Quoted, with useless adjectives removed: "Following the release of the digital badge stacking tool - Badgr Pathways - BadgeRank allows anyone to explore the digital badges published by Open Badges compliant systems around the world." According to the release, "BadgeRank indexes over 100,000 digital badges from around the world and ranks them based on signals such as Endorsements by external organizations and Outcomes for credential holders" (their pointless capitalization).
So I ended up adding three comments to Doug Belshaw's post. He reports that the lawyers have said they have to delete all their meeting recordings because of GDPR. I firmly doubt that mass deletions of recordings are taking place in actual law offices, because the risk of not having a record exceeds the risk of not having deleted it. Anyhow, here's what my responses were: "I think that the first thing you need is a second opinion. The lawyer seems very over-cautious. It strikes me that what the lawyer is requiring go well beyond the provisions of GDPR. p.s. I want to call my bank and have them delete any records they have related to me. Especially the ones that say I owe them money. p.p.s. What I have learned over the years is to never ask a layer what course of action to take. The lawyer will always recommend the path of zero risk. Instead, ask the lawyer what the risks are. Then you decide.
Watch out for the marketing with this one. The Chronicle article is simply a restatement of the first page of 'key findings' (p. 6) (except it changes the title of the third from "Online learning is providing a positive return on students" investment' to "Regrets" since it is the Chronicle, after all). The report (62 page PDF) is a lot more detailed than that. Learning House, which produced the report, wants your data in return for the download (though typing "no spam" works). The survey of 1500 online students is actually worth the time to read it. Not so the Chronicle article, which is mostly a vehicle for an advertisement for an expensive 'Future of Learning' report embedded right in the middle of the article (where it looks like the report being reviewed in the article, which it's not). It's hard to believe the Chronicle would accurately project the future of learning, but since I'm not about to pay them $179, I guess I'll never know.
This newsletter is sent only at the request of subscribers. If you would like to unsubscribe, Click here.
Know a friend who might enjoy this newsletter? Feel free to forward OLDaily to your colleagues. If you received this issue from a friend and would like a free subscription of your own, you can join our mailing list. Click here to subscribe.
Copyright 2018 Stephen Downes Contact: email@example.comThis work is licensed under a Creative Commons License.