VERSATILE TOOL FOR COMPETENCE MANAGEMENT

An e-Portfolio Management System for Higher Education in Applied Sciences

Jouni Huotari

School of Technology, JAMK University of Applied Sciences, Piippuk 2, FI-40100 Jyväskylä, Finland

Mirja Pulkkinen

Department of CS&IS, Faculty of Information Technology

PO Box 35, FIN-40014 University of Jyväskylä, Jyväskylä, Finland

Annu Niskanen

Teacher Education College, JAMK University of Applied Sciences, Rajak 35, FI-40100 Jyväskylä, Finland

Keywords: Outcome Based Education, Higher Education, Assessment, Accreditation of Prior Achievement, Portfolio,

e-Portfolio, ePMS.

Abstract: In the line of outcome based education and transferability of credits, we study a Higher Education case and

propose an e-Portfolio solution as a versatile tool for assessment tasks. The solution tackles the problems

firstly, of accreditation of prior achievements from both institutional and experiential learning. Secondly,

the developed tool carries the process of learning outcome definitions management (derived from the real

employment world), and the learner self-assessment and self-reflection as well as the guidance and support

for these. From the areas where the tool is applied, we present the learning unit Project management given

at the ICT department in a university of applied sciences. The e-Portfolio management system, ePofo,

supports the identification, assessment, recognition and accreditation of prior learning achievements and

learning outcomes. Additionally, it is a tool to present the sectoral qualification requirements to the students,

to derive learning needs and define the learning outcomes, thereby structuring the teaching. It also provides

support for the learner’s own management of achievements and competences, and finally for presenting the

profile to potential employers.

1 INTRODUCTION

The change towards the European Union Bologna

agreement requires attention not only on the

philosophies but also on practices and tools to be

used to enable the Higher Education Institutions

(HEIs) to attain the centric Bologna goals. The

competences acquired and striven for should be

captured in such information systems that support

the teachers in their task to appraise achievements

attained in both the formal education setting and

prior to enrolment to a HEI.

The importance of accrediting prior learning

achievements is growing in higher education. This is

shown clearly in the strategies and decisions in the

European Parliament and the Council of the

European Union on the European Qualifications

Framework (EQF). (European Commission 2005;

2006; European Parliament Council, 2008). The

emerging agenda of lifelong learning promotes the

idea of life-wide learning processes, which take

place everywhere, in all paths of life and are based

on various sources of formal, non-formal and

informal learning. Understanding this leads us to

understand the fundamental idea of APL. The focus

in APL process is on competences. It is based on

comparing the existing knowledge and skills against

the requirements of the curriculum or programme.

(Lepänjuuri, 2010). Accordingly, APL sets a request

to build support for teachers’ activities such as

definition of the competences to be learned as well

as assessment, accreditation, and validation of these

learning outcomes. In turn, students should get

438

Huotari J., Pulkkinen M. and Niskanen A..

VERSATILE TOOL FOR COMPETENCE MANAGEMENT - An e-Portfolio Management System for Higher Education in Applied Sciences.

DOI: 10.5220/0003481704380448

In Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Computer Supported Education (ATTeL-2011), pages 438-448

ISBN: 978-989-8425-50-8

 2011 SCITEPRESS (Science and Technology Publications, Lda.)

support and guidance in self-assessment,

management of learning outcomes and career plans,

and in building a professional identity. (Keurulainen,

2010; Niskanen and Lepänjuuri, 2006).

This paper reports an effort to develop

supporting system and electronic tool with the help

of which students could self-assess their prior

learning through reflecting their achievements

required against the competences as described in

curriculum. We present a solution called ePofo, an

e-portfolio management system, aimed for both

teachers and learners. The system supports also the

student both in studies and in the pursuit of

employment career. S/he may have gained his/her

competence either in formal education or in informal

settings as work practice or on-the-job training. The

developments of the ePofo described here is related

to wider development of the recognition and

accreditation of prior learning (APL) system for the

higher education sector done in JAMK University of

Applied Sciences during the last decade (JAMK,

2011).

The paper is structured as follows: In the next

section (Section 2), firstly (2.1) a brief account is

given on the competence based education and its

consequences at the HEIs as the driver of the

challenge to which the presented development is an

answer. Secondly (2.2 and 2.3), as further

background, we take on some discussion of the

meaning of assessment and judgment in HEI, since

this is the main function the ePofo tool supports

within the HEI activities. We explain what portfolio

and e-portfolio mean in the context of this paper.

Section 2.4 presents the case organization and the

steps to develop the tool: requirements, the solution,

and the technical implementation details. In Section

3, the study method is discussed, and Section 4

accounts the experiences with the tool this far. In

Section 5, we discuss the implementation and the

changes induced and opportunities opened by the

tool in the activities of learners and teachers. Section

6 concludes with remarks to further research opened

by this initial work.

2 BACKGROUND

2.1 Competence Driven Education

Identifying and recognition of prior learning is a big

issue in education in Europe. The European

strategies have been developed to increase mobility

and to acknowledge the competences and learning

outcomes provided by vocational education (the

Copenhagen Process) and by higher education (the

Bologna Process) (Commission of the European

Communities, 2005). There has been a numerous

research and development projects going on in

different European countries which aim is to get

better understanding about identifying and

recognition of formal and informal learning (e.g.

Duvekot et al., 2007a; Laitinen, Nurminen and

Soininen, 2007; Soininen, Niskanen and Lepänjuuri,

2010; Stenström, Niskanen and Lepänjuuri, 2010;

Duvekot, Pukelis and Fokiene, 2010).

This phenomena is located in frameworks of

Lifelong learning, Life-wide learning and European

Qualifications (EQF) which all highlight the

meaning of assessment of learning outcomes (skills,

knowledge and competences). Recognition of

learning outcomes means to acknowledge those

competences that have been acquired in formal and

informal learning environments. Competences can

be mapped out (identified), assessed and

acknowledged (certified). The acknowledgement can

take place in a more formal (e.g. through

certification) or in a less formal way (e.g. to check

what has been learnt by the individual). (Niskanen,

Lepänjuuri, and Rautio, 2006; Niskanen and

Virtanen, 2008). Recognition of informal and formal

learning concerns both young people and adults, and

it should be an established practice of provision of

higher education.

The European Qualifications Framework (EQF,

European Commission 2006) outlines the underlying

principles and benchmarks the criteria for

educational judgment. In EQF, educational

achievements are described in terms of knowledge

(factual and theoretical), skills (cognitive and

practical deployment of knowledge) and competence

(including responsibility and authority).

The achievement of these is valued with criteria

for seven distinct achievement levels (European

Commission, 2006). The concept of competence,

translated in an institutional education context to

‘learning outcome’ (European Parliament Council,

2008; Simon et al., 2011), is a point of focus and

drives the planning and development of ICT based

tools and systems to support educational activities.

The learning outcome based education means a shift

from teaching and curriculum centred paradigms to

learner focus emphasizing achievement (Burke,

1995, p. vii). These targets are equally striven for in

the European Commission guidelines.

Following the Bologna process outline, there are

two-fold targets the HEIs aim at when developing

the approaches towards competence and learning

outcome based education. It is changing, firstly, the

VERSATILE TOOL FOR COMPETENCE MANAGEMENT - An e-Portfolio Management System for Higher Education

in Applied Sciences

439

administrative attention to the educational offering.

The definition and appraisal of the relevant

knowledge, skills, and broader competence

constitute the targeted and acknowledged

achievements. Achievements accredited by HEIs in

many fields mean official qualifications to

professions (European Parliament Council, 2008).

Thus, the governments delegate the judgment of a

person’s qualification for a profession to the HEIs as

in the EQF definition of qualification: ”a competent

body determines that an individual has achieved

learning outcomes to given standards”.

Secondly, both structuring the teaching

arrangements, e.g. to units (curricula, modules,

courses), and the appraisal of the achievement of the

learning outcomes are aligned along the

competences targeted at. Following the EU

rationale, improved performance in economy and

society, the source for the information on

competence requirements is the employment market.

As stated in the EQF documentation, professional

bodies in the respective fields shall provide this

information. European Parliament Council (2008)

puts this in the EQF definition: “‘international

sectoral organisation’ means an association of

national organisations, including, for example,

employer and professional bodies, which represent

the interests of national sectors.

2.2 Assessment of Competences

Achieved

Concerning recognition and accreditation of

competence achieved there are different concepts

used that may take slightly different stand: Learning,

APL (Burke 1995, p. 4), for assessing and validating

result of learning prior to enrolment to an

institutional program. To this, concept of APEL adds

‘experiential’ for learning in non-formal (e.g. work

practice) context. Canadians use the concept Prior

Learning Assessment and Recognition, PLAR,

(Conrad, 2008) which combines learning results

from both formal (education) and non-formal

(practice) context for appraisal and validation

process.

Within EU, context assessment of prior learning

is often referred as validation. It includes three

processes: i) identification, ii) assessment, and iii)

recognition and accreditation of competences

(Colardyn and Bjørnåvold, 2005; Niskanen and

Lepänjuuri, 2006; Lepänjuuri, 2010.) In turn,

Duvekot (2007b) prefers using word valuation of

prior learning to emphasise raising awareness and

motivation of a learner and the meaning of the

process - not only for the development of an

individual but of organisations and society.

The profile of a student enrolling to a curriculum

or syllabus is established for required achievements

that s/he might already have covered previously.

Prior learning achievements in the case of HE may

come either through former institutional education,

professional development (PD, e.g. courses by

commercial education and training providers, staff

training on-the-job), or through work practice.

Appraising PD outcome as part of institutionally

accredited qualification is inline with the lifelong

learning idea. As an example in the specific area of

ICT, there are tightly supervised certification

programs with very detailed learning outcomes for

e.g. some frameworks and models (e.g. ITIL,

CMMI). It is the task of the HEI quality assurance to

position and appraise such achievements as a part of

a qualification.

Be it prior learning, or learning during education,

assessment is the key to establishment of achieved

learning outcomes and thus qualifications. Joughin

(2009) derives from an extensive review of literature

a definition of assessment that is well suited to both

cases:

“From these definitions, the irreducible core of

assessment can be limited to (a) students’ work, (b)

judgements about the quality of this work, and (c)

inferences drawn from this about what students know.

Judgement and inference are thus at the core of

assessment, leading to this simple definition: To assess

is to make judgments about students’ work, inferring

from this what they have the capacity to do in the

assessed domain, and thus what they know, value, or

are capable of doing.”

As said, European Commission (2005) deﬁnes

validation as the process of assessing and

recognising a wide range of knowledge, know-how,

skills and competences, which people develop

throughout their lives within different environments,

for example through education, work and leisure

activities. This process can very well be supported

by a portfolio tool. A portfolio not only provisions

the technical and administrative process support, but

also provides an expedient for social aspect of the

learner’s self-reflection, identity building, and the

learner-teacher interaction e.g. in learner guidance

and supporting the self-assessment (Barrett, 2001).

