Building taxonomies for connected Open Badges
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
Next call: TBD
Archived Calls: as
Thursday Oct 8, 2015: http://etherpad.badgealliance.org/taxonomy-wg-10-8-2105
Thursday Oct 22: http://etherpad.badgealliance.org/taxonomy-wg-10-22-2015
MEETING: September 24, 2015 11 am ET / 8 am PT
Who's here? Brief Intros/What interests you about taxonomy in Open Badges
- Don Presant / @donpresant / Interests: seeking badges to earn and recognize and align/stack/clump for employability
- Charles Schultz: just here to learn, no specific interests, actually quite overwhelmed by the whole thing. :)
- Brett Herzog / firstname.lastname@example.org / interested in utilizing taxonomies in our badging platform (particularly in the realm of building earner profiles)
- Grainne Hamilton from DigitalMe @grainnehamilton / interested in enabling discovery of badges and connections between badges, helping people to discover interests via badges
- Kim Carey: Doctoral Instructional Design & Technology Student working on 2
- Kerri Lemoie/ @kayaelle - Technologist in Ed Tech Space. Been building Open Badges issuing and displaying tools for almost four years including as the CTO of Achievery.com. Interested in creating and supporting taxonomy extensions to help build apps and data tools that connect and inform about learning opportunities.
- Sunny Lee @soletelee, what Kerri said :)
- Tim Cook | @timothyfcook | Interested because connected learning technologies need to actually CONNECT+1
- Nate Otto / @ottonomy / Badge Alliance / Interested in building badges that other people can understand and understanding the badges that others have issued. Particularly interested in alignment to shared goals and understanding badges based on how they fit into the real world, and the categories that badge consumers already value...shared value systems+1
- Federico Giacanelli / @bolsoblog /@joinbestr / https://bestr.it / email@example.com
- Carla Casilli / @carlacasilli / firstname.lastname@example.org / taxonomy, folksonomy, typology: long term interests, but you knew that. :)
- Jim Goodell / @jgoodell2 / Common Education Data Standards ceds.ed.gov
- Doug Belshaw / @dajbelshaw (at a conference)
- Chris McAvoy / @chmcavoy
- Serge Ravet / @szerge (had an emergency work to do)
Initial Community Call Discussion on Taxonomy: http://etherpad.badgealliance.org/CC15_September16
- Open, participatory calls. Will be some presentations but dialog is encouraged.
- Etherpad: This will be the landing etherpad referencing future etherpads which will be dated going forward.
- Note taking: We'll need a volunteer every week to take notes. Sunny Lee is our note taker this week. Everyone is encouraged to type up their thoughts & notes on the etherpad
- When should we meet? Does every other week on Thursdays at this time work? If not, what works for you?
- This works for me! -Nate Bi-weekly hourlong works for me, 30min weekly also works.
- Grainne: I have a MozFest call at 5pm BST every week until November but could attend for 30 minutes
- OK for me-Don
- Works for me - Brett
- I have another call at 11:30am EDT but can join 1st 1/2 hour.
- Carla: This is mostly a good time for me and biweekly is good!
- I will know my kids' afternoon activities only next month, sorry. Cannot answer right now. Doodle +1
- Sunny: works for me
- Try a Doodle?
- Nate: What mailing list should we use? Use core open badges mailing list or create a new one?
- Standards WG? That would be fine with me -- it's pretty quiet, and most of us are on that list already.
- Jim: +1 Carla's comment about other work being done...we need to stay coordinated so the different efforts are compatible going forward.
- Anh (Lurking):08:21 hashtag for taxonomy? Need to promote the idea people need to think about these things as they design the badges. +1#OpenBadgesTaxonomy so long!!!
- #openbadges #taxonomy (so that it pollutes the high volume twitter feed with our work too ;) +1
- #OBIxT (OBI xtension Taxonomy)
- Let's use subejct tags in the core mailing list +1+1
- Carla: monthly is too long. We need to keep momentum going.
Goals of this Working Group
green: great, good to go
yellow: I'm confused
red: wait, doesn't seem right, let's discuss this
- Learn about each other's badge systems and how taxonomy has been applied or could be applied
- People are already working on internal taxonomy and competency system. What are you doing for your needs?
- Get familiarized with existing taxonomy/classification systems & frameworks
- We can leverage what already exists in a smart way. Are there experts who can educate us?
- Carla: Can we look at LRMI that we can build from? What do we hope to gain from taxonomy implementation. +1
- Choose which frameworks we will leverage to create taxonomy extension(s)
- Meta frameworks..e.g. an initial level of commonly agreed categories (e.g. skill, subject, purpose...) that can branch out to meet specific needs
- What do we do with existing Alignment field?
- It references a URL, so nothing needed, I think of it as another context.
- What does it tell you?
- Credmos will give your badges more relevancy points (WIP) if you're actually using a real alignment URL ie: Common Core. As well as additional search context about what your badges is about if you're writing a 1 line description (which sadly most people are doing).
- Determine best practices to manage and maintain extensions.
- Create the extensions
- Provide implementation support - technical and system.
- Watch it in action - follow-up on usage
Feedback? Other Goals?
Defining Outcomes. - what does success look like. What is it that we want to come out on the other side.
* Interoperability seems to be key
* be able to define significant relationships between badges
* be able to find the broader term of a badge tag: ex. a badge tagged with "physics" should be found by "science" too.
KL: don't think of a single centralized taxonomy system. Think there will be several different systems.
Carla: What would success look like? Agree with Anh that these things can be very contextual. What do we mean by taxonomy? What would we be comfortable with coming out from the other side. Taxonomies are living tools.
- Learning about how people are organizing their badges is an important research step.+1+1 (The future "City of Learning" badges have a taxonomy for badge TYPE as differentiated from learning type, the badge type refers to the scope of the badge itself, not the learning. e.g. a "Showcase" badge)
- Carla: Doing an audit is a good idea and will reveal opportunities for partnerships and streamlined processes.
- Carla: Doing an audit will require a lot of work: gathering, processing, rationalizing, sharing
- Carla: Who will be the arbiter of what's a useful / meaningful definition and appropriate for a taxonomy? Put another way, are we aiming for some form of meta-taxonomy or a series of context-relevant taxonomies?
Red (Not So Good - Hold the Phone!)
High level Overview of Extensions & How They Work
- Power of the specification is that we're using similar data properties so that data can be aligned, connections made, apps/search engines can consume.
- Limitation of the specification is that changes are major and affect everyone. Slow to make changes. Take time to adopt. Ecosystem is broad and it's a challenge to add properties that everyone agrees on.
- Concept came out of the Open Badges Directory (http://badgealliance.github.io/openbadges-directory/) work
- Meets the need of adding properties to badges in a defined way for the community to adopt (rather than organizations adding their own properties that no one else knows about and can consume).
- Small, concise purposes - like location, apply link, endorsements
- Multiple applications - Can be added to the assertion, badge class or issuer object
- They're optional
- Anyone can contribute an extension. Contribute to the Open Badges git hub or host on your own. The Standards Working Group meets every other Tuesday and can lend a hand and provide feedback. Also can email out to the Open badges or Open Badges Dev Google Groups.
- Extensions are versionable and link to their own meanings and validation so that when the badge is consumed it's very clear what the data means, how it can be validated, and which version should be referred to. For instance, with a taxonomy extension, if terms are added or changed, it easy to know which version of the taxonomy to refer to when consuming and validating. This is still a challenge if taxonomies change often so we should think about best practices but it provides a mechanism to adopt to the changes.
- I have a newbie question: how do we keep from getting too fine-grained / micromanaging? Specific technologies (ie, java, ruby, etc) will forever be changing, but what employers want to know is if an employee can adapt and be agile in learning.
Types of Taxonomy Frameworks in the Context of Open Badges & Who can speak to them or is willing to research and speak to them? Let's build a list out and investigate.
- Educational/Domain Based (Terms that define outcomes, pathways - better definition?)
