Engaging with electronic portfolios: identity and

dwelling

Peter Chalk

London Metropolitan University

FoC seminar 26.11.08

Why go electronic?

• Increasing expectation by employers – will improve students’ employability (currently low at London Met)

• Part of London Met’s e-enablement policy (all modules to use VLE)

• Students’ evidence/ artefacts increasingly digital – multimedia/ CV – as are tools

• Improves sharing with multiple viewers

Foundation Degree Community Sports Coaching students

‘Non-traditional’ students

• Contested term: ‘modern’ better?

• Perceived as ‘deficit model’:– Class– First in family– ‘Non-standard’ qualifications, i.e. ‘less’– Race

• Alternative view – diversity as positive self-identity, alternative cultural capital…

Evidence of diverse prior achievement, ‘digital natives’

Towards an academic (transformative) identity

Evaluation of coaching session –evidence of reflection

SMART analysis – use of a PDP tool

Learning object (assignment) – a collection of files

Positive image – role model for non-traditional student – FDSc students enthusiastic compilers of ePortfolios, happy to use web 2 services – ‘distributed e-portfolio’

Tutor’s initial template for Events Management (M level) ePortfolio

Evaluation

• Evaluation of the Autumn pilot was carried out by – Two questionnaires to students, – Two workshops for staff, Nov & Jan– Email discussion, – Observation, and – Analysis of actual student ePortfolios

Selective feedback from 3 staff

• Very few students not in the pilot tutorial group chose to use the ePortfolio.

• Very few students have engaged any more than was absolutely necessary. 30% experienced a significant degree of difficulty in using the system

• The ePortfolio was not assessed in any way so little engagement: one uploaded their CV, two provided some evidence of reflection

Staff feedback 2 (events management)

• 71% of the students in one tutorial group used the ePortfolio for their reflective commentary, and 28% of these had invited guests to view it (but not the module leader),

• In another group only 37.5% used the ePortfolio to record their reflections and none invited in guests,

• Students’ reasons for non-engagement: costly, confusing, unstable internet, too much effort.

Staff feedback 3 (film studies)

• ePortfolio is an improvement over paper-based PDP, customisable by student, told “this is London Met’s Facebook”, but it’s not as user-friendly,

• Tutor can see lots of potential but needs to be integrated into teaching and learning throughout the course and not just on one module,

• Can use multimedia binder to store short films, only place to store seminar logs throughout their course.

Student feedback 1 (events)

• “I don’t think I will find it useful since a lot of my courseworks have to be scanned if I want it in my portfolio and that’s quite time consuming for me”,

• “I am using the reflections tool… it will be useful”,

• “I use the blog, not the CV tool as I use my own version, I don’t like the layout”

Student feedback 2 (Sports FDSc)

• “I find this portfolio system safe and also fun… I can post my work on it and add other accessories, e.g. poems, pictures, videos etc. Using this portfolio has been one of my greatest experiences”

• Non-traditional students compiled ePortfolios – introduced across whole course, assessed and supervised in lab.

Student feedback 3 (maths employability)

• 16 students filled in November questionnaire with 90% stating they had uploaded files and added guests, 70% posted a comment and adapted the presentation, only 40% using the CV tool.

• The most positive ratings were for guest control, showcasing achievement, improving employability, developing self and subject awareness, reflecting on progress.

• The least positive ratings were for developing creativity and learning about ePortfolios.

Results of evaluation questionnaires

• In November generally positive on a Likert scale questionnaire about features

• In January, at the end of the modules, a free text email drew 26 responses, 6 positive and 20 negative

• Evidence from ePortfolios seen by author is patchy (CVs uploaded here, blog written there) except Sports Coaching – see earlier slide – for showcasing/ feedback & session evaluation/ SMART/ standards evidence/ learning object design

Towards a theoretical understanding…

• ‘Otherness’ inherent in diversity not a barrier, but can be a tool to help realise academic excellence

• ePortfolio provided a dwelling space (Heidegger 1971)– “…Only if we are capable of dwelling, only then

can we build…”– Chantelle’s ‘Brian Lara learning object box’

Another explanation?

• Sports achievers use immediate feedback

• Knowledge of Results (KoR) theory:– Fast, positive feedback is inspirational

• ePortfolio, perhaps, also provided a form of immediate feedback, e.g. achievement evidence showcased on web

• Tentative suggestion: transference of skill/ expectation/ experience going on?

Preliminary findings• London Met has decided not to adopt one single

ePortfolio system at present,• Insufficient evidence of ‘stickability’,• Need user friendly ePortfolio system, integrated

into all aspects of the student’s life, including regular assessment related tasks and enthusiastically supported by academic staff,

• Considering alternatives (new Blackboard, Pebble Pad, ELGG/Moodle, Web 2 Services),

• Researching staff/student opinion…

Ongoing research

• Working with the IV Cohort of the International Coalition for ePortfolio Research, using repertory grid analysis technique of personal construct theory (Kelly 1955, Steed & McDonnell 2003)

• Identifying the key features required for the future ‘stickability’ of ePortfolios in HE

Repertory Grid Analysis

• ePortfolio research group wanted to ask the question: “Why are staff and students resistant to PDP?” starting with how staff keep their own portoflio

• First, identify a category such as ‘storing, presenting and reflecting upon our own evidence of achievement’ (e.g. research papers, reports, other products)

RGA – selecting elements to compare

• What elements in the above discourse are important?

