Software to Support Assessment - Essay Example

?Software to Support Assessment Technology has now become an integral part of our world. Starr posits, ‘Each year, school districts require teachers to integrate technology into the curriculum in more substantial ways.’ Teachers are therefore required to become au courant at an alarming rate of the use of technology in the classroom. Donnelly, McGarr, & O’Reilly noted that in the quest to arrest the decline in the number of students taking science subjects in higher education the National Council for Curriculum and Assessment highlighted ‘the need to focus on investigative approaches, problem-solving, the assessment of practical work and the effective use of ICT.’ In light of this rapid injection of technology in the teaching and learning arena teachers need to be able to assess not only the software that is on the market for their use but the ability of the technology to effectively assess student learning. Consequently, there is a need to analyze the capacity of technology to facilitate assessment of students’ learning. Tomlinson emphasizes that there may be ‘assessment of learning, assessment for learning, and assessment as learning.’ Ultimately, Tomlinson suggests that assessment is most useful when it is seen as learning because it is then that it most informs the teaching and learning process. She sees assessment as the ‘beginning of better instruction’. Assessment then is a vital part of the entire teaching learning process. This paper analyses how technology can facilitate both formative and summative assessment of student learning. These two types of assessments are different in its process and purpose. Firstly, formative assessment speaks to the assessment of learning during a particular lesson whereas summative assessment refers to assessment that takes place at the end of a year or at the end of a unit. Kibble et al. noted that ‘The purpose of formative assessment is to provide information …to enhance learning. Formative assessments should occur during learning and can be contrasted with summative assessments that typically make judgments about what was learned after a period of instruction.’ Whereas formative assessment provides immediate feedback to the student the summative assessment occurs at the end of a year when all the mistakes may have been solidified. Tomlinson observed that by the time she had given a final grade in a summative assessment the class would have been ‘moving on to a new topic’. She noted that this information could not be effectively utilized because the time for its effectiveness would have been gone. Thus, Tomlinson became ‘a devotee of formative assessment’ which would allow her to correct students’ faults in real time. Finally, Tomlinson views summative assessment as assessment of learning, and formative assessments as assessment for learning. It is difficult for the teacher to use technology for formative assessment since this process occurs almost spontaneously. Nonetheless, the use of the SMART board as highlighted by Debunker allows the teacher and the student to interact in real time. It is easier for summative assessment to be provided through technological means since these are standardized materials which may be given to all students at the end of the year. Using technology to assess student learning is an emerging concepts as such there are a number of teething problems associated with its implementation. Hence, the use of technology to assess student learning brings with it several pros and cons. Technology allows teachers to analyze the scores of students at a faster rate. The use of assessment software allows for greater standardization across the districts. What is more, the students enjoy interacting with the technology. Thus, they will be more comfortable with the use of the technology than with traditional procedures. Two major concerns of the use of technology are the ‘quality’ and the cost of the materials. Williams, Boone, & Kingsley assert that teachers expect producers of educational material to be ‘properly designed, developed, and evaluated’ but on several occasions these expensive products have been found to be wanting (214). A second disadvantage to these assessment packages is the lack of input of the teacher. Williams, Boone, & Kingsley note that teachers adapt their materials to fit the needs of their students on a continuous basis but the majority of the educational software is made without the input of the classroom teacher thus the teacher is usually unable to adjust the software to meet the needs of the students. A third con highlighted by Williams, Boone, & Kingsley is the lack of expertise and training of teachers to evaluate educational software. Student learning is at the center of all teaching and learning activities. Thus, in today’s technological age a teacher can assess a student through the use of online student journals and group work generated from a wiki. What is interesting is that because of this enveloping nature of learning that a teacher should not only use technology to assess student learning but should utilize as many methods of assessment as possible. Just as Howard Gardner posits that students have multiple intelligences and therefore should be exposed to a variety of teaching methods so too should the student be exposed to various methods of assessment. In formative assessment the use of electronic quizzes during the lesson can be enjoyable and effective but students who are not linguistically intelligent may perform better with oral questioning. Tomlinson noted that the poor performance of a student on one type of assessment usually indicated that the assessment and the student did not ‘fit’. Hence, she argued that she would never settle for ‘a single assessment as an adequate representation of what a student knew.’ Assessment is an essential component of the teaching and learning process. For this reason, teachers need to incorporate the three dimensions of assessment into their classroom. The three components: ‘assessment of learning (summative assessment), assessment for learning (formative assessment), and assessment as learning’ need to be understood and utilized effectively by teachers (Tomlinson). Technology is rapidly becoming a cornerstone of teaching and learning. The onus is therefore on the teacher to utilize technology in a comprehensive manner in order to facilitate both summative and formative assessment of student learning. References Burnett, C. “Medium for empowerment or a 'centre for everything': Students' experience of control in virtual learning environments within a university context.” Education an Information Technologies, 16 .3 (2011): 245. Web. 9 July 2011. Dekunder, D. “SCUC installs SMART Boards in every classroom, school.” Pt - Northeast Herald, (2010).pp. 6NH. Web. 9 July 2011. Donnelly, D., McGarr, O., & O’Reilly, J. “A framework for teachers’ integration of ICT into their classroom practice.” Computers & Education, 57.2 (2011):1469-1483. Web. 9 July 2011. Kibble, J., Johnson, T., Khalil, M., Nelson, L., Riggs, G., Borrero, J., & Payer, A. “Insights Gained from the Analysis of Performance and Participation in Online Formative Assessment.” Teaching and Learning in Medicine, 23.2 (2011): 125-129. Web. 9 July 2011. Starr, L. Load ‘Em Up: The Best Software in the Education World. Education World, 24 Oct. 2001.Web. 9 July 2011. Tomlinson, C. “Learning to Love Assessment.” Educational Leadership, 65.4 (2007/2008):8-13. Web. 9 July 2011. Williams, D., Boone, R., & Kingsley, K. “Teacher beliefs about educational software: A Delphi study.” Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 36.3 (2004): 213-229. Web. 9 July 2011. Yorbalinda. “Teachers getting smarter in the classrooms.” Orange County Register (California), 17 Sep. 2009. Web. 9 July 2011. Read More