This article was downloaded by: [Ondokuz Mayis Universitesine]On: 13 November 2014, At: 12:50Publisher: RoutledgeInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registeredoffice: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Computer Assisted Language LearningPublication details, including instructions for authors andsubscription information:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/ncal20

The role of the electronic portfolioin enhancing Information andCommunication Technology and Englishlanguage skills: the voices of sixMalaysian undergraduatesSiew Ming Thang a , Yit Sim Lee a & Nurul Farhana Zulkifli aa School of Language Studies and Linguistics, UniversitiKebangsaan Malaysia , Bangi , MalaysiaPublished online: 19 Mar 2012.

To cite this article: Siew Ming Thang , Yit Sim Lee & Nurul Farhana Zulkifli (2012) The role of theelectronic portfolio in enhancing Information and Communication Technology and English languageskills: the voices of six Malaysian undergraduates, Computer Assisted Language Learning, 25:3,277-293, DOI: 10.1080/09588221.2012.655299

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2012.655299

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the“Content”) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis,our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as tothe accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinionsand views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors,and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Contentshould not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sourcesof information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims,proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever orhowsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arisingout of the use of the Content.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Anysubstantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing,systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms &

Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Ond

okuz

May

is U

nive

rsite

sine

] at

12:

51 1

3 N

ovem

ber

2014

The role of the electronic portfolio in enhancing Information and

Communication Technology and English language skills: the voices of six

Malaysian undergraduates

Siew Ming Thang*, Yit Sim Lee and Nurul Farhana Zulkifli

School of Language Studies and Linguistics, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia, Bangi, Malaysia

This study investigated the effects of the construction and development ofelectronic portfolios (e-portfolios) on a small user population at a publicuniversity in Malaysia. The study was based on a three-month Information andCommunication Technology (ICT) and language learning course offered to theundergraduates of the university. One of the key components of the course wasthe construction and development of an e-portfolio. The purpose of this study isto uncover the impact of this class project on student development of computerand language learning skills. The problems faced in the developmental processwill also be discussed. A qualitative case study approach involving interviews withsix respondents was utilised in collecting and analysing the data. A questionnairewas used to support the qualitative data. The findings revealed that the e-portfolios had a positive impact on the student development of computer andwriting skills.

Keywords: e-portfolio; TESL; ICT; undergraduates; language skills development

Introduction

Portfolios have long been used as an authentic educational tool to demonstratelearners’ development and achievement (Perlman, Ross, Christner, & Lypson, 2011).Since the Internet boom and mushrooming of web technology, there is a growingbody of literature on the use of electronic portfolios (e-portfolios) in variouseducation and employment situations (Chau & Cheng, 2010; Fitch, Peet, Reed, &Tolman, 2008; Zhang, Olfman, & Ractham, 2007). The term e-portfolio is arguablymulti-faceted and various terminologies have been used to refer to it. Primary andsecondary teachers often refer to it as ‘‘digital portfolio’’ or ‘‘digital learningportfolio’’ whereas higher education practitioners prefer to use the terms ‘‘electronicportfolio’’, ‘‘e-portfolio’’, or ‘‘webfolio’’. The corporate sector opts for terms such as‘‘performance management tool’’ or ‘‘career management tool’’ (Hallam & Creagh,2010). However, since most definitions encompass somewhat similar characteristics,the Wikipedia definition of e-portfolio will be adopted for this study. It defines e-portfolio, as a collection of electronic evidence assembled and managed by a user,

*Corresponding author. Email: thang@ukm.my

Computer Assisted Language Learning

Vol. 25, No. 3, July 2012, 277–293

ISSN 0958-8221 print/ISSN 1744-3210 online

� 2012 Taylor & Francis

http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2012.655299

http://www.tandfonline.com

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Ond

okuz

May

is U

nive

rsite

sine

] at

12:

51 1

3 N

ovem

ber

2014

usually on the Web. Such electronic evidence may include input text, electronic files,images, multimedia, blog entries, and hyperlinks.

The role of e-portfolios is also diversified based on purpose and context. The IMSGlobal Learning Consortium (2005) identifies six major roles of e-portfolios:assessment, presentation, learning, personal development, multiple-owner and work-ing e-portfolios. In education, e-portfolios are usually created for the purpose ofassessment, presentation and learning. E-portfolio assessment, especially, is gainingpreference among today’s educators as a more practical alternative to standardisedtesting because e-portfolios capitalise on students’ natural tendency to save theirwork, re-look, re-think and further improve on it (Baturay & Dalo�glu, 2010).

E-portfolios enable students to have control over the stored information whichcan be in the forms of graphics, sound, digital video, text and other media (Bobak,2004). According to Young (2002), some students use their e-portfolios for jobseeking and it helps to demonstrate their technological skills to their potentialemployers (Wright, Stallworth & Ray, 2002). Barrett (2000b) reported that researchinto the implementation of e-portfolios for both students and teachers since 1991 hasshown that they gain technological skills and experiences by creating, selecting,organising, editing and evaluating their e-portfolios.

In the Malaysian context, some universities have implemented e-portfolios tobenefit students as well as teachers. In 2005, the University of Technology Malaysia(UTM) in Skudai, Johor created an e-portfolio system for its students to record theiracademic progress and learning reflections. The e-portfolio system in UTM is intendedto give their students a platform to reflect on their own learning as well as to keep trackof their acquisition of knowledge, and technical and generic skills. In the case of theMARA University of Technology (UiTM), e-portfolios are used for promotingteaching and learning by various faculties in the university. In University MalaysiaSarawak (UniMaS), language instructors utilise e-portfolios as a personalisedclassroom management tool to tap into learner needs and instructional effectiveness(Nadarajan, 2008). Findings on the effectiveness of the above mentioned systems arenot available. However, the engineering department at the Technical University ofMalaysia in Malacca (UniTeM) did investigate the feasibility of implementing an e-portfolio system as a means to assess engineering undergraduate students’ coursework.Findings from the survey revealed that their students were extremely positive about theinnovation and appeared ready to embrace the concept of e-portfolio for assessment(Hussein, 2009). As far as we know the system is yet to be implemented.

