University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Prior learning assessment portfolios: an evaluation study

(USC Thesis Other)

Prior learning assessment portfolios: an evaluation study

PDF

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content Running head: PRIOR LEARNING ASSESSMENT PORTFOLIOS 1

Prior Learning Assessment Portfolios: An Evaluation Study

by

Galvin Deleon Guerrero

A Dissertation Presented to the
FACULTY OF THE USC ROSSIER SCHOOL OF EDUCATION
UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
In Partial Fulfillment of the
Requirements for the Degree
DOCTOR OF EDUCATION

December 2019

Copyright 2019 Galvin Deleon Guerrero

PRIOR LEARNING ASSESSMENT PORTFOLIOS 2

Dedication

To my mother, Jessica Sablan “Kilili” Deleon Guerrero, whose wisdom is deeply rooted
in her experiences of love and sacrifice.

PRIOR LEARNING ASSESSMENT PORTFOLIOS 3

Acknowledgements
In October 2018, Super Typhoon Yutu, a category 5 hurricane with winds exceeding 200
miles per hour, struck many Pacific islands. Thus, in a literal sense, a perfect storm struck my
community just as I commenced the research for this dissertation. However, just as island
communities came together to help each other through the storm, many individuals came
together to help me throughout this stormy dissertation process. Much thanks go to my
Dissertation Committee Chair, Dr. Kimberly Hirabayashi, and committee members, Dr. Cathy
Krop and Dr. David Kupferman, for helping me navigate my way through the storm. A debt of
gratitude also goes to my colleagues in Cohort 7, especially Dr. Michael Colarusso and Dr.
Regina Morlino, for giving me courage to make it through the storm. I also owe thanks to my
school family for supporting me as we made it through the storm together. I also thank my
children--Victoria, William, and Mary Shelley--for letting me venture out into the storm. And
most importantly, I thank my wife, Velma, for standing behind me and standing with me as we
made it through the worst of the storm.

PRIOR LEARNING ASSESSMENT PORTFOLIOS 4

Table of Contents

Dedication 2

Acknowledgements 3

List of Tables 7

List of Figures 9

Abstract 10

CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION 11
Background of the Problem 11
Importance of Addressing the Problem 12
Organizational Mission and Context 13
Organizational Goal 14
Description of Stakeholder Groups 15
Stakeholder Group of Focus and Stakeholder Goal 16
Purpose of the Evaluation and Questions 18
Methodological Framework 19
Definitions 19
Organization of the Project 19

CHAPTER TWO: REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE 21
Adult Learners in Higher Education 21
Enrollment Trends of Adult Learners in Higher Education 21
Challenges for Adult Learners in Higher Education 23
Prior Learning Assessment 25
History and Overview of Prior Learning Assessment 26
Prior Learning Assessment Portfolios 28
How Prior Learning Assessment Helps Adult Learners 29
The Clark and Estes Gap Analytic Conceptual Framework 30
Stakeholder Knowledge and Motivation Influences 32
Knowledge and Skills Influence 32
Motivation Influences 38
Organizational Influences 45
Cultural Model Influences 45
Cultural Setting Influences 47
Conceptual Framework: The Interaction of Stakeholders’ Knowledge
and Motivation and the Organizational Context 50

CHAPTER THREE: METHODS 55
Participating Stakeholders 55
Survey Sampling Criteria and Rationale 56
PRIOR LEARNING ASSESSMENT PORTFOLIOS 5

Survey Sampling (Recruitment) Strategy and Rationale 57
Interview Sampling Criteria and Rationale 57
Interview Sampling (Recruitment) Strategy and Rationale 58
Data Collection and Instrumentation 58
Document Analysis of Student Achievement Data 58
Interviews 59
Document Analysis of Prior Learning Assessment Portfolios 61
Data Analysis 62
Credibility and Trustworthiness 64
Ethics 65

CHAPTER FOUR: RESULTS AND FINDINGS 67
Participating Stakeholders 67
Knowledge Findings 70
Motivation Findings 87
Organizational Findings 100
Answers to Research Questions 109
Research Question #1: Results 110
Research Question #2: Results 110
Summary 110

CHAPTER FIVE: RECOMMENDATIONS 117
Introduction and Overview 117
Recommendations for Practice to Address KMO Influences 118
Knowledge Recommendations 118
Motivation Recommendations 123
Organization Recommendations 129
Integrated Implementation and Evaluation Plan 134
Organizational Purpose, Need, and Expectations 134
Level 4: Results and Leading Indicators 136
Level 3: Behavior 137
Level 2: Learning 141
Level 1: Reaction 145
Evaluation Tools 146
Data Analysis and Reporting 148
Limitations and Delimitations 150
Future Research 152
Conclusion 153

References 155

Appendices 168
Appendix A: Survey Questions 168
Appendix B: Interview Protocol Questions 170
Appendix C: Learning Resources 172
PRIOR LEARNING ASSESSMENT PORTFOLIOS 6

Appendix D: Sample Modified Course Evaluation Form 181

PRIOR LEARNING ASSESSMENT PORTFOLIOS 7

List of Tables

Table 1. Organizational Mission, Global Goal, and Stakeholder Performance Goals 17

Table 2. Knowledge Influences, Types, and Assessments for Knowledge Gap Analysis 37

Table 3. Motivational Influences, Types, and Assessments for Motivation Gap Analysis 44

Table 4. Organizational Influences and Organizational Influence Assessments 49

Table 5. Credit Award Rates for PLA Portfolios 68

Table 6. Former PU PLA Students Interviewed 70

Table 7. Experiential Learning Articulated in PU PLA Portfolios 73

Table 8. Percentage of Time PU’s PLA Students Spent on Reflection While Working on
Portfolios 84

Table 9. Reported Hours Survey Respondents Spent Working on PLA Portfolios 88

Table 10. Factors That Respondents Believe Affected Their Ability to Complete Their
Portfolios 92

Table 11. PU PLA Program and CAEL LearningCounts Portfolio Achievement Data 102

Table 12. PLA Portfolio Credit Award Determined With and Without the Use of a Rubric 107

Table 13. Were Assumed Knowledge, Motivation, and Organizational Influences Confirmed?
111

Table 14. Summary of Knowledge Influences and Recommendations 118

Table 15. Summary of Motivation Influences and Recommendations 124

Table 16. Summary of Organization Influences and Recommendations 130

Table 17. Outcomes, Metrics, and Methods for External and Internal Outcomes 137

Table 18. Critical Behaviors, Metrics, Methods, and Timing for Evaluation 138

Table 19. Required Drivers to Support Critical Behaviors 139

Table 20. Evaluation of the Components of Learning for the Program 144

PRIOR LEARNING ASSESSMENT PORTFOLIOS 8

Table 21. Components to Measure Reactions to the Program 145

Table 22. Data Collection Matrix for Recommended Implementation Plan 149

PRIOR LEARNING ASSESSMENT PORTFOLIOS 9

List of Figures

Figure 1. Conceptual map for knowledge, motivation, and organizational context for prior
learning assessment (PLA) students 53

Figure 2. How familiar are you with the concept of experiential learning? 71

Figure 3. As I worked on my portfolio, I knew what I needed to do in order to complete my
portfolio. 82

Figure 4. I think that putting my portfolio together was a valuable experience. 90

Figure 5. To what degree did you feel confident about completing your portfolio? 95

Figure 6. To what extent do you feel the college’s faculty are supportive of giving academic
credit for someone’s experiences instead of having that person take a class? 101

Figure 7. The college supported me as I worked on my portfolio. 103

Figure 8. The expectations for the portfolio were clear. 106

Figure 9. The New World Kirkpatrick Model 135

Figure 10. Simulated PU PLA dashboard 150

PRIOR LEARNING ASSESSMENT PORTFOLIOS 10

Abstract
In response to the projected enrollment growth of non-traditional students over the age of 25 in
higher education, some colleges and universities have begun offering prior learning assessment
(PLA) programs. PLA programs meet the needs of these adult learners by enabling them to earn
academic credit towards their degrees for their experiential learning, thereby helping them save
money and time and improving their graduation rates. The purpose of this study was to evaluate
one specific PLA program, a PLA portfolio development program at Pacific University (PU, a
pseudonym), to ascertain how well that program is helping adult learners earn academic credit
from their PLA portfolios. Using the Clark and Estes gap analysis framework, this study
employed a mixed methods approach to examine assumed knowledge, motivation, and
organizational influences on PU’s PLA students as they developed their PLA portfolios. Based
on findings from surveys, interviews, an analysis of student achievement data, and a document
analysis of sample PLA portfolios, this study found that while participants in this study were
motivated to complete their PLA portfolios and felt supported by PU faculty, they lacked the
knowledge, clear portfolio rubrics, and additional support from PU necessary to earn more
academic credit for their PLA portfolios. These findings informed recommendations for
improving PU’s PLA portfolio development program that are provided using Kirkpatrick and
Kirkpatrick’s (2017) New World Kirkpatrick Model.
Keywords: prior learning assessment, PLA, higher education, portfolios

PRIOR LEARNING ASSESSMENT PORTFOLIOS 11

CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION
Between 2001 and 2015, the number of non-traditional students over the age of 25
enrolled in colleges and universities increased across the United States, with enrollment of
students 25- to 34-years-old increasing by 35% and enrollment of students 35-years-old and over
increasing by 13% (McFarland et al., 2018). This trend is expected to continue through 2026,
with enrollment of students 25- to 34-years-old projected to increase by 11% and enrollment of
students 35-years-old or older projected to increase by 4% (McFarland et al., 2018). While many
colleges and universities have begun offering graduate and post-graduate programs that
accommodate adult learners (Yoo & Huang, 2013), similar accommodations have not been made
in undergraduate programs, which remain largely focused on younger students between the ages
of 18 and 24 (Kasworm, 2014). Often, adult learners are left behind in youth-centric
undergraduate programs across the nation.
Background of the Problem
Undergraduate programs in higher education have traditionally been designed to facilitate
the transition of high school graduates into professional careers, thereby catering to younger
students. This traditional focus has created several barriers for non-traditional, adult students.
First, since most undergraduate programs target their marketing on high school seniors, many
adult learners are discouraged by the lack of information about getting into college, including
admissions, enrollment, tuition and fees, and scholarships (Gast, 2013). Second, undergraduate
programs and student services at many colleges and universities tend to prioritize the needs of
younger students over older students, depriving, for example, working parents with daycare
obligations with more course scheduling options that fit their busy schedules (Kasworm, 2010).
Third, and equally important, much of the pedagogy in four-year degree institutions emphasizes
PRIOR LEARNING ASSESSMENT PORTFOLIOS 12

passive models of learning, such as lectures and direct instruction (Chen, 2014; Nelken, 2009),
over more engaging features of adult learning theory, such as experiential learning and active
discussions that tap into the rich experiences of older students (Kenner & Weinerman, 2011). To
be sure, many colleges and universities have begun offering graduate and post-graduate
programs that are more accommodating for adult learners (Yoo & Huang, 2013). These graduate
and post-graduate programs have expanded distance education services and offered more online
courses to meet the needs of working professionals (Yoo & Huang, 2013). However, similar
accommodations have not been made for undergraduate programs (Kasworm, 2014). The failure
of undergraduate programs to better accommodate adult learners has left many of them feeling
disengaged from their college experience, which, in turn, has led to attrition rates among non-
traditional students that are higher than their younger counterparts (Gilardi & Guglielmetti,
2011). Whether it is through disengagement or dropping out, losing these non-traditional
students comes at a great price in higher education.
Importance of Addressing the Problem
The problem of accommodating non-traditional students is something that undergraduate
programs must address. Among 35 countries measured by the Organization for Economic
Cooperation and Development (OECD), from 2000 to 2016, the percentage of adult populations
in OECD countries that had completed at least an associate’s degree increased by 14% while this
adult population only increased by 9% in the United States, falling behind countries like Japan
and Canada that had increased by 17% and 16% respectively (McFarland et al., 2018). This lag
has undermined the United States’ ability to improve its economy with a highly educated and
skilled workforce (Western Interstate Commission for Higher Education, 2012).
PRIOR LEARNING ASSESSMENT PORTFOLIOS 13

Since the enrollment of non-traditional students is projected to increase over the next
eight years, improving accommodations for their needs will help increase their retention rates
and boost overall college completion rates across the country. Helping non-traditional students
succeed will help the broader economy, as well as the students themselves, particularly at a time
when 63% of jobs in the country require at least a two-year college degree (Carnivale, Smith, &
Strohl 2010). In short, colleges and universities must do a better job of meeting the needs of
everyone in their student body, especially the fasting growing part of that population: students
25-years-old and older.
Organizational Mission and Context
Pacific University (PU, a pseudonym) is an institution of higher education in the Pacific
whose mission is to provide high quality, affordable, and accessible educational programs and
services for the individual and people of the Pacific. The vision of PU is to serve as the engine to
drive the economic growth and the social and cultural vitality of the Pacific.
PU offers certificate programs and associate degrees in business, criminal justice, liberal
arts, natural resource management, and nursing, as well as bachelor’s degrees in business and
education (PU website). PU also provides other services to the community, including Adult
Basic Education, continuing education courses through its Community Development Institute,
and standardized testing such as the College Board’s SAT and the General Education
Development (GED) (PU website). Also, as a United States land grant institution, PU operates
the federally funded Community Development Institute, and the Cooperative, Research,
Extensions, and Education Service (CREES) (PU website).
Cognizant of the market for adult learners in higher education, PU has taken some steps
in recent years to meet the needs of adult learners, such as expanding distance education services
PRIOR LEARNING ASSESSMENT PORTFOLIOS 14

and online courses. In addition, in 2014, PU launched a prior learning assessment (PLA)
program. According to the Council for Adult and Experiential Learning (CAEL), “PLA is the
process by which an individual’s learning is assessed and evaluated for purposes of granting
college credit, certification, or advanced standing toward further education or training” (Klein-
Collins & Wertheim, 2013, p. 51). This learning typically occurs outside a traditional academic
environment and can include “on-the-job experiences, corporate training, military training or
experience, volunteer work, or self-guided study” (Klein-Collins & Wertheim, 2013, p. 51). PU’s
PLA program was launched to help non-traditional students capitalize on their learning in a way
that helps them complete their degrees faster and cheaper, while maintaining the academic
integrity of their degrees. Since the program’s launch, PU has distinguished itself as the only
higher education institution in the region to offer a PLA program.
Specifically, PU’s PLA program is a portfolio-based program in which adult learners
enroll in a course that guides them in the development of PLA portfolios. Working on their
portfolios throughout a regular semester, PLA students are expected to articulate their
experiential learning in portfolio narratives that must align with student learning outcomes
(SLOs) of courses for which PLA students intend to earn academic credit. PLA portfolios must
also include evidence of experiential learning, such as performance evaluations from PLA
students’ professional work or sample work from PLA students’ careers and professions. These
PLA portfolios are then reviewed by PU faculty content experts who determine how much credit
will be awarded to each student for his or her respective portfolio.
Organizational Goal
As set forth in its 2015-2020 Strategic Master Plan, PU has joined 33 state college
systems in the Complete College America (CCA) initiative, which aims to boost college
PRIOR LEARNING ASSESSMENT PORTFOLIOS 15

graduation rates by improving the completion time for college degrees (Complete College
America, 2013). Research has shown that the longer it takes for students to complete their
degrees, not only does it cost more money in tuition and fees, but it also decreases the likelihood
that students will graduate at all (Jones, 2015). By reducing the average completion time for
degrees, colleges can increase overall graduation rates.
As a participant in the CCA Initiative, PU’s goal is that by 2020, 75% of its students will
complete their respective degrees within two years for associate degrees and within four years
for bachelor’s degrees. In developing its 2015-2020 Strategic Master Plan, PU set this goal to
address lackluster completion times. At the national level, only 4% of students complete an
associate degree within two years, and only 19% to 36% complete a bachelor’s degree within
four years (Complete College America, 2013). Student achievement data from 2016 revealed that
7% of PU students completed an associate degrees within two years, while only 9% completed a
bachelor’s degree within four years. Although PU’s average completion time for associate
degrees is higher than the national average, that still leaves 93% of students taking more time to
complete a two-year degree or not completing at all. Moreover, PU’s average completion time
for its bachelor’s degrees is far lower than the national average. By improving the average
completion time for degrees, PU intends to improve overall graduation rates. In that regard, PU’s
PLA program can help improve average completion times by expediting the awarding of
academic credit for non-traditional students.
Description of Stakeholder Groups
PU’s stakeholders include its governing board, administrators, faculty, staff, alumni, the
broader community, and students. PU’s student population can be narrowed down to three
groups of student stakeholders. The first group is composed of students below the age of 25.
PRIOR LEARNING ASSESSMENT PORTFOLIOS 16

These students are often called traditional students because they tend to transition directly from
high school to college. As of Fall 2016, 861 traditional students were enrolled at PU, which
accounted for 83% of PU’s total enrollment (PU website). The second group consists of students
25-years-old or older. These students are often called non-traditional students because they either
postponed a college education after graduating from high school or started college but stopped
for several years before returning. As of Fall 2016, 176 non-traditional students were enrolled at
PU, which accounted for 17% of PU’s total enrollment (PU website). The third and final group
are non-traditional students who participate in PU’s prior learning assessment (PLA) program, a
program that helps participants earn academic credit for experiential learning. As of Fall 2016, of
the 176 non-traditional students enrolled at PU, 63 had participated in PU’s PLA program (PU
website).
Stakeholder Group of Focus and Stakeholder Goal
While PU works towards its organizational goal to have 75% of all its students complete
their respective degrees within two years for associate degrees and within four years for
bachelor’s degrees by 2020, this study will focus on non-traditional students participating in
PU’s PLA program. Between 2001 and 2015, more non-traditional students over the age of 25
enrolled in colleges and universities across the United States, with enrollment of students 25- to
34- years-old increasing by 35% and enrollment of students 35-years-old and over increasing by
13% (McFarland et al., 2018). This trend is expected to continue, with enrollment of students 25-
to 34-years-old projected to increase by 11% and enrollment of students 35-years-old or older
projected to increase by 4% (McFarland et al., 2018). As this stakeholder group grows, PLA
programs can enable these students to translate their experiential learning into academic credit to
accelerate degree completion, saving them time and money. PU specifically launched its PLA
PRIOR LEARNING ASSESSMENT PORTFOLIOS 17

program in 2014 to accelerate and improve degree completion rates for this underserved student
population (PU website).
The goal of improving degree completion rates for non-traditional students is also the
justification for the stakeholder goal that focuses on these students’ abilities to earn credit from
the PLA program. In this case, the stakeholder goal is that 100% of students in the PLA program
will earn 80% of their intended credits from portfolios by the end of the 2020 Fall term. This
goal will be measured by tracking individual student portfolios throughout the portfolio review
process and identifying how many academic credits are awarded for each student. If students in
PU’s PLA program successfully earn enough academic credit to accelerate through their degree
completion, it will help PU fulfill its larger organizational goal of graduating students on time.
However, if students in PU’s PLA program fail to earn enough academic credit to accelerate
degree attainment, overall degree completion rates for non-traditional students will decline.
When overall degree completion rates decline, PU’s broader organizational goal of accelerating
and improving degree completion rates will be undermined.
Table 1
Organizational Mission, Global Goal, and Stakeholder Performance Goals
Organizational Mission
Through its commitment to student learning, Pacific University’s mission is to provide high
quality, affordable and accessible educational programs and services for the individual and people
of the Pacific.
Organizational Performance Goal
By 2020, 75% of Pacific University’s students will complete their respective degrees within two
years for associates degrees and within four years for bachelor’s degrees.

PRIOR LEARNING ASSESSMENT PORTFOLIOS 18

Stakeholder 1 Goal Stakeholder 2 Goal Stakeholder 3 Goal
100% of students in the prior
learning assessment program
will earn 80% of their intended
credits from portfolios by the
end of the 2020 fall term.
By the Fall 2018, PU will
increase the percentage of non-
traditional students enrolled
from 17% to 25%.
Within one year of enrolling at
PU, 75% of incoming
freshmen will place into
college-level English and math
courses.

Purpose of the Evaluation and Questions
The purpose of this project is to evaluate the degree to which PU is meeting its
organizational goal that by 2020, 75% of its students will complete their respective degrees
within two years for associates degrees and within four years for bachelor’s degrees. The
analysis will focus on knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences related to achieving
the organizational goal. While a complete performance evaluation would focus on all
stakeholders, for practical purposes, this analysis will focus on non-traditional students
participating in PU’s PLA program. The questions that will guide this evaluation study are:
1. To what extent is PU meeting its goal of PLA students earning at least 80% of academic
credits petitioned in their PLA portfolios by the 2020 Fall term?
2. What is the knowledge and motivation of non-traditional students participating in PU’s
PLA program related to this organizational goal?
3. What is the interaction between organizational culture and context and stakeholder
knowledge and motivation?
4. What are the recommendations for organizational practice in the areas of knowledge,
motivation, and organizational resources?

PRIOR LEARNING ASSESSMENT PORTFOLIOS 19

Methodological Framework
This project employed a quantitative/qualitative mixed methods approach for data
gathering and analysis. PU students who completed PU’s PLA course were surveyed, assessed
using document analysis of student achievement data of PLA students, an artifact analysis of
sample PLA portfolios was conducted, and interviews with PU students who have completed
PU’s PLA course were completed. Research-based solutions are also recommended and
evaluated in a comprehensive manner.
Definitions
Before proceeding into the literature review, it is necessary to define some key terms for
PLA programs that will be used in this study.
Adult Learners: Adult learners are students 25-years-ol or older who either never enrolled
in higher education and are currently enrolled or once enrolled, left, and have since re-enrolled.
Non-traditional students is another term used to refer to adult learners.
Experiential Learning: Knowledge, skills, and concepts that a student has learned from
his or her work, life, and extra-curricular experiences.
Portfolio: A collection of narratives in which a student articulates reflections on his or her
experiential learning and provides evidence to document the experiences described in the
reflections.
Prior Learning Assessment: A process by which a student’s experiential learning outside
of academia are evaluated in order to grant that student academic credit.
Organization of the Project
Five chapters were used to organize this study. This chapter provided the reader with key
concepts and terminology commonly found in the discussion about adult learners and prior
PRIOR LEARNING ASSESSMENT PORTFOLIOS 20

learning assessment (PLA). The organization’s mission, goals, and stakeholders and the
framework for the project were introduced. Chapter Two provides a review of current literature
surrounding the scope of the study. Topics of adult learners in higher education, PLA methods,
and PLA portfolio development will be addressed. Chapter Three details the knowledge,
motivation, and organizational elements to be examined, as well as the selected methodology
including choice of participants, data collection, and analysis. In Chapter Four, the data and
results are described and analyzed. Chapter Five provides recommendations for practice, based
on data and literature, as well as recommendations for implementation and evaluation.
PRIOR LEARNING ASSESSMENT PORTFOLIOS 21

CHAPTER TWO: REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE
While adult learners 25-years-old or older are a growing population on United States
college campuses, many colleges and universities have largely focused their programs on
younger students between the ages of 18 and 24 (Kasworm, 2014). In contrast, some colleges
and universities are using prior learning assessment (PLA) programs to accommodate the needs
of adult learners while also validating the valuable life experiences they bring with them. The
following literature review will examine how PLA programs are meeting the needs of adult
learners. First, trends in adult learners in higher education will be discussed. Second, an
overview of PLA will be provided, including its history, various approaches taken by PLA
programs, and PLA portfolios. Third, PLA and PLA portfolios will be examined for how they
help adult learners succeed in higher education. After the literature review, the key stakeholder
group for this study, non-traditional students at Pacific University (PU) that participated in PU’s
PLA portfolio development program, will be discussed. A gap analysis framework (Clark &
Estes, 2008) will be employed to examine the stakeholder knowledge, motivation, and
organizational influences on their successful participation in PU’s PLA program.
Adult Learners in Higher Education
Enrollment Trends of Adult Learners in Higher Education
Between 2001 and 2015, there was a growth in non-traditional students over the age of 25
enrolled in colleges and universities across the United States. In that timeframe, enrollment in
degree-granting postsecondary institutions of students 25- to 34-years-old increased by 26%
(McFarland et al., 2018). By 2015, this group of students made up 24% of students enrolled in
United States colleges and universities (McFarland et al., 2018). Between 2001 and 2015,
enrollment of students 35-years-old and over increased by 13% (McFarland et al., 2018). By
PRIOR LEARNING ASSESSMENT PORTFOLIOS 22

2015, this student group made up 17% of the total student population on United States colleges
and universities (McFarland et al., 2018). When combined, by 2015, students 25-years-old and
older accounted for 41% of all students enrolled in United States colleges and universities. This
enrollment trend is expected to continue, with the enrollment of students 25- to 34-years-old
projected to increase by 11% by 2020, and the enrollment of students 35-years-old and older
projected to increase by 4% by 2020 (McFarland et al., 2018).
While the enrollment of adult learners is growing, the rates of enrollment vary depending
on institutional level, control, and type of enrollment. As of Fall 2015, among four-year
undergraduate colleges, the full-time enrollment of adult learners comprised 11% of public
institutions, 12% of private nonprofit institutions, and 69% of private for-profit institutions
(National Center for Education Statistics, 2018). As of Fall 2015, among two-year undergraduate
colleges, the full-time enrollment of adult learners comprised 23% of public institutions, 46% of
private nonprofit institutions, and 53% of private for-profit institutions (National Center for
Education Statistics, 2018). These enrollment data indicate that adult learners are not a large
presence in public undergraduate full-time enrollment, especially in four-year degree institutions.
However, the data indicates that adult learners account for a majority of full-time enrollment in
private for-profit institutions, especially in four-degree institutions.
The presence of adult learners on United States college campuses is amplified when the
enrollment of part-time students is considered. As of Fall 2015, among four-year undergraduate
colleges, the part-time enrollment of adult learners comprised 45% of public institutions, 63% of
private nonprofit institutions, and 80% of private for-profit institutions (National Center for
Education Statistics, 2018). As of Fall 2015, among two-year undergraduate colleges, the part-
time enrollment of adult learners comprised 42% of public institutions, 60% of private nonprofit
PRIOR LEARNING ASSESSMENT PORTFOLIOS 23

institutions, and 67% of private for-profit institutions (National Center for Education Statistics,
2018). When compared to full-time enrollment, the most notable variance is among adult
learners enrolled in public four-year institutions, where their enrollment percentage increased
from 11% of full-time enrollees to 45% of part-time enrollees. In real numbers, as of Fall 2015,
3.096 million adult learners were enrolled full-time in all types of institutions, compared to 5.045
million adult learners enrolled part-time in all types of institutions (National Center for
Education Statistics, 2018). Collectively, these data suggest that adult learners prefer to enroll
part-time and at private for-profit institutions over public and nonprofit institutions.
Challenges for Adult Learners in Higher Education
While adult learners are gradually making up a larger portion of enrollment in higher
education, undergraduate programs at United States colleges and universities have remained
mostly unaccommodating for adult learners. A number of characteristics distinguish adult
learners from younger students. Adult learners tend to work full-time, have children, and have
additional obligations, such as mortgages and other forms of debt (Colvin, 2013; Ross-Gordon,
2011). Despite these unique needs, most colleges and universities have not adapted to meet the
needs of adult learners (Colvin, 2013; Patterson, 2018; Ross-Gordon, 2011).
This lack of accommodation, however, was not always the case. In the 1950s, as World
War II veterans returned, the United States government and higher education industry
intentionally designed programs, like the G. I. Bill, to accommodate this older student population
(Colvin, 2013; Kasworm, 2010). However, with the arrival of Baby Boomers into the post-
secondary education market, undergraduate programs shifted their programming and marketing
focus to younger students, namely teenagers graduating from high school (Colvin, 2013;
PRIOR LEARNING ASSESSMENT PORTFOLIOS 24

Kasworm, 2010). This focus on younger students has made colleges and universities less
welcoming to and less responsive to students 25-years-old and older.
The overall lack of accommodation for adult learners has compounded the challenges that
they face in returning to college. Situational barriers, such as having children and prior financial
commitments, often conflict with the demands that a college education places on time, finances,
and energy (Bergman, Gross, Berry, & Shuck, 2014; Fairchild, 2003). Dispositional barriers,
such as competing identities between parent and student or worker and student, create cognitive
dissonance that can undermine an adult learner’s performance in college (Bergman et al., 2014;
Fairchild, 2003). Institutional barriers among undergraduate programs, such as inconvenient
course schedules or inadequate student support services, deprive non-traditional students of
support structures that can offset situational or dispositional barriers (Bergman et al., 2014;
Colvin, 2013; Fairchild, 2003; Patterson, 2018). By not accommodating the unique needs of
adult learners, undergraduate programs are making it more difficult for adult learners to succeed
in returning to college.
The lack of accommodations for adult learners has led to a number of additional
challenges for adult learners in undergraduate programs. Adult learners find themselves excluded
from many curricular and extra-curricular offerings at four-year institutions, and often feel
misunderstood or unwelcomed by college faculty, staff, and younger students (Colvin, 2013;
Patterson, 2018; Witkowsky, Mendez, Ogumbowo, Clayton, & Hernandez, 2016). Many adult
learners find that undergraduate programs are biased against them, favoring of younger students
(Colvin, 2013; Patterson, 2018; Witkowsky et al., 2016).
Perhaps as a result of this bias and sense of exclusion, adult learners have had lower
retention and graduation rates in undergraduate programs than their younger counterparts. In a
PRIOR LEARNING ASSESSMENT PORTFOLIOS 25

cohort study of undergraduate students who first enrolled in Fall 2011, it was found that adult
learners fell behind younger students in retention rates and graduation rates. Among students
who were younger than 20-years-old when they started at four-year public institutions, after six
years, 20.8% were no longer enrolled and 63.9% had completed a four-year degree (Shapiro et
al., 2017).
In contrast, among students who were 24-years-old or older when they started at four-
year public institutions, after six years, 42.5% were no longer enrolled and 47.4% had completed
a four-year degree (Shapiro et al, 2017). As these data reveal, at four-year public institutions,
adult learners had retention rates and graduation rates that were lower than their younger
counterparts. This pattern is similar at other types of institutions. Among students who were
younger than 20-years-old when they started at four-year private nonprofit institutions, after six
years, 13.9% were no longer enrolled and 76.2% had completed a four-year degree (Shapiro et
al, 2017). However, among students who were 24 years old or older when they started at four-
year private non-profit institutions, after six years, 31.7% were no longer enrolled and 60.6% had
completed a four-year degree (Shapiro et al, 2017). Again, as these data reveal, at four-year
private nonprofit institutions, adult learners had retention rates and graduation rates that were
lower than their younger counterparts.
Prior Learning Assessment
Although most undergraduate programs are not accommodating the growing number of
adult learners on their campuses, some colleges and universities offer programs like prior
learning assessment (PLA) that specifically cater to the unique needs of adult learners. While
PLA programs have existed, in one form or another, since the 1930s, they began to develop as
PRIOR LEARNING ASSESSMENT PORTFOLIOS 26

more formal structures for learning during the 1970s and have recently expanded to offer a wide
array of options.
History and Overview of Prior Learning Assessment
PLA programs were first utilized on a large scale soon after World War II. As veterans
returned to the United States, the American Council on Education (ACE) began assessing
military experience to grant college credit to veterans that enrolled in college with the help of the
G. I. Bill (Travers, 2012). This assessment eventually became the Defense Activity for Non-
Traditional Education Support (DANTES), which continues to be used to this day by veterans
(Travers, 2012).
In addition to assessments of military service, the College Entrance Examination Board
(CEEB), the precursor to the current College Board, also began developing college entrance
exams in the 1930s, which led to the creation of the Advanced Placement (AP) Program in 1955
(Travers, 2012). Since its creation in 1955, the AP Program has allowed high school students to
earn college credit for a variety of core courses by passing AP tests that are administered as high
schools across the nation (Travers, 2012). The AP Program paved the way for the College
Board’s College Level Examination Program (CLEP) in 1967, which allows high school students
and older students to take tests that can earn them credit for a number of college-level courses
(Travers, 2012).
As these tests proliferated, some colleges and universities began piloting their own ways
of granting college credit for experiential learning, including professional certification programs
and portfolio evaluations. With the growth of PLA programs across the nation, the Commission
on Non-Traditional Study was created in 1971 to resolve growing tensions between colleges,
universities, and organizations that were not always accepting each other’s PLA credits (Travers,
PRIOR LEARNING ASSESSMENT PORTFOLIOS 27

2012). The Commission on Non-Traditional Study eventually became the Council on Adult and
Experiential Learning (CAEL), which now serves as one of the nation’s leading think tanks and
service providers for PLA programs (Travers, 2012). In addition to holding PLA conferences
throughout the year, CAEL funds and conducts much of the research on PLA (Travers, 2012).
Since the 1980s, more colleges and universities have developed PLA policies and programs to
grant PLA credit (Travers, 2012).
In the 2000s, the growth of online education not only increased the number of non-
traditional students going back to college, but it also provided more tools for and access to PLA
programs (Travers, 2012). The growth of online education, with open and free educational
resources (OER), massive open online courses (MOOCs), and online digital libraries, is
providing all learners, including non-traditional students, with more tools for learning material
on their own (Klein-Collins & Wertheim, 2013). These tools are also enhancing student mobility
between both geography and institutions (Klein-Collins & Wertheim, 2013). For example, a
student from Florida could take a MOOC based in California and eventually earn credit from an
institution in New York. Such mobility is a boon for non-traditional students that avail of PLA.
As PLA becomes a much more acceptable and credible alternative to earning college
credit, more PLA options become available to adult learners. One PLA option is credit by
examination, whereby students can demonstrate prior learning of material by passing exams
administered by national organizations or by colleges and universities (Gambescia &
Dagavarian, 2007). The College Board’s AP and CLEP tests are examples of credit by
examination, and a number of colleges allow students to “test-out” of classes. An extension of
credit by examination are competency-based education programs, or CBEs (Burnette, 2016).
Many CBEs allow students to take courses on their own time at their own pace and use criterion-
PRIOR LEARNING ASSESSMENT PORTFOLIOS 28

referenced assessments to determine whether students have met or mastered student learning
outcomes for a course (Burnette, 2016).
Prior Learning Assessment Portfolios
Of growing interest and use in colleges and universities are PLA portfolios. The PLA
portfolio requires a student submit a reflective narrative that articulates how he or she has met or
mastered the student learning outcomes of a particular course (Klein-Collins & Hain, 2009). That
narrative is supported by artifacts such as proof of certifications, performance evaluations, or
sample work, that are used towards earning credit for specific courses (Klein-Collins & Hain,
2009). Content experts, usually college faculty, evaluate the student’s PLA portfolio to
determine whether to grant credit to that student (Klein-Collins & Hain, 2009).
There are a variety of approaches to PLA portfolios. This diversity reflects not only the
diversity of colleges and universities that use them, but also the diverse experiences and
narratives of adult learners that complete portfolios (Sweygers, Soetewey, Meeus, Struyf, &
Pieters, 2009). Despite that diversity, two paradigms underlie most approaches (Conrad, 2008).
On one hand, the positivist paradigm views the portfolio as part of a broader credentialing
process that focuses on students earning degrees and, by turn, improving their marketability in
the workforce (Conrad, 2008). On the other hand, the constructivist paradigm views the portfolio
as a knowledge-building process within a broader framework of lifelong learning (Conrad,
2008). So, while the positivist paradigm is functional and pragmatic, the constructivist paradigm
is more aspirational and abstract. However, while the two paradigms may be different, they are
not mutually exclusive, as demonstrated by a number of PLA portfolio programs that employ
both paradigms (Conrad, 2008).

PRIOR LEARNING ASSESSMENT PORTFOLIOS 29

How Prior Learning Assessment Helps Adults Learners
As PLA programs continue to develop in higher education, they are helping adult learners
in a number of ways. PLA programs can save adult learners time and money by crediting their
experiential learning towards some college courses (Gast, 2013; Kamenetz, 2011; Klein-Collins
& Wertheim, 2013). Saving time and money also helps adult learners overcome some of the
struggles they have in balancing time commitments between family, occupation, and coursework
(Klein-Collins & Wertheim, 2013). Relieved of some of those struggles and buoyed by progress
being made towards their degrees, adult learners also feel empowered with a greater sense of
efficacy and agency, making them more likely to persist through coursework (Klein-Collins &
Wertheim, 2013).
That persistence pays off as PLA programs have demonstrated improved graduation rates
among adult learners, more than doubling the graduation rate compared to adult learners that do
not take a PLA program (Bowers & Bergman, 2016; Gast, 2013; Hayward & Williams, 2015;
Klein-Collins, 2010). PLA programs are also helping move adult learners’ careers forward,
particularly at colleges and universities focused on meeting the workforce needs of their
respective states and regions (Boyle, Gotcher, & Otts, 2018). Above all, by validating the life
experiences of adult learners, PLA programs are helping colleges and universities become more
welcoming for an adult learner population that has often felt excluded by higher education
(Kamenetz, 2011).
PLA portfolios have had a particularly positive impact on adult learners in higher
education. Consistent with how PLA programs in general have helped improve graduation rates,
PLA portfolios have also been used to demonstrate improved degree completion and graduation
rates. In a study of student achievement data for adult learners at one university, Rust and Ikard
PRIOR LEARNING ASSESSMENT PORTFOLIOS 30

(2016) found that the adult learners enrolled in a PLA portfolio course had a graduation rate of
54%, compared to 43% among adult learners not enrolled in the course. Furthermore, Rust &
Ikard (2016) found that adult learners in the PLA portfolio course earned an average grade point
average (GPA) of 3.77, which was higher than the 2.81 GPA for adult learners not enrolled in the
course. Plus, they found that the GPA of adult learners who enrolled in the PLA portfolio course
increased after the course by an average of .84 points (Rust & Ikard, 2016). In other words, the
benefits of the PLA portfolio course extended beyond graduation rates.
These extended benefits speak to the broader advantages of a portfolio-based PLA
program. In their study of a PLA portfolio development program at the University of
Massachusetts at Amherst, Stevens, Gerber, and Hendra (2010) found that the program
contributed to the transformational learning of students enrolled in the program. Using the
understanding and application of reflective practice acquired in the PLA portfolio development
program, the authors found that the students had developed analytical and critical thinking skills
that transformed how they approached work, family, and life in general (Stevens, Gerber, &
Hendra, 2010).
The Clark and Estes (2008) Gap Analytic Conceptual Framework
The gap analytical conceptual framework developed by Clark and Estes (2008) draws
attention to a performance gap between where an organization is, or its status quo, and where the
organization intends to go, or its goals and objectives. That gap is then examined for knowledge,
motivation, and organization influences that can explain how and why the performance gap
exists (Clark & Estes, 2008). Knowledge influences speak to whether or not stakeholders know
how to perform certain tasks, which stems from four knowledge types: factual, conceptual,
procedural, and metacognitive (Krathwohl, 2002). Motivation influences refer to three processes
PRIOR LEARNING ASSESSMENT PORTFOLIOS 31

in performance: choosing to complete a task, persisting in that task, and exerting effort
throughout the task (Clark & Estes, 2008; Mayer, 2011; Rueda, 2011). Several aspects of
motivation affect choice, persistence, and effort, including expectancy value (Eccles & Wigfield,
2015), interest (Schraw & Lehman, 2001), emotions (Pekrun, 2011), self-efficacy (Bandura,
2005), goal orientation (Pekrun, 2011), and attributions (Pintrich, 2003). Finally, organizational
factors, such as resources, policies and procedures, and cultural models and settings can
influence performance gaps in an organization (Clark & Estes, 2008; Kezar, 2001).
A modified version of the Clark and Estes (2008) conceptual framework will be
employed below to examine knowledge, motivation, and organization influences on Pacific
University’s (PU) efforts to meet its performance goal of improving graduation rates by
increasing the number of non-traditional students who earn academic credit for their prior
learning assessment (PLA) portfolios. The first section will discuss knowledge influences in the
PLA program, specifically the ability of PLA students to engage in the metacognitive process of
reflective practice and their procedural ability to articulate that reflection of their experiential
learning in their portfolios. The second section will discuss three motivation influences,
specifically the sense of self-efficacy of PLA students as college students, their goal orientation,
and their attribution, or to what do they attribute their success or failure. The final section will
discuss resources and cultural settings as organizational influences on PLA students’ ability to
succeed in the program. All three influences will be examined through the methodology to be
discussed in Chapter Three.

PRIOR LEARNING ASSESSMENT PORTFOLIOS 32

Stakeholder Knowledge and Motivation Influences
Knowledge and Skills Influences
As part of PU’s goal to improve its graduation rates, it has launched a PLA program that
aims to expedite degree completion times for non-traditional college students (students who are
25 years old or older) by helping them earn academic credit for experience in life, work, civic
participation, and community service. Specifically, PU’s PLA program requires a participating
student to develop a portfolio that documents his or her experiential learning and demonstrates
how that learning fulfills student learning outcomes (SLOs) for courses selected by that student
(PU PLA Course Guide). The process of developing a PLA portfolio calls on a student to employ
a set of procedural, conceptual, and metacognitive knowledge and skills. In particular, older,
non-traditional students may have developed expertise in a particular field that they lack the
metacognition to articulate that expertise (Feldon, 2007). Coming to a better conceptual
understanding of experiential learning and learning the procedural steps for portfolio
development can help PU PLA students identify, reflect on, and articulate their experiential
learning in their PLA portfolios.
Knowledge influences. What one learns and knows stems from four knowledge types:
(a) factual, (b) conceptual, (c) procedural, and (d) metacognitive. Factual knowledge involves
basic recall of simple information like facts, figures, and definitions, while conceptual
knowledge connects those facts into broader patterns and relationships that organize information
into coherent packets of knowledge (Krathwohl, 2002). For example, as factual knowledge, a
student may remember that Christopher Columbus landed on American shores in 1492, but
conceptual knowledge would contextualize that fact into a broader understanding of European
colonization of the Americas. The student can acquire such conceptual knowledge by reading a
PRIOR LEARNING ASSESSMENT PORTFOLIOS 33

historian’s interpretation of history, or the student may develop the skills necessary to interpret
history for himself or herself. Learning how to interpret history is an example of another type of
knowledge, procedural knowledge, which involves learning the skills, steps, or techniques
needed to perform a given task (Krathwohl, 2002). Going back to the example of the history
student, if that student later evaluates the strengths and weaknesses of his or her interpretation of
history, and is able to identify how he or she arrived at that interpretation, that process would be
an example of metacognitive knowledge, or the ability to reflect on and become more aware of
one’s knowledge and learning (Krathwohl, 2002). Together, factual, conceptual, procedural, and
metacognitive knowledge types influence what and how one learns.
These knowledge types are all integrated in the process of developing a PLA portfolio.
From the perspective of factual knowledge, non-traditional students enrolled in PU’s PLA
program need to be able to list and document facts and information about their experiences in
work, life, civic participation, and community service. That factual knowledge then needs to be
contextualized within broader conceptual knowledge, one that locates experiential learning
within coherent frameworks that make sense of that learning. Then, students need the procedural
knowledge for assembling a PLA portfolio, such as how to structure the portfolio, what steps to
follow in assembling parts of the portfolio, and what methods can be used to submit the
portfolio. However, while these knowledge types are important, they can only emerge once PLA
students have acquired the metacognitive knowledge and skills necessary to identify and
articulate the experiential learning that is at the heart of the PLA portfolio. In particular, PLA
students need to develop a conceptual understanding of experiential learning, learn the
procedural steps for assembling a PLA portfolio, and learn how to reflect on their experiential
learning.
PRIOR LEARNING ASSESSMENT PORTFOLIOS 34

Conceptual understanding of experiential learning. When returning to college or
enrolling for the first time, one of the most common obstacles adult learners face is failing to
understand and value experiential learning as a valid form of learning. While some studies have
suggested that older students outperform younger students in some areas, such as study skills and
time management (Cassidy, 2012), other research has indicated that older students may not be
fully aware of how much they have learned on their own while away from college (Conrad,
2008). Despite this lack of awareness, research on PLA programs has demonstrated how much
learning non-traditional students acquire in their lives, work environments, civic activity, and
community service (Conrad, 2008; Ritt, 2008; Rust & Ikard, 2016; Travers, 2012). Moreover,
that kind of real-world, experiential learning is becoming increasingly important in higher
education as employers are seeking more college graduates who possess a blend of academic
knowledge and practical skills (Carnivale, Smith, & Strohl, 2010). While non-traditional students
have acquired a wealth of experiential learning, they are not aware of the value of that learning.
Developing more appreciation for non-traditional students’ experiential learning can be
accomplished by coming to a better conceptual understanding of experiential learning. Kolb
provided a conceptual framework for extracting meaning and learning from one’s experience
(Kolb, 1984; Kolb & Kolb, 2005). According to Kolb, experiential learning emerges from
recalling concrete experience, reflecting on that experience, drawing abstract concepts from that
reflection, and then applying those concepts to new situations. Adult learners first need to be
attuned to experiences that they may not have considered before. For example, a working mother
may recall her professional work, but overlook the experience of child-rearing, which may also
be a source of experiential learning. Once experiences are recalled, guided reflection on those
experiences can lead adult learners to draw abstract concepts from those experiences. As a
PRIOR LEARNING ASSESSMENT PORTFOLIOS 35

working mother, reflecting on how she raised her children may yield some insights into
childhood psychology that she may have not considered. Finally, abstract concepts drawn from
reflections on experiences then need to be applied to different scenarios, perhaps even simulated
ones, to engage adult learners in higher order, critical thinking skills. In order for adult learners
to reflect on their experiential learning, they need to come to a better understanding of the
concept of experiential learning and Kolb’s conceptual model for reflecting on one’s
experiences.
How to assemble a portfolio. With a better conceptual understanding of experiential
learning, adult learners enrolled in PU’s PLA program can begin documenting their experiential
learning by learning the procedural steps for assembling a PLA portfolio. Conrad (2008) built on
Kolb’s theory of experiential learning, as well as the work of Dewey, Freire, and Mezirow, to
recommend steps that should be taken in developing a PLA portfolio. Drawing from Dewey’s
emphasis on real-world, experiential learning, Freire’s grounding of learning in learners’
experiences, and Mezirow’s advocacy for transformative self-reflection, Conrad identifies and
explains four steps in portfolio development. First, learners should reflect and find new, more
sacred meaning in the old, more mundane aspects of life. Second, learners should map and
scaffold the most important events and insights in that learner’s experiences. Third, the learner
should connect those insights into a broader schema of knowledge. Fourth, the learner must
demonstrate the knowledge built into a medium and format that are appropriate for academic
credit.
Conrad (2008) noted that in the last step, learners must articulate what has been learned
as learning statements that employ language from Bloom’s Taxonomy, demonstrating learning
all along the cumulative hierarchy of the taxonomy. As Conrad (2008) observes, “The writing of
PRIOR LEARNING ASSESSMENT PORTFOLIOS 36

learning statements is indeed the heart of the portfolio…it is an exercise that challenges
learners—often for the first time—to deconstruct their learning and break it into its constituent
parts” (p. 145). Since the purpose of a PLA portfolio is to earn academic credit, it is important
that PLA students always loop their reflections back to the academic context in which the PLA
portfolio is situated.
How to reflect on experiential learning. At the heart of both conceptual knowledge and
procedural knowledge for assembling PLA portfolios is the metacognitive skill of reflecting on
experiential learning. Feldon (2007) observed that the more expertise one has, the more
automated that expertise becomes, making it harder to explain the knowledge that underlies that
expertise. Non-traditional students face a similar difficulty when trying to explain knowledge
and skills they have gained from life, work, civic participation, and community service (Kenner
& Weinerman, 2011). For example, a seasoned paralegal may know how to write a legal brief
but may not be able to fully explain the writing standard of the legal profession, the special
language used in the profession, or the legal concepts behind the brief. Should this paralegal take
a criminal justice course, he or she may be able to write better legal briefs that the professor but
may not be able to articulate the factual or conceptual knowledge that goes into that brief. What
the paralegal lacks is the reflective skills to explain what he or she knows and how he or she
knows it.
Reflecting on one’s learning, knowledge, and skills is necessary to articulate one’s
experiential learning in a PLA portfolio. Such reflective skills are also a key part of
metacognition. In updating and revising Bloom’s Taxonomy of Educational Objectives,
Krathwohl (2002) made the case for reflection as a metacognitive skill. In this revised taxonomy,
one cannot assume that a student will know how to reflect because reflection is a cognitive skill
PRIOR LEARNING ASSESSMENT PORTFOLIOS 37

that must be learned and practiced. Moreover, as a skill, it is also reinforced with consistent
practice (Krathwohl, 2002), which has been the case with PLA portfolios (Müller, 2012). As the
research suggests, non-traditional students that develop PLA portfolios not only learn and use
reflective skills, but also develop and apply those skills at a higher level on a range of
metacognitive skills. In a study of PLA portfolios in Flanders, Sweygers et al. (2009) concluded,
“Portfolio creation…served to augment competencies important for personal and professional
learning and development, including increased critical thinking, organization, communication,
self-reflection, self-knowledge, and a greater recognition of the workplace as a site of learning”
(p. 99). In other words, by reflecting on their experiential learning in PLA portfolios, non-
traditional students can begin a process of continually spiraling upwards in metacognitive skills
like reflection.
Below, Table 2 states PU’s organizational mission, organizational global goal, and
stakeholder goal, along with the knowledge influence, type, and assessment that have been
selected for this stakeholder group. As noted in Table 2, the knowledge influence assessment to
be used will be embedded into and lifted from the PLA portfolio work of the stakeholder group.
Table 2
Knowledge Influences, Types, and Assessments for Knowledge Gap Analysis
Organizational Mission
Through its commitment to student learning, Pacific University’s mission is to provide high
quality, affordable and accessible educational programs and services for the individual and
people of the Pacific.
Organizational Global Goal
PRIOR LEARNING ASSESSMENT PORTFOLIOS 38

By 2020, 75% of Pacific University’s students will complete their respective degrees within
two years for associate degrees and within four years for bachelor’s degrees.
Stakeholder Goal
100% of students in the prior learning assessment program will earn 80% of their intended
credits from portfolios by the end of the 2020 fall term.
Knowledge Influence Knowledge Type Knowledge Influence
Assessment
Adult learners enrolled in
PU’s PLA program need to
know the concept of
experiential learning.
Conceptual Sample PLA portfolios will
be analyzed for examples of
Kolb’s recollection,
reflection, abstraction, and
application.

Former PLA students will be
interviewed to ascertain their
conceptual understanding of
experiential learning.
Adult learners enrolled in
PU’s PLA program need to
know how to prepare a PLA
portfolio.
Procedural Former PLA students will be
interviewed to identify what
steps they took in developing
their respective PLA
portfolios.
Adult learners enrolled in
PU’s PLA program need to
reflect on what skills,
insights, and lessons they
learned from their experience
in life, work, civic
participation, and extra-
curricular interests.
Metacognitive Sample PLA portfolios will
be analyzed to identify
examples of reflection.

Former PLA students will be
interviewed identify the kinds
of reflection they conducted
when preparing their PLA
portfolios.

Motivation Influences
Just because you know how to do something does not mean that you will do it or want to
do it, which is why, when it comes to learning, motivation is just as important as knowledge
PRIOR LEARNING ASSESSMENT PORTFOLIOS 39

(Clark, 2017). To effectively learn, learners must choose to start learning, persist in learning
activities, and exert mental effort throughout those learning activities (Clark & Estes, 2008;
Mayer, 2011; Rueda, 2011).
A number of factors influence motivation. Expectancy value theory presents two factors
that help learners start a task, wherein expectancy refers to whether one believes one can do the
task, while value refers to whether one values the task enough to start the task (Eccles &
Wigfield, 2015). A related motivational factor is interest, which can be the interest an individual
has in a task itself or interest that is triggered externally by the situation of the task (Schraw &
Lehman, 2001). Emotions are also a motivational factor that can range between positive
activating emotions like hope, negative activating emotions like anger, positive deactivating
emotions like relaxation, or negative deactivating emotions like hopelessness (Pekrun, 2011).
Another motivational factor, self-efficacy, refers to how much confidence a learner has that he or
she can complete a task (Bandura, 2005). Related to self-efficacy is the motivational factor of
goal orientation, which reflects whether a learner approaches or avoids tasks based on either a
focus on an effort to master the task or to perform better than others on the task (Pekrun, 2011).
Finally, similarly related to self-efficacy is the motivational factor of attributions, for which
perceived success or failure at a task is attributed to either stable or unstable causes that are
internal or external to the learner (Pintrich, 2003). These six motivational factors—value,
interest, emotions, self-efficacy, goal orientation, and attributions—help explain how learners are
motivated to start learning tasks, persist through them despite obstacles and distractions, and
exert enough mental effort to perform well on those tasks.
Non-traditional students who enroll in college and a PLA program demonstrate that they
are motivated enough to start. However, research indicates that the additional responsibilities that
PRIOR LEARNING ASSESSMENT PORTFOLIOS 40

many older students face, such as family and work, can undermine their motivation to persist and
exert enough mental effort to adequately fulfill the tasks required of them in college, including a
PLA portfolio (Ritt, 2008). As a result, non-traditional students may not be motivated enough to
complete a PLA program and may eventually drop out of college (Rust & Ikard, 2016). This
would not only hamper PU’s efforts to increase graduation rates among all students, but would
also jeopardize the overall educational goals of adult learners. To help illuminate this
motivational aspect of non-traditional students enrolled in PU’s PLA program, task value,
attribution theory, and self-efficacy will be examined.
Task value. How motivated one is to complete a task depends on how much value he or
she ascribes to that task. Tasks can have intrinsic value, attainment value, and utility value, all of
which may be diminished by the perceived cost of the task (Eccles, 2006). Whether personal or
situational, intrinsic value is when a task is perceived as having inherent interest to the person,
such as a teacher whose desire to teach well motivates him or her to work on weekends (Eccles,
2006). Attainment value is when the person links the task to his or her identity or preferences,
such as a teacher who, despite a fear of public speaking, finds value in delivering lectures
(Eccles, 2006). Utility value refers to how the task much the task will help the person fulfill his
or her goals or how well the task meets his or her psychological needs like need for competence,
need for relatedness, or a need for autonomy (Eccles, 2006). No matter how much a person may
value a task, however, that value may be undermined by any perceived costs to the task (Eccles,
2006). To continue with the example of the teacher, a teacher’s friends who are not teachers may
tease that teacher about spending so much time lesson planning, which may undercut the value of
that task for the teacher.
PRIOR LEARNING ASSESSMENT PORTFOLIOS 41

For adult learners returning to college and working on a PLA portfolio, there is potential
for considerable task value. Many adult learners find intrinsic value in recalling and reflecting on
their experiential learning (Calleja, 2014; Stevens et al., 2010). The very nature of reflecting on
and finding value in one’s experiences also brings attainment value to PLA students as they
engage in sensemaking that leads them to see themselves as lifelong learners (Conrad, 2010).
Adult learners also perceive the utility value of completing a PLA portfolio as part of an overall
effort to earn a college degree (Klein-Collins & Wertheim, 2013).
Despite the value that adult learners may find in completing a PLA portfolio, the
perceived costs of completing the portfolio may undermine that value. The very challenges that
adult learners face in returning to college are still there even with programs like PLA that are
designed to overcome some of those challenges (Leiste & Jenson, 2011; Ritt, 2008). For
example, working parents are still responsible for raising their children, paying the bills, and
fulfilling other obligations. Any demand on their time, such as developing a PLA portfolio, may
be perceived as a cost that undermines the value of the PLA development process.
Attributions. Attribution theory posits that a learner perceives success or failure to be
caused by stable or unstable variables that are either located internally or externally, which are
also perceived as within control of the learner or beyond the control of the learner (Pintrich,
2003; Weiner, 2010). It is important to remember that the perception of the attribution need not
be accurate in order to influence a learner’s motivation (Weiner, 2010). Also, attributions need
not be external to be perceived as beyond the control of the learner, because internal attributions
can also be seen as beyond a learner’s control, either as stable factors such as perceived lack of
aptitude or unstable factors such as health or mood (Wiener, 2010). As Pintrich (2003) asserted,
“the general trend is that students who believe they have more personal control of their own
PRIOR LEARNING ASSESSMENT PORTFOLIOS 42

learning and behavior are more likely to do well and achieve higher levels than students who do
not feel in control” (p. 673). The crux of attribution theory, therefore, lies in how much control a
learner perceives he or she has over learning.
Non-traditional students grapple with several attribution challenges. Externally, having
either dropped out of college or delayed enrollment, non-traditional students often attribute their
absence from college to both stable and unstable factors that they believe are beyond their
control, such as family, work, or financial challenges (Kenner & Weinerman, 2011; Phipps,
Prieto, & Ndinguri, 2013; Ritt, 2008). Internally, these students also attribute their absence from
college to stable and unstable factors such as perceived lack of aptitude or health issues that they
believe are beyond their control (Kenner & Weinerman, 2011; Phipps et al., 2013; Ritt, 2008).
Either way, when confronted by the rigors of college or a college environment that is unfamiliar,
non-traditional students run the risk of feeling even more out of control of their learning (Kenner
& Weinerman, 2011; Phipps et al., 2013; Ritt, 2008).
This attribution challenge can also carry over into non-traditional students who enroll in a
PLA program and are faced with what they may perceive are the overwhelming demands of
developing a PLA portfolio (Rust & Ikard, 2016). Their perceived lack of control could lead to a
downward spiral of losing even more sense of control, further undermining their performance
and achievement. However, shifting their attribution back to factors within their control, such as
task management and time management, can help restore a sense of control for adult learners in a
PLA portfolio program.
Self-efficacy. Losing a sense of control over one’s learning, and any subsequent decline
in performance, is related to the motivational factor of self-efficacy. As discussed earlier, a
learner’s self-efficacy reflects one’s personal beliefs about how much agency or control he or she
PRIOR LEARNING ASSESSMENT PORTFOLIOS 43

has over one’s learning and performance (Bandura, 2005; Bandura, 2012). As Bandura (2012)
noted, “self-efficacy beliefs influence how well people motivate themselves and persevere in the
face of difficulties through the goals they set for themselves, their outcome expectations, and
causal attributions for their successes and failures” (p. 13). In addition, learners with a high sense
of self-efficacy work harder to master knowledge or skills or to perform well (Pintrich, 2003). In
short, self-efficacy can motivate learners to persist and exert mental effort through difficult
learning tasks such as a PLA portfolio.
The metacognitive reflective skills that a non-traditional student cultivates in developing
a PLA portfolio can help increase perceived self-efficacy. In a study of non-traditional students
who developed PLA portfolios at Middle Tennessee State University (MTSU), Rust and Ikard
(2016) found that students in the PLA portfolio program not only outperformed other students on
a range of student achievement data points, but, in subsequent courses, they also demonstrated
higher metacognitive skills as a result of reflecting on their experiential learning. Rust and Ikard
(2016) suggested that the improved student outcomes for these students stemmed from their
enhanced metacognitive skills. While Rust and Ikard (2016) and Sweygers et al. (2009) have
called for more research on the link between PLA portfolio development and metacognitive
skills, the implications for self-efficacy are promising. The improved achievement outcomes of
students in a PLA portfolio program can boost their sense of self-efficacy which can, in turn,
enhance their performance in future work, contributing to what Bandura (2000) called a positive
self-efficacy spiral of reciprocal causation.
Table 3 below reiterates PU’s organizational mission and organizational global goal, as
well as the stakeholder goal for this study. Also listed are the motivational factors of this study,
task value, attributions and self-efficacy, as well as assessments for those factors. These
PRIOR LEARNING ASSESSMENT PORTFOLIOS 44

assessments will help bring more clarity to how these motivational factors are affecting this
stakeholder group.
Table 3
Motivational Influences, Types, and Assessments for Motivation Gap Analysis

Organizational Mission
Through its commitment to student learning, Pacific University’s mission is to provide high
quality, affordable and accessible educational programs and services for the individual and people
of the Pacific.
Organizational Global Goal
By 2020, 75% of Pacific University’s students will complete their respective degrees within two
years for associate degrees and within four years for bachelor’s degrees.
Stakeholder Goal
100% of students in the prior learning assessment program will earn 80% of their intended credits
from portfolios by the end of the 2020 fall term.
Assumed Motivation Influences Motivational Influence Assessment
Task value: Adult learners enrolled in PU’s PLA
program need to see the value of their experiential
learning and prioritize their PLA work enough to
complete their PLA portfolios.
Former PLA students will be interviewed to
identify what value they saw in the PLA
portfolio process.
Attributions: Adult learners enrolled in PU’s
PLA program need to attribute their control from
factors beyond their control (family emergencies,
crises, etc.) to factors within their control (task
management, time management, etc.) when
developing PLA portfolios.
Former PLA students will be interviewed to
identify the reasons that they completed their
PLA portfolios.
Self-Efficacy: Adult learners enrolled in PU’s
PLA program need to feel confident in their
ability to complete a PLA portfolio so that other
roles (parent, breadwinner, etc.) do not undermine
their PLA portfolio.
Former PLA students will be interviewed to
identify how their confidence level changed,
if at all, throughout the PLA portfolio
development process.

