University of Delaware

EDUC 685: Multimedia Literacy

Dr. Fred T. Hofstetter

January 4, 2001

Assessing Tomorrow: The Digital Portfolio

by Amy Laslow

Abstract

The Merriam-Webster Collegiate Dictionary Online defines the portfolio as:

1 : a hinged cover or flexible case for carrying loose papers, pictures, or pamphlets  2 [from the use of such a case to carry documents of state] : the office and functions of a minister of state or member of a cabinet  3 : the securities held by an investor : the commercial paper held by a financial house (as a bank)  4 : a set of pictures (as drawings or photographs) either bound in book form or loose in a folder.

The word’s origin dates to the year 1722 from the Italian portafoglio from the Latin  portare meaning to carry and foglio or folium meaning leaf or sheet (“Portfolio”).  Nevertheless, this modern-day, Internet-retrieved definition neglects to acknowledge the infiltration of the digital revolution in the description across its referenced professions.  The issue of a tangible object versus a virtual concept streaming through space represents another aspect of the digital divide philosophy that continues to exist across societies; it also creates, yet another dilemma for success-driven, ecology-stricken individuals throughout the world to overcome the needless accumulation of paper documents, and simplify, simplify, simplify their lives!  Addressing the device, the means of delivery and the impact for such an innovation that provides knowledge of an individual’s actions, thoughts and/or ambitions upon which valid assessments or opinions may be formulated in the educational, professional or personal realms shall be the purpose of exploring the concept of the ‘digital portfolio’.

[Return to Top]

Evolution of the Portfolio

The term portfolio conjures interesting, yet varied images in the minds of individuals across all disciplines and careers.  While an artist may perceive a portfolio to consist of originals of their best works of art sandwiched between two Masonite boards secured with duck tape or photographs creatively arranged in a leather booklet, a financial planner may refer to an online stock-ticker or the Wall Street Journal in analyzing their portfolio of virtual funds.  Education professionals leaf through numerous papers often housed in file folders, pizza boxes or constructed books bound by yarn to evaluate their students’ capabilities beyond the standardized test scores, just as entrepreneurs are eager to quickly design, develop, construct and distribute their ideas through ‘dimensional promotions’ [a commercial design tool incorporating a résumé and a three-dimensional prototype to communicate the individual’s abilities].  Nevertheless, the portfolio’s guiding theme of a ‘collection of whatever trinkets deemed important’ has inspired men, women and children throughout the world to document their contributions to society or simply prove their very existence, and has evolved from past cultures into the present day.

From the first line etched into the sand to the contorted shapes of animals and human beings drawn with sticks and blood on the cave walls at Lascaux, France, individuals have strived to communicate with others about daily events, processes and learned ways.  It was not long before recognizable symbols were chiseled into stone tablets and then drawn onto pressed reeds to describe, through storytelling, the trials and tribulations of the ceremony of life.  Clergymen spent endless hours beside candlelight to scribe collected works onto the processed skins of animals and to bind their pages between the hides of mighty beasts.  Their exquisite folio creations served as inspiration to weary travelers and oftentimes, promoted the wealth of the learned scholar.  As time passed and invention fostered innovation, communication devices evolved; the physical beings of these collected works emerged into easy-to-transport packages of convenience for humankind.  Yet the collection of drawings, symbols and thoughts continued to grace the refined documentation tool referred to as the portfolio, or portable book, during an age where everyone struggled to be the best.

In the personal and professional world portfolios often include résumés highlighting the achievements and goals of individuals seeking advancement.  These documents were once typed and copied onto ivory-bond paper graced with either a prestigious watermark or laid finish.  However, the popularity, convenience and affordability of both computer hardware and software sparked creativity among expressive individuals who wished to garnish their efforts with fancy fonts, colorful designs and innovative arrangements of data.  Today, streaming technology permits ‘Ted’ and other new-generation jobseekers to display their achievements and aspirations in ‘virtual space’ hosted by Monster.com and other employment sites, and the days of sending hundreds of letters of intent for these employment hopefuls are becoming mute.  The popularity of such brokerage services has exploded exponentially over the past year and indicated to all a trend for the future of technology-enhanced promotions as a new millennium dawns.

