assessing e-portfolios through a constructivist lens

7/30/2019 Assessing E-portfolios Through a Constructivist Lens

1/8

0 Running Head: Assessing E-portfolios through a Constructivist Lens

Assessing E-portfolios through a Constructivist Lens

Assignment 1

ETEC 530

Gillian Sudlow

The University of British Columbia

Samson Nashon


2/8


Introduction

Constructivism requires a learner-centred environment in which the learner actively constructs

knowledge through the process of authentic tasks and assessment. Electronic portfolios (EPs) can be

effective learning and assessment tools that align with constructivist epistemology if all stakeholders

remain cognizant of their primary goal to capture the learning process and encourage students to

engage in self-reflection as they seek to discover what and how they learn.

By examining EPs through a constructivist lens, one can see their alignment with constructivist

epistemology as they enable learners to use technology as a cognitive tool to actively construct

knowledge, create a learner-centred environment through authentic tasks, and authentically assess the

learning process.

What is an Electronic Portfolio?

An Electronic portfolio (EP) is a digital collection of work, or artifacts, selected and reflected upon by the

learner that tells the story of the learners progress and change over time in their efforts to achieve

learning goals (Wang, 2007; Barrett, 2005, 2007). Technological affordances of EPs provide many

advantages over traditional paper-based portfolios, ultimately bringing them in closer alignment to the

goals of constructivism.

A digital platform allows learners to include artifacts and reflections in a variety of media formats

including text, images, audio and video (Barrett, 2005; 2007), thus supporting a variety of learning styles

and enhancing student engagement. Digital formats allow students to archive data and change and

update their portfolios to reflect changes in their construction of knowledge. The use of hyperlinks

allows learners to make connections among their collection of artifacts as well as to learning outcomes

goals or standards; such links support deep learning and metacognition along with making assessment

more authentic (Barrett, 2005, 2007; Wang, 2007). Many digital platforms also afford collaboration with


3/8


peers and teachers enabling social learning and social negotiation of meaning through reciprocal

feedback. The process of using digital technologies to create and organize artifacts using an electronic

medium is an authentic task in itself as competencies with ICT (Information and Computer Technology)

skills reflect real world tasks. Moreover, As learners create their own electronic portfolios, their unique

voice should be evident from navigating the portfolios and reading the reflection on the screen. In an

electronic portfolio, the ability to add multimedia elements expands the definition of voice within that

rhetorical construct. (Barrett, 2005, p.9) Finally, because of their digital format, EPs lend themselves to

all modes of course delivery classroom, blended and online.

While using technology to create a portfolio can be a motivating factor and engage learners, it can also

be a barrier in regards to learner access and technical competency (Barrett, 2005). Access to technology

is becoming less of a factor, even in remote and economically depressed communities as internet access

is becoming more widespread and as more open-source technologies become available; however, it

should still be a consideration of the teacher before deciding to use EPs. Learner competency with ICT

skills, however, may vary within a class. To minimize technical competencies from becoming a barrier to

learning, teachers should survey students before beginning the process of EPs to assess their level of

competency and then provide appropriate scaffolding. In conjunction with teacher scaffolding, learners

should be encouraged to solve and trouble-shoot technical problems on their own and look for peer

support within their learning community, thus fostering both autonomous and social learning (Chau &

Cheng, 2010).

E-Portfolios as Authentic Tasks

Constructivism dictates that learners take an active role in their construction of knowledge through

participation in authentic tasks. Learners take ownership of their portfolios and thus their own learning

through goal setting, monitoring progress, reflecting on what theyve learned, and receiving and giving


4/8


feedback. The assembly of an EP requires a leaner to not only create, select and organize artifacts in a

digital platform, but also to reflect upon, evaluate through self and peer assessment and synthesize their

learning experience throughout the entire process (Barrett, 2007; Chau & Cheng, 2010; Clark &

Adamson, 2009; Wang, 2007).

The artifacts that a learner selects to include in their EPs are meant to represent evidence of their

learning experience and progress over time (Barrett, 2007). While the assembly of such evidence is in

itself an authentic task, the artifacts which constitute the evidence could themselves be the products of

authentic tasks. Artifacts are coursework, projects and assignments that have been done as part of a

class. For example, an artifact could be a multi-media project, resulting from a project-based learning

task, or an essay response outlining a solution to an ill-structured problem. Whatever the artifact, the

evidence of learning is not complete without an accompanying reflection.

Researchers agree that the reflective process of creating an EP is critical to achieving the constructivist

goals of developing an understanding of how one learns to become an independent and life-long learner

(Barrett, 2005; 2007; Chau & Cheng, 2010; Clark & Adamson, 2009; Paulson & Paulson, 1994).

Reflections in an EP can include rationales for the inclusion of an artifact, personal assessment and

explanations of how the artifact represents their achievement of learning goals or standards, responses

to peer and teacher feedback, and personal responses detailing the learning process and experience of

creating the artifact (Chau & Cheng, 2010; Barrett, 2007). Reflection is a means to become aware of

ones strengths and weaknesses, monitor progress, employ repair strategies where needed, modify

goals and recognize opportunities for further improvement (Chau & Cheng, 2010). The process of

reflection supports deep learning and metacognition as it encourages students to think more about how

they learn rather than what they learn, emphasizing the learning process over the learning product

(Barrett, 2007; Clark & Adamson, 2010).


5/8


Viewing an EP as a sum of its parts, it is clearly more than a learning tool or strategy; it is a constructivist

learning environment in which the learner is in control. Within this environment, learners learn by

doing, attempt to reconcile new knowledge with existing cognitive structures, acquire new skills, share

understandings with peers and teachers and construct shared knowledge.

By placing learners in the centre of the learning task, EPs reduce the role of the teacher.The teacher

supports the process of creating an EP by providing students with regular feedback, scaffolding tasks

when needed and providing extra help only when requested. For an EP to remain in the control of the

learner, it is important for the teacher to maintain the role of guide on the side or at most a co-

constructor. Too much teacher intervention risks removing the locus of control from the learner and

losing the authentic voice of the learner in the process of creation (Barrett, 2007). The setting of

learning goals and tasks which provide the foundation for the artifacts and reflections of an EP can be a

vulnerable point in the process where ownership and control can be usurped by the teacher. Such

intervention is likely caused by a teachers concern over accountability in meeting institutional

curriculum goals and standards. However, institutional accountability and learner control can both be

accomplished through social negotiation and co-construction. With the teacher, learners can co-

construct learning goals and tasks, using institutional learning goals and achievement standards as a

guide (Barrett, 2005; 2007; Paulson & Paulson, 1994). This process can also be used to ensure

assessment practices remain authentic.

E-Portfolios as Authentic Assessment

Constructivism favours authentic assessment; assessment which is part of the learning process and

based in the context of the learner and the learning environment. Unlike traditional assessmentOF

learning where assessment is viewed by the learner as something done to them, authentic assessment is

assessment FOR learning and is a process in which the learner is directly involved (Barrett, 2005;


6/8


Paulson& Paulson, 1994). If an EP is to be an example of authentic learning, attempting to apply

traditional standards would subvert the nature of the portfolio process by taking control and ownership

away from the learner (Paulson & Paulson, 1994).Still, balancing the desire to provide an authentic

learning experience for learners within a constructivist model and the need to satisfy institutional

curricular standards can be a tenuous act, especially in regards to assessment.The challenge for us is to

find electronic portfolio strategies that meet the needs of both the students, to support this deep

learning, and to give the institution the information they need for assessment and reporting purposes.

(Barrett, 2005, p.8)Paulson & Paulson (1994) contend that portfolios, if assessed according to the

constructivist paradigm, can bring learners to the centre of the assessment process:

The portfolio is a way of including students in the assessment process. It is a place where it is

perfectly legitimate for the student to deliberately try to influence others beliefs in what they

know. The portfolio is a way of changing the relationship between the student and the

assessment process itself - to turn it upside down to make the student a full and active partner

in his or her own learning and the assessment thereof including the design of the assessments

that determine the standards and judgements that are reached. (p. 13)

By bringing external institutional curriculum documents which set learning goals and objectives for

student achievement into the classroom as a resource and a reference, students and teachers can define

and interpret learning goals and how to achieve them by creating rubrics which adhere to the

institutional standards. EPs can then be self, peer and teacher assessed using these rubrics. Used in this

way, assessment becomes authentic and part of the learning task as the learner, with the support of

peers and the teacher,makes the institutional standards operational (Clark & Adamson, 2009; Paulson &

Paulson, 1994) while still maintaining control of the entire EP process from the selection of artifacts to

reflection to assessment.


7/8


Conclusions

While there are numerous opportunities to lapse into traditional methods along the way, EPs can fulfill

constructivist goals of learning, teaching and assessment if the focus remains on the learner and the

learning process, not the end product. Throughout the entire process of creating an EP, from assembly

to assessment, the learner must be placed at the centre. An EPs digital platform provides an engaging,

flexible learner-centred environment while encouraging the acquisition of ICT skills and enabling

metacognition and social learning. The artifacts and reflections included in EPs represent a series of

authentic tasks within a larger authentic task of assembling, throughout which the learner is in full

control. The reflections support metacognition by encouraging the learner to focus on and understand

the process of his or her own learning. Finally, authentic assessment includes the learner while meeting

the needs of the institution.


8/8


References:

Barrett, H. C. (2005). White paper: Researching electronic portfolios and learner engagement: The

REFLECT initiative. Retrieved fromhttp://electronicportfolios.com/reflect/whitepaper.pdf

Barrett, H. C. (2007). Researching electronic portfolios and learner engagement: The REFLECT initiative.

International Reading Association, 436-449. doi:10.1598/JAAL.50.6.2

Chau, J., & Cheng, G. (2010). Towards understanding the potential of e-portfolios for independent

learning: A qualitative study.Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 26(7), 932-950.

Retrieved fromhttp://www.ascilite.org.au/ajet/26/chau.htm

Clark, W., & Jackie, A. (2009). Assessment of an eportfolio: Developing a taxonomy to guide the grading

and feedback for personal development planning. Univesity of Cumbria, 3(1), 43-51. Retrieved

fromhttp://194.81.189.19/ojs/index.php/prhe/article/viewFile/33/31

Paulson, F. L., & Paulson, P. R. (1994). Assessing portfolios using the constructivist paradigm. Retrieved

fromhttp://www.eric.ed.gov/PDFS/ED376209.pdf

Wang, S. (2007). Roles of students in electronic portfolio development. International Journal of Teaching

and Learning, 3(2), 17-28. Retrieved from

http://www.sicet.org/journals/ijttl/specialIssue/sywang.pdf
http://electronicportfolios.com/reflect/whitepaper.pdfhttp://electronicportfolios.com/reflect/whitepaper.pdfhttp://electronicportfolios.com/reflect/whitepaper.pdfhttp://www.ascilite.org.au/ajet/26/chau.htmhttp://www.ascilite.org.au/ajet/26/chau.htmhttp://www.ascilite.org.au/ajet/26/chau.htmhttp://194.81.189.19/ojs/index.php/prhe/article/viewFile/33/31http://194.81.189.19/ojs/index.php/prhe/article/viewFile/33/31http://194.81.189.19/ojs/index.php/prhe/article/viewFile/33/31http://www.eric.ed.gov/PDFS/ED376209.pdfhttp://www.eric.ed.gov/PDFS/ED376209.pdfhttp://www.eric.ed.gov/PDFS/ED376209.pdfhttp://www.sicet.org/journals/ijttl/specialIssue/sywang.pdfhttp://www.sicet.org/journals/ijttl/specialIssue/sywang.pdfhttp://www.sicet.org/journals/ijttl/specialIssue/sywang.pdfhttp://www.eric.ed.gov/PDFS/ED376209.pdfhttp://194.81.189.19/ojs/index.php/prhe/article/viewFile/33/31http://www.ascilite.org.au/ajet/26/chau.htmhttp://electronicportfolios.com/reflect/whitepaper.pdf

assessing e-portfolios through a constructivist lens

Documents