Learning Evidence
Portfolio Progress Calculator
Separate approved, submitted-awaiting-review, and missing portfolio artifacts.
Enter portfolio artifact statuses
Artifact count and evidence quality differ
A file can be present yet fail authenticity, recency, reflection, or competency requirements.
Use approved status only after the required review.
Questions that affect interpretation
Does upload mean completion?
No. Uploaded work belongs in pending until approval when review is required.
How should revisions count?
Track the current artifact status once, not each version as a separate requirement.
Can optional artifacts be included?
Keep them outside the required denominator unless the template says otherwise.
Approved and pending portfolio artifacts
Seven of 12 artifacts are approved and three await review. Approved completion is 58.3%; two artifacts remain missing.
Calculation basis
Scope: Pending review improves submitted coverage but not approved completion.
Large artifacts may contain several decisions
A capstone file can occupy one portfolio slot while containing multiple assessed sections. Keep the artifact count for workflow progress and criterion decisions for learning evidence; do not force both questions into one percentage.
The portfolio manifest should link the two levels.
Follow artifacts through review
- Confirm the portfolio template.
- Reconcile approved decisions.
- Identify pending reviews.
- Plan missing and returned work.
Reconcile the manifest, not only the total
Keep artifact identifier, requirement, version, submission date, reviewer, decision, and revision request.
A single artifact may support several competencies while occupying one portfolio slot; preserve both relationships.
If reviewers disagree, retain the moderation trail before changing approved status.
Export a dated manifest at completion so later link failures or file replacements do not erase what was reviewed.
Required slots may have different deadlines and external dependencies. Sort missing artifacts by lead time rather than treating the count as a queue of equal tasks.
When an artifact is replaced, preserve the decision history and mark the current version clearly.
Review capacity can become the constraint when many artifacts are pending; the submitted-coverage rate should not be reported as learner completion.
A portfolio may also impose breadth rules, such as artifacts from several periods, methods, or contexts. Twelve approved files do not satisfy those conditions merely by reaching the count. Check the portfolio blueprint after calculating progress and flag any required category that lacks acceptable evidence.
Revision creates a workflow state
Returned artifacts should remain submitted or move to missing according to the portfolio system's defined statuses.
Avoid counting both the original and its revision as two required artifacts.
Portfolio evidence can also track the competencies supported by portfolio evidence or manage a separate application-component checklist.