The Effects of New Technologies on Testing and Student Performance

By Jean Hussey and Kayla Clyma

Lesson Rational

How does using Plickers increase students comprehension test scores? That is

the question that we, two first grade teachers, first proposed in this study. Test scores

greatly influence many aspects of school and daily lessons in the classroom.

Standardized testing has become an evaluative measure for schools, teachers, and

students. State and district mandated tests are no longer an annual event, but have

become quarterly and even bi-weekly. Teachers are hounded to not only assess

student performance, but also to collect and analyze data based on those tests. Most

teachers feel like testing takes away from lessons and academic activities. They also

feel that students lose confidence in their own abilities because of the difficulty of these

tests.

In addition to this strain placed on teachers and students alike, many wonder if

the actual test data is useful to schools or students. A study done at the Learning

Research and Development Center of University of Pittsburgh found that most central

office administration do not view themselves as major users of test information. Test

scores simply do not provide central office administrators with the kinds of information

they need to solve the problems that they face. [Salmon-Cox, L.. (1981)]. Despite

teacher opinion and research based opinions on the effect of testing on students, we

acknowledge that our students need to show proficiency using the test taking format

required by the state and district because it is required by law and is a required format

to show student growth put in place by the district and state. As first grade teachers,
Jean Hussey and Kayla Clyma, wondered if a change in testing format would positively

affect the scores and students opinion on test taking. With the change in mandated

testing put into place by No Child Left Behind and Common Core State Standards and

the evolution of technology over the past century, the daily activities of the classroom

are very different even from our own elementary school experiences. Adopting new

literacies is one way to blend the evolution of technology that can be used in the

classroom with the concern for underperforming readers. Student scores around the

country have shown that students are struggling to read at a grade appropriate level. 1

in 4 children in America grow up without learning how to read. (Do Something.org)

Academic change, such as additional support for student reading, evidence based

reading programs, reading training for elementary teachers, support for struggling

readers in upper grades and more, is needed.

Todays students are digital natives, meaning that students manipulate

technology with great ease. Students are growing up with these new technologies and

can easily gain the skills needed to evolve with changing technology. Teachers have

found that technology holds student focus much better than traditional methods of

learning. We have worked to bring relevant technology into their classrooms in order to

increase student focus and attention. It is our belief that students can use technology

as a new pedagogy in order to teach traditional academic concepts and ideas. With the

shift to new literacy ideals, we believe that we can change students testing experiences

by adding technological measures and methods to the standardized testing process.

We hope to see improvement in student test scores when using a technology rather

than paper and pencils for test taking.

 The content covered in our PBI project is reading comprehension, with a

pedagogical focus on paper and pencil versus technological testing methods, such as

Plicker. We believe that tests and assessments fall under the remembering component

of the Revised Bloom's taxonomy. While this is the lowest thresh-hold of thinking skill, it

is also the one with the greatest value placed on it, because the government mandates

the use of specific tests to show student proficiency in subject areas. While a higher

form of thinking skill would be preferred, it is not the format that our students see most

often. We hoped to find a method of testing or remembering that would increase

proficiency in reading comprehension. Remembering has replaced Blooms knowledge.

Knowledge as defined here includes those behaviors and test situations which

emphasize the remembering, either by recognition or recall, of ideas, materials, or

phenomena. (Bloom et al., 1956, p 62).

We are working towards the thinking skill understanding, but have found that

testing does not often give students a chance to display their understanding of a topic

as well as other methods allow. Langevins Learning Services describes Blooms

knowledge as Knowledge to check learner ability to recall basic information. This is

usually assessed using a non-performance test that checks for knowledge of the

information the learner has been taught. This is accomplished through quizzes using

assorted multiple choice, matching, or true/false questions. You want the learner to

define, repeat, recall from memory, list, etc. the information he/she has learned.

(Langevin Blog) We found that this describes most state and district mandated testing.