Nevertheless, the demand for such promotion and documentation failed to escape the clutches of the education profession.  In fact, those providing guidance during the formative years of these future, corporate ‘techies’ were introduced to the portfolio craze from the politics and issues that surrounded the late 80’s buzzword … Authentic Assessment.  In a 1996 article concerning assessment in technology education, University of Missouri-Columbia assistant professor, Dr. Rodney L. Custer explains his exposure to the valuable tool.

Several years ago, I asked a colleague with expertise in assessment to identify the future trends in assessing students in technology education.  “Authentic assessment” he responded, “and it won’t be restricted to technology education; it’s going to cut across the entire curriculum” (Custer, 27).

Dr. Custer elaborates:

[Assessment] should be a natural part of the learning process woven throughout the richness of classroom interactions using a diverse set of tools [portfolios, rubrics, informal and formal observation, peer, self, and group assessment, writing samples, process and product assessment, and much more] (Custer, 29).

While Dr. Custer continued research in authentic assessment by focusing his efforts on the ‘evaluation’ aspect [rubric construction] versus the actual development of the portfolio and its contents, many other books, articles and workshops have been established to guide teachers and administrators in organizing successful assessment programs in their schools and implementing the use of portfolios.

From the copied pages of students’ reflections plastered with paste and secured to colorful construction paper held together with yarn ties to the swelled bellies of pizza boxes housing the plethora of drawn, written and videotaped work of individual students or groups, the portfolio has provided educators an additional means by which to evaluate children across all disciplines -- just as Dr. Custer’s colleague predicted.  As in the past, though, innovations in technology influenced such programs for educators and computers soon aided both teachers and students in the development of materials for portfolio inclusion.  Word processors provided ease for written compilations, while spreadsheets organized a student’s data.  Advancements in graphic software recently permitted students to incorporate picture files from clip art, scanned images and digital photography for placement into their professional-like productions; labels were sometimes created for the video tape slipcases of a student’s performance in the classroom.  It was inevitable that these documents would migrate from the hard drives of school computers to their servers via the information super-highway not only as a sign of technological advancement, but also as a showcase of the future for this assessment tool.

[Return to Top]

Form Follows Function

One such teacher-help guide Portfolio Assessment and Evaluation provides a general understanding for the issues that surround the implementation for portfolio development in the classroom.  Like many educators throughout the world, author Janine Batzle stresses the importance of the portfolio development and utilization as a ‘celebration’ of what the child can do that provides insight to where the child once was, is now, and will be going through the collaboration of teacher and child providing a continuum of personal and educational growth over a period of time (Batzle, 4-12).  Our collections of accomplishments throughout our lives portray this concept as well, but a different audience evolves as the target to evaluate or review the promotions.  Therefore, the form of the portfolio should accommodate, complement and enhance the function for which it is intended.

Separated by the cables and invisible waves of a virtual environment, the tangible world offers leather and clothe-bound journals as well as lockable diaries to members of our society, whether young or old, to record their everyday thoughts and experienced events.  The emergence of such technological advancements now permit wallet-sized units to house this information as they perform additional time-saving tasks with the push of a button.  So as many creative individuals flock to nearby craft stores for their ‘scrapbooking’ materials, there exists a technology-influenced population that share their innermost thoughts with the global community by constructing personal ‘memory pages’ through multimedia presentations designed as linear and/or branching progressions.  Manned by enhanced navigational controls, these creations have evolved as the personal ‘Home Page.’

Today, those bound by corporate America conduct web-searches to locate competent prospects to fill their vacant positions when they once consulted brokerage firms or temp-agencies to produce almost identical results.  Time has permitted and fostered these advancements in our society.  For those people equipped to accommodate and accept the new trends, their patience and fortitude prove profitable to all involved.  However, for the individuals distanced by the ‘digital gap’ for economic, social or educational deficiencies, the outcome is not pleasurable, nor it is ever welcomed.  Ingenuity, though, can foster success for the relentless few who decide to overcome many of the hurdles and free themselves from this static pack of bodies, thus spawning a uniqueness that many business managers deem as ‘desirable’ in the competitive market.

