Digital Portfolio Reflection

Digital Portfolio Reflection Badge

Almost there! 

Virtual Identity and Audience of My Work

I initially created this blog for a previous class, but I think that it was appropriate to use it again for this class.  This blog is a good representation of a lot of my graduate work over the past year, and I think that it accurately reflects who I am as a graduate student. 

I chose the name Brick Pollitt, because he is a character from my favorite play, Cat on a Hot Tin Roof by Tennessee Williams.  This name connects with my love of literature while also allowing me to preserve some anonymity in the online world.  I am not ashamed or embarrassed by anything on my blog, but I don’t necessarily want students or parents to find it and question it.  I want the blog to remain public so that it allows me to connect and interact with educators who choose to take part in similar discussions, but I don’t necessarily want my online life so closely connected with my personal life.

My intended audience for this portfolio was primarily my classmates and instructors of the classes.  We had the shared experience of the course readings, and so the portfolio/blog is merely a part of the larger conversation that we shared over the course of two semesters.  However, I also realize that the audience could go beyond this class and extend to those in the online community who are interested in the topics that I discuss.  I don’t expect too many people to stumble across my blog, but I plan on leaving it public so that I have future opportunities for discussion.  I also know that I can get more involved in the educational community that is actively involved online, and I can choose to actively share my blog.  I am already a member of English Companion, and I know that there is a passionate community of educators associated with that website.

Reflection on Artifacts and Documents

            I am proud of the lot of the work that I have done for this course, and I appreciate my classmates’ contributions to this experience.  Their comments supported and challenged me as I navigated the readings of the curriculum.  My reflection on badges and gamification initiated a conversation with my classmates that challenged me, but also provided me with some new perspectives.  In that case my blog reflection showed that the readings had changed my view of badges.  At the beginning of this course, I thought that badges seemed a bit silly.  However, after the course reading, I saw badges as similar to traditional assessments.  Jacinth and EloiseThree challenged my view and pointed out the real benefits of badges, and I found their comments to be very helpful.  I think that this conversation resulted in a lot of growth for me.

            My reflection on multimodal composition and assessment was also some of my best work, and I know that it will be quite useful for me in the future.  The course readings challenged my print-based bias, and forced me to reconsider my own educational experiences.  Writing that blog post made me realize that writing is most convincing and engaging when it is multimodal.  Even though it can be hard to assess, educators must be willing to embrace it.

            Jacinth’s entry on the 3P’s was extremely helpful to me, and it stands out as one of the blog entries that I really remember from this course.  She shared her experience with a senior class and how she shifted the course to digital portfolios.  I appreciated that she shared her struggles in implementing new curriculum, but she also outlined how she made plans to handle challenges when they arose.  This story was inspiring and showed the potential of digital portfolios.

            Hoku Lani’s blog about digital badges and gamification was also extremely helpful to me.  She shared her experience with some badge programs, and she also offered some great resources to check out (SmithsonianQuests,  Mindshift).  Her blog made me realize that I need to do some more exploration in digital badges, before I cast judgment on the idea.  Her willingness to share her experience showed me that badges can provide a sense of accomplishment that will motivate some learners.

Learning Outcomes

Course Objective: Students will assemble their own electronic portfolio, based on a badge-system approach.

This course objective was relevant to me because I had very little experience with badges and electronic portfolios.  In just one month, I feel like I have a very strong grasp of these topics, and I can integrate new ideas into my classroom.  My blog entries demonstrate that I am comfortable with multimodal writing and digital portfolios, and my wall of badges shows that I have embraced and succeeded in the badge system.

Course Objective: Students will explore specific e-assessment topics aligned with their current teaching needs, interests, and areas of professional development.

            This course objective was extremely practical for me, and I think that I have achieved this goal through my course reading and reflection.  I have a much better understanding of e-assessment of writing.  Before this course I was not familiar with the technologies that were available for e-assessment.  My blog entry demonstrates that I am much more familiar with these technologies, and I also understand their strengths and weaknesses.  My classroom goals at the end of each blog entry will also provide me with a guideline for avenues to take when further pursuing professional growth.

