Page 1 of 140 Thesis Title: Designing ePortfolios for Music postgraduate study. A practice-led inquiry. Submitted by: Paul Stephensen GradCertCI (DigitalMedia), MastersCI (Communication and Design) A thesis submitted in total fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Masters of Arts by Research in the Faculty of Creative Industries at the Queensland University of Technology 2 George St, Brisbane QLD 4000 GPO Box 2434, Brisbane QLD 4001
140
Embed
Thesis Title: Designing ePortfolios for Music postgraduate ...eprints.qut.edu.au/35751/1/Paul_Stephensen_Thesis.pdf · Thesis Title: Designing ePortfolios for Music postgraduate study.
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
Page 1 of 140
Thesis Title: Designing ePortfolios for Music postgraduate study. A practice-led inquiry.
Submitted by:
Paul Stephensen GradCertCI (DigitalMedia), MastersCI (Communication and Design)
A thesis submitted in total fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of
Masters of Arts by Research in the Faculty of Creative Industries at the Queensland
University of Technology 2 George St, Brisbane QLD 4000
GPO Box 2434, Brisbane QLD 4001
Page 2 of 140
Abstract
Title: Designing ePortfolios for music postgraduate study. A practice-led inquiry.
In this research I have examined how ePortfolios can be designed for Music postgraduate
study through a practice led research enquiry. This process involved designing two Web
2.0 ePortfolio systems for a group of five post graduate music research students. The
design process revolved around the application of an iterative methodology called Software
Develop as Research (SoDaR) that seeks to simultaneously develop design and pedagogy.
The approach to designing these ePortfolio systems applied four theoretical protocols to
examine the use of digitised artefacts in ePortfolio systems to enable a dynamic and
inclusive dialogue around representations of the students work. The research and design
process involved an analysis of existing software and literature with a focus upon
identifying the affordances of available Web 2.0 software and the applications of these
ideas within 21st Century life. The five post graduate music students each posed different
needs in relation to the management of digitised artefacts and the communication of their
work amongst peers, supervisors and public display. An ePortfolio was developed for each
of them that was flexible enough to address their needs within the university setting.
However in this first SoDaR iteration data gathering phase I identified aspects of the
university context that presented a negative case that impacted upon the design and usage
of the ePortfolios and prevented uptake. Whilst the portfolio itself functioned effectively,
the university policies and technical requirements prevented serious use. The negative case
analysis of the case study found revealed that Access and Control and Implementation,
Technical and Policy Constraints protocols where limiting user uptake. From the semi-
structured interviews carried out as part of this study participant feedback revealed that
whilst the participants did not use the ePortfolio system I designed, each student was
employing Web 2.0 social networking and storage processes in their lives and research. In
the subsequent iterations I then designed a more ‘ideal’ system that could be applied
outside of the University context that draws upon the employment of these resources. In
conclusion I suggest recommendations about ePortfolio design that considers what the
Page 3 of 140
applications of the theoretical protocols reveal about creative arts settings. The
transferability of these recommendations are of course dependent upon the reapplication of
the theoretical protocols in a new context. To address the mobility of ePortfolio design
between Institutions and wider settings I have also designed a prototype for a business card
sized USB portal for the artists’ ePortfolio. This research project is not a static one; it
stands as an evolving design for a Web 2.0 ePortfolio that seeks to refer to users needs,
institutional and professional contexts and the development of software that can be
incorporated within the design. What it potentially provides to creative artist is an
opportunity to have a dialogue about art with artefacts of the artist products and processes
in that discussion.
Page 4 of 140
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
I wish to acknowledge the incredible patience, wisdom, knowledge and support of
my primary supervisor Dr. Steve Dillon. Steve has been an exemplary supervisor always
being available to discuss any matters or concerns in a responsive and considered way with
great insight. He has always offered my work to others as being innovative and important
and allowed me opportunities to participate in research opportunities both within QUT and
externally. These few short lines will never be enough to thank him for his professionalism
and understanding in helping me to gain the confidence to write this thesis and the virtues
of tolerance and celebrating the differences of others.
I also wish to also acknowledge my other key stake-holders and supervisors. Dr.
Andrew Brown, Dr. Robert Davidson and Dr. Glenn Smith for their counsel and advice on
the many challenges faced during my journey. I particularly wish to thank the Dean of the
Faculty of Information Technology Professor Simon Kaplan who provided me with the
scholarship to undertake this study. Other critical supporters have been all the staff in the
Creative Industries research office, Professor Brad Haseman, Professor Terry Flew, Dr
Susan Carson. Their assistance has helped me to navigate the research process and journey
in a professional and collegial manner. I also wish to thank Associate Professor Helen
Partridge for her Mentorship.
My life is blessed with many friends who have helped me with proof reading or just
generous smiles and chats over coffee when I complained about late nights and not enough
sleep. Or even just asking me what my research was about. To these I add with enduring
thanks Mr. Brian Smith for his expert advice on writing styles and grammar. To my
extended family and friends who have put up with my long absences from their life, the
many missed family events like birthdays and graduations I thank you as well. I am
eternally grateful to my father Mervyn James Stephensen Senior for the ability to be able to
discuss the views of others in a critical fashion while affirming and respecting the person
who gave that view, this being the most important thing about a debate. Finally, to my
Mother Margaret who is my rock. I can never repay you for your patience, love and
sacrifices that have helped me achieve the completion of this selfish dream. The only way I
can thank you is to dedicate this thesis to you.
Page 5 of 140
STATEMENT OF AUTHORSHIP
Except where reference is made in the text of the thesis, this thesis contains no material
published elsewhere or extracted in whole or part from a thesis by which I have qualified
for or been awarded another degree or diploma.
No other person’s work has been used without due acknowledgement in the main text of
the thesis. This thesis has not been submitted for the award of any degree or diploma in any
other institution.
All research procedures reported in the thesis were approved by the Queensland University
of Technology Human Ethics Committee.
Page 6 of 140
Introduction
Electronic Portfolios (ePortfolios) are difficult to define as the term can be applied
to numerous electronic media. Designing an ePortfolio system for creative artists has been
a great challenge for me as an interaction designer. This is because I felt charged with a
responsibility to learn how to design an ePortfolio system which would allow creative
artists to represent their creative artefacts in a compelling manner when integrated into an
ePortfolio system. In chapter 1 I undertake a contextual analysis to examine how creative
digital artefacts are represented, stored and managed by creative artists and the relationship
and value the viewer places upon them and the original performance of those works. To me
this meant there was a risk that the meaning, intent or ownership of the performance could
be lost or changed if those digital media artefacts were included in an ePortfolio system
without the application of appropriate design protocols (Dillon and Brown 2006). For
musicians creating work for postgraduate study the digitisation and representation of a
creative work is NOT the work itself and may have limitations in its expressive capacity.
In many cases ‘curating’ digital artefacts may even become another kind of ‘art’.
Considering the value and purpose of the artefact was important for the integrity and
intention of the study. It is from this analysis that I framed the research question in this
study as: How can ePortfolios be designed for Music postgraduate study?
Having had nearly 18 years experience and education in the use of Information
Technology I consider myself to be a competent user of Information Technology.
Accordingly, I acknowledge that I have a preference for technologies which have helped
me to achieve success in the past. I also believe that technology can be used to overcome
barriers to learning and allow people to be innovative in developing strategies for
developing new ways of working and living. Accordingly, I acknowledge that not
everyone views technology through this lens. Some impediments to the update of
technology can include technophobia, policy problems and lack of technical support and
access to time to gain comfort with technology (Williams and Castells, 2003). In chapter 2
I describe the application of the Software Development as Research methodology (SoDaR)
(Brown, 2007) which enabled an approach to research and design that privileges the users
Page 7 of 140
in the design and simultaneously includes pedagogical strategies to the design in a client
responsive way (Brown, 2007). In chapter 2 I also provide a detailed analysis and
explanation of how the SoDaR method has helped me to identify these problems by
examining the qualities of artistic knowledge which needs to be built into ePortfolios in the
creative arts. This approach has helped me to reflect further on how ePortfolio designers
can go about deconstructing an ePortfolio system design so that the affordances and deficits
of ePortfolio use can be determined through iterations of user-led design and prototyping.