A budding, commercial art entrepreneur, David Carter struggled in his small-town business to compete for major advertising contracts using the ‘kit’ concept.  Promotion or demonstration of a company’s best traits and/or proof of the entity’s integrity and commitment in the economy was an essential standard in the advertising industry as it currently remains.  Appeal, whether visual or spoken, is necessary and timing, critical!  However, the dimensional promotion grew from the 1950’s philosophy belonging to “the father of the funny commercial,” Stan Freberg; he was the first to utilize a type of communication that did not fit into a conventional envelope, but consisted of a three-dimensional box (Carter, 5).  All of the above packaged as an interactive element proved to be the innovation and spark that David Carter’s struggling company so desperately needed.  Coupled with his natural humor, each creatively promoted business portfolio or collection of accomplishments in this extraordinary format achieved direct interaction with the recipient and public approval.  Carter comments: “At a time when ‘cutting-edge’ industrial direct mail meant using a color logo [instead of black only] on a catalog sheet, I was creating ‘kits’ which were the talk of the steel industry” (Carter, 3).  His technological ingenuity coupled with Freberg’s invention enhanced the once two-dimensional industry and rocketed Carter’s business to success.

Since his first project, Kentucky Electric Steel, others have studied this man’s contributions and captured his unique ability to add form to a product’s function, thus producing dimensional promotions for personal and professional résumés and portfolios.  Recall the mention of pizza boxes and construction paper folios used by teachers to collect, revisit and evaluate a student’s progress in a particular subject area or grade … dimensional promotion!  Nowadays, ‘kits’ are not economically sound investments for any situation and many would rather traverse highways that reach millions rather than avenues that lead to thousands.  Enter the Internet and various multimedia[1] tools and/or applications.  With relentless passion, schools have made and continue to make considerable advancements in the implementation of technology into the classroom to enhance the learning process.  Several districts and individual teachers have experimented with the implementation of transporting the portfolio concept from the once enclosed, tangible environment to the majestic spans of a virtual world.  Our multimedia connections to the electronic environment provide us with the necessary means to create electronically stored and managed folios for easy distribution and dissemination of personal, professional and educational information.  But, at what cost does this transition incur?

[Return to Top]

Impacts of Technology

The question of what technological competencies should exist among our students and faculty continues to plague the education community from teacher and professors to administration and government officials.  As many covet opinions across the board spawning debates and sometimes, heated arguments with regards to portfolio form and function, the information age definition of the digital portfolio acquires new identities on a daily basis.  The digital portfolio identity and the factors that determine the varying definitions are directly proportionate and dependent upon one another.  Such factors include, but are not limited to: the individuals involved in the conception, implementation and evaluation stages of this assessment form as well as the student or professional authors of the portfolio, itself; the skills and competencies requiring measurement; the act of purposeful creation of the portfolio; and the maintenance or storage requirements.  Consider one district’s portfolio dilemma.

During a 1999 Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development [ASCD] Teaching and Learning Conference on Electronic Portfolios as a Tool for Authentic Assessment, Department of Defense teacher, H. Hatcher of the Fort Campbell School System lectured on the government’s strategic plan and implementation of the mysterious ‘electronic portfolio.’  While it appeared as an imperative necessity for their mobile[2] students to acquire new skills, maintain adequate competencies and obtain current resources in the field of instructional technology, the members who drafted the required benchmarks at grade levels 4, 8 and 11 failed to effectively define the very idea of their cyber-folio!  Although no mention with regards to the storage, purpose or identity existed among this official, law-making contingency, the notion that their students must meet or exceed certain standards across the DOD school system to ensure consistency and continuity among the uniquely dynamic educational environment led to the unexpected birth of their electronic portfolio ‘problem’.  Surprise!

Not every school or professional organization has struggled with the development or use of a new concept or product similar to Fort Campbell’s portfolio endeavor, but nearly all have experienced the need for an adequate and descriptive definition … as well as the necessary training to implement the plan.  As mentioned earlier, the portfolio is not a new invention, but an innovation that has developed across cultures and has acquired certain qualities, features and attributes that reflect each period of time.  Therefore, a definitive description for the introduction of technology to this assessment concept of a digital portfolio, electronic portfolio, technofolio, etc. must be clearly stated at the plan’s conception.  Hence, a name would drive the content, rather than the content determining the name … as it should be.

