Performance assessments (PAs) offer a more authentic measure of higher order skills, which is ideal for competency- based education (CBE) especially for students already in the workplace and striving to advance their careers. The goal of the current study was to examine the validity of undergraduate PA score interpretation in the college of IT at a CBE online, higher education institute by evaluating (a) the transparency of cognitive complexity or demands of the task as communicated through the task prompt versus expected cognitive complexity based on its associated rubric aspect and (b) the impact of cognitive complexity on task difficulty. We found that there is a discrepancy in the communicated versus expected cognitive complexity of PA tasks (i.e., prompt vs. rubric) where rubric complexity is higher, on average, than task prompt complexity. This discrepancy negatively impacts reliability but does not affect the difficulty of PA tasks. Moreover, the cognitive complexity of both the task prompt and the rubric aspect significantly impacts the difficulty of PA tasks based on Bloom's taxonomy but not Webb's DOK, and this effect is slightly stronger for the rubric aspect than the task prompt. Discussion centers on how these findings can be used to better inform and improve PA task writing and review procedures for assessment developers as well as customize PAs (their difficulty levels) to different course levels or individual students to improve learning.
Competency-based education (CBE) is essentially an approach to teaching and learning featuring flexible pacing, robust competencies, and an emphasis on student completion. CBE differs from traditional education that focuses instead more on seat time and credit hours. Though CBE has existed on college campuses in many forms, faculty are often inexperienced in teaching CBE. Facing growing demands for CBE, institutions must find ways to prepare faculty to take part in CBE. This mixed methods study explored faculty views of CBE, their self-efficacy, and beliefs about support mechanisms needed for those teaching and delivering CBE. Findings suggest faculty have mixed though balanced views of CBE, generally high self-efficacy due to the importance of mastery experiences, and believe in the importance of specific learning opportunities in an environment built on collaboration to ensure CBE faculty are supported and can thrive. Findings can help institutions with CBE or those considering it to support faculty and ensure they are trained in teaching courses in this modality.
Michelle Weise's new book is a gift you should give your professional self! The book tackles the need for change in postsecondary education by suggesting that the current education system is unprepared for a 100-year long work life with ongoing needs for upskilling. Long Life Learning is also a call to action for the Competency-Based Education (CBE) community with Weise's insightful recommendations for a new learning ecosystem in which CBE is part of the solution. Formerly with Strada Education Network as its Chief Innovation Officer and Senior Vice President of Workforce Strategies, Michelle also brings expertise from her role as a Senior Research Fellow at the Clayton Christiansen Institute for Disruptive Innovation. Her book, Long Life Learning, consolidates her extensive research and innovation background into an impressive review of workforce realities and an open invitation to consider the opportunities and challenges that lie ahead. Long Life Learning is organized into two sections. The first section, From a Rigged System, sets out the research evidence for a 100-year work life and underscores the inadequacies of the current postsecondary education system in the United States. The second section, To a New Learning Ecosystem, unravels the complexities revealed in the first section to offer a clear and convincing roadmap for needed reforms, innovations, and collaborations. In chapter 1, A 100-Year Work Life, Weise points out that 2, 4, or 6 years of front-loaded college will be woefully inadequate for the learning needs of future working adults with careers lasting more than 60 years and involving as many as twelve job changes. She highlights evidence that today's learning resources and funding models are geared to students between the ages of 18 and 24, despite that commitment approximately 70% of the high school graduates who enter college do not persist to a degree. Furthermore, of those who persist many are underemployed at graduation and 75% are underemployed 10 years later. Given the workforce reality that the top jobs sought after in 2014 did not even exist in 2009, the future calls for flexible upskilling and reskilling in a learn, earn, learn, earn cycle that is unlike standard higher education practice today. Chapter 2, The Theories Behind the End of College, examines the growing issues about escalating costs, the rising number of Institutions of Higher Education, and the decreasing number of births in the United States. Fewer young people entering college and increasingly higher costs beg the need for disruption and innovation in the standard model of postsecondary education. Weiss sets the stage for a new system that is affordable, accessible, and structured in ways that facilitate portability and value to an employer. Chapter 3, The Future of Work, The Future of Us, anchors Weise's arguments about the need for higher education change with a deeper look at worker reality, caregiving responsibilities, and the silver age. She points out that there is an opportunity gap as employers retreat from training. If we could, states Weise, “solve for the pain points of the most distressed” then everyone wins. Chapter 4, Seamless On and Off-Ramps, establishes five guiding principles for a new learning ecosystem: navigable, supportive, targeted, integrated, and transparent. Each of the following five chapters delves into each principle in turn. Every chapter contains three parts: What We Are Hearing, The Predicament, and Seeds of Innovation. What We Are Hearing presents stories and statistics that establish the basis for the guiding principle. The Predicament reveals challenges to be met. Seeds of Innovation highlights case studies of agencies, organizations, or institutions meeting challenges with innovative and effective programs. In a spirit of continuous improvement, competency-based educators in secondary and higher education can leverage these principles and consider adapting the seeds of innovation into their own practice and processes. Chapter 5, Navigating Our Next Job Transition, provides an overview of the current and future job markets and establishes the need for a variety of learning pathways responsive to interests, skills, past training, and former experiences. Weise identifies challenges in gathering better insights into skills needed, translating skills from one industry to another and finding ways to assess an individual's personal and informal learning experiences. Meeting those challenges are a variety of programs and entities opening up possibilities across a spectrum of job, skills, and employee characteristics. CBE is well positioned to highlight the ways in which current programs integrate, align, or update competencies with industry skills and to begin to solve for the challenges that Weise raises. Chapter 6, Wrap Around Supports, acknowledges the complexities in the lives of working adults and seeks to give voice to the experiences of these learners in today's world. Weise explores the challenges of lack of necessities and access and counters those with examples of institutions and innovations that are meeting the call in immediate and effective ways. Although some institutions, such as Western Governors University, already surround students with a 360° community of care, newer CBE programs might imagine innovations based on the examples Weise provides. Chapter 7, Targeted Education, shines a light on personalized learning to ensure that an individual's educational journey is tailored to access the right skills and the needed pathways at the opportune time. Weise bemoans the predicament underlying academic silos, the absence of connectivity across disciplines, and the general lack of knowledge transfer from postsecondary learning experiences to real life. The innovations cited are impressive and compelling from problem-centered learning to the integration of virtual and augmented reality. CBE institutions and programs have an opportunity to draw from Wiese's presentation of skills as “shapes” to work toward greater synergy and alignment with workforce needs. Chapter 8, Integrated Earning and Learning, draws attention to the precious resources of time and money for an individual to continue their education while juggling multiple responsibilities of an adult learner. Innovations are highlighted that explore partnerships and collaborations between the earning and the learning stakeholders. CBE institutions might also benefit from exploring these examples of improved and intensive partnerships that are not limited to simply providing feedback on and input for learning competencies. Chapter 9, Transparent and Fairer Hiring, points a spotlight on hiring practices. Given a new learning ecosystem that is navigable, supportive, targeted, and integrated, an adult learner is still prey to hiring practices in which job expectations and qualifications are not adequately defined. In this chapter, Weise underscores the need for transparency in hiring and explores the opportunities already emerging around skills-based hiring. Competency-based hiring programs are discussed and open up an opportunity for CBE programs to work toward integrating partnerships, internships, and matchmaking tools into their educational offerings. Weise wraps up the five guiding principle chapters in Chapter 10, Getting Started: Taking Root, by highlighting the need for a system of data exchange among K-12, postsecondary, and workforce development. The Endnotes section alone is an opportunity for CBE administrators and workforce program developers to grow their understanding of the work ahead and initiate conversations about the basis for it. In conclusion, Long Life Learning: Preparing for jobs that don't even exist yet is a book we need but didn't know we needed. It charts a way forward for those of us striving to provide access to learning opportunities and experiences that meet the needs of individuals who dream of a better life for themselves and their families. If nothing else, Weise's book offers five guiding principles for decision-making, program planning, and continuous improvement of the work that we already do in educating adults and all learners through CBE.
AbstractBackgroundThis paper reports on a study that analyzed the Diploma in Secondary Education (DSE) curriculum in Tanzania to establish its competency‐based education (CBE) attributes. The attributes of the curriculum and whether these reflect the basic principles of CBE are critical to successful implementation at the classroom level.MethodsA Qualitative Content Analysis method was used to analyze purposively sampled DSE curriculum documents such as the curriculum of the diploma in teacher education program, Biology and Geography academic and pedagogy syllabi for the DSE etc. to establish the program's CBE attributes.FindingsThe analysis established that the DSE program is characterized by a mixture of diametrically contradictory attributes, some of which reflect traditional content‐based education and others that are more aligned with the CBE model.ConclusionWe concluded that, by maintaining attributes of both traditional and competency‐based education models, the DSE program could self‐constrain its implementation at the classroom level.
