Activity 2.1 - applications of eportfolios

http://buckinsand.blogspot.com/2008/10/activity-21-applications-of-eportfolios_02.html

Key readings chosen
Batson, T. (2002) The electronic portfolio boom ..
Batson, T. (2008) ePortfolios: Hot Once Again (not listed)
Jafari, A. (2004) The sticky eportfolio system
Steffani, L. (2005) PDP/CPD and eportfolios: rising to the challenge
Vuorikari, R. (2006) National policies and case studies

Discussion points from
Molley 2, Janet (26, Sep, 2008) re(6): eportfolios and community education) - discussion board
Cheer, Peter C (25, Sep, 2008) Re(4): eportfolios and community education
Nkuyubwatsi, Bernard (27, Sep, 2008) - Re(5): eportfolios and community education,


General topics that emerged from all of the readings
1) advantages of eportfolios are many and the notion is not likely to disappear
2) yet there are significant challenges that need to be addressed if the benefits ascribed to using eportfolios are to be realized

There is consensus amongst the writers that eportfolios are not a passing fancy. Batson argues that they are here to stay because they naturally capitalize on the growing number of students with IT competencies (Batson, 2002) and their growing ability to produce digital work. Jafari (2004) outlines how its benefits are extended to other stakeholders besides students and in ways that were not thought of as possible before. Examples include facilitating career development (soft skill and aptitude review), accreditation (program review) and tenure. A key point is that eportfolios are likely to stay, not because of their technological advantages but because of their pedagogical advantages (Martin).

Eportfolios provide many new opportunities. Batson notes for students, the ability to visualize their learning development or to provide evidence of their actual work to support a transcript. This reflective process and the skills associated with it personalize learning for students, promote a culture of lifelong learning and according to both Vuorikari and Steffani, come to be enthusiastically supported by students "once they understand reflective learning".

Teachers note how eportfolios promote deeper learning from their students. Students can demonstrate their understanding of theory not just with individual assignments but with their practice over time. Such a combination invites new forms of "real assessment" (Vuorikari) based upon reflection on and discussion of what has been learned. Students can share their findings with fellow students to test and construct meaning. Students can also review where they are in a selected learning program and plan accordingly (Janet Molley) thus inviting more personalization of learning programs. As Batson notes (2008) the eportfolio in effect becomes a virtual "learning environment" available almost anytime and anywhere by the increasingly ubiquitous nature of the internet.

However, all four readings also noted the challenges that need to be overcome if these opportunities are to be fully realized. Vuorikari notes the need for eportfolios to be used in a meaningful and purposeful way when made part of the learning process (Vuorikari p. 13). Benefits need to be clearly modeled to students to promote their buyin (Jafari) and to promote their use of reflective practices (Stefani). Standardization of design may also be needed to improve ease of use and interoperability (Jafari) but it needs to be done in balance with promoting flexibility otherwise it risks undermine the reflective aspect (Vuorikari) . Training to realize these benefits also extends beyond just students and faculty. Vuorikari notes how parents too need to be trained to understand how to support eportfolio practice. Stefani's stresses the need for evidence of "action" (after reflection) that supports one's claim to pdp or cpd. In other words, she argues assessment of an eportfolio becomes an important requisite in either case. However teachers have identified that assessment often risked becoming more summative and thus marginalized formative assessment and the skills associated with promoting lifelong learning (Jafari). As Bernard poignantly noted, this same desire to support life long learning through the use of eportfolios requires that the process become habit forming for students. Thus the design, implementation and integration of eportfolios can not be deemed to be a simple task.

Activity 2.1 - Applications of eportfolios

Key readings chosen
Batson, T. (2002) The electronic portfolio boom..
Batson, T. (2008) ePortfolios: Hot Once Again (not listed)
Jafari, A. (2004) The sticky eportfolio system
Steffani, L. (2005) PDP/CPD and eportfolios: rising to the challenge
Vuorikari, R. (2006) National policies and case studies

Discussion points from
Molley 2, Janet (26, Sep, 2008) re(6): eportfolios and community education) - discussion board
Cheer, Peter C (25, Sep, 2008) Re(4): eportfolios and community education
Nkuyubwatsi, Bernard (27, Sep, 2008) - Re(5): eportfolios and community education,


General topics that emerged from all of the readings
1) advantages of eportfolios are many and the notion is not likely to disappear
2) yet there are significant challenges that need to be addressed if the benefits ascribed to using eportfolios are to be realized

There is consensus amongst the writers that eportfolios are not a passing fancy. Batson argues that they are here to stay because they naturally capitalize on the growing number of students with IT competencies (Batson, 2002) and their growing ability to produce digital work. Jafari (2004) outlines how its benefits are extended to other stakeholders besides students and in ways that were not thought of as possible before. Examples include facilitating career development (soft skill and aptitude review), accreditation (program review) and tenure. A key point is that eportfolios are likely to stay, not because of their technological advantages but because of their pedagogical advantages (Cheer).

