Foreign approaches to assessing the universal competencies of future and current teachers

Cover Page

Cite item

Full Text

Abstract

The article presents an analysis of foreign sources containing concepts of future and current teachers’ universal competencies and models for assessing these competencies, as well as comparative studies that can be used to enhance domestic theory and practice in shaping and evaluating these teaching resources. Two main conceptualizations of universal competencies in higher education (analytical and holistic) are identified, the specifics of evaluating universal competencies within these approaches are defined, their advantages and limitations in the process of training future teachers are demonstrated. Research on the assessment of universal competencies in teacher training primarily focuses on cognitive skills such as problem-solving, verbal, quantitative, and analytical reasoning, and critical thinking. Further research, as foreign experts believe, should focus on modeling academically acquired universal competencies and subject-specific competencies. Currently, the most relevant approach to building up and assessment of universal competencies for future and practicing teachers is considered to be an integration of analytical and holistic concepts. This approach involves the use of two sets at different stages of preparation: standard aspects of universal competencies and subject-specific situations. The formation and assessment of competencies are carried out within specified modes of activity and in predefined situations.

About the authors

Viktoria Arkadievna Prudnikova

Samara Branch of The Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration

Email: prudnikovava@yandex.ru

candidate of pedagogical sciences, director

Russian Federation, Samara

Lev Isaakovich Fishman

Samara Branch of The Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration; Samara State University of Social Sciences and Education

Author for correspondence.
Email: fishman@sgspu.ru

doctor of pedagogical sciences, doctor of economical sciences, professor, dean of Economics, Management and Service Faculty; Samara State University of Social Sciences and Education; chief researcher; Samara Branch of The Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration

Russian Federation, Samara; Samara

Irina Samuilovna Fishman

Samara Branch of The Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration

Email: irina_fishman@list.ru

candidate of pedagogical sciences, associate professor, leading researcher

Russian Federation, Samara

References

  1. Van der Velden R. Measuring competences in higher education: What next? // Modeling and measuring competencies in higher education / eds. S. Blomeke, O. Zlatkin-Troitschanskaia, C. Kuhn, J. Fege. Rotterdam: Sense Publishers, 2013. P. 207–216. doi: 10.1007/978-94-6091-867-4_15.
  2. Hanushek E., Woessmann L. The economics of international differences in educational achievement // Handbook of the economics of education. 2011. Vol. 3. P. 89–200.
  3. Рытов А.И., Фиофанова О.А. Международный анализ моделей, применяемых в практике оценки компетенций учителей // Высшее образование сегодня. 2017. № 3. С. 49–55.
  4. Марголис А.А. Оценка квалификации учителя: обзор и анализ лучших зарубежных практик // Психологическая наука и образование. 2019. Т. 24, № 1. С. 5–30. doi: 10.17759/pse.2019240101.
  5. Писарева С.А., Пучков М.Ю., Ривкина С.В., Тряпицына А.П. Модель уровневой оценки профессиональной компетентности учителя // Science for Education Today. 2019. Т. 9, № 3. С. 151–168. doi: 10.15293/2658-6762.1903.09.
  6. Минюрова С.А., Леонова О.И. Профессиональный экзамен: оценка квалификации педагога на соответствие требованиям профессионального стандарта // Психологическая наука и образование. 2016. Т. 21, № 2. С. 66–75. doi: 10.17759/pse.2016210208.
  7. Blömeke S., Gustafsson J.E., Shavelson R.J. Beyond dichotomies: competence viewed as a continuum // Zeitschrift für Psychologie. 2015. Vol. 223, № 1. P. 3–13. doi: 10.1027/2151-2604/a000194.
  8. Koeppen K., Hartig J., Klieme E., Leutner D. Current issues in competence modeling and assessment // Zeitschrift für Psychologie. 2008. Vol. 216. P. 61–73. doi: 10.1027/0044-3409.216.2.61.
  9. Weinert F.E. Concept of competence: a conceptual clarification // Defining and selecting key competencies / eds. D.S. Rychen, L.H. Salganik. Seattle: Hogrefe and Huber, 2001. P. 45–65.
  10. Ewell P.T. Can assessment serve accountability? It Depends on the question // Achieving Accountability in Higher Education / ed. by J.C. Burke. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 2005. P. 1–24.
  11. Rychen D.S., Salganik L.H. Key competencies for a successful life and a well-functioning society. Hogrefe Publishing, 2003. 25 p.
  12. Shavelson R.J. On the measurement of competency // Empirical Research in Vocational Education and Training. 2010. Vol. 2, № 1. P. 41–63. doi: 10.25656/01:5235.
  13. Benjamin R. The principles and logic of competency testing in higher education // Modeling and measuring competencies in higher education: tasks and challenges / eds. S. Blömeke, O. Zlatkin-Troitschanskaia, C. Kuhn, J. Fege. Boston: Sense, 2013. P. 127–136. doi: 10.1007/978-94-6091-867-4_9.
  14. Blömeke S., Busse A., Suhl U., Kaiser G., Benthien J., Döhrmann M., König J. Entwicklung von Lehrpersonen in den ersten Berufsjahren: Längsschnittliche Vorhersage von Unterrichtswahrnehmung und Lehrerreaktionen durch Ausbildungsergebnisse // Zeitschrift für Erziehungswissenschaft. 2014. Vol. 17. P. 509–542.
  15. Lunenberg M., Dengerink J. Designing knowledge bases for teacher educators: challenges and recommendations in teacher educators and their professional development. London: Routledge, 2021. 17 p. doi: 10.4324/9781003037699-6.
  16. Mork S.M., Henriksen E.K., Haug B.S., Jorde D., Froyland M. Defining knowledge domains for science teacher educators // International Journal of Science Education. 2021. Vol. 43. P. 3018–3034. doi: 10.1080/09500693.2021.2006819.
  17. Tack H., Vanderlinde R., Bain Y., Kidd W., O’Sullivan M., Walraven A. Learning and design principles for teacher educators’ professional development. Teacher Educators and Their Professional Development. London: Taylor & Francis, 2021. 14 p.
  18. Spencer L.M., Spencer S.M. Competence at work: Models for superior performance. USA: Wiley, 1993. 384 p.
  19. McBer H. Research into teacher effectiveness: a model of teacher effectiveness. Nottingham: Department for Education and Employment. 2000. 67 p.
  20. Koster B., Brekelmans M., Korthagen F.A.J., Wubbels T. Quality requirements for teacher educators // Teaching and Teacher Education. 2005. Vol. 21. P. 157–176. doi: 10.1016/j.tate.2004.12.004.
  21. Smith K. Teacher educators’ expertise: what do novice teachers and teacher educators say? // Teaching and Teacher Education. 2005. Vol. 21, № 2. doi: 10.1016/j.tate.2004.12.008.
  22. Nguyen N.T.L. How to develop four competencies for teacher educators // Frontiers in Education. 2023. Vol. 8. doi: 10.3389/feduc.2023.1147143.
  23. Rijmen F., Tuerlinckx F., De Boeck P., Kuppens P. A nonlinear mixed model framework for item response theory // Psychological Methods. 2003. Vol. 8. P. 185–205. doi: 10.1037/1082-989x.8.2.185.
  24. Kane M.T. An argument-based approach to validity // Psychological Bulletin. 1992. Vol. 112, № 3. P. 527–535. doi: 10.1037/0033-2909.112.3.527.
  25. McLachlan G., Peel D.A. Finite mixture models. New York: Wiley, 2000. 446 p. doi: 10.1002/0471721182.
  26. Preston R., Gratani M., Owens K., Roche P., Zimanyi M., Malau-Aduli B. Exploring the impact of assessment on medical students’ learning // Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education. 2019. Vol. 45, iss. 1. P. 109–124. doi: 10.1080/02602938.2019.1614145.
  27. Kimbell R.A. Innovative technological performance // Defining technological literacy: Towards an epistemological framework / ed. J. Dakers. Basingstoke: Palgrave, 2006. P. 159–179. doi: 10.1007/s10798-007-9030-8.
