Keywords: Portfolios

Texts Abstracted on this page are all from the following volume: Black, Laurel, Donald Daiker, Jeffrey Sommers, and Gail Stygall, eds. New Directions in Portfolio Assessment: Reflective Practice, Critical Theory, and Large-Scale Scoring.

Pat Belanoff "Portfolios And Literacy: Why?"

Edward M. White "Portfolios As An Assessment Concept"

Peter Elbow "Will The Virtues Of Portfolios Blind Us To Their Potential Dangers"

James Berlin "The Subversions Of The Portfolio"

Tom Romano "Removing The Blindfold: Portfolios In Fiction Writing Classes"

Glenda Conway "Portfolio Cover Letters, Students' Self-Presenation, And Teachers' Ethics"

John Beall "Portfolios, Research, And Writing About Science"

Cheryl Forbes "Reading Portfolios Conversationally"

William Thelin "The Connection Between Response Styles And Portfolio Assessment: Three Case Studies Of Student Revision"

Agnes A. Cardoni, Rebecca Fraser, And Janet Wright Starner "Collaboration, Collages, And Portfolios: A Workshop"

Sandra Murphy "Writing Portfolios In K-12 Schools: Implications For Linguistically Diverse Students"

Sharon Hamilton "Portfolio Pedagogy: Is A Theoretical Construct Good Enough?"

James Reither And Russell A. Hunt "Beyond Portfolios: Scenes For Dialogic Reading And Writing"

Chris Anson "Portfolios For Teachers; Writing Our Way To Reflective Practice"

Nedra Reynolds "Graduate Writers And Portfolios: Issues Of Professionalism, Authority, And Resistance"

Kathleen Blake Yancey "Make Haste Slowly: Graduate Teaching Assistants And Portfolios"

Irwin Weiser "Portfolios And The New Teacher Of Writing"

Laurel Black, Donald Daiker, Jeffrey Sommers, And Gail Stygall "Writing Like A Woman And Being Rewarded For It: Gender, Assessment, And Reflective Letters From Miami University's Student Portfolios"

Gail Stygall, Laurel Black, Donald Daiker, And Jeffrey Sommers "Gendered Textuality: Assigning Gender To Portfolios"

Robert L. Broad "Portfolio Scoring: A Contradiction In Terms"

William Condon And Liz Hamp-Lyons "Maintaining A Portfolio-Based Writing Assessment: Research That Informs Program Development"

Russel K. Kurst, Marjorie Roemer, And Lucille M. Schultz "Portfolio Negotiations: Acts In Speech"

David W. Smit "A WPA's Nightmare; Reflections On Using Portfolios As A Course Exit Exam"

Charles I. Schuster "Climbing The Slippery Slope Of Assessment; The Programmatic Use Of Writing Portfolios"

Brian Huot "Beyond The Classroom: Using Portfolios To Assess Writing."

Carl R. Lovitt And Art Young "Portfolios In The Disciplines: Sharing Knowledge In The Contact Zone."

Black, Laurel, Donald Daiker, Jeffrey Sommers, and Gail Stygall, eds. New Directions in Portfolio Assessment: Reflective Practice, Critical Theory, and Large-Scale Scoring. Portsmouth, NH:Boynton/Cook, 1994.

OVERVIEW:

New Directions in Portfolio Assessment contains a collection of conference papers from the 1992 Miami University Conference on Portfolios. Many issues are considered, including portfolio validity and reliability, use of portfolio assessment in and out of the classroom, practices that make portfolio assessment more ethical, and difficult questions that still need to be answered.

In the introduction to the book, the editors note that qualitative, classroom-based research has generally been favored over experimental, positivistic research in studies regarding portfolios. But the editors favor Kirsch's "methodological pluralism" and incorporate articles that use "the case study, quantitative analysis, discourse analysis, and reflective administrative practice" (3). Therefore, readers get a picture of particular classrooms as well as a picture that has been put together based on "research emerging from the aggregate data available in large-scale portfolio projects" (3).

This book is divided into three parts: perspectives of the conference's keynote speakers (Pat Belanoff, Edward M. White, Peter Elbow, and James Berlin), portfolios in the classroom, and large-scale portfolio assessment. A brief summary of each of the 26 articles in the book follows.

