Reimagining Assessments to Supercharge Learning Adobe Express & Adobe Firefly Gen AI Series | Justin Hodgson

Why "the digital" Matters

Bringing creative technologies into the classroom can fundamentally expand students capacities of expression and allow them to engage with course content, ideas, and practices in new ways.

• INCLUSIVITY - The digital divide is most pronounced across issues of Race, Gender, and Class. When we fail to integrate digital literacy into higher education, we create double-jeopardy digital inequity (McLay & Reyes, 2019): a process by which we unintentionally widen that gap.
• ENGAGEMENT - Bringing digital literacy/digital creativity practices in the classroom has a positive impact on student engagement, performance, and retention. This is even more pronounced (nearly 2 times more) for BIPOC and first generation students (Civitas, Adobe, and UT San Antonio, 2020).
• ACCOUNTABILITY - In a 2022 survey, over 80% of Students, Faculty, and Administrators agree/strongly agree that teaching digital literacy skills should be part of the curriculum (Chronicle of Higher Ed, 2022).

A Few Different Approaches to Engagement

Low-Stakes to High-Impact ACTIVITIES

Example: What does a Scientist Look Like?

• From sketches to creations (Text-to-Image in Adobe Express)

Workflow: Select "Text to Image"; Type in description; Click "Generate"; Select "Generate more"

BONUS CONTENT: Demo for extending the "Identity" Activity

The video below shows a workflow that uses Generative Fill, Remove Background, and Text-to-Image to put myself into the identity activity.

Low-to-Mid Stakes Activity/Assignments

Example: From Discussion Boards to Express Posters/Infographic Brochures

High Impact Projects

Example: Digital Monuments Project via Adobe Express + Minecraft EDU

3 Alternative Approaches to Assessment

Ungrading

Ungrading places the focus on feedback (and multiple avenues for feedback) and student learning and development, instead of the grade. It champions reflection as a critical value in learning and empowers students to situate their own learning in relation to course, unit, and even assignment-specific learning objectives. It is commonly used in conjunction with some form of specifications (or SPECS) grading.

• For a quick overview, see "What is ungrading" by Amy Kenyon (Duke University)
• For a more in-depth exploration, see the many works of Susan D. Blum (Notre Dame) -- specifically Ungrading: Why Rating Students Undermines Learning (and What to Do Instead)

Specs Grading

Specifications Grading, or Specs Grading, shifts the focus from subjective assessment to mastery or competency based evaluations. It often operates on a pass/fail structure (with some examples using Exceeds/Meets/Somewhat Meets expectations as a model) and invites faculty to bundle assignments and activities into modules that progressively demonstrate course or unit learning outcomes. Its purest form allows students to determine the level of achievement they want to pursue (i.e., A vs. B vs. C etc.) and complete the modules that fulfill the expectations of that grade.

• Specs grading is achievement / completion based, allows for mapping activities / assignments directly into learning outcomes, and can work to destress student anxiety related to digital projects by making the measures for success clear.
• Specs gradings requires instructors to provide very detailed specifications for meeting the expectations of a successful assignment/activity (i.e., what counts as passing, and at what level).
• For a quick overview on Specs Grading, see "What is Specification Grading and Why Should You Consider it?" by Macie Hall (Johns Hopkins University)
• For a fuller exploration, see the work of Linda Nilson (Clemson University) - particularly, Specifications Grading: Restoring Rigor, Motivating Students, and Saving Faculty Time

An Ecology Heuristic | Kuhn+2 Model

Kuhn+2 Model provides a a wholistic set of interrelated criteria (and prompting questions) for responding to digital projects, anchoring the assessment conceptually and rhetorically. The model itself comes from the work of Virginia Kuhn (2008), "The Components of Scholarly Multimedia." In 2010, working in specific relation to the Institute for Multimedia Literacy programs at the University of Southern California, the model was extended by Kuhn, with DJ Johnson and David Lopez (see "Speaking with Students: Profiles in Digital Pedagogy"). Then Cheryl Ball (2012) refined it further in "Assessing Scholarly Multimedia." The six areas: Conceptual Core, Research Component, Form & Content, Creative Realization, Audience, & Timeliness (see below).

Conceptual Core

• What is the project's controlling idea? Is it apparent in the work?
• Is the project productively aligned with one or more multimedia genres? (If so, what are they? How do you know?)
• Does the project effectively engage with the primary issue of the subject area into which it is intervening?

Research Component

• Does the project display evidence of substantive research and thoughtful engagement with the subject matter?
• Does it use a variety of credible (and appropriate) sources and cite them appropriately?
• Does the project deploy more than one approach to the issue?

Form & Content

• Does the project's structural/formal elements serve the conceptual core?
• Does the project's design decisions appear deliberate and controlled? Are they defensible?
• Is the project's efficacy unencumbered by technical problems?

Creative Realization

• Does the project approach the subject in a creative or innovative manner?
• Does the project use media and design principles effectively?
• Does the project achieve significant goals that could not be realized on paper?

Audience

• Is the target audience for the project apparent in the work?
• Does the project work at the appropriate levels (of language, design, function, etc.) for its target audience?
• Has the project been created with an attentiveness to the experience it offers its targeted audience?

Timeliness

• Is the project timely in its engagement/focus?
• If not, does the project attempt to demonstrate why it is relevant to contemporary matters/concerns?

Justin Hodgson, Ph.D.

Justin Hodgson is an award-winning educator and digital transformation leader at Indiana University, where he directs the Digital Gardener Initiative — a system-wide series of programs designed to integrate digital literacy, digital creativity, and digital learning into the curriculum.

Dr. Hodgson is also an Associate Professor of Digital Rhetoric and creator of the Online Composition program at IU Bloomington, the founding editor of JUMP+ (the Journal for Undergraduate Multimedia Projects), and a digital innovation and faculty development specialist.

Mia Freeman

Mia Freeman is an undergraduate at Indiana University studying neuroscience and business management. She’s interested in storytelling through both digital and written rhetoric, and she believes that to best serve a diverse and intersectional population it’s essential to be multidisciplinary.