The cloud and Web 2.0 tools are creating new genres at a breath-taking pace. As educators develop clearer understanding of their underlying structures and begin integrating them into their programs, rules of use are developing; common assumptions of the purpose and function of these genres are emerging.
Here is an example of how to assess tweets.
http://www2.uwstout.edu/content/profdev/rubrics/Twitter_Rubric.html
As a teacher I see the value in developing common rubrics and assessment tools and I think that the above rubric is useful. It would be particularly helpful to someone trying to understand why they are not gaining followers on twitter or why their tweets are not-being retweeted or why no one has entered into conversation with them. As a teacher, at one time, I would have created similar rubrics and handed them to my students. I don't do that anymore. I would much rather have my students experiment with the tool, determine its purpose and function on their own and then collaboratively develop ways to assess effective use. Students gain a much deeper understanding when they are allowed to work in this way. In the pre-written rubric all the thinking has already been done. The learning has been pre-determined. The creativity element is missing. The imposition of the rubric designer's understanding of tool is given priority and users become mimickers.
It's not that rubrics such as the above do not have their place. Sometimes it is expedient to push a process along. Sometimes students need to be shown other ways of engaging that they have not discovered independently. Ultimately, twitter already contains meaningful assessment - are you gaining followers, are your tweets being retweeted, are you being mentioned? The above rubric helps a student understand why.
What does one do though when gaining followers and retweets or advancing discussion is not someone's purpose in using twitter? Who am I to say that someone is using twitter incorrectly? Web 2.0 tools are exciting precisely because they allow learners to explore learning independently and to express their ideas in ways meaningful to them. Let's not lose sight of that.
Here is an example of how to assess tweets.
http://www2.uwstout.edu/content/profdev/rubrics/Twitter_Rubric.html
As a teacher I see the value in developing common rubrics and assessment tools and I think that the above rubric is useful. It would be particularly helpful to someone trying to understand why they are not gaining followers on twitter or why their tweets are not-being retweeted or why no one has entered into conversation with them. As a teacher, at one time, I would have created similar rubrics and handed them to my students. I don't do that anymore. I would much rather have my students experiment with the tool, determine its purpose and function on their own and then collaboratively develop ways to assess effective use. Students gain a much deeper understanding when they are allowed to work in this way. In the pre-written rubric all the thinking has already been done. The learning has been pre-determined. The creativity element is missing. The imposition of the rubric designer's understanding of tool is given priority and users become mimickers.
It's not that rubrics such as the above do not have their place. Sometimes it is expedient to push a process along. Sometimes students need to be shown other ways of engaging that they have not discovered independently. Ultimately, twitter already contains meaningful assessment - are you gaining followers, are your tweets being retweeted, are you being mentioned? The above rubric helps a student understand why.
What does one do though when gaining followers and retweets or advancing discussion is not someone's purpose in using twitter? Who am I to say that someone is using twitter incorrectly? Web 2.0 tools are exciting precisely because they allow learners to explore learning independently and to express their ideas in ways meaningful to them. Let's not lose sight of that.
Hi Heidi,
ReplyDeleteWhile I think the intent of the rubric designer is good, it's certainly a "standardized" way to approach something as dynamic and free flowing as a community of diversity contributing to ways of thinking, reinvention and discourse using twitter as a platform.
Consider Howard Rheingold's work-in-progress map of "a literacy of cooperation":
http://cmapspublic3.ihmc.us/rid=1JM1F3253-10P3TPN-YFL/Toward%20a%20literacy%20of%20cooperation.cmap
The rubric sees the tiniest glimpse of this, in its references to retweets, links and crediting sources. It misses slabs of understanding in terms of negotiating trust, curation, negotiation and understanding how tweets perform as ways to propagate further learning through the twitter network. It doesn't consider self-interest, echo chambers, ecosystems and so much more.
A while back, I discovered something interesting that could be done with twitter and learning empathy and global citizenship and transliteracy. I'd be interested in your comments on it.
http://ianchia.com/2011/02/25/threnody_for_egypt/#comments
Best,
- Ian
I agree, Ian, that the intent is good and presents a starting point but that the rubric does not begin to cover the rich and dynamic possibilities of twitter. Perhaps that is the problem with most assessments - they go only as far as the designers current understanding. My own understanding of the function and use of twitter has changed dramatically since my first tweet back in December of 2010.
