The Business of EdTech: Credly by Pearson
In week 5 of the Critical Issues in Digital Education course, we have been discussing how platform capitalism (Srnicek 2017) and tech companies’ fixation on scalability (Pfotenhauer et al. 2022) are changing the field of education, and higher public education in particular. To help us develop this discussion and reflect on the readings provided this week, we are asked to analyze the business model of an EdTech platform of our choice. I have selected Credly by Pearson because I had some experience working with the platform which is equally used by corporate training professionals and in higher education. In this short article, I will give an overview of the platform and its products, and analyze how it is enabling the de- and re-institutionalization of education by contributing to the unbundling of its provision (Komljenovic 2021)
Credly is one of the leading providers of digital credentials and badges, a fast-growing market of technology products offering a digital alternative to a traditional certificate or other types of training achievement recognition. Credly positions itself as “the largest and most connected network of digital credentials, with over 70 million digital badges issued to users around the world”. While micro-credentials are not entirely new, they have seen a new wave of hype during and following the Covid-19 pandemic with more higher education institutions adopting them, which in turn raised debates on how this trend might be advancing the “employability” discourse in higher education and applying additional pressure for the higher education curriculum to align more closely with labor market requirements (Wheelahan & Moodie, 2021)
Credly offers multiple products mainly focused on workplace training solutions and skill management, with their main product remaining Credly Acclaim, a digital credential management platform. According to their website, their second main target audience after employers is higher education. For this target audience, Credly promises to “provide students with the ability to validate their sought-after job skills through digital credentials to future employers”. While there are a few recognizable logo references on the Credly higher education page, it is not clear how many higher education institutions are using this provider and recent studies have found that despite the hype over the last few years, in the United States it is still not many (Lang and Sharp, 2021).
Credly does not disclose its pricing model on its website, but the standard among digital credential platforms is to charge an annual fee based on the number of credentials a customer is expecting to use during the billing period, and one of Credly’s competitors claims their fees are between $2,500 and $20,000. This pricing model by itself implies the platform is built with a scalability-first approach typical for EdTech companies that require the company to sell more credentials to existing and new customers.
In February 2022, Credly was acquired by Pearson, the world’s largest private education provider. In the press release announcing the acquisition, Pearson disclosed that this was a strategic move following the acquisition of the AI analytics company Faethm which offers “labor market insights” and ” strategic workforce planning” products. Together with Pearson role-specific assessment tools TalentLens and workplace learning content tool Skill Accelerator, these two acquisitions are added to what Pearson defines as a “global workforce learning market” which it claims is estimated at c.$400bn in 2022.
All in all, after carefully analyzing the product offering by Credly by Pearson, its promises to higher education and students, and the details of its acquisition in 2022, I believe it to be an interesting example of platformization of education as well as how EdTech might be contributing to the unbundling of higher education provision. While the adoption of this technology among higher education institutions remains minimal (Wheelahan & Moodie, 2021), it is clear from their website and marketing statements as well as acquisition investments that there is an ambition for such market creation.
References
- Komljenovic, J. (2021). The rise of education rentiers: digital platforms, digital data and rents, Learning, Media and Technology, 46:3, 320-332. https://doi.org/10.1080/17439884.2021.1891422
- Lang, G., Sharp, J. (2023). Micro-Credentials in US Higher Education: An Empirical Analysis. Information Systems Education Journal, v21 n1 p2-10. https://eric.ed.gov/?q=guido&ff1=autLang%2C+Guido&id=EJ1385272
- Pfotenhauer, S., Laurent, B., Papageorgiou, K., & Stilgoe, and J. (2022). The politics of scaling. Social Studies of Science, 52(1), 3-34. https://doi.org/10.1177/03063127211048945
- Srnicek, N. (2017) Platform capitalism. Cambridge, UK ; Polity.
- Wheelahan, L, Moodie, G. (2021). Analysing micro-credentials in higher education: a Bernsteinian analysis, Journal of Curriculum Studies, 53:2, 212-228. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220272.2021.1887358
Hi there, Marta!
Thanks for your blog post.
I want to begin my feedback by highlighting that you crafted a clear argument in your introductory paragraph (“how it is enabling the de- and re-institutionalization of education by contributing to the unbundling of its provision (Komljenovic 2021)”. The theme of de – and re-institutionalization of education is quite interesting, and I can imagine how Credly can enact said process. I also like that you used Pearson again, as it gives continuity to your blog posts and aligns with your context/practice.
I also want to highlight that you bring pertinent research to your blog post. This is an excellent practice, as it deepens your understanding of a topic, in this case, micro-credentials.
Finally, I want to state that you are addressing my last feedback effectively by stating a clear argument. I can see why the de- and re-institutionalization of education matters. It is a clear and pertinent argument.
Now, I want to bring your attention to three actions that can improve your next blog post.
First, I invite you to develop your argument thoroughly. This is a point that I raised in your last blog post, and it is something that still needs to be improved. The two central concepts of your argument are “de- and re-institutionalization” and “unbundling”. I would like to know more about how Credly, through its micro-credentials system, is unbundling education. For instance, you can add a definition of micro-credentials, expand Wheelahan and Moodie’s argument on the “employability” discourse in higher education, and relate it to the unbundling process. I must say that the blog post, as it is, is not implying a connection between the concepts. But, a clear and explicit connection will help to develop your argument.
Second, I would like to see clearly your stance towards the topic you are discussing. Your stance can be stated in your argument and developed throughout the text. Please check out this blog by Audrey Watters (https://hackeducation.com/archives). You can infer her stance regarding edtech by reading her blog posts. She also develops her arguments quite well. Please use it as a source of inspiration.
Finally, I invite you to add an image to your next blog post.
Keep up the excellent effort! And enjoy Laussane!