The Effectiveness of e-Portfolios for Enhancing College Freshmen’s

Reflection and Aesthetic Literacy

Shih-yun Lu

, Wei-her Hsieh

, Chih Cheng Lo

, Yi Zeng Hsieh

and Tsai-Cheng Chang

Department of Digital Content and Technology, National Taichung University of Education, Taichung, Taiwan

Department of Fashion Design, Asia University, Taichung, Taiwan

Department of Industrial Education and Technology, National Changhua University of Education, Changhua, Taiwan

Department of Management and Information Technology, Southern Taiwan University of Science and Technology,

Tainan, Taiwan

Department of Digital Content and Technology, National Taichung University of Education, Taichung, Taiwan

Keywords: e-Portfolios, Reflection, Aesthetic Literacy.

Abstract: This paper aims to explore the theories and interrelationships of the effectiveness of creating e-portfolios for

enhancing the reflection and aesthetic literacy of first-year college students. First, the paper re-examined the

reflection scale and the aesthetic literacy scale with a questionnaire survey of first-year university students

in the central of Taiwan. Moreover, this paper justified the relationships between the reflection and aesthetic

literacy scales and their dimensions. Furthermore, the research results show that the reflection is highly

correlation to the depth of the digital files and aesthetic literacy is highly correlation to the visual

presentation of the digital files. Both variables can suitably reflect the student’s characteristics in the e-

portfolio., which provides a foundation for future research. Finally, the research attempted to encourage the

school educational incorporating the use of e-portfolios in the 12-year compulsory education curricula.

1 INTRODUCTION

In terms of e-portfolios is a learning product, created

by the learner, a collection of digital artefacts

articulating achievements, experiences and learning.

Through the process of creating these files, learners

demonstrate the knowledge they have acquired. This

paper tends to address the correlation between

learners’ reflection and aesthetic literacy by the

experience of e-portfolios. The objective of this

research is to employ suitable scales whether a

correlation exist between a college freshman’s

reflection and aesthetic literacy when creating an e-

portfolio.

2 LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1 Reflection and Dewey’s Education

Theory

Dewey’s education theory regarding the concepts of

reflection and aesthetic literacy were referred to as

progressivism between the 1920s and 1950s and was

considered mainstream in American education.

However, since the mid-1950s, progressivism has

gradually declined (Ye, 2010). Although a number

of scholars have defended Dewey and contended

that the decline of progressivism cannot be attributed

to Dewey’s theory of education (Lin, 2005), others

have argued that his theory only emphasizes

experiences related to reflection (Wu, 2009).

Therefore, scholars have begun reconsidering the

empirical theory and education theory on reflection

and aesthetic literacy proposed by Dewey

(Exploratorium, 2011; Mcdougall et al., 2011).

2.2 Reflection and e-Portfolios

Reflection is the heart and soul of a portfolio, and

the method to identify personal talent through

feedback analysis, which applied to e-portfolios, is

the objective of reflection (Barrett, 2010a).

Zubizarreta (2004) stated that the goal of a learning

portfolio is to enhance the personal development,

thus it must provide a framework that allows

students to reflect on their learning processes

Lu, S-y., Hsieh, W-h., Lo, C., Hsieh, Y. and Chang, T-C.

The Effectiveness of e-Portfolios for Enhancing College Freshmen’s Reﬂection and Aesthetic Literacy.

In Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Computer Supported Education (CSEDU 2016) - Volume 1, pages 421-425

ISBN: 978-989-758-179-3

421

systematically and continuously. In addition,

through critical reflection, students can develop their

aptitude, skills, and habits. Therefore, self-awareness

was the effectiveness of learning (Barrett, 2005).

The process of learning e-Portfolios product is the

complex processes of planning, synthesising,

sharing, discussing, reflecting, giving, receiving and

responding to feedback (Joyes et al., 2010).

2.3 Aesthetic Literacy and e-Portfolios

Aesthetic literacy is the meaningful response to

reading experiences and explanations, particularly

regarding print, images, and sounds (Clinard and

Foster 1998). The content of aesthetic literacy is

extended through writing, and is a distinctive

communicative language that includes verbal

expressions, music, kinesthesia, and vision.

Moreover, the processes of reading and writing are

not limited to the writing of the text but also include

the responses and communications of various artistic

activities. Thus, Clinard and Foster proposed the

Montana Framework for Aesthetic Literacy to

understand the content of visual, literary, and

performing arts. Furthermore, aesthetic literacy is

not used to cultivate professional artists, but is

instead meant to free students’ imagination and,

thus, enable them to possess the ability of narrating

and expressing their personal experiences of

aesthetic (arts) encounters (Greene, 1995).

