Standard+IV+Reflection

Please refer to below attachment for APA formatted document

Standard IV Reflection Assessment and evaluation is the focus of TF/TL Standard IV and it is a difficult one to implement without the appropriate tools. In this age of increasing accountability, it is difficult to see how using technology for assessment can prepare our students to take the still prevalent paper and pencil exams that must be taken in order to proceed to the next grade level and graduate high school. Williamson and Redish (2009) state, These current conditions increase the demand for educational technologists to demonstrate how technology can improve assessment of student learning in the classroom, district-level benchmarking throughout the school year, and annual administration of high-stakes, standardized testing. (p.78) Technology facilitators and leaders must be the driving force behind this shift in assessment. We must help our colleagues understand the need to conduct formative rather than summative assessments and to use available technologies to do it. Solomon and Schrum (2007) reinforce that that technology can absolutely be used to authentically assess and prepare students for standardized testing (p.168).

When the opportunity arose for teachers in my district to compose and submit grant proposals to BASF for improvements in Science and Math, I jumped at the chance and saw a way to get funding to buy a classroom student response system for my campus. I co-wrote and was awarded a grant for the purchase of a two classroom set of i>clickers. Before composing the grant, I researched the most widely used clicker systems, and others that were not as well known, in order to ascertain which system would afford me to get the maximum amount of clickers for the amount of money the grant was allowing.

Using clickers in the classroom is part of my educational technology vision for every classroom because of the instant feedback that they can provide. Not only can they provide instant feedback for all students but for individual students as well. These results can be displayed in a variety of different graphical representations. Teachers can analyze these results and adjust instruction accordingly. Most clickers do not allow for typing in text responses so they rely on multiple-choice questions to assess learning. Although it is widely assumed that multiple-choice formats can only assess a basic level of understanding, if the questions are appropriately designed they can assess many levels of Bloom’s taxonomy ( Pitler, Hubbell, Kuhn, & Malenoski, 2007, p.45). These clickers also allow for more student interaction. Those students that do not normally participate in class are more willing through the use of clickers due to the anonymity afforded.

During our back to school conferences this year, I presented and trained campus staff on how to use the i>clicker system in the classroom. Since the software that runs the program “floats” over any software currently on the computer it is not necessary for teachers to type in massive amounts of information to be assessed. They can use what they have already created. This allows for easier integration of this student response system. It also includes a software component that allows you preset correct answers to questions, will grade students responses and these results can be exported to an excel spreadsheet. The ease of use of this technology is one of the many benefits of technology integration in the classroom.

Also in our district back to school in-services, the district curriculum coordinator came to the campus to show teachers how to make the best use of our Data Management for Assessment and Curriculum (DMAC) system. The variety of reports that can be created through this system was astounding to me. I had never used this system before so this was all new information for me and I have used it frequently since my initial instruction. The ability to disaggregate TAKS data by student, objective, questions missed most, etc. is an invaluable resource for teachers who are looking for ways to see where more focus should be placed in instruction for particular students or a group of students overall. After my training I was also able to share this knowledge with other teachers on campus so that they may utilize the wealth of information available through this system.

My internship activities that correlate to this standard allowed me to expand my knowledge base in the area of how to use technology for assessment in the classroom and I was able to share this information with many of my colleagues.

Pitler, H., Hubbell, E., Kuhn, M., & Malenoski, K. (2007). //Using technology with classroom// // instruction that works //. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development .

Solomon, G., & Schrum, L. (2007). //Web 2.0: New tools, new schools//. Eugene, Oregon: International Society for Technology in Education.

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