Design, implementation and evaluation of a 'generic' ePortfolio: the Newcastle experience.

1. Design, implementation and evaluation of a 'generic' ePortfolio: the Newcastle experience. Simon Cotterill, Tony McDonald, Paul Drummond, Geoff Hammond School of Medical Education Development University of Newcastle, UK

2. Background SST (Student Support & Tutoring) 1st Newcastle-Nottingham PARs project, 1998-2000 • Internet-PARs • DfES funded • PDP focus • FDTL-4 project • ePortfolios in Medicine • Evidencing outcomes • PDP 2nd Newcastle-Nottingham PARs project, 2000-02

3. Background • An FDTL-4 project developing ePortfolios for undergraduate Medicine (2002-2005): • Newcastle University (lead site) • Leeds University • Sheffield University • Dundee University (for consultancy) Project funded by

4. Aims • 1. Personal Development Planning (PDP) • "a structured and supported process undertaken by an individual to reflect upon their own learning, performance and/or achievement and to plan for their personal, educational and career development” • Quality Assurance Agency for Higher Education, 2001.

5. a) Towards a life-long learning record • School HE CPD Aims 2. Supporting Life-Long Learning (LLL) • b) Encouraging the development of LLL Skills: • Evidencing Learning Outcomes • Transition to Independent learning • Preparation for professional requirements: • - Appraisals • - Assessment • - Revalidation

6. Aims (technical) 3. Design a ‘generic’ ePortfolio -transferable / useful in different contexts 4. Integration with VLEs

7. Integrated into the common contents structure Context-specific tools • CV • Outcomes / skills log • PDP • Reflective learning diary • Meetings log • SWOT Common tools • Common contents structure • sharing • cross-referencing • searchable • integrated action planning • Customisation • select tools by course/year • outcomes / skills sets • nomenclature • graphics / layout • simple tool editor Architecture ‘Generic’ framework Developed with Open Source products: Zope, MySQL

8. ‘Generic’ framework: Customisaton Selecting tools by Course and Year Course Admin view Student view • create context-specific • tools via simple Web forms

9. ‘Generic’ framework: Customisaton Configuring learning outcomes / skills sets Course Admin view

10. ‘Generic’ framework: Sharing

11. Piloting & Implementation The ePortfolio developed at Newcastle has been applied in the following contexts: 2003/4 Undergraduate Medicine Contract Research Staff (CPD) Generic Portfolio (project demonstrator) 2004/5 Dentistry (Undergrad + Vocational Training) Undergraduate Biosciences St Andrew’s University (Medicine)

12. Generic ePortfolio: Public Demonstrator http:www.eportfolios.ac.uk

13. Medicine at Newcastle: Integration with a bespoke VLE

14. Common Tools: Learning Diary (Medicine – Newcastle)

15. Context-specific Tools: PDP for Year 4 Student Selected Components

16. Common Tools: Record courses (CRS)

17. Common Tools: Learning Outcome / Skills (CRS)

18. Common Tools: SWOT (Bioscience prototype)

19. Common Tools: CV (St Andrew’s University)

20. Common Tools: Tutor meetings (St Andrew’s University)

21. Context-specific Tools: Dentistry Project involves 6 Dental schools and 2 Postgraduate Deaneries

22. Context-specific Tools: Dentistry Promoting Continuity & LLL in Dentistry

23. Integration #2: Blackboard (via a ‘tab’)

24. Integration #2: Blackboard (via the tool bar)

25. Evaluation #1: Medicine (Years 1&2) Cotterill SJ, Sarma S, McDonald AM, Bradley P • Ethical approval / informed consent • Focus groups + Questionnaires • Key issues: • Generally well received but what motivation ? • not assessed • not viewed by tutors (staff interface completed later) • Need better clarity of purpose • Wanted a more quirky / fun design ! • Learning diary - useful at first, less so over time • Good to browse the Learning Outcomes

26. Evaluation #2: Medicine(Year 4) • PDP for student selected components • Cotterill SJ, McDonald AM, Bradley P, Robinson R, Hammond GR • Ethical approval / informed consent • Questionnaires (before and after using the ePortfolio) • Change in awareness of intended learning outcomes ? • Factors influencing use of the ePortfolio • Attitudes and perceptions of using the ePortfolio • Student perception of impact of using the ePortfolio • Evaluation of technical features and ‘usability’ • 186 students completed the portfolio (~100% compliance) • 105 questionnaires completed (56% of cohort) at 30/06/2004

27. Evaluation - positive “It encouraged me to really give thought to what I wanted to achieve during the option, which was especially useful as this was my first option. As a result of the portfolio I think I got much more out of the option than I would have otherwise.” “It made me concentrate on creating aims at the start of the option and allowed me to plan the option with my supervisor in a defined way. Overall it made my learning for the option more organised and focused.”

28. “Access to computer as option took place in Barnard Castle, records may have been more detailed if completed straight after meetings etc.” Evaluation - barriers & problems: “Most of the things I learned couldn't be 'measured/quantified' so I felt it was of little value to try and invent a way in which they could.”

29. Having clearly defined intended learning outcomes influenced the way in which I approached the option 72% felt that the LOs influenced their approach Building the ePortfolio was a useful learning experience 80% thought it was a useful learning experience

30. At the end of the option I spent time considering what I had learned from this option. 93% reflected on their learning after their SSC

31. Conclusions #1 The ‘generic’ ePortfolio • Highly configurable • Can be readily adapted for different contexts • Existing tools have an emphasis on PDP -but the portfolio framework can serve other purposes Integration in VLEs • Fully integrated into a VLE for Medicine • Initial work to integrate with Blackboard has been successful

32. Conclusions #2 • Evaluation (in Medicine) • ePortfolios implemented / piloted in 2003/4 • Demonstrated: Feasibility & Acceptability • Most students perceive these as beneficial • However, unless assessed / mandatory the motivation to complete is reduced.

33. Conclusions #3 • Educational Objectives (including PDP) • Some evidence that PDP had a positive impact on planning and approach to learning (Year 4 SSC) • Encouraged reflection in some students • Good preparation (and practice) for LLL & CPD • However, long-term impact on learning is unknown • Further research is essential • Some (limited) evidence that PDP improves learning: A systematic map and synthesis review of the effectiveness of personal development planning for improving student learning. EPPI-Centre (2002) http://eppi.ioe.ac.uk

34. Additional Developments: • ePortfolios Extension Toolkit (ePET) • -A JISC funded project to develop a ‘Web services’ interface for the portfolio (by 04/2005) http://www.eportfolios.ac.uk/ePET • IAMSECT ‘Shibboleth’ Single Sign-On project • JISC funded project • http://iamsect.ncl.ac.uk • Further information on the ePortfolio: • http://www.eportfolios.ac.uk • Simon Cotterill (S.J.Cotterill@ncl.ac.uk)

35. Implementation of ePortfolios - Humans are important too ! • Buy-in of key stakeholders: • Learners • Clarity of purpose ? • Sense of Ownership ? • Tutors & Admin staff • Extra work ? • Senior Curriculum staff • Integration with existing processes • Training (all) • Monitoring and evaluation

36. Central data: • Transcript • MIS/ HR data • Programme data: • Granular assessment data • Outcomes / skills sets Selecting sub-sets of portfolio data for different purposes: Portfolio for Assessment Portfolio for Presentation Portfolio for Application (job / promotion) Portfolio for Accreditation/ Revalidation Learner’s ‘repository’ Institutional Data Portfolio for Appraisal PDP (shared) PDP / Reflective (private)