Article at the Open Badges in Education workshop

This summer I presented a paper at the 1st International Workshop on Open Badges in Education (OBIE2014). In our study, we were exploring the potential of open bagdes in formal higher education. The study was carried out in the “Creating Digital Learning Resources” course for the educational technology master students.

When designing our badge system, we did a literature review to understand current approaches for using open bagdes in higher education courses. The following four approaches were identified:

  • composite badges can be achieved by completing multiple assignments;
  • activity-based badges can be awarded automatically based on measurable learning activities;
  • grade-based badges are based on the grades that the learners have received;
  • hierarchical badges are divided to several levels, some of which may be composite badges based on lower level badges.

Considering these approaches, we recognized that none of these were focused on learning outcomes. The Estonian higher education system has a strong focus on outcome-based assessment, therefore in our context the open badges should be also directly linked to learning outcomes.

We designed a badge system where the learning outcomes of the course and the assignments were connected to badges. The course had 7 learning outcomes, 8 assignments and 15 different badges. There was a basic knowledge badge for each of the six main topics of the course that was awarded for the blogging assignments. For group assignment on creating a digital learning resource the students were able to earn one of the three skills badges. Finally, there were six advanced knowledge badges for the literature review on a chosen topic.

obie2014_figure1

At the end of the course, we carried out focus group interviews to evaluate our approach on using badges in formal higher education. The students pointed out feeling of recognition and confirmation about accepted assignments as the main benefits of using bagdes. They noted that the badges would become more valuable, if they are used in several courses, not as a one time experiment. Some students were also interested in recognizing prior learning with badges.

The proceedings of the workshop are now published by Springer:

Põldoja, H., & Laanpere, M. (2014). Exploring the Potential of Open Badges in Blog-Based University Courses. In Y. Cao, T. Väljataga, J. K. T. Tang, H. Leung, & M. Laanpere (Eds.), New Horizons in Web Based Learning: ICWL 2014 International Workshops, SPeL, PRASAE, IWMPL, OBIE, and KMEL, FET, Tallinn, Estonia, August 14-17, 2014, Revised Selected Papers (Vol. 8699, pp. 172–178). Cham: Springer. doi:10.1007/978-3-319-13296-9_19

Our presentation is in SlideShare and there is also a video recording.

I am planning to use badges again next spring in the same course. For the next iteration, I have the following plans:

  • offering at least two levels of badges for each assignment;
  • providing more choice of different badges / learning paths;
  • encouraging learners to propose and design their own badges.
Posted in Conferences, General, Presentations, Publications | Leave a comment

Open Education 2030 workshop on school education

Last week I participated the Open Education 2030 foresight workshop on school education. The workshop was organized by the The Institute for Prospective Technological Studies in Seville. It was second of the three workshops that aim to provide input for the European Commission’s new initiative “Opening-up Education”. The other two workshops focus on openness in lifelong learning and in higher education. Before the workshops there was a call for vision paper on open education in 2030. Vision papers for lifelong learning and school education are published on the Open Education 2030 weblog.

The workshop started with a presentation of recent trends on open education by the local organizers Christine Redecker, Yves Punie and Jonatan Castaño Muñoz. After the presentation we were divided to groups to identify the most important issues for open education 2030 in four key areas:

  • educational resources
  • personalization & flexibility
  • social interaction
  • open schools & society

I decided to join a group on educational resources. In the discussion we agreed on the following top five issues related to educational resources on 2030. We also had to rate the importance and difficulty of these issues on 10-point scale:

  • More research (importance: 10, difficulty: 6) is needed to make evidence-based decisions.
  • Indexation, interoperability and open standards (importance: 9, difficulty: 9). With the vast amount of educational resources the key issue is in finding the right content. The content has to be described with appropriate educational metadata for indexation by search engines. For interoperability it is important to follow open standards. Unfortunately we can see that big companies are using proprietary solutions to keep the content locked in their ecosystem (e.g. iBooks Author and iTunes store).
  • Legal framework and business models (importance: 8, difficulty: 10). There is a need for business models that would allow the co-existance of commercial content developed by the professional textbook publishers and open educational resources developed by the teachers. How can the teachers revise and remix the commercial content? How can the commercial publishers reuse high quality open educational resources? How are teachers rewarded for the high quality educational resources that they have created? We have seen how the music industry has transferred to new business models but in case of educational content it will be more difficult. For music it is clear that the listener will pay for the downloads or streaming service. But who is the paying customer for educational resources? In some cases it might be the school, but also the parent or the teacher.
  • Teachers’ and learners’ interactions, teacher training (importance: 7, difficulty: 8). It is important to look from the teachers’ and learners’ perspective and understand how they interact with educational resources. Also, teacher training is highly important.
  • Authoring models and tools (importance: 6, difficulty: 7). More research is needed on different authoring models. Publishers, teachers and learners should be all seen as possible authors of educational resources. Future authoring tools should support revising and remixing the educational resources by teachers and learners.

Issues related to educational resources

Our second task was to develop scenarios for school education in 2030. At first we had to agree on the key tensions that will differentiate the scenarios. After a lively discussion we agreed that the two main tensions will be between autonomy-control and formal-informal learning. Some of us still felt that two dimensions are not enough for positioning the scenarios. For example there is often a tension between human-centered and technology-centered approaches.

Key tensions for open education

I joined a group that started working on the scenario for formal school setting with high learner and teacher autonomy. We didn’t come up with a concrete scenario but rather a description of the context.

Scenario A

In order to develop actual scenarios we should have a problem or design challenge that we need to solve. For example one possible real life challenge is related to closing local upper secondary schools in rural areas due to lack of students. This process is currently going on in Estonia and probably in other countries as well. How can we address this issue by more open school system where students and teachers have high level of freedom?

On the second day of the workshop we continued discussing the scenarios and roadmap of actions until 2030. It was rather difficult to set milestones after 2020. I proposed the following three milestones for the roadmap:

  • Develop quality assurance framework for user-generated open educational resources (2015)
  • Support the development of business models that allow reusing, revising and remixing of educational resources by the publishers (2016)
  • Implement new forms of gradeless assessment (open badges, etc) on a larger scale (2018)

Open Education 2030 roadmap

It is important that the European Commission has turned its attention to open education. I have participated in similar workshops before and I feel that our understanding of openness in education is getting wider. It is not only about OER’s and MOOC’s, but also about decentralizing education and giving more freedom to learners and teachers.

Posted in General | Comments Off

Article published in the World Wide Web Journal

Our article about web-based self- and peer-assessment of teachers’ digital competencies has been recently accepted for publication in the World Wide Web Journal special issue on Advances in Multimedia e-Learning Technologies. The article is a revised version of a paper presented that we presented at the ICWL 2011 conference. It has been extended by a description of the software implementation and a validation study.

We have now completed the first working prototype of DigiMina tool for assessing teachers’ digital competencies. This tool and initial set of assessment tasks were evaluated with a group of teachers. At the moment we have still covered only 20% of competencies with assessment tasks. Therefore we cannot open the system for a wider audience. This autumn we will continue with creating the assessment tasks and improving the usability of the system.

The online version of the article is available through SpringerLink:

Põldoja, H., Väljataga, T., Laanpere, M., & Tammets, K. (2012). Web-based self- and peer-assessment of teachers’ digital competencies. World Wide Web. doi:10.1007/s11280-012-0176-2

I am planning to include this article in my dissertation instead of an earlier paper that was presented at the ICWL 2011 conference.

Posted in General | Comments Off

ICWL 2011 conference

Last week I participated the International Conference on Web-based Learning (ICWL 2011) that took place in Hong Kong. Three conference papers and one workshop paper were accepted from our research group, so I travelled with my colleagues Mart Laanpere and Vladimir Tomberg.

I was presenting our work on assessing teachers’ educational technology competencies and the conceptual design of DigiMina environment. As a nice surprise, our paper received the best student paper award.