PRIOR LEARNING ASSESSMENT PORTFOLIOS 45

Organizational Influences
How well stakeholders perform in an organization is influenced by that organization’s
culture. Organizational culture can be defined as a dynamic set of beliefs, norms, and values that
individuals in an organization have learned over time in response to challenges and opportunities
and that guide how old and new members behave in that organization (Schein, 2017). Within the
context of achieving organizational or stakeholder goals, organizational culture can either
support or hinder performance in achieving those goals (Clark & Estes, 2008; Rueda, 2011).
Whether a boon or a hindrance, organizational culture manifests itself in visible cultural settings
that are rooted in deeper and less visible cultural models (Rueda, 2011). A cultural model
represents the underlying schemas and assumptions in an organization, such as whether the
organization tends to value individualistic competition or collective collaboration (Rueda, 2011).
That cultural model shapes the more concrete cultural setting of an organization, such as whether
performance incentives tend to reward individual achievement or collective success (Rueda,
2011). One can thus better understand an organization’s culture by distinguishing between
cultural models and cultural settings in that organization.
Cultural Model Influences
Bias. The predominant cultural model operating at PU is part of a broader cultural model
in higher education that prefers pedagogy over andragogy. In contrast to pedagogy, which uses
developmental psychology in order to help elementary teachers reach children, andragogy
employs adult learning theory to help adults learn (Danver, 2016). One of the key differences
between pedagogy and andragogy is that while teacher-driven instruction is effective for children
learning, student-driven learning is more effective for adults (Knowles, 1975). However, while
andragogy may be better suited to the needs of college students, especially older students
PRIOR LEARNING ASSESSMENT PORTFOLIOS 46

enrolled in a PLA program, undergraduate programs at many colleges and universities are still
entrenched in a pedagogical paradigm (Fairchild, 2003; Falk & Blaylock, 2009; Kasworm, 2010;
Patterson, 2018; Rabourn, BrckaLorenz, & Shoup, 2018; Sissel, Hansman, & Kasworm, 2001).
To better meet the needs of PLA students, PU will need to shift from a paradigm of pedagogy
towards a paradigm of andragogy.
Resistance to change. Another cultural model at PU is resistance to the experiential
learning that stands at the heart of PLA programs. Resistance to organizational change can take
on a number of forms, including outright opposition to the change, silent repression of change
initiatives, or inertia and inaction (Agocs, 1997). Moreover, resistance to change often comes
from stakeholders who perceive a threat to their power or position (Agocs, 1997). While PLA
programs help students earn academic credit for non-academic learning from life, work, and
volunteer experiences, many in academia, particularly instructional faculty, do not consider such
non-academic learning as legitimate for higher education (Travers, 2012). This resistance to non-
academic, experiential learning stems, in part, from the academic background of instructional
faculty, most of whom invested years of academic study and research into becoming
professionals in higher education (Conrad, 2010). Perhaps the non-academic roots of PLA’s
experiential learning are antithetical to the academic lineage of college faculty.
At a deeper level, though, resistance to PLA’s experiential learning may have more to do
with power and privilege than with academics. As Conrad (2010) has argued, “Gate-keeping
mechanisms, honed over time, have valued institutionalized knowledge over knowledge gleaned
from experience” (p. 158). Put another way, higher education has historically treated learning as
a limited resource that must be protected as an asset and commodified for profit and prestige
(Fenwick, 2006; Harris, 2000). In this context, experiential learning is perceived as a threat to the
PRIOR LEARNING ASSESSMENT PORTFOLIOS 47

power, privilege, and money that higher education has traditionally held over academic learning.
However, to achieve its organizational goal of improving graduation rates, including rates among
PLA students, PU needs to help faculty accept and appreciate informal, experiential learning as a
valid avenue towards more formal, academic learning.
Cultural Setting Influences
The cultural model at PU and in higher education that values pedagogy above andragogy
has led to a cultural setting that is youth-centric. Marketing, curricula, and programs in higher
education tend to target younger adolescents (Kasworm, 2010), and many college campuses and
undergraduate programs do not accommodate the needs of older learners (Fairchild, 2003).
Whether it be courses that are inconveniently scheduled for working adults, student services that
are closed after working hours, or even student activities that are geared towards younger
students, adult learners are often left behind on college campuses. If PU is to help improve the
graduation rates of older students, especially those enrolled in its PLA program, then the
organization will need to improve and increase accommodations for those students.
Resources. Similarly, the cultural model at PU and in higher education that resists PLA’s
focus on experiential learning has resulted in a cultural setting marked by inadequate training and
resources for faculty and staff involved in PLA programs. Specifically, many faculty evaluators
of PLA portfolios not only lack the training to fairly and accurately evaluate PLA portfolios
(Mckay, Cohn, & Kuang, 2016), but they are often tasked to conduct such evaluations without
clear assessment instruments or rubrics for those portfolios (Joosten-ten Brinke, Sluijsmans, &
Jochems, 2010; Stenlund, 2012). Again, if PU is to improve graduation rates for its students,
including older students enrolled in its PLA program, it needs to ensure that PLA portfolio
PRIOR LEARNING ASSESSMENT PORTFOLIOS 48

evaluators are adequately trained and supported with resources to ensure the fair and accurate
evaluation of PLA portfolios.
Goals. Lacking resources and training for PLA portfolio programs can lead faculty to
mislead PLA students with vague performance goals and unclear expectations. Clear and clearly
articulated goals can contribute to successful achievement of those goals, while vague or
ambiguous goals can undermine performance towards achieving those goals (Kezar, 2001;
Shute, 2008). Similarly, clear and guided feedback can improve performance and learning, while
unclear and haphazard feedback can deter performance and learning (Bangert-Drowns, Kulik,
Kulik, & Morgan, 1991; Shute, 2008). Rubrics that are developed in advance and provide
scoring criteria and descriptions for each aspect of student work are one common method for
providing students with both guidance and feedback on their work (Simper, 2018; Wiggins &
McTighe, 2005). Kelley (2017) recommends a set of PLA portfolio rubrics to guide PLA
students in developing their portfolios and faculty in evaluating those portfolios. These rubrics
cover key areas in experiential learning, including recollecting experience, reflecting on that
experience, connecting that experience to theory and practice, and applying lessons learned from
that experience to different scenarios (Kelley, 2017). With the clarity that such rubrics provide
for both students and faculty, PLA students can more successfully complete their PLA portfolios
and earn academic credit with their portfolios.
Table 4 below reiterates PU’s organizational mission and organizational global goal, as
well as the stakeholder goal for this study. Also listed are the organizational factors of this study,
bias, resources, and vague goals, as well as assessments for those factors. These assessments will
help bring more clarity to how these organizational factors are affecting this stakeholder group.

PRIOR LEARNING ASSESSMENT PORTFOLIOS 49

Table 4
Organizational Influences and Organizational Influence Assessments
Organizational Mission
Through its commitment to student learning, Pacific University’s mission is to provide
high quality, affordable and accessible educational programs and services for the
individual and people of the Pacific.
Organizational Global Goal
By 2020, 75% of Pacific University’s students will complete their respective degrees
within two years for associate degrees and within four years for bachelor’s degrees.
Stakeholder Goal
100% of students in the prior learning assessment program will earn 80% of their
intended credits from portfolios by the end of the 2020 fall term.
Assumed Organizational Influences Organizational Influence Assessment
Bias and Resistance to Change: PU needs to
cultivate more faculty acceptance of and
institutional support for the experiential
learning at the heart of the PLA program.
Document analysis of student achievement
data for PLA students will include an
internal examination of PLA credit-award
rates by academic department, as well as
external comparisons to national credit-
award rates in order to identify any
possible variance.
Resources: PLA instructors and PU student
support services need to provide more
technical and curricular support for non-
traditional students enrolled in PU’s PLA
program as they develop their PLA
portfolios.
Former PLA students will be interviewed
to identify what support or lack of support
they faced when developing their PLA
portfolios.
PRIOR LEARNING ASSESSMENT PORTFOLIOS 50

Vague goals: Faculty evaluators of PLA
portfolios need to clarify expectations for
PLA portfolios by developing rubrics and
guidelines for PLA portfolios.
Document analysis of sample PLA
portfolios will utilize rubrics to evaluate
the sample set and compare credit-award
rates from rubric-based evaluations of the
document analysis against actual credit-
award rates from the institution.

This chapter has reviewed research on how colleges and universities utilize PLA
programs to re-engage older, non-traditional students in higher education. As the research
indicated, using a variety of approaches, PLA programs validate experiential learning as a
complement to academic study. Using the Gap Analysis Framework (Clark & Estes, 2008), this
chapter also examined knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences on the performance
of this study’s stakeholder group, non-traditional students enrolled in PU’s PLA portfolio
program. Knowledge influences include a conceptual understanding of experiential learning, the
knowledge of the procedural steps for developing a portfolio, and the metacognitive skill of
reflection. Motivation influences include task value, attribution, and self-efficacy. Finally,
organizational influences include cultural settings, such as accommodations for non-traditional
students and resources for PLA portfolio evaluators. Such cultural settings are rooted in other
organizational influences, specifically higher education’s cultural models of resistance to change
from traditional faculty and an overall preference in higher education for pedagogy over
andragogy. The next chapter will lay out this study’s methodological approach.
Conceptual Framework: The Interaction of Stakeholders’ Knowledge and Motivation and
the Organizational Context
When studying particular phenomena, researchers will often adopt a conceptual
framework that serves as the theoretical map for the research. A conceptual framework
PRIOR LEARNING ASSESSMENT PORTFOLIOS 51

deliberately reflects and articulates the underlying beliefs and ideas of the researcher and the
study (Maxwell, 2013). Rather than being discovered, the researcher constructs a conceptual
framework to organize the study around interdependent concepts that will guide the collection
and analysis of data (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). The framework helps identify stakeholders for a
study, whether from within or outside an organization, and allows the researcher to design an
experimental or experiential model that can help explain relationships between variables within
that model (Slayton, 2018). Conceptual frameworks are often informed by empirical and
theoretical literature and grounded in the personal experiences of the researcher (Maxwell,
2013). Considering all of these elements, a conceptual framework serves as a lens through which
research phenomena is studied and understood.
The framework that was used in this study draws from empirical literature on PLA
research, theoretical research on andragogy, and the experiences of the researcher as a PLA
instructor. The following framework also integrated knowledge and motivation influences for
PLA students within organizational culture and under an umbrella of andragogy to examine how
and why some students succeed in a PLA program while others do not. In particular, PLA and
andragogy research suggest that motivation influences factor heavily into how well adult learners
perform in higher education, with knowledge influences and organizational culture having an
impact on the knowledge and motivation of adult learners in a PLA program.
Given the many demands faced by adult learners, including family, work, and financial
obligations, motivation plays a central role in how well adult learners perform in higher
education programs like PLA. Adult learners may be motivated enough to go back to college and
enroll in a PLA program, but additional responsibilities they face, such as family and work, can
undermine their motivation to persist and exert enough mental effort to adequately fulfill the
PRIOR LEARNING ASSESSMENT PORTFOLIOS 52

tasks required of them in a PLA program (Ritt, 2008). As a result, they encounter attribution and
self-efficacy challenges (Bandura, 2005; Bandura, 2012; Pintrich, 2003; Weiner, 2010), which
undermine their motivation to complete a PLA program or even finish college (Rust & Ikard,
2016). Put another way, adult learners may be motivated to take care of their families and their
obligations, but not motivated enough to take care of their academic work in a PLA program.
Two areas have an impact on the motivation of PLA students: knowledge influences and
organizational culture. PLA programs require a conceptual understanding of experiential
learning, a grasp of the procedural steps for developing a PLA portfolio, and metacognitive skills
that facilitate the reflective practice of one’s experiential learning (Kenner & Weinerman, 2011;
Krathwohl, 2002; Murphy, 2007). Adult learners who have not acquired or developed that
knowledge and skill set may lose even more sense of self-efficacy if they believe that they are
not up to the task of such reflection. Moreover, adult learners who feel out of place going back to
college with younger students may find their self-efficacy further undermined by the
organizational culture of higher education. The cultural setting of colleges tends to be youth-
centric in its marketing, curricula, and student services (Kasworm, 2010), and are often
unaccommodating for adult learners (Fairchild, 2003), with courses and services that are
inconveniently scheduled and located. The youth-centric lack of accommodations for adult
learners reflects a broader cultural model of higher education, namely that many undergraduate
programs lack a proper grasp of andragogy in their bias towards pedagogy (Fairchild, 2003; Falk
& Blaylock, 2009; Kasworm, 2010; Sissel et al., 2001). In short, if PLA students do not know
how to do the work in a PLA program and are not supported by a college culture that just does
not “get them”, they may be less motivated to complete a PLA program or college itself.
PRIOR LEARNING ASSESSMENT PORTFOLIOS 53

Figure 1 illustrates the relationship between knowledge influences and motivation
influences and the organizational context of higher education.

Figure 1. Conceptual map for knowledge, motivation, and organizational context for prior
learning assessment (PLA) students.

At the center of the figure is the stakeholder goal that PLA students will complete and
submit PLA portfolios that earn academic credit. This goal is heavily influenced by a PLA
student’s motivation to persist and exert enough mental effort to succeed in the PLA program.
That motivational target is influenced by how well-equipped a PLA student is to engage in the
kind of metacognitive knowledge required for reflecting on one’s experiential learning. That
knowledge and the student’s motivation are, in turn, influenced by the cultural setting of many
colleges and universities, which tend to be youth-centric in their lack of accommodations for
adult learners. Finally, the motivation, knowledge, and cultural setting that affect PLA students
PRIOR LEARNING ASSESSMENT PORTFOLIOS 54

are influenced by a cultural model in higher education that currently prioritizes pedagogy over
andragogy.

PRIOR LEARNING ASSESSMENT PORTFOLIOS 55

CHAPTER THREE: METHODS
The purpose of this project was to conduct an evaluation study of Pacific University’s
(PU) prior learning assessment (PLA) portfolio development program to determine how and why
some students succeed in the program and others do not. The goal of this project was to evaluate
how well students enrolled in the PLA portfolio program complete the program as part of PU’s
broader goal of improving college completion and graduation rates. Employing the gap analysis
model from Clark and Estes (2008), this study identified knowledge, motivation, and
organizational boons and barriers to students completing PU’s PLA portfolio program. The study
first identified which students are succeeding and which students are failing the program, and
then examined the factors that contribute to success or failure in the program.
The following questions guided this study:
1. To what extent is PU meeting its goal of PLA students earning at least 80% of academic
credits petitioned in their PLA portfolios by the 2020 fall term?
2. What are the knowledge, motivation and organizational influences related to achieving
this goal?
3. What are the recommendations for organizational practice in the areas of knowledge,
motivation, and organizational resources?
Participating Stakeholders
The primary stakeholder group studied were non-traditional students older than 25-years-
old who have enrolled in PU’s PLA portfolio course. As of fall 2018, 185 students had
participated in PU’s PLA program. However, the PLA program has been operating since the fall
2014 term, and past enrollees in the program were also included in this study. This study worked
PRIOR LEARNING ASSESSMENT PORTFOLIOS 56

with PU’s PLA program staff to assemble more general data about past PLA enrollees and to
reach out to them for participation in this study.
Since the purpose of this study was to examine how and why some students succeed or
fail in the program, this stakeholder group was divided into two groups that represent varying
degrees of success or failure in the program. The first group were PLA students who did submit
portfolios but earned less than 25% of credits petitioned in their portfolios. The second group
were PLA students who submitted portfolios and earned more than 75% of credits petitioned in
their portfolios.
It should be noted that soon before this study’s research commenced, a Category 5
hurricane with winds reaching 180 miles per hour devastated more than 80% of the PU campus.
The hurricane’s devastation disrupted PU’s 2018-2019 academic year, causing the fall 2018 term
to extend to February 2019 and forcing the spring 2019 term to run from March 2019 through
June 2019. These disruptions to PU’s academic calendar, as well as the hurricane’s impact on the
lives of PU students, faculty, and staff, undermined some elements of this study’s research.
Survey Sampling Criteria and Rationale
Criterion 1. Students who had previously enrolled in PU’s PLA course. Since this study
evaluated the performance of PU’s PLA program, only students who enrolled in the program’s
PLA course were studied.
Criterion 2. PLA students who did not withdraw from the PLA course. While some
students who first enrolled in PU’s PLA course withdrew from the course, they may have
withdrawn for reasons unrelated to the course. To focus this study on the course itself, only
students who stayed in the course were studied.

PRIOR LEARNING ASSESSMENT PORTFOLIOS 57

Survey Sampling (Recruitment) Strategy and Rationale
The purpose of surveying this sub-group of the stakeholder population was to identify
some of the KMO influences on submission or non-submission of their PLA portfolios. This
information revealed some of the knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences that
helped account for their performance or lack thereof. An anonymous survey (Appendix A) was
used and the study worked with PU’s PLA program staff to generate and access a random sample
of the 185 students who had enrolled in PU’s PLA portfolio development course. A random
sample was preferred as it provided a representative cross-section of students, which helped
identify some generalizable trends within the survey results (Creswell, 2014). The survey
followed a single-stage sampling procedure that surveyed respondents who enrolled in PU’s PLA
program from the fall 2014 term through the fall 2018 term (Creswell, 2014). While this study
attempted to secure a representative sample of the 185 students, due to disruptions caused by the
2018 hurricane, the study was only able to secure 24 respondents. Furthermore, survey results
did not distinguish between which respondents successfully submitted PLA portfolios and which
respondents did not submit portfolios.
Interview Sampling Criteria and Rationale
Criterion 1. Students who enrolled in PU’s PLA course. Since this study evaluated the
performance of PU’s PLA program, only students who had enrolled in the program’s PLA
course were studied.
Criterion 2. Former PLA students who submitted portfolios.
Criterion 3. Former PLA students who submitted portfolios and earned less than 25% of
credits petitioned in their portfolios.
PRIOR LEARNING ASSESSMENT PORTFOLIOS 58

Criterion 4. Former PLA students who submitted portfolios and earned more than 75%
of credits petitioned in their portfolios.
Interview Sampling (Recruitment) Strategy and Rationale
For this study’s interviews, purposeful sampling was used to select three students who
earned less than 25% or less of credits requested in their portfolios, and three students who
succeeded in PU’s PLA program by earning 75% or more of the academic credits that they
requested in their PLA portfolios. Given the time constraints of the research phase of this study,
focusing on six former PLA students allowed time for in-depth interviews to provide substantive
qualitative results. However, due to disruptions caused by the 2018 hurricane, and reluctance on
the part of students who had earned 25% or less on their portfolios, this study conducted only
one interview with a former student who had earned 25% or less credits requested in that
student’s PLA portfolio. The other five students had earned 75% or more of credits requested in
their portfolios. Also, the PLA portfolios of the six former PLA students were part of the broader
document analysis phase of this study, which preceded the interviews.
Data Collection and Instrumentation
Document Analysis of Student Achievement Data
Student achievement data of PU’s PLA program was obtained from reports prepared and
published by PU’s PLA program staff. This data was analyzed for PLA course completion rates,
the number and percentage of PLA portfolios submitted, and the number and percentage of PLA
credits awarded. Furthermore, this PLA student achievement data was benchmarked against
student achievement data from the Council for Adult and Experiential Learning (CAEL). CAEL
offers Learning Counts, which is an online course that helps students develop PLA portfolios for
PRIOR LEARNING ASSESSMENT PORTFOLIOS 59

review by content experts at Learning Counts who determine what academic credit, if any, will
be granted by CAEL (Klein-Collins & Hudson, 2017).
As a form of qualitative research, document analysis is a valuable tool for triangulating
one’s research (Bowen, 2009; Merriam & Tisdell, 2016), which can produce “rich descriptions
of a single phenomenon” (Bowen, 2009, p. 29). For this study, analysis of PLA student
achievement data helped identify trends and correlations in the program that informed this
study’s interviews and document analysis of sample PLA portfolios. For example, the analysis
distinguished between PLA students who never submitted portfolios, PLA students who
submitted portfolios but earned less than 25% of credits requested, and PLA students who
submitted portfolios and earned 75% or more of credits requested. Such data helped
contextualize data gathered from this study’s interviews and additional document analysis.
Analysis of the data also yielded some clues about organizational barriers, particularly by
identifying any variance in credit award rates between PU and CAEL.
Interviews
Interview protocol. When trying to understand a specific behavior, interviewing can
provide information that observations cannot provide, namely what is going on inside someone’s
head, such as his or her motivation (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). For this study, semi-structured
interviews were conducted with three students who earned 25% or less of academic credits
requested in their PU PLA portfolios and three students who earned 75% or more of the
academic credits they had requested in their portfolios. This semi-structured approach allowed
for specific qualitative data to be gathered during the interviews without stymying the flow of
information and discussion with a rigid set of questions (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). Since the
PRIOR LEARNING ASSESSMENT PORTFOLIOS 60

interviews explored all KMO influences addressed in this study, the interviews needed to be
structured, yet flexible enough to cover all KMO influences.
Interview questions (Appendix B) focused on how these students developed their PLA
portfolios and how they persisted in the program. One set of questions spoke to the participants’
procedural knowledge of developing PLA portfolios, their conceptual understanding of
experiential learning, and their metacognitive knowledge of reflection. Another set of questions
spoke to participants’ motivation to persist in developing their PLA portfolios, specifically the
task value they ascribed to the portfolio development process, their attributions of control in
developing the portfolios, and their sense of self-efficacy in developing the portfolios. A final set
of questions ascertained what support, or lack of support, was provided by the institution as the
participants developed their portfolios.
Interview procedures. This study’s interviews took place concurrently with a document
analysis of student achievement data in PU’s PLA portfolio program and a document analysis of
sample PU PLA portfolios throughout the fall 2018 term. Formal, one-time interviews were
conducted with three former PU PLA students who earned 25% or less of academic credits they
requested in their PLA portfolios and three students who earned 75% or more of credits they had
requested in their PLA portfolios. Wiess (1994) noted that when conducting interviews, building
“immediacy and drama” (p. 72) can help interviewees “provide a density of detail that would not
be provided in ordinary conversations” (p. 73). To build that immediacy, interviews took place in
one of PU’s group study rooms to situate the interviewee back in an academic context, especially
if that interviewee has already graduated with a college degree. It is also important to avoid
situations and environments that may cause too many distractions for the interview (Patton,
2002). Holding the interviews in PU’s study rooms also helped minimize distractions that may
PRIOR LEARNING ASSESSMENT PORTFOLIOS 61

arise from busy places, such as a coffee shop or an interviewee’s workplace. Each interview
lasted about 60 minutes and was recorded using the audio recorder on an Apple iPhone while the
interviewer took notes.
Document Analysis of Prior Learning Assessment Portfolios
Fourteen PU PLA sample portfolios were examined for two knowledge influences,
conceptual understanding of experiential learning and metacognitive reflection on experiences,
and possible organizational influences. Such document analysis is commonly used in qualitative
research for the depth of ethnographic insight it provides researchers, as well as its ability help
researchers learn more about how people in a study are thinking or feeling (Merriam & Tisdell,
2016). Document analysis can also help triangulate other sources of qualitative data (Bowen,
2009), such as this study’s interviews and document analysis of student achievement data.
Initially, this study aimed to analyze seven portfolios from PLA students who earned 25% or less
of credits requested in their portfolio seven portfolios from PLA students who earned 75% or
more of credits requested in their portfolios. However, disruptions caused by the 2018 hurricane
made it difficult to obtain portfolios that met this criteria. Instead, of the 14 portfolios analyzed,
four had earned less than 25% of credits requested, six had earned between 33% and 68% of
credits requested, and four had earned 75% or more of credits requested.
The document analysis was conducted in two phases. The first phase was a content
analysis that identified and codes examples of conceptual understanding of experiential learning
and metacognitive reflection. The second phase involved an evaluation of each portfolio using
PLA portfolio rubrics developed by CAEL (Kelley, 2017). The PLA portfolio rubric included the
following criteria:
• Course student learning outcomes identified and addressed (SLOs)
PRIOR LEARNING ASSESSMENT PORTFOLIOS 62

• Experience is discussed (Recollection)
• Reflection on experience is evidence (Reflection)
• Understanding theory and practice (Abstraction)
• Learning application (Application)
• College-level writing and communication (Communication)
• Supporting documentation (Evidence)
Each criterion was scored on the following scale:
• 4 for exceptional performance on a criterion
• 3 for above average performance on a criterion
• 2 for a criterion being addressed
• 1 for a criterion being addressed but needing improvement
• 0 for a criterion not being addressed
Based on the rubric developed by CAEL (Kelley, 2017), a minimum total score of 19 was
required to earn academic credit. This study’s author used this rubric to evaluate all 14 portfolios
analyzed as part of this study to determine which courses listed in each portfolio would earn
credit and which courses would not earn credit. These credit award determination results were
then compared to actual credits awarded by PU for the 14 portfolios. The degree of alignment or
misalignment between the rubric-based evaluation and the credits awarded by PU provided some
comparative data on organizational influences on the PLA portfolio program at PU.
Data Analysis
Since the first phase of this study focused on quantitative data, student achievement data
for PU’s PLA program was compiled as the study’s survey was being conducted. Descriptive
PRIOR LEARNING ASSESSMENT PORTFOLIOS 63

statistics were employed to identify frequencies, central tendencies, and dispersion of the data
gathered, particularly to illuminate any patterns for student performance in PU’s PLA program.
The patterns that emerged from the descriptive statistics were then analyzed in response to the
study’s research questions. The patterns from the descriptive statistics also related back to the
study’s conceptual framework and provided some context for the qualitative phase of the study.
For the qualitative phase of this study, “the process of data collection and analysis [was]
recursive and dynamic” (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016, p. 195), to allow both deductive and
inductive analysis to inform the study’s findings and assertions. Specifically, Corbin and
Strauss’s (2008) analytical tools were utilized to guide this study’s iterative process of qualitative
data analysis. One aspect of this iterative analysis was opening coding. Before interviews and
PLA portfolios are studied, a priori codes were developed based on the study’s research
questions, the conceptual framework, and patterns that emerged from the study’s quantitative
data. Once these a priori codes were developed, the first interview transcript and the first PLA
portfolio were coded using in vivo coding to identify potential typicality trends not included in
the a priori codes. A priori and in vivo codes were integrated into a dynamic and adaptive
codebook that automatically updated primary spreadsheets as additional interviews and PLA
portfolios were coded. The study continued to alternate between a prior and in vivo codes as
more interviews and PLA portfolios were coded.
As more interviews and PLA portfolios were coded, axial coding was used to begin
identifying typicality among a priori and in vivo codes. Axial coding guided continued coding of
interview transcripts and PLA portfolios. Axial coding, in turn, helped uncover patterns and
themes presented by the interviews and PLA portfolios. These patterns and themes related back
to the study’s research questions and conceptual framework, with a focus on what influences
PRIOR LEARNING ASSESSMENT PORTFOLIOS 64

student success or failure in PU’s PLA program. These patterns and themes from the axial
coding also informed coding of remaining interviews and PLA portfolios in the study. Taken
together, patterns and themes lifted from axial coding of interviews and PLA portfolios, along
with the study’s quantitative data analysis of the study’s surveys and PU PLA student
achievement data, formed the foundation for the study’s findings and assertions. These findings
and assertions circled back to the study’s research questions and conceptual framework,
particularly as they related to student success or failure in PU’s PLA program.
Credibility and Trustworthiness
Since this study utilized qualitative research methods, it was important to ensure the
trustworthiness of the methods to reinforce the credibility of the research findings. In qualitative
research, ensuring credibility can be difficult because it involves an interpretative reconstruction
of people’s experience of reality, not a direct assessment of that reality (Merriam & Tisdell,
2016). This is exacerbated by the elusive nature of reality, which is “holistic, multidimensional,
and ever-changing” (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016, p. 242). These difficulties in qualitatively
researching reality further complicated this study’s exploration of how PLA students recalled,
reflected on, and articulated their experienced realities, namely their experiential learning and
metacognitive reflection. However, qualitative researchers can take steps to increase the
credibility of their findings, steps that can make the methods more trustworthy.
For this study, three strategies were utilized to build credibility and trustworthiness. First,
the study triangulated data from three sources of qualitative research, the analysis of interviews
and two different types of documents. Triangulation from various sources of data can reinforce
and strengthen the integrity of the study (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). Second, the study attempted
to reach adequate engagement of the research with rich student achievement data and multiple
PRIOR LEARNING ASSESSMENT PORTFOLIOS 65

sample PLA portfolios for document analysis (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). As part of that
engagement with the data, this study attempted to “look for data that support alternative
explanations” (Patton, 2015, as cited in Merriam & Tisdell, 2016, p. 248) for student
performance on PLA portfolios. Third, the author of this study documented his positionality by
explaining “biases, dispositions, and assumptions” about PLA programs (Merriam & Tisdell,
2016, p. 249). Considering that this study’s author has been involved with PU’s PLA program
since fall 2014, this author must openly and clearly acknowledge his positionality at the outset of
the study.
Ethics
Since this study utilized qualitative research that included semi-structured interviews with
individuals and document analysis of student work (Creswell, 2014), it was important to uphold
the ethical principles of respect for persons, beneficence, and justice (Samkian, 2018). These
principles were applied through informed consent, voluntary participation, confidentiality, the
right to withdraw, permission to record, and secure storage of data (Glesne, 2011; Merriam &
Tisdell, 2016). First, all interview subjects participated voluntarily, with the option to withdraw
or not participate, after they were provided written, informed consent using a form designed by
the researcher and approved by the University of Southern California’s Institutional Review
Board (IRB). Second, data and information transcribed from interviews and document analysis
were kept confidential and securely stored in encrypted online files protected by secure
passwords.
To compliment the ethical principles described above, this study took note of Rubin and
Rubin’s (2012) caution that researchers should refrain from conducting studies involving human
subjects over whom the researchers hold power, such as students, employees, or direct reports.
PRIOR LEARNING ASSESSMENT PORTFOLIOS 66

Mindful of this caution, this researcher acknowledged that he is an adjunct instructor for PLA
courses at PU. As such, the researcher worked with students who have already completed their
PLA coursework with another instructor. Furthermore, the researcher clearly communicated to
research participants his role as an investigator and that their grades and academic standing
would not be affected by his research.
Finally, even if the above precautions are taken to uphold ethical principles and protect
research participants, this study’s author acknowledged that assumptions and biases may also
affect the integrity and trustworthiness of his research. In particular, as an educator for over 20
years who has strong opinions and beliefs about the value of project-based and experiential
learning that are embodied by PLA programs, this researcher was careful not to play the role of
an advocate that “champions a cause” (Glesne, 2011, p. 170). That said, the researcher
acknowledged that the overall KMO gap analysis (Clark & Estes, 2008) that his research did
employ may be used to inform improvements to the organization’s PLA program. In this light,
perhaps some advocacy helped, especially if it leveraged a degree of beneficence to the
organization and its students.
PRIOR LEARNING ASSESSMENT PORTFOLIOS 67

CHAPTER FOUR: RESULTS AND FINDINGS
This study evaluated Pacific University’s (PU) prior learning assessment (PLA) portfolio
development program to determine how and why some students who enrolled in the program
succeeded and other students did not.
The following research questions guided this study:
1. To what extent is PU meeting its goal of PLA students earning at least 80% of academic
credits petitioned in their PLA portfolios by the 2020 fall term?
2. What are the knowledge, motivation and organizational influences related to achieving
this goal?
3. What are the recommendations for organizational practice in the areas of knowledge,
motivation, and organizational resources?
As explained in Chapter Three, a mixed methods research approach was taken to collect
both quantitative and qualitative data (Creswell, 2014). Quantitative data included collecting
student achievement data for PU’s PLA program and administering a survey to former students
in the program. Qualitative data included a document analysis of 14 sample PLA portfolios from
former PU PLA students and interviewing six former PU PLA students.
The stakeholders who participated in this study will be described, followed by an analysis of the
data collected using the knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences identified in
Chapters Two and Three. The chapter will conclude with a findings section that provides
answers to the study’s research question.
Participating Stakeholders
All stakeholders who participated in this study were drawn from a population of 185
former students older than 25-years-old who had previously enrolled in PU’s PLA portfolio
PRIOR LEARNING ASSESSMENT PORTFOLIOS 68

development course. While student achievement data was gathered from PU’s PLA program
staff for all 185 students, the group was narrowed down to three subgroups for the other parts of
this study.
One subgroup included 24 former PLA students who responded to an online survey about
PU’s PLA program. The median age of the survey respondents was 42, with the youngest
respondent being 27 years old and the oldest respondent being 70 years old. Another subgroup
was made of 14 students whose PLA portfolios were analyzed for the document analysis portion
of the study. As discussed in Chapter Three, this study aimed to analyze seven portfolios that had
earned 75% or more of credits requested and seven portfolios that had earned 25% or less of
credits requested. However, disruptions caused by the 2018 hurricane made it difficult to obtain a
set of portfolios that met this criteria. Table 5 lists the percentage of credits requested that was
awarded for each portfolio used in this study and divides the portfolios into three subsets.
Table 5
Credit Award Rates for PLA Portfolios
Percentage of Requested Credits Awarded
Portfolio Subset
A (earned ≤ 25%
credits)
.00
Portfolio 1 .00
Portfolio 2 .00
Portfolio 3 .00
Portfolio 4 .00
Subset Mean .00
Portfolio Subset B
(earned 33%-68% credits)

PRIOR LEARNING ASSESSMENT PORTFOLIOS 69

Portfolio 5 .33
Portfolio 6 .54
Portfolio 7 .33
Portfolio 8 .68
Portfolio 9 .65
Portfolio 10 .43
Subset Mean .49
Portfolio Subset C
(earned ≥ 75%
credits)

Portfolio 11 1.00
Portfolio 12 1.00
Portfolio 13 .75
Portfolio 14 1.00
Subset Mean .94

As Table 5 shows, in Subset A, Portfolios 1 through 4 did not earn any credits requested.
In Subset B, Portfolios 5 through 10 earned between 33% and 68% of credits requested with a
subset mean of 49%. In Subset C, Portfolios 10 through 14 earned 75% or more of credits
requested with a subset mean of 94%.
It should be noted that these 14 portfolios were analyzed blindly. That is, the authors of
the portfolios were kept anonymous to this study’s author. This blind analysis made it difficult to
identify any overlaps between the 14 portfolios and other parts of this study.
The last stakeholder subgroup for this study was comprised of six former PLA students
who had successfully completed and submitted portfolios. As discussed in Chapter Three, this
study aimed to interview three former students who had earned 75% or more of credits requested
PRIOR LEARNING ASSESSMENT PORTFOLIOS 70

and three former students who earned 25% or less of credits requested. However, the devastation
caused by the 2018 hurricane, as well as the reluctance of former students to participate in
interviews, made it difficult to meet this criteria. Instead, this study interviewed five former
students who earned 75% or more of credits requested in their portfolios and one who earned less
than 25% of credits requested. These six former PLA students participated in semi-structured
interviews that took place in PU’s study rooms in order to situate the interviewees back in the
academic context of their PLA portfolio and college work. To facilitate clarity in reading this
study’s findings, Table 6 lists the interviewees with pseudonyms and indicates the level of credit
awarded per interviewee.
Table 6
Former PU PLA Students Interviewed
Pseudonym*
Percentage of Requested Credits
Awarded
Interviewee 1 Jane 1.00
Interviewee 2 John .91
Interviewee 3 Rosa .78
Interviewee 4 Rod 1.00
Interviewee 5 Antonia 1.00
Interviewee 6 Anthony 0.00
*The gender assigned for each pseudonym is arbitrary and does not necessarily indicate the
gender of the interviewee.

