Student-generated digital artefacts

Associate Professor Wan Ng

School of Education

University of Technology Sydney

Email: Wan.Ng@uts.edu.au

2015 Assessment in Schools Conference

Quick survey

What types of digital artefacts do your students

create for assessment?

Survey link at:

https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/QZKNB2Q

Use of Digital Technology for Assessment:

Purposes

1. Assessing different types of learning outcomes, for

example knowledge acquired

lower order understanding

higher order analysis and synthesis; creativity

Multimodal affordances of technology allows for

different means of conveying understanding

Mode of

representationLearning activity

Examples of digital technology/software enabling

learning or creating

Written

Written essays and reports Word, Pages

Worksheets; surveys; quizzes Word, Pages; SurveyMonkey; Quizlet; QuizCreator;

Polleverywhere

Research-based projects Word, Pages; Internet search for information

Verbal Oral presentations Audio/video recording; podcasts

Visual

Drawings/figures Drawing software e.g. DrawPlus, SmartDraw; Artrage;

AutoCAD; Sketchbook Pro; ChemSketch; digital

camera to capture pictures as figures

Concept maps (could be multimodal) Inspiration; Kidspiration; iMindMap, FreeMind

Tables and graphs Excel; Numbers

Animations/simulations

(these are multimodal)

Flash, java applets; simulations/animations resources;

GoAnimate; Scratch; AdventureMaker

Presentations (could be multimodal) PowerPoint; Keynote; Prezi; Fotobabble; timeline

creation tools e.g. TimeToast; Dipity

Embodied Role play; drama (these are multimodal) Digital video recorder; digital camera

Spatial 3D models; location-based assignments GPS; visualization software e.g. JMol, VISBARD;

Molekel;

Multimodal

Experimental or project work; reporting Word/Pages for text; Excel/Numbers for graphs; digital

camera capture results; video recorder to record process

Concept development Range of subject specific software online and offline

Use of Digital Technology for Assessment:

Purposes

2. Assessing learning processes which have previously been

difficult to capture, for example:

contributions to group work - wiki; discussion forums

metacognition through reflection – blog, online journal

analytics

Use of Digital Technology for Assessment:

Purposes

3. Streamlining assessment administration processes, for

example:

using Gradebook for submission and distribution of work

for grading, annotating submission through Turnitin

4. Enhancing teaching through feedback, for example:

using online quizzes (with or without feedback) for regular

formative assessments

Examples of online quizzes – Quizlet; Socrative; ProProf

online peer or self-assessment

Examples of digital artefacts and toolsCreation Examples of Tools

Presentation PowerPoint; Keynote; Prezi

Online poster (glog) Glogster; Piktochart

Collaborative work GoogleDocs/Spreadsheets;

Collaborative (wiki) Wikispaces

Collaborative (blog) Blogster

Video (vodcast; digital story) Screenr; Community clips; iMovie; MovieMaker;

Concept map; Mind map Inspiration; Popplet;Mindomo; Coggle; iMind Map;

FreeMind

Digital comic or animation GoAnimate; Adventure Maker; Comic life; Powtoon;

Scratch; Moovly; Bitstrip

Timeline Dipity; TimeToast

Website Wordpress; Weebly; Wix; Yola; Zunal (for webquests)

eBooks iBooks Author; StoryBird;

Architecture/engineering design SketchUp

Others Fotobabble;

ePortfolio Mahara; websites

Underpinning learning theories for use of

digital technology for learning

Constructivist (Piaget; Bruner)

Individualised, active interaction with learning materials and internalisation of knowledge

Social constructivist (Vygotsky)

Social interactions and dialogues with peers and/or teachers

Externalise knowledge

Constructionism (Papert)

Students learn better if they build an artefact for the public to view

Embrace constructivist learning theories

Student generated digital artefacts

Demonstrate knowledge acquired – understanding and

application

Foster development of creativity

Develop digital literacy

How should student-generated digital artefacts be

assessed: What assessment criteria are suited for the

assessment?

Assessing student-created glogs

In groups of 2-3, assess two glogs (life cycle of a

butterfly)

oHalf the group use criteria (non-rubric)

oHalf the group use a rubric

Assessing glogsLIFE CYCLE OF A BUTTERFLY (Year 2,3,4)

1. http://edu.glogster.com/

2. Username: Wan.Ng@uts.edu.au

3. Password: LIST2

4. Click on Glogpedia

5. Type in ‘life cycle of a butterfly’ in glogpediasearch

6. Scroll to bottom right to find these 2 glogs:

Butterfly Life Cycle by MrFritzen

Butterfly Life Cycle by lbm003

MrFritzen

lbm03

Primary Pre-service teachers assessment

Class 1 Class 2 Class 3

Rubric Non-Rubric Rubric Non-Rubric Rubric Non-Rubric

14 13 12 11 12 12

Marks for MrFritzen/20 (average of 4 groups)

Marks for lbmo/20 (average of 4 groups)

Class 1 Class 2 Class 3

Rubric Non-Rubric Rubric Non-Rubric Rubric Non-Rubric

18.5 15 16 15 18 16

Assessing student-created artefacts

Assess glogs (online posters)

What would be the criteria that you would

use

Primary Pre-service teachers: Assessment

criteria for glogs (asked for 5-6 criteria)

Class 1 Class 2 Class 3

1. Evidence of research

2. Spelling/grammar

3. Images (appeal)

4. Layout

5. Relevance??

6. Accurate information

& correct

terminology

1. Content

2. Creativity

3. Visually appealing

4. Use of Technology,

videos & hyperlinks

5. Variety of modes

6. Layout/sequential

7. Correct use of language

1. Presentation

(aesthetics)

2. Communication

(language used)

3. Visual/Use of images

4. Functional use (easy to

use)

5. Multimodal

6. Referencing

7. Engaging

8. Information related to

topic

Assessment criteria Bubaš, G., Ćorić, A. and Orehovački, T. (2012) ‘The integration and assessment of

students’ artefacts created with diverse Web 2.0 applications’, Int. J. Knowledge

Engineering and Soft Data Paradigms, Vol. 3, Nos. 3/4, pp.261–279.

accuracy of presented information – relevant and trustworthy sources for facts

provided in the project

content quality – clarity, conciseness and novelty of written information

grammar, spelling and punctuation

originality in thinking (personal contribution) – synthesising of gathered information

draw new conclusions or construct new meanings

organisation and presentation of information – how well the text is organised and

presented on the project page

illustration through multimedia (video, image, sound, etc.)

general quality of supporting artefacts having in mind all the above-mentioned

elements.

[Each of the listed criteria was rated on a scale from 1 (one) to 5 (five)]

Thank You