Knowledge management and e-Portfolios for sustainability

Oksana Polyakova

doi:10.59400/fes1586

Knowledge management and e-Portfolios for sustainability

Oksana Polyakova Applied Linguistics Department, Universitat Politècnica de València (UPV), Camino de Vera s/n, 46022 Valencia, Spain

Article ID: 1586

Keywords: sustainable education; university knowledge management; English for Specific Purposes (ESP); qualitative analysis; electronic portfolios (e-Portfolios)

Abstract

Integrating sustainable practices within technical university settings has garnered significant attention in recent years. However, there needs to be more progress in merging these practices with active foreign language learning and knowledge management. Recent studies have introduced new perspectives on social constructivism and second/third language (L2/3) acquisition, emphasizing knowledge-building and gender-related factors. This paper presents the methodology of a pilot study conducted during an English for Specific Purposes (ESP) course. The primary instructional technique employed was electronic portfolios (e-Portfolios), which facilitated extensive data collection to compare gender-differentiated lexical production among engineering university students. Two research instruments provided a comprehensive qualitative analysis of professional portfolio texts written in English. The visualization of e-Portfolio data, incorporating lexical and sentiment analysis, revealed specific differences in the characteristics of learners. This approach aims to integrate a broader perspective of ESP with sustainability and university knowledge management, areas that have yet to be explored. This study’s convergence of academic and labor market needs highlights the potential to prioritize sustainability goals while fostering and showcasing innovation in higher education.

References

[1]Manesh MF, Pellegrini MM, Marzi G, Dabic M. Knowledge management in the fourth industrial revolution: Mapping the literature and scoping future avenues. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management. 2020; 68(1): 289–300.

[2]Adhikari DR, & Shrestha P. Knowledge management initiatives for achieving sustainable development goal 4.7: higher education institutions’ stakeholder perspectives. Journal of Knowledge Management. 2023; 27(4): 1109–1139.

[3]UN General Assembly. Transforming our world: The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. 2015. Available online: https://www.refworld.org/docid/57b6e3e44.html (accessed on 1 August 2024).

[4]Polyakova O, Galstyan-Sargsyan R. Sustainable higher education via telecollaboration: Improving plurilingual and pluricultural competence. Integration of Education. 2021; 25(4): 544–561.

[5]Zamora-Polo F, Sánchez-Martín J. Teaching for a better world. Sustainability and sustainable development goals in the construction of a change-maker university. Sustainability. 2019; 11(15): 4224.

[6]Aleixo AM, Azeiteiro UM, & Leal S. Are the sustainable development goals being implemented in the Portuguese higher education formative offer? International Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education. 2020; 21(2): 336–352. doi: 10.1108/IJSHE-04-2019-0150

[7]Kioupi V, Voulvoulis N. Education for Sustainable Development: A Systemic Framework for Connecting the SDGs to Educational Outcomes. Sustainability. 2019; 11(21): 1–18. doi: 10.3390/su11216104

[8]Burbules NC, Fan G, & Repp P. Five trends of education and technology in a sustainable future. Geography and sustainability. 2020; 1(2): 93–97. doi: 10.1016/j.geosus.2020.05.001

[9]Hymes D. On communicative competence. In: Pride JB, Holmes J (editors). Sociolinguistics. Penguin Books; 1972. pp. 269–293.

[10]Canale M, & Swain M. Theoretical bases of communicative approaches to second language teaching and testing. Applied Linguistics. 1980; 1(1): 1–47.

[11]Collins JW, O’Brien NP. The Greenwood Dictionary of Education, 2nd ed. Greenwood; 2011.

[12]Anthony L. Introducing English for Specific Purposes. Routledge; 2018.

[13]Hutchinson T, & Waters A. English for Specific Purposes: A Learning-centered Approach. Cambridge University Press; 1987.

[14]Işık-Taş EE, Kenny N. Current Practices, Challenges, and Innovations in English for Specific Purposes Instruction and Research. In: Kenny N, Işık-Taş E, Jian H (editors). English for Specific Purposes Instruction and Research. Cham; 2020.

