1. Digital identities in ePortfolios: the first-year experience in a higher educational institution Sue Murray and Susi Peacock Centre for Academic Practice

2. Overview Introduction Study aims Research methods Study design Examples of subject areas Examples of use Sample: phase 1 Findings 1: interview Findings 2: co-operative task evaluation Findings 3: questionnaire Emerging issues Conclusion

3. Introduction

4. Study aims Explore first-year learners’ experience of, and attitude to, using ePortfolios in contrasting subject areas Seek to develop a deeper understanding of how and why learners use the ePortfolio to create digital identities, focussing on accessibility and usability Provide grounded guidelines to support institutional implementation and assist student engagement in developing digital identities

5. Research methods Mixed method approach Case studies –Face-to-face interview –Co-operative task evaluation - ‘think aloud’ Online questionnaire –Via Survey monkey

6. Study design Phase 1: December 2007 – Summer 2008 –Pilot phase –Testing & honing of research questions, tools, process and analysis Phase 2: Autumn 2008 – Summer 2009 –Main data collection stage –Seven case studies –Minimum of two participants from each cohort Phase 3: Summer 2009 – onwards –Data analysis, writing up, dissemination

7. Examples of subject areas Drama: stage management; costume design Diagnostic Radiography Interprofessional Health Education Media, Communication & Sociology MSc Physiotherapy MSc in Professional Education MSc Nursing Practitioner

8. Examples of use Reflective journal (blog) –Placement experience; processes of group work; introducing reflective and IT skills Forms –Recording evidence Webfolio –PDP; reflective practice portfolio; evidence of skills; presenting case studies

9. Examples of use

11. Sample: phase 1 MethodStage 1Stage 2 Face-to-face interview UG yr1 (n4) PG (n1) UG yr 1 (n2) Co-operative task evaluation UG yr 1 (n4)UG yr 1 (n2) Group interview(n3)UG yr 4 Questionnairen129 - administered n16 - responded Email interviewyr 1 (n2); yr 4 (n1)

12. Findings 1: interview First impressions –Mixed: ‘impressive’, ‘useful resource’, ‘nice look’, ‘more hassle than a notebook’, ‘gimmicky’ Expectations –Memory aid, bit like a diary, Benefits –Easy to use, all in one place, saves time –Easy to access “where-ever you are” –Facilitates reflection, sharing, personalisation, future recall –Environmental benefits Barriers –Attitudes to change –Learning to develop materials –Perception of interface –Concerns regarding privacy –Access and interoperability issues

13. Findings 2: co-operative task evaluation Initial evaluations showed some learners’ to be unsure how to use aspects of the tool Later evaluations showed confident use of the tool Indicates learnability

14. Findings 3: questionnaire Respondents –15 female; mean age 35.4; five UG, 11 PG; Attitude to new technologies –56.3% “love / like” new technologies & early users; Reasons for use –For assessment (50%), as part of course (37.5%) –Professional requirements (50%) –Easy, accessible place to record PDP / CPD materials Actual use –Time using (mean - 6.4 months); 44.4% used weekly; 92.8% used webfolio, 43.8% used blog; Usability –Over half (75.1%) found it easy to use; one commented it was time consuming to use.

15. Emerging issues Role of the ePortfolio –Professional identity, personal identity Diversity of learners –varied characteristics and abilities – affecting confidence and ability to use the tool –Varied educational history – increasing likelihood of having multiple records and prior learning (Ittelson, 2001) Need for support –Timely –Hands-on experience

16. Conclusion Moving on to phase 2 –Identifying case studies & recruiting participants Resources –Examples of case studies at QMU: http://www.qmu.ac.uk/eportfolio/case.htm http://www.qmu.ac.uk/eportfolio/videos.htm Contacts smurray@qmu.ac.uk & speacock@qmu.ac.uk