The world of education programs and credentials outside of the traditional mold of high school diplomas and college degrees is vast and continually evolving. And the wide variation can be perplexing. While all nondegree programs may all be nontraditional, they are not all of one type; they seek to meet vastly different goals for vastly different learners and workers. 

Nondegree learners can be students enrolled in community college programs to become welders or medical assistants, or workers seeking to upgrade their careers through a project management certificate. They may be learners enrolled in university continuing education programs seeking to gain the latest skills in the pharmaceutical industry; learners engaged in online training to enter or advance in technology fields and eventually obtain industry certification; or even students in traditional degree programs seeking to get specific skills to complement their degree program. 

A sidenote on credentials and programs: while these are distinctly different things, there is significant overlap between the two—though not always. Among credentials, it is important to distinguish between:

  • Those that are institutionally awarded for the completion of a program (e.g., certificates), and 
  • Those that are awarded for passing tests of occupational competence by bodies aligned with industry and occupational standards (e.g., certifications and licenses). 

Short-term workforce programs often, but do not always, lead to certificates; and sometimes prepare learners for certifications or licenses. It is possible for non-degree programs to exist without a clear association with a credential. And it is also possible for credentials to exist without a clear association with a program. Some credentials—particularly certifications—can be attained without completing a formal education program, simply through the demonstration of competence (e.g., verified skills on LinkedIn Learning). 

Nondegree education programs and credentials have many goals and purposes, and without a consistent language or understanding, it becomes very difficult to sort them into intelligible categories.

Prior work has identified several broad focus areas commonly found among noncredit programs. These include basic skills, avocational, contract training, and occupational training. IPEDS currently asks about whether institutions offer these types of programs (though not about student enrollment) in a similar set of categories, with the addition of continuing education. Taken together, these categorization schemes provide a useful starting point when making sense of this vast universe:

  • Pre-college/Basic skills
  • Personal interest/Avocational
  • Contract training/Incumbent worker
  • Occupational/Workforce education
  • Continuing professional education

Yet, among these, the area of the greatest potential confusion remains among credentials and programs that are occupation-oriented. While it is tempting to think of them as of one type, in reality they include many types with many goals. Occupational credentials and programs can include those that: 

  • Encompass all skills needed for occupational entry
  • Focus on targeted skills to enhance occupational entry or advancement 
  • Provide on-going education needed to keep up with a profession

It is important to make this distinction among occupation-oriented credentials and programs because outcomes flow from intention. A credential or program that is designed to prepare a person fully for occupational entry would be expected to have significantly different impacts than a credential or program that is intended to help someone gain one very narrow skill. While targeted skill development is important, it may not result in significant wage gains, while a credential that paves the way for occupational entry generally should. Better understanding the goals can help set expectations for outcomes that are more aligned with the program or credential. 

As policymakers and others continue to grapple with the ever expanding universe of credentials and programs, making sense of the foundational distinction among them is essential to making good decisions. Getting under the hood of a credential or program to articulate its core goal or intention for learners would make a significant difference in helping various stakeholders understand where to invest—and help cut through the babble that so often creates confusion in the current landscape.

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.