1. E-portfolio for teachers initial training Rossi P.G., University of Macerata, University of Udine, pg.rossi@unimc.it Varisco B.M., University of Padua, bianca.varisco@unipd.it Alessandri G., University of Macerata, g.alessandri@unimc.it Giannandrea L., University of Macerata, l.giannandrea@unimc.it Magnoler P., University of Udine, p.magnoler@virgilio.it Introduction Models Structure Analisys Evaluation Conclusion

2. La Rochelle 28 october – E-portfolio – pg.rossi@unimc.it 2/42 Implicits and critic elements Theorical referral to. constructivism VS deeply transmissive practical methods; to a children-centred model VS projects of activities, where children has just to listen and fill printed forms; to children potential VS statement where children potential in learning is under evaluated, mediators are used to simplify and the language is rich in diminutive. Introduction Models Structure Analisys Evaluation Conclusion

3. La Rochelle 28 october – E-portfolio – pg.rossi@unimc.it 3/42 In which way? Involving the student himself, his/her history, his/her behaviour; re-building the meaning of experiences by telling; re-crossing theorical-practical paths; discussing with peers and experts pre, in e post action; growing self-awareness and self- assessment. Introduction Models Structure Analisys Evaluation Conclusion

4. La Rochelle 28 october – E-portfolio – pg.rossi@unimc.it 4/42 How? A laboratoty to realize a discussion (like professional e-portfolio), where the students are requested to think back to the reasons of that Faculty enrolment, their initial and following expectations. (Varisco – Uni. Padua) A forum negotiation activity involving students of two Italian Universities (Padua and Udine), to analyse if and how the same course changed into the two universities to improve students' educational design skills. The main activity was the e-portfolio. Introduction Models Structure Analisys Evaluation Conclusion

5. La Rochelle 28 october – E-portfolio – pg.rossi@unimc.it 5/42 Research hypothesis -to improve teachers skills and have more explicit models and knowledge; -to support a continuous ring between theory and practice, expert models and students conceptions; -to increase the students' awareness; -to change and personalize the University students' study method. Introduction Models Structure Analisys Evaluation Conclusion

6. La Rochelle 28 october – E-portfolio – pg.rossi@unimc.it 6/42 The reference models Danielson, C., & Abrutyn, L. (1997) An introduction to using portfolios in the classroom. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development. Barrett, H. C., (2000) “Create Your Own Electronic Portfolio Using Off-the-Shelf Software to Showcase Your Own or Student Work” In Learning & Leading with Technology, April, 2000 Takona, J. (2002) Pre-service Teacher Portfolio Development, Writers Club Press, New York Introduction Models Structure Analisys Evaluation Conclusion

7. La Rochelle 28 october – E-portfolio – pg.rossi@unimc.it 7/42 J. Takona the materials Collection, the Reflection, that is a dialogue between the subject and materials, considering goals and results, the Reduction, where materials are connected with standards, the Display consisting on organising the materials to publish them. (2002) Introduction Models Structure Analisys Evaluation Conclusion

8. La Rochelle 28 october – E-portfolio – pg.rossi@unimc.it 8/42 Danielson - Abrutyn Collection: to point out the aim, the user, the portfolio future use; Selection: to select the materials, pointing out the selection parameters according to the didactic aims already established; Reflection: to include reflections in every section and a general one; Projection: to check the materials and reflections about learning, in order to point out reached aims and select the future goals. (1997) Introduction Models Structure Analisys Evaluation Conclusion

9. La Rochelle 28 october – E-portfolio – pg.rossi@unimc.it 9/42 H. Barrett To replace Projection with Direction; To add the Connection ( the contribution of the network is emphasised, the network as epistemological resource). Introduction Models Structure Analisys Evaluation Conclusion

10. La Rochelle 28 october – E-portfolio – pg.rossi@unimc.it 10/42 Research model 1.Selection 2.Connection 3.Telling 4.Direction 5.Orientation Each step has a different tool Introduction Models Structure Analisys Evaluation Conclusion

11. La Rochelle 28 october – E-portfolio – pg.rossi@unimc.it 11/42 1. Selection The students insert text fragments that are meaningful in their process of professionality building. Inserted materials come from book, notes, from their personal diary, their projects, sentences of pupils. (the students proof their educational philosophy) Introduction Models Structure Analisys Evaluation Conclusion

12. La Rochelle 28 october – E-portfolio – pg.rossi@unimc.it 12/42 2. Connection The students create a map combining the previously selected fragments with keywords meaningful for didactics project (project, program, evaluation, listening, kinds of project, mediators). Map nodes may contain texts written on purpose inside the map tools, or fragments/lexias taken from the first phase blog, or from the forum messages. Introduction Models Structure Analisys Evaluation Conclusion

