Lifewide? What do you mean?

Recently I was asked this very question, 'What do you mean by Lifewide?' I have noticed before that others have used the term 'Lifewide' without really defining what it means.

There are at least three different aspects whereby I would describe an ePortfolio as being Lifewide:

1. All learners have multiple personas and should be able to display differing aspects to different audiences concurrently. For instance, I may be applying for two different jobs, one requiring a very professional format as an educator and yet another side of me, that of a bearded environmentalist wanting to escape academia and work for a charitable organisation. The two are not very compatible!
   



2. Secondly, the software itself should be capable of moving with the steadily maturing young learner, ‘through multiple metamorphoses’. This requires a simple easy-to-use tool which even the youngest student can use and yet has the capability of highly professional or complex multi-media presentation. Some years ago I attempted to illustrate this as on my website: http://www.maximise-ict.co.uk/eFolio-01.htm
   



3. Even within one persona, there are many different facets to that learner. Eg a college student does not just follow one course of study – his tutors want to know something of other aspects of his life, what clubs he attends, his out of college activities, his family circumstances, his part-time job. All of these go to make up the whole ‘width’ of the person.

I have also put together a random collection of sample ePortfolios for discussion purposes which might help the thoughtful reader: http://www.scoop.it/t/eportfolios-examples How many of the 'examples' that I list are capable of showing different 'views' to different audiences.

January 10, 2011 ePortfolio Interoperatbility using the Leap2A standard

I have a very high respect for the work of JISC and the CETIS group in particular. Their recent posting is well worth studying, particularly for those who have not looked at the advantages and disadvantages of interoperability before.

However, I find a certain poignancy in the picture that they use to focus our attention - that of a lone travelling suitcase. I find it somewhat incongruent that upon arriving at my planned destination, my personal effects carefully packed within the suitcase should be tipped out in a heap - to be reorganised according to another institution's instructions. What I pack in my own suitcase should be mine to organise, display or not display as I choose. And what, having arrived at my new destination, can I do with the contents of my suitcase if the new institution or workplace does not have an ePortfolio system? Or what if I am 'between jobs' and want to get to work on re-designing my ePortfolio?

I am well aware that for intelligent and computer literate adults moving from one institution that has an ePortfolio system to another institution with similar facilities the prospect of interoperability might be acceptable, despite possibly having to rebuild their ePortfolio from the debris of a previous system.

With thousands of schools in the UK alone who do not visualise the importance of Leap2A, I can only ask, 'Do you really believe in Lifelong and Lifewide Learning?' and if so, what are you doing about it. For me, there are only two options, either every institution in the UK adopts the Leap2A standard or that learners are provided with an externally hosted system that can facilitate true portability.

Learning Through Life

I've just started catching up on my 'holiday reading' and feel most remiss in that I have not previously read 'Learning Through Life' despite it having been published last year. On almost every page there are profound observations which, when added together, create a storm of conscience. It is the well-know scenario of "The rich get richer and the poor get poorer." or in this case, the educated continue to learn more, and thus enhance their lifestyles, whilst the less well-educated find themselves falling further behind. Is this really the right response to the Leitch Report?

I particularly like the abiguity of the title - ie Learning Throughout Life, or Learning From Life.

However, as regular readers will recognise, I keep on feeling a sense of frustration in that, in my opinion, the solution to many of the issues raised is THE EPORTFOLIO ! It talks (p5) of 'Local Learning Exchanges' but fails to recognise the place of virtual communities and thus the place of ePortfolios as supporting 'Communities of Interest'.

I cannot find any references to 'Learning Styles' or 'Multiple Intelligences'. This, again, is important. We need to understand how people not only of different 'attitudes' or life-styles learn but how age might influence learners' preferred learning styles.

RAPEL The Recording and Assessment of Prior and Experiential Learning appears not to be considered. Again, the ePortfolio is an excellent way of encouraging a learner to document a wide variety of experiences and accomplishments that a mentor might recognise as worth recording and submitting through one's ePortfolio in order to get a foothold on the 'Learning Ladder'.

Above all, I get the feeling that the authors still feel that institutional teaching and learning is the only solution. We read (P8) of the 'personalisation' of learning, ie as delivered by the institution, but not of 'personal learning' as devised by the individual. - See Wendy Drexler's article.

ePortfolios – still trialling? Why?

Darren Lott recently raised the above question in his blog. Funnily enough, the questions that he raises are very similar to the issues that I tried to address at both the EIfEL and AAEEBL conferences earlier this month.

However, Darren's enthusiasm for wanting to get going highlights a recurring issue, that of individual organisations 'doing their own thing'. It is essential that if a true Lifelong and Lifewide ePortfolio is to continue throughout life, 'From cradle to grave' then the practicalities of how that ePortfolio can evolve with the maturing lifestyle and interests of the learner need to be explored.

Firstly, all of the ePortfolio 'pages', the welcome page in particular, should be capable of repeated re-formatting with appropriate graphics, colour schemes, fonts and widgets etc. As I have said before, the immediate impact that an 11yr-old (or even a 5yr-old) may wish to convey will be quite different to that of a young professional trying to get on in the world. It is similarly true for the teenager whose overriding passion is for a particular football team or pop group - and what happens when they change their loyalties?

Secondly, and following on from the first point, I believe that a good ePortfolio should be capable of presenting different views or 'personas' to different audiences. Using the one ePortfolio and dipping into a common set of artefacts, which have been stored once, the owner can represent him/herself in different ways to different audiences. How I represent myself to my pupils at school or to my professional colleagues, to my church group or to a charitable organisation might all be very different. Should I therefore be using four or more different ePortfolios in order to present each persona?

