In this paper we comment on the notion of competence and on the widely-recommended practice of defining learning and assessment in terms of competence statements. Two lines of comment are explored. Firstly, we consider the meaning of competence as an aspect of the description of human activity, and find that it has not yet been coherently specified. In particular, it is not clear whether a competence is a personal attribute, an act, or an outcome of action; moreover, the idea of competence, as currently used, is open to complaints that it is atomistic, individualistic, and unable to cover all types of relevant behaviour or mental activity. Secondly, we discuss the implications for education and training of the adoption of competence as a model of outcome. We note difficulties with the design of competence statements, which can be empty and uninformative. In addition, the idea of competence seems to lack reference to the personal processes entailed in a skill, over-simplifies the theory/practice relationship, and so on — all of which can lead to serious difficulties in training and education. © 1990, Taylor & Francis Group, LLC. All rights reserved.
Author Keywords
Index Keywords
