INTEGRATION OF KEY COMPETENCES IN VET CURRICULA

Contemporary curricula today meet with the big challenge to find the best and most efficient ways to develop key competences without undermining the importance of occupational skills and competences. The analysis of different type of curricula helped to identify the main types of integration of key and occupational competences. The most typical ways of integration could be grouped into two broad approaches: 1) structural (integration through learning outcomes or assessment criteria); 2) instructional (through specific pedagogies or instructions). In many cases we find a mixed approach of the bellow-presented approaches.

Matrix approach

A matrix approach is more evident in general curricula (Wang, 2019), which may lead to sufficiently overcrowded and unbalanced curricula. Cross-curricula integration of key competences also needs clarity regarding pedagogical approaches and assessment. For example, a list of key competences is often provided and these competences are supposed to be developed throughout the whole of the curricula, however, key competences might be vaguely reflected in the defined learning outcomes. The challenges of a matrix approach to curriculum design (Tedesco et al. 2013) are related to the problem of that key competences are “inevitably seen as ‘add-ons’ and of secondary importance, and that linking capabilities to subjects tends to be an arbitrary and forced process” (Gilbert, 2019, p. 171).

Integration within particular modules/subjects/projects, based on the relevance

The latest research indicates (Saavedra and Opfer 2012; Gilbert, 2019;) that an increasing emphasis in curricula is on the development of key competences through the disciplines related content, rather than promoting them as a series of stand-alone competencies. This model of integration seems most relevant to VET curricula due to the need to develop professional identity and develop key competences which are realised in diverse work-related settings. Still, more investigations are needed to confirm this opinion. Integrating key competences within occupational themes or modules could be explained by the fact that VET curricula are typically designed based on VET standards, which reflect the main fields of professional activity or are based on the logics of work processes (Hupfer, Spöttl, 2014). Integration of several vocational content modules within vocational curricula can also be considered as a way to develop key competences.

Added to the already existing curriculum as new subjects

The research suggest that some key competences can be integrated into existing curricula and some could be developed as distinct areas of knowledge, for example, ICT, languages. Co-curricula approach or integrating key competences into curricula through separate units has the major problem which is related to the risk of making curricula too complex and overloaded. This is particularly observed with general education curricula (Jackson, 2015). Voogt & Roblin (2012) conclude from the analysis of international studies that “competences are integrated across the curriculum, with the exception of ICT-related competences which in the majority of the countries were either introduced as separate subjects or accompanied by specific guidelines to facilitate its teaching and assessment” (Voogt & Roblin, 2012, p. 314).

Be part of a new curriculum in which the traditional structure of school subjects is transformed

One of the examples of this type of integration of key competences is reported by Watters & Christensen (2014) who presented two cases when newly developed curricula attempt to integrate science and mathematics with workplace knowledge and practices. These curricula were collaboratively developed by school teachers and partners from mining and aerospace industry. This resulted in new integrated curricula named Science, Maths and Related Technologies for Engineering and Electrical School-based Apprentices (or QSMART) and Aerospace Curriculum. The curricula design was based on the following principles:

1. a clear and consistent focus on applied learning in terms of approaches to teaching and assessment processes;
2. a clear representation of the workplace practices of the trade concerned;
3. a strong focus on embodied, embedded, encultured and encoded knowledge related to the trade, alongside the required embrained knowledge (Watters & Christensen, 2014).

In addition, the implementation of this type of curricula require appropriate teaching practices and assessment.

Technology literacy approach

For example, in German curricula key competences are not clearly mentioned (Hensen & Hippach-Schneider, 2016), but key competences are viewed holistically and are developed in workplace and school-based environments. Hensen and Hippach-Schneider (2016) give an example of industrial clerk curricular where information procurement, processing and evaluation is delivered in an integrated manner via media and information technology systems in all learning fields.

