Integrating Electronic Portfolio Assessment into Teaching Materials: An Exploratory Study on Speaking Course Syllabus Development

Accepted: 11-07-2022 Approved: 25-08-2022 Abstract: The ICT advancement provokes the possibility of developing speaking skill through portfolio assessment which was commonly attributable mostly to writing skill. Hence, an exploratory study adopting ADDIE model was conducted to develop an electronic portfolio assessment integrated into teaching materials. A triangulated technique of data collection: questionnaire respondents, interviews and data from evaluation sheets was gathered. Statistical descriptive analysis, discourse and content analysis were conducted and positive possibilities were found to ffacilitate the development of speaking skills through electronic portfolio assessment.

Portfolio assessment is one suggested way for dealing with the complexity of having pupils practice their speaking. Despite the paucity of research on portfolio's impact on speaking development, it has been claimed that portfolio gives learners more time to prepare, space to reflect, opportunities to reorganize ideas, and a substantial contribution to self-regulated learning development (Mak and Wong, 2017). Furthermore, when it is ICT-integrated, the advantage can be doubled. According to Zulfikar (2016), an electronic portfolio can help with long-term learning, technological advancement adaptation, and learning autonomy. Thus, it is hypothesized that a Google-Drive-powered e-portfolio accompanied with teacher feedback, which is critical in the development of speaking skills can facilitate learners' speaking skills development with flexible time and more equal chance to practice (Adityas, 2013;Anil, 2016;Muhsin, 2016).
The usage of a portfolio to develop speaking skills has been shown to have a substantial impact on improving speaking performance in the EFL context (Cepik and Yastibas, 2013). Despite the fact that creating a speaking portfolio is timeconsuming and difficult, it is critical to the development of learners' speaking skills and metacognitive strategies (Cepik and Yastibas, 2013;Safari and Koosha, 2016). Some speaking development studies have been conducted in the Indonesian environment, which indirectly resemble the implementation of electronic collection-portfolios, which record students' progress. For instance, Blogging was used in some research to improve speaking ability (Anil, 2016). Blogging was proven to generate considerable improvements in speaking skills, such as pronunciation, fluency, grammar, vocabulary, and comprehension, as well as students' learning motivation.
It is further elaborated that Blogging relied heavily on classroom interaction and project-based learning. In this type of study, the speaking performance is assessed at the end of a term as the Blogging assignment was the students' final project. During the classroom session, the speaking practice is focused on the students' preparation on the final project. Thus, it is viewed that Blogging has not yet facilitated flexibility and equal chance for students to practice their English speaking skill. Therefore, a supplementary speaking material should be developed to expose students to English speaking practices more regularly and equally. The current study used a Google-Drive-powered electronic portfolio speaking assessment with teacher feedback embedded in a speaking material as an option for English teachers to assist college students in improving their speaking skills.
Some learning materials have been developed in the field of improving English speaking skills. Blackwell and Naber (2006), for example, created a learning resource in the shape of a book called Open Forum; Academic Listening and Speaking, which was published by Oxford University Press. This book includes many audio recordings that students can use to improve their listening skills and provide language input for their speaking skills. Aside from that, there are two books that focus on improving students' speaking skills: Baker and Gershon's (2012) Skillful Listening and Speaking, published by Macmillan, and Unlock;Listening and Speaking Skill, published by Cambridge University Press. Using Tomlinson and Masuhara's (2013) coursebook evaluation scheme, it can be concluded that those three volumes meet the requirements for an excellent coursebook for English language teaching and learning (ELT). The availability of extensive exposure to English in use, engaging-learner activities, engaging-learner cognitively, achievable challenges, routes to personalize students' learning, activities for learners to discover how English is typically used, opportunities to use the target language for communication, and cultural awareness development are some of the characteristics of an appropriate coursebook that those three books have fulfilled. However, the three books fail to meet two criteria: assisting learners in using the English environment outside of the classroom and assisting learners in continuing to learn English after they finished the course. Tomlinson and Masuhara (2013) had analyzed six other ELT coursebooks out of the three books that were evaluated as the basis for developing an electronic material in this study. The study also found that none of the six books sought to assist students in using their English outside of the classroom or after they had completed the course. To address this issue, particularly in the development of speaking skills, the current study aims to create extra electronic content that included electronic portfolio assessment. It is expected that by doing so, the materials could assist college students in using their English outside of class hours by maintaining a spoken language portfolio, as well as solve problems in speaking skill development caused by a lack of time constrains.
Aside from that, some English teachers admitted to have a difficulty in communicating in English with their students in class. According to a preliminary study conducted at Universitas Negeri Malang, several graduates of the English Language Teaching program reported in a mini-survey that when teaching English, they had a tendency to communicate in the students' native tongue. This pattern is consistent with Jusoh, Rahman, and Salim's 2020 study, which found that translation in English as a Second Language (ESL) classrooms is still frequent. However, it is further stated that it should not be used in practice because it is believed to cause a detrimental shift in learners' language preferences. As a result, the final product of this study attempted to accommodate these issues by providing some units that focused on classroom communication between teachers and students. Taufik,Karmina,Cahyono,Sharif,Integrating Electronic Portfolio… 311

