Julie Frey Phil Prale HOW ARE WE DOING? In an attem empt t to - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Chris Baldwin Julie Frey Phil Prale

HOW ARE WE DOING? In an attem empt t to mon onitor or the e growth wth of our ur Al Algebra bra and Plane e Geome ometr try y students udents, , the e math th depar partm tmen ent t has : • Created common final exams for all students taking Algebra 1- 2, Plane Geometry 1-2, and Advanced Algebra 1-2 courses • Entered common exams into Mastery Manager • Reviewed results from final exams • Advanced our understandings about student learning • Prompted us to adjust instruction • Prompted us to adjust our final exam

Plane Geometry Second Semester Final Exam Common Item Analysis Question on Question on 2010/2011 Final Percent 2011/2012 Percent Exam Correct Final Exam Correct Difference 2 84 1 85 1 1 63 2 69 6 3 67 3 79 12 4 46 4 54 8 5 45 5 55 10 6 80 6 81 1 7 73 7 81 8 10 74 10 77 3 12 75 11 73 -2 14 74 12 73 -1 15 68 13 68 0 18 49 14 61 12 19 80 15 78 -2 20 77 16 82 5 EXAMPLE OF ITEM ANALYSIS COMPARISON FOR TWO CONSECUTIVE YEARS

ALGEBRA 1 FINAL Percent Difference from 2011 to 2012 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Decrease of Decrease of 4 Difference of Increase of 4 Increase of 10 10 or more to 9 -3 to 3 to 9 or more (There were no overlapping questions from the Algebra 2 2011 Final Exam to the 2012 Final Exam)

PLANE GEOMETRY 1 FINAL Percent cent Differen rence e from m 2011 to 2012 20 15 10 5 0 Decrease of Decrease of 4 Difference of Increase of 4 Increase of 10 or more to 9 -3 to 3 to 9 10 or more

PLANE GEOMETRY 2 FINAL Percent Difference from 2011 to 2012 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 Decrease of Decrease of 4 Difference of Increase of 4 Increase of 10 10 or more to 9 -3 to 3 to 9 or more

IMPLICATIONS FOR OUR TEAM In order r to interpr pret et this data ta, we consid idere ered reasons ons why studen ent t scores would d incr crea ease e or decrea ease on final al exam am quest estion ons. Possible e explana lanations tions includ clude: e: • Pre-req equisit ite informati mation on – the order in which the topic c was taug ught. ht. • Time spent t teaching ching the concep cept. t. • Teac aching ing activ iviti ities es conn nnect ected d to the topic. c. • Forma mativ tive e assess essment ment strategi egies. es. • Clearly stated learning targets • Feedback from formative assessments • Teacher adjustments made as a result of formative assessment.

COMMON PROBLEM - GEOMETRY Here is an example of a problem where students improved their performance by 18%. This concept covered two different learning targets and was assessed through multiple formative assessments, and multiple summative assessments. • 4.05 I can define and identify congruent triangles • 4.06 I can prove triangles congruent cts  BAD, which In the figure ure shown, n, if AC bisects ch B t  ABC   ADC? met ethod d proves es that A. A. AAS AAS B. B. ASA A C C. C. SAS D. D. SSA SSA D E. E. SSS SSS

COMMON PROBLEM - GEOMETRY Here is an example of a problem where students decreased their performance by 21%. This concept is covered in one learning target and was not tested through formative assessments, but did exist on the chapter test. 5.02 I can identify a median or the intersection of medians in a triangle(centroid). 1. 1. Given en: : Point Po nt L is the centroid oid of  NOM OL = 6 O Find d the length gth of OQ P R A. A. 4 L B. B. 9 N M C. C. 11 11 Q D. D. 12 12 E. E. 18 18

GEOMETRY Students knowledge increase due to the following: • The learning targets are written and explicit • The learning targets are assessed through multiple formative assessments • Instruction is adjusted as a consequence of information learned through formative assessments • Learning activities are adjusted and become better focused on learning target. • Topics are re-taught when necessary. • Concepts are assessed throughout the entire year.

COMMON PROBLEM - ALGEBRA Here is an example of a problem where students improved their performance by 22%. This concept covered two different learning targets and was assessed through multiple formative assessments, and multiple summative assessments. • 4.02 Given any form (slope-intercept, standard, point-slope), I can graph a linear function. 4.03 Given any information, I can write the equation of a line. • Which of the above graphs could represent 𝑦 = −4 ? a. A b. B c. C d. D

COMMON PROBLEM - ALGEBRA n 𝟖𝒚 − 𝟐 = 𝒚 − 𝟐 + 𝟕𝒚 James s solved ed the equ quati tion and got ot 0 = = 0. What t does s his s result ult mean? a) T There re is no soluti ution b) E Every y number r is a s soluti ution c) 𝒚 = 𝟏 d) James s must st have done somethi ething ng wrong Here is an example of a problem where students decreased their performance by 9%. This concept is covered in two learning targets. Part of this concept was assessed through formative assessment, part of this problem was not. Do we need to adjust our learning targets? • 3.01 I can define and collect “like terms.” • 3.02 I can manipulate an equation to solve for a specific variable (one-step – multi-step).

CONCLUSION • Clear learning targets can be used to increase student achievement on final exams. • Frequent formative assessments can be used to increase student achievement on final exams. • Teacher adjustment of lessons can increase student achievement on final exams. • Re-teaching concepts throughout the year can increase student achievement on final exams.