16
This article was downloaded by: [Moskow State Univ Bibliote] On: 07 December 2013, At: 14:19 Publisher: Routledge Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK Journal of Geography in Higher Education Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/cjgh20 Developing and Embedding Reflective Portfolios in Geography Pauline Kneale Published online: 03 Aug 2010. To cite this article: Pauline Kneale (2002) Developing and Embedding Reflective Portfolios in Geography, Journal of Geography in Higher Education, 26:1, 81-94, DOI: 10.1080/03098260120110386 To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03098260120110386 PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the “Content”) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinions and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors, and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content should not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising out of the use of the Content. This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is

Developing and Embedding Reflective Portfolios in Geography

  • Upload
    pauline

  • View
    217

  • Download
    1

Embed Size (px)

Citation preview

This article was downloaded by: [Moskow State Univ Bibliote]On: 07 December 2013, At: 14:19Publisher: RoutledgeInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH,UK

Journal of Geography in HigherEducationPublication details, including instructions for authorsand subscription information:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/cjgh20

Developing and EmbeddingReflective Portfolios inGeographyPauline KnealePublished online: 03 Aug 2010.

To cite this article: Pauline Kneale (2002) Developing and Embedding ReflectivePortfolios in Geography, Journal of Geography in Higher Education, 26:1, 81-94, DOI:10.1080/03098260120110386

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03098260120110386

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all theinformation (the “Content”) contained in the publications on our platform.However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make norepresentations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness,or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinions and viewsexpressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors, andare not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of theContent should not be relied upon and should be independently verified withprimary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for anylosses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages,and other liabilities whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly orindirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising out of the use of theContent.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes.Any substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan,sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is

expressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found athttp://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Mos

kow

Sta

te U

niv

Bib

liote

] at

14:

19 0

7 D

ecem

ber

2013

Journal of Geography in Higher Education, Vol. 26, No. 1, 2002, pp. 81–94

Developing and Embedding Re� ectivePortfolios in Geography

PAULINE KNEALE, University of Leeds, UK

ABSTRACT The School of Geography at the University of Leeds, UK, led thedevelopment of a faculty-wide Personal Re� ective Portfolio as part of a universityproject—A Strategic Model for Developing Methods and Materials for RecordingAchievement in Traditional Universities (Jackson et al., 2000). This paper describes thematerials and their usage, the value of bottom-up design, and the issues of embeddingthis type of material within faculty programmes. The re� ections of both students andtutors are considered. Overall the materials are viewed positively and considered tohave long-term and workplace relevance. Whether they meet the original aim of helpingstudents to become more re� ective and evaluative learners is impossible to measure andnot thought to be successful as yet. Re� ection on action is more evident than actionplanning.

KEYWORDS Re� ection skills, personal development portfolios, recording achieve-ment, personal development planning.

Introduction

In United Kingdom higher education personal development portfolios (PDPs) are aninstitutional matter. The Quality Assurance Agency for Higher Education (QAA, 2000,para 36) state that “the minimum expectations for institutional PDP policies are that:

· Institutional promotional materials should indicate how the skills and attitudes thatunderlie PDP are promoted.

· At the start of an HE programme, students will be introduced to the opportunities forPDP within their programme.

· Students will be provided with opportunities for PDP at each stage of their pro-gramme.

· The rationale for PDP at different stages of a programme will be explained for thebene� t of students (e.g. in student or course handbooks or module/unit guides).

· The nature and scope of opportunities for PDP, the recording and support strategieswill be determined by each institution.”

ISSN 0309–8265 print/ISSN 1466–1845 online/02/010081–14 Ó 2002 Taylor & Francis LtdDOI: 10.1080/0309826012011038 6

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Mos

kow

Sta

te U

niv

Bib

liote

] at

14:

19 0

7 D

ecem

ber

2013

P. Kneale

They also state that “these minimum criteria are not intended to constrain existingpractice or local initiatives and institutional or local policies are likely to exceed theseminimum expectations” (QAA, 2000, para 36). This policy follows from the DearingInquiry into Higher Education in England and Wales (National Committee of Inquiryinto Higher Education, 1998), which recommended that institutions in Higher Educationdevelop progress � les for student use at all levels. Dearing proposed that the � le wouldhave two elements:

· a transcript recording student achievement which should follow a common formatdevised by institutions collectively through their representative bodies;

· a means by which students can monitor, build and re� ect on their personal develop-ment.

Development of the � rst element is under discussion in the UK and its implementationis taking account of international good practice, particularly that from the USA wherethere is extensive experience of producing secure transcripts. Development of the secondelement has been a matter for within-university and departmental decision making. TheQAA, elaborating the Dearing principle, states that personal development planning(PDP) is: “a structured and supported process undertaken by an individual to re� ect upontheir own learning, performance and/or achievement and to plan for their personal,educational and career development”. It should help students:

· become more effective, independent and con� dent self-directed learners;· understand how they are learning and relate their learning to a wider context;· improve their general skills for study and career management;· articulate their personal goals and evaluate progress towards their achievement;· encourage a positive attitude to learning throughout life.