Nationally Recognized Standards: ISTE 3a and 3b

Through my work in this class, I have clearly “demonstrated fluency in technology systems and the transfer of current knowledge to new technologies and situations.”  My blog is a living example of multimodal writing and reflection on new technologies and the changing educational landscape, and my elective badges also provide evidence of that work.  My building community badges are evidence that I have “collaborate[d] with students, peers, parents and community members using digital tools and resources to support student success and innovation.”  The comments that I have left for my classmates and received from them demonstrate that I am a part of a collaborative community of educators who are taking steps so that our students can be engaged and successful citizens. 

Next Steps for Professional Learning

 I am excited to say that this class will be my final class of my graduate program, and I will immediately be putting together my online MEd portfolio so that I can graduate this summer. Even though my formalized program will be complete, I hope to maintain my blog for educational purposes.  I also would like to become more involved in EnglishCompanion so that I can feel like I am a part of that active community of educators.  I also hope to spend some time this summer exploring Connected Learning and Digital Is to see if they could help me in my professional development.

Finish Line Image Source:  http://www.lifetime-weightloss.com/blog/2013/1/30/the-finishing-line-effect.html

Moving Beyond the Pen and Paper

Elective 4 – Multimodal Composition and Assessment

https://nandosgirl.files.wordpress.com/2010/01/software.gif

1.  What are the intersections and differences between print-based writing and multimodal writing?

            I believe that writing is a form of communication.  Whether print-based or multimodal, writing has the same goal: to communicate an idea.  Writing has naturally evolved throughout history, and its ability to communicate information is more effective and more efficient than it has ever been.  Writing is now multimodal and does not merely rely on print. 

Multimodality can enrich writing, but it cannot rescue a bad idea or a poor effort at communication.  To that end, I really enjoyed the Bill Gates quote from Neal’s (2011) introduction, “automation applied to an efficient operation will magnify efficiency . . . automation applied to an inefficient operation will magnify inefficiency” (p. 106).  I think that this view of automation applies nicely to the multimodality of writing.  Multimodality can “magnify” a great idea and present it in a dynamic and convincing way.  However, it cannot make a bad idea dynamic and convincing.

In its position statement on Multimodal Literacies, the NCTE (2005) said that, “Integration of multiple modes of communication and expression can enhance or transform the meaning of the work beyond illustration or decoration.”  I agree completely with this view on multimodality.  In my undergraduate years, I double-majored in English Literature and Film.  For me, this was a natural pairing of majors.  To put it simply, I enjoyed stories.  In my literature classes I encountered a lot of great print-based literature, and I was engaged by the quality of the writing.  However, I must admit that my film classes were usually more engaging.  Stories were not limited to print, and my other senses were engaged when watching a film or creating a film in my production classes.  This week’s reading helped me better understand that heightened level of engagement.  Strop and Carlson (2010) created a chart of the five semiotic systems:

 

           

p. 11

This chart shows how film engages all five semiotic systems while a novel only engages two.  This chart also illustrates how other text modes can engage and challenge students.  I think that teachers, including myself, should keep this chart in mind when trying to select texts that will engage students.

2.  How can these intersections and differences be addressed in multimodal composition assessment?

            Assessing multimodal compositions is not an easy task.  The mere variety of modes that are possible with these texts makes them very hard to standardize or “rubricize.”  Neal (2011) addressed this concern, “Perhaps the most challenging obstacles we face in implementing new writing and assessment technologies in our writing classes is ourselves, specifically our lack of expertise and confidence in these new technologies that prevents us from allowing our students to explore new media literacy possibilities in their composing processes,” (p. 126).  I think that Neal’s observation here is a good one, and it should challenge teachers to overcome the obstacle.  We cannot reject multimodality just because it is hard to assess.  We must embrace multimodality and be willing to make mistakes as we figure out the best way to assess this incredibly dynamic world of writing experiences.  Just this week I read an article about Columbia University accepting a graphic novel for a doctoral dissertation in its education program.  It’s a fascinating article that ties directly to this conversation.  I highly recommend it for those interested in multimodal literacies.  It’s good to see that even the most prestigious universities have accepted that texts are now multimodal, and I hope that all educators can embrace this wonderful new world of communication.

My classroom

1.  I’m finally convinced!  After several graduate school courses that embraced multimodality, I am going to actively bring it into my classroom.  In my sophomore class I plan on replacing the notebook journal with a blog.  I have really enjoyed writing blog entries and exploring their multimodality, and I think my students will enjoy it as well.  I know that assessment is possible because of my experiences in these courses, and I know that blogs can help create a sense of community.  Now, I have to talk with the technology team to figure out the safest way to set up this course so that it is in line with school policy.

Works Cited:

NCTE (2005). Position Statement on Multimodal Literacies. Retrieved from: http://www.ncte.org/positions/statements/multimodalliteracies

Neal, M. (2010). Writing assessment and the revolution in digital texts and technologies. New York: Teachers College Press.

Strop, J. & Carlson, J. (2011). Multimedia text sets: Changing the shape of engagement and learning. Portage & Maine Press.

The Rise of the Machines

Elective 3 – E-Assessment of Writing

http://blog.modernmechanix.com/school-uses-machine-to-mark-all-examination-papers/

The Rise of the Machines

Sometimes when I am at school, I choose to grade a pile of papers or student journals while sitting in the faculty lounge.  It is a room with some space for me to get comfortable as I prepare to make a dent in a stack of assignments that I know will take me hours and hours to get through.  As I read through pages of student writing, correcting the same mistakes again and again, it is easy for me to get a little frustrated with my choice in profession.  This frustration only increases when a history teacher or science teacher strolls into the room with a stack of Scantron sheets and goes to the machine in the corner.  They are able to grade their tests in two minutes, while I am still trying to repair the introductory paragraph on the first paper.  I will joke with these teachers about running my stack of papers through the machine, and a part of me wishes that I could. 

The reading that I did this week showed me that this type of computer-assessment of writing is possible, but may not be the sophisticated enough to rely on entirely.  (Note: I also believe that Scantrons probably shouldn’t be used so prominently in the classes of some of my colleagues, but that is another conversation).

Vojak, Kline, Cope, McCarthey, & Kalantzis (2011) really provided me with a strong introduction to the world of electronic writing assessment, and I feel that I understand the potential benefits and drawbacks of the tools that are out there.  One line from the article that really got me thinking about this issues was the CCCC’s 2004 position statement on digital assessment:

Writing to a machine, they argue, “violates the social nature of writing” and is thus detrimental to students’ understanding of writing as a uniform of communication.  In addition, the CCCC questions the validity of machine scoring and the criteria on which machine scoring is based; the CCCC raises concerns the machine scoring of college papers will lead to high schools preparing students to write for machines rather than for human audiences. (p. 98)

Teaching to the standardized test has already infiltrated education enough, and so it would be very detrimental if teachers had to start teaching writing with a machine-based assessment in mind.  Vojak et al. established three key understandings about writing with this “social nature” in mind.  According to Vojak et al. writing is socially situated, functionally and formally diverse, meaning-making, and can be conveyed in multiple modalities.  With these key understandings in mind, it is clear that digital writing assessment cannot fully support a student’s understanding of the writing process.

When reading about the digital-assessment of writing, I was interested to read the strengths of some of the programs.  Their accuracy when compared to a human scorer is impressive (AES scores within a single point of human grader 97% of the time), and I like how programs like CPR incorporate peer scoring, teacher scoring, computer scoring, and self-scoring.  A lot of these programs are innovative and truly amazing, but they are still flawed.  The purpose of assessment is not to merely provide an accurate grade, but it should also help the student improve.  Without meaningful and direct feedback from a person, I don’t think students will have much motivation to improve.

However, these tools should not be neglected completely.  I think that teachers can use them as supplements.  These programs can be “used to facilitate students’ early drafting and revising process, followed by human feedback from both the teacher and peers in the later process” (Vojak et al., p. 104).  A little computer feedback on the front end of the writing process, might allow teachers to focus on other more important aspects of the writing later in the process.  With a little more focus on these other aspects, teachers might be able to more readily embrace the increasingly multi-modal nature of writing.

