Badge endorsement is important

During the sixth task of the Badge System Design course the participant is asked to compare and contrast three adjacent cells from within the rubric. I have chosen the three rightmost adjacent cells from the Endorsement criteria row.

the three rightmost cells from the endorsement criteria of the badge system design rubric.

Endorsement: The badge system is recognized by other organizations, communities, individuals and/or systems. It fits or is aligned with previous badge and credentialing systems of similar subject areas.

I will break my compare and contrast into three sections;

1. how I understand each cell
• within the introductory cell endorsement is not applicable as this performance level is about having a simple badge or badge system being issued. Having endorsements for the badge or system is not required. If a badge or badge system begins to receive endorsements it would move into the working performance level.
• the working cell needs a couple of endorsements, and these can come from anywhere. It is that people, groups, communities or institutions have put in the effort to endorse a badge that adds the value and puts the badge or badge system into the working performance level.
• the notable cell needs endorsements from multiple sources, it is preferable these endorsements come from different subject areas and different contexts. The people, groups, communities or organizations need to resolve back to proven entities of reputation. How the reputation is provided will vary, it needs to exist.
2. how each cell compares to the other
   It makes sense the introductory cell does not require endorsement. The idea is to quickly create a badge or badge system and endorsement would add effort and require a third party to provide the endorsement, this would slow down release of the badge. A working system needs endorsement from a few parties, the effort of a few parties providing endorsement is adequate to move an introductory system into being a working system.The notable system is like the working system in that it has endorsements from multiple sources. These endorsements will come from across industries and subject areas.
3. and where do the cells contrast and what is the value in their differences
   The three different cells contrast in that the introductory cell requires no endorsement, the working cell has endorsements, and the notable cell has endorsements from multiple sources from within different industries and / or subject areas.

Improvement:
I believe these three performance cells for the endorsement criteria work well together and they build toward more comprehensive endorsement. I would suggest adding that some of the sources of endorsement for the notable performance level come from organizations, communities or individuals of proven reputation. How reputation is proven becomes another issue for discussion.

Designing a badge to span contexts

Designing badges so they can span contexts is good for badges. The idea being that a badge designed for one context could fit well within another context. This context spanning should work for learning specific skills, informal learnings, accomplishments or attendance within a conference, helping out in the community, or being recognized for something of importance. There are many ways badges can be awarded and designed to be used across contexts. This is well understood through a couple of scenarios;

1. Soldering badges
There is a growing number of organizations and events that support the hacker ethos. Hacking has also been a hobby of many for generations. The idea of figuring something out and making it better, or combining it with something else, or starting from scratch and creating your own goodness is what hacking is about. Some of these organizations include; hacker scouts, maker faires, hardware hobbiests, and adafruit. They all focus on hacking, making and inventing. Mostly hacking occurs within technical environments, but things are changing where you can pretty much hack anything to better serve your needs. All four of these organizations see the ability of soldering as a skill required to be a successful hacker. And each of them offer ways to develop and recognize the skills of soldering. Hacker scouts provide lab type environment to develop soldering skills, maker faire will have workshops or table setup where a person can prove their soldering skills, home hobbiests could create a short video displaying their soldering skills, and the adafruit organization has learning reasources and toolkist to learn soldering. All these organization and approaches could issue the same badge in this capacity.

The same badge design, criteria, validation, and endorsements could be used across these different contexts to award the same soldering badge.


2. Lighting badges
   
   
   Many different disciplines include lighting as a part of their learning curriculum. These disciplines include;
   • Landscape architecture where lighting is important for safety and showcasing the landscape at night.
   • Theater lighting where lighting is important to the stage for the particular theater performance.
   • Band lighting where the performance band needs lighting across many different sized and shaped venues.
   • Residential lighting where lighting is designed specifically for the residence.
   • Industrial lighting where lighting is designed for the specific industrial of large public space.
   
   The importance here is that different contexts have the need for different (yet similar) badges. Each needs a lighting badge and each criteria would be different due to the environments they are wanting to light. Each badge should be designed for each specific environment, while each badge could be reused into another curriculum. As an example, an independent learner may want to learn all they can about the lighting of space, regardless of context or environment. They could earn badges from all five disciplines and create their own lighting specialty curriculum.
   
   Different badges of the same descriptions, developed for different contexts could be used within a new unique and specialized learning program.

What does this mean to badge design? What design approaches should be considered so a badge could be used across contexts?

There are five main attributes within the badge metadata that describe the badge and how it relates to other things and where its criteria is described. It is within these attributes that the badge can be designed to span different contexts and environments.