PAT BELANOFF "PORTFOLIOS AND LITERACY: WHY?" PP. 13-24.

Belanoff would like teachers and administrators to carefully examine their use of portfolios to insure that portfolios don't become another means of conventional testing, but rather that they continue to allow for full and multiple literacy practices. She addresses the important issue of the portfolio's potential to "nourish" literacy, which she defines here using Scribner's three-part approach with its emphasis on the connection between literacy and society. Scribner emphasizes three metaphors: "literacy as adaptation, which stresses functional aspects of the ability to read and write"; "literacy as power, which stresses ways in which reading and writing can advance group and community status"; and "literacy as grace, which stresses intellectual, aesthetic, and spiritual participation in the accumulated creations and knowledge of humankind, made available through the written word" (13). Belanoff, providing a brief view of the history of writing, shows how composition classes beginning in the 19th century saw a separation of those literacies, with English departments being relegated to teaching form and style--"literacy as grace"--while knowledge became the province of other departments. Writing instruction gradually improved with the process writing movement of the 1970s.

Belanoff believes that portfolios are particularly important in that, while most methods of testing validate only academic literacy, portfolios offer a chance to validate multiple literacies, which is important given the variety of students being taught (non-native English speakers, nontraditional students, students from various cultural backgrounds). But she warns that while some are sympathetic with the trend to allow portfolios to validate multiple literacies, others push for standardized testing to "ensure uniformity in educational goals throughout the country" (20). She says portfolios are a kind of compromise to acknowledge mandated testing without undercutting teaching. "What they are is enough: a way of integrating testing, teaching, and curriculum; a way of reintroducing a piece of the most laudable feature of oral testing, the awareness that literacy of all kinds exists within a social setting" (20).

EDWARD M. WHITE "PORTFOLIOS AS AN ASSESSMENT CONCEPT" PP. 25-39

This article suggests that portfolio assessment provides a possible defense against a return to indirect assessment, especially assessment that is imposed by administrators who wish to assess a college's effectiveness, not necessarily for reasons that are in the best interest of students. If such assessment must inevitably move forward, White suggests that at least arguing for portfolio assessment (rather than indirect assessment) would "offer to the world of assessment a view of student learning that is active, engaged, and dynamic, as opposed to the overwhelmingly passive concept that still dominates the assessment movement" (27). We need to view portfolio assessment as something more than a "neat teaching tool" if we are to have an impact on American education. We need to see it as possibly affecting educational policy, funding, and outcomes. Some teachers, White says, argue against taking portfolios outside the classroom for fear that they will be subjected to outside standards and made to fit into a more conventional mode as questions arise regarding the criteria with which portfolios are to be assessed. While White sympathizes with this view, he also believes such a discussion regarding standards might have positive results that leads to "serious and honest assessment of student work" (30). Finally, he proposes that, in order for portfolio assessment to seem feasible both in and out of the classroom and have an impact on education, we have to make it demonstrably valid and reliable, as well as cost effective.

PETER ELBOW "WILL THE VIRTUES OF PORTFOLIOS BLIND US TO THEIR POTENTIAL DANGERS" PP. 40-55

Portfolios, Elbow says, lend themselves to assessment, and when used for assessment, they do present some positives. For instance, while they do inevitably serve the need for a product, they also allow teachers to see a student's process, and they allow students to postpone lower order concerns such as grammar and usage until they've had enough time to work on other aspects of writing. But Elbow also believes that viewing portfolios as a means of assessment carries some dangers. He says, "When portfolios enhance validity, they undermine reliability" (45). That is, when they represent more valid pictures of a writer's complex processes, abilities, and weaknesses, and when they provide a valid picture of a writer attempting a variety of genres, reader reliability becomes much more difficult, because (as some research shows) readers have a much more difficult time proposing a single score to a student's portfolio than they do to an individual work. Single scores, Elbow says, simply can't sum up a portfolio's diversity. And he disagrees with White. Elbow does not believe that we should allow political pressures to push us into thinking portfolios must be scored with a single holistic score. But, since Elbow does admit that many cases do insist that we make assessment, he suggests that evaluators use one of two phrases to assess portfolios: "Excellent" or "Poor/Unsatisfactory."

