ePorfolio selection, and pilot outcomes (ACU)

1,334 views
1,278 views

Published on

Rebecca Wilson, Project Manager, Australian Catholic University
ACU required an ePortfolio solution for accreditation, embedding graduate attributes, and to provide a repository for Students and Academic staff’s electronic artefacts. The presentation will provide an overview of the selection criteria, evaluation of products, Desire2Learn implementation experiences, and pilot outcomes.

0 Comments
1 Like
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Views
Total views
1,334
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
150
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
18
Comments
0
Likes
1
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

ePorfolio selection, and pilot outcomes (ACU)

  1. 1. Rebecca Wilson<br />Project Manager<br />25 June 2010<br />ACU ePortfolio Project<br />
  2. 2. Definition<br />A purposeful collection of information and digital artefacts that demonstrates development or evidences learning outcomes, skills or competenciesAn electronic tool that helps you successfully achieve your goals by better understanding yourself and receiving valuable feedback from others<br />
  3. 3. Project Overview<br />Why we <br />did it<br />Implementation<br />and Review<br />Evaluation stage<br />Selection criteria<br />
  4. 4. Why we did it<br /><ul><li>Desire to extend the online learning systems to include a personallearning space
  5. 5. Curriculum requirement for certain faculties
  6. 6. Aid with transition from learning to working environments
  7. 7. Provide students with an ePortfolio for life</li></li></ul><li>Project Sponsor<br />Paul Campbell, Director of IT<br />Project Steering Committee<br />Dean of EducationAssociate Dean of Health SciencesExecutive Manager, Office of Student SuccessDirector, Learning and TeachingDirector of IT<br />Project Working Group<br />Project ManagerDirector of ITAssociate Dean EducationeLearning Coordinators (Education, Health Sciences)LecturersManager, ACUOnline (support and training)Library representativeOffice of Student SuccessIT Client Services<br />Monthly meetings<br />Weekly meetings<br />Project Teams<br />
  8. 8. Scope of the Project<br />
  9. 9. Selection Criteria<br /><ul><li>Easy to use, web-based
  10. 10. Ability to present in a multi-pagewebsite
  11. 11. Store a wide range of digital artefacts, reflections and presentations
  12. 12. Able to personalise and customisepresentations
  13. 13. Ability to communicate with and assess student portfolios – to be adopted as a choice by lecturers
  14. 14. Students able to flag content using the University’s approved attributes
  15. 15. Flexible file size and storage limits
  16. 16. Ability to statistically report on ePortfoliouse
  17. 17. Sustainable after graduation
  18. 18. Integration with LMS for marks, assessments, artefacts</li></li></ul><li>Pebblepad<br /><ul><li>UK based with AUS rep
  19. 19. Rate against graduate attributes, and self made attributes
  20. 20. Customisable presentations
  21. 21. Wizard-like system
  22. 22. Interface is childlike
  23. 23. Flash technology and potential issues on different platforms in use</li></ul>Mahara<br /><ul><li>Relatively inexpensive solution
  24. 24. Good community base
  25. 25. Unable to create multipage views
  26. 26. Limited theme design and customisation by student
  27. 27. Unable to rate against graduate attributes</li></ul>Product selection<br />and <br />evaluation<br />Desire2Learn<br /><ul><li>Canada based with AUS rep
  28. 28. Web-based, platform independent
  29. 29. Simple interface for data input
  30. 30. Able to customise and personalise presentations
  31. 31. Management of graduate attributes
  32. 32. Not previously in use at Australian universities</li></ul>Careerhub<br /><ul><li>Australia based
  33. 33. Aligned with an existing project at ACU
  34. 34. Good resume building tool
  35. 35. No theme design or customisation by student, difficult to manage content
  36. 36. Poor tracking of experiences and reflections</li></li></ul><li>
  37. 37. Graduate Attributes<br />
  38. 38. Desire2Learn Competencies<br />Graduate attributes created as <br />Learning Objectives<br />Activities can be created under each Learning Objective<br />Activity results can <br />be measured<br />
  39. 39. Implementation<br />October 2009<br />November 2009<br />December 2009<br />January 2010<br />Training<br /><ul><li>Train the Trainer sessions
  40. 40. eLearning Coordinators, IT staff, Learning and Teaching staff
  41. 41. Students and academics provided with online self-paced tutorials and documentation
  42. 42. Academics trained by their faculty eLearning Coordinators</li></li></ul><li>Review process has just commenced<br />Initial statistics:<br />Mid Pilot Review<br />
  43. 43. Feedback<br />…taken to the assignment tasks like “ducks to water” and I have not heard one complaint from any of them. I find all this student activity quite amazing…<br />Student motivation to learn and self assess has improved. They are learning more independently.<br />The immediate benefit that I experienced with Desire2Learn was the paperless assessments. Being able to access students work from home without have to take it home was great. A definite time saver.<br />There have been no problems reported to me by staff or students associated with not understanding how to use the software…<br />Problems were related to equipment and space, the usual problems…<br />Initial problems with students not accessing ePortfolio– this was improved with the addition of formative assessment/class activities built around ePortfolio<br />Some anxiety around using ePortfolios. Resolved with regular small training bite sessions.<br />
  44. 44. <ul><li>Coordinating with LMS project
  45. 45. Involvement of faculty staff
  46. 46. Keep up the momentum
  47. 47. Support resources</li></ul>Lessons Learnt<br />
  48. 48. Thank you<br />Questions?<br />

×