[15]Johns AM, Dudley-Evans T. English for Specific Purposes: International in Scope, Specific in Purpose. TESOL Quarterly. 1991; 25(2): 297–314.

[16]Council of Europe. Common European framework of reference for languages: Learning, teaching, assessment, companion volume. Council of Europe Publishing; 2020.

[17]Arnó-Macià E, Aguilar-Pérez M, & Tatzl D. Engineering students’ perceptions of the role of ESP courses in internationalised universities. English for Specific Purposes. 2020; 58: 58–74.

[18]Fei WF. Enhancing Students’ Professional Competence and Generic Qualities through Writing in English across the Curriculum. 3L The Southeast Asian Journal of English Language Studies. 2016; 22(1): 235–236. doi: 10.17576/3L-2016-2201-18

[19]Salmani-Nodoushan MA. English for specific purposes: Traditions, trends, directions. Studies in English Language and Education. 2020; 7(1): 247–268. doi: 10.24815/siele.v7i1.16342

[20]O’Connor K. Constructivism, curriculum and the knowledge question: tensions and challenges for higher education. Studies in Higher Education. 2022; 47(2): 412–422.

[21]Tan C, Ng CS. Constructivism in education. In: Oxford Research Encyclopaedia of Education. Oxford University Press; 2021.

[22]Arık S, Yılmaz M. The effect of constructivist learning approach and active learning on environmental education: A meta-analysis study. International Electronic Journal of Environmental Education. 2020; 10(1): 44–84.

[23]Matsumoto S. Constructivism: An Overview. Visio. 2022; 53: 29–36.

[24]Puntambekar S. Distributed scaffolding: Scaffolding students in classroom environments. Educational Psychology Review. 2022; 34(1): 451–472.

[25]Wood D, Bruner JS, Ross G. The role of tutoring in problem solving. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, and Allied Disciplines. 1976; 17(2): 89–100. doi: 10.1111/j.1469-7610.1976.tb00381.x

[26]Akpan VI, Igwe UA, Mpamah IBI, & Okoro CO. Social constructivism: Implications on teaching and learning. British Journal of Education. 2020; 8(8): 49–56.

[27]Ode E, Ayavoo R. The mediating role of knowledge application in the relationship between knowledge management practices and firm innovation. Journal of Innovation & Knowledge. 2020; 5(3): 210–218. doi: 10.1016/j.jik.2019.08.002

[28]Ülker N, Otrar M. University 4.0 essentials: Influence of industry 4.0 on higher education. Industry and Higher Education. 2024; doi: 10.1177/09504222241295625

[29]Quarchioni S, Paternostro S, Trovarelli F. Knowledge management in higher education: A literature review and further research avenues. Knowledge Management Research & Practice. 2022; 20(2): 304–319. doi: 10.1080/14778238.2020.1730717

[30]Ahmad N, Lodhi MS, Zaman K, & Naseem I. Knowledge Management: A Gateway for Organizational Performance. Journal of the Knowledge Economy. 2017; 8(3): 859–876. doi: 10.1007/s13132-015-0282-3

[31]Sallis E, Jones G. Knowledge management in education: Enhancing learning & education. Routledge; 2012.

[32]Cruz ML, Saunders-Smits GN, & Groen P. Evaluation of competency methods in engineering education: A systematic review. European Journal of Engineering Education. 2020; 45(5): 729–757. doi: 10.1080/03043797.2019.1671810

[33]Hartikainen S, Rintala H, Pylväs L, & Nokelainen P. The Concept of Active Learning and the Measurement of Learning Outcomes: A Review of Research in Engineering Higher Education. Education Sciences. 2019; 9(4): 276. doi: 10.3390/educsci9040276

[34]Olstad HA. e-Portfolio Introduction: Designing a Support Process. In: Kori K, Laanpere M (editors). Informatics in Schools. Engaging Learners in Computational Thinking. Springer International Publishing; 2020. pp. 209–220.

[35]Sodhi J, Moon S. Work in Progress: Using e-Portfolios to Showcase Student Projects. In: Proceedings of 2018 FYEE Conference; 24 July 2018.

