Critical and systematic micro-credential studies worldwide1, many captured in the European Union’s Micro-Credential Observatory, hosted at Dublin City University (DCU)2 and in Contact North | Contact Nord’s micro-credential resource hub at teachonline.ca3 identified a series of core issues colleges and universities as well as regulators, policy-makers and funders for MICRO-CREDENTIALS 2.0:
- Not all micro-credentials are related to skills in demand. Some are but many are not.
- Competency statements that focus on the explicit knowledge, skills and capabilities needed for in-demand skills are not the driving force for the design and development of many micro-credentials. Rather, course learning objectives reflect a more traditional approach to the design of these learning experiences.
- Few micro-credentials offered in Canada or Europe carry employer endorsements.
- There is no substantial use of competency-based assessment requiring students to submit audio, video or other forms of evidence of their skills and capabilities for many micro-credentials. Providers continue to use traditional academic assessments as the basis for awarding the credential.
- Micro-credentials offered in Canada vary in length from six to 450+ hours at universities and 25-175 hours at colleges. It is difficult to make sense of this complex landscape.
- Various kinds of micro-credentials were developed, including the list of 10 showcased at teachonline.ca4. Not all are skills-based or related to skills in demand.
- The process for quality assurance varies. A recent analysis of the situation in Ontario by the Postsecondary Qualifications Assessment Board (PEQAB) recommends there be two streams: (a) an open market, which is the current situation, and (b) a quality-assured market that carries a trademarked brand to make clear that a specific micro-credential meets a set of criteria. Various frameworks for micro-credentials exist and informed initial thinking, but they don’t reflect the current reality of what’s available to students.
- There is little compelling evidence in Canada of widespread acceptance of micro-credentials by employers as a basis for hiring decisions. New approaches to employer co-creation and their deep involvement in assessment may be needed to change this situation5.
- There are issues about the portability of a micro-credential. For example, if a student successfully completes a college or university micro-credential in cybersecurity in Ontario, will it be acceptable to employers in the United States (US) or the EU?
- Micro-credentials are seen to shift the responsibility for upskilling from employers to employees, which is a concern for unions. Canada already spends less per employee on training and development than its OECD counterparts. Fewer than 30% of adult workers in Canada participate in job-related education and training, compared to almost 35% in the United Kingdom and nearly 45% in the US. American firms spend about 50% more on training than Canadian firms6.
- The delivery of some (but not all) micro-credentials through online learning limits access for those living in remote and rural areas of Canada where Internet access is often limited and expensive.
- Access to micro-credentials for learners who are traditionally under-represented in post-secondary education systems remains a challenge. For example, Indigenous ways of knowing embedded in micro-courses or courses designed specifically for newcomers are few and far between.
- Canadian micro-credentials are not strongly linked to qualifications standards and frameworks, even though these do exist. For example, Ontario has a substantial qualifications framework7.
- Although some micro-credentials are reported to have attracted significant enrolment, not all have. How sustainable this eco-system is remains in doubt.
The recalibration of micro-credentials – moving to Micro-credentials 2.0 – requires a refocus on skills, competencies and capabilities as well as a higher level of employer engagement in the design of the credential. More specifically, employers must be highly engaged in the design of and evaluation of student competencies. New approaches to assessment will make Micro-credentials 2.0 a strong response to the growing skills gap.
[1] See https://www.dcu.ie/nidl/micro-credential-observatory#Reports
[2] See https://www.dcu.ie/nidl/micro-credential-observatory
[3] See https://teachonline.ca/tools-trends/making-sense-of%20micro-credentials
[4] https://teachonline.ca/tools-trends/10-kinds-micro-credentials
[5] See https://cwf.ca/research/publications/what-now-micro-credentials-small-qualifications-big-deal/ and also https://teachonline.ca/tools-trends/10-key-actions-ensure-micro-credentials-meet-needs-learners-and-employers for specific suggestions of what needs to happen.
[6] See https://oaresource.library.carleton.ca/cprn/45354_en.pdf.
