Alternative Credentials As Social Policy: A Lifecourse Perspective on Skill Certification for Disadvantaged Groups

Possessing certified skills is essential in today’s knowledge economies. For most, these can be acquired through the standard route i.e. a period spent in a learning environment. This standard path to the acquisition of educational credentials, however, may be unsuitable for many vulnerable groups. These include individuals how have learned a job through practical experience or those who have obtained a degree in a foreign country that is not recognised. Possessing skills that are not certified by a recognized credential is arguably a major source of disadvantage. To deal with this issue, interest in alternative paths to skill credentials has been rapidly gaining ground. The concrete tools and policies that are deployed are known as alternative credentials. Examples include processes that allow the recognition of prior learning (RPL) which provide the certification of skills gained through practical experience, the recognition of foreign degrees, the modularisation of standard VET or adult education programmes, which allow individuals to obtain partial certification without the need to complete a full programme. Against this background, the objective of this paper is to identify and discuss the social policy implications of alternative credentials. We argue that the distributional impact of these credentials is not predetermined. Drawing on insights from life course research, we identify two key dimensions that are likely to shape the distributional impact of alternative credentials. First, the degree to which these alternative credentials are cumulable and can provide access to standard educational and training offers (or “stackability”). Second, the extent to which such credentials are known to and recognised as valuable by employers. These are two important qualities of credentials. Failure to meet them may result in alternative credentials being the source of segmentation instead of integration.