Modified: June 26, 2001
iMET Home | Culminating Experience | El Dorado Cohort
Dr. Helen Barrett of the University of Alaska provides much of the background for the iMET and Cohort Electronic Portfolio Culminating Experience. Dr. Barrett's work serves as a research-based reference that clarifies the structure and content of electronic portfolios for iMET and Cohort graduate students. While the structure and content of the iMET and Cohort Electronic Portfolio Culminating Experience will be based on Dr. Barrett's references, much of the thinking behind the individual's electronic portfolio will be determined by the graduate students themselves.
The electronic portfolio contains three stages.
Use the Portfolio Diagram and refer to the descriptions above.
See the PowerPoint Presentation.
Geoffrey Mills (2000) defines action research as "... any systematic inquiry conducted by teacher researchers, principals, school counselors, or other stakeholders in the teaching/learning environment, to gather information about the ways that their particular schools operate, how they teach, and how well their students learn." Mills identifies four main steps in the process:
The steps in action research have as their purpose the acquisition of insight into behavior in educational settings. In identifying an area of focus, for example, the teacher researcher isolates a problem and explores his or her own understanding of educational theories and values as well as historical contexts linked to the problem. The teacher researcher reviews the related literature gaining further insight into possible practices that might be useful in formulating an action plan that may effectively address the problem. Further, teachers conducting action research collect, analyze and interpret qualitative data gathered through conventional sources (interviews, questionnaires, and surveys) as well through exhibits, photographs, student portfolios, inventories, rating scales, observations and archival sources within a school or district setting. Teacher researchers apply the principles of triangulation to their data collection to provide more than one perspective on the problem. Researchers must also consider the validity and reliability of the data collection as established by current theories of qualitative methodology and apply appropriate descriptive statistics when necessary. As insight is gained through the analysis and interpretation of the data, the teacher researcher expects to revise his or her action plan and recommend action. The result of the action research is new knowledge which is presented to peers and administrators in school or conference settings. Mills (2000) provides detailed theoretical and practical guidance in his recent work, Action Research: A Guide for the Teacher Researcher. As well, McMillan and Schumacher (1997) present a very thorough overview of ethnographic research in Educational Research: A Conceptual Introduction.
Teachers within the iMET and Cohort programs come from a variety of professional contexts that create a lively community of practice that is consistent in face-to-face as well as synchronous and asynchronous online learning environments. As graduate students, iMET and Cohort teachers are expected to produce projects that reflect collaboration, research, and sound pedagogy. Projects completed during coursework become the artifacts of the individual's Electronic Portfolio.
As mentioned above, the iMET and Cohort Electronic Portfolio has three stages. As determined by course assignments, the first stage (Working) will contain at least the following artifacts:
Since the artifacts of the individual's electronic portfolio are largely determined by course assignments, the refinement of the artifacts and the subsequent action research should be determined by the student and, when the product is the result of collaborative construction, his or her colleagues. This part of the individual's electronic portfolio should reflect the style and commitment of individuals and groups contributing to the project. All artifacts of the electronic portfolio will be available through a menu and hyperlinks.
The action research product
The second stage (Review) of the portfolio involves the refinement of artifacts, the merging of artifacts from the working stage to the review stage, and some testing of the artifacts in classrooms and staff development contexts. An area of focus for the action research project is identified that utilizes the artifacts in the review stage. In selecting an area of focus, graduate students will address the following questions:
- Does the area of focus involve teaching and learning?
- Is the area of focus within your locus of control?
- Is the area of focus something you feel passionate about?
- Is the area of focus something you would like to change or improve?
The third stage (Presentation) of the portfolio product must be based on action research conducted in an appropriate educational setting. Further refinement, merging and testing of portfolio artifacts occurs which includes a broad review of relevant literature, an interpretation and analysis of data, and an action plan based on the results of the research. The literature review will be tied together through an overall statement of purpose identifying an area of focus and the connections the research has with each presentation portfolio artifact. The relevance of the whole to modern educational pedagogy must be analyzed and commitment to an action plan must be demonstrated.
Presenting the portfolio
- Multimedia programs such as HyperStudio and presentation applications such as PowerPoint may be utilized in the most appropriate presentation and staff development settings.
- Web-based delivery of action research findings must be made available and presented to professional colleagues which may include school or district administrators.
- Portfolio artifacts shall be made available on CD ROM or other appropriate formats accessible to all professional colleagues.
- Portions of the electronic portfolio may be published using word processing or publishing software and made available through links to the iMET server at CSU, Sacramento.
Mills, G. E. (2000) Action Research: A guide for the teacher researcher. Upper Saddle River, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall Inc.
