I’m in the midst of prepping my syllabus for a summer course entitled “Digital Tools, Trends, and Debates.” One of my modules – in fact, one I’m most excited about – is focused on digital learning and digital literacies, so I think it’s relevant in this week’s worth of material to include in our conversation some talk about badge systems, especially considering that we will be talking about Gee’s learning principles in games. There certainly is some overlap. And while I’m not quite convinced that badges go beyond “shiny new toy syndrome”, I think the emerging research indicates that there is something worth our attention that, while not necessarily needing our full focus, warrants a general understanding of the topic, especially for LIS professionals where learning and libraries overlap more often than not.
6 Comments So Far
Don't be a stranger, join the discussion by leaving your own commentTrackbacks/Pingbacks
-
-
February 22, 2012
[...] written as a response to Kyle M. Jones’ posting on TheCorkboard.org entitled “Digital Learning and Badges” in which he calls for greater discussion around using “badges” to certify [...]
Everything I’ve heard is that badges are designed to take the place of the diploma– but a diploma is just a way for an educational institution to confer its reputation upon an individual who has successfully proven mastery of content. The whole system is based on faith that the institution knows what mastery looks like, and it has done due diligence to ensure that its graduates have mastered the skills. While employers couldn’t actually see evidence of what students learned, they trusted the judgement of the learning professionals who “supposedly know these things”.
So the question that badges are meant to answer, I think, is
“How can an employer believe that you’ve mastered content if there’s no accredited institution willing to put their reputation on the line to say that you did”?
Even if a site gives you a badge– does it really mean that somebody has done the due diligence to ensure that you really learned your stuff? If the answer is no– badges will become useless right quick.
The only answer I can give for that is if you have an ePortfolio of mastery-level work to show them. You can say that you know HTML5, you can have a badge that says “Mozilla thinks you know HTML5″, and/or you can build a website that shows your well-rounded understanding of HTML5. Which would you trust more?
Insightful response, Ted. First, thanks as always for stopping by.
You’ve hit on a key point in stating that the crux of the issue is the presence or absence of an institution in the process. Accrediting learning is not something that can be crowd sourced on the web; it has to be thoughtfully discussed by a selection of professionals that understand what needs to be accomplished in learning experiences.
The Mozilla example represents your point perfectly. And to answer your question, I would trust Mozilla because Mozilla has the cachet of a knowledgeable institution. Who better to recognize quality HTML5 work than those who work intimately with crafting spaces on the web? The credibility of badges, it seems, will therefore rely on the credibility of the granting institution.
Thanks Kyle-
Nicely put. I hope that this trend is also leading to more transparency in assessment as well. I hope that I won’t have to simply rely on Mozilla’s reputation as much as we’ve gotten used to doing with universities, but will instead be able to “drill down” behind the badge and see exactly what tasks the student successfully completed to earn that badge. In other words, I hope we’re moving from faith in institutions to faith in explicit evidence of mastery.
If I were an employer, I’d love to scan down over a list of benchmarks the student had completed so I could ensure that her/his skill set matches the needs of my project.
“So this applicant is an “expert” in HTML5, eh? What has she done?
Basic HTML5 Syntax– Proficient
Advanced HTML5 Syntax– Proficient
CSS3 Stylesheets– Advanced
HTML5 Geolocation– Proficient
HTML5 Local Storage– Proficient
Responsive Design– Proficient
”
etc. You get the idea here.
It would even be great to be able to drill down to the next level and see the actual assignments she completed and her submissions that merited those grades. In this way, employers can get a much clearer picture of the actual strengths that applicants can bring to an organization.
The problem with the above scenario is that (at least in 2012) it still takes a highly-trained human mind to evaluate student work to this level. Though this process will one day be possible to automate (sorry, teachers!) I don’t think we can get too close to that level of detail with current technology.
I just saw this news article and thought it was germane to the conversation at hand:
https://chronicle.com/blogs/wiredcampus/badge-based-learning-competition-names-winners/35638
I haven’t followed all the links to learn more about the winners yet, but it sounds like they are figuring out where institutions and evidence fit into this puzzle.
I saw that as well. Marked the page for a little more digging when my class gets to my module on badges/digital learning. I was surprised to see so many submissions.