ePortfolios are being used by a variety of CSU campuses within a variety of schools. ePortfolios are a digital repository, allowing the users to build web-pages (websites) with specific content. ePortfolio vendors usually allow secure and selective access to the websites, and some vendors provide report writing. Goals vary for each CSU case, but one common use is reporting for accreditation purposes, making the report writing a ‘must have’ for most.
One of the most interesting issues I’ve noticed while studying ePortfolios is the importance of allowing the student to own their work, and the ability for that student to access the ePortfolio long after graduating from the institution. We want the information on the portfolio to last a lifetime.
Minnesota has a statewide electronic portfolio management system, a product of the Minnesota State Colleges and Universities. Any resident who is older than 12 can have an ePortfolio. They stress using these as Career Portfolios and/or Educator Portfolios. They see the ‘big picture’.
I have briefly talked to a few people about this. I went over to Sacramento for a California School Board meeting. The guest speaker was supposed to be Jack O’Connell, State Superintendent of Public Instruction. He couldn’t make it, so his assistant stepped in. I took the opportunity to introduce myself and talk about ePortfolios, the CSU, and how Minnesota is providing portfolios to residents. He was interested.
I also talked to Scott Plotkin, who is the California State Board Association executive director, previously director of governmental affairs for the CSU system. He, too, is interested.
I have also talked to the Sonoma County Superintendent of Schools. He would like to have a school do a pilot with ePortfolios.
It is time now to develop a plan.
Thursday, June 1, 2006
Thursday, March 30, 2006
EduTools Review - Late 2005-2006
I was hired (along with the incredibly wise Cara Lane) to review selected e-portfolio systems through a project sponsored by the Western Cooperative for Educational Technologies (http://www.wcet.info) and the Edutools project (http://www.edutools.info).
They invited higher ed institutions to be part of a consortium and those who joined could vote on what tools were reviewed and they established a framework that encompassed feature sets such as formatting abilities, templates and customizations publish/share options, ability to organize, analysis tools, sustainability, and technical summation. Vendors could see the review and offer feedback, additions, and corrections.
In spring of 2006 we had a face-to-face meeting to share the results (at the beautiful Asilomar near Monterey, CA) and we held two online presentations. See the results at http://eportfolio.edutools.info.
They invited higher ed institutions to be part of a consortium and those who joined could vote on what tools were reviewed and they established a framework that encompassed feature sets such as formatting abilities, templates and customizations publish/share options, ability to organize, analysis tools, sustainability, and technical summation. Vendors could see the review and offer feedback, additions, and corrections.
In spring of 2006 we had a face-to-face meeting to share the results (at the beautiful Asilomar near Monterey, CA) and we held two online presentations. See the results at http://eportfolio.edutools.info.
Wednesday, March 15, 2006
Why have an ePortfolio?
Why does one have a portfolio? To show off your stuff, right? Or to have a place where you can keep things – a storage chest of sorts – where you can store things and find them later. Sometimes students put together binders so they can turn them in for grades, but really one would want to encourage and to have an ePortfolio for the longterm.
Student centered - that’s the number one reason for portfolios.
Five years ago I attended a conference (NLII) and two guys from Berkeley were giving a presentation on the electronic card-board box. This was particularly for teachers – because teachers tend to use the same things year after year, and they have all these old ditto sheets, and workbooks that they tote around, classroom to classroom. I remember thinking how cool that would be. They could save (scan) their stuff in and keep it forever.
Mine is on this disk here, and some is on this disk. . . (old floppies).
Anyway, I remember that ah-ha moment and the reality that this is coming. I’m going to be able to store things on the internet and retrieve them when I want, where I want (as long as there is internet access). Wow.
Well – here we have it – and its name is ePortfolio.
Student centered - that’s the number one reason for portfolios.
