The Open-Ended Webpage Model

- Laurie Mullen, Ball State University

Goals and Purposes
I have been exploring the role of portfolios in the teaching and learning process at the university level for many years. Like many teacher educators, I began with paper-based portfolios and in recent years have added electronic portfolios as a requirement to my courses.

          The initial goals for electronic portfolios in my course were two-fold. First and foremost, I wanted my students to understand, articulate, and demonstrate their growth as future teachers in relation to the INTASC standards. Students would accomplish this in the context of artifact documentation and articulated reflections as well as on their experiences as learners. I defined artifacts as tangible evidence of knowledge that is gained, skills that are mastered, values that are clarified, or dispositions and attitudes that are characteristic of you. Their portfolios would be a cumulative and on-going reflection of their progress and readiness in learning to teach. Reflection was built into the artifact production as the students were to justify the artifact in the portfolio for a particular standard. Students were to answer the following questions and include well-considered rationale:

  • What is the artifact?
  • Why is it filed under this standard?
  • What does it say about my growing competence?
  • What are my strengths and weaknesses in relation to this standard?
          The second goal was related to preparing future teachers in computer technologies for teaching and learning. The technology skills they would learn in the context of preparing their electronic portfolios – Webpage design and publishing, digital photography, hypertext narrative, electronic mail, and digital media – were infused in an authentic course-related activity. Instead of learning these skills as separate and disconnected experiences, I wanted students to learn technology skills as related to the learning to teach process. In other words, this was my attempt to infuse technology into my curriculum. (For more information on technology standards in teacher education, see the NETS standards.)

Structure
The "open-ended" in my title, given my approach to electronic portfolio implementation, is another way to say that my students began with a blank page. They also began with a lot of anxiety about the process. However, my choice for this approach to portfolio production is congruent with my beliefs about teaching, learning, and learning to teach. I will briefly state my beliefs as it is directly related to assessment opportunities.

          I believe that learning to teach is developmental, procedural, dynamic, political, and problematical. Knowledge is not static and permanent in nature, but emergent, contextual, situated, and socially constructed. Therefore, novice teachers need opportunities to construct their knowledge by interacting with new ideas in settings with structured coaching and appropriate
interventions.

          Learning to teach is not a process of learning discrete techniques separate from the context of schooling. It must also include reflective capacities of observation, critical analysis and decision making around their identities in interactions with students and colleagues. Given this philosophy of learning to teach, I felt it necessary to parallel my assessment requirements in line with my beliefs.  Consequently, I could not justify the use of a pre-made templates.

          Students were required create a standards section in table form on their portfolio with relative links to all ten INTASC standards. They were asked to reflect upon each standard three times during the semester. At that time, they were to reflect and write on the meaning they had for each standard in terms of prior experience, both personal and professional. For each reflection, they were to submit an artifact representing their current competence in that standard. By the end of the semester, each student would have three reflections and artifacts for each of the ten INTASC standards. In addition, they were to have a link to a professional resume along with suggested Web sites in their area of study.

          Finally, at the end of the course, each student was required to present a presentation of their portfolios to their peers. They were given the opportunity to choose two specific standards to discuss and I chose one more. I wanted their peers in the class to serve as "critical friends" in this scenario - where they would push their peers in a supportive and professional way. This activity had its strengths and weaknesses. The strength of an oral presentation of work completed lies in the practice of professional discourse. Preservice teachers are rarely asked to speak professionally in depth about their work. This act of presentation made many connections for my students that might not have been made otherwise. The weakness of such an activity lies in the inability for students to serve in the role of "critical friend." Due to many reasons, including inexperience in such a role and fear of criticism, my students did not "perform" in the way I had imagined. I have come to understand that this is a skill that must be taught and nurtured in our classes in order to be effective.