[36]Polyakova O. e-Portfolio in students’ learning for sustainable development. Information Technologies and Learning Tools. 2023; 96(4): 1–14. doi: 10.33407/itlt.v96i4.5238

[37]Cohen L, Manion L, Morrison K. Research methods in education, 8th ed. Routledge; 2018.

[38]Kuckartz U, Rädiker S. Analyzing qualitative data with MAXQDA: Text, audio, and video. Springer; 2019.

[39]Kuckartz U, Rädiker S. Using MAXQDA for mixed methods research. In: Onwuegbuzie AJ, Johnson BR (editors). The Routledge Reviewer’s Guide to Mixed Methods Analysis. Routledge; 2021. pp. 305–318.

[40]Moreno-Ortiz, A. Lingmotif: A user-focused sentiment analysis tool. Natural Language Processing. 2017; 58: 133–140.

[41]Taboada M. Sentiment Analysis: An Overview from Linguistics. Annual Review of Linguistics. 2016; 2(1): 325–347. doi: 10.1146/annurev-linguistics-011415-040518

[42]Geitz G, & de Geus J. Design-based education, sustainable teaching, and learning. Cogent Education. 2019; 6(1): 1647919. doi: 10.1080/2331186X.2019.1647919

[43]Machado HPV, Elias MLGGR. Knowledge management: The field’s constitution, themes, and research perspectives. Trans-Information. 2020; 32. doi: 10.1590/2318-0889202032e200037

Published

2024-12-13

How to Cite

Polyakova, O. (2024). Knowledge management and e-Portfolios for sustainability. Forum for Education Studies, 3(1), 1586. https://doi.org/10.59400/fes1586

Download Citation

Issue

Vol. 3 No. 1 (2025)

Section

Article

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Editor-in-Chief

Dr. Surapati Pramanik

Nandalal Ghosh B.T. College, India

eISSN

3029-2956

Publication Frequency

Quarterly

About the Publisher

Academic Publishing insists on taking academic exchange and publication as the main line, carrying out comprehensive management based on science and technology, and fully exploring excellent international publishing resources. Within 5 years, it will form a strategic framework and scale with science (S), technology (T), medicine (M), education (E), and humanities and arts (H) as the main publishing fields. Academic Publishing is headquartered in Singapore and based in Malaysia, with the United States and China providing the main scientific and academic resources. At the same time, it has established long-term good cooperative relations with other publishing companies, scientific research communities, and academic organizations in more than a dozen countries and regions. Academic Publishing uses English and Chinese as its main publishing languages, mainly publishing books, journals, and conference papers in print and online. The vast majority of publications follow the international open access policy, providing stable and long-term quality and professional publications. With the joint efforts of the expert team and our professional editorial team, our publications will gradually be indexed by international databases in stages to provide convenient and professional retrieval for various scholars. At the same time, manuscripts we accept will be subject to the peer review principle, and cutting-edge and innovative research articles will be preferentially accepted for peer reference and discussion. All kinds of our publications are welcome for peer to contribute, access, and download.

more

Volume Arrangement

2025

2024

2023

Featured Articles

Diachronic analysis of Spanish scientific production on teaching methodologies in Primary Education: A scientometric and conceptual perspective (2000–2023)

The evaluation of science is essential to ensuring the quality, validity, and reliability of scientific results. Science needs to undergo a review process to ensure the rigorousness of scientific output. This evaluation provides a solid basis for political and economic decisions related to the design and execution of research projects, the establishment of new lines of research, or the identification of areas of specialization. This paper analyses diachronically the Spanish scientific production related to the implementation and development of teaching methodologies in primary education and indexed in the Scopus and Web of Science databases during the period 2000–2023. This analysis is carried out on the one hand, from a scientometric perspective, based on the analysis of indicators such as diachronic production, the journals with the highest scientific productivity, and the most productive institutions, and, on the other hand, from a conceptual perspective, trying to define its relationship with other areas of education. The general results of this study reveal two clear stages: the first, up to 2010, with little scientific production; and the second, from 2011 onwards, characterised by a general growth. The relationship between this field and others such as initial teacher training, ICT, and didactics is also evident.

