| SEARCH OnWEAC |
|---|
By Linda V. Neiman
Introduction
The first time I used portfolio assessment was in the last weeks of spring semester with ninth graders some years ago. I had simply collected their writing assignments in folders marked with their names throughout the semester. In the last two weeks of the semester, I handed them their folders and directed them to choose five pieces that showed what they had learned about their writing the past semester. They had to explain why they chose those pieces and what those pieces showed about their writing. Finally, they had to reflect about themselves as writers and they had to set some goals for their writing. As I looked at those first portfolios, I was amazed. The students had poured through their writing, reflected on what they knew they had learned about writing, and what they would still like to learn about their own writing. I knew from those portfolios that my students had learned something, and they knew it too. It was almost magical and I was hooked. From there, my use and knowledge of portfolio assessment developed and grew.
Next, I expanded my use of portfolios from the writing classroom to the literature classroom. I remember when I made that decision. It was during a late spring workshop on assessment. During a presentation by a secondary teacher, who was successfully using portfolios in his psychology class, I scribbled out a plan to use portfolios in an American literature course, a plan I implemented the next semester. I read, studied, and sought out conferences and workshops on portfolio assessment while I developed and improved the use of portfolios in my writing and literature courses. The time and effort developing the use of portfolio assessment in my classes were worth it. And, maybe because I was a trailblazer for portfolios, others in my department followed along the trail, further developing and improving the use of portfolios. Today, a writing, a speech, and a literature portfolio are being considered as graduation requirements (See Appendix A).
In the beginning, three simple principles guided my implementation of portfolio assessment: collect, select, and reflect. But, as my knowledge of portfolio assessment grew, I became aware of other issues that demanded attention: use, grading, ownership, and standardization. Portfolio assessment is at its best when it is closest to the teacher and the student, however, there is pressure to move it beyond the classroom. Once it leaves the classroom, issues of use, grading, ownership, and standardization begin to surface.
In order to implement portfolio assessment appropriately, these issues must be defined, discussed, and addressed. In this article, portfolio assessment is defined, its purposes outlined, and its guiding principles explained. In addition, the advantages and disadvantages are enumerated. Finally, the issues that complicate the implementation of portfolio assessment are defined and discussed, but not resolved. Resolving those issues rests with those individuals actively involved in the implementation of portfolio assessment.
What is portfolio assessment?
The concept of portfolio has been around for a long time. Artists, models, photographers, journalists, to name a few, have always developed portfolios of their best work. Those portfolios are evaluated and updated by removing and adding works, depending on the audience and the growth of the individual. Adding the word "assessment" to portfolio broadens the concept of portfolio. It becomes a selected collection of work that shows not only the best work, but also the development of the individual's work over a period of time. An added dimension is the individual's reflection of his/her development to the present and for the future. In the literature, the terms, portfolio and portfolio assessment, seem interchangeable.
Although there are many varied definitions of portfolio and portfolio assessment, they all seem to share some common attributes. Portfolios are collections of works and/or artifacts selected over a period of time with a specific purpose in mind. Porter and Cleland define portfolio as follows (1995, 154):
A collection of artifacts accompanied by a reflective narrative that not only helps the learner to understand and extend learning, but invites the reader of the portfolio to gain insight about learning and the learner.
Paulson, Paulson, and Meyer (1991, 60) offer an expanded definition of portfolio:
A purposeful collection of student work that exhibits the student's efforts, progress, and achievements in one or more areas. The collection must include student participation in selecting contents, the criteria for selection, the criteria for judging merit, and evidence of student self reflection.
But, basically, no matter which definition you choose, it comes down to these words: collect, select, and reflect.
