The Digital Transformation of Education

Click to see the whole article

Although Vineet Madan does not even mention ePortfolios what he does say makes a lot of sense, for schools of all age-ranges, not just Higher Education, upon which he focuses.

I quote briefly from two sections of his paper:

"Creating a More Engaged Classroom
"Increasing engagement is about much more than simply entertaining our students with new devices and whiz-bang multimedia; it's about accomplishing the very real task of connecting them more closely to their coursework, to their teachers and to each other. Technology enables biology students to touch, spin and explore the structure of a molecule as they're reading about it in a text, watch a speech by Dr. Martin Luther King as they read about the civil rights era and ask questions of their classmates and complete their homework assignments all in a digital environment. By fostering these connections, technology can enhance and increase students' learning interactions, leading to better performance.


"Making Personalized Learning a Reality
"To teach our students effectively, we first have to learn about them. One of the best ways to do this is to use technology to collect data that tells us where they're strong and where they're weak, how they learn best, and use this data to create personalized pathways to help students build their knowledge and skills.
"The single hottest trend in education technology is the popularity of adaptive learning systems. These systems use student assessments to gather performance data and point students to course content that's specifically targeted to help them build their knowledge and skills. Formative assessment programs work in a similar way, only they provide insights directly to teachers, allowing them to more efficiently personalize their instruction for every student. When we talk about making the classroom smarter, this is what we mean....

" The simplest reason why we should continue our push to bring technology to our classrooms is also the best one: it works. According to the U.S. Department of Education and recent studies by the National Training and Simulation Association, technology-based instruction can reduce the time students take to reach a learning objective by 30 to 80 percent. In the world of higher education, where technology is adopted at a much faster rate than in K-12 schools, adaptive learning systems such as LearnSmart have already been shown to have a significant impact on student pass rates, retention rates and overall academic performance.
This improved level of performance has implications far beyond the classroom. Today we live in a global, digital society, and increasing students' exposure to technology can not only help them develop the skills they need to succeed in it but open them up to a world much greater than their own."

For those of us who understand the ePortfolio culture, we can say 'Amen' to all of the above.  eFolio is one of the best ePortfolio systems for providing the feedback, ownership and flexibility that Vineet is writing about.

Towards the Next Revolution in Teaching and Learning

to boldly go...

I have long maintained that so-called disruptive technologies are only that for the slothful teacher who is not willing to recognise that Teaching andd Learning strategies are changing.  For those educationists who DO recognise that we must move on in terms of teaching styles, that learners my benefit from a different combination of learning styles on two different days then and only then can we move on. 

The wise teacher will recognise that mobile devices, self-paced learning, collaborative pedagogies, cloud-based systems and intelligent PLEs are but tools to assist their dreams.  I argue that the ePortfolio is the central hub that can make all of the potential changes in Teaching and Learning become effective. - And, I would suggest, within the next few years.

The paper briefly identifies some 25 aspects of Teaching and Learning which, when mixed together will combine to form an explosive mixture that is nothing short of revolutionary:

http://www.maximise-ict.co.uk/Towards_the_next_revolution_in_T&L.pdf

Tool Thinking?

I have just been invited to learn about a 'new' ePortfolio product with the title, 'Gather and present multiple content types — even multimedia — in one polished PDF file' !!! What a disappointment! The developers must have spent tens of thousands of pounds developing a non-starter.

Quite simply, products such as this cannot possibly deliver 90% of the functionality of what a true ePortfolio should be capable of doing. The developers, I would suggest, have been beguiled into what I call 'Tool Thinking'. By this I mean that it would appear that the developers have said to themselves, "Here we have a tool. - What can we do with it?" Rather than asking, "What educational processes need to be served?"

I cannot possibly think what use a single polished .pdf file can be in terms of Lifelong Learning, or Collaborative Learning, or peer review, or mentoring, or formative feedback. What of on-line Assessments? Where are the feedback tools such as comments or Likart Scales? How can the one document address different audiences for different purposes and with different 'personas'? What would happen if one small spelling mistake or grammatical error was spotted when about to present the ePortfolio? Would it be capable of quick and simple editing?

