CONNECTED 2007 INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON DESIGN EDUCATION
9 – 12 JULY 2007, UNIVERSITY OF NEW SOUTH WALES, SYDNEY, AUSTRALIA
ePortfolios and collaborative dialogues between professionals and
graphic design students enhance educational outcomes
Mary-Jane Taylor and Coralie McCormack
School of Design and Architecture and Centre for the Enhancement of Learning, Teaching & Scholarship,
University of Canberra, Canberra, Australian Capital Territory, 2601, Australia
ABSTRACT innovation that facilitated professional involvement with
During 2005 and 2006 electronic media—Omnium and design education. Students’ questionnaire responses
Gravitron software—were used to trial ePortfolios in an suggested they valued the opportunity to see each other’s
online graphic design learning and teaching environment. work. The lecturer’s reflections noted that ePortfolios were an
Links between students and professional practice were effective tool to develop and capture student learning, and to
established via an online site where students displayed their facilitate collaboration with the profession in an online
individual visual portfolios and engaged with prominent local, educational environment. The paper concludes with a
national and international design professionals in design discussion of these outcomes and the questions emerging for
dialogue and critique on their ePortfolio project work. This on-going investigation.
paper reports graphic design practitioners’, students’ and their
lecturer’s perceptions of the advantages and disadvantages of
I. LITERATURE REVIEW
ePortfolios. Postings from the profession suggested this
approach was a positive innovation that facilitated The advantages of portfolios have been championed across
professional involvement with design education. disciplines and across learning contexts (Chang 2001, Abrami
Benchmarking their work against the work of their peers was & Barrett 2005, Carliner 2005, Challis 2005, Lorenzo &
the advantage of ePortfolios most frequently reported by Ittelson 2005, Milman & Kilbane 2005, Wade, Abrami &
students. The lecturer’s reflections noted that ePortfolios were Sclater 2005, Butler 2006, Lane 2007, Wilson 2007).
an effective tool to develop and capture student learning, and Portfolios can foster authentic professional learning. Butler
to facilitate collaboration with the profession in an online (2006:2) notes portfolios are seen by some tertiary education
educational environment. All stakeholders felt that the visual researchers as more authentic because “they rely on more than
ePortfolios established collaborations with a global one piece of evidence, show development of thinking, and
professional graphic design community which enhanced more accurately represent student ability”. Pereira de Eca
educational and professional outcomes for students. (2005) suggests portfolios provide authentic assessment tasks
that respect the voices and personal styles of students.
Portfolios motivate students to become more involved in
“Digital convergence, affordability, and ease-of-use are their learning, increase their sense of ownership of their work
creating portfolio opportunities for more disciplines while and provide opportunities to reflect on their learning. Students
enhancing the opportunities for fields with long portfolio can showcase their work and document their credentials.
traditions” (Greenberg 2004:30). Portfolios are not new to Portfolios can also act as a catalyst for on-going professional
design assessment. Portfolios showcase design students’ work development.
for teachers, other students and prospective employers. ePortrolios offer particular advantages for design students.
However, “simply collecting work without getting feedback They can integrate multimedia materials, foster multimedia
is unlikely to offer new perspectives that will help the student literacy and so demonstrate technical as well as design skills.
develop and evolve” (Greenberg 2004:30). This paper reports ePortfolios are easy and efficient to store, easy to maintain,
graphic design practitioners’, students’ and their lecturer’s edit and update and portable beyond the life of the course.
perceptions of the advantages and disadvantages of They place students’ work in the public domain where it is
ePortfolios. Students displayed their individual ePortfolios immediately accessible to others (particularly prospective
and engaged with prominent local, national and international employers) across time and across place (local, national and
design professionals in design dialogue and critique of their global spaces). ePortfolios can also facilitate social
work. interaction and design dialogues between students and
The paper begins by contextualising ePortfolios within the experienced practitioners to strengthen the connection between
“emerging field of design research” (Friedman 2007:3) and the teaching and learning in the classroom to the real world of
research literature reporting the use of portfolios and design practice.
