MDE STUDENT E-PORTFOLIOS
1. The MDE e-Portfolio Case
The Master of Distance Education program was launched in January 2000 and is offered in partnership between the
University of Maryland University College (UMUC) and the Center for Life-long Learning1 (C3L) at Oldenburg
University in a fully online asynchronous mode using WebTycho web-based virtual classroom interface developed and
maintained by UMUC. The MDE provides a multidisciplinary focus, building on students’ educational and professional
background, enhancing their career profile towards the areas of distance education and e-learning in a variety of
settings. The population attending the MDE program consists of working adults, from various backgrounds, including
corporate training, military, and academia. During these 8 years2 the capstone course has been the umbrella of two
major activities for students: a research project and a personal e-portfolio.
The main goals of the course have been consistent since its inception:
Each student will develop a personal e-portfolio, which will “demonstrate the student's qualifications gained in
the field” (Bernath & Rubin, 2003) and provide evidence of his/her “competencies and skills in a variety of
disciplines /roles” (p. 24).

Each student will develop a Distance Education project, which should “reflect the student's sophistication in
and knowledge of the field” (p. 24). The project “is intended as both a reflective and a constructive activity”
(UMUC, 2008).
However, despite the maturity of e-learning at an institutional level (UMUC) and an ingrained constructivist
(McPherson & Nunes, 2004) approach in the teaching and learning process, the MDE e-portfolio activity is still below
the expected level of institutional support. Institutional involvement, however, can be controversial when it comes to
student ownership and the use of the e-portfolio as a life-long learning tool.

The conundrum of ownership, integration, interoperability and (students’) future use is at the core of the exploration of
the new action framework for the MDE e-portfolio project. The MDE – based on its core content – is in a prime
position to research, analyze, further develop and adapt e-portfolios.
2. Analysis of Past and Current Situation
2.1. Initial Situation, Research and Proposed Actions
In 2003/2004 Walti was charged with researching the state of the art concerning portfolios and developing strategies
to support students in building their e-portfolios. The trigger was the increasing number of students entering the
capstone course with little or no work done prior to their registration for the MDE capstone course. This meant that,
due to the lack of consciousness and a steep learning curve, too much time was spent on developing the e-portfolio
as opposed to the intended main activity of working on a culminating project. Based on a literature review, conference
attendances and feedback from students who had completed the capstone course the following strategies were
outlined (Walti, 2004a, b, c, 2005, 2008):

To alleviate the technological learning curve and raise consciousness and awareness with respect to the
work that lays ahead the MDE e-portfolio tutorial was developed
to help students understand the concept of e-portfolios and think of and contribute to the development of
1
2
Former Center for Distance Education
Currently the program has around 130 graduates and 230 active students.
S. Porto & C. Walti
1
their e-portfolios on an ongoing basis (Walti, 2004b).

Part of the above strategy incorporated the avocation and implementation of learning journals as a means to
keep track of and archive learning outcomes, feedback, artifacts, reflections and thoughts on their future as
DE professionals.

The ‘MDE Club’, where under the guidance of responsible MDE persons, students could discuss, reflect and
exchange experiences in terms of tools and content with one another.

Finally, it was strongly recommended that the MDE directors approach adjunct faculty to include the eportfolio tutorial link in their classes and remind students that the work on the e-portfolio was an ongoing
process.
In an update to the MDE e-portfolio process Walti (2008) noted that the efforts did not achieve the intended outcomes
or reach any recognizable level of improvement in terms of awareness, preparation, time commitment, technological
learning curve on part of the students. The reasons for this were reflected upon with the co-author (Porto, personal
communication) and ascertained as follows:

The MDE e-portfolio tutorial was only consequently introduced and discussed in OMDE 601, where the
author of the tutorial was the lead adjunct faculty.

During 2005/2006 both partner institutions (UMUC and the University of Oldenburg) experienced changes in
the management of the program and the new directors had other pressing issues to deal with; this
circumstance was not conducive to the implementation of the recommended strategies.

