Hi Judith
always happy to promote cogitation ...
on the terms 'competence' and 'capability' - I don't think a mere shift of terms helps. Indeed, my own involvement in the field (from around 1989, some 2 years prior to my involvement with Enterprise in Higher Education) started with critical engagement with the competence movement, especially the approach adopted with the development of NVQs (arguably, not as originally envisaged by the De Ville report). The latter attempted to apply a Watsonian behaviourist view, the notion that competence/ capability/ skill may be ascertained by observation of performance. The trouble is that meaningful human behaviour cannot be simply observed - it must be construed as behaviour of a particular kind. There is wide range of philosophical and social scientific theory and research that succesfully argues this.
In my own work I have drawn upon these, especially the work of Rom Harre and Paul Secord, to consider under what 'mere' behaviour is interpreted or construed as performance of some particular kind, and in certain kinds of social contexts. I have expressed this in terms of:
- the kind of person that the particular individual is (of a range of possible kinds of persons salient to the social setting) - that is, their identity;
- the type of practice they are engaging in (of a range of possible practices, again as salient to the social setting - the definition of the situation).
see, eg:
‘Reframing the Ability-Based Curriculum in Higher Education’, presented at workshop of the Ability-Based Curriculum Network, (May 1996) (http://www.re-skill.org.uk/grads/refrabc.htm)
'‘What can performance tell us about learning? Explicating a troubled concept’, in European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, (June, 2000) (http://snipurl.com/_or)
‘Reframing the skills agenda in higher education: graduate identity and the double warrant’, in D. Preston (ed.), University of Crisis, Rodopi Press (2002)
‘Abilities, competencies, and selection decision-making’, in Hosking, D. M. and McNamee, S. (eds.), The Social Construction of Organization, Oslo: Liber (2006)
Such interpretation/ construal usually takes place without deliberation - drawing on 'typifications' as Schutz put it. Moreover, multiple actors are engaged in the process of construal/ interpretation, with the consequence that it is always in process, essentially contestible and fragile, with the possibility of stabilisation, albeit temporarily.
There is scope for the **language** of skills, as providing some generalised way of talking about practices (eg problem-solving - it's not a skill, it's a **practice**). Graduate recruiters use such language to signal, in some way, what they expect graduates to do in employment; graduates can use such language to warrant their claim on being the kind-of-person the employer is seeking.
Skills cannot be demonstrated - they don't exist. Any effort to find some objectively observable phenomenon (called a 'skill' or 'competence') that is distinguishable from performance (of which, supposedly, it is some form of instrumental cause) is merely some fairytale search for the grail/ golden fleece.
All this has been well-rehearsed, and I find it surprising and rather disappointing that the same issues get recycled without recognition that the underlying thinking of posessive-instrumentalism is the problem. Of course, whilst there is public funding supporting such nonsensical approaches, I guess there will continue to the recycling of the issues. Perhaps one day the debate will move onto more intellectually robust ground, and progress will start to be made. Perhaps.
regards
Len
-----------------------------
Dr Leonard Holmes
Reader in Management
School of Business and Social Sciences
Roehampton University
www.re-skill.org.uk
________________________________________
From: Judith Smith [[log in to unmask]]
Sent: 07 June 2011 14:34
To: Leonard Holmes; [log in to unmask]
Subject: RE: discussing employability interventions: conceptualising skill
Thanks Len some thoughtful points. and you've got me cogitating.... so some thinking aloud here. I'm not taking a particular stance as I think the points you are making are actually at the nub of the issue for HE and highlight the concerns some academics have about HE 's role in the 'skills ' debate.
Sometimes the words competence and capability are also used. A recent paper by OECD provides a definition
In the context of the OECD Skills Strategy, the concepts of ‘skill’ and ‘competence’ are used interchangeably. By skill (or competence) we mean: the bundle of knowledge, attributes and capacities that enables an individual to successfully and consistently perform an activity or task, whether broadly or narrowly conceived, and can be built upon and extended through learning
OECD (2011) Towards an OECD Skills Strategy http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/58/27/47769000.pdf
In workplace settings individuals are expected to be able to demonstrate 'competence' in the way they undertake tasks and these are 'assessed' in some way that provides a measure of those competences= skills. Demonstrating such competence may be through following techniques, procedures and actions that are undertaken within the context and appropriate to the requirements. These may have become more standardised and regulated within the work context - working practices driven by many concerns including accountability, legislation, CRM, cost, etc. We would find it difficult to avoid these issues in any work context - even teaching in higher education. I think how we use the screwdriver may be more relevant here but is it also fair to say that if the level of competence is recognised - formally or informally - then the individual has achieved this and will 'tick it off' - (literally in some NVQ assessments) - I have the skills...??