Five years ago I attended a conference (NLII) and two guys from Berkeley were giving a presentation on the electronic card-board box. This was particularly for teachers – because teachers tend to use the same things year after year, and they have all these old ditto sheets, and workbooks that they tote around, classroom to classroom. I remember thinking how cool that would be. They could save (scan) their stuff in and keep it forever.
Mine is on this disk here, and some is on this disk. . . (old floppies).
Anyway, I remember that ah-ha moment and the reality that this is coming. I’m going to be able to store things on the internet and retrieve them when I want, where I want (as long as there is internet access). Wow.
Well – here we have it – and its name is ePortfolio.
Blackboard's Dream
Blackboard is coming out with a new Assessment/Accreditation tool. Currently called “Caliper” this may have an interesting impact on the current e-portfolio tools available.
There are some e-portfolio tools that are simply a way to let students share ‘stuff’ online. This is Blackboard’s current model. Then there are the custom-made tools such as Connecticut’s ePortfolio tool which is goal-centered. The two bigger commercial ventures, stand-alone portfolio systems including TaskStream and LiveText, offer assessment and accreditation support.
Students first.
Let’s not mince words. ePortfolios are first and foremost a way for students to share their work. It’s also a way to organize and save their work.
ePortfolios can also be a way for instructors to view the students’ work. This may or may not include assessment (grading).
Lastly, it’s a way for institutions to collect data – for assessment and accreditation purposes.
Is this a be-all end-all or an e-portfolio system? What's at the: Student level; Faculty level; Institutional level?
Other vendor notes: I'm hearing lots of talk about elgg, which is being used w/ WebCT module, Moodle's module, and some campuses talking about Oracle - heard only six campuses nationwide have that.
There are some e-portfolio tools that are simply a way to let students share ‘stuff’ online. This is Blackboard’s current model. Then there are the custom-made tools such as Connecticut’s ePortfolio tool which is goal-centered. The two bigger commercial ventures, stand-alone portfolio systems including TaskStream and LiveText, offer assessment and accreditation support.
Students first.
Let’s not mince words. ePortfolios are first and foremost a way for students to share their work. It’s also a way to organize and save their work.
ePortfolios can also be a way for instructors to view the students’ work. This may or may not include assessment (grading).
Lastly, it’s a way for institutions to collect data – for assessment and accreditation purposes.
Is this a be-all end-all or an e-portfolio system? What's at the: Student level; Faculty level; Institutional level?
Other vendor notes: I'm hearing lots of talk about elgg, which is being used w/ WebCT module, Moodle's module, and some campuses talking about Oracle - heard only six campuses nationwide have that.
Wednesday, November 30, 2005
2005 WCET Annual Conference
Nov 2005 – In beautiful San Francisco.
Presented with Diane Goldsmith and Bruce Landon. We led a roundtable discussion focused on available e-portfolio systems, implementation stories, and unexpected impacts of student e-portfolios. We included the use of e-portfolios in assessment, advising and career exploration, as well as their use by students to showcase achievements.
Presented with Diane Goldsmith and Bruce Landon. We led a roundtable discussion focused on available e-portfolio systems, implementation stories, and unexpected impacts of student e-portfolios. We included the use of e-portfolios in assessment, advising and career exploration, as well as their use by students to showcase achievements.
2005 CSU ePortfolio Meeting
April 2005 – Yasuda Center at CSUSB.
Teamed up to host another CSU ePortfolio meeting with the education departments. To prepare we sent out a survey asking what subjects are the most important. Clearly the two top issues were implementation and how ePortfolios are being used: assessment tools, informational tools, hiring tools, (candidate evaluation). Third highest was help for students/value for students including graduate’s response on the values of creating a portfolio. These were followed by less popular subjects: How others are progressing; Meeting the needs of district induction programs; Blackboard; How to encourage faculty participation; Incorporating a database and ways of scoring the e-portfolio; Feasibility.
We had four campuses presenting their ePortfolios (LiveText, TaskStream, and campus-built) and sharing what they’ve learned.
