Executive Summary

This paper provides a policy studies perspective on the process of Workplace Learning, contrasting the claims for the development of National Vocational Qualifications [S/NVQs] in the United Kingdom since the mid- 1980s with the problems of poor definition, confused conceptualisation, complex language and procedures, dilution of knowledge requirements, and a lack of a reliable and valid system of assessment. This latter problem is likely to have been complicated by the unwillingness of officials to consider that the UK model might have had fundamental flaws, resulting in a significant delay in introducing reforms and improvements.

This experience contrasts with the success of the German "dual system" in its various forms and the likelihood of its providing a model for EU developments which are likely to underpin EU human resources management strategies being developed as part of Agenda 2000.

The analysis of this paper indicates that there are two competing models of "competence" in use, one focussing on the needs of the individual and the other on the needs of employers. Although policies have existed in the UK which aimed to bridge this divide, the prevailing hostility to Trades Unions and the EU concept of "social partnership" under the Conservative governments prior to 1997 effectively prevented the improvement of the UK labour force that ten years of discussion had indicated were necessary for international competitiveness.

The new Qualifications and Curriculum Agency [QCA] took over responsibility for all English qualifications in September 1997. The QCA's overarching aims will be to promote coherence in education and training and to improve the nation's level of attainment in education and training. This brief is likely to prove difficult to achieve, given the missed opportunities of the last decade.

Context of this paper

The main aim of the project has been defined as "exploring invisible training" (Marconato 1998). This paper argues that the educational goals defined by formal education are merely the "tip of an iceberg" of the whole learning set which is associated with the ability to carry out work responsibilities effectively. A dichotomy between "formal" and "informal" education is postulated; the former being associated with the schooling carried out in off-the-job schools and colleges, while the latter is located within the workplace.

In most of the countries of the European Union [EU], the relationship between these two processes is formalised as a system of "apprenticeship".

"This proposal for a decision which is being presented by the Commission envisages the inclusion of all young people in apprenticeship and work linked training who are supported by the current training systems of the Member States at any level of training, including higher education. … The 'European Training Pathways' are organised on the basis of a few limited common principles. They should each be the result of the co-operation between the training establishment of the country of origin and the enterprise, establishment, or the training establishment of the receiving partners. They have the objective of monitoring the training methodology. They should be finally integrated into the training of the originating Member State. The Training Pathways are accompanied by a Community document called "EUROPASS TRAINING". It constitutes an attestation in the form of a passport certifying that the young person in question is following one or several training pathways within the context of the training framework of the originating country, and describes the competences acquired and the work experience which has been gained. As such the "EUROPASS TRAINING" constitutes an advantage for the integration of participants into the labour market. The implementation of this decision, once adopted by the Council according to the co-operation procedure, will be advanced by the Commission in close co-operation with the Member States, the social partners and the representatives of the organisations for work linked training and apprenticeship, with the prime aim of ensuring that the European Pathways retains a mark of high quality."(European Commission 1997)

The above quotation indicates how far initial vocational training at all levels is defined as conforming to the "dual system" model. In this context, the process of attaining professional status is conditional on a centralised statutory model based on administrative decree where government and social partners are involved in the decision making processⁱ.

The Origins of competence-based qualifications in the UK

"The new generation of actions must focus upon a limited number of objectives:

• increasing access for the citizens of Europe to the full range of Europe's education resources, in support of and as a complement to policies pursued in the Member States;
• innovation in these resources: pilot projects initiated by the Commission need to be conducted to test new approaches and instruments (such as second-chance schools and the accreditation of skills). The point is to develop new approaches based on the pooling of experiences from different countries. A significant proportion of resources must therefore be set aside for such pilot projects whose subsequent introduction on a more widespread basis is of course principally a matter for national authorities;
• wide dissemination of good practice in education and better mutual knowledge of systems and activities. Systems for regular survey and analysis of education and training systems and youth policies in the Member States will enable political and economic decision-makers to improve the quality of their initiatives." (European Commission 1997:2)

One of the major tasks of the LEONARDO Project Workplace Learning over the next two years will be to respond to the changes that are taking place in the process of Vocational Education and Training [VET] as the EU prepares for enlargement.

Using competencies at work - the UK experience

Definitions

"These competency frameworks are based, to a lesser or greater extent, on the following (alternatives):

• A competency model which relates to 'an underlying characteristic of an individual which is causally related to effective or superior performance in a job' [Boyzatis 1982]. Competencies are expressed as the behaviours that an individual needs to demonstrate.
• A competency model which relates to 'the ability to perform activities within an occupation to a prescribed standard' [Fletcher 1991]. Competencies are expressed as minimum standards of competent performance." (Strebler et al 1997: 3)

These distinctions are extended by a critical appraisal of the methodology of Functional Analysis used to develop the National Vocational Qualifications [NVQs].

