Developing a Reference Model of ePortfolio Peter Rees Jones CETIS (The UK Centre for Educational Technology Interoperability Standards) Drawing on the work led by the University of Nottingham to develop an Initial Reference Model of ePortfolio for Lifelong Learning funded by JISC

In this presentation I will set out:- A scenario; ePortfolio in 2010 integrating learning in education & employment; A sketch of the pre-conditions; what government and educators did. But I will focus on: - The Major Problem; Monolithic technology; monolithic specifications and standards Is “The Framework” a potential solution? Could the definition of modular ePortfolio enabled services help? The work of the Nottingham Reference Model of ePortfolio is intended to produce a set of co-ordinated profiles of the interfaces required by ePortfolio enabled services focusing & extending existing specifications.

Blue Skies Scenario Until 2005 the UK ePortfolio Community had focused on joining up successive episodes of learning in education & employment. In 2010 what they actually implemented was also lifewide. How did this happen? ePortfolio enabled the learner to integrate & use what s/he learned in simultaneous episodes of education and employment.

Pre conditions: - Govt The Westminster Govt introduced a £150 m / year programme for anyone leaving school with below standard qualifications Employers released these workers and Govt paid their tuition to bring them up to the standard For those at the standard employers and Govt brought them up to the standard for entry to University The National Employers Training Programme starts in England in 2006

Pre-conditions: - universities Many university Centres for Excellence in Teaching and Learning offered all students the opportunity to integrate experience of employment into learning. Skills Inflation ! English 20 year olds above the OECD average Graduates in work signing up to masters degrees Strong growth in the knowledge economy Within the emerging single European market for education & employment But how did ePortfolio help?

The Problem ICT systems have become core to learning, teaching, research & administration BUT they are difficult and expensive to change partly because of the high cost of integration within and between organisations. Yet educators and employers are subject to constant change. Existing ICT systems are becoming barriers to strategic change.

Just another Brick in the Wall? ePortfolio must connect to many systems within a single institution and across many institutions IMS LIP / ePortfolio worked, but proved complex and therefore expensive to implement; Monolithic specifications cannot deliver transformational change on the timescales we require We need lightweight specs designed for ease of implementation There is a candidate solution: -

The Framework The Framework applies the principles & methods of the service oriented approach being developed by the major IT vendors to JISC developments. It comprises 2 main parts: Sets of Services, where a Service exposes information or functionality through a public interface that other systems can call on. Sets of Reference Models where a Reference Model identifies a common requirement and shows how one or more services can be used to meet this need. A Reference Model should lead to a Reference Implementation.

ePortfolio Reference Model A Bridge between User Needs & Services Reference Implementation A Reference Model shows how a set of Services are combined to meet a common User Need. User Needs Reference Model Domain Specific & Common Services Design The Reference Model then forms the basis for a Reference Implementation.

Reference Models Learner’s ePortfolio Use Case ‘Orchestration’ Learning Flow Web Service Service A Invoke Service B Invoke Typically User Tasks need to call on several services. ’Orchestration’ standards are emerging for creating ‘composite services’. Learner

Reference Models Learner’s ePortfolio Use Case Orchestration & Choreography Learning Flow Web Service Service A Invoke Service B Invoke Typically User Tasks need to call on several services. ’Orchestration’ standards are emerging for creating ‘composite services’. Learner Teacher

Create a learning plan (16 year old with results below the minimum standard) Trigger: - assessment results Human Actors: - a learner & a teacher Inputs: - –Assessment results –Pathway information ePortfolio enabled services: - –Assessment –Personal Development –Pathway –Guidance Outputs held in the ePortfolio:- –Learner reflection –Learner teacher dialogue –Learning Plan

Learner’s ePortfolio Assessment Learner Teacher Create a new learning plan Personal Development Guidance Pathway service Results & comments Reflection Formal Plan Record of Dialog

Learner’s ePortfolio Assessment Learner Teacher A plan for education & work Personal Development Guidance Pathway service Results & comments Reflection Formal Plan Record of Dialog Employer

What is the Learning Plan? Pre-conditions –There is a Pattern Book which any of the actors can use to find a particular type of plan for a particular type of learner, job, learning problem or goal –There is an agent which can help any actor to navigate the Pattern Book, customise the learning and the learning flow –Each actor can specify conditions when the plan will alert them, for example by poor diagnostic assessment results or attendance –The plan is therefore a learning flow and an active resource The employer identifies the gaps in learning required for the job; The teacher identifies the gaps required to bring the learner up to the minimum standard; The learner identifies the gaps required for his / her long term ambitions; The actors negotiate a learning flow customised to the needs of the employer meeting the minimum standard and personalised by the learner; The plan is executed

Propositions: - ePortfolio is best defined in terms of the ePortfolio enabled services which make use of and contribute to its development These services in this instance include:- –Assessment –Personal Development –Pathway –Guidance –Workflow is key A standard / specification for ePortfolio should comprise the coordinated set of profiles of the interfaces for the coordinated use of services.

ePortfolio systems in 2010 Complete ePortfolio solutions, including services such as Personal Development? OR a minimum ePortfolio service capable of supporting a range of separate ePortfolio enabled services? What kind of ePortfolio systems does the blue skies scenario require? Where an educational institution and an employer offer different learning environments there are distinct advantages in the latter approach

ePortfolio in 2010 A personal view: - A complete MLE aims to fit all requirements but may excel at none. Is this a good model for eP? A minimum ePortfolio service allows organisations (& individuals) to select the best services for their needs. This model allows open source developers to lead the market producing versions of services targeting specific needs commercial vendors have ignored Should government aim to manage the market in this way in order to provide the diverse, innovative services personalisation requires?

What happens next? Nottingham University will draw on the work of UK and international partners to propose a reference model of ePortfolio to UK JISC; Drawing on CETIS it will propose & pilot some of the interfaces required by ePortfolio services; These will be profiles focusing and extending existing specifications We will report back to alt-i-lab in 2006

Developing a Reference Model of ePortfolio Peter Rees Jones CETIS (The UK Centre for Educational Technology Interoperability Standards) Drawing on the work led by the University of Nottingham to develop an Initial Reference Model of ePortfolio for Lifelong Learning funded by JISC