METHOD
The speaking syllabus was developed using a research and development (R&D) approach. The R&D model that was used in this study was based on Branch's (2009) ADDIE model. As the name implies, ADDIE refers to the stages of research and development, which include (1) analyzing, (2) designing, (3) developing, (4) implementing, and (5) evaluating. The present study excluded the implementing stage due to the focus on the development stage. Some instruments employed in this study included (1) questionnaire of need analysis, (2) interview guide, and (3) product evaluation sheet. These instruments are elaborated in detail based on the relevant stages of ADDIE model.

Analyzing
Data on needs analysis were collected in order to prepare a syllabus that fulfilled the learners' needs. There were three sets of Linkert scale questionnaires given out. They were given out to students in the Speaking for General Purposes course, alumni who benefited from speaking courses taken in college, and a lecturer who was teaching the Speaking for General Purposes course. Paputungan, Otoluwa, and Machmud (2018) provided the basis for the three-party questionnaire. The questionnaire covered three topics: (1) perceptions of the current or prior course, (2) expected speaking activities, and (3) portfolio assessment.
In this step, an interview was also employed as an instrument. The lecturer of a general purpose speaking class was interviewed in order to obtain more detailed information on the class. During the interview, there were five things to keep in mind. It began with a discussion of how speaking instruction and learning had been constructed. The second consideration was the types of activities used in the classroom. This could be a group project or a one-on-one activity.
Aside from the activities, the sort of media utilized in class was also a topic of discussion throughout the interview. This was to see if the students and professor had agreed on a certain medium as the best instrument for teaching and learning about speaking. Another point to consider was how the professor graded the students' speaking abilities. This was deemed highly important in order to highlight that assessment can have a positive or negative impact on speaking growth, depending on how it is handled. The conversation concluded with a discussion of how speaking micro skills, such as intonation and pronunciation, are developed.

Designing and Developing
The syllabus was developed at this stage by relying on the findings of the needs analysis. For example, the inquiry about the learners' preferred learning topics contributed in determining the language input topic. It might be formal or informal engagement, academic or non-academic. Moreover, Tomlinson (2012) presented a five-step process for developing instructional materials as presented in Figure 1.2. The first stage was to determine a need to be met or a problem to be solved by the materials. This was accomplished by looking into the current materials in the speaking class. The absence of a coursebook that allowed students to practice speaking outside of school hours was shown to be a common concern in speaking classes. This challenge was then speculated to be solved by creating a syllabus that was backed by portfolio assessment.

Figure 1. The process of designing and developing the syllabus
The second stage was to investigate the area of needs/problems in terms of what language, meanings, functions, skills, and other elements should be included in the syllabus. The results of the needs analysis were used to determine these factors. This was then followed by the initial stage of development. The proposed new resources were to be contextualized at this phase. This was accomplished by identifying appropriate concepts, situations, and texts with which to work. Pedagogical realization was the next step in the development process. It was primarily concerned with locating exercises or tasks and drafting relevant instructions. The activities should correspond to the linguistic input supplied in a certain unit. In addition, the activities should increase language usage in teacher-student interactions, student-student interactions, and individual use. The physical manufacture of the materials was the final phase. Layout, aesthetic design, replication, tape length, and other factors have to be considered.

Evaluating
A specialist in English Language Education (ELT) was recruited to authenticate the syllabus because it was so closely tied to language teaching. The current study used Tomlinson and Masuhara's (2013) coursebook assessment scheme. The criteria were narrowed down by selecting several items considered relevant to the expected product. The criteria included: (1) extensive exposure to English in use, (2) engaging learners affectively, (3) engaging learners cognitively, (4) providing achievable challenge, (5) personalizing their learning, (6) providing opportunities to use language for communication, and (7) helping learners to use the language outside the classroom. The result of the evaluation was then analyzed qualitatively. It was another supporting data to revise the product of this research.