PDPs are not summative portfolios as used in many subjects where folders containinga student’s best pieces of work are submitted together with the student’s evaluation ofthe strengths and weaknesses of the pieces (Cole et al., 2000; Darling, 2001). In theterminology of Killion and Todnem (1991), who distinguished three elements inre� ection (re� ection on action, re� ection in action, re� ection for action), the PDP isconcerned with the � rst and third. Re� ection in action is part of many students’in-module experience. The PDP as described here is a vehicle for looking back over theprevious semester to evaluate activities and accomplishments, and then looking forwardto plan constructively for the next semester.

A number of UK universities and departments have been involved in PDP develop-ment in the past 5 years. At the University of Leeds this was through the UK’sDepartment of Education and Environment (DfEE) funded project ‘A Strategic Modelfor Developing Methods and Materials for Recording Achievement in TraditionalUniversities’ (R&RA, 2000). The Centre for Recording Achievement (CRE, 1999; CRE,2000) played a coordinating role. Parallel initiatives involving consortia of universitiesinclude PADSHE—Introducing Personal and Academic Records based at the Universityof Nottingham (PADSHE, 2000); LUSID—Liverpool University Student InteractiveDatabase at Liverpool (LUSID, 2000); and Recording Achievement for Professional andIndividual Development at University of Loughborough (RAPID, 2000). Individualdepartments have developed their own materials, for example the Student Pro� le at theUniversity of Plymouth (Chalkley, personal communication; Livingstone & Matthews,2000). Re� ective portfolios of this type are not a formal university activity in the UnitedStates, Canada or Australia but there are some local initiatives. The University of

82

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Mos

kow

Sta

te U

niv

Bib

liote

] at

14:

19 0

7 D

ecem

ber

2013

Developing and Embedding Re� ective Portfolios

Washington (2000) for example has a career-planning related portfolio for geographystudents.

There is growing acceptance of the value of portfolios in professional life. TheUniversity of Washington’s (2000) opening statement makes the longer term gains clear:

Portfolios can help people in business and industry move more freely in thecurrent work environment, in which more individuals are acting as if they wereindependent contractors, selling their skills and capabilities they can � ll anemployer’s needs.

Portfolios that include evidence of teaching skills and a commentary re� ecting on theexperience of teaching are a common element in many programmes for training teachersat all levels from kindergarten to higher education (Weeks, 1996; Seldin, 1997; Bullard& McLean, 2000). Amongst the reported bene� cial experiences of portfolios are raisingself-con� dence, increasing evaluation skills and more sophisticated and more in-depthplanning—all outcomes from which undergraduates can bene� t in their student career.Re� ective practice and portfolios are part of the experience of university academics intheir workplace, for example in applying for membership of the UK’s Institute forLearning and Teaching, (ILT, 2000) as well as in the wider workplace. Encouragingmore mature re� ection skills in undergraduates can be seen as part of professionalpreparation for work in academia or elsewhere.

This paper discusses the development of a PDP for undergraduate geography studentsand its use in the Faculty of Earth and Environment (R&RA, 2000). This is one of a suiteof portfolios developed to meet different departmental and professional needs. A parallelportfolio was created for geography taught master’s students in the faculty, and aseparate project developed a portfolio for MPhil and PhD research students across theuniversity (Orchard et al., 2000). While it is not possible to consider the long-term, � ve-and ten-year effectiveness of the portfolio, the outcomes from focus-group assessmentsand interviews are discussed.

The Leeds Approach: departmental diversity and ownership

Types of Portfolio

Within the Leeds project the guiding principles during development were that theportfolios must have a pay-off in improving academic learning and that any lifelonglearning bene� ts would be a bonus for the individual. All the PDPs seek to encouragestudents to think about how they do things, in a more self-analytical, evaluative way.Ideally PDPs should encourage greater thought on and broader thinking around thesubject area, and the development of higher order learning skills. To what extent theysucceed in this will be dif� cult to evaluate objectively, but given the ever greaterdiversity of the student intake and limited staff time for one-to-one discussion thisapproach was seen as having value in supporting students. In addition the portfolio seeksto emphasise and make transparent to students the aims and objectives of theirprogrammes, and to provide a record of what they have done which they can refer to ongraduation. This may prove useful when constructing applications to employers, but isnot the primary aim. In most departments the PDP is regarded as a formative document;it is used in a developmental framework and is not summatively assessed.

The different types of portfolios developed to meet student and departmental needswithin the R&RA (2000) umbrella include:

83

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Mos

kow

Sta

te U

niv

Bib

liote

] at

14:

19 0

7 D

ecem

ber

2013

P. Kneale

· Recording professional development—exempli� ed in practice by Dentistry, Medicine,Healthcare Studies and Education with module- and programme-based logs. These askstudents both to re� ect on their general learning and to pay particular attention tore� ection arising from experience when interacting with the public and patients.

