International Journal for Educational Media and Technology
2017, Vol.11, No. 1, pp.25-33

Designing and Evaluating “Portfolio Practice I,”
a Course for Online Graduate Students
Junko Nemoto
Ehime University, Japan
nemoto.junko.nu@ehime-u.ac.jp
Akiko Takahashi
Tokushima University, Japan
atakahashi@tokushima-u.ac.jp
Atsue Takeoka
National Institute of Technology, Akashi College, Japan
atakeoka@akashi.ac.jp
Hiroshi Nakano
Kumamoto University, Japannakano@cc.kumamoto-u.ac.jp
Katsuaki Suzuki
Kumamoto University, Japanksuzuki@kumamoto-u.ac.jp

This research aims at proposing design principles for the support of portfolio activity through implementation of aportfolio course. Taking our implementation of a new course entitled “Portfolio Practice I” for online graduate students
as a practical example, we reviewed the course results from actual students’ portfolios and questionnaire survey results.
By reviewing the trends in the created portfolio have, we confirmed that students utilized the samples presented by thecourse instructors and customized them to fit the situational context. They get habituated to the e-portfolio system(Mahara) as they use it more. Through the questionnaire surveys, we found that the students understood the value of
portfolio creation activities and the course goals. We suggested that the operability of the e-portfolio has significantly
influences the learning load and that support for the creation process is important. Per these results, we propose suggestions
for implementers at the conclusion of this paper.

Keywords: portfolio, showcase, reflection, course design

Introduction“Portfolio” is becoming a common term in higher education. The purpose and methods of portfolio use vary. The
goal can be formative (learning) and/or summative (assessment) (Trevitt, Macduff, & Steed, 2014; Van Tartwijk &Driessen, 2009). Capable of being adapted to the specific purpose of a target program or organization, portfolios
provide a flexible and influential tool. While a number of studies on teacher education have dealt with (e-)portfolios,
the majority of these focus on the development process (Balaban, Mu, & Divjak, 2013). Recent studies have been
more focused on learner perspectives, with researchers exploring successful factors in the development and use of
the Electronic Portfolio Students Perspective Instrument (Ritzhaupt, Ndoye, & Parker, 2010); investigating factorsthat influence student use of personal, academic, and professional development portfolios (Ahmed & Ward, 2016);
and developing an instrument for assessing the e-portfolio (Balaban et al., 2013). Given that the aims and goals of
portfolio stakeholders vary, it is difficult to satisfy the needs of everyone (Parker, 2012). Indeed, this is one of themain challenges in bringing portfolio usage into successful operation.
This paper discusses our implementation of “Portfolio Practice I,” a new course for online graduate students aimed
at proposing design principles to support portfolio activity. After a trial year, we introduced the course as a mandatory
part of our curriculum. Our focus was on both the learning process and the summative assessment provided by thestudents themselves. After describing the design of the course, we review the results of actual portfolios to see how
IJEMT, Vol.11, No. 1, 2017, pp.25-33 ISSN 1882–2290

25they develop the outcome and how the learners perceived the course implementation and reported on their overall
experiences, considering the balance of implementation intention and learner experience.