The relationship between teachers’ self-efficacy and classroom management practices in secondary schools

This study explores the intricate relationship between teacher self-efficacy and classroom management practices in secondary schools in the Mansehra district of Pakistan. Teacher self-efficacy, defined as the belief in one’s ability to manage and influence classroom environments effectively, has been identified as a critical factor influencing both teaching performance and student outcomes. The research employed a mixed-method approach, gathering data from 62 teachers and 310 students using both online surveys (via Google Forms) and physical questionnaires to ensure a diverse and inclusive participant pool. Data analysis was conducted using two complementary tools: SPSS and Smart PLS. SPSS was used for descriptive statistics and inferential analyses, such as t-tests, chi-square tests, and measures of central tendency, to offer an overview of group differences and relationships between variables. Meanwhile, Smart PLS was employed for Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM), a technique suited for complex models and smaller sample sizes. This method allowed for the analysis of both direct and indirect relationships between the study variables—teacher self-efficacy, teaching practices, and classroom management. The findings reveal a significant positive correlation between teacher self-efficacy and classroom management practices. Additionally, teaching practices were found to mediate this relationship, indicating that higher levels of self-efficacy not only directly improve classroom management but also enhance teaching performance, which in turn contributes to better-managed classrooms. These results suggest that interventions aimed at enhancing teacher self-efficacy can have far-reaching effects on educational outcomes. The study highlights the need for focused teacher development programs that foster self-efficacy, thereby improving classroom management, student engagement, and overall academic success.

Artificial Intelligence in education: A comprehensive study

This comprehensive study delves into the multifaceted role of AI in education, exploring its applications, benefits, challenges, and future implications. The purpose of the study is to show how AI in education helps educators identify gaps in student knowledge and provide targeted feedback to improve learning outcomes. As a methodology, the library method and the study and review of various documents have been used in this research. The study examines the diverse range of AI technologies employed in educational settings, including intelligent tutoring systems, personalized learning platforms, educational chatbots, and virtual reality simulations. Furthermore, the study delves into the numerous benefits that AI brings to education. It highlights how AI-powered analytics and data-driven insights enable educators to gain deeper insights into student learning patterns, identify areas for improvement, and tailor instructional strategies accordingly. Additionally, AI-driven tools promote inclusivity by providing personalized support to learners with diverse needs and learning styles. Despite its transformative potential, the study also acknowledges the challenges and ethical considerations associated with integrating AI into education. Data privacy, algorithmic bias, and the digital divide are examined in detail, emphasizing the importance of responsible AI deployment and ethical guidelines. Looking ahead, the study explores the future implications of AI in education and the evolving role of educators in AI-enabled classrooms. It discusses how AI technologies will continue to evolve, offering new opportunities for collaborative learning, skill development, and lifelong education. In conclusion, this comprehensive study underscores the profound impact of AI on education and the need for thoughtful implementation strategies that prioritize equity, inclusivity, and ethical considerations. By harnessing the potential of AI, education systems can better prepare learners for the challenges and opportunities of the future.

Enhancing adult learner success in higher education through decision tree models: A machine learning approach

This article explores the use of machine learning, specifically Classification and Regression Trees (CART), to address the unique challenges faced by adult learners in higher education. These learners confront socio-cultural, economic, and institutional hurdles, such as stereotypes, financial constraints, and systemic inefficiencies. The study utilizes decision tree models to evaluate their effectiveness in predicting graduation outcomes, which helps in formulating tailored educational strategies. The research analyzed a comprehensive dataset spanning the academic years 2013–2014 to 2021–2022, evaluating the predictive accuracy of CART models using precision, recall, and F1 score. Findings indicate that attendance, age, and Pell Grant eligibility are key predictors of academic success, demonstrating the strong capability of the model across various educational metrics. This highlights the potential of machine learning (ML) to improve data-driven decision-making in educational settings. The results affirm the effectiveness of Decision Tree (DT) models in meeting the educational needs of adult learners and underscore the need for institutions to adapt their strategies to provide more inclusive and supportive environments. This study advocates for a shift towards nuanced, data-driven approaches in higher education, emphasizing the development of strategies that address the distinct challenges of adult learners, aiming to enhance inclusivity and support within the sector.