Employers want to know what credentials are credentialing, and they want to hear it in their own language. The temptation will be to convince faculty and others to revise descriptions, however the opportunity is in leaving that and instead seeking their consensus and comfort with interpreting their descriptions into the languages of employers.

• Page 17: Top 5 most important factors for creating an effective teaching and learning ecosystem: Having a strong leadership and vision (45%) is the #1 (next highest is 15%)
• Page 20: *83% of higher education respondents said that it was important for institutions to provide studens with skills-based learning alongside their academic education. *
• Page 26: Participants identified several challenges in fostering a a culture of lifelong learning for professionals, including: 89% Clear learning objectives
• Page 7: Real-world experiential and work-based learning are no longer fringe; 4 in 5 see these as essential.

Barrier is about burden to status quo...if sustainable process existed, would systems accommodate something that is probably in learners' interests?

Model for HE to value high quality external (non-accredited) credentials

Seeds of doubt on MC quality

Assessment questions

These questions (I believe) are coming from a place of validating certifications. Experts publish these as helpful guides to understand if and to what degree certifications are trustworthy. In other words, are they worth the paper they're printed on? In the case of micro-credentials, most questions are likely overkill for the proposal process, etc. Given the central role and importance of TRUST however, perhaps providing a version of these questions to stakeholders seeking to propose micro-credentials could be beneficial in pushing their thinking, or at least centering these themes in their thinking.