http://geraintevans.edublogs.org/2008/06/18/e-portfolios-and-web-20/
So this is my second post - further than i thought i’d get, but it’s taken me longer than planned! And it’s also taken us longer than planned to make a decision on an e-Portfolio tool (or tools) for the University. I won’t go into detail about what was eventually decided, as its not actually all wrapped up yet, but in getting to this preliminary decision its useful to reflect on the process and the area of e-portfolios generally.
What i expected was: Here’s a number of e-portfolio tools - which one is the best? And the that’s the way it started out. But i think we quickly started to realise that the number of good, all-in-one solutions on the market was very limited, and, furthermore, that there was no clear front-runner that met all of our criteria.
Therefore, the solution, such as it is, has not been a blanket ‘e-portfolio’ system for the whole university, but rather several tools which can perform portfolio-type functions, and can be targeted for selected needs. Is this a sign of the immaturity of the e-portfolio market, or an indication of wider changes in educational technology generally, led by the rise in Web 2.0?
VLE Vs Web 2.0?
I saw a blog a couple of weeks ago (i know i should link to it but i can’t remember where it was - i wasn’t a proper blogger then!) that suggested VLE use could be in decline (either now or in the future) as academics move away from a single catch all tool to a using several hand-picked tools with students for specific uses - i.e a blog for reflection, a wiki for collaboration, google apps for document sharing, skype for video conferencing etc.
There are obviously many issues involved in this (e.g. single authentication, security, legal issues etc) and i’m not convinced we are ready just yet to deal with all of these, certainly not on an institution level. However, i think it is a sign of things to come and we need to become less tied down to the idea of a one-size-fits-all system.
Certainly we already in Birmingham partly recognise this, hence ’powerlinks’ from WebCT (to Turnitin, QM Perception, ePop etc) that tie in different systems, and now a choice of reflective tools, but obviously there is a limit to how far this approach can be taken. It is a different thing to change the culture of the institution by addressing the above issues with Web 2.0 and encouraging academics to find and embrace their own tools. And would we, in fact, want to do this anyway?
Web 2.0 - overhyped?
I think we need to be careful about jumping on the bandwagon with Web 2.0 just for the sake of it. Of course it provides us with some great tools for learning (such as this blog!), and the potential is huge, but i feel we need to look at each tool on it’s own merit, not just as part of the ‘web 2.0 revolution’ or, even more vaguely, ‘the future’!
For example, social networking tools for learning, which we are starting to see - i must confess i havent really explored this too closely, but i would be tempted to ask whether this adds to the student learning experience, or whether we are just trying to catch up because all the students use facebook? Are students gonna stop using facebook and use the university version? doubt it. are they gonna use two parallel systems - one for personal life, one for their education? again, I doubt it. We have to ask where each of the tools fit in and whether they actually add value to the student experience. Otherwise we run the risk of seeming like an old lecturer trying to be cool.
So we need to explore these tools, which probably are, in many cases, ‘the future’, but maintain a level of quality and control, and provide guidance to how best they can be used in education.
So for me the ideal is, at least in the short to medium term, a varied but limited suite of engaging and easy-to-use tools that are somehow linked together through a single ‘portal’, be that WebCT or another such system. How we achieve this is another matter…
Authored by geraintevans. Hosted by Edublogs.
