Enabling computing students to recognize acquired competencies with ePortfolios

ABSTRACT

Background and Context

While higher education in Norway intends to ensure students can translate academic learning to real-world settings, a gap persists in computing students’ perceptions of their acquired competencies.

Objective

This study aims to understand the gap and explore how formative assessment with ePortfolios can help students recognize acquired competencies.

Method

This study investigates data from a national student survey, summative reflections from 67 computing students’ exams at the end of a course, and observations of their ePortfolio development during the course.

Findings

The ePortfolio emerges as a powerful tool, enabling students to actively record their learning journey, recognize acquired competencies, and gain a holistic understanding of the total learning outcomes, thus bridging the identified gap.

Implications

This study offers insights into how ePortfolios can help computing students recognize acquired competencies and present implications and recommendations for higher education institutions and teachers.

KEYWORDS:

• ePortfolio
• learning outcomes
• competencies

1. Introduction

Computing students gain competencies throughout their educational journey, which is essential for a nation or organization’s ability to maintain a competitive edge in the ever-evolving technological landscape. As the technological sphere continuously transforms industries and drives economic growth, having a workforce adept in computer science becomes vital to ensuring long-term economic prosperity (Abdurakhmanova et al., 2020). However, many students worldwide quit their computing education (Lacave et al., 2018; Pappas et al., 2016; Säde et al., 2019). Additionally, a national student survey from Norway reveals that in 2021, only 25% of the students in computing programs felt they had received good training in how to convey their competencies. Moreover, only half believed they had been provided adequate information about how their competencies would be relevant in future job contexts (Bakken et al., 2022). As students’ understanding of their present and future competencies contributes to their self-efficacy and perception of their studies as meaningful, helping the students develop this understanding is likely to positively affect retention and learning outcomes (Taheri et al., 2018).

In 2011, Norway took a significant step towards standardized and detailed descriptions of learning outcomes levels by adopting the Norwegian qualifications framework for lifelong learning (NKR) (Ministry of Education and Research, 2011). This framework, anchored in the broader European context through its alignment with the Bologna Process and the European Qualifications Framework for Lifelong Learning (EQF) (European Commission, 2008), establishes a benchmark for the standards and quality of qualifications in higher education (European Commission/EACEA/Eurydice, 2018). Such alignment mandates that countries emphasize learning outcomes, detailing the intended learning outcomes including the knowledge, skills, and competencies students should attain by the end of their courses and study programs. Concerning learning outcomes, competence is the proven ability to use knowledge, skills and personal, social and/or methodological abilities, in work or study situations and in professional and personal development” (Ministry of Education and Research, 2011, p. 39). However, while these systems aim to provide clarity in what knowledge, skills, and competencies students should hold at the end of a learning process, this is still not the case. In the national student survey, the feedback from the students themselves reveals concerns about how academic learning is transformed to a professional learning. This concern is also highlighted by the Ministry of Education and Research in Norway: transforming academic learning to a professional context (Meld. St. 16, 2020, 2020–2021).

The ePortfolio is a powerful tool for self-awareness and professional development (Okoro et al., 2011; Ring et al., 2017) and is found to make invisible learning visible to students themselves (Eynon et al., 2014; Kuh et al., 2017; Olstad et al., 2022; Ring et al., 2017). The generic definition of “ePortfolio” relates to the ePortfolio as a technological product, a digital container capable of storing students’ examples of work, so-called artifacts, both visual and auditory content, including text, images, video, and sound (Abrami & Barrett, 2005). Beyond the product view, the ePortfolio represents a dynamic process where learning occurs through construction as students engage in selecting artifacts and reflect on what they represent, evaluate their performances, and draw connections between distinct assignments, courses, and other activities (Mazlan et al., 2015).

The issue of students finding it challenging to translate their academic learning to professional contexts has been addressed by the Ministry of Education and Research in Norway (Meld. St. 16, 2020-, 2020–2021). To help students in this regard, the Ministry recommends that the higher education institutions enhance career guidance. While the challenge of translating academic learning to professional contexts is a widespread concern across study programs, the research presented in this paper seeks to gain a deeper understanding of the gap targeting computing education specifically. Furthermore, this study looks into how ePortfolios, in particular, can add value to the intention of learning outcomes and support students in recognizing gained competencies. Our study is guided by two overarching research questions (RQs):

• RQ1: What is the gap between the intention of learning outcomes regarding competencies and computing students’ perceptions of their acquired competencies?

• RQ2: How can formative assessment with ePortfolios support computing students in recognizing acquired competencies?

Central to the first research question (RQ1) is a national student survey from Norway. The survey sheds light on whether computing students feel they have been equipped to convey competencies and if they have been provided with adequate information about the relevance of these competencies in future job contexts. Our analysis of computing students’ summative reflections at the end of a course further deepens our understanding of students’ perspectives. The survey findings, along with the student reflections, give a picture of a discrepancy between, on the one hand, the university’s expectations regarding students’ understanding of their competencies and abilities to convey these competencies and, on the other hand, students’ own perception of acquired competencies and their actual abilities to describe them. Thus, the first research question (RQ1) provides essential background information that sets the stage for the subsequent inquiry. The second research question (RQ2) explores how formative assessment with ePortfolios might enable computing students to recognize and articulate their acquired competencies.

The international research literature on ePortfolios is dominated by studies on the use of ePortfolios in teacher education, creative disciplines, communication, and medicine (Mihai et al., 2021). The present study will enrich the literature with new insight into using ePortfolios in computing education.

Although set in the Norwegian context, our study is of interest from an international perspective. The EQF learning outcomes approach, including knowledge, skills, and competence, is compatible with the Qualifications Framework for the European Higher Education Area (EHEA) (European Commission/EACEA/Eurydice, 2018), which has now been implemented in 49 countries (ENIC-NARIC Networks, 2023).

2. Background

In computing education, students develop diverse competencies essential for their future roles in the industry. This education provides a broad spectrum of skills and related knowledge, covering areas such as coding, designing software, and extracting information. It equips students with essential competencies, from software project estimation and effective communication to project management (Pappas et al., 2016). These competencies are essential for promoting successful professional practice in various career paths (ACM/IEEE, 2013).

According to Taheri et al. (2018), job-related factors influence the decision to pursue computing education. However, as the education continues, students’ beliefs about the competencies they acquire can affect their motivation to engage and their determination to remain in the program (Taheri et al., 2018). The spectrum of motivation can range from extrinsic motivation, fuelled by external rewards like grades or guidance from a mentor to intrinsic motivation, driven by personal passions or the desire for mastery (Ryan et al., 2000). According to Herman (2012), fostering a sense of competence can increase the motivation of computing students to continue learning and improve (Herman, 2012). A sense of competence can be seen as a feeling of intrinsic motivation that stems from an individual’s belief in their ability to perform and achieve tasks successfully. This internal drive is rooted in the desire for mastery and confidence in one’s competencies rather than being influenced by external rewards or pressures such as grades or approvals (Pink, 2011).