Thirdly, as I have said many times before, the ePortfolio is Learner Owned. It is appreciated that initially the ePortfolio may be provided by an institution and even fitted out with some appropriate level of scaffolding. However, like an exercise book, once the learner has used the exercise book, or decided to use a ring-file etc, it inherently becomes the property of the learner and is kept for perpetuity. (How many of us still have some of our old exercise books stored away in the attic?)

Fourthly, the question of 'transition' must be addressed. One of the reasons for so many pilots and reports of mixed feelings towards adoption arises when the student leaves their school or college to join another academic institution. It is a common experience that the 'new' school will have a different ePortfolio system. They get to the new institution only to find that the promised 'interoperability' does not deliver the student's anticipated ePortfolio intact but rather find it 'broken' into a number of separate files, some unrecogniseable. The student is then faced with the unenviable task of having to re-build their lovingly crafted ePortfolio all over again. I can just imagine the feelings of rebellion that some of my more rebellious teenagers or 'neets' would think! But even worse still, what would happen to the child's work when moving from Primary school to Secondary school? Who would do the exporting and who would do the importing? Who would do the re-building and having to learn a new ePortfolio system?

Following on from the above is the slightly different aspect of 'portability', ie where the learner has possession of their ePortfolio and wishes to show it to others. Many institutions are not willing to host their alumnis' ePortfolios for perpetuity and thus the whole arguments concerning PDP and showcasing fall down. Many graduates, for instance, may not move seemlesly from University straight into employment, they may choose a 'gap-year' or take on some part-time work whilst they get their social life sorted out. Others may be 'between jobs' for a considerable period of time - all when they might want to work on their ePortfolios but not be part of an academic institution willing to host their work. Please see the example of an eFolio student who graduated several years ago. Her eFolio remains intact and up-to-date as it is hosted externally to any institution and certainly external to her present place of work. It is completely 'mobile' and is accessible from anywhere in the world.

Finally, there is the whole question of Assessment. There are a number of good assessment tools that work very well when attached to the MIS of the VLE or LMS - and that, in my opinion is where they should be kept. Unfortuanately there has become established a tradition that particular subject-specific training organisations provide their students with an on-line learning pack which is a combination of a course management tool, a personal log, a collaboration tool, a sophisticated testing and assessment tool, all rolled into one and called an 'ePortfolio'. Such a tool is hardly 'learner owned' and has little value as a showcasing or reflection tool for lifelong learning.

So, in response to Darren's enthusiasm, I would suggest that we look more carefully at the long-term expectations one may have of an ePortfolio before committing to a product which is bound to fail several criteria.

Research or Introspection?

From the illustrious University of Canterbury (New Zealand) I saw this impressive report entitled, 'NZCARN Research Symposium Paper on ICT'. I quote the section on e-Portfolios:

"e-Portfolios are increasingly being adopted in a range of educational settings for a variety of purposes including learning, assessment, presentation of achievement, and personal professional development (Stefani, Mason, & Pegler, 2007). In terms of learning and personal development, e-portfolios can have a key role in supporting individuals to reach their full potential by promoting the development of lifelong learning skills such as reflection, self regulation and collaboration (Lamont, 2007). The advancement of 21st century educational technologies has focused attention on the e-portfolio as a powerful learning tool, and has prompted many authorities to consider the benefits (Fox, Britain, & Hall, 2009). Fox et al. (2009) identify some additional key components of an e-portfolio, which are essential for our conception of an e-portfolio: author ownership, where the user can maintain a personal lifelong record of learning; interoperability, allowing the user to transfer their e-portfolio from one environment to another; and confidentiality, where students have the opportunity to think critically about their work and to speak openly about their progress in a secure environment.

"Mahara (http://www.mahara.org/ ) is a fully featured open source electronic portfolio, which was developed in 2006 by the New Zealand e-Portfolio Project funded by the New Zealand Tertiary Education Commission’s e-learning Collaborative Development Fund. Mahara is a web-based e-portfolio, designed for tertiary education as a learning portfolio which is constructivist in nature (Stefani et al., 2007), with the emphasis being on the ownership and lifelong learning and development of the user. Mahara was designed with accessibility, ownership, interoperability and transferability in mind, and includes collaborative and communication tools. Mahara is currently being used within teacher education programmes in Massey University, the University of Canterbury, Auckland University of Technology and Victoria University. It is also being piloted with some New Zealand secondary school students (Fox et al., 2009). The design features support ongoing collaborative approaches to action and research to which NZCA&RN aspires.

"Within the context of action research and related approaches, the e-portfolio has the potential for practitioner and researcher ownership of a lifelong virtual private space for: setting and reviewing goals; reflecting on actions, learning and progress; engaging in professional critical dialogue; disseminating knowledge; and showcasing skills and dispositions. This virtual space can be accessible from anywhere; and the user can select particular aspects to share with individuals and communities of practice. The virtual space also allows for recording emerging knowledge, skills and ideas privately until such time as they are mature enough to share with others, or be dismissed or laid aside to return to at a later date. An e-portfolio tool therefore, has great potential to enhance collaborative action and research networking, and to navigate the ‘braided rivers’ of action research approaches and ‘whanau of interest’ (Macfarlane, 2009). However it is important to note that the issues identified by Margaret Lamont (2009) when implementing ePortfolios in teacher education are also likely to apply to their use in research too. These include equitable access and development of a shared vision of purpose among the NZCA&RN communities of practice."

To me, this looks like encouragement to further introspection rather than trying to understand how Lifelong, Lifewide Learning and Leisure can be supported through an e-Portfolio. Mahara might well be a good basic tool for those in HE but what of the rest of society, for all Ages, Aptitudes, Abilities, Accesibilities and Attitudes?

