Created by Helen Chen & John Ittelson. Presented at the ePortfolio California Summit 2010 - ePortfolios for Student Learning Outcomes session.

1. ePortfolios for Student Learning Outcomes: Questions and Common Needs with Helen Chen & John Ittelson ePortfolio California Summit 2010 - October 11, 2010

2. Faculty Buy-In What strategies can be employed to address faculty buy-in? How do you get faculty to accept ePortfolios? What is the role of faculty in the ePortfolio process – promote learning objectives, mentoring, thread through academic life? How can ePortfolios be viewed as a teaching resource as well as an assessment resource?

4. How can the ePortfolio facilitate “self-advising” (e.g., educational templates for students to select from, modify, & tailor)?

5. How can we get students invested and engaged in the ePortfolio (e.g., tell your story to another institution, employer, etc.)?

7. How can the ePortfolio (through learning activities/assignments, a folio thinking culture, etc.) foster reflective thinking?

8. How do we develop assignments that create artifacts that can go into an ePortfolio?

10. What is the impact of fee structures on how the ePortfolio is rolled out and how it is used, short term & long term?

11. Data Security – where is data stored? How is data accessed?

12. Costs of LT & ST maintenance

14. Logistics How do we roll this out on campus (e.g., have departments opt in)? What are models of adoption for my institution? How do we facilitate communication among various stakeholders – students, faculty, advisors, external audiences?

16. Who owns it? Who maintains it? Who pays for it? Who has access?

17. How do we define “appropriate use” expectations for students, faculty, institutions?

19. Closing Questions 1. What are three or four things to make the ePortfolio work on your campus? 2. What are the three or four things to make the ePortfolio work at the state level?

21. Funding/resources

22. Motivation and support structure

24. Have experts define and scope ePortfolio and have State procure a tool

27. Portability

28. Faculty development

29. Flexibility of drawing data from different sources to present in a useful attractive interface

30. Organization of assessment organizations

31. Security of information controlled by both admins and students

32. Champions from faculty to administrators

33. A basic functioning flexible tool

34. Interstate standards

35. Faculty assessment encouragement, central....enforcement

36. Similarity

39. Get all stakeholders at the table

40. Make sure it works for all campuses (comm. Colleges, K-12, and 4 yr)

41. Identify benefits for all stakeholders

42. Get time frame

43. Market the plan

44. Make it interoperable

45. Grants/integrate reports/results/data

47. Require interoperabiltiy between systems based on these standards.

48. Magically require all instructor agree to support this. :)

49. Evaluate what other states (Minnesota) have done to standardized on an eport tool and along with state evaluation standards.