To state that one has developed an electronic or digital portfolio does not simply express the nature of information content that resides within the package’s virtual covers.  Once again, the DOD, like many other professional organizations, businesses and school districts was forced to distinguish between form and function.  When the confusing issue arose, their major concern blossomed--to establish guidelines for the student development of a portfolio that demonstrated the student’s capabilities in acquiring, using and developing knowledge with electronic devices [specifically computer hardware and software].  What their portfolio was not, was a means of storage for projects produced in other media (“Electronic Portfolios”).  For example, a student who correctly arranged graphic elements, adequately adopted ideas and produced an image utilizing the mechanical and formatting tools of a desktop publishing suite effectively met the DOD’s standards for an electronic portfolio entry.  However, another student who produced a far superior and hand-rendered project, converted the image to electronic format either through the use of digital photography or scanner and produced an image failed to qualify as an acceptable entry.  The later display of technology use was an end to the means, not a means to an end according to Hatcher.  Confusing?  Possibly biased?  Formulate a decision upon these facts from Mr. Hatcher’s lecture.

The English teacher who escorts their students to the Technology Lab to use the word processing software for the typing of the final term paper does not effectively promote technology use in education by making learning more efficient, nor do they foster the necessary competencies in the organization’s ‘technology-literate’ student definition.  H. Hatcher questions these individuals.  Why permit these students to struggle with grammar, correct sentence structure, punctuation, and/or spelling concerns, to produce numerous note cards documenting their research efforts and create hand-written drafts when they can efficiently produce a superior product in a timely fashion by plopping in front of a computer screen, typing away as their thoughts flow, searching, cutting and pasting from online sources and permitting a program to correct the numerous green and red, squiggly underlined mistakes (“Electronic Portfolios”)?  In his scenario, do these students ever recognize the reason for the ‘squiggly’ lines as they passively sit by intellectually idle and robbed of the knowledge that exists within the mechanics of the English language?  After all, a computer will not speak for this individual during a face-to-face job interview.  But have we, as a society, placed less emphasis on this style of direct communication and interaction in our school systems for display in the business world?

Careful and thoughtful considerations do exist across the tangible and virtual fields for people who have expressed interest and concern to technology’s impact on educational, professional and personal endeavors.  As with any powerful tool, neglect in use or failure to adequately administer training will usually lead to harmful, if not devastating repercussions and undesirable outcomes.  Though many resources do exist for those interested and driven to produce dynamic portfolios, lessons learned by the previous failures of others tend to be wise investments during any institution’s strategic plan development.  However, every action should be taken to thoroughly evaluate the source of such information [as in evaluating a web site, for example] prior to considering the recommendations as ‘law.’   Whileas the use of technology lends itself to providing effective tools to make life simpler by eliminating wasteful and time-consuming actions, important and almost necessary concepts are often sacrificed.  The negative outcome of this absent content usually ‘snowballs’ over of a period of time and usually impacts larger groups, or even society as a whole.  Special care should be observed by the educational environment where decisions on technology inclusion and the need to be ‘state-of-the-art’ in record time can negatively influence those responsible for the development and delivery of pertinent curricular material.  It is true that by removing this once valuable content, class time may be dedicated to addressing the growing concern of producing students who will be prepared to enter our society as productive members facilitating our need for technology literacy, but false outcomes across a curriculum at the school district, state or national levels can leave even more children behind.

[Return to Top]

Content, Competency and Creativity in Instructional Technology

Marja Kankaaranta and colleagues, in a study of the challenges faced by school based portfolio assessment echoed the importance of maintaining a positive collaboration between teacher and child, school and community that Janine Batzle previously stressed.  In addition though, The Institute for Educational Research at the University of Jyväskylä in Finland[3] places importance in producing portfolio assessment strategies in an ecological approach of a child’s learning experience.  Referencing Solomon[4], Kankaanranka stresses:

In a ecological approach the individual [child or teacher] is seen in context, thus the attention is focused on the learner and in his/her various learning environments.  This holistic perspective particularly highlights the reciprocal relationships of the learner and different surrounding environments.  The reciprocity of relationships expands from the learner’s immediate environment to wider systems, in which the learner has a share, or which influence his/her daily life (Kankaanranka, 2).

