[p2pu-webcraft] Using OSQA for badges

[Parag Shah]

Hi Stian,

I agree, deploying on OSQA was a very good way to get started and pilot the
badges. I am sure the new platform will address many of the requirements of
working with badges.

-- 
Thanks & Regards
Parag Shah
http://blog.adaptivesoftware.biz
http://www.diycomputerscience.com

On Tue, Mar 8, 2011 at 7:15 PM, Stian Håklev <shaklev at gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi Parag,
>
> thanks, I think these are very useful ideas.
>
> I don't think we meant to confine badges to only OSQA, indeed in the new
> platform, whose development is now really gathering steam, I am guessing
> that we will try to build this in more directly. Part of the reason for OSQA
> was to get started quickly, and gain some experience, without having to wait
> for custom-built technology.
>
> Your idea of splitting up large competency-based badges in smaller chunks
> for reviewers is also interesting.
>
> Stian
>
> On Mon, Mar 7, 2011 at 23:46, Parag Shah <adaptives at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I have been thinking about badges and the environment which can support
>> badges for learners.
>>
>> I guess OSQA is a natural choice because it suppports QA type forums and
>> badges. However, I had a few thoughts which I feel might be important as we
>> go ahead.
>>
>> 1. Context of community badges.
>> Along with competency badges, we might also support other badges, such as
>> 'peer helper', 'consistent learner', etc. Most likely these badges would be
>> in the context of a course. So if someone gets a 'peer helper' badge in the
>> Javascript course, it might be a good feature if we could reflect this,
>> because that person may not have been a 'peer helper' in another course. It
>> may also be a nice idea to reflect proof of the work along with a badge. It
>> will be a bit cumbersome to have all this information in a coherent and
>> clutter-less way, in OSQA.
>>
>> 2. Voting for challenge parts.
>> Right now our notion of voting for a challenge submission, is to evaluate
>> the entire work of a candidate. However, for slightly large challenges, it
>> may be a deterant, for a reviewer to spend 3 hours reviewing a challenge.
>> However, they would be happy to review certain parts of a challenge based on
>> their expertise and time available. Not sure how well OSQA will support
>> that.
>>
>> I don't mean to say that OSQA is a bad choice. Rather just trying to get a
>> discussion going on where we might get into bottlenecks with OSQA, and if we
>> should consider some alternatives or customize OSQA.
>>
>> --
>> Thanks & Regards
>> Parag Shah
>> http://blog.adaptivesoftware.biz
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> p2pu-webcraft mailing list
>> p2pu-webcraft at lists.p2pu.org
>> http://lists.p2pu.org/mailman/listinfo/p2pu-webcraft
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> http://reganmian.net/blog -- Random Stuff that Matters
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.p2pu.org/pipermail/p2pu-webcraft/attachments/20110309/5bb9e370/attachment-0001.html>