The job description, competency framework, training framework ...

Cedefop International workshop on Curriculum Innovation and Reform
20-21 January 2011, in Thessaloniki, Greece
The job description, competency framework, training framework model in initial
vocational training: an unsatisfactory curriculum model
Xavier Roegiers, Professor, Université de Louvain-la-Neuve (Belgium), président of the BIEF
This conference is epistemological and methodological. It attempts to answer the question
“how to ensure that the reform enters each classroom, in a perspective of efficiency and
equity” (Renato Opertti, 2011).
It attempts to link the demand of the labour market on the one hand, and classroom practices
on the other hand, not with the view that young people depend on the labour market, but to
develop the potential of each of them, beyond the labour market as it currently stands (the
current labour market and an alternative labour market). It shows how the practice of complex
situations and integrative assessment tasks as the target of learning is an interesting
perspective that goes beyond the division between knowledge, skills and competences.
It was long believed that the competence-based approach, as it reinforced the dimension of
meaningful learning in training, would solve problems in initial vocational training.
However, it should be noted that many education systems - from industrialized, emerging to
developing countries - are struggling to develop or implement initial vocational training
curricula with competence-based approach in the field 1 .
To what reasons can we attribute these difficulties, whereas one would have expected that this
curriculum shift took place in a natural way
1. To the diversity of social referential practices related to certain professions, and
therefore the difficulty in agreeing on the content of the practice of these professions,
and skills to develop as a priority.
2. To the way the term “competence” is understood in curricula. It is the case when is
understood as “crosscutting competence”, a particularly difficult concept to operate in
initial vocational training.
1
Roegiers, X. (2010). Des curricula pour la formation professionnelle initiale. Bruxelles : De Boeck

3. To the way competency frameworks are understood and constructed: sometimes
endless lists of know-how, criteria and indicators, forming unmanageable check lists
for the trainer to handle. In addition to this problem, there are different understandings
and formulations of these competences, which obstruct the daily management of
diversity by trainers who, in their own career as professionals and/or trainers, have
never been acquainted with the culture of competence-based approach.
4. To the too tenuous and abstract link between curricula on the one hand, and
assessment-validation system on the other (VAE or acquired initial training).
5. To the illusion that the initial training delivered in technical and vocational training
institutions can be conceived in the same way as in business, whereas the objectives of
vocational training centres, their context and the means they have, are quite different.
Apart from that, the pedagogical constraints associated with the use of didactical
materials in these institutions, as well as how to manage the development of
psychosocial capacities, clearly show this malaise.
6. To a “rushing ahead” in the way new curricula are written, which often goes too fast,
too far, and does not take realistic account of current training practices of trainers and
the limitations of how initial training system is organised (disciplinary separation,
workload and schedule, nomination of teachers and trainers...).
The scheme that envisaged job description, competence framework and training framework in
a linear way does not work in practice.
The assessment framework must be first introduced, as it is equivalent to the training
framework, in terms of validation of learning achievements.

But this is not enough. Indeed, competency-based curricula start from the assumption that the
competency framework is the interface between the working world and that of initial
vocational training.
However, it is not. The competency framework, like the job description, is dictated by the
demands of the working world. It consists of a list of competences that meet professional
requirements. Initial vocational training is often confusing because, operationally, it can not
handle those lists of competences, given its organization. It leads to huge difficulties in
deducing a training framework from a competency framework. It also reflects the existing gap
to deduce an assessment framework from a competency one.
These difficulties have led us to propose an operational articulation between competency
framework and training framework.
We introduce a framework of curriculum engineering (“curriculum framework”), which is
based on a core of professional competences, corresponding to the key activities of a
profession (2 or 3 competences per profession). In addition to that, the curriculum framework:

- specifies to which family of tasks or complex situations each of the core competence is
associated;
- gives some examples of such tasks or complex situations;
- reformulates the core competences in a more comprehensive and concrete form;
- specifies the parameters of each family of tasks or complex situations;
- specifies the assessment criteria of these tasks or complex situations, in order to assess
professional competences related to these situations;
- specifies various professional know-how, levels of competences and psychosocial and
crosscutting abilities feed into each core competence;
- sets out some key resources (knowledge of the profession, technical know-how...).
The dimension of critical thinking is not absent (and more generally, the “depth acquirements:
analysis skills, problem-solving skills…”), as well as creativity.
The training framework and the assessment framework are developed on the basis of these
core competences.
Where is this curriculum framework situated in the process
(1) It can be an integral part of the competency framework, if its character - official or not -
can allow extensions. This is the most logical solution, since competency frameworks are
intended to be implemented, whether for training or certification of competences, but it is not
always possible.
(2) If the official status of the competency framework does not allow this curriculum
framework to be inserted, it may be subject to a common introduction to both, the training and
the assessment frameworks.

In these schemes, we respect both the specificity of the world of work and the vocational
training institutions. Training and assessment practices may evolve in the direction of
effectiveness, as well as equity 2 .
Why equity For several reasons that it is not possible to detail here. I can mention two
reasons:
- Firstly, for the development of resources, each teacher can use teaching methods that suit
them : classroom practices should not change immediately for everyone ; initially, it may
be sufficient to introduce integrative situations after a period of resource development ;
- Secondly, the focus is more on process than on the results : the function of the school
remains first learning before assessing ;
- Thirdly, the fact of evaluating students based on complex situations is fairer than on the
basis of resources; this fact is highlighted by research results more and more numerous.
The main obstacle is a political obstacle: do all countries really want an equal system
2
Roegiers, X. (2010). Pedagogy of Integration. Education and Training Systems at the Heart of our
Societies. Bruxelles : De Boeck (traduit du français à l’anglais)