Measuring Technology Readiness and Skills

  • Rhonda Christensen
  • Gerald A. Knezek


Traditional and emerging forms of assessment for measuring technology readiness are ­presented in the context of society’s need for assessing twenty-first century skills. Workforce preparation is identified as a driving force for new forms of assessment, while rapid advances in information technologies offer opportunities for new techniques to emerge. Recent approaches to learning, such as digital game environments, demonstrate that alternative forms of assessment are emerging to fulfill these changing needs. In this chapter the need for technology readiness is introduced in the context of assessing twenty-first century skills. Conceptual and practical considerations are addressed within the categories of foundation skills, technology applications, attitudes toward technology, communicating with technology and digital citizenship. A presentation of emerging assessment techniques leads to discussion of the importance of technology readiness for preparing a productive workforce. In addition, this chapter includes prospects for forms of assessment unique to new digital media.


Technology readiness Twenty-first century skills Digital literacy 


  1. Atomic Learning. (2012). Skills assessment. Atomic Learning. Retrieved from
  2. Baker, E. (2007). The end(s) of testing. Educational Researcher, 36(6), 309–317.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Baker, E. (2011). Towards imagining a coherent, engaging educational system. Presentation to the Taiwan Educational Research Association (TERA) International Conference on Education. Retrieved from
  4. Becker, J. D., Hodge, C. A., & Sepelyak, M. W. (2010). Assessing technology literacy: The case for an authentic, project-based learning approach. Retrieved from
  5. *Brown, C., & Mevs, P. (2012). Quality performance assessment: Harnessing the power of teacher and student learning. Executive summary. Boston MA: Center for Collaborative Education, and Quincy MA: Nellie Mae Education Foundation. Retrieved from
  6. *Casner-Lotto, J., & Barrington, L. (2006). Are they really ready to work? Employersperspectives on the basic knowledge and applied skills of new entrants to the 21st century U.S. Washington, DC: The Conference Board, Inc., the Partnership for 21st Century Skills, Corporate Voices for Working Families, and the Society for Human Resource Management.Google Scholar
  7. Davis, N. E. (2009). The co-evolution of information technology and education. Keynote Presentation to the Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education Annual Conference. Charleston, SC.Google Scholar
  8. Digital Media Learning. (2012). Learning can happen anytime, anyplace, at any age. Badges for Lifelong Learning. Retrieved from
  9. Dodge, B. (2001). Focus: Five rules for writing a great WebQuest. Learning and Leading with Technology, 28(8), 6–9.Google Scholar
  10. EdTech Systems. (2010). Skills21. EdTech Systems. Retrieved from
  11. Edutopia. (2012). Grant Wiggins: Defining assessment. Edutopia. Retrieved from
  12. Ellis, C. (2001). Innovation in education: The increasing digital world – Issues of today and tomorrow. Presentation at the National IT Workforce Convocation of the Information Technology Association of America, San Diego, CA.Google Scholar
  13. *Erstad, O. (2008). Changing assessment practices and the role of IT. In J. Voogt, & G. Knezek (Eds.), International handbook of information technology in primary and secondary education. New York, NY: Springer.Google Scholar
  14. European Computer Driving License Foundation (ECDLF). (2011). ECDL/ICDL for Teachers & Students. Retrieved from
  15. Generation YES. (2011). Generation YES History and Philosophy. Retrieved from
  16. Global Kids. (2012). Badges for learning: An abridged recent history. Retrieved from
  17. Hickey, D. T., Filsecker, M. K., & Kwon, E. J. (2009). Situative considerations of incentives and competition in educational videogames. Paper presented at the Educational Technology Special Interest Group Invited Symposium at the Biennial Meeting of the European Association for Research on Learning and Instruction, Amsterdam, August 2009.Google Scholar
  18. Hickey, D. T., & Itow, R. C. (2012). Re-mediating assessment. Retrieved from
  19. Johnson, L., Adams, S., & Cummins, S. (2012). The NMC horizon report: 2012 higher education edition. Austin, TX: The New Media Consortium.Google Scholar
  20. Jukes, I. (2011). The massive size of Google (Infographic). Retrieved from
  21. Knezek, D. (2011, January 6). ISTE takes technology leadership global for digital-age learning. Presentation to the Hawaii International Research on Education Conference.Google Scholar
  22. Kucharvy, T. (2010). The jobs of today and tomorrow. The Future of U.S. Knowledge Work in a Global Economy. Retrieved from
  23. Lacey, T. A., & Wright, B. (2009). Occupational employment projections to 2018. Monthly Labor Review, 11, 82–123.Google Scholar
  24. Law, N., Pelgrum, W. J., & Plomp, T. (Eds.). (2008). Pedagogy and ICT use in schools around the world: Findings from the IEA SITES 2006 study. Hong Kong: CERC-Springer.Google Scholar
