Moving toward Competence-Based Learning Outcomes: Strategies and Actions for Universities

1. Outcomes vs. Competences2nd UNICA EduLab Eötvös Loránd University Budapest2015.12.03Halász GáborELTE/OFI

2. Are we really talking about different things? What we were thinking about this in the „CEDEFOP leaning outcomes” project • Covering all European countries • Covering all subsystems • 33 country cases and 10 institutional cases (department, program and classroom level analyses)

3. The linkage „Learning outcomes are always situated in educational contexts, whereas competencesalso refer to practices in the workplace and in social and personal practices. Learning outcomes are validated by their relationship to competences.” (p.37)

4. The focus „…policies enhancing the use of learning outcomes approaches require major changes in the behaviour of institutions and individuals. (…) Behavioural changes require support and time for adaptation” (p.19)

5. The shift of focus • How to move towards teaching and learning led by competence-based learning outcomes • A shift of focus to • implementation • change management • innovation diffusion • Can universities as engines of innovation enhance innovation in their own teaching practice?

6. The approach of successful systems • Multilevel strategies and actions • National level(e.g. implementing qualifications reforms, tuning accreditation criteria, spreading best practices, awarding innovative solutions, using international programs, launching development interventions, supporting HR capacities) • Institutional level (e.g. defining program management standards, spreading best practices, awarding quality teaching, developing human capacities) • Department and program level (e.g. effective program management, nurturing a culture ofinnovative pedagogies, building partnerships, involving students) • A rich repertoire of „soft instruments”(incentives, capacity building, information sharing, media campaigns, targeted research, pilots, international programs, awarding good practice, alternative rankings, supporting partnerships etc.)

7. Some examples from Hungary • National level: • Applying the NQF/EQF in HE • The creation of a national education sector innovation strategy • Institutional level:the launching of a capacity developmentprogram in a regional agricultural university • Department/program level: • LeO research • Project based learning in a HE pedagogy MA program

8. Conclusions • The use of competence based learning outcomes requires partnership between HEIs and the actors of the world of work • The learning outcomes approach in program design and implementation requires effective program management and intensive cooperation within the teaching team • Achieving competence based learning outcomes requires innovative pedagogy enhancing practice-based learning

9. Conclusions (cont.) • The use of learning outcomes requires significant changes in the behaviour of people and institutions • This can be achieved only incrementally, through a gradual process reaching an increasing number of actors • The process requires a change and innovation friendly environment and sustained support at national, institutional and departmental level

10. Thank you for your attention