The Real Deal is a series exploring what we know about the quality of nondegree credentials. Read other posts in the series here.
A hallmark of nondegree credentials is their collective complexity. Any generalization about them is perilous: Most exist outside the credit-based system governed by the Higher Education Act, but not all. Some are awarded by colleges, others by state and federal agencies, and still others by trade associations or companies. Instructional sequences range in length from a single day to a full year. Providers and students may receive federal workforce subsidies or state subsidies or none at all.
The credit-based higher education system is also complex, of course. But it is typically referred to as “credit-based” or “degree-seeking” because these features have been defined and standardized at a national level, as have many other aspects of American higher education. Nondegree credentials, on the other hand, have mostly evolved outside that standardized system, although often in dialogue with it.
They respond to needs that the degree-credit system has not efficiently met: quick start-up, shorter sequences, relationships with third-party credential issuers, real-time employer engagement, and so on. The complexity of the needs of the market and of learners has led to a proliferation of diverse credentials, and a landscape that continues to evolve in surprising directions.
Amid this complexity, there’s no one single arbiter of quality but rather a host of “quality influencers” who seek to shape the market in different ways. Exploring who those influencers are, how they approach their work, and what they seek to accomplish is essential to understanding what quality means for noncredit credentials—and what could happen in years to come.
A Tour of Nondegree Credentials
To understand the role of influencers, one first has to consider the main kinds of nondegree credentials:
+ Certificates are credentials awarded for completion of an educational program that does not lead to a degree. For-credit certificates are typically awarded by postsecondary institutions, and unlike other nondegree credentials they are eligible for federal financial aid and therefore bound by the same rules that govern degree programs. Noncredit certificates may or may not be eligible for financial aid. In addition to postsecondary institutions, training providers, employers, labor unions, and industry associations may issue certificates.
+ Certifications are awarded for the demonstration of a specified set of skills, typically via examination based on industry or occupational standards. They are typically awarded by private third-party entities such as companies or trade associations.
+ Licenses are awarded for the demonstration of skills in a specific occupation. Licenses are awarded by a governmental agency and individuals are legally required to hold them in order to practice in their desired profession; licenses thus act as occupational gatekeepers. Most licenses are issued by state agencies, although federal and local agencies issue a few as well. Professional associations and occupational groups strongly influence licensure requirements, often through boards constituted by state governments to determine examination standards.
+ Apprenticeship credentials are awarded after completion of a structured educational program and work-based learning experience based on industry and occupational standards. Registered apprenticeships meet standards set by the U.S. Department of Labor, by state labor agencies, or both and are registered by them. Non-registered apprenticeships are unregulated and non-standardized. Key providers are labor unions, labor-management partnerships, trade associations, and employers.
+ Badges and microcredentials are a newly emerging and evolving field, with definitions that remain under development. They generally include a digital component and are awarded for completion of a short program of study or demonstration of a targeted set of skills. Key providers include postsecondary institutions, training providers, employers, labor unions, and industry associations.
The Role of Influencers
The diversity of nondegree credentials poses a special challenge for assessing and improving quality outcomes. There is unlikely to ever be a single system of oversight or quality improvement applicable to all nondegree credentials. Quality goals, benchmarks, and stakeholders vary from one type of credential to another. And there is no national mandate to report outcomes or, indeed, anything in a consistent fashion.
As a result, quality has become highly contextual, assessed in relation to the goals of learners, employers, and providers, and the relationships between them.
Quality influencers play a vital role in this complex ecosystem. These private and public entities seek to improve the quality outcomes of nondegree credentials, most commonly shaping strategies attuned to specific types of credentials, providers, and stakeholders. In 2023, we interviewed leaders of 36 quality influencer organizations to gain an understanding of who they are, what they seek to accomplish, and how they go about their work. Our findings are summarized in a landscape scan EERC released earlier this year.
Quality influencers come in many different forms, including quality-assurance bodies, professional associations, accreditors, and state government agencies. We found that they gravitate to four general approaches: transparency, norm-setting, policy, and capacity-building.
When quality influencers seek to improve transparency, they’re seeking to directly inform consumers—both learners and employers—about the quality outcomes of nondegree credentials. For learners, those outcomes might be employment, earnings gains, and pathways for educational advancement. Employers might be interested in hiring and retention outcomes. Norm-setting asks and answers the question: what is quality? These quality influencers create new documented standards, frameworks, and best practices, as well as social rules that become part of the professional culture—often without even being written down. Transparency and norm-setting go well together.
Policy is a crucial field for influencing quality. Mandates, rules and regulations, and funding structures all represent points of leverage for policymakers. It’s also worth considering the intangible tools that policymakers wield, such as stakeholder convening and guidance. For example, when a state agency or governor encourages providers to move in a particular direction, they take it seriously.
Finally, capacity-building is critical to improving quality outcomes over time. Infrastructure, community knowledge, and networks do not just spring up spontaneously. People and organizations have to intentionally work to build them, and the presence or absence of capacity can mean the difference between a quality initiative’s success or failure.
It is striking to see the breadth and depth of quality influencers’ efforts. Some influencers are working to build quality-relevant mechanisms across credential types, such as Credential Engine’s efforts to develop a standardized credential reporting schema and Credlens’ nascent initiative to launch a national data trust for nondegree credentials.
But the majority of quality influencers we interviewed lean into the particularities of specific credentials and stakeholder communities. From the accreditors developing standards for an evolving landscape of college credentials to the third-party certification issuers who have grown with their industries over decades; from the non-profit organizations seeking to develop norms for data reporting to the company building a one-stop shop for certification outcomes, quality influencers adapt to the needs of the stakeholders in their communities. They respond to complexity by building expertise and seeking measurable change in their own wheelhouse.
In upcoming posts in this series, we will dive into the ground-level experience of the people and organizations influencing the quality of nondegree credentials. We will examine the approaches of national organizations that are going on their own quality journeys. And we will explore changes happening at the state level, where innovation and experimentation are building across the country.
Michelle Van Noy is director of the Education and Employment Research Center at Rutgers University’s School of Management and Labor Relations, which focuses on better understanding how education intersects with the labor market. Tom Hilliard is deputy director for policy and engagement at the center.