Using an evidential reasoning approach for portfolio assessments in a project-based learning engineering design course

The purpose of this study is to analyse the feasibility of an evidential reasoning (ER) method for portfolio assessments and comparison of the results found with those based on a traditional holistic judgement. An ER approach has been incorporated into portfolio assessment of an undergraduate engineering design course delivered as a project-based learning (PBL) course and the calculated utility interval means of the student results compared with weighted rubric means based on a traditional holistic judgement. The findings show the ER method superior to the traditional holistic judgement in that ER is capable of incorporating, firstly, assessors' ignorance of information concerning the portfolio development and content and, secondly, incomplete portfolio information. The ER approach is a commendable alternative to traditional holistic judgement of PBL portfolios, since it provides additional information, increases accuracy and is easier to use.