1. e-Portfolios Scott Wilson 23-05-2005

3. Who am I? Assistant Director, CETIS Researcher, MELCOE IMS Participant Blogger Not Very Good Musician Music Fan Dad-to-be

4. The Order of Business What are e-Portfolios for? What do they contain? Who owns and manages them? How can standards help?

5. What is an e-Portfolio for? Reflecting Recording Planning Evidencing Assessing Presenting

6. Recording Activities –Formal learning –Informal learning –Employment –Volunteering –Military service Memberships and Affiliations Capabilities –Competencies –Skills –Abilities Achievements –Qualifications –Awards –Licenses

7. Reflecting Commentary by the subject on any aspect of themselves Can be private, shared, or public Examples include journals and blogs

8. Evidencing The ‘traditional’ role of a portfolio: a collection of artifacts that say something about the subject: Essays, documents, reports Photos, artwork, music Plans, blueprints, patents Certificates, awards, references, reviews

9. Planning Goals Interests Plans

10. Presenting Its more than just prettifying the content; presenting offers an opportunity to tell a story or make a point –Structuring –Visualising –Narrating –Re-purposing

11. Assessing Using an e-Portfolio for a specific purpose: –Gaining access to education or employment –Achieving a grade, or a promotion –Getting a license or certificate

12. Cultural Differences UK: Primarily a set of information about goals, achievements, and reflections for personal development US: Primarily a set of evidence for presentation and assessment

13. Where is the e-Portfolio, and who owns and manages it?

14. transition

15. From school to college to university to work…wherever you go, someone is managing your e- portfolio! A model for e-Portfolio as an institutionally-managed* construct Key requirement is ability to export across transitions * but potentially ‘learner-centered’

16. Question: What happens when I work or study in more than one organisation?

17. intersection

18. David Tosh Learning Technologist The University of Edinburgh d.tosh@ed.ac.uk Ben Werdmuller Application Developer The University of Edinburgh b.werd@ed.ac.uk

19. The e-Portfolio lives in the intersection between the worlds for education, work, and home A model for e-Portfolio as a learner- managed construct Key requirement is easy-to-use tools and hosting services* *E.g. the “e-Portfolio-as-blog” approach

20. aggregation

21. recording planning reflecting recording evidencing presenting E-Portfolio?

24. Pieces of e-Portfolio are scattered amongst employers, institutions, websites, and applications A model for e-Portfolio as a learner- assembled construct Key requirement is interoperability

25. Or, to put it another way Depending on where it sits, the application that supports an e-Portfolio may be: –An enterprise solution –A weblog or personal information solution –An aggregator or “bloggregator”

26. So which is it to be? Dedicated e-Portfolio tools of the “first generation” (e.g. OSPI) tend to be transitional and enterprise-oriented Current tools under development (e.g. ELGG) look more intersectional, but are evolving towards aggregation … is ownership the key consideration?

27. Question: how can an e-Portfolio be learner- centered (and learner-owned?)… …yet at the same time be scaffolded and supported in the learning process?

28. Ownership

29. Ownership [1] Some things are clearly the provenance of the subject: –Personal reflections –Plans and goals –Statements of interest –Independently-produced artifacts (e.g. photos)

30. Ownership [2] Some things are clearly the provenance of an institution: –Awards –Artifacts with institutional IPR e.g., patents –Official records of achievement –Materials used in learning e.g., learning objects

31. Ownership [3] Some things are clearly the provenance of an employer: –References –Artifacts created for the company, e.g. source code, products –Official records of conduct –Official records of training outcomes

32. Ownership [4] Some things have problematic ownership: –Records of personal tutoring and coaching –Artifacts created ‘outside company time’ –Posts to forums and blogs within an LMS or other enterprise system

33. The Question of Ownership Given that the pieces of an e-Portfolio have a range of owners, how do we make e-Portfolios work? –how do we include or reference material? –How do we verify aspects of e-Portfolios for assessment?

