Future of Portfolio Assessment

A Reflection on the Future of Portfolio Assessment:

Students vs. Self

Portfolio Assessment for Students

Assessment is a key factor in designing effective curriculum. The importance of assessment has come to light in the era of NCLB. With increased pressure placed on schools to show quantifiable data related to assessment the use of Portfolios has become an issue. Assessment portfolios have a number of advantages over traditional testing instruments. The strength of portfolio-based assessment lies in that it allows reviewers to see hand-picked artifacts that represent what the student deems most important. Not only are students allowed to choose their best, or most influential work, portfolios provide an opportunity for students to synthesize and explain their choices. A second strength of portfolios is that they allow students a chance to show their understanding a manner that requires interactivity. Passive displays of knowledge, such as traditional testing, limit students’ expression. With this increased expression students can show their understanding of a concept over time rather than through a score received on a specific day that may include other variables rather than just knowledge of a subject. In addition to the strengths listed above, technology-driven portfolios provide increased opportunities for including artifacts of an interactive and visual nature. Also, students’ familiarity with the Software products used to prepare electronic portfolios means that students can be more involved in the portfolio design process and reduces the time and organizational efforts of the teacher.

Although portfolios have many solid arguments in their favor, they are vulnerable to several weaknesses. Portfolios are time consuming to create. They require the student, and instructor, to develop a portfolio plan beforehand so that both know which artifacts might be appropriate to include. Portfolios are more difficult to grade, requiring additional time for the reviewer. What intellectual products we produce and include in portfolios may be good indicators of our abilities, but not an indicator of how much of the information we have retained. As indicators of knowledge over time, the specific artifacts included must be designed to show cumulative knowledge as well as an understanding of concepts at a specific time. The largest concern over the use of assessment portfolios is that they are difficult to quantify. With the reporting pressures of NCLB schools may be faced with the difficult decision of whether students' personal progress and understanding should outweigh the bureaucratic requirements placed on them by outside sources.

Portfolio Assessment for Myself

I am a graduate of CalStateTEACH, an online credentialing program that, at the time that I completed it, required a comprehensive, high-stakes portfolio for each of four stages over eighteen months. By necessity I became quite familiar with creating portfolios and their strengths and weaknesses as an assessment instrument.

I appreciated that portfolios give me a chance to showcase my work. Although I am considered ‘a good test taker,’ I believe that portfolios provide a better platform to truly show what I consider to be my most influential work. I appreciate the flexibility that many portfolios allow in choosing which artifacts that I feel are the most important and the opportunity to explain why. Portfolios also allow me to include artifacts and products from lessons and teachable moments that might not have been captured during a formal observation visit. It is the diversity of what happens in a classroom that truly expresses the abilities of a teacher.

As I discussed above, the use of portfolios is not with out its weaknesses. Artifacts can be difficult to gather when you are alone in the classroom. It takes quite a bit of forethought, and hope, to make arrangements for someone to come in a photograph a new unit that might go well or might not. Often, I find myself showcasing student work. Student work is helpful in understanding a teacher’s abilities, but does not give an accurate picture of what went on in the classroom. Tensions between a portfolio for personal growth and a high-stakes portfolio provide added opportunities for confusion.

High-stakes portfolios need to have clear expectations, guidelines, and a listing of the items required. Required elements should be delineated early with an explanation of why certain artifacts will be required. Not knowing the reasoning behind specific artifacts causes confusion and may lead to inclusion of an artifact that does not meet the expectations of the reviewers and affect the overall acceptance of the portfolio.

Conclusions

I believe that portfolios are most effective as an assessment tool in the educational scheme, but not as the only assessment instrument. I would prefer to have my abilities assessed by a varied battery of instruments than by a high-stakes portfolio. The use of portfolios as an indicator of student achievement has merit, but in this climate of NCLB and its reporting requirements they are not particularly helpful. The increased use of technology may provide assistance with creating and grading, but being able to produce data on student progress from the portfolios is problematic. The culture of education would have to shift dramatically for portfolios to be widely accepted in our test-driven classroom culture.