The ePortfolio must be a 'living, breathing and growing' collection of artefacts, capable of addition or removal and viewed by differing audiences who may have different permissions. It should be a dynamic and easily editable collation of all aspects of the learner's life. It should be capable of evolving, chameleon-like, according to the developing self-image of the owner.

Use of e-portfolios in Social Sciences (Sheffield Hallam University)

A nice but brief review of the implementation of a popular e-Portfolio system! Worth reading if only to spot the additional features that eFolio offers!

As you may see in my comment to the authors, I question how students get access to the other necessary tools which we would expect to find embedded in a good e-Portfolio tool. Yes, older and more able students might be able to find the right tools for polls or questionnaires but why not have them already embedded where even the youngest pupils in schools or the elderly or less-able can access them?

Personalised Learning Plans

The report in the New York Times reminded me of one of the key principles of getting started with an e-Portfolio in the classroom, KISS (Keep it Short and Simple). The article is well worth reading in its entirety. Obviously an exciting venture for New Jersey Middle Schools. Educators around the world will be interested to follow their progress.

John Pallister had been doing just this for several years before he retired with his focus on Personal Learning and Thinking Skills. Several other eFolio pilots have similarly started by focussing on a few headings.

One very exciting pilot study in the Orkneys was based primarily on just the four components of their 'Curriculum for Excellence':

The initial headings were restricted to:

Home
My Timetable
Effective Contributor
Successful Learner
Confident Individual
Responsible Citizen
About Me

From this initial setup the children could focus primarily on working to the four main assessment criteria. In their own time they were then encouraged to complete a less-formal description of themselves, their interests and ambitions. Later on it is anticipated that the students will then expand their eFolios to cover more subjects areas of their own choices.

Passion and Learning

I have just come back from 3 days of HE/FE conferences in which I heard repeated criticisms of VLEs and e-Portfolios as not meeting the needs of students. Discussions ranged from the sterility of the formats to the inability of lecturers and professors to actually understand the potential of the new technologies.

And then, next morning, I discovered this offering from Angela Maiers' presentation for K12OnlineConference09. What a refreshing change this was! This raised my spirits for the simple reason that this is what I see as the secret of eFolio. The reality of real involvement as opposed to the half-hearted efforts of our kids in the classroom that Angela refers to is at the heart of the child's ownership of learning.

As I said at one of the meetings, 'Unless all stakeholders are fully consulted before the implementation of a new technology (here talking about VLEs), unless the decision makers are educated as to the full potential of the new tools, unless they can then in turn decide how this will impact on teaching and learning, it is no wonder that the technology fails to meet expectations.'

And this is equally true of e-Portfolios. In all sectors of Education, it would appear, decision makers have failed to do the spadework of consulting with the whole range of stakeholders - and certainly do not appear to have explored how the e-Portfolio can change teaching and learning. Far too often it is the case that installations are managed by technicians who have little understanding of the future direction of education. It is essential, as Angela Maier clearly illustrates, that unless the e-Portfolio is designed (by educators) to adapt to the learner's individual passions there will be very little chance of its real takeup within education.

Schools and Parents: a New Partnership?

Niel McLean, Executive Director, Becta, the government agency for technology in education discusses (November 2009) how technology supports a new relationship with schools. In his introduction he writes:

"Good parental engagement is fundamental to children’s learning and closely linked to increased attainment. One of the more effective ways for parents to engage in their child’s learning is to maintain good communication with a school, learning more about their child’s progress whilst also helping to identify any development or performance issues early on."

The website is very attractive and, for those who can find it, provides a lot of thoughtful material, including the 16-page .pdf document.

Yes, school VLEs or MLEs are as essential as the Home Access Programme. However, yet again, the mention of e-Portfolios is significant by its absence. School may be one part of e-Learning and before long it is hoped that teachers will begin to realise that remote on-line access will change the ways teaching & learning is enabled.

But, as I have repeatedly said, the major part of a child's learning takes place outside of the four walls of the classroom. It is the e-Portfolio that can document all the other forms of informal, casual or experiential learning that enables teachers, parents, new school or colleges as well as employers to see the 'whole person'.