FINDINGS
The findings of the study were elaborated in three sections, namely (1) need analysis, (2) the syllabus design and development, and (3) expert evaluation. This way shows a chronological elaboration of how the syllabus was brought into existence.

The questionnaire need-analysis results
The questionnaire contained five aspects: (1) the respondents' perception towards content knowledge development, (2) learning and teaching environment, (3) the learners' speaking performance development of the existing course, (4) the respondents preferred topic or activities in the syllabus being developed, and (5) their familiarity with the implementation of electronic portfolio assessment.

Content Knowledge
In the first aspect, in general, the respondents showed positive perception. As presented in Table 1, there were only 9% of the respondents who disagreed with the statement that the syllabus provided sufficient lexical resources; such as vocabulary items and language expressions. The rest of the respondents (91%) agreed that the existing speaking syllabus had provided sufficient lexical resource development. In the next item, when asked whether the existing syllabus provided some section to practice English speaking skill, there were only 2% of the respondents who disagreed, and the rest 98% of them showed an agreement. The next two items of content knowledge aspect received a higher negative review. For instance, to the statement that the existing syllabus provided some insights in generating and organizing ideas in speaking performance, 15% of the respondents showed disagreement, and the rest (85%) showed positive attitude. When asked whether the existing syllabus provided authentic language input, 11% of the respondents showed disagreement and the rest 89% showed positive attitude. Thus, it was concluded that there were some aspects in the content knowledge of the existing syllabus that needed improvements, particularly by providing some insights on how to generate and organize ideas, and authentic language inputs.

Learning and teaching environment
The next aspect that was elicited over the respondents' perception on the existing course was about the teaching and learning environment. As presented in Table 2, 21% of the respondents showed dissatisfaction on the topics of teaching and learning of the existing syllabus, and the rest of them (79%) showed positive attitudes. Unlike the first item, to the second item that focused on the teaching method, there were only 12% of the respondents showed disagreement, and the rest 88% showed satisfaction. Taufik,Karmina,Cahyono,Sharif,Integrating Electronic Portfolio… 313  In the next item, when asked whether the respondents were provided with evaluation on their speaking performance, 14% of them claimed to not have received satisfying evaluation on their speaking performance while the other 76% proposed the opposite claim. High percentage of dissatisfaction was noticeable in the next item that asked about the respondents' satisfaction on the coursebook content. 23% of the respondents were dissatisfied with the content of the course, and the rest of them (77%) showed a positive attitude. To the last item that elicited the respondents' opinion on the variation of the teaching and learning activities, 11% of them showed negative attitude while the rest of them (89%) showed positive reviews. In short, there were some aspects of the teaching and learning environment that needed improvement. It included the topics of the learning and teaching activities, evaluations, coursebook content, and the variation of activities that received a relatively high percentage of dissatisfaction.

Performance
It was noticeable that, as presented in table 3 the respondents in general agreed that the existing course had provided them with fairly equal chance to perform their speaking skill in the classroom, despite the fact that there were still few respondents (9%) who had an opposite view. Unlike the chance to perform speaking skill in the class, the existence of feedback on their speaking performance was viewed negatively. Almost one-fourth of the respondents (23%) thought that they have not been provided with feedback on their performance, and the rest of them (77%) showed positive attitude. To the last item which asked whether or not the respondents were encouraged to practice their speaking outside classroom through a given assignment, 20% of the respondents showed disagreement, and the rest (80%) showed agreement. Thus, feedback provision and encouragement of speaking performance outside class through an organized assignment were taken into account in the syllabus being developed.

Preferred topics or activities
Following the respondents' perception on the existing course, the next aspect of the questionnaire was to know the respondents' preference on topics and activities that were used as a consideration in determining the topics and activities in the syllabus being developed. It covered 9 items containing different topics and activities. The respondents were invited to show the preference towards each item by selecting strongly disagree to show a high degree of aversion, disagree to show a fair aversion, agree to show a fair preference, or strongly agree to show a high degree of preference. After calculating the value of agree and strongly agree, the index of positive preference was noticeable as presented in table 4. The highest preference was on the availability of materials that can contribute to the learners ability to in communicatively motivate their future students to be engaged in classroom activities. This item received as high as 98% of preference. It was followed by topics or activities that can develop the students' ability in communicating instruction to their future students. The third most favored topic was preparing the students' ability in presenting materials in their future class as an English teacher. These first three items were significantly related with the students' speaking development which focused on their performance as future teachers. The next items that showed a percentage of preference over 90% were the items of topic and activities related with discussing issues in education, discussing English Language Teaching (ELT) issues, and presenting materials in college classes. The following percentage, which was below 90%, was perceived in the activities or topics about communicating to colleagues in educational fields and doing an interview. Finally, the least favored topic or activities was one about communicating to colleagues outside educational fields.