The learner gets assistance in developing their

judgment (Joughin, 2009) of their own expertise,

profile, and development needs. The teacher has a

tool for judging prior achievements with

qualification profiles from authoritative professional

bodies that help to sustain assessment criteria

consistent in the appraisal of the achievements. This

CSEDU 2011 - 3rd International Conference on Computer Supported Education

440

is enabled by storing in the tool international

sectoral organization qualification profiles that

comprise the learning outcome definitions to be

aimed at.

In order to recognise learning which may occur

in diverse environments, educational institutions are

challenged not only to develop their curricula to be

competence-based but to describe the criteria based

on what the assessment of learning can be done.

Accreditation of prior learning challenges in a very

profound way our understanding of assessment and

methods used but also guidance of students.

(Niskanen and Lepänjuuri, 2006; Keurulainen, 2006;

2010) Accordingly, it is important to notice that the

student makes an initiative on assessment of prior

learning. It starts from learner’s willingness to show

his/her prior learning and ask it to be identified and

recognised by the educational institution. (Niskanen,

2010.)

2.3 Assessment Tools

As Joughin (2009) points out, assessment is a task

for both teachers and students. For both, there are

quite negative connotations with assessment in

education. Assessment is however, a core in the HEI

function: as we stated, there lies the responsibility of

establishment of qualifications. Joughin’s review of

assessment studies shows that the student approach

to learning can be influenced by the assessment

towards a deeper (more reflective) learning. Through

electronic tools, the assessment function can,

however, be enhanced to encompass self and peer

assessment, motivation and professional profile

building, to support the modes of assessment that

pursue deeper learning goals.

Electronic tool enables, firstly, the management,

presentation, and sharing of information between the

stakeholders, here students and teachers. This

information includes the focus area and learning unit

information, learning content, and student data. The

system retains information specific to each learner,

so that his or her personal learning plans can be

followed through over the study career. HEI learning

management systems should therefore follow all

legal requirements for the storage and processing of

learner specific information. Using an electronic tool

enables an assessment and APL process transparent

to the student.

Portfolios have been in the focus of educational

developments over the past decades (Kankaanranta

et al., 2007; Barrett, 2001; Grant, 2008). A portfolio

means a collection of pieces of work of an individual

(professional), from which sets of samples can be

presented as proof of the competence of the

individual. With portfolios, diverse educational

goals can be pursued: assessment in its various

forms as the general summative, in some cases also

formative, or peer assessment. Further, the portfolio

augments the assessment processes with self-

reflection and self-assessment and a learner profile

construction for developing judgment (Joughin

2009) that is also according to the EQF a part of

professional competence. Judgment is a part of

qualifications granted at HEIs, essential in expert or

leadership roles.

Cumulating work achievements, and the task to

select and sample work achievements for

establishment of qualification leads to reflection and

insights into one’s capabilities. With a portfolio, the

students can enquire their own strengths and

weaknesses. Aiming at a qualification, an electronic

portfolio augments the process with pre-established

qualification profiles from the labour market that

enable a gap analysis (comparison to one’s own

profile) and thus guides in selecting the learning

opportunities to cover the achievements still needed.

There are many alternative portfolio tools and

systems. The challenge is to choose the best

combination and integrate them in a meaningful

way. In addition, visualizing the connections

between competencies and courses is important for

two reasons: it helps understanding of the structure

of the curriculum and it facilitates finding potential

omissions or inconsistencies.

In the Case at the JAMK University of Applied

Sciences, the creation of the electronic portfolio

solution started with developing APL procedures in

HEI. The main objective of the first two projects

coordinated by Teacher Education College in 2004-

2007 called Taituri (Niskanen et al., 2006) and

AAKE (Laitinen et al., 2007) was to develop

theoretical background and pedagogical grounds for

APL in universities of applied sciences. This

development was followed in 2008-2010 with a line

of three smaller projects called @mk-Tieturi, Anturi

and Säihke (Niskanen and Virtanen, 2008)

especially focusing on development of methods for

identification, assessment, recognition, and

accreditation of prior learning. These methods yet

included development of theoretical principles and

practical guidelines, but also ICT tools such as web-

based e-Portfolio management system, self-

evaluation questionnaires, and skill tests. The @mk-

Tieturi project was a kind of a feasibility study

phase. During that phase, existing e-Portfolio

management systems were examined such as FSU

Career Portfolio. (Lumsden, 2011). Although we

VERSATILE TOOL FOR COMPETENCE MANAGEMENT - An e-Portfolio Management System for Higher Education

in Applied Sciences

441

found many promising open source tools or systems

such as Mahara (http://mahara.org/) and Elgg

(http://elgg.org/), none of them met all the

requirements (see section 4). Later on, the

development of e-Portfolio has been continued in the

project called KORSI (Peltola, 2011).

2.4 Case: APL in Project Management

Course

As an example, we take an area of competence the

institution chooses to offer in their program. The

case under study is project management. The use of

an e-Portfolio management system (ePMS) (Ravet,

2007) is illustrated here with this example.

Project management is a subject area commonly

taught especially in higher education for ICT and

other technology and business related study

programs, but also in professional development

offered by various commercial education

institutions.

The starting point is a competence description

that is normally presented at achievement levels and

competence components. Description of targeted

competence, both generic descriptions (EQF), and

with subject area specific descriptions, is entered to

the database. For the project management, the

specific authoritative descriptions and detailed

competence descriptions are available through the

web pages provided by the international institutions

representing the area:

 The International Project Management

Association, IPMA, http://www.ipma.ch/

 Project Management Institute, PMI

http://www.pmi.org/

The teacher enters to the portfolio database the

detailed competence description, with the given

levels of knowledge, skills, and competence. The

teacher also maps the provided learning

opportunities (courses) in the institution (in this case

the School of Technology), with the detailed

descriptions of competence. This means following

the learning outcome driven approach in structuring

and presenting the educational offering.

