Is Assessing Students Work Using Technology In An Elementary Math

Or Science Class On Its Way Out The Door?

Sean Turner
ETEC 533
University of British Columbia
Christopher Rozitis
June 26, 2017
Introduction

A STEM issue that I have identified and am curious to learn more about is: How can teachers
effectively use assessment for, as and of learning, using technology? In particular, how can an
intermediate math and science teacher effectively use assessment with technology? As an
educator, assessment is one area that I struggle with, and it resonates with others. When I
interviewed a colleague for our Module A Lesson 2 activity, my interviewee named Ms. G
quotes, Since I have not been able to find a type of technology that checks for understanding
(quizzes, tests), I have been using more traditional forms of assessment such as tests, quizzes
and projects. If there was a way I could assess students on their understanding by them
completing online tests, quizzes, and projects, I would be very receptive. This seems to be a
very common theme. Even though technology is being more and more integrated into our
everyday teaching practices, educators dont have the knowledge or the knowhow to
incorporate assessments using technology.
With this, comes underlying assumptions. Many educators feel that they dont have enough
training in using technology or the knowhow to implement assessment with it. I asked a few of
my colleagues how they feel assessing students using technology in the classroom and their
responses were, I dont have enough training to fully incorporate this yet in the classroom or,
I dont have time to create online quizzes or tests using technology. Are online tests and
quizzes the only form of assessment teachers can use? Referring to the STEM issue mentioned
above, this is a very relevant and important topic for intermediate science and math teachers.
Since there are so many technologies out there, how does a teacher decide to use one and for
when? My interviewee, Ms. G., states, I would like to learn how to use technology across most
subjects. For example, how can I incorporate technology into Science and Art Education? I
would also like to learn how to set-up e-portfolios and blogs that are secure and protect
student identity but that can also be shared with parents, teachers, and classmates. E-
portfolios are just one way to showcase and assess student work as it can show their
progression over time.

Annotated Bibliography:

The three articles I have chosen to use in my annotated bibliography and to help frame my
STEM issue will be found below in a logical order. Besides using CiteULike, I used Google Scholar
and used the keywords, elementary, technology and assessment. I wasnt concerned
with what country the article came from or when it was first published. Assessing using
technology is a very up and coming topic these days, so I was keen to find anything related to
this matter. I found these articles to be noteworthy since they all address in one form or
another, assessment using technology that can be beneficial for intermediate math and science
teachers.

Barrett, H. C. (2006). Using electronic portfolios for formative/classroom-based

assessment. Classroom Connect Connected Newsletter, 13(2), 4-6.

The author describes that if there was a better understanding of how e-portfolios can be used
for formative assessment to improve student learning, then K-12 schools would adopt these
with the same excitement as their higher education counterparts. E-portfolios support both
assessment of learning and assessment for learning. Using this type of assessment in math and
science will allow for a student-centered, formative portfolio, where the student can reflect on
his/her growth over time. Barrett explains that there needs to be more research on examples of
implementation that will differentiate between student owned e-portfolios and the assessment
models used to record evidence of students progress. She worked with TaskStream to create
the REFLECT Initiative, a research project to study the effects that portfolio creation and
reflection have on student engagement and learning. Barrett & Wilkerson (2004) argue that an
e-portfolio system needs to have three different tools that will ultimately talk to each other
electronically for it to be successful: 1) A digital archive of the learners work. 2) A learner-
centered e-portfolio using the students voice. 3) A central database to gather teacher-
generated assessment data based on rubrics and tasks (As cited in Barrett, 2006). In summary, a
system with these three components will act as a system to support formative (student
feedback) and summative assessment (collecting data).
What this article fails to address is that e-portfolios can assess as learning too. By students
reflecting and peer assessing their own and each others work, it will satisfy the STEM issue
raised: How can teachers effectively use assessment for, as and of learning, using technology?
What type of online portfolio should schools adopt? The author states that each school or
district must decide the purpose for having students create an online portfolio. She mentions
software such as Microsoft Office and Adobe Acrobat, but stops there.