• image - the badge image should remain issuer agnostic. There should be no branding information within the image of the badge and the badge should use universally recognized imagery that aligns with the meaning of the badge. The above soldering badge could serve as an example.
• criteria - the wording within the badge criteria should describe the learning, achievement, or recognition using a neutral language. Within the badge criteria refrain making reference to the issuer, context or environment. Consider the badge having the abilities being issued by another organization or within a different context.
• tags - use tags to decribe the badge across contexts. 
• alignment - if the badge aligns with a standard other similar badge with a well articulated and similar criteria add AlignmentObjects. Keep in mind that official standards are sometimes difficult to find in areas of innovation. If other similar badges exist, add them here, and also link to thier official describtions or critiria URL.
• endorsement - when endorsement comes available within the OBI. Seek endorsements for your badge. 

Badge System Design for Communities

During the P2Pu community call it was suggested I tie the badge system design rubric more closely to communities (within which the badge has currency). Consider how the badge system represents skills, practices, participation, and habits of an existing community? How much does the community identify with the badge?

I believe this is a good suggestion and an excellent couple of questions. I took it on to deeply review the rubric and make adjustment to increase alignment with community based learning. Fortunately the adjustments required were small as the rubric had already considered community. The adjustments I did make made the rubric a better guide for individuals, communities, groups and institutions.

The vocabulary that ties the rubric to community;
I see it as very important that the rubric works well at guiding different individuals, groups, communities and organizations. I harvested some of the vocabulary associated with community and am grateful for this additional focus and increasing the rubrics ability to guide badge system design for communities.

• attending an event, or participating in a community
• encourage outstanding participation in community or event
• people who have earned the full collection of badges are considered masters by their peers
• earning one or many badges from within the system is considered an accomplishment by peers and community members
• multiple learning, achievement or recognition contexts and applies well across communities, events, curriculum and cultures
• it describes different learning, achievement or recognition approaches, associated tasks and outcomes
• for accrediting a subject, community or event domain
• endorsements from cross-industry / cross-subject organizations, communities and/or individuals
• team requires strong community building, pedagogical, and/or curriculum development skills

The badge within the community;
I believe the two questions can be answered together; how does the community identify with the badge? and does the badge represent the skills, practices, participation and habits of the community?

These are questions best answered by the community itself. And the rubric is well aligned to help groups and communities ask and answer these questions. The rubrics purpose is the guide and prompt thinking about the badge system being designed. It is not used (though it can be) to evaluate existing badge systems.

Badge System Compare and Contrast

One of my current tasks is in developing the Badge System Design challenge for the P2Pu School of Badges. This course is based around a rubric developed for badge system design. In task three of the challenge it is requested the learner reviews, compares and contrasts a number of existing badge systems, this post answers this following request from the challenge.

1. Write a blog post or task discussion item describing what you found when exploring the different badge systems listed above. Compare and contrast the different badge systems. If you write a blog post be sure to provide the link to the post in the task discussion thread.


• foursquare - provides a very engaging flat badge system. A great example of earning badges for simple accomplishments. In general, foursquare badges are about visiting locations. Some badges are fun accomplishments, like visiting a location of global significance. The simple graphical appeal of the badges bring a cohesiveness to the badges. The foursquare badges are not focused on accomplishing learning goals, this is not to say people would learn if they visited a museum or hardware store a number of times.
• khan academy - provides a very comprehensive and integrated badge system. The badges are issued stealthfully when the learner completes an activity or lesson. Different scores are given for different badges, and badges are awarded for completing a number of related tasks. Khan Academy has effectively used objects in the universe (meteors, moon, earth, etc.) as the badge design theme. Badges are also grouped into programs and badges are issued for completing courses. The learning journeys associated with badge systems is not easily apparent.
• mozilla webmaker - provides a great set of badges well aligned with their digital literacy initiative. Badges are earned stealthfully and by completing accomplishments. Their badge system is well articulated and earning pathways are easily identified. The badge design is attractive and encourages engagement and the desire to learn.
• wikipedia - has been issuing badges (or barnstars), and should be considered one of the first online organizations to offer digital badges. Barnstars are awarded based on contribution and peer review / nomination. Most of the barnstars are stand alone and are not a part of a learning journey. Barnstars represent single accomplishments.
• carnegie mellon robotics - provides comprehensive learning journey toward computer science use within robotics. The program includes badges awarded along the way with completed tasks. The strength with this project is the good use of learning pathways, which are easily understood.
  
  
• compare and contrast - I believe the creation and use of learning pathways will become recognized as an important design principle when creating badge systems. These pathways can be created using traditional curriculum pathways, used during events and conferences, and by self-directed learners who are creating their own pathways. For the self-directed learner the idea of pathways aligns with personal curriculum mapping. I digress.
  
