BACK

Higher Ed

Meaningful Competency Based Education

Parchment Staff  •  Jan 28, 2025  •  Podcast
Parchment-Credentials-Unscripted-Podcast-Episode-28

What do we really know about the skills and competencies of graduates? Surprisingly, very little. In this episode, we are joined by Amber Garrison Duncan from the Competency Based Education Network, an organization dedicated to true competency — what an individual knows and can do — rather than on proxies for knowledge and skills.

 

Transcript

Matthew Sterenberg (00:02.006)

All right, Amber, Garrison, Duncan, welcome to the podcast.

 

Amber Garrison Duncan (00:06.888)

Hi, welcome and thanks for having me.

 

Matthew Sterenberg (00:10.646)

Yeah, so you are the executive vice president and chief operating officer at the competency based education network. Why is competency important? let’s who does it benefit when we think about competency based education?

 

Amber Garrison Duncan (00:29.808)

Yeah, that’s a great question. You know, I like to think of competencies as like a win, win, win, and maybe even a fourth win. In the bottom line, what we know is that if I put the learner in the center first, right, is that people are coming to learning, education, and training programs, higher education, because they need to gain skills. And one of my provosts that I work with frequently says, our students want the skills to pay the bills.

And when we use competencies as a way to measure that instead of time spent in a classroom or time spent on a task, what we’re really measuring is do they have those skills? And so we make sure that every learner gets to master every skill on a program because that’s what they’re coming to us for. So the quality of the learning goes up, the return on investment for the learner goes up. But then we also hear from employers that they love competency based education because

They know folks when they hire them are competent day one. They don’t have to do any retraining or upskilling. They have almost a guarantee in what they’re hiring that they know that those individuals are ready for the work they’re gonna be asked to do on the job that they’re competent. And then I feel as a, know, certainly as a public entity or a tax paying citizen that I wanna make sure that when my tax dollars are going to pay,

for people to go to college in that Pell Grant or whatever, that it’s going to quality programs. And so we also hear from accreditors and others that it is a good way, again, a good measure of quality is by really focusing on the learning, focusing on the competencies in the program. So that’s why I say it’s a win, win, win, win, win. I’m sure there’s other things, but those are why competencies are so critical and important to focus on.

 

Matthew Sterenberg (02:24.29)

Yeah, when you think about it, it’s kind of silly that we do anything but competency based education, you know, like the Carnegie unit got established. It’s hard to make changes. It’s like, do I care how many days you were in second grade or do I care that you can read? I care that you can read. I don’t really care about anything else. So it’s kind of just battling against the entrenched system of the Carnegie unit of, and the benefit of the Carnegie unit is everyone understands it.

 

Amber Garrison Duncan (02:29.729)

Okay.

 

Amber Garrison Duncan (02:40.572)

See? Yeah.

 

Matthew Sterenberg (02:53.836)

Right? Like it’s, it’s a common language, right? And I think that you probably battle against this in your work at CBEN. You know, how do you get people to buy into a new system when, when they’re so entrenched in the other system? How do you get institutions to start thinking, to start thinking, to start approaching this differently than the way that they’ve always done it?

 

Amber Garrison Duncan (02:54.118)

Yes. Yes.

 

Amber Garrison Duncan (03:06.827)

yeah.

 

Amber Garrison Duncan (03:18.92)

Sure, it’s so interesting over the course of Seabend’s existence. I’ll just kind of start with our early innovators. We’re seven institutions that said there has to be a better way. And we’re trying to figure out on our own, can we come together and figure out how you move a system that is so entrenched into time and credit hour to use competencies. And I share that because I think

That’s again, the folks that we started with and have learned with over time. You now we’re 10 years in and there’s over 600 institutions and over a thousand programs in the US. That’s a huge amount of change in higher ed, you think about it, over a 10 year period, being able to go from seven to 600. And when we survey those sets of institutions,

The three reasons really they tell us they’re trying to do this. One is they want to serve learners they’ve not been able to serve before. What we find with CBE programs is they’re not necessarily replacing traditional programs per se, but institutions are using them to serve new pockets of learners that they’ve not been able to, again, find or be able to serve well. And so they want to be able to reach new markets.