The history of CALL in the National University of Malaysia (the universityunder investigation in this study) could be traced back to 1991 with the introductionof the course, Educational Technology in TESL (Teaching English as a SecondLanguage). This course has been renamed as Technology and Innovation in TESLand is offered as an elective subject to students majoring in TESL (from the Facultyof Education) and students majoring in English Language Studies and EnglishLiterature Studies from the School of Language Studies and Linguistics, Faculty ofSocial Sciences and Humanities. In this course, e-portfolio was utilised as one of theprimary tools for promoting, developing and assessing students’ computer literacyand language competency in English language learning. The students were requiredto build their own e-portfolio using Yahoo Geocities or Google Sites. Thedevelopment of an e-portfolio was a 10-week project to be completed by eachstudent undertaking the course. The submitted e-portfolios were then graded by thecourse instructors. The purpose of the e-portfolio was for the students to present a

278 S.M. Thang et al.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Ond

okuz

May

is U

nive

rsite

sine

] at

12:

51 1

3 N

ovem

ber

2014

formal description of themselves for professional employment in the future. Itinvolved the creation of an audio–visual presentation containing personal details,curriculum vitae, family tree and favourite links to language learning websites.

In view of the dearth of literature on the effectiveness of e-portfolio systems inMalaysian universities, we strongly feel that this current study will make a significantcontribution to this field.

An overview of e-portfolio development

Designing e-portfolios

The development of e-portfolios involves specific technological tools and pro-cesses. Barrett (2000a) listed seven generic types of software for creating e-portfolios. They are:

(1) Relational databases(2) Hypermedia ‘‘card’’ software(3) Multimedia authoring software(4) World Wide Web (HTML) pages(5) Adobe Acrobat (PDF files)(6) Multimedia slideshows(7) Video (digital and analogue)

The criteria for software selection are usually based on the purpose, audience,technology skills required and equipment availability. The Web pages are used as theprime software by the students in the e-portfolio project of the current study. Theadvantages of creating Web-based portfolios centre on its multimedia, cross-platform, and Web capabilities (Barrett, 2000a) and this is in line with the primarygoal of this project which is to enable the students to showcase themselves easily andeffectively to potential viewers (supposedly potential employers). However, Barrett(2000a) cautioned against using this medium. She claims that web pages requiremuch more file-management skills than other types of portfolio development toolswhich may pose as ‘‘a too steep learning curve’’ for computer literate learners.

The five-stages for portfolio development model proposed by Barrett (2000a)were used as the guiding principles for this research project. This model drew uponprinciples proposed by Danielson and Abrutyn (1997) and Ivers and Barron (1998)as shown in Table 1.

As shown in Table 1, developing an e-portfolio involves the acquisition ofnumerous skills which bring us to the question as to whether it is fair for a course toexpect students to acquire all these skills with a period of just one semester. This willbe considered in the discussion section.

Problems and benefits associated with development of e-portfolios

Barrett (1998) pointed out that in order for e-portfolios to be effective as a learningtool, there had to be sufficient classroom computers and a suitable operating systemso that students could have adequate development time. She added that there wasalso a need for recent versions of Macintosh and Windows 95 operating systems toensure that multimedia features such as videos and sound systems could work well.Evidently, due to technological advancement, we have moved a long way from that

Computer Assisted Language Learning 279

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Ond

okuz

May

is U

nive

rsite

sine

] at

12:

51 1

3 N

ovem

ber

2014

position. However, that does not necessarily mean that such basic technologicalproblems do not still exist. Wetzel and Strudler (2005, 2006) discovered that some ofthe problems associated with the implementation of e-portfolios were programmeperformance, access to and reliability of the technology, and the amount of time andeffort expended. Cambridge, Cambridge, and Yancey (2009) also found time andtechnology to be the major problems. Other challenges include student resistance,student cheating, student fear of sharing work and difficulty in designing andproviding appropriate guidelines for students. Administrative problems such as lackof faculty motivation and a support system were also challenges faced. It would beinteresting to see whether such problems exist in the Malaysian context.

Studies in the West have demonstrated that the e-portfolio is beneficial tostudents for a variety of purposes. Strudler and Wetzel (2008) found that from theperspective of the deans of 25 universities in the USA and one Australian university,e-portfolios increased students’ opportunities to reflect and learn, helped them tobetter understand teaching standards, improved faculty’s communication withstudents and allowed better assessment and tracking of students’ work for purposesof accreditation and programme improvement. These findings were reiterated intheir earlier study on pre-service teachers’ views of e-portfolio (Wetzel & Strudler,2006). Cambridge et al. (2009) further added that e-portfolios helped studentsreview, assess and reflect on their learning progress including their use of meta-cognitive skills. They further proposed that they could help in the development ofthe social aspect of learning through working together and taking into considerationa broader audience. In view of the lack of empirical research studies on the impactof e-portfolios on Malaysian learners, the findings of this study will shed more lighton whether these findings are relevant or applicable to the Malaysian context.However, it is not possible to cover all the dimensions discussed above, thus, thisresearch study will confine itself to seeking answers to the following researchquestions:

(1) In what way did the students feel they benefited from developing theire-portfolios with regard to the following?(a) development in Information and Communication Technology (ICT) skills(b) development in language learning skills

(2) (a) What were the problems faced by the Malaysian students in developingtheir e-portfolios?