ePortfolios as authentic assessment. A description of the case The enthusiasm for the opportunities afforded students,
study context, and the sources of data which provide the basis teachers and employers by ePortfolios has been accompanied
for later discussion, is presented in the following section. The by considered calls for caution (Smith & Tilleman 2003,
results section reports that the analysis of feedback from the Carliner 2005, Tosh et al. 2005, Wilson 2007). Butler
design professionals suggested ePortfolios were a positive (2006:4) suggests that there is an “inherent conflict between
the goals of students and the goals of their supervisors in graduate with a professional and high quality design
constructing portfolios”. Students focus on the use of ePortfolio that showcases their graphic design capabilities
portfolios to gain employment while teachers focus on developed over the whole course.
professional development (Zeichner & Wray 2001). Concerns A trial of Omnium and Gravitron software provided the
around the purpose, pedagogy and assessment have raised online environment for the ePortfolios. Links between
questions such as: What are the goals (expected learning students and professional practice were established via an
outcomes) of ePortfolios and are these outcomes achieved? online site where students displayed the individual visual
Should ePortfolios be simply an electronic version of paper portfolios and received feedback on that work from prominent
portfolios? How can we assess ePortfolios? How is evidence local, national and international design professionals.
in an ePortfolio authenticated? and Could some students be
unfairly disadvantaged by lack of technical knowledge?
III. DATA COLLECTION
Resistance from teachers who feel nervous about requiring
students to use technology with which they themselves are The focus of the investigation reported in this paper is
not comfortable has been noted (Pereira de Eca 2005). Tosh et graphic design practitioners’, students’ and their lecturer’s
al. (2005) argue that issues of student ‘buy-in’ and motivation perceptions of the advantages and disadvantages of
also need to be addressed. Concerns around teachers’ workload ePortfolios. Data was gathered from three sources (the
(Lind 2007) and students’ readiness to take on the level of international group of professional designers, students and the
independence required to produce and self-assess (and reflect teacher) using three methods: questionnaires, analysis of
on) their portfolio (Pereira de Eca 2005) have also been raised. online postings and analysis of reflective journal entries of
Published accounts of portfolios in the field of art and the teacher.
design education are few and tend to focus on learning Interstate design professionals (eg. Adelaide, Melbourne,
contexts other than higher education: elementary school (Lin Sydney, Wollongong), and overseas designers (eg. China,
et al. 2006); secondary school students (Blaikie, Schonau & London, Netherlands, New Zealand, USA, UK) as well as
Steers 2004, Pereira de Eca 2005); and community college local graphic design professionals, provided feedback to
students (Wilson 2007). Indeed, Butler (2006:9) noted “only students on their ePortfolios. The results section reports:
one or two articles…could be readily accessed”. Friedman
• thematic analysis of professionals’ online feedback
(2007:4) suggests this could be because “[u]ntil now, most
postings (12 professionals in 2005, 15 in 2006), and
design research…results are accessible only on a local level
and often lost when projects are finished”. • responses of nine professionals (6 who participated in
The use of ePortfolios in design courses in higher both 2005 and 2006; 3 who participated in 2006 only)
education contexts has received little attention. Though, the to an online survey (Figure 1).
potential of the online environment (and ePortfolios) to
address “a perceived growing dislocation between Thinking back, what were the best aspects of being involved
contemporary design education and professional practice” has in this project for you?
recently been noted (Bennett & Dziekan 2005:2). Bennett and
What was the most surprising thing for you about the project?
Dziekan (2005) have explored the role of online collaboration
Why was this surprising?
in the creative process and Conanan and Pinkard (2001) have
used Studio Zone, a website where students present digital What do you think were the advantages of this site/project for
images of their designs and post asynchronous comments to the students? What were the disadvantages?
each other. Was it worthwhile for you?
