Autonomy and Social Responsibility of Universities in the Competence-Based Education
2. Competence-Based Education and National Qualifications Framework for Higher Education
2.1. Conceptual bases of National Qualifications Framework for Higher Education (NQFHE)
The critical evaluation of conceptual bases of NQFHE (key-concepts, competence categories, description of qualifications in terms of learning outcomes, acquaintance with the used descriptors etc.) shows that it is about a competency-based education model.
Therefore, the key-concepts of a qualification description demarche aim at the learning results, in terms of knowledge, skills, competences. (The recommendation of the European Parliament and of the Council regarding the setting of EQF, 23 April 2008).
A qualification is accredited through a document of study (diploma, certificate), which gives a person the legal right to practice a job/ profession. Reporting to the labour market is again present, the qualification being considered an official recognition of the learning individual outcomes for the labour market.
The approach is not a predictiviste one but rather a constructiviste one, since one considers qualification also in the context of the value recognition of the learning individual outcomes for continuous professional education and training.
Regarding the learning outcomes, the authors consider the set of knowledge, skills and competences a person has acquired and is able to demonstrate after the end of the learning process within a certain school cycle.
The competence is considered the proven capacity of adequately selecting, combining and using knowledge, skills and other acquisitions (values and attitudes), with the view to successfully solving a certain problem. One makes the distinction between two categories of competences: a) professional competences – involved in successfully solving the work and learning situations circumscribed to the respective profession, in terms of efficiency and effectiveness; b) transversal competences – which transcend a certain field, have multidisciplinary nature and ensure personal and professional development, in terms of efficiency and effectiveness.
The analysis of conceptual bases of NQFHE shows that approaching the competences from behaviorist perspective is discreet, which considerably reduces the risk of a competence to a sum of small performances on different labour tasks. The holistic approach of competences seems to be more productive, especially that most of the critics appear when the competences are conceptualized in behavioral terms.
Types of competences General descriptors
Professional Competences
Knowledge (cognitive dimension)
1. Knowledge, understanding and use of specific language
Role Competences 6. Autonomy and responsibility Competences of personal and
professional development
7. Social interaction
8. personal and professional development 48
Barbu Gheorghe, Ciucurel Manuela / Procedia – Edu World 2010
Table 1 – Learning outcomes according to conceptual bases of NQFHE 2.2. Methodological implications of National Qualifications Framework for Higher Education (NQFHE)
From a methodological point of view NQFHE model uses more tools: NQFHE matrix, Grid 1 (offers the description of the study program in terms of competences) and Grid 2 (establishes correlations between the professional, transversal competences, the contents areas, the study subjects and the allocated ECTS).
Identifying the competences associated to a certain qualification presupposes the running of several stages:
1. consulting the main beneficiaries (employers) of the qualification graduates;
2. consulting the qualification providers (universities offering the study programme);
3. elaborating the qualification description;
4. analyzing the qualification description in consortium;
5. finishing the qualification description after the discussions in consortium;
6. presentation in the necessary format for subscription to RNCIS.
Regarding the employers’ consulting, one may identify several methodological difficulties, among which the most relevant seems to us those related to the tool of collecting the data and to the capacity of employers of benefiting from CBE.
First, one may ask whether CBE is able to offer employers what they really desire.
The element of reference is workplace, and one of the major arguments for CBE is that it gives individuals opportunities to "achieve qualifications that relate to required performance in the workplace" (Erridge and Perry 1994, p. 140). One starts from the performance expected by the employer, one identifies the elements of competence associated with that performance and then one gets to the curricular elements capable of facilitating the training of those competences.
But how do we identify and describe the performance expected by the employer?
One can use interviews or open questionnaires, but experience shows that employers are not willing to provide such information. If one moves to the next stage, the construction of a closed questionnaire, based on data from interviews or open questionnaires, there is the risk of being accused of suggesting answers, plus low conceptual validity of the identified competences.
But at the same time, are the employers prepared to benefit from CBE?
Toye and Vigor (1994) found that employers are aware of it potential benefits but cited major costs in delivery, uncertain suitability for their work force, and confusing language/jargon as barriers.
Also, numerous studies found employers largely indifferent to or ignorant about the nature and purpose CBE and reluctant to participate in work-based assessment; there were many concerns about who was represented on the industry standards-setting boards and whether they were truly employer led.
The solution seems to be a possible approach for the competence identification and design, which combine the information offered by academics (e.g. groups of experts may be used to build a profile of competences required by a certain qualification) with that offered by employers.
Talking about CBE, the emphasis should be placed on employers’ view, starting from the assumption of the university openness towards the economic environment in order to ensure the correspondence between offer and demand for education and training
49
Barbu Gheorghe, Ciucurel Manuela / Procedia – Edu World 2010
That is why we can consider the setting up of the RNCIS as being a real experience of negotiation and learning for all the partners involved (employers, qualifications suppliers, students, institutions etc.).
