Beyond the shoe box: Developing an ePortfolio for Leisure Sciences students

Julie Howell
Careers Advisory Service
Edith Cowan University

This presentation reports work in progress for an ECU Teaching and Learning grant project to create an electronic portfolio for Leisure Sciences students. The presentation will outline the components of the project being undertaken and the processes that students will experience. The e-portfolio for Leisure Sciences students will be trialed during Semester 1, 2002 in a unit on leisure facility planning.

The e-portfolio is emerging as the latest tool in professional development, for documenting in service achievements and seeking employment. Considerable portfolio development has occurred in the field of education and the arts, but other disciplines are increasingly applying the portfolio as a professional tool, for example in Youth Work studies (Cooper, 1997). An e-portfolio for Leisure Sciences students will enhance the existing practicum (industry practice/ fieldwork) component of their course, building throughout each year of the course.

The project will consist of more than an electronic storehouse for a resume and copies of evidence such as scanned reference letters, photographs and even video clips. It will include a self learning process to help students identify "gaps" in their current portfolio. One feature of this process will be an interactive web site (Blackboard, WebCT or similar) that will allow students to identify their existing skills, competencies and experiences. These capabilities could then be compared to samples of "real" job advertisements and corresponding job descriptions. In this way the students could see in which areas they need additional paid or voluntary work experience or additional skills to meet specific job requirements.

This presentation is more practical that philosophical, drawing on a vast literature in the general area of portfolio development and applying some recognised models to a structure for Leisure Sciences students. It is proposed that some preliminary examples of the e-portfolio planning and storage facilities will be available for demonstration.

Introduction

The ePortfolio framework is informed by the work of Barrett (1999, 2000, 2001). This project adopts Barrett's (2001, p. 5) definition of an electronic portfolio that focuses "on growth and development over time, implementation through selection, reflection and inspection of classwork, along with goal setting and self evaluation." However, in the early stages of this project, only the professional practice/practicum will be assessed in portfolio format.

Much of the research and development of portfolios for learning and assessment has occurred in higher education, especially in teacher education (eg., Baltimore, Hickson, Greorge, & Crutchfield, 1996; Fisher, 1993; Tanner, Longayroux, Beijaard, & Verloop, 2000). This project focuses on students preparing for professional careers in the broad leisure industry. Due to the scope and variety for work and development opportunities in this industry, ranging from children's vacation care to elite sport events management, a portfolio application seems most relevant.

Professional practice in the Leisure Sciences Program

Benefits of student practice

In 1998, a portfolio approach to student practicum was adopted to focus student energy and effort on work based learning outcomes, rather than just a variety of work experiences in the industry. The portfolio approach was based on Cooper's (1997) model of a paper evidence portfolio, presented in a binder or display book. The evidence may consist of letters of reference, samples of work (eg., brochures), extracts from reflective journal, and similar hard copy material.

Changing circumstances added other dimensions to student learning at ECU. The University developed a set of graduate attributes (key competencies or standards) (see Table 1), and faculties introduced generic skills (critical reading, thinking and writing). The current portfolio encourages and assists Leisure Sciences students to identify gaps in three foci:

1. in existing skills and experience in relation to existing leisure industry jobs;
2. in relation to graduate attributes, and
3. the students' own interests.

Beyond the classroom

In changing work environments, where the number of people in full time work will dwindle, part time and temporary work become more common (Kimeldorf, 1997, p.14), and with a 'variegated income' (Handy, 1989, p.44), individual portfolios may become the means by which a job seeker demonstrates what the person can bring to a job. Career portfolios will match this new way of working, with the advantages of demonstrating talents across a broad range of assignments (A. Lichtenberg, personal communication, October, 2001). For the students, learning how to build a portfolio early in their careers has many benefits from self assessment against University and industry standards (eg., graduate attributes and job selection criteria), to setting personal learning outcomes, strategies and performance indicators (Cooper, 1997). The collection of materials derived from student practice becomes the basic resource file or storehouse from which portfolios are built (DeGraff & Jordan, 1996, p.38).

