Over the past several decades there has been an emphasis in educational research on student assessment and achievement in mathematics. Formative assessments are designed to inform the instructional decision making process and require assessment literacy to interpret and use data provided by these assessments. Many teachers and students were lacking assessment literacy; therefore, they were unable to adjust their instruction and study habits to increase student performance on summative assessments. This study investigated the impact Scholastic Math Inventory (SMI) benchmarks and assessment literacy training had on summative assessments and student motivation in mathematics. The researcher analyzed unit posttest scores and results from the Instructional Materials Motivation Survey (IMMS) for seventh- and eighth-grade mathematics control and treatment groups. The study took place in a public International Baccalaureate (IB) charter school that served families from suburban communities in northern Utah. An analysis of covariance (ANCOVA), using previous CRT math scores as the covariate, was conducted to determine whether there was a difference in the scores of the students who received the SMI benchmarks and assessment literacy training and the students who did not receive this treatment. An analysis of variance (ANOVA) tested whether there was a difference between the IMMS scores for the students who received the SMI benchmarks and assessment literacy training versus students who did not receive this treatment. The study results indicated that summative scores for seventh- and eighth-grade students who received instruction for the unit along with SMI benchmark and assessment literacy training were not statistically different from students in the control group. The results also showed that the student mathematical motivation overall mean scores were not statistically significant. However, the subscale of satisfaction did show a significant difference in the means. The researcher recommended that use of SMI and assessment literacy training be examined carefully, as these strategies may not improve summative assessment scores in all cases.
| Identifer | oai:union.ndltd.org:UTAHS/oai:digitalcommons.usu.edu:etd-3173 |
| Date | 01 May 2014 |
| Creators | Rushton, Sheryl J. |
| Publisher | DigitalCommons@USU |
| Source Sets | Utah State University |
| Detected Language | English |
| Type | text |
| Format | application/pdf |
| Source | All Graduate Theses and Dissertations |
| Rights | Copyright for this work is held by the author. Transmission or reproduction of materials protected by copyright beyond that allowed by fair use requires the written permission of the copyright owners. Works not in the public domain cannot be commercially exploited without permission of the copyright owner. Responsibility for any use rests exclusively with the user. For more information contact Andrew Wesolek (andrew.wesolek@usu.edu). |
Page generated in 0.0015 seconds