Teamed up to host another CSU ePortfolio meeting with the education departments. To prepare we sent out a survey asking what subjects are the most important. Clearly the two top issues were implementation and how ePortfolios are being used: assessment tools, informational tools, hiring tools, (candidate evaluation). Third highest was help for students/value for students including graduate’s response on the values of creating a portfolio. These were followed by less popular subjects: How others are progressing; Meeting the needs of district induction programs; Blackboard; How to encourage faculty participation; Incorporating a database and ways of scoring the e-portfolio; Feasibility.
We had four campuses presenting their ePortfolios (LiveText, TaskStream, and campus-built) and sharing what they’ve learned.
Friday, May 28, 2004
Report 2004
In April of 2004 we (Peggy Kelley, Michael Menchaca, John Ittleson, Lou Zweier, Rachel Smith, and I) published our findings in a report "Digital Portfolios in Teacher Education Within The California State University." It took us a year!
It was interesting to see the changes from vendors. In one year they had taken the list I had sent them and used our criteria to prioritize modifications. It was amazing review the requirements list from 2002-3 (most answers were "no") against the early 2004 list (many requirements were now 'yes' or 'in process'). Perhaps due to the 'dot-com' bust they were more responsive to customers?
Here is a blurb from the Exec Summary - with vendor info in bold:
All commercial portfolio shell applications have evolved rapidly over the last year and are continuing to evolve. Vendors have been responsive to the expressed needs of the education community and the work of the CSU Digital Portfolio project has provided high quality information about the needs of teacher education which has positively influenced tool development.
Feedback from respondents about pilot activities at their campuses show that all the tools in use meet the basic requirements of students and faculty to create digital portfolios and to use them for student evaluation. However, all pilots used portfolios to evaluate individual courses rather than across a program. Also, there are differences in the way programs collect artifacts and organize portfolios depending on their beliefs about the validity of TPE’s, Signature Assignments, and Benchmark Candidate Work Samples in the assessment process. Coordinating campus digital portfolio design with BTSA to support the ongoing evaluation of teachers once they are in the field was another goal identified as important by study respondents.
The administrative needs of aggregating data for program evaluation and for satisfying accreditation agency requirements is not clearly met by any tool at this time. In fact, the task of aggregating data for these purposes is not well understood by anyone (program administrators, vendors, or credentialing agencies) because of the lack of experience with this new possibility. This represents an opportunity for programs, vendors, and credentialing agencies to work together.
It was interesting to see the changes from vendors. In one year they had taken the list I had sent them and used our criteria to prioritize modifications. It was amazing review the requirements list from 2002-3 (most answers were "no") against the early 2004 list (many requirements were now 'yes' or 'in process'). Perhaps due to the 'dot-com' bust they were more responsive to customers?
Here is a blurb from the Exec Summary - with vendor info in bold:
All commercial portfolio shell applications have evolved rapidly over the last year and are continuing to evolve. Vendors have been responsive to the expressed needs of the education community and the work of the CSU Digital Portfolio project has provided high quality information about the needs of teacher education which has positively influenced tool development.
Feedback from respondents about pilot activities at their campuses show that all the tools in use meet the basic requirements of students and faculty to create digital portfolios and to use them for student evaluation. However, all pilots used portfolios to evaluate individual courses rather than across a program. Also, there are differences in the way programs collect artifacts and organize portfolios depending on their beliefs about the validity of TPE’s, Signature Assignments, and Benchmark Candidate Work Samples in the assessment process. Coordinating campus digital portfolio design with BTSA to support the ongoing evaluation of teachers once they are in the field was another goal identified as important by study respondents.
The administrative needs of aggregating data for program evaluation and for satisfying accreditation agency requirements is not clearly met by any tool at this time. In fact, the task of aggregating data for these purposes is not well understood by anyone (program administrators, vendors, or credentialing agencies) because of the lack of experience with this new possibility. This represents an opportunity for programs, vendors, and credentialing agencies to work together.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
