To Test or Not to Test. . .

i-Pad Madness

I attended the Assessment Technology and Questions of Equity workshops at the Promising Practices conference. The first workshop was "The Demystification of Touch Technology" given by Shawn Rubin and Stephanie Castilla. Their presentation focused on how i-Pads can be used to help teachers more effectively track their student progress through formative assessment (daily/frequent checks-ins of student).

For those of us in need of a brief refresher, below is a simple chart that defines both formative and summative assessment.

Rubin and Castilla, who are employed by the Highlander Dunn Institute, have created a formative assessment i-Pad app that helps track student growth or lack thereof on any skill the teacher wants to focus on. Ideally this technology will allow teachers to better differentiate their instruction to meet the needs of each individual student in their classrooms.

In an article from The New England Post entitled "Providence Charter School Builds and Launches Its Very Own Formative Assessment App for i-Pad," Rubin discusses how before creating and implementing this new technology he was essentially winging his differentiation, "using his gut" to determine if a student had mastered a particular skill or was ready to move on.

This was something I could definitely identify with. I believe in the importance of formative assessment yet too often I find myself making from the gut decisions about my students' readiness. I am also guilty of sometimes forcing kids who have mastered a particular skill to keep working on it so that their peers can catch up. Rubin and Castilla's presentation got me thinking about all the ways that technology can allow me to better differentiate for my students.

Still the issue of resources remains ever a problem. Rubin teaches at a well funded charter school in Providence where his students have ample access to this kind of technology so his incorporation of this app makes perfect sense. I can't see Attleboro High spending the big bucks to get every student an i-Pad. However, Rubin and Castilla did a good job of showing us how just one teacher armed with an i-Pad can begin to use formative assessment to better inform her practice. I am seriously considering whether or not it is something that I should purchase to help me make more informed decisions about my students.

If this kind of technology is something that you are interested in, Highlander Dunn is hosting three workshops on how to use technology (i-Pads, Smartboards, laptops, etc.) to better track student growth and differentiate instruction.

• Thursday, November 10th from 5pm - 7pm for "Differentiating Instruction Through Technology" Registration- $25 (includes pizza)

• Friday, November 18th from 8:30am - 3pm for "Using Touch Technology to Inspire and Motivate Learners" Registration-$150 or $75 if you tell them you attended Promising Practices (includes coffee, donuts, and lunch)
  

• Thursday, December 8th from 5pm - 7pm for "Using iPads for Writing" Registration-$25 (includes pizza)
  

Stop the Madness

The second workshop entitled "How Do You Measure the Work of Schools?" was presented by Christine Kunkel, a RIC faculty member, who was the principal of the KEY Learning Community in Indianapolis. KEY was the first multiple-intelligences school in the United States:



Kunkel's presentation centered around the struggles progressive schools like KEY are facing trying to remain relevant in spite of high stakes testing mandates. Although Kunkel's research is still in the beginning stages, she raised some interesting questions about the purpose of schooling and how schools can prove their effectiveness in ways other than test scores.

It's a complex issue without a simple answer which is why society is having such a hard time devising a method to accurately hold schools and teachers "accountable." Is a school's worth measured by its students' ability to attain high marks on their NECAP or MCAS tests or by its ability to inspire students to learn and grow, to become those "life long learners" we hear so much about? Diane Ravitch and Geoffrey Canada went head to head on this very issue during a debate sponsored by NBC's Education Nation:

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

I find myself siding with both Ravitch and Canada. I am so conflicted when it comes to high stakes testing. On one hand, I have seen how testing mandates have forced AHS to focus on the neediest of our students. I can say with some certainty that NCLB has been the impetus for real reform in my high school. No longer can a teacher say that a student "isn't cut out for school." It just isn't tolerated. You either believe that all students can learn and that it is your job to figure out how to reach each of your kids or you quickly discover that AHS is not the place for you. Of course, there are exceptions to this rule--veteran teachers who have had a difficult time adjusting to this idea, bad teachers who have gone under the administration's radar--but I can honestly say that I am proud to be a part of such a progressive, dedicated staff.

Still, I have also seen the damage that test centered curriculum can do to students' intrinsic motivation and creativity. Reading Wesch really made me question my ability to remain relevant to my students. They may leave my class knowing how to write an effective thesis statement but will they leave inspired? Will I have lit that fire within them? I'm starting to doubt it more and more. So what do we do?

In her presentation, Kunkel referenced the work of Sir Ken Robinson, who argues that the answer to America's education problem is that we are attempting to deal with the problems of tomorrow with the strategies of yesterday. His TED talk "Changing Paradigms" was both inspiring and depressing. If you haven't seen it, I highly recommend you take a look: