Student Work Analysis Protocol

Subject Area: Language Arts Grade Level: 9th Grade

Teacher Evaluator: Emily Pipkin

A. Reaching Consensus about Pro ciency

Read the assessment task, performance, and/or rubric, and:
1. Describe what the students were expected to do? - Write their rst body paragraph for their summa ve essay following a mini lesson detailing
the format and expecta ons
2. Which standards (CCSS or content standards) or curriculum expecta ons are being assessed? These should already be listed on your CEP Lesson
Plan Template - Write arguments to support claims in an analysis of substance topics or texts, using valid reasoning and relevant and su cient
evidence. (CCSS: W.9-10.1)
3. Describe what you would consider to be a pro cient response on this assessment? Exactly what would students need to say, write, or perform
for you to consider their work pro cient? - Students meet the expecta ons present on the assignment rubric for either the pro cient or advanced
categories (see a ached images below)

tt
ti

fi
fi

fi

fi
ti
ti
ti
fi
ffi
 B. Diagnosing Student Strengths and Needs
1. Read student work and without scoring, do a “quick sort” of students’ work by the general degree of the objec ves met, par ally met, not met. You
may need a “not sure” pile. A er sor ng, any papers in the “not sure” pile should be matched with the typical papers in one of the other exis ng piles.
Student rst names (or an assigned #) should be recorded in the columns in order to monitor progress over me

HIGH EXPECTED LOW

(Objec ves met) Expand Table as needed (Objec ves par ally met)
• Danika - Claim is the only serious loss • Canyon - 4/5’s across the board
of points • Braydon - Solid paper but reasoning
• Brook - Almost perfect except for needs work
evidence • Reese - Lacking evidence
• Angie - Evidence and reasoning could • Nicholas - Commentary could be be er
be improved • Colleen - Evidence and claim need
• Addison - Claim and evidence could be improving
improved but great other than that • Cooper - Claim, evidence and reasoning
is low
(Objec ves not met)
• Ariel - Solid grammar but the rest of
the paper is lacking
• Hailey - Lack of evidence and
reasoning
• Stetson - Evidence and reasoning are
low
• Emma (not submi ed)
• Hayden - General low scores,
especially evidence
• Madison - Evidence needs to be
improved
• Nick (not submi ed)
• Parker (not submi ed)
• Cheyenne (not submi ed)
• Julian (not submi ed)

20% OF CLASS 30% OF CLASS 50% OF CLASS

2. Describe what you were looking for as you sorted the assessments for high, expected, and low?

The student’s summa ve assessments are incrementally being completed, and this por on is from the day I taught my lesson. The rubric that is used to
grade provides me with the necessary informa on to separate the ers of their work, and their work is graded out of 20. 20 - 17 was high, 16 - 14 was
expected, and 15 - 8 was low (students are given 8 points if they turn in nothing to incen vize them to complete missing work).

C. Iden fying Instruc onal Next Steps

Discuss the learning needs for the students in each level considering the following ques ons:

ti
ti
ti
ti
fi

ti
tt
tt
tt
tt

ti

ti
tt

ft

ti

tt

ti

ti
ti
ti
ti

ti

ti

ti
ti
 1. What pa erns or trends are noted?

HIGH EXPECTED LOW

(Objec ves met) (Objec ves par ally met) (Objec ves not met)
• Body paragraph meets the advanced • Students wrote a body paragraph that • Assignment consisted of one or two
categories in the rubric (for the most part) addressed the essen al expecta ons sentences and hardly follows the
• The claims that are raised by students are
present in the rubric expecta ons on the assignment sheet
ones that not only surprise and deviate
from baseline understanding, but show • They clearly establish their claim and or rubric
thorough thinking and investment in the use evidence to back their ideas, but • Assignment failed to stay focused and
assignment don’t use reasoning to unpack their dri ed away from the original prompt
• Reasoning provides extensive unpacking of ideas to the extent that they could • Assignment was not submi ed
the evidence presented in the piece

2. Based on the diagnosis of student responses at the high, expected, and low levels, what instruc onal strategies will students at each level bene t
from? List those instruc onal strategies in the table below:

HIGH EXPECTED LOW

(Objec ves met) (Objec ves par ally met) (Objec ves not met)
Students show clear understanding of not Guided prac ce aimed primarily at the This sec on requires guided prac ce as
only the subject ma er, but also the re nement of student work would be the well as conferencing. Students at this er
expecta ons for the assignment. Keeping in sugges on for this category. While their either did not complete the work or were
mind their academic level, there is li le work is solid, it could use some far behind when it came to what was
improvement that could be made to their improvement, revision and expansion in a expected of them, so guided prac ce
work (given the expecta ons). Individual handful of areas. Pushing students to would help a lot when it comes to being
prac ce that encourages the use of more develop unique and hear elt claims as well explicit in instruc on and what they
evidence within their arguments that as digging deeper into the reasoning they should be doing. Conferencing would also
further eshes out their thoughts and use to jus fy the use of their evidence allow the teacher to understand the
claims in their paper would help them even would go a long way in improving their speci c roadblocks that are preven ng
more in terms of their comprehension of work here. student success and allow their work and
material/expecta ons. ideas to feel valued, ul mately mo va ng
them.
fi
ft
ti
fi
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
fl
ti
ti
tt
ti

ti

ti

ti
ti

ti
ti

tt
ti

ti
ti

ti
tf

tt
ti

ti
ti
ti
ti
tt

ti
ti

ti
fi
 D. Consider how your assessment(s) showed quali es with considera on to Grading for Equity (Accurate, Bias-free, Mo va onal)
Because the assignment uses a rubric in order to gauge student work, expecta ons are explicit and universal, making the project equitable. That being
said, I did not personally design the rubric as this is a summa ve assessment. I do think given how many students struggled to meet the expected and high
categories, perhaps the expecta ons should be lower in order to account for the large gap that can be seen in scores. It’s also worth no ng that this
assignment spans over a week so the lack of students comple ng their work can likely be a ributed to that. Regardless, I think that a rework of the rubric
would help increase equity because of the score gap, but aside from that I think that the means of grading this assessment were accurate, bias free and
mo va onal.
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
tt
ti
ti

ti