· Generic skills based—exempli� ed by the faculties of Earth and Environment; Physicsand Astronomy; Arts, Food Sciences and Biology. These materials are used inassociation with academic and/or personal tutorials.

· Year abroad—exempli� ed by German, Spanish and Portuguese, Japanese and Music.Some elements of these are assessed.

· Off-site learning—used for industrial year placements by Physics and Astronomy,Electrical Engineering, Politics, Computer Studies and Biomedical Sciences.

· Further HE Studies—PhD (Orchard et al., 2000), taught master’s in Earth andEnvironment faculty, MRes for Built Environment, and MRes for BioinformaticStudents.

Development Process

The Faculty of Earth and Environment chose to cooperate in creating a generic portfolioto be used by all the undergraduates in the Schools of Geography, Earth and Environ-mental Sciences and the Institute of Transport Studies. This was the � rst all-facultylearning activity. It was thought that by working together fewer wheels would bereinvented and individual schools would bene� t from not having to generate their ownversions. The schools were well placed to handle this initiative since there was extensivegood practice that included materials in student handbooks and for monitoring tutorialprogression. Re� ective planning sheets, journals and logs were used as part of variousmodule assessments. Students in two schools already met regularly with personal tutors,either individually or in groups of � ve, to discuss academic and personal matters and toreview progress (Kneale, 1995).

In creating the portfolio the intention was that students would have the opportunity,in one place, to assess their own strengths and weaknesses, to make a record of personalsuccesses and failures and record the reasons underpinning these achievements. It wouldallow them to monitor their own progress throughout their degree. One aim was to makestudents understand that they can and should set their own academic or learningobjectives, and not simply act in response to departmental and tutors’ agendas. It washoped that the process would encourage students to identify gaps in their activities, andthat this would encourage them to seek speci� c training or work experience, and thatthrough reviewing their own objectives on a regular basis they could see the longer-termbene� ts of re� ective planning. The portfolio acts implicitly as a way of monitoringprogress and sets an agenda for conversations with peers and tutors. Formalising theprocess through the portfolio was hoped to have bene� ts in integrating consistently andin greater depth a practice that was already present albeit in a more general, lesssystematic or ad hoc manner.

Creating an undergraduate portfolio for faculty-wide use was seen as cohesive andinclusive. There was already considerable re� ective practice in certain modules andprogrammes but depending on options selected some students missed out on these skills.Re� ection was not coordinated and it did not feed through effectively to make the linkwith planning a degree and other activities from year to year, or with longer-term careerplanning. To a certain extent designing the portfolio was a matter of repackaging somematerials into a single booklet and attaching information on re� ection that was available

84

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Mos

kow

Sta

te U

niv

Bib

liote

] at

14:

19 0

7 D

ecem

ber

2013

Developing and Embedding Re� ective Portfolios

within ‘skills’ modules, rather than an enormous step forward into developing newmaterials. A draft portfolio was piloted in the spring and summer terms of 1999 usinggroups of students and staff from all the schools. Feedback led to further developmentsand the � nal version was compiled for use across the faculty starting in the academicyear 1999–2000.

Portfolio Structure and Management

The portfolio—which can be viewed and downloaded from http://www.geog.leeds.ac.uk/publications/portfolio/—is for student use and personal to that individual. There aresections to be completed at the start or end of each semester, and a separate section fordepartmental use, completed at the end of each year. The portfolio is written such thatit could be used in a ‘stand-alone’ mode, but each school recognises that to give itvalidity in the students’ opinion it needs to be integrated in curricular activities.

The portfolio’s main elements are:

· An introduction to skills and re� ection, an explanation of the role of the portfolio, thetutorial system and how the portfolio will be used in each of the schools.

· A section which asks students to complete a summary assessment of their pre-university skills, to explore why they chose this degree and university, and toarticulate ambitions for the coming year. This section is the basis for discussion atstart-of-year tutorials.

· A section on how to re� ect, with examples of re� ective statements stressing the needto articulate the evidence. Depending on the school this section is used privately, intutorials, or in a group study skills session.

· Pages for structured personal re� ection to be completed at the end of each semester.This includes a section to record modules and marks, external activities and ‘ActionPlanning’ for the next semester. This is discussed individually or as a group withtutors.

· An end-of-year summary of skills and achievements which is discussed with tutorsand � led in departmental records to inform people writing references.

· Advice on planning a CV, and details of resources in the Careers Centre and on theWorld Wide Web.

Cartoons were used to illustrate the portfolio. They were seen as important in makingsomething potentially worthy and dull seem more accessible, giving it an amusementvalue enjoyed by staff and students.

The use of the portfolio varies between the four schools but in all cases is part of theacademic or personal tutorial system. Students are prompted through email reminders tocomplete particular sections and to take them to the next tutorial. These emails are sentto tutors, prompting them to include the portfolio work in tutorial time. Students areaware that the portfolio, which underpins the tutorial process, offers equity andconsistency of treatment to all students.

