Self-assessment (continued)
In the do now I asked them to answer the following questions:
1. Explain what each graph shows in your own words. (minimum of three sentences per graph)
2. Are you missing any information that would make these graphs more clear or easier to explain? If so, what is it and how would it help you better understand the graphs.
3. Do these graphs make sense when you compare them to your test and the homework about the Quiz objectives?
4. Did you do well on the objective(s) you felt you needed more work on for the test?
If yes, what did you do to get better at those objectives?
If no, what can you do in the future to be better prepared for a test?
Students were given approximately five minutes to answer these questions. They were encouraged to answer these two questions to the best of their abilities. I projected both graphs on the board while students completed this reflection activity so they could see a more clear and colored version of the graphs they had in their handout. Once I noticed most students had finished writing I asked students to share some of their answers and we had a class discussion on the interpretation of these graphs. I asked students questions to get them thinking about specific pieces of information these graphs show us. They began with broad observations, shown in Document 2 of Artifact 6, such as for Table 1 of the activity handout students wrote that it;
Table 1, Artifact 6:
Students’ Broad Observations:
“It shows more people ‘needs work’ in my opinion.”
“The mastered objectives side was a little smaller than the ‘needs work’.”
"It shows what things we need to work on and what we mastered.”
Students’ Specific Observations:
"6.4 was the least understood.”
"Seems the more we advanced in the unit the more needs work.”
"We mastered the highest on 6.3 and 6.4.”
Table 2, Artifact 6:
Students’ Specific Observation:
"we got a lot correct but we also got a lot of partial credit”
After students completed the Do Now we discussed what information was given to them, the tables, titles, labeled axis, table descriptions, and the objectives key. The majority of students only commented that what needed to be changed to improve understanding was a better quality printed copy of the graph. I probed them with questions such as “can you tell me how many students were included in these data?” In response to this question one student offered to read her answer; “What’s missing is out of how many students this information gathered, and maybe compare from students in other 10th grade chemistry classes.” Another student read her answer; “We should add the final scores we got for the test. Show everyone’s final grade in the end of the test and also the first quiz we took.” Most students agreed verbally and with head nods that this would be useful information to have.
The next part of this exercise asked students to compare the graphs of the activity handout to their individual performance on the unit 6 exam. I then handed back their graded Unit 6 Exams and their Unit 6 Quiz reflections. I gave students approximately eight minutes to complete questions last two questions of this activity:
3. Do these graphs make sense when you compare them to your test and the homework about the Quiz objectives?
4. Did you do well on the objective(s) you felt you needed more work on for the test?
If yes, what did you do to get better at those objectives?
If no, what can you do in the future to be better prepared for a test?
Once students had finished I asked if anyone wanted to share their observations. One student offered to read her answer stated; “They do make sense to me because I feel like I mastered 6.1.a, 6.1.b, and 6.3 and according to the test I got the questions right that was on those units and 6.4 was the lowest on the graph and I had those wrong. I think I was okay but not fully so I would have to practice a little more.” This lead to a class discussion about what questions fit into each of the objectives in the graphs. Many students noted that overall they did a lot worse on objective 6.1.b on the test than they had thought they had mastered it initially in their Quiz Reflection, Table 1 (Artifact 5). We then broke down which exam questions were included in each objective. I specifically asked students how valid it was for objective 6.1.b to be represented by only one multiple-choice question. Many students acknowledged in our discussion that this was an unfair and invalid assessment of their understanding of this objective. We wrapped up this activity with students sharing anything further observations or overall comments about this activity. Multiple students stated that they found it very interesting that overall the objectives they didn’t feel they mastered were the ones they did more poorly on the exam. One student remarked “if we figure out which objectives we aren’t that good at and study those maybe we could bring up how well we do on them for the test.”
My goal for implanting this class activity was to have students reflect on how the overall class performance on unit 6 exam, Table 2 Artifact 5, compared to their overall class quiz reflection, Table 1 Artifact 5, and to their individual performance on the exam. This exercise supported students’ ability to make a tangible and individual connection to affects of self-assessing their learning and success academically in this class in relation to objectives. Based on this data, I had students go beyond just reflecting on their learning strengths and weaknesses by having them identify, list, and carry out steps to address their weaknesses. I had them is by having them identify the objectives the homework assignments, quizzes, or classwork fulfill. Then when they prepare for an upcoming summative assessment they can use their reflections of weaknesses in relation to the learning objectives to self-select homework problems that will support their individual learning needs. I scaffolded this for students through class activities, by having them identify the objectives an assignment fulfilled and then having them reflect on what there performance means about their strength and weaknesses. The next step was to use objectives to assess their learning in a assessment outside of quizzes or exams. I had students individually identify the objective of a daily lesson in an exit ticket. During the lesson of this day I began the class stating “You will tell me the objective of today’s lesson in an exit ticket at the end of class.” This supported students’ use of objectives as a daily self-assessment. Image 1 of Artifact 9 shows the Wordle constructed from the key words students used when they identified the objective of that day’s lesson in the exit ticket. A total of 33 of 35 students accurately identified that day’s objective. The students’ ability to identify the learning objective in a lesson and reflect on their performance on summative assessments promoted their metacognitive development as a self-regulated learner. Developing students’ skills in becoming metacognitive, self-regulated learners, will translate into student success “wherever learning happens – academic or otherwise” (Kaplan, 2008, pp. 479-480). These data and the literature supported a change in what I believe teaching and learning can be in secondary education. This concept of developing students’ abilities as a metacognitive and self-regulated learner was a foreign concept to me prior to this program. I had never been exposed to this idea in my educational experiences. As I reflected on the changes I realized I wanted to understand students views of the use of objectives. This included their views on the use of objectives in my class as well as other classes.
