nilesh, 5 months ago

@impactology 💯

I think the reason is that it's not just "learning". It's learning + credentialing + stratification all bundled into one. Before the Internet, learning had to take up in a physical place where experts and students could assemble which inherently brought scarcity.

Now, the scarcity of learning can go away (lectures can be live-streamed to millions) but credentialing remains a zero-sum game. Now, is it possible that people really want credentials and not learning?

impactology, 5 months ago

@nilesh good point on disentangling credentialing with learning

What if the certifying body makes its standards/rubrics of evaluation for competency put up on the web for everyone to see, understand

Perhaps credentials, certifications are valuable but the way one acquires them via competition is not.

Perhaps we need to envision a model of evaluation for attainment of certification which is also open

image/jpeg
image/jpeg

irenes, 5 months ago

@impactology @nilesh we're all for this line of thought

impactology, 5 months ago

@nilesh

Licensing is fine, provided the evaluation of it is completely open. Rigorously evaluate before granting license okay, but keep it completely transparent and open to/for anyone

So learning about concepts on your own & getting evaluated by a separate body & their rubrics for certification should be kept open via documentation for people to learn how they were made (rationale for the rubric) so that they can contextualize them

impactology, 5 months ago

@nilesh imagine a platform like this for rubrics/standards

https://mastodon.social/@impactology/111538714837845739

impactology, 5 months ago

@nilesh a catalogue of rubrics for evaluating competency in different fields with explanations of the underlying principles behind the choice of a rubric

https://mastodon.social/@impactology/111538703213301734

impactology, 5 months ago

The way this kind of gatekeeping has been normalized and desensitised folks in accepting it as a way of life is astonishing