Choosing Electronic or Paper-based Formats

Whether the PDP should be in an electronic or paper-based format was a topic of livelydebate. There were requests for both types of materials from staff and students. Duringuniversity-wide consultations, student representatives argued more strongly for electronic

85

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Mos

kow

Sta

te U

niv

Bib

liote

] at

14:

19 0

7 D

ecem

ber

2013

P. Kneale

versions as modern and forward-looking, and over the next 5 years some of the currentlypaper-based materials will become electronic. A number of departments includinggeography have chosen paper-based portfolios because they are used regularly intutorials and in other classes where students are not at terminals. However, the studentsmay download a Word version to their workspace if they wish to use it online.Arguments from students currently using the portfolio favour the paper version:

You need to be able to carry it around and add things when you feel like it.

The (hard copy) booklet is more private.

… you can scribble in it at random, without making a big effort to access amachine.

If I had to � nd a computer each time, I wouldn’t.

There are issues that surround students’ perceptions of privacy and therefore theirwillingness to re� ect on very personal matters; if a portfolio is held in universitycomputer � le space ‘is it really private?’

There were anecdotal observations at the design stage from staff using re� ectiverecording in their modules that encouraged the paper version. They argued strongly thatrecording at a computer encourages the relating of events and achievements by studentsbut at the expense of the process of thinking and re� ection on the experience. Musingwith a pen was thought to be more effective for re� ection.

Electronic portfolios are being developed. The PADSHE project has an Internet-basedPersonal and Academic Records system in progress (PADSHE, 2000) and the universityin Leeds is developing a portfolio that integrates personal planning with the transcript,but there are tensions in a move to entirely e-based systems. Creating electronic logs hasthe potential to reduce reproduction costs. However, until all students have their ownportable machines the issue of accessibility remains. Active, integrated re� ection intutorials and lectures cannot be achieved until these sites are networked electronically.

The Master’s Portfolio

The structure and content of the one-year taught masters portfolio draws heavily on theexperience derived from the undergraduate process. Its chief advantage is perhaps inoffering an opportunity to remind master’s students who are deeply involved in intensiveacademic modules that there are other bene� ts from their degrees. It also includesinformation about the university careers centre and about electronic access to careersinformation and CV systems. Master’s students were generally complementary about itsvalue, and particularly highlighted the usefulness of the ‘wake-up reminder’ to startapplying for jobs and as a counterbalance to the demands of essays and projects. Anumber of master’s students used the checklist of skills and report that they are nowappreciating and valuing what they have achieved on their course in addition to theacademic knowledge. However, they also comment that their use of the portfolio is moremental than physical—more of an aide-memoire than a written record.

Costs

Development costs were met from the RARA project funding. The coordinators met ona number of occasions to discuss the needs of the different schools and agree the maincomponents. The cost per 44-page undergraduate booklet, printed centrally, is £1.11 per

86

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Mos

kow

Sta

te U

niv

Bib

liote

] at

14:

19 0

7 D

ecem

ber

2013

Developing and Embedding Re� ective Portfolios

student. This is met from school budgets. This apparent addition to school costs is offsetby the inclusion within the portfolio of materials that had previously been copied locallyand more expensively. The portfolio is utilised within existing curriculum and tutorialarrangements, so there are no additional tutoring costs. In this respect the portfolioprovides a focus that enhances existing data collection, and links end-of-year, tutor andreference report forms. New staff are briefed about the use of the portfolio within theirinduction programme, which again has a minimal cost.

Use of the portfolio in geography is prompted by the coordinator’s emails. This,together with an annual review to revise and update the portfolio, amounts to about oneday’s workload per academic year for the coordinator.

Student Evaluations

Students’ views were canvassed through written comments and focus-group interviewswith an independent external assessor from the Centre for Recording Achievement togain an objective assessment of the portfolios’ usefulness (Jackson et al., 2000). Thestaff involved in delivering the materials were asked about the implementation processthrough informal discussions. The feedback from both students and staff is generallypositive, with the usual range from scepticism to enthusiasm. What was noticeable wasa consistent absence of requests to abandon the process. While there were individualswho did not engage with the process as actively as might be wished, they all, staff andstudents, saw it as a helpful.

Undergraduate Comments

Undergraduate students’ views were canvassed on both the procedure and its impactthrough focus groups and by sampling the written responses in 60 randomly selectedend-of-level-one reports for tutors. Within the whole cohort there was a clear bias inusage: generally female and mature students expressed the more positive views, admittedto completing the portfolio and articulated their appreciation of the process.

Level one students’ comments after the � rst 6 months of use were dominated by thosewho found helpful the sections on developing a personal timetable and prioritising. Theassistance in getting into the ‘university style’ was compared favourably with theexperience of colleagues in departments without the PDP:

It felt like a chore but it made a real difference in the � rst few weeks. I thinkI got myself more organised than I might have done.

