Content uploaded by Sandra Nunn
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Sandra Nunn on Jul 27, 2016
Content may be subject to copyright.
Chapter
# - will be assigned by editors
DIGITAL BADGES AND MICRO-CREDENTIALS
Historical Overview, Motivational Aspects, Issues, and Challenges
AUTHORS – Larry E. Ellis (University of Phoenix), Sandra G. Nunn (University of Phoenix), John T.
Avella (University of Phoenix)
Abstract: The use of symbols in ancient times to reflect different meanings has evolved into modern day usage of digital
badges and micro-credentials to indicate achievements, knowledge, skills, and competencies. This article explores
the historical overview, motivational aspects, issues, and challenges of digital badges and micro-credentials to
provide insight and clarity into the various uses and functions in the modern world. The historical perspective of
symbols will be presented, and the historical use of both traditional and digital badges will be defined. In addition,
this essay provides current research and literature that focuses on the theoretical foundations and human theories
that support badging as well as empirical evidence of digital badge utilization. The discussion will explore fields
where traditional badging is prevalent and digital badging has limited use such as industry, business, sports,
education, entertainment, and peer group programs. Finally, this essay explores the changes due to technology
infusion and the theory of disruptive innovation due to the explosion of technology within the last 50 years, current
digital badging, and the future of digital badging.
Key words: digital badges, micro-credentials, open badging, open systems technology, performance validation
1* EVOLUTION OF SYMBOLS
1.1 Original purposes
From hieroglyphics to barcodes, symbols have been a shorthand method used for communicating all types
of information for many thousands of years. Some of the earliest symbols used by humanity exist in caves
in Europe and are believed to be somewhere between 10,000 and 20,000 years old (Bailey, 2008). The
paintings in these caves portrayed great hunters in the middle of their kills; therefore, these paintings
represented a kind of symbol or badge of accomplishment. Symbols have played key roles in the lives of
individuals, groups, and organizations throughout the world. They have identified kingdoms and
birthrights through heraldry, organizations, and services. For example, McDonalds and Kelly Services use
trademarks. Groups such as the Masons and the Scouts use logos. Each symbol has its own connotative
and denotative meanings based on how the individual perceives it. The meaning of symbols is influenced
by extrinsic conditions like the place, time, culture, the actual graphic structure of the symbol, and the peer
group involved. In addition, it is influenced by intrinsic conditions like the individual’s background,
experiences, age, and condition. Further, meaning can be influenced relative to the contextual use and any
bias the individual may have developed personally or indirectly in discussion with significant others
(Womack, 2005). Initially, the symbol was a direct representation of the event itself; however, over time
the meaning of the symbol changed even though the physical representation may or may not have
changed. The development of the open badge concept represents the result of the evolution of symbolism.
2
Chapter # - will be assigned by editors
While symbols convey meaning based on experience or learning, the open badge allows changes, more
comprehensive meaning, and the ability to update meaning based on changes to the field or topical area.
Between 10,000 B.C. and 4,000 B.C., there was little progress in the development and use of symbols.
However, some believe that this time in human history was when people moved from a prehistoric
existence to a modern man environment (Bailey, 2008). When the new era of humanity began, the
different civilizations throughout the world contributed in their way to the advancement of the number,
type, and use of symbols. This expanded use was not without its problems, however. One of the issues
with the cross-cultural use of symbols that existed early on is still an issue today as the world feels the
impact of globalization on non-verbal communications and specifically symbolism. Symbols can take
many forms including badges, unique awards, trophies, certificates, credentials, plaques, pictures,
clothing, and jewelry. Symbols can stand for or suggest something else by relationship, association,
convention, or accidental resemblance, which can derive from an individual or group of individuals based
on their personal perceptions and experiences (Bailey, 2008). The value of a symbol depends on an
individual’s personal perception of it, which then impacts the desirability of having or not having it.
Initially a problem, it has been shown that the desirability can be manipulated positively or negatively by
understanding and using different motivation theories.
Initially, many organizations and functions used symbols and badges in their operations. These
symbols were designed not for the individual but rather to satisfy the internal or external needs of the
organization. As a result, organizations were concerned about what meaning or value the users gave to the
symbols. Most of the interpretation dealt with extrinsic tangibles. The organization identified the
symbols with values that had meaning to them such as a certified technician. In this scenario, the
organization could easily find a technician when the group needed certain skill sets. While an employee
viewed the certification as an opportunity for greater income or to earn a promotion, the organization
viewed the certification as a means to identify skill sets needed for the benefit of the organization. Very
little attention, if any, was paid to what individuals thought about the symbol, how desirable it was to
them, and what caused the individual to feel the way he or she felt about the symbol or badge. Examples
of that approach exist in the military and business. If the military needed to identify someone who they
knew had certain skill sets or needed to be identified quickly in an emergency for delegation of
responsibility or for providing direction, they provided a specific rank and a symbol of that rank for their
purposes. If an organization needed to identify a valuable customer, it would confer a certain status such
as a club member, a special certificate, or a unique designation to show that a different relationship was
needed when interacting with the customer.
1.2 Development of human theories that explain badging
The success of badging depends on three factors: motivation, pedagogy, and credentialing (Ahn, Pellicone,
& Butler, 2014). Motivation may represent the common link to all elements that relate to the effectiveness
of a digital badging program. Further, pedagogy is defined as methods, techniques, theories, or
approaches to teaching as well as learning (Pember, 2008). Credentialing is a process used to verify that
an individual or organization has met certain defined standards established by a group charged with
creating and implementing these standards (Styles, 1999). Credentialing includes some mandatory and
voluntary processes. Therefore, credentialing may involve licensing or certification requirements.
Organizations, programs, and individuals seek credentialing as evidence of their ability to meet any
formally established standards (Dickerson, 2012).
Because motivation is a key factor in many aspects of badging, it is important to understand what
motivation is and its significance in badging. Over the last two centuries, individuals explored what
motivation is as well as its absence or presence through the use of different theoretical constructs. These
included Maslow’s Hierarchy of Human Needs, Herzberg’s Two Factor Theory, McClelland’s Acquired
# - will be assigned by editors. DIGITAL BADGES AND MICRO-CREDENTIALS
3
Needs Theory, Adams’ Equity Theory, Vroom’s Expectancy Theory, and Keller’s ARCS motivational
model (Kreitner & Cassidy, 2011; Ebert & Griffin, 2015; Huett, Moller, Young, Bray, & Huett, 2008).
