INFUSING TECHNOLOGY INTO THE PRESERVICE TEACHER EDUCATION PROGRAM THROUGH ELECTRONIC PORTFOLIOS
Carla Piper, School of Education, Chapman University, USA, piper@chapman.edu
Dr. Susan Eskridge, Benerd School of Education, University of the Pacific, USA, seskridge@uop.edu
Abstract
Helping prospective teachers become aware of the uses of technology in education is an important goal of today's teacher preparation programs. Three education reform themes concerning the preparation of teachers for the 21st Century converge in this study: teacher accountability to professional certification standards, authentic assessment, and understanding of advanced technologies. The question of how to use technology effectively in the assessment of teacher candidates in order to demonstrate achievement of course objectives based on state certification standards led to the development of an electronic portfolio project in two small university teacher training programs. The potential for using technology in assessment is examined through analyses of electronic portfolios created by teacher candidates as well as interviews to gather information concerning experiences of collecting and preserving electronic evidence. The researchers' process of designing templates in hypertext markup language (HTML) and Hyperstudio, a multimedia authoring software program, provides further insight into the design and implementation of the electronic portfolio project
In 1997, the National Council for Accreditation of Teacher Education (NCATE) issued a report called "Technology and the New Professional Teacher: Preparing for the 21st Century Classroom." The NCATE Task Force on Technology and Teacher Education recommends that NCATE stimulate more effective uses of technology in teacher education programs. In order to prepare students to teach in tomorrow's classrooms, "they must experiment with effective applications of computer technology for teaching and learning in their own campus practice" (NCATE, 1997). The International Society for Technology in Education (ISTE), along with NCATE, established standards which challenge higher education to incorporate technology across the entire teacher education program, not just as a single computer literacy class added to the existing curriculum (1997, p.7).
According to the NCATE task force, teacher education has the responsibility to prepare students for teaching in the 21st Century, even though that future is impossible to predict with the rapid developments in technology. The task force states that teacher education is in a time of transition, calling for experimentation and a new attitude that is "fearless in the use of technology" (p.6). NCATE recommends that teacher education programs provide early experiences for their students and that technology be integrated into other education reform efforts (p. 8). Education reform documents focus on the importance of rigorous standards for the certification of teacher candidates, authentic assessment aligned to these standards, and the use of technology as a potential tool for assessing these standards.
The U.S. Department of Education acknowledges the potential of technology for integrating assessment into the daily life of the classroom (1997). The 1993 U.S. Education Reform Studies indicate that technology facilitates (1) obtaining a trace of student thinking processes, (2) collecting real-time feedback from multiple students, (3) storing and retrieving student work and associated comments, and (4) setting individual goals and managing instruction" (U.S. Department of Education, 1993). Bennett and Hawkins (1993) state that technology can make crucial contributions to the creation of workable and meaningful forms of alternative assessment and that computers and video records offer potential for collecting and storing records of students’ work.
Lankes (1995) discusses the use of computer technology as a "likely solution" to the problem of creating, managing, and storing portfolios. Electronic or computer-based portfolios are similar to traditional paper portfolios, but information is collected, stored, and managed electronically with computerized text, graphics, sound, and video. Lankes (1995) states that computer-based portfolios provide authentic demonstrations of accomplishments and motivate students to take responsibility for their own work. Sheingold and Frederiksen (1994) indicate that technology can help link assessment with reform by providing the following functions: support for student work in extended, authentic learning activities; portable, accessible and re-playable copies of performances in multiple media; libraries of examples and interpretive tools; greater participation in the assessment process; and publication of works recognizing student accomplishments (p. 121). Technology can provide evidence of assessment beyond products that are text-based or activities that require the physical presence of the evaluator. Student work can be captured and preserved using interactive multimedia formats that integrate many forms of information on one computer disk (p. 122).
