Pa g e | 1

Student Work Analysis Protocol3

Subject Area: Voyager 9 Grade Level: 9

Formative or Performance Task: Worksheet demonstrating understanding of Character

Types

A. Reaching Consensus about Proficiency

Read the assessment prompt and/or rubric and explain:
 What are the students expected to do?

Students are expected to participate in a lesson on types of characters, namely

Flat/Round characters, Flat/Static characters, and the difference between a
Protagonist and Antagonist. We will be doing a mini-lecture on character types to
start, and then filling out a worksheet in groups. The worksheet is based on the
book The Compound. I will be co-teaching with one student who volunteers to co-
teach with me.

 Which standards (CCSS or content standards) or curriculum

expectations are being assessed?

Standard 2-3-1-a-ii: Determine a theme or central idea of a text and analyze in

detail its development over the course of the text, including how it emerges and is shaped
and refined by specific details; provide an objective summary of the text. (CCSS: RL.9-
10.2)

 What do you consider to be a proficient response on this assessment?

Exactly what do students need to say or write for you to consider their
work proficient?

A) Audience: Laura Druse’s 9th grade Voyager reading class. These

students are reading at a lower level for their grade, so they have
been placed in a lower-level reading class.

B) Objectives: (Behavior)
Students will be asked to work in groups after a co-teaching model
has been implemented for review, with the following objectives:
1) Students will be able to tell the difference between a flat character
and a round character in future readings.
2) Students will be able to tell the difference between a static character
and a dynamic character in future readings.
3) Students will be able to see the larger importance of the protagonist
and antagonist, and how this informs future readings.
4) Students will be able to see how character types permeate relevant
 Pa g e | 2

animated movies.

C) Condition:
Given a chance to review prior knowledge, and a co-teaching model,
students should be able to work effectively in groups to complete the
assigned worksheet. Afterwards, given a chance to discuss what
they have learned, students will assess relevance in the English
classroom and in the larger world.

D) At least 90% of students should understand the concepts relevant to

this lesson.

 Did the assessment give students a good opportunity to demonstrate what they
know?

I don’t believe that it did. This lesson is going to have to be re-done.

Only 50% of the students filled out the worksheet to a satisfactory level, and
they required constant redirection.

I have attached (at the bottom) examples of exemplary, satisfactory, and poor
student work.

B. Diagnosing Student Strengths and Needs

After reaching consensus, read student work and without scoring, do a “quick sort” of
students’ work by the general degree of the objectives met, partially met, not met.
You may need a “not sure” pile. After sorting, any papers in the “not sure” pile should
be matched with the typical papers in one of the other existing piles. Student names
should be recorded in the columns in order to monitor progress over time.

HIGH EXPECTED LOW

(Objectives met) (Objectives partially (Objectives not met)
met)
RJ, Colin, Krisy, Angelica, Malik, Roberto, Ciana, Chyraia, Madi, Lea, Nora, Lea, Amiah,
Natalee, Kylee, Fritzna Ty Kaydence

42% OF CLASS 23% OF CLASS 35% OF CLASS

 Pa g e | 3

3 Adapted by the National Center for the Improvement of Educational Assessment

from the (add in citation for Maryland doc) and the Center for Collaborative Education
(2012).(Permission to reproduce and use is given when authorship is fully cited.
 Pa g e | 4

Student Work Analysis Protocol (continued)

C. Choose a few samples to review from each level (low, expected, high) and
discuss and identify the prerequisite knowledge that students demonstrated
that they knew.

HIGH EXPECTED LOW

(Objectives met) (Objectives partially (Objectives not met)
met)
Students remembered and could Roberto and Ciana were fuzzy Madi and Nora barely tried to
evaluate present characters on these details, they filled out attempt this assignment, they
based on past knowledge of the worksheet but were required constant redirection.
Flat/Round or Static/Dynamic redirected a few times. After These are two of my most
characters. Kylee and Colin review and discussion, they challenging students, they turned
were exemplary in this, tying could draw parallels between in inaccurate worksheets that did
these trops to their own lives certain themes and class not at all represent the material.
during class discussion. These readings. They could accurately They were just writing down
students completed most if not answer about 75 % of the random things, and socializing.
all of the worksheet. questions. These students did not
complete the entire worksheet.

D. Using the reviewed samples from each level, discuss and identify the
misconceptions, wrong information, and what students did not demonstrate
that was expected.

HIGH EXPECTED LOW

(Objectives met) (Objectives partially (Objectives not met)
met)
Kylee and Colin were able (after Roberto and Ciana demonstrated Madi and Nora did not attempt
the refresher lesson) to identify a degree of understanding, but the assignment satisfactorily.
static characters, to fill out the did not give a satisfactory effort. They did not put in the effort
worksheet to completion, and required to complete the
make their teacher proud. assignment.
 Pa g e | 5

Student Work Analysis Protocol (continued)

E. Identifying Instructional Next Steps

After diagnosing what the student knows and still needs to learn, discuss as a
team the learning needs for the students in each level considering the following
questions:

Based on the team’s diagnosis of the student’s performance:

 What patterns or trends are noted for the whole class?

Our students are very antsy, have trouble sitting still and paying
attention, and almost always require constant redirection.

 What instructional strategies will be beneficial for the whole class?

We are still working on that. One of the things that has come out of this
lesson I taught that is positive is the fact that Mrs. Druse has implemented a
co-teaching model. During the lesson, I asked for a volunteer to co-teach with
me, and when I got one, respect for the teacher went up. We have changed it
so that every day, one of the students leads the daily vocabulary instruction.
This has given empathy, and lets students see what it is like to instruct.

 Based on the team’s diagnosis of student responses at the high, expected,

and low levels, what instructional strategies will students at each level
benefit from?

We are still experimenting with the co-teaching model. This is a

question we are still trying to answer, because our students have trouble
being productive in groups.

HIGH EXPECTED LOW

(Objectives met) (Objectives partially (Objectives not met)
met)
A quieter place to work, away More review of concepts before Differing methods of
from the distraction that the rest teaching the next lesson. redirection.
of their peers cause.
 Pa g e | 6

Excellent Example:
 Pa g e | 7

Satisfactory Example:
 Pa g e | 8

Poor Example:
Pa g e | 9
 Pa g e |
10

Bibliography

Center for Collaborative Education (2012), Quality Performance Assessment: A Guide

for Schools and Districts, Boston, MA.

Langer, G., Colton, A., and Goff, L. (2003), Collaborative Analysis of Student Work,
ASCD, http://www.ascd.org/publications/books/102006/chapters/The-Benefits-of-
Collaborative- Analysis-of-Student-Learning.aspx

Looking at Student Work Collaborative (2013). Why Protocols.

Retrieved from http://www.lasw.org/who.html

McClure, C. (2008), The Benefits of Teacher Collaboration: Essentials on Education

Data and Research Analysis, District Administration: Solutions for School District
Management, http://www.districtadministration.com/article/benefits-teacher-
collaboration

Maryland State Department of Education (n.d.), Examining Student Work to Inform

Instruction.
Retrieved from http://mdk12.org/data/examining/index.html