In this Chapter I will outline the design outcomes of this research beginning with a discussion of the context and definition of web 2.0 portfolios and their origin and then describing how the contextual and theoretical analysis has led to the design that has been implemented here.
Tosh and Werdmuller (2005) and Barrett (2007) suggest that ePortfolio systems could be built using extensible mark-up language and Web 2.0 technologies which would allow for an ePortfolio to use weblog technologies (p2). Tosh and Werdmuller argue that:
“Use of the Electronic Portfolio (ePortfolio) is rising around the world and in particular the US and UK. Two main purposes of the ePortfolio include: promotion of student centred learning and reflection; career planning and CV building. Weblog use has grown rapidly leading to the development of some excellent programs for keeping a daily online ‘diary’. This report explores the possibility of merging weblog technology with ePortfolios, creating a platform for learning reflection. ePortfolios and weblogs: one vision for ePortfolio development. Edinburgh: The University of Edinburgh.” (Tosh and Werdmuller, 2004.p2).
Barrett (2007) believes that Web 2.0 ePortfolios could be designed with the following characteristics. Barrett lists these as:
“In summary, as I review all of these comparisons, I have designed an ePortfolio that considers the framework of Web 2.0, which I call ePortfolio 2.0. Other terms might be “blog-folios” or “wiki-folios” or perhaps iPortfolios (i=interactive ) (Refer to appendix 9 for the full table of characteristics) .
Barrett (2007) discusses the affordances of interactive ePortfolios that use Web 2.0 technologies and asks to reflect on these. Barrett argues:
“What are some of the advantages of an Interactive Portfolio? Just as the Web changed with the implementation of the architecture of interaction, we could say that portfolios have the potential to change with the pedagogy of interaction, especially as used within a paradigm of assessment for learning. With these new tools, we can post work and invite feedback, as in a blog; we can post work and invite co-authors, as in a Wiki. Fortunately, Wiki tools keep track of the changes, so that authorship can be tracked, if that is important for accountability. As I wrote in the Connected Newsletter (2006)” (Barrett, 2007)
This project has drawn specifically upon the Web 2.0 ePortfolio system design models of Barrett (2007) and Tosh and Werdmuller (2004) to create a Web 2.0 interactive ePortfolio system.