' I have a degree, a masters, a PHD'- what do we mean by these phrases? Do we just mean we have achieved a qualification and have a certificate we possess that states that or do we also presume other things? Do we presume that achieving a qualification in higher education provides evidence of knowledge in a particular field, do we also presume 'attributes and capacities' from the qualification? Do you think that employers make presumptions from the achievement or even that employers critically make presumptions of a lack of competence despite the qualification/achievement?
Is the concern for graduates that on entering employment there is a presumption of a certain level of capacity to perform but it is the successful and consistence performance of the individual in the work setting that actually demonstrates the level of skill. For me this is the problem for many graduates - they have to indicate they possibly have the 'capacities' employers require but have to get into the workplace and consistently perform before they are able to demonstrate their competencies/skills. They may say they 'have' the skills already especially if we in HE indicate their programme will develop/form these skills through their HE studies, classroom activities and so forth.
I get the point you are making. I think the choice of language may be relevant but
I think it will be difficult for graduates to say to employers 'I have the capacity to perform consistently so employ me'. Having work experience will help some individuals to understand their capacity to perform but being realistic how much work experience will actually help graduates to demonstrate competence/skill? Undertaking professional training programmes seems the only valid way of doing this. For the majority who do not have extensive workplace experiences we have to support them through working with employers and HEIs to address this capacity to perform issue. For some graduates and graduate recruiters this has never been a problem. I think the TLRP report Education, globalisation and the knowledge economy http://www.tlrp.org/pub/documents/globalisationcomm.pdf
and the 'War on Talent' debate demonstrate that some employers make great presumptions about the capacity to perform of graduates from particular HEIs....
How HEIs support students to develop the capacity to 'use' their knowledge, attributes and capacities i.e. skills and be able to confidently articulate this to employers remains the issue ...
Judy
Judith Smith
Senior Adviser
Employability, Employee Learning
The Higher Education Academy
Tel +44 (0)1904 717500 ext 3220
Mobile: 07979598783
Fax +44 (0) 1904 717505
Email: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
http://www.heacademy.ac.uk/ourwork/teachingandlearning/employability
________________________________
From: List for UK HEI employability developers on behalf of Leonard Holmes
Sent: Tue 07/06/2011 10:48
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: discussing employability interventions: conceptualising skill
Yes, the **term** 'skill' is used within such discussions. BUT ... it is by no means clear that the **concept** is the same in the different discourses. Gilbert Ryle long ago pointed out the problems (of thinking) that arise when a term used as an **untechnical** concept (ie in 'untechnical' discourse) is taken as a **technical** concept. Even further back, Aristotle pointed out that a term may be used paronymously - with rather different meanings in different contextss (he gave the example of 'healthy' - healthy diet, healthy body, healthy city - think also now of 'healthy argument').
In the skills utilisation discourse, the term 'skills' tends to be used as mass noun. Moreover, the focus is upon **performance**, NOT on possession. Employers want employees who, they anticipate, WILL (and DO) perform as required.
In contrast, the tendency in curriculum-based initiatives (heavily sponsored by public funding - which, arguably, might have been beter deployed in other areas), has been to try to **disaggregate** the general, untechnical notion into a set of supposedly separate so-called skills - or at least to create lists of words and phrases that, supposedly, refer to some set of separate skills. These so-called skills are NOT derived from any soundly based analytical techniques (of which there are many, developed over many decades within the skills training field) - rather, they tend to be the outcomes of small groups, meetng away from any place where **real** analysis of skills may be undertaken, using such techniques as discussion, listing on flip charts, drafting discussion papers and reports, and meeting to agree lists that supposedly represent the 'skills' of 'the University of X graduate' or 'a graduate in Y discipline'.
There is an urgent need NOT for more lists, or 'better' lists, or definitive lists - but for sound thinking that avoids the 'bewitchment of language' about which Wittgenstein warned us. We have to take care when using possessive-instrumentalist language (eg 'having skill' and 'using skill' - as in 'Graduates may find they have skills that are recognised on recruitment but they don't know how to make the best use of them'). As Wittgenstein might put it, when we say a graduate has (possesses) a skill, is it like possessing a mobile phone? When we say they use a particular skill, is it like using a screwdriver? If not, in what sense are we using the terms 'have' and 'use'.
Sure, such clear analytical thinking is not easy - but we are, after all, **higher** education, and our tradition goes back to the Academy of Plato and the Lyceum of Aristotle: it's what we do, isn't it?
regards
Len
-----------------------------
Dr Leonard Holmes
Reader in Management
School of Business and Social Sciences
Roehampton University
www.re-skill.org.uk
________________________________________
From: List for UK HEI employability developers [[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Judith Smith [[log in to unmask]]
Sent: 07 June 2011 09:20
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: discussing employability interventions
Thank you Ron, really helpful.