The result was five groups of motivational theories of motivation with a common thread.
The first four groups focused on some form of internalized causes for behavior, which an individual
could manipulate partially. The fifth group known as Humanistic Theory represented a philosophy that
learning represents an individual act undertaken to fulfill personal potential (Benson, 2007). Woolfolk
(2008) wrote that humanistic interpretations surrounding intrinsic-based motivation emphasized self-
actualization taken from Maslow (1968), actualizing tendency taken from Rogers and Freiberg (1994), and
self-determination from Deci, Vallerand, Pelletier, and Ryan (1991). The theories in the Humanistic group
focused on two types of questions relating to motivation: (a) why do individuals do the things they do and
(b) how are individuals motivated to do them. Maslow in his Hierarchy of Human Needs (Kreitner &
Cassidy, 2011) identified the why in his five levels need structure that all individuals experience. Keller’s
ARCS theory approached motivation based on how individuals can achieve motivational states (Huett et
al., 2008). Also, his ARCS theory attempted the synthesis of behavioral, cognitive, and affective
theoretical constructs to show how individuals’ intrinsic motivation can be impacted by extrinsic
conditions (Moller, 1993). It is important to note that it is not extrinsic motivation but external conditions.
The other identified human theories fell between Maslow and Keller’s approaches.
Motivation can be internal (intrinsic) or external (extrinsic). Understanding the similarities and
differences is important to begin to understand how symbols and badges can create motivation. Intrinsic
motivations represent attitudes or drivers extending beyond the satisfaction of mere physiological and
security needs, which are the basic levels prescribed by Maslow. Maslow’s two highest level needs,
known as esteem needs and self-actualization needs, are those that provoke intrinsic motivation
(Becchetti, Castriota, & Tortia, 2013). Deci (1975) noted that one is considered intrinsically motivated
when he or she receives no reward other than the activity itself. Alternately, extrinsic motivation is where
behavior is driven by outcomes or external factors that are not unique to the individual (Robinson et al.,
2012).
Motivation, whether internal or external, can be regarded as a collective group of several influential
factors rather than as a single force (Deci & Ryan, 1985). Therefore, individuals involved in creating
digital badges should understand motivation as well as the basic principles of how and why symbols
motivate people. For example, individuals are motivated by other individuals to fulfill the need for
belonging (extrinsic). In the past, people joined specialized clubs, groups, clans, and professions that had
unique symbols. People worked to wear that symbol to create the image of personal importance and
success. Badges and other similar indicators of performance, learning, membership, and rank work
because they fulfill human needs like belonging, growth, and accomplishment. Though badges may
appear to be physically identical in shape or name, badges take on meanings based on their function and
implementation (Abramovich, Schunn, & Higashi, 2013; Antin & Churchill, 2011).
As people implement a new program, they create symbols for program participants to create a desire to
belong to the group. The evolution of badge development has followed a dichotomy that involved either
(a) modifying existing badges and symbols to reflect changes, or (b) creating totally new badges to
support new organizations or activities not previously in existence. Every situation that involves an
individual or organization continues to need some form of symbolic representation. History provides a
comparative basis to show how digital badging can change the use of symbols. History can also reveal
why changing to the concepts involved with open digital badging can significantly improve learning and
its understanding.
2
Chapter # - will be assigned by editors
2* HISTORICAL USAGE
A comparison of the definitions of a traditional badge and a digital badge can help facilitate understanding
of these two concepts of badging. A traditional badge can be defined according to its tangible make-up
(e.g. metal, plastic, paper, wood, glass, etc.) and what function it serves (e.g. to show authority, to show
completion of an activity, etc.). As a unique type of symbol, badges have long been a product in the
creation, evolution, and modification of human behavior (Halavais, 2012). Badges can carry out a wide
variety of functions and purposes. Traditional badges are often graphic representations of what it is that
the badge represents. For example, a scout merit badge has a symbolic graphic of what the topic of the
badge is. A law enforcement badge is usually in the form of a star, which is a symbol of enforcement.
Digital badges exist in a different state or condition; thus, they possess a unique definition.
Janzow (2014) defined a digital badge as “a digital representation of a learning outcome. It could
represent a certification, a credential, a competency, or a soft skill” (p. 9). Ford, Izumi, Lottes, and
Richardson (2015) described a digital badge as “merely a visual representation of an earner’s
achievement, skill, or disposition” (p. 32). Badges consist of digital representations of logos or icons
shown on a website or another online page (Educause, 2012). They are a new way to capture and
communicate what an individual knows and can demonstrate (Finkelstein, Knight, & Manning, 2013).
Digital badges can signify the accomplishment of an objective such as reading a book, creating a product,
participation on a team, touring a foreign country, publishing an article, teaching a seminar, or rebuilding a
car engine. In the past, badges were named by an organization and tied to the group but there was no way
to identify and track significant learning. However, open badging and credentialing allow for the clear
identification and tracking of the skills and knowledge required to earn a badge. This hard data can be
expanded unlike previous physical badges or symbols that represented static information. Further, use of
this technology allows people to store, track, and communicate with digital badges and credentials. In the
historical context, symbolism has placed a role in communications and understanding mankind’s
existence; whereas, badging has become an extension of that symbolism.
The fields described in the next section represent areas where traditional badging exists in various
forms, but digital badging does not except for education. Programs are still being tested and evaluated in
limited target areas. However, these fields represent areas where researchers should explore the use of
digital badging.
2.1 Industry
In the past, individuals received awards for reaching important goals in the workplace. These included
personal safety goals, exceeding base production standards, achieving a lower work rejection rate,
completing specialized training, completing years of service, or raising money for charity.
