rs aom literature review

8/12/2019 Rs Aom Literature Review

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/rs-aom-literature-review 1/46

12OPENING MINDSAN EVALUATIVELITERATURE REVIEWDR SARAH AYNSLEYDR CHRIS BROWNPROFESSOR JUDY SEBBAJULY 2012

www.thersa.org



Contents

Executive summary 2

What the review set out to do 5

1 Evidence to support a competency-based approach 10

2 Specic competency systems 18

3 Evidence to support a competency-basedapproach to assessment 25

Concluding comments and recommendations 34

Appendix: Search terms 42



Opening Minds

Executive summary

This document reports on an independent literature review aimed at

developing an evidence base related to the value of a competence-basedcurriculum in secondary schools both generally, and with specic refer-ence to the RSA Opening Minds competences. The review sought toexplore differing interpretations of ‘competence’ and to offer a workingdenition. Comprehensive searching of the literature was undertaken andincluded electronic databases, websites and citation tracking. Literatureidentied included empirical studies, peer and non-peer reviewed researchpapers, research syntheses, policy documents, unpublished literature andtheoretical papers.

Opening Minds covers a wide range of outcomes and embraces manyof the conceptual positions supported by the research reviewed in thisreport. However, there are insufficient empirical studies and none exceptthe evaluation commissioned by the RSA that specically addressthe OM programme. The little empirical work that exists in this areasuggests that RSA should be encouraged: their competency frameworkis more balanced than most others reviewed in this report. For examplethe EU’s competencies are heavily weighted to ‘Learning’; Hoskins andDeakin-Crick’s to ‘Citizenship’ and ‘Managing Situations’; PISA’s to‘Learning’ and ‘Managing Information’. Jaros and Deakin-Crick ( ,p. ) support these characteristics of Opening Minds in suggesting:

The RSA Curriculum Project ‘Opening Minds’ ( ) is another exampleof an innovative approach to the curriculum for school-aged students thataims at integration, rather than a subject-based and thus fragmented ap-proach to knowledge. It lends itself to a more holistic and learner-centredapproach that encourages interdisciplinary enquiry, the stimulation oflearning power, and the acquisition of transferable skills.

Main recommendationsRecommendation 1: The Opening Minds curriculum resonates well withboth the economic and wider learning characteristics that emerge fromthe review as important. As such the RSA should be promoting both the

versatility of its curriculum and how it appears to meet the diverse aimsor drivers underpinning competence based approaches.

Recommendation 2: If they are to lead to expertise and competence, CBEmust be grounded in the local and individual context and this is what OMalready does.

Recommendation 3 : Since the evidence supports a view of competence asembracing a diverse range or types of knowledge, tailoring OM must alsobe realised by students being able to use standard knowledge in a local-ised context as well as embracing other existing knowledge types.



Opening Minds

Recommendation 10: As the OM programme aims to develop a widerange of competences, assessment processes need to reect this and ensure that the drive to gain a formal qualication does not inhibit widerlearning and that the assessment process is not divorced from the peda-gogical approach.

Recommendation 11: If formal accreditation is brought into the OM pro-gramme, different actors such as students and teachers can provide usefulinput for the format and operation of competency based assessments.

Recommendation 12: An appropriate system of assessment of OM compe-tencies should embrace the principles of Assessment for Learning througha collaborative approach, in particular by sharing the criteria for learningwith the learners incorporating self and peer-assessment and ensuringfeedback informs future teaching and learning.

The RSA should consider re-evaluating the effectiveness of OpeningMinds looking at the impact at school, teacher and pupil level with a viewto strengthening existing arguments regarding its efficacy. Whilst ac-knowledging that accreditation of the OM programme is at school level,the overall accreditation process could draw on Hipkins et al ( ) inasking: how the competencies will be assessed and reported on, who willbe involved in the assessment and what kind of professional developmentsupports the effective use of the Opening Minds curriculum?

BibliographyEU ( ) (Recommendation / /EC of the European Parliament and of

the Council of December [Official Journal L of . . ]).

Hipkins, R., Reid, A. & Bull, A. ( ) Some reections on the philosophicaland pedagogical challenges of transforming education Curriculum Journal

, , – .

Hoskins, B. and Deakin-Crick, R. ( ) Competences for Learning to Learnand Active Citizenship: different currencies or two sides of the same coin?European Journal of Education , Special Issue: Knowledge, Globalisationand Curriculum, , , – .

Jaros, M., and Deakin-Crick, R. ( ) Personalised learning for the post-mechanical age: Journal of Curriculum Studies , : , – .

Wesselink, R., Jong, C. & Biemans, H.J.A. ( ) Aspects of competence-basededucation as footholds to improve the connectivity between learning in school andin the workplace vocations and learning. Vocations and Learning, , , – .

Schleicher, A. ( ) PISA – Science Competencies for Tomorrow’s World,Paris: OECD.



What the review set out to do


The aim of the review was to develop an evidence base related to the

value of a competence-based curriculum in secondary schools both gener-ally, and with specic reference to the RSA Opening Minds competences.We sought to explore differing interpretations of ‘competence’ and tooffer a working denition. The review was organised around the follow-ing three key questions:

• What is the evidence to support a competence-based approachto education generally-including the impact on both outcomesand pedagogy?

• What is the evidence base for the competences dened by Open-ing Minds and how do these compare to other competences asutilised by other approaches?

• How could the outcomes and impacts of Opening Minds bemeasured and evaluated?

Background

ContextThe current policy context with its focus on revising the curriculum,employability skills and the links between schooling and work, pro-vides an important justication for undertaking this review. There aremany policy initiatives which are particularly pertinent to the effectiveoperation of the Opening Minds curricular model. Policies which spe-cically address schools include: curricular changes (eg to the NationalCurriculum and the introduction of the EBacc); assessment modications(eg an increasing emphasis on end-of-course assessment and the reductionin opportunities to resit exams); institutional change (eg the prolifera-tion of free schools, academies and University Technical Colleges); andchanges to the monitoring of schools’ performance (eg the new guidelinesfor school performance tables). In addition, the Education and Skills Act(DCSF ) introduced legislation to ensure all young people in Englandremain in education or training until they are .

The review of the National Curriculum commissioned by theCoalition Government provides an important opportunity for debateabout the future of the curriculum. The ‘expert panel’s’ report (DfE,

) recommended that the revisions to the curriculum should encour-age high expectations for all and reduce the amount of prescription. Inparticular, they proposed that levels are abandoned and the purposes,progression and inter-connections between the knowledge that pupilsare to be taught should be made more explicit. The panel’s report empha-sised the importance of breadth suggesting it should be increased at KeyStage . To maintain breadth whilst also reducing prescription, the panelrecommended reclassifying Design Technology, Citizenship and ICT tothe basic curriculum which would reduce requirements on schools whilstpreserving the statutory status of these subjects. This could open up

The Education andSkills Act (DCSF ) introducedlegislation to ensureall young peoplein England remainin education ortraining until

they are



Opening Minds

opportunities for more cross-curricular activities that promote the typeof competencies included in the Opening Minds curriculum.

In Scotland, the Curriculum for Excellence introduced in isencapsulated in the four capacities – to enable each child or young personto be a successful learner, a condent individual, a responsible citizenand an effective contributor. The curricular aims are to ensure that all

children and young people in Scotland develop the knowledge, skillsand attributes they will need if they are to ourish in life, learning andwork, now and in the future. Examinations and specialisation occur inthe fourth year of secondary school. The less prescriptive nature of thecurriculum (for example in comparison to England) was welcomed as ameans of recognising the professional judgement of teachers but contrast-ingly is regarded as too vague. Its strength is in the relevance of contentthat teachers have been able to select and in how the curricular areasare addressed. The vagueness is however, leading to questions about theviability of assessing it.

There are also relevant policy initiatives from employer and highereducation representative bodies. For example, a recent CBI report notedthat ‘there is a big issue of a failure [for pupils] to grasp why learningis important … and for gaining a basic insight into the world of work’(CBI p. ). The CBI subsequently recommended the developmentof a new standard which would enable selected institutions to achieve‘Employability School’ status, one that has an engagement with businessand involves teamwork and problem-solving. This type of recommenda-tion will have resonance for schools involved with the Opening Mindsprogramme. In addition, the recent Higher Education White Paper (BIS

), reinforced government concerns regarding the development ofemployability skills in graduates. The president elect of AGCAS (theAssociation of Graduate Career Advisory Services) recently distinguishedbetween ‘employability’ and ‘employment’ and commented that ‘to beemployable, you need a range of skills and attitudes. Creative thinking isone of them’ (Redmond n.p.).

The lack of literature addressing the questions raised by the RSA isa further justication for this review. Bates ( , p. ) points out that,despite the plethora of publications relating to ‘competence’ in recentyears, most of it was ‘particularly insulated from critical academicscrutiny’. She writes further that, ‘there remained a dearth of critique andscholarship on the competence movement’ (p. ) and that this ‘stands in

marked contrast to the strategic importance of competence to the currentreconstruction of education and training’ (p. ). This literature review isan attempt to bridge this gap.

How the review was conductedThe focus and scope adopted for the review was broad and dened bythe following criteria for the inclusion of studies:

• focus on publications after (to contextualise the launch ofOpening Minds in );

• engage with competence based curricula in secondary education; • include both national and international perspectives i.e. coun-




tries where competence based curricula are found;• include outcomes and/or learners’ perspectives on outcomes and

impacts of different curricular models; • identify key issues relating to the assessment, both formative

and summative, of competence based qualications.

Comprehensive searching of the literature was undertaken andincluded electronic databases, websites and citation tracking. Literatureidentied included empirical studies, peer and non-peer reviewedresearch papers, research syntheses, policy documents, unpublishedliterature and theoretical papers (to inform the conceptual framework forthe synthesis of ndings). Sources included:

• Electronic databases: AEI, BEI, ERIC, Google/Google Scholar, JSTOR, SCOPUS;

• Citations: in papers identied were screened for furtherreferences;

• Websites: of charitable foundations were searched for rel-evant reports.

Using bibliographic software, an EndNote database specic to thisreview has been complied.

The descriptors, or keywords used for the literature review aredetailed in Appendix and included: capability, competence* (to iden-tify anything starting with this stem), core skills, employability skills,expertise, competence-based assessment, learning outcomes, key com-petences, key skills, learning power, transversal skills, prociency andlifelong learning.

Structure of the reportIn the rst section, the literature that provides evidence to support acompetency-based approach in general is reviewed. In the second section,specic competency-based systems including Opening Minds are de-scribed and compared. In the third and nal section, specic approachesto assessment are reviewed with a view to assisting the Royal Society ofArts in its consideration of how the outcomes and impact of OpeningMinds might be measured. First, the development in perspectives thatled to the current views of competency is set out in order to contextualise

what follows.

What does the literature tell us?

What is competence?Although there is an extensive literature on competence-based curricula,competence remains a contested concept. Understanding overallcompetence as the integration of knowledge, skills and attitudes whichenable someone to perform competently rather than simply gainingskills is a more recent perspective. Biemans, et al ( ) point out thatcompetence-based learning has a long history in the VET eld, both inthe Netherlands (where they are based), and in many other countries.Competency models were highly debated in the s, s and s and



Opening Minds

were criticised for being disintegrative and reductionist. In more traditionalapproaches, ‘competences were specied in detailed lists of fragmentedand assessable behavioural elements related to job performance. However,competencies cannot be specied precisely in the same way as performanceoutcomes can; and mistakenly equating learning outcomes (performance)and competencies gives the latter a false objectivity’ (p. ). ‘Moreover,

these detailed lists of competences cannot provide guidelines for curriculumdesign because of the detailed level of description; they thus frustratelearning and development more than they support’ (p. ). Competencesystems carry with them the promise of rendering learning processes andoutcomes that are measurable and manageable but as this review willsuggest, this promise has proved challenging to deliver.

Denition of CompetenceThe way in which competence is conceptualised inuences the choice ofoutcomes assessed in order to demonstrate its benets. Hence, a narrowvocational denition will lead to the assessment through qualicationsalone whereas a broader conceptualisation of competence which encom-passes affective outcomes and interconnectivity implies a much widerset of benets, though inevitably more difficult to measure. At the timeWolf’s ( ) book was published, the competence movement was inextri-cably linked to developments in vocational education and training. Wolfnoted that the concept of ‘competence’ had been dened in a number ofways, ‘many of them quite unrelated to the idea of a competence-basedassessment system’ (p. ). She referred to the essentially vocationaldenition of competence offered by the (now defunct) Manpower ServicesCommission (MSC): ‘By competent we mean performing at the standardsexpected of an employee doing the same job’ (p. ). While recognis-ing that this denition of competence is ‘highly workable at one level’,in practice, it seems to ‘encourage narrow mechanistic denitions ofwhat ‘performance’ involves’ (p. ). Furthermore, this denition raisesBiemans et al ’s criticisms above of equating performance with compe-tence and implying false objectivity.

A broader denition of competence is provided by the OECDProgramme for International Student Assessment (PISA) as ‘the abilityto successfully meet complex demands in varied contexts through themobilisation of psychosocial resources, including knowledge and skills,motivation attitudes, emotions and other social and behavioural compo-

nents’ (Schleicher, p. ). This denition encompasses the ‘affec-tive’ dimensions of learning and as such is more aligned to the approachtaken by the Opening Minds curriculum.

The working denition of competence offered by Biemans et al (p. ) is similar to that of OECD:

Competence is the capability of a person to reach specic achievements.Personal competencies comprise integrated performance-oriented capabil-ities, which consist of clusters of knowledge structures and also cognitive,interactive, affective and where necessary psychomotor capabilities andattitudes and values.

Competence systemscarry with them the

promise of renderinglearning processesand outcomes thatare measurableand manageable




This denition goes beyond that offered by OECD in recognisingthe interconnectivity and integration of skills that emerge in this reviewas a key component of the evidence that supports a competency-basedsystem. Furthermore, it resonates with RSA’s Opening Minds competenceframework which emphasises the integrating of teaching across subjectsin modules that can explore common themes.



Opening Minds

1 Evidence to supporta competency-basedapproach

Competence-based educationAs noted with the denitions of competency, views of competency basededucation range from purely vocational to substantially affective orfocused on learning to learn skills with many authors positioning them-selves somewhere between by incorporating some of each approach.Overall, the literature supports focusing Competence-Based Education(CBE) on developing individual students’ competences and not merely onenabling them to acquire qualications or diplomas. Reducing ‘competen-cy’ to assessment and the ability to successfully demonstrate skills createsan imbalance: for example, as Wolf ( ) argues, the search for uni-formity and national standards is likely to move education away from aconcern with competence and capability; CBE should instead be a meansof enhancing student-led learning with individual students taking a cen-tral position by being able to optimally develop their own competencesbased upon their capabilities and preferences. Thus, it implies creatingopportunities for students in meaningful learning environments but,simultaneously, accepting that the outcomes of these opportunities will beproblematic to dene and so likely to be regarded by critics as ‘woolly’.

One approach based on capabilities and preferences is the ‘compre-hensive approach’ in the Netherlands and France, which has a focus onindividual competence, ‘based on the integration of different forms ofknowledge, skills and attitudes, as well as social and personal capabilities’(Brockmann et al , p. ). Instead of a detailed list of competencies,

the comprehensive approach consists of ‘integrated constructs of knowl-edge, skills and attitudes that lead to competence performance’ (Biemanset al p. ). More on integration and connectivity is reviewed in thesection below on the conditions under which CBE is most effective.

Competence-based education from a vocational perspectiveThe EU ( ) argues that key competences are essential in a knowledgesociety and guarantee more exibility in the labour force, allowing it toadapt more quickly to constant changes in an increasingly interconnectedworld. It also suggests that competencies are a major factor in innovation,productivity and competitiveness, and they contribute to the motivationand satisfaction of workers and the quality of work. The recommenda-tion concludes that key competences should be acquired by young people

Wolf ( ) argues,the search foruniformity and

national standardsis likely to moveeducation away

from a concernwith competenceand capability



Evidence to support a competency-based approach

at the end of their compulsory education and training, equipping them foradult life, particularly for working life, whilst forming a basis for furtherlearning (see Table ). Biemans et al ( ) examined the implementationof competence-based education in the Netherlands which, they suggested,was now a ‘major trend’. They argued that the goals of competence-based education included: i) preparing future professionals so that they

are able to contribute to the advancement of a given economic sector; ii)contributing to the development of students’ (professional) identity; iii)preparing students, not only for working in professional practice, but alsofor participating in society as a whole. Hence they reiterate the prepara-tion for working life mentioned by many others but go beyond this byidentifying additionally, contribution to civic society. Whilst not empiri-cally-based, that CBE is supported at a super national level and that it isbeing implemented in other EU member states, provides an indicator ofthe perceived compatibility of its aims with twenty rst century economicand learning requirements.

In a similar vein, both Tchibozo ( ) and Wesselink et al ( )take stock of the emergence of competence-based education in EUcounties and explore how both economic circumstance and educationalimperatives have led educational policy makers to shift their focustowards competence-based education. Tchibozo argues that not only didgovernments see the acquiring of basic competences as vital to increasingemployment, but that educators too have identied benet, in particular:

• a competence-based approach replaces behaviourism (teachingby objectives) with a constructivist vision of the learner develop-ing their abilities in action situations – consequently, the learnerbegins to understand the world of which he/she is part, can actappropriately in such situations and so can develop as an eman-cipated individual;

• competence-based education cannot be considered exclusive ofa construction by the learner in action situations. Setting thisconstruction in context creates meaning and therefore interestand motivation for the learner.

Similarly, Hoskins and Deakin-Crick ( , p. ) suggest thatprioritising certain competences and the identication and establishmentof key competences are necessary for economic success, social cohesion

and sustainable living for countries, regions and the world. As such ‘Oneof the challenges for education is to identify competences which are keyto social and economic success in the st century’.

Competence-based education from a broaderlearning perspectiveWhilst economic and nancial factors are key drivers, the emergenceof CBE also had educational motivations. Halász and Michel ( )note ‘an important factor of resistance amongst some intellectuals andteachers against such an evolution is what they see as the increasingimportance of economic considerations in the context of economic andnancial globalisation’ (p. ). They suggest that whilst ‘the growingimportance of competitiveness in the global economy and the increasing



Opening Minds

role of human capital and education in the knowledge society are im-portant factors in the emergence and development of the new educationparadigm’ (ibid), there are other inuences on expectations in educationsuch as:

• ‘Coping with the rapid pace of change and obsolescence of

knowledge and skills, which imply lifelong learning for all andpreparing mindsets from an early age to accept change andthe continuous questioning of what was previously taken forgranted as normal constraints of everyday life;

• Preparing students to question the consequences of change,rather than considering it as an end in itself, and in particularto analyse science ndings and technology innovations in termsof their ethical and practical implications for the future. TheFrench author Rabelais’ warning in the th century has neverbeen more apposite: ‘knowledge without conscience is but theruin of the soul’. Environment, sustainable development, bioeth-ics and other crucial issues for the future of humanity requirecross-subject approaches and active learning in teams.

• Preparing students to live in the digital era, using in a relevantway the rapidly changing ICT, while being aware of the newethical challenges brought about by social networks, butalso adapting teaching/learning practices to young people’sdigital culture.

Making learners aware of the dangers of growing inequalities (andnew forms of social exclusion) for social cohesion, peace and democracyamong countries and within some countries, as well as of the resurgenceof xenophobia, racism and intolerance ( , p. ).

Recommendation 1: The Opening Minds curriculum seems to resonatewell with both the economic and wider learning characteristics that Ha-lász and Michel and others are suggesting are important. As such the RSAshould be promoting both the versatility of its curriculum and how it ap-pears to meet the diverse aims or drivers underpinning competence basedapproaches. At the same time, however, none of the studies listed aboveare empirically based and, as such, the RSA should consider re-evaluatingthe effectiveness of Opening Minds with a view to strengthening existing

arguments regarding its efficacy. Below we now consider the individualelements that contribute to making CBE effective and the conditions re-quired for its success.

The importance and role of contextFlyvberg ( ) argues that a major misunderstanding in relation to thesocial sciences is that generalisable, theoretical (context-independent)knowledge is of higher value than concrete, practical (context-dependent)knowledge. Flyvberg goes on to suggest that it is context dependentknowledge that research on learning shows to be necessary to allowpeople to develop from rule-based beginners to ‘virtuoso’ experts. Hecites phenomenological studies into human learning showing that learn-ers pass through several stages as they move from novice to expert, each




of which correspond to recognisable ways of acting and performing inrelation to a given skill. What differentiates between these levels is thatthe novice will tend to rely on rules-based analysis for their choices andaction. Functional expertise corresponds to Flyvberg’s ( ) notion ofthe ‘procient performer’; here situational intuition interacts with analyti-cal decision making to provide an understanding of what should be done

and how this ‘what’ corresponds to a given specic situation. Flyvberg’sconcludes that if people were exclusively trained in context-independentknowledge and rules, they would forever remain at beginner level in thelearning process.

Hodkinson and Issitt ( ) believe that ‘competence is not, andcannot be, a xed concept, and argued that without a context, compe-tences are too generic and have little meaning for the student’ (cited inBiemans et al p. ). Competence is ‘about framing an overallperformance that is appropriate to a particular context. It is not aboutfollowing simplistic recipes’ (Hager p. ). In reviewing a numberof evaluation studies based on the views of teachers/ trainers and employ-ers from the s and s, Bates ( , p. ) recounts that a majorconcern in the evaluation studies was a narrowing of the curriculumand a lack of focus on theoretical knowledge. Bates writes that ‘CBET[competency based education and training] reverses much of traditionaleducational practice with its emphasis on outputs rather than inputs andhas been viewed as reducing the scope for teachers and students to act ascreative participants in learning. It will be important to examine…theimplications of competence models for the development of the creative‘lifelong learner’ (p. ).

Meijer et al ( ) distinguish between two types of skill: (a) domainspecic eg ‘students are capable of using compensating interpretationstrategies, such as inferring the meaning of words from the context inwhich they occur’ and (b) domain exceeding (cross-curricular, ‘general’skills), eg ‘students can arrive at a personal stance on the basis of argu-ments.’ Alexander, Graham and Harris ( ) speak of a continuum fromgeneral to domain specic to task specic. While the term ‘general skills’highlights that the skills have a broad sphere of application, the term‘cross-curricular skills‘ highlights that the skills need to be practised andtaught in an educational context.

Throughout the literature, the importance of integrating expertiseand competence is emphasised as critical to the success of CBE. Bereiter

( ) identies six different types of knowledge that are necessary tobecome a competent expert:

• stable or declarative knowledge – knowledge in an explicit form;• implicit or tacit knowledge – understanding through experience;• episodic knowledge – memories, episodes, events, or narratives

from the past;• impressionistic knowledge – feelings and impressions that

inuence action;• skills or procedural knowledge – knowing how;• regulative knowledge – principles and ideas that professional

groups pursue in order to accomplish their work.



Opening Minds

He stresses that in high-level expertise these six types of knowledgeare not separate but tightly integrated in their use. It is not helpfultherefore to claim to develop one or more types of knowledge in school,and the other knowledge types in the workplace. The entire range ofknowledge types should be developed in relation to each other, and acrossall kinds of settings. This implies integrating the learning activities of

students in schools and workplaces to enable students to become compe-tent professionals.

Recommendation 2 : The above analysis therefore indicates that, if theyare to lead to expertise and competence, CBE must be grounded in thelocal and individual context. OM should continue to offer a curriculumframework which enables schools to develop a localised curriculumwhich is relevant to their own school.

Recommendation 3: Since the evidence supports a view of competence asembracing a diverse range or types of knowledge, tailoring OM must alsobe realised by students being able to use standard knowledge in a local-ised context as well as embracing other existing knowledge types.

Learning PowerA number of the papers reviewed addressed issues related to ‘learningpower’ dened by Jaros and Deakin-Crick ( pp. – ) as ‘ thosedispositions, values, attitudes, and skills that coalesce to form the natureof an individual’s engagement with a particular learning (or living) oppor-tunity’. These authors suggest that what is required is a shift in the focusof curricula from knowledge acquisition to one of learning itself.

The authors identify the key benets of learning power as (p. ):

… to engage critically in living in the world in relation to others over time.It is about ‘meaning-making’ as a central part of learning power; thatis, not only connecting items of information and putting them togetherin new and creative ways, but also developing learning that is personallymeaningful to the learner, through the use of personal and cultural nar-ratives and the dynamic excavation of meaning. It requires risk-taking,lateral thinking, and imagination which constitutes creativity as part oflearning power.

James and Brewer ( ) identied good practice in the developmentof key skills in academic and vocational programmes, with a particularemphasis on learner experiences; teaching approaches and learningstrategies; and the day-to-day management of the relationship betweenkey skills and wider programme content. They suggested that thoseresponsible for curricular development should seek to establish betterunderstanding of the conceptions of key skills – and especially, of theirsuccessful development – which are current and have currency amongstteachers, students, trainers and trainees. Good key skills programmes arethose which develop a general ‘can do’ attitude and are best developedand assessed in a contextualised and fully integrated fashion, whetherthey are undertaken alongside NVQs, GNVQs or A levels. Most of thelearners interviewed in their project seemed to be convinced of the value




and importance of key skills in present and future employment, and therewere some examples of direct linkage with work tasks for those in work.There were also numerous occasions in which learners drew researchers’attention to the transfer of learning under key skills to new contexts.

A study ( Hoskins and Deakin-Crick ) looking specically atlearning to learn considered whether, within the limited space of some

national curricula, key competences directed towards social outcomeswere competing against those aimed at employability. Two competences,drawn from the European Education Council Framework were analysed:learning to learn and civic competence.

The authors suggest that the idea that learning can lead to profoundchange in individuals and communities is an important link betweenthese two core competences, because both the notion of competence andthe notion of personal and social change are ‘historical, contextualised,and value dependent: they imply a sense of direction leading towards a‘desired end’’ (p. ). The authors also draw on Haste’s ( ) conceptof an overarching ‘metacompetence’; of being able to manage the tensionbetween innovation and continuity. This, they suggest, is somethingwhich schools need to nurture and develop in their learners and is also apre-requisite for both lifelong learning and active citizenship. The authorscite Haste in suggesting that, in order to be able to manage this tensionbetween innovation and continuity, young people need the followingadditional competences:

• Adaptively assimilate changing technologies • Address ambiguity and diversity • Find and sustain community links • Manage motivation and emotion • Manage moral responsibility and citizenship

Further evidence of the link between learning to learn and civiccompetence was reported in two systematic reviews of the impact ofcitizenship education on the provision of schooling (Deakin-Crick et al. ,

; Deakin-Crick et al. , ). The conclusions of these highlighted therelationship between a learner-centred pedagogy, which stimulates thedevelopment of a learning to learn competence and ‘intentional learning’and the skills, values, attitudes and dispositions for active citizenship.The quality of dialogue and discourse in the classroom is essential both

to learning to learn and to citizenship education and such discourse isconnected with learning about shared values, human rights and issues ofjustice and equality. The reviews concluded that a facilitative, learner-cen-tred pedagogy, characterised by trust and respect, integral, contextualisedvalues education and personal meaning making is crucial in developingboth learning to learn competence and civic competence. Central too areproblem-based thinking, and context-based, real life learning. They showthat developing civic competence can enhance students’ ability to makemeaning of and connections between their personal stories and societyand improve their higher order creative and critical thinking skills, theircommunication skills and their overall academic achievement.

The quality ofdialogue anddiscourse in the

classroom isessential both tolearning to learnand to citizenshipeducation andsuch discourse isconnected withlearning aboutshared values,

human rights andissues of justice andequality.



Opening Minds

Recommendation 4 : The analysis above implies that the CBE shouldcentre on learning as a skill rather than simply lead students to acquireknowledge. As such, teachers using the OM curriculum should ensurethat OM is fully grounded in an understanding of a conception of learn-ing skills and, in particular how such skills can be developed over time.

Conditions for effective competence-based educationThere is signicant literature on the conditions under which a compe-tence-based curriculum is most effective. For example, Biemans et al( ) provide evidence from research into possible pitfalls in designingand implementing competence-based education. The authors also provide‘clues as to how the various pitfalls might be further addressed’ in thefuture. The list of pitfalls includes:

• Different stakeholders (eg teachers, learners, employers) havingdifferent perceptions of competence. Biemans et al developed a‘matrix for competence-based vocational education’ to use asa ‘validated conceptual framework for comprehensive CBE’ toreduce differences in perceptions.

• Over-reliance on standardisation which ‘may result in too muchinsensitivity to context and in conservative training’ (see alsoHodkinson and Issitt ; Wolf , ).

• Developing and implementing appropriate competence-basedassessment is a crucial issue in the implementation of CBE: newinstruments have to be developed that meet quality criteria (egobservation and a criterion-based interview).

• Changing roles and the identity of teachers. Biemans et al ( )found that it was difficult for many teachers to adopt their newcoaching role: according to the students, teachers should notrely too heavily on their students’ independent learning at anearly stage and support them in their learning process until theyare competent enough themselves. ‘Teachers need to balancetheir roles as coaches and experts, and self-responsibility andself-reection of the students should be stimulated to establish asound basis for lifelong learning.’ Not only students should de-velop their competencies; teachers need to develop their teachingcompetencies to t with competence-based curricula and to beable to full their new roles.

Lord and Jones ( ) reviewed pupils’ experiences and perspectivesof the curriculum over – . Despite seeing the curriculum asrelevant to passing exams, getting grades, and as a passport to their nextsteps, real-life connections are important in creating relevance for pupilsand vocational relevance for all is a value espoused by pupils. Pupils enjoysubjects and activities in which teaching and learning is active, participa-tory and has practical application. They also noted that learners appreci-ate supportive and collaborative approaches, with preferences for increas-ing responsibility and autonomy as they get older. Explaining clearly isamongst the most consistently valued quality in a teacher. In addition,pupils appreciate teachers’ wide subject knowledge, and welcome sessions




with professionals from within the eld (eg health professionals, visitorsfrom colleges, the workplace and so on).

Wesselink et al ( ) suggest that, where competence developmentis the ultimate goal, educational programs should include the followingeight aspects of competence-based education:

•

Aspect 1: The competencies that are the basis for the studyprogramme are clearly dened; • Aspect 2: Core professional problems are the organising unit

for designing or redesigning the curriculum (learning andassessment);

• Aspect 3: Competence development of students is assessedbefore, during, and after the learning process;

• Aspect 4: Learning activities take place in various authenticsituations;

• Aspect 5: Knowledge, skills, and attitudes are integrated inlearning and assessment processes;

• Aspect 6: Self-responsibility and (self-) reection of studentsare stimulated;

• Aspect 7: Teachers, both in school and in the workplace, balancetheir roles as coaches and experts;

• Aspect 8: A basis is established for a lifelong learning attitudeamong students.

In addition to the recommendations listed above:

Recommendation 5 : The RSA should consider its denition of competenceand choose one that has salience with the main stakeholders concerned(i.e. teachers, learners and employers) whilst also reecting the myriadand diverse outcomes that OM supports (as noted above).

Recommendation 6: Ensure that those teaching OM are themselves com-petent to do so (i.e. are comfortable in their roles as coaches and expertsand the balance required between these roles and the need for self-respon-sibility and self-reection in their students) and are able to demonstratethe competences that are required of their pupils.

Recommendation 7 : The eight aspects suggested by Wesselink et al ( )

should also be considered by those using OM.



Opening Minds

2 Specic competencysystems

A number of competency systems were reviewed that specify areas ofindividual competences. In the table at the end of this section, we haveattempted to map these for comparison against the Opening Mindsframework. It is somewhat arbitrary how specic competences are clas-sied and few if any evaluations appear to exist that test out whether thecompetences being taught and learned in schools or colleges using thesesystems are in fact the same as those intended or what outcomes theyachieve. Broadly, the competency systems can be distinguished betweenthose that focus primarily on skills for employment (eg CBI, ) andthose that include mainly competencies for learning to learn. (eg DeakinCrick et al , ), though some (EU, ; Dąbrowski and Wi śniewski,

) explicitly include both.The CBI equate competence to preparedness for employment and, in

particular to ‘showing the skills and attitudes essential for work’ (CBI,: ). The CBI argue that ‘the mindset of schools as regards leavers

at and has to be driven by employability’ and that this should bedriven by ‘successful participation in work experience placements, careersadvice, curriculum content and training in areas such as project workingand presentation skills’ (CBI, : ). The CBI also argued that employ-ers are concerned with the basic skills levels of school and college leavers.In particular, in the CBI/EDI annual Education & Skills survey of

employers suggested that % were not satised with the basic use ofEnglish by school and college leavers, while more than a third ( %) wereconcerned with the basic numeracy skills of that age group.

Some individual employers also set out the competencies they requireof school leavers. For example, professional services organisation

KPMG’s applicants to the school leavers’ programme must demonstratetheir competence in nine key areas, which KPMG describe as encompass-ing the skills and behaviours needed to be successful in their organisation.These include career motivation, delivering quality, building relation-ships for collaboration internally and externally, a positive approach toself-development, exercising professional judgement, making an Impact,seizing business opportunities, demonstrating innovation and curiosity

. See: www.cbi.org.uk/media-centre/press-releases/ / /poor-standards-of-english-and-maths-among-school-leavers-could-hinder-growth-cbi-edi/

. See: www.kpmgcareers.co.uk/SchoolLeaverProgrammes/HowtoApply--KeyCompeten-cies_( ).aspx?pg=

%were not satised

with the basic use ofEnglish by school and

college leavers



Specic competency system

and displaying resilience (under challenging circumstances). A smaller butalmost identical set of competencies are also set out by Deloitte.

Hipkins et el ( ) are critical of the instrumental and work-relatedpurposes attributed to competences in these models:

Competencies have become a ubiquitous feature of contemporary official

curriculum documents, albeit variously named. However, despite theirwidespread use, they have been largely under-theorised in curriculumterms. Rather, they are usually named in curriculum documents withoutreference to the reason for their selection, and are left to take on a life oftheir own (p. ). Haste ( ) has made an important contribution totheorising the ‘content’ of competencies by carefully building a case fornew forms of civic engagement. Importantly, she has given competenciesa social justice and democratic purpose, eschewing the instrumental andsolely work-related form that they have assumed in many countries.

Predictably, systems which place greater emphasis on the social justiceand democratic purposes of competencies tend to stress learning skillsrather than employability and have often emerged from educational sources.Deakin Crick et al ( ) identied the elements of an individual’s capacityfor lifelong learning. They dened learning as ‘a process carried out by indi-viduals and groups. What is learned counts as knowledge or skills, whichcan take the form of the ability to do something which could not be donebefore’ (p. ). Based on extensive literature searches, the authors suggestedthat there is a ‘strong link between the intellectual and emotional compo-nents of learning, that is the affective, cognitive and conative dimensions aredeeply interrelated’ (p. ). They trialled the Evaluating Lifelong LearningInventory (ELLI) with pupils across a range of ages and subjected the datato factor analysis. Seven dimensions of learning power emerged. Thesedimensions ‘appear to be capable of differentiating between efficacious,engaged and energised learners and passive, dependent and fragile learners’.Although the authors recognise the need for larger scale eld trials and nofurther evaluations of their typology have been undertaken, they suggestthat the ndings have ‘signicant implications for conventional modelsof curriculum design and classroom practice’ (p. ). Further empiricalevidence might make this suggestion possible to operationalise.

The competency systems drawn up by governments and internationalagencies tend to include both employability and learning to learn compe-

tencies. The EU ( ) argued that key competences for lifelong learningare a combination of knowledge, skills and attitudes appropriate to thecontext and that they are particularly necessary for personal fullmentand development, social inclusion, active citizenship and employment.Their reference framework denes eight key competences and describesthe essential knowledge, skills and attitudes related to each of these.These key competences are:

• Communication in the mother tongue: the ability to express andinterpret concepts, thoughts, feelings, facts and opinions in both

. See: http://careers.deloitte.com/united-kingdom/students/csc_general.aspx?CountryContentID=



Opening Minds

oral and written form (listening, speaking, reading and writing)and to interact linguistically in an appropriate and creative wayin a full range of societal and cultural contexts;

• Communication in foreign languages: this involves, in additionto the main skill dimensions of communication in the mothertongue, mediation and intercultural understanding. The level

of prociency depends on several factors and the capacity forlistening, speaking, reading and writing; • Mathematical competence and basic competences in science and

technology: mathematical competence is the ability to developand apply mathematical thinking in order to solve a rangeof problems in everyday situations, with the emphasis beingplaced on process, activity and knowledge. Basic competencesin science and technology refer to the mastery, use and applica-tion of knowledge and methodologies that explain the naturalworld. These involve an understanding of the changes causedby human activity and the responsibility of each individual asa citizen;

• Digital competence involves the condent and critical use ofinformation society technology (IST) and thus basic skills ininformation and communication technology (ICT);

• Learning to learn is related to learning, the ability to pursue andorganise one’s own learning, either individually or in groups,in accordance with one’s own needs, and awareness of methodsand opportunities;

• Social and civic competences: social competence refers to per-sonal, interpersonal and intercultural competence and all formsof behaviour that equip individuals to participate in an effectiveand constructive way in social and working life. It is linked topersonal and social well-being. An understanding of codes ofconduct and customs in the different environments in whichindividuals operate is essential. Civic competence, and particu-larly knowledge of social and political concepts and structures(democracy, justice, equality, citizenship and civil rights), equipsindividuals to engage in active and democratic participation;

• Sense of initiative and entrepreneurship: the ability to turn ideasinto action. It involves creativity, innovation and risk-taking,as well as the ability to plan and manage projects in order to

achieve objectives. The individual is aware of the context of his/her work and is able to seize opportunities that arise. It is thefoundation for acquiring more specic skills and knowledgeneeded by those establishing or contributing to social or com-mercial activity. This should include awareness of ethical valuesand promote good governance;

• Cultural awareness and expression: this involves appreciation ofthe importance of the creative expression of ideas, experiencesand emotions in a range of media (music, performing arts, litera-ture and the visual arts).

These key competences are regarded as interdependent, and theemphasis in each case is on critical thinking, creativity, initiative,




problem solving, risk assessment, decision taking and constructivemanagement of feelings.

Halász and Michel ( ) commenting on the EU competenciesobserved that they interlock and overlap, each can contribute to asuccessful life in the knowledge society and that some themes such ascritical thinking, creativity, initiative, problem solving, risk assessment,

decision taking and constructive management of emotions should applythroughout as they play a role. These authors note that this set of keycompetences represents a consensus at a given moment in time and thatmany other basic qualities or attributes could also have been mentioned,for example, the capacity to set priorities, to be aware of one’s limitsor ignorance and to respect time-schedules and deadlines – this lattercompetence matching ‘time management’ within the Opening Mindscompetency area of Managing Situations. One challenge for schoolsnoted by these authors is to make explicit the links between curricularsubjects such that the interrelated nature of the EU competencies canbe addressed, which has to be the responsibility of all teachers. It wasnoted that the rst three are more commonly interpreted across MemberStates whereas the other ve are transversal and have been perceived andinterpreted in different ways in each of the European countries.

Recommendation 8: Teachers using OM should make explicit the linksbetween curricular subjects such that the interrelated nature of competen-cies can be addressed.

In seeking to assess competence, PISA (Schleicher, ) focused itsrst three assessments on ‘literacy skills’: ‘the capacity of young adultsto access, manage, integrate and evaluate information, to think imagina-tively, to hypothesise and discover, and to communicate their thoughtsand ideas effectively’ (ibid); and did so in relation to reading (in PISA examined the capacity of students to use, interpret and reect onwritten material), mathematics (in , PISA focussed on the capacityof students to put mathematical knowledge into ‘real world’ functionaluse) and science (in PISA focussed on students’ scientic knowledgeand use of that knowledge; their understanding of science as a formof enquiry; their awareness of how science and technology shape ourmaterial, intellectual and cultural environments; and their willingnessto engage with science-related issues, and with the ideas of science, asa reective citizen). Given the political and economic emphasis placed

on PISA in comparisons of the effectiveness of the educational systemsof different countries, this relatively narrow focus has been the target ofmuch criticism. Responding to this, PISA has begun to look at students’dispositions to learning, their approaches to learning, their self-conceptand their engagement with school more generally.

In , a regulation in the Polish Government resulted in the for-mulation of the rst list of key competences to be included in the Polishlegislation on education (D ąbrowski and Wi śniewski, ). The empha-sis of the regulation was on ‘shaping skills and preparing students forresponsible life in a democratic society and free market economy’. Thecompetences which addressed both learning and employability included:



Opening Minds

• Learning: solving problems related to cognition and carrying outprojects. Organising the learning process and assuming respon-sibility for your own education. Using experiences and combin-ing various elements of knowledge;

• Thinking: identifying connections between the past and present,as well as cause and effect and functional relationships. Cop-

ing with lack of self-condence and complexity of phenomena;perceiving them as a whole and in context;• Searching: searching, putting in order and using information

coming from various sources, also prudent and competent useof the media;

• Self-improvement: assessment of individual attitudes and con-duct and these of others in line with generally accepted stand-ards and universal values. Assuming responsibility for yourselfand for others. Flexible approach to changes, looking for newsolutions, facing adversities. Keeping t and caring for men-tal health;

• Communication: successful communication. Presenting individu-al point of view, arguing for and defending opinions. Readinessto listen to and take into consideration opinions of other people.Using the latest information and communication technology;

• Cooperation: group work; negotiating and reaching the consen-sus; taking group decisions, applying democratic procedures.Establishing and maintaining relationships;

• Action: organising your own and others’ work; learningto use work techniques and tools. Designing actions andtaking responsibility for their course and results. Efficienttime management.

Cheetham and Chivers’ ( ; ) holistic model of professionalcompetence has a set of ve interrelated competences:

• Cognitive competence: including underpinning theory andconcepts as well as informal tacit knowledge gained experien-tially. Knowledge (know that) is underpinned by understanding(know why)

• Functional competences (skills or know how): things that a per-son should be able to do, and to demonstrate

• Personal competency (behavioural competencies or knowing howto behave): those relatively enduring characteristics of a personthat relate to effective or superior performance

• Ethical competences: possessing the appropriate personal andprofessional values as well as the abilities to make sound judge-ments in work related and other situations

• Meta-competences: the ability to cope with uncertainty, as wellas with learning, learning to learn and reection.

Hoskins and Deakin-Crick ( ) reported that a number of OECDcountries were asked to list which competences they considered to be key.Four groups were frequently mentioned:




• Social Competences/Cooperation; • Literacies/Intelligent and applicable knowledge: • Learning Competences/Lifelong Learning; • Communication Competences.

These would seem to relate to the Opening Minds (OM) Framework

in the following ways:

• Social Competences/Cooperation – OM’s Competences for Relat-ing to People;

• Literacies/Intelligent and applicable knowledge & Learning Com-petences/Lifelong Learning – OM’s Competences for Learning;

• Communication Competences – OM’s Competences for Relatingto People.

The OM’s Framework has a major emphasis on Competences forCitizenship that includes morals, ethics, diversity and self-reliance whichwhile not listed in the OECD priorities, are included in the EU ( ) rec-ommendations for Lifelong Learning and in Hoskin and Deakin-Crick’s( ) own work. Furthermore, the emphasis placed on ‘ManagingInformation’ in the OM competences, which includes research andreection is not well addressed in other systems though is often identiedin surveys on the employability skills sought by employers (eg Forbes et al

; Morley et al )However, Winter ( ) regards OM as lacking in both ethics and

political concerns:

The OM curriculum text overlooks the politics and ethics of knowl-edge through the dominance of a technical, economistic, outcomes-drivencompetency framework (p. ). The OM competency curriculum paysscant attention to developing students’ critical capacities and the word‘political’ is absent. Competency knowledge of ‘critical judgement’ ap-pears only once, under the heading ‘managing information’ (Bayliss/RSA

, ), conferring a particular orientation towards evaluative judge-ments of a technical kind, instead of towards those founded on ethico-political concerns. Similarly, the term ‘ethics and values’ occurs only oncein the competences, under the category of citizenship (p. ).

The OM’s ‘Competences for Managing Situations’ includes timemanagement, management of change, creative thinking and risk-taking which are addressed in a number of other systems (eg EU ).However, this competency group also includes ‘feelings and reactions’such as celebrating success and managing disappointment which do notseem to be specically mentioned in other systems. Halasz and Michel( ) in commenting on the EU ( ) framework note that one of themany themes that should apply throughout this framework is ‘construc-tive management of emotions’.

Recommendation 9: The emphasis placed in the OM curriculum on‘Managing emotions’ should be maintained given the evidence on theimportance of these competencies in and out of the workplace.

The OM’s‘Competences for ManagingSituations’ includestime management,

management ofchange, creativethinking and risk-taking which areaddressed in anumber ofother systems



Opening Minds

Table 1: A comparison between the competencies included inOpening Minds and those in other specic competency systems

RSA Opening Minds Hoskins andDeakin-Crick(2010)

Dą browski andWiś niewski (2011)

European Union PISA CBI

Citizenship

Morals & ethics,Making a difference,diversity, technologicalimpact, self reliance

Find and sustaincommunity links Social and civic

Moral responsibilityand citizenship

Learning

Learning styles,reasoning, creativity,positive motivation,key skills, ICT skills

Learning to learn Attitudes andskills in relationto employability

Entrepreneurship Work readyliteracy andnumeracy skills

Digital competence

Cultural awareness andexpression

Learning: solvingproblems relatedto cognition andcarrying out projects

Communication in themother tongue

Communication in foreignlanguages

Mathematical competenceand basic competences inscience and technology

ManagingInformation

Research, reection

Thinking: identifyingconnectionsbetween the pastand present, aswell as cause andeffect and functionalrelationships

Mathematical competenceand basic competences inscience and technology

“Literacyskills” inmaths,scienceandreading

Work readyliteracy andnumeracy skills

Searching: puttingin order and usinginformation comingfrom various sources

Relating to people

Leadership,teamwork, coaching,communication,emotional intelligence,stress management

Successfulcommunication

Action: organisingown and others’work

Social competenceincluding personal,interpersonal and

intercultural competence

Attitudes andskills in relationto employability

Cooperation: groupwork; negotiatingand reaching theconsensus

Managing Situations

Time management,coping with change,feelings and reactions,creative thinking, risktaking

Adaptivelyassimilate changingtechnologies

Efcient timemanagement,exible approachto changes, facingadversities

Creativity, innovation &risk-taking, constructivemanagement of feelings

Deal with ambiguityand diversity

Manage motivation/emotion



Opening Minds

can be dened in isolation from the context that gives them their mean-ing, and unproblematically applied to other contexts.’ (p. )

In summary, in this section we indicate that competency basedapproaches to assessment differ in ways similar to the distinction drawnout in relation to approaches to Competency Based Education (CBE) moregenerally, between those focusing on employability and those giving greater

emphasis to the skills of learning to learn. As the OM programme aims todevelop a wide range of competences, assessment processes need to reectthis. The following sections analyse this approach in more detail.

The danger of limiting teaching to what is assessedWith the introduction of the National Council for VocationalQualications (NCVQ) in the mid s, the competence movement inthe UK became ‘wedded to a national system of qualications…uniformin its manifestations and most deeply entrenched’ (Bates, p. ). Batesreminds us of the importance of competence-based education and train-ing (CBET) within the UK government’s s/early s educationpolicy agenda and its application to vocational and technical education(as opposed to general/academic education). Because of this, Bates arguesthat ‘what is emerging is a dominant denition which has narrowed andreied the meaning of the term [competence]’ (p. ). This understandingof competence ‘hinges upon tight pre-specication and subsequent meas-urement of the intended consequences of learning’ (p. ) which leads, inBates’s view, to the removal of what is learnt ‘from the orbit of inuenceof practising teachers …who instead become ‘deliverers’ and ‘assessors’of learning outcomes’ (p. ). Similarly, Ecclestone ( , p. ) warnsthat ‘Narrow instrumentalism … can make … assessment ‘not merely‘for’ learning or ‘of’ learning: instead it was learning’. She suggests thatusing detailed grade descriptors and exemplars can encourage supercialcompliance with atomized tasks derived from the assessment criteria.

A similar argument has been put forward by Wheelahan ( ) whosuggests that education and training policy in Australia is based on theassumption that it is possible to separate qualication outcomes fromthe processes of learning. She writes that ‘Policy determines outcomes,pedagogy teaches to those outcomes. This is a destructive dichotomy thatimpoverishes learning and results in simplistic notions of skill’ (p. ). Theseparation of means (teaching and learning) from ends (qualication out-comes) is supposed to allow industry to specify the skills needed for the

workplace, and teachers to develop creative ‘delivery strategies’ to teachthese skills. Conrming this view, Watson and Robbins make the pointthat learning and assessment have become divorced from one another,assessment methods have not been sufficiently responsive to change inpedagogy and curriculum, particularly with regard to summative judge-ments of practice or performance. They recognise the substantial body ofwork which addresses ‘assessment for learning’ (eg Gardner ). Herethe focus is on the purposes of assessment, that is, whether one engages inan ‘assessment of learning, for grading and reporting … or an assessmentfor learning, where the explicit purpose is to use assessment as part of theteaching to promote learning’ (James and Pedder , p. ).

Similarly, on the theme of separating qualications from wider learn-ing, Gibbs and Armsby ( ) noted in the context of higher education



Evidence to support a competency-based approach to assesment

that ‘the purpose of accrediting, rather than evaluating knowledge, seemsto owe its origins to the argument that prosperity … is based on economicsuccess, facilitated by educational attainment’ (p. ). This view has‘been actualised in a more servile notion of education as one of obtainingqualications’ (Guile ). Further support is provided by Watson andRobbins ( ) who confront what they see as the ‘assessment problem’,

that is, the tradition of individualistic and competitive approachesto qualications.As the primary purpose of most summative assessment remains that

‘of rank ordering candidates for competitive entry into further and highereducation, any problems with reliability of results affect the credibility ofthe assessment, which is usually at high public and political cost’ (p. ).When assessments of learning are over-emphasised, and when the focusof the assessment is heavily concerned with producing reliable results thenif the subject of the assessment is highly complex … it may be that onlythe ‘more easily and reliably assessed parts of a construct are assessed’(Stobart , p. ). The assumption that results are reliable has beenchallenged, Biemans et al ( ) noting for example that different schoolsinterpret national standards and ideas on summative assessments dif-ferently. This issue of reliability was also raised by Ecclestone ( ) inthe context of formative assessment where apparently agreed meaningsand principles can conceal very different learning goals. Students andemployers can provide useful input for the improvement of competencybased assessments.

In a comprehensive analysis of how st century skills can be assessed,Binkley et al ( ) noted that ‘teachers tend to model the pedagogicalapproach reected in high-visibility tests’ p. . The authors point out thatwhen tests were composed of multiple-choice items, there was a tendencyfor teachers to become over-reliant on multiple-choice worksheets intheir classroom, resulting in an emphasis on lower level cognitive skills.In contrast, when the assessments drew on extended writing and/orperformance assessments, many teachers included similar activities intheir teaching.

It is acknowledged by Schleicher ( ) that PISA only assesses a smallelement of the competencies that might make young people successful;it does not capture; for example, inter and intra personal dimensions ofcompetencies (eg the capacity of students to manage and resolve conictsor to adjust to an increasingly complex environment). This is due to

a number of factors, including methodological issues associated withtesting competence and the lack of international consensus as to whatfundamental competencies, year olds should possess. Nonetheless,Schleicher argues that the competencies that are assessed, do successfullypredict the future outcomes of students. For example, PISA data has beenlinked to data from the Canadian Youth in Transition Survey (studentstook part in both) to show that the odds of students participating in postsecondary education, are directly related to their performance on PISA.

The challenge of assessing or measuring the degree of attainment ofcompetences was one of the concerns expressed by many Member Statesabout the EU Competency Framework: ‘this is a real issue, as experiencehas shown that what can be effectively assessed in a curriculum is takenmore seriously by learners and teachers and is therefore more likely to be



Opening Minds

learned and taught’ (Halász and Michel , p. ). Hence, the ten-dency to limit teaching to what is assessed is a fear expressed in relationto competency-based education.

Recommendation 10: As the OM programme aims to develop a widerange of competences, assessment processes need to reect this and

ensure that the drive to gain a formal qualication does not inhibit widerlearning and that the assessment process is not divorced from the peda-gogical approach. Careful attention needs to be given to the developmentof both formative and summative assessment processes to ensure thatgaining a qualication is not privileged over wider learning.

Recommendation 11 : If formal accreditation is brought into the OM pro-gramme, different actors such as students and teachers can provide usefulinput for the format and operation of competency-based assessments.

Student-led assessmentGibbs and Armsby ( , p. ) stress the complexities of assessmentand state that ‘nding concepts which reveal the unique character-istics of achievements is no simple task and the complex assessmentprocess for this, which involves understanding claims from theclaimants perspective’.

The Assessment Reform Group (ARG) has developed principlesof formative assessment that encourage teachers to develop the linksbetween information about students’ progress towards learning goals,adaptations to planning and teaching based on feedback and dialogue,and attention to the ways in which students learn. This requires‘encouragement of autonomy, some choice about activities and students’understanding of goals, criteria and the purpose of feedback’ (ARG p ). To be considered formative, Binkley et al ( , p. ) noted that‘assessment evidence must be acted upon to inform subsequent instruc-tion. Rather than focusing backward on what has been learned, formativeassessment helps to chart the learning road forward, by identifying andproviding information to ll any gaps between the learners’ current statusand goals for learning’

Within the Teaching and Learning Research Programme (TLRP), James (reported in James and Pollard ) worked with staff in infants, primary and secondary schools using large-scale questionnaires,

interviews and classroom observations in an attempt to answer the ques-tion of whether Assessment for Learning (AfL) could help pupils learnhow to learn. They found that implementing ‘the spirit’, the underlyingprinciples, of AfL was hard to achieve with most teachers adopting theletter of AfL, in the shape of its procedures or techniques, for exampleby sharing the criteria with learners and implementing peer and self-assessment but few did so in a way which enabled the pupils to becomemore independent as learners. The teachers who did capture that spiritshared key characteristics. That is, they all had a strong belief in pupilautonomy and constructed activities that provided scaffolding for learn-ing opportunities.

This perspective was reinforced by Ecclestone ( ) whose approachis based on a socio-cultural understanding of assessment. Ecclestone

Careful attentionneeds to be givento the developmentof both formativeand summativeassessment

processes to ensurethat gaining aqualication isnot privileged overwider learning.




acknowledges that research on formative assessment has been developed‘in the context of the UK’s highly prescriptive summative assessmenttesting systems in schools’ (p. ). As a result of an increasing emphasison raising levels of participation and achievement there has been a blur-ring in the distinction between summative and formative assessment. Shemakes the point that ‘there is a marked difference in whether ‘teachers …

understand … the spirit or letter of formative assessment’ (p. ). Acommitment to the ‘spirit’ of formative assessment might enable studentsto go beyond extrinsic success in meeting targets and, instead, to combinebetter performance with engagement and good learning habits in orderto develop ‘learning autonomy’. This view was reinforced by Binkley etel ( ) who found that ‘testing has become dominated by routine, andhighly predictable items, which are also often short and highly scaffolded,thus reducing the expectation that students should apply knowledge,skills and broader capabilities demanded by today’s world.

Ecclestone ( , p. ) cites Black and Wiliam ( ) to suggest that‘specic assessment activities such as grading, feedback and questioningcan explicitly or implicitly reinforce ego or a sense of self as an unsuccess-ful or successful learner, or focus solely on performance and achievementin the form of a good or poor grade. Teachers tend to use formative andsummative assessment to reinforce these two goals rather than offeringgood advice about improvements to tasks and activities.’

In this section we have highlighted the complexities of competence-based assessment and would like to warn against attempts to over-sim-plify the process. In particular, we believe that in developing an appropri-ate assessment system of the OM competences, which encompasses bothformative and summative assessment, account should be taken of thecomprehensive research conducted by the Assessment Reform Group(ARG). Specically, the embracing of principles of formative assessmentwhich implement ‘the spirit’ rather than ‘the letter’ of Assessment forLearning. This would have the underlying aim of enabling pupils tobecome more independent as learners through constructing activities thatprovide scaffolding for learning opportunities.

How might competences be assessed?Watson and Emery ( ) note that the rst challenge is to adequatelydescribe what should be valued in young people, recognising that thereis little consensus on what wider achievements or capabilities constitute

and how they can be assessed or measured. Drawing on research fundedby the Welsh Assembly, they discuss a range of curricular initiatives andprogrammes which have included a focus on social and emotional dis-positions and skills (SEDS). Some have been centrally driven such as theSocial and Emotional Aspects of Learning (SEAL ) and Healthy Schools .Secondary SEAL is a loose framework on social and emotional learningthat schools can use as they wish. Humphrey et al ( ) comparing SEAL schools with others concluded that there was a mixed picturedue to differing patterns of implementation. There are also curricular

. http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/ /http:/www.teachingan-dlearningresources.org.uk/whole-school/social-and-emotional-aspects-learning-seal

. http://education.gov.uk/schools/pupilsupport/pastoralcare/a /healthy-schools



Opening Minds

initiatives introduced by organisations including Opening Minds, ELLI(Deakin-Crick et al ) and the certicate of personal effectiveness(ASDAN ). The authors note that a common thread has emerged with anemphasis on ‘well-being’, ‘transferable skills’ and on the development ofsocial and emotional ‘intelligence’, ‘literacy’, or ‘competence’. However,with respect to dening what should be taught and how it should be

assessed they comment that ‘the rhetoric belies the complexities involvedin this aspiration’ (p. ).Examples are given by Watson and Emery of a socio-cultural approach

to SEDS including the Northern Ireland Skills and Capabilities frame-work (CCEA ), Enquiring Minds and Opening Minds . The authorsnote that assessment methods in these initiatives tend ‘to lean towardsmethods that include in situ observational assessment, portfolios,video evidence, diaries and journals, participatory approaches, simula-tions and drama-based activities, interpretive narratives or summaries(Delandshere and Petrosky ) and learning stories (Carr )’(p. ). The emphasis through these approaches is ‘in the co-construc-tion of interpretations of SEDS’ (p. ). Adopting a socio-cultural per-spective, assessment is ‘…the ability to form judgements and determinethe signicance of an event’ (Delandshere and Petrosky , p. ). In acollaborative model, ‘assessment is a process of a more knowledgeable orexpert ‘other’ sitting alongside a learner and making an informed judge-ment of their knowledge, abilities, skills and performances. This deni-tion of assessment implies that we engage in observational assessment ofauthentic performance’ (Watson and Emery , p. ).

Deakin Crick et al ( ) developed and tested an instrument toidentify the elements of an individual’s capacity for lifelong learningincluding learning orientation which they dened as ‘the complex mix ofexperience, motivation, intelligences and dispositions that any particularlearning opportunity evokes’ (p. ). They argue that in an unpredictableand ever-changing world, it will be crucial to assess the characteristicsof people as learners. If the capacity to go on learning throughout life isimportant, then it is important to be able to assess the developing qualitiesthat make up an individual’s capacity for lifelong learning. Their researchaimed to identify the elements that dene a good learner and devise aninstrument that could be used to assess where an individual is located inrelation to these elements at any given time, and in any particular context.

Existing research suggested that there are at least broad categories

that can be identied are making a substantial contribution to learning:

• Learning capacities: dispositions, awareness and skills; • Learning identity: the beliefs, values and attitudes about learning,

self and knowledge held by the learner; • Learning story: the socio-cultural formation of learners over

time; Learning relationships: the quality and substance of learn-ing relationships.(Deakin-Crick et al, 2004, p. 249)

. www.asdan.org.uk/

. www.enquiringminds.org.uk/




These authors provide a detailed discussion and analysis on how theEffective Lifelong Learning Inventory (ELLI) was piloted, rened and tri-alled with a cohort of students who were drawn from a range of social,economic and ethnic backgrounds. They conclude that ‘the implicationsof our study must be seen in the light of how learners themselves feel aboutlearning rather than from a more external measure of learner orientation –

if indeed this was possible’ (p. ). They note that being a good learner iscritical to the response individuals make to new opportunities and contextsin enabling them to engage enthusiastically and effectively with learning.

An alternative model for assessing competencies is provided by Meijeret al ( ) at the University of Amsterdam, who developed and testedan instrument which was constructed to assess the level of competence ofstudents (aged – ) on eight cross-curricular skills. These are dened as‘general skills which can be taught and practised in curricula for differentdisciplines’ (p. ). They noted that the challenge to use multiple-choicequestions, not an approach usually associated with measuring generalskills, was welcomed because there is an increasing need for assessmentinstruments which are appropriate for large-scale investigations.

Meijer et al identify four cross-curricular skills taught in secondaryeducation: ‘designing and conducting investigations’, ‘stating one’s ownideas and opinions’, ‘working in collaboration on assignments’ and‘using criteria to evaluate the quality of one’s own work and workingmethods.’ In designing an appropriate assessment they drew on literatureabout higher-order thinking skills (eg Marzano and Arredondo ).An instrument was designed for assessing students’ prociency in eightskills, which were considered relevant for students of – years of age.The instrument included multiple-choice questions, eight for eachcross-curricular skill. In , the revised version of the assessment wasadministered to a representative sample of approximately , studentswho were and years of age. The results of the test were used to‘establish a base level for future evaluation studies on the mastery ofcross-curricular skills of students in secondary education’ (p. ). In con-clusion, the authors note that the use of a multiple-choice questionnaireto assess skills is to be welcomed because ‘there is an increasing need forassessment of general skills and for assessment instruments, which areappropriate for large-scale investigations’ (p. ).

In this section we highlight a number of studies in which attemptshave been made to develop a tool for assessing competences. However,

none seem to be directly relevant to the OM programme, either becausethey had been designed to test large cohorts of pupils or to test generic‘thinking’ skills. Instead, we believe that the OM programme benetsmost from adopting a socio-cultural approach to assessment, that is,using a collaborative model in which assessment is based on the involve-ment of a more knowledgeable or expert ‘other’ sitting alongside a learnerand making an informed judgement of their knowledge, abilities, skillsand performances authentic performance.

Recommendation 12: An appropriate system of assessment of OM compe-tencies should embrace the principles of Assessment for Learning througha collaborative approach in particular by sharing the criteria for learning

An instrument wasdesigned for assessing

students’ prociency in

which were consideredrelevant for students of

– years of age



Opening Minds

with the learners incorporating self and peer-assessment and ensuringfeedback informs future teaching and learning.

Portfolio assessmentA portfolio is described as ‘a purposeful collection of examples of learningcollected over a period of time, and gives visible and detailed evidence of

a person’s attainment of competences’ Segers et al , p. ). Portfolioassessment has developed partly in response to concerns that qualicationsand testing assess only the surface learning which relies on memorisationand reproduction of material needed to complete the assessment. In con-trast, modes of assessment such as assignments and portfolios enhance theadoption of deep approaches to learning because they require students to‘relate, analyse, solve and evaluate’ (Segers et al p. ).

One hundred and ten students in Applied Science using portfolioassessment participated in the study by Segers et al. The researchers usedan Assessment Experience Questionnaire to capture students’ perceptionsof this assessment method and its relationship to their learning approaches.The study highlights, as noted by Wade and Yarbrough ( ), that feed-back is essential when implementing portfolio assessment and that it is notthe assessment design that matters, but how it is implemented. The con-struction process of a portfolio over time is found to contribute to individ-ual learning (Zeichner and Wray ). Collecting targeted information ina portfolio is a highly reective process (Hamilton ). In addition, Tanget al ( ) reported that students who engage in portfolio assessment,compared with multiple choice tests, show deeper approaches to learning.

Segers et al (p. ) describe conditions for assessment to enhancestudent learning. These are summarised as:

Quantity and distribution of student effort

Condition 1

Condition 2

Sufcient assessed tasks are provided tocapture sufcient study time and effort

These tasks distribute student effort evenlyacross topics and weeks

Quality and level of student effort

Condition 3

Condition 4

These tasks engage students in productivelearning activity

Assessment communications clear and highexpectations of students

Quantity and timing of feedback Condition 5

Condition 6

Student feedback is provided both oftenenough and in enough detail

The feedback is provided quickly enough tobe useful to the students

Quality of feedback

Condition 7

Condition 8

Condition 9

Feedback focuses on learning rather than onmarks or on students themselves

Feedback is linked to the purpose of theassignment and to criteria

Feedback is understandable to students,

given their sophistication




The Questionnaire addressed students’ perceptions of the condi-tions and two main ndings emerged: in comparison with a multiple-choice test, students adopted ‘more cognitively challenging activities suchas application, relation and reection.’ Secondly, the results indicatedthere was a ‘signicant positive correlation between a deep approach tolearning and what students do with the feedback they receive’ (p. ).

These conditions provide a useful set of factors to build into theassessment of Opening Minds.

In summary, this section highlighted the benets of assessmentprocesses which encourage deep approaches to learning rather than thosewhich embrace surface learning, such as tests which rely on memory.Deep learning can be fostered through the inclusion of modes of assess-ment such as assignments and portfolios. Of primary importance is theneed to include high quality feedback. The Table above (Segers et al )helpfully outlines eleven conditions for assessment to enhance studentlearning feedback and the OM programme may benet from drawing onsome of the ideas detailed in the table. We offer the view that an appropri-ate assessment tool for use in the OM programme may be the construc-tion of a portfolio of evidence coupled with formative feedback.

Student response to feedback

Condition 10

Condition 11

Feedback is received by students andattended to

Feedback is acted upon by students toimprove their work or their learning



Opening Minds

Concluding commentsand recommendations

Opening Minds covers a wide range of outcomes and embraces manyof the conceptual positions supported by the research reviewed in thisreport. There are insufficient empirical studies and none except the evaluation commissioned by the RSA that specically address OM to beable to state clearly whether OM generates better attainment or otheroutcomes than other approaches. The little empirical work that existsin this area suggests that RSA should be encouraged: their competencyframework is more balanced than most others reviewed here. For exam-ple the EU’s competencies are heavily weighted to ‘Learning’; Hoskinsand Deakin-Crick’s to ‘Citizenship’ and ‘Managing Situations’; PISA’s to‘Learning’ and ‘Managing Information’. Jaros and Deakin-Crick ( ,p. ) support these characteristics of Opening Minds in suggesting:

The RSA Curriculum Project ‘Opening Minds’ ( ) is another exampleof an innovative approach to the curriculum for school-aged students thataims at integration, rather than a subject-based and thus fragmented ap-proach to knowledge. It lends itself to a more holistic and learner-centredapproach that encourages interdisciplinary enquiry, the stimulation oflearning power, and the acquisition of transferable skills.

Throughout this review recommendations are given that might assistin improving the OM approach.

Recommendation 1: The Opening Minds curriculum resonates well withboth the economic and wider learning characteristics that emerge fromthe review as important. As such the RSA should be promoting both the

versatility of its curriculum and how it appears to meet the diverse aimsor drivers underpinning competence based approaches. Below we nowconsider the individual elements that contribute to making CBE effectiveand the conditions required for its success.

Recommendation 2: If they are to lead to expertise and competence, CBEmust be grounded in the local and individual context and this is whatOM already does.

Recommendation 3: Since the evidence supports a view of competence asembracing a diverse range or types of knowledge, tailoring OM must alsobe realised by students being able to use standard knowledge in a local-ised context as well as embracing other existing knowledge types.

The little empiricalwork that exists inthis area suggeststhat RSA shouldbe encouraged:their competency

framework ismore balancedthan most others

reviewed here.



Concluding comment and recomendations

Recommendation 4 : The evidence on learning power implies that theCBE should centre on learning as a skill rather than simply lead studentsto acquire knowledge. As such, teachers using the OM curriculum shouldensure that OM is fully grounded in an understanding of a conceptionof learning skills and, in particular how such skills can be developedover time.

Recommendation 5: The RSA should consider its denition of competenceand choose one that has salience with the main stakeholders concerned(i.e. teachers, learners and employers) whilst also reecting the myriadand diverse outcomes that OM supports.

Recommendation 6 : Ensure that those teaching OM are themselves com-petent to do so (i.e. are comfortable in their roles as coaches and expertsand the balance required between these roles and the need for self-respon-sibility and self-reection in their students) and are able to demonstratethe competences that are required of their pupils.

Recommendation 7: The eight aspects suggested by Wesselink et al ( )should be considered by those using OM.

Recommendation 8 : Teachers using OM should make explicit the linksbetween curricular subjects such that the interrelated nature of competen-cies can be addressed.

Recommendation 9: The emphasis placed in the OM curriculum on‘Managing emotions’ should be maintained given the evidence on theimportance of these competencies in and out of the workplace.

Recommendation 10: As the OM programme aims to develop a widerange of competences, assessment processes need to reect this and ensure that the drive to gain a formal qualication does not inhibit widerlearning and that the assessment process is not divorced from the peda-gogical approach.



Opening Minds

Recommendation 11 : If formal accreditation is brought into the OM pro-gramme, different actors such as students and teachers can provide usefulinput for the format and operation of competency-based assessments.

Recommendation 12: An appropriate system of assessment of OM compe-tencies should embrace the principles of Assessment for Learning through

a collaborative approach, in particular by sharing the criteria for learningwith the learners incorporating self and peer-assessment and ensuringfeedback informs future teaching and learning.

Hipkins et al ( p. ) remind us:

…an understanding of the curriculum role of competencies is mostly stilla task to be tackled. Given the power of the competitive academic cur-riculum, there are many questions in this agenda that must be addressedif competencies are to be enacted in the way envisaged by Haste ( ).These include: What is the relationship between competencies and subject‘content’? Are competencies assessed and reported on, and if so how?

How are they planned for and ‘taught’ in the curriculum? What kind ofprofessional development is needed? Unless these and other questionsare addressed, competencies will simply be subsumed by the dominantcurriculum grammars and fail to live up to the potential of their trans-formative promise.

The RSA should consider re-evaluating the effectiveness of OpeningMinds looking at the impact at school, teacher and pupil level with aview to strengthening existing arguments regarding its efficacy. Whilstacknowledging that accreditation of the OM programme is at schoollevel, the overall accreditation process could draw on Hipkins et al inasking: how the competencies will be assessed and reported on, who willbe involved in the assessment and what kind of professional developmentsupports the effective use of the Opening Minds curriculum?



References

References

Alexander, P.A. Graham, S. and Harris, K.R. ( ) A perspective on strategy

research: Progress and prospects. Educational Psychology Review, , ,– .

Arthur, J., Deakin Crick, R., Samuel, E., Mcgettrick, B. & Wilson, K. ( )Character Education: The formation of virtues and dispositions in –year olds with particular reference to the religious and spiritual (CanterburyChrist Church University).

Assessment Reform Group (ARG) ( ) principles of assessment forlearning ; Cambridge, CUP.

Bates, I. ( ) The Competence and Outcomes Movement: The Landscape of

Research Education-line www.leeds.ac.uk/educol/documents/ .htmdownloaded March .

Bereiter, C. ( ). Education and mind in the knowledge age.Mahwah: Erlbaum.

Biemans, H., Wesselink, R., Gulikers, J.T.M., Schaafsma, S., Verstegen, J.A.A.M. & Mulder, M. ( ) Towards competence-based VET: dealingwith the pitfalls. Journal of Vocational Education & Training , , – .

Binkley, M., Erstad, O., Herman, J., Raizen, S., Ripley, M. and Rumble,M. ( ) Draft White Paper. Dening st Century Skills. Universityof Melbourne, Australia.

Black, P. and Wiliam, D. Assessment and classroom learning, Assessmentin Education , , , – .

Brockmann, M., . Clarke, P. Mehaut, and C. Winch. ( ) Competence basedvocational education and training (VET): The cases of England and Francein a European perspective. Vocations and Learning , – .

Carr, M. ( ) Assessment in early childhood settings; learning stories :London, Sage.

CCEA ( ) Northern Ireland skills and capabilities framework

Belfast: Northern Ireland Council for the Curriculum, Examinationsand Assessment.

Cheetham, G and Chivers, G ( ) Towards a holistic model of professionalcompetence, Journal of European Industrial Training, , , pp. – .Cheetham, G and Chivers, G ( ) , The reective (and competent)practitioner: A model of professional competence which seeks to harmonisethe reective practitioner and competence-based approaches, Journal ofEuropean Industrial Training, , , pp. – .

Dąbrowski and Wi śniewski , J. ( ) Translating key competences into theschool curriculum: the Polish experience. European Journal of EducationSpecial Issue: Key Competences in Europe, , , pp. – .



Opening Minds

Deakin-Crick, R., Coates, M., Taylor, M. & Ritchie, S. (Eds) ( )A Systematic Review of the Impact of Citizenship Education on theProvision of Schooling (London, EPPI-Centre, Social Science Research Unit,Institute of Education).

Deakin-Crick, R., Tew, M., Taylor, M., Durant, K. & Samuel, E. ( ) ASystematic Review of the Impact of Citizenship Education on Learning and

Achievement. Research evidence in education library (London, Evidencefor Policy and Practice Co-ordinating Centre, Social Science Research Unit,Institute of Education).

Deakin-Crick, R., Broadfoot, P., and Claxton, G. ( ) Developing andEffective Lifelong Learning Inventory: the ELLI Project Assessment inEducation: Principles, Policy & Practice, , , – .

Delandshere, G. and Petrosky, A.R. ( ) Assessment of complexperformances: limitations of key measurement assumptions, EducationalResearcher , , , – .

DfE ( )The Framework for the National Curriculum: A Report bythe Expert Panel for the National Curriculum Review London: DfE.www.education.gov.uk/schools/teachingandlearning/curriculum/nationalcurriculum

Ecclestone, K ( ) Commitment, compliance and comfort zones: the effectsof formative assessment on vocational education students’ learning careersAssessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, , , – .

EU ( ) (Recommendation / /EC of the European Parliament and ofthe Council of December [Official Journal L of . . ]).

Flyvbjerg, B. ( ) Making Social Science Matter: Why Social Science Failsand How it Can. Succeed Again . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Flyvbjerg, B. ( ) Five Misunderstandings About Case-Study Research,Qualitative Inquiry, , , – .

Forbes, P. and Kubler, B. ( ) Student Employability Proles CIHE report –A Summary, www.cihe-uk.com/publications.php.

FreshMinds; Unlocking potential : A summary of research into Opening Minds, FreshMinds, London.

Gardner, J. ( , nd edition) Assessment for Learning , London: Sage.

Gibbs, P and Armsby P ( ) Recognition is Deserved, Qualications areMerited. Where does that Leave fairness in Accreditation? European Journalof Education Special Issue: Key Competences in Europe, , , – .

Griffiths, T., & Guile, D. ( ). A connective model of learning: theimplications for work process knowledge. European Educational Research

Journal, , , – .

Guile, D ( ) From ‘Credentialism’ to the ‘Practice of Learning’:reconceptualising learning for the knowledge economy, Policy Futuresin Education , , – .

Gulikers, J. ( ). Authenticity in the eye of the beholder. Beliefs andperceptions of authentic assessment . Heerlen: Open University.



References

Guthrie, H. ( ) Competence and competency-based training: Whatthe literature says Adelaide: National Centre for Vocational EducationResearch Ltd.

Hager, P. ( ) Recognition of informal learning: Challenges and issues . Journal of Vocational Education and Training , no : – .

Halász, G. and Michel, A. ( ) Key Competences in Europe: interpretation,policy formulation and implementation European Journal of Education ,Special Issue: Key Competences in Europe, , , –

Hamilton, M. L. ( ) Reconceptualising teaching practice: Self study inteacher education. New York, Corwin Press.

Haste, H. ( ) Ambiguity, autonomy and agency, in: D. Rychen & L. Salganik(Eds) Denition and Selection of Competences; Theoretical and ConceptualFoundations (Seattle, OECD, Hogreffe and Huber).

Hipkins, R., Reid, A. & Bull, A. ( ) Some reections on the philosophicaland pedagogical challenges of transforming education Curriculum Journal

, , – .

Hodkinson, P. and Issit, M. ( ) The challenge of competence:Professionalism through vocational education and training. London.Cassell.

Hoskins, B. and Deakin-Crick, R. ( ) Competences for Learning to Learnand Active Citizenship: different currencies or two sides of the same coin?European Journal of Education , Special Issue: Knowledge, Globalisationand Curriculum, , , – .

Humphrey, N., Lendrum, A. & Wigelsworth, M. ( ) Social and emotional

aspects of learning (SEAL) programme in secondary schools: nationalevaluation London: DfE.

James, D. and Brewer, J. ( ) Key Skills Across the Pathways? Case studies ofsuccessful development and some implications for policy. Paper presented atthe British Educational Research Association Annual Conference, Queen’sUniversity, – August .

James, M. and Pedder, D. ( ) Beyond method: Assessment and learningpractices and values. The Curriculum Journal , , – .

James, M. and Pollard, A. ( ): TLRP’s ten principles for effective pedagogy:

rationale, development, evidence, argument and impact, Research Papersin Education , , , – .

Jaros, M., and Deakin-Crick, R. ( ) Personalised learning for the post-mechanical age: Journal of Curriculum Studies, : , – .

Jenkins, A. and Wolf, A. ( ) Why Do Employers Use Selection Tests?Evidence from British Workplaces. CEEDP, . Centre for the Economics ofEducation, London: London School of Economics and Political Science.

Lord, P. and Jones, M. ( ) Pupils’ experiences and perspectives of thenational curriculum and assessment: Final report for the research review

Slough: NFER.



Opening Minds

Marzano, R.J. and Arredondo, N.E. ( ) Tactics for Thinking . Aurora, CO:Mid-continent Regional Educational Laboratory.

Meijer, J., Elshout-Mohr, M. & Van Hout-Wolters, B.H.A.M. ( ). Aninstrument for the assessment of cross-curricular skills. EducationalResearch and Evaluation, , , – .

Michel, A ( ) Schools for an emerging world, in: What Schools for theFuture? (Paris, OECD), pp. – .

Morley, L., Eraut, M., Aynsley, S. ( ) Establishing the needs of employersand related organisations for information about the quality and standardsof higher education provision and student achievement in England. FinalReport: HEFCE, London.

Raffe, D., Howieson, C. and Hart, J. ( ) Credit Systems for LifelongLearning CS L Background Report on Scotland. Edinburgh: Centre forEducational Sociology, University of Edinburgh.

Redmond, P. ( ) The future of graduate employability: looking forward toGuardian October .

Schleicher, A. ( ) PISA – Science Competencies for Tomorrow’s World,Paris: OECD.

Segers, M., Gijbels, D., and Thurlings, M. ( ) The relationship betweenstudents’ perceptions of portfolio assessment practices and their approachesto learning. Educational Studies, , , – .

Stobart, G. ( ) The validity of formative assessment. In J. Gardner (ed.)Assessment for Learning , London: Sage.

Tang, C. et al ( ) How do students prepare for traditional and portfolioassessment in a problem-based learning curriculum? In J. Conway and A.Williams (eds.) Themes and variations in PBL: Vol ,. Newcastle, Australia.

Tchibozo, G. ( ) Emergence and Outlook of competence-based education inEuropean

education systems: an overview. Education, Knowledge and Economy , , ,– .

Tynjälä, P. ( ). Perspectives into learning at the workplace. EducationalResearch Review , , – .

Tynjälä, P. ( ) Connectivity and transformation in work-related learning -Theoretical foundations. In M. L. Stenström & P. Tynjälä (Eds.), Towardsintegration of work and learning ( – ). Springer Science + Business MediaB.V.

Wade, R.C. and Yarbrough, D.B. ( ) Portfolios: A tool for reective thinkingin teacher education? Teaching & Teacher Education , , , – .

Watson, D and Robbins, J ( ) Closing the chasm; reconciling contemporaryunderstandings of learning with the need to formally assess and accreditlearners through the assessment of performance Research Papers inEducation , , , – .



References

Watson, D. L. and Emery, C. ( ) From rhetoric to reality: the problematicnature and assessment of children and young people’s social and emotionallearning British Educational Research Journal , , – .

Wesselink, R., Biemans, H. J. A., Mulder, M., & Van den Elsen, E. ( ).Competence-based VET as seen by Dutch researchers. European Journal ofVocational Training , , , – .

Wesselink, R., Jong, C. & Biemans, H.J.A. ( ) Aspects of competence-based education as footholds to improve the connectivity between learningin school and in the workplace vocations and learning. Vocations andLearning, , , – .

Wheelahan, L. ( ) We teach people, not skills. Australian TAFE Teacher , pp. – .

Winter C ( ) Curriculum knowledge and justice: content, competency andconcept Curriculum Journal , , , – .

Wolf, A. ( ) Competence-based assessment (assessing assessment).

Buckingham UK. OUP.

Zeichner, K. and Wray, S. ( ) The teaching portfolios in US teachereducation programs: What we know and what we need to know. Teachingand Teacher Education , , – .



The RSA: an enlightenment organisation committedto nding innovative practical solutions to today’s socialchallenges. Through its ideas, research and 27,000-strongFellowship it seeks to understand and enhance humancapability so we can close the gap between today’s realityand people’s hopes for a better world.

8 John Adam StreetLondon WC2N 6EZ+44 (0) 20 7930 5115

R i t d h it

rs aom literature review

Documents