Regarding the Electronic Portfolio article, I find it is a natural progression from the portfolios commonly found in elementary school classrooms. Similar is the criteria, for example, the inclusion of student-selected works, the reason for its selection, student-reflection, and a form of rubric for evaluation. In addition, the two share a similar purpose, that being, the promotion of learning and/or assessment.
Many of the benefits of other forms of technology may also be employed when creating an electric portfolio. For example, students may have greater ease of access to their target audience, and to tools such as online encyclopedias, typing software and clip art. Many of these tools can enhance a presentation and expand content resources, (which can then be hyperlinked and used by the audience as a link for extended study).
I read the article through the lens of a student creating work, and gave no thought to the electronic portfolio’s value as a tool for explaining why a work might be included or as an assessment. As I read on, the article suggested the use of a hyperlink to standards as a proof of merit. This, I believe, is a much less cumbersome way of illustrating the students’ addressing of standards, (rather than an entire document of standards accompanying a body of work, which must then be cross-referenced by the assessor.)
As for use in third grade, typing is always an issue, especially in the beginning of the year. I believe the portfolio may be modified for my younger audience, as they gain proficiency with keyboarding. For example, the teacher may make the tools easily accessible, such as line-item standards, which may be copied and pasted, a list of hyperlinks focusing on the content, make use of web templates, and online opportunities such as web quests and hyperstudio projects, which may be readily included in an electronic portfolio. Exciting learning!
How do you see yourself using this in your classroom? Are there other supports that may be used to support our younger learners?