|Cover sheet |E-learning Tools for Learners and | | |Teachers | | |Distributed E-learning Programme | |Name of lead institution/organisation Oxford Brookes University | |Name of project Personal e-Portfolios for Teaching and Lifelong Learning | |(Petal) | |Project partners The Association for Learning Technology (ALT), Knowledge | |Integration (K-Int), The Sheffield College, Abingdon and Witney College, | |Thames Valley Professional Institutes Partnership (TVPIP), Oxfordshire | |County Council Adult Community Education, Centre for Recording Achievement | |(CRA) | |Author | |Name: George Roberts | |Position: Development Director, Off-campus e-Learning | |Email: groberts@brookes.ac.uk | |Address: Oxford Brookes University, Headington, Oxford, OX3 0BP | |Tel: 01865 484871 | |Fax: 01865 484603 | |Programme area(s) of proposal | |e-Portfolios; tools for learners and tools for teachers | |Length of project and total cost to the JISC over its life | |7 Months | |Cost of proposal to the JISC | |£112,000 | |Proposed project start date September 2004 | |Outline project description | |Petal will produce a general e-portfolio tool for lifelong learning based on| |the Open Source Portfolio Initiative (OSPI - http://www.theospi.org/) and | |the Certified Member of ALT scheme (CMALT - | |http://www.ucl.ac.uk/epd/alt-accreditation/). This adaptive Learning | |Technology software based on best appropriate technical specifications will | |have data-mediated personalisation for teachers and learners in post | |compulsory education. The starting point for Petal will be the BS8788 | |schema. Petal is designed for capturing disparate activities and is not | |limited to traditional educational institutions. Petal will also develop | |multiple post compulsory education use-case scenarios that are conceptual | |and pedagogical. The project is both digital and dialogic, technical and | |pedagogic. The petal metaphor is intended to connote the component nature of| |the project, part of a composite, productive application component | |deployment framework (ACDF) that links networked learning institutions | |through the personal learning histories and plans of a community of | |learners. | [pic] Personal e-Portfolios for Teaching and Learning (PETAL) Final Report George Roberts Project Manager Oxford Brookes University 2 May 2005 Revision Information: |# |Author |Date |Description | |0.1 |GR |2005-04-15 |first draft started | |0.2 |GR |2005-04-18 |continued | |0.3 |GR |2005-04-22 |continued | |0.4 |GR |2005-04-25 |continued | |0.5 |GR |2005-04-29 |continued, appendices added | |0.6 |GR |2005-05-02 |first draft | Table of Contents Acknowledgements 4 Executive Summary 5 Background 6 Aims and Objectives 7 Methodology 7 Implementation 8 Outputs and Results 8 Outcomes 8 Conclusions 8 Implications 8 Recommendations 8 References 8 Appendixes 9 Scenarios of use 9 Scenario Template 9 CMALT UML Diagrams 9 Acknowledgements Petal was funded by the Distributed e-Learning Tools (DeL Tools) strand of the JISC e-Learning Programme. We would like to thank the DeL Tools Programme Manager and colleagues in the JISC e-Learning Programme for their interest in and support through the project. We would also like to thank the Project Partners on the Steering Group: . Oxford Brookes University . Abingdon and Witney College . Sheffield College . The Association for Learning Technology . Thames Valley Professional Institutes Partnership . SEEDA On the Implementation Group . Knowledge Integration . Oxford Brookes Media Workshop And especially the 8 Learning Technologists on the Learning Technologists Pilot Group for whom at times only chocolate could make user acceptance testing bearable: . Shirley Borrett . Ruth Hilbourne . Irmgard Huppe . Jim Hyndman . Nick Jeans . Anne Jones . Ellen Lessner . Dave Pickersgill. The project was advised by Martin Oliver of the London Institute, Rhona Sharpe of the Oxford Centre for Staff and Learning Development, and Peter Reese Jones of the Centre for Recording Achievement. Executive Summary The Petal Project aimed to produce a general e-portfolio tool for lifelong learning based on the Open Source Portfolio Initiative (OSPI - http://www.theospi.org/) and the Certified Member of ALT scheme (CMALT - http://www.ucl.ac.uk/epd/alt-accreditation/). It is recognised that portfolios can be an aid to reflective learning and that reflection has value across the disciplines as a means of developing transferable skills. Portfolios also have wider social significance. Portfolios facilitate the representation of identity. Identity issues, on one hand, concern the problem of associating an identifier with an individual and then associating that identifier (name, id number, etc) with data. However, Identity issues also cover things like: gender, race, age, ethnicity, vocation, class, embodiment, pleasure, communities, family, friendships, religion and so on; who am I, really? Both the compilation and presentation of a collection are manifestations of reflection and reflective learning is almost entirely concerned with such identity issues. We therefore aimed to create a tool that was explicitly dialogic: that is, a tool that encouraged reflective learning conversations. Such conversations might be between a person and the system or they might be between different users facilitated by the system. We wanted a tool that might be used in any post-compulsory, adult education scenario and was not biased towards undergraduate university education; we wanted a tool that was not biased towards the US education system, a tool based on open-source software available to the UK education community and a tool compatible with UKLeaP and the Lifelong Learning Record. As well as the tool itself the project also aimed to produce 8 use-case scenarios of the application of the tool in different post compulsory educational contexts: HE, FE, ACE, and Professional Institutes. In most respects the above aims were achieved. The project . implemented CMALT as an instantiation of a general e-portfolio tool for personal and lifelong learning based on the Open Source Portfolio Initiative (OSPI). . piloted the general e-portfolio tool for personal and lifelong learning with a small cohort of learning technologists from three different post- compulsory education sectors: FE, HE, and Professional Institutes. Adult Community Learning (ACL) proved more difficult . developed eight scenarios of use for the application of the e-portfolio tool. . created a template for the production of further scenarios of use of the e-portfolio tool (but primarily by borrowing and adapting one from the Centre for Recording Achievement) . disseminated knowledge, experience and applications of the general e- portfolio tool for personal and lifelong learning to the JISC community. . produced and made available a version of the tool for use in the JISC community. The project also aimed to produce a formal description conforming to the IMS-LD standard of the use of the e-Portfolio tool in teaching situations. In this we were not successful. We also failed to achieve the mapping of the tool to the UK-LeaP specification. In the time available to the project we had to achieve usability for the pilot group prior to conforming to specifications. The project started by building a reference installation and writing a first scenario of use. We then refined the tool through three iterations (alpha, beta, release 1.0) while the pilot group used to tool to prepare their applications for CMALT. With this completed, each member of the pilot group developed a scenario for the application of the tool in their educational context. Background Portfolios are collections of objects that attest to claims. Portfolios have been used for a long time in certain creative professions (advertising, architecture, photography, modelling) and came into wide use as an assessment method for many disciplines in schools in the UK with the introduction of the GCSE in 1986. Electronic portfolios have recently become widely used in the education of undergraduates in the USA. A common starting point is that an e-portfolio is simply an electronic version of a physical portfolio incorporating digital objects instead of physical objects. They are, "... the new generation of the old 3-ring binder" (http://www.pt3.org/stories/eportfolio.html) or, "... a self-selected multimedia presentation of student work". (http://www.eportfolio.lagcc.cuny.edu/) With the advent of the Lifelong Learning Record in the UK, e-Portfolios are rapidly growing in importance and have come into wide use as an assessment method. The implications of developing and maintaining lifelong learning records is being explored through a programme of JISC-funded projects under the MLEs for Lifelong Learning Programme. The projects are being supported by the Centre for Recording Achievement (CRA) and the CETIS Learner Information Profile Special Interest Group (LIP SIG) to develop scenarios around how learners will maintain and use information gathered by institutions and themselves as learners [Petal emphasis] (Bailey et al, 2004, http://www.alt.ac.uk/altc2004/timetable/abstract.php?abstract_id=153). There are important international