19 Designing ePortfolios for the development of professionally equipped and empowered creative arts teachers to inspire digitally resilient future learners

Sarah Ralfe, Jenilyn Deyzel, and Jane Ross
STADIO, South Africa

ABSTRACT

The late Sir Ken Robinson (TED, 2007) addresses shifting educational paradigms and the value of creativity as we educate youngsters for a world currently beyond our conception. The Emergency Remote Teaching (ERT) that resulted from the impact of the Covid-19 virus on education was a major disruptor in the trajectory of assessment. Lecturing in the creative arts, we were accustomed to the immediacy of contact learning, which emphasises embodied, collaborative, and practical learning and assessment. We were at first reticent to let go of the need for live energy exchange, but Covid-19 forced us to adopt adaptive pedagogy and to reimagine our teaching and assessment strategies as we embraced the multimedia potential of ePortfolios as a valid means of supporting and monitoring learning.

 In this chapter, the authors, three creative arts lecturers working in teacher education, reflexively examine the impact of ePortfolios on their assessment practices in a South African higher education institution. The chapter will examine our initial apprehension and concern at the use of online assessment, our gradual acceptance of ePortfolios and our eventual advocacy for ePortfolios as a valid assessment method in the creative arts. Through self-study, participatory research, and analysis of our own experiences and practices, deeper insights are gained about the role of ePortfolios in teacher education in the creative arts. It is through embracing the arts and technology that we acquire the flexibility to “surf the waves” of change. We explore how ePortfolios assist in the acquisition of digital resilience in both students and lecturers, providing us with comprehensive tools for multidisciplinary teaching and assessment in arts education. This digital resilience puts us in a strong position to mentor and inspire colleagues and future creative arts educators alike.

Keywords: ePortfolios, creative arts, assessment, higher education, teacher training.

INTRODUCTION

In his oft-cited TED talk (2007), the late Sir Ken Robinson addresses shifting educational paradigms and the value of creativity as we educate youngsters for a world currently beyond our conception. As lecturers, we found ourselves forced to confront a world beyond our conception when the COVID-19 pandemic hit in 2020. The resultant Emergency Remote Teaching (ERT) forced us into uncharted waters and scrambling for digital lifelines as we reimagined our modules in the online space. One of the strategies employed during COVID-19 was the adoption of online assessment and ePortfolios as an emergency measure to allow students who were socially distanced at the time to submit their work. Working in the creative arts, we were concerned about what online assessment meant for the physical and emotional connection that we regarded as essential in practical creative arts work. We were apprehensive about whether ePortfolios could bridge the gap between concrete lived experiences in the real world and how these would transmit into the virtual space. In this chapter, the three authors, all creative arts lecturers, critically examine the process of adopting ePortfolios for assessment.

We all lecture in the School of Education at a private higher education institution located in South Africa. This institution offers both undergraduate and postgraduate teaching qualifications in contact and distance learning modes. Modules have a dual purpose in that they introduce students to both pedagogic and disciplinary knowledge in the creative arts, equipping them for the world of work as professionally qualified teachers.

Sarah’s background is in music, with a focus on music identity and history. In addition to coordinating the arts department, she lectures in undergraduate music and movement modules, training generalist Foundation and Intermediate Phase student teachers. Jenilyn specialises in visual arts and interdisciplinary learning with an emphasis on creative strategies for teacher empowerment. She lectures in creative and visual arts at the Senior and FET levels. Jane’s interests and professional experience are in acting, directing, film, and education. Prior to 2024, she lectured undergraduate creative arts in the contact learning mode, and she currently focuses on training postgraduate FET drama teachers online. Our professional experience encompasses classrooms, lecture halls, and, more recently, online, covering all phases of study, from primary to tertiary. In addition to our experience of teaching and lecturing in the four art forms, our individual strengths provided a strong base, enabling us to work as a team and to support one another as we navigated the online space of ERT.

The creative arts in South Africa are a marginalised and neglected area of the curriculum (de Villiers, 2015; Jansen van Vuuren & van Niekerk, 2015; Pooley, 2016; Ralfe, 2024). As creative arts teachers and lecturers, we are well versed in operating in liminal spaces with limited resources. This adaptability put us in a strong position to modify our assessment methods to ePortfolios. In this chapter, we draw on our collective experience in interrogating our process of coming to terms with ERT and redefining our assessment practices through the implementation of ePortfolios. In order to achieve this, we aimed to answer the following research question: What was the experience of three creative arts lecturers in the implementation of ePortfolios? To understand the impact of technology on assessment, we have made use of the Technological Pedagogical and Content Knowledge (TPACK) framework (Koehler & Mishra, 2009; Mishra, 2019) as a theoretical underpinning to consider the interplay between technology, content, and pedagogy in creative arts assessment.

CONTEXT

Any discussion on the implementation of a new assessment method, as was the case with the adoption of ePortfolios, must be undertaken with our context in mind. As lecturers at a rapidly expanding private institution, one of the challenges facing us is the issue of massification. This issue is not unique and has been observed in other South African institutions, both public and private (Altbach et al., 2009). In our teaching, learning, and assessment, it is imperative for us to consider scalability, as this has been foregrounded by our institution. There is an ongoing tension between maintaining academic integrity and ensuring the scalability of assessment in our arts modules, and we felt this tension acutely in the implementation of ePortfolios.

Our institution’s goal of widening access to higher education results in a diverse student body from a broad range of socio-economic backgrounds. Although a basic requirement of enrollment at the institution is a functioning digital device such as a laptop or computer, some of our students rely solely on their smartphones or internet cafes for connectivity. When COVID-19 hit in 2020, the institution was able to rapidly shift to online learning, under the assumption that every student had a functioning device. However, this was not always the case, and as lecturers we were aware of multiple students completing their qualifications via smartphone or through the use of internet cafes. In addition to the challenges with access to hardware, since 2020, connectivity challenges have been compounded by COVID-19 restrictions, the inflated price of data in South Africa, a period of unrest with floods, riots, rolling electricity blackouts, and a generally unstable and unreliable internet supply (Essop, 2021; Pika & Reddy, 2022). In 2023, only 14.5% of South African households had a fixed internet line at home (Odendaal, 2024). These issues had to be considered in the implementation of ePortfolios for assessment, as both hardware and connectivity are required to successfully compile and submit an ePortfolio, which requires sophisticated technological competencies (Rowley et al., 2016). As lecturers we have often felt challenged by the institution’s focus on the implementation of technology and our own awareness of the technological challenges students face with hardware, connectivity, and general digital competencies. Furthermore, access to technology is not equal and “mirrors the racial inequalities of the apartheid era” (Mkhize et al., 2020). These tensions will be examined further in the findings section of this chapter.

REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE

Assessment and ePortfolios in the creative arts

Traditionally, the creative arts have been assessed by means of practical assessments. In visual arts this would involve the creation of artworks, while in the performing arts, assessment would often include some form of performance or practical task (Bowman, 2018; Koster, 2014; Odendaal & De Jager, 2021). The emphasis on practical assessment is also foregrounded in the Curriculum and Assessment Policy (CAPS), which guides learning in South African schools (Department of Basic Education, 2011). Practical assessments had traditionally taken place in the classroom, with students performing live for an audience (Clark-Fookes, 2023) or creating artworks in a communal and collaborative space (Cutliffe et al., 2024). Assessments are embodied, practical, relational, and situated (Murphy et al., 2022). Prior to COVID-19, calls were being made for a rethinking of assessment for the online space (Johnson & Lamoth, 2021). However, creative arts teachers generally resisted the implementation of technology, citing the need for situated, live, practical performances (Clark-Fookes, 2023).

The adoption of ePortfolios in South Africa and other developing nations prior to the COVID-19 pandemic was slow (Modise & Madau, 2021), and the use of ePortfolios for the assessment of the creative arts was not common practice. However, several benefits in the implementation of ePortfolios in the creative arts were noted. These included the multimodality of ePortfolios and the ability to integrate documents, images, sound, and video into a single document (Calderón-Garrido et al., 2023; Whitney et al., 2021). This allowed for creative arts student teachers to demonstrate multiple student competencies such as performance, composition, arrangement, teaching, and conducting, along with PDFs of official teaching practice documents such as reports, lesson plans, and assessments which could also be included (Dunbar-Hall et al., 2010). The diversity of evidence that could be included in an e-portfolio across both practical and teaching skills meant that the multiple identities of student teachers could be showcased and allowed for a “drawing together [of] the disparate strands of a degree program” (Dunbar-Hall et al., 2010, p. 63). Furthermore, ePortfolios were found to support creativity and self-expression (Farrell, 2021) and were an authentic record of a student’s skills and abilities (Rowley et al., 2016; Rowley & Dunbar-Hall, 2017). This documentation included in an ePortfolio held the potential to become a professional portfolio to be showcased to potential employers (Farrell, 2021; Rowley et al., 2016; Rowley & Dunbar-Hall, 2017). ePortfolios were also found to contribute to peer learning and collaboration (Mudau & Modise, 2022; Whitney et al., 2021) and provided students with opportunities for active self-directed learning and autonomy and independence (Farrell, 2021; Rowley & Munday, 2022).

One of the challenges of implementing ePortfolios is the level of technological competence required from students and lecturers in their implementation (Calderón-Garrido et al., 2023; Whitney et al., 2021) and the need for ongoing institutional support (Makhaya & Ogange, 2019; Modise, 2021). This is of particular significance in a context such as South Africa, where students experience unequal access to and experiences of technology (Mkhize et al., 2020).

Impact of COVID-19 on assessment practices

The arrival of COVID-19 in early 2020 was a major disruptor in education, and “Arguably, for the first time, learning via the Internet became a significant part of teaching and learning in Africa” (Faturoti, 2022, p. 71). Much of the disruption of COVID-19 was felt in the urgency to move teaching and learning online and to redesign existing content and assessments for the online space (Essop, 2021; Green et al., 2020). ERT differed from pre-planned distance learning in the sheer speed with which it was implemented as an emergency measure in response to a worldwide catastrophe (Essop, 2021; Jili et al., 2021). This exposed the varying levels of preparedness for online teaching among lecturers, with many overwhelmed and underprepared for the shift (Trust & Whalen, 2020). Students too were ill-equipped, with many from disadvantaged backgrounds in South Africa lacking the necessary technological skills, hardware, devices, and connectivity to successfully engage in online learning (Essop, 2021; Jili et al., 2021; Mkhize et al., 2020).

The sudden adoption of ERT was challenging in the creative arts, where social constructivism had been foregrounded in classrooms that relied on face-to-face engagement. The collaborative and communal nature of creating artworks (Cutcliffe et al., 2024) and performing music, drama, and dance pieces (Bowman, 2018; Koster, 2015; Odendaal & De Jager, 2021) was replaced by virtual online engagements. This required resilience and adaptability in both lecturers and students, both of which will be discussed below.

Resilience and adaptability

Resilience in education refers to an individual’s ability to adapt when faced with difficulties and stress (Hargraves, 2020). In other words, resilience is the capacity to face challenges and to persist through adverse conditions while maintaining a positive attitude—a mental framework that is focused on growth and learning. Winner et al. (2020) describe it as an ability to engage and persist, which they include as one of the eight disciplined habits of mind they argue are developed through engagement in the arts. They go on to argue that arts teachers nurture persistence in their students through two key processes. Firstly, through the creation of challenging art projects that will require work over a sustained period, and secondly, by teaching students how to push through frustrations, to solve problems, and not to give up.

Adaptability, as observed in adaptive pedagogy, is a teaching approach that is responsive to the needs and context of the learner (Athanases et al., 2015). In other words, the deliberate and responsive adjustment of teaching practices is based on the requirements of a specific classroom environment. In the case of ERT, this required a rapid move to online teaching and assessment. In our multilingual and multicultural South African context, teachers and lecturers are already well versed in adaptive pedagogy, as we frequently must adapt our teaching strategies to the context. This is particularly relevant in the arts, which operate in traditionally marginalised spaces (de Villiers, 2015; Jansen van Vuuren & van Niekerk, 2015; Pooley, 2016; Ralfe, 2024). We argue that the participants in this study had to engage with adaptive pedagogy through the embracing of digital tools and the move to the online teaching context.

THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK

In this study we consider how we experienced the implementation of ePortfolios in the higher education creative arts context. The implementation of an ePortfolio, which called for lecturers and students to adapt their assessments for the online space, required technological skills and competencies alongside the pedagogical and content knowledge required by student teachers. Thus, the Technological Pedagogical and Content Knowledge (TPACK) framework (Koehler & Mishra, 2009; Mishra, 2019) provided a useful lens to consider the impact of the introduction of technology into the module assessment.

The TPACK model (Koehler & Mishra, 2009) builds on the Pedagogical Content Knowledge (PCK) framework of Shulman (1986, 1987), with the addition of technology. Thus, the TPACK model considers the different knowledges that a teacher requires in the classroom, namely, content, pedagogy, and technology. Content knowledge refers to what the teachers know and understand about the subject matter that is being imparted in the classroom. Pedagogical knowledge relates to what is understood about the practice of teaching, while technological knowledge considers the technological competencies of a teacher and his or her ability to integrate technology productively within the classroom. We argue that technology in this context refers to the knowledge, skills, and hardware a student requires to effectively engage with the module content via the Learning Management System (LMS). This might include access to a laptop or mobile device, skill in navigating online platforms and applications, and general digital literacy and competencies.

The TPACK model considers the ways that content knowledge, pedagogical knowledge, and technological knowledge interact in the classroom context. While knowledge is required in each of the individual areas, TPACK also considers “the complex interactions among these elements in specific contexts” (Koehler & Mishra, 2009, p. 66).

In an update to the TPACK model (Mishra, 2019), the outer border of the TPACK diagram, previously labelled “contexts,” is adjusted to “contextual knowledge.” This knowledge refers to the understandings that the teacher has about the context and the multitude of contextual issues within the classroom.

Koehler and Mishra (2009) acknowledge the challenges that many teachers face regarding the adoption of technology in the classroom. They argue that teachers often feel unsupported in leveraging technology into the classroom space and that many also have limited experiences and training in the successful implementation of technology in the classroom. This issue impacts a teacher’s ability to integrate technology successfully into the classroom.

The literature reveals that, while TPACK has been used to a limited extent in the creative arts in a South African context, there is much room for further exploration and research in this area. For example, we struggled to find relevant literature to support the implementation of TPACK in dramatic arts. Gall (2015), who utilised the TPACK framework to conduct research into music education, also argues that much more research is needed in this area. The limited extent of the application of TPACK in music and drama could possibly be due to the performative nature of these subjects. In the visual arts, Wang (2024) suggests that core teaching competencies within the TPACK framework are dependent on the teacher’s ability to adapt to environmental changes. Indeed, the author argues that contextual changes drive the improvement of a teacher’s teaching ability. The need for technological training is supported by Kara (2021), who found that the technological knowledge of pre-service visual art teachers was lower than their content knowledge. Within the South African context, research has considered how technological developments could be integrated into the teaching of creative arts (Hlatswayo, 2023); however, there is limited research on the role of TPACK within the teaching of creative arts in the South African context, a gap that this study aims to fill.

METHODOLOGY

To reflect on our experiences in using ePortfolios, we employed a self-study methodology. This approach was selected as self-study requires researchers to consider their own professional experiences and to use these to improve practice (Hauge, 2021; Pithouse-Morgan, 2022). As Pithouse-Morgan (2022, p. 7) argues, self-study research “begins with a sense of curiosity rooted in practice”. The appeal of self-study was that it allowed us to investigate how the implementation of ePortfolios in higher education affected each of us and its implications for our practice. In relation to TPACK (Koehler & Mishra 2009; Mishra, 2019), the use of self-study allowed us to consider how our pedagogical, content and technological competencies developed through the implementation of ePortfolios. One of the cornerstones of self-study that appealed to us was the collaborative nature of co-producing and co-analysing the data (Vanassche & Kelchtermans, 2015).

The data generation phase of this study involves two separate strategies. Firstly, we each constructed a personal narrative outlining our use of ePortfolios for assessment in our modules. The use of narrative appealed to us, as it provided us with a vehicle to foreground and understand our personal experiences of ePortfolios (Clandinin, 2023). The inclusion of our personal narratives allowed us to offer our personal experiences and reflections on how we implemented ePortfolios as a method of assessment. Secondly, we conducted two open-ended, semi-structured focus group interviews, which provided empirical data, which we analyse in this chapter. The open-ended, semi-structured interviews were conducted online, via Teams, and were one hour and twenty minutes and fifty minutes long, respectively. These sessions were guided by a set of predetermined questions and discussion points that all three researchers formulated and agreed to prior to the interviews. The semi-structured format was selected for our focus group discussions, as we wanted a methodology that was not prescriptive and allowed us to pursue alternative valid points as they were raised. The focus group structure appealed to us as all three participant researchers were encouraged to interact with each other (Cohen et al., 2018). When the discussion moved away from the questions, Sarah acted loosely as moderator by bringing it back to the predetermined questions. This method of collaborative self-study, in which we scrutinised our practice in relation to the adoption of ePortfolios, allowed for rich data to be produced (Vanassche & Kelchtermans, 2015). All ethical principles were followed, and ethical clearance was granted by our institution, allowing our participation in this research.

The two open-ended, semi-structured discussions were recorded and transcribed, and in the initial phase of analysis, all three researchers analysed the data independently. We made use of thematic analysis and employed an inductive approach (Braun & Clarke, 2006), allowing the data to guide the coding rather than applying a priori categories. This allowed us to identify “meanings, feelings, actions, events, and so on” (Cohen et al., 2018, p. 718) within the data set. We then worked together to combine similar codes into categories and themes. One of the strengths of the analysis process was our collective involvement in the coding, which allowed for “alternative interpretations of collected data and … new understandings” (Vanassche & Kelchtermans, 2015, p. 516). Where different interpretations of the data surfaced, we deliberated and discussed these, ultimately coming to a shared consensus.

FINDINGS

We begin our findings with a reflexive narrative outlining how we have used ePortfolios as a method for assessment in the creative arts. We then move on to an analysis of the analytical data generated during the two open-ended, semi-structured focus group discussions.

Narratives

Moving to ePortfolios was easier than I thought – Sarah

I lecture on a music and movement module to generalist undergraduate students. This module always included practical group work for assessment. This involved a group rhythm piece using body percussion and found instruments. During COVID-19, this had to be converted to an individual task. I felt that the ability to follow a pulse was a cornerstone of the assessment, so I retained this in the online version by providing three different pulse recordings at differing tempos whilst retaining rhythmic variety in performance using found instruments.

Prior to ERT, students used glockenspiels in a practical task that demonstrated their mastery of melody and harmony. In reconceptualising this assessment for online submission, students downloaded digital pianos, glockenspiels, and xylophones to explore melody.

In a dance and creative movement task, I asked students to select adjectives to describe an artwork and to translate these into physical form through the choreography of their own dance pieces. ERT adaptation allowed for the inclusion of online South African artworks, which opened practical possibilities beyond the canon of classical images.