JAMES BERLIN "THE SUBVERSIONS OF THE PORTFOLIO" PP. 56-67

Berlin praises the use of portfolio assessment as a means to subvert "the conditions of profit-making corporations" (56) that are being perpetuated in universities. These "conditions," largely inculcated in students through the conventional testing and placement procedures they have gone through during most of their school years, encourages students to view their education as a commodity that will ensure them a job. Marketing campaigns of companies encourage people to view commodity, personal enjoyment, and outcome without any sense of how products are created or the "complex systems of relationships that help shape our daily lives" (59). Portfolios, then, are revolutionary in that they view "writing as an act that creates and discovers knowledge instead of simply recording it" (60). Portfolio assessment doesn't view knowledge and writing as a product or commodity. By exploring postmodern conceptions of signification, subjectivity, and contingent narratives in portfolios, Berlin hopes students will be able to see the complex relationships and views that have an effect on their lives.

TOM ROMANO "REMOVING THE BLINDFOLD: PORTFOLIOS IN FICTION WRITING CLASSES" PP. 73-82

Romano believes that having students create portfolios in their fiction writing classes allows them to become more cognizant of their own writing development. In cover letters, students explicitly state their difficulties, level of commitment, and areas of growth. He says, "My grading is informed considerably by the students, who show and explain what they have learned and come to value."

GLENDA CONWAY "PORTFOLIO COVER LETTERS, STUDENTS' SELF-PRESENATION, AND TEACHERS' ETHICS" PP. 83-92

Conway looks closely at the role that portfolio cover letters play and at possible "hidden agendas" for assigning them to students. Teachers, she says, expect certain things of cover letters--positive reflection, a demonstration that the students think like writers, and a demonstration that the students can analyze their processes. Some students, however, view the cover letter merely as a formality, not understanding a teacher's expectations or wishes. Conway says that "given the cover letter's prominent position in the portfolio and in the evaluator's judgment, we must unveil and then openly deconstruct its often hidden agenda" (88). Because she does view self-reflective pieces as important devices for getting students to think critically about their writing, she offers practical advice for teachers to use them more effectively and ethically. First, ask questions and assign pieces that will get students to do the kind of metacognitive thinking that teachers expect. Also, have students practice this kind of writing throughout the semester rather than just expecting it for the portfolio cover letter. And teach and model for students how to scrutinize their own work. Finally, engage in classroom discussions about the self-reflective pieces, making your expectations explicit.

JOHN BEALL "PORTFOLIOS, RESEARCH, AND WRITING ABOUT SCIENCE" PP. 93-102

Beall teaches "Writing for Science," a course that "begins with the assumption that students can learn to write more clearly by writing to educate 'lay' readers about scientific theories and discoveries" (94). Portfolios allow students to spend more time understanding the secondary sources used in research papers, which helps them to gain knowledge and to use that knowledge as a springboard for their own work. Beall points out that some might reject the use of portfolios, worried that this kind of assessment won't prepare students for "college exams and the time-pressured facts of adult life" (101), but he answers that many employers will also look for workers who can do a variety of tasks over a period of time, and who see that their work is a cumulative process.

CHERYL FORBES "READING PORTFOLIOS CONVERSATIONALLY" PP. 103-112

Forbes believes that because writing is a social, collaborative activity, teachers should read students' portfolios as "conversations," not as pieces written in isolation. She demonstrates in this article how she read her collaborating students' portfolios together, looking at how voices of a student's collaborators enter into that student's portfolio. She believes that reading the portfolios in such a way helps her to realize how effectively collaborative writing classrooms allow students "to write more and better, to think more deeply, to learn to love and understand the writing process" (112).

