Switch course ▾
Session 1. From Teacher Competencies to Programme Outcomes
Objective. Write a programme purpose and six or fewer observable outcomes, and build a competency map that shows where each competency is introduced, practised and assessed.
A programme is promised in one sentence and proved in many. This lesson goes beyond the key ideas: how to climb from a purpose sentence to outcomes a trainer and a head can both check, and how to run the competency-map meeting so that it ends with decisions rather than a long wish list. Without this step every later design choice floats free of what teachers need to do.
Key ideas
A programme is more than a long workshop
- Course 11.8 (Designing Professional Learning) taught you to design one workshop and its follow-up. A programme is a planned set of modules that leads to a stated result and usually to an award such as a certificate.
- That changes the questions. Who is it for, what must they already have, what can they do at the end, and how will anyone outside the room trust the certificate?
- Write the purpose in one sentence: 'Teachers of Grades 2 to 6 who complete this programme can teach and check reading comprehension in their own classes, and show the evidence.'
Start from competencies, not from topics
- A competency is something a teacher does well in a real classroom, built from knowledge, skill and habit. 'Checks pupils' understanding with short tasks and uses the result' is a competency; 'assessment' is only a topic.
- Take the list from a public teacher framework or the national standards you already use (see course 14.3, Teacher Development Systems), then choose the five or six this programme will really develop.
- A programme that tries to develop fifteen competencies develops none. Say plainly what is out of scope and where teachers can find it.
Outcomes a teacher can show
- A good outcome has four parts: a verb you can observe, the thing done, the context, and the standard. 'Plan a 45-minute reading lesson from a state textbook text that includes a before-, during- and after-reading task.'
- Avoid 'know', 'understand', 'be aware of' and 'appreciate'. Bloom's revised taxonomy is a handy ladder from remember and understand up to apply, analyse, evaluate and create; most programme outcomes should sit at apply or above.
- Write what the teacher does, not what the trainer does. 'The trainer presents twelve techniques' is a plan for the trainer, not an outcome.
The competency map and the stakeholder check
- A competency map is a grid: competencies down the side, modules across the top. In each cell write I (introduced), P (practised) or A (assessed). Every competency needs at least one I, two P and one A.
- Read the grid by rows to find gaps (a competency never practised) and by columns to find overload (a module carrying five competencies). Fix the grid before you write any session.
- Then check the draft with three groups: teachers who will take the programme, school heads who will release them, and someone who knows pupils' results. Ask each, 'What would you need to see to trust this?' and change the draft.
From purpose to session
Four levels of writing, one chain
Outcomes live at four levels. The purpose sentence says who finishes and what they can do. Programme outcomes, five to eight, spell this out in observable terms. Module outcomes, three to five each, say what a teacher can do after that block. Session aims, one or two, say what the group will do today. Each level should be a smaller piece of the one above, so that you can trace any activity back to the purpose.
Use Bloom's ladder to check the height of your verbs. If every outcome sits at remember or understand, the programme will produce teachers who can talk about practice. Aim for most outcomes at apply, analyse or create, and keep one or two at remember where a fact really must be known, such as the difference between literal and inferential questions.
Running the competency-map meeting
Bring the grid drawn large on paper and fill it in together with pens, not on a screen. Start with the A column, the assessed cells, because it is the hardest and the one most often left empty. Ask, 'Where would we see this competency in a teacher's own classroom, and who would see it?' If nobody can answer, the competency is probably a topic and should be reworded or cut.
Then apply a cut rule. Each competency must earn its place with at least one I, two P and one A, and the programme has a fixed number of hours. If a competency cannot be given two practice cells without overloading a module, it goes to a later programme. Cutting openly, with reasons recorded, prevents the quiet cut when time runs out.
Examples from the classroom
Fifteen competencies become six
Scene. At a district centre in Samarkand, a group of methodists lists fifteen competencies for a 90-hour reading programme. The leader asks of each, 'Could we show this in one teacher's portfolio?' Nine fail the test or overlap. After an hour the group keeps six, writes the reason for each cut on a card, and sticks the cards under the map. When the head of the centre visits, the cards answer her question about what was left out.
Insight. Open cuts with written reasons make the programme defensible and protect it from quiet cuts later.
The empty assessment column
Scene. A Tashkent team draws its map for a 60-hour programme and notices that every A sits in the last module. Teachers would practise for 50 hours with no feedback on whether they were succeeding. The team moves two A cells to the middle modules, using short portfolio entries, and the last module is left for the practical task. In the first cohort fewer teachers say they were surprised by the final assessment.
Insight. Spreading assessment across the programme turns it into feedback, not only a final judgement.
A head sets the release rule
Scene. Before finalising outcomes for a mathematics programme, a deputy head in Bukhara shows the draft to three school heads. One asks, 'Which of these outcomes will I see when I walk into the classroom?' and another says she can release teachers on Saturdays but not on weekdays. The deputy head rewrites two outcomes in classroom terms and records the Saturday rule in the descriptor, so that the plan is built on what heads can truly give.
Insight. A stakeholder check changes the design when it asks concrete questions and records the answers.
Common pitfalls
- Copying a list of competencies from a framework without choosing which ones this programme will really develop.
- Writing outcomes about the trainer's actions, such as 'presents', 'explains' or 'covers'.
- Filling the map only with I and leaving the A cells to be decided later.
- Asking stakeholders 'Do you agree?' instead of 'What would you need to see to trust this?'.
From Eight Hopes to a Map
- Open the Activity Kit. A district centre in Samarkand plans a 90-hour certificate, 'Reading for Meaning, Grades 2-6', with five modules. You have eight draft aims, six competencies and a blank map. In your own cluster use your real draft. (5 min)
- Alone (10 min): mark each of the eight aims as clear outcome, vague verb, trainer activity, or too big for one programme. Note your reasons in a few words.
- Pairs (15 min): rewrite the weak aims as outcomes with verb, thing, context and standard. Then write the programme purpose in one sentence and decide which one competency you would cut if the programme had to be shorter.
- Trios (20 min): fill the competency map with I, P and A for the five modules. Rule: every competency has at least one I, two P and one A, and no module carries more than three competencies.
- Whole group (10 min): read your map by rows and by columns. Name one gap and one overload, and fix them. Part B starts below.
- Part B, stakeholder check (13 min): in your trio choose one group (teachers, heads, or pupil-results people). Write the three questions you would ask them about your draft, then predict their likely objection and your response.
- Alone (12 min): write your leadership task from the Kit and choose the competency list you will bring.
Your facilitator will guide you through this activity in the session.
Questions to discuss
- Which aim changed most when you rewrote it as an outcome, and what did the change reveal?
- What did reading the map by columns show about overload, and what did you move?
- Which stakeholder objection would worry you most, and how could you answer it with evidence?
Reflect
- Which programme in your district or school has a certificate but no clear statement of what holders can do?
- Which competency would you protect if the programme lost one third of its hours?
- Who in your system could tell you honestly if the outcomes are realistic for teachers in large rural classes?
Try it tomorrow
- Take one course your school offers and underline every verb in its aims. Mark each as observable or not, and rewrite one.
- Draw a three-by-three map on a sheet of paper for a unit you teach, with I, P and A, and see which cell is empty.
- Ask one head, 'What would you need to see to trust a certificate on a teacher's wall?' and write the answer verbatim.
Further reading and links
A programme starts from the teacher at the end: one purpose sentence, a handful of observable outcomes and a map with no gaps and no overloaded module.