- From: Phil Barker <phil.barker@pjjk.co.uk>
- Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2019 18:15:55 +0100
- To: public-talent-signal@w3.org
- Message-ID: <a4a73b97-6a04-f31a-eb88-7a6716b4a592@pjjk.co.uk>
Merrilea, so sorry to hear about your mother.
Yes, currently skills in schema.org are just text values. The example
hidden down the bottom of this page shows a suggested refinement of that
to controlled values drawn from a "DefinedTermSet" That defined term set
would be a competency framework. So:
"skills": {
"@type": "Definedterm",
"termCode": "K0016",
"description": "Knowledge of computer programming principles",
"inDefinedTermSet": {
"@type": "DefinedTermSet",
"name": "National Initiative for Cybersecurity Education (NICE)
Cybersecurity Workforce Framework",
"url": "https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.SP.800-181"
<https://nam02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fdoi.org%2F10.6028%2FNIST.SP.800-181&data=01%7C01%7CGNADEAU%40PCGUS.COM%7C4cc0f23be87c4eb1088008d700202f49%7Cd9b110c34c254379b97ae248938cc17b%7C0&sdata=GSojtCwQ%2BoMlLRqzT0IGnlvfPadELhDBUu%2BVBPjH6oM%3D&reserved=0>,
"publisher": {
"@type": "Organization",
"name": "National Institute of Standards and Technology"
},
"datePublished": "2017-08"
}
}
This mirrors the approach the Educational Occupational Credentials
community took when wanting to specify what a Credential certified, this
is from the example at the end of the page for
schema:EducationalOccupationalCredential
<https://schema.org/EducationalOccupationalCredential>
"competencyRequired" : {
"@type": "DefinedTerm",
"termCode": "ASTFM401",
"name": "Understand facilities management and its place in the organisation",
"url": "https://www.ukstandards.org.uk/PublishedNos/ASTFM401.pdf",
"inDefinedTermSet": "https://www.ukstandards.org.uk/"
}
There isn't currently anything in schema.org for Assessments, and we
don't have a means of declaring a defined term as being a Competency
statement, but if we can agree that the existing skills property should
point to definitions of competencies, then we will be one more step
towards having competencies surrounded.
I'm not so comfortable about using the skills property to point to
directly to an EducationalOccupationalCredential. The existing
qualification and educationalExperience properties seem a better match
for that (I use qualification in the sense of the definitions gathered
by UNESCO
<https://unevoc.unesco.org/go.php?q=TVETipedia+Glossary+A-Z&filt=all&id=367>)
In writing this I remember a sketch of the Talent Signalling domain that
I used in the kick-off webinar
**
I still think this works. I'm not sure how big a bite to take at it, I
certainly don't want to suggest everything in it to schema.org in one
go, but I'm now thinking that we might usefully think about whether it
is a reasonable framework around which to have our discussions?
Phil
On 31/07/2019 17:41, Merrilea Mayo wrote:
>
> So.. let me preface my undoubtedly ignorant and way-behind-the times
> comment with the disclaimer that I, too, have been away from work.
> I'm just now back from the three week "farewell" cruise with my mother
> (she was diagnosed with terminal cancer on Memorial Day). I more or
> less dropped everything during those 3 weeks, including this group.
> Add to that, the cruise spent about half its time north of the Arctic
> circle, and so modern communication, even by satellite, was extremely
> spotty. So, be aware I'm not all here.
>
> Here's the probably-late-to-the-party comment: I see that our current
> schema for "skills" assumes that a loose English language description
> is sufficient. This may be true for now. However, we can see
> organizations starting to develop skills frameworks, skills
> definitions, and skills assessments to back up very specific
> definitions. At that point, there will be "critical thinking" as
> defined/certified by organization ABC and "creativity" as
> defined/certified by organization XYZ. Once skills be come
> "certifiable" (I mean that in the "testable/documented" sense, not in
> the "crazy-lady" sense), you will need some properties that are
> currently associated with more formal concepts, like
> EducationalOccupationalCredential. Certified skills in essence become
> mini-credentials. I am not sure what is supposed to happen at that
> point. Do people just migrate to using
> EducationalOccupationalCredential instead of Skill for the same concept?
