Action research on student portfolios.

Abstract

This action research project explores ways in which portfolios can be used in a secondary English classroom. Students created portfolios by choosing which works were included in the final product.

Rationale

Many urban secondary students have trouble writing effective discussion questions, opinion pieces, business letters, explanations of processes, and literary analysis. Many have trouble maintaining a structure that provides the relevant information in an orderly fashion while maintaining the voice of the writer. Students rely too heavily on the remarks and grades of teachers rather than learning to recognize and evaluate quality work of their own or that of other students. According to Wiggins (1990), "Assessment is authentic when we directly examine student performances on worthy intellectual tasks." (pg 18) I plan to use portfolios and their assessment by both the teacher and student to address all of these problems.

Research in the areas of authentic assessment, constructivism, and portfolios will be important parts of my project. According to Peggy Bishop (1996), portfolios are one of the best ways for students to analyze their strengths and weaknesses as writers, to construct learning as they need it to create the portfolio, and to demonstrate their abilities in a variety of ways. If our educational system is going to change to address both the needs of our students and the increasing demands of society, then a "back to basics" approach that stresses direct teaching and standardized testing is not the answer. Because information changes so rapidly, students must learn to manage the exchange of information through research, reading, and evaluation that leads to writing about what they have found and learned in an organized fashion. Creating a portfolio that showcases the talent and growth of the student as a writer, reader, and editor serves the needs of the student, and it helps to create literate, confident problem-solvers who have tangible evidence of their success.

Background

One major area of the literature on writing assessment addresses the validity of the portfolio as an assessment tool and the effectiveness of authentic assessment in comparison to standardized testing and the use of objective, quantitatively measured tests. The second area is that of the construction and use of the portfolio. While some are continuous works in progress, others are collections of selected works that represent only the best work the student has done. The selection and evaluation process involves the teacher and student to varying degrees. While the use of standards and rubrics helps to streamline the goals and expectations of portfolio use, it still allows for the artistic element of the teacher and the learner to surface and to avoid the pitfall of finding the "right way" to make and evaluate a portfolio. The final area is that of studies and responses by teachers and students who have implemented portfolios and have evidence and/or testimony to support the use of the portfolio as a teaching and learning tool.

Assessment is authentic when it is used to examine the performance of students on tasks that are both intellectual and worthy, according to Wiggins (2000). Assessment should be created from intellectual challenges such as having students evaluate problem-posing and problem-solving in mathematics, engaging in experimental research in science, conducting document-based historical inquiry, and revising imaginative or expository writing until it "works" for the reader and the writer. Although the process needed for evaluating and scoring any of these projects is more complex and time-consuming than what is needed to score an objective test, the finished product would surely be more impressive than a numerical score report. The use of objective tests is misleading if it leads teachers, students, or parents to believe that correct answers are more important than the thought processes needed to arrive at those answers and the justifications of the test-taker's approach to the question and his or her results. Additionally, traditional tests rely heavily on secrecy to maintain their validity. This can make it difficult for teachers and students to rehearse for their performance obligations in a way that builds confidence. If the student and teacher know the challenge of the approaching task, it is possible to hold both to higher standards. Wiggins (2000) asserts that the following are important distinctions between authentic assessment and traditional tests:

   Authentic assessments require students to be effective performers
   with acquired knowledge. Traditional tests tend to reveal only
   whether the student can recognize, recall, or plug-in what was
   learned out of context. This may be as problematic as inferring
   driving or teaching ability from written tests alone. (Note,
   therefore, that the debate is not "either-or": There may well be
   virtue in an array of local and state assessment instruments as
   befits the purpose of the measurement.)

   Authentic assessments present the student with the full array of
   tasks that mirror the priorities and challenges found in the best
   instructional activities: conducting research; writing, revising,
   and discussing papers; providing an engaging oral analysis of a
   recent political event; collaborating with others on a debate, etc.
   Conventional tests are usually limited to paper and pencil, one
   answer tests. Authentic assessments attend to whether a student can
   craft polished, thorough, and justifiable answers, performances, or
   products. Conventional tests typically only ask the student to
   select or write correct responses.

   Authentic tasks involve "ill-structured" challenges and roles that
   help students rehearse for the complex ambiguities of the "game" of
   adult and professional life. Traditional tests are more like drills,
   assessing the static and too-often arbitrarily discrete or
   simplistic elements of those activities. (p.1-2)

If the objectivity and reliability of those who score and judge the authentic assessment are in question, Wiggins adds that a number of state and national testing programs now include judgment-based components in their tests, and they have maintained a high degree of credibility and integrity. Some examples are the New York Regents exam, the Advanced Placement program--particularly in the Art Portfolio and Foreign Language exams, state-wide assessments, the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), and performance-based and portfolio-based testing in Arizona, California, Connecticut, Kentucky, Maryland, and New York. According to Johannessen (2001), writing instruction needs to focus on problem solving or inquiry. The teacher should present a puzzling event, question, or problem, and the students should formulate hypotheses, collect data, draw conclusions, and reflect on the original problem and the possible answers. This method of teaching writing will help produce citizens who will fulfill the needs of our growing country. Johannessen continues by stating "the instruction needs to engage students in exploring problems that are intrinsically interesting to them" (p.39).