Cope, Kalantzis, McCarthey, Vojak, & Kline (2011) also made a lot of great points about digital writing tools.  Much of their article was a little challenging for me to fully grasp, but when I finished it I was blown away by one of their ideas.  They suggest more assessments rather than less.  Initially this suggestion might seem like a call for tests everyday, but that is not the case.  Rather, they suggest continual formative assessments that make summative assessments less daunting:

We imagine a time in the not-too-distant future when there is no practical distinction between formative and summative.  These two forms of assessment will only ever be used to measure the same thing, for learning (as you go) and progress in learning (retrospectively) will converge.  If and when the day arrives, there will be no need for the problematic end-of-program, high-stakes, or accountability defining tests that we have today.  Formative assessment will be pervasive—a repertoire of modes of machine-assisted social intelligence that provides continuous feedback to learners in a rapidly responsive manner and with sufficient substantive feedback.

I apologize for the length of the quote, but it really seems to provide an image of a utopian world of education.  Perhaps it is too ambitious, but I appreciate the attempt to move forward and dream about the possibilities.

Here is a petition I stumbled on this week when I was researching the topic.  I found it interesting:

http://humanreaders.org/petition/

For My Classroom
 I think that the best thing that I can do for my classroom would be to experiment with some of these writing programs this summer.  I am especially interested in Calibrated Peer Review (because it's free), but I am not yet very comfortable with any of these programs. I know that these programs will not "do the grading for me" but I think that they might be able to supplement my writing instruction in a way that is beneficial for my students.

Works Cited:

Cope, B., Kalantzis, M., McCarthey, S., Vojak, C., & Kline, S. (2011). Technology-Mediated Writing Assessments: Principles and Processes. Computers and Composition, 28(2), 79–96.

Vojak, C., Kline, S., Cope, B., McCarthey, S., & Kalantzis, M. (2011). New Spaces and Old Places: An Analysis of Writing Assessment Software. Computers and Composition, 28(2), 97–111.

(Note: Sorry for the length.  I wrote most of this response before watching this week's Voicethread.  I promise my next post will be shorter.)

Elective Badge 2 - BADGES

Elective 2 – Badges

A New Tool for Assessment?

http://imoviequotes.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/201-The-Treasure-of-the-Sierra-Madre-quotes.gif

 

 

 

My initial blog post for this course mentioned my own hesitance when it came to badges in education.  They seemed a little silly to me, but I also did not have much familiarity with badges.  Honestly, it made me think of my kindergarten teachers putting stickers on top of handwriting worksheets.  Could these types of assessments truly be qualitative?

However, the readings that I did this week really broadened my knowledge on badges, and I would say that I have changed my mind on the issue.  I can see the value in badges, although I now find myself questioning them for other reasons.  At the end of the day, are these badges much different than current methods of assessment?

My mind started to shift when I read O’Byrne et al. (2015).  Their introduction to badges really helped me understand these assessments much better.  Now, I have at least a functional definition of digital badges.  “Digital badges are web-enabled tokens of accomplishment.  They can contain specific claims and evidence about learning and are intended to culminate in social networks that badge issuers and earners participate in” (451-452).  As I read about the “claims and evidence” and social potential for badges, I realized that these tokens of accomplishment can be much more valuable than just a picture or a sticker.  They can provide data and chart accomplishments for students.

I agree with O’Byrne et al. when they state “two of the most challenging design principles [with badges are] associating badges with existing credentials and determining how learners will interact with badges to unlock their value.”  Associating badges with existing credentials can be challenging, however I think that it can be done and badges can achieve a lot of the same results.  They can create that same (or greater) level of “motivation” that more traditional assessments have created.  However, at the end of the day, I am left wondering if a shift to badges is really necessary.

In a bizarre way, I think that badges are just another form of assessment.  They serve as another set of tools in a teacher’s toolbox.  The tools are less important than how they are used.  Can’t a skilled teacher use traditional assessments to motivate students to do well while also gathering valuable data?  It seems to me that a carefully planned badge is just as effective as a carefully planned “traditional” assessment.  At the end of the day, there is still some type of “grade” and the efficacy of assessment really depends on how it is implemented in the classroom.  Therefore, I am a little hesitant to dramatically shift the assessment landscape for the same type of results.  Also, I would share O’Byrne’s concern that “a badge does not guarantee that those outside specific learning communities recognize the achievement or metadata as a credible marker of success” (452).

