8 minute read
Competency-Based Learning: A Definition
week, it was likely the school would be forced to move to such a model for a short time. As everyone in education would soon discover, that “short time” went from days to weeks to months. Suddenly, Brian and his fellow educators had to find new ways to support students in their learning with the absence of an in-person experience. Everyone seemed to be on a steep learning curve to figure it out.
Brian’s experience as an educator during the pandemic mirrors the experiences of many in classrooms across the globe. As educators reflect on lessons learned during the COVID-19 pandemic, new priorities have emerged about how best to support student learning. Suddenly, educational strategies and models that could deliver flexible, personalized, and student-centered approaches have taken on increased meaning for all.
It is not surprising why the years following the global pandemic that began in 2020 will likely be viewed as the time of the greatest advancement of the competency-based learning model in schools.
Competency-Based Learning: A Definition
As educators reflect on lessons learned during the COVID-19 pandemic, new priorities have emerged about how best to support student learning. Suddenly, educational strategies and models that could deliver flexible, personalized, and student-centered approaches have taken on increased meaning for all. In competency-based learning, learning is organized by a student’s ability to transfer knowledge and apply skills across content areas. Students refine their skills based on the feedback they receive through formative assessment and, when they are ready, demonstrate their understanding by performing thoughtfully developed summative assessment tasks.
Over the years, competency-based learning, defined as a comprehensive learner-centered system that allows students to move on upon demonstrated mastery of transferable learning objectives and skills, has become a prevalent phrase in education reform dialogues. It is born from the notion that elementary schools, secondary schools, and institutions of higher education cannot be confined by the limitations of “seat time” and the Carnegie Unit (credit hours) when organizing how students will progress through their learning. In competency-based learning, learning is organized by a student’s ability to transfer knowledge and apply skills across content areas. Students refine their skills based on the feedback they receive through formative assessment and, when they are ready, demonstrate their understanding by performing thoughtfully developed summative assessment tasks.
Chris Sturgis (2015) provides one of the first clear and concise definitions for competency-based learning, and it influenced our book Breaking With Tradition: The Shift to Competency-Based Learning in PLCs at Work (Stack & Vander Els, 2018).
According to Sturgis (2015), in competency-based learning: Students advance upon demonstrated mastery Competencies include explicit, measurable, transferable learning objectives that empower students Assessment is meaningful and offers a positive learning experience for students Students receive timely, differentiated support based on their individual learning needs Learning outcomes emphasize competencies that include application and creation of knowledge, along with the development of important skills and dispositions (p. 8)
These traits provide a foundation for schools that were starting to implement early competency-based models. Since this time, however, we have learned quite a bit as a profession as the movement has grown. Since 2010, competency-based learning became one of the fastest growing education reform initiatives of the decade. The Aurora Institute has tracked this progress over time by studying state-adopted policies and procedures that support the model. Consider figure 1.2 from Aurora Institute (Truong, 2019), a 2012 map of the United States denoting which states had committed to policies that support competency education that were considered to be emerging, developing, or advanced.
In 2012, Aurora Institute classified just four states (Maine, New Hampshire, Iowa, and Oregon) as having advanced policies in place to support competency-based learning systems, while twenty-four states had yet to adopt any policies in this area. Advanced states received this rating due to “comprehensive policy alignment” or because the state has “established an active state role to build educator capacity in local school systems for competency education” (Truong, 2019). Similarly, a developing state “has open state policy flexibility for school districts to transition to competency education” (Truong, 2019). Finally, an emerging state has “limited state policy flexibility and, usually, the state requires authorization for school systems to shift to competency-based education” (Truong, 2019).
Fast forward to 2019, and a similar Aurora Institute review of state policies identified significant movement in the field in nearly every state. Consider figure 1.3 (page 12) from Aurora Institute (Truong, 2019), a 2019 revised map of the United States,
X
Advanced States
Those states with clear policies that are moving toward proficiencybased; more than just an option
Developing States
Those states with pilots of competency education, credit flexibility policies, or advanced next gen policies for equivalents to seat time
Emerging States
Those states with waivers, task forces
ILN States
Since its inception, the Innovation Lab Network (ILN) engaged schools, districts, and state education agencies working to identify through local efforts new designs for public education that empower each student to thrive as a productive learner, worker, and citizen. The state’s responsibility is to establish conditions in which innovation can flourish and to develop capacity to sustain and scale what works through policy. The Council of Chief State School Officers (CCSSO) facilitates this network of states to support programmatic, policy, and structure design work within each participating state and across the network.
No Policies in Competency Education
States with seat time and no competency education policies
Source: Aurora Institute (Truong, 2019). Adapted with permission.
Figure 1.2: 2012—A snapshot of competency-based learning policy across the United States.
X
Advanced States
Those states with comprehensive policy alignment and/or an active state role to build capacity in local school systems for competency education
Developing States
Those states with open state policy flexibility for local school systems to transition to competency education
Emerging States
Those states with limited flexibility in state policy—usually requiring authorization from the state—for local school systems to shift to competency education, for exploratory initiatives and task forces, and/or minimal state activity to build local capacity
No Policies in Competency Education
States with no statelevel activity and enabling policies for competency education. Significant policy barriers may exist, such as inflexible seat time restrictions
Source: Aurora Institute (Truong, 2019). Adapted with permission.
Figure 1.3: 2019—A snapshot of K–12 competency-based learning state policy across the United States.
denoting which states have committed to policies that support competency education that are rated to be emerging, developing, or advanced.
From 2012 to 2019, the number of advanced states increased from three to seventeen. Another fourteen moved into the developing category. Most notably, nearly every state made some growth in the area of policy development to support competency-based learning models. State-by-state progress with policy development was motivated primarily by an increased need for educational equity for all students. For many schools, the need for “all means all” policies continues to increase, looking to better address gaps experienced by students of color, students with disabilities, economically disadvantaged students, and other disadvantaged populations. Since 2012, the field of education has grown its capacity to understand and react to this growing need.
As competency-based learning has expanded across the United States, a parallel shift has taken root in several countries across the globe. A study of these international shifts (Bristow & Patrick, 2014) finds: Finland has initiated comprehensive education reform over the past forty years. High scores across most PISA exam cycles include unparalleled equity in performance, and its systemic approach to greater individualization in the tenth through twelfth grades can inform our thinking about high school redesign. British Columbia showcases the policy language of competency and personalization, innovates with pedagogical architecture, and enables student choice in the classroom through a flexible core curriculum. New Zealand has well-articulated competency frameworks, features the most autonomous schools in the OECD and strongly supports selfevaluation for principals, teachers, and even students. Scotland has been phasing in most components of competency education at the policy level for more than eleven years. National standards encourage teacher autonomy, formative assessment is the norm, and classroom supports focus on the whole child rather than solely academic performance.
According to the National Equity Project (n.d.), educational equity happens when “each child receives what he or she needs to develop to his or her full academic and social potential.” The organization goes on to note the following.
Working toward equity in schools involves: › Ensuring equally high outcomes for all participants in our educational system; removing the predictability of success or failure that currently correlates with any social or cultural factor;
› Interrupting inequitable practices, examining biases, and creating inclusive multicultural school environments for adults and children; and › Discovering and cultivating the unique gifts, talents, and interests that every human possesses.
This definition is a call to action to schools to examine not only their culture for learning, but the ways in which they ensure high levels of rigor and understanding for all and how they work to support students individually to meet this high bar. Ultimately, this culminated in the need for revisions to the founding principles of competency education. The Aurora Institute spearheaded this work in 2018, releasing their results one year later. According to Levine and Patrick (2019), the following is a revised definition for competency-based learning that outlines seven design principles. 1. Students are empowered daily to make important decisions about their learning experiences, how they will create and apply knowledge, and how they will demonstrate their learning. 2. Assessment is a meaningful, positive, and empowering learning experience for students that yields timely, relevant, and actionable evidence. 3. Students receive timely, differentiated support based upon their individual learning needs. 4. Students progress based on evidence of mastery, not seat time. 5. Students learn actively using different pathways and varied pacing. 6. Strategies to ensure equity for all students are embedded in the culture, structure, and pedagogy of schools and education systems. 7. Rigorous, common expectations for learning (knowledge, skills, and dispositions) are explicit, transparent, measurable, and transferable.
Levine and Patrick (2019) call on educators to find ways to implement all seven design principles in their classrooms and schools. They stress that strong implementation requires “policies, pedagogy, structures, and culture that support every student in developing essential knowledge, skills, and dispositions.” They make it clear that competency-based learning is a radical philosophical shift from a traditional system, one that is driven by “the equity-seeking need to transform our educational system so all students can and will learn through full engagement and support and through authentic, rigorous learning experiences inside and outside the classroom.”