"The notion of competence applied here has two characteristics. First that competence consists of specific behaviours on the part of individuals and that certain behaviours lead to superior performance. Second, that these behaviours are associated with personal qualities which are capable of being learned and developed. Boyzatis proposes that effective performance will occur when three components are consistent with each other. They are:

• the individual's competences;
• the job's demands; and
• the organisational environment.

This would suggest that competence is situation specific. [my emphasis]" (Stewart & Sambrook 1995: 97)

In practice, studies show that the theoretical distinction between the behavioural and competence models is often blurred in practice. The most important issue is that employers and employees should be clear about the focus [individual or job] and standard of performance [non-competent or competent or effective or superior].

The starting point for the development of competence-based qualifications has been the analysis of occupational functions. This involves a group of experts in the methodology of functional analysis, rather than the particular area of occupational competence, carrying out a top-down analysis of an occupational area using a model of competence based on "the whole work role".ⁱⁱ

In the behavioural model, competencies help to define the values of the enterprise as being concerned both with individual and business development. A typical example is the use of the Investors in People UK National Standard. ⁱⁱⁱ

The "minimum standards" approach to competency is increasingly associated with the introduction of performance management and competency-based pay. (Industrial Society 1996) The newly privatised sectors, such as telecommunications, water, electricity and gas [the "utilities" sector] has made particular use of this approach. In practical terms, this has often meant that standards-based qualifications [in the UK, S/NVQs] have been associated with the early 1990s rise in unemployment, lack of job security and growth of multi-skilled rather than mono-skilled employment.

The contributory impact of financial institutions seeking to maximise shareholder value to the neglect of other stakeholders, especially the workforce, has recently been highlighted as a problem against the background of high rates of job creation in the US economy. (Reich 1998)

The fundamental weakness of the UK approach to competence-based qualifications is related to the functional analysis approach referred to above.

"It is clear from the critical appraisal presented here that functional analysis has arguable weaknesses at a number of levels ..its philosophical and conceptual base is problematic, and empirical assessment of its application suggests failure to achieve claimed and expected benefits. ... There are two major implications …

First, … the result of this conception of competence and functional analysis is a concentration on a narrow range of technical skills. Therefore, enhanced skill levels are unlikely to be developed.

Second, purposes and values other than those associated with employment, which are traditionally pursued through education, are likely to be marginalised. …

It is clearly our view that the method cannot be accepted as a valid and reliable tool for constructing a national system of vocational qualifications." (Stewart & Sambrook 1995: 104- 105)

This view is supported by a study of "expert workers" which showed that "expertise", unlike "competence", depended on both the amount of specific skills possessed and the ways that the workers organised their knowledge. (Cornford and Athanasou 1995). In addition, there is some evidence from the UK engineering industry to support the EU "social partnership" approach in that trade unions, workers' expectations and past history will have an important impact on training decisions. (Heyes 1993)

The conclusion that may be drawn from the above analysis is that the development of the NCVQ model of competence-based qualifications represented a flawed model where a small group of enthusiasts seemed to have been unable to consider the fundamental methodological and ideological critiques of the approach. That is not, however, to say that the idea of competence-based qualifications is similarly flawed, merely that any discussion of such an approach needs to consider the issue systematically and without predetermined assumptions.

Users perceptions

Ease of assessment and development of competencies: users' views

In this context, the competencies that are easiest to develop and assess are those that can be:

• observed;
• tested;
• measured.

The interesting issue raised by this study is whether the behaviours where development and assessment are easiest are those that employers regard as the most important. The study suggests that competencies in softer skill areas are difficult to assess because of the way they are defined, overlap with each other, relative to particular situations and difficult to change. [Strebler et al 1997: 48-59]

The Assessment of Competence

The nature of Competence-based assessment

"Competence-based assessment is a form of assessment that is derived from a set of outcomes; that so clearly states both the outcomes - general and specific -that assessors, students and interested third parties can all make reasonably objective judgements with respect to student achievement or non-achievement of these outcomes; and that certifies student achievement of these outcomes. Assessments are not tied to time served in formal educational settings." (Wolf 1995:1)

This quotation from a United States review of the field (Grant et al 1975:5) is a somewhat surprising start to a review of the field, by one of the most authoritative English researchers in the field of competence-based curricula. This view is important in that it makes clear that much of current UK thinking in this field originates in American higher education. Wolf points out that it

"… encapsulates most of the key features of competence-based assessment … most especially in vocational, technical and professional education and training."

