IDEAS home Printed from
   My bibliography  Save this article

Alternative Assessment and Portfolios: Review, Reconsider, and Revitalize


  • Brian A Sandford
  • Chia-Chien Hsu


The concept of evaluating performance in relation to an established objective is certainly not a new idea. The use and application of alternative assessments is likewise not a revolutionary notion. However, the mechanics and potential applications of the portfolio as one area of alternative assessment do deserve reconsideration with the purpose of a renaissance of this valuable and self-motivating type of formative and summative evaluation. The application of the portfolio to student, teacher, employment, and program areas provides the unique ability to assess performance based on selected work that demonstrates ability as well as potential. The ideal portfolio is a "living" document that allows individual expression of work while still meeting a uniform criterion of expected performance. In the same way that the benefits of student-centered over teacher-centered learning is being discussed, centering the assessment burden upon the student, teacher, employee, or program by providing the tools for authentic demonstration of their performance through the portfolio deserves another look.

Suggested Citation

  • Brian A Sandford & Chia-Chien Hsu, 2013. "Alternative Assessment and Portfolios: Review, Reconsider, and Revitalize," International Journal of Social Science Studies, Redfame publishing, vol. 1(1), pages 215-221, April.
  • Handle: RePEc:rfa:journl:v:1:y:2013:i:1:p:215-221

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: no

    More about this item


    portfolio; alternative assessment; evaluation;

    JEL classification:

    • R00 - Urban, Rural, Regional, Real Estate, and Transportation Economics - - General - - - General
    • Z0 - Other Special Topics - - General


    Access and download statistics


    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:rfa:journl:v:1:y:2013:i:1:p:215-221. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Redfame publishing). General contact details of provider: .

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.