(b) To what extent were they able to overcome the problems?

Table 1. Barrett’s five stages e-portfolio development model.

Electronic Portfolio(Barrett, 2000)

Portfolio (Danielson &Abrutyn, 1997)

MultimediaProject (Ivers &Barron, 1998)

Stage 1 Defining the portfoliocontext and goals

¼ Purpose, Audience þ Decide, Assess

Stage 2 The working portfolio ¼ Collect, Interject þ Design, PlanStage 3 The reflective portfolio ¼ Select, Reflect, Direct þ DevelopStage 4 The connected portfolio ¼ Inspect, Perfect,

Connectþ Implement,

EvaluateStage 5 The presentation portfolio ¼ Respect þ Present, Publish

280 S.M. Thang et al.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Ond

okuz

May

is U

nive

rsite

sine

] at

12:

51 1

3 N

ovem

ber

2014

Theoretical framework

The Cognitive Learning Theory underlines the development of e-portfolios as thistheory supports deep learning processes. Cambridge (2004) identified the followingprinciples for a deep learning process – that is, deep learning must involve reflection;it must be developmental, integrative and self-directive; and it must bring aboutlifelong learning. In her work, she provided many illustrations that supported theseprinciples. One particular example pointed out the importance of using e-portfoliosto support durable learning, which is:

. . . learning that lasts beyond a course. The newly emerging science of learning offers agrowing body of principles and research findings to be systematically applied. E-portfolio technology offers learners the means to document and reinforce their learning.

(Barrett and Wilkerson, 2004, p. 2)

Cambridge (2004) further illustrated the importance of reflection in learning byquoting one of the founders of modern learning theory:

To reflect is to look back over what has been done so as to extract the next meaningswhich are the capital stock for intelligent dealing with further experiences. It is the heartof the intellectual organization and of the disciplined mind. (Dewey, 1938, p. 87–8)

Thus, it can be seen here that an e-portfolio not only helps one in sorting out andorganising one’s work but it also involves the reflection stage which exposes how theowner analyses his or her past learning experience. Through such reflection, theowner or the developer is in the process of learning and this involves recognising his/her strengths and devising strategies to overcome his/her weaknesses.

Research methodology

Background of the university and participants

This study was conducted at the National University of Malaysia (or UKM –Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia, in Malay) which was established in 1970. Thehistory of UKM is very much rooted in the spirit of nationalism among theMalays and it is recognised as the university that champions the Malay language(now Bahasa Malaysia). Initially, it was founded based on the need for a universityfor students from Malay medium schools and religious schools to further theirstudies at tertiary level. Thus, in the initial years, the majority of the students inUKM were Malays drawn from the rural parts of Malaysia (i.e. from the EastCoast states) and from religious schools. The trend has changed since UKMbecame a research university in 2006. The majority of the undergraduates are stillMalays and many of them come from rural areas but more students from otherethnic groups (such as Chinese, Indians, Kadazans and Ibans) are now accepted atUKM. In addition, UKM has accepted a large number of internationalpostgraduate students.

The participants in this study were six final year undergraduate students whoregistered for an elective course offered by the School of Language Studies andLinguistics at UKM. Thirty students signed up for the course at the beginning of thesemester. The main objective of the course was to provide exposure to the potentialuse of current technologies in the teaching of English language. Hence, the e-portfolio project was given as an assignment to the students to be completed by the

Computer Assisted Language Learning 281

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Ond

okuz

May

is U

nive

rsite

sine

] at

12:

51 1

3 N

ovem

ber

2014

end of the semester. Since the researcher wanted her study to focus on final yearstudents, only students from the final year were selected using a purposive samplingapproach. The selection criteria and procedures are explained in the next section.

Research design and instruments

This research utilised a qualitative approach that centred on deriving meaning andunderstanding of a situation from perceptions of individuals. According to Fontanaand Frey (2008, p. 118–119), ‘‘interviewing is one of the most common and powerfulways in which we try to understand our fellow humans’’ and ‘‘qualitative researchersare realising that interviews are not neutral tools of data gathering but rather activeinteractions between two (or more) people leading to negotiated, contextually basedresults.’’ The purpose and focus of conducting interviews in this study is to furtherinvestigate an individual’s feelings, experiences and perceptions in relation to e-portfolio development.

Prior to the interview, questionnaires were administered to the participants toobtain background information on personal details, academic achievements,multimedia and technology skills, as well as English language proficiency. Theintegration of the questionnaires allows us to select the appropriate student sampleand also to enable us to triangulate the data. The questionnaires were administeredto all 30 students who registered for the course, to collect the following informationat the beginning of the semester:

(1) personal details (e.g. age, sex, description of hometown);(2) academic background (e.g. past results of courses undertaken);(3) multimedia skills (e.g. knowledge on various software/browser and ability to

upload files/images),(4) perceived English language proficiency

The questionnaires were then perused to select final year degree students. Therewere 11 final year students. The students were then categorised as ‘‘Advanced’’,‘‘Intermediate’’ and ‘‘Low’’ level students based on the grades they obtained in theirpast language and ICT courses (please refer to Table 2). Only Malay respondentswere selected because the majority of the students in UKM are Malay. Furthermore,this would avoid problems arising from cultural variation factors. Two Malaystudents from each category were selected as participants for the interview. Oneinterview was conducted with each participant at the end of the 10-week project.The interviews were conducted at the School of Language Studies and Linguistics by

Table 2. Results of previous three courses related to ICT and language learning.