3 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

This paper adopted the existing reflection scale

(Kember et al., 1999; 2000) and aesthetic literacy

scale (Zhang, 2011; Cheng et al., 2011) in order to

explore the impact of e-portfolio on relatiionship

between reflection and aesthetic literacy. In termes

of the aesthetic literacy scale was only recently

developed and has not yet been applied by scholar.

The participants of this research were 1,277 first

year university students in Taiwan. This paper

employed a reflection scale, aesthetic literacy scale,

and group questions regarding the three topics of 29

questions were developed through a questionnaire

survey of the variables of participation in e-portfolio

competitions, gender, and years of e-portfolio use.

There were 1,189 valid sample, and the Cronbach’s

α for the reliability of the total scale was 0.839.

Excluding the three basic group questions, the

Cronbach’s α for the reliability of the 26 questions

in the two scales was 0.852. This indicates that the

stability of the scales was acceptable.

3.1 Reliability and Validity of the

Reflection Scale

Table1 shows that the results of this research are

nearly identical to those of the Kember scale

regarding the reliability of the scale dimension.

Excluding the reflection dimension, the Cronbach’s

α of this research exceeded that of the original scale

by 0.104. The values of the other dimensions were

0.004 to 0.015 lower. Additionally, the total α

coefficient of the reflection scale used for this

research was 0.795. Thus, the stability of the

reflection scale was acceptable.

Table 1: The Cronbach’s α value for dimensions of the

scale.

Scale

dimension

*Cronbach’s

α of the

original scale

Cronbach’s α

of the reflection

scale in this

research

Habitual &

action

0.621 0.617

Understanding 0.757 0.744

Reflection 0.631 0.735

Critical 0.675 0.660

Reflective

thinking

0.850 0.820

Total 0.795

*Based on Kember et al., ( 2000) and Zhang, 2011; Cheng et

al., 2011

The validity of the reflection scale used in this

research was based on the content validity,

confirmatory factor analysis, and construct validity

of the original scale (Kember et al., 2000, Wu,

1985).

The reliability results of this research were

nearly identical to those of the total scale developed

by Cheng et al. The Cronbach's α value of this

research was 0.820, slightly lower than that of the

original scale (0.030). However, the reliability of the

two versions of the scale reached an equal standard.

Therefore, the stability of the aesthetic literacy scale

used in this research was acceptable (Table2).

The validity of the aesthetic literacy scale used in

this research was based on the content validity,

confirmatory factor analysis, and construct validity

of the original scale (Wu, 1985; Zhang, 2011; Cheng

et al., 2011) Therefore, the research inferred that the

reliability and validity of the reflection and aesthetic

literacy scales used in this research exceeded the

standard, and the acquired data were worth

considering.

CSEDU 2016 - 8th International Conference on Computer Supported Education

422

Regarding the reliability of the college freshmen

reflection and aesthetic literacy scales, this paper

combined the reflection and aesthetic literacy scales

into a questionnaire comprising 26 questions. The

Cronbach's α value of the questionnaire was 0.844.

Therefore, the stability of the reflection and aesthetic

literacy questionnaire used in this research was

acceptable.

4 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

EMPIRICAL RESULT

4.1 Correlation between College

Freshmen’S Reflection and

Aesthetic Literacy

According to the results shown in the table 2, no

correlation exists between habitual action and

reflection in the dimensions of the reflection scale

because the lowest level of significance (p < .05)

was not achieved. Habitual action and understanding

are negatively correlated, despite the correlation

coefficient being quite low (-0.073*). The

correlation coefficient of habitual action and critical

reflection was 0.151***, which indicates a low

correlation. The results imply that the habitual action

dimension basically comprises actions that do not be

considered, which differs fundamentally from the

dimensions of reflection, understanding, and critical

reflection.

By comparison, the correlation coefficients of

the dimensions of understanding, reflection, and

critical reflection indicate a moderate correlation

(0.498***, 0.544***, and 0.583***) with p < .001.

The data indicates that the three dimensions overlap

in certain areas. Although the confirmatory

discriminant validity of the original scale was

acceptable, the dimensions of the reflection scale

would be more complete if the correlation between

each dimension was further decreased.

The significance level of the correlation

coefficients for the three dimensions of the aesthetic

literacy scale was p < .001, which indicates a

moderate correlation (0.439***, 0.554***, and

0.579***). Due to the confirmatory discriminant

validity was superior when closer to 0, the data

indicate that the dimensions of the original scale

have room for improvement (Wu, 1985).