Knowledge Findings
This study’s data analysis begins with a discussion of the knowledge findings. As part of
the conceptual framework laid out in Chapter Three, this study focused on three assumed
PRIOR LEARNING ASSESSMENT PORTFOLIOS 71

knowledge influences: (a) adult learners enrolled in PU’s PLA program need to know the
concept of experiential learning; (b) adult learners enrolled in PU’s PLA program need to know
how to prepare a PLA portfolio; and (c) adult learners enrolled in PU’s PLA program need to
reflect on what skills, insights, and lessons they learned from their experience in life, work, civic
participation, and extra-curricular interests.
Conceptual knowledge: Adult learners enrolled in PU’s PLA program need to know
the concept of experiential learning. To generally assess stakeholders’ conceptual knowledge
of experiential learning, one question asked in this study’s survey was, “How familiar are you
with the concept of experiential learning?” Responses to the question included very familiar,
somewhat familiar, and not familiar. The summary of survey responses is listed in Figure 2.

Figure 2. How familiar are you with the concept of experiential learning?
As Figure 2 shows, seven respondents (29%) said that they were very familiar with the
concept of experiential learning, 13 respondents (54%) said that they were somewhat familiar,
and 4 respondents (16%) said that they were not familiar. With a majority of respondents (83%)
answering that they are not very familiar with the concept of experiential learning, the data
suggests that respondents did not have a firm grasp of the concept.
PRIOR LEARNING ASSESSMENT PORTFOLIOS 72

This lack of a firm conceptual understanding of experiential learning was evident in the
document analysis of the 14 portfolios used in this study. This study employed Kolb’s four levels
of experiential learning—recollection, reflection, abstraction, and application—to evaluate how
experiential learning was articulated in PLA portfolios (Kolb, 1984; Kolb & Kolb, 2005). To
quantify that qualitative evaluation of the PLA portfolios, this study developed four a priori
codes along Kolb’s framework: K1-1 for recollection, K1-2 for reflection, K1-3 for abstraction,
and K1-4 for application. Using these a priori codes, each time that a PLA portfolio discussed or
presented evidence of a particular level of experiential learning, that level’s code was entered
into a codebook that tabulated the number of times each code was entered.
Table 7 lists the results for the coded analysis of the 14 PLA portfolios used for this
study. Note that the table aggregates results for each of the Portfolio Subsets, with Subset A
representing PLA portfolios that did not earn any credits requested, Subset B representing
portfolios that earned between 33% and 68% of credits requested, and Subset C representing
portfolios that earned 75% or more of credits requested. Table 7 also includes ratios for each
level of experiential learning in relation to total counts for each portfolio subset and a total count
for all portfolios.

PRIOR LEARNING ASSESSMENT PORTFOLIOS 73

Table 7
Experiential Learning Articulated in PU PLA Portfolios
K1-1: Recollection K1-2: Reflection K1-3: Abstraction K1-4: Application
Portfolio Subset A
(earned ≤ 25%
credits)

Portfolio 1 50 49 39 52
Portfolio 2 16 11 21 14
Portfolio 3 149 83 38 96
Portfolio 4 106 89 96 40
Subset Total 321 232 194 172
Subset Ratio* .35 .25 .21 .19
Portfolio Subset B
(earned 33%-68%
credits)

Portfolio 5 62 17 17 0
Portfolio 6 502 329 422 96
Portfolio 7 29 17 0 2
Portfolio 8 18 6 97 0
Portfolio 9 192 95 639 15
Portfolio 10 178 72 114 9
Subset Total 981 536 1289 313
Subset Ratio* .34 .18 .44 .04
Portfolio Subset C
(earned ≥ 75%
credits)

Portfolio 11 49 27 54 3
Portfolio 12 97 75 48 8
PRIOR LEARNING ASSESSMENT PORTFOLIOS 74

Portfolio 13 88 80 199 10
Portfolio 14 17 6 12 0
Subset Total 251 188 313 21
Subset Ratio* .32 .24 .40 .03
Total Count 1358 956 1796 314
Total Ratios** .31 .22 .41 .07
*Each subset’s ratio refers to that subset’s count of each level of experiential learning in relation to the
total count of all levels of experiential learning for that subset.
**Total ratios refer to the count for each level of experiential learning for all portfolios in relation to the
total account of all levels of experiential learning for all portfolios.

K1-1: Abstraction had the highest count and the highest ratio overall, with 1796 and 41%
respectively, while K1-4: Application had the lowest count and the lowest ratio overall, with 315
and 7% respectively. Table 7 also shows that K1-1: Recollection had the second highest count
and ratio overall, with 1358 and 31% respectively, while K1-2: Reflection had the second lowest
count and ratio overall, with 956 and 22% respectively. Between portfolio subsets, there was
mostly parity in ratios for K1-1: Recollection and K1-2: Reflection.
However, Subset A’s ratio for K1-4: Application was 19%, which was higher than Subset
B and C’s ratios of 4% and 3% respectively. Conversely, for K-3: Abstraction, Subsets B and C
had ratios of 44% and 40%, respectively, which were higher than Subset A’s ratio of 21%. These
ratio variances between subsets indicate that the more that a portfolio invested in K-3:
Abstraction, the more likely that would correlate to a higher credit award rate. Overall, these
results suggest that while PLA students wrote abstractly about concepts related to their
experiences several times in their portfolios, they did not articulate as much how lessons learned
from those experiences can be applied in future scenarios. The overall results also suggest that
PRIOR LEARNING ASSESSMENT PORTFOLIOS 75

while PLA students recollected their experiences, they did not reflect as much on those
experiences.
This disparity between abstraction and application, as well as between recollection and
reflection, was evinced by many of the narratives written in the portfolios. Overall, most
portfolios chronicled students’ experiences but failed to reflect what was learned in those
experiences and how those lessons could be applied in different situations. Instead, there was a
tendency to list an experience and then jump straight to an abstract idea that connected with that
experience. This was due, in part, to students’ efforts to demonstrate that they had mastered the
student learning outcomes (SLOs) of courses for which they were attempting to earn credit.
Demonstrating mastery of course SLOs is a requirement for PLA students at PU to earn credit
for courses requested in their respective PLA portfolios. However, course SLOs are written as
abstract goals for student learning, not as expressions of students’ concrete experience. It is up to
students to link their personal experiences with course SLOs.
As this became apparent during the document analysis, an in vivo code for SLOs was added to
the codebook to track how many times students had tied their narrative back to SLOs. The final
count for SLO references in the 14 portfolios came up to 2,328, which was more than double
956, the number of times students had recollected an experience.
Given that demonstrating mastery of SLOs is required at PU for students to earn
academic credit for courses based on their portfolios, it is understandable that many narratives in
PLA portfolios focused on course SLOs. However, many of those narratives failed to reflect in a
manner that connected life or work experiences with course SLOs. In many cases, the narrative
read more as an explanation of the SLO rather than as a reflection on the student’s experience
with that SLO.
PRIOR LEARNING ASSESSMENT PORTFOLIOS 76

Take, for example, one portfolio that spoke to the following SLO for an education course
on instructional strategies: “Demonstrate teaching skills using a variety of instructional
strategies.” The student’s portfolio began with a discussion about other teachers that the student
had observed while serving as a teacher aide. As the student recollected, “Working in the special
education program and following my assigned students around, I saw many classrooms and was
exposed to many different instructional strategies.” The student also recollected specific
strategies that different teachers demonstrated. However, rather than following up that
recollection by reflecting on how those observations influenced that student’s work as a teacher
aide, the student skipped that opportunity for reflection and proceeded with a general, abstract
statement about instructional strategies: “Just as classroom management is crucial, having
effective strategies is just as important.” Not only did this statement parrot the SLO in
discussion, but the narrative did not continue with a discussion about how the student would
apply that abstract concept in future teaching situations.
In another portfolio, the narrative spoke to the following SLO for a sociology course on
family relationships: “Analyze sociological experiences that affect marriages.” The narrative
began with the student observing, “I’ve seen many relationships and marriages fall apart because
of infidelity.” The narrative was followed by a detailed recollection of several encounters with
infidelity that the student had experienced. However, at no point in recollecting those encounters
did the student reflect on how those encounters affected the student or informed the student’s
thinking about marriage. Instead, the student went on to discuss, in abstract, some of the
consequences of infidelity, including the challenges that single parents face in raising children.
In this case, the narrative further explained the SLO, but did not explore how lessons learned
from the student’s experience could be applied to future situations.
PRIOR LEARNING ASSESSMENT PORTFOLIOS 77

By skipping reflection, many of the portfolios missed an opportunity to use reflection as a
concrete bridge between students’ experiences and abstract ideas. Skipping reflection also
undercut the ability to apply lessons learned from reflection to future scenarios. Again, the lack
of reflection may be attributed to focusing efforts on course SLOs. However, this study’s
interviews also revealed a general lack of conceptual knowledge of both reflection and
application as framed by Kolb.
To gauge interviewees’ conceptual grasp of experiential learning, all interviewees were
asked, “When you enrolled in PU’s PLA portfolio development course, what did you learn about
the concept of experiential learning?” In response, all the interviewees understood and
appreciated the value of experiential learning and that they could earn academic credit for their
experiential learning. As interviewee, John, noted, “As far as my experience, you know, it was
really showing me that there’s stuff I did throughout my career that actually counts for
something and I can use it to help me get a degree.” Or, as interviewee Anthony stated, “It’s
learning through experience, through working experience, and an opportunity to prove your work
experience and probably get credit for it.” These excerpts revealed that interviewees appreciated
the value of experiential learning, especially in helping them earn academic credit.
Moreover, all the interviewees had acknowledged the role that recollecting experiences
played in developing their portfolios. As one interviewee, Rosa, said, “You know, it made me it
made me aware that I can put down my experiences.” Another interviewee, Rod, for whom
English is a second language, was so concerned about conveying his recollection of life and
work experiences that he worried about how clearly he could articulate those recollections. As
Rod observed, “Remembering them, I say oh wow, I did this, I did that, okay so how do I put
these in proper sentences…because I've done it but I cannot just say it in plain English.” These
PRIOR LEARNING ASSESSMENT PORTFOLIOS 78

excerpts revealed that interviewees grasped the importance of recollecting their life and work
experiences as part of the PLA portfolio development process.
As these excerpts demonstrate, these former PLA students understood and appreciated
the value of experiential learning and the role that recollection played in the PLA portfolio
process. However, only three of the six interviewees indicated a conceptual understanding of
reflection, and only two indicated a conceptual understanding of abstraction and application. On
the value of reflection, John engaged in reflection to appreciate how much he had accomplished
in life, even without a college degree. As John stated:
I’ve lived through so many things and I've done so many things, especially as a police
officer, that other people probably won't get to try and it kind of made me proud, proud of
the life I live and the career that I made for myself.
Another interviewee, Jane, also engaged in reflection and realized how much they had
accomplished. Although struggling at first to answer the question, Jane finally said:
Rewarding. It was really rewarding. Looking back at all the things that I've done, and you
know, I mean, it was hard, but I almost couldn't believe the things that I went through or
the decisions I've made for school and work and, you know, family.
Reflecting on those choices, Jane added, “I mean, I feel good about the things I've done.”
Anthony also demonstrated reflection, this time on mistakes he had made. As Anthony said:
I mean, it made me think what I can do better and can push for. I can correct, like life
choices. I mean, they're not all bad, but I think if I had done things in a different way,
maybe the turn out would have been better.
By processing the value of their life and work experiences, these interviewees went one step
beyond recollecting by reflecting on the experiences they had chronicled in their PLA portfolios.
PRIOR LEARNING ASSESSMENT PORTFOLIOS 79

Other than demonstrating a grasp of reflection, only two interviewees showed a
conceptual understanding of abstraction. One interviewee, Jane, drew a comparison between
learning about childhood development in a classroom and learning about it as a parent. As Jane
put it:
There's really a big difference because you can sit in a classroom and learn about what
works and what doesn't work, but in reality, as a [parent], you don't have the degree but
you lived it so you have the experience and you probably would know more about what
you're talking about than what you've learned through teachings in the traditional setting.
Jane engaged in abstracting lessons by comparing her experiential learning as a parent to
learning in a classroom, noting that “you know more about what you’re talking about.”
These same two interviewees were the only two among the six interviewed that
demonstrated a conceptual understanding of application. One interviewee, Jane, discussed
applying experiential learning as a parent in her workplace at a school. As Jane observed about
decisions made at the school:
So, you know, the job I have right now it’s, it's interesting because I have people who are
my bosses who don't have kids and when they decide things it's like, ‘Okay sounds good,’
but let me tell you what's really going to happen.
Jane took lessons learned as a parent to apply them to real-world scenarios involving decisions
about other children. This application of experiential learning was also demonstrated by another
interviewee, John, who explained how real-world experience can be applied much more
effectively in the field than what police officers learn in police academies. As John observed:
PRIOR LEARNING ASSESSMENT PORTFOLIOS 80

Experience counts a lot. We see it a lot in the police force. A cadet could be top notch all
throughout the Academy and pass every single course with flying colors. But, as soon as
you put them into the real world, they crumble.
By differentiating between learning from the academy and learning from experience, John
demonstrated a concrete application of experiential learning.
While John and two others demonstrated a conceptual understanding of Kolb’s reflection,
only two demonstrated a conceptual understanding of all four levels of the framework for
experiential learning, recollection, reflection, abstraction, and application (Kolb, 1984; Kolb &
Kolb, 2005). This lack of conceptual knowledge of all aspects of experiential learning among all
interviewees is consistent with the survey results and document analysis of this study, which
indicated that most former PLA students did not have the conceptual knowledge of experiential
learning.
Procedural knowledge: Adult learners enrolled in PU’s PLA program need to know
how to prepare a PLA portfolio. PU’s PLA course development course sets forth a sequence of
procedural steps that PLA students must take to develop their portfolios. Those steps are:
1. Revise and expand one’s resume to a document more akin to a curriculum vitae to
include a better timeline of a student’s life, work, and extracurricular experiences.
2. Work with an academic adviser to review one’s individualized degree plan to identify
what courses will be petitioned in a PLA portfolio.
3. Gather course guides for the courses that will be petitioned in a PLA portfolio and
identify SLOs for each course.
4. Compile and digitize evidence of life, work, and extracurricular experiences.
5. Align course SLOs with both evidence and life, work, and extracurricular experiences.
PRIOR LEARNING ASSESSMENT PORTFOLIOS 81

6. Write narratives that chronicle one’s life, work, and extracurricular experiences, reflects
on what was learned from the experiences, and explains how lessons learned apply to
each course SLO and can be used in different scenarios in the future.
7. Submit draft narratives to the PLA portfolio development course instructor for review
and feedback.
8. Reflect on larger themes and insights that can be gleaned from course SLO narratives and
articulate that reflection in a personal statement.
9. Receive feedback from the PLA portfolio development course instructor and integrate
feedback into revised narratives.
10. Finalize the portfolio for submission to include a personal statement, a curriculum vitae,
course SLO narratives, and ample evidence to support the narratives.
11. Submit the PLA portfolio and work with PU faculty and staff to provide any additional
information or evidence needed during the PLA portfolio review process.
To assess stakeholders’ knowledge of these procedural steps, one question asked in this
study’s survey was, “To what extent do you agree with this statement? As I worked on my
portfolio, I knew what I needed to do in order to complete my portfolio.” Responses to the
survey included strongly agree, agree, disagree, and strongly disagree. The summary of survey
responses is listed in Figure 3.
PRIOR LEARNING ASSESSMENT PORTFOLIOS 82

Figure 3. As I worked on my portfolio, I knew what I needed to do in order to complete my
portfolio.

As Figure 3 shows, eight respondents (33%) strongly agreed with the statement, 12
respondents (50%) agreed, 3 respondents (13%) disagreed, and 1 respondent (4%) strongly
disagreed. With a majority of respondents (83%) answering that they agreed or strongly agreed
with the statement, the data suggests that most respondents believed they had the procedural
knowledge necessary to complete their PLA portfolios.
However, interviews with six of the stakeholders suggest that those interviewed did not
have a firm grasp of the procedural knowledge necessary to complete their PLA portfolios. To
gauge interviewees’ procedural knowledge of the portfolio development process, the following
question was asked: “What steps did you take to ensure that you completed your portfolio?” In
response to this question, many spoke about Step 4 (compile and digitize evidence of life, work,
and extracurricular experiences). John said it was important to “get all your all your certificates
and letters and stuff like that organized and get it ready, readily available.” Rod agreed, “I made
sure I had evidence.” Jane also noted, “Through experience you pretty much know what you are
talking about. But you also need to back it up with evidence.” This emphasis on the need for
evidence was echoed by all interviewees.
PRIOR LEARNING ASSESSMENT PORTFOLIOS 83

However, beyond that procedural need for evidence, instead of talking about the other
procedural steps set forth by PU’s PLA program, interviewees spoke more generally about what
they did personally to manage the workload of assembling the portfolio. For example, several
interviewees talked about how they managed their time while working on their portfolios. Rosa
admitted to “struggling through making time for work and making time at home…trying to
balance work, school, and my personal life.” Finding that balance was also mentioned by
Anthony, who said, “Sometimes, I'll do it at work, when I have downtime. Sometimes, at home, I
have some time alone.” Also aware of the need for time management, Jane said, “It's really a
matter of how you break your time out.” To manage the time and organize tasks, John said that
“creating a checklist was pretty instrumental in helping me stay organized.” As with all the
interviews, when asked about what steps they took to complete their portfolios, the focus was on
time management, not on the procedural steps set forth by PU’s PLA program.
Perhaps the focus on time management was influenced by other questions asked in the
interview that dealt with how interviewees balanced the demands of work and home while also
working on their portfolios. However, even if that were the case, the document analysis of the 14
PU PLAs suggests that there may have been different interpretations about portfolio
development procedures. Although this study did not plan to utilize document analysis to assess
procedural knowledge of the portfolio development process, that analysis did reveal variability in
how portfolios were formatted. For example, ten portfolios placed course SLO narratives in
columns while four portfolios presented those narratives in paragraph form. Another example
was varying narrative length between portfolios. In nine portfolios, each course SLO was
matched by at least three paragraphs of narrative, while four portfolios matched each course SLO
with only one or two paragraphs. One portfolio even included only one or two paragraphs for all
PRIOR LEARNING ASSESSMENT PORTFOLIOS 84

SLOs per course. The variability of PLA portfolio formatting suggests that PLA students had
inconsistent understandings about PU’s PLA procedures. This variability in portfolio formatting,
combined with the lack of interview comments about most of PU’s PLA procedural steps,
indicates that PU’s PLA students did not have the procedural knowledge necessary to develop
portfolios for PU’s PLA program.
Metacognitive: Adult learners enrolled in PU’s PLA program need to reflect on
what skills, insights, and lessons they learned from their experience in life, work, civic
participation, and extra-curricular interests. This knowledge influence aligns with Kolb’s
framework for experiential learning, specifically the need to reflect on one’s experiences (Kolb,
1984; Kolb & Kolb, 2005). To assess metacognitive knowledge of the need to reflect on what
one has learned from one’s life and work experiences, one item on the study’s survey was,
“Complete this statement with a percentage: As I worked on my portfolio, I spent ____ of my
time reflecting on my life, work, civic participation, and extra-curricular experiences.”
Respondents answered by sliding a scale between 0% and 100%. The summary of survey
responses are listed in Table 8.
Table 8
Percentage of Time PU’s PLA Students Spent on Reflection While Working on Portfolios

Percentage
Respondent 1 .65
Respondent 2 .50
Respondent 3 .50
Respondent 4 .50
PRIOR LEARNING ASSESSMENT PORTFOLIOS 85

Respondent 5 .65
Respondent 6 .50
Respondent 7 .70
Respondent 8 .75
Respondent 9 .75
Respondent 10 .50
Respondent 11 .75
Respondent 12 .80
Respondent 13 1.00
Respondent 14 .50
Respondent 15 1.00
Respondent 16 .85
Respondent 17 .75
Respondent 18 .25
Respondent 19 .50
Respondent 20 .80
Respondent 21 .50
Respondent 22 .75
Respondent 23 .50
Respondent 24 .70

Using the data from Table 8, the mean response was 65%, but the mode response was
50%. Either way, the data reveals that while developing their PLA portfolios, the respondents
believed that they spent at least half of the time reflecting on their life, work, civic participation,
PRIOR LEARNING ASSESSMENT PORTFOLIOS 86

and extra-curricular experiences. This data suggests that they were engaging in metacognitive
reflection on their experiences.
However, interviews data suggests that half of the interviewees did not demonstrate an
understanding of the role that reflection plays in the portfolio development process. As discussed
earlier, three of the six former PLA students that were interviewed discussed how they engaged
in reflection while developing their portfolios. While all the interviewees spoke about the value
of experiential learning, three of the interviewees did not speak about reflection and how it
contributed to the portfolio development process. One question in the interview directly asked,
“As you developed your portfolio, what was it like to reflect on your experiences like work, life,
extra-curricular activities, community service, or hobbies?” However, in response to this
question, four of the interviewees focused more on documenting their experiences instead of
reflecting on them. As Rosa noted, “It's very satisfying knowing that I can look back and put
together a portfolio that represents myself in the best way possible, that I can put down my
experiences.” For her part, Jane recollected work experiences, saying, “I do things because it’s
my job and I have kids and I have to feed them.” In contrast, Antonia expressed a sense of
accomplishment in recollecting experiences but did not explain what it was like to reflect on
those experiences. As Antonia reported, “Oh it was really a very good feeling that I was going
back and collecting my memories. By doing those things I did achieve my goals.” As previously
mentioned, these interviewees successfully recollected their experiences, but did not demonstrate
that they had reflected on those experiences. The focus appeared to be more about managing
their work and life experiences and less about reflecting on what they learned in those
experiences.
PRIOR LEARNING ASSESSMENT PORTFOLIOS 87

This lack of reflection among half of the interviewees was supported by the quantitative
coding conducted for the 14 portfolios. As Table 6 noted, in contrast to the 2,328 mentions of
course SLOs and 1,166 mentions of recollection, there were only 783 mentions of reflection in
the PLA portfolios. As previously noted, there was a tendency in these PLA portfolios to
recollect an experience but skip reflection and jump straight to abstractions. These abstractions
also tended to explain course SLOs instead of using reflection to explain how students’
experiences demonstrated their mastery of course SLOs. This lack of reflection in the 14
portfolios studied, along with only half of interviewees demonstrating an understanding of the
role of reflection in experiential learning, suggests that stakeholders in this study did not possess
the metacognitive knowledge to reflect on what skills, insights, and lessons they learned from
their experience in life, work, civic participation, and extra-curricular interests.
Motivation Findings
This study’s data analysis continues with a discussion of the motivation findings. As part
of the conceptual framework laid out in Chapter Three, this study focused on three assumed
motivation influences: 1) adult learners enrolled in PU’s PLA program need to see the value of
their experiential learning and prioritize their PLA work enough to complete their PLA
portfolios; 2) adult learners enrolled in PU’s PLA program need to attribute their control from
factors beyond their control (family emergencies, crises, etc.) to factors within their control (task
management, time management, etc.) when developing PLA portfolios; and 3) adult learners
enrolled in PU’s PLA program need to feel confident in their ability to complete a PLA portfolio
so that other roles (parent, breadwinner, etc.) do not undermine their PLA portfolio.
Task value: Adult learners enrolled in PU’s PLA program need to see the value of
their experiential learning and prioritize their PLA work enough to complete their PLA
PRIOR LEARNING ASSESSMENT PORTFOLIOS 88

portfolios. To assess how much task value stakeholders assigned to their work on portfolios, two
questions were asked in this study’s survey. One question was, “How much time, in hours, did
you spend on your portfolio?” Responses to this question are listed in Table 9. Another question
was, “To what extent do you agree with this statement? ‘I think that putting my portfolio
together was a valuable experience.’” Responses to the question included strongly agree, agree,
disagree, and strongly disagree. The summary of survey responses is listed in Figure 4.
Table 9

Reported Hours Survey Respondents Spent Working on PLA Portfolios

Hours
Respondent 1
80
Respondent 2
20
Respondent 3
20
Respondent 4
10
Respondent 5
30
Respondent 6
80
Respondent 7
80
Respondent 8
120
Respondent 9
20
Respondent 10
120
Respondent 11
160
Respondent 12
10
Respondent 13
60
Respondent 14
16
Respondent 15
126
PRIOR LEARNING ASSESSMENT PORTFOLIOS 89

Respondent 16
80
Respondent 17
140
Respondent 18
21
Respondent 19
2
Respondent 20
40
Respondent 21
24
Respondent 22
6
Respondent 23
30
Respondent 24
80
Standard Deviation
48

Based on data from Table 9, the mean response was 57 hours, the mode response was 80
hours, and the median response was 35 hours. Taken together, this yields a standard deviation of
49.7, which indicates a high variability in the number of hours used by survey respondents in
developing their PLA portfolios. This variability suggests a wide variance in time that
respondents invested in their portfolios. This variance in time invested also suggests that the
respondents varied in how much they prioritized their work on their PLA portfolios. However,
the data does not account for how many courses each respondent had requested in their
respective portfolios. For example, a respondent seeking credit for five courses would likely
invest more time in developing a portfolio than a respondent seeking credit for only one course.
Without that information, it is difficult to infer how much each respondent prioritized portfolio
work.

PRIOR LEARNING ASSESSMENT PORTFOLIOS 90

Figure 4. I think that putting my portfolio together was a valuable experience.
In contrast to the variance in hours spent on PLA portfolios, Figure 4 presents less
variance in how much respondents valued their work on those portfolios. As Figure 4 shows, 15
respondents( 63%) strongly agreed with the statement, eight respondents (33%) agreed, and 1
respondent (4%) disagreed. Almost all respondents (99%,) answered that they agreed or strongly
agreed with the statement, suggesting that they valued developing their portfolios.
The task value demonstrated by these survey results was supported by interview data.
Every interviewee demonstrated a commitment to completing their portfolios as evinced in
responses to the question, “Why was it important to you to complete your portfolio?” However,
interviews revealed two distinctive types of task value. While some interviewees demonstrated
an attainment value to confirm their self-schema as individuals who could complete difficult
tasks, other interviewees focused on the utility value of earning credits for their portfolios
(Eccles, 2006). For example, John saw the utility value of the PLA portfolio as a way to earn a
college degree faster. As John said, “I just wanted to get everything so I can get us much credits
as I could and lower down the number of actual classes I had to take.” Likewise, Anthony
mentioned, “If I don't complete it, I don't get a grade. If I don't get a grade, I won't get paid, and
PRIOR LEARNING ASSESSMENT PORTFOLIOS 91

most of all, I won't know if there'll be anything reviewed and possibly approved or what.” By
contrast, Jane perceived the attainment value of completing her portfolio as part of a broader
commitment to completing college, especially for her family. As Jane said, “I wanted to show
my kids that I can finish college.” Similarly, Antonia saw the attainment value of the PLA
portfolio as a challenge to overcome. As Antonia recalled, “I want to prove myself that it can be
done, it's not hard to do. So, I just wanted to challenge myself, and I did it.” However, while task
value varied between attainment and utility values, all interviewees demonstrated a commitment
to completing their portfolios.
Also, as discussed earlier, interviewees all expressed an appreciation and understanding
of the value of experiential learning. It is also important to note that all the interviewees had
actually completed and submitted their portfolios, which is evidence of their commitment to their
portfolio work. This commitment to completing portfolios aligns with survey responses that
revealed that almost all respondents valued the portfolio development process. These results
suggest that the stakeholders that participated in this study saw the value of their experiential
learning and prioritized their PLA work enough to complete their PLA portfolios.
Attributions: Adult learners enrolled in PU’s PLA program need to attribute their
control from factors beyond their control (family emergencies, crises, etc.) to factors within
their control (task management, time management, etc.) when developing PLA portfolios.
To assess how participating stakeholders managed attributions during the portfolio development
process, respondents were asked to rank, in order of influence, the factors that affected their
ability to complete their portfolios. Respondents were given the following factors to rank: (a)
personal effort, (b) understanding of portfolio requirements, (c) time management, (d)
obligations (family, work, community, etc.), (d) lack of resources (computer, internet access,
PRIOR LEARNING ASSESSMENT PORTFOLIOS 92

etc.), (e ) external factors (crises, emergencies, etc.), and (f) other. A summary of responses to
this survey item is listed in Table 10, with responses listed in descending order from top ranked
responses to lowest ranked responses.
Table 10
Factors That Respondents Believe Affected Their Ability to Complete Their Portfolios

Score
Respondent Ranking
1
st
2
nd
3
rd
4
th
5
th
6
th
7
th
Obligations 4.83 6
.25
5
.21
1
.04
7
.29
3
.13
0
.0
2
.08
Time Management 4.67 6
.25
2
.08
6
.24
3
.13
2
.08
5
.21
0
.0
Personal Effort 4.58 4
.17
7
.29
1
.04
4
.17
5
.21
1
.04
2
.08
Understanding of
Portfolio Requirements
4.25 2
.08
3
.13
9
.38
3
.13
1
.04
4
.17
2
.08
External Factors 4.00 3
.13
4
.17
2
.08
2
.08
7
.29
6
.25
0
.0
Lack of Resources 3.50 2
.08
3
.13
3
.13
2
.08
4
.17
7
.29
3
.13
Other 2.17 1
.04
0
.0
2
.08
3
.13
2
.08
1
.04
15
.63
PRIOR LEARNING ASSESSMENT PORTFOLIOS 93

Note: Score refers to the weighted average for each factor based on how that factor was ranked by
respondents. A rank of 1 per respondent is worth 7 points while a rank of 7 is worth 1 point.