ReplyDeleteIt was my sister, Karen, (@resumestrategy) who first encouraged me to begin using twitter. After I had been on for a few weeks she asked, "How come you're only following 25 people?"
My response, "How could I possibly follow more that 25 people. That would be ridiculous."
Had I designed a twitter rubric back then, I would have included only "reads tweets, clicks on links, follows at least 25 people" and that would have been an "A"!
My understanding of the power and possibilities of twitter is continuously evolving. I think learning in the 21st century requires a new understanding of assessment.
And now ... I need to go look up: echo chambers!
Interesting. I'd never thought of exploring the creation of a rubric for Twitter use. I'm not sure I still see the point, even after having looked at the sample. Like Heidi said, my use and purpose and understanding of it has evolved over time.
ReplyDeleteI guess, however, that if you've set out goals for how your students are to utilise Twitter at a specific slice of time, this makes perfect sense.
Do we even need to develop assessments for social media that we are using in our classrooms or do we merely share learning of ways of using the tools. A student's purpose in using the tool, is the student's purpose in using the tool.
ReplyDeletePoint in time is key. When my students first began using Collaborize, the class developed Success Criteria for effective use - a checklist essentially - that allowed discussions to proceed more effectively. This grew out of a specific need for students to better understand what and why their colearners were posting.
I think assessment of your students' social media use depends on why you're having your students use it. If it's for familiarity and understanding of how to use it, then guiding students with a rubric is probably necessary, not to mention motivational. If, on the other hand, it's meant to optionally facilitate some other sort of learning or project (e.g. they are given Twitter as a potential tool for extending dialogue outside the classroom), then whether they use it one way or another is likely pointless to assess.
ReplyDeleteGood point, purpose is key. I suppose what's imperative is that as we introduce social media tools into classrooms, we continue to explore possibilities and expand our own understanding of how and why they might be used.
ReplyDeleteSome great points, here, and my experience is similar to yours, Heidi. The rubric assessment may be good for a starting point with students, in order to learn how to us the tool, but that isn't where the real learning occurs regarding social media IMO. There is so much more. I remember taking a large group of students into NYC for a day recently. On their own, they devised a hashtag for the day so that while exploring large museums, they could easily find each other (problem-solving on the fly).
ReplyDeleteWhile I didn't think to archive and Storify it (but thanks for the idea, Ian, as I will surely do so in the future) at the time, some of my classes experienced some of that human, global connection and empathy Ian speaks of during the Japan crisis. We were able to connect with a teacher I knew there, (first to make sure she was safe) follow her hashtags, and ultimately ended up finding a local radio broadcaster who was broadcasting events via Twitter, real-time as they were happening. Students were able to ask him questions via his twitter stream and he answered them on air. It was an entirely different experience than watching CNN's breaking news. There was a level of emotion in my classroom that day that I can't quite put to words. And, it certainly can't be measured by a
test or a rubric.
I started writing a post several days ago (although it sits in draft form) about getting students to 'get' Twitter. It is still in draft form, I believe, because we can't erroneously create these events that bring about the a-ha moments. Using such tools as these has to be about inquiry and exploration as each will arrive on their own time, just as many of us. Great conversation. I think I get it.
I've seen many conversations lately asking teachers to put forth more evidence about how tools have impacted student learning and/or how summer PD for teachers impacts classroom instruction, but I really believe this easier said than done.
Suzie Nestico @nesticos
What a rich contribution to this discussion Suzie. These tools absolutely need to be about inquiry and discovery. They are powerful because they are free flowing. Fabulous that your students developed a hashtag on the fly. I loved this.
ReplyDeleteHi Heidi,
ReplyDeleteAs a beginner "Tweeter" I would completely flunk with this rubric. I do agree with what many have said - Twitter like other social media forums are evolving and developing as you use them. Although I do think guidelines to help "pave the way" for students in the beginning would be more helpful so they understand what Twitter is capable of....
Kerri
First of all Kerri, welcome to twitter. That's a good word "guidelines" instead of rubrics and assessments.
ReplyDeleteKerri, what is your twitter name?