And certainly from an institution’s perspective, it’s always good to increase enrollment. But again, they want to make sure they’re serving that workforce. They want to better serve employers and again, making sure that they’re using competencies to do that and understand how do I make sure that my learners are ready? Because a lot of them see that their graduates from their programs are getting that return on investment through quick hiring and at a higher wage than folks who are in their traditional program.

And then we also hear that institutions do this because they just want to improve learning. That when something comes back from their accreditor, something comes back saying that students aren’t learning, that they really, that’s not okay. And of course not, that’s their mission, right? And so they’re telling us that that’s also why they get into it. Now, those have to be strong. Those are very convincing, I would say, because it is a lot of work. We tell people that upfront.

 

Amber Garrison Duncan (05:37.426)

You’re changing a lot of your infrastructure at the institution that’s time-based, credit hour-based, but it’s possible, it’s doable. It does take about a year to get a program built, start to finish, and launched. But if you think about when you’re starting a new program or doing program reviews, that’s about how long it takes anyways. But again, the reason we hear is it really is about new populations of learners.

especially as this demographic cliff is hitting, is that adult learners are going to need more flexible routes. And they want to make sure that, again, there’s that guarantee that if they’re going to come and spend their one chance, they get to have a learning opportunity that they’re going to get what they need out of it.

 

Matthew Sterenberg (06:23.854)

I think some of the pressures in higher ed are bringing this to the forefront too, right? I always kind of say, you know, would we be thinking about if college was extremely affordable or free? You know, like would we have this pressure to make it as transactional as we are kind of pursuing now? You know, it used to be go to college, you know, hey, you’re going to learn a lot here, then you’re on your own.

And now I feel like colleges are considering the last mile problem. You know, how do we get you to your professional opportunity? Cause you’re spending a lot of money to be here. And so I like that this is a clear, you know, I know exactly what I’m signing up for. I know what the outcomes are and I know what types of jobs I’m going to look for that have these skills and competencies. But I do want to ask you about the skills and competencies network.

the qualifications. When I speak with people in Europe, they have national frameworks, right? Like, you know, this is what the government of Greece says are the national qualifications. We don’t have that in the US in terms of like a federal government entity saying here skills and competencies.

So in other countries, there’s national qualification frameworks, right? The federal government says, here’s what the skills and competencies are for these jobs. And there’s more of a central authority dictating what those are. In the U S we don’t have that. You know, how do, how do we agree on reliable and objective definitions to measure and validate skills? Like that’s a huge undertaking.

 

Amber Garrison Duncan (08:50.258)

And it’s so interesting our approach in the US to respond to those types of models where again, it’s more centralized like the European Union and then the big alignment they do every five years across their labor market and then pushing those qualifications frameworks down to their education providers.

It is a model that we tried to figure out how we could implement, given the ways that we function are so different, the ways that we govern our labor market and education entities, and the way that employers engage in that process. And in those contexts and countries, employers are paying taxes to have that work done. And they then feel like, well, if I’m paying for it, I need to participate.

And we don’t have that type of model here. It’s why we’ve also had a hard time scaling apprenticeships. It’s just not something that we think is the way we want to do it, which is totally fine. But it definitely means we’ve had to be more creative. I will say that, you know, we’ve been working in states like Alabama on a statewide ontology. The state has been convening industry councils to review and demand jobs and demand competencies, being able to share those.

But we also know that and have had to in that process create room for employers to be flexible and bring new types of skills and competencies to the labor market more quickly as it’s changing. And so for instance, in a manufacturing, I might need to have a more regional approach based upon the type of manufacturing or advanced manufacturing that’s happening in a region. And so while the top down approach

and other places has worked, it doesn’t allow for that type of, again, regionality or that type of quick response to labor market shifts and change. And so this more ground up approach, again, that we’re seeing in Alabama, we’re quarterly, we’re meeting with those industry councils to review, again, jobs and competencies and understanding what the pathways are to destination jobs. You know, it’s not perfect, but it’s definitely much more.

 

Amber Garrison Duncan (11:08.218)

engaging and gives us a way to monitor those changes and be able to, again, help education institutions be responsive to that as it’s happening. And again, the employers finding value because they understand where their talent can come from. again, it’s really it’s and it’s called the Alabama Talent Triad, but it’s that triad then creates again that win, win, win model where cross

the employer, the education institution, and the citizen, everybody is focused on competencies and gets what they need out of the workforce, education, and training systems.

