Developing Integrated Student-Teacher Portfolio Value in a Medical School Environment

1. Developing Integrated Student-Teacher Portfolio Value in a Medical School Environment Gillian Armitt, Roland Ukor & Tim Dornan Manchester Medical School

2. Outline • Interactions between student and teacher portfolio systems? • Value emerging from whole-system analysis approach? • Background and purpose • Method • Results • Conclusions, value and limitations ? Student portfolio Teacher portfolio

3. Background • Purposes and structure of student e-portfolios • Purposes and structure of teacher e-portfolios • Communities of practice: • Cooperation between student and teacher e-portfolios • Whole system approach to map medical education ‘world’

4. Method Identify stakeholders Gather requirements

5. Method – stakeholder requirements • 19 hospital teachers – individual interviews • 7 students (Y3/Y4) – focus group • 3 students (Y3) – individual interviews • Senior management/admin – meetings, interviews, workshops • ‘domain experts’ in project team

6. Method Identify stakeholders Gather requirements

7. Method Identify stakeholders Gather requirements Object-oriented analysis Develop UML model

8. Method Identify stakeholders Gather requirements Object-oriented analysis Develop UML model Validate UML model Novel use of an ontology tool

9. Method Identify stakeholders Gather requirements Object-oriented analysis Develop UML model Determine services Validate UML model Service-oriented architecture approach Novel use of an ontology tool

10. Method Examples of Services Discussion forum PBL E-portfolio • Logical collections of UML concepts and relationships • Independently implemented • Interact with each other through interfaces • Services interfacing with student and teacher portfolios

11. Method Identify stakeholders Gather requirements Object-oriented analysis Develop UML model Determine services Validate UML model Service-oriented architecture approach Novel use of an ontology tool

12. Method Identify stakeholders Gather requirements Object-oriented analysis (Evaluate user reqs) Develop & roll out software Develop UML model Determine services Validate UML model Service-oriented architecture approach Novel use of an ontology tool

13. Data originating in the Student Portfolio Student Portfolio Teacher Portfolio • Student feedback to teachers: • Teacher motivation • Evidence for teacher PDR portfolios • Management information on teaching quality • “(The feedback system is) an excellent mechanism, with students being perhaps more forthcoming than they would be face to face. Student feedback is an excellent morale-booster for staff”.

14. Data originating in the Teacher Portfolio Student Portfolio Teacher Portfolio • Teacher feedback: • Mentoring student portfolio activities • Supporting student facilitators – discussions • End of firm attendance/monitoring forms • PBL group assessment and feedback forms • Evaluations of Self-Selected Components (SSCs) • Performance in OSCEs

15. Shared data Student Portfolio Marks & Grades Teacher Portfolio • Marks and grades: • Trend data • Student motivation • Staff motivation – PBL groups • Predicting the failing student

16. Shared data Student Portfolio Calendar / Events Teacher Portfolio • Calendar / events management : • Student and teacher timetables • Cancelling events / informing other party • Student recording of teacher non-attendance (KPI) • Evidencing “hours” of teaching activities for teacher PDR • Costing of teaching activities

17. Conclusions Service architecture – student-teacher portfolio interactions

18. Value and limitations of the approach • Value • Listening to stakeholders • View of the system as a whole • Joined up thinking, sparking ideas • Questioning existing processes • Limitations of design • One medical school • Partially built/evaluated

20. UML Design (fragment)