RETURN
edited 7/14/01

Abstract

Multimedia portfolios combine a number of philosophical beliefs valued by the instructor, but which are usually hard to see clearly in practice. These include integrating technology into the curriculum as a natural and essential part of learning, creating a student-centered educational environment, encouraging students to use many of their "intelligences," and offering projects which are rigorous and possible for all students. The objective of this project is to teach students how to create CD and Web based professional portfolios that will foster an inquiry approach, and help shift ownership and responsibility of learning to the learner. In addition, the tools developed with this project will promote a reflective stance during which design and technology students will be engaged in "revisiting and revising their ideas over time". Such a reflective stance will allow the learner to not only step back from experiences but also to form connective links to rethink past experiences in the context of new ones, and ideally to develop ways of applying those insights to future endeavors in the workplace of the 21 st century.

Rationale and Significance

A multimedia professional portfolio has value as both a process of assessment and evaluation and as a product of the process. As is true in many processes, the whole is greater than the sum of its parts. That is, the meshing of self and collaborative evaluation with products that demonstrate the outcomes of those evaluations is greater than either the processes or the product alone (Newby, Stepich, Lehman, Russell, 2000). Consideration will be given first to the value of the process and second to the value of the product.

Developing a professional portfolio is a complex, thought-provoking process of self evaluation - reflection, decision-making, and goal setting - that takes place over time and in authentic contexts. Beginning the process with students, allows the portfolio to be a vehicle for career-long professional development and a source of unrivalled personal satisfaction (McKinney, 1998; Newby, et. al., 2000).

Adding a multimedia component to the portfolio development process combines a number of philosophical beliefs valued by the instructor, but which are usually hard to see clearly in practice. These include integrating technology into the curriculum as a natural and essential part of learning, creating a student-centered educational environment, encouraging students to use many of their "intelligences," and offering projects which are rigorous and possible for all students.

Additional value is attributed to the portfolio itself, the product. A professional portfolio is a display of individual goals, growth, and achievement, as well as a testimony to acquired knowledge, and professional and personal attributes (Burke, 1997).

Through their portfolios, the students are expected to show competence in five areas: aesthetics; problem solving; communication; research; and out-of-class activities. At the end of the student's program these areas serve as a basis by which instructors, peers and potential employers can evaluate a students skill level.

Finally, a professional portfolio has value as a source of self-satisfaction and pride. Like all symbols of growth and success, portfolios help stir feelings of accomplishment. Unlike awards given by others, portfolios are a celebration of both self and collaborative evaluation.

In summary, the value of professional portfolios is both actual and potential. They are credible vehicles of reflection, assessment, evaluation, and means of communication. With the increased pressures on higher education to justify itself, in terms of its visible contribution to the economy the professional portfolio provides both the university and potential employers with tangible evidence of the students' ability to apply abstract concepts to current business issues and opportunities (Henkel, 2000). The professional portfolio also allows students in underrepresented population groups to develop and refine their written and multimedia communications skills as well as develop methodologies to market themselves to the digital workplace of the 2 I't century.

Project Goals

At the time this program was conceived 6 major goals were established: 1) helping students integrate learning and business needs; 2) assist the students with the processes of goal setting, reflecting upon growth, and recognizing achievement; 3) developing reflective decision makers; 4) developing an awareness of the special requirements of their industry of choice; 5) understanding of professional as well as personal attributes that contribute to their respective industries; 6) helping young professionals engage in collaborative dialog with other professionals.

In addition to the original goals established, the University supports a strong technology and interdisciplinary thread which is woven throughout its programs. The portfolio will allow the students to hone their technological skills during their formal educational process, and provides them with a set of skills the will encourage then to continue to grow throughout their careers.

Objectives

Through their portfolios, the students are expected to show competence in five areas: aesthetics; problem solving; communication; research; and out-of-class activities. At the end of the student's program these areas serve as a basis by which instructors, peers and potential employers can evaluate a students skill level.

Portfolios may also foster an inquiry approach and help shift ownership and responsibility of learning to the learner (Graves and Sustein, 1992). In addition, they promote a reflective stance during which design and technology students may be engaged in "revisiting and revising their ideas over time" (Wade and Yarborough, 1996). Such a reflective stance allows the learner to not only step back from experiences but also to form connective links to rethink past experiences in the context of new ones, and ideally to develop ways of applying those insights to future endeavors.

Market Need

It is now standard procedure to make initial contact with a potential employer via a hard copy or digital (e-mail) text resume. The resume is often not an accurate source of information about the student candidate, they have a tendency to be full of words but give few details due to their 1-2 page length. They also have a tendency of focusing on the past and not on what the candidate is capable of doing. Due to the constraints of the r6sum6 employers may inadvertently miss an opportunity to hire an employee that would be a valuable asset to the company, or may hire a person that looks good on paper but does not possess the skills required for a given position (Sullivan, 1999).

The professional portfolio could address the two problems noted above by allowing the perspective employer to review actual work in order to assess its quality. By looking at actual work samples the employer will often find student candidates that appear to have "insufficient experience" on their rdsum6 actually have capabilities beyond their years. They also allow the prospective employer to assess creativity because they give the candidate leeway in the work they include and how said work is presented in the portfolio. This practice gives organizations more exposure to actual work being done by other firms and in institutions of higher education, thereby, providing a form of benchmarking and competitive intelligence. Because portfolios take some effort they demonstrate a degree of commitment on the part of the student candidate. The portfolio can focus on what the student candidate will/can do as opposed to what they have done in the past.

