STEP Standard 6 - Analysis of Student Learning

Post-Test Data: Whole Class - Once you have assessed your students’ learning on the topic, collect and
analyze the post-test data to determine the effectiveness of your instruction and assessment.
Number of Students Number of Students
Pre-Test Post-Test
Highly Proficient
(90%-100%) 1 2

Proficient
(80%-89%) 2 9

Partially
Proficient
5 1
(70%-79%)

Minimally
Proficient
6 2
(69% and below)

Post-Test Analysis: Whole Class

There was an obvious incline in students who scored at 80% or higher on the post-test versus the
pretest. 11 students scored below proficient on the pretest (below 80%), while only three did so
on the post test. There was a definite rise in the success rate of students from pre to post test.
Although highly proficient only gained one more student from pre to post test, the number of
students who rated proficient on the post test is 450% higher than the pretest. That seems like a
successful lesson was taught and learned. One question that almost everyone answered incorrectly
on the pretest was answered correctly by all but one student on the post test. That is proof of
learning.
Students were given the pretest to “show what they know”. After interpreting the results, a course
of instruction was decided upon. Instead of opening the lesson with two digit by one digit
multiplication, the students were first asked to review basic math facts. The group struggled in
this area at the beginning. After building a solid foundation, the students could then move on to
multi-digit multiplication. The post test questions that most of them answered correctly included
questions that they generally answered incorrectly on the pretest. Because of the number of
questions regarding this concept, the chances of them getting that many correct without knowing
the operations is highly unlikely.

Post-Assessment Analysis: Subgroup Selection

The subgroup chosen was students identified as being at poverty level. This subgroup was chosen
because of the great strides that each individual student has made. It is remarkable, and worth
documenting.
Post-Assessment Data: Subgroup (Gender, ELL population, Gifted, students on IEPs or 504s, etc.)

Number of Students Number of Students

Pre-Test Post-Test
Highly Proficient
(90%-100%) 0 0

Proficient
(80%-89%) 0 3

Partially
Proficient
1 1
(70%-79%)

Minimally
Proficient
5 2
(69% and below)

Post-Assessment Analysis: Subgroup

The interpretation is that students learned much over the course of this lesson. Five began the
lesson in the minimally proficient range, and only two tested there on the post test. However, the
two that scored minimally proficient on the post test, improved their score greatly. One student
scored a 10% on the pretest but improved to a 60% on the post test. The other student, had an
original score of 20% but improved to a score of 65%. That means they answered only 4
questions correctly on the pretest, but 13 correctly on the post test. It was a great improvement to
witness. Most of the students in the subgroup truly understand what “carrying a number” means
now. They understand the order of operations much better than before the lesson began.

The six students in the subgroup improved greatly from the pretest to the post test. However,
three are still partially proficient or below. The issue still revolves around basic math facts. For
the tests, students were given the opportunity to use a multiplication chart. This greatly improved
most students’ ability to solve the problems. Unfortunately, two of the students in the subgroup
have not completely grasped the concept of multiplication, and therefore struggled on both tests.
The other student who struggled on the test completely shut down after working on the post test
for about 20 minutes. The questions this student answered were almost all correct, but the student
did not complete the test. For the sake of good data collection, that student’s score has been taken
into account, but the fact that the test took an emotional toll on him was not. In future days, the
students will have one-on-one instructional time each day, and will be given the opportunity to
retake the test at the end of the week.

Post-Assessment Data: Remainder of Class

Number of Students Number of Students

Pre-Test Post-Test
Highly Proficient
(90%-100%) 1 2

Proficient
(80%-89%) 2 6

Partially
Proficient
4 0
(70%-79%)

Minimally
Proficient
1 0
(69% and below)

Post-Assessment Analysis: Subgroup and Remainder of Class

The subgroup managed to improve by a much bigger margin than the remainder of the class. The
average improvement for the subgroup was 20%, while the remainder of the class average was
7%. An interesting epiphany came when a student was working out a problem, and said aloud, “I
can use the turtle head method!” That student scored an 80% on the post test, versus a 50% on the
pretest.

The next step is division. The students have learned how to multiply and must now learn the
inverse operation. To build on the previous content, the objective will be that students will be able
to divide a multi digit dividend by a single digit divisor and find the quotient. By using the
success criteria steps (divide, multiply, subtract, check, bring it down), each student should be
successful at completing this objective.