However, most of the correlation coefficients

between the seven dimensions shows a low

correlation when the two scales were combined for

the test. Excluding the moderate correlation

Table 2: Correlation coefficient analysis of the dimensions

of the reflection and aesthetic literacy scales for college

freshmen.

1 2 3 4 5

1.Habitual

Action

2.Understanding -.125 1

3.Reflection -.013 .531** 1

4.Critical

Reflection

.116** .419** .485** 1

5.Reflective

thinking

.421** .653** .731** .741** 1

(0.434*** and 0.400***) between reflective

thinking and critical reflection and exploration and

performance, the other correlation coefficients were

acceptable. Therefore, the confirmatory discriminant

validity between the dimensions of the scales used in

this research was acceptable.

Table 3: Post Hoc Turkey HSD for difference among

different experienced groups on E-portfolio.

Dimensio

(I)E-

Portfolio

experience

(J) E-

Portfol

experi

ence

MD (I-J) Std.

Error

P-value

Habitual

action

3 years’

experienc

2 -.40616

.14629 .015

1 .16224 .08112 .113

2 years’

experienc

3 .40616

.14629 .015

1 .56840

.12528 .000

1 years’

Experien

3 -.16224 .08112 .113

2 -.56840

.12528 .000

Understan

ding

3 years’

experienc

2 -.18821 .12862 .309

1 -.43318

.07132 .000

2 years’

experienc

3 .18821 .12862 .309

1 -.24497 .11015 .068

1 years’

Experien

3 .43318

.07132 .000

2 .24497 .11015 .068

The Effectiveness of e-Portfolios for Enhancing College Freshmen’s Reﬂection and Aesthetic Literacy

423

Table 3: Post Hoc Turkey HSD for difference among

different experienced groups on E-portfolio (cont.).

Reflection

3 years’

experienc

2 -.08745 .12681 .770

1 -.17407

.07032 .036

2 years’

experienc

3 .08745 .12681 .770

1 -.08661 .10860 .705

1 years’

Experien

3 .17407

.07032 .036

2 .08661 .10860 .705

Critical

3 years’

experienc

2 -.15574 .12242 .411

1 -.19511

.06788 .011

2 years’

experienc

3 .15574 .12242 .411

1 -.03938 .10484 .925

1 years’

Experien

3 .19511

.06788 .011

2 .03938 .10484 .925

2 .05476 .06154 .647

Aesthetic

literacy

3 years’

experienc

2 -2.94554

1.2924

.059

1 -1.22449 .71666 .202

2 years’

experienc

3 2.94554

1.2924

.059

1 1.72105

1.1068

.266

1 years’

Experien

3 1.22449 .71666 .202

2 -1.72105

1.1068

.266

Reflectiv

thinkin

3 years’

experienc

2 -.33502 .14130 .047

-.25605 .07835 .003

2 years’

experienc

3 .33502 .14130 .047

.07898 .12101 .791

1 years’

Experien

3 .25605 .07835 .003

-.07898 .12101 .791

Notes: *p<0.05, **p<0.01, ***p<0.001

An independent-samples t-test was conducted to

compare Aesthetic literacy and reflection by the

experience of e-portfolio competition and results are

displayed in table 4. According to the results there

was a significance difference in Aesthetic literacy of

Habitual action by students without experience of e-

portfolio (M=2.89, SD=.687) and those with

experience (M=3,24, SD=.74); t=-2.656, p=0.000.

There was a significance difference in total aesthetic

literacy by students without experience of e-

portfolio (M=33.46; SD=6.01) and those with

experience of e-portfolio (M=37.05,SD=6.51); t=-

4.303, p=0.000. There was not a significance

difference in understanding, reflection, critical and

total reflective thinking.

Table 4: An independent-samples t-test for aesthetic

literacy and reflective thinking by the experience of e-

portfolio competition.

Dimensions

With

portfolio

competiti

N Mean S.D. t

Sig.

(2-

tailed)

Habitual

action

1134 2.8924 .68781

-3.656 .000

Yes 55 3.2409 .74374

Understandi

1134 3.9791 .61025

.610 .542

Yes 55 3.9273 .69999

Reflection

1134 3.8541 .59248

-.336 .737

Yes

55 3.8818 .69531

Critical

1134 3.5370 .57026

-1.304 .192

Yes

55 3.6409 .70179

Total

Aesthetic

literacy

1134 33.4656 6.01705

-4.303 .000

Yes

55 37.0545 6.51897

Reflective

thinking

1134 5.7050 .65509

-1.863 .063

Notes: *p<0.05, **p<0.01, ***p<0.001

5 CONCLUSIONS

Through a literature review and quantitative

statistical analysis, analysis of the results revealed

that there are tangible benefits related to the

utilization of e-portfolios. This research founds that

college freshmen’s reflection and aesthetic literacy

showed a moderate and positive correlation with the

construction of e-portfolios as learning process files.

