On today’s episode of the Illumination by Modern Campus podcast, host Amrit Ahluwalia was joined by Anissa Vega to discuss aligning continuing education and academic affairs with microcredentialing and the model Kennesaw state has implemented to help learners career development.
On today’s episode of the Illumination by Modern Campus podcast, host Amrit Ahluwalia was joined by Anissa Vega to discuss aligning continuing education and academic affairs with microcredentialing and the model Kennesaw state has implemented to help learners career development.
Voiceover: Welcome to Illumination by Modern Campus, the leading podcast focused on transformation and change in the higher education space. On today’s episode, we speak with Anissa Vega, who is Associate Vice Provost of Curriculum and Academic Innovation at Kennesaw State University. Anissa and podcast host Amrit Ahluwalia discuss aligning continuing education and academic affairs with microcredentialing and the model Kennesaw state has implemented to help learners career development.
Amrit Ahluwalia (00:00): Anissa Vega, welcome to the Illumination Podcast. Great to be chatting with you.
Anissa Vega (01:22):Thank you. Thank you for having me.
Amrit Ahluwalia (01:23):Absolutely. Well, we're in Washington dc We're at the Sia Acro Convergence Conference, and I would say it is a really fun topic for me to get to talk to you about, and obviously anyone who's at the conference, it's going to be too late to hype up our session now, but we're doing a session on this topic later in the week about the idea of aligning continuing education, academic affairs around the topic of micro-credentialing. And in fact, that's how you and I met.
Anissa Vega (01:51):That's right.
Amrit Ahluwalia (01:52):We were at a one ed Tech Digital Credential Summit. You were doing a presentation about how not to toot our own horn, how you're using a modern campus product to create some level of alignment internally around micro-credentialing. It wasn't a use case that anyone had really thought of from our org before, and it really sparked an interesting conversation around how you start to bring these two worlds together. I am curious what sparked your interest in,
Anissa Vega (02:18):Well, it actually started in 2017 as a professor, I was providing teachers with training and personalized learning, but this training wasn't tied to any licensure associated with teacher education. And so it also wasn't enough training to create a degree or a certificate. So I wanted to find a way for these teachers who had completed this training and had this new skillset to help them share and communicate that they had this skillset. And so that's where Micro-credentials sparked my personal interest. And then it moved further when I went into administration.
Amrit Ahluwalia (03:02):So the world of micro-credentialing really started to open up from the faculty development side as opposed to a new approach to student engagement.
Anissa Vega (03:12):Well, it was K 12 teachers, so it was our students. It was our students.
Amrit Ahluwalia (3:18):That's so interesting. Now, obviously, as I mentioned, you've worked to create this repeatable process that standardizes micro-credential offerings and establishes consistency and clarity on what the rigor of micro-credentials are, what they actually mean. What were some of the warning signs or some of the indications that preparatory work was necessary?
Anissa Vega (03:41):So our provost had asked us to select a single micro-credentialing software because we had multiple units across campus using different providers. And immediately we did an assessment of who was offering micro-credentials, what were they about and what platform were they using In that process. We saw an amazing variation across campus and we noticed that we couldn't identify the value of any of them because the variability wasn't well communicated within the micro-credential itself at that time.
Amrit Ahluwalia (04:25): How does that happen? How does an environment become that diverse?
Anissa Vega (04:34):
Well, I think it's related, especially in higher ed, to a lot of independent activity that takes place in individual colleges or individual departments. Faculty have a lot of authority to initiate a curriculum, a new degree program, or perhaps a micro-credential. And since they have that authority, you find that they do exactly that. But their perception of what a micro-credential is varies. I mean, even the micro, I don't want to call it a microcosm, maybe that's not right. The university is pretty large, 43,000 students. But even our community had vast variability and it was very reflective of the industry itself and how cross higher ed understanding of what micro-credentials are and what should be credentialed and valued as a microcredential was just wild and decentralized and there was no common rules or standards.
Amrit Ahluwalia (05:33):
And what's the outcome of that? I mean, what impact were you seeing it having on student understanding, on employer understanding even internally within the institution?
Anissa Vega (05:42):
Well, it left no understanding for any of the stakeholders except the individual who's awarding the micro-credential themselves. It tended to be that they were the only ones who really understood what the value was to students and employers. And so we really needed to come together with a common standard.
