MET:Assessment and Electronic Portfolios
This page originally authored by Marc Kampschuur and Phillip Chatterton (2007)
Revised by Katie Hay (2008)
Revised by Ronaye Kooperberg (2014)
Introduction to Assessment and ePortfolios
At the most basic level, assessment is the acquisition and interpretation of information about learning. The assessment process is based on the principles of validity, reliability, flexibility and fairness. An assessment may be formative to facilitate the learning process or summative to conclude on learning outcomes. Accordingly, assessments may reflect both constructivist and positivist learning theory (Barrett, H., Wilkerson, J., 2004).
|Principles||Dissection of Principles|
|Validity||Does the assessment measure what is meant to be measured?|
|Reliability||Does the assessment consistently produce the same measurement?|
|Flexibility||Does the assessment accommodate diverse requirements?|
|Fairness||Does the assessment produce measurements that are free from bias?|
Assessment, when used effectively, not only provides interpretation of information about learning, but it provides the teacher with feedback on individual students, teaching techniques and theories, and even modes of assessment. Effective assessment directs and adapts instruction. It guides capacity building. It moves students forward. It empowers students to take charge of their own learning. It informs students, teachers, and parents about the impact of their efforts (Lafleur, Earl & Katz, 2006).
Electronic portfolios (ePortfolios)
Cotterill et al. (2007) suggest that ePortfolio are a "purposeful collection of information and digital artifacts that demonstrates development or evidences learning outcomes, skills or competencies. The process of producing an ePortfolio (writing, typing, recording etc.) usually requires the synthesis of ideas, reflection on achievements, self-awareness and forward planning; with the potential for educational, developmental and/or other benefits. Electronic portfolios have many different names, they are also known as digital portfolios, eportfolios, E-Portfolios, and online portfolios. No matter the name, they all provide the same learner-centered acquisition of knowledge.
ePortfolios support both formative and summative assessment in the application of constructivist and positivist learning theories. The assessment tools available to ePortfolios are consistent with the principles of assessment.
Characteristics of ePortfolios
An ePortfolio is a compilation of concrete artifacts that document learning over time. ePortfolio artifacts take the form of text, graphics, animation, video and audio in response to individual learning styles. The selection of artifacts for inclusion reflects constructivist learning theory while the collection of artifacts reflects positivist learning theory. The temporal characteristic of an ePortfolio affords learners the ability to reflect, reorganize, rework and integrate learning objects.
Connections to Learning Theories
Using ePortfolios as part of the assessment process requires advance planning to address pacing, feedback and learning quality. Both positivist and constructivist learning theories influence the implementation of ePortfolios as assessment in competing ways. Positivist-influenced ePortfolios will put emphasis on student demonstration of learning outcomes. Constructivist-influenced ePortfolios value the reflective nature of the student-selected content (Barrett & Wilkerson, 2004). It is up to the facilitator to set clear parameters as to the learning that is being assessed prior to student ePortfolio development.
Positivist theory suggests the purpose of ePortfolio affordances is to assess learning outcomes. Therefore, the ePortfolio is the final product presented of the student's knowledge on the specific outcome (So & Ng, 2011). Assessment of positivist portfolios utilizes concrete and objective tools such as artifacts and rubrics. Rubrics may be specific, to assess a defined learning outcome, or holistic to assess the portfolio in its entirety (Barrett, H., Wilkerson, J., 2004).