CPD is VITAL

At the Naace Conference last week I was fortunate enough to attend the 'Soft Launch' of Vital. The £5.6 million scheme to help teachers bring technology even more effectively into the classroom now has a name, and collaboration with existing providers and practitioners is underway ahead of the programme’s much-anticipated official launch in January 2010.

Vital (Transforming Lessons, Inspiring Learning) is to be the overarching title for an unprecedented collaboration between the Open University (OU) and e-skills UK. First announced in July, Vital’s goal is to foster and develop top-class continuing professional development for teachers and other educational practitioners in England who face the dual challenge of stimulating increasingly technology-confident students, and preparing them for the ‘knowledge economy’ beyond school.

“Between now and January, we will be making good use of a number of opportunities, including this week’s Naace and Handheld Learning conferences, to set out our ambitions for Vital and explain the progress made to date ahead of the scheme’s ‘hard’ launch at BETT 2010,” says e-skills UK’s Debbie Forster, the Vital Programme Co-ordinator. “Our focus is to work alongside existing training providers and practitioners to build on best practice in this area, and with employers to identify ways for them to support the development of teachers. We also want to encourage practitioners to pre-register at www.vital.ac.uk in advance of the roll-out of courses from the start of next year.”

Vital responds to the needs of two types of practitioners – those seeking to exploit ICT across the curriculum, and the specialists teaching technology subjects (Computing, IT and ICT) as disciplines in their own right.

“We recognise that keeping abreast of the latest developments in technology is a continual challenge. As well as supporting teachers of all subjects, a core component of Vital will be opportunities for specialist teachers to work with employers and to sample industry-level cutting edge content and facilities,” explains Debbie Forster.

The OU’s Peter Twining, Vital’s Programme Director adds: “The scheme will celebrate and promote practical solutions to the challenges that schools are facing both in terms of their broader development plans and day-to-day classroom practice. Often this will be about teachers gaining the confidence and experience to make better use of the ICT their schools already have, and encouraging the creative combination of traditional and digital technologies to create the best experiences and outcomes for pupils.”

From January, Vital will be offering six new face-to-face courses and at least three online courses. In addition, a network of nine regional Vital co-ordinators will be in place working with local training providers, schools, local authorities and employers to ensure provision is appropriate and tailored to each region’s needs.

“A key part of Vital will be to introduce new development opportunities for teachers, with the first courses aimed at addressing important aspects of the curriculum, such as how to promote effective discussion and collaboration in the classroom, using Web 2.0 technologies where appropriate. But Vital is about more than just offering courses, with the programme supporting informal peer-to-peer learning both within and across schools.” says Peter Twining. “Vital will also play an important role in researching and promoting the best CPD that currently exists. We appreciate that a great deal of excellent provision is already happening and we are busy mapping the current ICT CPD landscape and seeking collaboration with the best that’s out there. For example, where we find that a provider, such as a local authority, has a superb course available in their region we are keen to collaborate with them to extend that course’s reach to a national scale.”

“We aim for personalised learning for students, and we want the same for our teachers,” emphasises Debbie Forster. “Our ambition is to provide support that makes a real difference for specialist technology teachers and to build an ongoing commitment to continuing professional development in ICT amongst all the nation’s teachers. As well as developing specific courses where they are needed, we will also work to enable online teacher communities and networks offering mutual support and the means of sharing good practice.”

Footnote: Debbie Forster and Peter Twining were keynote speakers at the Naace conference, Hellidon Lakes, near Daventry, Northamptonshire, Saturday 10 October 2009.

Online Learning

A recently produced research document makes encouraging reading- even if a lot of the interesting bits are embedded within masses of statistics and tables. However, although this document is about online learning we can extend its conclusions to the additional functionality that an e-Portfolio can provide. As the document is online and available for all to see I trust that the extracts as listed below make a fair basis for further discussion.

