e-Portfolios (16 June 06, Coventry)

Programme

Past event summary

This workshop illustrated how an e-portfolio can be integrated within the languages curriculum both for the specialist undergraduate language provision and for the UWLP programme. It discussed the issues relating to the assessment of a portfolio and give participants the opportunity to create and discuss their own version of an e-portfolio. References were made to a variety of available formats, including the European Language Portfolio, PebblePAD (developed at the University of Worverhampton) and WebCT.

This event was organised under the Subject Centre's Workshops to go scheme. The event was run twice, once at Coventry and once at Manchester.

Venue

Room GE614, George Eliot Building, builiding 4 on campus map (pdf).

Event report: Integrating an e-Portfolio into the languages curriculum

by Marina Orsini-Jones, Coventry University

The workshops aimed to illustrate how an e-portfolio could be integrated within the languages curriculum both for the specialist undergraduate language provision and for the university wide-type programmes.

Participants discussed the issues relating to the assessment of a portfolio and had the opportunity to create and discuss their own entries for an e-portfolio via the Virtual Environment WebCT, as a dedicated training web had been created for this purpose (Figure 1) with temporary passwords to enable all participants to post messages in discussion, interact with the environment and 'meta-reflect' on reflection issues. References were made to a variety of available formats, to include the European Language Portfolio, PebblePAD (developed at the University of Wolverhampton) and the forthcoming WebCT e-portfolio.

The two workshops were attended by a total of 45 participants from 18 different HE institutions in the UK and Ireland, to include representatives from the Higher Education Academy (HEA) and the Subject Centre for Languages, Linguistics and Area Studies.

Figure 1: The e-portfolio training web

Introduction to the workshop: Integration of an e-portfolio into the languages curriculum (Why? How? What? When?)

Marina Orsini-Jones
Download PowerPoint presentation (524Kb)

Marina Orsini-Jones provided the background information to the introduction of Personal Development Planning, portfolios and e-portfolios into the UK HE curriculum and invited participants to discuss in group how portfolios are being integrated into the curriculum in their own institutions.

She also outlined the overall aims of the day workshop, i.e. for participants to:

• Learn more about e-Portfolios and PDP (Personal Development Planning) in general and ways in which they can be integrated into the languages curriculum in particular;
• Try and define what an 'e-Portfolio' is;
• See a demonstration of an e-Portfolio and have some hands-on practice on it;
• Discuss and practise the 'reflective discourse' and the way in which it can be fostered via a VLE's discussion board;
• Explore and discuss some of the Horizon-Wimba voice tools and their possible utilisation for spoken e-Portfolio entries.

By the end of the day participants would:

• Learn more about available models of e-Portfolio integration for languages and the rationale for their integration into the curriculum;
• Practise the use of PebblePAD;
• Share ideas about the integration of an e-Portfolio into the languages curriculum;
• View samples of e-Portfolios entries;
• Practise Horizon-Wimba voice tools.

At the end of the first talk participants were invited to carry out the following task:

Work in small groups and discuss:

1. What types of languages portfolios - if any - are in use in your institution?
2. What is their 'value added' in comparison with other forms of recording achievement - if any?
3. How do students react to their use?
4. How do staff react to their use?
5. How are they assessed?
6. When are they introduced to students?

Points raised by the participants attending the workshop at the University of Manchester:

It was said by some of the lecturers that they found portfolios unsuccessful in their personal experience, as students do not use them correctly, and they include irrelevant information instead of evidence of progression. Incentives must be given to encourage them to use them, for instance if the student includes recordings of themselves conversing with a native speaker of the language they are learning; then some of the assessment weight is taken off of their oral exams. This suggestion has proved successful.

It was also stated that students need a mark to make the production of a portfolio seem worthwhile. Students have been assessed all their lives and so see the final mark as reward for their hard work, and so if their portfolio is not assessed they just won't do it! It was suggested that face to face interaction between student and lecturer is more appreciated than electronic communication. But lecturers embrace the electronic communication as a way to gently remove themselves from students' dependency by switching the role of central learning co-ordinator from themselves to the student. The student needs to control their own learning and development and become independent.

The following points were also made in response to the specific questions asked:

1. What types of language portfolios, if any, are used in your institution?

• Mainly paper based but 'blended' i.e. tapes and CDs
• Writing portfolio whereby feedbacks on drafts is given and the student produces improved drafts which are kept together to show progression.
• Southampton uses a compulsory 'integrated training program' in the advanced skills.
• Chester uses a paper based portfolio for first year students only. It is formally assessed.