Compared with my hall mates in … I think I have more idea about what I amsupposed to be doing.

It helped to get you to understand what was going on.

But this is counterbalanced by those who were less involved:

It was too much to do at the start of the course.

My tutor didn’t push it too hard and I found I could do OK in our discussions.

Looking at the responses from those in later years they generally break down into threegroups:

· Students who were starting to make use of the document strategically: “I use it toestablish myself as a student and to compare what I am now to what I was six

87

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Mos

kow

Sta

te U

niv

Bib

liote

] at

14:

19 0

7 D

ecem

ber

2013

P. Kneale

months ago”. “I have been able to see where I have been and where I am going, withmore clarity”. “I didn’t really think it was much use at � rst, but after 18 months I cansee that the notes we made at the end of the � rst exams were useful”. “I was surprised,it seemed to be a waste of time at � rst, but I now realise what a help doing someplanning can be”. “Recording helped me realise what I have learnt this year”.

· Those who recognised the positive potential of the approach: “If I took time to readthe portfolio, I am sure I would � nd it very valuable in aiming for the future”. “Itreminds you what you should be doing”. “Maybe I would use it at the end of the yearto re� ect upon the whole year’s work”. “I know I should be using it more, I am notgood at this sort of thing, so having to do it for my tutor would be useful”.

· Those who were dismissive of the recording process in particular: “I assess what I amdoing myself, I don’t need a book to help me”. “I don’t need to write downexperiences and achievements, I think I can remember”. “It’s too early to plan ahead,I don’t know what I am doing next week”.

There was, however, an important caveat which emerged in both written and focus-groupcomments: “I think (this type of) support is good, but talking to someone on a regularbasis is better and more productive than writing it down” (Jackson et al., 2000).

Sampling students’ statements at the end of level one, those discussed with their tutorsand held on � le in the school showed that 92 per cent were happy or very happy withtheir geography programme choices and progress. The majority expressed variations on“I am pleased with my progress so far, but aim to improve next year” and “I seem tobe doing enough to get by at the moment, aim to step it up next year”. The main areasidenti� ed for future development were: essay writing (34 per cent), time management(32 per cent), reading (24 per cent), planning ahead (12 per cent), working harder (12per cent). The majority of students made statements of intent such as “I will organise mytime better”, “I will work harder through the week”, “I am aiming to hand in assessmentsearlier in future”, “Do more hours” and “I’d also like to become more interested ingeography and do more background reading”. There were relatively few examples ofaction planning although this is the style encouraged. One exception: “Next year I willtry to continue my reading. I have set a target of two extracts a week per subject.”Overall the statements made at the end of level one are dominated by good intentions,but there are very few examples of action planning. The responses suggest that there ismore evidence of Killion and Todnem’s (1991) re� ection on action, and rather lessre� ection for action. But while the evidence may not be visible on paper at the end oflevel one, the fact that the group has gone through the PDP process may encourage moreconstructive planning for the next semester.

The format of the PDP was agreed by the majority of students to be repetitive, askingthe same questions at the end of each semester. Students asked for more exemplarstatements for each section to remind them of the style of re� ective writing. Makingthese exemplars more subject relevant was also requested. They are rather general to � tthe needs of the four schools.

Master’s Students’ Comments

Interviews and email comments were solicited from geography MA and MSc students,which allowed for privacy in response. The majority of students included positivemessages on being reminded about time management and planning and: “This is reallyuseful, I was beginning to worry over Christmas about what to do next and how to apply

88

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Mos

kow

Sta

te U

niv

Bib

liote

] at

14:

19 0

7 D

ecem

ber

2013

Developing and Embedding Re� ective Portfolios

for jobs”. Where master’s students were not Leeds graduates the information about thecareers centre services was particularly welcome:

This is useful because the MA doesn’t really talk about the skills at all, the MAis very academic which is what I wanted, but it is good to get the skills pointedout. We are doing lots of things that you don’t normally think about puttingon a CV.

I am not sure whether I will � ll it all in, but it is very useful to read andremember what I have been doing.

The master’s student’s comments picked up on the CV element speci� cally and hadsome useful comments about the timing of the arrival of the � rst draft portfolio. “I thinkthis had more of an impact arriving in January, rather than as yet another piece of paperat the start of the year”.

Part-time and overseas students were particularly enthusiastic, � nding it helpful withtimetabling and prioritising. From a student whose � rst language was not English:

I think it is quite useful to follow step by step own improvement. Because itis devised in section and each section is sub-divided, each one can understandexactly where one has the problems or the strong points. For example, I havefound the areas where I have improved (time management, literature research,information technology and a little bit in writing skills). Students can under-stand where they must increase the work and where, instead are enough able.Each one will have its different goal and different work timetable that can beorganise with the help of this portfolio. It is like a ‘Identity Skills Card’ ofeveryone.

