1. Lars Heinemann Competence Measurement and Learning – Findings of the Project 'KOMET' INAP Conference Beijing, May 27 th 2011

2. Lars Heinemann 1.Is it possible to measure vocational competences? 2.Is it possible to establish a competence model, that is acceptable on an international level? 3.Is it possible to measure occupational commitment in this context? 4.How relevant are the findings for trainees, teachers and colleges? Key questions:

3. Lars Heinemann 5. Is it possible to use the concept as a didactical concept for improving teaching and training? 6. Colleagues in China wanted to know how effective their concept of alternating duality works in comparison to the concept of integrated dualism (Germany). 7. What are the factors influencing the development of competence? 8. Would the psychometrical validation of the concept be successful? Key questions: 5.Is it possible to use the concept as a didactical concept for improving teaching and training? 6. What are the factors influencing the development of competence? 7. Would the psychometrical validation of the concept be successful?

4. Lars Heinemann Competence is a cognitive disposition to perform in a specific way in a specific context, since areas of competence can, to a certain extent, be generalised by extension to similar situations. (Klieme)

5. Lars Heinemann central ideas and goals of vocational education model of competence and measurement test tasks learning tasks

6. Lars Heinemann Criteria of holistic problem solving in vocational tasks orientation on business and work process vocational tasks functionality clearness/ presentation efficiency/ effectiveness sustainability environmental responsibility social responsibility creativity

7. Lars Heinemann Holistic Shaping Competence Processual Competence Functional Competence Criteria Efficiency Effectiveness Sustainability/ Use Value Social Responsibility Environmental Responsibility Creativity of the Solution Functionality Clearness/ Presentation Levels Orientation on Work and Busi- ness Processes Competence Model

8. Lars Heinemann content dimension (areas of learning) dimension of action (complete work and learning action) demand dimension (level of competence) basic / nominal competence functional competence processual competence holistic designing competence repetitionapplicationtransfer controlling conducting deciding planning informing assessing The Three Dimensions of the KOMET Competence Model

9. Lars Heinemann The concept of open test tasks The training regulations for electronic technicians point to ….. - developed (offered) - well founded Variety of solutions/ - appraised / assessed Various ways of problem solving …considering } - technical/functional - economicrating criteria - ecologic - consumer oriented } The expert work (as well as training regulations) e.g. for electronic technicians point to … - developed (offered) - well founded Variety of solutions/ - appraised / assessed Various ways of problem solving …considering } - technical/functional - economicrating criteria - ecologic - consumer oriented } Test tasks have to be open in order to allow a variety of solutions, which – in turn – have to be rated according to the criteria defined in the KOMET Competence Model

10. Lars Heinemann The KOMET Rating Scheme: criteria 2: Functionality

11. Lars Heinemann Competence Levels Hessen 2009 Electricians Industry 2nd and 3rd Year n = 304 (2nd y: n = 122; 3rd y: n = 182)

12. Lars Heinemann Percentiles occupational competence in electro-technology according to occupational profile (Hessen 2008 und 2009) 510152025303540 Crafts 2009 (n=122) Crafts 2008 (n=114) Industry 2009 (n=310) MW 26 18 10%25%75%90% 10%25%75% 90% 10%25%75%90%MW 10%25%75%90%MW Industry 2008 (n=253) 26 Overall Score

13. Lars Heinemann Overall Score Percentiles occupational competence according to VET school Hessen 2009 MW 510152025303540 S 6 (n=21) 18 S 5 (n=50) 24 S 4 (n=69) 25 S 2 (n=111) 27 S 1 (n=120) 24 S 3 (n=61) 17 10%25% 75%90%MW 45

14. Lars Heinemann Overall Score Percentiles occupational competence according to class (2009) MW 510152025303540 Overall (n=432) Class 2 (n=20) 32 24 Class 5 (n=28) 28 24 Class 17 (n=21) 23 Class 19 (n=20) 19 Class 25 (n=31) 18 Class 6 (n=21) 22 10%25%75%90%MW 45 Class 22 (n=23)

15. Lars Heinemann Top-10-percentile competence profile Bottom-10-percentile competence profile Average competence profile

16. Lars Heinemann Differenzierung der Kompetenzprofile nach dem GPW (Gesamtpunktwert) sowie der Varianz: lowvariancehigh low high

17. Lars Heinemann Competence Levels n = 186 (Electronics Industry 3. Year); n = 65 (Technical colleges)

18. Lars Heinemann Overall Score Percentiles occupational competence technical colleges (Hessen 2009) 510152025303540 Total (n=66) School A2 (n=16) School A1 (n=14) Mean 20 27 23 10%25%75%90%MW School B (n=35) 27 4045