The Research on the pedagogical use of digital learning media is increasingly interested in the complex phenomenon of open badges as a concept for lifelong learning. They echo investment as a mechanism of the independent appraisal system, offering credentials in a variety of individuals’ life experiences and their context of learning and skills (MacArthur, 2013). In the field of education, the notion of badge can be in a context both formal and informal. In this framework, the objectives implemented and the consequences attached to the badges are related to the concerns of the teaching / learning and education systems structuring the practices of use. However, what about skills acquired in situations that are not covered by this educational system? Like some works (Ahn, Pellicone, Brian, Butler, 2014), we try to analyze in the literature, the contribution of open badges in the informal and non-formal evaluation system in several aspects: motivation, pedagogy and skills. It is in this perspective that several questions were asked in the framework of the project (MyLK)in order to develop a platform to overcome this need of use. In this article, we discuss how the system could exploit the open badges system with its platform (Dashboard), as a tool for evaluating and valuing informal and non-formal learning throughout life, whatever the geographical and institutional situation? In this respect, we organize our discourse in two main axes: the notion of open badges and competing concepts, their pedagogical uses as an informal and non-formal evaluation title in addition to formal education. Finally, we articulate these two axes in our conclusion with a look at the contribution of Dashboard around the question above.

1. Open badges and competing concepts

Open badge expression builds on open-learning conceptions and refers to a multitude of contexts, involving the changes made possible by digital technologies (computing, networking and the internet), giving individuals the ability to create and to share coded or multimedia objects (Peter and Deimann 2013, Ahn et al., 2014).
Badges indicate, among other things, what is called a short hand to implicitly understand the skills and knowledge acquired in the interest of winning a given title (Arkes 1999). They give rise to the competing tensions that Ahn and his colleagues associate with the concept of openness from the perspective of both the production, access and appropriation of knowledge in non-formal educational and learning practices. formal or informal with technologies. There is an increase in investment, in the use of open badges, in awarding titles to individuals for their learning experiences, as a means of valuing skills (MacArthur, 2013). In the United States, for example, educational institutions are incorporating digital learning badges to support the new design of open badges in education reform. On the other hand, the researchers who are interested in this concept, have a rather mixed and reserved attitude, as regards this new conception for education, because it seems to them difficult to make sense to clarify the questions of intentions and consequences in the design and implementation (op.cit).

2. The use of open badges as evaluative title on MyLK platform

The social and economic issues associated with badges are so weak that today, their pedagogical use in learning contexts is to a large extent outside the confines of formal education. The creation of the badge system complements the traditional tool of education, which results in the awarding of diplomas (Halavais 2012, MacArthur and Mozilla, 2011). It is also recognized that in many industrialized countries in Europe as well as in the United States, education systems do not have the assessment tools for recognizing skills acquired in informal or non-formal situations. But the potential of open badges can constitute titles offering this possibility to grant the recognition of another form of learning experiences (Werquin, 2008). Its potential on a dashboard and in particular the MyLKplatform, can be used for example to report information to identify potential knowledge and skills acquired in such a learning situation.

3. MyLK and the production of digital badges as functions of skills assessment

The MyLK platform can offer users the opportunity to displaytheiropen badges and their subsequent effective exploitation by different organizations.
The traditional use of analogue badgesin some programmes outside the institutional education framework would provide a roadmap for proposed activities and achievements. Open badges as digital tools could play a unique role in promoting teaching and lifelong learning activities. In this case, the badge system can serve as a means of visualizing the learning path. Research in the learning sciences has analysed how to guide the design of software interfaces and learning tools by involving the badge system in the process so that it is visible to the learner (Jarman 2005, Pea 2004; Quintana et al 2004, Guzdial 1994). Thus, badges can be used to value specific positive learning behaviours that trace a series of milestones towards understanding.
The MyLK plugin may give opportunity to the user to track all sort of badges acquired or obtained during a non-formal training as MOOC. He may only take little steps to record those tools on the platform MyLK.
The process of learning to use a digital artefact in a context involving novice learners, requires human action, in terms of guiding or coaching and evaluation to facilitate the achievement of goals. The costs generated by such a system, not always accessible to learners of all social strata, now favours online devices for lifelong mass formation.
It is in this respect that, when thinking about badges as an educational tool, it is interesting to define the pedagogical functions that they can play in the process of learning with technologies. Their good design can be used to signify the knowledge and skills acquired or evaluated. In addition, it also provides guidelines designed to help learners plan and chart their path, articulating state mechanisms in the learning process. (Pea 2004).
The designers of the system of badges in the context of non-formal education, like MOOCs, can exploit the orientation based on the pedagogical functions that we try to define from the literature and presented in four axes (a, b, c, d) below:
a-Structuring: It consists of communicating through sequences of structured badges, a course and the desired actions for learners on a platform (Anderson et al., 2013, Joseph 2012).
b- Badge gain: This involves implementing a process submitted to the learners of the system, consisting in winning a badge in the form of feedback, or a symbol acting on the status of the learner and his affirmation in the system ( Antin and Churchill 2011).
c-Signifier: It serves to signify the value of certain learning activities such as discussion and peer evaluation with the requirement to earn a badge (Kriplean, Beschastnikh and McDonald 2008).
d-Production: offers individuals the ability to expand the production of resources (educational, information, …) and their own learning experiences with new digital tools for open education on the internet (Brown and Adler, 2008)
e-Gamification / Motivation: The badge is integrated as a game tool within a learning environment. The goal is to influence the behaviour of the learners and to accentuate their engagement and motivation by the perception of their score. (Deterding et al., 2011).