Amrit Ahluwalia (06:01):
Absolutely. And so let's speak a little bit about that process. I mean, how did you go from, this is such an overused term, the wild west of micro-credentialing
Anissa Vega (06:12):
Kenesaw.
Amrit Ahluwalia (06:13):
How did you evolve from that space that was so diverse, so confusing to one where there was a level of commonality?
Anissa Vega (06:22):
Well, so that assessment that we had done and we realized great variability that we had on campus, we immediately realized we needed to categorize the type of micro-credentialing that was happening on campus. And with that, our first task was really to build a taxonomy. That taxonomy kind of provides the blueprint for what a micro-credential should include or what it should take to earn a micro-credential. And so that started to set a common standard across campus.
Amrit Ahluwalia (06:55):
Absolutely. And how did you get buy-in for that? Who needed to be in the room? Who needed to be involved? Where did the proposals come from? Can you give us a little bit more color on what this process looked like?
Anissa Vega (07:07):So the task force that was putting together the taxonomy as well as the process for micro-credentialing all had representatives from the groups that were already awarding. Okay. So luckily in that sense, Kennesaw took this on early enough that it wasn't a body of a hundred people on a task force. It was about a dozen people on a task force. So that was doable. And then that representation really helped smooth the process of bringing their units on board to the new standard that we were setting. And the other folks on campus were not necessarily engaging at that point.
Amrit Ahluwalia (07:49):Oh, interesting.
Anissa Vega (07:51):It wasn't proliferated throughout the campus, and so it was little pockets all over campus. And so just by engaging those pockets to help make the rules and set the standard, they were the ones who were likely to resist. Right.
Amrit Ahluwalia (08:05):They already had something
Anissa Vega (08:06):Because they already had something. Right. And so involving them in the process of developing that taxonomy in the process that we would use such that they could see their own micro-credentials reflected in it would work.
Amrit Ahluwalia (08:18):Absolutely. How did you guys create a rule structure that was actually enforceable? Because you spoke right off the top about the tendency for there to be a level of autonomy, especially when it comes to the academic space and capacity for faculty to really own the academic product, especially in a space that's not necessarily accredited. How did you manage to create and enforce a set of rules that folks have really taken to?
Anissa Vega (08:50): Yes. So one of the things we did was we only had one micro-credentialing platform on campus. No one was allowed to purchase additional micro-credentialing platforms. Another thing that we did was we implemented our curriculum review process. So there was a place to submit your idea for a micro-credential. It would be reviewed by your peers as to whether or not it met the standards that the institution had set. And then one piece that's been really important is that the coordinator of our micro-credential is one person on campus, only one person. She can give access to grantors. And by managing the grantors, we don't have new grantors popping up. And in addition, the grantors sign an agreement that they will follow our standard and process for any additional microcredentials that they want and that they will award microcredentials with integrity.
Amrit Ahluwalia (09:55):That's such an interesting model. I think this is where a lot of, where the wheels can fall off the bus occasionally, a lot of work can go into building a taxonomy, building a clear model for credentialing, understanding what goes into what should go into the rigor, but then when push comes to shove, if someone wants to offer a certificate in nail clipping, they’ll do it.
Anissa Vega (10:18):Correct.
Amrit Ahluwalia (10:18):Yeah. So that is very interesting.
Anissa Vega (10:20):So it was a limitation of their ability to access the platform to create new really. That was the enforcement model
Amrit Ahluwalia (10:29):Makes a lot of sense. If you can't offer the microcredential, it becomes really difficult to make up a microcredential.
Anissa Vega (10:34):Correct.
Amrit Ahluwalia (10:36):Now, a secondary piece of this, of course, is the student experience, especially when serving a non-degree learner or a non-traditional learner. The expectations they have for the administrative experience and bureaucratic experience of the post-secondary institution be very different than what a traditional traditional student expects. So how did you and the rest of the team in academic affairs maintain the collaborative lines with the team in continuing education to ensure that there was a delivery of a consistent high quality academic experience, but also the delivery of that more consumer oriented student experience?
