Using an e-portfolio as a reflective learning tool

The Elevate Team have just published a working paper around why you would want to use an e-portfolio for reflective learning, this discussion paper aims to answer the following question, “How can you use an e-­portfolio as your reflective learning tool?”.

This will be answered through focussing on the following key questions,

• What do we mean by the term reflective learning?


• How have people been using e-­portfolios as reflective learning tools?


• What tools are available in Mahara to afford reflective learning?


• What are some considerations if someone was going to use Mahara as a reflective learning tool?

The primary audience for this discussion paper are staff and students at UCS, and can be viewed by following the link below.

https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B_WbibcPpDY-WVBZLW1HZ0psd1U/edit?usp=sharing

You can also see other reports, papers and publications by visiting the Reports and Publications section on this blog above.

New students, learning technology and digital literacies

During the Student Induction period the Elevate Team have been running sessions across UCS on how technologies can enhance your learning. As part of this we have used the Clickers (Turning Point) software to gather information.The aims of using the clickers included; demonstrating a technology they will use in their learning, and a rough snapshot across the first year student on technology use, and their perceptions.

Over 11 induction sessions (UCS Ipswich only) we collected a total of 617 people (students) votes on a number of questions.

The questions focused on the following key areas;

• what technology have you used in your learning?


• are you registered on Web 2.0 technologies?


• how would you rate yourself in terms of technology?

The outcomes indicate the need to develop effective student development programmes around technology based learning and digital literacies.

In terms of what tasks they have completed previously in their learning, they where asked, “previously had you completed any of the following in your studies?”a) Been told to access some web based reading resources
b) Had to submit some work electronically for marking
c) Maintain an electronic portfolio

The results (n = 590), indicated the majority of the audience had been instructed to use web based resources in their learning (45.9%, and 33% when combined with answer b). While the number who had previously been exposed to electronic portfolios was very low (1.4%).

It must be stated the question design was poor, as it did not include a not used any of these options, and the multiple answer made it difficult to identify patterns. However, it did give an indication of low awareness around what is an e-Portfolio. A message which must be taken on board when staff roll out Mahara within their teaching.

An increasing trend within teaching is the combined use of internal and externally hosted software. For instance, our Induction focused on how students could take ownership of their learning and use Web 2.0 technologies to achieve a number of learning outcomes. A simple indicator of engagement with Web 2.0 technologies was to ask, have to a facebook account? The rationale being, if yes, they must have created an account, and therefore, engaged with Web 2.0 services. The results indicated our student base has engaged with Web 2.0 technologies, as 85% have a facebook account, 10% do not, and 5% would not say (n = 599).

A limitation of this question was they might not be on Facebook, but use other Web 2.0 services. This question didn’t accommodate this scenario.

The final question focused on how students perceived their confidence with using technology. They were asked how they would rate themselves, as either a technology (software) power user, novice, happy amateur or being anxious.

The definitions were as follows:

• I’m a power user. I’m very competent with Microsoft Word, I’m a master of the pivot table, I update blogs, I’ve added content to youtube and I use Google Docs


• I’m a novice. I’m very good as some aspects of Microsoft Office, I read lots of material from web sites, I access multimedia (video and audio) online, and I have used skype


• I’m a happy amateur. I tend to use UCS computers and software, and share most of my word documents as email attachments. It meets my needs


• I’m rather stressed and anxious when it comes to technology. I don’t feel in control, and what I’m currently doing isn’t very satisfactory

The key differences (when we explained to students) was the power user was a content creator, compared to the novice. While the happy amateur tended not to use intranet based information.

The outcomes indicate the majority of students rate themselves (n = 617) as a novice (66.3%), compared to a happy amateur (17.3%), a power user (11.5%), or rather anxious (4.9%). Many observations can be drawn from this, including we tend to have a new intake who have a really good grounding in software (desktop and web based).  It also indicates the need to devote resources to a well designed student support package, as 22% are not engaging with web based material would rate themselves as anxious and stressed with respect to technologies in learning.

Overall, there are some lessons we need to take on board. Although, these are good indicators for learning technologies, there are still a large group of students, who are not confident or digitally literate, around the use of externally hosted solutions. Therefore, we do need to ensure our student support mechanisms are fit for practice.

Lastly, the ice breaker question … how did students like our shirts? This question was asked by the Elevate Team member when they ran the session. The majority didn’t care (67.9%), while 5.3% hated it! The sample was 585 people ... a lesson for use next year.

New report: transforming curriculum delivery through technology

The JISC have recently published a new report entitled Transforming Curriculum Delivery through technology: stories of challenge, benefit and change. This is available from:

http://www.jisc.ac.uk/whatwedo/programmes/elearning/curriculumdelivery/curriculumdeliveryguide.aspx

There was a couple of messages and observations I've taken from the report for the future direction of technology enhanced learning at UCS. Firstly, the report reviews a wide range of effective uses of technology which have had an impact at the local level, and influenced institutional policy. Therefore, for us to take advantage of these projects, and emulate the success we need to ensure the discussion around the opportunities technology offers is at the start of the project and not as is common, introduced further down the line, and is less effective as it is a bolt on. As identified in the report, "the starting point for each project was to identify challenges in their particular context that might be addressed by the intervention of technology" (pg 2).

Secondly many of the projects focussed on the effective fusion of institutional services and tools, with externally hosted web 2.0 solutions. This is very much inline with our current model, and at one level the report helps to evidence the success of this approach, while also making us reflect on where we need to go to make it work for us. I'd suggest there are a number of questions we need to answer, in particular have we the guidelines in place to help staff make well informed decisions around using externally hosted solutions, and is there at the staff development and support programmed in place to enable staff and students to effectively navigate these different learning spaces? I'd suggest we are making good progress on the first issue, although there needs to be significantly more work around digital literacies. In terms of the second issue, I think we need to prioritise a better defined hub - spoke model, which will deliver the needs of practitioners at the coal face.

The use of clickers at UCS: reflections on academic year 2010/11

I've written the report of the initial observations and staff feedback on the use of clicker's (audience response system) to enhance the learning experience. The full report is available from:

• http://dl.dropbox.com/u/12497737/reports/clickers_report_2011_elevate.pdf
  

The outcomes were very encouraging. The executive summary is;

In January 2011, the Elevate Team started administrating an audience response system (clickers) pilot service at UCS. This service aimed to administer the loan of clickers and develop staff in how they might use audience response systems (TurningPoint Clickers) to enhance face to face teaching.

The following report covers the period January 1st, 2011 and April 30th, 2011, and aims to address;

1. Are clickers being used by staff at UCS and are they likely to continue using them?


2. Do staff perceive clickers add value to their teaching, and the student learning experience?


3. Is the emerging staff development model and support programme fit for purpose? Will it scale for greater uptake?

The broad findings imply;

1. staff liked using clickers, the perception was they add value to their teaching and staff are planning to use them again.


2. the administration around managing the clickers needs to be improved. In particular, the collection and return process


3. the staff development programme needs to be fine tuned in terms of greater emphasis on question design and more promotion.

So it reads like this is much more to come with people using clickers creatively at UCS :-)