This approach builds on the essential concept of criterion-referenced assessment, which is more associated with criteria derived from school curricula, such as the current English National Curriculum with its statements of competence for schooling between the ages of 5-14 years within a hierarchy of Levels.

The policy context

The acceptance of Competence-based assessment in the UK originates with the opening of the "Great Debate of the late 1970s based on a cross- party consensus that Education was "failing the nation". This ideology provided a policy continuum from the New Training Initiative of 1981, through the National Curriculum of 1988 and 1995, (Konrad 1995) to the priorities of the 1997 Labour Government which were "Education, Education and Education".

A notable aspect of the policy changes of the 1980s in the UK was a challenge to established thinking which was claimed to have neglected the needs of the users of publicly-provided services by an over-emphasis on the interests of providers. In education and training, this was most influentially described by the most prominent figure in the development of the National Standards.

"We have what has been described as a provider- led system. What is frequently neglected is the learner, that is the client or customer of the education and training service. … Learning is a personal experience which can take many forms and can occur in many places. … Nor would anyone question that what they acquire from an education or training process is a personal and selective interpretation of the course which is offered. … If one accepts that the central process with which we are concerned is learning and that learning can take many forms, education and training may be seen as helping to make that possible. … The majority of people are operating in employment, and in life generally, at far below their potential … the country needs to make more effective use of its human resource to remain economically competitive." (Jessup 1991: 3-6)

The N/SVQ framework

"NVQs and SVQs are based on national standards which describe the expected performance of an individual in a work role. They focus on the required outcomes rather than on the processes or tasks the individual is required to complete. By using outcomes, they can be tied very closely to the industrial and commercial needs of organisations. … NVQs and SVQs are based on the nationally agreed standards of competence. The standards are combined into units of competence. Individuals achieve NVQs and SVQs by accumulating these units. … There are five levels of qualification. The definitions of these are given below:

Level 1 - competence in the performance of a range of varied work activities, most of which may be routine and predictable.

Level 2 - competence in a significant range of varied work activities, performed in a variety of contexts. Some of the activities are complex or non-routine, and there is some individual responsibility or autonomy. Collaboration with others, perhaps through membership of a work group or team, may often be a requirement.

Level 3 - competence in a broad range of varied work activities performed in a wide variety of contexts, most of which are complex and non-routine. There is considerable responsibility, autonomy, and control or guidance of others is often required.

Level 4 - competence in a broad range of complex, technical or professional work activities performed in a wide variety of contexts and with a substantial degree of personal responsibility and autonomy. Responsibility for the work of others and the allocation of resources is often present.

Level 5 - competence which involves the application of a significant range of fundamental principles and complex techniques across a wide and often unpredictable variety of contexts. Very substantial personal autonomy and often significant responsibility for the work of others and for the allocation of substantial resources feature strongly, as do personal accountabilities for analysis and diagnosis, design, planning, execution and evaluation.

Assessment of N/SVQ outcomes

"Performance evidence is required for each element of competence within each Unit. This should normally be derived from the real work environment. Details of what performance evidence is needed is set out in the statement of evidence requirements for each element. There is further guidance including, where appropriate, details on quantities of evidence, in the assessment guidance for each element. These quantities set out the minimum amount of evidence the candidate has to supply; you need to ensure that this covers all the performance criteria and range statements for the element. If it does not, you will need to increase the number of performances or products required. The combined performance and knowledge evidence must demonstrate that the candidate can meet the competence described in the element title. …

knowledge of principles and processes, which might be demonstrated through performance and supported by a statement or discussion and justification;

knowledge of skills, methods and techniques, which might be demonstrated through performance and supported by a statement or justification;

knowledge of facts, such as legislation, which might require written or oral answers to questions;

understanding of trends and developments and their impact, which will usually require a discussion and justification;

knowledge of organisational policy, structures, systems, which might be demonstrated through performance and description. …

In assessing candidates it is important to remember the values which are embodied in the standards and which should be apparent throughout the candidates' work. These are:

• encouraging learners to learn effectively and autonomously in a way that will enable them to continue learning;
• encouraging learning through establishing rapport with learners and supporting their needs as individuals;
• encouraging non-discriminatory practice and access to learning and qualifications;
• encouraging all practitioners to reflect on their own work and to continue to develop;
• encouraging the use of training and development as an integral part of organisational development." (EOSC 1994: 4, 11, 18- 20,)

At the conceptual level, this substantial quotation indicates clearly the extent to which the specification of the N/SVQ approach seeks to cover the broad concerns originally identified by Jessup and other advocates. However the substantial and persistent criticism of this approach, has focused on the failure to promote the broader values identified above.

