- From: Phil Barker <phil.barker@pjjk.co.uk>
- Date: Mon, 19 Mar 2018 09:28:16 +0000
- To: public-eocred-schema@w3.org
- Message-ID: <1674beac-371e-4cd3-6e16-3c648110d2db@pjjk.co.uk>
Thank you all. I have moved the proposal for competencyRequired
<https://www.w3.org/community/eocred-schema/wiki/Competencies_for_credential>
into the main wikispace. Please let me know if you see anything in it
that you think could be improved.
One potential issue is that we cannot model optional competencies. I
think trying to model complex competence profiles such as "(A and B) or
(C and (D or E))" would be too much for a first-cut proposal. However, I
do wonder whether it might be worth having a property for "optional
competency". My inclination would be to leave it for later, when we know
more about how people use these properties. In the meantime, it is
possible to prove textual descriptions of complex competence
requirements. Thoughts?
Phil
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.
>
> 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 <http://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.
>
> 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 <http://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.
>
> On Wed, Mar 7, 2018 at 7:22 AM, Phil Barker <phil.barker@pjjk.co.uk
> <mailto: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 <http://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
> <http://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 <mailto: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
Received on Monday, 19 March 2018 09:28:46 UTC