We might not have heard much from the new government about the prospects of the Lifelong Learning Entitlement (LLE), but Labour’s manifesto commitment to facilitate easier student mobility means the issue of credit transfer isn’t going anywhere.
Credit transfer is often referred to as the “third rail” of the LLE – an aspect necessary to deliver on the ambitions of the policy, but probably the hardest one to realise. There’s nothing stopping credit transfer from happening in the current system; indeed, it does. We might not have a sector-wide system, but recognition of prior learning is included in the UK Quality Code and therefore most providers have a process for it.
So, what is it about current practice that has policymakers talking about credit transfer like it’s some fancy new idea?
The miserable reality
The answer is in the execution. QAA has today published a comprehensive review of credit transfer policies across UK providers. The headline finding ? We’re miles away from a coherent system.
For starters, the policies themselves are often not easy to find. The language and terms used differ from policy to policy. You say APL, I say RPL. It’s a miracle so many applicants don’t call the whole thing off.
So, what happens if a potential student does manage to locate and translate a provider’s credit transfer policy? Well, they will then find that the responsibility for evidencing any prior learning is likely to be very much upon their own shoulders, sometimes with precious little guidance apparently on offer.
Credit crunch
They may also discover that not all credit was created equal. Some providers are more welcoming of credit gained in an educational setting than gained through experience. They’re also unlikely to be allowed to carry their marks or grades over with them, putting them on an uneven footing with their peers who have gained all their credit in one institution. Not all their credits will be recognised – or some may indeed have expired by the time they hope to use it.
There is no one-size-fits-all approach for credit transfer. The diversity of providers and the sheer volume of disciplines available in higher education mean that there will inevitably be nuance across the sector. But that’s no reason why students and potential applicants shouldn’t be able to clearly understand those processes and the rationales which underpin them. It might indeed even prove desirable that providers wishing to promote learner mobility – and all the opportunities that come with it – might seek to achieve some degree of consensus in these areas.
However, as we await such collaborative efforts, these ongoing barriers may well end up preventing the participation of precisely those people whom higher education most wants and needs to attract.
Access to credit
Given the value of credit transfer mechanisms in the promotion of widening participation and in the development of the agile, skilled workforce essential for the country’s industrial and economic future – and the commitment made by providers to meet these key points on the new government’s policy agenda – the continuation of these barriers might come to seem like something of an own goal.
There are some big set pieces the sector could deliver to demonstrate it’s serious about making this work. A sector-owned template so that policies are comparable is one. Engaging with the government and regulator about how the system could better incentivise the credit transfer process – for example through OfSAccess and Participation Plans – is another.
But there are also some quick, easy wins.
Navigating the credit transfer process would be made infinitely easier if providers made the policies easily accessible on their websites. And while this may seem insignificant and pedantic, an active hyperlink to the policy when it is mentioned elsewhere would’ve halved our research time. We can only assume it would have similar benefits for applicants.
Creating the kind of seamless system that’s often touted in the policy debate will inevitably require a heavy lift from everyone involved. An overarching system might not actually allow for the nuance and autonomy that the sector thrives on.
But by taking stock of where we’re at, it’s clear that there are some simple steps we can take as a sector to make this less of a slog for everyone involved. That way, we can deliver on the government’s agenda in this space but, more importantly, deliver for the learners that the current processes are keeping out in the cold.