Results of previous three courses

Respondents Language and IT IT for Social Science Multimedia in English

A A A AB A A AC B A7 A7D A7 A7 A7E A7 B BF A7 B Bþ

282 S.M. Thang et al.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Ond

okuz

May

is U

nive

rsite

sine

] at

12:

51 1

3 N

ovem

ber

2014

one of the researchers. Each interview took about 30 to 40 minutes. Prior to theinterview, the researcher informed the participants that they were allowed to expressthemselves in the language they were most comfortable with, Malay or English. Asthe participants were students majoring in English disciplines, the data revealed thatall of them preferred to communicate in English. Each interview was audio recordedand transcribed.

The interview data were analysed based on the following four themes which arein line with the research questions:

(1) Feelings before, while developing, and after publishing the e-portfolios.(2) Challenges faced during the developmental process.(3) Experiences during the developmental process.(4) Opinions regarding the advantages and disadvantages of creating e-

portfolios.

The data from the questionnaires provided information to enable a clearerunderstanding of the respondents’ background. The interview data providedretrospective data that gave deeper insights into the thought processes and feelingsof the participants. The two sets of data were corroborated to provide the necessarybreadth and depth to the study. The questionnaire data on the other 24 students werenot used since the study only focuses on the voices of the six selected respondents.

Research findings

Data from the questionnaire

This section provides the necessary background on the six participants in theinterview section of the study.

Personal details

All the respondents were registered as Bachelor of Arts students, majoring in EnglishLanguage Studies (ELS). Four respondents (A, B, C and E) were male and tworespondents (D and F) were female. All respondents were young adults within theage range of 21–25. Respondents B and E came from urban areas, respondents Cand D from sub-urban areas, and respondents A and F from rural areas.

Academic qualifications

All six respondents possessed recognised pre-university qualifications. Respondents Aand B had undergone a diploma course, respondents C and E had passed theMalaysianCertificate of Higher Education (STPM), and respondents D and F had undergone thematriculation pre-university programme. Prior to this course, all six respondents hadtaken three ICT-related courses. Table 2 provides more information regarding this.

Multimedia skills

The data gathered from this section were self-assessment of the respondents’ abilitiesto use software (e.g. Geocities, Microsoft Front Page) and multimedia technologyskills (e.g. video transfer, audio recording transfer) related to the development of an

Computer Assisted Language Learning 283

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Ond

okuz

May

is U

nive

rsite

sine

] at

12:

51 1

3 N

ovem

ber

2014

e-portfolio. For the complete list of software and multimedia skills, please refer toAppendix A. Respondents self-assessed their familiarity of each skill by indicating 1,2 or 3 (1-‘‘Never tried before’’, 2-‘‘Use it once in a while’’, and 3-‘‘Very familiar’’).The overall scores of respondents A and B were the highest which put them in thecategory of ‘‘very familiar with the necessary technology and multimedia skills’’,while respondents C and D were ‘‘occasional users’’, and respondents E and F were‘‘rare users’’. This categorisation corroborates the earlier classification of respon-dents A and B as ‘‘Advanced level’’, C and D as ‘‘Intermediate level’’, and E and F as‘‘Low level’’ according to grades.

Perceived language proficiency

In this section, the respondents self-rated their own language proficiency in Malay,English and other languages. All respondents claimed they were highly proficient inwritten and spoken Malay. However, only respondents A, B, C and D rated theirEnglish language proficiency in both written and spoken as high. Respondents E andF indicated their written and spoken English language proficiency as intermediate.

Data from the interview

The interview data were analysed using a cross-comparison approach whereby thesix respondents’ feelings, challenges, experiences and opinions towards e-portfoliodevelopment were compared to identify similarities and differences. Relevant datafrom the questionnaire were also used to support the interview data.

(1) Feelings before, while developing and after publishing the e-portfolio

Table 3 summarised the feelings of the six respondents towards publishing the e-portfolio. Four respondents (B, C, D and F) were excited (though C and D were a bitworried too) at the beginning stage but during the developmental process, onlyrespondent B claimed to have positive experiences while respondents C, D and Fstated that they had some bad experiences. Things seemed to improve after theypublished their e-portfolios as all four expressed positive feelings towards theirexperiences. The perceptions of respondent A (an advanced level student) andrespondent E (a low level student) differed somewhat from the other four. Respon-dent A was not very excited and felt annoyed at the onset of the course and professed

Table 3. Comparison of respondents’ feelings towards the development of e-portfolios.

Respondents Before developing While developing After publishing

A (Adv. level) Not very excitedand annoyed

Bad experience Indifferent

B (Adv. level) Curious and excited Good experience GoodC (Int. level) Afraid and excited Good and bad experiences ExcitedD (Int. level) Afraid and excited Bad experience ProudE (Low level) Neutral Bad experience at first, after

that good experienceIndifferent

F (Low level) Excited Bad experience at first, afterthat good experience

Quite happy

284 S.M. Thang et al.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Ond

okuz

May

is U

nive

rsite

sine

] at

12:

51 1

3 N

ovem

ber

2014

annoyance while developing his portfolio and displayed an indifferent attitude afterpublishing it. The interview data further revealed that his bad experiences weremainly caused by poor ICT facilities. Respondent A’s lack of enthusiasm was also dueto the fact that he had created an e-portfolio before as shown below:

A: I learn it (e-portfolio) from the internet itself.. . . I’m not very excited though. Notthat I’m not interested in doing this, but the connection in the faculty itself is making meannoyed.

Respondent E was neutral at the beginning of the course when he was asked tocreate an e-portfolio because he perceived the task only as a course requirement. Atthe development stage, he had some bad experiences due to poor Internetconnection. He appeared more positive when he saw his e-portfolio developingwell. However, after publishing his e-portfolio, he was not excited as he did not seethe relevance of the task to his personal development.