WILLIAM THELIN "THE CONNECTION BETWEEN RESPONSE STYLES AND PORTFOLIO ASSESSMENT: THREE CASE STUDIES OF STUDENT REVISION" PP. 113-125

Thelin conducted case study research which demonstrates that teachers don't always fully examine their goals for using portfolios or "ensure that their class structures, evaluation criteria, and response styles" coincide with the goals. For instance, in his case study, the instructor's criteria for assessment were to produce "polished, final drafts," but many of the instructor's intervening comments were aimed at raising the consciousness level of the students. This "inconsistency between grading criteria and the implicit and/or explicit criteria written as comments on student papers" can confuse and frustrate students and lead to unfair evaluation practices.

AGNES A. CARDONI, REBECCA FRASER, AND JANET WRIGHT STARNER "COLLABORATION, COLLAGES, AND PORTFOLIOS: A WORKSHOP" PP. 129-139

This collage essay pieces together fifteen different voices that discuss doubts, frustrations, explorations, and trials associated with portfolio assessment. Its purpose seems to be to merely raise issues for one's consideration.

SANDRA MURPHY "WRITING PORTFOLIOS IN K-12 SCHOOLS: IMPLICATIONS FOR LINGUISTICALLY DIVERSE STUDENTS" PP. 140-156

Murphy suggests that there are clear benefits to using portfolios, particularly for linguistic minority students. Traditional standardized testing is problematic, she believes, because linguistic minority students may not have had similar experiences and backgrounds which those tests tap into. She believes portfolio assessment is fairer. First, portfolios offer a "greater degree of student choice" (156), which might help motivate students as well as allow for cultural difference. Also, students are not hindered as much by time constraints. "In addition, because portfolios provide multiple opportunities for students to show what they can do in a variety of writing conditions, they provide a more comprehensive assessment of performance" (156). Portfolios also allow teachers to gather information about writers' processes. This information is important for teachers -- especially teachers of non-native speakers--because it can inform teachers about "why and when students need help in the revision process and it can help teachers learn when the characteristics of writing may be related to misconceptions the student may have about the teacher's expectations" (147). Finally, Murphy says, portfolios can "make the assessment process a learning process for our students" (156). Teachers can do this by giving students a voice in the assessment process, by providing more detailed and individual feedback, and by making evaluation criteria clear to students so that they can learn how to evaluate themselves.

SHARON HAMILTON "PORTFOLIO PEDAGOGY: IS A THEORETICAL CONSTRUCT GOOD ENOUGH?" PP. 157-167

Hamilton begins by pointing out some "theoretical constructs about writing and language learning that inform portfolio assessment" (157): teaching and assessment should acknowledge multiple literacies, portfolios more accurately assess writing progress by including a variety of writing written over time, portfolios "provide congruence among classroom instruction, classroom assessment, and large scale assessment" (160), "writers should remain in charge of their writing" (160), "reflection and revision contribute to writing improvement" (161), and "reflection and revision are enhanced in a collaborative learning environment" (161). But, unfortunately, portfolios are primarily seen as a means of assessment, and Hamilton resists this emphasis. She believes teachers should attempt to "separate the compilation of a portfolio from assessment, in order to emphasize to students that assessment is merely one of the several steps in the evolution of a lifetime portfolio of their writing rather than the entire or even prime reason for putting their writing into a portfolio" (166). Rather than something imposed on students, portfolios should be used by students "according to their short-term needs and long-term intentions" (167).

JAMES REITHER AND RUSSELL A. HUNT "BEYOND PORTFOLIOS: SCENES FOR DIALOGIC READING AND WRITING" PP. 168-182

Reither and Hunt say that they eliminated the use of portfolio assessment at their school when they realized that "the social motives for and functions of writing got lost from view, not only for faculty charged with determining ranks and grades, but also for students charged with completing assignments to fill a portfolio with writing" (172).

CHRIS ANSON "PORTFOLIOS FOR TEACHERS; WRITING OUR WAY TO REFLECTIVE PRACTICE" PP. 185-200.

