• Share
  • Email
  • Embed
  • Like
  • Save
  • Private Content
Nssa las vegas_4-2-12__final
 

Nssa las vegas_4-2-12__final

on

  • 307 views

 

Statistics

Views

Total Views
307
Views on SlideShare
307
Embed Views
0

Actions

Likes
0
Downloads
1
Comments
0

0 Embeds 0

No embeds

Accessibility

Categories

Upload Details

Uploaded via as Microsoft PowerPoint

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Processing…
Post Comment
Edit your comment
  • Diane
  • Diane
  • Diane
  • Diane
  • Diane
  • Diane
  • Diane
  • Diane
  • Diane
  • Diane
  • Diane
  • Diane
  • Diane
  • Assumptions 1 – 3 (MET)
  • Assumptions 4-5 (Not MET)
  • Diane
  • Diane
  • Diane
  • Diane
  • Diane
  • Diane
  • Diane
  • Diane
  • Kay

Nssa las vegas_4-2-12__final Nssa las vegas_4-2-12__final Presentation Transcript

  • Lamar University College of Education Educational Leadership Beaumont, TX Development of an E-Portfolio Process: Implementation and Use in PK-12 SchoolsKay Abernathy, Ed.D.Diane Mason, Ph.D.Sheryl Abshire, Ph.D.Cindy Cummings, Ed.D.
  • • Cohort VI - 12 Universities - United States and Australia• 3 year studies• Various e-portfolios, including those embracing rich media and social software, which enact reflection and integration.• Cohort VI investigating e- portfolios in a systemic way for assessment and inquiring into their effectiveness.
  • IntroductionThe use of electronic portfolios, web 2.0tools, and their transference to PK-12schools emphasize a process whichengages learners at all levels to takeownership of their learning.
  • Rationale for Study• Validation of ETL Graduates e-portfolio process and transference of ETL candidates’ knowledge to PK-12 classroom practices.• Authentic assessment and multiple measures used beyond standardized testing.
  • Research QuestionHow has the participationof an ETL master’scandidate in an e-portfolioprocess contributed to theimplementation of e-portfolio practices with PK-12 students?
  • Theoretical Framework Helen Barrett• Developmental process• Addresses both the diverse and growing technology competency of the students and teachers• Addresses the varied experience with the portfolio learning and assessment process.
  • Levels of Implementation• Level 1: e-Portfolio as Storage• Level 2: e-Portfolio as Workspace• Level 3: e-Portfolio as Showcase
  • Level 1: e-Portfolio as Storage• The basic activity is converting student work into digital formats and saving these documents in the designated storage space (not on individual laptops).• The role of the teacher at this level is to provide students with guidance on the types of artifacts to save.
  • Level 2: e-Portfolio as Workspace• Learner keeps a learning journal (organized chronologically, with a blog) and reflects on the learning as represented in the samples of the work.• Artifacts should represent more than a single curriculum area.• Artifacts should demonstrate the many ways that students are using technology across the curriculum.• The primary role of the teacher at this level is to provide formative feedback on the students work so that they can recognize opportunities for improvement.
  • Level 3: e-Portfolio as Showcase• Requires the student to organize one or more presentation portfolios around a set of learning outcomes, goals or standards (depending on purpose and audience).• The teachers role at this level is not only to provide feedback on the students work, but also to validate the students self-assessment of their work.
  • e-portfolios PK-12• Web-based or electronic portfolios (e- portfolios, ePortfolios, efolios, digital portfolios, etc.) are a relatively new, but quickly expanding, component of teacher education programs (Strudler & Wetzel, 2005).• e-Portfolio templates in teacher education programs range – highly structured(e.g., foliotek) to those that are – loosely defined by rubric where students independently organize and construct format of their own entries using website design program (e.g., Google Sites).• Electronic portfolios (ePortfolios) basically operate as a "content-management system" (Jafari, 2004, p. 40).
  • e-portfolios PK-12• Chen and Light (2010) observed that ePortfolios allow students to select a variety of digital artifacts and assemble them in one place in order to exhibit presentation skills or reflect, inquire, and analyze material.• ePortfolios require students to reflect on their learning.• Richards and Guilbault (2009) contend that reflection has become an essential way for students to speak in their own voices.• Critical reflection at strategic points in the development of the ePortfolio creates a pathway for the formative examination and demonstration of learning.
