JCPSLP Vol 16 no 3 2014_FINAL_WEB

2. My development of competency – uploaded evidence mapped against CBOS including a STAR-L (Situation, Task, Assessment, Results, Learning) reflective comment (AeP, 2009). 3. Record of clinical hours – records of hours, range of experience and learning contracts. Method Participants In total, 53 students enrolled in years 2–4 of the speech pathology course at ECU were invited to participate in the study by announcements in lectures and being sent an email link to an anonymous online questionnaire. Information about the project was given and e-mailed to students. Consent was given by completing the questionnaire. Repeat emails were sent out and the questionnaires were open for two months. Ethics approval was received from the University’s Research Ethics Office (No: 8307). The number of participants who responded in each cohort, their ages and number of years at university are shown in Table 1. The ePortfolio was used in the course for 18 months before the study commenced. Therefore, fourth and third-year students had been using the ePortfolio for 18 months, and second-year students for one year. Table 1. Number, age and years at university of students Student cohort 2nd 3rd 4th Number of students 14 24 15 My age is: 18–20 1 3 2 21–25 3 3 4 26–30 1 2 0 31–40 0 1 2 above 40 1 2 0 Including this year I have studied at university for: 2 years 3 0 0 3 2 7 0 4 0 2 8 5 0 1 0 6 + 1 1 0 Questionnaire This project used a mixed methods approach. Data was collected via a student questionnaire and additional qualitative data (not reported) was also collected through student focus groups. The questionnaire consisted of 4 forced choice questions, 30 statements and 3 free text questions (see Appendix). The forced choice questions gathered demographic data and elicited comfort and confidence levels with technology. The statements were rated using a 5-point Likert scale from strongly disagree (1) to strongly agree (5). The statements related to topics such as engagement with the portfolio, using the technology,

( process ) and a product for the assessment of learning (Hallam & Creagh, 2010). While research is limited, there have been studies that show ePortfolios can be useful to support student learning; develop reflection, self-awareness and IT skills (Buckley et al., 2009); and foster increased responsibility for learning (Tochel et al., 2009). However, students may find an ePortfolio time-consuming and to ensure students’ engagement it must be aligned with course outcomes, linked to future careers, have a clear purpose and have clear guidelines (Buckley et al., 2009). Researchers have suggested that embedding ePortfolios across a whole course ensures the greatest benefits (Faulkner, Aziz, Waye, & Smith, 2013; Woodley & Sims, 2011). Furthermore, the ePortfolio platform needs to be user-friendly, flexible, transferable and have easy access (Gordon & Campbell, 2013) as well as be well-designed and have good organisational support (Tochel et al., 2009). Student perspectives of ePortfolios have been reported in United States and the United Kingdom but research is limited and results are mixed (Buckley et al., 2009; Hallam & Creagh, 2010). Exploring student perspectives of an ePortfolio use across different cohorts is also relatively new (Chambers & Wickersan, 2007). As student participation is vital to the successful implementation of an ePortfolio, the investigation of student perspectives is required. Yet there is very little evidence of student perspectives of the ePortfolio in Australia (Hallam & Creagh, 2010) and no reports of SP students’ perspectives. Therefore, this project investigates students perceptions across a course of the validity of using an ePortfolio as a tool for learning and for showcasing their skills to future employers. ePortfolio implementation In 2010, an ePortfolio was embedded across the newly established four-year undergraduate SP course at Edith Cowan University as a learning tool and assessment task. The ePortfolio aimed to (a) engage students in collecting evidence of clinical competencies; (b) reflect upon their learning to strengthen the theory/clinical practicum links, (c) develop reflective practice; (d) evaluate their own strengths and weaknesses in order to set future clinical practicum goals; and (e) map their own hours across the range of practice. The SP course used My Expo as the ePortfolio platform as it was already in use by nursing and education courses within the university. A template with detailed assignment information and marking guides to cover all four years was developed in MyExpo that students downloaded once in the second semester of first year. The instructions were collated into a manual and a frequently asked questions document was available to students. The workload was designed to increase in complexity and volume as the student progressed through the course. Each semester the assessment was carefully explained to students and an opportunity to workshop the ePortfolio in a computer lab was available. The template for the students consisted of three parts: 1. Reflections on my learning – structured reflections about their learning on their practicum and about themselves as a speech pathologist.

140

JCPSLP Volume 16, Number 3 2014

Journal of Clinical Practice in Speech-Language Pathology