Eportfolios provide many new opportunities. Batson notes for students, the ability to visualize their learning development or to provide evidence of their actual work to support a transcript. This reflective process and the skills associated with it personalize learning for students, promote a culture of lifelong learning and according to both Vuorikari and Steffani, come to be enthusiastically supported by students "once they understand reflective learning".

Teachers note how eportfolios promote deeper learning from their students. Students can demonstrate their understanding of theory not just with individual assignments but with their practice over time. Such a combination invites new forms of "real assessment" (Vuorikari) based upon reflection on and discussion of what has been learned. Students can share their findings with fellow students to test and construct meaning. Students can also review where they are in a selected learning program and plan accordingly (Janet Molley) thus inviting more personalization of learning programs. As Batson notes (2008) the eportfolio in effect becomes a virtual "learning environment" available almost anytime and anywhere by the increasingly ubiquitous nature of the internet.

However, all four readings also noted the challenges that need to be overcome if these opportunities are to be fully realized. Vuorikari notes the need for eportfolios to be used in a meaningful and purposeful way when made part of the learning process (Vuorikari p. 13). Benefits need to be clearly modeled to students to promote their buyin (Jafari) and to promote their use of reflective practices (Stefani). Standardization of design may also be needed to improve ease of use and interoperability (Jafari) but it needs to be done in balance with promoting flexibility otherwise it risks undermine the reflective aspect (Vuorikari) . Training to realize these benefits also extends beyond just students and faculty. Vuorikari notes how parents too need to be trained to understand how to support eportfolio practice. Stefani's stresses the need for evidence of "action" (after reflection) that supports one's claim to pdp or cpd. In other words, she argues assessment of an eportfolio becomes an important requisite in either case. However teachers have identified that assessment often risked becoming more summative and thus marginalized formative assessment and the skills associated with promoting lifelong learning (Jafari). As Bernard poignantly noted, this same desire to support life long learning through the use of eportfolios requires that the process become habit forming for students. Thus the design, implementation and integration of eportfolios can not be deemed to be a simple task.

Activity 2.1 - applications of eportfolios (notes)

Are eportfolios fulfilling a genuine need or are they just the latest fad?

There are definite benefits for all parties involved.. certainly at the academic level (student, teacher, adminstrator). Eportfolios can be used by all of them to achieve any number of objectives.. but there are a good number of questions that need to be answered to make them meaningful and purposeful (sources - Stefani (2005), Vuorikari (2006) )


Is PDP different for students than for staff?
Originally I thought that they are in many respects similar, perhaps in most cases much less prescriptive for teachers .. whereas students may need much more guidance and direction on how and when to use them.


However, perhaps that guidance depends on the amount of experience someone has had with eportfolios before .. no matter what their age (same structure might be required for teachers who have never been exposed to the process) . So now I'm coming back to concluding that fundamentally I don't see how there can be much different. We still have a process of collecting evidence, reviewing / reflecting on the evidence, to then arrive at some sort of conclusion, review which can then be used to plot something forward. How they are realized might be different because of the level of understanding of the concepts that may be introduced .. especially at the introductory stage.

At such a point, I would anticipate the need for some form of detailed scaffolding for a newbie.. to realize construction / collection of evidence and placement of it into a logical framework (similar to what is happening here in our H808 course now - with the creation of evidence via activities and guidance on where to put them, how to tag them). As time progresses, the level of scaffolding might be less directive and become more coaching in style.

However Stefani's point about the need for some sort of assessment / review to make the eportfolio process meaningful (certainly in the context of CPD) struck me as realistic. If that assessment is to be done on one's own, then one needs to have developed / constructed some sort of rubric to make sense of how to review the collection for meaningful / focussed reflection - the demands of which sound very forboding especially for the uninitiated (i.e. yours truly). Thus it's likely more realistic to think that having some sort of rubric to help with reflection might be as useful for staff / faculty as it would be for students.

************************************
my posting to the bulletin board - Core Activity 2.1

Interesting to see the readings that I studied (Batson, Jafari, Stefani, Vuorikari) putting so much importance on assessment and the need for it to be "meaningful" and "purposeful". As a former teacher and now an IT support specialist, I found my interest peeked when I read about portfolios being used in the context of CPD for teachers.

As Stefani (PDP/CPD and eportfolios, 2005) points out , assessment of CDP for teachers, is as important as assessment of PDP for students. Here some sort of review / assessment is needed to encourage integration of concepts learned through PD activities into one's professional practice. It has been my experience that this is typically not done, evidence being typically unpredictable teacher attendance levels for PD activities as well as a low level of engagement or follow up by teachers, and the absence of any recognition (extrinsic motivation) by management of a teacher's efforts to do so.