This exegesis discusses these methods and instruments which were applied the four
protocols of ePortfolio design in a Web 2.0 context (O’Reilly. T. 2005). I have also sought
to design this ePortfolio system so that creative artefacts can be stored on a centralised
University server or allow the ePortfolio owner to connect to and embed their creative
product from external Web 2.0 websites. These websites can include social networking
sites such as Flickr.com, Youtube.com and Last.fm. This process can be achieved by an
institution adapting these suggested design frameworks that incorporate the four protocols
of ePortfolio design applied in this research (Dillon and Brown, 2006).
In Chapter 3 I examine two design models for ePortfolio systems that seek to enable
postgraduate creative arts students to maintain the integrity of the creative product and to
keep music and performances present in the conversation about music. In this research I
have sought to achieve this through extending on existing theoretical research and
problematizing four protocols of ePortfolio design :
1) "Access and Control
Who controls the use of the portfolio and how much control is appropriate?
In media arts, users may have a great deal of technical skill to manipulate
the portfolio. (Dillon and Brown, 2005)
2) Ethics and Rights Management
Confidentiality, intellectual property, copyright. Who sees and owns the
work? (Dillon and Brown, 2005)
Page 8 of 140
3) Implementation, Technical and Policy Constraints?
What are the technical constraints that prevent quality representations from
being uploaded, or who has the skills of access to the technological
gateway? (Dillon and Brown, 2006)What policies
prevent or enhance this access?
4) Representation and Recognition
How is the work to be represented and what is the quality of the work that is
acceptable as an artefact? Can the collection of artefacts capture the
qualities of artistic knowledge effectively?" (Dillon and Brown, 2006 )
It is hoped that these methods may be transferable to others designing ePortfolios
for teachers and postgraduate students. The goal of this process of design is to create
ePortfolios which provide multiple lenses on phenomenon and enable multi-modal
approaches to learning (Lai and Chan. 2006). This is important for postgraduate music
students so they can provide evidence of their learning and achievement in multiple forms
of digital media to support their claims of discipline-specific knowing and their own
learning. In addition to a model for a centralised Web 2.0 ePortfolio system I have also
designed a portable ePortfolio system which allows the postgraduate music student to
provide prospective employers or agents the ability to link to their ePortfolio from a Smart
Web 2.0 business card. This creates a new business relationship between the user of the
portable ePortfolio and the postgraduate student. The portable ePortfolio acts as an Internet
Portal or Kiosk to the postgraduate student’s online version of the Web 2.0 ePortfolio and
the university which houses the ePortfolio system.
In chapter 4 I provide a series of recommendations and conclusions about further
development of the ePortfolio prototypes and design processes. This exegesis acts as an
explanation and examination of theory and critical analysis of designs and context for
ePortfolios in creative arts . These ideas have been applied to the design of two prototypes
which constitute the practice led component of this study. The first prototype can be found
at http://dmap.ci.qut.edu.au/ as documented in chapter 3 Design Outcomes. The second
prototype is attached to this exegesis see appendix 11.
Page 9 of 140
In chapter 4 I recommend my Web 2.0 integration design as design frameworks and
as a policy response to the four protocols of ePortfolio design for Web 2.0 ePortfolio
design and integration. I hope that these two frameworks will inform the creative artist and
university how to develop and integrate Web 2.0 ePortfolios in an equitable way based on
the four protocols of ePortfolio through (Dillon and Brown, 2006).
Page 10 of 140
Table of Contents
ABSTRACT 2
INTRODUCTION 6
CHAPTER 1 CONTEXTUAL ANALYSIS 14
THE STUDY OF EPORTFOLIOS 17
DEFINING THE EPORTFOLIO 19
EPORTFOLIO DEFINITIONS 20
EPORTFOLIO CATEGORIES FROM THE CREATIVE ARTS 23
PRESENTATION 23
DOCUMENTARY 24
CURATED EXHIBITION 25
PERFORMANCE EPORTFOLIOS. 25
INSTALLATION 26
CHOREOGRAPHY 27
REPRESENTATION AND ARTISTIC EXPRESSION VIA EPORTFOLIOS. 27 Table 3: The ethical protocols of ePortfolio design in the creative arts. 31
THE EPHEMERAL NATURE OF MUSIC. 32
REPRESENTATION AND OFF-LINE OBJECTS 34
PRESENTATION 34
THE FOUR PROTOCOLS FOR WEB 2.0 EPORTFOLIO DESIGN IN THE CREATIVE ARTS. 37
CONCLUSION 39
CHAPTER 2 METHODOLOGY 40 Table 4 Research Question Matrix 40 Table 5 Research description by phase and research question relationship 41
Page 11 of 140
Date 41 SoDaR Stages 41 Research question relationship. 41
OVERVIEW OF THE METHODOLOGY 42
BACKGROUND TO THE PROTOCOLS 43
RESEARCH METHODS USED IN THIS PROJECT. 46
THE PRACTICE-LED INQUIRY. 47
SOFTWARE DEVELOPMENT AS RESEARCH. 47
SODAR PHASES 48
Stage 1 Identify activity 48
Stage 2 Software design and production 49
Stage 3 Usage and refinement 50
TRAINING AND FOCUS GROUPS. 51
THE CASE STUDY. 52
THE PARTICIPANTS. 52
PARTICIPANT DESCRIPTION. 52
THE FOCUS GROUP. 53
THE INTERVIEWS. 54
TRIANGULATION OF DATA. 54
NEGATIVE CASE ANALYSIS. 54
Access and Control. 55 Examples of reason for lack of uptake. 55
Implementation, Technical and Policy Constraints? 56
'Representation and Recognition' and 'Ethics and Rights Management' and 'Implementation, Technical and Policy Constraints'? 57
CONCLUSION 58
Page 12 of 140
CHAPTER 3 DESIGN OUTCOMES 59
WORDPRESSMU. 61
HOW WORDPRESSMU WORKS. 62
WORDPRESSMU AS AN EPORTFOLIO SYSTEM FOR POSTGRADUATE MUSIC STUDENTS. 63
MODULAR DESIGN 65
INTEGRATING WEB 2.0 CONTENT FROM SOCIAL NETWORKING WEBSITES 66
TRADITIONAL EPORTFOLIO SYSTEMS. 67 Figure 3.0 Traditional ePortfolio content model 67 Figure 3.1 Previous examples of ePortfolios 68
WEB 2.0 ENABLED EPORTFOLIO SYSTEMS. 68 Figure 3.2 Web 2.0 ePortfolio design conceptual layout 69
PORTABLE EPORTFOLIOS FOR POSTGRADUATE MUSIC STUDY. 70 Figure 4.1 Start the ePortfolio software 71 Figure 4.2 Confirm that you are running the software locally by clicking no 71 Figure 4.3 Start the Apache Server Module 71 Figure 4.4 Starting the ePortfolio 71
SUMMARY 73
CHAPTER 4 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 74
CHAPTER 4 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 74
REFERENCE LIST 80
APPENDICES 89
APPENDIX 1 | FOCUS GROUP SUMMARY 89
APPENDIX 2 | INTERVIEW TINA 95
APPENDIX 3 | INTERVIEW ARTHUR 113
APPENDIX 4 | MOBILE LEARNING STYLES 126
APPENDIX 5 | LIST OF CONTENT MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS EXAMINED. 127
Page 13 of 140
APPENDIX 6 | CONTENT MANAGEMENT SYSTEM SELECTION CRITERIA AND TEST PROCESS 129
APPENDIX 7 SOFTWARE SELECTION CRITERION 131
APPENDIX 8 | TABLE 2.0 SODAR BY PHASE. 134
APPENDIX 9 BARRETT’S WEB 2.0 EPORTFOLIOS CHARACTERISTICS. 136
APPENDIX 11 | PORTABLE ELECTRONIC SMART BUSINESS CARD 138
APPENDIX 12 | CD PORTABLE EPORTFOLIO 139
APPENDIX 13 | RECORDED INTERVIEWS AND FOCUS GROUP. 140
Page 14 of 140
Chapter 1 Contextual Analysis In this research I will be examining the idea of ePortfolio use within the context of
postgraduate music production and study. In the study I will create a design for an
ePortfolio system as required by a student undertaking a 'practice-led' enquiry to present a
prototypes accompanied by an exegesis.