Acknowledgments for these milestones came in the form of pins, certificates, gift certificates, and special
titles of recognition. These awards focused on what the individual could do for the organization and its
shareholders. Similarly, badging may hold potential in these circumstances. Dudek, Gamret, Peck, and
Zimmerman (2014) posited that digital badging had implications for meeting the needs of employers and
workers through personalization in workplace learning and by summarizing individual achievement using
digital badging. Gibson, Ostashewski, Flintoff, Grant, and Knight (2015) stated “digital badges have the
potential to become an alternative credentialing system, providing visible recognition in digital symbols
that link directly via metadata to validating evidence of educational achievements in public displays.” (p.
403). While there is no formal activity with digital badges currently being tested or evaluated in the
workplace, digital badging could support activities currently performed on a manual basis.
# - will be assigned by editors. DIGITAL BADGES AND MICRO-CREDENTIALS
3
2.2 Business
Research reveals that business is a fertile area for expanding digital badging. Antin and Churchill (2011)
indicate that badging is an emergent process in which more research is required. With the movement of
staff, technologists, and management across various organizations, understanding individual abilities and
capabilities within needed functions will not only enhance productivity but will also improve hiring
efficiencies, and potentially reduce turnover. Adams and DeFleur (2006) found that employees who earn
digital badges might be valuable to managers. Also, badging appears to enhance employee engagement
and professional development (Educause, 2014). These insights demonstrate implications for a business
setting focusing on achievement, growth, and incentives. Businesses spend a portion of their budgets on
training and schooling as well as on acknowledgments. Digital badging would help keep track of this
ongoing developmental activity in a manner that is easily understood and followed. Badging activity is
underway in the areas of business education such as the Mozilla Project. However, digital badging could
support activities currently done manually. Olneck (2012) identified important badge features like the
ability to identify knowledge and skills as well as the usefulness of badges in the context of credential
inflation. He also concluded that badges serve as an alternative to prior dominant forms of credentials.
2.3 Sports
Sports programs provide a somewhat different perspective on the use of badging. The scope and variety
of sports available to people have exploded in the past 50 years. Different organized sports programs
involve children and extend into programs that involve sports-minded adults. Sports programs not only
provide trophies to participants and winners, but they also offer certificates, t-shirts, and pins as proof of
participation. More formalized sports in schools and club teams generate plaques, ribbons, certificates,
name awards, and scholarships. Additionally, many organizations and schools offer learning and
performance camps that issue trophies and certificates for a variety of outcomes. While professional
sports have two kinds of participants (e.g., players and fans), players are the only ones who have formal
awards. Fans very seldom receive any acknowledgment other than a thank you letter to a season ticket
holder. However, the advent of open badging provides clubs the opportunity to develop more ways to
acknowledge fans and communicate with each professional realm. At the lower levels of usage such as in
developmental sports programs like the YMCA, elementary school, and middle school, the open badge is
more of a “gold star” representation. For example, the digital badges offered by the YMCA in New York
to improve teen fitness allow users the opportunity to earn merit badges based on performance
(YMCANYC, 2015). Similarly, other badges offer recognition for achieving personal sports goals.
2.4 Education
The field of education has been one of the primary users of symbols and badging beginning with diplomas
and degrees as well as specialized regalia. Additionally, honorary fraternities and organizations provide
certifications and designations for high GPAs. Educators also publish to maintain their jobs. Teachers
write books, develop new classes, do research on new concepts, and work on team projects. All of these
result in the issuance of some acknowledgment on a resume that the teacher must build. In education, an
instructor may design and create an online class but get no credit for it. Further, an employee may work to
complete a team-based project; however, no acknowledgment exists to show how the experience and
practice enhanced the individual’s capabilities. Instead, the acknowledgment shows what the person
accomplished but not how they achieved these endeavors. Further, issues regarding meaning may not be
addressed. For example, individuals who complete an MBA program can show that achievement and a
2
Chapter # - will be assigned by editors
GPA. In such a case, an MBA graduate could be great at concepts but have no practical experience;
whereas, another MBA graduate may possess real world experience with each topic in the curriculum.
Open badging could provide an easy way to capture all formal and informal learning experiences and
make this information available to anyone who had access to the digital badging database. Use of badging
could motivate learners. For example, Abramovich et al. (2013) found that learner motivation might drive
the act of earning badges. Further, he determined that systems that used badges could result in positive
effects on learners’ motivational influences. They further implicated that when designing badges,
designers must consider the abilities and motivations of learners. However, some observers tout that open
badge systems might also lessen the actual learning experience rather than enhance it (Young, 2012).
Therefore, it is necessary to achieve a balance between the educational experience and ancillary learning
outside of a formal classroom.
2.5 Entertainment
Individuals who entertain in different professions (e.g. dancing, acting, singing, broadcasting, writing,
etc.) get special titles, trophies, plaques, and certificates. Likewise, individuals who complete support
activities for the entertainment industry also get credit for activities like costuming, music, screenplays,
choreography, scenery, composing stories, music, and other creative, non-performance activities. Most of
those acknowledgments come in the form of movie credits on screen and self-generated resumes. Open
badging presents a way for all people to view a central point of information about what they did, what
they learned, how well they performed certain activities, and any training or certifications earned (Gibson
et al., 2015). Again, there is no formal activity with digital badges currently being tested or evaluated.
However, digital badging would support activities currently done manually.
2.6 Group programs
Affiliation groups are groups that people join on a voluntary basis for specific objectives and purposes.
These groups include Boy and Girl Scouts, Masons, Lion’s Clubs, social and scholastic fraternities, church
groups, and civic organizations. The Boy and Girl Scouts provide actual merit and rank badges as well as
certificates. The other organizations provide certificates and special plaques based on service and
involvement. With the national average of a family moving every 3-4 years, taking important
memberships into other states can present a problem. Open badging solves the problem with its ability to
save badges and all relevant information attached to the badge through the capture of its metadata. The
use of metadata eliminates a problem of individuals having to reinstate membership with the organization
at the new location.
Every organization has specific awards and acknowledgments regardless of specialty location, size, or
membership. But they also have people who perform tasks for the organization for which no
acknowledgment exists. This unrewarded activity may improve the individual’s knowledge, skills, and
abilities through active participation, reading, or planning. Frederiksen (2013) noted that current badging
approaches identify the activity by topic; however, they do not capture the important details of how many
symbols with the same name may have completely contrary meanings and results. It is these contextually-
defined experiences that separate proposed open digital badging from traditional symbols and make digital
badging such a major step forward in learning and communicating potential.