2.1. The ePortfolio in an international perspective

Students, in general, tend to focus mainly on aspects such as the final exam, the grade, and the perfect research paper, while the steps in the learning process become invisible (Johnsen, 2012), making it challenging for students to recognize evidence of employability (St Jorre & Oliver, 2018). Underlying the ePortfolio is a deep approach to learning, where students seek to construct meaning and knowledge rather than to complete learning tasks (Ehiyazaryan-White, 2012).

As a process, the ePortfolio is a virtual space for students to reflect on artifacts, assess their work, and make connections among different courses, assignments, and other activities, which constructs learning, puts the agency in the hands of students, and fosters motivation to learn (Mazlan et al., 2015). Such an approach to learning moves towards constructivism (Ehiyazaryan-White, 2012), a theory based on the idea that students actively construct their knowledge from experiences rather than passively taking in information (Jonassen, 1991). Additionally, since ePortfolios are web-based tools that students can freely share, they offer students opportunities to construct knowledge by sharing it with peers or teams and interacting with the learning materials and environments (Ehiyazaryan-White, 2012). By sharing ePortfolios, the ePortfolios become an environment where students can collaborate and learn from each other (Wakimoto & Lewis, 2014). According to Amineh and Asl (2015), such interactions fall under social constructivism (Amineh & Asl, 2015).

By reflecting upon various artifacts in their ePortfolios – be it projects, presentations, essays, or multimedia content – students can effectively showcase and articulate their ability to apply learning to real-world contexts (Faulkner et al., 2013). This tangible demonstration and articulation can enhance students’ grasp of the competencies they have gained from their educational experiences (Alexiou & Paraskeva, 2010), fostering a sense of competence (Wigfield & Eccles, 2000). In particular, a sense of competence is fundamental for students’ motivation to continue learning (Herman, 2012; Wigfield & Eccles, 2000). Several motivation theories, such as the expectancy-value theory, self-determination theory, and self-efficacy theory, highlight the connection between a sense of competence and motivation to learn (Bandura, 1978; Deci & Ryan, 1985; Eccles & Wigfield, 2002; Wigfield & Eccles, 2000).

Reflection, as a professional methodology and mechanism, enables students to derive learning from their experiences (Coulson & Harvey, 2013). Reflection is also fundamental in ePortfolio development (Abrami & Barrett, 2005; Ring et al., 2017; Yan & Brown, 2017). For assessment purposes, the artifacts and the associated reflections are evidence of achievement and demonstrate skills, competencies, or learning acquired from education and training (Janosik & Frank, 2013). Reflecting on artifacts, however, might represent a great challenge for many students (Slepcevic-Zach & Stock, 2018). To meet this challenge, Ring et al. (2017) present a reflection model, the What? So what? Now what? with guiding questions. The model intends to make the students think about what they have done, what they learned, and what they are capable of because of what they have learned (Ring et al., 2017). In the study by Ring et al. (2017) the authors introduced the reflection model in a targeted ePortfolio session, including technological and pedagogical instructions and support (Ring et al., 2017). Relevant literature emphasizes the need for technical and pedagogical support when introducing students to ePortfolios (Attwell, 2009; Eynon et al., 2014; Hallam & Creagh, 2010; Tosh et al., 2005). The literature shows that when integrating ePortfolios, teachers often provide introduction sessions covering both technological and educational aspects, and students typically give positive feedback on these sessions (Johnsen, 2012; Lambert & Corrin, 2007; Poole et al., 2018; Ring et al., 2017).

ePortfolios can be shared externally and internally, and ePortfolio activities are user-owned in that students organize and structure their learning. Since students have the autonomy to organize and structure their learning within the ePortfolio, it instils a strong sense of personal commitment and ownership (Abrami & Barrett, 2005). The ePortfolio’s shareable nature allows teachers to access, assess, and comment on students’ work and reflections. Furthermore, this accessibility can be extended to peers, family, employers, or other relevant parties, fostering a broader feedback environment. In addition, when students visit their peers’ ePortfolios, such as those of fellow students, and read their reflections, they can make connections to their own experiences (Welsh, 2012). They may rediscover the learning that happened or discover new knowledge from others (Olstad et al., 2022).

Considering lifelong learning, ePortfolios can be essential because they provide evidence of learners’ progress over time and, in the context of self-evaluation, enable reflecting on personal strengths and weaknesses and recognizing gaps in existing knowledge and competencies (Fuglik, 2013, p. 9). In New Zealand, all educational institutions and students have access to a government-supported and developed ePortfolio platform because of a dual policy aims of promoting lifelong learning and developing open-source platforms students have access to after graduation (Maher & Gerbic, 2009). The capacity of graduates to actively cultivate, modify, and present their skills in various ways is a crucial element of their employability (St Jorre & Oliver, 2018).

2.2. Competence and learning outcomes

In Norway, intended learning outcomes as described for courses and study programs capture not only the subject-specific competencies but also the broader, general competencies students are expected to acquire. The emphasis on learning outcomes is central to both the EQF and the NKR. “Learning outcomes” are defined as statements of what the student knows, understands, and is able to do upon completion of a learning process in terms of knowledge, skills, and competencies (European Commission, 2008, p. 28; Ministry of Education and Research, 2011). “Competence” in learning outcomes is the proven ability to use knowledge and skills in work or study situations (Meld. St. 16, 2017, p. 47). Competencies are intended to be acquired both after completing individual courses and by the time of graduation. Students’ ability to use what they have learned in a work situation is about professional relevance, which is a central aspect of the concept of quality in Norwegian higher education (Meld. St. 16, 2017). Enabling students to apply their academic learning (knowledge, skills, and competencies) in real-world or professional contexts can be considered the primary intention of learning outcomes in a Norwegian context.

General competencies are not merely about possessing knowledge or skills but also about the capability to apply them autonomously in study or a job context. It encapsulates the essence of collaboration, responsibility, reflective thinking, and critical analysis in educational and professional contexts. The aim is to produce knowledgeable graduates who leverage that knowledge effectively in work situations (Ministry of Education and Research, 2011).

Within the scope of this paper, we explore the ePortfolio as a tool to enable students to recognize their acquired competencies. It is not merely about documentation; the ePortfolio serves as a means for students to understand and evaluate their potential in real-world scenarios, aligning with the intention of learning outcomes in Norwegian higher education. When this paper refers to competencies, it points to integrating knowledge, skills, and abilities in a job context. The main aim of the ePortfolio is to help students recognize gained competencies, in other words, students perceived abilities in a job context. This viewpoint prioritizes the end product, what students can do at the end of a learning process, which aligns with the learning outcomes’ definition of competence in the NKR (Ministry of Education and Research, 2011) and the EQF (European Commission, 2008).

2.3. Policy of higher education in Europe

The EQF is defined by eight Learning Outcome-based levels, each including level descriptions that show progression expectations for knowledge, skills, autonomy, and responsibility increase as students’ progress from level 1 to level 8. The levels and descriptors make it possible to compare qualifications from different countries and institutions (European Commission, 2008). Although Learning Outcomes were not part of the Bologna Process’s initial declaration, they were integrated in 2003 and are today a central component for evidencing qualifications at the European level (Loughlin et al., 2020).