The typical teacher preparation classroom format provides limited time for extended reflection and sharing on the many topics that are covered in each class. Portfolios have been helpful, not only in assessing student performance in teacher training courses, but in helping students reflect upon and organize the material learned in the courses. Developing portfolios electronically provides students with new ways to demonstrate a broad range of abilities, as well as give them greater awareness of the unique capabilities of technology in creating meaningful forms of alternative assessment. A well-designed electronic portfolio system can support this approach and offer expanded potential for collecting different kinds of records of students' work. Final products in a variety of media (text, graphics, video, multimedia), students' oral presentations or explanations, interviews that capture students' development and justifications for their work, and in-progress traces of thinking and problem solving processes can now be included using video and computer technologies.
The use of technology as a tool for assessment of teacher candidates is the focus of an on-going study at two small private California universities. The authors of this paper are developing and testing a system by which teacher candidates computerize their teacher education course portfolios. An electronic portfolio project has been developed to explore the possibilities of using computer technology to store artifacts as evidence of achievement of course objectives based on state certification standards. The electronic portfolio project is being used by students in multiple subjects credential courses as a means of documenting achievement and providing evidence of reflective practice. Templates in both web (HTML) and Hyperstudio formats provide a framework for linking evidence and artifacts to course objectives, teacher credential standards, and useful resources. The electronic portfolio project began in spring of 1998 and research continues through spring of 1999, at which time a formal study will be completed.
A preliminary computer literacy questionnaire has been used with all students to examine technical background and student attitude toward technology. Student perceptions of the portfolio process have been explored through interviews and the final portfolio products have been analyzed to determine the effectiveness of the electronic product as assessment. Technological processes within the real-life context of a university computer lab have been examined for problematic hardware and software issues. Personal interviews with teacher candidates have been conducted in an effort to describe and evaluate the electronic portfolio process on an individual basis. The course professors and the computer lab technicians have provided observational data, opinions, and insights into the portfolio process through interviews and e-mail correspondence. A field journal has been kept throughout the project to provide historical record of the researcher's involvement in the process of developing templates for the electronic portfolio project.
The initial electronic portfolio was designed in the spring of 1998 with the creation of a template based on the course objectives and assignments included in a reading methods course syllabus. The course professor provided a syllabus indicating how course objectives were linked to state certification standards. The course syllabus included descriptions of all assignments and included guidelines for traditional portfolio preparation. The portfolio designer began with the assumption that HTML web authoring offered the most practical format for students because of its cross-platform compatibility and accessibility to HTML editing software through Netscape Gold software browser and editor. In addition, linking course objectives directly to the World Wide Web addresses of state certification agencies seemed to offer possibilities for providing easy access to current standards. A literacy resource packet was also compiled to provide teacher candidates with additional curriculum materials. Technical problems developed immediately because of cross-platform issues. The designer created the web pages on a Windows NT computer and saved all files on a CD-ROM. The web pages did not load properly on the Macintosh Power PCs in the computer lab. The hypertext links were broken due to the fact that files on the NT were saved using long file names. Once all files were renamed in the eight-letter DOS format, all links were operable.
Teacher candidates participating in the first electronic portfolio project were asked to purchase zip disks in order to have adequate storage space for all text, graphics, audio, and video files. The HTML template was transferred to each student's zip disk. Most of the students requested MAC format, but a few students requested Windows format in order to work on the portfolio on their own computers rather than in the lab. When the project was finally introduced, the students indicated that they were overwhelmed with the complexity of the web and confused over the links to the literacy resource packet. The course professor separated the resource packet from the portfolio in an attempt to differentiate between the purposes of the portfolio and the literacy resources. Early in the semester, it became clear that students also were having difficulty using the HTML template. A decision was made to provide an alternative template using Hyperstudio, a multimedia authoring software program. The course designer created stacks for each objective, as well as a main menu stack and an assignment stack. Each stack included a series of cards or pages in which students were to place their artifacts. These artifacts could be inserted as text files within text boxes, graphics files, sound files, or video files. The students appeared to be less intimidated by the Hyperstudio design. Only one student from the original group elected to use the HTML template.