>
> Thoughts?
>
> Merrilea
>
> On 7/31/2019 7:33 AM, Phil Barker wrote:
>>
>> Hello all,
>>
>> I would like to prod this discussion for further input, just because
>> I know that several people (including me) on this list have been away
>> from work since I first raised it.
>>
>> So far the message that I'm seeing is that the simple approach I
>> showed in the email (below) and on the wiki
>> <https://www.w3.org/community/talent-signal/wiki/Example_of_how_to_refer_skills_requirements_to_competency_definitions>
>> [1] is adequate, and that while there are complexities that may be
>> represented elsewhere, the existing schema.org property skills
>> <https://schema.org/skills> is adequate for relating any type of
>> required competence to a job posting.
>>
>> I'm interested in hearing more opinions regarding this, whether
>> agreeing or not with that approach.
>>
>> Regards, Phil
>>
>> 1.
>> https://www.w3.org/community/talent-signal/wiki/Example_of_how_to_refer_skills_requirements_to_competency_definitions
>> <https://nam02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.w3.org%2Fcommunity%2Ftalent-signal%2Fwiki%2FExample_of_how_to_refer_skills_requirements_to_competency_definitions&data=01%7C01%7CGNADEAU%40PCGUS.COM%7C4cc0f23be87c4eb1088008d700202f49%7Cd9b110c34c254379b97ae248938cc17b%7C0&sdata=fJJKvoSDgelDu0%2FGO%2BIjPAbZEHbLF1yQetBdldSs6MQ%3D&reserved=0>
>>
>> 2. https://schema.org/skills
>>
>> On 04/07/2019 17:50, Nadeau, Gregory wrote:
>>>
>>> Hello All –
>>>
>>> From my perspective, delineating distinctions between knowledge,
>>> skills, abilities is mostly an exercise in semantics and is not
>>> necessary for information modelling. The more critical functional
>>> distinction is between:
>>>
>>> * An *achievement* – something that more than one person could
>>> demonstrate (examples include: SKA, competency, credential, etc)
>>> * An *assertion* – a specific instance by an issuer about a
>>> recipient (learner/worker) regarding the achievement
>>>
>>> Other terms could be used. This distinction aligns with the IMS
>>> Global Open Badge and new draft candidate Comprehensive Learner
>>> Record specification.
>>>
>>> g.
>>>
>>> **
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> *Greg Nadeau
>>> *Manager
>>>
>>> 781-370-1017
>>>
>>> gnadeau@pcgus.com <mailto:gnadeau@pcgus.com>
>>>
>>> publicconsultinggroup.com
>>>
>>> **
>>>
>>> This message (including any attachments) contains confidential
>>> information intended for a specific individual and purpose and is
>>> protected by law. If you are not the intended recipient, you should
>>> delete this message and are hereby notified that any disclosure,
>>> copying, or distribution of this message, or the taking of any
>>> action based on it, is strictly prohibited.
>>>
>>> *From:* Fritz Ray <fritley@gmail.com>
>>> *Sent:* Wednesday, July 3, 2019 9:37 PM
>>> *To:* public-talent-signal@w3.org
>>> *Subject:* Re: [Talent-Signal] relating competencies to job postings
>>>
>>> I have decided to re-open the can of worms, because it is a holiday
>>> weekend, and discussion is what the holidays are about.
>>>
>>> There are a constellation of objects and relationships that, I
>>> believe, represent some clarity when it comes to relating a number
>>> of these things. Let me know if I am making some fundamental error here.
>>>
>>> Definitions: First, there is task itself. This represents a
>>> repeatable thing that can be done by an individual. A
>>> competence/competency represents the capability of an individual to
>>> perform a task. Demonstrating a task implies competence and the
>>> ability to employ KSAs.
