The Validity of Portfolios in Predicting Performance in a Gifted Program

Abstract

The nation is moving toward more authentic assessment procedures such as product portfolios. This study examined the degree to which samples collected in product portfolios from 216 kindergarten through second-grade students were able to predict their successful performance in a gifted program four years later. Successful performance was determined by scores on achievement tests and teacher classroom ratings. Hypotheses were analyzed using descriptive and inferential statistics. This study found that students whose product portfolio scores are in the top quarter perform significantly better on math and reading achievement subtests, but their classroom performance is not rated significantly higher than students whose product portfolio scores are in the bottom quarter. No significant differences were found among racial or ethnic minority groups.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Archbald

D. A.

Newman

F. M.

(1988). Beyond standardized testing: Assessing authentic academic achievement in the secondary school. Reston, VA: National Association of Secondary School Principals.

Barton

P. E.

Coley

R. J.

(1994). Testing in America's schools. Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service, Policy Information Center.

Chinn

P. C.

Kamp

S. H.

(1982). Cultural diversity and exceptionality. In Haring

N. G.

(Ed.), Exceptional children and youth (3rd ed., pp. 37–390). Columbus, OH: Merrill.

Cohen

(1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Cummins

(1984). Bilingualism and special education: Issues in assessment and pedagogy. San Diego: College Hill Press.

Dougherty

(1987). A me at my best. Austin, TX: Division of Gifted/Talented Education, Texas Education Agency.

Duncan

Dougherty

(1991). Using product portfolios for student assessment for gifted programs. Update on Gifted Education (pp. 12–16). Austin: Texas Education Agency, Division of Gifted/Talented Education.

Gentile

(1992). Exploring new methods for collecting students' school-based writing: NAEP's 1990 portfolio study. Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics.

Glaser

(1990). Testing and assessment: O tempora! O mores! Pittsburgh, PA: University of Pittsburgh, Learning Research and Development Center.

10.

Hadaway

Shroer

Marek M. F.

(1992). Multidimensional assessment of the gifted minority student. Roeper Review, 15(2), 73–77.

11.

Hays

W. L.

(1994). Statistics. Orlando: Harcourt Brace.

12.

Johnsen

Ryser

Dougherty

(1993). The validity of product portfolios in the identification of gifted students. Gifted International, 8(1), 43–47.

13.

National Association for the Education of Young Children. (January, 1988). NAEYC position statement on developmentally appropriate practice in the primary grades, serving 5- through 8-year-olds. Young Children, 47(1), 64–84.

14.

Northwest Evaluation Association (NWEA). (1989). Writing portfolio assessment issues and concerns. Lake Oswego, OR: Author.

15.

Shaklee

(1993). Preliminary findings of the early assessment for exceptional potential project. Roeper Review, 16(2), 105–109.

16.

Shepard

L. A.

(1991). Interview on assessment issues with Lorrie Shepard. Educational Researcher, 20(2), 21–23, 27.

17.

Texas Education Agency. (1995). Technical digest of the Texas Assessment of Academic Skills. Austin: Author.

18.

Valencia

(1992 January). Implementing literacy portfolio assessment. Paper presented at the meeting of the Southwest Regional International Reading Association, Tucson, AZ.

19.

Gold

Valeri M.

Olson

J. R.

Deming

M. P.

(1992). Portfolios: Collaborative assessment opportunities for college developmental learners. Journal of Reading, 35(4), 298–305.

20.

Wiggins

(1989). Teaching to the (authentic) test. Educational Leadership, 46(7), 41–47.