Foothill's Online Courses will begin adding an ePortfolio option as soon as the new version of our course software (EtudesNG) comes out next year. Right now it's in the testing phase...so I took the "guided tour" which the Open Source Portfolio (OSP) consortium offers. Here's my first impressions -- not all of them positive!
Dear OSP Designers,
I'm a Foothill
College
faculty member (English Dept) with interest in the future of ePortfolios.
Found out about your OSP project from Vivian Sinou, our Foothill College Dean of Online Everything. Decided to take the guided tour. Since you asked for first impressions, and even offered up an email address, here's a few of my reactions:
1. COLORS, PHOTOS, AND STORIES: Great idea to use individual stories to help organize the guided tour presentation. Definitely makes it seem more "human" and accessible. Loved the colorful Matrix and splashy graphics too.
2. JARGON: While impressed, overall, with the architecture of your OSP, I'm disappointed with the word-choice, especially the labelling of key functions (hey, remember, I'm an English Professor--so I'm picky).
Specifically, I found some of your key categories/concepts to be tedious, jargony, techy, confusing and overall and off-putting for low-tech types like myself.
For example, your "CIGs" category is an excellent concept -- but how many people know what a CIG is without being told first? Couldn't you just call them "Groups" or "Discussion Groups" or spell out "Common Interest Groups" without resorting to the acronym. And yes, I'm well aware that savvy net-users have been familiar with this particular acronym for years. But what about the rest of us?
There are numerous instances of similar (unnecessary?) "tech-talk" in your presentation software. For example, does everyone have to learn what webDAV is? Couldn't this be explained, in terms of its function, a bit more simply?
3. A related concern was the (relative) lack of concrete examples to click through when it comes to content. I realize things are still in the very early stages, but it would sure help if, say, Jennifer had a full portfolio of presentations, essays, reports, projects, community service, and other activities we could click through.
4. Absent this richer portfolio content, the general impression I'm given by your guided tour is that that the whole eportfolio experience will boil down to checking off boxes in a rigid matrix, filling out tedious forms, and receiving mildly insulting one-sentence comments from faceless instructors who check "incomplete" in my matrix box and send me back to the drawing board unassisted.
5. Another area of concern is the lack of an "administrator," "parent," or "employer" in your spectrum of user profiles. Aren't these people potentially key participants in the ePortfolio process also?
All these areas point to the need for a richer, more robust, more user-friendly set of examples and functions than what has been provided so far. These richer, more robust examples might (in turn) spell the difference between an "oh god, do we have to?" response to a "Wow, this looks like fun" reaction. From "gotta-do" to "wanna-do is a long journey. But without the "wanna-do" factor, will instructors and students ever really "wanna" use this thing in the first place?
Recent Comments