Competence-based learning - A proposal for the - Tucahea

Dr. Aurelio Villa Sánchez obtained his PhD in Education Sciences (Pontifical University of Salamanca, Spain) in 1983, and was Director of the Institute of Education Sciences for 10 years: Since 2000, he has been Deputy Vice-Chancellor for Innovation and Quality at the Deusto University (Spain) where he is also Professor of Research Methods at the Faculty of Philosophy and Education Sciences.Dr. Villa is the author and editor of several publications and a member of the editorial board of various education journals. He is Chief Scholar and Co-ordinator of the INNOVA research team, currently involved in the research project: «Innovation, Organisational Development and Service Assessment in Educational Institutions».

Dr. Manuel Poblete Ruiz holds a BA and PhD in Psychology (from the Complutense and Barcelona Universities, Spain respectively) and graduated in Education from the Pablo Montesinos School of Madrid (Spain). He currently lectures on Psychology (Labour and Organisational Psychology) at Deusto University (Spain) where he is a member of the University Teaching Innovation team, under the Deputy Vice-Chancellor for Innovation and Quality. In the last 10 years, Dr. Ruiz has co-ordinated and participated in several research projects on the development of higher education competences. He has co-authored various books on the subject, several articles in management journals and presented numerous papers at national and international conferences. A

ure

lio V

illa

Sán

chez

an

d M

anu

el P

ob

lete

Ru

iz (

Eds.

) Aurelio Villa Sánchez & Manuel Poblete Ruiz (Eds.)

Competence-based learningA proposal for the assessment of generic competences

ISBN

978

-84-

9830

- 19

8-4One of the core themes of the Tuning Project is the issue

of generic competences as a requirement for inclusion in the syllabus design update. This book contains a set of 35 generic competences defi ned and divided into 3 levels with indicators for their assessment. This will save you time and effort when selecting those which best suit each degree programme, adapting them to the context to attain the expected academic and professional profi le.

Co

mp

eten

ce-b

ased

le

arn

ing

University Press

Deusto

Cub01 Tuning Competence (21).indd 1Cub01 Tuning Competence (21).indd 1 12/5/09 12:49:2512/5/09 12:49:25

Tunning Competence.indd 2Tunning Competence.indd 2 21/1/09 15:07:1121/1/09 15:07:11

Competence-based learning


Competence-based learning

A proposal for the assessment of generic competences

EditorsAurelio Villa SánchezManuel Poblete Ruiz

AuthorsAurelio Villa Sánchez

Manuel Poblete Ruiz (Co-ordinator)Ana García Olalla

Gonzalo Malla MoraJosé Antonio Marín Paredes

José Moya OteroM.ª Isabel Muñoz San Ildefonso

Josu Solabarrieta Eizaguirre

2008University of Deusto


Páginas web Tuning

Tuning – América Latina:http://tuning.unideusto.org/tuningalwww.rug.nl/let/tuningal

Tuning Europa:http://tuning.unideusto.org/tuningeuwww.rug.nl/let/tuningeu

Apoyo fi nanciero

El proyecto Tuning está subvencionado por la Comisión Europea dentro del marco del Programa ALFA.

La presente publicación refl eja únicamente la opinión de sus autores, no pudiendo hacerse responsable a la Comisión Europea del uso que pueda hacerse de la in-formación en ella contenida.

© Tuning project

Aunque todo el material que ha sido desarrollado como una parte del proyecto Tuning – América Latina es propie-dad de sus participantes formales, otras instituciones de educación superior serán libres de someter dicho material a comprobación y hacer uso del mismo con posterioridad a su publicación a condición de reconocer su fuente.

Any form of reproduction, distribution, public commu-nication or transformation of the work can only be per-formed following authorisation by its owners, unless le-gally established otherwise. If you wish to photocopy or scan any part of this work please contact CEDRO (Centro Español de Derechos Reprográfi cos / Spanish Copyrights Centre) at www.cedro.org

© University of DeustoP.o. box 1 - 48080 Bilbao

ISBN: 978-84-9830-967-6


7

Table of Contents

Introduction by Tuning General co-ordinators . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9

Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13

Introduction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15

Chapter 1. Competence-based learning . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31

Chapter 2. Instrumental Generic Competences . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63

Competence: Analytical Thinking . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65Competence: Systemic Thinking. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 72Competence: Critical Thinking . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 80Competence: Creative Thinking . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 87Competence: Refl ective Thinking . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 94Competence: Logical Thinking . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 101Competence: Analogical Thinking . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 107Competence: Practical Thinking . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 113Competence: Deliberative Thinking . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 120Competence: Team Thinking . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 126Competence: Time Management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 133Competence: Problem-Solving . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 140Competence: Decision-Making. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 146Competence: Learning Orientation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 153Competence: Planning . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 161Competence: Computer Skills . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 167Competence: Database Management. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 175Competence: Oral Communication . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 181Competence: Writing Skills. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 188Competence: Foreign Language Profi ciency . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 195


© University of Deusto - ISBN 978-84-9830-967-6

8

Chapter 3. Interpersonal Generic Competences . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 201

Competence: Self-Motivation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 203Competence: Diversity And Interculturality . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 210Competence: Adaptability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 216Competence: Ethical Sense. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 223Competence: Interpersonal Communication. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 232Competence: Teamwork. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 238Competence: Confl ict Management And Negotiation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 245

Chapter 4. Systemic Generic Competences . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 255

Competence: Creativity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 257Competence: Enterprising Spirit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 264Competence: Innovation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 270Competence: Objectives-Based Management. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 278Competence: Project Management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 285Competence: Quality Orientation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 294Competence: Achievement Orientation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 301Competence: Leadership . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 308

Final Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 317

Bibliography . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 325



9

Introduction by Tuning General co-ordinators

The book Competence – based learning. A proposal for the As-sessment of Generic Competences opens a new series within the Tuning Higher Educational Structures publications. Up to now, the books were international reports, publications which reflected the consensus of experts from concrete geographical regions either at a regional level (Europe, Latin America) or at the level of countries as Georgia and the Russian Federation. Other Tuning publications cover thematic fields, like Chemistry, Physics, Educational Sciences, European Studies, Medicine and Occupational Therapy.

All these publications are also available on the Tuning website which counted in November 2008 a significant number of 2.3 million visits (together with the Tuning Latin America website more than 4.500.000 visits!). By now, the general introduction to the Tuning approach has al-ready been translated into 13 languages. Translation into the wider spo-ken languages was a clear strategy of the Management Committee of the project. The translation into other languages has been initiated by people involved in Higher Education from particular countries. In both cases the work was done with the objective to make the Tuning ap-proach and methodology available for large groups of academics and other stakeholders.

Although Tuning started off as a project - set up by higher education institutions and their academics and strongly supported morally and fi-nancially by the European Commission - it has developed into a process of itself. The Tuning Process of higher education programmes results



10

from and is clearly related to the Bologna Process. While the Bologna Process focuses on the harmonisation of systems, the Tuning Process aims to make educational programmes compatible and comparable. The axiom of the Tuning approach is to respect and promote diversity of de-gree programmes. To make this possible, Tuning has given much atten-tion to the development of a common language, which is understood by all stakeholders involved in the process. Key to this language is the de-velopment of competences and the achievement of learning outcomes. The aim of a degree programme or a period of studies is to make the learner more competent.

The Tuning publications so far were the result of transnational coop-eration of academics. This book reflects the work done by a group of academics from a single university, i.e. the University of Deusto. Tuning is aware that other efforts are being made at the level of institutions, which relate clearly to the Tuning Process approach. Tuning welcomes publications in its new series which offer concrete tools for implement-ing its methodology.

Up to now the Tuning publications dealt with issues of general meth-odology. A methodology focusing on (re)designing degree programmes which contributes to the joint venture of the creation of a regional high-er education area, in Europe, in Latin American, etc. This book shifts from design to implementation and it is as such a concrete example how to proceed. Translated into English at the request of a large number of academics and management in charge of implementation at institution-al and degree programme level, this is a book which is prepared to ac-company the process of change at a concrete university. It is meant as a case study, a possible way forward, not as a model. This is true, even at the level of the University of Deusto for which it has been developed. Many of the people who read the book thought it was useful and thought provoking. It has also been used at some international pro-grammes and workshops, creating interesting debate and stimulating the development of new ideas.

At this particular moment in the process of educational reforms, ex-perience shows that it is not sufficient to desire change, or even to pro-gramme it at a general or institutional level. It is absolutely required to base these changes on well developed and thought through processes which are accompanied by selected tools. It is obvious that it is not enough to identify the profile of a degree or to define the competences and their weight in the programme. It is also critical to be able to iden-tify levels and their indicators to be able to measure the desired or ex-pected learning outcomes. It is critical to be transparent about how these



11

outcomes will be evaluated, knowing that there should be a consistency line between evaluation and the way learning outcomes are taught, learned and assessed.

It is very much of interest that the book deals with the generic com-petences as studied by Tuning. From the year 2000, when the project started, until today, the notion of generic competences or general aca-demic skills has really developed to reach significant levels of importance and understanding, not only at the level of 1st and 2nd cycle but also at the level of doctoral studies. There is wide acceptance now of the impor-tance of generic competences in the curriculum. They are clearly seen as key elements to take into consideration particularly in connection to em-ployability and personal and citizenship development.

As stated before, Tuning has always underlined the need for diversity, adaptation to context, and a creative response to needs of the objective and capacities and strengths of the institution delivering an educational programme. The Tuning tools and methodologies are never intended to be prescriptive, but rather intended to provoke reflection and inspire new way. Focusing on a number of competences does not mean that they all need to be covered or that these are the most relevant competences for a particular programme. It means that institutions, and countries for that matter, should think what is the most relevant for them in this respect, whether they want to adopt a concrete policy of stressing some compe-tences in particular, some for specific subject areas or leave it completely open to the institutions / programmes themselves.

It is also important to emphasize that the way competences are han-dled in this publication is one way to implement educational reform. Naturally there are others. In this book it is suggested to use three levels for the development of a particular competence based on five indicators. One can imagine that also two or four levels can be indicated based on a different number of indicators. This is purely up to the teams responsi-ble for developing degree programmes. What is of crucial importance, however, is that these decisions are based on reflection and discussion and that the outcome of the process should be transparent.

As Tuning General Coordinators, we present this case study as a use-ful tool to discuss and to develop educational programmes based on competences and learning outcomes. We think that it presents a clear example of a consistent approach and a basis for reflection and we hope that it will inspire others.

Julia González and Robert Wagenaar Bilbao - Groningen, November 2008



13

Acknowledgements

The publication, which we are pleased to present today, is the result of the work carried out by a team for two years. In this case, this hap-pens to be a publication for English-speaking people, after the two edi-tions in Spanish.

The subject matter of the assessment of competences is currently of great interest, as European universities are setting up the European Higher Education Area (EHEA), wherein competences play a leading role.

The publication covers thirty five cross-sectional competences that had been defined within the “Marco Pedagógico” (Pedagogical Frame-work) (2001) issued by the University of Deusto. These are currently clearly specified in three different levels, various indicators and five de-scriptors, to enable its development and assessment. It is quite evident that thirty five competences are clearly excessive to attain in graduate studies or a university career. This is not the object of the publication, but rather, to present a wide range of generic or cross-sectional competenc-es that enable one to make a selection as regards each career or degree in question, destined to become a starting point. Some modifications will probably be required as regards its indicators in order that they can be better adapted to the various contexts wherein they are to be devel-oped, or even blend some of the indicators with the “tonality” of each of the scientific areas incorporated to the specific curriculum; neverthe-less, they probably entail a starting point which will enable academicians and lecturers in charge of curricular design to obtain the different aca-demic-professional profiles to be devised.

The competences approach changes the concept of the traditional teaching-learning process, previously focused on the lecturer and the



14

teaching imparted, to base it on the students themselves, on their au-tonomy and responsibility.

On the other hand, learning based on competences requires a trans-formation of how the lecture room is to be managed, renovation of its methodologies, a style involving interaction with students, geared to-wards joint research and a teaching method that ensures that lecturers will be facilitators and organizers of a learning project.

The publication that is currently presented seeks to become a docu-ment that will serve as support both to lecturers and degrees alike. Our experience indicates that there are various ways of incorporating cross-sectional competences in the curricular design. In some universities, these are handled as competences that are taught in ad hoc modules, which students work on throughout their degree parallel to the specific compe-tences, in such a way that they will acquire these competences in an inte-grated manner.

This new version will enable us to receive criticism and new sugges-tions for coming publications which will, undoubtedly, help to improve the same.

The competences approach, which through the Tuning project has become a key issue in the Bologna process, and the European Credit Transfer System, (ECTS), make up two basic pillars of the teaching-learn-ing process.

I would like to conclude this brief presentation by thanking all the members who have made up this work team, and I would also like to express my gratitude to the other people who provided their highly pro-fessional assistance occasionally, such as María García Feijoo, Cristina de la Cruz Ayuso, and Gema Pascual Hoyuelos.

Also of great relevance was the assistance provided during the early stages by Intermanagement’s group of experts, led by Jesús Berruezo.

And, on a more recent scale, we would like to thank Eclipse Digital, S.L. for their collaboration in the preparation of software to enable the procedure required for the assessment of competences according to the model developed.

And, finally, on behalf of all the members of the team and myself, we would like to thank all the lecturers, as well as university institutions who have kindly sent us their comments and who have incorporated these competences in their curricular designs.

Bilbao, 25th September 2008Aurelio Villa SánchezVice-Rector for Innovation and QualityUniversity of Deusto



15

Introduction

This publication on Competence-Based Learning is the fruit of co-operative teamwork among a large group of professors and lecturers mainly belonging to the University of Deusto (henceforth UD).

During the 1999-2000 academic year, a phase of pedagogical re-newal was begun at UD, whose authorities felt that it was necessary to modernise the excessively professor-centred teaching and methodologi-cal model of the University. The new phase was in line with the recently published Bologna Declaration (1999), announcing a future European Higher Education Area.

The transformation initiated in UD, together with the initiatives of other European universities sharing a similar outlook and need for change, helped to spawn the Tuning Project, under the leadership of the University of Deusto and the University of Gröningen (Netherlands). In the several years that it has been under way, this project has spread throughout Eu-rope. Today over two hundred European universities are involved, and the Tuning project is also being undertaken on other continents. Latin America was first, and soon Asia and India will be initiating the project as well.

In this volume, we focus especially on the long road travelled at our University, with its approach to pedagogy and teaching, and experience in five degree programmes, producing graduates taught and assessed under the European Credit Transfer System (ECTS) and competence-based learning.

During the 1999-2000 academic year, UD created a Vice-Rectorate for Pedagogical Innovation, to underscore an essential feature of its edu-cational commitment. Three years later, another vital dimension was added and the Innovation Vice-Rectorate was renamed the Vice-Rector-



16

ate for Innovation and Quality. The new Vice-Rectorate was entrusted with the challenge of promoting and implementing innovation and qual-ity throughout the university. Its functions included:

— Elaborating a Pedagogical Framework on which to base a signifi-cant independent learning approach for students.

— Promoting pedagogical innovation in the university’s Faculties, In-stitutes and Schools.

— Promoting innovation in the university’s Departments (planning and programming).

— Facilitating the means and resources required for pedagogical in-novation.

— Providing Information and Communication Technologies.— Developing pedagogical training and updating for teaching staff.— Promoting self- and peer-assessment processes in the university’s

Faculties, Institutes and Schools.— Enhancing the quality of the teaching-learning process.— Promoting the development of values.— Devising pedagogical progress indicators and instruments.

1. STEPS AND MILESTONES IN DEVELOPING UD INNOVATION AND QUALITY

The first step taken by the Vice-Rectorate was to draw up a Peda-gogical Framework laying down the University’s mission and vision, in order to serve as a guide and reference for UD’s different centres (Facul-ties, Schools and Institutes) as they undertook their own action, incorpo-rating the pedagogical line set for the entire university.

The Pedagogical Framework includes what is known as the Univer-sity of Deusto Training Model, better known as UDTM. Moreover, the Pedagogical Framework spells out the University’s principles as follows:

1. A university that focuses on the student as a person

Education is aimed at the student as a whole, at all his or her facets and dimensions, from the intellectual and professional, to the psychologi-cal, moral and spiritual. UD considers each person to be a unique, un-repeatable human being and seeks to develop to the utmost each student’s capacities. Students develop in all their dimensions, so that the prime indi-cator of the University’s achievement is what they become as persons.



17

2. A university that bases learning on values

In its Deusto University Project (DUP), the UD has listed a set of val-ues, including: to develop persons who are free and responsible, profes-sional and supportive, competent and creative, capable of critical think-ing and teamwork, ethical and devout. In order to train people in these values, the university as an institution must itself live by them.

Understood as guidelines for pedagogical innovation, these values fall under three main headings:

— Personal and social development— Knowledge orientation— Ethical and social commitment

3. A university that fosters healthy personal and social attitudes

Integral, wholesome growth and development at university is based not only on intellectual capacities; students’ attitudes are also crucial for successful personal achievement. Attitudes, motivations and habits con-stitute the true basis of drive as a synthesis of choice and personal com-mitment to study.

4. A university that promotes significant independent learning

The proposed learning model emphasises the autonomous personal de-velopment of students, whose responsibility and commitment steadily grow throughout their university years. Learning must be seen as a fully meaning-ful act that contributes to personal growth and development. Ensuring that each student becomes an autonomous person embarked on the best pos-sible project of self-realization is one of UD’s most important objectives.

5. A university that stimulates thinking

The main characteristic of university students is clear thinking. Clear thinking distinguishes the educated individual from one who is not. There-fore one of the university’s key tasks is to foster and promote a type of think-ing that will enable students to become persons with well-structured, or-derly heads on their shoulders, rather than heads that are merely “full”.

To develop clear thinking means to foster different types of thought as instruments at the service of reason. Some of the types of thinking



18

considered necessary for good intellectual development are: reflective thinking, logical thinking, analogical thinking, analytical thinking, sys-temic thinking, critical thinking, creative thinking, practical thinking, de-liberative thinking and team thinking. Course content is considered a necessary vehicle for such intellectual development, but must never be-come the ultimate objective.

6. A university that promotes the attainment of academic and professional competences

In order to function and integrate successfully into society and iwork-place, people need to acquire certain instrumental, interpersonal and systemic skills and abilities. These competences are therefore crucial to university degree programmes which, in addition to requiring mastery of an academic specialty, also incorporate a broad range of competences designed to enrich the student’s personal life and career.

7. A university that incorporates information and communication technologies in its work

The incorporation of new information and communication technolo-gies (ICTs) permeates all aspects of the university, from management and research, to teaching. Specifically, an important part of pedagogical in-novation is based on the didactic and pedagogical use of such technolo-gies by both lecturers and students. The use of ICTs helps to create new virtual spaces that promote student autonomy and multiply the educa-tional possibilities of interaction and creation.

8. A university that has become a learning organisation

An organisation that promotes ongoing innovation and self-renewal aimed at a common, shared mission based on a collective commitment to the promotion of a set of values.

The essential features to be promoted are: a shared forward-looking project, an accepted style of leadership, a culture of evaluation and qual-ity, an openness and willingness to experiment, a strong emphasis on learning, and enhanced awareness of the systemic nature of our univer-sity experience.



19

Learning organisations are places where people continually develop their aptitude for obtaining truly desired results, where new approaches and ways of thinking are fostered, where group expectations are given free rein, where individuals constantly learn how to learn together.

According to the European University Association, a learning organi-sation must be characterised by:

— Experience and assumption of risks— Monitoring and assessment— Openness, curiosity, capacity to admit own errors— Inclusion of problem-solving mechanisms— Absence of self-satisfaction— Solid internal and external references

9. A university committed to quality service and offerings

Such a university manifests its public commitment to the quality of processes and results based on its permanent concern to assess system-atically the services that it provides and undertakes to ensure excellence and quality. To this end, the university will implement a culture of quality in all its areas and sectors, together with an evaluation system that will enable it to detect any flaws or failures that might exist, with a view to introducing changes and improvements.

10. A university that leads and that fosters the development of leadership in lecturers and students

A university that exercises leadership and fosters it at all levels of the organisation, particularly among its teaching staff and students. A lead-ership that heightens awareness of all important matters, promotes ea-gerness for achievement and a job well done, learning, ongoing educa-tion, and ideals that enable us to look beyond our own interests.

11. A university that values, develops and promotes co-operation and teamwork within its own structures

It encourages and practices co-operation as a key value. Personal and institutional development are attained through a dynamic of team-work and projects targeting common, shared goals.



20

12. A university with a social commitment

Given its Christian outlook on life, the University of Deusto seeks to combine faith and justice, a faith that sees justice as a world-transform-ing reality, with human culture open to constant dialogue. UD students are therefore taught to perceive, think, judge, choose and act on behalf of the rights of others, especially the disadvantaged and oppressed (Kol-venbach, 2000).

This means that the UD endeavours to create opportunities where students can encounter, participate in, live and experience situations that lead to involvement with the poor and marginalised, in order to learn about social realities and develop their sense of solidarity.

13. A university with an open, universal outlook

As an institution, the University of Deusto is open to new ideas and new ways of thinking. It is oriented toward serving the society to which it belongs, promoting the preservation and development of Basque cul-tural heritage, while at the same time maintaining an open, universal outlook that connects it to world concerns and issues.

14. A university committed to the quest for peace and enhanced human dignity for all persons

The idea of human dignity underlies our way of thinking and acting, and is the prime factor inspiring UD policy. On this basis, the University contributes to the quest for peace, which is so necessary, and to the education of students committed to these principles.

15. A university that is concerned and concerns itself with the social problems of the underprivileged, both at home and abroad

One of the University’s essential aims is to be aware of, reflect on, and help propose lines of work, research and co-operation on the most pressing social issues at home and abroad.

Satisfying these general principles requires integral training based on competences spanning the different human, social, intellectual and eth-



21

ical facets of life. This means providing an education focused first on the student’s development as a person, ahead even of his or her academic and professional training.

2. UNIVERSITY OF DEUSTO TRAINING MODEL (UDTM)

The University’s Pedagogical Framework spells out the educational and learning model in terms of a four-sided pyramid on a base plate, with each side representing one of the organisation’s four key principles. These constitute the habitat and atmosphere that ensure that the model will function well and strongly affect the results that can be achieved.

Organisation

Figure 1UD Pedagogical Framework

The four main features of an organisation that will foster the type of development sought are outlined below.

1. A student-focused learning organisation. The defining fea-tures of a learning organisation have been amply described in the abundant literature on this subject, but some of the most basic are the following:

— A learning culture that encourages willingness to unlearn and change mental frameworks, tolerance for mistakes, experi-



22

mentation, an open, objective attitude, time for reflection, questioning;

— An organisation focused on students and their learning, which means finding ways to satisfy students’ needs;

— Individuals learn through daily activities and organisations learn when there is feedback, for this is what leads to neces-sary change.

2. An organisation that works as a team and values co-oper-ation. Both the teaching and non-teaching staff must be able to learn and work as a team, establishing common objectives, syn-ergies, respecting and valuing differences, with clear, well-estab-lished roles and responsibilities.

3. An organisation that leads and empowers people. Leader-ship is encouraged at all levels of the organisation, and delega-tion of tasks is seen as a strategy that enhances people’s poten-tial and talents, recognising their responsibility. Leadership is based on values that promote innovation, change and continu-ous improvement.

4. An organisation with an ethical and social commitment. All the University’s personnel are committed to society, maintain-ing a spirit of service and solidarity, particularly with the under-privileged. These commitments include the value of working for peace as an essential means for good social co-existence.

Organisation

Organisation

That learns andis student focused

That values teamworkand co-operation

That leads andempowers staff

That has a strong ethicaland social commitment

Learning

Values

AttitudesCom

petences

Figure 2Deployment of the UD Pedagogical Framework



23

These four features affect the functioning and development of val-ues that students experience and live.

The four sides of the pyramid represent the four core features of the model – i.e., the Values, Attitudes, Competences and Learning Model that will further autonomy and the meaningfulness of learning. As stat-ed by Edgar Morin (2000): “a well-formed mind is a mind able to organ-ise knowledge, thereby avoiding sterile accumulation”. In this regard, we could say even that a command of subject matter is insufficient. Innova-tion at the university means emphasising the organisation of knowledge, and to this end it is necessary to develop different types of thinking.

Meaningful learning occurs when students are able to relate new information to prior knowledge and experience. This enables students to build and develop knowledge by linking the logical structure of the sub-ject to their own perspective.

The proposed model is designed to help students to learn to think, enhancing their ability to research and write about aspects of their field of study, as key parts of their course of study. Learning should be based on the development of various forms of thinking: analytical thinking and synthesis, critical thinking, deliberative thinking, creative thinking, prac-tical thinking, etc. These types of thinking help to shape a well-ordered mind capable of structuring information and ensuring that knowledge is comprehensive.

The four sides of the pyramid represent the elements to be borne in mind in the pedagogical innovation proposal (a model of learning, atti-tudes, values and competences). At the top of the pyramid is the value of personal development, the idea being to strive for well-rounded growth and development. The combined elements in the process con-tribute to personal growth, and not only to academic or intellectual progress.

This learning model calls for different modes of learning and the ap-plication of different types of intellectual thinking. Attitudes help to es-tablish and systematise good habits and behaviour depending on the personal options that are assumed as values.

Learning based on the interplay of different types of skills and abili-ties can lead, when fully mastered, to the formation of true compe-tences. All these elements combined promote integral learning and help students to grow and develop as individuals.

The various elements making up the pyramid are inter-related, al-though they are individually presented here for explanatory purposes.

One side constitutes what we have called the learning model, or the pattern proposed as a reference for the learning organisation. This mod-



24

el can be applied cyclically in five phases for each topic or teaching unit, or it may be taken into account somewhat more freely, serving as a refer-ence or reminder that learning must be related to experience, thoughtful observation, abstraction, application, experimentation, and assessment of the process and results.

3. ATTITUDES TOWARD LEARNING

A second side of the pyramid represents the attitudes that we con-sider essential to this learning approach. By attitude we mean “a predis-position to act in a certain way toward an object (idea, person, institu-tion) with a certain positive or negative intensity.” In this case, the object of the attitude is learning itself.

This strategy is designed to get students to internalise positive atti-tudes toward what they are learning and toward the learning process itself. Specifically, it emphasises three attitudes which we consider es-sential, although not unique, in the teaching-learning process in ques-tion. These three attitudes are autonomy, personal responsibility and co-operation.

3.1. Autonomy

This attitude could be defined as a predisposition to act independ-ently, with initiative, instead of continually depending on a professor in order to learn. Autonomy is the capacity to act for oneself and is a neces-sary condition for carrying out independent work.

In order to become autonomous, students must develop the cogni-tive habits of thinking, analysing, evaluating, argumentation, etc., which are what will open the way to academic progress.

In this regard, Burón (1993: 136) says the following:

“The fundamental objective, according to cognitive goal research is that students should become independent, mature, efficient and able to work on their own. When this is achieved, they will not need such thorough, detailed and repeated explanations from a lecturer, but instead will be able to study by themselves, learning what is essential more effectively (understanding more and mechanically memorising less), and knowing how to use and present what they learn”.

Independent learning helps students to find meaning in what they study, to see where it fits in. They become involved as persons, making



25

of learning something that is valuable and significant. Learning is truly meaningful if it is later used personally rather than merely repeated at a given moment. Meaningful learning differs from memoristic, mechanical learning in that it involves many of the student’s capacities and feelings – i.e. the capacity to think and reflect individually or with others, which is what leads to positive cognoscitive and affective internalisation of what is learned.

3.2. Personal responsibility

Here the idea is for students to adopt and develop an attitude of personal responsibility for their own learning.

This means building up competence in time management and plan-ning, short- and medium-term planning, producing quality work, abid-ing by the rules of teamwork, meeting deadlines for handing in work, completing courses, etc. An attitude of personal responsibility must be accompanied by habits that help to internalise the attitude of responsi-bility for mastering the competences that will make it effective, and re-sponsibility toward the teaching environment, which must steadily in-crease the responsibilities laid on students.

This attitude must be developed not only in its cognitive dimension, but also in the affective domain. That is, students must learn to appreci-ate positively that they are responsible for their own progress (internal locus of control), while at the same time appreciating behavioural as-pects, seeing that deadlines are effectively met, that quality criteria are recognised, and seeing too that they themselves are better able to de-velop such behaviour.

3.3. Co-operation

The idea behind a co-operative attitude is to develop our permanent willingness to co-operate with colleagues and those around us.

The cognitive dimension of co-operation requires a knowledge of teamwork techniques and procedures, which will be explained in the section on basic competences.

The affective dimension of co-operation calls for appreciation of the contributions of others, recognition that co-operation offers us an op-portunity to get to know other people and other points of view, which will help to round out our own.



26

Finally, the behavioural dimension of a co-operative attitude is that it can help us to evaluate our way of interacting with others, to know our-selves better in relation to others and to recognise the contributions that others make, the feedback that they give us and the recognition that our social behaviour merits.

Developing these three attitudes throughout one’s years at university means strengthening a key element of learning. Experience, opportunities to work together, co-operating with other persons and groups, will facili-tate a change or improvement in attitude. Even though attitude is at the base of group learning and teamwork, personal and interpersonal capaci-ties that each one must contribute to the group are also required.

4. VALUES

Universities, as the prime agents of higher knowledge, are being asked to play a new role in the defence and development of values start-ing within the institution and radiating outward to all aspects of the so-cial and political milieu. This task is perhaps more important than ever at the start of the third millennium.

By values we understand the internal ideals that motivate a person to act according to his or her priorities in life. A university education can-not be reduced simply to good academic training. Universities must also endeavour to nourish values that will, above all, help students grow pri-marily as persons, meaning that they will defend and postulate values that dignify all human beings as persons, regardless of any other varia-bles that distinguish them.

The importance of values in contemporary education has been stressed by numerous authors and institutions. As stated in the World Declaration on Higher Education (1998) for the Twenty-first Century: Vi-sion and Action:

“On the eve of a new century, there is an unprecedented demand for and a great diversification in higher education, as well as an increased awareness of its vital importance for sociocultural and economic devel-opment, and for building the future, for which the younger generations will need to be equipped with new skills, knowledge and ideals.” (p. 1)

Responding to social demands requires a new spirit on the part of uni-versities, as can be seen in this declaration when it states the following:

“Owing to the scope and pace of change, society has become in-creasingly knowledge-based so that higher learning and research now



27

act as essential components of cultural, socio-economic and environ-mentally sustainable development of individuals, communities and na-tions. Higher education itself is confronted therefore with formidable challenges and must proceed to the most radical change and renewal it has ever been required to undertake, so that our society, which is currently undergoing a profound crisis of values, can transcend mere economic considerations and incorporate deeper dimensions of moral-ity and spirituality.” (p. 2)

In a document entitled “Development of the Deusto University Project” (1992), UD spelled out the values that it seeks to promote with-in its sphere. Based on an analysis of this document, we have established three major guidelines along which sets of values are grouped, in conso-nance with the University’s mission, its view of development of the per-son, and its desired learning model.

These three guidelines are:

— Personal and social development— Knowledge orientation— Social and ethical responsibility

4.1. Personal and social development

The first values guideline has to do with individuals. The University of Deusto centres its activity round persons as a value. This means, in the first place, starting from the idea that people are something central and valuable in themselves. Values such as personal dignity, the right to life, self-esteem, self-confidence, self-realisation – all the human rights are linked to this guideline.

4.2. Knowledge orientation

We not only want our students to learn, we want them to learn how to learn. We grow by accepting and, more importantly, by learning from our mistakes. This requires a high degree of confidence and a non-com-petitive environment in which knowledge is shared. Enabling university students to become knowledge-oriented is one of the university’s funda-mental tasks.

The first step is to try to turn attitudes of merely passing into an at-titude of wanting to know, into seeing knowledge as something valua-ble. To our mind, changing this outlook means helping students to be-



28

come knowledge-oriented, seekers of truth, defenders of such values in all circumstances of their lives.

Achieving a knowledge orientation means undergoing a radical change in ways of working, commitment to studies and knowledge. It requires profound changes in systematic study habits; and finally, it means changing one’s framework so as to be guided by this value throughout one’s university years and thereafter.

4.3. Social and ethical responsibility

This involves taking responsibility for economic resources and for hu-man capital and structure; balancing the quality of service offered and creat-ing a stimulating work environment; contributing to the community in the broadest sense; and all with the ultimate objective of educating students.

The University of Deusto seeks to develop in its students an ethical and social sense that will guide their personal and professional behav-iour. This means forming a conscience and acting in consonance with it, assuming responsibly for decisions and conduct made or performed in any area of life. In short, it requires that people think about the conse-quences and effects of their decisions on others, particularly those that contribute to social justice.

5. COMPETENCES

Society today is demanding new competences of its professionals and citizens in general, who are required to have specific skills and abili-ties. So two positions can be adopted: building on these competences in the professional sphere, or developing them within the academic sphere prior to a career.

Many universities in different countries are redesigning their degree programmes on the basis of new academic and professional profiles incor-porating a number of competences. These competences are individual and group benchmarks calling for the development of personal resources, which then have to be integrated in the possibilities of the environment in order to obtain complementarity, or the greatest mutual benefit.

At the personal level, competences are effective insofar as each one establishes the basis and reference of achievement. That is, we are com-petent insofar as the achievement is effective. The origin of such achieve-ments lies in perfecting our personal (individual and social) qualities.



29

Definition of competences

By competence, we understand good performance in diverse, au-thentic contexts based on the integration and activation of knowledge, rules and standards, techniques, procedures, abilities and skills, attitudes and values.

There are various models incorporating competences considered essential from the point of view of professional performance. In our case, we have drawn up a typology of competences, selecting those that we consider to be basic and acquirable during a university course of studies. These competences are useful and valuable for a student’s future professional career, as seen in the reports and studies reviewed previously.

In our proposal, competences are consistent with our model for change and can be classified under three main headings:

— Instrumental competences: or competences that function as a means to an end. They require a combination of manual skills and cognitive capacities that are needed for professional compe-tence. These include skill in handling ideas and the environment in which persons, craft skills, physical skill, cognitive comprehen-sion, language ability and academic achievement all come into play.

— Interpersonal competences: require personal and relational abilities. These competences refer to capacity, ability or skill in expressing one’s feelings and emotions in the most appropriate way and accepting the feelings of others, making it possible to work together toward common objectives. Interpersonal com-petences are related to the ability to act with generosity and un-derstanding toward others, for which it is first necessary to know oneself. These skills imply the ability to objectify, identify and in-form feelings and emotions, whether one’s own or others’, to foster social interaction and co-operation.

— Systemic competences: involve skills and abilities related to an entire system. They require a combination of imagination, sensi-bility and ability, enabling one to see how the parts of a whole are conjoined and related. Such competences include the ability to plan changes that will introduce improvements in overall sys-tems, and the ability to design new systems. These competences are built on previously acquired instrumental and interpersonal competences.



30

6. DEVELOPMENT OF THE UD INNOVATION MODEL

During the 2003-2004 academic year, an experimental plan was un-dertaken to apply the proposed model in five degree courses organised according to the European Credit System (ECTS).

During this period, pedagogical guidelines were devised for the dif-ferent centres (guidelines for syllabus design, for drafting Learning-Guides, for formulating and developing specific competences, and for devising instruments for assessing generic competences).

Together with this experimental approach, the University has sup-ported initiatives and promoted a number of innovation activities through calls for Innovation and Quality Projects, which offered the opportunity to present individual and group pedagogical-innovation activities. One result of these projects is constituted by our Innovation and Quality Workshops where information is exchanged on experiences undertaken by professors or groups of professors.

During the first three years of the Vice-Rectorate for Innovation and Quality, an interdisciplinary working group was created to develop teach-ing materials for each of the generic competences defined in the Peda-gogical Framework. These materials were created in online format so that students can learn and develop each of the generic competences. We are currently considering the best procedure for generalising the use of this type of training for all students, either as course subjects pro-posed by each respective faculty, or in the form of practical seminars or workshops conducted during the academic year in more intensive peri-ods.

During the following three years, from 2004 to 2007, it was felt that a working group should be created to design and draw up a generic competence assessment system, since there was indeed the need to as-sess, but practical difficulties stood in the way of actually doing it. The professors who participated in this project came from different special-ties, faculties and campuses. They therefore formed a heterogeneous group, which nevertheless undertook its activity with an excellent team spirit and a methodology accepted by all for carrying out their work along common guidelines.

The result of this teamwork can be seen in this publication, which is presented to the teaching staff of the UD and to the university world in general.



31

Chapter 1

Competence-based Learning

In its World Declaration on Higher Education for the Twenty-first Century (1998), UNESCO described the situation, stating that:

“The second half of this century will go down in the history of higher education as the period of its most spectacular expansion: an over six-fold increase in student enrolments worldwide, from 13 million in 1960 to 82 million in 1995. But it is also the period which has seen the gap between industrially developed, the developing countries and in particu-lar the least developed countries with regard to access and resources for higher learning and research, already enormous, becoming even wider. It has also been a period of increased socio-economic stratification and greater difference in educational opportunity within countries, including in some of the most developed and wealthiest nations.”

We can see in this text the great paradox of our time. The more de-veloped and wide-spread that higher education is, the wider the gap between rich countries and poor. That is, the greater the progress in sci-ence, knowledge, research and technology, the greater the difference between the developed and developing countries, not to mention in the least-developed ones. This means that progress in science and knowl-edge is not distributed fairly. Not only are differences not reduced, but in fact they increase and get worse.

Clearly, universities in general need to heighten awareness of this worldwide phenomenon. It is necessary to enhance students’ awareness and social commitment so that they will place their capacities and com-petences at the service of others, rather than using them merely for their own benefit or at the service of the power-hungry corporations compet-ing in an increasingly merciless globalised free market.



32

According to the Bricall Report (2000:96):

“Knowledge, innovation and learning capacity are the three com-plementary aspects of current development in advanced societies”.

These three facets listed above are part of a process of structural change in modern societies. The report identifies four fundamental di-mensions:

— The generation of new progress in science and, especially, the diffusion of new technologies, particularly information and com-munication technologies (ICTs)

— Profound changes in the distribution of economic activity among the different sectors of the economy, followed by a radical redis-tribution of employment

— Accelerated internationalisation of societies and their economies— An increase in the level of education and knowledge base in the

countries considered most advanced

Against this background of scientific progress, incorporation of new technologies, accelerated changes in communications, increasing glo-balisation, priority given primarily to economic criteria and sharp compe-tition between the companies of different continents, there arose an EU project designed to create a European Higher Education Area (EHEA).

Its aims include ensuring that European universities have their own, unique characteristics, and are able to compete with the best universities in any part of the world, each in its own style. To this end, through a series of declarations signed at the Sorbonne and in Bologna, among others, the parties have defined and spelled out a common university framework that will stimulate co-operation and collegiality among European universities and better facilitate exchanges and mobility among professors and stu-dents, at the same time harmonising teaching systems so that interrela-tions and connections can be achieved without special problems.

As a result of these meetings of ministers, commissions and universi-ties, an agreement has been worked out and accepted by the vast ma-jority of European countries on what the European Higher Education Area ought to be. From the pedagogical point of view, the most charac-teristic feature is the acceptance of higher education understood as Competence-Based Learning. This education is a learning process cen-tred round the capacity and responsibility of each student, and the de-velopment of his or her autonomy and self-reliance. In short, it is a sys-tem of teaching and learning focused on the student, instead of the previous professor-centred system.



33

As is clearly stated in the Bricall report:

“Universities must also make an essential contribution to social, cultural and community development within their local or regional en-vironment. Historically, these institutions have been actively involved in promoting certain important community services (in fields such as medicine and the arts). Moreover, they contribute significant audienc-es for different forms of cultural and scientific expansion. They are very active in boosting volunteer activities or other altruistic initiatives. Fi-nally, they are key factors in fostering critical thinking, monitoring opinion leaders, and producing leaders of political and civil life”.

It is precisely in this idea of contributing to development in all its personal, social, cultural, political and economic facets that the need was seen to adapt universities to their national and international con-texts; to prepare themselves to respond satisfactorily to the requirements of society and to any new issues, needs or interests that may arise. Uni-versities were being asked not to devise their academic programmes and syllabuses in isolation from other stakeholders involved in the develop-ment of society and employment; and they were asked to bear in mind and consider the points of view of public and private institutions that seek to undertake their tasks with professional staff skilled in compe-tences that today are considered essential.

