6. Analysis of Student LearningShowcase Lesson(s) (LO 1.

1) (APS 3)
TWS Standard
The teacher uses assessment data to profile student learning and communicate information
about student progress and achievement.

Date Lesson Number Lesson Title

September 6 Lesson 1 Predictions

September 7 Lesson 2 Higher Level Predictions

September 8 Lesson 3 Retelling a Story (EEDA)

September 9 Lesson 4 Partner Predictions (SSCA)

September 12 Lesson 5 Partner Retell

Lesson 1: Predictions
A. Whole Class
a. Assessment Table

Pre- During Post

1 88 93 95
2 80 85 95
3 75 75 80
4 90 95 100
5 85 90 90
6 90 95 95
7 90 95 98
8 95 95 100
9 70 85 90
10 95 95 100
11 A A A
12 93 90 93
13 65 78 85
14 78 88 95
15 88 90 100
16 75 85 90
17 73 73 78
18 90 98 100
19 98 95 100
20 60 65 75
21 A A A
22 90 90 95
AVG 83.4 87.75 92.7

A = Absent
Red = Low Achieving Student
Blue = Average Achieving Student
Green = Above Average Student
 b. Graphical Summary

Students
94

92

90

88

86
Students
84

82

80

78
Pre- During Post-

Overall, students did a great job on this lesson. Students did better than expected on the pre-
assessment. Students read an excerpt and predicted what they thought would happen next. They
were assessed on their knowledge of the word predict. During the lesson the students were
assessed on their ability to create a prediction for the read-aloud. Many of the students had
forgotten what the word prediction meant. Once they were reminded of what a prediction was,
their scores went up. For the post-assessment, the students read individually to create a picture of
their prediction and explain if their prediction was correct or incorrect. I believe the scores
soared even higher because the students were able to explain their ideas in a different way rather
than just writing them down.

B. Individuals
a. Above average: This student scored 95% accuracy on the pre-assessment. This
shows me that she understands what a prediction is. For the during-assessment their
score remained the same. I believe this happened because she was applying the same
amount of effort as the pre-assessment. The post-assessment showed the amount of
work they could truly produce. They scored 100% accuracy when they drew the
picture of the prediction because they included details from the story to back up their
ideas and gave a fully detailed explanation of why their prediction was correct or
incorrect.
b. Average: This student had a gain with each assessment. Their pre-assessment started
out with 80% accuracy. I felt that the student understood what a prediction was, but
did not fully explain what their prediction actually was. The during-assessment was
scored with 85% accuracy. They began to give a little more detail to their prediction,
but not the amount that is expected of a third grader. The post assessment was scored
with 95% accuracy. I believe the student felt more comfortable with explaining their
thoughts through drawing than with writing. They drew more details than they had
been writing in the previous assessments.
c. Below Average: This student had the same amount of gain in each assessment as the
average achieving student. The reason is also the same. The student scored 60%
accuracy on their pre-assessment, 65% accuracy on their during-assessment, and for
their post assessment they scored 75% accuracy. Although the scores are not high, the
student did learn from the lesson. In the beginning I was not sure they understood
what a prediction was. By the end of the lesson, I felt confident that the student
understood what a prediction was. The main problem was the student was not
producing the amount of details they should have been producing as a third grader.
Lesson 2: Higher Level Predictions
A. Whole Class
a. Assessment Table

Pre- During Post

1 90 98 100
2 90 90 93
3 88 85 90
4 90 98 100
5 88 90 95
6 A A A
7 80 78 80
8 98 98 100
9 80 83 88
10 78 80 85
11 A A A
12 80 83 88
13 75 80 85
14 88 90 90
15 78 83 83
16 90 93 98
17 90 90 95
18 88 90 95
19 85 88 88
20 75 80 75
21 A A A
22 90 90 95
AVG 85.315 87.736 90.684

A = Absent
Red = Low Achieving Student
Blue = Average Achieving Student
Green = Above Average Student
 b. Graphical Summary

Students
92
91
90
89
88
87
Students
86
85
84
83
82
Pre During Post

The students did well on this lesson. The pre-assessment had a better score than the previous
lesson because at this point the students should know what a prediction is. The previous lesson
introduced predictions and reviewed what they are. This lesson is focusing on digging for details
to make better predictions. Overall, the students scores increased throughout the lesson. There
were some students that did not make an increasing score with each assessment, but with the
class average the entire class made progress.

B. Individuals
a. Above average: This student had an increasing gain between the pre-assessment
and the post-assessment. They scored 98% accuracy on both their pre-assessment
and their during-assessment. The increase was with the post-assessment. They
scored 100% accuracy. This student did well on the previous lesson and had
shown that they understood predictions. This lesson just added to her prior
knowledge of predictions.
b. Average: This student also scored the same on their pre-assessment and during-
assessment. They scored 90% accuracy on both. The students score increased to
93% accuracy for the post-assessment. This students score went down from the
previous lesson. They scored 95% accuracy on the previous lessons post-
assessment. That points back to my thoughts that they were able to produce more
details from the story in drawing than in writing alone.
c. Below average: This student scored 75% accuracy on the pre-assessment and the
post-assessment. This shows me that there were no major gains during the lesson.
They did score 85% accuracy on the during-assessment. The difference in scores
could be caused by several things. The student could have done better because
they had an example modeled directly before they did the work. The student could
have also done well for the during-assessment because it was during a read-aloud,
rather than the student reading.
Lesson 3: Retelling a Story (EEDA)
A. Whole Class
a. Assessment Table