Portfolio Course Design
The target of this study was an online master’s program aimed at training practitioners to become professionals in elearning in corporate and/or university settings. Most participants were adult students working full-time, and they
took all their courses online with Moodle. The program has 12 core competencies that represent the basic knowledge
and skills to be fulfilled by completing the required course as well as seven optional competencies obtained throughelective courses (Suzuki, 2009). Portfolio Practice I is designed for first-year online graduate students as a required
course. The annual course was first offered in 2015. Its design is based on a prior year’s test operation in which weoffered the students at the target graduate school several reflection activities throughout the trial period. The current
course design is based on what we learned from this trial year. The main purpose of the course as it is currently
designed is to provide opportunities for students to revisit what they were required to do in the program and reflectcomprehensively on the learning activities involved. It is intended as a vehicle for students to think about all theactivities in graduate school in an integrated manner. This critical reflection is introduced on a regular basis throughout
the term, while showcase development and a competency-based reflection—essentially a rehearsal for the final
exam—occur at the end of each semester. All full-time master’s students are automatically registered for this course;
however, to complete the course, students need to successfully finish other required courses, because all the activitiesof this portfolio course are premised on those courses.
In conducting the course, we use Moodle as our learning management system and Mahara as our e-portfolio system.
Moodle is employed for course activities such as submitting the reflection report, and Mahara is used to implement
the final practice exam and the development of the showcases. All students are required to take an orientation coursesoon after the announcement of student application results. Students in the program learn the basic concepts related
to portfolio development and how to use an e-portfolio system by working with it to introduce themselves.
Course activities focus on students revisiting activities from their other courses, both separately and in an integrated
manner. The course consists of two parts: (1) reflection activities related to specific mandatory courses and (2) acompetency-based reflection (a rehearsal for the final exam) and showcase development, which provide a means ofsummarizing the learning results by showing the student’s work, together with appropriate supporting evidence.
Combining both types of activities was one of our primary points of emphasis in designing the course.
As shown in Figure 1, the portfolio course is divided into two blocks: first semester and second semester. Students
take the course concurrently with other courses. In fact, the first part of each block involves a reflection on each
student’s other required courses. These course reflections are performed on a regular basis. Activities such as rehearsal
for the final exam and showcase development are conducted at the end of the semester after students have completed
their other required courses. These activities are intended to integrate what the students have learned throughout theirprogram of study. Rehearsal for the final exam consists of a competency-based reflection activity. Submission of acompetency-based reflection report is a requirement for completing the program, and the rehearsal is included as
preparation for the final exam. Showcase activity is intended for the students to organize or summarize what they havelearned for the target readers. Students develop showcase under the assumption that they are applying for a job.
Between the first and second semester, we offer an optional activity for students to introduce and exchange views on
their showcases with peers, seniors, and instructors at a study camp. Study planning for the second semester is also
included as an activity of the course.

IJEMT, Vol.11, No. 1, 2017, pp.25-33 ISSN 1882–2290

26

Figure 1. The structure of activities for “Portfolio Practice I.”

Results from Students’ Activities and Perspectives on Course
Participants and Methods
Out of the 22 students registered for the portfolio course, 12 learners completed it in 2015. Ten students failed tocomplete the course because they had not finished the other required courses that form the foundation of theportfolio course. These 10 students did not engage in any activities in the portfolio course. All 12 participants whocompleted the first course activity finished all the course activities.
After implementation, we confirmed the results of the course activities from two perspectives. One perspective
concerns the content of the students’ actual portfolio: what is the quality of the portfolio of students who participatedin the activities and what are the characteristics of the deliverables? We reviewed each student’s portfolio to see thefeatures. The second perspective concerns the questionnaire survey administered at the end of each semester to see
how the students responded to the course activities.

Competency-based Portfolios
Considering the operability of Mahara, for the competency-based portfolio, we recommended that students copy anduse the prepared sample template that provided two types of examples, a “fulfilling example” and a “minimum
example.” As a result, everyone completed a competency-based portfolio (rehearsal for the final exam) with thissample template (Figure 2). The first page gives a summary of the target semester activities with an explanation ofwhat the student learned, how they learned, and a circular radar chart of the student’s self-evaluation based on thecompetencies (left part of Figure 2).
Because the same layout was used in all the portfolios, there was very little difference among them in visual appearance,
but the units of evidence were different, as shown in Table 1. Many students modeled their portfolio after the sample
but customized it according to their own situation. In addition to the top page, the students prepared evidence pages
for each competency as support for their self-evaluation (right part of Figure 2). The unit or amount of evidence
attached varied depending on the student. The unit or amount of evidence increased in order of task, assignment,
and course. Tasks included class activities such as discussion, minireports, and so on.
There was a tendency for there to be a higher number of sentences in the overall explanation in the second semester
than in the first semester. In particular, this tendency was seen in students who had less sentence volume in the firstsemester than the second one. Because less time is required to operate the system (Mahara) in the second semester,
there is a possibility that it helped to have work in a careful manner.

