What is A Portfolio Assessment?

In the ever-evolving landscape of education, the concepts of portfolio and portfolio assessment have garnered significant attention as comprehensive tools for evaluating student growth. This post delves into the intricacies of portfolio assessment, drawing primarily on the insightful research presented in the works of Valeri-Gold et al. (1991/1992) and Gillespie et al. (1996). These papers offer a deep dive into the benefits and challenges of portfolio assessment in educational settings.

Portfolios, particularly as instruments of formative assessment, stand out for their ability to track and assess student progress over extended periods. Unlike summative assessments and standardized tests, which often fail to capture the nuanced development of students, portfolios offer a more holistic and continuous evaluation method.

As highlighted by Valeri-Gold et al., traditional forms of objective, timed assessments are “inadequate for decisions involving student progress” (p. 298). This statement underscores the need for more dynamic and flexible assessment tools that can truly reflect the multifaceted nature of learning and growth.

In exploring these themes, this post will navigate through the advantages of portfolio assessment, such as fostering reflective learning and promoting a deeper understanding of the interplay between various academic skills. Simultaneously, it will address the challenges and potential pitfalls, including increased workload for educators and the complexities involved in portfolio management and evaluation. By balancing these perspectives, the aim is to present a comprehensive view of portfolio assessment as a valuable educational tool, capable of enhancing the learning experience for both students and teachers.

What is a Portfolio?

In the context of education and learning, the term ‘portfolio’ takes on a distinct meaning, separate from its use in finance and investment. A portfolio in education is aptly defined by Gillespie et al. (1996) as “meaningful collections of students’ work over time” (p. 481). This definition, while straightforward, lays the groundwork for a more in-depth understanding of the concept.

Delving deeper, Tierney, Carter, and Desai (1991) offer a nuanced perspective, describing a portfolio as “tangible evidence of accomplishments and skills that must be updated as a person changes and grows” (p. 43, cited in Gillespie et al., 1996, p.481). This definition highlights the evolving nature of a portfolio, reflecting the continuous development of a learner.

Meyer, Schuman, and Angello (1990) provide an even more comprehensive definition: a portfolio is a “purposeful collection of student work, exhibiting to the student and others the student’s efforts, progress or achievement in selected areas.” This includes essential elements such as student involvement in content selection, criteria for both selection and judging merit, and crucially, evidence of student self-reflection (p.3, cited in Gillespie et al., 1996, p. 481).

Further expanding on this concept, Paulson, Paulson, and Meyer (1991) define a portfolio as a collection that not only showcases a student’s efforts, progress, and achievements but also involves the student actively in the process. This participation includes choosing what goes into the portfolio, establishing the criteria for this selection, and reflecting on the work included.

They emphasize that a portfolio “provides a complex and comprehensive view of student performance in context,” transforming the student from a passive subject of assessment to an active participant. This approach fosters independent, self-directed learning, an essential skill in the educational journey (pp. 60-63, cited in Gillespie et al., 1996, p. 482).

These definitions collectively underscore the portfolio’s role as a dynamic, reflective, and participatory tool in the educational process, far removed from its financial counterpart.

Related: Best Digital Portfolio Tools for Students

Advantages of Portfolios

Recent studies, as synthesized by Valeri-Gold et al. (1991/1992), highlight the beneficial role of portfolios across various educational stages, from early schooling to higher education. Some of these advantages include:

• Diverse Educational Impact: Research shows portfolios positively affect students from kindergarten to college, enhancing learning across various age groups.
• Holistic Learning Documentation: They serve as comprehensive collections of student work, showcasing a range of reading and writing activities.
• Customized Teaching Tool: Portfolios facilitate individualized instruction and self-assessment, aiding in personalized educational approaches.
• Collaborative Learning: They foster collaboration between teachers and students, deepening the understanding of reading and writing development.
• Progress Tracking: Portfolios provide a record of both quantitative and qualitative student performance over time.
• Varied Learning Environments: Encourage participation in different learning settings, from instructional to individualized.

Key Considerations for Implementing Portfolios in Class

Valerie-Gold et al. (1991/1992) talk about five questions that teachers need to address in order to integrate portfolios in (college level) classrooms. These questions cover the following areas: structure, content, assessment timing and methods, evaluation and scoring, and portfolio’s fate post-term. These questions are

1. What kind of structure will the portfolio have?

• The structure of the portfolio should be designed to align with the course objectives and learning outcomes. Teachers must decide whether the portfolio will be digital or physical, thematic or chronological, and how it will reflect the overall progression of the student’s learning journey.

2. What evidence will the portfolio contain?

• Deciding on the evidence to include in the portfolio is crucial. This could range from written assignments, project reports, to reflective essays. The chosen content should demonstrate the student’s skills, knowledge, and personal growth throughout the course.

