At the conclusion of this session, you will be able to:
1. Describe the higher education landscape with regard to competency-based learning models/degrees and how several universities have successfully implemented that educational model
2. Understand and explain the impact of the SACSCOC accreditation process and standards on competency-based learning models
3. Walk away with a blue-print for evaluating competency-based learning programs in your institution
4. Describe how assessment can be utilized to measure prior learning, and
5. Build your own customized competency-based learning programs in your institution
Competency-based education (CB) is focused on actual student learning, and the application of that learning, rather than time spent in class/on material
Learners’ progress is measured when they demonstrate their competence through a system of rigorous
assessments, meaning they prove they have mastered the knowledge and skills required for a particular
competency or area of study
Meeting President Obama’s 2020 College Completion Goal (2011)
◦ Increase U.S. college degree attainment from 40% to 60%
◦ 10 million additional Americans
◦ Keys: access and affordability; quality and completion
U. S. Department of Education
◦ First in the World Grants
◦ Experimental sites
Congressional Support/Reauthorization
◦ Bi-partisan interest in CBE
Lumina’s Big Goal
◦ 60% of American’s possess post-secondary credentialing by 2025
Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation
◦ Mozilla Open Badge Program
Council on Adult and Experiential Learning
◦ Prior learning assessment
◦ Competency-based degree programs in the U.S. published in 2012
Saving Higher Education (2012)
SNHU President’s letter (January 31, 2013)
◦ Flips the relationship – lets time be variable, learning well- defined, fixed, and non-negotiable
Dear colleague letter from DOE (March 19, 2013)
◦ Direct assessment of student learning “in lieu of measuring
student learning in credit hours or clock hours” may qualify for
federal financial aid
“Competency-based approaches to education have the potential for assuring the quality and extent of learning, shortening the time to degree/certificate completion, developing stacking credentials that ease student transitions between school and work, and reducing the overall cost of education.”
Who’s engaged?
Course-based, integrates discrete competencies into a single course
Learning measured by seat time and teacher-treated assessments
No courses, no credit hours, know competencies, graduate
Learning measured by direct assessment
CBE Framework Continuum
CORE
competency
Customized outcome-based relevant evaluation
Customized Outcome-based Relevant
Evaluation
A = Assess on relevant competencies
B = Award e-credential badges
C = Customized plan for identified competency gaps
D = Develop targeted competencies through coach- supported modules and assess on relevant competencies
Standard Content
CR 2.7.1 Program length CR 2.7.2 Program content CS 3.4.4 Acceptance of academic credit CS 3.4.6 Practices for awarding credit
CS 3.4.7 Consortial relationships/contractual agreements CS 3.4.8 Noncredit to credit
CS 3.4.10 Responsibility for curriculum CS 3.5.2 Institutional credits for a degree CS 3.6.3 Institutional credits for a graduate degree FR 4.4 Program length
FR 4.8 Distance and correspondence education FR 4.9 Definition of credit hour
Standard Content
CR 2.7.1 Program length: 60 AD; 120 baccalaureate; 30 graduate/professional CR 2.7.2 Program content: coherent course of study
CS 3.4.4 Acceptance of academic credit: publishes policies/criteria for evaluating, awarding/accepting credit
CS 3.4.6 Practices for awarding credit: sound and acceptable practices for amount and level of credit regardless of format/mode
CS 3.4.7 Consortial relationships/contractual agreements: ensures quality/compliance w/principles, evaluates against mission
CS 3.4.8 Noncredit to credit: based on documentation of equivalency to a designated credit experience
CS 3.4.10 Responsibility for curriculum: content, quality, effectiveness with faculty CS 3.5.2 Institutional credits for a degree: 25% of credits earned at institution CS 3.6.3 Institutional credits for a graduate degree: 1/3 graduate credits earned at institution FR 4.4 Program length: appropriate for all degrees
FR 4.8 Distance and correspondence education: student identification FR 4.9 Definition of credit hour: policies/procedures conform to higher education and
commission policy
STEPS ACTIVITY
Step I Competencies defined Step II Competency framework Step III Badging ecosystem Step IV Rigorous assessments Step V Customization
Step VI Development process
Are all competencies clearly articulated?
Are you leaving out any “soft skill” competencies and focusing only on technical expertise?
Are there commonalities between and among the
different competency standards?
41 Key competencies
Includes expandable competencies like functional/technical expertise, organization knowledge, industry knowledge, technical savvy
7 categories
◦ Communication
◦ Conceptual
◦ Contextual
◦ Interpersonal
◦ Management
◦ Personal
Think about a typical college undergraduate: then sort cards into one of three stacks:
Absolutely must possess Nice to have – not critical Not important for the role
Take 10 minutes to complete
Are your programs “direct assessment” or “credit-based”?
Do you have “degrees” of competence for a position?
◦ Is it a check mark or a level?
How do you define the competencies for supervisors, trainers, or assessors of others?
◦ Are they at a higher level of the same set of competencies or are additional competencies needed?
Do you allow for continuing education or greater
competency development?
Pipeline equivalent
Proficiency level Description of competency proficiency
Strategic leader
4 Master/guru
Demonstrates mastery of competency and is capable of mentoring and coaching others in its application Functional
manager 3 Exceptional – expert
Demonstrates expert application of competency and is capable of coaching others in its application
First-level supervisor
2 Accomplished practitioner
Demonstrates advanced competence and is capable of modeling this competency for others
Individual contributor
1
Basic/elementary
Possesses the fundamental knowledge, skills, and motivations needed for this competency; can consistently apply this competency 0
Inadequate
Falls short of the knowledge, skills, and motivations needed in this competency for role. Development is needed to reach required standard
Could you standardize some of the competencies so they could count in multiple arenas?
Could badges help individuals build their credentials over time or encourage more diversity?
Could badges be positioned as an outward sign of
credentials?
Outcomes only as good as your assessment process
Must be able to clearly and consistently evaluate across all credential methods
◦ Can’t have double standards for portfolio and classroom
What are your requirements?
◦ Objective and consistent; relevant and job related; precise and in-depth; valid and highly reliable; fair and has opportunity to demonstrate skills; supportive of diversity
Assessment and Development
Center
It’s a process – not a physical space
It recreates work environments with exercises, simulations, and role plays
Typically: 6 participants; 3 trained assessors, and 1 administrator
Behaviors are recorded and rated against pre- determined criteria
Trained assessors must agree on final rating
Communications
◦ Active listening
◦ Communicativeness
◦ Presentation skills
Conceptual
◦ Problem-solving and decision- making
Interpersonal
◦ Assertiveness
◦ Conflict management
◦ Relationship building
◦ Team player
Leadership
◦ Change mastery
◦ Influence
Management
◦ Organizing and planning
Personal
◦ Composure
◦ Initiative
◦ Mission focus
◦ Results orientation
Sample behavior criterion
Sample behavior criterion
Objective and consistent
Relevant and job-related
Precise and in-depth
Valid and highly reliable
Fair and provide opportunities to demonstrate skills
Supportive of diversity
Do you allow for customization based on market needs?
Do you utilize platform to undergird and unite all programs, even when customized?
Student Experience A personalized development
plan is designed to help the learner develop the targeted competencies.
Currently offered in course
format
Steps toward degree completion
Step I Initial assessment identifies
competency gaps
•Address competency gaps similar to e-credential students
Step III Complete concentration coursework
•More traditional style learning
•Provided by partner departments
•Blend on-line with on-ground courses
•Prefer to incorporate competency into content area
Step IV
Choose additional competencies in consultation with department faculty but base research in field
•Research reveals “magic competency”
combination Step V
Integrate KSA into capstone project assessment
Step II Begin working with a competency-development coach
Required courses Credit hours (45 in total) Big Six Leadership Competencies:
relationship building; problem- solving and decision-making; organizing and planning; influence; communicativeness, drive and energy
6 courses x 3 credits each = 18 credit hours
Subject matter concentration: aging;
business; human resources; psychology;
restorative criminal justice; information technology; supply chain management;
and others
6 courses x 3 credits each = 18 credit hours
Two concentration-specific competencies 2 courses x 3 credits each = 6 credit hours
Integrated capstone assessment project 1 course x 3 credits = 3 credit hours
Participate in the Assessment
Center Prior
Knowledge
Reassess
