Technology and Assessment

I think it was Benjamin Franklin who said, "The only things certain in life are death and taxes and assessment." Because of the strong emphasis placed on assessment in our culture, we must learn to adapt and cope with reality, and fortunately in modern times we have technology to help.  With the increased number of iPads and Chromebooks falling into students' hands, we expect the skills needed to properly use these tools and the world wide web to be assessed on standardized tests.  We can also expect testing to increasingly take place on such devices, ready or not.  However, we can also use these devices to our advantage.  Yes, we can prepare students for the reality of assessments and the Common Core State Standards, but we can also use them as tools to make our own assessments easier.

Jennifer L. W. Fink, author of The next tests: emphasize digital literacy, reading, and writing to get ready for the new assessments, asserts that the Smarter Balanced assessments will not be simply completed by selecting from a list of multiple choice answers, but will be a thorough assessment of "critical thinking, communication, collaboration, and creativity".  These assessments will be checking reading and writing skills, focusing heavily on synthesis and supporting writing with details.  Because these tests will be administered using tablets or computers, these tools will become part of the assessment.  Having these in students' hands means they should have digital literacy skills for the 21st century, and the tests will reflect these skills.  Therefore, it is the educator's responsibility to teach such skills as part of their curriculum, and to teach students how to use digital tools properly.  Teachers must also be sure their students know the device on which they will be tested as well.

Though the importance of digital literacy is looming because of standardized assessments, teachers can also use these tools to their advantage.  We can see tablets and computers being used to create and administer summative assessments, like standardized tests, but teachers can also take advantage of what these tools offer in designing assessments.  Teachers can design rubrics using free online services like Rubistar, or might use Google Forms with the Flubaroo script to create a culminating test. However I think this concept contradicts Fink's article and this type of assessment is not teaching the skills needed.  

However, Google Forms with the Flubaroo script may be used to create formative assessments.  Teachers can quickly use such tools to gain an idea of their students' understanding, or even gather data for teacher research.  Formative assessments, like exit tickets, are evolving from being paper-and-pencil physical entities, to immediate digital feedback that can be projected on a white board, with scores immediately documented for the teacher.  Student response applications like Socrative and InfuseLearning offer options for students to answer questions in class, often anonymously, to give teachers an immediate gauge of their understanding.  These tools may have additional benefits that enhance classroom learning.  For example, students who normally choose not to participate in class discussions might answer in this context because of the capacity for anonymity.   

I am skeptical of online or computer-based reading programs and assessments like Accelerated Reader, though.  As a certified reading specialist, I am afraid that these easy data-spewing programs can do more harm than good.  Perhaps this is because they do not address reading in the ways that can be facilitated with digital tools.  A passion for reading needs to be fostered, and AR takes that away for the sake of ease - we always seem to be looking for an easy reading fix, and schools gravitate toward reading programs who publish their own testimonials.  Reading A-Z looks like it is founded in excellent principles like Universal Design for Learning, but I have a hard time thinking a computer can teach and assess reading better than a human.  Technology must be used appropriately in order to foster the skills necessary for the 21st century, and just because we have a digital tool does not mean it is going to benefit our students.  This is where we need to use the same skills we impart on our students to think critically and evaluate the tools for their real value, or we are disservice our students.

The Write Stuff

When asked whether digital tools improve student writing, teachers agree that technology is making a huge impact.  With the use of technology, two major themes arise that make all the difference - the presence of an authentic audience and the enhanced capacity for collaboration.  My experience completely relates to and reinforces the ideas in the article "Writing Re-Launched: Teaching with Digital Tools" by Liana Heitin.

Like the teachers in the article, my students benefitted from having an authentic audience when they wrote online.  My students created ePortfolios on Weebly and felt motivated by the medium for writing.  A major part of preparing for such work involved the discussion of audience and appropriate language for their intended audience.  They loved showing off themselves, and their best writing appeared on their websites when they were writing about things that they cared about.  It may be surprising to some, but knowing others will read their writing because it is online motivates them to be aware of their use of conventions.  They were very open to asking others for help editing, and offered help freely.  They did not want to look unintelligent.

