Where in the World?

Currently this blog has recorded 11518 readers from 129 countries and 2763 cities. (see bottom rh column). However, I would like to hear from the many silent partners, particularly at this time, on the subject of the age-groups of ePortfolio users. I am attempting to collate a list of 'Use Cases' from around the world which will demonstarte that people of all ages, from Pre-school, through mainstream education, VET, FE, HE and adult education are currently using ePortfolios for a variety of purposes. In particular, I am looking for more examples of the use of ePortfolios in order to support adult learners - or even those who use an ePortfolio system for a Community of Practice, in retirement or Care Homes. If readers can supply me with a link to your ePortfolio examples, or relate in approximately 100 words how you or your organisation use ePortfolios, I would be most grateful. If you want to email me, please use: support@maximise-ict.co.uk

Graham Attwell on ePortfolios

Graham Attwell makes a masterful presentation (25 mins) describing the whole ePortfolio panorama. He starts by stating the classic opinion that there are just four different types of ePortfolio. However, he does not appear to come to the same conclusion as myself, that all these types, and more, can all be contained within the one system. Later on he does argue that there are many different uses of an ePortfolio which tend to contradict his arguments for four separate systems.

As regular readers of this blog will know, I argue for a single system with all artefacts uploaded once only but that they can then be re-purposed for several different and concurrent audiences. He raises the important question of ownership as an unresolvable conundrum: should the institution, the Local Authority or even Government own and supply the ePortfolio? Or should employers be required to provide the ePortfolio? And, as I have raised before, what happens when a learner is attending two or three concurrent institutions or is working for more than one employer? Graham continues to ask more challenging questions but without presenting the listener with constructive solutions.

My arguments for eFolio are quite simple. The ePortfolio should be learner owned and not embedded within a single institution. By being externally hosted it is freely portable - wherever the learner may go, and whatever various works they are doing. He hints at the possiblity of cloud-based systems but does not give any solution as to where the non-techie can get support. In contrast, eFolio has both excellent context-sensitive help designed for the young or inexperienced learner and also professional help-desk services - and all at extremely low cost.

How Effective are Online Assessment Systems?

This guest post is contributed by April Davis. She raises several important issues but her description of the existing scenario raises questions for me about whether we should be expecting more from 'assessment'. Should assessment be only summative, or if formative, when? - and by whom? Does assessment really help the learner? April writes:

"There are many ways for students to assess their capabilities, and online assessment systems are just one of these. They’re being increasingly used today, not just by organizations and educational institutions to gauge if students and employees will be a right fit for the job or the degree, but also by those who want to assess themselves and see how good their chances are of getting into a course or gaining employment in the organization of their choice. Most online assessment exams test attitude and personality (or psychometric capabilities), and pre-employment skills. The efficacy of these assessment systems depends on a number of factors:

• The standardization of the tests – an online assessment system comprises a question bank and a question engine. The question bank must hold standardized question definitions in organized categories and contexts and the question engine must be able to pull these definitions based on user interaction. Also, the organization using the test must be sure that the assessment and analysis returned by the system are in conjunction with their values, beliefs and needs.
  
  
• The robustness of the system – since the tests are held online, the system has to make allowances for unexpected occurrences like lost connections, users pressing back and forward buttons indiscriminately or closing browser windows by mistake, server crashes, broken connections to the database and loss of data that has already been filled, and so on. Where these tests are timed the above problems could influence the accuracy of the results.
  

"For organizations that use these assessment systems, the relative success or failure of these tests can be gauged only in hindsight – the performance and attitude of the employees that the test recommends, when assessed over a period of time, helps companies decide if online assessment systems are effective in their hiring policies.

"However, it should also be noted that these tests are not a perfect science and that every employee changes in their attitude and personality based on the nature of the job and the environment in which they work. So while the test may throw up a few suitable candidates, it’s unrealistic to hope that they’re all going to be a good fit. The key to assessing the efficacy of these tests with some degree of accuracy is to give them some time, use a large number of employees as a test pool, and allow a few variances in your interpretation of the results."

By-line:
This guest post is contributed by April Davis, she writes on the topic of Accredited Degree Online . She welcomes your questions and comments at her email id: april.davis83(@)gmail(.)com.

home-school relationships - 1

The FuturLab report, 'Developing the home-school relationship using digital technologies', published a few weeks ago, is a useful statement of the present situation, warts 'n all. Illustrated profusely throughout its 68 .pdf pages and well documented, I wonder just how brief FutureLab's message really is.

For me, I get a similar sense when reading the document as when I see other publications by Becta on Parental Engagement - 'It all seems a bit one-sided'. It all seems to be about telling parents what the school does and what the parents should be doing. Yes, there are occasional statements about listening to 'pupil voice' but generally the data-flow all seems a bit one-sided. Again, although I believe in on-line reporting in its full and wholesome potential, many fear that the term relates only to the dreaded 'REPORT' mentality which usually tends to highlight a pupil's failings (eg times late, detentions etc) rather than their merits.

Obviously, I tend to look at any report in terms of its references to e-Portfolios, again, only one brief reference in passing to something that might be implemented in the future. As regular readers will recognise, I see the e-Portfolio as being the tool par excellence for communicating to parents both the progress of their child(ren) in real time and the apposite place for formative feedback.