The EQF defines qualifications as “the formal outcome of an assessment and validation process obtained when a competent body determines that an individual has acquired learning outcomes to given standards” (European Commission, 2018, p. 7). According to the European Commission (2008), the learning outcomes approach should support individuals when they are moving between various levels of education and training, within and between sectors of education and training, between education and training and the labour market, and within and across borders (European Commission, 2008). This emphasis on mobility and adaptability in education aligns with the principles of lifelong learning, which seeks to strengthen connections between different parts of the education and training system, as well as between the education and training system, society, and the labour market (Ministry of Education and Research, 2011).

As part of the Bologna Process, countries within the EHEA have implemented the Qualifications Framework for Higher Education (QF-EHEA), adopting the three cycles of higher education qualifications from the EQF and integrated them into the NQFs. The three cycles of higher education qualifications include bachelor’s, master’s, and doctoral degrees (levels 6 to 8) (European Commission/EACEA/Eurydice, 2018). The Bologna Process Implementation Report from 2020 states that students should always be “considered as active participants in their learning” and that students should be able to plan their learning paths based on precise information in order to acquire the knowledge, skills, and competencies that meet both their personal goals and societal needs (European Commission/EACEA/Eurydice, 2020, p. 46).

With the integration of learning outcomes, there was an expectation of more student-centred learning and teaching (Damsa & Lange, 2019), even though the intention of the learning outcomes was mainly to provide a means of measurement (Loughlin et al., 2020). However, in 2015, a revised edition of Standards and Guidelines for Quality Assurance in the European Higher Education Area (ESG) was adopted, where more student-centred and active learning for the first time received significant importance (Standards and Guidelines for Quality Assurance in the European Higher Education, 2015). Countries participating in the Bologna Process have agreed to follow the ESG recommendations.

Some authors equate student-centred learning with ‘active learning, while others adopt a more comprehensive definition, including active learning, choice in learning, and the shift from teacher-centred approaches to student-centred ones (Damsa & Lange, 2019; O’Neill & McMahon, 2005). Student-centred learning, highlighted by Standard 1.3 in the ESG, recommends that universities “should ensure that the programs are delivered in a way that encourages students to take an active role in creating the learning process and that the assessment of students reflects this approach” (Standards and Guidelines for Quality Assurance in the European Higher Education, 2015, p. 12). Consequently, the ESG views student-centred learning as a pivotal approach in which students are empowered to actively shape their educational journey, with assessments tailored to reflect this proactive role in the learning process.

The ESG is the basis for quality assurance in the EHEA, and the main achievements of the Bologna Process and its follow-up structure (Standards and Guidelines for Quality Assurance in the European Higher Education, 2015). The Bologna Process is a series of ministerial meetings and agreements between European countries to ensure comparability in higher-education qualifications standards and quality, which was launched with the Bologna Declaration in 1999. Since its initiation, 49 States have implemented the guidelines and principles of this process, collectively forming what is now known as the European Higher Education Area (EHEA) (ENIC-NARIC Networks, 2023).

2.4. The Norwegian context

The NKR is fully integrated into the Norwegian education and training system and is linked to accreditation and re-accreditation of study programs within vocational school education (level 5) and higher education (levels 6 to 8) (Cedefop, 2020, p. 114). The NKR describes the learning outcomes for the various higher education levels and requires a description of the intended learning outcomes for all study programs and associated courses. Grades reflect the extent to which students achieve the intended learning outcomes (Ministry of Education and Research, 2011).

As a member of the Bologna Process, Norway has agreed to align its higher education practices with the ESG. Although there is a general belief that teaching can shift from a teacher-centred approach to a student-active one, this transition has been challenging (Cuban, 2013; Raaheim et al., 2019). Teachers tend to modify new methods to fit within traditional practices, resulting in a mix of old and new methods without notable change. For example, Raaheim et al. (2019) find that the core teaching methods in the Norwegian higher education system remain the same, as teachers integrate new technologies into existing traditions rather than revolutionize them (Raaheim et al., 2019). Nonetheless, there has been one noticeable shift in the assessment landscape in Norway. Examinations, a cornerstone of evaluation, have undergone a digital transformation. Exams have adopted a digitized format, where students use their laptops instead of the conventional pen and paper. However, despite this technological shift, the foundational principles remain steadfast. These exams maintain their closed-book/closed-web nature, with strict invigilation (Raaheim et al., 2019).

Higher education learning environments tend to rely heavily on summative assessment at the end of a semester or academic year (Joughin, 2010; Winstone & Boud, 2020), and the traditional exam has a strong holding within Norwegian higher education and is very often the preferred way of assessing students (Raaheim et al., 2019). Summative assessment makes students focus mainly on aspects such as the final exam, the grade, and the perfect research paper, while the steps in the learning process often become invisible (Johnsen, 2012). When these steps become invisible, it can be challenging for students to recognize evidence of employability (Kensington-Miller et al., 2019; St Jorre & Oliver, 2018).

Alongside the technological shifts in assessment in Norway, learning management systems (LMSs) have become integral to the student experience, but they are not without challenges and critiques. First, LMSs face criticism regarding lifelong learning, as students no longer have access to the contents when a course ends, they graduate, or institutions change LMS (Sclater, 2008). When the teaching process ends and the students no longer have access to what they have done during their studies, the learning process also ends (Altınpulluk & Kesim, 2013). Furthermore, in many cases, LMSs impose a specific learning process and an environment on students where the teachers decide the content and folder structure as they are not flexible enough to be personalized by students (Wilson et al., 2007). According to Wilson et al. (2007), the asymmetry between teachers’ and students’ possibilities to structure and organize in LMSs sends a conflicting message as students are expected to be creative, participate, and take control of their learning. However, in LMSs, students are restricted to a primarily passive role where their contributions are limited (Wilson et al., 2007). The reason might be that higher education institutions and teachers prioritize supporting contact-time activities, e.g. duplicating class teaching activities on Blackboard such as the same set of slides (Sim, 2021), or because LMSs were designed more for administrative duties than for facilitating learning (Klipp, 2018).

LMSs and ePortfolios evolved separately, but after 2010, the trend was to combine them, allowing the LMS to benefit from using the ePortfolio for assessment purposes (Weller, 2018). The LMS ePortfolios can also serve other purposes, such as professional or career development planning or being a tool for active learning (Attwell, 2009). In contrast to the course folders in LMSs, the LMS ePortfolio allows students to organize and structure their work at their own pace, which gives students a more active role in their learning (Morales et al., 2016). The LMS ePortfolio is also shareable so that students can share their ePortfolio with peers, instructors, or others within their institutions or external agents such as partnership teachers and future employers (Reid-Griffin, 2020). However, ePortfolios in widely used LMSs such as Blackboard and Canvas come with some challenges. For example, with the ePortfolio offered in Blackboard, students lose access when they no longer have access to the LMS. Blackboard allows students to download their ePortfolio but in the form of a zip file, a snapshot that is difficult to build on. The same applies when students share their ePortfolio internally and externally; it is only a momentary snapshot of students’ learning. If students add new artifacts or edit their ePortfolio in other ways, they must share the ePortfolio again.

While LMSs like Blackboard and Canvas offer integrated ePortfolios, their limitations may hinder professional or career development planning and active learning. The challenges associated with these systems may make it difficult for students to track and share their learning progress effectively. In light of these challenges, it becomes even more essential to understand teachers’ perspectives on the importance of competencies in the Norwegian higher education context. According to a teacher survey distributed in 2021 to everyone who teaches in Norwegian higher education (NOKUT, 2021a), seventy-one percent (71%) of the teachers say they to a large extent make students aware of how their competencies are relevant to the industry. A total of 10,223 teachers responded to the survey in 2021. Teachers’ current practices of relating competencies to industry needs include inviting guest lectures from industry, establishing places where students and industry actors can meet, and involving industry representatives in the development of study programs. However, results from the teacher survey also show that only fifty-one percent (51%) of those who teach believe that they, to a considerable extent, make students aware of how they can convey competencies in meetings with employer (Amundsen et al., 2021).

The teacher survey was distributed by the Norwegian Agency for Quality Assurance in Education (NOKUT), an independent expert body under the Ministry of Education and Research in Norway. Each year, NOKUT distributes a survey to all students in Norway, and in 2019, they added the category “vocational” to the survey. The questions related to the vocational category examine the extent to which the students feel they receive information about relevance to working life and whether they receive various work-oriented activities and opportunities. In 2019, on a Likert scale of 1 to 5, the “vocational” category received the lowest average score, making it the index with the lowest value (Wiggen et al., 2020), and in 2021 the result was approximately the same (Bakken et al., 2022). For 2021, the student survey shows that many students (75%) do not perceive that they get adequate training in conveying their competencies. Half of the students (50%) think that they do not receive useful information about their competencies’ relevance in a future job context (Bakken et al., 2022, p. 35).

The survey indicates that the intended learning outcomes and the competencies they entail are less evident for the students than they might be for policymakers, higher education institutions, and teachers. Therefore, it is essential to examine tools such as the ePortfolio that can bridge this perceptual gap and enhance students’ awareness and articulation of their competencies.

3. Case and methods

This chapter outlines the methodology used to examine the gap between the intention of learning outcomes and computing students’ perceptions of their acquired competencies. Additionally, this chapter delves into the method investigating the effectiveness of ePortfolios in formative assessment for aiding students in identifying their competencies. We begin with a detailed description of the student survey case and its associated methods. Next, we explore the ePortfolio case, emphasizing its data collection and analysis techniques. Finally, we examine the main limitations of the study.

3.1. The student survey case

The Student Survey is a part of the work on quality assurance of higher education in Norway. NOKUT distributes the survey and asks students about their perceptions of educational quality in their study programs. The questionnaire is conducted using a five-point Likert scale, where five means most satisfied. Each year, NOKUT distributes the survey to all 2nd-year bachelor’s students with a course of study of 3 years, 2nd-year master’s students with a course of study of 2 years, and 5th-year students in master’s degree programs that are five years or longer (Bakken et al., 2022). In 2019, the survey was distributed to 65,120 students, of whom 31,927 responded (Wiggen et al., 2020). In 2020, the survey was distributed to 69,500 students, of whom 30,289 responded (NOKUT, 2021b), and in 2021, almost 74,000 students received the survey, of whom 30,223 students responded (Bakken et al., 2022).

The items in the student survey are grouped into the following categories: learning environment, student participation, inspiration, vocational relevance, teaching, student evaluation, and learning outcomes. We identified two items in the category of vocational relevance that can be linked to learning outcomes in terms of competencies and students’ perception of gained competencies:

1. I receive training in how to convey my competencies to potential employers.

2. I receive useful information about how my competencies are relevant for the labour market.

These two questions from the student survey can provide insights into how well students perceive their academic learning aligns with professional expectations. Specifically, if students feel they need to receive adequate information about the relevance of their competencies for the labour market without perceiving that they actually get such information, it might indicate a gap in their understanding of how their academic journey can be translated into a job context.

We extracted the score given on the two items above by 2nd-year bachelor students in computing education at the university of our case study. This encompassed a subset of eight distinct study programs within the computing domain, reflecting diverse curricula and learning outcomes, from practical programming skills to data management and system integration.

Within these eight study programs, the participation in the survey varied over three consecutive years. In 2019, out of the 439 students enrolled, 277 responded to the survey. In 2020, 281 out of the 553 enrolled students participated, and in 2021, 261 out of 538 responded (NOKUT, 2019-, 2019–2021). This data accounts for annual variations across different academic cohorts within computing education, ensuring a comprehensive understanding of student perceptions.

3.2. The e-portfolio case

In our case study, we collected data from two similar undergraduate courses in Collaboration Technology. The courses are part of two undergraduate (bachelor level) study programs within computing education at a large university in Norway. The courses have a practical orientation, with project-related assignments towards the intended learning outcomes. The intended learning outcomes were developed at the university in accordance with the NKR.

One of the study programs is campus-based, and the other is web-based. In the year of our data collection, due to the COVID-19 pandemic, both courses were conducted digitally in the LMS-integrated digital classroom, with the same learning activities that, under normal circumstances, take place in the physical classroom. There were 81 students in total in the two courses.

Throughout the course, the students had five mandatory assignments on which they worked in teams of 3–4. In the spring semester of 2021, the campus-based study program had 55 students divided into 15 teams, and the web-based study program had 26 students divided into eight teams. Each team assignment was handed in and approved for the whole team. Furthermore, each assignment included an individual reflection part to be entered into an ePortfolio with the completed assignments. The ePortfolios were the basis for individual assessment (pass/fail) in the courses. In this study, we introduced the students to the ePortfolio integrated into the LMS Blackboard. As described earlier in this paper, we know the limitations of LMSs, especially regarding lifelong learning. Our motivation, however, was to gain experience with ePortfolios as a process and knowledge of how ePortfolios may benefit students, teachers, and higher education institutions.

For the individual reflections, the students were given four guiding questions: What did we do/what was the assigned task? What was my contribution to the group work? What did I learn from the assignment? How can I apply what I have learned to a future job context? The guiding questions were based on an established approach to reflection (the what- so what- now what model (Ring et al., 2017), which relates explicitly to acquired competencies and learning outcomes.

The main part of the teachers’ feedback addressed the product of the group work. However, the teachers also gave feedback on the students’ reflections in the ePortfolio – feedback on the individual reflections intended to encourage reflection while not judging the content.

At the end of the courses, the students conducted a final individual exam assignment (pass/fail). The exam was a summative reflection on learning, the reflection activities, and the use of ePortfolio and other aspects of the course. The students were given a passing grade by answering the questions in the summative exam (summative reflection). For research purposes, we added the following guiding questions to the exam:

1. What do you think are the three most important things you have learned in this course?

2. What do you think about the reflection tasks throughout the course in terms of your own learning and your own awareness of what you have learned?

3. Did you understand the purpose of submitting work assignments in the ePortfolio and writing associated reflections?

4. What do you think about fellow students being able to view your ePortfolio, what you have done in it, and the feedback you have received from the teachers?

5. If you had to select between the two options below, which option would you prefer and why?

   1. Assignments (with reflection) and feedback take place in the ePortfolio.

   2. Assignments (without reflection) are delivered in the LMS as you are used to.

The digital exam system Inspera Assessment was used to conduct the summative exam, following the university’s examination regulations for digital exams.

