Supporting further and higher education Situating e-portfolios: what do learners need? Helen Beetham Consultant in Pedagogy JISC e-learning programme

Supporting further and higher education

Situating e-portfolios:what do learners need?

Helen BeethamConsultant in Pedagogy

JISC e-learning programme


Who am I?• Research consultant in pedagogy, JISC e-

learning programme: – Research reviews– Commissioning new work in ‘designing for learning’

and ‘understanding my learning’– Informing development of systems and standards

www.jisc.ac.uk/elearning_pedagogy.html• Poet, teacher of creative writing

– Learning as reflective practice– Negotiating personal identity and goals within public

definitions of quality– Portfolio as public performance, private commentary,

and claim for recognition• Qualified mountain leader, etc…

– Portfolio of ‘mountain days’ as evidence


What does this reveal about the context?

• Learners have multiple identities and present them differently in different contexts (venues)

• Learners are likely to be engaged in multiple forms of learning

• e-learning = ‘learning facilitated and supported by the use of information and communications technologies (ICTs or ILTs)’ but…

• Choice of technology may be made by the learner, provisionally, unconsciously, without emphasis– e- and m-technologies are already incorporated into

learners’ lives• So we are not trying to articulate some new kind

or part of learning– we are trying to re-articulate learning in a new

technological context


What do learners need?The theory

• Curriculum focus: ‘designing for learning’ research strand

• Range of research reviews, funded projects and pedagogic evaluations

• Found three broad approaches to understanding learning and learners’ needs– Associative, constructive (individual and social

flavours), situative– Suggest different types of teaching, different

activities, and different assessment tasks


Associative approach• In learning

– Routines of organised activity– Clear goals and feedback– Individualised pathways matched to prior performance

• In teaching– Analysis into component units– Progressive sequences of component-to-composite skills or

concepts– Clear instructional approach for each unit– Highly focused objectives

• In assessment– Accurate reproduction of knowledge or skill – Component performance– Components integrated (composite topic-knowledge or skill-

set)


Constructive approach• In learning

– Conceptual development through integration of ideas– Ill-structured problems– Opportunities for reflection – Ownership of the task

• In teaching– Provide interactive environments and appropriate

challenges– Encourage experimentation and the discovery of broad

principles– Coach and model thinking skills– Frame learning outcomes in meta-cognitive terms to

encourage the development of autonomy• In assessment

– Conceptual understanding (applied knowledge and skills)– Extended performance– Processes as well as outcomes– Crediting varieties of excellence– Development of self-evaluation skills


• In learning– Conceptual development through collaborative activity– Ill-structured problems– Opportunities for discussion and reflection– Shared ownership of the task

• In teaching– Provide interactive environments and appropriate

challenges– Encourage experimentation and discussion– Coach and model skills of problem solving and

collaboration– Learning outcomes may be collectively negotiated

• In assessment– Conceptual understanding (applied knowledge and skills)– Extended performance– Process and participation as well as outcomes– Crediting varieties of excellence– Development of peer-evaluation skills

Social constructive approach


Situative approach• In learning

– Participation in social practices of enquiry and learning– Development of identities as capable and confident

learners– Development of learning relationships

• In teaching– Creating safe environments for participation– Supporting development of identities– Facilitating learning dialogues and relationships

• In assessment– Crediting participation– Extended performance, including variety of contexts– Authenticity of practice (values and beliefs as well as

competencies)– Involving peers


Common to all approaches• Activities must produce feedback to enable learning

– Intrinsic – comes from the activity or environment– Extrinsic – comes from other people

• Assessed feedback will be characterised by:– Explicit recording of process and/or outcomes of task– Explicit recording of feedback to the learner

• There must be an opportunity for integration– Associatively: to make explicit the components of

knowledge/skill and integrate into a coherent whole– Constructively: to apply the knowledge/skill critically; to

integrate what is learned into a wider understanding of the world

– Socially: to apply the knowledge/skill in collaborative contexts; to contribute to collaborative knowledge-building

– Situatively: to practice the knowledge/skill reflectively; to integrate it into a holistic practice, and a developed identity within a community of practice


learning activity

specific interaction with other learners, tools and resources,

oriented towards intended outcomes

learning outcomes

new knowledge, skills and abilitiesartefacts of the activity process

learningenvironment

Tools, resources, artefacts; affordances of the physical and virtual environment for learning

learner

Identity: preferences, needs, motivations Competence: skills, knowledge, abilities