Lee, H., Feldman, A., & Beatty, I. D. (2012). Factors that affect science and mathematics
teachers initial implementation of technology-enhanced formative assessment using a
classroom response system. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 21(5), 523-539.

The authors identify ten main hindering factors reported by science and math teachers of the
implementation of Technology-Enhanced Formative Assessment (TEFA); a pedagogy created for
teaching with classroom response system (CRS) technology, otherwise known as clickers. The
38 participants included in this study were science and math teachers from 6 different high
schools in the northeastern US. The data was collected through a series of interviews,
classroom video-recordings, online teacher and student surveys and audio recordings of PD
meetings. There were two overall hindering themes to implementing CRS into a math or science
classroom: extrinsic and intrinsic. Extrinsic factors are basic to a teachers practice: time and
curriculum pressure, hardware, software and students ability, behaviour and attitude. Intrinsic
factors include: CRS technology skills, creating relevant and thought provoking questions and
facilitating student-centered whole-class discussion. Their study proved that teachers need
more than technology and training for its use.
Referring to the main STEM issue: How can teachers effectively use assessment for, as and of
learning, using technology? Classroom response system does achieve this but as mentioned
above there are limitations; primarily due to teachers beliefs and their technological knowhow.
Although this study was conducted within a high school setting, I can see this type of
assessment used in an intermediate one too. If there was a change in attitude towards some
teacher and the funds and professional development opportunities available, CRS would work
for intermediate math and science teachers.

Mndez, D., & Slisko, J. (2013). Software Socrative and smartphones as tools for
implementation of basic processes of active physics learning in classroom: An initial feasibility
study with prospective teachers. European Journal of Physics Education, 4(2).

The authors present a study that was conducted with 36 prospective science teachers. Their
goal was to see how the app called Socrative can enhance student learning, engagement and
real-time assessment. Socrative is an updated version of the clickers that was presented by Lee
et al., (2012). A major difference between the two is that with Socrative, all students need is a
mobile phone, tablet or laptop computer. According to Project Tomorrow (2010), 98% of
students in the USA between the ages of fourteen to eighteen years old own a cellphone (as
cited in Mendez & Slisko, 2013). What they fail to address is how did they determine this figure
since this is almost all teenagers in the USA own a cellphone, which is highly unlikely. The ease
of use aspect of Socrative asked all participants to rate their opinion after using this app. Only
33 responded. More than 50% agreed that using Socrative helped them understand concepts
more, and allowed for exchange of opinions when asked to discuss their answers in groups.
Referring to the main STEM issue: How can teachers effectively use assessment for, as and of
learning, using technology? Using Socrative is an easier way to assess for, as and of learning
using just a mobile device and wifi. Limitations of this study were poor previous mechanics
knowledge of the involved teachers and the short amount of time for instructional time. Both
of these taken into account, made it difficult to obtain better results in conceptual learning of
mechanics.
Conclusion:
These three articles help address the main STEM issue raised. From e-portfolios, CRS clickers to
Socrative; assessment for, as and of learning can all be achieved with each of these tools. A
common message that was echoed throughout these papers, was the technological knowhow
that teachers and students need in order for these to be effective. If teachers dont know what
type of program or software to use for e-portfolios, they are less likely to use them in the
classroom. If teachers or districts dont have the funds to purchase clickers or technical support
when something goes wrong, they will not be able to effectively use them for assessment
purposes. When it comes to Socrative, students need to have a mobile device in order for it to
work. There will always be drawbacks when it comes to assessing students work with
technology, but they outweigh the cons in this case. There is more student engagement,
collaborative group work and a sense of ownership when it comes to their learning. I believe
educators need to figure out what technological device works for them in order to assess
students work. Its not a matter of one size fits all, but a trial and error method. An e-portfolio
may work great in a math class, but perhaps not in a science class.