Taxonomies Working Group
Building taxonomies + related extensions for connected Open Badges
Call audio: https://archive.org/details/OpenBadgesTaxonomyWG09October2015
Meets every other Thursday from 12pm-1pm ET
Kickoff Etherpad: http://etherpad.badgealliance.org/taxonomy-wg
Conference Number: https://www.uberconference.com/badgealliance
Optional dial in number: 207-645-1621 (no PIN required)
Lines are muted automatically. if you've dialed in from a browser, you can control your mute setting there.
If you've dialed in by phone, hit ** to unmute.
The call moderator can also unmute you from uberconference as well
MEETING: October 8, 2015 12 pm ET / 9 am PT
Who's here? Brief Intros/What interests you about taxonomy in Open Badges
- Doug Belshaw / @dajbelshaw / email@example.com / Have been doing some work with @BryanMMathers about #OB101 which includes taxonomy stuff: http://badges.thinkoutloudclub.com
- Serge Ravet / szerge / externalise criteria from badges, create competency repositories, using wikipedia's definitions too, and more...
- Randy Macdonald/@firstname.lastname@example.org/Innovation Academy-InnovateOregon/part of working group to define badges for in & out of school proficiencies
- Nate Otto / @ottonomy / Badge Alliance & Concentric Sky
- Paul Nauert / @PaulFromDP / Project manager on educator micro-credentials initiative at Digital Promise (a project using the Open Badges Standard)
- Brenda Perea/@pereaink/Colorado Community College System
- Don Presant / @donpresant
- Federico Giacanelli / @bolsoblog / www.cineca.it / https://bestr.it / @joinbestr
- Carla Casilli / @carlacasilli / email@example.com (so sorry to have missed the call!) / taxonomies are my middle name. :P
- Dave Crusoe / @davecrusoe / firstname.lastname@example.org (12.10.15, wikes, just found this -> I'm developing this @ BGCA *now* so very relevant! I'll be sure to jump on future calls. We've had to take an approach that integrates our Org priorities. Interesting...
- Last week:
- Why we'll never have a single universal taxonomy for open badges
- Can we use open badge Extensions to experiment with many different possible taxonomies to see what takes hold?
- Q. How different is what Kerri describes in her most recent blog post from the 'standards' metadata field?
- What do you think about the implications of this idea so far?
- Doug: Open Badges aren't used _just_ in an educational context. From my standpoint, in what situations would you want to use the taxonomies you describe instead of just pointing (aligning) to a certain existing standard? +1
- Doug: If you're defining things as a taxonomy, you might as well just publish a standard as well. +1
- Kerri: I was looking at a bunch of existing standards, like Mozilla's new one for open science publishing.
- Kerri: No programattic control over the standard(?)
- Kerri: The person who creates the standard is responsible for keeping it online and updates. We can translate a standard into the info for taxonomy
- Doug: Prefer to define use cases or user stories early on
- Serge: ~Has some experience writing XSLT translation sheets to crosswalk one standard to another. It would be good to create equivalence maps between different standards.
- Serge: what do we mean by 'taxonomy'? (we should define our terms!)
- Competency Standards are a good opportunity. We have these standards already.
- In the UK >90% of occupations are covered with competency standards.
- Kerri: There's an opportunity to translate a standard into a taxonomy.
- Doug: I've found people, as I'm doing here, project their own understanding into a term. Maybe we need to start with a definition of taxonomy.+1
- This might be a good use case for Simon Grant's inLOC project: http://www.cetis.org.uk/inloc/Home
- What is a taxonomy in the context of open badges?
- Doug: Serge is saying for some people a taxonomy is equivalent to a competency map...
- Serge clarifying: what is the status of taxonomies in relation to competency standards?
- Kerri: I think that it woudl be taking the competency standard and translating it into ids and links
- Paul: For example, if Digital Promise published a standard & taxonomy for teacher microcredentials, it could help organize badges issued in this field.
- There could even be multiple taxonomies referenced in a single badge.
- Kerri: Let's do that asynchronously -- Kerri approaches a taxonomy from a technical standpoint, as a collection of referencable terms, maybe with child relationships with other terms.
- When you're doing work around taxonomies, you're in the real of ontology, which can be political :-/
- Kerri: ~here's an example taxonomy that's informing my thinking:
- Translating existing standards into something that could be done by an extension author
- Don: Having an initial vocabulary (Competency, geolocation) would be good to have a common foundation to branch out from.
- Serge: If we build a system where every definition, instead of being in a text field within a badge, it should
- What is the difference between working on a taxonomy and working on externalizing every definition? (using metadata/linked data to link badges to things that are outside themselves)
- (Serge, I'd love to dig into this question a little more with you offline -Nate)
- Kerri: ~We don't talk about badges enough from the consuming standpoint.
- How do we create badges that have value?
- Nate: (Badges have value when they represent something that people care about). So understanding what the badge represents TO YOU is important.
