RAPPORT Vol 3 RAPPORT Vol 3 Issue 1 | Page 58

RAPPORT Volume 3 Issue 1 (2018) In 2018, the 70% assessment weight apportioned to individual reflective learning journal in 2017 was split into two components, with 20% for formative learning and :50% for summative learning. As most students fulfilled the criteria for the 20% assessment, the average grade here is higher, impacting on the year on year final average grade comparison, and largely explaining the grade differential between 2017 and 2018. A comparison of the final reflective learning journals, without e-portfolios in 2017 and with e-portfolios the following year, shows an average grade that is remarkably similar across both years. Students’ average grade for the final reflective learning journal in 2017, without using e-portfolios, was 64.8%, compared to 64.73% in 2018 for the final reflective learning journal (e-portfolio collection). Therefore, this doesn’t support the hypothesis that e-portfolios improve learning outcomes. Similarly, it can’t be said that they adversely impact on learning outcomes. Looking at the other assessment components, students’ average grades for the group report were higher by 2% in 2018, while average grades for the group video were lower by 6% in 2018. When combined averages are compared for both years, i.e. 62% in 2017 and 60% in 2018 the difference is an average of - 0.6% when cumulative weighting of 30% is applied, i.e. a marginal difference overall. The main thing that can be said here is that, overall, Michele’s grading was broadly in line with Geraldine’s, with slightly higher average marks for the group report, lower average marks in the group video, and almost identical marks in the final reflective learning journal. The main difference is due to the 20% formative assessment learning. When this is factored in, and allowing for weighting, the average grade for the reflective journals with e-portfolios was 68.1% in 2018, while the average grades without them was 64.78% in 2017. When adjusted for weighting this accounts for a positive average grade increase of c.2%, not significant, but reassuring in terms of assessment. However, this could be down to other factors, which need to be considered in the next cycle, for example did groupwork on the video suffer due to the additional workload of developing e- portfolios for the first time? Step 4: Evaluate (3) Evaluating the ePortfolio as Assessment AS Learning The assessments developed by Geraldine were designed so students would engage with theories of creativity in their own contexts, effectively learning by doing and then reflecting on what they learnt by engaging with the theory through their own experiential practice. While there were some issues during implementation (outlined above) the way they were dealt with provided additional in-class collective learning on the process of introducing new technology to enhance learning. By the fifth week of the semester students began to work more collaboratively (for example, sharing tips on how to manage the functional aspects of the e-portfolios). Halfway through the semester Michele asked some students who had developed fantastic reflective journal pages if they would show them in class, and they did so in Weeks 8 and 12, also giving tips on how they managed to add the creative content. This clearly demonstrated the 57