Author: Serena Bufton, s.a.bufton@shu.ac.uk
Author: Richard Pountney, r.p.pountney@shu.ac.uk
JISC e-Learning Activity Area: e-Portfolios
Higher Education Academy Subject Centre: Sociology, Anthropology and Politics
This case study illustrates...an effect on learning, an effect on student personal development, student satisfaction with e-learning, innovation in learning and teaching, an influence on educational research, staff satisfaction with e-learning, use of resources
Background & Context
Why did you use this e-learning approach?
Evidence from an internal research project indicated a variable level of engagement of students with personal/academic development planning (PDP) in the first year of their study on a large, social science degree programme. Issues were also identified in relation to course identity, tutor-student relationships and meaningful, timely feedback on work. Although a few students in the research sample reported finding PDP a useful activity, the majority gave very negative feedback. Typical comments were: 'I didn't really find it that useful'; 'I couldn't see the relevance of it'; 'I haven't really learnt anything from it'. As tutors suspected, some students viewed PDP simply as an assessment task that could be completed just before the deadline:
'To be honest, that [PDP] was just kind of all made up...you just filled it in, you kind of pretended.'
In this context, e-portfolio was introduced as a vehicle for integrating first-year learning, enhancing group work and peer/tutor support of learning, providing regular feedback on progress and functioning as the focus for personal development planning at all three levels of the degree programme.
What was the context in which you used this e-learning approach?
The Applied Social Science Programme comprises a range of social science degree routes within a large, post-1992 university. Social Science Foundations (SSF) is a core skills and support module for many of these routes and promotes the integration of student learning at Level 4. Each year there are around 280 students and 10 tutors involved with this module.
Personal/academic planning (PDP) activities were introduced into this module in 2001/2. In Semester 2 students are required to analyse their progress in their Semester 1 modules, drawing on the feedback they have received, to devise an action plan for Semester 2, implement this and evaluate their progress again at the end of the academic year. This work is assessed (see paper-based PDP assignment). Tutors commissioned an independent evaluation of student PDPs from 2002/3 which confirmed the limited development of meta-cognitive and reflective capacities in this student cohort and the predominance of seemingly mundane concerns about time and personal organization (Bradley and Clegg, 2004). A decision was taken to commission a follow-up study of the 2002/3 cohort in its final year (2004/5), focusing specifically on the development of reflective processes and academic skills. Twenty qualitative interviews were conducted by an external researcher. This research drew attention, among other things, to feelings of alienation and dislocation amongst students (Clegg and Bufton, forthcoming).
In response to this research, module tutors explored new ways of engaging incoming students with the learning context. The introduction of e-portfolio followed a successful application in 2006 for membership of the U.S.-based Inter/National Coalition for Electronic Portfolio Research (NCEPR). Sheffield Hallam University is one of only two UK institutions to gain membership of Cohort III of this coalition and is committed to a three-year research project (2006-9) on e-portfolio learning. In our work with NCEPR we are researching the ways in which we can use e-portfolios to help students to reflect upon and improve their learning. Our research is informed by an integrated learning design (ILD) framework (Bannan-Ritland, 2003) which conceptualises educational research as an iterative process in which the evaluation and subsequent transformation of practice form a continuous feedback loop. There are four phases in this ILD framework: informed exploration; enactment; and evaluation (local and broad).
Whilst it was clear to us that e-portfolio had potential for supporting and integrating student learning by providing additional channels of communication and facilitating collaborative working and feedback, we anticipated challenges in identifying, acquiring and embedding an e-portfolio tool which was suitable for the pedagogical purposes envisaged and which engaged students.
What was the learning design?
The methodology adopted in this approach is the Integrated Learning Design Framework (Bannan-Ritland, 2003): we started by examining the propositions about teaching and learning that are integral to our work and then set out in a cycle of informed exploration and evaluation. As noted above, we wanted to foster a community of practice amongst students and tutors in a context of increasing student numbers and staff workloads and to encourage and support students to reflect upon, evaluate and plan their learning. Our adoption of an e-portfolio was one strategy to achieve these aims: we hoped that this tool would provide an additional route of communication and further opportunities for feedback and support.
Our primary assumption is that reflection plays a central role in student learning. Reflection may be an individual activity but also has an important social dimension: like learning in general, reflection is facilitated by an interactive and dialogic learning context. We therefore designed the learning and assessment processes in SSF in such a way as to capitalise on the functions of PebblePad, which allows for collaborative working practices (e.g. the design of group presentations), the sharing of work with peers and tutors for feedback purposes, and systematic collection and reflection on achievements. Of crucial importance for us was that, using PebblePad, students could substantiate their analysis of progress through the inclusion of hyperlinks to evidence - feedback comments, pieces of work etc. The design of this learning experience evolved over the course of the academic year as our familiarity with, and confidence in, the tool grew, and we plan to extend our use of it in the SSF module and beyond in the coming academic year. Throughout the development and implementation of the tool within SSF, we had technical support both from within the University and also from PebblePad. Initial use of PebblePad during 2006/7 has been solely for the work supporting, and assessment of, student PDPs (see attached webfolio assignment).
How did you implement and embed this e-learning approach?
Following the decision to use PebblePad, a training session was arranged for tutors and provided by PebblePad personnel. Students were initially introduced to the tool in a lecture, where there was a demonstration of the main features of the tool. Information sheets were also distributed. Students worked in small groups in IT labs with their tutors to set up and develop their PDP webfolios and subsequently had drop-in support at specified times. One tutor developed a webfolio for his retired racing greyhound ('Mrs Doyle') to demonstrate the functions of PebblePad.
Evaluation of the use of PebblePad is being gained through focus group meetings and interviews with students and tutors. In addition, the webfolios submitted by students for their assessment in SSF in Semester 2, 2006/7, are being analysed to evaluate the ways in which students have used the tool to aid reflection on, and planning of, their learning. This analysis is being undertaken using the paper-based assessments students submitted in 2005/6 as a comparator.
Some problems anticipated in relation to the implementation of this e-learning tool did arise. The lack of integration of the tool with the institution's VLE meant that the module tutor had to take full responsibility for all technical aspects of the implementation, with the guidance of the PebblePad technical support team. However, despite this drawback, the introduction of the e-portfolio tool went surprisingly smoothly: technical support was readily available from the commercial providers and, even with low levels of technical expertise, the module tutor was able to sort out most of the problems with little difficulty. In the future, the employment of e-learning technical support staff within the Faculty will take over some of the technical aspects of PebblePad functioning. Nevertheless, the feasibility in the medium- and long-term of using a commercial e-portfolio tool in an institution which has a strong commitment to the use of a common VLE across all courses is questionable.