Through this sharing and reinforcing of skills, concepts, influences and reactions, positive partnerships may grow between the child’s school and home environments.  It is in this prospering surrounding that Solomon’s technology-intensive instruction may produce a significant impact.

Allowing a child to create a self-awareness of their growth and learning based upon prior experiences over a period of time exists as a common belief among the numerous, investigated authorities for this document.  Nevertheless, Kankaanranta’s ‘Albums of Growth’ were by far the most compelling and intriguing for numerous personal reasons.  The Institute’s primary research or study group consisted of young, school-aged children from families who wanted to be highly involved in the education system across Finland.  Likewise, there existed a reciprocal need from the schools to establish positive working relationships with the community surrounding them.  Having served as a member on the Dover Air Force Base Middle School’s School Improvement Plan Committee [SIP][5] for several years, the need for community involvement and collaboration has grown in importance during a volatile period of educational reform in the state of Delaware … the issue of accountability.  Creating links to help students achieve success in their education rather than foster the widening of existing socio-economic gaps for at-risk youth naturally promotes educational accountability globally.  Furthermore, the application of positive student practices as an extension into one’s own professional growth provides the educator with insight, a deepening appreciation for process and product, and a greater understanding for the need to be active participants to deliver technology enhanced learning.  The Finnish study witnessed their teachers creating their own digital portfolios to document this self-growth.  “Elbert Hubbard in a biographical sketch of Friedrich Froebel said: ‘The teacher is the one who gets the most out of the lessons, and the true teacher is a learner’” (“Quotes”).  Until education professionals internalize the importance for technology inclusion as a means to enhance the already existing curriculum and their own personal growth, the implementation of such electronic portfolios programs renders a mute point.  In his lecture on the Fort Campbell School System, Hatcher noted that many of their teachers failed to place value on computers in the classroom and immediately experienced difficulties instructing the students upon implementing the strategic plan (“Electronic Portfolios”).

The mere thought that “along with the portfolio assessment, the meaning of the adult-centered communication [becomes] less central, and the child’s own role as narrator is strengthened” regardless of the age group solidifies a teacher’s true existence (Kankaanranta, 8).  In fact, such positive environments could provide closure for the ‘Why am I here?’ mentality experienced by some frustrated educators, and offer all an opportunity to integrate and apply “portfolios in the documentation and assessment of their own professional growth” (Kankaanranta, 8).  Versed with one’s own content knowledge and recognizing an increased confidence in technological competencies, teachers throughout the world are moving beyond the introduction of the digital portfolio concept, and igniting creativity in the documentation productions of their students, colleagues and self.

Elizabeth Hartnell-Young, a contributor to Finnish portfolio research, notes that Australian professional development standards maintain strategic factors in “using images, video and sound, linked by hypertext” to increase their teachers’ confidence levels (Hartnell-Young, 1).  This tidal effect ripples and roars throughout the educational community often setting into motion the development of new teacher practices.  Sharing of the ‘what works, and what does not work’ philosophy can prove more valuable than the actual experience of learning from personal failure since other lives are at risk … those of the students!  By creating clear sight of the advantages and disadvantages of multimedia portfolio assessment, class time may now be allotted to explore those high-tech skills noted by the DOD Fort Campbell school system without sacrificing the content delivery in other discipline areas, especially English mechanics as well as foster creativity within the student or teacher presentation.

[Return to Top]

The 'Digital' Move

Recent innovations in software products from multimedia presentation development and its delivery to digital portfolio creation and maintenance have produced numerous conferences [many available online] to discuss current ideas and the ability for further possibilities.  David Niguidula, affiliate of the Coalition of Essential Schools and the Annenberg Institute for School Reform as well as renowned digital portfolio expert, states that:

The Digital Portfolio is a software tool that can help students create a ‘richer picture’ of their skills and accomplishments than traditional transcripts allow.  It has the potential to help schools as they think about performance assessment and overall issues of school reform – by providing a more thorough documentation of how students are reaching goals, it can give a school better information on how to help individual students, and the school as a whole (Niguidula, 1).