While I was initially highly skeptical about how these practical assessments would work online and how the videos would hang together in an ePortfolio, I was pleasantly surprised. One of the main issues facing music education is the prohibitive cost of instruments along with storage challenges. While I was initially dead set against using apps, this experience has forced me to acknowledge the opportunities that they offer for schools.

Implementing ePortfolios for dramatic arts was a creatively liberating experience – Jane

For undergraduate generalists, the move to online assessment was a direct result of ERT. Hitherto, student portfolios had involved character analysis, labelled costume design, and a marked-up script with stage directions, as well as a reflection. Final performances had been assessed in the venue, usually by a team, which may have included an internal moderator. As the organisation grew and cross-campus standardisation through recording became necessary, lecturers needed to remember to keep digital records.

Switching entirely to digital assessment and an ePortfolio was beneficial in the sense that recording work for posterity was automatically integrated to the process, and the other portfolio components readily translated to the digital space. In the first year of ERT, ePortfolios were introduced, and practical performances involved the recording of Shakespearean monologues. The following year, although contact learning was back, we chose to retain ePortfolios, which by then included group presentations, as the preferred method of assessment.

Prior to the pandemic, campuses had held their own live arts showcases. EPortfolios sparked an exciting initiative of online cross-campus festivals of digital creativity, which have since become an annual fixture.

 Recently, we have experimented with Chat GPT script generation. I had students create prompts for AI-generated drama on topics of relevance to teens. I then asked them to write the humanity back into the dialogue. It was submitted as part of the ePortfolio, along with an edited version of the script, as well as a personal reflection on their experience of using this method.

In postgraduate teaching qualifications, dramatic arts students are geographically dispersed, so assessments are designed to be online. In this context, an ePortfolio might comprise a dramatic arts lesson plan or a project-based teaching plan, along with assessment strategies, a reflection, and a 3-minute video of the student teaching lesson highlights.

My favourite ePortfolio has students working in groups of four to six to simulate the kind of practical performance programmes that would be required of their future learners. Centering around a chosen theme, the students record their own live solo and group performances, using split screen for scenes involving multiple actors.

The final dramatic arts ePortfolio evaluates students’ directing skill through the conceptualisation of school musical productions. Components include digital samples of design, such as working drawings for set, costume, props, lighting, and sound; a budget; an advertising campaign; a rehearsal schedule; and a 3-minute video of the (student) director addressing the cast.

Sharing tools promoted inclusivity and empowered teachers – Jenilyn

In terms of providing positive peer-assessment opportunities, I have designed a ‘Dancing for Diversity’ assignment. For this task, students record themselves performing a dance routine on their mobile phones. The videos are uploaded, with links posted on the LMS for peer review.

The use of digital imagery has been explored through a ‘selfie’ assignment where students create a tableau that illustrates their unique cultural wealth and their understanding of dramatic elements.

A strength of ePortfolios is that they contain multiple parts, enabling the assessment of multiple skills. For example, in one ePortfolio assignment, postgraduate students design a drawing task to evaluate their pedagogic competencies in visual arts. The submission for this assignment includes a professionally designed learner brief, process photos, an A5 photograph of their final drawing, a rubric, and a reflective paragraph in which they evaluate the efficacy of the marking tool that they designed.

Their final ePortfolio is entitled ‘Online Exhibitions.’ Students invite local artists into their studios to present their work and conduct practical demonstrations. They design an activity inspired by the visiting artist and create an online exhibition to exhibit their work. The exhibition link may be widely shared to promote the learner’s artwork in a ‘semiprivate’ digital space. Thus, aspiring visual artists gain digital skills to empower their own practice, and this knowledge can be utilised in their future classrooms.

Analysis of Open-ended focus group discussion

In our analysis of the two open-ended focus group discussions, a variety of codes and categories emerged. These were grouped into six overarching themes: initial apprehension at using ePortfolios, the drawbacks of ePortfolios, the benefits of ePortfolios, embracing ePortfolios, the development of digital resilience, and the tools that were employed in the adoption of ePortfolios. These themes will be discussed further below.

Initial Apprehension

The data clearly indicates our initial apprehension towards the adoption of online assessment and ePortfolios. While digital assessment was already a reality when Jenilyn joined the arts department in 2021, Jane and Sarah had to navigate the change from hard copy and in-person practical assessment to operating entirely online with ERT.

Jane and Sarah describe themselves as initially “deeply reluctant” and “reticent” to embrace ePortfolios and digital assessments, arguing for a need for live energy exchange in the arts. As Sarah comments, “In the creative arts, … you need that… performative experience.”

We all agreed that peer learning plays a vital role in creative arts assessment, especially in the performing arts, where students collaborate and assessment regularly happens in groups. This seemed challenging to replicate in ePortfolios if practical engagement were solely online.

Apprehension about ePortfolio assessment was further compounded by the limited potential for “organic feedback” to students, as online feedback would be essentially “locked down.” A further concern was raised in relation to the way the modules were designed. Originally, students engaged “with the arts in their spaces” through gallery, theatre, and music concert visits. We expressed concern at how this could be replicated online. As Jane explains, art immersion is “…an emotional process, and it engages all the senses. … you would not get that same level of emotional engagement in the digital space.”

Drawbacks of ePortfolios

The concept of loss emerges strongly in the data. We found a loss of connection, in that it was difficult to offer online support and guidance, particularly to large cohorts resulting from the massification of education. While students may have had a sense of familiarity with the lecturer from their online videos and postings on the LMS, this relationship was not necessarily reciprocated, and we often felt cut off from our students. There was concern for a loss of process where the ePortfolio emphasis is generally on the final product, while the creative arts place a great deal of importance on process work. In terms of the loss of peer learning opportunities, the data reveals that it was hard to encourage hesitant students to engage online, even in discussion or group work situations.

Our awareness that not all students had equal access to connectivity, funds, or systems to facilitate the creation of ePortfolios is clear in the data. We were aware that students from impoverished backgrounds inevitably had limited digital access or opportunity to upskill themselves technologically. While online assistance was offered where possible, some students were jeopardised, especially those who had to travel to find signal and work off their phones in public spaces. In such instances, it was difficult for students to shoot and edit video footage, upload it, and generate a link, all of which are necessary skills for the creation of an ePortfolio. We expressed concern about the impact that the technological divide had on our students, with Sarah commenting, “I have certainly lost students this way….” Thus, the digital divide was deepened, as Jen points out: students were confronted by the need for “so many skills…that are not even listed in learning goals.”