Shouldnt we expect higher levels of thinking from our students than the lowest possible

form?
 During this PBI project we identified a technology that could assess students in a

simple, fun way that might increase testing performance. We chose the formative

assessment program Plickers which is a website that uses the scanning capabilities of

an iPad or iPhone to recognize A, B, C, D choices found on unique Plickers cards. We

especially liked this format because most EOG assessments are in multiple-choice

format. The Plickers program allows students to give their answers by turning their

personal card depending on their answer. The questions are read to students and

auditory and visual instructions are given instead of just reading the directions on a

paper. Students use the technology to display their answers. Plickers helps teachers

collect and evaluate formative assessment data to help increase student

comprehension and helps teachers reflect on their lessons. It was our theory that

students would have more success with the Plickers test then they do with traditional

paper tests.

Our research had the following results; Clymas class met little to no growth when

taking the Plickers style tests. In fact, the second test taken showed a dramatic

decrease in test scores using Plickers compared to the paper and pencil and only a

small increase in scores using the first and third test comparison. Husseys class also

showed little to no growth using the Plickers test. Her students showed a slight

percentage increase using Plickers in the first two tests given, and no overall growth

change for the last test.

We had a few theories on why we obtained these results. Hussey wondered if

the students age and maturity affected their scores and success with Plickers. Many of

our students struggle with focus, hand-eye coordination, and understanding new
technology. It is possible that students in a higher grade with increased testing

experience and greater maturity would be more successful with a Plickers-style test.

Clyma wondered if students showed no growth because the test was seen as more of a

game to students since technology is often seen as a fun activity. Clyma wondered if

students put less value in their answers and their efforts during the Plickers test than a

paper and pencil style test. We both wondered if the newness of the activity affected

student scores. It is possible that if students continue to take Plickers style tests

throughout the year we would see an increase in test scores with Plickers test taking. It

seems that not all students were certain how they should behave, act, and what they

should do during a Plickers test; while paper test taking behavior and instructions are

stressed in the classroom at all ages.

Lesson Implementation

Both Hussey and Clyma used the technology tool Plickers and paper copies of a

multiple choice test to compare comprehension test scores. We chose three chapters

from three Henry and Mudge books. We created a five-question test for each chapter.

The three tests combined included questions about the different parts of a story,

problem and solution questions, cause and effect, and using details from the text

questions. (See appendix for test questions.)

We began by teaching our students how to use the Plickers tool. Students were

introduced to the cards; students were given individual card numbers that the program

could identify them by, students were shown where the letter answers were found on

the cards, and how to hold them properly in order to have the cards read by the

scanner. We then implemented a very basic practice test that all students would be
able to answer; i.e., Show me answer A. Show me answer B. Show me answer C.

Show me answer D. What is your teachers name? What school do you go to? Doing

this gave students the chance to practice holding their cards properly, see the

immediate visual responses on the Brightlinks board beside their card number, and the

graphic results of each question asked.

To begin the actual testing process, students were each given their own copy of

the text and they read along as teachers read it to them. Clyma used teacher read; I

read, you read and choral reading to allow for understanding of the text. Students were

read to when using both the paper test and the Plickers test. Hussey used teacher read

and choral reading. With students following along with their fingers, she read the

passage first and then read it with the students the second time. Students took the

written test while the teacher read the questions and answers to them. While taking the

written test, students should have answered questions at the same time, but could have

moved ahead of the teacher if they could read for themselves. Students completed the

written test at the beginning of the week. Teachers administered the Plickers test a few

days later. Students were given these two tests for three weeks in order to find a

pattern with test taking strategies as well as to help solidify data and results.

Challenges & Success

We ran into several challenges and some successes throughout this experiment.

We found that the challenges we face everyday in a first grade classroom were present

during both the paper test and the technology infused testing. First grade students

struggle with focus, attention, listening, and distractions. First graders also struggle to

stay still or sit in their chairs. They are still working to master their fine motor skills and
we discovered that Plickers encompasses fine motor skills in a way that pencil and

paper tests do not. We found that using manipulatives help students with engagement

and focus. The visuals used with the Brightlink connection to Plickers kept students

engaged in what they were doing and what was being read to them. We found that

anytime students can read or see using the Brightlinks visual, the lesson is more

successful because student engagement is increased.

