The Problem
It started with generally clunky and overpriced “student clickers” by such brands as SMART Technologies and Einstruction, and over the past few years it has transitioned into slick apps like Socrative, Kahoot!, and Plickers. Time and time again we have seen these apps demoed during professional development sessions and written about on websites and blogs. Nevertheless, we need to be careful that we do not prioritize technology over pedagogy by referring to these apps as “formative assessment tools” when they are anything but.
When James Popham defines formative assessment, he states:
Formative assessment is a planned process in which teachers or students use assessment-based evidence to adjust what they’re currently doing.
In other words, if teachers or students are not leveraging results/data (from Socrative, Kahoot!, Plickers, etc.) to then differentiate instruction or learning, the app inspired dog and pony show does not qualify as a formative assessment.
Formative assessment is a process…not an event, questions on a piece of paper, or even an app. What makes an assessment formative depends on the context in which it is used.
The Solution
I do feel that professional development that includes these apps can start with the apps themselves, as “cool tools” are an easy way to grab an audience’s attention, but they should be presented within the context of formative assessment or something like Total Participation Techniques. In other words, “Why are we learning what we’re learning, and how can it benefit our students?”
Since what takes place after the apps are used – the differentiated instruction – is what matters most, the majority of professional development time should then be dedicated to this stage of instruction and learning. In other words, “We have our results/data, now what do we do with it?”
Here are some ideas as to what this could look like:
- The presenter issues to teachers authentic student results from when one of the apps was used in her classroom. Some context is provided, and then the teachers are asked, “How would you modify your planning based on what you now know?” (In this instance, I would be particularly interested in any teacher questions that may arise to possibly gain additional context.)
- The presenter issues to teachers authentic student results from when one of the apps was used in her classroom. Some context is provided, and then the teachers are asked, “Based on the questions and answers, how would you revise the questions to learn more about what the students know/don’t know?” (This activity can go hand in hand with the first bullet point. In Part 2 of this post we will dive deeper into quality questioning.)
- The presenter uses an app to pre-assess teacher knowledge of a specific topic (possibly formative assessment). The results are immediately shared out and the teachers are asked, “Where should the professional development go from here?”
The idea is that the increased emphasis on “the after” during professional development will correlate with teachers thinking more deeply about “the after” during classroom instruction.
In the End
In the end, there is obviously nothing wrong with the tools themselves, but what matters most is the context in which they are presented during professional development, and ultimately the differentiated instruction that follows their classroom use.
None of these tools are that complicated, and any teacher can learn how to use them. However, what is complicated (and often times, messy) is what to do after the students’ results show up on our device. This is where our focus needs to be.
In Part 2, we will look at leveraging these apps to promote higher-order questioning and thinking.
What are your thoughts on these apps? What are some unique ways in which you have seen them used in the classroom and/or during professional development? How do you think they relate to the formative assessment process?
Connect with Ross on Twitter.
- Project Based Learning: 3 Types of Direct Instruction #RealPBL - April 17, 2022
- Getting Started with Project Based Learning #RealPBL - April 11, 2022
- How Do I Lead Project Based Learning? – Evaluate Professional Learning #RealPBL (part 4 of 4) - April 3, 2022
Reblogged this on The Great Equalizer.
Too often I see teachers who use these tools to engage their students but it does nothing to drive their instruction, differentiate the learning taking place, or give the teacher data on how to move forward. Some Ts use it as a game, not a way to get real data on their students. Or sometimes it’s a case of the wrong questions being asked.
PD should focus on best practices, and hey, here’s a cool tool that can aide you in this. Too much PD is centered around tools, not processes.
Thanks for the great read!
Michelle, thank you for taking the time to read and respond. I think it would be an interesting conversation as to why professional development focuses too much on tools (and programs, from what I have seen). Maybe it’s a way of taking shortcuts and avoiding the hard work/conversations?