13. La Rochelle 28 october – E-portfolio – pg.rossi@unimc.it 13/42 3. Telling The students define their apprenticeship experiences according to their new theorical knowledge and they write a narration (Bruner,1990). Re-arranging together the fragments in a texts, the student gives his interpretation of events, kaleidoscopically reconstructing his identity (Wenger, 2002). redundance = coherence and learning Introduction Models Structure Analisys Evaluation Conclusion

14. La Rochelle 28 october – E-portfolio – pg.rossi@unimc.it 14/42 4. Direction The students fill online a partly structured form, where they should point out positive and negative aspects of their knowledge, learnt skills, and competencies not yet developed. Introduction Models Structure Analisys Evaluation Conclusion

15. La Rochelle 28 october – E-portfolio – pg.rossi@unimc.it 15/42 5. Orientation The students represent their idea of teaching practitioner, as reflexive practitioner with a map. Introduction Models Structure Analisys Evaluation Conclusion

16. La Rochelle 28 october – E-portfolio – pg.rossi@unimc.it 16/42 Features E-portfolio is a section of the online learning environment; The environment and the e-portfolio tools allow to link and combine writings. Different rethorical methods are required to write the e-portfolio materials ( linear narrative structure, networked structure ) In the e-portfolio sections, students use different networked tools and languages. Introduction Models Structure Analisys Evaluation Conclusion

17. La Rochelle 28 october – E-portfolio – pg.rossi@unimc.it 17/42 Net and Data mining Introduction Models Structure Analisys Evaluation Conclusion

18. La Rochelle 28 october – E-portfolio – pg.rossi@unimc.it 18/42 Environment + E-portfolio Teacher materials Student productions Repository Reflection, sharing New patchwork productions Assessment and self assessment Introduction Models Structure Analisys Evaluation Conclusion E-portfolio

19. La Rochelle 28 october – E-portfolio – pg.rossi@unimc.it 19/42 Activity Where: Education Faculty University of Udine, University of Macerata Topic: Istructional design and Apprendiship (3° anno) Partecipants: 89 (2003), 119 (2004). Duration: 1 Year Teacher: PG Rossi Introduction Models Structure Analisys Evaluation Conclusion

20. La Rochelle 28 october – E-portfolio – pg.rossi@unimc.it 20/42 Research Evaluation Four methods: 1.An rubric to evaluate coherence and awareness has been constructed; 2.Present themes have been analyzed with the ethnographical approach; 3.Materials present in the e-portfolio have been compared with other referral materials; 4.E-portfolio materials have been discussed speaking with every student. Introduction Models Structure Analisys Evaluation Conclusion

21. La Rochelle 28 october – E-portfolio – pg.rossi@unimc.it 21/42 Coherence (1 method) Levels% 2004 Different sections’ materials include incoherent and incomplete works. 3 Partially coherent texts; maps not connected with the texts. 27 Texts and maps are mutually coherent but maps are incomplete. 49 Texts and maps are mutually coherent and complete. 21 Introduction Models Structure Analisys Evaluation Conclusion

22. La Rochelle 28 october – E-portfolio – pg.rossi@unimc.it 22/42 Awareness (1 method) Levels2004 % Little comprehension of duties and problems 1 Description of the course (analysis)12 And construction of meaningful interpretation of past steps, linking projects and practice, projects and theories, projects and different contexts. 66 And according to the personal experience, enriches lab. theoretic aspects focusing on relevant aspects, stressing difficulties, building a relative personalized model (personalization) 21 Introduction Models Structure Analisys Evaluation Conclusion

23. La Rochelle 28 october – E-portfolio – pg.rossi@unimc.it 23/42 To explicit critical elements Critical elements the initial under evaluation of 2004 (%) 1. children potential 71 2. disciplinary skill 36 3. children ability to overcome difficulties 57 the importance of the listening 80 Introduction Models Structure Analisys Evaluation Conclusion

24. La Rochelle 28 october – E-portfolio – pg.rossi@unimc.it 24/42 Ethnographical approach (2 method) First level categorySecond level C. More reflexive study methods Reflection on class course Critic awareness of personal interventions, ability to select strategies for an improvement Growth of reflexive dimension Attempt to personalize the course Importance of disciplinary epistemology Awareness of the importance of a specific language Use of texts and study depending on the construction of personal and professional id. Change personal study method Importance of planning and projecting Importance of observation and context Difficulties in linking theorical and practical needs Promote a mutually positive connection between t. & p. Introduction Models Structure Analisys Evaluation Conclusion

