Yes, I have used Authentic Assessments. I find them refreshing and they make the connection with real-live experiences. This makes the course relevant and it carries learning beyond the classroom. I also find that the authenticity allows what is learned to be remembered longer. I believe this is because it has a basis in reality and not hypothesis, theories, or abstraction.

I find using evaluations that are objective provide an opportunity to teach while you are testing. What I mean by this is the answer to the question is somewhere within the test. So, students are given an opportunity to perform critical thinking to dismiss the incorrect answers and recall the correct answer while taking the test. This is tantamount to "teaching while testing".

The words "summative" versus "formative" is self-explantory. But, the words "assessment" versus "evaluation" are used interchangeably in many cases, so distinguishing between the two is difficult for most educators. Would you agree?

I have taught using technology to both young and old. I found to my surprise that the older students (i.e. senior citizens; greater than 65 years old) are more interested in learning technology to participate than students in their thirties. Has anyone found this same phenomenom?

I wonder if course revisions are also dependent upon the student cohort. In other words, if it is noted that the student are not familiar with material from a prerequisite course,then would it be necessary to provide remediation from the prerequisite course?

I am concerned that peer assessment exposes students to their peers shortcomings and errors. Could this defeat the purpose of learning from one another and encouraging one another?

Scaffolding involves building upon a students prior knowledge. One way to determine students prior knowledge is to conduct a pretest or prerequisites assessment. Would you agree?

I generally view a framework as a foundation upon which you build the course. So, how is the framework different from a course outline?

I wonder if resolving online conflicts is difficult because students are attempting to be disruptive. This technique takes the focus off of their academic shortcomings as they attempt to discredit the instructor.