[Bf-education] Bf-education Digest, Vol 96, Issue 10

Piotr Arlukowicz piotao at gmail.com
Thu Dec 5 09:52:29 CET 2013

​Hi All,
dear Octavio,

I can set up WIKI page for us like before, but WIKI​ is good only for
stationary content, as a documentation system, not for real dynamic
discussion. If we got some clues I will be more than happy to put all our
work somewhere, and then WIKI will serve well. I asked BF already about a
good handy platform for discussion and for documentation of certificate
progress, but we have to wait for them to answer. I you would like, I can
establish a forum (using SMF engine) on my Polish Community pages, which
will be international and open for further discussion. One way or another,
I can setup this in any second.

I would like to propose the fist topicto be discussed, i think we must
>> begin from the beginning: A blenderuser certification is required?, yes?,
>> no?, why? pros and cons?
>I would say yes and no. Only in an ideal world we don't need any
certification. Here where we are we need it to prove something. This is
important mainly for business and for self-development purposes. And while
Blender becomes one of the industry and educational standard, we
desperately need something which can standardize things, mainly at the
basic ground level. So, certificates for 101 training are welcome, BFCT is
welcomed, another things are still a subject of discussion.

> About the certificate itself, in thepast, Ton suggest to create or use
>> something like Mozilla Open Badges(http://openbadges.org ) insteadof a
>> certificate. Seems like a good idea to me, what do you think?.
​I have mixed feelings about badges. They really have to be well-taught in
order to serve seriously as a measurement who represent what. So, we can
allow two approaches: to disperse them to small specialties, ​or just to
keep few of them for bigger things. We can also establish levels or trees
or pyramids and count only the most valuable badges. The system is however
similar to collecting stamp marks, and in my mind it don't fit well for
professional grading system. What do you think?
Piotr Arlukowicz
Version: 3.1
GCS/ED/IT/S d++(-)>--pu s(+):(+)> a C++(+++)$@>++++$  ULAVISC*()$>+++$
P++(+++)$>++++ L++(+++)$@>++++$ !E---(---)>++ W++(+++)$@>+++ N(+)>++ o--?
!K-(-)>-$ w++(+)>-- !O-(-)>- !M-(-)>-- !V-(-)>- PS(+)>++ !PE()>+  Y PGP>+
t(-) !5? !X R()>* tv- b++ DI++ D+(++)>+++ G++@ e++++>+++++ h---()>++ r+++
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.blender.org/pipermail/bf-education/attachments/20131205/dc8ec39b/attachment.html>

More information about the Bf-education mailing list