Reflections+on+Technology+Facilitator+Standard+IV

**__Self –Assessment __**
 * __Reflections on Technology Facilitator Standard IV: Assessment and Evaluation __**
 * When reading Williamson & Redish's text, Standard IV I reviewed my feeling that applying justified and fair assessments for students is the most difficult job of a teacher. Not only are we faced with teaching current and applicable material, but we must present it in an engaging format with an end result in mind for our students to learn from and grow with. This is an amazing feet when accomplished with pure experiences for students to show what they have learned. So, we as “Facilitators and leaders need an understanding of how technology can help assess student learning in core academic areas, be sensitive to over testing and be able to balance computer based testing and other electronic tools for alternate testing” (Williamson & Redish, 2009).﻿ I was actually amazed at the amount of information that the text has about computer-based testing (CBT) because this concept, in my experiences, is not used as much as culminating projects or lessons for presenting or showing what students have learned. Although I think that CBT is a logical step to assessment, it is the least used in my experiences. "In most classrooms, technology-supported assessment strategies are partially implemented or not used at all" (Williamson & Redish, 2009).
 * In studying the constructivist practices, it is known that using technologies for performance-based learning is ideal for enhancing student participation and learning. "Now that performance-based learning standards and constructivist practices are valued, technology provides a way for students to create authentic, original products...representing what they have learned" (North Central Regional Educational Laboratory, 2004). But, what I learned was that using technology literacy assessments in a consistent way throughout the United States is virtually impossible because of states allowing districts to determine their own method of assessing and by giving few resources to do so (Williamson & Redish, 2009, p. 82). It's too bad that our country has come up with national standards for educational movements, our states ultimately have the control and money whether or not to be able to fulfill those standards.
 * While I was able to learn how to implement a SmartBoard student response system, create rubrics for written portfolio pieces, and use Web 2.0 tools to assess student vocabulary, I feel that my experiences with this standard of assessment and evaluation could use some more work. Performance-based projects using technology applications are the most ideal with the core content that I teach currently. The resources that we have available at my school are slim pickins when it comes to clickers, but online testing and rubric making has been useful and successful.

**__Learn as a Learner __**
 * When I consider how to assess and evaluate student learning, I think of ways to get the data back to the students in a timely manner so that they may synthesize and problem solve immediately after performing the task. According to Pitler, Hubbell, Kuhn and Malenoski (2007), feedback should be quick, specific, and guide students to the correct responses. Sometimes that is not always possible when grading 80 written papers and process writing pieces when required for report card time. But, nonetheless, our ways of implementing the standard for teaching, learning, and the curriculum have to coincide with the assessment and evaluation standard so that we have a clear path of where to go with the student lessons and outcomes. When I set up the student response system, the learning curve to inputting the questions and scoring procedures takes the longest, but being able to model the use of technology tools to assess student learning of subject matter by using a different method of assessment goes a long way with student participation and their own self-evaluating techniques.
 * As a learner, I feel that my ability to assist teachers in using evaluation straegies for improving students' use of technology resources for learning, communication, and productivity has grown, but could still use more experience with different types of these technologies. I am confortable with learning and using web-based assessment tools, but I still would like the exposure to more of the web 2.0 possibilities out there for creating common formative assessments online. "ISTE defines this essential condition as 'continuous assessment, both of learning and for learning, and evaluation of the use of technology and digital resources'" (Williamson & Redish, 2009, p.91).
 * My learning and interaction with collegues through discussion board, wikis, emails, and blog have strengthened my ability to create and assist teachers in implementing more performance-based assessments. Because I feel comfortable with these technologies now, it is easier for me to create and explain how teachers can have theri students blogging and how to grade there experiences as participation and useful time learning.

**__Lifelong Learning Skills __**
 * Learning about assessment and evaluation is an ongoing goal of mine to grow from in the teaching profession. Whether it be using technology or not, finding ways for students to show what they know is the ultimate peak of an educator's premise. By using technology, we only open the doors wider for students to show their creativity, sense of adventure, and technical skills. By providing these technologies at school, we shorten the gap between those that "have and don't have" in their personal lives. By modeling the use of technology to assess student learning I can impact my and every student's learning potential for the future.
 * My experiences with using differnet methods of assessment and evaulation can only grow from this point on. Past experiences with student response systems, rubrics, online testing adds to my growing platter to chose from the next time I want to engage my students.
 * A fear of mine is that we will not have budgetary needs to help this standard become a reality in the form of student response systems. Although there are other types of assessing with technology, like web-based games or testing, I feel that the tactile and physical response needed in the SRS approaches are much more applicable with our students who struggle or need differentiated instruction for success.

**__References: __** North Central Regional Educational Laboratory. (2004). //Pathways to school improvement: Alternative assessment//. Retreived October 19, 2010, from []

Pitler, H., Hubbell, E., Kuhn, M., & Malenoski, K. (2007). //Using Technology with Classroom Instruction that Works//. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development, Introduction.

Williamson, J. & Redish, T. (2009). //Technology Facilitation and Leadership Standards: What every K-12 leader should know and be able to do.// Eugene, OR: International Society for Technology in Education.