Student Learning Analysis

Cynthia Lepper

Introduction:

I am completing my student teaching internship at Wiley Elementary. It is in the Utica

Community School District. I am teaching a second grade class of twenty students. The diversity seen
at Wiley can be seen in this class. India, Mexico, Iraq, and Albania are just a couple of the countries
represented in the class. Of the twenty students, nine are girls and eleven are boys. Out of the
twenty students in the class, four scored the lowest. I chose the objective of being able to divide
words into parts because I noticed during this unit that these students had difficulty. Understanding
this task helps speed the process of decoding. Knowing the rules for syllable division can help
students read words more accurately and fluently. Understanding syllables can also help students
learn to spell words correctly. This assignment was used to track, monitor, check for understanding,
and assist students in the area of syllabication in their reading phonological awareness. During this
time, I was able to identify four students who did not understand the concept of dividing words into
parts. I was able to provide individual and small group assistance to help them grow in this area. The
benchmark I identified for this area is: EERF.2.3.a-c. Apply letter-sound and word analysis skills in
decoding words. In context, identify 18 or more letter-sound associations. To keep the confidentiality
of the names used in this report I replaced the names with student 1- 4. Of the four selected
students, there was an accumulation of one boy and three girls. These four students were very
willing to work in a group and individually. Attendance was a factor when working with the selected
group. Prior to this assignment, I noticed that student 2 would bring a challenge to this task because
she is accustomed to missing school on a regular basis. As a result, her reading level and academic
performance reflect her lack of presence in the classroom. Nevertheless, it was clear that she
needed extra support and that it would be beneficial to receive additional attention. I would like to
note that on the days I provided the pre- and post-test, group practice, and individual practice, all
students were present.

Section I. Goals and Standards:

The standard was chosen from Unit 2 of the second grade mass curriculum, McGraw Hill
Reading Wonders. It aligns with the reading benchmark standard EERF.2.3.a–c. Apply letter-sound
and word analysis skills in decoding words. In context, identify 18 or more letter-sound associations.
The objective for this phonemic awareness intervention is that students will be able to know and
apply grade-level phonics and word analysis skills in decoding words. Students will be able to
distinguish long and short vowels when reading regularly spelled one-syllable words. Students will
be able to know spelling-sound correspondences for additional common vowel teams. Students will
be able to decode regularly spelled two-syllable words with long vowels.
Section II. Assessment Information Gathered:

The assessment I used as an analysis was a pretest I created myself. The area the students
were struggling with was very clear. I looked at their NWEA phonemic awareness results skills
checklist. All four students fell below grade level, and their lowest section was vocabulary use and
function. The students were aware that the pre-assessment would not be graded but rather be used
as a way for me to see how much I needed to intervene and help them. The assessment was
administered to four students. The pre-test is a word-part sort with twelve words. The NWEA calls
syllables ‘word parts,’ so I wanted to make sure I used the same language interchangeably so they
knew it meant the same thing. The students had to read the word, identify the number of syllables,
and write the word under one word part or two word parts. This pre-test provided me with an
adequate amount of data to analyze and compare. The horizontal axis on the bar graph shows four
students that took the pre assessment. The vertical axis shows the score out of 100% that the
questions were eligible for. As seen on the bar graph, for the pre assessment score, all students
scored under 50%. Student one and two got 7 out of 12 correct, the third student got 9 out of 12
correct, and the fourth student got 8 out of 12 correct. This data was not entered into a district
system.

Pre assessment Master copy:

Student 1: Student 2:

Student 3: Student 4:
Section III. Analysis of Student Thinking:

The pre-test scores from the question on the analysis showed that all four students scored
under 50%. I gave the assessment to each student individually. After the assessment, I did let each
student know that I appreciated that they gave this evaluation their best effort. I let them know the
knowledge I gain from this will enable me to better target my instruction or how I teach them going
forward. When looking at the pre assessment, I noticed a pattern that was present in all of the
students' answers. The students were unsure whether a word had one or two word parts. They did
not know how to determine how to get the answer. What I noticed is that if a word had the same
two letters in it, they placed it under two word parts, even if it only had one syllable. For example,
the words spoon, smell, and sleep are one-word parts, but because they had two of the same letters
consecutively, the students assumed it was a two-word part. Words that were correctly placed like
rabbit, happy, and tennis also followed the same pattern, but I believe they were placed there
because the word had two of the same letters consecutively in the word. When it came to words like
problem and sister, those were placed in one-word parts even though they have two syllables. I
believe this was the case because these words did not have two of the same letter in the word. The
extra support that I thought about for the assessment was intervention and reteaching them the
skill. This skill is crucial for them to understand because understanding this task facilitates processing
words more quickly. Students who understand the syllable division rules will read words more
accurately and fluently. Syllable knowledge can also aid students in learning how to correctly spell
words. Below are some student samples where I noticed they were off course. Based on these
results, I knew my instructional focus moving forward was on teaching students how to divide words
into parts.