After having identified the competences, one must decide between a multiple criterion or a predictive criterion of the professional success. In the multiple criterion case, one starts from the assumption that all competences have the same contribution / weight in determining professional success. Instead, an approach from the composed criterion perspective involves different weights of competences.
In our case, given the need to establish correlations between the role played by competences in determining professional success and credit points allocated to those competences one prefers the use of a composed criterion.
For exemplification we chose a qualification in the automotive engineering field.
One identified six professional competences and three transversal ones:
C1 - Operating with fundamental concepts in the engineering sciences field, C2 - Appropriate use of basic concepts in automotive engineering;
C3 - Designing constructive solutions to ensure functional requirements for motor vehicles;
C4 - Designing manufacturing technologies for motor vehicles, their assemblies and special equipment;
C5 - Designing and applying technologies of maintenance for motor vehicles;
C6 - Operating with concepts of economic systems and subsystems management, which are object of research, design, manufacture or maintenance of motor vehicles;
CT1 - Executing professional tasks according to specified requirements and within the imposed deadlines, following a pre-established work plan, under qualified guidance;
CT2 - Integrating easily within a group, assuming specific roles and establishing a good team communication;
CT3 - Achieving personal and professional development, using personal resources and modern study tools.
To construct a predictive composed criterion of the professional success, we used a group of six experts from a university, qualification providers; the experts were asked to indicate how big is the role played by each competence in determining professional success, to express it in percentage of 100%. The following composed criterion resulted, from the qualification providers perspective:
Professional performance = C1*13,83+ C2*15,5+ C3*14,66+ C4*13,66+
C5*11,66+ C6*7,16+ CT1*8,83+ CT2*7,5+CT3*7,66
Subsequently, we tried to identify the employers’ opinions, using the same procedure. The following composed criterion resulted, from the employers’ perspective:
Professional performance = C1*11,22+ C2*13,41+ C3*15,55+ C4*16,34+
C5*14,66+ C6*6,12+ CT1*9,21+ CT2*7,81+CT3*5,68
Analyzing the two results one realizes that there are differences:
- The employers consider that the most important competences in obtaining professional success are C4, C3, C5;
- The qualification providers consider that the most important competences in obtaining professional success are C2, C3, C1;
Competence Qualification
Providers
Employers C1 – Operating with fundamental concepts in the engineering sciences
field
13,83 11,22
50
Barbu Gheorghe, Ciucurel Manuela / Procedia – Edu World 2010 C2 – Appropriate use of basic concepts in automotive engineering 15,50 13,41 C3 – Designing constructive solutions to ensure functional
requirements for motor vehicles
14,66 15,55
C4 – Designing manufacturing technologies for motor vehicles, their assemblies and special equipment;
13,66 16,34
C5 – Designing and applying technologies of maintenance for motor vehicles
11,16 14,66
C6 – Operating with concepts of economic systems and subsystems management, which are object of research, design, manufacture or maintenance of motor vehicles
7,16 6,12
CT1 – Executing professional tasks according to specified requirements and within the imposed deadlines, following a pre-established work plan , under qualified guidance
8,83 9,21
CT2 – Integrating easily within a group, assuming specific roles and establishing a good team communication
7,5 7,81
CT3 – Achieving personal and professional development, using personal resources and modern study tools
7,66 5,68
Table 2 – Variants of composed criterion, from the employers and some Construction of automotives qualification providers’ perspective
Taking into consideration these differences who determines educational goals, standards, and curriculum: employers (and government) or educational institutions?
Employers (and government) claim that competency standards empower individuals with the choice of what to learn and how to learn it.
The counter argument is that, in CBE, knowledge is defined narrowly in terms of employer needs, and rather than being a framework, competency standards are a prescription to which educational funding is tied, by which teachers are benchmarked and assessed, and through which workers' progression and pay are determined (Mulcahy 1996).
Ecclestone (1997) asserts that the economic basis of CBE neglects the wider cultural and social purposes of learning and the rights of all stakeholders to determine those purposes. CBE may be an empowering tool for economic independence, but it does not promote critical thinking about social and political issues or address structural inequalities (Ecclestone, 1997).
Harris et al. (1995) concede that criticism of economic and political rationales is a
"valid objection to bad applications of CBE principles" However, they argue that, with more emphasis on a holistic conception of competence and on education for citizenship and cultural understanding, well-done CBE can find a realistic middle ground between the humanist and behaviorist perspectives, taking another step toward breaking down the divisions between general and vocational education (Harris & al., 1995, p. 68).
In this context, within a general, methodological and of educational policy framework, imposed by the National Agency for Qualifications in Higher Education and The Partnership with the Economic and Social Milieu (ACPART), the universities, as qualifications suppliers, make significant decisions, which should cover a wide range of choices:
o Which are the specific elements of description of the study program (the supplementary competences they offer starting from the adjustment of the educational offer to the labour market requirements, competences which will be mentioned in G1 supplementary grid);
51
Barbu Gheorghe, Ciucurel Manuela / Procedia – Edu World 2010
o How exactly they establish the correlations between the professional and transversal competences, on one hand and the contents areas and the subjects, on the other;
o Which is the modality of granting the credits according to the professional success criterion (multiple criterion versus composed criterion);
o How exactly the educational conception of the university is expressed within the curriculum of a study program;
o What other new qualifications they decide to offer etc.
3. Conclusions
Competency-based education is perceived by some as the answer, by others as the wrong answer, to the improvement of education and training for the complex society.
This study has tried to argue that beyond the limits imposed by the institutions which are authorities in the field, the universities have significant roles and responsibilities which must be based upon the assumption of their own autonomy and their social responsibility.
CBE represent a real experience of social negotiation and learning for all the partners involved (employers, qualifications suppliers, students, institutions, the staff involved in the elaboration of policies within the higher education, members of district committees, the social partners staff, the civil society in essence).
CBE is focused on outcomes (competencies) that are linked to workforce needs, as defined by employers and the profession.
CBE is an institutional process that moves education from focusing on what academics believe graduates need to know (teacher-focused) to what students need to know and be able to do in varying and complex situations (student and/or workplace focused).
CBE often necessitates more complex assessment, involving portfolios, experiential learning assessment in field experience, demonstration in varying contexts, role play, use of standardized patients or clients, etc.
With more emphasis on a holistic conception of competence and on education for citizenship and cultural understanding, well-done CBE can find a realistic middle ground between the humanist and behaviorist perspectives.
References
Chappell, C. (1996). Quality & Competency Based Education and Training. in The Literacy Equation, pp. 71-79. Red Hill, Australia: Queensland Council for Adult Literacy.
Collins, C. (1993). Competencies: The Competencies Debate in Australian Education and Training. Curtin:
Australian College of Education.
Ecclestone, K. (1997). Energizing or Enervating? Journal of Vocational Education and Training, no. 1 (1997):
65-79.
Erridge, A., Perry, S. (1994). The Validity and Value of National Vocational Qualifications. Vocational Aspect of Education 46, no. 2 (1994): 139-154.
Gonczi, A.(1997).Future Directions for Vocational Education in Australian Secondary Schools. Australian and New Zealand Journal of Vocational Education Research 5, no. 1 (May 1997): 77-108.
Hager, P. (1995). Competency Standards-A Help or a Hindrance? Vocational Aspect of Education, no. 2 (1995): 141-151.
Harris, R., Guthrie, H., Hobart, B. & Lundberg, D.(1995). Competency-Based Education and Training:
Between a Rock and a Whirlpool. South Melbourne: Macmillan Education Australia.
Hodkinson, P., Issitt, M. (1995). The Challenge of Competence. New York: Cassell.
Jackson, N. (1994). If Competence Is the Answer, What Is the Question? In A Collection of Original Essays on Curriculum for the Workplace, pp. 135-149. Geelong, Australia: Deakin University.
52
Barbu Gheorghe, Ciucurel Manuela / Procedia – Edu World 2010 Jones, L., Moore, R.(1995). Appropriating Competence. British Journal of Education and Work, no. 2 (1995):
78-92.
Mulcahy, D.(1996). Performing Competencies: Of Training Protocols and Vocational Education Practices.
Australian and New Zealand Journal of Vocational Education Research, no. 1 (May 1996):
35-67.
Toye, J., and Vigor, P.(1994). Implementing NVQs. Brighton, England: Institute of Manpower Studies, University of Sussex.
Berdrow, I.& Evers, F. (2010). Bases of Competence: A Framework for Facilitating Reflective Learner-Centered Educational Environments. Journal of Management Education, August 2010, 34 (4).
Right, J.(2010). Competency-Based Education & Training, http://www.ehow.com, updated: May 28, 2010.
Wood, R. & Payne, P. (1999). Competency – based recruitment and selection, New York: Wiley & Sons.
Zlate, M.(2004). Tratat de psihologie organizaţional-managerială, vol.I, Iaşi: Polirom.
Burns, R. & Klingstedt, J.L. (1972). Competency-Based Education: An Introduction. New York: Wiley &
Sons.
*** The recommendation of the European Parliament and of the Council regarding the setting of EQF, 23 April 2008, in Official Jurnal of the European Union C111din 6.05.2008.
53
4th International Conference "Education Facing Contemporary World Issues"
Piteşti, Romania, 2010, 2010, October