First, a collection must be created. The collection is all of the activities, assignments, and projects that are constructed in a specific setting. In the American Literature course, the collection consisted of students' notes, class activities, assignments, and projects based on selections from the authors that I chose (See Appendix B). Based on that collection, the decision for the selection of items or artifacts has to be made depending upon the purpose of the portfolio. The clarity of that purpose will help shape the final portfolio. The design of the portfolio is dependent upon what we want to learn about our students and what we want our students to learn about themselves (Johnson 1996, 30). In American Literature, I wanted my students to interact with at least six authors so that when they walked out of my class, they would never forget the works of those authors. And, I wanted my students to realize how reading and studying literature can unlock their ideas and thoughts about themselves and the world. Finally, reflection must occur. It is the reflective stage that pulls it all together at the end for the learner and makes the selection of work more than just a collection. A collection of student work, even when it is planned, does not make a portfolio (Johnson 1996, 30). It is this third principle that transforms a collection into a meaningful learning experience. It is during this reflective process, that the responsibility for learning shifts from the teacher to the student (Porter and Cleland 1996, 39).
The portfolio process is designed to look at students' work over a period of time, either at the end products or the process itself. Most portfolios fall into the following categories: (1) showcase or selection and (2) developmental or process. A showcase or selection portfolio is a collection chosen by the student and/or teacher which shows the student's best work with a specific goal in mind (Johnson 1996, 30). For example, in writing, it may include the best pieces of a variety of writing styles including both expository and creative writing. In science, the best laboratory work, the best position paper on a scientific issue, or the best review of a scientific article could be included (Johnson 1996, 34-35). A developmental or process portfolio is a collection of work, which focuses on the student's development of a process or a product. For example, in math, double-column problem solving, where students do their figuring in one column and record their metacognitive process in the other column, might serve as evidence of a developing problem solving strategy for specific types of mathematical problems. In social studies, the student might include documentation of the evolution of a historical research paper using primary and secondary sources (Johnson 1996, 34). The type of portfolio chosen, whether it is showcase or developmental, is dependent upon the purpose, which in turn determines the types of items selected from the collection for the portfolio.
What are the advantages and disadvantages of portfolio assessment?
The biggest advantage to portfolio assessment is the impact on the learner. It allows learners to reflect on their strengths and weaknesses (Gillespie and others 1996, 482). It provides opportunities for learners to set academic and personal goals (Young and others 1997, 359) as well as encouraging the habit of metacognition (Frazier 1992, 64). And, even those learners considered "at risk" seem to find a sense of responsibility and efficacy in evaluating their own work and in selecting and attaining their own academic goals (Young and others 1997, 360) . "Portfolio assessment offers students a way to take charge of their learning; it also encourages ownership, pride, and high self-esteem (Frazier and Paulson 1992, 64)."
During the portfolio process, a transformation from observer to participant seems to occur. It happens sometime during the process when students are asked to evaluate their own work, to find evidence that learning has taken place, and to reflect not only on their past learning, but to set goals for their future learning. It is a process rather than a final project. During the course of the semester in American Literature, students were requested to make evaluations about the authors they were studying and the work they were doing. Periodically, students were directed to choose their best set of notes, their best class activities, their favorite authors, their favorite selections, their best literary analyses, and their best projects. Students had to support their choices, using established rubrics, and set goals for improving future work. By the end of the semester, putting the portfolio together was challenging, but not overwhelming because of all the work that was previously completed. The results were consistent with the research. Students took responsibility for their learning and were rewarded with a sense of pride in their work and in their learning.
When learners take responsibility for their own learning, there is a definite impact on the classroom. Students demand the knowledge and information they need to continue the process. Classroom activities must be constructed to direct and support the portfolio process. The American Literature students demanded the knowledge and information they needed to produce a portfolio worthy of their efforts. They not only needed the content, they needed the process. If they were to attempt a poem in the style of Emily Dickinson, they needed to know more about her style, her themes, her life. If they were to attempt a model of Moby Dick, they needed to know where to find the resources to construct a model. And, they needed guidance in reflection; they needed the right questions to formulate their thoughts and ideas into something significant.