3. How and when the classroom teacher assess student’s works in the portfolio?

• Teachers need to establish clear guidelines on how and when the portfolio will be reviewed. This might involve periodic reviews throughout the term, allowing for ongoing feedback, or a summative assessment at key milestones. The assessment criteria should be transparent and consistent.

4. How will the portfolio be evaluated and scored?

• Determining how the portfolio will be evaluated involves setting clear, objective criteria that align with the learning goals. This might include rubrics that address various aspects of the work, such as creativity, analytical skills, and depth of reflection. The scoring system should be fair and should ideally encourage self-assessment by the student.

5. What will happen to the portfolio at the end of the term?

• Finally, deciding what happens to the portfolio after the term is vital. Options include returning it to the student as a record of their work, using it as a tool for future course development, or having students present their portfolios as part of a final showcase or review session.

While Valerie-Gold et al. originally conceptualized their framework with a focus on college classrooms, the universality and adaptability of their approach make it highly relevant for other educational levels as well. This is precisely why I find it important to share their insights here. The framework’s emphasis on structure, content, assessment, evaluation, and post-term utilization of portfolios offers valuable guidance that can be effectively applied across a wide spectrum of educational settings, from primary to high school levels.

What is a Portfolio Assessment?

Portfolio assessment, a multifaceted educational tool, has been defined through various scholarly lenses. Valeri-Gold et al. (1991/1992) describe it as a formative assessment technique where students transform into “active learners and questioning thinkers” (p. 298). Harlin et al. (1992) view it as a “multidimensional system which provides teachers with a complete picture of a student’s abilities and literacy development” (p. 203, cited in Gillespie et al., 1996, p. 482).

While not explicitly labeled, K. Wolf’s (1993) concept aligns closely, depicting it as a process wherein “knowledgeable teachers systematically observe and selectively document their students’ performance through multiple methods, across diverse contexts, and over time as students engage in meaningful learning activities” (p. 519, cited in Gillespie et al., 1996, p. 482). This comprehensive approach underscores the depth and breadth of portfolio assessment in capturing and enhancing student learning.

Advantages of Portfolio Assessment

Drawing on Gillespie et al.’s insightful research paper (pp. 482-483), I aim to delve into the multifaceted advantages of portfolio assessment in educational settings. Their comprehensive study sheds light on how portfolio assessment benefits students, teachers, and parents, offering a well-rounded perspective on its impact across different stakeholders in the education community. This research serves as a foundation for understanding the diverse and significant positive effects of implementing portfolio assessment in classrooms.

Here’s a summary of the advantages of portfolio assessment as outlined by Gillespie et al. (1996):

Advantages for Students:

• Reflective Learning: Portfolios enable students to reflect on their learning development over time.
• Understanding Relationships: They help students understand the interplay between reading, writing, and thinking.
• Collaborative Climate: Portfolios facilitate a collaborative environment through peer collaboration and critiques.
• Responsibility and Independence: They encourage students to take charge of their learning and foster independence.
• Self-Esteem and Attitude: Portfolios contribute to developing self-esteem and a positive attitude toward the learning process.

Advantages for Teachers:

• Insight into Student Growth: Portfolios offer a comprehensive view of student growth.
• Data for Instructional Decisions: They provide valuable data for instructional decision-making.
• Diverse Evaluation Information: Portfolios contain a wide range of information useful for both formative and summative evaluations.
• Defining High-Quality Work: They assist in identifying the criteria for high-quality work.
• Assessment and Instruction Integration: Portfolios bridge the gap between assessment and instruction.
• Facilitating Conferences: They serve as a basis for productive student-teacher relationship.

Advantages for Parents and the Public:

• Demonstration of Competence: Portfolios showcase children’s knowledge, competence, and growth over time.
• Enhancing Communication: They offer concrete evidence that facilitates communication among students, teachers, parents, and other stakeholders.

Weaknesses of Portfolio Assessment

Gillespie et al. provide a critical analysis of portfolio assessment, drawing on various research papers to identify its weaknesses. Here is a concise summary of the weaknesses of portfolio assessment as reported by Gillespie et al., :

1. Increased Teacher Workload: Implementing portfolios significantly adds to teachers’ responsibilities (Christian, 1993; Frazier et al., 1993).
2. Reduced Instructional Time: Portfolio management tasks can limit actual teaching and learning time (Christian, 1993; Metzger & Bryant, 1993).
3. Inappropriate Teacher Practices: Risks include limited student input, inadequate feedback, and excessive teacher direction (Bell, 1992; Cooper & Brown, 1992).
4. Grading Disputes: Subjective nature of portfolios can lead to grading controversies (Christian, 1993; Johns, 1992).
5. Need for Extensive Support: Effective use requires substantial teacher training in data collection and analysis (Abruscato, 1993; Harlin et al., 1992).
6. Data Acceptance Challenges: Portfolio data may face skepticism or criticism from educational stakeholders (Calfee & Perfumo, 1993; Van Horn & Brown, 1993).
7. Standardization and Validity Issues: Concerns over the reliability and standardization of portfolio content (Farr, 1990; Maeroff, 1991).

