 But we also thought that people were putting far too much emphasis on these credentials because if they just interviewed the person for five minutes, they would know more about what that person knew and didn't know than relying on these pieces of paper. Yeah, so the problem of matching your degree or you know the certificate with your conferences. So we were talking about this and you get that position because you got the degree or whatever and maybe you're not able to. My personal case here is a good example because all of my qualifications are from England but I wanted to work in Spanish universities so it wasn't good enough. So I couldn't just get the Spanish authorities to recognise my English certificate because that's not done. You get to recognise a European level pain and then the Spanish people look at the European level and then they recognise a European. I have to pay again. It's crazy, isn't it? It's interesting, one of the things we alluded to in the presentation, we didn't talk about quality of the learning but the reputation of the teaching. If the Spanish don't trust the British, don't believe them. Then there's not much credential to do about it. Now on the other hand, if you are willing to trust the British on these certain conditions, then there's a lot of credential to do about it. It's also when you get into the same thing for the quality of the learning. We had this slide up before that we were like this and these are the elements of a credential statement. So these, you need all of these, you need to have a certain quality of learning, you need to have certain learning outcomes. But at one point in the project we were playing around with the concept of a inherent quality of learning and we decided to kick it out because we descended way too low to philosophy. But generally speaking, there's always this element of what is the quality of the learning that the credential represents. But the person who evaluates that is the employer. Is your learning good enough for my purposes? Is the issuer who taught you who do I trust enough to take a decision? All the credential is a facilitating document for that process. We put this here and everything we do is important to understand that it is an add-on to existing quality assurance. An add-on to all the systems there are for learning, etc. But our argument was that you could have a top university issuing you a worthless certificate and it wouldn't make the slightest bit of difference to your ranking. I'll continue in a second or so to repeat 100 people. An example of that was the early days of MOOCs. Here you have Harvard and MIT issuing you with certificates of participation in MOOCs. Which especially at the beginning were not worth the pain that they were printed on. But they came from Harvard. Now imagine some 14-year-old student from a deprived community trying to figure out the recognition spaces of that. Not realistic. So this is some of the areas we go into where we think about these things. But you wanted to say something. I wanted to add that this is also very true with all the degrees and masters and whatever diplomas that are delivered by universities. For a certain time you are able in fact to, because there is nothing special saying master in physics or what and that's it. But you do not know exactly about the exact content of the courses that were followed and reached by the owner of the diploma. For a certain time you are able to link to the regulations. But after 10 years, 20 years, all these rules for a certain faculty or department, they have changed. If there is the integral assignment, the details what you have achieved in certain subjects is more than just the paper. Oh yeah, right. It was one step ahead. I don't think the final solution is there. But after 10 years. After 10 years, it's still there. Yeah, right. After 10 years, though, we kept this presentation, which is about education. But Wolf showed a slightly different diagram earlier, where he showed the entire section of credentials. Letters of recommendation are effectively slightly different from that of education. I, the employer, recommend Florian, who has worked with me for 10 years, who was responsible for this, this, this and this. They might not explicitly write skills and learning outcomes effectively. They are an employment certificate or a letter of recommendation from an employer after 10 years is probably far more valuable than your degree at that point. So, 5 more minutes, right? So, in that sense, you could actually take a letter of recommendation and apply it and apply all these same criteria to it. And the LinkedIn endorsement, which I think we all agree is worthless. Why? It's not easily shareable outside of LinkedIn. It does represent a specific skill, but you can't verify, you can't trace and reproduce the conditions by which that happened. And if you just look at this and you want to fix LinkedIn endorsements, this actually gives you a map to do so if you really want to. And in terms of, by the way, have you ever faked a certificate? If you've ever sent an endorsement to someone you didn't deserve and you faked an education certificate. So, one more question to you. First of all, a quick preview of the afternoon so that you can come back after lunch. We won't continue on quality of credentials. I told you that this was the more technical velvet. I'm happy. We've been looking at it a little bit differently. We've been looking at employer acceptance of credentials. We've been looking at this concept of exchangeability and we've been looking at how this translates into digital tools for the future for credentials. And we've also been prototyping piloting some tools. So, we're actually, let's say, like to talk to you about the more utilitarian aspect of all of this and how we're trying to translate some of this work into, let's say, working products. So, if you're interested in that, please come back in the afternoon. The last question for you on this. Do you find this of any use and if so, for whom? In the end, we are, let's say, also trying to validate it. You see this mainly, I think, as a use for a very limited set of people which are basically credential developers. Institutions, private or public, that are creating new forms of credentials, but also for standardization bodies, software companies, et cetera, who are, let's say, trying to build new media of credentials and new systems of issuing credentials. And what we're trying to build is a framework guide for it. My question to you is, by taking these three examples and using this framework to analyze them, do you find it has helped you understand the nature of these predictions better? And if not, by the way, feel free to say so. Yes, definitely. If I can add my two chance, we will definitely use this work and we have an EU project. We are doing a MOOC and we had the problem that we need to certificate at the very end of the MOOC what are the skills and, you know, the distribution and whatever you've earned by this MOOC. And we decided to use that just with all the problems that we've done before. And this is very useful. We will use definitely this slide. Perfect. Thank you. Thank you.