  Of the five badge systems above, two provide well visualized and easily understood learning pathways (mozilla webmaker & carnegie mellon robotics), one provides for ongoing learning (khan academy), and the other two are flat and provide recognition of accomplishment (foursquare & wikipedia).I believe all are successful with implementing the purpose of their badge system. I do believe the khan academy could do more with visualizing pathways for their learners for it is not immediately apparent what would be accomplished by pursuing which badges. The differences between the badge systems that support pathways and those focused on individual accomplishment show how both can be valuable in their own way, fun for the earner, have good visual appeal, and fit within the many different aspects of badge earning.

Flipped assessment implemented

The 301 - Badge System Design course being built for the P2Pu School of Badges will also include flipped assessment. The basic idea of flipped assessment is to have people early on in a shared learning journey assess those who are a few lessons ahead. The thinking behind this is the people most invested in giving and receiving collaborative assessment and peer review are those currently active in a learning journey.


Within the P2Pu Badge System Design course the flipped assessment occurs twice. Once during task 3 where early learners review a badge system design created by someone almost finished the P2Pu course. And again as a peer assessment of another learners compare and contrast task.

The collaboration is supported by both early and later learners having to reach out to each other to complete the challenge. The fun part is how the early learners have to find an open badges quick issuing site to award badges to the later learners for completing the tasks they are reviwing. and without these in-course awards the learner will not achieve overall completion of the P2Pu challenge.

A badge system design rubric

With the amazing assistance and feedback from others I have created a badge system design rubric. The purpose of this rubric is to guide people toward creating a good badge system. The rubric is not meant to evaluate existing badge systems, but to prompt thinking about what is a good badge system design. The goal is for people to create effective and well thought-out badge systems.

A pdf file of the badge system design rubric is available with this link.

The rubric has four levels of performance and nine criteria. The levels of performance are as follows;

1. Introductory - this is meant as just the basics of a badge system. the badge system implements just what is needed to provide a basic / introductory badge system. The level of knowledge to create an introductory badge system is a minimum.
2. Working - this is meant to be a working badge system. It implements everything of the introductory with the addition of a more thorough set of dimensions and integration with other learning and credentialing systems. A working badge system is a complete badge system.
3. Notable - this is meant to be a badge system of note, it should be referred to as a good working system with additional features that should be considered when developing badge systems. It implements everything of the working system with the addition of being recognized (and utilized) by other learning and credentialing systems within the same subject domain.
4. Exemplary - the exemplary badge system is a badge system that most others aspire to be. The exemplary badge system becomes the defacto standard for accrediting a subject domain.

for greater understanding of each level of performance for the badge systems, read each level as a column. Given the depth of detail for the criteria I will be dedicating a blog post to each criteria explaining my thinking, references and rationale. Remember, the badge system design rubric is to guide the development of a badge system not evaluate existing badge systems.

Flipping assessment

I've been exploring the idea of flipping assessment for a while. It started with my work as a TA during my M.Ed graduate studies, also explored it during my time with WikiEducator, it was confirmed as I reflected upon my graduate studies and every community of practice since, and I designed it into a language learning portal I architected a while back. Why do we have people who have already completed the work (and possibly long since forgotten the details) assess those currently working on building their understanding. Why not have the cohort of learners most current with the subject provide the bulk of the assessment. Why not flip the assessment and have the novice learners assess those a few steps ahead on the same learning journey? I believe the cohort of novice learners (working with master learners) would be the most motivated to develop understanding and invest the most time in the assessment of another learners work. Particularly, if the assessment event is a formative event and just a part of the overall assessment.

This is what I envision for flipping assessment. This wouldn't be a complete flip, where novice learners do all of the assessment, but they would have an increased role in the assessment of the learning cohort. As I see it the elements of the diagram are as follows;