Competence-based learning (CBL)

To have Competence-Based Learning (CBL), we must first establish which competences are necessary in today’s world. As is logical, this can-not be decided solely by the universities without the advice and partici-pation of corporate and professional entities. Working together, the dif-ferent sectors have come up with a generic competences proposal. This document calls for delimitation of the essential competences needed in each of the professions for which the universities prepare graduates, which will be taught along with all other aspects and dimensions consid-ered opportune, pertinent and necessary for the best training and ca-pacitation of their students.

CBL consists in developing the necessary generic or transversal (in-strumental, interpersonal and systemic) competences and the specific competences pertaining to each profession. The aim is to endow stu-dents with scientific and technical knowledge, and enable them to apply such knowledge in diverse complex contexts. To this end, knowledge is integrated along with attitudes and values in ways that are appropriate for each student’s personal and professional life.



34

CBL is an approach to teaching and learning that necessarily starts from an academic and professional profile featuring all the knowledge and competences that need to be developed by students pursuing a given course of studies. Their programme of studies must spell out the generic and specific competences desired, and distribute them over the entire degree course in question. This approach calls for a great deal of co-ordination and co-operation among faculty to contribute effectively and efficiently to the development of the academic-professional profile through each subject or course.

CBL is based on an analysis of the professional requirements that will help to define and prioritise the fundamental competences required for a given professional and/or specialty area. As expressed in the 1998 World Higher Education Conference, there is a great need for life-long learning that will provide the competences that people must have if they are to contribute to the cultural, social and economic development of society.

CBL builds on a teaching-learning system that steadily develops stu-dents’ autonomy and ability to learn how to learn. This approach loses its meaning and essence if it is incorporated only as a methodology for lecturers. As stated by Mario of Miguel et al. (2006):

“The institutional nature of teaching requires participation of the entire teaching staff to ensure the necessary convergence of ideas and hypotheses regarding what it means to teach how to learn, and sub-sequent consistency of action on the part of the centre’s teaching staff. Along these lines, all professors, in co-ordination with the rest of the university’s teaching staff, must organise the teaching-learning of his/her subject as an intervention that is fundamentally aimed at develop-ment through progressively autonomous learning on the part of stu-dents.” (p. 78).

CBL is an approach to teaching that is accepted collectively and based on the association and interrelations between different subjects, each contributing specifically by providing scientific or technical knowl-edge and developing generic and specific competences. In this approach, students are the true drivers of their own learning, and therefore need a certain amount of self-motivation and supervision, as well as the devel-opment of cognitive strategies and cognitive goals that will help them to learn and to reflect on their learning.

CBL is an approach that fits in well with the European Credit Transfer System (ECTS), in which students must devote themselves to their stud-ies sufficiently to acquire or develop the competences proposed within an estimated time frame. It is an individual learning system that com-



35

bines theory and practice, and which distances itself from the previous system based primarily on memorisation – a system that allowed stu-dents to get by with studying intensively only at certain moments of the year. CBL requires a much more constant and systematic dedication to learning, plus a greater commitment on the part of the student to plan and manage his/her time appropriately.

CBL provides greater enrichment of learning methodologies, closer monitoring and tutoring of students individually and in groups, as well as a range of techniques for assessing learning. The teaching role of the professor or lecturer is modified, so that now he/she can concentrate on organising, supervising and assessing students’ learning.

Incorporation or renovation of teaching methodologies

European universities are working to incorporate teaching-learning techniques, methodologies and strategies to favour students’ inde-pendent development and more significant learning. This is achieved with a more active methodology calling for individual and group work, as well as more thinking about the work and actions undertaken by students.

Many universities are organising workshops where new pedagogi-cal, methodological and technological developments at different univer-sity centres are presented and discussed. Different government agencies are also promoting exchange workshops where experts in methodolo-gies, innovation and quality present talks to heighten universities’ aware-ness of the key importance of these subjects in coming years.

In recent years, different works have been published on necessary methodological issues and providing information on how to incorporate the CBL suggested in creating the European Higher Education Area (EHEA) and which serves as a framework of reference for university centres.

Today, probably more than ever before, people are talking, studying and trying to incorporate pedagogical innovations. The benchmarking undertaken by some universities that wish to contrast their points of view, experiences and approaches with those of others is helping to standardise this process. Many Spanish universities have already incorpo-rated into their strategic policies the ongoing training and updating of teaching staff, as a key policy for the next few years.

To switch from the teaching method that used to be used to a compe-tence-based approach requires a strategic policy and the specific allocation to the project of significant funds in order to complete successfully complete



36

the change and keep it from remaining merely skin deep – a cosmetic change to improve the university’s image vis-à-vis society in general.

Sooner or later all universities that do not wish to fall behind and out of the running must incorporate these new trends and see that their schools become centres of proven quality and innovation.

Competence-based learning entails a profound change, one that we call a transformational change, since it affects both the breadth and depth of the university. Breadth, because it affects university life as a whole, and all the institution’s underlying structures. All stakeholders are called upon to participate in the change to be undertaken in the univer-sities. Moreover, this change means modifying the teaching model or approach employed to date. It is difficult, if not impossible, to incorpo-rate the new model without changing old structures and the attitudes of all concerned (teaching and non-teaching staff, university management and the students themselves).

Some people might consider that the change being proposed is just another change, one that will not be very far-reaching or significant for our universities. We think that people who feel this way are mistaken. Experience shows that it would be impossible to try to apply a compe-tence-based learning system without modifying previous structures. In addition to causing huge headaches, such an attempt would prove fu-tile, unworkable and even counterproductive. The teaching staff would soon become frustrated with the huge effort required and the vast number of obstacles and difficulties to be surmounted, most often with-out substantive support or points of reference.

Undertaking CBL means adapting degree programmes and syllabus-es, structures and infrastructures. It means altering the role of lecturers, preparing students for a new type of teaching and learning. In synthesis, it means adequating and adapting the university to this transformational change. And this can only be achieved with the commitment and in-volvement of the university’s highest authorities – that is, under the lead-ership of the university’s president, vice-presidents and deans, together with all their staffs.

Transformational change gains solidity if it is well thought through beforehand, as such thinking helps to specify and formulate the new vision to be developed. This calls for good planning spelled out in strate-gic plans for the university, which are then transferred to the plans and projects of the university’s different centres, faculties, schools or insti-tutes for acceptance and incorporation into their everyday tasks.

Figure 3 shows the factors and agents involved in the teaching-learning process.



37

University authorities

Students ASP

Teaching staff

Organisationof learning

Managem

ent

and structures

Support

Reso

urce

s and

infra

struc

ture

Policiesand strategies

Methodology,

supervisions,

assessment

Mod

alitie

s

Aut

onom

y an

d re

spon

sibi

lity

Competencebased

learning

Figure 3Factors and agents in the learning process

The figure shows the principal stakeholders involved in different ways in the teaching-learning process. First come the university authori-ties, understood as ranging from the president’s team (president and vice-presidents) to the deans’ teams or directors of each academic cen-tre. These are the persons responsible for laying down policies and strat-egies, as well as for implementing them in the different centres. Their contribution is crucial, for they are the ones who see to it that the neces-sary structures and infrastructures are in place for the proper pedagogi-cal functioning of each centre. Without them, nothing will work.

The key questions in this case are: What is the university’s innovation and training policy? Does the university have a strategic plan that in-cludes innovation as a key guideline? Has further ongoing training been formulated for the teaching staff and have means and resources been allocated? Is pedagogical change leading the centres, or on the contrary, are they being led by other outside initiatives?

The second necessary agent is the ASP (Administrative and Services Personnel), which must also be involved in the process, providing technical support and speeding up necessary administrative and bureaucratic proc-esses in any case. The proper functioning of infrastructures and the avail-ability of resources are crucial for the success of students’ independent learning, since they must study and develop in different spaces utilising the resources and means that the university places at their disposal.



38

The key questions are the following: Are administrative and services personnel familiar with the innovation plan in the university’s Faculties, Schools and Institutes? Are they prepared to facilitate the process as far as they are able within the scope of their job? Are they appropriately informed and trained to participate in the process? Have all the services’ quality processes become a key factor for improving service to internal and external users? Are resources and infrastructures always available and in proper working order? etc.

Another agent or stakeholder is the teaching staff or faculty. It is generally claimed that faculty is crucial to the transformation of universi-ties, but this may lead to the mistaken belief that by retraining faculty, everything has been achieved. It would be risky to think so. It is true that if the teaching staff is not on board, no programme or syllabus, no ped-agogical innovation can be carried out; but with only the faculty, such things cannot be carried out either.

Implementing a new learning system, renovating teaching and learn-ing methodologies, incorporating ICTs is not only a question of retrain-ing teaching staff in their use, but an organisational and institutional change that goes well beyond the faculty.

What is asked of lecturers is a commitment to change, a positive at-titude toward the unlearning of previous routines and customs that must be replaced with new ones. The teaching tasks called for in the new pedagogical system require greater capacity than a simple command of the matter to be taught, if lecturers are to organise, monitor and con-tinuously assess the learning of students. This of course does not mean that faculty members no longer need to have a full command of the course content and topics that students will be working on. Far from it! In fact, the new system requires a greater knowledge and command of sources to organise and structure learning with full adequacy.

The key questions are: Are lecturers trained in teaching-learning methodologies? Are they familiar with, and proficient users of tech-niques for monitoring and assessing students’ learning? Do they know how to apply techniques for assessing students’ attainment of compe-tences? Are they able to organise a teaching system that enables inde-pendent, significant learning? Etc.

Students constitutes the fourth important and crucial category of stakeholders. Under the new model, students are the true key to success of the system. Students must learn how to learn so that, independently and consciously, they can discover and perceive the competences that are to be developed and acquired during their university studies – com-petences that will help them to improve as individual and social human



39

beings, and that will provide them with the necessary knowledge and techniques to do well in their future career.

Students must work in a system of continuous learning which em-phasises, in a systematised temporal way, what, how, why, what for, when and by when study tasks must be undertaken. That is, active learn-ing must constitute the centre of students’ ordinary activity during a period of their university lives. This system will have to resolve important problems such as how to help students to combine study with work (the situation of a high percentage of students in some universities and years). In this regard, the system must be creative and introduce mixed learning modes (for example having some subjects done online, others half in the classroom, and still others entirely in class).

The incorporation of computer technologies will undoubtedly help to resolve problems posed by different users, and not only the problems that occur within the university. Universities must strive to create opportunities and make them available to the greatest number of users possible in all different circumstances. This does not mean that learning should fall into first- and second-class situations, but rather that it should satisfactorily at-tend and respond to the different needs arising in society.

The main hurdle to be overcome by students is to convince them-selves that the new system is based fundamentally on the continuous assessment of their individual and group work. This is measured in hours devoted to the different tasks that must be completed to achieve target competences. Acquiring and developing competences requires full per-sonal involvement on the part of each student, who must become in-volved in each assigned activity, giving it a great deal of thought and making his/her own assessment of the learning achieved.

The key questions are: Is the student prepared to begin learning in-dependently? Does the student have the basic capacities to undertake this type of learning? Does he/she have the basic competences to con-tinue learning at the university level? If students arrive at the university with prior deficits, how can they be enabled ? Does the university re-spond adequately to students’ personal and work/study needs by offer-ing different modalities? Etc.

Main elements in the teaching-learning process

In the system proposed here, competences are the cornerstone. The curriculum is formulated and specified in terms of generic or transversal competences, and specific competences. The four fundamental ele-



40

ments in the teaching-learning process leading to the attainment of competences are:

1. Teaching-learning strategy and methodologies2. Modalities3. Monitoring4. Assessment

1. Strategy and methodologies

Here strategy means designing a regulatable process comprised of a set of procedures and rules for taking the right decisions in each situa-tion, depending on the objectives set, incorporating appropriate meth-ods and techniques and adjusting them to the time allowed.

In accordance with the methodological principles underlying the Eu-ropean convergence model and the University of Deusto Training Model (UDTM), for each subject in a degree programme the professor must specify the teaching-learning strategy that he/she has devised in the fol-lowing terms:

— In the first place, the teaching-learning strategy must ensure that students will acquire the generic and specific competences of the subject.

— The chosen teaching-learning methods and techniques must be specified (lectures and explanations, document study, case study, projects, problem-solving, group dynamics, discussion and debate, delivering talks, etc.).

— The spatial, material, audiovisual, computer or other teaching-learning support resources to be used must be specified.

— The total amount of time students should expect to spend on each of the major aspects of the subject, both inside and outside class, must be calculated. This time estimate must be specified in terms of ECTS credits assigned to the subject (1 ECTS is the equivalent of 25 hours work on the part of the student), bearing in mind that the total must include all the work that the student must complete to meet the course requirements (including attendance at lectures, in-class individual and group work, information gathering, reading, individual study, preparation of individual and group work, essay writing, tutorials, study for and sitting of exams, etc.).

In a recent work, De Miguel et al. (2006) presented a number of teaching strategies and methodologies, explaining the advantages and



41

disadvantages of each one. This is a highly recommendable publication due to the practical advice and experience it conveys, and will be of great help to professors and universities wishing to introduce the peda-gogical innovation proposed for the European Higher Education Area.

According to De Miguel, the different modalities are: lectures, semi-nars and workshops, exercises, external practice and training, tutorials, group work and individual work. The teaching methods analysed are: explanatory method, case study, exercises and problem-solving, prob-lem-based learning, project-oriented learning, co-operative learning, learning contract.

2. Modalities

In this work, modalities are the general ways of organising the teach-ing-learning process. Basically, three major modalities are considered: full-time, part-time and online studies.

— Under the full-time arrangement, students must attend class regu-larly. The classroom is the fundamental learning space, although it is supplemented by other outside spaces and times, such as labo-ratories, individual or group study outside class, the library, etc.

— Part-time studies means that the student’s fundamental attend-ance is supplemented with virtual teaching. Universities are in-creasingly offering courses online, or at least online platforms enabling students to do and present work from their homes or places outside the classroom.

— The online studies modality requires electronic equipment and virtual supervision and support on the part of faculty.

3. Learning supervision

Monitoring students’ learning is one of the main keys in the new system. This supervision can take the form of individual and/or group tutorials; correcting essays and projects; assessing full or partial project presentations; feedback on exercises and problem-solving or case resolu-tion, etc. In short, any procedure can be used that affords feedback to students on their progress or that leads to students’ self-evaluation or reflection on how their studies and academic work are going. Monitor-ing can be done either in class or online, through tutorials, portfolios or other means.

The purpose of such supervision, in addition to monitoring students’ progress, is to assess and advise in each case, offering necessary guid-



42

ance and correcting errors, or helping students to overcome obstacles in the path undertaken.

Supervision and what it entails in the way of individual guidance and control should gradually be lessened as students progress from year to year. Gaining autonomy is meant to be a steady process, so by the time students reach their final year they should be showing the highest level of autonomy achieved. Therefore, no standard advice is valid for all situ-ations, and it is up to lecturers to adjust the guidance they give to suit students’ level of maturity and year at the university.

4. Assessment

As noted in the guidelines for drawing up course programmes (UD, 2006):

“The course assessment system includes not only aspects related to final exams prior to issuing final grades, but also covers everything concerned with formative assessment. That is, assessment is under-taken in order to provide students with guidance and feedback on their work, exercises and tests, or on any learning activity which the lecturer feels can be improved if students are given such informa-tion.”

The assessment system for each subject must be completely devel-oped by the professor and presented to the students in the Learning Guide. The course syllabus should summarise at least those aspects of the assessment system that concern students’ degree of progress in learning competences and how this is reflected in the final grade. The final grade is expressed in terms of a numerical score out of ten and given to one decimal point. The following must be specified:

— First, what is going to be assessed – i.e., the Specific and Ge-neric Competences that the class has worked on. Subsequently, in the Learning Guide, the professor must itemise the assessment indicators for each of the competences. These indicators provide relevant, significant evidence of progressive proficiency in each generic and specific competence.

— Second, how these competences are going to be assessed – i.e., the instruments and techniques that will be used during continu-ous assessment and at the end of the process (final assessment). A variety of techniques should be used to suit the nature of the competences worked on (e.g., exams, analysis of work done, oral presentations, test problems, observation of behaviour, etc.)



43

— Third, students must be told the criteria that will be used in as-sessing their learning, and the weighting of these criteria in the final grade. The grading system should reflect a balanced distri-bution among the different competences worked on and the dif-ferent techniques employed in calculating the final grade.

Clear evidence of the adequacy of the pedagogical innovation proc-ess and the CBL applied comes through analysis of the assessment sys-tem employed. When this system is simple – that is, based on traditional exams – it can be said that in practice, competences are not being evalu-ated and therefore there is an important gap in how the system is being applied. CBL requires a varied assessment system, since each compe-tence is comprised of very different components that can only be prop-erly evaluated through a range of procedures.

An area where university professors are in greatest need of train-ing is in assessment techniques. Generally speaking, faculty members are unaware of, or lack experience with diverse evaluation techniques and find it difficult to plan appropriate assessment of certain compe-tences.

Competence assessment calls for different techniques and proce-dures depending on what is to be evaluated. One question is knowledge assessment, where the techniques to be used can include long-answer tests, short-answer tests or multiple choice); quite another is attitudes and values assessment (done through observation techniques, self-eval-uations, attitude scales, etc.). In addition, there is competential behav-iour assessment (applying knowledge to specific situations, writing cer-tain types of essays, developing different types of thinking (analysis, synthesis, comparison, critical thinking, creative, comparative, delibera-tive thinking, etc.). To this end, lecturers can use procedures such as portfolios, reports, problem-solving, essays, etc.

What is truly important in evaluating students is consistency between the progress to be assessed and the procedure chosen for this purpose. Occasionally it happens that a lecturer uses a procedure that is not useful for evaluating what he/she really wants to assess. This can happen sim-ply out of lack of familiarity with more appropriate techniques, or it can happen because certain types of progress or competences are more dif-ficult to assess than others or require more time and effort.

Assessment of competences, including generic competences, is cru-cial to determining the validity of the teaching-learning process, since results will depend on what is measured and how it is measured. Com-petence assessment requires technical capacitation of teaching staff and



44

awareness of its true value, so that adequate time and dedication will be devoted to it to ensure success.

Generic or transversal competence assessment proposal

Before we can develop an adequate model for evaluating compe-tences, we must define and specify them so that the assessment will only have to consider the indicators established to reflect levels attained. When we do not have a clear idea of what we want to assess, any pro-cedure will do, since it does not really matter what we evaluate. Assess-ing by competences means, first, knowing what we wish to evaluate; second, explicitly defining how it is going to be evaluated; and third, specifying the level of achievement that is going to be assessed.

Competence-based learning should not be understood as fragment-ed learning, as competences were seen from a behaviourist standpoint. Instead, CBL should be seen from an integrating point of view. In our opinion, competences contribute added value to the learning process, making it possible for knowledge, basic skills and effective behaviour to build on each other.

To develop competences, one needs knowledge, since competences cannot develop in a vacuum. They have an essential cognitive compo-nent, but provide meaning to learning and to the achievement aimed at, characterised by competence and quality. As noted by Argudín (2000:20).:

“We see competences as part and parcel of the educational proc-ess. That is, a competence is the building of knowledge, while using the competence means applying that knowledge to execute a task or build an object – i.e. a practical result of knowledge. This notion of learning recalls the constructivist view of learning.”

Professor Sarramona concurs with this (2000:256) when he says: “Insistence on the importance of theoretical (academic) knowledge

used to be the dominant policy in education, particularly at the sec-ondary level. The criticism levelled at this predominant trend can be summarised in Montaigne’s well-known phrase that he would prefer a well-formed head to one that was merely well filled. In this regard, it should be noted that the educational reforms undertaken in recent times have tended to insist more on the attainment of skills broadly understood, including those that enable students to access knowledge and further it, rather than the simple accumulation of information, which today is relatively easy to find through the numerous informa-tion sources now available.”



45

Pedagogical research stresses the need to incorporate experiences, attitudes and values into the curriculum, integrating them with knowl-edge. Education through competences includes knowledge (the theo-retical knowledge pertaining to each scientific or academic area), know-how (the practical, operational application of knowledge to given situations), relational know-how (the personal and interpersonal atti-tudes and skills that facilitate working and getting along with others), and perceptual know-how (the values involved in our way of perceiving ourselves and our role in the world; our personal commitment to and on behalf of the world).

Morris (1999) describes the type of competences required by con-temporary university education, noting that the enterprising spirit that characterises this new era calls for the construction of competences as a new academic culture promoting leadership that coincides with the new society, demand for technological information and development of the corresponding instructive skills, for knowledge about the products of the period, for services and interaction, for new financial paradigms and strategic alliances; and for new initiatives, for a reorganisation of existing programmes and processes which will help to build competences that, at the same time, will support the development of the knowledge-based society.

Competence, considered from an integral point of view, represents a dynamic combination of attributes (knowledge, attitudes, abilities, roles and responsibilities) which, according to Heywood (1993), provide:

— A description of action to the extent that a person strives to per-form it as a particular type of activity

— A performance in specific situations, incorporating the idea of judgement

— Capacity to interpret followed by decision-making— Integration and relations in specific contexts and fundamental

tasks which, like “intentional acts” are a central part of profes-sional practice

— Recovery, as a key to competent performance, ethics and values— Context and transfer to diverse situations

There is wide-spread discussion in universities over CBL and the type of competences to be incorporated into the academic curriculum. Some universities in English-speaking countries and many polytechnic universi-ties already have long experience with the CBL approach. Most other universities are trying to find and select the competences they consider most appropriate. Various studies have been made into what these com-



46

petences should be according to different sources of information: com-panies and public and private entities, university professors, undergradu-ates and graduates, as well as groups of experts that have presented their own lists of competences needed for today’s professional world.

Characteristics of generic competences

The work entitled The Key Skills Qualifications Standards and Guid-ance published by the Qualifications and Curriculum Authority (2001) stresses that any theoretical or conceptual basis for defining and select-ing key competences cannot help but be influenced by individual and social ideas and by what is valued in life under particular political and economic or social conditions.

They recommend selecting competences according to certain criteria.

Generic competences are consistent with the principles of human rights and democratic values

Today, cultural, religious, social and political institutions are stressing the need to promote democratic values, respect for people’s ideas and beliefs, respect for other cultures and customs, etc.

Transversal competences develop individual capacity for a good, successful life

Generic competences should further develop the basic skills that help people to satisfy their individual needs. They must be ethically con-sistent and include the concept of a successful life healthy relations with others, with nature and with society. This is an alternative approach to considering competences predominantly from the standpoint of produc-tivity and competitiveness.

Generic competences are not incompatible with individual and social diversity

The competences approach takes for granted that both individuals and societies are unique and have different life styles, customs and out-looks on life. It is important, when looking at competences abstractly, to recognise that their development and application can take many forms depending on individual and social factors.



47

Below is a list of features to bear in mind in defining and considering generic competences.

Generic competences integrate human capacities

A generic or transversal competence should not dissociate knowl-edge of values and attitudes from their use. On the contrary, it should integrate knowledge with personal and civic skills and consider it from the ethical and social point of view. We learn and develop not only to benefit ourselves but also to contribute to the development and well-being of others.

Competences develop individual autonomy

A competent person is clearly one who can live, work and pursue a career with autonomy. Competences should help people to gain the highest degree of individual autonomy, self-reliance and decision-mak-ing capacity.

Competences enhance the meaningfulness of learning

Competences carry the potential for learning-to-learn, which is the basis for acquiring and developing any competence. People who find it hard or impossible to learn how to learn independently never achieve the basic conditions for becoming truly competent.

Four basic conceptual features of generic competences

Rychen and Salganik (2006) suggest four analytical features that ap-pear relevant to a multidisciplinary approach to generic competences in an international context:

1. Generic competences are multifunctional. The concept of ge-neric competence is invoked only to designate competence that is needed to meet a range of different and important demands in daily, professional and social life. Key competences are needed to achieve different, important goals and to solve multi-ple problems in various contexts. In the model proposed here, these contexts are distinguished according to levels of compe-tence. The first level always refers to one’s closest context, one’s



48

family and daily life. By contrast, the third level refers to a con-text in which one is called upon to act in complex situations or circumstances.

2. Generic competences are transversal across social fields. The term transversality is used by Rychen and Salganik with a partic-ular meaning, suggestive of the fact that competences span var-ious sectors of human existence. Therefore, key competences are relevant for effective participation not only in school and the labour market, but also in the political process, social networks and interpersonal relations including family life, and most gener-ally, for developing a sense of personal well-being. In our model, it is also used in this broad sense and applies to one’s personal and family life, as well as to interpersonal and social relations. Competences integrate ways of thinking, acting, feeling and be-having in any area of one’s personal or civic life.

3. Generic competences refer to a higher order of mental complex-ity. Competences should stimulate the development of higher levels of thinking and mental complexity. Generic competences should help to develop more advanced mental skills, such as crit-ical and analytical thinking, and promote the growth and devel-opment of the highest possible attitudes and values. As these authors say, “generic competences assume a mental autonomy, which involves an active and reflective approach to life.” Rychen and Salganik (2006).

4. Generic competences are multidimensional. Rychen and Sal-ganik propose five dimensions that enable us to recognise an adequate composition of key competences:

— Recognising and analysing patterns, establishing analogies between experienced situations and new ones (coping with complexity).

— Perceiving situations, discriminating between relevant and ir-relevant features (perceptive dimension).

— Choosing appropriate means in order to reach given ends, appreciating various possibilities offered, making judgements and applying them (normative dimension).

— Developing social orientation, trusting other people, listening to and understanding others’ positions (co-operative dimension).

— Making sense of what happens to oneself and others in life, seeing and describing the world and one’s real and desirable place in it (narrative dimension).



49

Competence-based learning and employability

One aspect of the CBL approach that has been criticised is its appar-ent emphasis on the workplace. There is concern that strictly academic objectives will be abandoned such as the overall humanistic education of students.

We feel that this fear is unfounded, since CBL emphasises individual growth and development as well as reflective thinking about what one learns and its application. Emphasis on humanism depends more on the way in which academics integrate these aspects into CBL than on the approach itself.

Competence-based learning is valued by employers because it better enables students to apply their knowledge. No one doubts that a univer-sity education should provide students with a good academic back-ground, meaning good conceptual formation and mastery of knowledge and certain contents. However, today more than ever, higher education is expected to develop abilities and skills that can be applied to situations at work and in society that students will encounter when they finish their studies. The educational literature on this topic clearly suggests that hav-ing an education means not only knowledge, but know-how, and learn-ing to be and to live together, as memorably stated in the Delors Report on education.

As noted above, the idea of competence includes the knowledge and know-how of certain subjects in different domains, as well as skills or abilities understood as practical or applied knowledge, and the per-sonal attitudes and values that shape and guide people’s conduct. What are the basic competences that all students, regardless of their chosen field, should possess?

The first important question is who should decide which compe-tences should be acquired and developed in centres of higher education. The Tuning project (González and Wagenaar, 2003) undertook in Eu-rope, and later in Latin America, a study in which three different sources were used. First, over 5,000 students who had completed their studies during the preceding five years were consulted. Given their work experi-ence, they were in an excellent position to give their views on the com-petences that are most useful and necessary for obtaining a job and then carrying out the work involved. These students ranked a number of com-petences according to their importance in their own working lives, and then gave them a score according to the degree to which they had been worked on and attained at their university. This information has enabled us to appreciate the gap between students’ view of the need for compe-



50

tences and how well they are attained at university. Many of the compe-tences are scarcely worked on, and learning of them will enable universi-ties (if they wish) to remedy the situation in coming years.

The second source of information was employers. Nearly a thousand organisations evaluated the list of competences, scoring the importance of each and the degree to which universities prepare students in them. Thanks to this information, we are able to see the extent to which the universities’ view coincides with that of employers.

The third source were nearly a thousand academics, who also scored each competence on two scales: importance and degree of achieve-ment. The data from the study can be seen in the Tuning Report.

It is not a question of improving students’ training for a given job or career, but mainly to offer an education that is more solid, firm and in accordance with the idea of what a good university education should be – i.e. one that helps students to learn to know and do, and learn to be and to live together. This requires the development of competences that go beyond mere knowledge, placing the emphasis on integrating the contents of what one learns and the mental outlook of each student, so that learning will be more significant and long-lasting.

This change necessarily entails a revamping of methodology and teaching, so that through the ECTS system, innovations can be intro-duced to transform universities, making them centres of learning rather than teaching centres.

Universities in English-speaking countries have been working on key competences and incorporating into their curricula the ones they con-sider basic to today’s world. Their list of competences is really quite long, and each university justifies its own choice of competences and incorpo-rates them into each area of study. Ordinarily, every competence is de-fined at three or four levels of attainment, indicating the extent of the student’s proficiency.

Levels of achievement in each competence are normally defined ac-cording to the following criteria:

1. The basic level refers to the knowledge that the student needs to develop the skill in question. Such knowledge has to do with dates, facts, events, features, principles, postulates, theories, etc. It may also be a first step in self-evaluation, enabling the student to know his/her initial level in the competence in question.

2. The second level is the way in which the knowledge or skill is applied in different situations (analysing, solving, applying, judg-ing, clarifying, etc.)



51

3. The third level indicates the way in which a person is able to in-tegrate the skill or ability into his/her life (or some facet thereof: academic, interpersonal, social etc.) and is able to demonstrate this ability. The essential feature of this level is the use that the person makes of the competence in question. Competences may be instrumental, interpersonal or systemic, according to one typology of competences. Under other taxonomies, compe-tences may be labelled as methodological, technological etc.

The Higher Education Funding Council for England (HEFCE) conduct-ed a study (March 2001) in order to compare the level of employment achieved by UK graduates with that of graduates from other European countries and Japan. The comparison is highly interesting due to the dif-ferences detected between UK and other university systems.

According to the introduction, the report “is based upon the results of a major international study of graduate employment”. Entitled Higher Education and Graduate Employment in Europe”, the study was funded by the European Commission. It was carried out collaboratively by re-search groups in 11 European countries (Austria, the Czech Republic, Finland, France, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands, Norway, Spain, Sweden and the United Kingdom) and in Japan.

According to this study, UK graduates appeared to have advantages over other European and Japanese graduates in their greater likelihood to find jobs in the labour market or research.

Specifically, UK graduates were more likely than their European counterparts:

— To be employed three years after graduation— To be on permanent (rather than temporary) employment con-

tracts— To have full-time (rather than part-time) employment contracts— To spend less time in job search activities— To obtain their jobs by applying for advertised vacancies— To make more use of their higher education institution’s careers

office— To start their job search prior to graduation

In the study, graduates were asked what they thought had been the most important factors in the eyes of the employers when recruiting them to their first job.

The table below ranks UK and European graduates’ perceptions of the importance of recruitment criteria



52

Table 1Factors, according to graduates

UK EUROPE

1. Personality 1. Personality 2. Field of study 2. Field of study 3. Recommendations from third persons 3. Main subject/specialisation 4. Main subject/specialisation 4. Computer skills 5. Work experience during study period 5. Work experience during study period 6. Computer skills 6. Recommendations from third persons 7. Exam results 7. Exam results 8. Work experience prior to study period 8. Foreign language proficiency 9. Reputation of HE institution 9. Work experience prior to study period10. Experience abroad. 10. Reputation of HE institution11. Foreign language proficiency 11. Experience abroad

Skills and Competences

The graduates were asked to rate a list of 36 competences according to the extent to which they possessed them on graduation, and the ex-tent to which they were required in their current work. The table below lists the 10 most highly rated possessed competences by UK, European and Japanese graduates.

Table 2Competences, according to graduates

UK EUROPE JAPAN

1. Learning abilities 1. Learning abilities 1. Loyalty, integrity 2. Working independently 2. Power of concentration 2. Power of concentration 3. Writing skills 3. Working independently 3. Adaptability 4. Teamwork 4. Writing skills 4. Getting personally in-

volved 5. Working under pres-

sure 5. Loyalty, integrity 5. Learning abilities

6. Accuracy, attention to detail

6. Field-specific theoretical knowledge

6. Field-specific theoretical knowledge

7. Power of concentration 7. Getting personally in-volved

7. Fitness for work



53

UK EUROPE JAPAN

8. Oral communication skills

8. Critical thinking 8. Initiative

9. Problem-solving ability 9. Adaptability 9. Tolerance

10. Initiative, adaptability, tolerance

10. Tolerance 10. Teamwork

UK graduates are valued for their learning abilities, ability to work independently and oral communication skills as the predominant com-petences at the time of graduation. Compared to other European gradu-ates, they are perceived to be more proficient in the use of ICTs, in plan-ning and organising, documenting ideas and information, and working under pressure. They consider that working under pressure, oral com-munication skills, and accuracy/attention to detail are the competences most needed at work.

It seems clear that learning-to-learn and learning independently are at the heart of the teaching-learning process in UK universities and that this is what gives them an advantage over European and Japanese grad-uates where the labour market is concerned. Clearly, graduates must not only have a good knowledge base, but know how to apply it in their own way in different contexts.

Each group of graduates surveyed perceived rather differently the competences they needed in their current work. The table below shows the 10 most highly rated required competences by UK, European and Japanese graduates

Table 3Most highly rated competences.

UK EUROPE JAPAN

1. Working under pres-sure

1. Problem-solving ability; working independently

1. Problem-solving ability


2. Fitness for work

3. Accuracy/attention to detail


3. Oral communication skills; accuracy/atten-tion to detail

4. Teamwork 4. Working under pressure



54

UK EUROPE JAPAN

5. Time management 5. Taking responsibility and decisions

6. Adaptability 6. Teamwork 6. Teamwork 7. Initiative 7. Assertiveness, decisive-

ness and persistence 8. Working independ-

ently8. Adaptability, initiative,

accuracy/attention to detail

8. Power of concentra-tion; time manage-ment

9. Taking responsibility and decisions

10. Planning, co-ordinat-ing and organising

10. Initiative

The differences encountered among the three groups of graduates surveyed (UK, Europe and Japan) and their association with greater like-lihood of employment causes us to think about curricula and the meth-odologies employed in different degree programmes. It would appear that UK degree programmes are much more employment-oriented than those of other countries. HEFCE provides very significant data on the different emphases found in the higher educational systems of each country.

Each generic competence included in this work comprises the fol-lowing:

— A definition that specifies and delimits the meaning expressed by the name of each competence. This definition seeks only to de-limit the meaning of the term in this model, and may be differ-ent to that of other models.

— How proficiency in a given competence is associated with other closely related values, attitudes and competences. Competence as a human achievement is complex and made up of abilities, skills, values and knowledge that cannot be isolated and attrib-uted to that competence alone. Moreover, learners should be aware that when they are working on one competence, they are also developing others.

— Attainment of competences is divided into three levels. The first level reflects competence within the context of normal daily life, where individuals carry out their activity under normal conditions with proficiency. The second level indicates competency in the proper use of techniques, or competent performance. The third



55

level indicates competency in multiple, complex situations. Gen-erally speaking, such situations arise in the work place, but may also occur elsewhere.

— A set of indicators (from four to eight per level) providing clues or evidence of the degree to which individuals have mastered the competence in question. Each of the indicators comprises a scale of five descriptors which are easily translatable to more tradi-tional systems of issuing final grades.

Competence-based learning requirements

Implementing CBL involves a number of steps that must be taken into account. As stressed above, mastering a competence means draw-ing on different elements (knowledge, techniques, attitudes and values) in a given situation in order to deal with it successfully. In training stu-dents to acquire or develop competences, it is important to:

— Define clearly and specifically what is comprised in the compe-tence to be developed and assessed

— Formulate explicitly the purpose of each activity— Specify the context and circumstances in which the activities will

be undertaken (e.g. in an academic setting, in the classroom, in a laboratory, in a company, hospital or institution, etc.); whether the activity will be undertaken individually or in groups; and what tools or specific techniques will be used

— Estimate the approximate time to be spent on the activity (a powerful aid in calculating ECTS credits)

— Indicate the necessary materials or resources to be used, whether assigned or to be looked up by students

— Specify the strategy (methods and procedures) for undertaking the proposed action

— Provide indicators or standards of what is understood as a satis-factory demonstration of competence (assessment criteria related to indicators and evidence).

Key competences

In the 1990s, Prahalad and Hamel claimed that a small number of competences (which they called Core Competencies) can account for



56

success in business. Their work, originally intended for business manage-ment, has also been studied and applied in the field of education.

Many universities in English-speaking countries have developed the concept of key skills or key competences for personal development and a successful life at home and at work.

The conditions determining whether competences are identified as key skills are listed below. Such competences must be:

— Multifunctional: helping to satisfy different demands placed on the person in daily life. They are needed to achieve important goals and solve problems in various different contexts.

— Transversal: valid and utilised in different areas of life (personal, family, social, work, political)

— High level of mental complexity: requiring independent thinking, ability to reflect and take a detached view of socialisation proc-esses and one’s own needs and convenience, in order to gener-ate independent thinking

— Multidimensional: containing a style or way of doing things, a keen analytical and critical sense, communicative abilities and common sense

These competences include:

— Critical and reflective thinking— Computer skills

— Working in heterogeneous groups (OECD, 2000)

Other experts add:

— Learning orientation— Communication— Application of mathematical thought— Problem-solving ability

These are the key skills incorporated into a large number of univer-sity curricula in English-speaking countries (University College of Lon-don, Middle Tennessee State University, University of Central Lancashire, Toronto University, etc.).

As can be seen, all these skills are included in the list on which the Tuning Project and the ANECA whitebooks are based. However, the of-fer of differentiated key competences according to field of study is still not available in our country.

Some universities select a small group of key competences for all their degree courses. When this happens, they generally choose from



57

eight to twelve core competences. Below are some examples of univer-sities that have become references for their CBL experience or ap-proach.

A recent review of the key competences used by universities (Villa and Bezanilla, 2002) analyses the debate on how to implement CBL in higher education and takes note of the terms used in the different mod-els:

“The terms “transferable skills”, “general skills”, “common skills”, “core skills” are defined in different ways by different authors. Gener-ally speaking, they refer to the skills needed for gainful employment and responsible citizenship, and are important for all students regard-less of the field they are studying.” (Fallows and Steven, 2000).



58

Montfort University

UK

LUTON UNIVERSITY

UK1

ALVERNO COLLEGE

USA

NAPIER UNIVERSITY UK2

University of Australia

MIDDLESEX University

UK

Mathematical skill

Information recovery and processing

Communication Study skills Ability to work with sufficient knowledge

Personal and professional development

Communication Communication and presentation

Analysis Mathematical skill

Life-long learning preparation

Effective learning

Learning self-improvement

Planning and problem-solving

Comprehensive outlook

Management skills

Problem-solving ability

Communication

Computer technology

Development and social interaction


Maths skills Working independently

Teamwork

Problem-solving Effective citizenship

Ethical action and social responsibility

Mathematical skill

Teamwork Decision-making Effective com-munication

Computer skills

Aesthetic response

International outlook as professional and citizen

Social interaction

12

1 The University of Luton (UK) groups competences into four areas, each of which is further subdivided into other competences.

2 The University of Napier (UK) has fi ve types of competences: Study skills (time man-agement, note-taking, resource identifi cation, group work), Communication skills (spelling



59

and grammar, essay writing, oral presentations, using telephone); Computer skills (user profi ciency: computer, text processors, e-mail, spreadsheets); Information/library manage-ment (information gathering, key words, Web searches, compiling bibliographies); Maths skills (arithmetic, simple equations, basic statistics, graphs).

University of Wollongon Australia

Bowling Green State University

USA

Curtin University of Technology Australia

Oxford Brooks University UK

Leeds Metropolitan University UK

Sheffield Hallam

University UK

Commitment to independent learning

Communication Communication Manages own learning

Study skills Written expression

Broad, consistent knowledge of field

Analysis Literacy and computer skills

Learning skills Learning methods

Oral communication skills

Self-confidence and communi-cative ability


Literacy in information management

Communication Information and research

Visual communication

Teamwork Critical judgement

Teamwork Teamwork Evaluation Information management

Analytical capacity

Leadership Decision-making Problem-solving ability

Social skills Teamwork

Adaptability and appreciation of multiculturality

Self-confidence Computer skills Personal development

Computer skills

Management and information skills

Work-oriented Mathematical skill

Participation in organisational and social change


Acceptance of individual and social responsibility

Enhanced learning

Time management



60

The table shows some of the universities analysed. Each one selects the skills and competences it considers most important for its students, bearing in mind the degree courses it teaches.