Badging acknowledges an individual for an accomplishment that records may not reveal. The
information stays with the organization and lasts as long as the individual is an employee or member of
the organization. Each item exists in isolation from the others. The individual can carry home the award
or certificate and may add the name of the award to the resume. However, unless others know about the
award or achievement, there is no way for a potential new employer or admissions board to ascertain what
# - will be assigned by editors. DIGITAL BADGES AND MICRO-CREDENTIALS
3
the awards encompassed. The digital badge provides new potential for all involved. Finkelstein et al.
(2013) noted that digital badging provides lifelong recognition, decentralizes credential granting,
recognizes prior learning, provides mobility across the field of the same and different endeavors,
recognizes achievement, and acknowledges new achievements and assessments. Joseph (2012) noted that
digital badging could create the scaffolding of classes to create advanced, higher order results as well as
specific career paths.
3* DIGITAL BADGING IN A CHANGING WORLD
3.1 Technology
No industry has changed more significantly than technology in the past 50 years. Nowhere is the effect
called disruptive innovation more evident. Christensen (2015) defined disruptive innovation as “a process
by which a product or service takes root initially in simple applications at the bottom of a market and then
relentlessly moves up market, eventually displacing established competitors” (para. 1). But the
application of new information tracking control technology and storage has expanded the potential for
badging in much the same way online capabilities expanded delivery of learning to rural areas, single
student environments, home-based students, and global populations. The use of badging technology offers
businesses worldwide the opportunity to evaluate a potential employee in terms not only of the resume or
the cover letter but also based on a more objective and thorough method of identifying skill sets and
experiences. Badging allows for explanation and discussion of what static names or titles mean.
Organizations that once had to test, evaluate, and monitor employees can now have a way of ensuring
what an employee can do before hiring him or her. It will break down cultural, geographical, and
organizational boundaries for employees, students, and teachers because what once were nebulous terms
can be well defined and documented in many different ways. It’s possible to create records, establish and
distribute standardized guidelines, and control the integrity of a system created as the result of disruptive
innovation. Information about what an individual has learned can be stored, sent around the world
instantly, and assessed according to the meta-information embedded in the badge (Janzow, 2014).
The impending pressure to continue attracting and retaining students as a source of income and
reputation is forcing changes in the education sector. The changes initially will have a larger effect for
those who are not benefiting from the current roles of post-secondary education. As the values and
benefits of the ever-improving higher education system become clear, learners will advocate for
widespread changes across the nation (Christensen & Horn, 2011).
The technology is available for digital badging as shown by the various projects now underway. As
technology evolves through innovation, additional applications for digital badging may emerge. This is
consistent with various concepts of disruptive innovation. However, the changes in applications are also
unexplored. As one area expands and develops, it triggers a change in the other; therefore, a self-
sustaining creative reaction is created that develops faster than can be validated by experience. Also, other
companies and governments outside of the U.S. have been looking at different uses of digital badging that
may differ from the U.S. primarily because these users may not have the same technological resources or
high-level needs.
2
Chapter # - will be assigned by editors
3.2 Globalization
Globalization had already become a reality far in advance of full implementation of open digital badging,
so it is not something new but rather another adaptation of efforts to optimize the impact of reaching out to
other countries. As more diverse, inter-country teams are put together virtually to resolve problems that
belong to multiple countries, it will become important for people in the US to know what skill sets,
backgrounds, and experiences mean in other countries. Conversely, teams from other countries will need
to know the same information about US-based teams to help organizers make a good match of human
resources from all countries involved. There is no predominant factor or need beyond that of
understanding.
The use of open badges with standardized metadata significantly improves individual mobility across
disciplines, companies, governments, and countries as more organizations assume a global posture.
Unlike the badges and awards used in other countries, open badges provide much more needed
information to make decisions about the use or application of human resources. Janzow (2014) identified
a metadata template that included eight components. These components consisted of the achievement
name, achievement description, issuer background information, and issuing criteria used to measure a
recipient’s qualifications. Also, the template included evidence to show a recipient’s qualifications, links
to external standards about the achievement, badge dates (e.g., issuance, expiration), and keyword tags.
Fontichiaro and Elkordy (2013) identified three other components to include learner objectives, specified
tasks, and how level-related badges provided prerequisites for the next level. Using this approach could
support the development of the meta-badge, a badge that an individual can achieve by earning different
badges (Beattie, 2014). The completion of the badges results in the creation of a badge hierarchy and the
generation of a meta-badge to signify high achievement (Myllymäki & Hakala, 2014). Using this type of
foundation, the meta-badge could replace traditional university degrees with digital degrees or
nanodegrees.
In contrast to advanced countries with more developed digital badging programs, many countries are
not yet fully capable of identifying skills, abilities, knowledge, and experiences because of different socio-
cultural priorities, lack of centralized systems, and underdeveloped technology. One solution involves
providing a system that is open and usable to those countries that may lack the technology to get their
programs started. Adoption of cross-cultural programs usable worldwide would make the badging process
available more quickly. Through this process, users could gain knowledge into badging processes. These
insights would assist in identifying and implementing applications aligned with the needs of the country.
3.3 Mobility
One of the benefits of the digital badging system is that of mobility. Often, employees must abandon 10
or 15 years’ worth of education, training, and experiences with an organization when the employee moves
to a new place of employment. However, the digital badging program allows the individual to take all of
his or her experiences, training, certifications, skill set information, and awards with him or her. Digital
badging makes the individual more mobile and helps the acquiring company to know what the new
employee can do. Digital badges would prove helpful in determining how well an employee works and
what additional work or training needs to be undertaken to make the employee productive in the new
position.
# - will be assigned by editors. DIGITAL BADGES AND MICRO-CREDENTIALS
3
3.4 Evolving needs and technology
As previously stated, digital badges can provide a lifetime record of learning, evidence of readiness, job
fit, special equipment usage, and unique experiences (Fontichiaro & Elkordy, 2013). However, as
technology evolves and needs change, new opportunities to use digital badges may emerge. Because of
innovation, digital badges could also demonstrate entirely new technology than what the current digital
badging environment uses in current systems. The key will be to remain open to changing paradigms and
how it could evolve in the future.