"Some of the (former) criticism has been has been polemical and impassioned. Part of the reason for this that competence models have been seen as flying in the face of deeply respected theories of learning … as mechanistic, reductionist, … as fundamentally incompatible with more experiential approaches to learning … leading to the impoverishment of learning." (Bates 1995: 10)

"Whatever may be claimed about the independence of competence outcomes from learning programmes, the actual implementation of Competence-based Education and Training [CBET] across a wide range of occupational sectors has resulted in a reduced curriculum, a loss of significant theoretical content, a reduction of teacher-student interaction and a de-skilling of work roles. All the evidence indicates that it is simply not feasible to separate means and ends, learning and assessment in such an arbitrary manner." (Hyland 1996:171)

"The adherence of NVQ development to functional analysis alone is inexcusable, and there is an urgent need for development to be more closely grounded in practice through considering what competent people actually do. A wealth of research was already available in this area ^ivwhen NVCQ [the National Council for Vocational Qualifications] was established … and there are several well-proven approaches ranging from repertory grid technique through critical incident analysis, to grounded theory and phenomenological interviewing which have contributions to make to developing better conceptions of competence and better descriptions of what constitutes competent action." (Lester 1997)

Outcomes and the nature of knowledge

In the 1960s and early1970s, many British educators found it difficult to accept fully the objectives approach, which had been primarily developed in the United States. However, the ideas of such theorists as Davies, Mager and Gagnι have had an impact on post-school education and training which extended beyond the context of military and industrial training in which they had been developed.

The review of 100 NVQs/SVQs

1. The definition of competence:

2. Content

3. Knowledge and Understanding

"The NVQ/SVQ statement of competence concentrates on the ability to perform effectively. However effective performance depends on the individual having an appropriate body of knowledge, theory, principles and cognitive skills on which to draw … It is also necessary to … reflect in the standards, the knowledge, understanding, practical and thinking skills which are required for effective performance." (NVQ/SVQ Criteria and Guidance 1995; quoted in NCVQ/SCOTVEC 1996:31

The evidence from the UK is that assessment of knowledge evidence is given at least equal priority to performance evidence in College-based assessment. The Beaumont research found that workplace assessors and verifiers often lacked resources and commitment in this area and recommended:

"Awards could be delivered in partnership between colleges and employers, by [training] providers, perhaps at work, or through distance learning packages and text books at work." (NCVQ/SCOTVEC 1996:29)

4. Quality Assurance: Assessment and Verification

• poorly structured portfolios of evidence, especially a lack of relationship to the standards being assessed;
• lack of agreement between assessors on the number of times that competent performance had to be demonstrated before competence could safely be inferred;
• doubts about the authenticity of evidence based on handouts or other learning material were likely to limit the ability of internal and external verifiers to check the quality of the original assessment(s);
• lack of a common interpretation of standards across centres, especially between college-based and work-based assessors;
• lack of standard procedures in sampling assessment decisions by verifiers;
• inconsistency between Lead Bodies [not National Training Organisations] as to the level of occupational competence required by assessors and verifiers;
• lack of involvement of supervisors and managers in the process of assessment and verification affected the validity and credibility of the qualifications with employers;
• difficulties in collecting the majority of evidence in the workplace occurred when:
  • the breadth of competence demanded by the qualification [through the "range statements"] was greater than the workplace provided either because of the nature of the firm or the specific roles and responsibilities of the employee;
  • employers were hostile to training and assessment which was seen as not being applicable to the requirements of a particular workplace, although they had been agreed as being relevant to the needs of the industry as a whole;
  • the need to collect performance evidence across the whole of the specified range was not fully understood and accepted by those involved;
• the complex language used in the standards
  • made it difficult for practitioners to recognise their job roles;
  • prevented assessors and verifiers feeling particularly comfortable with the standards as written;
  • resulted in very few candidates being aware of, and assessed against the national standards
• output-related funding [payments to training providers based on candidates' achievements] is undermining the quality and confidence that employers have in the qualifications. (NCVQ/SCOTVEC 1996:38-75)