Another context in which students' writing flourished was during a collaborative inquiry project in which they had to present findings with help from a visual component made with digital tools, much like the Maryland teacher in the article.  Students wrote essential questions, and investigated their answers to report their findings to classmates.  The results were amazing!  During the process, students collaborated with Google Docs, where they drafted and gathered resources.  They shared these documents with me so I could provide feedback during the process and I could monitor what was contributed.  Students created Prezis with Animoto and YouTube videos embedded, along with their text reporting the information; some students created their own short movies to convey their findings.  This was by far the best quality research project my students have ever engaged in because they were so deeply engrossed in their digital tools and working together.

If I were to continue teaching, I would be using blogs for writing next year, and I would be signing up for QuadBlogging right now.  I have seen the power of the authentic audience in student writing, and blogging would enhance their motivation and sense of purpose.  QuadBlogging is such an amazing way to open the classroom beyond its four walls and allow students to interact with "global empathy".   Schools interacting during an election year would be so powerful.  Imagine what American students could learn about their own culture from the perspectives of students from around the world!  QuadBlogging is an idea I will promote in my new position.

Any teachers who are interested in student blogging might want to get in touch with Nick Provenzano, Michigan's "Nerdy Teacher" .  He had a lot of success with blogging about Romeo and Juliet in his high school English classes and would be the first guy to tell you about the value of blogging for improved student writing.

The library of digital tools that are available is constantly growing, providing greater opportunity for students.  A few years ago, digital storytelling was a huge idea in education, and now the concept has evolved beyond the photo and music slideshow that was gaining popularity.  With tools such as StoryBird, MyStoryMaker, and Glogster, students have opportunities to express themselves in increasingly diverse and creative ways.  Such tools create motivation through online publication and audiences.  Tools like Padlet, PrimaryPad, and Google Docs enable project collaboration from the planning phase to the final product.  No longer is writing and creating a two-way person-and-paper event; it is now an opportunity for global audiences to witness and a community to create.  And judging by the way students love taking pictures of themselves and posting their statuses publicly, why wouldn't they want to do the same with their writing?

Recent findings have continued to confirm teachers' observations that digital tools improve student writing.  The Pew Research Center recently released a report with its findings.  The summary is available at this website: The Impact of Digital Tools on Student Writing and How Writing is Taught in Schools.   The complete report is available on this site as well.  All of this is very promising, but it is important to focus on learning.  As Liana Heitin said in her article, "keep focused on instructional goals" and make sure not to "use technology  simply for technology's sake."

Beyond Text

While reading the article “The Reading Brain in the Digital Age: The Science of Paper versus Screens”, the differences between reading printed and digital texts are pronounced, but also leads to further questioning of these technologies and their place in education.  Research shows that reading printed texts, like books, offer a tactile experience lacking in digital texts.  When reading printed materials, they have geographic qualities and landmarks within themselves, navigating a reader easily.  They offer for physical interaction with the text - writing on it, highlighting it, and even folding it.  These interactions aid in understanding written selections.  Another benefit of printed text is the limitation of page space, so a reader never has to read through endless scrolling, which has been proven to interfere with reading.  (Perhaps this is why so many people call it the ‘scroll of death’?) 

Though printed text has been proven to benefit readers, digital texts have advantages, especially when used in conjunction with devices and apps that enable accessibility.  For example, the iPad has built-in text features that allow for zooming as well as reading selections aloud. Likewise, apps can be downloaded that enable speech-to-text and text-to-speech conversion.  These features allow readers who have vision problems or reading disabilities to access the text in ways books could never allow.  Devices like iPads and Chromebooks also offer apps that support reading instruction beginning with early literacy learning.  For practitioners of Universal Design for Learning, digital tools for reading are an enhancement, providing access to learning that would not otherwise exist; people who design learning following the principles of UDL find that such devices are a necessity for all students.