E: I don’t think that for now the e-portfolio has given me any advantage. . . I haven’tseen the advantage of what e-portfolio can give us.

(2) Challenges faced during the developmental process

Table 4 indicates the various problems experienced by the respondents whiledeveloping their e-portfolios. As shown in the table, the most common problem waspoor Internet connection. The data showed that all but one respondent complainedabout the poor facilities provided by the university.

This was supported by the interview data where respondent A complained that:

A: . . . the computer in the course we used is a very low, I mean in the context of theperformance itself. Like still using Pentium 3, the RAM is still low, maybe around 123,usually we use 256 or 512 MB. That’s minimum requirement. And, the hard disk also,contained various malware and spyware, no antivirus or Internet security to help us tocounter measure the virus that we faced.

The second most common problem among the respondents was inadequateknowledge on how to use the online tools to create e-portfolios. It was a problem forall the respondents (except for respondent A). This is understandable as it was theirfirst experience in creating an e-portfolio. This was explained by the respondents inthe interview data.

B: . . . I have little knowledge in constructing the e-portfolio . . . I have problems in firstuploading files . . . uploading files in Geocities is quite puzzling . . . second is how youcan put more content without people scrolling down . . .

Table 4. Comparison of problems faced in the developmental process.

Respondents/Problems A B C D E F

Poor internet connection / / / / /Poor PC performance /Inadequate knowledge on how to use the service/tool/software / / / / /Lack of guidance from instructor / /Time constraints / /

Computer Assisted Language Learning 285

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Ond

okuz

May

is U

nive

rsite

sine

] at

12:

51 1

3 N

ovem

ber

2014

C: . . . bad experience with yahoo geocities . . .

D: . . . the software that I used to develop my portfolio is, I used Geocities, actually touse this is not very easy . . . to be honest I am not actually very exposed to the concept oftechnology, computer, and what more of e-portfolio . . . it’s something new tome . . . something alien to me . . .

E: . . . first I used Geocities, and after I had some troubles, after using it three or fourtimes because I had problems . . . uploading the files . . . customizing the links . . . afterthat I used Google site . . .

F: . . .Geocities . . . because our lecturer ask me to use the software . . . but I find that it’snot easy to use that software because I always have some problem to upload picturesand materials because I’m not every skilled to use that . . .

Respondents D and E also complained about the lack of guidance from instructors.

D: . . . as a beginner and also as a person with limited knowledge of technology and e-portfolio, I hoped that my lecturer will provide appropriate and adequate informationabout e-portfolio such as how to use it, and especially on how to use the software. So,giving a lecture is not enough.

E: I did ask but she, she’s not a lot of help, I think she’s also lost, she’s also some kind oflost, I think . . . she’s also not very clear about how to use the software of developing thee-portfolio.

Respondent A also indicated that poor PC performance was a problem andrespondents C and F complained about time constraints.

(3) Experiences during the developmental process

During the developmental process, all the respondents (except for respondent B)reported that they encountered difficulties due mainly to poor Internet connection.Despite the problems, the respondents managed to complete their e-portfolios intime. The findings revealed that the respondents’ feelings at the end of the coursewere affected by their positive or negative reaction towards the challenges faced.Respondents A and E finished the course feeling indifferent. The fact that respondentA already knew how to develop an e-portfolio from the beginning may be the causeof the indifference. In the case of E, it was probably due to poor ICT skills butinterestingly, respondent F who also had poor ICT skills was able to overcome thechallenges as shown below:

F: I learn from my friend. And I go to library and search spot where Internet is veryexcellent.

This suggests that personal desire to do well can lead to success even though theperson may have poor ICT skills. This was also evident in the case of respondent Cwho encountered problems with Yahoo Geocities and as a result switched to GoogleSites. Similarly, respondent D was capable of overcoming her difficulties because shehad a positive attitude as shown below:

D: I was asking around to my friend, I also look in the Internet to find some sample of e-portfolio done by some oversea student . . . I get some idea, generate some idea, some,how to do a better portfolio, what should I include in my portfolio.

286 S.M. Thang et al.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Ond

okuz

May

is U

nive

rsite

sine

] at

12:

51 1

3 N

ovem

ber

2014

And when she finished she was very excited as she felt that:

D: it’s a huge achievement in my life. Because it is something that I successfully manageby my own effort. I didn’t rely much to my instructor, but I rely to myself, so this issome feeling which I think is very beautiful.

Respondent B was the only one who reported he had good experiences from thestart despite facing problems uploading files at first. He did not view the problem asan obstacle to his e-portfolio development and he felt it was an invaluableexperience, after completing his e-portfolio. This is another example of how apositive attitude can lead to success.

(4) Opinions regarding the benefits gained from creating e-portfolios

Data from the interviews showed that all the respondents felt that they benefitted toa certain extent from the development of their e-portfolios. Table 5 provides asummary of the skills that the various respondents felt they gained from the project.

As indicated in Table 5, all respondents (except for respondent A) indicated thatthey gained knowledge in multimedia skills through developing their e-portfolios.Excerpts of their responses are given below:

B: . . . much related to my computer skills . . . have the experience of developingsomething new . . . using language to develop ICT skills . . .

C: I think that well I learned to developed e-portfolio, that is one thing. And then I alsolearned to maybe upload files . . . create my own picture by cropping my picture, editingskills.

D: I know how to manage file manager in my e-portfolio because before this I didn’tknow what file manager is all about.

E: I think I have learnt, for example computer skills . . . first of all using this kind ofsoftware in developing . . . and also experience in managing all my work in folders foreasy access . . .

