This research is grounded in the social cognitive theory of self-regulated learning (Zimmerman, 2000), constructivist principles of active knowledge construction (Piaget, Vygotsky, Dewey), and the CAR pedagogical model (Cooperative, Active y Reflexive). Together, these frameworks position students as autonomous, reflective learners who use digital tools to set goals, monitor progress, and evaluate outcomes, aligning with the ISTE Empowered Learner standard and emphasizing reflection as a pathway to authentic learning.
This study employed a mixed-methods design to examine how digital portfolios support student empowerment and self-regulated learning in upper-secondary science courses. Participants included approximately 75 students enrolled in Biology and Physics, selected through purposive sampling to represent diverse learning profiles. Over one semester, students created digital portfolios using Google Sites or Canva Docs to document learning evidence, reflect on progress, and set academic goals aligned with the CAR (Cooperativa, Activa y Reflexiva) model.
Quantitative data were collected through a pre- and post-application of the Motivated Strategies for Learning Questionnaire (MSLQ) to measure changes in self-regulation and motivation. Qualitative data sources included student reflection entries, teacher observation rubrics, and semi-structured focus group interviews exploring perceptions of empowerment, challenges, and usability.
Data analysis involved paired t-tests to identify significant differences in motivation and self-regulation levels, and thematic coding to extract patterns of reflection, agency, and feedback use. Triangulation across data sources ensured validity and provided a comprehensive understanding of how digital portfolios influence learning ownership and metacognitive growth.
Preliminary results indicate a significant increase in students’ self-regulation and motivation after the implementation of digital portfolios. Quantitative analysis from the MSLQ showed measurable gains in goal setting, task planning, and self-evaluation behaviors. Students demonstrated greater ownership of learning, frequently using feedback to revise their work and articulate progress toward personal goals.
Qualitative findings revealed that reflection prompts within the portfolios fostered metacognitive awareness and emotional engagement. Students reported feeling more capable of directing their own learning and understanding how their daily actions contributed to long-term achievement. Teachers noted improved communication and more authentic evidence of learning through curated artifacts.
It is expected that continued portfolio use will strengthen sustained motivation, digital fluency, and reflective thinking, aligning with the ISTE Empowered Learner standard. The study aims to provide a replicable model showing how structured digital reflection can transform assessment into a catalyst for empowerment and deeper learning in science education.
This study contributes to the growing body of research on student agency, digital assessment, and self-regulated learning by demonstrating how digital portfolios transform traditional evaluation into a reflective, empowering process. It provides empirical evidence linking technology integration with measurable gains in motivation, autonomy, and metacognitive awareness—core competencies of 21st-century learners.
For educators and leaders, the study offers a replicable framework for integrating digital portfolios into curriculum design, aligning instructional practice with ISTE Standards for Students and Educators. For researchers, it bridges cognitive theory and classroom innovation, illustrating how reflection and feedback cycles promote deeper learning.
Conference audiences will gain both conceptual insights and practical strategies for fostering student empowerment through technology, making this work relevant across content areas and educational levels committed to authentic, learner-centered transformation.
Barrett, H. (2010). Balancing the two faces of ePortfolios. Educação, Formação & Tecnologias, 3(1), 6–14.
Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2018). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (5th ed.). Sage.
Dewey, J. (1938). Experience and education. Macmillan.
International Society for Technology in Education. (2023). ISTE standards for students. ISTE.
Jenson, J. D., & Treuer, P. (2014). Defining the ePortfolio: What it is and why it matters. Change: The Magazine of Higher Learning, 46(2), 50–57. https://doi.org/10.1080/00091383.2014.896705
Schunk, D. H., & DiBenedetto, M. K. (2020). Motivation and social cognitive theory. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 60, 101832. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2019.101832
Zimmerman, B. J. (2000). Attaining self-regulation: A social cognitive perspective. In M. Boekaerts, P. R. Pintrich, & M. Zeidner (Eds.), Handbook of self-regulation (pp. 13–39). Academic Press.
Posters in this theme:
Back
Trips and Tours