Constructivist theory, specifically Vygotsky's Social Constructivism, perceives ePortfolios as a social learning environment. The learner constructs meaning through interaction with this environment, whereby the portfolio represents a learning process and record of individual or collective thought. (Barrett, H., Wilkerson, J., 2004). Assessment of constructivist portfolios utilizes self-assessment through reflection and peer evaluation.
|Focus||End result of learning||Process of learning|
|Emphasis||Understanding patterns of cause and effect||Analytical and problem solving skills|
|Process||Learn through the recognition of patterns||Learn through assimilation and accommodation|
Assessment Techniques for ePortfolios
As ePortfolios are learner-centered and reflective in nature, it is logical to assume assessment must be as diverse as the archived content. Assessment of an ePortfolio can take the form of self or peer assessment as well as by educators and external reviewers. The assessments can be informal, as well as formal, and utilize rubrics, learning goals and learning outcomes. According to San Fransisco State University, a program-based ePortfolio, may be reviewed by a panel. This final review of ePortfolios would assess completeness, or evidence of integrative learning, even though the individual artifacts and reflections have already been given grades from the instructors who assigned them. An oral presentation of the portfolio may also be a part of your assessment strategy (San Franscisco State University, ePortfolios).
Assessment tools assign proficiency levels to learners. Proficiency levels may be assigned analytically or holistically. The choice of assessment tool should be communicated with the learner prior to artifact gathering. This must reflect the design of the portfolio and the learning theory endorsed by the teacher, program, and/or institution.
A wide selection of software exists to help develop and assess E-Portfolios.
Positivist Assessment Tools
Rubrics can be broadly defined as "[a] scoring scale used to assess student performance along a task-specific set of criteria" (Mueller, J. 2007, p1). Rubrics may be used as formative and summative assessment completed by self, peers or experts. Rubrics for assessing ePortfolios must take into consideration the learning outcomes and the previously communicated requirements for the students.
The following ePortfolio rubric samples assess multiple perspectives:
- General ePortfolio Rubric Number 3. This rubric takes into consideration technological choices from the student, reflection, artifacts and mechanics of an ePortfolio.
- ePortfolio Rubric for General or Course-Based Learning. This rubric provides the assessor with multiple general categories. These focus not only on artifacts and reflection but the general layout, design, and functionality of the ePortfolio.
Artifacts are data elements or "educational experiences" which illustrate the contextual evidence of the learner’s expertise. In contrast to rubrics that measure proficiency on a specified criterion, the artifact itself is proof of the level of mastery. These artifacts take various forms including electronic quizzes, assignments, and projects to provide summative assessment. Cleveland State University (2011) has complied a list of potential artifacts their education students could potentially use to demonstrate comprehension of certain criteria. For example, to demonstrate students understand classroom communication, the student could use a audio or visual recording of their understanding as an artifact or the student could provide a reflective writing piece to conceptualize their understanding.
Student learning outcomes communicate the knowledge, skills, and abilities as outcomes for a learner to attain in a particular course, program, or institution. Outcomes must be communicated as specifically as possible and should clearly instruct the students of the facilitator's expectations. The University of Toronto (n.d.) has excellent resources which provide examples of learning outcomes.
Constructivist Assessment Tools
The Reflective Process is a strategy for students to formulate a thought or idea based on personal experience, concepts, theories, or artifact after meditation on a topic. Reflection is a formative process as "it explains the reasons why a student chooses a particular artifact for the portfolio, helping students to understand how they learn and what they have learned." (Johnson-Taylor, S., 2007). E-Portfolios afford reflection in various forms including journals, blogs, discussions and presentations. Reflection may be assessed in these forms through rubrics and learning outcomes.
To facilitate the reflective process in students, Carrington & Selva (2010) have complied a list of tools to assist this process. It is suggested that extensive journal writing, scaffolding questioning to foster thinking and provide feedback, and to use the 5Rs framework. The 5Rs framework suggests that students report, respond, relate, reason and reconstruct their writing and in such become increasingly reflective.
Peer Evaluation is an important stage in the social context of learning. Sharing ideas, continued discussion and feedback can provide the learner with an increased understanding of learning outcomes, artifacts, or differing view points. Peer evaluation provides a collaborative process which can assist a learner in the clarification of goals, to demonstrate improvement, and to encourage the learner to take responsibility for their learning (Cambridge Regional College, 2011). Peer evaluation is thus formative as it assesses and enhances learning.
