Portfolio Assessment

Key Features of the CPL Program

Diverse Assessment Methods: Students can earn credit through various methods, including Advanced Placement (AP), College Level Examination Program (CLEP), industry-standard certifications, military training, departmental exams, and portfolio assessments.

Portfolio Assessment: Credit for What You Know

Indiana State University is deeply committed to recognizing the college-level learning you have acquired through your professional and life experiences. We understand that education happens everywhere—not just in a classroom. To ensure our students receive the most rigorous and fair evaluation of their expertise, we partner with the Council for Adult and Experiential Learning (CAEL) and follow the American Council on Education (ACE) national guides for crediting prior learning.

What is a Portfolio Assessment?

A portfolio assessment (also known as Prior Learning Assessment or PLA) is a formal process where you demonstrate that your work history, volunteer service, or independent study meets the specific learning outcomes of a university course.
Unlike a standardized exam, a portfolio is a narrative-driven collection of evidence. It allows you to provide concrete examples, artifacts, and critical reflections that prove you have mastered the subject matter. Upon successful review by faculty experts, you can earn college credit, saving you both time and tuition costs as you work toward your degree.

Getting Started

To successfully earn credit through a portfolio review, you must consult with your advisor. They will mentor you through the process of identifying courses that may align with your prior experience and help you prepare your materials. Faculty will then evaluate your portfolio on your mastery of learning outcomes, conceptual knowledge, and the quality of your critical reflection.

Fee Note

Faculty evaluation of portfolios includes a fee of 25% of the tuition cost for the course. Contact your academic advisor today to see if your experience is a fit for a portfolio assessment.

Portfolio Review Prior Learning Assessment

Course Description: Emphasizes analyzing business situations and preparing written reports including informational reports, problem-solving reports, and formal analytical reports.

Learning Outcomes:

Use effective data displays and correct writing techniques, style, tone, and format in
writing business reports of various degrees of formality.
Prepare written and verbal presentations to meet the needs of the consumers of reports and to achieve the purposes of the originator.
Analyze business situations, identify problems and factors relevant to understanding and handling the situations, and plan an organized procedure for obtaining the facts needed to resolve the situation.
Gather and analyze data and draw conclusions and/or make recommendations based on the data analysis.
Apply ethical considerations to making recommendations for solutions to business problems.
Present report ﬁndings and conclusions orally using effective delivery techniques.
Instructions: The goal of creating the portfolio is for the applicant to demonstrate that they have met the course learning outcomes. For successful completion of a portfolio, please submit a resume, veriﬁcation of work experience, a cover letter describing at least four professional reports, and corresponding writing samples or work artifacts. At least two of these reports must have been prepared and completed independently by the applicant, rather than as part of a group. In addition, the applicant must include a narrative explaining their role in each group-produced report. Reports must include an example of at least one of each type of report (informational, problem-solving, and formal analytical). A video presentation must accompany the formal analytical report. At least one of the reports must include data visualizations. When using real work artifacts, the student must "redact" (black out) sensitive company data, client names, or proprietary ﬁnancial ﬁgures to protect their employer while still showing the structure of the writing.
- Work Evidence & Artifacts:
  - Informational Reports - The primary goal of an informational report is to collect and provide data without offering deep analysis, opinions, or recommendations. It answers the questions: "What happened?" or "What is the current status?" The key characteristics of these reports are that they are objective, factual, and highly structured for quick reading. Typical lengths of information reports range from two to three pages.
    - Examples:
      - Quarterly status reports
      - Policy briefs
      - Standard operating procedure
      - Quarterly production summaries
      - Project progress report
      - Departmental performance report
      - Regulatory compliance updates
      - Reports related to other functional areas
  - Problem-Solving Reports - A problem-solving report (often called a Proposal or Justiﬁcation Report) goes a step further by identifying a speciﬁc issue and suggesting a way to ﬁx it. It focuses on the "Why" and the "How." The key characteristics of these reports are that they are persuasive in nature and typically follow a "Problem-Analysis-Solution" format. Typical lengths of problem-solving reports range from two to three pages.
    - Examples:
      - Internal memo/proposal
      - Incident report & corrective action
      - Operational bottleneck investigation report analyzing workﬂow
        and providing process streamlining recommendations
      - Memo proposing new software to ﬁx communication gaps
      - Report on how to reduce employee turnover
      - Request for new equipment to replace a failing machine
      - Reports related to other functional areas.
  - Formal Analytical Reports – A formal analytical report involves comprehensive research and data analysis to help stakeholders make a major decision. Unlike the other two, it follows a strict professional format including a title page, executive summary, and table of contents. The key characteristics of these reports are that they are evaluative and investigative. It compares multiple variables (like "Option A" vs. "Option B") and concludes
    with a deﬁnitive, evidence-based recommendation. Typical lengths of formal analytical reports range from eight to ten pages excluding the preliminary (title page, table of contents, etc.) and supplementary (references, appendix) sections.
    In addition to the formal analytical report writing sample, the applicant must submit a ﬁve-minute video presentation based on that report. The presentation should demonstrate a clear and logical structure, adhere to professional business communication standards, and incorporate appropriate visual aids (such as slides, charts, or tables).
    - Examples:
      - Feasibility study
      - Annual market analysis
      - Annual "State of the Company" reports for shareholders
      - Reports related to other functional areas.

