Alternative Digital Credentials in Higher Education: Bridging the Skills Gap Through Workforce, Employer, and Education Partnerships

Literature Review

Due to myriad factors, including the cost of undergraduate tuition (and resulting student loan debt) and the lack of formal education requirements for many good-paying jobs, an increasing number of students are choosing two-year institutions or entering the workforce in place of pursuing a traditional four-year college education. This also means that at some point in their career, these individuals are likely to hit a figurative wall in terms of salary and skills. Alternatively, those who earn a four-year degree may still find themselves struggling in their entry, and even mid-level positions after graduation (Casilli and Hickey 2016). This creates an opportunity for ADCs as a pathway to increased wages and career mobility.

“Badges” have been around for years. From knights displaying valiant emblems of bravery to the Boys and Girls Scouts of America proudly supporting patches on a sash, these symbols show the owners accomplishment and ability in certain areas or skills (Gibson et al. 2015). However, the concept of ADCs does face some opposition. Those against the usage of ADCs in higher education find themselves questioning if these credentials defeat the purpose of a traditional degree (Stefaniak and Carey 2019). The answer to the question is simple and is answered with another question. What are traditional credentials and how are they any more trustworthy? Despite the history of accreditation, the trust we have put in accrediting coursework where potential employers cannot even view what was covered in a course is categorized as murky at best (Casilli and Hickey 2016).

While traditional credentials earned through a college degree imply completion of certain areas of importance, ADCs are unique in that they “allow issuers to include specific claims about an earner's experience, skills, or competencies and to associate them with detailed evidence that supports those claims” (Casilli and Hickey, 2016, p. 117). Research demonstrates that the quality of an ADC is critical to determining its value to students and employers alike. Skills-based ADCs require the clear “evidence of mastery associated with the badge along with the evaluation criteria” in order to hold value to employers (Carey and Stefaniak, 2018, p. 1211). Thus, ADCs issued for participation in an activity are less meaningful than those aligned with and assessing a candidate’s specific skills.

For some institutions, such as University of Colorado or Coastal Carolina University, ADCs have become a part of the undergraduate curriculum (Stefaniak and Carey 2019). While students still have the option to complete traditional coursework, they are also given an opportunity to collect ADCs and display the actual skills they picked up in the course in place of a simple course title on a transcript. The University of Central Oklahoma has implemented digital badging at the undergraduate level, allowing students to obtain badges in “soft skills” such as “communication, decision-making, time management, leadership, problem-solving”, creating an opportunity for students to demonstrate mastery of critical skills expected of a graduate of the institution (Stefaniak and Carey 2019).

In certain subjects, such as biology and chemistry, employers must assume that candidates have been assessed properly in how to operate lab equipment (Seery et al. 2018). When ADCs are introduced, there is now an opportunity to provide documented evidence of what skills a candidate possesses in the discipline. In addition, “there is a gap between what graduates leave university education with and what industrial employers report that they need”, allowing for institutions to collaborate and devise certain badges that will fill said gaps (Seery et al., 2018, p. 403).