TELE (UG) PORTFOLIO – ASSIGNMENT GUIDANCE

GENERAL INFORMATION

Submission: Via Canvas

Due: Check Sussex Direct for details

Assignment weighting: 100% of overall module marks

PORTFOLIO DESCRIPTION

The assignment for TELE is an individual portfolio submission. The assignment is worth 100% of your marks for the module.

There are three elements to the portfolio, shown below, with the relative percentages for each:

Element Percentage

1. Journal: What makes learning meaningful? 15

2. Learning environment prototype (video) 25

3. Project report 60

1. JOURNAL: WHAT MAKES LEARNING MEANINGFUL? (1000 WORDS)

For this part of the portfolio, you will be documenting one positive learning experience from your past. You will be asked to

consider this experience in terms of its theoretical underpinnings, underlying assumptions about how people learn and what

motivates them. You will then reflect on whether, and how, the elements of your positive learning experience can be

implemented in a technology enhanced learning environment, with reference to your own learning environment prototype.

Specific instructions are provided for each of the five entries, which you can find in the Assessment section of Canvas. Please

work on each entry when the relevant topic is introduced during the term. Although the journal is only due at the end of the

module, along with the rest of the portfolio elements, writing entries over the course of the term means that 1) you will

actually be able to use these personal reflections to inform the design of your learning environment prototype, 2) you will

have finished this element of the portfolio well before the final deadline and 3) we can give you feedback on your entries

before you submit them if you would like.

Journal Marking Criteria

70-100% - Excellent journal. Each of the five entries addresses the points specified and are written clearly. Some or all (for

the highest end of the mark band) of the entries show in depth critical reflection on experiences, and excellent

understanding of the relevant theories of learning and motivation.

60-69% - Very good journal. Each of the five entries addresses the points specified and are written clearly. Some or all of the

entries show critical reflection on experiences, and very good understanding of the relevant theories of learning and

motivation.

50-59% - Good journal. Most of the five entries address the points specified and are written clearly. Some of the entries

show critical reflection on experiences, and there is some evidence of good understanding of the relevant theories of

learning and/or motivation.

40-49% - Poor journal. Some entries are unclear and/or do not address the points specified in the instructions. There is some

evidence of reflection on learning experiences, but it may be fairly superficial. Some entries show a basic understanding of

the relevant theories of learning and/or motivation, but there may also be some misunderstandings evident.

30-39% - Very poor report. Most entries are unclear and/or do not address the points specified in the instructions. There is

little evidence of reflection on learning experiences, and are misunderstandings evident in what has been written.

Below 30% - Journal has very little content of relevance.

1

2. LEARNING ENVIRONMENT PROTOTYPE (VIDEO SUBMISSION – MAX 3 MINUTES)

This component of the portfolio involves the design of a technology-enhanced learning environment prototype (in the

broadest sense: this could be a desktop or smartphone app, a tangible device, virtual or augmented reality application, an

embodied interaction tool, etc.). You are, however, not required to develop a VR, AR, haptic, or similar tool. Your prototype

could be as simple as an interactive mock-up built using Adobe XD.

You should start by deciding on a learning focussed issue of your choice. Then, using theories of learning, motivation, and

relevant research, you will design and prototype a technology-enhanced learning environment, which addresses the issue.

Your solution should make appropriate use of relevant technologies and consider the needs of the learner, as well as the

learning context.

Your solution will be developed iteratively over the course of the module. Many of the practical sessions will focus on a

specific task related to the design process. You will be given worksheets to guide you through these tasks. You should

download the relevant one for the week from Canvas and complete as much as possible before the session. You should then

bring the sheet to the practical session to get feedback. These completed worksheets will be included in your project report

as appendices (see below).

In designing your learning environment, you should focus on “innovative interactions”, i.e. ways of approaching a topic

which go beyond standard methods of teaching. This may involve the use of novel technologies (e.g. augmented reality,

virtual reality, gesture-based interactions, etc.), but you can equally design a desktop/tablet/mobile learning environment,

provided you can clearly show how the interactions afforded by your environment are novel and/or innovative in a way that

could benefit learning. Your learning environment also needs to embody your chosen theories of learning and motivation in

a clear and rigorous manner. You should be aiming for a mid-fidelity prototype, which is explained clearly in the project

report.

A 3 minute (max) video of the prototype should be included as part of your portfolio. The video should demonstrate the

features of your prototype of which you are most proud, and explain how the design meets the needs of the learners and

which theories influenced the design.

Prototype Marking Criteria

70-100% - Excellent prototype that addresses the identified learning issue well. Innovative interactions are clearly

demonstrated, and it is easy to get a sense of what the learner would experience when using the proposed environment.

