Implementing a “Modified”
Portfolio Assessment Approach in
ESL Writing Courses
David Bruno
Assistant Professor II & Chairperson
ESL Department
Camden County College
Portfolio Background at CCC
 1996: Academic Skills Writing Department pilots portfolios as final
assessment in the last Writing course before ENG-101
 2009 – Academic Skills Writing Department developed following
“Position Statement on Writing”
“One piece of writing—even if it is generated under the most desirable
conditions—can never serve as an indicator of overall writing ability,
particularly for high-stakes decisions. Ideally, writing ability must be
assessed by more than one piece of writing, in more than one genre,
written on different occasions, for different audiences, and responded to
and evaluated by multiple readers as part of a substantial and sustained
writing process.”
 2013 – Academic Writing and ESL Department Co-Presented at
NJCCC Best Practices Conference
ESL Department Writing Course
Assessment Timeline
2008
Department
implements a
holistically
graded “timed
essay” final exam
for Level 5 writing
course - similar to
ENG-101 final
assessment
Prior to 2006
Individual
instructors
responsible for
creating own
assessment
measures and
final exams
2013 to Present
Department
implements
“portfolio
assessment”
approach in all
writing courses
2006
2010
Department
creates
standardized final
exams for most
ESL courses,
including writing
courses
Department
expands “timed
essay” final exam
to Level 4 writing
course
“Timed Essay” Final Exams
 Final exam administered 2 weeks prior to end of semester
 Graded holistically by ESL Department faculty on 1 – 6 scale by two graders
 Students must pass “ESL Departmental Exam” in order to pass the course.
 If passing, score counts as 30% of final grade (holistic score is converted)
 If failing, students automatically fail the course
 Students offered retest within 2 weeks.
 Matches current English Composition I final exam method in order to better
prepare students
 Drawbacks to “ESL Departmental Exam”




No ongoing ESL Department involvement in the learning process
One essay was not enough to properly assess the students’ writing ability
All Student Learning Outcomes not being assessed in the exam.
Students who are not ready for the next level are still being passed in both lower
levels and in courses with “Departmental Exam”
Benefits of Portfolio Assessment
 Increased uniform approach across sections
 Increased departmental role in sections taught by adjuncts
 Students received a “realistic” assessment mid-semester in
time to make adjustments
 Increased focus on sentence structure skills – one
complaint of English Department
 Reduce the number of students who are passed on to the
next level even though they are not ready
Portfolio Assessment Procedure
 Full-time faculty “mentors” are partnered with 5+ adjunct faculty
teaching a combined 10+ sections of writing.
 Mentors collect and review first-day handouts and 1st day writing
samples for verification purposes.
 Partners communicate via email or in person about academic
concerns, process questions, classroom management, essay
topics, teaching tips, and grading.
 All partners have at least three face-to-face meetings per
semester: review 1st day writing verifications, to review midterm
portfolios and to review final portfolios.
 Mentors review portfolios at midterm and end of semesters and
provide
Academic Writing - Portfolio Contents
 Midterm:
 Cover letter
 Revised essay with a draft
 MyWritingLab (online software) printout
 Final:
 Cover letter
 Two revised essays (one must be peer edited and one teacher
edited)
 open-topic
 reading-based
 Timed essay
 MyWritingLab printout
ESL Department Portfolio Contents
 Beginning of Semester

1st Day Writing Verification (if completed)
 Midterm Portfolio Review





Writing Assignment for Chapter A – All drafts (including final draft graded with
departmental rubric)
Writing Assignment for Chapter B – All drafts (including final draft graded with
departmental rubric)
Timed Writing Assignment 1 – graded with departmental rubric.
Initial Reflection Homework Assignment (not graded)
Graded Quizzes from Chapters A & B
 Final Portfolio Review