Familiarity with e-portfolio assessment
As the syllabus developed in this research was significantly related with electronic portfolio assessment, the respondents were asked about their familiarity with this type of assessment, particularly in speaking performance. As shown in Table 5, two items were delivered. To the first item, when asked whether the respondents were familiar with electronic portfolio assessment for speaking performance, more than half of them showed negative responses, indicating that they had not experienced keeping portfolio for their speaking performance. Slightly different from the first item, the second item was received negative reviews for as high as 34% of the respondents. This item was to know whether or not the respondents were familiar with Google Drive as it was used as the medium for the electronic portfolio. The implication of this section of the questionnaire was that the syllabus developed in this research should provide a brief explanation of the concept and procedures of portfolio assessment. Also, a detailed instruction needed to be prepared. It covered the steps on how to prepare the Google Drive folder as a medium to record the students' speaking performance, and how the students could submit their recorded videos or audios of their speaking to the prepared Google Drive folder.

The results of interview of the need analysis
Another instrument used in the analyzing stage was interview. The lecturer of Speaking for General Purposes course was invited to provide in-depth data about the needs of the class. Based on the interview, the teaching and learning activities were structured based on communicative approach. The class started with brainstorming by questioning and answering activities. Then, it was followed by the main activities which were initiated by providing language input, such as reading or watching videos, and followed by group discussion. The group work and whole-class discussion was claimed to ensure the students' equal chance to perform their speaking. Taufik,Karmina,Cahyono,Sharif,Integrating Electronic Portfolio… 315 Concerning the feedback, the lecturer stated that the feedback given to the students' speaking performance was general and indirect, meaning that the lecturer observed what might be the weaknesses of the students' speaking performance in the class and proposed a solution to that issue without the need of mentioning the ones who made the errors. This was argued to keep the students' confidence in performing their speaking skill. Apart from that, the lecturer admitted to have prepared the students' with some alternatives of how they can review their pronunciation. This way, it was expected that the students can develop their pronunciation more independently. Apart from finding some problems to solve, the finding of the interview was used to be one the basis in determining the routes of activities presented in the syllabus being developed and how the speaking performance in the students' speaking portfolio should be evaluated.

The syllabus design and development
Based on the results of the need analysis of the questionnaire and interview, there were two products developed through this research, which were: (1) a manual on preparing and keeping electronic portfolio, and (2) the syllabus of the teaching and learning of speaking. The first product was considered necessary to produce due the fact that most of the respondents were not familiar with conducting and keeping portfolio assessment. The complete elaboration of the manual can be seen in Appendix 1. The basic requirement to succeed in keeping portfolio was the availability of personal computer (PC) or mobile phone powered with internet connection.
The second product, the syllabus, was based on a mixed syllabus; which were topic and functional syllabus, containing 7 units presenting different focus of teaching and learning. The complete elaboration of the syllabus is presented in Appendix 2 into which the links to the video or audio as the language inputs were embedded. The topics and function included in the syllabus covered; (1) educational issues, (2) being a good presenter, (3) facilitating the students, (4) classroom instruction, (5) research-like interview, (6) a news anchor, and (7) an extemporaneous speech. Each unit contained similar learning structure. It started with brainstorming activities of whole class discussion through question and answer techniques guided by the lecturer. Then, it was followed with observing activities through watching a video which was carefully selected to match the topic being discussed. This activity functioned as a language input for the students. After observing activities, the students' understanding of the topic was further internalized through group discussion. The discussion should be triggered by formulating high-orderthinking-skill questions significantly related to the presented language input.
Also, each unit presented a language focus section which was objected to developing the students' speaking micro skills. In general, through the syllabus, the micro skills presented in the language focus included grammar, pronunciation, vocabulary items, language expression, and text generic structure. Apart from presenting micro skill input, the language focus section presented some exercised to help the learners contextually put the skills in practice. In some units, there was a section that assigned learners to evaluate a certain speaking performance by relying on their knowledge in the first presentation and the language focus section. The presence of this section was to develop the students' critical thinking through evaluating and discussing. At the end of each unit, the syllabus assigned the students to perform their speaking skills related with the topic being presented. In this section, some speaking prompts were presented to help learners generate and organized their ideas. Their performance should be recorded in audio or video and stored to their speaking portfolio prepared earlier. To provide more realistic presentation of how the syllabus can be implemented, a sample unit is presented in Appendix 3.

