The Role of Portfolio Assessment in Developing Selected Aspects of Learner Autonomy

Anna Czura, University of Wrocław, Poland

Anna Czura is an aassistant professor in the Institute of English Studies at the University of Wrocław, Poland. In her research she is mainly interested in language assessment, learner autonomy, CLIL, European language policy, intercultural communicative competence, mobility and teacher training.

Menu

Summary
Introduction
Learner autonomy
Portfolio assessment
Methodology
Results and discussion
Conclusions and practical implications
References
Appendix

Summary

Nowadays, irrespective of the discipline, teachers agree that one of their major tasks is to develop learners’ ability to learn and take responsibility for their own learning. Learner autonomy has therefore become one of the paramount objectives of school teaching. This article presents the results of mixed methods research conducted with lower secondary school students in Poland, which aimed to explore the impact of portfolio assessment on two aspects of learner autonomy: the learners’ ability to select and apply learning resources as well as their self-assessment skills. The study helped to draw up a number of practical recommendations that are hoped to increase learning gains of portfolio assessment in a language classroom.

Introduction

Globalization, tourism and mobility necessitate knowledge of foreign languages and effective communication both in informal and professional situations. However, the question remains: How can learners continue their language education outside institutionalized teaching? Learner autonomy seems to be a solution to this problem since it helps the individuals to take control over their own learning without the teacher’s supervision.

The ability to direct one’s own learning can be developed by a number of specially designed pedagogical tools. Alternative methods of assessment facilitate holistic development of the learners and are therefore claimed to have a positive impact on the development of autonomy (Fox, 2008; Shohamy, 1996). Whereas traditional tests tend to focus on passive and highly theoretical knowledge, the unconventional assessment methods aim at assessing the overall communicative language competence, which comprises not only linguistic, but also strategic, discourse and sociolinguistic elements. Moreover, in learner-centred education self-assessment makes it possible to transfer the responsibility for assessment from the teacher to the learners.

Since both autonomy and assessment aim at the individual development of a learner, I decided to carry out a research study in a lower-secondary school to observe whether the portfolio assessment exerts any impact on two aspects of learner autonomy: the learners’ ability to select and implement learning resources and their ability to engage in self-assessment processes. Before explaining the present study, I will first discuss learner autonomy and portfolio assessment in light of relevant literature in the field.

Learner autonomy

One of the first definitions of autonomy was formulated by Holec (1981, p. 3), who asserted that autonomy is “the ability to take charge of one’s own leaning”. This definition implies that autonomous behaviour is present at all stages of the learning process, from goal setting and ongoing management to the evaluation of the outcomes.

Since autonomy in language learning is a multifaceted capacity, subject to the learning situation and learner’s individual differences, it is difficult to formulate a single definition encompassing all aspects of the concept. Benson (2011) claims that a coherent definition of autonomy should embrace three interdependent levels of control: control over learning management, cognitive processes and learning content. Control over learning management involves the learner’s decisions concerning planning, implementation and evaluation of the learning process. Autonomous learners are capable of construing their own learning system and employing appropriate learning strategies. Control over cognitive processes involves the learner’s mental involvement in the learning process. The learner needs to be able to reflect on all stages of learning and be ready to introduce any necessary modifications. Finally, control over learning content depends on the learner’s ability to establish learning goals as well as select appropriate learning resources, methods and techniques to accomplish these objectives. This type of control heavily depends on whether learners are granted freedom of independent choice in their learning environments (for instance, in their schools) (Benson, 2011).

On the basis of the characteristics provided by Breen and Mann (1997), an autonomous learner can be defined as a learner who:

• has positive attitudes to the learning process and is motivated to learn a particular language;
• is able to define the aims and the content of learning;
• takes over the responsibility for making all decisions concerning the learning process;
• can independently direct the learning process and select the most beneficial learning methods and techniques;
• reflects upon the learning process;
• being a good guesser, is able to infer meaning of new language on the basis of linguistic and non-linguistic clues;
• applies the acquired knowledge in meaningful contexts;
• has well-developed cooperative skills;
• is able to learn from corrective feedback.

Autonomy can, to a large extent, determine success in language learning, hence the need to develop the learners’ responsibility for their life-long learning. As the Common European Framework of Reference (CEFR) indicates, schools may contribute to the development of learner autonomy if they create optimal conditions enabling learners to acquire knowledge and develop their reflectiveness both at school and in self-study situations.

Portfolio assessment

Assessment is an important element of the classroom procedure; not only does it serve as feedback on the learners’ progress in the learning process, but also provides a valuable insight into the effectiveness of the teaching practice. Traditional assessment, being product-oriented and summative in nature, promotes memorization, underlines learners’ weaknesses and tends to elicit learners’ passive knowledge. Such assessment is usually conducted at the end of a course, semester or school year in order to provide information on learners’ overall achievement in the form of a grade. Alternative assessment, on the other hand, concentrates on the process of learning and offers more formative feedback, which enables the learners to analyse their own strong and weak points. Being aware that their performance is assessed on a regular basis, learners are more likely to feel motivated to work systematically and understand the importance of their individual work. Additionally, alternative assessment offers highly authentic and meaningful tasks which are consistent with classroom goals, curricula and instruction (Brown, 2004).

One of the alternative methods of assessment is portfolio, which is defined as,

a purposeful collection of student work that tells the story of the student’s efforts, progress, or achievement in (a) given area(s). This collection must include student participation in the selection of portfolio content; the guidelines for selection; the criteria for judging merit; and evidence of students’ self-reflection. (Arter & Spandel, 1992, p. 32)

The content and structure of a portfolio vary, depending on the application (classroom assessment, university admission) and the audience (parents, headmasters, other teachers, general public). In language learning, portfolios are mainly used to assess writing. However, if designed appropriately, they may also focus on other skills and thus provide evidence of growth in language competence.

Depending on the content and function, O'Malley and Valdez Pierce (1996) distinguish between three types of portfolios:

• Showcase (or exhibition) portfolios are collections of learners’ best pieces of work that can be presented to the stakeholders as evidence of achievement. This type of portfolio, however, focuses on the end product of learning and does not reflect the learning process.
• Collection portfolios (working folders) consist of learners’ work produced during a certain period of time. They may contain both work in progress, as well as finished assignments. Despite demonstrating both the process and product of learning, they are often criticised for their lack of planning and structure.
• Assessment (learning) portfolios contain a systematic collection of learner work, elements of self-assessment and teacher feedback. The owner of a portfolio selects separate entries in cooperation with the teacher against a set of previously established criteria. The contents of such portfolios illustrate learners’ growth over time and their success in relation to curricular objectives.

O'Malley and Valdez Pierce (1996) note that the key elements of portfolios include samples of student work, student self-assessment and clearly stated criteria, which are agreed on by the teacher and the learners. Portfolio is claimed to be both an assessment and a self-assessment method as it involves the teacher’s feedback (accompanied with occasional grading) and, at the same time, it gives the learner an opportunity to observe and reflect on the progress achieved over a certain period of time. By means of diverse self-assessment tools, learners are prompted to adopt a critical attitude to their own work in order to establish new learning objectives.

Methodology

Aims of the study

Learners attending lower secondary school (aged 13-16) undergo a transition from childhood to adulthood. At this age the development of autonomous learning and the ability to take responsibility for their own decisions seem vitally important in the process of holistic development of an individual. The question is whether the application of a new form of assessment is a sufficient means to develop autonomous behaviours in adolescent learners. The study presented here aims to determine whether portfolio assessment exerts any effect on two aspects of learner autonomy:

 aspect 1: selection and implementation of relevant learning resources (i.e., learners’ ability to find, evaluate and apply additional language learning resources), and
 aspect 2: learners’ self-assessment skills and the ability to evaluate their own learning process.

Participants

49 lower secondary school learners (aged 13-14) at A2 level of proficiency in English took part in the research. All students were taught by their regular teachers, attended three hours of English per week and the lessons were based on the same syllabus and course book.