Grant money received during the mid-1990’s provided numerous schools to partake in the formulation of digital portfolio assessment to aid in developing, clarifying and evaluating ‘what the student should know and be able to do’ along the continuum of their educational experience, and directly link the philosophy to the individual school’s vision.  “In the digital portfolios, the vision is typically translated into the portfolio’s main menu, so that each student knows what is expected of him or her before leaving the school” (Niguidula, 4).  Furthermore, Niguidula and his colleagues stress with respect to planning such an endeavor for instructional technology inclusion that certain topics such as: “a school’s vision, assessment system, use of technology, logistics issues, and overall culture” must be addressed prior to purchasing equipment and training individuals (Niguidula, 4).  The following chart will briefly address each of the aforementioned topics individually.

Information condensed from  “The Digital Portfolio: A Richer Picture of Student Performance” (Niguidula, 4-6).

As Nicholas Negroponte points out in Being Digital [Knopf, 1995], bits have great advantages over atoms.  Bits are easy to transport; atoms are difficult.  In the case of portfolios, the sheer volume of material and media makes Digital Portfolios much easier to transport than paper portfolios (Niguidula, 7).

Likewise, the mere form of this multimedia application can aid in the transportation and delivery to the variety of audiences previously mentioned.  Dr. Helen Barrett, professor at the University of Anchorage, Alaska and electronic teaching portfolio authority, not only addresses the need for going digital, but also outlines the very stages of its development.  Throughout each stage, accommodations may be formulated to meet the requirements of the numerous audience viewers.  Her specific divisions of the digital portfolio include: “The Working Portfolio, The Reflective Portfolio, The Connected Portfolio, and The Presentation Portfolio” (Barrett, “Electronic Teaching Portfolios” 1).

Having conducted research in the development and implementation of electronically managed portfolio assessment since 1991, Dr. Barrett supports the reciprocity theory and collaborative nature that tends to exist between the teacher and student, and praises its ability to provide easy transitions for all to include technology as an enhancement tool in the learning environment.  As colleagues of digital reform agree that a general understanding of the relationships in the educational community is first and foremost in portfolio development, Dr. Barrett’s thoughtful regard for multimedia connections provide insight and depth to the often mysterious or confusing assessment tool.  She writes: “Creating an electronic portfolio can develop teachers’ as well as students’ multimedia development skills” through “determining needs, goals, and audience requirements,” designing/planning of content, “gathering and organizing multimedia materials for inclusion,” implementation/delivery of presentation, and “evaluating the presentation’s effectiveness” (Barrett, “The Electronic Portfolio Development Process” 2).  Furthermore, she introduces the modeling concept: “If teachers develop electronic portfolios, their students will be more likely to have their own electronic portfolios” (Barrett, “The Electronic Portfolio Development Process” 2).

This copycat relationship between teacher and student actually creates a symbiotic sharing of positive practices as mentioned by Marja Kankaanranta in the findings of the Finnish research where the implementation of student electronic portfolios fostered and promoted the creation of teacher reflections.  Barrett finally mentions that “Each stage of the portfolio development process contributes to teachers’ professional development and students’ lifelong learning through collection, selection, reflection, projection, and presentation” just as noted by Hartnell-Young in mention of the Australian school systems (Barrett, “The Electronic Portfolio Development Process” 2).  Nevertheless, all must recognize the true meaning for such development and understand how the process of authentic assessment and instructional technology relate to the educational environment before technology can enhance learning in any surrounding environment--the old saying ‘Look before you leap!’ can be the difference between success and praise to failure and frustration.

[Return to Top]

Conclusion

There exists a network of sharing and growth through learned practices among members of the educational community.  Recognizing strengths and contributions to failures and concerns for future endeavors, educators across the world may implement new strategies to overcome ignorance among new generations by providing positive connections between a student’s various environments, thus fostering growth over time.  Authentic Assessment and the implementation of reflection in the classroom have provided success for many as well as a source for argument and concern for others.  Adding the demand for computer-supported learning to produce ‘technology-literate’ individuals when many students exhibit difficulty in reading literacy does not aid the situation, but hinders its acceptance.  Recognizing when and how to implement valuable programs or strategic plans, and how to manage the program’s produced results are necessary in creating awareness throughout the education community, extending to the home environment.  As professionals, it is imperative that educators make every attempt to remain current and excel in their duties to their students, their school, their society and themselves through the evaluation of new concepts, ideas and programs.  By promoting professional development through encouragement rather than demand, educators may begin to understand, accept, and permit prosperity, power and growth across the curriculum, time and virtual space.

