Rubric-Based Formative Assessment in Process Eportfolio: Towards Self-Regulated Learning
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.1344/der.2019.35.18-35Palabras clave:
self-regulated learning, formative assessment, rubric, eportfolio, learning for allResumen
This article explores the results of a rubric-based formative assessment of an eportfolio task as part of a pedagogical subject on a weekly basis during the first year in the Teacher Education programme of the University XXX. The study aims to explore the possibilities of the rubric usage for formative assessment as an answer to all student learning needs. The literature review briefly covers research on closely related concepts such as formative assessment and feedback along with process eportfolios for reflective tasks, which are all aimed at achieving higher-level cognitive skills and, eventually, self-regulated learning. Data, which is obtained from students’ performance, reveals evidence of the general improvement of results throughout the semester with the majority of students moving from lower to higher levels. Conclusions reflect on challenging implications for sustainable transferrable practices, self-regulated learning and formative assessment for all.
Citas
Abrami, P. C., Venkatesh, V., Meyer, E. J., & Wade, C. A. (2013). Using electronic portfolios to foster literacy and self-regulated learning skills in elementary students. Journal of Educational Psychology, 105(4), 1188-1209. doi: 10.1037/a0032448
Aguaded, J.I.; López Meneses, E. & Jaén, A. (2013). University e-Portfolios as a New Higher Education Teaching Method. The Development of a Multimedia Educational Material (MEM). Universities and Knowledge Society Journal (RUSC),10 (1), 188-209. doi: 0.7238/rusc.v10i1.1333
Alexiou, A., & Paraskeva, F. (2010). Enhancing self-regulated learning skills through the implementation of an e-portfolio tool. Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences, 2, 3048-3054. doi: 10.1016/j.sbspro.2010.03.463
Alexiou, A., & Paraskeva, F. (2013, June 12-14). Exploiting motivation and self-efficacy through the implementation of self-regulated oriented ePortfolio. Paper presented at The International Conference on E-Learning in the Workplace, New York, USA. Retrieved from https://www.icelw.org/proceedings/2013/ICELW2013/papers/Alexiou_Paraskeva.pdf
Beaumont, C., O’Doherty, M., & Shannon. L. (2011). Reconceptualising assessment feedback: a key to improving student learning? Studies in Higher Education, 36 (6), 671-687. doi: 10.1080/03075071003731135
Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (1998). Inside the black box: Raising standards through classroom assessment. Phi Delta Kappan, 1-13. Retrieved from https://rdc.udel.edu/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/InsideBlackBox.pdf
Boer,A., Pijl, S.J., & Minnaert , A. (2011). Regular primary schoolteachers’ attitudes towards inclusive education: a review of the literature. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 15(3), 331-353. doi: 10.1080/13603110903030089
Cambridge, D. (2010). E-portfolios for lifelong learning and assessment. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Carless, d., Salter, D., Yang, M. & Lam, J. (2011). Developing sustainable feedback practices. Studies in Higher Education, 36(4), 396-407. doi: 10.1080/03075071003642449
Charteris, J.; Quinn, F.; Parkes, M.; Fletcher, P. & Reyes, V. (2015). e-Assessment for Learning (eAfL) in higher education: is it a wolf in sheep’s clothing? Journal of Learning Development in Higher Education, 9. Retrieved from http://www.aldinhe.ac.uk/ojs/index.php?journal=jldhe&page=article&op=view&path%5B%5D=278
Cheng, G. & Chau, J. (2013). A study of the effects of goal orientation on the reflective ability of electronic portfolio users. The Internet and Higher Education, 16, 51–56. doi:10.1016/j.iheduc.2012.01.003
Cukusic, M.; Garaca, Z. & Jadric, M. (2014). Online self-assessment and students’ success in higher education institutions. Computers & Education, 72, 100–109. doi: 10.1016/j.compedu.2013.10.018
Dalmau, M., Guasch, D., Sala, I., Llinares,M., Dotras, P., Álvarez, H. & Giné. C. (2015). Diseño universal para la instrucción: indicadores para su implementación en el ámbito universitario. Universitat Politècnica de Catalunya. Retrieved from http://upcommons.upc.edu/bitstream/handle/2117/27277/diseno_universal_universidad.pdf?sequence=2&isAllowed=y
De Wever, B., Van Keer, H., Schellens, T., & Valcke, M. (2011). Assessing collaboration in a wiki: the reliability of university students’ peer assessment. The Internet and Higher Education, 14(4), 201–206. doi:10.1016/j.iheduc.2011.07.003
Dee, T.S. (2015). Social Identity and Achievement Gaps: Evidence From an Affirmation Intervention. Journal of Research on Educational Effectiveness, 8(2), 149-168. doi: 10.1080/19345747.2014.906009
Douglas, G., McLinden,M., Robertson, C.,Travers, J. & Smith, E. (2016).Including Pupils with Special Educational Needs and Disability in National Assessment: Comparison of Three Country Case Studies through an Inclusive Assessment Framework. International Journal of Disability, Development and Education, 63(1), 98-121. doi: 10.1080/1034912X.2015.1111306
Fraile, J., Pardo, R., & Panadero, E. (2017). ¿Cómo emplear las rúbricas para implementar una verdadera evaluación formativa?. Revista Complutense de Educación, 28(4), 13-21. doi: 10.5209/RCED.51915
Galván-Fernández, C., Rubio-Hurtado, M., Martínez-Olmo, F., & Rodríguez-Illera, J. (2017). Can the integration of a PLE in an e-portfolio platform improve generic competences?. Journal of New Approaches in Educational Research, 6(2), 112-118. doi: 10.7821/naer.2017.7.230
Gámiz, V.; Montes, R. & Pérez, M.C. (2014). Self-assessment via a blended-learning strategy to improve performance in an accounting subject. RUSC. Universities and Knowledge Society Journal (RUSC), 11(2), 41-54. doi http://dx.doi.org/10.7238/rusc.v11i2.2055
Gaytan, J., & McEwen, B. C. (2007). Effective online instructional and assessment strategies. American Journal of Distance Education, 21(3), 117–132. doi: 10.1080/08923640701341653 Gielen, S. Dochy, F. & Onghena, P (2011). An inventory of peer assessment diversity. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 36, 137–155. doi: 10.1080/02602930903221444
Gikandi, J.W. Morrow, D. & Davis, N.E. (2011). Online formative assessment in higher education: A review of the literatura. Computers & Education, 57, 2333–2351. doi: 10.1016/j.compedu.2011.06.0 04
Gunawardena, C. N., Hermans, M. B., Sanchez, D., Richmond, C., Bohley, M., & Tuttle, R. (2009). A theoretical framework for building online communities of practice with social networking tools. Educational Media International, 46(1), 3-16. doi: 10.1080/09523980802588626
Hatzipanagos, S. & Warburton, S. (2009). Feedback as dialogue: exploring the links between formative assessment and social software in distance learning Learning, Media and Technology, 34(1), 45-59. doi: 10.1080/17439880902759919
Hemmings, B. Kemmis, S. & Reupert,A. (2013). Practice architectures of university inclusive education teaching in Australia. Professional Development: Education For All As Praxis, 39(4), 470-487. doi: 10.1080/19415257.2013.796293
Herro, D. (2014). Techno Savvy: a Web 2.0 curriculum encouraging critical thinking. Educational Media International, 51(4), 259-277. doi: 10.1080/09523987.2014.977069
Kabilan, M.A. & Khan, M.K. (2012). Assessing pre-service English language teachers’ learning using e-portfolios: Benefits, challenges and competencies gained. Computers & Education, 58, 1007–1020. doi: 10.1016/j.compedu.2011.11.011
Karsenti, T., Dumouchel, G., & Collin, S. (2014). The Eportfolio as Support for the Professional Development of Preservice Teachers: a Theoretical and Practical Overview. International Journal of Computers & Technology, 12(5), 3486-3495. Retrieved from http://cirworld.org/journals/index.php/ijct/article/view/671
Kaur, A., Noman, M., & Nordin, H. (2017). Inclusive assessment for linguistically diverse learners in higher education. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 42(5), 756-771. doi: 10.1080/02602938.2016.1187250
Kivinen, O., Piiroinen, T., & Saikkonen, L. (2016). Two viewpoints on the challenges of ICT in education: knowledge-building theory vs. a pragmatist conception of learning in social action. Oxford Review of Education, 42(4), 377-390. doi: 10.1080/03054985.2016.1194263
Lai, C. L. & Hwang, G.J. (2015). An interactive peer-assessment criteria development approach to improving students' art design performance using handheld devices. Computers & Education, 85, 149-159. doi: 10.1016/j.compedu.2015.02.011
Lim, C.P., Yan, H., & Xiong, X. (2015). Development of pre-service teachers’ information and communication technology (ICT) in education competencies in a mainland Chinese university. Educational Media International, 52(1), 15-32. doi: 10.1080/09523987.2015.1005425
Meyer, E., Abrami, P. C., Wade, C. A., Aslan, O., & Deault, L. (2010). Improving literacy and metacognition with electronic portfolios: Teaching and learning with ePEARL. Computers and Education, 55(1), 84-91. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2009.12.005
Moreno, & Rochera, (2016). Uses of ICT and Timing in Evaluative Practices of Teachers in Upper Secondary Education. Digital Education Review, DER, 30, 147-164. Retrieved from http://revistes.ub.edu/index.php/der/article/view/15235/pdf
Ng, E. M. W., & Lai, Y. C. (2012). An exploratory study on using wiki to foster student teachers’ learner-centered learning and self and peer assessment. Journal of Information Technology Education: Innovations in Practices, 11, 71–84. Retrieved from http://www.jite.org/documents/Vol11/JITEv11IIPp071-084NG1096.pdf
Nicol, D.J. & Macfarlane-Dick, D. (2006). Formative assessment and self‐regulated learning: a model and seven principles of good feedback practice. Studies in Higher Education, 31(2), 199-218. doi: 10.1080/03075070600572090
Nicol, D. J. & Milligan, C. (2006). Rethinking technology-supported assessment in terms of the seven principles of good feedback practice. In C. Bryan and K. Clegg (Eds), Innovative Assessment in Higher Education (pp.64-79). London: Taylor and Francis Group Ltd, London.
Pachler, N.; Daly, C.; Mor, Y. & Mellar, H. (2010). Formative e-assessment: Practitioner cases. Computers & Education, 54, pp. 715–721. Doi: 10.1016/j.compedu.2009.09.032
Panadero, E., & Jonsson, A. (2013). The use of scoring rubrics for formative assessment purposes revisited: A review. Educational Research Review, 9, 129-144. doi: 10.1016/j.edurev.2013.01.002
Panadero, E., & Alonso-Tapia, J. (2014). How do students self-regulate? Review of Zimmerman’s cyclical model of self-regulated learning. Anales de Psicología/Annals of Psychology, 30(2), 450-462. doi: 10.6018/analesps.30.2.167221
Panke, S. (2014). E-Portfolios in Higher Education Settings: A Literature Review. E-Learn 2014- New Orleans, LA, United States, October 27-30. Retrieved from https://www.safetynet-solutions.com.au/uploads/2/6/0/6/26060087/eportfolios.pdf
Peacock, S.; Murray, S.; Scott, A. & Kelly, J. (2011). The Transformative Role of ePortfolios: Feedback in Healthcare Learning. International Journal of ePortfolio, 1(1), 33-48. Retrieved from http://www.theijep.com/pdf/ijep28.pdf
Penny, L., & Murphy, E. (2009). Rubrics for designing and evaluating online asynchronous discussions. British Journal of Educational Technology, 40(5), 804–820. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-8535.2008.00895.x.
Piedra, N., Chicaiza, López, J., Romero, A., & Tovar, E. (2010). Measuring collaboration and creativity skills through rubrics – experience from UTPL collaborative social networks course. In Paper presented at IEEE EDUCON education Engineering 2010 – The future of global learning engineering education. doi: 10.1109/EDUCON.2010.5492349.
Raposo, M.; Cebrián Robles, V. & Cebrián de la Serna, M. (2015). Erubric For The Assessment Of Skills And Content In The External Practices: Legal Aspects. ECER 2015. doi: 10.13140/RG.2.1.3917.2320
Raposo, M. & Sarceda, M. C. (2010). El trabajo en las aulas con perspectiva europea: medios y recursos para el aprendizaje autónomo. Enseñanza & Teaching, 28(2), 45-60. Retrieved from http://campus.usal.es/~revistas_trabajo/index.php/0212-5374/article/viewFile/7889/8359
Raposo-Riva, M. & Gallego-Arrufat, M.J. (2016). University students’ perceptions of electronic rubric-based assessment. Digital Education Review, DER, 30, pp. 220-233. Retrieved from http://revistes.ub.edu/index.php/der/article/view/15442/pdf_1
Rodríguez Illera, J.L.; Galván, C. & Martínez Olmo, F. (2013). El portafolios digital como herramienta para el desarrollo de competencias transversales. Teoría de la Educación. Educación y Cultura en la Sociedad de la Información (TESI), 14(2), 157-177. Retrieved from http://campus.usal.es/~revistas_trabajo/index.php/revistatesi/article/view/10218/10627
Rosselló, M.R. & Pinya, C. (2017). Using blogs to improve professional competencies among undergraduate students. Digital Education Review, DER, 31, 20-38. Retrieved from http://revistes.ub.edu/index.php/der/article/view/15910/pdf
Sancho-Vinuesa, T. & Escudero, N. (2012). ¿Por qué una propuesta de evaluación formativa con feedback automático en una asignatura de matemáticas en línea? Revista de Universidad y Sociedad del Conocimiento (RUSC), 9(2), 59-79. doi: 10.7238/rusc.v9i2.1285
Saul, C. & Wuttke, H.D. (2011). Feedback Personalization as Prerequisite for Assessing Higher-order Thinking Skills. European Journal of Open, Distance and E-learning. EURODL, 14(2). Retrieved from http://www.eurodl.org/index.php?p=special&sp=articles&inum=3&article=445
Sellami, H.M (2015). What are Web 2.0 Competences and Why are They Important? – A Proposal to Enrich ePortfolio Standards. European Journal of Open, Distance and E-learning. EURODL, 18(1). Retrieved from http://www.eurodl.org/?p=archives&sp=brief&year=2015&halfyear=1&article=688
Soomro, K.A., Kale, U., & Zai, S.Y. (2014). Pre-service teachers’ and teacher-educators’ experiences and attitudes toward using social networking sites for collaborative learning. Educational Media International, 51(4), 278-294. doi: 10.1080/09523987.2014.977003
Strudler, N. & Wetzel, K. (2011). Electronic Portfolios in Teacher Education: Forging a Middle Ground. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 44(2), 161–173. doi: 10.1080/15391523.2011.10782584
Tan, V., & Kou, X. (2014). Case-based reasoning to help educators design with Web 2.0. Educational Media International, 51(2), 91-108. doi: 10.1080/09523987.2014.924662
Tierney, R. & Simon, M. (2004). What's still wrong with rubrics: focusing on the consistency of performance criteria across scale levels. Practical Assessment, Research & Evaluation, 9(2), 1-10. Retrieved from http://PAREonline.net/getvn.asp?v=9&n=2
Topping, K. (2003). Self and Peer Assessment in School and University: Reliability, Validity and Utility. In M. Segers, F. Dochy and E. Cascallar (eds.), Optimising new models of assessment: in searThe role of e-portfolios in supporting productive learning. (pp. 55-87). Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Wang, C. (2009). Comprehensive assessment of student collaboration in electronic portfolio construction: an evaluation research. TechTrends, 53(1), 58-67. doi: 10.1007/s11528-009-0238-1
Wang, T.H. (2014). Developing an assessment-centered e-Learning system for improving student learning effectiveness. Computers & Education, 74, 189–203. doi: 10.1016/j.compedu.2013.12.002
Wiliam, D. (2011). What is assessment for learning?. Studies in educational evaluation, 37(1), 3-14. doi: 10.1016/j.stueduc.2011.03.001
Yang, M.; Tai, M. & Lim, C. P. (2016).The role of e‐portfolios in supporting productive learning. British Journal of Educational Technology, 46(6), 1276–1286. doi:10.1111/bjet.12316
Yastibas, A.E. & Yastibas, G.C. The Use of E-portfolio-based Assessment to Develop Students’ Self-regulated Learning in English Language Teaching. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 176, 3-13. doi: 10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.01.437
Descargas
Publicado
Número
Sección
Licencia
El/la autor/a que publica en esta revista está de acuerdo con los términos siguientes:
- El/la autor/a conserva los derechos de autoría y otorga a la revista el derecho de primera publicación de la obra
- Los textos publicados en Digital Education Review están bajo una licencia Reconocimiento-No comercial-Sin obras derivadas 3.0 España de Creative Commons.
- Para poder mencionar los trabajos se debe citar la fuente (DER) y el autor del texto.
- Digital Education Review (DER) no acepta ninguna responsabilidad por los puntos de vista y las declaraciones hechas por los autores en su trabajo.
