E-Portfolios+and+Assessment

The information on this page is compiled from the following research paper. // White Paper: Researching Electronic Portfolios and Learner Engagement -3- // // ©2005, Helen C. Barrett, Ph.D. // **History** The term "portfolio assessment" in education emerged in the late 1980s, primarily in college writing classrooms (Belanoff, Elbow, 1991) to address the needs for accountability: the emphasis on portfolio **//assessment//**. As portfolios began to be incorporated into K-12 classrooms, the emphasis was more on portfolios as a showcase for learning, as a counterpoint to traditional forms of assessment, or to illuminate capabilities not covered by standardized testing: the emphasis on **//portfolio//** assessment.

According to Kathleen Blake Yancey and Irwin Weiser (1997), those purposes are becoming reversed, with post-secondary institutions exploring the wide varieties of purposes for portfolios (learning, advising, employment) and with state departments of education (Kentucky, Vermont, Connecticut) designing statewide models of student portfolios for statewide assessment.

In their synthesis of "Portfolio Research: A Slim Collection, " Herman and Winters (1994) note the following:

Well-designed portfolios represent important, contextualized learning that requires complex thinking and expressive skills. Traditional tests have been criticized as being insensitive to local curriculum and instruction, and assessing not only student achievement but aptitude. Portfolios are being heralded as vehicles that provide a more equitable and sensitive portrait of what students know and are able to do. Portfolios encourage teachers and schools to focus on important student outcomes, provide parents and the community with credible evidence of student achievement, and inform policy and practice at every level of the educational system. (Educational Leadership, October 1994, pp. 48-55) These authors go on to discuss the **lack of empirical evidence to support these claims**. Joanne Carney (2001) noted in the literature review for her dissertation that the research literature on portfolios has not changed much in the seven years since Herman & Winters published their article. Collections of writing are considered here as a special case of a class of new performance assessments known as “portfolio assessments.” Although models of portfolio assessment differ, it is common practice that students’ classroom work and their reflections on that work are assembled as evidence of growth and achievement. The goal is to produce richer and more valid assessments of students’ competencies than are possible from traditional testing… However, **little is known regarding the capacity of portfolio assessments to support judgments that are valid for large-scale [assessment] purposes**. (Novak, Herman & Gearhart, 1996) **To effectively use portfolios for assessment, a learning organization needs to establish a culture of evidence.** Evidence in an electronic portfolio is not only the artifacts that a learner places there, but also the accompanying rationale that the learner provides: their argument as to why these artifacts constitute evidence of achieving specific goals, outcomes or standards. Furthermore, just because a learner makes the claim that their artifacts are evidence of achievement, in "high stakes" environments, **the evidence needs to be validated by a trained evaluator, using a well-developed rubric with identifiable and specific criteria.** This process can be represented by a simple formula: Evidence = Artifacts + Reflection (Rationale) + Validation (Feedback) (Barrett, 2003).

**How do we match the needs of the institution for valid and reliable data for accreditation and accountability while still meeting the needs of learners for formative assessment to enhance and support the learning process?**


 * The Challenge and the Solution **

**The challenge** is to find electronic portfolio strategies that meet the needs of


 * the students, to support this deep learning,
 * and to give the institution the information they need for assessment and reporting purposes.

Barrett proposes a systems model that shows how portfolios can be used for both summative and formative assessment. See the White Paper PDF on the references page.Barrett's White Paper **Research Based Principles of Assessment For Learning** Here is a comparison of these two key assessment purposes, based on work done in Britain (see http://www.assessment-reform-group.org.uk ):
 * E-Porfolios and Formative and Summative Assessment **
 * part of effective planning of teaching and learning
 * focus on how students learn
 * recognized as central to classroom practice
 * regarded as a key professional skill for teachers
 * should be sensitive and constructive because any assessment has an emotional impact
 * take account of the importance of (and foster) learner motivation
 * promote commitment to learning goals and a shared understanding of the criteria by which they are assessed
 * develop learners’ capacity for self-assessment so that they can become reflective and self-managing
 * recognize the full range of achievements of all learners
 * Learners should receive constructive guidance about how to improve

|| involved in daily learning and teaching || Is designed to assist teachers and students. || digestible numbers, scores and grades || Usually detailed, specific and descriptive feedback in words (instead of numbers, scores and grades) || with either other students or the 'standard' for a grade level || Usually focused on improvement, compared with the student's 'previous best' and progress toward a standard || most able to improve learning ||
 * ** Assessment of Learning ** (Summative) || ** Assessment for Learning **(Formative)
 * Checks what has been learned to date || Checks learning to decide what to do next ||
 * Is designed for those not directly
 * Is presented in a formal report || Is used in conversation about learning ||
 * Usually gathers information into easily
 * Usually compares the student's learning
 * Does not need to involve the student || Needs to involve the student -- the person

