More information about this webinaris available at http://europortfolio.org/articles/webinar-recording-strategies-implementing-eportfolios-higher-education
Slides are available at
http://www.slideshare.net/EPNET-Europortfolio/strategies-for-implementing-eportfolios-in-higher-education-34724244
Dr Professor Baumgartner from Donau-Universität Krems presents a taxonomy of ePortfolio use cases. He writes:
This is the result of a research project at the Department of Interactive Media and Educational Technologies, which reviewed the state of the art of ePortfolio in the Austrian Higher Education sector. Special emphasis will be put on implementation strategies and the use of ePortfolio software.
In the talk I will present a taxonomy of ePortfolio use cases. This taxonomy is one of our results from a research project funded by the Austrian Ministry of Science and Research. During the study we reviewed the state of the art of ePortfolio in the Austrian Higher Education sector. We especially investigated implementation strategies and the use of ePortfolio software.
It turned out that different implementation approaches are prioritising different features of ePortfolio software. Studying the literature on ePortfolio usage we categorised the different features of software functionalities of ePortfolio software and found clues how to match them with different implementation strategies. This approach not only helped us to distinguish different prototypes of use cases but also resulted in an elaborated taxonomy for ePortfolios.
Europortfolio is a European Network of ePortfolio Experts & Practitioners.
Europortfolio, a not-for profit association established with the support of the European Commission, is, dedicated to exploring how e-portfolios and e-portfolio-related technologies and practices can help us to empower:
1. 'Individuals as reflective learners and practitioners;
2. Organisations as a place for authentic learning and assessment, and
3. Society as a place for lifelong learning, employability and self-realisation."
Europortfolio has a broad agenda, if you would wish to know more, or to get involved, you can do this by visiting our website www.europortfolio.org
Strategies for implementing ePortfolios in Higher Education
1. Danube University Krems (DUK)
Department for Interactive Media and Educational Technology (IMB)
The slides are licensed under a Creative Commons-license
Strategies for Implementing ePortfolios in Higher Education
2. Danube University Krems (DUK)
Department for Interactive Media und Educational Technology (IMB)
Webinar March 2014 Peter Baumgartner 2
Outline
rting Point: What? – The Research Question
Motivation and Considerations
ults: Taxonomy, Software Evaluation &
Implementation Strategies
Methodology: How? – Theory and
Procedures
Constructivism: Why a Taxonomy?
3. Danube University Krems (DUK)
Department for Interactive Media und Educational Technology (IMB)
“There is Nothing So
Practical as a Good
Theory”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kurt_Lewin
Kurt Lewin (1890-1947)
German-American Psychologist
Pioneer of Social Psychology
4. Danube University Krems (DUK)
Department for Interactive Media und Educational Technology (IMB)
Webinar March 2014 Peter Baumgartner 4
Recommendations and Guidelines for Implementing ePortfolios in
Higher Education: 5 work packages
(1) Development of a Taxonomy for ePortfolios
(2) Description and Analysis of an implementing Framework
(3) Description of the necessary Functionality of Software packages
(4) ePortfolios for Competency based education
(5) Education Policy and Criteria for Recognition and Acknowledgement
Peter Baumgartner, Klaus Himpsl, and Sabine
Zauchner
A DUK-report under the contract of the
Austrian Federal Ministry of Science & Research
(January 2007 – December 2008)
ePortfolios for Higher Education
5. Danube University Krems (DUK)
Department for Interactive Media und Educational Technology (IMB)
Webinar March 2014 Peter Baumgartner 5
Aftermath publications
2010 2011 2012
6. Danube University Krems (DUK)
Department for Interactive Media und Educational Technology (IMB)
Webinar March 2014 Peter Baumgartner 6
Public under http://www.e-portfolios.org
Base: Personal Homepage Tool Weebly
after (free) registration at
www.mahara.at
Examples of ePortfolios
7. Danube University Krems (DUK)
Department for Interactive Media und Educational Technology (IMB)
Webinar March 2014 Peter Baumgartner 7
• Curriculum vitae
• Certificates & Diploma
• Results of (formal and informal) Assessments
• Content of Courses and Participation of Continuing Education
• References, Recommendation, Evaluations
• Job Descriptions, Job Specifications
• Examples, „Show Cases“ (Photos, Documents, Links etc.)
• Reflections, Feedback
• Development Plans & Strategies for filling in educational gaps
Content of ePortfolios
8. Danube University Krems (DUK)
Department for Interactive Media und Educational Technology (IMB)
Webinar March 2014 Peter Baumgartner 8
• Working Portfolio
• Assessment Portfolios
• Application Portfolios
• Interdisciplinary Unit Portfolios
• Development Portfolios
• Hybrid Portfolios
• Learning Portfolios
• Presentation Portfolio
Many Faces of ePortfolios
• Display Portfolio
• Showcase Portfolio
• Best Practice Portfolio
• Process Portfolio
• Time Sequenced Portfolios
• Reflection Portfolios
• Status Report Portfolio
• Celebration Portfolio
9. Danube University Krems (DUK)
Department for Interactive Media und Educational Technology (IMB)
Constructivism
Webinar March 2014 Peter Baumgartner 9
10. Danube University Krems (DUK)
Department for Interactive Media und Educational Technology (IMB)
Webinar March 2014 Peter Baumgartner 10
ePortfolio is a strategy or tool displayed by any digital system
supporting reflexive learning and practice by allowing a person
(or an organisation) to collect, manage, and publish a selection
of learning evidence in order to have one’s assets recognised
and accredited; to plan further learning, create one´s identity, to
connect and share based on one´s own /organisational
decisions
Europortfolio definition (draft), based on EIPIL-PAN
(2009) and Guàrdia (2014).
Europortfolio definition (draft)
11. Danube University Krems (DUK)
Department for Interactive Media und Educational Technology (IMB)
Webinar March 2014 Peter Baumgartner 11
An ePortfolio is a specific type of a
Content Management System (CMS).
It works as a collection of
digital artefacts,
where different types of users
have different rights of access
provided by the maintainer of the ePortfolio.
Peter Baumgartner: Eine Taxonomie für E-Portfolios.
Part II of the internal report for the Austrian Federal Ministry of Science & Research, 2008
ePortfolio working definition
12. Danube University Krems (DUK)
Department for Interactive Media und Educational Technology (IMB)
Webinar March 2014 Peter Baumgartner 12
Product Evaluation
Michael Scriven (1991), further developed by Peter Baumgartner, Hartmut Häfele and Kornelia Maier-Häfele
Learning Management Systems
(LMS)
Content Management Systems
(CMS)
Qualitative Weight and Sum (QWS)
Baumgartner, P. & Bauer, R., 2010.
MedidaPrix Award – An Agent for Changing
Higher Education eLearning Practice. In U.-
D. Ehlers & D. Schneckenberg, eds.
Changing Cultures in Higher Education.
Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer, pp. 457–469.
Download:
http://peter.baumgartner.name/publikationen
/liste-abstracts/abstracts-2010/medidaprix-
award-agent-for-higher-education/
13. Danube University Krems (DUK)
Department for Interactive Media und Educational Technology (IMB)
Webinar March 2014 Peter Baumgartner 13
Research Design
Michael Scriven (1991), further developed by Peter Baumgartner, Hartmut Häfele and Kornelia Maier-Häfele
Qualitative Weight and Sum (QWS)
Advantages
• doesn't need a metric scale
• leaves "marks“: each step of the
process can be retraced
• avoids the disadvantages of other
methods by combining several
procedures in a smart way
Disadvantages
• a rather complex procedure
• an iterative process
• no definite algorithm
• results are not necessarily clear
without ambiguity
14. Danube University Krems (DUK)
Department for Interactive Media und Educational Technology (IMB)
Webinar March 2014 Peter Baumgartner 14
The method of Qualitative Weight and Sum (QWS)
Process flow
Well-proven classification
• Essential (E)
• Extremely important (*)
• Very important (#)
• Important (+)
• Less important (|)
• Not important (0)
(numbers are avoided deliberately!)
Criteria weights
Setting up the
essential criteria
Definition of
all criteria
Weighting
Deleting
0-Dimensions
Grouping
criteria
Assessing
evaluands
optionally pair-
wise comparison
Shortlist of
recommendable
products
15. Danube University Krems (DUK)
Department for Interactive Media und Educational Technology (IMB)
Webinar March 2014 Peter Baumgartner 15
Meta level categories
Portfolio processes according to the taxonomy
Five meta level categories:
(M1) Collecting, organising, selecting
(M2) Reflecting, testing, verifying and
planning
(M3) Representing and publishing
(M4) Administrating, implementing, adapting
(M5) Usability
16. Danube University Krems (DUK)
Department for Interactive Media und Educational Technology (IMB)
Webinar March 2014 Peter Baumgartner 16
Selection of software products
60 products
• WCET study product list
• EIfEL product list
• Salzburg Research "Vorstudie“
1
• Contacting the providers
• Statements to essential criteria
• Providing test accounts
2 18 products
12 products
• Evaluation with our checklist
• 25 experts alltogether
• Detailed analysis by core team
3
17. Danube University Krems (DUK)
Department for Interactive Media und Educational Technology (IMB)
Webinar March 2014 Peter Baumgartner 17
12 recommendable products
Key to column "Type“
(M) E-Portfolio Management-
Software
(L) LCMS/LMS with
E-Portfolio functions
(I) Integrated systems
(A) Other systems like Blogs
Key to column "License“
(OS) Open Source
(P) Commercial with
all-inclusive offer
(U) Commercial with
licenses per user
(PU) Commercial, a
combination of P and
U
18. Danube University Krems (DUK)
Department for Interactive Media und Educational Technology (IMB)
Webinar March 2014 Peter Baumgartner 18
Shortlist of recommendable products
recommendable
with some restrictions
recommendable
highly recommendable
19. Danube University Krems (DUK)
Department for Interactive Media und Educational Technology (IMB)
Webinar March 2014 Peter Baumgartner 19
A taxonomy is a
systematic classification scheme
to order
things, phenomena, processes etc.
after consistent and uniform
principles, procedures and rules
of their inherent logic.
Peter Baumgartner: Eine Taxonomie für E-Portfolios.
Part II of the internal report for the Austrian Federal Ministry of Science & Research, 2008
Taxonomy working definition
20. Danube University Krems (DUK)
Department for Interactive Media und Educational Technology (IMB)
Webinar March 2014 Peter Baumgartner 20
1. Integration: Isolated phenomena are bundled into groups
(Taxa); they are classified.
2. Orientation: A taxonomy provides a consistent framework.
3. Information: Facilitates communication (e.g. LOM).
4. Cost reduction: Uniform description facilitates re-usability.
5. Transfer: Similarities become evident, main types are easier
to learn, distinctions between types and variants are easier.
6. Innovation: (So far) unknown methods (User) und
systematic frameworks (Experts) come into view.
7. Heuristics: Quest for new types (classes) are inspired (e.g.
compare periodic table of the elements).
Advantages of a Taxonomy
21. Danube University Krems (DUK)
Department for Interactive Media und Educational Technology (IMB)
Webinar March 2014 Peter Baumgartner 21
Categories: How many and what kind of criteria should be
constructed out of the infinite pool of characteristics
(attributes)?
Operationalisation: How to confine/delimit and how to
measure the different characteristics?
Structuring: What kind of attributes are to what extend
decisive for a new category ? (new class versus
variant, version, mutation)
Granularity: Which hierarchic level has to be chosen to get
a taxonomy serving the desired practical purposes?
Troubles with Taxonomies
22. Danube University Krems (DUK)
Department for Interactive Media und Educational Technology (IMB)
Webinar March 2014 Peter Baumgartner 22
Validity Claim
Relations to the
World
subjective objective
social
Theory of Communicative Action
23. Danube University Krems (DUK)
Department for Interactive Media und Educational Technology (IMB)
Webinar March 2014 Peter Baumgartner 23
Validity Claim Relations to the
World
subjective
Development of the
own Personality
objective
Content, Material
social
(Co-)Learner
Education
24. Danube University Krems (DUK)
Department for Interactive Media und Educational Technology (IMB)
Webinar March 2014 Peter Baumgartner 24
Validity Claim Relations to the
World
subjective
interaktive media
assignments, exercises
interaktives knowledge
objective
presentational media
presentation
receptive knowledge
social action
communicative media
social
constructed knowledge
Media
25. Danube University Krems (DUK)
Department for Interactive Media und Educational Technology (IMB)
Validity claim
Relations to the
world
pattern of
utilisation
objective
functionality
of the
software
social
setting
(scenario)
ePortfolios
Webinar March 2014 25Peter Baumgartner
26. Danube University Krems (DUK)
Department for Interactive Media und Educational Technology (IMB)
Webinar March 2014 Peter Baumgartner 26
Summary Worksheet for distilling Categories
(Example)
27. Danube University Krems (DUK)
Department for Interactive Media und Educational Technology (IMB)
Webinar March 2014 Peter Baumgartner 27
L e a rn in g p ro d u c t
p o rtfo lio
s u m m a tiv e
L e a rn in g p ro c e s s
p o rtfo lio
fo rm a tiv e
m e ta c o g n itio n
p e rs o n a l p o rtfo lio
T y p e A
L e a rn in g p o rtfo lio
A c q u ire K n o w le d g e & C o m p e te n c e s
L e a rn in g p ro d u c t
A s s e s s m e n t p o rtfo lio
s u m m a tiv e
L e a rn in g p ro c e s s
~ m o n ito rin g
fo rm a tiv e
o rg a n is a tio n a l p o rtfo lio
T y p e B
A s s e s s m e n t p o rtfo lio
E v a lu a te K n o w le d g e & C o m p e te n c e s
R e fle c tio n P o rtfo lio
(E d u c a tio n a l P o rtfo lio )
q u a lific a tio n
p o rtfo lio
s k ills & a b ilitie s
c o m p e te n c e
p o rtfo lio
d is p o s itio n fo r
s e lf-o rg a n is a tio n
p e rs o n a l p o rtfo lio
T y p e A
p e rs o n a l d e v e lo p m e n t p o rtfo lio
d e v e lo p in g p e rs o n a lity
jo b
p o rtfo lio
"g a p a n a ly s is "
p ro fe s s io n a l c a re e r
p o rtfo lio
o rg a n is a tio n a l p o rtfo lio
T y p e B
c a re e r p o rtfo lio
s u p p o rtin g p ro fe s s io n a l c a re e r
D e v e lo p m e n t p o rtfo lio
Summary: Types of Portfolios
Types of Portfolios
structured by
owner &
product/process
3 main types = reflection, development, presentation
2 Types of ownerships = personal (A), organisational (B)
summative or formative = product-process distinction =
3 * 2 * 2 = 12 Types of Portfolios
application
portfolio
jobprofile
self-promoting
portfolio
personalportfolio
TypeA
demonstrationportfolio
demonstrateownproducts&competences
showcase
portfolio
bestpracticeexamples
representation
portfolio
trustbuilding
organisationalportfolio
TypB
professionalportfolio
demonstratebusinessproducts&competences
Presentationportfolio
28. Danube University Krems (DUK)
Department for Interactive Media und Educational Technology (IMB)
Webinar March 2014 Peter Baumgartner 28
Reflection portfolio
L e a rn in g p ro d u c t
p o rtfo lio
s u m m a tiv e
L e a rn in g p ro c e s s
p o rtfo lio
fo rm a tiv e
m e ta c o g n itio n
p e rs o n a l p o rtfo lio
T y p e A
L e a rn in g p o rtfo lio
A c q u ir e K n o w le d g e & C o m p e te n c e s
L e a rn in g p ro d u c t
A s s e s s m e n t p o rtfo lio
s u m m a tiv e
L e a rn in g p ro c e s s
~ m o n ito rin g
fo rm a tiv e
o rg a n is a tio n a l p o rtfo lio
T y p e B
A s s e s s m e n t p o rtfo lio
E v a lu a te K n o w le d g e & C o m p e te n c e s
R e fle c tio n P o rtfo lio
(E d u c a tio n a l P o rtfo lio )
29. Danube University Krems (DUK)
Department for Interactive Media und Educational Technology (IMB)
Webinar March 2014 Peter Baumgartner 29
Development portfolio
q u a lific a tio n
p o rtfo lio
s k ills & a b ilitie s
c o m p e te n c e
p o rtfo lio
d is p o s itio n fo r
s e lf-o rg a n is a tio n
p e rs o n a l p o rtfo lio
T y p e A
p e rs o n a l d e v e lo p m e n t p o rtfo lio
d e v e lo p in g p e rs o n a lity
jo b
p o rtfo lio
"g a p a n a ly s is "
p ro fe s s io n a l c a re e r
p o rtfo lio
o rg a n is a tio n a l p o rtfo lio
T y p e B
c a re e r p o rtfo lio
s u p p o rtin g p ro fe s s io n a l c a re e r
D e v e lo p m e n t p o rtfo lio
30. Danube University Krems (DUK)
Department for Interactive Media und Educational Technology (IMB)
application
portfolio
job profile
self-promoting
portfolio
personal portfolio
Type A
demonstration portfolio
demonstrate own products & competences
showcase
portfolio
best practice examples
representation
portfolio
trust building
organisational portfolio
Typ B
professional portfolio
demonstrate business products & competences
Presentation portfolio
Webinar March 2014 Peter Baumgartner 30
Presentation portfolio
31. Danube University Krems (DUK)
Department for Interactive Media und Educational Technology (IMB)
Webinar March 2014 Peter Baumgartner 31
Implementation framework: At which level does the implementation take
place? Which organisation units are taking part?
Motivation, purpose and goal: For which goals are the portfolios
implemented? Which competencies should be acquired?
Study and examination regulations: Is the portfolio work anchored in the
curriculum? How do students gain credit for it?
Culture of learning: What do teaching / learning processes look like? What
kind of changes result from the introduction of portfolios?
Teacher’s competencies: How are they prepared for portfolio work? What
competencies do they need? How are difficulties / resistance dealt with?
Benefit/effort for students: Which preconditions are necessary? How do
they benefit? How are barriers overcome?
Software support: Which software is used? Who has what kind of access?
Analyses of use cases
32. Danube University Krems (DUK)
Department for Interactive Media und Educational Technology (IMB)
4 Strategy models
Student Service
(A)
Learning Tool
(B)
Curriculum
Integration (C)
University wide
implementation
Development
(competence p.)
Reflection
(learning portfolio)
Assessment and
showcase portf.
Reflection &
development &
presentation
Graz, Klagenfurt Salzburg, Vienna Eisenstadt, Krems Vienna
Visualisation of
own strength,
interests and
competences
Reflecting the
learning process,
metacognition
PLE, PIM,
certificates,
application
(A), (B),
application
Decrease of drop-
out rates, informal
learning
Analysis, transfer,
quality control
Submissions of
achievements,
quality control
Increase of
employability
Mahara,
Taskstream
choice depends
on course goals
Factline, Mahara Maraha,
PebblePad
Webinar March 2014 Peter Baumgartner 32
33. Danube University Krems (DUK)
Department for Interactive Media und Educational Technology (IMB)
Webinar March 2014 Peter Baumgartner 33
Theoretical Consequences
PROBLEM:
Taxonomy of ePortfolios: Different goals
need different type of software and
implementation strategy
Use cases: Many different aspects, each with
many dimensions
Software: Complex tool with many
functionalities, not easy to learn
SOLUTION:
Developing a Pattern Language for ePortfolios
Knowledge transfer as a collection of patterns
Baumgartner, P., 2011. Educational
Scenarios with E-portfolios. In P.
Sojka & M. Kvizda, eds. SCO 2011,
Sharable Content Objects, 7. ročník
konference o elektronické podpoře
výuky. Brno, Česká republika: muni
Press, pp. 3–12.
Download:
http://peter.baumgartner.name/publika
tionen/liste-abstracts/abstracts-
2011/educational-scenarios-with-e-
portfolios/
34. “Each pattern describes a problem which occurs over
and over again in our environment, and then describes
the core of the solution to that problem, in such a way
that you can use this solution a million times over,
without ever doing it the same way twice.”
– Christopher Alexander, A Pattern Language, 1977
35. Pattern/Method and Variation
Pattern/Method as
= Model
Master plate, template,
A variation is just a small change of the
same pattern
Pattern/Method as
= Situation
Structure, constellation, configuration,
Every variation forms a new pattern
36. Danube University Krems (DUK)
Department for Interactive Media und Educational Technology (IMB)
Developing a Pattern Language for ePortfolios I
37. Danube University Krems (DUK)
Department for Interactive Media und Educational Technology (IMB)
Developing a Pattern Language for ePortfolios II
38. Danube University Krems (DUK)
Department for Interactive Media und Educational Technology (IMB)
Developing a Pattern Language for ePortfolios III
39. Danube University Krems (DUK)
Department for Interactive Media und Educational Technology (IMB)
Name of Pattern to express adequately problem and solution
Picture to capture (metaphorically) the main idea of the pattern
Context: Scenario where the pattern is useful
Problem What is the main issue?
Forces: What conditions one has to observe?
Solution: What is the solution to address the problem?
Details: What are the implementation strategies?
Stumbling blocks to overcome?
Advantages: What is the surplus value of the solution?
Disadvantages: What are the negative consequences?
Examples: Case studies where the pattern is used successfully
User Role: For what type of user is the pattern useful?
Tool: What kind of technical support or tool could be helpful?
Similar pattern: Relation to other patterns
References: Where to find more information?
Description Format for ePortfolio Pattern Scenarios
Bauer, Reinhard, and Peter
Baumgartner. 2012. “Showcase of
Learning: Towards a Pattern Language
for Working with Electronic Portfolios
in Higher Education.” In , 6:1–6:30.
EuroPLoP ’11. New York, NY, USA:
ACM.
Download:
http://peter.baumgartner.name/publik
tionen/liste-abstracts/abstracts-
2012/showcase-of-learning/
40. Danube University Krems (DUK)
Department for Interactive Media und Educational Technology (IMB)
Webinar March 2014 Peter Baumgartner 40
Thank You For Your Attention!
Univ.Prof. Dr. Peter Baumgartner
http://www.donau-uni.ac.at/imb
http://www.peter.baumgartner.name
http://twitter.com/pbaumgartner
The slides are licensed under a
Creative Commons-license
Hinweis der Redaktion
The project "E-Portfolios in Higher Education“ on behalf of the Austrian Federal Ministry of Science and Research last from January 2007 to December 2008, so we'll get the full results in a few months.
The Main objective is to develop guidelines for universities for implementing E-Portfolios within their studies.
The project contains five work packages:
(1) was and is the most difficult part!
(2) How to introduce E-Portfolios for teachers and students, how to integrate them within processes of teaching and learning, how to incorporate them within curricula and much more
(3) Focus for my presentation: how to choose the best software solution, fitting to the needs of the institution and its members
(4) The shift from input orientation to learning outcomes
and
(5) considerations concerning education policies and HRM
The project "E-Portfolios in Higher Education“ on behalf of the Austrian Federal Ministry of Science and Research last from January 2007 to December 2008, so we'll get the full results in a few months.
The Main objective is to develop guidelines for universities for implementing E-Portfolios within their studies.
The project contains five work packages:
(1) was and is the most difficult part!
(2) How to introduce E-Portfolios for teachers and students, how to integrate them within processes of teaching and learning, how to incorporate them within curricula and much more
(3) Focus for my presentation: how to choose the best software solution, fitting to the needs of the institution and its members
(4) The shift from input orientation to learning outcomes
and
(5) considerations concerning education policies and HRM
E-Portfolios sind CMS, die als elektronische Sammelmappen dienen
Es können Dokumente und andere Leistungen gesammelt präsentiert, reflektiert, kommentiert und bewertet werden.
In literature you find different research methods to evaluate software products. We decided to take the well-proven method of Qualitative Weight and Sum, originally developed by Michael Scriven.
The advantages are:
The disadvantages are:
In literature you find different research methods to evaluate software products. We decided to take the well-proven method of Qualitative Weight and Sum, originally developed by Michael Scriven.
The advantages are:
The disadvantages are:
How does the QWS method work?
Instead of a numeric scale you take a classification like shown in the table and weight each single software criteria.
Then you delete all zero dimensions because they are regarded as not important and reduce the list of criteria.
Then you have a first look at the software products (called evaluands) applying the essential criteria – these are YES or NO criteria like "Supports different languages“. If an evaluand doesn't support these criteria we kick it out!
Now everything is prepared to find the shortlist: you have evaluands that fit the essential criteria and assess them looking at different criteria from Extremely important one to Less important one and you try to find out how they perform in each category or feature.
According to the portfolio processes defined within the taxonomy we created five meta level categories:
...
M4 represents the administration perspective, M5 different features that are important for the user, for example accessibility or navigation within the system.
We already talked about the difficult question which software is an evaluand for our list?
As a starting point we used three sources:
and got 60 products that matched with our assumptions
Then we contacted the providers and got statements of them to our essential criteria and test accounts. In the case of open source software we installed them by ourselves.
This procedure reduced our list to 18 products.
These products were analyzed by 25 experts, each expert evaluated three to five products.
Our core team collected all evaluation forms and decided what the final result is in each criteria.
Key to column “type”:
M: E-Portfolio-Management-Software (products deliberately offered to institutions as E-Portfolio software)
L: LMS/LCMS with integrated E-Portfolio functions (“learning platform“ with E-Portfolio elements)
I: integrated systems respectively software families (various CMS with rather “indirectly“ possible Portfolio functions)
A: other systems, respectively kinds of software
I think many of the products are well-known as E-Portfolio Software, but perhaps two sentences to Drupal and Wordpress. We took them as the most common representatives of their software type:
Drupal as a weblogbased CMS used as a personal web presentation by many people, and wordpress as a well-known weblogging software with single-user and multiuser functions.
This table tries to summarize our results:
We created rankings like shown before for each meta level category and differentiated three ratings:
1 2 3
You can see that most of the products perform quite well in collecting and organizing, but rather bad in reflecting ... Here only Taskstream and also Epsilen were convincing, but the demo-account of Epsilen didn't have full functionality, so Epsilen has only two ticks.
Usability: only the three big Open Source projects Drupal, Elgg and Wordpress can convince perfectly.
The new column effort for first time installation was added because we recognised during our assessment that there is a big difference between out-of-the-box-systems like Epsilen, Exabis, Mahara or PebblePad and other systems like Drupal or Movable Type that need a lot of preparations before you can start portfolio work.
As well-balanced products I regard PebblePad and Mahara.
The full results in January will also provide a report for each of the 12 evaluands with more details to the assessed scores.
The development of a taxonomy for E-Portfolios was started by Silke Kleindienst as a dissertation project and unfortunately not finished yet.
According to the table the various types of portfolios mentioned in related literature can be categorised into five major types: from “working portfolio” to “presentation portfolio“, in which learners show activities from “collecting” to “presenting” when working on a portfolio. The parameters “joined” and “unjoined” are worth mentioning as well: they describe whether the different elements of the portfolios are stored in a connected or unconnected way. The terms and especially the allocation of these terms to portfolio processes play a major role for the criteria checklist. The development of this checklist as well as the research design will be described in the following section.
The development of a taxonomy for E-Portfolios was started by Silke Kleindienst as a dissertation project and unfortunately not finished yet.
According to the table the various types of portfolios mentioned in related literature can be categorised into five major types: from “working portfolio” to “presentation portfolio“, in which learners show activities from “collecting” to “presenting” when working on a portfolio. The parameters “joined” and “unjoined” are worth mentioning as well: they describe whether the different elements of the portfolios are stored in a connected or unconnected way. The terms and especially the allocation of these terms to portfolio processes play a major role for the criteria checklist. The development of this checklist as well as the research design will be described in the following section.
The development of a taxonomy for E-Portfolios was started by Silke Kleindienst as a dissertation project and unfortunately not finished yet.
According to the table the various types of portfolios mentioned in related literature can be categorised into five major types: from “working portfolio” to “presentation portfolio“, in which learners show activities from “collecting” to “presenting” when working on a portfolio. The parameters “joined” and “unjoined” are worth mentioning as well: they describe whether the different elements of the portfolios are stored in a connected or unconnected way. The terms and especially the allocation of these terms to portfolio processes play a major role for the criteria checklist. The development of this checklist as well as the research design will be described in the following section.
The development of a taxonomy for E-Portfolios was started by Silke Kleindienst as a dissertation project and unfortunately not finished yet.
According to the table the various types of portfolios mentioned in related literature can be categorised into five major types: from “working portfolio” to “presentation portfolio“, in which learners show activities from “collecting” to “presenting” when working on a portfolio. The parameters “joined” and “unjoined” are worth mentioning as well: they describe whether the different elements of the portfolios are stored in a connected or unconnected way. The terms and especially the allocation of these terms to portfolio processes play a major role for the criteria checklist. The development of this checklist as well as the research design will be described in the following section.
The project "E-Portfolios in Higher Education“ on behalf of the Austrian Federal Ministry of Science and Research last from January 2007 to December 2008, so we'll get the full results in a few months.
The Main objective is to develop guidelines for universities for implementing E-Portfolios within their studies.
The project contains five work packages:
(1) was and is the most difficult part!
(2) How to introduce E-Portfolios for teachers and students, how to integrate them within processes of teaching and learning, how to incorporate them within curricula and much more
(3) Focus for my presentation: how to choose the best software solution, fitting to the needs of the institution and its members
(4) The shift from input orientation to learning outcomes
and
(5) considerations concerning education policies and HRM