  28. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. 2013. AHELO Feasibility Study Report. Vol. 2. Data Analysis and National Experiences [Internet] // http://www.oecd.org/edu/skills-beyond-school/AHELOFSReportVolume2.pdf.
  29. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. 2013. AHELO Feasibility Study Report. Vol. 3. Further Insights [Internet] // http://www.oecd.org/edu/skillsbeyond-school/AHELOFSReportVolume3.pdf.
  30. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. 2010. OECD feasibility study for the international assessment of higher education learning outcomes 2010–2011 brochure. Paris: OECD [Internet] // http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/37/49/45755875.pdf.
  31. Tremblay K. OECD assessment of higher education learning outcomes (AHELO): rationale, challenges and initial insights from the feasibility study // Modeling and Measuring Competencies in Higher Education: Tasks and Challenges / eds. S. Blömeke, O. Zlatkin-Troitschanskaia, C. Kuhn, J. Fege. Rotterdam: Sense Publishers, 2013. P. 113–126.
  32. Shavelson R.J. Assessing student learning responsibly: from history to an audacious proposal // Change The Magazine of Higher Learning. 2007. Vol. 39, № 1. P. 26–33. doi: 10.3200/chng.39.1.26-33.
  33. Klein S., Benjamin R., Shavelson R.J., Bolus R. The collegiate learning assessment // Evaluation Review. 2007. Vol. 31, № 5. P. 415–439. doi: 10.1177/0193841x07303318.
  34. Blömeke S., Suhl U., Kaiser G. Teacher education effectiveness: quality and equity of future primary teachers’ mathematics and mathematics pedagogical content knowledge // Journal of Teacher Education. 2011. Vol. 62. № 2. P. 154–571.
  35. Kane M.T. Validating the interpretations and uses of test scores // Journal of Educational Measurement. 2013. Vol. 50. № 1. P. 1–73. doi: 10.2307/23353796.
  36. Fundação Cesgranrio. Exame Nacional de Cursos (ENC or Provão), 2014 [Internet] // http://www.inep.gov.br/superior/provao/default.asp.
  37. GCA (Graduate Careers Australia). Australian Graduate Survey [Internet] // http://www.graduatecareers.com.au/research/surveys/australiangraduatesurvey.
  38. Zlatkin-Troitschanskaia O., Shavelson R.J., Kuhn C. The international state of research on measurement of competency in higher education // Studies in Higher Education. 2015. Vol. 40. № 3. P. 393–411. doi: 10.1080/03075079.2015.1004241.
  39. Allen J., Van der Velden R. Competencies and labour market careers of higher education graduates. Maastricht: ROA, 2009. 136 p.
  40. Allen J., Van der Velden R. The flexible professional in the knowledge society: New challenges for higher education. Dordrecht: Springer, 2011. 260 p.
  41. Oser F. I know how to do it, but I can’t do it: Modeling competence profiles for future teachers and trainers // Modeling and measuring competencies in higher education: Tasks and challenges / eds. S. Blömeke, O. Zlatkin-Troitschanskaia, C. Kuhn, J. Fege. Rotterdam: Sense, 2013. P. 45–60.
  42. Henze I., van Driel J.H. The development of experienced science teachers. pedagogical content knowledge in the context of educational innovation // Towards Research-based Science Teacher Education: Proceedings of the 18th Symposium on Chemical and Science Education held at the University of Bremen, 15–17 June 2006 / ed. by I. Eilks, B. Ralle. 2006. P. 99–112.
  43. Nilsson P. Student teachers. Reflection // Towards Research-based Science Teacher Education: Proceedings of the 18th Symposium on Chemical and Science Education held at the University of Bremen, 15–17 June 2006 / ed. by I. Eilks, B. Ralle. 2006. P. 53–64.
  44. Gold B., Förster St., Holodynski M. Evaluation eines videobasierten Trainingsseminars zur Förderung der professionallen Wahrnehmung von Klassenführung im Grundschulunterricht // Zeitschrift für Pädagogische Psychologie. 2013. Vol. 27. P. 141–155.
  45. Boyle B., Lamprianou I., Boyle T.A. Longitudinal study of teacher change: what makes professional development effective? Report of the second year of the study // Journal of School Effectiveness and School Improvement. 2005. Vol. 16. № 1. P. 1–27.
  46. Beck E., Baer M., Guldimann T., Bischoff S., Brühwiler C., Müller P., Niedermann R., Rogalla M., Vogt F. Adaptive Lehrkompetenz. Analyse und Struktur, Veränderbarkeit und Wirkung handlungssteuernden Lehrerwissens. Münster: Waxmann, 2008. 214 p.
  47. Sahlberg P. Finnish lessons: What can the world learn from educational change in Finland. New York: Teachers College Press, 2011. 167 p.
  48. Shewbridge C., Jang E., Matthews P., Santiago P. OECD Reviews of Evaluation and Assessment in Education. Denmark: OECD Publishing, 2011. 162 p.
  49. Dutch Ministry of Education, Culture and Science response to OECD survey, Teachers for the 21st Century: Using Evaluation to Improve Teaching. OECD Publishing, 2013. 126 p.
  50. Uerz D., Volman M., Kral M. Teacher educators’ competences in fostering student teachers’ proficiency in teaching and learning with technology: An overview of relevant research literature // Teaching and Teacher Education. 2018. Vol. 70. P. 12–23. doi: 10.1016/j.tate.2017.11.005.
  51. ACT. 2015. Collegiate assessment of academic proficiency [Internet] // http://www.act.org/caap/.

Supplementary files

Supplementary Files
Action
1. JATS XML
Download
2. Figure 1 – Siegrid Bloemecke’s Competence Model

Download (203KB)
Indexing metadata

Copyright (c) 2024 Prudnikova V.A., Fishman L.I., Fishman I.S.

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

This website uses cookies

You consent to our cookies if you continue to use our website.

About Cookies