US Department of Education
Evaluation of Evidence-Based Practices in Online Learning
May 2009

Extracts from the Executive Summary:
Online learning—for students and for teachers—is one of the fastest growing trends in educational uses of technology. The National Center for Education Statistics (2008) estimated that the number of K-12 public school students enrolling in a technology-based distance education course grew by 65 percent in the two years from 2002-03 to 2004-05. On the basis of a more recent district survey, Picciano and Seaman (2009) estimated that more than a million K–12 students took online courses in school year 2007–08.

These activities were undertaken to address four research questions:

1. How does the effectiveness of online learning compare with that of face-to-face instruction?
2. Does supplementing face-to-face instruction with online instruction enhance learning?
3. What practices are associated with more effective online learning?
4. What conditions influence the effectiveness of online learning?

Worth noting:
When a α < .05 level of significance is used for contrasts, one would expect approximately 1 in 20 contrasts to show a significant difference by chance. For 51 contrasts, then, one would expect 2 or 3 significant differences by chance. The finding of 2 significant contrasts associated with face-to-face instruction is clearly within the range one would expect by chance; the 11contrasts associated with online or hybrid instruction exceeds what one would expect by chance.

Key Findings:
The main finding from the literature review was that:

• Few rigorous research studies of the effectiveness of online learning for K–12 students have been published.
• Students who took all or part of their class online performed better, on average, than those taking the same course through traditional face-to-face instruction.
• Instruction combining online and face-to-face elements had a larger advantage relative to purely face-to-face instruction than did purely online instruction.
• Studies in which learners in the online condition spent more time on task than students in the face-to-face condition found a greater benefit for online learning.
• Most of the variations in the way in which different studies implemented online learning did not affect student learning outcomes significantly.
• The effectiveness of online learning approaches appears quite broad across different content and learner types.
• Effect sizes were larger for studies in which the online and face-to-face conditions varied in terms of curriculum materials and aspects of instructional approach in addition to the medium of instruction.
• Blended and purely online learning conditions implemented within a single study generally result in similar student learning outcomes.
• Elements such as video or online quizzes do not appear to influence the amount that students learn in online classes.
• Online learning can be enhanced by giving learners control of their interactions with media and prompting learner reflection.
• Providing guidance for learning for groups of students appears less successful than does using such mechanisms with individual learners.

Extract from the Conclusions:
In many of the studies showing an advantage for online learning, the online and classroom conditions differed in terms of time spent, curriculum and pedagogy. It was the combination of elements in the treatment conditions (which was likely to have included additional learning time and materials as well as additional opportunities for collaboration) that produced the observed learning advantages. At the same time, one should note that online learning is much more conducive to the expansion of learning time than is face-to-face instruction.

Personal Observation:
Although there are some remarkable facilities available to some students in the US, I wonder just how many children in 'average' schools in the US have the same computer ratios as in the UK or more importantly what % of the US population uses 'Home Access' as we are beginning to understand it here in the UK.

I say this because I am not sure how well we can compare 'like-with-like' across different countries. Until the UK can get down to producing similar research for our 'K-12' cohort we will not be able to begin to ascertain the added advantages of e-Portfolios.

There are still many 'loopholes' in the paper that I am still trying to clarify with the American authors. For instance, were their 'online learning courses' freestanding tools with no f2f support? And then, what does f2f mean? Individual 1:1 tuition or one lecturer in front of 200 students? Did the online courses allow collaboration? Did they allow individual investigation or project work? Was the students' work machine-marked or was it assessed by a real person? Why, in some cases did online retention rates drop - was this just bad teaching or was it online technical frustrations?

For me, the document, despite all its academic excellence, raises a number of issues which need to be discussed with those who are aware of the contexts.

Moving House?

There comes a time in most people's lives when they have to move house and take all their loved possessions with them - and what an upheaval that can be! Unfortunately some people have a perception of the e-Portfolio as being that 'removal van' or 'pantechnicon' - which is used to transport every bit and piece of value or even no-value - just sentimental rubbish that one cannot throw away. However, the analogy gets worse! The learner decides that rather than unloading all their stuff, every bit of coursework, every idle amusement, every item of correspondence shall all be kept on board - because, after all, they are not stopping here but plan to move on again. And the effort of unloading and loading up again is just too much bother.