4. Badges of open productions and gamification

4.1. Evaluation of open productions
The term “open” associated with the badge is a reminder of the initiative for shared-license software on the Internet (Open Source). The goal is to give an extended access authorization to download the contents of the information, the software products, to be able to exploit them and to modify if possible their source code (Raymond, 2000). It promotes the ever-increasing availability of computing resources and network infrastructures, which today offer a diversified access to content and a strong learning activity on the Internet. This openness gives individuals the technical ability to create creations with digital media, to accelerate the creation, sharing, reuse and dissemination of objects made (Lessig, 2008). Under these conditions, open badges would help to evaluate and value the different productions of individuals in the informal or non-formal lifelong learning environment. This open badge concept is closely related to open production ideas and will serve as a formative evaluation tool in MOOCs, still controversial in higher education. Using a dashboard involving the visibility of badges, the tool can leave traces that would help to value the assessment of informal knowledge and skills that learners can see, to highlight their learning outcomes. and professional experiences.

4.2. Evaluation by gamification
Open badges in education is a gamification method that is presented as a game that helps to stimulate the motivation factor. To bring the learner to change behavior and continue to get involved in the task, this tool acts as an external indicator, exploiting the elements like scores, levels and points obtained (Deterding et al. 2011, Zicherman and Cunningham 2011). The use of open badge is useful in a virtual classroom on an educational platform, where one can note the existence of complex interactions between highly motivated learners, and the improvement of their level of knowledge (Abramovich, Schunn and Higashi, 2013). On the other hand, in the context of informal and non-formal activities, the presence of open badges can serve as an evaluation tool in incentive mechanisms for increased participation at the individual or collective level in a variety of communities. line, involving popular social issues sites (Mamykina et al., 2011). But also more specific questions in a professional or technical field sought by an institution or an individual during his training throughout his life from the perspective of his informal or informal learning from companies that request him to perform certain tasks.

5. Conclusion

We believe that the platform MyLK project could help to ensure the visibility of the open badge as an achievement. It can be located as indicated by Arkes (1999) in a process to collect, perform different triage and classification of informal and non-formal learning information.Thus, Dashboard integrates the functionalities that contribute to formalizing the lifelong learning process of individuals, supporting possible decision-making by employers and other training institutions that are interested in the career path of jobseekers who hold open badges. It is from this perspective that we have raised from the outset one of the questions as to how the project’s device (MyLK) could exploit the system of open badges with the platform (Dashboard) to promote and showcase all types of learning (online or offline, in private or public, collective or individual) in an informal or non-formal setting? In other words, how can it be used as a tool for evaluating and valuing informal or even non-formal learning throughout one’s life, whatever the situation or learning context?
This question seems fundamental to us and could be answered by analysing the dashboard design functions in the MyLK project experimentation phase. In this respect, taking into account various functions associated with open badges as we have tried to define above with reference to the literature must be reflected in the implementation modules and open to subsequent modifications. And this, without obscuring the utility and usability in terms of perception of individual and collective experiences in use. This would promote the understanding of both the technological environment (interfaces and interoperability with the bases of other digital media and networks, …) and practices in a broader social context at European level during testing.