Below are the top thirteen skills that appear most frequently in the more than twenty universities studied. They are listed in order of fre-quency:

1. Written communication and presentation skills (essay and re-port writing, spelling, grammar, note-taking, etc.)

2. Oral communication and presentation skills (listening, oral ex-pression, using the telephone, etc.)

3. Computer skills4. Information management (information processing and manage-

ment)5. Teamwork6. Problem-solving ability7. Learning-to-learn (effective learning, life-long learning, learning

strategies, awareness of own learning abilities)8. Social interaction skills (human relations, interpersonal relations,

interpersonal comprehension, ability to form relationships, etc.)9. Collaborative learning and working (working with others, co-

operative work)10. Self-confidence11. Time management12. Ethical sense (ethics, ethical commitment)13. Decision-making (powers of judgement)

Generic competences at the University of Deusto

As noted earlier, the Pedagogical Framework of the University of Deusto distinguishes three types of generic or transversal competences:

— Instrumental competences: considered as means or tools for ob-taining a given end.

— Interpersonal competences: different capacities that enable peo-ple to interact well with others.

— Systemic competences: concerned with comprehension of an en-tire set or system. They require a combination of imagination, sen-sibility and ability to see how the parts of a whole are inter-related.

This organisation of generic competences is summarised in the table below:



61

Table 4Organisation of Competences

Table of generic competences

Instrumental

CognitiveAnalytical, systemic, critical, reflective, logi-cal, analogical, practical, team, creative and deliberative thinking.

Methodological

Time management

Problem-solving

Decision-making

Learning orientation (in the pedagogical framework, learning strategies)

Planning

TechnologicalPC as working tool

Use of databases

Language

Oral communication skills

Written communication skills

Foreign language proficiency

Interpersonal

Individual

Self-motivation

Diversity and interculturality

Resistance and adaptation to environment

Ethical sense

Social

Interpersonal communication

Teamwork

Conflict management and negotiation

Systemic

Organisation

Objectives-based management

Project management

Quality orientation

Enterprising spirit

Creativity

Enterprising spirit

Innovation

LeadershipAchievement orientation

Leadership



62

Brief description of the draft generic competences model proposed by University of Deusto

For each competence, this publication provides:

— A description, with orientations on how to interpret and apply it— The definition given by UD to the different competences— Overlap with other competences, attitudes and values— The description of three levels of mastery for each— A set of progress indicators at each level— Five descriptors for each indicator

The volume provides a wealth of information to be used either in conjunction with the UD pedagogical platform, or to draft guides sup-porting lecturer assessment, student self-assessment, or student peer assessment.

The structure of generic competences assessment can also serve as a guide for organising the assessment of specific competences, which each professor must explain in the students’ learning guide.



63

Chapter 2

Instrumental generic competences

These are competences that serve as a means or tool for attaining a given goal.

Instrumental competences can be further subdivided into types, in-cluding cognitive, methodological, technological, and language skills. There are many other ways of classifying them. However, UD has adopt-ed the system shown in table 1.

Some of the most important instrumental competences are different types of thinking. The more modes of thinking that a person develops, the greater his/her intellectual prowess will be. The UD model distin-guishes ten types of thinking whose relative importance depends on the type of studies undertaken by the student.

These ten types of thought are: analytical, systemic, critical, reflec-tive, logical, analogical, creative, practical, deliberative and team think-ing. Each profession develops its own predominant way of thinking, al-though of course it also uses others. Indeed, other complementary types of thinking are necessary and will be more or less abstract, or more or less experimental depending on the field of study.

Another important group of instrumental competences are those that we call methodological. Each field of study has its own methodolo-gies and procedures for the advancement of knowledge. However, we can distinguish more general methodologies, which cover any type of study and can be considered basic or fundamental. Such key methodolo-gies include time management, a competence which, like planning, sup-ports students’ independent development. The other three included in this section are very frequently encountered in many universities. Prob-lem-solving and decision-making are two key tools for organising and



64

undertaking tasks at school and at work. The third competence is learn-ing orientation, understood as a systematic, permanent procedure throughout life. Learning-to-learn is considered a strategy par excel-lence. Some authors consider it so important in fact, both for people and for organisations, that there are two organisational approaches based on these principles: organisational learning and learning organisations.

Under the heading of instrumental competences, a third group is technological skills. The University of Deusto pedagogical model features two basic technological competences: “computers as a working tool” and “database use”. In a world such as ours where technology is so important, students must become proficient users of computers, mean-ing that they must have a basic mastery of the main types of software: text processors, spreadsheets, audiovisual presentations. In addition, at least a basic knowledge of databases is considered not only advisable but necessary for good academic progress in any field of study.

Finally, there is a fourth group of instrumental competences which we call language skills. They include good oral and written communica-tion skills, both of which are key competences for university students. Moreover, students should become proficient in at least one foreign lan-guage. In such an increasingly internationalised world, more and more students take part of their studies abroad, need to be able to read in other languages, and find that their future jobs depend on this since proficiency in other languages is required by companies and institu-tions.



65

COMPETENCE: ANALYTICAL THINKING

Description

Analytical thinking is the type of mental process we use to understand reality. It is based on a methodical approach whereby we break down com-plex situations into their constituent parts to study them and identify the most qualitatively or quantitatively significant items, distinguishing these from items that are not important. This process highlights the interrelations between the elements identified, groups them to allow interpretation of the situation, presents it in a clear and orderly way, and so facilitates a diagnosis, the taking of decisions or solving of problems.

Analytical thinking is almost the antithesis of intuitive thinking, since:

A. It proceeds systematically, step by step, to identify, separate and evaluate the components of a situation, instead of allowing in-terpretation to be based on its most salient features or precon-ceived ideas.

B. It identifies relations of priority, hierarchy, cause and effect, etc. before arriving at conclusions or offering solutions to a problem, and instead of vaguely expressing a situation in general terms or presenting conclusions unsupported by available information.

C. It uses tools for analysis, redefining the situation in doing so, and for presenting conclusions, instead of relying on ideas that merely pop into one’s mind as an approach to truth. Mastery of this competence involves developing a set of skills such as:

— Identifying, in the unordered description of a situation, the in-formative elements it contains, classifying them according to the degree of reliability or certainty attached to them. (An ob-jective fact from a reliable source is not the same as an opin-ion expressed by someone who has a vested interest in the matter, for example.)

— Recognising information gaps, for which one must have a prior theoretical model for sorting information elements into categories. Lack of sufficient or sufficiently reliable informa-tion can lead to decisions to search for new information or to posit reasonable hypotheses or estimates before attempting to reach conclusions.

— Using analytical tools to organise available information and show the relations between different components. Such tools include figures, outlines, tables, concept maps, graphs, etc.



66

showing clearly both the elements and the relations between them. Of the various types of relations that can exist between elements identified, causal relations are particularly important for a correct interpretation of the situation to be analysed.

Interaction with other competences, attitudes, interests and values

Analytical thinking is closely related to other types of thought, par-ticularly critical thinking and practical thinking, for which it provides a prior rational basis. For these same reasons, it is essential for problem-solving skills, and the competences of planning and decision-making.

Analytical thinking develops the ability to apply logic, observation and conceptualisation, and helps to form systematic methodological habits that are useful for coping with all kinds of tasks, especially those related to information gathering and research. Therefore, it is a type of thinking that is basic for learning.

By helping us to comprehend reality, analytical thinking also helps to generate confidence in our own ability to face and deal with it. Conse-quently, it reduces our insecurity when we are faced with new tasks, projects, etc. It also facilitates growth by providing us with a tool for in-dependently interpreting matters without need of guidance from above.

Importance of this competence for academic and professional life

From a very early age, students are constantly encountering tables and classifications produced through analytical thinking, but they do not always understand how these “summaries” have been arrived at and they simply memorize them. In daily life they also encounter manifesta-tions of this type of thinking (a doctor’s diagnosis, for example) but may not be familiar with the underlying process of analysis, believing simply that such outcomes are the result of “memory” or “opinions”.

To build concepts – i.e. to achieve meaningful learning – students need to master the processes of analytical thinking. They must learn how to draw their own diagrams and graphs, create their own tables and concept maps. No matter what the field of study, comprehension of theory and its application to real situations requires the development of analytical thinking.

At work, the ability to understand and explain situations, and the ability to provide sound argumentation for one’s points of view or con-



67

clusions, marks a very significant difference between good workers and mediocre ones. Clearly, success at work correlates closely with mastery of this competence.

How to incorporate it into the academic curriculum

To develop these skills, it is best to begin with simple situations (few elements and direct or linear relations), giving clear guidance as to the tasks to be undertaken sequentially. At subsequent levels, the complex-ity of the situations can be increased, both in the number of elements involved and in the types of relations between them. Preliminary instruc-tions, on the other hand, can be decreased to stimulate students’ initia-tive as to the course to take, the tools to use and ways of presenting conclusions.

Specifically, the case-study method often proves very appropriate for introducing students to this competence and developing it up to the highest level.



68

COMPETENCE: ANALYTICAL THINKING

Definition: This is the mental behaviour that enables one to dis-tinguish and separate the parts of a whole to arrive at its princi-ples or elements. Analytical thinking is thinking in detail, accu-rately, enumerating and distinguishing.

Mastery of this competence is closely related to: Reflection, logic, power of observation, comprehensive vision, ability to conceptu-alise, planning, problem-solving ability, oral and written commu-nication skills, etc.

Levels of mastery:

1. Describing, relating and interpreting simple situations and prop-ositions

2. Selecting the most significant elements and their relations in complex situations

3. Identifying information gaps and finding relations with elements outside the situation in question

Indicators:

1. Analysis of written information (books, cases, articles, etc.)2. Quantitative analyses3. Process analyses4. Qualitative analyses5. Use of graphic support



69

Leve

ls o

f M

aste

ryIn

dic

ato

rsD

escr

ipto

rs

12

34

5

Firs

t le

vel o

f m

aste

ry:

Des

crib

ing

, rel

atin

g

and

inte

rpre

tin

g

sim

ple

sit

uat

ion

s an

d p

rop

osi

tio

ns

List

ing

in o

rder

ly

way

th

e el

emen

ts in

a

text

Onl

y id

entif

ies

the

mos

t ob

viou

s or

sa

lient

item

s in

a t

ext.

List

s m

ost

of t

he

elem

ents

con

tain

ed

in a

tex

t.

Iden

tifie

s an

d lis

ts a

ll el

emen

ts a

ccor

ding

to

pre

-est

ablis

hed

crite

ria.

List

s an

d so

rts

all

elem

ents

(by

sim

ilarit

y, d

ate,

etc

.).

Cla

ssifi

es e

lem

ents

in

syst

emat

ic, o

rder

ly

way

(ind

ex, t

able

, et

c.).

Gro

up

ing

an

d

des

crib

ing

set

s o

f q

ual

itat

ive

elem

ents

in

pre

-est

ablis

hed

ca

teg

ori

es

Gro

ups

haph

azar

dly

or c

anno

t us

e su

gges

ted

cate

gorie

s.

Mak

es m

ista

kes

in

appl

ying

sug

gest

ed

cate

gorie

s.

Cor

rect

ly g

roup

s qu

alita

tive

elem

ents

in

pre

-est

ablis

hed

cate

gorie

s.

Cor

rect

ly e

xpla

ins

grou

ping

and

de

scrib

es g

roup

s fo

rmed

.

Prop

oses

new

ca

tego

ries

or

subc

ateg

orie

s to

im

prov

e gr

oupi

ng.

Co

rrec

tly

des

crib

ing

se

qu

enti

al p

roce

sses

Fails

to

unde

rsta

nd

the

sequ

entia

l pr

oces

s co

ncep

t.

Con

fuse

s “p

roce

ss”

with

“en

umer

atio

n”.

Con

fuse

s th

e te

mpo

ral o

r lo

gica

l su

cces

sion

of

a se

quen

tial p

roce

ss.

Cor

rect

ly d

escr

ibes

th

e te

mpo

ral o

r lo

gica

l seq

uenc

e or

pr

oces

s.

Expl

ains

the

im

port

ance

or

logi

c of

a s

eque

nce.

Iden

tifie

s po

ssib

le

chan

ges

in a

se

quen

tial p

roce

ss a

nd

thei

r con

sequ

ence

s.

Inte

rpre

tin

g s

imp

le

seri

es o

f d

ata

(of

on

e o

r te

mp

ora

ry

vari

able

s)

Is n

ot a

ble

to

inte

rpre

t a

set

of

num

eric

al d

ata.

Mak

es m

ista

kes

in

inte

rpre

ting

sim

ple

data

ser

ies.

Cal

cula

tes

aver

ages

, pe

rcen

tage

s an

d co

nsta

nt t

rend

s.

Expl

ains

the

si

gnifi

canc

e of

dat

a an

alys

is.

Dra

ws

conc

lusi

ons

from

ana

lysi

s of

dat

a.

Exp

ress

ing

in

form

atio

n in

si

mp

le t

able

s o

r g

rap

hs

sug

ges

ted

b

y le

ctu

rer

Can

not

cond

ense

in

form

atio

n in

a t

able

or

gra

ph.

Util

ises

tab

les

and

grap

hs b

ut d

oes

so

inco

rrec

tly o

r in

com

plet

ely.

Cor

rect

ly u

tilis

es

doub

le e

ntry

tab

les

and

sim

ple

grap

hics

(li

nes,

col

umns

, se

quen

ces,

etc

.).

His

/her

tab

les

and

grap

hs a

re c

lear

and

hi

ghlig

ht im

port

ant

info

rmat

ion.

Show

s or

igin

ality

, his

/he

r gr

aphi

cs a

re

self-

expl

anat

ory

than

ks t

o us

e of

fo

rms

and

colo

urs.



70

Leve

ls o

f M

aste

ryIn

dic

ato

rsD

escr

ipto

rs

12

34

5

Seco

nd

leve

l of

mas

tery

:Se

lect

ing

th

e m

ost

si

gn

ific

ant

elem

ents

an

d t

hei

r re

lati

on

s in

co

mp

lex

situ

atio

ns

Co

rrec

tly

iden

tify

ing

th

e m

ain

idea

s in

a

com

ple

x te

xt

Con

fuse

s m

ain

and

seco

ndar

y id

eas.

Le

vels

of

impo

rtan

ce

not

dist

ingu

ishe

d.

Iden

tifie

s m

ain

idea

s bu

t at

trib

utes

im

port

ance

to

som

e th

at a

re n

ot.

Cor

rect

ly s

elec

ts a

nd

enum

erat

es a

ll m

ain

idea

s.

Logi

cally

ord

ers

idea

s (p

rem

ises

and

co

nclu

sion

s,

hypo

thes

es a

nd

argu

men

ts, e

tc.).

Cle

arly

ord

ers

and

desc

ribes

with

or

igin

ality

the

re

latio

ns b

etw

een

mai

n id

eas

(con

cept

m

ap).

Rel

atin

g a

nd

o

rder

ing

qu

alit

ativ

e el

emen

ts

Onl

y id

entif

ies

obvi

ous

rela

tions

or

esta

blis

hes

inco

rrec

t re

latio

nshi

ps.

Esta

blis

hes

corr

ect

but

fairl

y in

sign

ifica

nt

rela

tions

hips

.

Iden

tifie

s w

ithou

t hel

p sig

nific

ant

rela

tions

hips

(te

mpo

ral,

hier

arch

ical

, or

oth

ers)

.

Expl

ains

the

typ

e of

re

latio

nshi

p id

entif

ied

and

its im

port

ance

.

Just

ifies

rel

atio

nshi

ps

iden

tifie

d an

d dr

aws

conc

lusi

ons.

Co

rrec

tly

des

crib

ing

n

on

-seq

uen

tial

(p

aral

lel,

seve

ral

po

ssib

le li

nes

, re

vers

ing

) p

roce

sses

Redu

ces

any

com

plex

pr

oces

s to

a s

erie

s of

se

quen

ces.

Mak

es m

ista

kes

in

iden

tifyi

ng t

he

diff

eren

t pa

ths

of a

no

n-se

quen

tial

proc

ess.

Cor

rect

ly d

escr

ibes

th

e di

ffer

ent

lines

of

a no

n-se

quen

tial

proc

ess.

Iden

tifie

s an

d ex

plai

ns t

he r

easo

ns

why

a p

roce

ss is

not

se

quen

tial.

Sugg

ests

im

prov

emen

ts

prop

osin

g po

ssib

le

new

pat

hs.

Rel

atin

g t

wo

or

mo

re q

uan

tita

tive

va

riab

les

Doe

s no

t kn

ow h

ow

to c

orre

late

tw

o va

riabl

es.

Mak

es m

ista

kes

in

corr

elat

ing

varia

bles

.C

orre

ctly

cor

rela

tes

varia

bles

.C

orre

ctly

des

crib

es

the

sign

ifica

nce

of

corr

elat

ion

anal

ysis

.

Dra

ws

conc

lusi

ons

from

cor

rela

tion

anal

yses

.

Inte

rpre

tin

g

com

ple

x ti

me

seri

esA

naly

ses

serie

s as

lin

ear

whe

n th

ey a

re

not

(e.g

. adj

usts

a li

ne

to a

sea

sona

l ser

ies)

.

Mak

es m

ista

kes

in

anal

ysin

g co

mpl

ex

time

serie

s.

Cor

rect

ly id

entif

ies

tren

d or

cyc

le

chan

ges.

Cor

rect

ly e

xpla

ins

type

of

adju

stm

ent

mad

e.

Cor

rect

ly in

terp

olat

es

and

extr

apol

ates

fr

om a

djus

tmen

t m

ade.

On

ow

n in

itia

tive

, se

lect

ing

th

e ri

gh

t to

ol f

or

pre

sen

tin

g

info

rmat

ion

(ta

ble

an

d t

ype

of

gra

ph

)

Tabl

es a

nd g

raph

s ar

e al

way

s th

e sa

me.

O

nly

know

s ho

w t

o us

e on

e w

ay o

f re

pres

entin

g da

ta.

Use

s va

rious

typ

es o

f ta

bles

and

gra

phs

but

choo

ses

them

m

ore

for

aest

hetic

s th

an f

or

appr

opria

tene

ss t

o si

tuat

ion.

Cor

rect

ly u

ses

best

ty

pe o

f gr

aph

for

repr

esen

ting

each

ty

pe o

f si

tuat

ion

(sta

tic, e

volu

tion,

co

mpa

rison

s, e

tc.).

Acc

ompa

nies

tab

les

or g

raph

s w

ith

expl

anat

ory

text

hi

ghlig

htin

g m

ost

impo

rtan

t fe

atur

es.

Des

igns

ow

n gr

aphs

an

d ta

bles

, add

ing

visu

al e

lem

ents

tha

t im

prov

e th

eir

com

preh

ensi

on.



71

Leve

ls o

f M

aste

ryIn

dic

ato

rsD

escr

ipto

rs

12

34

5

Thir

d le

vel o

f m

aste

ry:

Iden

tify

ing

in

form

atio

n g

aps

and

fin

din

g

rela

tio

ns

wit

h

elem

ents

ou

tsid

e th

e si

tuat

ion

in

qu

esti

on

Iden

tify

ing

in

form

atio

n g

aps

or

lack

of

log

ical

ar

gu

men

tati

on

in

wri

tten

tex

ts

Fails

to

see

gaps

or

inco

nsis

tenc

ies

in

text

.

Iden

tifie

s on

ly s

ome

of t

he g

aps

or

inco

nsis

tenc

ies.

Iden

tifie

s ne

ed f

or

addi

tiona

l in

form

atio

n. P

oint

s ou

t in

cons

iste

ncie

s.

Prop

oses

add

ition

al

sour

ces

of

info

rmat

ion.

Sug

gest

s im

prov

emen

ts in

ar

gum

enta

tion.

Inco

rpor

ates

ad

ditio

nal

info

rmat

ion.

Sol

ves

inco

nsis

tenc

ies.

Seei

ng

cau

se-e

ffec

t re

lati

on

ship

s o

r d

evel

op

ing

idea

s fr

om

qu

alit

ativ

e el

emen

ts

Doe

sn’t

iden

tify

caus

al r

elat

ions

. D

oesn

’t g

ener

alis

e fr

om t

he p

artic

ular

.

Esta

blis

hes

inco

rrec

t ca

usal

rel

atio

nshi

ps.

Mak

es u

nfou

nded

ge

nera

lisat

ions

.

Iden

tifie

s ca

use-

effe

ct

rela

tions

hips

. D

evel

ops

idea

s fr

om

obse

rvat

ion.

Prov

ides

cor

rect

ar

gum

enta

tion

to

just

ify r

elat

ions

or

gene

ralis

atio

ns

iden

tifie

d.

Brin

gs in

out

side

fac

ts

(ana

logi

es) t

o su

ppor

t an

d st

reng

then

co

nclu

sion

s.

Des

ign

ing

th

e ri

gh

t p

roce

ss f

or

atta

inin

g o

bje

ctiv

es

in s

pec

ific

sit

uat

ion

s

The

proc

ess

desig

ned

does

not

lead

to

resu

lts. I

mpo

rtan

t fac

ts

or a

ctiv

ities

miss

ing.

Des

igns

the

oret

ical

pr

oces

s th

at d

oes

not

suit

the

situ

atio

n in

ha

nd.

Des

igns

eff

ectiv

e pr

oces

s fo

r ac

hiev

ing

obje

ctiv

es, t

akin

g in

to a

ccou

nt t

he f

acts

of

the

situ

atio

n.

Des

igns

eff

ectiv

e pr

oces

s su

ited

to t

he

situ

atio

n to

mee

t ob

ject

ives

.

Des

igns

orig

inal

, in

nova

tive

proc

ess

or

prop

oses

var

ious

al

tern

ativ

e pr

oces

ses.

Usi

ng

so

ph

isti

cate

d

met

ho

ds

for

anal

ysin

g d

ata

and

in

terp

reti

ng

res

ult

s

Unf

amili

ar w

ith

soph

istic

ated

st

atis

tical

mod

els.

Kno

ws

and

utili

ses

som

e so

phis

ticat

ed

stat

istic

al m

odel

s bu

t do

esn’

t kn

ow h

ow t

o in

terp

ret

resu

lts.

Util

ises

sop

hist

icat

ed

stat

istic

al m

odel

s an

d kn

ows

how

to

inte

rpre

t re

sults

.

Just

ifies

the

typ

e of

an

alys

is m

ade

and

corr

ectly

des

crib

es

the

sign

ifica

nce

of

resu

lts.

Dra

ws

sign

ifica

nt

conc

lusi

ons

from

st

atis

tical

ana

lysi

s of

th

e da

ta.

Bas

ing

idea

s an

d

con

clu

sio

ns

on

fac

ts

and

th

e re

lati

on

s b

etw

een

th

em

Pres

ents

idea

s as

op

inio

ns w

ithou

t ba

sing

the

m o

n fa

cts

or o

n th

e re

latio

ns

betw

een

them

.

Use

s fa

cts

but

only

th

ose

that

sup

port

ow

n op

inio

n.

Util

ises

all

the

fact

s an

d re

latio

ns

betw

een

them

to

argu

e in

fav

our

of

idea

s.

Eval

uate

s an

d w

eigh

s fa

cts

and

rela

tions

to

arriv

e at

con

clus

ions

.

Con

side

rs v

ario

us

poss

ible

opt

ions

ba

sed

on d

iffer

ent

wei

ghtin

gs o

f th

e fa

cts

and

rela

tions

be

twee

n th

em.



72

COMPETENCE: SYSTEMIC THINKING

Description

The idea of systems can be approached from a very general, basic point of view, where we could say that a system is a set of elements or-ganised to interact dynamically toward a given end. A more demanding idea of systems, such as those at work in social spheres, would refer to complex (open, alive, social) systems conceived as an ordered combina-tion of parts which, although working independently, interact forming a functional, rational and organised whole for the attainment of previ-ously established common objectives. In any case, what is always recog-nised in systems are the basic features of totality (the whole is more than the sum of the parts) and purpose (objectives-oriented).

Systemic thinking means focusing on the whole to see how the parts fit together, interrelate and interact. It is a way of thinking that tries to look at a situation and see the system or systems of which it is com-prised. Consequently, we would say that students have developed the competence of systemic thinking when they can see and comprehend situations using systemic patterns. The ability to work with totality re-fers:

— Both to the productive dimension of creation, where the indi-vidual is able to build and/or communicate a unique produc-tion based on various elements (a summary, a synthesis, a the-ory, model or system of abstract relations, a plan, a method, a project, a design, etc);

— And to the receptive dimension of comprehension, where the individual is capable of seeing the systems at work in daily life or experience, and understand how the parts of which they are comprised interact.


Systemic thinking is clearly an instrumental competence that de-pends on proficiency in other basic competences for its own develop-ment, but that at the same time is also necessary for other complex competences to develop.

— It is closely related to knowledge transfer, or the capacity to transfer specific knowledge to diverse situations, and to the abil-



73

ity to interact with and understand other fields or disciplines. So it is based on other instrumental competences, particularly the cognitive skills of analytical thinking (which it complements), logical thinking, analogical thinking, creative thinking, practical thinking and team thinking.

— It is necessary for decentration and transversality – to transcend one’s own objectives and co-operate with others to achieve more comprehensive objectives, to develop the capacity to deal with different internal and external agents of an institution and un-derstand their points of view, and the capacity to comprehend the real extent of certain problems or conflicts. It is related there-fore to the interpersonal competences of interpersonal commu-nication, teamwork, conflict management and negotiation, and also with ethical sense, diversity and multiculturality.

— Finally, it constitutes the primary instrumental basis for develop-ing the systemic competences required for work in social, organi-sational and institutional contexts. It is needed in order to iden-tify new opportunities for improving effectiveness and quality, to gather information and advice and take the right decisions, to organise resources, to analyse and evaluate results. That is, it is essential for objectives-based management, project manage-ment, quality orientation and achievement, innovation, creativity, enterprising spirit and leadership.


The degree to which students develop this instrumental competence is crucial to the success of their academic work, given its close relation to theoretical and practical knowledge transfer, and to complex mental op-erations. Therefore, despite its complexity, work on this competence should not be put off until the last years of a degree course, but instead should be worked on from the very beginning (at its least complex level) to familiarise students with the systemic outlook that characterises scientific and techni-cal knowledge in any discipline, in contrast to the more lineal thinking so often used in everyday knowledge. Moreover, students who take a sys-temic view of their studies and of the medium- and long term are the ones who will seek advice and take the right decisions concerning a future ca-reer (itineraries, choice of subjects, internships, etc.).

In talking about the interactions of this competence, we have stressed the fact that systemic thought is the basis for comprehending and deal-



74

ing with complex interpersonal, social and institutional situations and contexts such as are to be found in any job. So it is one of the compe-tences given highest priority by academics and students in different fields of study.


Systemic thinking is a transversal competence that can be used in numerous situations and circumstances. Therefore, special situations do not have to be created in order to teach this kind of thinking. Instead, the idea is to take advantage of the potential offered by certain kinds of academic work and situations in order to develop this competence. In incorporating it into the curriculum, the main thing is to become aware of when we are working on a dimension in which this type of thinking appears to a greater or lesser extent:

— Integrating knowledge: relating knowledge within a subject, be-tween subjects and between disciplines.

— Attitude toward analysis and comprehension of the complexity and dynamics of a situation: first becoming aware of this com-plexity and then showing curiosity and interest to learn more and delve further so as to understand different perspectives and dy-namics.

— Knowledge transfer: relating theory and practice, applying what has been learned to practical situations and to integral projects.

— Analysis of systems and their interactions: this refers to the logi-cal part of the competence, meaning capacity to work simulta-neously with the parts and the whole, identifying systems and subsystems, differentiating micro- meso- and macrosystems, ana-lysing their interdependent relations, their interactions and their dynamic transformations.

— Mental models: becoming aware of the mental models underly-ing our own and others’ actions and situations, identifying, rec-ognising, analysing, and contrasting them, and proposing inte-gral models.

— Use of different techniques to develop systemic thought (cause-effect, sequential analysis, circular analysis, work with data and generalisations, etc.).

In this way, students can gradually delve deeper into the complexity of tasks and objectives:



75

— At the first level, students should simply become aware of the systemic nature of reality, which does not allow reductionism and defies simplification if it is to be known and understood with a minimum of professional rigour.

— At the second level, students should be given complex, compre-hensive tasks and situations to study and develop from a clearly systemic point of view.

— At the third level, students’ systemic vision should determine their action and be manifested in dynamic actions and interac-tions, exercised responsibly, knowing the impact that their ac-tions will have on the people and teams with which they inter-act.

For these reasons, no general recommendation can be made on the type of situations to use for assessing this competence. Instead, we should go directly to the indicators, which will enable us to assess its manifestations in salient situations of the subject and course. The com-plexity of the indicators makes it hard for students to participate in the assessment process until they are in their final years, so most of the re-sponsibility falls to the lecturer. However, the lecturer should neverthe-less share and discuss with students his or her observations and evalua-tions, especially in the context of ongoing evaluation, and particularly with certain students who may be having greater difficulty in making progress with systemic thinking.



76

COMPETENCE: SYSTEMIC THINKING

Definition: This is the mental behaviour that enables one to or-ganise and integrate interrelated components to form a whole. Understanding and dealing with reality through overall patterns.

Mastery of this competence is closely related to: Capacity to trans-fer specific knowledge to diverse situations. Transversality: tran-scending one’s own objectives and co-operating with others to achieve more comprehensive objectives. Understanding the scope of certain problems or conflicts. Decisiveness. Enterprising spirit, leadership, etc.

Levels of mastery:

1. Mentally organising and integrating diverse components of real-ity, explaining it using holistic (global) models

2. Dealing with reality by using holistic knowledge3. Having positive impact on team with a systemic, dynamic vision.

Indicators:

1. Integrating knowledge2. Comprehending complexity3. Knowledge transfer4. Analysing systems and their interactions5. Mental models6. Using techniques



77

Leve

ls o

f M

aste

ryIn

dic

ato

rsD

escr

ipto

rs

12

34

5

Firs

t le

vel o

f m

aste

ry:

Men

tally

org

anis

ing

an

d in

teg

rati

ng

d

iver

se c

om

po

nen

ts

of

real

ity,

exp

lain

ing

it

th

rou

gh

ho

listi

c (g

lob

al)

mo

del

s

Inco

rpo

rati

ng

d

iffe

ren

t co

urs

e co

mp

on

ents

into

o

wn

an

alys

is

Fails

to

rela

te k

ey

elem

ents

of

the

subj

ect

or m

akes

ill

ogic

al a

ssoc

iatio

ns.

Esta

blis

hes

sign

ifica

nt

rela

tions

hips

bet

wee

n so

me

com

pone

nts,

fa

cts

etc.

of

the

subj

ect.

Expl

ains

pro

cess

es,

rela

tions

, int

erac

tions

, co

nnec

tions

, de

pend

enci

es, e

tc. o

f th

e su

bjec

t.

Ord

ers

and

rank

s el

emen

ts, f

acts

, pr

oces

ses,

rel

atio

ns,

etc.

of

the

subj

ect.

Dia

gram

s pr

oces

ses,

re

latio

ns, i

nter

actio

ns,

etc.

of

the

subj

ect.

Bec

om

ing

aw

are

of

com

ple

xity

an

d

pro

ceed

ing

to

an

alys

e it

Show

s no

inte

rest

in

com

plex

ity. D

oes

not

seem

aff

ecte

d by

it.

Get

s bl

ocke

d by

co

mpl

exity

.D

iscov

ers

com

plex

ity

with

out b

lock

ing,

al

thou

gh in

secu

re o

r un

com

fort

able

with

it.

Acc

epts

the

co

mpl

exity

of

real

ity

and

feel

s ab

le t

o co

pe

with

it.

Ord

ers

and

rank

s th

e el

emen

ts t

o be

co

nsid

ered

in d

ealin

g w

ith c

ompl

exity

.

Sho

win

g a

bili

ty t

o

tran

sfer

th

eore

tica

l o

r cl

assr

oo

m

kno

wle

dg

e to

p

ract

ical

sit

uat

ion

s

Fails

to

rela

te t

heor

y an

d pr

actic

e.H

as h

ard

time

seei

ng

the

prac

tical

ap

plic

atio

ns o

f w

hat

has

been

lear

ned.

Iden

tifie

s pr

actic

al

appl

icat

ions

of

the

cont

ents

stu

died

.

Mak

es s

ome

prac

tical

ap

plic

atio

ns o

f co

nten

ts.

Syst

emat

ical

ly p

roje

cts

and

appl

ies

cont

ents

to

pra

ctic

e.

Dis

tin

gu

ish

ing

sy

stem

s an

d

sub

syst

ems

(mes

o

syst

ems

and

m

icro

syst

ems)

in

per

son

al li

fe a

nd

/or

at w

ork

Fails

to

iden

tify

the

exis

tenc

e of

sys

tem

s an

d su

bsys

tem

s.

Has

diff

icul

ty in

id

entif

ying

sys

tem

s an

d su

bsys

tem

s.

Det

ects

the

sys

tem

s an

d su

bsys

tem

s at

w

ork

in t

he

envi

ronm

ent.

Ana

lyse

s so

me

rela

tions

bet

wee

n sy

stem

s an

d su

bsys

tem

s.

Gra

sps

inte

rdep

ende

ncie

s an

d ex

plai

ns t

he

inte

ract

ions

bet

wee

n sy

stem

s an

d su

bsys

tem

s.

Co

nsi

der

ing

th

e m

enta

l mo

del

s u

nd

erly

ing

a

situ

atio

n

Una

war

e of

the

ex

iste

nce

of m

enta

l m

odel

s in

a s

ituat

ion.

Has

har

d tim

e se

eing

so

me

men

tal m

odel

s un

derly

ing

the

situ

atio

n.

Refle

cts

on t

he im

pact

of

men

tal m

odel

s on

th

e si

tuat

ion.

Iden

tifie

s an

d ex

plai

ns

the

men

tal m

odel

s un

derly

ing

the

situ

atio

n.

Com

pare

s an

d co

ntra

sts

diff

eren

t m

enta

l mod

els

unde

rlyin

g th

e sit

uatio

n.

Uti

lisin

g b

asic

te

chn

iqu

es t

o

eng

age

in s

yste

mic

th

inki

ng

Onl

y id

entif

ies

isol

ated

ca

use-

effe

ct p

airs

.O

nly

mak

es li

near

an

alys

es o

f se

quen

ces

of f

acts

.

Mak

es c

ircul

ar a

naly

sis

of s

eque

nces

of

fact

s.G

rasp

s ci

rcul

ar

inte

ract

ions

cor

rect

ly

and

easi

ly.

Iden

tifie

s th

e ef

fect

s of

inte

rven

tion

and

regu

latio

n on

circ

ular

se

quen

ces.



78

Leve

ls o

f M

aste

ryIn

dic

ato

rsD

escr

ipto

rs

12

34

5

Seco

nd

leve

l of

mas

tery

:D

ealin

g w

ith

rea

lity

usi

ng

ho

listi

c kn

ow

led

ge

in

com

ple

x ta

sks

and

si

tuat

ion

s

Inte

gra

tin

g e

lem

ents

fr

om

dif

fere

nt

sub

ject

s o

r fi

eld

s in

an

alys

ing

rea

lity

Fails

to

rela

te

elem

ents

fro

m

diff

eren

t su

bjec

ts.

Sees

rel

atio

nshi

ps

betw

een

som

e el

emen

ts, e

vent

s,

fact

s, e

tc. f

rom

di

ffer

ent

subj

ects

.

Inte

grat

es e

lem

ents

fr

om v

ario

us s

ubje

cts

in t

he s

ame

field

of

know

ledg

e in

to a

m

odel

for

ana

lysi

ng

real

ity.

Inte

grat

es e

lem

ents

fr

om d

iffer

ent

disc

iplin

es o

r fie

lds

of

know

ledg

e in

to a

m

odel

for

ana

lysi

ng

real

ity.

Wor

ks w

ith a

n in

terd

isci

plin

ary

appr

oach

.

Ad

op

tin

g d

iffe

ren

t p

ersp

ecti

ves,

so

urc

es,

dim

ensi

on

s, e

tc. t

o

anal

yse

real

ity

Ado

pts

a so

le

pers

pect

ive,

sou

rce,

di

men

sion

, etc

. in

anal

ysin

g re

ality

.

Ado

pts

a fe

w

pers

pect

ives

, sou

rces

, di

men

sion

s, e

tc. i

n an

alys

ing

real

ity.

Ado

pts

a va

riety

of

pers

pect

ives

, sou

rces

, di

men

sion

s, e

tc. i

n or

der

to u

nder

stan

d re

ality

.

Ord

ers

and

rank

s va

rious

per

spec

tives

, so

urce

s, d

imen

sion

s,

etc.

in a

naly

sing

re

ality

.

Logi

cally

inte

grat

es

the

dive

rse

pers

pect

ives

, sou

rces

, di

men

sion

s, e

tc. u

sed

in a

naly

sing

rea

lity.

Tran

sfer

ring

con

tent

s in

to p

ract

ice,

thr

ough

th

eir

inte

grat

ion

in a

pr

ojec

t

Fails

to

appl

y co

nten

ts

to p

ract

ice.

Part

ially

app

lies

cont

ents

to

prac

tice.

App

lies

cont

ents

to

prac

tice

thro

ugh

inte

grat

ion

in a

pr

ojec

t.

Des

igns

and

dev

elop

s a

proj

ect

whe

re

cont

ents

are

app

lied.

Eval

uate

s pr

ojec

t an

d in

trod

uces

im

prov

emen

ts a

s a

cons

eque

nce.

Iden

tify

ing

an

d

exp

lain

ing

an

y sa

lien

t m

acro

syst

ems

in t

he

situ

atio

n

Doe

sn’t

dis

tingu

ish

mac

ro-

from

mes

o-

and

mic

rosy

stem

s.

Onl

y de

scrib

es t

he

mac

rosy

stem

s in

the

si

tuat

ion.

Expl

ains

the

sal

ient

m

acro

syst

ems

in t

he

situ

atio

n.

Esta

blis

hes

rela

tions

hips

bet

wee

n m

acro

-, m

eso-

and

m

icro

syst

ems.

Cle

arly

pre

sent

s th

e in

terr

elat

ions

bet

wee

n m

acro

-, m

eso-

and

m

icro

syst

ems.

Bec

om

ing

aw

are

of

ow

n m

enta

l mo

del

sN

ot a

war

e of

ow

n m

enta

l mod

els.

Has

diff

icul

ty in

re

cogn

isin

g ow

n m

enta

l mod

els.

Is a

war

e of

ow

n m

enta

l mod

els.

Con

side

rs o

ther

m

enta

l mod

els

apar

t fr

om o

wn.

Expl

ains

the

situ

atio

n fr

om t

he p

oint

of

view

of

oth

ers’

men

tal

mod

els.

Dif

fere

nti

atin

g

bet

wee

n is

ola

ted

fa

cts

and

g

ener

alis

atio

ns

infe

rred

fro

m f

acts

Gen

eral

ises

im

puls

ivel

y an

d w

ithou

t ca

utio

n.

Con

fuse

s is

olat

ed

fact

s an

d ge

nera

lisat

ion,

al

thou

gh s

how

s so

me

caut

ion.

Gen

eral

ises

with

ca

utio

n an

d cr

itica

l se

nse

base

d on

ob

serv

atio

n.

Util

ises

gen

eral

isat

ions

in

dec

isio

n-m

akin

g ta

king

into

acc

ount

th

eir

degr

ee o

f ac

cura

cy.

Syst

emat

ical

ly c

heck

s th

e va

lidity

of

gene

ralis

atio

ns.



79

Leve

ls o

f M

aste

ryIn

dic

ato

rsD

escr

ipto

rs

12

34

5

Thir

d le

vel o

f m

aste

ry:

Hav

ing

po

siti

ve

imp

act

on

tea

m

than

ks t

o d

ynam

ic

syst

emic

vis

ion

in

teg

rati

ng

var

iou

s p

ersp

ecti

ves

Vie

win

g v

ario

us

fiel

ds

of

kno

wle

dg

e an

d/o

r d

isci

plin

es

syst

emic

ally

Fails

to

inte

grat

e el

emen

ts f

rom

var

ious

su

bjec

ts, f

ield

s,

pers

pect

ives

, etc

. in

a si

ngle

pro

posa

l.

Inte

grat

es s

ome

elem

ents

fro

m

diff

eren

t fie

lds

in a

si

ngle

pro

posa

l.

App

roac

hes

situ

atio

ns

syst

emic

ally,

goi

ng

beyo

nd t

he le

vels

of

each

of

each

fie

ld o

f kn

owle

dge.

Pres

ents

ow

n sy

stem

ic

visi

on c

ompr

ehen

sibl

y fo

r ot

hers

.

Hel

ps t

eam

to

deve

lop

syst

emic

vis

ion.

Un

der

stan

din

g t

he

mec

han

ism

s o

f re

sist

ance

to

ch

ang

e in

sel

f an

d o

ther

s

Reac

ts n

egat

ivel

y to

pe

ople

who

res

ist

or

reje

ct c

hang

e.

Exer

ts p

ress

ure

to

over

com

e re

sist

ance

to

cha

nge.

Iden

tifie

s th

e m

echa

nism

s (im

plic

it ru

les

or p

ower

re

latio

ns) u

nder

lyin

g re

sist

ance

to

chan

ge.

Dev

ises

str

ateg

ies

to

over

com

e th

e m

echa

nism

s (im

plic

it ru

les

or p

ower

re

latio

ns) u

nder

lyin

g re

sist

ance

to

chan

ge.

Mot

ivat

es t

eam

to

over

com

e th

e m

echa

nism

s (o

wn

impl

icit

rule

s or

pow

er

rela

tions

) und

erly

ing

resi

stan

ce t

o ch

ange

Vie

win

g s

yste

ms

dyn

amic

ally

Has

diff

icul

ty in

ex

plai

ning

the

ev

olut

ion

of a

sys

tem

ov

er t

ime.

Look

s fo

r th

e im

med

iate

eff

ects

of

chan

ge.

Des

crib

es a

sys

tem

’s tim

e pe

rspe

ctiv

e.Fo

rese

es t

he d

elay

ed

effe

cts

of c

hang

e an

d th

eir

impa

ct o

n th

e sy

stem

.

Fore

sees

(sho

rt-,

m

ediu

m-

and

long

-te

rm) e

volu

tion

of

syst

ems

and

thei

r al

tern

ativ

es.

Pro

po

sin

g

mo

tiva

tin

g, f

easi

ble

w

ays

to a

dva

nce

b

eyo

nd

exi

stin

g

men

tal m

od

els

Part

ial,

limite

d vi

sion

of

rea

lity

hind

ers

team

’s pr

ogre

ss.

Supp

orts

tea

m

mem

bers

who

pr

opos

e pr

ogre

ssiv

e sy

stem

ic v

iew

s.

Prop

oses

men

tal

mod

els

that

wou

ld

impr

ove

the

team

’s pr

edom

inan

t on

es.

Stim

ulat

es

impr

ovem

ent

of

team

’s m

enta

l mod

els.

Hel

ps t

eam

to

deve

lop

men

tal m

odel

s th

at

bett

er e

nabl

e it

to

deal

with

situ

atio

ns.

Hel

pin

g t

o in

teg

rate

co

nfl

icti

ng

men

tal

mo

del

s

Doe

s no

t co

nsid

er

othe

rs’ m

enta

l m

odel

s.

Show

s w

illin

gnes

s to

co

nsid

er o

ther

s’

men

tal m

odel

s.

Expl

ains

situ

atio

ns

usin

g m

enta

l mod

els

othe

r th

an o

wn.

Iden

tifie

s co

nsis

tenc

ies,

in

cons

iste

ncie

s,

mee

ting

poin

ts a

nd

poin

ts o

f di

ffer

ence

be

twee

n di

ffer

ent

men

tal m

odel

s.

Prop

oses

new

men

tal

mod

els

acce

ptab

le

from

ant

igen

ic

pers

pect

ives

.

Part

icip

atin

g in

tea

m

con

sid

erin

g it

s co

mp

lexi

ty a

nd

in

terd

epen

den

cy

Tend

s to

sim

plify

pr

oble

ms

and

cast

bl

ame.

Avo

ids

and

reje

cts

sear

ch f

or s

cape

goat

s.Re

cogn

ises

the

re

spon

sibi

lity

of

mul

tiple

age

nts

in

prob

lem

s.

Spec

ifies

the

sys

tem

ic

impa

ct o

f ea

ch a

gent

’s re

spon

sibi

lity.

Dis

tingu

ishe

s ea

ch

agen

t’s c

apac

ity t

o co

ntrib

ute

to c

hang

e in

the

sys

tem

.



80

COMPETENCE: CRITICAL THINKING

Description

Critical thinking goes beyond the skills of logical analysis since, accord-ing to Brookfield (1987), it involves questioning the underlying assump-tions behind our usual ways of thinking and acting, and then, on the basis of this critical questioning, being willing to think and act differently. In the opinion of Moya (2005), critical thinking is why thinking: Why are things like that? Why can’t things be some other way? Why do you think things are like that? Why would anyone want things to be like that?

Consequently, we will say that students have developed the compe-tence of critical thinking to the extent that they wonder about things and are interested in the foundations underlying their own and others’ ideas, actions, judgements and evaluations.


Critical thinking is an instrumental competence that depends on pro-ficiency in other basic cognitive competences such as reflective thinking, logical thinking, analytical thinking, systemic thinking, practical thinking and team thinking.

It is necessary to develop critical thinking in order to be able to rec-ognise the conditions under which a given set of ideas can be trans-formed into knowledge or beliefs that will have a decisive influence on decisions and actions, as well as the way in which people construct their own mentalities based on ideologies. Therefore, it is an essential basis for developing individual interpersonal competences (self-motivation, adaptability and ethical sense) and social competences (interpersonal communication, teamwork and conflict management). Finally, at the systemic level, critical thinking enables people to revise, question and improve social and organisational practices (quality orientation, achieve-ment orientation and enterprising spirit).


Critical thinking can be recognised in our private lives and at work, and in its social and political implications. According to Brookfield (1987), being a critical thinker is part of what it means to be a growing, develop-ing individual. Going even further, we could say that critical thinking is



81

crucial for creating and maintaining a healthy democracy. Without it, we could not grow at any of these three levels: our personal relations would atrophy, organisations would stay the same as twenty years ago, and political participation would deteriorate.

“Learning to think critically is one of the most significant activities of adult life. When we become critical thinkers, we develop awareness of the assumptions under which we and others act. We learn to pay attention to the context in which our actions and ideas are generated. We become sceptical of rapid solutions, single responses to problems and appeals to universal truth. Also, we open up to alternative ways of seeing things and behaving in the world. The ability to think critically is important to our lives in many different senses (....) In our personal relations we lean to see our own actions through the eyes of others; in the work place we try to exercise democratic control of the organisa-tion and functions of our jobs, and to take initiatives to go in new di-rections and design the form and content of our activities. We become aware of the potential for distortion and predisposition in public and private life. Politically, we value liberty, we practice democracy, we en-courage tolerance toward diversity, and we submit to review the dem-agogic tendencies of politicians” (Brookfield, 1987: IX).

For these reasons, it is very important that university students receive training in the type of critical thinking that is required in adult life and life at work, a correspondence which must be taken into account in facilitat-ing the transfer of this competence, since often the activities and tasks undertaken in academic contexts to work on this competence lack such correspondence.


As just noted, more than mere cognitive training, the situations and tasks proposed to develop students’ critical thinking should prepare for this transfer, stressing awareness and consistency between our thoughts and our actions, a willingness to revise them, and the importance of sharing these activities and reflections with other persons.

The idea therefore is to create situations where assumptions can be examined and checked against others. The object of analysis will always be our own and others’ discourse and actions, either directly expressed and observed (for example in the case of our own thoughts or behav-iour), or else gleaned from a written document (article, news item, story, etc.) or audiovisual item (audio recording, radio or TV programme, docu-mentary, film, etc.). Dialogue and discussion will make it possible to con-



82

trast reasonings and broaden the perspectives of analysis. To this end, we should try to approach the different manifestations of critical think-ing analysed in the competence indicators congruently:

— Formulating own judgements: asking questions about surround-ing conditions, reflecting on them, formulating and arguing own judgements.

— Analysing others’ judgements: being interested in and analysing oth-ers’ judgements (distinguishing fact from opinion, strong and weak points, and identifying underlying ideas, principles and values).

— Using well-grounded criteria to analyse judgements, adopting a constructive attitude: internal criteria (consistency, logic, congruency, reliability,...) and external criteria (utility, feasibility, validity, etc.).

— Becoming aware of the practical implications of judgements and acceptance of responsibility for such implications: the pros and cons of decisions, their consequences for others and for the rights of individuals.

Progress in the competence depends not so much on the type of situations worked on, but on how deep students delve in the following dimensions:

— At first, the idea would be simply to pose questions and reflec-tions on surrounding conditions, formulating one’s own judge-ments and checking them against those of others.

— Later, students should explore the consistency between thought and action, and the personal and social implications entailed thereby.

— Finally, students should be able to give a reasoned, well-founded account of it, in view of the principles and values inspiring their decisions and actions.

Although as we have said critical thinking involves both thought and action, what lecturers can observe is essentially the student’s reasoning, so this becomes the pathway to assessment (the reasonings and arguments that the students produces orally and in writing, as well as how he/she reconsiders and redevelops them as a result of dialogue with others).

Here again, the complexity of the indicators makes it hard for stu-dents to participate in the assessment process, with the result that most of the responsibility falls to the lecturer. However, the lecturer should share and discuss with students his or her observations and evaluations, especially in the context of ongoing evaluation, and particularly with certain students who may be having greater difficulty in making progress with critical thinking.



83

COMPETENCE: CRITICAL THINKING

Definition: This is the mental behaviour that questions things and concerns itself with the foundations on which our own and others’ ideas, actions and judgements are based.

Mastery of this competence is closely related to: reflective think-ing, logical and analytical thinking. Recognition of the conditions that make it possible for a given set of ideas to be transformed into knowledge. Decision-making, innovation, etc.

Levels of mastery:

1. Asking oneself questions about life around us and actively par-ticipating in discussions about it, analysing the judgements made and reflecting on the consequences of one’s own and oth-ers’ decisions

2. Analysing the consistency and logic of one’s own and others’ judgements, evaluating their personal and social implications

3. Arguing the pertinence of judgements made and analysing the consistency of one’s own conduct, given the principles and val-ues that one defends

Indicators:

1. Own judgements2. Judgements analysis3. Judgement criteria4. Practical implications5. Responsibility



84

Leve

ls o

f M

aste

ryIn

dic

ato

rsD

escr

ipto

rs

12

34

5

Firs

t le

vel o

f m

aste

ry:

Ask

ing

on

esel

f q

ues

tio

ns

abo

ut

surr

ou

nd

ing

life

an

d a

ctiv

ely

par

tici

pat

ing

in

dis

cuss

ion

s o

n it

, an

alys

ing

th

e ju

dg

emen

ts m

ade

and

ref

lect

ing

on

th

e co

nse

qu

ence

s o

f o

ne’

s o

wn

an

d

oth

ers’

dec

isio

ns

Sho

win

g c

riti

cal

spir

itN

ever

que

stio

ns t

he

situ

atio

n or

con

ditio

ns

of o

wn

life.

Que

stio

ns c

erta

in

situ

atio

ns in

ow

n lif

e.Sh

ows

criti

cal

attit

ude

tow

ards

co

nditi

ons

of o

wn

life.

Que

stio

ns a

nd

expl

ores

rea

lity,

re

flect

ing

on li

fe.

Form

ulat

es o

wn

judg

emen

ts a

nd

eval

uatio

ns b

ased

on

syst

emat

ic r

efle

ctio

n on

rea

lity.

Dis

tin

gu

ish

ing

fac

t fr

om

op

inio

n,

inte

rpre

tati

on

s,

eval

uat

ion

s, e

tc. i

n

oth

ers’

ar

gu

men

tati

on

Acc

epts

as

own

judg

emen

ts o

r de

cisi

ons

base

d on

op

inio

ns, e

valu

atio

ns,

etc.

as

thou

gh t

hey

wer

e ob

ject

ive

fact

s.

Acc

epts

with

out

ques

tion

judg

emen

ts

or d

ecis

ions

bas

ed

on o

pini

ons,

ev

alua

tions

, etc

. as

thou

gh t

hey

wer

e ob

ject

ive

fact

s.

Que

stio

ns

judg

emen

ts o

r de

cisi

ons

base

d on

op

inio

ns, e

valu

atio

ns,

etc.

Dis

tingu

ishe

s ob

ject

ive

fact

s fr

om

opin

ions

and

ev

alua

tions

.

Cor

rect

ly a

naly

ses

judg

emen

ts o

r de

cisi

ons

base

d on

op

inio

ns, e

valu

atio

ns,

etc.

Act

ivel

y p

arti

cip

atin

g in

d

iscu

ssio

n

Rem

ains

pas

sive

du

ring

disc

ussi

ons.

Find

s it

hard

to

part

icip

ate

in

disc

ussi

on s

ituat

ions

.

Act

ivel

y pa

rtic

ipat

es

in d

iscu

ssio

n.Pa

rtic

ipat

es

cons

truc

tivel

y in

di

scus

sion

s,

cont

ribut

ing

to

cons

truc

tion

of r

ich,

sh

ared

ref

lect

ion.

In d

iscu

ssio

ns s

erve

s as

con

stru

ctiv

e po

int

of r

efer

ence

for

ot

hers

.

Fore

seei

ng t

he

prac

tica

l im

plic

atio

ns

of d

ecis

ions

and

ap

proa

ches

Una

war

e of

the

ef

fect

s of

dec

isio

ns

and

prop

osal

s.

Igno

res

the

prac

tical

im

plic

atio

ns o

f de

cisi

ons

and

prop

osal

s.

Fore

sees

the

pra

ctic

al

impl

icat

ions

of

deci

sion

s an

d pr

opos

als.

Ana

lyse

s th

e pr

os

and

cons

of

the

effe

cts

of d

ecis

ions

pr

opos

ed.

Giv

es im

port

ance

to

prop

er e

valu

atio

n of

th

e pr

os a

nd c

ons

of

deci

sion

s an

d pr

opos

als.

Ref

lect

ing

on

th

e co

nse

qu

ence

s an

d

effe

cts

that

on

e’s

dec

isio

ns

hav

e o

n

oth

ers

Doe

sn’t

thi

nk a

bout

th

e co

nseq

uenc

es o

f ow

n ac

tions

.

Sim

ply

acce

pts

othe

rs’ o

bser

vatio

ns

and

criti

cism

s of

ow

n be

havi

our.

Refle

cts

on t

he

cons

eque

nces

and

ef

fect

s th

at o

wn

deci

sion

s ha

ve o

n ot

hers

.

Reco

gnis

es a

nd

acce

pts

own

mis

take

s.

Ask

s fo

r, w

eigh

s an

d ta

kes

into

acc

ount

ot

hers

’ fee

dbac

k on

ow

n co

nduc

t.



85

Leve

ls o

f M

aste

ryIn

dic

ato

rsD

escr

ipto

rs

12

34

5

Seco

nd

leve

l of

mas

tery

:A

nal

ysin

g t

he

log

ic

of

ow

n a

nd

oth

ers’

ju

dg

emen

ts,

wei

gh

ing

th

eir

per

son

al a

nd

so

cial

im

plic

atio

ns

Form

ula

tin

g o

wn

ju

dg

emen

ts a

nd

ev

alu

atio

ns

Inca

pabl

e of

mak

ing

own

judg

emen

ts a

nd

eval

uatio

ns.

Lets

sel

f be

in

fluen

ced

whe

n m

akin

g ju

dgem

ents

an

d ev

alua

tions

.

Mak

es o

wn

judg

emen

ts a

nd

eval

uatio

ns.

Mak

es w

ell-f

ound

ed

judg

emen

ts a

nd

eval

uatio

ns.

Def

ends

ow

n ev

alua

tions

and

ju

dgem

ents

with

co

nvic

tion.

Co

nsi

der

ing

oth

ers’

ju

dg

emen

tsN

ot in

tere

sted

in

othe

rs’ j

udge

men

ts

or o

pini

ons.

Acc

epts

with

out

ques

tion

othe

rs’

judg

emen

ts.

Con

side

rs t

he

judg

emen

ts o

f ot

her

pers

ons.

App

ropr

iate

ly

anal

yses

and

ev

alua

tes

the

stro

ng

and

wea

k po

ints

of

othe

rs’ j

udge

men

ts

or o

pini

ons.

Inco

rpor

ates

oth

ers’

id

eas

into

ow

n re

ason

ing

and

judg

emen

ts.

Mak

ing

ju

dg

emen

ts b

ased

o

n i

nte

rnal

cri

teri

a (i

nte

rnal

co

nsi

sten

cy,

log

ic,

con

gru

ency

, re

liab

ilit

y, e

tc.)

Arb

itrar

ily ju

dges

ot

hers

’ opi

nion

s.So

met

imes

in

trod

uces

crit

eria

of

inte

rnal

con

sist

ency

an

d lo

gic

in o

wn

opin

ions

.

Usu

ally

intr

oduc

es

crite

ria o

f in

tern

al

cong

ruen

cy a

nd lo

gic

into

ow

n op

inio

ns.

Cor

rect

ly c

ritic

ises

the

co

ngru

ency

and

co

nsis

tenc

y of

ar

gum

enta

tion.

Ana

lyse

s th

e lo

gic

of

an a

rgum

ent

in

rela

tion

to a

re

fere

nce

mod

el o

r pa

tter

n.

Wei

ghin

g th

e pr

acti

cal i

mpl

icat

ions

of

dec

isio

ns a

nd

prop

osal

s

Igno

res

prac

tical

im

plic

atio

ns.

Con

side

rs p

ract

ical

im

plic

atio

ns, w

ithou

t ad

equa

tely

wei

ghin

g th

em.

Wei

ghs

the

prob

able

im

plic

atio

ns o

f de

cisi

ons

and

prop

osal

s.

Reco

nsid

ers

prop

osal

s an

d de

cisi

ons

in li

ght

of r

efle

ctio

n,

wei

ghin

g pr

obab

le

impl

icat

ions

.

Con

side

rabl

y im

prov

es p

ropo

sal/

deci

sion

tha

nks

to

eval

uatio

n m

ade.

Iden

tify

ing

th

e h

um

an r

igh

ts

imp

licat

ion

s o

f a

pro

ble

m o

r p

rop

osa

l (d

ign

ity,

se

lf-e

stee

m, e

tc.)

Eval

uate

s si

tuat

ions

ac

cord

ing

to o

wn

inte

rest

s.

Occ

asio

nally

ex

pres

ses

disa

gree

men

t w

ith

situ

atio

ns t

hat

infr

inge

oth

er

peop

le’s

right

s.

Nor

mal

ly id

entif

ies

the

rela

tions

hip

betw

een

cert

ain

situ

atio

ns a

nd

indi

vidu

al r

ight

s.

Take

s a

stan

d on

si

tuat

ions

invo

lvin

g th

e rig

hts

of o

ther

s.

Def

ends

the

rig

hts

of

peop

le a

nd g

roup

s ag

ains

t pa

rtic

ular

po

sitio

ns a

nd

inte

rest

s.



86

Leve

ls o

f M

aste

ryIn

dic

ato

rsD

escr

ipto

rs

12

34

5

Thir

d le

vel o

f m

aste

ry:

Arg

uin

g t

he

per

tin

ence

of

jud

gem

ents

mad

e an

d a

nal

ysin

g t

he

con

sist

ency

of

ow

n

beh

avio

ur,

bas

ed

on

un

der

lyin

g

pri

nci

ple

s an

d

valu

es

Sup

po

rtin

g a

nd

ju

stif

yin

g o

wn

ju

dg

emen

ts

Doe

sn’t

exp

ress

ow

n ju

dgem

ents

, ev

alua

tions

or

opin

ions

.

Mak

es ju

dgem

ents

w

ithou

t be

ing

able

to

defe

nd t

hem

.

Just

ifies

ow

n ju

dgem

ents

and

ev

alua

tions

.

Supp

orts

and

just

ifies

bo

th t

he s

tron

g an

d w

eak

poin

ts o

f ow

n ju

dgem

ents

and

op

inio

ns.

His

/her

cap

acity

for

re

ason

ing

mak

es

othe

rs q

uest

ion

thei

r ow

n id

eas

or b

elie

fs.

Iden

tify

ing

u

nd

erly

ing

idea

s,

pri

nci

ple

s, m

od

els

and

val

ues

of

crit

ical

jud

gem

ents

Mak

es u

nfou

nded

st

atem

ents

.Lo

osel

y as

soci

ates

so

me

stat

emen

ts

with

cer

tain

sta

nds.

Iden

tifie

s th

e pr

inci

ples

or

idea

s un

derly

ing

judg

emen

ts.

Rela

tes

stat

emen

ts

and

judg

emen

ts t

o un

derly

ing

valu

es.

Just

ifies

judg

emen

ts

on t

he b

asis

of

unde

rlyin

g th

eore

tical

m

odel

s an

d va

lues

.

Mak

ing

jud

gem

ents

b

ased

on

ext

ern

al

crit

eria

(u

tilit

y,

feas

ibili

ty, v

alid

ity,

et

c.)

Igno

res

exte

rnal

cr

iteria

in f

orm

ulat

ing

judg

emen

ts.

Occ

asio

nally

rel

ies

on

exte

rnal

crit

eria

in

emitt

ing

judg

emen

ts.

Eval

uate

s po

sitio

ns

acco

rdin

g to

som

e ex

tern

al c

riter

ia.

Sele

cts

appr

opria

te

exte

rnal

crit

eria

to

use

in s

uppo

rtin

g a

judg

emen

t.

Ana

lyse

s w

ith

appr

opria

te c

riter

ia

the

pert

inen

ce a

nd

rele

vanc

e of

ar

gum

ents

and

pr

opos

als.

Act

ing

wit

h

con

sist

ency

an

d

resp

on

sib

ility

in

dec

isio

ns

and

b

ehav

iou

r

Avo

ids

refle

ctin

g on

ow

n co

nduc

t or

be

havi

our.

Ana

lyse

s a

post

erio

ri th

e co

nseq

uenc

es o

f ow

n ac

tions

.

Acc

epts

res

pons

ibili

ty

for

own

actio

ns a

nd

beha

viou

r.

Ana

lyse

s th

e co

nsis

tenc

y be

twee

n ow

n be

liefs

and

ac

tions

.

Base

s ow

n be

havi

our

on t

he v

alue

s he

/she

de

fend

s.



87

COMPETENCE: CREATIVE THINKING

Description

Creative thinking does not follow a logical process, and in this is dif-ferent from other types of thinking, since all the rest follow more or less orderly, systematic patterns. By contrast, creative thinking seems to zig-zag, going back and forth with steps that apparently lead nowhere, but that can later be used to find a solution or way out.

To engage in creative thinking one needs to overcome the barriers of the obvious and traditional, challenging what is established and even becoming iconoclastic during a given phase. One needs to be ready to surmount any metal barriers found on the path of creation, before fi-nally arriving at the moment of evaluation, with its corresponding use of critical judgement. In the development phase of creative thinking, one must ceaselessly seek ideas, words, images. This fluidity provides a foun-dation based on quantity. According to the experts, quantity is the key to quality of ideas. That is, out of many ideas produced, a few may prove valuable and provide an original solution.

Another important aspect of creative thinking is flexibility. Creative thinking is the opposite of rigidity, inflexibility, resistance. The essential feature of creative thinking is that it is elastic, ductile, malleable, shapa-ble. Flexibility means seeing things from different angles, different, and even opposite, points of view. In short, it is the ability to perceive some-thing, an object, situation or problem, from many different perspectives. Herein resides the true contribution of creative thinking. When a person or group is able to face a problem and see it from different sides, new possibilities of solution are opened up that may lead to a truly original, creative solution, at least for that person or group, even though it might not be so for everyone everywhere.

Along the continuum of development of this competence, three lev-els of complexity have been established:

— Identifying and developing manifestations of creative thinking in simple situations

— Using creative thinking to organise or relate information in novel ways

— Systematically using and evaluating creative thought in academic or professional work

The criteria for assessing progress in this competence are set out in the different indicators for each established level.



88

Interaction with other competences, attitudes, interests, values

Engaging in creative thought means making use of many intellectual and affective capacities. In the creative phase per se, creative thinking occurs along with analogical, synthetic, and comparative thinking, which it uses to develop its own divergent thought.

However, creative thought can also take advantage of any of the other type of thinking, if only to place it in doubt, question its validity, in order to find a position contrary to the one presented and explore new pathways.

Creative thinking can be done individually or in groups. Research shows that groups usually achieve the best results, although the time em-ployed is much greater. Group creative thinking is based on a lack of criti-cism when group members are in the midst of creating or searching for solutions. Moreover, it calls for the conscious, necessary withdrawal of rejection or criticism of any proposals that come up, no matter how strange or outlandish they might seem. Only by creating a productive climate of brainstorming can we bring to light subconscious ideas and solutions that could produce practical, feasible solutions.

During the phase of selecting ideas and proposals, creative thinking calls on other types of thought, such as analytical thinking and critical thinking, which make it possible to analyse and weigh each of the alternatives pro-posed, applying pertinent evaluation criteria and choosing the best ideas according to established criteria.


In all facets of life (personal, academic, social, work), there are times when solutions can be found only if one is capable of overcoming intel-lectual, cultural and social barriers. That is, one must see problems from new and different angles and perspectives that might at first seem unu-sual or weird.

Both in academic and professional life, mental flexibility, the basis of creative thought, is a very helpful tool for understanding and compre-hending human evolution and the evolutionary, cultural, technical and scientific development of peoples and civilisations.

At work, we often encounter problems that require imagination and originality in order to be solved. Such solutions can only be found in the right atmosphere, where there is mutual trust and creative, enriching par-ticipation on the part of all the members of the group when faced with a problem or difficult situation.



89


Creative thinking works very well in academic life, where it is well suited to many different situations, as for example when different ideas or views of a problem are needed, or when a situation needs to be ana-lysed from different standpoints (social, personal, cultural, economic, practical, legal, etc.). Creative thinking is especially helpful in situations where a problem seems unsolvable.

The use of creative thinking throughout a degree course is mind-broad-ening, enhances flexibility, oral fluency and the originality of persons and groups. Creative thinking applied systematically in academic life means ask-ing students to present more than one possible alternative whenever they hand in a project or action proposal. Having to think of more than one alter-native leads to creativity and enhances the originality of proposals.



90

COMPETENCE: CREATIVE THINKING

Definition: This is the mental behaviour that generates searches to find new and unusual solutions that make sense in different areas of life.

Mastery of this competence is closely related to: Reflective, ana-logical, analytical and systemic thinking, the ability to observe, to see relationships, to solve problems and take decisions, enterpris-ing spirit, creativity, innovation, flexibility, open mindedness, etc.

Levels:

1. Perceiving information with an open mind, from different an-gles, utilising it to generate new ideas and approaches

2. Formulating a variety of questions and open alternatives to better understand a situation and generate original reasoned actions

3. Systematically developing creative and original approaches when doing academic or professional work

Indicators:

1. Independent thinking2. Using information3. Diversity of approaches in interpreting information4. Versatility in searching for ideas5. Using analogy6. Applying criteria



91

Leve

ls o

f M

aste

ryIn

dic

ato

rsD

escr

ipto

rs

12

34

5

Firs

t le

vel o

f m

aste

ry:

Perc

eivi

ng

in

form

atio

n w

ith

an

op

en m

ind

, fr

om

dif

fere

nt

ang

les,

usi

ng

it t

o

gen

erat

e n

ew

idea

s an

d

app

roac

hes

Free

ing

sel

f fr

om

re

stri

ctiv

e ef

fect

of

rece

ived

idea

s o

r co

nce

pts

Idea

s st

ill v

ery

trad

ition

al.

Prop

oses

idea

s w

ith

wel

l-kno

wn

base

s or

w

ithou

t go

ing

beyo

nd b

ound

s of

tr

aditi

on.

Form

ulat

es id

eas

that

ov

erco

me

soci

al a

nd

cultu

ral b

arrie

rs.

Expr

esse

s id

eas

that

go

bey

ond

com

mon

th

inki

ng (s

tatu

s qu

o).

Test

s id

eas

mai

ntai

ned

thro

ugh

trad

ition

.

Usi

ng

rec

eive

d

info

rmat

ion

as

a m

ean

s to

gen

erat

e n

ew id

eas

Stic

ks w

ith r

ecei

ved

info

rmat

ion.

Use

s in

form

atio

n, b

ut

alw

ays

with

in

rece

ived

per

spec

tive.

Use

s in

form

atio

n as

sp

ringb

oard

to

deve

lopi

ng n

ew

idea

s.

Wor

ks w

ith r

ecei

ved

info

rmat

ion,

off

erin

g a

new

vie

w o

f th

e si

tuat

ion.

Rest

ruct

ures

in

form

atio

n pr

oduc

ing

a ne

w

prop

osal

tha

t st

ands

ou

t du

e to

its

orig

inal

ity.

Perc

eivi

ng

in

form

atio

n o

r a

situ

atio

n f

rom

d

iffe

ren

t an

gle

s

Is u

nabl

e to

bre

ak

free

of

rece

ived

pe

rspe

ctiv

e.

Perc

eive

s si

tuat

ions

fr

om d

iffer

ent,

bu

t co

mm

on o

r w

ell-k

now

n an

gles

.

Vie

ws

situ

atio

ns f

rom

di

verg

ent

poin

ts o

f vi

ew.

Prop

oses

diff

eren

t pe

rspe

ctiv

es a

nd

argu

es t

hem

with

rig

our.

Prop

oses

pro

mis

ing

new

idea

s th

at c

ould

pr

ove

feas

ible

.

Exp

lori

ng

eac

h id

ea

fro

m d

iffe

ren

t st

and

po

ints

Is u

nabl

e to

imag

ine

diff

eren

t pa

ths

or

poss

ibili

ties

for

each

id

ea.

Con

trib

utio

ns

conc

entr

ated

in

a w

ell-k

now

n or

com

mon

ci

rcle

.

Prop

oses

diff

eren

t di

rect

ions

to

expl

ore

each

idea

.

Trac

es d

iffer

ent

path

s fo

r ea

ch id

ea.

Trac

es o

rigin

al p

aths

fo

r ea

ch id

ea

pres

ente

d.

Gro

up

ing

rel

ated

id

eas

in o

rig

inal

ca

teg

ori

es

Is u

nabl

e to

gro

up

sim

ilar

idea

s in

ca

tego

ries.

Cla

ssifi

es n

ew id

eas

in f

ores

eeab

le w

ays.

Gro

ups

rela

ted

idea

s in

orig

inal

cat

egor

ies.

Com

preh

ensi

bly

clas

sifie

s id

eas

in

orig

inal

cat

egor

ies.

Cla

ssifi

catio

ns

note

wor

thy

for

orig

inal

ity a

nd

expl

anat

ory

capa

city

.



92

Leve

ls o

f M

aste

ryIn

dic

ato

rsD

escr

ipto

rs

12

34

5

Seco

nd

leve

l of

mas

tery

:Fo

rmu

lati

ng

var

iety

o

f q

ues

tio

ns

and

o

pen

ing

al

tern

ativ

es t

o

bet

ter

un

der

stan

d

situ

atio

ns

and

g

ener

ate

ori

gin

al

reas

on

ed a

ctio

ns

Ask

ing

co

mp

lete

ly

un

inh

ibit

ed

qu

esti

on

s to

fa

cilit

ate

flo

w o

f o

pti

on

s

Doe

sn’t

rai

se

ques

tions

tha

t w

ould

je

opar

dise

the

sta

tus

quo.

Ask

s qu

estio

ns t

hat

stay

with

in t

he

ordi

nary

or

know

n co

ncep

tual

fr

amew

ork.

Ask

s qu

estio

ns

with

out

self-

cens

orsh

ip t

hat

favo

ur t

he d

iver

genc

e of

idea

s.

Leav

es a

side

all

type

s of

cen

sors

hip

and

pose

s al

l kin

ds

of q

uest

ions

tha

t he

lp b

road

en t

he

span

of

poss

ible

op

tion

s.

Ask

s de

ep,

wel

l-fou

nded

qu

estio

ns w

ithou

t so

cioc

ultu

ral l

imits

.

Ach

ievi

ng

var

iety

of

alte

rnat

ive

idea

sD

oesn

’t p

ropo

se

alte

rnat

ive

idea

s.H

as d

iffic

ulty

in

prop

osin

g al

tern

ativ

e id

eas.

Prop

oses

var

iety

of

alte

rnat

ive

idea

s.O

ffer

s di

vers

e,

wel

l-dev

elop

ed id

eas.

Just

ifies

with

goo

d re

ason

ing

the

rang

e of

idea

s pr

esen

ted.

Ask

ing

div

erse

q

ues

tio

ns

fro

m

dif

fere

nt

ang

les

abo

ut

par

ticu

lar

situ

atio

ns

Ask

s so

me

ques

tions

ab

out

situ

atio

ns, b

ut

does

so

insu

ffic

ient

ly.

Ask

s al

l que

stio

ns

from

the

sam

e pe

rspe

ctiv

e.

Ask

s nu

mer

ous

dive

rgen

t qu

estio

ns

abou

t a

situ

atio

n or

is

sue.

Syst

emat

ical

ly a

nd

thor

ough

ly r

aise

s al

l po

ssib

le q

uest

ions

ab

out

an is

sue

from

di

ffer

ent

angl

es.

Out

stan

ding

for

the

w

ay in

whi

ch h

e/sh

e ra

ises

que

stio

ns

abou

t si

tuat

ions

or

issu

es f

rom

su

rpris

ingl

y di

ffer

ent

angl

es.

Seei

ng

th

e co

nse

qu

ence

s th

at

each

op

tio

n m

ay

hav

e

Fails

to

see

the

cons

eque

nces

of

optio

ns o

r do

es s

o in

adeq

uate

ly.

Sees

som

e bu

t no

t al

l co

nseq

uenc

es o

f pr

opos

ed o

ptio

ns,

and

does

so

insu

ffic

ient

ly.

Sees

pos

sibl

e co

nseq

uenc

es f

or

each

opt

ion

prop

osed

.

Syst

emat

ical

ly a

nd

rigor

ousl

y fo

rese

es

the

poss

ible

co

nseq

uenc

es o

f ea

ch p

ropo

sed

optio

n.

Fore

sees

the

pos

sibl

e co

nseq

uenc

es o

f ea

ch p

ropo

sed

optio

n, t

akin

g in

to

acco

unt

the

diff

eren

t pe

rspe

ctiv

es f

or e

ach

one.

Shar

ing

an

d

uti

lisin

g o

ther

s’

idea

s, e

xpan

din

g o

n

or

tran

sfo

rmin

g

them

in o

rig

inal

w

ays

Doe

sn’t

kno

w h

ow t

o us

e ot

hers

’ ide

as t

o de

velo

p ow

n cr

eativ

ity.

Util

ises

oth

ers’

idea

s w

ithou

t ch

angi

ng

pers

pect

ive,

fai

ling

to

achi

eve

orig

inal

m

odifi

catio

n.

Util

ises

oth

ers’

idea

s tu

rnin

g th

em in

to

orig

inal

idea

s th

anks

to

ow

n tr

ansf

orm

atio

n.

Shar

es a

nd u

tilis

es a

s ba

sis

othe

rs’ i

deas

tr

ansf

orm

ing

them

in

to n

ew a

nd o

rigin

al

idea

s.

Cre

ativ

ely

uses

ot

hers

’ ide

as a

nd

stim

ulat

es t

he

crea

tion

of o

rigin

al

idea

s in

the

gro

up.



93

Leve

ls o

f M

aste

ryIn

dic

ato

rsD

escr

ipto

rs

12

34

5

Thir

d le

vel o

f m

aste

ry:

Syst

emat

ical

ly

usi

ng

cre

ativ

e an

d

ori

gin

al a

pp

roac

hes

w

hen

do

ing

ac

adem

ic o

r p

rofe

ssio

nal

wo

rk

Pro

po

sin

g c

reat

ive

app

roac

hes

bas

ed

on

info

rmat

ion

g

iven

or

fou

nd

w

hen

un

der

taki

ng

a

pro

ject

Doe

sn’t

con

trib

ute

orig

inal

idea

s to

the

pr

ojec

t.

Con

trib

utes

idea

s th

at a

re r

arel

y or

igin

al o

r im

port

ant.

Prop

oses

an

orig

inal

ap

proa

ch b

ased

on

info

rmat

ion

give

n to

cl

ass

prio

r to

un

dert

akin

g a

proj

ect.

Mak

es t

he m

ost

of

any

idea

, vie

win

g it

from

ang

les

that

are

un

usua

l and

rel

evan

t to

the

pro

ject

.

Tran

sfor

ms

any

appr

oach

into

a

mor

e or

igin

al

one

by m

odify

ing

or

com

bini

ng it

w

ith o

ther

ap

proa

ches

.

Ask

ing

per

tin

ent

qu

esti

on

s to

st

imu

late

oth

ers’

cr

eati

vity

Que

stio

ns a

sked

are

co

nver

gent

or

unid

irect

iona

l.

Ask

s qu

estio

ns t

hat

are

only

slig

htly

di

verg

ent.

Stim

ulat

es g

roup

’s cr

eativ

ity b

y as

king

pe

rtin

ent

ques

tions

.

Ask

s ch

alle

ngin

g qu

estio

ns t

hat

prom

pt o

rigin

al

resp

onse

s an

d st

imul

ate

grou

p pa

rtic

ipat

ion.

Que

stio

ns o

ther

s’

resp

onse

s an

d re

utili

ses

them

fr

om o

ther

pe

rspe

ctiv

es t

o pr

ompt

new

idea

s an

d vi

ews.

Mak

ing

pro

po

sals

b

ased

on

wel

l-p

on

der

ed c

ho

ice

of

bes

t id

eas

Prop

osal

s ar

e no

t w

ell

just

ified

.M

akes

poo

r or

in

suff

icie

nt

eval

uatio

ns.

Sele

cts

idea

s on

the

ba

sis

of e

valu

atio

n.M

akes

sys

tem

atic

ev

alua

tion

befo

re

sele

ctin

g th

e be

st

idea

s an

d in

corp

orat

ing

them

in

to a

pro

ject

.

Use

s or

igin

al

eval

uatio

n pe

rspe

ctiv

es

to s

elec

t be

st

idea

s an

d in

corp

orat

e th

em

into

a p

roje

ct.

Dev

elo

pin

g a

n

ori

gin

al

app

roac

h f

or

a h

igh

ly

dev

elo

ped

p

roje

ct

Proj

ect

lack

s or

igin

ality

and

el

abor

atio

n.

Leve

l of

orig

inal

ity

and/

or e

labo

ratio

n is

ve

ry p

oor.

Und

erta

kes

proj

ect

with

an

orig

inal

, w

ell-d

evel

oped

ap

proa

ch.

Und

erta

kes

proj

ect

with

orig

inal

, ver

y w

ell-d

evel

oped

el

emen

ts.

Inte

grat

es w

ith

orig

inal

ity a

ll el

emen

ts o

f th

e pr

ojec

t.



94

COMPETENCE: REFLECTIVE THINKING

Description

When faced with a challenge, task or problem, we deal with it using a certain kind of thinking. When taking a decision, we give importance to different things, tending to reason in certain ways or using particular types of thinking. Even the same person will deal with different situa-tions using different types of thought. Their capacity to do this is what enables them to adapt to the environment and to act appropriately both in their personal lives and at work.

It is possible to develop the competence of reflective thinking in or-der to be aware at all times how we are thinking. This will enable us to alter some of the keys to our way of dealing with situations. Reflective thinking consists precisely in recognising how we go about addressing a task or problem, and to take steps that will lead to growth in our way of thinking.

There is abundant literature on reflective thinking. Frequently, this label is applied to very different books and articles, making it quite dif-ficult to establish clearly and definitively what reflective thinking consists of and what its main features are.

In this volume we have chosen to identify some of the features of reflective thinking that appear most often in the literature and which can best be worked on and developed during the course of university stud-ies. Therefore, we will be particularly interested in the ability to: 1) iden-tify and overcome the preconceptions that frequently impede access to alternative reasoning; 2) identify the key elements of a situation or issue; 3) formulate appropriate questions that will frame the problem and give some preliminary guidelines on how to handle it; 4) represent forms of thinking – e.g., using concept maps; 5) identify the forms of thinking being used; 6) overcome mental blocks; 7) pursue elaborate thought suited to a professional or academic situation, and then reconstruct and verbalise it; 8) realise the importance of context and the moral implica-tions of challenges or issues.


Reflective thinking has to do with all the forms of thinking dealt with in this volume. To the extent that competence in other forms of thinking is well developed, students will have easier access to alternative modes



95

of thought and action. Reflective thinking is also related to the ability to change mentalities and recognise other modes of thought. It is also as-sociated with more specific capacities such as the ability to make think-ing explicit and represent it. Moreover, in each field of knowledge, the contributions of theories and studies are essential for deeper reflective thinking in each particular field.


Professionals or students who have not developed the competence of reflective thinking will tend always to repeat the same patterns of thought, and will have few opportunities to grow in them. In order to overcome conflicts, self-imposed limitations and other types of problems both in one’s personal life and at work, reflective thinking is required.

Moreover, different professional fields, such as education, medicine, architecture, engineering, etc.) establish degrees of hierarchy or paths of career promotion that are characterised to a large extent by increased ability to think reflectively. The highest professional levels tend to be characterised by more reflective thinking, the ability to overcome pre-conceptions, ask the right questions, appropriately identify and rank key elements, overcome mental blocks, develop elaborate thinking and later make it explicit or reconstruct it, etc.

Accordingly, an undergraduate or graduate degree should lead espe-cially to development of the competence of reflective thinking, for use both in studies and later at work.


The levels of this competence have been defined bearing in mind their application in three types of context. These go from projecting re-flective thinking onto others’ reasonings, to development in simple aca-demic situations, and finally to dealing with more complex academic and professional situations.

First level indicators focus on situations where students must ob-serve, analyse and propose guidelines for improving others’ thought processes. This may be done through case studies, narratives, newspa-pers, reports, stories, etc. where the student is not the protagonist. In-stead, others confront personal or professional situations showing more or less explicitly what their thinking is in and on the action.



96

Second level indicators refer to students’ quality of thought when they are dealing with simple academic situations. Therefore, these indi-cators can be used in activities where students must reflect and explain their thinking orally or in writing when analysing a situation or docu-ment, or when trying to solve a problem, etc.

Finally, third level indicators allow us to assess the quality of the reflec-tive thinking of students who have somehow participated in a situation. Naturally, the students must verbalise their reasoning, preferably in writing, in the form of narratives, critical incidents, diaries, action reports, etc.



97

COMPETENCE: REFLECTIVE THINKING

Definition: This is the mental behaviour that facilitates the rec-ognition and growth of the modes of thinking that we use in solving problems or performing tasks.

Mastery of this competence is closely related to: identifying and overcoming preconceptions, the ability to conceptualise, solve problems, represent ideas and thought diagrams, change men-tality and recognise other ways of thinking, etc.

Levels:

1. Identifying and understanding the way of thinking that a person utilises in a given given situation

2. Identifying and developing one’s own way of thinking and rea-soning in usual academic situations and tasks, adopting strate-gies for improvement

3. Consciously and systematically identifying strategies and re-sources for analysing and developing one’s own thinking in the course of one’s work

Indicators:

1. Identifying and overcoming preconceptions2. Identifying and ranking key elements3. Asking questions4. Representing ways of thinking5. Identifying and growing in ways of thinking and learning6. Overcoming mental blocks7. Thinking in action and its reconstruction8. Importance of context and ethical implications



98

Leve

ls o

f M

aste

ryIn

dic

ato

rsD

escr

ipto

rs

12

34

5

Firs

t le

vel o

f m

aste

ry:

Iden

tify

ing

an

d

un

der

stan

din

g

the

way

of

thin

kin

g t

hat

so

meo

ne

use

s in

a

giv

en s

itu

atio

n

Iden

tify

ing

th

e p

reco

nce

pti

on

s (t

hin

gs

take

n f

or

gra

nte

d,

ster

eoty

pes

, etc

.) in

o

ther

s’ r

easo

nin

g

Att

ribut

es

prec

once

ptio

ns

inac

cura

tely

and

in

appr

opria

tely.

Doe

sn’t

kno

w h

ow t

o id

entif

y pr

econ

cept

ions

in

rea

soni

ng.

Acc

urat

ely

iden

tifie

s so

me

unde

rlyin

g th

eorie

s, b

elie

fs o

r as

sum

ptio

ns.

Acc

urat

ely

iden

tifie

s m

ost

prec

once

ptio

ns.

Acc

urat

ely

reco

nstr

ucts

al

l pre

conc

eptio

ns a

nd

thei

r or

igin

.

Ap

pre

ciat

ing

th

e ef

fect

o

f p

reco

nce

pti

on

s o

n

the

qu

alit

y o

f o

ther

s’

thin

kin

g a

nd

act

ion

Sees

wro

ng o

r no

nexi

sten

t rel

atio

nshi

ps

betw

een

prec

once

ptio

ns

and

ensu

ing

thou

ght a

nd

actio

n.

Des

crib

es t

houg

ht a

nd

actio

n of

pro

tago

nist

s w

ithou

t an

y m

entio

n of

pre

conc

eptio

ns.

Cor

rect

ly d

escr

ibes

at

leas

t on

e of

the

eff

ects

of

pre

conc

eptio

ns o

n th

ough

t an

d ac

tion.

Cor

rect

ly e

xpla

ins

vario

us e

ffec

ts o

f pr

econ

cept

ions

on

thou

ght

and

actio

n.

Acc

urat

ely

and

com

preh

ensi

vely

dis

cuss

es

the

way

in w

hich

pr

econ

cept

ions

con

ditio

n th

ough

t an

d ac

tion.

Ap

pro

pri

atel

y re

pre

sen

tin

g o

ther

s’

reas

on

ing

th

rou

gh

co

nce

pt

map

s o

r o

ther

p

roce

du

res

Repr

esen

ts o

ther

s’

thin

king

in a

cle

arly

di

sorg

anis

ed w

ay.

Repr

esen

ts o

ther

s’

thin

king

with

not

able

er

rors

or

defic

ienc

ies.

Repr

esen

ts o

ther

s’

reas

onin

g in

a fa

irly

orga

nise

d w

ay.

Repr

esen

ts o

ther

s’

reas

onin

g co

mpl

etel

y an

d w

ith g

ood

orga

nisa

tion.

Repr

esen

ts o

ther

s’

reas

onin

g co

mpl

etel

y an

d w

ith o

rgan

isat

ion

wel

l-sui

ted

to t

he t

ype

of

cont

ents

or

styl

e of

th

ough

t.

Rec

og

nis

ing

an

d

dea

ling

wit

h o

ther

s’

men

tal b

lock

s

Igno

res

the

exis

tenc

e of

a

men

tal b

lock

in t

he

scen

ario

.

Iden

tifie

s a

situ

atio

n of

m

enta

l blo

ck w

ithou

t ac

tual

ly p

ropo

sing

re

ason

able

sol

utio

ns.

Prop

oses

som

e ap

prop

riate

act

ion

to

over

com

e a

situ

atio

n of

m

enta

l blo

ck in

oth

ers.

Prop

oses

an

appr

opria

te, w

ell-

foun

ded

stra

tegy

for

ov

erco

min

g a

situ

atio

n of

men

tal b

lock

.

Reas

onab

ly e

stim

ates

the

fe

asib

ility

of

the

stra

tegi

es t

hat

he/s

he

prop

oses

for

ove

rcom

ing

a bl

ock.

Rec

on

stru

ctin

g t

ho

ug

ht

in a

ctio

n o

f ag

ents

in

pro

fess

ion

al s

cen

ario

Can

not

reco

nstr

uct

the

thin

king

beh

ind

acto

rs’

actio

ns.

Poor

ly o

r in

corr

ectly

re

cons

truc

ts t

he

thin

king

beh

ind

acto

rs’

actio

ns.

Acc

urat

ely

desc

ribes

th

e m

ost

impo

rtan

t el

emen

ts o

f a

prof

essi

onal

’s re

ason

ing

in a

giv

en s

ituat

ion.

Cor

rect

ly a

nd

com

plet

ely

narr

ates

a

prof

essi

onal

’s re

ason

ing

in a

giv

en

situ

atio

n.

Cor

rect

ly a

nd c

ompl

etel

y ex

plai

ns t

he r

easo

ning

fo

llow

ed a

nd t

he

cons

eque

nces

of

that

re

ason

ing.

Iden

tify

ing

th

e ch

arac

teri

stic

s o

f re

flec

tive

pro

fess

ion

als

Fails

to

iden

tify

any

of

the

dist

inct

ive

feat

ures

of

a r

efle

ctiv

e pr

ofes

sion

al.

Reco

gnis

es t

he

oppo

rtun

ity o

f re

flect

ive

thin

king

in

som

e ac

adem

ic a

nd

prof

essi

onal

situ

atio

ns.

Man

ages

to

iden

tify

som

e di

stin

ctiv

e fe

atur

es c

hara

cter

istic

of

ref

lect

ive

prof

essi

onal

s.

Expl

ains

the

bas

ic

char

acte

ristic

s th

at

mak

e so

meo

ne a

re

flect

ive

prof

essi

onal

.

App

reci

ates

the

ch

arac

teris

tics

of

refle

ctiv

e th

inki

ng a

nd

disc

erns

how

it

cont

ribut

es t

o th

e pr

ofes

sion

al s

cena

rio.

Form

ula

tin

g

app

rop

riat

e q

ues

tio

ns

abo

ut

a si

tuat

ion

Form

ulat

es q

uest

ions

th

at a

re u

nim

port

ant

or

lead

to

now

here

.

Que

stio

ns d

ispe

rse

and

not

wel

l tho

ught

out

(p

artia

l, in

com

plet

e or

no

t w

ell f

ocus

ed).

Form

ulat

es s

ome

rele

vant

, key

que

stio

n.Fo

rmul

ates

alm

ost

all

key

ques

tions

.O

rder

s an

d in

terr

elat

es

key

ques

tions

.



99

Leve

ls o

f M

aste

ryIn

dic

ato

rsD

escr

ipto

rs

12

34

5

Seco

nd

leve

l of

mas

tery

:Id

enti

fyin

g a

nd

d

evel

op

ing

o

ne’

s o

wn

way

o

f th

inki

ng

an

d r

easo

nin

g

in n

orm

al

acad

emic

si

tuat

ion

s an

d

wo

rk, a

do

pti

ng

st

rate

gie

s fo

r im

pro

vem

ent

Iden

tify

ing

th

e m

ain

co

nce

pts

or

idea

s b

ehin

d o

wn

ref

lect

ion

s

Con

fuse

s m

ain

and

seco

ndar

y co

ncep

ts.

Doe

sn’t

dis

tingu

ish

leve

ls o

f im

port

ance

.

Iden

tifie

s m

ain

idea

s bu

t gi

ves

impo

rtan

ce

to s

ome

that

are

not

.

Cor

rect

ly e

num

erat

es

mai

n id

eas.

Logi

cally

ord

ers

conc

epts

(pre

mis

es a

nd

conc

lusi

ons,

hy

poth

eses

and

ar

gum

ents

, etc

.).

Ord

ers

and

expl

ains

with

cl

arity

and

orig

inal

ity t

he

rela

tions

bet

wee

n m

ain

idea

s.

Iden

tify

ing

p

reco

nce

pti

on

s in

ow

n

reas

on

ing

(th

ing

s ta

ken

fo

r g

ran

ted

, ste

reo

typ

es,

etc.

)

Obv

ious

exi

sten

ce o

f pr

ior

reas

onin

gs t

hat

cond

ition

his

/her

th

ough

t.

Erro

neou

sly

iden

tifie

s so

me

prec

once

ived

id

eas

as p

rese

nt in

ow

n re

ason

ing.

Iden

tifie

s pr

econ

cept

ions

pre

sent

in

ow

n re

ason

ing.

Cor

rect

ly d

escr

ibes

the

m

ain

prec

once

ptio

ns

pres

ent

in o

wn

reas

onin

g.

Expl

ains

the

pr

econ

cept

ions

pre

sent

in

ow

n re

ason

ing,

as

wel

l as

the

ir or

igin

and

w

eigh

t.

Ref

lect

ing

on

ho

w

pre

con

cep

tio

ns

affe

ct

ow

n t

hin

kin

g a

nd

ac

tio

n

Doe

sn’t

tak

e in

to

acco

unt

how

pr

econ

cept

ions

aff

ect

own

thin

king

and

ac

tion.

Part

ially

iden

tifie

s th

e ef

fect

of

own

prec

once

ptio

ns.

Expl

ains

how

pr

econ

cept

ions

lim

it ow

n th

inki

ng a

nd

actio

n.

Expl

ains

in d

epth

how

pr

econ

cept

ions

lim

it ow

n th

inki

ng a

nd

actio

n.

Cle

arly

in p

roce

ss o

f id

entif

ying

and

ov

erco

min

g ow

n pr

econ

cept

ions

.

Des

crib

ing

th

e le

arn

ing

st

rate

gie

s u

tilis

edD

oesn

’t r

ecog

nise

any

of

ow

n le

arni

ng

stra

tegi

es.

Giv

es p

oor

acco

unt

of

som

e le

arni

ng

stra

tegi

es t

hat

he/s

he

uses

.

Ade

quat

ely

desc

ribe

s th

e el

emen

ts

char

acte

risi

ng t

he

lear

ning

str

ateg

ies

that

he/

she

uses

.

Expl

ains

in d

epth

and

de

tail

the

elem

ents

ch

arac

teri

sing

the

le

arni

ng s

trat

egie

s th

at h

e/sh

e us

es.

Expl

ains

in d

epth

and

ev

alua

tes

the

lear

ning

st

rate

gies

tha

t he

/she

us

es.

Sele

ctin

g a

lear

nin

g

stra

teg

y su

ited

to

a

giv

en s

itu

atio

n

Igno

res

the

exis

tenc

e of

po

ssib

le a

ltern

ativ

e le

arni

ng s

trat

egie

s.

Cho

oses

wro

ng

lear

ning

str

ateg

y.C

hoos

es r

ight

lear

ning

st

rate

gy.

Wis

ely

choo

ses

a le

arni

ng s

trat

egy

and

reje

cts

othe

rs.

Wis

ely

uses

var

ious

co

mpl

emen

tary

lear

ning

st

rate

gies

.

Ad

equ

atel

y re

pre

sen

tin

g o

wn

kn

ow

led

ge

and

idea

s u

sin

g c

on

cep

t m

aps

or

oth

er p

roce

du

res

Repr

esen

ts o

wn

thin

king

in a

cle

arly

di

sorg

anis

ed w

ay.

Repr

esen

ts o

wn

thin

king

with

not

able

fla

ws

or d

efic

ienc

ies.

Repr

esen

ts o

wn

reas

onin

g w

ith f

air

orga

nisa

tion.

Repr

esen

ts o

wn

reas

onin

g co

mpl

etel

y an

d w

ith g

ood

orga

nisa

tion.

Repr

esen

ts o

wn

reas

onin

g co

mpl

etel

y an

d w

ith o

rgan

isat

ion

that

ref

lect

s th

e st

ruct

ure

of t

hink

ing

proc

esse

s.

Sho

win

g c

apac

ity

for

surp

rise

an

d d

isco

very

Fails

to

dete

ct n

ovel

or

dist

urbi

ng e

lem

ents

in

the

situ

atio

n.

Iden

tifie

s pa

rtia

lly o

r in

com

plet

ely

nove

l or

dist

urbi

ng e

lem

ents

in

the

situ

atio

n.

Cor

rect

ly d

etec

ts n

ovel

or

dis

turb

ing

elem

ents

in

the

situ

atio

n.

Dra

ws

som

e co

nclu

sion

s fr

om

dete

ctio

n of

nov

el o

r di

stur

bing

ele

men

ts.

Show

s go

od le

arni

ng a

nd

chan

ges

in o

wn

thin

king

ba

sed

on s

urpr

isin

g fa

ctor

s.



100

Leve

ls o

f M

aste

ryIn

dic

ato

rsD

escr

ipto

rs

12

34

5

Thir

d le

vel o

f m

aste

ry:

Iden

tify

ing

an

d

dev

elo

pin

g

on

e’s

ow

n w

ay

of

thin

kin

g

and

rea

son

ing

in

no

rmal

ac

adem

ic

situ

atio

ns

and

w

ork

, ad

op

tin

g

stra

teg

ies

for

imp

rove

men

t

Exp

lain

ing

ow

n

thin

kin

g o

n a

ctio

n in

jo

urn

als,

nar

rati

on

s,

rep

ort

s, e

tc. (

refl

ecti

on

af

ter

leav

ing

p

rofe

ssio

nal

sce

nar

io)

Can

not

refle

ct o

n ow

n ac

tion.

Poor

or

supe

rfic

ial

refle

ctio

ns o

n ac

tion.

Reas

onab

le r

efle

ctio

ns

on o

wn

actio

n.M

akes

rea

sona

ble,

co

mpl

ete,

wel

l-st

ruct

ured

ref

lect

ions

on

act

ion.

Refle

ctio

ns r

evea

l pr

oces

s of

per

sona

l gr

owth

.

Iden

tify

ing

eth

ical

an

d

po

litic

al im

plic

atio

ns

of

ow

n p

rofe

ssio

nal

p

ract

ice

Fully

con

fiden

t th

at

prof

essi

onal

act

ivity

is

inno

cuou

s an

d ha

s no

thin

g to

do

with

et

hics

and

pol

itics

.

Has

diff

icul

ty in

id

entif

ying

eth

ical

and

pr

actic

al im

plic

atio

ns.

Iden

tifie

s th

e m

oral

an

d po

litic

al f

acet

s an

d co

ntex

t of

ow

n pr

actic

e.

Mak

es p

ropo

sals

for

pr

ogre

ssin

g in

the

po

litic

al a

nd e

thic

al

issu

es in

here

nt in

pr

ofes

sion

al p

ract

ice.

Mak

es r

easo

nabl

e pr

opos

als

for

subs

tant

ial

impr

ovem

ent

in t

he

ethi

cal a

nd p

oliti

cal

dim

ensi

on o

f pr

ofes

sion

al p

ract

ice.

Iden

tify

ing

th

e re

fere

nce

fra

mew

ork

s o

f ro

les

and

issu

es

Des

crib

es r

oles

and

is

sues

with

out

refe

renc

e to

any

fr

amew

ork.

Iden

tifie

s re

fere

nce

fram

ewor

ks p

artia

lly

or in

com

plet

ely.

Cor

rect

ly d

escr

ibes

the

re

fere

nce

cont

ext

that

m

akes

it p

ossi

ble

to

unde

rsta

nd r

oles

and

is

sues

.

Inte

rpre

ts r

oles

and

is

sues

fro

m v

ario

us

angl

es o

r co

mpl

emen

tary

fr

amew

orks

.

App

reci

ates

and

wei

ghs

the

impl

icat

ions

of

cons

ider

ing

diff

eren

t re

fere

nce

fram

ewor

ks in

an

alys

ing

role

s an

d is

sues

.

Form

ula

tin

g le

sso

ns

lear

ned

fro

m r

efle

ctio

n

on

pra

ctic

e

Dis

cour

se d

oes

not

refle

ct le

sson

s le

arne

d fr

om p

ract

ice.

Form

ulat

es s

ome

less

ons

lear

ned,

but

pa

rtia

l or

som

ewha

t un

focu

sed.

Expr

esse

s im

port

ant

core

less

ons

lear

ned.

Elab

orat

es im

port

ant,

co

re le

sson

s le

arne

d in

an

inte

rrel

ated

, wel

l-st

ruct

ured

way

.

Man

ages

to

conv

ey

effe

ctiv

ely

impo

rtan

t le

sson

s le

arne

d ab

out

prac

tice.

Usi

ng

heu

rist

ic

reso

urc

es (

exp

lora

tio

n

and

dis

cove

ry)

to r

evis

e o

wn

th

inki

ng

Wro

ngly

inte

rpre

ts t

he

resu

lts o

f an

alys

ing

own

thin

king

.

Mak

es s

uper

ficia

l or

inco

mpl

ete

anal

ysis

of

own

thin

king

.

Util

ises

som

e to

ols

of

anal

ysis

or

diag

nosi

s of

ow

n th

inki

ng a

nd

iden

tifie

s so

me

impo

rtan

t as

pect

s.

Mak

es c

ompl

ete,

w

ell-r

easo

ned

inte

rpre

tatio

n of

ow

n w

ays

of t

hink

ing

base

d on

ana

lysi

s or

di

agno

sis.

Show

s pr

ogre

ss b

ased

on

sys

tem

atic

ana

lysi

s or

di

agno

sis

of o

wn

way

s of

thi

nkin

g.

Usi

ng

ref

lect

ive

thin

kin

g t

o d

eal w

ith

o

wn

sta

tes

of

men

tal

blo

ck

Doe

sn’t

rec

ogni

se o

wn

stat

es o

f m

enta

l blo

ck.

Reco

gnis

es s

ome

men

tal b

lock

s, b

ut

fails

to

iden

tify

the

acco

mpa

nyin

g id

eas,

fe

elin

gs a

nd e

mot

ions

.

Iden

tifie

s m

ain

idea

s,

feel

ings

and

em

otio

ns

acco

mpa

nyin

g a

stat

e of

men

tal b

lock

.

Man

ages

to

use

refle

ctiv

e th

inki

ng t

o de

al w

ith t

he id

eas,

fe

elin

gs a

nd e

mot

ions

ac

com

pany

ing

a st

ate

of m

enta

l blo

ck.

Cle

arly

ove

rcom

es s

tate

s of

men

tal b

lock

, usi

ng

refle

ctiv

e th

inki

ng t

o de

al w

ith t

he

acco

mpa

nyin

g id

eas,

fe

elin

gs a

nd e

mot

ions

.



101

COMPETENCE: LOGICAL THINKING

Description

This is the type of thinking that shapes the most significant mental processes, primarily through deduction. This type of thinking is based on the acceptance of certain conditions, and mainly makes it possible to identify, define, analyse, classify and infer. Logical thinking means pro-ceeding in a reasoned, sufficiently argued way.

It is developed through numerous procedures, which appear associ-ated with concepts, judgements and demonstrations. Its aim is to ap-prehend reality and endow it with significantly ordered, rational mean-ing.

In short, it is the way of thinking that enables us to order reality through simple or complex logical procedures and generate new, well-reasoned, well-argued ideas.

The levels of mastery of this competence reflect how students are expected to proceed with this type of thinking. The first level of mastery concerns how students use logical procedures to recognise concepts, and to distinguish and infer ideas, factors and/or consequences of real situations or cases.

The second level of mastery reflects how students employ their ca-pacity to argue their analyses of real situations or cases. This argumen-tation should show their capacity to use appropriate logical proce-dures.

Since logical thought generates ideas, the third level of mastery re-flects how students make logical analyses of real situations or cases to reason out solutions and generate new ideas.

The way of measuring these levels is through indicators that evaluate how students work “logically” on real situations or cases; fundamen-tally to reason and explain reality, to identify determining factors, to con-struct ordered enunciations and arguments, to deduce relations and re-sults and, finally, to find solutions.


This competence is related to reflective, analogical, analytical, sys-temic, critical, practical, deliberative and team thinking. It is present in the competences of time management, problem-solving, planning, oral communication and objectives-based management.



102

It also plays an important role in computer skills and the use of data-bases. This competence contributes to the development of interest in knowledge and research. It boosts motivation and self-confidence.


Logical thinking should be a constant in the life of university stu-dents, since their work and study depend in good measure on this skill. Their capacity to reason and argue their points forms part of the founda-tion of their work.

In professional life as well, their capacity for logical thinking greatly helps them to deal with daily events with realism and the ability to gen-erate new ideas to solve problems and sort out different situations with-out difficulty.


The study and analysis of cases, simulated or real, is the best way for students to work on this competence. These cases should stimulate the development of logical thinking through diverse procedures – e.g. argu-mentation or the delimitation of causal factors. It is also wise to grade the complexity and difficulty of the cases used.

This work can be undertaken through learning strategies such as problem-based learning, case studies and the project method. Students also learn how to handle sources of information and to apply different techniques for data processing and interpretation.



103

COMPETENCE: LOGICAL THINKING

Definition: This is the mental behaviour that develops ways of thinking that lead to knowledge in general and to scientific knowl-edge in particular, paying close attention to its structure.

Mastery of this competence is closely related to: Reflective think-ing, analytical thinking, deliberative thinking, planning, problem-solving, decision-making, project management, autonomy, etc.

Levels:

1. Utilising logical procedures to conceive, distinguish and infer ideas, factors and/or consequences of real situations or cases

2. Proceeding with logic to justify analyses of real situations or cases

3. Making logical analyses of real situations or cases to reason out solutions and generate new ideas

Indicators:

1. Analysing cases or situations to reason and explain them 2. Identifying determining factors of real situations or cases3. Constructing enunciations and arguments to order ideas or con-

cepts4. Deducing relations and possible results 5. Questioning the logical value of real situations or cases to find so-

lutions



104

Leve

ls o

f M

aste

ryIn

dic

ato

rsD

escr

ipto

rs

12

34

5

Firs

t le

vel o

f m

aste

ry:

Uti

lisin

g lo

gic

al

pro

ced

ure

s to

co

nce

ive,

d

isti

ng

uis

h a

nd

in

fer

idea

s, f

acto

rs

and

/or

con

seq

uen

ces

of

real

sit

uat

ion

s o

r ca

ses

Rea

son

ing

th

e m

ean

ing

of

a re

al

situ

atio

n o

r ca

se

Doe

sn’t

kno

w h

ow t

o re

ason

out

the

m

eani

ng o

f a

real

ca

se o

r si

tuat

ion.

Con

fuse

s, in

a r

eal

situ

atio

n or

cas

e,

the

who

le w

ith o

ne

of it

s pa

rts

or

vice

-ver

sa.

Iden

tifie

s th

e m

eani

ng o

f a

real

si

tuat

ion

or c

ase.

Enun

ciat

es w

ith

clar

ity t

he s

igni

fican

t fa

cts

of a

pro

blem

or

case

.

Infe

rs s

igni

fican

tly

the

mea

ning

of

a re

al

situ

atio

n or

cas

e.

Iden

tify

ing

wit

h

idea

s an

d/o

r co

nce

pts

th

e m

ain

fa

cts

of

a re

al

situ

atio

n o

r ca

se

Con

fuse

s pr

imar

y an

d se

cond

ary

data

. D

oesn

’t d

istin

guis

h le

vels

of

impo

rtan

ce.

Iden

tifie

s th

e m

ain

fact

s bu

t gi

ves

impo

rtan

ce t

o so

me

that

are

not

.

Cor

rect

ly s

elec

ts a

nd

enum

erat

es a

ll th

e m

ain

fact

s of

a r

eal

situ

atio

n or

cas

e.

Gra

sps

the

real

si

tuat

ion

or c

ase

with

ap

prop

riate

idea

s an

d co

ncep

ts.

Ade

quat

ely

expl

ains

th

e de

term

inin

g fa

ctor

s of

a r

eal

situ

atio

n or

cas

e.

Arg

uin

g t

he

reas

on

s b

ehin

d a

rea

l si

tuat

ion

or

case

Con

fuse

s, in

a r

eal

situ

atio

n or

cas

e,

effe

cts

with

cau

ses.

Onl

y en

umer

ates

the

po

ssib

le c

ause

s of

a

real

situ

atio

n or

cas

e.

Cla

ssifi

es t

he m

otiv

es

behi

nd a

rea

l si

tuat

ion

or c

ase.

Dis

cern

s th

e po

ssib

le

caus

es b

ehin

d a

real

si

tuat

ion

or c

ase.

Ratio

nally

rea

sons

the

m

otiv

es b

ehin

d th

e ca

se o

r th

e re

al

situ

atio

n.

Ded

uci

ng

th

e re

lati

on

al s

ense

of

the

fact

ors

or

ph

eno

men

a th

at

con

stit

ute

a r

eal

situ

atio

n o

r ca

se.

Fails

to

obta

in

cons

eque

nces

in

anal

ysin

g a

real

si

tuat

ion

or c

ase.

Wro

ngly

util

ises

the

re

latio

ns b

etw

een

fact

ors

or

phen

omen

a of

a r

eal

situ

atio

n or

cas

e.

Com

pare

s fa

ctor

s or

ph

enom

ena

of a

rea

l si

tuat

ion

or c

ase

to

find

rela

tions

.

Find

s po

ssib

le

rela

tions

bet

wee

n th

e fa

ctor

s or

ph

enom

ena

that

co

nstit

ute

a re

al

situ

atio

n or

cas

e.

Reas

ons

the

rela

tions

be

twee

n fa

ctor

s or

ph

enom

ena

behi

nd a

re

al s

ituat

ion

or c

ase.

Rea

son

ing

aw

ay

do

ub

ts, p

rop

osi

ng

al

tern

ativ

e re

aso

ns

Dou

bts

get

in w

ay o

f re

solv

ing

a re

al

situ

atio

n or

cas

e.

Turn

s do

ubts

into

cr

itici

sms

with

out

cont

ribut

ing

solu

tions

to

the

rea

l situ

atio

n or

cas

e.

Reas

ons

away

dou

bts

to s

ettle

the

ana

lysi

s of

a r

eal s

ituat

ion

or

case

.

Dis

sipa

tes

doub

ts

cons

truc

tivel

y w

hen

anal

ysin

g a

real

si

tuat

ion

or c

ase.

Ratio

nally

rea

sons

out

po

ssib

le a

ltern

ativ

es

that

cou

ld r

esol

ve a

re

al s

ituat

ion

or c

ase.



105

Leve

ls o

f M

aste

ryIn

dic

ato

rsD

escr

ipto

rs

12

34

5

Seco

nd

leve

l of

mas

tery

:Pr

oce

edin

g w

ith

lo

gic

to

arg

ue

on

e’s

anal

ysis

of

real

si

tuat

ion

s o

r ca

ses

Mak

ing

sen

se o

f re

al s

itu

atio

ns

or

case

s to

exp

lain

th

em

Lack

s lo

gica

l ord

er

in h

is/h

er a

naly

ses

of r

eal s

ituat

ions

or

case

s.

Gra

sps,

but

doe

s no

t lo

gica

lly e

xpla

in t

he

mea

ning

of

the

real

si

tuat

ion

or c

ase.

Sign

ifica

ntly

def

ines

th

e m

eani

ng o

f a

real

si

tuat

ion

or c

ase.

Expl

ains

in o

rder

the

ch

arac

teris

tics

of a

re

al s

ituat

ion

or c

ase.

Cle

arly

con

veys

in

det

ail h

is/h

er

expl

anat

ion

of a

rea

l si

tuat

ion

or c

ase.

An

alys

ing

rea

l si

tuat

ion

s o

r ca

ses

to d

isce

rn t

hei

r d

eter

min

ing

fac

tors

o

r p

hen

om

ena

Con

fuse

s th

e lo

gic

of c

ausa

lity

in a

rea

l si

tuat

ion

or c

ase.

Find

s w

rong

fac

tors

of

a r

eal s

ituat

ion

or

case

due

to

inco

rrec

t an

alys

is.

Ade

quat

ely

dist

ingu

ishe

s th

e de

term

inin

g fa

ctor

s of

a r

eal s

ituat

ion

or

case

.

Cla

ssifi

es, i

n de

term

inat

ive

orde

r, th

e fa

ctor

s or

ph

enom

ena

of a

rea

l si

tuat

ion

or c

ase.

App

lies

in lo

gica

l or

der

caus

e-ef

fect

an

d co

nseq

uenc

e re

latio

ns o

f th

e re

al

situ

atio

ns o

r ca

ses

that

he/

she

anal

yses

.

Co

nst

ruct

ing

ar

gu

men

ts in

o

rder

ly w

ay

Arg

umen

ts d

isor

derly

si

nce

he/s

he d

oesn

’t

anal

yse

the

real

si

tuat

ion

or c

ase

in a

lo

gica

l way

.

Arg

ues

the

real

si

tuat

ion

or c

ase

with

out

test

ing

prem

ises

.

Sens

ibly

che

cks

the

mot

ives

beh

ind

the

case

or

real

situ

atio

n.

Logi

cally

org

anis

es

soun

d ar

gum

ent

on

the

real

situ

atio

n or

ca

se a

naly

sed.

The

prem

ises

util

ised

to

rea

son

the

real

si

tuat

ion

or c

ase

are

cons

iste

nt w

ith

conc

lusi

ons.

Syst

emat

isin

g t

he

log

ical

rel

atio

ns

of

fact

ors

or

ph

eno

men

a in

a

real

sit

uat

ion

or

case

Enum

erat

es f

acto

rs

or c

onse

quen

ces

illog

ical

ly.

Des

crib

es f

acto

rs

or p

heno

men

a of

a

real

situ

atio

n or

cas

e w

ithou

t sa

ying

how

th

ey a

re li

nked

or

rela

ted

logi

cally

.

Reas

ons

out

the

rela

tions

be

twee

n fa

ctor

s or

ph

enom

ena

that

giv

e ris

e to

a r

eal s

ituat

ion

or c

ase.

Use

s th

e re

latio

ns

betw

een

fact

ors

or

real

phe

nom

ena

as

trig

gers

of

infe

renc

es.

Syst

emat

ises

th

e re

latio

ns

betw

een

fact

ors

or

phen

omen

a of

rea

l si

tuat

ions

or

case

s to

for

mul

ate

nove

l ap

proa

ches

.

Usi

ng

log

ic t

o

do

aw

ay w

ith

u

nce

rtai

nti

es

Dea

ls w

ith r

eal

situ

atio

ns o

r ca

ses

with

out

stop

ping

to

cons

ider

the

ir lo

gica

l im

plic

atio

ns.

Diff

use

in r

easo

ning

ab

out

real

situ

atio

ns

or c

ases

.

Ratio

nally

rea

sons

ou

t th

e po

ssib

le

alte

rnat

ives

tha

t co

uld

reso

lve

a re

al

situ

atio

n or

cas

e.

Fore

sees

pos

sibl

e co

ntra

dict

ions

in

elim

inat

ing

doub

ts t

hat

caus

e un

cert

aint

ies.

Use

s lo

gica

l ana

lysi

s to

res

olve

dou

bts

and

over

com

e un

cert

aint

ies

in e

ach

real

situ

atio

n or

cas

e.



106

Leve

ls o

f M

aste

ryIn

dic

ato

rsD

escr

ipto

rs

12

34

5

Thir

d le

vel o

f m

aste

ry :

Mak

ing

log

ical

an

alys

es o

f re

al

situ

atio

ns

or

case

s to

rea

son

o

ut

solu

tio

ns

and

g

ener

ate

new

idea

s

Arg

uin

g w

ith

ou

t af

firm

ing

mo

re t

han

ca

n b

e p

rove

n

Use

s un

relia

ble

stat

emen

ts w

ithou

t ch

ecki

ng t

hem

ca

refu

lly.

His

/her

con

clus

ions

ca

nnot

with

stan

d ob

ject

ions

con

cern

ing

the

fact

ors

of t

he r

eal

situ

atio

n or

cas

e.

His

/her

arg

umen

ts

prov

e cl

early

and

in

deta

il th

e ex

plan

atio

n of

a r

eal s

ituat

ion

or

case

.

Expl

anat

ions

are

wel

l ba

sed

on h

is/h

er

anal

ysis

of

the

real

si

tuat

ion

or c

ase.

His

/her

aff

irmat

ions

ha

ve b

een

duly

ch

ecke

d ag

ains

t th

e fa

ctor

s of

the

rea

l si

tuat

ion

or c

ase.

Usi

ng

ap

pro

pri

ate

log

ical

pro

ced

ure

sTh

e pr

oced

ures

of

logi

cal a

naly

sis

utili

sed

for

the

real

si

tuat

ion

or c

ase

are

ques

tiona

ble.

App

lies

logi

cal

proc

edur

es b

ased

on

basi

c ca

usal

ity o

nly.

App

lies

with

lo

gica

l rig

our

the

caus

e-ef

fect

and

co

nseq

uenc

e re

latio

ns o

f re

al

situ

atio

ns o

r ca

ses

anal

ysed

.

Use

s on

ly t

he

proc

edur

es (i

nduc

tive

or d

educ

tive)

of

logi

cal a

naly

sis

that

ar

e ap

prop

riate

to

the

real

situ

atio

n or

ca

se in

han

d.

App

ropr

iate

ly u

tilis

es

diff

eren

t pr

oced

ures

to

fur

ther

his

/her

an

alys

is o

f th

e re

al

situ

atio

n or

cas

e.

Mak

ing

an

d

pre

sen

tin

g v

erif

ied

an

alys

es

Supp

ress

es p

roof

. O

nly

pres

ents

, fro

m

anal

ysis

of

the

real

si

tuat

ion

or c

ase,

the

pr

emis

es t

hat

supp

ort

his/

her

argu

men

t.

His

/her

arg

umen

t co

ncer

ning

the

rea

l si

tuat

ion

or c

ase

does

no

t fo

llow

fro

m t

he

evid

ence

.

The

prem

ises

use

d to

exp

lain

the

rea

l si

tuat

ion

or c

ase

are

cons

iste

nt w

ith

conc

lusi

ons.

Cor

rect

ly c

orre

late

s an

d in

fers

the

co

nten

t of

a r

eal

situ

atio

n or

cas

e.

In h

is/h

er a

naly

ses,

fin

ds li

mits

and

fo

rmul

ates

al

tern

ativ

es t

o ov

erco

me

them

in

verif

iabl

e, f

easi

ble

way

.

Gen

erat

ing

new

p

oss

ibili

ties

of

kno

wle

dg

e

Ove

rlook

s po

ssib

le

alte

rnat

ives

due

to

failu

re t

o es

tabl

ish

links

bet

wee

n th

e fa

ctor

s of

a r

eal

situ

atio

n or

cas

e.

Gen

eral

ises

and

ex

trap

olat

es w

ithou

t ch

ecki

ng t

he r

elat

ions

be

twee

n fa

ctor

s or

ph

enom

ena

of t

he

real

situ

atio

n or

cas

e.

Syst

emat

ises

th

e re

latio

ns

betw

een

fact

ors

or

phen

omen

a of

rea

l si

tuat

ions

or

case

s to

for

mul

ate

nove

l ap

proa

ches

.

Util

ises

logi

cal

proc

edur

es a

s a

lear

ning

str

ateg

y an

d to

sol

ve p

robl

ems.

Mak

es n

ew

conn

ectio

ns a

nd

gene

rate

s in

fere

nces

to

arr

ive

at n

ew

fact

ual h

ypot

hese

s or

re

spon

ses.

Sup

po

rtin

g

ob

ject

ion

s w

ith

so

un

d

arg

um

enta

tio

n

Con

trad

icts

sel

f in

ana

lysi

ng r

eal

situ

atio

n or

cas

e.

Und

erta

kes

anal

ysis

of

a c

ase

or r

eal

situ

atio

n w

ithou

t ca

lcul

atin

g po

ssib

le

obje

ctio

ns.

Use

s lo

gica

l ana

lysi

s to

res

olve

dou

bts

and

over

com

e un

cert

aint

ies

in e

ach

real

situ

atio

n or

cas

e.

Ana

lyse

s do

ubts

and

po

ssib

le o

bjec

tions

to

impr

ove

own

argu

men

ts a

bout

rea

l si

tuat

ions

or

case

s.

Fore

sees

, with

ad

hoc

argu

men

ts, h

ow t

o ov

erco

me

obje

ctio

ns

in a

naly

sing

a r

eal

situ

atio

n or

cas

e.



107

COMPETENCE: ANALOGICAL THINKING

Description

Analogical thought organises each person’s cognitive experience of reality, since it is a process that makes it possible to interrelate and trans-form ideas, perceptions and concepts. This type of thinking enables us to turn the ordinary into extraordinary and the extraordinary into ordi-nary, and and to approach the unknown through what we already know. Simple observation of similarities and differences in an object, phenom-enon or situation is a way of practicing this style of thinking.

