Findings from the Questions Explored - My Buddies Second Question

This entry is intended to support issues identified and discussed in some of my earlier blogs.

The question I chose from my buddy related to my own first question that  looked at technical issues associated with the delivery of technology, then focused on the vexed issue of what constitutes appropriate - legitimate assessment in a Web 2.0 world where it appears the only constant is change!.

My partner Camilla's Question 2 which I modified  became:  What is the most effective way to test students' progress using online learning tools and how is this different from traditional forms of assessment? 

This question was of particular interest to me because of the ongoing debate around assessment practices and the need to create tasks that assess what is important in a changing world where individualism is less important than flexability, collaboration, creativity and teamwork (Gillen & Barton, 2009).  The question also had to acknowledge the speed of technological change which traditional assessment practices are poorly attuned to.  That there is a time lag between what is discovered,what is taught and learned, and how and what is assessed is becoming more of an issue than ever before in a Web 2.0 world.

What I discovered:

Using Web 2.0 technology requires different methods of assessment and types of questions than those that have traditionally been used.  Types of questions that might to be considered when assessing using Web 2.0 tools are  -  Has the learning brought about a change in behaviour?  Has it lead to greater learner independence?  Has the learning enhanced confidence and self perception? Has it brought about greater collaboration?  Is there evidence that personal competencies have been enhanced?  How has this judgement been made?  Is the assessment task one that is content based such as mastery of facts or is it more flexible than that?  Does assessment rely on traditional definitions of literacy as reading and writing or is it more creative and flexible and reflect its changed nature? (Gillen & Barton, 2009).  Is the 'test' in a traditional  form with objective assessment criteria or is it more subjective relying on teacher observation and judgements? 

Personalisation of learning is an important component in Web 2.0 learning and is achieved through communication and collaboration with  learners who actively participate in the process of tailoring it to meet their needs (An & Williams, 2010).  Knowledge is viewed as an active process and happens in a less structured environment than in the past and outside 'experts' might be involved rather than the traditional teacher whose skill base may well be less than the learners in front of them.  Assessment practices must reflect that.

An effective way to minimise the risk of assessing in the 'wrong way' is to use a personalised learning approach (so much a part of a Web 2.0 environment)  where so much of the teaching and learning is collaborative and aimed at developing confidence and self perception.  In this context assessment might take the form of portfolios and ongoing observation of personal growth, confidence, dexterity with use of tools, and be far more collaborative in both its form and structure than traditional forms of individual assessment.

Other important considerations in Web 2.0 assessment are the provision of authentic contexts (Gillen & Barton, 2009, p5) the creation of tasks that change attitudes, behaviours and lead to greater learner independence, the realisation that teachers will not necessarily be the possessor of the most relevant knowledge and avoiding using pen and paper assessments for Web 2.0 learning as these invariably assess different skills and knowledge than is intended.

This list is far from exhaustive but gives I believe a 'feeling' for how assessment might be approached in the second decade of the twenty first century.

References:

An, Y., & Williams, K.(2010) Teaching with Web 2.0 Technologies: Benefits, Barriers and Lessons Learned.  International Journal of Instructional Technology and Distance Learning.  Retrieved from http://www.itdl.org/Journal/Mar_10/article04.htm

Barrett, H. (2004) Differentiating Electronic Portfolios and Online Assessment Management Systems.
Retrieved 19 August from http;//www.electronicportfolios.com/systems/concerns.html


 Gillen, J.,  & Barton, D.  (2009, 12 -13 March 2009).  Digital Literacies.  Paper presented at the meeting of the teaching and Learning Research Programme-Technology Enhanced Learning, Lancaster University.