Luk 1

Connery Luk
Dr. Vernon
EDUC 4991: Final Clinical Practice Seminar
4/1/2021
Claim, Evidence, Reasoning (CER) SGO Data
Studen Life as a Digestion Ocean Cancer Cells Achievement Tier
t Hunter (11/23) Acidification vs. Normal Target Score
(9/25) (1/27) Cells (3/10) (9)
AI 12 6 0 11 Met Bottom
BA 9 10 10 0 Not Met Middle
BE 12 12 12 12 Met Top
BM 12 12 12 12 Met Top
CJ 9 6 9 11 Met Middle
EK 9 10 11 12 Met Top
FK 11 10 10 12 Met Top
HH 10 12 12 12 Met Top
HA 12 12 12 12 Met Top
HO 7 12 11 10 Met Middle
HP 11 11 12 12 Met Top
L0 8 12 0 11 Met Bottom
LA 9 6 0 6 Not Met Bottom
MA 9 10 12 12 Met Top
PJr 11 12 12 12 Met Top
PJ 8 6 9 12 Met Middle
PD 8 10 9 10 Met Middle
PM 10 12 11 11 Met Top
RE 8 10 10 11 Met Middle
RN 11 10 6 12 Met Middle
TM 10 6 9 9 Met Middle
TA 7 10 9 9 Met Middle
VT 7 0 9 0 Not Met Bottom
BJ 12 10 12 6 Not Met Middle
CT 11 6 0 9 Met Bottom
DS 7 10 12 9 Met Middle
DK 8 6 9 8 Not Met Bottom
DM 10 12 12 12 Met Top
EK 10 10 12 12 Met Top
EO 8 12 12 11 Met Top
GK 8 12 12 11 Met Top
HJ 10 6 12 12 Met Middle
HD 12 11 12 12 Met Top
HH 8 10 8 6 Not Met Bottom
JL 12 12 12 12 Met Top
 Luk 2

KG 11 12 12 12 Met Top
KJ 10 0 0 0 Not Met Bottom
LO 8 0 9 8 Not Met Bottom
MV 10 12 12 12 Met Top
NJ 7 0 0 0 Not Met Bottom
OA 12 12 12 12 Met Top
RM 10 12 11 11 Met Top
STr 7 12 12 12 Met Top
ST 12 12 12 12 Met Top
SA 12 10 12 12 Met Top
TH 10 12 12 12 Met Top
VC 9 10 12 9 Met Middle
WA 8 8 0 10 Met Bottom
AG 10 12 10 12 Met Top
AE 9 0 8 11 Met Bottom
AM 9 10 10 11 Met Middle
CH 11 12 12 12 Met Top
CK 11 0 12 12 Met Middle
DT 11 11 9 10 Met Middle
DH 10 12 11 11 Met Top
JE 9 8 10 12 Met Middle
MJu 7 0 8 10 Met Bottom
MJr 10 12 12 12 Met Top
MJ 11 12 12 12 Met Top
MT 10 11 3 5 Not Met Bottom
NB 7 10 12 8 Not Met Middle
NR 8 11 10 0 Not Met Bottom
OR 10 10 10 7 Not Met Middle
SK 10 12 12 12 Met Top
SJc 8 8 10 5 Not Met Bottom
SJ 12 12 10 12 Met Top
SI 9 12 0 12 Met Bottom
SG 10 6 9 11 Met Middle
WV 8 0 10 8 Not Met Bottom
Red cells shows students that have an 8 or lower average, placing them in the bottom group.
Yellow cells show students that have a 9 or 10 average, placing them in the middle group.
Green cells show students that have an 11 or 12 average, placing them in the top group.
Students that did not turn in the assignment were given a zero.

Overall Data
Number of Percentages
 Luk 3

Students
Bottom (18) Bottom (26%)
Met Not Met Met Not Met
7 11 10.10% 15.90%
Middle (20) Middle (28.9%)
Met Not Met Met Not Met
16 4 23.10% 5.70%
Top (31) Top (45.1%)
Met Not Met Met Not Met
31 0 44.90% 0%
Total (69/100%)
Met Not Met Met Not Met
54 15 78.20% 21.80%

Final SGO Submission

Who Was Assessed and Why?

This SGO has me analyzing 69 11th grade honors biology students in their ability to use evidence
to back their claim about how cancer cells are different from normal, healthy cells. The standard I
focused on was:

HS-LS1-4. Use a model to illustrate the role of cellular division (mitosis) and differentiation in
producing and maintaining complex organisms.

I chose this standard for several reasons. First, prior to assigning the Claim, Evidence, Reasoning (CER) to
the students, they learned how cancer cells differ from normal cells via different graphics and charts. I
wanted them to be able to synthesis different reasons why cancer cells are different from normal cells
into one conclusive answer, which would be their reasoning section. Second, mitosis is a large part of
the current Storyline and I wanted the students to see what happens beyond the phases of mitosis –
why is mitosis important, and what could go wrong with it.

I chose to assess this standard using a CER because the students have been completing CERs
throughout the year, and my mentor and I believe that being able to create a claim, back it up with
evidence, and then further explain it (reasoning) is as integral to science as the scientific method itself.
Hence why we continued to assign these to the students, additionally, backing up claims with evidence
is not just a skill used in science, but in other subjects and in everyday life.
 Luk 4

CERs Explained

The data used to measure and analyze the students were several CERs they completed
throughout the year. I specifically chose the very first CER they were assigned (Life as a Hunter), the last
CERs of the first and second trimester (Digestion and Ocean Acidification), and the latest CER (Cancer
Cells vs. Normal Cells). The CERs are open-ended questions with three areas for students to fill-in (Claim,
Evidence, Reasoning). Most of the CERs were pulled from the Storylines, to maintain continuity between
what the students were learning, and how we assessed them. However, minor changes were adapted to
fit the needs of our students. I will go into more detail about this later.