IJEMT, Vol.11, No. 1, 2017, pp.25-33 ISSN 1882–2290

27

[Top Page: Summary of self-evaluation][Evidence page of each competency]

What I learned

Links to evidence

Reflection on the second semester

How I learned
Refection on the first semester
Self-evaluation of competency(core and optional)

Figure 2. Student example of a competency-based portfolio in the second semester.
Table 1Units of Evidence Refereed in Competency-based Portfolio

Unit of evidence
By assignment and unit task
By assignment
By subject or assignment
No evidence (only a list of evidence)

Number of Students(N = 12)5
51
1Proportion
41.7%
41.7%
8.3%
8.3%

Showcase Portfolio Development
In this activity students choose opening position of a company in the first semester, and a university in the second
semester, and then develop a showcase portfolio for the target position. We prepared three samples for the showcase
portfolio, but unlike in the case of the competency-based portfolio, we did not prepare a sample template. We madethis activity freely except for preparing an explanation of the purpose of the showcase, in addition to the portfolio
development. Therefore, the composition of the showcase reflected individual differences, as shown in Table 2.
Overall, a top page with a brief profile and appealing points was prepared, plus one or more pages summarizing theevidence tailored to the opening position (or offering content). Type A in Table 2, “TOP page summarizing the whole
picture, with skills and experience page on work,” was structured using a part of sample A. It was confirmed that
other students referred to the earlier developed portfolio with reference to sample A rather than being made withreference to sample A.
Also, there was no imitation of sample B and sample C in the first semester. Sample B seems to have not been copied
because English was used as an example of an application to a foreign company. Sample C was based on the curriculumof the graduate school, and it was not used because it was similar to the final examination (competency-based
portfolio).
In the second semester, there were students who are with the same composition of the first semester, even if notcopied, some referred to sample A. Three students developed an original structure. In other three cases, students
partially used the reporting page in sample B. We found no use of sample C. There is a possibility that master’s students
avoided using sample C because evidence based on research achievements was not relevant for first-year students.
Each student created their own portfolio according to the contents of the public offering, and there were six people
in the same pattern of the first and second semester.
IJEMT, Vol.11, No. 1, 2017, pp.25-33 ISSN 1882–2290

28

[Page for knowledge and skills for the target position] position]
Link to skill and experiment page

[Top Page of the showcase]Self-introduction
Reason for application[Self-Public Relation]

Lists of appealing points

Job titles
Description of experience

Comments are from peersin the grope[Page for experience regard to the job p
osition]Figure 3. Student example of showcase developedin the second semester (Type A).
Table 2Comparison of Structure of Showcase Portfolio
Structure of showcase portfolio
Type A: TOP page summarizing the whole picture, and skill and experience page on
work <sample A>
Type B: TOP page summarizing the whole picture with pages for each sales point<sample Aα>
Type C: All on one sheet（including course evidence）
Type D: All on one sheet (including course evidence) and(Report required to be submitted for job offering) <sample B>
OthersNote: < > means the sample referred, N = 12

1st Semestern%

2nd Semester
n
%

5

41.7

2

16.7

3

25.0

4

33.3

3

25.0

1

8.3

0

0.0

3

25.0

1

8.3

2

16.7

Survey of Students’ Perspectives
We administered questionnaire surveys at the end of each semester. The surveys consisted of Likert scale–typequestions and written questions asking students to explain the reason for their selected response. Both question types
were included in each section. Students answered the Likert scale questions using a 5-point scale (5: applicable, 1: notapplicable). Table 3 shows questionnaire results reflecting the students’ experience and perceptions of the twosemester course. Overall, the results indicate that both semester courses were generally found to be quite acceptable.
By way of comparison, scores for the first semester were higher than those for second semester, although the scoresfor four of the questions (A-2, E-6, E-7, and E-9) were higher in the second semester. “I enjoyed portfolio
development with Mahara” showed a higher agreement score, while “Portfolio development with Mahara was difficult”
IJEMT, Vol.11, No. 1, 2017, pp.25-33 ISSN 1882–2290

