Your SlideShare is downloading. ×
Eportfolio Presentation
Eportfolio Presentation
Eportfolio Presentation
Eportfolio Presentation
Eportfolio Presentation
Eportfolio Presentation
Eportfolio Presentation
Eportfolio Presentation
Eportfolio Presentation
Eportfolio Presentation
Eportfolio Presentation
Eportfolio Presentation
Eportfolio Presentation
Eportfolio Presentation
Eportfolio Presentation
Eportfolio Presentation
Eportfolio Presentation
Eportfolio Presentation
Eportfolio Presentation
Eportfolio Presentation
Eportfolio Presentation
Eportfolio Presentation
Eportfolio Presentation
Eportfolio Presentation
Eportfolio Presentation
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5

Thanks for flagging this SlideShare!

Oops! An error has occurred.

Saving this for later? Get the SlideShare app to save on your phone or tablet. Read anywhere, anytime – even offline.
Text the download link to your phone
Standard text messaging rates apply

Eportfolio Presentation


Published on

discussion on systemic vs organisation ePortfolios. Policy and interoperability considerations

discussion on systemic vs organisation ePortfolios. Policy and interoperability considerations

Published in: Economy & Finance, Education
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Total Views
On Slideshare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

Report content
Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

No notes for slide
  • Transcript

    • 1. AVETRA 2008 ePortfolios: Policy Issues and Interoperability Jerry Leeson
    • 2. About us
      • <PORTFOLIO>
      • <who we are>
      • is a not-for-profit ministerially owned agency, governed through a Board by nominees from the Australian Government, higher education, school education, and vocational education and training sectors.
      • The agency focuses on the needs of Australian education, training and careers within the context of emerging information and communications technologies (ICTs) and standards as they apply to the Internet. </who we are>
      • <aspirations>
      • to be Australia’s leading ICT agency for education </aspirations>
      • <plan>
      • </plan>
      • <evidence>
      • <1> </1>
      • <2> </2>
      • <3> </3>
      • <4> </4>
      • <5> </5>
      • <6> <6>
      • </evidence>
      • </PORTFOLIO>
    • 3.  
    • 4. Overview
      • Background
        • Research report for the Australian Flexible Learning Framework
          • E-Standards for Training project
      • Research
        • Environmental scan of current practice in ePortfolio field (emphasis on VET sector)
        • Development of use case scenarios
        • Consultation
        • Desktop research
      • Analysis
        • Identification of business rules, policy considerations for ePortfolio implementation
        • Identification of technical standards to support ePortfolios
      • Some observations
    • 5. ePortfolio Classifications
      • ‘ ePortfolios mean a lot of different things to a lot of different people ’
      • Some classifications
        • EPICC
          • Assessment, showcase, development, reflective
        • JISC
          • Presentation, transition, learning
        • Becta
          • Learning, assessment, presentation, transition
        • IMS
          • Assessment, presentation, learning, personal development, multiple owner, working
    • 6. Use Case Scenarios / consultation
      • Developed scenarios in order to explore the application of eportfolios in different stages of a learners involvement in the VET system
        • Transition into the VET sector
        • Learning/transition within the VET sector
        • Transition out of the VET sector
        • Managing a VET sector workforce
        • Transition into self employment
      • Revealed common functionality
        • Portability of information about qualifications and competencies
        • Recognition of prior learning (RPL)
        • Management and provision of secure and verifiable information
    • 7. Transitions RPL RPL RPL RPL
    • 8. Emerging differences
      • Looked at a number of projects/project reports, as part of desktop research.
        • JISC,BECTA, Europass, Bologna Process etc.
        • Some reports not available at time of project
        • Findings
          • Australia lags behind similar jurisdictions (Sectoral perspective)
          • Reference model for ePortfolio services particularly useful
            • Separating content and services provides users/portfolio owners the ability to access multiple sources
              • Supports the scenarios that we looked at - transitions
          • At a sectoral level, standards compliance is very important for widespread use
    • 9.  
    • 10. Policy and Business Issues
      • Guidelines for the development and provision of ePortfolio services
      • Flexibility and Customisation
      • Storage
        • Where?
          • Eg Europass CV
        • How much?
          • Seems to be a major issue for a number of the organisational based ePortfolios that we looked at
      • Accessibility
      • Identity
        • Learner Identity Management Framework (LIMF) / Australian Access Federation (AAF)
        • Evidence
        • authenticity
      • Data management
      • Data exchange
        • Policies and procedures
        • Formats
        • Interoperability (data format, vocabularies, qualifications etc)
    • 11. Organisation vs Systemic ePortfolios
      • Research based on the premise that ePortfolios are ‘learner-owned’
        • Learner-owned ePortfolios have the potential to cross organisational boundaries
      • Do organisational ePortfolios satisfy learners needs:
        • Over the long term
        • With regards to current and evolving usage of other online services
          • Implications of Web 2.0 type services
          • Combining organisation based services with Web services (not all of a learner’s portfolio may reside in the organisation infrastructure
      • Custodianship of content
        • Who, how long for
        • Access
        • archiving
    • 12. Some examples
      • National example