developments in basic skills and adult continuing education (e.g. European Certificate in Basic Skills project: http://www.eucebs.org/), the introduction of the Europass portfolio (http://www.education.gov.mt/employment/europass_mobility.htm) and new policies enabling the recognition and validation of prior formal and informal learning. Bold claims are made: portfolios are crucial for lifelong learning in a knowledge society (http://www.qwiki.info/projects/Europortfolio/) and, "...the future of learning" itself. (http://www.eradc.org/). While the widest use of e-Portfolio tools appears to be in the education of undergraduates in the USA, there are important international developments taking place in basic skills and adult continuing education. See for example the European Certificate in Basic Skills project (EUCEBS, http://www.eucebs.org/) or the Nova Scotia Department of Education, Adult Education Section (http://www.nald.ca/cbln/projects/dsuccess/Cover.htm). Many groups are working together to explore e-portfolios, e.g. in the United States EPAC (http://webcenter.aahe.org), NLII (http://www.educause.edu/nlii), and Eportconsortium (http://www.eportconsortium.org). Eifel organises an annual conference (http://www.qwiki.info/projects/Europortfolio/ep2004). The European Union project EPICC (http://www.qwiki.info/projects/Europortfolio/epicc) describes use cases and scenario's. ALT and SURF organized a two-day conference in Edinburgh in 2004 (http://www.surf.nl/en/publicaties/index2.php?oid=30). This marked the start of international co-operation which now includes the Irish Learning Technology Association (ILTA) and a second conference in Dublin in 2005 (http://www.alt.ac.uk/conferences.php). Today, e-Portfolios are usually compiled on a user's own computer or on a secure central file server. e-Portfolios are themselves are often reified and discussed as if they were an entity with a commonly accepted definition. In terms of e-Learning Standards they are usually described in terms of Learner Information Profiles, where portfolios are conceived as collections of information about a learner entity. This is a limited view of e-portfolio processes. Both the compilation of an e-portfolio collection and the deployment of components of the e-portfolio collection are manifestations of reflection. For example, ePortfolio.org defines an e- Portfolio as a "method" (http://www.eportfolio.org/eportfoliomanual.pdf). Further, "Portfolios allow you to describe the work you have chosen, tell why you selected this particular work, and reflect on what you learned from doing the work." E-portfolios, "... are personalized, web-based collections that include: selected evidence from coursework, artefacts from extra-curricular activities, and reflective annotations and commentary related to these experiences." (http://portfolio.psu.edu/about/index.shtml). While most e-portfolio projects see the compilation of an e-portfolio as an essentially individual activity in which a learner gathers objects into a repository, the Nova Scotia Department of Education, Adult Education Section recognises that the compilation of a portfolio is an essentially dialogic activity (http://www.nald.ca/cbln/projects/dsuccess/dsuccess.pdf). ePortfolio.org's presumption is that the source of the electronic materials will be the user's own computer or possibly the user's own file store on an educational institution's server. However, with the proliferation of web services and the evolution of personal computing the compilation of an e-portfolio collection now often requires access to objects held in multiple distributed databases with differing authentication and access regimes. Recently, Peter Reese Jones has proposed a definition of e-portfolios which embraces this complexity: An individual's e-portfolio for learning is: . a repository of information about a particular learner provided by the learner and by other people and organisations, including products in a range of media that the learner has created or helped to create alongside formal documents from authoritative sources, such as transcripts of assessed achievement, which the learner has chosen to retain . principally owned by the learner, although some of the things it contains may be co-owned, for example an individual learning plan containing past results and future targets negotiated between learner and teacher, or fully owned by another party, for example a showcase set of architectural drawings for a client . capable of providing the information about a learner from which different profiles of the learner may be developed through other services and retained within the ePortfolio . typically provided by an organisation which may set conditions for its use. An individual may have a single ePortfolio or a sequence of ePortfolios and may make simultaneous use of several ePortfolios. An ePortfolio for Lifelong Learning is the aggregation of all an individual's ePortfolios such that they appear to the owner as a seamless whole. A closer understanding of the services contributing to and making use of ePortfolio will help to develop a fuller definition of ePortfolio in particular by scoping the discrete functionality that ePortfolio provides. (http://www.elframework.org/learning_domain_services/eportfolio/forums/ public/563531763371?b_start:int=0#490980605664) Petal addressed the lack of open source tools designed to build ePortfolios in the UK context. It built on good practice and re-used existing open source software wherever appropriate. Aims and Objectives The Petal Project aimed to produce a general e-portfolio tool for lifelong learning based on the Open Source Portfolio Initiative (OSPI - http://www.theospi.org/) and the Certified Member of ALT scheme (CMALT - http://www.ucl.ac.uk/epd/alt-accreditation/), which addressed the following needs . a tool that is explicitly dialogic . a tool that might be used in any post-compulsory, adult education scenario and is not biased towards undergraduate university education . a tool that is not biased towards the US education system . a tool that is based on open-source software available to the UK education community . a tool that is compatible with UKLeaP and the Lifelong Learning Record These aims have broadly been met. The Petal Project also aimed to produce a formal description conforming to the IMS-LD standard of the use of the e-Portfolio tool in teaching situations. This has not been achieved The Petal Project aimed to produce 8 use-case scenarios of the application of the tool in different post compulsory educational contexts: HE, FE, ACL, Professional Institutes. The Project Objectives were to: . implement CMALT as an instantiation of a general e-portfolio tool for personal and lifelong learning based on the Open Source Portfolio Initiative (OSPI). . pilot the general e-portfolio tool for personal and lifelong learning with a small cohort of eight learning technologists from four different post-compulsory education sectors: FE, HE, ACL, and Professional Institutes . develop 8 more use-case scenarios for the application of the e-portfolio tool. . describe the processes involved in the creation and applications of a general e-portfolio tool for personal and lifelong learning using IMS LD . create a template for the production of further use-cases of the e- portfolio tool . disseminate knowledge, experience and applications of the general e- portfolio tool for personal and lifelong learning to the JISC community. . produce and make available a version of the general e-portfolio tool in software for personal and lifelong learning for use in the JISC community. Methodology The overall approach was to get a reference installation built based on OSPI 1.5 and first use case written based on the Certified Member of ALT scheme and then: 1. to refine the tool through at least three iterations (alpha, beta, release 1.0) 2. develop 8 different use-case scenarios for the application of the tool in other educational contexts. We used a rapid approach, putting the application before users from the inception. This was the most significant aspect of software development. The user acceptance test (UAT) group of eight learning technologists used the tool to prepare their application for CMALT. Although there was some resistance to this approach from both the programme and the technical partner, we believe that it has proven extremely valuable in ensuring that the development was done with the involvement of a representative user group. As a result we traded idealised conformance to specifications for real usability. ... the process and the product (and the people, always the people) has been enormously interesting and I'm really happy that [my line manager] agreed to let me participate in Petal. (member of LTPG) Implementation Petal had two broad sets of outputs to achieve: . Creation of a General e-Portfolio Tool . Development of Scenarios of use for the Tool The creation of a "General e-Portfolio Tool" was done by Sheffield-based Knowledge Integration (K-Int) working with Brookes Media Workshop and 8 learning technologists from 4 post-compulsory education sectors. The tool was iteratively developed and applied