In regards to the Plickers directed test, students struggled to hold their cards so

the scanner could read their answers. Students also struggled to double-check their

answers because they could not see their cards while holding them up. Students would

manipulate their cards in multiple ways that gave them incorrect answers, even if they

were attempting to answer with the correct response. However, students were always

excited to take the test in Plickers form and quickly got their Plickers card and were

ready to start without complaining. Clyma had trouble getting the questions to show up

on the Brightlinks board. Sometimes the wrong question was presented on the board

and the screen would not change until students answers were scanned. Plickers would

not load on Clymas iPhone 4 and did not work at all for Clyma until she upgraded her

phone. There was still a delay from the computer and the iPhone while the test was in

progress. Hussey did not experience any of these technical difficulties but admits that

we had to learn all about Plickers in a short amount of time in order to successfully give

the test to students.

In regards to the paper test, our multiple-choice test, while written at a first grade

level, we found that it was challenging for our lower performing students. Although we

read the text and tests to them multiple times, we believe that our students were visually
overwhelmed. Our students often answer questions using one-word or simple sentence

answers. We as teachers do not often use multiple-choice tests as assessment tools.

Multiple-choice is helpful for students who need clues or possible answers, but it is a

great number of words for students who are overwhelmed by tests and longer texts.

Both Clyma and Hussey found that this was not a deterrent for our high performing

students. Children who read consistently above grade level were able to answer the

paper test correctly and did not seem to have any challenges with the format or

wording. Students who we expected to be successful with the paper test answered with

accuracy on the paper test, but were not always as successful with the Plickers test,

which involved more unexpected challenges like fine motor skills, small text, and an

unfamiliar test form.

We also feel the need to point out that our class population is greater than 80%

FRL and has a low SES. The majority of our students come to us below grade level

and face many challenges at home that affect their academic performance. Our classes

have several behavior issues that often make lessons difficult to effectively teach and

we are aware that our children have a deficit in vocabulary and print exposure

compared to a high achieving student. We felt that our first graders coordination and

fine motor skills were a challenge that higher grades would not experience. We

wondered if a fourth grade class would have more immediate success with the Plickers

form of testing. We would also be interested in running this same experiment with our

students at the end of the year to see if the same challenges arise.

We were pleasantly surprised by the enthusiasm we saw during the Plickers test.

It seemed that students were excited simply to have their own card to manipulate.
Students were also pleased to see their answers on the Brightlinks board. Hussey

allowed students to see correct and incorrect answers during one Plickers test and

noticed her students greatly invested once they knew how many they were getting

correct. The immediate feedback helped increase enthusiasm and possibly encouraged

the students to try harder. Clyma found that students were much louder when they

could see who had answered and who had not. Students often shouted at each other

or wanted to make sure that their answer was accounted for. Hussey found that her

students answered all the questions in Plickers form but some did not answer all the

questions on the written form. Students wanted to have an answer, whether correct or

not, when they were taking the test in Plickers form.

Collaboration

We both conducted our lessons during the same three weeks. We discussed

the reading materials and what type of questions to use each week. We created an

outline of three tests and each created our own Plickers test for it. We are both at W.G.

Pearson Elementary and share a TA, so we were able to explain what we wanted to film

and what the structure of the test would be like to her. Hussey created the tests and

explored the Plickers site in detail. Clyma started the paper and created the movie

outline.

We found that collaboration is difficult even being in the same school a few doors

down from each other. Graduate school class assignments and school lesson

assignments kept blending together and we were both overwhelmed by the number of

things we had to do each week. The use of the Google doc and Wikispace pages were

extremely helpful as it allowed us to work on our own time and did not requires us to
meet up every time we wanted to write or publish together. We did meet up a few times

to discuss the type of questions we would have on our test as well as to work on the

Wiki entry, the experiment and testing format, the paper, and the video presentation.
Citations:

Bloom, B. S. (ed.). Taxonomy of Educational Objectives. Vol. 1: Cognitive Domain. New

York: McKay, 1956.

