Richardson, H.C., & Ward, R. (2005) Developing and Implementing a Methodology for Reviewing E-Portfolio Products, The Centre for Recording Acheivement

Richardson, H.C., & Ward, R. (2005) Developing and Implementing a Methodology for Reviewing E-Portfolio Products, The Centre for Recording Acheivement

The report focuses on the available e-portfolio products and begins to classify their designed uses. Within this are included tools for PDP (the majority are designed for this use), assessment management, and presentational tools. “We found that most systems have been developed for a particular age or stage of learning.” This also implies that the tools lack flexibility and are designed with specific uses in mind.

The findings reported also indicate that the majority of tools had low levels of personalisation in their functionality stating that, “very few systems currently support learner selected screen display preference settings.” (p.14) This was identified as a key issue and is significant in terms of student ownership of their content.

Dillon, S. & Brown, A. (2006) ‘The Art of E-Portfolios: Insights from the Creative Arts Experience’ In Jafari, A. & Kaufman, C. (Eds.) Handbook of Research on E-Portfolios pp420-433 Hershey, PA: Idea Group Reference

Dillon, S. & Brown, A. (2006) ‘The Art of E-Portfolios: Insights from the Creative Arts Experience’ In Jafari, A. & Kaufman, C. (Eds.) Handbook of Research on E-Portfolios pp420-433 Hershey, PA: Idea Group Reference

The authors aim to examine the creative production context in order to reveal challenges potentially encountered using portfolios in the creative arts through case studies in diverse creative fields. Initially there is an acknowledgement of the “intensive media-rich nature of creative production contexts” being a significant challenge for electronic portfolio use. The article goes on to describe the generic elements of traditional creative arts portfolios to represent the intrinsic creative processes associated:

“When creative product and experience are textualised, the explanation is privileged over a representation of the knowledge itself in its original symbolic form. Artefacts of artistic practice can be organized into a system that documents creative practice in a way that combines both the experience of the work and the explanation of the work to provide a rigorous, accountable, and compelling presentation of the work.” (p.421)

The trend for multimedia richness made possible and driven by technology, is suggested to “level the playing field” for contexts beyond the creative arts (there is a historical and cultural tendency for prioritising text and numerical modes of description). The authors highlight ways in which multimedia can be utilised to extrude metaphors for creative arts, citing music and the performing arts’ temporal nature as being well suited to such outputs.

A key question raised is; “Is the artefact of the production sufficiently representative of the quality of the work?” A focus on understanding subjects and the tools and processes intrinsic to them is provided as a basis for a solution; “Understanding the ways of knowing within a discipline is critical to the effective use of ePortfolios, and understanding within creative arts is tightly bound with the mediums of those practices.” (p.431)

Mehanna, W.N. (2004) ‘E-Pedagogy: The Pedagogies of E-Learning’ ALT-J, 12 (3), pp279-293

Mehanna, W.N. (2004) ‘E-Pedagogy: The Pedagogies of E-Learning’ ALT-J, 12 (3), pp279-293

Mehanna develops a taxonomy of pedagogical traits through a grounded research approach. Findings are triangulated with an existing classification of pedagogies, research findings (29 effective practices) and theoretical backing. Of the pedagogic behaviours listed, non-linguistic presentation seems to bear relevance to the use of e-portfolios, suggesting that this is has a cognitive foundation.

Logan, C., Allan, S., Kurien, A. & Flint, D. (2007) Distributed E-Learning in Art, Design and Media: An Investigation into Current Practice The Higher Education Academy Subject Centre for Art, Design and Media

Logan, C., Allan, S., Kurien, A. & Flint, D. (2007) Distributed E-Learning in Art, Design and Media: An Investigation into Current Practice The Higher Education Academy Subject Centre for Art, Design and Media

The research aimed to provide a picture of the current use of virtual learning environments and other learning and teaching technologies in these subject areas. The findings of the project were reviewed in the light of current literature, and the report provides development-oriented advice that aims to benefit stakeholders in these specialist subject areas.

Three kinds of findings contributed to the project. Detailed survey evidence describes current and extensive use of learning technologies and levels of user satisfaction; case studies provide in-depth accounts of practical and pedagogical issues involved in introducing e-learning into course programmes; and focus group findings give rich, qualitative accounts of real-life learning and teaching, including the student experience. The project’s evidence provides a picture of the diverse and innovative use currently being made of e-learning across art, design and media disciplines.

For further information visit:
http://pathfinder.cumbria.ac.uk/del1.html

Download the full report.