Instruments and procedures

In this mixed methods research, three instruments that centred on the two aforementioned aspects of autonomy were applied. The first instrument, which is a questionnaire on learner autonomy, consisted of 10 questions based on a scale where 1 indicated “strongly disagree” and 5 – “strongly agree” (the questions can be found in the Appendix). It was distributed before and after the experiment. Additionally, once a month, I observed lessons in both groups in a variety of classroom situations: language instruction, practice, production as well as assessment-related procedures. Finally, towards the end of the experiment, 4 randomly selected students from both groups took part in a semi-structured interview which helped me to collect more in-depth information about their autonomous attitudes and behaviours.

The experiment

The research lasted 9 months, that is, one full academic year. Both groups of learners were assessed on the basis of a regular assessment procedure established in the school by all English teachers. To examine the impact of portfolio assessment on the selected aspects of learner autonomy, one group (referred to as an ‘experimental group’) was additionally subjected to portfolio assessment. The group of students who did not experience portfolio assessment will be called the ‘control group’. The learners in either group had never been subjected to portfolio assessment before.

The first time portfolio assessment was introduced into the experimental group, the teacher explained the structure, objectives and possible content of the new assessment method. Encouraged by the teacher, the learners put forward the following criteria: neatness, grammatical and lexical accuracy, the amount of work, a variety of tasks and the systematic work. The list of criteria was attached to each portfolio so that the learners were able to refer to it at all times. The portfolios included obligatory entries, tightly linked with the classroom instruction and set on an ongoing basis by the teacher (e.g., extension of vocabulary introduced in the course book, written weather forecasts, reports of classroom surveys, letters etc.). In addition, the learners were encouraged to attach to their portfolios examples of additional work, such as translations of songs, extracurricular vocabulary, and articles in English they had read. The learners had also a chance to reflect on their own learning process through open-ended questions or closed-ended mini-surveys prepared by the teacher. The teacher collected portfolios twice a semester and provided feedback in the form of a grade and a written comment about the weak and strong points of the collected work. The teacher decided to grade individual pieces of work and no overall grade was given for the entire portfolio. The outcomes were then summarised by the teacher and discussed in front of the class.

Results and discussion

Table 1 illustrates the questionnaire results before and after the experiment in both groups. An increase in both aspects of autonomy was observed in the experimental group. In the control group, on the other hand, only a minimal rise was noted in the scale referring to the learners’ ability to select and apply additional resources, whereas their ability to self-reflect on their learning progress seemed to diminish.

Table 1. Mean results obtained from the pre- and post-questionnaire on two aspects of learner autonomy

As far as the first aspect of autonomy is concerned, statistical checks have shown that portfolio assessment contributed to the development of adolescent learners’ ability to select and implement additional language learning materials. This increase in the experimental group might have resulted from the fact that almost all items included in the portfolio exceeded the content of the course book and prompted the learners to search for information in other sources. The results of the observations and the interviews revealed that when learners were given a chance to obtain a better grade for additional entries in their portfolio, they had to make all decisions concerning task completion independently: they were responsible for selecting a task type as well as choosing relevant resources and evaluating the final outcome. Since the teaching process in both research groups was to a large extent based on the course book and workbook, the learners were encouraged to use additional resources only to submit assignments to their portfolios. It appeared that the control group had hardly any opportunities to employ additional resources in their L2 learning.

In the second investigated aspect of autonomy, that is the learners’ ability to self-reflect on their learning process, no significant difference was noted before and after the treatment. As the monthly observations revealed, this might be due to the fact that classroom procedures in both groups were dominated by the teacher, who was responsible for the whole teaching process. Even though in the experimental group the teacher explained that one of the aims of portfolio assessment is to observe the growth of language competence over time, this premise did not seem to be pursued and the learners were not able to reflect on their own performance. Despite being offered both open- and closed-ended self-assessment instruments, the learners did not develop the ability to reflect on their own work and failed to submit those tools to their portfolios. On the basis of the interviews and monthly observations it can be hypothesised that such a situation may have stemmed from low support of independence and insufficient training in self-assessment. The learners might not have understood the benefits of reflecting on their learning (one of the learners even said: “what do I get out of it?”) and, being left without the teacher’s assistance, they simply were not able to interpret their language performance. No attempt to introduce self-assessment was observed in the control group.