3.5 Problems
Issues with digital badging are coming from within the badge ecosystem. The issues involve the learner
making decisions about the value of the badge to him or her as well as someone making the operational
decisions regarding what information badges will contain and the tracking of badges. Other issues of
concern involve who will handle storing and updating the information as well as who will handle the
infrastructure to keep and display the badges (Foster, 2013). Besides the design and creation mechanics,
the full implementation and use of the open system will require creating, redefining, or eliminating many
basic concepts and beliefs about learning. Several issues for the field involve the acceptance that
legitimate learning can occur outside the traditional education system (Randall, Harrison, & West, 2013)
and an agreement on exactly what constitutes evidence of learning (Fontichiaro & Elkordy, 2013). For the
individual earning the digital badge, a core issue is the value problem. In effect, one must consider which
of all the similar digital badges earned will provide the greatest value to individuals (Kim, 2015). A
concern by detractors is the potential for disruptive innovations that might result in a shift in the open
system concept after committing the necessary funds and resources to make the system functional
(Christensen, Horn, & Johnson, 2011). Because the actual work in completing a task, assignment, or
objective is not observed or validated, it can be impossible to prove who completed the requirements.
This revelation creates a trust issue on the value of the badge and the system, which subsequently may
affect who chooses to participate and who doesn’t (Educause, 2012). However, newer developments in the
digital badging environment are helping to mitigate this issue. Certain resources are becoming available
to help verify and validate badges, such as the website https://badgecheck.io and other similar sites.
At some point in the process, the amount of data and the activity will reach a point where they will need
to be audited and controlled. To accomplish this task requires additional staff, training, and control
processes that another organization unrelated to the issuing or displaying organization must perform. In
that same area, badges are not universally accepted by all organizations because they don’t know the rigor
required to earn the badge. However, development of a rubric could help delineate criteria and
competencies. Further, some groups may not accept the credentials of the organization awarding the
badge and how well the person did even with a metadata link. Additionally, even with the metadata, it is
possible that ultimate users such as individuals and organizations will interpret the value of the badge and
use it in different ways. In one organization, their badge may be significant but in another organization
the same badge will have little value (Ahn et al., 2014). What happens if there is a legitimate difference of
opinion about what a badge should include? Who is the arbitrator? Where does the arbitrator obtain
authority? What happens if the system is infected or is shown to be wrong? These questions warrant
consideration.
Because the learner possesses a degree of freedom for documenting and completing the badge, there is
a concern about identifying how well a student did. Though the badge issuer bears the ultimate
responsibility for determination of badge completion, students could view the completion of objectives in
different ways. If there is a list of things to do, the person might have skipped one or did not do well on
another. In a classroom, a degree or certificate does not tell what classes a student studied or how the
2
Chapter # - will be assigned by editors
student performed in each class. The same degree at a traditional school on the east coast is not likely to
include or even mean the same things as an online degree from another college.
4* NEW CONSIDERATIONS OF BADGING
New considerations such as validation of a digital badge will depend on the determination of what
functions the badge is designed to perform. These functions may include pre-learning, meta-learning,
cognitive learning, guideposts for planning, and assessments. Each badge, based on its function, will be
validated differently. Validation could involve many people such as knowledge experts (instructors),
applications specialists (real world knowledge practitioners), a curriculum designer, a career planner, a
trainer, and an assessment specialist (Ahn et al., 2014). Because these credentials demonstrate a new
approach to the learning paradigm, different people must assist in helping to determine what constitutes
learning evidence compared to the traditional educational system. For this reason, the badge could easily
be compared to a recipe. If one ingredient is wrong, the dish will not work. Therefore, understanding
how badging and its applications work will help in the change process as well as mitigate potential actions
by detractors who may seek to downplay the role of badging.
4.1 New items
As digital badging technology matures and better applications emerge through innovation, developers are
discovering and evaluating new uses for badging. For example, some badges could provide profitable
applications while others may provide a foundation for changes that could impact a larger framework.
Uses may involve changes to existing processes or they could be the focal point of a totally new or
revolutionary function. While new items often fail at doing what they were created to do, they also can
fill a current or future need. Often the use of new technology or application creates needs for new items
that only exist because of using new programs. Digital badging may replace existing structures, may
create new ones, or may make an existing process more efficient. For example, one area that represents
the potential for significant changes is in education. “Some advocates are working to replace the
traditional college degree entirely, creating a new system of badges that recognize educational
achievement both inside and outside the classroom” (Briggs, 2013, para. 7).
4.2 New programs
When an organization commits to a digital badging program, questions about new and different uses arise.
As more information is made available about existing programs as well as how they are being developed
and utilized, more questions will be generated about what to do in the future for different functions.
Therefore, growth in new programs must be considered. For example, project staffing will need to
evaluate the capabilities of the infrastructure for future development and expansion. Further, the cost to
implement changes becomes a consideration. As new information becomes available from organizations
experimenting with digital badging, questions are asked that identify possible new uses for the technology.
Less obvious uses can become readily apparent in virtually any field such as for sports. For example,
fans of a particular team can be rewarded for continuous purchases of season tickets or of participation in
special team offers. Players and teams may be able to use the system to track performances and create
new data for metrics programs. Therefore, levels of recognition in team and league requirements could be
# - will be assigned by editors. DIGITAL BADGES AND MICRO-CREDENTIALS
3
tracked and documented publicly by issuing badges. It could make it possible to complete interleague
comparisons.
The potential for improving communications about people using industry, league, or discipline
standardizations could increase productivity in hiring employees, accepting enrollments in various
programs such as college acceptance, and various job assessments like matching skills to new classes of
jobs. Badges would link completed functions, skills, and other requirements for programs like entrance
exams, certifications, and creating new jobs based on technology or need changes. Further, usage would
not exhibit cultural or geographical constraints.