As we wrap up summer, this issue of JCBE spans the globe and the process of CBE. The first two articles highlight factors in and indicators of student success. What a great way to welcome the fall issue with a focus on student success! In their manuscript entitled Factors that Contribute to Student Success and Satisfaction at Brandman University, Dr. Gilmer-Echols and her colleagues identify factors that are most influential in student success for Brandman's model of Competency-Based Education (CBE). Defining success as program longevity, the authors explored the results of student satisfaction surveys of various student services, such as academic coaching and the writing/math center. The discussion section offers a number of opportunities for further study that may be of interest to CBE researchers. In their article, Learning and Individual Differences in Skilled Competency-Based Performance: Using a Course Planning and Learning Tool as an Indicator for Student Success, Dr. Sean Gyll and his colleague at Western Governors University used a course planning and learning tool (CPLT) to identify factors in student success, such as the use of resources or the summative assessment. They defined student success as measured by planning and learning (using the course planning tool), knowledge, and confidence/experience (using a course preassessment). Implications for supporting student success include the importance of assessing the learner profile by using the CPLT. The third article, The Teacher Education Curriculum and its Competency-Based Education Attributes, comes to JCBE from Tanzania where Dr. Tarmo and his colleague at the University of Dar Es Salaam provide an analysis of the Diploma of Secondary Education to establish its integration of CBE attributes. Using a qualitative content analysis of documents and arguing that implementation of the CBE approach now mandated in K-12 schools is dependent upon teacher preparation, the author(s) found contradictory attributes in the Diploma that constrain CBE implementation in K-12 classrooms. The fourth article opens up the conversation about how to support widespread adoption of CBE, Implementing Competency-Based Education in Multiple Programs: A Workshop to Structure and Monitor Programs' Priorities Using ADDIE. Dr. LaFleur and his colleagues from Laval University Faculty of Medicine in Canada report on their support of the transition of 29 medical residency programs to CBE. They describe nine workshops they offered and how the ADDIE instructional model was used to assess and monitor levels of CBE implementation. Implications of their work extend to training faculty for CBE adoption. The fifth and final manuscript explores a new approach to developing CBE models, Developing competency frameworks using natural language processing: An exploratory study. Dr. Garman from Rush University and colleagues from Oak Park, Illinois, as well as Idaho State and DePaul universities, generate a set of leadership competency domains using a language processing approach called Latent Dirichlet Allocation (LDA). The LDA-generated competency domains are compared to a set of human-generated domains and assessed for coherence. The findings are intriguing and suggest opportunities for refinement of an LDA approach in establishing and evaluating domains of competency.
Imagine this: The owner of a Boston-based computer gaming company needs a Python-savvy programmer to develop a new game. Melina is a self-taught programmer living in Somerville, just outside the city, who was recently laid off because of the pandemic. Melina would be an ideal candidate for the position, but she chooses not to apply because the job description specifies that a computer science degree is required. Melina had started her degree a few years earlier but had to drop out because balancing her full-time job, raising a child, and going to school on a rigid schedule was untenable. Melina had continued to learn on her own, but never obtained the degree to show for it. Unfortunately, variations of this story are repeated every day. The unemployed programmer, project manager, or sales associate can do the job that an employer is trying to fill, but the employer inadvertently closes off that option in the job description by requiring a degree. This focus on degrees as hiring criteria hurts many jobseekers but hits underrepresented communities especially hard: Degrees have historically been the currency of the education-to-work continuum, serving as shorthand for competence and functioning as gatekeeping mechanisms for higher-status education and employment. We are not arguing that degrees do not matter, but we are promoting the design of alternative approaches that can also function as bridges to attaining a degree or demonstrating competence. Put simply, people with competencies need jobs, but are hampered by a perceived need for degrees to obtain those jobs. It is our responsibility as educators and advocates to elevate and scale CBE as a solution to this challenge. There is an urgency to this matter because of a growing bifurcation of access to education and opportunity between white, affluent students, and those from low socioeconomic backgrounds and people of color, especially Black and Latinx students. Research from the Georgetown Center on Education and the Workforce reveals that Black Americans are steered toward majors and career paths leading to low-paying jobs. Even when entering high-paying fields, Black students often pursue the lower-paying majors within them. For example, a higher representation of Black female students entering a STEM (science, technology, engineering, and mathematics) program choose biology, the lowest-paying science major. In contrast, white students and those of higher economic status often enter into longer-term degree programs with greater overall economic value (Carnevale et al., 2016). In a 2020 article, Carnevale asserted the following: The divide Carnevale pointed to must be addressed in ways that make the bachelor's degree—and those higher-paying majors and jobs—accessible to all. Any new educational and funding policies should avoid sending a message to certain learners that the baccalaureate degree is “not for you, but we have something else that is more appropriate.” That scenario represents the underlying problem. Thus, we have a twofold challenge that is not easy to navigate: We must “credentialize” CBE, while also “democratizing” the BA. An important task for a national program is to educate hiring managers. We can help employers with jobs that require skills rather than degrees to avoid being mesmerized by academic credentials. In the case of the gaming company executive and the Python programmer, the two will never meet under current circumstances, which is a net loss for both—and for the local economy. However, the change is as simple as deleting one phrase in a want ad: “computer science degree required.” Equity in work and economic opportunity is at the heart of our mission at JFF (Jobs for the Future): As noted earlier, we believe that one effective response to these inequities is a national commitment to competency-based, equity-centered education, or CBEE. Employers like our gaming company manager routinely cite a lack of preparedness in the talent pool, pointing to a competency and skills gap that needs bridging. Often, these hiring managers are sorting candidates exclusively through a degree-focused lens, which narrows the candidate pool overall. When using degrees as a blunt sorting mechanism, many employers still note a persistent skills gap in potential hires. Further, they often state that degree-holding candidates lack specific, foundational skills they are seeking, even in entry-level candidates (Sidhue & Calderon, 2014). Another priority of a national program would be to point out that there is a connection between their hiring process and the skills gap. From an education and training perspective, the employer's dilemma reflects multiple realities in our current approach to education and work: (a) It underscores the value of degrees as the ultimate currency in our labor market; (b) it suggests that although degrees offer recognized criteria for employment entry, they are usually insufficient in conveying specific skills or overall competencies for employment readiness; and (c) it implicates the inherent inequities in long-term economic mobility for those currently underserved in degree-granting programs. Ultimately, employers are missing out on an untapped market—those prospective workers who possess skills and potential but no degree. Hiring managers may not realize that the capability is there, because “degree-based myopia” prevents them from seeing it. Pursuing a degree is a costly proposition in both time and money, and its importance as a job portal has offered a means of social mobility for those of economic or racial privilege while consigning others to the lower rungs of a class hierarchy. This is the problem that we must address. As we grapple with the economic reality of a global pandemic, we detect a growing tension nationally between the desire for short-term, revenue-producing jobs and the return on investment that typically comes with a 4-year degree. An article in Inside Higher Ed (Clayton, 2020) stated the following: Our task as we emerge from the current crisis is to become bridge builders, spanning the chasm between the short- and long-term needs of students and workers. While people require “economic security” today, they will also need “economic mobility” in the future. Today's jobseekers are looking for programs that can prepare them for careers—and they need a strong indication that a degree will pay off in the long run. As Paul LeBlanc, president of the University of Southern New Hampshire, a national leader in CBE, said, “Many students don't have the social capital to get it wrong. A bet on us is a big bet” (LeBlanc, 2020). Students have much to lose if they make the wrong choice because they are counting on their educational investments to produce labor market value. They are losing faith in the BA because its value can be unpredictable. CBE can offer a better value proposition when done well, because it promises better outcomes when tied to labor market and offers more efficient pathways at lower cost in time and money. A shift has been taking place, and we are now witnessing a tipping point where competencies are increasingly being recognized as more important than the traditional degree in the hiring process for many disciplines. Many employers are requiring specific competencies in their top candidates, showing less adherence to the “degree as currency” model that has shaped much of the higher education landscape. As the US Chamber of Commerce Foundation (2020) stated: It may be difficult to see it now, but the degree is eroding as a “gold standard” for hiring. The federal government—the nation's largest employer—announced in June 2020 that hiring in many federal jobs will now be based on competencies, not degrees. White House Exec. Order No. 13932 (2020), “Modernizing and Reforming the Assessment and Hiring of Federal Job Candidates,” laid out the new policy. It states the following: The Trump administration's move to accelerate skills-based hiring builds on prior administrations' openness to CBE and other skills-based education and training programs. This latest decision appears to hold great promise that more federal jobs will open up to currently underserved communities, but many observers greeted the announcement with skepticism. For example, Amanda Bergson-Shilcock, senior fellow at the National Skills Coalition, said, “This executive order is like trying to turn around the Queen Mary. … It's going to take years to see how this really plays out” (Koenig, 2020). Beyond the federal government's efforts, we have seen an increasing commitment by colleges and employers to reduce the equity gap in credential attainment and wage gain for people of color. However, successes to date represent isolated pockets of advancement, and there is little evidence of scale. Colleges—particularly community colleges—are still under fire for not preparing students to take the next step in their work and learning journeys, so they are increasingly interested in reconfiguring how they teach and document learning outcomes. Thus, there is still much to be done by educators in conjunction with the actions of public- and private-sector employers. Now is the time to seize the opportunity for transformation through reforms like CBE that are more accessible for more people. With the spread of the novel coronavirus, the economy is headed into a recession, and the economic disruption is striking us like a tidal wave, faster and more radically than anyone could have imagined. (Hoffman, 2020) Everyone agrees that COVID-19 has upended employment and education worldwide. Rapid, unplanned shifts to online learning have been only partially successful, and efforts to safely operate schools, colleges, and