Student Performance – Pretest-Posttest Results

Prior to the unit on photosynthesis and implementing the multimodal project, the teacher-researcher administered a 10-question pretest (see Appendix A) to gauge

students’ prior knowledge of major concepts pertaining to photosynthesis. A total of twenty-four students (out of twenty-five enrolled) completed the pretest. Student names were replaced with pseudonyms for purposes of maintaining anonymity of results. Table 4.1: Pretest-Posttest Performance Comparisons for BI 114 treatment group (Summer 2018) Pretest Raw Missed % Missed PostTest Raw Missed % Missed Q1 1 4 Q1 1 4 Q2 7 29 Q2 2 8 Q3 11 46 Q3 14 58 Q4 9 38 Q4 7 29 Q5 7 29 Q5 7 29 Q6 10 42 Q6 7 29 Q7 12 50 Q7 6 25 Q8 17 71 Q8 8 33 Q9 21 88 Q9 12 50 Q10 18 75 Q10 11 46 Avg Score 5.2 53 Avg Score 6.8 69 # Tests 24 24 # Tests 24 24 Mean 11.3 47.2 7.5 31.1 In analyzing the pretest responses, both the raw number of students that missed a question and the percentage of the class were observed. The teacher-researcher observed the highest number/percentage of students missed questions 9, 10, and 8 respectively.

the two stages of photosynthesis known as the Light Dependent and Light Independent reactions, but also the abstract, critical thinking involved as compared to other questions. Regarding the raw number of students that missed questions, the mean number of

students that missed questions #1-10 on the pretest were 11.3 out of 24. The mean percentage of the class that missed questions #1-10 on the pretest was 47.2%.

After instruction on the unit on photosynthesis, and implementation of the multimodal project over the course of one week (four instructional days) within the 5- week summer semester, students were administered an identical posttest to complete (see Appendix A). Twenty-four students completed the posttest. In addition to generally improved results, the teacher-researcher observed that while questions #9 and 10 remained among the three highest missed, the number of students which missed these questions decreased significantly. For question #9 on the significance of the Light Independent reactions, 12 students missed the question versus 21 on the pretest. For question #10 on oxidation-reduction reactions, 11 students missed the question versus 18 on the pretest. Question #8 on the significance of the Light Dependent reactions was no longer considered one of the three most missed questions from the posttest. Eight students missed question #8 versus 17 on the pretest. The mean number that missed #1- 10 on the posttest were 7.5. The mean percentage of the class that missed questions #1-10 on the posttest was 31.1%.

In order to ascertain whether or not any observed differences between the pretest and posttest were deemed significant, the teacher-researcher used a repeated measures t- test to compare collective means for the raw number of students that missed questions and the percentage of students that missed. The results of a repeated-measures t-test comparing the means for the raw number missed showed a p value of .008145, which is significant at a 95% confidence interval (p ≤ 0.05). The results of a repeated-measures t- test comparing the means for the percentage missed showed a p value of .007512, which is also significant at a 95% confidence interval (p ≤ 0.05). For the teacher-researcher, this indicates that there were generally positive impacts that occurred over the course of the photosynthesis unit. As the unit was instructed as similarly as possible to a traditional BI 114 course with exception of the multimodal assessment project, the teacher-researcher ascertains that at least part of the positive impacts found from the pretest-posttest differentials can be attributed to that of the treatment.

Additional classroom observations. Recorded teacher-researcher observations on day four noted that students appeared more confident and at-ease in responding to the posttest questions versus the pretest questions. Rhonda, a typically vocal student-athlete at the ESJC with multiple BI 114 course attempts, stated upon turning in her pretest: “Some of these questions were difficult. Will we be expected to know these for a test?” Upon turning in her posttest, Rhonda additionally stated: “I felt more confident in answering these questions this time. I think I did much better.” Students were

documented during the posttest as appearing to shuffle less in their seats, expressing less overt anxiety during the process.

It was also observed that students generally took less time responding to the posttest questions, as students cumulatively finished within 12 minutes as compared to 20 minutes with the pretest.

Conflicting pretest-posttest question results. While the students generally improved in their performance on the posttest, there were also some observed

inconsistencies. For question #3 regarding the contributions of producers and consumers to one another, there was a cumulative increase in incorrect responses on the posttest. Whereas 11 students (46%) answered incorrectly on the pretest, 14 answered (58%) incorrectly on the posttest. The teacher-researcher noticed individual improvements in 5 out of the 11 students from the pretest, Rhonda, Justin, Kaylee, Andrea, and Rachel. Rhonda is a student-athlete, Justin is a 12-year Navy veteran having last taken biology 15 years ago, and Andrea is a first-generation high school graduate and college attendee. Both Kaylee and Rachel are dual-enrollment students.

A cumulative regression in incorrect responses may be attributed to a

confounding factor such as situational stress or could indicate a focus on the connections between producers and consumers more within the project or unit. For question #5 which scientifically described a chloroplast, there was no cumulative difference in performance between the pretest and posttest, with seven students, 29% of the class, answering incorrectly although some individual improvements in response were noted for three students, Rhonda, Justin, and Andrea in the class. Regarding the cumulative

inconsistencies noted between the pretest-posttest results, the teacher-researcher believes that additional improvement and implementation of the action research project at later dates will provide further insight and guidance.