Comments on the Draft Guidelines for Credit Transfer and Course Articulation
From Phil Ker, Chief Executive, Otago Polytechnic (Copy of email posted with permission.)
I have read through this and it presents as sound in all respects, but it does seem a tad complex eg I am not why we really need the three categories of transfer credit. Phil
Phil, thanks for your feedback.
Fair comment about the complexity of having 3 categories of credit transfer.
I believe these were introduced to assist with the information design of the model to be used for developing systems to communicate pathways of study on the OERu website. They should also simplify local work flow processes for partners who require individual articulation agreements to recognize transfer credit, fpr example if the credential is an "approved" OERu qualification, then the processes required for mapping and articulating the OERu qualification with the local credential does not need to be repeated each time a course is approved for credit transfer.
To simplify the generic guidelines, the operational detail regarding types of credit could be shifted into guidlines for bi-laterial or mutilateral articulation agreements which is still to be developed?