Of the 81 students enrolled in the two courses, 67 gave informed consent to participate in our study, which received approval from the Norwegian Centre for Research Data (NSD 279,991). Our data collection concentrated on 335 individual assignment reflections from the students’ ePortfolios and 67 reflections from the students’ summative exams. The reflections provided by the students were anonymized, prepared, and transferred into NVivo for thematic analysis and categorization by the first author. The analysis unfolded in sequential steps, following several levels of analysis (Creswell & Creswell, 2018) and combined deductive and inductive coding (McDonald et al., 2019).

We initiated our analysis by thoroughly reading all the reflections to understand the data comprehensively. Then, we read the first eight summative reflections and wrote thoughts in a separate document in NVivo to identify topics and underlying meanings in the information. Topics were then clustered together and abbreviated as codes. We evaluated the preliminary organized scheme to see if new codes and categories should be added. Next, we turned topics into themes to group associated related codes to avoid unstructured codes without context.

Central to our qualitative exploration was understanding students’ perceptions of gained competencies and the role of ePortfolios in aiding students’ recognition of these competencies. To answer the research questions in this paper, we systematically examined the categorized student reflections to understand why students responded to the selected two items in the Student Survey. We also identified excerpts that could illuminate students’ transition between the education system and the labour market. The research questions and data sources played a pivotal role in shaping our analytical approach, ensuring that our coding and theme extraction remained firmly aligned with the objectives of our research questions. Table 1 lists the data sources used in this paper and how they connect to answer our RQs. (McDonald et al., 2019)

Table 1. Research questions and data sources.

Research Questions	Data	Analysed	Number Analysed
RQ1: What is the gap between the intention of learning outcomes regarding competencies and computing students’ perceptions of their acquired competencies?	Student survey	Study programs	8
	Exam assignments	Summative reflections	67
RQ2: How can formative assessment with ePortfolios support computing students in recognizing acquired competencies?	Exam assignments	Summative reflections	67
	Assignments	ePortfolio reflections	67*5 (335)

Two of the four authors collaborated closely during the qualitative analysis. Author 1 initiated the process, sifting through the reflections and setting the preliminary coding framework into motion. Author 2, who also served as a teacher in the course, contributed with valuable pedagogical insights. To ensure objectivity and limit potential biases, the second author’s interaction with the data was confined to its anonymized form. Author 3 played a pivotal role in the initial stages of coding by actively sharing expertise and providing advice. The fourth author was instrumental in other parts of the study, offering overarching guidance.

As we delved deeper into the data, it became clear that a single topic could not encapsulate the richness of students’ experiences and insights. Although some reflections directly related to our initial topic, others provided nuanced perspectives that did not fit neatly within that frame. Through discussions we identify more specific codes, based on students’ reflections. This process aligns with McDonald et al.‘s (McDonald et al., 2019) observation that in qualitative research, “coding takes place over multiple meetings to discuss disagreements and refine codes. The primary goal was to identify themes and codes outside the predicted topics (McDonald et al., 2019). One such emergent code was ‘Contextualizing learning’. This code emerged from reflections where students articulated the purpose of submitting work assignments in the ePortfolio and writing associated reflections. Excerpts from the students” reflections exemplify this: “ … Often, I grapple with isolated concepts, not able to see the whole picture of courses” and “how they fit into the real world”. These reflections emphasize the students’ longing for a more holistic understanding and, possibly, their desire to contextualize academic concepts within real-world scenarios.

Recognizing the significance of inter-coder reliability or inter-coder agreement, we engaged two independent reviewers. Their central role was to validate the codes, ensuring an objective and unbiased stance. Utilizing a team of coders and consensus-building processes helps diminish the potential biases inherent in each researcher’s perspective (McDonald et al., 2019). By contrasting the coding against the raw reflections, they added an external perspective to our analysis. This iterative approach to independent coding and subsequent discussions ensured that the themes truly encapsulated the sentiments expressed by the students (McDonald et al., 2019). The high-level code structure of this study is presented in Figure 1.

Figure 1. High-level code structure.

Each high-level code in Figure 1 is surrounded by a coloured square, with the colour indicating the research question(s) to which the code is most relevant. Red indicates high-level codes that primarily address Research Question 1 (RQ1): What is the gap between the intention of learning outcomes regarding competencies and computing students’ perceptions of their acquired competencies? Blue is for high-level codes that specifically relate to Research Question 2 (RQ2): How can formative assessment with ePortfolios support computing students in recognizing acquired competencies? Green signifies high-level codes pertinent to both RQ1 and RQ2, highlighting areas of overlap where the data provide insights into both the gap in perceptions of competencies and the role of ePortfolios in bridging this gap.

3.3. Limitations

While summative reflections offer invaluable insights, they inevitably contain biases as individuals recount their subjective experiences. Therefore, we adopted a triangulation approach, using data from a national student survey and comparing exam reflections with insights from students’ ePortfolios. This method aimed to capture a well-rounded student experience perspective by counteracting potential biases relying on a singular data source (Creswell & Creswell, 2018). We secured ethical clearance for our study from the Norwegian Centre for Research Data (NSD) (279991).

One limitation of this study arises from analysing data from the national student survey. The survey provides aggregated results, offering valuable insights into the average perceptions of computing students across various educational institutions. However, the results do not offer individual response data necessary for a more detailed statistical analysis. Specifically, the dataset’s omission of individual scores prevents the calculation of standard deviations for the reported average scores. Standard deviations are essential for evaluating the variability or dispersion of responses, offering a quantitative measure of how much student opinions deviate from the mean. The absence of individual response data limits our ability to discern this level of detail, highlighting a significant gap in the survey’s informational yield. While the national student survey’s aggregated data constrains our capacity for a detailed statistical analysis due to the absence of individual response data, this study also draws on qualitative insights from students’ reflections in their final exams. These reflections offer a rich, nuanced understanding of students’ perceptions and experiences, providing a depth of analysis that complements the broader trends indicated by the survey results.

Furthermore, the self-selected nature of our survey sample might introduce biases – for example, students with strong opinions or unique experiences might be more inclined to participate. This could potentially lead to results that are not universally representative of all students in computing education programs. It should be noted, however, that our study aligns with the broader perspective emphasized by the Ministry of Higher Education in Norway. Specifically, the importance of translating academic learning to real-world competencies has been robustly endorsed in the wider context of higher education (Meld. St. 16, 2020-, 2020–2021). The study described in this paper delves deeply into this topic, focusing specifically on computing education.

4. Findings

4.1. Learning outcomes and students’ perceptions of gained competencies

Our inquiry into the gap between the intention of learning outcomes and students’ perceptions of their acquired competencies in the Norwegian context led us to delve into two primary sources of information: a national student survey and students’ summative reflections (exam), Anchoring this exploration are the foundational frameworks of EQF and NKR. The robust frameworks set forth by these entities emphasize not just the acquisition but the practical application of knowledge and skills in professional contexts. The intent is clear: graduates should not merely be repositories of knowledge but also have the proficiency to utilize this knowledge constructively and autonomously in real-world scenarios (European Commission, 2008; Meld. St. 16, 2020-, 2020–2021; Ministry of Education and Research, 2011).