to realise the Certified Member of the Association for Learning Technology (CMALT) scheme. Both the tool and the profession of Learning Technology are to be seen as general to education, not specific to HE. There were to have been least 8 Learning Technologists from four post-compulsory education sectors on the project: 2 from HE (Brookes), 2 from FE (1 from Sheffield College, 1 from AWC), 2 from Adult Community Education (Blackbird Leys Learning Centre), 2 from the professional institutes (TVPIP). Use case 1 was the CMALT scheme itself. The Learning Technologists worked with the developers as they used the tool to prepare their own portfolios for submission to the CMALT scheme. Then each of the Learning Technologists wrote a scenario describing the application of the General e-Portfolio tool in their domain of expertise or community of practice. We organised the project into three overlapping functional groups: . Steering Group (SG) . Implementation Group (IG) . Learning Technologists Pilot Group (LTPG) The Steering Group consisted of representatives from: . Oxford Brookes University . Abingdon and Witney College . Sheffield College . The Association for Learning Technology . Thames Valley Professional Institutes Partnership (TVPIP) . SEEDA The implementation group became known as the Petal Project Implementation Group, or Petal PIG. This group consisted of: . Project Manager . Richard Francis, Head of Brookes Media Workshop . Fawei Geng, Learning Technologist, Media Workshop . Neil Smith, Knowledge Integration (K-Int) . Zack Wragg, Knowledge Integration The LTPG consisted of . Shirley Borrett, TVPIP . Ruth Hilbourne, TVPIP . Irmgard Huppe, Brookes School of Health and Social Care . Jim Hyndman, Brookes School of Education . Nick Jeans, Sheffield College . Anne Jones, TVPIP . Ellen Lessner, Abingdon and Witney College . Dave Pickersgill, Sheffield College The tasks as we envisaged them were to have been: . Initial Installation: Knowledge Integration (K-Int) to get OSPI up and running, deployment of a reference OSPI service on a dedicated server resource. o This was done readily . Media Workshop (MW) familiarisation with IMS Learning Design specifications and OSPI tools. Research accreditation process modelling o In the event, we familiarised ourselves with the OSPI tools and the specific requirements of the CMALT accreditation. o We had less time to familiarise ourselves with IMS Learning Design. . K-Int create initial overview/SWAT analysis of the OSPI system itself. Petal will want the co-operation of the OSPI community to facilitate the overcoming of any geographical boundaries and differences. It is anticipated that much of the work that needs to be done will be in re- factoring the parts of OSPI that contain assumptions that are aligned with North American schemes and working methods. o K-Int formed a view of the initial OSPI system and Media Workshop analysed the requirements of the CMALT o In the end we did not establish close communication with the OSPI community in the USA. We still intend that this be done in the context of the myWORLD project. . Project Manager build bridges with the developers and wider OSPI community. Project becomes OSPI Workgroup. o Initial exploratory contact was made and it is still intended that this be done in the context of the myWORLD project. . K-Int, MW and Project Manager specify quality criteria for use cases (In terms of level of detail needed for use, sign-off, etc) o The work proceeded more quickly than the evolution of control systems. The principal, formal control document was the Issues Log, which became the basis for formal acceptance testing. K-Int wrote two specifications documents: Beta Release and Final Release. . MW and Project Manager form Learning Technologists Pilot Group and conduct inception meeting with Advisory Group o This was done, though the Advisory Group was less important to the project than originally envisaged. We drew on the expertise of the CRA in producing the Scenario Template (Appendix 3); we drew on the expertise of the CMALT project in preparing the presentation template. . MW consultation with LTs to develop UML descriptions of learning design and processes underlying CMALT and general e-portfolio tool. - To specify the required kinds of interactions - To define categories of data - Compile LT feedback . MW, with the Learning Technologists lead on a first use case, the CMALT scheme for accredited Learning Technologists . K-Int, MW and Project Manager sign off use case . K-Int undertake design work and liaison with MW to develop OSPI tools in light of the user requirements. . K-Int and MW undertake a "feature-gap analysis" between first use case and current reference OSPI installation. . K-Int performs low level technical gap analysis at the schema level to identify mismatches at the data level; . K-Int and MW compare first model use case with OSPI, functional and data requirements. and create detailed list of tasks that need to be undertaken; iteration with users. This evaluation task, along with the subsequent ranking of priorities is something best done collaboratively between all stakeholders. . K-Int "Closes the gap" between OSPI and the first CMALT use case. (PETAL Alpha release) . MW Works with LTs to apply the prototype e-portfolio tool to build up their own CMALT portfolio . K-Int undertakes software delivery; gets regular updates out to the user community, with MW gather feedback, adjust plans and deliver on time. (PETAL Beta release) . MW develops and refines use-case scenario template . MW works with Learning Technologists to develop use-case scenarios in different application domains It wasn't all smooth sailing! I'm rather fed up, I've been working seriously on my CMALT since 5 this evening now its 9.30. I have entered some paras 3 times, they have some times saved and more often than not thrown me out and deleted when I have pressed the save button, Once saved stuff later disappearing when it unexpectedly closed. In other words the Save button is very unreliable. One category was wrongly labelled ' supporting the development of LTs' rather than DEPLOYMENT of LT, the next time I looked even the category had disappeared. I assure you I was doing it correctly. Unfortunately I was composing onto the screen so I have got to think it all out again , its tempting just to put my paper version on as an attached document. Miserable blue eyes, this is not the way to spend Friday evening! (member of LTPG) But it worked. The PetalPIG had two very different voices represented. Brookes Media Workshop were a strong advocate for appropriate pedagogy and the user. Knowledge Integration are a small, commercial software development house. There was an initial clash between educational idealism and positivist pragmatism. K-Int wanted to get on with the job, Media Workshop wanted to ensure we had fully and appropriately considered the dialogic teaching processes that had to underlie the tool. Our initial desire to produce a description of the e-portfolio process in Learning Design and other external pressures and relationships with other projects led to an attempt to meta-model the project development process using LAMS. LAMS had some features that might have made this an interesting route. LAMS uses a process-flow modelling user interface which can make task sequencing explicit. LAMS also provides a discussion forum and a means of commenting on web pages presented within the LAMS frame set. However, there were too many layers of novelty. The LAMS implementation that we were sharing was not stable. e-Portfolios and reflective learning, regardless of the application used to implement them, are still novel concepts. CMALT is a new qualification. Petal and OSPI were novel tools under development. The project team members were new to each other. We entered dangerous waters very early. The LTPG, in spite of being highly "fault tolerant" and experienced users of learning technologies, were uncertain what their primary task was. Were they trialling LAMS? Were they trialling CMALT? Were they trialling OSPI? Or were they helping to develop Petal? We had to drop LAMS early in the project. The permutations of novelty were too great. Dropping LAMS led to down playing the Learning Design modelling ambitions that we had started with. Outputs and Results We got there. There is a working implementation of the Personal E-portfolio for Teaching and Learning on the Sourceforge website (http://sourceforge.net/projects/petal) and attached to this report is the catalogue of scenarios of use and a scenario template. These can also be found in the JISCmail archive at (http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/files/MYWORLD/scenarios03myWORLD.doc). The UML drawings of the CMALT scenario are also in the appendices. Petal begins to address some of the complexity suggested by Peter Reese Jones's definition. Petal handles three kinds of data. . Data entered by the portfolio owner into the Petal database . Artefacts or "products" produced by the portfolio owner and uploaded to the file system referenced by the Petal database . URIs to remote objects held in other file stores. The Petal Release 1.0 