What I do not see in this report, as with other Becta publications, is any mention of the facility for TEACHERS to take notice of what learning takes place outside of school which is NOT school directed. The e-Portfolio is very much a two-way process as opposed to Becta's uni-directional approach of TELLING the parents. The e-Portfolio can resolve a very real dilema - that of parents not knowing how children are taught, but also that schools should be aware of what happens in the home, in the ballet class, the Saturday morning football fixture or the additional private tuition.

Why should I bother?

There is a situation which I feel is endemic amongst many of our traditional academic institutions. Perhaps their argument is 'If it isn't broken, why mend it?' - little realising that the educational omnibus of 50 years ago is not helping today's students and teachers to get to where they want to be in the future. The vintage omnibus is not necessarily going in the right direction for everyone, particularly when more personal and individulaised vehicles can help learners get closer to where they want to be in a more satisfying way. I recently came across a post asking for responses to the statement below.

“In truth, I can't say I've ever found much evidence of demand for any sort of e-portfolio tool among students, and to be honest there's comparatively little interest among academic staff in using them with students - except perhaps in subjects where portfolios are a professional requirement, and even then they tend to be very much driven by the needs of the certifying professional body.”

Why should students or teachers get excited about something that they do not appreciate? As long as an e-Portfolio is held up as an electronic CV or as a storage system for assessment of coursework no one is going to get inspired. As long as publications still suggest that an e-Portfolio can be held on a CD or flash drive we are still thinking ‘old technologies’.

Perhaps the problem is that of understanding new pedagogies:

• If staff were really looking for a method of capturing the transient interchanges of collaboration or peer review,
• if students realised how on-line formative assessment helps their academic progress,
• if they realised that the e-Portfolio was really an opportunity to share with others their deepest interests,
• if teachers realised that the e-Portfolio can often be a window into the souls of otherwise reticent students,
• if ownership of an e-Portfolio really gave opportunity for self-expression,
• if the e-Portfolio really was a Lifelong and Lifewide tool with full and uncompromised portability,
• if students and teachers realised the value of familial mentors,
• if the value of rich media was really understood,
• if both students and teachers really understood that the e-Portfolio can actually save time and allow both ‘travelling light’ and working where and when they choose, then perhaps the situation might be different.

When is an e-Portfolio not an e-Portfolio?

Nils Petersen on the AAEEBL forum recently pointed up this interesting example of what some were calling an 'e-Portfolio' where others were perhaps more correctly calling it her 'electronic reputation' or as Serge Ravet would say, 'her digital identity'.

The work of Margo Tamez as illustrated by the Touchgraph that she created hit the courts when litigation ensued as to the ownership rights of an e-Portfolio created as part of her academic work. This is a classic example of 'Cloud Computing' and raises the whole issue of 'who owns what'?

Traditionally, any work created in the workplace belonged to the owners of the company and similarly, any work created using the tools of the workplace, either on-site or off-site still belonged to the company. But that is not the point of this post.

Firstly, as I have stated before, the e-Portfolio should not be considered as a 'pantechnicon' of all that a student has ever produced. Rather, the e-Portfolio should be seen as that selection of appropriate artefacts, either work in progress or completed activities that the learner feels are the best exemplars of learning processes.

Secondly, the e-Portfolio should be that organised and well presented selection of artefacts supported by intelligent comment for a particlar audience. I cannot begin to think that Margo has a particular audience in mind for this tumble of evidences.

Thirdly, the technical competence required for this form of entertainment can only serve as a barrier to learning if others are tempted to emulate this form of bravado. As others have noted on the AAEEBL forum, the creation of an e-Portfolio should not be a measure of technical competence. Rather, an e-Portfolio (such as eFolio) should be a simple to use tool that enables all the positive things of e-Portfolio practice to happen naturally as part of reflection and showcasing.

Instructional Technology in Schools

"The Use of Instructional Technology in Schools examines teachers' use of the major instructional technologies over the last century — from the days of silent film, radio and slide shows through to the modern interactive whiteboard and the Web. It explores the reasons why so few teachers have used these technologies and why, even in today's digital world, the most commonly used classroom tools are the pen, paper and teaching board."

I make no apology for including this 'advert' as I helped in some of the discussions with Mal Lee about the evolving use of technologies in the UK. However, I have just been informed by Eurospan Limited, the UK branch of ACER Press, that they are offering a 15% discount on Mal Lee's books to educationists. The 'blurb' goes on to say:

"The book provides decision makers with an invaluable insight into the million dollar question: What is required to get all teachers across the nation using the appropriate instructional technology as a normal part of everyday teaching? Without question, student learning is enhanced by adopting these new technologies.

"Until now, research on why the majority of teachers use only the most basic tools in the classroom has been scarce. The Use of Instructional Technology in Schools examines this phenomenon and, most importantly, identifies what is required to achieve teachers' universal acceptance of instructional technologies."

About the authors
Mal Lee is an educational consultant specialising in the development of digital technology in schools. He is a former director of schools and secondary school principal, who has written extensively on the effective use of ICT in teaching practice. Mal Lee is co-author of Leading a Digital School: Principles and practice (ACER Press, 2008) and The Interactive Whiteboard Revolution: Teaching with IWBs (ACER Press, 2009).

Arthur Winzenried has taught in a wide variety of library and classroom settings, from primary to tertiary, and has been responsible for innovative developments in school ICT over a number of years. He is a frequent national and international speaker on knowledge management and is currently Lecturer in Information Systems at Charles Sturt University, NSW, Australia.