Here are a few good resources for UDL and literacy:
 http://udlstrategies.wikispaces.com/Technology+and+Reading

http://www.udlresource.com/ios-apps-to-support-reading-and-writing.html

 http://www.callscotland.org.uk/Common-Assets/spaw2/uploads/files/iPads-for-Communication-Access-Literacy-and-Learning.pdf
 

Books are an old technology. I grew up reading books and magazines, so it is no wonder I printed the article “The Reading Brain in the Digital Age: The Science of Paper versus Screens”, although I had a copy of the article saved on my iPad.  I printed it because I knew I could get more from it by interacting with it through tactile experience - I wrote comments, questions, symbols and underlines all over it, having been taught to do so and knowing I learn more through such interaction.  However, ‘digital natives’ are growing with new technology, which makes me question the research subjects.  If subjects of reading research are adult readers, they learned to read on paper; their native technology is paper.  Does one’s native medium impact the navigability of text?  Does physicality look different for ‘digital natives’, like the little girl who tried to ‘pinch, swipe, and prod’ a magazine?  Will ‘digital natives’ who are tested on their reading skills in ten or twenty years have differing results?  Perhaps adults who grew up reading text on paper will score differently than an adult who will grow up reading digital texts.

The end of the article addressed a question that was pressing my mind as I read the text - how will technology replace text as we know it?  Considering paper is an ancient technology, why are we trying to adapt it to modern technology and replicate its functions?  I am sure that when people first started recording symbols on paper, they did not think this is the best medium for interaction and comprehension of texts! What an amazing discovery!  No, I am sure the ancient folks simply found what resource was available and used it.  We have so much more available to us, so we should be finding new ways to disseminate information.  Why do we have to rely so heavily on text, anyway, when we have visual and auditory alternatives that all can access?  The article reminds us that "text is not the only way to read" - reading happens in more contexts than reading texts.  Students already access podcasts and videos for learning.  Will reading become obsolete one day?  We owe it to students to use their native tools, and what works best for them, not us.

IWBs: 2D in a 3D World

During my years as a teacher, I never had a Promethian or a SMART Board, and if presented the choice today, I would decline the offer.  Interactive whiteboards were a fine technology before the introduction of smart phones and tablets in our world and they may continue to hold a place in the business word, but in education they are two-dimensional surfaces with limited options for use.  If schools want to invest money and  integrate technology into the classroom, the IWB is a weak option in a time when tools fulfilling many options are readily available.  As educators we need too look for multi-dimensional tools to fulfill many functions, enabling creativity, inquiry, critical thinking, communication, and collaboration without boundaries of time or space, and the IWB does not fulfill that requirement.

As the article “Interactive Whiteboards: Creating Higher-Level, Technological Thinkers?” clearly concludes, no, IWBs are not creating higher-level technological thinkers, and student engagement is short-lived.  IWBs seem to be one of the quick-fix gimmicks schools districts across the country are adapting in order to sell themselves as technology-rich learning environments.  The Fort Worth Independent School district’s initiative to install 5,000 interactive whiteboards across the district in two years is very near-sighted.  As Larry Cuban suggests, teachers are often not prepared to implement such technology that has landed in their classrooms.  Often IWBs are used as expensive screens or white boards because teachers feel they lack the training needed to fully integrate them.  Another weakness, J. Lacina points out, is often students become “spectators”, watching a teacher interact with the boards, continuing the tradition of the teacher-centered classroom.

My former school district decided to jump on the iPad bandwagon and is implementing a 1:1 initiative, though this decision was made with no substantiated research to back the decision, echoing the decision made my FWISD. Despite the plethora of problems this adoption entails, I feel more hope for this technology because the tool has multiple functions.  Because iPads have the capability to morph into countless tools, it is a better investment option.  With downloadable applications, many of which are free, an iPad can become an interactive whiteboard with many functions not previously available on IWBs and they can become many tools beyond IWBs.