This paper adds to this small but growing literature on the
use of ePortfolios in design education contexts. It confirms What do you think the on-going usefulness is for students of a
site like this?
the potential value of the ePortfolio as a context for students
to showcase their work and the appreciation of potential What do you think is 'value added' of ePortfolios for the
employers of the electronic context for reviewing student profession and employers?
work and for matching student competencies with employer
requirements. Fig 1. Online survey questions sent to design professionals,
II. COURSE CONTEXT Students’ perceptions of the unit were gathered in an end of
The University of Canberra, School of Design and semester paper survey (in 2005 and 2006) and then three
Architecture, Bachelor of Graphic Design program’s months following course completion using an online
exploration of visual ePortfolios for assessment of final year questionnaire (2006 cohort only). Response rates are shown
students in the final semester unit Graphic Design 4.2, begun in Figure 2.
in 2005, continued in 2006. The purpose of the ePortfolio
was to showcase students’ competencies and achievements.
Source of student data Number Response
Learning outcomes for this subject included the expectations responding rate
that students would complete projects to a standard ready to End of semester paper GD 4.2 2005=36 64.3%
enter the profession of graphic design and that they would survey GD 4.2 2006=35 60.3%
Online survey 3 months becomes a work of art, rather than a piece of design). Try
post-course completion* GD 4.2 2006=11 91% putting a short standfirst under the headline to help sell an
*surveys could only be sent to those students whose 2007 emails were article, or grab a pull-quote to provide another access
known ie 11 of the 58 students. point for the reader. Make these ‘real world’ elements
work in an exciting way and your design will really stand
Fig 2. Student response rate by source of data.
out to any potential employer! (2005 professional)
The teacher was an experienced educator with considerable The designers engaged with students as design professionals
industry experience. She had taught the subject Graphic and saw them as members of a community of designers. They
Design 4.2 (GD 4.2) over a number of semesters. Her end of addressed students personally, sometimes as a group, other
semester reflections were analysed for emerging themes in times as individual designers.
Last words to the graduates. A great designer is also a
relation to the ePortfolios.
great thinker, always think broadly and laterally, your
passion and endeavors for creativity will definitely make
IV. RESULTS you stand out. (2005 professional)
Comments, if taken up by the students, could facilitate
This section presents three perspectives on the use of
their entry into the design profession and tips included in the
ePortfolios for final year graphic design students. Firstly,
comments provided support for on-going success as a design
analysis of design professionals’ feedback revealed both the
benefits and limitations of online feedback on ePortfolios.
I too would have liked to see some more experimental
Students’ questionnaire feedback and the teacher’s reflections
work. It is all very well being 'work ready' so you can fill
on ePortfolios and feedback in the online learning
a desk space in someone else's studio (what happened to
environment of Omnium follow this analysis.
the last person?) How will you feel in six months, two or
A. Feedback from Professional Designers five years into your professional career? You will
probably ask yourself ‘there must be something more to
Analysis of professional designers’ online postings and
being a graphic designer’. Experiment, make a bold
survey responses suggest three benefits of ePortfolios for
statement show an edge - but also don't loose your
students: showcasing designs to potential employers, an
professionalism. Remember to ask yourself ‘why am I
opportunity to receive constructive and supportive feedback,
special and why should they hire me?’ (2005 professional)
and recognition of students as a member of a professional
Students were able to observe expert designers in
design community. National and international benchmarking
conversation with each other. Professionals read previous
of designs benefited both students and the teacher.
postings and engaged with each other in professional
ePortfolios enabled students to showcase their work to
conversations through their postings.
local, national and international designers.
...it gives the students a quick and simple way of getting While the design experts valued the opportunity to
their work to studios that they may not normally be able to comment on students’ work some also commented on the
reach. (2005/2006 professional) demand on their time. To save time the professional designers
Someone…literally anywhere in the world can get an idea sometimes provided feedback across the portfolios rather than
of their work and literally decide to invite them to an on an individual’s portfolio.
interview based on something they wouldn't otherwise There is quite a lot of work to get through-more than I had
have ever seen. (2005/2006 professional) imagined. (2005 professional)
Students (and the teacher) were able to benchmark their …time to go through all the work, I didn’t to be honest.
