MAT 729 Implementation

Plan

Adan Rodriguez
USM
MAT 729

Why do diverse students score lower in

assessments than their counterparts?
Diverse students are widely known to score lower in high stake assessments
and standardized testing. I conducted an analysis of USD 475 Geary County
Schools Report Card provided by the Kansas State Department of Education.
The data examined confirmed that diverse students in Geary County are also
scoring lower in key examinations compared to White non-Hispanic students.
The group with the largest achievement gap in reading were African American
students. A total of 22 percent of all African American students were either in
the academic warning or approaching standard category. Meaning that these
students failed to have the necessary basic understanding for their grade level.
Hispanic students had the second largest learning gap with 17.2 percent of
students not meeting grade level assessment for assessed grades. White nonHispanic students percentage of not meeting grade level standard was 12.6
percent. Significantly less than other students from different ethnicities.

Continued
The achievement gap widened when other categories of diverse students were
included for example students with Learning Disabilities (LDs), English Language
Learner (ELL), Economically Disadvantaged (EDs), and migrant students (MS).
The percentages ranged from 40.7 for LDs to 19.5 for EDs. ELL students also had
a high rate of failure, 34.4 percent did not meet the standard. Math scores for
White non-Hispanic students for 2013 were 24.1 percent (not meeting standard).
Thirty-two percent of Hispanic students also did not meet the standard. African
American students performed significantly worse with a percentage of 41.6
percent. The other diverse categories at USD 475 surprised with significant
higher passing rates when compared to state wide students. ED students only
had a 13.8 percent failure rate, state wide students failure rates were 27.8
percent. The other surprising group was ELL students, when compared to state
wide students. ELL students only had 15.2 failure rate compared to 32.9 percent
for their counterparts state wide.

Implementation plan
My implementation plan included providing diverse students with before
school and after school sessions to prepare for standardized testing or
high stake assessment. By immersing students in these sessions it
will better prepare them to take the state assessment. During sessions
the environment of state testing will be mimicked. I want to ensure the
first time students face the environment of state testing is not during
the actual exam. I will also provide an opportunity for students to work
in small groups on similar reading passages to expose them to
vocabulary that may be unfamiliar. The largest benefit of attending
sessions will be obtaining the necessary exposure to familiarize with
process of state assessments and what it entails for students.

Interviews
For the interviews I had a wide range of questions about my
implementation plan. I focused on these top questions.
Is state assessments a necessity in the classroom?
How do you prepare diverse students for state assessments?
Is Affective Assessment a useable form of assessment?
Is there bias in state assessments that can be eliminated?

Interviews

4th Grade Teacher

- State assessments are a value
to both students and educators
providing a form of evaluation
to both.
- Prepares students for testing
by conducting pretests for all
students.
- Affective assessment has no
value added to when taking
state assessment.
- Bias is something that is very
difficult to eliminate.

6th Grade Special Ed Teacher

- State testing are often
misconstrued by educators,
while important they are only a
part of a students education.
- Using students IEPs to provide
necessary adjustments.
-You need to evaluate students
holistically. Affective
assessment is vital to
accomplish a holistic approach.
-Bias is often blamed for
students low scores.

HS Chemistry Teacher
- State assessment help
educators adjust teaching
method if necessary.
- Providing students additional
help before school as necessary
but nothing specifically for
state testing.
-Affective assessment is at the
bottom of assessment forms
used.
- Bias is something that can
reduce but not complete
eliminated. It is reduced by
proactive educators.

Assistant Principle
- State assessments are a form
of accountability. For both
students and educators.
-Providing all students a safe
environment to learn in.
- Educators are encouraged to
use all forms of assessments.
-Reducing bias is the
responsibility of all
administrative personnel and
educators.

Conclusion
My implementation project was important to me and my future
as an educator. After the military I want to teach high risk
students which many times are diverse students. This
assignment allowed me to bring my research project to
experienced educators and obtain responses from educators
currently in the field. They are in the front line of educating our
future doctors, lawyers, judges, and educators. Allowing all
students to have an equal opportunity to grow and learn is what
all educators should strive for. I just hope to have to the
opportunity to give my future students what they deserve. While
this action research focused on diverse students all students
require engaged educators.