Return-Path: <nifl-aalpd@literacy.nifl.gov> Received: from literacy (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by literacy.nifl.gov (8.10.2/8.10.2) with SMTP id hA4H6HV19270; Tue, 4 Nov 2003 12:06:17 -0500 (EST) Date: Tue, 4 Nov 2003 12:06:17 -0500 (EST) Message-Id: <Sea2-F34Zxx5Hhbl0IZ00032527@hotmail.com> Errors-To: listowner@literacy.nifl.gov Reply-To: nifl-aalpd@literacy.nifl.gov Originator: nifl-aalpd@literacy.nifl.gov Sender: nifl-aalpd@literacy.nifl.gov Precedence: bulk From: "Eileen Eckert" <eileeneckert@hotmail.com> To: Multiple recipients of list <nifl-aalpd@literacy.nifl.gov> Subject: [NIFL-AALPD:800] Re: Flaws in frameworks? X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed Status: O Content-Length: 1894 Lines: 36 Hi all: In response to Jackie's question, a possible flaw in competency-based frameworks is that competencies can be viewed in isolation. Competencies can be taught and assessed with a kind of "checklist" mentality and an assumption that "competence" is simply the sum of all competencies. Cognitive science research describes, explains, and provides support for the ideas of both tacit knowledge--unconscious knowledge that contributes to proficient performance when it is correct, and is a barrier when it is incorrect--and mental models. Mental models are organizational frameworks for knowledge and skills. They are largely tacit, which means that if they are not "surfaced" and addressed they continue to operate subconsciously, possibly interfering with acquisition of competencies that don't fit the mental model. Competency-based frameworks tend to ignore tacit knowledge and mental models that influence how all of someone's knowledge and skills fit together in use (or don't). There's an article by Shavelson and Huang in the February 2003 issue of "Change" called "Responding responsibly to the frenzy to assess learning in higher education." Though the intended audience is in higher education, I think it applies to adult literacy and basic education and ESOL. The authors describe four types of domain-specific knowledge: declarative (knowing that) procedural (knowing how) schematic (knowing why), and strategic (knowing when, where, and how certain knowledge applies) Those who use competency-based frameworks, does your instruction include all of the above? If so, how? If not, what's missing? And can you tell from current assessments what's working and what's not? Eileen _________________________________________________________________ MSN Messenger with backgrounds, emoticons and more. http://www.msnmessenger-download.com/tracking/cdp_customize
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Thu Mar 11 2004 - 12:15:24 EST