On occasion, we are able to understand and comprehend a situation or event as a consequence of an interrelation of ideas, concepts or events which, in principle, were incomparable. We are able to comprehend be-cause we have associated ideas, concepts or events which, in appear-ance, were divergent.

Occasionally we also manage to convey a complex idea or concept because we have utilised a simile or comparison that facilitated under-standing and communication. We explain something unknown to a per-son in terms that he/she understands, so making ourselves understood.

Analogical thinking is expressed in the analogies and/or similarities that we use to explain reality, communicate ideas and resolve problems. The history of scientific knowledge shows how progress in explaining natural or social phenomena is achieved by allowing our thoughts to interact with apparently unrelated fields of knowledge.

The development of this competence should start from the simple use of analogies to relate and explain ideas. This process is a regular habit in daily life that can be built on to structure the way in which stu-dents utilise analogies to relate and explain their thoughts. The first level of mastery consists in testing the simple association of divergent ideas.

The second level of mastery measures what the student draws from close or divergent fields of knowledge to establish useful and rigorous analogies that will serve to solve problems or cases.

The use of comparisons and similarities to create knowledge com-prises the third level of mastery. This level is characterised by the system-atic resources used by students when they employ this type of thinking to create and organise ideas.

Registering explicit use of this type of thinking consists in verifying how students relate ideas, how they create analogies or examples, how they explain complex ideas simply, how they propose novel solutions to prob-lems or cases and, finally, how they link different fields of knowledge.



108


Analogical thinking is related to reflective, logical, systemic, analyti-cal, critical and creative thinking. Moreover, it is associated with creativ-ity and innovation. It is also closely related to diversity and intercultural-ity and is of strategic help in problem-solving.

This type of thinking serves to relativise problems and find solutions. It helps to develop values concerning the social and human sense of living together in groups. It enhances the willingness to change, rationally and logically, ideas and preconceptions about a phenomenon or contingency.

Analogical thinking is useful for reflecting on the value and limits of knowledge, for knowing how to formulate complex explanations, and for developing creativity and imagination.


Mastery of this competence facilitates the comprehension and devel-opment of abstract notions. It makes it possible to modify preconceived notions and plays a key role in the generation of new ideas.

This is the best type of thinking for developing interdisciplinary or transdisciplinary knowledge, and for addressing learning in specialised fields of knowledge. In both procedures, the most methodical way of practicing this type of thinking is by systematically employing compari-sons to examine relations, interactions, similarities and differences be-tween two or more objects, ideas, concepts, events or phenomena.

Learning these procedures enables students to examine the ins and outs of research and to see the need for rigorously updating information and acquired knowledge, not only at university but in their personal and professional lives as well.


This competence can be developed through learning strategies that confront students with situations where they can use, understand and apply things they learn as a procedure to solve problems and propose solutions.

The most appropriate learning strategies for this competence are: problem-based learning, case studies and the project method. Practice in analogical thinking also teaches students to handle different sources of information and techniques for data processing and interpretation. It is useful as well for simulations or field work.



109

COMPETENCE: ANALOGICAL THINKING

Definition: This is the mental behaviour that seeks relations of similarity or analogy between different things. It is usually used in examples.

Mastery of this competence is closely related to: Creative thinking, problem-solving ability, creativity, innovation, project manage-ment, etc.

Levels of proficiency:

1. Utilising analogies intuitively to relate and explain ideas2. Utilising analogies to compare and establish interdisciplinary re-

lations3. Utilising comparisons and similarities to create knowledge

Indicators:

1. Relating ideas2. Using correspondences between ideas to create analogies or ex-

amples3. Explaining complex ideas in simple ways4. Finding novel solutions5. Knowledge transfer



110

Leve

ls o

f M

aste

ryIn

dic

ato

rsD

escr

ipto

rs

12

34

5

Firs

t le

vel o

f m

aste

ry:

Uti

lisin

g a

nal

og

ies

intu

itiv

ely

to

asso

ciat

e id

eas

and

ex

pla

in t

hem

Rel

atin

g c

on

cep

ts

and

idea

s in

ori

gin

al

way

s

Ass

ocia

tes

idea

s w

ithou

t co

ntex

tual

izin

g th

e ca

ses

or p

robl

ems

enun

ciat

ed.

Find

s si

mila

ritie

s bu

t do

es n

ot r

esol

ve b

asic

ca

ses

or p

robl

ems.

Ass

ocia

tes

diff

eren

t id

eas

to g

rasp

the

m

eani

ng o

f a

case

or

prob

lem

.

Link

s di

ffer

ent

idea

s to

cha

nge

perc

eptio

ns o

f a

case

or

pro

blem

.

Com

pare

s id

eas

to

find

new

mea

ning

s of

a c

ase

or p

robl

em.

Iden

tify

ing

in

mo

del

s th

e co

rres

po

nd

ence

b

etw

een

idea

s an

d

exam

ple

s

Mis

take

nly

omits

or

rela

tes

exam

ples

and

id

eas

pres

ent

in a

m

odel

.

Ove

rlook

s th

e co

rres

pond

ence

s be

twee

n id

eas

and

exam

ples

.

Find

s th

e co

rres

pond

ence

be

twee

n th

e id

eas

and

exam

ples

in a

m

odel

.

Find

s an

alog

ies

betw

een

cert

ain

mod

els.

Util

ises

the

co

rres

pond

ence

s be

twee

n m

odel

s to

ge

nera

te n

ew

com

paris

ons.

Dra

win

g o

n

anal

og

y to

cre

ate

exp

lan

atio

ns

Use

s in

appr

opria

te

exam

ples

.C

onfu

ses

exam

ples

w

ith w

ith

fund

amen

tal i

deas

.

Use

s ex

ampl

es t

o ex

plai

n ab

stra

ct

proc

esse

s or

idea

s

Use

s co

mpa

rison

s to

fo

rmul

ate

exam

ples

.U

ses

sim

iles

to

expl

ain

abst

ract

pr

oces

ses

or id

eas.

Dra

win

g o

n a

nal

og

y to

fin

d s

olu

tio

ns

Ove

rlook

s co

mpa

rison

as

a gu

ide

to s

olut

ions

.

Imag

ines

sol

utio

ns

with

out

syst

emat

isin

g th

em.

Seek

s po

ssib

le

solu

tions

in o

ther

ex

ampl

es.

Util

ises

com

paris

on

to c

reat

e so

lutio

ns.

Dra

ws

on c

ompa

rativ

e ex

ampl

es t

o tr

ansf

er

solu

tions

.

Tran

sfer

rin

g id

eas

fro

m d

iffe

ren

t d

om

ain

s

Dis

soci

ates

idea

s an

d ov

erlo

oks

poss

ible

re

latio

ns.

Iden

tifie

s si

mpl

e re

latio

ns w

ithou

t an

alys

ing

thei

r co

rres

pond

ence

.

Esta

blis

hes

rela

tions

hips

bet

wee

n id

eas

not

othe

rwis

e as

soci

ated

.

Iden

tifie

s th

e re

latio

nshi

p be

twee

n di

ssoc

iate

d id

eas,

as

a w

ay o

f re

solv

ing

prob

lem

s or

ca

ses.

Use

s th

e re

latio

ns

betw

een

idea

s as

a

way

of

reso

lvin

g pr

oble

ms

or c

ases

.



111

Leve

ls o

f M

aste

ryIn

dic

ato

rsD

escr

ipto

rs

12

34

5

Seco

nd

leve

l of

mas

tery

:U

sin

g a

nal

og

ies

to c

om

par

e an

d

esta

blis

h

inte

rdis

cip

linar

y re

lati

on

s

Syst

emat

ical

ly

asso

ciat

ing

d

iver

gen

t id

eas

Con

fron

ts id

eas

with

out

payi

ng d

ue

atte

ntio

n to

the

si

mila

ritie

s su

gges

ted

in a

cas

e or

pro

blem

.

Com

pare

s id

eas

with

out

fittin

g th

em in

to a

line

of

argu

men

t.

Com

pare

s id

eas

to a

rgue

new

ap

proa

ches

to

a ca

se

or p

robl

em.

Giv

es a

rgum

ents

for

th

e co

rres

pond

ence

be

twee

n co

mpa

rison

s ut

ilise

d.

Use

s co

mpa

rison

sy

stem

atic

ally

to

just

ify s

olut

ions

.

Esta

blis

hin

g

corr

esp

on

den

ce

bet

wee

n d

iver

gen

t id

eas

Com

pare

s w

ithou

t es

tabl

ishi

ng a

dequ

ate

corr

espo

nden

ce

betw

een

idea

s.

Con

fron

ts id

eas

with

out

com

parin

g th

em.

Util

ises

co

rres

pond

ence

s be

twee

n id

eas

and

exam

ples

to

gene

rate

ne

w c

ompa

rison

s.

Com

pare

s id

eas

and

conc

epts

to

reso

lve

case

s or

pro

blem

s.

Ded

uces

com

paris

ons

extr

apol

atin

g ap

prop

riate

ly.

Dra

win

g o

n

anal

og

y to

cre

ate

com

pre

hen

sib

le

exp

lan

atio

ns

Ove

rlook

s ex

ampl

es

as a

way

tow

ard

expl

anat

ion.

Use

s in

effe

ctiv

e ex

ampl

es t

o ex

plai

n id

eas.

Use

s ex

ampl

es t

o ex

plai

n ab

stra

ct

proc

esse

s or

idea

s.

Use

s an

alog

y to

cl

arify

ow

n an

d ot

hers

’ ide

as.

Expl

ains

com

plex

id

eas

with

eff

ectiv

e an

alog

ies.

Emp

loyi

ng

an

alo

gie

s to

co

mm

un

icat

e so

luti

on

s

Ana

logi

es u

tilis

ed a

re

conf

usin

g.U

tilis

es e

xam

ples

th

at a

re in

suff

icie

ntly

co

ncis

e an

d cl

ear.

Con

veys

idea

s w

ith

clar

ity t

hank

s to

the

co

mpa

rativ

e ex

ampl

es

he/s

he u

ses.

Util

ises

app

ropr

iate

ex

plan

ator

y si

mile

s fo

r th

e id

eas

to b

e co

nvey

ed.

Dra

ws

clea

r, ef

fect

ive

anal

ogie

s to

con

vey

nove

l sol

utio

ns.

Tran

sfer

rin

g id

eas

fro

m d

iffe

ren

t d

isci

plin

es

Ove

rlook

s tr

ansv

ersa

l kn

owle

dge

in

reso

lvin

g ca

ses

or

prob

lem

s.

Inap

prop

riate

ly

asso

ciat

es id

eas

in

tryi

ng t

o re

solv

e ca

ses

or p

robl

ems.

Util

ises

rel

atio

nshi

ps

betw

een

disc

iplin

es

as a

way

of

solv

ing

prob

lem

s or

cas

es .

Util

ises

tec

hniq

ues

from

oth

er d

isci

plin

es

to c

ompa

re id

eas

or

conc

epts

.

App

ropr

iate

ly tr

ansf

ers

idea

s or

con

cept

s fr

om o

ne d

iscip

line

to

anot

her

to re

solv

e ca

ses

or

prob

lem

s.



112

Leve

ls o

f M

aste

ryIn

dic

ato

rsD

escr

ipto

rs

12

34

5

Thir

d le

vel o

f m

aste

ry:

Usi

ng

co

mp

aris

on

an

d s

imila

riti

es t

o

crea

te k

no

wle

dg

e

Co

nce

ivin

g id

eas

anal

og

ical

lyU

ses

anal

ogie

s un

syst

emat

ical

ly.U

ses

sim

ilarit

ies

with

out

duly

tes

ting

them

.

Use

s co

mpa

rison

s sy

stem

atic

ally.

Use

s co

mpa

rativ

e pr

oced

ures

tha

t ar

e ap

prop

riate

to

each

ca

se o

r pr

oble

m.

Cre

ates

com

para

tive

proc

edur

es t

hat

are

appr

opria

te t

o ea

ch

case

or

prob

lem

.

Rea

son

ing

th

e si

mila

riti

es o

r co

mp

aris

on

s u

tilis

ed

Use

s co

nfro

ntat

ions

as

com

paris

ons.

Use

s an

alog

ies

with

out

basi

ng t

hem

on

arg

umen

tatio

n.

Ded

uces

rea

sone

d co

mpa

rison

s.U

ses

sim

iles

as

part

of

his/

her

argu

men

tatio

n.

Just

ifies

the

ex

trap

olat

ions

tha

t he

/she

use

s.

Fin

din

g t

he

corr

esp

on

den

ce

bet

wee

n

(div

erg

ent)

idea

s an

d r

eal s

itu

atio

ns

to c

om

e u

p w

ith

so

luti

on

s

Util

ises

sim

ilarit

ies

with

out

taki

ng

into

acc

ount

the

ir co

ntex

tual

rel

atio

ns.

Use

s ex

ampl

es

with

out

clar

ifyin

g th

eir

corr

espo

nden

ce

with

wha

t he

/she

is

tryi

ng t

o ex

plai

n.

Expl

ains

com

plex

ca

ses

or p

robl

ems

with

eff

ectiv

e an

alog

ies.

Cre

ates

eff

ectiv

e an

alog

ies

that

are

ap

prop

riate

to

each

ca

se o

r re

al p

robl

em.

Use

s co

mpa

rison

to

posi

t re

ason

ed

hypo

thes

es.

Cre

atin

g a

nal

og

ies

to c

on

vey

no

vel

solu

tio

ns

and

ap

pro

ach

es

Use

s ex

ampl

es

but

fails

to

clar

ify

disc

ours

e.

Dra

ws

on s

tale

an

alog

ies.

Con

ceiv

es o

wn

clea

r an

d ef

fect

ive

anal

ogie

s to

con

vey

solu

tions

.

Build

s an

alog

ies

with

in w

ell-a

rgue

d di

scou

rse.

Tran

sfer

s id

eas

from

on

e co

ntex

t to

an

othe

r th

roug

h ow

n an

alog

ies.

Usi

ng

an

alo

gy

as

an in

terd

isci

plin

ary

wo

rkin

g m

eth

od

Use

s an

alog

ies

draw

n fr

om a

sin

gle

disc

iplin

e.

Link

s id

eas

or

conc

epts

fro

m

diff

eren

t di

scip

lines

.

App

ropr

iate

ly

tran

sfer

s id

eas

from

on

e di

scip

line

to

anot

her

to r

esol

ve

case

s or

pro

blem

s.

Reso

lves

cas

es o

r pr

oble

ms

with

in

terd

isci

plin

ary

proc

edur

es.

Gen

erat

es

inte

rdis

cipl

inar

y pr

oced

ures

to

reso

lve

real

pro

blem

s or

ca

ses.



113

COMPETENCE: PRACTICAL THINKING

Description

This is the action-oriented way of thinking that we use in daily life to adapt to new situations that arise, take decisions and consequently to act. It is a type of thinking aimed at achieving results in circumstances not necessarily well defined beforehand.

Practical thinking involves clarifying the objectives to be attained, which often must be defined by the subject, and identifying all the infor-mation available, including the restrictions or obstacles that must be taken into consideration to accomplish those objectives. In particular, limitations on time or other available resources must be taken into ac-count in addressing the situation. Practical thinking also requires paying close attention to effectiveness and efficiency.

Quantitative and qualitative information must be interpreted and evaluated as to its importance in resolving the situation in hand, mean-ing that one must use information-processing criteria and procedures that are clear and preferably explicit, which must be consistently applied throughout the thinking process.

One of the characteristics of this type of thinking is that it means con-fronting uncertainty, since in real-life situations, as opposed to theoretical assumptions, one does not always have all the information that formal models require. The use of one’s own or others’ past experiences and of reasonable hypotheses may prove indispensable for furthering thought.

Courses of action, or solutions to situations, are not predetermined. Therefore we use practical thinking to select, on grounds of effective-ness, efficiency and available information, the most appropriate course, after which we can plan how to proceed to accomplish our objectives. This will necessarily include the actions to be undertaken, the resources required and an estimated time sequence.


From the above definition, we can see that practical thinking is clear-ly related to the competence of adaptability.

It is also closely related to other types of thought such as analytical, creative, reflective and deliberative thinking, since it utilises and develops them to understand and evaluate the situation and find solutions to help us accomplish our objectives.



114

It is related to planning, objectives-based management, enterprising spirit, achievement orientation, problem-solving and decision-making. Any of these competences would be impossible to master without ap-propriate use of practical thinking.

Practical thinking provides people with a mental structure capable of dealing with complex situations in the knowledge that they will be able to address and resolve them. Consequently, proficiency in this type of thinking greatly enhances self-confidence.

In our relations with others, proficiency in practical thinking is re-flected in the speed with which we find ways to meet objectives, and in our superior argumentation as to why these ways are the right ones. It is also reflected in the ability to evaluate critically the arguments of others, all of which facilitates leadership, or at least assuming a role of authority in groups.

Importance of this competence in student and professional life

One of the problems that may be occasioned by classical methods of teaching is that students always receive the necessary information to do prefabricated exercises in order to gain practice in applying specific tech-niques. This can make students think that all situations have a specific solution that must be reached. Their response will be correct or incorrect according to whether or not it matches the “right answer” – i.e. the answer of the lecturer. Consequently, students become dependent on teachers in evaluating the quality of their responses. Worse still, when information is lacking, they do not know what to do.

Furthermore, in academic life, students do not have to put into prac-tice the solutions they come up with. They do not have to take respon-sibility for the success or failure of their proposals. This is why theoretical responses, which may be unviable if all real constraints are taken into account, may seem sufficiently valid to students.

By contrast, exercising practical thinking prepares students to deal with situations where it is not sufficient to apply pat solutions or formu-las, and where the solutions or decisions proposed must be well-argued and consistent with available resources. Therefore, practical thinking prepares students to deal with real problems.

In the course of professional work, besides finding viable solutions to problems that arise with greater facility, people with the capacity to ar-gue their positions in detail and critically examine those of others, point-ing out possible flaws and ways to complete or improve them, will have



115

greater chances of success and promotion to positions of higher respon-sibility.


Positing real situations as a basis for learning is fundamental for de-veloping this competence. Students should be given precise instructions at first, but later become accustomed to handling real facts and taking responsibility for their decisions.

Both the case method and project-based learning can significantly help in developing this competence. Lecturers should pose questions such as: What are the objectives to be reached? What facts do we have? How important are they? What do they mean? What difficulties do they entail? Are there any constraints? What other facts would we need? What other situations does this seem similar to? How are they different? What possible solutions exist? Which seems best? And above all, Why?



116

COMPETENCE: PRACTICAL THINKING

Definition: This is the mental behaviour that makes it easier to select the best course of action on the basis of available informa-tion and to decide how to proceed to achieve objectives with ef-fectiveness and efficiency. It is the action-oriented way of think-ing.

Mastery of this competence is closely related to: Deliberative think-ing, creative thinking, reflective thinking and analytical thinking, planning, objectives-based management, achievement orienta-tion, adaptability, self-motivation, enterprising spirit, problem-solving ability, decision-making, etc.

Levels:

1. Utilising own capacities and the resources available to achieve objectives in usual situations, following instructions

2. Addressing new or complex situations with own approach lead-ing to the design and development of a plan containing con-crete actions

3. Addressing new or complex situations together with others until a sound plan has been devised with concrete actions

Indicators:

1. Identifying or deciding objectives. Specifying the problem to be resolved or situation to be overcome

2. Using information. Identifying information gaps. Dealing with uncertainty

3. Specifying criteria to evaluate information reliably4. Using helpful procedures to analyse information5. Results of thinking process (planning, decision, action) and its

argumentation



117

Leve

ls o

f M

aste

ryIn

dic

ato

rsD

escr

ipto

rs

12

34

5

Firs

t le

vel o

f m

aste

ry:

Usi

ng

ow

n

cap

acit

ies

and

av

aila

ble

res

ou

rces

to

ach

ieve

o

bje

ctiv

es in

u

sual

sit

uat

ion

s,

follo

win

g

inst

ruct

ion

s

Iden

tify

ing

th

e co

ncr

ete

ob

ject

ives

to

be

ach

ieve

d in

as

sig

ned

tas

ks

Con

fuse

s ob

ject

ives

w

ith p

roce

dure

s (t

he

goal

and

how

to

get

to it

).

Sim

ply

repe

ats

the

inst

ruct

ions

rec

eive

d,

conf

usin

g ob

ject

ives

an

d pr

oced

ures

.

Cle

arly

dis

tingu

ishe

s th

e ob

ject

ives

to

be

achi

eved

fro

m t

he

proc

edur

es u

sed

to

atta

in t

hem

.

Def

ines

in o

wn

wor

ds t

he c

oncr

ete

obje

ctiv

es o

f as

sign

ed

task

s.

Def

ines

con

cret

e ob

ject

ives

and

rel

ates

th

em t

o th

e st

eps

to

follo

w in

att

aini

ng

them

.

Co

rrec

tly

uti

lisin

g

all a

vaila

ble

in

form

atio

n

Doe

sn’t

tak

e in

to

acco

unt

all a

vaila

ble

info

rmat

ion.

Con

fuse

s re

leva

nt

and

irrel

evan

t ite

ms

of in

form

atio

n.

Cor

rect

ly id

entif

ies

all

the

rele

vant

item

s of

in

form

atio

n pr

ovid

ed.

Iden

tifie

s, in

add

ition

, th

e re

leva

nt it

ems

of in

form

atio

n st

ill

lack

ing.

Mak

es r

easo

ned

assu

mpt

ions

abo

ut

info

rmat

ion

gaps

.

Hav

ing

cle

ar c

rite

ria

for

eval

uat

ing

th

e q

ual

ity

of

info

rmat

ion

p

rovi

ded

Doe

sn’t

eva

luat

e av

aila

ble

info

rmat

ion.

C

onsi

ders

all

type

s of

in

form

atio

n eq

ually

va

lid o

r re

liabl

e.

Use

s ar

bitr

ary

or

varia

ble

crite

ria

durin

g th

e ev

alua

tion

proc

ess.

Use

s cl

ear

crite

ria t

o ev

alua

te d

iffer

ent

type

s of

ava

ilabl

e in

form

atio

n ac

cord

ing

to

inst

ruct

ions

re

ceiv

ed.

Expl

ains

(sho

win

g go

od u

nder

stan

ding

) ho

w e

valu

atio

n cr

iteria

hav

e be

en

appl

ied.

Con

sist

ently

app

lies

eval

uatio

n cr

iteria

du

ring

entir

e pr

oces

s.

Co

rrec

tly

usi

ng

p

roce

du

res

for

pro

cess

ing

in

form

atio

n

corr

esp

on

din

g t

o

the

sub

ject

Doe

sn’t

use

the

pr

oced

ures

indi

cate

d.U

ses

prop

osed

pr

oced

ures

bad

ly.

Cor

rect

ly u

tilis

es t

he

proc

edur

es p

ropo

sed.

Expl

ains

the

ste

ps

take

n in

app

lyin

g pr

oced

ures

.

Cor

rect

ly in

terp

rets

th

e re

sults

obt

aine

d.

Turn

ing

an

alys

is

of

situ

atio

n in

to

dec

isio

ns

or

con

cret

e ac

tio

ns

Doe

sn’t

arr

ive

at c

oncr

ete

conc

lusi

ons.

Get

s lo

st in

dig

ress

ions

or

ambi

guiti

es.

Prop

oses

con

cret

e ac

tions

but

the

y do

no

t le

ad t

o ob

ject

ive.

Prop

oses

con

cret

e ac

tions

to

achi

eve

obje

ctiv

es.

Giv

es g

ood

argu

men

ts f

or t

he

rela

tion

ship

bet

wee

n in

form

atio

n,

prop

osed

act

ions

an

d th

e ob

ject

ives

se

t.

Iden

tifie

s th

e w

eak

poin

ts o

r ris

ks c

onta

ined

in

prop

osal

.



118

Leve

ls o

f M

aste

ryIn

dic

ato

rsD

escr

ipto

rs

12

34

5

Seco

nd

leve

l of

mas

tery

:A

dd

ress

ing

n

ew o

r co

mp

lex

situ

atio

ns

wit

h o

wn

ap

pro

ach

lead

ing

to

th

e d

esig

n a

nd

d

evel

op

men

t o

f a

pla

n c

on

tain

ing

co

ncr

ete

acti

on

s

Sett

ing

co

ncr

ete

ob

ject

ives

co

nce

rnin

g t

he

situ

atio

n in

han

d

Doe

sn’t

set

con

cret

e ob

ject

ives

.H

is/h

er o

bjec

tives

are

no

t ap

prop

riate

for

th

e si

tuat

ion.

Sets

app

ropr

iate

co

ncre

te o

bjec

tives

fo

r th

e si

tuat

ion

in

hand

.

Sets

fin

al o

bjec

tives

an

d th

e in

term

edia

te

step

s fo

r at

tain

ing

them

.

Sets

var

ious

at

tain

able

obj

ectiv

es

sim

ulta

neou

sly

and

expl

ains

the

rel

atio

ns

betw

een

them

.

Iden

tify

ing

th

e in

form

atio

n n

eed

ed

to a

dd

ress

th

e si

tuat

ion

Is u

nabl

e to

en

umer

ate

the

type

s of

info

rmat

ion

need

ed t

o ad

dres

s th

e si

tuat

ion.

Ove

rlook

s so

me

type

s of

impo

rtan

t in

form

atio

n fo

r ad

dres

sing

the

si

tuat

ion.

Dra

ws

up a

com

plet

e lis

t of

the

info

rmat

ion

item

s ne

eded

to

reso

lve

the

situ

atio

n.

Loca

tes

info

rmat

ion,

fil

ling

in g

aps

with

w

ell-r

easo

ned

assu

mpt

ions

.

Thes

e as

sum

ptio

ns

incl

ude

seve

ral

poss

ible

val

ues

for

the

info

rmat

ion

that

is

lack

ing.

Sett

ing

ow

n

crit

eria

to

eva

luat

e th

e va

lidit

y o

f in

form

atio

n

Doe

sn’t

spe

cify

th

e cr

iteria

use

d to

ev

alua

te in

form

atio

n.

Use

s po

or c

riter

ia t

o ev

alua

te d

iffer

ent

type

s of

info

rmat

ion.

Use

s ap

prop

riate

cr

iteria

to

eval

uate

di

ffer

ent

type

s of

in

form

atio

n.

Expl

ains

and

arg

ues

the

appr

opria

tene

ss

of t

he c

riter

ia u

tilis

ed.

Def

ines

pro

cedu

res

to e

nsur

e co

nsis

tent

ap

plic

atio

n of

ev

alua

tion

crite

ria.

Sele

ctin

g a

deq

uat

e p

roce

du

res

for

pro

cess

ing

in

form

atio

n

Use

s pr

oced

ures

tha

t ar

e in

appr

opria

te f

or

the

situ

atio

n.

Sele

cts

appr

opria

te

proc

edur

es, b

ut u

ses

them

bad

ly.

Cor

rect

ly u

tilis

es

appr

opria

te

proc

edur

es

for

proc

essi

ng

info

rmat

ion.

Ade

quat

ely

expl

ains

th

e pr

oced

ure

follo

wed

to

proc

ess

info

rmat

ion

and

its

appr

opria

tene

ss f

or

the

situ

atio

n or

the

ty

pe o

f in

form

atio

n.

Cor

rect

ly in

terp

rets

re

sults

in r

elat

ion

to t

he s

ituat

ion

and

obje

ctiv

es d

efin

ed.

Dev

isin

g a

so

un

d

pla

n f

or

add

ress

ing

th

e si

tuat

ion

Prop

oses

a t

heor

etic

al

plan

not

sui

ted

to

the

situ

atio

n in

han

d,

or n

ot s

pelle

d ou

t in

ac

tions

.

His

/her

pla

n is

not

co

nsis

tent

or

logi

cal.

Prop

oses

a s

et o

f un

coor

dina

ted

actio

ns t

hat

do n

ot

lead

to

atta

inin

g ob

ject

ives

.

Des

igns

a s

ound

pla

n to

ach

ieve

obj

ectiv

es.

Cle

arly

exp

lain

s w

hy h

is/h

er p

lan

is

feas

ible

and

will

lead

to

acc

ompl

ishm

ent

of

obje

ctiv

es.

His

/her

pla

n in

clud

es

a ris

k an

alys

is a

nd a

t le

ast

one

cont

inge

ncy

plan

(“pl

an B

”).



119

Leve

ls o

f M

aste

ryIn

dic

ato

rsD

escr

ipto

rs

12

34

5

Thir

d le

vel o

f m

aste

ry:

Ad

dre

ssin

g n

ew o

r co

mp

lex

situ

atio

ns

tog

eth

er w

ith

o

ther

s u

nti

l a

sou

nd

pla

n h

as

bee

n d

evis

ed w

ith

co

ncr

ete

acti

on

s

Agr

eein

g

appr

opri

ate

conc

rete

ob

ject

ives

for

the

si

tuat

ion

in h

and

Doe

sn’t

acc

ept

appr

oach

es d

iffer

ent

from

ow

n.

Del

ays

or e

ven

impe

des

agre

emen

t by

crit

icis

ing

the

appr

oach

es p

ropo

sed

by o

ther

s.

Agr

ees

conc

rete

ob

ject

ives

incl

udin

g di

ffer

ent

appr

oach

es

to t

he s

ituat

ion

in

hand

.

Faci

litat

es a

gree

men

t on

obj

ectiv

es

by s

earc

hing

for

in

term

edia

te

posi

tions

.

Dev

ises

a p

ropo

sal

for

rank

ing

or

wei

ghin

g ob

ject

ives

an

d th

e re

latio

nshi

ps

betw

een

them

tha

t is

ac

cept

able

to

all.

Ag

reei

ng

th

e se

t o

f in

form

atio

n it

ems

nee

ded

to

ad

dre

ss

situ

atio

n

Fails

to

take

into

co

nsid

erat

ion

info

rmat

ion

item

s di

ffer

ent

from

tho

se

that

sup

port

ow

n po

int

of v

iew

.

Hin

ders

agr

eem

ent

by c

astin

g do

ubt

on

the

info

rmat

ion

item

s pr

ovid

ed b

y ot

hers

, w

ithou

t co

nvin

cing

pr

oof

or a

rgum

ents

.

Agr

ees

to t

ake

into

co

nsid

erat

ion

all t

he

type

s of

info

rmat

ion

prop

osed

by

othe

rs.

Hel

ps t

o id

entif

y in

form

atio

n ga

ps

and

to in

corp

orat

e un

cert

aint

y in

to t

he

proc

ess.

Prop

oses

rea

sone

d as

sum

ptio

ns o

n in

form

atio

n ga

ps

that

incl

ude

diff

eren

t se

nsib

ilitie

s.

Ag

reei

ng

sh

ared

cr

iter

ia t

o e

valu

ate

the

valid

ity

of

info

rmat

ion

item

s

Doe

sn’t

acc

ept

crite

ria d

iffer

ent

from

ow

n fo

r ev

alua

ting

info

rmat

ion

item

s.

Hin

ders

agr

eem

ent

by in

sist

ing

on

impo

sing

ow

n cr

iteria

de

spite

arg

umen

ts

agai

nst

by o

ther

s.

Agr

ees

the

maj

ority

cr

iteria

for

eva

luat

ing

the

valid

ity o

f in

form

atio

n ite

ms.

Iden

tifie

s er

rors

of

judg

emen

t in

eva

luat

ing

info

rmat

ion

item

s an

d pr

opos

es w

ays

to

over

com

e th

em.

Prop

oses

a

cons

iste

nt s

yste

m

for

eval

uati

ng

the

valid

ity

of

info

rmat

ion

item

s,

achi

evin

g un

anim

ous

agre

emen

t.

Ag

reei

ng

th

e p

roce

du

res

to b

e u

sed

in p

roce

ssin

g

info

rmat

ion

Onl

y ac

cept

s th

e pr

oced

ures

tha

t he

/sh

e al

read

y kn

ows

and

appl

ies.

Wai

ts f

or r

esul

ts

befo

re a

ccep

ting

or

reje

ctin

g pr

oced

ures

.

Agr

ees

the

proc

edur

es t

hat

mos

t co

nsid

er o

ppor

tune

an

d th

e re

sults

ob

tain

ed.

Prop

oses

pro

cedu

res

that

are

sim

ple

or

are

reco

mm

ende

d by

ex

pert

s to

fac

ilita

te

agre

emen

t.

Off

ers

a re

ason

ed

inte

rpre

tatio

n of

re

sults

, tak

ing

into

ac

coun

t di

ffer

ent

obje

ctiv

es a

nd

sens

ibili

ties.

Ag

reei

ng

a s

ou

nd

p

lan

to

res

olv

e th

e si

tuat

ion

Util

ises

fal

se

dile

mm

as o

r ot

her

falla

cies

to

oppo

se

plan

.

Onl

y ac

cept

s pa

rt o

f th

e ac

tions

. Opp

oses

ov

eral

l pla

n.

Take

s pa

rt in

de

sign

ing

the

plan

, ac

cept

ing

the

actio

n pr

opos

als

supp

orte

d by

the

maj

ority

.

Incl

udes

eve

ryon

e’s

prop

osal

s in

ord

er t

o fa

cilit

ate

agre

emen

t on

the

gro

up p

lan

of

actio

n.

Aft

er id

entif

ying

ris

ks,

inco

rpor

ates

min

ority

op

tions

as

poss

ible

co

ntin

genc

y pl

ans.



120

COMPETENCE: DELIBERATIVE THINKING

Description

Seeing thinking as a competence is a decision that the professional world agrees on and requires as the basis of all action. Deliberative think-ing is a mental process that is closely related to decision-making. This seems obvious. However, decision-making, a daily practice in many pro-fessions and in human activity in general, demands correct utilisation of thought mechanisms in a given direction.

When competences are concerned with specific types of thinking, they are considered to be instrumental skills. Deliberative thinking helps to organise ideas and concepts according to certain criteria, norms and values that will ensure the soundness and consistency of any decisions taken. The better grounded the ideas, the greater the assurance that they will serve as a good basis for decision-making.

In developing this competence, one must first identify the characteris-tics of deliberative thinking and how it is best employed in daily life situa-tions. At this stage, deliberative thinking calls for a certain amount of re-flection and logic geared toward action; it provides explanatory support for the decisions to be adopted and should adequately justify them.

During a second stage, students learn to identify the connotations of their own decision-making style, which may be more or less reflective (depending on the amount of time devoted to reflection). Such connota-tions may be more or less pragmatic, more or less fleshed out, etc.

At the third level of mastery of this competence, students learn tech-niques to fortify their own style when faced with complex decisions. They analyse and put into practice various alternatives to improve deci-sion-making, justifying their use.

The indicators of the different degrees of development of this com-petence are the identification, recognition and utilisation of principles and techniques involved in deliberative thinking.


This competence is closely related (as noted above) to other types of thinking, such as reflective, logical, analytical, critical and systemic thought. It is related to identifying, problem-solving and decision-making.

Deliberative thinking requires flexibility, fairness and a sense of jus-tice. It is essential for adequately exercising competences such as leader-



121

ship, innovation, project management, enterprising spirit and values such as self-esteem, self-motivation, creation of a new order, global jus-tice, etc.


People’s personal and professional quality is attested to by the qual-ity of the decisions they take. Such quality is based on solid deliberative thinking.

Development of this competence is especially necessary for students studying Law, Business Administration and Education. Generally speak-ing, all university studies require some decision-making ability, above all those whose exercise has a direct influence on people.

Deliberative thinking is also a key competence at work, where cer-tain jobs involve resources management, commercial activity, personnel management, public relations, etc.


Activities that involve ordering ideas or concepts to arrive at conclu-sions or to organise discourse can be included in a course syllabus as ways of developing this competence.

Learning deliberative thinking is compatible with almost all academ-ic subjects, as long as activities are chosen where the above-mentioned behaviours can be practiced.

Recommendable for this competence are evaluation techniques that involve student participation, through self-evaluation and the evaluation of other classmates.

First level activities could include reading a case or listening to a situ-ation (narration, film, etc.), and analysing the process followed in elabo-rating a proposal, so that students identify whether the components and phases of deliberative thinking are present.

At a more advanced level, importance should be given to the origi-nality of deliberative thinking, transferring the process to different fields and contexts.



122

COMPETENCE: DELIBERATIVE THINKING

Definition: This is the intellectual behaviour that considers the pros and cons of our decisions before taking them and examines the validity of points of view before making a judgement.

Mastery of this competence is closely related to: reflective think-ing, logical thinking, analytical thinking, critical thinking, prob-lem-solving, decision-making, leadership, justice, etc.

Levels:

1. Closely considering the pros and cons of the motives behind a decision before adopting it in a simple situation not involving the student

2. Closely considering the pros and cons of the motives behind a decision before adopting it, in a situation where the student is personally involved

3. Closely considering the pros and cons of the motives behind a decision before adopting it in complex situations

Indicators:

1. Gathering information to deliberate on a situation2. Taking into account the criteria, norms, values, references, etc.

in the deliberation 3. Analysing the different components of the situation4. Construction of a proposal based on own deliberative process



123

Leve

ls o

f M

aste

ryIn

dic

ato

rsD

escr

ipto

rs

12

34

5

Firs

t le

vel o

f m

aste

ry:

Clo

sely

co

nsi

der

ing

th

e p

ros

and

co

ns

of

the

mo

tive

s b

ehin

d a

dec

isio

n

bef

ore

ad

op

tin

g it

in

a s

imp

le s

itu

atio

n

no

t in

volv

ing

th

e st

ud

ent

Gat

her

ing

in

form

atio

n t

o

del

iber

ate

on

a

sim

ple

sit

uat

ion

Resp

onds

intu

itive

ly,

with

out

seek

ing

info

rmat

ion.

Gat

hers

insu

ffic

ient

in

form

atio

nG

athe

rs a

ll av

aila

ble

info

rmat

ion

to

delib

erat

e on

a

situ

atio

n.

Che

cks

to s

ee

whe

ther

he/

she

has

info

rmat

ion

from

all

the

sour

ces.

Gat

hers

all

the

info

rmat

ion

poss

ible

, pr

esen

ting

it in

an

orde

rly w

ay.

Taki

ng

into

acc

ou

nt

refe

ren

ce c

rite

ria

in

the

del

iber

atio

n

Doe

sn’t

mak

e re

fere

nce

to c

riter

ia.

Use

s in

appr

opria

te

crite

ria f

or t

he

situ

atio

n or

con

text

.

Take

s in

to a

ccou

nt

appr

opria

te c

riter

ia

for

the

cont

ext

or

situ

atio

n.

Inco

rpor

ates

ap

prop

riate

and

or

igin

al c

riter

ia in

a

give

n co

ntex

t.

Take

s in

to a

ccou

nt

appr

opria

te c

riter

ia o

f di

ffer

ent

type

s (n

orm

s, v

alue

s,

refe

renc

es, e

tc.).

An

alys

ing

th

e d

iffe

ren

t co

mp

on

ents

of

the

situ

atio

n

Con

fuse

s th

e co

mpo

nent

s of

a

situ

atio

n.

Reco

gnis

es s

ome

com

pone

nts

of t

he

situ

atio

n.

Dis

tingu

ishe

s th

e di

ffer

ent

com

pone

nts

of a

giv

en s

ituat

ion.

Find

s re

latio

nshi

ps

betw

een

the

diff

eren

t co

mpo

nent

s of

a

situ

atio

n.

Dis

cove

rs t

he m

odel

, pa

tter

n, s

yste

m o

r pr

inci

ples

tha

t re

gula

te t

he

rela

tion

ship

s be

twee

n co

mpo

nent

s.

Co

nst

ruct

ing

a

pro

po

sal b

ased

on

o

wn

del

iber

ativ

e p

roce

ss

Del

iber

ates

with

out

arriv

ing

at a

pro

posa

l. Fo

rmul

ates

an

inco

mpl

ete

or p

oorly

ju

stifi

ed p

ropo

sal.

Dev

ises

a p

ropo

sal

base

d on

ow

n de

liber

ativ

e pr

oces

s.

Just

ifies

ow

n pr

opos

al w

ith s

olid

ar

gum

ents

.

Con

stru

cts

a pr

opos

al

base

d on

car

eful

, de

taile

d co

nsid

erat

ion

of t

he

pros

and

con

s.



