How can technology be assessed to demonstrate “independent” use by learners and still focus on curricular content?

In the online McGinn article, she claims the use of technology and assessing it to be a "natural, organic" process. I would agree with this. In the process of creating a product or using technology as a tool, there is constant revision. The user is always confronted with "how do I get this to work?", "why isn't this showing what I want", etc. and needing to trouble-shoot and thus learn. Most often, the process is far more valuable than the outcome.

I think students should have plenty of choice as to how they present, use and tap into technology, but it is very difficult for the teacher if there are too many directions toward new programs which students "may" not be equipped to use. It is a given that some students come more equipped and experienced with technology than others, yet we do not want to hold back those who can fly and we want to give time to those who do not have the skills. Therefore, if the teacher allows some choice yet has certain project criteria and expectations that all need to meet, there is still lots of room for students to learn (tech-wise) what they would like, use what they know, and be stretched to learn something new.

For instance, a students are studying arthropods in science. A project: Create a fantasy arthropod that shows you know all the traits of this animal, including the digestive system, the segments, etc. Some could hand draw their creature and then scan the drawing into a slide. Others may use "Paint" to draw their creature on the computer, labeling it with the parts, etc. Others may use PhotoShop to import an arthropod and change it's features digitally. Maybe all would present their project on the computer. Some could use PowerPoint, others movie maker, some would add sound, others would not.

Does technology offer answers in assessing learners, especially online opportunities?

It has always amazed me that the "standardized" tests do not make use of computers. Yet, I also see the flaws and problems in doing so. For instance, I do not "like" to write by hand, my writing is far more creative when I type (much faster & can keep up with my stream of conscience), I can cut/paste/edit easily and it IS legible. A student like me, will not do as well in the writing prompt without the use of technology. Then again, if a student is MADE to use the computer for writing when he/she has difficulty with the tech side, their voice, tone, and organization may go down the tubes due to the tech handicap.

The keyboarding program we use has a testing portion to it. It is wonderful to have a student type a screen, and at the end have the program run through it, highlight the mistakes, and report the typing speed and accuracy. This kind of assessment is a super time-saver for me and beats the old way of counting words per line and doing the math myself. A nice use of technology assessing.

I am always concerned about authenticity. With assessments online, there are holes that can be found and circumstances that are not taken into consideration.

I also am leary of the huge amount of resources that go into creating these assessments. Time - often by the time the assessment is created, fine-tuned, and tested; it may be time to create a whole new assessment. It reminds me of all the "new wave" latest strategies in the teaching and assessing field. We used to have competencies - paper records of tests students took. That went by the wayside (thank goodness) and Portfolios have come into the picture. Portfolios can vary in their grading dependent on the person assessing. Three different teachers can grade the same piece 3 different ways regardless of how many workshops they go to. I believe online assessment would have similar flaws. Also the usercreates the variable: For instance, our 8th graders investigate careers. They go to the "Bridges" site and take an interest survey. At the end, it tells them what careers they may end up being good at with those intests. The kids will take it seriously but often do not understand the question. Others will fill it out showing they are interested in nothing just to see the results. Money is another resource. The programs, the training and the constant need for updates can deplete school funds pretty quickly. More time seems to be put into assessing than teaching and teachers are often teaching for the test! That seems terribly backward to me.