With apps like Doceri (free), Prezi (free), and Splashtop ($19.99), learning can become student-centered and very portable.  Yes, teachers can make presentations and demonstrations with these apps, then share them via email or the web, but more importantly students can use these tools to show their learning and share their understanding with others.  Doceri and Splashtop, along with apps like Educreations (free), ShowMe (free), and ScreenChomp (free), all enable variations of interacting with  a surface, while simultaneously recording what is happening on the screen, accompanied by sound.  A student could complete a math problem while thinking aloud through the process and send the video and audio to a classmate or teacher to demonstrate learning or to help others.  In fact, this type of tool allows students to have an authentic audience, motivating a higher level of performance.

Prezi (free) is an example of the technology moving beyond whiteboard functioning.  A presentation made with Prezi changes the dimension of the content, having multiple boards on one virtual plane for interaction.  Users glide from slide-to-slide, interacting with text, video, images, and sound.  Students creating content in Prezi and interactive whiteboard apps are using higher-order thinking skills than those using a traditional IWB.  They contribute better to inquiry-based classrooms in which students must learn how to “analyze, interpret, and compose using varied texts”, as Lacinda describes.

As Lacinda points out, pedagogy needs to be at the forefront of educators’ minds.  The SAMR model of integration is something I believe in strongly.  

We need to move students from substitution to transformation.  IWBs are on the substitution level, while apps like Prezi, ScreenChomp, ShowMe, and Educreations show up on the transformation level because they enable tasks that were not possible before and allow for higher levels of creativity.  Notice this means that they also correspond to the higher levels of Bloom's Taxonomy, as shown in the model below.

 

When it comes to technology in the classroom, it is important to chose that which will serve the greatest function and the highest order of thinking.  If we do not choose accordingly and wildly jump on tech bandwagons without direction, we are putting the cart before the horse and driving education in the wrong direction.

Throw Away the Chalk

"Chalk and Talk", as Jouneau-Sion and Sanchez calls it, is a thing of the past.  It's time to throw away the chalk, turn off the teacher talk, and put the focus on students, including technology for their generation, not Grandma's.  Though it may be difficult for teachers to adapt to new ways of doing things, we owe it to the next generation, and ourselves, to utilize the resources at our disposal to best develop our future through students.

For the past several years, walking through the doors of the middle school where I taught felt like I was going back in time.  Students would hide the gadgets that seemed to be an extension of their own bodies, making sure the devices were never visible to adults.  Teachers turned on overhead projectors, played DVDs, and recorded grades online, thinking they were utilizing technology in the classroom. And they were.  However, this is their technology, not their students'.  Teachers have a very hard time adapting to new technology because they feel they learned successfully from such devices and have taught successfully for quite some time.

As Larry Cuban made clear in Teachers and Machines, the same problems teachers have with adapting to new technology in 2013 existed when film entered the classroom in the 1920s, radio entered in the 1930s, and television entered in the 1950s.  The challenges making it difficult for teachers to use film when it first entered the classroom are the same as it is for teachers to adapt today.  In fact, if one replaces the word 'film' in Cuban's passage (p. 18) below, with the word iPad, computer, or app, the statements are equally true today.

...the following reasons turned up on lists of obstacles blocking increased film use in classrooms:

• Teachers' lack of skills in using equipment and film
• Cost of films, equipment, and upkeep
• Inaccessibility of equipment when it is needed
• Finding and fitting the right film to class

I have heard teachers make the same complaints as they are faced with integrating computers or  iPads into their lessons.  They express having little training and access to equipment.  Money is often to blame for a lack of progress as well.