I completely agree with this post. Without the process, it is not formative assessment. Checking for understanding is a vital step in the process, but not formative assessment on its own. I wrote a similar post of the topic. http://principalmkelly.blogspot.com/2015/07/our-formative-assessment-journey.html?m=1
Thanks, Mike! I really got a lot out of your post.
Well said Ross! I completely agree that PD has to be done to help model process and meaningful use.
Thanks, Tara!
Formative assessment has nothing to do with the tools and everything to do with the learning process. Formative assessment is about having clear learning intentions, co-created criteria for success, descriptive feedback along the learning journey (whether it come from teacher/student/peers/parents etc..), reflection on the process, and steps to move forward (future goals). This entire process is also cyclical in nature and is repeated over and over again. Formative assessment takes time, understanding, and ongoing learning and relearning. It’s frustrating for me to read that a tool that is “formative assessment”. I appreciate that you are trying to tap into this knowledge by having session participants look at the information that the tool is providing and suggesting next steps for their teaching practice. As teachers, it is our job to facilitate student learning but imagine the power it would have for students if THEY played a part in their learning journey by allowing them to look at the data the tool has provided. Learning if more personal and real when the learner plays a key role in the process. Perhaps an additional focus could be… how might you help facilitate student x’s reflection on their learning journey. How could you help them think about their areas of strength (things they are proud of), and areas they would like to get better at. Involving the students in the process is the power of formative assessment. It’s not done to with, it’s done with them.
Karen, thank you for the well-thought-out comment! I love the additional focus you provide that involves students reflecting upon their learning journey. To me, this sounds a lot like instructional coaching, and this approach would bring so much to any professional development session on formative assessment (and, of course, any classroom)!
Also, I would highly recommend taking a look at the James Popham book to which the post includes a link. The whole basis for the book is the breaking down of formative assessment into levels: teachers’ instructional adjustments, students’ learning tactic adjustments, classroom climate shift, and finally schoolwide implementation…This books sounds a lot like what you are talking about in your comment. I read it awhile back, but maybe it’s time for a reread!
Your post resonates. Too often, we “show” these tools and sell them as a means of formatively assessing our students. But you’re right–if we don’t act on the data, the tool used, the time spent, and the students’ understanding–it’s all for naught. While the technology has the power to enhance student learning and teacher effectiveness, it’s also very, very scary. Traditionally, teachers have had to wait for the kind of data that tech tools can now give us in mere seconds. I’ve worked side by side with many panic-stricken teachers who want to act on the data populating on their devices, but they aren’t quite sure how; they’re used to carefully reviewing exit tickets in the solitude of their classrooms once the students have left for the day. Reading, processing, and acting upon this data in the hustle and bustle of their classrooms requires instructional risk taking, practice, and professional development.
Socrative is my go-to app for higher order thinking questions, so I’m anxious to read your Part II. With the new literacy demands and the focus on text-based classrooms, I encourage teachers to use Socrative to create student-centered experiences that promote rich dialogue yet are still carefully guided by the teacher (through the information collected by this tool). But again, we need to be able to act on the live stream of student responses inundating our devices. Students are so used to answering questions, handing them in, and receiving “credit” that I’ve found their thinking stops just between recall and inference. Having follow-up, scaffolded questions is essential if we want students to move through the full progression of quality, text-dependent questions. This kind of on-the-spot differentiation takes a new kind of planning and preparation, and it requires us to push our students to the point of productive struggle. We can’t let their thinking stop once they hit “submit”; there is no grade for compliance. Instead, we push them to think harder, think longer, and think deeper because of the instantaneous data the technology provides for us.
Jaime, thank you for the thoughtful response! I was also a big fan of Socrative when I taught fourth grade two years ago (before the other apps existed/became popular). For the most part, I also used the open-ended feature to promote dialogue. I think that one of the problems, in general, is that these apps lend themselves to multiple-choice, lower level questioning. As you hint at, making them work with higher-order questions takes not just an instructional shift, but also possibly shifts in mindset and classroom culture.