Former educator, President Lyndon B. Johnson once addressed our profession during a period of time before the necessity to become ‘digitally-literate’ was important in schools.  In expressing his dream of the Great Society and the importance of education, President Johnson stated: “At the desk where I sit, I have learned one great truth.  The answer for all our national problems--the answer for all the problems of the world--comes to a single word.  That word is ‘education’” (“Quotes”).  Realizing the potential of a teacher to inspire and influence American youth as the basis for whatever problem may ail the world was and should remain as the primary focus today.  Believing that we are better equipped to fight these battles and preparing for the effective use of any innovation--in this case technology--should be every educator’s goal for the students that they instruct.

Whether the goal is the utilization of a specific software program to enhance the process of completing a final draft, to conduct research through the numerous resources provided through the World Wide Web, or to showcase the culminating work as a multimedia presentation, the use of technology can be designed to facilitate and enhance the delivery of knowledge.  Educators of today are entrusted with the responsibility of forming the society of the future.  If our nation and our students are to be competitive in our society as well as that of the world, we must leave behind any reservations of change, and adapt and conform to the advances that technology and the digital age has provided us.  Our profession affords us the opportunity to surround ourselves with the future of the world, but it is each educator’s internal desire to share their thoughts, insights and knowledge with others throughout the growth process that permit our profession to ‘touch’ tomorrow … assessing one moment at a time.

[Return to Top]

Works Cited

Barrett, Helen.  “The Electronic Portfolio Development Process.” 1999/2000. 22 Oct 2000 <http://transition.alaska.edu/www/portfolios/EPDevProcess.html>.

---.  “Electronic Teaching Portfolios.”  Handout for SITE 98, Anchorage. 4 Dec 2000 <http://transition.alaska.edu/www/portfolios/site98.html>.

Batzle, Janine. Portfolio Assessment and Evaluation. Cypress: Creative Teaching Press, Inc. 1992.

Carter, David E.  Dimensional Promotions. New York: HBI, an imprint of HarperCollins Publishers. 2000.

Custer, Rodney L. “Rubrics: An Authentic Assessment Toll for Technology Education.” The Technology Teacher. Dec/Jan 1996.

Electronic Portfolios as a Tool for Authentic Assessment. Recording. Prod. H. Hatcher, Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development, 1999. (MLA) 90 min.

Hartnell-Young, Elizabeth.  “Digital Portfolios: More Than a Website.” 17 Oct 2000. <http://www.results.aust.com/
Finarticle.htm>.

Hofstetter, Fred T.  Multimedia Literacy. Boston: McGraw-Hill/Irwin, 2001.

Kankaanranta, Marja.  “Towards Digital Bridges Between Educational Cultures: Challenges for School Based Portfolio Assessment.” 1998. Institute for Educational Research at the University of Jyväskylä, Finland. 17 Oct 2000 <http://www.jyu.fi/ktl/publications/ electronic/001/kankaanranta.htm>.

Niguidula, David. “The Digital Portfolio: A Richer Picture of Student Performance.” 1997. Coalition of Essential Schools. 19 Oct. 2000 <http://www.essentialschools.org/pubs/exhib_schdes/dp.html>.

“Portfolio.” Merriam-Webster’s Collegiate Dictionary. Electronic tenth ed., 2001.

Quotes on Academia.  Spring 1995. Center for Teaching and Learning. Western Kentucky University. 12 Jan 2001 <http://www.wku.edu/Dept/Support/AcadAffairs/CTL/booklets/quotes.htm>.

[Return to Top]

Additional Resources for Authentic Assessment and Digital portfolios

Arter, Judith et al. Portfolios for Assessment and Instruction. ERIC, 1995. ED388890.

Aschermann, Jerry R. "Electronic Portfolios: Why? What? How?" April 1999. Department of Education at Missouri Western State College. 17 Oct 2000 <http://www.mwsc.edu/~edexp/mwscportfolio99.html>.