incorporates two significant improvements over OSPI 1.5: . Tabbed interface . Profiling. The tabbed interface begins to address the rigid hierarchical structure of the OSPI tool. This is not a particularly significant restructuring of the hierarchical epistemology, but it makes the system much easier to navigate. [insert screen-shot of tabbed interface] Profiling addresses multiple contexts of use and multiple orientations. There are four stages to the portfolio cycle: orientation, selection, reflection, representation. When a learner engages with an e-portfolio they do so with an orientation. Orientation can be goal-directed, such as preparing a portfolio for an assessment or preparing a portfolio in support of a CV for a job application. Or, orientation may be less goal directed, such as: thinking about my future, wanting to change jobs and so on. The orientation will determine the selection of artefacts to be included in the portfolio. Through reflection the artefact becomes evidence that attests to an assertion. Having selected artefacts in to the system and reflected upon them, the learner then selects them out of the system, that is, they make a presentation using a subset of the artefacts. This presentation will be made for a rhetorical purpose shaped by the orientation: an assessment, a transition point in a career, a session with a mentor. [insert screen-shot of profile management] The project produced two instances of the application: CMALT and a generalised "personal e-portfolio" system. [insert CMALT screenshot and Personal e-portfolio screenshot] The application requires the following infrastructure components to be installed: . SUN Java J2SE Development Kit 5.0 (note this is not the same as the Java Runtime Environment) . Apache Tomcat version 5.0 (note version 5.5 does not work with PETAL) . MySQL version 4.0.2 or higher Petal can also be deployed using other Servlet containers (e.g. Resin) and RDBMSs (e.g. ORACLE). However it has not been tested extensively using these. Petal is licensed under the OSPI OS Licence (see http://www.theospi.org/modules/cjaycontent/index.php?id=8). The Petal project has only paid limited attention to making Petal presentations compliant with information about the learner (IMS LIP, UK LeaP/BS8788) and information about the content of the portfolio (IMS e- Portfolio). While each category of metadata is important there are two other dimensions to the e-portfolio field that need to be addressed: underlying taxonomies of knowledge, skills and awareness (RCDEO) and the learning designs that make use of portfolios for formative assessment, reflective learning and summative assessment (Simple Sequencing, IMS Learning Design). We address these questions in "Implications" below. Outcomes The most significant outcomes of the project are: . Petal is the basis of the Brookes-led JISC e-learning programme project, myWORLD wide-scale regional pilot. . Petal is also part of the University of Kent-led PLPP wide scale regional pilot and is being evaluated at least three other project sites as this report is being written. . Petal scenarios are being incorporated into the Nottingham reference models project. . Petal dissemination events have drawn attention to the problematic issues that underlie the e-portfolio process . e-Portfolios are being taken up by Oxford Brookes University and the University of Brighton as one means of personal development planning (PDP) [expand] Conclusions There is great satisfaction in having achieved most of the project objectives, but, being honest about it, there is a long way to go. e-Portfolios are a contested area and this tension is reflected in the software development process. Why are e-portfolios contested? Portfolios are pedagogically significant. They represent a genuine move toward learner-centred, self-directed, peer- to-peer autonomous learning. This move is essentially about the re- alignment of power in society. Who controls the representation of knowledge? Reflective learning and reflective practice have been hallmarks of professionally-oriented learning in many fields. It is now recognised that portfolios can be an aid to reflective learning and that reflection has value across the disciplines as a means of developing transferable skills and increasing learner autonomy. Portfolios also have wider social significance. Portfolios facilitate the representation of identity. Identity can be weakly or strongly conceived. Weak identity issues concern the problem of associating an identifier with an individual and then associating that identifier (name, id number) with data. Strong identity issues cover things like: gender, race, age, ethnicity, vocation, class, embodiment, pleasure, communities, family, friendships, religion and so on; who am I, really? Both the compilation and presentation of a collection are manifestations of reflection and reflective learning is almost entirely concerned with strong identity issues. However, if our identities are in part artefacts of digital technologies it is important that we have some choice over the tools we use to make our identities. When we consider e- Portfolios today we must focus on questions of power, democratisation, control, permission, inscription and replication and we should question the illusion of control over self-representation that lies at the heart of e- portfolios. Software development under economic constraint is a necessarily goal- directed, positivistic activity. A representation of a system is postulated and work is done to realise that representation. An evolving representation of a system is not a good thing. A developer wants a specification to remain stable for at least long enough to develop a system that meets the specification. But if the state of knowledge about the specification is changing the risk is that a system is developed that meets a specification but the specification is no longer valid. The rapid development approach tries to overcome this limitation. The specification is evolved through iterative testing of modules with representative end users. This does have the risk of producing "unfinished" systems. It also favours usability by hook or crook rather than conformance to standards. Rapid development and extensive user testing in the development phase is not an inexpensive approach, but it can produce good, usable results. In commercial development projects the UAT team might ordinarily be provided by the client and the cost of providing such a resource externalised from the project cost. In Petal it can be seen explicitly what it costs to develop software with a UAT team, when the resource is internal to the project. Implications Petal release 1.0 is a great improvement over OSPI 1.5 but, there are limitations to Petal. Ultimately, Petal is a web-served database. The user must be online to connect to the service. This has implications for mobile and nomadic use of the application and also implications for users whose preference might be to keep some data more securely off-line, say on a local file store rather than a remote service. The discussion function is limited to a list of comments. There is no threading of the comments either by author or by topic. Although the owner of the portfolio can comment at any level, comments by third parties can only be made at the level of the presentation, not at the level of the individual data element. This is a function of the separation of the data input system and the data output templates. Presentations made from the Petal database are linked to dynamic, underlying data. Consequently it is not possible to "freeze" presentations at a certain date for assessment purposes Petal also depends, ultimately on a general representation of knowledge, knowledge theory or knowledge framework; that is, it manifests a particular epistemology. The underlying framework is essentially the pre-professional (pre-qualification, white-collar employment seeking) US undergraduate, Liberal Arts curriculum. This framework conceives of knowledge in a positivistic, normative, structuralist, verbal, hierarchical mode. The Petal user interface reflects this and represents its knowledge framework hierarchically. But even the verbal, hierarchical representation of knowledge can be contested and does not suit all people or disciplines. While there are aspects of the "computerisation" of knowledge that may ultimately limit the representations of knowledge available to any system, efforts can be made to accommodate learners whose preferred epistemology is non-hierarchical, say networked or mind-mapped, and whose preferred learning style is more visual than verbal. Petal also reveals the limitations of the LIP/UKLeaP specification. In "Recommendations", below, we address some improvements that might be made to Petal to make it more useful as an e-portfolio application. Recommendations The application will benefit from further development. The field of e- portfolio applications and services is growing rapidly and is in a very dynamic state at present. We have submitted a proposal for two such improvements: . a Web Services-based off-line tool for mobile computing devices that will keep a subset of portfolio