Through comparing to the descriptions of target

profiles (IPMA/PMI and competence descriptions

provided by the teachers), the student can fill in the

elements of the competence for their own

achievement profile. If they have documentation,

e.g. achieved through accomplishment of education

provided by an institution, the respective school

report, diploma or certificate can be scanned and

stored into the student’s own portfolio area for

proving the achievement and its evaluation.

If a student wants to have informal learning

outcomes (e.g. acquired through work practice)

acknowledged as part of the competence required for

a degree, (s)he enters a description of the prior

achievement, and a self-assessment of the

achievement. Student compares and matches the

given descriptions of the levels and elements from

project manager’s competence profile and returns a

self-assessment based on the IPMA Competence

Baseline (Caupin et al., 2006) to the ePMS or to a

learning environment. This has been a mandatory

task in the Project Management course. This helps

students to see the competences needed in project

management and evaluate their current level of

knowledge and skills. The teacher can then utilise

this valuable information in order to give individual

guidance, suggest APL process (including the use of

ePMS), and make the acknowledgement decisions.

The atomistic approach chosen has been found a

good choice in the user experiences. It is significant

in self-assessment and motivation. When enrolling

into a curriculum, the student is motivated through

the parts of the competence area (s)he already covers

through some previous experience or training, even

though the prior learning achievements do not

suffice for whole learning units or modules.

3 METHOD (DSRM)

Design Science is recognized as the mainstream

Information Systems research methodology for

constructive efforts (March and Smith, 1995). A

generic process model for DS type research

endeavours has been defined (Peffers et al., 2008) as

the Design Science Research Methodology DSRM

(Figure 1). The process is iterative. The entry to this

process is possible at any of the first five phases: a)

Problem Definition, b) Definition of the objectives

of a solution, c) Design and Development, d)

Demonstration (of a functioning solution prototype)

or e) Evaluation. A full research cycle includes all

these as well as the last phase, f) Communication

that is done through discipline specific ways and

means in presenting the constructed solution to the

scientific community of the field.

The construction of the solution presented in

Figure 1: Iterative process of design science research

(Peffers et al. 2008).

Problem

identi‐

fication

Definition

ofthe

objectives

ofa

solution

Design

andDeve‐

lopment

Demon‐

stration

Eva‐

luation

Commu‐

nication

CSEDU 2011 - 3rd International Conference on Computer Supported Education

442

this study followed iteratively and incrementally in

sequential projects, abided with the study of the

topical literature. After the problem identification,

five iterations (see Section 4), each resulting to an

implemented system or an increment to the system

are conducted. With each iteration, stakeholder input

to the objectives, requirements, and constraints is

taken in. The demonstration is undertaken in

practical use. In this paper, one of the user domain

experiences is reported. Evaluation follows through

user feedback collection with surveys and

interviews. A collaboration environment (wiki and

ning) is used for management of the pre- and post-

development user information.

4 E-PORTFOLIO MANAGEMENT

SYSTEM - EPOFO

4.1 Definition of the Objectives

One of the aims was to develop a web-based,

theoretically and pedagogically well-founded e-

Portfolio management system, which besides normal

learning and assessment portfolio functionalities,

supports also identification, assessment, recognition,

and development of prior learning achievements.

This is based on the idea that it is the responsibility

of the individual student to invest in personal

growth, development of professional judgment

(Joughin 2009). The e-portfolio system facilitates

this development.

One of the main requirements for the solution

was to create a database structure and a competence

matrix, which help in describing and visualising

competences, both from the institute’s and the

student’s view. The solution is based on generic and

subject-specific competencies, as described in the

EQF (The European Commission, 2005). The

system should be modifiable so that any institute or

organisation could define their competencies.

Therefore, it is possible to add the key competencies

(DeSeCo, 2005), project management competencies

based on the IPMA Competence Baseline (ICB)

(Caupin et al., 2006), or any other list of

competencies to the system.

One of the main requirements was the

integration to the student register system. For

example, the documents and other files that provide

evidence about student’s competences should be

easily achieved. In addition, the courses, student

groups etc. could be imported and/or linked to the

system.

To develop a solution, the activities of the

stakeholders and the requirements for a tool to

support the stakeholders at a unit (a college or a

school at the University of Applied Sciences) were

analysed and listed. We present here the tasks for the

learning facilitator (with sub-roles of teacher, tutor,

content administrator), and the student, who are the

main user groups of the solution.

For accounts of learner achievements, learning

facilitators are involved in

1. Reviewing the items students are adding as

their existing personal achievements (knowledge,

skills, competencies);

2. Appraising and acknowledging learner prior

achievements as learning outcomes e.g. to be part of

required achievements for a certificate or diploma;

3. Providing tutoring to guide the student on

their path through the program at their present

learning institution (what is / should still be

achieved, at what level and on what area to attain

qualification);

4. Presenting the educational offering according

to the outcome orientation principles to the students

(i.e. how can the student cover missing learning

achievements and qualifications through the courses

given in the program of the institution); and

5. Managing the competence profile

descriptions (e.g. qualification for a profession)

coming from societal and professional bodies.

