Sarah Penn

FRIT 7236 KA2

Section 1 Students
The students who completed this assessment are in the fourth grade. We have a
total of seven classes in this grade level. I administered this assessment to two of these
classes. The first group consists of 25 students ranging in age from nine to ten years of
age. There are twelve males and thirteen females. Fourteen of these students are
black, nine are white, and two are multi-racial. The second group consists of 23
students also ranging in age from nine to ten years of age. There are ten males and
twelve females. Ten of these students are black, nine are white, one is multi-racial, one
is Asian, and one is Hispanic. These students are on all ranges of the socioeconomic
spectrum. I have students whose parents are lawyers, nurses, and teachers; while other
students have non-working parents and still others who are homeless. Our school has
close to 1,100 students in grades Kindergarten through fifth. All the students in our
district are eligible to receive a healthy breakfast and lunch at no cost because we
implemented a new program called the Community Eligibility Option (CEO) available
to the State of Georgia for the 2014-2015 school year.
Section 2 Course
All the students completed this assessment within the regular education
classroom. However, a handful of students in each class receive accommodations due
to IEPs or Tier 2 instruction. These accommodations include small group, extended time
and oral reading of the test questions. This assessment was intended to measure an
Earth Science standard involving the phases of the moon. The standard states that
students will model the position and motion of the earth in the solar system and will
explain the role of relative position and motion in determining sequence of the phases
of the moon. The first element is to explain the day/night cycle of the earth using a
model. The next element is to explain the sequence of the phases of the moon. The
next element is to demonstrate the revolution of the earth around the sun and the
earths tilt to explain the seasonal changes. The final element is to demonstrate the
relative size and order from the sun of the planets in the solar system.
Section 3 Descriptive Analysis
The mean or average for this assessment was 15.88 for my morning class (Penn
HR) and 15.82 for my afternoon class (White HR). The median test score was 16 for my
morning class (Penn HR) and 17 for my afternoon class (White HR). The standard
deviation of the students overall achievement on the test was 2.08 for my morning
class (Penn HR) and 3.14 for my afternoon class (White HR). This shows that the values of
the students achievement vary since the standard deviation is slightly elevated.
Question 4 had the lowest scores and that is due to the difficulty of the concept. The
question is asking something very abstract and the students have difficulty visualizing
what it is asking.

Sarah Penn
FRIT 7236 KA2
Reliability is the degree to which an assessment tool produces stable and
consistent results (Brookhart & Nitko, 2015). After computing the Spearman-Brown
reliability, I discovered that the reliability of this assessment was 0.65 for my morning
class (Penn HR) and 0.66 for my afternoon class (White HR). You can see this
information in Appendix A. The closer this number is to one, the more reliable the
assessment. Therefore, it is more than half reliable, but still not completely reliable. The
Correlation Coefficient was rather low for each class meaning the assessment is not
very reliable. It was 0.42 for my morning class (Penn HR) and 0.52 for my afternoon class
(White HR). You can also see this information in Appendix A. When comparing the
Spearman-Brown reliability and the Correlation Coefficient, I am given mixed readings.
The Spearman-Brown gives a better reliability score than does the Correlation
Coefficient (See Appendix B). This was a bit confusing to me, but then again I did not
administer this assessment twice so I had to use the odd and even as my test 1
and test 2. Im guessing that has to be an attributing factor to the differences. In an
effort to make this assessment more reliable, I feel the difficult questions could be
changed into multiple choice giving the students some options to pick from. I could
also increase reliability by adding pictures or visuals for the more abstract questions
being asked.
Section 4 Analysis of Student Strengths & Weaknesses
This assessment was to assess the students knowledge of the moon phases, day
and night cycle, and the seasons. As I analyzed the data and looked for the strengths
and weaknesses, I discovered that students did not do as well on the fill in the blank
and short answer questions as they did on the multiple choice questions. Questions 12
and 13 were fill in the blank and question 14 was short answer. Only 52% of my morning
class (Penn HR) answered question 12 correct, but 91% of my afternoon class (White HR)
answered it correctly. Only 60% of my morning class (Penn HR) and 57% of my
afternoon class (White HR) answered question 13 correctly. Only 44% of my morning
class (Penn HR) and 57% of my afternoon class (White HR) answered question 14
correctly. These questions had the lowest overall scores (See Appendix C). I feel the
students are so accustomed to multiple choice that they do not want to be required to
think about what to write for their answer. They most certainly do not want to have to
write anything into a complete sentence. In order to answer these questions, the
students were required to look at a lunar calendar. Many students mixed up the
full/new moon and waxing/waning gibbous. Even though we covered it
thoroughly during instruction and gave tips such as full means all light and the light
starts on the right, students still had difficulty recalling this information. On questions 1,
15 and 20, all students scored 100%, except the afternoon class (White HR) scored a
91% on question 1 (See Appendix C). These questions covered content we continually
discussed each day throughout the unit to include: Why does the Moon shine brightly
at night?; Name the regular changes in the Moons appearance as seen from Earth;

