Australia considers formalised recognition of micro-credentials

A move to formally incorporate short courses into Australia’s qualifications hierarchy could help meet an industry need while discouraging universities from churning out an unwieldy mishmash of micro-credentials.

A new discussion paper offers qualified support for the inclusion of short-form study programmes, from enabling courses and vocational “skill sets” to micro-master's and massive open online courses, in the Australian Qualifications Framework.

The paper was released by an expert panel reviewing the AQF, a pioneering policy innovation when it was launched in 1995 but now seen as lagging behind global practice.

The panel is scheduled to make its recommendations to the federal government in July. While the paper stresses that the group has not yet adopted any firm positions, its ideas around micro-credentials have turned heads.

Ian Jacobs, vice-chancellor of the University of New South Wales, said that the proposals were timely as institutions around the country developed suites of mini-courses.

He said that the panel was focusing on the same sorts of issues that UNSW was grappling with as it constructed its own mini-credentials, such as how to maintain academic standards and meet regulatory and industry requirements. “Rigour and quality is crucial, so that students know what they’re getting,” Professor Jacobs said.

The paper outlines the types of short credentials that could be incorporated in the AQF, and the technical hurdles that would need to be addressed – including how their quality could be assured, and where they could be assigned on the qualifications ladder.

It notes that Denmark, the Republic of Ireland and Scotland have successfully tackled such questions, and that New Zealand was considering following suit.

It also outlines the advantages of recognising short courses in the AQF, particularly around questions of credit. “Employers and workers are looking for credentials that are affordable and timely, that can help people to retrain and upskill as the workplace changes,” it notes.

Times Higher Education understands that, if the panel ends up recommending inclusion, universities would retain the freedom to offer micro-credentials outside the AQF structure. But the move could inject consistency around the treatment of micro-course graduates who progress to longer studies, such as how much credit they should get and at what level.

It could also provide the foundations for a credit points system. Chris Pilgrim, pro vice-chancellor (education and quality) at Swinburne University of Technology, said that the move could be a “game changer” and urged the panel to be “courageous” in its recommendations.  

“It is what the sector is talking about – how the nature of work is changing due to technology and globalisation. Being able to reskill and retrain quickly is going to be critical,” he said.

“The panel has set out the criteria upon which the recognition of these short-form credentials needs to happen. We need some way of validating and recognising them so that they can be trusted.”

Professor Pilgrim said that a shake-up of master’s qualifications after the last AQF review, in 2011, had generated a lot of work for universities but “helped protect brand Australia”.

“Universities will be saying, ‘Oh no, not again’. But there was significant benefit to the sector through that 2011 review.”

john.ross@timeshighereducation.com