Course Portfolios: A Systematic Mechanism to Document Teaching and Learning Jodi Reeves, Kevin Hugo, Robert Heussner, Ahmed Hala, Bulent Sarlioglu, Steve Bialek, and Sandra Courter College of Engineering, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, WI 53706 Abstract - Many creative and effective teaching strategies are forgotten or misplaced between semesters, only to be learned anew in subsequent semesters or lost forever. Beginning in September 1997, the University of Wisconsin- Madison College of Engineering linked its efforts to strengthen undergraduate education with a project designed to help teaching assistants become better instructors. This project, called a course portfolio, is a formal mechanism that documents and shares course-specific teaching information among teaching assistants and faculty. Course portfolio components include a repository of knowledge, instructor reflections, and critical analyses of activities. Instructors representing all ten departments in the College of Engineering have created course portfolios, and the project continues to expand and improve. Introduction A survey at the College of Engineering January 1997 Teaching Improvement Program showed the need for a systematic method of collecting and distributing materials from one instructor to the next. One of the key findings of this survey was that a majority of the College of Engineering teaching assistants has less than one month to prepare for the course they are teaching. Additionally, slightly fewer than 50% of the teaching assistants found out about their teaching appointment within only one-week of the beginning of the semester. Even though nearly 85% had taught their course before, interaction between teaching assistants and course supervisors was less than desirable in terms of discussing the syllabus, student learning activities, and assessment strategies. Data indicate that only 65% of the respondents had discussed a syllabus with the supervisor; only 58% had discussed learning activities or assessment strategies with their supervisor. Data indicate that 27% had not discussed any of these issues at the time of the survey. Improving existing curricula is difficult without a systematic mechanism to document and share what works and what doesn’t work in the classroom. The course portfolio project was introduced by a group of Teaching Assistant Fellows who were given the charge to “identify, prioritize and carry out a quality improvement project that would improve undergraduate education.” To accomplish this task, the Fellows collected the data discussed earlier and accumulated evidence that directed them toward the course portfolio as a solution to the problem. As envisioned by the TA Fellows, a course portfolio would be similar to a teaching portfolio in many respects. According to Wolf [1], “More than a scrapbook or steamer trunk of eye-catching materials, a teaching portfolio is an ongoing, collaborative process that carefully and thoughtfully documents a set of accomplishments attained over an extended period.” This statement would certainly apply to course portfolios. In the initial stages of developing the course portfolio project, William Cerbin [2, 3] described his course portfolio to the TA Fellows at UW-Madison. Echoing Wolf, Cerbin cautioned against turning the course portfolio into a “wheelbarrow” of information. Many authors [1-10] agree on the general components of a teaching portfolio: background information including a curriculum vitae and teaching philosophy; reflections and teaching artifacts such as learning activities and examples of students’ work; and professional information including honors received and letters of recommendation. As discussed later in more detail, a course portfolio primarily consists of teaching artifacts and reflections. The reasons for making a course or teaching portfolio are similar, with one main exception. Course and teaching portfolios are both used to document effective classroom teaching activities, to organize instructional materials, and to improve individual teaching performance. To a lesser extent, both types of portfolios are used to refine pedagogical or personal goals and to preserve evidence of the quality and quantity of teaching in universities. The major difference is that teaching portfolios are used for personnel decisions and career advancement, namely promotion, tenure, merit pay [1- 10]. The course portfolio project at UW-Madison provides a systematic approach to document teaching and learning. The portfolio components are a repository of knowledge, instructor reflections throughout the course, and critical analysis of activities. In contrast to teaching portfolios that remain with the individual, the course portfolio remains with the course, department, and institution. Course portfolios also capture the essence of the course goals, objectives, learning activities, assessment strategies for student learning, student feedback, instructor reflections and analysis. A course portfolio is a resource exchange of course- specific teaching and learning information. This program is central to the College of Engineering and the 140 teaching assistants who work with 210 faculty and instructional staff to provide a learning environment for 3500 undergraduate and 1500 graduate students. Although the current course portfolio targets the teaching assistants in one specific college, the course portfolio process will benefit all instructional staff and their students. This paper describes the portfolio process and product; benefits to teaching assistants, faculty, administrators, and students; results of the first year pilot; and issues to address