Pedagogical strategies

Key competences can be well developed in different curricula by specific pedagogic strategies, such as problem-based learning, co-operative learning, experiential learning, and aligning assessment of competences developed at workplace and school-based environments (Ajjawi et al. 2020), also self-assessment. This means that the development of key competences is not only linked to structural design of curricula, which need to find room for key competences but other supporting factors play an important role and they are related to teachers’ professionalism, involvement of diverse stakeholders, revision of the assessment (Halász & Michel, 2011). Most of the analysed curricula (integrated, workplace-oriented, WIL, project/problem oriented, and other) stress a need to develop key competences through collaborative learning and inquiry-based learning in authentic contexts or solving problems from real world situations (Pilz and Fürstenau, 2019). Hoskins & Crick (2010) note that key competences, namely, civic and learning to learn competences are successfully developed through learner-centred pedagogies and an environment built on trust and respect, engaging with wider communities.

Mixed approaches

A mix of approaches is frequently applied. For example, in workplace-oriented, WIL curricula learning units are designed and developed mainly based on work processes through the multidimensional project topics (Deitmer & Heinemann, 2010; Deitmer, 2018) to develop both occupational and key competences because work processes are related to different situations and contexts (for example, communication with clients and ethical standards). 

The question of integrating, developing, assessing key competences within different curricula needs more attention. The analysis how different descriptors for monitoring and following the progression of competences would be useful (Keevy & Chakroun, 2015). Further research regarding how specific key competences are integrated within VET curricula would help to map more relevant practices regarding different approaches.

References

1. Ajjawi, R., Tai, J., Nghia, T. L. H., Boud, D., Johnson, L., & Patrick, C.-J. (2020). Aligning assessment with the needs of work-integrated learning: The challenges of authentic assessment in a complex context. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 45(2), 304–316. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2019.1639613
2. Deitmer, L. (2018). Innovation Skills in Apprentice Training. In S. McGrath, M. Mulder, J.Papier & R. Suart (Eds.), Handbook of Vocational Education and Training: Developments in the Changing World of Work (pp. 1-17). Springer.
3. Deitmer, L., & Heinemann, L., (2010). Innovation through evaluation and quality development of in-company training and workplace learning. Conference Proceedings on Second International Online Conference on Innovation in Training Practice, www.trainersineurope.org
4. Gilbert, R. (2019). General capabilities in the Australian curriculum: Promise, problems and prospects. Curriculum Perspectives, 39(2), 169–177. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41297-019-00079-z
5. Halász, G., & Michel, A. (2011). Key Competences in Europe: Interpretation, policy formulation and implementation. European Journal of Education, 46(3), 289–306. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1465-3435.2011.01491.x
6. Hensen, K.A.; Hippach-Schneider, U. (2016). Key competences in vocational education and training – Germany. Cedefop ReferNet thematic perspectives series. http://libserver.cedefop.europa.eu/vetelib/2016/ReferNet_DE_KC.pdf
7. Hoskins, B., & Crick, R. D. (2010). Competences for Learning to Learn and Active Citizenship: Different currencies or two sides of the same coin? European Journal of Education, 45(1), 121–137. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1465-3435.2009.01419.x
8. Keevy J., Chakroun, B. (2015) Level-setting and recognition of learning outcomes: The use of level descriptors in the twenty-first century. UNESCO Digital Library. (2015). https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000242887
9. Pilz, M., & Fürstenau, B. (2019). Duality and learning fields in vocational education and training: Pedagogy, curriculum, and assessment. In D. Guile & L. Unwin (Eds.), The Wiley handbook of vocational education and training (pp. 311-327). Hoboken: Wiley.
10. Saavedra, A. R., & Opfer, V. D. (2012). Learning 21st-Century Skills Requires 21st-Century Teaching. Phi Delta Kappan, 94(2), 8–13. https://doi.org/10.1177/003172171209400203Ercikan and Oliveri 2016
11. Tedesco, J.C., R. Opertti and M. Amadio. 2013. The curriculum debate: why it is important today. IBE Working Papers on Curriculum Issues No. 10. Geneva: UNESCO-IBE.
12. Voogt, J., & Roblin, N. P. (2012). A comparative analysis of international frameworks for 21st century competences: Implications for national curriculum policies. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 44(3), 299–321. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220272.2012.668938Jackson, 2015).
13. Wang, T. (2019). Competence for Students’ Future: Curriculum Change and Policy Redesign in China. ECNU Review of Education, 2(2), 234–245. https://doi.org/10.1177/2096531119850905
14. Watters, J. J., & Christensen, C. (2014). Vocational Education in Science Technology, Engineering and Maths (STEM): Curriculum Innovation through industry school partnerships.