Re: EOCred: cost of a credential

On 29 January 2018 at 15:02, Phil Barker <phil.barker@pjjk.co.uk> wrote:


> If you want the cost to include the learning opportunity then I think we
> will need a new property along the lines of "typical aggregated cost".
>

I think this would not be an advisable route to take.

The costs of such learning opportunities should be defined in an *Offer* by
the provider of that opportunity, possibly linked to the EOC via
Offer->addOn.

As to a “typical aggregated cost” - who would do the aggregating and
calculation of what is typical? - a minefield for confusion and out of date
data.

~Richard.


>
> On 27/01/18 14:58, Stuart Sutton wrote:
>
> Phil, I'm a bit uneasy about the scoping and (slightly about) the
> definition.  In scoping you state:
>
> *Cost*
> *Having found a credential it should be possible to identify the cost of
> acquiring the credential.*
>
>
>            Constraint
>
> *This is the cost of the credential itself, not the cost of courses,
> training or other things required in order to earn the credential (these
> costs can be shown when describing those other things).*
>
>
> People looking for the cost of a credential are seldom interested in costs
> pertaining to the mechanics of the award and very interested in direct
> costs of attaining the credential. I think those "other things" you mention
> boil down to cost of verification of competencies attained by: (1) some
> form of independent assessment (e.g., my California State Bar exam to earn
> a license to practice law), or a learning opportunity (course (of study),
> apprenticeship or other form of verified experience), e.g., my law degrees.
> So, wouldn't people looking for a credential they can afford want some
> estimated direct costs stemming from any necessary assessment or learning
> opportunity. In many/most cases, the only direct cost of a credential are
> the costs of independent assessment and/or learning opportunity.
>
> I appreciate wanting to slice and dice this so that the costs attached to
> a required schema.org/Course (of study) are expressed there (and should
> be), and the costs of any independent assessment (no current schema.org
> entity) are expressed there (and should be), but someone searching for a
> credential they can afford would want to see the direct costs rolled up.
>
> Phil, what's meant by "objects" in "Requires: ability to show relevant
> cost for educational / occupational credential objects"?
>
>
>
> On Fri, Jan 26, 2018 at 2:40 AM, Phil Barker <phil.barker@pjjk.co.uk>
> wrote:
>
>> I want to try and keep some momentum by doing some of the quick and easy
>> use cases while we discuss the more difficult ones. I think this is one:
>>
>> Cost
>> Having found a credential it should be possible to identify the cost of
>> acquiring the credential.
>>
>> Requires: ability to show relevant cost for educational / occupational
>> credential objects
>> Note: this implies that a credential is offered
>>
>> This is the cost of the credential itself, not the cost of courses,
>> training or other things required in order to earn the credential (these
>> costs can be shown when describing those other things).
>>
>> schema.org has means for specifying the cost of things with the offers
>> <http://schema.org/offers> property which we could use. If
>> EducationalOccupationalCredential is a CreativeWork, then we already
>> have the offers property (if it is not, we may need change the domain of
>> the existing offers property)
>>
>> A simple example
>>
>> {
>>   "@context": "http://schema.org/" <http://schema.org/>,
>>   "@type": "EducationalOccupationalCredential",
>>   "url" : "https://www.alt.ac.uk/certified-membership"
>> <https://www.alt.ac.uk/certified-membership>,
>>   "name": "CMALT",
>>   "description": "Certified Membership of the Association for Learning
>> Technology",
>>   "offers": {
>>     "@type": "Offer",
>>     "name": "Registration fee (UK)",
>>     "price": "150",
>>     "priceCurrency": "GBP"
>>   }
>> }
>>
>> Offers <http://schema.org/Offer> can get quite complex, allowing
>> different currencies, different offers for different regions, add on offers
>> etc.  I think it would cover our needs adequately; the only potential
>> problem I can see is that eligibleCustomerType as defined is too
>> restrictive to provide information like "special price for military
>> veterans". My approach to this would be to 1) raise this as an issue with
>> schema.org. 2) provide text values anyway (schema.org allows this)
>>
>> Any objections? Have I missed anything?
>>
>> Phil
>> --
>>
>> Phil Barker <http://people.pjjk.net/phil>. http://people.pjjk.net/phil
>> PJJK Limited <https://www.pjjk.co.uk>: technology to enhance learning;
>> information systems for education.
>> CETIS LLP: a cooperative consultancy for innovation in education
>> technology.
>>
>> PJJK Limited is registered in Scotland as a private limited company,
>> number SC569282.
>> CETIS is a co-operative limited liability partnership, registered in
>> England number OC399090
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Stuart A. Sutton, Metadata Consultant
> Associate Professor Emeritus, University of Washington
>    Information School
> Email: stuartasutton@gmail.com
> Skype: sasutton
>
>
>
> --
>
> Phil Barker <http://people.pjjk.net/phil>. http://people.pjjk.net/phil
> PJJK Limited <https://www.pjjk.co.uk>: technology to enhance learning;
> information systems for education.
> CETIS LLP: a cooperative consultancy for innovation in education
> technology.
>
> PJJK Limited is registered in Scotland as a private limited company,
> number SC569282.
> CETIS is a co-operative limited liability partnership, registered in
> England number OC399090
>