Re: [TalentSignal] Example for JobPosting qualifications as EducationalOccupationalCredentials

Thanks for the clarification, Stuart.  I knew I'd remembered only half 
the information!

Merrilea

On 6/21/2019 10:19 AM, Stuart Sutton wrote:
> Hi, Merrilea, just a couple of brief notes on your CredentialEngine 
> comments. You are correct that in Credential engine (i.e., in CTDL), 
> the offeror (as well as other related agents) of a credential are 
> separate entities from the credential offered. That mirror's 
> schema.org <http://schema.org> practice. The CTDL does have an array 
> of properties that relate a particular credential to an organization 
> including accreditedBy, approvedBy, offeredBy, ownedBy, recognizedBy 
> renewedBy and revokedBy.
>
> Bottom line, you are absolutely correct that the relationship between 
> offeror (etc) and credential is really important regardless of the 
> downstream motive of those wanting to have the information.
>
> Stuart
>
> On Fri, Jun 21, 2019 at 7:04 AM Phil Barker <phil.barker@pjjk.co.uk 
> <mailto:phil.barker@pjjk.co.uk>> wrote:
>
>     Interesting thoughts Merrilea, thank you.
>
>     I think that you're right to say that no employer will publicise
>     that they won't accept credentials from Institution X; and anyway,
>     I can't think of a way of expressing that information in
>     schema.org <http://schema.org>. So let's put that to one side.
>
>     EducationalOccupationalCredential has a property provider
>     <https://schema.org/provider> which might be useful for saying
>     things about credentials from which institutions are acceptable.
>     So you could say the provider must be memberOf the Ivy League, or
>     say that only one or two institutions are acceptable. This might
>     work where there is some sort of closed shop or monopoly for
>     providing the credential, but I am not convinced that this really
>     scales to many scenarios. (Tell me if I am wrong and I will make
>     an example.)
>
>     What I do think would work better is to show is that the
>     credential should be recognised by
>     <https://schema.org/recognizedBy> some accrediting organization:
>
>     {
>       "@context": "http://schema.org/" <http://schema.org/>,
>       "@type": "JobPosting",
>       "title": "Systems Research Engineer",
>       "qualifications": {
>         "@type": "EducationalOccupationalCredential",
>         "credentialCategory": "Bachelor of Science",
>         "about": "Computer Science",
>         "name": "Bachelor of Science in Computer Science",
>         "recognizedBy": {
>           "@type": "Organization",
>           "name": "British Computer Society",
>           "url": https://www.bcs.org/
>       }
>     }
>
>     (using British Computer Society because I am not sure whether ACM
>     / IEEE or who provides similar accreditation in the US or
>     elsewhere; happy to show alternatives)
>
>     Phil
>
>     On 21/06/2019 13:58, Merrilea Mayo wrote:
>>
>>     This is pretty good.  The TL;DR version of my longer response
>>     below: It would be nice to have a data element associated with a
>>     credential that described an acceptable (to the employer)
>>     issuer/owner/source of the credential.
>>
>>     Why?
>>
>>     I would like to fix one reason that credential listings as they
>>     exist today  are so poor at signaling requirements to
>>     candidates.  That is, that all sources of a given credential are
>>     not equally satisfactory to employers.  If I get a Bachelor of
>>     Science from a no-name university, my resume will never be
>>     considered even though technically I have the required
>>     credential. If I get a B.S.  from MIT, my resume floats to the
>>     top. This is particularly a problem in Computer Science, where,
>>     In the US, 70,000 African-Americans currently remain employed
>>     out-of-field (most in extremely menial jobs, like short-haul
>>     delivery drivers and bellhops - see my LinkedIn posting on US
>>     Census data showing this) because they have the BS degree in
>>     Computer Science, but not from anywhere an employer is interested
>>     in, or recruiting from.  Meanwhile, employers are complaining
>>     that minority talent  simply doesn't exist.  The signal that
>>     employers "need minority talent" is getting out, but in a form
>>     that doesn't allow individuals to respond correctly.  The result
>>     is a colossal waste of many individuals' time, and a profound
>>     accumulation of unnecessary debt, to pursue degrees no one is
>>     interested in.
>>
>>     Now, the real problem is of course that no employer really wants
>>     to admit they won't hire you if your degree is from Institution
>>     X.  But there is also no way in current data schema to easily
>>     signal a preferred credential issuer/owner/source even if
>>     employers *were* so inclined.  As a less incendiary example,
>>     there are at least 3 different organizations handing out Six
>>     Sigma Black Belt certifications.  Which one(s) is the employer
>>     willing to accept?  I think in Credential Engine, the credential
>>     owner ended up being stored in records completely separate from
>>     the other data regarding a credential, which also made it
>>     difficult, when working with their APIs, to extract listings of
>>     credentials that included the information on who was issuing
>>     them.   I can't be 100% certain of that last claim, since I'm not
>>     a programmer, but I think that's what I heard from ours, when
>>     they attempted it.
>>
>>     So...long story short:  It would be nice to have a data element
>>     associated with a credential that described an acceptable
>>     issuer/owner/source of the credential.  It could be a specific
>>     organization,  a class of organizations (e.g., "Ivy League
>>     Universities" or "Accredited higher education institutions"), or
>>     a list containing several of the above ("Embry-Riddle
>>     University," "Pima Community College").  At least that way, if
>>     employers ever did get explicit about signaling acceptable
>>     credentials, they'd have a mechanism for doing so.  I will say
>>     that if employers ever specified their preferred credential
>>     providers, it would dramatically shake up higher education. 
>>     Especially if such information were available in structured form,
>>     it could easily be collated for national-level reports on
>>     supply/demand, which typically utilize real-time labor market
>>     information (job postings) as their data source. Particularly if
>>     employers were willing to identify subsets of institutions less
>>     than 50 in number (for example, something smaller than just
>>     "accredited higher education institution"), Higher education
>>     would then get an extremely strong signal about what was, and was
>>     not, considered an "employable" educational pathway.
>>
>>     Merrilea
>>
>>     On 6/21/2019 7:27 AM, Phil Barker wrote:tthe qualifications
>>     property of a JobPosting.
>>>
>>>     It is based on an existing example in schema of anOccupation
>>>     <https://schema.org/Occupation> requiring a PhD level qualification.
>>>
>>>     {
>>>       "@context": "http://schema.org/" <http://schema.org/>,
>>>       "@type": "JobPosting",
>>>       "title": "Systems Research Engineer",
>>>       "qualifications": {
>>>         "@type": "EducationalOccupationalCredential",
>>>         "credentialCategory": "Bachelor of Science",
>>>         "about": "Computer Science",
>>>         "name": "Bachelor of Science in Computer Science"
>>>       }
>>>     }
>>>
>>>     There's a full description on the wiki at
>>>     https://www.w3.org/community/talent-signal/wiki/Example_of_JobPosting_qualifications_as_EducationalOccupationalCredential
>>>
>>>     Any comments?
>>>
>>>     Phil
>>>
>>>     -- 
>>>
>>>     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 <mailto: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.
>
-- 

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)

Received on Friday, 21 June 2019 15:33:53 UTC