Competence matrix

from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The articles competence matrix and competence grid overlap thematically. Help me to better differentiate or merge the articles (→  instructions ) . To do this, take part in the relevant redundancy discussion . Please remove this module only after the redundancy has been completely processed and do not forget to include the relevant entry on the redundancy discussion page{{ Done | 1 = ~~~~}}to mark. Nfhrfh ( discussion ) 13:48, Jul 17, 2020 (CEST)

The competence matrix (also called competence raster, quality raster, matrix or rubrics) is a form of school performance assessment that works with the help of a matrix or a raster. In this model, different competencies are listed which can be assigned to a certain requirement level. The competencies are shown in the rows and the level in the columns.

Reasons for a new form of performance evaluation

Pupils often develop a narrow understanding of learning through school. Often there is no clear distinction between learning and performance. The learners gain the experience that it is not the learning process itself with its contents and difficulties that is taken into account, but mainly the subsequent performance in class work with the associated grades. This results in an examination behavior of the learners with which they aim at what the teacher wants to hear, with which they compare themselves with one another and with which they learn for the teacher instead of learning to understand the content. Accordingly, the students develop a certain learning behavior. You study for the exam, have a low intrinsic motivation to learn, only learn the essentials and develop test anxiety . This is caused, among other things, by the traditional methods of performance assessment, which are criticized for having focused on reward and punishment and thereby offering the learners an inappropriate incentive. The students are distracted from the subject matter itself and especially weaker ones are quickly discouraged. In addition, there has been a change in the learning culture. It developed and is developing away from teaching that is characterized by frontal teaching towards teaching that promotes independence, in which there is a strong orientation towards the learning processes, in which the tasks are constructed in a complex and everyday manner and in which the students have a right to Have codetermination and participation .

This changed form of learning culture is a reaction to the current discourse on heterogeneity in the school context. The heterogeneity is not a new phenomenon. However, the discourse has moved away from homogenization and towards the perception and recognition of diversity. In the past, schools were often perceived as a homogenizing institution. Currently, heterogeneity is seen partly as a problem and partly as an opportunity. The tendency, however, points in the direction of a positive assessment, as the German School Prize, for example, honors schools that deal particularly intensively with heterogeneity. This changed view of heterogeneity leads to a changed learning culture and, as a result, demands a change in performance evaluation that fits the new type of learning. One approach for this is the concept of the competence matrix.

Competence matrix

The basic idea for the competence matrix is ​​based on the PISA studies . In these, performance is not assessed on the basis of grades, but broken down according to skills.

Use

With the help of the competence grid, technical topics, interdisciplinary competencies and the associated requirements are systematically presented. They promote the self-regulated learning of the students, as individual learning processes are clearly structured. Both the teachers and the learners are given an overview of the current state of learning. Parents can also understand their children's requirements and performance assessment. A pronounced formalization of competence grids enables a high level of transparency for all those involved. In addition to the function of providing feedback on the performance of the students, the competence grid serves as a basis for making pedagogical decisions relating to the school in general or the lessons. When using competence grids, the learners are given more responsibility for their own learning. The students should learn to recognize their strengths and weaknesses themselves, to set learning goals for themselves, to work at their own pace and to present and evaluate their results independently. This corresponds to the new learning culture.

implementation

Competence matrices can be implemented in a variety of ways. Grids that can be used universally across schools are an exception. Every school that wants to work with this form of performance assessment must develop a matrix that fits its own needs and specifications. On the one hand, it must correspond to the guidelines of the educational standards, the respective core curriculum and curriculum. On the other hand, internal school requirements such as the school program or similar must be taken into account and integrated.

The development process of a competence matrix can be broken down into three consecutive steps. At the beginning, the competencies must be scientifically described. This can result in sub-competencies which, like the competencies, are based on the thematic content and learning areas. In the second step, the levels are determined, i.e. the degree of expression of the respective competence. In the last step, the abilities and skills that the students must demonstrate must be defined. These are important for the concrete implementation of the lessons, as they form the basis for checklists and the learning tasks, planning and advice based on them. The checklists enable a specific classification in a certain level of competence. The evaluation of student performance results directly from the grid. Tests can be derived from the individual cells to check whether the competence level has been reached and the student can move on to the next level. In addition to this summative assessment of the performance, there are also formative assessments such as information on learning progress, strengths and weaknesses. It is therefore a "process-accompanying performance measurement with the aim of individual support". Feedback on the performance of the learner can be entered directly into the grid, for example using crosses in the cell indicating the competence completed. These do not have to be pure crosses. They can be supplemented, for example, with praise, advice or the like. In addition, feedback can be formulated in dialogic discussions between learner and teacher and in discussions with parents . The students have the opportunity to set crosses independently in order to control themselves. To avoid mistakes, the crosses of the learners should be compared with those of the teacher. Both self-assessment and external assessment play a role.

