Prof. dr. Martin Mulder Vinke

c.v. publications publication list presentations projects journals associations contact pictures thoughts
 ↓↓
 

May 6, 2009

 

Many colleagues get confused when the definition of competence, competency and competencies is concerned. It is a difficult issue, and by now I see this as one of the essential things to discuss in competence theory. One of the difficulties is that there are many dimensions by which the concept varies, many contexts in which it is conceptualized, and different functions it fulfils. To try to order the different meanings of the concept of competence a bit, I came to the following levels of use of the concept.

 

Level 1. Competences as behavioristic functionalism; this meaning entails the detailed breakdown of competencies in list of trainable behaviors, for instance as was used in the 70s and 80s of the last century. Experience showed this approach was difficult to maintain in education as it was too fragmented, and actual behavior of teachers did not really change when they were trained in very many isolated skills.

 

Level 2. Competence as integrated occupationalism; this means that competence is seen as the integrated capability of persons to achieve results. This approach is very popular amongst educational policy experts who want to warrant that the outcomes of education are up to the standards defined in national competency-based qualification frameworks. The approach is called integrated because there is combined attention for the development of knowledge, skills and attitudes, often based on occupational profiles.

 

Level 3. Competence as situated professionalism; this means that competence only gets meaning in a specific context, in which professionals interact which each other. It is closely related to the theories and practices of professional development which showed that personal epistemologies have a stronger influence on professional behavior than isolated skills training. It also touches upon the notion that competence is heavily influenced by what important stakeholders expect of the professional in terms of wishful professional action. Professional associations (such as associations of medical specialists or captains in the aviation industry), but also local players (such as hospital directors, chefs de clinique, and airline executives) have a strong influence on the desired competence fields and the extent to which the professionals need to be proficient in these fields.

 

Applied to the reorientation of certain farmers, who are engaging in multifunctional farming (such as in fields like care farming, regional produce, rural tourism, environmental education), competence development means that the farmers can follow specific practical training sessions, enroll in certain educational programs to receive a license for their new or additional activity, and develop their own knowledge, skills and attitudes by getting experience in their new fields of economic activity.

 

 

 

August 8, 2008 - Fundamental views on Competence

 

Exactly seven years after (which I remember well as it was the date of birth of my oldest grandson) my Foreword in the book Competence Development in Organizations: Perspectives and Practices (sorry: in Dutch only), I was thinking about the fundamental differences in competence development philosophies. In May I was thrilled because Renate Wesselink found the piece of Robert W. White (see below) who saw competence as a basic motive of humans. Just recently I reviewed a manuscript (I cannot - and if I could I should not - disclose the author, as it was a blind review) in which competence was conceived of as the being of a person, and existential characteristic, which I can understand, since being able to accomplish things to ones own or other's expectations, standards or wishes, adds significantly to the feeling of self-esteem and personal or professional identity. As such, competence is the core of self efficacy. In between these publications I have seen publications in which competence is conceptualized in a series of different theoretical and practical contexts: in selection psychology, in management development, in training and education, in occupational standardization, in professional association management, in legally binding licensing arrangements, in organizational strategy, in sector development and institutional capacity building. It truly is a complex concept with a multitude of dimensions. It comprises elements of what persons

- can do

- want to do

- dare to do

- are allowed to do

- are expected to do

in a specific context.

Competence as capability of persons thus is not the same as the performance of these persons, because using competence in practice, that is: performing to the level of what the person is capable of in a given situation, depends to a large extent on the other dimensions listed: motivation, guts, permission, and desirability (and of course resources).

 

May 8, 2008 - Laboragogy

It is a couple of years ago when I coined the concept of laboragogy. It is an analogy of peda-gogy, the science of raising children, and andra-gogy, the science of development of adults. Labor-agogy is the science of the development of human resources in the world of work. There are many theories which contribute to laboragogy. Occupational psychology, work sociology, organizational sociology, personnel psychology, organizational psychology, business administration, various field of law, micro-economy, educational theory, and competence theory to name a series of examples. Would the term laboragogy justify elaboration? Would it inspire researchers in the field of human resource development to take it further? Let us wait a while to see who takes the concept up. 


May 8, 2008 - Competence as a basic motive for acquisition of knowledge, mastery of skills, need for exploration - competence as exploratory learning for effectance

Renate Wesselink pointed me at an article called 'Motivation reconsidered: the concept of competence', by Robert W. White, which was published in Psychological Review, Vol. 66, No. 5, 1959. Let me think. I was 8 years of age at that time.

The article coins the term competence as a reaction to the biological drive theories which were dominant in those days. He refers a lot to animal tests and goes into the theory of psycho-analysis of Freud, and convincingly contends that humans have a need for exploration, activity, manipulation, as a motivation to learn to deal with the environment. Competence is seen as motivation for action, humans want to master knowledge, skills and the like, to be able to cope with the environment. It is a leading need to deal with the environment. White proposed to call the nature of the motivational aspect of competence effectance, the satisfying feeling of mastery (of speaking, walking, working), of efficacy. I would say that competence is a need that would fit in the higher levels of the hierarchy of needs of Maslow, later more often referred to as self-realization (ontplooiing). In that perspective, competence development indeed reflects a holistic development philosophy, which underscores the importance of self-management learning. In essence, the learning him or her self want to develop to master a job, a core task, a work process. Clearly, in this development knowledge, skills and attitudes play their role in combination. This competence development philosophy is quite different from the tri-partite and separatist approaches of delineating knowledge, skills and competence elements (as in the present European Qualification Framework, but also in the Dutch qualification dossiers). Put as shortly as possible competence in the sense of White is the innate will to master. How does relate to the modern conception of motivation? In White's terms, competence is an intrinsic motive of humans in itself. Motivation seen as part of competence (as Spencer and Spencer do) is therefore false. As said, competence is seen as a strong and independent motive for exploration etc. itself.

 

16 februari 2008 - Een vernietigend oordeel over het competentiegericht leren?

Het eindrapport van de parlementaire onderzoekscommissie Onderwijsvernieuwingen 'Tijd voor Onderwijs', spreekt nauwelijks over het competentiegerichte onderwijs. Dat komt uiteraard omdat het onderzoek niet over het MBO en HBO handelt, maar over de basisvorming, tweede fase voortgezet onderwijs en het VMBO. Als er één partij de zwarte Piet krijgt toebedeeld, dan is het de Politiek, die veel te veel en te snel veranderingen heeft doorgezet. Op pagina 93 wordt het competentiegricht beroeponderwijs genoemd. Er wordt een definitie gegeven van competentie die ik altijd heb bestreden, en die ook averechts werkt. Competentie is en blijft bekwaamheid, en daar zit een kennis-, vaardigheids- en attitudeaspect in. Bloom, Krathwohl en Simpson hebben in de jaren vijftijg van de vorige eeuw hun standaardwerken geschreven bestaande uit de taxonomieën voor onderwijsdoelstellingen. Die taxonomieën maken integraal deel uit van het competentiedenken. En zoals ook ik vaak zeg: kennis is de basis van een opleiding, die is absoluut nodig. Maar ook: kennis alleen is niet voldoende. Lerenden moeten die kennis leren toepassen, anders is het onderwijs een te dure investering in de samenleving. Tot dit inzicht ben ik gekomen in het werken met studenten uit diverse culturen die buitengewoon veel kennis hebben van economie, wiskunde, statistiek, sociologie, psychologie, geschiedenis, kunst en cultuur, maar die deze kennis niet kunnen toepassen bij het ontwerpen van onderwijsprogramma's.

Ik vind de parallel tussen het competentiedenken en het nieuwe leren niet correct. Zoals ik vaak zeg: er is geen 1-op-1 relatie tussen benoemde competenties als curriculuminhouden (WAT) en het nieuwe leren als instructietechnologische vormgeving van het onderwijs (HOE).

Er wordt vaak gesteld dat het competentiegericht onderwijs logisch gepaard gaat met het doen afnemen van het aantal contacturen. Onzin. Die zaken zijn gescheiden. Schooldirecties hebben in het nieuwe leren een mogelijkheid gezien om bezuinigingen door te voeren. Echter: goed competentiegericht onderwijs is duurder dan traditioneel vakkengericht onderwijs.