ReplyDeleteSo um ... how to use twitter ;) http://jhische.com/blog/twitter.jpg
ReplyDeleteHeidi - I am @BostonGirl223 - thanks for welcoming me - still plenty to learn :)
ReplyDeleteWell, Jessica Hische's chart is more how the twitter platform "operates" within the 140 chars (or more if your retweet since it appends your ID to the original 140 chars as a retweet ID), but it's not really "how to use" twitter. Isn't that what this discussion is more tending towards? (-;
ReplyDeleteYou may be also interested in the Connectivism and Connective Knowledge course that ran earlier this year by Stephen Downes & George Siemens. Some extremely interesting and insightful exploration of different theories and a pedagogy of networked learning (their notion of a "Connectivism Pedagogy")
http://cck11.mooc.ca/
Lots of good stuff under "Contents" on the lower LHS.
- Ian
For example, you may see some principles behind the thinking of the http://iliveoverhere.com/roadmap from CCK11's week 3 ideas.
ReplyDeletehttp://cck11.mooc.ca/week3.htm
eg. "Rhizomatic Education: Community as Curriculum" by Dave Cormier etc.
(-;
Hi Heidi,
ReplyDeleteI read this twice and I was not sure what/how to reply. I never used rubrics to assess tech use. To me it seems futile as I am making an analogy with pencils: would we develop rubrics on how students use pencils or other tools in the learning process?
I say that not in relation to Twitter (I don't and won't use it with students - they are too young yet and I am against immersing them in tech so early) but in relation to blogs.
I read blogs quite often and they fall into two categories: those that are retweeted often and say nothing to me, and others that leave me with a deep sense of having learnt something (something that adds a nuance to my thinking or enhances my experience as a teacher). If I were to consider the former, they would perhaps get an "excellent" on a rubric (that is what makes them popular, I guess). And still...they do not resonate with me and are felt like "recycled" ideas, full of rhetoric and cliches.
Therefore my questions is: who are we to decide how the learner uses tech tools? How do we know what enhances their process of learning since they are so different and they process information differently?
I am not dismissive of this idea (rubrics)but I find it highly subjective (despite their goal of being the opposite). I am looking forward to seeing what other educators think! :)
Point taken Ian, the link refers to how twitter functions, but it was useful so I added it in. Thanks for the links to exploring networked learning more deeply.
ReplyDeleteCristina,
Thank you for adding to the discussion. Can you assess how well someone uses a pencil? Hm. I remember bringing an artist into my classroom once who showed my students the many different types of pencils and the possibilities they allow. Students experimented and practised and created and I monitored whether or not they were trying out the many different techniques that had been taught. Innate artistic talent shone through, of course, but all students were thrilled by the possibilities and were able to improve their skills. It wasn't something I marked though, that did seem pointless. It was where students were on the learning curve of pencil use that mattered. When I think of the fluid environment that surrounds tech use, feedback is more effective than marks. Does a student know how to use a particular feature of the tool, yes ... move on to something else ... no, show them the feature and then move on to something else. Checklists and "on-going descriptive feedback" would perhaps be more useful. I suppose ultimately what matters is whether or not the assessment is useful to the learner.
This does bring to mind a You Tube video from Clive Thompson on how to use a two-holed pencil sharpener. I and many others discovered we had been using the sharpener ineffectively for years. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PP-74B6-R7k
As to the blogosphere, I agree they fall into categories. There are those that are at the retell stage and those that lead me to deeper thinking. I keep those on a twitter list. https://twitter.com/#!/HeidiSiwak/thinkers. I do think we need to be careful with our valuations though. What is cliche to me might be an entirely earth shattering revelation to the writer, again, it is where a blogger is on the learning curve.
I do appreciate the work of @melaniemcbride who encourages avoiding cliches (among other things). She once referred to "Captain Obvious" in response to a ridiculous series of self-evident cliches that were being tweeted. Captain Obvious now sits on my shoulder and occasionally gives me a pointed poke when I'm tempted to tweet or blog the unnecessary.
And that takes us full circle and back to the original question: who are we to decide how the learner uses tech tools?
Your reply only confirms what I struggle with: assessment as a way to understand the learner's needs.
ReplyDeleteI think you nailed it better than I could have: on-going DESCRIPTIVE feedback that is USEFUL for the learner.
In what regards twitter and blogs - I think it is important to apply the concepts of "autonomy" and "choice" here, as well. Hence my careful choice of words - "me". Precisely because bloggers and tweeps come from so various backgrounds and blog about what matters to them it is essential to allow freedom - what is critical for you, as a learner/tweep/blogger might be irrelevant to me. I was not being dismissive - I merely framed this as a problem of differentiated learning, that in turn, leads to not having rubrics for evaluation. Maybe, as Ian Chia and @seburnt pointed out, only at the beginning, so students would have a big "picture" of what might be expected. Later on, the descriptive feedback you suggest.