work. They gained a sense of the quality of their designs in (2005/2006 professional)
relation to standards both nationally and internationally. The professionals also noted that many students missed an
By any standard the work you have shown on this site is important learning opportunity by not including written
impressive and well executed. Nearly all of the projects comments on their designs.
would stand out in major international student shows. Make sure you have the 'why' and the 'what for' stated on
Some of it would win deserved awards and plaudits. (2005 your details about your pieces of work - it gives guys like
professional) me a much better idea about where your creativity springs
…they have exhibited significant sophistication way from and the motivations for your executions. (2005
beyond what I’m accustomed to seeing anywhere in professional)
student work (I am fortunate in that my job takes me all I agree with many of the other reviewer’s comments
over the world several times a year to look at design from regarding the designer’s writing about their work. Not
schools and professionals in the biz)…and of a high only does it offer context for evaluation, it demonstrates
professional standard. (2005 professional) the ability of the designer to communicate their intentions
A lot of the work here is equal if not better than what I've and knowledge of the brand, content and process. This is
seen from students in the UK. (2005 professional) quite valuable when you are competing for a job or selling
Professionals’ feedback provided constructive and the design internally or to a client. (2005 professional)
supportive ideas for on-going development of individual …it was also difficult viewing so much work out of
student designs. context. The lack of explanation on the student’s part
It is one thing to design a beautiful page but you should means work gets passed over as there is little
also consider the person who'll be reading it (otherwise it
understanding in terms of the brief, the process and the C. Teachers’ Reflections
solution. (2005/2006 professional)
A journey through and initial phase of resistance followed
The design professionals felt their feedback could have been
by phases of growing acceptance emerged from the analysis of
better targeted if it had been constructed with the background
the teacher’s end of semester reflections.
knowledge provided by such comments. They also felt
The introduction of ePortfolios began with many
students would have benefited from practice in written
challenges. Both students and tutors initially resisted this
communication provided through compilation of these
innovation as they considered this direction challenging and
comments. They saw this as a skill immediately transferable
additional work. The ePortfolio included additional authentic
to the professional design context.
assessment activities and the important, but generally avoided
B. Student Feedback task of writing about the project work, and the new and
different task of putting work online. Many students had only
Benchmarking their work against the work of their peers
experienced online learning through the university’s learning
was the advantage of ePortfolios most frequently reported by
management system (WebCT) in a variety of non-core
students in their responses to the end of semester surveys:
subjects. They felt WebCT was an inadequate environment
you can see other people’s work, it helped me improve (2005
and the interface was perceived as generally flawed and so were
uncertain of what lay ahead in the new online environment.
Most students also felt the unit was relevant to their
Some students and tutors resisted the online environment and
professional practice (91% in GD4.2 in 2006). ePortfolios
ePortfolio because they were not confident with a
were: good for self-promotion (2006 student) and relevant to
technological environment, while other more advanced design
industry (2006 student). ePortfolios allowed me to undertake
students and tutors felt the site would be restrictive in its
projects that suited the type of graphic design that I want to
pursue (2006 student), to learn more about the skills needed
By the end of semester students and tutors seemed
to be more professional (2005 student) and to communicate
particularly impressed with the benchmarking aspects of the
work from the entire course (2006 student). I can see how it
ePortfolios and the added convenience and administrative
is useful to prospective employers outside the university
functions provided by the online software. Students and tutors
across all six tutorials were able to view all the student
The positive comments made by students in the end of unit
project submissions online with visual representations and
surveys were reflected in their responses to the online survey
supporting text components. A greater consistency and
completed by the 2006 cohort some three months after course
transparency of project work, reassurance that they are on or
off track, learning from others’ examples, and a greater sense
...it gave me a great way to evaluate myself against other of belonging to a wider group were observed. Tutors
students and made sure that my standard of work was on acknowledged in teaching team meetings that this led to a
par with other students...within the comfort of your own greater consistency and cohesiveness in teaching across the
space and home.. whole cohort, benchmarking of results across all tutorial
You can get instant feedback from professionals in the groups, increased opportunities for feedback to students and
field, you post your work up, they post their feedback and awareness of other tutors’ opinions and approaches. Improved
comments (good or bad) and you take that into administrative functions, such as tracking of progress and
consideration for future projects. submissions in a central location, was another advantage for
A great way for employers looking for junior designers to tutors.
