Digital Badges and Wearable Devices

In the ever evolving field of technology enhanced learning as well as the mobile framework of learning, Gamrat and Zimmerman (2015) proposed new badging system to enhance STEM knowledge within a group of  K-12 educators. The idea itself initially appears elementary in the fact that users receive stamps or badges for mastering certain skills within the STEM field by completing tasks or attending webinars. However, after reading their report, I feel connections can be made to use a similar system for K-12 students.  The program has many features including self directed learning opportunities and collaboration amongst users of different levels of expertise. Something that stood out to me particularly was the idea of personalization especially in a school setting when students have such a variety of ability levels. Having the ability to earn a stamp which is represented by mastery of a lower level skill is still a way to include all students within the digital environment. As Gamrat et al (2015) mention from the teachers perspective, “We posit that by providing teachers the ability to make decisions about their assessment (high or low levels of mastery) provided them the flexibility to personalize their PD to align with their existing and desired expertise teachers needed for successful teaching” (18). The badging program proved to have high impact results when it came to supporting personalized learning. As a STEM teacher myself I see great value in this program and would have liked to be a participant myself in order to assess my own understanding of these topics and the opportunity to collaborate with other STEM teachers.

Keeping the theme of technology based learning in mind, another research study was conducted by Schaefer et al (2016)  attempted to promote learning in an even more personal way by launching Project GETUP. The goal of the project was to educate and promote physical activity amongst urban adolescence. Each child was given a Fitbit to track their physical activity over a period of several months. Their attempt to turn the idea into a game for the participants an provide them incentives for physical activity, proved to have unsuccessful results. In their findings they contributed several factors to why their experiment did not yield better results. On page 14 they list several reasons including: lack of motivation, the participants not being able to think abstractly enough, as well as socioeconomic factors as well and the lack of support from their households.

Both experiments sought to incorporate technology based learning through a self directed format to promote learning amongst the users. All though each of them had varying levels of success, the point behind both of them is to continue to research and evaluate different ways to incorporate technologies with both formal and informal learning environments. As this relatively new field continues to expand and develop, experiments will continue to come back with negative results despite their hypothetical intentions. Continuing to propose new ideas and testing them will eventually move use forward to find the best ways and practices to get the most out of mobile devices as tools for learning.

References:

Badging: Gamrat, C., & Zimmerman, H. (2015). An Online Badging System Supporting Educators’ STEM Learning. In D. Hickey, J. Jovanović, S. Lonn, & J. E. Willis (Eds.), Proceedings of the 2nd International Workshop on Open Badges in Education co-located with the 5th International Learning Analytics and Knowledge Conference (LAK 2015)(pp. 12–23).

Wearables/exergames: Schaefer, S. E., Ching, C. C., Breen, H., & German, J. B. (2016). Wearing, thinking, and moving: Testing the feasibility of fitness tracking with urban youthAmerican Journal of Health Education47(1), 8–16.

 

 

3 thoughts on “Digital Badges and Wearable Devices

  1. Christina

    Hey Jeff,
    It came as no surprise to me that the Fitbits to motivate student activity didn’t work out so well. In order to keep kids more active and incorporate the Fitbits they probably would have needed to create different short-term goals each week like a steps goal, the next week was a calories burned goal, and so on. There would have also needed to be prizes awarded for the winners each week (that’s the only way I could think to keep the students invested in something like that). The badging system sounded like an awesome way to work in a diverse classroom. With students earning badges for lower and higher level tasks, it includes all learners and everyone feels like they’ve earned something by completing the work no matter what level it was at.

  2. Pam Dobson

    Hey Jeff-

    I was really interested to read your concluding paragraph that highlighted “self-direction” as a key component of learning with technology. I’m wondering what your personal opinion is regarding the current state of self-directed students, in your classroom.

    The study that you read about, Project GETUP mentioned some of the concerns we’ve seen in my district when trying to implement more personalized, self directed learning using mobile technology. Lack of motivation or more generally, task initiation was a big factor that limited the success of a couple teachers who tried to create personalized learning paths using a learning management system. But a larger issue, larger than simply being motivated and getting to work, I think, is the ability to think outside the box. You noted that in Project GETUP the participants struggled to think abstractly. I’ve struggled with this in my own classroom. Last year in particular, I tried to remodel my culminating project from a “recipe” design (do this, then this, then this) to a more open ended design (show me your learning in a way that works best for you). My students really struggled with the freedom, with the abstract nature of having to create something from their learning to show what they learned. We came together as a class to brainstorm ideas for products and in the end, I got about 19 PowerPoints and four or five papers. I felt a little defeated. How do we teach abstract thinking and ingrain skills in our students at an earlier age? Granted, I teach a senior elective, so I’m not sure my students were trying as hard as they would in other classes…however 21st Century jobs/skills demand innovative skills and part of innovation is the ability to think outside of what you already know.

  3. Andrew Robert Gray

    Hey Jeff!

    From what I’ve gathered generally from the readings and others’ blogs it seems that the major idea is to provide unique ways to learn to increase learner engagement. Professor McClain states as much in our Lesson 6 Road Map, “discuss the role of emerging mobile tools to support new kinds of learning and engagement in learning environments”. When it comes to badging I skipped over those articles immediately because I’ve heard of them before and don’t personally find them effective. I understand the concept of receiving a badge for completing some kind of task or accomplishing this or that, but I don’t personally see how it engages students in the classroom compared to other methods. I feel that students already have a visual reminder of our accomplishments by the grades we receive. Certainly not as flashy, but I find “badges” to be more effective out in the real world, receiving physical badges like young boys do in the Boy Scouts. What are your personal thoughts on badging, I see from your post that you find value in it, but what exactly do you like about it or find effective?

    You brought up Project GETUP. I also read an article by Lee et al (2015) that did the same thing, but with more successful results. I want to compare them and present a few major factors that might lead to the success of the one project over another. Naturally, I have not read your article so if I’m getting anything wrong don’t hesitate to tell me! First, the study I read about by Lee et al involved young children. What age were your children? Younger minds are naturally more inquisitive and they also are typically given less freedom throughout a school day than older students. Therefore, any new activity (like using fitbits) would be accepted much more readily. Second, my students used their fitbits IN SCHOOL and during an activity they loved, RECESS. It seems in Schaeffer’s activity they were asked to track data over a several-month-long period, therefore doing so outside of school. Therefore, the students in Schaefer et al’s study were asked to be responsible for an item outside of school hours and to do something outside of school hours, both potential deterrents.

    P.S. What do you think the Flyers will do, if anything, in the upcoming free agency period?

Leave a Reply