Expert Evaluation
The syllabus was evaluated on the basis of coursebook evaluation scheme proposed by Tomlinson and Masuhara (2013). In general, the validator claimed that the syllabus had fulfilled the criteria of the evaluation scheme. As presented in table 6, each unit of the syllabus proposed some application of language learning and teaching that were in-line with the proposed criteria.

Aspects
Unit coverage Application Providing extensive exposure to English in use.

All units
Using carefully selected videos and audios relevant to the objectives of each unit. Engaging learners affectively.
Unit 4, Unit 5, Unit 6, Unit 7 Encouraging the students to comments and give suggestions to language performances engaging learners cognitively Unit 4, Unit 5, Unit 6, Unit 7 Encouraging the students to analyze some principles to a certain language performance, and compare-contrast two different language models 316 Jurnal Pendidikan, Vol. 7, No. 8, Bln Agustus, Thn 2022, Hal 309-319 providing students with challenging activities All units Responding to questions in group after observing the language inputs helping learners personalize their learning All units Simple questions at the beginning of each unit that potentially uncover students background through personal thought or experiences Providing opportunities to use the target language for communication

All units
The 'my speaking portfolio' section provides justification on the standards of speaking performance, such as topic coverage, language use, audience, and context helping learners to make use of English outside the classroom

All units
The 'my speaking portfolio' section assigns students to perform speaking practice outside school hours

