Assessment, Data, and Analysis

Pre-Test:
During the first day of the chapter, I administered a pre- test of the unit. While many
would argue that the pre-test and the post-test need to be identical, I did not see that as beneficial.
Instead, the pre-test was a quick four question quiz consisting of 3 questions finding the area of
the new polygons and 1 question that required students to plot a rectangle in the coordinate
plane. This quiz is attached in a separate tab.
While students were not officially given a grade on this quiz, I did score the quiz so they
could see their performance and so that we could note their growth through a unit. Each problem
was worth four points, as with all my assessments this semester, making the quiz worth a total or
16 points. While in our class a 0-4 point standards based grading scale is used, I will use a
tradition percentage score to analyze data from both the pre- and post- tests. I did not hand the
pre-test back to the students until after the post- test. I decided it would be the most impactful to
let them observe their growth by comparing the pre- and post- tests.
To score each question on this pre-test, one point was given for the correct name of each
polygon, two points were given for the correct area, and one point was given for showing any
kind of work, something that is expected of them on any assessment. A big reason for this test
for me is to assess their thinking and problem solving. Much of this test was about discovering
formulas for area, not just memorizing given ones. During this pre-test, I want to see if anyone
could work through how to find the area of an unknown polygon. The results are as follows:
Student
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17

Period 1
44
56
38
31
25
31
31
31
25
50
44
31
25
13
56
63
13

Class
Period 2/3
13
13
13
44
44
38
50
25
44
6
19
13
31
6
56
38
13

Period 4
75
44
0
13
50
31
19
44
25
13
31
13
13
50
44
31
25

18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
Average

6
0
75
44
50
75
75
31
6
19
56
44
31
13
44
36.75

25
44
31
44
31
50
13
13
13
13
13
44

19
19
13
19
13
25
13
31
44
13
0
19

27.5862

25.8276

As you can see, period one had a higher average score than either of the other two classes
while the other two were relatively similar. This was expected as my first period is an enriched
class that follows the same curriculum but works faster to further extend learning and make
connections. Out of all 90 students in all classes only 14 scored higher than 50 percent with 4
students scoring the high of 75 percent.
The work on the pre-test was expected, most students could identify the given polygons
but very few could accurately find the area of that polygon. Most of the students just estimated
the area by counting the blocks inside of the polygon. No students could accurately find any sort
of equation or accurately break down one of the polygons to find the area. Some students
estimation was equal to the area but as far as I could tell was that students estimation just
happened to be the same. The one question that most students could get was question 4, which
dealt with plotting a polygon in the coordinate plane with four given vertices. This tells me that
the students do not need as much focus on this specific lesson.
Post-Test:
The post- test was given on the last day of the unit after 9 lesson days. The unit spanned
three weeks by the time all lessons were completed and a few days were taken to review, take
assessments and catch up. Also, keep in mind that thanksgiving break was right in the middle of
this unit meaning that students were completely removed from the content for 5 days. While the
post-test was taken the week right after break, we took multiple days to review material that may
have been forgotten over that time.
The post test is also attached in a separate tab in my eportfolio. The test was composed
of 9 questions, hitting on major concepts from each lesson inside of the unit. The state standards

that we were expected to hit (see Assessment Tools) were listed at the top of the test so that
students could be sure of what standard we were trying to hit during this unit.
As with all assessments in this class, each question was scored out of 4 points making the
test worth a total of 36 points. The grading of each question varied slightly, but still followed the
same grading technique as the pre-test. On problems that required students to find the area of a
polygon one point was given for the name of the shape, one point was given for the area formula
for the corresponding shape, one points was given for the correct area (with correct units) and
one point was given for showing work. Emphasis was placed on giving the area formula,
throughout the unit we spent a lot of time talking about staying organized and using their
resources. I did not expect them to memorize the are formulas at this point. The scores that are
seen will be as a percentage out of 100 even though we grade everything on a 0-4 standards
based grading scale.
Student
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26

Period 1
83
93
93
81
89
95
100
93
91
89
93
95
97
93
81
95
97
99
100
93
91
83
95
87
81
80