29

Table 3.
Students’ Perceptions through Course Activities
The usability of Mahara as a course tool
1. I am glad to use Mahara as a learning tool for a half a year.
2. I enjoyed portfolio development with Mahara.
3. Portfolio development with Mahara was difficult.
4. I think activities with Mahara will be of help when becoming a portfolio designer in the future.
Effect of participating in “Portfolio Practice I”
1. In this course, “Portfolio Practice I,” there are opportunities, situations, and experiences forcontinuous learning reflection.
2. Through this course, “Portfolio Practice I,” I recognized the importance of opportunities,
situations, and experiences for continuous learning reflection.
3. I think my reflection skill was improved by opportunities, situations, and experiences forcontinuous learning reflection in this course.
4. Continuous learning opportunities, situations, and experiences in this course were useful for
improving learning reflection.
5. Continuous learning opportunities, situations, and experiences in this course will be useful for
improving future learning reflection.
Effect of linking other courses in the course
1. In this course, “Portfolio Practice I,” there was a situation in which I could consider themeaning of attained knowledge, skills, and values, and then link those.
2. Through this course, “Portfolio Practice I,” I discovered the importance of consideration andof linking the meaning of attained knowledge, skills, and values.
3. Experience in this course, such as considering and linking the meaning of learned knowledge,
skills, and values, helped me improve learning activities.
4. Experience in this course such as considering and linking the meaning of learned knowledge,
skills, and values will help me improve future learning activities.
Effect of interaction with peers in the course
1. In this course, “Portfolio Practice I,” there are opportunities to recognize one’s own strengths
and weaknesses, and one's standing through interaction with others.
2. I learned the importance of recognizing one’s own strengths and weaknesses, and one’s
standing through interaction with others.
3. I improved my skills at recognizing my own strengths and weaknesses, and my standing
through interaction with others.
4. Recognizing my own strengths and weaknesses, and my standing through interaction withothers in this course helped me improve my learning skills.
5. Recognizing my own strengths and weaknesses, and my standing through interaction withothers helped me improve my learning skills in this course.
Reflection/connection/feeling/motivation
1. [Reflection] Rehearsal for the final exam helped me reflect on my own learning.
2. [Reflection] Showcase development helped me reflect on my own learning.
3. [Connection] Course reflection enables rehearsal of final exams to go smoothly.
4. [Connection] Rehearsal of the final exam enables showcase development to go smoothly.
5. [Feeling] Course reflection helped me recognize which part of my ability was enhanced.
6. [Feeling] Final exam helped me know which part of my ability was enhanced.
7. [Feeling] Showcase helped me know which part of my ability was enhanced.
8. [Plan] Rehearsal of the final exam helped me consider my future learning and career.
9. [Plan] Showcase development helped me consider my future learning and career.
10 [Motivation] Sharing the outcome of showcases and competency checks motivated me toimprove on my own.
Note: N = 12
IJEMT, Vol.11, No. 1, 2017, pp.25-33 ISSN 1882–2290

1st Sem. Av.
(SD)
4.3(0.7)
3.2(0.9)
4.2(0.7)
4.5(0.7)

2nd Sem.
Av (SD)
4.0(0.7)
3.8(0.6)
3.5(0.9)
4.3(0.9)

1st Sem. Av.
(SD)

2nd Sem.
Av (SD)

4.6(0.5)

4.3(0.7)

4.6(0.7)

4.3(0.8)

4.0(0.7)

3.9(0.9)

4.3(0.7)

4.2(0.6)

4.7(0.5)

4.2(0.6)

1st Sem. Av.
(SD)

2nd Sem.
Av (SD)

4.4(0.7)

4.3(0.8)

4.3(0.8)

4.3(0.9)

4.3(0.8)

4.0(0.9)

4.6(0.7)

4.3(0.8)

1st Sem. Av.
(SD)

2nd Sem.
Av (SD)

4.3(0.8)

4.1(0.8)

4.3(0.7)

4.2(0.8)

4.1(0.7)

3.8(1.0)

4.0(0.7)

3.8(0.9)

4.2(0.7)

4.1(0.7)

1st Sem. Av.
(SD)
4.4 (0.7)
4.3 (1.0)
4.2(0.6)
4.1(0.9)
4.1(0.7)
4.2(0.7)
4.0(1.0)
4.1(0.8)
4.0(1.0)

2nd Sem.
Av (SD)
4.3 (0.8)
4.3(0.8)
3.4(0.8)
4.1(0.8)
3.3(0.9)
4.3(0.8)
4.3(0.9)
4.0(0.6)
4.3(0.8)

4.2(0.8)

