Date post: | 02-Jan-2016 |
Category: |
Documents |
Upload: | brielle-hendrix |
View: | 29 times |
Download: | 2 times |
1
ePortfolios Models and Implementation:Idealistic Why versus Pragmatic How
Tim Neumann
Wilma Clark
3
Contents
1 Introduction
2 Scenarios
3 ePortfolio Models
4 Empirical Studies
5 Tool Comparison
Durham Blackboard Users’ Conference 2009
4
1 Introduction
Project Phases
Durham Blackboard Users’ Conference 2009
Needs Analysis
Decision M
aking
(Technology and Pedagogy)
Piloting
Implem
entation
5
1 Introduction
ePortfolio History at the IOE
• 2003-2005: Level 10, custom project/group management tool• 2006-2007: PebblePad pilot for Secondary PGCE• since 2006: individual, small-scale efforts and explorations• 2008-2009: TQEF ePortfolio project
Durham Blackboard Users’ Conference 2009
6
1 Introduction
Motivation
• Multiple academic staff members had sought advice on ePortfolios• Two researchers started projects on ePortfolios in HE• Availability of tools at no additional costs
Durham Blackboard Users’ Conference 2009
7
1 Introduction
Approach
• Discussion with participants (staff and students)• Review of previous ePortfolio trials, paper portfolios, electronic exchanges• Developing contextualised models of ePortfolio use• Evaluation of tools in three test scenarios (with student input)• Implementation in five cases
Durham Blackboard Users’ Conference 2009
8
2 Scenarios
Five Cases
1. The Doctoral School
2. MA in ICT in Education
3. Secondary PGCE ICT
4. Post-Compulsory PGCE (ESOL/Literacy)
5. MTeach
Durham Blackboard Users’ Conference 2009
9
2 Scenarios
Case 1: The Doctoral School
• Portfolios co-owned by student and supervisor• Limited access for registry staff for tracking purposes• Record of supervisory meetings, progress reviews, assignments,
attendance• Evidence of doctoral level competencies• Building a professional academic identity
Durham Blackboard Users’ Conference 2009
10
2 Scenarios
Case 2: MA in ICT in Education
• Student-owned and generated portfolio• Repository for student-created teaching resources• Record reflections on personal/professional development (multi-media)• Identity space (profiles)• Bibliographic management system• Peer comments/reviews• Monitoring of tutor-generated portfolio tasks
Durham Blackboard Users’ Conference 2009
11
2 Scenarios
Case 3: Secondary PGCE in ICT
• Community of practice involving five stakeholder groups• Collaborative production• Monitoring of course requirements (tracking of deadlines)• Checklist for QTS standards• Mentoring log, lesson observations, assessment record file• Career entry and professional development profile
Durham Blackboard Users’ Conference 2009
12
2 Scenarios
Case 4: Post-Compulsory PGCE (ESOL/Literacy)
• Student-owned portfolio• Tutors and mentors to contribute to selected portfolios• Record of teaching practice• Tracking progress over distances
Durham Blackboard Users’ Conference 2009
13
2 Scenarios
Case 5: Master of Teaching
• Collaborative community beyond the course context• Portfolio as a starting point for post-graduation engagement• Communication and sharing tool• Politically skewed towards open source tools
Durham Blackboard Users’ Conference 2009
14
3 ePortfolio Models
Multiple Themes
1. Model: What is an ePortfolio?
2. Ownership: Who controls what?
3. Access: How does collaboration work?
4. Use and purpose: Implications for learning, development and assessment
5. Issues: Training, support, portability
Durham Blackboard Users’ Conference 2009
15
Questions asked
Durham Blackboard Users’ Conference 2009
Theme Questions
Model What is an ePortfolio?How can it be used to support learning, development, assessment?How can/should it be organised/structured/managed?Who would/should monitor development and progress?What are the benefits to the student, tutor, supervisor, mentor and/or Institution?
Ownership Who is it for? Who has overall control/ownership of it?How, what, and with whom can it be shared?
Accessibility How can it be accessed?Who can/should/needs to have access to it and at what level?
Tool Can it be integrated or linked to other systems, e.g. Registry?What are the practical issues and implications of implementation?What costs are involved?Which system should be used and what are the alternatives?
Support What training is needed and how could this be delivered?
16
3 ePortfolio Models
Durham Blackboard Users’ Conference 2009
ePortfolio Model
Course Assessment Tool Shared Content Management
Tool
Student Gen. Folio Tool
(Repos./ Refl.)
Professional Development
ToolDoctoral School 2 (4) 1 (1) 4 (3) 3 (2)
MA in ICT 2 (4) 1 (1) 3 (2) 4 (3)
Sec PGCE ICT 2 (2) 1 (1) 4 (4) 3 (3)
PC PGCE 2 (3) 3 (2) 1 (1) 4 (4)
MTeach 4 (4) 2 (2) 1 (1) 3 (3)
1 = high importance4 = low importance Institution -------------------------------------------------------------- Student
Tutor and Administrators’ perceptions of ePortfolios as learning models
17
3 ePortfolio Models
Durham Blackboard Users’ Conference 2009
Course Students
Supervisors or
Course Tutors
InstitutionCourse/
DeptLink Tutors
School or Work-Based
Mentors
Registry
Doc Sch. 1 1 2 N/A N/A 2
MA in ICT 1 2 1 N/A N/A N/A
PGCE ICT 1 1 N/A 2 2 3
PC PGCE 1 2 1 3 3 2
MTeach 1 2 N/A 0 0 3
Perceptions around ownership and control of the ePortfolio
1 = high3 = low0 = neutral
1 = high3 = low0 = neutral
18
4 Empirical Studies
Overview
Three scenarios, focusing on
1. The Institutional experience: Doctoral School
2. The student experience: MA in ICT in Education
3. The tutor experience: Secondary PGCE in ICT
To evaluate the potentials and limitations of four ePortfolio tools:Blackboard Basic, Blackboard Personal, Expo LX, Mahara
Durham Blackboard Users’ Conference 2009
19
4 Empirical Studies
Durham Blackboard Users’ Conference 2009
Screenshots, Feature Summary and further information(PDF document)
20
5 Tool Comparison
Comparison of Features
Durham Blackboard Users’ Conference 2009
21
Contact
Learning Technologies UnitInstitute of Education, University of London
London Knowledge Lab23-29 Emerald StreetLondon, WC1N 3QS
www.lkl.ac.uk/LTU