What IS an e-Portfolio ?

People are continually asking this question and using generally outdated text to thus argue for outmoded Teaching & Learning styles. A recent post on this issue caught my eye, primarily from the succinct cartoon as above. The student wrote:

"I am currently researching eportfolios as part of the #H808. In my professional life as an elearning advisor I have vowed never to use the word eportfolio on its own. This is because the same word is used for very different types of system. Instead I use the following terms which I hope we will get to acknowledge and understand more as the course progresses. "

The complete post can be seen here.

My response was inevitable:

I love the e-Portfolio cartoon - it really expresses the dilemma. And this is the point: too many people have avoided the issue, like you, by disaggregating what in essence is ONE tool which can be used in a wide variety of purposes and functionalities and by a very wide range of users.

Writing with a mixed academic perspective, I was once asked who were the potential users of an e-Portfolio. At that time I listed off some 18 different users, see: http://maximise-ict.co.uk/eFolio-03.htm

Quite simply, my plea to you is that you do not go down the route of different e-Portfolios for different purposes. Each learner has a multitude of different needs - and the e-Portfolio can meet many of these various needs through differing functionalities.

Certainly, one of the best features of an e-Portfolio is the ability to store a variety of artefacts such that they can be reused for different purposes and persona.

Crystal ball gazing?

Serge Ravet posts some tough lines of enquiry as to the future of e-Portfolios. The question therefore comes to mind, quite simply, where shall we be in ten years time? The answer does not come from Doris Day's rendering of 'que sera, sera - whatever will be will be'. Rather, the future of e-Portfolios is what we make it. We are now well passed the position of 'This looks like a good idea.' It's now time to get down to some serious business!

Serge writes a post entitled '10 ePortfolio Challenges' the opening paragraph sets the scene for some hard questioning:

"For the 7th ePortfolio conference, and in order to give directions to our work towards our 2010 goal (ePortfolio for all), EIfEL decided to address a number of challenges to the ePortfolio community and beyond —many of the problems the ePortfolio community faces today will not be resolved if they are not addressed beyond the ePortfolio silo. The goal of these challenges is to move beyond the current state of ePortfolio development, in particular in the field of interoperability as interoperability is not just a technical issue, but a means to enable new practices and the emergence of truly lifelong and life wide ePortfolios."

Another challenging paper by Serge must be studied: 'What is the problem with personal data today?' I quote the opening paragraph:

"Digitised personal data records now play a central role in our life, from the record of a birth at a hospital (and the photos of the new born!) to the delivery of a death certificate at the registrar. The increasing number of digital data, by and about ourselves, lead to the emergence of what is now referred to as 'digital identity', i.e. all the attributes and digital production by and about a person —school records, health records, employment records, business records, credit records, surveillance records etc."

Economies of Scale?

Congratulations are in order to the NZ Ministry of Education for their brave decision to provide an impressive Software Agreement for the next three years. Click to see announcement.

Cynics may suggest that in providing something 'for free' it creates a lock-in which is hard to resist. Of course, as the statement says, "Schools will still be free to use any product they wish to. A number of schools are using open source software or browser based alternatives and they will continue to have this choice." But, as the graphic attempts to illustrate, 'Who wouldn't chase after free software?'

The whole point for e-Portfolio watchers, as I referred to before, see post - 'A Common Approach?, is that I am impressed with Local Authorities, Districts, States or even whole countries that see the benefits of the economies of scale and are willing to take up the challenge.

Again, some will be aware of the far-sighted vision of those in Minnesota who established a State-wide free e-Portfolio facility for all residents. This has proved without doubt that, without the 'holy grail' of perfect interoperability, eFolio is the best solution for portability or transition that anyone has thought possible.

In the UK, despite all our impressive programmes for 'Home Access' and a 'Digital Britain' the Government's present approach to e-Portfolios is particularly tardy. Yes, individual schools are developing their own in-house e-Portfolios and we have some good work going on in the careers service, 'Connexions'. However, what with 35 or so VLE suppliers offering various attempts at e-Portfolio solutions and a few commercial free-standing systems, it would appear that 'everybody does that which is right in their own eyes.'

The point of this post, therefore, is to ask if UK readers in particular agree with my proposition that whole-school or Local Authority-wide provisions of an e-Portfolio system such as eFolio, which is both Lifelong and Lifewide, is the logical solution. Economy of scale is essential at the present time. I just wonder when our mandarins will wake up to this fact!

The Forgotten Learners

Last Friday, July 24th, I attended the NIACE meeting in Leicester. It was only supposed to be a half-day seminar but wow! the amount of detail covered could have easily been spread over a two-day residential course.

Of late we have been considering the case for helping digitally deprived children in the UK. But Rachel Thompson's presentation really set me thinking. One of her slides in particular raised the issue of who are not as yet included in a 'Digital Britain'. So, apart from disadvantaged kids, who else should we be considering as 'digitally deprived'?

1. Adults aged 55+
   
2. People in rural areas
   
3. People in areas of multiple deprivation
   
4. C2DEs (ie lower potential employability)
   
5. The disabled and those with learning difficulties
   
6. The unemployed and low-income households
   
7. People affected by mental ill-health
   
8. Homeless/vulnerably housed adults
   
9. Itinerant workers and services personnel
   
10. 'Delegators' (ie those who pass on any ICT work to others)
    
11. Those detained in Prison (both staff and inmates)

It soon became obvious that we need a wide variety of approaches to meet the needs of such people, all 17 million of them. But, consistent with all of these groups is the potential that an appropriately scaffolded eFolio would be of exceptional help to them.