      • Public CV builder
      • Organisational ePortfolio integrating external services (eg YouTube)
    • 13. Other Models to Consider (1)
      • JISC ePortfolio Engine Reference Model
        • ePortfolio described as a set of services
        • These services could be web services that are distributed across the Web
        • An ePortfolio implementation could be seen as an aggregation of a set of portfolio related services relevant to a particular set of needs (eg resume builder, planner, evidence store, presentation builder etc)
        • Organisations and ePortfolio system buildersneed not be responsible for providing all the services that are required by the users
        • Recognises that there is no ‘one size fits all approach’
        • Opportunity exists to include more generic web services to provide some of the functionality (eg blogs, document/image sharing services etc)
        • What are the policy considerations for such a model?
    • 14. ePortfolio as a set of services Aggregation Presentation planning CV builder … .. reflection evidence networks course information Users ePortfolio ‘engine’
    • 15. Other Models to Consider (2)
      • The Web
        • Use web services for everything
        • In an age where organisations are moving more applications to the Web (email, Office, CRM etc, why not ePortfolios)
        • Increasing competition from Web 2.0 services and acceptance by learners
          • In some cases, preference for web-based services
    • 16. Read/Write Web
      • Is Google my ePortfolio?
        • No (at least, not yet)
        • – for a number of reasons.
    • 17. Some examples
      • Example of ePortfolio built with free web services
        • http:// /home
      • How to do it yourself with that service
        • http://
      • Social network
        • http:// /
      • ‘ professional’ social network
        • http:// /
      • Integration between social network and job site
        • http:// =
      • Claiming your content
        • http:// /
    • 18. But what about authenticated evidence?
      • EUN Bologna Process
        • Diploma Supplement
        • Certificate Supplement
        • Language Supplement
      • Australian Graduation Statement
        • Contains authenticated information about an award (eg degree)
        • Secure and verifiable
        • Static (unlike an ePortfolio which is a continually evolving document)
      • What value would an authenticated (electronic) statement of achievement have in an ePortfolio?
      • In a lifelong ePortfolio such services could perform an important component
    • 19. Authenticating claims Aggregation Presentation planning CV builder RPL claims reflection evidence networks course information Users ePortfolio ‘engine’ Certificate supplement
    • 20. Some definitions
      • Standards
        • A definition:
          • “ A Standard is a published document which sets out specifications and procedures designed to ensure that a material, product, method or service is fit for its purpose and consistently performs in the way it was intended.” (Standards Australia website: - March 2008)
      • Interoperability
        • Requires standards
        • Enables us to make ePortfolio related information portable (eg aggregation, syndication, migration)
        • Complete interoperability requires agreement on:
          • Communications method
          • Common data format
          • Semantics
          • vocabularies
        • Difficult to achieve
        • How necessary is it?
    • 21. Standards and specifications
      • Some of the standards we looked at included:
        • IMS
          • ePortfolio
          • RDCEO
          • LIP
          • Content Packaging
          • Vocabulary Definition Exchange
          • General Web services
        • RSS, Atom
        • WebDAV
        • W3C
        • Microformats
        • Shibboleth / MAMS
        • HR-XML
        • FOAF
        • opensocial
    • 22.  
    • 23. Some observations
      • Impact of Web 2.0
        • Tension between individuals and systemic benefits
      • A number of specifications are very complex and difficult to implement
        • Little support / few implementations of complex specifications
      • Agreement on complex, heavy weight specifications and implementation of such would be very difficult to achieve across a large, disparate sector
      • Simple, lightweight specifications already have widespread support
        • Could be adapted/adopted in this area
      • Longevity
        • Will the lifespan of individual ePortfolios outlast the technologies / solutions that support them
        • Storage space / ownership / custodianship
    • 24. Acknowledgements and References
      • Acknowledgements
        • The Australian Flexible Learning Framework and in particular, the E-Standards Expert Group for providing the opportunity to undertake the initial study.
        • The Australian ePortfolio Project for the Australian ePortfolio Symposium.
        • University of Maine: Reading Revolutions for the Magna Carta Image:
      • References
        • AeP (2008). The Australian ePortfolio Project. Retrieved February 10, 2008 from .
        • Smallwood A. (2008), the Australian ePortfolio Symposium, Review of Day 1. Retrieved March 16, 2008 from .
        • PILIN (2008). PILIN Project. Retrieved February 10, 2008 from
        • European Commission (2008) a. The Diploma Supplement. Retrieved February 17, 2008 from .
        • European Commission (2008) b. Recognition and transparency of qualifications. Retrieved February 17, 2008 from .
        • Harman G (2008). Proposal for an Australian Higher Education Graduation Statement. Retrieved March 16 from .
        • Curyer, Leeson, Mason, Williams (2007). Developing e-portfolios for VET: Policy issues and interoperability. Retrieved December 2007 from
      • This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 2.5 Australia License. To view a copy of this license, visit or send a letter to Creative Commons, 171 Second Street, Suite 300, San Francisco, California, 94105, USA.
    • 25. Thank you