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.
