Comparing student achievement using pre and post formative assessment instructional activities

Abstract

Improving student achievement and learning is a continual goal of education. The literature supports that formative assessment and quizzing helps with these goals. I wanted to determine if a modified formative assessment would be a better practice compared to the traditional format of formative assessment. Three sections of physical science were used in the study. Two of the three sections were the experimental group, either receiving the modified formative assessment or the traditional form, while the third section was the control. These methods rotated during the first three units of semester one so each section participated in all three methods. This process was repeated for the first three units of the second semester. At the completion of the school year, 18 students were randomly selected from each section (54 total) and their data was analyzed by determining a mean from each unit exam for each experimental method. This data was then used to run a one-way analysis of variance with a post-hoc comparison to determine if there was a statistical significance in any of the methods used. When all 54 students were used despite the differences in test means, there was no statistical significance. Further analysis showed that by removing the top nine students (based upon GPA) there was a statistical significance in the modified formative assessment. This modified form of formative assessment could potentially help educators with closing the gap between the top 25% and bottom 25% academically.