Salmon-Cox, L.. (1981). Teachers and Standardized Achievement Tests: What's Really
Happening?. The Phi Delta Kappan, 62(9), 631634. Retrieved from
http://www.jstor.org/stable/20386059

11 Facts about Literacy in America. (n.d.). Retrieved November 17, 2015, from
https://www.dosomething.org/facts/11-facts-about-literacy-america

Langevin Blog. (2012, June 25). Retrieved November 17, 2015, from
http://www.langevin.com/blog/2012/06/25/how-to-apply-blooms-taxonomy-to-the-
testing-process/

Testing Resources

Rylant, C., & Stevenson, S. (1998). Together in the Fall. In Henry and Mudge under the
Yellow Moon. Pine Plains, N.Y.: Live Oak Media.

Rylant, C., & Stevenson, S. (1999). The Picnic. In Henry and Mudge in the Green Time.
United States: Live Oak Media.

Rylant, C., & Stevenson, S. (1999). Annie Turns Pink. In Henry and Mudge and the
Careful Cousin. United States: Live Oak Media.
Appendix
Henry and Mudge Together in the Fall
Who are the characters in the story?
a. Frog and Toad
b. Henry and Mudge
c. Elizabeth and Clifford
d. Toot and Puddle

What is the setting of the story?

a. summer and the beach
b. winter and the backyard
c. spring and the garden
d. fall and the woods

Whats the most important thing that happens in the story?

a. Mudge licked apples
b. Henry liked the leaves
c. Henry and Mudge liked being together
d. Henry and Mudge took long walks in the woods

What does Henry do when the birds are flying south?

a. count them
b. yell at them
c. sing to them
d. ignore them

Why dont Henry and Mudge ever do things the same way?
a. They like different things.
b. One likes to pick apples and one likes to lick them.
c. One is a boy and the other is a dog.
d. The walks they take are too long.

Henry and Mudge The Picnic

What action happens at the beginning of the story?
a. Henry was stung by a bee and he cried.
b. Henry packed food and they went to the park for a picnic.
c. Mudges tail went Whack! Whack! Whack!
d. Henry cried and Mudge licked his face until his hand stopped
hurting.

What action happens in the middle of the story?

a. Henry was stung by a bee and he cried.
b. Henry packed food and they went to the park for a picnic.
c. Mudges tail went Whack! Whack! Whack!
d. Henry cried and Mudge licked his face until his hand stopped
hurting.

What action happens at the end of the story?

a. Henry was stung by a bee and he cried.
b. Henry packed food and they went to the park for a picnic.
c. Mudges tail went Whack! Whack! Whack!
d. Henry cried and Mudge licked his face until his hand stopped
hurting.

Why did Mudges tail keep whacking the tree?

a. He was chasing ants around a tree and he was so big.
b. He was a very happy dog.
c. He was upset and wanted to go lay down.
d. He was playing the drums with his tail on the tree.
How did Henry feel when Mudge licked his face?
a. Sad
b. Hurt
c. Upset
d. Happy

Henry and Mudge Annie Turns Pink

What was the problem in this story?
a. Henrys room was a mess.
b. Mudge kissed Annie on the face.
c. Henry ate cookies from under the bed.
d. Henrys cousin Annie was going to be with him for a whole day and
night.
What is the solution in this story?
a. Henry tries to make Annie feel welcome.
b. Annie likes fish.
c. Henry gives Annie an old fudge cookie.
d. Annie turns pink.

How does Annie respond to Henry when he offers her an old fudge
cookie?
a. She eats it.
b. She turns pink.
c. She hides under the bed.
d. She goes home.

How did Henry feel when Mudge kissed Annies face and she turned
pink?
a. He felt Mudge was the best dog.
b. He didnt like Annie.
c. He liked that Mudge left drool on Annies cheek.
d. He couldnt believe a person would not like dog kisses.

How did Annie react when Henry opened his bedroom door?
a. She cried because it was so messy.
b. She ran away and hid.
c. She opened her eyes wide, hung her mouth open, smiled and said
Fish!
d. She went into Henrys room and started cleaning it up.