In “Portfolio Standards for English 101″ Douglas D. Hesse discusses the criteria which distinguishes the different grades on portfolios. Since a portfolio is a collection of drafts, revisions, and reflections, not only the final product is evaluated, but the process is also examined. The following review of A-F level portfolios represents only a selection of the elements on which a portfolio is evaluated:
An “A” level portfolio – This portfolio will represent a student’s ability to handle any type of rhetorical situation an undergraduate might encounter. The writing is ambitious, fresh, and demonstrates a well-read understanding of situations. Interpretations are in-depth and explained in such a way that the gap between writer and reader is bridged. Both local and global revisions are effectively enacted.
A “B” level portfolio – This portfolio suggests that that student will be able to perform many of the rhetorical situation that an undergraduate would encounter. These writings are less ambitions than “A” level writings, but still demonstrate an ability of the writer to express mature, logical, supported claims. “B” level portfolios incorporate personal ideas, insights, and readings, but do so less smoothly or appropriately than “A” level portfolios. Local and global revisions are well-done, but rarely move past direct teacher or peer comments.
A “C” level portfolio – This portfolio shows the writer is working towards becoming competent in a variety of rhetorical situations. “C” level writers tend to be less perceptive than “B” level writers, and this is demonstrated, in part, through less awareness of audiences outside the classroom. This portfolio seems “standard”, with course materials integrated, yet, little outside readings. Revisions are mainly in one area and lack moving beyond draft comments.
A “D” level portfolio – This portfolio shows the writer’s inability to work with a variety of rhetorical situations. It shows the writers inability to reflect on their work and make necessary adjustments. There may be gaps in logic and little understanding of audience expectations. Claims are basic and support is minimal. While there may be limited local revisions, the portfolio demonstrates that these do not substantially improve papers.
A “F” level portfolio -This portfolio shows the writer’s inability to write for various aims and shows difficulties in most rhetorical situations. The writing is rarely appropriate for the audience. Claims are unsupported. The writer shows that they had difficulty with reading and understanding course materials. There is little evidence of revision.
