Archive for July 5, 2012
This is the most insightful and balanced piece that I’ve yet read about badges, including Nora Sabelli’s spot-on comments at the tail end. The insight from Henry Jenkins, that education is already gamified is important and one I hadn’t really considered. It is already about getting “score,” and beating some relatively arbitrary challenges/bosses in order to gain points. A possible benefit of badges is to expose the current flaws, and possibly create a better model. I’d love to see this in CS, to address the kind of “We covered that in a five line example, so you should be able to build this 75 line program!” assumption that the cartoon about CS textbooks was lampooning. We assume that students learn much more than what our assessments say that they’re learning. But Dan and Nora point out that it only gets better if we can measure what we really think is important, and it’s still not obvious that we can.
In particular, I agree with Henry’s argument that education is already “gamified”. So the answer to Mike’s question about what badges promise is really another question: Compared to what? Given the trivial amount of learning supported by many current formal and informal educational contexts, ANY attention to learning outcomes might be an improvement. Introducing digital badges is sure to change most learning ecosystems. On the upside, the incentive value of digital badges is likely to draw attention to dubious credentialing practices and lousy assessments. While stakeholders who have a vested interest in the existing ecosystem are likely to blame the badges, most will agree that such attention is needed and generally helpful.
Certainly some of the changes that follow from digital badges will be bad. In particular, I worry about the fetishistic obsession with test-driven educational reform expanding to badges. I believe the policy researchers who argue that overconfidence in test-driven reform undermined achievement in many schools that were already high-achieving before No Child Left Behind. I worry that the same thing may happen as well-meaning administrators and governing boards insist that high-functioning schools and programs incorporate digital badges.
I love the goal of Runestone Interactive! Last weekend, I saw a cardboard astrolabe, built into a book, using threads to link the pieces. This book was created in the 1500′s, and was part of an exhibit on Renaissance Astronomy.
Today, we can make even more powerful interactive books. But how do we do it? How can we make it easier, more accessible, more scalable than cutting out cardboard and weaving together pieces via threads? How can we manage growth and complexity, to go beyond pamphlet-level tools to book-level tools?
The goal of runestone interactive is to provide the tools, content, and hosting for high quality, interactive computer science textbooks. Everything is available under an open source license. There are really two main branches of the Runestone interactive project:
1. To provide tools for building interactive textbooks. Our ultimate vision is to become ‘The LaTeX of interactive publishing.’ To this end we have built a platform based on Sphinx, comprised of several extensions for building interactive books.
2. To provide hosting for interactive textbooks. We have three books that we host on this site for free, without registration or login required. We can also host a custom book for your course. If you are an instructor and looking to host your own course here is what you get:
- You can choose which modules you want to include.
- Your students get login-based access to their book so they can save their work, turn in homework right from the book, and take notes in the scratch edtitor popups.
- You get access to the grading interface
Runestone interactive is a project of Luther College.