124

Leve

ls o

f M

aste

ryIn

dic

ato

rsD

escr

ipto

rs

12

34

5

Seco

nd

leve

l of

mas

tery

:C

lose

ly c

on

sid

erin

g

the

pro

s an

d c

on

s o

f th

e m

oti

ves

beh

ind

a d

ecis

ion

b

efo

re a

do

pti

ng

it,

in a

sit

uat

ion

wh

ere

the

stu

den

t is

p

erso

nal

ly in

volv

ed

Gat

her

ing

in

form

atio

n t

o

del

iber

ate

on

ow

n

situ

atio

n

Resp

onds

intu

itive

ly,

with

out

seek

ing

info

rmat

ion.

Gat

hers

insu

ffic

ient

in

form

atio

n.G

athe

rs a

ll av

aila

ble

info

rmat

ion

to

delib

erat

e on

ow

n si

tuat

ion.

Che

cks

to s

ee if

in

form

atio

n fr

om a

ll so

urce

s ha

s be

en

gath

ered

.

Syst

emat

ises

all

the

info

rmat

ion

gath

ered

.

Taki

ng

into

acc

ou

nt

refe

ren

ce c

rite

ria

in

the

del

iber

atio

n

Fails

to

refe

r to

cr

iteria

. U

ses

inap

prop

riate

cr

iteria

for

the

si

tuat

ion

or c

onte

xt.

Take

s in

to a

ccou

nt

appr

opria

te c

riter

ia

for

the

cont

ext

or

situ

atio

n.

Inco

rpor

ates

ap

prop

riate

and

or

igin

al c

riter

ia in

a

give

n co

ntex

t.

Take

s in

to a

ccou

nt

appr

opria

te c

riter

ia o

f di

ffer

ent

type

s (n

orm

s, v

alue

s,

refe

renc

es, e

tc.).

An

alys

ing

th

e d

iffe

ren

t co

mp

on

ents

of

a si

tuat

ion

wh

ere

he/

she

is in

volv

ed

Con

fuse

s th

e co

mpo

nent

s of

the

si

tuat

ion.

Reco

gnis

es s

ome

com

pone

nts

of t

he

situ

atio

n.

Dis

tingu

ishe

s th

e di

ffer

ent

com

pone

nts

of t

he s

ituat

ion.

Esta

blis

hes

rela

tions

hips

be

twee

n th

e di

ffer

ent

com

pone

nts

of t

he

situ

atio

n,

over

com

ing

own

invo

lvem

ent

in it

.

Disc

over

s th

e m

odel

, pa

tter

n, s

yste

m o

r pr

inci

ples

that

regu

late

re

latio

nshi

ps b

etw

een

com

pone

nts.

Co

nst

ruct

ing

a

pro

po

sal b

ased

on

o

wn

del

iber

ativ

e p

roce

ss

Del

iber

ates

with

out

arriv

ing

at a

pro

posa

l. Fo

rmul

ates

an

inco

mpl

ete

or p

oorly

su

ppor

ted

prop

osal

.

Dev

ises

a p

ropo

sal

base

d on

ow

n de

liber

ativ

e pr

oces

s.

Just

ifies

ow

n pr

opos

al w

ith s

olid

ar

gum

ents

.

Con

stru

cts

a pr

opos

al

base

d on

car

eful

, de

taile

d co

nsid

erat

ion

of t

he

pros

and

con

s.



125

Leve

ls o

f M

aste

ryIn

dic

ato

rsD

escr

ipto

rs

12

34

5

Thir

d le

vel o

f m

aste

ry:

Clo

sely

co

nsi

der

ing

th

e p

ros

and

co

ns

of

the

mo

tive

s b

ehin

d a

dec

isio

n

bef

ore

ad

op

tin

g it

in

co

mp

lex

situ

atio

ns

Gat

her

ing

in

form

atio

n t

o

del

iber

ate

on

a

com

ple

x si

tuat

ion

Leav

es o

ut im

port

ant

info

rmat

ion.

Gat

hers

info

rmat

ion

with

out

orde

r.G

athe

rs a

ll in

form

atio

n,

pres

entin

g it

in a

n or

derly

way

.

Syst

emat

ises

all

the

impo

rtan

t in

form

atio

n.

Add

ress

es th

e co

mpl

ex

situa

tion

with

an

exac

t de

finiti

on o

f the

cas

e or

pro

blem

.

Taki

ng

into

acc

ou

nt

dif

fere

nt

refe

ren

ce

crit

eria

in

del

iber

atin

g o

n a

co

mp

lex

situ

atio

n

Util

ises

insu

ffic

ient

or

inap

prop

riate

crit

eria

. O

nly

utili

ses

stan

dard

cr

iteria

.Ta

kes

into

acc

ount

di

vers

e ap

prop

riate

cr

iteria

for

the

co

ntex

t or

situ

atio

n.

Inco

rpor

ates

ap

prop

riate

and

or

igin

al c

riter

ia in

a

com

plex

situ

atio

n.

Out

stan

ding

for

the

or

igin

ality

and

su

itabi

lity

of t

he

crite

ria u

tilis

ed in

co

mpl

ex s

ituat

ions

.

An

alys

ing

th

e d

iffe

ren

t co

mp

on

ents

of

a co

mp

lex

situ

atio

n

Mak

es a

n in

com

plet

e or

mis

take

n si

tuat

ion

anal

ysis

.

Dis

tingu

ishe

s th

e di

ffer

ent

com

pone

nts

of a

com

plex

si

tuat

ion.

Esta

blis

hes

rela

tions

hips

bet

wee

n th

e di

ffer

ent

com

pone

nts

of t

he

situ

atio

n.

Dis

cove

rs t

he m

odel

, pa

tter

n, s

yste

m o

r pr

inci

ples

reg

ulat

ing

rela

tions

hips

bet

wee

n co

mpo

nent

s.

Prop

oses

a n

ovel

or

orig

inal

mod

el,

patt

ern,

sys

tem

or

prin

cipl

es f

or t

he

cont

ext.

Co

nst

ruct

ing

a

com

ple

x p

rop

osa

l b

ased

on

ow

n

del

iber

ativ

e p

roce

ss

Form

ulat

es a

n in

com

plet

e or

un

supp

orte

d pr

opos

al.

Dev

ises

a s

uper

ficia

l pr

opos

al d

urin

g de

liber

ativ

e pr

oces

s.

Dev

ises

a c

ompl

ex,

wel

l-fou

nded

pr

opos

al d

urin

g de

liber

ativ

e pr

oces

s.

Con

stru

cts

an

effe

ctiv

e pr

opos

al

base

d on

sol

id

argu

men

ts.

Syst

emat

ises

ow

n pr

opos

al c

lose

ly

cons

ider

ing

the

pros

an

d co

ns.



126

COMPETENCE: TEAM THINKING

Description

Team thinking is a way of working with other people to arrive at shared views. This calls for bringing together and incorporating into one process different ways of thinking. The construction of team thinking is manifested at two levels:

— First, the individual level. Each person incorporates and integrates into his/her own thought processes a number of diverse elements and ways of thinking that would not have been generated other-wise. That is, the person builds, through interaction and dialogue with others, a negotiated knowledge which is subsequently inte-riorised as that person’s own.

— Secondly, at the social level, team thinking enables various people to employ different modes of thinking which, through meetings and dialogue, they negotiate, build and reconstruct into a joint, shared knowledge, thereby creating a community of thought.

Consequently, development of this competence is extremely impor-tant so that people can contribute to the building of knowledge in what-ever groups, organisations and communities to which they belong. This is particularly so in the construction of learning communities where pro-fessional and scientific knowledge is generated and shared.

The indicators for assessing team thinking provide content dimensions that help to examine its development: 1) the recognition of team thinking and its manifestations in diverse situations; 2) evaluation of its contribu-tion to the development of knowledge and therefore to the development of individuals, groups, organisations and communities; 3) building team thinking by expressing one’s own thoughts, analysing and understanding others’ thoughts, and synthesising and integrating individual contribu-tions into shared common thinking; and 4) the application of strategies, techniques and resources that facilitate knowledge management.


Mastery of this competence is closely related, first, to the compe-tences of teamwork, problem-solving and negotiation; and, secondly, to other types of thinking competences, since it requires a combination of different ways of thinking.



127

Development of this competence involves acquiring conceptual, pro-cedural and attitudinal components: 1) recognising the manifestations of team thinking, distinguishing it from particular thinking and one’s own thinking; 2) having something to say and believing that it is worth sharing; 3) skills for conjugating modes of thought; 4) interpersonal skills that make possible the joint construction of knowledge (of communica-tion, interpersonal relations, teamwork and negotiation); and 5) the sys-temic skills (project management, quality and achievement orientation, innovation and enterprising spirit) needed to apply the knowledge gen-erated for the improvement of groups, institutions and contexts where team thinking takes place.


The competence of team thinking is one of the essential pillars of knowledge management and the formation of scientific or professional communities. Therefore, compared to other learning opportunities and scenarios encountered throughout life, universities and the educational period that they represent constitute a privileged space and time for sharing, creating and recreating team thinking and knowledge. A uni-versity is a meeting place designed specifically to generate and share professional and scientific knowledge within a professional and learning community. One of the specific goals of universities is to teach students to think and to think together, through dialogue and the systematic methods devised by scientific and professional communities to produce accepted knowledge.

This shared learning experience should serve as a reference through-out students’ subsequent professional lives, as a learned model for the management of team thinking and knowledge to be applied to the im-provement and development of the organisations and institutions in which they work, live or participate.


The best situations for developing this competence are basically of three types, which also constitute its levels:

— First, fairly simple, familiar situations, where students work on some aspect or component of this competence. These might in-



128

clude: a) identifying manifestations of team thinking in certain situations and cases (their own or others’, real or hypothetical), where they can analyse and appreciate how team thinking helps to improve the situation, so as to better understand the compe-tence and its value; b) situations where students gain practice in some procedural aspect of the competence (expressing, analys-ing and integrating different types of thinking; c) participating in debates and controversies; interpersonal skills of communication, teamwork and negotiation).

— At the second level, students confront situations where they have to use all the components of the competence to under-take a task or project in groups. Development of the compe-tence is especially facilitated when the conditions and structure of the task require co-operative learning, to experience the pos-itive interdependence between members of the group and to develop all kinds of co-operative skills conducive to true team outcomes.

— Finally, a third level of complexity is fostered by situations where students working in groups must address a complex project or problem in their field of knowledge. The situation may be real or simulated, but close to their real work. Moreo-ver, the team outcome of the process must constitute a true contribution to the development of knowledge and profes-sional practice in that field, meaning that the situation must match a systematic work and/or research process based on the proven methods and tools of the scientific and professional community in question. Work that involves applying a research process provides an ideal occasion for developing this compe-tence and experiencing peer group agreement as the basis of scientific knowledge.

These situations enable the lecturer to apply the assessment indica-tors to the performance of the students participating in the joint think-ing of each team. Moreover, by analysing the work they produce, the lecturer can assess whether it is a true team outcome, or merely the sum of particular thoughts. Finally, the reflections and reports of the students themselves on the process followed enable them to become aware of, and explain, the conditions and difficulties encountered, and the strate-gies used to progress from private thoughts to their integration in team thinking. Formative assessment, self-assessment and assessment by oth-ers are essential for fostering progress in this process.



129

COMPETENCE: TEAM THINKING

Definition: This is the mental behaviour that is constructed to-gether with other people in a group, where everyone considers input from all the group’s members in order to respond to a situ-ation with commitment and solidarity.

Mastery of this competence is closely related: to the competences of teamwork, problem-solving and negotiation; and also to com-petences involving other types of thought, since it requires a com-bination of different ways of thinking.

Levels:

1. Identifying and evaluating the manifestations of team thinking in everyday situations, developing attitudes and skills that facili-tate its construction

2. Developing systematic strategies that will generate team think-ing in any working groups in which one is a member

3. Actively promoting the construction of professional team think-ing as the expression of shared analysis of a situation and the search for solutions and projects that will help to improve it

Indicators:

1. Recognising team thinking (as distinguished from one’s own pri-vate thoughts)

2. Constructing team thinking: Expression of one’s own thoughts3. Constructing team thinking: Contrast with others’ thinking4. Constructing team thinking: Search for synthesis and integration5. Evaluation of team thinking and its potential for change



130

Leve

ls o

f M

aste

ryIn

dic

ato

rsD

escr

ipto

rs

12

34

5

Firs

t le

vel o

f m

aste

ry:

Iden

tify

ing

an

d

eval

uat

ing

th

e m

anif

esta

tio

ns

of

team

th

inki

ng

in

ever

yday

sit

uat

ion

s,

dev

elo

pin

g

atti

tud

es a

nd

ski

lls

that

fac

ilita

te it

s co

nst

ruct

ion

Iden

tify

ing

el

emen

ts a

nd

ex

pre

ssio

ns

of

team

th

inki

ng

in o

wn

th

ou

gh

ts

Con

fuse

s ow

n th

inki

ng w

ith o

ther

s’

thou

ghts

.

Dis

tingu

ishe

s w

ith

diff

icul

ty

man

ifest

atio

ns o

f te

am t

hink

ing

in o

wn

thou

ghts

.

Iden

tifie

s so

me

freq

uent

ele

men

ts

and

expr

essi

ons

of

team

thi

nkin

g in

ow

n th

ough

ts.

Iden

tifie

s w

ith

prec

isio

n el

emen

ts

and

expr

essi

ons

of

team

thi

nkin

g in

ow

n th

ough

ts.

Reco

gnis

es t

he

man

ifest

atio

ns o

f te

am t

hink

ing

shap

ing

own

men

talit

y.

Rec

og

nis

ing

m

anif

esta

tio

ns

of

team

th

inki

ng

in

ever

yday

sit

uat

ion

s

Doe

sn’t

dis

tingu

ish

priv

ate

and

team

w

ays

of t

hink

ing

or

elem

ents

in f

amili

ar

situ

atio

ns.

Iden

tifie

s so

me

clea

r m

anife

stat

ions

and

cu

stom

s of

tea

m

thin

king

in n

orm

al

situ

atio

ns.

Reco

gnis

es

man

ifest

atio

ns o

f te

am t

hink

ing

in

norm

al s

ituat

ions

.

Acc

urat

ely

dist

ingu

ishe

s fo

rms

and

man

ifest

atio

ns

of p

rivat

e an

d te

am

thin

king

in n

orm

al

situ

atio

ns.

Reco

gnis

es t

he

man

ifest

atio

ns o

f te

am t

hink

ing

pres

ent

in t

he o

pini

ons

of

othe

r pe

rson

s an

d gr

oups

.

Exp

ress

ing

an

d

def

end

ing

ow

n

thin

kin

g w

ith

cla

rity

an

d a

sser

tive

nes

s

Avo

ids

expr

essi

ng

own

posi

tion

and

thou

ghts

.

Has

diff

icul

ty in

ex

pres

sing

opi

nion

s an

d th

ough

ts w

ith

clar

ity a

nd

asse

rtiv

enes

s.

Cle

arly

exp

ress

es

own

opin

ions

and

th

ough

ts.

Man

ifest

s ow

n op

inio

ns a

nd

thou

ghts

with

cla

rity

and

asse

rtiv

enes

s.

Man

ifest

s ow

n po

sitio

ns w

ith

asse

rtiv

enes

s an

d de

fend

s th

em w

ith

good

arg

umen

ts.

Co

ntr

asti

ng

ow

n

tho

ug

hts

wit

h t

ho

se

of

oth

ers

Avo

ids

cont

rast

ing

own

opin

ions

and

po

sitio

ns w

ith t

hose

of

oth

ers.

Has

diff

icul

ty in

un

ders

tand

ing

the

opin

ions

and

po

sitio

ns o

f ot

hers

.

Com

pare

s an

d co

ntra

sts

own

thou

ghts

with

tho

se

of o

ther

s.

Que

stio

ns o

ther

s to

le

arn

and

unde

rsta

nd

thei

r th

inki

ng a

nd

cont

rast

it w

ith o

wn.

List

ens

to a

nd

cons

ider

s th

e po

sitio

ns

of o

ther

s to

gen

erat

e co

-ope

ratio

n.

Seek

ing

an

d

inte

gra

tin

g d

iver

se

con

trib

uti

on

s

Acc

epts

or

reje

cts

with

out

good

crit

eria

th

ough

ts e

xpre

ssed

by

oth

ers.

Seek

s po

ints

of

enco

unte

r be

twee

n op

inio

ns a

nd

posi

tions

exp

ress

ed.

Iden

tifie

s si

mila

ritie

s an

d di

ffer

ence

s in

op

inio

ns a

nd

posi

tions

exp

ress

ed.

Ana

lyse

s w

ith g

ood

crite

ria th

e im

port

ance

of

and

arg

umen

ts

(fact

s, p

roof

) beh

ind

opin

ions

and

pos

ition

s ex

pres

sed.

Synt

hesi

ses

and

inte

grat

es t

he b

est

cont

ribut

ions

of

each

on

e in

to a

col

lect

ive

opin

ion

or p

ositi

on.

Eval

uat

ing

th

e re

sult

s o

f te

am

thin

kin

g t

o r

esp

on

d

to e

very

day

si

tuat

ion

s

Mai

ntai

ns o

wn

posi

tion

with

out

ente

ring

into

co

ntro

vers

y w

ith

othe

rs.

Doe

sn’t

giv

e re

ason

s fo

r ev

alua

ting

team

vs

. per

sona

l res

ults

fo

r ad

dres

sing

ev

eryd

ay s

ituat

ions

.

Giv

es p

ositi

ve

eval

uatio

n of

the

re

sults

of

team

th

inki

ng f

or e

very

day

situ

atio

ns.

Def

ends

the

val

ue o

f th

e co

ntrib

utio

n of

ot

hers

to

achi

eve

a be

tter

-dev

elop

ed

resu

lt fo

r de

alin

g w

ith

ever

yday

situ

atio

ns.

Giv

es w

ell-s

truc

ture

d ar

gum

ent f

or h

ow

team

thin

king

enr

iche

s bo

th g

roup

out

com

e an

d pe

rson

al

deve

lopm

ent.



131

Leve

ls o

f M

aste

ryIn

dic

ato

rsD

escr

ipto

rs

12

34

5

Seco

nd

leve

l of

mas

tery

:D

evel

op

ing

sy

stem

atic

st

rate

gie

s th

at w

ill

gen

erat

e te

am

thin

kin

g in

an

y w

ork

ing

gro

up

s in

w

hic

h o

ne

is a

m

emb

er

Rec

og

nis

ing

th

e m

anif

esta

tio

ns

of

team

th

inki

ng

in

the

app

roac

h a

nd

u

nd

erta

kin

g o

f g

rou

p w

ork

Con

fuse

s ow

n th

inki

ng w

ith t

hat

of

othe

rs in

gro

up-w

ork

situ

atio

ns.

Onl

y re

cogn

ises

som

e ev

iden

t man

ifest

atio

ns

of te

am th

inki

ng in

gr

oup-

wor

k sit

uatio

ns.

Iden

tifie

s te

am

thin

king

in g

roup

w

ork.

Iden

tifie

s th

e pr

esen

ce a

nd la

ck o

f te

am t

hink

ing

in

grou

p w

ork.

Acc

epts

the

res

ults

of

the

grou

p’s

team

th

inki

ng.

Hel

pin

g t

o c

on

stru

ct

team

th

inki

ng

an

d

wo

rk, m

akin

g

imp

ort

ant

and

re

leva

nt

con

trib

uti

on

s

Giv

es o

pini

on

rega

rdle

ss o

f its

re

leva

nce

to t

he

grou

p ta

sk.

Mak

es c

ontr

ibut

ions

th

at a

re o

nly

slig

htly

re

leva

nt t

o th

e gr

oup

task

.

Con

trib

utes

per

tinen

t op

inio

ns a

nd

prop

osal

s w

ell s

uite

d to

the

gro

up t

ask.

Mak

es v

alua

ble

pers

onal

co

ntrib

utio

ns t

hat

sign

ifica

ntly

enr

ich

the

grou

p pr

ojec

t.

Con

trib

utes

si

gnifi

cant

ly, u

sing

the

co

ntrib

utio

ns o

f ot

hers

.

List

enin

g t

o a

nd

co

nsi

der

ing

th

e th

ou

gh

ts o

f o

ther

m

emb

ers

of

gro

up

Not

inte

rest

ed in

the

po

sitio

ns a

nd m

otiv

es

of o

ther

mem

bers

of

grou

p.

Doe

sn’t

list

en w

ith

atte

ntio

n to

the

op

inio

ns o

f ot

her

mem

bers

of

the

grou

p.

Ask

s an

d lis

tens

to

lear

n an

d un

ders

tand

th

e th

ough

ts a

nd

posi

tions

of

fello

w

grou

p m

embe

rs.

Ask

s se

rious

ly f

or t

he

thou

ghts

of

othe

rs in

or

der

to c

olla

bora

te.

Prom

otes

an

atm

osph

ere

of t

rust

an

d su

ppor

t w

here

all

can

expr

ess

them

selv

es a

nd b

e he

ard.

Seek

ing

co

nse

nsu

s an

d a

gre

emen

t in

si

tuat

ion

s o

f co

ntr

ove

rsy

and

d

iscr

epan

cy

Avo

ids

cont

rove

rsy

and

ratif

ies

own

posi

tions

.

Seek

s ag

reem

ent

with

oth

er m

embe

rs

of t

he g

roup

, but

has

di

ffic

ulty

in f

indi

ng

poin

ts o

f en

coun

ter

betw

een

cont

rove

rsia

l, co

nflic

ting

posi

tions

.

Util

ises

the

co

nver

genc

e of

in

tere

sts

and

crite

ria

betw

een

conf

lictin

g op

inio

ns a

nd

posi

tions

.

Ana

lyse

s di

scre

panc

ies

to c

onst

ruct

sha

red

thou

ght.

Expl

ores

and

in

tegr

ates

con

fluen

ce

and

disc

repa

ncie

s be

twee

n m

embe

rs o

f th

e gr

oup

until

a

com

mon

pos

ition

can

be

rea

ched

.

Val

uin

g t

eam

th

inki

ng

as

an

inst

rum

ent

that

tr

ansf

orm

s th

e th

ou

gh

t an

d a

ctio

ns

of

the

gro

up

Con

side

rs t

eam

th

inki

ng a

s an

im

pose

d im

pera

tive.

Will

ingl

y ac

cept

s w

ith

good

att

itude

the

ta

sk o

f th

inki

ng

toge

ther

.

Giv

es w

ell-j

ustif

ied

eval

uatio

n of

how

te

am t

hink

ing

cont

ribut

es t

o gr

oup

actio

n.

Mod

ifies

per

sona

l po

sitio

ns a

nd p

roje

cts

in a

ccor

danc

e w

ith th

e th

inki

ng g

ener

ated

by

the

grou

p.

Acc

epts

and

pro

mot

es

a co

mm

itmen

t to

te

am t

hink

ing

and

actio

n.



132

Leve

ls o

f M

aste

ryIn

dic

ato

rsD

escr

ipto

rs

12

34

5

Thir

d le

vel o

f m

aste

ry:

Act

ivel

y p

rom

oti

ng

th

e co

nst

ruct

ion

of

pro

fess

ion

al t

eam

th

inki

ng

as

the

exp

ress

ion

of

shar

ed a

nal

ysis

of

a si

tuat

ion

an

d t

he

sear

ch f

or

solu

tio

ns

and

pro

ject

s th

at

will

hel

p t

o im

pro

ve

it

Iden

tify

ing

th

e m

anif

esta

tio

ns

of

team

th

inki

ng

in

pro

fess

ion

al

thin

kin

g

Fails

to

reco

gnis

e te

am t

hink

ing

in t

he

cons

truc

tion

of

prof

essi

onal

kn

owle

dge.

Reco

gnis

es o

nly

som

e m

anife

stat

ions

of

team

thi

nkin

g in

ow

n pr

ofes

sion

al f

ield

.

Reco

gnis

es

man

ifest

atio

ns o

f te

am t

hink

ing

in o

wn

prof

essi

onal

fie

ld.

Reco

gnis

es a

nd

valu

es t

eam

thi

nkin

g as

ess

entia

l to

the

cour

se o

f pr

ofes

sion

al

wor

k.

Prom

otes

tea

m

thin

king

sty

le a

s to

th

e co

urse

of

prof

essi

onal

wor

k an

d to

car

eer

deve

lopm

ent

.

Part

icip

atin

g

acti

vely

in t

he

anal

ysis

of

situ

atio

ns

linke

d t

o

ow

n p

rofe

ssio

nal

fi

eld

Is in

hibi

ted

in

disc

ussi

ng a

naly

ses

of

situ

atio

ns r

elat

ed t

o ow

n pr

ofes

sion

al

field

.

Dis

cuss

es a

naly

ses

of

situ

atio

ns r

elat

ed t

o ow

n pr

ofes

sion

al

field

.

Part

icip

ates

co

nstr

uctiv

ely

in t

he

anal

ysis

of

situ

atio

ns

rela

ted

to o

wn

prof

essi

onal

fie

ld.

Con

trib

utes

ana

lyse

s ba

sed

on s

uppo

rtin

g hy

poth

eses

, fac

ts o

r ev

iden

ce t

hat

cont

ribut

e to

the

co

mpr

ehen

sion

of

situ

atio

ns in

ow

n pr

ofes

sion

al f

ield

.

Con

tras

ts t

he d

iver

se

pers

pect

ives

tha

t an

alys

e an

d co

ntrib

ute

to t

he

com

preh

ensi

on o

f pr

ofes

sion

al

situ

atio

ns.

Co

njo

inin

g t

he

dif

fere

nt

way

s o

f th

inki

ng

exi

stin

g in

th

e g

rou

p t

o r

eso

lve

pro

fess

ion

al t

asks

an

d p

rob

lem

s

Beco

mes

rad

ical

ab

out

own

prof

essi

onal

act

ion

prop

osal

s.

Con

trib

utes

ow

n pr

ofes

sion

al a

ctio

n pr

opos

als

with

out

cons

ider

ing

thos

e of

ot

her

mem

bers

of

the

grou

p.

Take

s in

to a

ccou

nt

the

way

s of

thi

nkin

g ex

iste

nt in

the

gro

up

to f

ind

a so

lutio

n to

a

prob

lem

.

Prop

oses

str

ateg

ies

to

inte

grat

e di

ffer

ent

way

s of

thi

nkin

g to

re

solv

e th

e pr

oble

m

in h

and.

Con

stru

cts

a so

lutio

n th

at in

tegr

ates

the

di

ffer

ent

way

s of

th

inki

ng o

f th

e gr

oup.

Pro

po

sin

g s

trat

egie

s an

d r

eso

urc

es f

or

kno

wle

dg

e m

anag

emen

t in

th

e g

rou

ps

to w

hic

h

on

e b

elo

ng

s

Sees

kno

wle

dge

as

an e

xclu

sive

res

ourc

e of

eac

h in

divi

dual

.

Reco

gnis

es t

acit

know

ledg

e as

a

reso

urce

per

tain

ing

to t

he g

roup

.

Prom

otes

the

ge

nera

tion

of e

xplic

it kn

owle

dge

as a

st

rate

gy f

or

deve

lopi

ng

co-o

pera

tion.

Prop

oses

str

ateg

ies

for

diff

usin

g ex

plic

it kn

owle

dge

and

prom

otin

g co

-ope

ratio

n.

Des

igns

net

wor

k st

ruct

ures

to

shar

e kn

owle

dge

and

gene

rate

co

-ope

ratio

n.

Ap

pre

ciat

ing

th

e co

ntr

ibu

tio

ns

of

team

th

inki

ng

to

th

e d

evel

op

men

t o

f sc

ien

tifi

c kn

ow

led

ge

Doe

s w

ithou

t te

am

thin

king

. M

akes

app

aren

t su

perf

icia

l use

of

team

thi

nkin

g.

Use

s te

am t

hink

ing

to g

ener

ate

know

ledg

e.

App

ropr

iate

ly u

ses

stra

tegi

es o

f te

am

thin

king

to

deve

lop

know

ledg

e.

Cre

ates

orig

inal

tea

m

thin

king

str

ateg

ies

to

gene

rate

kno

wle

dge.



133

COMPETENCE: TIME MANAGEMENT

Description

In the western world as we know it today, more and more people are finding that their scarcest resource is not money, as used to be thought in economic analyses, but time. High ranking among the diseases typical of the developed world are stress-related disorders. The emotional, af-fective, social etc. consequences of the lack of time to attend to family, work, friends, oneself, etc., appear constantly in the news. People are required to undertake more and more activities, and since they cannot perform all of them, it is almost inevitable that they become over-whelmed, live in a constant state of tension and fall prey to illness.

Being able to organise and distribute available time correctly has be-come a requirement not only for one’s own effectiveness, but also and more importantly, for one’s physical and mental health. Managing time means distributing it according to priorities. If we do not become per-sonally involved in organising our time, it will inevitably be others and external circumstances in general who will do so, increasing demands and conditioning what we do and when we do it, with the well-known result that what is urgent will take priority over what is important.

The aim, therefore, is to be able to establish clear priorities for the short-, medium- and long-term, both at work and in one’s personal and social life. We must decide what we are going to do and what we will not, planning how much time we are going to devote to each activity, and endeavouring to fulfil these plans.

Undoubtedly, we are not entirely free to decide how we will spend our time. There are very powerful external constraints that limit our de-cision-making capacity. But it is also true that if we stop to analyse how we spend our available time, we find that we waste much of it. We actu-ally throw away part of our scarcest resource due to lack of organisation and discipline, devoting more time than necessary to some areas to the detriment of others. What is worse, we have a negative influence on others’ distribution of time.


Time management requires capacity for analysis and planning, and therefore a certain prior mastery of the competences of analytical think-ing, practical thinking and planning.



134

Because it is important to manage not only one’s own private time, but also and above all the time we spend on work and interacting with other persons, this competence has very much to do with adaptability, teamwork and negotiation.

Because of its negative consequences, poor time management af-fects the image that we have of ourselves, and gives us the feeling that we are totally dominated and conditioned by circumstances. Sometimes we may even feel incapable of controlling our own lives. As we learn to manage time, these negative sensations begin to disappear. We spend more time and effort on what we consider important, thanks to which we feel better about ourselves. We discover that we are more effective, that we can accomplish more in areas that interest us but which we had neglected (health, social relations, etc.), all of which relates time man-agement to self-motivation and self-esteem.


As far as this competence is concerned, students and professionals differ only in terms of age and type of work. In both cases, it is necessary to distribute time between work, family, social relations, hobbies, par-ticipation in community and leisure activities, etc., and in both cases work tends to take the lion’s share of one’s time.

Striving for success and the competitiveness that this entails are dominant values in today’s society, and this conditions how we actually distribute our time. Students have to decide how much time they are going to spend attending class, studying, doing group work and as-signed work, and how much they will spend on their family and social relations, sports, entertainment, volunteer work and on themselves. When internal and external pressures increase to spend time on student activities (writing long, complex essays, studying for exams, etc.), stu-dents are obliged to lessen the time spent on personal activities, to the detriment of their emotional and social development. When personal life is what dominates (hobbies, sports, affective relationships), study per-formance declines.

For workers, particularly those in positions of responsibility, the situ-ation is the same if not worse, because their standard of living depends on keeping a job and getting promoted, meaning that it is usually per-sonal time that gives way under the demands of work. In both cases, the ability to stop and analyse what we are doing with our time – i.e. with our life – and the capacity to set our own priorities and explicitly plan



135

how time is to be distributed is essential for effectiveness and for freeing ourselves from stress.


In the first place, it is important for students to be aware of the im-portance of managing their time. They must be helped to learn tech-niques for analysing their use of time, for identifying who and what steals time from them, and for planning time use over the short-, medi-um- and long-terms. This planning should be revised by lecturers or tu-tors.

Secondly, academic pressure must stay within the limits established by society. Specifically, academic planning in terms of European credits is a key reference, and establishes that approximately 1600 hours per year is the total time that students should devote to the set of tasks related to the educational process. This calls for good co-ordination among lec-turers to ensure that total programmed activities do not exceed this limit, and to plan these activities week by week.



136

COMPETENCE: TIME MANAGEMENT

Definition: Distributing time wisely according to priorities, tak-ing into account short-, medium- and long-term personal objec-tives and the areas of personal and professional life that one spends most time on.

Mastery of this competence is closely related to: Self-esteem, self-control, control, discipline, respect for rights, rationality, adapta-bility, effectiveness in planning, decision-making, initiative, etc.

Levels of mastery:

1. Establishing objectives and priorities, planning for the short term and sticking to the plan (every day, each week)

2. Defining and ranking objectives and planning individual me-dium- and long-term activity (from a few weeks to a semester)

3. Establishing objectives and priorities, planning for time with oth-ers, and fulfilling this plan

Indicators:

1. Defining objectives2. Setting priorities3. Planning4. Fulfilment.5. Order/Preparation



137

Leve

ls o

f M

aste

ryIn

dic

ato

rsD

escr

ipto

rs

12

34

5

Firs

t le

vel o

f m

aste

ry:

Esta

blis

hin

g

ob

ject

ives

an

d

pri

ori

ties

, pla

nn

ing

fo

r th

e sh

ort

ter

m

and

sti

ckin

g t

o t

he

pla

n (

ever

y d

ay,

each

wee

k)

Cle

arly

def

inin

g t

he

acti

viti

es t

o b

e ac

com

plis

hed

in t

he

sho

rt t

erm

Has

no

expl

icit

shor

t-te

rm o

bjec

tives

.H

is/h

er a

ctiv

ities

m

erel

y co

mpl

y w

ith

wha

t is

ext

erna

lly

requ

ired.

Mak

es w

eekl

y or

da

ily li

st o

f th

e ac

tiviti

es t

hat

he/s

he

is g

oing

to

perf

orm

.

Com

bine

s st

udie

s or

w

ork

with

per

sona

l lif

e (le

isur

e, f

amily

, re

latio

nshi

ps).

Regu

larly

rec

ords

de

gree

of

acco

mpl

ishm

ent

of

activ

ities

.

Sett

ing

pri

ori

ties

am

on

g t

he

task

s to

b

e p

erfo

rmed

eac

h

day

Con

fuse

s pr

iorit

ies

with

des

ires

(put

s w

hat

is e

asy

befo

re

wha

t is

impo

rtan

t).

Has

diff

icul

ty in

di

stin

guis

hing

deg

rees

of

impo

rtan

ce o

r of

ur

genc

y.

Cle

arly

dis

tingu

ishe

s w

hat

is im

port

ant

from

wha

t is

ac

cess

ory.

Rank

s ta

sks

both

by

urge

ncy

and

by

impo

rtan

ce.

Focu

ses

on im

port

ant

task

s, le

avin

g ot

hers

to

be

done

acc

ordi

ng

to e

stab

lishe

d pr

iorit

ies.

Plan

nin

g o

wn

dai

ly

acti

viti

es a

ssig

nin

g

tim

e to

eac

h o

ne

Doe

sn’t

pla

n.

Add

ress

es t

asks

as

they

com

e up

.

Sets

dai

ly g

oals

way

ab

ove

capa

city

to

mee

t th

em. L

ives

un

der

stre

ss.

Dev

otes

tim

e ea

ch

day

to p

lann

ing

the

task

s to

be

done

, as

sign

ing

real

istic

du

ratio

ns.

Plan

ning

incl

udes

tim

e fo

r re

st, t

rave

l an

d co

ntin

genc

ies.

Reco

rds

daily

fu

lfilm

ent

of a

nd

devi

atio

ns f

rom

pl

anne

d sc

hedu

le.

Hab

itu

ally

sti

ckin

g

to p

lan

Oft

en p

uts

off

task

s th

at s

houl

d be

don

e.C

onfu

ses

activ

ity w

ith

resu

lts. K

eeps

bus

y bu

t do

es n

ot f

inis

h w

ork.

Gen

eral

ly c

ompl

etes

ta

sks

prog

ram

med

da

ily a

nd w

eekl

y.

Wor

k tim

e do

es n

ot

incr

ease

at

the

expe

nse

of p

erso

nal

time.

Fulfi

ls p

lan,

val

uing

th

e tim

e in

vest

ed.

Mai

nta

inin

g o

wn

p

aper

s an

d

mat

eria

ls in

ord

er

Is d

isor

derly

. Was

tes

a lo

t of

tim

e lo

okin

g fo

r pa

pers

or

mat

eria

ls.

Cla

ssifi

es a

nd p

uts

thin

gs in

ord

er b

ut

with

poo

r cr

iteria

.

Cla

ssifi

es a

nd p

uts

pape

rs a

nd m

ater

ials

in

ord

er w

ith u

sefu

l cr

iteria

.

At

the

end

of e

ach

task

pic

ks u

p an

d pu

ts a

way

all

mat

eria

ls u

sed.

Mai

ntai

ns a

nd u

pdat

es

a lo

catio

n in

dex

on a

ll im

port

ant

docu

men

ts.



138

Leve

ls o

f M

aste

ryIn

dic

ato

rsD

escr

ipto

rs

12

34

5

Seco

nd

leve

l of

mas

tery

:D

efin

ing

an

d

ran

kin

g o

bje

ctiv

es

and

pla

nn

ing

in

div

idu

al m

ediu

m-

and

lon

g-t

erm

ac

tivi

ty (

fro

m a

few

w

eeks

to

a

sem

este

r)

Cle

arly

def

inin

g

ow

n m

ediu

m-

and

lo

ng

-ter

m o

bje

ctiv

es

Live

s in

the

sho

rt

term

; doe

sn’t

hav

e ex

plic

it m

ediu

m-

or

long

-ter

m o

bjec

tives

.

Sim

ply

acce

pts

the

obje

ctiv

es s

et b

y ot

hers

.

Enum

erat

es a

nd

desc

ribes

ow

n m

ediu

m-

and

long

-ter

m o

bjec

tives

.

His

/her

obj

ectiv

es

incl

ude,

in a

dditi

on t

o w

ork,

ow

n pe

rson

al

and

fam

ily li

fe.

Regu

larl

y re

vise

s ob

ject

ives

and

de

gree

of

achi

evem

ent

in t

he

diff

eren

t ar

eas.

Ran

kin

g o

bje

ctiv

es

acco

rdin

g t

o c

rite

ria

The

easi

est

obje

ctiv

es

to a

ccom

plis

h co

me

first

.

Con

fuse

s pr

iorit

ies

or

utili

ses

only

ext

erna

l cr

iteria

to

esta

blis

h th

em.

Esta

blis

hes

clea

r or

der

of p

riorit

ies

for

own

med

ium

- an

d lo

ng-t

erm

obj

ectiv

es.

Sets

ow

n cr

iteria

for

ra

nkin

g ob

ject

ives

.H

is/h

er im

port

ant

long

-ter

m o

bjec

tives

or

ient

med

ium

- an

d sh

ort-

term

prio

ritie

s.

Plan

nin

g f

or

lon

g-

term

, ass

ign

ing

d

ead

lines

fo

r co

mp

leti

ng

eac

h

ob

ject

ive

Doe

sn’t

pla

n. D

oes

thin

gs o

n ur

genc

y ba

sis.

Plan

ning

too

gen

eral

. Is

too

opt

imis

tic

abou

t de

adlin

es.

Has

a w

ritte

n pl

an

with

beg

inni

ng a

nd

endi

ng d

ates

for

eac

h bl

ock

of a

ctiv

ities

.

Gro

ups

bloc

ks o

f ac

tiviti

es t

o sa

ve t

ime.

His

/her

pla

nnin

g in

clud

es a

ltern

ativ

es

and

poss

ible

re

spon

ses

to

cont

inge

ncie

s.

Fulf

illin

g p

lan

sO

ften

fal

ls b

ehin

d or

do

esn’

t ac

hiev

e ob

ject

ives

.

Mee

ts d

eadl

ines

but

at

the

exp

ense

of

the

qual

ity o

f w

ork

or

infr

ingi

ng o

n ow

n pe

rson

al t

ime.

Ach

ieve

s th

e ob

ject

ives

set

with

su

ffic

ient

qua

lity

and

with

in t

he e

stab

lishe

d de

adlin

es.

Com

bine

s w

ork

times

an

d re

st t

imes

to

incr

ease

pro

duct

ivity

.