An additional problem emerged with the design of both templates during the first semester. The course professor noted that students were confusing the assignments with the actual purpose of the portfolio, which was to provide evidence of achieving course objectives. The initial portfolio menu design emphasized the course assignments, causing students to think completing assignments meant meeting course objectives. The design was altered to present an initial menu giving the course objectives greater prominence. Assignments were then placed under a "notes" menu and students were encouraged to use the assignment stack as means of entering and storing work. The assignments stack could be used as evidence of meeting objectives, but it had to be linked to the appropriate objective stack or the cards could be copied into the objective stack. The new design gave students a clearer understanding of the types of evidence they needed to provide for each objective.
One student did complete an HTML portfolio and several indicated they would be interested in trying the web format if they were to prepare an electronic portfolio in the future. One student indicated that she would have used HTML if she had had more time, but that Hyperstudio simply proved to be faster. Most students used the Hyperstudio template and worked, for the most part, in the MAC computer lab. Many students did type their text at home and then used the cut and paste options to enter text into their template. Students indicated that they needed considerable help from the lab technician, particularly for scanning and digitizing graphics and sound. Most of the students followed the template and made few changes in layout and design. Several students customized their graphics and one student created animation as a part of her personal philosophy statement. Several students indicated that they preferred the electronic portfolio process over the paper portfolio process. One student stated: "I think electronic portfolios are a lot easier to look at because you can go to exactly where you want and you can find it right where you want it. You don't have to flip through tons and tons of paperwork." Another student indicated that, with the electronic portfolio "you really strive to pick the quality things that are going to fit" whereas in paper portfolios "you're just tossing papers in."
Several changes were implemented for the second group of reading methods course students who began portfolios in the fall of 1998. The California Advisory Task Force on Teacher Preparation for Reading Instruction (RICA) prepared new standards that needed to be implemented into an updated course syllabus. The course professor reorganized objectives, added RICA goals to accommodate changes in state certification standards, and simplified the template design. Students were expected to make connections between the RICA goals and the course objectives. Other changes in the project included the addition of Saturday technology workshops in which students worked with the software and hardware in the computer lab. Students were required to attend for at least one four hour session during the semester. The weekly computer hours were extended, allowing students more time on the computers with the assistance of the lab technician.
The assessment of the fall semester electronic portfolios is not complete, but it is clear that the content of the portfolios demonstrates more meaningful collection of artifacts aligned with course objectives. The first group reported that evidence selection was determined primarily by the ease of being able to digitize and insert the artifact into the Hyperstudio stack. Artifacts from the second group were more complete and the portfolios were more elaborate and personalized. Students demonstrated less frustration over the electronic portfolio process throughout the fall semester. For the most part, students reportedly kept up with assignments and did not wait to the last minute to work on the project. The course professor did not introduce the literacy resource packet until the portfolio project was well under way, resulting in less confusion over the purposes of the project. The students also had the advantage of viewing student projects from the previous semester. One student elected to use the HTML template rather than the Hyperstudio template. Complete analyses of the fall portfolios and student interviews will be conducted during the next semester.
Electronic portfolios were introduced in a beginning Foundations of Education course in another teacher training program. The computer lab at this university academic center included ten Windows 95 computers. Because Hyperstudio software was not available, students in this course used the Netscape Gold Browser and Editor to create an introductory web page. A simple template was designed which enabled students to insert a photograph, a letter of introduction, resume, a personal philosophy of education statement, favorite web links, and reflections on research articles. The purpose was to provide beginning teacher candidates with an introduction into the use of computer technology. No attempt was made to link evidence to course objectives or gather additional artifacts relating to their educational experience, although several students did go beyond the scope of the project. Students brought disks of their text files from their home computer. Graphics were digitized using a video capture board and a digital camera. Several students managed to customize their portfolios on their home computers. Students were given the option of having their portfolios posted on the university web server. Students generally indicated that they were pleased with their portfolio product and all but one person chose to put their portfolio on the web. Their perceptions of the portfolio project are currently in the process of being assessed.
