CAT ePortfolio Subcommittee

February 23, 2011

Members Present:  Barbara Walters, Howard Wach, Michael Smith, and Gina Cherry

Five of the twenty-two schools in the Connect to Learn program are CUNY colleges:  Hunter, Lehman, LaGuardia, Queensborough, and SPS, plus Bronx, which is represented in a different way (not in C2L).  The current goals and direction of the ePortfolio subcommittee originate, in part, from our participation in this national group.  Other colleges also may find themselves examining – analyzing – the impact of ePortfolios on student learning.  This emerged as the main theme of our meeting, a theme we will continue to develop throughout Spring 2011.

Gina Cherry and I were both impressed with the presentation by Melissa Peet at the AAC&U & C2L Conference.  Peet, ePortfolio scholar at the University of Michigan, noted the difference between the UM and most of our colleges.  Nonetheless, educators, in her view, make at least a couple problematic assumptions, such as:

• – A capacity learned or demonstrated in one place will automatically translate to other contexts
• – Students naturally integrate their experiences:  cultural, spiritual, emotional, professional, physical, and economic. 

Their 2009 – 2010 study used double-blind open-ended questions. Students with ePortfolios stood out in terms of:

• – Immediacy of responses
• – Coherence of self
• – Self-direction and internal locus of control
• – Ability to use embodied language

This study and other observations from the conference led to other topics and further discussion of what folks are doing across various CUNY campuses, with the idea of sharing information and ideas – perhaps even data so as to generate a large enough sample for a collaborative research endeavor.

Gina noted that Hunter was especially interested in assessing the impact of ePortfolios and sharing information across campuses, perhaps in a private wiki, not unlike the one we developed for “Universal Concerns:  Aggregating and Integrating Information” in Fall 2010.  Hunter, using a budget from the President’s office, currently funds 25 small Faculty Innovations in Teaching with Technology projects (similar to the Kingsborough President’s Award). They have also implemented “Tech Thursdays” and “Teaching Tuesdays,” which provide faculty with opportunities to exchange information about teaching. Thus there is a faculty development structure in place, but nothing specific to ePortfolios. 

Howard Wach and BCC have a robust ePortfolio project including faculty development in place.  He noted that campus projects are and should be the unit of analysis; ePortfolio projects are always campus based with wide variation in goals and strategies.  BCC would love to do some kind of evaluation, and they have enough data in terms of the number of ePortfolios, but the ongoing project operation absorbs all of their energy.  He recalled from the AACU conference that in a room of over 250 people, when the question was raised about how many schools have a full-time person working on ePortfolios, two hands went up. 

Michael Smith indicated that York is currently focused on the first-year experience as part of their Gen Ed reform.  Their use of WordPress as part of their ePortfolio project led to a long discussion of the specific aspects of various forms of ePortfolio research projects, including classroom based SoTL projects.  Michael noted two different types of rubrics in his own research, one for the assignment and one for reflection.  Does student understanding of the assignment get better?  Their use of WordPress as part of a course, alongside instances of the use of Digication as a course management system, led us back to one of our first “universals”: the ePortfolio should be outside the course management system, a universal that has grown fuzzy as different people begin experimenting with different platforms.

Despite the multiple centrifugal forces at play when ePortfolios are project based, we continue to identify areas of consensus and areas for potential sharing and collaboration.  An ePortfolio belongs to the student.  This is its distinctive characteristic.  There are multiple levels of reflection on which we might want to share prompts and/or questionnaires:  course level, program level, college level, community engagement, ect.  A key theme or driving question is the specific function or role of ePortfolios in student learning.  How do ePortfolios sui generis impact student learning and how do we assess this?

I have updated the private group blog in the CAT ePortfolio subcommittee and have attached it to a new wiki page:  Evaluating the Impact of ePortfolios.

 The new page is currently listed as a link on our Fall 2010 wiki page, ePortfolios Across CUNY: Aggregating and Integrating Information.

Next month’s meeting will take place during the week of March 21.  A Doodle will be circulated shortly to schedule a time.

Barbara Walters

ePortfolio Subcommittee Chair

Attachments:

You must be logged in to view attached files.

