Nnalue Ifeoma: Designing Learning Pathways Built Around Jobs, Not Certificates at Univad

For decades, higher education followed a familiar logic. Enrol, attend classes, earn a certificate, then hope the job market rewards the effort. That sequence is now under strain. Employers are asking different questions. Learners are making different choices. And institutions that fail to adapt are quietly losing relevance.

At Univad, an online learning institution serving learners across multiple regions, that shift is not treated as a trend but as a design constraint. According to Nnalue Ifeoma, Chief Operating Officer at Univad, the institution does not begin with course outlines or academic calendars. It begins with a far more direct question: what should a learner be able to do when this programme ends that they could not do before?

That question shapes everything.

Rather than building programmes around subject coverage or theoretical breadth, Univad works backwards from real job roles. The focus is on the skills employers actually test for, the tools used on the job, and the problems professionals are expected to solve. Learning pathways are structured to reflect those realities, with emphasis on applied outcomes instead of abstract mastery.

This approach emerged from a pattern Ifeoma observed repeatedly across traditional education and many online courses. Learners arrived with certificates, sometimes several of them, yet struggled to articulate their capabilities. They could describe what they had studied but not what they could execute. Employers, on the other hand, were less interested in duration or titles and more concerned with practical competence. Can this person solve this problem. Can they use this tool. Can they adapt under pressure.

That disconnect between credentials and capability is the gap Univad aims to close. Certificates still exist within the system, but they are treated as representations of demonstrated ability rather than proof of participation. Completion alone is not the benchmark. Performance is.

To maintain relevance, Univad treats curriculum as a living system. Employer expectations are not reviewed once a year or locked into multiyear plans. They are monitored continuously. Hiring trends, industry tools, and feedback from the field inform ongoing adjustments to programme content. Modules are refined, practical components expanded, and outdated material reduced when it no longer reflects real work.

This flexibility often means revisiting initial assumptions. If expectations change, the programme changes. The priority is not consistency for its own sake but alignment with reality. Education that cannot evolve quickly enough, Ifeoma argues, risks becoming outdated while it is still being taught.

Inside a typical Univad learning pathway, progress is measured less by-passing scores and more by evidence. Learners are expected to complete structured tasks that mirror professional scenarios. They practise decision making, problem solving, and communication within the context of their chosen field. By the time interviews come into view, they are not relying on theory alone. They can point to work completed, challenges navigated, and tools used.

This shifts the nature of interviews themselves. Instead of abstract discussions, conversations become grounded in experience. Confidence increases not because learners have memorised answers but because they have something concrete to reference.

Technology plays a supporting role in this model, particularly through UnivadGO, the institution’s learning assistant. Rather than replacing thinking, AI is used to extend practice. Learners can simulate scenarios, test their understanding, receive immediate feedback, and refine their responses. For many students, especially those without easy access to mentors or career coaches, this consistency matters. It allows them to practise more frequently and learn from mistakes without delay.

The broader implication of this shift goes beyond any single institution. Education systems that continue to prioritise certificates without corresponding outcomes face a growing trust problem. As employers become more outcome driven, credentials that do not reflect real ability lose weight. Learners, increasingly aware of this mismatch, begin to question the value of time and money spent on education that does not translate into opportunity.

Over the next decade, models that emphasise adaptability, measurable skills, and real-world readiness are likely to pull ahead. The future of education, Ifeoma suggests, belongs to systems that prepare people not simply to graduate, but to contribute.

At Univad, that belief is not framed as a manifesto. It is built into the structure of how learning pathways are designed, delivered, and assessed. In a labour market that is steadily moving away from symbolic credentials, the institution is betting on something simpler and harder to fake. What learners can actually do.