2. What is their 'value-added' in comparison with other forms or recording achievement, if any?

• Blackboard was considered unsuitable for use as a portfolio basis, it did not work effectively.
• More personal and reflective as it is learner directed.
• Time saving for the student, but not necessarily for lecturers.
• Portability and durability in comparison with paper format.
• Adaptability e.g. costly to print multiple paper copies.
• Plagiarism can be closely monitored, as specialist software can be used.
• Skills audit-Employability.
• Better access to multimedia-links.
• Better mobility e.g. Erasmus.
• Increased interactivity between students and lecturers and students and other students.

3 and 4. How do staff and students react to their use?

• Time is needed to accept and get used to the system and to realise what is expected of them.
• Southampton set aside 5 extra hours to train students so that lecture time was not taken up.

5. How are they assessed?

• Accuracy of language.
• It is difficult to assess a portfolio as there are no exact guidelines or marking criteria as it is so personal.
• The average weighting of a portfolio is 40% in universities.

6. When are they introduced to students?

• Intermediate level students and upwards.
• In some institutions only 1st year students are assessed on their portfolios but action is being taken to apply this to all years.

Similar feedback was received during the Coventry workshop, mainly relating to the way the portfolio is integrated into the curriculum. During the Coventry workshop it was also reported that students' and staff attitudes towards portfolio tasks can be very negative:

3. How do students react to their use?

• "Does it have a point?"

4. How do staff react to their use?

• Slaves to corporate culture

Example of an e-portfolio - PebblePAD demonstration, hands-on and reflective activity

Andrew Turner
Download PowerPoint presentation (862Kb)

Andrew Turner illustrated how the e-portfolio PebblePAD developed at the University of Wolverhampton can be used to support Personal Development Planning . The feedback on both the talk and the hands-on session on PebblePAD was overall very positive both at Manchester and at Coventry (Figures 2 and 3). For further information on this e-portfolio please refer to the review of this piece of software published in the latest edition of the Association for Learning Technology Newsletter (ALT-N).

Figure 2: Feedback on PebblePAD posted in discussion at the University of Manchester on 16th May.

Figure 3: Feedback on PebblePAD posted in discussion at Coventry University on 16th June.

After lunch, participants had two more sessions, both delivered by Marina Orsini-Jones.

Creating spoken entries for an e-Portfolio via the Horizon-Wimba voice tools

Marina Orsini-Jones
Download PowerPoint presentation (813Kb)

The Horizon Wimba Voice Tools consist of a suite of tools that can be easily integrated as PowerLinks within a Virtual Learning Environment (VLE) like WebCT or Blackboard and/or used as stand-alone web tools. The four voice tools illustrated at the workshop were:

• Voice Board - Asynchronous audio discussions;
• Voice Email - Audio email (with added text box facility): sends voice messages to email addresses outside the VLE;
• Voice Direct - Live audio chat with turn taking;
• Voice Recorder - Audio announcements/audio recordings.

It was demonstrated how these are easy to use and reliable interactive listening and speaking tools for online communication within a VLE and participants had a hands-on session and posted voice messages on the Voice Board tool reflecting on how the tool could be used for oral e-portfolio entries (Figure 4). For further details on these voice tools please refer to the above mentioned ALT-N online publication, which contains a review of these tools: Sound Opportunities with Horizon Wimba Voice Tools. As can be seen in the screen shot reproduced in Figure 4, participants could both speak and write their contributions. These tools were very well received and many questions were asked about them. I would recommend that all participants now refer to the above mentioned review.

Figure 4: The Horizon-Wimba Voice Board Discussion Interface

Reflecting on the languages portfolio and on the reflective entries 'discourse'. Meeting the challenge of independent learning

Marina Orsini-Jones
Download PowerPoint presentation (111Kb)

Participants had the opportunity to discuss their definition of 'reflection' and compare it with existing ones by famous experts in the field (Figure 5), also, examples of portfolio integration into the curriculum from Coventry University were presented and discussed as well as examples of students' reflective entries within WebCT discussion.

Figure 5: Reflecting on reflection

The feedback for the two days was quite positive. For further information and/or if interested in having a similar workshop at your institution, please email Marina Orsini-Jones (m.orsini@coventry.ac.uk).

References

Sumner, N. 'PebblePAD', ALT-N, Issue 5 (2006)
http://newsletter.alt.ac.uk/e_article000611550.cfm?x=b11,0,w (last accessed 19/7/06).

Orsini-Jones, M. 'Sound opportunities with Horizon Wimba Voice Tools The Horizon Wimba Voice Tools (as PowerLinks within a VLE)' , ALT-N Issue 5 (2006)
http://newsletter.alt.ac.uk/e_article000613337.cfm?x=b11,0,w (last accessed 19/07/06)