In this article, consultant Karin Hess suggests analyzing student work in three layers: first describing the student work we actually see (or what students tell about it); then interpreting what the evidence might mean (specific to the intended purpose); and then evaluating what next steps should be taken. Hess shares 6 reasons or purposes for analyzing student work.
Here is an excerpt from the article:
Six distinctly different purposes of student work analysis Each purpose requires a different lens when analyzing the student work and acting on what was first Described, Interpreted and then Evaluated before taking next steps. I call this evidence from student work “Student work to D-I-E for” and use the acronym DIE in this way:
• Describe first only what you actually see (or hear students tell you about) in the work;
• Interpret what that evidence might mean (specific to your intended purpose); and then
• Evaluate next steps to be taken. Will you revise the prompt or rubric for better clarity? Will you add scaffolding to make the task more accessible to all students? Will you target specific lessons to address a common misconception? Will you be able to use the results from multiple tasks to show progress over time? And if not, should you design other assessment tasks to be given after more instruction and before the post assessment is given?
Here is the link to article.