The exegesis will describe the user-led design process and discuss the wider issues
surrounding the design and implementation of ePortfolio systems in the world today. The
research question that drives this research process is: "How can ePortfolios be designed for
Music postgraduate study?". In this exegesis I will begin by undertaking a contextual
analysis of ePortfolios to determine the role of Web 2.0 technologies in their design
affordances and deficits. I then examine these findings against a conceptual framework for
ePortfolios in creative arts. Following this I will outline a practice led methodology for
designing ePortfolios specifically for postgraduate music students’ use. Music studies
include a variety of media and artefacts of research and practice that problematised the
design process. In particular the practice-led methodology will be used as a vehicle for
understanding how the ephemeral aspects of representation of musical experience and
production can be effectively documented. I will describe the design outcomes providing
links to artefacts, examples and interviews/focus groups with participants and raise extra
questions for further research.
"The art of ePortfolios" sought to ‘Construct a new conceptual framework for using
digital technologies in achieving better arts assessment' (Dillon, Nalder, Brown and Smith,
2003). This research used a language which comes from the creative arts and was targeted
towards other researchers and interaction designers interested in developing ePortfolio
systems. It implements metaphors from the creative arts to extract deeper meaning from
their research (Woolcock, 2004). In this study I have sought to contextualise the design of
ePortfolios in a global economy that is driven, in part by, the development of the World
Wide Web and the Internet in academic and the creative industries (Young, 2002).
Page 15 of 140
To be competitive in the international job market new talent needs to be highly
educated, experienced and flexible with high-end design skills (Pink, 2005) (Leadbeater,
1999). Design and knowledge-based skills are highly sought after by industry and academia
as they are seen as tools that will add competitive advantage expressed in new products and
processes (Cunningham, 2002) (Leadbeater, 1999).
Transferable skills and accreditation then become important enablers in
documenting and accrediting these skills sets (Emmett, 2003). This raises questions about
how industry and academia can validate or qualify which talented people are best for their
organisation (Cotterill, Hammond, Drummond , Aiton and .et al. 2005). For employees
who wish to work in creative production contexts, how they represent themselves in virtual
spaces, such as ePortfolios, is becoming a passport which will allow them to participate in
new economic opportunities (Saxenian, 2002) (Ruthmann, Seddon Frederick et al., 2008).
These economic opportunities include new work opportunities and entry into study
programs within more increasingly distributed global economies in businesses that can
often be spread over diverse geographical environments (Flew, 2002) (Pink, 2005)
(Phillips, 2004). For example, Florida (2002) suggests that creative people prefer to live in
large cities (p.ix). This enables creative people who wish to live in cities to have access to
the global economy through e-business solutions, have access to tertiary education and
secure employment opportunities, and the flexibility to be able to choose what sort of
lifestyle they have in their private and work life (Madon, Shirin, Sahay and Sundeep, 2001)
(Florida, 2002).
The rise in the use of information and communication technologies in our society
has enabled larger amounts of people to become educated with high end design, business
process modelling and quality improvement skills (Pink, 2005, Florida 2002 and 2005).
Many academics and business leaders are arguing that these types of skills are in high
demand for globalised businesses. It is suggested that design skills can be used to create
businesses which sell intellectual property via design orientated goods and services which
then operate in a global economy via e-commerce and the Internet (Pink, 2005) (Flew
Terry. 2009).
In the past, creative arts students used their ePortfolio as a collection of digitised
artefacts, including demonstrations, resources and accomplishments that represented their
individual, group, community designs or performances (Feng, 2006). This collection was
Page 16 of 140
often made up of text-based, graphic or multimedia elements which were then archived on
a web site or on other media such as CD-ROM or DVD, (Emmett, 2003). Often this work
was integrated as part of a course-work program such as a bachelors or postgraduate design
course. However, ePortfolios can also be aimed at improving the strategic management of
education programs, documenting knowledge, skills, abilities and learning (Lorrenzo and
Ittlelson, 2005). Furthermore, ePortfolios can be used for the documentation of how an
educational program which helps to develop the programs ability to provide for self
examination or reflection and the monitoring and evaluation of courses (Harper, Hauville,
et al,. 2006) (Nalder, Dillon, Brown and Smith, 2004). Barret discusses how ePortfolios
are generally viewed by educators as an assessment process or as a tool for reflecting or
referring to the students learning:
“According to Arina, blogs make visible what you have learned and we could
use blogs as a meta-cognitive tool (something I have advocated ever since I
started blogging). Further, Arina says that we could connect reflections through
the use of wikis for abstraction and generalization, referring to Kolb's
Experiential Learning Model. With Web 2.0 technologies, we are moving from
browsing to aggregation. … When educators think of portfolios in education,
they assume the purpose is for assessment. But I always ask, "What kind of
assessment?" As I have discussed in my previous online papers, there are
several approaches to assessment, and thus to portfolios. First, here is a
comparison of these two key assessment purposes, based on work done in
Britain by the Assessment Reform Group (see www.assessment-reform-
group.org.uk)” (Barrett H. 2007)
An examination of the literature that examines the use of I.C.T. and Web
Technologies shows that there is the potential for a new relationship to be created between
the student and their design work, the student and the employer, and academia and the
global economy (Phillips, 2004) (Klug and Katz, 2005). This is a radical departure from the
previous view of many ePortfolio theorists. This is because the ePortfolio was seen as a
tool for sharing academic or creative design work. This research discusses these new
relationships and provides examples of the literature and contexts which provides evidence
of this and discusses these views.
Page 17 of 140
The Study of ePortfolios Gardner argued that it would be of benefit if we could develop a tool that allowed
for assessing and identifying the different types of intelligences and strengths individuals
possessed and how to assess those multiple intelligences. (Gardner, 1985).The main point
from Gardner’s application of these ideas in the Harvard Project Zero Arts Propel Project
was to:
"1) Provide portfolio assessment and models 2) Undertake domain
projects to discover what ePortfolios would provide as a digitised version
of the physical portfolio." (Dillon 2009: personal correspondence).
(Brisbane, July 2009). (Davidson, 1992)
Gardner’s work provides some long termed examples of projects which fostered
the use of paper based process portfolios so that students could demonstrate their deeper
learning and document changes in the way that they think.
The study of ePortfolios began in the 1990's when educators began exploring how
the sharing of a student's achievements could be documented and shared with others by
using personal computers, the World Wide Web and the Internet. Butler-Songer (1996),
examined how the personal computer, the World Wide Web and the Internet could be used
to create an Internet-infused learning environment. Butler-Songer examined the use of
Internet and telecommunications network such as where and how they would enhance
learning and teaching (Butler-Songer, 1996).This research sought to allow students to
undertake ‘genuine scientific inquiry' in the context of a school science classroom. Butler-
Songer (1996) concluded that for an Internet-infused learning environment curriculum to
be effective it needed to adapt a coordinated approach that included:
‘... the design of a coordinated, distributed-learning approach to guide
the development of cohesive and relevant understandings.' (Butler-
Songer, 1996).
Page 18 of 140
Studies such as Butler-Songer's have contributed to highlighting the complexities
involved in the on-line publishing of ePortfolios. Understanding these complexities allows
us to gain a more meaningful appreciation of the positive and negative effects that the
World Wide Web and the Internet have in relationship to ePortfolios. This is because the
technical limitations that technology brings with it are juxtaposed against the human
expectations of students, teachers and key stake-holders who wish to interact with such
systems (Emory, 2007) (Harper, Hauville K , et al. 2008).