Sarah Penn
FRIT 7236 KA2
and Name the imaginary line passing through the center of a planet. I feel that
because of the repetition of these concepts, the students were able to recall this
information more thoroughly.
Section 5 Improvement Plan
Improving future assessments is necessary as data is collected and analyzed for
reliability and validity. After analyzing all this data, I have discovered that some
changes need to be made to this assessment. I feel in order to improve this assessment
for the future, either more multiple choice questions need to be used or familiarize the
students with more fill in the blank and short answer questions. This is due to the fact
that students are more familiar with multiple choice questions. I also feel that by using
even more visuals and hands on activities during instruction will help the students grasp
the concepts of moon phases, day and night cycle, and the seasonal changes. The
more repetition, visuals, and demonstrations of each concept will help them better
understand and grasp them more thoroughly. I think there is a need to share data with
other colleagues to discuss the teaching strategies each person used during instruction.
Discuss which strategies were successful and which ones were not. Therefore, changes
can be made to the teaching strategy used previously especially if it was not effective.
After sharing with colleagues, have discussions with the students about strategies they
can use for the upcoming assessments. Most often they will make you aware of where
they are struggling and you will be able to work with them through differentiation of
instruction.

Sarah Penn
FRIT 7236 KA2
Student Data I have included the data for both sets of classes in which I administered this assessment.
PENN HR
Students

Q1

Q2

Q3

Q4

Q5

Q6

Q7

Q8

Q9

Q10

Q11

Q12

Q13

Q14

Q15

Q16

Q17

Q18

Q19

Q20

Student
Total

Total
Questions

Test
Score

Ahmad

18

20

90

Zion

14

20

70

Michellangelo

16

20

80

Keishawna

17

20

85

Charlotte

19

20

95

Winston

19

20

95

Jamiyah

14

20

70

Lleyton

15

20

75

Katie

18

20

90

Hunter

15

20

75

LeMarcus

17

20

85

Keshawn

17

20

85

Janay

14

20

70

Jacob

15

20

75

Laurana

16

20

80

Josey

14

20

70

Madelyne

12

20

60

Alayna

19

20

95

Iytavia

16

20

80

Cameryn

15

20

75

Aiden

15

20

75

Ja'Vosky

17

20

85

Delia

19

20

95

Jada

12

20

60

Jashari

14

20

70

Student
Total
Total Correct
Total Students
% Correct

25
25

24
25

20
25

8
25

18
25

22
25

23
25

17
25

22
25

21
25

24
25

13
25

15
25

11
25

25
25

22
25

22
25

21
25

19
25

25
25

100%

96%

80%

32%

72%

88%

92%

68%

88%

84%

96%

52%

60%

44%

100%

88%

88%

84%

76%

100%

Mean
Median
Standard
Dev.

Test Score

15.88
16

79.4
80

2.0880613

10.44031

Sarah Penn
FRIT 7236 KA2
WHITE HR
Students

Q1

Q2

Q3

Q4

Q5

Q6

Q7

Q8

Q9

Q10

Q11

Q12

Q13

Q14

Q15

Q16

Q17

Q18

Q19

Q20

Student
Total

Total
Questions

Test
Score

Erik

19

20

95

Asyah

15

20

75

Damani

17

20

85

Brayden

18

20

90

20

95

Jonathan

19

Jah'zariah

15

20

75

Tylin

20

20

100

Chinara

15

20

75

Ashly

18

20

90

Gabi

11

20

55

Leilani

17

20

85

Alex

17

20

85

Mikell

14

20

70

Riley

15

20

75

Isabel

19

20

95

AJ

15

20

75

Eli

16

20

80

Mahi

17

20

85

Halle

20

35

Emily

14

20

70

Zoey

18

20

90

Jaliah

10

20

50

Cameron

18

20
Student
Total

90
Test
Score

21

21

15

11

10

19

18

19

20

18

19

21

13

13

23

20

20

20

20

23

Mean

15.826087

79.13043

23

23

23

23

23

23

23

23

23

23

23

23

23

23

23

23

23

23

23

23

17

85

91%

91%

65%

48%

43%

83%

78%

83%

87%

78%

83%

91%

57%

57%

100%

87%

87%

87%

87%

100%

Median
Standard
Dev.

