Download Theme: Implementation Issues Addressed: Benefits, Implementation

Theme:
Issues Addressed:
Implementation
Benefits, Implementation, Scale, Models
Title:
ePortfolio Artifact Scaffolding Study
Presentation Mode:
Full Research Paper with 20 minute presentation
Authors:
Lathem, Sandra A., University of Vermont
Morris, Joyce L., University of Vermont
Qi, Jing, University of Vermont
Vandersall, Kirk, Arroyo Research Services
Abstract
The e-Portfolio Artifact Scaffolding Study is one of several research projects being conducted by the
Electronic Portfolio Connection, a four-year grant awarded in October 2003 to the University of Vermont by
the U.S. Department of Education Preparing Tomorrow’s Teacher to Use Technology (PT3) initiative.
Recognizing a lack of substantive research about the effect of electronic portfolios on teaching practice
(Carney, 2006; Ma & Rada, 2006; Wetzel & Strudler, 2005), the goal of this study is to provide additional
insight about the implementation and transferability of portfolio development in pre-service teacher education
programs. In this exploratory study, the authors examine the process by which pre-service teachers in the
elementary, middle, and physical education programs at the University of Vermont are taught to construct
their licensure portfolios (in paper or electronic formats) and attempt to identify relationships between
instructional scaffolding and the quality of the artifacts and reflections subsequently produced. This study
focuses on the instructional strategies and sequence faculty members employ to assign, introduce, support,
and assess the development of artifacts designed to become elements of a student’s licensure portfolio.
Scaffolding has been used successfully as an instructional technique for many years. In this approach, the
teacher initially models the task or strategy and then gradually turns responsibility over to the student. This
practice is based on the work of Vygotsky and then Bruner who postulated that with an adult's assistance,
children could perform tasks too complex for them to perform independently. Hammond and Gibbons (2001)
note that “A major feature of the term ‘scaffolding’ is its ability to capture the role of the ‘expert,’ or more
knowledgeable other (typically the teacher), in assisting students’ learning, and the role of that
knowledgeable other in extending students’ current levels of understanding or current capabilities.” A
scaffolding experience allows a student to move away from assistance, to become an independent learner
able to transfer the acquired understanding to new contexts. Given this premise, a teacher must recognize
when to withdraw support and to move intentionally away, allowing the student to apply and transfer
knowledge in new ways. This ability to recognize when to provide support and when to withdraw, labeled
contingency, can be an indicator of good pedagogy and teaching. (Hammond & Gibbons, 2001) Scaffolding
is also seen in instructional design as the intentional planning of curricula to organize tasks and activities in
such a way as to build understanding. Thus, scaffolding occurs at both the micro (the individual
teacher/student interaction) and the macro (the program or organization) level, and both elements are
presumably active in learning environments where good pedagogy takes place.
Contemporary learning theory research echoes much of the work of Vygotsky, Bruner, and others, and by
association, the concepts of scaffolding. Findings from the National Research Council’s publication How
People Learn add credence to the concept of contingency by acknowledging that teachers must first come to
understand one’s prior knowledge in order to uncover “false beliefs, and the naïve renditions of concepts that
learners bring with them to a given subject.” (Bransford et al., 2000) This research recommends
pedagogical practices that begin with student prior knowledge, that uncover and reveal misconceptions, that
build metacognition and reflection, and that employ formative assessment practices to make student thinking
visible. These contemporary notions about learning support constructivist learning and the social
construction of knowledge and recognize scaffolding and formative assessments as strategies teachers “use
to move learning forward in the zone of proximal development.” (Shepard, 2005) As Shepard (2005) states”
“Formative assessment uses insights about a learner’s current understanding to alter the course of instruction
and thus support the development of greater competence. From a sociocultural perspective, formative
assessment – like scaffolding – is a collaborative process and involves negotiation of meaning between
teacher and learner about expectations and how best to improve performance.”
Scaffolding is therefore important in many ways. Strong instructional programs recognize the need to design
curricula that purposefully builds knowledge, introducing skills and concepts in logical and meaningful
increments that provide students a firm, factual foundation in content. This macro level design constructs the
path for deep learning to emerge. At the same time, teachers in the program must be adept at scaffolding at
the micro level by providing instruction and assistance that challenges and motivates individual students to
construct and transfer new knowledge and understanding.
Based on these theoretical foundations, this study examines the following questions:
1. How are faculty members at the University of Vermont intentionally scaffolding portfolio artifact
development in pre-service teacher education courses to support the development of electronically produced
licensure portfolios? Can these strategies be grouped into different categories or typologies? What are the
“drivers’ behind these instructional and implementation strategies?
2. What attitudes and predispositions do pre-service teachers have in terms of preparedness to construct
their licensure portfolios (in either paper of electronic format)?
3. Are there correlations between the instructional scaffolding students receive and the quality (as evidenced
by reflective statements, depth and sophistication of artifacts, etc.) of their licensure portfolios? Does the
instructional scaffolding strategy and sequence matter?
4. What can be learned about best practices in e-portfolio development and program implementation as a
result of this study?
The study aims to identify correlations (or stronger statistical evidence) between classroom practices and the
resulting artifacts. The research methodology is exploratory in nature and uses a mixed methods approach
that includes gathering both qualitative and quantitative data through a variety of instruments during the
Spring 2006 semester. Although the focus of this investigation is being conducted at the University of
Vermont, selected portions of data collected from grant partner institutions (i.e., Champlain College,
Castleton State College, Lyndon State College, and Johnson State College) will be analyzed and
incorporated into the final report.
Data analysis is currently underway and will be completed by late summer 2006. Preliminary findings from
the study reveal that individual faculty and smaller programs have made a concerted effort to scaffold
instruction to support the licensure portfolio process, but many gaps still remain, especially in larger programs
where coordination and cooperation in a culture of independently-minded faculty prevails. There is also
some preliminary evidence that technology tools and communication networks provide opportunities for
deeper reflection because students can more easily share their work with their peers and professors and
connect their own thinking and artifacts through hyperlinks. In the past pre-service students have had little
opportunity to develop a portfolio throughout their programmatic experiences, because to a large extent the
portfolio is driven by State requirements for licensure that focus on student teaching experiences which
typically occur during their last semester of their senior year. Faculty and students have articulated this
emphasis detracts from the value of the portfolio process. Technology tools and communication networks
provide greater opportunity to scale in practice writing reflections and sharing these with peers and faculty
over a longer period of time. Faulty are beginning to recognize the value of developmental portfolios and the
process of collection, selection, and reflection at earlier stages in the teacher education program and
integrating scaffolding experiences in targeted course work and field experiences using eportfolio tools.
Address:
University of Vermont
College of Education and Social Services
426 A Waterman Building
Burlington, Vermont 05405
Email: [email protected], [email protected]
Phone: J. Morris – 802-656-4140
S. Lathem – 802-656-0481
Web: http://www.uvm.edu/pt3