The literature on the evolution of ePortfolios discusses how an ePortfolio should be
defined and on the different research methodologies that could be used to steer such
development projects (See for example: (Abrami P and Barrett H. 2005). The ePortfolio
literature also focuses upon how a particular ePortfolio software solution can be used and
what the particular affordances of the software are to the potential clients (See for example:
(Gibson G and Barrett H. 2002). Ravet, for example, provides and explanation of how new
Web 2.0 technologies could effect Web and Internet technologies incorporated into an
ePortfolio system supplier’s ePortfolio frame work (See for example: (Ravet, S. 2007). It is
the complexities of customising ePortfolios to educational use that Ravet discusses as one
element of this work:
“The last point I would like to address in this introduction is that of complexity. The world is
complex, learning is complex, the management of learning processes is complex. Yet, most
activities on learning technology, and even more on standards, are aiming at simplifying the
world, using technology as a kind of shoehorn to force life's complexity into a series of predefined
machine readable forms. Some believe that by simplifying the world's representation it will be
easier to manage. For them, everything has to be expressed into XML schemas, because what we
want is machine readable ePortfolios and CVs because we want machines to do the work that
humans can't do (like reading thousands of applications for a job offer). The question one should
ask is whether when describing individuals into a set computer readable data we are not in reality
simply reifying (thingifying)” (Ravet, S. 2007.p2)
It is suggested that it is the affordances of the different types of ePortfolios that are the focus for the arts communities use of ePortfolios.
“For the arts community ePortfolio affordances include:
Portfolios are beneficial, in that they enhance student motivation and engagement in learning,
foster constructive learning, enable dialogue and co-operation between students and their teachers,
provide valid and authentic assessment tasks that are related to the art curriculum, and respect the
voices and personal styles of students (Pereira de Eca, 2005). However, while students are
Page 19 of 140
encouraged to make their own decisions about the art or design project they conduct, and which
pieces of work are included in their portfolios as evidence, the autonomy of decision-making is
difficult for some students, especially where they have no previous experience of critical reflection
or evaluation their own work (Pereira de Eca, 2005).” (Butler P. 2006.p9)
Defining the ePortfolio The ePortfolio is problematic to define as the term ePortfolio can be applied to
many different electronic media. These media can include video tape, digital versatile
media such as DVD's, CD's, USB keys, static websites, weblogs and even user profiles on
social networking sites such as Facebook.com, Myspace.com, Twitter.com, Flickr.com and
Last.fm.
What becomes perplexing for ePortfolio theorists is how we delineate what an
ePortfolio is? And what criteria do we use to identify those portfolios? How might we
design better ePortfolios so that they include meaningful artefacts and digital media
content? These questions are further complicated by the introduction of powerful mobile
devices such as smart-phones which can digitally capture images, video and sound
recordings of a student's performances and upload them to a student's website or Social
Networking profile (Tepper, 2003). Students naturally want to include these digitally
recorded works into their academic studies (Jafari, 2006). How do educators assess the
academic worthiness of these hyper-mobile hyper-media so that they can be included in a
student's ePortfolio? Another important question is how do we ensure that Web 2.0
and earlier style ePortfolio systems allow for user friendliness and academic credibility to
be built into ePortfolio systems (Zimmerman, 1992)? Or has the ePortfolio become so
flexible that they will begin to affect how assessment criteria are applied or constructed for
ePortfolios?
For example Cobcroft, Towers, Smith and Bruns (2006) meta-study suggested that
the learning landscape is pervasive in the lives of students and teachers which is
transported by new and advancing mobile technologies. They construct a view of
contemporary student's use of technology in this profile (see for example appendix 4
mobile learning styles). These traits combine to present a different relationship between
learner and how knowledge is found, shared, expressed, critiqued and communicated.
Page 20 of 140
Richardson and Ward (2005) point out that other researchers are also experimenting
with blogs and Wikis as a tool to assist in approaches to effective ePortfolio
implementation and embedding in an educational institute (Richardson and Ward,
2005.p12).
Jafari suggests that we need to examine web technologies that offer certain
qualities that afford the University and the user a number of affordances. Jafari suggests
that the qualities can include user friendless and ease of use as well as an approach that
caters to the business needs of educational settings, advanced features, broad reaching
technologies, lifelong support and transportable standards of design (Jafari, 2006).
Jafari expresses this hypothesis as a formula of ePortfolio design:
“Successful ePortfolio Project =
I + J + K + L + M + N + O, where:
I = ease of use,
J = sustainable business plan,
K = advanced features,
L = robust integrated technology
architecture,
M = lifelong support,
N = standards and transportability,
And O = X.” (Jafari, 2006.p42)
By reflecting on how we may go about defining an ePortfolio the research of in this
section is suggesting that a web 2.0 enabled web log system may be a suitable vehicle for
develop an ePortfolio systems for creative artists and the creative arts.
EPortfolio Definitions The United Kingdom’s Joint Information Steering Committee (JISC) provides a
succinct definition of an ePortfolio. An ePortfolio is:
"..the product created by learners, a {purposeful ...sic} collection of
digital artefacts articulating learning, experiences and achievements."
(JISC. 2007).
Page 21 of 140
However, as Hallam and McAllister (2008), suggests, the ePortfolio needs to be a
'purposeful' collection of materials as defined in the JISC definition (JISC, 2007). Hallam
argues that an ePortfolio should be more than a random collection of digital files and links.
This creates an important link to creative arts ePortfolio systems. For example Cobcroft,
Towers, Smith and Bruns (2006) propose that the learners of today are digitally literate,
may already have a multiple web presences, and are interested in sharing the do-it-yourself
approach to creating and sharing creative product (Bruns A. 2007). With this in mind it is
important for ePortfolio designers to ask:
"Does a Facebook.com, Myspace.com, Twitter.com, Flickr.com and
Last.fm profile count as an ePortfolio?" (Ravet, S 2007.p1).
Ravet asks us to reflect upon this important question of ePortfolio design and Web
2.0 integrations of how we should go about integrating these new technologies into
ePortfolio systems. Ravet states:
"So, if the World Wide Web allows everything to be connected to
everything, the immediate question that comes to mind is: what are the
limits of my ePortfolio? Are MySpace and SecondLife - two of the spaces
where I create meaningful artefacts and develop social relations - part of
it? Or could I decide to have my ePortfolio Island on SecondLife to
create, store and share my ePortfolio? Would that mean that my
ePortfolio is part of SecondLife? Which contains the other? It is clear
that this question could not have been asked about paper portfolios or
even online paperless portfolios. The nature of the new media transforms
the nature of the ePortfolio and its dialectic." (Ravet, S 2007.p1).
As Emory warns us in education environments that can change swiftly that learning
management systems designer need to be able to integrate the needs of different
generations. Emory has found that:
“An emerging generation of users influenced by social networking
experiences and empowered to create, publish, appropriate and
redistribute content may find the structures of the LCMS traditional and
inflexible in contrast with the user-centered approach of Web 2.0
services.” (Emory, C. 2007.p2)
Page 22 of 140
The JISC definition suggests we can start to develop more flexible types of
ePortfolio systems that will allow more Web 2.0 functionality to be included. JISC argues
that an ePortfolio should support an argument for advancement in:
1. "Supporting an application, e.g. for study or for a job
2. Supporting transition, e.g. into a new employment situation
3. Supporting teaching, learning and assessment, e.g. the assessment of
learning (summative evidence of achievement) or the assessment for
learning (a formative process that encourages students to reflect on their
learning activities and outcomes)
4. Supporting professional development planning (PDP) and/or
continuing professional development (CPD)" (JISC. 2007).
Thus combining the JISC definition and Ravet’s ePortfolio definition ePortfolio
designers can start to define a Web 2.0 ePortfolio as a distributed Internet-infused virtual
container of a person's evidential learning which becomes the ePortfolio (Richardson and
Ward 2005). The ePortfolio may be able to demonstrate the ePortfolio owners' evidential
learning and achievement over multiple forms of digital media to support their claims.