Judy
Judith Smith
Senior Adviser
Employability, Employee Learning
The Higher Education Academy
Tel +44 (0)1904 717500 ext 3220
Mobile: 07979598783
Fax +44 (0) 1904 717505
Email: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
http://www.heacademy.ac.uk/ourwork/teachingandlearning/employability
________________________________
From: List for UK HEI employability developers on behalf of McQuaid, Ronald
Sent: Mon 06/06/2011 08:28
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: discussing employability interventions
Skills utilisation (of those in work) is certainly an important current policy thrust in Scotland – with the (HE/FE) Funding Council being involved.
For example:
Scottish Government’s Action Group:
http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Topics/Education/skills-strategy/making-skills-work/utilisation/ActionGroup/Q/editmode/on/forceupdate/on
Literature review:
http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Publications/2008/12/15114643/16
Scottish Funding Council’s Brief report on their 12 skills utilisation projects awarded funding in July 2009 (mostly FE but includes OU in care and Robert Gordon Univ.):
http://www.sfc.ac.uk/web/FILES/CMP_SkillsCommittee26August2010_26082010/SC_10_25_Skills_Utilisation_-_Programme_of_Projects_Progress_Report.pdf
Getting employers involved is seen as an issue.
________________________________________
From: List for UK HEI employability developers [[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Judith Smith [[log in to unmask]]
Sent: 31 May 2011 15:12
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: discussing employability interventions
Hi,
This is just the debate we need to be having! Providing evidence of what works is important for us all, especially when related to pedagogic approaches and curriculum development.
In some respects the dominant utilitarian approach being taken to employability development, employability skills and so forth I think will continue particularly because of the socio-economic circumstances of new graduates and the link with graduate employment policy...
To add to this, one area Jane Kettle and I have been discussing recently is the connection between employability development for those in HE and the link for those who are already in work. What appears to be happening in the policy agenda is a shift in focus from supply of employability skills (i.e. the way HEIs are involved in the formation of skills and skills supply) to a demand side for how these skills are utilised by those in work (i.e. how employers develop and use skills). Graduates may find they have skills that are recognised on recruitment but they don't know how to make the best use of them (and in many case neither does the employer). I suspect however the correlation between those who have work experience and those who get jobs is because they can see how their skills can be utilised in the workplace. Work experience, work place mentoring, work placements and so forth will be dominate agendas....
Colleagues need to be involved in providing evidence of what works but also being realistic that some of the evidence may come from alumni..?
The HEA offer of teaching grants may be of interest as a priority area is employability. Look out too for grants for cross-department and cross -institution grants in coming weeks
http://www.heacademy.ac.uk/funding
To remind everyone: some evidence is located within a subject specific context. Subject Centres have been funding and identifying this work for some time. A good example is that produced by the Physical Sciences subject centre
http://www.heacademy.ac.uk/assets/ps/documents/graduate_skills/physics.pdf
http://www.heacademy.ac.uk/hca/news/detail/NewsClassicsSurvey
http://www.bioscience.heacademy.ac.uk/journal/vol15/beej-15-2.aspx
Kind Regards
Judy
Judith Smith
Senior Adviser
Employability, Employee Learning
The Higher Education Academy
Innovation Way
York Science Park
Heslington
York
YO10 5BR
England
Consider the environment. Please don't print this e-mail unless you really need to.
This email and any attachments are confidential and intended solely for the addressee and may also be privileged or exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If you are not the addressee, or have received this e-mail in error, please notify the sender immediately, delete it from your system and do not copy, disclose or otherwise act upon any part of this email or its attachments.
Internet communications are not guaranteed to be secure or virus-free. Roehampton University does not accept responsibility for any loss arising from unauthorised access to, or interference with, any Internet communications by any third party, or from the transmission of any viruses.
Any opinion or other information in this e-mail or its attachments that does not relate to the business of Roehampton University is personal to the sender and is not given or endorsed by Roehampton University.
Roehampton University is a company limited by guarantee incorporated in England under number 5161359. Registered Office: Grove House, Roehampton Lane, London SW15 5PJ. An exempt charity.
Consider the environment. Please don't print this e-mail unless you really need to.
This email and any attachments are confidential and intended solely for the addressee and may also be privileged or exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If you are not the addressee, or have received this e-mail in error, please notify the sender immediately, delete it from your system and do not copy, disclose or otherwise act upon any part of this email or its attachments.
Internet communications are not guaranteed to be secure or virus-free. Roehampton University does not accept responsibility for any loss arising from unauthorised access to, or interference with, any Internet communications by any third party, or from the transmission of any viruses.
Any opinion or other information in this e-mail or its attachments that does not relate to the business of Roehampton University is personal to the sender and is not given or endorsed by Roehampton University.
Roehampton University is a company limited by guarantee incorporated in England under number 5161359. Registered Office: Grove House, Roehampton Lane, London SW15 5PJ. An exempt charity.
|
