Re: Fwd: Re: EOCred: Credentials and competences

Phil, I was agreeing with you that DefinedTerm works in our context since
what's needed for EducationalOccupationalCredential is the ability to
identify a specific competency node (or array of such nodes) in a specific
framework with a competencyRequired property. With my comment about not
being 'ideal', I was thinking about a context in which competency
frameworks themselves were described on the Web using schema--i.e.,
the "structured
data type
<https://www.w3.org/community/eocred-schema/wiki/index.php?title=User:Philbarker/Draft:Competencies_for_credential>"
you mention...a push toward SKOS-land.

On Mon, Mar 12, 2018 at 5:17 AM, Phil Barker <phil.barker@pjjk.co.uk> wrote:

> OK, now I'm talking to the right forum...
>
> On 12/03/18 11:38, Phil Barker wrote:
>
> [This was Stuart's reply to the message I sent to the wrong list]
>
>
> Phil, thanks for pushing forward.
>
> So, in essence, the question is how to handle referencing competencies
> from the credential and what's on the other end of rangeIncludes.
>
>
> Yes. Also, there's a question about how much of the work of defining
> competencies we take on here.
>
>
> As for the property referencing a competency, I hope we do NOT use the
> existing educationalLevel / AlignmentObject for the reasons already
> discussed on this list. There is a broad consensus out there that defines
> competencies as assertions of knowledge, skills, and abilities--what
> someone should know, already knows and/or is able to do. While the
> pending schema.org/skills property could have it's definition tweaked as
> you suggest, Phil, as noted above, skills are just one kind of competency.
> So perhaps the tweaking of the label 'skills' would make the use more
> inclusive of what the term means across the talent pipeline--from syllabus
> learning outcomes, through credentialing requirements to job postings and
> HR functions.
>
> Sadly, I suspect that it is too late to change the label that property
> seems to be moderately well used. I would be happy to be wrong about that,
> so if anyone thinks I am please let me know.
>
> I've drafted a proposal for competencyRequired
> <https://www.w3.org/community/eocred-schema/wiki/index.php?title=User:Philbarker/Draft:Competencies_for_credential>,
> which could live alongside skills, replace skills, or serve as a new
> definition of skills.
>
> *Name:* compentencyRequired
>
> *Definition:* Knowledge, skill, ability or personal attribute that must
> be demonstrated by a person.
>
> *Expected Range:* text, url
>
>
> Competencies have been the focus of both ad hoc and de facto standards
> efforts--i.e., a lot of experts have looked at the description problem and
> there is a lot of accord across them.  The LRMI Task Group started out
> looking at developing a schema.org proposal for competencies and decided
> that the then emergent DefinedTerm proposal (see Category Code in pending
> and discussion to change name
> <https://github.com/schemaorg/schemaorg/issues/1775>) would basically
> work for this purpose. While the DefinedTerm proposal isn't ideal, it's a
> sound base that will likely have broad use. Perhaps, if useful, it could be
> subtyped later to provide the few properties that might optimize it for
> competencies.
>
>
> Agreed. Are you suggesting that we propose DefinedTerm to be in the range
> expected for competencyRequired (until it gets subtyped into something more
> specific)? Or that we propose a subtype for CompetencyDefinition here?
>
> Phil
>
>
> On Wed, Mar 7, 2018 at 7:22 AM, Phil Barker <phil.barker@pjjk.co.uk>
> wrote:
>
>> Hello again.
>>
>> We have several use cases relating to the competences that an educational
>> / occupational credential requires. Does adapting the skills
>> <http://pending.schema.org/skills> ('skills required to fulfill this
>> role.') from the JobPosting fulfil our need?
>>
>>
>> The use case / requirements we have are
>>
>>    - Individuals should be able to search for and find credentials that
>>    best address competencies they wish to attain.
>>    - Individuals should be able to search and find credentials that best
>>    match competencies that the individual posses and wishes to be recognized
>>    - Employers should able to search for and find credentials that
>>    address the competencies required of an employee.
>>    - [having identified a credential] It should be possible to identify
>>    the competencies required in order to obtain a credential.
>>
>> Also, knowing the competences required to earn a credential would help
>> someone find relevant learning resources / opportunities, i.e. those which
>> had similar competencies as learning outcomes.
>>
>>
>> Currently, there is no means in schema.org to describe competencies.
>> There is a lot of work going on in different forums around the description
>> of forums, and some of us have ideas for how the proposed Defined Term type
>> might be extended to describe competences.
>>
>> We have several choices to make.
>>
>> Firstly do we use the educationalAlignment / AlignmentObject for this, or
>> do we create a new property for  'required Competence'.
>> For reasons discussed when we were dealling with educationalLevel, I
>> would prefer not to use the Alignment Object. We may want to discuss the
>> similarity between the new property and skills
>> <http://pending.schema.org/skills> ('skills required to fulfill this
>> role.') from the JobPosting
>>
>> Secondly, do we try to propose properties for Competency and
>> CompetencyFramework types here or do we leave this for others to do and
>> settle for text descriptions or URL links?
>>
>> Given that Defined Term is not yet in schema, and given the work going on
>> elsewhere, I am inclined to leave defining Competency and
>> CompetencyFramework types to later, and to settle for text descriptions or
>> links.
>>
>>
>> My inclination would be to modify the existing schema.org/skills
>> property by tweaking the definition.
>>   skills: the skills and competences required.
>> and add EducationalOccupationalCredential to its expected domain.
>>
>> We could also raise an issue about the desirability of a more formal
>> means of representing competencies.
>>
>> What do you think?
>>
>> 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
>



-- 
Stuart A. Sutton, Metadata Consultant
Associate Professor Emeritus, University of Washington
   Information School
Email: stuartasutton@gmail.com
Skype: sasutton