Embedded Files
Student KWL charts used on first day of the industrial revolution unit.
Period 6 DataThe data tracker used to collect student information of the unit assessments.
Nearpod formative assessment of standard objectives WH 3.1 and WH 4.2
Nearpod formative assessment of standard objectives WH 3.1-2
Nearpod formative assessment of standard objectives WH 4.1-3
Baseline Data
Baseline Data
The baseline quantitative data presented is based on my world history industrial revolution unit. The KWL charts on the left indicate the beginning of our class’s understanding and awareness of the industrial revolution. Based on student responses, many did not know much about the industrial revolution but made assumptions based on the word revolution learned during our past units. This information is helpful to recognize what students may already know about the relevance of the industrial revolution and indicates what standards/objectives may need additional attention. In this case, the majority of students held no basis for the industrial revolution. Therefore, I ensured to equally cover all concepts and heavily emphasize introductory material instead of glossing over the basic terminology of the unit.
The formative assessments below highlight the major source of student quantitative data and set the baseline for each unit standard. I used seven formative assessments to capture student baseline data for each standard. The Nearpod reports below show examples of the data collected and indicate what students understood based on the lessons and readings used.
The formative assessments are based on each standard that I am required to teach. The standards are based on Mississippi World History Social Studies Standards WH.3 and WH.4, which focuses on the industrial revolution period and the introduction of economic systems. Using the standards as a basis for calculating student mastery, I focus formative assessments on aligning to each standard and collect the data in my data tracker (located on the left).
Our school recognizes student mastery as a goal of 80% of students mastering the standard. This is used as a key focus for informing my practice. The formative assessments calculated in the tracker are based on the Nearpod reports similar to the examples listed below. The selection of questions is determined by the standard objectives for each lesson and formed based on the material constructed within my curriculum.
The line graph above visually shows the class performance of the formative assessments and final unit test.
The Data Analysis Summary
The Data Analysis Summary
The data located in the tracker is summarized into the seven key major findings based on the mastery of standards for all World History sections:
WH 3.1 assessment showed 73% mastery.
WH 3.2 assessment showed 56% mastery.
WH 3.3 assessment showed 60% mastery.
WH 3.4 assessment showed 58% mastery.
WH 4.1 assessment showed 70% mastery.
WH 4.2 assessment showed 78% mastery
WH 4.3 assessment showed 50% mastery.
The data analysis for the formative assessments led to several interpretations:
Students did not reach the 80% goal for each standard based on the initial formative assessments, which suggests additional scaffolding material needed to be prepared for the standard aligned material on the unit exam.
Students required additional targeted vocabulary practice to inform their understanding of the key concepts.
The lessons which utilized Venn diagram comparisons and mind mapping (WH 3.1, 4.1, 4.2) had higher gains than the standards which used less visual comparisons.
Assessments (WH 3.2,3.3, 4.3) that relied on reading comprehension of the informational text showed a lower mastery of the content standards. This data suggests students need additional scaffolding to support their understanding of informational texts. The school's student I-Ready scores indicate this challenge, but the data is not currently accessible to teachers.
Student mind mapping samples to support connection of key unit concepts and themes.
Scaffolding Reviews
Scaffolding Reviews
The data interpretations support my consistent use of scaffolding practices. One practice I use heavily to scaffold prior unit concepts are mind maps. The samples on the left are from a few lessons and our class unit review. The data interpretations raise my awareness of the key concepts and themes my students did not fully master. For example, I spent additional time focusing on differentiating the economic systems because these are a crucial component to understanding the economic priorities of the time period which relate to the standard of living of the working class. Students spent time mapping out the key vocabulary and ideas based on the guiding questions. Prior to the unit test, I created a list of additional guiding questions that were important for students to review. Using mind maps or concept mapping, students spent a class period dissecting the important pieces of key vocabulary terms and concepts to support their understanding of the time period. These decisions are founded on the data because I recognized what strategies worked best to support my student’s understanding and applied additional practice based on misunderstood concepts.
Industrial Revolution Test Period 6 - Google Forms.pdfIndustrial Revolution summative assessment that served as the benchmark data point.
Benchmark Unit Test
Benchmark Unit Test
The unit summative exam serves as the data benchmark used to assess my student’s mastery of the WH3 and WH4 standards. The questions are aligned to each standard objective and include a variety of multiple-choice and checkbox questions.
Data Analysis
Data Analysis
The final data analysis provides official insight into my student’s growth from day one of the unit to the final summative exam. The majority of students entered the unit with very little understanding of the industrial revolution but made major gains in conceptualizing the time period. Overall, based on the unit summative exam the class averaged 81% mastery of the targeted standards and objectives. The line graph indicates the ebb and flow of the standard objective formative assessments with a satisfactory goal of 80% of the class mastering the standards. The 80% mastery goal sets a high expectation for students to meet with the awareness that some students may not reach that goal. Therefore, the data that is more important in analyzing is the individual growth acquired from start to finish.
When we factor in student growth, the data tells a different story. A majority of students started from no foundational knowledge of the industrial revolution and made tremendous growth from essentially 0% to ~81% mastery of the key concepts.
Based on the data:
10/15 students reached our mastery goal.
Every student experienced major academic growth of ~51-87% based on data collected with the KWL charts. This is factored by the standards mastery column in the data tracker.
Page updated
Google Sites
Report abuse