4.1(0.9)30

in Section A of the questionnaire had a lower score in the second semester. In the written comments, some students
mentioned that the second-semester activities were easier than the first because they were more used to the Mahara
e-portfolio system, as the iterative activities had acclimated them to Mahara. Because the e-portfolio software controls,
restricts, or enhances portfolio development (Barrett, 2000), ensuring the usability of the e-portfolio system is essential
for success. Written comments show that many students experienced difficulty in getting accustomed to the system,
indicating that continuous improvement in the functionality of Mahara is one of our future challenges.
Results in Section B of the questionnaire indicate that students felt that course activities were a good opportunity forlearning, but when compared to other questions, the scores for question B-3, “I think my reflection skill was improvedby opportunities, situations, and experiences for continuous learning reflection in this course,” were relatively low. The
reason was not clear from the written responses. Although most students commented positively on the reflection
activity and its effect, some mentioned the time limitation and workload. Section C results indicate that learners
believed that the course helped them review other courses in an integrative way. In the comments section, one student
mentioned that “understanding of competency was one of this activity’s outcomes.” We believe that linking courses
would also help when considering curriculum design. Regarding peers in Section D, while students believed that peers
were useful resources for improving their course activities, some felt that they had not received enough feedback fromtheir peers. Some students also felt that giving comments to others was difficult, and some noted the limited time fordiscussion. In their written comments, many students mentioned the usefulness of showcase development.
The reasons varied regarding why showcase development was positively received. Many found that summarizing andsupporting their ideas in discussions with others helped them recognize their own strengths and weaknesses. Somestudents were encouraged by the chance to review their thoughts with others and receive constructive feedback. In
this way, they appeared to gain insight and were able to reconfirm and/or reevaluate the importance of self-assessment.
However, students generally felt that the rehearsal for the final exam was more of a formality, because the main activityof the rehearsal was following instructions rather than presenting their own feelings or exercising their own creativity.
There were exceptions, however. For example, one student expressed her view that “the rehearsal of the final exam
helped integrate learning outcomes and competency.” Overall, the combination of a flexible approach, such as
showcase development, and a formal approach, such as the rehearsal for the final exam, was positively received.

Discussion
In this practice, portfolio activities were implemented as a course, and two types of portfolios were created at the endof the first and the second semester based on a regular review of other compulsory courses in the portfolio course.
It is suggested that providing portfolio activities as a course helps regularly performing activities on a portfolio.
Through our preparing a sample template, every student was able to create a portfolio in this system. This suggeststhat the template is effective as a scaffolding strategy for students who are learning to use the portfolio for the firsttime. Even when students are given the opportunity to make a portfolio freely, it was confirmed that they can maketheir own portfolio more efficiently using examples than making one from scratch. In particular, in the case of adultlearners, the students emphasized performing the portfolio work efficiently in a short period of time, so similar trends
can be expected in the context of teacher education.
When portfolios were reviewed on a continuous basis, the amount of the contents, which is an accumulation ofreflection activities, increased. When students create a portfolio a number of times, the process becomes more efficientfor them and the volume of the review increases.
The results of the questionnaire conducted with the students showed that they worked on these activities based onan understanding of the advantages that portfolio activities could have for them. We believe that portfolio activities
are effective in deepening students’ understanding of what they have learned so far. Regarding an operational
perspective, many students mentioned the e-portfolio system Mahara. The ease of the system is an important factor
for students in doing portfolio activities. The more students used Mahara, they less difficulty they had with it. The
results of the questionnaire confirmed that the degree of difficulty declined as they used Mahara. It appears thatproviding an explanation of how to use Mahara in the orientation course at the beginning of the curriculum, letting
students use the system continuously, and providing templates and examples also helped improve operability.
Both showcase and competency-based reflection are effective as ways of using self-reflection to confirm achievement,
although learners tend to feel that showcase development is more worthwhile. For assessment, competency-basedreflection is essential for accumulating learning outcomes and reviewing individual lessons and assignments. The
design of our course included both participant and practitioner views, which was important in achieving our intended
course goal. If the observation of Ritzhaupt, Singh, Seyferth, and Dedrick (2008) is correct—that understanding the
IJEMT, Vol.11, No. 1, 2017, pp.25-33 ISSN 1882–2290

31

purpose of a portfolio is the key to successful e-portfolio development—then, our practice will be successfully
implemented . Although satisfying all stakeholders’ needs or expectations is not easy, our approach shows a way to
overcome this difficulty by integrating summative and formative activities (Ritzhaupt et al., 2008).

