Competence based Dutch reform of Higher Education

1
Competence based Dutch reform of Higher Education

• A short overview of model,
• implementation and results
• International Workshop
• Digital Library Education
• March 2005
• Ton de Bruyn

2
Context

• Dutch professional universities (strange
  degrees...see hand-out, non-selective entry for
  non-specific O-level equivalent)
• ICT-departments within Saxion Universities
  Library Sciences (or Information Services and
  Management) are part of the ICT-department)
• Deans conferences of ICT (HBO-I) and ISM however
  are (still? partly) separate entities
• At Deventer Business Information Technology and
  Information Services and Management have jointly
  implemented a model of competence learning
• (We are not far away from the cutting edge on
  implementing competence learning)

3
Basic models, (not necessarily contradictory)

• Analytical model of competences (a competence is
  to some extent reduced to specific aspects of
  behaviour and defined as a competence!) model
  used by HBO-I and Saxion at Deventer
• Easier to have flexible learning routes
• More difficult to build (integral) assessments
• Credits are awarded to (parts of) a competence
• etc
• Synthetic model of competences (generic behaviour
  and task specific behaviour is considered an
  integral part of a competence) seems (partly) to
  be the concept of Dublin descriptors (nrs 2-5)?
• More difficult to have flexible learning routes
• Easier to build real life assessments
• Credits are a bit of a problem
• etc

4
Analytical model

• Generic competence model HBO-raad (Federation of
  Dutch Professional Universities)
• 10 generic competence descriptions example
• Information Services and Management Focus op
  Kennis (Focus on Knowledge), new set
• First model HBO-I 2000
• based on HBO-raad with 12 task specific
  competence descriptions added (48
  sub-competences!! each one being given 5
  levels!!!!)
• set of job descriptions
• (New model HBO-I 2004 not yet implemented at
  Saxion
• reduced set of 5 specific competence building
  block descriptions and the 10 HBO-raad generic
  competence descriptions (now also building
  blocks)
• NEW! illustrations of professionals contexts in
  relation to specific competence building block
  descriptions!)

5
Curriculum design 1

• BIT concentric (Spaghetti?)
• Very detailed (bureaucratic) planning (students)
  and tracking (staff)
• ISM monolythic (Asparagus?)
• Easier on planning and tracking
• Difficult (because short) development model for
  students

6
Curriculum design 2

• Semesters
• Thematic approach
• Project for each theme/semester
• Project breaks down into tasks
• Tasks relates to (ideally) more than one
  competence
• This is the way we (hope to) offer students the
  possibility to develop integrated competences
• Support classes (lectures, workshops,
  laboratories)
• Support classes can either be synchronous (mostly
  BIT or a-synchronous (ISM)
• Competence matrix as design instrument

7
Student assessment

• No written tests!
• Based on individual development plan
• Individual(ized) assessment
• (no group evaluation)!
• Two phased (different assessors!)
• 1st phase focus on development
• 2nd phase focus on (evaluative) assessment
• Based on task performance during project
• Through observation (360 degree feedback)
• Through individual(ized) assessment interviews
  based on professional artefacts (results of
  tasks)
• General interviews on professional development
  (with specially assigned staff)

8
The good

• Seems a pretty good and fast selective instrument
  (see Dutch non-selective entry we have to get
  rid of chaff)
• Much better staff-student interaction
• The new HBO-I competences (reduced to 5) seem to
  offer opportunities to reduce the complexity of
  our model, especially to students
• In addition we are likely to scrap the 5 levels
  as well
• To me it seems a pretty good way of educating
  professionals although...

9
The bad

• Very labour intensive!
• Not all staff is yet comfortable with this type
  of education and student assessment
• Level of knowledge can be difficult to assess
  yet, why should we want to?
• (nice discussion topic)
• Tracking of the development and assessment
  process is (or has become) bureaucratic

10
The ugly?

• Written test will be re-introduced as part of
  formative assessment (students can test and
  discuss their perfomance with assessor) so what?
  I like knowledge anyway but...
• Integral competence/assessment approach is a
  hurdle that we somehow got stuck in
• Is behavioural/product assessment a stronger
  proposition than classical knowledge/skills/(attit
  ude) assessment? Or are we just going through the
  motion?
• To my mind observation of behaviour is
  multi-dimensional (competence!) but derived
  whereas knowledge assessment through written is
  mono-dimensional but fairly direct

11
Discussion... 5 minutes!
12
Discussion is over!
Stop talking, Ton!!
13
Appendix
14
Dublin bachelor, back

• have demonstrated knowledge and understanding in
  a field of study that builds upon and supersedes
  their general secondary education, and is
  typically at a level that, whilst supported by
  advanced textbooks, includes some aspects that
  will be informed by knowledge of the forefront of
  their field of study
• can apply their knowledge and understanding in a
  manner that indicates a professional approach to
  their work or vocation, and have competences
  typically demonstrated through devising and
  sustaining arguments and solving problems within
  their field of study
• have the ability to gather and interpret relevant
  data (usually within their field of study) to
  inform judgements that include reflection on
  relevant social, scientific or ethical issues
• can communicate information, ideas, problems and
  solutions to both specialist and non-specialist
  audiences
• have developed those learning skills that are
  necessary for them to continue to undertake
  further study with a high degree of autonomy.

15
Dublin master

• have demonstrated knowledge and understanding
  that is founded upon and extends and/or enhances
  that typically associated with Bachelors level,
  and that provides a basis or opportunity for
  originality in developing and/or applying ideas,
  often within a research context
• can apply their knowledge and understanding, and
  problem solving abilities in new or unfamiliar
  environments within broader (or
  multidisciplinary) contexts related to their
  field of study
• have the ability to integrate knowledge and
  handle complexity, and formulate judgements with
  incomplete or limited information, but that
  include reflecting on social and ethical
  responsibilities linked to the application of
  their knowledge and judgements
• can communicate their conclusions, and the
  knowledge and rationale underpinning these, to
  specialist and non-specialist audiences clearly
  and unambiguously
• have the learning skills to allow them to
  continue to study in a manner that may be largely
  self-directed or autonomous.

16
Generic ICT competencebuilding blocks (old/new)

• A1 Broadly-based professionalism
• A2 Multidisciplinary integration
• A3 Scientific and non-scientific application
• A4 Transfer and broad usability
• A5 Creativity and complexity of action
• A6 Problem-oriented approach
• A7 Methodical and reflective reasoning and action
• A8 Social and communicative skills
• A9 Basic qualification for management positions
• A10 Sense of social responsibility
• back

17
Task specific competencebuilding blocks for ICT
(new)

• B1 Analysis
• B2 Advice
• B3 Design
• B4 Implementation
• B5 Maintenance
• back

18
Task specific competencebuilding blocks for ISM
(new)

• Information resources
• Retrieval
• Classification systems
• Information collation
• Management information
• Information and knowledge exchange
• Information and business processes
• Systems development
• Information and knowledge policy
• back

19
Competence matrix, sample, back