Consideration factors and adoption of type, tabulation and framework for creating e-portfolios

Abstract

The purpose of this research is to analyze the content of e-portfolios created by students in order to understand their tabulation and ways of displaying content. The analytic result shows that the number of outcome portfolios created by students is more than that of process portfolios. The five types of e-portfolio tabulation, in order of those most commonly created by students, are combination-based, content item-based, work-based, course unit-based, and time-based. The combination-based type incorporates the advantages of other tabulation types, while the content item-based and work-based types are better for clearly classifying data and step-by-step organization of it. Future research may further explore factors related to students’ decision of tabulation type, the difficulties they face in the process, and their mentality as they adopt a portfolio type.

Introduction

As Internet usage becomes more widespread, e-portfolios represent an advantage over traditional portfolios in terms of storage, access, management, interactivity, real-time functionality, and presentation method. E-portfolios have the capability to digitize information and organize content through hyperlinks (Barrett and Garrett, 2009, Lorenzo and Ittelson, 2005). Compared with paper-based portfolios, they also have the added value in terms of keeping records, connecting ideas, relating information, and publication (Barrett, 2006, Barrett and Garrett, 2009). Portfolios are categorized based on intended purposes, include outcome, process, assessment, and reflective portfolios, presentation, showcase, and assessment, etc (Abrami and Barrett, 2005, Greenberg, 2004, McPherson, 2007, Tillema and Smith, 2000). Of course, portfolios differ not just in terms of student’s learning process but also their particular personal styles as well. Also, the way in which content is collected, organized, and displayed is very important in creating an e-portfolio. However, portfolio content differs according to the proficiency of the student who created it, resulting in different types of portfolios. Therefore, the purpose of this study is to explore whether student e-portfolios can be categorized, and if so, what these categories are. This is one of the motivations for this study.

In terms of structure, e-portfolios favor systematic organization rather than random displays of data (Lee, 2006), and this organization is essential for helping viewers quickly get a grasp of the student’s learning process. The tabulation of the portfolio provides a communication interface as well as a way to exchange information for its viewers, which is the only way for them to interact with the portfolio. In e-portfolios, tabulation is similar to the concept of website navigation, the primary function of which is to help viewers browse information. Navigation aids are often a part of web design, such as hyperlinks, search indexes, and tabulation. At the same time, good web navigation enables users to efficiently execute tasks and locate information quickly, which not only influences data retrieval, storage, and management, but also affects how information is obtained, produced, and organized (Barrett, 2006, Barrett, 2010, Barrett and Garrett, 2009, Ntuli et al., 2009, Oskay et al., 2008, Tubaishat et al., 2009).

Tabulation, which refers to a set of buttons arranged according to a specific method and order, has both the navigational mechanism and hyperlink functionality. Its primary function is to help viewers interact with portfolio content. It is similar to a navigation tool which includes category indexing and searching functionality, serving to organize the overall structure of the portfolio and facilitate interaction with users. It is therefore apparent that design of a portfolio’s tabulation has a significant influence on how content is organized and presented. Tsai, Lowell, McDonald, and Lohr (2003) found that much of the time students spent creating e-portfolios went toward designing an interface and arranging the order in which content was presented, showing that organizing a good portfolio can present quite a challenge. Therefore, deciding on a suitable tabulation type or method of organizing content for students to follow can make it easier to create a good e-portfolio.

Wang’s research (2004) establishes three categories of e-portfolio navigation interfaces: folder-style menus, double level style menus, and guide map style menus. Different types affect the performance and attitude of learners as they navigate the portfolio, and portfolios are divided into these three categories based on navigation interface and button types. The three types of tabulation are irrelevant to the content items of an e-portfolio or the learning process of a student. Are they exactly the types of tabulation used in all e-portfolios? That remains to be researched. Kuo (2004) proposes several types of portfolio organization based on fields of study, content item, student works, chronological order, etc. These organization methods are relevant to the portfolio content items and the student’s learning process, and may be used as a reference in designing the tabulation of the portfolio. However, they are designed for paper-based portfolios. Should e-portfolios have similar tabulations with those of paper-based portfolios? Or should they employ a different form of organization? And can these forms be categorized? These unanswered questions interested the researcher, and prompted exploration and induction of the types of portfolio tabulation used by students, forming the second motivation for the research.

In summary, the purpose of this research is to analyze the content of e-portfolios created by students in order to understand their tabulation and ways of displaying content. Portfolio structure refers to the way in which students use hyperlinks to organize and link portfolio content according to a specific method. Portfolio structure includes tabulation, navigation design, and links between different items in the portfolio. Questions to be explored include: (1) Can e-portfolios be categorized in terms of content, and if so, what are these categories? (2) Can portfolio structure be categorized according to tabulation, and if so, what are these categories?