III. Pre/post assessment analysis
III. Pre/Post Assessment Analysis and Chart
To view Graphs 1, 2, and, 3 please see attached document.
pre_and_post_assessment_graphs.docx | |
File Size: | 100 kb |
File Type: | docx |
To view examples of student pre and post tests please see attached document
pre_and_post_test_student_examples | |
File Size: | 1854 kb |
File Type: | pre and post test student examples |
I used a short writing prompt as the assessment to gather quantifiable data regarding my students understanding of the lesson topic before and after the lesson was taught. Before the lesson began and again after the lesson was taught, I asked students to write responses to the following questions:
1. What are three things all adult human faces have in common?
2. What is the difference between scale and proportion?
Responses were given one point for each facial commonality students were able to identify, one point for their understanding of scale, and one point for their understanding of proportion. During the time I have spent in this classroom I have seen the students include faces as the subject matter for their projects. From their projects I observed that they had not already been taught the standard proportions of a human face, or how to effectively use proportion as a measurement tool. By looking at Graph 1, the lack of understanding I observed from the students previous work was reflected in the scores earned on the pre-test.
Graph 1 compares each students overall score on the pre-assessment to their overall score on the post-assessment. The blue bars on the graph represent the students total score on the pre-test and the red bars on the graph represent the students total score on the post-test. Student growth was assessed by comparing the total number of points earned on the pre-assessment to the total number of points earned on the post-assessment. The data shown in the graph above shows an overall increase in student scores. By taking a closer look at the data shown in the graph above, one can see that 75% of students scored higher on the post assessment than they did on the pre-assessment, 25% of students in this class did not improve their scores from pre-assessment to post-assessment, and none of the students scores decreased from pre to post assessment.
Graph 2 compares each student’s response to question 1 of the pre-assessment to their responses to question 1 on the post-assessment. The blue bars on the graph represent the students score on question 1 of the pre-assessment and the red bars on the graph represent the students score on question 1 of the post-assessment. Growth of student learning in the area of standard human facial proportion was assessed by comparing the number of points earned on question 1 of the pre-assessment to the number of points earned on question 1 of the post-assessment. The data from this graph shows that, 35% of students increased their scores, 40% of students scored the maximum number of points on both, and that 5% of students scores either decreased or did not improve. However, if the complexity of responses provided by students to question 1 in the pre-assessment is compared to the complexity of responses provided in the post-assessment, student learning developments as a result of this lesson look a bit different. The answers to question 1 of the pre-assessment show that students were able to identify 3 things all faces have in common but their answers consisted mostly of the simple identification of basic facial features such as eyes, nose, mouth and ears. None of the students identified commonalities regarding the alignment or proportions of facial features in their responses to question 1 of the pre-assessment. However, in their responses to question 1 of the post-assessment students were able to demonstrate a more complex understanding of facial alignment and proportion by providing answers that went far beyond the simple identification of basic human facial features. So, the data from graph 2 shows that 40% of students were able to provide a sufficient answer to question 1 of the pre-assessment and post-assessment. Not that they already understood the basics of human facial alignment and proportion before the lesson was taught.
Graph 3 compares how each student scored on question 2 of the pre-assessment to how they scored on question 2 on the post-assessment by looking at how many points they earned out of the 2 points available on question 2. The blue bars on the graph represent the students score on question 2 of the pre-assessment and the red bars on the graph represent the students score on question 2 of the post-assessment. Student growth in understanding of the difference between the terms scale and proportion was assessed by comparing the number of points earned on question 2 of the pre-assessment to the number of points earned on question 2 of the post-assessment. The data displayed in graph 3 shows that 80% of students increased there score on question 2, and that 20% of students scores on question 2 did not change from pre-assessment to post-assessment.
The quality of written responses to the second question in the pre-assessment showed that students had little to no understanding of the difference between scale and proportion before the lesson began. The content of their responses demonstrated to me that the terms scale and proportion were ones that they were familiar with, but could not actually define. Some students were able to give me examples of real life contexts that they associated with the use of these words but, were unable to actually articulate the difference between the meanings of the words scale and proportion.