data locally and synchronise with on- line data stores when connected . a threaded discussion tool as a replacement for the OSPI-derived "comment" function. As well as making these enhancements we wish to test them in up to four pilot implementations and to disseminate the results of the Petal round one project and these new developments. RCDEO import for creating databases embodying different underlying epistemologies. Non-hierarchical UI Improved dialogism References . ALT accreditation scheme for Learning Technologists (http://www.ucl.ac.uk/epd/alt-accreditation/) . Application Component Deployment Framework (http://www.jisc.ac.uk/uploaded_documents/Technical%20Framework%20feb04 .doc) . e-Learning Pedagogy Programme (http://www.jisc.ac.uk/elearning_pedagogy.html) . e-Portfolio, Learning Domain Service as part of the e-Learning Framework (http://www.elframework.org/learning_domain_services/eportfolio) . e-Portfolio Research and Development Community, ERADC, (http://www.eradc.org/) . Europortfolio (http://www.eife-l.org/portfolio) . Open Source, definition (http://www.opensource.org/docs/definition.php) . Open Source Portfolio Initiative (http://www.theospi.org) Appendix 1 - Scenarios of use |[pic] |E portfolios for practical use by a professional body (CILIP) |[pic] | Metadata General information about the scenario |Title |E portfolios for practical use by a professional body | |Description |E Portfolio development for the Chartered Institute of Library and Information Professionals | |Date |23 March 2005 | |Creator |Norman Briggs will use the e portfolio to apply for a Fellowship of CILIP | |Affiliation |ALT CILIP TVPIP | |Audience |Members of CILIP wishing to track CPD and/or apply for accreditation, chartership, | | |revalidation or fellowship recognition | | |CILIP chartership and standards board | | |Employers | |Source |Link to Oxford Brookes Petal project | | |Petal Project Partners | | |PETAL : Welcome Page | |Other | | |Contributors | | The policy and practice context of the scenario In a new initiative CILIP is encouraging its members to participate in a process of continual professional development where the individual is encouraged to think carefully about what they have learned and how they put it into use in their work (reflective practice). Routes to Chartership and related recognitions are currently being re worked and introduced in order to enable members to constructively participate in these processes. The Scenario The e portfolio will be used to fulfil the requirements for a CILIP application for fellowship in according to the specification below: . "Candidates for Fellowship have to demonstrate that they have built on the potential identified by the award of Chartered Membership, through developing the ability to carry out demanding tasks and handle complex professional issues and by making a contribution to all or part of the profession. . At this level the selection of material for submission is of considerable significance. Work presented for the award of Fellowship will almost invariably contain an element of originality, demonstrating intellectual and professional development. It may be in any format." (Taken from http://www.cilip.org.uk/qualificationschartership/Fellowship) The same narrative told from the perspectives of different actors |Perspective 1 | |Perspective 2 | | Perspective 3 | |Norman Briggs Candidate for |A |Members of the Chartership |A |Potential employer of Norman | |fellowship | |board | |Briggs | |As I accumulate the materials for |B |Having the material presented |B |When I look at the e | |my Fellowship | |in this way makes it easy for | |portfolio | |I can see patterns in my leaning | |members of the chartership | |I see the enormous body of | |and work history | |board to assess and discuss. | |learning held by this person,| |I can see how my career should be | |We can quickly find examples of| | | |further developed | |his reflective practice and of | |I can see how his skills can | |I learn where any gaps in my | |evidence based learning. | |benefit my operation | |knowledge lie. | |We realise the e portfolio | |I can see his knowledge is | | | |works well towards a process of| |contemporary | | | |career-long Continuous | | | | | |professional development | | | A list of stakeholders |Stakeholder |What the stakeholder wants | |Ruth Hilbourne |To progress onward from the PETAL project in creating a portfolio tailored to | | |the specific needs of the professional body CILIP | | |To tailor the e -portfolio towards the needs and aspirations of CILIP | |Norman Briggs |To utilise the e portfolio to create a personal application for fellowship of | | |CILIP | | |and as a member of the Membership and recruitment panel to disseminate the | | |benefits of the use of e portfolios for presenting professional applications | | |within CILIP | | | | |CILIP Chartership and |A standard wrapper by which individuals can demonstrate their skills, knowledge | |standards board |and expertise throughout various stages of their professional growth | | | | Others involved | |E portfolio System administrators | | |Software developers | | | | Definitions of terms CILIP = the Chartered Institute of Library and Information Professionals References and Bibliography More information about the new CILIP framework of qualifications which commences on the 1st April 2005 can be found at CILIP Framework of Qualifications |[pic] |e-portfolio for Chartered Professionals |[pic] | General information about the scenario |Title |e-portfolio for Chartered Professionals | | |Description | E.g. e-portfolio to help an application to be a |Petal e-portfolio usage scenario | | |Chartered Manager | | |Date |March 18th 2005 | | |Creator |Anne Jones | | |Affiliation | TVPIP & the CMI | | |Audience |Managers, would be managers and other such |............ | | |professionals wanting to get Chartered Status and | | | |track their CPD | | | |, | | |Source | Link to Ox ford Brookes Petal project | | | |www.broookes.ac.uk/research/odl/petal/petal__home.h| | | |tml | | | | | | |Other |The LLS tracking system for verification of | | |Contributors |practical learning | | | |www.lls.co.uk/v2 | | The policy and practice context of the scenario The CMI and other such bodies are encouraging members to get Chartered Status. Gathering information & evidence of management skills developed can be prepared in advance ready to make a real application, as well as being ready to do a job application. Particularly important to keep an ongoing record of verifiable evidence of management skills demonstrated. It is very difficult to get chartered status if such data has not been systematically collected, stored, verified over a period of time. It is almost impossible to reconstruct such data later, and the people needed to verify it may have moved on or retired. The Scenario . The e-portfolio needs to be completed, thoughtfully, over a period of time and also maintained. . Tracking of verifiable management skills needs to be set up, maintained and verified over time . The tracking of CPD learning through events, training, learning on the job etc also needs to be set up, verified & maintained . When the evidence has been thus gathered, verified and maintained, then selected appropriate data is ready to be used in the application for chartered status, partly online e.g. www.managers.org.uk The same narrative told from the perspectives of different actors |Perspective 1 | |Perspective 2 | | Perspective 3 | |The Manager starts the E portfolio|A |His/ her line manager agrees |A |His /her professional | |and gathers as much evidence as | |to verify as much as possible | |adviser/mentor | |possible | | | |Supports encourages & guides | | | | | |if necessary. | | | | | | | | | | | | | |The Manager starts his LLS |B | The line manager continues to |B |Professional adviser | |action plans & tracks his project | |verify his claims and also | |continues as above | |management skills , attributes & | |links to internal management | | | |CPD | |appraisal | | | |The Manager consolidates the |C |Line manager verifies or helps |C | | |evidence needed to achieve | |find other suitable verifier | |Adviser guides | |chartered status & maintain it | | | | | |through CPD Record & enters it | | | | | A list of stakeholders |Stakeholder |What the stakeholder wants | |The Manager | | | |Recognition, professional advancement, a record that can survive if (s)he loses | | |his job, or his company goes bust or he moves house, or takes maternity leave | | |or retires | |The Line Manager |Wants to motivate the manager, ensure he does a good job, be seen as a good boss | | |( could use this on portfolio) , slightly worried that the manager might leave | | |or indeed be better than himself. Therefore sets up the same processes for | | |himself and gets the manager, amongst others to verify his skills etc. | | | | |The Professional Adviser | This person may not exist, but should and could be found , if necessary a peer | | |could be involved in | | |Co-counselling/ support. Not so good for verification though, as not objective. | | |A real professional adviser wants to do a good job, to encourage the learner