Electronic Assessment Portfolio
Project Report



Problem
Analysis
Rationale
Results
Evidence
Reflection
Competencies
Action Research

Note: This report has several sections related to this project, listed below this first artifact report.
Problem Statement

In August of 2002, Dana Ewald and I worked with various portfolio projects through the Center for Innovations in Teaching and Technology, CITT. Dana and Vickie Wood had been developing this project throughout the previous year, and I was brought in after Vickie left CITT when she completed her doctorate. While working with students, faculty and departments, we observed a lack of knowledge on types and uses of portfolios. We also realized there was confusion about pre-defined criteria, when creating portfolios for student and departmental assessment. The most pernicious issues seemed to be that people tended to think of portfolios mostly as showcases for work completed. Most were unaware, or underused possible options such as inter-communication between students and advisors, evaluating work over time, or using predetermined posted assessment criteria to improve and grade student’s work. This issue was timely, because CU had to revise its interdepartmental plans for improvement, after receiving feedback from the latest certification assessment.

Dana and I were using a prototype portfolio software, developed by David Gibson, called the Personal Learning Portal (PLP), to assist several departments in developing student portfolios. The PLP was offered free in exchange for our beta-testing the software with our clients. This project was expanded to include departments that were interested in investigating the software, as a tool to self-assess their own departments. Dana and I met with a variety of departments, explaining the software’s functionality and possible uses in creating assessment, development and showcase portfolios. Overtime, we presented the PLP and examples of portfolios to a variety of potential clients in Schools of:

Education
Architecture
Nursing
Pharmacy
Communications
Library
Business
Arts and Media
The CU Assessment Committee
And to our own ILT cohort

Some of these departments, The School of Education and Communications decided to use the PLP tool, while other departments chose to use different portfolio tools, build their own, of postpone decisions till they had revised their department criteria. While repeating this information to various groups Dana and I decided that we needed a method to efficiently organize and communicate information about digital portfolios, as they had become an increasingly popular tool in corporate, and academic settings for showcasing skills, and abilities. The trend to create digital portfolios as a tool for organizing, archiving, communicating and assessing students, as well as their institutions, is also growing in higher education .
top

Situation Analysis
Learner Analysis
Our CITT clients were all intelligent, busy people.
Learners were divided into three categories:
Students: Who were primarily interested in creating Portfolios to meet credential standards in their schools, as a course requirement, or Capstone Project, and as a showcase for potential employers.
Faculty: Interested in the technology and wanting to assist students to those develop skills, compelled by department heads, motivated to improve student performance through assessment tools.
Department Administrators: Motivated by a need to develop strategies to assess departments to meet departmental improvement goals, and to more uniformly assess student’s performance and instructional needs.
All of the learners had varying degrees of comfort with technology or identifying assessment criteria, all voiced having little free time. All had varying degrees of autonomy to make decisions and follow through with plans. Faculty and departmental heads voiced political concerns about how difficult it was to get other faculty and departments to work together on developing assessment criteria. And in fact we found University politics to be the defining issue in whether, or not departments eventually took on the time consuming and difficult process of creating portfolios.Instructional Goals
We wanted our presentation to include:

Relevant learner objectives, and appropriate instructional goals.
A well defined outlined presentation with activities, helpful informational handouts and related website links
Well defined examples of different types of portfolios
Instructions on hoe to create your own portfolio
Advice and overviews about the issues in digital portfolios
Relevant information about assessment criteria

We began by looking at what information was already available on e-portfolios and compiled that with information the CITT already had from the work of Vickey and Dana, who had developed a PowerPoint presentation, and web site for the Teaching with Technology conference. As an Action Research project with Brent Wilson we questioned students, faculty and administration about their experiences using e-portfolios during the past year.
See Action Research link
We also used the opportunity to present portfolio information in our Trends and Issues class to practice instructional activities and get feedback about how to develop presentation tools for information.
See Trends and Issues Report link

top

Rationale for Approach:
After conducting research, we decided to redesign the existing CITT e-portfolio to expand and develop it an instructional tool for potential CITT clients, and portfolio users. Our objective was to make a broader, more in-depth site on portfolios to enhance our current client presentation needs at the CITT. We wanted to keep a focus on assessment, as that seemed to be the most challenging topics. While creating the new web site, we outlined five learner objectives that would be pertinent for portfolio instruction:
1. Introduce the site so they could access it later when they had further questions. http://tlt.cudenver.edu/eap
2. Increase general knowledge about E-portfolios.
3. Define and discriminate types of portfolios through their uses, rubrics, design, communication and organization features, artifacts and assessment criteria.
4. Understand and examine different uses of technology when choosing or creating portfolio formats.
5. Offer information on political and practical issues raised by creating portfolios.

