About 25 years ago, online courses were seen as a novelty—full of potential but met with skepticism. Critics argued that they could never match the quality of face-to-face learning, claiming they were simply a quick way to maintain or boost enrollment. Even today these concerns persist.
But one argument is rapidly losing its footing: quality. In my experience as an instructor, instructional designer and online learner, the conversation about quality in the online learning environment has evolved. Over the last two decades, organizations like Quality Matters and the Online Learning Consortium have established clear frameworks for what makes a high-quality online course. From instructor preparation to learner expectations and learning evaluation methods, the standards for online education have become significantly more robust and well defined.
Lately, the conversation around implementing microcredentials has given me a sense of déjà vu. My colleague and mentor Sherri Braxton discussed this challenge and sentiment in her recent op-ed, “Quality and Trust: Not a New Consideration in Microcredentials.” It is crucial to draw attention to the fact that it is not uncommon for microcredential administrators, practitioners, earners and consumers to project a similar fear regarding both the quantity and quality of microcredentials available. Given progress in online education, the solution seems clear: Just as we did with online courses, we need a well-defined rubric and structured review processes to evaluate and ensure the quality of all microcredentials.
What’s the Purpose?
There is still debate across the national landscape about what microcredentials are genuinely meant to capture. Some view them as recognition for smaller, specialized learning achievements that supplement traditional degrees. In contrast, others like myself go even further and contend that microcredentials highlight the most nimble, niche competencies learners acquire throughout their journey.
Regardless of an institution’s or practitioner’s stance, one thing is clear: It’s essential to define the purpose of microcredentials and why issuing them matters.
At the University of Maryland, Baltimore County (UMBC), we are committed to supporting our community throughout the lifelong learning journey. Microcredentials serve as tangible artifacts of this journey, recognizing competencies learners acquire on and off campus. Our vision is for members of the UMBC community to amass hundreds of microcredentials throughout their careers.
This approach often raises a common concern: With so many microcredentials, how do you ensure quality?
Every microcredential at UMBC undergoes a rigorous quality assurance process. We consult with microcredential proposers to create clear learning outcomes, implement authentic assessments, reference external frameworks and identify market-relevant skills tags. Our microcredential review board then reviews proposals by leveraging a comprehensive rubric to evaluate and ensure each offering’s quality.
UMBC Microcredential Evaluation Rubric
We didn’t start from scratch when we created our microcredential evaluation rubric. Instead, we drew on existing frameworks and standards from online learning and digital credentialing, asking how to adapt them to meet the unique needs of microcredentials.
The first significant influence on our work was Quality Matters (QM), a leader in quality assurance for online course design for nearly 20 years. Core principles from QM, such as detailed learning outcomes and alignment, are foundational to our microcredential evaluation rubric. The second key influence was the 1EdTech TrustEd Microcredential Framework. This framework emphasizes capturing the details of a learning experience within the microcredential’s metadata and ensuring its external relevance through skills descriptors that will resonate with a broader audience.
By aligning these frameworks with institutional priorities, we crafted our microcredential evaluation rubric. We’ve labeled it a first edition, recognizing that it will evolve as we apply it, learn from its use and continue to align it with national best practices.
We Don’t Throw Spaghetti (Anymore)
Admittedly, when we first launched our microcredentialing initiative, we threw a healthy amount of spaghetti at the wall to see what would stick. We were eager to pilot microcredentials and demonstrate their utility to learners. Since then, the national landscape and perceptions of microcredentials have significantly evolved and so has our institutional commitment to them.
Microcredentialing at UMBC has shifted from an interesting experiment to a strategic institutional responsibility. In light of these shifts, we must address any lingering hesitation regarding the quality and consistency of the microcredentials we issue. Through our consultation processes, the implementation of a rigorous rubric and our microcredential review board, we are making substantial progress in dispelling such concerns. Our microcredential review board is a crossfunctional team composed of faculty members from our most prominent colleges, along with staff with expertise in online learning, student affairs assessments and employer relations. This diverse group rigorously evaluates microcredential proposals using our microcredential evaluation rubric. The board’s primary objective is to ensure each new microcredential aligns with institutional priorities and meets the highest quality standards. This is what microcredentialing quality assurance looks like at UMBC.
Our Collective Responsibility
At UMBC, we recognize that despite having made significant strides in establishing microcredential review and governance, we don’t yet have all the answers. What I do know is that prioritizing quality creates a layer of trust, validity and accountability—elements that are sometimes missing within the broader microcredentialing landscape.
Like the early days of online education, anyone entering the microcredential space must feel a deep responsibility toward quality. This commitment ensures microcredentials are not reduced to flashy badges for social media profiles but accurately represent meaningful, rigorously earned recognition that support lifelong learning.
To realize our vision of microcredentials as a powerful tool for lifelong learning, we must collectively commit to upholding the highest standards of quality and transparency. By doing so, we can create a future where microcredentials earned from various institutions or employers seamlessly support learners’ growth and development.
I’m excited to share more about UMBC’s journey at the 1EdTech Digital Credentials Summit in Phoenix this March. My session, “Governance & Advisory Groups: Ensuring High-Quality Microcredentials,” will explore the importance of engaging campus partners in advisory roles to add value and maintain consistency across microcredential programs. I look forward to continuing this critical conversation and exchanging ideas about the future of microcredentials.
You Might Also Like