Another point that emerged from the data is that we regard ourselves as lecturers and not IT specialists. “We don’t always know ourselves or where to get the information, never mind how to support our students,” comments Jane.

A further sense of loss resulted from changing digital platforms. Our institution moved from Moodle to CANVAS and from Zoom to Teams during the period under discussion. The data reveals that we found this to be an additional challenge in the production of ePortfolios, particularly as some useful platforms and affordances of the old technology suddenly became mysteriously unavailable on the new platforms.

Finally, we raised challenges in relation to the marking and moderation of ePortfolios, which include the unwieldy nature of “massive” ePortfolios for final summative assessments. The data raises the question of how to submit them and how to obtain sufficient manpower to mark them, particularly in the context of massification and in instances where lecturers and moderators may have excessive workloads.

Positives of ePortfolios

After considering our initial apprehension and the possible disadvantages of implementing ePortfolios, we found ourselves pleasantly surprised by the affordances of ePortfolios. We were struck by their functionality and durability as digital resource banks across all the arts disciplines. In music, visual art, drama, and dance, they provide opportunities for creativity, reflection, analysis, and peer review. This was extremely valuable from the outset, as we came to grips with digital space in response to ERT.

The data reveal that we gained greater objectivity in the assessment of ePortfolios when compared to live performance. One of the key findings of this research is the affordances that video submissions provide for both lecturers and students. We could interrogate digital material in a new way by rewinding or reviewing a performance. Similarly, students who were too shy to perform in front of an audience were able to make videos and record themselves until satisfied with the results. The use of videos and imagery also provided students with the opportunity to integrate special effects, music, backgrounds, props, and titles in their videos, thus developing their technological capabilities and creativity. We noted that students were supportive of one another, especially when engaging in collaborative projects.

Our digital endeavours were well served by an unprecedented global outpouring of generosity in the arts. Widening access provided a wealth of digital material for viewing and engagement, notably from international galleries such as the Tate, dramatic productions from Britain’s National Theatre, and music and dance from some renowned orchestras and dance companies. Through ePortfolios, we could stay on trend and develop communities of practice, unfettered by geographical constraints.

We found an advantage in our ability to moderate practical work through ePortfolios across campuses, in that they include recorded video links. This facilitated the standardisation process and made recording mandatory: there was no longer a possibility of forgetting to document live student performances.

Allowing for varied assessment strategies within a single assignment, the data suggest that one of the advantages of ePortfolios is that they can be designed to cover many learning outcomes, including the practical, theoretical, pedagogical, and reflexive aspects of a course. This is particularly significant for student teachers, as practical work can be included in an ePortfolio alongside teaching videos and lesson plans. Assessing in this way provides insight into individual students, which might otherwise be difficult online. Our LMS has an inbuilt audio recording and replay facility, which enables us to provide students with comprehensive and encouraging verbal feedback. The immediacy of this helps to foster connection and build relationships.

Embracing ePortfolios

Jane and Sarah are clear that one of the main catalysts for embracing ePortfolios was the COVID-19 pandemic. They admit that they were previously “too set in their ways” and that the impact of COVID-19 forcing them into the online space was ultimately positive, if uncomfortable and challenging at the time.

As the world grappled with the impact of the pandemic, the move to ERT in the higher education sphere rendered previous assessment methods invalid. Jane likens this time to:

“…falling into the unknown. And then we had a process of kind of clawing our way out of it. … We’d learnt a bit more. The planet had calmed down a bit, and we went through a gradual process of embracing…”

Data findings highlight both losses and gains as part of the embracing process. For example, as discussed above, we found losing the in-person visits to galleries and theatres a drawback of online learning and assessment; however, we acknowledge that in losing this, we gained the plethora of online resources and facility with online spaces. Similarly, while the trauma of employing ERT was challenging, we acknowledge that it led to the enhancement of digital skills and capabilities in ourselves and our students. Although the embodied focus of the arts was lost, Jenilyn comments, “In order to surf the wave of change, to move forward…in order to embrace, we had to first let go.”

The data reveal that embracing ePortfolios was a gradual process and that it is still ongoing, as we continue to reimagine, reflect upon, and refine our ePortfolio assessment strategies. The continual nature of this refinement practice means that as our digital skills have improved, so too have our ePortfolio assessment practices.

Digital Resilience

A key and recurring finding in the data is that lecturers and students all had to develop an adaptive attitude to navigate the constantly changing educational environment enforced by ERT. Once online, institutional changes, data shortages, and logistical issues proved constantly challenging. The emergence of new and different technologies added to this shifting terrain, providing an unstable working environment where resilience was key.

The data reveal that resilience was demonstrated by lecturers as we learnt from one another and experimented with new and shifting educational platforms, questioning best practices and responding to the needs of students as well as the institution. In terms of support, we note that lifelines often came from our more digitally adept colleagues, rather than the institution, as we navigated the way forward. In Sarah’s words, “We are always making a plan… it’s never easy.”

We cultivated a resilient attitude through collaboration with colleagues and through the frequent acknowledgment of loss in our reimagining of the educational space. There was a constant building of confidence and digital resilience through normalising the online space. As Sarah points out, “We were forced to be resilient, but in many ways, this forced resilience in our students.”

Digital Tools

“The mastery of digital tools” became a central component in the creation of an effective learning environment for both lecturers and students. Critical and reflective thinking was required from lecturers in the designing of learning events, assessments, and digital collaborative spaces. Students required digital proficiency across a number of platforms, applications, and tools to access and complete their ePortfolio assignments on the LMS (Figure 1). The data reflect frustration when tools and Apps were removed or monetised out of our reach.

Another finding was that during ERT and beyond, all of us made extensive use of WhatsApp groups. With rules of engagement in place, these allowed for the rapid dissemination of information and promoted a “classroom ethos,” fostering the growth of digital communities of practice through collaboration and support. Furthermore, platforms such as TEAMS and Zoom provided the digital space to interact with groups of students simultaneously, as in a lecture hall.