universities remain problematic. COVID-19 has amplified preexisting concerns about the need to shift higher education from its focus on degree completion to jobs and career paths, and about its perpetuation of inequities. The pandemic has merely made the consequences more immediately clear, given that the people who have been hardest hit by the financial fallout are those with the least economic security: workers whose jobs are disproportionately in service industries and similar fields. This terrible situation offers the opportunity to advocate for fundamental change in the current system. The time is right to ask, “What are the implications of COVID-19 for CBE and all forms of education and training?” As we rebuild, it's essential that we create education approaches that bridge a short-term need for training with a long-term need for career success—from “economic security” to “economic mobility.” The pandemic and accompanying recession means that there are vast numbers of unemployed and underemployed who need additional skills and credentials to get back into the workforce, and CBE is the ideal model to meet their needs because of its tie to labor market demands and efficient pathways to jobs and careers. So now is the time to implement innovative competency-based programs, supports, and experiences designed for learners and workers from all backgrounds and contexts. The “CBE advantage” provides the flexibility and targeted skills development, combined with personalized supports, to help our students as they confront numerous challenges that were unknown even recently. It is our responsibility as education leaders to work with employers to expand and scale CBE programs to offer educational pathways that are more relevant to the labor market and reduce the amount of time and expense required to obtain a credential. It will be a great loss to society if we continue with “business as usual” or wait to “get back to normal.” In the United States, persistent education gaps and economic inequity prevent many from living the kind of lives they want or need. Lack of opportunity and skills keep many stuck in a cycle of disadvantage and despair. People become trapped in low-wage jobs with long hours and face the uncertainty and stress that come from being among our nation’s working poor. (Krause, 2017) As we continue our efforts to recover from the pandemic in 2021, equity must be a central concern. The education community will fail in its obligations if we ignore this unique moment to build career pathways that break the vicious cycle perpetuating inequities by tracking people into low-wage jobs that lack long-term financial and advancement opportunities. However, many attempts to create skills-based approaches have led to unequal quality in programming, where low-income students and students of color are too often funneled into shorter-term and less economically viable pathways. In contrast, white students and those of higher economic status tend to enter into longer-term degree programs with greater overall economic value. The pandemic has focused a spotlight on marginalized students. For many of them, in-person schooling represents a safe place, a community, and perhaps the only place where they can access the technology needed for learning in a modern setting. Online learning has been a net loss for many of them. CBE alone cannot address every dimension of social inequality. However, it can help to remove specific barriers. In a degree-dominated world, economic disparities may prevent lower-income students from putting in the “seat time” needed for educational attainment. A parent working two jobs will find it difficult to be in a classroom every week for 2 or 4 years or more. If the work-life experience of that parent is taken into account and a customized career pathway is created for her, she can obtain a credential faster and less expensively. A flexible, CBE career pathway, that recognizes previous learning and provides opportunity for all learners to secure a job with a family-sustaining wage, offers a convincing model of education with equity at the center. There is a new consumer audience turning to postsecondary education. Research reveals that 87% of adults in the workforce today acknowledge that it will be essential or important for them to get training and develop skills throughout their work lives. The new working learner is a different kind of consumer of education, and thus requires a different engagement and personalized pathway. (Weise, 2021) The postsecondary education landscape is crowded with reform initiatives because almost no one is satisfied with the current situation. The question is not “What is wrong?” but “What will work?” For more traditional postsecondary education, specifically in academic, credit-bearing programs, much of the reform effort of the past 20 years has centered on increasing access to higher education opportunities. In light of acute attention to alarmingly low graduation rates in the early 2000s, the focus moved to the “completion agenda”—getting students in and out of their programs with credentials more effectively and efficiently. Current reforms fail to challenge the dominant paradigm, focusing instead on improving what already exists. Only in the past few years has the postsecondary sector as a whole begun to home in on the importance of job skills and career advancement. This trend accelerated in 2020 with efforts to respond to the COVID-19 pandemic and the over 40 million unemployed, the majority of whom were low income and people of color (Casselman et al., 2020). The intense concern with jobs and economic recovery challenged states, colleges, and employers to make more public commitments to reduce inequities in the job market. A strong partnership among these stakeholders offers the promise of a new post-pandemic paradigm. Reforms for both guided pathways (degree programs) and career pathways (career and technical training programs) have shown real promise in supporting learners in credential attainment. However, their ultimate goals and their typical student populations diverge. Guided pathways seek to build out structured systems that move students to completion of a degree with transfer value, or a job with economic promise. Although guided pathways have generated substantial movement toward education attainment for community college students, the focus has remained on sequences of courses rather than on program competencies grounded in the labor market. And guided pathways’ goals of improving equitable outcomes remain unfulfilled. Career pathways address the ways in which learners build and stack skills and credentials to address both immediate needs (jobs) and long-term economic prospects (careers). However, the promise of “stackable” credentials has not been fully realized (Bailey & Belfield, 2017), and such credentials are often inadequate if their skills and competencies are not explicitly vetted by employers or are not transferable to multiple contexts. Combining guided and career pathways approaches—grounded in competencies—and collaborating across sectors will promote wider access to education and training programs that go beyond college completion and ensure that students can directly apply learning to jobs and careers with labor market value. This will create a transformative marketplace that promotes equitable economic mobility. Higher education's shift in focus from college access to college completion, and from job attainment to economic mobility, will especially benefit learners and workers of color and low-income first-generation students. If we embrace equity as the object of this evolution, we will be addressing social problems on a broad level, using the education system as a mechanism for scale. The National Survey of Postsecondary Competency-Based Education (2018) asserted that “policymakers want to know whether CBE is expanding across institution types and what barriers are inhibiting growth as they consider whether and how to design policies that support or inhibit CBE expansion.” So we know that CBE is on the minds of federal policymakers, but they need to know what to do next. Successes in the past offer some guidance. When the United States makes a national commitment, as it did, for example, with the Apollo moon-landing program or the GI Bill, transformative results follow. The White House's executive order cited earlier marks a hopeful beginning toward a national approach to equitable education and economic advancement. We find another positive indicator of progress in the regulatory language around distance learning recently issued by the US Department of Education (2020). Among other things, the new regulations emphasize demonstrated learning over amount of time in class (i.e., seat time) and encourage employer participation in designing educational programs. We should build on initiatives like these with legislation that encourages employers to take a leadership role while supporting educators to find new ways to address the competency gap. Here are a few examples of what this might look like: To build an approach to the next generation of CBE—one that incorporates equitable economic mobility: Competency-based Equity-Centered Education (CBEE). We must look to the current reform landscape and identify what is working, what can be strengthened, and what efforts can be combined for deeper impact. The next generation of CBE should apply the strengths of past efforts, integrating them into a cohesive system and reporting the results nationwide. Two examples of lessons learned come from promising work by organizations leading CBE efforts at a national level. C-BEN (Competency-Based Education Network), the largest education network dedicated to CBE and the national leader in CBE quality standards, developed its Employer Engagement Best Practices Toolkit (2019) as a resource for institutions of higher education to establish industry partnerships. Educational institutions should work collaboratively with employers and industry to build out modularized curricula and share competency and assessment data. With tools like C-BEN’s employer toolkit, model CBE programs can be designed with input from employers and industry through a rigorous process based on defined standards for quality. Other important lessons coming out of CBE reform efforts are highlighted by the 2019 National Survey of Postsecondary Competency-Based Education, conducted by American Institutes for Research. The resulting report describes the continued growth of CBE programs nationwide and the overwhelming confidence that college leaders have in the CBE model. Yet the authors also recognize that the persistent internal and external barriers encountered by colleges require significant changes in policy and business practices to fulfill their potential impact and scale. The authors make a number of recommendations, including paying more attention to reporting completion and labor market outcomes for CBE students. They also advocate for “research about how and whether employers value the demonstration of competencies in CBE programs will continue to advance conversations about quality and the validation of programs in the labor market” (Mason & Parsons, 2019). Events in 2020 laid bare the inadequacies of our working-learning ecosystem and highlighted the urgency of fundamental transformation. The current patchwork of reform efforts will help, but it will not produce the results needed to support short- or long-term economic recovery. As we look to the next generation of CBEE—Competency-Based, Equity-Centered Education—we should aim for a more resilient, market-driven system that will aid in economic recovery, create a competitive advantage for the United States, and demonstrate a commitment to equitable solutions for low-income learners and people of color. Now is the time for a national mobilization of resources to develop a CBEE model as the foundation for a robust, resilient system tied to the labor market—all while reducing inequality and maximizing economic opportunity. The arrival of a new administration in Washington offers multiple opportunities to jump-start the proposed national commitment. For example, the initiative could be designated the Biden-Harris Program for Competency-Based, Equity-Centered Education, and the Vice President Kamala Harris and First Lady Jill Biden, who has a doctorate in educational leadership, could co-lead it. Vice President Harris has demonstrated a strong concern for underrepresented communities, and Dr. Biden has an abiding interest in community colleges, which have been proving grounds for CBE over the years. This national commitment speaks to many of the issues on which President Joe Biden ran for office, and it is an idea that might well attract bipartisan support. Even if the new administration does not adopt CBEE as a federal initiative, the need for a national commitment remains clear, and we are hopeful that its champions will eventually emerge. No conflicts declared.