4.3 Failed programs
Ample evidence reveals that unvalued badges routinely fail. For example, programs regarding redundant
physical badge systems such as those with the Boy Scouts and Girl Scouts or those with duplicate systems
fail to succeed in long-term efforts. However, failure of new programs is an inherent risk given newer
technology. It can come from varied sources. Some failure results from unreal expectations, limitations
of technology, immature applications, lack of understanding, passive or active resistance, and from trying
to fit a new approach into an existing framework or condition. Technological issues will arise as people
attempt to use existing hardware and systems infrastructures to save money and time rather than focus on
innovative processes to reduce costs and implementation time. The result of a failed program is often
suspension or abandoning efforts because of timing, skill, capability, or cost issues. Regardless of the
final status of the effort, the innovator gains information that should be captured for future consideration
when conditions and requirements change or when peoples’ attitudes change. Badging innovation efforts
are no different. What appears to be a failure at the time might be the link needed in a future effort.
4.4 Low impact programs
Divided usage among companies and extended organizations could become common. Alternatively,
divided usage could also occur on a smaller scale in organizations that have a single function. Close
tracking of activities and participants would improve organizational efficiency as well as enlarge the
market for the organization. However, this would have to be balanced with ethical considerations because
of the fine line inherent in employee monitoring and technical surveillance. Notwithstanding, the impact
would be relatively small in other situations such as having a professional sports organization keep track
of all its prize winners or season ticketholders. It could also improve medical services by more carefully
and completely tracking all services rather than relying on the patient’s memory.
4.5 Cultural driven foreign programs
As globalization continues to expand into emerging economies, digital badging could prove useful to
individuals and organizations as they seek to modernize and evolve in a rapidly changing economic
environment. Through the use of digital badging, individuals could expand their knowledge to achieve
higher levels of competency and skills as part of the emerging workforce. Organizations could adopt the
use of digital badging to assist in the hiring, training, and promotion process of employees. By using this
system, organizations could identify employee competencies to achieve higher levels of innovation and
competitiveness in the global economic system.
2
Chapter # - will be assigned by editors
5* DIGITAL BADGING TODAY
5.1 Discussion on current digital badging program
The innovation and concept of digital badging may be considered impractical in some applications.
Digital badges are somewhat unwieldy at this time primarily because of the lack of experience defining,
creating, and utilizing them. When online learning emerged as a viable learning environment, the old
curriculum and lesson plan for the class was just dropped into the online infrastructure (Palloff & Pratt,
2001; Rice, 2014). However, that approach proved unsuccessful leading some opponents to argue that
online learning didn’t work. Badging can't just replicate sticker charts, which rely on extrinsic motivation.
Without careful design and construction, digital badges could become a digitized “do it just to earn it”
approach. In effect, "badge-grubbing” will become the reason for getting involved in earning digital
badges (Fontichiaro, 2014).
The mission of universities will be changing from gatekeepers of knowledge to innovators and leaders
of knowledge. Due to the need for accessibility and keeping track of constantly increasing information,
the learner no longer needs a university to obtain information (Wolfe & Andrews, 2014). Changes have to
be made to keep higher education relevant in the information age. Christenson and Horn (2011) have
warned that the current business model characterizing higher education in America is outdated and no
longer viable. Challenges from escalating tuition, declining endowments and government funding, and
the immediate access to highly credible information require changes in the system. These changes will
cause higher education to meet the needs of the students, the communities, and stakeholders (Christenson
& Horn, 2011).
5.2 The future of badging
A great deal of work has already been completed to evaluate and develop digital badging systems.
Programs like Mozilla Open Badge Framework (Ahn et al., 2014), Massachusetts Institute of Technology
(MITx), Khan Academy, and the Joint Educational Project at USC represent examples of a small number
of the programs being developed and used nationally and internationally. More experimentation is
expected and, as more results are accrued and evaluated, many more changes will be considered.
Researchers and developers engaged in working with digital badge technology will need to determine
what processes work best within the framework of different disciplines and how to optimize the use of
digital badges for all stakeholders. While this remains a challenging prospect, badging also holds great
promise for the future because of the many uses and applications.
This exploration of the history of badging noted that symbolism is a form of communication that has
been a tool of mankind for more than 20,000 years and has evolved to parallel the needs of people. With
the advent of new technology, new programs are available that make badges more meaningful and
effective for virtually everyone. The new baseline program called open digital badging allows users to
design how the use of badges can meet the needs of humanity in the 21 st century. As with most changes of
this magnitude, principles, philosophies, beliefs, and attitudes that have existed for decades and even
centuries are being challenged. There is no doubt that open badging can work. It is now a matter of
determining if the benefits will demonstrate acceptance. The current picture will change. Therefore, it
will be interesting to see what the evolutionary process brings in the future. “Digital badges are gaining
traction and are no longer considered a technology of the future” (Foster, 2013, p. 30). Certainly, digital
badging already demonstrates many possible applications in today’s world.
# - will be assigned by editors. DIGITAL BADGES AND MICRO-CREDENTIALS
3
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The authors wish to acknowledge and thank Dr. Mansureh Kebritchi, Research Chair for the Center for
Educational and Instructional Technology Research at University of Phoenix, for her feedback and
assistance in preparing this article.
REFERENCES
Abramovich, S., Schunn, C., & Higashi, R. M. (2013). Are badges useful in education?: It depends upon the type of badge and the
expertise of the learner. Educational Technology Research and Development, 61(2), 217-232. doi: 10.1007/s11423-013-9289-2
Adams, J., & DeFleur, M. H. (2006). The acceptability of online degrees earned as a credential for obtaining employment.
Communication Education, 55(1), 32-45. doi: 10.1080/03634520500343376
Ahn, J., Pellicone, A., & Butler, B. (2014). Open badges for education: What are the implications at the intersection of open
systems and badging? Research in Learning Technology, 22. Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/10.3402/rlt.v22.23563
Antin, J., & Churchill, E. F. (2011). Badges in social media: A social psychological perspective. CHI 2011 gamification workshop
proceedings. Vancouver, BC, Canada. Retrieved from http://gamification-research.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/03-Antin-
Churchill.pdf
Bailey, E. (2008, Nov/Dec). Symbols: Historic and current uses. International Journal of Pharmaceutical Compounding, 12(6),
505-507. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/212039109?accountid=35812
Beattie, S. (2014, June 14). Types of digital learning badges: Drawing on the xbox achievement experience [Web blog post].
