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