Another point that came across, most strongly, was that of motivation. Where a person sees little need to log on and communicate with others, where they can see no practical purpose for using many of our common applications, when they see no need to save time or money we have a problem.

Those of us who provide support and training really need to advertise and communicate the ways in which ICT can improve the quality of life of each of the groups listed above. We need to identify how best to reach out to each of those groups and to design materials which they can understand and respond to. We need to invest time and effort in order to attract these people to the services we want to provide. Perhaps, also, we need to look at our delivery styles and provide attractive and challenging materials which are more relevant to the learners' needs.

This goes for eFolio as much as any other product. For each group as listed above, the eFolio can be that means of communication, of involvement of ownership and motivation which is the basis of any learning environment.

If people reading this have any desire to reach out to any of the above groups then please let me help by providing a simple, low-cost, eFolio tool, appropriate to their needs.

contact at: support@maximise-ict.co.uk

e-Portfolios - A Common Approach?

For some time now the e-Portfolio thinking and research in New Zealand has intrigued me. The clear thinking by such as Paul Seiler is enabling a 'greenshoot approach' to e-Portfolios not, as far as I am aware, seen in other countries. See, 'ePortfolios - Celebrating Learning'.

In this context I was very impressed by the clear logic of Jamin Lietze who in response to the report listed some interesting ideas about a whole country using a common approach to e-Portfolio practice:

"If we all used one tool then schools/teachers will have:

"1) Flexibility (They can use this one tool to add what they like into it to meet the individual needs and while maintaining student choice, voice and ownership.)

"2) Better communication (Students/Teachers would use "one language" and so work together easier across levels and ages developing their ePortfolios.)

"3) Efficiencey (Professional development is made easier because we are all using the same language and focusing on the one tool.)

"4) Better consistency (One school or teacher will not be considered lower than another because they did not have the expertise or financial support to develop superior ePortfolios. Everyone will have the same building blocks.) "

It should be noted that this was the very scenario in which the original Minnesota eFolio project developed over six years ago. In Minnesota everyone throughout the whole state has free access to eFolio. I just wonder if RBCs in the UK or even countries in Europe would dare to face this challenge and investigate the UK availability of eFolio?

eFolio v 2 has arrived!

Well, we've been waiting quietly but excitedly for the arrival of our new baby! Well, not new as such and not so much of a 'baby' - it's really very big once you get to know it! The 'new' eFolio might on the surface look very much like it did before BUT the whole of the 'back office' working has been revamped to meet the needs of the new web 2.0 generation.

Everything you thought you knew about eFolio is about to change… and it is not only because the look and feel of the interface are different.

Electronic portfolio users have often focused on the eFolio tools and resulting portfolio sites. This has, in the past, created a gap in development and process. Unfortunately that gap has directly impacted the value portfolios can play in the assessment of learning. We often refer to the gap as “portfolio thinking”…representing elements of design and planning needed by both educators and learners. I look forward to what users will experience in filling that gap as they discover what the new version of eFolio tools are positioned to contribute to learning communities, social learning, and teaching strategies.

Start now by thinking about content as discrete objects that can be used in many ways within a single portfolio. The simplest example may be found in the data fields identifying self, a peer or professional contact. Change your thinking that those “contact-related” fields create items about a person that contribute only to a “Contact Me” or “References” page.

A contact may now be identified as someone who contributed to your work on a project or was a mentor in an activity. A contact might be identified as an employer associated with a past job or a professor who evaluated your class work. As such, the contact can be linked to an artifact, event, or affiliation. Resulting content combinations will, in turn, be available as items posted on the pages of your portfolio site.

The difference is that each content object (such as a contact) also remains uniquely available for re-use in a different context on a different page or within the pages of an alternative site. The possibilities are endless when expanded to address the advantage of owning multiple personal portfolio sites as part of one account (e.g., Personal, Career, Coursework, Work Experience) or the existence of shared sites available to members of defined groups and learning cohorts.

Perhaps this is what excites me most, that objects can be re-used for different audiences and for different purposes - and all at the same time!

Join us over the next several weeks as we begin to discover how eFolio’s expanded toolset will promote your experience with the power of portfolio thinking in a content/object-oriented interface.

Thanks to Lynne Groves at Minnesota for much of this text.

Formative Assessments - for whom and when?

As a teacher of many years experience I thought that I knew all about formative assessment. After all, I had been doing it for ages with Design & Technology coursework well before computers came into my life! And all of this became so much easier with my beloved network of computers.

Yes, I knew that at the start of a course I would assess what my students knew about my proposed content and activities. I was well drilled in defining 'previous knowledge/experience' in my lesson plans, and yes, I would modify my plans according to the initial 'survey'.

Similarly, at times during the course I would attempt to inform my students as to their progress and what their individual strengths and weaknesses might be. But that was about all. However, it was not until reading W.J Popham's book, 'Transformative Assessment' that I understood, for the first time, just how much I had been missing out on.

How do I know when and what to assess? Will it be appropriate to my long-term planning and booking of resources etc? Perhaps the first thing I learnt from his book is that if I was not to totally overdo this assessment thing and make myself a nervous wreck I first needed to plan when to assess in terms of my ongoing delivery, teaching and learning styles.

The second thing I learnt about formative assessment is the need for self-control. In this modern 'instant fix' working lifestyle, students would soon latch on to the fact that at any time of asking they would expect immediate answers, day in day out and every evening. 'Formative overload' would soon render any conventional teaching impossible. Yes, as soon as students discover the advantages of 24/7/365 access the system would soon overload and self-destruct.

However, the e-Portfolio can lend some sense of sanity and organisation. Instead of Instant Messaging or Tweeting, the e-Portfolio can provide a scaffold for students to follow their suggested plan for formative assessments with places for feedback as and when planned rather than on instant demand.

