Professional Learning Through Test Analysis

by Carol Brown Dodson

When the new school year begins and teachers plan how they can improve instruction and student achievement, they often wonder how they can possibly cover all the potential items that will appear on the Ohio Graduation Test. Sometimes, it’s tempting just to print the released items and ask the students to answer the questions and practice responding to the questions that have been used on past tests.

But knowledge of content and experience with teaching and learning serve as a reminder for all educators that learning the answer to a particular question does not prepare students for the test. Teachers who work with reading strategies to help students comprehend what they read know that knowledge alone is also not enough. Because the test is in fact a reading test, students must be able to read and comprehend the text.

What can teachers do to improve student achievement?

One way to increase student achievement is for schools to provide opportunities for teachers to collaborate as they deconstruct questions, analyze student responses, and determine ways to apply their knowledge to students’ reading and ultimate achievement. Teachers deepen their knowledge and extend their professional learning by looking at and talking about student answers. Consider the following scenario and the ways in which teachers can think deeply about why their students answered a question with a wrong answer.

Tenth-grade English language arts and reading teachers are meeting to consider their next steps in test preparation so their students will reach proficiency on the OGT. One of the teacher leaders, Maya, brings copies of some released items and sample student responses. The first question the teachers look at is a multiple-choice question based on the passage “Trees.”

To read the paragraph, students had to go back to the passage. The part they needed to read is reprinted below:

After reading the question and the paragraph, the teachers might engage in a conversation that goes something like this:

Pat: I looked at the question about identifying an example of a euphemism and was shocked to see that only 41 percent of the students answered the question correctly. What could they have been thinking?

Dylan: They obviously don’t know what a euphemism is. None of the other choices looks like a euphemism.

Toni: They should have known the answer. I always teach euphemism and other figurative language to my students.

Maya: I think our first step is to look at the question and the passage to see why so many chose the wrong answer.

The teachers proceed to read the first paragraph silently and then scribble a few notes on their papers. Toni jumps into the discussion.

Toni: You know, even though the question says “paragraph 1,” I was thinking that students should have memorized terms like euphemism. I didn’t even look at the paragraph. I wonder how many students did the same thing. They might have ignored the explanation of euphemism that appears in the first paragraph.

Dylan: And they probably didn’t even see the example of a euphemism in the text.

Pat: If they ignored that part, then they probably guessed at the answer unless they really knew the meaning of euphemism.

Maya: I agree. So the problem is, how do we get students to see these kinds of avoidable errors?

Dylan: Why can’t we lead them through the same discussion we just had? They might need more direction, but I think they can discover the same things we did.

Pat: The question wasn’t nearly as hard as it seemed. As I see it, there are two steps that a student has to take to find the answer. First, it’s important to determine the meaning of euphemism by reading the paragraph in the passage. There was even an example of a euphemism in the paragraph. Then the student has to go back to the question and find a phrase that does the same thing as the phrase “having the oak tree ‘removed’” accomplished in the passage.

Toni: I think you're right. If we can help students see those steps, they might remember that they should always go back to the passage before answering a question.

Dylan: That means that we don’t need to use more exercises to help students recognize euphemisms. That’s not going to increase student achievement.

Toni: Right! The usual test-taking strategies—things like eliminating choices and so on—don’t work here. We need to get our students to look beyond the questions and possible answers. So my question is, how can I convince my students to return to important parts of the passage?

Maya: Good question! Let’s keep it in mind as we look at some resources.

Maya shares the AdLIT site on ORC and points out the section titled “Reading Strategies.” Once they look over the strategies, the teachers decide to use the ten strategies as the content for future meetings.

The teachers look over the first strategy, “Setting a Purpose for Reading,” and discover that this section, written by an expert Ohio educator, contains what they need for teaching their students to set a purpose for their reading.

The teachers might then plan future meetings around each of the ten strategies, with the  teachers taking turns presenting a strategy. Between meetings, they might use the strategy with their students. Because the strategies include activities, lessons, and additional professional development articles, the group described in the scenario might decide to try out some of the lessons and activities to teach each of the strategies.

Next steps

A scenario such as this is likely to lead to several other discussion topics and even to a change in instructional planning and classroom practice as teachers continue to examine the released OGT items. Teachers become aware of what their students need to know and be able to do in order to do well on the OGT questions. Other possibilities for teachers’ professional learning include:

• Give students a test based on the same passage (“Trees”) and include additional questions from the released-item bank of questions. After testing their students, teachers can interview some of their students to determine why they chose certain answers or, in the case of a short-answer or extended-response item, why they decided to give a particular answer or example. Teachers bring student papers to another meeting where they examine the answers so they can begin to see the kinds of errors students are making. Often, seeing students’ wrong answers helps us to understand their thinking and figure out why they gave the answer they did. The interviews with students about their answers will enrich these conversations.
• Plan another meeting around additional test items, but next time, focus on short-answer and extended-response questions. Released OGT items, scoring rubrics, and student responses, found on ODE’s Success website, provide the context for the meeting.
• Spend some time looking over the benchmarks covered by the items. In the case of the question about a euphemism, the benchmark is from the acquisition of vocabulary standard, but the question is closely related to some literary text benchmarks as well. A discussion of the differences and similarities of the benchmarks is useful so that teachers can determine ways to distinguish among the benchmarks and to deepen their knowledge of the benchmarks and the indicators.

Reflection

Consider what has taken place during and after the team meeting. The teachers extended their professional learning and created a plan for ongoing, building-level professional learning opportunities and experiences. They are now engaged in a study of reading strategies and will use the strategies and accompanying activities to help their students become better readers. They will also continue to examine OGT questions closely as they plan for embedded instruction. The additional resources and columns described below will enhance and support the kind of professional learning that is occurring through this study.

More ORC resources and In Perspective columns

"Will This Be on the Test?!" Literacy and Assessment in High School English
This classroom vignette written by Ohio high school teacher Colleen Ruggieri deals with this ever-present question about the content students need to learn. The author highlights strategies and provides insights for assessment: Positive Results with Pre-Assessment, K-W-L-R Charts, Anticipation Guides, Making Meaning by Marking the Text, Double-Entry Diaries, and From Study Guides to Comprehension Construction. Each type of assessment is described in detail and includes activities.

You might also want to revisit an earlier OGT column that examines the results of a sample OGT question in order to better help students prepare for the Ohio Graduation Test.

A Look at the OGT: Examining Results
The article includes the sections (1) "How Did Students Perform on This Question?" (2) "How Can I Help Them Improve?" (3) How Well Do Students Perform on a Constructed-Response Item?" (4) "How Can They Improve Their Responses?" and (5) "Why Do Students Miss Easy Questions?" A list of ORC websites is included in response to each of the five sections above, and all websites link to outstanding educational resources for teaching.

Don’t forget to go to the archives for the In Perspective magazine. You can search for more articles by title, date, or OGT columns at http://www.ohiorc.org/adlit/.

Note: The links provided for each ORC resource take you to the ORC page that includes a list of standards, benchmarks, and grade-level indicators covered by the resource. From that page, you can click the URL to go directly to the resource. In case you are not familiar with ORC's records, you can read a very brief explanation of the resource commentaries and the records.

Carol Brown Dodson is the outreach specialist for the Ohio Resource Center. Dodson was an English language arts consultant for the Ohio Department of Education and is past president of OCTELA (Ohio Council of Teachers of English Language Arts). Dodson, formerly a high school English teacher, department chair, and supervisor of English language arts in Columbus Public Schools, serves on the Ohio Graduation Test Reading Content Committee.

Return to top