Evaluation Criteria:

	Exceeds Expectations (3)	Meets Expectations (2)	Partially Meets Expectations (1)	Does Not Meet Expectations (0)
Course Learning Outcomes Mastery 20% Raw Score:	All course learning outcomes are addressed. Evidence demonstrates deep conceptual understanding and integration for all outcomes.	All course learning outcomes are addressed. Evidence demonstrates basic conceptual understanding for all outcomes.	All course learning outcomes are addressed. Evidence demonstrates basic conceptual understanding and some application for a majority of outcomes; or evidence demonstrates minor ﬂaws in conceptual understanding for a majority of outcomes.	No course learning outcomes are addresses; or evidence does not demonstrate basic conceptual understanding for some outcomes; or evidence demonstrates signiﬁcant ﬂaws in conceptual understanding for a majority of outcomes.
Experiential Learning 15% Raw Score:	Narrative and relevant supporting documentation demonstrates a focus on the learning that has come from experience. Concrete examples reinforce the learning focus throughout the portfolio.	Narrative and relevant supporting documentation demonstrates a focus on the learning that has come from experience. Supporting examples are provided.	Narrative and relevant supporting documentation addresses learning but remains primarily focused on experience as a proxy indicator of learning.	Narrative and relevant supporting documentation does not address learning from experience; or experience is cited as an assumption of learning without focus on learning that resulted.
Conceptual/Theoretical Knowledge 15% Raw Score:	Narrative demonstrates ﬂuency in the concepts/theories of the discipline that are explored in the course. Concepts/theories are discussed in connection to the student’s own experiential learning.	Narrative demonstrates knowledge of the concepts/theories of the discipline that are explored in the course. Concepts/theories are discussed in connection to the student’s own experiential learning.	Narrative demonstrates limited knowledge of the concepts/theories of the discipline that are explored in the course and/or makes limited or ﬂawed connections of concepts/theories to the student’s own experiential learning.	Narrative does not address or demonstrate knowledge of the concepts/theories of the discipline that are explored in the course; or narrative addresses concepts/theories with no/signiﬁcantly ﬂawed connection to student’s own experiential learning.
Critical Reﬂection Applying Concepts to Practice 30% Raw Score:	Narrative demonstrates clear and compelling integration of personal experiences, learning that resulted from these experiences, concepts/theories of the discipline, and application of these to the content of the course and the student’s academic goals.	Narrative demonstrates clear integration of personal experiences, learning that resulted from these experiences, concepts/theories of the discipline, and reﬂection of how these relate to the content of the course and the student’s academic goals.	Narrative explores connections between personal experiences, learning that resulted from these experiences, and concepts/theories of the discipline with ﬂaws and/or limited connection to the content of the course and/or the student’s academic goals.	Narrative does not draw connections or draws signiﬁcantly ﬂawed connections between personal experiences, learning that resulted from these experiences, and concepts/theories of the discipline in connection to the content of the course and/or the student’s academic goals.
Communication 10% Raw Score:	Evidence demonstrates college-level writing: Ideas are relevant to the purpose of the portfolio, expressed clearly and in a logical progression, supported with compelling evidence/examples, and appropriate for the intended audience. When applicable, appropriate citations are included. There are no technical errors or irrelevant information.	Evidence demonstrates college-level writing: Ideas are relevant to the purpose of the portfolio, expressed clearly, supported with compelling evidence/examples, and appropriate for the intended audience. When applicable, appropriate citations are included. Technical errors are minimal and do not signiﬁcantly interfere with comprehension. Minimal irrelevant information is included.	Evidence demonstrates capacity for college-level writing: Ideas are relevant to the purpose of the portfolio and is supported with some evidence/examples. Clarity may be affected by appropriateness for the intended audience, lack of compelling arguments, lack of appropriate citations, a number of minor technical errors or some major technical errors, and/or overuse of irrelevant information.	Evidence does not demonstrate capacity for college-level writing, or suggests signiﬁcant concerns for college-level writing capacity in content, word choice, approach, evidence/citations, and/or mechanics.
Supporting Documentation 10% Raw Score:	All required documentation is included. Narrative and supporting documentation communicate a consistent and clear message about student experience and learning relative to the course. The student draws connections between various sources of information documented in the portfolio.	All required documentation is included. Narrative and supporting documentation communicate a consistent and clear message about student experience and learning relative to the course.	All required documentation is included. Narrative and supporting documentation communicate a similar message about student experience and learning relative to the course, but supporting documentation may be vague or contain minor, not concerning inconsistencies compared to the narrative.	All/some required documentation is missing; and/or narrative and supporting documentation communicate signiﬁcantly inconsistent or conﬂicting messages about student experience and/or learning relative to the course.