Figure 1
Tools students were required to master for ePortfolios 

Systems:

Moodle

Canvas

Teams

Video / Connection

Teams

Zoom

Studio

WhatsApp

CANVAS Studio

Apps

WhatsApp

Spotify

FlipGrid (deceased)

Online piano / xylophones

Editing tools

Canva

Grammarly

Turnitin

Note: Figure created by Authors

DISCUSSION

Our initial apprehension toward the adoption of ePortfolios for evaluation purposes centres around what we perceive to be elements of assessment that could be lost online, especially with regard to the live element of a practical drama, dance, or music performance, or the live display of artworks in the case of visual art. This perspective of creative arts assessment foregrounds the live, embodied, relational, situated, communal, and collaborative elements of assessment as of particular importance, and this was supported in the literature (Clark-Fookes, 2023; Cutliffe et al., 2024; Murphy et al., 2022). We could not see how these elements would translate into the online space. However, after implementing ePortfolios for assessment, we were struck by the advantages that they offered. In the performing arts—drama, music, and dance—live student performances were recorded. Whilst the absence of a live audience might have been a drawback, we could see the value for those who lacked confidence, as they were able to rerecord their videos until satisfied. This was especially beneficial for students enrolled in generalist undergraduate teaching qualifications, who may have had limited experiences of performance. The use of videos for practical submissions was also beneficial for lecturers, who were able to engage with the practical work more deeply by rewinding and reviewing performances. From a purely administrative perspective, the availability of a recording also brought greater levels of credibility to the cross-campus moderation process. While ePortfolios cannot replace live performance, they offer an adequate substitute, and we found that we could effectively assess performative competencies through the videos submitted in an ePortfolio. In addition, we were struck by the creative affordances that students could include in editing their videos and the advantage that an online submission offered students who could not physically attend a campus. Working in teacher education, we furthermore argue that ePortfolios provide a platform where students are able to display both their practical and teaching competencies, by virtue of the flexibility of what can be included in an ePortfolio.

The initial concerns we held regarding collaboration, which were also noted in the literature (Cutliffe et al., 2024), proved to be unfounded. Students were able to collaborate virtually with other members of their group and participate in shared practical work. At the peak of COVID-19 and during social distancing mandates, students worked separately and edited to create video montages. This allowed for greater levels of creativity in the digital representation of their work. Communities of practice were established, and there was evidence of student collaboration through the effective use of WhatsApp groups.

While the initial concern that students would struggle to engage with the arts in their ‘spaces,’ such as galleries, theatres, and music venues, was a valid one, the international emergence of online resources brought the arts to students in their own homes. While we still argue that online engagement is not the same as the lived experience, we cannot ignore the affordances that the online space allows. Students in remote areas, who would have had little opportunity to attend a gallery, theatre, or music venue, can now engage with world-class concerts. While attendance at live arts events was a loss, the availability of arts online is a gain.

The TPACK framework (Koehler & Mishra, 2009) emphasises content, pedagogical, and technological knowledge. The implementation of ePortfolios as an assessment method has allowed us to assess the content and pedagogical knowledge of student teachers. However, we argue that in the employment of ERT, the technological aspect of the framework has taken on a new significance. While the need for technological competence for the submission of ePortfolios was highlighted in the literature (Calderón-Garrido et al., 2023; Whitney et al., 2021), its importance was not sufficiently emphasised. We found that students who displayed competence in their content and pedagogical knowledge were unable to submit ePortfolio assignments if their technological knowledge was lacking. Thus, the technological aspect of the framework eclipses the content and pedagogical knowledge aspects, and the result of this was that students, who may otherwise have been competent creative arts teachers, were unable to gain teaching qualifications.

Since ePortfolios require advanced technological knowledge in recording, editing, and uploading files and videos, the context of the student became a factor in determining student success (Mishra, 2019). Students from impoverished backgrounds and rural areas were particularly impacted, as some lacked not only the technological skills but also access to reliable internet, hardware, and data (Jili et al., 2021; Mkhize et al., 2020). While the institution does provide technological support for students, even accessing this requires both hardware and stable internet, which is beyond the reach of some of our students. Thus, access to support is inequitable. As Mkhize et al. (2020) argue, access is often felt along racial lines, and thus the students most negatively affected are the formerly disadvantaged living in rural areas. As academics, we need to question the ethical implications of students requiring technological competence as a prerequisite to success in our modules. Possibly, we need to reconceptualise the curriculum to ensure that students gain the required technological skills before engaging with the course materials and assessments.

As lecturers, we also had to develop TPACK while navigating ERT and the move online, and as Trust and Whalen (2020) argue, we too were underprepared and often felt overwhelmed. Our adoption of technology included the use of WhatsApp and LMS voice notes to provide verbal feedback, the creation of teaching and instructional videos, and the use of Zoom and Teams for live online engagement. While we already displayed content and pedagogical knowledge, we had to upskill in the technological realm.

We furthermore argue that lecturers and students had to cultivate resilience to navigate the move to online teaching, ePortfolios, and the constantly shifting digital world that became the new classroom. Hargraves (2020) argues that resilience refers to an individual’s ability to adapt under stress. During COVID-19, with the resultant ERT and the move to online assessment, we demonstrated deep resilience, as did our students, as we adapted all aspects of our teaching and learning to the online space. Despite our initial reservations, we gradually came to embrace ePortfolios and now advocate for their usage.

Our resilience does not imply that challenges were easily surmountable. At the onset of COVID-19, we found ourselves to be severely challenged by the requirements of ERT, and as Koehler and Mishra (2009) have argued, we too felt unsupported and challenged by utilising technology in the classroom. Prior to ERT, we had no training or experience with ePortfolios as an assessment tool. However, we had designed, participated in, and completed an extensive number of creative projects as learners, university students, and then as lecturers. Following Winner et al. (2020), we argue that our experience in the creative arts may have contributed to the development of a ‘can do’ attitude, where persistence and resilience became a central component of success in the reimagining of ePortfolios and online teaching. We overcame our initial misgivings and employed adaptive pedagogy, which was responsive to the new context we found ourselves in (Athanases et al., 2015).

CONCLUSION AND FUTURE RESEARCH

Once we engaged with ePortfolios, we were forced to re-evaluate our initial prejudices. In embracing them, we discovered that their affordances outweighed potential drawbacks. In releasing our attachment to traditional pedagogy and assessment practices, we discovered a wealth of innovative digital possibilities. ePortfolios are an enduring artefact in measuring creative competencies, and they present opportunities for students to showcase their work to prospective employers upon completion of training. We regard this as an area that requires further study within the South African context.

The process, with its inevitable losses, has built resilience in us and in our student teachers. However, we acknowledge that the digital divide was just too great for some. Thus, we argue that students require a certain level of digital access and competency to manage assessment through ePortfolios. In relating this to TPACK (Koehler & Mishra, 2009), we recognise the heightened importance of technological competence as a key contributor to academic success.