Do I make sense?
Providing useful assessment is a struggle we all have. The obligation of assigning marks is at times a burden for educators and runs counter the learning process.
ReplyDeleteYour words make perfect sense, autonomy and choice are key. I was attempting to describe how readers respond differently to text. This is where face to face would be beneficial!
Going back to Christina's questions, I think rubrics perform a basic checklist function. In my past as a music educator, I've taught improvisation to a range of musicians from beginners to skilled performers. A rubric performs a useful filter to see what building blocks need to be in place before they can learn to fly by themselves, but ultimately, for something like improvisation - the learnt techniques and skills are a springboard for the individual to launch themselves into the unknown, and take their learning out into "the real world".
ReplyDeleteI think rubrics have a place to assess how we should scaffold and construct a learning pathway - what disturbs me is when particular rubrics are recommended as the intended be-all and end-all.
Learning how twitter works, or learning how to use a pencil in art (and from personal experience studying graphic design, there are LOTS of ways to use a pencil), or learning how to use technology can all benefit from seeing the basic frameworks. It's important not to "reinvent the wheel" if you can benefit from basic instruction.
I think that ultimately, the rubrics I've seen tend to form the early levels of assessment. What would be fruitful in ongoing assessments would be seeing how the learners come up with further discoveries through collaboration and synthesis - their own contributions that deepen a rubric for others, growing a shared, ongoing body of knowledge and learning.
- Ian
Ian,
ReplyDeleteYou have summed up very nicely why I was feeling uncomfortable with the rubric. I see its usefulness, but only as a starting point. When I thought of how much the way I use twitter is changing I found it limiting.
When rubrics were first introduced as an assessment tool and we were taught how to design them, level 4 (our equivalent of an "A" or "80%+) always included the phrase "goes beyond expectations". Very little time was spent thinking and discussing how and why this might occur. The rubric was the endpoint.
For mastery of specific skills, I prefer a straightforward checklist. For how well a student is using a particular skill, I prefer a learning curve.
For the creative, critical thinking aspect of learning I prefer self-assessment and conversation through a reflective learning log, for example.
I still have trouble with giving a low mark to someone who tweets infrequently (unless the purpose in the course was, of course, to tweet frequently) This approach does not consider impact. What if someone tweets once, but it travels for weeks around the globe causing readers to reflect or write blog entries?
In my board,as we gain better understanding of the role of assessment in learning, I feel that the use of rubrics is coming to an end.
ReplyDeleteHeidi
ReplyDeleteThanks for this discussion. I hope many read your blog and the comments that follow here. Your last comment sums it up for me. Rubrics coming to an end...yes oh yes. Now people may think that I would be all for rubrics, given that I believ in ongoing assessment to inform instruction and precision etc. But I have never liked or used to any real degree rubrics. When I loved and worked ithe US for 5 years, it ws the first time I had ever had to use rubrics in a formal way and I hated it for the very reasons you state. The rubric became the purpose...just as testing can become a purpose for so many teachers. As you say...what if it is only one tweet? It could be powerful or it might not. What if is 20 bland repetitive self promoting tweeting? What if it 20 tweets but as you also correctly point out...what does it look like to go beyond the level 4 of the rubric. Once level 4 is reached it is as if 'who cares' - they reached the maximum required. So for me both ends of the continuum get forgotten, the student for who the minimum is too advanced ( what comes before the minimum?) and for the student who is beyond the maximum ( Where to for them?). Ian believes that as a starting point they provide a framework, i like you, offer a continuum and a set of indicators that have detours and recursive paths...oh wait a minute...of curse...I believ in building Critical Learning Pathways (CLIPS) for every student...the very essence of my research for the last 15 years. So many read Breakthrough and totally missed the whole pointof what a CLIP really is...and it is not a 'big idea' let me tell you that.
Thanks again everyone for a great challenging interaction.
PS: I am on my iPad and cannot scroll down to check all my typos...so sorry...and if I can but I do not know how to then somebody needs to tell me now!
CC
This response came via Jennifer Borgioli @DataDiva on twitter. It broadens the discussion of rubrics: http://qualityrubrics.pbworks.com/w/page/35653651/Response-to-the-Twitter-Rubric
ReplyDeleteThanks Karen Franker who created the original rubric that has caused so many of us to think more deeply about assessment.