The ePortfolio

More than a shoe box

The underpinning philosophy for the project follows Clarke's (1995, p. 246) guidelines to focus attention on students' initial understanding of the process and its purpose; encouraging student ownership and individual expression; providing some structured aspects to balance the open ended nature of portfolios; and evaluating portfolio process and students' responses. The strength of a portfolio (as assessment for professional practice) lies in its collaborative teamwork for students and teacher. It provides a common framework within which learning and achievement are discussed. It is a student centred and empowering process (Baltimore et al, 1996, p. 115; McLaughlin et al., 1998). It is also a place where evidence is stored and organised until required.

The ePortfolio consists of more than an electronic storehouse for a resume and copies of hard evidence, such as scanned letters, photographs and even video clips. It will include a self directed process of identifying gaps in current knowledge, skills and competencies. against 'real' job requirements (using advertisements and job descriptions). Students then write their learning outcomes, with objectives and strategies for achieving them. These additional features reflect Barrett's view (Barrett, 2000a, 2000b) that a portfolio is a "process, rather than a product - a concrete representation of critical thinking, reflection. Used to set goals for ongoing professional development."

An ePortfolio offers the possibility to:

• create a systematic store of all relevant artefacts for easy access, selection and presentation in the creation of portfolios with a specific purpose (eg., student assessment, job application or promotion);
• develop highly creative, visual and more authentic artefacts through the technology (eg., PowerPoint presentations, video clips of performance and products)
• store large amounts of relevant information that are easy to update, reflect upon and improve;
• access easily to transfer parts of the portfolio in a fast and efficient manner.

Figure 1: The ePortfolio as process and product

The advantages of a focus on electronic student portfolios/resource files were identified by Rogers and Rogers (1999, p.30) as a distinguishing feature for a university, reduction of storage and access disadvantages, and a cost effective method of collecting student materials

Some contentious issues arise from the growing popularity of ePortfolios, especially web based portfolios. Recent world wide web developments allow students to display web based portfolios 'to the world'. Open access creates possibilities of plagiarism and misrepresentation by and of students (Wheeler, 1996; Wolfe, 1999). Public display of student work may not be as motivating as some suggest and create problems of privacy. Security and confidentiality are also issues for web based portfolios that are not openly published, especially for reflective portfolios. Other disadvantages may include high costs of compilations and assessment, cheating, or the creation of a useless paper chase (Wheeler, 1996).

Portfolios seem to have different purposes. Students may see portfolios as marketing tools, whereas faculties see portfolios as assessment tools. This confusion of purpose can create dissonance.

The use of portfolios as assessment tools raises many issues and contrary views about their effectiveness as evaluation tools (eg., Burns, 1999; Centra, 1994, Seldin, 1991). Gwa-Dong et al. (2001, p. 20) warned that teachers must diligently strive to observe student portfolios and comprehend student learning processes to guide students to develop their portfolios. A portfolio as an assessment tool is not discussed in the paper. At this stage of this project, assessment is less a concern than multi media platforms and software options for the ePortfolio.

This project encapsulates two of the major changes in portfolio development:

1. defining a portfolio, and
2. presenting artefacts (evidence) effectively.

Multimedia development of the ePortfolio

Storing an ePortfolio

Publishing the ePortfolio

For this project, two products are trialed: Macromedia Dreamweaver and Adobe Acrobat PDF files. In 2002 the University will adopt Blackboard as the platform for web delivery of teaching programs and the ePortfolio project will be written for this format. Figure 2 provides a summary of the course outline. It clearly links to the process covered in Figure 1.

Figure 2: Flow diagram for ePortfolio structure in Blackboard

Editing the evidence requires a deep understanding of the purpose of the portfolio, reflecting on the quality of artefacts and the most effective presentation. The reflection process would ideally include the comments of lecturers/supervisors. This stage also provides an ideal opportunity for students to work as a team to improve the ePortfolio content and presentation.

One key aim of the ePortfolio project is to provide a framework where professional practice materials can be linked with career portfolio materials. This storehouse will hold electronic evidence to demonstrate a student's skills, attributes and competencies, to enhance a student's career choices and job seeking skills and knowledge

Whilst 'editing the evidence' students develop the ability to select from their storehouse items for specific purposes (for example addressing selection criteria for an employment position). Consolidating the reflection process at this time has the potential to aid career development. This is a future direction for the Leisure Sciences ePortfolio project.