As we reimagine our ePortfolios, we recognise that fast-moving technological advances are forcing us to continually surf the wave of change that was initiated by ERT. The advent of AI will continue to push us into uncharted assessment spaces, and this is a potential area for research as we continue to manage the tension between quality and scalability in higher education through ePortfolios.

REFERENCES

Altbach, P. G., Reisberg, L., & Rumbley, L. E. (2010). Tracking a global academic revolution. Change: The Magazine of Higher Learning, 42(2), 30-39.

Athanases, S. Z., Bennett, L. H., & Wahleithner, J. M. (2015). Adaptive teaching for English language arts: Following the pathway of classroom data in preservice teacher inquiry. Journal of Literacy Research, 47(1), 83–114. https://doi.org/10.1177/1086296X15590915

Bowman, W. D. (2018). Music’s place in education. In G. E. McPherson & G. F. Welch (Eds.), Music and music education in people’s lives: An Oxford handbook of music education, Volume 1 (pp. 19–37). Oxford University Press.

Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative research in Psychology, 3(2), 77 – 101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa

Calderón-Garrido, D., Gil-Fernández, R. & Martín-Piñol, C. (2023). Exploring perspectives, uses, implications, and needs of the educational digital portfolio in the arts: A systematic review of the scientific literature. SAGE Open, 13(3), 1 – 11. https://doi.org/10.1177/21582440231185557

Clandinin, D. J. (2023). Engaging in narrative inquiry (2nd ed.). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003240143

Clark-Fookes, T. (2023). Aesthetic approaches to digital pedagogy in arts education. International Journal of Education & the Arts, 24(8). http://doi.org/10.26209/ijea24n8

Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2018). Research methods in education (8th ed.). Routledge.

Cutliffe, K., Batorowicz, B., Johnson, R., Cantrell, K. & McLean, T. (2024). Socially Distant Social Constructivism: Transitioning Visual Arts Pedagogies Online During COVID-19, Studies in Art Education, 65(1), 81-98, https://doi.org/10.1080/00393541.2023.2285208

Department of Basic Education. (2011). Curriculum and Assessment Policy Statement Grades R – 3: Life Skills. South African Government. https://www.education.gov.za/Portals/0/CD/National%20Curriculum%20Statements%20and%20Vocational/CAPS%20Life%20Skills%20%20English%20_%20Gr%20R-3%20FS.pdf?ver=2015-01-27-162204-953

de Villiers, A. (2015). The transformation of music education: A South African case study. British Journal of Music Education, 32(3), 315–322. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0265051715000376.

Dunbar-Hall, P., Rowley, J., Webb, M., & Bell, M. (2010). ePortfolios for music educators: parameters, problems, and possibilities. In Proceedings of the 29th World Conference of the International Society for Music Education, Beijing, pp. 61-64.

Essop, A. (2021). Covid-19: The “new normal” and the future of higher education. SARCHI Chair T&L Research Papers Series Paper, 1. University of Johannesburg. https://www.uj.ac.za/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/covid-19-and-the-future-of-higher-education.pdf

Farrell, H. (2021). Considering Dissemination : Maximising the potential of the e-portfolio. Irish Journal of Technology Enhanced Learning, 6(1), 110–117. https://doi.org/10.22554/ijtel.v6i1.90

Faturoti, B. (2022). Online learning during COVID-19 and beyond: a human rights-based approach to internet access in Africa, International Review of Law, Computers & Technology, 36(1), 68-90, https://doi.org/10.1080/13600869.2022.2030027

Gall, M. (2017). TPACK and music teacher education. In A. King, E. Himonides & S. A. Ruthman (Eds.). The Routledge companion to music, technology, and education (pp. 329-342). Routledge.

Green, J., Burrow, M., & Carvalho, L. (2020). Designing for transition: Supporting teachers and students coping with emergency remote education. Postdigital Science and Education, 2(3), 906–922. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42438-020-00185-6

Hargraves, V. 2020. An Introduction to Resilience in Educational Settings. https://theeducationhub.org.nz/an-introduction-to-resilience-in-educational-settings/?utm_source=chatgpt.com

Hauge, K. (2021). Self-Study Research: Challenges and Opportunities in Teacher Education. Teacher Education in the 21st Century—Emerging Skills for a Changing World. IntechOpen. pp. 1-18. https://doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.96252

Hlatshwayo, M. (2023). Enhancing creative arts teaching and learning through a blended approach [Master’s Thesis: University of the Witwatersrand]. https://wiredspace.wits.ac.za/server/api/core/bitstreams/809ae8c9-e6ea-48cc-89b2-e3ef6066f085/content

Jansen van Vuuren, E. J., & van Niekerk, C. (2015). Music in the life skills classroom. British Journal of Music Education, 32(3), 273–289. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0265051715000340

Jili, N., Ede, C. & Masuku, M. (2021). Emergency remote teaching in higher education during Covid-19: Challenges and opportunities. International Journal of Higher Education, 10(5), 1–9. https://doi.org/10.5430/ijhe.v10n5p1

Johnson, C., & Lamothe, V. C. (2021). Creating authentic assessments for online music courses: Mapping a learning task. In Research anthology on developing effective online learning courses (pp. 531-553). IGI Global.

Kara, S. (2021). An investigation of Technological Pedagogical and Content Knowledge (TPACK) competencies of pre-service visual arts teachers. International Journal of Technology in Education (IJTE), 4(3), 527-541. https://doi.org/10.46328/ijte.184

Koehler, M. J., & Mishra, P. (2009). What is technological pedagogical content knowledge? Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 9(1), 60-70.

Koster, J. (2014). Growing artists: Teaching the arts to young children (6th ed.). Wadsworth Cengage Learning.

Makhaya, B. K., & Ogange, B. O. (2019). The effects of institutional support factors on lecturer adoption of elearning at a conventional university. Journal of Learning for Development, 6(1), 64-75.

