Graphics Programs Reference
In-Depth Information
decision and persistence with a technology”
(Straub, 2009, p. 641). The power of the reflection
is that it helps students and faculty members move
beyond seeing the e-portfolio as a mere alterna-
tive assessment tool to appreciating its value as
a learning strategy. Digital portfolios assisted
student learning by increasing student motivation
and allowing the students to publish their work
in ways that result in greater self-confidence and
more reflections (Villar & Alegre, 2008). Analysis
of portfolios by Smith and Tillema (2003) allowed
them to differentiate the portfolios clearly into at
least four distinguishable types; dossier, training,
reflective and personal development portfolios.
In our course, entitled “Digital portfolios for a
quality culture in university teaching” (http://gid.
us.es:8083), we have introduced faculty instruc-
tors to constructing a reflective portfolio, that
is, one which compiles evidence revealing best
teaching practices or key teaching competences
chosen to meet certain university quality criteria
for professional growth.
Electronic portfolios for FPL are grounded in
the rich history of research examining portfolios
in learning assessment environments. We drive
this review by three themes: (a) portfolio as a
scaffold for reflective inquiry (e.g., Lyons, 2006),
(b) peer review of a teaching portfolio (e.g.,
Quinlan, 2002), and (c) the analysis of digital
portfolios (e.g., Woodward, & Nanlohy, 2004).
We also use these three themes to develop the
three guiding research questions for the review:
(1) What types of electronic portfolio architectures
and reflective practices are most conducive for
faculty members to enhance their learning? (2)
What kinds of portfolio-embedded tasks enhance
reflection about teaching practice and contribute to
colleague coaching? (3) What is the value-added
of analysing a portfolio in an electronic format?
Below, we examine each of the three questions:
their learning?
A portfolio is more or less
a novel in hypertext format: typically it
begins with a preface, which summarizes
a faculty member's philosophy or theoreti-
cal constructs, and linked chapters which
underpin, give detailed evidence of teach-
ing processes and products (e.g., artefacts
or tools, reflections, and references), and
simplifies the process of navigating (Hill,
2008). The plot answers the happenings in
the learning process; the character includes
the persons involved in teaching; the setting
contains the context where teaching actions
take place; the theme alludes to the discipline
content, and point of view which mentions
how teaching episodes are told. A portfolio
should be like a symphony in that its closing
movement echoes and resounds with all the
teaching episodes that have been represented
before, linked with the formative and sum-
mative purposes of assessment. As Lyons
(2006, p. 156) stated: “It concludes with a
final reflection on the portfolio as a whole
and often suggests further actions”. Hence,
it fosters high-level self-assessment, which
allows the re-writing of teaching scenes or
learning passages.
(2)
What kinds of portfolio-embedded tasks en-
hance reflection about teaching practice and
contribute to colleague coaching?
Although,
there is little research on colleague review
to determine whether and how criteria come
into play during the portfolio review process
(Quinlan, 2002), peers usually applied their
personal knowledge constructions when
appraising a colleagues' portfolio. Also, a
protégé's portfolio review by another faculty
member can be an opportunity to develop
a mentoring process where the protégé ex-
plores thoughts and feelings, and develops
independence of mind (Harland, 2005).
(3)
What is the value-added of analysing a
portfolio in an electronic format?
Digital
portfolio criteria are descriptors for assessing
(1)
What types of electronic portfolio archi-
tectures and reflective practices are most
conducive for faculty members to enhance
Search WWH ::
Custom Search