A Systematic Map of Evaluation Criteria Applicable for Evaluating E-Portfolio Systems

Gary F. McKenna, Gavin J. Baxter

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceedingChapter

3 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

This chapter examines the literature on evaluation methods within e-learning with respect to their applicability to evaluate e-portfolio systems within higher education as evaluation criteria for reviewing e-portfolio provisions do not currently exist in the literature. The approach taken is to initiate two extensive literature searches and reviews. The first search was undertaken in 2009 involved reviewing over 600 articles by abstract dating from 1995 to 2010 to develop evaluation criteria suitable for Blackboard LMS e-portfolio systems evaluation. The second search undertaken in 2013 involved extending the search criteria to include further terminology and databases and returned over 4107 articles, which were read by title and abstract dating from 2009 to 2013, in order to systematically map evaluation methods used within e-learning to assess their quality and applicability for evaluating e-portfolio systems. The implications of the research undertaken provide a starting-point for further research into the development of robust e-portfolio evaluation models and frameworks. The lack of evidence uncovered in the 2009 and 2013 searches of the literature justify the need for further research into the design, development, and testing of evaluation methods for the evaluation of e-portfolio systems.
Original languageEnglish
Title of host publicationAdvanced Research in Adult Learning and Professional Development
Subtitle of host publicationTools, Trends, and Methodologies
EditorsVictor C. X. Wang
Place of PublicationHershey, PA, USA
PublisherIdea Group Inc
Pages1-54
Number of pages54
ISBN (Print)9781466646155
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2014

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'A Systematic Map of Evaluation Criteria Applicable for Evaluating E-Portfolio Systems'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this