Roles: approaches and modes of participating

A learning activity

Contextorganisational, wider social, cultural and economic contexts


learning activity

specific interaction with other learners, tools and resources,

oriented towards intended outcomes

learning outcomes

new knowledge, skills and abilitiesartefacts of the activity process

learningenvironment

Tools, resources, artefacts; affordances of the physical and virtual environment for learning

learner

Identity: preferences, needs, motivations Competence: skills, knowledge, abilities

Roles: approaches and modes of participating

Integration within a learning activity

Contextorganisational, wider social, cultural and economic contexts

reflect or integrate

do

apply

capture or feedback

support

adapt


Integration across learning activities

• There must also be opportunities across activities and programmes to – receive feedback on progress– integrate knowledges and skill-sets– reflect on learning strengths, preferences

and needs• And in a ‘lifelong learning’ context to:

– articulate different learning experiences in the context of a larger learning journey

– articulate different knowledges and skills in the context of a larger motivation for learning

– reflect on identities and roles


E-portfolio functionsMy programme

My learning My life

Internal Capturing and supporting learning

Personal development planning

Developing identity

External Sharing, evidencing, presenting for assessment

Sharing, presenting for review and application

Participating, developing repertoire of roles


How can new technologies support this integration?

• Within activities– New ways of capturing the processes and outcomes of

learning– New ways of giving and receiving (and recording)

feedback, including peer and self-review– New ways of collaborating and recording contribution to

collaborative outcomes– Enabling learners to select what is recorded and

communicated– Adding value to recordings through comment, annotation,

sharing, re-visiting, peer / tutor review• Across activities

– Ordering items for conceptual integration– Relating items across activities and programmes– Sharing items with others and developing shared assets– Presenting items in new narrative or purposeful order for

reflection– Presenting items in new order for external review

(assessment, application, accreditation etc)– Supporting self-analysis and action planning




Strengths of e- and m-technologies for

integration• Ubiquity

– The capacity to participate in and record the processes of learning is extended in time and space

• Communicability– New forms of dialogue possible, supported by traces of the

learning process (blogs, tracking data, screen shots, video clips)• Transferability

– Potentially, ownership devolves to learner• Adaptability to learners’ needs

– Multiple media for recording and adding value to learning– Multiple modes for ordering and re-ordering items (mind mapping,

narratives, outcomes-based etc)– Multiple formats for presenting and re-presenting evidence

• Making processes explicit– For communicating about one’s learning with others – For making claims about progress and achievement– For reflecting on one’s own learning

• File management and information processing – Re-presentation for multiple readers and purposes and in multiple

contexts– Non-linear structures support multiple roles and identities


What can the technology not support (on its own)?

• Learners’ capacity to reflect on their own learning…– understand their identity as a learner, manage a range of

roles, and participate successfully in a range of contexts– A recent review of the research (Wegerif 2004) concluded

that ‘using technology can not, by itself, lead to transferable thinking skills’

• Supportive contexts of use– in which learners’ identities and achievements are

recognised– in which learners’ particular needs are understood– in which learners’ identities and roles, as well as their

competences, are developed– in which learners participate with others in an environment

of trust, respect, openness…• Equality of access

– Computer ownership => widening gap in participation between social classes

• Transferability– Human processes cannot (should not?) be standardised


What do learners really need and want?

• Learner focus: ‘Understanding my learning’ research strand• Reviews of the research

– Learner experiences of e-learning – Learner differences in e-learning

• Study: learners’ perspectives and experiences– Conversations with learners– How do learners integrate their different experiences of learning,

and of technologies?– What are the significant differences among learners?

• prior experience; competing responsibilities; particular needs– What makes for a ‘good’ e-learning experience?

• Working with the DeL tools projects – Make recommendations to developers, based on pedagogic

evaluation of tools in use by learners– Develop scenarios of use

• Explore the specific role of e-portfolios – Involve learners as well as teachers and developers in consultation


For more information:www.jisc.ac.uk/elp_outcomes.html

outcomes of the ‘design for learning’ theme, particularly relevant to the pedagogic evaluation of DeL tools

www.jisc.ac.uk/elearning_pedagogy.htmlgeneral overview of the programme, including the new ‘understanding my learning’ theme and current projects

www.jisc.ac.uk/index.cfm?name=elp_practiceEffective Practice with e-learning publication and case studies

[email protected] Programme Manager

[email protected] Consultant

Documents

Supporting further and higher education Situating e-portfolios: what do learners need? Helen Beetham Consultant in Pedagogy JISC e-learning programme