W3C Verifiable Credentials Education Task Force 2022 Planning

  1. Verifiable Presentations (VPs) vs (nested) Verifiable Credentials (VCs) in the education context — How to express complex nested credentials (think full transcript). The description references full transcript but this topic is also related to presentation of multiple single achievements by the learner. I ranked this first because presentations are a core concept of VCs and very different from how the education ecosystem is accustomed to sharing their credentials. VPs introduce an exchange of credentials in response to a verifiable request versus sharing a badge online or emailing a PDF. Also, there’s been quite a bit of discussion surrounding more complex credentials such as published transcripts that we can get into here.
  2. Integration with Existing Systems — Digitizing existing systems, vs creating; existing LMSes; bridging; regulatory requirements — ex: licensing, PDFs needing to be visually inspected. To gain some traction with VCs, we need to understand how systems work now and what can be improved upon using VCs but also, how do we make VCs work with what is needed now?
  3. Bridging Tech. This ties into integrating with existing systems above. We are accustomed to the tech we have now and it will be with us for some time. For instance, email will still be used for usernames and identity references even when Decentralized Identifiers start gaining traction. They will coexist and it can be argued that compromises will need to be made (some will argue against this).
  4. Protocols — Much of the work in VC-EDU so far has been about the data model. But what about the protocols — what do we /do/ with the VCs once we settle on the format? (How to issue, verify, exchange, etc). This made my top five because as the description notes, we’re pretty close to a data model but we need to understand more about the protocols that deliver, receive, and negotiate credential exchanges. Part of what we do in VC-EDU is learn more about what is being discussed and developed in the broader ecosystem and understanding protocols will help the community with implementation.
  5. Context file for VC-EDU — Create a simple context file to describe an achievement claim. There are education standards organizations like IMS Global (Open Badges & CLR) that are working towards aligning with VC-EDU but having an open, community-created description of an achievement claim, even if it reuses elements from other vocabularies, will provide a simple and persistent reference. A context file in VC-EDU could also provide terms for uses in VCs that haven’t yet been explored in education standards organizations and could be models for future functionality considerations.

--

--

--

Director, Digital Credentials Research & Innovation at Concentric Sky & Badgr. Equitable Technology Activist. Competitive Axe Thrower. She/her/hers.

Love podcasts or audiobooks? Learn on the go with our new app.

Recommended from Medium

Using podman with the Docker extension for Visual Studio Code

My Journey: From a Code Newbie to Advanced Beginner

[LeetCode]Palindrome Partitioning III

Simple Is Not Easy

Loop Structures — The Method Of Repeating Routines In Statements

Important Details to Ask Before You Hire a Dedicated Laravel Developer

Weekly Dev Update 03

Get the Medium app

A button that says 'Download on the App Store', and if clicked it will lead you to the iOS App store
A button that says 'Get it on, Google Play', and if clicked it will lead you to the Google Play store
Kerri Lemoie, PhD

Kerri Lemoie, PhD

Director, Digital Credentials Research & Innovation at Concentric Sky & Badgr. Equitable Technology Activist. Competitive Axe Thrower. She/her/hers.

More from Medium

Ecopath: a worthwhile green project

The Clash of Titans — The Great 2021 Players — Epikonic

Learning from creative technology company (FCI — PART5)

Ethical Considerations in NLP: The Culture of (AI) Review

Huggingface.co demo of text-classifier model “DistilBERT base uncased finetuned SST-2” on example containing the phrase “ethics in NLP”, classified as 0.995 POSITIVE and 0.005 NEGATIVE