DISCUSSION
The present study was objected to develop a syllabus of the teaching and learning of speaking skill. The syllabus was expected to be communicative and, most importantly, to encourage learners to practice and comprehend their speaking skill development independence from classroom hours by employing portfolio assessment. Despite the fact that the syllabus had not been tried out, the claims of the expert evaluating the syllabus indicated that the syllabus had been developed to meet the research objective. This was done by carefully determining the needs of the students in speaking class, routing the activities relevant to language acquisition process, and providing considerably authentic language input. For example, each section unit of the syllabus started with a brainstorming activity. This was based on some studies that brainstorming has been shown to aid in the development of speaking skills. In an experiment done by Zuwanda and Umara (2022), for example, it was discovered that students who began the class with brainstorming exercises performed much better than those who began the class without brainstorming activities. Moreover, numerous additional studies have found that brainstorming helps students enhance their background knowledge before engaging in further debate on a particular issue (Srihandayani and Marlina, 2019), to hone creative problem-solving abilities (Almutairi, 2015), and to gather relevant ideas (Octariana, Rizal, and Zasrianita, 2021) Opening each unit of the syllabus with brainstorming activities is relevant to several coursebooks evaluated by Tomlinson and Masuhara (2013). This common notion can be explained through theoretical assumption proposed by Burns and Goh (2012), stating that brainstorming contribute greatly to the first step of the cognitive process of speaking, namely conceptual preparation. In this stage, language users examined their knowledge of the issue which can rely on their own experience stored in their long-term memory. Aside from knowledge, language users at this level try to figure out what kind of encounter they are about to have. As a result, brainstorming can help with the very first step of cognitive processing when learning to speak.
Other favourable attributions in ensuring the communicativeness of the syllabus was by delivering linguistic inputs in the form of videos and, in certain units, audios after brainstorming sessions. The claim of the expert validation that the language input of the syllabus can utilize speaking skill improvement is in-line with some studies eliciting that using videos or audios as language input has been proven to aid in the development of speaking abilities. For example, Syafiq, Rahmawati, Anwari, and Oktaviana (2021) discovered that after being exposed to YouTube videos as a learning resource, students' speaking micro skills, such as fluency, vocabulary, pronunciation, grammar, and content, improved dramatically. Similarly, Riswandi (2016) discovered the same phenomena after doing a classroom action research and concluding that students' micro skills of speaking increased greatly after being exposed to YouTube videos. Aside from micro-skills in speaking, using video as a learning resource can assist learners in improving their overall speaking ability (Jati, Saukah, and Suryati, 2019).
The existence of language input is always related to the development of language competence. When learning a second language, linguistic input serves as a role model (Burns and Goh, 2012). However, it is also believed that poor language input selection might impede language acquisition from proceeding. When a language input reflects experienced speakers, or those who can deliver understandable inputs with a high degree of fluency and accuracy, it is deemed important. Language learners can be trained to identify acceptable utterances and develop language that is becoming progressively correct in this way.
The syllabus developed in this study also presented language production activities through group discussion. The presence of language production activities is considered significant due to the theoretical assumptions that students' speaking skills are thought to be less developed when they only receive comprehensible input. Swain (1985) as cited in Burns and Goh (2012) introduced the output hypothesis, which states that learners need to produce spoken language in order to learn new forms of language. She went on to explain that language learners should be encouraged to utilize the target language, particularly if what they are saying is ambiguous or grammatically incorrect. As a result, in order to generate an understandable output, learners must repeat, restate, or amend what they have said. The syllabus in the present study was filled with various comprehension problems that had to be discussed in groups in order to realize this notion. The questions were then supposed to prompt language development that would aid in their speaking. Taufik,Karmina,Cahyono,Sharif,Integrating Electronic Portfolio… 317 To meet the second objective of the study which is encouraging the practice of speaking outside classroom hours, the present syllabus employed portfolio assessment. The existence of a speaking portfolio evaluation in the syllabus is thought to have a major impact on students' ability to communicate effectively. Despite the fact that there have not been much research on the usefulness of portfolio evaluation for speaking, some studies have found that portfolio assessment for speaking can help students improve their speaking skills. For example, Kwak and Yin (2018) found that after one semester of retaining an electronic speaking portfolio, students' speaking abilities improved dramatically.
Other favorable attributions regarding the application of portfolio evaluation were evoked by Kwak and Yin (2018) in addition to speaking skill achievement. They discovered that, in the students' opinion, a portfolio is a useful learning and evaluation tool since it gives diagnostic information to help learners understand their present status and direct them toward greater progress. Furthermore, it is mentioned that portfolio helps learners with Assessment as Learning (AaL), which is an assessment that takes place during the learning process rather than at the conclusion of the semester and allows learners to gather information about their skills while grading their own performance (Kwak and Yin, 2018). This trait, in fact, cannot be isolated from portfolio evaluation; it must always be accompanied by peer and self-evaluation (O'Malley and Pierce, 2019). Interestingly, the existence of portfolio for speaking instructed in the syllabus is considered unique to other speaking materials, such as the ones evaluated by Tomlinson and Masuhara (2013).
The consideration of integrating Portfolio assessment in the syllabus was based on the fact that this type of assessment is invariably linked to self-or peer-evaluation. According to Swain (1985) as cited by Burns and Goh (2012), through the selfassessment on the speaking portfolio, students may have the opportunity to notice linguistic forms in their speech that are likely to cause issues for listeners, such as pronunciation or grammar, and attempt to improve their speaking correctness. Furthermore, the finding showing that the portfolio evaluation, which included self-and peer-assessment, is highly attributable to the students' higher accomplishment in speaking which is consistent with research that emphasized self-assessment on speaking ability development. Marzuki, et al., (2020) for example, reported that encouraging students to self-assess their speaking helped them improve their speaking skills. Most of the students utilized the findings of their self-assessment to determine whether or not they had met the learning objectives in the speaking lesson. Despite the benefits, the study underlined the importance of training and supervision for students to build their judgment on their own performance.

CONCLUSION
The goal of this study was to create a syllabus for the teaching and learning of general purpose speaking. The research employed Research and Development design with a modified ADDIE model suggested by Branch (2009). It was broken down into four stages: (1) analysis, (2) design, (3) development, and (4) evaluation. A speaking syllabus and a guidebook on how to develop and maintain a portfolio were the outcomes of this study. The design and development of a product need careful content selection and mapping to satisfy the expectations of participants identified during the analysis stage. The availability of an electronic portfolio evaluation, which was incorporated to allow students to practice speaking outside of the classroom, is another unique aspect of the syllabus. Despite the positive results of expert validation, the syllabus needs to be tried out further in English Speaking class to know its effectiveness.
For future studies, it is perceived difficult to locate literatures on the usefulness of increasing speaking skills using portfolio evaluation, as portfolio assessment has traditionally been associated with writing ability. Also, keeping an electronic portfolio by recording and uploading to a Google Drive folder is seen to be a difficult effort. Thus, more research and development could be done to build a medium that provided simplicity and convenience in maintaining a portfolio for speaking ability.