advanced mastery elearning mastery elearning (ame) courses: competency-based courses incorporating...
TRANSCRIPT
HEKADEMIA INC. | 27 Main Street North, Bayfield, Ontario, Canada, N0M 1G0 p: 647.874.4517 f: 519.565.4100 e: [email protected]
Advanced Mastery eLearning A COMPLETE APPROACH TO COMPETENCY-BASED LEARNING
Advanced Mastery Learning
1
Preface
Elements of competency-based learning have been popular amongst instructional designers for
decades. More recently, competency-based education has become popular in some states to improve
student success.
Currently, however, the definition of competency-based learning varies from district to district, and the
implementation of such programs is often inconsistent. In response, Hekademia has developed the
Advanced Mastery eLearning (AMe) courses: competency-based courses incorporating modern concepts
of mastery learning, competency-based evaluation and standards-referenced instruction. This
document, based on 15 years of eLearning experience, provides the working definitions, design best-
practices, and implementation strategies of an Advanced Mastery eLearning course.
Introduction
Competency-based learning can mean many things to many people. To some, it means aligning closely
with curriculum standards. To others, it means evaluating students using a binary checklist of
competencies rather than percentage-based grades. AMe courses simplify the debate by focusing on
the three pillars of education: learning objectives, assessment, and instruction. AMe courses build on
each of these three elements and define each element to make each one optimal for competency-based
learning.
Objectives refer to the national or regional standards described by curriculum documents. Assessment
refers to the tools and strategies used to gather information on student understanding of learning
objectives, either for the purpose of informing instruction or for the purpose of reporting. Finally,
instruction refers to the tools and strategies which create student learning opportunities.
Learning Objectives in an AMe Course
Learning Objectives are clear statements that describe the knowledge and skills that students should
achieve upon completion of a course of study. Curriculum documents, including national documents
such as the Common Core State Standards and the Next Generation Science Standards, often refer to
these statements as standards or performance expectations. Hekademia refers to these statements as
standards.
Competency-based education, however, uses the term competency to refer to course objectives and
curriculum standards. A competency, much like a standard, is a knowledge goal or a skill goal which a
student is expected to achieve.
Advanced Mastery Learning
2
However, in an AMe course, a competency is different from a standard in a number of ways:
1. Standards are defined by the curriculum documents 2. Competencies are created by an institution or instructional designer. 3. Competencies are often created in response to standards. 4. Competencies require a demonstration of both knowledge and skill. 5. Standards can be sub-divided in to competencies. 6. Standards can be combined to form competencies.
When discussing an AMe course it is permissible to refer to standards and competencies using the term
competency. That is, the term competency also implies the term standard.
Designing Competency Structures AMe courses must have a hierarchy of competencies to guide instruction and assessment. If a course
has a related curriculum document, then the competencies of that course will be created by the
instructional designer based on the standards of the curriculum document. If the course does not have
a curriculum document, the instructional designer (ID) must be sufficiently knowledgeable to create the
competencies for that course. Alternatively, the ID can coordinate with a content expert to write the
competencies.
Sub-division Beginning with the curriculum standards, an ID must construct the nested-hierarchy of competencies.
Most often, curriculum documents are already arranged in a hierarchy of standards which can be
translated into competencies. However, the lowest tier of standards in a curriculum document is often
quite broad and insufficiently detailed for the lowest tier of competency tracking.
Therefore, most curriculum standards must be divided into a finer level of competency by establishing
learning goals which are often used directly for instruction and assessment and seen by the student.
Consequently, learning goals must be written in student-friendly language. IDs divide a curriculum
standard by identifying simple concepts, processes, and skills that must be mastered to support any
competencies based on that standard.
Super-Competencies Competencies are hierarchical. Therefore, just as competencies can be sub-divided into smaller,
supporting competencies, they may also be combined to create larger, super-competencies.
These super-competencies best describe collections of knowledge and skill traditionally associated with
units and courses. For example, a conventional biology course is composed of units such as
microbiology, evolution, and ecology. Super-competencies align well with this level of knowledge and
skill.
Competencies, however, are not merely replacement terms for conventional organizational terms.
Remember that competencies are often skill-based and as such reflect a unique approach to recognizing
understanding. For example, a super-competency describing a unit on evolution in a biology course may
say “Construct an explanation for neo-Darwinian evolution including concepts of natural selection and
Advanced Mastery Learning
3
heritably, and buttress this explanation with evidence from a variety of fields.” Notice how the
competency is skills-based, is composed of sub-competencies, and encompasses a large body of skill and
knowledge.
Assessment in an AMe Course
Current literature on competency-based education suggests that there are four guiding principles for
assessing students in a competency-based environment (Priest, Rudenstine, Weisstein & Gerwin, 2012;
Sturgis, 2014):
an emphasis on formative assessment,
assessments that measure mastery of learning objectives,
assessments that are embedded throughout the curriculum, and
summative assessments that are initiated after a student has demonstrated mastery, ensuring that students are prepared for statewide exams.
These recommendations outline the fundamental principles of competency-based assessment, and are,
in fact, the fundamental principles of all assessment. All Hekademia courses implement these principles
of assessment.
Formative and summative assessments, scaffolding, and rubrics, for example, are implemented
consistently across all Hekademia courses. For more on Hekademia’s approach to assessment, please
refer to the document Instructional Design. There are however, several major differences between
conventional Hekademia courses and AMe competency-based courses.
Elements of Competency-Based Grading AMe courses use a competency-based grading system instead of a traditional grading system based on
percentages. Competency-based grading systems are modular rather than holistic, binary rather than
analog and set a high standard for graduation.
Modular Evaluation Percentage-based grading systems are holistic. Student work is assigned a percentage evaluating the
student’s average success on all the competencies covered on an assignment. AMe competency-based
grading is not holistic. Instead, students are evaluated on the individual competencies composing an
assignment.
For example, a business class assignment may ask a student to write a report on a topic. Several
competencies may be involved in writing this report: researching and referencing, explaining concepts in
business, and writing for a particular audience. Using rubrics, teachers assess student products on these
competencies and no percentage grade is issued for the assignment. Instead, students are declared
either competent or non-competent on the competencies. Ultimately, these competencies will combine
to form super-competencies and a student can be declared competent for a large set of knowledge and
skills.
Advanced Mastery Learning
4
Hybrid Evaluation This modular approach can be blended with traditional percentage-based grading systems to produce a
robust hybrid model of evaluation. In this hybrid model traditional percentage-based grading is used to
holistically assess students for their ability to integrate competencies, while a parallel competency-
based assessment system ensures that students master all competencies.
This hybrid approach is appropriate for districts that must integrate with traditional percentage-based
systems at the postsecondary level.
Binary Evaluation Percentage-based evaluation systems are analog in nature, meaning that they use a finely graded scale
to approximate the level of student success. Competency-based evaluation systems are binary in nature
meaning that there are only two conditions describing student success: competent and non-competent.
AMe courses use a competency-based evaluation system and report student success on competencies
as either competent or non-competent.
There are several advantages to a competency-based evaluation system. This type of system
deemphasizes the importance of numerical evaluation and focuses the student’s attention on the
formative learning process. This approach also ends the progressive grade inflation that plagues many
districts and institutions.
It should be noted that the rubrics used to assess student success use a five-point scale to evaluate
student success on competencies. At first glance, this may appear to be at odds with the binary
reporting method. The five-point rubric system is necessary, however, for effective formative
assessment during the learning process. The five-point rubric system allows students to understand
their progress towards achieving a competency. The five-point rubric system is also required to integrate
with the mastery learning system.
Setting a Standard In reality, this binary system is describing a complex, analog system of student knowledge and skill. For
practical reasons, however, there must be an inflection point at which a student is judged to be either
competent or non-competent. That is, because a five-point rubric system is used to evaluate student
work, and because student success on quizzes and tests is determined by the number of questions
correctly answered, an inflection point must be set to translate the results from these assessments into
terms of competency. AMe courses set this inflection point at 75%. On tests and quizzes, students must
correctly answer 75% of the questions to achieve competency. Similarly, students must achieve a level
III score on pieces of student work evaluated with a rubric.
This standard aligns well with common practice in competency-based learning and also aligns well with
common practice in apprenticeship programs (the original competency-based programs).
Advanced Mastery Learning
5
Instruction in an AMe Course
Competency-based education is often closely associated with the concept of mastery learning. Mastery
learning is an instructional approach that requires students to master a concept before proceeding to
subsequent or more advanced learning tasks. The high success standards and binary nature of
competency-based education in many ways force students to master concepts to graduate. However,
competency-based learning does not explicitly restrict student progress through a course. That is to say,
not all competency courses are mastery courses.
Mastery Learning AMe courses, however, enforce mastery learning. Using a variety of tools available within the
Hekademia learning environment, AMe courses require students to master a concept before proceeding
to subsequent or more advanced learning tasks. This process ensures that students develop the
competencies required to understand subsequent concepts and to complete the course at large.
Mastery learning has its drawbacks. It is possible for students to become “stuck” at topics they find
challenging. With nowhere to proceed, students may become discouraged. Mastery learning is also
challenging to implement in classroom settings where students master concepts at different rates.
AMe courses are uniquely suited to address both of these concerns. Because AMe courses are
eLearning courses and are implemented in online and blended environments, varying rates of student
success become less of an issue. Students may move through their blended or online courses at their
own pace, independent of their classmates, and other time and place-based variables.
Remediation AMe courses also offer a powerful solution to address variation in student need and ability. Using a
variety of tools available within the Hekademia learning environment AMe courses differentiate student
Instruction based on their success on various assessments. Students struggling to meet a competency
are automatically directed by the learning environment to remedial instruction addressing common
misconceptions and failure points relating to a topic. This remediation pathway helps reduce the
number of students trapped at any given competency.
Enrichment AMe courses, however, are not only about meeting competencies. They are about truly differentiated
learning and ensuring that all students receive challenging and personalized education. Just as struggling
students are directed to a personalized remedial pathway, students exceeding standards for
competency are directed to an enrichment pathway. This enrichment pathway offers a variety of
enrichment topics depending on the course. Such topics may include Advanced Placement material,
postsecondary material, social engagement tasks, inquiry tasks, or partnership activities with third-party
groups.
Remediation and enrichment are essential to AMe courses and create personalized learning
progressions for each student. Remediation and enrichment are powerful instructional strategies for
ensuring that students of all levels are engaged and succeeding.