  • Web 2.0• Web 2.0 applications and mobile Internet devices add new issues to the safety/access situation in schools.• The Children’s Internet Protection Act (CIPA) is the key federal law affecting ICT use in PK-12 schools.• Title II of the Broadband Data Improvement Act, which became Public Law in 2008, is titled, “Protecting Children in the 21st Century.”• As the result of serious implications for children engaged in social networking and Web 2.0 tools, state boards of education have enacted state requirements for school districts pertaining to bullying, hazing, and harassment (CoSN, 2010).• Students use Web 2.0 social networking tools and other authoring tools regularly; parents may still be in a Web 1.0 world.
  • Web 2.0• Inherent characteristics of Web 2.0 are so aligned with significant educational pedagogies we are going to have to dramatically rethink our educational institutions and expectations because of them. (Hargadon, 2009)• Idea of students as authors is not new in education; what is new is scope of audience to which student authors can write or publish.• Student authorship not just for teachers or local schools or even school communities, but the world.• Students can now maximize the notion of airing their own work both creatively and academically via Internet tools in blogs or podcasts or even via social networking tools.• Additionally, while student work could be displayed for a short while on the walls of rooms, it can now be captured and displayed without limits via Web 2.0 tools and eportfolios. (Reynard, 2009)
  • Reflection• Reflection is the "heart and soul" of a portfolio and is essential to brain-based learning (Kolb, 1984; Zull, 2002).• Need to develop strategies that better support reflection in the learning process, supporting different types of reflection to improve learning.• Reflection is the hallmark of many thoughtfully developed portfolios.• Reflections on the products within a portfolio allow the audience to understand why these items were chosen to represent the student and his / her capacities and can provide some of the best indicators of student growth (Barrett & Richter, 2012).
  • Assessment• Assessment portfolios, contain examples of student’s best work, as well as an explanation of why each work is significant.• The explanation or reflection discusses how the particular work illustrates mastery of specific curriculum requirements or learning goals (Brown, 2011).• No Child Left Behind (2001) federal legislation changed the focus of assessment from the PK-12 classroom to statewide standardized testing for high stakes accountability.• Renewal of NCLB has not been finalized; there are indications that a broader definition of assessment will allow multiple measures of achievement, supporting more formative, classroom-based assessment, which will make portfolios more popular in PK-12 schools (Barrett, 2009).
  • Assessment• The primary role of the teacher is to provide formative feedback on the students work so that they can recognize opportunities for improvement.• Used in the PK-12 classrooms, portfolios are not so much an instructional strategy to be researched, but more of a means to an end: to support reflection that can help students understand their own learning and to provide a richer picture of student work that documents growth over time (Barrett, 2011).
  • Methodology Mixed Methods Explanatory Sequential Design Quantitative Data Qualitative Data Follow up Collection and Collection and Interpretation with Analysis Analysis-
  • Quantitative Sample• Distributed survey to 289 ETL graduates.• 16 not valid email addresses• 2 opt outs – not PK -12 educators• Possible respondents - 271• 110 completed survey – 40.5 % response rate• Reporting specifically on the e-portfolio data (Question #13)
  • Quantitative Assumptions• Assumption 1: The majority of Educational Technology Leadership graduates believe PK-12 students should use digital portfolios for assessment.• Assumption 2: The majority of Educational Technology Leadership graduates believe PK-12 students in my school use traditional paper-based portfolios for assessment.• Assumption 3: The majority of Educational Technology Leadership graduates believe PK-12 students in my district use traditional paper-based portfolios for assessment.
  • Quantitative Assumptions• Assumption 4: The majority of Educational Technology Leadership graduates believe PK-12 students in my school use digital portfolios as a form of assessment.• Assumption 5: The majority of Educational Technology Leadership graduates believe PK-12 students in my district use digital portfolios as a form of assessment.
  • Question #13 - Survey Data 70.0% (77) 87.2% A & SA (96) A & SA 66.3% 15.4% (73) (17) A & SA A & SA 23.6% (6) A & SA