Understanding the collaborative uses of the e-Portfolio, it soon becomes obvious that the symbiotic relationship of e-Portfolio and formative assessment is not just to be used by students. This culture of formative assessment, as used in teacher-student relationships, can so easily be used in both departmental or whole-school assessment and planning. Similarly, the outcomes of formative assessments can be communicated through personal PDP and institutional e-Portfolios.

Once teachers and lecturers have learnt the basic skills of e-Portfolio management a synergy soon develops between students, even the youngest of pupils and their teachers. 'No one, having put their hand to the plough, turns back' from e-Portfolios. If never before, they seemlesly become lifelong and lifewide tools of learning.

Look at this list of some of the benefits of using an e-Portfolio and think about how many of these points are also highly beneficial to the mutuality of formative assessment.

A Teacher's Questions

Recently, through a blog that I came across, some searching questions were asked to which I have attempted to give some answers.

Could an e-Portfolio be used by educators and learners as an enabler towards education and learning?

Very much so! I appreciate that teaching and learning varies around the world. For instance, the Americans often refer to ‘instruction’ whereas that grates a bit as sounding too didactic for UK teachers. Have a look at my slideshow for something of how education is moving in the UK.

But even with a ‘liberated’ teaching and learning environment, accessing work remotely through the VLE and having laptops at home through the Home Access programme, this sort of work can still be seen by the learner as belonging to the school – the very interface and organisation of files is ‘school’.

The use of the e-Portfolio firstly underlines the ‘ownership’ of the learning as belonging to the learner. The look of the interface in terms of colour schemes, fonts, colours, avatars and rich media etc along with web 2.0 tools and widgets all go to a representation of ‘ME’.

Secondly, the style of learning, anytime, anywhere and anyhow (ie what devices are used) lends itself to a spontaneity as opposed to the regimentation of most school timetables. In contrast to the formal classroom situation, the e-Portfolio allows for collaboration between peers from different classrooms or even different schools. So often, schoolwork has to be produced to preferred grammatical standards and layout whereas through the e-Portfolio it is possible to collaborate quickly and creatively in their own patois.

But thirdly, and perhaps most importantly, the teacher or other mentors can communicate privately through the e-Portfolio at a time convenient to the teacher and is more able to provide considered formative comments which is not always possible during the hurly-burly of a busy class.

Fourthly, because the e-Portfolio is seen as owned by the learner and representing their own perspectives, it is inevitable that the teacher will understand things about the child’s home life, their informal learning and experiences, their relationships etc, all of which help the teacher to better appreciate the learner’s needs and expectations.

How could one integrate e-Portfolio as evidence and records of competency and as a learning reflection tool to ensure its aims towards the achievement of life long and life wide learning goals?

I view the e-Portfolio as sitting alongside the institution’s VLE. The user’s own area on the VLE will inevitably contain a large amount of incomplete work, the ‘debris’ from short tests, work in progress etc as well as completed exercises which have been assessed and from which the learner has moved on. Within that VLE will also be a number of assessment tools and capstone assessments which will be recorded by the MIS providing support to both Real Time and end of term reporting. However, the e-Portfolio is that place in which the learner can place selected artefacts from the VLE as representing evidences of significant achievements. As W.J. Popham clearly explains in his book, Transformative Assessment, both the teacher and the learner need to understand which items are to be assessed and their significance within the learning processes. Again, reflection should not just be a matter of introspection but one of peer assessment, collaboration and reference to mentors.

Your second part to the above question, that of Lifelong and Lifewide learning, almost requires a thesis by itself. No one can predict the future so well as to be able to identify beforehand which artefacts will be significant in later life as milestones of one’s learning. As much as one might have kept old exercise books in a tin box and photographs in an album, I think that in this digital age we still need to archive ‘unwanted’ artefacts on CD ROMs or similar storage devices ‘for posterity’.

I do not see the e-Portfolio as being the ‘pantechnicon’ of all of ones learning and life-experiences but rather an open home for the time and ‘place’ one’s life has got to. Certain ‘childish’ things might be put away when other adults are our audience and yet, in another setting, time or place, it is right and proper to share our reflections with others. The whole beauty of a well constructed e-Portfolio system is that these different audiences could all be seeing different views of the same e-Portfolio all at the same time!

For some novice educators and adult learners, preparation of e-portfolio requires mentoring and development. It also takes consideration time and efforts for the learner to appreciate the importance and application of e-Portfolio.

Again, you have two implicit questions here. Yes, there are some complicated e-Portfolio systems out there that might not let you do what you want or others that require an advanced knowledge of Macromedia or others that are downright expensive which cause people to go down the DIY route. There is no need for this. A simple system such as I promote is all that is needed to present even the most mature and technical of e-Portfolio presentations.

Again, I do not think that there is any problem with learners wanting to represent themselves to a variety of discrete audiences. I believe that experience in schools has proved that even the 5yr-old can select artefacts for showcasing, for discussion, reflection and planning for future activities.


Given the emergent knowledge and complex nature of learning and the dynamic changes in the learning ecology, does it also require a continuous planning, implementation and review cycle in the e-portfolio to ensure its successful implementation and sustainability?

Yes, but that is the whole principle of teaching as I see it. We often refer to the Plan-Do-Review cycle or enhanced versions of it. The e-Portfolio is the perfect vehicle to demonstrate a collation of artefacts, including initial drafting of ideas, research questionnaires, MP3/4 recordings, photographs, a team blog, transcripts of interviews, brainstormed concept maps, along with a final report etc all dragged from a variety of sources into the e-Portfolio.

e-Portfolios and Personalisation

For well over a year now I've been trying to think through what 'personalisation' means in something more than just the technical specifications of what some may call a PLE.