Overall the MA and MSc students were impressed and keen that it should continue inthe future. There were no votes to ‘forget it for future years’. They suggested that thedegree of diligence in use would be very variable but its prompting role was valuable.Generally students rated the portfolios useful in providing a skills framework to “helpyou see where you need to improve”, and for analysing and evaluating their ownprogress.

Tutors’ Comments

Staff re� ections were, as always, diverse and challenging. The ‘another set of paper-work’ response in the � rst instance is very understandable. The fact that much of thepaperwork incorporated in the PDP was familiar in style and format meant that it wasnot new or overwhelming. There were no complaints at the launch and brie� ngs.Differences in staff involvement came through in the discussions: groups with tutors whohave used re� ective practice as part of their research or in career development processesseemed to be more involved.

Overall tutors were complementary about the structure and format of the booklet. Theintroduction to re� ection and skills and the link to the workplace were seen to be clearand pertinent. “The inclusion of examples of re� ective statements at the start helped thetutorial discussions and generally they [students] were good at relating their experiencesand making evaluative links”. The level of detail was described as positive andappropriate, but could perhaps be “made more challenging for � nal year students”. Themajority of tutors agreed that “getting the portfolio in use at the � rst tutorial helpedstudents start talking about their background and expectations in a positive way”. The

89

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Mos

kow

Sta

te U

niv

Bib

liote

] at

14:

19 0

7 D

ecem

ber

2013

P. Kneale

regularity of the structure imposes “some constraints but the start and end of semesterstructure is about right. If you looked at it more often it would be tedious, less often andit makes no sense. The activities would be forgotten.”

The degree of attention reportedly paid to the document was variable:

In my (level 2) group the two girls were noticeably more serious aboutcompleting the log. One was very diligent and had clearly put a good deal ofthought into her responses. The lads were less engaged. They were happy todiscuss the issues in the tutorial, and did well, but they were not completingthe log or using it to prepare for the discussion.

This mirrors a number of tutors’ experiences that “some of the group feel that they knowwhat they think and cannot be bothered to put it on paper”. Overall the tutors’ experienceis that, as the students’ comments indicated, mature and female students are the moreattentive users.

It is possible that the PDP process bene� ts students who might be naturally quieter andshyer but compiling evidence for this is impractical. The fact that students complete thisre� ective element in advance of the tutor meeting may provide a platform for morephilosophical and forward-looking discussions:

The discussions with my tutees are usually positive. One advantage is thatmost have completed the paperwork beforehand, so they arrive prepared todiscuss their plans for the future. Ideas and suggestions may not be brilliant,but they are, perhaps, more thought through than is my previous experiencesof such discussions.

Each member of the group was ready with something to say, so maybe thereis less meandering in the discussions.

The portfolio seems to have the bene� t of switching the discussion focus from the tutorand modules to the individual and his/her achievements and gains:

The majority of discussions led back to time-management matters. Overall this seemsto be the students’ biggest worry. We might have discussed these issues in the absenceof the portfolio, but it certainly highlighted them:

I don’t think my tutees were a particularly bright or committed group, but thePDP gave them a new opportunity to review their modules. I found a studentmaking comments that I am not sure he would have expressed otherwise. Butthen he might have, you can’t tell.

Essentially the problem is that the tutors’ comments re� ect their experience with thesecohorts. We cannot know how individuals would have performed without the PDPprompt.

While this is unsatisfactory it should be set against tutors’ agreement that the processis productive and positive. That it:

… is consistent in making everyone consider skills in a coordinated way. Mylevel 2 module has plenty skills but I don’t really say much about them. My[tutorial] group discussed the practical skills involved and three of the � ve hadmade some notes—which is maybe more than previous groups would have.

The log has some pages that are entirely private and other sections that students sharewith their tutors. “It was clear that the more diligent students are � lling in the log fairlyfully. Some were making a one or two word response to each section.” One tutordiscussed the nature of honesty in the different responses from some students:

90

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Mos

kow

Sta

te U

niv

Bib

liote

] at

14:

19 0

7 D

ecem

ber

2013

Developing and Embedding Re� ective Portfolios

X had clearly embellished his tutor-read statement because he knew I wasgoing to use it when writing a reference. Shouldn’t we expect them to be morehonest? Are we driving students who have few outside interests to lie on theirforms?

This concern about honesty is interesting. If a student understands that he/she ismotivated to give a tutor a rather fuller account of his/her year’s activities then this maymotivate him/her in the future and at the least provide some food for thought. Logjottings may be minimal and disjointed but if they prompt later thoughts, whether forCVs or in discussion, they have a bene� t, albeit an unquanti� able one.

