This project was based on the concept that a student’s “MyPlan” will be capable of being used flexibly to achieve the first three objectives.  To do so it needed to be capable of being divided into separate components and of being easily referenced to external documents.  There is evidence that where a portfolio is seen primarily as an assessment document, it is not valued by students beyond the point of being assessed.  One school in the United States is reported to have had a year 12 students’ bon-fire to burn portfolios immediately after they were assessed.  On the other hand, where there is no urgency to present “MyPlan” for assessment, some students may never proceed beyond the first few pages.  If it is not assessed, this may not matter to the student but it would represent a failure to gain a skill that would serve the student well in both study and career management as well as in many personal life management situations.  Peer rivalry, personal pride, and informal experimentation can be adequate drivers if carefully encouraged in the school.  A “MyPlan” whose primary purpose is not assessment can still be presented for assessment at some stage of a student’s education – for example, in year 10 SOSE or as part of “Personal Learning Plan” as a subject in the new SACE.

In two separate trial environments with year 9 students the content of MyPlan (called “My Transition Plan” in one of the trials) varied greatly from student to student.  Some with artistic flair produced an almost overwhelming mass of colours and computer art while others made very few changes to the given format preferring to concentrate on the words of their own plan.  Where a student’s MyPlan is assessed it could be done on the basis of effort and achievement rather than content. 

It was not envisaged that use of “MyPlan” for data collection would be compatible with a freely adapted plan which each student owns, adapts and uses over time

This project was based on the concept that a student’s “MyPlan” will be capable of being used flexibly to achieve the first three objectives.  To do so it needed to be capable of being divided into separate components and of being easily referenced to external documents.  There is evidence that where the artefact is seen primarily as an assessment document, it is not valued by students beyond the point of being assessed.  One school in the United States is reported to have had a year 12 students’ bon-fire to burn portfolios immediately after they were assessed.  On the other hand, where there is no urgency to present “MyPlan” for assessment, some students may never proceed beyond the first few pages.  If it is not assessed, this may not matter to the student but it would represent a failure to gain a skill that would serve the student well in both study and career management as well as in many personal life management situations.  Peer rivalry, personal pride, and informal experimentation can be adequate drivers if carefully encouraged in the school.  A “MyPlan” whose primary purpose is not assessment can still be presented for assessment at some stage of a student’s education – for example, in year 10 SOSE or as part of “Personal Learning Plan” as a subject in the new SACE.

In two separate trial environments with year 9 students the content of MyPlan (called “My Transition Plan” in one of the trials) varied greatly from student to student.  Some with artistic flair produced an almost overwhelming mass of colours and computer art while others made very few changes to the given format preferring to concentrate on the words of their own plan.  Where a student’s MyPlan is assessed it could be done on the basis of demonstrated understanding and application of planning and achievement rather than just colourful content.  It was not envisaged that use of “MyPlan” for data collection would be compatible with a freely adapted plan which each student owns, adapts and uses over time.