Downes, S. (2007) Web 2.0 and Your Own Learning Development [Online video presentation] Available at: http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-5431152345344515009 (accessed November 21 2007)

Downes, S. (2007) Web 2.0 and Your Own Learning Development [Online video presentation] Available at: http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-5431152345344515009 (accessed November 21 2007)

This online presentation characterises the principles upon which the author considers web 2.0 technologies to be based. These three underlying principles have connections with the social learning theories of other entries in this annotated bibliography (Lave & Wenger, 1991), (Mendoza et al., 2007). The three principles are:- Interaction: participation in communities of practice; Usability: the software must be easy to use and accessible; and Relevance: or salience. Most significantly, Downes describes the need for the user to own and personalise the spaces that they use, encouraging the bespoke selection of resources from the vast collective knowledge available through the World Wide Web. It is the skills associated with this selective process that are of particular interest when considering the links with user-driven e-portfolio software, whether it be for representational or reflective use.

Butler, P. (2006) A Review of the Literature on Portfolios and Electronic Portfolios

Butler, P. (2006) A Review of the Literature on Portfolios and Electronic Portfolios [Online] Available at: https://eduforge.org/docman/view.php/ 176/1111/ePortfolio%20Project%20Research%20Report.pdf (accessed 23 July 2007)

2006 review of literature on e-portfolio research with some focus on art and design specific e-portfolio use. The most significant points emerging relate to the purpose and use of e-portfolios and from where these are driven. (Purposes: what an e-portfolio is designed for. Uses: What e-portfolios are actually used for.) Although there are several interpretations of the purposes of e-portfolios, they essentially range from, at one end of the scale, a process / learning portfolio to, at the other, representational / showcase.

Art and design specific analysis is based on a relatively small sample of literature but indicates a subject-oriented preconception that is also evident in other fields. For art and design this is that the portfolio is fundamentally a collection of visual work, often supported with reflective / explanatory information.” (Blaikie et al., 2004)

The review highlights benefits associated with electronic portfolios: skill development; evidence of learning; feedback; reflection; psychological benefits; assessment; artefacts; maintenance; portability and sharing. (p11)

Perry, M. & Medler, A. (2004) Marketing your Creativity: New Approaches for a Changing Industry, Lausanne: AVA Publishing

Perry, M. & Medler, A. (2004) Marketing your Creativity: New Approaches for a Changing Industry, Lausanne: AVA Publishing

The authors have written the book for graduates who are readying themselves for employment in the design sector. They talk about the changing face of employment in the sector describing, “client spending on marketing activity is undoubtedly down and permanent jobs in the industry have suffered, freelance is more buoyant.” (p38) The authors offer an alternative ethos for enhancement employment opportunities, suggesting interdisciplinary awareness and diversity of skill-base being key elements.

The book describes ways that graduates can market themselves for employment. Digital portfolios – CD or web based – are first on the agenda and assert a need for easy to access and readily compatible content the key. A number of other approaches are listed; digital direct mail, email, multimedia, but the portfolio is seen as a fundamental tool. “Turning your traditional portfolio into a digital portfolio opens up all kinds of doors or you.” (p54) And the authors re-state the need for individuality and asserting the “brand of you.”

Mendoza, H.R., Bernasconi, C. & MacDonald N.M. (2007) ‘Creating New Identities in Design Education’ International Journal of Art and Design Education, 26 (3), pp308-313

Mendoza, H.R., Bernasconi, C. & MacDonald N.M. (2007) ‘Creating New Identities in Design Education’ International Journal of Art and Design Education, 26 (3), pp308-313

Mendoza et al explore a community theory of shared knowledge in interdisciplinary design fields. The ideas are not dissimilar to Lave & Wenger’s legitimate peripheral participation in that the authors state that they “do not subscribe to the idea of restrictive fields of knowledge which thereby prevent access to others. We argue that a collective mapping of interrelated knowledge territories creates a stronger framework…”

“The ability to interrelate with others using the ap, to add and to edit it creates a powerful participatory learning tool.” There are also links with well-founded web 2.0 technologies such as wikis and weblogs in the underlying ethos expressed in the article. The authors go on to affirm the belief that restricting knowledge through boundaries is counterintuitive to its mercurial nature.

Lave, J. & Wenger, E. (1991) Situated Learning: Legitimate Peripheral Participation Cambridge: Cambridge University Press

Lave, J. & Wenger, E. (1991) Situated Learning: Legitimate Peripheral Participation Cambridge: Cambridge University Press

The authors describe the concept of legitimate peripheral participation as being central to their theory of Situated Learning. In broad terms, legitimate peripheral paticipation describes the way in which members of communities of practice are valued by their willingness to learn and contribute to the knowledge of a sociocultural community based on a predicated mastery of existing knowledge and skills.

There is a relationship with this theory and the recurrent capacity of Web 2.0 technologies as described by Downes (2007); Interaction: participation in a community of practice; Usability and Relevance. So there are significant parallels to the theme of ownership (user, organisational) of portfolios for learning and employment.