DUC352-Evaluation and Assessment-Web- based portfolio assessment

1. SELF-ASSESSMENT IN A
WEB-BASED PORTFOLIO ENVIRONMENT
Lamis Al Hakim – EDUC352
Assessment and Evaluation - 2021

2. Aim literature review Method
Consistency among three
assessment methods in a Web-
based portfolio assessment
environment:
 Portfolio assessment
method highlight
learners’:
 79 student’s senior high
 (computer course )
 72 portfolios were studied
 12-week period / 3 h for each week
 teacher-assessment;
 peer-assessment;
 self-assessment.
 autonomy;
 participation;
 self & peer-
rating.
 Two-unit course
 Animation Creation
 Website Creation covering design
skills and web page creation
abilities
Research questions 4.1- 4.2 -
4.3
 Are results consistent among
the assessments?
 Are results consistent with
end-of-course examination
scores?
 Rubric for portfolio
assessment
 Web-based portfolio assessment system
A comparative analysis of the consistency and difference among teacher-assessment, student self-assessment and peer-
assessment in a Web-based portfolio assessment environment for high school students
Results
teacher-raters generally had the
strictest scoring standards
Peer-raters were the most lax
Peer and teacher assessments
showed inconsistency
Self-assessment and peer-
assessment were not
consistent.
 Self and teacher-assessment
were the most consistent, and
consistency was detected in
Artifact.
Attitude had the lowest
reliability and validity, and the
worst consistency between self-
and teacher-assessment.
Self scoring should weigh more
than peer scoring
Teacher assessment should
have the largest proportion.
Article 2

3.  Web-based portfolio assessment system
 Experimental procedure
 Pilot-test (Unit 1: Animation Creation)
 Formal test (Unit 2:Website Creation).
o The practice of pilot-test was instrumental in
increasing raters’ skills and familiarity with
assessment rubrics, which also helped to enhance
the reliability and validity of the formal test.
 Development of assessment rubrics. (factor analysis and
Cronbach’s a value)
 Item analysis of assessment rubrics (t-values)
 Validity of assessment rubrics (Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin (KMO)
values) factor analysis
 Reliability of assessment rubrics (Cronbach’s value )
Method

4. Aim literature review Method
This study explored the
 reliability
 validity
of self-assessment in Web-based
portfolio.
 Web-based portfolio
assessment
 Reliability and validity of
self-assessment
79 student’s
computer course - 72 portfolios
Word Processing:
 Page Setup (Unit 1)
 File Edition (Unit 2)
Research questions
 Are self-assessment results
consistent with teacher-
assessment results?
 Students performed portfolio
creation, inspection and self-
assessment.
 Teachers monitor learning progress
and learning performances.
 Are self-assessment results
sufficient to examine learning
achievements, are self-
assessment results consistent
with end-of-course exam results?
 Development of assessment
rubrics
Is learner self-assessment reliable and valid in a Web-based portfolio environment for high school students?
Results
 the self-assessment and teacher-
assessment results were highly
consistent without significant
differences;
 According to Pearson’s
correlations: self-assessment
and end-of-course examination
were highly consistent, implying
that Web-based portfolio self-
assessment can faithfully reflect
learning achievements.
Sample activity

5.  Development of assessment rubrics
 The rubric consisted of 27 scoring criteria
 six aspects:
o Portfolio Creation;
o Learning Goal;
o Artifact;
o Reflection;
o Attitude;
o and Other.
Rubric Scale
Method
 Analysis of assessment aspects (t-values)
 Validity of assessment rubrics (Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin
(KMO) values)
 Reliability of assessment (Cronbach’s value )
 Web-based portfolio assessment system
 Procedure of experiment (pre-test and a formal test)

6. Irubric
Rcampus.
Com
Sample from Article - Rubric Scale
Back to Results

7. PHOTOGRAPHY CLASS E-PORTFOLIO SELF ASSESSMENT RUBRIC
E-POTROLIOS
PLATFORMS
Weebly
Wordpress

8. Reference
Chang, C.-C, Tseng, K.-H, & Lou, S.-J. (2012). A comparative analysis of the consistency and difference among teacher-assessment, student self-
assessment and peer-assessment in a web-based portfolio assessment environment for high school students. Computers & Education, 58(1), 303–
320. doi: 10.1016/j.compedu.2011.08.005
Chang, C.-C, Liang, C, Chen, Y.-H (2012). Is learner self-assessment reliable and valid in a Web-based portfolio environment for high school students?
Computers & Education, 60(1), 325-334.doi: 10.1016/j.compedu.2012.05.012
University of Southern Maine.(n.d.) E-Portfolio Rubric. https://usm.maine.edu/sites/default/files/assessment/Rubric-E-Portfolio_1.pdf

9. Questions and discussion
“Students are more likely to identify the
problem areas by themselves during the
development of learning portfolios” (Hult,
2001, as cited in Chang, C.-C et al, p.326).

10. THANK YOU