Recognition of Micro-Credentials for Education and Training

This form of recognition takes place anytime prior learning is recognised for formal education and training purposes. This can include for admission into an E&T organisation, exemption from part of a programme, as well as stacking or combining credentials for the purposes of progression through an education and training programme or for certification of learning outcomes.

Such recognition can take place via various routes depending on the existence of credit sharing and recognition agreements or on regional or global recognition frameworks, as well as validation arrangements. This chapter recommends micro-credential providers to ensure the necessary pre-conditions for recognition to take place through different recognition routes.

In Europe, the recognition of qualifications is mainly the prerogative of the education and training institution to which an applicant applies for recognition. Given that there is a lack of harmonisation of definitions, processes, and evaluation criteria for micro-credentials, E&T organisations are expected to tailor criteria for recognition.

The project ‘Evaluating e-learning for academic recognition’ - e-Valuate led by Nuffic demonstrated how stand-alone e-learning (including micro-credentials) can be recognised for access into Higher Education. The project suggested seven criteria for the evaluation of a micro-credential, based on recognition procedures of foreign qualifications:

• quality - internal or external quality assurance procedures applied to the micro-credential or accreditation of the micro-credential provider;
• online verification - the authenticity of a credential may be determined by checking the provider's website for the programme or by checking the digital signature on a verifiable credential;
• level - should be indicated with reference to established (national or regional) qualification frameworks, rather than to a platform specific classification;
• learning outcomes - should be listed in as much detail as possible, preferably with reference to a skill or competence framework;
• workload - should be indicated in terms of theoretical workload, as well as actual workload undertaken by the learner;
• testing - the existence of standardised testing rubrics against which to assess learner performance;
• online identification - the processes for ensuring that the credential-holder is the same person who followed the learning experience and participated in the assessment.

Nuffic have developed a freely available online tool to aid credential evaluators in assessing micro-credentials against these criteria. Screenshots are shown in Figure 11.

Figure 11: Screenshots of the Micro-Evaluator tool. Source: Nuffic (n.d.)

The high administrative burden required to evaluate micro-credentials on a case-by-case basis creates a strong incentive for providers to develop routes for automatic or semi-automatic recognition wherever possible.

Enable Multiple, Feasible Routes for Micro-Credential Recognition

Our mapping of recognition practices for micro-credentials, displayed in Figure 12, indicates that there are several potential routes an education and training provider may take to enable recognition.

Figure 12: Main routes to recognise micro-credentials for education and training purposes.

The most automatic route involves recognition of a micro-credential using an established credit-exchange agreement between the education and training institutions involved. Where no such agreement exists, micro-credentials may be recognised through the procedures for recognition of prior learning (RPL). In each case, recognition might enable a learner to be admitted, progress through or complete a study programme on the basis of micro-credentials earned at another learning institution.

Additionally, a micro-credential can be recognised for access to Higher Education in institutions belonging to systems which have ratified the Convention on the Recognition of Qualifications concerning Higher Education in the European Region (LRC) and/or the UNESCO Global Convention on Higher Education (GRC) - both legally binding recognition frameworks to ensure fair and transparent recognition processes.

Currently, most of the 'recognition routes' are theoretical, or the subject of pilot projects. Interviews indicate that where it is available at all, the only route that is widespread at this moment is usually that of RPL. Nevertheless, the next sections provide a guide to how to enable recognition of micro-credentials in any learning organisation.

Facilitate Recognition via Credit-Exchange Agreements

'Recognition Networks' which use inter-institutional agreements provide the best route to the recognition of micro-credentials between learning organisations. Inter-provider agreements for credit exchange are a common feature of mobility programmes. Within VET, a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) is often signed to regulate mobility. It confirms that VET partners accept each other’s status as competent institutions; accept each other’s quality assurance, assessment, validation and recognition criteria and procedures as satisfactory for the purposes of credit transfer; agree on the conditions for the operation of the partnership, such as objectives, duration and arrangements for review of the MoU; agree on the compatibility of qualifications concerned for the purposes of credit transfer, using the reference levels established by a regional qualification framework such as the EQF; and identify other actors and competent institutions that may be involved in the process concerned and their functions (European Parliament and Council, 2009). In Higher Education 'Inter-institutional Agreements' serve a similar purpose. Providing that micro-credentials are credit-bearing (and share a credit system with the programme a learner follows), then they can be recognised as contributing to a programme a learner is following or in which they want to enrol.

