TRC-Teaching Portfolios

Teaching Portfolios

What is a Teaching Portfolio
What Should be in the Teaching Portfolio
Uses of the Teaching Portfolio
Guidelines for Developing a Portfolio Program
Research of Interest

Portfolios Used for Faculty Evaluation (Peer, Dean, and Student Ratings Compared)
Characteristics of Effective Portfolios
Faculty Interviewed about Using Portfolios for Evaluation

References
Other Suggested Reading
Web Sites
Footnotes

Grayson H. Walker Teaching Resource Center
The University of Tennessee at Chattanooga
401 Hunter Hall--Mail Code 4354
615 McCallie Ave.
Chattanooga, TN 37403-2598
(423) 425-4026
(423) 425-4025 (fax)

Send ideas for new workshops or comments to: Karen I. Adsit, EdD, Director

Last modified April 17, 2002

Copyright © 1998 The University of Tennessee at Chattanooga. All rights reserved.
The University of Tennessee at Chattanooga is an EEO/AA/Title VI/Title IX/Section 504/ADA institution.

What is a Teaching Portfolio?

In reviewing the literature, several definitions of a teaching portfolio emerge. Some definitions restrict the portfolio to a summary of your accomplishments as a teacher. Other definitions are much broader in scope, suggesting that the portfolio be a comprehensive, self- reflective record of a teacher's strengths and weaknesses. Still others (Edgerton, et al., 1991), ¹ claim that a definition for a teaching portfolio simply does not exist. Probably the best advice for establishing a definition (and thus a framework for content selection) is offered by Murray (1995). He suggests that you must decide how the portfolio is to be used before deciding on the content. If the portfolio is to be used for summative evaluation, such as tenure decisions, then it should probably only contain the best of a teacher's work. If, however, the portfolio is to be used for formative evaluation, then it should be more comprehensive and "needs to contain reflections on difficulties in teaching" (Murray, 1995, p. 169). Overall, the following definition might tentatively be given for a teaching portfolio: It is a record that documents your work as a teacher.

What Should be in the Teaching Portfolio?

The content of a portfolio will depend on its intended use. Many sources offer various recommendations and categories for designing the portfolio. The following list might help you in deciding what should go into your portfolio:

A list and descriptions of courses you have taught.
Syllabi (You may want to include 2 syllabi from the same course that demonstrates changes you have made in course content).
Your philosophy of teaching
Student evaluations
Exams, quizzes, projects. May want to include graded student work that demonstrates your written feedback.
Teaching awards
Statement of your roles, responsibilities, and goals as a teacher [http://cte.iastate.edu/portfolio.html].
Instructional materials used in your courses (ex., handouts, computer programs, audio/visual materials)
Letters or comments about your teaching from colleagues, peer observers, students, alumni, department head, etc.
Committee work
Attendance of teaching seminars, conferences, workshops
Participation in curriculum design
Evidence of what you have done to improve your teaching
Innovative teaching methods
A plan for improvement
Videotape of your teaching
A separate section (log) for reflections

Perhaps it is easier to conceptualize the content of portfolios by thinking in terms of general categories. The Center for Teaching Excellence (http://cte.iastate.edu/portfolio.html) suggest seven areas of content:

Roles, Responsibilities, and Goals
Representative Course Materials
Materials Showing the Extent of Student Learning
Evaluations of Teaching
Contributions to Your Institution or Profession
Activities to Improve Instruction
Honors or Recognitions.

Others (Boileau, 1993; and Seldin, 1993) ² recommend three areas of material:

products of teaching
material from oneself
material from others

Murray (1995, p. 170) sees portfolio content as consisting of six themes:

what one teaches
who one teaches
why one teaches them
how one's philosophy of education influences the design of courses and the choice of teaching strategies
assessment of one's teaching effectiveness
a plan for improving one's teaching effectiveness.

Uses of the Portfolio

Just as the definition of the portfolio can vary, so can its uses. The following list of potential uses of the portfolio was comprised from a review of the work of Seldin (1993) ², Boileau (1993), Murray (1995; & 1994), Defina (1996), Wolf (1995; & 1991), and the Advisory Centre for University Education at the University of Adelaide (http://web.adelaide.edu.au/AE/teach-portfolios.html).

A tool for self-evaluation and self-reflection. Many portfolio proponents feel this is the best use of the teaching portfolio. "The very process of collecting and sifting documents and materials that reflect a professor's teaching, gets them thinking about what has worked and what hasn't in the classroom. And why they do what they do in the classroom. It forces them to review their activities, strategies, and plans for the future" (Seldin, p. 13). ²
To facilitate discussions about teaching with department heads, colleagues, or an evaluation committee.
To provide evidence of teaching effectiveness when applying for tenure, new jobs, or promotions.
If your effectiveness as a teacher is challenged, the portfolio can provide evidence of teaching quality.
Can be a multifaceted assessment device (provide evidence of teaching effectiveness from many sources)
Lead to the improvement of teaching, which in turn increases student learning. The teaching portfolio "can promote growth by providing a textured picture of teaching and learning as they unfold over time, enabling teachers to examine, discuss, and reflect on their performance" (Wolf, Whinery, & Hagerty, 1995, p. 32).
Stimulate research on teaching .
A tool for long-term, ongoing, authentic evaluation. The portfolio "allows teachers ... to examine actual work performances over time and across contexts in ways that other forms of assessment cannot" (Wolf, 1991, p. 8).

Guidelines for Developing a Portfolio Program

The plan must be presented clearly to all faculty members
Faculty must be involved in developing the program
The primary purpose should be to improve teaching
Must initially involve highly esteemed faculty
Should have a trial run
Administration must give their active support
Cannot rush implementation (can take a couple of years to refine the program)
Should not be forced on faculty
If used for summative evaluation, faculty must be given clear criteria and standards by which the portfolios will be judged. Also, some standardization of content should occur
Collaboration should be encouraged
Examples of portfolios should be provided
Mentors should be provided
Pack-ratting should be discouraged. Portfolios should contain selected material
Use evidence from multiple sources to support claims of teaching effectiveness
A philosophy of teaching should be included
All evidence in the portfolio should be clearly explained
Faculty and administrators should be aware of the time and effort commitment required in a portfolio program
If a special part of the portfolio is for reflection only; should not be forced to share this "reflection log"

Research of Interest

The Use of Portfolios for Faculty Evaluation

Centra (1994) examined the use of portfolios for faculty evaluation at a community college. In the portfolios, faculty documented their accomplishments and wrote personal statements in four areas: (1)teaching effectiveness; (2)service to the college and community; (3) personal credentials; and (4) professional activities (p. 557). The area of most interest in this study was teaching effectiveness. The raters of the portfolios were two peer faculty members and four deans (one dean to rate for each department). One peer (peer A) was chosen by the faculty member being evaluated, while the other peer (peer B) was chosen by the department dean. The study compared the ratings made by the different raters. Also, Centra compared the ratings on teaching effectiveness with end of the course student evaluations. The students completed the Student Instruction Report (SIR). Results indicate that all three groups of raters judged the portfolios very high. However, the three groups of raters differed significantly when rating teaching effectiveness. The deans gave the lowest ratings for total teaching effectiveness. Peer A gave the highest ratings for teaching effectiveness. Peer B gave higher ratings than the deans, but, lower ratings than Peer A. The ratings of Peer A did not significantly correlate with any student evaluation measure. Peer B and dean ratings correlated with three student evaluation measures (quality of instruction, faculty and student interaction, and organization and planning).

Considering that request were made for only positive portfolio content, Centra is not surprised that the ratings were generally high. Also, it is not particularly surprising that the peers chosen by the faculty did not seem to rate the portfolios very objectively. Centra suggests that the seemingly invalid ratings of peers chosen by faculty is probably attributable to the fact that these peers knew that they were also being evaluated at same time by another peer. In essence, the faculty peers seemed to "stick together" and give each other high ratings. The peers chosen by the deans seemed more objective than peers chosen by faculty. The student ratings correlated with dean and peer B ratings for many dimensions rated in the portfolio for teaching effectiveness.

Centra notes that a problem with the portfolio assessment in this study is that no standard criteria was used to rate the portfolios. The deans and peers were expected to formulate their own criteria. Centra recommends that when using portfolios for evaluation, a standard criteria by which they are to be judged should be established. (Click here to see more guidelines for a portfolio program). Even though the conditions of evaluation were not ideal in this study, Centra concludes that using portfolios were still useful for evaluating teaching performance. Overall, he sees portfolio evaluation as useful, especially when combined with student ratings.

Characteristic of Effective Portfolios

A study by Ross, Bondy, Hartle, Lamme, and Webb (1995) had 5 qualitative researchers evaluate the effectiveness of teaching portfolios designed to support claims of excellence made by teachers. All portfolios were prepared at the University of Florida for the Teaching Improvement Program. In essence, the study was designed to identify characteristics of effective portfolios. Ross, et al. suggest seven guidelines for portfolio development based on the portfolios found to be exceptional in this study.

These researchers conclude that effective portfolios have:

some standard sets of content
some standardized context data ( list of courses taught, enrollment in courses, if the course was an auditorium or small lecture class, etc.)
a teaching statement
evidence of effort to improve instruction
multiple sources of evidence to support claims of effectiveness
all evidence explained
limited amounts of evidence.

(Click here to see more on What Should Be in the Teaching Portfolio)

(Click here to see more Guidelines for Developing a Portfolio Program)

Portfolio Evaluation (Faculty Interviews)

In a qualitative study, Robinson (1993) interviewed 22 faculty members from 3 departments with reputations of excellent teaching. These faculty had used portfolio review for two semesters prior to the interview. Portfolios were reviewed by peers for evaluation purposes. Interview questions were designed to investigate the value faculty placed on teaching, their ideas about what effective teaching means, and their opinions about whether or not portfolios capture their ideas about teaching. In general, the faculty had different ideas about what constitutes effective teaching. Also, faculty placed high personal value on teaching but did not see teaching as professionally valuable when compared to research. Furthermore, the faculty indicated that they did not gain anything from constructing portfolios. Most faculty neither liked portfolio review as a means for evaluating teaching effectiveness, nor believed that portfolios effectively evaluated teaching.

Robinson suggests several reasons for why faculty negatively viewed portfolios, which include:

the portfolio program was introduced too quickly
the portfolios were used immediately for accountability purposes
little guidance was provided to faculty members as they constructed their portfolios.

Robinson notes ways that he believes portfolio implementation could have been better. To see a list of guidelines for developing a portfolio program, which encompass those suggested by Robinson, click here (Guidelines)

References

*Advisory Centre for University Education, University of Adelaide. (No date). Evaluation service: teaching portfolios.[On-line], February 21, 1997. Available HTTP: http://www-etu.itd.adelaide.edu.au/ACUE/acue/AE/teach_portfolios.html

*Boileau, D. M. (1993). Scholarship reconsidered: A challenge to use teaching portfolios to document the scholarship of teaching. Journal of the Association for Communication Administration (JACA). (3), 19-23.

*Center for Teaching Excellence. (No date). How to document your teaching. [On-line], February 21, 1997. Available HTTP: http://cte.iastate.edu/portfolio.html

*Centra, J. A. (1994). The use of the teaching portfolio and student evaluations for summative evaluation. Journal of Higher Education, 65, (5), 555-570.

*DeFina, A. (1996). An effective alternative to faculty evaluation: The use of the teaching portfolio. Paper Presented at the Fifth Annual International Conference for Community & Technical College Chairs, Deans and Other Organizational Leaders, Phoenix/Mesa, AZ (ERIC Document Reproduction Services No. ED 394 561)

*Edgerton, R., Hutchings, P., & Quinlan, K. (1991). ¹ The teaching portfolio: Capturing the scholarship in teaching. Washington D.C.: America Association for Higher Education. (ERIC Document Reproduction Services No. ED 353 892)

Thoroughly examines the concept of the teaching portfolio, its uses, and its content. Includes sample entries. Very useful reading if you are just starting you own portfolio project.

*Murray, J. P. (1995). The teaching portfolio: A tool for department chairpersons to create a climate of teaching excellence. Innovative Higher Education, 19, 163-175.

*Murray, J. P. (1994). Why teaching portfolios? Community College Review, 22 (1), 33- 43.

*Robinson, J. (1993). Faculty orientations toward teaching and the use of teaching portfolios for evaluating and improving university-level instruction. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association (AERA), Atlanta, GA. (ERIC Document Reproduction Services No. ED 358 149)

*Ross, D. D., Bondy, E., Hartle, L., Lamme, L. L. & Webb, R. B. (1995). Guidelines for portfolio preparation: Implications from an analysis of teaching portfolios at the University of Florida. Innovative Higher Education, 20, (1), 45-62.

*Seldin, Peter & Associates (1993). ² Successful use of teaching portfolios. Bolton, MA: Anker Publishing Company, Inc.

*Wolf, K., Whinery, B., & Hagerty, P. (1995). Teaching portfolios and portfolio conversations for teacher educators and teachers. Action in Teacher Education, 17, (1), 30-39.

*Wolf, K. P. (1991). Teaching portfolios: Synthesis of Research and annotated bibliography. San Francisco, CA: Far West Lab for Educational Research and Development. (ERIC Document Reproduction Services No. ED 343 890)

Web Sites

Center for Teaching Excellence. (No date). How to document your teaching. [On-line], February 21, 1997. Available HTTP: http://teach.admin.iastate.edu/CTE/port.html

Devlin, B. (1996). Teaching portfolios: Short list of web sites. [On-line], February 21, 1997. Available HTTP: http://www.ntu.edu.au/education/portfolios.html

Hong Kong University of Science and Technology. (1995). Teaching Portfolios. [On-line], February 21, 1997. Available HTTP: http://www.ee.ust.hk/cpeg/cpeg3/paul.html

Footnotes

1. Edgerton, R., Hutchings, P., & Quinlan, K. (1991). The teaching portfolio: Capturing the scholarship in teaching. Washington D.C.: America Association for Higher Education. (ERIC Document Reproduction Services No. ED 353 892)

Thoroughly examines the concept of the teaching portfolio, its uses, and its content. Includes sample entries. Very useful reading if you are just starting you own portfolio project. 2. Seldin, Peter & Associates (1993). Successful use of teaching portfolios. Bolton, MA: Anker Publishing Company, Inc.

Peter Seldin is highly influential in the teaching portfolio movement. In fact, he might even be considered the founder of this movement in higher education. This book is a must read if you are seriously interested in developing a teaching portfolio.

Send ideas for other virtual workshops to: Karen I. Adsit, EdD, Director

Grayson H. Walker Teaching Resource Center
The University of Tennessee at Chattanooga
401 Hunter Hall--Dept. Mail Code 4354
615 McCallie Ave.
Chattanooga, TN 37403-2598
(423) 425-4188
(423) 425-4025 (fax)

Send comments to: Karen I. Adsit, EdD, Director
Last modified: April 17, 2002

The University of Tennessee at Chattanooga is an EEO/AA/Title VI/TitleIX/Section 504/ADA institution.