Additionally, the level of correlation was higher if

the students had participated in e-portfolio

competitions. The results also indicated that external

encouragement was required to motivate students to

use e-portfolios to create learning process files due

to e-portfolios have still not yet been incorporated

into higher education curricula in Taiwan, which

means the use of e-portfolios is only promoted in

higher education, which is insufficient. This research

suggests that it required extra activities to guide

students to use E-Portfolio to set up their own

learning portfolio. Undertake the effective practices

within E-Portfolio, which will have efficiency gains

of enhance aesthetic literacy and student’s learning

CSEDU 2016 - 8th International Conference on Computer Supported Education

424

reflection were revealed. The findings of this

research presented the use of e-portfolios are able to

increases the correlation between reflection and

aesthetic literacy. Concisely, this paper attempted to

encourage the school educational utilizing e-

portfolios as an evaluation tool to achieve the

educational objectives of the 12-year compulsory

education curricula In Taiwan.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The authors would like to thank National Taichung

University of Education, Taiwan for financially

supporting this research under Contract No. NTCU-

104202. The authors would also like to thank the

students who participated in the evaluation.

REFERENCES

Barrett, H. C. (2010a). Balancing the Two Faces of E-

Portfolios Retrieved April 12, 2015, from http://elect

ronicportfolios.org/balance/balancingarticle2.pdf.

Barrett, H. C. (2005). White Paper: Researching

Electronic Portfolios and Learner Engagement

Retrieved April 12, 2015, from http://electronicportfoli

os.com/reflect/whitepaper.pdf.

Clinard, J., & Foster, L. (1998). Putting Art Standards into

Practice with Aesthetic Literacy. NASSP Bulletin,

82(597), 18-24.

Cheng Shufen (2011). Ability Scale aesthetic taste of the

preparation - A Case Study of College Students.

Unpublished master's thesis, the UIS education quiz

Taichung University of Education, Taichung.

Exploratorium. (2011). Art as a way of knowing: Readings

Retrieved May 15, 2015, from http://www.explorator

ium.edu/knowing/readings.html.

Greene, M. (1995). Active learning and aesthetic

encounters: talks at the Lincoln Center Institute, 1994.

New York: NCREST.

Jimmy Lin (2005). Social Theories about educational

philosophy of John Dewey. South Sinica, 39 (1), 41-

62.

Joyes, G., Gray, L. and Hartnell-Young, E. (2010)

Effective practice with e-portfolios: How can the UK

experience inform practice?, Australasian Journal of

Educational Technology, 2010, 26(1), 15-27.

Knight, G. R. (1998). Issues and Alternatives in

Educational Philosophy (3 edition ed.). Michigan:

Andrews University Press.

Kember, D., Leung, D. Y. P., Jones, A., Loke, A. Y.,

McKay, J., Sinclair, K., Yeung, E. (2000).

Development of a Questionnaire to Measure the Level

of Reflective Thinking. Assessment & Evaluation in

Higher Education, 25(4), 381-395.

Kember, D., Jones, A., Loke, A., McKay, J., Singlair, K.,

Tse, H., Yeung, E. (1999). Determining the level of

reflective thinking from students' written journals

using a coding scheme based on the work of Mezirow.

International Journal of Lifelong Education, 18(1),

18-30.

Mcdougall, M., Bevan, B., & Semper, R. (2011). Art as a

way of knowing Conference Report. Paper presented

at the Art as a way of knowing conference, San

Francisco, CA. http://www.exploratorium.edu/knowin

g/pdfs/ConferenceReport.pdf.

Ye Kun Ling (2010). American progressive education

movement (1919-1955) on the secondary education

reform. Bulletin of educational materials, 46,138-162.

Tuon Hung Wu (1985). Reliability and validity can

degrees and Behavior: Theory, Applications,

introspection (network updated version). Opinion

academic monograph, 29-53.

Wu Kun Wood (2009). Enlightenment of Dewey

experience of curriculum and teaching philosophy.

Taipei Municipal University of Education, 40 (1), 35-

54.

Zhang Yingyao, Shi Qinglin, Xiebai Qi (2011). Sun Yat-

sen basic literacy and core competencies assessment

scale of the planned construction of nuclear final

report. Kaohsiung: Sun Yat-sen.

The Effectiveness of e-Portfolios for Enhancing College Freshmen’s Reﬂection and Aesthetic Literacy

425