This site was created to distribute research information and findings from our study on the use of electronic portfolios in teacher education programs. During the first phase of the research, we identified teacher education programs in which e-portfolios were well-articulated, mature, and implemented program-wide for a minimum of two years. From that sample, we selected six sites and conducted case studies for each, based on observations, review of portfolios and program materials, and extensive interviews of faculty, administrators, support staff, and students.

Findings from the study are being released to address research questions such as...

• What was the situational and historical context in which electronic portfolios were adopted and implemented?
• What do the various facets of the electronic portfolio process look like as implemented?
• What are the benefits and costs of electronic portfolios as perceived by the various stakeholders?
• Are the perceived benefits worth the investment for teacher education programs?
  
• What are the “next steps” envisioned for the electronic portfolio programs?
  
• What recommendations do experienced users of e-portfolios have for programs in earlier stages of adoption or implementation?
  

• Wetzel K., Strudler, N., Addis, A. & Luz, T (March, 2009). Trends in the use of electronic portfolios for accreditation purposes. Paper presented at the the Annual Meeting of the Society for Technology and Teacher Education, Charleston, SC.
  
  This study analyzed 52 Board of Examiner (BOE) reports submitted to NCATE in 2007 to reveal trends in the use of electronic portfolios (EPs) for accreditation purposes.  In comparison to 2004 baseline data (Mitchell, Allen & Ehrenberg, 2006) the current study found far greater use of EPs for accreditation purposes. Commercially available, large-scale portfolio and data analysis systems are increasingly being employed rather than off-the-shelf applications such as Microsoft Word and EXCEL. Implementation issues identified by Mitchell and colleagues, however, continue to be cited in the BOE reports, including the need to ensure consistency and fairness in evaluation, and the need to aggregate and use data for meaningful program improvement. Recommendations for future research are provided.
  
  
• Wetzel K. & Strudler, N. (March, 2008). Are Electronic Portfolios a Good Idea for Teacher Education?  A paper presentation at the the Annual Meeting of the Society for Technology and Teacher Education, Las Vegas, NV.

• SIG-TACTL Symposium, (April, 2007) Papers presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Chicago, IL.
• Strudler, N. & Wetzel, K.  Electronic Portfolios in Teacher Education: Current Goals and Future Directions. (Powerpoint presentation).
  


• Paul Gathercoal, California Lutheran University; Douglas O. Love & Gerry McKean, Illinois State University. Webfolios in Teacher Education: Teacher Performance Expectations and Teaching Performance Assessments - Present and Future.
  
  
• Jason Adsit, Johns Hopkins University. The Transition from Linear to Integrated Digital Portfolios: Implications for Assessment of Teacher Candidates
  
  
• Pete Adamy, University of Rhode Island. The Value of Reflective Frameworks for Preservice Teacher Reflection in Electronic Portfolios
  
  
• Helen Barrett, Reflect Initiative. Discussant notes (Powerpoint presentation).

• Interview Guides

• Faculty
• Students
• Leaders
• Graduates
• Support Staff
• Initial Phone Interviews

• Initial Survey