** How does Assessment for Learning relate to electronic portfolios? ** The issues of using portfolios for high stakes assessment have already been discussed by Wilkerson and Lang (2003) ……. To be effectively used to support assessment for learning, electronic portfolios need to support the learner's ongoing learning. Here is Barrett's comparison of electronic portfolios used as assessment of learning with those that support assessment for learning: || ** Portfolios that support Assessment for ** || institution || Purpose of portfolio agreed upon with learner || determine outcomes of instruction || Artifacts selected by learner to tell the story of their learning || a class, term or program - time limited || Portfolio maintained on an ongoing basis throughout the class, term or program - time flexible || based on a rubric and quantitative data is collected for external audiences || Portfolio and artifacts reviewed with learner and used to provide feedback to improve learning || set of outcomes, goals or standards || Portfolio organization is determined by learner or negotiated with mentor/advisor/teacher || decisions || Rarely used for high stakes decisions || date? (Past to present) || Formative - what are the learning needs in the future? (Present to future) || learner || learner can choose ||
 * ** Portfolios used for Assessment of **
 * Learning (Summative) **
 * Learning (Formative) **
 * Purpose of portfolio prescribed by
 * Artifacts mandated by institution to
 * Portfolio usually developed at the end of
 * Portfolio and/or artifacts usually "scored"
 * Portfolio is usually structured around a
 * Sometimes used to make high stakes
 * Summative - what has been learned to
 * Requires Extrinsic motivation || Fosters Intrinsic motivation - engages the
 * Audience: external - little choice || Audience: learner, family, friends -


 * Issues relating to the use of electronic portfolios for assessment **
 * This material comes from** A Review Of The Literature On Portfolios And Electronic Portfolios Philippa Butler, eCDF ePortfolio Project Massey University College of Education Palmerston North, New Zealand October 2006 (see below)


 * Authenticity of student work **
 * Difficulty in authenticating evidence in student portfolios - is it really the work of the student in question? Abrami and Barrett (2005)
 * Technical Expertise of Users **
 * The level of student technical expertise may unfairly disadvantage some students, and the danger is that students will end in being assessed more on their technology prowess. Abrami and Barrett (2005)
 * Hauge (2006), in his study on electronic portfolio use in Norwegian teacher education, found that students with high levels of computer experience found electronic portfolios easiest to use, but that students without such experience did eventually catch up.
 * Students need technology skills or adequate training to gain those skills, and that technical problems with software or equipment can be very frustrating and stressful Heath (2005) and Pecheone et al. (2005)
 * An electronic portfolio system needs to be extremely flexible so that it can be adapted to fit students’ levels of technical skill, improvements in their skills and confidence over time, and their preferred styles of working. “It may well be the case that the present generation of template-driven e-portfolios will turn out to be too restrictive for many students as they gain skills in gathering and presenting their work and experiences” Tosh, Light, Fleming and Haywood (2005)


 * Evaluation & Assessment **
 * Difficulty for evaluators in judging the quantity and quality of evidence in a digital environment. Abrami and Barrett (2005); Lorenzo and Ittleson (2005a, pp. 4-5)
 * Students should be provided with the assessment criteria before they begin the portfolio process. Carliner (2005)
 * Knowing how the electronic portfolio will be assessed is also important, yet it cannot be seen as ‘just another assignment’, or students will focus on meeting the assessment criteria to the detriment of thinking critically about their learning journey. Tosh, Light, Fleming and Haywood (2005)
 * “clear rubrics and scaffolding for students on how to reflect so that they internalize the benefits of reflective practice are clearly needed if this approach to learning is going to be embraced by most learners”. Tosh, Light, Fleming and Haywood (2005)

E-Portfolios and Assessment.
video:

media type="custom" key="5100163"