The student activities include:

1. Creating an account of their personal learning

achievements, together with stored data and

information on the achievement for valuation and

proof (i.e. for judgment of their quality by institution

staff), the students post documentation (certificates,

job descriptions, letters of recommendation,

produced files) into the portfolio tool;

2. Presenting their existing knowledge, skills

and competences, i.e. prior achievements to the

learning facilitators;

3. Comparing their achievements to the required

qualification profiles of their desired learning targets

that is provided in the system; and

4. Presenting their qualifications in the form of

a sample portfolio to peers for peer support and

review, and to other stakeholders, e.g. potential

employers.

There are two approaches to competence

evaluation, holistic and atomistic (i.e. the elements

that together comprise the competence). The chosen

approach is atomistic, i.e. the student has the

opportunity to have small units or elements of prior

achievements acknowledged as part of their personal

achievements profile.

VERSATILE TOOL FOR COMPETENCE MANAGEMENT - An e-Portfolio Management System for Higher Education

in Applied Sciences

443

For the assessment, the aim was to offer a 360°

perspective. The student gives his/her own

evaluation, which is then commented and evaluated

by the teachers or other experts from the institute.

Finally, if the student has given permission, peers

and external reviewers can give their evaluation and

comments.

Some further requirements for the ePMS were

listed in our project environment called Nest

(Rintamäki, 2008). For example, it should allow

24/7 access, be based on open standards and support

nationally agreed interoperability standards, and

usable over mobile and wireless technologies.

4.2 Design and Development

The e-Portfolio management system, ePofo, is

developed by using incremental and iterative

approach. Each year, one project group of four to

five students took the responsibility of fulfilling the

requirements given mainly by the experts of the

Teacher Education College in JAMK. One of the

students then took the results of the development to

the group of the following year. The principal

lecturer in software engineering was leading the

development group making sure that the

requirements were understood. One of the

dissemination methods was using wiki and, during

2009, a Ning environment was established. Thus, the

developers received immediate feedback and some

requirements for the future versions.

The ePofo is based on free and open source

software running in a Web site. The technical

solution of the web server was built with the

“LAMP” set of open source technologies, i.e. on

Linux operating system, Apache HTTP server

management software, the MySQL database

management system, and the PHP programming

language for developing the web interface to the

database. The user interface was developed with

XHTML with the help of CSS and JavaScript

(AJAX).

The ePofo is technically a multimedia database,

where the students can store their sample

achievements (voice, video, image, text). This is an

important feature for different skills and abilities as

e.g. design, technical professions or music. Each

user sets up the structure of the database for their

personal portfolio. Following the reflective aspect,

(Barrett, 2001), the user decides on the number and

names of the categories according to which they

arrange their achievements.

An ePMS should enable the students to get

familiar with the required competencies and then

add proof of their individual skills and

qualifications. ePofo combines characteristics of

each of the typical portfolios: assessment, showcase,

development, and reflective portfolio (Stefani et al.,

2007).

The users store categorized descriptions of their

achievements and add documents into the database

as attachments to provide evidence of the

achievement of the competencies or learning

outcomes for the qualification (certificates, diplomas

and the like). An example view is shown in Figure 2.

In addition, sample files can be added to present

performance in a competency area. The

administrator decides the formats that are allowed,

e.g. pdf, doc, jpg, mp3, avi etc.

To provide sample portfolio functionality, the

solution allows the user to extract own data as a .zip

file, containing an html page as a start page with the

description of the user’s portfolio and links to the

attached files saved along to a portable .zip file to be

used as a sample portfolio.

Figure 2: A student can add metadata, choose related

skills, and attach documents. Other users can add

comments.

The ePofo consists of four user roles, each with

their own views and user rights: Learner, Teacher,

Content Admin (a role that provides the target

achievement profiles) and Technical Admin (a role

that provides technical support).

4.3 Demonstration

The ePofo was first introduced into use in 2007.

Total number of pilot users in separate schools of

JAMK has so far been 10 teachers and about 50

students during the three years of use. In each unit of

the institution, one staff member has been trained to

take the responsibility of a “content admin”

(teacher’s functionalities, point 5, see above).

However, there has been hesitation to use the

solution, which is usual with new e-Learning tools.

The use has not been mandatory, and there has been

no reward for use of the system.

CSEDU 2011 - 3rd International Conference on Computer Supported Education

444

For the development that started in 2007, there

has been each year a student-learning project to

develop the technical solution further. User

requirements and user feedback has been collected

in group interviews and survey forms. Because

student project groups are changing and the target

for them has been learning IT project work, the

system cannot be compared with commercial

solutions in e.g. usability. This is why the user base

in this phase is teacher volunteers “early adopter”.

However, the tool has been in real use, and gained

both positive feedback and many suggestions to

improve it.

In the beginning, ePofo was mostly used in

Teacher Education College of JAMK. However,

ePofo has been further developed for the needs of

young students in other schools of JAMK. Teacher

Education College continues to develop further the

development of APL and ePofo especially in adult

learning. The results of these developments will be

reported in a later point in time.

4.4 Evaluation

The development of e-Portfolio system in parallel

with curriculum development has given a valuable

learning experience for both the faculty members

and the students. As an example, one of the teachers

sent an email on May 2010 mentioning that (free

translation) “Thank you, I have been really excited

to (almost "drunk" about) this ePofo tool. It is a

wonderful tool for a trainer to recognise students'

skills!” In addition, the faculty members argue to

understand both the basic concepts and the

competencies required in the curriculum much better

than before using the ePofo. In the ePofo, a teacher

(content admin) has to define the competencies,

skills and knowledge, student groups, and courses,

and link all of those in such a way that a student gets

to understand their relationships. According to the

questionnaires and interviews, this clarifies the

competence-based curriculum for all stakeholders.