Advantages and Disadvantages of ePortfolios
ePortfolios permit the expression of learning through multiple learning styles and utilize positivist and constructivist learning theories. ePortfolios support complex exploratory learning outcomes in a non-competitive collaborative learning environment. Summative feedback is expressed in a manner that is easier for external parties to comprehend, increasing its utility to stakeholders. Formative feedback provides guidance to the learner and expert which furthers learning and appropriate use of scaffolding. The ePortfolio is intrinsically motivational as it provides concrete evidence of progressive learning across a cross section of knowledge and skills. (Sewell, M. Marczak, M. & Horn, M., 2007)
Stakeholders can be skeptical of ambiguous learning outcomes and assessment. The selection of artifacts compiled in the ePortfolio may not be representative of learning outcomes. The digital nature of the learning artifacts may also reduce validity through the possibility of plagiarism. The digital medium removes the possibility to assess non-verbal cues. ePortfolios require hardware and software for production and publication, thus requiring the development of specific skill sets and funding. (Sewell, M. Marczak, M. & Horn, M., 2007)
Advances in ePortfolios
Weblog-Based Electronic Porfolios (WBEP)
Educators are now turning towards blogs to take the place of the reflection portion of electronic portfolios. Chuang (2010) suggests that the nature of ePortfolios could have the potential to become a solitary activity which contradicts the social learning of Vygotsky's Constructivist theory (p. 214). It is argued that the design affordances of a blog (ease of creation, editing and the immediacy of comments and feedback) provide the student with an increasingly communicative and reflective tool.
Web 2.0 and Electronic Portfolios
Many of the advancements of ePortfolios have been implemented due to the advancements of the web. Katie Ash, suggests that "Web 2.0 and other technology tools are making it quicker and easier than ever to create digital portfolios of student work—a method of showcasing student progress that experts say increases student engagement; promotes a continuing conversation about learning between teachers, parents, and students; and extends academic lessons beyond school walls". Social writing platforms, such as blogs, assist many areas of education. Alexander (2006) writes that social writing platforms are useful for student group learning to faculty department work. Utimately, he suggests that peer evaluation and editing are more accessible than ever for students.
Individual ePortfolios can highlight the students written work, artistic renderings, video and sound files, or images. This ePortfoliorepresents the culminating research from a Boston University graduate student. In this example, the student has provided examples of writing, images and reflection.
Functions within the ePortfolio reflect positivist (artifacts, learning outcomes) and constructivist (threaded discussions, peer evaluations) learning theories. These functions allow for a flexible assessment methodology.
Program and Institutional E-Portfolios
Program Accreditation: Quinsigamond Community College Dental Program Portfolio
Institutional Accreditation: Missouri State University Accreditation Portfolio
Stop Motion Video Links
Introductory Video to assessment and ePortfolios https://youtu.be/5Nr_ifun7uE
Individual Student Portfolio, Boston University.
E-Portfolio Information, E-Portfolio.com.
Peer Evaluation of Portfolios, University of Washington.
Constructivism Links, University of Denver.
Alexander, Bryan. (2006). Web 2.0: A new wave of innovation for teaching and learning? Educause Review. March-April 2006, 33-44.
Ash, K. (2011). E-portfolios evolve thanks to web 2.0 tools. Education Weekly, 4(03). Retrieved from http://www.edweek.org/dd/articles/2011/06/15/03e-portfolio.h04.html
Barrett, H.C. & Wilkerson, J. (2004). Conflicting paradigms in electronic portfolio approaches. Retrieved from http://electronicportfolios.com/systems/paradigms.html
Cambridge Regional College. (2011). Formative teaching methods. Retrieved from http://www.teacherstoolbox.co.uk/T_Formative_teaching_methods.html
Canada, M. (2002). Assessing e-folios in the on-line class. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, n91 p69-75. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. EJ655874).
Carrington, S. & Selva, G. (2010). Critical social theory and transformative learning: Evidence in pre-service teachers' service-learning reflection logs. Higher Education Reserach & Development, 29(1), 45-57.