As Table 10 shows, the three highest scored factors were Obligations with a weighted
average of 4.83, Time Management with a weighted average of 4.67, and Personal Effort with a
weighted average of 4.58. The four lowest scored factors were Other with a weighted average of
2.17, Lack of Resources with a weighted average of 3.5, External Factors with a weighted
average of 4.00, and Understanding of Portfolio Requirements with a weighted average of 4.25.
While the highest scored factor, Obligations, is an external factor beyond respondent control, the
next two highest factors, Time Management and Personal Effort, were factors within the internal
control of respondents. Moreover, two factors beyond respondent control, Lack of Resources and
External Factors, were two of the lowest scored factors. This data suggests that when it came to
developing their PLA portfolios, respondents exhibited a high degree of attribution to factors
within their internal control.
This attribution to internal factors over external factors was supported by data that
surfaced during interviews with former PU PLA students. Three interview questions elicited
responses related to such attribution factors:
1. As you developed your portfolio, how did you manage your time between working on
your portfolio and other commitments, like work, family time, and similar obligations?
2. Did you face any challenges as you worked on your PLA portfolio? What were they?
3. How did you overcome those challenges?
In their responses, while all interviewees acknowledged the challenge of external factors
that competed with their internal commitment to complete their PLA portfolios, they all
demonstrated internal control of their time and focus that enabled them to work on their
PRIOR LEARNING ASSESSMENT PORTFOLIOS 94

portfolios. For example, John admitted, “I think the biggest challenge was probably balancing
out my time at work and at home with the family.” However, John still prioritized time
management to work on the portfolio, and made the most of what time was available. Whenever
he had time to spare, “I try to cram as much as I can in that hour to and then go home and try and
cram in an hour or two there.” John also acknowledged that it was difficult “juggling how to give
everybody the time they need and the time that they deserve with the time that I need to spend on
the portfolio.” Still, he made time for the portfolio, stating, “That means I’d be up at three, four
in the morning, trying to knock it out.” For John, while there were external demands on his time,
the demonstrated internal control of time management. Anthony faced similar struggles with
time management, saying, “Time is always a challenge.” He added, “I think it's everyone's
challenge.” However, he reframed the challenge on his time by recognizing that the PLA
program would save time in the long run. As Anthony stated:
As a [parent], as an employee, as a [spouse], taking college courses after work was very
hard, especially with the courses you need that are not available after working hours. So
[the PLA courses] were courses that fit my schedule.
In addition to exerting internal control over time management, John demonstrated
internal control by seeking support from peers. Acknowledging factors that competed with time
to work on the PLA portfolio, he saw an opportunity for peer support within PU’s PLA program
and reached out to them to form a support group. As John recalled, “We're all going through the
same issues and struggle. We just grouped together to say, “Let's focus together. Let's do this
together.’” This effort to form a peer support group was another example of an interviewee using
internal control to manage external challenges to portfolio work. Whether reaching out to form
peer support groups or exercising time management, stakeholders that participated in this study
PRIOR LEARNING ASSESSMENT PORTFOLIOS 95

demonstrated that while working on their PLA portfolios, they attributed control over the process
more to internal factors than external factors.
Self-efficacy: Adult learners enrolled in PU’s PLA program need to feel confident in
their ability to complete a PLA portfolio so that other roles (parent, breadwinner, etc.) do
not undermine their PLA portfolio. To measure the amount of self-efficacy participating
stakeholders had while working on their PLA portfolios, in this study’s survey, respondents were
asked, “To what degree did you feel confident about completing your portfolio?” Responses
included very confident, confident, not very confident, and not at all confident. A summary of
responses to this question is listed in Figure 5.

Figure 5. To what degree did you feel confident about completing your portfolio?
As Figure 5 shows, six respondents (25%) felt very confident, 16 respondents (67%) felt
confident, and 2 respondents (8%) did not feel very confident. With a majority of respondents
(92%) expressing that they felt very confident or confident, the data suggests that most
respondents had a high sense of self-efficacy about completing their PLA portfolios.
PRIOR LEARNING ASSESSMENT PORTFOLIOS 96

This high sense of self-efficacy was supported by interview data. To gauge the level of
confidence interviewees had while working on their PLA portfolios, the following questions
were asked:
1. When you learned about what a PLA portfolio is, how confident did you feel about
completing the portfolio?
2. Did your confidence level change as you worked on your portfolio?
Based on responses to these questions, half of the interviewees felt confident throughout the
portfolio development process, and those that did not initially feel confident saw their confidence
increase as they worked on their portfolios. John said, “I’m always naturally very confident. I’m
the type of person that looks at something you tell me it's going to be hard, that’s exactly what I
want.” Likewise, Anthony stated, “Honestly, I was content. I did the best I could with that
portfolio.” Similarly, Antonia was excited about the potential of the PLA program, noting that it
“perfectly matches and accommodates my work, prior work experience, which earns me credit.”
Antonia added, “That's a very incredible opportunity for people working 24/7.”
While John, Anthony, and Antonia felt confident about their portfolio work at the
beginning of the process, Jane, Rosa, and Rod had less confidence. As Rod recalled, “I actually
doubted myself that I was ever going to finish it.” However, his confidence level increased while
working on the portfolio. “It's like, just put this together, give them my portfolio, share it with
them. It sounds hard but it's not. You just have to keep thinking and give it time.” Jane’s
confidence level also increased throughout the process. When talking about the beginning of the
PLA portfolio development course, Jane said, “I was not confident at all. What scared and
intimidated me and a lot of my classmates was the fact that there was going to be a lot of
writing.” However, as Jane remembered, “When I actually sat down soon to start the work, it
PRIOR LEARNING ASSESSMENT PORTFOLIOS 97

kind of starting to, you know, make sense. Okay, I get it now.” When asked to clarify what made
sense about the process, she observed:
The way I looked at it was, it’s pretty much me being the author of the story that I'm
about to write. So, I'm telling my story, my experience, what I've learned from
throughout my work. That’s when the writing doesn't stop.
It was clear that Jane felt empowered when she took ownership of the story being told in her
portfolio. This confidence level, whether at the beginning of the portfolio development process
or emerging later in the process, was evident with all interviewees and reflected in this study’s
survey’s results. These results suggest that stakeholders that participated in this study felt
confident in their ability to complete their respective PLA portfolios.
Emergent motivational influence: Over time, external factors that once deterred a
college education eventually started to support interviewees’ pursuit of a college education.
Before concluding this chapter’s discussion of motivation findings, a pattern emerged during the
interviews that is worth mentioning as it challenges some cultural assumptions embedded in the
Clark and Estes (2008) KMO conceptual framework. In the KMO framework, it is assumed that
external factors attributed beyond the control of a stakeholder can interfere with that
stakeholder’s achievement of a performance in a couple of ways (Pintrich, 2003). First, it is
assumed that external factors can distract a stakeholder from a performance task, like completing
a portfolio, thereby diminishing its task value (Eccles, 2006). Second, external factors may
become so overwhelming that those factors undermine a stakeholder’s sense of self-efficacy for
completing a performance task (Pajares, 2006). Given their impact on task value and self-
efficacy, these factors attributed beyond the control of a stakeholder act as barriers to achieving a
performance goal.
PRIOR LEARNING ASSESSMENT PORTFOLIOS 98

Interviews conducted in this study did reveal that external factors, like family and work,
at one point prevented participating stakeholders from achieving their goal of earning a college
degree. For many of the interviewees, having children or starting a job while still young placed
too much of a demand on their time to allow them to start or continue in college. As Jane stated,
“I had a kid when I was in high school, so it was hard. So, I pretty much decided to go to work
instead of going to college.” John told almost the same story, noting, “I had two kids before my
senior graduation, so I had to actually had to find a job that help support my kids.” John actually
started taking college classes after high school but could not make it work. As he admitted, “My
schedule was a bit too demanding to make time to keep up with what college wanted me to do
and what my work needed me to do at the same time.” John added, “We were working 16-hour
shifts, every day, so it left very little time to be with my kids and my spouse, so I had to cut
something off.” For Jane and John, the external factors of work and family obligations were
barriers that prevented them from pursuing a college degree.
However, years later, those same barriers became important factors in their commitment
to go back to college. In particular, for Jane and John, their families eventually served both of
them as their main motivation for going back to college. John admitted:
So I have two older sons right, they’re right around the age of going to college, and my
oldest one said, ‘You know you can’t really force me to go get my degree, if you haven't
even done yours and I'm basically following in your footsteps.’
That encounter motivated John to go back to college. As he recalled:
I was just always hopeful that first and foremost, my family will be proud of everything
that I've done because I sacrificed a lot of their time in order to provide them with the life
that I felt they deserved.
PRIOR LEARNING ASSESSMENT PORTFOLIOS 99

For John, that pride included earning a college degree. As he noted, “By getting my [associate]
degree and now pursuing my bachelor's, I'm just trying to continue to make them proud.”
Likewise, for Jane, who had two children already enrolled college when she returned to
college, it was a matter of inspiring them to persist in their education. “I told them I’m going to
get my degree before you get out of college to make a point to my kids, motivating them as
well.” Furthermore, for Jane, family also served as a primary support system. As she put it, “My
kids and my [spouse] do not bother me and they're a sensitive and, you know, sympathetic to my
studies.” Emphasizing how important that family support was, Jane said, “You’ve got to have
some kind of support at home.”
The experience of the other interviewees was very similar to John and Jane. Namely,
whereas family or work were once the primary external factors that stopped them from going to
college, over time, they became the main factors driving them to go back to college and
supporting them while in college. This shift in the impact that external factors can have on
stakeholders, like this study’s interviewees, raises questions about the limits of attribution theory
(Anderman & Anderman, 2009). This is especially relevant for Pacific island communities in
which this study’s interviewees live and which place a high value on family (O’Donnell, 1995).
While attribution theory advocates for relocating the locus of control from external factors, like
family, to internal factors, like effort and self-control (Anderman & Anderman, 2009), it is
difficult and culturally dysfunctional to downplay, ignore, or undermine the impact that families
have on Pacific Islanders (O’Donnell, 1995). As this study’s interviews suggest, however, family
need not be a negative external factor and can, in fact, become a positive external factor that
inspires and supports stakeholders to achieve performance goals.

PRIOR LEARNING ASSESSMENT PORTFOLIOS 100

Organizational Findings
This study’s data analysis concludes with a discussion of organizational findings. As part
of the conceptual framework laid out in Chapter Three, this study focused on three assumed
organizational influences: 1) PU needs to cultivate more faculty acceptance of and institutional
support for the experiential learning at the heart of the PLA program; 2) PLA instructors and PU
student support services need to provide more technical and curricular support for non-traditional
students enrolled in PU’s PLA program as they develop their PLA portfolios; and 3) faculty
evaluators of PLA portfolios need to clarify expectations for PLA portfolios by developing
rubrics and guidelines for PLA portfolios.
Bias and resistance to change (cultural model): PU needs to cultivate more faculty
acceptance of and institutional support for the experiential learning at the heart of the PLA
program. To assess the degree to which PU faculty supported or resisted the PLA program’s
reliance of experiential learning, one question was asked on this study’s survey: “To what extent
do you feel the college’s faculty are supportive of giving academic credit for someone’s
experiences instead of having that person take a class?” Responses to the question included very
supportive, somewhat supportive, not supportive, and not supportive at all. The summary of
survey responses is listed in Figure 6.
PRIOR LEARNING ASSESSMENT PORTFOLIOS 101

Figure 6. To what extent do you feel the college’s faculty are supportive of giving academic
credit for someone’s experiences instead of having that person take a class?

As Figure 6 shows, 13 respondents (54%) believed faculty were very supportive, 8
respondents (33%) believed faculty were somewhat supportive, 1 respondent (4%) believed
faculty were not supportive, and 2 respondents (8%) believed faculty were not supportive at all.
With a majority of respondents (87%) believing that faculty were very supportive or somewhat
supportive, the data suggests that PU faculty were generally supportive of awarding academic
credit for experiential learning.
The perception of faculty support is supported by student achievement data for PU’s PLA
program, especially when contrasted with achievement data for a comparable PLA program
facilitated by the Council for Adult and Experiential Learning (CAEL). Table 11 lists student
achievement data for PU’s PLA program from the program’s launch in fall 2014 to fall 2018,
along with comparable data for CAEL’s Learning Counts course (Klein-Collins & Hudson,
2017).

PRIOR LEARNING ASSESSMENT PORTFOLIOS 102

Table 11
PU PLA Program and CAEL LearningCounts Portfolio Achievement Data

Portfolio Submission Rate Credit Award Rate

Students Enrolled Portfolios Submitted Credits Requested Credits Awarded
PU Number* 185 81 980 526
PU Percentage . .44 .54
CAEL Number** 916 365 3,285 1,117
CAEL Percentage .40 .34
*Data drawn from Fall 2014 through Fall 2018 terms
**Data drawn from CAEL LearningCounts program from January 1, 2011 through December 31, 2015

As Table 11 shows, out of 185 students that enrolled in PU’s PLA portfolio development
course from fall 2014 through fall 2018, 81 students (44%) completed and submitted their PLA
portfolios. Likewise, out of 916 students that enrolled in CAEL’s Learning Counts portfolio
development course from January 2011 through December 2015, 365 students (40%) completed
and submitted their PLA portfolios. Of the 980 total credits requested in PU PLA portfolios, 526
credits (54%) of credits requested were awarded. Of the 3,285 credits requested in CAEL PLA
portfolios, 1,117 credits (34%) of credits requested were awarded.
As the data shows, the portfolio submission rate at PU is slightly higher than the
submission rate at CAEL, by four percentage points, indicating that PU’s PLA portfolio
development course faculty are generating slightly more portfolio submissions than CAEL.
Furthermore, as the data shows, the credit award rate at PU of 54% is 20 percentage points
higher than CAEL’s credit award rate of 34%, which suggests that PU faculty evaluators are
PRIOR LEARNING ASSESSMENT PORTFOLIOS 103

generally supportive of accounting for experiential learning when granting academic credit, at
least enough to grant more credit than CAEL does. This student achievement data, in which PU’s
PLA students have earned more credit, on average, than CAEL’s PLA students, supports survey
data in which former PU PLA students indicated that they believed that PU faculty supported the
use of experiential learning to award academic credit.
Resources (cultural setting): PLA instructors and PU student support services need
to provide more technical and curricular support for non-traditional students enrolled in
PU’s PLA program as they develop their PLA portfolios. To assess the degree to which PU’s
PLA students felt supported by PU’s instructors and student support services, this study’s survey
included one item that asked respondents to indicate the extent to which they agreed with the
following statement: “The college supported me as I worked on my portfolio.” Responses to the
survey included strongly agree, agree, disagree, and strongly disagree. The summary of survey
responses is listed in Figure 7.

Figure 7. The college supported me as I worked on my portfolio.

PRIOR LEARNING ASSESSMENT PORTFOLIOS 104

As Figure 7 shows, six respondents (25%) strongly agreed with the statement, 13
respondents (54%) agreed, 3 respondents (13%) disagreed, and 2 respondents (8%) strongly
disagreed. With a majority of respondents (79%) answering that they agreed or strongly agreed
with the statement, the data suggests that most respondents indicated that they felt supported by
PU as they worked on their portfolios.
This sense of support from PU was somewhat supported by interview data. To assess the
degree to which interviewees felt supported by PU, two sets of questions were asked:
1. What kind of support did you receive from PU as you worked on your PLA portfolio?
What kind of guidance did you receive from your academic adviser or the PLA course
instructor? How did they help you?
2. Do you wish PU would have offered other kinds of supports that could have helped you
as you developed your portfolio? If so, can you tell me what types of support would’ve
been helpful?
Based on responses to these questions, all the interviewees indicated that they had
received substantial support from PU instructors for their respective PLA portfolio development
courses. As Jane said about an instructor, “He was there when you needed him or had questions.
He made himself available and was really helpful having students complete the course.” Noting
similar support from another course instructor, Antonia agreed, “Every time I called him up, he
was always there. He said anytime you need any help, call me.” For his part, John appreciated
how proactive his instructor was. As John recalled, “My instructor was very motivating and kept
pushing us. Sometimes when we were lagging, they would give you that extra cheer to help you
go through the finish line.” These observations about instructor support were echoed by the other
interviewees.
PRIOR LEARNING ASSESSMENT PORTFOLIOS 105

However, while these interviewees felt supported by their PLA instructors, several
interviewees indicated that they did not receive the same amount of support from PU’s student
support services. For example, John noted the facilities at his PU satellite site did not have a
library. As John noted, “We have a public library just across the field, but I think for the College
to have one of its own would be very beneficial for students taking classes, even the PLA class.”
Similarly, Jane commented on the lack of resources at PU, “You see, our campus is really small
and, in terms of the research and books, they don't really have that much.” However, one
interviewee, Rod, did avail of a tutoring center at PU, along with others in that interviewee’s
section of the PLA development course. As Rod remembered, “The tutor center was a huge
benefit. I mean, it was likely a daily thing for us to meet there.”
Despite Rod’s use of PU’s tutoring center, the five other interviewees did not feel supported by
PU’s student support services, which led many of them to rely on their own resources. As John
quipped, “We are all pretty resilient and innovative in finding ways to get what we needed. The
University of YouTube was our other alma mater.” Despite interviewees feeling that they were
not supported by PU’s student support services, their interviews, along with results from the
survey, indicated that former PLA students felt supported by PU’s faculty.
Vague goals (cultural setting): Faculty evaluators of PLA portfolios need to clarify
expectations for PLA portfolios by developing rubrics and guidelines for PLA portfolios.
To assess how clear expectations for PLA portfolios were made to PU’s PLA students, one item
on this study’s survey asked respondents to indicate to what degree they agreed with this
statement: “The expectations for the portfolio were clear.” Responses to the survey item included
strongly agree, agree, disagree, and strongly disagree. The summary of survey responses is listed
in Figure 8.
PRIOR LEARNING ASSESSMENT PORTFOLIOS 106

Figure 8. The expectations for the portfolio were clear.
As Figure 8 shows, nine respondents (38%) strongly agreed with the statement, 12
respondents (50%) agreed, and 3 respondents (13%) disagreed. With a majority of respondents
(88%) answering that they agreed or strongly agreed with the statement, the data suggests that
most respondents indicated that the expectations for their PLA portfolio were clear to them.
However, the results from a rubric-based comparative analysis of the 14 portfolios used
in this study suggest that portfolio expectations may not be consistent among PU faculty
evaluators. As discussed in Chapter Three, to assess how clear portfolio expectations were for
PU’s PLA students, the 14 portfolios analyzed as part of this study were evaluated using a PLA
portfolio rubric adapted from a rubric developed by CAEL, which included the following
criteria:
• Course student learning outcomes identified and addressed (SLOs)
• Experience is discussed (Recollection)
• Reflection on experience is evidence (Reflection)
• Understanding theory and practice (Abstraction)
• Learning application (Application)
PRIOR LEARNING ASSESSMENT PORTFOLIOS 107

• College-level writing and communication (Communication)
• Supporting documentation (Evidence)
Each criterion was scored on the following scale:
• 4 for exceptional performance on a criterion
• 3 for above average performance on a criterion
• 2 for a criterion being addressed
• 1 for a criterion being addressed but needing improvement
• 0 for a criterion not being addressed
Based on this rubric, a minimum total score of 19 was required to earn academic credit.
This study’s author used this rubric to evaluate all 14 portfolios to determine which courses
listed in each portfolio would earn credit and which courses would not earn credit. These credit
award determination results were then compared to actual credits awarded by PU for the 14
portfolios. It should be noted that the actual credits awarded by PU for these 14 portfolios were
determined without the use of a portfolio rubric. Table 12 lists summaries per portfolio for credit
determination results by this study’s author alongside actual credit award results from PU.
Table 12
PLA Portfolio Credit Award Determination With and Without the Use of a Rubric

Portfolio

Credits
Requested
Evaluation using a Rubric
PU Results without using a
Rubric
Credits
Awarded
Percentage
Credits
Awarded
Percentage
Portfolio Subset A
(earned ≤ 25%
credits)

PRIOR LEARNING ASSESSMENT PORTFOLIOS 108

Portfolio 1 55 0 .00 0 .00
Portfolio 2 6 0 .00 0 .00
Portfolio 3 9 6 .67 0 .00
Portfolio 4 29 0 .00 0 .00
Subset Mean .17 .00
Portfolio Subset B
(earned 33%-68%
credits)

Portfolio 5 9 0 .00 3 .33
Portfolio 6 26 26 1.00 14 .54
Portfolio 7 9 0 .00 3 .33
Portfolio 8 19 0 .00 13 .68
Portfolio 9 34 10 .29 22 .65
Portfolio 10 21 3 .14 9 .43
Subset Mean .22 .49
Portfolio Subset C
(earned ≥ 75%
credits)

Portfolio 11 12 0 .00 12 1.00
Portfolio 12 9 9 1.00 9 1.00
Portfolio 13 12 0 .00 9 .75
Portfolio 14 3 0 .00 3 1.00
Subset Mean .25 .94
PRIOR LEARNING ASSESSMENT PORTFOLIOS 109

Total for all Portfolios 249 54 .22 97 .39

As Table 12 shows, out of 249 academic credits requested in the 14 portfolios, the rubric-
based evaluation determined that 54 credits (22%) of credits requested would be awarded. In
contrast, the actual credits awarded by PU was 97 credits (39%) of credits requested. At this
aggregate level, it would appear that a rubric-based evaluation would result in less credits
awarded. However, when disaggregated, the results are more nuanced. For Subset A, whereas
PU did not award any credits for any of the four portfolios submitted, the rubric-based evaluation
awarded 67% of credits requested for at least one portfolio, Portfolio 3. Moreover, while there
was alignment between the rubric-based evaluation and actual credits awarded for Portfolios 1,
2, 4, and 9, the rubric-based evaluation of Portfolios 3 and 6 recommended more credits that
were actually awarded by PU. These nuanced variances between the number of credits
recommended by the rubric-based evaluation and the actual credits awarded by PU suggest that
there are inconsistencies in how PU faculty evaluate PLA portfolios. Notwithstanding this
study’s survey results, which indicates that respondents believed that expectations for their
portfolios were made clear to them, these inconsistencies in credits evaluated make it difficult to
determine whether or not PU faculty share the same set of expectations of portfolios.
Answers to Research Questions
This chapter used the data and analysis presented to answer two of the three research
questions that guided this study:
1. To what extent is PU meeting its goal of PLA students earning at least 80% of academic
credits petitioned in their PLA portfolios by the 2020 spring term?
PRIOR LEARNING ASSESSMENT PORTFOLIOS 110

2. What are the knowledge, motivation and organizational influences related to achieving
this goal?
Chapter Five will discuss answers to the third research question of this study.
Research Question #1: Results
Answering the first research question of this study is contingent on an in-depth answer to
the second research question, as knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences will have
an impact on how successful PU’s PLA students were at earning academic credit from PU for
their PLA portfolios. Still, some data discussed in this study provides direct answers to the first
research question. As previously discussed, PU’s PLA portfolios have been awarded 54% of all
credits requested between fall 2014 and fall 2018, which is 26 percentage points short of the 80%
goal for the 2020 spring term. However, the 54% award rate is 20 percentage points higher than
the 34% award rate of CAEL’s Learning Counts online portfolio development course. Moreover,
to accurately answer the first research question, credit award rates must be disaggregated into
longitudinal data that can reveal whether the award rates have been improving or declining
towards the 2020 goal. Without that longitudinal data, it is difficult to determine whether PU’s
PLA program is on track towards reaching its stakeholder goal.
Research Question #2: Results
The second research question guided this study in an examination of knowledge,
motivation, and organizational influences on PU’s efforts to have 100% of its PLA students earn
at least 80% of academic credits for their PLA portfolios. Specifically, drawing from a review of
the literature discussed in Chapter Two, this study attempted to confirm assumed knowledge,
motivation, and organizational influences for their impact on students enrolled in PU’s PLA
PRIOR LEARNING ASSESSMENT PORTFOLIOS 111

program. Table 13 presents a summary of these assumed influences and whether this study
confirmed them.
Table 13
Were Assumed Knowledge, Motivation, and Organizational Influences Confirmed?
Assumed Influences Confirmed Need?
Knowledge Conceptual: Adult learners enrolled in PU’s PLA program need
to know the concept of experiential learning.
Yes
Procedural: Adult learners enrolled in PU’s PLA program need
to know how to prepare a PLA portfolio.
Yes
Metacognitive: Adult learners enrolled in PU’s PLA program
need to reflect on what skills, insights, and lessons they learned
from their experience in life, work, civic participation, and
extra-curricular interests.
Yes
Motivation Task value: Adult learners enrolled in PU’s PLA program need
to see the value of their experiential learning and prioritize their
PLA work enough to complete their PLA portfolios.
No
Attributions: Adult learners enrolled in PU’s PLA program
need to attribute their control from factors beyond their control
(family emergencies, crises, etc.) to factors within their control
(task management, time management, etc.) when developing
PLA portfolios.
No
Self-Efficacy: Adult learners enrolled in PU’s PLA program
need to feel confident in their ability to complete a PLA
portfolio so that other roles (parent, breadwinner, etc.) do not
undermine their PLA portfolio.
No
Organizational Bias and Resistance to Change (Cultural Model): PU needs to
cultivate more faculty acceptance of and institutional support for
the experiential learning at the heart of the PLA program.
No
Resources (Cultural Setting): PLA instructors and PU student
support services need to provide more technical and curricular
support for non-traditional students enrolled in PU’s PLA
program as they develop their PLA portfolios.
Mixed
PRIOR LEARNING ASSESSMENT PORTFOLIOS 112

Vague Goals (Cultural Setting): Faculty evaluators of PLA
portfolios need to clarify expectations for PLA portfolios by
developing rubrics and guidelines for PLA portfolios.
Mixed

Knowledge. All three assumed knowledge influences were confirmed as needs by this
study. First, this study confirmed that adult learners enrolled in PU’s PLA program need to have
a conceptual knowledge of experiential learning. Survey responses indicated that most former
PLA students did not have a clear understanding of the concept of experiential learning.
Furthermore, while some interviewees demonstrated a grasp reflection, not all interviewees
understood Kolb’s framework for experiential learning, which includes recollection, reflection,
abstraction, and application (Kolb, 1984; Kolb & Kolb, 2005).
Second, this study confirmed that adult learners in PU’s PLA program need to possess
the procedural knowledge to assembly a PLA portfolio. Although this study’s survey results
indicated that respondents had that knowledge, the lack of discussion in interviews about
portfolio procedures and the variability in portfolio formatting demonstrated that participating
stakeholders did not have that procedural knowledge.
Third, this study confirmed that adult learners enrolled in PU’s PLA program need to
have the metacognitive knowledge to reflect on what skills, insights, and lessons they learned
from their experience in life, work, civic participation, and extra-curricular interests. Survey
results, which asked how many hours were spent reflecting, were inconclusive because the
survey did not account for how many credits each respondent was requesting in their portfolios.
However, half of the interviews and many of the portfolios analyzed as part of this study had
minimal discussions about the role of reflection in the portfolio development process. This
PRIOR LEARNING ASSESSMENT PORTFOLIOS 113

suggests that participating stakeholders did not demonstrate this metacognitive knowledge of
reflection.
Motivation. While all three assumed knowledge influences were confirmed by this
study, the opposite was true for all three motivation influences, which were not confirmed by this
study. First, this study did not confirm that adult learners enrolled in PU’s PLA program need to
see the task value of their experiential learning and prioritize their PLA work enough to complete
their PLA portfolios. This study’s survey responses indicated that most of the respondents valued
assembling their portfolios. The survey results were supported by this study’s interviews, in
which participants demonstrated a strong commitment to completing their portfolios. This
suggests that stakeholders who participated in this study already saw the value of their
experiential learning enough to prioritize and complete their PLA portfolios.
Second, this study did not confirm that adult learners enrolled in PU’s PLA program need
to attribute their control from factors beyond their control (family emergencies, crises, etc.) to
factors within their control (task management, time management, etc.) when developing PLA
portfolios. Rather than losing internal control due to external factors, this study’s survey results
and interviews revealed adult learners who took control of their portfolio work by exercising
time management and forming peer support groups.
Third, this study did not confirm that adult learners enrolled in PU’s PLA program need
to feel confident in their ability to complete a PLA portfolio so that other roles do not undermine
their PLA portfolio work. This study’s survey results and interviews revealed adult learners had
the confidence they needed to complete their PLA portfolios.
Furthermore, another motivation influence emerged as part of this study. Contrary to
attribution theory’s assertion that stakeholders must relocate the locus of control from external
PRIOR LEARNING ASSESSMENT PORTFOLIOS 114

factors to internal factors, this study’s interviews found that external factors that once hindered
the stakeholder performance now supported their performance. As interviewees admitted, the
external factor of family may have once been a barrier to their commitment to go to college.
However, family eventually became both a source of inspiration and a source of support to go to
college.
Organization. Whereas this study did not confirm any of the three assumed motivation
influences, but confirmed all three knowledge influences, the results for organizational
influences were more mixed. First, this study did not confirm the assumed organizational
influence of bias and resistance to change. This study’s survey results revealed that a majority of
respondents believed that faculty supported the use of experiential learning to earn academic
credit. That sense of support was further confirmed by an analysis of student achievement data,
which revealed that PU has awarded more credit for PLA portfolios than CAEL has for its online
portfolio course. This data suggests that there is already broad faculty acceptance of and
institutional support for the experiential learning at the heart of the PLA program.
Second, this study both confirmed and challenged the assumed organizational influence
that PLA instructors and PU student support services need to provide more technical and
curricular support for non-traditional students enrolled in PU’s PLA program as they develop
their PLA portfolios. This study’s survey results and interviewees revealed that participating
stakeholders felt that the PLA program’s instructors supported them. However, the interviews
also revealed that they did not feel the same level of support from student support services.
Third, this study could not confirm the assumed organizational influence that faculty
evaluators of PLA portfolios need to clarify expectations for PLA portfolios by developing
rubrics and guidelines for PLA portfolios. Although this study’s survey results indicated that
PRIOR LEARNING ASSESSMENT PORTFOLIOS 115

respondents believed that expectations for their portfolios were clear, a document analysis of
credits awarded for 14 PLA portfolios revealed variances and inconsistencies between a rubric-
based evaluation of credits and actual credits awarded. These variances and inconsistencies make
it difficult to determine whether or not PU faculty share the same set of expectations of
portfolios.
Summary
This chapter began with an effort to determine how much of an impact this study’s
knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences had on PU’s goal of having at least 80% of
its PLA students earning 100% of academic credit for their PLA portfolios by 2020. At the
beginning, it was assumed that even if PU’s PLA students had the knowledge and the
organizational support necessary to complete their portfolios, they may not be motivated to
complete their portfolios. However, this study revealed the opposite. Namely, this study found
that PU’s PLA stakeholders are highly motivated, which they have demonstrated by returning to
college after many years, reaching a higher portfolio submission rate than a nationally
recognized PLA program, and treating external factors not as barriers, but as sources of support
and inspiration.
Conversely, while motivated, these same stakeholders lacked the conceptual, procedural,
and conceptual knowledge to develop PLA portfolios that would earn them most of the academic
credit they were seeking. While PU’s 54% credit award rate for PLA portfolios is higher than
CAEL’s 34% credit award rate, that still means that PLA portfolios are not earning about half of
the credits being requested. Moreover, that 54% credit award rate is far short of the 100% award
rate targeted for 2020.
PRIOR LEARNING ASSESSMENT PORTFOLIOS 116

In addition to these knowledge influences, organizational influences also need to be
addressed. While PU appears to be providing the faculty support that PLA students feel they
need to succeed with their PLA portfolios, support from PU’s student support services may be
lacking. Furthermore, it is unclear whether expectations for PU’s PLA portfolios are clear, given
the variances and inconsistencies in portfolio evaluations and credits awarded. Building on these
findings, the next chapter will answer this study’s third research question by providing
recommended solutions that will help PU improve the number of its PLA students who earn
academic credit for their PLA portfolios.