>>>
>>> KSAs are not directly demonstrable, because skills, knowledge, and
>>> abilities -- in their latent form -- are not expressible. They can
>>> only be demonstrated when performing a model task or representative
>>> task -- then ipso facto one is demonstrating competence or a
>>> competency, because one is employing a combination of KSAs to
>>> perform a task.
>>>
>>> ----- Examples -----
>>>
>>>
>>> So, to call something a skill or knowledge or ability is to speak
>>> about latent notions -- The knowledge of Pi to 25 places is latent.
>>> Reciting Pi to 25 places is a task. A person's capability to recite
>>> Pi to 25 places is a competency, because it necessarily employs a
>>> combination of KSAs -- breathing, memory, sequencing, the numbers,
>>> the number system, speech, etc to perform a task, reciting Pi to 25
>>> places, in a context that requires those KSAs -- A classroom, a bus,
>>> a job interview.
>>>
>>> The skill of sharpening a pencil is latent, bottled up in the human
>>> (or machine, but never mind that) brain and spine and whatever other
>>> parts. Sharpening a pencil is a task. The competence to sharpen a
>>> pencil employs all manner of other KSAs that perform the task and
>>> create an outcome.
>>>
>>> The ability to stand is only provable through the act or task of
>>> standing.... Repeat explanation...
>>>
>>> Therefore, *I think the labels skills is fine*. I believe skills are
>>> separate from knowledge or natural abilities or acquired abilities,
>>> so there may be something there -- but putting a competency in the
>>> place of a skill is not wrong per se. One (a skill) identifies a
>>> context free and task free latent capability that may or may not be
>>> deployable in other contexts, the other (a competency) is more
>>> explicit and grounded in task and context.
>>>
>>>
>>> ---- Continued nannerings -----
>>>
>>> Likewise, a Learning Objective is only expressible through a
>>> competency because an individual's having learned all they can learn
>>> (whether that involves performing the objective task or not) has a
>>> competence gap between what they learned or did in the learning
>>> environment and what they will do in the target environment. The
>>> KSAs employed demonstrating that competency in the "field" as it
>>> were are probably different from the classroom and lab environments.
>>> These contextual gaps don't exist when we talk about the knowledge
>>> it takes to remember how to spell quixotic, but the context matters
>>> suddenly when done on a stage with a bright light at a spelling bee.
>>>
>>> On Wed, Jul 3, 2019 at 4:24 AM Phil Barker <phil.barker@pjjk.co.uk
>>> <mailto:phil.barker@pjjk.co.uk>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hello all,
>>>
>>> I know that many of you are about start a holiday; and after
>>> that I will be on vacation. So this may not be the best time to
>>> start a conversation, but I want to post this now to see what I
>>> come back to...
>>>
>>> One of the issues we have listed is how to refer skills
>>> requirements to competency definitions in a standard framework.
>>>
>>> I have drafted on the wiki a straw man for a simple way of doing
>>> this
>>> <https://nam02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.w3.org%2Fcommunity%2Ftalent-signal%2Fwiki%2FExample_of_how_to_refer_skills_requirements_to_competency_definitions&data=01%7C01%7CGNADEAU%40PCGUS.COM%7C4cc0f23be87c4eb1088008d700202f49%7Cd9b110c34c254379b97ae248938cc17b%7C0&sdata=fJJKvoSDgelDu0%2FGO%2BIjPAbZEHbLF1yQetBdldSs6MQ%3D&reserved=0>
>>> [1] with minimal change to what currently exists in schema.org
>>> <https://nam02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fschema.org&data=01%7C01%7CGNADEAU%40PCGUS.COM%7C4cc0f23be87c4eb1088008d700202f49%7Cd9b110c34c254379b97ae248938cc17b%7C0&sdata=19XCZTOxfCuDvTAXObHqsszSBTy54XRKOkHoDvRVs9o%3D&reserved=0>.
>>> It requires only that the expected type for one property be changed.
>>>
>>> {
>>>
>>> "@context": "http://schema.org/"
>>> <https://nam02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fschema.org%2F&data=01%7C01%7CGNADEAU%40PCGUS.COM%7C4cc0f23be87c4eb1088008d700202f49%7Cd9b110c34c254379b97ae248938cc17b%7C0&sdata=hGZM%2B3yAKn4GivtFaXhiG9nZ5Wdz%2Fb%2BNqVvbTC%2FTWYs%3D&reserved=0>,
>>>
>>> "@type": "JobPosting",
>>>
>>> "title": "Junior software developer",
>>>
>>> "skills": {
>>>
>>> "@type": "Definedterm",
>>>
>>> "termCode": "K0016",
>>>
>>> "description": "Knowledge of computer programming principles",
>>>
>>> "inDefinedTermSet": {
>>>
>>> "@type": "DefinedTermSet",
>>>
>>> "name": "National Initiative for Cybersecurity Education
>>> (NICE) Cybersecurity Workforce Framework",
>>>
>>> "url": "https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.SP.800-181"
>>> <https://nam02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fdoi.org%2F10.6028%2FNIST.SP.800-181&data=01%7C01%7CGNADEAU%40PCGUS.COM%7C4cc0f23be87c4eb1088008d700202f49%7Cd9b110c34c254379b97ae248938cc17b%7C0&sdata=GSojtCwQ%2BoMlLRqzT0IGnlvfPadELhDBUu%2BVBPjH6oM%3D&reserved=0>,
>>>
>>> "publisher": {
>>>
>>> "@type": "Organization",
>>>
>>> "name": "National Institute of Standards and Technology"
>>>
>>> },
>>>
>>> "datePublished": "2017-08"
>>>
>>> }
>>>
>>> }
>>>
>>> }
>>>
>>> Points to note / consider
>>>
>>> * this doesn't attempt to fully describe the competency, that's
>>> the job of the framework. Furthermore this approach is pretty
>>> much agnostic to the format used to represent the framework--I
>>> mean, it would be nice if a linked-data friendly format were
>>> used and we can then link properly to its @id but this example
>>> is a pdf.
>>>
>>> * is there any other key information that is required to
>>> identify the competence being referred to?
>>>
>>> * I've used the existing schema.org
>>> <https://nam02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fschema.org&data=01%7C01%7CGNADEAU%40PCGUS.COM%7C4cc0f23be87c4eb1088008d700202f49%7Cd9b110c34c254379b97ae248938cc17b%7C0&sdata=19XCZTOxfCuDvTAXObHqsszSBTy54XRKOkHoDvRVs9o%3D&reserved=0>
>>> property skills to cover a competency that is defined as
>>> 'knowledge'. I know the KSA approach to competencies, but also
>>> that other aspects can be added (tools/technologies, attitudes)
>>> an other approaches taken. Can we live with lumping these
>>> together under the label skills, or do we have to look into
>>> creating a property with a different name? We will be somewhat
>>> constrained by existing schema.org
>>> <https://nam02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fschema.org&data=01%7C01%7CGNADEAU%40PCGUS.COM%7C4cc0f23be87c4eb1088008d700202f49%7Cd9b110c34c254379b97ae248938cc17b%7C0&sdata=19XCZTOxfCuDvTAXObHqsszSBTy54XRKOkHoDvRVs9o%3D&reserved=0>
>>> usage. Also I think that trying to separate out the different
>>> aspects of competence would cause difficulties when implemented
>>> in the non-specialist schema.org
>>> <https://nam02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fschema.org&data=01%7C01%7CGNADEAU%40PCGUS.COM%7C4cc0f23be87c4eb1088008d700202f49%7Cd9b110c34c254379b97ae248938cc17b%7C0&sdata=19XCZTOxfCuDvTAXObHqsszSBTy54XRKOkHoDvRVs9o%3D&reserved=0>
>>> context. Remember, the competence framework is where the
>>> information should be provided about what aspect of competence
>>> (knowledge, skill or ability) is being referred to.
>>>
>>> Best wishes to all celebrating the 4 July.
>>>
>>> Phil
>>>
>>> 1.