Taking into account the views of different stakeholders, and based on findings from Henderikx and Ubachs (2019), recognition of credit exchange occurs when:

• From an organisational perspective, two or more learning institutions organize and recognize the study periods followed by their learners in an exchange program or in a networked/joint program. Institutional policies and strategies entail such collaborations and mobility. Collaboration and mobility agreements create the organizational framework. The organisations involved enhance their profile and strengthen their curricula.
• From a learner perspective, learners follow a learning activity, a course or part of a curriculum in another university in the framework of a bilateral or a network/consortium agreement between universities. Learners benefit from a rich international academic experience.
• From a teaching staff perspective, staff is organising a learning activity or a course in the framework of a bilateral or a network/consortium agreement between learning organisations. By doing so, new learning and mobility formats are created, based on international course and curriculum design. Teaching combines collaboration in learning, research and innovation.

Automatic Recognition via Inter-Institutional Agreements

Under such an agreement, a group of E&T providers can agree to allow their learners to use credits from other providers party to the agreement, as part of their study programme. The essential nature of such agreements is that they are automatic in nature – i.e. learners who are studying a programme at a home organisation, may acquire any relevant micro-credential that meets the requirements of the agreement to form part of the study programme, without the need for further administrative procedures. Such agreements may be designed with varying scopes and level of ambition.

Learning organisations, especially small ones, may want to give learners access to a more comprehensive programme than what is feasible with their staff and resources. This can be made possible through an agreement leading to an elective learning pathway by extending a list of modules a learner may select from during their studies with select micro-credentials offered by other organisations.

Should the aim be to offer the learner an international multi-institutional learning, then an agreement leading to a rigid learning pathway would result in a programme designed to include compulsory credits from two or more E&T organisations. Joint degrees are an extreme form of such arrangements.

In all these cases, an inter-institutional agreement can be used to regulate micro-credential credit transfer - the key elements of the agreement being the:

• Two or more institutions party to the agreement.
• Modules/courses which shall be available for exchange.
• Programmes (at the home institutions) where these modules/courses may be included.
• Conditions for the automatic recognition of these modules/courses (e.g. the learner achieving a passing grade).

The project European Credit Clearinghouse for Opening up Education and training (ECCOE) created and validated a template for such inter-institutional agreements labelled as a Model Credit Recognition Agreement (MCRA). The MCRA may be organised between two higher education institutions (HEIs) for a maximum of two courses which can be mutually recognised/ validated as equivalent in each institution. A user's guide is available to support new HEIs in using the tool for developing a MCRA. Other than the elements described above, the tool also includes existing recognition and validation paths in the existing partner HEIs in order to further standardise and advance the use of MCRA with new HEIs (ECCOE, n.d.).

Credit-exchange agreements are the least administrative route given that they allow for automatic recognition, and they provide for predictable, reproducible outcomes in recognition processes. Figure 13 depicts a screenshot of a possible product of inter-institutional credit exchange agreements - two joint Master's degree programmes in Sustainable Development offered by Hiroshima University, University of Graz and Leipzig University according to the specialisation chosen by the learner.

Figure 13: A joint Master degree programme with two specialisations in sustainable development offered by Hiroshima University. Source: Hiroshima University (2020).

Such agreements can be signed bilaterally between institutions, or institutions may create wider 'networks of recognition' between larger groups of organisations. The 'European Universities' initiative provides many examples of such recognition networks being established across Europe. Examples include the "Mobility Minors" programmes of the European Consortium of Innovative Universities whereby learners of the partner universities of the alliance can sign up for an elective set of courses made up of 30 ECTS credits at any one of the partner universities. These credits will be automatically recognised as part of their programmes within their home universities.

Ad-hoc recognition via Inter-Institutional Agreements

The other potential path for recognition of micro-credentials is that of using trilateral contracts between a learner's home institution, an institution they choose to visit (either via a virtual or a physical mobility) and the learner (Sidaoui and Villecroze, 2020). An example of this is depicted in Figure 14 Different to the automatic recognition path described above, in this case, each recognition is a bespoke agreement which sets out an individual study plan that summarises the mobility (or successive mobility periods) within the curriculum or course.

Figure 14: The recognition process for credit exchange via learning agreements amongst South-East Asian Universities participating in the SHARE programme: European Union Support to Higher Education in the Association of South-East Asian Nations (ASEAN) Region. From SHARE (2018).