PRIOR LEARNING ASSESSMENT PORTFOLIOS 117

CHAPTER FIVE: RECOMMENDATIONS
Introduction and Overview
This study evaluated how well Pacific University’s (PU) prior learning assessment (PLA)
program is helping improve graduation rates at PU by helping non-traditional students earn
academic credit for their experiential learning. Examining knowledge, motivation, and
organizational influences on PU’s PLA program, Chapter Four analyzed data collected by this
study. That data analysis, in turn, confirmed all knowledge influences, did not confirm
motivation influences, and presented mixed results for organizational influences.
Chapter Five will present recommended solutions to close the performance gap of PU’s
PLA program. Since Chapter Four identified knowledge influences as the most salient source of
performance gaps, this chapter prioritizes recommendations for knowledge influences.
Conversely, since Chapter Four did not confirm motivation influences as an area of concern, this
chapter’s recommendations for motivation influences are intended to reinforce the motivation of
PU’s PLA students. Finally, since Chapter Four presented mixed results for organizational
influences, this chapter will present recommendations that address each specific organizational
influence.
The recommendations discussed in this chapter will help PU’s PLA program reach its
stakeholder goal of having at least 80% of its PLA students earning 100% of academic credit for
their PLA portfolios by 2020. These recommendations will employ the New World Kirkpatrick
Model (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016). Recommendations will be presented for knowledge,
motivation, and organizational findings, and an integrated recommendation and evaluation plan
will be presented using the New World Kirkpatrick Model (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016).

PRIOR LEARNING ASSESSMENT PORTFOLIOS 118

Recommendations for Practice to Address KMO Influences
Knowledge Recommendations
As discussed in Chapter Four, all three assumed knowledge influences for this study were
confirmed by the data collected. Of the three knowledge influences, the conceptual knowledge
that PU’s PLA students need to know the concept of experiential learning appears to be the most
important as this lays the foundation for their work in the program (Kolb, 1984; Kolb & Kolb,
2005). The next most important knowledge influence appears to be the metacognitive knowledge
that PU’s PLA students need to reflect on what they have experienced (Krathwohl, 2002), as this
reflection will drive their work on their PLA portfolios. Equipped with both the conceptual
understanding of experiential learning and the metacognitive skill of reflection, PU’s PLA
students can then proceed with developing their PLA portfolios, guided by a procedural
understanding of how to assemble those portfolios. Table 14 presents these knowledge
influences along with recommendations for each knowledge influence.
Table 14
Summary of Knowledge Influences and Recommendations
Assumed Knowledge
Influence
Principle and Citation Context-Specific
Recommendation
Adult learners enrolled in
PU’s PLA program need to
know the concept of
experiential learning. (D)
Conceptual (declarative)
knowledge connects factual
knowledge into broader
patterns and relationships
that organize information
into coherent packets of
knowledge (Krathwohl,
2002).
Provide education that
introduces PLA students to
key concepts of experiential
learning, specifically
Kolb’s conceptual
framework for extracting
meaning and learning from
one’s experience (Kolb,
1984; Kolb & Kolb, 2005).
PRIOR LEARNING ASSESSMENT PORTFOLIOS 119

Adult learners enrolled in
PU’s PLA program need to
reflect on what skills,
insights, and lessons they
learned from their
experience in life, work,
civic participation, and
extra-curricular interests.
(M)
Metacognitive knowledge
reflects one’s ability to
reflect on and become more
aware of one’s knowledge
and learning (Krathwohl,
2002).
Provide a worksheet that
guides PLA students
through six levels of
reflecting: remembering,
understanding, application,
analysis, evaluation, and
creation (Anderson &
Krathwohl, 2001).
Adult learners enrolled in
PU’s PLA program need to
know how to prepare a
PLA portfolio. (P)
Procedural knowledge
involves learning the skills,
steps, or techniques needed
to perform a given task
(Krathwohl, 2002; Rueda,
2011).
Provide a template, a
worked example for PLA
portfolio, and video
tutorials that guide PLA
students through the
different sections of the
portfolio.

Increasing PLA students’ conceptual knowledge of experiential learning. A key to
Pacific University’s (PU) prior learning assessment (PLA) program is mastering the concept of
experiential learning. However, quantitative and qualitative data from this study suggest that
PU’s PLA participants have not fully grasped the concept of experiential learning. This
knowledge gap could be addressed by improving PLA participants conceptual knowledge of
experiential learning theory. Krathwohl (2002) has noted that conceptual knowledge connects
factual knowledge into broader patterns and relationships that organize information into coherent
packets of knowledge. Schraw and McCrudden (2006) also speak directly to the concept of
experiential learning, noting that learning new concepts and ideas are enhanced when tied to
prior learning or knowledge. PLA participants unfamiliar with experiential learning theory could
benefit from a better understanding of how one’s experience can be contextualized within the
broader framework of experiential learning theory. In other words, their experience may take on
new meaning when placed within the context of experiential learning. To cultivate better
PRIOR LEARNING ASSESSMENT PORTFOLIOS 120

conceptual knowledge of experiential learning theory, PU’s PLA program could provide
education that introduces PLA students to key concepts of experiential learning.
Kolb provides a conceptual framework for extracting meaning and learning from one’s
experience. Kolb (1984; Kolb & Kolb, 2005) defined this conceptual framework with five
propositions for experiential learning that are prominent in the research: (a) learning is a process,
not an outcome, in of itself; (b) all learning is a discursive process of relearning what one already
knows and perceives in the world; (c) learning involves a dialectical synthesis of what one
knows and what one is learning; (d) learning results from a dynamic interaction between the
learner and her or his environment; and (e ) learning is fundamentally a creative process. Conrad
(2008) reinforces this last proposition by observing that the development of portfolios in higher
education PLA programs is a knowledge-building exercise for the adult learner. That knowledge-
building exercise involves recollecting life and work experiences, reflecting on those
experiences, abstracting broader lessons learned from those experiences, and applying those
lessons to future scenarios (Kolb, 1984; Kolb & Kolb, 2005). Taken together, the research
emphasizes a deliberate approach to portfolio development that PLA students could learn in
order to demystify the process and take more ownership of that process.
To help PLA students demystify the concepts involved in experiential learning, they
could be deliberately introduced to Kolb’s conceptual framework for experiential learning.
Specifically, PU could revise its PLA curriculum to integrate Kolb’s framework into student
learning outcomes for the PLA portfolio development course. The revised PLA curriculum could
be buttressed by the development or procurement of online videos that introduce the four key
elements of that framework--recollection, reflection, abstraction, and application--to PLA
students (Kolb, 1984; Kolb & Kolb, 2005). Research suggests that the use of online resources
PRIOR LEARNING ASSESSMENT PORTFOLIOS 121

that align with course curriculum and contextualizes the student learning experience is
particularly beneficial for adult learners (Tainsh, 2016).
Increasing PLA students’ metacognitive knowledge of reflection on experiential
learning. While a conceptual understanding of experiential learning can help PU’s PLA students
begin reflecting on their experience, that reflection must be consciously guided by the
metacognitive knowledge of how to effectively reflect on one’s experiential learning.
Specifically, PU’s PLA students need to reflect on what skills, insights, and lessons they learned
from their experience in life, work, civic participation, and extra-curricular interests.
However, this study suggests that many of those students did not demonstrate
metacognitive knowledge in their PLA portfolios. Krathwohl (2002) noted that reflecting on
one’s knowledge and experience is a metacognitive process that can be patterned on Bloom’s
Taxonomy of Educational Objectives, beginning with the recall process and working towards
evaluating and creatively building upon one’s knowledge. However, without that ability to
reflect, PLA learners may be able to recall work that they have done but be unable to explain
how they learned to do that work or how that work is done. Clark and Estes (2008) suggest that a
complex process, like metacognitive reflection, can be facilitated by a guide that walks learners
through that process. For PLA students, PU could develop and offer an experiential learning
worksheet that helps those students navigate their reflective process from simple recall to higher
order evaluation and synthesis.
Feldon (2007) suggested that while non-traditional learners may possess a depth and
breadth of skills, their focus on doing may hamper their ability to reflect. However, Müller
(2012) observed that such students can be aided in their reflection by worksheets that first
require PLA students to recall major life and work experiences, and then, through the use of
PRIOR LEARNING ASSESSMENT PORTFOLIOS 122

probing questions, lead them through several levels of reflection on those experiences. In the
end, the students reach a point where they can more clearly articulate how they know what they
know. PU’s PLA students could benefit from a similar experiential learning worksheet.
Increasing PLA students’ procedural knowledge of the PLA portfolio development
process. Once PU’s PLA students have grasped the concept of experiential learning and
processed their own experiential learning with metacognitive reflection, they must know how to
articulate their experiential learning within a PLA portfolio. This study revealed that a number of
PU PLA students did not possess the requisite procedural knowledge to successfully assemble a
PLA portfolio. Krathwohl (2002) notes that this kind of procedural knowledge is essential to
help learners master the skills, steps, or techniques needed to complete a task. Kirshner,
Kirshner, and Paas (2006) also explain that when a complex concept or task is simplified into
smaller, more manageable ideas tasks, learners are more likely to grasp the broader concept and
complete the larger task. PU’s PLA students would be better equipped to complete PLA
portfolios if they possessed the procedural knowledge for assembling those portfolios.
One way to facilitate this kind of procedural knowledge is through the use of templates
that guide learners through a complex task or process (Clark & Estes, 2008). To enhance PU’s
PLA students’ procedural knowledge for assembling PLA portfolios, PU’s PLA program could
develop a standardized template for PLA portfolios that guides PLA students through the
different sections of the portfolio. In addition, a worked example of the template could be
provided that offers PLA students clear guidance for each part of the PLA portfolio. The
template and worked example could be supported by a series of online tutorial videos that walk
students through each part of the PLA portfolio.
PRIOR LEARNING ASSESSMENT PORTFOLIOS 123

Research suggests that while standardizing experiential learning into PLA templates may
undermine the unique and personalized nature of each learner’s experience, pre-structured
portfolio templates may also guide more PLA students towards successful completion of their
respective portfolios (Sweygers et al., 2009). Conrad (2008) also notes that since PLA learners
may experience cognitive overload when reflecting on their entire life and work experience, it is
important to break that reflective process down into manageable steps. Providing PU’s PLA
students with a standardized template may reduce that cognitive overload and guide those
students through a clear and sequential process of transcribing their experiential learning into a
portfolio template.
Research has also suggested that when it comes to major assignments like a PLA
portfolio, providing worked examples with additional tutorials can be particularly helpful for
adult learners. As Sweller, Jeroen, and Paas (2019) noted, worked examples of a difficult process
provide the kind of concrete clarity that reduces cognitive overload for the process and ensures a
higher likelihood that the process will be completed. Furthermore, Tainsh (2016) noted that
providing digital resources, like online video tutorials that guide students through difficult
processes, aligns with the expectations that adult learners have for accessibility, flexibility, and
relevance of digital content. Providing PU’s PLA students with online video tutorials and a
worked example of a PLA portfolio will also help ensure they have the procedural guidance they
need to complete their portfolios.
Motivation Recommendations
The data analysis of Chapter Four study did not confirm any of the assumed motivation
influences discussed in Chapter Two. In particular, it was discovered that many of the
participants in this study demonstrated a high degree of motivation, especially in self-efficacy
PRIOR LEARNING ASSESSMENT PORTFOLIOS 124

and attribution. This high degree of motivation among PLA students is an asset of the PLA
program than can be reinforced with some recommendations. Of the assumed motivation
influences discussed in Chapter Two, the self-efficacy of PU’s PLA students appears to be the
most important as it can increase the sense of agency of students (Bandura, 2005; Bandura, 2012;
Pintrich, 2003). With the confidence that self-efficacy brings, task value and attribution can help
keep PU PLA students focused on completing their portfolios (Eccles, 2006; Pintrich, 2003;
Weiner, 2010). Table 15 presents these influences along with a recommendation for each
influence.
Table 15
Summary of Motivation Influences and Recommendations
Assumed Motivation
Influence

Principle and Citation Context-Specific
Recommendation
Adult learners enrolled in
PU’s PLA program need to
feel confident in their
ability to complete a PLA
portfolio so that other roles
(parent, breadwinner, etc.)
do not undermine their PLA
portfolio.
Self-efficacy reflects a
learner’s personal beliefs in
how much agency or
control she or he has over
one’s learning and
performance (Bandura,
2005; Bandura, 2012). High
self-efficacy has been
demonstrated to improve
persistence towards mastery
of learning and
performance (Pintrich,
2003).
The PLA portfolio
development process needs
to be broken down into
smaller, more concrete
tasks that can allow PLA
students to experience
success at each task.
Adult learners enrolled in
PU’s PLA program need to
see the value of their
experiential learning and
prioritize their PLA work
enough to complete their
PLA portfolios.
Task value refers to how
much intrinsic, attainment,
or utility value a learner
assigns to a given task,
which may be diminished
by costs perceived to be
associated with the task
(Eccles, 2006).
Provide networking and
mentoring opportunities
with former PLA
participants who have
succeeded in the program.
This will offer positive role
models who foster positive
values towards the task of
assembling a portfolio and
PRIOR LEARNING ASSESSMENT PORTFOLIOS 125

downplay the costs
perceived with assembling
the portfolio.
Adult learners enrolled in
PU’s PLA program need to
attribute their control from
factors beyond their control
(family emergencies, crises,
etc.) to factors within their
control (task management,
time management, etc.)
when developing PLA
portfolios.
Attribution theory leads
learners to perceive success
or failure as caused by
variables that are either
interior or exterior, stable or
unstable (Pintrich, 2003;
Weiner, 2010).
Convert PU’s PLA program
from a course-based
program into a cohort-based
program in which peers can
motivate and help each
other in the portfolio
development process.

Self-efficacy: Increase self-efficacy. This study finds that most adult learners enrolled in
PU’s PLA program do feel confident in their ability to complete a PLA portfolio, which prevents
other roles that they play, such as parent or breadwinner, from undermining their work towards
their PLA portfolios. Self-efficacy theory can help reinforce this level of confidence. Self-
efficacy reflects a learner’s personal beliefs in how much agency or control she or he has over
one’s learning and performance (Bandura, 2005; Bandura, 2012). High self-efficacy has been
demonstrated to improve persistence towards mastery of learning and performance, while low
self-efficacy has been linked to a failure to persist at a task (Pintrich, 2003). PU’s PLA students
may feel so overwhelmed by the amount of work required for a PLA portfolio that they begin to
lose self-efficacy. To counter this sense of being overwhelmed, it is recommended that the PLA
portfolio development process be broken down into smaller, more concrete tasks that can allow
PLA students to experience success at each task. For instance, instead of jumping directly into
writing a 50-page portfolio, PLA students could start with a simple worksheet in which they list
work and life experiences that could inform the content of the final portfolio.
PRIOR LEARNING ASSESSMENT PORTFOLIOS 126

Pajares (2006) asserts that setting concise, concrete, but challenging goals can help
learners experience success at a task that can increase self-efficacy. Bandura (2000) also notes
that success at small tasks can beget success in larger, subsequent tasks, creating a positive self-
efficacy spiral of reciprocal causation. In their study of a PLA program at Capella University,
Leiste and Jensen (2011) state that PLA programs increase student motivation and reduce student
anxiety when they structure the portfolio process into clearly defined steps. Leiste and Jensen
(2011) further state that when a structured PLA portfolio development process has students
succeed in early steps, they are more likely to succeed in subsequent steps. Likewise, at PU, if
PLA students experience success with small, manageable tasks early in the PLA development
process, their positive sense of self-efficacy may increase over time, empowering them to persist
in completing their PLA portfolios. A positive spiral of self-efficacy may be facilitated by
breaking down PU’s PLA portfolio development process into more manageable tasks.
Expectancy: Increase the task value of completing PLA portfolios. While results of
data collected in this study suggest that adult learners enrolled in PU’s PLA program are
prioritizing their PLA work enough to complete their PLA portfolios, this motivation influence
can be reinforced. Task value theory offers some considerations. According to task value theory,
learners are motivated to perform a task based on the intrinsic, attainment, or utility value they
assign to a given task (Eccles, 2006). Task value theory also notes that the value that a learner
assigns to a task may be diminished by the costs he or she associates with that task (Eccles,
2006). For many of PU’s PLA students, the amount of work required to complete a PLA
portfolio that is perceived as an overwhelming task could undermine any value they assign to the
task of completing the portfolio. To counter this, the recommendation is to provide current PU
PLA students with networking and mentoring opportunities that connect them with former PLA
PRIOR LEARNING ASSESSMENT PORTFOLIOS 127

participants who have succeeded in the program. This will offer positive role models who foster
positive values towards the task of assembling a portfolio and downplay the costs perceived with
assembling the portfolio. For example, a PLA student struggling with a PLA portfolio may be
inspired by the success of a former PLA student, who could help reduce anxieties and worries
over developing a PLA portfolio by sharing his or her own experience with the portfolio process.
The research on PLA portfolios finds that PLA students often assign considerable value
to developing a portfolio, whether it be the intrinsic value of reflecting on one’s experiential
learning (Calleja, 2014; Stevens et al., 2010), the attainment value of developing as lifelong
learners in the portfolio process (Conrad, 2010), or the utility value of working towards a college
degree (Klein-Collins & Wertheim, 2013). Rather than increasing a task value that is already
high, the focus should be on reducing the perceived costs of that task. Connecting students with
peers and role models who have succeeded at a similar task will provide the type of positive
modeling that can downplay the difficulty of that task (Eccles, 2006; Pajares, 2006), like
developing a portfolio. Pearson (2004) has generally discussed the importance of providing adult
learners with mentors to help them through the college experience. Brown (2002) and Klein-
Collins (2010) have specifically explored how such peer mentoring programs can help adult
learners persist in PLA programs. These findings reinforce the benefits of providing mentoring
and networking opportunities to PLA students. Networking with mentors who have succeeded in
the program may empower PLA students to persist towards completing their PLA portfolios and
succeed in their own right.
Attributions: Refocus loci of control towards stable, internal factors. This study’s
findings suggest that adult learners enrolled in PU’s PLA program do attribute enough control
over the PLA portfolio development process to stable, internal factors within their control.
PRIOR LEARNING ASSESSMENT PORTFOLIOS 128

Attribution theory can help explain this dynamic. Pintrich (2003) notes that learners attribute
success or failure to variables that are either interior or exterior and stable or unstable. Whether
accurate or not, the learner’s perception of attribution is what encourages or discourages him or
her when choosing or persisting at a task (Weiner, 2010). PU’s PLA students appear to attribute
controllability over the PLA portfolio process to internal factors within their control, like time
management, instead of unstable, external factors out of their control, like family and work.
Furthermore, this study found that PLA students attributed enough internal control to
seek each other and form peer support groups throughout the portfolio development process. To
build on this momentum, the recommendation is to convert PU’s PLA program from a course-
based program into a cohort-based program in which peers can motivate and help each other in
the portfolio development process. Creating cohorts of PLA learners may empower PLA
students to support, care for, and empathize with each other, especially as they share a common
struggle to balance work and life with the academic demands of the PLA portfolio development
process. For example, a PLA student who begins to feel overwhelmed by the amount of work
required for a portfolio would feel comfortable reaching out to other PLA students who will not
only understand what he or she is going through, but will also be able to offer concrete and
credible suggestions about how to persist in the process.
Pintrich (2003) asserts that building a community of learners who support and care for
each other has been demonstrated to increase attribution towards more stable, internal loci of
control. Lawrence (2002) asserts that among adult learners, learning communities like cohorts
provide the kind of collaboration and shared experiences that supports learners within a cohort.
As Lawrence (2002) further states, when working in cohorts, adult learners become “learning
communities [that] are sustained by interdependence, a willingness to be changed, and a deep
PRIOR LEARNING ASSESSMENT PORTFOLIOS 129

sense of commitment” (p. 91). Spaid and Duff (2009) also observe that when working adults are
grouped into cohorts in college programs, the collaborative and supportive network of the cohort
helps those adults persist more towards completion of their college degrees. This research speaks
to the benefits of converting PU’s PLA program from a course-based program into one that is
cohort-based. When PU’s PLA students work more closely together within cohorts, they may be
in a better position to seek and offer support that increases internal, stable attributions and help
them persist in completing their PLA portfolios.
Organization Recommendations
The data analysis of Chapter Four presented mixed results for whether assumed
organizational influences were confirmed by this study. One organizational influence, bias or
resistance to change (Agocs, 1997), was not confirmed among PU faculty, which places this
influence as the least important organizational influence to be addressed by this chapter’s
recommendations. Of the two other organizational influences with mixed results, this study’s
findings suggest that the organizational influence of clear goals (Clark & Estes, 2008) appears to
be the most important as the use of rubrics in this study could be replicated by PU for more
consistent assessment of PLA portfolios. The other organizational influence, resources (Rummler
& Brache, 1995), could be addressed by PU providing a more coherent set of support services for
PLA students. Table 16 presents these organizational influences alongside recommendations for
each influence.

PRIOR LEARNING ASSESSMENT PORTFOLIOS 130

Table 16
Summary of Organization Influences and Recommendations
Assumed Organization
Influence

Principle and Citation

Context-Specific
Recommendation
Faculty evaluators of PLA
portfolios need to clarify
expectations for PLA
portfolios by developing
rubrics and guidelines for
PLA portfolios.
Organizational goals must
be clear and measurable in
order to be achieved (Clark
& Estes, 2008).
It is recommended that PU
develop or adopt rubrics
for PLA portfolios that
follow industry standards.
PLA instructors and PU
student support services
need to provide more
technical and curricular
support for non-traditional
students enrolled in MU’s
PLA program as they
develop their PLA
portfolios.
Organizational resources
must be aligned with
organizational goals
(Rummler & Brache,
1995).
It is recommended that PU
redesign its academic and
student support programs
to provide a more coherent
suite of support systems
for PLA students,
including an expanded use
of online resources.
PU needs to cultivate more
faculty acceptance of and
institutional support for the
experiential learning at the
heart of the PLA program.
Resistance to
organizational change can
take on a number of forms,
including outright
opposition to the change,
silent repression of change
initiatives, or inertia and
inaction (Agocs, 1997).
It is recommended that PU
implement a training
program that will
familiarize PU faculty with
PU’s PLA program and the
concept of experiential
learning, help faculty
understand how the PLA
program will benefit the
organization, and appease
any fears faculty may have
about how the program
may threaten their jobs or
welfare.

Cultural settings: Goals. This study found inconsistencies and variances between a
rubric-based evaluation of sample portfolios and actual credit awarded by PU for those
portfolios. These inconsistencies and variances suggest that expectations among PU faculty for
PU’s PLA portfolios are vague and unclear, perhaps because PU faculty lack clear and
PRIOR LEARNING ASSESSMENT PORTFOLIOS 131

standardized rubrics to guide their evaluation of PLA portfolios. Clark and Estes (2008) assert
that for an organization’s goals to be achieved, those goals must be clear and measurable. For
PU’s PLA students, when it is unclear how their PLA portfolios will be assessed or that their
portfolios will be evaluated arbitrarily without clear and predetermined criteria, it becomes
difficult to develop portfolios that will achieve the goal of earning academic credit for their
experiential learning. Without clarity, one PLA student may earn credit for the same course for
which another student is denied credit. To help clarify goals and expectations for PU’s PLA
program, it is recommended that PU develop or adopt rubrics for PLA portfolios that follow
industry standards.
The research on PLA programs notes that many PLA faculty evaluators are ill equipped
to fairly evaluate PLA portfolios (Mckay et al., 2016; Popova-Gonci & Tobol, 2011; Travers,
2012). Not only do PLA faculty evaluators lack appropriate training for evaluating PLA
portfolios (Mckay et al., 2016), many conduct their evaluations without the guidance of clear and
consistent rubrics for PLA portfolios (Joosten-ten Brinke et al., 2010; Stenlund, 2012). It does
not help that the evaluation of PLA portfolios varies considerably between different colleges and
universities (Travers, 2012), and curricular guidance and support for PLA programs has been
limited (Popova-Gonci & Tobol, 2011). However, more work has been invested into developing
research-based rubrics for PLA portfolios (Hoffman, 2013), and the Council for Adult and
Experiential Learning (CAEL) has integrated much of that work into several publications that are
available for member institutions. As a member of CAEL, PU could access those publications to
help faculty evaluators develop or adopt clearer rubrics for evaluating PLA portfolios.
Cultural settings: Resources. While this study found that PU’s faculty offers
considerable support to PLA students, participants in this study expressed a need for more
PRIOR LEARNING ASSESSMENT PORTFOLIOS 132

support from student support services as they worked on their PLA portfolios. The lack of such
support reflects a misalignment between the PU’s organizational goals for the PLA program and
the organizational resources that PU allocates for that program. As Rummler and Brache (1995)
note, to meet organizational goals, an organization’s resource must be aligned with those goals.
For PU’s PLA students, this means that while the PLA program is designed to help them earn
their degrees through their PLA portfolios, PU does not offer enough support to help them
effectively complete their respective portfolios. For example, while PLA portfolios require a
considerable amount of writing, PU’s writing center is closed after working hours, which does
not accommodate the work schedules of most PLA students, many of whom are working
professionals. To address this issue, it is recommended that PU redesign its academic and student
support programs to provide a more coherent suite of support systems for PLA students. These
support systems could be complemented by expanding the number of digital and online
resources available to PLA students.
The research on adult learners in higher education has found that many colleges and
universities tend to focus on the needs of younger students over the needs of older and less
traditional students (Fairchild, 2003; Kasworm, 2010; Steele & Erisman, 2016). Since the
marketing, curricula, and student support services of higher education tend to be youth-centric
(Kasworm, 2010), colleges and universities also tend to overlook the needs of older students
(Fairchild, 2003), like PLA students. Furthermore, while PLA programs are designed to help
colleges and universities better meet the needs of non-traditional students, the broader cultural
setting in which PLA programs operate often undermine that goal (Steele & Erisman, 2016).
This is particularly true for institutions that assume that PLA programs are a singular solution to
meet the needs of older students (Steele & Erisman, 2016). However, promising practices are
PRIOR LEARNING ASSESSMENT PORTFOLIOS 133

emerging at some colleges and universities that are taking a more coherent and comprehensive
approach to PLA programs that embed PLA programs and PLA students into the institution’s
broader student support services (Rusk & Smith, 2014). Furthermore, adult learners value the
accessibility of higher education institutions that offer a wide variety of digital and online
resources to complement student support services (Tainsh, 2016). A similar approach could be
taken at PU to ensure that its PLA program is supported by a robust and more comprehensive set
of online and offline student support services for PLA students.
Cultural models: Bias and resistance to change. According to survey respondents and
interviews conducted for this study, PU’s PLA students do believe that PU faculty accept or
support the PLA process of granting academic credit for experiential learning. This survey data
was triangulated with a rubric-based document analysis of sample PU PLA portfolios, which
indicated that more credits were granted by PU faculty for the portfolios analyzed than were
awarded by a comparable online program run by the Council on Adult and Experiential Learning
(CAEL). Furthermore, this study’s interviews found that most former PLA students felt that they
were supported by PU faculty. To ensure continued support from PU faculty, it is recommended
that PU implement a training program that will familiarize PU faculty with PU’s PLA program
and the concept of experiential learning and help faculty understand how the PLA program will
benefit the organization.
Research on higher education in the 21
st
century generally finds that as technology and
workforce demands change in an increasingly globalized marketplace, higher education is also
evolving to adapt to such changes with less traditional and more innovative approaches to
teaching and learning (Bass, 2012; Egan, Maguire, Christophers, & Rooney, 2016; Hämäläinen,
Kiili, & Smith, 2017). One innovation in higher education that has received much attention is the
PRIOR LEARNING ASSESSMENT PORTFOLIOS 134

PLA model (Conrad, 2010; Travers, 2012), particularly because it blends real-world applications
of experiential learning with theoretical concepts as part of reflective practice (Calleja, 2014).
Moreover, some studies have shown that PLA programs can help improve overall academic
achievement rates at institutions that offer such programs (Rust & Ikard, 2016). Steele and
Erisman (2016) also discuss the importance of engaging faculty in the implementation of PLA
programs. When the innovative and transformative benefits of PLA programs are considered
within the context of 21st century higher education, the benefits of PLA programs may outweigh
their perceived disadvantages and even counter resistance to those programs by traditional
university faculty. This is more likely to happen when stakeholders feel included as equal agents
in a change process (Mezirow & Associates, 2000). In the case of PU’s PLA program, PU
faculty need to be engaged in a learning process about the benefits of a PLA program. This
engagement process should also ensure multiple, open lines of communication with faculty in
such a way that faculty can share their questions and concerns about the program and receive
timely responses to those questions and concerns.
Integrated Implementation and Evaluation Plan
Implementation and Evaluation Framework
The implementation and evaluation of recommendations discussed earlier will be situated
within the New World Kirkpatrick Model (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016). The New World
Kirkpatrick Model builds on the earlier work of Donald Kirkpatrick, who developed an approach
to training that worked through four successive phases of impact: (a) trainee reaction to the
training, (b) trainee learning of material, (c) transfer of training concepts and skills to the
workplace, and (d) achieving results within that trainee’s organization. The New World
Kirkpatrick Model refines this original model into a more iterative framework that accounts for
PRIOR LEARNING ASSESSMENT PORTFOLIOS 135

success along the way towards achieving organizational goals or results (Kirkpatrick &
Kirkpatrick, 2016), which can be seen in Figure 9 below.
Figure 9. The New World Kirkpatrick Model.
According to the New World Kirkpatrick Model, one should begin with the end in mind,
which in this case are Level 4 Results and how the desired outcomes of training contribute to the
organization’s overall goals (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016). Level 3 Behavior feeds into
Level 4 with drivers that reinforce, monitor, encourage, and reward behaviors that contribute to
Level 4 Results (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016). Level 3, in turn, is enabled by Level 2
Learning, or the amount of knowledge, skills, attitude, confidence, and commitment that trainees
acquire from training (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016). Finally, Level 2 is preceded by Level 1
Reaction from trainees to training, which includes how engaging, relevant, or satisfied the
training is for trainees (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016).

