Portfolio Use to Develop
Teaching Skills and Meet
Program Goals
Brian Mavis, PhD
Objectives
• What is a portfolio?
• How can it be used to document
accomplishments related to
teaching?
• What resources are available to
guide faculty and RPT committees?
What is a portfolio?
• Living document
• Extension of your CV
• Personal annual report (annual
review)
• Necessary part of many promotion
and tenure packages
What is a portfolio?
• Originally conceptualized like those
used with artists or architects
• Demonstrates quality of your work
• Records breadth of your work
• Illustrates professional
development
What is a portfolio?
“…a method of encouraging adult
and reflective learning … based on
developing a collection of evidence
that learning has taken place”
Snadden and Thomas 1998, p. 192
What is a portfolio?
Personal reflection
• Central to successful portfolio
• Explains
– What is included?
– Why it is included?
– How it is organized?
– How it relates to program or institutional
goals?
• Tell your story
– Where have you been?
– What have you done?
– What have you
learned?
– Where are you going?
What is a portfolio?
• How to build a portfolio?
– Find a place to store your work
– Keep everything
– Ask for it in writing
– Be organized
– Paper vs electronic
What is a portfolio?
Documenting Competence
Miller GE. The Assessment of Clinical Skills/Competence/Performance;
Acad Med 1990 65(9):63-67. Adapted by Drs R. Mehay & R. Burns, UK
(Jan 2009).
Why a portfolio?
Why a portfolio?
How can portfolios be used to
document accomplishments
related to teaching?
Documenting Accomplishments
• AAMC Taskforce on Educator
Evaluation: 2010 – 2012
• The Charge: To provide resources that
will aid decision-makers in developing
clear, consistent and efficient
evaluation processes for faculty with a
career focus in education
Task Force Members
Maryellen Gusic
Indiana University
Chair of the Task Force
Jonathan Amiel
Columbia University
Brian Mavis
Michigan State University
Suzanne Rose
University of Connecticut
Constance Baldwin
University of Rochester
Kathe Nelson
University of Alabama
Deborah Simpson
Medical College of Wisconsin
Latha Chandran
SUNY Stony Brook
Lois Nora
The Commonwealth
Medical College
Henry Strobel
University of Texas
Medical School at Houston
Ruth-Marie E. Fincher
GHSU/Medical College of
Georgia
Jamie Padmore
MedStar Health
Craig Timm
University of New Mexico
Nancy Lowitt
University of Maryland
Pat O’Sullivan
UCSF
Tom Viggiano
Mayo Medical School
What do educators do?
•
•
•
•
•
Teaching
Learner Assessment
Curriculum Development
Mentoring and Advising
Educational Leadership and
Administration
Simpson et al, 2007
Evaluating the work of educators?
Four typical indicators of
competence:
• Quantity
• Quality
• Scholarly approach
• Scholarship
Contributions in Teaching
• Quantity
– Duration, number, scope of teaching activities
• Quality
– Teaching effective and well-received
• Scholarly approach
– Incorporates best practices
• Scholarship
– Workshops, peer-reviewed presentations
– Adoption by others
Scholarship Reconsidered
• Scholarship involves:
– Discovery of new knowledge
– Application of knowledge
– Integration of knowledge
– Dissemination of knowledge
Boyer, 1990
Glassick’s Criteria
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
Clear goals
Adequate preparation
Appropriate methods
Significant results
Effective presentation
Reflective critique
Glassick, 2000
Let’s Focus on Teaching
1. Clear Goals
• Learning objectives for teaching
session/curriculum are:
– Clearly stated
– At level appropriate for learners
– Specified to measure learner’s
performance
1. Clear Goals
• Learning objectives are:
– Based on documented needs
– SMART (specific, measurable, achievable,
realistic and timely)
– Address multiple domains (e.g.,
knowledge, skills and/or attitudes)
2. Adequate Preparation
• Congruence/integration with other
curricular components
• Use of best practices
• Necessary resource planning
2. Adequate Preparation
• Best Practices
– Content is up-to-date and evidence-based
– Content is logically integrated with other
curricular components
– Content to be covered appropriate for time
available
– Content depth and breadth matched to
learners’ needs
2. Adequate Preparation
• Resource Planning
– Specific needed resources are specified
– Needed resources are available
– Adequate preparation for use of
technology
3. Appropriate Methods
• Teaching methods aligned with
learning objectives
• Methods are feasible, practical and
ethical
• Innovative teaching methods used
to achieve learning objectives
3. Appropriate Methods
• Chooses teaching strategies that
incorporate a variety of approaches
• Variety of approaches is evidencebased
• Uses interactive approaches and
promotes self-directed learning
• Includes strategies for monitoring
learner progress
• Provides evidence of innovation
4. Significant Results
• Satisfaction/reaction of learners
• Learning: Measures knowledge, skills,
attitudes and/or behaviors
• Application: desired performance
demonstrated in other settings
• Impact: educational programs and
processes here or elsewhere
Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2006
4. Significant Results
• Satisfaction/Reaction
– Teaching ratings by learners or
peers/experts
– Compare learner ratings across teachers
• Learning
– Measurable changes in knowledge, skills,
etc.