In the staff feedback the pay-off was consistently discussed in terms of longer-termjob applications and workplace links. Despite the aim of PDP to encourage students toenhance their re� ection and evaluation skills during their degree for their own academicbene� t, this was not mentioned voluntarily by any of the tutors. Tutors were thereforeasked whether they could see evidence of re� ective thinking and planning comingthrough in the students’ academic work, and they were consistent in saying ‘no’. “It isimpossible to say how well they would have done in its absence”. “We don’t havebenchmarks from their pre-university ability to test against in a meaningful manner.” “Idon’t think the tutees see it from that angle, for most it is a chore to be completed. Idon’t think the majority are using it consciously as they write or think.” This suggeststhat there is more to be done in introducing the PDP to both staff and students. A numberof the tutors clearly saw it primarily as a workplace and CV- prompting activity, andperhaps this is in� uencing the students’ views.

University careers advisers were interviewed about the way in which students wereusing the PDP. They agreed that students from across the university disciplines who havebeen involved in a PDP process have a greater insight into their own skills and canexpress themselves in the ‘skills jargon’ more readily than students where PDP has yetto be introduced. They comment on the generally “greater maturity of students inexpressing themselves in applications and at interview and the increasing level ofself-con� dence” than exempli� ed by students who are familiar with the re� ection skills.As with any initiative, “there are a few who it seems to have completely passed by”, butthe majority are “engaging with the ideas and understanding the implications”.

Discussion

These PDP materials were developed ahead of the QAA (2000) statement and exceed theQAA minimum standard. They were made available to undergraduate and taughtmaster’s students and a university-wide portfolio was passed to research students(Orchard et al., 2000). But to what extent were the PDP aims met? To recap it shouldhelp students:

1. become more effective, independent and con� dent self-directed learners;2. understand how they are learning and relate their learning to a wider context;3. improve their general skills for study and career management;4. articulate their personal goals and evaluate progress towards their achievement; and5. encourage a positive attitude to learning throughout life (QAA, 2000).

Discussions with tutors lead to the conclusion that objectively testing for enhancementagainst points 1, 2, 4 and 5 is next to impossible. Certain students may be feeling more

91

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Mos

kow

Sta

te U

niv

Bib

liote

] at

14:

19 0

7 D

ecem

ber

2013

P. Kneale

comfortable and con� dent, but is the PDP the cause? At best it will be only part of thepicture. The careers advisers’ comments suggest that students involved with PDPdevelop the language skills of re� ection and evaluation and are perhaps better equippedto engage with employers, so perhaps point 3 can be said to be met to some extent. Forsome students the ‘chore’ element of re� ection may be a negative aspect that will nothelp with point 5.

One aim of the PDP was that academic staff should bene� t through the contributionthe process makes to helping students to be more independent and self-con� dentlearners. The CRE (1999) project evaluation suggested that “though it is variable,the process can improve the quality of experience for tutors and tutees”. Morepragmatically, staff bene� ts include having more fully and effectively completedpaperwork collected consistently across all students. In an audit culture the portfoliogives consistent academic support and guidance. It can help staff to monitor studentprogress, and may also have bene� ts in terms of student retention, though this is not anissue here.

Academic staff attitudes towards the re� ection process are varied (Bullard & McLean,2000), as is the student appreciation outlined above. Perhaps it is not surprising thatdiscussions with academic tutors suggest that those who have kept portfolios themselvesas part of their training process are more supportive and more proactive in encouragingstudents to re� ect as part of their learning. As has been noted elsewhere the mature andwomen students are more likely to complete and respond to the PDP tasks (Burkill etal., 2000).

These are personal development portfolios and not assessed. It is part of theunderstanding that areas of the � le are for private use and that the student chooses whatto discuss with a tutor. Acceptance of the process by tutors was probably eased becauseassessment was not an issue, albeit much discussed at each stage of development andimplementation. The PDP provides students with a very good example of formativelearning support. The downside of non-assessment is that some students will choose togive it less attention. With assessment there would be more ‘creative writing’. It isarguable that discussions can be more honest and potentially of more value when marksare not an issue.

As student numbers expand and departments use many tutors, the PDP provides acommon opportunity for discussions of personal development. The PDP gives aperception of equality of access to all students. While some students valued theopportunity to place their thoughts and comments on paper they are more appreciativeof personal contact time and staff availability. In preparing students for consultations thePDP has the potential to make the discussions more fruitful.

Developing a portfolio between coordinators from three schools worked well. Theywere committed to the project and had materials to build upon. Pooling ideas, andcomparing and integrating appropriate departmental practice made acceptance by tutorsrelatively straightforward. It provided a � nancial saving in pulling together forms thatpreviously had been distributed individually, and has become part of a tutorial orpersonal tutorial system. The coordinators felt that this bottom-up, faculty-developmentapproach brought colleagues on board, and integrated materials into the curriculum in away that would not have been possible had the university imposed a single portfolio tobe used by all students.

