The Present and Future of Alternative Digital Credentials. ICDE World Conference
•Download as PPTX, PDF•
1 like•273 views
This presentation reviews the ICDE report on “The Present and Future of ADCs.” It also provides an update to the report with specific examples of issues that were highlighted that have already, subsequently to the report, come to our attention. We start with a list of recommendations that reveal the overarching purpose of the report, which encourages and provides guidance to ICDE member institutions who are considering, or have already adopted, ADCs.
Recommended
Recommended
More Related Content
What's hot
What's hot (20)
Similar to The Present and Future of Alternative Digital Credentials. ICDE World Conference
Similar to The Present and Future of Alternative Digital Credentials. ICDE World Conference (20)
More from Gary Matkin
More from Gary Matkin (19)
Recently uploaded
Recently uploaded (20)
The Present and Future of Alternative Digital Credentials. ICDE World Conference
- 1. The Present and Future of Alternative Digital Credentials: An Update Presented to the ICDE World Conference Gary W. Matkin, Ph.D Dean of Continuing Education, Vice Provost of Career Pathways University of California, Irvine Darien Rossiter 21CC Lead, Principal Advisor to DVC Education RMIT University Dublin, Ireland November 6, 2019
- 2. Report Recommendations 1. Adopt digital credentials 2. Secure support from senior management 3. Adopt uniform standards and oversight 4. Make important and early decisions 5. Establish an implementation plan 6. Choose a third party vendor 7. Continuously evaluate 8. Be alert of blockchain technology ICDE Report Download Designing and Implementing Micro-Credentials Report Download
- 3. Report Table of Contents (Abridged) 1. Definitions 2. Rationale 3. Employer Acceptance 4. Criteria 5. Implementation
- 4. Rationale for ADCs 1. ADCs are growing quickly 2. ADCs will supplement traditional transcripts 3. ADCs promote improved pedagogy 4. ADCs encourage cooperation between universities and regional workforce development 5. ADCs demonstrate university accountability 6. ADCs offer high quality service at low cost 7. ADCs are consistent with modern hiring practices 8. ADCs are natural components of open education 9. ADCs are consistent with demands of younger adult learners
- 5. Criteria for Issuance 1. Non-duplication of existing certifications (transcripts) 2. Relevant to workforce needs 3. Must indicate competencies, assessments, and evidence of attainment 4. Must be issued for evaluated competencies and learning 5. Must be substantive (non-trivial) 6. Assessments must be clearly and specifically defined (rubrics) 7. Assessors must be highly qualified in the specific field being verified 8. Levels of competency must be clearly defined 9. Institutional permanent records should be maintained 10. Identifying issues must be authenticated and secure
- 6. Crucial Issues in Adopting ADCs 1. Competency vs. learning achievement 2. Digital credentials vs. digitized transcripts 3. Workplace relevance 4. Campus oversight and control 5. Pedagogical relevance 6. Articulate needs for students 7. Articulate needs for faculty 8. Articulate needs for employers 9. Development of universal standards
- 7. REPORT QUESTIONS AND COMMENTS
- 8. UCI DCE ADCs Issued as of October 7, 2019 # Issued # Claimed % Claimed Shared %Shared Skill ADCs 2207 1615 73% 916 55% Program ADCs 897 742 83% 385 47% Course ADCs 440 296 67% 137 44% 3544 2653 67% 1437 51%
- 9. RMIT University (as of Oct 11 2019) Enrolments Completions (Issued) Badges Claimed % Shared % Satisfaction 2017 -19 2018 2017 -19 2018 2017 -19 2018 2017 -19 2018 2017 -19 2018 Open Marketplace 50,133 21,087 16,340 (33%) 7,481 (36%) 14,534 (89%) 6,617 (88%) 4,978 (34%) 2,576 (39%) 91% 93% Embedded (Formal Curriculum) 90,072 8,912 29,936 (33%) 3,440 (43%) 28,196 (94%) 3,370 (88%) 5,245 (19%) 749 (22%) 82% 84% Staff 3,720 663 1,964 (53%) 310 (47%) 1,542 (79%) 281 (91%) 380 (25%) 108 (38%) Total 143,925 30,662 48,240 (35%) 11,231 (38%) 44,272 (92%) 10,268 (88%) 10,603 (24%) 3,433 (33%) 85% 90%
- 10. Insights and Observations from Two Instituions • How has the approach adopted by these two institions varied? – UCI has been more selective about their ADCs and has resulted in higher performance around claims and shares – RMIT has had a ‘whole of institution approach.’ This allows us to operate at scale and refine and hone the experience and prioritization of our offerings