• Working from left to right a person masters a subject.
• A subject within a knowledge domain is exactly that, a complete subject that fits within a larger domain of knowledge. An example would be baking bread is a subject within the food preparation (or cooking, or baking) knowledge domain. And the subject of bread baking is large enough to be considered a subject within itself where someone would develop an expertise.
• An Interested learner is a person with an interest in the subject, who never actually studies the subject, but they will read about it and not shy away from a discussion.
• A Novice learner is a person committed to learning a subject. They actively seek out information, read and consume information about the subject. They participate in learning events (online and otherwise) to increase their understanding. They would even take a course from a traditional institution.
• A Master learner is someone nearing completion of their studies of a subject. They could be considered to have "almost" mastered the subject.
• Teaching assistants are people who are rewarded for providing mentorship to learners. This role is a part of traditional institutional learning, and plays a role in helping learners master a subject. Teaching assistants are often much closer to a subject than a professor as their learning was more recent and, given their role, they are closer to the learning cohort due to their frequency of personal interaction with the learners.
• A Seasoned learner is someone who has mastered a subject, and is not actively involved in learning the subject. They do continue to read about the subject and actively seek out new and related information. They are members of communities of practice regarding a subject and occasionally engage and/or contribute to the community. They are very current with the subject and provide feedback and guidance to other community members.
• The Professors are well, professors. They are most often people with Ph.D`s who are very active in furthering and adding to a domain of knowledge. Their focus is not always on teaching or the details of a specific subject within their chosen domain of knowledge, unless that is their area of research. I guess what I want to say is that a professor won`t be focused on the subject matter (and the learners study) of an undergraduate level course and its specific subjects. This is not to say professors can`t be an amazing resource for someone learning a new subject. A professors time should be used very wisely, but finding ways to encourage their engagement is good.
• The Experts are people who, through a number of different methods, have become experts in a subject. They continue to be experts by ongoing reading, personal research tasks, and involvement with online communities. They sometimes lurk (even engage) in online learning communities. Getting experts to contribute to assessment would be great, and finding ways to include them is time well spent.

My plan to implement flipped assessment
I want to experiment with the idea of having novice learners assess the work of master learners. Both the novice and master learners need to be active within the same learning journey, where the master learner is only a few lessons (or tasks) ahead of the novice. The idea being the novice is beginning their study of the subject and the master is almost finished.  I want the novice learners to read and understand the work of a master learner and give it an assessment. If the novice has questions, they ask them of the master learner. The master learner also has to encourage the novice learners to assess their work. Without this assessment neither the novice or the master will progress to completion. If novice learners want to team up to assess a master learners work, they can. This flipped assessment will not be the only assessment the learners will receive as a peer based summative assessment will occur when a learner has finished their study of the subject.

I plan to implement this flipped assessment in the Badge System Design challenge I am creating in P2Pu. The design of the challenge is iterative in that we will be covering the topics more than once with increasing depth as the challenge progresses. This iterative approach allows for a task earlier in the challenge to include the assessment of another learners completed works later in the challenge. Essentially, a novice learner is assessing the work of a master learner. Flipped Assessment.

If you are interested in the previous background chat discussing this idea it can be found in Google+.

Challenge 301 - Badge System Design

So I'm starting the development of the Badge Systems Design challenge for the School of Badges at P2Pu. In time we hope this challenge will become a part of the larger School of Badges, but a bunch of things have to happen for that to manifest.

I've been working with Badge System Design for a while now and have been involved in a number of discussions and learning communities. All of this taught me a few things about badge system design. What stands out for me is that I perceive three aspects to badge systems design;

1. The graphical look of the badges within the whole system. This includes things like colour scheme, branding, graphics and icons, the text to display, how badges graphically relate to each other, how levelling is recognized, and a few other attributes.
2. The network, hierarchy, or system of badges and how the badges relate to the learning or curriculum. There may be some kind of a rubric that identifies the tasks, knowledge or learning represented by each badge and the badge system as a whole.
3. Where the badge system is going to be hosted. Is an existing free and open system going to be utilized or are you going to build your own issuing capability. This is important for you may decide that the badge system design has specific attributes toward how the badges relate to each other, or how the badge criteria and evidence needs to be hosted. Some of the attributes of your badge systems design may be restrained by how you decide to host your badge system.

Once you have all this considered and have begun to dive deeper into each of these aspects of badge system design you are going to need to loop around to that first task and see if the restraints from one of these aspects don't change the design of another aspect (as an example; the chosen hosting system doesn't support the evidence attribute of the badge). I'm looking forward to developing this challenge for the School of Badges over the next while. If you want to help out, let me know; it could be fun. Stay tuned I'll post here as things proceed and new challenge tasks are developed... to see the beginings of this challenge visit this link; https://p2pu.org/en/groups/badge-system-design/

P2Pu School of Badges

Thanks to the amazing graphic design work by Leah MacVie I will be taking a lot of the Mozilla Open Badges resources I have created over the last year to lead the development of a couple of challenges within P2Pu.

P2Pu School of Badges Curriculum

I will start by focusing my efforts on the 301 challenge which will have the learner explore badge system design. I will draw heavily on the materials and discussion that were a part of the two week seminar series I facilitated at the end of last year. I'd also like to encourage any and all badge system designers to help out or provide suggestions or a critical eye.

Agile Learning and OpenBadges

I spend a lot of my personal time deepening my understanding of self-directed learning and its direct application. I'd rather walk-the-walk than talk-the-talk... and pedagogically you learn much more by walking-the-walk. Over the last eight months I have focused a lot of my learning on badge systems as a method for recognizing learning and achievement, and as an alternative method of accreditation. I have been exploring, what I consider, the four different approaches to badge systems and have utilized my Agile Learning Design (ALD) approach to direct my learning. Over the last eight months I have learned a considerable amount about this subject. And given there is yet to be a person or school that focuses on teaching about badges systems I really didn't have a choice but do it myself.