Other adjunct faculty members were never informed or involved in the e-portfolio process and thus not aware
of their important role in raising awareness in the e-portfolio process of their students.

Due to a change in the nature of the e-portfolio tutorial author’s position (from fulltime Oldenburg employee
to adjunct faculty) and a lack of allocated resources from either partner institution, the MDE Club was only
carried out in one term and then abandoned. In addition, no funds were allocated to update and maintain the
tutorial.
This was the situation until Porto (2008) renewed the effort on behalf of the students who needed support and
guidelines to better manage their time commitment to the e-portfolio throughout the program as opposed to
exclusively in the capstone course and appropriate institutional resources.
2.2. Renewed Research and Action Initiative
The following is a compilation of reviews of a total of 33 (past) e-portfolios from MDE graduates. Initial observations
about the limitations of this analysis are:

This is a small subset (around 20%) of all the e-portfolios submitted by MDE graduates (as of Fall 2007).
These observations should not be generalized and serve primarily as the basis for the research conducted
here.

The requirements for the e-portfolios have evolved over time and i.e. components such as the “summative
reflective statement” are absent in early e-portfolios.

In many cases, students in the MDE do not have professional experience and/or backgrounds that correlate
to their studies. Thus, it is more difficult to associate the learning with professional growth.
Based on general guidelines from the literature the following components of each e-portfolio were reviewed:
Main components:
S. Porto & C. Walti
2

Sample of work done during the program

Summative statement, which should convey personal and professional development, impact of the MDE
curriculum on learning, evolution as a scholar and practitioner and future goals

(Reflections)

Resume
Photo or graphics
Additional components:


Other professional or academic artifacts related to distance education outside of the MDE

List of activities and accomplishments outside of the MDE.
Thus far, reflections on one’s own artifacts (sampling of work) were not part of the MDE e-portfolio guidelines, but this
is a core value of the learning through e-portfolios and was added to the analysis of the existing e-portfolios.
For the summer term 2008 a rubric3 was developed to organize the components in each student’s e-portfolio and
classified in distinct performance categories according to the presence and level of completeness of each of the
required and additional components. The quality of the components was not assessed given the lack of initial
performance criteria.
In summary, the analysis of the e-portfolio samples and feedback received from students shows that overall, the eportfolio initiative has been successful within the MDE, given its initial expectations. Anecdotally, students are satisfied
with the activity itself, although there is no evidence that students have used it as a life-long learning tool after leaving
the program. Generally, the e-portfolio is useful in assessing how courses have impacted students professional lives
and enabled them to grow in(to) their careers. The main limitation is the circumstance that most students only start
with their e-portfolio development when they begin with the capstone course.4
In summary, the status of the e-portfolio activity within the MDE today displays the following inadequacies and
challenges. Some of them will be directly addressed in the proposed framework:

Permanence: Currently the environment supported by the institution does not provide permanence to the
students' e-portfolios. This issue needs to be re-visited and new guidelines developed for students.

Lack of the necessary skill set: Most students do not have the necessary technical and pedagogical skill set
to develop the e-portfolio; this includes technology fluency and practice of reflection on one's learning..

Late start: Although the e-portfolio tutorial is introduced to students in their first course, there are no formal
requirements of development of the e-portfolio throughout the program before the capstone course. It will be
necessary to incorporate milestones throughout the program in order to guarantee that students work on
their e-portfolios throughout their courses

Lack of support: Currently, students receive practically no support in the development of the e-portfolio.
Instructors teaching the capstone course must dedicate more time to the development of the research
project and are not always prepared to provide technical feedback or support on e-portfolio development
when students need it.

Lack of institutional support: The institution does not provide a strategy nor technical, pedagogical or
implementational support to students and/or faculty.
For details please see: http://tinyurl.com/eportfolio-rubric
One might say that an exit analysis of previous work has its place as a summative reflection. However, many students have
voiced their concern about not having started the activities of collection, organization and reflection during the program. This
concern is addressed as a major part of the new design for the portfolio initiative in the MDE. See survey results in the appendix
for details.
3
4
S. Porto & C. Walti
3

Lack of correlation with the curriculum: The e-portfolio is not formally connected to the rest of the curriculum,
although it requires students to post artifacts from others courses they have taken. There is a need to
establish a clearer and more direct link between this activity and the rest of the program.

