The essential elements of the framework of portfolio assessment are: the participants (language manager), the researcher/teacher (facilitator/ consultant), the assessment criteria, the authentic tasks, and the learner interactions.
Figure1. A conceptual framework for
Knowledge and ability Examination conditions Business Students Tasks Research Design Literature review & Construction Language works Assessment criteria Evaluation and Reflection Assessment conditions and training Examiners Knowledge and ability portfolio assessment 2. Review of Literature
2.1 Portfolio as an alternative assessment
With the recent concentration on assessments that record
learner?s growth, reflection, and ownership, portfolios have been a
6
form of authentic assessments. The portfolio tasks could integrate all aspects of language--reading, writing, speaking, and listening as well as higher-level thinking skills and strategies. Hamayan (1995: 213-215) reviewed the characteristics of alternative assessment that made it useful in oral training classroom: 1) Proximity to actual language use and performance; 2) A holistic view of language; 3) An integrative view of learning; 4) Developmental appropriateness; 5) Multiple referencing. Hamayan (1995) also claimed that alternative assessment procedures are based on activities that have authentic communicative function. The language use is assessed according to actual performance in authentic situations, which the learners encounter in daily life. Therefore, through portfolio approach, it is possible to evaluate language as a tool for communication rather than the structural analysis. These multidimensional perspectives cover the process integrating knowledge and transform student attitude toward learning (Marzano, 1994). The practical reasons for using portfolios for communication were summarized (Hart, 1994: 1). It aids a student in self-assessment, a crucial life skill. 2) It is a highly effective instructional tool as well as an assessment tool. 3) It
7
exemplifies language use as meaning-constructed behavior. 4) It supports student ownership for improvement. 5) It keeps the focus on genuine, student-oriented purposes. 6) It promotes audience awareness; 7) It emphasizes written and spoken activities that reflect each student?s unique background and interests. It helps a student develop a very positive attitude. 8) It promotes student-teacher interaction and collaboration among students. 2.2 Theoretical Framework Linking instruction and assessment
The portfolios have been linking instruction, learning, and assessment (Merzano & Costa, 1988; Hsieh, 2000). This approach has attempted to realize the perspectives of the participants as they construct their meaning because portfolios allow frequent opportunities to practice authentic language use in relevant contexts and for specific purposes. Therefore, interaction plays an essential role in the portfolio process in which the “construct of the ?self? exits. As Lylis (1993) commented, that language teachers might use a “formative type of assessment that is diagnostic in nature and informs teachers and students alike of progress made” (p.13). By
8
exploring the weakness or strength of business major, students would commit to their ownerships for oral language development. Different from traditional assessment, the portfolio approach has viewed culture as an essential ingredient to understanding the ESL student?s experience (Coballes-Vega, 1992). Portfolio was applicable to this study because it made business students from diverse background willing to talk about how they learn to speak and recall process. Actually, in recent decades, the concern of assessment has changed to multidimensional, and the focus has switched from product to process (Hebert, 1992; Merzano & Costa, 1988; Krest, 1990; Poston, 1993).
The Portfolio process and Cognitive Development
The portfolio as the collection of student?s growth serves as a
medium to understand students? cognitive processes which connect social, cultural, and linguistics factors (Gonzalez, 1999). According to Hansen (1992), students responded to reflective questions, such as” How does this item show my growth?” demonstrating their individual point of views and uncovering the awareness of the literacy. And, in Hebert?s portfolio project, “Learning Experience
9
forms”, adapting Gardner?s “Theory of Multiple Intelligences” (musical, linguistic, logical- mathematical, spatial, bodily kinesthetic, interpersonal, and intrapersonal) reacted again the traditional explanation of intelligence. The forms were used to recognize teacher?s relationship with students. Herbert termed “inside language”-- what we do in our classroom and “outside language”--what we say we do in our classroom. The former reflected the beliefs, experiences, values, and confidence, but the latter was influenced by learning environment, test sores, and language curriculum (Herbert, 1992). Indeed, “inside language” is more difficult because there were some linguistic limitations that made it more difficult to share understanding and beliefs of EFL learners.
Authentic experiences to EFL learner
Student portfolios are self-selected (Hansen, 1992), so their
choice demonstrated significant involvement with speaking and listening at the appropriate level of English language proficiency. Hansen (1992) reported that the comments of the literacy portfolio from peers and family encouraged a relevant curriculum. With
10