see the level of work out there and also a great way for As the initial resistance was overcome an interesting new
employers to find an employee whose design style will challenge did emerge. A key benefit of ePortfolios—the
suite their studio. feedback dialogues with professionals—has also been
experienced as a disadvantage. Approaching busy colleagues
…it was a great way for my peers and myself to
across time zones across the globe, and then maintaining
individualise the layout and display of our work (that we
these contacts from semester to semester, has been time
may not be able to do with the hardcopy portfolios).
consuming. In 2005 approaches to twenty professionals
Few students commented on the software environment in
elicited twelve participating design professionals. Of the
their end of semester survey responses. Across both year
thirty professionals approached in 2006, 15 agreed to
groups the number of students who commented favourably on
participate. Small irritations with the software, such as too
aspects of usability (8 students) equaled the number of
many places to leave feedback, emerged and were overcome.
students who mentioned a difficulty or limitation of the
Other challenges, such as balancing ease of use for ‘digital
software (8 students). Students from GD 4.2 (2006) post-
novices’ with providing sophistication for advanced students,
graduation comments were similar to the end of unit
remain. The project continues to be ‘under development’.
comments. For example some were positive Omnium
was…functional and displayed the students’ work in a
number of useful ways and some were negative the omnium V. DISCUSSION AND FUTURE DIRECTIONS
site was a little restrictive in terms of what could be
Students’ feedback on ePortfolios reported in this paper
displayed ie very small thumbnails and each student page
reflected the benefits of ePortfolios discussed in the literature
looked the same.
including benchmarking against the work of other students
and showcasing work to prospective employers. The software were contradictory. Some students felt it was
additional benefit for this group of graphic design students “simple to use” while others said “it wasn’t easy to use”. The
was that the prospective employers who were viewing student software was both “easy to navigate” and “easy to get lost
portfolios, and giving feedback on their designs, were from in”. Interestingly, Lane (2007:2) suggested students’
workplaces across Australia and overseas as well as from experience of ePortfolios was influenced “by their experience
‘down the road’. As noted by the teacher in her end of with other online presentations forums”. Similarly,
semester reflections: experience with WebCT was suggested by the teacher as a
The power to reach out to the international design possible factor contributing to GD 4.2 students’ experience of
community became very convincing when a graduating their ePortfolio software. While some students participating
student secured employment at a leading design in this research did comment on the Omnium and Gravitron
establishment in New York as a direct result of the software systematic data was not collected on the use of the
ePortfolios site and the involvement of the alumni in the software in this stage of the research project.
feedback process. While professional designers saw the value of ePortfolios
The postings and survey responses from the design for the students and for themselves, and were eager to
professionals indicated the two learning outcomes for the unit participate, they were disappointed when they could not
aligned with the ePortfolio assessment tasks—‘complete engage with the conceptual basis of each student’s work as
projects to a standard ready to enter the profession of graphic not all students accompanied their design with a written text.
design’ and ‘graphic design graduates will graduate with a Thus some students missed the opportunity to engage in a
professional and high quality design portfolio’—were dialogue about their work. More students may have attached a
achieved. textual rationale to their visual design presentation if they had
Achieving these outcomes was however, not without its been provided with information about how to use an
challenges. Researchers implementing ePortfolios in other ePortfolio to their advantage. As the teacher noted, writing for
disciplines have also encountered issues of resistance and a design students is “a generally avoided task”.
lack of ‘buy-in’ by students and concerns about increased Perhaps the public nature of ePortfolios led some students
workload. Analysis across the experiences of design to focus on presentation at the expense of the professional
professionals, students and the teacher reported in this paper skill of being able to explain their design concept to others.
