Portfolio Recommendation

An E-Portfolio Recommendation for the Royal Navy.

In order to successfully introduce an E-portfolio system to the Royal Navy it is necessary to understand three key points.  The infrastructure available to RN personnel, the target audience and its various needs,  and most importantly, the raison d’être of the eportfolio from the perspectives of those who should use it. 

The first consideration is one of infrastructure and the limited broadband access available to warships and personnel on operations across the globe.  The eportfolio of choice should be easy to operate, low bandwidth hungry and capable of being cached while still offering the necessary functionality.  

Secondly, the Royal Navy eportfolio requirement, while not yet set, is most likely to be institutionally focused, designed to deliver confidence to line managers and coordinators alike that the individual is capable and competent.  The training and learning planning function must be accessible by both the sailor and the line manager.  Here the line manager and the sailor are of comparable importance in considering the design emphasis of the chosen eportfolio.  The workplace for the sailor is an increasingly complex environment, where the understanding of the political environment is as relevant as the technical.  Sailors and their commanders often have to make complex decisions where the consequences can have significant impact on international affairs.  Therefore the Navy Management Board requires agile and flexible sailors capable of operating correctly in the harsh environment of the sea first time every time.  This requirement could be considered the Operational Requirement.  

The need to learn and reflect on ones performance is central to both the operational and the Long Life Learning agenda.  However careful consideration of how this is achieved will be critical to its enduring success in the L3 arena.  As the Navy continues to transition towards being a 'learning organisation' the ability of a sailor to electronically capture and record their competencies and see their training plan is essential.  That the eportfolio links to and compliments the Joint Personnel Administration system is considered an essential requirement.  This is seen as problematic as JPA is not Bologna Process complaint, which would enable the exchange of e-portfolio relevant data between systems.  The direct download of existing and recognized frameworks and competencies into the sailor’s eportfolio will deliver a critical weight of evidence which should convince them of its value.  Being able to see the output, rather than the eportfolio interface should win many a sceptic over to the value of the process.  That said, the existing naval culture sees sailors only thinking of their second career a year or two before their departure from the service.  This underlines the need for continued promotion of the Life Long Learning agenda within the Royal Navy, of which the eportfolio is tangible evidence.  Using the L3 justification for the eportfolio supplements the argument of the Operational but if it is to be credible, then the ownership and physical location of the eportfolio after a Sailors service is of critical importance.   The veteran sailor must have access to the eportfolio and should be supported in its use after active service. 

The last consideration is that of data security.  The loss or unauthorised access to any MoD data, regardless of security classification results in acute reputational issues for the department.  Any system used must be secure, yet accessible to users.  The use of a Secure Singular Sign In is considered essential.

At present there is no clear market leader in this area but as the Eportfolio will be required to link with the RN’s JPA system which is not Bologna Process compliant a bespoke or heavily modified E-portfolio system is considered necessary. 

2.5 Plus response

A response to a post from John Sumpter. 


John,

Thanks for the Information is Beautiful link. I agree that the these examples are much better at getting information across to the learner and that the RLO-CETL piece was rather staid and boring. That said I had written the piece below prior to your posting. My ready agreement with you was some what at odds with what I had written as a draft below.

I actually found the RLO-CETL piece rather useful in that it provides a framework and a series of questions that can be applied to any given reflective opportunity. The reflective theorist history provided helpful if not essential background and the simple learning styles questionnaire had merit. But it was the simple questioning framework of something happened?, what happened?, so what?, and what next? which appeared the most powerful tool here. The recognition that something had happened and a few questions to follow seem logical and easy to follow for those new to reflective writing. The explicit discussion of why reflect on page 8 was useful to recognize and therefore overcome the habitual element to our thinking. It highlighted the conscious effort required and why it is worth while. Section 9, on what should be written about, appeared rather obvious but in the final analysis if a student takes time to write about something that struck them as important enough to take the time to think about it and reflect then it has learning merit. Whether that merit builds to a course objective is dependent upon the student, learning design and interpretation. Finally, students like to have an example to follow and the one provided on page 10 was sufficiently vague enough in terms of scenario to be applicable, but specific enough to demonstrate the requirements of reflective writing. I feel I have a grasp of 'how' I should write reflectively, but little idea of how that can be translated into a tutor marking scheme where, as my colleagues have already outlined, the output and determination of development is still subjective.