- 11. Crucial Issues in Adopting ADCs 1. Competency vs. learning achievement 2. Digital credentials vs. digitized transcripts 3. Workplace relevance 4. Campus oversight and control 5. Pedagogical relevance 6. Articulate needs for students 7. Articulate needs for faculty 8. Articulate needs for employers 9. Development of universal standards
- 12. Crucial Issues in Adopting ADCs 1. Competency vs. learning achievement 2. Digital credentials vs. digitized transcripts 3. Workplace relevance 4. Campus oversight and control 5. Pedagogical relevance 6. Articulate needs for students 7. Articulate needs for faculty 8. Articulate needs for employers 9. Development of universal standards
- 13. Competency vs. Learning Achievement The Big ADC Challenge Competency • Based on demonstrated skills • Workplace relevant independent of learning Learning Achievement • Based on learning assessment • Academic relevance and learning centric
- 14. Crucial Issues in Adopting ADCs 1. Competency vs. learning achievement 2. Digital credentials vs. digitized transcripts 3. Workplace relevance 4. Campus oversight and control 5. Pedagogical relevance 6. Articulate needs for students 7. Articulate needs for faculty 8. Articulate needs for employers 9. Development of universal standards
- 15. Crucial Issues in Adopting ADCs 1. Competency vs. learning achievement 2. Digital credentials vs. digitized transcripts 3. Workplace relevance 4. Campus oversight and control 5. Pedagogical relevance 6. Articulate needs for students 7. Articulate needs for faculty 8. Articulate needs for employers 9. Development of universal standards
- 16. Crucial Issues in Adopting ADCs 1. Competency vs. learning achievement 2. Digital credentials vs. digitized transcripts 3. Workplace relevance 4. Campus oversight and control 5. Pedagogical relevance 6. Articulate needs for students 7. Articulate needs for faculty 8. Articulate needs for employers 9. Development of universal standards
- 17. Crucial Issues in Adopting ADCs 1. Competency vs. learning achievement 2. Digital credentials vs. digitized transcripts 3. Workplace relevance 4. Campus oversight and control 5. Pedagogical relevance 6. Articulate needs for students 7. Articulate needs for faculty 8. Articulate needs for employers 9. Development of universal standards
- 18. Relevance as Rankings Driver “Relevance explains two and three times more variance in consumer ratings of quality and value, respectively, than public data widely used to create college and university rankings.” Source: Strada Education Network and Gallup. (2018). From college to life: Relevance and the value of higher education. (pg.2)
- 19. Crucial Issues in Adopting ADCs 1. Competency vs. learning achievement 2. Digital credentials vs. digitized transcripts 3. Workplace relevance 4. Campus oversight and control 5. Pedagogical relevance 6. Articulate needs for students 7. Articulate needs for faculty 8. Articulate needs for employers 9. Development of universal standards
- 20. Crucial Issues in Adopting ADCs 1. Competency vs. learning achievement 2. Digital credentials vs. digitized transcripts 3. Workplace relevance 4. Campus oversight and control 5. Pedagogical relevance 6. Articulate needs for students 7. Articulate needs for faculty 8. Articulate needs for employers 9. Development of universal standards
- 21. Crucial Issues in Adopting ADCs 1. Competency vs. learning achievement 2. Digital credentials vs. digitized transcripts 3. Workplace relevance 4. Campus oversight and control 5. Pedagogical relevance 6. Articulate needs for students 7. Articulate needs for faculty 8. Articulate needs for employers 9. Development of universal standards
- 22. Crucial Issues in Adopting ADCs 1. Competency vs. learning achievement 2. Digital credentials vs. digitized transcripts 3. Workplace relevance 4. Campus oversight and control 5. Pedagogical relevance 6. Articulate needs for students 7. Articulate needs for faculty 8. Articulate needs for employers 9. Development of universal standards
- 23. Discussion 1. What issues are you experiencing and how are you dealing with them? 2. Which issues should we discuss further? 3. What more should ICDE do to advance the ADC Movement?