Lack of involvement of other stakeholders: Since the e-portfolio is not well anchored throughout the program,
students rarely include feedback from peers and other faculty members.. The learning journals proposed to
address this issue (Walti 2004 a, b, c) are not anchored in the program.

Grading: The course has been assessed as Pass or Fail. While this may be important given the nature of the
program (the two major deliverables have few standardized assessment criteria), this possibly creates
frustration for students who wish to receive a grade that assesses their performance and not only the
completion of the required components. Final recommendations will not be made in this paper, given that this
requires further discussion within the MDE faculty group and would be included as a criterion in future
research.

Lack of structure and criteria of assessment of e-portfolios: Guidelines that are shared with students are
incomplete and not used for assessment (possibly due to the lack of a performance-based grading scheme).
To add to this data analysis, a survey was sent to students and alumni (through two social networking environments
available to the MDE community (MDE Student Lounge and MDE Alumni Network). The survey
http://tinyurl.com/MDE-student-survey) asks students about their perceptions of the importance of the e-portfolio
activity, the need for orientation in such a process and details on their perception of the capstone course. An image of
the results, based on 25 responses, obtained with this survey is found below. Through analysis of these results, we
were able to summarize the following observations:




Students were overwhelming in support of the e-portfolio activity, as an important step in their professional
development and demonstrated clear intentions of continuous management of their e-portfolio.
Students were mostly neutral about the impact of the existing MDE tutorial, and recognized the need for
support in developing the e-portfolio early on in the program.
The option of an online orientation towards the development of the e-portfolio received clear support from
most students. Options about how this orientation should take place (with/out an instructor and the time
during the semester in which it should take place) received varied responses, demonstrating that the best
method is not yet clear and a single optimal option might in fact not exist to satisfy the entire student
population.
Students were overwhelmingly supportive of keeping the grade of the capstone course a “pass” or “fail”,
which suggests that this might be a critical issue that will need further in depth discussion. Nonetheless, a
rubric for the e-portfolio was seen as a positive addition by a strong majority of students.
3. The Proposal for an Enhanced e-portfolio Initiative
Initiating an e-portfolio project can be extremely challenging (Stefani, Mason & Pegler, 2007) and the case of the MDE
is no different, but does represent fertile ground for such an endeavor. The MDE has an ongoing inception of student
e-portfolios and the concept and value in e-learning is understood. Thus, e-learning practices for teaching and
learning, assessment and learner support are in place, accepted and considered a reliable and authentic education
modality by all stakeholders. The action research conducted thus far evidences the above statements.
In the specific case of the MDE, e-learning is also at the core of the subject matter under consideration. The
expectation is that MDE students should not only be able to develop their own e-portfolios, but need to be
knowledgeable about this topic given its importance in the overall e-learning arena.
Lorenzo and Ittelson (2005) provide a comprehensive list of such issues to be addressed by those responsible for
promoting and overseeing e-portfolios: self-assessment in terms of readiness identifying major critical aspects during
implementation. We have applied these questions to the MDE context, considering the research results. The
conclusion, in conformance with our AR approach is a framework for enhancing the e-portfolio initiative based on the
following components:
S. Porto & C. Walti
4
1.
A minimum set of standardized requirements for e-portfolio structure5
2.
An MDE curriculum revision to anchor the use of e-portfolio throughout all or most of the MDE courses;
3.
A rubric for assessment of students’ e-portfolios;
4.
Strategies for an action plan that supports:
I.
Students’ continuous involvement with the development of the e-portfolio;
II.
III.
Students’ familiarity with technologies for e-portfolio development and maintenance;
Faculty involvement as providers of activities and feedback that enhance students’ e-portfolios;
IV.
Students’ reflection on past work;
V.
Students’ evaluation of their own learning process/progress and development of professional goals;
VI. Diffusion of the values associated with e-portfolios within the program and the institution(s).
As discussed previously, this framework is proposed according to the Action Research method undertaken thus far.
Each of these components will be further discussed and as the implementation of this new phase evolves, the
researchers will be able to assess its importance, effectiveness and feasibility within the current context.
3.1. Minimum Set of Standardized Requirements for e-portfolio Structure
The proposed requirements need to provide students with the necessary guidelines, while at the same time maintain
a level of creativity and authenticity. It should result in the reflection on the student’s journey within the program and
reinforce feelings of ownership in order to promote e-portfolios as a life-long learning tool.
Two sets of standards closely related to the MDE program are:

Core Learning Areas – formulated in the institutional outcomes assessment process (UMUC, 2005); and

MDE program objectives (UMUC, 2007)
The area of specialized knowledge in the MDE program is not specifically included in the institutional outcomes
assessment process, but is obviously at the core of competencies students need to develop.
Students are never formally introduced to this plan nor how it relates to their program. However, a clear understanding
of these goals is of utmost importance in planning ones own learning and reflecting on achievements and milestones.
Exposure to and reflection on these outcomes is key to the proposed framework (Easterling, Hall & Holzmann, 2003).
3.2. Curriculum Revision and Anchoring of e-portfolio Activities
Including this component, which aims to guide students throughout the program to collect, organize and reflect on
artifacts. By proposing criteria for selecting samples and anchoring this within the individual courses, students avoid
postponing these activities. The involvement of faculty and the volume of required curriculum change must stay
feasible; changing current assignments is not the main thrust at this point. Instead, other anchoring methods within
the individual courses should be contemplated. This paper refrains from formulating definitive choices, as this needs
to be further discussed with faculty.
3.3. Rubric for Assessment of Students’ e-portfolio within OMDE 670 (Capstone)
The underlying belief is that the MDE e-portfolio should be owned and managed by students and is a personal
reflection of their learning journey. However, this conflicts with the fact that the e-portfolio is a required assignment
within OMDE 670 – the capstone course. Providing a rubric (based on the expectations discussed in this document) to be shared with students and used by OMDE 670 instructor(s) for the purpose of assessment and guidance is an
urgent need.
5
Based on information from the literature and the outcomes assessment plan developed for the MDE
S. Porto & C. Walti
5
The proposed rubric should be understood as an initial proposal, but is based on the goals and changes discussed in
this paper and must be discussed and enhanced based on the feedback from instructors involved in the capstone
course, the MDE managers and other course. Because not all students joining OMDE 670 in the immediate future will
have been exposed to the new initiative long enough and will not have developed their e-portfolios as an ongoing
activity, and OMDE 670 remains a course assessed on a Pass or Fail basis (instead of a letter grade), the rubric
provides a means for formative assessment. It also supports students in enhancing their e-portfolios and to strongly
consider and use it as a lifelong learning tool.
The proposed analytical rubric based on (Barrett, 2003; Klein, 2003) considers the following major aspects: Content
(Artifacts & Reflections), Design and Technical.
The levels of performance suggested are Poor, Good, and Excellent. ‘Poor’ reflects below expectations, ‘Good’ stands
for achieving minimal expectations and ‘Excellent’ refers to those e-portfolios that go beyond the basic requirements6.
As with all rubrics, this is a work in-progress. Students (current and graduates) and faculty members will be able to
propose changes and enhancements as they use this rubric to provide feedback and it should be used in a formative
fashion. Students should be able to work on their e-portfolios based on this feedback and achieve higher levels of
performance in all criteria.
3.4. Action Plan Strategies
As part of our renewed e-portfolio framework, and as an essential ingredient of our action research approach, we will
be conducting one core endeavor: conducting a short voluntary orientation workshop – here named MDE e-portfolio
orientation– available to ALL students, to be held in an online environment7 during one week in each term. This
orientation serves as a pro-active mechanism to support e-portfolio activities, reminding students to maintain their eportfolios and clarifying questions regarding technology and structure. Being in the early weeks of each term, these
orientations will trigger students’ awareness and readiness for necessary activities during that particular semester, as
well as making sure artifacts (from the previous semester) are stored and reflections on previous course work are
completed and validated. In addition, as expected in action research cases, it provides a feedback channel on the eportfolio initiative that allows for revision and refinement of this plan based on students’ needs. These workshops are
planned to be offered by the program director(s), with possible support from MDE graduate volunteers, a TA and other
interested program faculty.
I.
Strategy for increased and ongoing student involvement
II.
Increased student involvement in building their e-portfolios results in greater communication on this topic
