1. 1

2. ePortfolios Models and Implementation: Idealistic Why versus Pragmatic How Tim Neumann Wilma Clark

3. 3 Contents 1Introduction 2Scenarios 3ePortfolio Models 4Empirical Studies 5Tool Comparison Durham Blackboard Users’ Conference 2009

4. 4 1 Introduction Project Phases Durham Blackboard Users’ Conference 2009 Needs Analysis Decision Making (Technology and Pedagogy) Piloting Implementation

5. 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. 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. 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. 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. 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. 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. 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. 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. 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. 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. 15 Questions asked Durham Blackboard Users’ Conference 2009 ThemeQuestions 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? SupportWhat training is needed and how could this be delivered?

16. 16 3 ePortfolio Models Durham Blackboard Users’ Conference 2009 ePortfolio Model CourseAssessment Tool Shared Content Management Tool Student Gen. Folio Tool (Repos./ Refl.) Professional Development Tool Doctoral School2 (4)1 (1)4 (3)3 (2) MA in ICT2 (4)1 (1)3 (2)4 (3) Sec PGCE ICT2 (2)1 (1)4 (4)3 (3) PC PGCE2 (3)3 (2)1 (1)4 (4) MTeach4 (4)2 (2)1 (1)3 (3) 1 = high importance 4 = low importance  Institution -------------------------------------------------------------- Student  Tutor and Administrators’ perceptions of ePortfolios as learning models

17. 17 3 ePortfolio Models Durham Blackboard Users’ Conference 2009 Course Students Supervisors or Course Tutors Institution Course/Dep t Link Tutors School or Work- Based Mentors Registry Doc Sch.112N/A 2 MA in ICT121N/A PGCE ICT11N/A223 PC PGCE121332 MTeach12N/A003 Perceptions around ownership and control of the ePortfolio 1 = high 3 = low 0 = neutral 1 = high 3 = low 0 = neutral

18. 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. 19 4 Empirical Studies Durham Blackboard Users’ Conference 2009 Screenshots, Feature Summary and further information Screenshots, Feature Summary and further information (PDF document)

20. 20 5 Tool Comparison Comparison of Features Durham Blackboard Users’ Conference 2009

21. 21 Contact Tim Neumann t.neumann@ioe.ac.uk Learning Technologies Unit Institute of Education, University of London London Knowledge Lab 23-29 Emerald Street London, WC1N 3QS t.neumann@ioe.ac.uk www.lkl.ac.uk/LTU