4 2-12~1 sheryl-ka


Published on

Published in: Education, Technology
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Total views
On SlideShare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide
  • 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
  • 4 2-12~1 sheryl-ka

    1. 1. Development of an E-Portfolio Process:Implementation and Usein PK-12 SchoolsKay Abernathy, Ed.D.Diane Mason, Ph.D.Sheryl Abshire, Ph.D.Cindy Cummings, Ed.D.Lamar UniversityCollege of EducationEducational LeadershipBeaumont, TX
    2. 2. • Cohort VI - 12 Universities -United States and Australia• 3 year studies• Various e-portfolios, includingthose embracing rich media andsocial software, which enactreflection and integration.• Cohort VI investigating e-portfolios in a systemic way forassessment and inquiring intotheir effectiveness.
    3. 3. 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.
    4. 4. Rationale for Study• Validation of ETL Graduates e-portfolio processand transference of ETL candidates’ knowledgeto PK-12 classroom practices.• Authentic assessment and multiple measuresused beyond standardized testing.
    5. 5. Research QuestionHow has the participationof an ETL master’scandidate in an e-portfolioprocess contributed to theimplementation of e-portfolio practices with PK-12 students?
    6. 6. Theoretical FrameworkHelen Barrett• Developmental process• Addresses both the diverse and growingtechnology competency of the students andteachers• Addresses the varied experience with theportfolio learning and assessment process.
    7. 7. Levels of Implementation• Level 1: e-Portfolio as Storage• Level 2: e-Portfolio as Workspace• Level 3: e-Portfolio as Showcase
    8. 8. • The basic activity is converting student workinto digital formats and saving thesedocuments in the designated storage space(not on individual laptops).• The role of the teacher at this level is toprovide students with guidance on the typesof artifacts to save.Level 1: e-Portfolio as Storage
    9. 9. Level 2: e-Portfolio as Workspace• Learner keeps a learning journal (organizedchronologically, with a blog) and reflects on thelearning as represented in the samples of the work.• Artifacts should represent more than a singlecurriculum area.• Artifacts should demonstrate the many ways thatstudents are using technology across the curriculum.• The primary role of the teacher at this level is toprovide formative feedback on the students work sothat they can recognize opportunities forimprovement.
    10. 10. Level 3: e-Portfolio as Showcase• Requires the student to organize one or morepresentation portfolios around a set of learningoutcomes, goals or standards (depending onpurpose and audience).• The teachers role at this level is not only toprovide feedback on the students work, but alsoto validate the students self-assessment of theirwork.
    11. 11. e-portfolios PK-12• Web-based or electronic portfolios (e-portfolios, ePortfolios, efolios, digital portfolios, etc.) are arelatively new, but quickly expanding, component of teachereducation 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 independentlyorganize and construct format of their own entries usingwebsite design program (e.g., Google Sites).• Electronic portfolios (ePortfolios) basically operate as a"content-management system" (Jafari, 2004, p. 40).
    12. 12. e-portfolios PK-12• Chen and Light (2010) observed that ePortfolios allow students toselect a variety of digital artifacts and assemble them in one placein order to exhibit presentation skills or reflect, inquire, andanalyze material.• ePortfolios require students to reflect on their learning.• Richards and Guilbault (2009) contend that reflection has becomean essential way for students to speak in their own voices.• Critical reflection at strategic points in the development of theePortfolio creates a pathway for the formative examination anddemonstration of learning.
    13. 13. Web 2.0• Web 2.0 applications and mobile Internet devices add new issues tothe safety/access situation in schools.• The Children’s Internet Protection Act (CIPA) is the key federal lawaffecting ICT use in PK-12 schools.• Title II of the Broadband Data Improvement Act, which became PublicLaw in 2008, is titled, “Protecting Children in the 21st Century.”• As the result of serious implications for children engaged in socialnetworking and Web 2.0 tools, state boards of education haveenacted state requirements for school districts pertaining tobullying, hazing, and harassment (CoSN, 2010).• Students use Web 2.0 social networking tools and other authoringtools regularly; parents may still be in a Web 1.0 world.
    14. 14. Web 2.0• Inherent characteristics of Web 2.0 are so aligned with significanteducational pedagogies we are going to have to dramatically rethink oureducational institutions and expectations because of them.(Hargadon, 2009)• Idea of students as authors is not new in education; what is new is scope ofaudience to which student authors can write or publish.• Student authorship not just for teachers or local schools or even schoolcommunities, but the world.• Students can now maximize the notion of airing their own work bothcreatively and academically via Internet tools in blogs or podcasts or evenvia social networking tools.• Additionally, while student work could be displayed for a short while on thewalls of rooms, it can now be captured and displayed without limits via Web2.0 tools and eportfolios. (Reynard, 2009)
    15. 15. Reflection• Reflection is the "heart and soul" of a portfolio and isessential to brain-based learning (Kolb, 1984; Zull, 2002).• Need to develop strategies that better support reflection inthe learning process, supporting different types of reflectionto improve learning.• Reflection is the hallmark of many thoughtfully developedportfolios.• Reflections on the products within a portfolio allow theaudience to understand why these items were chosen torepresent the student and his / her capacities and can providesome of the best indicators of student growth (Barrett &Richter, 2012).
    16. 16. Assessment• Assessment portfolios, contain examples of student’s best work, as well asan explanation of why each work is significant.• The explanation or reflection discusses how the particular work illustratesmastery of specific curriculum requirements or learning goals(Brown, 2011).• No Child Left Behind (2001) federal legislation changed the focus ofassessment from the PK-12 classroom to statewide standardized testing forhigh stakes accountability.• Renewal of NCLB has not been finalized; there are indications that abroader definition of assessment will allow multiple measures ofachievement, supporting more formative, classroom-basedassessment, which will make portfolios more popular in PK-12 schools(Barrett, 2009).
