Table 1
Learners who were interviewed about the impact of their microcredential course.
| PSEUDONYM | COURSE(S) STUDIED | LENGTH OF INTERVIEW |
|---|---|---|
| Lisa | Online teaching: Evaluating and improving courses | 17 mins |
| Annabelle | Online teaching: Improving courses for adult learners | 21 mins |
| Tom | Tackline the climate crisis: Innovation from Cuba | 44 mins |
| Olympus | Digital photography: Discover your genre and develop your style | 110 mins |
| Sean | Cyber security operations (Cisco) | 102 mins |
| Andrew | Cisco: Python programming (OpenEDG) | 20 mins |
| Ethan | Online teaching: Creating courses for adult learners | 27 mins |
| Eva | Online teaching: Creating courses for adult learners | 46 mins |
| Anna | Online teaching: Embedding social, race and gender-related equity and Online teaching: Accessibility and inclusive learning | 48 mins |
Table 2
Survey participants by age group.
| AGE GROUP | NUMBER OF LEARNERS |
|---|---|
| 25 or under | 0% |
| 26–35 | 26.3% (10) |
| 36–45 | 26.3% (10) |
| 46–55 | 26.3% (10) |
| 56 and over | 21.1% (8) |
| Prefer not to say | 0% |
Table 3
Country of residence of survey participants.
| COUNTRY | NUMBER OF LEARNERS |
|---|---|
| England | 23.7% (9) |
| Scotland | 21.1% (8) |
| Wales | 2.6% (1) |
| Northern Ireland | 47.7% (18) |
| Other | 5.3% (2) |
| Prefer not to say | 0% |
Table 4
Learners’ sources of funding.
| FUNDING SOURCE | NUMBER OF LEARNERS |
|---|---|
| Government scheme | 60.5% (23) |
| Employer | 18.4% (7) |
| Self-funding | 15.8% (6) |
| Another source | 5.3% (2) |
Table 5
Percentages and numbers of learners identifying an impact of their course.
| AREA OF IMPACT | YES | NO | NOT SURE | NOT APPLICABLE |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Knowledge and skills | 78.9% (30) | 7.9% (3) | 13.2% (5) | |
| Changed thinking about the subject | 71.1% (27) | 15.8% (6) | 13.2% (5) | |
| Impact at work | 36.8% (14) | 31.6% (12) | 18.4% (7) | 13.2% (5) |
| Impact on everyday life | 21.1% (8) | 52.6% (20) | 26.3% (10) | |
| New job or role | 15.8% (6) | 73.7% (28) | 0% | 10.5% (4) |
| Further study | 39.5% (15) | 52.6% (20) | 7.9% (3) |
Table 6
Application of the Value Creation Framework to Anna’s narrative.
| CYCLE | VALUE TYPE | WHAT HAPPENS | EXAMPLE FROM ANNA’S NARRATIVE |
|---|---|---|---|
| Cycle 1 | Immediate values | Learners describe participating in a meaningful activity. | It was very easy to contribute to the comments. |
| Cycle 2 | Potential values | Learners describe outputs from their learning that might be useful later. | The first thing that I noticed was the overall design of the course as a way to embed equity. I’m talking about the flexibility where all the weeks are open. |
| Cycle 3 | Applied values | Learners describe putting their learning into practice. | I’ve been quite outspoken at work about creating accessible materials. I know where we have gaps in terms of the materials that we share or we create, so I’ve been working to address those. |
| Cycle 4 | Realized values | Learners explain what difference their learning made. | I feel more confident in advocating for accessibility. People have started calling me an expert, although I don’t feel like that yet because there’s still lots to learn. What I’ve learned shows in my conversations with colleagues and in the work I do. |
| Cycle 5 | Reframing values | Learners explain how their thinking has changed or their goals have been re-defined. | One thing that was eye-opening was learning about the social model of disability. That really has changed the way I think about everything. |