Conclusion
The following are suggestions on activity support, from our practice, for designing and conducting portfolio courses
in the future.
- For information technology, lower the barriers as much as possible
Regarding information and communications technology in particular, both instructors and students need time to getused to operating the e-portfolio. After they feel comfortable with the technology, they can concentrate on thereflection activities. In our practice, we provided the activities related to operating Mahara at an early stage of thecurriculum in the orientation course. Teaching complicated operations gradually is effective in helping users become
accustomed to the system.
- Prepare multiple examples to support students’ portfolio development
By preparing multiple examples and showing them to learners, rather than providing just one example, we can help
learners think about how they can create their own portfolio. In our practice we present multiple cases both on acompetency basis and a showcase portfolio. Even when the format is fixed, it is possible to offer variations as examples.
- Prepare multistage activities for portfolio development for students
Even if the final goal is for the learner to freely create a portfolio, it is better to show a general framework of theportfolio initially and make it all the way through. In this practice, we started with a competency-based portfolio with
templates and then gave students a high degree of freedom to make showcases. Consider the combination of free
performance and prescribed performance according to the situation and purpose of the student.
- Consider the role of the portfolio for the target learners
A portfolio has two roles: formative (learning) and/or summative (assessment). Instructors can include portfolio
activity in the target curriculum and adopt the necessary one. Two types are good but can become stressful on thesituation.
- To design throughout the curriculum, schedule according to the curriculum
Portfolios are implemented after other course activities have been done. Portfolio course activity may be done during
a vacation, such as the summer break. Long-term implementation is difficult unless we accept a flexible schedule andevaluation.
- In the case of new implementation, do not develop the course all at once, but prepare them step by step
In order to conduct full-scale portfolio activities, periodical reflection activities are essential for bringing self-regulated
activities. It is necessary to coordinate portfolio activity with the existing curriculum in order to incorporate it as a
new activity.
- In designing portfolio implementation, the multiple viewpoints of the stakeholders should be considered, such as the intentions of thepractitioner and the needs of the students
Portfolio activity requires higher-order skills and cognitive loading, because the activity concentrates other learning
activities. Designing considering advantage and disadvantage is essentials. A system thinking approach (Senge, 1990)
for analysis and design can be useful.
Further research is needed because only limited studies have thus far been conducted. Although this course was
implemented for a year, it is necessary to determine how students improved their reflection skills by keeping track of
the change in their work over the long term, until the completion of the program, and how it appears in the actual
portfolio. This practice is employed by a small number of graduate schools, and there would likely be many similarities
among other graduate schools and on a small scale, but there is a possibility that there are some differences, especiallyin undergraduate education.

IJEMT, Vol.11, No. 1, 2017, pp.25-33 ISSN 1882–2290

32

References
Ahmed, E., & Ward, R. (2016). Analysis of factors influencing acceptance of personal, academic and professional
development e-portfolios. Computers in Human Behavior, 63, 152-161.
doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2016.05.043
Balaban, I., Mu, E., & Divjak, B. (2013). Development of an electronic portfolio system success model: An
information systems approach. Computers & Education, 60(1), 396-411. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.com
pedu.2012.06.013
Barrett, H. (2000). Electronic portfolios = multimedia development + portfolio development: the electronic portfolio
development process. Retrieved from http://electronicportfolios.com/portfolios/EPDevProcess.html
Parker, M. N., Abdou; Ritzhaupt, Albert D. (2012). Qualitative analysis of student perceptions of e-portfolios in ateacher education program. Journal of Digital Learning in Teacher Education, 28(3), 99-107.
Ritzhaupt, A. D., Singh, O., Seyferth, T., & Dedrick, R. F. (2008). Development of the electronic portfolio student
perspective instrument: An ePortfolio integration initiative. Journal of Computing in Higher Education, 19(2), 4771. doi:10.1007/bf03033426
Senge, P. M. (1990). The fifth discipline: the art and practice of the learning organization: Doubleday/Currency. <AQ:
Date in text citation is 1999.>
Suzuki, K. (2009). From competency list to curriculum implementation: A case study of Japan’s first online master’s
program for e-learning specialists training. International Journal on E-Learning, 8(4), 469-478.
Trevitt, C., Macduff, A., & Steed, A. (2014). [e]portfolios for learning and as evidence of achievement: Scoping theacademic practice development agenda ahead. The Internet and Higher Education, 20, 69-78. doi:
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2013.06.001
Van Tartwijk, J., & Driessen, E. W. (2009). Portfolios for assessment and learning: AMEE Guide no. 45. Med Teach,31(9), 790-801.

IJEMT, Vol.11, No. 1, 2017, pp.25-33 ISSN 1882–2290

33