top

Results
See EAP link
I believe that we met the learner objectives we originally set in the site. The EAP site is clearly outlined with purpose statements and information for each area. The examples we provided are clear and relevant for the issues that were introduced. Dana later created an Instructional component for the site that has enhanced it as a stand-alone educational product. See Dana’s report on her activity in Joni Dunlap’s Online learning class.
The CITT was not interested in doing further research on the site, beyond offering it to potential clients. The only evidence I collected was my observations of using the site as an instructional tool in presentations, small groups, one-on-one teaching, or sending it out as a orientation information to potential portfolio users.
top


Evidence of Value

I have used this site at group presentations, one-on-one training and as a resource link to CITT clients. I have received complementary feedback on its usefulness. Walking through the site with users I observed good accessibility, usability, and they reported finding the information valuable. The main drawback to the usability of the site is that it is information and text heavy. As a pre- presentation tool, which we wanted it to be, so that we could orient learners to information about portfolios before we presented. I found that people usually only skimmed the material, and it wasn’t until I walked them through the site using features, showing examples, etc. that they actually see the value of the information. This is a common problem with a lot of instructional sites. The EAP is a big comprehensive site filled with great resources and information, and also may feel overwhelming to many users as a “sit down and learn” tool. Therefore I believe its strength may lie in using it as both a presentation and resource tool. In this way it could be a guide to face-to-face instruction, as well as a resource for users future research.
top

Reflection
I like the web site, and the comments I received from peers, clients, and CITT supervisors have been complimentary. I believe the site will be a good tool for future CITT clients, or others interested in working with assessment and digital portfolios at C.U. I learned a great deal about both digital portfolios and assessment, and will continue to increase my knowledge in my future work, as assessment and portfolios are helpful in both corporate and higher education venues. Working with Dana was great. We both enjoyed the project and working together. I benefited form her previous knowledge and work with Vickey Wood. We both shared responsibility for creating the site template, with graphic assistance from Travis Chillemi at CITT. I read, collected, synthesized and wrote a lot of the site information about portfolios. I was specifically interested with the process of creating developmental and assessment portfolios. Further I collected examples of Institutional assessment portfolios researching the process institutions went through to create assessment criteria, and shared this information with committees and faculty. In January of 2003, Scott Grabinger asked me to become the Project Manager for the Portfolio project. In this role I managed communications and presentations with all the portfolio clients, and the assessment committee. Dana focused on the School of Education clients as she had worked with them the previous year and understood their needs best. The CITT lost funding in May of 2003, and so the Portfolio Project is currently on hold.
. top

Competencies
Demonstration of Competency 1
Continued improvement of professional practice that requires critical inquiry, professional development, and reflective practice

The Electronic Assessment Portfolio Site met this requirement by expanding and improving upon a web site to broaden its applications to meet the needs of CITT clients, encourage critical thinking about e-portfolios, and serves as a useful tool for continued portfolio research, use, and development.
Demonstration of Competency 2
Designs instruction or human performance strategy to meet the needs of learners.

This responsibility was met by the creation of the EAP to impart a large amount of information about e-portfolios in an efficient well-organized method. We researched and anticipated learner needs and met them with both timely and ongoing resources through face-to-face training, presentations and the EAP site.
Demonstration of Competency 3
Uses a variety of media to deliver instruction to students and to engage students in learning.

We utilized web technology, face-to-face presentation, small group work, hands-on activities and further resource links to web sites and articles to meet this responsibility.
Demonstration of Competency 5
Manages complex projects and resources in support of learning

E-portfolio development is an ongoing project at the TLT. There is an enormous amount of information to research, learn and digest in creating a web site on e-portfolios—it is a never-ending process. As the Project Manager I had to organize and host meetings, give presentations and manage this complex project as new clients requested the CITT to assist them with e-portfolio development.
Demonstration of Competency 6
Uses incisive and relevant assessment and evaluation techniques
Please click here to see the final action research report
We met this competency by creating questions and surveys to assess users experiences with Portfolios on the UCD campus, through an action research project.

top

Action Research

Please click here to see the final action research report

Researching Electronic Portfolio Assessment at UCD
Dana Ewald
Kim Hansen
September 2002


