|
E-PORTFOLIO ADOPTION IN TEACHER CREDENTIALING PROGRAM BRINGS
POSITIVE RESULTS
Marryann Nickel, chair of the Sonoma State University (SSU)
Department of Literacy Studies and Elementary Education,
says the following about her work in helping to develop a
full-featured e-portfolio system for an SSU graduate-level
teacher credential program: "Finally in my life, after
having a PhD for almost two decades, I am having the kind of
discussions I had in my doctoral program with my colleagues.
We are sitting around talking about what it means for a
teacher candidate to be really knowledgeable. The
conversations are getting very much to the heart of what we
believe and hold important for our work."
Using LiveText
After conducting an
e-portfolio pilot from 2002 through 2004, SSU decided on
using LiveText (an e-portfolio vendor based in La Grange,
Illinois) in its Department of Literacy Studies and
Elementary Education (LSEE) Multiple Subject Teacher
Credentialing Program. This relatively new e-portfolio
system is called the "LSEE Digital Portfolio."
"We wanted it (the e-portfolio tool set) to be fully
integrated with our program," says Nickel. "We wanted every
faculty member to be able to use it. We wanted it to become
a virtual filing cabinet and a working portfolio that
students would have at their disposal when they constructed
their showcase portfolios. We needed something that would
allow faculty to design their own course projects and
assignments in that environment on their own. We don’t have
much tech support. We are small and don’t have much money.
We wanted something that was flexible, easy to operate and
accessible, even for faculty who might not have any interest
or exposure to this technology. So far, LiveText has been
successful for us. But, I don’t think we are fully informed
yet about all of the possible e-portfolio platforms that are
out there."
Integrating Video
Nickels says that the
LSEE Digital Portfolio works well with the integration of
digital video and images that the credentialing program is
keen on having inside their students’ e-portfolios. With a
strong Apple computer user base among its students, many of
these teachers are proficient users of Apple’s iMovie
software to create, edit and ultimately demonstrate their
live teaching experiences with digital videos inside their
e-portfolios. Moreover, LiveText partners with United
Learning, publisher of unitedstreamingTM, a web-based
digital video delivery system that provides access to a
library of more than 15,000 K-12 instruction and
resource-oriented digital video clips. Teacher candidates
can add unitedstreaming digital video clips as resources to
lessons plans, for instance, inside their e-portfolios.
How it Works
The LSEE Digital
Portfolio requires that students complete two "Candidate
Work Samples" - CWS-1 and CWS-2 - that are comprised of
documents and other artifacts from assignments, learning
plans and observations related to SSU-created performance
expectations that are based on the California Standards for
the Teaching Profession. A rationale statement must
accompany each CWS entry. The rationale statement is an
explanation of why the student selected the entry as
evidence of knowledge and/or teaching practice for each
specific performance expectation. In addition, students
submit reflections related to their entries that are
individual value statements that should show deep thought
and connection between field and course work, as well as
explain to the reviewer (of the e-portfolio) his or her’s
stance and beliefs on effective, important and
transformative teaching and learning.
An Artifact, Rationale and Reflection
The entire entry,
which is an artifact, a rationale and a reflection of the
student’s choice, "represents their strong content
knowledge, or their strong pedagogy, or their idea of
multi-cultural pedagogies, or diversity, or whatever our
performance expectation is that we put together based on
what we thought was important and what the state required,"
says Paula Lane, SSU’s Digital Portfolio Director. "So the
performance expectations are based on a combination of our
own performance expectations and the California Commission
on Teaching Credentialing’s performance expectations."
Lane further explains how students often struggle with
their e-portfolio entry decision-making process, being
forced to dig deep into what they have actually accomplished
as they move through the credential program. The struggle
often becomes a way in which they begin to see what may be
wrong with their teaching.
Nickel makes it clear that the entire
e-portfolio-building process is "an integrated component of
our program that mirrors our social constructivist view. I
think when students choose what goes into their portfolios,
they are actually constructing their understanding of what
it means to be a teacher."
SSU’s Evaluation and Inter-Rater Reliability Features
The other important
piece of any e-portfolio system is how a department or
college reviews and ultimately uses the data and information
collected inside their students’ e-portfolios to bring about
effective changes in a program. At SSU this process begins
with a rubric faculty/reviewers use to evaluate student
e-portfolios. The results of these evaluations are then
automatically tabulated inside inter-rater reliability
reports that are generated by the LiveText software.
Evaluating the Rationale
"We get information
about a student’s thinking, not about their performance on a
particular task," Nickel says. "So, maybe they have
submitted a lesson plan, and the lesson plans looks
wonderful. It says they teach something. We believe that the
rationale explaining it is more important. Most of our
students have decent work that they turn in, but in the end
it is what they are able to say and how they reflect on that
work that makes for a strong portfolio entry."
Looking Closer at Programs
Overall, the
inter-rater reliability data and reports provide the
program’s faculty and administrators with the ability to
take a close look at what they are accomplishing, in greater
depth than they have in the past when the department used
paper portfolios.
"I really think we can look at this (inter-rater
reliability data) and make sense of our program," says
Nickel. "We do not do signature assignments. What can you
learn about your program if you tell people what to put
inside their portfolios? We want to see if all our courses
and all of our experiences are represented across these
e-portfolios in some kind of reasonable distribution.
However, because students are choosing their work (to be
entered), we are seeing a real scattering of selection
across every field experience."
Stance on
Teaching Standards
So, with all their
ducks in a row, so to speak, did SSU ultimately pursue a
standards-driven e-portfolio system or an individual
student-based e-portfolio system? Or, was it something in
between? Nickel’s response to this question reveals the
answer:
"I think that everyone in our faculty was clear on the
fact that there are standards that drive the preparation of
teachers. And we were equally clear on the fact that we did
not want standards to drive our program," she says. "We
thought that would be thin and literal and not a very rich
program. And I think we have a very rich, complex program.
So, we asked each other what is it that makes a highly
qualified beginning teacher? And what is it that we could do
in this program to get a person to that space we believe in?
And we said let’s not look at the standards, because if we
answer this question in an adequate way, then we will look
at the standards and we will be able to match those
standards to things we believe should be taking place in the
program. I think it is a very strong philosophical stance.
We meet the standards, but the standards are not driving the
program.
"I think the part that makes it very important is a very
pragmatic one," Nickels continues. "Many times I think when
faculty balk at this kind of work, it is because someone is
shoving a set of standards at them, which also has an
accompanying set of activities or experiences. This feels
like somebody is usurping the space of the faculty.
"And I think the reason why we have full faculty buy -in—and
of course it is at varying degrees, but we do have full
faculty buy-in—
is because this is something that faculty have ownership of
and the ability to drive it on their own."
www.sonoma.edu/lsee/portfolio
http://college.livetext.com/college/portfolios.html |
