Learning by design VS Design based research

Dr. Reeves suggested me use learning by design as my theory framework of my research on e-p.

Meanwhile, we will have the class of Design based research.

I know they are different things because design based research is more like a research methodology when learning by design is a learning theory.

But today maybe we can combine both . Because my intentional research participants, the doctoral student in instructional technology program, are people who are doing or will doing research by themselves.

When I apply blog into e-p of the first year review, it will be a strategy of learning by design for the first year doctoral students.  Meanwhile, that will be a design based research because this e-portoflios research is based on design an innovation on the current e-portfolio base.

I am still not sure whether my though is correct. I need read more. 

Balance between e-Portfolios’ using for summative and formative assemssment

I just finished reading Dr. Helen Barrett and Joanne Carney’s paper of Conflicting Paradigms and Competing Purposes in Electornic Portfolio Development.

It is really a good paper for me because it answered many of my questions.

I have been always wondering why many people gave up updating their electronic portfolios after the class or the program as I saw. Also, when I went to EDIT2000 e-portfolio showcase, I talked to two students and they shew me their artifacts. But one of the students forgot what she did and how to demonstrate the power point slides.

Maybe it was just because she was not familiar with her works. But what is the reason behind these phenomenons? We usually look E-portfolios in Eudcation as :

  • an assemssment tool
  • a tool to help life-long learning.
  • Marketing goal to show the author’s accomplishment to get a job

Barrett’s paper answered my question: There are conflicts when e-portfolio serves both as assessment tools for institutions and story-telling tool to help life long learning. Barrett said, “Portfolios are considered products, and are evaluated summartively to hold teacher candidates accountable for demonstrating particular levels of achievement. Assessment data from portfolios used for this purpose are aggregated to reflect the performance of a particular educational or professional organization. While administrators often implement electronic portfolios for this assessment purpose, students usually view this type of portfolio as something “done to them” rather than something they WANT to maintain as a lifelong learning tool…”

Barret and Wilkerson then put forward a new taxonomy to support institution need for an assessment system and learner needs for a reflective portfolio to support deep learning:

Barret--Balancing Assessment Tool and Reflection learning

Is this a problem of motivation?

There seems at least one problem as far as I saw:

  • When I attended a class ‘s eportfolio showcase. I found one student forgot what she did when I asked her to show her artifacts.
  • Quite amount of students stop to update their eportfolios as soon as there is no longer requirements for that.
  • In fact , the reason of the student forgot what she did is because after she finished it, she threw it away because she thinked she finished the requirement. She will get the “score”.

    These two cases show that many of students don’t think eportfolio as a learning strategy, a reflection tool. They just think it as an assignment or a requirement from their instructors or the school.

    Is this a problem of motivation?

    How could we do with this problem?

    We should make students feel eportfolio is really helpful for their study.

    How could we do to make students feel eportfolio is helpful for their study? Is there anything to do with assessment or evaluation? Could the assessment results make sense to students’ feeling with the electronic portfolios? How could the assessment results affect students’ feeling or understanding with electronic portfolios??

    Could we solve this problem by improve our standard for electronic portfolios?

    Could we make some change with our components of e-portfolios by strength some field of eportfolios?

    ———Collaborative learning.

    Add blog, strengthen the power of collaborative learning and reflection learning.

    Many of students didn’t care about the real meaning of e-portfolios . Why?

    I saw this sentence in a dissertation:”A standards-based portfolio uses hypertext links to clearly show the relationship between the standards or goals, artifacts and reflections.”

    I suddenly recalled it seems all of eportfolios I visited until now have no sufficient links between the reflections and artifacts or goals.

    Am I neglected some points? Maybe…

    I should go back to find that.

    I have a new idea

    I have been always confused because I don’t know who will be my research participants. Should I interview and investigate our doctoral students? Or just our undergraduate students who take class having e-portfolios requirement?

    Suddenly, just now, I have a new thought:it should not be matter either doctoral students or undergraduate students. Both of them are higher education. I may investigate both of them, then give some comparision and summaries.

    Reality is made , not found???

    I am reading someone’s dissertation and found there is a quote like this:

    In the constructivism tene, Bruner emphasized that reality is made, not found. According to him,

    Education must be conceived as aiding young humans in learning to use the tools of meaning making and reality construction, to better adapt to the world in which they find themselves and to help in the process of changing it as required. In this sense, it can even be conceived as akin to helping people become better architecs and better builders.

    I am confusing now because since I was a little chile, I have been educated that science is to discover , not to create the reality. I don’t know why Bruner would like speak as this. Of course we are construct the world as what we are thinking it is. But the reality is there. It won’t depend on anyone’s thinking. I cannot agree with what Bruner said.

    Some thinking about our department’s first year doctroal review

    I read through our IT program’s requirements for the first year review.

    There are several primary components for our coming docotral portfolios:

    • Professional Development Statement
    • Career Goals Description
    • Curriculum Vitae
    • Samples of Work
    • Doctoral Research Ideas
    • Draft Program of Study
    • Program Assement
    • Self-assesment

    I think it is a good rubric, because there are usually 3 components for a good e-portfolio. They are;

    • Review or recording what you are learning (Professional Development Statement; Samples of Work; Draft Program of Study )
    • Your expectation for your learning or your learning objectives;(Career Goals Description; Self Assessment; Program Assessment)
    • Summary. Your weaknesses in your learning process and strategies to make up them. (Draft Program of Study; Doctoral Research Ideas; Self Assessment; Program Assessment)

    Although, there are some blur between these components and their roles, such as Draft Program of Study, Doctoral Research Ideas. They can be viewed both as the recording of the learner’s growth and the summary or strategies for future study.

    Also, although there is a part of self summary: self assessment. Few of my peers wrote their weakness in their self assessment. It may be beacuse this doctoral portfolio will be used to decide whether this doctoral student is fitful for this program’s studying.

    what kind of theory frame work I should use in my research?

    As far as I know about electronic portfolios, it is mainly a tool to relect the learner’s learning progress, to help learner record, think his or her learning and find out the weakness and find out what he or she should do next step.

    After reading some recently published dissertations , I found there are mainly these theory frame for the electronic portfolios:

    • Formative feedback and assessment(Is this a theory frame?) Or could it be substituted by “Evaluation theory”?
    • sociocultural theory
    • Collaboration; collaborative learning;
    • Design / development –based learning theory;

    I am considering the following theory frame works. They are:

  • Evaluation;
  • Reflection literature
  • Design/Development based learning theory
  • Collaborative learning.
  • I am considering about reflection a lot because I think electronic portfolios have more meaning on the learning strategy of reflection than merely as assessment tools. I am also considering adding blogs as a component of reflection learning and feedback part to e-portfolios.

    However , because e-portfolio is traditoinally a effective tool to assess student’s learnign and give feedback.

    Could I use the part of reflection indicator in evaluation theory to cover the part of reflection, and then use evaluation to cover the part of “assessment tool”?

    Also, I saw some people’s dissertaion is about Master students’ experience in development of E-portfolios. We also have a lot of doctoral senior students who developed the e-portfolios in their first year review and I will also begin to develop myself e-portfolios for the same reason. Could I adopt “Design/Development based learning theory” as my research theory frame?

    I am so confusing ……

    I don’t know how to start my research and how to design an experiment to test and collect data….

    I still don’t know what a real social science research looks like….

    …………..