It must be underlined, however, that even though the questionnaire indicated only limited changes in the selected aspects of learner autonomy, some incidental autonomous behaviours could be observed in situations in which the learners were engaged in the portfolio assessment. For instance, when they were requested to set assessment criteria to be later applied during the experiment, they eagerly participated in the process and were able to provide reasonable suggestions. They could also notice advantages of using clear assessment criteria: “although they were difficult to understand at the beginning, later on I got used to them. They helped me to focus on the most important aspects of my work”). Another observation worth mentioning is that portfolio assessment prompted some of the learners to prepare and attach to their portfolios diverse additional, non-compulsory assignments: “if it hadn’t been for the portfolio, I wouldn’t have prepared any additional tasks”, “I really liked that we could get additional grades for our extra work”. Apart from these tasks, the learners appeared to be reluctant to engage in any form of extracurricular work.

Conclusions and practical implications

Portfolio assessment is widely acclaimed for its formative value as it encourages independence and self-reflection both on the process and the product(s) of learning. The research reported on in this article revealed the emergence of certain autonomous behaviours in the group exposed to portfolio assessment. For instance, learners were able to select appropriate learning resources without the teacher’s assistance or establish and implement assessment criteria. These elements, however, appeared to be task-specific and were not transferred to other spheres of classroom learning and teaching. Thus, it can be said that portfolio assessment failed to contribute to the overall level of learner autonomy.

The experiment indicates that the effectiveness of an assessment method in developing autonomy depends on multiple factors, such as the nature of the assignment, the form of teacher feedback, learners’ engagement with the task as well as their attitude to the assessment method. On the basis of the present findings, a number of practical implications concerning learner autonomy and portfolio assessment can be drawn:

1. Adolescent learners are ready to assume responsibility for their learning. The responses provided in the interviews and questionnaires indicate that adolescent learners are well aware of the responsibility for language learning they need to shoulder. Still, they are not able to reach high levels of learner autonomy as they do not possess sufficient expertise and experience in self-directed learning. Therefore, teachers need to redefine their roles in the classroom and treat learner autonomy as one of the core objectives of language education (for practical details, see the points below).
2. Fostering autonomy is a process affecting all spheres of classroom teaching. The present study has indicated that implementing portfolio assessment does not suffice to develop fully autonomous behaviours in language learners. The process of introducing new assessment methods needs to be a part of a comprehensive and wide-ranging scheme that would involve many aspects of teaching. Unless learner autonomy is encouraged in other areas of classroom practice, we can hardly expect the newly developed autonomous behaviours to consolidate and become a regular occurrence affecting the overall level of autonomy.
3. Adapting the teacher’s role is necessary. Autonomous behaviours are not likely to develop in a teacher-centred, traditional classroom, in which a learner is viewed as a passive recipient of knowledge. On the contrary, learners need to become active constructors of their own knowledge. To achieve these objectives, teachers need to encourage learners to participate in decision-making concerning at least selected aspects of classroom learning so that they are able to make appropriate choices when working on their own. It is necessary that learners are able to set learning goals, plan their own learning process, select appropriate resources, monitor their progress and self-assess their work.
4. ortfolio encourages formative assessment. Another risk involved in the use of portfolio assessment is the way it is handled by teachers and applied in practice. Some teachers tend to disregard this prerequisite and treat portfolios as a means of external control directed at grading and emphasising the product, but not the process of learning. Such a teacher-centred application of portfolios which aims at ranking learners is hardly likely to encourage the emergence of autonomous behaviours.
5. The implementation of a new technique/method needs to be preceded by careful planning. When a novel teaching technique or method is introduced for the first time in a classroom, it is necessary that the teacher presents its aim, structure, practical aspects and possible gains to be obtained from it. In this study, portfolio assessment was introduced for the first time and it appeared that the learners did not fully understand the benefits it entailed. To overcome this problem, teachers should provide scaffolded help and practical guidance throughout the entire time the learners are engaged in portfolio assessment. In the case of children and adolescent learners, it might also be a good idea to explain the key principles underlying portfolio assessment to parents and other teachers and encourage them to assist learners in preparing their portfolios.
6. Self-assessment is a skill that needs to be gradually developed. Another problem that significantly diminished the formative value of portfolio assessment was the fact that the learners failed to engage in the process of self-assessment. The initial introduction of self-assessment was not sufficient – self-assessment is a difficult and complex process requiring teachers’ constant guidance; self-assessment is a skill that needs to be gradually developed in learners. As Lam and Legenhausen (2011, p. 188) conclude, “if learners are continually called upon to reflect on past learning experiences and to take responsibility for their learning, then they will develop a capacity for valid insights and self-assessments.”
7. Learner autonomy is inherently linked with communication. In the observed classrooms, language learning was focused mainly on linguistic properties and accuracy, while other elements of communicative language competence seemed to be rather neglected. The accuracy-based approach to language teaching was also reflected in the assessment process, which favoured traditional testing at the cost of direct and performance assessment. Consequently, a negative washback effect could be observed: since the teachers stressed the importance of accuracy, the learners focused on mastering grammar and vocabulary in the reviewing process. Learners are more likely to take responsibility for their own learning when they perceive the added value of language learning and when they are confident that the language they learn can be used in real communicative situations.

