Class 6 Blog - Reflection on class

Tonight's presentations on AT Assessment models were very informative! Karla, Sherry, and Dallas shared excellent information and each had some different discussion points. While doing my own search for the four models, I was amazed at how many models there are for AT Assessment. I've posted highlights of my PowerPoint presentation in the previous blog. The four models I discussed were the ones I found mentioned most often in the literature I reviewed.

The four common considerations in all the AT Assessment models are:
1. The individual/student/learner
2. The milieu/context
3. The task or activity
4. The tool/technology

The individual is at the centre of all AT Assessment and program planning. All other considerations revolve around the person in need of the AT. The milieu, task and tool all impact each other (and the student) and all factors are inter-related and dynamic. Time is an element that affects the student, the milieu, the task, and the technology. This is why AT Assessment is not an event but a continuous process.

The article by Karen Morrison provided insights into the four common considerations of all the AT assessment models. The overall message of her article was a reinforcement of the uniqueness of the requirements of each person being assessed for AT. She emphasized the need to know the capabilities of the software and then being able to relate it to student needs. After the AT is assigned, there is a need for monitoring for effectiveness and adjusting as necessary. The example of a student's growing need for access to a larger dictionary was a great example to illustrate this point. This made me think of the formative assessment practices I use in my classroom and the idea that monitoring for effectiveness of AT is similar to checking to see what the student knows and then adjusting instruction accordingly. This is how learning happens and it makes sense that the AT must keep up with the student's learning.

The discussion about the need to integrate ACT with specific instructional objectives resonated with me! We need more trained teachers who are also AT experts so that we can be more efficient in meeting the learning needs of students. A trained teacher is able to make links and connections that someone who has never been in a classroom can't. I also agree with the necessity of providing training to classroom teachers who have students using AT. Teacher ignorance of how to use the AT is a huge barrier to implementation and continued use of AT. I think that this problem will disappear as younger teachers who have grown up with technology as a part of their every day life enter the profession. Many teachers are still not comfortable with technology in general so it is a big stretch for them to embrace AT.

I found this image that represents the idea of the complexity of the process of AT assessment and successful implementation. Morrison re-emphasizes that the planning does not involve simply starting with the technology. Rather, it is necessary to know the students strengths, needs, preferences, interests, abilities, tendencies...AND knowing the AT that is available, how it works, how it CAN work for this particular individual...AND knowing the tasks, activities, and experiences the student will be expected to engage in...AND knowing how to train the teacher in the use of the technology. All this just to get started! Then the monitoring, re-evaluating, and adjusting as necessary begins. The student, context, task, and technology are all inter-related and any one can affect each of the others.