throughout the program. The program director(s) communicate through faculty with standard messages sent
out to all at the beginning and end of each term and includes an invitation to the workshops. The MDE blog
(http://mdeblog.blogspot.com) and the MDE student lounge (http://groups.google.com/group/MDE-lounge)
are additional vehicles.
Strategy for increased familiarity with technologies
Given the lack of existing institutional tools, guidelines for external technology will include open source
systems and web 2.0 based tools. The awareness and the continuous discussion about available tools are
important for the e-portfolio activities to enhance students’ (and faculty) awareness and information on elearning developments.
III.
Strategy for faculty involvement
Faculty involvement and support of this initiative is crucial. Their involvement starts with information and
discussion sessions during regular MDE faculty meetings. Faculty involved in the capstone course will have
6
The final rubric can be found as webpage at this URL: http://tinyurl.com/eportfolio-rubric (UMUC, 2008)
The online environment for the MDE e-portfolio workshop could be the existing MDE Student Lounge or a separate
environment, which would have the advantage of not cluttering the lounge with this discussion.
7
S. Porto & C. Walti
6
a prominent role in this process.
IV.
Strategy for students’ reflective activity
V.
One of the core activities in the workshop will be to assess major learning achievements, select, organize
and reflect on past artifacts. This will support regular updating and maintenance of the e-portfolio and/or
provide the opportunity to start development.
Strategy for students’ planning of their own learning process and professional goals
An additional activity during the MDE e-portfolio workshops is to have students reflect and journal on their
current goals for the learning of a particular semester and for the near professional future.
VI.
Strategy for diffusion of the e-portfolio values within the program and the institution
The diffusion of e-portfolio values within the program happens through faculty meetings and workshops with
students. At the institutional level, information sessions on ongoing activities should be held. Institutional
conversations/negotiations can ultimately solicit support for the program’s e-portfolio needs from the
organization(s). However, greater institutional involvement may mean that standardization becomes the main
focus, thus blurring the programmatic goal of a student-centered life-long learning task.
4. Conclusions
The authors re-visited the current MDE e-portfolio implementation process, reviewed previous contextual work and
renewed and expanded the authors’ understanding of and questions related to the e-portfolio development scenario
based on the action research framework that guided the process (McPherson & Nunes 2004; Checkland & Holwell,
1998). The re-initiated and now better-grounded research serves to facilitate the ongoing, cyclical evaluation of the eportfolio by taking into consideration the evolving organizational contexts and educational settings as well as
pedagogical implications.
Questions and issues, such as the tradeoff between flexibility and standardization, the use of e-portfolios as an
assessment tool on student and institutional levels, student readiness and support, faculty involvement, minimal
standards, curriculum revision and institutional engagement are all involved in this process (Siemens, 2004; Baston,
2007; Ayala, 2006; Ittleson, 2001, Walti, 2004, 2008).
In this paper on an enhanced e-portfolio experience within the MDE, we aspire to maintain the ‘learning nature’ of
students’ e-portfolios while promoting students’ reflections on their accomplishments, planning their future learning
and showcasing their artifacts as evidence of acquired professional competencies while taking action in supporting
our learners in this endeavor to make it meaningful within and beyond the MDE context. On the path to achieving
authenticity, a balance between organizational support, individual ownership and lifelong learning we provide students
with the necessary tools and support while leaving room for reflection and creativity. We work with adult learners and
their everyday balancing acts while pursuing professional, personal and academic goals and believe that everything
possible should be undertaken to accommodate a process and product that makes e-portfolios valuable for our
learners.
A wide spectrum of research questions and issues arise as we move forward with the new proposed framework. The
action research model is a well suited to continue to explore such issues. These certainly invite the MDE community
and other stakeholders to engage in further reflections, discussions and advancements. A few are worth mentioning
as part of the outlook for implementing the project:


The importance of providing continuous support to students in order to create a holistic eportfolio experience: What are the gains for students? What are advances for the MDE
management?
What improvements can be expected when connecting the MDE outcomes assessment to the
e-portfolio? How can the results of the e-portfolio activity inform a more authentic outcomes
assessment process?
What issues must be addressed to achieve the necessary level of support for and from adjunct
S. Porto & C. Walti
7

faculty to better align the process within the program?
The proposals discussed in this paper take limitations into consideration and aspire for higher goals within existing
contextual institutional boundaries. This plan, just like an individual e-portfolio, is a work in progress, shaped by
continuous reflections, accomplishments, feedback from stakeholders and institutional scenarios.
References
1.
AYALA, J. I. (2006, November). Electronic Portfolios for Whom? Educause Quarterly, (1), 12-13. Retrieved February 4,
2008, from http://www.educause.edu/ir/library/pdf/eqm0613.pdf
2.
BARRETT, H. (2003). Evaluating electronic portfolios. Electronicportfolios.org. Retrieved Arpil 23, 2008 from
http://electronicportfolios.org/ALI/rubrics.html
3.
BARRETT, H. (2006) Authentic Assessment with Electronic portfolios using common software and web 2.0 tools.
Electronicportfolios.org. Retrieved January 25, 2008, from http://electronicportfolios.org/web20.html
4.
BARRETT, H. (2007) My "Online Portfolio Adventure" Electronicportfolios.org. Retrieved January 25, 2008, from
http://electronicportfolios.org/myportfolio/versions.html
5.
BARRETT, H. & GARRETT (2007) N. Online Personal Learning Environments: Structuring Electronic Portfolios for
Lifelong and Life Wide Learning. Electronicportfolios.org. Retrieved January 25, 2008, from
http://electronicportfolios.org/portfolios.html
6.
BATSON, T (2007). The ePortfolio hijacked. Campus Technology. Retrieved April 23, 2008 from
http://www.campustechnology.com/articles/56617/
7.
BERNATH, U. & RUBIN, E. (2003). The online Master of Distance Education (MDE): Its history and realization. In U.
Bernath & E. Rubin (Eds). Reflections on Teaching and Learning in an Online Master Program (pp. 9-50).Oldenburg:
Bibliotheks- und Informationssystem der Universität Oldenburg.
8.
UMUC. (n.d.) Capstone course information. Retrieved on February 10, 2008 from
http://www.umuc.edu/departments/omde/capstone/capstone.shtml
9.
CHECKLAND, p., & HOLWELL, S. (1998). Action research: Its nature and validity. Systemic Practice and Action
Research, 11(1), 9-21. Retrieved July 15, 2008 from ABI/INFORM GLOBAL database.
10. COGHLAN, D., & BRANNICK, T. (2001). Doing action research in your organization. London: Sage Publications
11. EASTERLING, C., HALL, M. and HOLZMANN, G. (2003). University-Wide ePortfolio: Infrastructure for a culture of
evidence. Retrieved January 30, 2008 from http://portal1.oru.edu:7777/pls/portal/dynmgr.doc_get.doc?p_id=433
12. ITTELSON, J. (2001). Building and e-dentity for each student. Educause Quarterly, (4), 43-45. Retrieved February 8,
2008, from http://www.educause.edu/ir/library/pdf/EQM0147.pdf
13. KLEIN, S. (2003). Portfolio evaluation rubric for preservice portfolios. Retrieved on April 24, 2008 from