Barrett, Helen. Electronic Portfolio Home Page. "Annotated Bibliography on Portfolios, Alternative Assessment and Tools for Developing Electronic Portfolios."  20 Mar 1999. University of Alaska, Anchorage. 22 Oct 2000 <http://transition.alaska.edu/www/portfolios/bibliography.html>.

---. “Electronic Teaching Portfolios: Multimedia Skills + Portfolio Development = Powerful Professional Development.” Feb. 2000. Society for Information Technology and Teacher Education, San Diego. 22 Oct 2000 <http://transition.alaska.edu/www/portfolios/ site2000.pdf>.

---. Electronic Portfolio Home Page. “Learning and Leading with Technology.” Oct. 1998. University of Alaska, Anchorage. 22 Oct 2000 <http://transition.alaska.edu/www/portfolios/LLTOct98.html>.

---. "Listserv on Electronic Portfolios." Electronic Portfolio Home Page. 24 Jun 1998.

Cooper, Sandra B. "Electronic Diagnostic Portfolios: Advantages and Disadvantages of this Technological Approach." 1998. Texas Tech University, Lubbock. 17 Oct 2000 <http://www.coe.uh.edu/insite/elec_pub/
HTML1998/pt_coop.htm>.

Creating and Using Portfolios on the Alphabet Superhighway. University of Delaware, Newark. 17 Oct 2000 <http://www.ash.udel.edu/ash/teacher/portfolio.html>.

Digital Learner Portfolios. May 2000. Mt. Edgecumbe High School. 17 Oct 2000 <http://www.mehs.educ.state.ak.us/portfolios/portfolio.html>.

Gregory, Kathy. "Stepping Ahead: An Assessment Plan Development Guide." ASEE Prism (January 1997). Rose-Hulman Institute of Technology, Terre Haute. 2 Dec 2000 <http://www.rose-hulman.edu/IRA/IRA
/steppingahead.html>.

Hoff, David J. "Teachers Examining Student Work to Guide Curriculum, Instruction." Education Week on the Web (29 November 2000). 4 Dec 2000 <http://www.edweek.org/ew/ewstory.cfm?slug=13work.h20>.

Hogin, Gwen.  “Portfolios in a Technological Age.” 1995. California Math Council Newsletter, Spring ed., Turlock. 17 Oct 2000 <http://jarl.cs.uop.edu/~cpiper/portfol.html>.

Kimeldorf, Martin. Career Portfolio Sampler. Third Edition. 16 Oct 2000. <http://amby.com/kimeldorf/sampler/>.

Lankes, Anna Maria D. Electronic Portfolios: A New Idea in Assessment. ERIC, 1995. EDO-IR-95-9.

Morris, Joyce L. "Rubric for Assessing Electronic Portfolios." Department of Education at University of Vermont. 17 Oct 2000 <http://uvm.edu/~jmorris/rubricep.html>.

Nidds, John A. and James McGerald. "How Functional is Portfolio Assessment Anyway?" Britannica.com: Education Digest. (1 January 1997). 1 Jan 2001 <http://www.britannica.com/bcom/magazine/
article/print/0,5746,321271,00.html>.

“Reinventing Education: Digital Portfolio Assessment Tool.” IBM (International Business Machine). 19 Oct 2000 <http://www.ibm.com/ibm/ibmgives/grant/education/programs/reinventing/assesstool.html>.

Silva, Peggy. "Educators Making Portfolios." Britannica.com: Phi Delta Kappan. (1 June 1999). 1 Jan 2001 <http://www.britannica.com/bcom/magazine/article/print/0,5746,250436,00.html>.

Sweet, David.  “Student Portfolios: Classroom Uses.” Education Research CONSUMER GUIDE.  8  November 1993 <http://www.ed.gov/pubs/OR/ConsumerGuides/classuse.html>.

Wiedmer, Terry L. "Digital Portfolios." Britannica.com: Phi Delta Kappan. (April 1998). 31 Dec 2000 <http://www.britannica.com/bcom/magazine/article/print/0,5746,210888,00.html>.

[Return to Top]