As discussed in the methodology chapter, in the national student survey, we highlighted two questions under vocational relevance relevant to our study. Given the ambitions of EQF and NKR to foster students’ knowledge, skills, and competencies to apply them in professional contexts, it is pivotal to evaluate students’ ability to communicate and relate their competencies to the labour market. In what we will refer to as question 1 and question 2, the students were asked to indicate the degree to which they agreed to the following statements on a scale from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree):

1. I receive training in how to convey my competencies to potential employers

2. I receive useful information about how my competencies are relevant for the labour market

Results from the national student survey, which gathered responses from 2nd-year bachelor students in computing education, show averages of 2.6 for the year 2021 for question 1 and 3.2 for question 2 across all computing education programs in Norway. Results from second-year bachelor students in computing programs at the university where our study took place indicate an average of 2.73 for question 1 and 3.28 for question 2 in 2021. In 2020, question 1 reached an average of 2,52 for question 1 and 3,07 for question 2, and in 2019, question 1 received an average of 3.02 and 3.30 for question 2 (NOKUT, 2022). The average at the case university is thus roughly the same as for the rest of the country. Table 2 presents an overview of the results from the two questions for 2019, 2020, and 2021 for all computing education programs in Norway and the computing education programs offered at the case university. Additionally, the first column shows the number of responders for each year.

Table 2. Computing education programs in general and the case university.

Number of Responders Each Year	Computing Education	Questions	Average 2019	Average 2020	Average 2021
2019–1 163	Computing education programs across Norway	1	2,8	2.6	2,6
2020 – 1059		2	3,5	3,4	3,2
2021 – 1106
2019–277	Computing programs at the university central to this study	1	3,02	2,52	2,73
2020–281		2	3,30	3,07	3,28
2021–261

For the computing education programs in Norway, the average for question 2 is higher than for question 1 in 2019, 2020, and 2021. In other words, computing students answer more positively about getting helpful information about their competencies than they do about receiving training to convey these competencies. This agrees with what emerges in the NOKUT teacher survey: teachers put more effort into making the students aware of how their competencies are relevant to the industry than how students can convey them (Amundsen et al., 2021).

The average for questions 1 and 2 in the student survey is relatively low (5, meaning most satisfied), indicating a potential for improvement in how higher education institutions help computing students understand and convey their competencies.

While the numeric averages from the student surveys offer a quantitative view of vocational readiness, the intricacies and depth of these challenges are profoundly illuminated in the individual summative reflections (exam). The high-level code “Perceived gap” revealed that a major challenge for students was applying their learning to a future job context. Many students described this reflection type as a novel experience that they had not encountered in other courses. One student explained it like this in the summative reflection when asked what the student thought about the reflection tasks throughout the course: ”I have never been asked to consider my learning in this particular way before this course. I am confident that our program equips us with valuable competencies, but I found it challenging when it comes to identifying them and presenting them in my ePortfolio. Especially in the beginning, when first asked to explain my learning in a professional context”.

In addressing RQ1, the high-level code “Preferred solution” was instrumental in unveiling students’ perceptions of the gap between academic learning and practical application. Several students touched on the gap between academic learning and real-world application when asked to select between the ePortfolio for assignments and the LMS. Transitioning to the “Learning Outcomes” high-level code, this concern is further exemplified by a reflective insight from a student, which resonates with the experiences of their peers: ”Throughout our courses, we have been exposed to various theories and hands-on experiences with different tools. For example, we learned programming languages and related theories in the course Basic Programming. However, how to apply this in a job context, I am not sure what to apply. I feel there is a gap between academic achievements and how to apply it in a job context. However, using the ePortfolio in this course has been a valuable experience. It helped me process and reflect on my learning in a job situation, and I believe it would be beneficial also in our other courses”.

Incorporating the idea that learning should be contextual and connected to broader frameworks (high-level code contextualizing learning), several students expressed a desire to understand not only the “what” but also the “why” and “how” these concepts relate to broader frameworks and real-world applications. Reflecting on submitting work assignments in the ePortfolio and composing associated reflections, one student expressed, “At times, I feel like I am dealing with standalone concepts. I struggle to see the connection between the different course topics and modules and how they fit into the real world. It is like trying to solve a puzzle without knowing what the completed picture looks like”.

4.2. Formative assessment with ePortfolios’ role in students’ recognition of competencies

In our investigation into how formative assessment with ePortfolios aids computing students in recognizing competency-based learning outcomes, we comprehensibly examined the students’ summative reflections and ePortfolios. These reflections underscored students’ growing recognition of the value of placing their learnings within a broader context. This contextualization (high-level code contextualizing learning) highlights the importance of active knowledge construction in recognizing competencies. Furthermore, according to several students, their motivation to learn increased when they became able to recognize acquired competencies due to a more proactive role in framing their understanding. This was identified through the high-level code “Constructing knowledge”. The following sentiment is perfectly captured in one of the student’s reflections: “The ePortfolio has forced me to put my learning in an entirely new context, where I no longer just jumped from assignment to assignment but have had to put my learning in a job context before moving on. This was an entirely new experience for me, which made me more aware of what I could do and construct knowledge in a way that enabled me to see the relevance of what I had learned, which increased my motivation to learn”.

Furthermore, eighty-four percent (84%) of the students in this study described that reflecting on the artifacts made them more aware of what they had learned and how they could relate it to a job context. When first introduced to the ePortfolio reflection, most students found it challenging to relate what they learned to a job context. This was identified through the high-level code “Reflection”. However, they viewed it as an advantage that the reflection gave them practice in conveying competencies. During the course, we also observed an improvement in the students’ reflections concerning a job context. We present two examples from one student’s ePortfolio to highlight this progression. Example 1 stems from an initial assignment where the student reflected on learning in a job context. Example 2 is drawn from the final assignment, displaying a noticeable enhancement in the quality and depth of the reflection.

Example 1

Example 2

In their summative reflections, students viewed the ePortfolio as more than just a tool for reflection. For example, when reflecting on which solution they prefer if they could select between assessment with the ePortfolio or the LMS, many students expressed a clear preference for the former. The high-level code “Preferred Solution” provided insights into why students favoured the ePortfolio, particularly noting its effectiveness in organizing their work and reflections. This organization aids in clarifying the connections between course topics, modules, and assignments. Building on this insight, the high-level code “Learning Outcomes” elaborates on the significance of achieving a holistic understanding of the total learning outcomes. Several students believe such insight is critical when articulating and demonstrating their competencies to potential employers. These reflections emphasize the students’ longing for a more holistic understanding and their desire to contextualize academic concepts within real-world scenarios.

The high-level code “Constructing Knowledge” captures a pivotal shift in focus observed among students as they engaged in developing their ePortfolio. The reflection of a student exemplifies this shift: “By adding my work to the ePortfolio and reflecting on what it represented, my focus switched to what I have learned and why it is necessary instead of just finalizing assignments. When I have primarily focused on completing assignments, the learning has appeared more fragmented than when I must think about what I have learned and put it in the context of a work situation. This is a new experience for me, which has made me change focus in general in all courses”.