PRIOR LEARNING ASSESSMENT PORTFOLIOS 136

Organizational Purpose, Need, and Expectations
The broader organizational goal discussed in this study is the extent to which PU is
meeting its organizational goal of having 75% of its students complete their respective degrees
within two years for associate degrees and within four years for bachelor’s degrees. This study
has narrowed its focus to one stakeholder group, non-traditional students older than 25-years-old
who have enrolled in PU’s PLA program, and how successful they have been in progressing
through the PLA program. As previously discussed, while non-traditional students are often
overlooked on college campuses, PLA programs can accommodate their life and work schedules,
validate their experiential learning, and help them complete their respective degree programs. At
PU, this means that the more successful PLA students are in the PLA program, the more likely it
will be that they graduate from PU on time.
This study’s implementation and evaluation plan aims to translate the study’s findings
and recommendations into useful, credible, and measurable steps that PU can take to help
improve its PLA program. In particular, the plan will focus on how to help PU’s PLA students
succeed in completing PLA portfolios that earn them academic credit towards their respective
degrees. The plan will detail steps and metrics for each of the four levels in the New World
Kirkpatrick Model (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016).
Level 4: Results and Leading Indicators
The New World Kirkpatrick Model (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016) updates the
previous Kirkpatrick Model by recognizing that measurements of Level 4 results need not be
limited to summative assessments of an organization’s final outcomes. Instead, leading
indicators can be measured as a means of formative assessment as stakeholders in an
organization make progress towards meeting the organization’s broader outcomes. For PU’s
PRIOR LEARNING ASSESSMENT PORTFOLIOS 137

PLA program, the broader outcome of increasing graduation rates for PU’s PLA students can be
measured by internal and external indicators. Internal indicators will include PLA student
persistence in the PLA program, PLA student completion of PLA portfolios, and the extent to
which PLA portfolios successfully meet the standards of PLA rubrics developed and
implemented by PU. External indicators will include the successful awarding of credit for PLA
portfolios and how well PLA students progress through their respective degree plans at PU.
Table 17 details the outcomes, metrics, and methods for these internal and external indicators.
Table 17
Outcomes, Metrics, and Methods for External and Internal Outcomes
Outcome Metric(s) Method(s)
External Outcomes
PLA students successfully earn
academic credit for courses
listed in their respective PLA
portfolios.
The percentage of credits awarded to
PLA students for courses requested in
their PLA portfolios
PU’s PLA program staff will monitor
credit-award rates for PLA portfolios
for each term.
PLA students will successfully
progress through their
respective degree plans at PU.
Program completion rates for PLA
students
PU’s Institutional Researcher will
monitor degree program completion
rates for PLA students at the end of
every academic year.
Internal Outcomes
PLA students will persist
through the PLA program.
Course completion rates for the PLA
portfolio development course
PU’s PLA program staff and PU’s
Institutional Researcher will monitor
course completion rates for each term.
PLA students will successfully
complete their PLA portfolios.
PLA portfolio completion rates PU’s PLA program staff will monitor
PLA portfolio completion rates for
each term.
PLA students will successfully
meet 75% of PLA portfolio
rubrics
PLA portfolio rubrics will be met PU’s PLA portfolio development
course instructors, and PU faculty
evaluators will utilize PLA portfolio
rubrics, information from which will
be monitored by PU’s PLA program
staff.

Level 3: Behavior
Critical behaviors. Level 3 in the New World Kirkpatrick Model refers to those
behaviors that trainees or participants in a program learn and apply to their respective work after
PRIOR LEARNING ASSESSMENT PORTFOLIOS 138

the training (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016). For PU’s PLA students, there are five critical
behaviors and one critical enabler. First, PLA students will identify relevant work and life
experiences. Second, PLA students will compile and collate evidence and artifacts that verify
and validate work and life experiences. Third, PLA students will employ Kolb’s framework for
experiential learning which includes recall of, reflection on, and evaluation of life and work
experience (Kolb, 1984; Kolb & Kolb, 2005). Fourth, PLA students will articulate their
experiential learning by completing a PLA portfolio. Fifth, PU will PLA students will participate
in networking and mentoring opportunities as they work on their PLA portfolios. Table 18 lists
these critical behaviors, along with metrics for measuring each behavior, methods for measuring
the behaviors, and the timing for each measurement.
Table 18
Critical Behaviors, Metrics, Methods, and Timing for Evaluation

Critical Behavior Metric(s)
Method(s)
Timing
1 PLA students will
identify relevant work
and life experiences.
Number of work and
life events listed
Work and Life
Experience Worksheet
Weeks 1 and 2 of each
term
2 PLA students will
compile and collate
evidence that verify and
validate work and life
experiences.
Number and variety of
exhibits and artifacts
listed and provided
Evidence Inventory
Digital Evidence Locker
Weeks 3 and 4 of each
term
3 PLA students will
employ Kolb’s
framework for
experiential learning
(Kolb & Kolb, 2005),
which includes recall of,
reflection on, and
evaluation of work and
life experience.
Quantity and quality of
recall, reflection, and
evaluation of work and
life experience
Experiential Learning
Worksheet
Weeks 5 to 8 of each
term
4 PLA students will
articulate their
experiential learning by
completing a PLA
portfolio.
Number of course
petitioned in each PLA
portfolio
Quality of each
portfolio
PLA Portfolio Rubrics Weeks 9 to 12 of each
term
PRIOR LEARNING ASSESSMENT PORTFOLIOS 139

5 PLA students will
participate in
networking and
mentoring opportunities
as they work on their
PLA portfolios
The number of
mentoring sessions held
and the number of
networking connections
made for PLA students
Mentoring and
Networking Tracking
Sheet
Weeks 1 to 4 of each
term

Required drivers. Required drivers can help reinforce, monitor, encourage, and reward
critical behaviors while trainees or participants are working outside of training. Table 19
identifies required drivers that will help ensure this study’s primary stakeholders, PU PLA
students, engage in the critical behaviors it will take to succeed in PU’s PLA program. In the
table, the required drivers are categorized into the four types of drivers – reinforcing, monitoring,
encouraging, and rewarding – and each driver is linked to which critical behaviors are supported
by that driver. The timing for each driver is also listed.
Table 19
Required Drivers to Support Critical Behaviors
Method(s) Timing
Critical Behaviors
Supported
Reinforcing
PLA instructors will provide a
checklist of PLA portfolio
requirements.
In the first week of each term 4
PLA instructors will provide PLA
students with an evidence
worksheet for life and work
experience.
In the first two weeks of each
term
1, 2
PLA instructors will provide PLA
students with an experiential
learning worksheet in which PLA
students match their experiential
learning with appropriate student
learning outcomes.
In the second week of each
term
3, 4
PLA program staff will set up a
digital platform for PLA portfolios.
In the first three weeks of each
term
1, 2, 4

Encouraging
PRIOR LEARNING ASSESSMENT PORTFOLIOS 140

PLA program staff will coordinate
networking opportunities for PLA
students.
Weekly throughout each term 5
PLA program staff will pair PLA
students with mentors who have
prior PLA students who have
succeeded in the program.
Mid-way through each term 5
Rewarding
PLA instructors will showcase
PLA student work in a “Last
Lecture” series in which PLA
students synthesize their portfolio
into a 5-minute speech.
At the end of each term 4

Monitoring
PLA instructors will quiz PLA
students on Kolb’s framework for
experiential learning.
In the first three weeks of each
term
3
PLA instructors will evaluate
drafts of PLA portfolios.
Mid-way through each term 4

Organizational support. In addition to the critical behaviors that help primary
stakeholders achieve organizational goals, the organization itself can support stakeholders with
critical enablers that empower and guide stakeholders. At PU, the institution can support PLA
students with five critical enablers. First, as described in the required drivers above, PU
instructors will need to provide guidance and a number of resources to PLA students as they
develop their PLA portfolios (Appendix C). These include providing portfolio checklists,
evidence and experiential learning worksheets, quizzes, feedback on PLA portfolios, and an
opportunity to present PLA student work at a PLA exhibit. Second, also as described in the
required drivers above, PLA program staff will need to provide a digital platform for PLA
portfolios and will need to coordinate networking and mentoring opportunities for PLA students
throughout each term. Third, as discussed earlier in the organizational recommendations, PU will
need to implement a training program that will familiarize PU faculty with PU’s PLA program
PRIOR LEARNING ASSESSMENT PORTFOLIOS 141

and the concept of experiential learning, help faculty understand how the PLA program will
benefit the organization, and appease any fears faculty may have about how the program may
threaten their jobs or welfare. Fourth, as discussed in the organizational recommendations, PU
will need to redesign its academic and student support systems to provide a more coherent suite
of student support systems for PLA students. Fifth, also as discussed in organizational
recommendations, PU will need to develop and adopt rubrics for evaluating PLA portfolios that
follow industry standards.
Level 2: Learning
Level 2 of the New World Kirkpatrick Model (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016)
addresses the degree to which training participants learn from their training. To achieve the
described critical behaviors, PU’s PLA students will need to acquire the knowledge, skills,
attitude, confidence, and commitment as described in the learnings goals below.
Learning goals. Outlined below are the learning goals for PU’s PLA students that will
enable them to fulfill the critical behaviors necessary to succeed in the PLA program. PLA
students will be able to:
1. Define experiential learning.
2. Explain the role of recall, reflection, and evaluation in Kolb’s framework for experiential
learning.
3. Recall and list life and work experiences.
4. Evaluate one’s life and work experiences for experiential learning.
5. Collect and collate evidence of one’s life and work experience.
6. Identify the different parts of a PLA portfolio and explain their roles in the portfolio.
PRIOR LEARNING ASSESSMENT PORTFOLIOS 142

7. Review and evaluate a PLA portfolio exemplar for elements of a successful PLA
portfolio.
8. Complete a rough draft of one’s PLA portfolio.
9. Evaluate instructor feedback on a draft PLA portfolio.
10. Complete a final draft of one’s PLA portfolio.
Program. To help PU’s PLA students achieve the learning goals discussed above, a two-
pronged program is recommended that would revise the current PLA curriculum and support that
curriculum with an industry-standard textbook that is aligned with these learning goals. First, it is
recommended that PU modify its PLA curriculum by revising the course guide for PLA portfolio
development course. The goal of the course guide revisions will be to update the course’s student
learning outcomes (SLOs) to incorporate Kolb’s (1984; Kolb & Kolb, 2005) framework for
experiential learning as follows:
• PLA SLO 1.0: Define experiential learning.
• PLA SLO 2.0: Explain the role of recall, reflection, and evaluation in Kolb’s framework
for experiential learning.
• PLA SLO 3.0: Recall and list life and work experiences.
• PLA SLO 4.0: Reflect on life and work experiences.
• PLA SLO 5.0: Evaluate life and work experiences for experiential learning.
• PLA SLO 6.0: Collect and collate evidence of one’s life and work experience.
• PLA SLO 7.0: List the steps involved in developing a PLA portfolio.
• PLA SLO 8.0: Identify the different parts of a PLA portfolio and explain their roles in the
portfolio.
PRIOR LEARNING ASSESSMENT PORTFOLIOS 143

• PLA SLO 9.0: Synthesize recall, reflection, and evaluation of life and work experiences
into their respective parts of the PLA portfolio.
• PLA SLO 10.0: Complete rough and final drafts of a PLA portfolio.
The second recommended prong of the program is to adopt an industry-standard textbook
for PU’s PLA portfolio development course. The goal of adopting such a textbook is to align
with Kolb’s (1984; Kolb & Kolb, 2005) framework for experiential learning and the PLA SLOs
recommended above. Adopting an industry-standard textbook will also provide a curricular
resource for students and faculty, especially since the current PU PLA portfolio development
course does not have a textbook. Below are three textbooks that PU may consider and which are
widely used in similar PLA portfolio development courses:
• Colvin, J. (2012). Earn college credit for what you know (5th ed.). Dubuque, IA: Kendall
Hunt Publishing.
• Kolb, D. A. (2015). Experiential learning: Experience as the source of learning and
development (2nd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education.
• Michelson, E., & Mandell, A. (2004). Portfolio development and the assessment of prior
learning: Perspectives, models, and practices (2nd ed.). Sterling, VA: Stylus Pub.
Evaluation of the components of learning. To ensure that the recommended program
achieves its learning goals, Table 20 lists methods and activities that will be used to evaluate the
degree to which the learning goals are met.

PRIOR LEARNING ASSESSMENT PORTFOLIOS 144

Table 20
Evaluation of the Components of Learning for the Program
Learning Goal Method(s) or Activity(ies) Timing
Declarative Knowledge “I
know it.”

1. Define experiential
learning.
Course quiz During the first week of PLA
course
2. Explain the role of recall,
reflection, and evaluation of
Kolb’s framework for
experiential learning.
Classroom discussion During the second week of
PLA course
6. Identify the different parts
of a PLA portfolio and explain
their roles in the portfolio.
Course quiz
Classroom discussion
During the third week of PLA
course
Procedural Skills “I can do
it right now.”

7. Review and evaluate a PLA
portfolio exemplar for
elements of a successful PLA
portfolio.
Classroom discussion During the fourth week of
PLA course
Attitude “I believe this is
worthwhile.”

4. Evaluate one’s life and
work experience for
experiential learning.
Experiential Learning
Worksheet #2
During the second week of
PLA course
Confidence “I think I can do
it on the job.”

9. Evaluate instructor
feedback on a draft PLA
portfolio.
Discussion with course
instructor
During the eighth week of
PLA course
Commitment “I will do it on
the job.”

3. Recall and list life and work
experiences.
Experiential Learning
Worksheet #1
During the first week of PLA
course
4. Evaluate one’s life and
work experience for
experiential learning.
Experiential Learning
Worksheet #2
During the second week of
PLA course
5. Collect and collate evidence
of one’s life and work
experience.
PLA portfolio draft During the fifth week of PLA
course
PRIOR LEARNING ASSESSMENT PORTFOLIOS 145

8. Complete a rough draft of
one’s PLA portfolio.
PLA portfolio to be evaluated
by course instructor using
PLA rubrics
During the sixth week of PLA
course
10. Complete a final draft of
one’s PLA portfolio.
PLA portfolio to be evaluated
by course instructor using
PLA rubrics
During the tenth week of PLA
course

Level 1: Reaction
Level 1 of the New World Kirkpatrick Model refers to the degree to which training
participants are engaged and satisfied with training and how relevant they perceive that training
to be in relation to their work (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016). Level 1 reactions to training
can be measured using summative assessments after the training is held, but formative
assessments during the training consume less time and resources and are more useful for
adjusting the training to increase engagement, relevance, and satisfaction (Kirkpatrick &
Kirkpatrick, 2016). With that in mind, Table 21 lists a few summative assessments, but mostly
formative assessments, that PU can use to gauge how engaging, satisfying, and relevant the PLA
program is for PLA students.
Table 21
Components to Measure Reactions to the Program
Method(s) or Tool(s) Timing
Engagement
PLA Program staff will hold one-on-one
check-ins with PLA students to monitor
how engaged they are with the PLA
program and their work towards their PLA
portfolios.
Once per student throughout the term by
appointment
“Pulse-Checks” will be embedded into the
various PLA worksheets that will be used
throughout the program to monitor how
engaged PLA students are with the PLA
program and their work towards their PLA
portfolios.
Once per student throughout the term by
appointment
PRIOR LEARNING ASSESSMENT PORTFOLIOS 146

Relevance
Mid-Term Course Evaluations: End of term
course evaluations will be repackaged as
mid-term evaluations that also query PLA
students about how relevant the course
material is to their efforts to successfully
complete a PLA portfolio.
During the program at the mid-term
End of Term Course Evaluations: End of
term course evaluations will be
revised/amended to include questions about
how relevant the course material is to their
efforts to successfully complete a PLA
portfolio.
At the end of the term
Customer Satisfaction
Mid-Term Course Evaluations: End of term
course evaluations will be repackaged as
mid-term evaluations to provide PLA
instructors with a mid-term pulse check on
PLA student satisfaction with the program.
During the program at the mid-term
End of Term Course Evaluations: End of
term course evaluations will provide PLA
instructors with a post-course measure of
student satisfaction with the program.
At the end of the term

Evaluation Tools
Immediately following the program implementation. As listed in Table 21, the
primary instruments that are recommended to evaluate Level 1 engagement, relevance, and
satisfaction of PLA students are modified versions of PU’s course evaluation forms. These
evaluation forms are completed by all PU students at the end of each term, including PU’s PLA
students. The evaluation forms would be modified so that they can be used at the middle of each
academic term. The instrument would also be modified to include an item that measures the
degree to which PU’s PLA students believe the course material is relevant to their efforts to
successfully complete a PLA portfolio. That statement would be, “The course material was
relevant to my efforts to complete my PLA portfolio,” to which the student would either strongly
PRIOR LEARNING ASSESSMENT PORTFOLIOS 147

agree, agree, disagree, or strongly disagree. A sample of this revised evaluation instrument is
included in Appendix D.
In addition to measuring Level 1 engagement, relevance, and satisfaction, it is
recommended that PU measure Level 2 knowledge and motivation items discussed in Table 20.
Course quizzes, classroom discussion, worksheets, and personal reflections will be the primary
instruments for measuring the knowledge, procedural skills, attitude, confidence, and
commitment listed in the table. Attached are recommended quizzes, classroom discussion guides,
worksheet templates, and personal reflection prompts that PU may consider using to evaluate
these Level 2 knowledge and motivation items (Appendix C).
Delayed for a period after the program implementation. Further into the program’s
implementation, to measure Level 3 Critical Behaviors, a number of instruments are
recommended. As listed in Table 20, an Experience Worksheet can be used to measure how
many relevant work and life experiences PLA students identify for their PLA portfolios. This
worksheet will be followed by another worksheet, an Experiential Learning Worksheet, which
will measure and guide PLA students’ process of recalling, reflecting, and evaluating their work
and life experiences. In addition to these worksheets, an Evidence Inventory and Digital
Evidence Locker will track and document how much evidence of work and life experiences that
each PLA student compiles. Mentoring and networking tracking sheets will also be used to
monitor how many networking and mentoring opportunities in which PLA students participate.
Finally, how well students articulate their experiential learning in their PLA portfolios will be
measured using industry-standard PLA Portfolio Rubrics. Except for the rubrics, samples of
these instruments are attached (Appendix C).
PRIOR LEARNING ASSESSMENT PORTFOLIOS 148

In the long run, it is recommended that Level 4 results be evaluated by tracking student
achievement data through PU’s Office of Institutional Research. Within PU’s PLA program, it is
recommended that course completion rates for PU’s PLA portfolio development course be
monitored, along with the submission rates of PLA portfolios by PLA students. At the broader
institutional level, it is recommended that PU continue to track the percentage of credits awarded
to PLA students for courses requested in their PLA portfolios, as well as the graduation rates for
those students. By measuring such student achievement data, PU can determine to what extent
the PLA program is helping PU achieve its organizational goal of increasing graduation rates.
Data Analysis and Reporting
As data for results of the recommended implementation plan are collected, it will be
important to analyze and report that data in a manner that is accessible, understandable, and
actionable for the organization (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016). To guide how results are
analyzed and reported for the implementation plan recommended, a four-tiered model is
presented in the matrix below.
Data collection matrix. The matrix in Table 22 would track and report annual data for
the recommended plan along the levels set forth in the New World Kirkpatrick Model
(Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016).

PRIOR LEARNING ASSESSMENT PORTFOLIOS 149

Table 22
Data Collection Matrix for Recommended Implementation Plan
Academic Year
Fall Semester Spring Semester
1st Quarter 2nd Quarter 3rd Quarter 4th Quarter
Level 1:
Reaction
Pulse Checks Pulse Checks Pulse Checks Pulse Checks
Mid-Course
Evaluations
End of Course
Evaluations
Mid-Course
Evaluations
End of Course
Evaluations
Level 2:
Learning
Average
Performance on
Quizzes
Average
Performance on
Quizzes

Level 3:
Behaviors
Completion Rates
for Portfolio
Worksheets
Average Number
of Networking
Connections
Made
Completion Rates
for Portfolio
Worksheets
Average Number
of Networking
Connections
Made
Level 4:
Results
Student Retention
Rates in PLA
Program
Student Retention
Rates in PLA
Program
Portfolio
Submission Rates
Portfolio
Submission Rates
Portfolio Rubric
Scores
Portfolio Rubric
Scores
Portfolio Credit
Award Rates
Portfolio Credit
Award Rates
Degree
Completion Rates

Dashboard. Results collected using the matrix laid out in Table 22 can be presented in a
dashboard that tracks results quarterly and can also be updated quarterly. The dashboard in
PRIOR LEARNING ASSESSMENT PORTFOLIOS 150

Figure 10 presents simulated data with percentages reflecting each level’s assessments aggregate
as averages.

Figure 10. Simulated PU PLA dashboard.
Limitations and Delimitations
While this study employed a survey as a form of quantitative research, of the 185
students who have enrolled in PU’s PLA portfolio development course, only 24 of those former
students (13%) completed the survey. This low response rate undermines how representative the
survey results are for the broader population of stakeholders. This low response rate was offset
by triangulating the data with the qualitative research employed in this study.
Steps were also taken to counter the limitations of this study’s qualitative research. First,
since qualitative research is an interpretive process, it is vulnerable to bias, subjectivity, and
ambiguity that can skew the study’s findings (Bogdan & Biklen, 2007; Creswell, 2014).
However, the researcher offset these limitations in interpretation by reflexively acknowledging,
up front, his biases and positionality that may influence the research in Chapter Three’s
discussion on ethics (Creswell, 2014). As an added measure, the researcher utilized reflective
PRIOR LEARNING ASSESSMENT PORTFOLIOS 151

field notes throughout the research process to monitor and control his subjective interpretation of
the research (Bogdan & Biklen, 2007).
Second, qualitative interviews can be highly subjective and complex for both the
interviewer and the interviewee (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). As a result, the interviewer and
interviewee “bring biases, predispositions, attitudes, and physical characteristics that affect the
interaction and the data elicited” (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016, p. 130). The subjectivity and
complexity of qualitative interviews, however, were offset by the reflexive use of reflective field
notes (Bodgan & Biklen, 2007).
Finally, the use of document analysis in qualitative research also presented a limitation.
While most research instruments and results were planned in advance, documents gathered for
the qualitative research of this study may or may not have aligned with the purposes of this
study, especially since such documents were not produced for the study in question (Merriam &
Tisdell, 2016). That said, documents gathered for this study were still a rich source of inductive
insight, which were linked back to the purpose and research questions of this study.
In addition to the limitations that qualitative research poses, this study had other
limitations. The researcher was inexperienced when it came to qualitative research. In addition,
since PU’s PLA program is a relatively young program that has only run for four years, there
were some difficulties in obtaining an adequate number of sample portfolios and interviewees for
the study. Also, the anticipated time frame for conducting interviews presented time constraints
on completing all interviews in time. Finally, as discussed in Chapter Three, a Category 5
hurricane devastated more than 80% of the PU campus just as this study’s research commenced.
The hurricane’s devastation undermined this study’s ability to reach stakeholders for some parts
of the research.
PRIOR LEARNING ASSESSMENT PORTFOLIOS 152

Future Research
This study’s limitations resulted in just six interviews of former PU PLA students who
had completed and submitted their PLA portfolios, which excluded former PU PLA students
who did not complete their portfolios. However, as discussed in Chapter Four, 66% of former PU
PLA students did not submit PLA portfolios. A more representative sample of former PLA
students would include more interviewees, especially those who did not complete their
portfolios. Future research could study that group of stakeholders to explore what factors may
have prevented them from completing or submitting their portfolios.
Furthermore, while this study highlighted the importance of reflection in experiential
learning and the role that it plays in the PLA portfolio development process, it did not further
examine the impact that reflection has on credit award rates for PLA portfolios. Future research
could more closely study the link between reflection and credit-award rates for PLA portfolios.
Also, while this study explored the role that PU faculty played in supporting and
evaluating PLA portfolios, the study did not examine the role that PU PLA instructors played in
students’ development of their PLA portfolios. Future research could study the role that PU PLA
instructors play in guiding PLA students throughout the portfolio development process, including
how much and what kind of feedback PLA instructors provide their students.
Finally, as discussed in Chapter Four, while attribution theory may account for family as
an external factor that hindered PLA students’ initial attempts to enroll in college, over time,
family evolved to become a source of motivation for those students to complete their PLA
portfolios. This is especially true for Pacific Island communities that place a high value on
family (O’Donnell, 1995). Future research could, therefore, revisit attribution theory within the
cultural context of Pacific Island students enrolled in higher education. Specifically, the research
PRIOR LEARNING ASSESSMENT PORTFOLIOS 153

could examine longitudinal data to explore how and when family evolves from a mitigating
factor to a motivating factor for Pacific Island students in higher education.
Conclusion
Despite the projected enrollment growth of adult learners in higher education (McFarland
et al., 2018), most undergraduate programs remain largely youth-centric in their focus on
students younger than 25-years-old (Kasworm, 2014). Not only does this leave adult learners
behind, but it undermines the overall education of society, with the United States falling behind
other developed countries in providing an educated workforce to compete in the 21
st
century’s
global economy (McFarland et al., 2018). To better serve this underserved population and meet
the educational demands of a 21
st
century workforce, colleges and universities must do more to
accommodate the needs of adult learners. PLA programs are one way that some colleges and
universities are accommodating the needs of adult learners. By helping adult learners earn
academic credit for their experiential learning, PLA programs are validating the wisdom that
adult learners bring to higher education, while also helping them earn their college degrees
(Klein-Collins & Wertheim, 2013).
This study aimed to improve one specific PLA program by evaluating PU’s PLA
portfolio development program. Using the Clark and Estes (2008) gap analysis framework, this
study examined knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences on PU’s efforts to help its
PLA students earn academic credit towards a college degree. This study concluded that while PU
PLA students who participated in this study were motivated to complete their PLA portfolios,
they lacked the knowledge necessary to develop portfolios that earned more academic credit than
was ultimately awarded. This finding is promising because PU can work with students who are
already motivated to do the work but need to be shown how to do that work to further their
PRIOR LEARNING ASSESSMENT PORTFOLIOS 154

academic goals. Furthermore, this study concluded that while PU faculty were generally
supportive of the PLA program, evaluation standards of PLA portfolios were vague and PU
student support services did not appear to provide adequate support to PLA students. Again, this
is promising because PU can leverage faculty support to clarify goals for its PLA program and
improve support throughout the institution.
Based on these conclusions, the New World Kirkpatrick Model (Kirkpatrick &
Kirkpatrick, 2016) was employed to provide recommendations to help improve PU’s PLA
program. The recommendations were made as part of a coherent implementation plan that
includes processes and tools to monitor the plan and measure its success in generating the kind of
engagement, learning, behaviors, and results that will improve PU’s PLA program. Ultimately,
improving the program will help more students succeed in the program, especially those students
who would otherwise earn little or no academic credit for their PLA portfolios.
As mentioned in Chapter One, PU is the only institution in its region that offers a PLA
program. As such, this study could be of interest to other institutions in the region that are
considering PLA programs. These peer institutions could learn from PU’s successes in PLA and
be guided by this study’s recommendations in avoiding potential pitfalls in launching a PLA
program.
PU took a major step forward towards helping adult learners by launching its PLA
program in 2014. But more can be done. By refining its PLA program, PU can more effectively
meet the needs of adult learners in higher education. Doing so will improve PU’s graduation
rates and provide an educated workforce for PU’s community. More important, by better
meeting the needs of adult learners, PU will honor both the learning and the learners themselves
within a population that has been largely ignored in higher education.
PRIOR LEARNING ASSESSMENT PORTFOLIOS 155

References
Agocs, C. (1997). Institutionalized resistance to organizational change: Denial, inaction, and
repression. Journal of Business Ethics, 16, 917-931.
Anderman, E., & Anderman, L. (2009). Attributions. Retrieved from
http://www.education.com/reference/article/attribution-theory/.
Anderson, L. W., & Krathwohl, D. (2001). A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing: A
revision of Bloom’s taxonomy of educational objectives. New York, NY: Addison
Wesley.
Bandura, A. (2000). Exercise of human agency through collective efficacy. Current Directions in
Psychological Science, 9(3), 75-78.
Bandura, A. (2005). The evolution of social cognitive theory. In K. G. Smith & M. A. Hitt
(Eds.), Great minds in management (pp. 9–35). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Bandura, A. (2012). On the functional properties of perceived self-efficacy revisited. Journal of
Management, 38(1), 9-44.
Bangert-Drowns, R. L., Kulik, C. C., Kulik, J. A., & Morgan, M. T. (1991). The instructional
effect of feedback in test-like events. Review of Educational Research, 61, 213–238.
Bass, C. (2012). Learning theories and their application to science instruction for adults. The
American Biology Teacher, 74, 387-390.
Bergman, M., Gross, J., Berry, M., & Shuck, B. (2014). If life happened but a degree didn’t:
Examining factors that impact adult student persistence. The Journal of Continuing
Higher Education, 62(2), 90-101.
Bogdan, R. C., & Biklen, S. K. (2007). Qualitative research for education:An introduction to
theories and methods (5
th
ed.). Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon.
PRIOR LEARNING ASSESSMENT PORTFOLIOS 156

Boyle M., Gotcher, D. &, Otts, D. (2018) One state's use of prior learning assessment to augment
its workforce development agenda, The Journal of Continuing Higher
Education, 66(1), 54-58. doi: 10.1080/07377363.2018.1415634
Bowen, G. (2009). Document analysis as a qualitative research method. Qualitative Research
Journal, 9(2), 27-40.
Bowers, A., & Bergman, M. (2016). Affordability and the return on investment of college
completion: Unique challenges and opportunities for adult learners. The Journal of
Continuing Higher Education, 64(3), 144-151.
Brown, J. (2002). Know thyself: The impact of portfolio development on adult learning. Adult
Education Quarterly, 52(3), 228-245.
Burnette, D. (2016). The renewal of competency-based education: A review of the literature. The
Journal of Continuing Higher Education,64(2), 84-93.
Calleja, C. (2014). Jack Mezirow’s conceptualization of adult transformative learning: A
review. Journal of Adult and Continuing Education, 20(1), 117–136.
Carnivale, A. P., Smith, N., & Strohl, J. (2010). Help wanted: Projections of jobs and education
requirements through 2018. Washington, DC: Georgetown University’s Center on
Education and the Workforce. Retrieved from
http://www9.georgetown.edu/grad/gppi/hpi/cew/pdfs/HelpWanted.FullReport.pdf.
Cassidy, S. (2012). Exploring individual differences as determining factors in student academic
achievement in higher education. Studies in Higher Education, 37(7), 793-810.
Chen, J. C. (2014). Teaching nontraditional adult students: Adult learning theories in
practice. Teaching in Higher Education, 19(4), 406-418.
doi:10.1080/13562517.2013.860101
PRIOR LEARNING ASSESSMENT PORTFOLIOS 157