Student Performance/Whole Group Data Analyzation

Student tiers were created by averaging all four of the CERs. Students that averaged an 11 or 12
were placed in the “Top” tier. Students that averaged a 9 or 10 were placed in the “Middle” tier, while
students that scores below a 9 were placed in the “Bottom” tier. Students that did not complete the
assignment were given zeros, which dramatically impacts their tiering.

When analyzing the data, certain patterns became clear. For example, of the 18 students in the
bottom tier, 11 did not meet the target score of a 9 out of 12, which is roughly 16% of the students.
Collectively, 15 students did not meet the target, which is roughly 22% of the students. Conversely, the
other 54 students or 78% of the total met the target. In the middle tier, 16 students met the target
(23.1%), while only 4 did not (5.7%); the middle group was about 29% of the students. All the students in
the top tier met the target. Due to the nature of averages (and math in general) if a student were placed
in the top group, they would need to have scored at least an 11 on all four of the CERs, so all top tiered
students would have automatically met the target.

Changes to Instruction/Looking into a Crystal Ball

As stated before, changes needed to be made when using the CERs found in the Storyline.
Firstly, the requirement for the evidence section were adjusted. For example, for the Cancer Cells vs.
Normal Cells CER, the Storyline only required three pieces of evidence, however I believed that was not
rigorous enough for the honors classes, thus I changed it to four. Secondly, the Storylines do not have a
sentence requirement, this results in some students using sentence fragments and overall, less detailed
answers. This became apparent to me for one of the CERs that was not used in the SGO. It was the first
CER I assigned the students as a student teacher, and I neglected to put the sentence requirement,
 Luk 5

assuming the students would continue the proper process that they learned from my mentor teacher –
they did not.

Changes to classrooms instructions were not made, however changes to assignment instructions
were made, as detailed above. This is because the following lessons continued to reinforce the ideas and
concepts learned previously. Looking into the future, detailed instructions need to continue (listing the
evidence, sentence requirements, etc.). I believe this assignment was fair, it tested what I was looking
for. Changes could include more differentiation for students. For example, I could anticipate top tier
students and have them use five or even six pieces of evidence, while the bottom tiered students would
only need to use three.

Final Thoughts/Opinions on Assessments

This assignment reinforced my opinion on whole group data analyzation and assessments.
Whole group data analyzation is a useful tool for teachers to see how their students are doing overall.
However, it fails to see individual students, their potential, and needs. For example, student NJ (not the
state) scored a 7 on the first CER and proceeded to not turn in any of the following CERs. Having looked
at her transcript and seen the work that she has done, I can safely say that she is a very intelligent
student. Looking specifically at her transcript and past report cards, her grade began to drop once the
pandemic started and has continued to remain low even during a new school year. Another example
could be student BJ (not the casino game). BJ has consistently been a high preforming student this entire
school year, up until the third trimester, which has pushed him to turn in work late. In the first CER he
scored a 12, then a 10, followed by a 12, and then a 6 on the latest CER. So, just looking at whole group
data, I had to say that BJ did not meet the target and is now a middle-tiered student, when in reality he
is much more than that.

Using CERs as an assessment tool reinforced my preference for open-ended assessments. It

allows students to explain their fluid thoughts, without having to pick concrete, solid answers. In the
second CER, student JL (cannot think of something witty) answered the prompt incorrectly. However,
because she was able to fully explain and justify her answer, she got full credit. She exemplified the
whole idea of this assessment: create a claim and back your answer.

Mr. Luk’s Honors Biology Week of 3/8-3/12

 Luk 6

Name:_____________ Period:____ Date:_______

Cancer Cells vs. Normal

Cells CER 
The big question: How are cancer cells
different from normal cells? 

Claim 
(Answer in 1 or 2 sentences - short and simple)

Evidence 
(What evidence are you going to use for your Reasoning? 
You must use at least 4 data sets.
Evidence should be at least 2 sentences.)
1.   
 

2.  

 
3.  

4.
 Luk 7

Reasoning
(How do your 4 pieces of evidence support your claim? Explain how
your evidence relates to the claim. Restate your evidence and claim.
Each piece of evidence/reasoning should be several sentences.)

Claim, Evidence, Reasoning (CER) Rubric

  4 3 2 1
Claim Clearly stated claim is present Claim is present Has an idea of that Unsure of what
and it directly relatres to and that answers the the claim is. the claim is.
focuses on the most question/
important features of the problem/
question/ problem/ hypothesis.
hypothesis.

Evidence There are 4 or more relevant Uses 3 pieces of Uses 2 piece of Uses 1-2 pieces
pieces of evidence pulled sufficient and relevant evidence; of evidence that
froma variety of sources to relevant evidence writer needs to may not be
support the claim. to support the ass more evidence supported by
claim. and/or provide data.
evidence froma
variety of sources.

Reasonin reasoning shows how the reasoning shows Unclear why the Writer seems to
g evidence connects to the how the evidence evidence was used not understand
claim. Incorporates connects to the (connection to the outcome of
information about the claim. claim is unclear). the
scientific principle (or May appear to be investigation.
concept) related to the random listing of
question/ problem/ data.
hypothesis.
Luk 8