I’ve long been a fan of voting systems (eg. Turning Point, Quizdom) because of their capacity to add interactivity into formative assessment. The trouble is, though, that such systems cost – generally, around £2000 for 16 handsets. Many of us have hoped that voting in this way might become possible using mobile phones (not actually free, but a lot cheaper!), and now it seems that this is a reality.
For a start, there is the option of using a text wall (eg. xlearn: http://www.xlearn.co.uk/sms.htm) in which sms text responses are displayed on a web-site, and visible to all participants with screen & projector. There is a cost to this, but quite low for a standard service. At this level of service, text entry is possible, so words, numbers, ‘yes/no’ etc can be viewed, though there is no analysis of responses and hence no graphs etc (this can be done, but at greater cost).

Another option that I have just discovered (via the e-Assessment Association newsletter) is to use Twitter. Power-Point Twitter tools, developed by Timo Elliott, allow Tweets to be input into power-point slides. If Tweets with a unique ‘voting string’ are made in response to a question, eg. multiple choice, the tool can feed data into charts/graphs (Tweets can be made from a mobile device as well as a PC). The tool can be downloaded from the SAP Web 2.0 web-site at http://tinyurl.com/yecmh86 : it’s basically a power-point presentation from which you can copy and paste slides (they have to be in ‘presentation’ or ’slide-show’ mode to be fully functional). In addition to the ‘Twitter voting’ slide, there is a ‘Twitter feedback’ slide that displays Tweets in speech balloons, and a ‘Twitter Ticker bar’ that can be embedded into a Power-Point master slide to give real-time ticker-tape updates. I have tested all of these, and they work (hurray!), though there is sometimes a bit of delay as Twitter updates. These options are not quite as slick as using an up-to-date voting system, but they’re not bad, and definitely worth trying.

Over the past year there have been a series of meetings and consultations to develop a guide to aid teachers in the Lifelong learning Sector in their use of technology. The aim was to update the existing Fento ‘ILT Standards’ (2003) whilst building in more functionality and an awareness of the educational scene in Wales. LLUK (Lifelong Learning UK) led the developments which were funded by the Welsh Assembly Government, and input was obtained from several key organisations in Wales including NGfL Cymru, NIACE DC, NTfW, JISC RSC Wales, Fforwm. The Steering Group for the guide’s development also comprised representatives from all the key Post-16 sectors including FE, ACL, WBL, HE.
Following the example of the previous Fento publication, the guide was developed in three parts:
• A section for Teachers, Tutors and Trainers: this follows the format of the ‘New overarching professional standards for teachers, tutors and trainers in the lifelong sector in Wales’
• A guide for Leaders and Managers: this follows the format of the National Occupational Standards (NOS) for Management and Leadership 2008
• A series of case-studies

The first two of these sections are now available bilingually both as hard copy and online on the LLUK web-site (yng Nghymraeg, and in English). The Managers’ Guide should be of great value in highlighting the importance of educational technology at an institutional level, and outlines the responsibilities of senior staff. The Teachers’ Guide should prove really useful both for ILT Managers and Teacher-Training Co-ordinators when preparing courses/cpd, but the Guide was also designed to be of direct use to teaching staff. Each part of the guide (eg. Planning, Assessment, Specialist teaching) contains specific advice and examples that should be helpful both to beginners and those who are already well-versed in technology. The online version of the guide also provides hyperlinks to an extensive glossary as well as to key external web-sites. In due course, the case studies will give concrete examples of the uses of technology in teaching and learning that should be useful for all sectors and levels.
Any feedback about the guide is welcomed, especially with respect to ways in which it can be used in the professional development of existing and trainee teaching staff. In due course, I hope to use this blog to disseminate further ideas about the ways in which the guide could be used.

QCA (Qualifications and Curriculum Authority – but now QCDA) originally had high hopes  for the involvement of e-assessment in high-stakes, summative assessments like A levels. As we head towards Autumn 2009, there is little evidence of this, as highlighted in a recent Guardian article. Whilst the use of various technologies for formative assessment seems to be expanding (see RSC Wales blog of Nov, 2008), take-up of e-assessment for summative purposes in schools and colleges is mainly restricted to  certain GCSE subjects (eg. Science, AQA), and courses on basic and vocational skills (eg. GOLA).
The only technology-enabled A level examinations I’m aware of (but I’m happy to be corrected!) are run by the Welsh examination board WJEC (there have also been trials of onscreen assessment in some IB examinations (ie. International Baccalaureate). This summer, WJEC ran online examinations in 25 centres for two A level subjects – Applied Business and ICT –through the medium of Welsh as well as English ( the bilingual aspect is significant, since Welsh-language versions of questions tend to take up more space than their English counterparts, which may create issues of formatting).
There are many reasons why A levels remain largely paper-based, not least the cost of equipping institutions with the necessary technology and support. There are also good reasons why examination boards should look further at e-assessment – for example, the value of multimedia and interactivity for learners, and ease of marking for examiners. They might start with internally-assessed components (eg. course-work, science practicals, extended essays etc), and make use of technologies such as e-portfolios . This would extend the range of evidence that could be examined (eg. images, audio, blogs), and provide far more flexibility for internal and external moderation.

A Level examinations often come in for criticism (especially each August when the results come out!), but I was particularly intrigued by a recent comment that they have now become ‘too much like sat-nav’. The comment was made by Professor Bailey, Queen Mary College London, in a report by the Reform Group, and it implies that A-Levels are getting easier in the sense that using a sat-nav is easier than reading a map, ie. that students are given too much guidance. The report went on to say that recent changes in A levels such as modularisation and the use of  ‘quiz or puzzle’-style questions favour ‘shallow’ learning and do not encourage ‘independent inquiry’.
 These comments pose several questions, not least about the merits of modularisation, but the ‘sat-nav’ reference has really got me thinking. Are the Reform Group suggesting that we shouldn’t use technology to make life easier? Is there the implication that any novel form of assessment, including onscreen assessment, lacks depth? Do they favour A Level examinations that consist only of hand-written essays?
Perhaps curriculum leaders, A Level examiners and University admissions tutors need to get together to decide what purpose A Level examinations actually serve, and what the learning and assessment outcomes of A Level courses should be. If and when they do, I hope they’ll remember that students have different learning and assessment preferences, that learning should be enjoyable whatever the level, and that learners need to know as much about educational technology as all the other technologies that are an increasingly essential part of today’s world.

 A recent conference at the University of Cranfield (25-26 Nov) highlighted some of the key current activities in e-assessment. Formative assessment plays a major role in the ways in which online or onscreen assessment is used both in HE (eg. German at University of Warwick), and FE/pre-16 (eg. ‘SCHOLAR’ programme – see blog post of 15.10.08). Feedback is highly significant – immediate, high-quality feedback is highly valued by learners, and students are generally very happy to engage in well-structured interactive onscreen questions. Question-authoring can be quite an art, and in HE in particular, commercial enterprises such as Questionmark Perception are prominent especially where assessment is summative and/or high-stakes (ie. leading to a key qualification). However, there are plenty of open-source alternatives, and the possibilities of the ‘Quiz’ block in Moodle were mentioned several times (particularly as the OU are developing this further using OpenMark). It was agreed that investing time to train teachers/lecturers in question-authoring techniques pays dividends in terms of time saved in marking and in the consistency and flexibility of assessment.

The use of the internet offers lots of other assessment options, of course eg. wikis, blogs, but these did not receive much coverage at this event.

Many of the participants at the conference, and many key case studies, are mentioned within JISC’s ‘Effective Practice with e-Assessment’