This was one of five talks at a National Distance Learning Week Webinar on "Alternative, Stackable, and Micro Credentials: Where are we Headed". Hosted by Georgia Tech Professional Education, EDUCAUSE, AND IACEE

1. Daniel T. Hickey
Professor and Program Coordinator
Learning Sciences Program
Director, Participatory Assessment Lab
Indiana University
1

2. 2

3. Why Badges?
• Badges contain specific claims of competency,
achievement, completion, etc.
• Badges can contain evidence supporting those claims.
– The optional evidence field can contain links to additional
evidence (e.g., artifacts) supporting those claims
• These claims and evidence can readily circulate in social
networks, email, etc.
– Thus they gain additional information including endorsements
and (potential) rejection.
– Thus they can help potential earners find opportunities.
• Badges are interoperable and extensible.
– Earners can curate and annotate their collections.
– OBI Badges should be displayable in all future platforms
3

4. 4

5. 5
Three Functions
-------------------

6. The Promise of ePortfolios
• Puts learners in charge of learning and displaying
• ePortfolios are the “common denominator” in
the move from teaching to learning
– Abundance of knowledge
– Knowledge is rapidly changing
– Economy that demands documented competency
– Dismal evidence of learning from legacy methods
– Changing nature of college students
• Complements other trends in higher education
– CBE, SRL, authentic assessment, personalization, self-
pacing, service learning, etc.
6

7. Challenges for
ePortfolios
7

8. 8

9. • Allow credit outside of formal credential context
– Give credit for things that are hard to grade
• Can provide additional useful information
– Specific claims and detailed evidence
– Context in which content was created
– Standardize the inclusion of additional information without
cluttering eportfolios
• May simplify the process of defining competencies
• May offload summative credentialing functions
– Allows more formative and transformative functions
• Can connect eportfolio content to competencies and grades
– Learners stack badge URLs in maps or gradebook
• Can increase value of portfolio content by circulating
independently
9

10. Claims
and
Evidence
10
Three Functions
-------------------

11. • Boundary objects are particular
kinds of contextual and cultural
tools (Star and Grisimer, 1989)
– “both plastic enough to adapt to local
needs and constraints of the several
parties employing them, yet robust
enough to maintain a common
identity across sites.
– “weakly structured in common use,
and become strongly structured in
individual-site use.
– “They may be abstract or concrete.
They have different meanings in
different social worlds but their
structure is common enough to more
than one world to make them
recognizable, a means of translation.”11

12. • Dimensions where evidence crosses boundaries:
1. Types of evidence (artifacts vs. scores)
2. Explicitness of evidence (systematic?)
3. Extent to which actors from the local context
are available in the new context
4. Comprehensiveness of representation of local
context (foreground vs. background)
5. The interpretive norms and routines that
accompany the evidence
6. Roles of local and external actors in shaping
representations of practice.
12

13. • Students work and interact publically in eportfolios
– Including curricular and co-curricular work
– Artifacts are shared, discussed and endorsed.
• Students earn badges for the work
– Evidence of the full range of competencies
– Badges contain information about learning contexts
– Competencies are shared, discussed, and endorsed
• Students “stack” badges into competency maps or
gradebooks by simply pasting URLs
– Instructors assign grades and private feedback
– Information is FERPA-protected
– Same badge can be in multiple gradebooks and/or
competency maps
14

16. Current Status of Open Badges in ePortfolios
Integration
Integration w/employer search
LRN in development
Integration
Open Badge Factory default
Tutors issue Credley Badges
Badges in development
“Interested” 17
+
+
+

17. • Badges as
conversation
• Initial partner with
Credly
• ePortfolio and
Badge integration

18. • MyMantl
announced in
August 2016
• “ePortfolio 3.0”
• First “Learning
Recognition
Network”
19

19. • Issue badges with Pearson’s Acclaim
• Focus on assessment and student showcasing
authentic projects
• Badge and ePortfolio integration in development
• Major developments with edTPA

20. • Maraha v1604
• Open Badge Factory plugin for Mahara
• Badges can be displayed but not issued
• Enables display of badges already in
Mozilla backpack and other custom
badge platforms.

21. • Tutors issue badges
through Credly;
PebblePad connects to
repository directly for
access and to use within
portfolios.
• Enabling learners to tell
their own compelling
stories
• Provide support and tools
through reflections,
ePortfolio, and badges

22. • Focus on authentic assessment of learning
outcomes
• ePortfolios for deeper, reflective learning
with institutional plans
• Interested in the potential value of badges
• Investing in EdTPA

23. 24
• Numerous LRN features
• Employer-focused
– Widely used in California in vocational education
• Badges issued using Credley
• Displaced Chalk & Wire in at least one
system
– Open competition is healthy!

26. 27

34. Dan: “Can you say a bit more about what you did to
gain this badge? Was it in a class?”
Luis: “The first thing you must do is to enroll in one of
the classes that offers a specific badge. Let’s take
HIPPA for example. The classwork consists of
modules/lesson plans that focuses in understanding
the complexity of what HIPPA entails, its functions,
legal aspects, and practical applications in a
healthcare setting. Each module comes with an exam
to assess the student’s understanding of the material.
Once the student satisfies a score of 70% or more in
all exams, they will be eligible for the Comprehensive
Competency Exam. Upon completion of the
competency exam with a score of 80% or more, the
student will earn a badge for the competency; in this
case HIPPA”

35. Dan: “Do you think you can navigate HIPAA in a
university research context with children?”
Luis: “In a research based environment, assessing a
variable of study requires subjects, which they consent
their trust and time in the study. This must be valued
ethically and with utmost care because personal
information should be confidential due to legal aspects.
Having training about HIPPA establishes knowing its
regulations to avoid any legal issues involved with Tort
Laws. Overall, health care providers are respecting
patients, in this case the university research context on
children and their caretakers. The main goal is to
provide a service in the patient’s best interest.
Therefore, confidentiality is important in almost all
work forces and to understand its implications are
imperative in any working environment specially in the
medical field and research based ”

40. Open Badges 2.0 for
Competencies in Context
• Validated third party endorsement adds value
– Endorse badge before it is issued (i.e.,
BadgeClass).
– Endorse badge after it is issued (i.e., Assertion).
– Issuer can endorse the endorser of assertion.
• Linked data will make badges more
discoverable
41

41. 1. LACCD (“Issuer”) establishes a HIPPA
curriculum and Digital Expert badge
(BadgeClass)
2. The Electronic Freedom Foundation
endorses BadgeClass (“Endorsing
Organization”)
3. LACCD endorses all EFF officers to
endorse BadgeClass (“Endorsing
Individuals”)
4. Luis completes Digital Expert curriculum
and ePortfolio and earns Expert badge
(“Assertion Issued”)
5. EFF officer examines claims and
evidence in badges and asks a question
that Luis answers.
6. EFF officer endorses the badge
(“Endorses Assertion”)
42
Digital
Expert
Digital
Expert
EFF Endorsed
Digital
Expert
EFF Endorsed
Luis Lopez
October 20, 2016
Digital
Expert
EFF Endorsed
Luis Lopez
October 20, 2016
Rob McShane
Digital
Expert

42. Next Steps
• Work with the Open Badges Community
Council
• Finalize 2.0 Open Badges Specifications
• Build new features into badging platforms
• Define new models of practice for 2.0 features
• Support continued development of Learning
Recognition Networks across platforms
43