Figure 3: Skill matrix.

The development of ePofo has helped interacting

in socially heterogeneous groups (one of the key

competences in DeSeco, 2005). During the

development, teachers, students and administrators

from different faculties learned to cooperate,

understand each other’s views, and manage and

resolve conflicts. The decisions and ideas that

emerged during the development were documented

in wiki (http://epofo.labranet.jamk.fi/wiki/, in

Finnish, see Figure 4). In addition, a separate ning

environment (ahotat.ning.com) was created in order

to help student groups sharing experiences and to

answer questions.

Figure 4: Wiki environment.

The focus is on individual competencies.

According to interviews, the ePofo helps a student

show his/her current knowledge. The different

matrices in the system provide understanding about

the competencies and how much evidence there

already is. It also contains a dimension for different

types of informal and non-formal learning

categories, such as working experience, degrees,

courses, and hobbies.

Students were an essential source of the

development group. First, IT students have been

developing the e-Portfolio system. Second, students’

opinions were taken into account when defining new

features. In addition, the competences required from

a software engineer were recognised during the

development process. Finally, students from three

different subject areas formed the pilot user group

and their comments were considered in improving

the ePofo. During the project meetings, the

experiences and comments from all three different

user groups (administrators, teachers, and students)

were collected and then parts of the documentation

were shared by using the wiki.

According to discussions with students in the

Master's Degree programme, enabling the use of an

e-Portfolio can reduce dropouts. Some students,

which work abroad and have the needed

competencies, need a flexible way to proof their

expertise. According to the students’ feedback, it is

technically quite easy although time-consuming to

add proof about their knowledge and skills once they

learn the procedure. Students face the challenge how

to express themselves clearly, so that teachers and

VERSATILE TOOL FOR COMPETENCE MANAGEMENT - An e-Portfolio Management System for Higher Education

in Applied Sciences

445

other external reviewers can evaluate what the

student’s level of expertise is.

Variegated and voluntary student and teacher

involvement during the development phase proved

to be a good idea. We received a lot of valuable

feedback for improving the e-Portfolio system. In

addition, we were able to raise ICT skills and the

level of understanding about recognising prior

learning and validating competencies.

5 DISCUSSION

A significant change will take place in the ways and

procedures when migrating from curriculum and

course based approaches to a learning outcome

based approach in a higher education institution.

This induces several changes in both teaching and

administrative tasks, conducted by the teacher and

other institution staff. An important facet is that the

learning needs should be derived from actual

professional practice, which, among other things,

turns into a motivational factor for students. When

the learning needs are, as in the presented solution,

established according to the spirit of the EQF

through the qualification profiles attained from

international sectoral bodies, they enhance the

quality of both learning and teaching. In the

presented solution, they are recorded into the

portfolio management system, to be accessed by

students and other stakeholders at the HEI. This

alone is a factor that raises the quality and relevancy

of teaching, which again reflects to student

motivation.

As Ruud Duvekot (2007b) states, the focus in the

lifelong learning policy is slowly shifting from

formal learning environments to non-formal and

informal learning environments. A focal challenge in

the e-Portfolio system constructed in this study is to

enable the recognition of student non-formal and

informal learning. From the administrative point of

view, the e-Portfolio system is also a support tool for

recognition of prior learning (APL/PLAR). It serves

the student as a personal tool for documentation,

assessment, and development of their learning

towards the targeted qualifications. Teachers can

benefit from the e-Portfolio system in their

curriculum work, releasing them from curriculum-

bound thinking to learning objectives and learning

outcomes driven thinking. Consequently, the

portfolio tool supports the professional development

and learning-on-the-job of a teacher.

An information privacy specific issue to be

considered is how students can add confidential

information to an ePMS. Some students work in

their current or previous work career on classified

projects, and therefore are not allowed to add

information about them. In some cases, the teacher

or supervisor has signed a non-disclosure agreement

(NDA) with a company in order to keep the secrets

unrevealed. The teacher might have a discussion

with the representatives of a company to make sure

that the student has the competencies that s/he

claims to have. The summary of the discussion (a

kind of an evaluation report) can then be added to

the ePMS and validated with the HEI authority.

The key competences defined by the DeSeCo

project (2005) are classified in three broad

categories to which the ePofo contribute in several

ways. In the first competence category, use tools

interactively, the development and use of the ePofo

has improved ICT and language skills of

administrators, teachers, and students. In addition,

the ability to use knowledge and information

interactively is enhanced in all three user groups. For

example, the ePofo helps teachers to see how (key)

competencies relate to courses and student groups

and thus enables evaluation of quality,

appropriateness and value of that information.

The ePofo contributes in particular to the

development of two key competences: digital

competence, which involves use of Information

Society Technology for work, leisure and

communication, and learning to learn, which can be

described as an individual’s ability to organise their

own learning. The ePofo helps students to perceive

their learning needs as well as to process and analyse

the development of their competences. Furthermore,

it supports lifelong learning by providing knowledge

of students’ prior learning and encourages students

to reflect their own learning.

Acting autonomously is the basis for using the

ePofo. A student takes responsibility of his/her own

learning and development process. It is up to a

student to choose what evidence to add to the ePofo.

The system helps to understand the “big picture”,

e.g. how the key and other competencies relate to the

different curricula and courses, and how much

evidence there already exists about their individual

competencies.