to | | |take initiative and manage his/her own learning, to stimulate and motivate | | |without doing it for him/her. This adviser can also verify. | Others involved | E- portfolio | Keeps the system working well , repairs system glitches | |systems adviser | | |LLS System | System manager for technical problems available 24/7/365 | |Professional body |Does have an interest but cannot/does not intervene in individual cases, maintains | | |the online web version of system, arranges face to face interviews etc, receives | | |written portfolios, evidence etc, assesses | Definitions of terms . Action plans: defining goals and steps towards achieving those goals. Can be used for PDP s (personal development plans) as well as for project management plans, or tasks to be done to achieve a goal. . Verifying: a third party, preferably someone objective, verifies/states that a claim for evidence is true. . Evidence: proof that something has happened, or been seen to happen, been demonstrated . CPD: Continuing Professional Development, a record of this is needed by most chartered institutes for Chartered Status to be maintained . Attributes: These are qualities which have been consistently demonstrated e.g. reliable, Team worker, thorough, inspirational etc . References and Bibliography . CMI ( Chartered Managers Institute) website: www.managers.org.uk |[pic] |Tutorial process on an Access to HE course |[pic] | General information about the scenario |Title |Tutorial process on an Access to HE course | |Description |Petal e-portfolio supporting the tutorial process on an Access to HE course | |Date |March 2005 | |Creator |Ellen Lessner | |Affiliation |Abingdon and Witney College | |Audience |Learners, Course Leader, Course Tutor, University admissions tutor, Prospective employer | |Source |Tutorial unit - Open College Network (attached) | |Other | | |Contributors| | The policy and practice context of the scenario An Access to HE course is aimed at adults (19 +) who have few or no previous academic qualifications, though they will have an abundance of experience. The tutorial process aims to guide them through the UCAS application, the interview for their chosen course and asks them to reflect on their past life, work and educational experiences. In order to support them more effectively, an e-portfolio will build up a more complete picture of their accomplishments to date and encourage them to see these events as a reflection of their ability to pass the Access course and complete a university education. The Scenario The e-portfolio would be introduced at the start of the academic year and the learner would be encouraged to begin to populate it with evidence and information from their life to date; educational background, employment, voluntary work, travel, etc. This would help them think about their personal statement on the UCAS application in light of their accomplishments to date. Adding to it as they successfully complete units on the Access course would build their confidence as they approach an interview for a university place. In terms of the Access course, the evidence in the e-portfolio would encourage the reflective analysis required by the tutorial learning criteria at the end of the course. Finally, the e-portfolio would be equally useful to those learners who do not go to university, or who find they unable to stay on a course and need to return to work. The same narrative told from the perspectives of different actors |Perspective 1 | |Perspective 2 | | Perspective 3 | |The Access to HE learner | |The Tutorial lecturer | |The university admissions | | | | | |tutor | |Understand the requirements of the|A |Introduce the learner to the |A | | |Tutorial unit | |OCN accreditation scheme | | | |Learn how to use the e-portfolio |B |Teach group how to use an |B | | |and begin to gather evidence, | |e-portfolio, including scanning| | | |including scanning documents to | |documents for adding to | | | |include paper based evidence | |portfolio | | | |Reflect on UCAS application and |C |Review 1-1 individual learner's|C |Invite an Admissions tutor to| |begin writing personal statement | |e-portfolios and provide | |view selected e-portfolios | |using e-portfolio information | |guidance on writing a personal | |and suggest improvements and | | | |statement on UCAS form | |links to UCAS applications | |Keep e-portfolio up to date with |D |Remind learners to keep adding | | | |achievement on the Access course | |to the portfolios | | | |and on-going employment or | | | | | |voluntary work achievements | | | | | |Customise a presentation for a |E |Interview practice with | |Access the e-portfolio via | |particular application and send | |learners, using information | |the url provided as evidence | |the link to the university | |from e-portfolios | |and add items for discussion | |admissions tutor upon offer of an | | | |during interview. | |interview | | | | | |Use evidence in e-portfolio and |F |Review presentation from | |Circulate individual | |reflection to 'Critically assess | |learner as evidence of 1 form | |e-portfolio to course team | |and provide examples, or evidence,| |of a personal profile (of 3). | |for information on September | |of own skills and strengths and | | | |intake | |develop needs.' (Learning outcome | | | | | |1.1 of Tutorial credit) | | | | | |Create a presentation for |G |Support and guide learner to | | | |employment | |create an e-portfolio | | | | | |presentation suitable for an | | | | | |employer | | | A list of stakeholders |Stakeholder |What the stakeholder wants | |Learner | | | |A way to keep information together which supports their application for | | |university, holds evidence of reflection and change while on the Access course, | | |provides material for a CV and might enable them provide useful evidence for | | |future employment. | |Tutorial lecturer | | | |A useful tool to help learners see that their previous experience has value and | | |can be applied to the Access course, a university application and interview as | | |well as provide evidence for future employment | |Course leader | | | |Better retention and achievement on the Access to HE course. An e-portfolio | | |might help an individual see the value of their experience and keep them on the | | |course. | |University admissions |To easily see a more comprehensive picture of an applicant which might add more | |tutor |relevant information to the UCAS application form. | | |To help make a judgement on whether the candidate will succeed on the course. | |Prospective employer |To easily gain a more comprehensive picture of the applicant and their abilities,| | |which may not be easy to see in a traditional format | Others involved |IT Unit |To ensure that the e-portfolio system is secure and backed up frequently | | | | | | | Definitions of terms . Access to HE - a third route to HE aimed at people over 19. It is normally validated by the Open College Network system . OCN - Open College Network is a national system where local people design courses according to local needs. It is based on learning outcomes and better matches an adult learning style. A course will normally have many units which are assessed at Level 2 (GCSE) or L3 (A Level) and learners will need a minimum number of credits at each level in order to complete an Access course. OCN courses are put through a panel of peers and the regional centre goes through an inspection process for validity. References and Bibliography . DfES e-strategy document - http://www.dfes.gov.uk/publications/e- strategy/docs/e-strategysummary.pdf . National Open College Network - www.nocn.org.uk . AQA site with information about Access to HE courses - http://www.aqa.org.uk/qual/access.html |[pic] |Portfolio for Employment |[pic] | General information about the scenario |Title |Portfolio for Employment | |Description |e-portfolio developed by an Advanced level, 16-19 student | |Date |10tthMarch 2005 | |Creator |Dave Pickersgill | |Affiliation |The Sheffield College | |Audience |Personal Tutor, Staff responsible for careers Guidance, Teachers, parents, potential | | |employers... | |Source | | |Other |none | |Contributors| | The policy and practice context of the scenario Advanced level students are increasingly being asked to utilise the Internet and associated tools as an integral part of their study. For example, most will make a HE application using the on-line UCAS application procedure. In addition, most such students will, at some point, partake in remunerated employment. The provision of a continuously developing e- portfolio would assist them as they apply for such positions and would also provide the potential employer with a quality, polished and targeted document. The e-portfolio could follow the student, as they leave College, progress through Higher Education and into the graduate jobs market. The Scenario The e-portfolio will be compiled and then used by the Advanced level student in order to provide evidence and information to both potential employers and the gatekeepers of possible educational progression routes. In most cases, the student will email the url of an appropriately customised e-portfolio to a potential