Adding to the challenges of integrating technology is the fear teachers have; there is danger in the unknown.  As Caroline Jouneau-Sion and Eric Sanchez mentioned in "Preparing schools to accomodate the challenge of Web 2.0 technologies", students will find unsavory content and be prone to cheating with the accessibility of the internet in school.   However, teachers must trust students and teach them to make informed choices when using technology.  Rather than avoiding technology, teachers need to embrace it as a motivational tool.  As Jouneau-Sion and Sanchez said, teachers must accompany students in this move forward.

Meanwhile, students' phones are vibrating in their pockets, with status updates and notifications of photo postings making their presence known.  Students go home and create new worlds in Minecraft, create and share photo collages, and Skype with family members across the country.  Teachers need to adapt this technology to learning.  It holds the key to motivation and rich learning experiences, opening the virtual door to a the world and a universe of knowledge.

With use of current technology, teachers can facilitate collaboration on projects using tools like Wikispaces, reflection through ePortfolios and blogs, deep learning through inquiry, and building new ideas through creativity and innovation, as Jouneau-Sion and Sanchez explained.  Students should be called scientists, engineers, historians, and designers.  They should be in environments in which real-life designing of new ideas and building of new products should occur.  Every student should learn to code and should also be using a Raspberry Pi, an Arduino, the internet, and each other to learn, not a textbook and a teacher lecture.

With the availability of online environments, students have choice.  With increasing dropout rates, students belong in their own natural habitat.  Options should be available for students to learn online, face-to-face, or in blended learning environments.  Devices must be removed from pockets, and incorporated into learning environments.  All students must have access to hands-on learning and current technology to adapt to their own needs.  Boredom is a problem, according to Jouneau-Sion and Sanchez.  We are at a turning point in education, and society, and it is time to listen to the kids.  They deserve much more than being bored in rows facing an antiquated technology - the teacher.  

"To improve is to change; to be perfect is to change often."  -Winston Churchill

It's not about the technology

It's not about the technology

I made the video linked above to summarize my educational technology philosophy for my online portfolio during my recent job search.  It helped me land a position as an educational technology consultant for a regional educational services agency.  Below is a full explanation:

It’s not about the technology.  Learning in the 21st century requires a paradigm shift, and simply replacing old technology with new does not facilitate the type of thinking necessary for thriving in modern society.

Learners need an expert facilitator to design learning experiences involving inquiry, choice, collaboration, critical thinking, creativity, and innovation.  These experiences need to be project-based and available just-in-time, to meet individual students’ needs. Technology is a set of ever-changing tools that are used to enable rich learning experiences; the technology should follow they learning, not guide it.

As an educational technology consultant, I will guide learning facilitators with the ideas and principles of the educational shift we need right now.  I will inform leaders of reflective learning practices, Universal Design for Learning, building professional learning networks, and blended learning in order to best educate their digital natives.  I will provide teachers the best web 2.0 tools and applications to best facilitate 21st century learning practices and to suit their learning needs; however, I will never allow technology to dictate learning.

Who is Rachel?

Really? Three Rachels in one class? This has never happened to me before!  I suppose I have to distinguish myself from the other Rachels out there...

One way to distinguish this Rachel from the others is by looking at her last name: Verschaeve.  Though Flemish (and perhaps phlegm-ish) in origin, the Anglicized pronunciation is simply ver-shave. 

After teaching primarily eighth grade language arts for thirteen years, I recently left the classroom to take on a role as an educational technology consultant.  This is my last term in the Ed Tech program at UM-Flint, and I feel not only prepared by this program, but also highly inspired. It takes a lot of inspiration to make such a huge life change!

My previous master's degree is in Teaching Reading and Language Arts, with a reading specialist certification, from Oakland University.  I was also my school's literacy coach and a leader on our MiBLSi team, so clearly I have a strong background in literacy.

I am looking forward to learning techniques for combining my two areas of expertise to best complement each other during this course.  Now it's time to READ!