Process Portfolio is a term used by Howard Gardner in his article, "Zero-Based Arts Education: An Introduction to Arts PROPEL" (1989). The handbook uses the term PROPEL Portfolios instead.

Typically in the world of Visual Arts, artists use their portfolios to show their best finished pieces. They are utilized to show what they have accomplished, or are capable of accomplishing. The Process Portfolio, however, functions as a way to track student progress. Included in Process Portfolios are not only finished pieces; they also hold reflections, critiques, started projects left unfinished, sketches, journals (see assessment), and any record of inspiration (pages of magazines, images of dreams, postcards from a museum field trip, etc.). The Pittsburgh commitee suggests also including in the portfolio a cover sheet, an annotated table of contents, students' art background (possibly a beginning of term survey), a mid-year review, and a final review.

The portfolio should be part of the ongoing assessment throughout the school year. Teachers and students both benefit from periodic, informal portfolio review sessions as well as journal reviews. Process Portfolios focus on student reflection, self-assessment, and the artistic/thinking process.

Process Portfolios should represent student understanding of predetermined characteristics of each of the three components of Arts PROPEL, Production, Reflection, and Perception. These characteristics should be clearly communicated to students in the beginning of the school term. Examples of said characteristics include:

Production - Craftsmanship, Inventiveness, Effort, Expression, Utilization of skills and concepts.
Reflection - Awareness of self & processes, Strategies for revision, Notation of intent vs. end result.
Perception - Awareness of environment, art works, art materials, and varying points of view.

Assessment of Process Portfolios is both formative (ongoing) and summative (cummulative). The actual process of portfolio assessment/review is unique to each class, relative to the logistics of the particular environment. There can be no standardized approach to portfolio assessment from class to class. Ongoing, formative assessment serves to clarify student understanding and to direct future efforts. Summative assessment occurs at the end of the term and serves to provide the student and parents with an overall judgement of students' learning. It is important that summative portfolio assessment remain subjective.

While formative portfolio assessment often suffices in the form of informal discussions (between teacher-student, peers, or self-assessment), summative assessment requires a more formal approach. Ideally, the teacher would take 10-15 minutes (or longer) with each students for an end-of-term interview. Realistically, however, time is usually a major constraint. The Handbook offers two alternative formal approaches to summative assessment.

The first takes the form of a written exam, but rather than answering recall questions on technique, art history, or art materials (etc.), the exam focuses on students' development as an artist. The students answer questions that would be asked in an interview, drawing from their personal artistic endeavors, and using specific examples from their portfolio. The student would has their portfolio at hand during the 'exam' as the teacher has it while reading student responses.

The second alternative approach involves the student sharing their portfolio with a 'significant other.' The significant other, of the student's choosing, is invite to the art room to view and critically analyze the student's portfolio. Guided by a worksheet of questions and through dialog with the student artist, the significant other acts as critic, answering teacher questions, offering suggestions, and providing a third person point of view. This offers an extra dimension unique to the arts, and makes for a more dynamic learning experience. After all, what would art be without a broader audience to enjoy it?