employer. The employer will then consider the e-portfolio and make appropriate decisions regarding interview, job offer etc. The same narrative told from the perspectives of different actors |Perspective 1 | |Perspective 2 | |Perspective 3 | | | | | | | |The Advanced level student | |Personal Tutor/Careers | |Potential employer | | | |Advisor/Parent | | | | | | | | | |Collect: |A |encourage student to gather |A | | |1. evidence of previous | |together appropriate evidence | | | |achievement - certificates, | |which may be suitable for the | | | |photographs, sound bites, video | |development of an e-portfolio | | | |clips etc. | | | | | |2. previously prepared C.V.'s, job| | | | | |applications, Records of | | | | | |Achievement and progress Files. | | | | | | | | | | | |Learn how to use the Petal tool |B |Provide support as the student |B | | | | |learns how to use the | | | | | |portfolio. | | | | | | | | | |Compile the e-portfolio, taking |C |Provide support as the student |C |Advertises an employment | |advice from their personal Tutor, | |develops their portfolio, | |opportunity | |careers Advisor, colleagues and | |selecting appropriate | | | |family. Include links, attachments| |information, evidence and | | | |etc., as appropriate. | |links. | | | | | | | | | |Customises the e-portfolio for the|D |Assists the student, as |D |Is provided with a url by the| |intended audience and provides a | |appropriate | |Advanced level student - | |url as part of their initial | | | |their potential employee. | |enquiry regarding a potential | | | | | |employment opportunity. | | | | | | | | | | | | |E | |E |Accesses the e-portfolio, via| | | | | |the url provided. | | | | | | | |Responds to the decision from the |F |Provides advice and guidance, |F |Makes an appropriate decision| |potential employer. | |as appropriate. | |regarding the employment | | | | | |prospects of the applicant - | | | | | |this could result in an | | | | | |interview for a post for the | | | | | |advanced level student. | A list of stakeholders |Stakeholder |What the stakeholder wants | | | | |Advanced level student |A means of continuously developing their portfolio which allows relatively easy | | |selection of parts of the portfolio in order to reach the intended audience. | | | | |Personal Tutor/Careers |A means of allowing the student to develop a convenient, up-to-date and easily | |Advisor/Parent |customised portfolio. | | | | |Potential Employer |Straightforward web-based access to appropriate information on potential | | |employees | Others involved |IT Systems in the School/College|Ensure that the ICT infrastructure in the institution is robust | Definitions of terms References and Bibliography . AimHigher ; http://www.aimhigher.ac.uk/sitemap.cfm?lcl_lngcode=en - A website supporting the government's agenda of widening participation into Higher Education. Includes tutor resources. This link takes you to the site map of the site and provides an overview of the resources available . Careers Portal ; http://www.trotman.co.uk/default.asp?action=article&ID=13 - part of the NGfL - a gateway to careers and HE information on the web, including how to write a c.v., a covering letter, fill in an application form etc. . UCAS apply ; http://www.ucas.com/apply/index.html - on-line application to UK HE Institutions . UCAS HE tariff ; http://www.ucas.com/candq/tariff/index.html |[pic] |Portfolio for Employment and Education |[pic] | General information about the scenario |Title |Portfolio for Employment and Education | |Description |e-portfolio developed by a learner in Adult Basic Education | |Date |12tthMarch 2005 | |Creator |Nick Jeans | |Affiliation |The Sheffield College | |Audience |Personal Tutor, Teachers, potential employer or further educator | |Source |Petal project website: http://www.brookes.ac.uk/research/odl/petal/petal_home.html | |Other |none | |Contributors| | The policy and practice context of the scenario Many adults in employment are now expected to use email and other IT software in their work, while others want to develop their understanding of the Internet in the supportive environment of a Basic Skills class. There is therefore a willingness to engage with electronic methods of recording. Paper-free portfolios are also very attractive to those with low Literacy skills, since qualities can be demonstrated using video, photographic or audio recording, rather than the traditional reliance on written expression. The e-portfolio offers Basic Skills students a chance to improve their self- esteem by encouraging them to set out their achievements, most of which will not be academic qualifications. It would assist them as they apply for jobs and would also provide the potential employer with a detailed picture of the applicant. The e-portfolio could follow the student, as they leave College and progress into more education or employment. It could be compiled gradually during their Basic Skills course, providing a source of real life experiences to enrich classroom discussions. The Scenario . The Basic Skills student collects evidence of his/her abilities and achievements. . The e-portfolio will be compiled and then used by the Basic Skills student in order to provide evidence and information to both potential employers and those offering educational progress. . In most cases, the student will email the url of an appropriately customised e-portfolio to a potential employer or educator. . The employer/education provider will then consider the e-portfolio and make appropriate decisions regarding interview, job offer etc. The same narrative told from the perspectives of different actors |Perspective 1 | |Perspective 2 | |Perspective 3 | | | | | | | |The Basic Skills student | |Personal Tutor | |Potential employer / educator| |Collects: | | | | | |1. evidence of previous |A |encourages student to gather |A | | |achievement - certificates, | |together appropriate evidence | | | |photographs, sound, video | |which may be suitable for the | | | |recordings etc. | |development of an e-portfolio | | | |2. previously prepared C.V.'s, job| | | | | |applications, Records of | | | | | |Achievement and progress Files. | | | | | |Learns how to use the Petal tool | |Provides support as the student| | | |and scanner, developing IT skills.|B |learns how to use the |B | | | | |portfolio. | | | | | |Shows how to scan documents for| | | | | |adding to portfolio | | | |Compiles the e-portfolio, taking | |Provides support as the student| |Advertises an employment | |advice from the tutor. Includes |C |develops their portfolio, |C |opportunity or education | |links, attachments etc., as | |selecting appropriate | |course. | |appropriate. | |information, evidence and | | | | | |links. | | | |Examines job/ course on offer, | |Assists the student, as | | | |adjusts the e-portfolio for the |D |appropriate, reminding him/her |D |Receives url from the Basic | |intended audience and provides a | |to keep adding evidence to | |Skills student - their | |url to employer/ educator. | |portfolio | |potential employee or | | | |Advises learner to adjust | |student. | | | |e-portfolio presentation to | | | | | |suit particular job or course. | | | | | | | |Accesses the e-portfolio, via| | |E | |E |the url provided. | | | | | |Makes an appropriate decision| |Responds to the decision from the |F |Provides advice and guidance on|F |regarding the employment or | |potential employer/ educator. | |whether this is the best | |education prospects of the | | | |opportunity to follow up. | |applicant - may result in | | | | | |interview for a post for the | | | | | |Basic Skills student. | A list of stakeholders |Stakeholder |What the stakeholder wants | | | | |Basic Skills student |A means of continuously developing his/her portfolio which allows easy selection | | |of parts of the portfolio in order to reach the intended audience, while | | |improving his/her self-esteem. | | |A means of showing what he/she can do without having to rely on advanced writing | | |skills | | | | |Personal Tutor |A means of allowing the student to develop a convenient, up-to-date and easily | | |customised portfolio. | | |A focus for reflection and discussion throughout the student's course. | | | | |Potential Employer / |Straightforward web-based access to appropriate information on potential | |educator |employees or students. | Others involved |IT Systems in the College |Ensure that the ICT infrastructure in the institution and the e-portfolio | | |system is stable. | Definitions of terms . Basic Skills: Pre-GCSE level Literacy and Numeracy courses for over 19- year-olds. References and Bibliography . Lower-Literacy Users: http://www.useit.com/alertbox/20050314.html from Jakob Nielsen's Alertbox, March 14, 2005, stressing that Lower- literacy users exhibit very different reading behaviours than higher- literacy users: they plough text rather than scan it, and they miss page elements due to a narrower field of view. . NRDC (National Research and Development Centre for Adult Literacy and Numeracy) report: http://www.nrdc.org.uk/uploads/documents/doc_258.pdf. This project set out to obtain a picture of present teaching practice in the use of