Micro-credentials, often called the new currency of lifelong learning, are essential for education and professional development. They have become increasingly important in recent years due to the changing nature of work and the rising demand for life-long learning. This blog post represents a synopsis of a key deliverable in the MICROGUIDE project titled: “Analysis of the micro-credential implementation practice in project partner countries, making a list of examples of good practices.” The report explores the qualities and weaknesses in implementing of MCs in higher education and exemplary practices necessary for MC implementation in HEIs.
MC implementation practices in the partner countries in general share similar weaknesses, such as lack of appropriate legal framework, lack of MCs initiative in public HE as compared to the private HEIs, or lack of MCs final assessment, including quality assurance issues and link to NQFs/EQF. While micro-credentials are still in the early stages of development in the partner countries, some promising practices exist within existing micro-credential frameworks and HE programmes, which can be effectively adapted for implementing MCs in higher education. These practices revolve around the design, accreditation, quality assurance, and recognition of micro-credentials within universities.
First, MCs' design considers some of constituent elements in the European Common Micro-credential Framework (CMF). In addition to the CMF, other exemplary study programme design principles which can be adapted for MC design include flexibility and accessibility of education pathways (digitalisation); industry/skill-oriented approach; compliance with ECTS; “fit-for-purpose” approach, and inclusion of detailed MC supplement.
Next, the accreditation and QA of MCs in HE is based on the national HE QA mechanisms, the ESG principles, and external QA systems. For example, wherever appropriate and depending on the MC provider, the course content of some MCs is typically taken from accredited degree or master’s programmes. Thus, to the extent that they are made up of official degree courses that already exist and have been duly accredited, the QA of such MCs is the same as that of the official degree. On the other hand, when the MCs constitute an independent training experience, other QA systems, such as student surveys.
Lastly, the recognition principles of MCs, to some extent, follows the ESG principles, which are expected to foster the future recognition of MCs offered by accredited programmes in various HEIs. One of the good practices of MC recognition is the inclusion of sufficiently detailed information (MC supplement) to aid recognition by other HEIs. In addition, some universities that offer MCs have established policies for recognizing MCs granted by HE providers external to the corresponding institution, either when those providers are other universities or when they are partners of the university in the offer of MCs.
