8/14/2019 BBohlinger_ePortfolio Case Studies

1/2

1

Britta Bohlinger- 09/2009

http://britbohlinger.wordpress.com

Electronic Portfolio case studiesprovide significant clues as to whether which user groups benefit

the most of ePortfolio system implementations and they also cast light on the widespread belief that

students seem to be most interested in the ways ePortfolios can flesh out their rsums, both before

and after graduation (Batson, 2002). No doubt, at an institutional level these systems are useful in

management, assessment and reviews of student coursework as well as programme development. Yet,

there are areas where ePortfolio systems seem not to capture the needs of potential employers and it

seems more work needs to be done in order to reflect skills acquired in affinitive spaces and informal

learning practices. This brief summary does not attempt to provide answers but aims to raise

questions.

The [UK] Assurance Agency (QAA) defines PDP as 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.Ideally, an ePortfolio would help a range of

users to identity and manage learning progress: the learner her/himself, potential colleagues and

employers, teachers/lecturers, administrators, course/programme managers in educational institutions.

In 2004, David Ford et al. published their discussion of findings in relation to the implementation of

an ePortfolio system in Nottingham. The City of Nottinghams Passport system operates in local

schools and is connected to the University of Nottinghams ePARs system, they are supposed to help

making the transition between stages of education easier. This involves the individual learners

personal targets, the development of their CV as well as administrative processing of admission

requests and record-keeping of academic progress. The target group consists of young people from

the age of 11 and covers those up into the stage where they are progressing towards their first career

post -secondary education.

Positive outcomes were registered in so far as users noticed motivational effects and an increase in

self-esteem and confidence due to enhanced self-management and self-review skills. The

implementation of the system was beneficial to educational institutions whose planning and admission

processes could be improved due to data sharing among each other. Teachers and lecturers benefited

in relation to standardisation of assessment, handling of timetables and bookings of tutorials.

Key limitations related to restricted functionality, data storage and security, data transferability and

data access rights catering the future socially mobile and flexible work force that may have more

than one career in a globalised world seemed to be an ambitious goal. Batson (2002) had recognised

that interoperability in an ever more dynamic and constantly updated and interconnected world would

8/14/2019 BBohlinger_ePortfolio Case Studies

2/2

2

Britta Bohlinger- 09/2009

http://britbohlinger.wordpress.com

require non-static systems to reflect students progress and allow them to aggregate their pieces of

work. As Jafari (2004) rightly pointed out: ePortfolio systems need to stick for a lifetime and they

need to offer solutions for technical and licensing difficulties across institutional boundaries,

including the networking between alumni as well as accessibility to employers in various industries.

Taking into account what current data sharing sites enable users to represent and share across variousplatforms and with all kinds of audiences, whether in private or public settings, including the

aggregation of digital products and skills, ePortfolios come across as very web 1.0-driven. The key

question is whether ePortfolios will be able to keep pace with the technological development and the

rapidly changing practices in online spaces. Also, will they sufficiently take into account that

employers are still not overly enthusiastic by the prospect to be presented with pieces of work that

were not compiled for purposes related to their needs but academic assessment, possibly even some

years ago?

References

Batson, T. (2002) The electronic portfolio boom: whats it all about? [online] Campus Technology.

Available from: http://campustechnology.com/articles/2002/11/theelectronic-portfolio-boom-whats-it-

all-about.aspx [10 September 2009]

Jafari, A. (2004) The sticky e-portfolio system: tackling challenges and identifying attributes

(online),Educause Review, vol. 39, no. 4 (July/August), pp. 3849. Available from

http://www.educause.edu/ir/library/pdf/erm0442.pdf[10 September 2009]

QAA (2001) Guidelines for HE Progress Files [online] Quality Assurance Agency for Higher

Education. Available from

http://www.qaa.ac.uk/academicinfrastructure/progressFiles/guidelines/progfile2001.asp

[10September]

Ford, D., Harley, P. and Smallwood, A. (2004) Integrating an eportfolio within a university and the

wider community [online], workshop presentation, EIfEL ePortfolio conference, La Rochelle,

October 2004, University of Nottingham. Available from

http://www.nottingham.ac.uk/eportfolio/specifyinganeportfolio/keydocuments/LaRochelle

Paper.doc [10 September 2009]