  25. Lawton, J., & Gerschner, V. T. (1982). A review of the literature on attitudes towards computers and computerized instruction. Journal of Research and Development in Education, 16(1), 50–55.Google Scholar
  26. Lester, P. M. (1994–1996). Syntactic theory of visual communication. California State University at Fullerton.Google Scholar
  27. Litzinger, T., Wise, J., Lee, S., & Bjorklund, S. (2003). Assessing readiness for self-directed learning. Proceedings of the 2003 American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference & Exposition. Nashville, Tennessee.Google Scholar
  28. MacArthur Foundation. (2009–2011). Exploring digital media & learning. Chicago, IL: Author.Google Scholar
  29. Manyika, J., Lund, S., Auguste, B., Mendonca, L., Welsh, T., & Ramaswamy, S. (2011). An economy that works: Job creation and America’s future. Washington, DC: McKinsey Global Institute.Google Scholar
  30. Marshall, G., & Cox, M. (2008). Research methods: Their design, applicability and reliability. In J. Voogt & G. Knezek (Eds.), International handbook of information technology in primary and secondary education. New York, NY: Springer.Google Scholar
  31. Martin, F., Gibson, J., & Friesen, O. (2008). Digital Visual literacy: Interdisciplinary skills for the 21st century learner (ID: LIVE0810) EDUCAUSE Live! Webinars, Webinars, May 6, 2008.Google Scholar
  32. McREL. (2010). Blog: Technology literacy assessment. Retrieved from
  33. Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD). (2010). Programme for the International Assessment of Adult Competencies (PIAAC). Paris, France: OECD.Google Scholar
  34. Partnership for 21st Century Skills (P21). (2003). Learning for the 21st century: A report and mile guide for 21st century skills. Washington, DC: Partnership for 21st Century Skills. Retrieved from
  35. Partnership for 21st Century Skills (P21). (2007a). 21st Century skills assessment. Washington, DC: Partnership for 21st Century Skills. Retrieved from
  36. Partnership for 21st Century Skills (P21). (2007b). The international ICT literacy panel, digital. Washington, DC: Partnership for 21st Century Skills. Retrieved from
  37. Resta, P., Searson, M., Patru, M., Knezek, G., & Voogt, J. (Eds.) (2011). Summary report of the EDUsummIT 2011. Invitational summit held at UNESCO, Paris, June 8–10, 2011. Retrieved from
  38. Robles, D. (2011). Who is awarding the disruption badge? The Ingenesist Project. Retrieved from
  39. Russell, M. (2006). Technology and assessment: The tale of two interpretations. Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing.Google Scholar
  40. Schoonenboom, J., Sligte, H., Moghnieh, A., Hernandez-Leo, D., Stefanov, K., Glahn, C., et al. (2008). Supporting life-long competence development using the TENCompetence infrastructure: A first experiment. International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning, 3(1), 53–59.Google Scholar
  41. Sharples, M., Taylor, J., & Vavoula, G. (2007). A theory of learning for the mobile age. In R. Andrews & C. Haythornthwaite (Eds.), The Sage handbook of elearning research (pp. 221–247). London, UK: Sage.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Shute, V. J., Jeong, A. C., Spector, J. M., Seel, N. M., & Johnson, T. E. (2009). Model-based methods for assessment, learning and instruction: Innovative educational technology at Florida State University. In M. Orey, V. J. McClendon, & R. M. Branch (Eds.), Educational media and technology yearbook. New York, NY: Springer.Google Scholar
  43. Spector, J. M. (2012). Foundations of educational technology. New York, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar
  44. Taking a good look at instructional technology (TAGLIT). (2007).
  45. Talbot, D. (2012). Tectonic shifts in employment. Technology Review. Retrieved from
  46. Thompson, S., Thurlow, M., & Moore, M. (2003). Using computer-based tests with students with disabilities (Policy Directions No. 15). Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota, National Center on Educational Outcomes. Retrieved from
  47. van der Linden, W. J., & Glas, C. A. W. (Eds.). (2010). Elements of adaptive testing. New York, NY: Springer.Google Scholar
  48. Voogt, J., & Knezek, G. (Eds.). (2008). The international handbook of information technology in primary and secondary education. New York, NY: Springer.Google Scholar
  49. Voogt, J., Knezek, G., Cox, M., Knezek, D., & ten Brummelhuis, A. (2011). Under what conditions does ICT have a positive effect on teaching and learning? Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 29, 4–14. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2729.2011.00453.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Wiggins, G., & McTighe, J. (2005). Understanding by design. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.Google Scholar
  51. Wilson, M., & Sloane, K. (2000). From principles to practice: An embedded assessment system. Applied Measurement in Education, 13(2), 181–208.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of North TexasDentonUSA

Personalised recommendations