Open Thinkering

Menu

Tag: assessment

TB871: Reflections on TMA02 and looking forward to Block 5 (SSM)

Note: this is a post reflecting on one of the modules of my MSc in Systems Thinking in Practice. You can see all of the related posts in this category


After almost two weeks off, I’m back in the library continuing with my studies. Given the lack of downtime — only one week between modules — I’m wondering whether I’m going to be able to sustain this for three years to gain the full MSc.

I gained 85% for my first tutor-marked assignment (TMA01) whereas I received 75% for my most recent one (TMA02). As I said in an email to my tutor, the word count was so restrictive that I found it really difficult to get into much depth with my answers. The third question, for example, which called for an evaluation of particular tools for the purposes of making strategy, was limited to 300 words! Given that students are now penalised for going even 1% over the word count, I found this very frustrating.

I didn’t disagree with any feedback from my tutor, but some of what she suggested and said was missing was actually included in a previous version of the document. I’m all for concise answers, but the word limits seem somewhat arbitrary.


Moving on, I’m entering the Block 5 Tools Stream which covers Soft Systems Methodology (SSM). This is something I covered as part of TB872, so here are some posts I wrote about SSM as part of that module:

Although I never liked it as a teacher when students were really focused on what was in the test rather than on the curriculum, I’m going to have to be a bit strategic when it comes to TMA03 and my End of Module Assessment (EMA). It looks like TMA03 has exactly the same question structure as TMA02, so I’ve asked for model answers for the latter from my tutor to help structure my answers for the former.

Given that the questions ask about sequential parts of the module, I might actually try a different strategy and answer them as I finish each block, rather than wait to answer them all together. We’ll see.

Levelling up?

I’ve spent 13 years now interested in Open Badges and, more recently, Verifiable Credentials.* When you explain something over and over again you get better at explaining it. You also start to notice patterns. This post is about one of those patterns.

* Happily, v3.0 of the Open Badges specification uses the Verifiable Credentials data model. Find out more.

Define something worth learning, build a curriculum and scheme of work, then design some learning activities. Create an assessment based on the learning activities, and then issue credentials based on the outcome of the activities.
Image CC BY-NC Visual Thinkery

In broad brushstrokes, credentials are awarded in a similar way within academic systems. Define something worth learning, build a curriculum and scheme of work, then design some learning activities. Create an assessment based on the learning activities, and then issue credentials based on the outcome of the activities.

We’re so used to this that we forget that this is very far removed from how the world actually works. Learning outside of the classroom is messy, episodic, and relational. So how do we go about capturing this?


A common mental model I’ve seen is using gold, silver, and bronze as ‘tiers’ within a badging system. However, without a background in assessment design, these tiers often become even more arbitrary than those in formal education. There’s often a huge ask even to get on the bottom rung of the ladder. Why? I’d just give people badges for turning up. They’re free! You can issue as many as you like.

At Mozilla, where I also served as Web Literacy Lead, we aimed to link the Web Literacy Map to badges, and initially considered levels. However, we quickly realised that doing this globally in a decentralised way is essentially impossible. Instead, mapping badges to skills in specific areas made much more sense. Context matters: what might be ‘advanced’ in one place could be ‘beginner’ elsewhere.

Instead, mapping badges related to skills in a particular area made much more sense. Context does, after all, matter: what might be seen as ‘advanced’ somewhere might be seen as ‘beginner’ elsewhere, and vice-versa. Badges for levels are all well and good, but those levels need to describe something worthwhile.

After leaving Mozilla, I spent all my consultancy time with City & Guilds , collaborating extensively with Bryan Mathers (who created the images in this post). Even as an awarding body, it took City & Guilds staff a while to grasp all the possibilities badges offered.

Image CC BY-NC Visual Thinkery

Bryan created this super-simple taxonomy from our conversations as a conversation starter with City & Guilds staff, helping them realise that recognition in the form of participation in something, or membership of a thing, was just as legitimate as reaching a defined standard or demonstrating excellence. Badges help us tell a story about the learning journey we’ve been on.

For me, this has been one of the main takeaways from my own learning journey with Open Badges so far: when you’ve got enough verified ways of showing what you’ve done, levels don’t matter that much. We’re all different, so recognising and celebrating that is, to me, more important than expecting everyone to fit into pre-defined boxes.

So if you’re designing assessments based on academic research for something that’s high stakes then, by all means, design a rigorous system. For everything else, treat it like a product: figure out how your users (the people to be badged) want to be recognised, design around that, and iterate.


If you’re curious in how to go beyond the ‘microcredential’ approach to digital credentials, you might be interested in the free WAO email-based course Reframing Recognition. You’re also welcome to join us as part of the Open Recognition is for Everybody community.

TB872: Concept map to help with my EMA

Note: this is a post reflecting on one of the modules of my MSc in Systems Thinking in Practice. You can see all of the related posts in this category


A concept map based on the structure of TB872's End of Module Assessment questions.

It’s 15 years since I spent days creating a concept map for my Ed.D. thesis. Thankfully, the End of Module Assessment (EMA) for this MSc module is a mere 4,000 words, meaning it’s only taken me a few hours to create this one using Whimsical.

The requirements for the EMA are outlined in a previous post. All I’ve got to do now is write it. It’s such an interesting topic that I need to remind myself that I’ve given myself until next Friday to get it written. I’m moving house the week after, and I want this to be done.

In related news, although I’d originally planned not to do the other compulsory introductory module for this MSc (TB871) until 2025, I’ve changed my mind. Never one to shirk from a challenge, I’ll be starting that one on May 1st — a couple of weeks after finishing this assignment 😅

css.php