Comments on: Why Technology Assessments Suck

By: Jane Delmage

Jane Delmage — Thu, 20 Sep 2007 03:47:13 +0000

Hi Dean, I came across this site while searching for some information on authentic assessment. If you have not already come across it, I thought you may find it of intrest…
http://www.ncte.org/cccc/resources/positions/123773.htm

By: Ronda Wedhorn

Ronda Wedhorn — Tue, 18 Sep 2007 00:23:54 +0000

I agree with Kelly that we need to focus on the process and not the end product. As a third year education student we are learning that the process is more important than “the answer is b” but it will take some time before everyone comes around to that way of thinking.

Just this year, the university has made a shift in my classes, to more technology based learning, so the graduates of 2008 will be coming to the schools with a new way of thinking – I hope.

Keep up the great work Dean !!

Ronda

By: Kelly Christopherson

Kelly Christopherson — Sun, 16 Sep 2007 22:17:20 +0000

It’s too bad that we are still stuck on the how assess. How do you save a document? The use of these tools to answer questions, I believe, needs to deal with the why, for whom, and what for. We need to focus on the creation of the product, the process used, who it is aimed at, what the message is and why is it important. Whether students can use specific tools is only a small portion of technology assessment, from my point of view. I want students to think about what they are going to say, pick the tool they believe will help them say it and then work through the process of developing a response to the question. How they do that is more important to me than a. the answer b. the tool they chose to use. You’re right, it does suck!

By: Jody Hayes, NZ

Jody Hayes, NZ — Sat, 15 Sep 2007 07:01:17 +0000

I like that it is not ‘by grade’ it is open ended … isn’t that how it should be. We are all on a journey, learning along the way. I know this makes it hard to ‘assess’. The goal is connected and conversations isn’t it??? Kathy Cassidy’s class are just littlies (as are mine) but they get it, they are connected to one another.
I found your pdf interesting enough to download, so thanks for that. I’ll think some more on it.

By: Conn McQuinn

Conn McQuinn — Fri, 14 Sep 2007 17:47:09 +0000

We have discussed this a lot around here. My view is flavored by my background in science education, where technology is defined as the human process of solving problems through the use or creation of tools, materials, skills, and knowledge, rather than being specific devices or tools. (The American Advancement for the Association of Science has an extensive section on technology in their standards at http://www.project2061.org/publications/bsl/online/ch3/ch3.htm). The new ISTE standards have moved in this direction, which is very positive. But yes, it is very hard to evaluate. You can test the specific foundational skills in using particular basic tools or processes, but those skills don’t have much meaning if they aren’t applied to authentic tasks that allow the students to innovate, explore, and create.

By: Dean Shareski

Dean Shareski — Thu, 13 Sep 2007 23:53:06 +0000

Thanks John I’ll look forward to something from you. I also remember something from Jamie Mackenzie’s district used something from Mankota (Doug Johnson’s district I believe) in Washington that attempted to measure things like collaboration, design, communication but as I looked deeper, they still went down to the level of “students can use email”. I recall an assessment tool that measured more meaningful skills and processes, but I can’t find it anymore so I’d love for someone to develop something of value.

By: John Pederson

John Pederson — Thu, 13 Sep 2007 22:24:45 +0000

I’ve looked at this. A ton. There isn’t much. There’s even less that’s good. I’m currently working on a project with Bernajean Porter that is taking a specific look at student projects and evaluating them in a way that can be measured. It’s a nice mix that I hope we’ll be able to share at NECC ‘08. Not without a huge cost and committment.

By: Dean Shareski

Dean Shareski — Thu, 13 Sep 2007 21:13:18 +0000

Actually we have…LOTI focuses more on teachers which is good. I’m struggling with assessments that are specifically for kids.

By: Miguel Guhlin

Miguel Guhlin — Thu, 13 Sep 2007 21:05:15 +0000

Why not use the Levels of Technology Implementation (LOTI) developed by Dr. Chris Moersch? I highly recommend it.

Email: chris@learning-quest.com

More at: http://www.edsupport.cc/mguhlin/share/index.php?n=Work.loti