Others prefer to travel light, only carrying with them the immediate essential tools and equipment currently used in their studies. They have a more scatter-brained approach to learning - leaving a never-ending trail of artefacts scattered, on their academic travels, around the universe - sometimes called 'cloud computing'. The trouble with this approach, as any parent knows, is that things get far too easily misplaced or even lost for ever. For those who haven't read my previous jottings on 'transition' the potential amount of travelling the learner could experience is illustrated here.

As one gets older and possibly not much wiser there is the temptation to carry around even more clutter, 'just in case'. However, as we make our way to yet another presentation or job interview we begin to understand the need to cut our 'showcase' down to the bare minimum with which our audience can cope. And this is so true of our e-Portfolios. eFolio, in particular, is capable of displaying only what we want to show, uncluttered by ephemera or irrelevancies.

I have seen far too many blogs containing discussions about how much space on a school's servers their e-Portfolios should take. Similarly, there are debates about how long students' artefacts should remain on the school's servers once the students have left. Surely, these are all irrelevancies when considering the fundamental purposes of an e-Portfolio? It all comes down to an understanding of one of my several mantras:

"Let the VLE do what it does best and
leave the e-Portfolio to do what it can best do!"

This approach leaves all coursework, past and present, on the VLE's server alongside the specialist programs, assignment briefs, schemes of work, assessment tools, on-line reporting and all the other mechanics needed to run an effective 'electrified' school. How long these 'school owned' artefacts are kept is down to the institution's Policies.

The e-Portfolio, on the other hand, should be seen as belonging to the learner and need only contain those artefacts and tools that the student considers needful in their present circumstances. - Anything that rightfully belongs to the learner and is no longer immediately needed can be off-loaded to one's own PC or Tb backup for safe keeping.

Again, the e-Portfolio should be seen as a flexible and adaptable system. As much as any young adult may change friends or experience the coming and going of different teachers, the e-Portfolio should be flexible enough to adapt to the differing audiences who are permitted to share in the learner's activities. As children steadily mature into adulthood, so too, their affections and loyalties will change and their e-Portfolios should be capable of reflecting that change. It is not so much the opportunity to publicise one's avowed following of a film star, pop-group or football team so much as the fact that the e-Portfolio is capable of reflecting something of one's deeper self image.

The choice of media is so very important. Certainly we should avoid those e-Portfolio systems that are so heavily document-based as to provoke the audience to shout out, "I cannot understand what you are saying for the mass of words you write." The colour schemes, choice of fonts or avatars and the selection of recorded interviews, video-clips or SlideShares one may include will no doubt say more about a person than the text they write.

Chicken or Egg?

We have a very difficult situation concerning the introduction of e-Portfolios into the classroom. Until such time as teachers are able to free themselves from old didactic methods, until they are brave enough to let go of the reins or at least allow a bit of slack, there is very little reason to use an e-Portfolio.

On the other hand, without adequate technology, both in the classroom and beyond there is little hope of being able to do even the simplest of tasks that would benefit from using an e-Portfolio.

Unfortunately, there is also a third element with which we must contend, that of the silo-mentality of many institutions who only see the e-Portfolio as a one-purpose tool for the use of their individual institution. (see my paper, ‘Who’s Hijacking Our e-Portfolios?’)

Prior to using an ICT solution perhaps one of the first activities that caught my imagination was that of dividing my class into groups and brainstorming an issue on a large sheet of paper. But after several re-draws of the proposed solution something of the fire of the activity had died down. Yes the discussions or even arguments that took place were always excellent but somehow we never captured the dialogues between the students.

Later on I introduced the concept of blogging, starting by using a paper-based activity. Yes, again this produced howls of laughter and a definite broadening of understanding about how others felt on the topic in question.

If teachers are comfortable with this level of freedom within the classroom, where the outcomes may be quite different to what one might have planned, and if the teacher is then able to help the students learn from the exercise, then, and only then, might we be able to demand on the grounds of curriculum enhancement the technologies we want.

