Portfolio practices in higher education in Norway in an international perspective: macro‐, meso‐ and micro‐level influences

Abstract

The point of departure for this article is the ‘chameleon’ aspect of portfolios and the diversity of portfolio models and practices in higher education on the international arena today. Our aim is to investigate the contextual character of this diversity by using Norwegian higher education as an example and to show how macro‐level influences, particularly the Bologna related Quality Reform, have shaped the overall development of portfolio practices. We contextualise and discuss the sudden expansion of learning and assessment portfolios in Norway after 2002. Our data are primarily a nationwide survey of portfolio practices, supplemented by findings in a research evaluation of the reform and previously published case studies. The majority of portfolios in Norwegian higher education can be classified as ‘disciplinary‐based course work portfolios’ and they typically serve a combination of learning and assessment purposes. But within this category we found systematic differences between different educational areas where the main dividing line seems to be between professional and non‐professional education. The underlying research perspective is sociocultural and this directs our attention to contexts, cultures and traditions that shape portfolio development and practices rather than to individual differences (micro level).

Keywords:

• assessment
• portfolio
• higher education
• sociocultural perspective
• Bologna

Notes

1. The state colleges (or university colleges) have no studies at doctoral levels and are primarily involved in professional education (for instance engineering, nursing and teacher education).

2. A pilot survey was conducted in 2005 at the second largest university in Norway as well as four university colleges (Dysthe, Engelsen, and Lima 2007).

3. Since not all of our respondents have the official role of being course leaders, we use the term teacher as synonym to respondent.

4. Statistical Package for the Social Sciences.

5. The Bologna Declaration: http://ec.europa.eu/education/policies/educ/bologna/bologna.pdf

6. ECTS = The European Credit Transfer System. Sixty ECTS credits represent the workload of a normal undergraduate academic year of study. See http://www.esib.org/index.php/issues/Academic%20Issues/83-european-credit-transfer-system

7. Conducted at the second largest university in Norway as well as four university colleges (Dysthe, Engelsen, and Lima 2007).

8. We also asked whether students who gave peer feedback were systematically trained in giving response. Only 31% of the students involved were trained.

9. ‘Course work’ in the British sense of the term has not been common in Norwegian higher education and many teachers have regretted the lack of the opportunity of including work done during the course in the final grade.

10. Kolb (1981) makes a distinction between what he calls ‘hard disciplines’ like natural science, mathematics and engineering, and ‘soft disciplines’ that include social professions such as education, the humanities and social science (cited in Becher and Trowler 2001, 35).