��� �Session 4. Recognition, ECTS and Flexible Learning Pathways: From Short Learning Experiences to Progression���Prof. Dr. Ann Katherine Isaacs�ECTS, Bologna Process, Tuning expert; Former Vice Chair BFUG (Bologna Follow Up Group); Senior Advisor, Advisory Group on the revision of the ECTS Users’ Guide��Tbilisi�12 October 2026���
Session 4: Summary
Intitial conclusions - Discussion��
�����
An introductory remark:
In the current draft 4.1 of the new ECTS Users’ Guide the basics do not change. ECTS and its key principles will, we hope, be clearer, but they do not change.
What is new is the opening of ECTS to all learning, which we will discuss at the end of this session.
With regard to micro-credentials, the ‘changes’ are fuller explanations of how ECTS should be used for Microcredentials.
These are implicit in the 2015 Guide, for now still in vigor, but they are further explained in the future 2027 edition.
���1. Workload and allocation of ECTS credits.��
ECTS credits express two parameters:
The principles for allocating credits to micro-credentials are exactly the same as those for allocating credits to a full degree programme.
Naturally for a full programme the starting point is the number of years needed to complete the programme, and for each year the available credits are 60 in number. The key question is how to structure the programme: whether to modularize or not, and how order the modules so that the learning outcomes are achieved in the most appropriate order, in order to build the Programme Learning Outcomes.
���Workload and allocation of ECTS credits.��
The structural questions relevant for a full degree programme need not be addressed for MCs, which by their nature are ‘small’ and ‘standalone’.
Nonetheless, exactly as for full degrees, another decision to be taken is how many hours of estimated learner time are to correspond to one ECTS credit, within the 25 to 30 hour range.
In most countries this is decided at central level, to be applied by all providers in the country.
The allocation for MCs will be the same as that for larger programmes.
(In the case of Georgia, I understand, the workload corresponding to 1 ECTS is given as the full possible range, 25 to 30 hours, as defined by law.)
���Workload and allocation of ECTS credits.��
Another national decision: within what credit range can micro-credentials be offered?
Here decisions can be quite different, and correspond to ideas about what a micro-credential should look like: what its purpose is and how it related to the rest of the educational and higher education structure.
For some countries, the minimum is 1 ECTS; for others 3 ECTS. If an MC carries 3 ECTS, that means that the total learner time, whether in class, online, or engaged in personal study, is approximately from 75 to 90 hours: if we imagine a workday of 8 hours, we are talking about a workload of 9 to 11 days of full-time work.
Micro-credentials are ‘micro’ with respect to a full degree programme lasting several years, but they are understood as being significant pieces of learning.
���Workload and allocation of ECTS credits.��
Countries make very different choices about the highest number of credits that can still be considered a micro-credential.
Once again, this depends on many factors: for example, if there already were ‘smaller pieces’ of learning in the national system, what was their credit range? Are nicrocredentials very much understood to be short intensive learning experiences leading to a circumscribed acquisition of new competences? Or are somewhat longer less highly focussed MCs also of interest? Is there a danger that MCs will be confused with short degree programmes or diplomas?
In observing the choices made by different countries we can get an idea of how they plan to incorporate MCs into their system.
���Workload and allocation of ECTS credits.���
Here are some examples:
Belgium (FL): 1 ECTS = 25-30 hrs. MCs can legally be from 1 to 20, but are usually 3 to 19 (20 overlaps with another definition). For embedded MCs (pre-existing modules) 3 is normal; for LLL 1 ECTS is common.
Spain: 1 ECTS = 25-30 hrs. MCs, by law, can be from 1 to 14 credits. !5 and above become ‘diplomas’
Croatia: 1 ECTS = 30 hrs. MCs can be from 1 to 9 ECTS. Above that the course would be a ‘partial qualification’.
Ireland: 1 ECTS = 25 hrs. Legally MCs can be from 1 to 30 ECTS, but in practice 5 or 10 are common.