CAT ePortfolio Subcommittee

February 23, 2011

Members Present:  Barbara Walters, Howard Wach, Michael Smith, and Gina Cherry

Five of the twenty-two schools in the Connect to Learn program are CUNY colleges:  Hunter, Lehman, LaGuardia, Queensborough, and SPS, plus Bronx, which is represented in a different way (not in C2L).  The current goals and direction of the ePortfolio subcommittee originate, in part, from our participation in this national group.  Other colleges also may find themselves examining – analyzing – the impact of ePortfolios on student learning.  This emerged as the main theme of our meeting, a theme we will continue to develop throughout Spring 2011.

Gina Cherry and I were both impressed with the presentation by Melissa Peet at the AAC&U & C2L Conference.  Peet, ePortfolio scholar at the University of Michigan, noted the difference between the UM and most of our colleges.  Nonetheless, educators, in her view, make at least a couple problematic assumptions, such as:

• – A capacity learned or demonstrated in one place will automatically translate to other contexts
• – Students naturally integrate their experiences:  cultural, spiritual, emotional, professional, physical, and economic. 

Their 2009 – 2010 study used double-blind open-ended questions. Students with ePortfolios stood out in terms of:

• – Immediacy of responses
• – Coherence of self
• – Self-direction and internal locus of control
• – Ability to use embodied language

This study and other observations from the conference led to other topics and further discussion of what folks are doing across various CUNY campuses, with the idea of sharing information and ideas – perhaps even data so as to generate a large enough sample for a collaborative research endeavor.

Gina noted that Hunter was especially interested in assessing the impact of ePortfolios and sharing information across campuses, perhaps in a private wiki, not unlike the one we developed for “Universal Concerns:  Aggregating and Integrating Information” in Fall 2010.  Hunter, using a budget from the President’s office, currently funds 25 small Faculty Innovations in Teaching with Technology projects (similar to the Kingsborough President’s Award). They have also implemented “Tech Thursdays” and “Teaching Tuesdays,” which provide faculty with opportunities to exchange information about teaching. Thus there is a faculty development structure in place, but nothing specific to ePortfolios. 

Howard Wach and BCC have a robust ePortfolio project including faculty development in place.  He noted that campus projects are and should be the unit of analysis; ePortfolio projects are always campus based with wide variation in goals and strategies.  BCC would love to do some kind of evaluation, and they have enough data in terms of the number of ePortfolios, but the ongoing project operation absorbs all of their energy.  He recalled from the AACU conference that in a room of over 250 people, when the question was raised about how many schools have a full-time person working on ePortfolios, two hands went up. 

Michael Smith indicated that York is currently focused on the first-year experience as part of their Gen Ed reform.  Their use of WordPress as part of their ePortfolio project led to a long discussion of the specific aspects of various forms of ePortfolio research projects, including classroom based SoTL projects.  Michael noted two different types of rubrics in his own research, one for the assignment and one for reflection.  Does student understanding of the assignment get better?  Their use of WordPress as part of a course, alongside instances of the use of Digication as a course management system, led us back to one of our first “universals”: the ePortfolio should be outside the course management system, a universal that has grown fuzzy as different people begin experimenting with different platforms.

Despite the multiple centrifugal forces at play when ePortfolios are project based, we continue to identify areas of consensus and areas for potential sharing and collaboration.  An ePortfolio belongs to the student.  This is its distinctive characteristic.  There are multiple levels of reflection on which we might want to share prompts and/or questionnaires:  course level, program level, college level, community engagement, ect.  A key theme or driving question is the specific function or role of ePortfolios in student learning.  How do ePortfolios sui generis impact student learning and how do we assess this?

I have updated the private group blog in the CAT ePortfolio subcommittee and have attached it to a new wiki page:  Evaluating the Impact of ePortfolios.

 The new page is currently listed as a link on our Fall 2010 wiki page, ePortfolios Across CUNY: Aggregating and Integrating Information.

Next month’s meeting will take place during the week of March 21.  A Doodle will be circulated shortly to schedule a time.

Barbara Walters

ePortfolio Subcommittee Chair

Attachments:

You must be logged in to view attached files.