These multiple forms may include profiles and artefacts uploaded to Social Networking
sites such as Facebook.com, Myspace.com, Twitter.com, Flickr.com and Last.fm. Through
my own design processes and research I note that Web 2.0 ePortfolios have unique
qualities that affect how we assess creative practice (Thompson, 2007).
Bruns for example provides us with evidence that Web 2.0 content hosted in social
networking sites needs to be addressed as students are wanting to integrate their user led
products and processes into educational tools such as ePortfolios. Bruns suggests this when he
states that there is a:
“…a growing need for education to address and problematise the
process and practice of user-led content creation itself, in order to help
participants develop a more informed, self-reflexive, and critical
perspective on their own practices as information seekers, users, and
providers, and to enable a wider range of participants to engage
successfully in user-led environments.”(Bruns, 2007.p1)
Page 23 of 140
EPortfolio Categories from the Creative Arts Through examining prior research have identified six different creative arts
categories of ePortfolios by aligning them to metaphors drawn from the creative arts which
can be integrated into a Web 2.0 ePortfolio system. These categories are:
1. “Presentation;
2. Documentary;
3. Curated Exhibition;
4. Performance;
5. Installation; and
6. Choreography.” (Dillon and Brown, 2006.p423)
Presentation Presentation portfolios are a quintessential part of the creative arts as they help to
document presentations. This is because the presentation of one’s creative works provides
extra understanding of the fundamental elements of performance, aesthetics and the
philosophy of performance which relates to the performative nature of experience.
The presentation ePortfolio presents examples of a creative artist's creative product in a
structured way. Importantly, the viewing of the ePortfolios is different to the viewing of the
performance as the ePortfolio has a different temporal nature. By this I mean that the
inclusion of a digitally recorded performance within an ePortfolio presents us with
interesting challenges. This is because of the following reasons;
1. The presentation ePortfolios are presenting us with new opportunities to reflect and
review that performance in a non-linear format.
2. This would be done via the ‘presentation ePortfolio' and not via the viewing of the
original performance in the real world which is normally how these types of
reviews are carried out.
3. The presentation ePortfolio allows us to frame 'new presentational opportunities' for
a presentation portfolio to become a new performance itself.
Page 24 of 140
4. Perhaps the performance within the presentation ePortfolio and the interaction and
design elements within the presentation ePortfolio will be something akin to a meta-
performance.
Thus the meta-performance within the presentation ePortfolio may allow the original
performance to be re-examined in new and interesting ways, creating new opportunities for
new ways of discussing the performance within the presentation ePortfolio.
Documentary When students select critical moments on a DVD and present it in a documentary
style about their artistic performance it can be a powerful method of creating a new type of
multimedia résumé. Students could use these kinds of representations to provide evidence
and strengthen their argument in convincing employers or agents of their employability.
With the advent of new Social Networking sites such as Youtube.com and
Vimeo.com, the uploading of documentary videos is achieved relatively easily. These new
technologies can allow for the documentary ePortfolio becoming shareable between Social
Network users (see for example http://viemo.com and http://youtube.com ). This
technology can create extra dimensions of the performance included within the
documentary ePortfolio. This can be achieved by ePortfolio visitors leaving comments in
the form of text and video posts such as pod casts (Roberts, 2004). The use of web cams
can also be used to link to off-line objects such as sculptures, visual art installations or
project participants
Page 25 of 140
Curated Exhibition The ePortfolio can also be used to broadcast the ePortfolio owner's work in a
curated way. As the curator of an ePortfolio the ePortfolio owner sets the framework of
what will be exhibited and what the work means in terms of visual and artistic forms. In
this way:
‘... the presentation of materials from an ePortfolio can be understood as
an exhibition of works, curated to draw attention to a particular facet of
the materials." (Dillon and Brown 2006.p425).
A curator of a curated ePortfolio would decide how a historical display of creative
works in an ePortfolio should be displayed in the best way to show the importance of the
featured creative artist's works. The ePortfolio curator could also help to establish the
overall aesthetic of a collection of art works to create an objective display of the artworks
in question, as well as providing expert consultation on the scrutinising of works of art to
check their validity of authorship within the curated ePortfolio.
Performance ePortfolios. It is further possible that ePortfolios could one day be designed in such a way so
that the ePortfolio will support the ‘the arts metaphor of performance' in real time. For
example, the use of the ‘the arts metaphor of performance' can help define new types of
simultaneous live performances and digitised recordings that can be recorded and uploaded
to an ePortfolio as the performance is being performed in front of an audience.
These digitised performances can then be presented to a group of peer or teacher
assessors providing summative or formative feedback and assessment. This also helps the
creative arts student to demonstrate their information technology skills which some
students believe can add weight to the student's application for employment or course
acceptance.
Page 26 of 140
Installation The visual art installation ePortfolio suggests that this type of ePortfolio offers new
and interesting ways of expressing complex juxtapositions of art philosophy and visual
ascetics. This is because visual art installations are normally presented in ways that are
dynamic and often non-linear. This allows the audience different opportunities to
experience the visual artist’s work. This occurs because the visual artists often uses
techniques that require their audiences to experience their visual art installation using not
only their vision but also their other senses, such as smell and touch. In adding extra
dimensions to a visual art exhibition the visual artists may choose to include interactive
media or interactive multimedia which means that there is no one set way in which we
should be viewing the installation.
Not all the elements of a visual artist’s work can be captured in digital or electronic
format. The sensations that we experience from touch, taste, smell and the psychological
feelings associated with visual art installations are some of those non-quantifiable outputs.
However, with the advent of Hyper-media such as websites and weblogs and social
networking sites such as Facebook.com, Flickr.com, Last.fm and Youtube.com this could
potentially change. The visual artists can now go about creating an ePortfolio which allows
for them to create a Digital Story which can have many different story lines or different
presentational hierarchies and different methods for measuring tastes and feelings which
can be achieved by a range of survey tools available on the different Social Networking
sites. Barrett (2005a) defines Digital Story-Telling as:
"Digital Storytelling is the modern expression of the ancient art of
storytelling. Digital stories derive their power by weaving images, music,
narrative and voice together, thereby giving deep dimension and vivid
color to characters, situations, experiences, and insights. - Digital
Storytelling Association" (Barrett 2005a).
I think that it is important to note that Digital story telling does not just sit in the
installation ePortfolio category but rather that digital story telling would cut across a
number of the other categories. This is because narrative is an integral part of the work of
creative artists whose performances rely on digital media. In a sense all digital artists create
digital stories and these unify all electronic portfolios categorised here. The difference
Page 27 of 140
perhaps is that the narratives allow multiple pathways through the data and hence multiple
narratives. It has been suggested that a combination of digital storytelling and new hyper-
media such as installation ePortfolios can allow the visual artist to create an ePortfolio
which has the following characteristics:
"... Ability to have dynamic and programmatic Web sites {sic ... which}
can provide an ever-changing folio presentation that, like an installation,
may never be the same at each visit. Such algorithmic structuring of
materials can be manually prepared, as were the original art and music
works that used these procedures, or they can be automated with scripts
that select materials for presentation based on specified rules." (Dillon
and Brown,2005.p426)
Choreography The organisation of physical bodies in time and space is the art of choreography.
Dance problematises the capture of bodily gesture. This has implications for ePortfolios,
for example, while a dancer will be moving throughout a physical space in an ‘elegant
fashion' the digitisation of this process changes this relationship between the dancer and the
space and the choreography. This is because of the choreographer's ‘information space’,
where in the creative arts, choreography is a creative arts metaphor for navigating through
space within the real world.
