No abstract

This article considers the various uses of e-portfolios in an educational context and looks at the particular characteristics of the electronic version of portfolios. It then focuses on the application of the e-portfolio as an assessment method. A case is made for the use of the e-portfolio as an appropriate end of course assessment process where learning objects are the basis of the course design. Evaluation data from such a course is presented. This is a post-graduate online course run by the Institute of Educational Technology at the Open University. Conclusions are drawn from the evaluation about the appropriateness of eportfolios as an end of course assessment method. E-portfolios in lifelong educationAs with all terms that have acquired the prefix 'e', e-portfolios are an adaptation of the original concept, in this case portfolios, to the electronic domain. The 'e' could and no doubt will be dropped, but in the meantime, it is useful to highlight the specific features that electronic access and digitisation provide to the portfolio process compared to the paper-based versions of portfolios.There are different uses of educational portfolios, prepared for different purposes and using different kinds of resources producing a taxonomy of electronic portfolios in order to discuss and classify examples:• those for developmental purposes; • those for presentation purposes; • those for assessment purposes.LaGuardia College in New York has embraced the e-portfolio developmental approach which they define as:

No abstract

The list of barriers and enablers identified as influencing the use of open educational resources (OER) is extensive. However, factors and influences relating to reuse have often been noted within projects operating within a short time span, or subject to other specific conditions which limit generalizability. Evidence of reuse in practice has often emerged as isolated examples or anecdotes independent of context. While technical barriers and enablers to reuse have been well addressed in literature on reuse, from reusable learning objects (RLO) to OER, less attention has been given to the purpose of reuse and the motivation of those who choose to share or use reusable learning resources. Which factors have impact or influence on reuse, and how they relate to each other, is largely unexplored. This paper draws on a longitudinal cross case comparison of five facilitation initiatives within UK HE which represented differing approaches to reuse activity (i.e. sharing and use) (Pegler, 2012). Coding and comparison in that research identified 222 factors related to reuse and suggested three broad and distinctive categories representing the type of factor associated with reuse activity (or lack) within project and other contexts. These were: Technical (the technical or technological systems or processes supporting reuse, including licensing and rights issues); Quality (the way in which sharers or users may establish or interpret the quality of one resource or reuse service relative to another); and Motivation (the purpose or motive underlying engagement with the activity and the conditions that this may suggest). The relatively independent effect of these factors, and the way they appear to influence reuse, recalls the classic two factor theory of motivation by Herzberg (1968).

The use of virtual learning environments (VLEs) has become increasingly common in most higher education (HE) institutions. Recent developments have proposed the interoperability of software systems and content, to create component VLEs in contrast with the integrated, monolithic ones that are currently prevalent. This paper examines the student experience of two VLEs, one integrated approach and the other component. In general, students preferred the component system, although this may have been influenced by other factors such as performance. Although the study is limited to one cohort of student it makes a number of suggestions relevant to anyone deploying a VLE. These are that the component approach is a viable one from a student perspective, the broader context in which the VLE operates is important in student perception and that poor system performance may have unpredictable consequences for the learning experience.