25. La Rochelle 28 october – E-portfolio – pg.rossi@unimc.it 25/42 Previous surveys … (3 method) Level % 2003% 2004 To pass exam they though they only need to read notes and books. 8561 The study was based on the course and it was followed by connections among different topics. 1521 They though to a path with a first part of theorical study and a second one where theory and practise should be compared to develop new models. 017 Introduction Models Structure Analisys Evaluation Conclusion

26. La Rochelle 28 october – E-portfolio – pg.rossi@unimc.it 26/42 …E-portfolio (3 method) 12% of the students inserts theorical referrals and described the practise without connections; 34% connects theorical and practical experiences; 54%, study is a way to check and improve their professional model. Introduction Models Structure Analisys Evaluation Conclusion

27. La Rochelle 28 october – E-portfolio – pg.rossi@unimc.it 27/42 Final debat (4 method) The debate during the exam permitted to focus on themes/aspects not appeared in writing. A balanced approach favours an authentic assessment. [R. Fogarty (1998) K. Burke (2002) B. M. Varisco (2004)] In the final dialogue the teacher can test the awareness of what was written in the e-portfolio, while the student can see what he had written from a different point of view. Introduction Models Structure Analisys Evaluation Conclusion

28. La Rochelle 28 october – E-portfolio – pg.rossi@unimc.it 28/42 Never before I have been reflecting so much about what kind of teacher I would like to become, about how I will use what I learnt at University, on where teachers and supervisors want to arrive using their "big words" during the meetings of indirect practice and labs. Serena says … Introduction Models Structure Analisys Evaluation Conclusion

29. La Rochelle 28 october – E-portfolio – pg.rossi@unimc.it 29/42 Thinking back now, out of the things, I understand how important are the referring points we can count on and how important is the way they were introduced to us. It is important for us to understand how something can be experienced and interpret according different point of views, making it more complete and clear. Serena says … Introduction Models Structure Analisys Evaluation Conclusion

30. La Rochelle 28 october – E-portfolio – pg.rossi@unimc.it 30/42 Dividing the three communities of practice would be a mistake, making "tasteless" what we produced in class. The interaction among those areas, theory and practice make all our production meaningful, useful and complete for us as future teachers. Serena says … Introduction Models Structure Analisys Evaluation Conclusion

31. La Rochelle 28 october – E-portfolio – pg.rossi@unimc.it 31/42 At the beginning, I was extremely worried about the e-portfolio. Then I started to work on and structure it and I understood that it is really a great "invention". I see it as a sort of rucksack that you carry in a long difficult trip. In the rucksack, I can find all the things to go on in the most comfortable way and to overcome some obstacles. I hope that this metaphor is explicit enough to let you understand my opinion and my evaluation of the e-portfolio. Monica says … Introduction Models Structure Analisys Evaluation Conclusion

32. La Rochelle 28 october – E-portfolio – pg.rossi@unimc.it 32/42 When I started to study for this exam, I read and studied as I usually do for all the exams. Then I started to fill in the e-portfolio. I thought I had to write down things already studied, as it happens when I sum up or make outlines of the books I read. Soon I noticed that something was wrong. I had to collect all the materials, I put them on my desk, as in a market table. All the materials were speaking to me in a new language, as if they were not only talking to me but also talking the one with each other and with my experiences. Those connections among them did not easily come out of my traditional outlines. Elisa says … Introduction Models Structure Analisys Evaluation Conclusion

33. La Rochelle 28 october – E-portfolio – pg.rossi@unimc.it 33/42 At this point, I had a second problem: what I could select (books, notes, web pages, practice materials, materials filled in by the children), as materials were huge. What does "the most important" mean? Finally I understood that I was the parameter to decide what was important. In other words, I decided to select the most meaningful materials for my training progress, the things that impressed me when I was reading, that are/will be more meaningful for my and teaching profession, that are deeply linked with my practice experiences. An aspect is striking and deeply motivated me: I was building a portfolio that was only mine, even if materials were present also in other portfolio. Elisa says … Introduction Models Structure Analisys Evaluation Conclusion

34. La Rochelle 28 october – E-portfolio – pg.rossi@unimc.it 34/42 Link S. Ed MC PD UD SdF Forum E-portfolio E-portfolio (odl – canamus0)

35. La Rochelle 28 october – E-portfolio – pg.rossi@unimc.it 35/42 End Thank you for your attention Pg.rossi@unimc.it