Anson believes that teacher portfolios help to "legitimize classroom experience and wed teaching and instructional inquiry" (186). Recently, organizations like the American Association of Higher Education have emphasized "personal accounts of teaching " placed at the "center of instructional development" (186)--teaching portfolios. Such portfolios include primary material (syllabi, assignments, student evaluations) and secondary materials (reflections on course evaluations, self-evaluations, goal statements). "It contains documents that show teachers in action, both creating their teaching and reflecting on it during moments of introspection" (187). He ends by warning that problems can arise concerning assessment of these portfolios since working out criteria for assessment is difficult. He suggests that "an agenda of research and development for the teaching portfolio . . . might begin by acknowledging that no monolithic concept of 'good teaching' exists" (199).

NEDRA REYNOLDS "GRADUATE WRITERS AND PORTFOLIOS: ISSUES OF PROFESSIONALISM, AUTHORITY, AND RESISTANCE" PP. 201-209

Reynolds discusses the need and her attempt to involve graduate students in creating portfolios that might help them "find their own ways towards professional savvy and discursive authority" (201). She says there exists a notion that graduate students will get needed writing experience in their courses. But seminar papers, she says, are expected, not taught, and created in isolation. Reynolds suggests that implementing portfolios can allow students to practice (e.g. with different discourses, identities) the kinds of writing that will be expected of them and that they will be rewarded for.

KATHLEEN BLAKE YANCEY "MAKE HASTE SLOWLY: GRADUATE TEACHING ASSISTANTS AND PORTFOLIOS" PP. 210-218

Yancey believes that new graduate teaching assistants should wait at least one term until they try portfolio assessment. During that first term, TAs need time to learn to teach, to see how writers develop, and to gain experience reading and responding to texts. Her main point is that beginning TAs generally have very little preparation and experience, and should not be asked to learn about portfolios in addition to everything else that is expected of them.

IRWIN WEISER "PORTFOLIOS AND THE NEW TEACHER OF WRITING" PP. 219-229

Weiser disagrees with Yancey, suggesting that beginning teachers, with guidance, support, and practical advice from a supervising teacher and colleagues, can and should use portfolio assessment in their classrooms. The portfolio system allows teachers to "separate, at least temporarily, the two frequently conflicting roles assigned us by the institution: evaluator and instructor" (224). They are also more likely to get a chance to practice reading and responding to student texts before they grade those texts. Finally, portfolios encourage beginning teachers to see that revision and progress are more important than single-paper grades.

LAUREL BLACK, DONALD DAIKER, JEFFREY SOMMERS, AND GAIL STYGALL "WRITING LIKE A WOMAN AND BEING REWARDED FOR IT: GENDER, ASSESSMENT, AND REFLECTIVE LETTERS FROM MIAMI UNIVERSITY'S STUDENT PORTFOLIOS" PP. 235-247

The authors of this article found, based on research on women and writing and based on an examination of portfolios gathered at their university in 1991, that "women students fare more successfully on portfolio assessment than they had on single-sitting, impromptu exams in the past" (7). The authors' look at research on gender and writing (Chodorow, Gilligan, Keroes, Flynn) showed, first of all, that women's voices in writing tended to focus more on connectedness and attachment, while men's voices in writing tended to focus more on individual achievement and autonomy. Secondly, research indicates that, "for a variety of cultural and social reasons, the characteristics and structures of 'strong' writing have reflected culturally constructed characteristics of masculinity" (237), and "writing like a woman" is seen as a disadvantage, especially in the academy. However, the research at Miami revealed the opposite. In a study of portfolios, researchers noticed differences between the reflective letters written by males and those written by females. These differences were consistent with the above findings in that the men tended to posit a public relationship with the reader, and women a private one. An examination of the cover letters also revealed that women more frequently depicted themselves as writers, wrote about the importance of writing to their lives, and were more likely to discuss collaboration in writing. The portfolios at Miami, the researchers believe, happened to emphasize the kind of writing that the women displayed. The authors say that this research illustrates the importance of large-scale holistic assessors looking closely at subjective and culturally-biased notions of "good" and "bad" writing and how that might disadvantage certain groups over others in assessment.

