Next, as previously noted, I had to give a diagnostic test to my students to measure what they knew at the beginning of the course and will give it again at the end. These are the first results.
Class Description: Class: Street Law Period: 1
Number of Students: 13
Gender Breakdown: 4 females, 9 males
Special Education Breakdown: 0
English Language Learners Breakdown: 0
Analysis of performance on standardized or diagnostic test: Test administered on 10/10/08
TOTAL: 7 Students, 3 females, 4 males
50% of students were able to identify 1 example of a federal crime from a choice of 4.
37% of students were able to identify the 1 non-federal crime from a choice of 4.
50% of students were able to identify the 4 types of federal crime.
37% of students were able to identify the 3 amendments pertaining to the right to trial by jury.
25% of students were able to describe the jury selection process.
25% of students were able to identify the 2 factors that make some crimes more serious than others.
37% of students were able to identify and describe 1st degree murder.
37% of students were able to identify factors (like self-defense) that would make a “crime” not a crime.
44% of students were able to identify legal issues in a visual setting (like a cartoon).
37% of students were able to identify freedom of speech issues in a visual setting (like a cartoon).
Class Description: Class: World History and Geography II Period: 3
Number of Students: 24
Gender Breakdown: 8 females, 16 males
Special Education Breakdown: 3
English Language Learners Breakdown: 0
Analysis of performance on standardized or diagnostic test: Test administered on 10/8/08
TOTAL: 11 Students, 3 females, 8 males
50% of students were able to answer a question based on a Venn diagram.
40% of students were able to answer a question based on a map.
10% of students were able to answer a question based on a chart with comparing percentages.
80% of students were able to answer a question based on given percentages.
40% of students were able to answer a question based on a document/reading.
60% of students were able to answer a question based on a timeline.
Class Description: Class: World History and Geography II Period:4
Number of Students: 21
Gender Breakdown: 4 females, 17 males
Special Education Breakdown: 4
English Language Learners Breakdown: 0
Analysis of performance on standardized or diagnostic test: Test administered on 10/8/08
TOTAL: 11 Students, 3 females, 8 males
45% of students were able to answer a question based on a Venn diagram.
45% of students were able to answer a question based on a map.
36% of students were able to answer a question based on a chart with comparing percentages.
91% of students were able to answer a question based on a chart with given percentages.
43% of students were able to answer a question based on a document/reading.
60% of students were able to answer a question based on a timeline.
NOTE ABOUT THIS DATA:
In my opinion, these tests were not very accurate or well-prepared diagnostics. I will address both classes below.
For the Street Law class, the objective of the course, as defined by me and by Georgetown Law School (the partner), is not one that is very measurable with a paper and pencil test. The goals of the course are to encourage students in independent thought, critical thinking, and civic responsibility. We do this by engaging the students in mock trials, discussions, and activities, not with paper and pencil tests (and if we do test, it is short answers and essays, rather than multiple choice tests). For an accurate diagnostic to be developed for this class, it would have to be created in partner with Georgetown Law School and involve observations and a portfolio of work. This was not possible to create on such short notice (I was notified on October 7 that I would need to give a diagnostic test to measure student growth)—such a diagnostic would need to be developed over a period of months or an entire school year.
The World History and Geography II diagnostic was more useful, but still not ideal. Again, this is because my goals and objectives for the class are difficult to measure with a traditional diagnostic. I focus on critical thinking skills, getting students to generally know major events/people/things that society expects them to know (what Ellis Island is, etc), getting their literacy skills up, encouraging them to see history as living and breathing, improving their map skills, getting them to apply a 5 paragraph essay to ANYTHING, ramping them up to take AP classes and think about college skills, etc. I created this diagnostic test with the crappy test maker that the crappy textbook provides in about 30 seconds. While that is amazing and was helpful to be able to create a test so quickly, the test itself was terrible. It didn't, and I could never expect it to, cover the material that I cover, the skills that I cover, the way that I cover it. Instead of asking higher thinking-level questions like "Why?" and "How?", it asked questions like "This Japanese word, ______, means _____" And they were all multiple choice and true/false questions. It was shitty. You cannot measure accurately what students know from this kind of test, even if they were in a suburban school. And you certainly cannot measure what I teach which this kind of test. I feel that the best diagnostic test would be much more AP style. And even then, they would get frustrated with it in the beginning because they don't know anything and because it is justifiably HARD. What I did get out of the diagnostic is that only about a little less than half of them can read a map, most of them cannot compare percentages, they are ok with timelines, and we need to work on Venn diagrams and DBQs. Fair enough, I guess.
No comments:
Post a Comment