ENVISION
During the envisioning step of the ALD methodology you focus on a creative effort which defines what you know of a subject domain. Even if what you know starts with a single word or just the name of the subject you can still start exploring the subject and build a creative effort that defines your current knowing of the subject. With open badges I was able to read a few of the sites dedicated resources and was able to put together a concept map, and this really got me started and allowed me to set a direction for my learning.

My first concept map capturing my early understanding of open badges.

During the middle six months of 2012 I immersed myself in learning about digital badges and open badges. I wrote extensively and participated in many online events and created many online resources. All of this deepened my learning. The ALD approach helped focus my learning and assisted in identifying gaps in my knowledge. I followed an iterative learning approach and studied concepts as identified in my concept map and as they became apparent through my reading, investigation and peer feedback. My learning journey occurred as follows;

PLAN
The first few steps of my learning journey were planning my approach and setting the context and learner perspective. The importance of this is described in the planning step of ALD.

• Context and User Roles: This step was really important for setting the context and learner roles to define how I was looking at the learning I was about to embark upon. It really helped me understand who the learner was, and to what depth and direction I was to take my learning.
  
  • Learning plan
  • Learner roles
• Learning Themes: What did I want to get out of my learning and how would I anchor my learning.
  
  • Concept map
  • Learning themes
  • Anchor subject

BUILD
My next step in deepening my understanding was to build learning resources. These resources covered many of the topics I had identified in my concept map and during my planning. Each resource I created added depth to my understanding of open badges.

• Getting Started: What are the general concepts within open badges and what are the main technologies to be understood. What does it take to implement badges using these technologies.
  
  • Getting Started
  • Issuer vs. Displayer
  • Learning so far
  • Step-by-step guide
  • Making a badge
• Badge taxonomies: I began to realize that badge systems design was a big part of all this. And it seemed to me the first step of all this was in the taxonomies surrounding badge systems. So I explored further.
  
  • Badge taxonomies
  • Martial arts belt hierarchy
• Badge systems design: There came a point where I had deepened my knowledge of open badges where I wanted to create my own badge system. This seemed like the natural next step for me. This took me into understanding the criteria and evidence attributes of the badge and how the criteria would fit within a badge system.
  
  • Criteria and Evidence
  • Badges for Wikiversity
• Create learning resources: Wow! So after all of that learning I begin to build learning resources. This deepens my learning and creates artifacts that will hopefully assist others with their learning. Fortunately I was in the situation where Mozilla provided an incentive to build these resources.
  
  • Introduction
    suggested readings
    more suggested readings
    first look at the meta-data
    open badges on P2Pu
  • Claiming a badge
    claiming your first badge
  • Technical prerequisites
    JavaScript
    the technology stack
    server infrastructure
  • Issuer Technologies
    technical prerequisites
    a look at the json message
    the different servers
  • Wikiversity Case Study
    scenario and badge system design
    manually issuing the badge
    claiming the badge

STABALIZE
Once the first iteration build of my learning resources was complete I sought feedback by having others use the resources. In truth, I was continually asking for feedback. As soon as a resource was built I would publish it to the internet and seek input. All very iterative, all very lean. As you can see the above resources were all published at different times and as I published I would engage my learning community and ask for input. With some resources the feedback would initiate a change for others the resource remained the same, sometimes the change would come as how the new resource was hosted or the context around the learning was changed.

DEPLOY
The final step within this iteration of learning was to deploy the final versions of the learning resources. I chose to wrap the video resources in popcorn.js and to build a small portal to organize all the resources. This allowed further enhancement to the resources by focusing in on key learnings and also providing a listing of the embedded URL's as follow on learning resources. To view this portal visit the dedicated Bowen Institute of Technology website; http://badges.bit.bc.ca/

NEXT STEPS
I feel I learned a lot over the last nine months regarding digital badges and open badges. The next steps to deepen and continue my learning will be;

1. to assist others who are learning about digital badges, mostly through the following activities;
• facilitate online workshops whenever possible
• continue building out P2Pu School of Badges
• answer questions regardless of where they come from
• continue to engage the community as time permits
2. to loop around back to the start of the ALD where I revisit my learning themes and do another deep dive into my concept map.
3. to Plan, Build, Stabalize and Deploy another iteration of learning resources

The purpose of these activities is to celebrate all I have learned so far, expose the gaps in my knowledge regarding digital badges and open badges, create more resources for others to learn from, and refocus my learning. All good.