  • Question #13 - Survey DataStrongly Agree 4.19 3.66 3.68 2.57 2.32Strongly Disagree
  • Qualitative QuestionHow has the ETL Master’s graduates’knowledge of e-portfolio assessmentsupported the implementation of digitalportfolios with PK-12 students?
  • Qualitative Data Sample• We examined 60 graduate e-portfolios representative of graduates who completed the program during the same timeframe of the 217 ETL graduates in the survey data pool.• Graduates’ writing and electronic portfolio components were analyzed to obtain qualitative data regarding graduates’ viewpoints and perceptions about Web 2.0 tools as a component of an e-portfolio.• Conducted feedback sessions via web conferences, panel discussions, conference calls, and interviews with 50 ETL graduates from the same timeframe of the 217 ETL graduates in the survey data pool.
  • Qualitative Data from ETL Graduates’ e-Portfolios• Candidates integrate Web 2.0 tools (e-portfolios) in the classroom.• Candidates are enthusiastic and amazed at the extended use of Web 2.0 tools (e-portfolios).• Candidates report implementation of Web 2.0 tools (e- portfolios) in PK-12 classrooms.• Candidates implement Web 2.0 tools as a more purposeful inclusion of technology into PK-12 schools.• Candidates say cloud-based e-portfolios will house student products that will follow them from year to year.
  • Feedback SessionsETL PK-12 Teacher Graduates report:• e-portfolios used in a variety of individual and cross curriculum areas.• a variety of processes implemented in e-portfolio construction.• implementation of e-portfolios in various stages of Helen Barrett’s model.• allow students to self-select various e-portfolio platforms in order to construct personal e-portfolios.• provide evidence of student reflection toward learning goals within the e-portfolios.• use of e-portfolios for formal and informal assessment strategies.
  • Feedback SessionsETL PK-12 Teacher Graduates report:• students share e-portfolios with diverse audiences beyond the school environment.• student e-portfolios provide opportunities to inspire student creativity.• student e-portfolio construction constantly evolving, not finite, linear, or static.• students value the e-portfolio process.• interaction with various stakeholders to create e-portfolio implementation policies and procedures.• incorporate digital ethics for students as part of e-portfolio processes.• abundant use of Open Education Resources (OER) for e-portfolio construction.
  • Qualitative Data Analysis• Survey data indicated questions regarding implementation of digital portfolios vs. paper portfolios for assessment at the PK-122 school and district levels.• Developed qualitative question to guide coding and categorization of data gleaned from the ETL Masters’ candidate e-portfolios and feedback responses.
  • Results1. Conclusions:• Graduates of the ETL Master’s program are contributing to the evolving process of implementing both informal and formal e-portfolio assessment in PK- 12 schools.• The growth of Web 2.0 tools contributes to the implementation of the reflective e-portfolio practices in PK-12 schools.• Teachers of PK-12 students are working to increase the use of e-portfolio assessments.
  • 2. Implications:• Reflection eportfolio assessment beyond standardizing testing will continue to grow and give more meaningful and richer pictures that can help students understand their own learning and to provide documentation that shows growth over time as suggested by Barrett.• The teachers role at this level is not only to provide feedback on the students work, but also to validate the students self-assessment of their work as Barrett indicated. • The use of Web 2.0 tools in the reflective e-portfolio process add value and reveal a depth of knowledge to the PK-12 student learning.
  • 3. Suggestions for Future Research:• Researchers may seek more information related to the increased use of the reflective e-portfolio process in core curricula areas of PK-12 classrooms.• Researchers may be interested in use of reflective e- portfolio practice related to informal assessments within project- and scenario-based learning environments.• Interesting studies on the increased ownership of students for personal self-assessment could be beneficial to administrators and classroom teachers.
  • For More Information: Lamar University Beaumont, TX http://lamar.edu/ &http://tinyurl.com/7wbjugf& http://stateu.com/lamar/
  • Contact Information• Kay Abernathy, Ed.D. - lkabernathy@lamar.edu• Diane Mason, Ph.D. - diane.mason@lamar.edu• Sheryl Abshire, Ph.D. – sheryl.abshire@lamar.edu• Cindy Cummings, Ed.D. - cdcummings@lamar.edu