Anderson, A., Huttenlocher, D., Kleinberg, J., Leskovec, J. (2013) ‘Steering user behavior with badges’, Proceedings of the 22nd International Conference on World Wide Web, International World Wide Web Conferences Steering Committee, Geneva , Switzerland, pp. 95-106, [online] Available at: (accessed 16/03/2018)
Ahn, J., Pellicone, A., Brian S., Butler (2014). Open badges for education: what are the implications at the intersection of open systems and badging? College of Information Studies, University of Maryland, College Park, MD, USA
Arkes, J. (1999) ‘What do educational credentials signal and why do employers value credentials?’, Economics of Education Review, vol. 18, no. 1, pp. 133-141. Halavais, A. M. (2012) ‘A genealogy of badges: Inherited meaning and moral monstrous hybrids’, Information, Communication & Society, vol. 15, no. 3, pp. 354-373.
Blitman, s. (2014) The inverted class, a real educational upheaval? Online magazine EducPros.Fr (accessed on 26/02/2018)
Bjørnåvold, J. (2000), Making Learning Visible: Identification, Assessment and Recognition of Non-Formal Learning in Europe, Office for Official Publications of the European Communities, Luxembourg.
Brown, J.S. & Adler, R.P. (2008) ‘Open education, the long tail, and learning 2.0’, EDUCAUSE Review, vol. 43, no. 1, pp. 16-20.
Guzdial, M. (1994) ‘Software-realized scaffolding to facilitate programming for learning science’, Interactive Learning Environments, Vol. 4, no. 1, pp. 001-044. doi: 10.1080 / 1049482940040101.
Jarman, R. (2005) ‘Science learning through scouting: an understudied context for informal science education’, International Journal of Science Education, vol. 27, no. 4, pp. 427-450. doi: 10.1080 / 0950069042000266182.
Kriplean, T., Beschastnikh, I. & McDonald, DW (2008) ‘Proceedings of the 2008 ACM Conference on Computing Supported Cooperative Work, ACM, New York, NY, pp . 47-56. doi: 10.1145 / 1460563.1460573.
Knox, J. (2013) ‘Five Critics of the Open Educational Resources Movement’, Teaching in Higher Education, Vol. 18, no. 8, pp. 821-832.
Lessig, L. (2008) Remix: Making Art and Commerce Thrive in the Hybrid Economy, Penguin, = XJUN1ecjtj0wN7z8Yq13B7v9mYM (accessed on the 15/02/2018)
Landry, F. (2014) Inverse pedagogy (accessed 26/02/2018)
MacArthur F. (2013) Better futures for 2 million Americans through open badges. (accessed 17/03/2018)
Peter, S. & Deimann, M. (2013) ‘On the role of openness in education: a historical reconstruction’, Open Praxis, vol. 5, no. 1, pp. 7-14.
Pea, R. D. (2004) ‘The social and economic dimensions of scaffolding and related theoretical concepts for learning, education, and human activity’, The Journal of the Learning Sciences, vol. 13, no. 3, pp. 423-451.
Quintana, C., et al. (2004) ‘A scaffolding design framework for software to support science inquiry’, The Journal of the Learning Sciences, vol. 13, no. 3, pp. 337-386.
Raymond, E. S. (2000) ‘The cathedral and the bazaar’, (accessed 01/03/2018)
Singh, M. (2009), Why Recognition Matters – Valuing Informal and Non-formal Learning Across the North-South Divide, UNESCO Institute of Lifelong Learning, Hamburg.
Werquin, P. (2010) Recognizing non-formal and informal learning: RESULTS, POLICIES AND PRACTICES. OECD (accessed 28/02/2018)
Werquin, P. (2008) ‘Recognition of non-formal and informal learning in OECD countries: a very good idea in jeopardy?’, Lifelong Learning in Europe, vol. 3.
Organizations and companies
Cedefop (European Center for the Development of Vocational Training) (2008), Terminology of European Education and Training Policy, Office for Official Publications of the European Communities, Luxembourg.
Mozilla, & MacArthur (2011) ‘Open badges for lifelong learning’ (accessed 18/02/2018)
OECD (2010) Recognizing non-formal and informal learning RESULTS, POLICIES AND PRACTICES. OECD (Accessed 05/02/2018)
Smart Certificate. The trusted solution for issuing certified certificates / (Accessed 10/02/2018)
United States. Journal of the Association for Learning Technology (ALT). (accessed 14/03/20)