Yes, I've had several attempts at defining the functionalities that make learning personal. I really think that the e-Portfolio is that pinacle of personal ownership of learning and a potential summary of all aspects of formal, informal and experiential learning.

However, it was not until this week, I feel embarrassed to admit, that I came across a most powerful document, published in 2004:

Personalisation through participation
A new script for public services
Charles Leadbeater March 2004
Published by Demos (100pp)
http://www.demos.co.uk/files/PersonalisationThroughParticipation.pdf

Although the document is primarily written as a case study based on Health Care in the UK and with some illustrations of school scenarios, almost every paragraph could be applied to how we should think about e-Portfolios. I quote just two early paragraphs to illustrate:

First, personalisation could mean providing people with a more customer-friendly interface with existing services: 24/7 call centres, booked appointments, guaranteed fast response times, better basic customer service.

Second, personalisation could also mean giving users more say in navigating their way through services once they have got access to them. Thus in the health service, ministers talk about ‘patient pathways’ through the system, and in secondary education, children will be given more choice over the pace and style at which they learn.

I have taken the liberty (after checking copyright details) of extracting just four pages of selected notes with an adequate margin to add your own reflective comments:

http://www.maximise-ict.co.uk/Personalisation%20through%20participation.pdf

I found this to be a most salutory document, considering it is now almost five years old!

Comments appreciated.

Why so many confusions re e-Portfolios?

Two recent blogs got me going. In essence both questioned why there was so much confusion, and even in-fighting, about what purposes an e-Portfolio should serve. I repeat some of my responses here:

I wrote a paper, Who's Hijacking my e-Portfolio? almost two years ago, identifying this situation and asking that e-Portfolio users and designers should not hijack the e-Portfolio concept for their own individualistic purposes.

It all depends on where an organisation is starting from. The universities have generally started from a content delivery system, a tool for PDP and job-searching or a minor mandatory course in ICT competencies. Careers counsellors use their versions of an e-Portfolio specifically for just the one subject of 'Careers'. The 14-19 Diploma portfolio concept has evolved out of the paper-based portfolios of work in Design and Technology and ICT classes, many of which still produce a ‘digital portfolio’ as a PowerPoint or web-page presentation with none of the security features or control of audience that a proper e-Portfolio can provide. Many Primary schools have appreciated the immense value of a paper-based portfolio as a tool for teaching and learning and some have moved on to encouraging their pupils to ‘collect’ samples of best practice and present the same on their VLE. At the other extreme, and possibly coming to a state near you, is the concept being developed in some European countries that the e-portfolio should be a tool expected of all adults to assist in data-mining by the state in order to manage skills training in areas of deprivation.

There is one other ingredient to add to this boiling pot of confusions, that of the function of an e-Portfolio when contained within a VLE or close-coupled to an institution's MIS. Here in England Becta has clearly mandated that all schools should have a VLE installed by last year ie Spring 2008. Some VLE vendors have provided some form of e-Portfolio with their VLE which apparently ignores any possibility of transition or portability beyond the institution.

That said, it has always been my contention that we should all step back from our immediate situation and look at the concept of Lifelong, Lifewide Learning and Leisure:

IF Lifelong Learning, ie from ‘5-95’ and thus owned for life, then it must be simple to use and transportable through all the transitions of compulsory schooling and the ‘Seven Ages of Man’

IF Lifewide, then the e-Portfolio should be capable of configuring, by the learner as owner, to represent the image of ‘ME’ that the learner chooses to express at that time as I attempted to illustrate through the five learning phases of an imaginary student.

IF Learning is the prime focus of the e-Portfolio then why not include ALL aspects of learning, including a space for every different subject, access for collaboration by permitted peers and mentors, places for planning, reflection, collaboration, formative assessment etc etc. Again, one page from a popular SlideShare must suffice.

IF Leisure is a recognised part of learning, of doing and sharing, then the e-Portfolio should be able to recognise all the extra-curricular, informal and experiential forms of learning that are not normally included in one’s credentials. The present work in Recognition and Assessment of Prior Experience and Learning (RAPEL) begs the use of this sort of e-Portfolio.

Perhaps one of my first documents, trying to explore what are the fundamentals of any e-Portfolio system were defined some two years ago in my ‘Ten Prime Directives’

Concerning interoperability my immediate reaction is, “Don’t hold your breath!” I am a member (well, fringe member) of some of the interoperability groups – and they all have different agendas and appear not to be talking to each other! We just cannot wait another 10 years before interoperability between e-Portfolio could become a reality. I am also a member of two suppliers’ groups SALTIS (schools) and ‘The Information Authority'(FE). The problem is that all the different parties have not agreed exactly what interoperability is. Is it about passing data from one VLE to another? Is it about passing data from a VLE to an e-Portfolio? Is it about e-Portfolio-based assessments being passed back to the MIS? Is it about translating the learner’s e-Portfolio from one system to another? Is it about exporting and importing content? And without degradation????

Quite simply, if the e-Portfolio is to retain all the features, including the tools that the learner prefers, the cosmetic image, templates and accessibility functions, the audience controls, access to on-line support etc, if the hosting service is to be maintained (not just archived), if it is to ‘transition’ from institution to institution, if it is to be ‘portable’ anywhere throughout the European Union, never-mind the world, then an independent hosting service is essential.

I know that I’ve quoted it before, but one further piece of reading might help, notes supporting a presentation that I gave almost a year ago, my Paris Thesis.