Portfolios are not only demanding of the teachers' resources, but also of the teachers' time. According to Gillespie, Ford, Gillespie, and Leavell (1996, 483) there is a demand on teachers' time, specifically spending too much time on "managing the portfolio," possibly resulting in a decrease in instructional time. However, the more knowledge teachers have about portfolios, the easier it is to manage them. Included in the management of portfolios is conferencing. Conferencing can take on many different aspects. For some it is difficult to conference with one student while the others are not directly supervised. Others find it easier to maintain more of a dialogue journal between teacher and student. Still, another management concern is the storage of portfolios in progress and finished portfolios. And, perhaps the only way to meet these management challenges is intensive staff development: reading, studying, and talking to other teachers who are successfully managing portfolios.
Some may consider this need for intensive staff development a definite disadvantage (Gillespie and others 1996, 483). Teachers must be inserviced on the tenets of portfolios including the role of metacognition and the development of criteria and rubrics. Often, the use of portfolio assessment demands a shift in educational philosophy which can result in additional stress. Further, the use of portfolios can result in the idea that "one assessment tool fits all" and "portfolio assessment fits all purposes (Gillespie and others 1996, 483)" which may corrupt the process entirely.
Interestingly enough, the disadvantages tend to be teacher-centered and the advantages tend to be student-centered. In reality, however, the biggest disadvantage of portfolio assessment for some teachers is that it is something new and different which demands study. The biggest advantage of portfolio assessment for teachers is the knowledge they gain about their teaching and about their students. Looking at students' portfolios in both my writing and literature classes, I could adjust my instruction based on the data collected from these portfolios. But, the best part was the insights I gained about my students and my teaching. I had evidence to support that learning was happening in my classroom.
The use of portfolio assessment
The use of portfolio assessment focuses around the philosophy of the classroom teacher as well as the philosophy of the school and district. Portfolio assessment at its best involves teachers and learn-ers gathering and analyzing data and reflecting upon the impact of that data as it relates to those learners and teachers (Stowall and Tierney 1995, 82). This type of assessment demand that the teacher and learner act as collaborators and implies a child-centered philosophy of education. Stowell and Tierney (1995, 82-83) discuss the relationship of the teacher's philosophy and the teacher's view of portfolio assessment. Those teachers who tend to embrace a child-centered philosophy of education and use assessment to inform instruction tend to be very enthusiastic about the use of portfolios. Their use tends to be less restrictive as compared to those teachers who are uninformed about authentic assessment and do not embrace a child-centered philosophy of education. These teachers tend to feel it is extra work and something to be endured. Like so many other educational reforms, the teacher is the key to the successful use of portfolio assessment. If teachers believe that portfolio assessment is important and useful, and if they are inserviced adequately for its expanded use, portfolio assessment has a chance to succeed (Abruscato 1993, 477).
Grading
As teachers begin to implement portfolio assessment into their classrooms, the next issue that arises is grading. Should portfolios be the basis for a grade? Ideally the answer is no, but we live in a society that demands grades and scores (Defina 1992, 39; Tierney 1991, 147). According to Robert Proust (1988, 82), "The problem is not simply that the grade doesn't inform; rather, it misinforms and deceives. . . . it conceals information that might be useful to students and parents and trains them to accept an empty symbol as surrogate." And, although this may be true, is there a way to transform and eventually replace that empty symbol? The answer seems to lie in the development of scoring guides and rubrics that will give useful information to students, teachers, and parents. Portfolios can be used to support or even determine a grade when a well defined scoring guide or rubric is developed by both the teacher and the learner (Defina 1992, 37; Johnson 1996, 84; Porter and Cleland 1995, 124 ). Further, that along with that grade or score, a narrative by the teacher and the student should accompany the overall evaluation of the student's progress, including the student's strengths and weaknesses as well as the student's achievement, effort, and goals (Tierney, Carter, and Desai (1991, 147). Interestingly, Tierney, Carter, and Desai (1991, 158) note that often in districts that are implementing portfolio assessment, there is a shift in the report card to reflect the use of portfolios. And, along with those grades and scores are narratives describing the students' strengths and perhaps even the students' goals.