 

Matthew Sterenberg (11:47.564)

I’m glad you highlighted that because that was my next question was just, okay, national qualification frameworks. Great. But hiring is local, right? These partnerships are local and regional and a plug for the episode. had Nick Moran from the state of Alabama. So, so if you want to learn a lot about Alabama, you can check out that episode as well. And they’re doing some very cool, cool work there.

I’m glad you’ve talked to Nip, but it is, I mean, it’s helpful to have those national frameworks, certainly cyber manufacturing, some industries that have been working hard on this for a while. know, manufacturing was hit really hard in 2011 where they lost millions of jobs to when technology came in. And then you’ve got other new economy folk, you know, industries like cyber green energy.

Those frameworks have been helpful as a starting place, but to your point, these economies are so regional that you have to get in and still verify with those employers is what’s in this national framework, really what you need. And maybe it’s 60 % there, but we find there’s anywhere from 20 to 30, sometimes 40 % of a difference that we need to adjust. again, when employers say, want to hire somebody ready to go to work day one, having them 60 % prepared is not going to cut it.

 

Matthew Sterenberg (13:08.802)

You know, at Instructure and at Parchment, one of the things that we care lot about is, you know, you have Instructure and Canvas, which is the system of learning and then Parchment, which is the recognition of learning, right? So historically we’ve, you know, been focused on the high school and college transcript and now diplomas and now increasingly certificates and badges. And so it’s such a new place to be for many people, right? How do we embed these skills and competencies?

in these digital credentials and who cares? I think that’s the big question that we have to keep going back to. How do we get employers to care about the exchange of these digital credentials, know what to look for? if you were speaking to parchment and structure, what would you want us to take away? As we think about our products and services, what’s a good thing for us to know about the industry that you’re in?

 

Amber Garrison Duncan (14:07.292)

Yeah, that’s a great question. You know, I always go back to as we started the digital credentials movement, our goal was to make competencies and skills be able to move with the individual. And I think, you know, we got really excited about like, we can do digital things and it’s like, cool, show us what you can do, what kind of data you can hold in there. And started, then we started working on the data standard to say,

You know, we really want to make sure that it’s not just about the award of the credential. Well, that might be important of saying, you know, it’s not, again, you have a paper certificate or diploma or something on your wall, right, to signify that you might know or could do something. How do we include, again, the competency and skill statement, the evidence of that? What did you do to demonstrate that, that somebody said, yes, you can do that?

That was really why we got super excited about the digital format nature of this is because we could embed all of these artifacts that we were collecting, right? And if you think about the beauty between parchment and structure, it’s really saying, how do we take the learning information, not the time, what it is that that person, again, the competency they were trying to learn and the learning outcome from that, what’s the assessment that was used?

How do we make that transparent? Because that’s what people are trying to share with each other. Whether they’re sharing that with the employer to say, here’s the, again, here’s the competency and skill I have. And here’s what I had to do. Does this look the same as what you have to do on the job in your setting? And they can say, yes. Or what we often fall short on thinking about is that’s the same information I need to take with me if I’m trying to get credit for my prior learning. I need to take, what was it that I was trying to learn? What were learning outcomes?

That’s the richer data that the digital format allows us to hold and share more widely. And so really, again, my guidance is just saying, get back to that. are the learning artifacts? What are the things that are validations of skills? And then figure out how you present that to people in a way that they can consume it, that their systems can consume it. Because that’s the end goal is certainly, again, we can do lots of things.

 

Amber Garrison Duncan (16:29.99)

you know, everyone is very smart and very, you know, innovative, but at the end of the day, to your point, it’s people trying to take their skills with them. They’re trying to use them for further education employment. And then whatever we can do to make that easier and seamless should be the goal.

 

Matthew Sterenberg (16:47.606)

Yeah. And, know, are we preparing our students for their next professional opportunity or are we, and we just don’t know how to recognize it, you know, give them the recognition or do we have to change the way that we are delivering education? I think that’s, you know, I think the assumption is we are just, if we just, you know, recognize it, it’s already happening.

And think HighRed would say yes. Like they’re not going to say, we are absolutely not preparing students, right? But I do wonder, know, do we have to deliver education differently because we still have the credit hours, still this powerful artifact. So what do you think?