Conclusion

The shift to develop an ePortfolio for Leisure Sciences students was suggested by a discussion of the advantages and disadvantages of an ePortfolio system and the structure of a portfolio to enhance learning. The paper concluded with a review of existing multimedia resources and an explanation of the adoption of Blackboard as the platform. It also outlined the strategy for introducing the ePortfolio to Leisure Sciences student in Semester 1, 2002.

References

Barrett, H. C. (1998). Electronic Portfolios and Standards. http://transition.alaska.edu/www/portfolios/TelEd98Abstract.html

Barrett, H. C. (2000a). Electronic Portfolios = Multimedia Development + Portfolio Development. The Electronic Portfolio Development Process. [viewed 25 Jun 2001] http://transition.alaska.edu/www/portfolios/EPDevProcess.html

Barrett, H. C. (2000b). Electronic Teaching Portfolios: Multimedia Skills + Portfolio Development = Powerful Professional Development. Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE). [viewed 25 Jun 2001] http://transition.alaska.edu/www/portfolios/site2000.html

Barrett, H. C. (2001). ICT support for electronic portfolios and alternative assessment: The state of the art. Paper presented at the World Conference on Computers and Education (WCCE).

Burns, C. W. (1999). Teaching portfolios and the evaluation of teaching in higher education: Confident claims, questionable research support. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 25, 131-142.

Centra, J. A. (1994). The use of the teaching portfolio and student evaluations for summative evaluation. Journal of Higher Education, 65, 555-570.

Clarke, A. (1995). Professional development in practicum settings: Reflective practice under scrutiny. Teaching and Teacher Education, 11(3), 243-261.

Cooper, T. (1997). Portfolio Assessment: A Guide for Students. Quinns Rock, Western Australia: Praxis Education.

DeGraff, D. G., & Jordan, D. J. (1996). The use of a portfolio system as a pedagogical tool. Schole: A Journal of Leisure Studies and Recreation Education, 11, 37-45.

ECU Web for Graduate Attributes.

Fisher, F. (1993). PEACE. Journal of Lifelong Learning, 21, 27-32.

Handy, C. (1989). The Age of Unreason. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.

James, K. & Colyer, S. (2001). Campus Alive! A project to explore student attitudes to campus life. In T. Kulski & A. Herrmann (Eds.), New horizons in university teaching and learning: Responding to change. Perth, Western Australia: Curtin University. [web version at http://cleo.murdoch.edu.au/confs/tlf/tlf2001/james.html]

Jewell, D. L. Criteria for selection of the agency fieldwork supervisor. Schole: A Journal of Leisure Studies and Recreation Education, 65-83.

Kimeldorf, M. (1997). Portfolio Power: The New Way to Showcase all Your Job Skills and Experiences. Princeton: Peterson.

McLaughlin, M., Vogt, M. E., Anderson, J., DuMez, J., Peter, M. G., & Hunter, A. (1998). Portfolio Models: Reflections Across the Teaching Profession. Norwood: Christopher-Gordon Publishers.

Ralston, L., & Ellis, G. Service-Learning: Connecting Practical Experience With Classroom Instruction. 13-22.

Rogers, G. M., & J, W. (1999). Building a better portfolio. ASEE Prism, 8(5), 30-32.

Seldin, P. (1991). The Teaching Portfolio. Boston: Anker.

Shaklee, B., Barbour, N., Ambrose, R., & Hansford, S. (1997). Designing and Using Portfolios. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.

Tanner, R., Longayroux, D., Beijaard, D., & Verloop, N. (2000). Piloting portfolios: Using portfolios in pre-service teacher education. ELT Journal, 54(1), 20-30.

Wheeler, P. (1996). Using portfolios to assess teacher performance. In K. Burke (Ed.), Professional Portfolios: A Collection of Articles. Australia: Hawker Brownlow Education.

Wolfe, E. W. (1999). How can administrators facilitate portfolio implementation. High School Magazine, 6(5), 29-33.

Appendix: Portfolio checklist