>Ouch! Suppose we put on our activity theory hats for a
moment - the
>artifacts that the students produce in learning activity are
material
>traces of that activity - some measures of what a student did,
alone and
>possibly with others. In creating a graph, for example, if the
object of
>the activity is the subject learning, with the goal of
understanding a
>relationship between the two things that are graphed, then the
graph is the
>material means through which that action is accomplished. But
that is not
>enough - we are interested also in what the students' have
internalized
>through this process. So a portfolio that is only a simple
collection of
>artifacts is what I would call superficial - it is a measure of
performance
>but does not alone indicate competance. For a richer
description, we need
>more. Asking the student to provide some explanation of the
artifacts, for
>example, selecting and relating their artifact designs to the
learning
>goals is one way to take the process a level deeper.
Bill, this is where I see the portfolio becoming problematic. I
see the strength of a portfolio in that it is a tool that can
allow a student to reflect upon their learning. Your reference
of a student selecting and relating their artifact designs to
the "learning goals" for me implies goals that are out there and
stable to a certain extent. My argument is a portfolio can be an
essential tool in which student/students can reflect and take
ownership in their learning, why taint it in making it an
objective form of assessment.
>
>If the portfolio is to provide some indication of a zoped, then
the
>activity unfolds differently. Perhaps the teacher may
constrain the
>choices the students have to demonstrate their performance, by
providing or
>suggesting specific re-presentational forms. Either way,
portfolio
>assessment in this way is not completely divorced from
practice, but grows
>out of it. One purpose in the design of portfolios as an
assessment is
>its use to mediate parent conferences, which seems a nice way
to link home
>and school activity.
While I agree that a teacher may need to mediate choices to a
certain extent, a portfolio needs to be an assessment tool of
the student not solely the teacher. The best conferences with
portfolios I have seen have been the student demonstrating what
they are learning to the parents. I think we both agree that a
portfolio can be a valuable assessment tool, but the question
for me is an assessment tool for who. I question if there is one
assessment tool that can meet everyones needs such as on Peg's
url. As a teacher it would make sense for me to have a
portfolio of my students learning, but that should not be
blurred with each student's portfolio. Likewise, with Peg's
interesting approach to portfolio assessment, it ought not be
confused with the teacher and student's needs in portfolio
assessment. I question the sense of creating one assessment
tool that will meet everyone's needs. What a school district or
college needs from a portfolio may not have anything in common
with what a student or teacher needs from a portfolio. To
paraphrase Newman and Holzman portfolios should be a tool and
result not a tool for results.
Nate