References

Arter, J., & Spandel, V. (1992). Using portfolios of student work in instruction and assessment. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 11(1), 36-44.

Benson, P. (2011). Teaching and Researching Autonomy in Language Learning (2nd ed.). London: Longman.

Breen, M. P., & Mann, S. (1997). Shooting arrows at the sun: Perspectives on a pedagogy for autonomy. In P. Benson & P. Voller (Eds.), Autonomy and Independence in Language Learning (pp. 132-149). London: Longman.

Brown, H. (2004). Language Assessment: Principles and Language Practices. White Plains, NY: Longman.

Council of Europe (2001). Common European Framework of Reference for Languages. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Dam, L., & Legenhausen, L. (2011). Explicit reflection, evaluation, and assessment in the autonomy classroom. Innovation in Language Learning and Teaching, 5(2), 177-189.

Fox, J. (2008). Alternative assessment. In E. Shohamy & N. Hornberger (Eds.), Enyclopedia of Language and Education, 2nd edition, Volume 7, Language Testing and Assessment (pp. 97-108). New York: Springer Science.

Holec, H. (1981). Autonomy in Foreign Language Learning. Oxford: Pergamon.

Little, D. (1991). Learner Autonomy 1: Definitions, Issues and Problems. Dublin: Authentic.

O'Malley, M., & Valdez Pierce, L. (1996). Authentic Assessment for English Language Learners: Practical Approaches for Teachers. New York: Addison Wesley.

Shohamy, E. (1996). Language testing: Matching assessment procedures with language knowledge. In M. Birenbaum & F. J. Dochy (Eds.), Alternatives in Assessment of Achievements, Learning Processes and Prior Knowledge (pp. 143-160). Boston: Kluwer Academic Publishing.

Appendix

The questionnaire items concerning two aspects of autonomy
(translated from Polish)

Aspect 1: the ability to select and implement relevant learning resources:

• I would like to have a say in selecting the English course book.
• It is the teacher’s obligation to tell me which exercises to do and which resources to use. (NB. The statements in bold reflect low levels of autonomy. )
• To improve my language skills, I look for additional resources and do extra exercises.
• I try to solve my language problems by using additional grammar books, dictionaries and other learning resources.
• When I study English, I use only the course book, the workbook and the notebook that we use at school.

Aspect 2: self-assessment skills and the ability to evaluate their own learning process.

• I can self-assess whether I have learnt something or not.
• I think tests do not reflect my true knowledge. I am able to self-assess how much I have learnt.
• I try to look for and correct my own language mistakes.
• I know my strong and weak points in English.
• I believe the teacher should correct all my mistakes.

Please check the How the Motivate your Students course at Pilgrims website.
Please check the Building Positive Group Dynamics course at Pilgrims website.