The Journal of Competency-Based EducationVolume 6, Issue 4 e1262 p. 206-210 EMERGING ISSUESFree Access Competency-based education: Challenges and opportunities for accounting faculty Vicki M. Stewart, Corresponding Author Vicki M. Stewart Vicki.stewart@tamuc.edu Texas A & M University Commerce, Commerce, TX, USA Correspondence Vicki M. Stewart, Texas A & M University Commerce, Commerce, TX, USA. Email: Vicki.stewart@tamuc.eduSearch for more papers by this author Vicki M. Stewart, Corresponding Author Vicki M. Stewart Vicki.stewart@tamuc.edu Texas A & M University Commerce, Commerce, TX, USA Correspondence Vicki M. Stewart, Texas A & M University Commerce, Commerce, TX, USA. Email: Vicki.stewart@tamuc.eduSearch for more papers by this author First published: 22 September 2021 https://doi.org/10.1002/cbe2.1262AboutSectionsPDF ToolsRequest permissionExport citationAdd to favoritesTrack citation ShareShare Give accessShare full text accessShare full-text accessPlease review our Terms and Conditions of Use and check box below to share full-text version of article.I have read and accept the Wiley Online Library Terms and Conditions of UseShareable LinkUse the link below to share a full-text version of this article with your friends and colleagues. Learn more.Copy URL Share a linkShare onFacebookTwitterLinked InRedditWechat With student loans escalating out of control, yet the need for college degrees increasing for entry-level jobs, competency-based education (CBE) is gaining traction with students, universities, and the government as one solution to reducing costs and accelerating degree completion. Universities typically work with specific industry leaders and employers to define competencies geared toward marketable skills, as one goal of CBE is to focus learning on knowledge and skills students can utilize immediately upon entering the workforce (Voorhees, 2001). The flexibility of competency-based education allows students to quickly finish courses through direct assessment of competencies that they may have prior learning experiences in or spend extra time beyond the regular semester if needed for mastery while saving substantially on tuition (Selingo, 2013). Many of these programs target non-traditional students who may have started a business degree but never finished it (Dragoo & Barrows, 2016). At the same time, accounting organizations, accreditors, and businesses are calling for accounting curriculum changes to incorporate core competencies reflecting the skills that accounting graduates need in the twenty-first century. Lawson et al. (2014), citing the need for accountants to play more significant roles in organizations, emphasized that competencies should be integrated into the curriculum much as they are in organizations. However, competency-based education and curriculum require a paradigm change in teaching and learning that comes with challenges for accounting faculty but also provides opportunities. Knowledge of best practices for CBE from the literature, including experiences of other accounting educators who have developed and implemented competency-based learning into their courses, can ease the transition and foster dialogue about the use of broader CBE concepts in accounting courses. 1 COMPETENCY-BASED EDUCATION No one definition of competency-based education is universally accepted. However, the Competency-Based Education Network (2021) offers one endorsed by this group of regionally accredited institutions, employers, and CBE experts that collaborate in overcoming challenges associated with CBE while unlocking its potential for a more flexible, responsive, and valuable education: Competency-based education combines an intentional and transparent approach to curricular design with an academic model in which the time it takes to demonstrate competencies varies, and the expectations about learning are held constant. Students acquire and demonstrate their knowledge and skills by engaging in learning exercises, activities, and experiences that align with clearly defined programmatic outcomes. Students receive proactive guidance and support from faculty and staff. Learners earn credentials by demonstrating mastery through multiple forms of assessment, often at a personalized pace. Burnett (2016) emphasized that CBE focuses on the individual student with interdisciplinary content informed by industry needs. CBE programs, as defined by the Department of Education (DOE), can take different forms. For example, they can include traditional courses, provide a direct assessment of competencies after enrollment, or permit simultaneous enrollment in both a traditional and a CBE course. For example, a course can be administered very much like a traditional course with competencies embedded in the course and achievement based on time and credits earned. However, CBE programs can be radically different, involving direct assessment without regard to seat time or credit hours (Cunningham et al., 2016). 1.1 History and progression of CBE Competency-based education is not new but began in the 1970s as a method to train manufacturing workers in specific skills needed to complete a job and in teacher training programs in tasks useful in the classroom (Gervais, 2016; Gonczi, 1999). However, when introduced in the university setting, CBE students were often poorly supervised, and the courses were more expensive than initially planned. Consequently, these early CBE courses suffered from high drop-out rates and were not particularly popular with students or faculty (Gallagher, 2014). Later, in the 1990s, Western Governors University (WGU), by itself and later in collaboration with the State of Indiana, began to introduce courses with competency assessment as a cost-effective method of delivering courses online for minority, low-income, adult students (Cunningham et al., 2016; McDonald, 2018). WGU has grown from one student in 1998 to 129,169 full-time students in 2020, and its experience with the CBE model has contributed significantly to knowledge in implementing CBE curriculums (Soares, 2012; Western Governors University, 2020). Starting in 2013, WGU worked with several community colleges in various parts of the country to start their own CBE programs with funding from the U.S. Department of Labor to train military veterans and other displaced workers with specialized skills in high-tech areas (Rainwater, 2016). 1.2 Accreditation and financial aid of CBE Guidelines for meeting accreditation and financial aid requirements for CBE classes announced in 2015 by the Council for Regional Accrediting Commissions provided a framework for accreditation and assessment of students' Satisfactory Academic Progress for Title IV funding (Eaton, 2016). This announcement came just before the Department of Education (DOE) began working with 65 universities around the country to determine best practices for CBE (Cunningham et al., 2016). The DOE ended the CBE experiment in 2019, stating that it had received enough information to make informed policy decisions and issue regulations (Fain, 2019). Department of Education guidelines allow colleges to charge tuition at fixed amounts per term instead of per credit hour (Eaton, 2016). However, universities that choose to use competency-based courses must ensure that they provide proof of substantial faculty involvement with students in the courses as well as students' satisfactory academic progress to meet DOE guidelines. Western Governors University was cited at one point by the DOE for not providing substantial faculty involvement in their courses when they chose to separate instructional roles to reduce costs with different employees teaching, evaluating, and mentoring students (McDonald, 2018). A final negotiated rule on Distance Education and Innovation became effective on July 1, 2021, that clarified that regular interaction is that which takes place on a predictable and scheduled basis, and substantive interaction requires at least two of five teaching activities take place in a course, including direct instruction, providing feedback, responding to questions, facilitating group discussion, or providing other instructional activities approved by accrediting agencies (Williams, 2020). 1.3 Course development and assessment for CBE The first step in CBE course development is identifying relevant and valid competencies with a focus on the attainment of marketable skills in close collaboration with industry standards and potential employers. Next, faculty develop rubrics determining the relevant skills necessary to show mastery of the competency for assessment while also establishing validity (Curry & Docherty, 2017). An academic team should translate the competencies into courses of the appropriate size and length with learning outcomes and associated course materials derived from existing courses or developed independently (Dragoo & Barrows, 2016; Johnston & Soares, 2014). Choice of course materials is critical because the students will be learning at their own pace and require appropriate feedback and support (Monat & Gannon, 2018). Newer CBE courses frequently use adaptive learning and simulations utilizing computer technology that automatically allows students to determine what they already know or need to learn as they work toward mastery, but courses that require teamwork or frequent student-teacher interaction are less suitable for automation (Cunningham et al., 2016; Monat & Gannon, 2018). Based on its experience, WGU recommends that institutions, rather than individual instructors, work with publishers in course design (Johnstone & Soares, 2014). Assessments should be mapped back to the competencies to determine when the student has mastered the knowledge, behavior, skills, abilities, or values desired with emphasis on transparency. If the course allows credit for direct assessment, the student may take the assessment immediately and, after proving mastery, move on to the next module (Burnett, 2016). Ideally, a pilot should be performed before full course implementation to verify that assessments work as planned (Monat & Gannon, 2018). Students should receive timely feedback on assessments, preferably within 24 hr, from the evaluator (Johnstone & Soares, 2014; Rainwater, 2016). Assessments can be in common with traditional courses, if necessary, to translate competencies into credit hours (Dragoo & Barrows, 2016). Assessments can take two forms, either formative to show how much the student has learned or needs to practice, or summative to show mastery of a competency and allow the student to move on to the next module (Gervais, 2016). Assessments can also help to track when students need intervention and to meet federal financial aid requirements, such as proof of satisfactory on-time progress and substantial interaction between students and faculty (Johnstone & Soares, 2014; McDonald, 2018). Assessments must be reliable and secure with technology incorporated for detecting plagiarism and preventing dissemination of content on the internet (Johnstone & Soares, 2014). 1.4 Faculty development for CBE Faculty plays an essential role in CBE course development, implementation, and delivery; and there can be resistance because of the considerable time and effort required to restructure traditional courses (Gervais, 2016). Adequate faculty development is key to reducing faculty resistance and is needed in both CBE and technology, such as learning management, assessment, and course delivery systems. There are several different methods available for technology training, including self-study, online courses, one-on-one assistance from a CBE expert, telephone conferences, webinars, and mentoring by another faculty member (Echols et al., 2018). Training in curriculum and program design before deployment of CBE courses can often take a year and include consulting with experts, attending conferences, reading materials, and sharing information with other faculty members (Dragoo & Barrows, 2016). 1.5 Costs and benefits of CBE Competency-based education presents significant challenges to faculty in terms of course development, which often involves a backward process from competencies to material and takes considerable time. Students require timely support to successfully navigate through courses at an accelerated pace (Rainwater, 2016). Students unfamiliar with CBE courses may procrastinate, making monitoring of satisfactory performance and appropriate assistance in the course necessary (Johnstone & Soares, 2014). However, developing CBE courses can present opportunities for faculty, such as developing relevant, real-world content that is often reusable in traditional courses (Rainwater, 2016). Development of competencies with input from industry and course revisions based on feedback from former students helps ensure relevant courses that meet current expectations for new employees (Curry & Docherty, 2017; Johnstone & Soares, 2014). Students are most successful in CBE courses when they are disciplined, self-directed, and motivated to succeed (Dragoo & Barrows, 2016; Gallagher, 2014). Careful admissions policies and orientation programs are essential to ensuring that students succeed in self-paced accelerated courses (Dragoo & Barrows, 2016; Johnstone & Soares, 2014). Besides the cost and time savings of CBE, students cited flexible start times, prior experience credit, and relevant material as positive aspects of these programs. However, students taking competency-based courses just to become credentialed for past work experience or knowledge may become frustrated with courses designed for learning the material (Monat & Gannon, 2018). Faculty expressed that although time-consuming to set up, they found CBE competencies to work so well they included them in their non-CBE courses (Rainwater, 2016). 2 CHALLENGES AND OPPORTUNITIES FOR ACCOUNTING FACULTY Accounting educators are being urged to focus on competencies learned rather than principles taught. The American Accounting Association (AAA), an organization of accounting educators, has called for the integration of core competencies across the accounting curriculum in response to the increasingly complex global environment of the twenty-first century (Lawson et al., 2014). The International Accounting Education Standards Board (IAESB), which develops standards for members of the International Federation of Accountants (IFAC), an international accounting organization, has endorsed a broad framework of competencies in accounting education, training, and certification programs (Borgonovo et al., 2019). 2.1 History of competencies in accounting Integration of competencies is not new to accounting education. In 2012, the Pathways Commission, a collaboration between the American Accounting Association and the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants (AICPA), incorporated core competencies into a framework (Borgonovo et al., 2019). This framework identified five foundational competencies, including communication; quantitative, analytical thinking and problem solving; interpersonal and technological skills, which all accountants should have (Borgonovo et al., 2019; Lawson et al., 2014). The AICPA later expanded the framework to include competencies in risk assessment, measurement analysis, research skills, systems management, and technology tools (AICPA, 2019). Since 1999, the Association to Advance Collegiate Schools of Business (AACSB), the preeminent accreditor of business schools internationally, has supported competency-based education with student outcomes assessment as part of the accreditation accounting review (Daigle et al., 2007). There are many reasons why universities have been slow to embrace competency-based education within the accounting curriculum. Abbasi (2013) cites the fact that curriculum changes are always slow, and administrators are often unwilling to enact change. However, he also gives many reasons that specifically involve faculty, such as lack of sound pedagogy and faculty development as well as the absence of rewards for faculty innovation in curriculum. Developing the courses based on the frameworks is time-consuming and expensive since it must be done for both undergraduate and graduate courses and across disciplines with accounting and non-accounting faculty (Borgonovo et al., 2019). Assessments that are cost-effective and reliable are challenging because they may require the use of teams of faculty evaluators, which involves significant resources for universities with tight budgets (Lawson et al., 2014; Sharifi et al., 2009). The need to develop the competencies is evident, however. One reason is that the skills that accountants are needing are continually changing and evolving (Daigle et al., 2007). Technical knowledge, while necessary, does not reflect the breadth of the professional accountants' duties that often involve critical thinking and judgment that cannot be learned through a knowledge-based system (Borgonovo et al., 2019). These broader competencies are essential as accountants are being tasked with managerial roles in strategic planning that involves advising top management in making complex interdisciplinary decisions (Lawson et al., 2014). The skills that students need as their careers advance require core competencies, including advanced problem-solving skills learned in relevant contexts (van den Brink et al., 2003). 2.2 Examples of competency-based accounting courses Responding to the need despite the apparent challenges, accounting educators are experimenting with competency-based accounting courses. One example is that of a management accounting competency-based course from the Open University of the Netherlands designed to give students real-life problem-solving skills. Van den Brink et al. (2003) emphasized that managerial accounting students need to have a variety of competencies that they can draw upon in their career that no textbook can teach them. Using 15 cases that become increasingly complex, the students research the literature on their own, much the way a manager would in real life. The course assessment consists of determining if the students' case reports (25%) and examinations (75%) exhibit management accounting knowledge and problem-solving competencies. The authors' website assists the students and is frequently updated based on feedback from the students. However, the teacher no longer lectures on content but becomes more of a tutor or mentor to the students, guiding them as they work through the course. Students, dismayed at first by the course structure, eventually became enthusiastic, and many related that they continued to use the skills after graduation. Two courses from the Spanish University of Extremadura involving managerial and financial accounting illustrate CBE course development. Frameworks from both the AICPA and the IAESB were used to identify core competencies for inclusion in both courses (Ciudad-Gomez, 2011; Gomez & Berrocoso, 2012). Ciudad-Gomez (2011) described the process of constructing a module for the financial accounting class based on competencies linked to presenting, preparing, and understanding financial statements. After determining the competencies, the next step involved choosing sub-competencies and skills attributable to each along with an assessment rubric to determine achievement of qualitative aspects of the competencies. Gomez and Berrocoso (2012) determined that evaluating qualitative aspects of competency achievement was one of the more challenging aspects of course assessment. Rubrics helped to indicate the level of competency achieved by the student for the course. The management and financial accounting modules in both face-to-face and online classes utilized the university's Moodle learning management system, which facilitated assessing competencies in the courses. Two accounting professors at the University of Sam Houston in Texas designed a competency-based accounting information systems class around the AICPA's core-competency framework (Daigle et al., 2007). The authors' reason for using this framework was that it had the benefit of prior acceptance by the profession that these competencies were deemed necessary for the students' future careers. The framework also had the added benefit of being approved by the AACSB for accreditation purposes. The students knew from the beginning of the course that the competencies were valuable for their future careers. Both assignments and assessments were mapped to the competencies to provide transparency for grades and the AACSB review. After the course, the students' self-assessment of their skills increased, CPA exam scores increased, and the AACSB accreditation review was successful. 3 CONCLUSIONS While slow to change, the educational system has taken some tentative steps toward responding to the call for competency-based education that provides students with marketable skills desired by industry. As competency-based education grows, the knowledge gained from research on best practices can play an essential role in helping to improve the curriculum in all educational fields. There is every reason to believe that the future of education will include courses that are flexible to the needs of non-traditional students and represent significant cost savings. While not for every student, there is a need for adults who have substantial work experience to move through course material at their own pace, saving valuable time and money (Selingo, 2013). Proper screening of potential students is necessary to ensure that they are a good fit for these programs. As these examples illustrate, accounting faculty using established frameworks from professional accounting organizations have successfully developed competency-based accounting classes that meet the needs of students entering the profession. Faculty need adequate training and development in competency-based education to overcome the challenges of adopting broader competency-based education concepts, such as direct assessment, into their courses, but there would also be substantial benefits to students and faculty. As the literature illustrates, leveraging technology is critical not only for instruction but also for transparent assessment of competencies that meet accreditation and financial aid requirements. Changing the accounting curriculum to competencies learned rather than just knowledge taught will not be easy but is necessary to prepare students with the skills that the profession requires and their future careers demand. As Daigle et al. (2007) put it so well, shifting the focus in accounting to teaching competencies is like the adage of "teaching a man to fish" rather than just giving him a fish (p. 151). CONFLICTS OF INTEREST No conflicts of interest exist. Biography Vicki M. Stewart, CPA, is an instructor in accounting at Texas A & M University-Commerce (TAMUC) as well as a doctoral student in the Higher Education department. Prior to coming to TAMUC in 2016, she taught accounting as an adjunct for 10 years, mostly online, while working as a Foreign Audit Specialist with the Alabama Department of Revenue before retiring in 2015. Open Research DATA AVAILABILITY STATEMENT Data sharing not applicable to this article as no datasets were generated or analyzed during the current study. REFERENCES Abbasi, N. (2013). Competency approach to accounting education: A global view. Journal of Finance and Accountancy, 13(1), 1– 18. Google Scholar American Institute of Certified Public Accountants (2019). The AICPA pre-certification core competency framework. Retrieved July 5, 2019, from: https://www.aicpa.org/content/dam/aicpa/interestareas/accountingeducation/resources/downloadabledocuments/aicpa-pre-certification-core-compentency-framework.pdfGoogle Scholar Borgonovo, A., Friedrich, B., & Wells, M. (2019). Competency-based accounting education, training, and certification: An implementation guide. Retrieved July 5, 2019, from: https://www.pulsarprogram.org/sites/pulsar/files/libdocs/CBAET_Guide_Final_Web.pdfCrossrefGoogle Scholar Burnette, D. M. (2016). The renewal of competency-based education: A review of the literature. The Journal of Continuing Higher Education, 64(2), 84– 93. https://doi.org/10.1080/07377363.2016.1177704CrossrefWeb of Science®Google Scholar Ciudad-Gomez, A. (2011). Design of the accounting course focusing on the development of competencies. Journal of International Education Research (JIER), 7(5), 15. https://doi.org/10.19030/jier.v7i5.6112CrossrefGoogle Scholar Competency-Based Education Network (2021). What is competency-based education?. cbenetwork.org. Retrieved from: https://www.cbenetwork.org/competency-based-education/Google Scholar Cunningham, J., Key, E., & Capron, R. (2016). An evaluation of competency-based education programs: A study of the development process of competency-based programs. The Journal of Competency-Based Education, 1(3), 130– 139. https://doi.org/10.1002/cbe2.1025Wiley Online LibraryGoogle Scholar Curry, L., & Docherty, M. (2017). Implementing competency-based education. Collected Essays on Learning and Teaching, 10, 61– 73. https://doi.org/10.22329/celt.v10i0.4716CrossrefGoogle Scholar Daigle, R. J., Hayes, D. C., & Hughes, K. E. (2007). Assessing student learning outcomes in the introductory accounting information systems course using the AICPA's core competency framework. Journal of Information Systems, 21(1), 149– 169. https://doi.org/10.2308/jis.2007.21.1.149CrossrefGoogle Scholar Dragoo, A., & Barrows, R. (2016). Implementing competency-based education: Challenges, strategies, and a decision-making framework. The Journal of Continuing Higher Education, 64(2), 73– 83. https://doi.org/10.1080/07377363.2016.1172193CrossrefWeb of Science®Google Scholar Eaton, J. S. (2016). Accreditation and competency-based education. The Journal of Competency-Based Education, 1(1), 12– 16. https://doi.org/10.1002/cbe2.1006Wiley Online LibraryGoogle Scholar Echols, D. G., Neely, P. W., & Dusick, D. (2018). Understanding faculty training in competency-based curriculum development. The Journal of Competency-Based Education, 3(2), e01162-n/a. https://doi.org/10.1002/cbe2.1162Wiley Online LibraryGoogle Scholar Fain, P. (2019). Feds drop experiment on competency-based ed. Insidehighered.com. Retrieved from: https://www.insidehighered.com/quicktakes/2019/12/16/feds-drop-experiment-competency-based-edGoogle Scholar Gallagher, C. W. (2014). Disrupting the game-changer: Remembering the history of competency-based education. Change: The Magazine of Higher Learning, 46(6), 16– 23. https://doi.org/10.1080/00091383.2014.969177CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar Gervais, J. (2016). The operational definition of competency-based education. The Journal of Competency-Based Education, 1(2), 98– 106. https://doi.org/10.1002/cbe2.1011Wiley Online LibraryGoogle Scholar Gomez, A. C., & Berrocoso, J. V. (2012). Design of A competency-based assessment model in the field of accounting. Contemporary Issues in Education Research (CIER), 5(5), 343. https://doi.org/10.19030/cier.v5i5.7466CrossrefGoogle Scholar Gonczi, A. (1999). 12 Competency-based learning. Understanding learning at work, 180. Google Scholar Johnstone, S. M., & Soares, L. (2014). Principles for developing competency-based education programs. Change: The Magazine of Higher Learning, 46(2), 12– 19. https://doi.org/10.1080/00091383.2014.896705CrossrefGoogle Scholar Lawson, R. A., Blocher, E. J., Brewer, P. C., Cokins, G., Sorensen, J. E., Stout, D. E., Sundem, G. L., Wolcott, S. K., & Wouters, M. J. F. (2014). Focusing accounting curricula on students' long-run careers: Recommendations for an integrated competency-based framework for accounting education. Issues in Accounting Education, 29(2), 295– 317. https://doi.org/10.2308/iace-50673CrossrefGoogle Scholar McDonald, N. A. (2018). A private, nonprofit university's experiences designing a competency-based degree for adult learners. The Journal of Continuing Higher Education, 66(1), 34– 45. https://doi.org/10.1080/07377363.2018.1415632CrossrefWeb of Science®Google Scholar Monat, J. P., & Gannon, T. F. (2018). Two professors' experience with competency-based education. The Journal of Competency-Based Education, 3(2), e01061. https://doi.org/10.1002/cbe2.1061Wiley Online LibraryGoogle Scholar Rainwater, T. S. M. (2016). Teaching and learning in competency-based education courses and programs: Faculty and student perspectives. The Journal of Competency-Based Education, 1(1), 42– 47. https://doi.org/10.1002/cbe2.1008Wiley Online LibraryGoogle Scholar Selingo, J. J. (2013). College (un)bound: The future of higher education and what it means for students. Houghton Mifflin Harcourt. Google Scholar Sharifi, M., McCombs, G. B., Fraser, L. L., & McCabe, R. K. (2009). Structuring a competency-based accounting communication course at the graduate level. Business Communication Quarterly, 72(2), 177– 199. https://doi.org/10.1177/1080569909334052CrossrefGoogle Scholar Soares, L. (2012). A disruptive look at competency-based education. Centre for American Progress. Google Scholar van den Brink, H., Kokke, K., de Loo, I., Nederlof, P., & Verstegen, B. (2003). Teaching management accounting in a competencies-based fashion. Accounting Education, 12(3), 245– 259. https://doi.org/10.1080/0963928032000130202CrossrefGoogle Scholar Voorhees, R. A. (2001). Competency-Based learning models: A necessary future. New Directions for Institutional Research, 2001(110), 5– 13. https://doi.org/10.1002/ir.7Wiley Online LibraryGoogle Scholar Western Governors University (2020). Annual Report for 2020. Retrieved from: https://www.wgu.edu/content/dam/western-governors/documents/annual-report/2020-annual-report-compressed.pdfGoogle Scholar Williams, L. (2020). U.S. Department of Education issues final rules on distance education and innovation. NC-Sara.org. Retrieved from: https://nc-sara.org/news-events/us-department-education-issues-final-rules-distance-education-and-innovationGoogle Scholar Volume6, Issue4December 2021Pages 206-210 ReferencesRelatedInformation
The advent of COVID-19 and subsequent social disruption has exacerbated existing nursing workforce shortages. As nursing education programs and healthcare providers struggle to meet the care needs of their respective communities, the ever-present challenge of replenishing nursing candidates persists--particularly when those candidates face financial hardships to complete their education. In an effort to mitigate financial hardships, competency-based education (CBE) nursing offers the opportunity for students to self-pace their learning and potentially complete their education more quickly. In addition to CBE programs typically being more affordable that traditional "seat time" credit-based programs, students can potentially yield even more significant savings. Therefore, considering some healthcare providers, accreditors, and candidates may be concerned with CBE program quality, this study assesses the merit of that assertion. Through a comparative of analysis of Western Governors University's (WGU) CBE Nursing Program to similar traditional education state nursing programs, this research finds that CBE nursing programs can reduce cost while maintaining or even improving program quality by a measure of NCLEX pass rates.
Historical research shows that influencing student motivation is a factor in achieving academic success. The use of a competency-based educational (CBE) model provides a challenge in recognition of students who exceed the competency requirements of a given task or written paper. This study provides the opportunity to see if providing formal recognition of excellence in a student's work would improve their academic resilience and persistence in a CBE model. This is a retrospective longitudinal qualitative and quantitative study of all award recipients from August 2016 to August 2019, with a content analysis and correlation research investigation. Content analysis of 11,664 grateful responses showed 15.6% students receiving the excellence award who were on the verge of withdrawing their enrollment, decided to continue their studies and were more motivated. Quantitative analysis ( n = 30,340) comparing students receiving an excellent award with those who did not, showed the students who were awarded had a significant overall lift of 10.9% in persistence ( p < .01), with students in the lower quartile as the ones with the most lift in persistence (20.23%, p < .01). Subsequent data analysis validated initial findings (10 weeks: 5.9% persistence lift, p < .01, n = 27,510; 20 weeks: 3.6% persistence lift, p < .01, n = 27,490). The study's results are significant and have shown that student recognition positively impacts student retention and academic success. The results of this research investigation provide quantifiable and qualitative evidence that adds to the literature and contributes additional factors in the domain of competency-based education by which future research can proceed.
As editors, we had excellent reasons to create a special edition on the future of learning and work long before the COVID-19 pandemic swept across the world, leading to massive levels of death and unemployment that has unproportionally impacted Black, Latinx, and people of color. As this introduction is written, the rationale seems even more compelling for a special issue focused on the role of competencies in workforce and economic recovery. The pandemic’s impact on society has revealed fissures in all of our social systems, but education stands out as especially fragile. In spite of monumental efforts toward improvement in the past several decades, our education infrastructure is simply not providing equitable, workforce-aligned, student-centered learning for too many of our Black, Latinx, people of color, and low-income students and workers. Many of us knew all about this failing before COVID-19, but now the awareness has spread to every household, school, occupation, and community. As tragic as the onset of the virus has been, educators would be remiss if we did not take this opportunity to advocate for dramatic improvement. Unfortunately, social system transformation rarely happens in good times; usually when the old ways clearly become dysfunctional are people willing to consider alternatives. The alternatives are there and have been for many years: Competency-based education (CBE) offers a path to better, more fair pedagogy and careers with value for more learners—but only if educators and employers come together to implement them. Several common themes are interwoven throughout the issue. Assessing the pandemic’s impact is, of course, necessary and unavoidable. It is a unique historical event in which the entire world has been simultaneously affected. However, it is also a familiar story in that different populations have suffered in unequal ways. Linked to this fact, and not surprisingly, a concern for equity presents itself in almost every article. The uneven impact of COVID-19 has illuminated class and racial divides that can no longer be ignored. Unlike the virus, equity has been all too easy to overlook for many with more privileged race and economic backgrounds. Now, however, it shouts for attention. A long-standing challenge makes yet another appearance in these pages: Close collaboration between educators and employers emerges as perhaps the missing piece of the entire puzzle. We must create clearly defined pathways from the classroom to the workplace (in person or virtual), and learners must know how to follow them to a job or career. Educators can “buy into” the CBE mindset and make dramatic changes in their programs, but if there are no good jobs at the “end of that rainbow,” the whole effort, time, and expense will be for naught. Learners and workers who are already in despair over their situations will grow ever more cynical about the system’s concern (or lack thereof) for them. Finally, there is the big question: If these alternatives have been available all along, why have they not been implemented on a much wider scale? Is it only the lack of a crisis that has hindered development? The foundational document in this issue, from Clawson and Girardi of Jobs for the Future, argues that there is another variable: the lack of a sustained national commitment to competency-based, equity-centered education (CBEE). In calling for such a commitment, JFF reflects that the United States has been able to achieve great things when we have worked toward a unifying goal as a country. What could be more appropriate for a new administration whose president’s inaugural address focused on unity? Of course, if the recommendations of all our authors were followed, it would go far in meeting the crisis outlined here. However, these initiatives will remain incremental until a national framework boosts a cohesive movement that captures the strengths of each one of them and many others. Synergies among the various efforts could result in innovations we cannot, at this time, predict. Policy is outside the scope of our compilation, but we can hope that education, business, and economic advocates of the Biden administration might turn their attention to the issues we have raised here. Perhaps, with an educator as First Lady, it may be possible that a national commitment to CBE would become this generation’s “moonshot.” We certainly hope so. For now, I would like to thank our authors for contributing their attention to these important issues during a challenging time for families and communities. I also extend my appreciation to the Associate Editors for their gift of time and talent in helping create a quality special issue: Richard Barnes, Ashley Bliss-Lima, Allen C. Clarkson, Alton James, and Dr. Mara Lockowandt.
Competency- Based Education (CBE) programs have developed differently within higher education and medical education systems, yet both systems face challenges when bridging the gap between theory and practice. Both medicine and higher education face the challenge of adapting CBE programs for learners who begin the program with different configurations of knowledge and skillsets and learn at different rates. Additional challenges include, but are not limited to standard setting, time variability within programs for student learning, defining competencies, and training faculty to develop and assess CBE programs. This article argues there is much higher education programs can learn about defining competencies, assessing performance, and curriculum design by understanding how CBE is implemented in medical education. We also provide an overview of how CBE in medical education (CBE- ME) has evolved compared to CBE in higher education (CBE- HE), including examples of how medical education has addressed defining competency issues, assessing competence, and standard setting.
AbstractContextAll Canadian postgraduate medical programs are implementing the major components of competency‐based education. To do so, our institution had to provide individualized training and monitoring for all our programs.InnovationWe organized half‐day workshops with four work sessions: core competencies, competency portfolio, curriculum mapping, and competence committee. Program teams decided their priority tasks after each work session. We classified tasks into ADDIE pedagogical design stages (Analysis, Design, Development, Implementation, Evaluation). We conducted interviews at 12 months.ResultsPrograms (n = 29) prioritized mainly tasks of Design (37% of tasks), Development (24%) and Analysis (21%). At 12‐month follow‐up (n = 17), 20% of the tasks were initiated, 22% reached a higher stage, 33% reaching Implementation/Evaluation. Programs needed material and financial resources for Analysis/Development tasks, and faculty training for Implementation/Evaluation tasks.ConclusionWork sessions provided a structure to commit to priority tasks. Their classification into ADDIE stages systematized the monitoring and the search for solutions.
The novel coronavirus has dramatically altered teaching and learning for the foreseeable future. In addition to economic and workforce effects, the present predicts gaps from learning deficiencies for all current K‐12 students (Education Journal, 2021). Therefore, the direct syllogism anticipates fewer numbers of qualified college applicants in the coming generation. Thus, bold action can mitigate negative potential future social disruption impacts. Virtual practitioner training, license and program reciprocity, and interdisciplinary studies can ensure quality practitioner mobility and the ability to meet the workforce needs of all fields across the nation—at local, state, regional, and national levels.
This Volume 6 second issue follows on the heels of JCBE’s special issue on The Future of Learning & Work: How Focusing on Competencies will Support Equitable Economic Recovery. I want to thank Stacey Clawson from Jobs For the Future (JFF) for her tireless efforts as the guest editor-in-chief as well as her colleagues, Ashley Bliss Lima and Mara Lockowandt, for their support as guest Associate Editors. What a wonderful way for JCBE to kick off 2021 and Volume 6. This issue contains four themed miniclusters with seven manuscripts of original research, one commentary, one article on an emerging issue, and one additional editorial (aside from the one I am writing at this moment). It is such an interesting mix of ideas, discoveries, questions, and perspectives! The first minicluster consists of two manuscripts focused on health care and an editorial with recommendations for the future related to CBE. The first manuscript by Dr. Vasquez from the Van Andel Institute and his colleagues at the University of Michigan delve deeply into the foundations of Competency-Based Medical Education (CBME) in contrast with Competency-Based Higher Education (CBHE) in their article entitled The parallel evolution of CBE in medical and higher education. The authors examine issues of affordability, access goals, barriers to CBE, and a discussion of assessment and standards setting work in CBME. The second article continues with the healthcare theme by exploring how CBE nursing programs successfully reduce costs and maintain or improve the quality of education as measured by NCLEX pass rates. The authors, Dr. Hossler and his colleague, Dr. James, at Western Governors University, underscore the importance of evaluating quality, cost, and time to completion as measures of CBE effectiveness in their article entitled Competency-based nursing: Reducing cost while maintaining or improving quality. This minicluster of healthcare themed articles concludes with an editorial by Dr. James entitled Three US post-COVID legislative, regulatory, and higher education recommendations: Future considerations for policy, compliance, accreditation and curricula. The author proposes three recommendations showing how CBE can positively impact college enrollment declines resulting from educational disruption due to COVID-19. The second minicluster of manuscripts relates to the High School to College journey with an article of original research, a commentary, and an emerging issue. Mr. McPherson explores the experiences of middle and high school teachers in his article entitled A Metamorphosis of an Educator: A hermeneutic phenomenology study of the perceptions and lived experiences of the 6-12 educator in transitioning from teacher-centered to student-centered Learning. Situated in the mastery-based learning context in Idaho, the author explores changes in philosophy of education, methods of teaching, and teacher–student relationships that occur when shifting from teacher- to student-centered practices. The second manuscript is a commentary by Dr. Gauthier on the need to think about career and technical program content and facilitation in his article entitled Community college pathways conflict. His assertion is that more blended and flexible pathways are needed to connect competencies across disciplines and apply to core content. The minicluster concludes with an emerging issue by Mr. Carlgren entitled Competency-based curriculum transition: A conceptual framework. The author examines the boundary between high school and college through the lenses of policy, practice, and process. The framework may be a useful tool for designing curriculum when incorporating competencies that lead to changes in educational practice. The third minicluster addresses issues related to assessment in CBE. In the first manuscript, Dr Lafave and colleagues at the Mount Royal University faculty of Health and Community Studies in Alberta, Canada, speak to evidence-informed practice (EIP) in undergraduate healthcare education in their manuscript entitled Concept mapping towards competency: Teaching and assessing undergraduate evidence-informed practice. The authors review CBE methodology and introduce concept mapping as a strategy to deepen student understanding of a critical competency in health care. The reliability and validity of the grading rubric is also presented. The second manuscript also presents a validity study by Dr. Hayes and colleagues at Western Governors University entitled Transparency of cognitive complexity in performance assessment: A validity study. The author discusses the difference in cognitive complexity presented to student in a performance assessment prompt as compared to its scoring rubric. The author suggests that a good quality rubric is a valuable student aid to demonstrating competency. The fourth and final minicluster contains two manuscripts of original research coming from diverse settings and fields of practice. The first manuscript by Dr. Ahmed at the Assiut University and colleague, Dr. Sayed from Sohag University, presents the process of developing Competency-Based Training (CBT) of teachers in an article entitled An extensive model for implementing competency-based training (CBT) in TVET teacher training system for Assiut-ITEC, Egypt. The authors discuss improvements in education and training teacher competencies to develop facilitation skills and teaching practices underpinned by a description of the training curriculum and its assessment. The final manuscript by Dr. Rawboon and colleagues in Japan and Thailand is entitled Future competencies for three demanding careers of industry 4.0: Robotic engineers, data scientists, and food designers. What an intriguing way to conclude this issue by identifying the competencies for each of these careers and by pointing us toward the future of CBE as it broadens and deepens its impact on these promising career opportunities.
AbstractCOVID‐19 has accelerated changes that were already underway in the American economy, such as the increasing displacement of workers by automation, the exponential evolution of industries due to technical advancements (the Fourth Industrial Revolution), and a widening skills gap and attainment deficit in the American workforce. As a result, adult workers and their employers will increasingly demand efficient, reputable, and customizable pathways to quickly reskill and upskill. This paper will use the UW Flexible Option as a case study for how traditional universities can build competency‐based programs to help adults rapidly meet changing workforce needs. The UW Flexible Option's design is an exemplar of wrap‐around support services; a flexible academic calendar; integrated and efficient curriculum design; effective assessment of competence against articulated learning outcomes; project‐based learning tied to workplace competencies; and tuition policies and financial aid delivery tailored to adult learners. The design will be explored through a case study of one of our programs, the Bachelor of Science in Business Administration. Massive economic change will soon displace workers on a scale not yet seen, and higher education has a responsibility to ensure those individuals get back into the workforce with the appropriate skills. Institutions of higher education will need to innovate to rise to the occasion, and competency‐based education is one such pathway.
AbstractBackgroundDespite large amounts of research documenting, the transition to student‐centered learning from the perspective of the student, minimal literature exists describing the lived experience, and perceptions of Idaho teachers and principals when transitioning from teacher‐centered to student‐centered learning.AimThe purpose of this study was to explore in specific detail the perceptions and lived experiences of Idaho teachers and building principals in transitioning to student‐centered learning, and thereby assists in filling in the literature gaps surrounding this topic. Six middle and high school teachers and four building principals were asked to describe and reflect on their perceptions and lived experiences in transitioning from teacher‐centered to student‐centered learning.MethodsThis hermeneutical, qualitative phenomenological study used a constructivist theoretical framework to assist the researcher in identifying and conveying each participant's deep, rich experience. In‐depth interviews were used to gather responses, and the data were transcribed and coded into three major themes, with keywords and terms from the participants supporting each theme.Results and DiscussionThe three themes that emerged when identifying and describing the perceptions and lived experiences of the participants in transitioning to student‐centered learning were a shift in philosophy of education, changes in methods and pedagogy, and the importance of relationships between teachers, principals, and students.ConclusionKey findings from the study suggest that in order to effectively transition from teacher‐centered to student‐centered education, cognitive changes in an educator's philosophy and mindset, along with social adjustments addressing relationships, connections, and experiences must be recognized and even embraced.
AbstractIndividuals need the shortest path to opportunity and employers require the shortest path to a skilled diverse workforce. To solve for this, Western Governors University (WGU) has created a skills‐based architecture to map our competencies and credentials to high‐demand knowledge, and technical skills as well as powerful, enduring, employability skills like critical thinking, social‐emotional intelligence, creativity, and the ability to work with diverse collaborators. At WGU, these high‐demand industry‐relevant skills are mapped into educational experiences and credentials to better support the upskilling and reskilling needs required for our dramatically altered job market. WGU also intends to surface these skills and competency achievements to employers, thereby facilitating a more efficient and effective match of talent to opportunity. This skills‐based architecture enables WGU to create new in‐demand program offerings, better supporting underserved populations through new pathways and onramps to education while the alignment to skills ensures pathways to careers and a strong return on investment for students.
AbstractBackgroundUndergraduate students in healthcare professions need to develop critical thinking skills in order to be prepared to deliver patient‐centered high‐quality care upon graduation. The new Canadian Athletic Therapy Association (CATA) competency framework includes a “scholar” role, placing emphasis on knowledge and skills related to evidence‐informed practices (EIP). Educators are expected to develop their student's EIP skills; however, little is known about the optimal educational approaches to accomplish this task. The study objective was to examine concept mapping as a teaching and learning strategy to deepen the understanding of EIP and examine the validity and reliability of a concept mapping scoring rubric.MethodA concept mapping approach to teaching EIP was piloted in an upper‐level research methods and statistics course. Students (N = 15) participated in a pretest post‐test concurrent nested mixed‐method intervention study that analyzed the impact of concept mapping on students' understanding of EIP and assessed initial validity and reliability of the grading rubric.ResultsStudents demonstrated a deeper understanding of EIP and its relationship to healthcare practice following the concept mapping activity compared to a note‐taking activity (Cohen's d = 1.79). The concept mapping rubric used to assess EIP competence demonstrated strong construct validity and content validity with moderate inter‐rater reliability.ConclusionsEmploying the concept mapping technique as a teaching and learning tool proved to be effective to teach EIP principles and concepts based on student grades. An analytic rubric method was found valid and reliable for grading student concept maps underpinning EIP competency.
AbstractMinority students, particularly those of the Black and Latinx communities, face daunting challenges—confronted with the recent pandemic, ongoing inequality, and increased financial uncertainty due to job loss and rising unemployment. With recent shifts to skill‐based learning and remaining "work‐ready," competency‐based education (CBE) has never been more critical. CBE is outcome‐focused, student‐centered, and integrates instruction focusing on students mastering prerequisite content and skills to advance. However, many "in‐person" programs primarily structure delivery around lecture‐based delivery, often focus on the quantity of work versus behavioral outcomes, and fail to recognize the synergy of innovative delivery mechanisms. In a well‐designed online program/course, faculty can anchor course objectives to competencies, implement innovative assessments, leverage components of Connectivism, and utilize just‐in‐time learning to help their students excel. This writing focuses on best practices for implementing components of Connectivism and just‐in‐time learning for programs/courses shifting to online delivery.
There is a preponderance of studies on nurses’ research competency and its benefits to the nursing profession. However, investigations on nursing students’ research competency in the context of competency-based education (CBE) remain underreported. This study investigated the predictors and associations of Saudi nursing students’ research competencies using CBE approach. This research used a descriptive, cross-sectional design. A total enumeration sampling or census of 347 nursing students from three Saudi Arabian state universities who had finished the nursing research course was used. The 24-item Research Competency Scale for Nursing Students (RCS-N) was utilized to collect data, which was then analyzed using the chi-squared test and logistic regression. Most nursing students were familiar with the nursing research process. There is a strong link between research competencies and age and marks obtained in nursing research course. Age and nursing research course marks (A+/A) were significant predictors of nursing research competency. Thus, students who earned A+/A grades were three times more likely to be competent than those who had lower grades. Similarly, nursing students over the age of 20 years are twice as likely to be research competent as those under 20. As there are few reports on nursing research competency, CBE helps nursing research instructors create relevant intended learning outcomes (ILOs), allowing them to assess each research step's ILOs more efficiently. Additionally, incorporating functionalist, behaviorist, and constructivist learning theories into the CBE in nursing research course will be more beneficial.