suggest a number of tensions within each of these challenges. Positioning the online environment as a space for academic
On the one hand, GD 4.2 students were highly motivated. and professional interaction, as well as being the much more
They were in the final semester of their final year and familiar space for social interaction, may be needed for
expected that within a few months time they would be students to fully engage with the potential for dialogue offered
employed as ‘real’ designers, possibly by some of the by ePortfolios.
professionals giving feedback on their ePortfolios. Students’ Some existing studies (see for example, Lind 2007) have
survey responses suggested that they felt able to choose suggested that workload can increase with ePortfolios. The
assessment tasks for inclusion in their portfolio that suited responses of 2005 students in the end of semester feedback
their interests. Receiving feedback online was valued by the indicated that 95% felt ‘the workload was appropriate for a
students. Previously reported research with the same student unit at this level’. The high workload associated with giving
cohort (McCormack & Taylor 2006) suggested these students feedback on both paper and ePortfolios noted in the literature
felt the advantages of electronic recording and delivery of was mentioned by the teacher and by some of the
feedback outweighed the disadvantages and supported their professionals (it was very time consuming and demanding
learning preferences. process with so many students and so much work, 2006
On the other hand, the GD 4.2 teacher’s reflections noted professional). Yet, there was a tension for some professionals
both student and tutor resistance to putting portfolios online. as illustrated by the following comment: The scale of the site
She recalled that students had previously experienced with the numbers of students was a bit unwieldy…and yet I
difficulties with the University’s learning management wanted more! (2005/2006 professional). Rewarding busy
system (WebCT) which seemed to flow over into a lack professionals, especially if you want them to give feedback to
confidence in the new Omnium/Gravitron software. There future student cohorts, needs to be considered. The best way
were new multi-media and technical skills to be learnt by of course is with high quality work (I do love it when I see a
some students and tutors while those whose skills were more really beautiful piece from a student, 2006 professional) and
advanced felt restricted in the new online environment. highly skilled students they will be keen to employ. If
On-going research will need to consider how the students do not participate fully in the online environment
characteristics of the software used to create the ePortfolio and use it to their advantage the value of ePortfolios for both
environment can constrain or enhance the product and the students and professional designers could be lost.
learning process. Student concerns about the ePortfolio The use of ePortfolios for graphic design students in their
software have been reported in the literature, though no clear final year of study reported in this paper represents the
picture is emerging. MacDonald (2004) warns of the potential beginning of our investigations. Yet to come is investigation
of ePortfolio software to both constrain and enhance of questions such as: How did the use of ePortfolios influence
outcomes. Tosh et al (2003:12) noted students’ comments students’ acquisition of generic skills? Did students change
ranged from “too complicated” to “lacking functionality”. their designs as a result of the feedback from professional
Similarly, GD 4.2 students’ comments on the ePortfolio designers? Did they feel more like a ‘designer’ at the end of
the unit? What strategies best prepare students and tutors to Innovations in Education and Teaching International 38(2):
work effectively and efficiently in the ePortfolio 144-155.
Conanan, D and Pinkard, N. 2001. Students’ perceptions of
environment? giving and receiving design critiques in an online learning
The authors acknowledge the research presented in this environment. A paper to the Second European Conference on
paper is a one-classroom-based study with a small number of Computer Supported Collaborative Learning. 22-24 March
participants, and as Carliner (2005) reminds us, single case 2001, Maastricht, The Netherlands, viewed 3 February 2007,
studies limit the generalisability of findings. However, <http://www.ll.unimaas.nl/euro-cscl/Papers/29.pdf>.
Friedman, K. 2007. A new year for design research news. Design
research must begin somewhere. Incremental accumulation of Research News 12(1), viewed 3 February 2007,
information from case studies over time will provide <http://www.designresearchsociety.org>.
information across a variety of classroom settings, across the Greenberg, G. 2004. Extending the portfolio model. Educause
diversity that characterises students in today’s higher Review 39: 28-36.