merit, online, image, digital, and open badges

I read a tweet the other day about badges and it got me thinking about all the different types of badges and the names being used for badges. I wanted to capture what I understand to be four different kinds of badges;

• traditional badges - these include merit badges (scouting), awards like ribbons, martial arts belts, and other patches, buttons, and displayed insignia, etc...
• online (or image) badges -These are logos or images that infer participation or membership and are displayed on blogs and websites. These provide links back to the origin site, and, in general, don't provide an acknowledgement of achievement. More used for an affiliation.
• digital badges - achievement and recognition type badges that are digital and awarded by online communities, learning/educational sites, and social networking sites. (Khan Academy, Four Square, P2Pu, and WebMaker are a few).
• open badges - A badge infrastructure to support all of the above badge types with the addition of embedding meta-data into the badge image file. The ability to embed meta-data adds the ability for a badge to be self-describing and link back to why the badge was awarded.

In the end I hope all types of badges support an open meta-data standard describing the badge. This includes the traditional badges. I'd hope any badge earned over the course of a life could be displayed as a part of a persons online profile [wherever a person chooses their profile to be (facebook, linkedin, blog, wiki, etc)].

Badge Clustering

As my digital badges seminar series came to an end I was doing a lot of thinking about badge clustering and what I meant by the term. With a little creative thinking, and some fun, I borrowed and edited three clustering terms and applied them to badges.

Badge Cluster

noun, epistemology:
A bunch of badges (ranging in number from a few to hundreds) which are bound to each other by their mutual knowledge domain as defined by the badge earner.

Open Cluster
noun, epistemology.
a comparatively young, irregularly shaped group of badges, often numbering up to ten to one hundred, and held together by and active learning journey; usually found associated with people who are gaining new knowledge where new ideas are forming on a regular basis. As the open cluster grows domain mastery increases.

Globular Cluster
noun, epistemology.
a comparatively older, spherically symmetrical, compact group of up to a few hundred badges, held together by a shared knowledge domain, that are located in the earners digital badge repository. Globular clusters are often stable with few new badges being added. In general, they show a mastery of a subject domain.

What is a Badge Cluster?
Badge clustering happens as a badge earner groups their badges into knowledge clusters as defined by themselves (the badge earner). This provides an approach for people to deepen their learning through grouping knowledge in ways that make the most sense to them. It also provides visual queues or information organization to identify gaps or holes in their self-directed study. Badge clusters can be compared to personal curriculum maps to identify the gaps in their learning.

Mozilla digital backpack as a badge repository.

Why badge clustering will be important?
As learners gather more badges into their digital badge repositories they will organize the badges into groups for a variety of purposes. The groupings will be for;

• display purposes
• setting public and private display
• identifying personal knowledge domains
• achievement towards a learning goal
• inspiring others toward similar (yet personalized) learning journeys
• organizing badges into micro and macro badges

With the correct number of badge endorsements, badge assertions, verified badge criteria, confirmed evidence, and the ability to analyze a cluster of badges against a known knowledge domain we could get to a persons completed learning efforts being assessed towards the mastery of an identified knowledge domain. I dream!

An Introduction to Badge Systems Design

I believe there are two ways to explore badge systems design;

1. what already exists in badging (and related) systems
2. what innovations could be for awarding badges

Existing badge systems fall into two areas;
1. traditional badge systems
There are a number of proven badge systems. People often refer back to scouting as a solid and proven badge system. The martial arts belts also have much to offer.

• scouting (and similar organizations)

• martial arts (Taekwondo, Karate, Judo, Juijitsu, Etc.)
• university degree, diplomas, etc. (I know, many would not consider this a traditional badge system. For the sake of design, consider the course (with grades and completion) a badge and a collection of courses (degree or diploma) and patch or super-badge.

2. digital badge systems
There are also a number of existing badge systems and these exist in a number of different contexts. A thorough evaluation and a compare and contrast to these different digital badge systems can offer some interesting insights into what is possible with digital badge systems design.

• Khan Academy - http://www.khanacademy.org/badges  
• FourSquare - http://www.4squarebadges.com/foursquare-badge-list/ 
• Stackoverflow - http://stackoverflow.com/badges 
• OERu - http://ask.oeruniversity.org/badges/
• Wikipedia Barnstars - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Barnstars

Innovations for badge systems design

I believe this falls into two main areas, and where much investigation, innovation and research remains to be done with the emerging badge paradigm. Ah, the journey of a thousand steps...

