Data can be intimidating. Collecting data that is specific to a learning objective and breaking it down in ways that can easily translate to instructional strategies can make the use of data less daunting. “In its simplest form, data is a collection of facts and statistics that can be used for planning or analysis.” ( RethinkEd.com ) Data provides teachers with the evidence they need to substantiate the instructional choices they make for their students. Data can also help teachers monitor students ‘ progress as they progress through a unit . Performance assessments, pre-tests, student conferences, attendance, and test scores are some examples of data sources that help inform classroom, school, and district decisions. What is baseline data and how is it collected? Baseline data measures student understanding, knowledge or performance prior to intervention or teaching. It might show the results of students’ performance on a pre-assessment the same or similar to post-assessment planned to be implemented following instruction . At the Center for Educator Preparation our Teacher Candidates begin lesson planning once a standard has been identified, by implementing a pre-assessment that will provide data showing students’ current understanding levels of the content planned to be taught. It is extremely helpful to first determine the post-assessment that will show students’ mastery of that content. This should show what students learned/know/do following the lesson. Ideally a pre-assessment will provide students an opportunity to show knowledge/understanding beyond what is planned to be taught so that a teacher can provide appropriately challenging content that will offer all students an opportunity to progress in their learning and application of learning. This may result in some students being expected to master a different level of content or skill than the majority of their peers, resulting in more than one lesson objective being created. It may be necessary to implement a second pre-assessment if students show that they have already mastered content presented in the pre-assessment. This is time well spent as it will support wise use of students’ time in the classroom as they focus on what they need to learn rather than wasting precious time for learning. CEP Student Example: Paragraph Prompt & Organization Placement Assessments Paragraph Prompt: 1 point each for beginning capitalization of each sentence (CA), ending punctuation of each sentence (P), use of complete sentences (CS), support of topic sentence (SS), spelling (SP), and grammar (G). Paragraph Organization: 1 point each for a sentence that supports the topic. Baseline data can be collected through various measures including: percent accuracy, frequency, duration, rate and intervals. Number of words spelled correctly Percentage of math problems solved correctly Vocabulary words correctly defined Key: NM – did not meet expectations M : met expectations E : exceeded expectations Number of words read Number of times a student gets out of their seat Number of times students raise their hands How long a student engages in tantrum behavior How long a student engages in peer interactions How long a student remains on task Number of words read per minute Number of math problems completed per minute Number of tantrums per hour The occurrence of body rocking The occurrence of staying in an assigned area The occurrence of off-task behavior Without baseline data, it is difficult to show improvement in learning in a class as a whole or in identified subgroups of that class: identified students, students ready for additional challenge, students who speak English as a second language, etc. Baseline data should always serve as a starting point for instruction and can be gathered from prior student work, student assessment scores (classroom or standardized), or other anecdotal data. It is not recommended that teachers use homework as baseline data, since it is difficult to ascertain whether or not students’ completed the work independently. RethinkEd | 19 W 21st Street, Suite 403 | New York, NY | info@reth inkbenefits.com info@rethinkEd.com Section 2 of the CPS lesson plan depicts the prior evidence and baseline data (2a.) that justifies the lesson objective and calls for an analysis of this data. To earn full points on this portion of the lesson plan, the baseline data must be gathered from a pretest directly targeting the skills/content to be taught in the lesson. It is most effective and beneficial to “Keep it simple”. Again, a teacher might wisely create or determine a post-assessment aligned with the content planned to be taught and implement this as the pre-assessment. For example, if a third grade teacher plans to teach the three branches of government and the role or purpose of each, preassessment to analyze before formally creating the lesson objective and planning the lesson may consist of asking individuals to write/tell the three branches of government and everything they know about each branch. It is wise to include questions/problems that provide an opportunity for students to show understanding/skill beyond the content planned to be mastered, as the above example would. This supports planning that will appropriately challenge all students, including those who already know/understand the content the teacher anticipates covering in instruction. Open-ended assessments are IDEAL. Assessments should not be presented in true/false or multiple choice format . This supports students’ guessing and doesn’t show a student’s level of understanding with validity. In sequential lessons with objectives that build on one another, new prior evidence might include the data and work samples from the most recent preceding lesson.

Once pretest data has been collected, it must be analyzed to determine an appropriate instructional response for each student (section 2b. of lesson plan). To do so, consider proficiency in regard to your objective as described above. Which students are close to proficiency based on their pretest data? Which students are far from proficiency and will need scaffolded support to move toward mastery? Which students demonstrate the need to be further challenged, thinking at a higher level than anticipated? Complete an error analysis for each student’s pretest mistakes and describe the results in section 2b. Next, look for patterns in student understanding and misunderstanding in an effort to determine possible student groupings during the lesson. Representing your data in a chart or table to bring these patterns to light is ideal. It is not necessary to create elaborate graphs or visuals. Remember this is planning for a single lesson which may be restricted to a timeframe as minimal as 30 minutes. A chart or table clearly showing what students were to do/know along with each student’s performance (possibly through a key showing level of success) is ideal. It is most beneficial if students’ independent performance is assessed. When an objective states, “With support”, it is unclear as to the level of support provided, removing validity. Include a copy or link to your pre-assessment. Show the overall results and provide numerical data that serves as evidence of students’ performance. Provide a table or chart that clearly shows each individual’s performance . Write/revise lesson objective(s) Identify how to differentiate instruction for individual students and groups of students (Knowing students well, along with referring to Bloom’s Taxonomy, is extremely helpful.) Plan instructional activities Select/create assessments (adapted as needed to meet specific students’ needs, both those needing support and those needing challenge) 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 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. 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 of Data Analysis (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. Once you’ve analyzed your data and have created your lesson objective, consider which professional resources might be able to help you plan your instruction for your students. This might include a website, an experienced teacher, professional texts, field experts on social media and school specialists. You will note constructive feedback from consulting these resources which directly supports your instructional decisions and approach. View the following video to see how a PLN might analyze student data to inform future instruction. Example of a CEP Student’s Professional Learning Network Input: Lesson Planning 101 Copyright © 2019 by Deborah Kolling and Kate Shumway-Pitt is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License , except where otherwise noted. Share This Book