The implementation of a competence matrix is ​​not only associated with a new type of assessment, but also requires a different structure and a different type of teaching compared to traditional frontal teaching. Since increased self-efficacy and reflexivity are to be achieved, the ability to self-assess must be trained. The open and cooperative forms of teaching are known for this, in which the students are assigned a variety of control options. In addition to the feedback on technical skills, the learners also need feedback about their control processes in order to be able to improve them. Cross-year classes are also an option, as in the best case scenario the children can be given more freedom. Even if the approach of the competence grid aims at increased self-control, the students continue to be supported by the teachers in order to benefit from their cognitive and emotional experiences. This idea corresponds to a constructivist approach. Students who need more help can get it from the teacher. In a reflective consultation, both parties develop a kind of learning agreement about the progress of the learning process. The process is at times more externally controlled. In the long term, however, this should enable and promote greater independence. This support also takes place in extensive parenting discussions in which the learner takes part. Working with competence matrices aims at the students' independence, but not at the fact that they work completely alone. Both times when learning together, in projects or in group work, as well as phases of teacher-centered explanations continue to be part of everyday teaching.

Comparison with number notes

This newer form of school assessment is contrasted with the numerical grades. They are probably the best-known form of classic performance assessment. Grading with numbers has several advantages. They allow, for example, an assessment of many student performance without spending a lot of time. In addition, grades can warn in good time if there is a noticeable development of the learner and early intervention is made possible. In addition, they offer an incentive for the children to make an effort and to deal intensively with certain content. Since most elementary schools as well as most secondary schools work with grades, the transition is made easier for the students and they can be gently introduced to the grades in elementary school. In addition, the grade is generally understandable and therefore also relevant and socially recognized for institutions outside of school.

In contrast to these advantages, there are various disadvantages. Even if grades can offer an incentive to make an effort, it is an extrinsic motivation that suppresses the intrinsic motivation of the students. They lose their natural joy in learning new things and instead want to be better than their classmates. A competitive orientation develops instead of a factual motivation. In addition, grades suggest a high degree of comparability, but since they result from different learning situations and exams, they are not comparable. Nevertheless, the students are selected based on grades, for example when they switch to secondary school or after graduation. Furthermore, grades usually only record the learning outcomes, not the learning process itself. Especially with weaker or slower learners, this leads to demotivation and a more negative self-image and ultimately to lower performance. There is a risk that teachers will abuse grades as an instrument of discipline and thus force desirable behavior. The prerequisite for numerical grades is lessons that are designed in the same way for all children. However, this form of teaching contradicts the more recent findings on the design of lessons and in the course of the heterogeneity debate, the grade can no longer be justified. Since the students are usually not involved in the assessment process, the concept contradicts the goal of independence. Overall, numerical grades are not meaningful enough and therefore neither offer the learners nor their parents an opportunity to reflect on the performance or the learning process.

The concept of the competence matrix tries to resolve the disadvantages of a performance assessment using numerical grades. As already described, the competence grid enables a precise description of the learner's competencies. It becomes clear in which area the respective child is how far developed. This is more precise and easier to understand for the children and their parents than grades. In addition, funding and promotional measures can be derived more specifically from the evaluation. The children have the opportunity to orient themselves while learning to the specified competencies, which are clearer and easier to understand than numerical grades. In addition, the students achieve greater independence and more positive self-efficacy. The first disadvantage that can be mentioned is the high level of effort that this concept entails compared to the known numbered notes. The teachers have to familiarize themselves and then, ideally, jointly create a competence grid for their school or for the individual years. Furthermore, there is a risk that joint learning will take a back seat due to the strong individualization made possible by the competence grid. However, this is an important part of the school and must continue to be an integral part. In addition, difficulties arise in the individual implementation, as this concept has mostly not yet been tried and tested. For example, the term “competence” is not used in a uniform way, since a different focus is set in each case. As with the competence levels, the definition must be very carefully selected in order to enable a clear classification.

Overall, the competence matrix represents a possible approach to performance assessment in order to react to the existing heterogeneity of the student body and the resulting new learning culture.

