You are here:

Technology Use as a Scoring Criterion
PROCEEDINGS

, Central Missouri State University, United States

Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference, in Orlando, Florida, USA ISBN 978-1-880094-58-7 Publisher: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE), Waynesville, NC USA

Full Text

Abstract

In the current movement for embracing technology in assessing student learning, there is an uncertainty as to how we treat student teachers' ability to use technology in assessing their performance level. This paper suggests that technology use needs to be part of the scoring criteria. At the same time, technology based performance assessment such as electronic portfolios should not be treated as a mere exercise of students' ability to use technology to put together work samples. How much weight the criterion of technology use should receive in a scoring rubric for a performance assessment depends on the nature and purpose of the assessment. A distinction is made between technology as a tool to put together the performance and technology that is used as part of the competencies being directly assessed.

Citation

Yao, Y. (2006). Technology Use as a Scoring Criterion. In C. Crawford, R. Carlsen, K. McFerrin, J. Price, R. Weber & D. Willis (Eds.), Proceedings of SITE 2006--Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference (pp. 215-219). Orlando, Florida, USA: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE). Retrieved January 30, 2023 from .

Keywords

References

View References & Citations Map
  1. Anderson, R.S. (1998). Why talk about different ways to grade? The shift from traditional assessment to alternative assessment. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 74. 5-16.
  2. Baker, E.L. (1994). Making performance assessment work: The road ahead. Educational Leadership, 51(6), 58-62.
  3. Curoe, R. (1999). Instructional design in a technological world: Fitting learning activities into the larger picture. Journal of Interactive Instruction Development, Fall. 23-28.
  4. Gatlin, L. & Jacob, S. (2002). Standards-based digital portfolios: A component of authentic assessment for pre-service teachers. Action in Teacher Education, 25(4). 35-42.
  5. Goldsby, D. & Fazal, M. (2001). Now that your students have created web-based digital portfolios, how do you evaluate them? Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 9(4), 607-616.
  6. Hobson, E.H. (1998). Designing and grading written assignments. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 74. 51-57.
  7. Kuhs, T.M. (1994). Portfolio assessment: Making it work for the first time. The Mathematics Teacher, 87(5), 332-335.
  8. McConney, A. & Ayres, R.R. (1998). Assessing student teachers’ assessments. Journal of Teacher Education. 49(2). 140-150.
  9. Montgomery, K. (2000). Classroom rubrics: Systematizing what teachers do naturally. The ClearingHouse, 73(6). 324-328.
  10. Morrison, G.R. & Ross, S.M. (1998). Evaluating technology-based processes and products. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 74. 69-77.
  11. Phillip, C. (2002). Clear expectations: Rubrics and scoring guides. Knowledge Quest, 31(2). 26-27.
  12. Pomplun, M., Capps, L., & Sundbye, N. (1998). Criteria teachers use to score performance items. Educational Assessment, 5(2), 95-110.
  13. Popham, W.J. (1997). What’s wrong—and what’s right—with rubrics? Educational Leadership, 55(2), 72-75.
  14. Reis, N.K. & Villaume, S.K. (2002) The benefits, tensions, and visions of portfolios as a wide-scale assessment for teacher education. Action in Teacher Education, 23(4). 10-17.
  15. Sanlon, P.A. & Ford, M.P. (1998). Grading student performance in real-world settings. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 74. 97-105.
  16. Sunal, C.S., McCormick, T., Sunal, D.W., & Shwery, C. (2005). Elementary teacher candidates’ construction of criteria for

These references have been extracted automatically and may have some errors. Signed in users can suggest corrections to these mistakes.

Suggest Corrections to References