Instructional Strategies
Competency-Based Learning Models: Competencies, Evidence, and Progression
Define the competency and the decision it supports
Competency-based learning organizes progression around specified knowledge and skills and evidence against criteria. Pacing, reporting, grading, and reassessment rules depend on the school or system. Before changing a learner's pathway, confirm who may make that decision and which rules apply.
For one lesson or unit, connect competency → criterion → evidence → instruction and practice → authorized reassessment → next decision. A badge, completed project, or amount of time spent does not replace evidence of the named competency.
Specify the parts before selecting a tracking tool
| Component | Question to answer |
|---|---|
| Competency | What knowledge and action must the learner demonstrate, within the applicable standard or curriculum? |
| Criterion | What features of the response must be present? What would partial evidence look like? |
| Evidence | Which task and response provide enough information to make the stated decision? |
| Instruction and feedback | What model, targeted practice, and feedback address the missing feature? |
| Reassessment | Which fresh task, supports, timing, and recording rule are authorized? |
| Reporting and progression | Who reviews the evidence, records the result, and decides the next step? |
Publish criteria in language students can use, and review sample responses with colleagues when scoring decisions are consequential. Keep academic evidence separate from habits of work when local reporting rules require it. Reassessment is an evidence opportunity; it does not demonstrate a student's mindset.
Worked example: a bounded explanation competency
Hypothetical planning example: students must “Explain how two measurements support or fail to support a science claim.” The response criterion requires an accurate comparison of the measurements, a link from that comparison to the claim, and a limit on what the data establish.
A student accurately compares the measurements but omits the limit. The teacher retains that comparison as current evidence, models the distinction between one measured case and a general conclusion, and provides a parallel practice case. Feedback asks the learner to name a condition that was not tested.
If local rules allow reassessment, the teacher supplies a fresh pair of measurements under stated conditions and asks for a new explanation. Use the same criterion and record the support provided. A complete response can support the next locally authorized task; an incomplete response identifies another instructional need. Neither result establishes mastery of all scientific reasoning.
The example illustrates a decision structure, not an adopted grading policy or a reported classroom trial. Where a required support supplies a reasoning step, record that condition rather than treating the result as independent evidence.
Plan pacing, access, and reassessment fairly
Different amounts of practice may be appropriate, but flexible pacing still needs a review point, available instruction, and a route for learners whose work is incomplete. Check that task wording, materials, language, and response demands do not add an unrelated barrier. Continue required accommodations and services.
Before collecting portfolio evidence or using an LMS, agree on who can see it, what is retained, and how an error is corrected. A dashboard summarizes recorded work; it cannot explain why evidence is missing. Use the smallest record that supports the decision.
Copyable competency-decision record
Competency and applicable standard: Decision and authorized decision-maker: Response criterion: Initial task, evidence, and support conditions: Missing or secure criterion feature: Model, targeted practice, and feedback: Authorized reassessment rule and fresh task: Access and required supports: Reassessment evidence: Reporting or progression decision and next review:
Sources and implementation references
New Hampshire SAU 29’s competency-based learning page provides a school-system example and links to local expectations. Its rules are local examples, not requirements for every school. The former Aurora CompetencyWorks destination now redirects to FullScale’s overview of its work; it should not be read as the former definition page.
Additional implementation perspectives are available from D2L, Cult of Pedagogy, and Prodigy. Vendor and practitioner overviews can suggest questions; they do not establish that a local competency model will improve outcomes.
What changed: Added a criterion-to-evidence example, authorized reassessment decisions, and a copyable record; corrected the distinction between reassessment and mindset.
Classroom resources for this teaching goal
- Objective-to-Assessment Alignment Pack — Use the blank planner and fictional worked alignments to check whether a task elicits the objective and produces evidence recognized by its criterion.