Peter Goodman blogs frequently about education in New York. In this post, he explains what “competency-based education” is and why it is a problem.
He writes:
“A decades-long cyber revolution has been changing the face of education – sort of. Assignments are online, papers and homework submitted online, distance learning allows class participation from anywhere, Skype, Dropbox, cyber tools abound; however, every new cyber tool, hardware and software, has to be monetized, turned into dollars. Will the cyber tools ultimately substitute for the instructor? Enhance the effectiveness of the instructor? Increase student learning (defined as scores on tests aka assessments of learning)?
“Is the future of education a tablet with a student tapping away and the teacher, as an adjunct assisting the student in using the cyber tools?
“A description of Computer Adaptive Testing provided by I-Learn, a vendor,
‘There is growing interest in computer adaptive testing (CAT), where students answer questions online and a computerized algorithm tailors future questions based on correct or incorrect answers. The key difference between an adaptive assessment and a fixed-form one—which is often taken with paper and pencil— teachers can better understand the root causes of skill gaps spanning back multiple years as well as identify where to focus instruction next. This helps them differentiate instruction and meet the needs of all learners, including those who are below, on and above grade level.’
“Questar, the newly hired creator of the next generation of New York State grades 3-8 tests also is a proponent of competency-based education (CBE). Content can be divided into discrete packages; a Questar blog describes the process,
“… eliminate the one-to-many teaching approach. Students can’t receive personalized instruction and personalized learning when a teacher has to teach to the most common denominator. We can solve this problem with technology by giving every student a tablet device that wirelessly connects to adaptive software in the cloud.
… seamlessly integrate assessment with the instruction presented to each student on his or her tablet. Educators know that best-practice teaching involves instructing for five minutes, asking students a few questions to determine if they’ve understood the material, backtracking if necessary, and then moving on to the next topic … With tablets and the right software, this approach is possible on an individualized basis: after every five minutes of individualized tablet-based instruction, students would be presented with a brief series of questions that adapt to their skill level, much as computer-adaptive tests operate today. After that assessment, the next set of instructional material would be customized according to these results. If a student needs to relearn some material, the software automatically adjusts and creates a custom learning plan on the fly.’
“Does this competency or adaptive learning approach agree with what we know about how children learn?
“The last decade has seen an explosion in brain research, and we know that children learn through interactions with adults and other students in challenging environments, these interactions lead to increased learning….
“We are not Luddites, the world will continue to change, we just have to make sure the changes benefit the needs of children not line the pockets of entrepreneurs at the expense of our children.”

Reblogged this on stopcommoncorenys.
LikeLike
I wonder if there isn’t a social aspect to learning that would be traded away with individualized instruction. Seems like there is some value in having everyone in a classroom working through the same problems at the same time. And at some point on the continuum, individualized instruction may become an alienating experience.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Unquestionably. In fact, we’re better off keeping tech out of the classroom entirely: http://www.crlt.umich.edu/node/80537
Flerp, are you leaving NY in 2016? (There is a 4/5 chance you won’t, but I want to make sure.)
LikeLiked by 1 person
I feel about NY in 2016 like I’d feel about a sinking dingy in the middle of the Pacific. I’d love to leave, but . . .
LikeLike
FLERP, stay in New York. For example, your sarcasm would be misunderstood down South. Southerners would understand it as an insult, rather than irony.
I’m a middle-aged New Yorker who left Upstate for a job in the deep South. The job doesn’t pay as much as was claimed, benefits in this non-union environment are worse than what I had thought was legal, and the cost of living is much higher than where I had moved from.
Union-represented jobs still pay better: http://www.bls.gov/cps/cpsaat43.htm
Now I’m too old to compete for a job back in New York, where competition for jobs is tougher.
Live and learn.
It’s pointless to complain, in part because in the deep South, a complaint does not count as meaningful communication, unlike in New York.
Also, there are no good bagels.
LikeLike
Unfortunately, I will probably die in this place.
LikeLike
“The last decade has seen an explosion in brain research, and we know that children learn through interactions with adults and other students in challenging environments, these interactions lead to increased learning….”
The “drone”(cyber) education twist, on the old “monkey see, monkey do…”
LikeLike
Works for conventional content and well honed questions with a limited range of answers, or better yet one answer. Add well developed networks of modules for learning content and procedures for a limited domain of learning say, fractions, with a badge or certificate for completion including an ” exit test.” There can be visual/audio tutorials much like those now on the Internet.. The secret sauce is getting people to believe programmed instruction like this is personalized when it is not. Of course some programs are ” learning” how many ways students can be wrong with an answer to a question, but in fact, the knowledge that is easiest to program and sell is mapped on a domain where the questions are known,can only be asked in a limited number of ways, and the inventory of correct answers is small.
The computer can, of course also track the relative efficiency and correctness of the student’s answers. The closest thing so far to the computing power needed to answer a large number of questions is Watson.
Soon to be added to the claims for competency- based learning are survelliance systems tied to proper mind-sets for learning, obtained from questions that allow for “sentiment analyses,” facial recognitions, or brainwave activity detected from a simple cap with sensors…with pattern recognition linked to some theory of meaning.
You get the gist of these approximations of ” what did you mean” or ” what did you want to find out ” questions and answers when your iPad guesses the word you wanted, Google generates what you are searching for with incomplete information and misspellings, and you find a translation of something you have written, and ask for the translation back in English. The fortuitous, hilarious, infuriating and sometimes spot-on answers and guesswork is something computers do well, but this accuracy surely has diminishing returns for a concept of personalized learning that works for all learners all the time at any age, for any puzzlement that goes with being human.
LikeLike
A really good “adaptive” instructional system is also going to be very difficult to develop. It implies anticipating the possible ways a student might need help, and preset lessons for each contingency (a “knowledge space”).
Maybe it can work for some aspects of math, computer programming, physics, highly computerized forms of knowledge like bioinformatics and genetics, other relatively formalized kinds of knowledge.
These systems are going to require *lots* of work and big investments to develop, and for-profit investors will expect corresponding profits.
Also, it’s almost inevitable that as these systems are introduced, any subjects that are not amenable to this kind of system be deemphasized.
The university where I work requires all incoming students to take ALEKS courses, which are used for refresher coursework AND for placement. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ALEKS A friend in the math department showed me evidence that students do better in math course at the university, after they have done the ALEKS course.
The Wikipedia entry linked to above explains that ALEKS was developed at a university with federal funding, but now is owned by a for-profit corporation.
LikeLike
Our pediatrician asked my kids at their last checkup (a few months ago) if they prefer computers or paper — they immediately replied paper. The good doctor said that’s what all his patients have been telling him. We have a 1-1 initiative in the school where I teach, and kids hate it. The middle schoolers hate their chromebooks even more.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Peggy Robertson (http://www.pegwithpen.com) has been blogging about this for a while- good to see others are finally catching up.
LikeLike
I am no teaching expert, but a blended approach seems like a logical next step in trying to raise performance. The one-size-fits-all approach likely does hold better students back, while not providing enough support for the most challenged kids. Obviously, we can’t just throw IPads at all students and leave them on their own, but a lot of kids probably can benefit from the immediate and individual feedback they can provide through well-designed educational software. That would free the teacher to concentrate on the kids having difficulty, which would also be made visible by the software feedback to the teacher. I’d rather try to deal with the shortcomings of the new technology than continue on with this absurd reliance on invalid, inexact, delayed “measurement” of students and teachers and their jerry-rigged “Growth Models.” All they have done is prove they have lost another generation of kids to incompetent “reform.”
LikeLike
I have taught students who have struggled and experienced repeated failure in large classrooms settings for over 20 years, and I am now seeing great success with a blended, personalized approach. I have a group of students who learn at their own pace using a variety of online and/or paper curricular resources that a team of teachers select for them using detailed and personalized formative and diagnostic assessment. My students and I do some projects together (when that is the approach that seems most beneficial), have some small group teacher directed sessions, some student interactive sessions, and some individualized computer based practice. In short, we use all the tools available to us – and this is in a large, high poverty, public school with limited resources. While I see many terrible outcomes from test-based and for-profit reform, I think we should be hesitant to criticize every new initiative without giving a chance for new ideas that seem to be working.
LikeLike
As Becca indicates, the reason for all these blended approach is the class sizes. Those who promote personalized software, take $ away from education and channel it to software companies.
I say, spend the money on reducing class size and teachers’ class time.
Since this is the richest country in the world, limit class size to 15 both in lower and higher ed. If Hungary can afford class size of 20, so can the US afford 15.
LikeLike
Becca: I couldn’t agree more. A synthesis of traditional and technology driven instruction is, imo, the best of both worlds. In fact, I had a lot of success working with both emotionally disturbed kids and children with autism, utilizing both approaches in tandem.
My main concern (and it’s what I’m seeing take shape) is that the entrepreneurs selling the tech will want that to be the centerpiece of everything, with the teacher taking the passenger seat, acting as more of a monitor of attention paid and assistant to the technology.
LikeLike
Yes, exactly. There is a segment of the student population who need creative solutions designed by specially trained teachers – and part of the solution might be found through blended and personalized learning. We need smaller class size with experienced teachers empowered to find creative solutions for this group of students. The problem lies with non-educator billionaires who use their money and influence to disrupt the natural progression of experienced educators who are working to make education better. I just worry that in our fervor to stop the billionaire disruptors, we nay-say every new idea. If we are to lead the true reform of education, we have to do more than point out problems. We must propose promising solutions. I think teacher directed (rather than tech-corporate directed) personalized learning might be part of the answer for the 20% or so of young people who have not been successful in traditional education. We need to keep our minds open to this solution, instead of viewing it as yet another problem to attack simply by virtue of its “new-ness”.
LikeLike
BREAKING: a whopping 22% of New Yorkers plan to move out of the state in 2016, a reflection of a steep, sustained out-migration that will occasion the loss of (yet another) Congressional seat. One out of every five!
Click to access SRI_Predictions_and_resolutions_release_final.pdf
The numbers are shocking.
“The latest estimates bring New York’s total “net domestic migration” loss since the 2010 census to 653,071 people—the largest such decrease of any state, both in absolute terms and as a percentage of estimated population as of the start of the decade . . .”
Other states bleeding population: New Jersey, Connecticut, Illinois, California, Ohio, Michigan, and Wisconsin.
So where the heck are all those people going? The big net domestic migration winners: Texas, Florida, North Carolina, South Carolina, Arizona, Colorado, and Nevada.
People fleeing blue states for red states . . . didn’t they get the memo about how awful right-to-work states are?
That states like New York are looking at adaptive technologies to stretch their education dollars shouldn’t come as any surprise.
LikeLike
I’d put this in the New Year’s Resolution’s category (along with “You will get in best physical shape …in years” (63%)).
LikeLike
T, How many will officially move out of state to a state that has no income tax–and keep a second residence in NY (spending <180 days/year there)?
LikeLike
The LA County Office of Education has been not-so-gently trying to get me and my colleagues to buy and use computer adaptive software since at least Y2K. I’ve used Vantage writing software at gomyaccess.com, Scholastic Read 180 reading software at h100000065.education.scholastic.com/slms/studentaccess/read180ng, Study Island, etc., etc… SBAC, of course. The software programs all use artificial intelligence to differentiate instruction, so it is said. And repeated.
These programs have been widely despised by my students with very few exceptions, and in nearly all cases proven the opposite of instructional. The struggling readers stare blankly at the screens, typing random answers in attempts to get the machines to stop repeating the same question for hours, days, longer. There is a reason we all know what screen face looks like.
The academic achievers find ways to trick the machines into giving them high scores without making them work to earn the grades. The truly gifted hack, cut, and paste. I don’t blame them, as the artificial intelligence awards higher scores for more simplistic writing structures and downright incorrect answers. At least they’re not being taught to write with less efficacy when they trick the programmers.
And do not get me started on password issues wasting class time. Seriously, I could waste days of your life talking about log ins. Life is too short.
And as long as we’re mentioning Luddites, I don’t have a problem with them. I don’t have a problem with attacking spinning looms and thresher machines. I like hand crafted clothing. I like little vegetable gardens. Who likes mass production? You get what you pay for.
LikeLike
It just has all the markers of a generated, created demand to me.
Who is begging for this, outside of people in government who are selling it and vendors?
My 13 year old could not have been less impressed with the online CC test and he and his friends openly jeer at the online test prep programs that are supposed to be “adaptive”. One month into using them last year they were trying to beat the program – make it generate nonsense. That was the goal.
LikeLike
That’s been my experience, too, Chiara. In Utah, we supposedly have “computer adaptive testing,” which in my mind makes no sense if we’re somehow “grading” schools and teachers, because how can you compare when the tests aren’t the same? But anyway, my students loathe the testing, and hate the waste of computers and time that they have to endure.
LikeLike
Yeah, I;m sorry but I think allowing ed tech vendors to design “personalized” public education is like allowing the food industry to direct what’s in school lunches.
“I’ve just returned from an official trip to the White House. That’s not a sentence you write every week. I was invited there in my capacity as CEO of Edtech UK, following an ed tech trade mission we ran with UK Trade and Investment (UKTI), helping early stage start-up businesses to break into the US market. These are companies with amazing solutions to real challenges in the classroom and in the workplace.
Edtech UK launched just over a month ago, with cross-Whitehall endorsement, as a new strategic body, to accelerate the growth of Britain’s ed tech sector in the UK and globally.
Our aim is to be a convening voice for this burgeoning sector. To support educators and teacher innovators who have great ideas for products and solutions but no support; to help the highest growth start-up businesses which are exporting their work to the world; and to work across UK government to support strategy and policy that helps drive the sector to improve outcomes for learners as well as skills and economic growth.
My visit to the White House coincided with a historical moment for schools in the country. I was there for the launch of their landmark National Education Technology Plan but on the same day president Barack Obama signed new primary legislation, called the Every Student Succeeds Act. As the president’s special adviser Roberto J Rodriguez said: “It has been a momentous week for education and technology reform in the US”.
I don’t have any faith this will be done well or carefully. None.
There has to be a recognition that this is an industry, and there seems to be an almost deliberate attempt to deny that. Good intentions are not enough. I would have to see a lot more skepticism and actual analysis than I;m seeing now to trust this will end well.
I think it ends up as cheap, low quality online replacements for the instruction children have now in lower and middle income schools. I’d love to be proved wrong, but I won’t be. I hope public school leaders ignore the hype and use their own judgment. It will be difficult because this is being sold hard, but there is nothing wrong with resisting a sales pitch- to the contrary, it’s their duty to question this.
https://www.tes.com/news/school-news/breaking-views/us-placing-ed-tech-heart-its-education-reform-uk-must-follow-its
LikeLike
Yes, Chiara, it’s worth comparing these adhoc ways of deciding what competence is with the corresponding Finnish documents
http://oph.fi/english/curricula_and_qualifications/vocational_upper_secondary_education
LikeLike
I don’t see this gaining much traction in education except as a supplemental tool in subjects that lend themselves to discreet, sequential elements. Otherwise, I think it would be deadly, dull, especially for young children. Most poor students will do better from a teacher that knows how to diversify instruction, and one that knows how to relate to them as a human. Machines will not solve the skills gap.
LikeLike
My principal has fallen for Apple and I’m in a Parochial school. Sadly, my school is just trying to keep up with the Jones; other Parochial and private schools that have gone with Apple. The Catholic high school in my Archdiocese gave everyone an Apple I-Pad this year to replace text books.
LikeLike
The most glaring reason to be cautious of the competency based technology is that someone is deciding what competency is. When I was teaching Read180, one of the things the kids did was take a ten question quiz after they finished a book. The questions were really simplistic “who did what” kinds of questions really only meant to test recall. The multiple choice questions were chosen from a bank of 20(?) that were randomly chosen for each quiz. They could take them over as many times as they needed to pass. I found the whole thing stupid and boring(and they did, too). I’m not sure what they were supposed to prove. I tried different things with different kids to make the process more user friendly. For some kids, I printed out all the questions for reference while reading. Others I had complete a pencil and paper quiz open book either while they were reading or afterwards. Since I extended my library far beyond the Read180 titles, many times the books were chosen simply for pure enjoyment. I had more than one student buried in a book from my personal collection. To see struggling readers want to read and groan when they had to stop was enough assessment.
LikeLike
We all know that having children learn from tablets can’t be a good thing, especially if it’s the go-to method. Just as inBloom was defeated because of the lack of data security, so should “personalized” computerized learning. Watch just a few minutes of the Knewton Corp. get downright giddy over just how much data he can extract on children from these computerized lessons. As long as data can’t be fully protected (which I believe is the current state of technology), then this sort of business/education venture is risky business, and our children shouldn’t be the testers of a system that puts their identities and information at risk. Please tell parents to speak up and tell their school administrators and boards of education not to employ this risky — and unnecessary — technology. https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Lr7Z7ysDluQ
LikeLike
Thanks for the video, Lisa. It demonstrates, once more, that all these data-driven, slurry-talking people have one thing in common: they think education is to produce test results.
So what we need to do is get rid off tests. More generally, we need to get rid off grades. With giving out grades, we admit that education is measurable, hence we can assign numbers to it to measure levels of success.
Can we imagine a system where kids can be motivated to study by something else than grades?
LikeLike
Of course, the main motivation behind this is to get rid off teachers.
All these new ideas about education, that ultimately propose some kind of software, make one basic mistake: they ignore the fact that education has a very strong social component. As Lakoff says
“You learn something because you care about it, and you care about it because somebody emphasizes with you.”
Lakoff also explains the basic reason why those in power want to get rid off educators: it’s not really money.
LikeLike
“empathizes with you”.
LikeLike
Interesting how the reasonable “competence-based qualification”, as it appears in the Finnish educational system, got distorted into this drive for competency-based education, which is about selling Pearson software.
http://oph.fi/english/curricula_and_qualifications/competence_based_qualifications_for_adults
http://oph.fi/english/curricula_and_qualifications/vocational_upper_secondary_education
It’s worth peaking into one of these vocational qualification documents, say, for dance
Click to access 155026_Dance_VQ_2010.pdf
LikeLike
Man…these guys are GOOD! I could almost order this for dessert, they make it sound so delicious!
I like this one:
“Educators know that best-practice teaching involves instructing for five minutes, asking students a few questions to determine if they’ve understood the material, backtracking if necessary, and then moving on to the next topic … With tablets and the right software, this approach is possible on an individualized basis:…”
Yes…hearkening back to the ol’ tried and true from days of yore when when there was actually a teacher running the show. No need for that pesky, sloppy, human error in the equation, anymore. No more catering to the common denominator. Leave it to Computer Beaver and all will be well.
This is a cheap means of delivering the material. Like Frosted Flakes. The teachers role will become ever more diminished and, so, the need for experience will diminish as well. Enter lower teacher salaries so that ever more technology can be sold.
Do I sound bitter? Yes..I am. Yet another claim of the superiority of technology over people.
As was said before: the people pushing this stuff aren’t sending their kids to any school where they’ll spend the day in a cubicle, shut off from others, staring at a screen and then answering multiple choice questions every 5 minutes.
Is that what you want to for your child?
Honestly…?
A huge component of education is that of socialization. This technology bypasses that point entirely. We’re at a very important crossroad now: technology as a tool for the teacher or teachers as tools of the technology. No scare tactics here. The scenario is very real.
LikeLike
Please unsubscribe me. This email address is being shut down.
Sent from my iPhone
LikeLike
Catherine Lomas Scott,
I don’t know how to unsubscribe you. You subscribed. Find a button to unsubscribe. That’s your job, not mine.
LikeLike