The prototype video shows that learner needs and the learning context have been fully considered. It is clear how theories

of learning and motivation have influenced the design.

60-69% - Very good prototype which goes some way to addressing the learning issue identified. There are some innovative

elements, and the prototype gives a good sense of what the learner would experience when using the environment. The

prototype video shows that some thought has gone into learner needs and/or learning context. There’s evidence of a

theoretical grounding for many of the elements of the design.

50-59% - Good prototype. It’s clear how the learning issue is intended to be addressed, although this may not have been

fully successful. The prototype video gives some indication of the intended learner experience, but some aspects may be

unclear. There is some evidence of consideration of learner needs and/or learning context, and a clear attempt to apply

theory, although there may be a few misunderstandings evident.

40-49% - Poor prototype. It’s not clear how the prototype addresses the identified learning issue, and the intended learner

interaction is hard to understand. The prototype video shows some design elements that relate to theory covered on the

module, but they do not come together in a coherent design.

30-39% - Very poor prototype. The video may be very unclear or very generic without clear relevance to the module content.

There appears to have been no attempt to apply theory in the prototype, or theory has been applied incorrectly.

Below 30% - Prototype video is missing or includes only irrelevant content.

2

3. PROJECT REPORT (2500 WORDS)

This document should include the following sections:

1. Intro – what is your project topic? Why did you feel this was a learning issue that needed to be addressed in a new way?

2. Design/development/implementation process – describe your design process from start to finish (referencing relevant

practical worksheets as appropriate, included as appendices). Discuss the initial idea, how it developed over time, and

how it changed in response to feedback received. Finish by describing the final prototype (using illustrations/

screenshots as appropriate).

3. From theory to design – which theories of learning and motivation influenced the design of your learning environment?

How were they embodied in the design (provide specific examples)? Assume that the reader has a general familiarity

with the main theories, so only provide a brief overview of those relevant to your project (but any theories mentioned

should be appropriately cited and referenced). Why did you choose the theories that you did? Do you feel the approach

was successful, or would you do things differently?

4. Innovative interactions – in what ways does your prototype afford “innovative interactions”? Is the technology (e.g.

hardware) innovative? Is it a particular form of interaction that is different? Does it offer a novel way of learning about a

specific subject? Do you think it improves on existing/traditional techniques? If so, how? And why?

5. References and AI usage statement (excluded from the word limit) – include a list of all sources cited in your report,

and complete this AI usage statement: I acknowledge the use of [1. insert AI system(s) and link] to [2.specific use of

generative artificial intelligence]. The prompts used include [3. list of prompts]. The output from these prompts was used

to [4. explain use].

6. Appendices (excluded from the word limit) – include your completed practical worksheets here.

Report Marking Criteria

70-100% - Excellent report. The learning issue is explained very clearly, and the design process is described and documented

well. There is good evidence of how the design developed over time in response to feedback, and the final prototype is

presented and explained clearly. An excellent understanding of the relevant theories of learning and motivation is

demonstrated, and it’s clear how the chosen theories influenced the design. There’s a strong argument given about how the

prototype affords innovative interactions, and critical reflection on the success of the design.

60-69% - Very good report. The learning issue is explained and the design process is described and documented. There is

some evidence of how the design developed over time in response to feedback, and the final prototype is presented and

explained clearly. A good understanding of the relevant theories of learning and motivation is demonstrated, and there’s

some evidence of how the chosen theories influenced the design. There’s an argument given about how the prototype

affords innovative interactions, and some reflection on the success of the design.

50-59% - Good report. There is a clear account of the design process, and some evidence of how the design developed over

time. There may be some aspects missing or left unclear in relation to the learning issue tackled and/or the theoretical

grounding of certain elements of the design, but there are some strong elements as well. There’s some discussion of the

intended innovative interactions.

40-49% - Poor report. A basic account is given of the design process, but there may be a lack of evidence of how the design

developed. Some sections might be missing or very brief. There is some evidence of understanding of relevant theories of

learning and/or motivation, but it might not be clear how they were applied in the design, and there may also be some

misunderstandings evident.

30-39% - Very poor report. There is some attempt to give an account of the design, but key elements of the report are

missing or do not cover the relevant points. There are many misunderstandings evident in what has been written.

Below 30% - Report has very little content of relevance.

A FINAL POINT TO NOTE

3

The mark allocation could suggest that most of the work will be put into the project report. In truth, designing the learning

environment is likely to be more time-consuming than any other component. However, marks are allocated in this way in

order to put more weight on your learning process, rather than on your prototype: one term is really not enough time to

develop a fully functional learning environment prototype, therefore, we will be looking for evidence of what you have

learnt through the design process, and how your views on learning have developed over time (as evidenced by the project

report and journal).

4