Post on 02-Jan-2016
transcript
ePortfolios for Leadership Identity Development:
Some Very Preliminary Findings
George Mason University
dcambrid@gmu.edu
Lives We Lead:
• Three-year project at George Mason University;
• Leadership development portfolio using the Open Source Portfolio model;
• Research as part of the third cohort of the Inter/National Coalition for Electronic Portfolio Research.
I/NCEPR:
• Institutional research teams examining the impact of electronic portfolio practice on learning;
• 46 institutions in four cohorts; • Third cohort focuses on student affairs -academic
affairs collaboration;• US, Canada, England, Scotland, Netherlands; • Book to be published by Stylus in 2008.
Methodology -
• Design research: – Intervention design informed by theory; – Evaluated for effectiveness & contributions to
further development of theory.
• Grounded theory:– Collaborative coding of portfolio, video &
interview data by inter-disciplinary team. – Theoretical sampling.
Leadership theory -
• Leadership Identity Development: – Based on research on undergraduate student leaders at the
University of Maryland.– From positional leadership to multi-dimensional perspective:
• Identity; • Relationships; • Community .
• Evidence in leadership portfolios:– Products, reproductions, attestations.
Theories of Reflection -
• Kolb’s stages of reflection: – Description;– Analysis;– Judgment;– Planning.
• Yancey’s types of reflection: – constructive reflection; – reflection-in-presentation.
Program Design:
• Semester-long portfolio development experience;• Three face-to-face, day-long meetings; • Faculty, staff & mentors • Students who self-identify as leaders & those who don’t. • Sequenced use OSP tools with r-smart CLE:
– Hierarchical wizards;– Matrixes;– Portfolios.
Beginning of the Semester:
• Expanding thinking about evidence;
• Reflective writing in response to selections from a large number of prompts;
• Organized around identity, relationships, community;
• Hierarchical matrix.
Mid-semester:
• Re-conceptualizing as leadership.
• Organizing evidence & reflections in relationship to shared conceptual framework: – Matrix thinking.
• Matrix.
End of the Semester:
• Presentation portfolio for an audience of peers;
• Identity, relationships, community, future directions;
• Portfolio using template.
Very Preliminary Findings:
• First iteration ended in May 2007. • Analyzed so far:
– Evaluation surveys; – Selected final portfolios.
• Coding of additional portfolios, video data & conducting interviews with students through December 2007.
• Key themes in leadership identity, rather than impact of portfolio process.
Evidence, Audience & Mentoring:
• Broader conception of & new value placed in evidence in relationship to leadership-related activities;
• Strong sense of pride in final product. • Peer mentoring invaluable:
– Mirrors research as LaGuardia and other I/NCEPR campuses.
Strong Perceived Impact
Strengthened ability to connect learning experiences inside and outside of the classroom
73%
Stronger sense of self as a leader 87%
Stronger awareness of my leadership potential 88%
Enhanced awareness of how to present ideas to different audiences
75%
More confident in ability to use reflective practice for self-discovery and learning
82%
More confident in my ability to use electronic environments for my learning
87%
Greater awareness of how to select evidence that demonstrates my learning
100%
From Position to Integration -
• Students see their identities to be inseparable from multiple kinds of relationships & community memberships: – Family relationships, friendships, academic & professional
community memberships; – Navigation between cultures & putting them into conversations;– Portfolios as a sight of integration.
• Shift from positional definition of leadership to grounding in this integrated network.
• Mirrors findings of research in eFolio Minnesota & LaGuardia CC; LI, NY.
Academics as Test of Self:
• We intended for curricular content to be an central source of evidence, ideas & strategies, but it didn’t show up this way.
• Class work functioned as:– A demonstration of character virtues;– An experience; – A goal putting aspiration towards those virtues in action.
Steadfastness -
• Consistency of commitment over time seen as a central leadership virtue:– Tenacity, perseverance, patience, follow through;– Standing up to opposition & peer pressure;– Essential to ability to create change!
• Much more prominent than persuasiveness. • Spirituality & family are key arenas for
demonstrating steadfastness.
Change:• While steadfastness is central, so is change!
• Leadership requires growth.
• Students universally embraced change as both
a personal & societal goal.
• Local & global, with very little in between.
Evidence:
• Primarily reproductions & attestations;
• Symbolic rather than persuasive;
• Heuristics for reflection.
Questions Moving Forward:
• How do students who self-identify as leaders & those who don’t differ?
• Why is course content not see as relevant; how might we change that?
• Do the ways students use evidence match the expectations of their intended audiences?
• In terms of developing leadership competence, how important is self-identification? Does it matter when we call it leadership?
• How well do the different OSP tools support the development process?