ANALYZING ASSESSMENT DATA

February 22, 2023

ANALYZING ASSESSMENT DATA

Order Number	65363737383
Type of Project	ESSAY/DISERTATION
Writer Level	PHD/MASTERS CERTIFIED
Format	APA/MLA/HARVARD/OXFORD
Academic Sources	10 -20
Page Count	4-8 PAGES

Instructions/Descriptions

ANALYZING ASSESSMENT DATA

In this task, you will analyze the data set provided via the attached “Data Set Assignment Form” by reporting summative proficiency scores for students, explaining the method used to determine those scores, and disaggregating the data based on student subgroups. Then, you will evaluate the data to draw conclusions about individual student and whole-class proficiency, aberrant patterns or outliers, and student learning at the subgroup level. SCENARIO To begin work on this task, download the attached “Data Set Assignment Form.” In this form, enter your name and the last six digits of your student identification number into the spreadsheet. For example, if your student ID number were 000555XYZ, then you would enter 555XYZ into the specified cells in the spreadsheet. Once you do this, the table will update to present your randomly assigned data set that you will use to complete this task. The data generated within the attached “Data Set Assignment Form” represents the scores students earned on eight unique assessments that were scored using the same proficiency scale created to measure mastery toward a specific content standard. REQUIREMENTS Your submission must be your original work. No more than a combined total of 30% of the submission and no more than a 10% match to any one individual source can be directly quoted or closely paraphrased from sources, even if cited correctly. The originality report that is provided when you submit your task can be used as a guide. You must use the rubric to direct the creation of your submission because it provides detailed criteria that will be used to evaluate your work. Each requirement below may be evaluated by more than one rubric aspect. The rubric aspect titles may contain hyperlinks to relevant portions of the course. Tasks may not be submitted as cloud links, such as links to Google Docs, Google Slides, OneDrive, etc., unless specified in the task requirements. All other submissions must be file types that are uploaded and submitted as attachments (e.g., .docx, .pdf, .ppt). A. Analyze the assessment data from the attached “Data Set Assignment Form” by doing the following: 1. Submit a table reporting an overall summative proficiency score for each student for the measurement topic. 2. Explain how the summative proficiency scores in part A1 were determined. 3. Disaggregate the data according to student subgroups. B. Evaluate students’ summative scores by doing the following: 1. Draw conclusions about student learning based on patterns of scores at the individual student and whole-class level. 2. Draw conclusions about any outliers or aberrant patterns present in the data set at the individual student level. 3. Draw conclusions about student learning at the subgroup level based on the disaggregated data. C. Acknowledge sources, using APA-formatted in-text citations and references, for content that is quoted, paraphrased, or summarized. D. Demonstrate professional communication in the content and presentation of your submission.

[Order Now]

ANALYZING ASSESSMENT DATA

RUBRIC

Excellent Quality

95-100%

Introduction

45-41 points

The context and relevance of the issue, as well as a clear description of the study aim, are presented. The history of searches is discussed.

Literature Support

91-84 points

The context and relevance of the issue, as well as a clear description of the study aim, are presented. The history of searches is discussed.

Methodology

58-53 points

With titles for each slide as well as bulleted sections to group relevant information as required, the content is well-organized. Excellent use of typeface, color, images, effects, and so on to improve readability and presenting content. The minimum length criterion of 10 slides/pages is reached.

Average Score

50-85%

40-38 points

More depth/information is required for the context and importance, otherwise the study detail will be unclear. There is no search history information supplied.

83-76 points

There is a review of important theoretical literature, however there is limited integration of research into problem-related ideas. The review is just partly focused and arranged. There is research that both supports and opposes. A summary of the material given is provided. The conclusion may or may not include a biblical integration.

52-49 points

The content is somewhat ordered, but there is no discernible organization. The use of typeface, color, graphics, effects, and so on may sometimes distract from the presenting substance. It is possible that the length criteria will not be reached.

Poor Quality

0-45%

37-1 points

The context and/or importance are lacking. There is no search history information supplied.

75-1 points

There has been an examination of relevant theoretical literature, but still no research concerning problem-related concepts has been synthesized. The review is just somewhat focused and organized. The provided overview of content does not include any supporting or opposing research. The conclusion has no scriptural references.

48-1 points

There is no logical or apparent organizational structure. There is no discernible logical sequence. The use of typeface, color, graphics, effects, and so on often detracts from the presenting substance. It is possible that the length criteria will not be reached.