Senior Leadership and Management Teams (SLMTs), as we call them in the UK, need to be convinced however that the learning will be deep learning. This needs demonstration of teacher competence in managing such scenarios as the above before the leap of faith that justifies the investment in equipment and the access to electronic collaborative tools.

Yes, blogs and wikis may be a good start but are not necessary if students have a good e-Portfolio system. As a senior head of department for many years, I would prefer to provide my teachers and their students with an e-safe system that allows the controls to be gently lifted from a totally secure or private condition through stages of group collaboration and steadily expanding the number and variety of school-based and external audiences with which any individual child is able to cope.

A good e-Portfolio, such as eFolio, provides adequate facilities to manage one’s artefacts, to use feedback from peers and mentors, to reproduce electronic versions of the collaborative activities as mentioned above and repeatedly revising one’s planning, drafting and reflections within the e-Portfolio.

In the UK I feel that most schools have been encouraged for a number of years to develop these collaborative skills either on paper or in small groups huddled around a limited number of computers. Similarly, in the UK, we have experienced over the last ten to fifteen years a large number of technological initiatives (and more still to come!) that have prepared us for the next leap of faith. But thirdly, we also have had several initiatives concerning the personalisation of learning. Again, the e-Portfolio is that special place where one’s individuality, learning styles and support by other adults lends itself to a unique repository of learning far different to the formal content delivery mechanisms of our Learning Platforms.

I would argue strongly that the UK is therefore potentially ready for e-Portfolios. However, despite my statements above, this will require a massive amount of staff training in order to help teachers understand how the e-Portfolio fits into our curriculum and can in actual fact enhance it!

BUT, this e-Portfolio explosion is not about to happen throughout the world. Many countries, even if they had the technologies and 1:1 pupil:computer ratios are still teaching in didactic, teacher-led authoritarian regimes which may not allow the individuality which an e-Portfolio supports. I suspect (and am willing to be corrected) that some parts of America are as traditional or conservative in their teaching and learning methods as mid- or eastern Europe. In other places, such as New Zealand, many teachers are already actively developing the collaborative culture upon which e-Portfolios thrive but the hierarchy are still discussing what an e-Portfolio is.

So, in returning to my original question, ‘Chicken or egg?’ I suggest that those education authorities who are most ready to introduce an e-Portfolio culture should be considering a ‘controlled explosion.’ We need all the elements of an independent learning culture, of collaboration, of an adequate sufficiency of access both within institutions and remotely through home access policies. Perhaps most fundamentally, we need a teacher education programme which can pull together all the separate benefits of an e-Portfolio for the learner.

Will Technology change us?

I was very disturbed to note the articulate writings of David Jones who proposes, Technology will *not* change the way we teach - an example why we’re an amnesiac field It seems to me that universities are still replicating the research model of the 19th century whereby students replicate the selected thinking of previous generations without respecting any learning from what is going on in the here and now.

David quotes various dated authors in suggesting that learning is still dominated by the teacher's delivery, rather than the concept of the learner being encouraged to map out his/her own learning strategies.

Perhaps he is dominated by professors who know no better, who only deliver according to lesson plans set in stone decades ago? Perhaps those professors are frightened to stand back and see what can happen with learner-owned learning? Perhaps he is surrounded by 'techies' who invent pseudo e-Portfolios without the embedded structures and support that is needed? Teaching and Learning has come a long way in the last 50 years. It seems unfortunate to me that some institutions might still be repeating the mantras of a previous age.

In my post on formative assessment I try to give a simple understanding of how teaching and learning can be transformed in a way that is only possible through the advances in e-Portfolio development.

Again, in response to David Jones' post, the combination of e-Portfolios with other technologies as in Becta's article by John Traxler, 'Learners – Should We Leave Them To Their Own Devices?' points up the real potential of the combination of different technologies such as accessing my eFolio on my iTouch.

But until such time as e-Portfolios are properly embedded in the Teaching of all institutions and until such time as ALL learners have their own e-Portfolios I suppose that there will be those who get left behind?

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.