Institutional Utilization of Electronic Portfolios

California State University Sacramento, Portland Stated University, University of Illinois at Chicago, and Valley City State University utilize electronic portfolios for program evaluation. Florida State University, Illinois State University, Longwood College, Ohio Northern University, Seton Hall University, Wartburg College, and Wheaton College utilize electronic portfolios for career planning. It is the goal of this project to enhance the utilization of multimedia portfolios for program assessment and career planning, as well as utilize them as lifelong leaming tools.

Project History

During the summer of 2000, a literature review was conducted to determine industry needs and the viability of integrating multimedia portfolios into the Instructional Technology program at Philadelphia University. Based on the research findings, a pilot study was conducted during the Fall 2000 and Spring 2001 semesters with new Instructional Technology (IT) students in the Foundations of Instructional Technology course. The pilot denoted the benefits of integrating the portfolio process into the program.

... I pulled out my e-portfolio that you made us do. I made some minor changes but it was great cause it showed some things I had done. I had the interview ... and felt it went well ... most of all I want to thank you for getting me ready, even though I didn't know I should be!!! - Sandi Margolis, IT student 2001

Project Development Strategy

It is envisioned that the portfolio design, development and integration project will be completed in three phases over the course of two academic years. Phase I of the project addressed data gathering, prototype design and development, and defining student guidelines. During the Summer of 2001 a design and development team comprised of 3 faculty members and 4 graduate students developed four professional portfolio prototypes for the following career tracks: K-12 technology coordinator, corporate instructional technologist, higher education instructional designer and fashion designer. The team also developed a portfolio template to assist students with a limited knowledge of software tools design the alpha version of their portfolios, and web based student and faculty resource sites that provides guidelines, samples and supporting documentation for the portfolio process.

Phase 11 of the project will address creation of faculty presentation materials, identification of pilot population, design of assessment tools, development of the Learning Center student support for portfolio documentation, developing integration and advisement guidelines for the Career Center, and studying the pilot population. This phase will start in Fall 2001 and continue through Summer 2002.

Phase III of the project will address the assessment of the alpha group students, revision of the prototypes, templates, and student support materials, as well as documenting the finding and observations, developing faculty implementation instructions, working on an implementation package and integration plan other selected Colleges and Universities. This phase would start in the Fall 2002 and continue through Fall 2003.

Funding Sources

Phase I of this project was fully funded by a Philadelphia University Faculty Technology Grant. It is envisioned that Phases 11 and III will be funded by external grant sources. The projected cost for Phase 11 range from $30,000 to $400,000 depending on the implementation options selected. With Phase II - Option 1, graduate students in the Instructional Technology program will support the study group, the faculty members will not receive financial compensation for their research efforts, the multimedia labs will not be upgraded, and the project would be extended by one fiscal year. With Phase 11 - Option 11, alumni would be utilized to support the study group, faculty members involved in the research project would receive one course release per term for the life of the project, and the multimedia labs will be upgraded with the software and hardware required to support the design efforts.

If external grants were not acquired in a timely fashion Phase II, Option I would be implemented and Phase III would be placed on hold. Once external funding sources were acquired the project could continue as designed.

Project Impact

The following courses and departments will be impacted by Phase II of this project:

Undergraduate Courses

· T126 CAD for Fashion

· T 722 Fashion Layout and Portfolio Development

· L91 I Contemporary Perspectives

Graduate Courses

· MC72 Foundations of Instructional Technology/Current and Emerging Systems

· MC78 Research and Development in Instructional Systems

· MC80 Interactive Media I

Student Support Services

· Career Center

· Learning Center

Resources

Bruder, 1. (January 1993). Alternative assessment: Putting technology to the test. Electronic Learning, 12, 4 22-3 1.

Burke, K. (1997). Designing professional portfolios for change. Arlington Heights, IL: IRI/SkyLight Training and Publishing, Inc.

Graves, D. and Susstein, B. (1992). Poq/61io Portraits. Portsmouth, NA: Heinemann.

Henkel, M. (2000). Academic identities andpolicy change in higher education. Philadelphia, PA: Jessica Kingsley Publishers.

McKinney, M. (Winter, 1998). Preservice teachers' electronic portfolios: Integrating technology, self-assessment and reflection. Teacher Education Quarterly, 25, 85, 103-110.

Newby, T., Stepich, D., Lehman, J., & Russell, J. (2000). Instructional Technologyfor Teaching and Learning: Designing instruction, integrating computers, and using media. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill.

Philadelphia University. (2000). Graduate Catalog. Philadelphia, PA: Philadelphia

Philadelphia University. (2000/2001). Undergraduate Catalog. Philadelphia PA: Philadelphia University.

Slaughter, S., & Leslie, L. (1997). Academic capitalism: Politics, policies, and the entrepreneurial university. Baltimore, MD: The Johns Hopkins University Press.

Sullivan, John. (April 1999). Resumes Stink, Start Asking for A Portfolio, Career Path. Available: htty://www.careerpath.com [7 June 2000].

Wade, R.C. and Yarbrough, D.B. (1996). Portfolios: A tool for reflective thinking in teacher education. Teaching and Teacher Education, 12, 63-79.


TO TOP