Targeted Texas Essential Knowledge and skills categories TEK(S)

Student’s Last Name 1
Student’s Name
Professor’s Name
Course Title
Due Date
Plan for Instruction in Classroom
Targeted Texas Essential Knowledge and skills categories TEK(S)
The target Texas Essential Knowledge and Skills TEKS(S) for biology in Texas are
stipulated for the high school students. All students are supposed to demonstrate a good level of
understanding of the cells as the fundamental unit of structure and functions of all the living
organisms. To meet the readiness standards, the students should be able to research and provide
adequate explanations for various cellular processes such as the transport of molecules and
homeostasis. The TEKS will understand the mechanism of genetics. Students are supposed to
identify the components of the DNA and illustrate various changes in DNA. The students are
supposed to have a good understanding of the hierarchical classification of organisms and the
theories of biological evolution. Biology students are supposed to show understanding of energy
conversions, metabolic processes, and roles and interaction of various systems in organisms.
Lastly, the students are supposed to exhibit an understanding of interactions and interdependence
which occur within the environment and their importance. The understanding of the above target
TEKS(S) for biology will enable high school students to proceed with other biology courses in
higher levels of learning.

Student’s Last Name 2
Description of the assessment
The assessment data used is the STAAR End-of-Course assessment which measures the
students’ academic performance (readiness) for high school biology for summer 2019 in Texas.
The assessment tested 17339 students and included 143 other students totaling to 17482 students.
The students were from either gender (male or female) and of different races including those
with two or more races, white, Native Hawaiians, African Americans, Asians, American Indians,
Hispanics, and those who opted to disclose their racial identity. The assessment collected the
data based on immigration, proficiency in the English language, and bilinguals. The analysis was
done based on English as a second language and other categories such as the special education,
gifted/talented, At-risk, and those pursuing technical/career educations. The performance
standards that were considered were in 4 categories which included masters grade level, meets
grade level, Approaches grade level, did not meet grade level. The categories were used to record
the assessment of the five biology concepts.
Methods for collecting and scoring data
Data collection for the assessment is quite easy because the state’s public schools are
expected to submit the assessment data to the Texas Education Agency. The data analyzed is,
therefore obtained from the Texas Education Agency database. Two main methods were applied
in scoring data from the students’ assessment. The first scoring method utilized was raw scoring
which consists of the number of items that were answered correctly. The second was scale
scoring which results to a scale score; which is a statistic that enables comparison of students’
scores by allowing adjustments for variations in the difficulty of the forms that are applied in the
varied administrations of the assessments. The raw assessment is not used independently because

Student’s Last Name 3
it has limited utility; it cannot be used to compare scores across administrations. The scale score,
on the other hand, enables the assessors to effectively compare the scores between students
taking the same assessment and the scores of different cohorts of students taking the same
assessment in different years.
Descriptive analysis for the data
Below are descriptive analyses for various groups of students who took the biology assessment.
Descriptive analysis for all students
Performance standards Number Percentage (%)
Did not meet 11809 68%
Approaches 5530 32%
Meets 767 4%
Masters 128 1%
Total number of students 17339 100%
Average scale Score 3474
Descriptive analysis for males
Performance standards Number Percentage (%)
Did not meet 7325 71%
Approaches 2922 29%
Meets 385 4%
Masters 59 1%
Total 10247 100%

Student’s Last Name 4
Average scale Score 3450
Descriptive analysis for females
Performance standards Number Percentage (%)
Did not meet 4483 63%
Approaches 2608 37%
Meets 382 5%
Masters 69 1%
Total 7091 100%
Average scale Score 3510
Descriptive analysis by race
Race Total number of students Average scale Score
Hispanic/Latino 11588 3466
American Indian 40 3524
Asian 269 3520
African America 2969 3425
Native Hawaiian 39 3446
White 2201 3566
2 or more races 196 3557
No racial information 37 3591