Some students point to the reflections as essential for training in conveying competencies to potential employers. For example, a student describes the reflection experience like this: ”I am doing a bachelor’s program, and a permanent job is not a distant thought. Therefore, reflecting on what I have learned in a work situation is relevant. The reflections helped me to see the course’s relevance to a job context very clearly, and I now have a clear picture of how I can present my competencies to an employer”.

From the “Visibility” high-level code, it emerged that some students were concerned about their peers accessing their work via ePortfolios, particularly troubled by the adequacy of their effort in their assignments. On the other hand, from the “Comparison” high-level code, it is clear that students found observing their peers’ ePortfolios beneficial for recognizing their own competencies. One student describes it like this: ”One advantage of seeing other people’s ePortfolios was that I could compare my ePortfolio with the others’. It was beneficial for me, especially in the beginning. Without access to fellow students’ ePortfolios, I would not know how to relate what I learned to a job”.

Feedback and guidelines provided by teachers, identified under the “Support” high-level code, may be essential for students, especially in enabling them to link their academic learning to potential job contexts effectively. As it was observed early in the course that students found it challenging to connect what they had learned to a job context, the teachers intervened by providing tips on competencies and advising students to consider the intended learning outcomes for the course when crafting their ePortfolio reflections. The students describe the support as “necessary at the beginning”, “critical for being able to connect learning to a job context”, and “useful for further reflections in the course”.

Identified through the “Development” high-level code, students are showing a significant trend toward valuing the examination of their learning from an employment-related perspective. This realization deepens with their growing proficiency in reflection. This shift in perspective significantly contributed to their development, equipping them with the skills to articulate their competencies more effectively. A student describes it as follows; “One day I will need to explain to an employer the usefulness of my education to be employed. The reflections gave me excellent practice in conveying my competencies to employers. This way of reflecting through a course was entirely new for me and should have been part of all courses throughout the study program”.

An interesting finding in this study is how students transferred the reflection experiences from the ePortfolio to their final summative exam. Without being prompted, eighty-seven percent (87%) of the students who participated in this study linked the three most important things they felt they had learned to a job context. To exemplify this, one student reflected: “In a job context, I believe I can contribute meaningfully by emphasizing the principles of user-centred development. By ensuring that systems are developed with the end-users in mind, we can ensure enhanced user experience, increased adoption rates, reduced support and training costs, and a heightened sense of user satisfaction. These factors not only improve the system’s usability but can also directly impact an organization’s bottom line”.

5. Discussion

This study aimed to uncover the gap between the intention of learning outcomes regarding competencies and computing students’ perceptions of their acquired competencies in the Norwegian context. Additionally, the research explores how formative assessment with ePortfolios might assist computing students in recognizing acquired competencies. In this chapter, we will look into the findings that emerge from the study and highlight the potential implications of these outcomes.

5.1. The gap between the learning outcomes and students’ perceptions of gained competencies

The findings from our research indicate a gap in computing education: while learning outcomes intend to enable students to apply their academic learning (knowledge, skills, and competencies) in real-world or professional contexts (European Commission, 2008; Meld. St. 16, 2017, .; Ministry of Education and Research, 2011), computing students may find it challenging to translate their academic learning to a professional context.

The national student survey indicates that students may not be confident about recognizing their competencies or in their ability to effectively communicate them to prospective employers, as many students give a low score when asked if they receive training in how to convey their competencies and information about how their competencies are relevant for the labour market. This finding is supported by the computing students participating in our study, where many describe reflecting on the application of their learning in job scenarios as an unfamiliar and challenging experience.

While our study offers a unique approach and findings, it is situated within a broader academic context. For example, several authors argue that Higher education learning environments rely heavily on summative assessment at the end of a learning process (Joughin, 2010; Raaheim et al., 2019; Winstone & Boud, 2020). Raaheim et al. (2019) further point out that the traditional exam has a strong holding within Norwegian higher education (Raaheim et al., 2019). This might be one reason Norwegian computing students find it challenging to recognize competencies (St Jorre & Oliver, 2018). Furthermore, we find that students experience their courses or modules as “standalone concepts” without understanding the link between these concepts and how they relate to larger frameworks or real-world situations. Drawing from Wilson et al. (2007) and Klipp (2018), the LMS environment in use at the case university may pose challenges to students trying to actively construct their learning journey, whether due to inherent limitations of the LMS or the way teachers and institutions structure its requirements (Klipp, 2018; Wilson et al., 2007).

While the LMS has proven to be an efficient tool for the administrative aspects of study programs and courses from the standpoint of higher education institutions and teachers (Sim, 2021), it risks relegating students to a more passive role (Klipp, 2018; Wilson et al., 2007). To compensate for that, some courses in computing programs are designed with a student-centred approach to learning, including active learning, such as programming courses with pair programming, coding challenges, and problem-based projects. Nevertheless, these practices may not always be enough. Although many courses are designed with a more student-centred and active learning approach, topics and modules may end up as standalone concepts when organized in an environment that imposes a specific learning process. Drawing from the students who say they want to understand the “why” and “how” their learning relates to a broader framework and feel that they are “dealing with standalone concepts” suggests that the LMS environment might not support them in connecting learning to a larger context.

5.2. Recognizing of acquired competencies through ePortfolio development

Our findings suggest that using ePortfolios for formative assessment can support computing students in recognizing competencies. These positive results stem from student focus shifts, improved reflection practices, the ability to make connections between course modules and topics, and a comprehensive understanding of the learning outcomes.

Research indicates that students frequently centre their attention on the final results of their education, such as grades, often bypassing the intricate details of the learning journey (Johnsen, 2012). Our findings resonate with this notion. Students reported a change in perspective – from a sole emphasis on assignment completion to what they learn and why it is essential in a future job context. In other words, gaining competencies became more important while developing ePortfolios. This aligns with the constructivist philosophy behind ePortfolios, where students actively shape their knowledge about what is learned (Ehiyazaryan-White, 2012).

When students can recognize and articulate their competencies effectively, they have gained a sense of competence (Herman, 2012). This was evident in our study, where ePortfolio development played a significant role in helping students gain a sense of competence. Furthermore, we found that this profound realization further drives students’ motivation to learn (Herman, 2012). The connection between a sense of competence and motivation to learn is mirrored in multiple motivational theories (Bandura, 1978; Deci & Ryan, 1985; Wigfield & Eccles, 2000). Findings in this study thus indicate that ePortfolios are more than a collection of artifacts and reflections: they can potentially increase motivation to continue learning by reinforcing students’ sense of competence.

A large segment of the student summative reflections pointed to the role of reflection within the ePortfolio process. Such reflections were paramount in connecting academic accomplishments to real-world contexts, enhancing their ability to communicate competencies effectively. As the course progressed, it was evident that the students’ reflections on job-oriented scenarios improved significantly with practice. However, while beneficial, reflective practices can be challenging for students (Slepcevic-Zach & Stock, 2018). The reflection guiding questions in our study became instrumental in steering students toward prospective professional applications. The pedagogical significance of guiding students through reflection is well documented, and our teaching strategies resonate with the necessary pedagogical supports for effective ePortfolio integration (Tosh, Light, & Haywood, 2005; Ring et al., 2017).