F: I learn a lot by doing this project, I can improve my computer skill because beforeI’m taking this course I’m not very skilled in computer, before this I don’t know how toupload more picture but by doing this project I can learn the skill.

As for improvement in language skills, five out of six respondents (except forrespondent A) agreed that they had improved their writing skills as described below:

B: e-portfolio gives us a chance to express ourselves and practice your writing skills.

C: I think it improves my writing skills in terms that I have to describemyself. When you’retrying to write something about yourself, you use some kind of genre of language.

Table 5. Comparison of respondents’ views of benefits gained from developing e-portfolios.

Respondents/benefits A B C D E F

Multimedia skills / / / / /Language skills / / / / /Team working skills / /Networking skills / / / /Communication skills / / /Management skills / /

Computer Assisted Language Learning 287

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Ond

okuz

May

is U

nive

rsite

sine

] at

12:

51 1

3 N

ovem

ber

2014

D: It did improve the language in terms of writing perhaps.

E: Maybe in the written part, writing part, I think maybe.

F: Besides I also can improve my language learning skill like writing because when Iwrite in my e-portfolio, I can edit and because I want to people outside there can readmy writing so I can manage to make less mistakes when I write in my portfolio.

Besides computer and language skills, the respondents also indicated that theyimproved their skills in networking, communication, and management. However,this was not discussed in any depth.

Discussion

This research contributes significantly to the limited studies that examine thebenefits and uses of an e-portfolio as a learning tool in the Malaysian context fromstudents’ perspectives. It has to be admitted that this is a small scale qualitativestudy carried out only on one university, hence the findings cannot be generalised.Nevertheless, the findings in this study revealed that the students perceived thedevelopment of e-portfolios as beneficial towards their own ICT skills and writingskills. They explicitly stated that they have learned to upload files, edit photosonline and manage files. These findings support the view that using e-portfoliosenhances ICT skills, as reported by Evans, Daniel, Mikovch, Metze, and Norman(2006), Hartley, Urish, and Johnston (2006) and Herner, Karayan, McKean, andLove (2003) in their studies.

The findings from this study also demonstrated that problem-solving involved indeveloping the e-portfolios encouraged students to be more autonomous andpositive towards learning. Though the benefits reported are the students’ perceivedgains and are not based on empirical data, we can safely surmise that students whoview their experiences positively will benefit the most from the introduction of thisinnovation. A good example was respondent D who confessed that she was proud ofher work and learned to be more autonomous and self-directed by finding ways ofovercoming her difficulties despite the lack of guidance and instruction from hercourse instructor. On the other hand, students who were indifferent (like respondentA) or expressed negative attitudes (like respondent E) seemed not to have benefittedfrom the project. Respondent A, who had advanced skills in ICT, did not accomplishmuch as he started with an indifferent attitude due to the fact he already knew howto develop an e-portfolio and did not make use of this opportunity to showcase hiscapabilities by performing better than the rest of his classmates. Similarly,respondent E felt indifferent at the end of the project development because he didnot see the purpose and value of his own e-portfolio.

The main challenges faced by these students were related to technology.Problems related to ICT facilities were also found in other studies. Lin (2008) foundthis to occur among 38 undergraduate elementary pre-service teacher candidates inthe USA who were introduced to the concept of e-portfolios in a three-credit course.According to her findings, challenges related to technology and other issues led tofrustration among her sample population. In a recent study on Malaysian teachers,Thang et al. (2010) also found that frustration with technology was one of the mainproblems faced by these teachers and majority of them gave up easily without trying.

288 S.M. Thang et al.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Ond

okuz

May

is U

nive

rsite

sine

] at

12:

51 1

3 N

ovem

ber

2014

They were not motivated to use technology because they had negative perceptions oftheir own online competence. The fact that four out of the six students in the presentstudy were able to overcome their technical frustrations to the extent that theyacquired greater autonomy proved that it is possible to overcome such problems ifthere were real personal and professional commitment. Thang, Hall, Murugaiah,and Azman (2011) proposed the same possibility in their study and this study lendssupport to their findings.

To put it in a nutshell, the development of e-portfolios has the potential ofenhancing students’ personal experiences technologically, pedagogically andpsychologically. As evinced from the data, the students generally concurred thatthe e-learning project enabled them to learn new multimedia skills. Interestingly, itwas revealed that the students without basic skills in developing an e-portfolio werethe ones who felt they benefited the most from this project which clearly suggeststhat prior knowledge is not a necessity in such a task. Thus, the problem of ‘‘toosteep a learning curve’’ as described by Barrett (2000a) seemed not to be a problem inthe case of these students.

The development of an e-portfolio required the students to use the appropriatelanguage to achieve the intended purpose of the e-portfolio and to reach out to thetargeted audience reading their e-portfolios. The students expressed that the taskhad helped them to perform the above task effectively. However, the students didnot indicate that the task had help them in improving their listening, speaking andreading skills which suggests the limitation of this task in aiding holistic languageskills development. Similar findings were reported by Baturay and Dalo�glu (2010).They found that there was development of the writing skill through pre-test andpost-test, and students also concurred on that. Similarly, in an earlier study, Ozturkand Cecen (2007) also found that most students believed that keeping a portfoliohelped to improve their writing skills. Thus, it would appear that the developmentof e-portfolios is able to aid improvement in writing skills but considering it tookthe students of this study 10 weeks to complete it, the pedagogical benefit seemsrather limited. Therefore, it is proposed here that other online tools and materialsshould be added to enhance this course to ensure the development of other languageskills too.

