Cascading Style Sheets

This morning I attended a short workshop on CSS Basics. I learned two things: I'm hopeless coding HTML and I need to learn more about CSS. I know I kind of put the cart before the horse with respect to my electronic portfolio. However, I imagine "better late than never" applies in this case. I'll be able to use what I learned in future revisions of my portfolio.

Generic Tools or Customized System?

I've been busy dropping my portfolio content into the files the graphic artist has provided for me. As I was working on the Narrative, I started to talk about the tools I used to develop my portfolio and the reasons I had chosen them over others. That's when I realized I should have included that information in this blog - and months ago! I'm rectifying the situation now.

I started my Electronic Portfolio in LiveText - the customized system our university has adopted for the undergraduates. I had already read Joanne Carney's work on the dilemmas of electronic portfolios and could speak about the tradeoffs I was making in choosing LiveText over the generic tools approach. For me, the overwhelming reason for using LiveText was to become familiar with the university's tool of choice. I made serious efforts on my portfolio, but eventually abandoned the LiveText tool because it was "buggy" on the Macintosh.

Once I discarded the notion that I was going to use the university tool, the decision on what to use was easy. I was going to take the generic tools approach. Here's my thinking within the framework of Carney's dilemmas.

Multiple purpose dilemma - In my specific situation, the tool was neutral for this dilemma. LiveText allows users to create multiple views of a portfolio. As a relatively proficient designer, I can accomplish this with the generic tools, too. Carney writes about people trying to use their portfolios for multiple purposes. The portfolio I'm doing now is only for assessment. My next revision efforts will be to turn my portfolio-as-comp into an interview portfolio.

Personal revelation - For this dilemma, I would give LiveText a slight edge over the generic tools approach. I have decided to burn CDs of my portfolio rather than post it on the Internet in its entirety. 2c and I have talked about this decision. He sees little to no value in an unposted portfolio. I tried to convince him that a portfolio author might not be willing to create a truly reflective portfolio if s/he knew it would be posted online. I know mine would look very different if it was going online. He made the point that an Instructional Designer should have a professional portfolio. I agree. It's just a different portfolio than the reflective portfolio I'm creating now. I'll create an online version of my portfolio eventually.

Cognitive overload dilemma - Advantage LiveText. I wanted to use Cascading Style Sheets for my portfolio, but didn't know how to do it. Enter the web designer. That's how I minimized this dilemma. I would not have been able to concentrate on the content of my portfolio if I had simultaneously tried to learn a new technology. As it was, the metacognitive aspects of the reflection and architecture kept my brain cycles busy enough. I can easily imagine a portfolio author becoming overwhelmed trying to learn the ins and outs of the software while they're building their portfolio.

Self-expression dilemma - Advantage generic tools! LiveText portfolios all look pretty much the same. Users have the choice of about 6 different colors. With the generic tools approach, you're only limited by your skill - or your designer's skill. I thought it was very important to make the portfolio look and behave exactly as I wanted. With the generic tools approach, this has been accomplished. Reviewers can look at every aspect of the portfolio and ask why I did it the way I did. With LiveText, I would have been stuck with one of their templates and that's just not appropriate for an IT student.

Dead-end dilemma - This is a big deal with tools such as LiveText. At the end of the subscription period, the portfolio author has to decide whether or not to renew the subscription. If one buys into the idea of portfolios as lifelong learning, the LiveText system ultimately becomes quite expensive. I'm opting for generic tools, CDs burned on my laptop, and endless opportunities to revise my portfolio for different audiences.

Data aggregation - Not a consideration for my portfolio.

To sum things up, I'm using Dreamweaver for the editing, Photoshop for editing screen captures, photos from a digital camera, the Adobe suite to generate PDF files, and other things as they become necessary.

Navigation SNAFU

Things were rolling along beautifully. Last night I received all of the template files from the graphic designer/web programmer. This was the first time I saw everything put together and I realized there was a snafu with navigation of the top level pages. Up to then, I'd only seen one section of the second level pages and they were perfect.

Now it was time to polish the top level navigation. We passed a couple of emails back and forth and I checked in with my husband for his opinion, too. At one point, I think we had about five options on the table. Oh, to have the time for some usability testing! Since that wasn't an option, I had to settle for sleeping on it for a night. In the morning, the right choice seemed obvious. I still think it would be nice to feel confident based on some real data as opposed to my gut reaction. It seems like a very bad idea to do usability testing on my portfolio reviewers!

I think I'll go hunt down some unsuspecting friends......

A random thought

Dr. Baumbach has invited the reviewers for my portfolio-as-comp. That has gotten me thinking about the kinds of questions they'll ask and how I'll introduce them to my work. Since this is an experiment, I believe they'll ask me about my experience and not just content. This morning I was thinking that the most difficult part of the portfolio process - at least for me - has been the reflective writing. I don't suppose that should come as a big surprise. It is, after all, a good place for metacognition to happen. As I pursued that line of thinking (metacognitively, of course!) I realized that the reflective writing is much easier when I'm considering a "rich" artifact that gives me plenty to say. The drivel that sometimes comes out in the reflective process is, I think, appearing when the artifact doesn't demonstrate all that much.

I'm not sure what this means. Perhaps there actually is a correlation between the quality of the reflection and the richness of the artifact. (That might be a decent qualitative question to ask in future research.) Perhaps this is an indicator that the artifact under consideration really isn't worth including in the portfolio. Or perhaps my 5:00 am observation is simply wrong and I shouldn't blog about the things that wake me up.

The matrix design

In my post on October 28, I mentioned finding a matrix that inspired me to create my own. The need to get that matrix created has been gnawing at me. I have more than 30 artifacts in my portfolio (those poor reviewers!) and nearly the same number of standards and indicators to document. That's a matrix with an awful lot of cells on one electronic screen.

I alternated between numbering the artifacts across the top of the matrix with brief statements of standards down the side - and reversing those positions. I finally settled on indicating standards by letter/numbers across the top and the artifacts down the side. My reasoning was that such a layout made the artifact list more expandable.

My next task was to figure out how to keep a viewer from getting lost in an endless grid of boxes. I've decided to use color. I'm alternating vertical bands of color so the eye can travel down the list of standards. I'm using horizontal bands of color to represent the sections and subsections of the portfolio. It passed the Dr. Baumbach test, so I doubt it will change much.