Bàn về đánh giá hồ sơ học tập - công cụ thúc đẩy chiêm nghiệm trong đào tạo sư phạm
VNU JOURNAL OF FOREIGN STUDIES, VOL. 37, NO. 4 (2021)
26
PORTFOLIOASSESSMENTASATOOLFOR PROMOTING
REFLECTION IN TEACHER EDUCATION:
ALITERATURE REVIEW
Nguyen My Binh*
Department of Foundation English, School of Foreign Languages, Hanoi University of Science and Technology,
No. 1 Dai Co Viet Street, Hai Ba Trung District, Hanoi, Vietnam
Received 12 February 2021
Revised 3 April 2021; Accepted 20 July 2021
Abstract: This paper aims to explore the inextricable link between teaching and learning via
the use of portfolios as a form of assessment for pre-service and in-service teachers’ professional
practice. Specifically, it reviews the body of literature that conceptualizes and defines reflection and
reflective practice in the context of teacher education and examines the portfolio’s role as a conduit for
teachers’ reflection and professional transformation. The reviewed literature suggests that the use of the
portfolio provides formative assessment while, to some extent, promoting professional development and
improved practice via enhanced reflection, although the quality of such reflection may not reach a
critical level. With careful attention to the introduction of the portfolio and guided support throughout
the portfolio process, the use of portfolio assessment can be valuable in the context of teacher education
in the higher education system.
Keywords: reflection, reflective practice, portfolio, assessment, teachers’ professional education
1. Introduction*
Over the past three decades,
reflection and reflective practice have been
regarded as an approach to practice towards
which teachers and teacher educators must
strive (Gore & Zeichner, 1991; LaBoskey,
1993; Rodgers, 2002). The origin of the
notion of reflection dates back to the early
twentieth century, when psychologist and
manifests itself in various difficult situations
of human practice, mostly in activities and
communication, allowing practitioners to
gain conscious understanding of themselves
as individuals and also of people around
them. Dimova and Loughran (2009), upon
reviewing a large volume of work by major
authors, arrived at the conclusion that by
developing deeper understandings of
reflection
in
workplace
learning about
settings,
educationalist
John
Dewey
(1933)
practitioners’
their
highlighted the need for practitioners to not
only question their experience but also to
apply their reflective thinking to practice.
Many eminent authors of the twentieth
century have since looked at reflection as a
multi-faceted mental phenomenon that
professional knowledge of practice would be
enhanced, and claimed that “… the complex
nature of reflection can be embraced and
offer a new and different framework for
enhancing practice. In practice settings,
teaching and learning are inextricably linked
* Corresponding author.
VNU JOURNAL OF FOREIGN STUDIES, VOL. 37, NO. 4 (2021)
27
and, as such, reflection is clearly a central
pedagogic imperative” (p. 216).
figure out principles, theory, and knowledge
from the analysis of their own actions and
the influence of those actions on others
(Hall, 2004). However, the teacher
education curriculum in general and the
assessment for teachers in training in
particular in many countries, including
Vietnam, has been mainly summative, in
that both pre-service and in-service teachers
are assessed based on traditional theoretical
tests, the development of one (or more)
lesson plan, and one (or more) teaching
session in a simulated classroom while being
observed by a panel of assessors. In the
writer’s opinion, this form of assessment is
heavily theoretical and does not facilitate a
holistic judgment of the student teachers’
competence. Furthermore, it does not
On the other hand, the use of
portfolios in teacher education has been
widely embraced by many countries in the
world as an effective tool for the assessment
of teachers’ professional practice. A
considerable amount of literature has
addressed the benefits of portfolio
assessment in promoting quality learning
(e.g., Ashford & Deering, 2003; Jones, 2009;
Smith & Tillema, 1998; Strijbos et al., 2007;
Wade & Yarbrough, 1996; Woodward,
1998, 2000). The process of compiling the
portfolio, which involves collecting and
reflecting on evidence, is believed to not
only encourage trainee teachers to take
responsibility for their own learning, but also
allow them to connect their personal theories
with practice (Davies & LeMahieu, 2003;
Shulman, 1998). A large body of research
also claims the benefits of a portfolio in
promoting reflective practice (Antonek et al.,
1997; Biggs, 1998; Borko et al., 1997; Jones,
2010; Mokhtari et al., 1996; Setteducati,
1995; Winsor et al., 1999). The portfolio is
thus regarded as an important tool for
formative assessment in teacher education
(Zeichner & Wray, 2001).
promote
learning
and
professional
development. While it is impossible, and by
no means necessary, to reform the entire
system, the portfolio can be incorporated
into a practical component of the teacher
education programmes.
In that context, this paper aims to
explore the inextricable link between
teachers’ teaching and learning in their
professional education via the use of
portfolios as a tool for assessment of
professional practice. Specifically, it
investigates the body of literature that
addresses reflection and reflective practice
in the context of teacher education, both for
pre-service teachers who are being prepared
for their future profession in teaching and in-
service teachers who are undertaking higher
education programmes (for example,
masters programmes and other professional
development programmes). This paper is
particularly relevant to the practical
components of those teacher education
programmes. It also examines the portfolio’s
role as a vehicle for pre-service and in-service
teachers to reflect, learn and professionally
transform. In the scope of this study, student
teachers and in-service teachers take on the
role as the portfolio compilers.