Definitions
A portfolio is a collection of student work developed across varied contexts over time. The portfolio can advance learning by providing students with a way to organize, archive and display pieces of work. The electronic format allows faculty and other professionals to evaluate student portfolios using technology, which may include the Internet, CD-ROM, video, animation or audio. Electronic portfolios are becoming a popular alternative to traditional paper-based portfolios because they offer practitioners and peers the opportunity to review, communicate and assess portfolios in an asynchronous manner.
Background
During the 2001-2002 school year, the University of Colorado Office of Academic Affairs funded a collaborative project to assist three departments in the development of electronic student portfolios. The three participating departments within the University of Colorado at Denver (UCD) campus were the College of Arts and Media (CAM), the Graduate School of Public Affairs (GSPA) and the School of Education (SOE). The Technology Learning Team (TLT) provided assistance to each department. For three years, the TLT has supported the UCD campus with the integration of technology in instruction. In this role, TLT works with UCD faculty in the use of a variety of technologies for instruction, research, and service.
The goal of the project was to determine criteria for student portfolios, implement an electronic portfolio format and create exemplars. Each department identified assessment strategies within the curriculum and used this information to lead to the development of electronic student portfolios. Throughout the academic year, each group defined their criteria for student portfolios and chose what technology would be used to create an electronic portfolio format. This variety brought richness to the project and tested the limits of technology for presenting student portfolios. Specific information for each department is shown in Table 1.
College Faculty Goals Type of Portfolio Technology Used Student Volunteers
Graduate School of Public Affairs Linda DeLeon
Jay Moon Identify system to develop portfolios
Design portfolio assessment plan for program
Create exemplars Assessment ECollege website 14 graduates
College of Arts and Media Judith Coe
Richard Finklestein Showcase portfolios
Develop technical skills
Use video & sound Assessment
Showcase Website with streaming audio & video 38 undergraduate (theatre/music)
School of Education Elizabeth Kozleski
Robyn Hess
Judith Duffield
Deanna Sands
Rod Muth
Ken Wolf Evaluate value of current portfolio system
Identify framework for collecting& evaluating work
Create exemplars Developmental
Assessment Personal Learning Plan software 10 doctoral
10 undergraduate
Table 1. Projects of three academic units during the first year of the Portfolio Project (2001-2002).
Three types of portfolios are listed in the table: developmental, assessment and showcase:
• Developmental portfolios demonstrate the advancement and development of student skills over a period of time. Developmental portfolios are considered works-in-progress and include both self-assessment and reflection/feedback elements. The primary purpose is to provide communication between students and faculty.
• Assessment portfolios demonstrate student competence and skill for well-defined areas. These may be end-of-course or program assessments primarily for evaluating student performance. The primary purpose is to evaluate student competency as defined by program standards and outcomes.
• Showcase portfolios demonstrate exemplary work and student skills. This type of portfolio is created at the end of a program to highlight the quality of student work. Students typically show this portfolio to potential employers to gain employment at the end of a degree program.

Each department had very different needs. CAM was interested in collecting evidence of the students' processes, including students' goals for learning and continued growth, strategy assessments, and students' perceptions of their learning as well as student work. Faculty had to devise a way for art students to present theatrical and musical pieces of work using technology. The department decided to upload streaming audio and video files to a Dreamweaver template. Students were taught how to add work to this template using Dreamweaver by knowledgeable faculty and TLT staff. At the end of the project, students owned a unique portfolio that highlighted their artistic talents. Many students chose to use the portfolio as a resume for potential employers or as evidence for graduate school admittance.
Music students: http://www.colorado.edu/music/musiceducation/students.html
Theatre students: http://www.cudenver.edu/cam/eport/theater/index.htm
The GSPA department wanted to provide graduate students with a way to add the final capstone project to the Internet. The capstone course provides graduates with a way to demonstrate knowledge of the concepts and principles conveyed in the core curriculum. Faculty wanted students to post the final project in a portfolio format as evidence of their qualifications and expertise. GSPA chose to create a Dreamweaver template as well. GSPA students were unfamiliar with web authoring and many were hesitant to add information to the web. The TLT created the web template and taught students how to add information to the website using Netscape Navigator. Faculty members reviewed each capstone project online and students were able to send the final project to potential employers as a sample of the work that they completed during the graduate program.
GSPA students: http://tlt.cudenver.edu/gspa/gspagreen/classindex.htm
The School of Education was familiar with the portfolio process. The department has required students to create paper-based portfolios for many years. Faculty and administrators were interested in transitioning to electronic-based portfolios for several reasons. First, electronic portfolios provide a way to aggregate data for accreditation purposes. This is beneficial for NCATE purposes. Second, electronic portfolios provide means of communication between students and advisors throughout the program. Third, students develop marketable technology skills while developing the portfolio tool. The SOE department chose to test a new portfolio software tool called the Personal Learning Plan. The tool was designed specifically for electronic portfolio development.
SOE students: http://www.learningcentral.org/plp/ipte/Dorthea_UCDTLT.nsf?OpenDatabase&Login
At the end of the Spring 2002 semester, all three groups met to present the final portfolio products. The project established the importance of collaboration and valuing departmental differences. Although various forms of technology were used, and each group had varying goals for the project, the portfolio format proved to be beneficial for each departmental need. You can access examples of the Spring 2002 portfolio project at: http://tlt.cudenver.edu/eportfolio
The TLT has recently obtained a grant for outcome-based learning assessment using digital portfolios. As of Fall 2002, we have five departments participating in the portfolio project:
School of Education
Graduate School of Public Affairs
College of Arts and Media
Architecture
School of Nursing
Each department has an interest in developing an electronic portfolio format that will assess student work. In doing so, faculty members are discovering that the academic program must have specific, defined assessment criteria in place before they can implement an assessment portfolio.
Once this criteria is defined departments may then collect, analyze, and archive multiple student data. Therefore, other considerations for using assessment portfolios are:

Collecting departmental data on student achievement
Organizing program requirements
Archiving information for best practices and curriculum development

Problem Statement
The problem and promise of portfolios is that they are not a "one-size fits all" format. Departments, faculty, and students may have different views of what a portfolio can or should be. Some departments may be participating in this project out of coercion, or simply because there are funds available. Dealing with such clients can be problematic for TLT designers. TLT members must inform faculty, departments, and students of the potential for portfolios to organize, communicate, display and assess pieces of work. In addition, TLT members must assess both faculty and student technology skills in order to teach the necessary skills based on the type of technology used in the portfolio.