While reflection is fundamental for experiential learning (Coulson & Harvey, 2013) and one of the main activities when developing ePortfolios fundamental in ePortfolio development (Abrami & Barrett, 2005; Ring et al., 2017; Yan & Brown, 2017), students in our study perceived the ePortfolio as more than a reflective instrument. They perceived it as a comprehensive tool providing a more holistic understanding of their learning outcomes. The students’ holistic understanding of their total learning outcomes is reflected in their ability to link topics and modules and how they organized and structured their own learning in the ePortfolio. This ability to draw connections, facilitated by the ePortfolio, suggests its significant potential within individual courses and enables students to perceive linkages across various courses in a computing study program (Mazlan et al., 2015). Also, the possibility to see fellow students’ ePortfolios was another feature of the tool that made it more than a reflective tool. By looking at each other’s ePortfolios, students could recognize competencies through others (Wakimoto & Lewis, 2014).

Although the established practice in higher education involves inviting guest lecturers from the industry, creating spaces for students and industry representatives to interact, and incorporating industry figures in the development of study programs, which is valuable (Amundsen et al., 2021), there might be a need for a more proactive approach for students. Combining the approach teachers use today with the ePortfolio may yield more significant student benefits than the two approaches separately. Thus, the students can be information architects by getting information from industry representatives and, in the ePortfolio, collecting evidence that they have learned what the industry needs and reflecting on the evidence and what they represent. As such, higher education institutions may move towards a more student-centred and active learning approach in line with the constructivist approach to learning. In this way, they might achieve the ESG agreement (Standards and Guidelines for Quality Assurance in the European Higher Education, 2015).

5.3. Implications and recommendations

Based on our findings, this chapter presents a number of implications and recommendations for higher education institutions and teachers. The recommendations also indicate directions for future research.

5.3.1 For higher education institutions

5.3.1.1 Integrating Industry Insights with ePortfolios

Higher education Institutions teaching computing should amplify their engagement with industry representatives to bridge the gap between academic learning and real-world applications. This can be achieved by inviting guest lectures and, at the same time, facilitating more active, continuous dialogues and collaborations. By intertwining these industry interactions with the ePortfolio approach, students can act as “information architects”, assimilating practical insights from professionals and substantiating them within their ePortfolios. This dual approach may enable students to understand what the industry seeks, curate evidence of their aligned competencies, and reflect upon their significance, ensuring that their academic pursuits are constantly informed and aligned with professional demands.

5.3.1.2 Comprehensive introduction sessions

To fully realize the benefits of ePortfolios, institutions may need to provide comprehensive introduction sessions encompassing both technical and pedagogical support. These sessions can offer a preview of the courses the students will attend, address the main objective of study programs, help the students contextualize their learning journey, and set clear expectations for themselves. As they progress through their academic journey, continual reflection and documentation within the ePortfolio may help students recognize acquired competencies while studying and understand the link between their courses, developing a more holistic understanding of the total learning outcomes. In these sessions, students can receive guidance on setting up their ePortfolio and access to ePortfolio templates, get reflection guidance and practice, and receive support in gaining a deeper understanding of competence (i.e. integrating knowledge, skills, and abilities in a job context).

5.3.1.3 Training and Development

As the research indicated, ePortfolios can play a significant role in helping students recognize and articulate acquired competencies. Therefore, institutions should prioritize investment in training initiatives to familiarize teachers with the principles and practices of ePortfolio integration. A foundational understanding, coupled with comprehensive training on reflective guidance and formative assessment techniques, can empower teachers to utilize the potential of ePortfolios.

5.3.2 For teachers

5.3.2.1 Transitioning from Grades to Growth through ePortfolios

As our research shows, traditional modes of assessment and teaching may inadvertently divert students’ focus to final results, such as grades, rather than the intricacies and relevancies of the learning process. Teachers should actively support students in embracing a more holistic view of their education, which can be done by integrating ePortfolios into their teaching. Integrating ePortfolios in the teaching practice may foster deeper reflection and understanding and shift emphasis from end products to the journey of acquiring competencies.

5.3.2.2 Structured Reflective Practices and peer learning

Our findings reveal that when teachers incorporate regular and structured reflection points within the curriculum, it leads to significant outcomes. Specifically, the reflection process enabled students to improve their recognition and articulation of competencies in real-world contexts. Meanwhile, accessing and reflecting upon fellow students’ ePortfolios facilitated enhanced recognition of competencies through peer learning. Given these findings, we suggest that teachers weave in regular and structured reflection points throughout the curriculum. These reflection activities should be guided by specific questions, prompting students to think deeply and connect to real-world contexts. Additionally, teachers should leverage ePortfolios to facilitate regular reflections and peer learning. This involves introducing ePortfolios and actively fostering an environment that encourages students to share their ePortfolios, receive feedback, and engage in a mutual learning process.

5.3.2.3 Holistic View of Learning

Our findings reveal that students when engaging with their ePortfolios consistently throughout the course, develop a more comprehensive and interconnected understanding of their learning outcomes. Instead of focusing on individual modules or assignments, teachers must emphasize their collective value for academic progress. This can be achieved by encouraging students to actively engage with their ePortfolio throughout the course, updating their artifacts, and consistently reflecting on what they represent.

5.3.2.4 Choosing the Right ePortfolio Platform

Our findings underscore the pivotal role of peer interactions in enhancing the recognition of gained competencies. When students can effortlessly share and access fellow students’ ePortfolios, they benefit from diverse perspectives and amplify their learning experiences. This enhanced peer learning is only possible if the ePortfolio platform fosters easy sharing and collaboration. Consequently, selecting the right ePortfolio platform becomes critical. As such, teachers must prioritize platforms that support seamless sharing and collaboration, thereby maximizing the potential for peer feedback and collaborative learning.

6. Conclusion

Within the Norwegian higher education context, our study identifies a tangible gap between the intention of learning outcomes, characterized by the emphasis on competencies, and computing students’ perceptions of their acquired competencies. Learning outcomes are meant to ensure students can apply academic learning (knowledge, skills, and competencies) in real-world or professional settings (European Commission, 2008; Ministry of Education and Research, 2011). However, our findings reveal that students grapple with effectively translating these into competencies. This disconnect poses significant challenges, not only in academic progression but also in preparing students for their professional journey.

In addressing this issue, our research accentuates the role of ePortfolios. This formative assessment tool offers more than just a repository for academic achievements; it encourages students to engage actively in recording their learning journey, enabling them to recognize acquired competencies, aligning with the emphasis on active student participation as recommended by the ESG (Standards and Guidelines for Quality Assurance in the European Higher Education, 2015). However, introducing ePortfolios is only part of the solution. Their success hinges on their seamless incorporation into the educational process. This may call for concerted efforts from institutions, teachers, and other stakeholders to provide technical and pedagogical support.

While the findings from this study offer valuable insights, potential limitations may include the sample size and the specificity of the student group. Further research might explore different academic disciplines or expand to various educational levels to ascertain the universality of these findings.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).