Clark, R. (2017). 10.4 gap analysis: Learning and motivation. [Video lecture]. Retrieved from
https://2sc.rossieronline.usc.edu/mod/page/view.php?id=124617
Clark, R. E., & Estes, F. (2008). Turning research into results: A guide to selecting the right
performance solutions. Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing, Inc.
Colvin, B. (2013). Where is Merlin when I need him? The barriers to higher education are still in
place: Recent re-entry experience. New Horizons in Adult Education & Human Resource
Development, 25(2), 19-32.
Corbin, J., & Strauss, A. (2008). Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory (3
rd

ed.). Los Angeles: SAGE.
Complete College America. (2013). Game changers: Are states implementing the best reforms to
get more college graduates? Retrieved from
http://completecollege.org/pdfs/CCA%20Nat%20Report%20Oct18-FINAL-singles.pdf
Conrad, D. (2008). Building knowledge through portfolio learning in prior learning assessment
and recognition. Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 9(2), 139–150.
Conrad, D. (2010). Achieving flexible learning through recognition of prior learning practice: A
case-study lament of the Canadian academy. Open Learning: The Journal of Open,
Distance and E-Learning, 25(2), 153-161.
Creswell, J. W. (2014). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods
approaches. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Danver, S. (Ed.) (2016). The SAGE encyclopedia of online education (Vols. 1-3). Thousand
Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
PRIOR LEARNING ASSESSMENT PORTFOLIOS 158

Egan, A., Maguire, R., Christophers, L., & Rooney, B. (2017). Developing creativity in higher
education for 21
st
century learners: A protocol for a scoping review. International
Journal of Educational Research 82. 21-27.
Eccles, J. (2006). Expectancy value motivational theory. Retrieved
from http://www.education.com/reference/article/expectancy-value-motivational-theory/
Eccles, J., & Wigfield, A. (2015). Development of academic achievement motivation. In N. J.
Smelser & P. B. Balttes (Eds.), International Encyclopedia of the Social and Behavioral
Sciences (pp. 14-25). London, Elsevier Ltd.
Falk, C., & Blaylock, B. (2009). Strategically planning campuses for the “newer student” in
higher education. Allied Academies International Conference. Academy of Educational
Leadership. Proceedings, 14(1), 14.
Fairchild, E. (2003). Multiple roles of adult learners. New Directions for Student
Services, 2003(102), 11-16.
Feldon, D. (2007). The implications of research on expertise for curriculum and
pedagogy. Educational Psychology Review, 19(2), 91-111.
Fenwick, T. (2006). Reconfiguring RPL and its assumptions: A complexified view. In P.
Andersson & J. Harris (Eds.), Re-theorising the recognition of prior learning (pp. 283–
300). Leicester: NIACE.
Gambescia, S., & Dagavarian, D. (2007). Best practices: Review of prior learning assessment
options for adult continuing education degree programs. The Journal of Continuing
Higher Education, 55(3), 38-48.
PRIOR LEARNING ASSESSMENT PORTFOLIOS 159

Gast, A. (2013). Current trends in adult degree programs: How public universities respond to the
needs of adult learners: Current trends in adult degree programs. New Directions for
Adult and Continuing Education, 2013(140), 17-25. doi:10.1002/ace.20070
Gilardi, S., & Guglielmetti, C. (2011). University life of non-traditional students: Engagement
styles and impact on attrition. Journal of Higher Education, 82(1), 33-53.
Glesne, C. (2011). Chapter 6: But is it ethical? Considering what is “right.” In Becoming
qualitative researchers: An introduction (4th ed.) (pp. 162-183). Boston, MA: Pearson.
Hämäläinen, R., Kiili, C., & Smith, B. (2017). Orchestrating 21
st
century learning in higher
education: A perspsective on student voice. British Journal of Educational Technology
48(5). 1106-1118.
Harris, J. (2000). The recognition of prior learning power, pedagogy and possibility: Conceptual
and implementation guide. Cape Town, South Africa: HSRC Press.
Hayward, M.., & Williams, M. (2015). Adult learner graduation rates at four U.S. community
colleges by prior learning assessment status and method. Community College Journal of
Research and Practice, 39(1), 44-54.
Hoffmann, T. (2013). Reflecting on the importance of reflection and critical analysis in prior
learning portfolios: Instructional materials designed to enhance and guide the portfolio
development and evaluation process. The Journal of Continuing Higher Education,
61(2), 116-121.
Jones, S. (2015). The game changers: Strategies to boost college completion and close attainment
gaps. Change: The Magazine of Higher Learning, 47(2), 24-29.
doi:10.1080/00091383.2015.1018085
PRIOR LEARNING ASSESSMENT PORTFOLIOS 160

Joosten-Ten Brinke, D., Sluijsmans, D., & Jochems, W. (2010). Assessors’ approaches to
portfolio assessment in assessment of prior learning procedures. Assessment &
Evaluation in Higher Education, 35(1), 55-70.
Kamenetz, A. (2011). The transformation of higher education through prior learning
assessment. Change: The Magazine of Higher Learning, 43(5), 7-13.
Kasworm, C. E. (2010). Adult learners in a research university: Negotiating undergraduate
student identity. Adult Education Quarterly, 60(2), 143-160.
doi:10.1177/0741713609336110
Kasworm, C. (2014). Paradoxical understandings regarding adult undergraduate persistence. The
Journal of Continuing Higher Education, 62(2), 67-77.
Kelley, C. L. (2017). Assessing student portfolios for college credit. Chicago, IL: The Council
for Adult & Experiential Learning.
Kenner, C., & Weinerman, J. (2011). Adult learning theory: Applications to non-traditional
college students. Journal of College Reading and Learning, 41(2), 87-96.
doi:10.1080/10790195.2011.10850344
Kezar, A. (2001). Research-based principles of change. Understanding and facilitating
organizational change in the 21st century: Recent research and conceptualizations.
ASHE-ERIC Higher Education Report, 28(4), 113–123.
Kirkpatrick, J. D., & Kirkpatrick, W. K. (2016). Kirkpatrick’s four levels of training evaluation.
Alexandria, VA: ATD Press.
Kirshner, P., Kirshner, F., & Paas, F. (2006). Cognitive load theory. Retrieved from
http://www.education.com/reference/article/cognitive-load-theory/.
PRIOR LEARNING ASSESSMENT PORTFOLIOS 161

Klein-Collins, R. (2010). Fueling the race to postsecondary success: A 48-institution study of
prior learning assessment and adult student outcomes. Council for Adult and
Experiential Learning. Retrieved from https://eric.ed.gov/?q=Klein-
Collins+%22fueling+the+race%22&id=ED524753
Klein-Collins, R., & Hain, P. (2009). Prior learning assessment: How institutions use portfolio
assessments. The Journal of Continuing Higher Education, 57(3), 187-189.
Klein-Collins, R., & Hudson, S. (2017). What happens when learning counts? Measuring the
benefits of prior learning assessment for the adult learner. A CAEL self-study of the
Academic Outcomes of LearningCounts students. Council for Adult and Experiential
Learning. Retrieved from https://cdn2.hubspot.net/hubfs/617695/2017-
Learning%20Counts%20Report.pdf
Klein-Collins, R., & Wertheim, J. (2013). Growing importance of prior learning assessment in
the degree-completion toolkit. New Directions for Adult and Continuing Education, 140,
51-60.
Knowles, M. S. (1975). Self-directed learning: A guide for learners and teachers. Englewood
Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Kolb, D. A. (1984). Experiential learning: Experience as the source of learning and
development. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Kolb, A., & Kolb, D. (2005). Learning styles and learning spaces: Enhancing experiential
learning in higher education. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 4(2), 193–
212. doi: 10.5465/AMLE.2005.17268566
Krathwohl, D. R. (2002). A revision of Bloom’s taxonomy: An overview. Theory Into Practice,
41(4), 212–218.
PRIOR LEARNING ASSESSMENT PORTFOLIOS 162

Lawrence, R. L. (2002). A small circle of friends: Cohort groups as learning communities. New
Directions for Adult and Continuing Education (95). 83-92.
Leiste, S., & Jensen, K. (2011). Creating a positive prior learning assessment (PLA) experience:
A step-by-step look at university PLA. International Review of Research in Open and
Distance Learning, 12(1).
Mayer, R. E. (2011). Applying the science of learning. Boston, MA: Pearson Education.
Maxwell, J. A. (2013). Qualitative research design: An interactive approach. (3rd ed.).
Thousand Oaks: SAGE.
Mckay, H., Cohn, B., & Kuang, L. (2016). Prior learning assessment redesign: Using evidence to
support change. The Journal of Continuing Higher Education,64(3), 196-201.
McFarland, J., Hussar, B., Wang, X., Zhang, J., Wang, K., Rathbun, A., Barmer, A., Forrest
Cataldi, E., & Bullock Mann, F. (2018). The condition of education 2018 (NCES 2018-
144). U.S. Department of Education. Washington, DC: National Center for Education
Statistics. Retrieved from https://nces.ed.gov/pubsearch/pubsinfo.asp?pubid=2018144
Merriam, S. B., & Tisdell, E. J. (2016). Qualitative research: A guide to design and
implementation. (4th ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Mezirow, J., & Associates (2000). Learning as transformation: Critical perspectives on a theory
in progress. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Boss.
Müller, T. (2012). Prior learning narrative: Facilitating reflection to connect experience to
learning. Journal of Continuing Higher Education, 60(3), 181-185.
Murphy, E. (2007). A review of Bloom's taxonomy and Kolb's theory of experiential learning:
Practical uses for prior learning assessment. The Journal of Continuing Higher
Education, 55(3), 64-66.
PRIOR LEARNING ASSESSMENT PORTFOLIOS 163

Nelken, M. L. (2009). Negotiating classroom process: Lessons from adult learning. Negotiation
Journal, 25(2), 181-194.
National Center for Education Statistics. (2018). Characteristics of postsecondary students [Data
file]. Retrieved from https://nces.ed.gov/programs/coe/indicator_csb.asp
O’Donnell, C. (1995). The right to a family environment in Pacific Island cultures. The
International Journal of Children’s Rights, 3(1), 87–99.
https://doi.org/10.1163/157181895X00375
Pajares, F. (2006). Self-efficacy theory. Retrieved from
http://www.education.com/reference/article/self-efficacy-theory/.
Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative research and evaluation methods (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks,
CA: SAGE.
Patterson, M. (2018). The forgotten 90%: Adult nonparticipation in education. Adult Education
Quarterly: A Journal of Research and Theory, 68(1), 41-62.
Pearson, W. (2004). Supporting adult student persistence to the baccalaureate degree. The
Journal of Continuing Higher Education 52(2). 23-26.
Pekrun, R. (2011). Emotions as drivers of learning and cognitive development. In R. A. Calvo &
S. K. D’Mello (Eds.), New perspectives on affect and learning technologies (pp. 23-39).
New York: Springer.
Phipps, S. T. A., Prieto, L. C., & Ndinguri, E. N. (2013). Teaching an old dog new tricks:
Investigating how age, ability, and self-efficacy influence intentions to learn and learning
among participants in adult education. Academy of Educational Leadership
Journal, 17(1), 13-25.
PRIOR LEARNING ASSESSMENT PORTFOLIOS 164

Pintrich, P. R. (2003). A motivational science perspective on the role of student motivation in
learning and teaching contexts. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95(4), 667–686.
Popova-Gonci, V., & Tobol, A. R. (2011). Pla-based curriculum: Humanistic model of higher
education. The Journal of Continuing Higher Education, 59(3). 175-177.
Rabourn, K., Brckalorenz, A., & Shoup, R. (2018). Reimagining student engagement: How
nontraditional adult learners engage in traditional postsecondary environments. The
Journal of Continuing Higher Education, 66(1), 22-33.
Ritt, E. (2008). Redefining tradition: Adult learners and higher education. Adult Learning, 19(1-
2), 12.
Ross-Gordon, J. (2011). Research on adult learners: Supporting the needs of a student population
that is no longer nontraditional. Peer Review, 13(1), 26-29.
Rubin, H. J., & Rubin, I. S. (2012). Chapter 6: Conversational partnerships. In Qualitative
interviewing: The art of hearing data (3rd ed.) (pp. 85-92). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
Rummler, G., & Brache, A. (1995). Improving performance, how to manage the white space on
the organization chart. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Rueda, R. (2011). The 3 dimensions of improving student performance. New York: Teachers
College Press.
Rusk, D. T., * Smith, L. (2014). The prior learning assessment expansion initiative of the
University of Wisconsin system: A system approach to delivering a culture in which pla
can thrive. Prior Learning Assessment Inside Out 2(2).
Rust, D. Z., & Ikard, W. L. (2016). Prior learning assessment portfolio completion: Improved
outcomes at a public institution. The Journal of Continuing Higher Education, 64(2), 94-
100. doi:10.1080/07377363.2016.1177871
PRIOR LEARNING ASSESSMENT PORTFOLIOS 165

Samkian, A. (2018). [PDF document] Retrieved from Lecture Notes Online Website:
https://2sc.rossieronline.usc.edu/mod/page/view.php?id=138436.
Schein, E. H. (2017). Organizational culture and leadership (5
th
ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-
Bass.
Schraw, G., & Lehman, S. (2001). Situational interest: A review of the literature and directions
for future research. Educational Psychology Review, 13(1), 23-52.
Schraw, G., & McCrudden, M. (2006). Information processing theory. Retrieved from
http://www.education.com/reference/article/information-processing-theory/.
Shapiro, D., Dundar, A., Huie, F., Wakhungu, P.K., Yuan, X., Nathan, A. & Bhimdiwali, A.
(2017). Completing college: A national view of student completion rates – Fall 2011
cohort (Signature Report No. 14). Herndon, VA: National Student Clearinghouse
Research Center. Retrieved from https://nscresearchcenter.org/wp-
content/uploads/SignatureReport14_Final.pdf
Shute, V. (2008). Focus on formative feedback. Review of Educational Research, 78(1), 153-
189.
Simper, N. (2018). Rubric authoring tool for supporting the development and assessment of
cognitive skills in higher education. Teaching & Learning Inquiry: The ISSOTL Journal,
6(1), 10-24.
Sissel, P., Hansman, C., & Kasworm, C. (2001). The politics of neglect: Adult learners in higher
education. New Directions for Adult and Continuing Education, (91), 17-27.
Slayton, J. (2018). The role of the (interactive) conceptual framework Ex. 1 [PDF document].
Retrieved from https://s3.amazonaws.com/usc-
mat/prod/EDUC+532%3A+Inquiry+Methods+I/Spring+2017/RF+Role+of+CF.pdf
PRIOR LEARNING ASSESSMENT PORTFOLIOS 166

Spaid, R., & Duff, E. D. (2009). Working adults in accelerated cohorts: More than a learning
community. The Journal of Continuing Higher Education 57(2). 104-109.
Steele, P., & Erisman, W. (2016). Addressing the college attainment gap for working adults with
prior college credit. Change: The Magazine of Higher Learning 48(2). 46-53.
Stenlund, T. (2012). Threats to the valid use of assessment of prior learning in higher education:
Claimants' experiences of the assessment process. Assessment in Education: Principles,
Policy & Practice, 19(2), 177-192.
Stevens, K., Gerber, D., & Hendra, R. (2010). Transformational learning through prior learning
assessment. Adult Education Quarterly, 60(4), 377-404. doi:10.1177/0741713609358451
Sweller, J., Merriënboer, J., & Paas, F. (2019). Cognitive architecture and instructional design:
20 years later. Educational Psychology Review, 31(2), 261–292.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-019-09465-5
Sweygers, A., Soetewey, K., Meeus, W., Struyf, E., & Pieters, B. (2009). Portfolios for prior
learning assessment: Caught between diversity and standardization. The Journal of
Continuing Higher Education, 57(2), 92–103.
Tainsh, R. (2016). Thoughtfully designed online courses as effective adult learning tools.
Journal of Adult Education, 45(1), 7–9.
Travers, N. (2012). What is next after 40 years? Part 1: Prior learning assessment: 1970–2011.
The Journal of Continuing Higher Education, 60(1), 43-47.
Weiner, B. (2010). The development of an attribution-based theory of motivation: A history of
ideas. Educational Psychologist, 45(1), 28-36.
Weiss, R. S. (1994). Learning from strangers. The art and method of qualitative interview
studies. New York: The Free Press.
PRIOR LEARNING ASSESSMENT PORTFOLIOS 167

Western Interstate Commission for Higher Education (WICHE). (2012). Strategies for success:
Promising ideas in adult college completion. Boulder, CO: Lane.
Wiggins, G. P., & McTighe, J. (2005). Understanding by design. Alexandria, VA: Association
for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
Witkowsky, P., Mendez, S., Ogunbowo, O., Clayton, G., & Hernandez, N. (2016).
Nontraditional student perceptions of collegiate inclusion. The Journal of Continuing
Higher Education, 64(1), 30-41.
Yoo, S., & Huang, W. (2013). Engaging online adult learners in higher education: Motivational
factors impacted by gender, age, and prior experiences. The Journal of Continuing
Higher Education, 61(3), 151–164. doi: 10.1080/07377363.2013.836823

PRIOR LEARNING ASSESSMENT PORTFOLIOS 168

Appendix A: Survey Questions
We invite you to participate in a survey of Pacific University’s Prior Learning Assessment (PLA)
portfolio development program. Your responses will be used as part of a research study that will
evaluate the program and offer recommendations on how to improve the program. Since you
have participated in the PLA program, you can help improve it by providing your feedback on
the program. The survey should take about 5-10 minutes and your responses will be kept
confidential.
1. To what extent do you agree with this statement? “As I worked on my portfolio, I knew
what I needed to do in order to complete my portfolio.” Strongly agree, agree, disagree,
strongly disagree
2. To what extent do you agree with this statement? “The expectations for the portfolio were
clear.”
3. Strongly agree, agree, disagree, strongly disagree
4. To what degree did you feel confident about completing your portfolio? Very confident,
confident, not very confident, not at all confident
5. To what extent do you agree with this statement? “The college supported me as I worked
on my portfolio.” Strongly agree, agree, disagree, strongly disagree
6. To what extent do you feel the college’s faculty are supportive of giving academic credit
for someone’s experiences instead of having that person take a class?
7. Very supportive, somewhat supportive, not supportive, not supportive at all
8. To what extent do you agree with this statement? “I think that putting my portfolio
together was a valuable experience." Strongly agree, agree, disagree, strongly disagree
PRIOR LEARNING ASSESSMENT PORTFOLIOS 169

9. How familiar are you with the concept of experiential learning? Very familiar, somewhat
familiar, not familiar
10. Complete this statement with a percentage: As I worked on my portfolio, I spent ____ of
my time reflecting on my life, work, civic participation, and extra-curricular experiences.
(Sliding scale between 0% and 100%)
11. Please rank, in order of influence, the factors that affected your ability to complete your
portfolio: Personal Effort, Understanding of Portfolio Requirements, Time Management,
Obligations (family, work, community, etc.), Lack of Resources (computer, internet
access, etc.), External Factors (crises, emergencies, etc.), Other
12. How much time, in hours, did you spend on your portfolio?
13. What is your age?
PRIOR LEARNING ASSESSMENT PORTFOLIOS 170

Appendix B: Interview Protocol Questions

1. What were some of the reasons you thought about returning to college?
2. What motivated you to go back to college?
3. As someone who is returning to college after a break, what has the experience been like
so far?
4. As a returning college student, did you face any challenges with family, your work
schedule, fitting in with younger students, relating to faculty, or anything like that?
5. Why did you decide to enroll in PU’s PLA portfolio development course?
6. When you enrolled in PU’s PLA portfolio development course, what did you learn about
the concept of “experiential learning”?
7. When you learned about what a PLA portfolio is, how confident did you feel about
completing the portfolio? Did your confidence level change as you worked on your
portfolio?
8. When you developed your portfolio, what was that experience like?
9. What steps did you take to ensure that you completed your portfolio?
10. As you developed your portfolio, how did you manage your time between working on
your portfolio and other commitments, like work, family time, and similar obligations?
11. Why was it important to you to complete your portfolio?
12. As you developed your portfolio, what was it like to reflect on your experiences like
work, life, extra-curricular activities, community service, or hobbies?
13. Did you face any challenges as you worked on your PLA portfolio? What were they?
14. How did you overcome those challenges?
PRIOR LEARNING ASSESSMENT PORTFOLIOS 171

15. What kind of support did you receive from PU as you worked on your PLA portfolio?
15A. What kind of guidance did you receive from your academic adviser or the PLA
course instructor? How did they help you?
16. Do you wish PU would have offered other kinds of supports that could have helped you
as you developed your portfolio? If so, can you tell me what types of support would’ve
been helpful?
17. What resources, if any, at the college did you avail of while working on your PLA
portfolio? For example, did you try to use PU’s English laboratory or PU’s library?
17A. If you used those resources, such as the English laboratory or the library, did
they help? If they did help, how so? If they did not help, why were they not
helpful?
17B. If you did not use those resources, such as the English laboratory or the
library, why did you not use them?
18. If you knew that someone else was going to work on a PLA portfolio, what should that
person know about putting his or her portfolio together?

PRIOR LEARNING ASSESSMENT PORTFOLIOS 172

Appendix C: Learning Resources

Work and Life Experience Worksheet
Complete one table per course.
SLO INPUT OUTPUT OUTCOME
Student Learning
Outcome
How did you learn
that SLO? (Through
a workshop, on-the-
job training, reading
a manual, etc.)
What did you do
with that SLO?
(What work did you
do that made use of
that SLO?)
What can you do
with that SLO? (How
would you apply that
SLO to future
scenarios?)

PRIOR LEARNING ASSESSMENT PORTFOLIOS 173

Experiential Learning Worksheet
Think back to one of the most important experiences in your life. Now, reflect on that experience
by answering the following questions:
1. Remembering: What did I do?
2. Understanding: What was important about what I did? Did I meet my goals?
3. Application: When did I do this before? Where could I use this again?
4. Analysis: Do I see any patterns or relationships in what I did?
5. Evaluation: How well did I do? What worked? What do I need to improve?
6. Creation: What should I do next? What’s my plan/design?

PRIOR LEARNING ASSESSMENT PORTFOLIOS 174

Mentoring and Networking Tracking Sheet
Name of Mentor/Networking Contact Date of Meeting
What did you learn from this person?
What questions did you ask or do you still have for this person?
PRIOR LEARNING ASSESSMENT PORTFOLIOS 175

What will you do with what you learned from this person?

PRIOR LEARNING ASSESSMENT PORTFOLIOS 176

Prior Learning Assessment Quiz #1
1. To earn academic credit through prior learning assessment, you need only submit your
resume, evidence of training you have received, and recommendation letters.
a. True
b. False
2. Complete the following quote from John Dewey: “We do not learn from experience...we
learn from __________________________ on experience.”
3. Define experiential learning.
4. According to David A. Kolb, the framework for experiential learning includes which of
the following?
a. Recollection
b. Reflection
c. Abstraction
d. Application
e. All of the Above
f. None of the Above
g. A. B. and C
h. B, C, and D
5. Using Kolb’s framework for experiential learning, briefly describe an experience you
have had and what you learned from that experience.

PRIOR LEARNING ASSESSMENT PORTFOLIOS 177

Prior Learning Assessment Quiz #1 Answer Key
1. To earn academic credit through prior learning assessment, you need only submit your
resume, evidence of training you have received, and recommendation letters.
a. True
b. False
2. Complete the following quote from John Dewey: “We do not learn from experience...we
learn from reflecting on experience.”
3. Define experiential learning. Experiential learning is the process of recollecting and
reflecting on knowledge, skills, and concepts that one has learned from his or her
work, life, and extra-curricular experiences.
4. According to David A. Kolb, the framework for experiential learning includes which of
the following?
a. Recollection
b. Reflection
c. Abstraction
d. Application
e. All of the Above
f. None of the Above
g. A. B. and C
h. B, C, and D
5. Using Kolb’s framework for experiential learning, briefly describe an experience you
have had and what you learned from that experience. Answers will vary.

PRIOR LEARNING ASSESSMENT PORTFOLIOS 178

Prior Learning Assessment Quiz #2
1. Briefly describe the framework for experiential learning developed by David Kolb.
2. Place the following steps for developing your prior learning assessment portfolio in the
correct sequence by numbering them in order:
Number Step
Align course SLOs with both evidence and life, work, and extracurricular experiences.
Compile and digitize evidence of life, work, and extracurricular experiences.
Finalize the portfolio for submission to include a personal statement, a curriculum vitae, course
SLO narratives, and ample evidence to support the narratives.
Gather course guides for the courses that will be petitioned in a PLA portfolio and identify
SLOs for each course.
Receive feedback from the PLA portfolio development course instructor and integrate feedback
into revised narratives.
Reflect on larger themes and insights that can be gleaned from course SLO narratives and
articulate that reflection in a personal statement.
Revise and expand one’s resume to a document more akin to a curriculum vitae in order to
include a better timeline of a student’s life, work, and extracurricular experiences.
Submit draft narratives to the PLA portfolio development course instructor for review and
feedback.
Submit the PLA portfolio and work with PU faculty and staff to provide any additional
information or evidence needed during the PLA portfolio review process.
Work with an academic adviser to review one’s individualized degree plan in order to identify
what courses will be petitioned in a PLA portfolio.
Write narratives that chronicle one’s life, work, and extracurricular experiences, reflects on
what was learned from the experiences, and explains how lessons learned apply to each course
SLO and can be used in different scenarios in the future.

PRIOR LEARNING ASSESSMENT PORTFOLIOS 179

Prior Learning Assessment Quiz #2 Answer Key
1. Briefly describe the framework for experiential learning developed by David Kolb.
Kolb’s framework for experiential learning lays out four parts to examining what one
has learned from his or her experiences. First, one must recollect important
experiences and collect evidence of those experiences. Second, one must reflect on the
most important lessons learned from those experiences. Third, one must examine what
big, abstract ideas are presented by that reflection. Fourth and last, one must imagine
how those abstract ideas and lessons could be applied in future scenarios.
2. Place the following steps for developing your prior learning assessment portfolio in the
correct sequence by numbering them in order:
Number Step
5 Align course SLOs with both evidence and life, work, and extracurricular experiences.
4 Compile and digitize evidence of life, work, and extracurricular experiences.
10 Finalize the portfolio for submission to include a personal statement, a curriculum vitae, course
SLO narratives, and ample evidence to support the narratives.
3 Gather course guides for the courses that will be petitioned in a PLA portfolio and identify
SLOs for each course.
9 Receive feedback from the PLA portfolio development course instructor and integrate feedback
into revised narratives.
8 Reflect on larger themes and insights that can be gleaned from course SLO narratives and
articulate that reflection in a personal statement.
1 Revise and expand one’s resume to a document more akin to a curriculum vitae in order to
include a better timeline of a student’s life, work, and extracurricular experiences.
7 Submit draft narratives to the PLA portfolio development course instructor for review and
feedback.
11 Submit the PLA portfolio and work with PU faculty and staff to provide any additional
information or evidence needed during the PLA portfolio review process.
2 Work with an academic adviser to review one’s individualized degree plan in order to identify
what courses will be petitioned in a PLA portfolio.
6 Write narratives that chronicle one’s life, work, and extracurricular experiences, reflects on
what was learned from the experiences, and explains how lessons learned apply to each course
SLO and can be used in different scenarios in the future.

PRIOR LEARNING ASSESSMENT PORTFOLIOS 180

Classroom Discussion Guide/Reflection Prompts
● What are some of the most important experiences you have had in your professional life?
● What are some of the most important experiences you have had in your personal life?
● What made those experiences so important?
● What professional or personal successes are you most proud of?
○ What did you learn from those successes?
○ How can you build upon those successes?
● What mistakes or missteps have you made in your life?
○ What did you learn from those mistakes or missteps?
○ Based on what you learned from those mistakes or missteps, what would you do
differently in the future?
● Think of something you are really good at.
○ How do you know that you’re good at that thing?
○ Where or how did you learn to be good at that thing?
○ How would you teach someone else to do that thing you’re really good at? What
would you tell them? What steps would they need to take?
○ How can you get better at that thing you’re good at?

PRIOR LEARNING ASSESSMENT PORTFOLIOS 181

Appendix D: Sample Modified Course Evaluation Form

PRIOR LEARNING ASSESSMENT PORTFOLIOS 182

Abstract (if available)

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

Knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences in aligning learning to business performance results: a study of a promising practice

PDF

Application of professional learning outcomes into the classroom: an evaluation study

PDF

Examining the benefits of senior nutrition programs as a cost savings to Medicare: a promising practice study

PDF

Civic learning program policy compliance by a state department of higher education: an evaluation study

PDF

Creating effective online educational content: an evaluation study of the influences affecting course developers’ abilities to create online content with engaging learning strategies

PDF

Digital portfolios for learning and professional development: a faculty development curriculum

PDF

Adaptability characteristics: an evaluation study of a regional mortgage lender

PDF

Improving instructor skills (IIS): a Needs analysis

PDF

Online graduate-level student learning and engagement: developing critical competencies for future leadership roles: an evaluation study

PDF

Leadership in an age of technology disruption: an evaluation study

PDF

Increasing organizational capacity at a small college to deploy revenue diversification strategies: an evaluation study

PDF

Managers’ learning transfer from the leadership challenge training to work setting: an evaluation study

PDF

Systemic multilayered assessment of global awareness in undergraduate students: an innovation study

PDF

Collaborative instructional practice for student achievement: an evaluation study

PDF

An exploration of the experiences of undergraduate adult learners in an adult degree program from the theoretical framework of self-authorship

PDF

Perception of alternative education teachers readiness to instruct English language learners: an evaluation study

PDF

Embedded academic support for high school student success: an innovation study

PDF

Efficacy of non-formal education programs in educational outcomes of marginalized Filipino children: an evaluation study

PDF

Adaptive learning in higher education: an evaluation study

PDF

Applying best practices to optimize racial and ethnic diversity on nonprofit boards: an improvement study

Asset Metadata

Creator Deleon Guerrero, Galvin Sablan (author)

Core Title Prior learning assessment portfolios: an evaluation study

School Rossier School of Education

Degree Doctor of Education

Degree Program Organizational Change and Leadership (On Line)

Publication Date 10/15/2019

Defense Date 10/04/2019

Publisher University of Southern California (original), University of Southern California. Libraries (digital)

Tag adult learners,experiential learning,Higher education,non-traditional students,OAI-PMH Harvest,Portfolio,prior learning assessment

Language English

Contributor Electronically uploaded by the author (provenance)

Advisor Hirabayashi, Kimberly (committee chair), Krop, Cathy Sloane (committee member), Kupferman, David (committee member)

Creator Email galvin.deleonguerrero@gmail.com,mocktrialknights@gmail.com

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-c89-225973

Unique identifier UC11673429

Identifier etd-DeleonGuer-7848.pdf (filename),usctheses-c89-225973 (legacy record id)

Legacy Identifier etd-DeleonGuer-7848.pdf

Dmrecord 225973

Document Type Dissertation

Rights Deleon Guerrero, Galvin Sablan

Type texts

Source University of Southern California (contributing entity), University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses (collection)

Access Conditions The author retains rights to his/her dissertation, thesis or other graduate work according to U.S. copyright law. Electronic access is being provided by the USC Libraries in agreement with the a...

Repository Name University of Southern California Digital Library

Repository Location USC Digital Library, University of Southern California, University Park Campus MC 2810, 3434 South Grand Avenue, 2nd Floor, Los Angeles, California 90089-2810, USA