I may seem a bit pessimistic, but I don’t think that badges “will ever really matter.”  I like the concept, but I don’t know if there is a necessity or desire for this type of assessment within the landscape of education.  When looking at the list of organizations that use open badges, I am impressed.  Moodle, Microsoft, Michigan State, these groups might be trendsetters and their appearance on the Open Badge List might indicate that things are headed that way.  However, there is also a chance that these institutions have joined a fad that may prove to be ephemeral.  However, even if badges are a fad, I hope that their appearance will encourage educators to think about assessment and make adjustments with the positives of the badges in mind.

Goals:

1.  Talk to the teachers at my school and see if any of them have heard of the badge system.  I don’t think that I have ever heard it mentioned in my school, but I would love to talk to someone who is making it work.

2.  Videogames as educational tools?  This topic is fascinating to me and I would like to read a little more.  I enjoyed the podcast, but I am still skeptical of the value of video games.  I grew up with a Commodore 64 that had only “educational” games.  However, once I moved beyond that primitive system, I don’t think I ever encountered another video game that enriched my mind.  Throughout middle school and high school, videogames were nothing more than a way to pass the time, but I am curious to learn more about their educational potential.  I think that I know the “problems that need solving” but I am not quite ready to incorporate video games into my high school English curriculum.

Video of the Day:

 More James Gee talking about video games:

 

References:

Gee, J.P. (2014, September 24). Videogames: new literacies for a complex world.  Podcast available at: http://www.americanradioworks.org/video-games-new-literacy-for-a-complex-world/

O’Byrne, W.I., Schenke, K., Willis III, J.E., & Hickey, D.T. (2015) Digital badges: Recognizing, assessing, and motivating learners in and out of school contexts.  Journal of Adolescemt & Adult Literacy, 58(6), 451-454.

http://openbadges.org/participating-issuers/

Digital Citizenship

Being a Citizen in a Digital World

Image courtesy of http://monarchlibrary.wikispaces.com/digitalcitizenship

What is digital citizenship and why should it be a part of literacy instruction?

How can digital citizenship be assessed?

The term digital citizenship was foreign to me before taking graduate school courses, although I realize now that it is exactly what it sounds like.  Just as people are citizens within a community or country, they are also citizens within a very large digital community.  Being a citizen means that one has rights and responsibilities.  For instance, being a United States citizen means having certain rights and requirements.  In a similar way, participating in the online world makes someone a citizen of it.  However, the instructions on how to be a digital citizen sometimes are not communicated to our newest citizens (children) and they are not prepared to appropriately negotiate the digital world.

Gaining My Citizenship
Although I feel relatively young, I suppose I am ancient when I consider my entrance into the digital world.  I was able to gradually enter the digital world as it started to take shape.  I think that my first time exploring the Internet was in my 5th grade classroom in 1995.  My family got the Internet at home in 1997 (dial-up of course).  I started using email a little later, and in 2004 I was a freshman in college when I joined Facebook (which was a relatively small community at the time).  My freshman year in college was also the year when I had my first computer and cell phone.

The reason why I bring up my own citizenship is that it highlights the stark contrast to today's students.  When I was younger the world was not as connected, and I was able to gradually enter the budding digital world.  I think that my gradual entrance allowed me to adjust to and comprehend the rights and responsibilities of a digital citizen.  Today, kids are born into a world that is connected.  "As the Internet has gone mobile, the Nielson Company reports that by age 10 over half of youth own or borrow a cell phone, while six out of ten own a cell phone at age 11, and three-fourths of youths age twelve own a cell phone"  (Hollandsworth, Dowdy, Donovan, 2009, p. 37).  Everything is at their fingertips at an early age, and there is no structured orientation for the massive digital world.

The potential dangers of the digital world are well known, but I don't know if we as a society are doing a great job of preparing our children for these dangers.  But whose responsibility is it to educate?  According to Hollandsworth, Dowdy, and Donovan (2009), it takes a village.