>>> https://www.w3.org/community/talent-signal/wiki/Example_of_how_to_refer_skills_requirements_to_competency_definitions
>>> <https://nam02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.w3.org%2Fcommunity%2Ftalent-signal%2Fwiki%2FExample_of_how_to_refer_skills_requirements_to_competency_definitions&data=01%7C01%7CGNADEAU%40PCGUS.COM%7C4cc0f23be87c4eb1088008d700202f49%7Cd9b110c34c254379b97ae248938cc17b%7C0&sdata=fJJKvoSDgelDu0%2FGO%2BIjPAbZEHbLF1yQetBdldSs6MQ%3D&reserved=0>
>>>
>>> --
>>>
>>> Phil Barker
>>> <https://nam02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fpeople.pjjk.net%2Fphil&data=01%7C01%7CGNADEAU%40PCGUS.COM%7C4cc0f23be87c4eb1088008d700202f49%7Cd9b110c34c254379b97ae248938cc17b%7C0&sdata=%2FBipLxOJWK8aRBqXTZb21wPlDtx8XyVgRhw39R9dfeE%3D&reserved=0>.
>>> http://people.pjjk.net/phil
>>> <https://nam02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fpeople.pjjk.net%2Fphil&data=01%7C01%7CGNADEAU%40PCGUS.COM%7C4cc0f23be87c4eb1088008d700202f49%7Cd9b110c34c254379b97ae248938cc17b%7C0&sdata=%2FBipLxOJWK8aRBqXTZb21wPlDtx8XyVgRhw39R9dfeE%3D&reserved=0>
>>> CETIS LLP
>>> <https://nam02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.cetis.org.uk&data=01%7C01%7CGNADEAU%40PCGUS.COM%7C4cc0f23be87c4eb1088008d700202f49%7Cd9b110c34c254379b97ae248938cc17b%7C0&sdata=ahdrbEr0rJZ2MdOMWeoQjg46sDQte0oFzIrDlAZjwFE%3D&reserved=0>:
>>> a cooperative consultancy for innovation in education technology.
>>> PJJK Limited
>>> <https://nam02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.pjjk.co.uk&data=01%7C01%7CGNADEAU%40PCGUS.COM%7C4cc0f23be87c4eb1088008d700202f49%7Cd9b110c34c254379b97ae248938cc17b%7C0&sdata=PUQvqaf1mjf0vPsHtCh3lLhjIwyt1mxXBEa9%2FesK0gQ%3D&reserved=0>:
>>> technology to enhance learning; information systems for education.
>>>
>>> CETIS is a co-operative limited liability partnership,
>>> registered in England number OC399090
>>> PJJK Limited is registered in Scotland as a private limited
>>> company, number SC569282.
>>>
>> --
>>
>> Phil Barker <http://people.pjjk.net/phil>. http://people.pjjk.net/phil
>> CETIS LLP <https://www.cetis.org.uk>: a cooperative consultancy for
>> innovation in education technology.
>> PJJK Limited <https://www.pjjk.co.uk>: technology to enhance
>> learning; information systems for education.
>>
>> CETIS is a co-operative limited liability partnership, registered in
>> England number OC399090
>> PJJK Limited is registered in Scotland as a private limited company,
>> number SC569282.
>>
> --
>
> Merrilea J. Mayo, Ph.D.
> Mayo Enterprises, LLC
> 12101 Sheets Farm Rd.
> North Potomac, MD 20878
>
> merrileamayo@gmail.com
> https://merrileamayo.com/ < >
> 240-304-0439 (cell)
> 301-977-2599 (landline)
>
--
Phil Barker <http://people.pjjk.net/phil>. http://people.pjjk.net/phil
CETIS LLP <https://www.cetis.org.uk>: a cooperative consultancy for
innovation in education technology.
PJJK Limited <https://www.pjjk.co.uk>: technology to enhance learning;
information systems for education.
CETIS is a co-operative limited liability partnership, registered in
England number OC399090
PJJK Limited is registered in Scotland as a private limited company,
number SC569282.
Received on Wednesday, 31 July 2019 17:16:41 UTC