FRIT 7236

Technology-Based Assessment and Data Analysis

Key Assessment 2
Emily Horan

I. Students
The students who took this assessment were in 9th Grade and were enrolled in 9th
Grade Literature and Composition at the time of the assessment. The students took the
assessment in the first period of the day. Ten of the students are female and thirteen are male.
Eleven of the students are Black, ten are White/Caucasian, one is Mixed Race, and one is
Hispanic. Fourteen of the students are on free or reduced lunch. According to their last Georgia
Milestones report, six of the students scored at the Below Basic level in ELA, eleven scored at
the Basic level, and six scored at the Proficient level (none scored in the Advanced level).

II. Course
This assessment was given as a summative assessment at the end of the first unit in a
9th Grade Literature and Composition course. This is a required course for all Thomson High
School students in order to move into the 10th grade. The unit being assessment was a Short
Story unit with a focus on conflict, mood and tone, and general reading comprehension. The
assessment was given online using Google Forms, and the assessment items included 18
multiple-choice, 10 short answer, and 2 essay items. The following objectives and standards
were specifically assessed:

Objective GA Performance Standard Assessment

Items

1. Use terms and labels ELAGSE9-10L6: Acquire and use accurately 1 - 9, 19 - 23, 29
related to conflict general academic and domain-specific words
correctly and phrases, sufficient for reading, writing,
speaking, and listening at the college and
2. Identify conflicts in career readiness level; demonstrate
literature independence in gathering vocabulary
knowledge when considering a word or phrase
3. Analyze the effects of important to comprehension or expression.
specific conflicts on
character development ELAGSE9-10RL3: Analyze how complex
and plot characters(e.g., those with multiple or
conflicting motivations) develop over the
course of a text, interact with other characters,
and advance the plot or develop the theme.

4. Differentiate between ELAGSE9-10L6: Acquire and use accurately 10 - 18, 24 - 28,

mood and tone general academic and domain-specific words 30
and phrases, sufficient for reading, writing,
speaking, and listening at the college and
 5. Determine mood and
tone of a story
6. Analyze the impact of
specific words used in a
text
career readiness level; demonstrate
independence in gathering vocabulary
knowledge when considering a word or phrase
important to comprehension or expression.
ELAGSE9-10RL4: Determine the meaning of
words and phrases as they are used in the
text, including figurative and connotative
meanings; analyze the cumulative impact of
specific word choices on meaning and tone
(e.g., how the language evokes a sense of
time and place; how it sets a formal or informal
tone.)

III. Descriptive Analysis

Using Google Sheets, I was able to calculate the mean and standard deviation of the
assessment results:

Mean 25.04347826
(approx. 83.3%)

Standard Deviation 3.507485918

Below are the means and standard deviations for the specific objectives, which gives me
insight into which objectives the group of students as a whole consistently demonstrated
mastery and the average score in each section of objectives:

Mean Standard Deviation

Objectives 1 - 3 (Conflict) 20.20 3.45

Objective 4 - 6 (Mood/Tone) 18.20 2.81

By analyzing the mean scores of each assessment type, I found that students tended to
perform higher on the short answer assessment types, followed by the essay types. However,
there was not a significant difference between each assessment type. The mean for each
assessment type is found below:

Mean

MC 18.78
 SA 20

ESSAY 19

Below is the result of the Spearman-Brown reliability calculation:

Odd Total Even Total z-odd z-even z product Rnn Rel

9.00 12.00 1.86 0.33 0.61 0.73 0.84
9.00 12.00 1.86 0.33 0.61
11.00 10.00 0.76 1.33 1.01
13.00 14.00 -0.33 -0.68 0.23
13.00 13.00 -0.33 -0.17 0.06
14.00 14.00 -0.88 -0.68 0.60
14.00 14.00 -0.88 -0.68 0.60
12.00 14.00 0.21 -0.68 -0.14
13.00 14.00 -0.33 -0.68 0.23
13.00 13.00 -0.33 -0.17 0.06
14.00 14.00 -0.88 -0.68 0.60
14.00 13.00 -0.88 -0.17 0.15
12.00 12.00 0.21 0.33 0.07
13.00 14.00 -0.33 -0.68 0.23
14.00 14.00 -0.88 -0.68 0.60
14.00 13.00 -0.88 -0.17 0.15
13.00 14.00 -0.33 -0.68 0.23
13.00 13.00 -0.33 -0.17 0.06
8.00 6.00 2.40 3.34 8.03
12.00 14.00 0.21 -0.68 -0.14
11.00 10.00 0.76 1.33 1.01
15.00 14.00 -1.43 -0.68 0.97
11.00 10.00 0.76 1.33 1.01

Mean 12.39 12.65 16.80

SD 1.83 1.99
 The reliability score of this assessment is 0.84, which means that the reliability of this
assessment is mostly consistent. I can still possibly improve the reliability of this assessment by
reviewing questions with the highest standard deviation in student scores and adding additional
questions to the test that are similar to those with low standard deviation.

IV. Analysis of Student Strengths and Weaknesses

By analyzing the mean of questions that assessed each group of objectives, I was able
to identify the strengths and weaknesses of each student. Mastery of the objectives meant that
the student received a mean score of 80% or better for each section. The results are below:

Conflict Mood/Tone
Student 1 66.67% 66.67%
Student 2 80.00% 73.33%
Student 3 66.67% 73.33%
Student 4 93.33% 86.67%
Student 5 93.33% 80.00%
Student 6 100.00% 86.67%
Student 7 100.00% 86.67%
Student 8 86.67% 86.67%
Student 9 86.67% 93.33%
Student 10 93.33% 80.00%
Student 11 93.33% 93.33%
Student 12 100.00% 80.00%
Student 13 80.00% 80.00%
Student 14 93.33% 86.67%
Student 15 93.33% 93.33%
Student 16 100.00% 80.00%
Student 17 93.33% 86.67%
Student 18 86.67% 73.33%
Student 19 66.67% 40.00%
Student 20 86.67% 80.00%
Student 21 80.00% 66.67%
Student 22 93.33% 86.67%
Student 23 92.86% 57.14%
 Although this data is helpful for immediate feedback and improvement planning, I would
like to administer a more reliable assessment and analyze results before moving on to new
objectives.

V. Improvement Plan
Based on these assessment results, I would complete the following actions to improve
individual student achievement:
A. Increase reliability of assessment by adding additional assessment items.
B. Use a performance-based or higher-order-thinking-based assessment in order to
determine further reliability of results.
C. Reteach students with 79% or below average for each set of objectives in
small-group setting. This reteaching of the material will include review of terms
and additional practice with individualized feedback. These students will also be
re-tested using a similar (but not exact same) assessment and analyzed for
growth.
D. Students with 80% or higher scores in each objective set will be given enrichment
opportunities to encourage deeper understanding of the objectives and provide
further applications of skills/knowledge.