It would appear that psychological enhancement seems to be the most significantachievement of this project. Students with positive attitudes seemed to have gainedgreater autonomy. Lu (2005) and Zhang (2009) also found that keeping a portfoliohelped their students to become more autonomous. It would appear that thestudents’ reflections of the task at hand helped them to develop the desired problem-solving skills and self-directed learning strategies which are desirable in any learningexperience. Erice and Ertas (2011) arrived at the same conclusion too in their study.This is in line with the desired goal underlined by the Cognitive Learning Theorywhich frames this study. However, the problem of some students’ failure to benefitsignificantly from this experience needs to be addressed. It is possible that with thenecessary encouragement and support, this could be reduced. As pointed out by thestudents, there was a lack of support from their instructors. Thus, this is an area thatneeds to be given due attention to. Infrastructure support in the form of betterInternet facilities will help to minimise the technical problems faced by the students.Though this is a goal that is impossible to achieve in the short term, it should betargeted as a long-term goal.

Computer Assisted Language Learning 289

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Ond

okuz

May

is U

nive

rsite

sine

] at

12:

51 1

3 N

ovem

ber

2014

Conclusion

The study reveals the potential of e-portfolios as a tool for developing students’ ICTskills, writing skills and for promoting autonomous learning through problem-solving skills and self-directed learning strategies. We would like to conclude thatthis task is worth introducing in Malaysian schools and institutions of higherlearning as a new learning paradigm capable of enhancing Malaysian students’technological, pedagogical and psychological development provided that steps aretaken to alleviate the identified weaknesses.

Notes on contributors

Thang Siew Ming is Professor and Chair at the School of Language Studies and Linguistics,Faculty of Social Sciences and Humanities, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia. Her areas ofinterest are Learner Autonomy, Open Learning, CALL and Learning Styles and Strategies.She has published extensively and is on the editorial boards of numerous well-known CALLand Language Education journals. Her recent publications are available in the AJET, CALLJournal (Taylor & Francis) and EAR Journal. She is also the President of PacCALL and co-chair of the GLoCALL series of conferences (2009–2012). For more information regarding herwork, please access www.ukm.my/smthang.

Lee Yit Sim is a postgraduate student at the School of Languages and Linguistics. Her areas ofinterest are CALL, Teacher Education and Learning Pedagogies.

Nurul Farhana Zulkifli graduated with a Bachelor of Arts (Hons.) in English Language Studiesfrom Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia in 2009. She is currently working as an executive in an oiland gas company in Johor, Malaysia, in the field of occupational safety and health.

References

Barrett, H.C. (1998). Strategic questions: What to consider when planning for electronicportfolio. Learning and leading with technology. Retrieved June 5, 2011, from http://electronicportfolios.org/portfolios/LLTOct98.html

Barrett, H.C. (2000a). Create your own electronic portfolio: Using off-the-shelf software toshowcase your own or student work. Learning and Leading with Technology, 27, 14–21.

Barrett, H.C. (2000b). Electronic portfolio ¼ Multimedia development þ portfolio develop-ment: The electronic portfolio development process. Retrieved July 15, 2011, from http://electronicportfolios.com/portfolios/EPDevProcess.html#ben

Barrett, H.C., & Wilkerson, J. (2004). Conflicting paradigms in electronic portfolio approaches:Choosing an electronic portfolio strategy that matches your conceptual framework.Retrieved August 20, 2011, from http://electronicportfolios.com/systems/paradigms.html

Baturay, M.H., & Dalo�glu, A. (2010). E-portfolio assessment in an online English languagecourse. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 23, 413–428.

Bobak, R.A. (2004). Electronic portfolio. Distance learning, 1, 1–8.Cambridge, B. (2004). Electronic portfolios: Why now? Educause Live Teleconference, February

11, 2004. Retrieved from http://electronicportfolios.org/portfolios/educauselive.htmlCambridge, B., Cambridge, D., & Yancey, K. (Eds.). (2009). Electronic portfolios 2.0:

Emergent research on implementation and impact. Sterling, VA: Stylus Publishing.Chau, J., & Cheng, G. (2010). Towards understanding the potential of e-portfolios for independent

learning: A qualitative study. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 26, 932–950.Danielson, C., & Abrutyn, L. (1997). An introduction to using portfolios in the classroom.

Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.Dewey, J. (1938). Experience and education. New York, NY: Collier Books.Erice, D., & Ertas, A. (2011). The impact of e-portfolio on foreign language writing skills.

Journal of Faculty of Educational Sciences, 44, 73–94.Evans, S., Daniel, T., Mikovch, A., Metze, & Norman, A. (2006). The use of technology in

portfolio assessment of teacher education candidates. Journal of Technology and TeacherEducation, 14, 5–27.

290 S.M. Thang et al.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Ond

okuz

May

is U

nive

rsite

sine

] at

12:

51 1

3 N

ovem

ber

2014

Fitch, D., Peet, M., Reed, B.G., & Tolman, R. (2008). The use of eportfolios in evaluating thecurriculum and student learning. Journal of Social Work Education, 44, 37–54.

Fontana, A., & Frey, J.H. (2008). The interview: From neural stance to political involvement.In N.K. Denzin & Y.S. Lincoln (Eds.), Collecting and interpreting qualitative materials (pp.115–160). Los Angeles, CA: Sage Publications.

Hallam, G., & Creagh, T. (2010). ePortfolio use by university students in Australia: A review ofthe Australian ePortfolio Project. Higher Education Research & Development, 29, 179–193.

Hartley, M.T., Urish, C.K., & Johnston, S.P. (2006). The electronic portfolio: A proposedsolution to the issue of integrating computer technology in rehabiliation education.Rehabiliation Education, 20, 57–65.

Herner, L.M., Karayan, S., McKean, G., & Love, D. (2003). Special education teacher pre-paration and the electronic portfolio. Journal of Special Education Technology, 18, 44–49.