Lithuania: 1 ECTS = 25-30 hrs. MCs can normally be from 1 to 30 ECTS, but most commonly they are from 1 to 6.
Stackability, credit accumulation and transfer
Often microcredentials are advertised and promoted as being ‘stackable’.
This is a claim that an institution can make regarding its own micro-credentials if it has planned on their being smoothly incorporated into a larger qualification. Often the MCs described as ‘stackable’ are on the same or similar topics, at a more or less advanced stage (Computer programming I, Computer programming II) which means that there is progression and no overlap.
The same can be true for university consortia and alliances, where planning is joint, and offers of ‘stackability’ can be backed up in practice.
Stackability, credit accumulation and transfer
‘Stackability’ in final analysis is only possible if the recognizing institution or authority finds that the credits presented correspond to credits and learning outcomes compatible with the purpose for which recognition is sought.
It is easy to imagine scenarios in which learners think that their credit should be recognized and applied to a degree programme but this does not happen.
“Stackability” in the draft 2027 ECTS Users’ Guide:
“A term that became used with reference to micro-credentials to show that, in addition to having a stand-alone value, they can offer a route to a larger qualification. Both the MICROBOL Common Framework and the European approach to micro-credentials indicate that micro-credentials may be combined into larger credentials or qualifications.
“Stacking credits means that accumulated credits (from courses, modules or micro-credentials) are counted towards a qualification or larger credential, or used for access to a further learning opportunity. All ECTS credits are stackable: that is, they can be recognised by an education institution as a record of part of the achievement necessary to obtain a specified qualification or credential.
“Pathways to stack credits can be offered by a single education institution, education institutions can offer standardised pathways to stack credits obtained from another education institution, or education institutions can make case-by-case decisions to recognise credits towards a qualification or credential.”
Stackability, credit accumulation and transfer
Whethera specific micro-credential is ‘stackable’ always depends on the reason for which recognition is sought.
It is the recognizing institution or authority that must make the decision. Of course, the fact that the microcredential must be accompanied by the key descriptive elements to facilitate the decision. Most obviously these must include:
Embedding micro-credentials into degree programmes … without weakening qualification integrity.�
In many cases, and in many countries, the quick way of creating new MCs is to allow existing modules in normal degree programmes to be taken separately, as micro-credentials, with the same LOs and credits, but also with a separately issued digital certificate.
The advantages of such a system are clear: the modules are already being taught and assessed, and it is easy to recognize them if there is a request to use them to reduce the number of course modules that need to be taken to receive a final qualification.
Another advantage from the point of view of the learner: the learner is immediately able to show proof of achieved learning outcomes representing competences that can be of interest for employment.
Embedding micro-credentials into degree programmes … without weakening qualification integrity.�
Furthermore, a learner who ‘drops out’, for whatever reason – for work, family, changed interests – still has proof of the learning already achieved.
The downsides:
3. Recognition of prior learning (RPL), partial recognition and progression pathways.
The basic rules foreseen by ECTS for the recognition of prior learning have been in place for a long time. Although their level of utilization has until recently been very spotty, they are now very much a focus of attention.
With the development of the importance of including informal and nonformal learning in the records of citizens, RPL acquires a new importance.
The Council recommendation on MCs also gave stimulus in this direction: many countries make it obligatory for HEIs (or for specialised centers) to evaluate requests for recognition of prior learning.
Recognition of prior learning (RPL)
In the draft ECTS Users’ Guide, RPL and the related obligations are illustrated under this heading:
This is seen as an important factor in lifelong learning and inclusion.
RPL can be requested if the learner wishes to enrol in a programme and already has achieved some to the LOs in the course of their work or life experience.
It can also be requested in order for the learner to have the corresponding credits recognized “purely to formally document their personal learning achievement”.
Recognition of prior learning (RPL)
In order to make RPL a reality, HEIs are to have dedicated personnel, including «qualified» persons in each subject area able to take well grounded decisions on the recognition of credit on the basis of achieved learning outcomes and award the corresponding credits.
