LINDSAY STOETZEL, PHD
  • Home
  • Research
    • Teachology 101
    • Technology Showcase
  • Teaching
    • Elementary Education >
      • EDLA 261: Foundations of Literacy
      • EDUC 420: Teaching Elementary Reading (PK-3)
      • C&I 369: Teaching ELA
      • C&I 309: Literacy Across the Curriculum
      • C&I 463: Student Teaching Seminar
      • C&I 373: Practicum III
      • C&I 367: Practicum I
    • Secondary Education >
      • English 311: Teaching Adolescent Literature
      • C&I 313: Secondary Disciplinary Literacy
    • Instructional Coaching >
      • Foundations of Coaching
      • Assessment Analysis
      • Practicum in Student-Centered Coaching
    • Freshman Composition
  • In the Classroom
    • Engaging Digital Literacies
    • Collaborating
    • Resources
  • Blog
  • About
    • CV

The Same But Different: Resources for Designing Multimodal Assessment

11/9/2016

 
The wide-ranging and ever-expanding presence of technology tools entering our classrooms brings a multitude of potential opportunities for innovative new projects. Multimodal composition comes to life through student created digital stories, podcasts, websites, and large-scale projects that include all of the above. In many ways, digital projects pose the same challenges to traditional forms of assessment as familiar examples of low-tech projects. Similar to project-based learning, digital projects raise questions about contribution and collaboration, the process of documenting problem solving, and determining exactly what constitutes evidence of craft.

Teachers will also likely encounter the age-old composition struggle of balancing process and product, to weigh creativity and originality alongside the standards of conventions. However, I would argue that the challenge of assessment is even more pronounced for digital stories because of the added complexities of working with technology tools–a task that is often new for both teachers and students alike. Prior experience and exposure can play heavily on a student’s ability to successfully produce a high quality digital project, though even the most tech-savvy can fall victim to the unlucky technical glitch or misstep that can cause serious setbacks to the progress of the project.

How do you account for these considerations in your grading rubric? And, what characteristics or skills does your rubric actually even assess? These are always tough questions, only made harder with digital projects. We recently explored these questions in the University of Wisconsin-Madison’s ELA methods course I taught last year to preservice elementary teachers. While inevitably each teacher will come to his/her own interpretation of what assessment looks like, the following references might provide helpful starting points to begin the conversation. By no means an exhaustive list, these are practitioner-friendly tools to help us all inquire into what matters and why in crafting assessments of digital projects.


National Writing Project, Digital Is, Multimodal Assessment Tool
The starting point really began for us when we came across the National Writing Project’s Digital Is site that houses the NWP Multimodal Assessment Project. One of the most interesting features of this project is how the process is documented–helping new and veteran teachers alike dive into the complexities related to crafting a multimodal assessment rubric. This was particularly enlightening for my preservice teachers, as it noted the limitations of using the widely accepted 6+1 Traits rubric for these new types of digital projects. The latest project draft presented highlights five elements of multimodal composition that teachers might use to guide and formulate assessment tools: context, artifact, substance, process management and technical skills, and habits of mind.

Troy Hicks, Crafting Digital Writing & Assessing Digital Writing
The straightforward examples and discussions of the digital writing process in Hick’s book were helpful and practical for our classroom discussion and application. While providing examples and analysis of teacher-created projects, Hicks draws attention to the intentionality of the process as a whole: teacher intentionality in designing the assignment, student intentionality throughout the production process, and the degree to which assessment is intentionally authentic in nature. Intentionality is highlighted through his application of author’s craft to digital writing using MMAPS (p. 20-21): mode, media, audience, purpose, situation for the writer, and situation of the writing (for a deeper discussion of this very helpful heuristic see the Digital Writing Workshop pp. 56-59). These characteristics are equally useful for designing an assessment that is responsive and attentive to the goals of the project. In addition, students were particularly drawn to the discussion of “Habits of Mind” which mirrored many of the less quantifiable but highly valued goals in their perspective: curiosity, openness, engagement, creativity, persistence, responsibility, flexibility, metacognition (p. 26).

His follow-up book, Assessing Digital Writing, goes one step further to provide a collaborative protocol for looking closely at student writing. While not providing any easy answers, the perspectives offered highlight the ways in which craft is similar and different in digital contexts and how this impacts the assessment process.