3.14284431

15.71422

Total
Correct
Total
Students
Percent
Correct

Sarah Penn
FRIT 7236 KA2
Appendix A

PENN
HR

Computing correlation between halves

Half-test scores

z-scores for :

Student
Ahmad
Zion
Michellangelo
Keishawna
Charlotte
Winston
Jamiyah
Lleyton
Katie
Hunter
LeMarcus
Keshawn
Janay
Jacob
Laurana
Josey
Madelyne
Alayna
Iytavia
Cameryn
Aiden
Ja'Vosky
Delia
Jada
Jashari
SUM
Mean
Median
Standard Dev.
Cor. Coefficient
S/B Reliability

Odd Items
(1,3,5,7,9,11,
13,15,17,19)
9
9
9
10
10
10
8
8
9
9
10
8
8
9
8
8
6
9
8
8
8
9
10
6
7

Even Items
(2,4,6,8,10,12,
14,16,18,20)
9
5
7
7
9
9
6
7
9
6
7
9
6
6
8
6
6
10
8
7
7
8
9
6
7

213
8.52
9

184
7.36
7

1.122497216

1.350308607

0.42114264
0.654421188

Odd
0.427617987
0.427617987
0.427617987
1.318488793
1.318488793
1.318488793
-0.463252819
-0.463252819
0.427617987
0.427617987
1.318488793
-0.463252819
-0.463252819
0.427617987
-0.463252819
-0.463252819
-2.244994432
0.427617987
-0.463252819
-0.463252819
-0.463252819
0.427617987
1.318488793
-2.244994432
-1.354123626

Even
0.427617987
-3.135865238
-1.354123626
-1.354123626
0.427617987
0.427617987
-2.244994432
-1.354123626
0.427617987
-2.244994432
-1.354123626
0.427617987
-2.244994432
-2.244994432
-0.463252819
-2.244994432
-2.244994432
1.318488793
-0.463252819
-1.354123626
-1.354123626
-0.463252819
0.427617987
-2.244994432
-1.354123626

Product

(z x z)
0.182857143
-1.34095238
-0.57904762
-1.78539683
0.563809524
0.563809524
1.04
0.627301587
0.182857143
-0.96
-1.78539683
-0.19809524
1.04
-0.96
0.214603175
1.04
5.04
0.563809524
0.214603175
0.627301587
0.627301587
-0.19809524
0.563809524
5.04
1.833650794
12.15873016

Sarah Penn
FRIT 7236 KA2

WHITE
HR

Computing correlation between halves

Half-test scores

z-scores for :
Odd Items
(1,3,5,7,9,11,
13,15,17,19)

Even Items
(2,4,6,8,10,12,
14,16,18,20)

10
7
7
8
10
7
10
9
10
6
8
8
8
9
10
7
8
8
2
6
8
5
10

9
8
10
10
9
8
10
6
8
5
9
9
6
6
9
8
8
9
5
8
10
5
8

Median

181
7.869565217
8

183
7.956521739
8

Standard Dev.

1.937766939

1.664557295

Cor. Coefficient

0.51957117

S/B Reliability

0.663977805

Student
Erik
Asyah
Damani
Brayden
Jonathan
Jah'zariah
Tylin
Chinara
Ashly
Gabi
Leilani
Alex
Mikell
Riley
Isabel
AJ
Eli
Mahi
Halle
Emily
Zoey
Jaliah
Cameron

SUM
Mean

Odd
1.099427769
-0.448746028
-0.448746028
0.067311904
1.099427769
-0.448746028
1.099427769
0.583369836
1.099427769
-0.96480396
0.067311904
0.067311904
0.067311904
0.583369836
1.099427769
-0.448746028
0.067311904
0.067311904
-3.029035689
-0.96480396
0.067311904
-1.480861893
1.099427769

Even
0.626880351
0.026120015
1.227640687
1.227640687
0.626880351
0.026120015
1.227640687
-1.175400658
0.026120015
-1.776160994
0.626880351
0.626880351
-1.175400658
-1.175400658
0.626880351
0.026120015
0.026120015
0.626880351
-1.776160994
0.026120015
1.227640687
-1.776160994
0.026120015

Product

(z x z)
0.68920967
-0.0117213
-0.5508989
0.08263483
0.68920967
-0.0117213
1.34970226
-0.6856933
0.02871707
1.71364716
0.04219651
0.04219651
-0.0791185
-0.6856933
0.68920967
-0.0117213
0.00175819
0.04219651
5.38005504
-0.0252007
0.08263483
2.63024913
0.02871707

11.4305657

Sarah Penn
FRIT 7236 KA2
Appendix B

Correlation & Reliability (Penn HR)

0.7
0.6
0.5
0.4

Series1

0.3

Series2

0.2
0.1
0
Correlation Coefficient

Spearman-Brown Reliability

Correlation & Reliability (White HR)

0.7
0.6
0.5
0.4
Series1

0.3
0.2
0.1
0
Correlation Coefficient

Spearman-Brown Reliability

Sarah Penn
FRIT 7236 KA2
Appendix C

Percent Correct for each Test Question

(Penn HR)
120%
100%
80%
60%

Series1

40%
20%
0%
1

10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20

Percent Correct for each Test Question

(White HR)
120%
100%
80%

60%

Series1

40%
20%
0%
1

10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20