Portfolio Process

Introduction to Portfolio Process and Content:
With the passage of PI 34 in 2004, all Wisconsin teacher preparation programs were mandated to ensure that teacher candidates (TC) demonstrate competency on the ten Wisconsin Teacher Standards (WTS) before graduating. Each university has their own process whereby students complete a portfolio demonstrating competency in these standards. At UW-La Crosse, TC’s complete an electronic portfolio process on D2L. Competency is demonstrated via high quality artifacts and written reflections. An artifact is a piece of work or hard evidence completed by the TC as part of course work and/or experiences related to teaching. Artifacts represent the TC’s best work at that given moment in time within the program, and represent their competency of the WTS.

All TC’s enrolled in Teacher Education programs in Wisconsin must successfully complete a pre-student teaching and a post-student teaching portfolio in order to earn their teaching license. The portfolio is not intended to serve as an employment portfolio, but instead is used to demonstrate competency within the ten WTS.

Refer to www.uwlax.edu/soe/portfolio/ for an overview of the School of Education portfolio assessment process and for copies of the portfolio rubric.

Note: The PETE program has added an introductory benchmark to the school of education portfolio process, as a way to more fully prepare TC’s to complete the two subsequent, more formal benchmarks.

Assessment of the Portfolio:
Portfolios are assessed by the TC’s academic advisor, at two different benchmarks or times throughout the PETE program. Advisors use the Portfolio Reflective Narrative rubric to assess the portfolios to formally assess at both pre and post student teaching benchmarks. Data are collected from pre-student teaching and post-student teaching portfolios, are analyzed, and utilized for program revision. TC’s must use the rubric when writing their reflective narratives.

Reflective Narrative:
At each Benchmark the TC will identify quality artifacts and will write a reflective narrative describing how the artifacts demonstrate competency within the teaching standards. Each standard must have a minimum of one connected artifact, but may have multiple artifacts. Additionally, one artifact can be used to defend more than one standard. TC’s are encouraged to choose multiple, diverse artifacts to represent each standard. The goal is to demonstrate both depth and breadth of competency.

The narrative begins with an introductory paragraph including -TC information, portfolio benchmark number, and identification of artifacts (i.e., name of the artifact and the course or experience it came). Next the narrative is divided into sections, each labeled for one of the teaching standards. Each section includes a description of the artifact(s) that are being used for the standard and a reflection articulating a clear connection between the standard and the various aspects of the completed artifact(s). When writing the narrative, refer carefully to the descriptors on the Portfolio Reflective Narrative rubric.

The following grid provides prompts that TC’s may find useful when writing the narrative sections, keep in mind however that these examples are not meant to be inclusive. Your personal experiences are the best content for these reflections. A quality narrative will be concise, yet explicit – pointing out and connecting specific parts of the artifact to the standard.

Wisconsin Teaching Standard Sample Prompts for Reflective Narrative
  1. Content knowledge
  • What content knowledge did I utilize when completing this artifact?
  • How did I apply and combine multiple sources of content knowledge to complete this artifact?
  • How did I identify when students were inaccurate and what did I do about it to remedy their inaccuracies?
  1. Learner development and abilities
  • What do I know about learners’ universal and variable abilities across all domains?
  • How did I use that knowledge when planning instruction?
  • How did my planning impact the entire learner?
  1. Learner diversity
  • What do I know about individual differences and barriers to learning?
  • How did I use this knowledge to adapt and modify?
  • Did I create an inclusive environment where all can learn?
  1. Instructional strategies
  • What do I know about various instructional strategies, specifically those that encourage critical thinking, problem solving and performance skills? (think in terms of task presentations, task structure, task engagement)
  • How did I go about choosing the instructional strategies?
  • How did I analyze the effectiveness of my choices?
  1. Learner motivation and engagement
  • What do I know about factors that influence learner motivation for various learners?
  • How did I recognize barriers and plan ahead of time to avoid these barriers?
  • How did I use this knowledge to create a positive environment for learner engagement?
  • What impact did my choices have on the learners?
  1. Use of effective communication
  • How did I communicate in an effective manner with learners?
  • Did I use various forms of communication when teaching?
  • What effect did my communication have on my learners?
  1. Planning for learning
  • How did I use what I know about subject matter, students, and curriculum to create relevance for the learners?
  • How did I know what I planned was relevant for the learner?
  1. Assessing learning
  • What do I know about the importance of assessment?
  • How have I used various assessment strategies to monitor learning?
  • Have I used data to design and alter instruction?
  1. Reflection
  • How did my choices and actions affect my learners?
  • How do I use feedback on my actions and behaviors to alter and improve instruction for learners?
  • What would I do differently next time to enhance learning?
  1. Professional relationships
  • What professional relationships are important to foster?
  • How have I started to foster these types of relationships?
  • How have these relationships impacted learners?
  • How did I interact with the community in this experience?

Pre-Student Teaching Portfolio – completed final semester on campus, prior to student teaching

  1. Choose artifact(s) that represent your current competency on all ten standards.
  2. Write a reflective narrative that will have 11 sections, an introductory section and one section for each standard.
  3. Contact your advisor to identify how s/he would like to receive your materials. Submit to your advisor the first week of November/April.
  4. Advisors will carefully assess your reflective narrative using the Portfolio Reflective Narrative rubric, and will provide feedback specifically related to your ability to articulate your competencies according to the criteria on the rubric.
  5. TC will continue to revise the narrative until the Advisor gives approval.
  6. TC will upload the narrative and artifacts to D2L and inform his/her advisor. **This step should not be completed until the narrative has been approved by the advisor – the documents uploaded are to be considered the final copies**
  7. Once everything is on D2L, the advisor will complete the final assessment using the rubric, upload the rubric to the TC’s portfolio on D2L, and send it via email to OFE.
  8. The student teaching coordinator will verify that you have completed this benchmark. TC can NOT student teach without completing this benchmark.

Post-Student Teaching Portfolio – completed after student teaching semester

  1. Student teachers collect new artifacts for all 10 standards at both their elementary and secondary placements, and will write one narrative highlighting all 10 standards.
  2. Advisors will complete the same steps as were done in for the preparing to student teach portfolio, carefully using the Portfolio Reflective Narrative Rubric.
  3. When TC is ready to advance, the advisor will complete the rubric, upload it to D2L & submit it via email to OFE.
  4. The student teaching coordinator will verify that you have completed this benchmark by the end of student teaching. TC will NOT receive licensure without completing this benchmark.