The portfolio in the American Literature and Expository Writing courses became the basis for the grade for the semester. Although the rubrics were thoroughly discussed with the students, and the feedback from previous students' portfolios and comments were incorporated in the ongoing development of these rubrics, little time was spent with the current students in developing the rubric for their individual portfolios. The ideal, of course, is to involve students in the development of rubrics and scoring guides, but that process can be very time intensive. Rather, I concentrated on communicating to both students and parents how the portfolio was going to be used to determine the grade for the course. Sharing with both students and parents what should be included in the portfolio, the standards for the work submitted, and the criteria by which the work would be judged is supported by the research (Johnson 1996, 32). And, written progress reports with both teacher and student comments were sent home about every five weeks. The final semester grade was determined by both the student and me. Most of the time, we were in agreement about that grade. Students were able to see the relationship between their work, their portfolio, and the grades they earned. It was not a perfect system, but at least the grade was supported with evidence from the portfolio.
The standardization of portfolio assessment
Portfolio assessment isn't a standardized test and cannot be used like a standardized test successfully. Portfolios are not as neat and clean as testing. Portfolios are not as quick as testing. Portfolios do not result in numbers that are easily recorded and published as testing. Portfolios are not intended to take the place of testing. Yet, when portfolios are considered being used as a method of standardized testing, issues of validity and reliability manifest themselves.
Validity is the degree to which an assessment tool measures what it is supposed to measure (Gay 1987, 553). And, the validity of portfolio assessment has been questioned because it does not offer the same normalized statistics that standardized tests offer. However, the validity of portfolio assessment can be established. The key to validity is determining the criteria for evaluating the portfolio (Defina 1992, 58). Portfolio assessment demands developing reliable, valid, and effective scoring guides, rubrics, and criteria.
Another concern of portfolio assessment is reliability. Reliability is the degree to which an assessment tool consistently measures whatever it measures (Gay 1987, 549). Grant Wiggins offers some general recommendations to achieve reliability when implementing any performance assessment. Practice and refine the scoring process. Use multiple judges. Develop and utilize good scoring rubrics (Brandt 1992, 35). And, finally, Hewitt (1995, 193) offers a quote from Howard Gardner pertaining to the reliability of performance-based assessment: "It took more than a hundred years and billions of dollars to bring multiple-choice testing to its present state of development . . . so there may be some wisdom in giving performance-based assessment more than five or ten years to prove itself." With time and effort, validity and reliability are achievable through the refinement of a scoring system if a score is the desired outcome of a portfolio.
On a small scale and very informally, three people from the English department and the district Language Arts Coordinator met to evaluate portfolios from the American Literature classes. After the rubric was discussed thoroughly, we each read and evaluated the students' portfolios independently. The scores were recorded secretly and compared after all the portfolios had been evaluated. Within this very small sample and to our surprise, the portfolios generally received the same grade from each of the evaluators. We concluded that the rubric we used was the key to the consistent evaluations.
Finally, there are those who believe that portfolio assessment and standardized testing do not have to be at odds. Rather, portfolio assessment and standardized testing can coexist and complement each other. If the goal of standardized testing is not just for sorting students and testing trivia, scores from standardized tests could offer information to a school or a district about their programs. Yet, for the individual learner, the standardized test can only offer a snapshot, usually whose immediacy is long past, whereas, portfolios can offer the individual learner an album of an ongoing set of judgments that provide opportunities for the learner to do better work (Hewitt 1995, 194). Perhaps, at this time, the educational system needs both, the snapshot and the album.
Even though the framework for the portfolio in the American Literature courses was very well defined, each portfolio was unique and personal. The standardization of portfolio assessment will diminish these qualities. It is my opinion that the standardization of portfolio assessment will effectively nullify this initiative. As stated earlier, portfolio assessment is not a standardized test. The characteristics of portfolio assessment are in many ways in conflict with the characteristics of standardized testing (Tierney, Carter, and Desai 1991, 44). If standardizing portfolio assessment means developing a standard format for all portfolios, the true benefits of portfolios will be lost in the process. Standardized portfolios minimize student involvement in the selection of what goes into the portfolio (Allington and Cunningham 1996, 139) as well as diminishes the metacognitive aspects of portfolio assessment. That standardization also excludes teachers, students, and parents from the process (Graves 1992, 4). Still, Hewitt (1995, 196) offers a solution: create two portfolios, one for the district and one for the classroom. The classroom portfolio will meet the demands of the district portfolio. Perhaps that is a solution only in semantics, but one that could keep portfolio assessment flourishing in the classroom.
To whom does the portfolio belong?
This is a crucial issue because it underlies the philosophy behind the theory of portfolio assessment. There is only one answer to this question. The portfolio ultimately belongs to the student (Hewitt 1992, 67). If a school or district feels they might need that portfolio someday to respond to a question or controversy over a student's performance (Defina 1992, 64), let that school or district make a copy. Technology allows an easy transfer (Allington and Cunningham 1996, 141). It always amazes me that students, regardless of age, do not want to release their portfolios into anyone's hands but their own. Simply, the portfolio always belongs to the learner.
Are portfolios worth the time and trouble?
Yes, portfolios are worth the time and trouble because of their impact on learning and teaching. Portfolios shift learning to the student and teaching to the teacher. Students learn content, but they learn more than that. They learn about themselves as learners and they have evidence of their progress. They know what they have learned. Teachers learn about their students and in doing so, learn about their teaching. They learn what is effective and what is not. And, they have evidence that they have taught their students something worthwhile.
Hearing comments from students about their portfolios encourages the continued use of portfolio assessment. They are amazed at their achievement and what they have really learned. They are thankful for the opportunities that portfolios offered them. And, finally, the comments that always stay with me are: “ I don't care about the grade, I just want to do a really good job on my portfolio." "I never thought I could do anything like this." "I can't believe how much work I really did!" "I want my portfolio back!!"
Things to remember as you begin the journey
Johnson (1996, 85) states, "The important element in performance assessment development (portfolio assessment is a performance assessment) is that it is constantly under construction, and anyone can join the crew and push the work further." And, Hewitt (1995, 203) offers some principles for large-scale portfolio assessment he wishes someone had given to him when he began using portfolios. His advice applies to an entire school as well as an individual classroom. Portfolio assessment takes time. Teachers and students should be involved in the entire process. Articulate and monitor the purpose. Share. All portfolios are not alike. Finally, Lucas (1992, 5) adds to this advice, "Learning to 'do it right,' to integrate the process into one's classroom, live with it through its failures and misfires, hone it, adapt it, transform it, requires really studying, not just being willing to offer it some time."
Once you arm yourself with a solid theory of portfolio assessment, you are ready to put that theory into practice. Start slowly, but start. The benefits are worth it!
Appendix A
From Burlington High School's Graduation Requirements - A Work in Progress
GRADUATION REQUIREMENT #7: The BHS graduate effectively writes and speaks in standard English.
DESCRIPTION:
The student, in technical, academic, and creative styles:
a. employs a consistent process in preparing, composing, and editing written work.
b. adapts the language to a variety of purposes.
c. creates works for a reading audience.
d. successfully synthesizes, organizes, and presents information in clear, standard language.
e. delivers oral presentations which effectively employ language and physical presence for a specific purpose.
f. comprehends verbal and non-verbal communication at the literal and inferential levels.
g. creates and/or performs for audiences other than readers.
DEMONSTRATION:
The student will construct two portfolios consisting of ten written pieces and evidence of having delivered five speeches.
THE WRITING PORTFOLIO:
The student will construct a portfolio consisting of ten written pieces, two of which will be creative pieces, two practical or technical pieces, two persuasive pieces (one of which must be impromptu), and four other of the student's choosing.
CONDITIONS:
Creative pieces may be short stories, personal essays, poetry, ironic/humorous essays, children's stories, one act plays, radio/TV/video scripts. etc.
Practical or technical pieces may be resumes, instructions for a procedure, research reports, laboratory reports, minutes from meetings, application letters, appreciation letters, inquiry letters, etc.
Persuasive pieces may be editorials, letters to officials, letters to the editor, texts of persuasive speeches, formal essays, scripts for commercials, etc.
The impromptu persuasive piece will be administered by an approved proctor and evaluated by the appointed independent testing service.
THE SPEECH PORTFOLIO:
The student will construct a portfolio containing evidence of having delivered five speeches, an informational speech, a persuasive speech, an entertainment speech, and two other speeches of the student's choosing. Either video tape presentation and/or official written evaluations may be entered in the portfolio as evidence of these speeches.
CONDITIONS:
Informational speeches may be demonstrations, reports, news broadcasts, public service announcements, etc.
Persuasive speeches may be editorials, sales presentations, debates, orations, etc.
Entertainment speeches may be story telling, monologues, play acting, oral interpretation, special occasions, tributes, etc.
Finished portfolio will include a table of contents, dated pieces, a rationale for each inclusion, a completed authorization form for each inclusion, a self evaluation, and a final evaluation by a certified staff member.
GRADUATION REQUIREMENT #8: The BHS graduate reads, interprets, evaluates, and analyzes written selections.
DESCRIPTION:
The Student:
a. understands the differences among literary forms.
b. understands the relationship between purpose and text.
c. constructs meaning from text.
d. reads and understands literature for its aesthetic appeal, historical significance, and personal impact.
e. demonstrates familiarity with literature from the English/American tradition.
f. understands and uses technical documents.
DEMONSTRATION:
The student will construct a portfolio that will consist of summaries, analyses, and personal reactions to five literary selections, an in depth study of one author, movement, theme, etc. from the British or American tradition and proof of mastery of a technical document.
1. Collection of Literary Selections:
The student will select five literary selections, one of which must come from the American tradition: a novel, a short story, a play, a poem, and a nonfiction selection. For each literary selection, the student will include a written summary, a written analysis which includes a historical significance, an aesthetic evaluation, the author's purpose, and a personal reaction which may be multimedia and/or a creative response.
2. In Depth Study:
The student will complete an in depth study of one author, movement, theme, etc. that is drawn from the British or American tradition which will involve multiple literary selections. This may be written: however, an oral presentation of this in depth study is strongly recommended. The student will develop and submit a plan to the English Department for approval. A list of possible choices of literary selections is available.
3. Mastery of a Technical Document;
The student will show proof of mastering a technical document by applying the principles outlined in the document. This may be demonstrated in the following technical areas which might include business education, technical education, family and consumer education, agriculture, art, science, etc.
Appendix B
AMERICAN LITERATURE - Semester I - 1996
Course Outcome
The student reads, interprets, evaluates, and analyzes literary selections from American authors. The student understands the differences among literary forms; constructs meaning from text; understands the relationship between purpose and text; reads and understands literature for its aesthetic appeal, historical significance, and personal impact; and demonstrates familiarity with literature from the American tradition.
Demonstration
The student constructs a portfolio that includes class activities, notes, two major analyses, six personal extension projects based on the work of six different authors chosen by the teacher and the student.
Class Requirements
1. A three-ring binder, loose leaf paper, and dividers are required and should be organized as follows:
a. Class notes, activities, assignments, tests, assessments for each
author covered in class. These should be organized by date and author.
b. Personal extension projects in progress.
c. Finished personal extension projects.
d. Two major literary analyses - notes, outlines, and drafts signed by
the Writing Lab.
