Competencies in Context #3: Open Endorsement 2.0 is Coming

By Daniel Hickey and Nate Otto

In the third post of this series, we discuss the Open Badge Specification and its shift from the Badge Alliance to the IMS Global Learning Consortium in 2017. We then discuss the crucial Endorsement features that will be supported in the forthcoming 2.0 Specifications. We will use the example of Luis Lopez's HIPAA badge described in the first post in this series to consider how these new features might operate. This illustrates how Endorsement 2.0 will be crucial in the new Learning Recognition Networks that Dan described in the second post in this series. 

Competencies in Context #2: LRNs for Micro-Masters and eCertificates

By Daniel Hickey

In this detailed post, I discuss the announced release date of the MyMantl Learning Recognition Network (LRN) from Chalk & Wire and argue that such digital LRNs can add value to online career and professional education programs. This includes more conventional continuing education programs and newer MOOC-based "micromasters" programs. Both types of programs promise inexpensive short-term solutions for career entry/change/advance, but they introduce serious challenges for assessment and accountability. New digital LRNs can help.

Competencies in Context #1: New Developments at Portfolium

By Dan Hickey

In this detailed post, I illustrate how the Portfolium ePortfolio platform is breaking new ground with digital badges and new networking features that readily connect learners and potential employers.  In particular, I highlight my own interaction with a student in LA around one of the badges he earned in his coursework. I presented this example in talks at ePIC in Bologna and Mozfest in London and lots of people had questions about it. What I find particularly exciting about these developments is how it shows healthy competition to around the most effective communication about competencies and evidence of competencies among educators, learners, and employers. The communication is crucial because it provides information about the context in which students competencies were developed and (therefore) the range of contexts where those competencies will be most readily deployed in the future.

Badges + ePortfolios = Helping Turn Artifacts into Open Learning Recognition Networks

by Dan Hickey

This post summarizes a meeting between representatives of six leading ePortfolio providers, four digital badge providers, and four professional associations on August 2 in Boston at the Annual Meeting of the Association for Authentic, Experiential, and Evidence-Based Learning (AAEEBL)
We searched for and found synergy between these two crucial technologies that are helping innovators re-imagine how learning can be represented in the Internet era. They are starting to come together to create what some are calling Learning Recognition Networks (LRNs).

This meeting also brings to a close the two-year Open Badges in Higher Education (OBHE) project, carried out with the support of the MacArthur Foundation. We will be discussing the Boston meeting and future directions for LRNs in the next Open Badges Community Call hosted by the Badge Alliance. The call is at 1200 noon EST on August 31 and all are welcome and encouraged to join (meeting at this Uberconference link).

Traditional Approaches to Validity in Assessment Innovation (Part 2: Consequential Validity)

This is the second post in a series on the topic of validity in educational assessment. In my first post, I described the traditional characterization of content-related, criterion-related, and construct-related evidence as they are relevant to educators and credentialing innovators who use and design assessments. This post summarizes traditional characterizations of “consequential validity.” This aspect of validity concerns the broader consequences of administering assessments to learners and using the resulting scores. It is a complex idea that is really crucial to many assessment and credentialing innovators (because broader change is their goal). Many measurement professionals have long argued that it an "unsanctioned" aspect of validity.  Before I write about how that is changing, I want to describe how consequential validity has traditionally been written about and why I have long disagreed.  

Traditional Approaches to Validity in Classroom Assessment and Innovative Credentialing (Part 1)

By Daniel Hickey

In my work with the Participatory Assessment Lab at Indiana University and in my graduate education courses, I spend a lot of time helping people understand validity in the context of educational assessment.  In this post, I describe validity as it has traditionally been presented to educators. I summarize what one leading textbook has long said educators should know about validity when assessing learning in their own classes, and I extend that to credentialing innovators who are developing digital badge systems, micro-credentials, and competency-based educational programs.  In subsequent posts, I will explore traditional views of “face validity” and “consequential validity.” Together, these posts will lay the groundwork for a final post that will explore several new developments in validity theory that I believe are important for these two communities.

2016 AAEEBL Midwest Meeting Keynote: Open Badges + ePortfolios: Searching for and Supporting Synergy

By Dan Hickey

This is a brief report and link to a slideshare from the keynote address at the 2016 Midwest Meeting of the Association for Authentic, Experiential, and Evidence Based Learning.  It summarizes potential synergy between these two important educational technologies, as well as progress towards this synergy by the seven leading eportfolio platforms and between AAEEBL, the Open Badges in Higher Education Project, and the Badge Alliance.

Keynote Address at AAEEBL Midwest Regional Meeting at Notre Dame

Once I get this post up I will get to the several dozen emails awaiting me in my inbox with headers suggesting that we have indeed made some progress towards increased synergy.

A Situative "Roadmap" for Synergy in Motivating Family STEM Engagement

By Dan Hickey

This is the third post about my collaboration with Iridescent Inc., a science education non-profit in LA. This new post describes how a key assumption in newer "situative" theories of motivation can resolve the tensions between prior empiricist and constructivist approaches. When combined with Design Based Research methods, this assumption can result in a coherent "roadmap" towards synergy across the three approaches. I contend that such a roadmap can help Iridescent and other informal STEM innovators find a route that takes them from current levels of engagement to much higher levels of engagement, both in terms of quantity and quality.

This post could use some work and some trimming but I need to get it up for my class and colleagues and get on to other things. Will try to clean it up soon

Motivating STEM Engagement in Children, Families, and Communities

By Daniel Hickey

 This extended post is the second in a series of post about my work with non-profit STEM education start up called Iridescent.  In a previous post I describe their Curiosity Machine and an evaluation I carried out of a program designed to encourage families to complete Engineering Design Challenges on that website from home, after attending two-hour weekly evening workshops. In this post I explore the challenges that organizations like Iridescent and science museums face in attempting to motivate inquiry learning in informal contexts. I am also using this post as my weekly contribution to the graduate education class on motivation that I am currently teaching.

The Data of Learning: A Response to Martin Kurzweil's "Responsible Use of Student Data"

by James Willis

In mid-April, Stanford University hosted the "Learning Summit 2016: Inventing the Future of Higher Education." For those of us who study how the newer processes and protocols of using student data have ethical and legal consequences, one session in particular should be of interest: Marco Molinaro (UC Davis) moderated a panel on the "Responsible Use of Student Data for Individual and Organizational Improvement" which included speakers Martin Kurzweil (ITHAKA S+R), Mitchell Stevens (Stanford), and Kent Wada (UCLA). Kurzweil provided a recent blog posting summarizing the panel discussion, raising some important points.