Põldoja, H., Väljataga, T., Tammets, K., & Laanpere, M. (2011). Web-based Self- and Peer-assessment of Teachers’ Educational Technology Competencies. In H. Leung, E. Popescu, Y. Cao, R. Lau, & W. Nejdl (eds.), Advances in Web-Based Learning – ICWL 2011: 10th International Conference, Hong Kong, China, December 2011. Proceedings (pp. 122–131). Berlin / Heidelberg: Springer.

The conference papers covered wide variety of topics. I would like to point out a few of the presentations from the sessions that I attended. Elvira Popescu was presenting eMUSE platform that aggregates learner activities from several social media media tools (Blogger, MediaWiki, Twitter, Delicious, YouTube, Picasa, SlideShare) (preprint). This is very close to our work in EduFeedr project. Adriana Berlanga was presenting a paper co-authored with Riina Vuorikari and a group of researchers in TellNet project (draft). They were studying the eTwinning community and presented some interesting statistics. It was nice to see that Estonia has the largest percentage of teachers involved in eTwinning activities (9,74%). It would be good to have a similar study about LeMill community, but unfortunately we have detailed data only about those users who have filled up their profiles. In the KMEL symposium my colleague Vladimir Tomberg presented the conceptual design of Timeliner tool that supports collaborative scientific writing (presentation). It is nice to see that they have made an in depth design process and we have something to offer also in the research 2.0 field. However, I still think that often the main problem in collaborative writing is lack of time, not lack of tools.

I would have expected a little bit more active use of the web in the conference. It seems that I was the only one using #icwl11 hashtag in Twitter and I have found only a few presentations from SlideShare so far.

I had also some time to look around, take photos and enjoy asian food. First photos are up in Flickr and more will follow during the Christmas break.

Hong Kong skyline

Posted in Conferences, Presentations | Comments Off

Two new projects: DigiMina and Dippler

In recent months I have been busy with two new projects. Both of these are local projects but I hope that the final results will be useful also outside Estonia. Unfortunately most of the design documentation about these projects is in Estonian.

DigiMina

In DigiMina project we are developing a framework and a web-based tool for assessing teachers’ educational technology competencies. Our educational technology competency model for teachers is based on ISTE NETS for Teachers 2008 and consists of 19 competencies. Each competency can be measured on a 5-level scale. Teachers will be able to solve competency tests in DigiMina environment. These tests will contain self-tests items, peer-assessment tasks and self-reflection tasks. Finally teachers will be able to publish their competency profiles and compare their level with other teachers.

We are currently still in the design phase but first full paper about the project has been already accepted to ICWL 2011 conference and will be published in December:

Põldoja, H., Väljataga, T., Tammets, K., & Laanpere, M. (in press). Web-based Self- and Peer-assessment of Teachers’ Educational Technology Competencies. In H. Leung, E. Popescu, Y. Cao, R. Lau, & W. Nejdl (eds.), Proceedings of the 10th International Conference on Web-based Learning (ICWL 2011).

Dippler

In Dippler project we are developing a lightweight LMS with an open and distributed architecture. Learners will use WordPress blogs that have Dippler plugin. This plugin connects to a learning management system that is used to manage courses and learning activities. There are several aspects that make Dippler different from other learning management systems. One of these is blog-based architecture that supports open learning communities. Another aspect is special focus on learning outcomes. All the course assignments can be connected to learning outcomes. In the end of the course learners can compose e-portfolios where evidences are linked with learning outcomes.

We haven’t published anything about Dippler yet but in recent months we have made a fast progress with the software development. I hope that I will be able to use Dippler in my next course that is starting in February.

In both projects I have been also thinking about possible connections with my doctoral thesis. Educational technology competencies are not directly connected with open education but there are some aspects of openness that could be emphasized in the design of DigiMina (public competency profiles, etc.). In Dippler project my challenge is to find a compromise between open educational practices and institutional requirements that universities have for learning management systems.

Dippler and some other projects have taken all the time from our developers. This means that we had to postpone the next release of EduFeedr. Hopefully we can find some time for EduFeedr in the beginning of next year.

Posted in General | Comments Off