Class
Period 2/3
95
67
45
55
83
95
93
91
75
85
53
65
57
93
81
92
91
43
41
79
63
97
85
99
37
45

Period 4
100
85
62
65
77
75
57
75
77
87
61
47
47
85
95
85
67
43
57
75
43
71
49
75
81
79

27
28
29
30
31
32
Average

83
83
81
75
87
85
89.4063

76
87
83

47
39
59

74.1724

67.7586

As you can see from the above table, score averages increased for each class from the
pre-test despite the pre-test being much simpler. After grading, there were some things to be
excited about. First, students did an incredible job of showing their thought process through
detailed work. Second, students did a great job of not missing the questions that were basically
given to them (name, area formula, etc). While it sounds dumb to be praising that, it was
something that I was not sure if all students could achieve. Last, I continued to be impressed
with their understanding of plotting polygons on the coordinate plane. Overall, I am very
pleased with how the students did.
There were misconceptions that I saw repeated throughout student work. First, students
continued to really struggle with composite shapes. I especially disappointed to see almost of
the students put the wrong name for a composite polygon. I was careful to emphasize that any
polygon that did not fit into the criterion of one of the given polygons was a composite polygon.
Further, some students did not make any attempt to break the polygon into simple polygons to
find the area and instead just estimated the area. One last common mistake that I would address
if I were to stick around would be he students understanding of units inside a coordinate plane.
While nearly all students could accurately plot polygons on the coordinate plane, very few could
find the length of the sides of the polygon using appropriate scaling. There were all things that I
would address in the future with the class, especially before we enter the unit on finding volume.

Data Analysis

Following are various ways that I decided to analyze the data from this units assessments.

Pre-Test & Post-Test Class Comparison

100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
Pre-Test

Post-Test

This chart shows the Average test scores for each class. The average was run for all test scores,
including extreme high and low scores as I wanted to account for every student in my class.

Percent Increase
175
168.88

170
165

162.35

160
155
150
145

143.28

140
135
130

The percent increase of test scores was the value that I was most interested in analyzing for this
assessment. While period one scored an average score higher than that of both other classes,
they had the lowest percent increase. This is not a surprise, they score higher on the pre-test so it
would have been much harder for them to get as high on a percent increase as the other two
classes. It was encouraging to see how much both P2/3 and P4 increased through this unit. They
were very deserving of this, they worked their butts off this whole unit.

Following are P2/3s student assessment comparison. I chose to look at this class because they
achieved the highest percent increase of all three classes.
Student
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29

Pre-Test
13
13
13
44
44
38
50
25
44
6
19
13
31
6
56
38
13
25
44
31
44
31
50
13
13
13
13
13
44

Post-Test
95
67
45
55
83
95
93
91
75
85
53
65
57
93
81
92
91
43
41
79
63
97
85
99
37
45
76
87
83

Percent Increase
630.7692308
415.3846154
246.1538462
25
88.63636364
150
86
264
70.45454545
1316.666667
178.9473684
400
83.87096774
1450
44.64285714
142.1052632
600
72
-6.818181818
154.8387097
43.18181818
212.9032258
70
661.5384615
184.6153846
246.1538462
484.6153846
569.2307692
88.63636364

This assessment data drives home to point that learning did occur in my classroom. All but one
student had increases in their assessment scores and almost 2/3 of the class had a percent
increase of greater that 100%. There were 10 students that scored less than a 70% on this exam,
the goal that I had set for all my classes before taking this test. While these 10 students did not
meet this goal, they did make serious improvement throughout this unit.

Assessment Strengths and Weaknesses:

This assessment was as much a test of their organization and note taking abilities as it
was their understanding of the content. This could be both a strength and weakness. On one
side, every student has a chance to succeed on this test if they could focus throughout the unit,
take good notes and use those notes effectively on the assessment. Of the nine questions, the last
one was the only question that was something they have not seen before; I do believe however
that they had every tool required to solve this problem. The simplicity of this assessment was the
weakness. I would have loved to have created a test that required them to problem solve instead
of just requiring them to apply known area formulas. I did this because judging from the work
on their homework and other forms of formative assessment, I did not think that they were ready
for a test that assessed their thinking and problem solving abilities.