Typically, an inter-institutional agreement will establish a trust relationship between the institutions participating, but critically, unlike in the examples above, will not provide for automatic recognition of all such study periods. Instead, these are regulated on an ad-hoc basis by the learning agreement, key elements recommended from the SHARE programme (2018) include details on the:

• Parties to the agreement, including the learner.
• Modules/courses which are to be exchanged in the specific mobility.
• Specific dates for the mobility period.
• The specific programme (at the home institutions) where these modules/courses may be included.
• Conditions for the automatic recognition of the modules/courses (e.g. the learner achieving a passing grade).

While this route to recognition requires significantly more administration than the automatic recognition route, it may be easier to implement for institutions, since it uses existing structures and procedures that are already established for mobility periods.

Facilitate Recognition via free electives

In many learning systems, 'free' electives have been part of the system for years. Many micro-credentials aim to encourage learners to widen their perspectives and acquire additional self-identified skills they feel are valuable for their personal development.

Typically, the only requirement for the recognition of such elective studies is that the credits are awarded by (or workload acquired from) a certified or recognised institution. This facility is often used e.g. to allow learners to receive credit for attending summer schools, participate in entrepreneurship competitions and more. A variation of the scheme sometimes awards credit for volunteering or social work.

The pedagogical logic of free electives is that a learner should have full freedom to complement their studies from any source they feel would be conducive to their own personal and professional development. Given that it is the learner who decides that any given experience should be recognised as part of their learning, the institution owning the programme only has to implement minimal verification checks. Since these typically only form a small percentage of the overall programme, the risks from a 'wrong' choice are minimal.

Given the wide acceptance of this methodology, encouraging learners to take micro-credentials as part of such free-electives programmes is a straightforward and fast way to implement recognition procedures.

Facilitate recognition via Recognition of Prior Learning (RPL)

As eluded in Validation of Non-Formal and Informal Learning, an individual may have their previously acquired learning, especially which took place in non-formal or informal learning contexts, assessed and validated (VNFIL). Validation is a crucial factor for prior non-formal or informal learning to be recognised for the purpose of accessing education and training – granted such learning meets the general admission requirements. Micro-credentials as the form of certification of individual’s learning outcomes acquired through formal, non-formal and informal learning could therefore support both the validation and recognition of prior learning.

Anecdotal evidence indicates that currently RPL is the most common form of micro-credential recognition, given that procedures for this route already exist in most learning organisations. As such, RPL could be considered the default 'fallback' route for recognising micro-credentials, i.e. this route is always available when no other routes apply. However, RPL is also administratively heavy - often requiring customised processes for each procedure, which also leads to uncertain outcomes. This can create disincentives for institutions as well as learners to use this route. Formal qualifications may also be assessed by E&T providers particularly when the holder of the qualifications applies for admission to a learning offer without following the standard entry requirements (e.g. a secondary school leaving certificate). In states party to the UNESCO Global Convention on Higher Education (GRC), "individuals have the right to have their qualifications[1] assessed for the purpose of applying for admission to higher education studies or seeking employment opportunities.” 

Prior learning may also be validated through a process termed credit recognition, an example of which is demonstrated by The Open University’s Open Bachelor degree (QD) which allows individuals to apply for credit to be transferred from a previous study. When the subject of the previous study is the same or similar to that of the QD, applications are referred to an academic expert who will make an assessment as to how much credit would be transferred. When the subjects are different, there may be the option to transfer a maximum of 60 credits as part of a 'free choice' element offered in the QD (The Open University, n.d.).

While the labour intensive process makes it difficult for RPL to be used at scale as the default method for recognition of micro-credentials, by “simplifying” fit for purpose RPL procedures for micro-credentials that follow the EU Council principles for the design and issuance of micro-credentials, micro-credentials could support the recognition of prior learning, while RPL could in turn, further enable the stackability of micro-credentials as outlined in Learning Pathways.  

Facilitate recognition using International Conventions

Source: Council of the EU (2022).

The Erasmus+ funded project “Micro-credentials linked to the Bologna Key Commitments - MICROBOL” suggests that micro-credentials awarded by Higher Education Institutions may fall under the Lisbon Recognition Convention definition of a period of study, or, as long as they are awarded as a stand-alone credential, they can fall in the LRC definition of qualification (MICROBOL, 2021). This allows for them to be assessed according to the principles and procedures outlined in the convention.

The Global Recognition Convention is more explicit in its support for micro-credentials by emphasising the recognition of prior learning, and of qualifications based on partial studies. As such, it provides a strong policy imperative to signatories to use its tools to facilitate the recognition of micro-credentials.

[1] The GRC’s definition for a qualification broadly covers both higher education qualifications and qualifications giving access to higher education (e.g. diplomas and awards attesting the successful completion of an education programme or validation of prior learning).