– Comparison to benchmarks or prior data
4. Significant Results
• Application
– Demonstration of knowledge, skills, etc. in
subsequent settings or curricular components
• Impact
– Evaluation by knowledgeable peers,
educational leaders, etc.
– Internal or external awards or recognition
5. Effective Presentation
• Recognized as valuable (internally
or externally) through:
– Peer review
– Dissemination
– Use by others
5. Effective Presentation
• Invitations to conduct faculty
development, workshops,
presentations
• Peer review of other teachers
• Dissemination and adoption of
teaching materials or methods
6. Reflective Critique
• Ongoing improvement
– Personal reflection
– Learner performance data
– Evaluation results
– Peer review
6. Reflective Critique
• Critical analysis of teaching
activities using information from
others and self-reflection
• Evidence of continuous quality
improvement of teaching activities
Glassick’s Criteria
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
Clear goals
Adequate preparation
Appropriate methods
Significant results
Effective presentation
Reflective critique
Glassick, 2000
Toolkit
Criteria
Teaching
Assessm’t
Curric
Developmt
Mentoring/
Advising
Leadership
/Admin
Clear goals
√
√
√
√
√
Adequate
Preparation
√
√
√
√
√
Appropriate
Methods
√
√
√
√
√
Significant
Results
√
√
√
√
√
Effective
Presentation
√
√
√
√
√
Reflective
Critique
√
√
√
√
√
Where to Find It
AAMC Toolbox for Evaluating
Educators
• Available through MedEdPortal:
www.mededportal.org/publication/9313
References
•
Boyer EL. Scholarship reconsidered: priorities of the professoriate. San Francisco, CA.
Jossey-Bass Publishers; 1990.
•
Glassick CE. Boyer’s expanded definition of scholarship, the standards for assessing
scholarship and the elusiveness of the scholarship of teaching. Acad Med. 2000;
75:877-880.
•
Kirkpatrick DL and Kirkpatrick JD. Evaluating Training Programs: The Four Levels (3rd
Ed). San Francisco, CA: Berrett-Koehler Publishers, 2006.
•
Miller GE. The Assessment of Clinical Skills/Competence/Performance; Acad Med 1990
65(9):63-67.
•
Simpson D, Fincher RM, Hafler JP, Irby DM, Richards BF, Rosenfeld GC, Viggiano TR.
Advancing educators and education by defining the components and evidence
associated with educational scholarship. Med Educ. 2007;41:1002-1009.
•
Snadden D. & Thomas ML. The use of portfolio learning in medical education. Med
Teach. 1998; 20: 192-199.
Additional Resources
•
Baldwin C, Chandran L, Gusic M. Guidelines for evaluating the educational
performance of medical school faculty: priming a national conversation. Teach Learn
Med. 2011; 23(3):285-97.
•
Hutchings, P. and Shulman, L.S. (1999). The scholarship of teaching: new
elaborations and developments. Change, 31(5), 10-5.
•
Van Tartwijk, J. & Driessen, EW. Portfolios for assessment and learning: AMEE
Guide No. 45. Med Teach. 2009; 31: 790-801.