RAPPORT Vol 3 RAPPORT Vol 3 Issue 1 | Page 14

RAPPORT Volume 3 Issue 1 (2018) purposes that portfolios can live in and serve, among them assessment and career development, it’s reassuring to know that the central value of ePortfolios for these respondents is student reflection. As important, participants identified two more recent ePortfolio curricular features, curation and integration, which align with the three values of collection, selection, and reflection. Curation and integration, and perhaps especially integrative learning, draw on reflection: curation, integration, and reflection are interwoven practices. Students curate - that is, arrange and contextualize - artifacts demonstrating integrative learning as they reflect upon artifacts demonstrating that learning. Potential curricular features receiving little interest are also worth noting. The single item to receive no votes was “to create social media as part of the ePortfolio”: it may be that participants believe ePortfolios should be shared in more conventional networks of circulation. Likewise, two other features received very few responses. To “create a ePortfolio for an ill-structured context” received only two responses; participants seem to understand ePortfolios as inhabiting a defined context. And “to demonstrate global citizenship” also prompted few responses. Collectively, these limited responses seem to suggest that participants understand ePortfolios as operating in a well-structured context that is situated locally, regionally, or nationally; and while ePortfolios may have a global audience, they do not, for this audience, promote global citizenship as a key purpose. Responses to three other items may point the way to an ePortfolio curriculum of the future. Some respondents believe that “creat[ing] reflective texts in various media - in video as well as in print” is part of that curriculum, while equal numbers of respondents highlighted two other curricular dimensions: “us[ing] design principles (e.g., font style and size, color, and graphics) to create ePortfolios expressing their identities and meeting the needs of purpose and audience” and “demonstrat[ing] digital literacy.” These two features are related in that digital literacy includes the use of digital affordances to express identities, serve purposes and reach audiences. Additions to the list And, of course, participants made other suggestions, several of which extend and refine items on the given list, others of which do not. Two such suggestions, for example, were both anomalous and interesting. The first, “create/provide examples of disciplinary knowledge”, is oriented to a student’s major or specialization, while the second, “help students take ownership of their future”, seems oriented to the ePortfolio as a site of student agency. Three of the suggestions are oriented to assessment: “be purposeful regarding competencies”; “create evidence of learning, with outcomes”; and “collect evidence demonstrating their contributions”. Items linked to assessment, as previously indicated, make sense given that assessment is one typical context for ePortfolios. At the same time, what’s interesting here is how the items, taken together, emphasize different aspects of assessment all contributing to a holistic model: the competencies students may be demonstrating; the learning that should 13