There are many suggestions and ideas to be

added to the next version of the ePMS. One idea is

to integrate Mahara and competence descriptions

e.g. by creating the necessary plug-ins. Another idea

is to create a dedicated learning environment, which

is linked to competence register. Current solution is

stored in JAMK’s network server, but in the future

public cloud can also be utilised. As an example,

CSEDU 2011 - 3rd International Conference on Computer Supported Education

446

students who graduated (alumni) can continue

adding evidence to the ePMS and choose courses,

which match their professional development plan.

6 CONCLUSIONS

The ePofo solution development makes evident that

the introduction of the outcome orientation in

tertiary sector teaching and learning is means a

thorough change in the educational institution

practices. Consequently, it requires novel designs for

the technological support for student, teacher, and

other stakeholder processes. The solution discussed

here supports the students (learner) and the teaching

staff (learning facilitator) (Simon, Pulkkinen et al.

2011) and the assessment by a teacher and the

institution. The teacher may assess the items in a

student’s portfolio at various points in the learning

process: for diagnostic and formative assessment to

be able to assist in planning the studies and guide the

student underway; and for summative assessment to

acknowledge competence and report to the

institution that grants a degree. Last but by far not

least, a personal portfolio developed during studies

gives a head start to the professional career.

The portfolio tool appears to have the potential

to be a bearing point in sharing information on

competences at the institution between students,

teaching staff, and other stakeholder groups. It also

supports the students in planning their studies, it is a

motivational factor to see the collection of personal

achievements grow concretely as reflected in own

database, and to get guidance from teachers how to

turn prior learning in diverse contexts into units of

acknowledged competence. Further, the solution

provides support for various activities as guidance in

study plans, searching information on existing

expertise (e.g. in setting up project groups for

learning projects, and to find teachers with various

competences) and presenting sample portfolios to

external stakeholders.

The development of the ePMS and pilots during

2006-2010 has given us valuable understanding how

to give detailed descriptions about competences and

linking them to the courses. This is an expedient to

root the institutional learning to professional

qualification defined externally. For the teachers,

this enables to structure the overall learning effort in

a focus area to plausible learning outcomes as

detailed in the professional body description of

qualification, to be targeted by the students.

If an institute implements an ePMS whether it is

commercial, proprietary, or open source, we strongly

recommend simultaneous development of

curriculum, competences, and the ePMS. This

ensures that all of them are consistent, e.g. there are

no contradictions in use of concept and terms.

For further research, one could investigate

implications of using an e-Portfolio system not only

during studying period but also before and after the

studies. This enables the student continue with

his/her studies e.g. at Master’s level. Some members

of the faculty might develop trust in the relationship

to students and be able to support them in their

career planning. Thus, an e-Portfolio is not only an

instrument for individual development and offering

professional specialisation studies; it may help

finding skilful people and give valuable feedback to

the institution that the specific competencies have

been acquired.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

We are grateful to the all developers of the ePofo

such as Timo Palola and Ilkka Turunen. Project

managers, e.g. Heli Peltola from KORSI project, and

teachers, especially Outi Pylkkä, have given their

valuable contribution. Finally, we thank the funders:

The European Commission, the Ministry of

Education and Culture, and the JAMK University of

Applied Sciences Ltd. The eContent+ Best Practices

Network ICOPER (www.icoper.org) is grateful for

the collaboration on New Assessment Methods area.

REFERENCES

Barrett, H. C., 2001. Electronic Portfolios - a chapter in

Educational Technology; An Encyclopaedia. ABC-

CLIO, Online: <http://electronicportfolios.com/portfo

lios/encyclopediaentry.htm>.

Burke, J. (ed.), 1995: Outcomes, Learning and the

Curriculum: Implications for NVQs and Other

Qualifications. London, GBR. Routledge.

Conrad D., 2008. Situating Prior Learning Assessment and

Recognition (PLAR) in an Online Learning

Environment. A book chapter in: Anderson, Terry

(Ed.): The Theory and Practice of Online Learning.

2nd Edition. AU Press, Athabasca University.

DeSeCo, 2005. The definition and selection of key

competencies - executive summary, Online: <www.

oecd.org/dataoecd/47/61/35070367.pdf>.

Duvekot, R. C., G. Scanlon, A. Charraud, K. Schuur, D.

Coughlan, T. Nilsen-Mohn, J. Paulusse & R. Klarus

(eds.), 2007. Managing European diversity in lifelong

learning. The many perspectives of the Valuation of

Prior Learning in the European workplace.

Nijmegen/Vught/Amsterdam: HAN/EC-VPL& HvA.

Duvekot, R., 2007. The glass is half-filled: valuing

VERSATILE TOOL FOR COMPETENCE MANAGEMENT - An e-Portfolio Management System for Higher Education

in Applied Sciences

447

learning in the Netherlands. In Laitinen, A., Nurminen,

R.. & Soininen, L. (eds.) Tunnistatko osaamisen?

Näkökulmia ja välineitä osaamisen arviointiin ja

kehittämiseen ammattikorkeakoulussa. [Do you

recognize competence? Viewpoints and tools for

assessment and development of competences in

universities of applied sciences.] JAMK reports 80.

Grant, S., 2009. Electronic Portfolios: Personal

information, personal development and personal

values. Woodhead Publishing.

European Commission, 2005. Towards a European

Qualifications Framework for lifelong learning.

Brussels.Online: <http://ec.europa.eu/education/polici

es/2010/doc/consultation_eqf_en.pdf>.

European Commission. 2006. Recommendation of the

European Parliament and of the Council on the

establishment of the European Qualifications

Framework for lifelong learning. Online: <http://ec.

europa.eu/education/policies/educ/eqf/com_2006_047

9_en.pdf >.