Anissa Vega (11:13):Sure. So one of the first things we did was that I actually co-chaired that original task force with the dean of our continuing and professional education group. And so they were involved heavily from the very start. In addition, because our micro-credentials focus on the competency and the expertise of the individual verifying that competency, we don't really critique the learning experience. And that's in our review process. So when a proposal is submitted, they provide background information about what the learning experience is expected to be or what it might cost students. But we're not judging their micro-credential proposal based off of that. We're looking for alignment between their assessment, the competency, and the expertise of the individual verifying expertise or those competencies. And so what that does for our continuing professional education is they can focus on designing the learning experiences that work for their students. They can make the business case for micro-credentialing and so that they can balance their budget and determine what's the best thing for them. And so they can approach it in their own way, in the way that attracts students into that environment because the learning experience and designing that is owned by CPE or continuing professional education.
Amrit Ahluwalia (12:44):That's so interesting. So the micro-credential model that you have in place is largely oriented around or tied to a competency structure.
Anissa Vega (12:53):Correct.
Amrit Ahluwalia (12:53):How does that change the broad approach that's being taken to program assessment at Kennesaw? Are you seeing that mentality start to find its ways into maybe more traditional programs?
Anissa Vega (13:05):I love that question because our office, I provide oversight of curriculum, but I work very closely with our AVP of assessment, and we've been talking about our program student learning outcomes, and we've been realigning those across campus to match workforce skills. We've been using tools like Light Cast and others to help identify what those skills are. And in the process, we've noticed, well, perhaps we should be micro-credentialing these program student learning outcomes. And so we're in the process of planning how we want to encourage and work with programs to do that. We think we'll probably incorporate it into our academic program review process, which is a five to seven year cycle academic review. And our hope is that students, when they leave an academic degree program, that they'll have this collection of micro-credentials that align with their program student learning outcomes. Right now, though, it has been challenging to get faculty in the academic space on board. They're excited, but to put in the proposal and to do that piece, we just have a few who are jumping in there. They're enthusiastic and that's great, and they'll be our champions moving forward. But I think there's more to come in this space,
Amrit Ahluwalia (14:28):Like any innovative concept and take a little while to really
Anissa Vega (14:32):Exactly.
Amrit Ahluwalia (14:33):I'm curious as well as you guys are formalizing a competency-based credentialing model in the micro-credential space, how is it influencing the way the university thinks about credit for prior learning or prior learning assessment for students transferring in?
Anissa Vega (14:49):So we've recently been our credit for prior learning to see how we can make it easier to access and a smoother process, and to also encourage faculty to offer challenge exams or portfolio reviews for credit. And we see that the micro-credentials themselves could also support this process, but specifically because our level two badges require that the evidence is attached to that micro-credential, and because the evidence is attached, a student theoretically, we haven't had anyone do it yet, can submit their micro-credential a level two badge to our credit for prior learning office for that evidence to be rereviewed by Kennesaw State faculty member. And that's for any micro-credential that has evidence, right? If it matches the learning outcomes of the course and shows competency in those outcomes, then that student shouldn't have to take the course. They've already mastered that content.
Amrit Ahluwalia (15:59):Absolutely. And I mean, I love the concept of starting to shift at a university level to competency maps and looking at competency maps in this very clear way because as you start to think about competencies and you can start to think about lateral movement between programs and create a more interdisciplinary learning experience. Now we've talked about the level two mastery of badging that you have in place, and I feel like now folks want to learn more about the badging model that Ken saw, obviously look up This's article that she's written for the evolution that walks through it. And not to put you on the spot, could you briefly walk us through the micro-credentialing model that you have in place? What's at a very high level kind of what's required at each level?
Anissa Vega (16:42):So our lowest level is a souvenir, and this visually looks very different, looks very simple, and it represents participation engagement, and it's really for an internal audience. At Kennesaw, students like to stack these souvenirs and maybe get some credit in a class for a grade for attending so many events or something like that. Then the level one badges are about introduction to a skill, practicing a skill, but it hasn't been done in an authentic work related way.