 

Amber Garrison Duncan (17:18.824)

Hahaha

 

Amber Garrison Duncan (17:32.584)

Yes. I mean, yeah, because I think that’s what we find too is once you bring that level of you’re saying, here’s what I’m recognizing as learning and you take that out into the world. And when the feedback is that’s not maybe it’s well, I think we’ve done a really good job in higher ed. Let me back up. If I break down, what is a competency? It’s the knowledge. What do I know? What’s the theoretical backing? Why do I

What’s the rationale behind why I should do what I do? Then I’ve got the skill of actually going and doing it. Then I’ve got to have certain behaviors and ways that I show up, right? This is where I always say like in nursing, for instance, I have to know how the blood moves through the body. Then I have to have the skills to take blood pressure. Then I’ve got to have the ethic of care and cultural.

humility to serve the people I’m trying to serve. And then I need to be able to work with them in a lot of different contexts. And so with those clients, with those patients, so I might need to work with them in the emergency room, I might need to work with them in an assisted living facility. So those are different contexts, I might approach those differently. But what we’ve done really well in higher ed is say, here’s the knowledge you have, but we’ve not done as good a job on the skills and then

taking those skills and applying them a lot of different ways. If it’s knowledge, skills, behaviors, and context, that’s why I say makes up a competency. Done a really good job with knowledge sharing, not so much on the skill, like can you apply that knowledge? Can you go do something with it? Can you do something with it in a way that demonstrates to me you’re competent to work with people or whatever it is that might be. And then can you do that in a lot of different contexts?

So I always use like nursing where I have to know theory of like how blood moves through the body. And then I have to do, have the skill to actually check your blood pressure. And then I’ve got to have like an ethic of care when I do that. And then I need to do that in the ER and I need to do that in the assisted living facility. Like that’s, that’s the backend part that I would say we haven’t done well in higher ed.

 

Matthew Sterenberg (20:09.751)

I always think about the liberal arts education too, where I’m like, I was a history major in college. what, number one, it’s like, what did I learn? You know, it’s really hard to define. And also for a history major, was.

 

Amber Garrison Duncan (20:15.238)

Yeah.

 

Amber Garrison Duncan (20:22.778)

You learned a lot of content.

 

Matthew Sterenberg (20:26.473)

Yeah, and also, think if you were to ask me what the most valuable piece is, it’s how to think about history and not necessarily the actual content themselves, how to analyze historical events. But yeah, it’s harder to define some of these softer things, the humanities. It’d be so much nicer if I was like, can you recite the Pythagorean theorem? And I’ll be like, sure. I don’t know when you use it, to be clear.

 

Amber Garrison Duncan (20:40.38)

That’s right.

 

That’s absolutely right.

 

Matthew Sterenberg (20:55.403)

Yeah, I think some of those softer skills or durable skills or transversal skills, whatever you want to call them, those are a little bit harder to define. And sometimes coming from like a liberal arts college, I think about how it would be applied there if there’s a need. And are we moving away from that because it is just harder.

 

Amber Garrison Duncan (21:14.632)

This is why I always say, if you line up the durable skills conversation, the 21st century skills or whatever that is, with the goals of general ed, right? If you take, for instance, the AIC and U-value rubrics, you can easily say like, yes, what employer wouldn’t wanna hire, what I want.

 

learners to have that. But that was the goal of Gen Ed was to say, how do I give you exposure to things outside of your discipline that help you learn skills that you will need to be a critical thinker, to be able to communicate well, to communicate in writing and verbally and being able to have that array of complementary skills. And we’ve just not been able to do that in our

 

at cafeteria style gen ed checkmark piece. And so by focusing in on the competencies, those durable skills, you will find those in anything that’s called the liberal arts. mean, I’m a psychology major. Obviously that gets a bit more applied, but yes, to your point in history, you learned how to not just memorize facts, but you learned how to analyze those facts, pull, go to critical sources to

 

original sources to verify your analysis and that’s a huge skill. mean this day and age we need more and more of that. So being able to have that not just for history majors but saying a lot of other people need those skills of critical thinking and contextual analysis and that we want to make sure that if people have those skills but they need to learn them in a lot of different ways and places. But it’s all the more important for me.

 

say those are about gen ed and it’s time for us to really hone in on gen ed in that way.

 

 

 

There’s always more to learn.

Ready to feel the power of Parchment?

I’m a student or a learner

Order

I work at an institution or business

Get a Demo
admission-cta-reversed