This led me to ask how and /or why my opinions could differ so greatly? The RLO piece is staid and boring but as I had a need for the information and consider myself a motivated learner it delivered just enough, just in time. I guess it raises the issue of student motivation. Where there is little motivation, the full gambit of online learning and the ease of graphical representation should be bought to the fore. In essence is the RLO_CETL bit 'fit for purpose'? For those like myself on H808 probably yes. For students who are new to and not entirely comfortable with reflective techniques, probably not.

Core Activity 2.2: Reflection on the Drivers Exercise

Practice-related Competencies

The most obvious realization here was that E-portfolios are recognized as a valuable tool for learners (Seimens,2004).  The depth and breadth of possibility is astonishing but so is the cultural and curriculum change required to make it them truly integrated as effective tools. As an internal consultant for the MoD I often advise on the issues of implementation v's benefit and the Drivers Exercise clearly highlighted these to be of benefit in my professional domain. The collaborative nature of the task itself also provided insight and benefit. I was struck how much I was 'pulled back' to the computer to see what had been posted or what had changed. This exercise clearly demonstrated the power of online collaboration and has overturned my views on learning communities.  

Communications Competencies
I felt that I recognized some of the issues we were to face as a tutor group within minutes of reading the task requirements and saw that these would require resolving / organizing before we could complete the task.  However, I found it difficult to broach this within the group without being conscious of taking the lead when the majority of the group have far more experience in this style of learning than I do.  We got there because someone else took the plunge (and showed pro-activity).  I recognize now that my assertion was correct and my potential solution would have worked had I the confidence in my new found environment. Next time I should contribute to the organisation of the collaborative task earlier.  

Technology Competencies

I had tried using Google Docs before, but without having a reason to collaborate the full extent of utility was lost upon me.  However the decision to use Docs was agreed by the group and soon made sense.  The synchronous capability was also demonstrated more by luck than judgement when a fellow tutor group member found ourselves on line together and recognized that a chat facility was flashing in the corner.  As a task to demonstrate and expand my technological competencies, this has been effective and fun. Finding my way around Blogger has also been interesting if fraught with inconsistencies of approach and technical mis-understanding. I have since found out that Google Chrome (my Browser of choice) doesn't support the cutting and pasting of text in blogger nor in Google Docs where our collaboration has been occurring.  This in turn pushed me to use forums elsewhere to discover why and how to adjust the irritating niggle. I'm still none the wiser how I did it but I appear to have some control over Cut N' Paste now. 

Research Competencies

Possibly most relevant is the research element of this task.  Prior to conducting the research into E-portfolios I didn't recognize their value as they are particularly difficult to see working in my current work area due to simple IT infrastructure and accessibility issues.  The value and potential employment of e-portfolios has been a major revelation but it has also confirmed my interest in what and how something has been implemented.  Outside of the texts required for the activities I was particularly struck by the usefulness of a Becta article on the maturity of E-portfolio systems.

References

http://www.elearnspace.org/Articles/eportfolios.htm

Core activity 2.3: E-Portfolio Case study

Core activity 2.3: ePortfolio case studies

Case Study – West Cheshire College (WCC) Electronic NVQ

West Cheshire College electronic  NVQ, QIA Excellence Gateway. Available from: http://excellence.qia.org.uk/page.aspx?o=137813 (accessed 25 May 2010). 