Representation and artistic expression via ePortfolios. Human society has represented and communicated knowledge via gesture in dance,
song and visual art for 50,000 years before the invention of print:
"Think of the paintings in prehistoric caves. Thanks to them, we now
know what certain prehistoric mammals looked like! [Cave paintings]
preceded the invention of writing by 30,000 years! Those people left
us with veritable archives of the fauna of their time...” (Eco, Gould,
Carriere, & Delumeau, 2000, p.40).
Page 28 of 140
EPortfolios and Web 2.0 technologies that can present these forms of knowledge in
a unified and accessible form can provide an opportunity to reactivate the compelling
message off these media. Marshall McLuhan believed that the medium that is used to send
the message influences how the message is perceived (McLuhan, 1996). With the design of
ePortfolios the representation of artefacts takes on both ethical and value laden dimensions.
Print technologies have helped us to create a framework of reference, which has
helped us to create a shared history and common understanding of artistic representation
and artistic expression. For example, we now have an understanding of the works of
famous artists such as Van Gogh. This has been achieved through the codification of his
works through the study and practice of art history by art historians who have been largely
published through print.
Other media are now available to help us study artistic representation and artistic
expression but print is still the main method used to discuss the histories of artists and their
works. Print technologies allow us to go about, storing, representing, communicating, and
expressing valuable cultural ideas, Print based assessment systems are the most common
way in which we have gone about codifying artistic representation and artistic expression
within academic creative arts environments. This is most often done through summative
and formative text based assessments using print technologies. This suggests that there is
an imbalance between how we go about assessing our knowledge of the arts in print based
formats and that ePortfolios may help to correct this imbalance (Dillon and Brown, 2006).
From the study of ePortfolios ePortfolio designers are now able to
identify the processes that occur when creative product and experiences are
contextualised from the live performances or installations to the ePortfolio. This
is because the explanation of the performance is often privileged over a
representation of the knowledge itself when displayed symbolic form. By this I
mean that the artistic artefacts and the creative practice that went into these
artefacts can be formulated into a method which details and codifies the creative
practice and processes.
Page 29 of 140
Thus, the process of creating an ePortfolio allows us to organise and
present our creative practice to others through a process which allows displaying
and interacting with them in new and unique ways.
Other examples of digital archiving research demonstrate that this process can be
used to digitise, re-think and reflect on Australian indigenous ideas of ‘knowledge
referencing, management, and communication' (Mackinlay, 2004). Mackinlay's (2004)
demonstrates how this was achieved with sensitivity and awareness of issues relating to
culturally sensitive digital artefacts.
The process of creating an ePortfolio also allows us to organise and present our
creative practice to others which formulates a process that manages and organises our
artistic representations and expressions through the use of digital media and ePortfolios.
The process of digitisation suggests we need to re-think and reflect on how sensitive ideas
embedded in creative product and processes allows for the creation of a knowledge
referencing and management systems in an ePortfolio system. I also have found that we
need to reflect on how we can integrate knowledge referencing, management, and
communication systems which can be codified in an ePortfolio process and systems.
Thus, by discussing and analysing metaphors of artistic practice within the creative
arts I have been able to identify these forms of ePortfolio as being:
1. Presentation;
2. Documentary;
3. Curated Exhibition;
4. Performance;
5. Installation; and
6. Choreography.
Page 30 of 140
We can now start to see how contradistinct qualities of artistic knowledge provide a
means of problematizing the idea of ePortfolios. Problematizing has helped me to reflect on
how ePortfolio designers can go about deconstructing ePortfolio systems design so that the
affordances and negatives of ePortfolio use can be determined. Once determined these
affordances and deficits can help creative arts ePortfolio designers to create a design
solution which meets the needs of a creative arts community. The creative arts is
particularly challenging but rewarding in developing ePortfolios as the creative arts help to
provide us with evidence in multiple formats. For the ePortfolio systems designer there is
the same opportunity that exists within ‘Digital media and information systems' to enable
creative artists to present the ‘capture, store, and manage multiple forms of evidence'
(Dillon and Brown, 2006).
An ePortfolio system designed for and by creative artists would allow them to
capture, store, and manage multiple forms of evidence about their artistic products and
processes. This design model could also be used in other disciplines as the skill set used
can be transferable. ePortfolios use digital media to capture store and represent
experiences. What is problematic about ePortfolio systems in the arts is the ephemeral
nature of artistic product and processes. It is the organisation and representation of
ephemeral artefacts in digitised form which poses questions around the accountability,
rigour and value of the representation that provides useful understandings for other
performative and ephemeral research. The goal here is to design a system that lends itself
to processes which could be more compatible with the individual meanings specific to
artistic practices.
The intricacies of ePortfolio systems design have measured and captured in use and
via an Australian Research Council (ARC) Discovery grant entitled ‘Constructing a new
conceptual framework for using digital technologies in achieving better arts assessment.'
(Dillon, Nalder, Brown and Smith 2003) (Nalder, Brown and Smith. 2004). This study
contextualised the Original D-MAP project which has provided us with literature that helps
to demonstrate the intricacies involved in implementing ePortfolio systems in the creative
arts (Dillon, Nalder, Brown and Smith 2003).
Page 31 of 140
This current research has attempted to establish a re-contextualisation of the
DMAP ePortfolio system by creating a prototype ePortfolio system. From their research
Dillon and Brown where able to ascertain that ePortfolios afforded the creative arts
students the opportunity to, have a number of sites which allowed them to discuss their
reflection about their creative work in a reflective way. These insights have helped me to
contextualise the ‘creative production context' for ePortfolio systems designers who work
with ePortfolio systems within the creative arts. These opportunities are unique as they help
the creative arts ePortfolio systems designer to understand some of the unique insights
which go into the creation of creative product. For example, Dillon and Brown were
presented with feedback from within their stimulated recall interviews from both teachers
and creative arts students who suggested that ePortfolios presented a number of issues
within the creative arts, (see for example table 3).
Table 3: The ethical protocols of ePortfolio design in the creative arts.
Access and Control: Who controls the use of the portfolio and how
much control is appropriate? In media arts, users
may have a great deal of technical skill to
manipulate the portfolio.
Ethics and Rights Management Confidentiality, intellectual property, copyright:
Who sees and owns the work?
Implementation, Technical and
Policy Constraints
What are the technical constraints that prevent
quality representations from being uploaded, or
who has the skills of access to the technological
gateway?
What policies prevent or enhance this access?
Representation and Recognition How the work to be represented is and what is
the quality of the work that is acceptable as an
artefact? Can the collection of artefacts capture
the qualities of artistic knowledge effectively?
(Dillon and Brown, 2006. p424).
Page 32 of 140
An important juxtaposition is created between the ePortfolio designer, the teacher,
student and creative arts community. How to translate ephemeral creative products into a
suitable teaching and assessment system as opposed to an ePortfolio system which just
provides clear or literal numerical grades and comments is often contradistinct. This
juxtaposition leads me to reflect on how we can create and integrate an appropriate
assessment system within the creative arts ePortfolio system? Importantly, it is intended
that any evaluative framework integrated within an ePortfolio system within the creative
arts recognises:
“… graduations of technical and expressive ability inherent in the
product and process.' (Dillon and Brown, 2006.p421).
Attached to this complex juxtaposition is a need to acknowledge that teachers are
also a 'valid instrument of assessment' (Dillon and Brown, 2006). This is because the
teacher has the knowledge of experience and ability to evaluate assessable works and how
any aesthetics could impact on a creative works quality. The teacher also brings to the
students’ experience of creating creative products the live lens of the students experience.
This can be achieved if the teacher is able to interact freely with the students' ePortfolio.
The teacher can provide a level of rigour by discussing with the student progressions of
expressiveness and aesthetic development in their creative works. Teachers can also
provide rigour by provide 'multiple lenses' on the phenomenon. (Dillon and Brown, 2006).
The ephemeral nature of music.
For postgraduate music students their knowledge is often focused on the intuitive
and analytical elements which can be expressed in creative product in many forms.
