This course will become read-only in the near future. Tell us at if that is a problem.

The challenge explained

This P2Pu challenge is built to encourage interaction with your peers. Some of your tasks will be to evaluate the work of another a few tasks ahead.

This Badge System Design challenge is focused around a rubric that has been created to guide badge system design. The rubric is not meant to evaluate existing badge systems, but to guide and prompt thinking around the creation of new badge systems.

The badge systems design rubric can be found at this embedded link, and should be considered a work that is never finished, yet always useful. Digital badges and badge systems design is new, evolving and innovating. And through each iteration becomes broader, better understood, and more comprehensive. If you have comments, or suggested improvements, for the rubric please do not hesitate to provide them here.

A number of the tasks will be requesting you evaluate the work of your peers currently taking this same P2Pu challenge, only they are a few steps ahead of you. You can also expect learners further into this challenge to reach-out to you to evaluate and discuss their work within this challenge.

Having students peer assess each others work is a theme within all of the P2Pu, and the tasks within this challenge identified for peer assessment have been chosen to encourage engagement, deepen learning, and to improve badge system design.

Once you have finished reviewing and evaluating one of the other students work, you will need to issue them a badge confirming your acceptance and understanding of their work. If you need to learn more about how to quickly issue a badge I suggest you work through the School of Badges companion course; 102 Quick Issue.

Spend some time moving around in this challenge; quickly review each task and identify how the different tasks are linked to each other from a review, evaluation and peer engagement perspective. Enjoy, reach out to others, discuss...

Review the Badge System Design rubric and offer a suggestion to its improvement. The improvement could simply be fixing a spelling or gramatical error, or could be adding a whole new row. No suggestion is too small or too big...

Task Discussion

  • Jason said:

    Several  of the Exemplary and Notable criteria refer to the extent to which a badge system is integrated into other certification structures and deeply defined.  I have some concerns about this because I see as one of the strengths of online open badges the fact that they can be much more granular and standalone than traditional curricula models allow..  We shouldn't be in such a hurry to badgify the BA that we lose site of the opportunity badges give to verify and recognize learning that doesn't fit into the big systems (like university degrees) that we have now.    A badge system may be notable because it measures and recognizes something that traditional models don't .

    I'm not sure that's a suggestion, so under validity-notable,  I'd suggest that creditability is a rare enough word as to be less than entirely clear, and that perhaps it would be better to either replace it with credibility or explain what is meant by the term,

    on June 13, 2013, 10:23 p.m.

    Peter Rawsthorne said:


    I'm totally with you in having badges recognize learning outside the traditional. I was really hoping the rubric would provide badge system design guidance for both institutional learning and non-traditional learning and other events. I am wondering if one rubric for both these is too big a challenge. maybe we need multiple rubrics... hmmmm.

    Well... I think credability is a spelling mistake. So... I will fix the spelling mistake. I guess my remaining spelling mistakes will impact the credibility of the rubric. 

    Be Well...



    on June 14, 2013, 9:47 a.m. in reply to Jason
  • Damian Ewens said:

    In System Integration: How the badge system integrates with related and similar curriculum and badges systems. Are applicable standards being applied. 

    I think there needs to be the inclusion of language that describes the potential for badges to be accepted as alternate ways of receiving existing certifications, or act as replacements, or equivalent forms. Potentially the Exemplary, or Notable, column includes some language such as: (My additions in blue)

    Exemplary: The exemplary badge becomes the defacto (or exists as an equivalent) standard for accrediting a subject, community or event domain.

    Note: In Exemplary above, do we mean to say, the exemplary badge system...

    Notable: A notably integrated badge system implements all the attributes of the related working system with the addition of it utilizing appropriate resources (educational or otherwise) from these other badge systems, these resources are adequately cross referenced. 

    I'm not sure how to implement my thoughts above to the Notable description. What is the related working system referencing? 

    on June 13, 2013, 2:07 p.m.

    Peter Rawsthorne said:

    Damian (Jason and everyone),

    Given these comments, considered with Jasons, and other discussions I have been having online and off; I am seriously thinking of creating three rubrics. This is a tension I have been dealing with since I started on this rubric journey. Trying to reconcile badge systems design that aligns with the tarditional institution and related practices, and also wanting the rubric to work with the non-traditional, informal and event based badges. I've come to the conclusion that one rubric can't do it all.

    Thanks everyone for being a part of my gestalt. What do others think? Would it be better to have three rubrics?

    1. Badge System Design for traditional curriculum
    2. Badge System Design for informal learning
    3. Badge System Design for events and community

    Great to have all your involvement. Be Well...


    on June 14, 2013, 11:29 a.m. in reply to Damian Ewens
  • Jeroen said:

    I guess at the moment I am still a little fuzzy about the distinction beteen badges and a badges system. And I assume that continuing to work on the course will move me forward on that one.


