Case Study: Newcastle University, Use of e-portfolios to develop a reflective approach in medicine
Why this elearning approach was used
- E-portfolios were developed as a method to help foster a reflective approach to evidencing the achievement of both module-specific and program learning outcomes.
- The system had to be easily deliverable but sufficiently flexible for use in different contexts.
- The e-portfolio can be used on a "stand-alone" basis but is best integrated with virtual learning environments (VLE).
The context in which it was used
- Throughout the final three years of their study (Phase II), students are dispersed over a wide area in the North East of England where their training and administration are provided by four regional clinical centres called "base units". Physically, students are not located on campus.
- Before the implementation of e-portfolios the process was entirely paper-based -> the document was often very complex in print and inconvenient to carry around in hospitals in A4 format.
- Introduction of new pedagogy supported by e-portfolios-> summative assessment in Year 4-student selected modules and annual appraisal.
Anticipated problems and challenges:
1. Students are dispersed over a wide geographical area, spending 3 years located at various hospitals administered by one of the five regional base units, thus, reliable access to web-based resources is essential.
2. Students with high workload and tight deadlines require an efficient and reliable system. Challenge: the creation of a system which is easy to use and intuitive.
3. Students might wish to continue using a paper copy.
4. Curriculum leaders were rightly cautious on introducing new technologies, particularly "high stakes" assessment.
The design
- The e-portfolio was designed to be highly flexible and configurable on a programme and year-group basis.
- The design needed to support a constantly changing programme with multiple entry points.
- The implementation of e-portfolio includes support of a range of different pedagogy for different purposes within the curriculum including:
1. Provision of a framework for recording and evidencing "high level" programme outcomes during the year to support an end of year appraisal.
2. Provision of a framework for recording and evidencing student derived objectives when they will be summative assessed.
3. Supporting personal tutoring.
4. Support for recording, reflecting and sharing information including structured and unstructured information.
- Most of the pedagogy follows "blended learning" approach (appraisal & assessment).
Implementation of this learning approach
- The e-portfolio was embedded in the VLE used by medical students.
- Initially on a trial basis with 1st year students (offered a choice: either paper or online versions) and 4 year students to complete an e-portfolio -> mandatory requirement for progression but not formerly graded.
- After some detailed evaluation studies, the log book previously in paper, now became electronic and the year 4 e-portfolio is now formerly graded and counts towards final marks.
- A Teaching Fellowship was obtained in 2005 to extend the e-portfolio to evidence the achievement of high-level learning outcomes to support end-of-year appraisal. Piloted for year 1 students, following successful evaluation is being rolled out across all 5 years of the curriculum.
Comments
New comment
This case study shows effective use of an e.porfolio that contains tools & environments which web users will be familiar with (such as blogs) in a structured, academic way, rather than the free for all that is (or has been) the Web. This 'high stakes' environment, a medical school, demands equally high standards of thinking, development & execution. Clearly, in this case the exercise has proved to be a success. This contrasts with other efforts to incorporate e.portfolios that have apparently failed, such as that tried with part-time students studying midwifery & nursing at Wolverhampton University. One is an example of 'best practice' in the introduction of e.learning, the other is not. At what point would the academic, admin & IT staff at Newcastle Uni Medical School consider what they were doing to be innovative? From a student perspective, these 'digital natives' brought up with this technology, it might have felt like a case of 'about time.' i.e catch-up' rather than 'innovation.' Sometimes the words 'adoption' or 'adaptation' apply.New comment
Hi Jonathan,
I guess you are right cause sometimes the words adaptation or adopt apply. But obviously in this case it was something innovative rather than just adopting e-portfolios. They used it in order to develop a reflective approach in medicine and from students point of view seem rather enthusiastic and interested on this approach. The fact that at the end was a success proves that both parties-teachers and students- were in favor of this and they had worked on this to make it happen!
Regards,
Elena
New comment
Hi Elena
Being a Geordie (born on Tyneside) and once living a short walk away from Newcastle University, the medical school & the Royal Victoria Infirmary I find I am drawn back to this Case Study. It helps to know the geography of the place. From a student's point of view the five centres would be problematic; if you have a car and can afford to run it (& park it) then perhaps not ... but we're talking students here.
If I've understood this correctly efforts were made to develop some kind of reflective contribution to assessments on paper. These would be bundled up and physically transported around the sites I assume. The development of the e.portfolios evolved from this. From the Medical School's point of view the move to the Internet (using an intranet in effect) would be considered innovative.
Newcastle Medical School has a national, if not an international, reputation. It would need to be abreast of innovations in the education of medical students wherever it occured.
Increasingly I am contrasting the activites of Newcastle Medical School with Nottingham University Medical School.
I understand why these instituions, and similar ones, would work in isolation i.e. they don't openly collaborate. Why? Because they are in competition for students and best practice introduction of an innovation will help maintain their reputation.
The Nottinham Medical School 'finessing' of Optical Marking to Computer Based assessment is in itself another evolution, rather than innovation (jsut my point of view of corse) ... whilst their development of ways to accommodate students with a disability using what they call 'hotspots' and 'drag & drag' in an examination setting I feel is innovative.
New comment
Hi Jonathan,
Reputation of these two medical universities then tend to led them having their own system development and they do not actually promote collaboration among universities.
The evolution and the innovation matter you had mentioned which I liked very much the discrimination you made. It is surely an innovative approach the one for the disable students.
Regards,
Elena