(Swanwick, 1994). Two main elements are involved in the making of music. Measurable
elements, such as tempo and beat, can be easily assessed in numerical terms and rhythmic
accuracy to is comparable. These analytical aspects of musical knowledge are easy to
measure and quantify. This is because these elements are quantifiable. However, there are
more ‘intuitive aspects' elements within the music making process which come from an
individual’s expressiveness (Vella, 2000).
Page 33 of 140
Expressiveness requires knowledge of the technical expertise which allows the
musician to convey the inherent meaning which allows them to get across the meaning of
the sounds that they produce in a context (Vella, 2000). It is often that the musician is the
only person who can understand the meanings in these contexts as they come from what is
called ‘the embodied experience'. How can ePortfolio systems designers integrate these
types' of contextual symbols within an ePortfolio system?
Music is an interdisciplinary and integrated practice and does not sit outside other
disciplines. For example, music is included in dance, theatre and computer games. Music is
also often expressed as ‘gestures' within these other types of creative productions. We also
see songs being performed in other languages and cultures. The temporality of music can
be documented through the use of multimedia. With multimedia tools we can record and
then unpack each element of the performance so that a greater exegetical explanation can
be placed beside the musical performance. EPortfolio systems can potentially provide a site
and a rigorous process for examination of products and processes. As Polanyi infers the
artefact may not accurately represent the performance. However when the artefact is
accompanied by other evidence of the artists processes the intention of the work may be
more easily conveyed (Polanyi 1967) For the ePortfolio systems designer or owner we are
challenged to provide an information space which speaks of this human performance with
the same resonance as it was performed in.
I have found warnings that ePortfolio systems designers run the risk of not creating
a true representation of the work that was performed. One way of reducing this loss is to
record performances with more than one camera or microphone thus providing us with
more than one digital view of the captured performance. This kind of approach has been
used commercially with ‘directors cuts’ on DVD format that allow a multiple perspective
and an opportunity for a stimulated recall conversation around the art work that makes the
understanding potentially richer. This helps to provide a more trustworthy lens on temporal
performances. Other methods which can afford more honest and trustworthy perspectives
on artistic products and processes and their artefacts. This can include captured data from
multiple sources that help to build rigour within creative arts ePortfolios.
Page 34 of 140
Representation and Off-line Objects Representations are fraught with the potential for error as they rely on the human
interpretation. Likewise digital media and multimedia are also open to misinterpretations as
they can be vague (Dillon and Brown, 2006). EPortfolio designers need to consider that a
sound recording is a filtered artefact of a performance. The ephemeral nature of sound and
indeed its temporality presents the possibility of multiple interpretations. What is important
to the musician is that they select recordings and artefacts that represent their work and are
aware of what the technology conceals. In some cases using the ‘directors cut’ style
approach a musician may use multiple recordings of the same performance. The ePortfolio
can then be used to provide an artist selected representation of the performance the
technology used in the ePortfolio What is important here is that the artists is satisfied that
the performance has been represented in a light that allows the viewer to perceive the
intended meaning.
To provide accountability via an ePortfolio system, the creative arts will need to be
able to include creative product that is able to be incorporated from external online sources
which can be verified via an audit trail that can validate authenticity and authorship claims.
Just as importantly, offline objects of creative product such as buildings or sound
installations as part of a stand-a-lone performance will also have to be capable of being
included in a creative arts ePortfolio.
We should also be aware of the extra effort that accountability may incur needs to
be weighed up against time spent in making and presenting art. There is an ethical
responsibility to self in this process. With the advent of Web 2.0 technologies the inclusion
of geographical meta-data and possibly annotations will help in providing deeper thought
on how offline objects can be included into ePortfolios from the creative arts. This type of
meta-data may be able to be used to provide an audit trail.
Presentation In this section I will discuss presentation as a style of ePortolios. To the creative
artist, presentation is an essential element of creative product. This is because the creative
artist also have to show how they went about demonstrating their understanding of the
creative product processes they created, performed and designed. This is referred to as ‘the
Page 35 of 140
performative nature of experience' or presentation. This is because presentation needs to
include a:
‘... temporal unfolding which will be easily explainable and understandable as a
performance'(Dillon and Brown, 2006).
Thus we see the ePortfolio providing us with opportunities for performativity of the
ePortfolio to emerge. To some artists using an ePortfolio is itself a performative action.
This is because the creation of the ePortfolio is seen as a type of performativity. This
enhancement needs to be based on the understanding that the computer has a special
position where it is both the tool for constructing the portfolio and the medium in which the
construction takes place..
Importantly, as ePortfolio systems designers and owners we need to be aware that
digital media offers us certain elements which both promotes the advantages of technology
used but that also remove ‘the scope of the ePortfolio'. Sculptors, for example, have unique
skills in how they can talk about the media that they work with and they examine the
strengths and weakness of the media that they use on a constant basis for each project.
Therefore, if ePortfolios are to be more effective ePortfolios developers will need to be
guided by those who have expertise in each creative arts discipline. Nattiez provides
examples:
"1. according to expectations of performers and audience,
2. according to standards of judgement proper to the culture,
3. in terms of context proper to particular performance, and
4. in terms of analogies with the listener's way of perceiving the world in
general” (Nattiez, 1990.p 66).
Often students in tertiary arts based institutions have advanced skills in website
design. It would be optimal for the student to have full access to the aesthetic technologies
for controlling the aesthetic of the ePortfolio. Using the model developed for this project
this is achievable by the use of customizable themes. Creative arts students may also have
advanced e-commerce skills which will allow them to develop creative product which
represents their creative performances which they may wish to sell online. This can be
achieved by small software programs known as plug-ins.
Page 36 of 140
The ability to sell digitised creative product has become possible through the use of
e-commerce solution. Flickr.com is one such an example where a photography student can
share and upload their photographs, share them with their friends, protect their work by
using a Creative Commons License and offer that work for sale to the public or the
Flickr.com community. Part of the Flickr.com community experience is the leaving of
feedback and comments by the community and public.
Another example is Last.fm which is an online music community which allows its
users to upload their music and make it available for free listening by the public or Last.fm
community. Last.fm has a technology which then allows the listener to purchase the music
from iTunes.com.
Another example is Last.fm which is an online music community which allows its
users to upload their music and make it available for free listening by the public or Last.fm
community. Last.fm has a technology which then allows the listener to purchase the music
from iTunes.com.
Other examples include CDBaby.com which is a website that helps independent
musicians sell their own music online without the need for the major record labels to
become involved. The user could be a music student who is interested in setting up their
own record label, for example. As Barrett suggests an import part of Web 2.0 ePortfolio
design will be the selection of an appropriate software platform that will have the
affordances of Web 2.0 software such as the Wordpress bloging system:
“With Web 2.0, an ePortfolio is really an aggregator of my work that is
stored at many places online: video in video sharing sites like YouTube,
Vimeo, blip.tv, etc.; images in Flickr, Picasa; documents in GoogleDocs,
scribd.com, or lots of other locations; audio in Myna, etc. What we lack is an
aggregator. We need a database to keep track of our online content, sort of
like a database that we can use to organize our personal content, wherever it
resides on the web. If you look at the report that was written by Ian Fox in
NZ, a database of personal/academic content, that can be meta-tagged, is the
missing link.” (Barrett, 2010).
Page 37 of 140
Finally, as part of this contextualisation of the study of ePortfolios in the creative
arts I have re-adapted the four protocols of ePortfolio design:
Access and Control Ethics and Rights Management Implementation, Technical and Policy Constraints? Representation and Recognition (Dillon and Brown, 2006 )
The protocols where developed from feedback back from the original ARC study
‘Construct a new conceptual framework for using digital technologies in achieving better
arts assessment' (Dillon, Nalder, Brown and Smith, 2003). Lorenzon and Ittleson (2005)
also found these four protocols of ePortfolio design to be critical reflective design questions
(p.4). Other researchers have come to similar conclusions in identifying these protocols as
important to ePortfolio systems design see for example The feedback provided the
following suggestions for developing a suitable ePortfolio model for a creative arts based
ePortfolio system below. I have reinterpreted those protocols which should now allow for
the sale of creative product and the appropriate treatment of creative product from creative
arts students below.