Perhaps the only time some sort of PD activity is encouraged is through the annual teacher performance review when we as EFL instructors are required to submit a portfolio. The porfolio being promoted here, echoes almost in entirety, the 5 key aspects of teaching that the Univ or Auckland faculty drew up. These same headings are used to guide some sort of demonstration of one's "teaching effectiveness". My experience is that it did cause me to reflect upon my work of each past year. Interestingly, because of my tech competencies, I was motivated to support my "reflection" by assembling digital evidence or samples of things tried. This became especially useful when that reflection may have been about something more negative (i.e. expected response versus actual response by students to an activity). Over a number of years, I did find this process to be a positive one, however a good number of my colleagues still approached it as yet another bureaucratic exercise.

So I read with a great deal of curosity as to how this form of "detachment" to the exercise by a good many of my colleagues could be turned around to be more positive and engaging. While all four of the articles promoted the "eportfolio cause", they also shed some light on the many obstacles that come in the way of realizing effective use of portfolios (let along eportfolios).

Summary - PDP / CPD and ePortfolios (Stefani)

Portfolios in general
(basic) - standard folder w/ trigger questions (i.e. ZU - ABP teaching port)
(adv.) - eportfolio - modified / manipulated according to demands of subj. domain

great idea .. but poor execution / poor documented examples that illustrate success of the approach / intended purpose

if PDP is such a good idea why hasn't it succeeded?
There is a lack of examples to demonstrate success .. thus a need to re-examine

• chief purpose of pdp
• why learners do NOT engage in the concept
• support structures / portfolio format

.. to find improvement

if CPD is such a good idea (support for CPD for teachers) why has it been so poorly received?
equally poor uptake/ engagement w/ CPD by teachers
low level of meaningful implementation

.. same problems as PDP .. why is there the same need for review of ...

• chief purpose of CPD
• why learners do NOT engage in the concept
• support structures / porf format

.. to find improvement?

CPD is supported in principle

• need to reflect on / record / journal one's learning
• need to identify activities that support / encourage the indentification of learning needs to enhance practice

problem!

• not clear what activities help realize this
• little idea as to how to validate CPD by just reporting it

need identified!

• need evidence of actions that arose from development (evidence)

***************************
CPD vs PDP
- Ss are recording in a meaningful way (directed to do so)
- Ss get some credit for their work
.. but CPD has almost none of this (little more than a cert of attendance)

issues identified in HE Scotland example
- time requirements
what is the cause?
absence of "real" models
absence of teacher understanding / experience of reflection as a learning activity .. therefore .. difficult to support Ss w/ example

- positive views towards PDP from Ss (once they understood reflection)
but again. .. teachers have little to no direct experience w/ reflection

- need to realize some sort of reward for Ss via assessment
common to have alignment of teaching / learning / assessment so PDP is expected to be included as part of curriculum / thus assessed

• student attitudes towards PDP process - produce reflections for assess / learning
• teacher attitudes towards CPD process - no reward for CPD therefore it does not succeed

- efficiency of task increases w/ use of technology (recording / reflecting on achievements)

******************************
why does Batson think eports are revolutionizing HE?
eport can / makes the focus of learning on the whole person.. personalizes curriculum , invites more active learning from the student, contextualizes the learning for the student

how do we design curriculum to integrate eports?
- this is a major change in assessment
- it requires a major change in the mindset of faculty to manage assessment w/ eportfolios

how about CPD - relevance?
start with the question..
how do we measure teaching excellence?
- by assessing how well students are learning

• good teaching requires professional approach to teaching practice equal to the professional approach taken to do research

reflection

scholarly review

evidence

... by Ss to what they have learned / help them understand what they have learned
.. the same could apply to Ts

teaching portfolio needed to evaluate teaching
but needs

• generic guidelines
• use of technology to make / collect / assemble evidence
• review of PD support / resources so that they support reflection & produce evidence .. to support port development

supports evaluation of portfolio

model presented? Auckland example
generic yet focussed in 5 key areas

• roles, responsibilities, goals (to identify one's expertise in context of teaching)
• teaching evaluations
• contributions to your institution or profession
• activities to improve instruction
• honours or recognition

****************************************
process

list

• teaching goals
• learning activities that arise from teaching goals
• actual student outcomes that arise from learning activities

review / reflect on these three elements
produce a teaching philosophy
check for alignment of all 4 (goals / methods / outcomes / philosophy)

but what does an eportfolio contribute to this?

• more variety in how evidence can be assembled / presented
• improved flexibility / portability of the material
• effective modelling of technological competencies (increasingly in demand)

what does the University offer as result of assessment?

• offering faculty certification "Certificate in Academic Practice"

conclusion from Stefani
- eport / pdp / cpd is still a leap of faith that .....

• enhanced learning
• enhanced levels of attainment

.. .....will be achieved.