- Bloom's https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bloom's_taxonomy
- Marzano Taxonomy http://schoolnet.org.za/teach10/resources/dep/thinking_frameworks/marzano_new_taxonomy.htm:
- Lumina Connected Credentials http://www.luminafoundation.org/resources/connecting-credentials + Credential Transparency Initiative (GWU+ANSI work)
- Two separate funded projects, but they are separate initiatives. With LCC, they've been doing a comprehensive audit of all the activity happening in the digital credentialing world. CTI is looking at developing a registry for credentials, and a "common language" that can be used across different environments.
- Carla: Lumina has pretty big hitters as sponsor orgs. Led by George Washington U and ANSI.
- Trying to recruit 100 orgs using the common framework.
- Idea is to connect academia and workforce.
- Primary goals is to get to a commong language. Possible that a taxonomy evolves from that.
- Goal is to see what people are doing and find patterns that emerge.
- Brenda Pereira from Colorado badge system, emloyers had competencies that they were working from but all those competencies were defined differently.
- Technology can be the easy part but the conceptual framework can be challenging. Getting everyone to agree on what's useful.
- NAICS (sector classification for North America) North American Industry Classification System
- Occupational Classification
- "Weight"...credit hour vs....? +1
- Is it easy to get, is it hard to get?
- Carla: Agreed, weight is something I have been wrestling with vs. type
- Credit hour is an easy concept.
- KL: Does this fall under taxonomy or is it its own extension? How to define weight level is pretty difficult.
- CMC: Scope can explode pretty rapidly. We should define what we're aiming for with our taxonomy work. +1Taxonomy for formal education is one thing. Credit hour taxonomy is likely most pertinent to formal ed.
- What's the difference between a taxonomy and some things outside of taxonomy? -N
- Carla: again, this is about defining our scope
- NO: If a system wants to vary a badge based on eg age of intended target, they can create a simple extension and not necessarily a taxonomy specific extension.
- CMC: When we're talking about taxonomy extension, how is that different from linked data? KL: taxonomy extension can include linked data.
- European Qualification Framework and variants (SQF, AQF) - refers to level of academic level - complexity, difficulty
- SFIA: Software for an Information Age (ICT sector)
- Content based (Terms that earners are searching for - better name & definition?)
- Other Types and/or examples:
- What about other variables that organize badges within a system?
- Level (relative to one another), ( had thought of a bunch of these, but drawing a blank. Too little sleep!)
- Purpose/Recognition Type
- Some folks have come up with lists of badge "types", like "competency", "participation"...
- Scope or Kind of Badge (at a meta-level beyond the learning the badge represents)
- Taxonomies used by Apple and Amazon ebookstores
- Holland Codes - used by: My World of Work, O*Net. +1 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holland_Codes. Intended to define vocational preferences
- The 10 Most Important Work Skills in 2020
- Badge taxonomy being created by Doug Belshaw and Bryan Mathers for City & Guilds
- Badge taxonomy created by Ilona Buchem (based on Carla's work! :)
- Employability attributes identified by employer event with Industry Advisory Board for Computing
- University of Cambridge Behavioural Attributes Framework
- 4 capacities of the Curriculum for Excellence
- Tech Partnership Trailblazer Group (and other trailblazer groups defining apprenticeship standards in the UK)
- Qualifications Frameworks, eg SCQF based on EQF. Global Qualifications Framework being developed by SUNY - Should this be kept separate and applied within Levels instead?
- Intended age range or grade level of earners
- Indended audience
- Hours of work estimated to completion
- Levels - should this be separated from this work or included?
Badge Systems Using Taxonomy, Thinking About Taxonomy or Want To Use Taxonomy and Share With the Group (Sign up)
- Grainne Hamilton DigitalMe - just starting our thinking
- Sunny Lee @soletelee
- DonP: Would love to align Open Badges to Canada's Essential Skills in meaningful ways
- https://bestr.it - In Bestr we use internal vocabs in order to define topics, tags, categories, badge type, badge target and skills; topics and categories are linked to DBPedia; skills are linked to ESCO and DBPedia; the main idea is to define a new tag, with his labels in different languages (flexibility for the issuer), an internal identifier, and reference to a DBPedia | ESCO (skills) identifier; PROBLEM: we can't express all these information into the badge (we need an extension)
Reading/Blogst/Other things of Interest:
KL: We have a lot to learn here, but we're happy to move forward! We have to start somewhere.