In het rapport van de commissie wordt ook opgemerkt dat de invoering van het competentiegericht leren op het MBO nadelig is geweest vor de aansluiting van het VMBO op het MBO. Dat heeft ook te maken met de te grote zelfstandigheid die van de lerenden werd gevraagd. Er is te weinig aandacht voor instructie en begeleiding. De oorzaak is minder contacturen, en niet het competentiegerichte onderwijs.

Verbrugge verwijst op pagina 110 naar episteme. Zijn visie is niet exclusief. Plato en Aristoteles hebben niet de gehele wijsheis in pacht. Waarom niet verwezen naar Socrates? Hij was een pragmatist. Bovendien, waarom verwijst hij niet naar ikanotis, ook een term uit die tijd die stond voor bekwaaheid, vaardigheid. Zijn verzet tegen het competentiejargon is gericht tegen de praktische uitwerking ervan, maar hij kan ten principale niet tegen het idee zijn dat het onderwijs probeert de juiste bekwaamheden te ontwikkelen bij lerenden. Hij zegt eigenlijk 'alles is kennis', terwijl je ook kunt zeggen: 'alles is bekwaamheid'. Immers, kennis maakt integraal deel uit van bekwaamheid. Die discussie heb ik al eens uitgebreider behandeld in het boek 'Competentieontwikeling in organisaties'.

 

December 19, 2007

ECS held a plenary chair group meeting yesterday, and the concept of competence was discussed from the different areas ECS is covering: teacher education, skills training, vocational-agricultural education, sustainability and knowledge co-creation, education in developing countries, and the corporate world. It was interesting to see that the context of work indeed determines the notion of competence. In vocational education we speak of the competence-based qualification framework, which is established throughout the Netherlands. In teacher education job profiles are determined, and included in the law on professions in education. It is interesting to see how teacher education institutes have developed their own competence matrices for their programs. In skills training in the university academic competence is at stake, which is partly discipline-related, but also linked to personal and professional development. Then suddenly the competence profiles of the university programs are key. In learning for sustainable development one can speak of sustainability competence. In contexts of educational development in developing countries, the term competence is also often used, parallel to the notion of outcome-based education. The essence in that context is to innovate education and to make programs more relevant for local and regional socio-economic development. And in the corporate world there is the distinction between organizational and personal competence. So, indeed, the context determines the use of the concept of competence.

A question which arises is then: was is the commonality in the use of the concept of competence in these contexts, if any? I would say that this is the notion of capability or capacity if you will. Competence, capability and capacity all mean that an individual (or organization) has the right (or authority) to perform certain actions (including taking decisions) (interesting to note is that I recently found that in Sanskriet the phrase 'performance of action' can be found; later more about that, I hope), as well the proficiency in a certain field to do that according to certain standards, which can be (implicitly) set by customers, clients, organizations, associations or the law. 

So basically, competence in my view means: license (the legal aspect) and proficiency (the behavioral aspect) to perform.

What then is the relationship between competence and competency. I follow various authors in that competence is the general capability of a person (or organization) to perform in a certain field, and that competency is part of that general competence. So competence-competency is characterized by its a whole-part relationship.

Is competence a concept that adds value? I would say yes. It signifies that qualifications provided in educational programs may not be sufficient to perform in contexts outside the school or university, in personal, societal and professional situations. This idea was the basis of the composition of the book 'Competence-based vocational education. Qualified, but also capable?' The concept of competence made clear that education has to be aware of the importance of teaching knowledge, skills and attitudes, which can be applied in the daily life of the student and graduate.

For complex and critical professions educational institutions cannot warrant competence, because competence development can necessitate continuous learning and professional development, such as for lawyers, doctors, and psychotherapists. Professional associations or sector organizations play their role in setting standards for professional practice and training.

I see competence as a prerequisite for performance. But it is not the performance itself.

Competence has a behavioral aspect. But behavior is not the competence itself.