These points highlight the complexities and challenges involved in effectively integrating portfolio assessments in educational settings.

Final thoughts

Portfolios offer a dynamic and comprehensive method for assessing student growth, transcending the limitations of traditional summative and standardized tests. They enable a deeper, more continuous engagement with the learning process, promoting reflective learning, self-assessment, and a stronger understanding of the interconnectedness of academic skills.

However, the implementation of portfolios is not without its challenges. The increased workload for educators, potential reduction in instructional time, and complexities in portfolio management and evaluation are significant considerations. These factors necessitate a balanced approach and thoughtful integration of portfolios into the curriculum.

Ultimately, the value of portfolio assessment lies in its ability to provide a more authentic and holistic picture of student learning and development. It encourages a shift towards a more learner-centered approach, fostering a deeper connection between students, teachers, and the learning process itself. As educators continue to seek ways to enhance educational experiences and outcomes, portfolio assessment stands as a powerful tool in the quest for a more comprehensive and engaging approach to student evaluation and development.

References

• Abruscato, J. (1993). Early results and tentative implications from the Vermont portfolio project. Phi Delta Kappan, 74, 474-477
• Bell, S. (1992). Portfolio evaluation and Paulo Freire’s Pedagogy of the Oppressed: A descriptive analysis. Teaching English in a Two-Year College, 19, 95-96
• Calfee, R.C., & Perfumo, P. (1993). Student portfolios: Opportunities for a revolution in assessment, Journal of Reading, 36, 532-537.
• Christian, B. (1993). Freshman composition portfolios in a small college. Teaching English in a Two-Year College, 20, 289-297.
• Cooper, W., & Brown, B.J. (1992). Using portfolios to empower student writers. English Journal, 81, 40-45
• Farr, R. (1990). Trends: Reading; Setting directions for language arts portfolios. Educational Leadership, 48, 103
• Frazier, D., Palmer, P., Duchein, M., & Armato, C. (1993). Presentee elementary teachers’ evolving perceptions of portfolio assessment. In D. Leu & C. Kinzer (Eds.), Examining central issues in literacy research, theory, and practice (pp. 305-314). Chicago: National Reading Conference
• Gillespie, C. S., Ford, K. L., Gillespie, R. D., & Leavell, A. G. (1996). Portfolio Assessment: Some Questions, Some Answers, Some Recommendations. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 39(6), 480–491.
• Harlin, R., Lipa, S., & Phelps, S. (1992). Portfolio assessment: Interpretations and implications for classroom teachers and reading teachers. In N. Padak, T. Rasinski, & J. Logan (Eds.), Literacy research and practice: Foundations for the year 2000 (pp.203-208). Kent, OH: College Reading Association).
• Johns, J. (1992). How professionals view portfolio assessment. Reading Research and Instruction, 32, 1-10
• Maeroff, G. (1991). Assessing alternative assessment. Phi Delta Kappan, 73, 272-281
• Metzger, E., & Bryant, L. (1993). Pedagogy, power and the student. Teaching English in a Two-Year College, 20, 279-288
• Meyer, C, Schuman, S., & Angello, N. (1990). NWEA white paper on aggregating portfolio data. Lake Oswego, OR: Northwest Evaluation Association.
• Paulson, F.L., Paulson, P., & Meyer, C. (1991). What makes a portfolio a portfolio? Educational Leadership, 48, 60-63
• Tierney, R., Carter, M., & Desai, L. ( 1991 ). Portfolio assessment in the reading-writing classroom. Norwood, MA: Christopher-Gord
• Valeri-Gold, M., Olson, J. M.& Denning, M. P. (1992). Portfolios: Collaborative Authentic Assessment Opportunities for College Developmental Learners. Journal of Reading, 35(4), 298-305.
• Van Horn, B., & Brown, E. (1993). Hurdles in evaluating adult literacy programs.. .a few answers. In B. Hayes & K. Camperell (Eds.), Reading: Strategies, practices, and research for the 2 1st century (pp. 59-66). Logan, UT: Utah State University
• Wolf, K. (1993). From informal to informed assessment: Recognizing the role of the classroom teacher, Journal of Reading, 36,518-52