- From: Phil Barker <phil.barker@pjjk.co.uk>
- Date: Fri, 21 Jun 2019 17:02:26 +0100
- To: public-talent-signal@w3.org
- Message-ID: <af567c33-5c93-7aa6-9191-82ad1968d0b4@pjjk.co.uk>
Thank you. I have updated the example on the wiki
<https://www.w3.org/community/talent-signal/wiki/Example_of_JobPosting_qualifications_as_EducationalOccupationalCredential#Proposal>
[1] to show recognizedBy being used.
Any other comments / suggestions are welcome.
Phil
[1]
https://www.w3.org/community/talent-signal/wiki/Example_of_JobPosting_qualifications_as_EducationalOccupationalCredential#Proposal
On 21/06/2019 16:34, Merrilea Mayo wrote:
>
> Forgot to send to list
>
> -------- Forwarded Message --------
>
> Oh, I really like the idea of "recognized by" being a property. It
> solves the problem of having to call out or specify specific
> institutions. It creates a path forward for industry-centric
> organizations to "recognize" or give preferred status to academic
> courses/certifications that meet their approval. In some cases, the
> "recognized by" will be the same as the credential issuer (e.g.,
> Microsoft Office Certification recognized by Microsoft). In another
> case the "recognized by" will be an accrediting organization, such as
> ABET (in your other example) or the Manufacturing Institute (which
> recognizes ACT WorkKeys credentials, NIMS credentials, and others it
> believes do a good job aligning to needed manufacturing skills).
> This lets the employer "pass the buck" to a nonpartisan organization
> while still expressing some quality parameters around the credentials
> it will accept. I do like this.
>
> Merrilea
>
> On 6/21/2019 10:03 AM, Phil Barker 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. 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/",
>> "@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/",
>>>> "@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
>>> 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)
>
--
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 Friday, 21 June 2019 16:02:53 UTC