Isn't that more of "placing out" of a class/course rather then credentialing the informal learning?
What I'm envisioning is that a course of study has specific outcomes clearly defined and advertised by an institution. An individual seeking a credential approaches an institution for a gap analysis--what am I already able to demonstrate a proficiency in with regard to the outcomes (maybe reading journals, blogs, workproducts etc. as evidence), which need additional work and which do I need to learn from the ground up. It's then up to the individual to design a learning path--eg. self-directed study, mentorship, course A at institution X but course b at institution y--under the guidance of (or with the help of) an academic mentor from the credentialing institution.
Probably a bit Utopian?
Julia Hengstler
Posts made by Julia Hengstler
In my mind, I was simplistically thinking of producing a master work that illustrates my ability to meet the standards of my profession: I can do it & here is my proof. Acknowledged masters in the field review my work--and either I'm credentialed or back to the drawing board. How that happens?
The formalization & rigidity of the process -is perhaps at issue--and I hadn't thought it through quite as thoroughly as I would have hoped at this point.
My history is a bit rusty--but didn't the formalism & rigidity increase as a method of increasing control & establishing/consolidating power?
The formalization & rigidity of the process -is perhaps at issue--and I hadn't thought it through quite as thoroughly as I would have hoped at this point.
My history is a bit rusty--but didn't the formalism & rigidity increase as a method of increasing control & establishing/consolidating power?
Ahh--yes, but what does the teacher/instructor/teacher DO with the PLA? Does the instructor & department still require students to sit through the course because on paper the department demands it for compliance--the instructor attempting to "enrich" the content for those with a significant amount of the content already, or are those students exempted from courses or portions of the course?
I can see drivers for both approaches. The course requirement might be to establish a common language around similar concepts--one of the things Christensen refers to in Disrupting Class. Can you effectively exempt courses in a cohort model? Some students might have more knowledge and experience--but the profession or department needs to associate a specific language set on it.
Exemption would work well where terminology in a field is well defined--or common language is not an issue. However, most institutions have a vested financial interest in requiring courses.
I can see drivers for both approaches. The course requirement might be to establish a common language around similar concepts--one of the things Christensen refers to in Disrupting Class. Can you effectively exempt courses in a cohort model? Some students might have more knowledge and experience--but the profession or department needs to associate a specific language set on it.
Exemption would work well where terminology in a field is well defined--or common language is not an issue. However, most institutions have a vested financial interest in requiring courses.
Why?
How about credentialing? If we believe that substantive learning can take place outside of "formal" schooling experiences--that it is valid--then individuals should be able to use it toward some type of credentialing process should they so wish. For example, say I have a persistent personal interest in relational trust--I read widely, I publish, I run some projects etc.--but I don't take a formal course. Now, one day I decide that I would like to take some degree that has as a component--in whole or in part--relational trust. I should be able to have my knowledge/skills/experience in this area evaluated to determine if I have met the requirements for credentialing in this area without attending additional formal training--or to target the extent of additional training needed. This is what we do whenever we allow students to challenge a course--and receive credit for it. I think as "formal" institutions continue to evolve, we will see more emphasis on them as "credentialing" bodies that can provide entire courses of study or tailor materials to individuals' gaps. Kind of reminds me of guilds in the Middle Ages.
Julia
How about credentialing? If we believe that substantive learning can take place outside of "formal" schooling experiences--that it is valid--then individuals should be able to use it toward some type of credentialing process should they so wish. For example, say I have a persistent personal interest in relational trust--I read widely, I publish, I run some projects etc.--but I don't take a formal course. Now, one day I decide that I would like to take some degree that has as a component--in whole or in part--relational trust. I should be able to have my knowledge/skills/experience in this area evaluated to determine if I have met the requirements for credentialing in this area without attending additional formal training--or to target the extent of additional training needed. This is what we do whenever we allow students to challenge a course--and receive credit for it. I think as "formal" institutions continue to evolve, we will see more emphasis on them as "credentialing" bodies that can provide entire courses of study or tailor materials to individuals' gaps. Kind of reminds me of guilds in the Middle Ages.
Julia
Where does this place self-direct informal learning? Is there a process for specified faculty/facilitators to review/interview candidates to "sign-off" on what they know?