Hi Simon,

Thanks - looks good. I had a couple of initial thoughts:

One dimension that is missing is around dialogue; where ePortfolios can
act as vehicles to facilitate communication, formal/informal feedback,
coaching, mentoring, tutoring, peer group learning etc.

Skills & competencies could be added to the objectives/intended learning
outcomes. Sure educationally they are very different but in many ways
ePortfolios tools can be used to manage these in much the same way.

I'm not too keen on the label 'structured education', though I know
where you are coming from. What about 'informal learning' and 'formal
learning'. Any FE/HE course-programme, even postgraduate research,
implies *some level* of structure. As we move towards personal learning
pathways these might be considered  personally determined structures!
(pre-determined structures, self-selected structures...)

I guess this could get complex as you map structure in education with
structure in process (ePortfolio pedagogy). The level of structure from
an education perspective does not necessarily relate to the level of
structure in the portfolio tools. For example in medicine we use a
structured template for learners to determine and monitor intended
learning outcomes for a less structured part of the curriculum - student
selected modules where outcomes are not pre-defined but negotiated
between student and supervisor. On the other hand, in other contexts we
have used unstructured blogs to contribute to assessment of very
structured outcomes.
 
Part of our rationale in designing the component-based architecture in
ePET was that every programme has unique requirements so tools can be
selected to suite the level of structure in education/pedagogy on a
course and year-group basis. We have also added more individual control
over structure.

It is good to have this discussion, at the heart of it is how we define
ePortfolios and some of the tensions between positivist and
constructionist philosophies....

Cheers,

SimonC

>-----Original Message-----
>From: e-portfolio practitioners and developers 
>[mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Simon Grant
>Sent: 03 July 2007 22:32
>To: [log in to unmask]
>Subject: A model relating education to portfolio tools?
>
>Dear Colleagues
>
>For various reasons, the motive has appeared for thinking in 
>general terms about the role of e-portfolio tools in 
>education. What I'd like to do here is to offer some draft 
>thoughts to add to, criticise, fill in, knock down or 
>whatever, but at least as a stimulus for reaction and 
>discussion. Any contribution, however critical, is most welcome.
>
>Perhaps we can use this to pick up some of the domain 
>modelling that JISC encourages us to do. It would be really 
>useful to establish some consensus models in this area, to add 
>to what has been generated by the e-portfolio reference model 
>project and related work.
>
>Please feel free to offer any criticism of any point - to keep 
>messages down to size and to the point, please also try to 
>remove the bits of this message you aren't talking about.
>
>Here goes then...
>
>Thanks
>
>Simon
>
>  = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
>
>In order to decide how e-portfolio tools fit in education, the 
>first issue to resolve is whether the education is structured 
>or planned in any way. To many people in educational 
>institutions this may sound like an odd question, because 
>their assumption may be that education is a planned activity. 
>But there is the alternative, broader and looser view of 
>education in which learners engage with experiences without 
>planning beforehand what educational objectives there might 
>be, and learn whatever they happen to learn. Typically, 
>different people in the same situation are likely to learn 
>different things when left to their own devices.
>
>
>==Unstructured education==
>
>If education is not structured or planned, the role of 
>e-portfolio tools is at once simpler but more difficult to 
>define. Portfolio tools can in any case help learners record 
>what has happened, reflect on it in a more or less structured 
>way, and keep the materials in an easily accessed place, 
>helpfully categorised, so that the information can be used 
>later for whatever purpose emerges.
>
>
>==Structured education==
>
>If, as is normal in educational institutions, the education is 
>organised, we can imagine a simple model of an idealised 
>process of constructing, delivering and assessing a course, in 
>which we can set the possible roles for e-portfolio tools.
>
>===Learning objectives===
>Learning objectives (or intended learning outcomes - no 
>distinction is intended here) are statements that describe 
>what a learner will be able to do as a result of learning. 
>This is a normal place to start when designing a course. 
>
>A special case for e-portfolios would be if the objectives 
>included the ablity to use e-portfolio tools, or involved the 
>use of e-portfolio tools, or more generally involved attitudes 
>related to portfolio use:
>for instance, related to the ability to record experiences, 
>reflect on them, and use the results of reflection in 
>presentations to others.
>
>Other e-portfolio-related objective would be learners gaining 
>the ability to document and evidence personal abilities; and 
>the ability to present themselves more generally on paper and 
>through electronic media.
>
>===Learning processes===
>Clearly it is possible to allow learners themselves to decide 
>how to meet learning objectives, but many courses design the 
>processes to a greater or lesser extent, or at least envisage 
>how the learning process might take place. If the processes 
>are designed, they may involve pre-selected learning materials 
>and e-learning tools. Some of these tools may be e-portfolio 
>tools, or be linked with portfolio tools.
>
>Processes, and thus tools, depend greatly on the kinds of 
>learning objectives selected. But whatever processes and tools 
>are used, e-portfolio related tools can offer storage and 
>recall of the kind of information useful in formative 
>assessment. Indeed, any formative assessment processes could 
>well be based around tools that include e-portfolio functionality.
>
>===Assessment===
>Alongside the learning objectives, one has to decide how the 
>objectives are to be assessed summatively. Assessment may 
>involve portfolios of work, or a system which helps to 
>administer the collection, presentation, and assessment of 
>work. This is a significant area in its own right, which can 
>be dealt with separately, and for which there exist several 
>well-established tools, particularly in the area of vocational 
>education and NVQs. Some of these tools include e-portfolio in 
>their name, and it is possible for a summative assessment 
>management tool not to facilitate any reflection, or other 
>functionality frequently associated with portfolio tools.
>
>
>==Assessing available tools==
>
>A rational approach to portfolio use in education design might 
>proceed by assessing the available tools for any of the 
>purposes outlined above.
>
>There are purpose-built e-portfolio tools of various kinds, 
>but there are also many tools which, if they are generally 
>available to the learners in question, can be used to support 
>portfolio-related processes.
>
>Tools to help with the learning processes, without provision 
>for reflection, or recording for purposes beyond the course 
>itself, may best not be seen as e-portfolio tools, but rather 
>as part of a wider group of e-learning tools. There is a real 
>danger of any e-learning tool being labelled an e-portfolio 
>tool indiscriminately. To maintain meaning, this tendency has 
>to be resisted.
>
>
>==Use existing or build new==
>
>Having assessed available tools, the point of decision comes 
>between using existing tools, which may not be perfectly 
>matched to the situation; adapting existing tools for the 
>required purposes; or building new ones, with the implications 
>in terms of resources, and in particular, time.
>