In a follow-up to my previous post, I am going to assess Catherine Seimen’s Twine-based assessment for Integrated Language Arts. As an English teacher myself, I expect to do well in the game, given my level of experience. I expect to know how I’m doing based on whether I can complete five given tasks on the first try or not.
This game, Pirate’s Booty, is fun! I admire the clever premise and appreciate the variety of learning goals assessed in the game. It required me to have inference and feedback skills, knowledge of alliteration, main ideas, and universal questions. I didn’t know the definition of a universal question, so I guessed wrong on that task. Luckily it wasn’t extremely detrimental to try again (no points lost or game overs), although I did get a “dead man’s curse,” which told me I had gotten the wrong answer.
I think this game ties in nicely to Ms. Siemen’s assessment plan, as there has been instruction throughout the unit in these areas of internal and external grammar, and this game will act as a formative assessment on the way to a summative one at the end of the unit. Below I briefly compare it to my personal Assessment Design Checklist.
| Does this assessment allow learners to demonstrate their understanding of a state standard or course objective? | Yes. The specific course objectives/standards were not made explicit within the game, but that’s not always necessary. It was clear that specific learning goals were driving each of the tasks. |
| Does this assessment ask learners to apply their knowledge in a new but similar situation? | Yes. The assessment asks students to apply or transfer their knowledge to a situation that is different from but similar to those encountered during instruction–specifically, situations withing an imaginary pirate’s treasure hunt. This was not only fun, but it also provided opportunities to practice transferring knowledge. |
| Have I planned for effective feedback to be given and received on this assessment? | Yes. Feedback for correct/incorrect answers is immediate and the students know whether or not they can advance in the game. |
| Does this assessment allow and encourage students to act on the feedback they receive? | Yes and no. Each incorrect/correct page is the same, which doesn’t give much for the students to learn or do other than go back and take another guess (that’s something I want to fix within the game I created as well). |
| Are students actively involved in the assessment process? | Yes and no. They know by their advancement in the game if they are getting correct answers, but the teacher seems to be the main assessor here. She will view their progress/responses and use that data to guide future instruction. |
Constructive Advice:
Incorrect answers might lead to pages with more instruction/feedback to help students know why their choice was wrong. Likewise, correct answers could be reinforced with an explanation as well.
To involve the students in the assessment process a little more, they could take notes on what corrections they needed to make throughout the game or otherwise come to assess themselves in a way that would lead to deeper learning than the option of guessing until they win.
Overall, I think this game lines up very well with the principles of assessment we’ve been studying this semester. It is formative, provides feedback, and uses technology in an engaging way that helps learners show what they know. Nice job, Ms. Siemens, and thank you for sharing your game!
Still a Teacher 