In that light, the introduction of the
portfolio as a tool for the assessment of
teachers’ professional practice in Vietnam
could be of great value in the reform of our
national education system. Teacher
education programs in higher education
must produce qualified professionals who
can respond appropriately to new and
changing settings by integrating knowledge,
skills, and personal traits (Stephenson,
1998). For this to be accomplished, the
reflective practitioner approach which
combines
experiential
learning,
metacognitive learning, and constructivist
learning theories can be a good paradigm of
choice. This approach emphasizes the need
of including real-life experiences in the
curriculum, allowing student teachers to
VNU JOURNAL OF FOREIGN STUDIES, VOL. 37, NO. 4 (2021)
28
2. Reflection and Reflective Practice
understandings of their practice (1977, 1991).
Another writer whose work has
2.1. The Conceptualization of Reflection
and Reflective Practice
greatly
influenced
the
conceptual
development of reflective practice is Donald
Schön (1983, 1987), who suggests that it
involves thoughtful considerations of one's
own experiences in applying knowledge to
practice. Schön thus sees reflective practice
as a critical process that allows novice
practitioners to draw from others’
experience in order to refine their own skills
and professionalism. Schön also emphasizes
the “complexity, uncertainty, instability,
uniqueness, and value-conflict” (1983, p. 39)
in regard to professional practice. His
viewpoint thereby challenges the traditional
positivist view of professionalism as a
decision-making process that is solely based
on the expertise obtained from previous
training. In Schön’s argument, a reflective
practitioner must combine textbook
expertise and field knowledge to define the
important issues and the contexts in which
these issues should be positioned.
Accordingly, a reflective practitioner must
be able to deal flexibly with a changing
environment by asking himself/herself
questions about the basis of his judgment, as
well as the influences and considerations
that impact his choices. This point of view is
further supported by Lyons (1998) who
asserts that reflective thinking requires
linking together experiences to make
conscious the teacher’s knowledge and
understanding of practice. Accordingly, a
reflective practitioner must learn not only
the subject knowledge, but also the way to
The
terms
"reflection"
and
"reflective practice" have been used
interchangeably in most of the reviewed
literature in the field of teacher education
and professional development, although
according to Fook (2015), reflection has a
greater scope as a method of approaching a
deeper understanding of one's own life and
conduct, while reflective practice is
primarily concerned with professional
practice. In this paper, these two terms are
used indiscriminately.
John Dewey (1933) first introduced
the concept of reflection as a distinctive form
of thinking that involves “(1) a state of
doubt, hesitation, perplexity, mental
difficulty, in which thinking originates, and
(2) an act of searching, hunting, inquiring, to
find material that will resolve the doubt,
settle and dispose of the perplexity” (p. 12).
According to Dewey,
a
reflective
practitioner is characterized as someone who
is open to new ideas and findings, and
willing to listen to opinions different from
their own; engage whole-heartedly in the
process of thinking and reflection; and is
responsible for the consequences of their
actions.
Van Manen (1977) contributes to the
conception of reflection by identifying three
distinctive levels of reflections, the first of
which focuses on the technical side of
teaching, (i.e., treating teaching episodes as
isolated events). The second level appears to
be more advanced, since it puts into
consideration the theory and rationale for the
current practice. The highest level
incorporates the ethical, social and political
aspects of one’s practice into their reflection.
In van Manen’s argument, this level is the
most important because it leads the
practitioners towards more informed
engage
in
dynamic
professional
relationships and to establish meaningful
connections between theory and practice in
order to provide a rationale for their actions.
Schön (1983, 1987) also took the
initiative in introducing the concepts of
reflection-in-action
and
reflection-on-
action. Reflection-in-action, as defined by
Schön, is the reflection that occurs
somewhat consciously while a professional
VNU JOURNAL OF FOREIGN STUDIES, VOL. 37, NO. 4 (2021)
29
is addressing a problem in the so-called
“action-present.” It challenges the
professional’s assumptions that are based on
teachers’ paradigmatic approach to
the profession. Examples include
assumptions such as: adults are self-
directed learners; critical thinking is
an intellectual function characteristic
of adult life; good adult educational
processes are inherently democratic;
and education always has a political
dimension.
previous experience, and causes him to
"restructure
strategies
of
action,
understandings of phenomena, or ways of
framing problems" (1987, p. 28). Reflection-
on-action, on the other hand, occurs
consciously after the action and may involve
documentation.
• Prescriptive: Assumptions of what is
believed to be the best practice.
Examples include what should be
done in certain situations, or what
Atkins and Murphy (1993) pointed
out a common point in different theorists’
definitions of the term “reflection” - a
process in which an awareness of
uncomfortable feelings and thoughts is
followed by a critical analysis of feelings
and knowledge, leading to the development
of a new perspective. Reflection, therefore,
involves the self and must lead to a change
in perspectives. With the focus on reflection
in practice settings, it can be defined as a
process in which the practitioner critically
examines his or her past and present practice
in order to gain knowledge and
understanding, thus improving practice
(Buysse et al., 2003). According to Mezirow
(1990), it involves critically questioning the
content, process, and premise underlying the
experience in an attempt to make sense of or
better understand the experience. As
assumptions are what we instinctively
believe in, recognizing and questioning them
can understandably be a challenging task.
constitutes
process.
a
good educational
• Causal: Assumptions of the causal
relationship between practice and
outcomes. Brookfield claims that
this type of assumption is the easiest
to uncover and closest to reflective
practice.
Brookfield (1995) argues that while
these assumptions are valid in certain
situations, it is also worthwhile to examine
them from different angles. Only by doing so
can teachers reach a critical level of
reflection, which serves two distinctive
purposes: firstly, “to understand how
considerations of power undergird, frame
and distort educational processes and
interactions”, and secondly, “to question
assumptions and practices that seem to make
our teaching lives easier but actually work
against our own best long-term interests”
(Brookfield, 1995, p. 8). In a similar vein,
Dervent (2015) also claims that reflective
practice is a developmental process that
occurs at varying levels of sophistication and
complexity - from a technical level of
reflection to a more contextual and
deliberative one. As a teacher reaches a more
critical level of reflection, he or she may be
more driven to apply more appropriate
classroom practice. Therefore, reflection
must be done over time in order for the
practitioner to build the mental growth
required to attain the most complicated and
This point of view is supported by
Brookfield (1995), who claims that the most
distinctive feature of the reflective process is
the focus on “hunting assumptions”, or
examining what has generally been thought
to be true (common sense assumptions) in
order to obtain a more reliable guide to
action. A reflective teacher, therefore, ought
to be someone who is constantly on the hunt
for assumptions.
Brookfield (1995) identifies three
categories of assumptions:
• Paradigmatic: assumptions of the
VNU JOURNAL OF FOREIGN STUDIES, VOL. 37, NO. 4 (2021)
30
sophisticated levels of practice.
validation of a teacher's ideals, the
recognition of teaching as artistry, and
respect for diversity in applying theory to
classroom practice (Ferraro, 2000).
Brookfield (1995) particularly draws
attention to the role of critical dialogues and
theoretical literature in promoting teachers’
critical reflection. He asserts that the
engagement in critical dialogues with
colleagues, if carefully structured and
guided, could be of great value to critical
reflection. He also believes that by delving
into theoretical literature on critical
pedagogy, reflective practice, and adult
learning and education, teachers can
enhance their understanding and define their
own assumptions. It also gives them the
opportunity to learn from the practices and
lessons of others. This is further supported
by Benade (2015) who suggests that
individual reflection has little value outside
of certain professional requirements; it is
becoming more collaborative.
Jones (2007) further asserts that
reflection played the role of an important
“ingredient” in the development of
capability, which can be linked to long-term
professional development. However, Jones
points out that while reflection does enhance
practice, that impact relies on the
practitioner’s ability to build an adequate
knowledge base for them to reflect on, as
well as the skills to take effective action. She
also puts emphasis on the reflection process
as a means of informing and improving
practice rather than a deliberative problem
framing and solving process.
Morerecently, a research bySladeet al.
(2019) claims that reflective practice has a
tremendous impact on teacher education
programs in a variety of ways. It firstly
improves student teachers’ learning, as
evidenced by the acquisition of educational
knowledge, abilities, and dispositions. As a
result, because the two objectives are so
closely linked, the beneficial effects on their
2.2. Benefits of Reflection in Teacher
Education
It is claimed that the overall benefit
of reflective practice is that it will enrich,
systematize and construct professional
knowledge (Carr
&
Kemmis, 1988;
Cochran-Smith & Zeichner, 2005; Elliot,
1991; Kemmis & McTaggart, 1988). In the
context of teacher education, reflection is
believed to help teachers gain a deeper
understanding of their own practice on an
on-going basis, including an understanding
about the assumptions and knowledge upon
which their practice is based, as well as their
aims, values and beliefs (Buysse et al., 2003;
Loughran, 1995; Mclntyre, 1993; Zeichner,
1996).
learning become
demonstrating program effectiveness.
a
stimulant
for
3. The Role of Portfolio Assessment in
Promoting Reflection
3.1. Definitions of Portfolio
To enhance reflection and reflective
practice, the educational literature has
focused on the medium of writing (diaries,
journals and portfolios) as potential
approaches. In that context, portfolios, in
particular, have been embraced as an
effective tool for the assessment of teachers’
professional practice. There are many
diverse interpretations of the portfolio that
makes it difficult to arrive at one universal
definition of the term (Smith & Tillema,
2003; Wade & Yarbrough, 1996; Zeichner &
Wray, 200l). However, Wade and
Many studies have also credited
reflection for confronting and subsequently
changing practice (e.g., Francis, 1997;
Taylor, 1997). Because the reflection
process involves self-assessment and
justification of practice, the practitioner
gradually develops new theories that change
and improve their practice (Korthagen, 200l;
Lester, 1995). Other benefits include the
VNU JOURNAL OF FOREIGN STUDIES, VOL. 37, NO. 4 (2021)
31
Yarbrough (1996) provide a list of some
generally accepted notions about portfolios
in the context of teacher education as
follows:
forms of assessment and contributes to the
increased responsibility among students for
their own learning (Davies & LeMahieu,
2003; Winsor et al., 1999). This increased
responsibility is triggered by the
construction of a portfolio that allows them
to articulate and demonstrate what they are
learning about themselves as teachers. It also
encourages student teachers to self-assess
the learning that they have gained, the goals
that they have set, and the extent to which
they have achieved those goals. As pointed
out by Jarvinen and Kohonen (1995), this
self-assessment process helps novice
teachers develop their professional identities
and skills.
• Portfolios
demonstrate
student
teachers’ growth and learning over a
certain period of time and they
should include more than one or two
items.
• Portfolios are a tool for student
teachers to document and reflect on
their learning while at the same time
serve as a means of assessment that
allows their teachers to evaluate their
growth and achievement.
• Portfolios allow student teachers to
make their own choices regarding the
items to be included and the
organization of their portfolios. They
also have the opportunity to voice
their opinion regarding what parts of
the portfolio are to be evaluated and
what criteria are to be used.
According to Smith and Tillema
(2001), the most important advantage of the
portfolios is “the way they capture
achievements under realistic circumstances
and record them using authentic evidence
and tangible products” (p. 184). They also
highlight the portfolio’s ability to document
strengths and weaknesses in performance, to
develop awareness of competence, and to
resolve discrepancies between standards and
achieved performance. Other benefits of the
portfolio as an assessment tool include the
way it encourages teachers to integrate
theory and practice (Antonek et al., 1997;
Barton & Collins, 1993; Ladbrook &
Middleton, 1997; Winsor et al., 1999),
allows students to articulate and express
their beliefs, and promotes transformative
learning (Freidus, 1998). Finally, the
preparation of a portfolio has been widely
acknowledged for promoting reflection
(e.g., Antonek et al., 1997; Biggs, 1998;
Borko et al., 1997; Mokhtari et al., 1996;
Setteducati, 1995; Winsor et al., 1999).
• Portfolios allow authenticity in
student teachers’ work which cannot
be revealed through tests.
• Portfolios provide evidence of self-
reflection as student teachers
examine their own work and reflect
on it to set further goals. The
documentation allows them to follow
the changes that they make along the
way, thus facilitating learning and
reflection.
(Wade & Yarbrough, 1996, p. 65)
3.2. Portfolios as a Tool for Assessment of
Professional
Education
Practice
in
Teacher
The use of portfolios as an
assessment tool has been widely advocated
because of the learning that it promotes
(Loughran & Corrigan, 1995; Paulson et al.,
1991; Woodward, 1998). The process of
compiling the portfolio generates different
learning outcomes from other traditional
Because of its role as a form of
assessment, it is also important to consider
the validity and reliability of the portfolio in
order to deem it trustworthy. Meeus et al.
(2009), in a study that addresses the issue of
validity and reliability of portfolio
assessment for pre-service teachers, argue
VNU JOURNAL OF FOREIGN STUDIES, VOL. 37, NO. 4 (2021)
32
that the validity of portfolio assessment for
teaching and partnership competencies is
low while the validity for learning
competencies can be high. Therefore,
portfolios are more suitable for the
assessment of students’ capacity to execute
a self-regulated learning process, whereas
when it comes to assessing teaching
competencies, they should be used as a
complement to other tools.
entry (Wade & Yarbrough, 1996). The fact
that the portfolio is done as an assessment
task also manifests itself as a threat because
it involves the use of models and therefore
may make the process too instructional
(Baume et al., 2004; Daro, 1996). Finally,
concerns about grades may hinder the
sharing of certain information on the
students’ part during mentoring and
supervision (Boud & Walker, 1998).
A number of threats to the portfolio’s
validity has been identified, one of which is
the limited understanding of its purpose and
values among both students and teachers,
given the fact that it is a rather
unconventional form of assessment (e.g.,
Freidus, l998; Krause, 1996; Ladbrook &
Middleton, 1997; Loughran & Corrigan,
1995; Lyons, 1998; Wade & Yarbrough,
1996). In many cases, students’ lack of
understanding about the requirements and
process negatively impacts their motivation
to perform the task. This issue has been
recognized in a number of studies that
suggest teachers who are developing
portfolios often need a lot of scaffolding
during the process (Klecka et al., 2007). In
addition, specific strategies for reflection
should be taught to both pre-service and in-
service teachers (Ellsworth, 2002). As
discussed earlier, teachers initially may not
have an adequate understanding of reflection
as a skill and how they are expected to reflect
during the process. This is likely to add more
pressure on them from the outset of the
portfolio experience. It is therefore
recommended that proper mentoring on
these issues is provided to students to
improve the portfolio’s validity in this aspect
(Freidus, 1998).
Regarding the reliability of portfolio
assessment, Meeus et al. (2009) assert that
portfolios are “incapable of fulfilling the
classic psychometric requirement of
reliability” (p. 411) since portfolios and
standardization are essentially incompatible.
However, they suggest that the reliability of
portfolio assessment, despite being
problematic, can still be brought to an
acceptable level if the following measures
are taken:
• using a common assessment protocol
(prior moderation);
• using a common checklist of
assessment criteria;
• holistic marking;
• adequate training of assessors; and
• use
of
various
assessors
(retrospective moderation)
(Meeus et al., 2009, p. 411)
3.3. The Relationship Between Portfolio
Assessment and Reflection
A large body of research has
explored the relationship between portfolio
assessment and reflection. Throughout the
1990s, researchers generally embraced the
benefits of portfolios in promoting learning
and reflective practice (e.g., Antonek et al.,
1997; Biggs, 1998; Borko et al., 1997;
Mokhtari et al., 1996; Setteducati, 1995;
Winsor et al., 1999). Particularly, the study
by Borko et al. in 1997 reported that an
impressive majority of participants (71% in
written statements, 100% in interviews)
explicitly mentioned reflection as a benefit
Another threat to validity is the fact
that constructing a portfolio is a very time
consuming process, which to some extent
affects the assessment of students’ work
(Winsor et al., 1999). Furthermore, there are
aspects of practice that can be quite difficult
to demonstrate in the form of a portfolio
VNU JOURNAL OF FOREIGN STUDIES, VOL. 37, NO. 4 (2021)
33
of the portfolio process. According to Huba
and Freed (2000), reflection occurs at three
stages of the portfolio process: selection of
evidence, annotation of evidence for
presentation in the portfolio, and during
conversations with peers, faculty advisors
and others about their portfolio entries.
Gupta et al. (2001) further assert that the
portfolio encourages the compilers to write
down reflection on their own experiences,
thus improving the quality of reflections and
avoiding “single loop reflection” (p. 3).
Single loop learning refers to the search for
another strategy that will address and work
within the governing variables when a
problem occurs, as opposed to double loop
learning which subjects those variables to
critical scrutiny (Argyris & Schön, 1974).
Dialogues with others throughout the
process also contribute to reflection in two
aspects: critical conversations that question
portfolio entries and their significance, and
collaborative inquiry (Lyons, 1998).
reflection of their practice. Orland-Barak
(2005), on the other hand, takes a different
approach in search for “untold” evidence of
reflective practice in portfolios. The study
suggests that the quality of reflection resides
less in the use of different types of portfolios
to address different purposes, and more in
the collaborative process of participation in
constructing a group portfolio. Orland-
Barak also points out the absence of critical
reflection in portfolios as evidenced by the
predominance of descriptive reflective
language, indicating reflection at technical
level only. This finding aligns with those
made by Nagle (2009), who links this
phenomenon to pre-service teachers’ beliefs
about teaching and learning.
In order to better understand the role
of portfolios in promoting professional
development and the quality of the reflection
that they stimulate, Smith and Tillema’s
(2001) investigation into the sustained use of
a portfolio as an instrument to support
professional development in the long term
seeks to reveal why and how professionals
continue to maintain their portfolio. The
study focuses on four main issues:
documentation of professional competence
and development, systematic self-reflection,
maintaining a reflective dialogue with peers,
and learning from mistakes by analytic
reflection. As the findings suggest,
documentation of evidence is seen as the
most profound incentive for sustained
portfolio use, followed by reflection and
improved awareness, the chance for
A number of other studies have also
been conducted over the past decades on the
multi-facets of portfolio use that influences
learning and reflection.
A
quasi-
experimental research project with 174
teacher education students and 44
supervisors by Meeus et al. (2008) reveals
that the learning portfolio can significantly
increase student teachers’ capacity for
autonomous learning, given that supervisors
give them enough autonomy to do so. On a
different note, a comparative study was
specifically designed and carried out by
Groom and Maunonen-Eskelinen (2006) to
explore the impact of the portfolio on
reflective practice in different ecological
settings. The findings suggest that portfolios
can have an impact on the development of
reflective practice of student teachers and
the way they perceive their roles in the
classroom. Different contexts, national
priorities, approaches and policies cannot be
overemphasized as significant factors in how
portfolios are perceived and used for critical
collegial
dialogues
on
professional
performance, and lastly development and
learning. The main reasons for discontinued
portfolio use, on the other hand, are because
it is time consuming, not mandatory, and not
helpful
in
short-term
professional
development. The authors also point out that
while voluntary use of the portfolio is better
in enhancing professional development, it is
more likely to be sustained if it is mandatory.
They therefore suggest that a balance can be
VNU JOURNAL OF FOREIGN STUDIES, VOL. 37, NO. 4 (2021)
34
reached by the inclusion of a coach in the
assessment context who provides
instructions for the compilation of the
portfolio and at the same time offers
professional and personal support in a non-
threatening way.
benefiting from the formative aspects of this
form of assessment. On the other hand,
teaching portfolios can also be useful for the
appraisals of in-service teachers since they
can effectively demonstrate and clarify their
efforts which may not be showcased during
classroom observations or by any other
forms of evaluation. Using portfolios as an
assessment tool for professional practice can
also allow teachers to be professionally
competent and capable of continuing to learn
on a life-long basis.
4. Implications and Conclusion
The reviewed literature suggests that
the use of the portfolio provides formative
assessment while, to some extent, promoting
professional development and improved
practice via enhanced reflection, although
the quality of such reflection may not reach
a critical level. With careful attention to the
introduction of the portfolio and guided
support throughout the portfolio process, the
use of portfolio assessment can be valuable
in the context of teacher education in the
higher education system. It will not only
fulfill the basic purpose of assessment but
also enhance teachers’ reflective thinking
and their enthusiasm for learning about
themselves, others, and the process of
teaching (Wade & Yarbrough, 1996).
However, certain issues need to be
taken into account when applying this form
of assessment into practice for both pre-
service and in-service teachers. Firstly,
portfolios are time consuming; therefore
appropriate time should be allotted for
teachers to work on this assessment task.
Pre-service teachers, in particular, should
have adequate time to practise and become
comfortable with the process of compiling
the portfolio. Secondly, because portfolio
assessment can be unfamiliar to the portfolio
compilers and assessors alike, the purpose,
requirements and process must be made
explicit to both parties. Also, it is
particularly important to model what the
compilers are expected to do so they have a
clear understanding of the requirements and
expectations. Finally, support from peers,
faculty and colleagues is crucial to the
successful implementation of portfolio
assessment. It is thus important to create a
supportive environment in which the
necessary conditions for reflection and
inquiry are provided.
The use of portfolios in the higher
education context can be particularly useful
for the assessment of pre-service teachers.
Most teacher education programmes include
an internship period in which teachers in
training spend a few months teaching at
schools to gain practical experience. In many
cases, the assessment of their learning and
practice in this period is done solely via a
formal report to be submitted by the end of
the internship. In this context, the portfolio
seems more likely to be appropriate and
useful. Instead of writing a formal, heavily
theoretical report, student teachers could be
References
Antonek, J., McCormick, D., & Donato, R. (1997).
required to compile
a
portfolio to
The
student
teacher portfolio
as
autobiography: Developing a professional
identity. The Modern Language Journal, 81,
15-27.
demonstrate their competency with regard to
what they have been trained to do in the
previous components of the education
programme. By doing so, student teachers
can gain a more holistic and accurate insight
into their own learning and competence, thus
Argyris, C., & Schön, D. (1974). Theory in practice:
Increasing
professional
effectiveness.
Jossey-Bass.
VNU JOURNAL OF FOREIGN STUDIES, VOL. 37, NO. 4 (2021)
35
Ashford, A. N., & Deering, P. D. (2003, April 21-25).
Middle level teacher preparation: The
impact of the portfolio experience on
teachers’ professional development [Paper
presentation]. Annual Meeting of the
E. Cascallar (Eds.), Optimising new modes
assessment: In search of qualities and
standards. Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Dervent, F. (2015). The effect of reflective thinking
on the teaching practices of preservice
physical education teachers. Issues in
Educational Research, 25(3), 260-275.
American
Educational
Research
Association, Chicago, IL, United States.
Atkins, S., & Murphy, K. (1993). Reflection: A
review of the literature. Journal of Advanced
Nursing, 18, 1188-1192.
Dewey, J. (1933). How we think. Heath and Co.
Dimova, Y., & Loughran, J. (2009). Developing a big
picture understanding of reflection in
pedagogical practice. Reflective Practice,
10(2), 205-217.
Barton, J., & Collins, A. (1993). Portfolios in teacher
education. Journal of Teacher Education,
44(3), 200-210.
Elliott, J. (1991). Action research for educational
change. Open University Press.
Baume, D., Yorke, M., & Coffey, M. (2004). What
happens when we assess, and how can we
use our understanding of this to improve
assessment? Assessment and Evaluation in
Higher Education, 29(4), 451-477.
Ellsworth, J. (2002). Using student portfolios to
increase
reflective
practice
among
elementary teachers. Journal of Teacher
Education, 53(4), 342-355.
Benade, L. (2015). Teachers’ critical reflective
practice in the context of twenty-first
century learning. Open Review of
Educational Research, 2(1), 42-54.
Ferraro, J. M. (2000). Reflective practice and
professional development (ED449120). ERIC.
Fook, J. (2015). Reflective practice and critical
reflection. In J. Lishman (Ed.), Handbook
for practice learning in social work and
social care: Knowledge and theory (3rd ed.).
Jessica Kingsley.
Biggs, J. (1998). A role for summative assessment.
Assessment in Education, 5(1), 103-110.
Borko, H., Michalec, P., Timmons, M., & Siddle, J.
(1997). Student teaching portfolios: A tool
for promoting reflective practice. Journal of
Teacher Education, 48(5), 345-357.
Francis, D. (1997). Critical incident analysis: A
strategy for developing reflective practice.
Teachers and Teaching, 3(2), 169-88.
Boud, D., & Walker, D. (1998). Promoting reflection
in professional courses: The challenge of
context. Studies in Higher Education, 23(2),
191-206.
Freidus, H. (1998). Mentoring portfolio development.
In N. Lyons (Ed.), With portfolio in hand
(pp. 5l-68). Teachers College Press.
Brookfield, S. (1995). Becoming
reflective teacher. Jossey-Bass.
a critically
Gore, J., & Zeichner, K. (1991). Action research and
reflective teaching in pre-service teacher
education: A case study from the United
States. Teaching and Teacher Education,
7(2), 119-136.
Buysse, V., Sparkman, K., & Wesley, P. (2003).
Communities of practice: Connecting what
we know with what we do. Exceptional
Children, 69(3), 263-277.
Groom, B., & Maunonen-Eskelinen, I. (2006). The
use of portfolios to develop reflective
practice in teacher training: A comparative
and collaborative approach between two
teacher training providers in the UK and
Finland. Teaching in Higher Education,
11(3), 291-300.
Carr, W., & Kemmis, S. (1988). Becoming critical:
Knowing through action research. Deakin
University Press.
Cochran-Smith, M., & Zeichner, K. M. (Eds.) (2005).
Studying teacher education: The report of
the AERA Panel on Research and Teacher
Education. Lawrence Erlbaum.
Gupta, S., Ecclestone, K., & Greaves, D. (2001, July).
Daro, P. (1996). Standards and portfolio assessment.
In J. Baron & D. Wolf (Eds.), Performance-
based student assessment: Challenges and
possibilities (pp. 239-260). The University
of Chicago Press.
