eportfolios at the ioe
DESCRIPTION
Presentation at the London Blackboard User Group meeting, 3rd April 2009. Reports on the IOE TQEF project on ePortfolios, including a comparison of Blackboard internal portfolios, Expo LX and Mahara.TRANSCRIPT
1
e-Portfolios – Solutions for Particular Needs?London Blackboard User Group April 2009
ePortfolios Solutions for particular needs?
Tim Neumann
London Knowledge Lab
3
London Blackboard User Group
Date: 3rd April 2009
Venue: The Women’s Library
London Metropolitan University
London Blackboard User Group April 2009
4
Contents
1 Introduction
2 Five Scenarios
3 Three Cases
4 One Evaluation (of three ePortfolio systems)
London Blackboard User Group April 2009
5
1 Introduction
ePortfolio Consultation Process
Needs Analysis
Decision M
aking
(Technology and Pedagogy)
Piloting
Implem
entation
London Blackboard User Group April 2009
6
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
London Blackboard User Group April 2009
7
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 further costs
London Blackboard User Group April 2009
8
1 Introduction
Approach
• Discussion with participants (staff and students)• Review of previous ePortfolio trials, paper portfolios, electronic exchanges• Developing contextualised models of ePortfolio use• Implementation in five scenarios • Evaluation of tools in three cases (with student input)
London Blackboard User Group April 2009
9
2 Scenarios
Five Scenarios
1. The Doctoral School
2. MA in ICT in Education
3. Secondary PGCE ICT
4. Post-Compulsory PGCE (ESOL/Literacy)
5. MTeach
London Blackboard User Group April 2009
10
2 ScenariosScenario 1: The Doctoral School
London Blackboard User Group April 2009
11
2 ScenariosScenario 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
London Blackboard User Group April 2009
12
2 ScenariosScenario 2: MA in ICT in Education
London Blackboard User Group April 2009
13
2 Scenarios
Scenario 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
London Blackboard User Group April 2009
14
2 ScenariosScenario 3: Secondary PGCE in ICT
London Blackboard User Group April 2009
15
2 Scenarios
Scenario 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
London Blackboard User Group April 2009
16
2 ScenariosScenario 4: Post-Compulsory PGCE (ESOL/Literacy)
London Blackboard User Group April 2009
17
2 Scenarios
Scenario 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
London Blackboard User Group April 2009
18
2 ScenariosScenario 5: Master of Teaching
London Blackboard User Group April 2009
19
2 Scenarios
Scenario 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
London Blackboard User Group April 2009
20
2 Scenarios
Analysis: 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
London Blackboard User Group April 2009
21
Questions asked
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?
London Blackboard User Group April 2009
22
2 Scenarios
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)
Institution -------------------------------------------------------------- Student
Tutor and Administrators’ perceptions of ePortfolios as learning models
London Blackboard User Group April 2009
23
2 Scenarios
Course Students
Supervisors or
Course Tutors
InstitutionCourse/
Dept
Link 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
London Blackboard User Group April 2009
24
3 Case Studies
Overview
Three cases, 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
London Blackboard User Group April 2009
25
3 Case Studies
Screenshots
Download as PDF from:http://www.lkl.ac.uk/ltu/files/seminar/Bb_LondonBUG_ePortfolios.pdf
London Blackboard User Group April 2009
26
4 Evaluation
Case 1: Blackboard Personal Portfolio
• Almost no collaborative features• Sharing is limited to ‘viewing’• Tracking difficult and time-consuming• Good as online repository and reflection tool
London Blackboard User Group April 2009
27
4 Evaluation
Case 2: Blackboard Personal Portfolio versus Mahara
Blackboard
Mahara
London BBUG
28
4 Evaluation
Case 3: LO Expo LX Wiki Tool
London Blackboard User Group April 2009
29
4 Evaluation
Comparison of Features
Download as PDF from:http://www.lkl.ac.uk/ltu/files/seminar/Bb_LondonBUG_ePortfolios.pdf
A full report is currently under review and will be published at:http://www.lkl.ac.uk/LTU
London Blackboard User Group April 2009
30
Contact
Learning Technologies UnitInstitute of Education, University of London
London Knowledge Lab23-29 Emerald StreetLondon, WC1N 3QS
www.lkl.ac.uk/LTU