| Title |
Evaluation of the free, open source software WordPress as electronic portfolio system in undergraduate medical education
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Medical Education, June 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12909-016-0678-1 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Javier Avila, Kai Sostmann, Jan Breckwoldt, Harm Peters |
| Abstract |
Electronic portfolios (ePortfolios) are used to document and support learning activities. E-portfolios with mobile capabilities allow even more flexibility. However, the development or acquisition of ePortfolio software is often costly, and at the same time, commercially available systems may not sufficiently fit the institution's needs. The aim of this study was to design and evaluate an ePortfolio system with mobile capabilities using a commercially free and open source software solution. We created an online ePortfolio environment using the blogging software WordPress based on reported capability features of such software by a qualitative weight and sum method. Technical implementation and usability were evaluated by 25 medical students during their clinical training by quantitative and qualitative means using online questionnaires and focus groups. The WordPress ePortfolio environment allowed students a broad spectrum of activities - often documented via mobile devices - like collection of multimedia evidences, posting reflections, messaging, web publishing, ePortfolio searches, collaborative learning, knowledge management in a content management system including a wiki and RSS feeds, and the use of aid tools for studying. The students' experience with WordPress revealed a few technical problems, and this report provides workarounds. The WordPress ePortfolio was rated positively by the students as a content management system (67 % of the students), for exchange with other students (74 %), as a note pad for reflections (53 %) and for its potential as an information source for assessment (48 %) and exchange with a mentor (68 %). On the negative side, 74 % of the students in this pilot study did not find it easy to get started with the system, and 63 % rated the ePortfolio as not being user-friendly. Qualitative analysis indicated a need for more introductory information and training. It is possible to build an advanced ePortfolio system with mobile capabilities with the free and open source software WordPress. This allows institutions without proprietary software to build a sophisticated ePortfolio system adapted to their needs with relatively few resources. The implementation of WordPress should be accompanied by introductory courses in the use of the software and its apps in order to facilitate its usability. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 8 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 3 | 38% |
| United States | 2 | 25% |
| Canada | 2 | 25% |
| Iceland | 1 | 13% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 6 | 75% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 2 | 25% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 167 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Malaysia | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 166 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 29 | 17% |
| Researcher | 16 | 10% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 15 | 9% |
| Student > Bachelor | 15 | 9% |
| Lecturer | 12 | 7% |
| Other | 34 | 20% |
| Unknown | 46 | 28% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 30 | 18% |
| Computer Science | 20 | 12% |
| Social Sciences | 18 | 11% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 11 | 7% |
| Engineering | 6 | 4% |
| Other | 24 | 14% |
| Unknown | 58 | 35% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 23 October 2019.
All research outputs
#5,869,293
of 22,876,619 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medical Education
#919
of 3,337 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#94,155
of 339,345 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medical Education
#23
of 65 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,876,619 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 74th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,337 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.3. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 72% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 339,345 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 72% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 65 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 63% of its contemporaries.