a better grade as well. For the students
who missed assignments because they were absent would get extended due dates and would be
emailed the day of their absence to let them know what they missed. The educator did this to
create a safe learning environment and to meet diverse needs. The technology assessment
overall served as a new way for students to complete work and to learn at a more interactive
level. As an educator, providing students with different ways of presenting and submitting
learning materials allows for increased retention, expression and skill development.

A bar graph was created to show visual proof of the improvements made. 26 students
achieved high student learning gains. Six students received a score of 100 on all eight technology
assessments. Factors that affect high improvement scores are attendance, effort, understanding
and my grading policy. Many students missed multiple days during the technology assessments
and had to make the assignments up. To keep students scores up I made sure to notify them
during class time and over email through google classroom. If at any time work was missed, I
would send them a copy of it or give it to them in person and ask them to submit it through the
classroom platform or hand it in during class time. They would receive the same amount of time
for the due date as the students who were present. The students that were absent struggled to
get their work in at times and that is why their grade may be at a moderate level. For example,
for technology assessment number five, student E took a week of extra time to hand in their work
but the quality of it was impeccable. However, because of the late due date she lost twenty points
on the assignment. Effort plays a role in high improvement because if the students is making sure
to stay on top of their work and complete it to the qualifications of the rubric they will do good.
Although some students hand in their work late and get points taken off because of it, their
quality of work is remarkable. They make sure to follow along with the rubric. I have seen
students check off boxes on the rubric which shows they’re working through it step by step
making sure they hit every point possible. If students write down everything I ask them to during
discussions, activities, exit slips and power points that go along with the technology assessments
students will reach high improvement. One student was not focused during class for technology
assessment #3. They ended up handing in the assignment with one thing filled out, so they
received a 60. I wrote comments on the sheet and places a due date up top so that when I handed
it back to her she had a choice to fix her grade or not. She completed it before the due date and
boosted her grade by 30 points bringing it to a 90. Understanding plays a role in the technology
assessment grades because the students need to understand and connect to the question that is
being asked on the technology assessments. Some assessments students worked on by
themselves. These assessments were Nearpod quizzes and online worksheets. If students didn’t
understand a question being asked or did not understand the direction on the worksheets, they
would not get a good grade because of wrong answers or incomplete submissions. My grading
policy played a role in high improvement for students learning towards the technology goal
because if they submitted it incomplete, I provided them with feedback which helped students
gain extra knowledge to complete the technology assessment fully and receive a high score. If
they submitted the assignment late, they were penalized but they were allowed a few days to
hand it in late so students had a very fair opportunity to score a relatively high score.

The average score for the final grade of the class on activators was 97.9%. This means that
there was extremely high improvement in the 10th grade class overall. All 26 students’ scores
improved, and students worked much harder on getting their assignments in on time after
building a rapport with them. On one of my student surveys a student thanked me for being
understanding and for always helping them achieve in the classroom. Agawam’s high academic
achievements showed through the students work. A lot of students were able to obtain a score
of 100 on the first attempt. If I was to administer the technology assessments again, I would make
the technology assessment more interactive. For some of the assessments they were on Nearpod
but they had to get transferred over to paper because of the reports being erased after a certain
session time. To fix this issue, I would create two Power Points for each class to make sure their
reports stay on the Nearpod itself to decrease less confusion and wait time. I would also make
the some of the assessments more challenging. Students quality of work was very strong, and I
believe they could have been challenged even more. Most of their grades were affected by
absences. To make them more challenging I would make some of the assignments later in the
unit so students had obtained more information on the topic, so the rubric could be more in
depth and it would take more time and effort to complete. Another way to make them more
challenging would be to incorporate more individual work. A lot of the exit slips were teacher led
and did not make the students advocate for their grade. If students must look up answers on
their own with the resources provided, as an educator I am setting high expectation by holding
them accountable for their own submissions of work. I am also setting high expectations by giving
them the challenge of finding the correct information from the correct resources.