Improvement in student understanding of the difference between scale and proportion was demonstrated by the comparison of scores showed in graph 3. This growth in understanding was also demonstrated in the quality of the students written responses to question 2 when comparing their pre-assessment responses and post-assessment responses. Proportion is the appropriate relationship between the size, shape, and position of the different parts within a whole, while scale refers to the relationship between two or more sets of dimensions. This means that proportion is the relationship of parts within a whole and scale refers to the relationship in size between two whole things. The most important part of understanding the difference between these two terms is understanding that regardless of how scale may change, proportion remains the same. If my hand is the same size as my face in a two-inch by two-inch drawing, then my hand will still be the same size as my face in a two-foot by two foot drawing. The difference would be that both my hand and my face would be larger in the second drawing. This concept is a hard one to grasp at first but serves as an important foundational element in the comprehension of spatial concepts. What I was looking for in their responses was their ability to articulate the difference in spatial relationships between scale and proportion. Almost every student was able to articulate the difference between these two terms in their response to question 2 on the post-test.
Graph 1 shows that student growth in understanding did occur as a result of the lesson I taught. However, I do not feel it accurately captures the impact of this lesson on student learning. I think this happened as a result of the way I wrote the first question on the assessment. Question 1 on the pre and the post assessment asked students to simply list three things all adult human faces had in common. Because I was not more specific about what I was really looking for in the first question I had to give students credit for providing an acceptable answer in the pre-assessment and the post-assessment, leaving myself no room to account for the change in depth of the answers provided. Instead of asking, “what are three things all adult faces typically have in common”, I should have asked, “what are three things all adult faces typically have in common other than basic facial features such as eyes, ears, mouth and nose” or even, “what are three things all faces have in common regarding alignment and proportion”. Those minor changes to my question would have helped me to gain more comprehensive insight into exactly how much students learned as a result of this lesson.
As you can see in graph 2, the way I wrote the question was problematic because students are earning the same number of points for simply identifying human facial features in the pre-assessment as they were for identifying commonalities regarding facial proportion and alignment in the post-assessment. Identifying that all faces have eyes, a mouth, and a nose tells me nothing about their knowledge of alignment or proportion yet I had to give credit because technically, they answered the question I asked. If I had worded the question in a way that did not allow for the simple identification of features to be acceptable, and instead required students to demonstrate their exiting depth of knowledge in the pre-assessment I would have been able to gather more comprehensive data about student learning developments as a result of my lesson. If I were to teach this lesson again this would definitely be something I would change.
At the end of the lesson I asked students if they felt they actually learned something new that would be helpful to them as they continue on in art. A few students told me they learned about facial proportions early on in their art experience and that they were already familiar with the standards of facial proportion. However, none of them told me about standards of facial proportion in their pre-assessment and majority of their projects did not demonstrate an awareness of this concept. This makes me question weather students did not know about the basic proportions of the face, or if they had just not been taught how to actually use this concept in practice.
Because I have been involved in visual arts for a long time now, foundational knowledge such as proportional measurements have been so engrained in my own practice that they have become second nature to me. Based on the basic proportional errors I saw in their work I assumed that they had not yet been taught the basic proportions of the human face or even how to use proportion as a measurement tool. It did not even occur to me that maybe they actually had learned this information and just did not know how to use it effectively in their own practice. Realizing this made me feel very hypocritical. As a student one of my biggest issues with teachers is feeling as though they are too far into their area of study to be able to effectively teach its foundations. This often results in feelings of discouragement and frustration; not what I want in my classroom. I am glad that I was able to make this distinction between levels of understanding early on as a teacher so that I can be more aware of this in the future. Regardless of weather students had never learned the concept, or just did not know how to use it in practice, the post-assessment of this lesson did demonstrate that they now have a complete understanding of standard facial proportions as well as how to use scale and proportion in their own drawing practice.