The Electronic NVQ project run in conjunction with the WCC aimed to reduce the burden of paperwork created by the necessity of evidence based proof.  The project aimed to make the learning events and subsequent capture of evidence paperless by utilising mobile phones, digital cameras, email and audio devises.  In addition, the paper based system required periodic flurries of interaction between the tutor and candidate followed by periods of no interaction.  An anticipated benefit of using an e-portfolio system would be the re-connection of tutor and candidate leading to a higher quality of feedback and appraisal.  Also learners who were failing to adequately engage could be identified and remedial steps taken earlier. 

Limitations included the provision of adequate infrastructure, for staff, students and assessors, network security restrictions which hampered internet access and competing time pressures on students. 

The e-portfolio users in this instance had ownership of their portfolios.  Submissions to it were via readily available technology in terms of mobile phones.  The candidate’s employer could be more involved and working patterns did not negate attendance or engagement as the physical access to the college was replaced by College on line portal where, advice and guidance were available outside of college hours.  Candidates could be remotely monitored by tutors, verifiers and workforce development co-ordinators. 

The learners benefited from a doubling of the retention rate.  What is not clear from the text is whether this ‘retention’ is of learning or retention of candidates on the course as the text goes on to use retention in terms of financial benefits to the college.  Nonetheless, the key messages from the text are;  the increased engagement of learners, their subsequent increase in achievement and that learning through ICT can be fun. 

The eNVQ case study appears driven by the desire to remove the paper based evidence burden rather than implementing e-portfolios specifically.  In this instance e-portfolios appear to be more of an easily accessible repository of evidence rather than exploiting the wider benefits of e-portfolio use.  This starting premise may explain why the wider teaching and learning implications outlined in the Key Drivers document by Group X are absent from the text.  I would suggest the primary driver cited above (the reduction of paper work) seems inconsistent with the degree of change required to implement the eportfolio system in this instance.  As relevant though not explicit was the colleges desire to ‘develop an integrated approach to the planning and delivery of vocational provision’ which utilised digital technology to capture evidence.  These drivers sit more comfortably with the UK element of the template.  

Technical Revelation 2.

Another first. Using Google Docs and having a conversation with John Sumpter using the chat feature while progressing our E-Portfolio driver template. Synchronous learning?

Core activity 2.5: Criteria for reflective writing - RLO_CETL Approach

Core activity 2.5: Criteria for reflective writing RLO-CETL Approach

I actually found the RLO-CETL piece rather useful in that it provides a framework and a series of questions that can be applied to any given reflective opportunity. The reflective theorist history provided helpful if though not essential background and the simple learning styles questionnaire had merit.   But it was the simple questioning framework of something happened?, what happened?, so what?, and what next? which appeared the most powerful tool here.  The recognition that something had happened and a few questions to follow seem logical and easy to follow for those new to reflective writing. The explicit discussion of why reflect on page 8 was useful to recognize and therefore overcome the habitual  element to our thinking.  It highlighted the conscious effort required and why it is worth while. Section 9, on what should be written about, appeared rather obvious but in the final analysis if a student takes time to write about something that struck them as important enough to take the time to think about it and reflect then it has learning merit.  Whether that merit builds to a course objective is dependent upon the student, learning design and interpretation. Finally, students like to have an example to follow and the one provided on page 10 was sufficiently vague enough in terms of scenario to be applicable, but specific enough to demonstrate the requirements of reflective writing.  I feel I have a grasp of 'how' I should write reflectively, but little idea of how that can be translated into a tutor marking scheme where, as my colleagues have already outlined, the output and determination of development is still subjective.    