Also some 12 Slideshare presentations at:

http://www.slideshare.net/maximise/slideshows

A proliferation of e-Portfolios?

I was recently impressed by an article written by an American academic who had certainly got a good understanding of the present confusing situation. See his article.
However, I thought it worthwhile to repeat my response here:

Trent,

Thank you for an erudite and provocative article, much appreciated. However, There are several points with which I would disagree.

Yes, you are right to question whether an e-Portfolio should be modelled on a system several hundred years old. So my first question is 'Why not go back to basics and question what are the overriding requirements of an electronic Portfolio?'

Secondly, Yes, you are right to suggest that education is about process, so, 'Why not devise a system that supports and encourages an understanding and identification of the processes involved in any assignment?'

Again, I agree that the e-Portfolio is not the right place for the repository of all of one's life-works - a 'pantechnicon' of all that we own. So, 'Why not encourage students to present only 'work in progress' and selected 'showcase' items that are relevant to any phase or capstone?'

Reflection is a transient thing. The reflections of a 5-yr old may be very different to those of a PhD student or Senior Citizen. However, in order to support reflection one should be capable of re-presenting some evidences that might have been removed from the e-Portfolio and archived on a DVD or memory-stick. My point here is that the e-Portfolio should be learner-owned and easily managed by the owner, whatever their age. Chameleon-like, the e-Portfolio should be capable of adapting to its background so as to be equally presentable to a whole range of audiences - and ALL at the same time.

Finally, you opened by referring to the wide variety of e-Portfolios available. Perhaps one of the main causes for this is that they have short-sightedly established institutionally-based systems that do not truly support transition through all of life's stages or across territorial boundaries?

For more on my ideas please see www.maximise-ict.co.uk/eFolio-01.htm or efoliointheuk.blogspot.com or my demonstration portfolio at:

http://www.raytolley1.xfolioworld.com/

Style, Substance or Process?

Over this Christmas holiday I have been catching up with my reading and updating my own e-Portfolio.

Generally, searching the Internet for fresh gems of insight into e-Portfolios is a dispiriting activity. Most of the reports are several years old, refer to narrow introspective research or wishful project planning with no further outcomes published.

However, one fresh gem did come to my notice just now and I felt that I must comment on it. The report. 'A Review Of The Literature On Portfolios And Electronic Portfolios' by Philippa Butler, of the eCDF ePortfolio Project, Massey University College of Education, New Zealand raised many issues. Chief of these, my usual complaint, is that desk-based research inevitably quotes from older sources, many of these no longer standing up to the latest criteria based on the latest tools available or shifts in educational psychology. Secondly was the premise of the brief that, somehow, the e-Portfolio should be of concern only to those in Higher Education. However, a slow and careful reading of the following extract was joy to my soul!

'Very simply put, a portfolio is a collection of evidence that is gathered together to show a person’s learning journey over time and to demonstrate their abilities. Portfolios can be specific to a particular discipline, or very broadly encompass a person’s lifelong learning. Many different kinds of evidence can be used in a portfolio: samples of writing, both finished and unfinished; photographs; videos; research projects; observations and evaluations of supervisors, mentors and peers; and reflective thinking about all of these. In fact, it is the reflections on the pieces of evidence, the reasons they were chosen and what the portfolio creator learned from them, that are the key aspect to a portfolio (Abrami & Barrett, 2005; Klenowski, Askew, & Carnell, 2006; Loughran & Corrigan, 1995; Smith & Tillema, 2003; Wade & Yarbrough, 1996). In that way, those compiling portfolios are active participants in their own learning (Wade, Abrami, & Sclater, 2005). Kimball (2005, p. 451) goes further, arguing that “neither collection nor selection [of pieces to be incorporated into a portfolio] are worthwhile learning tasks without a basis in reflection. Reflection undergirds the entire pedagogy of portfolios”. Two other key elements to portfolios are that they measure learning and development over time (Barrett, 2000; Challis, 2005), and that it is the process of constructing a portfolio, rather than the end product, that is where the learning takes place (Smith & Tillema, 2003).'

The whole article can be found at:

https://eduforge.org/docman/view.php/176/1111/ePortfolio%20Project%20Research%20Report.pdf

Does Education need e-Portfolios?

I was recently asked to provide an article for a local newspaper. It set me thinking...

There is an increasing interest in educational circles about the use of e‑Portfolios. What are they and how do they help learners?

There are presently at least 35 different VLEs or Learning Platforms available to schools and LAs, many of which have some form of e‑Portfolio embedded within them. It is recognised that these e-Portfolio systems do make a valuable contribution to a child’s planning, collaboration and reflection.

However, all of these educational benefits can usually be attained through the school’s Learning Platform. So, what’s so different about an e-Portfolio?

The fundamental purpose of an e-Portfolio is that of communication and thus self representation. Whether in terms of reflection, planning, collaboration, getting feed-back from others or running polls or surveys the e-Portfolio is that private place of both contemplation and self expression. Yes, it can be used to display one’s CV but at the same time it can do so much more, with a variety of rich media, for a variety of audiences, all at the same time and all in an e-safe environment.

However, the ‘portability’ of an e-Portfolio between institutions is not attainable between any of the different VLEs at this present time and will probably not be capable of delivering a quality solution in the foreseeable future.

In some LAs there is the potential for a Primary school e-Portfolio to be accessed from within the Secondary school if they happen to be sharing the same VLE. However, the results so far, of a ‘one-size-fits-all’ configuration, do not promise a ‘lifelong solution’, ie portable throughout school life, on to FE/HE and through to employment(s) and beyond.

