NotesFAQContact Us
Collection
Advanced
Search Tips
ERIC Number: ED334250
Record Type: RIE
Publication Date: 1991-May
Pages: 12
Abstractor: N/A
Reference Count: N/A
ISBN: N/A
ISSN: N/A
The Ins and Outs of Using Portfolios To Assess Performance. Revised.
Paulson, F. Leon; Paulson, Pearl R.
Concerns about using portfolios (collections of student work showing student effort, progress, or achievement in one or more areas) in large-scale assessments are addressed. The products in a portfolio allow the reviewer to make inferences about the process of student learning. Hence, a portfolio should include information about the activities that produced the portfolio and a narrative in which the student describes the learning that took place. Stakeholders in the portfolio review process are identified, and the role of instructional goals and determination of contents of the portfolio are discussed. Standardized input-output assessments that evaluators usually use are viewed as poorly suited to portfolios. The implications of chaos theory for educational measurement and, more specifically, portfolio evaluation is outlined. The use of multiple perspectives and differing criteria in analyzing portfolios are illustrated via a comparison with movie reviewers. The place of reliability and validity assessments in portfolio assessments and the use of generalizability theory are discussed. Two methods that accommodate the diversity required of portfolio assessments are outlined: (1) the Environmental Beauty Estimation Method used by the United States Forest Service, and (2) the Comparative Method used by sociologists in studying comparative political systems. The use of scaling techniques and the importance of holistic as well as analytic judgments are discussed. A 39-item list of references is included. (TJH)
Publication Type: Reports - Evaluative; Speeches/Meeting Papers
Education Level: N/A
Audience: N/A
Language: English
Sponsor: N/A
Authoring Institution: N/A
Identifiers: Comparative Method; Environmental Beauty Estimation Method; Large Scale Programs; Stakeholder Evaluation
Note: Expanded version of a paper presented at the Joint Annual Meeting of the National Council of Measurement in Education and the National Association of Test Directors (Chicago, IL, April 4-6, 1991).