2. Attendance.
3. Class participation.
4. A final literature portfolio which contains the following:
a. Class notes, activities, tests, and assessments for each author covered
in class.
b. Personal extension projects - six projects based on six different authors.
c Two major literary analyses.
d. Final evaluation activities.
5. Students are responsible to read any selections that they miss in class as well as to obtain class notes from another class mate and complete any activities that were missed.
Grading
The final semester grade for American Literature is based primarily on the successful completion of the final literature portfolio, however meeting the class requirements which include maintaining a class notebook as outlined above, participating in class activities, completing class assignments, passing tests and assessments over specific literary selections as well as attendance, has a profound effect on the final semester grade.
Personal Extension Project: A personal extension project (PEP) is a project based on a literary selection and an interest or a strength of the student. See the list of personal extension project ideas. Students need approval from the teacher before starting a personal extension project unless it is one which is discussed in class.
Progress Reports and Quarter Grades
A letter will be sent home at both progress report times and at the quarter indicating your attendance and your progress based on the class requirements and the work completed.
American Literature Ideas for Personal Extension Projects
Standards and Scoring for American Literature
C: The student shows comprehension and a basic application of all skills and concepts.
Final portfolio: The final portfolio meets the minimum requirements, however, little attention was given to the overall quality of the finished portfolio. The PEPs reflect a literal knowledge of the literary selection. They are somewhat sketchy and do not necessarily show a student's strength or talent, but they meet the minimum requirements. Commentaries attempt a connection to the selection, but do not support a strong one. The literary analysis essays meet minimum requirements and attempt the correct format for the essay, however, the support for the thesis and the examples chosen are narrow. Class notes for each author are evident and there is evidence of attempting all class activities.
B: The student demonstrates a basic mastery of all skills and concepts, and also applies them to new and complex situations.
Final portfolio: The final portfolio meets the minimum requirements. Editing is obvious, some attention was given to the overall quality of the finished portfolio. The PEPs result in new products or are extensions of the original selection. The PEPs attempt to synthesize the selection and the student's own ideas. They may show the student's strength or talent. The commentaries reflect connections to the selections. The literary analysis essays meet minimum requirements and follow the correct format for the essay. Support for the thesis is solid and the chosen examples are appropriate. Class notes for each author are evident and all class activities are completed satisfactorily.
A: The student displays an unusually high level of application of all skills and concepts and evidences excellence in the quality of a finished product.
Final portfolio: The final portfolio meets and exceeds the minimum requirements. Proofreading and editing are obvious. The student evidences extraordinary attention to the quality of the finished portfolio. The PEPs result in new products or are extensions of the selections. The strength or talent of the student is evident in the PEPs. The PEPs reflect a synthesis of the selection with the student's own ideas. Creativity is obvious. The finished PEPs evidence quality and excellence. The commentaries are thorough and reflective and show strong connections to the selections. The literary analysis essays meet minimum requirements and follow the correct format for the essay. Support for the thesis is solid and the chosen examples are appropriate. The topic for the literary analysis essays is challenging and results in a logical conclusion. Class notes for each author are complete and all class activities show thought and effort.
NOTE: The bold print following the letter grade is the grading system at Burlington High School. The grades are A, B, C, and NC (no credit - course must be repeated.)
Directions for Constructing the American Literature Portfolio
NOTE: PEPs that do not fit the portfolio need a picture or a short description of the PEP or a housing for the portfolio that fits your PEPs.
Letter to Neiman Directions
Write a letter which is addressed to me, at least one page long or longer. Write a draft and have it signed by the Writing Lab. The final copy of your letter should be typed, word processed, or written neatly in ink. Your letter should include the following:
Statement of Preparation
You must be able to answer "yes" to all of these questions before turning in your finished final American Literature portfolio.
