The Impact of Large-Scale Portfolio Assessment Programs on Classroom Practice: Case Studies of the New Standards Field-Trial Portfolio

Abstract

The impact of the New Standards Project's (NSP) English language arts Field-Trial Portfolio on curriculum and classroom portfolio assessment practice in the 10th-grade classrooms of 2 experienced teachers was investigated in this study. Data consisted of field notes on biweekly field observations over a period of 9 months, interviews with teachers and students, and a variety of documents. The case studies illustrate ways in which teachers act as mediators of standards and reveal some of the problems that teachers may encounter when they attempt to implement external portfolio assessment systems Results indicated that the NSP Field-Trial Portfolio promoted certain goals associated with assessment reform but may have discouraged others. The open-ended requirements for evidence of breadth and depth in reading in the NSP Field-Trial Portfolio guidelines led the teachers to institute new independent reading programs or enhance existing ones. However, the more restrictive requirements for particular types of writing appeared to inhibit student-centered reform goals. Because so many different types of writing were required students had few decisions to make about the relative quality of different pieces of their work. As a result, instead of encouraging students to assess their work in relation to standards for quality, the menu of required writing types led students to search for pieces that fit the descriptions of the required forms. The required format for introducing portfolio contents appeared to discourage student reflection on individual progress and goals. The study highlights the importance of investigating the impact of assessments on practice as they are developed.