The Consequences of Portfolio Assessment: A Case Study

Abstract

This article contains findings from a yearlong case study of a quasi-experiment of a language arts portfolio assessment system in a northern California middle school. Students in the alternative assessment classrooms were issued report card grades determined by an external examination committee made up of local English teachers who applied a locally developed rubric to student portfolios. In contrast. students in the customary assessment classrooms were issued report card grades determined by individual classroom teachers. Measures of reading achievement, writing achievement, and motivational goal orientation examined the effects of placement in 1 or the other assessment condition. A significant effect on reading achievement favored the alternative assessment students. No significant effect on writing achievement was found. Students in the alternative assessment classrooms registered significantly higher levels of learning-goal orientation than did students in the customary classrooms, but there were no differences on scales measuring advancement and approval-goal orientations. Qualitative data are presented that illuminate the quantitative findings. In this article, I discuss why the school chose not to adopt the portfolio assessment system schoolwide, despite substantial evidence that students learned more in the portfolio classrooms than other students learned in the nonportfolio classrooms. I conclude that portfolio assessment systems are unlikely to be used to their full potential, even if they are shown to be effective instructional tools, if adequate resources are not allocated for their implementation.