Studies are currently being conducted on the use of electronic portfolios in a course entitled "Teaching and Learning in the Culturally Diverse Classroom." This course is designed to be the final class for multiple subjects credential students before they begin student teaching. Students are creating HTML portfolios based on the six evaluation domains of the California Commission on Teacher Credentialing (CTC). CTC published The California Standards for the Teaching Profession to be used to "guide, monitor, and assess the progress of a teacher's practice toward professional goals and professionally-accepted benchmarks" (p. 4). The California standards relate to six categories of teaching practice:
Students have collected artifacts and prepared written reflections as evidence of meeting the criteria for each of the six evaluation domains. Students have incorporated text and digitized images of curriculum projects. Students have included various types of lesson plans, including a SDAIE lesson plan and a multiple intelligences lesson plan. They have created thematic unit lesson plans and web pages using the Netscape Gold editor, the Netscape Communicator Composer, or Microsoft Word 97. These students also included the traditional portfolio artifacts: a letter of introduction, resume, a philosophy education statement, and a research paper. Students will be interviewed and portfolios will be analyzed at the end of the term.
Electronic HTML portfolios are being created by teachers enrolled in a "Computer Applications in Education" course. These students are in the process of meeting the California clear credential requirements for computer proficiency. The portfolio template was designed to show evidence of meeting course objectives relating to teacher productivity, desktop publishing, computer graphics, software review, e-mail communications, on-line research, web sites useful for instruction, and acceptable use policies. Students were able to save Powerpoint Presentations as a part of their portfolio web. Results of this study also will be available at the end of the term.
Electronic portfolios appear to have potential as tools for assessment. Many students have stated that they were overwhelmed with the idea of doing an electronic portfolio when they started the project. All of the students interviewed indicated that they became more proficient with technology and that they would be interested in doing an electronic portfolio again. Most of the students indicated that they felt that they would use their improved computer skills in the classroom. The electronic portfolio project is an on-going study. The researchers will continue to work on improving the design and implementation of both the electronic process and the portfolio product. The NCATE task force encourages teacher training institutions to provide teachers who are technologically prepared for the 21st Century stating that "today's teacher candidates will teach tomorrow as they are taught today" (p.4). One of the greatest advantages of infusing technology into teacher preparation courses through the electronic portfolio process is that students demonstrate greater confidence in being able to use computers in their future classrooms.
References
Bennett, D. & Hawkins, J. (1993). Alternative assessment and technology. ERIC Digest. [On-line]. Available: http://www.ed.gov/databases/ERIC_Digests/ed365312.html [1998, January].
California Commission on Teacher Credentialing (CTC). (January, 1997). California Standards for the Teaching Profession. [On-line]. Available: http://www.ctc.ca.gov/cstppublication/cstpreport.html [1998, November].
International Society for Technology in Education (ISTE). (1995). National standard for technology in teacher preparation: ISTE accreditation and standards committee. [On-line]. Available: http://www.iste.org/Resources/Projects/TechStandards/intro.html [1998, May].
Lankes, A. M. D. (December, 1995). Electronic portfolios: A new idea in assessment. ERIC Digest. [On-line]. Available: http://ericae.net/db/edo/ED390377 [1998, March].
National Council for Accreditation of Teacher Education (NCATE). (1997). Technology and the new professional teacher: Preparing for the 21st century classroom. [On-line]. Available: http://www.ncate.org/projects/tech/TECH.HTM [1997, February].
Sheingold K. & Frederiksen, J. (1994). Using technology to support innovative assessment. In B. Means (Ed.), Technology and education reform. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
U.S. Department of Education. (September, 1993). Using technology to support education reform: Support for teacher functions. [On-line]. Available: http://www.ed.gov/pubs/EdReformStudies/TechReform/chap4a.html [1998, February].
U. S. Department of Education. (April, 1997). Assessment of student performance: Studies of education reform. [On-line]. Available: http://www.ed.gov/pubs/SER/ASP/index.html [1998, May].