To successfully earn credit through the portfolio review, applicants must score a 60% or higher.

Contemporary Leadership (LEAD 350)

‌Portfolio Review Prior Learning Assessment

Course Description: In this course, learners will focus on leadership competence transferable across various disciplines that will help them become transformational leaders within their workplace, now and in the future.

Learning Outcomes:

Develop and articulate a personalized leadership identity
Apply effective leadership behaviors and change strategies
Analyze and evaluate historical and contemporary leadership theories
Develop transferable leadership skills

Instructions: Please provide a copy of your resume and a cover letter describing your leadership experience. The cover letter should outline your personal experiences as well as critical reﬂection that shows learning that resulted from these experiences, concepts/theories of leadership, and application of leadership.

Please provide evidence of evaluation of your performance as a leader and/or a letter of support from a supervisor outlining your experiences. Either the letter or the performance evaluation must include an assessment of your leadership capacity.

Please provide no more than a 2-page (single-spaced) summary of your leadership philosophy. In the philosophy statement, please deﬁne your leadership philosophy. The statement should demonstrate ﬂuency in the concepts/theories of leadership, discussed in connection to your own experiential learning. Within the philosophy statement, compare and contrast your leadership philosophy with another leader in the world (past or present).

Evaluation Criteria:

	Exceeds Expectations (3)	Meets Expectations (2)	Partially Meets Expectations (1)	Does Not Meet Expectations (0)
Course Learning Outcomes Mastery 20% Raw Score:	All course learning outcomes are addressed. Evidence demonstrates deep conceptual understanding and integration for all outcomes.	All course learning outcomes are addressed. Evidence demonstrates basic conceptual understanding for all outcomes.	All course learning outcomes are addressed. Evidence demonstrates basic conceptual understanding and some application for a majority of outcomes; or evidence demonstrates minor ﬂaws in conceptual understanding for a majority of outcomes.	No course learning outcomes are addresses; or evidence does not demonstrate basic conceptual understanding for some outcomes; or evidence demonstrates signiﬁcant ﬂaws in conceptual understanding for a majority of outcomes.
Experiential Learning 15% Raw Score:	Narrative and relevant supporting documentation demonstrates a focus on the learning that has come from experience. Concrete examples reinforce the learning focus throughout the portfolio.	Narrative and relevant supporting documentation demonstrates a focus on the learning that has come from experience. Supporting examples are provided.	Narrative and relevant supporting documentation addresses learning but remains primarily focused on experience as a proxy indicator of learning.	Narrative and relevant supporting documentation does not address learning from experience; or experience is cited as an assumption of learning without focus on learning that resulted.
Conceptual/Theoretical Knowledge 15% Raw Score:	Narrative demonstrates ﬂuency in the concepts/theories of the discipline that are explored in the course. Concepts/theories are discussed in connection to the student’s own experiential learning.	Narrative demonstrates knowledge of the concepts/theories of the discipline that are explored in the course. Concepts/theories are discussed in connection to the student’s own experiential learning.	Narrative demonstrates limited knowledge of the concepts/theories of the discipline that are explored in the course and/or makes limited or ﬂawed connections of concepts/theories to the student’s own experiential learning.	Narrative does not address or demonstrate knowledge of the concepts/theories of the discipline that are explored in the course; or narrative addresses concepts/theories with no/signiﬁcantly ﬂawed connection to student’s own experiential learning.
