One Relevant Lesson
One lesson I take from Weller’s (2020) chapter on 2008 is how closely the downsides of e-portfolios he describes match our own experience at the University of Fribourg’s (UNIFR) School of Medicine. Alongside the key benefits, Weller outlines common barriers encountered by both faculty and students: a lack of support for platform use, overly complex interfaces and, most importantly, the perception among students that e-portfolios were simply too time-consuming. He also notes that students are often unable to export their e-portfolio once their studies end — a real problem for lifelong learners when the institution stops hosting it.
In 2025, we ran a series of focus group interviews to better understand how our medical students perceived their e-portfolios. Beyond confirming the barriers above, we found that most students used the platform only because the Master of Medicine program required it. They uploaded the bare minimum and kept a more traditional vault of evidence — folders and files on their own computers. These interviews prompted us to question the relevance of e-portfolios to our students’ learning experience, and the decision has already been made to phase them out within the next two to three years.
One Conflicting Lesson
Weller’s (2020) chapter on 2005, which covers video, was particularly relevant to my own work creating instructional videos at UNIFR. To me, video is more than a tool: it remains a universal and effective learning medium that can be combined with most of the other tools and pedagogical approaches Weller describes. Where the chapter conflicts with my experience, however, is in its second part, on the “flipped classroom” or “flipped learning” concept, in which students engage with the learning material (including videos) before discussing it with their instructor in face-to-face class time.
While Weller cites several authors who are critical of this model, notably for the lack of evidence for its effectiveness, there are circumstances where it remains a practical way to deal with less-than-ideal learning programs. In our case, most of the instructors who teach in the Master of Medicine program are also active practitioners with limited time dedicated to teaching. The flipped classroom model helps them make the most of their class time by focusing on where students struggle and addressing points of confusion.
Transparency statement : AI assistance was used for grammar checking, phrasing, and final language polish.
References
Weller, M. (2020). 25 years of ed tech. Athabasca University Press. https://www.aupress.ca/books/120290-25-years-of-ed-tech/
Excellent reflections, Florian. I completely agree regarding e-portfolios—without long-term portability, students naturally treat them as a “non-value-add” requirement rather than a personal learning asset, explaining why your medical students defaulted to local storage.
Given that your faculty is phasing out e-portfolios over the next couple of years, I’m curious—is UNIFR considering alternative ways for medical students to curate their reflective practice and clinical evidence, or will students rely entirely on their own local storage systems?
I also really appreciate your defense of the flipped classroom model. Connecting it to Bloom’s Taxonomy highlights why it works so well for time-constrained practitioners: asynchronous videos handle foundational knowledge (recall and understanding), allowing valuable face-to-face sessions to focus entirely on higher-order cognitive tasks like clinical analysis, evaluation, and application. It shifts the in-person dynamic from information delivery to active problem-solving.
Hi Zubeida,
Thank you for taking the time to read and comment. The connection you draw between Bloom’s taxonomy and the flipped classroom model is spot on. In every program I have taken part in, I have always preferred building my own understanding of a topic first, by reading and interacting with the learning materials, before any face-to-face discussion. I suspect this is quite a subjective preference, though.
Regarding your question, we are indeed considering alternatives for our students to curate their knowledge and evidence. We are currently exploring the potential of personal knowledge bases as a central repository for evidence, knowledge and reflections, hosted directly by the students on their own computers. To ensure accessibility and exportability, open-source software and formats (such as Markdown) are our primary focus for now.
Hi Florian, I found your discussion of the flipped classroom really interesting. I liked the contrast between the concerns Weller raises and what you are actually seeing in practice. It made me think about how we balance what the research tells us with what seems to be working in a particular learning environment.
Hi Renata,
Thanks for reading! You make a fair point: while research may show that certain learning designs are more effective than others, those designs may not be suitable for every context.
Salut Flo!
What really caught my attention was that most of your students used the e-portfolio only because it was required and uploaded the bare minimum. That made me think about learner motivation and whether even a potentially useful technology can contribute much to learning if students do not see its value.
I work mainly with adult learners, and I find that people are much more willing to engage with a tool or activity when they can see how it connects to something they actually need or want to accomplish. Your students keeping their own folders and files seems especially interesting because they were still collecting the evidence, just not in the way the institution intended.
It makes me wonder whether the problem was the e-portfolio itself or the lack of perceived value in using it. If the students had more choice in how they created and maintained their portfolios, do you think they would have engaged with them differently?
Salut Christina!
Thank you for commenting. I believe your point raises a real question: if different tools or methods were offered to curate their e-portfolios, would the students spend more time building them? Or do they simply lack the time, or fail to perceive the value of the exercise?
Your point about adult learners seeing the connection between a tool and its purpose more clearly also suggests that learner maturity could be an influencing factor.