TAIP Framework for Educational Tool Assessment

While teaching an introductory course in educational technology for pre-service teachers this semester, I attempted to create a framework to help them evaluate new educational technology and tools. The ability to evaluate potential educational tools and technologies is a useful skill for all educators–getting pre-service teachers to develop this as a habit of systematic thought seemed a worthwhile pursuit. I began to think about my thought processes when looking at some new technology. I then based the framework on what I thought  I do when evaluating these tools.  I called it the TAIP Framework:

TAIP Tool Assessment Framework

TAIP Tool Assessment Framework (Hengstler, 2010)

The first time I used it with the class, I realized I had to further guide students in what was expected in answering each of the items. After comparing their initial attempts to my implicit expectations when reviewing them, I built the first rubric for the TAIP:

Tool
Beginning No specific tool delineated like a named website or service; no brief description of what it is or does in general
Developing Specific tool delineated; may or may not have brief description of what it is or does in general
Capable Specific tool delineated with a brief description of what it does in general
Powerful Specific tool delineated with a brief description of what it does in general that does not provide extraneous or irrelevant information.
 

Applications
Beginning No applications outlined or applications are general and not specifically related to potential uses of the tool by teachers, students in relation to education
Developing Few educationally relevant  applications are outlined
Capable Several educationally relevant applications are mentioned demonstrating how a teacher, student, class may use the tool.
Powerful A variety of educationally relevant applications are mentioned demonstrating how a teacher, student, class may use the tool not only teacher to student; but teacher to teacher; teacher to parent; student to student, etc.
 

Implications
Beginning No discussion of the educationally relevant benefits or challenges of using the tool. No mention of planning & resources necessary to use the tool.
Developing Little discussion of the educationally relevant benefits or challenges of using the tool—though there may be some general benefits or challenges mentioned. Little mention of planning & resources necessary to use the tool.
Capable Discusses several considerations of the educationally relevant benefits or challenges of using the tool. Establishes necessary planning & resources required to use the tool in at least 1-2 contexts (e.g. teacher-teacher; student-student; teacher-student).
Powerful Thorough consideration demonstrated of the educationally relevant benefits or challenges of using the tool. Planning & resources necessary to use the tool are considered & anticipated in the various contexts.
 

 

Policy & Professionalism
Beginning No discussion or consideration given to the types of policies or practices that may be in place –or would need to be developed–to encourage the use of the tool. No consideration of existing policies that might affect tool use. No discussion of impact that tool use might have on  teacher digital footprints
Developing Evidence of consideration given to the types of policies or practices that may be in place –or would need to be developed–to encourage the use of the tool. At least one consideration evident of what  tool use might mean for a  teacher’s digital footprints
Capable Several points considered re.  types of policies or practices that may be in place –or would need to be developed–to encourage the use of the tool. Mention made of existing policies that might negatively affect tool use. Discusses more than one impact  tool use might have on a  teacher’s digital footprints
Powerful Several points considered re.  types of policies or practices that may be in place –or would need to be developed–to encourage the use of the tool. Mention made of existing policies that might negatively affect tool use. 

Mentions forms or other permissions required. Considers the impact  tool use might have on a  teacher’s digital footprints from more than one perspective: teacher-teacher, teacher-student, teacher-parent, teacher-professional community, etc.

 

Other
Beginning Several grammatical & spelling errors evident 

Several issues with sentence structure.

Content strung together with little logical connection to move reader from one point to next.

Developing May have occasional grammatical & spelling error evident 

Few issues with sentence structure.

Content strung together with some logical connection to move reader from one point to next.

Capable May have 1-2 of the following overall: grammatical error, spelling error, issue with sentence structure. 

Logical connect is evident between points.

Powerful May have no more than 1 of the following overall: grammatical error, spelling error, issue with sentence structure. 

Logical connect is evident between points.

Responses in “Applications” & “Implications” show some evidence of creative or unique thought/perspective.

[Notes: Had to break rubric out of landscape table as there wasn’t room to display it properly here. Also, as a result of my lack of clarity, my students received a done/not done mark on their first attempts. When the rubric evolved, they were then given a chance to self-assess for editing and resubmission.]

When thinking about Applications, I wanted students to think about the uses the tool was meant for as well as unanticipated/unplanned uses.  I also stressed that virtually every TAIP’s Implications should include the issue of  providing access to selected tools outside of class without singling out individuals with limited or no access beyond school.

My ultimate idea was that my pre-service teachers would be able to collect solid TAIPS in a wiki and share them among our class and beyond. Our semester was short, so I could only devote a limited amount of time to using the framework.

In this blog post, I’m looking for some feedback & discussion around this TAIP Framework for Educational Tool Assessment & it’s attendant rubric to improve or reinvent them entirely.

Shortly, with my students’ permission, I will share some examples of their reviews using this framework.

Advertisements

One Response to TAIP Framework for Educational Tool Assessment

  1. jhengstler says:

    As an update, one of my students used this framework to assess a tool for use as a teacher for Language Arts. She reported that it worked quite well.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: