The Value of Portfolio Data in Action Research



Data is the cornerstone of action research and may take many forms such as interview notes, documentation of observations, video and audio recordings, photographs, drawings, graphs, charts, curriculum documents, meeting records, policy documents, and so on. For those engaged in action research in classrooms, one of the most commonly utilized forms of research data is the artwork made by students. From this work, a great deal may be learned about the artistic capabilities of students and their learning (or lack of it). All forms of data produced by research subjects may be regarded as artifacts. For the purpose of this chapter, we will focus on the value a specific class of artifact data known as the portfolio. Strategies for gathering and managing both traditional and electronic portfolios, data analysis, and interpretation of those data, as well as procedures for judging the quality of portfolios, will be discussed in the chapter.


Action Researcher Electronic Portfolio International Baccalaureate Assess Student Learning Drawing Skill 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Burton, D. (1998, April 2). A Survey of Assessment and Evaluation among U.S. K-12 Teachers of Art. Meeting of the NAEA Task Force on Demographic Research, NAEA convention, Chicago IL.Google Scholar
  2. Carmines, E. G., & Zeller, R.A. (1991). Reliability and validity assessment. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  3. Cizek, G. (1993). Alternative assessments: Yes, but why? Educational Horizons, 72(1), 36–40.Google Scholar
  4. Davis, H. (1999). Portfolios, a guide for students and teachers (Sound Recording Series). Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.Google Scholar
  5. Fornander, M. (1999). Digital portfolios: A district, school, and intermediate teachers’ presentation on how to get started (Report). Boise State University, ID.Google Scholar
  6. Gardner, H. (1996). The assessment of student learning in the arts. In D. Boughton, E. W. Eisner, & J. Ligtvoet (Eds.), Evaluating and Assessing the Visual Arts in Education: International Perspectives (pp. 131–155). New York, NY: Teachers College Press.Google Scholar
  7. Kerper, A. (2000). Digital portfolios implemented in the elementary program. Unpublished manuscript, Northern Illinois University, Art Education Division.Google Scholar
  8. Knight, P. (1992). How I used portfolios in mathematics. Educational Leadership, 49(8), 71–72.Google Scholar
  9. Lamdin, D., & Walker, V. (1994). Planning for classroom portfolio assessment. Arithmetic Teacher, 41, 318–324.Google Scholar
  10. Lewis, B., Jurmain, R., & Kilgore, L. (2008). Understanding humans: Introduction to physical anthropology and archaeology. Melbourne, Australia: Cengage, Advantage Books.Google Scholar
  11. Miller, R., & Morgaine, W. (2009). The benefits of e-portfolios for students and faculty in their own words. Peer Review, 1(1), 8–12.Google Scholar
  12. Niguidula, D. (1998). A richer picture of student work. In D. Allen (Ed.), Assessing student learning: From grading to understanding (pp. 183–198). New York, NY: Teachers College Press.Google Scholar
  13. Oros, L., Morgenegg, J., & Finger, A. (1998, Jan./Feb.). Creating digital portfolios. Media & Methods, 34(3), 15.Google Scholar
  14. Phye, G. (1997). Handbook of classroom assessment. San Diego, CA: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  15. Sullivan, G. (1993). Art-based art education: Learning that is meaningful, authentic, critical and pluralist. Studies in Art Education, 35(1), 5–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Tuttle, H. (1997). The multimedia report: Electronic portfolios tell a personal story. Multimedia Schools, 4, 32–37.Google Scholar
  17. Walker, C. R. (1983, Spring). The whole is more than the sum of the parts: Evaluation criteria in oral tests. British Journal of Language Teaching, 21(1), 41–44.Google Scholar
  18. Wetzel, K., & Strudler, N. (2006, Spring). Costs and benefits of electronic portfolios in teacher education: Student voices. Journal of Computing in Teacher Education, 22(3), 69–78.Google Scholar
  19. Wiedemer, T. (1998). Digital portfolios: Capturing and demonstrating skills and levels of performance. Phi Delta Kappan, 79(8), 586–589.Google Scholar
  20. Wolfe, D. (1988). Opening up assessment. Educational Leadership, 45(1), 24–29Google Scholar
  21. Zimmerman, E. (1994). How should students’ progress and achievements in art be assessed? A case for assessment that is responsive to diverse students’ needs. Visual Arts Research, 20(1), 29–35.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Sheri R. Klein 2012

Authors and Affiliations

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations