Presentation by David Matthews and Jayne Richards (Rose Bruford College of Theatre and Performance) at Mahara Hui UK in Southampton, UK, on 10 November 2015. Recording: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DfUVijh6hF8

1. Mahara for practical
teaching and learning in an
online Theatre Studies
programme
Presented by
David Matthews and Jayne Richards

2. Introduction
In this presentation, we will describe and evaluate our journey with Mahara on the Theatre
Studies (Online) programme at Rose Bruford College.
This programme encompasses a worldwide cohort of mature/professional ‘distance learners’
working on theatre studies with a group of tutors from our own institution and elsewhere.
The rollout of Mahara was an important step in transforming this traditional ‘distance’
programme into an online offer. In doing so, we were keen to:
• develop opportunities for assessment that went beyond essay writing;
• teaching that went beyond ‘chalk and talk’;
• foster opportunities for peer-to-peer learning and support;
• develop students’ digital literacies and employability skills.
Furthermore, Mahara has emerged an important tool in supporting our ongoing attempts to
build a practical dimension into the programme and to encourage students to take charge of
their own learning.
In this presentation, we will describe our early experiences with Mahara and how this has
become firmly embedded and a mature part of the delivery of the course. We will share
examples of portfolios developed by students and discuss next steps for the role of the online
portfolio in students’ learning.

3. Mahara – what for?
In adopting e-portfolio software we needed to consider the function it would serve.
As changes to the programme overall aimed to:
• encourage students to take ownership of their learning;
• place focus on process rather than just product;
• build in transferable skills.
Each module involves students in broader study around the topic. In the original
programme this element (possibly the bulk of the student’s time) was non-credit-bearing.
Assessment was based purely on the outcomes of written assignments.
In revising the programme Mahara would provide a platform for students’ independent
work which could be assessed for process, reflection and research.

4. What is an e-portfolio?
“a dynamic record of learning” [Murray, 2006]
“a collection of evidence gathered to show a person’s learning journey over time and
demonstrate their abilities.” [Butler, 2006]
Specific purposes of a portfolio [Nairn et al. 2006]
• learning portfolio
• credentials portfolio
• showcase
• assessment portfolio
• skills portfolio
There are lots of uses: blogs, diaries, PDP, CV/Resume development, learning and
assessment, archiving and so on.

5. Value-added?
What can an e-portfolio do that a p-portfolio
cannot?
Traditional portfolio processes:
Collating
Linking / thinking
Reflecting
Collaborating
Celebrating
[Buzzetto-More et al, 2010]
Technology-assisted processes
Archiving
Selecting
Storytelling
Projecting
Publishing

6. Relationship of the portfolio to study?
A key distinction lies in the way the e-portfolio functions:
“The term e-portfolio is still a work in progress” [Duffy et al, 2010]
The e-portfolio as visual schemata: [Endacott et al, 2004]
• shopping trolley
• toast rack
• spinal column
• cake mix
How might Mahara’s function be visualised on the Theatre Studies programme?
What did we want to achieve by using Mahara?

7. Defining function
• A repository for tasks and exercises undertaken throughout the
module.
• A platform for reflection.
• A platform for research.
tasks and
exercises
reflection
research

8. e-Portfolio as Repository
Pros?
• demonstrates completion;
• provides a situated visual reminder of
progress;
• formalises the student’s work record;
• places emphasis on process rather
than product;
• creates hypertext which encourages
“multifarious ways of
thinking” [Chappell & Schermehan,
1999]
• Promotes focus on student identity /
authenicity [Cambridge, 2010]

9. e-Portfolio as Repository
Cons?
• A multi-media version of a p-portfolio?
• A distraction from content:
“lamination” [Shulman, 1998]
• Could be seen as an “add-
on” [Stefani et al, 2007].
• Predicates rather than enforces
learning outcomes. [Light, et al, 2012]

10. Reflection and Research
Discoveries: the pros:
• prioritises meta-competencies and transferrable skills (technological,
compositional, artistic, organisational, communicational);
• compositional form (open navigation and evolutionary process) takes students
beyond information and description towards analysis as elements become
performative;
• multiple discourses and semiotics: visual, aural, lexical, schematic, symbolic
exercise different ways of thinking;
• emphasises student ownership of learning;
• concretises and situates accrued efforts drawing attention to the wider process of
learning;
• a-linear and aggregative: promotes importance of navigational clarity and sign-
posting;
• allows a reader to freedom to navigate thus imposes emphasis on clarity;
• flexibility over content; things can be moved, added and replaced;
• reliability and privacy.

11. Reflection and Research
Discoveries: the cons:
Our initial remit for the research element allowed
unlimited additional material which often led to
illustration and reportage rather than critical
evaluation.
• students began to complete with the visual
“look” of the page rather than focus on content;
• the e-portfolio began to absorb excessive study
time;
We decided to slim the research element down to
just one artefact per unit placing emphasis on
care over selection and rational for choice
rather than extent of material.
• this provokes attention to critically evaluation in
relation to ILOs;
• limiting the scale of research and reflections as
core-components has sharpened tutor
feedback.

12. Beyond the programme…
Digital Literacies
• Mahara encourages the development
of digital literacy skills through a
user-friendly interface.
• Builds confidence working with, for
example, different file types, external
media and code.
• Allows for tracking of progress and
development (which builds
confidence).
• Initial steps can be daunting for
students working in isolation.
Employability Skills
• Theatre Studies students are mature
learners, so may be on 3rd, 4th jobs or
even retired.
• Many theatre professionals on the
programme, and teachers.
• Often studying for pragmatic, career-
related reasons – and in fields where
technology is increasingly important.
• This said – relatively little use of the
resume builder, or of Mahara as an
online CV.

13. Case Study 1 -
Reflective Journals
• An example of Mahara for
developing a reflective account
of a theatre ‘attachment’.
• Recording practical, primary
research engagements and
reflecting critically upon them.
• A cumulative reflective journal
giving the opportunity for
ongoing assessment and
support.

14. Case Study 2 –
Practical modules
• An example of the use of
Mahara for modes of
assessment beyond traditional
essay writing.
• A digital ‘exhibition’ as the
culmination of a student’s
studies on live and performance
art.
• Digital artefacts are
accompanied by critical
commentary and reflection.

15. Issues and requests
• Technical competence – whilst Mahara undoubtedly helps to
develop digital literacies, it does require a base level of competence
and confidence.
• Training and support – can be challenging to provide at a distance,
but Mahara does encourage peer-to-peer support.
• Personalisation – where ‘Mahara for life’ is employed, students
require a higher degree of customisation.

16. Evidence?
Qualitative data (survey 2015):
• flexibility
• employability
• range of materials
• enhanced knowledge
• delivery mode
• satisfaction
• personal growth
Quantitative data (statistical)
Retention rates (annual)
Open University average = 52%
RBC 2010 = 75.4%
RBC 2014 and 2015 = 92.2%

17. Contact:
David Matthews: david.matthews@bruford.ac.uk
VLE Development Manager
Jayne Richards: jayne.richards@bruford.ac.uk
Programme Director: Theatre Studies

18. Bibliography
Butler, P. “A Review of the Literature on Portfolios and Electronic Portfolios.” Palmerston, New Zealand: Massey University, College of
Education, 2006.
Chappell, D.S. & J.R. Schermerhorn, “Using electronic student portfolios in management education: a stakeholder perspective.” Journal of
Management Education, Vol. 23, pp.651-662.
Duffy, K., Anthony, D.M. & Vickers, F. (2008) Are e-Portfolios an Asset to Learning and Placement? A report of a project funded by ASET,
Sheffield: ASET, available at
www.asetonline.org/documents/AreE-PortfoliosAnAssetToLe arningandPlacement-ASETandDMUReport-March2008_001.pdf
Accessed: 31.10.15.
Endecott, Murray and Butler, see Duffy.
Gentle, Paul, et al. “Changing the Learning Landscape: Connect to the Future” (final report). HEFCE Available at:
http://www.lfhe.ac.uk/en/programmes-events/your-university/cll/index.cfm?utm_source=development&utm_campaign=cll. Accessed: 31.10.15.
HEFCE/Glentraffic. “Review of the 205 HEFCE Strategy for e-Learning”. Available at http://www.hefce.ac.uk/data/Year/2008/Review,of,the,
2005,HEFCE,Strategy,for,e-Learning/Title,93074,en.html : Accessed, 31.10.15.
Buzzetto-More, Nicole, Ed. The E-Portfolio Paradigm: Informing, Educating, Assessing and Managing with E-Portfolios. California: Informing
Science Press, 2010.
Penn Light, Tracy, Helen L. Chen & John C. Ittelson. Documenting Learning with e-Portfolios: A Guide for College Instructors. San Fransico:
Jossy Boss, 2012.
Cambridge, Darren. Eportfolios for Lifelong Learning and Assessment. San Fransico: Jossy-Bass, 2010.
Stefani, Lorraine, Robin Mason and Chris Pelger. The Educational Potential of ePortfolios: Supporting Personal Development and Reflective
Learning. London, New York : Routledge, 2007.