Some e-Portfolio solutions:
Apart from the commercial applications as alluded to above, some schools are producing their own very limited solutions including wordprocessed files with hyperlinks or even PowerPoint presentations. Unfortunately neither of these two approaches has any real academic credibility or functionality. Alternatively, some schools do provide a limited pseudo-e-Portfolio solution but only for their ‘high-flying’ GCSE ICT classes who are taught how to write open access html-based websites.

These sites generally do not provide consistent organisation, nor the security of personal data, nor the control of audience that a true e-Portfolio can provide. As such, none of the above are solutions which the vast majority of learners, can ‘carry with them’, aged 5-95, for Lifelong, Lifewide Learning and Leisure.

‘Interoperability Gurus’:
It seems that the various interoperability groups show little concern for the maintenance of the graphical image of the e-Portfolio. In their hunt for data-handling solutions, the issue of ‘degradation’ tends to be ignored. The whole concept of personal ownership, of an ability for the learner to represent themselves, to say, ‘Look, This is ME!’ by selecting templates, fonts, images, by the way they choose to organise their e-Portfolio and embedding a whole variety of rich media is lost if degradation cannot be completely avoided.

The concept of ownership, which should start in our Primary schools, is also a strong generator of motivation to learning and is significantly enhanced by the robustness of quality graphics.

Home Access:
The provision of a good VLE, the setting up of parental accounts and the latest Home Access initiative, providing low-cost hardware, all converge towards the potential of becoming an excellent scheme, as far as it goes. However, the school’s VLE is primarily the deliverer of formal teaching and learning – and is ‘owned’ by the school.

The e-Portfolio, on the other hand, provides an opportunity for the less-formal aspects of learning to be enabled in an e-safe environment, the content of each e-Portfolio being owned by the learner. This allows for the more informal and formative contributions of teachers, mentors and peers. There are a score of functions outside of formal learning, all of which enhance formal learning. Perhaps one of the least recognised benefits of an e-Portfolio is the ability of staff to better understand a young person and their home environment through their personal diaries or blogs etc, all of which would not be seen within a conventional setting.

In Conclusion:
1. An e-Portfolio is proudly owned by the learner and ‘travels’ with the learner wherever he/she goes.
2. The e-Portfolio is the means of displaying the learner’s work to different audiences and for a variety of purposes.
3. A good e-Portfolio system can provide a trusted e-safe working environment.
4. Above all, the e-Portfolio allows the learner to plan, collaborate with others and work when and where they want – which MUST be a good thing!

The danger of 'Adult' e-Portfolios

I recently came across a very attractive and accomplished e-Portfolio by Sarah Stewart, a Senior Lecturer in Midwifery in Otago, New Zealand: http://sarahstewart-eportfolio.wikispaces.com/.

She also links this well organised e-Portfolio to her blog at: http://sarah-stewart.blogspot.com/.

And a YouTube video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-t2dXPb9Wc8

All three are well worth looking at and reflecting upon.

However, for those of us involved in developing tools for mainstream education I really think that we must step back a bit and ask ourselves if such a tool is totally appropriate.

Firstly, in her enthusiasm for the technology, she has had to invest much time in gaining an understanding of the skills required. Is it appropriate for a generic tool to be provided to all Primary school children and expect them to get on with it?

Secondly, as an adult, she freely allows a fair amount of personal information to be publicly available. I worry that however much one might explain to children the reasons for non-disclosure of personal information I believe that schools should have firmer controls in place to ensure that no child becomes vulnerable.

Again, because, as she admits, some of her practitioner details must remain confidential - there is therefore a dilution of the validity of her 'evidence' and thus requiring a probable duplication of electronic and paper-based reports.

As my regular readers will be aware, I am very concerned about all aspects of e-Safety as related to e-Portfolios. It should therefore be of no surprise that although I am a keen proponent of Web2.0 technologies, I am firmly of the opinion that any such tools should be contained within a safe e-Portfolio environment and NOT available to the whole 'cloud' until individual students are deemed to be appropriately responsible.

Knowing how easy it is to forge official paper-based certificates, I am amused by the common suggestion of providing links to scanned-in .pdf copies of original documents. Is the UK the only country to establish a central MIAP-type repository of one's qualifications?

In terms of collaboration, Sarah does admit that her site is available for public response. However, within the school situation I would hope that there are sufficient controls in place to allow collaboration only with identified peers or mentors etc.

One of the special features of eFolio is the ability to present different representations of one's self to different audiences. How students may wish to represent themselves to their peers, using their own patois, rich media etc may be very different to that side of themselves that they may wish to present to their parents, teachers or potential employers etc.

Perhaps one of my most fundamental concerns is in relation to the research community, including the intelligent and forward-looking people such as Sarah Stewart. The publication of research papers and other reports often suggest that the ubiquitous e-Portfolio, based on 'cloud' computing is the way forward for all. Yes, it might be for the top 10% of our community. But is this the best solution for the majority of the not-so-ict-literate?

I am not thinking in terms of a 'digital divide' as such. We are rapidly moving to a stage where the 'divide' defines a much narrower group created by an 'elite' who choose to separate themselves from a broad grey area, the wider community, who are already using ICT every day of their lives. This new 'silent majority' may not want to spend time building and maintaining their own e-Portfolio systems or blogs. Certainly our youngsters in schools, those out of work, those with educational disabilities or the elderly would be better provided for with a simple low-cost system that provides the security and privacy that they may need.

Is it not time that all organisations, including the SMEs recognised the place of e-Portfolios in enhancing their workforce through a sense of 'membership', offering training and suport and providing the opportunity for self-representation?

So I return to the title of this piece and ask if there is a silo effect generated by academia which interrupts the potential for the concept of an e-Portfolio for Lifelong, Lifewide, Learning and Leisure?