I really appreciate Hollandsworth, Dowdy, and Donovan's approach to Digital Citizenship instruction.  Parents have the responsibility to educate children in the home in the early years (the most vital education), but teachers and media specialists also have that same obligation to educate students in Digital Citizenship.  "As with other performance standards in addressing digital citizenship, the village must create a common set of policies, practices and curriculum with the end result in mind.  What should a good digital citizen look like as an adult member?" (41).  Schools should have the goals of forming student into responsible citizens who can contribute to society.  If society has shifted its focus to the digital world, schools must shift their focus as well.

I think that assessment of digital citizenship is a bit more complicated.  I appreciate Ribble's (2014) approach to educating students, but assessment still seems a bit tricky.  I think that his 9 key elements might provide some structure for assessment, but creating meaningful assessments that hit on all 9 elements might be challenging.  However, Ribble's approach to digital citizenship education is inspiring, "We need to make sure we help students understand the issues that might occur online while also stressing the positive impact of technology.  As many educators know, most students want to do the right things--and will, if they know what it is.  Let's help them do great things with technology while avoiding the pitfalls."  I agree.

My school's robotics team.  Kids doing great things with technology.  (Picture taken from school website: www.priory.org

)

References:

Hollandsworth, R., Dowdy, L., & Donovan, J. (2011). Digital Citizenship in K-12: It Takes a Village. TechTrends, 55(4), 37–47. 

Ribble, M. (2014, June 25). Essential elements of digital citizenship

My goals moving forward:

1.  Look further into Ribble's research.  Try to find Digital Citizenship in Schools

2. Look at my school's technology policy.  I don't think it even addresses digital citizenship.  I am currently reviewing the Student Handbook and considering changes.  Perhaps language involving digital citizenship would be appropriate.  

Digital Portfolios

http://emmottontechnology.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/07/bps_messy_patient_files-300x289.jpg

A Dynamic Writing Record

This week I read the following articles:

Conference on College Composition and Communication (2015). Position statement: Principles and practices in electronic portfolios.

Kabodian, A. (2013). Reflecting on the move to digital writing portfolios.

My experience with portfolios is extremely limited, and I must admit that my opinion of these portfolios is relatively simplistic and formed by my classroom experiences as a student. 

I remember that I had to create a writing portfolio in my sophomore year of high school, and I remember scrambling trying to revise and polish a few works so that they were "portfolio-worthy."  I didn't really understand the portfolio, but I created it because my teacher had requested it.  I turned it in for a grade and never really thought of it again.

I think that my experience is not an uncommon one for most students.  It is hard for students to see the "big picture" when it comes to writing.  I don't think that many of my students are as aware of how they are developing as writers as I am.  Writing is a task to them, and they fail to see their own growth or progression.  A portfolio may be a great way for teachers to assess the growth of a writer over the course of the year, but I don't know if the students see the same value.

As a teacher, I have dabbled in the use of the portfolio.  However, my experiences have sounded a lot like Kabodian's (2013) experiences with students and portfolios.  I questioned whether my students' minds were "cognitively and emotionally developed enough to comprehend reflecting on their own work."  I found myself chasing students down at the end of the year and trying to make sure that they turned in their portfolios.  "What started as a way to get a better look at the progress of their [the students'] writing over time, ended up with me chasing and corralling as many a rogue skateboarders as I could."  Even with all of these problems, it was nice for me to page through a student's portfolio and marvel at the work that he was able to do over the course of the year.  The portfolio made the writing assignments more meaningful because they continued to "exist" and be relevant even after the original assignments was long over.

Kabodian's (2013) description of the old-fashioned portfolio really made me appreciate one of the primary benefits of digital portfolios: they can't be lost.  Hearing about the folder with hard copies of a student's work that followed a student from kindergarten through 8th grade was impressive, and I can see the impact that such a portfolio could have on an 8th grader.  However, Nalbadian points out that these hard copies get lost or overlooked or forgotten.  The benefit of the digital portfolio is that it is always there and always accessible.  It can follow a student from teacher to teacher, school to school, or even state to state.  The convenience of that cannot be overlooked.