(17:18):So students, the assessment for level one badges may be tests and quizzes or papers, things like that. Then we move to the level two badge. The level two badge is supposed to represent competency. So we have an assessment that looks like a real world example, a simulation, something that clearly shows the student's competency can transfer into the workplace. And then our level one and level two badges, we do have special badges. We call those badges of distinction, I believe. And those are supposed to be rare. So maybe you're awarding to your class A level one badge, but one student exceeded expectations above what you had set as well as all their classmates. And so you really want someone to stand out. You can award them that level one badge with distinction. And at level two, we just had our annual pumpkin launch at Kennesaw, our engineering students design catapults. So all the students who design catapults can get a level two badge and they'll attach images and videos of their catapults to the level two badge. But the students who one who launched their pumpkins the furthest can get that badge level two of distinction,
(18:44):And then students can stack their badges to be a collection of competencies to create a digital certificate.
Amrit Ahluwalia (18:52):Absolutely. Well, I mean, as you think about the process that you and your team went through of developing and launching a badging infrastructure, rather, a broader micro-credentialing infrastructure, creating an ecosystem within which people are operating and are adapting the way they work, what are some of the most common pitfalls that you'd anticipate other academic affairs leaders might run into when they look to expand their own institutional approach to micro-credentialing?
Anissa Vega (19:21):Well, one pitfall I would say is waiting too long because those little microcosms of micro-credentialing on your campus are going to proliferate with time. There's going to be interest, and you're going to have a situation where you've got a large group of people who are doing micro-credentials in their own ways and don't want to come on board with your common standard. And so starting early before that's proliferated, I think is really helpful, especially in a traditional higher education environment where shared governance is a major component of how we function starting early. That's something that I think is really important. I would say moving towards having a governance model as well as a means to get employer input and your curriculum. I think I've seen a few institutions get stuck at the curriculum and not really move out of that. Starting with a few skills, designing those micro-credentials, awarding those micro-credentials, but now what? And then it's, well, let's think of more skills. And so it's still this small group of people responsible and you can't scale that. Right. And the governance structure is what lets you scale it, and the employers are what helps make it relevant and valuable. So we know curriculum in higher ed and we are ready to produce and make those experiences and design those badges, but we can't get stuck there.
Amrit Ahluwalia (21:06):Right, absolutely. And I mean, on the topic of collaboration that is, in fairness, the theme of the conference. What are some of the keys to the collaboration that you and your team established with the Continuing Professional Education unit to ensure that this process was again, consistent, cohesive, and really appreciated by all sides?
Anissa Vega (21:31):Well, I think from the beginning, including their voice throughout the process in developing what this centralized governance structure is going to look like, involving them in that centralized process. And there was even a point where their dean was the final approver on behalf of the Provost for the microcredentials. We've swapped out those roles, so it hasn't remained with their office, but we've also collaborated very closely with our career development office as well. And so leadership in their office, leadership in continuing professional education and leadership in academic affairs, we work together to keep that system moving, to get the approvals through, to work with the coordinator to get them built, to enforce the model and just engagement in the process.
Amrit Ahluwalia (22:23):Absolutely. Well, and that pretty much does it on my end. The way we like to end every podcast, as you know, is to pivot to being a food podcast. So I'm curious if someone's out to dinner at Atlanta, which in fairness, pretty popular conference town, where should someone go for dinner?
Anissa Vega (22:39):So I'm partial to my side of town. My part of town. I live in Marietta, and I'm going to give you two right for dinner spring. It's a lovely restaurant. Chef made food absolutely delicious, and I highly recommend any of their steaks or the like. And then the other, because I love breakfast foods. Breakfast foods are my favorite. I'm going to recommend the Crooked Tree Cafe, and that's got it's family owned, I want to say hole in the wall, but it's a cute restaurant and they've got great southern breakfast foods. And every time I go there, I am full and rolling myself out.
Amrit Ahluwalia (23:27):That is high praise.
Anissa Vega (23:29):And their jam is incredible. So he makes all his homemade jellies and jams there and sells them. So I always pick up two or three jars. And what I love about his jam is it still has a tartness to it. Instead of everything at the grocery store, is too sweet, and he leaves that tartness in all of his jams and jellies.
Amrit Ahluwalia (23:51):Oh, that is.
Anissa Vega (23:51):So I highly recommend visiting them and picking up a couple of jars of jelly.
Amrit Ahluwalia (23:56):I'm frustratingly hungry at this point. It's a Thank you so much for your time.
Anissa Vega (23:59):Thank you for having me Amrit