You are on page 1of 20

TWS 6: Analysis of Student Learning

Student Teaching
Channa Griham


During my showcase mini-unit on the regions of South Carolina, I was able to use my
pre-, during and post- assessments to monitor the progress of my students. There are 20 students
in my class and on the chart that follows one can see each individual students progress
throughout my showcase mini-unit. The performance scale is based on 0 to 3, with 3 being the
highest comprehension possible for the lesson and 0 being the lowest. In order to receive a 3,
students needed to score between an 80% and 100%, to receive a 2, students needed to score
between a 50% and 79%, to score a 1 students needed to score between a 30% and 49% and to
receive a 0, students scored between 0% and 29%. In order to calculate the pre, during and post
assessment scores, students scores for each assessment were averaged together to get the overall
score for each type of assessment. In this table, I have also highlighted my top performer,
average performer and my lowest performer during this showcase mini-unit.
The pre-assessment of my lesson consisted of data collected during a think-pair-share
discussion on what they already knew about the regions of South Carolina that was held before
the start of the lesson. As the students were answering questions, I kept anecdotal notes of the
students prior knowledge. For my during lesson assessment, students were graded on their
knowledge and their understanding of the regions by completing exit slips and weekly reviews
on the topics covered. As a closure to each lesson, students were to answer the essential question
that was introduced at the beginning of the lesson. These exit slips were collected and analyzed
to help guide future instruction. Weekly reviews were also a form of during assessment that was
used with the students. Weekly reviews were given out at the beginning of the week and
collected at the end. Students were only allowed to use their notes and knowledge gained during
lessons. The post-assessment results are the students scores on the summative quiz. Students
were graded on their answers given on the quiz and this information was used to assess the
students growth throughout the unit.

All of the scores recorded were collected during my mini unit on the regions of South
Carolina. The learning objectives for my unit were as followed: When given information on the
six geographical land regions of South Carolina, students will be able to name physical and
human features of each region with 80% accuracy, students will be able to identify and label the
six geographical land regions of South Carolina on a blank map with 90% accuracy, when
learning about the major cities of South Carolina, students will be able to analyze and summarize
their importance to South Carolina with 90% accuracy, and when learning about the major river
systems of South Carolina, students will be able to summarize their geographical location and
physical characteristics with 90% accuracy. All of the assessments given to my students were
aligned with these objectives. Based on my post-assessment scores, 60% of the students scored
3, 35% of the students scored a 2, and only one student scored a 1. Results of the assessments are
listed in the chart below.



During Assessment


Pre/Post Gain

















After reviewing the data from my pre-assessment, I analyzed that many of the students
had prior knowledge on the regions of South Carolina. During the pre-assessment, the students
were actively engaged during the think-pair-share activity and participated during the whole
group discussion. As we progressed through the unit, I noticed that a majority of my students
were engaged in their learning. By reviewing the data, many of the students were showing
progress as we went on. This correlates with the gain observed through the scores above. In the
beginning, I expected the pre-assessment scores to be low due to the high number of students
who were below grade level in the class. Many students received either a 0 or 1 during the preassessment due to the lack of prior knowledge on the regions of South Carolina. However, there
were a few students who scored a 2 on the pre-assessment because they showed knowledge on
the concept and were able to answer the questions pertaining to the regions of South Carolina.
As the mini-unit came to an end, I noticed major growth in all of my students. Data
collected from my post-assessment showed significant knowledge gain from my students.
Students who received a 1 during my pre assessment showed their gain by increasing to either a
2 or 3. The post-assessments consisted of 10 questions each on the information learned during
the mini-unit. Also, as a post-assessment, students had to label the six regions on a geographical
map. If the students missed between 1 and 2, they received a 3, if the students missed 3 or 4
questions they received a 2 and if the students missed more than 5 they received a 1. All of these
scores were averaged together to get their overall score for the post-assessments. All 20 students
improved on their assessments as the unit went on. Many of my students were able to meet the
accuracy level of 80%, but six students were not able to accomplish this. From my data
collected, I was able to see the gain in all of my students and I was very satisfied with their gain
of new knowledge from this mini-unit.

Individual Data:




1- High Performer


6- Low Performer

During this mini-unit, I had one student who was my high performer, one student who
was an average performer and also a student who was my low performer. My high performer
during this unit showed great progress throughout the lessons. In the pre assessment, this student
showed great prior knowledge on the regions of South Carolina. When recording this students
responses, she was able to name a couple of the regions and also was able to identify which
region we lived in. This student was actively engaged in all of the discussions and her
participation level was very high during the implementation of the lessons. This student was the
one who would always answer the questions and was right the majority of the time. In the future,
I would offer this student additional challenges to further her thinking. When given her post
assessment, this student was able to answer all of the questions correctly and used great detail in
her descriptions. This student also reached my degree of accuracy for mastering the learning
My average performing student showed some prior knowledge in the beginning of the
lesson. When the class was having the discussion, this student would also answer many of the
questions that I would ask but he was very vague in his answers. When this student would
answer, his answers did not have much detail and you could tell that he had some prior
knowledge in the topic but not a whole lot. At the beginning of the mini-unit this student scored
a 2 on the pre assessment and by the end he had received a 3 on the post assessment. This student
seemed to benefit from the visuals and hands on activities used in my lessons. He was able to
answer all of the questions correctly on the quiz and was able to verbally discuss his reasoning
during whole group discussions. This student showed gain throughout the lessons in this miniunit and was able to master the concept by the conclusion of the unit.
My lower performing student was one of the students who did not participate much
during my showcase mini-unit. When this student was asked to discuss with his partner during

the pre-assessment, he was hesitant to answer and was not able to show much prior knowledge
on the concept when he did answer. Due to this lack of knowledge, the student received a 0 on
his pre assessment. When called on, this student was reluctant to answer and would usually look
at me for the answers. I would usually have to refer to another student to help him out. This let
me know that this student did not have any prior knowledge on the concept. On his during
assessments, the student scored higher than he did on the pre-assessment. When completing
during assessments, students were able to use their notes to help them answer the questions. I
believe that since he was able to use his notes, he scored higher on his during assessment. The
student did not take very detailed notes and I believe this resulted in him receiving a low score
on his weekly reviews, but just even to meet the criteria for a score of 2. This also let me know
that the student was not very attentive during the implementation of the lessons. This does not
surprise me due to the fact that this student is one of the lowest students in the class and is being
referred for resource. When reviewing his post-assessment scores, his scores dropped. Without
the use of his notes and other resources, this student was not able to show his understanding of
the concept. Through his assessment scores throughout the unit, I was able to see that this student
needs further assistance on the regions of South Carolina. I believe this student will benefit from
small group instruction on the concept or individual help from me to help him understand the
Overall, the three individual students gained some knowledge from this mini-unit. Some
of the students did not gain a lot of knowledge, but others were able to gain valuable information
from the lessons. Each of the students was able to show what they learned from the lesson and
their progress throughout the unit. All three of these students raised their pre-assessment scores
by at least one point to their post-assessment scores. Two of my students were able to reach a 3,
which is the highest understanding of the concept and my lowest performing student ended on a
1, which is on a level where they will need further instruction.
The following are examples of my three individual students work. The first example
represents my high performer, the second example represents my average performer and the final
example represents work from my low performer. Below is an example of each assessment that
the students were given during this mini-unit. Each students work is in the respective order as
listed above.

High Performer

Average Performer

Low Performer