To use the portfolio in any way, from idle reference to direct adoption, downloadcopies from http://www.geog.leeds.ac.uk/publications/portfolio/

Further information on the R&RA project can be found at http://www.leeds.ac.uk/pdp/

92

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Mos

kow

Sta

te U

niv

Bib

liote

] at

14:

19 0

7 D

ecem

ber

2013

Developing and Embedding Re� ective Portfolios

Acknowledgements

Thanks are due to my fellow faculty coordinators, Jane Francis and Janet Humphreys,to Rob Ward from the ‘Centre for Recording Achievement’ for discussions andconducting the focus groups, and to all members of the University of Leeds Recordingand Reviewing Achievement project.

Correspondence: Pauline E. Kneale, School of Geography, University of Leeds, LeedsLS2 9JT, UK. Tel: 1 44 (0) 113 2333340. Email: [email protected]

REFERENCES

BULLARD, J.E. & MCLEAN, M. (2000) Jumping through hoops?: philosophy and practice expressed ingeographers ’ teaching portfolios , Journal of Geography in Higher Education, 24, pp. 37–52.

BURKILL, S., COREY, D. & HEALEY, M. (2000) Improving Students’ Communication Skills (Cheltenham,Geography Discipline Network Guide).

COLE, D.J., RYAN, C.W., KICK, F. & MATHIES, B.K. (2000) Portfolios Across the Curriculum and Beyond,2nd edn (Thousand Oaks, CA, Corwin Press).

CENTRE FOR RECORDING ACHIEVEMENT (CRE) (1999) Developing a Progress File for Higher Education:a report of the seminar to support consideratio n of the WCP-SCoP-QAA Consultation Paper[http://www.dfee.gov.uk/heqe/wigan.htm]

CENTRE FOR RECORDING ACHIEVEMENT (CRE) (2000) Centre for Recording Achievement (http://www.recordingachievement.org/)

DARLING, L.F. (2001) Portfolio as practice: the narratives of emerging teachers , Teaching and TeacherEducation, 17, pp. 107–121.

INSTITUTE FOR LEARNING & TEACHING (ILT) (2000) Guidance on Completing the Initial Route ApplicationForms [http://www.ilt.ac.uk/membership/additional.htm]

JACKSON, P., WARD, R., REES JONES, P. & BUTCHER, V. (2000) Developing a Strategic Model forRecording Achievement, report by University of Leeds to DfEE.

KILLION, J. & TODNEM, G. (1991) A process for personal theory building, Educational Leadership , 48 (7)pp. 14–16.

KNEALE, P.E. (1995) Encouraging student responsibilit y for learning through developing skills, pro� lingand records of achievement , in: A. JENKINS & A. WARD (Eds) Developing Skill-based Curriculathrough the Disciplines: case studies of good practice in geography, SEDA Paper 89 (Birmingham,SEDA) [http://www.chelt.ac.uk /el/philg/gdn/seda/kneale.htm] .

LIVINGSTONE, I. & MATTHEWS, H. (2000) Assessing and Recording a Skills Based Curriculum(Cheltenham, Geography Discipline Network Guide).

LUSID (2000) Liverpool University Student Interactive Database, Centre for Careers and AcademicPractice, University of Liverpool [http://lusid.liv.ac.uk /].

NATIONAL COMMITTEE OF INQUIRY INTO HIGHER EDUCATION (1998) Higher Education in the LearningSociety (Norwich, HMSO).

ORCHARD, M., CONWAY, J. & WARD, R. (2000) Training Research Students for Employability FinalReport: a collaborativ e project between the universities of Leeds, Shef� eld and York, 1998–2000[http://www.dfee.gov.uk /heqe/ks leeds rep.doc] .

PADSHE (2000) The University of Nottingham PADSHE (Personal and Academic Development forStudents in Higher Education) Project [http://www.nottingham.ac.uk/padshe/].

Quality Assurance Agency for Higher Education (QAA) (2000) Developing a Progress File for HE:summary report of the consultative exercise , [(http://www.qaa.ac.uk/crntwork/prog� lehe/summary/in-troduction.htm].

RAPID (2000) RAPID Progress File: recording achievement for professional and individua l develop-ment, University of Loughborough [http://rapid.lboro.ac.uk /].

RECORDING AND REVIEWING ACHIEVEMENT (R&RA) (2000) A Strategic Model for Developing Methodsand Materials for Recording Achievement in Traditional Universities, University of Leeds [http://www.leeds.ac.uk/PDP/].

SELDIN, P. (1997) The Teaching Portfolio (Boston, MA, Anker Publishing).

93

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Mos

kow

Sta

te U

niv

Bib

liote

] at

14:

19 0

7 D

ecem

ber

2013

P. Kneale

UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON (2000) Career Portfolio Basics: why are professional s using portfolios now?[http://depts.washington.edu /geogjobs /Careers/pfolbasics.html] .

WEEKS, P. (1996) The teaching portfolio: a professiona l development tool, Internationa l Journal forAcademic Development, 1(1) pp. 70–74.

94

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Mos

kow

Sta

te U

niv

Bib

liote

] at

14:

19 0

7 D

ecem

ber

2013