Editor's Notes
- We will begin this presentation with a review of the ICDE report on “The Present and Future of ADCs.” The presentation also will provide an update to the report with specific examples of issues that were highlighted that have already, subsequently to the report, come to our attention. We start with a list of recommendations that reveal the overarching purpose of the report, which encourages and provides guidance to ICDE member institutions who are considering, or have already adopted, ADCS. Here is a list of the report’s recommendation that clearly indicate this purpose. https://static1.squarespace.com/static/5b99664675f9eea7a3ecee82/t/5cc69fb771c10b798657bf2f/1556520905468/ICDE-ADC+report-January+2019+%28002%29.pdf In addition, here is another report for review. Rossiter, D. and Tynan, B. (2019) Designing and Implementing Micro-Credentials: A Guide for Practitioners. Commonwealth of Leaning, Knowledge Series. http://oasis.col.org/handle/11599/3279 Another indication is the recent review of the Australian Qualifications Framework – just released that recommends the development guidelines in Pathways Policy to facilitate the recognition of shorter form credentials, including micro-credentials, for credit. This includes recognition for credit transfer or articulation to AQF qualifications. https://www.aqf.edu.au.
- This is a shortened list of the topics covered in the report. Let us summarize very briefly each of these elements to remind those who may have forgotten or those who have not read the report. The report starts with a definition of ADCs that emphasizes the “alternative” as a differentiating from traditional transcripts, “digital,” to designate the format of the credentials, and a “credential” to indicate that some form of attestation of learning or competency has occurred. The rationale for the adoption is well documented in the report to the point that they are becoming an imperative—that is, they cannot be ignored by universities. For more information about this you may view two reports: EduTrends Alternative Credentials by Tech de Monterey, May 2019: EduTrends-Alternative-Credentials-May-2019.pdf and Making Credentials Work, Deakin University, August 2019: https://dteach.deakin.edu.au/2019/08/02/microcredentials/. This imperative is documented by the fact that ADCs are already widely in use, and in fact, traditional transcripts are not serving the workforce. ADCs are supportive of open education and hiring practices are favoring ADCs. in addition, the international ADC system is developing. The report also cites examples of the growing acceptance and use by employers of ADCs. Perhaps the most important part of the report is the offering of a set of criteria that institutions might use to guide the issuance of ADCs. Finally, the report describes some steps that an ICDE member institution might take to adopt and maintain an ADC service capacity.
- This is a complete listing of the elements that we see as clear indications that ADCs should be adopted by ICDE members.
- The most difficult decision to make regarding ADCs is really what not to issue. The adoption of clear and consistently applied criteria for issuance bolsters the credibility of the individual ADC and the reputation of the institution that issues it. Here is a listing of the criteria we propose. The primary and most controversial elements of this list of criterion are that ADCs be workplace relevant and that they be competency based.