All Midterm Portfolio documents
Writing Assignment for Chapter C – All drafts (including final draft graded with
departmental rubric)
Writing Assignment for Chapter D – All drafts (including final draft graded with
departmental rubric)
Graded Quizzes from Chapters C and D
Timed Writing Assignment 2 – graded with departmental rubric.
Final Reflection Homework Assignment – not graded
“Modified” Approach to Portfolio
Assessment
 1st Day Verification shows full spectrum of growth
 Standardized assignments/assessments
 All sections have the same required assignments to complete and quizzes/tests to
administer
 All writing assignments are scored based on departmentally created rubric
for each level
 Quizzes included to demonstrate skill ability
 Burden on department, not student
 Faculty maintains portfolio
 Incomplete portfolios based on students not completing assignments
 Copies of work provided for student review
 Required assignments show all work completed, not just best
 Factors into final grade breakdown
1st Day Verification
 Standardized 1st day tests to determine appropriate
level
 Given in all courses (except Oral Communication*)
 Writing classes – writing prompt
 FT faculty mentor evaluates writing sample to
determine level
 Students will be moved up levels – never down!
ESL Writing V – Departmental Rubric: Spring 2015
Name: __________________________________
Assignment: ____________________________
Date: _________________________________
Content (15 points)
 The essay fits the assignment.
 The essay is interesting to read and fully developed.
 The essay matches on the prewriting & outlining.
Total
Standardized
Rubrics Used
Organization (35 Points)
 The essay has an introduction, body, and conclusion.
 The essay has a funnel or attention-getting introduction with the thesis
statement at the end, and the thesis statement is well written. (it is not
too general; it is not just a simple announcement; it avoids stating an
obvious fact)
 Each body paragraph discusses only one main idea, and there are no
sentences that are off topic.
 Each paragraph achieves coherence by repeating key nouns, using
transition signals to show relationships among ideas, and using
transitions to link paragraphs.
 The conclusion includes a summary of the main points or paraphrases
the thesis statement.
Total
Grammar & Sentence Structure (40 points)
 Verb tenses are used correctly. (form and choice of tense)









The sentences use the correct word forms. (nouns, pronouns, verbs,
adjectives & adverbs, singular vs. plural)
The sentences are all complete sentences (no fragments) and there are
no fused sentences (run-ons, comma splices).
The sentences demonstrate subject-verb agreement.
There are a variety of sentence types: simple, compound, complex, and
compound-complex.
The sentences demonstrate English fluency including standard word
order – generally subject-verb-object/complement.
Word choice is accurate and descriptive.
Phrasal verbs and prepositions are used correctly.
Noun determiners (articles, much, many, some, etc.) are used correctly.
Modals are used correctly (form & choice of modal).
Maximum
5
5
5
15
8
7
10
5
5
35
5
5
8
4
3
4
3
3
3
2
Your Score
ESL Department – Spring 2015
Midterm Portfolio Comment Sheet: Writing
Name: ___________________________________
Portfolio
Assessment
Sheets
Course Number: ESL-_____________
Writing Assignment #1
Comments:
Writing Assignment #2
Comments:
 Well written!
 Acceptable
 Well written!
 Acceptable
 Major errors in paragraph/essay structure
 Major errors in sentence structure
 Major errors in grammar/mechanics
 Major errors in paragraph/essay structure
 Major errors in sentence structure
 Major errors in grammar/mechanics
Timed Writing Assignment #1
Comments:
 Well written!
 Acceptable
Quizzes
Comments:
 Great job!
 OK
 Needs improvement
 Major errors in paragraph/essay structure
 Major errors in sentence structure
 Major errors in grammar/mechanics
GENERAL MIDTERM ADVISEMENT (this is NOT included in final grade)
This student’s portfolio is:
Passing
Comments (if needed):
Failing
Portfolio Reviews
 All assignments/assessments are scored by the instructor – reviewed by the mentors
 Midterm and Final Portfolios are due on specific dates

Reviewed by FT Faculty Mentors

Allows failing & borderline students sufficient time to take additional steps to improve in time
for the final portfolio
 Midterm Portfolio is for “advisement purposes only”
 Final Portfolio scored as “Passing” or “Failing”


If the student passes the Final Portfolio, the grades of the assignments included in the portfolio
will count as 40% of the final grade. The 40% is broken down into the final categories as such:




10% for chapter writing assignments
8% for timed writing #1
12% for timed writing #2
10% for the chapter quizzes.
All categories are averaged into the final grade separately.
 If the student fails the Final Portfolio, the student will receive 0 points for each of the above
categories in the final grade. As a result, the student will automatically fail the course.
 Student AND/OR faculty as ability to challenge
Final Grade Breakdown
 ESL Department has established a standardized “final grade breakdown”
for all courses in order to build a uniform approach to assessment
 Students made aware on 1st day of class
 The final grade breakdown for Writing courses are:







10% - active in-class participation, homework and in-class work
8% - timed writing assignment 1 (included in portfolio assessment)
12% - timed writing assignment 2 (included in portfolio assessment)
10% - chapter writing assignments (included in portfolio assessment)
10% - quizzes (included in portfolio assessment)
20% - MyWritingLab work
30% - ESL Department exam
 Addendum included with portfolio instructions and grading
Portfolio Challenge Procedure
 If a student/instructor would like to challenge the portfolio, he/she
must follow these steps:
 The faculty member must approve the challenge request. If the faculty
member agrees with the failing portfolio grading, the student will not be
permitted to challenge and the failing grade will stand.
 If the faculty member agrees with the student that a challenge is
warranted, another full-time faculty member (not the faculty member’s
current mentor) will review the portfolio.
 If a challenge is still warranted, the student will be given the opportunity
to complete a timed writing assignment on campus prior to the start of
the semester.
 The ESL Department Chair will review the assignment and share it with
the faculty member so that they can both make the decision together.
Portfolio Assessment for Mentoring
ADVANTAGES
 All faculty have one person to direct questions to for quick response
and discussion.
 For new faculty, mentors help to adjust individual grading ideas with
departmental standards.
 Midterm portfolios enable partners to review and discuss grading,
comments & feedback on writing, format/organization/grammar
issues that appear throughout a section, indicating the need for
additional teaching or lessons.
 Exceptionally strong students can be identified for possible next
level exemption.
 Adjuncts feel connected to the department and are informed about
policies and changes in a personal manner.
Student Learning Outcome
Alignment with ESL-027
Upon completion of this course, the student will be
able to:
 Demonstrate the ability to write multiparagraph essays using accurate, meaningful
and appropriate sentences.
Portfolios allow students to meet their SLOs:
 Data shows the students are more
successful in College-level courses
 Revised work allows students who need
time to revise show how they can use the
writing process to reach their writing goals.

Demonstrate knowledge of the writing process

Demonstrate the ability to detect and analyze
errors and use correct forms in writing

Demonstrate the ability to recognize and
produce various sentence types

Demonstrate the ability to react in writing to a
reading selection
 The mix of reading-based and timed essays
allow students to showcase their best work
on meeting a variety of these goals.

Demonstrate the ability to produce
grammatical structures relevant to ESL Writing
V
 The quizzes/tests include grammar-based
questions
 The timed essays show how students can
edit on their own work independently.
Revised essays allow more time to revision
and editing.
Passing Rate Per Course
Before Portfolios: 2010 - 2012
Portfolios: 2013 - 2014
 ESL-020: ESL Writing I
 ESL-020: ESL Writing I
 ESL-022: ESL Writing II
 ESL-022: ESL Writing II
 ESL-023: ESL Writing III
 ESL-023: ESL Writing III
 ESL-026: ESL Writing IV
 ESL-026: ESL Writing IV
 ESL-027: ESL Writing V
 ESL-027: ESL Writing V
 74% successfully completed
 73% successfully completed
 77% successfully completed
 80% successfully completed
 82% successfully completed
 64% successfully completed
 63% successfully completed
 65% successfully completed
 65% successfully completed
 68% successfully completed
Students are no longer being passed unless ready
for next level
Passing Rate of ESL-027
Before Portfolios: 2010 - 2012
 ESL-020: ESL Writing I
 72% successfully completed ESL-027
 ESL-022: ESL Writing II
 73% successfully completed ESL-027
 ESL-023: ESL Writing III
 73% successfully completed ESL-027
 ESL-026: ESL Writing IV
 74% successfully completed ESL-027
Portfolios: 2013 - 2014
 ESL-020: ESL Writing I
 No data – students currently taking
ESL-027
 ESL-022: ESL Writing II
 83% successfully completed ESL-027
 ESL-023: ESL Writing III
 79% successfully completed ESL-027
 ESL-026: ESL Writing IV
 80% successfully completed ESL-027
Students are better prepared for higher level ESL
courses
Passing Rate of HIS-101 & PSY-101
Students who successfully
completed ESL-026 from 2010 - 2012
Students who successfully
completed ESL-026 from 2013 - 2014
75% successfully completed
HIS-101
80% successfully completed
HIS-101
68% successfully completed
PSY-101
78% successfully completed
PSY-101
Students are better prepared for College-level
courses
Portfolio Assessment - Results
Pros
 Students are better prepared for
higher level ESL courses
 Students are better prepared for
College-level / Gen-Ed courses
 More uniform approach of
assessment
 Full snapshot of ability to assess
 Increased adjunct preparedness
 Better departmental communication
 Better data to analyze
Cons
 Enrollment
 Students losing financial aid or F-1
status
 Time/Effort to Assess
 Due Dates
 Data Analysis
 Difficulties
 More needed
 ENG-101
Institutional Support
 Key to implementation and sustainability
 FT faculty compensation (release time/stipends)
 Work goes above and beyond the normal workload
 Portfolio documents/requirements updated each semester
 Time/effort of adjunct faculty
 Meeting with mentors periodically
 Preparing portfolios for review
 Secretarial support
 Handling portfolio supplies
 Copying of necessary documents
 Portfolio Storage (3 years minimum at CCC)
The Future of Portfolios at CCC
 Electronic Portfolios
 Online Courses
 Expand to Oral Communication courses for “oral
portfolios”
 Digital capturing of assignments and presentations
 Attempted in 2013, but removed due to technical issues