Cleveland State University. (2011). e-Portfolios. What are artifacts. Retrieved from http://www.csuohio.edu/cehs/students/eportfolio/docs/artifacts.pdf
Elon University Website. (2007). Retrieved from http://www.elon.edu/students/portfolio/what.asp
Chuang, H. H.(2010). Weblog-based electronic portfolios for student teachers in Taiwan. Educational Technology Research and Development, Vol. 58, No. 2 (April 2010). Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/40603157
Fenwick, Tara J. (1996). Assessing adult learning using portfolios. Nova Scotia: Atlantic Teaching Showcase Conference. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 400462).
Fenwick, T. & Parsons, J. (1999). Using portfolios to assess learning. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED428398).
Hollyman, D. (2007). Jerome Bruner, A Web Overview. Retrieved from http://au.geocities.com/vanunoo/Humannature/bruner.html
Kerka, S.; Wonacott, M (2000). Assessing Learners Online. Practitioner File. Columbus, OH: ERIC Clearing house on Adult, Career, and Vocational Education. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 448285).
Lafleur, C., Earl, L., & Katz, S. (2006). Classroom assessment for learning. Orbit, 36(1). Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com.ezproxy.library.ubc.ca/docview/213740944?accountid=14656
Liaw, Shu-Sheng (2004). Considerations for developing constructivist web-based learning. International Journal of Instructional Media, v31 n3 p309 Sum 2004. (EJ725544).
Liu C. & Tsai C. (2005). Peer assessment through web-based knowledge acquisition: tools to support conceptual awareness. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, Vol. 42, No. 1 p43–59. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. EJ719441).
Lorenzo, G. and Ittelson, J. (2006). An overview of institutional portfolios. The EDUCAUSE Learning Initiative, October 2005. Retrieved from http://www.educause.edu/ir/library/pdf/ELI3002.pdf
Lorenzo, G. and Ittelson, J. (2006). Demonstrating and assessing student learning with e-portfolios. The EDUCAUSE Learning Initiative, October 2005. Retrieved from http://www.educause.edu/ir/library/pdf/ELI3003.pdf
Mason R., Pegler C. & Weller M. (2004). E-portfolios: an assessment tool for online courses. Oxford: British Journal of Educational Technology v35 n6 p717-727.
Milheim K. (2004). Strategies for designing on-line courseware. International Journal of Instructional Media Vol. 31(3) p.267-272. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. EJ725540).
Roeber, E. (2002). Setting Standards on Alternate Assessments. Synthesis Report. Minneapolis, MN. National Center on Educational Outcomes. (ERIC Document
San Franscisco State University (n.d.) e-Portfolio academic technology. Retrieved from http://at.sfsu.edu/eportfolio/faculty_assess#3
Schwartz, P. & Graham,W. (2002) Assessment: Case Studies, Experience and Practice in Higher Education, Routledge, NY.
Sewell, M. Marczak, M. & Horn, M. (2007) The Use of Portfolio Assessment in Evaluation, The University of Arizona Web Site http://ag.arizona.edu/fcs/cyfernet/cyfar/Portfo%7E3.htm
Sing, C. & Der-Thanq, V. (2004). A Review on Usability Evaluation Methods for Instructional Multimedia: An Analytical Framework. International Journal of Instructional Media, v31 n3 p229-240. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. EJ725537).
So, C. & Ng, M.A. (2011). Positivism & constructivism: epistemology and the design of learning environments [PowerPoint slides]. Retrieved from http://www.slideshare.net/technclassLA/positivism-constructivism-3140096
Springfield, E. (2007) University of Michigan School of Nursing. Retrieved from http://www.nursing.umich.edu/facultyresources/ePort/stuPfolios.html
Vandervelde, J. (2008). E-portfolio rubric. Retrieved from http://www.uwstout.edu/soe/profdev/eportfoliorubric.html