Quantitative Data...so far

The coding process for the quantitative data is below.  You can see a student example and how it was coded.  The second image is a more in depth look at the the restating category and the all parts category. After that you see the tallies for each category of RAP as well as one for graphic organizers.    The description of all the data is in the paragraphs below.

Table 1

	Restating (R)	Missing Parts (MP)	Proving Answer (PA)	Graphic Organizer (GO)
Total	37	23	23	4
4th Grade	21	11	8	0
5th Grade	16	12	15	4

 

Observations

             Restating the question and/or marking the question for key words, important numbers, and underlining the question(s) was the most missed section of RAP.  After just marking whether students one or the other out, I decided I needed to specify exactly what part of the “R” they were missing so I went back through each example to clarify.  I found that only five examples displayed both parts completed correctly.  Two fourth graders and 1 fifth grader underlined, boxed, and circled, but did not restate the question in their answer.  Two fourth graders and two fifth graders did not underline, box, or circle, but successfully restated the question in each part of their answers.  Eighteen fourth graders and twelve fifth graders did not box, circle, or underline and did not restate the question in their answers.  The question must be asked.  If more students had underlined, boxed, and circled important words, numbers, and questions would they have been more aware of the task at hand and been more likely to restate the question? 

            The next code indicated the number of examples where students did not answer all parts of the question or some or all answers given were incorrect.  I also did an initial quick marking to indicate either of these options, but returned to the examples to specify which area exactly. I found that only one student correctly answered all parts that were answered, but just left out a part.  Five ERQs, two fourth grade and three fifth grade examples, had unanswered parts and had incorrect answers in the parts that were completed.  Nine fourth grade examples and eight fifth grade examples had all parts, but one or more of the answers given were incorrect. 

            Next, I looked for examples where students were unable to prove their answer using either evidence from the story or their own personal experience.  Twenty-three examples total received the “PA” code.  Fifteen of those samples were from fifth graders while just eight were from fourth graders. 

            Finally, I used the code “GO” to indicate the use of a graphic organizer.  Of the forty-two samples, only four contained a graphic organizer.  All four were fifth grade students.  The question asked was a compare and contrast question and students are “trained” to use a Venn-diagram to display similarities and differences.  Two of those students were reminded that they need to write their answers in sentence form from now on.  The other two students are special education students who had a writer.  I am not sure if the writer automatically drew the Venn-diagram or if the student prompted her to.  They should have prompted, but the scribe was not a usual scribe so she may not have known.  It is unlikely that a graphic organizer will be used on another ERQ this year.