tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7193208137942882340.post428779591535703762..comments2023-12-27T04:33:09.547-08:00Comments on Of That: Quantifying Learning: Alternatives to the Carnegie UnitBrandt Reddhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11766989840552023101noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7193208137942882340.post-78454664713771767452013-12-01T14:49:58.853-08:002013-12-01T14:49:58.853-08:00Thanks, Jim and Stuart, for your examples. I like ...Thanks, Jim and Stuart, for your examples. I like the "AD", "AC", "NR" system at WPI. Too bad they reverted to the more-conventional letters. I look forward to reading _Off the Clock_. It looks fascinating.<br /><br />Part of the point you're both making is that competency-based education isn't a new idea. I'm hopeful that we've reached the point where tools and culture may be ready to make it more common.Brandt Reddhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11766989840552023101noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7193208137942882340.post-17899876566928873672013-12-01T05:38:22.403-08:002013-12-01T05:38:22.403-08:00Abandonment of the Carnegie Unit as proxy for stud...Abandonment of the Carnegie Unit as proxy for student learning requires a shift from a factory model where time is the constant and competence the variable to one where competence is the constant and time the variable [1]. It would seem that abandonment of the Carnegie Unit and the embracing of competency-based models ultimately requires that we leave behind a second notion of “grade” as the positioning of the individual student in terms of his or her progress on a time-based factory model assembly line. Even our coveted competency frameworks peg what should be known (or be tackled in the classroom) at specific time-based intervals on the assembly line. If time is no longer the constant, then phrases like “I am in the 7th grade” become nonsensical since it is quite likely that I am at different levels of competence in different “subjects” (another suspect term) at any point in time. The current factory model is absolutely dependent on such variance to enable what you identify, Brandt, as the systems “sorting” function--to determine who wins whatever prize and who loses.<br /><br />[1] See Bramante & Colby, “Off the Clock” - ISBN: 978-1-4522-1731-4 - for a discussion of the early experience in New Hampshire's experiment.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02015675452178406304noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7193208137942882340.post-72116705964657238902013-11-26T07:13:48.290-08:002013-11-26T07:13:48.290-08:00[Re: An oft-repeated phrase among competency advoc...[Re: An oft-repeated phrase among competency advocates is that grades should be "A, B, and 'still working on it.'"] <br /><br />I'm glad that my undergraduate experience was at WPI in the mid-80s under the WPI PLAN when course grades were Acceptable with Distinction (AD), Acceptable (AC), and No Record (NR). WPI had (and still has) seven week terms. The fast pace terms teach students to manage time, change the stakes, and provide a tighter feedback loop than the typical semester. Graduation requirements included three significant projects and a final Competency Exam (COMP), in which students had to prove they had acquired the knowledge and skills in their major...and defend it in front of a board of three professors. <br /><br />In the late 1980s, WPI dropped the COMP and adopted an A, B, C, NR grading system, which I think was a step backwards. However, they kept the NR (the 'still working on it,') and the projects. The most important of the innovations that WPI adopted with "the PLAN" in the 1970s changed the focus from seat time to competency. Jim Goodellhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03995269633548256076noreply@blogger.com