• Examples:– Web site - PC disc – USB - protected web site– Blog - Wiki – Stored emails - Diary– Professional portfolio – CV tool– Brainstorming tool - Action plan tool

RGA (continued) constructs

• Choose any 3 elements (and select two alike and the other different ‘in some way’ – this is the personal construct (& its opposite) – and repeat

• Grade all the elements in a grid for each pair of constructs (including the ‘ideal’)

• Analyse the pattern of graded constructs to identify important features required for ‘ideal’ ePortfolio

Protocols

• Using Google Blogger as reflective journal on HEO etc

• Student obtains Google account

• Creates blog, names URL (own name best)

• Adds tutor as guest, tutor gets email

• Problems of management, assessment

Web 2 Technical issues

• Google Blogger, for example:• Sometimes not easy to get into, have to

enter un/pw every time and text from image

• Student not set up permissions correctly• Problems with cookie settings etc• Blogs disabled if subjected to virus/spam

attack

Evidence of engagement

Hard to manage web 2 blogs but worth the effort if small group

Learn about students’ identity & transformation

Students can relate to us with their achievements ‘as equals’?

Distributed e-portfolios are very powerful expressions of identity…

And personalised learning environments

Far more entries than in WebLearn journal (similar number of students)

Therefore, Google generation more confident, web 2 pioneers, ‘digital natives’, happy to dwell (& therefore build) in web 2 cloud?

Emerging findings

Chalk Tonks debate: Are our students self-reflexive?

 "... I also do digital photography. I tend to make all my work in black and white. I believe that every time we look at a black and white picture we see something new as our brain puts in new colours. It is very challenging to take a picture like that and most of the times it takes dozens or even hundreds of raw images to find it. It is not just creativity but a very hard work that requires to be patient in order to results."

It kind of meets the definition "self-reflexive, a term applied to literary works that openly reflect upon their own processes of artful composition" at least in terms of his photography.

Tentative Conclusion…

• My point is that these *new first year* Computing students bring with them to University a self reflexive self that we should be building on. Their personal portfolios give us a unique insight into their inner self, and confirm all the positive reasons for loving to teach here and, finally, by creating their own personal space in the internet cloud they seem to be expressing themselves more freely, more artistically, and yes, more self reflexively.

Metapedia: "To be self-reflexive when analyzing a certain object of study, is to take into account one's own background

and cultural baggage" - drawing on the work of Bourdieu.

• "What started as an interest in just using computers has developed into a growing desire to understand how a collection of simple ideas and components can interact to produce an entity as complex and adaptable as a computer. My first memory was the desire to open up the computer and see what was inside. That childish fascination has not left me but has deepened over the years; now after 27 years I have not only built, upgraded and modified many computers but have discovered that software interests me equally as much. You can check out some of my modding work on my website http://vypatech.net/, which is yet to be completed."

References

• Blundell, D. and Cunningham, P. (2007) ‘Community Sport Coaches as Social Pedagogues and Agents of Citizenship Education’, CiCe Nordic Conference - Citizenship Education in Society - A challenge for the Nordic countries at Malmö University, School of Teacher Education, Malmö, Sweden, 5th and 6th October, 2007.

• Chalk, P (2007) ’The WebLearn Portfolio and HEO pilot – implications for a blended learning approach’, workshop at London Met Teaching & Learning Conference 10/7/07. URL: homepages.north.londonmet.ac.uk/~chalkp/res/pdp-july-conf.ppt.

• Chalk, P. (2008) ‘Introducing an electronic portfolio: results of a one semester pilot’, London Metropolitan University PDP Group Report.

• Conole, Grainne ‘Disruptive technologies or new pedagogical opportunities?’, Keynote Address, Eduserv Foundation Symposium 2008, Accessed `19.10.08:http://www.eduserv.org.uk/foundation/symposium/2008/presentations/grainneconole

• Downes, S. (2008), ‘My Digital Identity’, Keynote Address to the 2nd Pan-American and Francophone ePortfolio Conference: ePortfolio and Digital Identity, Concordia University on 5-7 May 2008. Accessed on 19/10/08 fromhttp://halfanhour.blogspot.com/2008/10/my-digital-identity.html

• Heidegger, M. (1971) Poetry, Language, Thought. New York: Harper and Row.

• Kelly, G A (1955) The psychology of personal constructs, vol 1 and 2, Norton, New York.

• Steed, A., & McDonnell, J. (2003). Experiences with repertory grid analysis for investigating effectiveness of virtual environments. In Proceedings of the 6th International Workshop on Presence. Aalborg, Denmark, 6-8 October 2003, www.cs.ucl.ac.uk/staff/A.Steed/presence2003_fourpage.pdf (accessed 15.2.08)

Acknowledgements

• The author would like to thank the contributions of the module leaders to this pilot project and to this paper: Mehryar Adibpour, Sarah Atchia, David Blundell, Dafna Hardbattle, Maureen Kendal, Justin Lance, Tom Lunt, Rosemary Stott and Heather Wanstall.

• The author is a member of Cohort IV of the International Coalition for Electronic Portfolio Research (http://ncepr.org/).