- How do we connect badgeable events back to the standards that people care about? (Proficiency standards etc.)
- Carla: this is exactly the area that many initiatives are aiming to address: Connecting Credentials, Credential Transparency Initiative and IMS Currency Framework to name a few.
- After the fact: What can we learn from the multiple 'standardization' initiatives that have already happened, e., Common Core, disassociated US state standards, those that may exist in Europe and elsewhere:
- Do (how) they talk?
- What (and how) was talking resolved?
- It seems like that, instead of sync'ing line-item standards, society has standardized on 'high school', 'college', 'graduate' and 'doctoral' as attainments that communicate proficiency. Can we learn from this?
- Why it's ok and even good that we have many extensions addressing various taxonomies
- Consumer apps can understand +1+1+1
- A common type of taxonomy extension could allow consumer apps to understand all the possible taxonomies that exist.
- Can have taxonomies for assertions, badge class and issuer objects
- What would be the general framework for taxonomy extensions?
- A common framework that multiple taxonomy extensions can use.
- Have a place where they can be found (a listing of the extensions)?
- Follow a similar format (possibly use a shared schema)?
- Contributors host examples, contexts, schema and human readble reference and are direct points of contact?
- Don: What happens to alignment field used for badges?
- Kerri: This doesn't affect alignment
- Don: My assumption is that alignment would be the first step into the beyond, branching out to see how badges map to the real world. Worry about deadwood.
- Nate: Alignment needs some improvement to better map to http://schema.org/educationalAlignment : http://schema.org/AlignmentObject
- Kerri: We had at one point talked about putting LRMI into criteria pages
- Nate: I feel a much better approach would be to allow embedding criteria information into badgeclasses with linked data properties.
- Kerri: I feel taxonomy is a more precise/definable approach than alignment
- Alignment => Broad Context (Common Cores)
- Taxonomy => Precise Context (What does Age 14 mean?)
- Serge: Do we want to classify badges?
- S: If we use the criteria field, we can really make connections through narrative.
- S: If we use taxonomy extensions, it is hard to collect those taxonomies through narrative. I see taxonomy more about classifying things rather than connecting them.
- S: What will happen if we have three fields for three different taxonomies, will we silo the understanding.
- S: if we chose to use the criteria field, then we could use a general purpose technology, a semantic editor / linked data editor, something not specific to Open Badges. Using extensions would be building something ad hoc solely for badges. Using a general purpose technology would facilitate collaboration with other domains, just like working today in the W3C credentials WG connects us to other sectors. The problem of taxonomy is not specific to OB, therefore we should be able to find partners who have developed solutions we could reuse... My to pennies :-)
Definitions of 'taxonomy' (existing/ours):
- Oxford English Dictionary: http://www.oed.com/view/Entry/198305
- "Classification, esp. in relation to its general laws or principles; that department of science, or of a particular science or subject, which consists of or relates to classification; esp. the systematic classification of living organisms."
- "A classification of something; a particular system of classification."
What definitions do we need? (list here):
What use Cases Should we write up:
- Boys & Girls Clubs of America (DC contributing as example - can be nuked if needed / irrelevant!):
- Overview: BGCA's member-focused use case (personal agenda) is that we're devising a system by which to recognize participation, academic achievements, community achievements and personal/health achievements that 8-18 year olds make while members of a Boys & Girls Club. We need for the system to (a) provide many granular opportunities that benchmark against organizatoinal priorities, (b) incentivize and propel youth onward and (c) that ultimately "ladder up" into achievements with wider societal acceptance and recognition LIKE participation or winning in FIRST Robotics, High School graduation and/or college attainment, etc.
- Plusses: How we could utilize a taxonomy:
- Benchmarking & sync'ing with the taxonony we create
- Wider acceptance of what young people do in Club / vis how it relates to what external parties recognize
- Deltas: What would be hard about utilizing a taxonomy:
- BGCA has limited technical capacity in terms of person-power & would require excellent documentation / ease of integration
- Relevance: And, other people who could utilize our work include:
- Out of school time providers
- Youth serving organizations, more broadly
- Member use-case: Tommy is a 13 year old Club member. He has participated as a Club member for two years, and throughout the time, has been an active participant in Club activities. He has received the following badges
- Perfect Attendance (Signifies attendance in 85% or more of open after-school program days)
- Digital Literacy: Essentials Foundation and Essentials Intermediate (Signifies that he has completed 16 project-based digital activities at the elementary and middle school levels) - http://myfuture.net
- Fit as a Fiddle: Exercises two days per week for one hour
- First Lego Robotics Participation Award: Participated on a FLL team
- First Lego Robotics Finalist Award: Team reached the state finals
- Next use-case here?
Synonyms (close or otherwise):
- Competency map
Next Steps for the next 2 weeks:
- Collaborate on definitions
- Collaborate to develop a couple use cases.
Reading/Blogst/Other things of Interest:
Call from mobile
Add to Skype
You'll need Skype CreditFree via Skype