Badges have garnered great interest among scholars of digital media and learning. In addition, widespread initiatives such as Mozilla’s Open Badge Framework expand the potential of badging into the realm of open education. In this paper, we explicate the concept of open badges. We highlight some of the ways that researchers have examined badges as part of educational practice and also highlight the different definitions of open-ness that are employed in popular and scholarly thought. By considering badges from three different perspectives (motivation, pedagogy, and credential) and the concept of openness from three different perspectives (production, access and appropriation) we develop a framework to consider the tensions where these competing conceptions meet. This explication illuminates how the ideas of open and badges intersect, and clarifies situations where these concepts come into direct conflict or mutually enhance each other. Our analysis pinpoints and elucidates particular areas where research is needed to better understand the complex phenomenon of open badges, and also offers design considerations for developers, educators, and organizations that are actively involved in open badges.Keywords: open education; gamification; learning; credentials; badges; education reform(Published: 8 August 2014)Citation: Research in Learning Technology 2014, 22: 23563 -http://dx.doi.org/10.3402/rlt.v22.23563

No abstract

No abstract

An Alternate Reality Game (ARG) is an interactive storygame hybrid whose core mechanics include collaborative problem solving and storytelling. ARGs are also participatory experiences, because game designers dynamically adjust content in response to players' actions as game play progresses. What if the participatory process was extended during the design phase of an ARG as well? Few, if any, studies have explored how to include player populations in the ARG design process-especially ARGs that target youth. In this paper, we share the process we followed to design a large-scale ARG to promote scientific inquiry for teenagers (13-17 years old) by partnering with them. Our findings suggest that co-designing with youth resulted in novel design features in the final game, and gave us insight into adolescent attitudes toward various scientific concepts. We also share co-design techniques that were not as effective and offer suggestions for future approaches.