Improving the Quality of Evidence-Based Writing Entries in Electronic Portfolios
The problem investigated in this study was whether entries written to an electronic portfolio by preservice teachers improved in quality after an intervention was deployed. The study also compared portfolio metadata to writing quality scores to determine whether there was a relationship. Participants included a convenience sample of 11 undergraduate students enrolled in a teacher education program. Primary analyses focused on comparing portfolio entries, written before and after the intervention, using a repeated measures design. Secondary analyses involved calculating correlations between writing quality and portfolio metadata. Results showed that writing improved at a statistically significant level, t(10) = 4.99, p < .001, d = 3.16, 95% CI = 1.91 to 5.00. In addition, statistically significant correlations were found between writing quality and the number of unique terms shown on portfolio tag clouds, r = .60, N = 11, p < .05, d = 1.50, as well as writing quality and the total number of portfolio entries, r = .72, N = 11, p < .05, d = 2.08. These findings suggest that the intervention improved writing quality on entries made to electronic portfolios and that metadata predicted the quality of portfolio content.
International Journal of ePortfolio