Would You Pass the Information Literacy Test?

Grundelfeldsten writes "The Educational Testing Service -- the maker of the SAT and the GMAT -- has a new test called the Information and Communication literacy assessment. The test is designed to measure your "ability to make sense of the multiple streams of information that our computers throw at us every day," according to a Wired News reporter who just took it and described the process. The questions focus on completing tasks with Internet technologies, like using search engines efficiently and weeding out irrelevant email messages. Are such tasks really tied to technology? Or is "Information and Communication literacy" just a way for ETS to make money by selling more tests?"

Comments

tasks not technology

[godless dave]

At least they got one thing right:

ETS research scientist David Williamson ... noted that the software interfaces were not likely to change to look more like Outlook or any other program. In fact, they were purposely designed to be vendor-neutral. This, he said, places the emphasis on the task and not the technology. "We went to great efforts to make it not like any commercial product," said Williamson. "There are already plenty of commercial product certifications out there that can measure how adept you are at using software. But what we're trying to target is providing only the minimal software functionality that's required to get the task done."

The ETS people at least understand one thing many employers don't: the important computer skills are independent of the various tools used to carry them out. We've all heard (or experienced) horror stories of applicants being turned down for a web developer position because they don't have experience with a specific piece of software (Dreamweaver, for example). Many employers can't grok the fact that someone who knows how to code pages in a text editor will learn Dreamweaver or whatever in-house application is being used in 10 or 15 minutes. Someone who is competent at database admin will be equally competent with MySQL, dBase, or - the most common case - the customized proprietary software that only exists at your company. It's time employers stopped looking at paper certs for competency with specific pieces of software and started looking at actual skills. Maybe ETS can help them do that.

Re:tasks not technology

[akadruid]

We have a million miles to go before we can stop teaching applications and start teaching skills.

You ask a school teacher why 40% of their budget is spent on microsoft products, and the only answer is: "That's what the industry uses, we'd be failing our kids if we taught them anything else". Hence our kids come out knowing MS Word, not word processing, MS Excel, not spreadsheets, and so on, and those kids will be buying MS software for life.

The comparisons are easy: Imagine a school that taught how to use BIC biro, not how to write, a school that taught B&Q tools, not woodwork, how to use Nike sports gear... ... and so on. You can think of a million examples.

Re:"Are such tasks tied to technology"

[onion2k]

I think it's a little more complicated than that. If you look at the task of, for example, checking email and finding spam, you have two options. Either you test whether someone knows what buttons in Outlook to click on, or you show them a client they're never seen before and ask them to figure it out. Testing a user on Outlook is tying the problem to the technology. Testing the user on a new email client is looking for pattern recognition, problem solving, and general logic applied to IT skills.

In my opinion, to be "IT literate" you should be able to transfer skills between applications. Thats what the test ought to be looking for..

Honestly.

[ggvaidya]

is "Information and Communication literacy" just a way for ETS to make money by selling more tests?

Gosh, no, is that the impression you got? Jesus. When a private corporation expands its offerings in order to generate sales, they're always doing it out of the goodness of their hearts. Why, if it had anything to do with making money it'd be ... unethical? Capitalistic? Smart? One of those, I'm sure ...

Companies have a right to make money. That's why they're there.

Re:wrong test

[Viceice]

"multiple streams of information"

I think you misspelled 'advertisements'

Computer Literacy

[SteveTheRed]

My Evil Stepmother once told me that she wanted to go to community college to learn how to "do computer".

She would never pass a test like this. She thinks that AOL is the internet. She also thinks that it is great that there is lots of free (as in spyware, not beer or speech) software out there like gator and comet cursor.

I think that she is an excellent example of a real, average computer user.

Tied to technology?

[TheWormThatFlies]

I don't think that being able to filter out signal from noise on the internet has very much to do with technological know-how. The technology involved is either transparent (if you're a competent computer user) or an obstacle in carrying out the decisions you've made (if you're not a competent computer user).

Whether you are capable of making the right decisions about what information to accept or reject is almost entirely an issue of language skills and reading comprehension.

The people who continue posting their sob-stories as comments to some random guy's blog entry because they're convinced that the blog entry is Maury Povich's homepage aren't doing it because they're confused by Teh Intarweb (although it is a secondary factor); they're doing it because they can't read.

The guy thinking "Why, yes, I would like a penis enlargement; let me send you my credit card number!" would probably be falling for a snail-mail snake-oil scam right now if it weren't for the internet.

People who don't have good language skills are usually oblivious to the mistakes made by others, and thus often can't tell the difference between a genuine official document and something which is obviously not an official document because it is full of spelling and grammar mistakes and makes no sense.

I admit that a familiarity with the types of information sources available on the internet, their usual form, and their relative usefulness and reliablility, is helpful. For example, someone new on the internet may be unaware that nobody ever sends official warnings of danger to random people over email - and so they may be fooled by a well-written email hoax which more knowledgeable people would immediately mark as BS.