The other major benefit of digital portfolio's is well-articulated in the CCCC's position statement (2014), "E-portfolios can be "web-sensible"--a thoughtfully arranged collection of multimedia-rich, interlinked, hypertextual documents that students compose, own, maintain, and archive on the Internet or other formats."  Digital portfolios allow for a multimedia approach that is fitting for a 21st century student.  Yes, as English teachers we must preserve the integrity of the written word.  However, people now have the ability to communicate in a multimedia way that allows for a greater impact.  The digital portfolio acknowledges this multimedia approach, and students no longer have to feel limited by the abilities of the pen and paper.  The means of communication are so much more effective today thanks to digital tools, and it would seem silly not to acknowledge and embrace these new means of communication.



My goals:

1.  Learn more about digital portfolios, especially their multimedia potential.
2.  Assess my own classes and see if there is room/time for digital portfolios.

The A-Word (Assessment)

The Dilemma

 Image taken from Calvin and Hobbes by Bill Watterson

"Assessment is defined as choosing the words, numbers, or symbols that we think best represent literacy learning for the purpose at hand (Johnston, 1997)" (Renwick, 2014, Chapter 1).

As I read the syllabus for this class and looked through this week's readings, I couldn't help but think of this Calvin and Hobbes comic strip and how it reflects assessment.  The idea of using badges and other "non-traditional" means of assessment makes me a little skeptical.  The use of badges seems as silly as using smiley faces or some other seemingly arbitrary symbol.

However, I must also admit, that as a student, I am excited to experience this type of assessment in this class.  As a teacher it scares me, but as a student it feels somewhat liberating.  Won't it be nice to not be as focused on a number?  Won't it be nice to earn something instead of a percentage?

So if I am so excited to experience this type of assessment as a student, why would I be so resistant to using it in my own classroom?  To be honest, I would be afraid that the data that I gathered would not be the kind of data that my administration or my students or their parents would expect.  Students at my school are extremely motivated by grades and where they rank in the classroom.  Every time that I return an assignment, I have to ask them to stop comparing their work with one another.  Parents have access to my online grade book, and some of them are hyper-vigilant about each assignment.  Administrators want that grade book filled with data at the end of each term, and not all assessments fit into the parameters of that program.  It seems like if I were to do non-traditional assessments, no one would appreciate the importance of these types of assignments but me.

Formative vs. Summative

"We often see formative and summative assessments pitted against each other.  It's as if they are two students asking a question at the same time, each vying for the teachers attention"  (Renwick, 2014, Chapter 1).

I really appreciated Renwick's discussion of these two types of assessments.  It served as a wake-up call to me.  As I read, I realized just how reliant I have become on summative assessments, and I have scaled back my formative assessments drastically.  I feel that I have become so focused on summative assessments because my students are more motivated by those.  If I have a class do creative writing "just for fun and practice" they will always ask me, "Is this for a grade?"  I usually refuse to answer this question directly because if I tell them that it isn't for a grade then they will not put much effort into it.

Perhaps if I commit to formative assessments I can train my students to put forth a full effort even when a grade is not in play.  If they realize that effort put forth in formative assessments will result in improved performance on summative assessments, then this shift might be possible.

Bloom's Taxonomy

I appreciated when Darling-Hammond (2014) reminded me of Bloom's Taxonomy of the Cognitive Domain (see above).  When looking at this pyramid, it is really shocking to me to think about how much that we assess is located in the knowledge section (lowest order of thinking).  I appreciated the examples that Darlin-Hammond provided that showed how to assess cognitive skills at the top of the pyramid.  As and English teacher, it is my responsibility to come up with creative ways to inspire that same higher order of thinking in my students.

To-Do List
1.  Brainstorm formative assessments that can supplement summative assessments that I already use.
2.  Brainstorm assignments that challenge students to go above and beyond lower-order cognitive skills.


References:

Darling-Hammond, L. (2014). Next generation assessment: Moving beyond the bubble test to support 21st Century Learning. San Francisco, CA: Jossey Bass.

Renwick, M. (2014). Digital student portfolios: A whole school approach to connected learning and continuous assessment. Virginia Beach, VA: Powerful Learning Press.