Examining Student Work – Part II Response

The particular goals for this assessment were to see if students could complete the Punnett squares, and identify the genotype and phenotype ratios. In the context of the unit, the quiz was a higher stakes assessment because we had been working on the skills in class individually and completing problems on the board together.

I wanted to have some evidence showing that students understood the material but make it easy enough so that I could get the data quickly. I decided to go with a 1-question quiz to accomplish this. I ended up designing the quiz myself which was a part of the skills I had been developing at the time.

Students were asked to complete the quiz on their own; they had been working in groups throughout the week. This quiz was an end to the series of lessons working on Punnett square skills. We had worked through a lab recently where students had attempted to complete a Punnett square based off of a pedigree. They also had to figure out what the alleles for the parents were by looking at families of gummi bears. This and other practice with Punnett squares and traits were used to help improve understanding. Students had about 20 minutes to complete the quiz. Most did not need the entire time. I believe I administered the quiz somewhere in the middle of the week.

My main goal was to see if they could setup the Punnett square and actually complete the crosses themselves. Beyond that, the genotype and phenotype ratio understanding I was less concerned about since we had not spent as much time with it. Even though the quiz was scored out of 6 points, I could confidently say that most students were able to setup the Punnett square part of the quiz. I knew after grading, that I would have to review the part on genotype and phenotype ratios. It extended from a weak understanding of the difference between genotypes and phenotypes in general.

The sample that we are looking at here represents the median score, the high and low end. Overall, the scores showed clearly that they either understood it completely or they did not at all. For the 8A period, two thirds of the class scored in the 5-6 point range and the rest of the students fell in the 1-2 point range. Only one person got a 3 out of 6. In the 8B period, students performed considerably better. Eleven students got A’s, 5 got B’s, and 5 failed the test. The reason for this varies too, generally students who took notes and participated did better. More often I was surprised by how well certain students did. People who failed the quiz were those who were easily distracted in class or were frequently unprepared.

Familiarity with the students plays a role in the student performance on this quiz and also being able to teach two periods makes for improved outcomes. Depending on who is in second period that day would affect how they learned the material. I try to adjust and keep student progress at a similar pace but it’s definitely been challenging in that regard because the schedule changes day to day.

Among the strategies that have helped with student growth and relationship building include working one on one and making accommodations when I need to. I went over the quiz right afterwards with the students and a lot of them made small mistakes with the Punnett square skills. I was able to move forward, knowing how they did on the quiz and it was a reasonably flexible assessment to use. Being able to grade it immediately afterwards allowed me to decide where I would go with the next day’s lesson.

One particular student, Kaitlyn, showed me that she understands the concepts better because I would check in and she’d describe the process or show a correctly completed Punnett square. I also make an effort to engage her in participation by repeating that we’re all just practicing so it’s worth it to try and possibly get things wrong. For this quiz, she got a 4 out of 6 and only had an issue with the genotype and phenotype ratios.

Next Up: Reflections