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