Portfolio based learning as a tool for insider
practitioner
professional
presentation].
research:
knowledge
Third
Developing
[Paper
International
Interdisciplinary Evidence-based Policies
and Indicator Systems Conference,
Gateshead, England.
Davies, A., & LeMahieu, P. (2003). Assignment for
learning: Reconsidering portfolios and
research evidence. In M. Segers, F. Dochy &
VNU JOURNAL OF FOREIGN STUDIES, VOL. 37, NO. 4 (2021)
36
Hall, C. (2004). Two professional development
paradigms and a merging of the approaches.
Victoria University of Wellington.
Lester, S. (1995). Beyond knowledge and competence:
Towards a framework for professional
education. Capability, 1(3), 44-52.
Huba, M., & Freed, J. (2000). Learner-centered
assessment on college campuses. Allyn and
Bacon.
Loughran, J. (1995). Practising what I preach:
Modelling reflective practice to student
teachers. Research in Science Education,
25(4), 431-451.
Jarvinen, A., & Kohonen, V. (1995). Promoting
professional development in higher
education through portfolio assessment.
Assessment and Evaluation in Higher
Education, 20(l), 25-37.
Loughran, J., & Corrigan, D. (1995). Teacher
portfolios:
learning and teaching in persevere
education. Teaching and Teacher
Education, 11, 565-577.
A strategy for developing
Jones, E. (2007). A portfolio for assessment of the
practice of the special education resource
teachers [Doctoral dissertation, Victoria
University of Wellington].
Lyons, N. (1998). Portfolios possibilities: Validating
a new teacher professionalism. In N. Lyons
(Ed.), With portfolio in hand (pp. 1-21).
Teacher College Press.
Jones, E. (2009). Can portfolios promote quality
learning? In L. H. Meyer, S. Davidson, H.
Anderson, R. Fletcher, P. Johnston & M.
Rees (Eds.), Tertiary assessment & higher
education student outcomes: Policy,
practice & research. Ako Aotearoa.
McIntyre, D. (1993). Theory, theorizing and
reflection in initial teacher education. In J.
Calderhead
&
P.
Gates
(Eds.),
Conceptualizing reflection in teacher
development (pp. 39-52). Falmer Press.
Jones, E. (2010). Personal theory and reflection in a
professional practice portfolios. Assessment
and Evaluation in Higher Education, 35(6),
699-710.
Meeus, W., Van Petegem, P., & Engels, N. (2009).
Validity and reliability of portfolio
assessment in pre-service teacher education.
Assessment and Evaluation in Higher
Education, 34(4), 401-413.
Kemmis, S., & McTaggart, R. (Eds.). (1988). The
action research planner (3rd ed.). Deakin
University.
Meeus, W., Van Petegem, P., & Meijer, J. (2008).
Portfolios as means of promoting
autonomous learning in teacher education: A
quasi-experimental study. Educational
Research, 50(4), 361-386.
Klecka, C., Donovan, L., & Fishee, R. (2007). In their
shoes: Teacher educators’ reframing
portfolio development from the students’
perspective. Journal of Computing in
Teacher Education, 24(1), 31-36.
Mezirow, J. (1990). Fostering critical reflection in
adulthood: A guide to transformative and
emancipatory learning. Jossey-Bass.
Korthagen, F. (2001). Linking practice and theory:
The pedagogy of realistic teacher education.
Lawrence Erlbaum.
Mokhtari, K., Yellin, D., Bull, K., & Mongomery, D.
(1996). Portfolio assessment in teacher
education: Impact on preservice teacher’s
knowledge and attitudes. Journal of Teacher
Education, 47(4), 245-251.
Krause, S. (1996). Portfolios in teacher education:
Effects of instruction on preservice teachers'
early comprehension of the portfolio
process. Journal of Teacher Education,
47(2), 130-138.
Nagle, J. F. (2009). Becoming a reflective practitioner
in the age of accountability. The Educational
Forum, 73, 76-86.
LaBoskey, V. (1993) A conceptual framework for
reflection in preservice teacher education. In
Orland-Barak, L. (2005). Portfolios as evidence of
reflective practice: What remains ‘untold’.
Educational Research, 47(1), 25-44.
J. Calderhead
&
P. Gates (Eds.),
Conceptualizing reflection in teacher
development. Falmer Press.
Paulson, F., Paulson, P., & Meyer, C. (1991). What
makes a portfolio a portfolio? Educational
Leadership, 48(5), 60-63.
Ladbrook, J., & Middleton, S. (1997). Portfolios:
Promoting the role of reflection in the pre-
service education of graduate teachers
[Paper presentation]. NZARE Conference,
Auckland.
Rodgers, C. (2002). Defining reflection: Another
look at John Dewey and reflective thinking.
Teachers College Record, 104(4), 842-866.
Schön, D. (1983). The reflective practitioner: How
professionals think in action. Basic Books.
VNU JOURNAL OF FOREIGN STUDIES, VOL. 37, NO. 4 (2021)
37
Schön, D. (1987). Educating the reflective
practitioner: Toward a new design for
teaching and learning in the professions.
Jossey-Bass.
Taylor, I. (1997). Developing learning in
professional education: Partnerships for
practice. Society for Research into Higher
Education & Open University Press.
Setteducati, D. (1995). Portfolio self-assessment for
teachers: A reflection on the Farmingdale.
Journal of Staff Development, 16(3), 2-5.
van Manen, M. (1977). Linking ways of knowing
with ways of being practical. Curriculum
Inquiry, 6(3), 205-228.
Shulman, L. (1998). Teacher portfolios: Theoretical
activity. In N. Lyons (Ed.), With portfolio in
hand (pp. 23-49). Teacher College Press.
van Manen, M. (1991). The tact of teaching: The
meaning of pedagogical thoughtfulness.
State University of New York Press.
Slade, M., Burnham, T., Catalana, S., & Waters, T.
(2019). The impact of reflective practice on
teacher candidates' learning. International
Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching and
Wade, R., & Yarbrough, D. (1996). Portfolios: A tool
for reflective thinking in teacher education?
Teaching and Teacher Education, 12(1),
63-79.
Learning,
13(2),
Article
15.
Winsor, P., Butt, R., & Reeves H. (1999). Portraying
professional development in preservice
teacher education: Can portfolios do the
jobs? Teachers and Teaching: Theory and
Practice, 5(1), 9-31.
Smith, K., & Tillema, H. (1998). Evaluating portfolio
use as a learning tool for professionals.
Scandinavian Journal of Educational
Research, 42(2), 193-205.
Woodward, H. (1998). Reflective journals and
portfolios: Learning through assessment.
Assessment and Evaluation in Higher
Education, 23(4), 415-423.
Smith, K., & Tillema, H. (2001). Long-term
influences of portfolios on professional
development. Scandinavian Journal of
Educational Research, 45(2), 183-203.
Woodward, H. (2000). Portfolios: Narratives for
learning. Professional Development in
Education, 26(2), 329-349.
Smith, K., & Tillema, H. (2003). Clarifying different
type portfolio use. Assessment and Evaluation
in Higher Education, 28(6), 625-648.
Zeichner, K. (1996). Teachers as reflective
practitioners and the democratization of
school reform. In K. Zeichner, S. Melnick &
M. Gomx (Eds.), Currents of reform in pre-
service teacher education (1st ed., pp. 199-213).
Teachers College Press.
Stephenson, J. (1998). The concept of capability and
its importance in higher education.
In J. Stephenson & M. Yorke (Eds.),
Capability and quality in higher education
(pp. l-13). Kogan Page.
Strijbos, J., Meeus, W., & Libotton, A. (2007).
Portfolio assignments in teacher education:
A tool for self-regulating the learning
process. International Journal for the
Scholarship of Teaching and Learning,
1(2), Article 17.
Zeichner, K., & Wray, S. (2001). The teaching
portfolio in US teacher education programs:
What we know and what we need to know.
Teaching and Teacher Education, 17,
613-621.
VNU JOURNAL OF FOREIGN STUDIES, VOL. 37, NO. 4 (2021)
38
BÀN VỀ ĐÁNH GIÁ HỒ SƠ HỌC TẬP – CÔNG CỤ THÚC ĐẨY
CHIÊM NGHIỆM TRONG ĐÀO TẠO SƯ PHẠM
Nguyễn Mỹ Bình
Bộ môn Tiếng Anh cơ sở, Viện Ngoại ngữ, Đại học Bách khoa Hà Nội,
Số 1 Đại Cồ Việt, quận Hai Bà Trưng, Hà Nội, Việt Nam
Tóm tắt: Bài viết nghiên cứu mối liên hệ không thể tách rời giữa việc dạy và học của giáo viên
thông qua việc sử dụng hồ sơ học tập (portfolio) như một công cụ kiểm tra đánh giá đối với giáo sinh
và giáo viên trong thực hành nghề nghiệp. Cụ thể, bài viết tổng hợp, đánh giá các công trình nghiên cứu
liên quan tới khái niệm và định nghĩa sự chiêm nghiệm và thực hành chiêm nghiệm trong giảng dạy, từ
đó tìm hiểu vai trò của hồ sơ học tập như một tác nhân thúc đẩy sự chiêm nghiệm và phát triển chuyên
môn của giáo viên. Kết quả cho thấy hình thức kiểm tra đánh giá này có thể là một công cụ đánh giá
thường xuyên, đồng thời phần nào khuyến khích phát triển chuyên môn và cải tiến giảng dạy thông qua
việc tăng cường chiêm nghiệm, mặc dù chất lượng của sự chiêm nghiệm có thể chưa đạt mức độ sâu
sắc. Nếu có chỉ dẫn cụ thể và hỗ trợ trong suốt quá trình xây dựng hồ sơ học tập, hình thức đánh giá này
có thể có giá trị trong lĩnh vực giáo dục và đào tạo giáo viên trong hệ thống giáo dục đại học.
Từ khoá: chiêm nghiệm, thực hành chiêm nghiệm, hồ sơ học tập, đánh giá, giáo dục chuyên
môn của giáo viên
13 trang
20840
Free
Bạn đang xem tài liệu "Bàn về đánh giá hồ sơ học tập - công cụ thúc đẩy chiêm nghiệm trong đào tạo sư phạm", để tải tài liệu gốc về máy hãy click vào nút Download ở trên
File đính kèm:
- ban_ve_danh_gia_ho_so_hoc_tap_cong_cu_thuc_day_chiem_nghiem.pdf
