As institutions, government and industry work toward greater alignment, microcredentials are emerging as a critical bridge between education and workforce outcomes. Progress is accelerating, but unlocking their full potential depends on building shared frameworks, consistent standards and widespread confidence in their value as signals of real, job-ready skills. In this interview, Cheryl Kinzel discusses the role of provincial alignment in enabling transferable microcredentials and building employer trust in skills-based learning outcomes.
The EvoLLLution (Evo): How is provincial alignment transforming microcredentials from being isolated offerings into part of a truly portable learner-to-earner ecosystem?
Cheryl Kinzel (CK): Movement in this direction has been fairly slow. The vision—provincial alignment, transferability and laddering—is there across institutions, government and students, but the reality is that we’re not close yet. Microcredentials sit in that challenging space between noncredit and credit, and credit itself is already complex, especially around quality and how institutions perceive one another. We see those tensions in credit transfer already, so it’s no surprise they show up here too.
That said, there has been very recent progress. The province, through advanced education and ACAT, is beginning to formally explore articulation and transfer for microcredentials. That’s the first structured step we’ve seen. It’s promising because it supports learners building education piece by piece, and while institutions may worry about losing students, it creates a more fluid system that ultimately benefits both learners and industry.
Evo: How does provincial standardization help ensure flexible pathways lead to a trusted employer-recognized outcome?
CK: That’s a big lift, and it’s going to take coordination across postsecondary institutions, the Ministry of Advanced Education and likely the Ministry of Labour and Industry as well. Postsecondaries are already a trusted source of training for both learners and employers, but microcredentials are still relatively new. Degrees and certificates have long been understood, so industry knows what to expect. That’s not quite the case yet here.
What’s helping is the rise of digital credentials in the tech sector. Certifications from organizations like Google, Microsoft and IBM have built strong credibility with employers. That trust is already established. Bringing microcredentials into the postsecondary space, where there’s already a foundation of trust, helps extend that credibility. We’ll likely see the strongest alignment first in technology fields, but there’s real potential for this model to expand across other areas over time.
Evo: What role does provincial alignment play in building employer’s confidence in microcredentials as signals of real, job-ready skills?
CK: A big part of this comes down to how closely we’re working with industry. Traditionally, that’s happened through program advisory committees, but that input can be inconsistent. With microcredentials, it’s different. They’re built on a competency-based, performance-assessed model, and that requires direct collaboration with industry from the start. In my experience, when industry partners are involved in development, they fully understand what those credentials represent—the specific competencies, the transferable skills and the expectation that learners demonstrate real proficiency, not just pass.
That’s a shift. In some traditional programs, a 50% pass is acceptable. From an employer perspective, that’s not always reassuring. Microcredentials raise that bar. The challenge now is alignment across institutions, government and industry and reaching a level of awareness where that value is broadly understood. We’re not at critical mass yet, so there’s still work to do in building that shared confidence.
Evo: How far away do you think we are from seeing a shift in this mindset, so everyone is on the same page?
CK: I would’ve said we were really far away until recently. Seeing the ministry actively seek feedback on the microcredential framework and now including microcredentials in formal transfer and articulation conversations, signals we’ve moved from talking to actually doing. That gives me a lot of confidence on the advanced education side, though there’s still a role for the Ministry of Labor, especially given their connection to industry.
Where it will take longer is with employers. They’ll need to see the outcomes, talk to peers and understand the value firsthand. That’s when the shift really happens. The key difference is transparency: With microcredentials, employers can clearly see the specific competencies someone has demonstrated, not just that they’ve passed a program.
Evo: How can institutions balance learner-driven pacing with the need for the consistency and quality in microcredentials?
CK: It’s a complex balance, but it really comes down to how microcredentials are designed. At Bow Valley College, they’re competency-based and not tied to seat time. It’s not about showing up for a set number of hours. It’s about whether you can demonstrate the specific skills a job requires. We work closely with industry to define those competencies, often at a very granular level, then build performance-based assessments around them.
That’s what creates both flexibility and consistency. Learners can move at their own pace—whether that’s a month or several—but they don’t earn the credential until they’ve demonstrated full competency in every required skill. Some may come in with prior experience and complete it quickly. Others take more time.
On the quality side, our microcredentials go through the same academic approval processes as credit programs, with the same level of rigor. So, while the pacing is flexible, the standards are not. Ultimately, that aligns with what industry is looking for—clear evidence that someone can actually do the work, not just talk about it.
Evo: How might that provincial alignment unlock new models of stackable lifelong learning that better reflect how modern learners build their skills over time?
CK: I’d love to say provincial alignment will unlock that kind of stackable, lifelong learning, but it’s not that simple. While there’s strong interest and willingness, postsecondaries are still operating in a competitive environment for funding and students, and that reality can get in the way of collaboration.
That said, the microcredential forum has been a real coalition of the willing, with engaged partners across public institutions who see the value for learners and for the system. The challenge is that collaboration often depends on individual will, and that can change. What will really move this forward is stronger alignment at the system level—clear frameworks, shared boundaries and support from government, industry and learners. That’s where provincial alignment becomes critical in creating consistency and enabling true transferability.
Evo: Is there anything you’d like to add?
CK: I’ll just reiterate that I’m feeling very hopeful. The recent work on the provincial microcredential framework and the transfer and articulation discussions—coming from the ministry—are really positive signals that this work matters and will continue to move forward. Industry is already engaging, and that kind of alignment across government, institutions and employers will benefit everyone.