In order to analyze your student data, it’s helpful to know exactly what you’re looking for: What does proficient mean? What do the students still need to learn? This process of defining proficiency requires you as a teacher to shift your mindset from scoring (a summative examination) to diagnosing (a formative examination) student performance. Often teachers spend a great deal of time sorting student responses (either by letter grades or by rubric scores) and virtually no time diagnosing what students know and still need to learn. It is diagnostic information that is essential to helping teachers understand what to do next with their students’ instruction.
Error Analysis
Error Analysis to Guide Instruction
Error Analysis Example
Lesson Objectives
1. By the end of this 40 minute lesson, students will organize information to demonstrate an understanding of main ideas within a content area text through accurately charting with a Venn Diagram.
2. By the end of this lesson, students will accurately identify 8 elements for each of two ecosystems: aquatic and grassland and 5 elements that are common to both.
Formative Assessment in Error Analysis Example
After content instruction and guided practice on the elements of ecosystems and how to compare ecosystems, students completed the following as an independent practice: 1. read information about aquatic and grassland ecosystems (or listened, through the use of an MP3 player, to the information being read), 2. used a highlighter to highlight elements of each ecosystem as they read/listened (green for grassland and blue for aquatic), 3. identified common elements of both ecosystems by circling them, 4. recorded all elements on a Venn Diagram.
Work Sample Analysis for Student 1: Since he identified 13 aquatic elements, this student’s knowledge of that ecosystem is at mastery level, with one exception. He did not identify grass as being an element in both aquatic and grassland ecosystems (identified as only as an element in grassland ecosystem). This misconception was cleared up when I conferenced with him about his work. When examining his understanding of grassland ecosystems, it was found that although he demonstrated understanding of the main idea of the text material by correctly charting elements, his demonstrated knowledge about grassland ecosystems did not meet the lesson objective mastery criteria. His background knowledge about grasslands coupled with the text did not provide enough information for him to build a complete schema.
Future Instruction for Student 1: Additional instruction along with further practice will be provided through a Webquest. The Webquest will provide examples of several grasslands and the elements that make up the grassland ecosystem and the student will practice identifying the elements. His ability to determine common elements (compare) the two ecosystems is not at mastery level either but may be affected by his lack of complete schema about the grasslands. It is apparent that he understands the concept of compare/contrast since he correctly identified 3 elements that were the same.
Work Sample Analysis for Student 2 : Student was only able to identify 2 elements of the grassland ecosystem and 4 elements of the aquatic ecosystem. The elements he identified represented only animal elements although he did identify water as being common to both systems. This student’s difficulty identifying elements may be related to his challenges with memory and incomplete schema of the elements that make up an ecosystem. Despite being given a cue card reminding him of the different types of elements that make up ecosystems (along with examples), he is not identifying elements.
Future Instruction for Student 2: He needs more scaffolding in order to build his schema of the types of elements. Intensive direct instruction along with a structured Webquest activity in which he has to find examples of each type of element within ecosystems will be given. He did demonstrate understanding of the main idea of the text material by correctly charting elements and he was able to identify 4 elements that were common showing he understands the concept of compare/contrast, however, further practice (once he builds his schema of the types of elements) will be needed.
Work Sample Analysis for Student 3: Student was able to identify 13 elements of grassland ecosystems and 10 elements of aquatic ecosystems; she identified 6 elements in common and demonstrated she understood the concept of compare/contrast. The diversity of the elements she identified demonstrated she understood all of the types of elements in ecosystems. Her correct charting of the elements in the diagram demonstrates her understanding of the main idea of the text. The only element needing further probing was her categorization of “people” as being an element of both grassland and aquatic ecosystems. Her explanation showed a well developed schema and creative thought. She said that she had seen a TV program that showed people living in an underwater research station and that she also knew that there are African tribes that live on the grasslands.
Future Instruction for Student 3 (and DK, KS and TC): Students will create a third ecosystem to compare and contrast with grasslands aquatic ecosystems. Format for sharing this information with the class will also be a chosen activity (imovie, PowerPoint presentation, Webquest or other).
Analysis of Whole Class Learning: 13 out of the 15 students met or exceeded the evaluation criteria. They demonstrated their understanding of the elements of an ecosystem, the main idea of the text material and the concept of compare/contrast by correctly identifying the specified number of elements in both ecosystems and identifying the items that are common to both. The students who did not meet the criteria are included in the error analysis above along with possible reasons for lack of mastery and interventions directed at guiding them toward mastery.
Future Instruction for Whole Class: Differentiation of instruction within the next teaching cycle will follow the learning needs of the students. Students not meeting criteria will be provided instruction and practice as outlined above (intensive instruction will be focused on getting them to the level of understanding needed to join the next group). Students meeting criteria will be provided instruction and practice to move them to generalization of knowledge of ecosystem elements. Students exceeding the criteria will work on synthesizing and applying their knowledge of ecosystems by creating a new ecosystem.
| Student |
8 Grassland Elements |
8 Aquatic Elements |
5 Common Elements |
Notes |
| DK |
* |
* |
* |
|
| KS |
* |
* |
* |
|
| CC |
– |
+ |
+ |
See notes for student 1 above |
| HB |
+ |
+ |
– |
Misunderstood ‘common’ |
| EG |
+ |
+ |
+ |
|
| NM |
– |
– |
– |
See notes for student 2 above |
| TL |
+ |
+ |
+ |
|
| CF |
+ |
+ |
+ |
|
| TC |
* |
* |
* |
|
| CW |
+ |
+ |
+ |
|
| NT |
+ |
* |
* |
|
| TK |
+ |
+ |
+ |
|
| GP |
* |
+ |
+ |
|
| JP |
+ |
* |
+ |
|
| SH |
* |
* |
* |
See notes for student 3 above |
| Key:(-) Does not meet criteria,(+) Meets Criteria, (*) Exceeds Criteria
Note: The students in this category added elements beyond what was found in the text. This demonstrates a very well developed schema of the ecosystems and generalization skills related to their knowledge of ecosystem elements. |
Click Here for Resource
A CEP Student Example (aligning with baseline data noted above):
Assessment data shows that while students are able to organize a paragraph using prompts and graphic organizers, they struggle to apply rules to ensure that each sentence contains the elements that make them complete before moving onto the next sentence. The only criteria in which the majority of students was successful was “Support of topic sentence”. No students successfully wrote complete sentences, spelled all words correctly, or wrote with proper grammar. This impacts the readability of their writing and can be a cause of student negative behaviors when asked to edit their work.