Institution-led interpretation

Skills Taxonomy Mapping

Turn Learning Outcomes Into Structured Skills

Connect institution-defined learning outcomes, achievements and evidence to reviewed skills using recognised and institution-specific taxonomies.

Map Your Skills Framework Request an Institutional Demo

For universities, colleges and professional bodies. Institutional meaning stays in institutional hands.

The relationship, end to end

Each connection keeps its source and institutional review in view.

  1. Learning outcomeWhat is intended?
  2. EvidenceWhat was assessed?
  3. Institutional reviewWho interprets it?
  4. SkillWhat capability is represented?
  5. TaxonomyWhich language is referenced?
  6. CredentialWhich achievement carries it?
  7. Learner recordWhere does context stay?
  8. Workforce contextWhat external source helps compare?

01 / Start with institutional meaning

What Is Skills Taxonomy Mapping?

Skills taxonomy mapping connects an institution’s learning outcomes, achievement evidence and competency language to structured skill concepts. It gives teams a consistent way to describe and compare capabilities while preserving the programme, assessment and professional context behind each claim.

The mapped relationship is an interpretation for institutional review—not a replacement for an outcome, assessment, transcript or professional standard.

A governed relationship Outcome + assessment evidence + expert interpretation → reviewed skill relationship

A taxonomy offers shared terminology. It does not decide what a learner has demonstrated or certify competence on its own.

02 / Why credentials need a skills layer

Why Credentials Need a Skills Layer

A credential can confirm an achievement, but its title alone may not explain the assessed capabilities within it. A reviewed skills layer can make those capabilities easier to discover and compare without reducing a programme to a bag of keywords.

When departments use different language for related outcomes, mapped relationships can help academic teams see where descriptions align—and where context makes them distinct.

  • Keep skill claims connected to assessed outcomes and their evidence.
  • Compare related capabilities across credentials without erasing local meaning.
  • Give external framework references a clear source and review status.
  • Support curriculum conversations; do not treat mapping as a measure of quality or job readiness.

03 / How CertifyMe maps outcomes to skills

How CertifyMe Maps Outcomes to Skills

Explore three illustrative examples. In each, the proposed skill sits between an institution-defined outcome and a programme achievement; a framework is shown only as a reference point.

Illustrative examples only. Each relationship requires institutional evidence and subject-expert review. No external crosswalk or automatic competency determination is implied.

Illustrative programme outcomeReview required · no taxonomy code asserted
Institution outcomeEvaluate strategic choices

Outcome wording remains institution-defined.

Potential mapped skillStrategic decision-making

A proposed relationship to assess against the outcome and its evidence.

Framework referenceInstitutional framework

Reference context only; relationship is not a verified crosswalk.

AchievementProgramme achievement

Carried in its programme and issuer context.

Evidence & review

Illustrative evidence to examine: an assessed case analysis or project rubric. The institution would determine whether that evidence supports this proposed skill relationship.

Illustrative programme outcomeReview required · no taxonomy code asserted
Institution outcomeInterpret a clinical case using published guidelines

Outcome wording remains institution-defined.

Potential mapped skillClinical reasoning

A proposed relationship, not a finding about an individual learner.

Framework referenceInstitutional framework

Reference context only; relationship is not a verified crosswalk.

AchievementProgramme achievement

Assessment and professional context remain attached.

Evidence & review

Illustrative evidence to examine: a case-based assessment with documented criteria. Educators and relevant professional experts must review whether it supports the relationship.

Illustrative programme outcomeReview required · no taxonomy code asserted
Institution outcomeDesign a testable research question

Outcome wording remains institution-defined.

Potential mapped skillResearch design

A proposed relationship to review against the learning evidence.

Framework referenceInstitutional framework

Reference context only; relationship is not a verified crosswalk.

AchievementProgramme achievement

Achievement remains linked to its source and criteria.

Evidence & review

Illustrative evidence to examine: a research proposal assessed against programme criteria. Reviewers decide whether the proposed skill description is appropriate.

All examples are illustrative. A selected framework is a reference, not evidence of a native integration or a vetted mapping.

04 / Institutional skills vs external taxonomies

Institutional Skills vs External Taxonomies

An institution’s outcomes and competency framework carry local academic or professional meaning. External taxonomies can offer reference concepts for comparison, but a relationship between them must be assessed rather than assumed.

Institution definesOutcome, standard and assessment

Local meaning, criteria and issuer context remain the source of the achievement claim.

Review relatesPotential skill relationship

Subject experts determine whether the wording and evidence support the proposed connection.

Framework referencesShared concepts for comparison

External terminology can provide context; it does not replace local standards or prove equivalence.

05 / ESCO, O*NET & custom frameworks

ESCO / O*NET / Custom Frameworks

These resources are reference frameworks. This page does not claim a live integration or a verified institutional crosswalk to any external taxonomy.

Local authority

Institutional framework

Use the institution’s outcomes, programme language and competency standards as the source of meaning.

Institution-defined
European reference

ESCO

ESCO classifies European Skills, Competences, Qualifications and Occupations. A specific local relationship still requires evidence-led review.

About ESCO
External reference · not a verified crosswalk
United States reference

O*NET

O*NET provides structured occupational information, including skills, knowledge, abilities and work activities.

About O*NET
External reference · not a verified crosswalk
Discipline-specific

Custom frameworks

Relate discipline, regulated-practice or professional-body standards where the source and review basis are clear.

Local review required

06 / Review & governance

Review & Governance

A useful mapping is inspectable: reviewers can trace the proposed relationship back to the outcome, achievement and evidence that informed it.

What should a reviewer be able to inspect?

The source outcome and achievement, evidence or assessment criteria, proposed skill wording, framework source, reviewer decision and any local context needed to interpret the relationship. Confirm what implementation records and exposes during discovery.

How should external references be treated?

As sourced reference concepts until an institution has evaluated and approved a particular relationship. Framework mention is not evidence of native integration, equivalence, or a completed crosswalk.

  1. Institution owns the claim

    Academic and professional teams define what an outcome, credential or standard represents.

  2. Evidence grounds the interpretation

    Connect a proposed skill relationship to assessed work and criteria—not a credential title alone.

  3. Experts review before use

    Subject experts decide whether a relationship is appropriate for institutional representation.

  4. Provenance stays distinct

    Keep issuer achievement claims separate from local interpretations and external framework references.

07 / Skills in credentials

Skills in Credentials

A credential may represent an achievement and include structured skill claims that its issuer stands behind. Those claims should retain the institution’s wording and be grounded in reviewed evidence.

Open Badges 3.0 supports achievement and skill claims in portable credentials. The credential remains the issuer’s claim; a taxonomy reference does not independently verify competence.

Explore Digital Credential Infrastructure
Keep claim types clear Issued achievement → issuer’s skill claim → optional reviewed framework reference

Each piece has a different source and purpose. Skills context complements the achievement; it does not replace its evidence or verification.

08 / Skills in learner records

Skills in Learner Records

A Comprehensive Learner Record can bring credentials and other achievements together. Skills mapping adds an interpretation layer; the record preserves the issuer, achievement and context behind it.

A skills summary complements the transcript and achievement record—it cannot stand in for them.

Explore Comprehensive Learner Records
SourceCredential & evidence

Issued achievement and supporting context.

InterpretationReviewed skills

Institution-led relationships to skills language.

RecordLearner context

Achievements remain connected to their source.

09 / Skills in Workforce Intelligence

Skills in Workforce Intelligence

Reviewed skills relationships can help frame questions about how programme outcomes relate to occupation language. Workforce Intelligence adds separately sourced market context; mapping alone does not establish a job match, employment outcome or live demand.

  1. Institutional learning

    What does the programme teach and assess?

  2. Reviewed skills

    Which concepts are supported by evidence?

  3. Occupation reference

    Which sourced framework may help compare?

  4. Market context

    What does an authorised labour source show?

Explore Workforce Intelligence Explore Skill Passport

More on the approach

Skills mapping, clearly answered

Scope, evidence and framework boundaries for institutional teams.

What is skills taxonomy mapping?

Skills taxonomy mapping relates an institution's learning outcomes, competencies and credential achievements to structured skills concepts. It helps teams use a consistent skills language while retaining the meaning and evidence behind each institutional or professional claim.

What is credential-to-skill mapping?

Credential-to-skill mapping connects a credential, such as a degree, certificate, badge or professional certification, with the skills or competencies it represents.

Why do institutions need skills taxonomy mapping?

Institutions can use reviewed skills relationships to compare what programmes teach and assess, describe capabilities consistently across credentials and support programme review. Occupation or employer comparisons need separately sourced workforce evidence.

Can institutions use their own skills framework?

An institution's own terminology and competency framework should remain authoritative. It can be related to external concepts where appropriate, with each proposed relationship reviewed against the institution's outcomes and evidence.

Can skills be added to digital credentials?

Yes. Open Badges 3.0 supports structured achievement and skill context and aligns with the W3C Verifiable Credentials model. The issuer remains responsible for what the achievement establishes; a taxonomy reference alone is not proof of competence.

What is the difference between a skills taxonomy and a skills framework?

A skills taxonomy classifies skills and their relationships. A skills framework can also define competencies, proficiency expectations and learning outcomes.

Can skills mapping connect to occupations?

Established resources such as ESCO describe skills and occupations, and O*NET provides US occupational information. Any institution-specific crosswalk needs review; this page does not claim a live ESCO or O*NET product integration.

Does skills mapping replace a transcript?

No. Skills mapping complements transcripts, credentials and academic or professional records rather than replacing them.

Can mapped skills become part of a Comprehensive Learner Record?

Yes. Mapped skills can be represented alongside credentials, achievements and other learning evidence in a broader learner record.

How does skills mapping support workforce intelligence?

Reviewed skills relationships give institutional teams a way to compare what programmes evidence with occupation requirements. Employer demand and vacancies require a separate authorised labour-market source; mapping alone does not establish a live job match.

Can professional bodies map certifications to competencies?

Professional bodies can use their own standards and competency language to describe what a certification represents, then review relationships to structured skills concepts. Assessment evidence, renewal rules and professional authority should remain distinct from external taxonomy references.

10 / Start with your framework

Map Your Skills Framework

Bring an outcome, its assessment evidence and the framework language your institution wants to relate. Begin with the review question—not an assumed crosswalk.

For universities, colleges, professional associations and certification authorities.
Map Your Skills Framework Request an Institutional Demo