    17. 17. Assessment• The primary role of the teacher is to provide formativefeedback on the students work so that they canrecognize opportunities for improvement.• Used in the PK-12 classrooms, portfolios are not somuch an instructional strategy to be researched, butmore of a means to an end: to support reflection thatcan help students understand their own learning andto provide a richer picture of student work thatdocuments growth over time (Barrett, 2011).
    18. 18. MethodologyMixed Methods Explanatory Sequential Design-Quantitative DataCollection andAnalysisQualitative DataCollection andAnalysisFollow upwithInterpretation
    19. 19. 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)
    20. 20. Quantitative Assumptions• Assumption 1: The majority of Educational TechnologyLeadership graduates believe PK-12 students should usedigital portfolios for assessment.• Assumption 2: The majority of Educational TechnologyLeadership graduates believe PK-12 students in my schooluse traditional paper-based portfolios for assessment.• Assumption 3: The majority of Educational TechnologyLeadership graduates believe PK-12 students in my districtuse traditional paper-based portfolios for assessment.
    21. 21. Quantitative Assumptions• Assumption 4: The majority of EducationalTechnology Leadership graduates believe PK-12students in my school use digital portfolios as aform of assessment.• Assumption 5: The majority of EducationalTechnology Leadership graduates believe PK-12students in my district use digital portfolios as aform of assessment.
    22. 22. Question #13 - Survey Data87.2%(96)A & SA66.3%(73)A & SA70.0%(77)A & SA15.4%(17)A & SA23.6%(6)A & SA
    23. 23. Question #13 - Survey Data4.193.66 3.682.322.57Strongly AgreeStrongly Disagree
    24. 24. Qualitative QuestionHow has the ETL Master’s graduates’knowledge of e-portfolio assessmentsupported the implementation of digitalportfolios with PK-12 students?
    25. 25. Qualitative Data Sample• We examined 60 graduate e-portfolios representative ofgraduates who completed the program during the sametimeframe of the 217 ETL graduates in the survey data pool.• Graduates’ writing and electronic portfolio components wereanalyzed to obtain qualitative data regarding graduates’viewpoints and perceptions about Web 2.0 tools as acomponent of an e-portfolio.• Conducted feedback sessions via web conferences, paneldiscussions, conference calls, and interviews with 50 ETLgraduates from the same timeframe of the 217 ETL graduates inthe survey data pool.
    26. 26. Qualitative Data from ETL Graduates’ e-Portfolios• Candidates integrate Web 2.0 tools (e-portfolios) in theclassroom.• Candidates are enthusiastic and amazed at the extendeduse 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 morepurposeful inclusion of technology into PK-12 schools.• Candidates say cloud-based e-portfolios will housestudent products that will follow them from year to year.
    27. 27. Feedback SessionsETL PK-12 Teacher Graduates report:• e-portfolios used in a variety of individual and cross curriculumareas.• a variety of processes implemented in e-portfolio construction.• implementation of e-portfolios in a various stages of HelenBarrett’s model.• allow students to self-select various e-portfolio platforms inorder to construct personal e-portfolios.• provide evidence of student reflection toward learning goalswithin the e-portfolios.• use of e-portfolios for formal and informal assessmentstrategies.
    28. 28. Feedback SessionsETL PK-12 Teacher Graduates report:• students share e-portfolios with diverse audiences beyond theschool environment.• student e-portfolios provide opportunities to inspire studentcreativity.• student e-portfolio construction constantly evolving, notfinite, linear, or static.• students value the e-portfolio process.• interaction with various stakeholders to create e-portfolioimplementation policies and procedures.• incorporate digital ethics for students as part of e-portfolioprocesses.• abundant use of Open Education Resources (OER) for e-portfolioconstruction.
    29. 29. Qualitative Data Analysis• Survey data indicated questionsregarding implementation of digitalportfolios vs. paper portfolios forassessment at the PK-122 school anddistrict levels.• Developed qualitative question to guidecoding and categorization or datagleaned from the ETL Masters’ candidatee-portfolios and feedback responses.
    30. 30. Results1. Conclusions:• Graduates of the ETL Master’s program arecontributing to the evolving process of implementingboth informal and formal e-portfolio assessment in PK-12 schools.• The growth of Web 2.0 tools contributes to theimplementation of the reflective e-portfolio practicesin PK-12 schools.• Teachers of PK-12 students are working to increase theuse of e-portfolio assessments.
    31. 31. 2. Implications:• Reflection eportfolio assessment beyond standardizingtesting will continue to grow and give more meaningful andricher pictures that can help students understand their ownlearning and to provide documentation that shows growthover time as suggested by Barrett.• The teachers role at this level is not only to providefeedback on the students work, but also to validate thestudents self-assessment of their work as Barrett indicated.• The use of Web 2.0 tools in the reflective e-portfolio processadd value and reveal a depth of knowledge to the PK-12student learning.
    32. 32. 3. Suggestions for Future Research:• Researchers may seek more information related to theincreased use of the reflective e-portfolio process incore curricula areas of PK-12 classrooms.• Researchers may be interested in use of reflective e-portfolio practice related to informal assessmentswithin project- and scenario-based learningenvironments.• Interesting studies on the increased ownership ofstudents for personal self-assessment could bebeneficial to administrators and classroom teachers.
    33. 33. For More Information:Lamar UniversityBeaumont, TXhttp://lamar.edu/ &http://tinyurl.com/7wbjugf& http://stateu.com/lamar/
    34. 34. 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