The four protocols for Web 2.0 ePortfolio design in the creative arts.
In the following section I will examine the questions arising from the study of literature
and in particular those emerging from the re-examination of protocols within a web 2.0
ePortfolio context and integrate my own research findings with that of the context review.
1. How does a tertiary institution identify and manage the ethical implications that
may arise from when a research student uploads audio visual materials into a student
ePortfolio?
The use of Web 2.0 integration tools and third party websites allows the ePortfolio
user to manage the ethical management issues themselves.
Ethical standards control then becomes an issue for the research student and the
third party Web service provider and not the responsibility of the tertiary institution.
Page 38 of 140
This is achievable through the third party Web-services terms of service agreement
which often states the ethical restrictions and relationship between the people using
their services at the point of sign-up.
2. Who owns the intellectual property and the copyright of those audio-visual
materials integrated within a student ePortfolio?
The student should always have full control of the intellectual property and their
creative work at all times. The student created the work and designed the work.
However, the tertiary instition should retain the right to disallow access to uploaded
audio visual materials if the materials contravene local and state laws such as
decency, pornography or the violation of international copyright laws.
A Web 2.0 model which uses third parties Web-services can allow the student to
control their own intellectual property by signing a terms and services agreement
with some providers.
The appropriate service needs to be chosen as some Web 2.0 sites and third party
providers assume control of intellectual property when it is uploaded.
3. Who owns the ePortfolio? Is it the student or the institution?
The student always owns the ePortfolio. To protect their intellectual property the
Web 2.0 and third party services model allows for the audio visual materials to be
protected by the terms and service agreement of the service provider. This is
because the audio visual materials are stored on the third party services network of
computers and not the learning institutions.
4. Who is responsible for the costs of the storage of the ePortfolio and
artefacts?
It is the responsibility of the tertiary institution to provide the cost of the ePortfolio.
However, if a research student does elect to use a Web 2.0 integration model the
research student would not normally be charged for hosting or the downloading of
Page 39 of 140
material from their external provider to their tertiary institutions ePortfolio system.
This means the research student dose not have to pay for the hosting of their audio
visual data but can still have the option of integrating those materials into tertiary
institutes Web 2.0 based ePortfolio system.
Both these options are then able to be integrated into a Web 2.0 and third party
provider services in a tertiary institute’s ePortfolio system through the use of a
small piece of software, known as a plug-in. I have suggested an approach to
achieving this in the methodology section of this exegesis
This allows the research student to have full control of who has access to their audio
visual files when they are integrated via the use of Web 2.0 websites and third party
services.
Conclusion In this chapter I have examined and analysed, through a contextual analysis, the
deeper meanings of the text and provided links to other authors that help inform us of what
ePortfolio systems may be able to be developed. I have sought to treat artefacts from the
arts appropriately in a reflective manner. It is important to note that Dillon and Brown’s
research was undertaken in 2002-6 at a time when Web 2.0 was in early stages of
development. From Dillon and Brown's work I have been able to examine the metaphors
used and lessons learned from a synthesis of their conceptual framework and a contextual
and literature examination of recent design and technology to develop an interaction and
design methodology which I discuss in the next chapter.
Page 40 of 140
Chapter 2 Methodology In this chapter I discuss the methodologies and design processes applied to the
research question. Table 4 summarises the research activities phases of the project linked to
the research question. Table 5 reflects on the Software Development as Research phases.
The remainder of this chapter discusses the other elements of the design processes and
interaction and design techniques used to achieve the creation of two ePortfolio system
models proposed and prototyped.
Table 4 Research Question Matrix Activity number
Activity description
A1 Context analysis.
A2 Examination of the learning environment and identify potential
project participants.
A3 Examination of the institutional policy.
A4 Identifying the learning opportunity.
A5 Identification of appropriate software tools to design an open-
source ePortfolio system?
A6 Refinement and usage.
A7 Implementing a rigorous and accountable approach to design.
A8 Examination of uptake and usage of the ePortfolio system.
Page 41 of 140
Table 5 Research description by phase and research question relationship
Date SoDaR Stages Research question relationship.
A1, A2 and A3.
A2 and A4.
A1
February to March 2007.
Phase 1 Identify activity
First Meeting with key stake holders
Contextual Analysis
Identify Participants
Ethics and participant information.
A3, and A6
April 2007 To January 2008. d
Phase 2 Software design and production
A focus group
Document Design Requirement
Interface Feedback
Request for Functions
Test Functionality
Design Requirements
A1, A4, A5, A6 and A7
July 2008
to
November
2009
Phase 3 Usage and refinement
Interview Participants
Report and document case studies and
publish findings.
Recommend changes for the next
iterations.
A1, A5, A6 and A8
See appendix 8 for a full description of the SoDaR activities and phases.
Page 42 of 140
Overview of the Methodology This study utilises an interactive design-based practice-led enquiry to ask how
ePortfolio designers can design ePortfolios for Music postgraduate study. Practice-led
enquiry according to Schön is about examining:
"the situations of practice - the complexity, uncertainty, instability,
uniqueness and value conflicts which are increasingly perceived as
central to the world of professional practice" (Schön, 1984).
Schön's notions of reflective practice underpin the design of this study through developing
the idea of ‘knowing-in-action'. In applying these processes designers reflect on the activity
of practice iteratively informed by ‘making work- design' and critically reflecting on it and
further interrogating the process by reflective consultation of peers (Haseman, 2006)
(Schön, 1984). What ePortfolios potentially provide is a flexible and accessible location to
discuss and critique art through collaborative digital processes. Schon’s notions of
reflecting on and in action can be expanded to include ‘through’ action (Schön, 1984). The
ePortfolio then becomes part of a dynamic and collaborative reflective practice.
This study seeks to develop a prototype ePortfolio system that embodies and
extends upon a conceptual framework for ePortfolios applied to tertiary music research. It
adapts Schön's theories to present a tangible model that enables us to see the problems of
design of ePortfolios for research with a new lens. This lens helps us to extract deeper
meaning from the data collected through the design process which is built into the
methodology. These relationships will be examined over seven discrete research stages as
summarized in this table 5 (see appendix 8 for more detail). This process of iterative
reflective practice and creative production has allowed me to ‘dive in' (Haseman, 2006) and
attack the problem and start building prototypes as potential solutions. This approach
provides rigour and accountability that would help ensure that this project would be
appropriately documented and inform the design and production processes in a clear and
client responsive way.
As a confident Information technology user I have a bias towards technologies that
I have had success with and have tended towards a view of technology as something that
can enable new approaches to ways of working and living.
Page 43 of 140
However, not everyone sees technology in this light and techno-phobia and many
other impediments to uptake of technology can often stand in the way of large scale
adoption of what may seem obvious, innovative and useful advances to me (Rura-Polley
and Baker, 2002) (Williams and Castells, 2003). To counteract these aspects of personal
bias and to privilege the users in the design process I have adapted an iterative multi-
methodology called Software Development as Research (SoDaR) (Brown, 2007). This
approach to method has allowed me to combine an iterative approach of design and
pedagogical development (Brown, 2007) (Cotterill, Hammond, Drummond and Aiton et.
all, 2005).
This methodology also incorporates ‘practice-led enquiry' in the form of my
practice as an interactive designer that allows me to investigate the deeper meanings of the
research project through experiential knowledge gained in a studio based environment and
applying critical ‘reflection-in-action' and ‘reflection-on-action' (Schön, 1984).
The identification of the underlying problems in design were further achieved by a
process of critical context review involving the examination of open source software
programs which could be used to build the ePortfolio system (Appendix 5). This allowed
me to examine the affordances and problems of access and user-ability inherent in current
systems. This allowed me to develop an interaction and design model to address these
problems.
This interactive 'studio element' of the research allowed me to customise and install
an experimental design Web 2.0 ePortfolio system. (Haseman, 2006) (Dillon, Personal