Retrieved from HASTAC.org website at https://www.hastac.org/blogs/scott-beattie/2014/06/30/types-digital-learning-badges-
drawing-xbox-achievement-experience
Becchetti, L., Castriota, S., & Tortia, E. C. (2013). Productivity, wages, and intrinsic motivation. Small Business Economics,
87(2), 379-399. doi: 10.1007/s11187-012-9431-2
Benson, N. (2007). Psychology: A graphic guide to your mind and behavior. Cambridge, UK: Totem Books.
Briggs, S. (2013, August 13). Out with the degree, in with the badge: How badges motivate learning and 7 tips to use them right.
Retrieved from http://www.opencolleges.edu.au/informed/features/badges-in-education/
Christensen, C. (2015). Disruptive innovation. Retrieved from www.claytonchristensen.com/key-concepts/
Christensen, C. M., & Horn, M. B. (2011, July/Aug). Colleges in crisis: Disruptive change comes to American higher education.
Harvard Magazine, 40-43. Retrieved from http://harvardmagazine.com/2011/07/colleges-in-crisis
Christensen, C. M., Horn, M. B., & Johnson, C. W. (2011). Disrupting class: Expanded edition: How disruptive innovation will
change the way the world learns. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
Deci, E. L. (1975). Intrinsic motivation. New York, NY: Plenum Press.
Deci, E., & Ryan, R. M. (1985, August 31). Intrinsic motivation and self-determination in human behavior (perspectives in social
psychology). New York, NY: Plenum Press.
Deci, E. L., Vallerand, R. J., Pelletier, L. G., & Ryan, R. M. (1991). Motivation and education: The self-determination perspective.
Educational Psychologist, 26(3-4), 325-346.
Dickerson, P. S. (2012, May). Credentialing: Understanding the terms. The Journal of Continuing Education in Nursing, 43(5),
197-198.
Dudek, J., Gamret, C., Peck, K., & Zimmerman, H. (2014, August). Personalized workplace learning: An exploratory study on
digital badging within a teacher professional development program. British Journal of Educational Technology, 45(6), 1136-
1137. doi: 10.1111/bjet.12200
Ebert, R. J., & Griffin, R. W. (2015). Business essentials (10th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.
Educause. (2012, June). 7 things you should know about badges. Retrieved from http://net.educause.edu/ir/library/pdf/eli7085.pdf
Educause. (2014). Badging for professional development. Retrieved from https://net.educause.edu/ir/library/pdf/EST1402.pdf
Finkelstein, J., Knight, E., & Manning, S. (2013, July 16). The potential and value of using digital badges for adult learners
(American Institutes for Research Draft Report for Public Comment). Retrieved from LINCS (Literacy Information and
Communication System) website: https://lincs.ed.gov/publications/pdf/AIR_Digital_Badge_Report_508.pdf
Fontichiaro, K. (2014, April). Digital badges: Part 1. School Library Monthly, 30(7), 48.
Fontichiaro, K., & Elkordy, A. (2013, December 1). From stars to constellations digital badges can chart growth. Learning &
Leading with Technology, 41(4), 12-15.
Ford, E., Izumi, B., Lottes, J., & Richardson, D. (2015). Badge it!: A collaborative learning outcomes based approach to
integrating information literacy badges within disciplinary curriculum. Reference Services Review, 43(1), 31-44. doi:
10.1108/RSR-07-2014-0026
2
Chapter # - will be assigned by editors
Foster, J. C. (2013, Nov/Dec). The promise of digital badges. Techniques, 88(8), 30-34.
Frederiksen, L. (2013). Digital badges. Public Services Quarterly, 9(4), 321-325. doi: 10.1080/15228959.2013.842414
Gibson, D., Ostashewski, N., Flintoff, K., Grant, S., & Knight, E. (2015, June). Digital badges in education. Education and
Information Technologies, 20(2), 403-410. doi: 10.1007/s10639-013-9291-7
Halavais, A. M. (2012). A genealogy of badges: Inherited meaning and monstrous moral hybrids. Information, Communication
and Society, 15(3), 354-373. doi: 10.1080/1369118X.2011.641992
Huett, J. B., Moller, L., Young, J., Bray, M., Huett, K. C. (2008). Supporting the distant student: The effects of ARCS-based
strategies on confidence and performance. Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 9(2), 113-126.
Janzow, P. (2014, Oct). Connecting learning to jobs through digital badges. The Catalyst, 42(2), 9-11.
Joseph, B. (2012, June 25). Six ways to look at badging systems designed for learning. Online Leadership Program: Global Kids
[Web log post]. Retrieved from http://www.olpglobalkids.org/content/six-ways-look-badging-systems-designed-learning
Kim, J. (2015, January 5). The value problem in digital badging. Inside Higher Ed [Web log post]. Retrieved from
https://www.insidehighered.com/blogs/technology-and-learning/value-problem-digital-badging
Kreitner, R., & Cassidy, C. M. (2011). Management (12th ed.). Mason, OH: Cengage Learning.
Maslow, A. H. (1968). Toward a psychology of being. New York, NY: Van Nostrand.
McDaniel, R., Lindgren, R., & Friskics, J. (2012, October 1-12). Using badges for shaping interactions in online learning
environments. Paper presented at the 2012 IEEE International Professional Communication Conference (IPCC), Orlando, FL.
Abstract retrieved from http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/stamp/stamp.jsp?tp=&arnumber=6408619
Moller, L. (1993). The effects of confidence building strategies on learner motivation and achievement (Unpublished doctoral
dissertation). Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN.
Myllymäki, M., & Hakala, I. (2014). Open badges in higher education. In L. Chova, A. Martínez, & I. Torres (Eds.),
EDULEARN14 Proceedings. 6th International Conference on Education and New Learning Technologies (pp. 2027-2034).
