Assignment 2:

Formative Assessment Assignment

Elizabeth Lemieux 260742065

McGill University
Situating the Lesson

The lesson I used for this assignment was on coding and putting commands in the right

sequencing order. It was done with a group of 18 grade five students during science class. They

had previously had a short introductory lesson on how devices and computers work. In that

lesson, the students created their own program and ran through it with a friend. This gave me the

opportunity to see who had basic or advanced knowledge to foresee future lessons on coding.

The lesson presented in this assignment was done after the introductory as an “unplugged”

coding activity, which means that the students would code without a computer was divided into

two parts. The first part is working alone and understanding the concept of sequencing and

commands. The second part is perfecting that skill through re-teaching and peer support.

Types of Assessment

During the lesson, I used formative assessment as I observed particular students if I knew

they already struggled with math. These students might have needed extra help with math in the

past and coding is quite similar. I also wanted to challenge those who understood quickly, which

is why I gave them the opportunity to help other students when they were done. If I was

circulating and noticed someone was struggling, I would note the students initials on a loose-leaf

and write down their question. This was my personal sheet of observations to remember what

each student said and if their question was resolved. As Guskey (2003) mentions, teachers need

to see assessments as an important part of teaching because it is part of the process which

benefits student learning (p. 48). An assessment does not have to be something scary, as students

usually imagine it to be.

Another way I assessed students was with exit cards, where they wrote confusions and

what they thought they knew well after the lesson was done. Collecting and reviewing these exit

2
cards allowed me to see the strengths and weaknesses of each student with regards to coding. I

used these exit cards to pair the students up for the next lesson which promoted peer support for

those who I knew needed it. The students had to write their name on the exit card, and most of

those who said they were confused were the ones who also struggle in math, as previously

mentioned. I did not want my students to think that they were being paired up by intelligence

because that unfair. Coding is a complex subject to grasp at first and “teachers must avoid

thinking about children as smart or not smart because there are many ways to be smart” (Parkay,

Stanford, Vaillancourt, Stephens & Harris, 2010, p.176).

Re-Assessment and Struggling Students

For re-assessment, I paired students up by their understanding. One student in my class who was

not grasping the concept of coding and its command sequencing needed extra help. As I

mentioned in the lesson, I would circulate once more while students were completing the fourth

map and give extra aid to those whom I know needed it. Furthermore, while students were

solving their map, I called those who wrote they were confused and I know needed more help to

sit with me. We played a level of Lightbot Jr. and this was a hands-on experience since they

could picture the code and its commands in action. This is a way of re-teaching for the students

who are more visual than others. As McTighe and Thomas (2003) suggest, “to assess student

understanding of important ideas, we need to ask students to apply their learning to a new

situation and explain their responses rather than just make selections from a list of given

alternatives” (p. 56). It might also help the students who learn through music because of the

sounds the robot makes when there is movement or a mistake.

One student who came to see me has an IEP and struggles with math. They often need

extra help in class when completing work, and need a one-on-one explanations other than the

3
class-wide one. In coding for this activity, they did not understand where to put the commands

whether it be on the tile itself, or if it was a step to go to the next tile. There was also confusion

about how many “go forward” actions were needed for the whole path. Students who put more

“go forward” commands put them per tile which does not work. The student realized this by

playing the Lightbot Jr. game on the iPad because the robot did not move when they added extra

commands. The student tried it many times to realize their mistake, and did more than one level

but eventually got the idea that commands are steps and not related to how many boxes there

were.

Reflecting

If I were to do this lesson in the future, I would try to explain coding in many ways and not only

have one class on this type of coding. I would have them do more hands-on “unplugged”

activities which will give them more than one way of doing something.

4
 Rubric

The following rubric is an assessment tool I looked over and explained to the class before the

lesson. I received feedback and we created this rubric together. Although it’s quite wordy, I

wanted the students to be sure of what they were being evaluated on.

Coding Rubric

Advanced Thorough Acceptable Partial

ENGAGEMENT • The student is always • The student is mostly • The student is sometimes engaged • The student demonstrates little or
AND BEHAVIOR engaged in the activity from engaged with the project. in the activity. no engagement
beginning to end. • Completes the demands of • The student makes little progress and • Is frequently distracted and doesn’t
• Asking questions when they the project to a satisfactory is occasionally distracted by other asks for help,
cannot find answers alone. level. students • Prevents his or her classmates from
• Assists other students when • May also occasionally distract his or completing their own assignment.
needed. her classmates.

PROOACTIVITY • Student is proactive during • Student completes self- • Student frequently stops during the • The student does not complete the
self-guided interactive directed tasks. lesson and does not request self-guided task
tutorials • Asks the teacher for assistance. • Never asks for assistance when
• Exhibits exceptional self- assistance when needed. • Sometimes stays on track. stuck.
learning skills.

COOPERATION • Cooperates with other • Student makes a • Student contributes sometimes to the • Student consistently fails to stay on
students satisfactory effort to group effort track with the group project
• Makes excellent contribute to the group • Occasionally distracts the group from • Often keeps the group from
contributions to group • Never distracts the group its central goals. succeeding
learning activities. from its goals. • distracts other members of the
group.

SKILLS AND • The student exhibits • The student exhibits • Some learning and skill development • Little or no skill development has
LEARNING exceptional understanding of understanding in most of the may have taken place, taken place
the skills and tools skills from the activity. • the student has missed out on most • The student needs a considerable
• Attains proficiency with all • The student requires some of the core skills needed for amount of help from teachers or
new terms and concepts. help from classmates or the successful completion of the activity. classmates when completing the
• Assists other students when teacher assignment.
needed.

5
 References

Guskey, T. R., (2003) How classroom assessments improve learning. Educational, School, and

Counseling Psychology Faculty Publications, 48-52.

McTighe, J. & Thomas, R. S., (2003) Backward Design for Forward Action. Educational

leadership: journal of the Department of Supervision and Curriculum Development, 56-58.

Parkay, F. W., Stanford, B. H., Vaillancourt, J. P., Stephens, H. C., & Harris, J. R.

(2010). Becoming a teacher. Toronto, ON: Pearson Canada Inc.