literature

  • Education Commission NRW: Future of Education - School of the Future. Luchterhand, Neuwied 1995.
  • Thorsten Bohl, Jürgen Budde, Markus Rieger-Ladich (ed.): Dealing with heterogeneity in school and teaching. Basic theoretical contributions, empirical findings and didactic reflections. Uni-Taschenbücher GmbH. Julius Klinkhardt Publishing House, Bad Heilbrunn 2017 (UTB School Pedagogy, 4755).
  • Jürgen Budde: Heterogeneity: origin, concept, demarcation. In: Thorsten Bohl, Jürgen Budde and Markus Rieger-Ladich (ed.): Dealing with heterogeneity in school and teaching. Basic theoretical contributions, empirical findings and didactic reflections. Verlag Julius Klinkhardt, Bad Heilbrunn 2017 (UTB School Pedagogy, 4755), pp. 13–26.
  • Matthias von Saldern: School Achievement 2.0. From the grade to the competence grid. Books on Demand, Norderstedt 2011 (School in Germany, 4).
  • Hartwig Schröder: Learning - teaching - teaching. Psychological and didactic basics. 2nd edition, Oldenbourg, Munich 2002 (handbooks and textbooks of pedagogy).
  • Felix Winter: performance evaluation. A new learning culture needs a different approach to student performance. 3rd edition, Schneider-Verlag Hohengehren, Baltmannsweiler 2008 (Fundamentals of School Education, 49).
  • Jörg Ziegenspeck: Handbook Censorship and Certificate in School. Historical review, general problems, empirical findings and educational policy implications. A study and work book. Publishing house Julius Klinkhardt, Bad Heilbrunn / Obb. 1999.

Individual evidence

  1. ↑ a b Balance: School performance 2.0. From the grade to the competence grid. 2011, p. 131
  2. ^ Education Commission NRW: Future of Education - School of the Future. 1995, p. 87
  3. ↑ a b Balance: School performance 2.0. From the grade to the competence grid. 2011, p. 136
  4. ↑ Winter: performance evaluation. A new learning culture needs a different approach to student performance. 2008, p. 3
  5. ↑ Winter: performance evaluation. A new learning culture needs a different approach to student performance. 2008, p. 5f.
  6. ^ Budde: Heterogeneity: Origin, Concept, Delimitation. 2017, p. 13f.
  7. ^ Budde: Heterogeneity: Origin, Concept, Delimitation. 2017, p. 17.
  8. ↑ Balance: school performance 2.0. From the grade to the competence grid. 2011, p. 11
  9. ↑ Balance: school performance 2.0. From the grade to the competence grid. 2011, p. 131f.
  10. ↑ Balance: school performance 2.0. From the grade to the competence grid. 2011, p. 133
  11. ↑ Balance: school performance 2.0. From the grade to the competence grid. 2011, p. 131f.
  12. ↑ Balance: school performance 2.0. From the grade to the competence grid. 2011, p. 136f.
  13. ↑ Balance: school performance 2.0. From the grade to the competence grid. 2011, p. 133
  14. ↑ Balance: school performance 2.0. From the grade to the competence grid. 2011, p. 133f.
  15. ↑ Balance: school performance 2.0. From the grade to the competence grid. 2011, p. 141.
  16. ↑ quoted from Saldern: school performance 2.0. From the grade to the competence grid. 2011, p. 142
  17. ↑ Balance: school performance 2.0. From the grade to the competence grid. 2011, pp. 145f.
  18. ↑ Balance: school performance 2.0. From the grade to the competence grid. 2011, pp. 137, 140
  19. ↑ Balance: school performance 2.0. From the grade to the competence grid. 2011, p. 140
  20. ↑ Balance: school performance 2.0. From the grade to the competence grid. 2011, pp. 144f.
  21. ↑ Balance: school performance 2.0. From the grade to the competence grid. 2011, p. 147
  22. ↑ Balance: school performance 2.0. From the grade to the competence grid. 2011, p. 123
  23. ↑ Balance: school performance 2.0. From the grade to the competence grid. 2011, p. 124
    Ziegenspeck: Handbook censorship and certificate in school. Historical review, general problems, empirical findings and educational policy implications. A study and work book. 1999, p. 128f.
    Schröder: Learning - teaching - teaching. Psychological and didactic basics. 2002, p. 295f.
  24. ↑ Balance: school performance 2.0. From the grade to the competence grid. 2011, p. 124
  25. ↑ Winter: performance evaluation. A new learning culture needs a different approach to student performance. 2008, p. 3
  26. ↑ Balance: school performance 2.0. From the grade to the competence grid. 2011, p. 124
    Winter: Performance evaluation. A new learning culture needs a different approach to student performance. 2008, p. 14
  27. ↑ Winter: performance evaluation. A new learning culture needs a different approach to student performance. 2008, p. 3
  28. ↑ Balance: school performance 2.0. From the grade to the competence grid. 2011, p. 124
  29. ↑ Winter: performance evaluation. A new learning culture needs a different approach to student performance. 2008, p. 10
  30. ↑ Winter: performance evaluation. A new learning culture needs a different approach to student performance. 2008, p. 3
  31. ↑ Balance: school performance 2.0. From the grade to the competence grid. 2011, p. 148
  32. ↑ Balance: school performance 2.0. From the grade to the competence grid. 2011, p. 171
  33. ↑ Balance: school performance 2.0. From the grade to the competence grid. 2011, p. 148