1. badge systems

• digital badges for the self-directed and life-long learners
• digital badges for peer learning and communities of practice

Badge Clusters

2. meta-badge systems

The systems that form between and among badging systems that allow a person to create their own credential map (or badge clusters) of their accomplishments. Essentially allowing them to create their own credential(s) of proven mastery of their chosen area(s) of expertise. Mapping their own Personal Curriculum!

implementing a really simple badge system

I aspired to create a really simple badge system design so a beginner could implement open badges. I had the following restraints to this implementation;

1. creating the badge images needed to be really simple, and saved as .png files.
2. the badge system design was to be a basic hierarchy where three micro-badges lead to a badge.
3. the tasks to earn each badge were to be simple.
4. the badges needed to be hosted and issued from one of the free services currentlly available.
5. the badges had to easily move over to the Mozilla digital backpack for organization and display.

Scenario: the badge to be earned was by making a cup of tea. I know, not a rigorous amount of learning, but I was wanting to keep it simple. To make a cup of tea you need to prove the following three basic skills; boiling water, finding a teabag, and add the boiling water and teabag to a teapot.

Step 1: decide on the hierarchy of badges and their design
I chose to follow my thoughts on the martial arts for coloring my badges. Making hot drinks can become increasingly complicated and I want to be able to add more complicated tea making badges later. I want to become a tea ninja! The next level up could be to make filtered coffee or tea from dried leaves...
Step 2: create the badge images.
These images needed to be quickly created and contain a simple design. I chose visio to create the badges cause it allowed for transparent background, supported the png and svg file types, was *gak* windows based, and had a few basic shapes. There is no reason why you couldn't use windows paint to create a basic square with a couple of words in it as your badge. just remember to save as a png file.
Step 3: use a simple badge issuing site
I wanted to use a simple badge issuing site that integrated well with the Mozilla Open Badges backpack. I ended up using http://badg.us. This site allowed me to easily add badges and issue them. Once the badges were issued they could also be easily claimed via links in the issuing email.
Step 4: move the badges into the mozilla backpack
Once the earner had claimed their badges from within badg.us they could easily move them into their mozilla backpack by selecting the badge within badg.us click the "Add this badge to your Mozilla Badge Backpack" button.

image attribution
tea bag - http://thenounproject.com/kenset/#
kettle - http://thenounproject.com/Simon%20Child/#
teacup - http://thenounproject.com/CrocodileJock/#

Confessions of a badge addict

I'm fully into moderating a two week seminar series on digital badges. The seminar has far exceeded my expectations, the dialogue is outstanding and the participants are more than I could have dreamed of. 

When I was responding to one of the discussion threads I realized I am a badge addict. I have badges from more sources than anyone I have met during my last eight months of exploring and discussing digital badges.

In my youth I earned badges from at least five different sources. As show here I have badges from; Scouting, YMCA leaders and swimming, Red Cross, Canadian Particip-Action, and Canadian Yachting Association. I always knew what the criteria was and planned out my earning of the badge(s). And I don't recall ever just being given a badge. I looked forward to the events when I received my badges. I think I now know why I am so commited to furthering the idea of digital badges... and most of my efforts are in a volunteer capacity... this is all good!

I also spent time in organizing my badges, at first they remained sewn onto the scout sash or another appropriately wearable piece of clothing. I wore them with pride. When i was in my teens (I was into stitching) I moved all my badges onto a single piece of fabric and displayed it on my wall. I organized them by issuing organization. Now they exist in an old brown leather covered box and they are one of the things that stays with me as I move house, change cities. I'm not a big believer in keeping stuff (IMHO, it just clutters ones life), but the fact that these badges remain as one of the things that stays with me, implies I continue to attach importance to these achievements...

http://scope.bccampus.ca/mod/forum/view.php?id=9010

If you want to join in the two week seminar series on digital badges, feel free to jump in, introduce yourself, add to the discussion or just follow along. You would be very welcome!

The essential tasks for understanding digital badges

Over the next two weeks I will be facilitating a seminar series and two lunch-and-learns focused on understanding digital badges and how they can be deployed and issued to learners of all kinds. The seminar series will take place in SCoPE and begins on December 1st. Feel free to join in...

http://scope.bccampus.ca/mod/forum/view.php?id=9010

Over the first week I will be working through a number of tasks to help build understanding of digital badges and the resources available and required to be able to issue badges to learners (institutional and otherwise).  For an idea of the tasks feel free to review the six described here;

Task 1: The merit badge
1. Identify a merit badge you earned during your lifetime.
What did you have to do to earn it? Did you earn more than one badge? And were they awarded by the same organization?
2. Describe how you displayed the merit badge(s).
If you earned more than one badge, did you display them together? Did you display badges from different organizations together?

Task 2: The digital badge
3. Identify the digital and internet technologies best suited to create a digital merit badge.
How would you create the digital file (image) of the badge? Is it possible to keep people from copying the badge without having earned it?
4. Describe the technologies that could be used to attach (or reference) the learning to the badge.
Is there more than one way of "attaching" learning criteria to a badge? Would this criteria attribute differ from a learners evidence of fulfilling the criteria? Could a badge criteria change through time?

