New Way of Learning = New Way of Assessing

Weeks ago, I would have defined the digital divide as the difference between students that have access to technology and the students who don’t.  As I see it, there is another divide, that being the difference in technology levels in the community and the levels in the schools.  As I have mentioned previously, technology will not cease to exist in the world so it can not be expected to cease to be in the schools.  Our job as educators is to equip students with the knowledge and skills necessary to thrive outside of school.  Exposure to technology is the only way to accomplish that.  Exposure in one district may be higher or lower than another district.  Then comes another dilemma; how to demonstrate actual learning in an age of standards based assessment?

New ways of transferring knowledge can not be measured by old ways of teaching.  I found the idea of acquiring “credentials to certify a learner’s expertise with respect to specific skills” interesting.  Credentials could be earned in different skills groups: academic, generic and technical.  Learners would move through different levels of the curriculum amassing credentials along the way.  It sounds very much the same as passing grammar school before going to middle school and then passing middle school before going to high school and so on.  The credentials would be mini-diplomas if you will.  Students would pick and choose which credential they wished to gain and then set forth on earning it.  If the long range plan is college, then the student would need to earn one set of credentials.  If the student planned on attending a technical or vocational school, then a different set of credentials would be required.  The idea is that what ever path the student takes, he would be properly prepared. 

My objection to this type of system comes from my own experience.  If I had to decide back in 3^rd grade what educational path I was going to take based on what I wanted to be when I grew up, I would not be writing this blog right now.  I would be sitting in vespers with the other sisters.  Or, I would be frustrating myself trying to figure out how to become the first female center for the Chicago Bulls.  If parents are to help youngsters on their path to what they are to become, I would be in nursing school right now.  My point is, there are students out there who have many and varied interests and then there are students who have no idea what they want to be.  If students are put on a particular path and decide that they want to change, how much would it delay finishing school?  It is much like changing majors in college.  If you change from social studies major to a physiology major, how many credentials would not transfer?  Lifelong learner should not equal lifelong schooling.

I am afraid that this suggested way of progression will produce learners who are very strong in certain areas and extremely weak in others.  I know that traditional ways of assessing students can produce the same, however I think that the gaps will be larger.  I do agree that new methods of assessing learning need to be developed because new ways of learning are being developed.