SJ3's Three Degrees of Measurement: TOP

SJ3’s Three Degrees of Measurement : TOP
T: Target
O: Objective
P: Perspective

So you have been given an iTouch or technology tool to use in your classroom and you need to provide documentation on how it impacts the education of your students. You are left wondering what type of data or evaluation you use. I am going to suggest not to just use one single method, but to look at three ways to measure for success. I use the TOP strategy for thinking of assessment views.

Measurement 1: T is for Targeted
Our school district currently uses MAP assessment data tested in the Spring and Fall. This is one piece of information that will be an easy data collection to use. Once you have determined what your academic goal will be with the technology tool, you will be able to align your goals with the correct ‘Strand’ on MAP for measurement. For example if you are going to use a language arts application on the iTouch to increase vocabulary throughout the year. MAP assessment breaks the Reading test measurement into ‘Strands’ which assigns a number score tested by the student. The comparison between the start and end of the school year data on your targeted strand will show the amount of growth that the new technology may have had on academic impact. The FAll Strand can be used to determine at what level your student is currently being challenged. This may give you a starting point with your student to address their vocabulary needs and skill level. Using this information can provide you a level that the student can be moderately challenged and yet provide attainable success. It may really help to use this information for the first time using the tool to know a level that a student will experience success and become engaged with technology tool. For some students it can be critical the first time using a new tool to find success with using it. Immediate frustration with too difficult of a task can have a lasting impact for sustained implementation. Remember the student is not only being challenged to increase their academic skills, but also learning how to utilize a new tool.

Measurement 2: O is for Objective
My second suggestion for measurement is a more frequent assessment using a type of benchmarking or task specific objective. The frequency of using this form of measurement will depend on how you integrate the technology tool into your classroom. Creating a process of implementation with the new technology that is consistent and can be replicated will give more validity to the data you measure. For example if you use the tool to strengthen spelling skills and have an established plan for frequency of use along with how the tool will be used, you may decide to use a method of measurement on a weekly basis. Some tools provide pre-test and post-test data already within the device and this information can be documented weekly. If the tool does not have a method for comparing data you could create short assessment methods to determine improvements on the more specific objective within your class. My suggestion here is to create the assessment that makes real connections to the targeted goal and as similar to the integration technique of the tool. This type of measurement should reflect both your targeted goals and be similar to the learning strategy used within the technology tool. A couple of important considerations are to determine goals and timeline expectations. Select the way you use the tool to integrate with your academic goals and make a consistent plan for implementation.

Measurement 3: P is for Perspective
My third measurement strategy is more an observation and perception assessment. I suggest this strategy because often we find data conflicting with how we perceive a new tool’s effectiveness. Sometimes it takes time to learn how to increase the effectiveness of a new technology and to quite simply ‘get good at it’. These will measure outcomes that we may and may not anticipate. These things can be measure of a student’s behavior, attendance, and their learning enjoyment. Also measuring a teacher’s perspective or self-assessment can provide valuable information. This data could include such things as how well you feel the tool was implemented, how well the tool affected flow of the classroom, how the tool may have impacted classroom management, and how over time of use their own skills increase with utilizing the tool for instruction. There are several ways to gather this type of data. Some data can be objectively gathered over a period of time, such as classroom behavior. You can effectively measure if certain behaviors increased or decreased and also document if new behaviors occurred. A form of reflection or survey can be used to address several perceptions and the degree to the impact on learning.

TOP all Together
Information analyzed from these different forms of measurement will help you in making data-based decisions for your classroom. Evaluating the technology tool than won’t be putting all your eggs in one basket on any one single assessment to determine if you continue or terminate your integration of a technology tool. Rather you will have a wealth of ability to see how the tool better impacts your students’ academics, your students’ behaviors, the teacher’s perception and the level of implementation. Maybe your tool needs some modification, but has had a positive impact on learning that one of the three measures may not identify. Hopefully looking at data in three different measurements will provide you will valid information for good instructional reflection and impact of the technology tool used to meet your curriculum needs. TOP strategy is a way of collecting and view data in multiple ways.