Critical Reﬂection Applying Concepts to Practice 30% Raw Score:	Narrative demonstrates clear and compelling integration of personal experiences, learning that resulted from these experiences, concepts/theories of the discipline, and application of these to the content of the course and the student’s academic goals.	Narrative demonstrates clear integration of personal experiences, learning that resulted from these experiences, concepts/theories of the discipline, and reﬂection of how these relate to the content of the course and the student’s academic goals.	Narrative explores connections between personal experiences, learning that resulted from these experiences, and concepts/theories of the discipline with ﬂaws and/or limited connection to the content of the course and/or the student’s academic goals.	Narrative does not draw connections or draws signiﬁcantly ﬂawed connections between personal experiences, learning that resulted from these experiences, and concepts/theories of the discipline in connection to the content of the course and/or the student’s academic goals.
Communication 10% Raw Score:	Evidence demonstrates college-level writing: Ideas are relevant to the purpose of the portfolio, expressed clearly and in a logical progression, supported with compelling evidence/examples, and appropriate for the intended audience. When applicable, appropriate citations are included. There are no technical errors or irrelevant information.	Evidence demonstrates college-level writing: Ideas are relevant to the purpose of the portfolio, expressed clearly, supported with compelling evidence/examples, and appropriate for the intended audience. When applicable, appropriate citations are included. Technical errors are minimal and do not signiﬁcantly interfere with comprehension. Minimal irrelevant information is included.	Evidence demonstrates capacity for college-level writing: Ideas are relevant to the purpose of the portfolio and is supported with some evidence/examples. Clarity may be affected by appropriateness for the intended audience, lack of compelling arguments, lack of appropriate citations, a number of minor technical errors or some major technical errors, and/or overuse of irrelevant information.	Evidence does not demonstrate capacity for college-level writing, or suggests signiﬁcant concerns for college-level writing capacity in content, word choice, approach, evidence/citations, and/or mechanics.
Supporting Documentation 10% Raw Score:	All required documentation is included. Narrative and supporting documentation communicate a consistent and clear message about student experience and learning relative to the course. The student draws connections between various sources of information documented in the portfolio.	All required documentation is included. Narrative and supporting documentation communicate a consistent and clear message about student experience and learning relative to the course.	All required documentation is included. Narrative and supporting documentation communicate a similar message about student experience and learning relative to the course, but supporting documentation may be vague or contain minor, not concerning inconsistencies compared to the narrative.	All/some required documentation is missing; and/or narrative and supporting documentation communicate signiﬁcantly inconsistent or conﬂicting messages about student experience and/or learning relative to the course.

To successfully earn credit through the portfolio review, applicants must score a 60% of higher.

Portfolio Assessment

Contact

Key Features of the CPL Program