34. Objects and metadata

35. Who owns what… Sometimes the artifact can only be referenced, but the metadata about it can be either included or referenced Sometimes only the metadata about an artifact can be referenced, not the artifact itself Sometimes, there is only metadata; there is no artifact

36. Verification and evidencing of claims Metadata in a portfolio can often be seen in terms of a claim: –A claim that an institution gave the subject a specific grade –A claim that the subject has a specific skill Some claims are best verified, some are best evidenced, some need both

37. Evidencing I can play guitar, as evidenced by this song I recorded I know Java, as evidenced by this code I wrote I can do first aid, as evidenced by this training certificate I am a capable employee, as evidenced by this reference from my last employer

38. Verification I got a 2:1 in Psychology, as verified by checking with the University I did a training course in UML, as verified by checking with the employer I got this reference, as verified by calling the referee I like music, because I say so

39. authentication

40. The owner holds the artifacts and metadata, and the subject has to authenticate to get at them The e-portfolio is pretty bare, just some links to organisations which own the information All organisations need to manage accounts in perpetuity All organisations must never lose any data!

41. assertion

42. The owners allow the metadata to be included in the subject’s portfolio, but provide a means of verification For example, using a digital signature

43. Privacy and Disclosure

44. How does the subject manage disclosure? By providing alternative views of the portfolio for particular audiences By providing access controls over a single portfolio Same issues as for any disclosure of personal information

45. Standards

47. Standards and e-Portfolio IMS Learner Information Packaging IMS e-Portfolio HR-XML Resumé X/HTML RDF Other…

48. IMS IMS Global Learning Consortium Specifications consortium in e-Learning Various members; government organisations, companies, universities http://www.imsglobal.org

49. IMS LIP “Learner Information Packaging” One of the earliest IMS specifications, along with metadata (now IEEE LOM) Very comprehensive data model But verbose, and prolix

51. IMS e-Portfolio Currently a Public Draft specification Due out this year Uses the top-level classes of IMS LIP only Creates a graph using Relationships e.g. asserts, evidences, supports etc.

53. But… This is just the information model of IMS e-Portfolio The binding uses a combination of IMS Content Packaging and IMS LIP, so there is still a big barrier to entry

54. HR-XML Resumé A specification by the HR-XML consortium Resume is another XML schema, and contains the sorts of things you’d expect to see on a resume Doesn’t directly support reflections and planning; more useful as an export option

55. X/HTML The predominant current standard for e- Portfolios :-) Human-readable, but not machine readable Doesn’t aggregate nicely

56. RDF A possible future way for representing e-portfolios Some useful vocabularies already exist, e.g. Friend of a Friend (FOAF), RSS 1.0 The IMS e-Portfolio information model can be bound to RDF instead of LIP

57. Other useful stuff RSS Atom FOAF SRU/SRW OpenURL iCalendar vCard

58. My favoured approach A simple base vocabulary of types from the IMS ePortfolio model Syntax provided using existing standard vocabularies: Dublin Core metadata, X/HTML, FOAF Ontology based on IMS ePortfolio relationships Sharing structure from RSS/Atom

59. Starting small First stage: X/HTML, Atom outputs, FOAF/vCard for identification Second stage: Atom/RSS-style modularisation and linking of parts for interoperability Third stage: typing of items from IMS ePortfolio; adding metadata Fourth stage: Ontology of relationships to provide evidencing and advanced linking

60. Example Portfolio Atom feed Entry links to (or contains) X/HTML Entry is typed as “ep:goal” via XSI Entry is described using DC metadata Entry is linked to other entries by relationships

61. goal4 improve my guitar playing #competency3 http://www.43things.com/things/view/2540 2005-04-31

62. Possibilities… Can support a range of designs and approaches: –Transition –Intersection –Aggregation –Push –Pull

63. Question: What else do we need for interoperability?

64. Thanks! s.wilson@bangor.ac.uk http://www.cetis.ac.uk/members/scott