Mishra, P. (2019). Considering Contextual Knowledge: The TPACK Diagram Gets an Upgrade, Journal of Digital Learning in Teacher Education, 35(2), 76-78. http://doi.org/10.1080/21532974.2019.1588611

Mkhize, N., Ndimande-Hlongwa, N., Ramrathan, L. & Smit, J. A. (2020). Editorial: Teaching and learning in higher education in the time of COVID-19. In N. Mkhize, N. Ndimande-Hlongwa, L. Ramrathan & J. A. Smit (Eds.), Teaching and learning in higher education in the time of COVID-19 (pp. 1–15). CSSALL Publishers. https://doi.org/10.29086/978-0-9869936-4-0/2020/aasbs03

Modise, M. (2021). Postgraduate students’ perception of the use of e-portfolios as a teaching tool to support learning in an open and distance education institution. Journal of Learning for Development, 8(2), 283 – 297. http://doi.org/10.56059/jl4d.v8i2.508

Modise, M.P. & Mudau, P. K. (2021). Using ePortfolios for meaningful teaching and learning in distance education in developing countries: A systematic review. Journal of Continuing Higher Education, 71(3), 286–298. https://doi.org/10.25159/UnisaRxiv/000015.v1

Mudau, P. & Modise, M. (2022). Using E-Portfolios for active student engagement in the Odel environment. Journal of Information Technology Education: Research, 21, 425 – 438. http://doi.org/10.28945/5012

Murphy, R., Ward, F., McCabe, U., Flannery, M., Cleary, A., Hsu, H., & Brennan, E. (2022). Recasting embodied and relational teaching in the arts: Teacher educators reflect on the potential of digital learning, Irish Educational Studies, 41(1), 213-224, https://doi.org/10.1080/03323315.2021.2022525

Odendaal, M. & De Jager, T. (eds.) (2021). Creative Arts Education. Pretoria. Van Schaik Publishers.

Odendaal, N. (2024). More South African households are getting connected to the internet. Engineering News, 14 June 2024. https://www.engineeringnews.co.za/article/south-african-households-have-become-more-connected-2024-06-14#:~:text=The%202023%20General%20Household%20Survey,used%20cellular%20phones%20in%202023.

Pika, S. T., & Reddy, S. (2022). Unintended pedagogical consequences of emergency remote teaching at a rural-based university in South Africa. Education Sciences, 12(11), 830. https://doi.org/10.20944/preprints202210.0468.v1

Pithouse-Morgan, K. (2022). Self-study in Teaching and teacher Education: Characteristics and contributions. Teaching and Teacher Education, 119(2022): 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2022.103880

Pooley, T. M. (2016). Extracurricular arts: Poverty, inequality, and indigenous musical arts education in post-apartheid South Africa. Critical Arts: A South-North Journal of Cultural & Media Studies, 30(5), 639–654. https://doi.org.ukzn.idm.oclc.org/10.1080/02560046.2016.1262438

Ralfe, S. I. (2024). Music Teachers’ music life histories: Music in the primary school. [Doctoral Thesis, University of KwaZulu Natal]. UKZN Research Space. https://hdl.handle.net/10413/23291

Rowley, J., Dunbar-Hall, P., Blom, D., Bennett, D., & Hitchcock, M. (2016). ePortfolios for creative arts, music, and arts students in Australian universities: Final report 2015.

Rowley, J. & Dunbar-Hall, P. (2017). ePortfolios in a music faculty: Student differentiations in expectations, applications, and uses, in J. Rowley (Ed.), ePortfolios in Australian universities (pp. 83-98). Springer Singapore.

Rowley, J. & Munday, J. (2022). An arts-based learning model: Synergies of artist mentorship, ePortfolio and discovering ‘possible self’. The Australian Journal of Indigenous Education, 51(1), 1–16. http://doi.org/10.55146/ajie.2022.30

Shulman, L. S. (1986). Those who understand: Knowledge growth in teaching. Educational Researcher, 15(2), 4-14.

Shulman, L. (1987). Knowledge and teaching: Foundations of the new reform. Harvard Educational Review, 57(1), 1-23.

TED. (2007, January 7). Do schools kill creativity? | Sir Ken Robinson | TED. [Video]. YouTube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iG9CE55wbtY

Trust, T. & Whalen, J. (2020). Should Teachers Be Trained in Emergency Remote Teaching? Lessons Learned from the COVID-19 Pandemic, Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 28(2), 189-199. https://doi.org/10.70725/307718pkpjuu

Vanassche, E., & Kelchtermans, G. (2015). The state of the art in self-study of teacher education practices: A systematic literature review. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 508–528. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220272.2014.995712

Whitney, I., Rowley, J. & Bennett, D. (2021). Developing Student Agency: ePortfolio Reflections of Future Career Among Aspiring Musicians. International Journal of ePortfolio, 11(1), 53–65. http://www.theijep.com

Winner, E., Hetland, L., Veenema, S., Sheridan, K. and Palmer, P., (2020). Studio thinking: How visual arts teaching can promote disciplined habits of mind. In New Directions in Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts (pp. 189-206). Routledge.

Wang, J. (2024). Middle school art teachers’ smart teaching ability under the TPACK framework: Structural model, mechanism, and enhancement strategy. International Journal of Learning and Teaching, 10(4), 458–466. https://doi.org/10.18178/ijlt.10.4.458-466

1 Generalist teachers are those trained for the Foundation Phase (Grades R–3) and Intermediate Phase (Grades 4–6) of schooling. In these phases of schooling, the generalist teacher is responsible for offering the full curriculum.

2 In the Senior (Grade 7–9) and FET (Grades 10–12) Phases, teachers are regarded as specialists and only teach in their area of expertise. Many of these teachers have an undergraduate qualification in their areas of specialisation and a Postgraduate Certificate in Education (PGCE).

AUTHORS

Sarah Ralfe is a senior lecturer at Stadio in the School of Education. She lectures the creative arts, with a particular focus on music and movement, to undergraduate students in the Bachelor of Education qualification. Sarah completed a PhD in Higher Education Studies, with a focus on music education, in 2024. Her research considered the music life histories of student teachers. Her research interests include music and identity, music education, creative arts education and life history research.
Email: sarahr@stadio.ac.za

Jenilyn Deyzel specialises in developing arts-based curricula that blend theoretical insights with practical skills development. This pedagogical approach cultivates adaptive expertise while encouraging critical thinking and collaboration in practical, real-world contexts. With 15 years of classroom experience in three different countries and an additional 5 years as a teacher-educator, Jenilyn has a wealth of knowledge to contribute to the field of education. Her research interests include interdisciplinary learning, culturally responsive teaching, community empowerment, and environmental education. She holds a master’s degree that focused on integrating arts-based methodologies into science education, emphasising teacher capacity building and the practical application of skills in diverse educational settings.
Email: jen@imajen.co.za

Jane Ross is aCreative Arts Practitioner and therapist Jane Ross holds a BA Honours Degree and a PGCE in Drama and English, in addition to qualifications in various healing modalities. She is an experienced actor and director who has worked extensively in education and community as well as in professional theatre. She currently facilitates corporate workshops and runs a post graduate programme in Dramatic Arts for Stadio School of Education.
Email: janer@stadio.ac.za