European Parliament Council. 2008: Recommendation of

the European Parliament And of the Council on the

establishment of the European Qualifications

Framework for lifelong learning. Online: <http://eur-

lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:C:2

008:111:0001:0007:EN:PDF>.

IPMA, 2006. ICB - IPMA Competence Baseline, Version

3.0. Caupin ,G., Knoepfel, H., Koch, G.,

Pannenbäcker, K., Pérez-Polo, F. & Seabury, C. (eds.).

International Project Management Association.

JAMK, 2011. Viewed 4 April, 2011, <http://www.

jamk.fi/vocationalteachereducation/research/priorlearn

ing>.

Joughin, G. (ed.). 2009. Assessment, Learning and

Judgement in Higher Education. Springer.

Kankaanranta, M., Grant, A., Linnakylä, P. (eds.), 2007. e-

Portfolio: adding value to lifelong learning. Institute

for Educational Research. Agora Center.

Keurulainen, H. Assessment of prior learning in teacher

education. In: R. Duvekot, K. Pukelis & A. Fokiene

(eds.), 2010. Assessment of Prior Learning in

Vocational Teacher Education. Handbook for

Assessors. pp. 31-37.

Laitinen, A., Nurminen, R. & Soininen L. (eds.), 2007.

Tunnistatko osaamisen? Näkökulmia ja välineitä

osaamisen arviointiin ja kehittämiseen ammatti-

korkeakoulussa [Do you recognize competences?

Viewpoints and tools for assessment and development

of competences in universities of applied sciences. ]

Reports of JAMK University of Applied Sciences 80.

Lepänjuuri, A. 2010. Value of assessment of prior

learning. In: R. Duvekot, K. Pukelis & A. Fokiene

(eds.). 2010. Assessment of Prior Learning in

Vocational Teacher Education. Handbook for

Assessors. pp. 23-30.

Lumsden, J., 2011. Florida State University Online

Career Portfolio, viewed 4 April, 2011, <http://

www.career.fsu.edu/portfolio/publications/>.

March, S. T. and Smith, G. F., 1995. Design and natural

science research on information technology. Decision

Support Systems 15, pp. 251-266.

Najjar, J., Grant, S., Simon, B., Klobucar, T. (eds.), 2011.

ICOPER Deliverable D 2.3: ISURE: Report on

implementation and validation of a standardized

model for learning needs analysis and the provision of

learning opportunities.

Niskanen, A. 2010. Osaamisen tunnistaminen ja

tunnustaminen – etua kaikille osapuolille.

[Identification and accreditation of prior learning – a

benefit for all] In: Soininen, L., Niskanen, A. &

Lepänjuuri, A. (eds.). 2010. Tohditko tunnistaa? [Do

you dare to recognise?] Reports of JAMK University

of Applied Sciences 105.

Niskanen, A., Lepänjuuri, A. & Rautio, T. (eds.), 2006.

Tunnistatko taiturin? Osaamisen tunnistaminen ja

tunnustaminen korkea-asteella. [Do you recognise a

skillful person? Recognition and accreditation of

learning competences in higher education.] Reports of

JAMK University of Applied Sciences 67.

Niskanen, A. & Virtanen, R. (eds.), 2008. Taidatko

tunnistamisen? [Are you skilled in recognising

competences?] Reports of JAMK University of

Applied Sciences 92.

Palola, T. & Pelkonen H., 2007. Portfolio

verkkosovelluksena Jyväskylän ammattikorkea-

koulussa [the Development of a Digital Portfolio for

the Jyväskylä University of Applied Sciences].

Peffers, K., Tuunanen, T., Rothenberger, M., and

Chatterjee, S., 2008. A Design Science Research

Methodology for IS Research. Journal of Management

Information Systems, 2007-8. vol, 24, no. 3, pp. 45-

77.

Peltola, H., 2011. KORSI project. Viewed 4 April, 2011,

<http://www.jamk.fi/english/research/projectreference

s/developmentofeducation/korsi/contact>.

Ravet, S. 2007. For an ePortfolio enabled architecture:

ePortfolios, ePortfolio management systems and

organisers. European Institute for E-Learning.

Rintamäki, M., 2008. NEST Net Working Platform

Development from Aspect of Training Use (in

Finnish). Jyväskylä University.

Rojas Gutierrez, I., García, R., Leony, D. & Kloos, D.

(eds), 2010. Deliverable D6.3 –ISURE Best practice

guidelines for assessment and evaluation

specifications and standards.

Simon, B., Pulkkinen, M., Totschnig, M., Kozlov, D.

(eds.), 2011. ICOPER Deliverable D7.3b: ICOPER

Reference Model Specification. Viewed 4 April, 2011,

<http://www.icoper.org/deliverables/ICOPER_D7.3b.

pdf>.

Soininen, L., Niskanen, A. & Lepänjuuri, A. (eds.), 2010.

Tohditko tunnistaa? [Do you dare to recognise?]

Reports of JAMK University of Applied Sciences 105

Stefani, L., Mason, R. & Pegler, C., 2007. The educational

potential of e-portfolios. Routledge, London and New

York.

Stenström M-L, Niskanen, A. & Lepänjuuri A., 2010.

Identifying and Recognition of Prior Learning

Outcomes in Initial Vocational Education and

Training in Finland. Paper presented at ECER

European Conferences on Educational Research,

25.8.2010 Helsinki.

CSEDU 2011 - 3rd International Conference on Computer Supported Education

448