IATED Academy. Barcelona, Spain. Retrieved from http://library.iated.org/publications/EDULEARN14
Olneck, M. (2012, April 26-27). Insurgent credentials: A challenge to established institutions of higher education. Paper presented
to Education in a New Society: The Growing Interpenetration of Education in Modern Life at Radcliffe Institute for Advanced
Study, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA. Paper retrieved from http://hastac.org/documents/insurgent-credentials-challenge-
established-institutionshigher-education.
Palloff, R. M., & Pratt, K. (2001). Lessons from the cyberspace classroom: The realities of online teaching. San Francisco, CA:
Jossey-Bass.
Pember, M. A. (2008, April 17). Diversifying pedagogy. Diverse Issues in Higher Education. Retrieved from
http://diverseeducation.com/article/11004/
Randall, D. L., Harrison, J. B., & West, R. E. (2013, November/December). Giving credit where credit is due: Designing open
badges for a technology integration course. Tech Trends, 57(6), 88-95. doi: 10.1007/s11528-013-0706-5
Rice, M. (2014, Jan/Dec). Ethical challenges of studying online learning curriculum. Curriculum and Teaching Dialogue, 16(1/2),
131-134.
Robinson, L. J., Stevens. L. H., Threapleton, C. J. D., Vainiute, J., McAllister-Williams, R. H., & Gallagher, P. (2012, October).
Effects of intrinsic and extrinsic motivation on attention and memory. Acta Psychologica, 141(2), 243-249. doi:
10.1016/j.actpsy.2012.05012
Rogers, C. R., & Freiberg, H. J. (1994). Freedom to learn. New York, NY: Pearson.
Styles, M. (1999). Credentialing as a global profession in progress: Part I. Measuring up . Quality Assurance Through
Credentialing Vol. 1: Global perspectives. Washington, DC: American Nurses Credentialing Center.
Wolfe, J. K., & Andrews, D. W. (2014). The changing roles of higher education: Curator, evaluator, connector, analyst. On the
Horizon, 22(3), 210-217.
Womack, M. (2005). Symbols and meaning: A concise introduction. Walnut Creek, CA: Altamira Press.
Woolfolk, A. (2008). Educational psychology, active learning edition (10th ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson.
YMCANYC. (2015). Y-MVP teen fitness challenge: Get fit. Make friends. Have fun. Retrieved from The YMCA New York City
official website located at http://www.ymcanyc.org/association/pages/y-mvp
Young, J. R. (2012, October). “Badges” earned online pose challenge to traditional college diplomas. Education Digest, 78(2), 48-
52. Retrieved from http://connection.ebscohost.com/c/articles/82981834/badges-earned-online-pose-challenge-traditional-
college-diplomas
AUTHOR INFORMATION
Complete name: Ellis, Larry E.
# - will be assigned by editors. DIGITAL BADGES AND MICRO-CREDENTIALS
3
Institutional affiliation: University of Phoenix
Institutional address: 1625 W. Fountainhead Parkway, Tempe, AZ 85282
Complete mailing address: (same as institutional address)
Telephone number: (602) 909-6630
Fax number (optional): N/A
Email address: Docdistance7@email.phoenix.edu
Website (optional): N/A
Short biographical sketch: Dr. Ellis taught at University of Phoenix for five years and for over 10 years
at several community colleges on a national level in business and education. He earned an MBA and
MAEd at the University of Phoenix and a PhD in Distance Education at Capella University. He has held a
number of administrative, technical, and professional positions including budget officer, risk manager, tax
audit manager, systems analyst, project manager, reengineering specialist, administrative manager,
legislative specialist, instructional designer, and training director. Publications include an article titled
“Rubrics and Evaluations” and a historical fiction novel about Route 66 entitled “The Trail of the
Oent’rfazr.”
Complete name: Nunn, Sandra G.
Institutional affiliation: University of Phoenix
Institutional address: 1625 W. Fountainhead Parkway, Tempe, AZ 85282
Complete mailing address: 1107 Brewley Lane, Vista, CA 92081
Telephone number: (760) 917-2660
Fax number (optional): N/A
Email address: sandynunn@email.phoenix.edu
sandynunn@roadrunner.com
Website (optional): N/A
Short biographical sketch: As an ethics, leadership, and national security expert, Dr. Nunn has appeared
extensively in the national and international media, testified before the U.S. Senate, and was also featured
as a guest speaker at prestigious Smith College in Northampton, Massachusetts. In addition, she has
served on the Board of Directors for an international public company as well as an international nonprofit
organization. Currently, Dr. Nunn serves as an executive for two consulting firms and a green alternative
2
Chapter # - will be assigned by editors
energy firm. She also serves as a Board Member for several non-profit organizations and as a Trustee for
a private trust. She is a Founding Board Member and Director of International Ethics with the Foreign
Affairs Council, Inc., a non-profit organization that serves as an international platform for advancing
knowledge and leadership. Further, Dr. Nunn is a Research Affiliate with the Center for Educational and
Instructional Technology Research at University of Phoenix where she collaborates on scholarly research
and publishing endeavors regarding ethics, leadership, education, and technology. Dr. Nunn holds a
Doctor of Management in Organizational Leadership, an MBA in Global Management, a BS in
Electronics Engineering Technology, and an AA in General Studies. She is currently working on several
books for future publication.
Complete name: Avella, John T.
Institutional affiliation: University of Phoenix
Institutional address: 1625 W. Fountainhead Parkway, Tempe, AZ 85282
Complete mailing address: 128 Grande Woodlands Way, Toms River, New Jersey 08755
Telephone number: (848) 210-6818
Fax number (optional): N/A
Email address: jackavella@eduinnovationsllc.com
Website (optional): www.eduinnovationsllc.com
Short biographical sketch: Dr. Avella possesses more than 30 years of experience in education as a
public school special education teacher, vice-principal, principal, and assistant superintendent before his
retirement in 2010. He is presently an associate faculty member of the University of Phoenix for the
doctoral program and a faculty member for Western Governors University in the masters teacher
preparation and research program. Dr. Avella co-owns and co-administers an educational consulting firm
with his wife called eduInnovationsllc located in Toms River, NJ. He is married with two daughters and
two dogs. His interests include sports, music, and traveling.