    Regarding the rubric; it might be beneficial for readers to have a little explanation under the qualification levels headings. Just a few lines (frowm the slideshare presentation perhaps) to summarize what is means to be Examplary, or notable, workable or introductory.


    on June 10, 2013, 12:23 p.m.

    kathweaver said:

    I think your average semester or year long course SHOULD give students a series of badges -- thus a badge system, rather than just one badge.

    Each badge would reflect a particular unit or skill learned, and then some students would earn all the badges or just some of them depending on what skills they had learned.

    on June 10, 2013, 12:36 p.m. in reply to Jeroen

    jsn4d said:

    I agree. I've been thinking about creating the main badges to be linked to the objectives of the course. This way students know exactly what they should be striving for and it would be easier to tie back to accreditation.

    on June 10, 2013, 2:04 p.m. in reply to kathweaver

    Jeroen said:

    Makes sense. My pilot project with badges is involving a long distance learning course with 7 units, where I would hope that giving badges for completed units will help with motivation to continue in the course. So a series of badges indeed.

    I'll have to have another look at the rubric with that in mind. Something tells me it is all a bit over-analysed ...

    on June 11, 2013, 4:15 a.m. in reply to kathweaver

    Peter Rawsthorne said:


    Great question, what is the difference between a badge and a badge system?

    I believe badges are more single events; learning, conference attendance, participation, recognition, proving a skill, etc... where badge system recognize events along a journey or parts within a whole knowledge domain. Badges can exist within a badge system. 

    I know this was a quick answer, and just my quick thoughts... I will compose a full blog post on the subject...

    What do others think is the difference / similarity between the badge and the badge system?


    on June 11, 2013, 10:52 a.m. in reply to Jeroen

    Peter Rawsthorne said:

    From a fun perspective, I wrote this blog post about badge clustering;

    I believe it also applies here, but more conceptually...

    on June 11, 2013, 11:16 a.m. in reply to Jeroen

    jsn4d said:

    I really like the idea that Mozilla allows you to create "collections" for your badges. This seems to support your idea of the badge earner being able to "cluster" their badges into a grouping they define.

    on June 11, 2013, 1:13 p.m. in reply to Peter Rawsthorne

    jsn4d said:

    Sat in on a webinar with a co-worker yesterday with someone talking about badges. She had used 3D game labs. I missed the second half, but my co-worker sad that the platform had support for:

    • Badges
    • Achievements
    • Rewards/Awards

    A single badge was awarded for completing a series of tasks (the criteria).

    Achievements were awarded for completing the tasks. These weren't visual in nature like a badge, just text. Ex,. "You've earned the achievement of Post It Note for posting a reply to a comment."

    Rewards/Awards were given to reinforce good behaviors; they had no direct impact on the earning of the badge. For example, the Sherlock Award could be given to someone who found an error.

    on June 11, 2013, 1:23 p.m. in reply to Jeroen

    Peter Rawsthorne said:


    Thanks for the prompt. I added brief descriptions to each of the rubric performance levels.

    The example for an outstanding badge system. Badge systems should aspire to be as comprehensive and as well designed.    
    A badge system that should be reviewed for their approach toward design and implementation.    
    A badge system that is working and consist of a few badges that collectively represent an accomplishment beyond a single badge.    
    The minimum for a badge system.

    What do you think?

    on June 12, 2013, 1:58 a.m. in reply to Jeroen

    Jeroen said:

    Thanks, yes, useful!

    on June 12, 2013, 4:14 a.m. in reply to Peter Rawsthorne
  • jsn4d said:

    I like the idea of the criteria not expiring for the badge and that a badge could be earned multiple times. This makes me think of the certain health programs that require re-certifications or demonstrations of knowledge every 3-5 years. The criteria has not necessarily changed, but a person must be able to show they can still perform it. I wonder if you could build expiration dates on a badge that would require a user to demonstrate the criteria again in order to "renew" it?

    on June 6, 2013, 3:38 p.m.
  • Peter Rawsthorne said:

    Thinking the wording of some of the performance levels need review. I don't believe they should be worded as questions, but as levels of performance. As an example, the bottom right square should be worded "Evidence of an earned badge represents the learning criteria of the badge."

    on April 9, 2013, 9:07 a.m.

    jsn4d said:

    i think doing so would it keep it consistent with the rest of the rubric. The same would need to be done with the notable Criteria box. "Does the badge criteria..."

    on June 6, 2013, 1:41 p.m. in reply to Peter Rawsthorne

    jsn4d said:

    Spelling wise (I am pretty bad at catching these):

    Notable column - Purpose:

    Last sentence:.

    ...change in knowledge, skills, behaviours...(currently missing an r).

    Exemplary column - Technical integration

    2nd sentence.

    Technical innovation is present... (missing i).

    3rd Sentence

    Is the first word Integration?

    on June 10, 2013, 2:25 p.m. in reply to Peter Rawsthorne