The departments on campus have a wide range of assessment needs. Due to this variance, the TLT must determine how to assess these needs to support each department in choosing the most effective means of portfolio development. With this information, members of the TLT can help faculty make an informed decision regarding the portfolio format that best meets their unique program and technical abilities.

The process of creating a portfolio forces faculty to define or rethink the program’s standards, rubrics, goals, and objectives used to assess both learning and program outcomes. Our experience is that academic departments run the gamut from stringent, mandated standards to highly subjective assessment criteria. Therefore, methods must be available to quickly assess and meet departmental assessment needs. We anticipate that as more departments enter into the portfolio process they will be forced to examine their assessment criteria and program outcomes. This may be problematic for departments that do not have organized and well-defined assessment criteria.

Purpose Statement
The purpose of our research is to determine how the TLT can better assist faculty members in the development and design of electronic portfolios that will meet their specific assessment needs. To research how electronic portfolios can assess student learning and performance, we will examine how faculty members chose to develop and organize assessment criteria and assessment outcomes to effectively use electronic portfolios. We will further examine how students use the electronic portfolio to post work that reflects program standards. We hope to analyze the experiences of past and current portfolio users in both creating and using digital portfolios with the help of the TLT. We then hope to clarify how the TLT can provide better support and instruction in the portfolio process. We then hope to research how electronic portfolios influence how learning is assessed, as well as how the TLT can refine the portfolio as an assessment tool.

Research Questions:
How can the TLT better serve the academic departments on campus in the design and development of electronic portfolios?
How can departments integrate portfolios without disrupting students and faculty? (Disruption may include additional time for training, advising, posting work, etc.)
How can the TLT make the portfolio process easier for departments that would like to integrate portfolios in the future?
How can the TLT help to promote the use of portfolios to departments that are considering using portfolios as a method of assessment?
Methods:
Literature Review
We plan to review the current literature (books, articles, presentation handouts, and websites) for the development of both electronic portfolios and assessment criteria at other educational institutions. We intend to collect information on best practices from these institutions to determine strategies the TLT can implement at UCD to make the portfolio process more effective and efficient. The literature we plan to review is listed in the resources section.
Survey and/or Interview Questions
We intend to interview past and current participants when possible (students, faculty and administrators) to ask the following questions: (If participants are not available for interview, we will ask these questions in a survey format)
Student Questions
How are you using your portfolio?
| To show to potential employers?
To track your progress through the program?
To assess your own learning?

How has the portfolio had practical value beyond your academic needs?

Has the portfolio provided you a way to view your progress through the program? If so, in what way? If not, why?

By creating a portfolio, do you have a better sense of what your department’s expectations are for your education?

How are you/did you utilize the feedback/reflection features of the portfolio?

How was the portfolio helpful in organizing your academic work in classes, final projects, research etc.?

What technological issues are you/did you face by using the portfolio?

How comfortable were you using the technology required by the electronic portfolio?

Did you receive adequate training/assistance to develop your portfolio?

How did the portfolio encourage communication between you and your advisors, professors, etc?

What kind of feedback have you received from those who reviewed your portfolio?
What type of feedback would you like to receive?

How did faculty communicate the results of your portfolio to you?

During the process of creating your portfolio, what were your main challenges/ rewards?

How did using the portfolio effect the opportunity to reflect on your own learning?

What expected or unexpected value did you find in going through the portfolio process?

What would make the portfolio more relevant to your education?

Faculty/Administration Questions:
How do you plan to use the portfolios for the purpose of assessing students?

Do you feel that student portfolios provide you with a way to track student progress through the program? How have you utilized this feature?

How do faculties evaluate portfolios?

Is there a system in place to distribute portfolios to a review board?

Who evaluates the portfolios?

Do you have a defined set of program standards/criteria that you use to assess portfolios?

Do you feel that the review process is efficient? If not, what changes in the portfolio or review process need to be made to make the portfolio process more efficient?

Do you plan to keep copies of the portfolios for accreditation purposes?

Have you found electronic portfolios to have practical value beyond academic purposes? How so?

Have you used statistical information from the portfolio?

How did the portfolios assist or create obstacles for communication between students and faculty?

What technology issues did using electronic portfolios raise?

Knowing what you know now, would you do it again?

What would you change in the pre-assessment process?

What could we have done better to assess your needs?

How could we have better assisted you in preparing for choosing, crating, and maintaining your portfolio?

Environmental Impact
All parties involved in the implementation of electronic portfolios will be affected in both positive and negative ways. It is important that members of the TLT be aware of any potential issues before helping departments to effectively implement assessment portfolios. The three main groups involved in the project are students, faculty and departments.

The student population can benefit from the use of electronic portfolios in several ways. Electronic portfolios provide students with a way to post work in one area for review and a method for personal reflection and understanding. By implementing assessment portfolios, students become more familiar with their programs standards overall and understand the expectations that the program has for their education. Lastly, one of the major benefits, as seen from the students’ perspective, is that portfolios provide a format for students to showcase work for employment searches. In contrast to the many benefits of electronic portfolio use, there are some drawbacks. Students must make the effort to learn the technology skills needed to post work to the portfolio. Students must also spend the time needed to post work and reflections to the electronic tool. Many students may also be hesitant to post work to a format that allows all advisors and faculty to review their work.

Faculty may also benefit from the use of electronic portfolios. Assessment portfolios can provide a means of asynchronous communication between faculty and students. Faculty can also review and evaluate student work at any time. This can be seen as both an advantage and disadvantage by faculty members. Many faculty members feel pressed for time and are hesitant to become involved in a time-intensive evaluation process. Faculty must also learn how to use the technology in order to evaluate student work. Faculty who are hesitant to spend the time learning and/or using the technology must be persuaded to use electronic portfolios by being shown how portfolios can create more efficient and effective communication. This must be done in a manner that does not make them feel as if they are being coerced into using a new tool.

Lastly, the benefits of electronic portfolios extend into the academic department. By collecting electronic portfolios from every student in the program, departments can demonstrate overall student competency for accreditation purposes. To do this administrators must be sure that assessment criteria are already well defined and reflect the goals and standards of the institution. Implementing electronic portfolios comes at a cost. Administrators should be willing to invest funds for the implementation of portfolios if the project is to be successful. In addition to the financial cost, administrators must also be willing to invest the time to introduce the student and faculty population to the portfolio tool and provide opportunities for these individuals to get adequate training.

References
Portfolio References
Electronic Portfolios, Emerging Practices in Student, Faculty, and Institutional Learning.AAHE, 2001.
Developing Portfolios for Learning and Assessment, Processes and Principles. Val Klenowski. 2002, Routledge Falmer
Assessment References
An Outcomes-Based Taxonomy for Instructional Systems Design, Evaluation , And Research. David Jonassen and Martin Tessmer. Training Research Journal 1996/1997 Volume 2. Educational Technology Publications.
Closing the Feedback Loop in Classroom-Based Assessment. Barbra E. Walvoord., Barbra Bardes, and Janice Denton. Assessment Update, Sept./Oct.,1998 1-2, 10-11.
RWC Academic Assessment Website http://www.rwc.uc.edu/philips/index_assess.html
A Simple and Effective Student Learning Outcomes Assessment Plan That Works. James E Jacob. California State University, Chico. November 1998. http://www.csuchico.edu/bss/plan.html
Power Point PresentationHandoutsAssessment of Outcomes in the Major: Majors Through Outcomes. AAHE Assessment Conference, Denver, Colorado. June 26th, 2001, Alverno College Presenters: Brenda Lambrecht, Tomisha Martin, Dan Leister, Glen Rogers, Georgine Loacker.

Building Institutional Support for Use of and Commitment To Student Assessment. AAHE Assessment Conference, Boston, MA. June 21, 2002. University of Michigan Presenters: Marvin W. Peterson, Heidi Grunwald, Lori Hendricks, Derek S. Vaughan

Electronic Assessment Portfolio Website Blueprint
for Trends and Issues
Dana Ewald
Kim Hansen
Electronic portfolios are becoming increasingly common in higher education. E-portfolios are a popular alternative to traditional paper-based portfolios because they offer practitioners and peers the opportunity to review, communicate and assess portfolios in an asynchronous manner. This growing trend is raising many issues for institutions as they attempt to create electronic portfolios without a clear understanding of the different types, methodology and purposes of what portfolios are. This is particularly true in the area of assessment. Faculty, students, and departments often underestimate the time, technology skills, and subsequent demand for well-defined assessment criteria that portfolios require.
During the 2001-2002 school year, the University of Colorado Office of Academic Affairs funded a collaborative project to assist three departments in the development of electronic student portfolios. The Technology Learning Team (TLT) provided assistance to each department. The goal of the project was to determine criteria for student portfolios, implement an electronic portfolio format and create exemplars. The TLT created a website that provided general information about electronic portfolios and provided links to the e-portfolio projects created during the Spring 2002 semester. http://tlt.cudenver.edu/eportfolio
As of Fall 2002, five departments are participating in the portfolio project with the assistance of the TLT. Each department has an interest in developing an electronic portfolio format that will assess student work. In doing so, faculty members are discovering that the academic program must have defined assessment criteria in place before they can implement an assessment portfolio. TLT members must inform faculty, departments, and students of the potential for portfolios to organize, communicate, display and assess pieces of work. In addition, TLT members must assess both faculty and student technology skills in order to teach the necessary skills based on the type of technology used in the portfolio.
As part of the ongoing portfolio project, we will research and analyze the experiences of past and current portfolio users in both creating and using digital portfolios so that we may provide better support and instruction when assisting with the portfolio process. Further we wish to examine how electronic portfolios impact the way that departments and faculty assess students learning.
For this class, we intend to redesign the TLT’s e-portfolio website so that stakeholders may gain knowledge of the different types of portfolios, their purposes, requirements, and potential before they begin to choose, implement, or design a portfolio template. We would also like to provide faculty and administrators with a method to self assess their program.

The following is a list of information that we would like to include in the new website:
Define electronic portfolios
Examples of assessment portfolios at other institutions
Examples of assessment portfolios used at UCD
Self-assessment survey
- technology and media requirements
- aesthetic needs
- technology skills for design/development/implementation/maintenance of the portfolio
Job aid for faculty so they can determine if assessment portfolios can be implemented in their department/program
- does the department have well defined standards/assessment criteria?
- can these criteria be appropriately assessed using the e-portfolio format?
Resources section with links to web sites and literature on electronic assessment portfolios

Electronic Portfolio Presentation Artifact Report
Kim Hansen and Dana Ewald
Current Trends & Issues (IT 6750)
Problem Statement
The goal of our presentation was to develop and share a web based instructional product that would efficiently organize and communicate information about digital portfolios. While working with faculty, departments, and students on various portfolio projects we have observed a lack of basic knowledge on types and uses of portfolios as well as assessment criteria. Having studied about issues in digital portfolios, we felt that it would be helpful to share our knowledge and experience with the ILT student cohort for two reasons. First, all ILT graduates are required to create their own digital portfolio and so would find the information personally valuable. Second, portfolios are a growing trend in both corporate and academic settings as a method to showcase skills and abilities. The trend to create digital portfolios as a tool for organizing, archiving, communicating and assessing both students, as well as departments, is quickly growing in higher education institutions.
Situation Analysis
We wanted our presentation to include:
Information about a current trend or issue in Instructional Technology
Relevant learner objectives, and appropriate instructional goals.
A well defined outlined presentation with planned activities and helpful informational handouts and related website links
Setting
The instructional product was delivered in class during a one-hour session
The audience consisted of 15 ILT graduate students.
The audience was diverse in its prior knowledge and experiences in creating their own portfolios, but generally more knowledgeable about portfolios, and experienced with technology issues than our clients.
Constraints
Time as always, how to communicate so much information in an hour.
The biggest challenge was planning how to walk the students through the web site with enough information, depth, and efficiency so that they understood the basic information, and could also learn where they could access further knowledge as needed.
Other issues concerned creating practical activities that would best communicate the many varied issues surrounding E-portfolios.
Rationale
We began by looking at what information was already available on e-portfolios. During the Spring 2002 semester, Dana worked with Vickey Wood (a PHD student) and other TLT members, on e-portfolio development and accumulated knowledge, resources and experience. A portfolio web site was created to showcase the TLT’s work with students and faculty. Kim was assigned to the portfolio project at the beginning of the Fall 2001 semester through the TLT. Together, Dana and Kim compiled the best information the TLT had on e-portfolio development and questioned students, faculty and administration about their experiences using e-portfolios.
After conducting this research, we decided to redesign the TLT e-portfolio web site. We wanted to make it a broader, more in-depth site on portfolios to meet our current client needs at the TLT. We also wanted to keep a focus on assessment, as that seemed to be one of the most challenging topics. While creating the new web site, we outlined five learner objectives that would be pertinent for the ILT student presentation:
1. Introduce the site so they could access it later when they had further questions. http://tlt.cudenver.edu/eap
2. Increase general knowledge about E-portfolios.
3. Define and discriminate types of portfolios through their uses, rubrics, design, communication and organization features, artifacts and assessment criteria.
4. Understand and examine different uses of technology when choosing or creating portfolio formats.
5. Relate the information to the ILT portfolios, so they could assess the type, use, and criteria used in the student portfolios.
To increase the relevance of our presentation we created three-breakout activity sessions so students begin to see how the information they were learning could be used in their upcoming portfolio creation. These were:
1. Provide examples of different portfolios for them to assess.
2. Offer case studies of portfolio clients so they could assess and discriminate what type of portfolio would be required.
3. Examine the ILT to see what type of portfolio it was, and what they would need to do to best meet the criteria.
Our presentation outline is included below:

Presentation Outline
Part I
Leading Statement:
The purpose of this presentation is to increase your general knowledge of the types, uses, and functions of electronic portfolios. After learning about the current e-portfolios trends in higher education, we will ask that you reflect on the design, reflection, goals, and matrix of the ILT portfolio that you will be required to create this summer.
Present:
We begin by presenting the first section in the site. Define e-portfolios, types, uses, and discuss why e-portfolios are becoming a trend in higher education. Quickly discuss that universities can use e-portfolios for students, departments or the institution as a whole but that our focus will be on student portfolios. (5-minutes)
Activity:
After discussing the three types of portfolios, we will break the class into 3 groups to look at examples of various e-portfolios. Students will answer questions to help them determine e-portfolio information. The purpose of this activity is to improve the student’s ability to identify types and uses of e-portfolios by looking at the overall design, goals, standards and artifacts of specific student portfolios. (10-minutes)
Part II
Presentation:
Present page 1 and 2 of "Create Your Own" section of the site. Discuss how e-portfolios can be created using different types of software depending on faculty and student technology skills. Discuss the various issues that faculty need to consider when designing and implementing an e-portfolios for their students or department. (5-minutes)
Activity:
Break class into groups again and give each group one case study and the portfolio software development matrix. Ask students to make e-portfolio decisions based on the matrix. Students will explain the choices they made to the group. (10 minutes)
Part III
Assessment:
Ask the class to think about how the information on e-portfolios relates to the e-portfolios that they are required to create in ILT. Give the class the link to the ILT portfolio list on the ILT server and ask them to fill out a final questionnaire.
What type of portfolio must you create for ILT?
Does it incorporate the elements found in our research?
Are we required to reflect on our work?
How does ILT faculty assess your work?
(10 minutes)

Results Report
We believe that we met the learner objectives we set. The presentation was clearly outlined with purpose statements for each activity, which we shared with the learners to assist pre-cognitive organization. We led students through pertinent web pages and offered the site as a tool for future review. The examples we provided were clear and relevant for the issues that we were introducing. The activities were appropriate and helpful as well. Class participation was excellent and the opportunity for hands-on learning focused student attention on our presentation. We observed that the class gained knowledge of the vast array of issues related to electronic portfolio development, by the questions and statements they provided throughout the presentation.
The final assessment activity revealed a good discrimination and understanding of the ILT portfolio, and we could see the students drawing connections to their own upcoming projects.
Evidence of Value
We observed that our learners understood the information and found it of relevant value to their own work. The in-class feedback and subsequent e-mails we received from our classmates were positive, enthusiastic and felt rewarding for our effort. The audience stated that they enjoyed the site, the presentation, and found the activities appropriate and interesting.

Evidence of Value
We believe that our audience met the defined learning objectives. Replies to our assessment, which we sent via e-mail, have revealed that students retained the information and made connections between our presentation and the ILT portfolio. All responses revealed that students could define types and uses of e-portfolios. Students could also recognize e-portfolio technology needs, and demonstrated an increased awareness of the rubrics, matrixes, and corresponding responsibilities required by assessment portfolios. When asked to relate this information to the ILT e-portfolio, students stated that the ILT portfolio process should begin early in the masters program and should provide more instructor feedback in the reflection pieces required by students.
Reflection
We feel the presentation went very well. We were prepared, organized, and had done a tremendous amount of work in creating the e-portfolio web site. The presentation went smoothly and our activities supported our information. We can not think of anything that we would have done differently. For a first presentation of this material, it went very well. We both like the web site, and the comments we have received from both our peers and the TLT supervisors has been complimentary. We believe the site will be a good tool for our TLT clients. We learned a great deal about both electronic portfolios and assessment, and we will continue to increase our knowledge as we work together on this project. We expect to do similar presentations in the future for interested faculty, administrators, and students, so this was good experience for future presentations.
ILT Competencies
Demonstration of Responsibility 1
Continued improvement of professional practice that requires critical inquiry, professional development, and reflective practice

The presentation met this requirement by expanding and improving upon a web site to broaden its applications to meet the needs of new TLT clients and to encourage critical thinking about e-portfolios within our cohort.
Demonstration of Responsibility 2
Designs instruction or human performance strategy to meet the needs of learners

This responsibility was met by the creation of the presentation outline and activities to impart a large amount of information about e-portfolios in a short amount of time. We anticipated learner needs and met them with both timely and ongoing resources through both the presentation and the web site.
Demonstration of Responsibility 3
Uses a variety of media to deliver instruction to students and to engage students in learning.

We utilized web technology, face-to-face presentation, small group work, hands-on activities and further resource links to web sites and articles to meet this responsibility.
Demonstration of Responsibility 4
Understands how to capitalize on the capacities and abilities of each learner

We have worked along side our learners as members of the same ILT cohort for approximately one year. Our knowledge of the learners allowed us to assess the learner population and anticipate what types of material and activities would be most relevant to their needs. Further, in the creation of our web site we were meeting the needs of our TLT clients as well.
Demonstration of Responsibility 5
Manages complex projects and resources in support of learning

E-portfolio development is an ongoing project at the TLT. There is an enormous amount of information to research, learn and digest in creating a web site on e-portfolios—it is a never-ending process. We will have many future opportunities to manage this complex project as new clients ask the TLT to assist them with e-portfolio development. Our clients have diverse needs and abilities that require a variety of development strategies and we must continue to stay abreast of the e-portfolio research in higher education. We hope to make the Electronic Assessment Portfolio Website a tool to support our clients into the future.
Demonstration of Responsibility #6
Uses incisive and relevant assessment and evaluation techniques

The assessment techniques we used in our presentation provided relevance to the cohort’s needs in understanding, anticipating, and designing their own upcoming portfolios. We wanted our presentation to be helpful to our fellow students so we chose to share and assess information that they could use in the future. Further, because electronic portfolios are becoming a trend in professional and academic use, we wanted to present as many tools and resources for our peers to access as future ID professionals.

In Class Activity
The purpose of this activity is to improve your ability to identify types and uses of e-portfolios by looking at the overall design, goals, standards and artifacts of specific student portfolios. Keep in mind that most e-portfolios are hybrids (usually showcase/assessment or developmental/assessment) but this is not always the case. Also, please note the organization, technology and communication features used to answer the questions below.
What type of portfolio are you looking at?
0 Developmental
0 Assessment
0 Showcase
Which of these features are included in this portfolio?
0 Student Info
0 Table of Contents: or various way to display links to contents of the portfolio
0 Learner Goals
0 Clear standards and/or criteria
0 Rubrics
0 Guidelines for selecting appropriate artifacts
0 Artifacts
0 Instructor feedback
0 Self-reflection pieces
In what way are these features beneficial for students? For faculty? For the institution?

What type of software was used to create this e-portfolio? (make your best guess)
0 Word processing
0 Database
0 PowerPoint
0 Commercial software program
0 HTML editor
0 Other ___________________
When should faculty and students start creating this type of portfolio?
0 Beginning of program
0 Middle of program
0 End of program

1. What is your experience using traditional paper-based portfolio assessment?
1 2 3 4 5
Limited experience in storing samples of student work in file folders Regularly use portfolios as instructor-centered assessment tool Students and instructor collaboratively select items to go into student's portfolio. Well-defined rubrics have been created to evaluate student work All items in Level 3, plus portfolios incorporate assessment standards and stakeholders have access to exemplars for comparison All items in Level 4 and portfolio maintains student-centered assessment as well as instructor assessments
2. At what level are the instructors' computer skills?
1 2 3 4 5
Limited experience with desktop computers but able to use mouse and menus and run simple programs All items in Level 1 plus proficient with a word processor, basic e-mail, and Internet browsing. Can enter data into a pre-designed database or program All items in Level 2 plus able to build a simple hypertext document with links using a hypermedia program such as HyperStudio, Adobe Acrobat, or HTML editor All items in Level 3 plus able to record sounds, scan images, record digital video, and/or design an original database All items in Level 4 plus multimedia programming or HTML authoring skills. Can create QuickTime movies and/or program a relational database
3. At what level are the students' computer skills?
1 2 3 4 5
Limited experience with desktop computers but able to use mouse and menus and run simple programs All items in Level 1 plus proficient with a word processor, basic e-mail, and Internet browsing. Can enter data into a pre-designed database or program All items in Level 2 plus able to build a simple hypertext document with links using a hypermedia program such as HyperStudio, Adobe Acrobat, or HTML editor All items in Level 3 plus able to record sounds, scan images, record digital video, and/or design an original database All items in Level 4 plus multimedia programming or HTML authoring skills. Can create QuickTime movies and/or program a relational database
4. What is the level of student access to computers?
1 2 3 4 5
Little or no access during a typical week Access to a computer for at least two hours a week Access to a computer for at least half an hour a day Access to a computer for at least one hour a day Access to a computer for at least two hours a day
5. How much time is available for staff development and support?
1 2 3 4 5
No staff development time After-hours workshop and/or own time Few days dedicated to implementation Release time for faculty development Release time plus in-class support
6. How much budget is available for additional hardware and software?
1 2 3 4 5
No money for additional hardware or software Some money for additional hardware or software Significant funds available to purchase additional hardware or softwareElectronic Portfolio Publishing Software
Looking at the following table, which type of software to you feel this faculty member should choose to create e-portfolios?
1 2 3 4 5
Word Processing saved to Zip Disk, Floppy Diskette
Hard Drive, or WWW Server Relational databases or Hypermedia card formats using software such as
Microsoft Access, HyperStudio
HTML Web pages using Netscape Composer or
Adobe Acrobat PDF files Commercial Software Programs such as Personal Learning Plan
http://www.learningcentral.org Multimedia Authoring Software such as Macromedia Dreamweaver or Microsoft Frontpage