Donald Graves (1992) compared writing portfolios to portfolios that have been used by artists for many years. The portfolio, for the artist, represents the "range and depth of their best and most current work" (p. 1). Writers, as professionals or beginners, can benefit from the same process and product. Graves is concerned that portfolios are already becoming too rigid a process that attempts to show positive results too soon. He believes that "sustained, long-term learning about the possibilities of portfolios as a learning/evaluation medium may be lost in the rush to mandate their use" (p. 1). He adds, "Without careful exploration, portfolio use is doomed to failure. They will be too quickly tried, found wanting, and just as quickly abandoned" (p. 1). To insure the growth and use of portfolios, Graves suggests that we involve the students, help the staff keep portfolios of their own, broaden the purpose of the portfolios, keep instructional opportunities open, and study the effect of school policy on portfolio practice.(p. 3) Graves summed up the need for flexibility in the use of portfolios with by saying, "If our goals are to keep students reading and writing, to help them get better at both, and to help them become independent learners, then we must nurture self-evaluation of writing and reading as process and as a final product" (p. 60).

Because portfolios will have to be assessed if they are used in the school setting, it is of the utmost importance that an evaluation tool that is fair, flexible, and understandable by students, teachers, and parents be used. The assessment tool that works best is the rubric. According to Moskal (2000), "Scoring rubrics are typically employed when a judgement of quality is desired and may be used to evaluate a broad range of subjects and activities" (p. 1). The rubrics may be analytic or holistic, and they may be general or specific. Rubrics are generally four to six point scales that have descriptions for what the score represents. In creating a rubric, Moskal (2000) suggests that the teacher start with the qualities that represent a top-level product and assign that the highest score. Next, the lowest level should be established. The descriptions should suggest what type of performance would show a very limited understanding of the task. The middle range scores should then be established, with descriptions, by contrasting the top and bottom of the scale.

Moskal and Leydens (2000) assert that in order for a teacher to create a valid rubric, he/she must first clearly state what he/she wants to learn from the students and how the students are expected to demonstrate the proficiencies. It is crucial that students and teachers know what is expected before the task is undertaken. Reliability is established by having well-defined scoring categories, having clear differences between categories, and by using anchor papers as guides or models for what each score represents. The goal is to have two independent evaluators assign the same score to any given paper or project. Authentic assessment is an important tool for students, teachers, and parents. It is complex, but it is worth the time and energy needed to master it. Used in combination with effective objective tests, students and teachers can accurately assess where they are and where they need to go. Portfolios can be an integral part of that assessment. Because portfolios focus on writing, they are obviously great tools for the English classroom, but their flexibility allows for their adaptation to almost any classroom. The keys are teaching the portfolio as process and product where students know the audience and the expectations.

Procedure

The setting for this study is an urban Title I classroom of five tenth grade classes. Two are honors classes, and the remaining three are standard classes. Attendance is a major obstacle for many of my students. About 140 students participated in the research, and all but two are African-American. I introduced the project to my classes in the following sequence:

1. I provided examples of portfolios that I have created for graduate classes and discussed how they work as examples of my best work and as an example of the growth/progress that I made over the course of the class. I provided guidelines to help students understand the goals of the portfolio, as well as its structure.

2. Students created portfolios from prior journal entries and essays. This took three weeks.

3. The portfolios were graded by me and returned to the students to make sure that the students understood the process.

4. I introduced the student scoring guide and the rubric that I planned to use to evaluate their writing. Students practiced using the guide and the rubric on samples of their own work.

5. After gaining an understanding of the scoring guide and the rubric, students revised their portfolios to include work that best exhibits the standards of the scoring guide and rubric. They had the option of revising existing work or creating new entries.

6. At the end of the process, students completed a survey to provide their input on the use of portfolios.

I collected data from student surveys, the graded portfolios, student responses in the portfolios, attendance during the project, classroom management issues during the project, and a journal kept by me. My goal was both to triangulate the data to assure the accuracy of the interpretation and to get a mix of qualitative and quantitative data to represent the levels of achievement and success of the project. Data was collected from all of my English students over the course of a full semester.

Results

Approximately 85% of the students successfully created a portfolio that followed the established guidelines. I was surprised by the attitude that many students showed: They were quite receptive to the task, and they were enthusiastic in their efforts. In general, they preferred the portfolios to tests and standard assignments. At first, classroom management was worse because students were a little frustrated by the open-ended nature of the project. They had grown accustomed to looking for the "right answer." Since writing has no one correct answer, they had a difficult time beginning. After seeing some examples and trying a few entries, their confidence rose and they settled into the project. At that point, classroom management problems diminished, as they had developed individual plans and time-lines for completion of their portfolios.