Formative Tools
Once the purpose and goals for a project are clearly established and a rubric has been created (or co-created with students), the role of formative assessment and feedback is just as much if not more so important when implementing digital projects. These projects can often feel “fuzzy” and uncertain as you move forward the first few times. I have often found that keeping the limits “open” and encouraging my students to take risks requires me to have less control and clarity over how I envision the final product. For me this choice feels empowering for my students, however, they don’t always interpret the responsibility of the unknown in the same way. Instead, many students have encountered anxiety and confusion over not quite understanding “what” exactly they were producing (even as I reassuringly supported them in embracing the freedom of the opportunity).

Later on, I often found this anxiety becoming my own as I struggled to assess the work of: the student who produced the bare minimum and used no feedback to make improvements; the student who had ambitious ideas but failed to pull it together; the student who crashed her computer and lost everything to start anew the night before and submit something less than her best but the best she could manage. Of course these examples are no different from the assessment challenges of traditional writing assignments; they only become much more widespread and amplified when new technology tools are added to the mix. The addition of carefully designed formative and informal assessments, however, aided in my analysis of the project and student work, helping to validate the meaningfulness of the assignment through the insights and skills students were developing-even when their final pieces were not necessarily successful in terms of traditional rubric categories.
​

Some strategies I’ve employed include:
  • Design journals: having students write about, discuss, and document decisions and ongoing work related to their projects. These are especially helpful to understand why students made particular decisions, which can later be compared to post-product assessments of how well these decisions actually worked in contributing to the overall project goals.
  • Storyboards/outlines: these documents help to organize student ideas and also call attention to the various demands of the mode and media that students should attend to. For example, even before students have found the right music to set to a scene in their podcast, it is helpful to see that they have considered the mood of a segment of narration in terms of the music they plan to use. For assessment purposes, they allow you to quickly confer with students and determine who is ready to begin working with the technology tools, and who might benefit from extended conferencing to work through the concept.
  • Digital Writing conferences: Similar to traditional writing conferences, these informal checks are essential to understanding how students are progressing through the project, determining what “trouble areas” might be arising that would benefit from mini-lessons, and helping students to receive workshop feedback prior to publishing their final drafts. An added element to balance is the type of feedback being requested and given: related to the technology or the project concept. Oftentimes, students can get hung up on technical questions related to using the tool, overlooking perhaps more important questions related to the project goals. Addressing both needs, through informal or informal conferences, can help the production process to stay focused.
Taken together, these formative measures can provide great insight to use alongside final products in assessing what exactly students have learned or are able to do as a result of working through the process of digital construction.

Comments are closed.

    This Blog

    Wonderings on teaching. learning. and everything in between.

    Archives

    April 2019
    February 2019
    January 2019
    December 2018
    November 2018
    October 2018
    September 2018
    October 2017
    November 2016
    October 2016
    June 2016
    May 2015
    February 2015
    January 2015
    November 2014
    May 2014
    April 2014
    March 2014
    February 2014
    January 2014
    October 2013

    Categories

    All
    Authentic Assessment
    Blended Learning
    Children's Literature
    Digital Literacies
    Ed Tech
    Educational Reforms
    For Consideration
    For Inspiration
    Informational Literacies
    Instructional Coaching
    Instructional Design
    Online Learning
    Reading Instruction
    Supervision & Feedback
    TeachingELA
    Writing Instruction

    RSS Feed

Proudly powered by Weebly
  • Home
  • Research
    • Teachology 101
    • Technology Showcase
  • Teaching
    • Elementary Education >
      • EDLA 261: Foundations of Literacy
      • EDUC 420: Teaching Elementary Reading (PK-3)
      • C&I 369: Teaching ELA
      • C&I 309: Literacy Across the Curriculum
      • C&I 463: Student Teaching Seminar
      • C&I 373: Practicum III
      • C&I 367: Practicum I
    • Secondary Education >
      • English 311: Teaching Adolescent Literature
      • C&I 313: Secondary Disciplinary Literacy
    • Instructional Coaching >
      • Foundations of Coaching
      • Assessment Analysis
      • Practicum in Student-Centered Coaching
    • Freshman Composition
  • In the Classroom
    • Engaging Digital Literacies
    • Collaborating
    • Resources
  • Blog
  • About
    • CV