I am including two scenarios of student data:

Scenario 1:

Here are reports for a French IV class: After reviewing this data, I knew which students needed extra help and I provided them extra opportunities to master the vocabulary.

For the next quiz, I made sure to provide a wider variety of differentiated assessments or activities.  I worked individually with the students with weaknesses and encouraged them to try different strategies for learning the content.  

Although more than 40% did well, 61% was the mean score and this alarmed me. Several students failed to demonstrate competency in the vocabulary for chapter one. As this report indicates, these students will require extra help.  As a result, I provided additional resources to practice the vocabulary.  As an online instructor, I would I set up additional resources in the LMS as well.  I would set up notices to students about receiving extra help if the scores indicate weaknesses.  In my classes, I always encouraged students to come in to redo assignments in order to master the current material before moving to the next unit.  They knew that I wanted them to succeed and the parents appreciated my efforts to motivate their students. Additionally, I also complete an item analysis for each question to determine if there are invalid questions on the test: (Although I can see an analysis per student, I did not include that here due to FERPA guidelines: 

Overall, I always plan instruction based on the data of student performance.  Although I have always offered remediation for students displaying weaknesses, I offer a list of additional resources for all students.  I individually communicate with students who are in need of supplemental instruction in order for them to be successful.  I send out newsletters as well as personalized emails to encourage students to keep trying. 

Scenario 2:

In my experience of teaching both French and Spanish, I noticed that the students in my level II classes were very weak in speaking proficiency of the target language.  After struggling to motivate students to improve this competency, I decided to research technology strategies that would improve target language speaking proficiency in level one. Contrary to the proponents of the traditional grammar approach, I promote speaking proficiency instead of rote grammar memorization. I have seen trends come and go, but today, the emphasis of foreign language instruction is on real world communication skills.    I investigated the impact of frequent speaking assessments on students’ ability to improve their speaking ability.  I decided to use Blackboard voice board in order to provide students with more opportunities to speak the target language without intimidation and fear. As the following charts show, their speaking proficiency did indeed improve as a result of increasing the frequency of speaking opportunities.Results of an anxiety scale survey in studying a foreign language, I realized that students were very nervous about speaking in class.  

Students completed a survey about studying a foreign language and the results provided essential information about their anxiety level of speaking: Here is a comparison of anxiety level before and after using Blackboard Voiceboard.  

Results of Blackboard Voice Board Speaking Assessments:

Comparison of Class Averages for Speaking Assessments

I provided feedback after each speaking assessment with the improvement of the students' speaking in mind.  Providing authentic feedback for improvement motivated the students to keep trying.  The results of this project were extremely positive and they prove our valuable feedback can be in driving student performance. 

Here is the rubric that was used to assess students’ formative speaking assessments: