Compass Point Competency-Based Education

Compass Point Competency-Based Education By Marie A. Cini, PhD Provost and Senior Vice President, Academic Affairs University of Maryland University College Competency-based education has become a hot topic in higher education. Recently, I facilitated a panel for a convening by CAEL (Council on Adult and Experiential Learning) on Quality in Competency-Based Education, and heard several speakers say that 200 to 300 universities are working on some form of CBE model; Inside Higher Ed estimates that the number is even higher -- over 350. With all the attention, there is also a lot of misinformation out there. It mirrors the discussion in the 1990s about online education: its impact on quality, students, faculty and higher education in general. Let me address some of the issues we need to discuss at UMUC. First, competency-based education (CBE) is not new; it has been around for at least 40 years. In the 1970s, institutions including Empire State College, DePaul University, Thomas Edison State College, and yes UMUC developed systems for competency identification and validation. The language of competencies, outcomes and assessment entered our culture and informed our thinking. Those of you who work in the Prior Learning Assessment program are already part of this model. But the CBE discussion is heating up, and new models emerging. From relatively new institutions like Western Governors University to traditional ones like the University of Wisconsin, the University of Texas system, and Purdue University, universities are moving into the CBE arena. Why is CBE gaining traction now? One reason is the national push for college completion. Many believe that CBE will support the completion agenda by helping students save money and accelerate time to degree. Is this true? For some students, yes, it could be. Picture, for example, an adult student who has accumulated some college credit, achieved some certifications, and ascended to VP of marketing for a national company. Such a student might come to us with over half the degree already, demonstrate the college-level learning gained through professional experience, and be capable of completing the needed assessments in 6 months to complete a baccalaureate. But let s not start there. It s a mistake to focus on individual cases as though they are themselves the model. CBE is not necessarily a shortcut or a timesaver or money-saver it is a way of thinking about learning, and it can play out in different ways. I cannot stress this point enough; it is a way of thinking about education that will shift the national conversation on postsecondary education, just as online education did in the 1990s and 2000s. In fact, the words "competency-based education" no longer have a single meaning, if they ever did. CBE models come in many flavors. As schools develop models to align with their missions, they are producing entirely new ways of thinking about education. So let s get beyond the stereotypes and false

assumptions, unpack the CBE movement to consider the various components of competency-based approaches, and develop a more accurate perspective on their nature and possibilities. There are some basic characteristics that most CBE programs incorporate. Any one CBE program generally has several, but not necessarily all of these characteristics. They may play out differently or even be absent in any single model, but they inform the discussion and design. Competency-Based Curriculum First, to truly design CBE degrees, the curriculum must be based on competencies. Medical schools and programs do this well--think of the competencies physicians must demonstrate, from manual (for example, suturing) to observational and theoretical (correct diagnosis). We want our physicians to know as well as do. In higher education, this design means that every degree must focus on learning outcomes that include both knowledge and demonstration of that knowledge in real ways-- rather than simply on classroom inputs, such as time in class or number of assignments. This is no simple task. Higher learning goes beyond factual memory and basic skills. Outcomes must include the higher-order thinking necessary to integrate those facts and skills into an appropriate process of decision and action: evaluation, synthesis, analysis, and application in complex settings. To get at all those dimensions, we must break down the outcome or domain into its elements, in the form of narrower competency statements and detailed descriptions. For example, one learning outcome for our undergraduate psychology degree is Communicate evidence-based psychological concepts and theories using appropriate APA style. There is a lot packed into that statement. Mastery would entail multiple aspects, including knowledge of terminology and theory, critical analysis and evaluation, and communication of results in professional form. This is not simply narrow vocational education, as some fear. In another example, the quantitative reasoning domain in one of our graduate business programs includes construction of models with appropriate data, visual representation of data, analysis with mathematical tools, and use of results to inform the problem statement and solution. A true competency-based curriculum is a complex endeavor. At UMUC we have always embraced the concept of a competency-based curriculum, and now we are making that happen systematically. Our students will be expected to know and do at high levels. Application But formulating a competency-based curriculum is just stage one. The next stage is application. Let s go back to the medical example. The competencies are broken down so that residents understand and then apply. They don t just know the theory of laparoscopic surgery--they must be able to do it. At UMUC, where a student may be majoring in accounting, students must know more than the description of a balance sheet--they must be able to develop one correctly and know how to interpret it to a nonaccountant to answer a very specific business question.

That s why competency-based education isn t a shortcut approach, a series of quick exams or a list of someone s work experience. To reach the learning outcomes, students don t just demonstrate knowledge of facts or ideas -- they have to show what they can do with that knowledge. As the outcomes I referenced earlier show, application in higher education is based on critical thinking-- understanding a concept deeply enough to know when and how to apply it. Not all CBE models will focus on application. Some may put more emphasis on theory and articulation. But at UMUC (and many other institutions) application will be a central element. We will focus on application, the ability to apply theory and technique in complex real-world situations because our student population consists of adults who seek higher-order professional skills: they want to know and do at a higher level. Evaluative Assessment How do we know students have the abilities I referenced? Along with careful definitions of learning outcomes, we need robust, reliable and valid assessments. Most CBE programs rely on assessments to ascertain whether the student knows and can apply the competencies. Some institutions may use traditional "tests," but many, including UMUC, emphasize more authentic assessments, which ask the student to "do" the deliverable that will be required--the balance sheet, the proposal, the critique of an artwork. Traditional multiple choice or short answer tests do not assess whether a student can analyze, write, and synthesize; at UMUC our assessments will increasingly measure these complex domains. For some, the very term competency may have unfortunate connotations, suggesting mere adequacy, meeting minimum expectations. At UMUC, we will require that students not simply reach competence, which in traditional terms may be a C grade, but rather mastery. That doesn t mean perfection more a goal for a test rather than for authentic assessments -- but it does mean serious proficiency, going beyond memorization and mimicry to deep levels of understanding and application. The complexity of the assessment reflects the complexity of the learning, and will show us whether the student has mastered each domain. If not, the student will receive more time and faculty focus to help achieve mastery of the competency. Even more, because the learning is clearly articulated from the beginning, the assessments build on each other throughout the program, so that each piece contributes to the student s growing ability. Courses are not stand-alone parts but contribute in clear ways to the whole. So the student is not just accumulating credits or courses, but competencies and the program moves students to higher levels of mastery in a progressive way. Isn t it the case that good curriculum and course design already achieve these goals? Yes, effective curriculum is organized around learning outcomes, and demands student performance. Even traditional class study can use assessments requiring application. Some institutions such as Alverno College and Brandman University -- build competency-based assessment into a traditional course structure. But most institutions, including UMUC, have not approached academic programs holistically from this perspective. Competency-based curricula take the logic of outcomes-based design to the next level. They break learning outcomes into measurable components, and push assessments further in the

direction of active, real-world application, as well as building the entire learning experience in a more seamless way. Other elements of competency-based education are emerging as well, and are important to understand. Initial Assessment Initial assessment opportunities are drawing a lot of attention because they step outside the traditional course structure and offer one way to accelerate progress to degree. Any given CBE program may or may not focus on initial assessments to help students verify their prior college-level learning. At UMUC we will. UMUC has a long history with assessment of prior learning and experiential learning. We validate adult students prior college- level learning gained outside the traditional classroom through our Portfolio program, where students construct a portfolio demonstrating learning gained through work and other experience. We also recognize some professional certifications and other validations of learning from credible sources such as the American Council on Education. So in this area, we are building on our own prior learning program. But we can do more, and we can build it earlier into the student experience. Now, we can use competency mapping to validate student learning in more comprehensive ways -- to better identify gaps and assure that students have met all the needed outcomes. As technology-enabled assessments allow for better initial measures, UMUC will ensure that students are provided with initial assessments of their prior learning. That way, the new learning we facilitate with them will build upon what they already know, rather than repeat learning they bring with them. Learning Itself The possibilities of CBE are richer than gaining a few credits through assessments. It s a false assumption that many students will simply take a series of tests and earn a college degree. And it won't be the UMUC model. What makes CBE so promising is that it offers a new lens to view the learning experience itself. A competency-based curriculum can construct learning experiences in many ways. For example, Westminster College in Utah, where our Graduate School Dean Aric Krause worked before coming to UMUC, uses a series of project-based learning experiences to support and measure competency. Other institutions, like Southern New Hampshire University and Excelsior College, move students through demonstration and assessment of a series of required competencies rather than course requirements. Still others, like Northern Arizona University, allow progress through competency demonstration combining courses and independent study. At UMUC, in addition to initial assessments, we will continue our tradition of having excellent learning design in our courses so that students can learn from the material in the courses. We will improve our learning design, based on learning science and research, so that students are presented with the right level of material at the right stage for optimum learning. Careful sequencing will enable them to build on

existing competencies to full mastery and to integrate their experience with new learning more fully. As we apply more of what we know from learning research, we will design courses that lead to optimum learning outcomes. And to dispel a rumor, we will continue to have faculty working directly with students. However, the role of faculty will likely change. Just as our move to online education required faculty who understood how to teach online, this new model will require faculty who understand how and when to work with students for optimum learning outcomes. Faculty will be more important than ever because of the need to assist students to achieve mastery. We ve been talking for some time about the faculty transformation from the sage on the stage to the guide on the side, but honestly the role of guide on the side has not been studied, articulated and described as well as it could be. Any faculty member struggling with how to run an effective online discussion that leads to improved learning understands what I mean. Now we can truly develop faculty roles as coaches, mentors, and tutors. This does not diminish the importance of faculty, but rather the opposite. It helps focus their content expertise where it belongs in the learning equation: directly engaged with the learner where it is most needed, as opposed to simply doing a rote series of tasks each week that may or may not lead to increased learning. And just as we did in moving to online learning, UMUC will engage faculty in discussions about the changing role of faculty and will develop state-of-the-art training and development. Time as a Variable One reason that faculty roles will change is the individual variation that CBE allows in progress toward learning goals. The student can move forward when mastery is achieved, not just when a cohort reaches the same point. Focusing on mastery lets us break free from seat time in individual courses allowing, for example, self-paced study. If a student can work through a series of learning activities and demonstrate competency faster than his peers, why shouldn t he be able to do this? Many universities are developing CBE models wherein students can take as long or as short a time as they need to achieve mastery. That opportunity helps CBE transform education from an assembly line to an individual experience that supports the needs of the individual learner. UMUC will begin by allowing students to accelerate their learning, but not go longer than 8 weeks for discrete units or modules, due to financial aid considerations. As we develop our programs, we hope to change our financial aid model so that students can also take longer as they need to. Like most CBE programs, we want to focus on learning and not "time in seat." Mastery It s not just about individualized pacing. CBE can also help students achieve at new levels. Think about a typical student who graduates with B and Cs. This student has "mastered" between 70 and 80% of the program outcomes, but is still graduating as an accountant or software developer. With CBE, students

are typically required to achieve mastery typically, 85% or more of the competency. (Some schools also give additional recognition to very exceptional levels of mastery.) What happens to those who do not achieve 85%? They are not allowed to move on to the next module until they achieve mastery. This means that in some cases, students take longer to complete a module and perhaps to graduate, whereas in the past they might have squeaked by with 70%. Rather than lower quality, we believe that the quality of the learning our graduates will achieve will be much higher and far more useful in their lives and professions. Cost There is a widespread belief that students will save money with CBE. In fact, for some students CBE may imply less cost and faster time to completion, but for others not. Those that are highly motivated, with deep and broad knowledge and skills, may be able to work quickly through the competencies. In an "all you can eat" model (for example, a fixed price for as many credits as you can earn in 6 months), this could make sense and save them money. But for other students who will move through more slowly, this model may not work well. UMUC has to think through the right tuition model(s) for CBE. We have not made a final decision yet. But cost is not the most important element. At least for UMUC, we need a new way to talk about our emerging model. Too many stereotypes of CBE assume poor quality with low cost and faster speed. Instead, whatever we call it, we are moving toward greater value for the students, better learning outcomes, and a tighter connection to professional roles, which is what our students desire and what we will provide them. CBE at its heart supports learning and demands evidence of mastery. As a result, it can allow for individualized pace and varied delivery formats. It can also recognize existing learning and enrich it with new learning. So while the conversation nationally around CBE tends to be about speed and cost, those of us working hard on these models see something different--we see high-quality learning, higher levels of achievement, and more focused roles for faculty. Bottom line? The principles underlying UMUC s competency approach are the principles that have driven us since 1947. Not everyone supported UMUC s move to online education in the 1990s and look at us now. A CBE model that is designed around our mission and the needs of our students will enable UMUC to transform the educational experience again, assure quality curricula and learning, and help our students change their lives. Next Steps UMUC is now participating in pilots related to CBE. With our own commitment and with support from funders like the Lumina Foundation, the Gates Foundation, and federal demonstration projects, we are working out the elements of our model. We are actively involved in projects with CAEL (Council on Adult and Experiential Education) and ACE (American Council on Education).The elements I have

outlined are guiding our work. And yes, our regional accrediting body, Middle States Commission on Higher Education, fully supports CBE. Competency-based education is not a fringe idea. It is being discussed and adopted at traditional institutions across the country and is embraced by major national educational associations. And UMUC needs to be at the forefront of this national movement. Stay tuned as these projects unfold. As we move forward, I welcome your ideas, thoughts and concerns about CBE and what it can mean for UMUC.