education classrooms, and across disciplines. “Although the Lane, C. 2007. The power of “E”: Using e-Portfolios to build
online presentation skills. Innovate 3(3), viewed 3 February
use of digital portfolios is increasing, research on this topic is 2007,
in its infancy” (Milman & Kilbane 2005:2). <http://www.innovateonline.info/index.php?view=article&i
Lind, V. 2007. e-Portfolios in music teacher education. Innovate
VI. CONCLUSION 3(3), viewed 3 February 2007,
In this study all stakeholders felt that ePortfolios reviewed d=351>.
by a global professional graphic design community could Lorenzo, G and Ittelson, J. 2005. An overview of E-Portfolios.
enhance educational and professional outcomes for students. EDUCAUSE Learning Initiative. Advancing Learning through
Careful preparation of both students and tutors for the new IT innovation, viewed 3 February 2007,
online environment, and on-going support during <http://www.educause.edu/LibraryDetailPage/666?ID=ELI30
implementation, is needed. The findings suggest “[e]ectronic MacDonald, L. Liu, P. Lowell, K. Tsai, H and Lohr, L. 2004.
portfolios provide a starting point for the type of learning Graduate student perspectives on the development of
communities that higher education will need to offer future electronic portfolios. TechTrends 48(3): 52-55.
students” (Greenberg 2004:36). McCormack, C and Taylor, MJ. 2006. Electronic delivery of oral
feedback on graphic design projects. Proceedings of the
ASCILITE Conference Who’s Learning? Whose Technology?
REFERENCES Sydney, 3-5 December 2006.
Milman, N and Kilbane, C. 2005. Digital teaching portfolios:
Abrami, P and Barrett, H. 2005. Directions for research and Catalysts for fostering authentic professional development.
development on electronic portfolios. Canadian Journal of Canadian Journal of Learning and Technology 31(3), viewed
Learning and Technology, 31(3), viewed 3 February 2007, 3 February 2007,
Bennett, R and Dziekan, V. 2005. Creative waves – international Pereira de Eca, M. 2005. Using portfolios for external
online student design project: Working with the most assessment: An experiment in Portugal. International
interactive community of designers we have (n)ever met, Journal of Art & Design Education 24(2): 209-218.
Designs on E-Learning International Conference Smith, K and Tillema, H. 2003. Clarifying different types of
Proceedings: The University of the Arts, London, England, portfolio use. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education
viewed 23 February 2007, 28(6): 625-648.
<http://www.omnium.net.au/project/research/omnium/paper Tosh, D. Light, TP. Flemming, K and Haywood, J. 2003.
s/>. Engagement with electronic portfolios: Challenges from the
Blaikie, F. Schonau, D and Steers, J. 2004. Preparing for student perspective. Canadian Journal of Learning and
portfolio assessment in art and design: A study of opinions Technology 31(3), viewed 3 February 2007, <
and experiences of existing secondary school students in http://www.cjlt.ca/content/vol31.3/abrami.html>.
Canada, England and The Netherlands. International Journal Wade, A. Abrami, P and Sclater, J. 2005. An electronic portfolio
of Art & Design Education 23(3): 302-315. to support learning. Canadian Journal of Learning and
Buchanan, R. 1998. Education and professional practice in Technology 31(3), viewed 31 January 2007,
design. Design Issues 14(2): 63-66. <http://www.cjlt.ca/content/vol31.3/wade.html>.
Carliner S. 2005. Commentary: Assessing the current status of Wilson, S. 2007. The disappointment of portfolio-based
electronic portfolios. Canadian Journal of Learning and teaching Inside Higher ED, viewed 3 February 2007,
Technology, 31(3), viewed 3 February 2007, <http://insidehighered.com/layout/set/print/views/2007/02/
<http://www.cjlt.ca/content/vol31.3/carliner.html >. 15/wilson>.
Challis, D 2005. Towards a mature ePortfolio: Some implications Zeichner, K and Wray, S. 2001. The teaching portfolio in US
for higher education. Canadian Journal of Learning and teacher education programs: What we know and what we need
Technology 31(3), viewed 3 February 2007, to know. Teaching and Teacher Education 17(5): 613-621.
Chang, C. 2001. Construction and evaluation of a web-based
learning portfolio system: An electronic assessment tool.