In addition institutions are asked (‘should’):
«create facilities for counseling and guidance as as regards the validation of nonformal and informal learning. These may take different forms depending on national and institutional practices (e.g. they may exist within single higher education institutions or as joint centres for several institutions).
Prior learning (RPL), partial recognition and progression pathways
RPL can be requested for personal satisfaction as well as for enrollment in a programme leading to a larger degree.
The ECTS principle: the number of credits awarded should correspond NOT to the actual workload in an informal or non formal situation, but rather the workload required to achieve those learning outcomes in formal education.
If recognition is requested to replace a part of the work required to recieve a full degree, a matching of the learning outcomes has to take place: it is entirely possible that the learner that seeks recognition has achieved learning outcomes that are superior in number and level to those foreseen by the degree programme.
In this case they will be recognised and registered, but only a part of them will be considered to replace part of the degree programme.
Prior learning (RPL), partial recognition and progression pathways
The experts, national or institutional, delegated to recognize prior learning, are encouraged to consider the general competences acquired by the learner, rather than specifics related to content.
Assessment may be performed by the means normal in the recognizing institution, but must be appropriate to assess the achievement of the learning outcomes.
If the learner presents evidence that the learning outomes have already been assessed by a reliable authority, assessment is not to be repeated.
Prior learning (RPL), partial recognition and progression pathways
Pathways, in consortia, national and international networks, European University Alliances and the like, can be planned and agreed to facilitate the acquisition of credits useful to obtain a qualification.
This is to be agreed and communicated clearly to potential learners, so that they are able to benefit fully from the combined offer of learning opportunities from multiple institutions in multiple countries.
Independent learners, who follow individual learning paths, accumulating credits in various ways, including formal micro-credentials, partial qualifications or diplomas, and in work-based, informal and/or non formal contexts, will probably not be able to ‘spend’ all their credits to obtain a specific qualification, but their records can still show potential employers the range of competences they have acquired.
4. Institutional governance: who decides recognition, on what evidence, and with which safeguards.
“Who decides” depends on the organization of the HE system in the country concerned.
In the EHEA there is agreement on fundamental values which include institutional autonomy and also appropriate quality assurance.
Looking specifically at micro-credentials, normally the institution itself is responsible, within general parameters fixed at national level, for recognition of requests for recognition coming from other institutions or providers in the same country or from other countries.
It is advised that there be staff in each department or subject area who are fully trained in how ECTS works in connection with MCs.
Who decides recognition, on what evidence, and with which safeguards?
The decision, in any case, normally pertains to the recognizing institution. Some institutions form consortia to share expertise and specialised staff.
The evidence to be produced is the standard description of the micro-credential.
In the EHEA the safeguards lie in the full respect of the ESG (which we have already considered): an effective internal quality culture, both of the provider of the micro-credential in question and of the institution that recognizes it, as further guaranteed by the external QA of an ENQA partner registered in EQAR.
5. Emerging EHEA developments: the current revision of the ECTS Users’ Guide and implications to watch for micro-credentials.
With the Tirana Communiqué the EHEA ministers entrusted to the European Commission (the original promoter of ECTS) the task of reviewing and if appropriate revising and updating the 2015 edition of the ECTS Users’ Guide.
To this end, the Commission appointed an Advisory Group, formed of experts from various countries and consutative members, and two “Senior Advisors”: myself, and Robert Wagenaar of the University of Groningen (NL), both involved in developing ECTS since the beginning of the ECTS Pilot Project in 1989.
The current revision of the ECTS Users’ Guide
The original idea was to simplify and clarify the existing guide. There was also a request to insert a section on micro-credentials.
In practice a much more thorough revision has taken place.
The principles of ECTS are confirmed and have not changed.
What has changed is that ECTS is now open to all education, not only higher education, and how it supports flexible learner-centered education is further clarified, for micro-credentials, and more in general for all formal, informal and non formal learning.