ICT in adult literacy, numeracy and ESOL within formal provision. . The benefits to employers of raising workforce basic skills: a review of the literature: http://www.nrdc.org.uk/uploads/documents/doc_2792.pdf This paper summarises the literature on the benefits which employers derive from raising the basic skills levels of the workforce. . Skills for Life survey (summary): http://www.dfes.gov.uk/research/data/uploadfiles/RB490.pdf National needs and impact survey of literacy, numeracy and ICT skills, published in October 2003, forms a key part of the research on which the Skills for Life strategy is based. |[pic] |"Fit for Practice" - E-portfolios as tools in competency assessment for future |[pic] | | |social workers | | General information about the scenario |Title |"Fit for Practice" - E-portfolios as tools in competency assessment for| | | |future social workers | | |Description |The e-portfolio tool allows students to combine a record of academic | | | |and professional achievements with competency assessment in practice | | | |learning. The use of the tool is to be embedded in the framework of an | | | |undergraduate double module 'Fit for Practice' for students in a HE | | | |institution in healthcare. This module prepares students to engage in | | | |the practice learning component of their training. | | |Date |21 March 2005 | | |Creator |Sharon Vitali | | |Affiliation |Oxford Brookes University, School of Health and Social Care, Social | | | |Work Department | | |Audience |Social Work students, lecturers, practice educators, employers |............ | |Source |Portfolios are considered to be one of a variety of assessment tools on|[pic] | | |HE Social Work, see information on swap website | | | | | | | |http://www.swap.ac.uk/learning/Assessment1.asp | | |Other |Irmgard Huppe (Learning Technologist) | | |Contributors | | | The policy and practice context of the scenario The use of the e-portfolio tool is to be embedded in the framework of an undergraduate double module 'Fit for Practice' for students in a HE institution in healthcare. This module prepares students to engage in the practice learning component of their training. Using the portfolio tool builds on existing practice. In the list of activities for this module are at least 3 activities where the tool can assist the student's learning: 1) A reflective framework, and data collection plan and instrument to prepare the student for their shadowing opportunity 2) An application for a practice learning opportunity and CV 3) A Fit for Practice Portfolio Inclusive of: . Written Reflections of Shadowing Experience(s) . An Agency Assessment . A Client Profile (drawn from simulated agency files) . An example of evidencing competency in Key Units demonstrating the use of reflective practice and embedded theoretical constructs. The e-portfolio tool allows students to combine a record of academic and professional achievements with competency assessment in practice learning. It would be a means for students to help structuring and monitoring the learning experience and also for the three-way-communication between prospective practice educator - learner - lecturer/tutor. As the e-portfolio tool allows communication and exchange through the creation of presentations and a feedback system, it could be used for advise and mentoring over a distance. The Scenario A: Analysis of existing practice in creating portfolios with social work students - purpose of portfolios, format, integration into current educational practice B: Analysis of components of the existing e-portfolio tool (Petal project), which results in the definition of user requirements in social work C: Adaptation of the existing tool according to definition for use by social work students D: Defining the use of the adapted tool within the module E: Introducing the tool to students, students practising with tool while still on campus (end of semester 2) - adding data of previous career(s), academic achievements, CV F: Students using e-portfolio tools while on placements / shadowing over the summer (2005) G: Evaluation of student experience The same narrative told from the perspectives of different actors |Perspective 1 | |Perspective 2 | | |Social Work Student | |Practice Tutor (SH&SC) | | |Getting help with recording achievements, getting |E |Can support student in a 'controlled environment' |E | |feedback from tutors | |which makes it more objective and gives all | | | | |students a chance to get the same amount of | | | | |feedback, creating records in communicative | | | | |process | | |Getting mentor advice from practice teachers while|F |Being able to accompany the students while on |F | |on placement, feedback and support with problems, | |placement, give feedback and mentor the student | | |being able to include peer review and comments | |'from a distance'. Taking advantage of peer | | |from colleagues | |reviews and communication suggestions to a bigger | | | | |audience rather than just individual | | |Valuing and using a new resource for job |G |Valuing a new tool for a creative and |G | |applications and professional assessment | |communicative mentoring process | | A list of stakeholders |Stakeholder |What the stakeholder wants | |SH&SC, Social Work |A practical tool which assists in assessing practice learning, supports the | |Department |students with job applications, increases the success rate, enhances the | | |reputation of SH&SC Social Work Department | | | | |Students |Same as above | | | | |JISC - MyWorld project |Evaluation of open source e-portfolio in real world scenario, recommendation | |managers |for future use and implementation | | | | |Learning Technologist in |Same as above | |SH&SC | | | | | |Future Employers |Support in the painstaking procedure of choosing the ideal candidate for a job | Appendix 2 - Scenario Template |[pic] | |[pic] | | |PETAL | | e-Portfolio Scenarios Template - V1.0 Adapted from: |Author: Peter Rees Jones | |Date: 18 June 2004 | |Function: To provide a exemplar for the presentation of scenarios and the capture of feedback and further | |scenarios | Definitions of terms in this document: Metadata General information about the scenario - About 50 words |Title |A name given to the scenario. | | |Descripti|An account of the content of the scenario. |Petal e-portfolio usage scenario | |on | | | |Date |Date Created | | |Creator |A person or entity primarily responsible for making| | | |the content of the resource. | | |Affiliati|Affiliation of creator of scenario. | | |on | | | |Audience |The intended audience for this scenario. |............ | | |For example, Teachers, Learners, Policy Makers, | | | |Technologists, Managers, Employers, or more | | | |specific types of audience such as "staff | | | |responsible for careers guidance" | | |Source |A Reference to a resource from which the present | | | |resource is derived/linked to, if any e.g. | | | |http://www.nottingham.ac.uk/e-portfolio/ | | |Other | | | |Contribut| | | |ors | | | The policy and practice context of the scenario - About 100 words Brief details of the background, in particular the purpose and need for the scenario. You may wish to say whether the practice being developed arises from a formal policy, and whether it builds on existing practice. The Scenario - About 100 words The key stages (A, B, C,...) of the process involved in your scenario told from the perspective of an external narrator. You may like to use a simple flow diagram to describe how the e-portfolio will be used. The same narrative told from the perspectives of different actors - About 150 words Enter here the text of the scenario told from the perspective of two or more stakeholders. You are welcome to provide links to any resources you may feel to be relevant. Please link the stages (A, B, C,..) to those in Section II. |Perspective 1 | |Perspective 2 | | Perspective 3 | | |A | |A | | | | | | | | | |B | |B | | | | | | | | | |C | |C | | | | | | | | A list of stakeholders - About 100 words Enter here the stakeholders involved in the scenario and what each wants from the e-portfolio. |Stakeholder |What the stakeholder wants | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Others involved - About 50 words Enter here information other people or systems which play a role in the scenario, but have no interest in its outcome, for example e-portfolio system administrator. | | | | | | | | | Definitions of terms - About 50 words This is not intended as an exhaustive definition of all the terms used in the scenario, but as a means of ensuring that terms which are used in a specialised way are easily understandable by other readers in different contexts. However, you are welcome to offer your own definitions of key terms. One specific intention of the scenarios is to help develop vocabularies which can define the different aspects of e-portfolios. References and Bibliography Add here references to other resources and more general materials which other practitioners, may wish to follow up. CMALT UML Diagrams [pic] [pic] [pic]
------------------------------------------------------------ Minesota Demo --Brian, Mon, 09 Jul 2007 19:53:00 -0400 http://eportfolio.d.umn.edu/demo.html