Core activity 2.4: Reflection and learning

Moon, 2001 argues that depth of reflection achieved by a student corresponds with the depth of learning.  The desired Deep learning outcomes, where the learning transforms an existing understanding by restructuring ideas and concepts, or where students gain the depth of understanding required to evaluate and create further knowledge is only is achieved by Deep reflective practice.   Furthermore the activity of reflection re-presents knowledge to ourselves and thus aids our retention and longer term understanding, leading to a permanent behavioral change. Lastly, this re-presentation action is the  'Cognitive housekeeping' outlined by Moon, 2005 which gives learners the opportunity to re-order the information and its position within our thinking.  In the context of H808, journal writing or Blogging is simply the vehicle to record reflection.  Creme 2005, outlines the benefits of reflection via journals but also identifies the concern that by attempting to assess these reflections directly through the journal, you risk distorting the practice of reflection.  Assessment of reflection jeopardizes its honesty as students attempt to interpret what 'is required' or mask their thoughts, processes and feelings. Stuart Barret sums this concern up rather nicely.

Stuart BarrettPost 2 in reply to 1

27 September 2010, 12:20

"it is acknowledged by the course team in the ECA and TMA forum that reflection is very much a personal activity - and yet we are assessed on this. For example, the marking scheme for TMA01, Part 2 (top of page 7 of the assignment guide) says 'convincingness of the evidence as evidence of development' (15%). I needed to read this a few times to try to make sense of it. I think it means that i need to convince the marker (with evidence) that i am 'developing'.  What i am developing into is not made clear.

My real point is that this kind of judgement - i.e., is my evidence 'convincing', is entirely subjective. There are no objective outcomes for this 'evidence' that i can find in the marking scheme."

Introducing reflection into a curriculum requires careful consideration as to what if any assessment is required. At the same time however the student must recognize the value of reflection via which ever vehicle chosen and as value is often interpreted in terms of credit this balancing act is critical.  

The benefits of reflective practice as required by this course are clear.  Transformative learning results from reflection and an opportunity to re-write, re examine ones thoughts and arguments.  The cross pollination of ideas and critique from other students requires regular engagement and re-evaluation.  Depth of understanding and the capacity to evaluate and create further knowledge from our own connections and those of our colleagues is hugely valuable. I am yet to fully appreciate the impact of Tutors assessing our written reflections but I'm sure Stuart Barret won't be alone in his thoughts and concerns. 

Prior to engaging with the reading for this section I posted some remarks about reflection in my work place context.  Further reflection confirms my previous statements about reflection in the work place.  Schon, cited by Moon 2005, depicts a crisis of theory within the professional domain.  This is particularly true of MoD instructors who are often quoted as saying 'Out there in the real Airforce*, Navy* or Army*' (*delete as appropriate), as if the training regime was not indicative of the real world. The theory taught and delivered inside the training fence is devalued by those delivering it.  This appears a good example of Schon's crisis of professionalism and theory I believe.  The Armed Forces would however argue that they conduct after action reviews as a matter of course, not necessarily against a particular theory but against a procedure or required outcome. In fact, to think of it, it is part of the procedure of conducting an exercise!!

The art of being a 'reflective training practitioner' is often talked about, but the theoretical understanding upon which to base reflection is a very minor part of the training delivered as a Navy Educator / Schoolie / or training manager.  I remember Kolb, Maslow and a Regulations Manual being the only point of reference for what became several years of on job training.  Colleagues that followed just a year later were exposed to a wholly different training regime, (one that I foolishly resisted joining for some years because of its apparent inept delivery by the faculty responsible.)  My point is that for many years reflection was done of a matter of course (inherent in the procedure) but reflection against an academic text, well that has been a revelation in the last few days.  (Do I leave that in for fear of getting marked down, or push the boundaries of honesty and trust that my tutor understands that I have learnt something....... where is the Assessment strategy and how much credit is this worth?)

Any tool which enable the creation of quick and dirty notes make reflection easier, I guess this would be the same for making audio files as well, but part of the process for me has been writing in a coherent (semi) manner knowing that others could read.  This has required the process and reprocess of information and thoughts which hopefully should be readable.   I'll look at some others methods but suspect that blogging is the right route for me.  

Still not finished this but posting anyway.......