Barrett and Garrett’s emphasis on the institution, or
university, controlling digital archives made me think of how we sort of have
online portfolios but they are scattered across different social networks and
drives. The idea of “what happens
when a student moves to another university” made me think of how at some point
this school year, I decided to primarily use my gmail account for school
correspondence as opposed to my Berkeley email account because I knew the data
would be out of my reach in the next year or two. This article made me think of how future technologies could
enable educators and students to consolidate information, presentations and
related archive for easy access and sharing.
On a broader note, I appreciate Barrett and Garrett’s idea of reconceptualizing the tools so they’re not just for students and not just contained within the institution. The article gave an example of how families should have a digital repository, and how senior citizens might find it useful to have post-retirement “legacy” stories. It is true that portfolios are more relevant in certain professions and fields, thus, might have more a personal than professional incentive for some folks. I wonder what a digital archive might look like for a teacher?
I found the diagrams in this article somewhat useful to my understanding of processes implied in a digital archive, but without a techie/programmer/designer’s eye, I’m not sure what a digital archive looks like? To what extent could a digital archive contain information? What variety of information are digital archives capable of storing and sharing? The authors mentioned RSS (Really Simple Syndication) as an example of a software solution. RSS reminds me of the archaic Google Reader, which allowed me to subscribe to various news sites and read newly published articles from these sites. Thinking of other examples provided by the authors, such as LiveJournal, various webhosting websites for pictures and files gives me the impression that this digital archive notion is still largely decentralized. I’m still unsure if their vision is a “lifetime personal website” or a mixture of a public website with private storage settings.
As a future teacher, I am interested in an online system or digital archive that could store grades, parent correspondence, assignments and assignment copies, and correspondence updates about changes in the class or the school, and maybe even model examples of student work. Obviously, information such as grades and parent correspondence would need access restriction (student should be able to view their grades but not the parent correspondence). I can see grades and parent information being stored on a system like ABI (OUSD) or school loop (SFUSD), and information about assignments, examples of student work on a personal/school website, but it would be superb if all this information could be consolidated onto one vessel to facilitate learning and communication for parents and teachers.
On a broader note, I appreciate Barrett and Garrett’s idea of reconceptualizing the tools so they’re not just for students and not just contained within the institution. The article gave an example of how families should have a digital repository, and how senior citizens might find it useful to have post-retirement “legacy” stories. It is true that portfolios are more relevant in certain professions and fields, thus, might have more a personal than professional incentive for some folks. I wonder what a digital archive might look like for a teacher?
I found the diagrams in this article somewhat useful to my understanding of processes implied in a digital archive, but without a techie/programmer/designer’s eye, I’m not sure what a digital archive looks like? To what extent could a digital archive contain information? What variety of information are digital archives capable of storing and sharing? The authors mentioned RSS (Really Simple Syndication) as an example of a software solution. RSS reminds me of the archaic Google Reader, which allowed me to subscribe to various news sites and read newly published articles from these sites. Thinking of other examples provided by the authors, such as LiveJournal, various webhosting websites for pictures and files gives me the impression that this digital archive notion is still largely decentralized. I’m still unsure if their vision is a “lifetime personal website” or a mixture of a public website with private storage settings.
As a future teacher, I am interested in an online system or digital archive that could store grades, parent correspondence, assignments and assignment copies, and correspondence updates about changes in the class or the school, and maybe even model examples of student work. Obviously, information such as grades and parent correspondence would need access restriction (student should be able to view their grades but not the parent correspondence). I can see grades and parent information being stored on a system like ABI (OUSD) or school loop (SFUSD), and information about assignments, examples of student work on a personal/school website, but it would be superb if all this information could be consolidated onto one vessel to facilitate learning and communication for parents and teachers.
Thoai,
ReplyDeleteI also found myself asking "What in the hell would one of these things actually LOOK like?" I would hope it would be designed with a SUPER simple interface, given the depth of information it would contain. I really hated the idea of it being a storehouse for links to a bunch of different websites that collectively contain the information of a person's life. Sounds like a circuitous MESS. Along the same lines, I was wondering how it might be accessed and by whom. I wondered whether the person owning portfolio would be the one responsible for granting access to individual parts, as with Google Drive, or if there would be some built-in access-granting situation for schools, employers, government agencies, etc. And while I hope at least some permissions would have to pass through the owner, as a potential owner of one, I wouldn't want to have to constantly be dealing with that... Hm.
Definitely.
ReplyDeleteWhile not expressly delineated in your review, the issue I can't stop thinking about having read your review deals with the "rights" of students and citizens. You spoke of this idea being more applicable for certain people and professions than others, and the article itself talked about each person having "the right" to an e-portfolio. However, how would this "right" actually be ensured? Currently not everyone has a computer nor access to the internet. Would these portfolios simply recapitulate current economic divides? Would they be included in UNESCO's rights determined for children, or would it be enforced by governments? How would an idea like this be taken up in China or Chile or Zimbabwe or Papua New Guinea? While it, hands down, could help educators, would it globally or nationally cause more harm and divide? What happens if you immigrate from a country where these portfolios aren't used and you go to get a job? What happens if you grew up in a tech-deficient neighborhood and couldn't properly maintain and update yours and you now need a job?
Suddenly, I'm left with many, many questions regarding this system in relation to equity...
Thoai,
ReplyDeleteI too appreciated the article for its focus on some larger theories of how people (not just students) use portfolios throughout their lifetime. I think the authors mention this, but portfolios seem to be one of the few assignments that many schools use that are directly relevant to many institutions outside of school (compared to literary response essays, for example). We as educators will be asked to present a portfolio when we apply for jobs, and to a certain extent, resumés are like super condensed portfolios. What's new, though, that I think the authors are trying to get at, is the social aspect of portfolios. It seems that for any profession, a LinkedIn account is going to help you stand out, and now, all the sudden, we aren't the sole creators of our portfolios. Our portfolios stand out based on who endorses what skills, how many connections you have, on top of traditional resumé elements like work and education experience.
I agree that it's hard to conceptualize specifically what kind of system these authors envision, but when you look at the bigger picture, as Tygue put it... Hm.