http://www.uwstout.edu/art/artedportfolios/evaluating/portevaluatiorubric.html
14. LORENZO, G. & ITTELSON, J. (2005) An overview of e-portfolios. Educause Connect. Retrieved January 28, 2008,
from http://www.educause.edu/ir/library/pdf/ELI3001.pdf
15. LORENZO, G. & ITTELSON, J. (2005b) Demonstrating and assessing student learning with e-portfolios. Educause
Connect. Retrieved January 25, 2008, from http://www.educause.edu/ir/library/pdf/ELI3003.pdf
16. McPHERSON, M., & NUNES, M. B. (2004). Developing innovation in online learning. An action research framework.
London: RoutledgeFalmer
17. PORTO, S.C. (2008). E-Portfolios from concept to implementation: In search of an enhanced MDE experience.
Unpublished thesis for the MDE program.
18. SIEMENS, G. (2004). ePortfolios. elearnspace. Retrieved February 8, 2008, from
http://www.elearnspace.org/Articles/eportfolios.htm
19. STEFANI, L., MASON, R. & PEGLER, C. (2007). The educational potential of e-portfolios. Oxon, UK: Routledge.
S. Porto & C. Walti
8
20. WALTI, C. (2008). Die Anwendung von Web-Basierten Portfolios von StudentInnen. Beispiel: Master of Distance
Education Programm: Update. In V. Hornung-Prähauser & M. Luckmann (Eds.): Selbstorganisiertes Lernen mit ELearning. Einblick in die Landschaft der webbasierten Bildungsinnovationen. Sammlung von ausgewählten Fach- und
Praxisbeiträgen zu interaktiven Lehr- und Lernszenarien aus den EduMedia-Konferenzen 2005-2008. Insbruck,
Austria: StudienVerlag
21. WALTI, C. (2005). Die Anwendung von Web-Basierten Portfolios von StudentInnen. Beispiel: Master of Distance
Education Programm. Presentation at ePortfolio Forum Austria 2005, April 27, 2005, Salzburg, Austria.
22. WALTI, C. (2004a). Implementing web-based portfolios and learning journals as learner support tools: An illustration. In
J. Brindley, C. Walti, & O. Zawacki-Richter (Eds.), Learner support in open, distance and online learning environments
(pp. 157-168). Oldenburg: Bibliotheks- und Informationssystem der Universität Oldenburg.
23. WALTI, C. (2004b). The web-based portfolio and learning journal in the MDE program – Support for a work in progress.
In U. Bernath & A. Szücs (Eds.), Proceedings of the 3rd EDEN Research Workshop Oldenburg, March 4-6, 2004, (pp.
87-95). Oldenburg: Bibliotheks- und Informationssystem der Universität Oldenburg.
24. WALTI, C. (2004c). Net-based portfolios and learning journals: The journey of learning. (Tutorial for the MDE eportfolio.) Retrieved on January 25, 2008 from http://www.uni-oldenburg.de/zef/christinewalti/tutorial/index.htm
25.
UMUC. (2008). MDE e-portfolio rubric. Retrieved August 8, 2008 from http://tinyurl.com/eportfolio-rubric
26. UMUC. (2008). OMDE 670 Course description. Retrieved February 10, 2008 from
http://www.umuc.edu/programs/grad/courses/omdecat.shtml#omde670
27. UMUC. (2007). MDE outcomes assessment plan. Retrieved February 4th, 2008 from
http://www.umuc.edu/outcomes/pdfs/inst_plan_2007.pdf
28. UMUC. (2005). UMUC Core Learning areas. Retrieved February 4, 2008 from
http://www.umuc.edu/outcomes/areas.shtml
Additional Works Consulted: http://scsporto.googlepages.com/Additional_works_consulted_Porto_Wal.htm
S. Porto & C. Walti
9
Appendix 1: Results of MDE student survey - http://tinyurl.com/MDE-student-survey-results
S. Porto & C. Walti
10