Based on the rubric printed on the other side, I think my portfolio best meets the criteria for a (n) ________________ because
Signed________________________________
Date___________________
American Literature Portfolio
Name_____________________________________________
Date________________________
Before you write your letter to Neiman, answer each of the following questions as honestly as you can.
BEST LITERARY ANALYSIS
ESSAY:
Why?
BEST PEP:
Why?
If I was going to grade the entire portfolio based on one PEP, which
one would you want me to evaluate? Explain why.
If I was basing your grade on strictly what you feel you have learned
in this class, what would you want me to know?
Is there anything I should know or you would like me to know before
I either evaluate your portfolio and/or assign you a grade for the
course?
References
Abruscato, J. 1993. Early results and tentative implications from the Vermont portfolio project. Phi Delta Kappan 74 (February) 474-477.
Allington, Richard L. and Patricia M. Cunningham. 1996. Schools that Work Where All Children Read and Write. New York: HarperCollins College Publishers.
Brandt, Ron. 1992. On performance assessment: A conversation with Grant Wiggins. Educational Leadership 49 (May) 35-37.
DeFina, Allan A. 1992. Portfolio Assessment: Getting Started. New York: Scholastic Professional Books.
Frazier, Darlene M. and F. Leon Paulson. 1992. How portfolios motivate reluctant writers. Educational Leadership 49 (May) 62-65.
Gay, L. R. 1987. Educational Research: Competencies for Analysis and Application, 3rd ed. Columbus: Merrill Publishing Company.
Gillespie, Cindy S., Ford, Karen L., Gillespie, Ralph D., and Alexandra G. Leavell. 1996. Portfolio assessment: Some questions, some answers, some recommendations. Journal of Adolescent and Adult Literacy 39 (March) 480- 491.
Graves, Donald H. 1992. Chapter 1: Portfolios: Keep a good idea growing. In Portfolio Portraits, edited by Donald H. Graves and Bonnie S. Sunstein, pp. 1-12. Portsmouth: Heinemann.
Hewitt, Geof. 1995. A Portfolio Primer: Teaching, Collecting, and Assessing Student Writing. Portsmouth: Heinemann.
Johnson, Bil. 1996. Performance Assessment Handbook: Volume 1 Portfolios and Socratic Seminars. Princeton: Eye On Education, Inc.
Lucas, Catharine. 1A992. Chapter 1: Introduction: Writing Portfolios-Changes and challenges. In Portfolios in the Writing Classroom, edited by Kathleen Blake Yancey, pp. 1-11. Urbana: National Council of Teachers of English.
Paulson, F. Leonard, Paulson, Pearl R., and Carol A. Meyer. 1991. What makes a portfolio a portfolio? Educational Leadership 48 (February) 60-63.
Porter, Carol and Janell Cleland. 1995. The Portfolio as a Learning Strategy. Portsmouth: Boynton/Cook Publishers.
Probst, Robert. 1988. Response and Analysis. Portsmouth: Heinemann. Quoted in Geof Hewitt. A Portfolio Primer: Teaching, Collecting, and Assessing Student Writing, 82. Portsmouth: Heinemann, 1995.
Stowell, Laura P. and Robert J. Tierney. 1995. Portfolios in the classroom: What happens when teachers and students negotiate assessment? In No Quick Fix: Rethinking Literacy Programs in America's Elementary Schools, edited by Richard L. Allington and Sean A. Walmsley, pp. 78-93. New York: Teachers College Press.
Tierney, Robert J., Carter, Mark A., and Laura E. Desai. 1991. Portfolio Assessment in the Reading-Writing Classroom. Norwood: Christopher-Gordon Publishers, Inc.
Young, Josephine Peyton, Mathews, Samuel R., Kietzmann, Anne Marie, and Todd Westerfield. 1997. Getting disenchanted adolescents to participate in school literacy activities: Portfolio conferences. Journal of Adolescent and Adult Literacy 40 (February) 348-360.
Posted October 26, 1999