I will be posting Part 2 within a week, and I would love to hear what you think.
Great post, and thoughtful responses! I often use these tools in the “teacher-paced” mode, where initial student responses are hidden until everyone weighs in, responses are then revealed all at once, and a reteach immediately occurs. The learning is in the intervention, not necessarily in the initial launch of the assessment or the choice of the tool. Looking forward to reading Part 2!
Cathy, thanks a lot! I’m curious as to what the pros/cons are of teacher-paced vs. student-paced, and if these might fluctuate based on what app is used. It seems to me that revealing all of the responses at once could help to keep things more organized.
Hi Ross,
Teacher-Paced seems to keep the experience more formative. With Socrative, for example, the teacher can wait for all students to answer a question, then reveal student responses and intervene/reteach before sending the next question. When the same assessment is launched in a student-paced format, there’s no intervention between questions and it’s less formative and is more of a summative experience. It depends what sort of assessment is desired, and whether the teacher is using it to inform immediate instruction or assess after instruction has occurred. Both have value! 🙂
Reblogged this on JO'C's blog.
Thanks for your article, you and the other contributors have made some great points on using some popular tech tools many teachers use. I think most of us agree that all these tools are just part of the process and need to be integrated into the lesson plan and program like any other tool, tech or non-tech. There are teachers who perhaps use them for one off games or quizzes and do not use the data or feedback to differentiate what is to come. I don’t think that is ideal, but not a big problem either. Differentiation is such a complex, time consuming and exhausting thing to do day in a day out. We all need to differentiate our lessons to provide the best outcome for students, but teachers also need to survive each day for their own well-being. So if you use one of these tools and its a one off activity or a formative task to differentiate content, they all have their place.
I agree. There is nothing wrong with “one off” activities, as long as they are balanced with activities the lead to some form of differentiation. I would be willing to bet that most students perform better when they feel as if they are not being “evaluated” in some shape or form. Thanks for taking the time to read and comment!
Hi Ross, yes, they probably perform better knowing something won’t be included in their final assessment grade. I suppose obtaining and reaching a standard needs data to validate it. Keep up the interesting work! I’m looking forward to reading your future posts.
Reblogged this on Leren.Hoe?Zo! and commented:
Er bestaan intussen heel wat student response systems (Socrative, Kahoot, Nearpod, …) die het mogelijlk maken om alle leerlingen actief te laten participeren tijdens de les. Zoals Ross in deze interessante blogpost correct verwoord worden ze echter soms ook te snel automatisch als “formative assessment tools” omschreven.
Time to teach the tool versus time to implement the tool are two separate professional learning moments and the latter is forgotten, assumed, or glossed over; sadly even when I have presented them. I talk about the fact that it isn’t the tool. The questions still come from the teacher and those are truly what matter. Most teachers can grade fairly quickly, but to collect the data and then use that is what is truly powerful and the ah-ha moment that these tools can offer.
I have seen teachers use these tools so effectively. However, they’re effective teachers with any tools. 🙂
I am a big fan of formative assessment, but not a big fan of how I see teachers using tools to “measure” learning. I blogged about one of the problems I’ve seen—teachers who don’t think about how to use the results—at https://icanteachwriting.wordpress.com/2012/10/07/formative-assessment-tools-and-standards/
In my classes, I try to make formative assessment tell me not just who did/did not get the message, but also what students understood the message to mean. For example, instead of asking students to identify the subject of a sentence I give them, I might ask them to write a sentence and then explain which words in it are its subject and its verb.
When I used that task as formative assessment, one 30-ish college student wrote as her sentence, “I really like that red car.” She explained that the subject was car because she was talking about liking the red car.
Based on that experience, I learned not to use the common English class term “subject of the sentence.” Now I use the term “subject of the verb.” I also take care to say that the grammatical subject of a sentence and a conversational subject of the sentence may be different.