Blooms Rose

Task 3: Identifying the curriculum
5. Identify the completion criteria for any badge you have earned (traditional or digital).
Did you have to complete a series of tasks? Did you have to prove mastery of a skill? How was the mastery described? Was the badge knowledge based, how was the knowledge domain described as a learning criteria?
6. Describe a hierarchy or network of badges.
Does a single badges stand on its own or is it best associated with other badges? Do badges cluster in and around knowledge domains? Do badges exists in hierarchies or networks or both? What other patterns can an collection of badges exist?

Task 4: Go earn some badges already!
7. Identify a variety of sites that issue badges.
Spend some time to find two or more sites that issue badges. Are these event based badges or learning based badges? Do the badges exist on their own or are they a part of a hierarchy or network? Earn some badges and figure out how they are displayed. Were the badges easy to earn? How easily can they be displayed outside of the site where you earned the badges? Display your badges or send the link to a friend.
8. Describe the skills, knowledge and curriculum the badges represent.
Can you easily describe the criteria for earning the badges you just completed? Were they part of a bigger curriculum? Were the badges more commercially oriented? Would displaying the badges attract other to earn the badges or participate in related learning?


Task 5: Building the digital badge(s)
9. Identify the visual elements that best describe the learning represented by a specific badge. 
Does the learning represented by the badge have a de facto standard image. Are there elements of your group, team, organization or institution that also need to be part of the badge? Are there visual elements that are well suited to the badges target learners?
10. Describe the skills and knowledge required to design and create the digital badge(s).
Does your team or organization have resources familiar with creating graphics? Are the resources familiar with the design, branding and layering of images? If your badges start showing up all over the internet do they promote a strong organizational brand? Why does this matter?

Task 6: Defending the digital badge
11. Identify as many objections to digital badges your organization or group may offer that keeps them from further exploring digital badges.
Are the objections focused on current accreditation approaches and why badges shouldn't to be integrated into existing courses, programs, etc? or are they focused on areas of opportunity? Do the objections include new and emerging technologies and pedagogical approaches? or are they focused on the traditional? Where do most objections come from?
12. Describe the different ways badges can be used for the institutional learner, peer-based learner and the self-directed life-long learner.
How do the three learner types described differ when it comes to accreditation. Does each different context / environment offer different opportunities for the issue of badges? What activities outside of courses and programs offer the opportunity to issue badges? Do badges offer things other than just accreditation? How can these be leveraged? Could peer evaluations be represented by badges? Could an independent learner prove competency with a collection of related badges from different sources?

Task 7: Deploying the digital badge(s)
13. Identify the internet technologies required to deploy the digital badge(s).
Think of this in non-technical terms; do you need a location to store descriptions and images? Where / how would you store the association of a badge to each earner? Are there security or information privacy issues you need to consider? Try and describe each of these in non-technical language with as much detail as you can.
14. Describe the skills and knowledge required to develop and administer the software and technical environment required to host digital badges.
Could you be non-technical and successfully deploy digital badges? Can you find any of the self-service digital badge issuing sites? Do any of these free digital badge systems insulate the non-technical person from the technology required to issue digital badges? If technology skills and knowledge are required can they be identified?

A simple three badge system design

I am facilitating a two week seminar series on digital badges and one of the participants suggested issuing badges for the series. Well that seems like a no-brainer, particularly if I build out the badge development as a part of the seminar series. I see value in proposing what I see as the three badge system design and grow the discussion from there. So these are the three badges I am considering issuing, and the basic criteria for earning each badge;

1. Learner badge - person introduces themselves to the group via the discussion forum and contributes to a couple of discussion threads. Mostly, they could be considered lurkers (much can be learned through lurking)
2. Participant badge - person introduces themselves to the group via the discussion forum and actively contributes to 7 of the 12 primary discussion threads, also participates in one of the two lunch-and-learn sessions.
3. Contributor badge - does everything the participant does with the addition of contributing;
   • by designing badge images
   • creating a badge system design for another curriculum
   • blogs about their participation in this seminar series
   • other creative endeavours regarding digital badges

So depending on a persons engagement they will earn a badge. And this recognizes whether a person just "shows-up" or engages deeply. It allows the learner to determine their amount of engagement, and still honors their effort.

OER + OAA² Slide Stack

As an outlier, I still believe the current innovations within education are off target. I think all the disruption is good, but the real innovation is in breaking the emancipation of learning from the institution.

OER + OAA² from Peter Rawsthorne

This isn't to say that institutions aren't still good places to learn, its just an institutional approach should no longer be considered the first or only approach to learning.