“The centralised model of present-day learning is no longer sustainable,” the authors of the report write. “Blockchain technology allows for a total disintermediation and disaggregation of higher education.”
Micro-accreditation could take place through a blockchain, allowing for the easy validation and transfer of skills and credentials.
“Even if the institutions that issued the certificates were to close down, or if the entire system of education collapses (as, for instance, happened in Syria), those certificates are still verifiable against the records stored in a blockchain,” the European Commission writes. “Furthermore, once institutions issue a certificate, they do not need to spend any further resources to confirm the validity of that certificate to third parties, since these will be able to verify the certificates directly themselves on a blockchain.”
“Within larger organisations, students need to regularly identify themselves with different parts of the organisation. In such cases, either each part of the organisation will collect the student data for itself, or the organisation will use single sign-on, whereby one shared copy of the student data is used by all parties within the organisation. Under both these models, tens if not hundreds of people might have access to a student’s personal information. Keeping that data safe requires managing access rights for all those people, and ensuring that their devices are also secure and hack-proof—a mammoth undertaking.”
With blockchain, only a select few—namely the parties responsible for verifying a student’s identity—can have access to the data. Other than that, it’s in the student’s hands.
“This means that the organisation no longer needs to manage the complex systems for access rights, and only needs to secure the device or network where the verifications initial verification is taking place. This would save significant resources spent in hardening the network against data breaches, staff training on data-protection and in managing access rights.”
Students gain control and ownership of all their education data, including accreditation and portfolios of work, “in a secure place that is accessible to anyone who needs to verify it—and for their entire lifetime.”
Drawing on the research of Au (2017) and Lewis (2017), the Commission explains:
“Public blockchains facilitate self-sovereignty by giving individuals the ability to be the final arbiter of who can access and use their data and personal information. Within an educational context, the term is on its way to becoming synonymous with the empowerment of individual learners to own, manage and share details of their credentials, without the need to call upon the education institution as a trusted intermediary.”
The success of blockchain pilots in one country could then be used to encourage knowledge-transfer across nations.
“Currently, credit transfer depends on institutions to negotiate agreements to recognise each other’s credits subject to certain conditions—but students often report that these agreements are not recognised. Using a blockchain, these agreements could be written as smart-contracts whereby upon fulfilment of the conditions of the contract, the credits would automatically be transferred.”
“Except for Open Badges, none of these [resources] provide ways to verify the experience and credentials described and included within these systems – therefore these systems operate as a digital counterpart to a box full of paper certificates – deriving, little to no additional benefits or efficiencies from the process of digitisation.”
With blockchain tech, learners could store their own evidence of formal or informal learning, share it with a desired audience, and ensure instant verification.
“This means students have a CV that updates itself and can be shared with employers. Employers, on their part, can reduce their workload since they won’t have to verify CVs and can simply search instantly to see whether candidates have the skills they require.”
Finally, a way to record lifelong learning.
Students and institutions could then make metrics-based decisions on which teaching materials to use.
Teachers could announce the publication of their resources and link to those resources, or announce which other resources they used in creating the material.
Coins could be awarded to educators according to the level of reuse of their respective resources.
“In an open-scenario, coins would not be spendable—and would be used to determine the prominence of an author. In a closed-scenario, coins would have monetary value and would result in monetary compensation. A more advanced implementation might automatically scan resources to identify what percentage of other resources were re-used and automatically award accordingly.”
For example, a smart-contract could distribute payment to authors based on how often their material is cited or used. Authors would no longer have to go through intermediaries such as research journals, which often limit use by charging high fees for access.
“This is an extremely time-consuming and technical process which requires experts in accreditation to manage,” the Commission says, noting how entire networks of agencies with offices in every EU member state currently exist to manage the process.
But blockchain offers a more efficient alternative:
“Using a blockchain, rather than researching these connections, institutions needing to check the ‘pedigree’ of a degree could easily do so with a single click. A fully automated process would then be able to visualize the accreditation chain and verify that certificates had indeed been issued, and (critically) that they were still valid for each step of the chain.”
“Especially for cross-border studies, and also in response to legislation, many organizations only accept payment made through electronic means.”
Governments and organizations could also provide students with funding for tuition in the form of blockchain “vouchers” to be “spent” at universities, which could be programmed to “release tranches of funding to either the student or the educational organization, based on certain performance criteria such as grades.”
—
Several universities around the world are already implementing blockchain technology and reaping the benefits.
Open University UK is currently using blockchain to improve access to higher education and transparency of qualifications through MOOCs, open badges, and e-Portfolios. Their strategy is holistic, with “researchers encouraged to explore the full potential of technology, as opposed to one particular aspect (such as cryptography).”
The University of Nicosia on Cyprus claims several “world firsts” in using blockchain for education, including accepting Bitcoin for tuition for any degree program; offering courses on cryptocurrency and degrees in digital currency; and issuing academic certificates onto the Bitcoin blockchain, using its own in-house software. The cryptocurrency course alone has attracted students from over 80 different countries since its launch in 2014.
In 2015, the Massachusetts Institute of Technology’s Media Lab began using cryptology and blockchain to develop Blockcerts for issuing digital certificates to groups of people in its broader community. In 2017, MIT issued its first round of Learning Machine (LM) Certificates, commercial versions of Blockcerts, at the Media Lab and the Sloan School of Business. This is the first example of recipient-owned diplomas.
Will your school be next?