- The committee that produced this report has continued to monitor the progress of the ADC movement and continues to collect cases and issues that influence the evolvement of ADCs. Here is a list of the major issues and concerns. These were either described in the report and continue to be an impact or new issue that has come to our attention as we proceed to implement ADCs in our institutions. We will briefly discuss each of these to see if they correspond to your concerns and then open the floor for you to add issues or describe how you have addressed them on your campus.
- To give you an idea of two institutions represented in the report we will describe the extent to which we are engaged in issuing ADCs. This shows UCI’s record to date.
- ( In contrast to UCI, RMIT has been extensively engaged in ADCs as part of a holistic approach to workforce development in Australia. Here you will see their volume. This is a table that demonstrates volume and scale. It demonstrates the high adoption in 2 ½ years since we launched the initiative. BUT caution about aggregation of data as it hides the variation and biases which exist between different models/ creds/products and learner demographics. 49,000 students from student population of 92,000 who have participated. 3,500 learners (not enrolled in formal qualification programs who have participated - fee basis) Over 60% do more than 1 cred Brief description of open v embed Staff Creds launched Nov 2018 Embedded Program Enrolments – significant step up in enrolments – primarily from size of embed program where we have over 80 of formal degree program participating. BUT also importantly over 50% increase in open as well ( all on organic – no market campaigns to enrol) Completions for current year misleading as shells still open till rollover. Completions indicate variation – some creds 100% but we have a tail of lower performing creds which bring % down. YTD 2019 tracking 35% . We have a target of 40%. Completions influenced by whether voluntary or automatic enrolment in creds for example. Badges claimed – consistently high – pleasing. Indicator of value or worth once individual has successfully completed cred. Shared much more challenging – many younger students not sure what to do with it once they have it. We see high % of our first years students don’t have linked in account for example. Satisfaction consistently high but more challenging as we scale the volume product, need to maintain the quality and also move beyond early adopter participants. Those who voluntarily participate (open) have higher satisfaction than those who are ‘volunteered’ to participate through embed.
- The committee that produced this report has continued to monitor the progress of the ADC movement and continues to collect cases and issues that influence the evolvement of ADCs. Here is a list of the major issues and concerns. These were either described in the report and continue to be an impact or new issue that has come to our attention as we proceed to implement ADCs in our institutions. We will briefly discuss each of these to see if they correspond to your concerns and then open the floor for you to add issues or describe how you have addressed them on your campus.
- By far the most difficult decision for an institution to make is whether or not to limit ADCs to competency-based attestations.
- The best use of ADCs is in the verification of actual competency or skill mastery rather than just a verification of learning. Competency is the application of learning to a specific skill/behavior rather than just knowledge.
- Another confusion that presents itself related to competency vs. learning achievement is the notion that digitizing traditional transcripts is the same or very similar to digitizing credentials. Especially if an institution recognizes only competency based assessments for issuing ADCs, then digitizing traditional transcripts Is a different concept and process.
- Restricting ADCs to those that are workplace relevant is both a bold and controversial move since it blocks out achievements that seem worth of recognition by a university, including such activities such as student involvement in public service activities or international experiences to name just two curricular activities that are praiseworthy. However, ADCs from an institution need some focus to gain legitimacy and a focus on the workplace and skills gap is the best focus for a meaningful ADC to have.
- The barriers to entry into ADC issuance are exceedingly low and so it is possible that more than one unit of a university might begin issuing ADCs. This could squander the potential power of ADCs by having ADCs issued according to different criteria, with different iconic treatment, and different structures of metadata. Such a proliferation of ADCs can create confusion in the marketplace and devalue the ADC and the reputation of the institution.
- One positive finding of our early experience in ADCs is that they appear to have positive pedagogical effects when embedded in regular courses. When students are rewarded for learning useful skills they learn better the general content surrounding those skills. This is a strong rationale for ADC adoption.
- As learning objects relevant to the world of work are infused in the content delivery, learning, and satisfaction increase.
- I wonder should we ask audience at this point what other issues they would identify and then we could vote on/prioritize the ones for discussion.