I am familiar with LaGuardia’s eportfolio system, first time I heard about it was back in 2004. It was relatively unique back then, and I still like the way it allows a student to feature their work. This student’s portfolio is a good example of the power of such a program.

That said, they are using BlackBoard’s eportfolio, and along with that comes some real questions. Is this just a fixed space that students create once as a model and then walk away from? Can they take it with them when they go? Or does LaGuardia’s BlackBoard installation have to house it forever? Can they use multimedia? Are they eportfolio-ing (in Alan’s sense of the term)? And what about that ugly URL?

This model really embodies everything the one I am outlining above is moving away from. It is a centralized depository for static work, not a vital trace of a student’s development. Not to mention the web design and interface limits the ability for a student to really express themselves aesthetically as they would like. I think it may have been impressive back in 2003, but it really isn’t in 2008. And not simply for aesthetics reasons, but for the larger realities of capturing the stream-driven ideas of education that reflect the development and reflection on thought over the course of study–which cannot be encapsulated in a static space that is hard to find and far less than open.

More than that, take a look at the carrot system involved in this process, the portfolios are reviewed, graded, and then a monetary reward is accompanied for those students who go through al the workshops. It is the most industrial, capitalistic approach to an ePortfolio you can imagine. It is an inauthentic assessment model, that undermines much of the process minded nature of how the web works.