The document summarizes a study by the Joint Research Centre (JRC) on using blockchain technology for digital accreditation of learning. The study aims to identify current uses of blockchain in education, explore case studies, and propose recommendations to support open education in EU member states. Main conclusions are that blockchain applications are still emerging but have potential to disrupt student information systems. The benefits are better achieved through open implementations utilizing open standards and self-sovereign data management. The report recommends further development be a shared competence of the public and private sectors.

1. Joint Research Centre
the European Commission's
in-house science service
Blockchain in
Education
A study on the digital
accreditation of personal and
academic learning
Andreia Inamorato dos Santos
@aisantos
Groningen, The Netherlands
5th September 2017

2. 2
Joint Research Centre - JRC
The JRC (Seville) is the in-house science service of the European
Comission. Our main goal is to support policy making in Europe via
research evidence. We have over 100 policy reports published in the
field of education, to include reports on Open Education, area in
which we locate our blockchain study.

It can be downloaded from:
http://bit.ly/openeduframework

 

3. 3
DigComp
(DG EMPL)
EntreComp
(DG EMPL)
DigCompConsumers
(DG JUST)
OpenEdu Policies (DG EAC)
MOOCKnowledge
(DG EAC)
Blockchain for
Education
(DG JRC)
OPTEV
(DG JRC)
MOOCs4 inclusion
(DG EAC)
Learning Analytics
(DG JRC)
Anticipatory studies
Policy & society
OrganisationsIndividuals
DigCompEdu
(DG EAC)
DigPolEdu
(DG EAC)
CPDmodels
(DG EAC)
ICTinPISA
(DG EAC)
CompuThink
(DG JRC)
DigCompOrg4Schools
(DG EAC)
OpenEdu (HE)
(DG EAC)
DigCompOrg
(DG EAC)
Current JRC research on Digital Age Learning
and 21st Century Skills

4. 4
Blockchain in Education study
Who is involved: The study is being carried out by the Joint
Research Centre (JRC), unit B4, of which the overall education
project areas coordination is by Yves Punie. Main researchers for
this study are Alex Grech and Anthony Camilleri (Strategyworks)
and study design and management is by Andreia Inamorato
(European Commission, JRC).
Collaborators for use cases: interviewees, informants and
reviewers based in Europe and abroad (e.g. Open University UK;
MIT, Learning Machine, University of Nicosia, Malta education
institutions, Ministry of Education of Estonia and The Netherlands -
University of Groningen)
Outcome: A report to be published in the Autumn 2017

5. 5
Outcome
‘Blockchain in Education: a study on the digital
accreditation of personal and academic learning’
(JRC, 2017)
Upcoming report:
Autumn 2017

6. 6
Aims of the study
The study sought to:
Identify, analyse and disseminate the state-of-the-art of the
use of blockchain technologies in education in the EU.
Currently stakeholders within the education sector are often
unaware of the social advantages and potential of blockchain
technology. The report tries to address this gap
Explore examples of practices via case studies in Europe and
abroad ( and present possible future scenarios: e.g. blockchain for
automatic recognition and transfer of credits, as a lifelong learning
passport, for tracking intellectual property, etc)
Propose a set of recommendations that may support EU efforts
(Member States and the European Commission) to open up
education in Member States by maximising the potential for
blockchain technologies.

7. 7
Qualitative methodology
Source: Overview of Methodology, Blockchain for Education, JRC 2017

8. 8
Report content overview
 Identification and engaging with the key issues which are
influencing policy-makers and other key stakeholders in
considering the use of the Blockchain as a value-added
proposition within an education landscape (social value
proposition: 1. self-sovereignty and identity; 2: trust; 3.
transparency and provenance; 4. immutability; 5.
disintermediation and 6. collaboration)
 Exploration of how education institutions and learners can use
the technology as a transparent, trusted system for
securing, sharing and verifying academic achievements in
Europe ( e.g. ontology of certifications, smart contracts, digital
signatures, grants issuing, etc)

9. 9
Report content overview
 Discussion whether the technology is fit-for-purpose for the
recording of academic achievements within the short-term,
and the likely take-up by European universities and higher
education institutions should it be deployed as an open standard
 Discussion of how the Blockchain may help bridge the legitimate
need for academic institutions to safeguard their brands
and reputation when issuing academic credentials and the
aspirations of individuals to maximise their learning portfolio
OpenCred report (JRC, 2016)
Validation of non-formal,
MOOC-based learning
Available at: http://bit.ly/opencredreport

10. 10
Report content overview
 Identification of a set of clear opportunities and challenges
for the take-up of the Blockchain in higher education institutions
 Exploration of issues relating to interoperability of technology;
and how the centralized nature of accreditation and the
decentralized nature of the Blockchain could be reconciled
 Set of recommendations that may support open education in
Member States by maximising the potential for blockchain
technologies

11. 11
Main conclusions
This report concludes that blockchain applications for education are
still in their infancy (1). It describes case studies of
implementations from various European and non-European
players, but each of these implementations is in a piloting phase.
However, even from these early pilots, it is possible to suggest
that blockchain has the potential to disrupt the market in student
information systems (2), by loosening the control current players
have over this market. ( in line with open education’s sharing and
transparency principles)

12. 12
Main conclusions
A further conclusion is that the benefits of blockchain in education
are better achieved through open implementations of the
technology (3), by utilising open source software, open standards
for data, and implementing self-sovereign data management
solutions.
Finally the study recommends that: a) further development of the
technology in the educational field should be considered as a
shared competence of the market and of public authorities (4), to
ensure an appropriate balance of private sector innovation coupled
with safeguard of the public interest ( shared competence between
the EU and MS)

13. 13
Upcoming reports: OpenEdu Policies

14. 14
24-26 April

15. 15
Thank you
andreia-inamorato-dos.santos@ec.europa.eu
yves.punie@ec.europa.eu
https://ec.europa.eu/jrc/en/open-education