Many of these issues were addressed in the 1994 changes to the standards for assessors [Units D32/33 & 36], Internal Verifiers [Unit D34], and External Verifiers [Unit D35]; with revised guidance issued in 1997, the new procedures specified go some way to meeting the issues identified above. One major issue not identified in the research was the question of the currency of the Assessor and Verifier awards. It could well be argued that there should be a national cross-awarding body approach to registration, requirements for continuing professional development and monitoring of range and level of practice. It is, however, very difficult to match these criticisms with the high aims and intentions of the originators of these qualifications in the UK. It is the view of the writer that not only was the implementation and management of the initiative flawed, but that the concept is fundamentally flawed.^v

Recent developments

Conclusions

References

Beaumont G 1996 Review of 100 NVQs and SVQs: A Report submitted to the Department for Education and Employment, Chesterfield

Boyatzis R 1982 The Competent Manager: A Model of Effective Performance, New York, John Wiley

Burke, J 1995 "Theoretical Issues in Relation to Jessup's Outcomes Model", in Burke J (ed.) Outcomes, learning and the Curriculum, London, Falmer Press

Cornford I & Athanasou J 1995 "Developing expertise through training", Industrial & Commercial Training, 27, 2, pages 10-18

EOSC 1994 National Standards for Training & Development, Educational and Occupational Standards Council

European Commission 1997 TOWARDS AN EUROPEAN APPRENTICESHIP "EUROPASS - TRAINING" DGXXII November 12th

European Commission 1997:2 "Towards a Europe of knowledge" COM(97)563 final

Fletcher S 1991 NVQs, Standards and Competence: A Practical Guide for Employers, Managers and Trainers, London, Kogan Page.

Grant, G et al 1975 On Competence: A Critical Analysis of Competence-Based Reforms in Higher Education, San Francisco, Jossey-Bass

Heyes J 1993 "Training provision and workplace institutions", Industrial Relations Journal, 24, 4 (December), pages 296-308

Hirst P H 1975 "The Nature and Structure of Curriculum Objectives" in Golby M et al (eds), Curriculum Design, London, Croom Helm,

Hyland T 1996 "Professionalism, Ethics and Work-based Learning" British Journal of Educational Studies, 44, 2 (June) pages 168 to 180

Industrial Society 1996 "Managing Competencies", Managing Best Practice, 21 London, Industrial Society

Jessup G 1991 Outcomes: NVQs and the Emerging Model of Education and Training, London, Falmer Press

Konrad, J L 1995 "The Politics of Training" in Mullard M (ed.), Policy-making in Britain, London, Routledge

Lester S 1997 "Towards competent NVQs" in T Magazine, copy obtainable from the author at stan@devmts.demon.co.uk

Marconato G 1998 "Workplace Learning: on discovering invisible training" Paper presented to first meeting of the LEONARDO project Workplace Learning; Bolzano, February 1998.

Mueller F 1992 "Designing flexible teamwork: German and Japanese approaches", Employee Relations, 14, 1, pages 5-17

NCVQ/SCOTVEC 1996 Review of 100 NVQs/SVQs: A Report on the findings.

Reich R B 1998 "The new meaning of corporate social responsibility", California Management Review, 40, 2, page 8.

Strebler M et al 1997 Getting the best out of your competencies: IES Report 334, Brighton, Institute of Employment Studies..

Stewart J & Sambrook S 1995 "The role of functional analysis in National Vocational Qualifications: A critical appraisal", British Journal of Education and Work, 8, 2, pages 93- 106

Wolf, A 1995 Competence-based assessment, Buckingham, Open University Press

Footnotes

ii Mansfield B. & Mitchell L. 1995, Towards a competent workforce, London, Gower

iii Investors in People is the UK national quality standard for effective investment in the training and development of people to achieve business goals. The Investors in People Standard provides a framework, (not a blueprint) for improving business performance and competitiveness, through a planned approach to setting and communicating business objectives and developing people to meet these objectives. It recognises that all companies are different, and will have specific strengths and areas for growth. The result, is that what people can do and are motivated to do, matches what the organisation needs them to do.

iv For example:

• Raven J 1984 Competence in modern society, London, H.K.Lewis
• Schφn D A 1983 The reflective practitioner, New York, Basic Books
• Klemp G O 1977 "Three factors of success" in Vermilye D W (ed) Relating work and education, San Francisco, Jossey-Bass
• McClelland D C 1976 A guide to job competency assessment, Boston, McBer & Co
• Boyzatzis R E 1982 The competent manager: a model for effective performance, New York, John Wiley & Sons

This document was added to the Education-line database 25 May 1998