Paul Grainger’s 25th April article exploring the role that micro-credentials can play in the economy and lifelong learning was an interesting take on their use. Whilst I agreed with a lot of his arguments there were some elements of his article that I’d like to challenge and provide an alternative viewpoint for. “Of course, micro-credentials will never replace carefully thought-through, formal vocational qualifications . But they can meet both an economic and personal need, particularly at times of crisis or rapid change.”“The micro-credential draws upon relevant parts of an existing course and the professional expertise of those who deliver the course, both qualified lecturers and industrial experts.”MICRO-CREDENTIALS ARE NOT COMPETITION TO MACRO-CREDENTIALSMicro-credentials are not and should not be seen as a competitor to macro-credentials (qualifications), they are a different beast entirely. The most widely accepted purpose and intention of micro-credentials is that they are primarily used to upskill and/or reskill people already in work, with a focus on a particular skill set which can be learned in a shorter period than a full qualification.One of the benefits of a micro-credential is its small size. When in development, timeframes are shorter and there is more agility with being able to update them, maintaining currency. Due to the size constraints, the training has to be focused on what the learner needs to learn at that moment for that particular set of skills.Drawing upon relevant parts of an existing course to create micro-credentials becomes problematic. Having elements of the same course both as a qualification and a micro-credential begin to lead to issues of duplication and currency and move away from the real purpose of micro-credentials. There are some who have created policies to ensure this division, in New Zealand for instance, micro-credentials will not be accepted on the New Zealand Qualifications Framework if the content already exists as part of a qualification.“There are, at present, attempts to formalize, and so undermine, the spirit of micro-credentials .”MICRO-CREDENTIALS TO DATE HAVE BEEN VARIED IN THEIR STRUCTURE AND DESIGNMicro-credentials to date have been varied in their structure and design, without a widely accepted definition, limiting the value of credentials in areas of the world where they are not formalised. To best utilise micro-credentials there needs to be boundaries, and a genuine and formal understanding of micro-credentials for them to mean anything. Formalising micro-credentials doesn’t undermine them, it gives them value and improves their validity with a formalised and recognised structure.There isn’t just one way to formalise micro-credentials: micro-credentials can be added to a national qualifications framework where the learner can earn credits and potentially funding too. With micro-credentials being on a national framework there is a stronger chance of international recognition as well as domestic respect for, and acceptance of, what the learner has achieved. An alternative method of formalising is via industry.Instead of being accredited on a national framework, it could be accredited by an industry group for instance – recognising the value of the learning, ideally via the group being involved in the development and/or quality assuring the credential. Both methods provide an assurance by a recognised body that the credential has tangible value, assuring employers that the workers who hold it have a certain set of provable skills and at the same time assures the learner that it is a valid credential to undertake and will help them in their career.“Towards the end of the pandemic, I was invited to a city-wide meeting of universities to develop micro-credentials to help support the changing city economy. Sadly there was no talk of employers’ needs of learners’ competencies. The discussion kept reverting to the value of ‘units’, and who would accept whose accreditatio...

Ver todos los episodios