The current revision of the ECTS Users’ Guide
The Draft 4.2 will soon be presented to the Bologna Follow Up Group for its upcoming meeting in Ireland: it is almost final, agreement on a few finishing touches is still needed. The new edition of the Users’ Guide should be approved in June 2027 by the EHEA ministers at the Iasi-Chisinau conference to be used by all EHEA countries, and offered to other world regions as well.
What is the rationale behind the new edition of the User’s Guide?
The current revision of the ECTS Users’ Guide
The new edition responds to what is seen as the ongoing and welcome transformation of learner centered learning into an appreciated and useful accompaniment of people’s lives, lifelong … or life-wide.
The hope of course is that individuals will actually have access to the learning they need or require for their work or profession and for their personal satisfaction and their civic role.
The current revision of the ECTS Users’ Guide
Although obtaining a HE degree or qualification today is still the most obvious path to achieve and be able to demonstrate the high level competences necessary in the future world, this is unlikely to continue to be the case.
The current revision of the ECTS Users’ Guide
Smaller pieces of learning, sometimes in presence, sometimes online, sometimes delivered in a university setting, but often not, are increasingly available to learners.
Some may be achieved before accessing tertiary education, some during and some or even many after.
Useful learning and achievement of new competences may be work-based, or experience based.
The current revision of the ECTS Users’ Guide
Many opportunities are already offered in the form of short pieces of learning, and they are offered by various kinds of providers.
ECTS makes it possible to present, to organise and to utilize opportunities for learning of many types. By systematizing communication and approaches to such small pieces of learning, as well as to full degrees, ECTS facilitates the transition to a reality of flexible learning paths, to foster upskilling, reskilling, and in general access throughout life to new opportunities … while making it possible to show what competences one possesses in a widely understandable form.
Micro-credentials in the new ECTS Users’ Guide
There are many mentions of micro-credentials in the Guide. There is also a specific text on MCs:
“Micro-credential’ means the record of the learning outcomes that a learner has acquired following a small volume of learning.
“The European approach to micro-credentials for lifelong learning and employability (Council Recommendation 2022/C 243/02) built on the MICROBOL Common Framework for Micro-credentials in the EHEA (2022) offers a common framework for the design and issuance of micro-credentials. .
“Micro-credentials are typically designed to provide the learner with specific knowledge, skills and competences. These learning outcomes respond to current societal, personal, cultural, or labour market needs. Learners may use micro-credentials to top-up existing degree skills, advance their personal goals, or respond to labour market needs.
Micro-credentials in the new ECTS Users’ Guide
“Micro-credentials can be designed independently as standalone learning opportunities or can be derived from components of existing programmes.
“The volume of a micro-credentials is expressed in ECTS credits. The same principles that apply to traditional educational programmes and their components also apply to micro-credentials.
“Some micro-credentials can be combined with other micro-credentials to a larger credential, be recognized as part of a qualification or stacked towards a qualification, under the conditions established by the education institution offering the qualification.
“Both frameworks underline the importance of micro-credentials being underpinned by robust quality assurance – in line with the European Standards and Guidelines for Quality Assurance in the EHEA (ESG) in higher education or with the European Quality Assurance Reference Framework for Vocational Education and Training (EQAVET) in VET.
Micro-credentials in the new ECTS Users’ Guide
“The learning achieved is certified in a digital credentials that should be owned by the learner, sharable and portable. The credential should incorporate the information according to the Course Catalogue and Transcript of Records formats, which covers the information listed in Annex 1 to the Council Recommendation 2022/C 243/02.
“The correct use of ECTS requires understanding of the system by each member of the teaching and training staff as well as the administrative staff concerned.
“Education institutions should foster this understanding by ensuring regular training on ECTS for staff members and by providing appropriate information for learners. Education institutions using ECTS should designate a unit/office as responsible for coordinating trainings and assembling information material for learners and staff. This can be an internal unit or organised jointly together with other education institutions.”
.
Questions – reflections - discussion
Thank you! Let’s make this work!