Student’s Last Name 5
Descriptive analysis by economic status
Economic status Total number of students Average scale Score
Economically stable 13550 3453
Economically disadvantaged 3737 3548
No information 52 3576
Descriptive analysis by Title I, Part A program
Title I, Part A Total number of students Average scale Score
Participants 10733 3454
Non participants 6545 3507
No information provided 61 3574
Descriptive analysis by migration
Migration Total number of students Average scale Score
Migrant 149 3474
Non-migrant 17097 3474
No information 93 3499
Descriptive analysis by Limited English Proficient
Limited English Proficient Total number of students Average scale Score

Student’s Last Name 6
Current LEP 6430 3431
Non-LEP(Monitored 1st year) 229 3514
Non-LEP (Monitored 2nd year) 128 3558
Non-LEP (Monitored 3rd year) 84 3681
Non-LEP (Monitored 4th year) 99 3577
Other Non-LEP 10296 3496
No information provided 73 3539
Descriptive analysis by bilingual
Bilingual Total number of students Average scale Score
Participants 22 3501
Non-participants 17239 3474
No information provided 78 3529
Descriptive analysis by ESL
English as Second Language Total number of students Average scale Score
Participants 6292 3432
Non-participants 10972 3498
No information provided 75 3535
Descriptive analysis by special education

Student’s Last Name 7
Special education Total number of students Average scale Score
Yes 4558 3414
No 12724 3495
No information provided 57 3568
Descriptive analysis by gifted/talented
Gifted/ Talented Total number of students Average scale Score
Participants 96 4185
Non-participants 17176 3470
No information provided 67 3569
Descriptive analysis by At-Risk
Students at-risk Total number of students Average scale Score
Yes 15689 3452
No 1600 3689
No information provided 50 3582
Descriptive analysis by career/technical education
career/technical education Total number of students Average scale Score
Participants 12277 3476
Non-participants 4993 3470
No information provided 69 3501

Student’s Last Name 8
Recommendations on next steps for instructions using research-based strategies
From the descriptive statistics, it is quite clear that the groups of students had a different
understanding of biology studies. There are students who got the concepts well, such as the
majority of the Gifted/ Talented students followed by those not at risk. However, other groups,
such as the students on special education and the current LEP category, seem to have the highest
number of students who seemed not to get the concept. Generally, most of the students, 68%
seemed not to have a good understanding of the biology target concepts as per the Texas
Essential Knowledge and skills by the summer of 2019.
To improve the performance of various groups of students, it will be important to adopt
research based practices for addressing the next steps to be applied for each student or small
groups of student. For instance, teachers are supposed to set clear lesson goals for different
genders because of the disparity that appears in their performance. Having clear goals may help
the males to focus on achieving the goals and improve their performance. The second strategy
that the educators should adopt is “shown and tell” strategy for the students who are not
proficient in the English language and those who are using English as a second language.
Showing should involve modeling various aspects while telling involves sharing the information
shown to the students in the models.
For the special and technical education student, the strategy of sharing with students how
long the learning exercise takes will be an appropriate strategy to embrace. Flexibility in the
duration of the lesson may help the students to maximize the information gained from every

Student’s Last Name 9
lesson. Educators can use productive group work for the economically disadvantaged students
and those at risk to increase the feeling of inclusion in them so that they are encouraged in their
studies. The strategy of summarizing concepts learned graphically can be applied to enable those
not proficient in the English language to master what they have learned. Lastly, for the gifted
students, the educators are supposed to teach strategies and not simply content so that they can
advance their understanding of the concepts.
In conclusion, Texas has a well-stipulated program (Texas Essential Knowledge and
skills) that teachers have to follow to ensure uniform learning and development of students. The
assessment that was done in summer 2019 shows that various groups of students have a different
understanding of the biology concepts as defined by TEKS. It is, therefore, important to adopt
various research-based practices to enhance the performance of individual students and small
groups of students.
Appendix

Student’s Last Name 10