Competence is a possession of the person (or organization). One can decide to use it in performance. But whether that happens depends on a lot of other things (motivation, opportunity, allowance, situation, threat, urgency, rewards, energy).

 

April 18 ,2007
During the AERA in Chicago a colleague from Mexico stated strongly that she did not believe in competence-based vocational education. Her experience was that competencies were mapped in a very detailed way, and that teachers did not like it, nor students. This competence-based vocational education was implemented only for a very limited number of students, a fraction of the total population of students in vocational education. She held a plea for including knowledge about the work environment, organization, society, rights and political power in the curriculum, and to link vocational education with work places. All this however is included in the competence-based re-design of vocational education in the Netherlands. It is different from the competency-approach in the US in the 70s and 80s. We have been moving away from occupational behaviorism of that time to professional holism. Competence development is necessary to also move away from mere theory without any practical experience and application. Society asks for competent workers or skilled workers who have the capability to achieve results in work places, not from a reproductive exploitative perspective, but from a productive self realization perspective. All this of course within the expectations and regulations which hold in work and society. In our work at ECS we are working on the development of a matrix for competence-based vocational education. This matrix is not intended to facilitate the implementation of externally imposed frameworks for the redesign of vocational education. The matrix helps program teams to find out where they are in terms of competence-based education, and where they want to go to. The matrix thus does not serve as a normative standard. On the contrary, it is meant as a tool for the empowerment of program teams. And we are pleased that this matrix can be used well and is appreciated by those teachers who work with it. A colleague from the US stated that there are negative associations attached to competency-based education in that country. So we need to explain that we are using the concept based on the developments since the 70s and 80s. Or should we suggest to read the literature on competence that appeared from the 70s to the beginning of this century first before we enter in a debate about competence-based vocational education so that we can understand what we mean and really communicate about the value added of the concept of competence in vocational education? After all there is that fundamental difference between the selection and development paradigm in using strategies for competence-based education.
 

March 10, 2007
There are various complaints about the introduction of competence-based vocational education. It seems to me that:
- if the concept and definition are not agreed, we are around a sort of Tower of Babel, we hear one another speaking about competence-based vocational education, but we mean different things; I have seen quite a lot of competency lists, and many of them do not differ from task and activities lists which were produced in the seventies and eighties in occupational analyses; what is new about such a view on competence?
- if the number of competencies is too large, they will have little impact on the (re) design of vocational education;
- in the EU circles, competence is used for general attitude-like characteristics of students; it is placed next to knowledge and skills, and thus it is unclear what the holistic meaning of competence in that sense entails;
- if instruction and contact time are reduced to a minimum, the quality of education is diminishing, even if this variety of education is called competence-based; all education needs sufficient class room instruction, discussion, reflection and feedback time; not all pupils and students have enough stamina to self-manage learning during large periods of time effectively; not all self-discovery is efficient en effective.
What is still needed are good descriptions and analyses of high-quality competence-based vocational educational practices. These should inspire teachers, and give them and of course the students the feeling that these show meaningful and rewarding interactive processes of teaching and learning. If teachers and developers are being asked to invent the wheel themselves, a lot of public resources and private energy is wasted, which is not really sustainable.
 

January 02, 2007
There is quite some debate about the concept of competence. Some think it is purely behaviouristic. In my opinion that is not necessarily true. Education as a whole can be designed in a behaviouristic way. But that is not necessary either. Competence is a very old concept. I was lucky to be able to trace it back to Greek and Persian. It stands for being able and permitted to do things sufficiently well. This is what we expect from pilots, surgeons, nurses, architects, technicians, teachers. Even better than competent, they should be excellent. Development of competence can be approached in several ways, varying from holistic and integrated to atomic and fragmented. Needless to say that I am in favour of an integrated approach in which knowledge, skills, attitudes and personality are developed in a continuous, meaningful and stable way. That does not match with long lists of detailed standards. The art of supporting competence development is to inspire pupils, students, alumni, employees, entrepreneurs, independent workers, voluntary workers and executives to develop themselves to higher levels of achievement. As an analogy with the concept of core competence, competence development of persons should be matched with their talents. That gives a great sense of fulfilment.