Hussein, N.H.N. (2009). Students perspectives on the engagement of electronic portfolio as atool in classroom instruction. Journal of Human Capital Development, 2(1) 53–64.

IMS Global Learning Consortium Inc. (2005). IMS ePortfolio best practice and implementa-tion guide. Retrieved June 1, 2011, from http://www.imsglobal.org/ep/epv1p0/imsep_bestv1p0.html

Ivers, K., & Barron, A.E. (1998). Multimedia projects in education. Englewood: LibrariesUnlimited.

Lin, Q. (2008). Preservice teachers’ learning experiences of constructing e-portfolios online.Internet and Higher Education, 11, 194–200.

Lu, Z.D. (2005). Developing portfolios with young English learners, Beijing: English teachingand research. Notes, 184, 52–55.

Nadarajan, S. (2008). Undergraduate language teaching: The e-portfolio way. TheInternational Journal of Student Research and Development, 1(1), 1–11.

Ozturk, H., & Cecen, S. (2007). The effects of portfolio keeping on writing anxiety of EFLstudents. Journal of Language and Linguistic Studies, 3, 218–236.

Perlman, R.L., Ross, P.T., Christner, J., & Lypson, M.L. (2011). Faculty reflections on theimplementation of socio-cultural eportfolio assessment tool. Reflective Practice, 12, 375–388.

Strudler, N., & Wetzel, K. (2008). Costs and benefits of electronic portfolios in teachereducation: Faculty perspectives. Journal of Computing in Teacher Education, 24, 135–142.

Thang, S.M., Hall, C., Murugaiah, P., & Azman, H. (2011). Creating and maintaining onlinecommunities of practice in Malaysian Smart Schools: Challenging realities. EducationalAction Research, 19(1), 87–105.

Thang, S.M., Murugaiah, P., Lee, K.W., Hazita Azman., Tan, L.Y., & Lee, Y.S. (2010).Grappling with technology: A case of supporting Malaysian Smart School teachers’professional development. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 26, 400–416.

Wetzel, K., & Strudler, N. (2005). The diffusion of electronic portfolios in teacher education:Next steps and recommendations from accomplished users. Journal of Research onTechnology in Education, 38, 231–243.

Wetzel, K., & Strudler, N. (2006). Costs and benefits of electronic portfolios in teachereducation: Student voices. Journal of Computing in Teacher Education, 22, 69–78.

Wright, V.H., Stallworth, B.J., & Ray, B. (2002). Challenges of electronic portfolios: Studentperceptions and experiences. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 10(1), 49–61.

Young, J.R. (2002). E-portfolios could give students a new sense of their accomplishments.Chronicle of Higher Education, 48, A31–A32.

Zhang, S. (2009). Has portfolio assessment become common practice in EFL classrooms?Empirical studies from China. English Language Teaching, 2, 98–118.

Zhang, S.X., Olfman, L., & Ractham, P. (2007). Designing eportfolio 2.0: Integrating andcoordinating web 2.0 services with eportfolio systems for enhancing users’ learning.Journal of Information Systems Education, 18, 203–214.

Computer Assisted Language Learning 291

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Ond

okuz

May

is U

nive

rsite

sine

] at

12:

51 1

3 N

ovem

ber

2014

Appendix 1. Survey on the use of electronic portfolio in language learning: UKM

students’ perceptions

NAME:PROGRAMME:SEX:AGE:ADDRESS (RURAL/URBAN/SUB-URBAN):ACADEMIC BACKGROUND:

Computer literacy

(A) Ability to use software:How familiar are you with the following software/term/browsers?

(a) Put 3 if Use it frequently(b) 2 for Use it once a while(c) Never heard of it

(B) Multimedia Technology SkillHow familiar are you with the following software/term/browsers?

(a) Put 3 for most skilled,(b) 2 for Use it once a while(c) 1 Never tried it

YEAR INSTITUTION PURPOSE (UPSR/PMR/SPM/SIJIL/DIPLOMA)

Software/browser Rate

GeocitiesGoogle siteYahoo! Page BuilderPDF Adobe AcrobatMicrosoft Front Page/PublisherPicasa/Microsoft Office Picture ManagerGrammar Check softwareFile ManagerMozilla FirefoxInternet ExplorerYoutube

Skill

Set up folders to organize files on computer hard driveUse File Sharing to copy files to and from laptop and another computerCreating a HTML file using certain softwareUse advanced features of Microsoft Word (Document Map, hyperlinks, etc.)Using any Grammar Checking tools software/integrated in certain software

292 S.M. Thang et al.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Ond

okuz

May

is U

nive

rsite

sine

] at

12:

51 1

3 N

ovem

ber

2014

(2) List of ICT courses you have taken and the grades.(2) List of ICT courses you have taken and the grades.

Language proficiency

Please rate your level of proficiency in the following table:

3 For High proficiency2 For Intermediate proficiency1 For Low proficiency

Thank you for participating in this survey!

Skill

Use advanced features of Microsoft PowerPointUse a digital camera to take picturesScan images with a desktop scannerTransfer video into a computer for editing using either Digital Video camera or

analogue-digital video converter (in lab)Edit a digital video (using Picasa, Window Movie Maker, or other software)Record digital audio to the computer with a microphoneCreate and edit Adobe Acrobat files from a variety of computer applications‘‘Burn’’ a CD-ROMPut already-made text using html code into your portfolioUploading files into a website/web blog

Name of course

Grade

Language Spoken Written

MalayEnglishOther (�)

Computer Assisted Language Learning 293

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Ond

okuz

May

is U

nive

rsite

sine

] at

12:

51 1

3 N

ovem

ber

2014