A major finding of this research was its effects on student organization. The portfolios helped students with issues of organization. Both in their feedback forms and verbally they stated that they liked having their work collected in a single, ordered binder. Urban secondary students generally struggle with organization, and it was interesting to watch these skills improve over the course of the semester. Many of our students have chaotic lives, filled with parental visitation, after school activities, part-time jobs, and many other considerations. Each day they knew they would come to English class and have access to their writings up to that point. Whether working on rough drafts, polishing pieces, or peer editing, they became secure and confident in their work. During the first phase when students were gathering together prior essays and journal entries, I talked with them about different ways to present information so that it made sense to the reader. As part of these discussions we talked about time management and how it is possible to be very busy in life, and still accomplish one's goals. It is important for my students to understand that they have power in their lives. By helping them learn organization, I believe I help empower them in many areas.

In the second phase of the portfolio process when students were using the rubric on their own writing and adding more examples to show their development as writers we revisited the organization issue. Many of the students had been saying to me how much progress they felt like they were making in theft understanding of organization as a process, just like writing is a process. As they were better able to evaluate their own writing skills, they were also better able to see the places in their lives that needed better organization. By making the connection between an organized, safe place to keep their work and a well-ordered place to think and study, many students have become more successful in all of their classes, because they aren't trying to chase down papers or study on the fly. Finally, I found that the project helped me to look at student development as a whole, not just as a series of achieved or failed objectives. It helped me to refine some of the ways that I teach writing, and it helped me to look the written product holistically as well. I know that in the past, I have not done a good job of teaching and evaluating style and voice. I believe that this project has helped me become a better writing and reading teacher.

References

Berryman, L., & Russell, D. (2001). Portfolios across the curriculum: whole school assessment in Kentucky. English Journal, 90(6), 76-83.

Bishop, P. A. (1996). Promoting student self-knowledge though writing portfolios. Middle School Journal, 27(1), 33-36.

Brualdi, A. C. (1996). Multiple intelligences: Gardner's theories. Practical Assessment, Research & Evaluation, 5(10). Available online: http://ericae.net/pare/getvn.asp?v=5&n=10.

Burch, C. B. (1997). Creating a two-tiered portfolio rubric. English Journal, 86(1), 55-58. Chapman, C. (1990). Authentic writing assessment. Practical Assessment, Research & Evaluation, 2(7). Available online: http://ericae.net/pare/getvn.asp?v=5&n=10.

Forgette-Giroux, R. & Simon, M. (2000). Organizational issues related to portfolio assessment implementation in the classroom. Practical Assessment, Research, & Evaluation, 7(4). Available online: http://ericae.net/pare/getvn.asp?v=7&n=4.

Grabill, P. (1998). A portfolio experience in writing across the team. Middle School Journal, 29(6), 20-24.

Graves, D. H. & Sunstein, B.S. (Eds.) (1992) Portfolio portraits. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.

Johannessen, L.R. (2001). Teaching thinking and writing for a new century. English Journal, 90(6), 38-46.

Mondock, S. L. (1997). Portfolios-behind the story. English Journal, 86(1), 59-64.

Moskal, B. M. (2000). Scoring rubrics: what, when, and how? Practical Assessment, Research, & Evaluation, 7(3). Available online: http://ericae.net/pare/getvn.asp?v=7&n=3.

Moskal, B. M., & Leydens, J. A. (2000). Scoring rubric development: validity and reliability. Practical Assessment, Research, & Evaluation, 7(10). Available online: http://ericae.net/pare/getvn.asp?v=7&n=10.

Popham, W. J. (1999). Why standardized tests don't measure educational equality. Educational Leadership, 56(6), 31-40.

Porter, C., & Clelland, J. (1995). The portfolio as a learning strategy. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.

Schipper, B., & Rossi, J. (1997). Portfolios in the classroom. York, MN: Stenhouse Publishers.

Shafer, G. (1997). School reform and the high school proficiency test. English Journal, 86(5), 39-41.

Spandel, V. (2001). Creating writers through 6-trait writing assessment and instruction (3rd ed.). New York: Addison Wesley Longman.

Wiggins, G. (1990). The case for authentic assessment. Practical Assessment, Research, & Evaluation, 2(2). Available online: http://ericae.net/pare/getvn.asp?v=2&n=2.

Wilcox, B.L. (1997). Writing portfolios: active vs. passive. English Journal, 86(6), 34-37.

Jennifer A. Borek, Ph.D., The University of Memphis

Jerry O. Chappell, Frayser High School

Jennifer Borek is an Assistant Professor of Secondary English Education, and Jerry Chappell is a secondary English teacher and doctoral student.