GAIL STYGALL, LAUREL BLACK, DONALD DAIKER, AND JEFFREY SOMMERS "GENDERED TEXTUALITY: ASSIGNING GENDER TO PORTFOLIOS" PP. 248-262

The authors conducted a research study of portfolios at Miami University. Readers of portfolios said that based on topic selection, stance toward topic, amount of detail included, word choice, and pronoun usage, they were able--about 70 percent of the time--to determine the writer's gender. Their assumptions about male and female writing differences coincided with Robin Lakoff's mid-1970s gender research. The authors advise that portfolio readers conduct calibration sessions "in which raters explore their constructions of student writers" (262) to see how stereotypes and expectations may affect grading.

ROBERT L. BROAD "PORTFOLIO SCORING: A CONTRADICTION IN TERMS" PP. 263-276

Broad believes that the "peculiarly 20th century hunger to quantify writing ability and demand interrater agreement has never...served teachers and students of writing well" (266), and portfolios especially should not be subjected to this in that they emphasize pedagogical items like context, choice, difference, and multiplicity. But, he says, "we persist in stripping context and quashing difference" when it comes to evaluating portfolios, just as we do in scoring standardized tests. Instead, he proposes offering brief narratives as assessments, and, when those aren't as feasible--as in large-scale assessment--he suggests a "pass/fail" decision along with a checklist of several items on which raters can note a writer's strengths and weaknesses. He ends by saying that narrative, positioned assessment, rather than positivistic assessment, better supports a democratic culture.

WILLIAM CONDONS AND LIZ HAMP-LYONS "MAINTAINING A PORTFOLIO-BASED WRITING ASSESSMENT: RESEARCH THAT INFORMS PROGRAM DEVELOPMENT" PP. 277-285

Previous research conducted by the authors had indicated that "readers do not attend equally to all the texts in a portfolio" (278), because they become affected by their impressions after reading the first work(s) in the portfolio. They found in new research that raters who formed themselves into groups and took a more active role (e.g. visited each other's classes, met to discuss particular portfolios) were more invested in the portfolios produced in their and their colleagues' classes, and attended to the writing in the portfolios more closely.

RUSSEL K. KURST, MARJORIE ROEMER, AND LUCILLE M. SCHULTZ "PORTFOLIO NEGOTIATIONS: ACTS IN SPEECH" PP. 286-300

The authors encourage "group discussion of student work" when grading portfolios as a way of subjecting "decisions to debate and possible revision" (286) rather than making decisions in isolation.

DAVID W. SMIT "A WPA'S NIGHTMARE; REFLECTIONS ON USING PORTFOLIOS AS A COURSE EXIT EXAM" PP. 303-313

As a WPA concerned with issues of portfolio validity and reliability, Smit proposes that we think carefully about criteria used to determine general writing competence as well as department-specific criteria.

CHARLES I. SCHUSTER "CLIMBING THE SLIPPERY SLOPE OF ASSESSMENT; THE PROGRAMMATIC USE OF WRITING PORTFOLIOS" PP. 314-324

Schuster examines problems that he feels may "doom portfolio assessment programmatically within [his university's] writing curriculum." For instance, he is concerned about the extent to which teachers may appropriate student texts over a semester's worth of providing feedback for revision, as well as the extent to which students come to rely on outside help. Also, raters of portfolios have "a strong tendency to create a portrait of the author based on the writing" (319), which might move readers "away from normed criteria replacing careful evaluation with reader response" (319). Finally, he is concerned about "whether we can form valid and reliable holistic judgments of portfolios that consist of two or three different kinds of work produced in dissimilar settings" (320).

BRIAN HUOT "BEYOND THE CLASSROOM: USING PORTFOLIOS TO ASSESS WRITING." PP. 325-333

The author believes that one of the most valuable aspects of portfolio assessment is that it has reconceptualized the notion about what it takes to measure a person's writing ability. Instead of endangering portfolios by trying to make them satisfy the needs of assessment, he says, we should not view them as THE means of assessment, but consider them "an option from which teachers and testers can choose when deciding upon the most relevant and valid measure for a specific testing situation" (332).

CARL R. LOVITT AND ART YOUNG "PORTFOLIOS IN THE DISCIPLINES: SHARING KNOWLEDGE IN THE CONTACT ZONE." PP. 334-346

The authors examine the difficulties and learning experiences involved when faculty from the English and Finance departments at their college collaborated on developing a Writing in the Disciplines program using portfolios.