1. Explain what each graph shows in your own words. (minimum of three sentences per graph)
2. Are you missing any information that would make these graphs more clear or easier to explain? If so, what is it and how would it help you better understand the graphs.
3. Do these graphs make sense when you compare them to your test and the homework about the Quiz objectives?
4. Did you do well on the objective(s) you felt you needed more work on for the test?
If yes, what did you do to get better at those objectives?
If no, what can you do in the future to be better prepared for a test?
Students were given approximately five minutes to answer these questions. They were encouraged to answer these two questions to the best of their abilities. I projected both graphs on the board while students completed this reflection activity so they could see a more clear and colored version of the graphs they had in their handout. Once I noticed most students had finished writing I asked students to share some of their answers and we had a class discussion on the interpretation of these graphs. I asked students questions to get them thinking about specific pieces of information these graphs show us. They began with broad observations, shown in Document 2 of Artifact 6, such as for Table 1 of the activity handout students wrote that it;
Table 1, Artifact 6:
Students’ Broad Observations:
“It shows more people ‘needs work’ in my opinion.”
“The mastered objectives side was a little smaller than the ‘needs work’.”
"It shows what things we need to work on and what we mastered.”
Students’ Specific Observations:
"6.4 was the least understood.”
"Seems the more we advanced in the unit the more needs work.”
"We mastered the highest on 6.3 and 6.4.”
Table 2, Artifact 6:
Students’ Specific Observation:
"we got a lot correct but we also got a lot of partial credit”
After students completed the Do Now we discussed what information was given to them, the tables, titles, labeled axis, table descriptions, and the objectives key. The majority of students only commented that what needed to be changed to improve understanding was a better quality printed copy of the graph. I probed them with questions such as “can you tell me how many students were included in these data?” In response to this question one student offered to read her answer; “What’s missing is out of how many students this information gathered, and maybe compare from students in other 10th grade chemistry classes.” Another student read her answer; “We should add the final scores we got for the test. Show everyone’s final grade in the end of the test and also the first quiz we took.” Most students agreed verbally and with head nods that this would be useful information to have.
The next part of this exercise asked students to compare the graphs of the activity handout to their individual performance on the unit 6 exam. I then handed back their graded Unit 6 Exams and their Unit 6 Quiz reflections. I gave students approximately eight minutes to complete questions last two questions of this activity:
3. Do these graphs make sense when you compare them to your test and the homework about the Quiz objectives?
4. Did you do well on the objective(s) you felt you needed more work on for the test?
If yes, what did you do to get better at those objectives?
If no, what can you do in the future to be better prepared for a test?
Once students had finished I asked if anyone wanted to share their observations. One student offered to read her answer stated; “They do make sense to me because I feel like I mastered 6.1.a, 6.1.b, and 6.3 and according to the test I got the questions right that was on those units and 6.4 was the lowest on the graph and I had those wrong. I think I was okay but not fully so I would have to practice a little more.” This lead to a class discussion about what questions fit into each of the objectives in the graphs. Many students noted that overall they did a lot worse on objective 6.1.b on the test than they had thought they had mastered it initially in their Quiz Reflection, Table 1 (Artifact 5). We then broke down which exam questions were included in each objective. I specifically asked students how valid it was for objective 6.1.b to be represented by only one multiple-choice question. Many students acknowledged in our discussion that this was an unfair and invalid assessment of their understanding of this objective. We wrapped up this activity with students sharing anything further observations or overall comments about this activity. Multiple students stated that they found it very interesting that overall the objectives they didn’t feel they mastered were the ones they did more poorly on the exam. One student remarked “if we figure out which objectives we aren’t that good at and study those maybe we could bring up how well we do on them for the test.”
My goal for implanting this class activity was to have students reflect on how the overall class performance on unit 6 exam, Table 2 Artifact 5, compared to their overall class quiz reflection, Table 1 Artifact 5, and to their individual performance on the exam. This exercise supported students’ ability to make a tangible and individual connection to affects of self-assessing their learning and success academically in this class in relation to objectives. Based on this data, I had students go beyond just reflecting on their learning strengths and weaknesses by having them identify, list, and carry out steps to address their weaknesses. I had them is by having them identify the objectives the homework assignments, quizzes, or classwork fulfill. Then when they prepare for an upcoming summative assessment they can use their reflections of weaknesses in relation to the learning objectives to self-select homework problems that will support their individual learning needs. I scaffolded this for students through class activities, by having them identify the objectives an assignment fulfilled and then having them reflect on what there performance means about their strength and weaknesses. The next step was to use objectives to assess their learning in a assessment outside of quizzes or exams. I had students individually identify the objective of a daily lesson in an exit ticket. During the lesson of this day I began the class stating “You will tell me the objective of today’s lesson in an exit ticket at the end of class.” This supported students’ use of objectives as a daily self-assessment. Image 1 of Artifact 9 shows the Wordle constructed from the key words students used when they identified the objective of that day’s lesson in the exit ticket. A total of 33 of 35 students accurately identified that day’s objective. The students’ ability to identify the learning objective in a lesson and reflect on their performance on summative assessments promoted their metacognitive development as a self-regulated learner. Developing students’ skills in becoming metacognitive, self-regulated learners, will translate into student success “wherever learning happens – academic or otherwise” (Kaplan, 2008, pp. 479-480). These data and the literature supported a change in what I believe teaching and learning can be in secondary education. This concept of developing students’ abilities as a metacognitive and self-regulated learner was a foreign concept to me prior to this program. I had never been exposed to this idea in my educational experiences. As I reflected on the changes I realized I wanted to understand students views of the use of objectives. This included their views on the use of objectives in my class as well as other classes.