Pre- During Post

1 80 80 90
2 80 80 90
3 70 70 80
4 80 90 90
5 80 80 90
6 70 70 70
7 70 70 80
8 90 90 100
9 80 90 90
10 60 70 60
11 A A A
12 70 80 70
13 60 60 80
14 A A A
15 80 80 80
16 80 90 90
17 70 80 80
18 60 70 80
19 80 80 80
20 50 60 70
21 A A A
22 80 80 90
AVG 73.157 77.368 82.105

A = Absent
Red = Low Achieving Student
Blue = Average Achieving Student
Green = Above Average Student
 b. Graphical Summary

Student
84

82

80

78

76
Student
74

72

70

68
Pre During Post

This was the first time the students revisited the idea of retelling a story since second grade. The
students overall scores steadily increased, but were not as high as previous lessons. The average
pre-assessment scores for the past two lessons were in the 80s, whereas the average pre-
assessment score for this lesson was 73. From the graph and the chart, I can see that the students
gained knowledge from the lesson. Looking ahead, I can see that it is a good idea to have another
lesson visiting this subject again.

B. Individuals
a. Above average: This student scored 90% accuracy on the pre-assessment and the
during-assessment. This student was also the only student to score 100% accuracy
on the post-assessment. This shows me that the student understands how to
correctly retell a story according to the third grade standards.
b. Average: This student scored 80% accuracy on the pre-assessment and the
during-assessment. This shows me that the student understands retell, but did not
include the amount of details needed. The student scored 90% accuracy on the
post-assessment. This could be caused by the fact it was based off the read-aloud
in comparison to individual reading.
c. Below average: This student scored the lowest on the pre-assessment with 50%
accuracy. This shows me that the student is not familiar with retelling main events
of a story. The student scored 60% accuracy on the during-assessment and 70%
accuracy on the post-assessment. This shows that the student did gain knowledge
in the subject of retell.
Lesson 4: Partner Predictions (SSCA)
A. Whole Class
a. Assessment Table

Pre- During Post

1 90 90 95
2 95 90 95
3 80 80 85
4 90 90 95
5 80 80 90
6 80 80 90
7 90 85 90
8 100 90 95
9 85 80 85
10 80 80 80
11 A A A
12 80 80 85
13 80 90 90
14 75 85 80
15 90 95 90
16 85 80 75
17 85 85 85
18 80 80 90
19 90 90 90
20 70 85 75
21 A A A
22 85 95 90
AVG 80.45 85.5 87.5

A = Absent
Red = Low Achieving Student
Blue = Average Achieving Student
Green = Above Average Student
 b. Graphical Summary

Students
90

88

86

84

Students
82

80

78

76
Pre During Post

Overall, the scores increased. This is the first of the five lessons that the students did not make a
gradual increasing score. This score shows that the students did learn throughout the lesson, but
the growth slowed after the during-assessment.

B. Individuals
a. Above average: This student scored 100% accuracy on the pre-assessment, but
the scores decreased as the lesson went on. They scored 90% accuracy on the
during-assessment and 95% accuracy on the post-assessment. I believe this
occurred because the students were working in pairs. The students wrote
individually in their notebooks, but because they worked together their work was
graded the same.
b. Average: This student scored 95% accuracy on the pre-assessment and the post-
assessment. During the lesson the student scored 90% accuracy. These scores
show me that the student understood the lesson. The scores may have fluctuated
because of the students being in partners.
c. Below average: This student scored 70% accuracy when working alone on the
pre-assessment. For the during-assessment and post-assessment the student was
paired with a partner. The student scored 85% accuracy for the during-assessment
and 75% on the post-assessment. This is large jump in scores for this particular
student. I believe this occurred because they were paired with a higher achieving
student.
Lesson 5: Partner Retell
A. Whole Class
a. Assessment Table

Pre- During Post

1 A A A
2 95 95 90
3 80 80 85
4 90 90 90
5 80 80 80
6 80 75 80
7 95 90 90
8 95 95 90
9 90 90 95
10 80 85 85
11 A A A
12 95 90 95
13 70 80 80
14 85 85 80
15 90 90 95
16 85 90 95
17 85 80 85
18 85 85 85
19 80 90 90
20 70 75 85
21 A A A
22 80 85 90
AVG 84.736 85.789 82.894

A = Absent
Red = Low Achieving Student
Blue = Average Achieving Student
Green = Above Average Student
 b. Graphical Summary

Students
86.5
86
85.5
85
84.5
84
83.5 Students
83
82.5
82
81.5
81
Pre During Post

As you can see in the graph above, the students average scores did not increase
throughout the lesson. I do feel that the students did learn from the lesson because of the increase
between the pre-assessment and the during-assessment. I believe that the students did poorly on
the post-assessment because this was the second day of full partner work and the students were
becoming rowdy. The average scores show that the students did average work. None of the
averages for this lesson fell below 80% accuracy and there was an increase in the lesson.

B. Individuals
a. Above average: This student scored 95% accuracy on both the pre-assessment
and the during-assessment. This students score did decline as the whole classes
average declined in the post-assessment. Their post-assessment score was a 90.
b. Average: This student scored the same scores as the student above. They scored
95% accuracy for their pre-assessment and during-assessment. They scored 90%
accuracy for their post-assessment. Even though the students post-assessment
declined in comparison to their other scores, I can tell that they learned from the
lesson. I can see the improvement when looking back to the scores from the
previous lesson on retell.
c. Below average: This student scored 70% accuracy on their pre-assessment, 75%
accuracy on their during-assessment, and 85% on their post-assessment. This
student had an increasing score throughout the lesson. The jumps in score could
be a result of the partner they had.