Student sample 1 Part A Student sample 1 Part B

Student sample 2 Part A Student sample 2 Part B

 Student sample 3 Part A Student sample 3 Part B

Student sample 4 Part A Student sample 4 Part B

Student samples findings

Part A: The students were unsure about whether a word had one or two parts. They had no idea
how to figure out how to find the solution. What I found was that, even if a word only had one
syllable, it was still classified under two word portions if it had the same two letters. Even though
these words contain two syllables, they were grouped together as one-part components when it
came to angel, dinosaur, and elephant. Car was the only one-word syllable that was correctly placed
by three students.

Part B: The students had to say the name of each animal and make a choice on how many word
parts they heard. The number they came up with was the number they would circle. The students
now had a picture and the word. It was clear the student still did not understand. After evaluating
the work, it seems to me like they were counting the letters and circling that number. For example,
the words "fox" and "cat" have one syllable, so they circled the number 3. The word panda has five
letters, and they circled the number 5. All the other words had more than five, and number 5 was
circled for all the remaining questions.

Section IV Subsequent instruction is informed by the analysis of student thinking:

Based on the pre-assessment and other practice worksheets on the same objective of
dividing words into parts, I knew dividing words was a common area of concern for these four
students since they did not meet the standard. My first strategy that I came up with is a domino
game. I would tell the students to tell me what pictures, what one domino piece I would clap the
syllables with them to model it first, and then ask them how many word parts we counted. The first
time we did it, I pointed to the picture. The students would tell me what the picture was, and then
we would clap together. I paid extra attention and looked for things that they were doing that were
messing them up. I then asked for the number of syllables in the word. If they were incorrect, I
would model it and ask them how many syllables they heard. For example I had one student when it
came to one word syllables they kept having a hard time. I would ask them to clap out "cat" or "bus,"
and they would longate the a sound and the u sound so they kept counting it as two syllables; they
were saying ca-at and bu-us. I would then clap it out correctly so the student could hear the mistake
that was being made. After some serious practice, the students started to feel more comfortable and
confident. This game was played individually.

Activity 1:
 My second activity was a game board I created that resembled Candy Land. Each card had a
picture, and on the other side of the picture was the number of syllables the word had. This game
was played with all four students. Each student placed their game piece on the start space. The first
player to draw a card would say the word on the card and count the syllables. The student would
then move the same number of spaces on the game board. The first one to get to the finish line won
the game. They all took turns. After practicing with them individually on the previous game before
and watching their growth I had confidence that they could execute the game properly. I was there
to observe the whole game. The students also helped each other if they were unsure of the answer
or if the answer was wrong. They would help each other clap out the word to figure out the number
of word parts.

Activity 2:

Section V. Additional Assessment Information Gathered to Determine Student Growth:

The students were aware that the post-assessment would not be graded but rather used as a
way for me to see how much they had grown and improved in this skill. It would also let me know if
there are things we should continue working on. The post-assessment was identical to the
pre-assessment. As seen in the graph, all four students who took the pre-assessment had an
increase in their score in their post-assessment. Student one increased their score by 44%, student
two increased by 57%, student three increased by 61%, and the fourth student increased their score
by 67%. All four students know how to divide syllables. They are continuing to clap out their
syllables, which is serving as an excellent tool to stretch out their words with longer words while
reading. I will continue working one-on-one with them and as a group. I did provide feedback to the
students to let them know I had noticed their improvement and how far they had come. I wanted to
let them know that I am proud of them. I also showed them their pre- and post-assessments, which
we compared. I wanted to see if they could see the mistakes that they were making before they
understood the concept. This week we had parent-teacher conferences, so I informed the parents of
the students that I have been working with them, what we did, and their growth since the
beginning. This data was not entered into a district system.

Student 1: Student 2:

Student 3: Student 4:
Conclusion:

Although growth was evident, providing additional time for subsequent instruction with the
students will be a point of reference while working with small groups in the future. The activities
that I created for these four students, I felt, were going to be beneficial and suited them best. If I was
doing this again, I would try to do the same and then try to tailor it more specifically to the students'
needs. I felt like because I tailored my syllable activities to resemble games that the students are
familiar with, they would understand the concept, and that is exactly what happened. This might not
always be the case, and so that is also something to think about if I were to do it again. After
performing this task with these four students, this gives me a basis for where to begin when pulling
small groups from any subject. The experiences gained from this analysis are transitional for all core
subjects provided in elementary school. Gaining experience in recognizing students that need
additional support, establishing goals that are reasonable for students’ abilities, and providing
additional support to selected students while preparing them to reach their goals is crucial for
providing instruction in all core subjects.