Find

s w

ays

of

orga

nisi

ng li

fe t

hat

save

tim

e, a

lway

s ac

com

plis

hing

thi

ngs

with

the

qua

lity

requ

ired.



139

Leve

ls o

f M

aste

ryIn

dic

ato

rsD

escr

ipto

rs

12

34

5

Thir

d le

vel o

f m

aste

ry:

Esta

blis

hin

g

ob

ject

ives

an

d

pri

ori

ties

, pla

nn

ing

fo

r ti

me

wit

h

oth

ers,

an

d

fulf

illin

g t

his

pla

n

Cle

arly

def

inin

g

ob

ject

ives

to

be

reac

hed

du

rin

g

colle

ctiv

e ti

me

(wo

rkin

g g

rou

ps,

m

eeti

ng

s,

inte

rvie

ws,

etc

.)

Con

side

rs t

hat

atte

ndin

g m

eetin

gs is

an

obj

ectiv

e in

its

own

right

.

Part

icip

ates

in

mee

tings

to

whi

ch

calle

d bu

t w

ithou

t sp

ecifi

c pe

rson

al

obje

ctiv

es.

Sets

cle

ar p

erso

nal

and

grou

p ob

ject

ives

fo

r m

eetin

gs.

Cla

rifie

s or

req

uest

s cl

arifi

catio

n on

the

co

ncre

te o

bjec

tives

to

be

met

in

mee

tings

.

Cle

arly

diff

eren

tiate

s th

e ob

ject

ives

to

be

met

indi

vidu

ally

and

th

ose

that

req

uire

co

llect

ive

time.

Esta

blis

hin

g

pri

ori

ties

am

on

g

ob

ject

ives

, in

teg

rati

ng

co

llect

ive

and

in

div

idu

al

ob

ject

ives

His

/her

indi

vidu

al

obje

ctiv

es a

lway

s ta

ke p

riorit

y ov

er

colle

ctiv

e ob

ject

ives

.

Col

lect

ive

obje

ctiv

es

alw

ays

take

prio

rity

over

indi

vidu

al o

nes.

Inte

grat

es c

olle

ctiv

e an

d in

divi

dual

ob

ject

ives

usi

ng g

ood

crite

ria.

Shar

es c

riter

ia f

or

rank

ing

colle

ctiv

e an

d in

divi

dual

ob

ject

ives

.

Agr

ees

the

crite

ria f

or

ratin

g co

llect

ive

and

indi

vidu

al o

bjec

tives

.

Plan

nin

g c

olle

ctiv

e ti

me

His

/her

mee

tings

ha

ve a

sta

rtin

g tim

e bu

t th

eir

dura

tion

is

left

und

ecid

ed.

Tim

es a

ssig

ned

to

colle

ctiv

e ta

sks

not

real

istic

.

His

/her

mee

tings

m

eet

pre-

esta

blis

hed

star

ting

and

endi

ng

times

.

Ass

igns

and

/or

agre

es w

ith o

ther

s th

e am

ount

of

time

to b

e de

vote

d to

ea

ch m

atte

r or

tas

k.

Prop

oses

im

prov

emen

ts (o

ther

w

ays

of o

rgan

isin

g,

chan

ges

in t

he o

rder

of

tas

ks, e

tc.)

to b

e m

ore

effic

ient

.

Fulf

illin

g p

lan

Util

ises

mee

tings

as

a re

st f

rom

wor

k an

d do

esn’

t ca

re h

ow

muc

h tim

e th

ey t

ake.

Was

tes

time

or

allo

ws

it to

be

was

ted

on m

atte

rs

not

on m

eetin

g ag

enda

.

Mak

es s

ure

that

the

bu

sine

ss a

nd

obje

ctiv

es o

f m

eetin

gs a

re

acco

mpl

ishe

d.

Impe

des

usel

ess

digr

essi

ons

and

wor

ks a

ctiv

ely

to

mee

t ob

ject

ives

and

de

adlin

es.

Save

s tim

e by

fa

cilit

atin

g ag

reem

ent

or r

esol

ving

di

ffic

ultie

s.

Mak

ing

ad

equ

ate

pre

par

atio

ns

so

that

co

llect

ive

tim

e is

use

d p

rop

erly

Att

ends

mee

tings

w

ithou

t an

y pr

ior

prep

arat

ion.

Prep

ares

litt

le a

nd

expe

cts

othe

rs t

o m

ake

up f

or o

wn

defic

ienc

ies.

Fulfi

ls p

rior

indi

vidu

al

prep

arat

ion.

C

ontr

ibut

es t

he

resu

lts o

f ow

n w

ork.

Mak

es s

ure

ever

yone

ha

s be

fore

hand

all

the

info

rmat

ion

they

w

ill n

eed

at t

he

mee

ting.

Pres

ents

spe

cific

pr

opos

als

that

are

w

ell a

rgue

d an

d do

cum

ente

d.



140

COMPETENCE: PROBLEM-SOLVING

Description

We speak of the existence of problems when we appreciate differ-ences between the situation as it is now and as we feel it should be, when there is a discrepancy between the current state of affairs and the objectives to be reached, when there is some dysfunction or disorder in what we are dealing with.

In order to address problems adequately, we first must identify them as such, be aware of the dysfunction, discrepancy or difference. This means drawing on diverse knowledge and skills, relating knowledge from differ-ent fields, and updating our view of relations between past situations.

The problem-solving process is based on logic and on the utilisation of a number of properly organised techniques or tools. These techniques do not serve to resolve conflicts. Conflicts are not problems. Likewise, problem-solving techniques do not solve physical or mathematical prob-lems, which must be taken care of by algorithms.

Therefore, a problem is a question that doesn’t have a predefined solution. Moreover, problems must be interesting matters that make one want to solve them, tasks on which one is willing to spend time and ef-fort. Once resolved, it gives a considerable sensation of pleasure to have accomplished the solution. In the very process of searching for solutions and making progress, there are pleasurable components.

In the continuum of developing this competence, we can distinguish three levels of complexity: a first level of proficiency is solving problems by applying knowledge and methods learned in class or in books. Students who, through reflection and experience, develop their own criteria for solving problems reach a second level of proficiency. A more advanced level is reached when individuals are able to propose and develop solu-tions for unusual problems in matters with which they are not familiar.

The criteria for assessing progress in this competence are indicated by the ability to identify problems, to define them, to gather necessary information, to follow a methodology, to develop different alternative solutions and to devise and follow an action plan.


People working on their problem-solving ability exercise different types of thinking, including analytical, systemic and creative thinking.



141

Since problem-solving is often done in groups, the competence of teamwork is also exercised. Problem-solving helps to take a proactive atti-tude toward life and to experience success- and achievement-orientation.

Competence in problem-solving helps to improve self-esteem and is related to values such as giving meaning to life, research and the devel-opment of wisdom and knowledge.

To paraphrase Polya (1945), in all problem-solving there is a bit of discovery.


Problems of greater or lesser importance crop up constantly in the lives of students. Having good criteria for addressing and solving them facili-tates personal growth, self-confidence and control no matter what the circumstances.

Situations exist in reality; problems are creations. Situations become problems when we take them on as a personal challenge and decide to devote time and effort to resolving them.

Solving a problem adds something to what we already knew. It pro-vides new relations between what we already knew or provides us with other points of view concerning familiar situations. Problem-solving helps to spark creativity.

In professional life as well, numerous problems arise and put one’s professionalism and mastery of the field to the test. In positions of re-sponsibility, problem-solving ability is especially important due to the ef-fects on staff of one’s way of dealing with problems. Becoming inhibited or addressing problems unsatisfactorily has important repercussions.

The quality of a good professional is to a large extent measured by his/her capacity to handle complex problems and provide alternatives, the basis for good decision-making. Individual training and proficiency in this competence facilitates a group’s ability to address and solve problems.


Problem-solving ability can be developed in academic work, either through the handling of specific problem situations linked to topics being covered, or through the teaching strategy known as problem-based learning.

To paraphrase Polya (1945) again, by solving problems, the experi-ence acquired as a student may determine one’s taste for intellectual work and make a life-long impression on one’s spirit and character.



142

COMPETENCE: PROBLEM-SOLVING

Definition: Identifying, analysing and defining the significant elements constituting a problem in order to solve it effectively and with good criteria.

Mastery of this competence is closely related to: Vision and out-look on the future, questioning of one’s own paradigms, achieve-ment orientation, analytical and systemic thinking, proactive at-titude, rationality, competence, research, discernment, knowledge, wisdom, etc.

Levels of mastery:

1. Identifying and analysing a problem to generate alternative solu-tions, applying methods learned

2. Using own experience and criteria to analyse the causes of a problem and construct a more efficient, effective solution

3. In teams, proposing and constructing solutions to problems in different fields, with an overall view

Indicators:

1. Identification2. Definition3. Information gathering4. Methodology5. Alternatives6. Action plan



143

Leve

ls o

f M

aste

ryIn

dic

ato

rsD

escr

ipto

rs

12

34

5

Firs

t le

vel o

f m

aste

ry:

Iden

tify

ing

an

d

anal

ysin

g a

pro

ble

m

to g

ener

ate

alte

rnat

ive

solu

tio

ns,

ap

ply

ing

m

eth

od

s le

arn

ed

Iden

tify

ing

wha

t is

an

d is

not

a p

robl

em,

taki

ng t

he d

ecis

ion

to

add

ress

it

Doe

sn’t

pro

perly

di

stin

guis

h pr

oble

m

of c

onfli

ct f

rom

al

gorit

hm.

Has

diff

icul

ty in

di

ffer

entia

ting

betw

een

prob

lem

, co

nflic

t and

alg

orith

m.

Cor

rect

ly id

entif

ies

prob

lem

s,

diff

eren

tiatin

g th

em

from

oth

er s

ituat

ions

.

Out

stan

ding

abi

lity

to

easi

ly id

entif

y w

here

a

prob

lem

lies

.

Iden

tifie

s pr

oble

ms

with

eas

e an

d is

abl

e to

say

why

or

how

he/

she

does

it.

Rea

din

g a

nd

/or

liste

nin

g a

ctiv

ely.

A

skin

g q

ues

tio

ns

to

def

ine

the

pro

ble

m

in h

and

Doe

sn’t

res

pond

to

the

prob

lem

.A

sks

som

e ap

prop

riate

qu

estio

ns to

def

ine

the

prob

lem

.

Ask

s ap

prop

riate

qu

estio

ns t

o de

fine

the

prob

lem

.

Is q

uick

to

ask

ques

tions

to

defin

e a

prob

lem

.

Form

ulat

es k

ey

ques

tions

to

defin

e th

e pr

oble

m a

nd

eval

uate

its

impo

rtan

ce.

Gat

heri

ng s

igni

fica

nt

info

rmat

ion

to

reso

lve

prob

lem

s us

ing

fact

s an

d no

t on

ly s

ubje

ctiv

e op

inio

ns, f

ollo

win

g a

logi

cal m

etho

d of

in

form

atio

n an

alys

is

Doe

sn’t

gat

her

info

rmat

ion

or t

he

info

rmat

ion

gath

ered

is

not

sig

nific

ant.

Gat

hers

sig

nific

ant

info

rmat

ion,

but

so

met

imes

in

com

plet

e, a

nd

does

n’t

alw

ays

follo

w

a m

etho

d of

ana

lysi

s.

Gat

hers

the

in

form

atio

n ne

eded

an

d an

alys

es it

co

rrec

tly.

Acc

urat

ely

sele

cts

valu

able

info

rmat

ion

and

anal

yses

it

syst

emat

ical

ly.

Effic

ient

ly g

athe

rs

sign

ifica

nt

info

rmat

ion

and

anal

yses

it w

ith a

go

od m

etho

d,

cont

ribut

ing

thou

ghts

.

Follo

win

g a

log

ical

m

eth

od

to

iden

tify

th

e ca

use

s o

f a

pro

ble

m r

ath

er t

han

ju

st t

he

sym

pto

ms

Fails

to

iden

tify

the

caus

es o

f th

e pr

oble

m. C

onfu

ses

caus

es w

ith

sym

ptom

s.

Iden

tifie

s so

me

caus

es, i

n ot

hers

onl

y th

e sy

mpt

oms.

Iden

tifie

s th

e ca

uses

of

a p

robl

em,

follo

win

g a

logi

cal

met

hod.

Iden

tifie

s an

d ra

nks

the

caus

es o

f a

prob

lem

.

Follo

ws

a lo

gica

l pr

oces

s to

iden

tify

caus

es, i

nteg

ratin

g th

em in

to a

mod

el.

Pres

enti

ng

dif

fere

nt

op

tio

ns

for

alte

rnat

ive

solu

tio

ns

to a

sin

gle

pro

ble

m,

and

eva

luat

ing

th

e p

oss

ible

ris

ks a

nd

ad

van

tag

es o

f ea

ch

Doe

sn’t

pre

sent

al

tern

ativ

es.

Occ

asio

nally

pre

sent

s al

tern

ativ

es.

Pres

ents

som

e al

tern

ativ

es a

nd s

ome

pros

and

con

s.

Pres

ents

a g

ood

anal

ysis

of

avai

labl

e al

tern

ativ

e so

lutio

ns.

Cho

oses

the

bes

t al

tern

ativ

e, b

ased

on

anal

ysis

of

the

diff

eren

t op

tions

.

Des

ign

ing

a p

lan

of

acti

on

fo

r ap

ply

ing

th

e ch

ose

n s

olu

tio

n

Doe

sn’t

cho

ose

a so

lutio

n or

pro

pose

s on

e th

at is

illo

gica

l.

Cho

oses

a s

olut

ion

but

does

n’t

plan

ap

plic

atio

n.

Spec

ifies

the

ste

ps t

o ta

ke in

app

lyin

g th

e so

lutio

n th

at h

e/sh

e ha

s ch

osen

.

Cho

oses

a g

ood

solu

tion

and

desi

gns

the

plan

of

actio

n fo

r ap

plyi

ng it

.

Out

stan

ding

for

ch

oice

of

solu

tion

and

for

the

desi

gn o

f th

e pl

an o

f ac

tion.



144

Leve

ls o

f M

aste

ryIn

dic

ato

rsD

escr

ipto

rs

12

34

5

Seco

nd

leve

l of

mas

tery

:U

sin

g o

wn

ex

per

ien

ce a

nd

cr

iter

ia t

o a

nal

yse

the

cau

ses

of

a p

rob

lem

an

d

con

stru

ct a

mo

re

effi

cien

t, e

ffec

tive

so

luti

on

Reco

gnis

ing

a co

mpl

ex p

robl

em a

nd

bein

g ab

le t

o br

eak

it do

wn

into

m

anag

eabl

e pa

rts

Is u

nabl

e to

han

dle

com

plex

pro

blem

s.H

as d

iffic

ulty

in

seei

ng a

nd a

naly

sing

th

e co

mpl

exity

of

a pr

oble

m, d

oesn

’t

man

age

to b

reak

it

dow

n in

to

man

agea

ble

part

s.

Iden

tifie

s co

mpl

ex

prob

lem

s, a

naly

ses

them

and

sub

divi

des

them

into

m

anag

eabl

e pa

rts.

Mak

es a

goo

d an

alys

is t

hat

incl

udes

pr

iorit

ies

and

brea

ks

dow

n th

e pr

oble

m

into

man

agea

ble

part

s.

Has

com

preh

ensi

ve

view

, bril

liant

ly

reco

gnis

es t

he p

arts

of

the

pro

blem

and

ho

w t

hey

are

rela

ted.

Con

tras

ting

sour

ces

of in

form

atio

n an

d ha

ndlin

g fa

cts

rigor

ousl

y

Doe

sn’t

wor

ry a

bout

th

e rig

orou

snes

s of

in

form

atio

n.

Nee

ds h

elp

in

chec

king

rel

iabi

lity

of

sour

ces

of

info

rmat

ion

and

stre

ngth

of

fact

s.

The

fact

s he

/she

use

s ar

e rig

orou

s an

d co

me

from

tr

ustw

orth

y so

urce

s.

Han

dles

har

d fa

cts

and

know

s ho

w t

o m

anag

e co

nflic

ting

info

rmat

ion

from

di

ffer

ent

sour

ces.

Prov

ides

not

ewor

thy

anal

ysis

of c

onfli

ctin

g in

form

atio

n dr

awn

from

diff

eren

t sou

rces

, an

d ev

en c

ontr

ibut

es

new

sou

rces

.

Hav

ing

a m

etho

d of

an

alys

is f

or id

entif

ying

el

usiv

e un

derly

ing

caus

es a

nd e

valu

atin

g th

eir

impa

ct o

n pr

oble

ms

Mak

es d

efic

ient

an

alys

es o

f ca

uses

.Id

entif

ies

caus

es, b

ut

still

doe

sn’t

eva

luat

e th

eir

impa

ct o

n pr

oble

ms.

Cor

rect

ly f

ollo

ws

a m

etho

d to

iden

tify

caus

es a

nd e

valu

ate

thei

r im

pact

.

Prov

ides

a g

ood

met

hod

of a

naly

sis

for

iden

tifyi

ng c

ause

s.

In a

dditi

on to

pro

vidi

ng

a go

od m

etho

d of

an

alys

is f

or id

entif

ying

ca

uses

, eva

luat

es t

heir

impa

ct w

ith

com

preh

ensi

ve v

iew

.

Pres

entin

g so

lutio

n op

tions

tha

t ar

e m

ost

ofte

n ef

fect

ive

for

reso

lvin

g pr

oble

ms.

Doe

sn’t

pre

sent

any

so

lutio

ns.

Pres

ents

sol

utio

ns,

but

they

are

not

ef

fect

ive.

Pres

ents

mor

e th

an

one

effe

ctiv

e al

tern

ativ

e so

lutio

n.

Pres

ents

arr

ay o

f op

tions

with

eff

ectiv

e so

lutio

ns.

The

optio

ns p

ropo

sed

feat

ure

dive

rsity

, rig

or

and

inte

rnal

logi

c.

Hav

ing

good

crit

eria

fo

r ch

oosi

ng b

etw

een

alte

rnat

ive

solu

tions

Lack

s cr

iteria

. Doe

sn’t

kn

ow h

ow t

o ju

stify

hi

s/he

r de

cisi

on.

Util

ises

crit

eria

in

appr

opria

tely.

Cor

rect

ly u

tilis

es t

he

crite

ria o

ffer

ed f

or

choo

sing

a s

olut

ion.

App

lies

the

mos

t ap

prop

riate

crit

eria

fo

r w

eigh

ing

optio

ns

and

choo

sing

the

rig

ht s

olut

ion.

Dev

elop

s ow

n cr

iteria

th

at le

ad t

o se

lect

ing

the

best

of

alte

rnat

ive

solu

tions

.

Dev

isin

g a

real

istic

pl

an o

f ac

tion

and

follo

w-u

p fo

r ap

plyi

ng

the

solu

tion

Doe

sn’t

dev

ise

a re

alis

tic p

lan

of

actio

n.

His

/her

pla

n of

act

ion

is r

ealis

tic b

ut la

cks

a fo

llow

-up

plan

.

His

/her

pla

n of

act

ion

is r

ealis

tic a

nd

incl

udes

a f

ollo

w-u

p pl

an.

His

/her

pla

n of

act

ion

and

follo

w-u

p pl

an

note

wor

thy

for

thei

r qu

ality

.

Not

ewor

thy

for

the

qual

ity o

f hi

s/he

r pl

an

of a

ctio

n an

d fo

llow

-up

pla

n. F

ores

ees

cont

inge

ncy

plan

s.



145

Leve

ls o

f M

aste

ryIn

dic

ato

rsD

escr

ipto

rs

12

34

5

Thir

d le

vel o

f m

aste

ry:

In t

eam

s, p

rop

osi

ng

an

d c

on

stru

ctin

g

solu

tio

ns

to

pro

ble

ms

in

dif

fere

nt

fiel

ds,

w

ith

co

mp

reh

ensi

ve

view

Fore

seei

ng

pro

ble

ms

bef

ore

th

eir

effe

cts

bec

om

e ev

iden

t

Lack

s fo

resi

ght

in

iden

tifyi

ng p

robl

ems.

Has

diff

icul

ty in

fo

rese

eing

pro

blem

s if

thei

r ef

fect

is n

ot

evid

ent.

Fore

sees

the

pos

sibl

e ex

iste

nce

of

prob

lem

s.

Iden

tifie

s pr

oble

ms

ahea

d of

tim

e,

anal

ysin

g an

d pr

iorit

isin

g th

em.

Hea

ds o

ff p

robl

ems

by id

entif

ying

the

m

ahea

d of

tim

e.

An

alys

ing

pro

ble

ms

and

th

eir

cau

ses

thro

ug

h a

n o

vera

ll,

med

ium

- an

d lo

ng

-te

rm a

pp

roac

h

Con

fron

ts p

robl

ems

with

out

an a

ppro

ach.

App

roac

h is

par

tial o

r fo

r th

e sh

ort

term

on

ly.

Has

an

over

all

med

ium

- an

d lo

ng-

term

vie

w o

f th

e pr

oble

m.

Focu

ses

on t

he

solu

tion

of p

robl

ems

fore

seei

ng t

heir

cons

eque

nces

.

Not

ewor

thy

for

exce

llent

ana

lysi

s of

th

e pr

oble

m a

nd it

s so

lutio

n.

Dir

ecti

ng

th

e sy

stem

atic

pro

cess

o

f w

ork

ing

to

war

d

dec

isio

n-m

akin

g in

th

e g

rou

p

The

wor

king

pr

oces

ses

follo

wed

ar

e no

t sy

stem

atic

or

adeq

uate

for

gro

up

deci

sion

-mak

ing.

Follo

ws

but

does

not

di

rect

the

pro

cess

.D

irect

s in

org

anis

ed

way

the

app

roac

h an

d pr

oble

m-s

olvi

ng

proc

ess

in t

he g

roup

.

Take

s th

e in

itiat

ive

in

dire

ctin

g th

e ap

proa

ch a

nd

prob

lem

-sol

ving

pr

oces

s in

the

gro

up.

Cre

ativ

ely

dire

cts,

w

ith t

he c

onse

nt a

nd

trus

t of

fel

low

m

embe

rs, t

he

appr

oach

and

pr

oble

m-s

olvi

ng

proc

ess

in t

he g

roup

.

Tran

sfer

rin

g

lear

nin

g f

rom

cl

assr

oo

m e

xerc

ises

an

d c

ases

to

rea

l si

tuat

ion

s in

oth

er

fiel

ds

Stic

ks t

o sp

ecifi

cs, t

o th

e “h

ere

and

now

”.N

eeds

gui

danc

e to

tr

ansf

er le

arni

ng t

o ot

her

field

s.

Tran

sfer

s th

e ap

proa

ch le

arne

d to

si

tuat

ions

in o

ther

fie

lds

of a

ctio

n.

Con

fron

ts r

eal

situ

atio

ns in

oth

er

field

s ut

ilisi

ng p

rior

lear

ning

whi

ch h

e/sh

e ge

nera

lises

and

in

terr

elat

es.

Out

stan

ding

for

ab

ility

to

deal

eas

ily

with

rea

l situ

atio

ns in

al

l fie

lds,

cre

ativ

ely

utili

sing

prio

r le

arni

ng.

Ob

tain

ing

th

e n

eces

sary

su

pp

ort

o

f o

ther

s to

bac

k ac

tio

ns

and

hav

e su

ffic

ien

t al

lies

for

the

succ

ess

of

his

/h

er d

ecis

ion

s

Doe

sn’t

mak

e al

lies.

Obt

ains

sup

port

but

it

is in

suff

icie

nt t

o ca

rry

deci

sion

s.

Obt

ains

the

sup

port

of

mem

bers

of

the

grou

p to

car

ry o

ut

the

plan

s of

act

ion

desi

gned

for

pr

oble

m-s

olvi

ng.

Obt

ains

sup

port

of

allie

s ou

tsid

e th

e gr

oup

to e

nsur

e su

cces

s of

the

de

cisi

ons

take

n.

Is r

ecog

nise

d fo

r hi

s/he

r ab

ility

to

orga

nise

and

m

anag

e th

ings

at

the

inte

rgro

up le

vel t

o en

sure

suc

cess

of

the

deci

sion

s ta

ken

by

the

grou

p.



146

COMPETENCE: DECISION-MAKING

Description

All students and professionals need to take decisions. However, what generally characterises people at the highest levels of a job or profession is the nature and importance of the decisions they must take. Society expects university graduates to be able to take appropriate decisions in the most complex and important contexts and fields, in full awareness of and attention to the scope and consequences of their decisions.

The competence of decision-making consists, basically, in being able to choose the best course of action. Development of this competence leads to taking quality decisions systematically, making good use of the potential offered by technology, and standing behind decisions once taken, with commitment.


This competence is related to numerous educational factors. Many facets of the individual are marshalled in taking decisions, and therefore are conditioning factors. That is, the competences of analytical, systemic and critical thinking, and the ability to solve problems form a first basis for good decision-making. Oral and written communication skills are also important for conveying accurately and without mistaken interpre-tations the decision adopted. Moreover, the best decisions are adopted by people who have good capacities for innovation, objectives-based management, leadership, self-motivation and self-esteem. Finally, the competence of decision-making will fail if it is not accompanied by ethi-cal commitment. Therefore, decision-making is based on a combination of knowledge, techniques and procedures, as well as complementary attitudes and values.


Taking decisions is present everywhere in people’s lives. From a very early age we begin to take decisions and never stop doing so throughout our lives. It is a capacity that we develop with more or less success. In the academic and professional worlds, people must also take decisions very frequently.



147

Many academic specialisations offer guidance on how to take deci-sions in certain very specific types of situations in order to deal with well-defined problems. This happens for example in medicine, engineering, education, psychology, law, etc. However, a course of studies frequently lacks training focused on the general, core competence of decision-mak-ing that cuts across fields and is transferable to unforeseen situations. Sometimes university graduates are well prepared to take decisions in certain types of specific situations on the job, but they feel disoriented or insecure when they must take a decision in a new, unforeseen context or when unfamiliar complexity arises.

All fields of work are full of this type of unexpected situation. Be-cause of ongoing scientific, technological, cultural and social progress, university graduates will have to confront situations in their professional life that were not covered or even imagined during their studies. The overworked phrase, “They never taught me this at university” comes to graduates’ minds when they have to take a decision outside what they were led to expect in class. Therefore, together with training in decision-making in well-defined situations that are specific and proper to the field, students must spend time on generic training in decision-making. The idea is for them to become able to utilise this competence particu-larly in unforeseen situations before graduating.

Both in academic and professional settings, decisions are frequently taken with excessive impulsiveness, on unsolid grounds based mostly on intuitions, rumour, prejudice, unfounded suppositions, etc. A good number of such decisions – those that are taken without luck on their side – will very likely have negative consequences. Therefore, time and effort spent on this competence is well justified.


The three levels of indicators correspond to three types of graded situations: everyday individual decision-making, decision-making in col-laboration with others, and more difficult decision-making. To apply this therefore, we must identify or promote situations where students will have to take individual, shared or more difficult decisions.

At the first level, the focus will be on the quality of the individual decision, meaning how systematic and based on facts and information it is, with what assurance it is adopted, and the use of computer skills in taking the decision. At the second level the indicators focus on the abil-ity to adopt group decisions, standing by the decision and contributing



148

to the systematicity and grounds for decisions taken collectively. At the third level, attention is paid to students’ capacity to make good decisions even in difficult situations, where the decision might have important consequences. The indicators focus on the assurance, logic and systema-ticity with which decisions are taken, and, where applicable, the good use made of computer skills and technology for this type of challenge.



149

COMPETENCE: DECISION-MAKING

Definition: Choosing the best course of action, following a sys-tematic process and assuming responsibility for the scope and con-sequences of the option taken.

Mastery of this competence is closely related to: Analytical think-ing, critical thinking, systemic thought, problem-solving ability, oral and written communication, ethical commitment, objectives-based management, innovation, leadership, self-motivation, self-esteem, self-fulfilment.

Levels of mastery:

1. Applying systematic methods to take good personal decisions with logic and assurance

2. Collaborating with others in taking group decisions of quality3. Showing assurance and initiative in taking good responsible de-

cisions in difficult situations

Indicators:

1. Quality 2. Systematicity3. Incorporation of technology4. Commitment 5. Logic



150

Leve

ls o

f M

aste

ryIn

dic

ato

rsD

escr

ipto

rs

12

34

5

Firs

t le

vel o

f m

aste

ry:

Ap

ply

ing

sys

tem

atic

m

eth

od

s to

tak

e g

oo

d p

erso

nal

d

ecis

ion

s w

ith

log

ic

and

ass

ura

nce

Taki

ng

go

od

d

ecis

ion

s b

ased

on

fa

cts

Take

s po

or d

ecis

ions

.D

oesn

’t t

ake

the

best

de

cisi

ons.

Take

s go

od d

ecis

ions

.Q

uick

ly t

akes

goo

d de

cisi

ons.

Not

ewor

thy

for

taki

ng

good

dec

isio

ns in

ow

n da

ily c

ondu

ct.

Taki

ng

dec

isio

ns

wit

h a

ssu

ran

ceG

ets

bloc

ked

in

deci

sion

-mak

ing.

Is in

secu

re a

bout

ta

king

dec

isio

ns.

Take

s de

cisi

ons

with

as

sura

nce.

Ta

kes

deci

sion

s an

d kn

ows

how

to

just

ify

them

.

Not

ewor

thy

for

the

assu

ranc

e th

at h

e/sh

e ha

s an

d co

nvey

s in

ta

king

dec

isio

ns.

Mak

ing

log

ical

d

ecis

ion

s in

ow

n

dai

ly li

fe

Use

s po

or lo

gic

in

taki

ng d

ecis

ions

.So

met

imes

lack

s lo

gic

in t

akin

g de

cisi

ons.

Is lo

gica

l in

deci

sion

-m

akin

g in

nor

mal

da

ily li

fe.

In d

iffic

ult

situ

atio

ns

show

s lo

gic

in

deci

sion

-mak

ing.

Show

s ou

tsta

ndin

g lo

gic

in t

akin

g de

cisi

ons.

Sho

win

g m

eth

od

an

d s

yste

mat

icit

y w

hen

tak

ing

d

ecis

ion

s

Not

ver

y or

gani

sed

whe

n ta

king

de

cisi

ons.

Org

anis

es

deci

sion

-mak

ing,

but

w

ithou

t fin

ding

a

good

met

hod

for

doin

g so

.

Met

hod

and

syst

emat

icity

ap

pare

nt w

hen

taki

ng d

ecis

ions

.

Puts

into

pra

ctic

e ow

n sy

stem

s th

at

faci

litat

e de

cisi

on-m

akin

g.

App

lies

inno

vativ

e m

etho

dolo

gies

or

syst

ems

that

fac

ilita

te

deci

sion

-mak

ing.

Ap

ply

ing

co

mp

ute

r sk

ills

to

dec

isio

n-m

akin

g

Doe

sn’t

kno

w h

ow

to u

se t

echn

ical

or

tech

nolo

gica

l re

sour

ces

in t

he

deci

sion

-mak

ing

proc

ess.

Use

s co

mpu

ter

in

own

deci

sion

-mak

ing

whe

n ob

liged

to.

Util

ises

com

pute

rs o

n ow

n in

itiat

ive

for

deci

sion

-mak

ing.

Inte

grat

es t

he u

se o

f va

rious

com

pute

r re

sour

ces

in

deci

sion

-mak

ing.

Is v

ery

inge

niou

s in

in

corp

orat

ing

com

pute

r pr

ogra

mm

es a

nd

reso

urce

s in

ow

n de

cisi

on-m

akin

g.



151

Leve

ls o

f M

aste

ryIn

dic

ato

rsD

escr

ipto

rs

12

34

5

Seco

nd

leve

l of

mas

tery

:C

olla

bo

rati

ng

wit

h

oth

ers

in t

akin

g

gro

up

dec

isio

ns

of

qu

alit

y

Taki

ng

go

od

d

ecis

ion

s w

hen

w

ork

ing

wit

h o

ther

s

Take

s de

cisi

ons

behi

nd t

he g

roup

.Is

pas

sive

in g

roup

de

cisi

on-m

akin

g.Ta

kes

good

dec

isio

ns

whe

n w

orki

ng w

ith

othe

rs.

Shar

es w

ith o

ther

s co

ncer

n fo

r ta

king

qu

ality

dec

isio

ns.

Take

s th

e in

itiat

ive

in

achi

evin

g te

am

deci

sion

-mak

ing.

Sho

win

g a

ssu

ran

ce

in g

rou

p

dec

isio

n-m

akin

g

Bloc

ks t

he g

roup

with

in

secu

rity

in g

roup

de

cisi

on-m

akin

g.

Is in

deci

sive

whe

n ha

ving

to

take

gro

up

deci

sion

s.

Show

s as

sura

nce

in g

roup

de

cisi

on-m

akin

g.

Con

trib

utes

with

ow

n an

alys

is t

o ta

king

a d

ecis

ion

that

is

con

sist

ent

with

the

th

inki

ng o

f th

e gr

oup.

Enth

uses

oth

ers

with

ow

n as

sura

nce

whe

n ta

king

dec

isio

ns in

gr

oup.

Bei

ng

log

ical

wh

en

taki

ng

dec

isio

ns

in a

g

rou

p

Indu

ces

the

grou

p to

ta

ke il

logi

cal

deci

sion

s.

Scar

cely

con

trib

utes

to

logi

c in

de

cisi

on-m

akin

g.

Supp

orts

logi

cal

deci

sion

-mak

ing

in

the

grou

p.

Ow

n pr

opos

als

help

to

ens

ure

the

logi

c of

th

e de

cisi

ons

take

n by

his

/her

tea

m.

Hel

ps t

he g

roup

to

clos

ely

anal

yse

the

logi

c in

gro

up

deci

sion

-mak

ing.

Follo

win

g a

d

ecis

ion

-mak

ing

sy

stem

wh

en

wo

rkin

g in

a g

rou

p

Enco

urag

es t

he

grou

p to

tak

e de

cisi

ons

in a

ha

phaz

ard

way

.

Doe

sn’t

par

ticip

ate

in

the

syst

emat

ics

of

deci

sion

-mak

ing

char

acte

risin

g th

e gr

oup.

Follo

ws

the

syst

emat

ics

of

deci

sion

-mak

ing

whe

n w

orki

ng in

gr

oup.

Take

s th

e in

itiat

ive

and

conv

ince

s ot

hers

w

ith t

he s

yste

mat

ics

empl

oyed

in

deci

sion

-mak

ing.

Is c

reat

ive

in

intr

oduc

ing

and

deve

lopi

ng n

ew

met

hodo

logi

es o

f te

am d

ecis

ion-

mak

ing.

Inco

rpo

rati

ng

o

rgan

ised

p

rog

ram

mes

fo

r ta

kin

g g

rou

p

dec

isio

ns

Is a

gain

st u

sing

te

chni

cal r

esou

rces

in

taki

ng g

roup

de

cisi

ons.

Sim

ply

acce

pts

the

appl

icat

ion

of

tech

nolo

gica

l re

sour

ces

to g

roup

de

cisi

on-m

akin

g.

Part

icip

ates

in t

he

inco

rpor

atio

n of

pr

ogra

mm

es

desi

gned

to

faci

litat

e de

cisi

on-m

akin

g.

Co-

ordi

nate

s th

e ac

tion

of t

he g

roup

w

hen

inco

rpor

atin

g te

chno

logi

es in

to

deci

sion

-mak

ing.

Take

s th

e in

itiat

ive

in in

nova

tion

appl

ied

to g

roup

de

cisi

on-m

akin

g.



152

Leve

ls o

f M

aste

ryIn

dic

ato

rsD

escr

ipto

rs

12

34

5

Thir

d le

vel o

f m

aste

ry:

Sho

win

g a

ssu

ran

ce

and

init

iati

ve in

ta

kin

g g

oo

d,

resp

on

sib

le

dec

isio

ns

in d

iffi

cult

si

tuat

ion

s

Taki

ng

dec

isio

ns

of

qu

alit

y in

dif

ficu

lt

situ

atio

ns

Take

s po

or d

ecis

ions

in

diff

icul

t si

tuat

ions

.H

is/h

er d

ecis

ions

are

no

t th

e be

st in

di

ffic

ult

situ

atio

ns.

Take

s go

od d

ecis

ions

, ev

en w

hen

delic

ate.

Kee

ps c

alm

whe

n m

akin

g ha

rd d

ecis

ions

an

d ba

ses

them

on

avai

labl

e fa

cts.

Is h

ighl

y ef

fect

ive

taki

ng g

ood

deci

sion

s in

diff

icul

t si

tuat

ions

.

Sho

win

g a

ssu

ran

ce

in t

akin

g d

iffi

cult

d

ecis

ion

s

Relu

ctan

t to

tak

e de

licat

e de

cisi

ons.

Is in

secu

re w

hen

taki

ng d

elic

ate

deci

sion

s.

Show

s as

sura

nce

in

taki

ng d

iffic

ult

deci

sion

s.

Is a

ble

to t

ake

delic

ate

deci

sion

s w

ith a

nat

ural

m

anne

r, co

nvey

ing

assu

ranc

e to

oth

ers.

Show

s an

d in

spire

s gr

eat

assu

ranc

e in

ta

king

del

icat

e de

cisi

ons,

exp

lain

ing

inhe

rent

lim

itatio

ns.

Sho

win

g lo

gic

in

taki

ng

dec

isio

ns

that

req

uir

e co

mm

itm

ent

Take

s ill

ogic

al

deci

sion

s in

diff

icul

t si

tuat

ions

.

Take

s fa

irly

illog

ical

de

cisi

ons

in d

elic

ate

situ

atio

ns.

Take

s de

licat

e de

cisi

ons

with

logi

c.

Just

ifies

the

logi

c of

hi

s/he

r de

cisi

ons

in

diff

icul

t si

tuat

ions

.

Take

s de

licat

e de

cisi

ons

with

logi

c,

expl

aini

ng a

nd

adm

ittin

g in

here

nt

limita

tions

.

Bei

ng

sys

tem

atic

w

hen

tak

ing

d

elic

ate

dec

isio

ns

Lack

s m

etho

d fo

r ta

king

del

icat

e de

cisi

ons.

Som

etim

es is

di

sord

erly

whe

n ta

king

dec

isio

ns t

hat

requ

ire c

omm

itmen

t.

Is s

yste

mat

ic in

way

of

tak

ing

delic

ate

deci

sion

s.

Org

anis

atio

n in

ta

king

diff

icul

t de

cisi

ons

quite

no

tew

orth

y.

Take

s th

e in

itiat

ive

and

know

s ho

w t

o co

nvin

ce o

ther

s to

fo

llow

sys

tem

atic

m

etho

d in

tak

ing

diff

icul

t de

cisi

ons.

Fin

din

g w

ays

to

app

ly t

ech

no

log

y w

hen

tak

ing

d

ecis

ion

s re

qu

irin

g

hig

h d

egre

e o

f co

mm

itm

ent

Is a

gain

st u

sing

te

chni

cal r

esou

rces

in

taki

ng d

iffic

ult

deci

sion

s.

Onl

y ac

cept

s th

e ap

plic

atio

n of

te

chno

logi

cal

reso

urce

s to

dec

isio

n-m

akin

g th

at r

equi

res

com

mitm

ent.

Find

s w

ays

of

appl

ying

tec

hnol

ogy

whe

n ha

ving

to

take

de

cisi

ons

that

req

uire

co

mm

itmen

t.

Inte

grat

es t

he u

se o

f va

rious

com

pute

r re

sour

ces

in t

akin

g di

ffic

ult

deci

sion

s.

Is in

nova

tive

in

appl

ying

tec

hnol

ogy

to t

he t

akin

g of

di

ffic

ult

deci

sion

s,

usin

g va

rious

co

mpu

ter

prog

ram

mes

and

to

ols.



153

COMPETENCE: LEARNING ORIENTATION

Description

The convergence and creation of a European Higher Education Area is much more than a formal process; it involves a major transformation of the current teaching-learning model. Because of rapid changes in employ-ment, academic syllabuses in every field must be a means by which other things can be taught and learned so that students can function effectively in today’s knowledge society. With the increasing importance of lifelong learning, universities must offer their students an education that will en-sure their ability to function effectively as citizens and workers in society.

A ‘knowledge-based society’ is also a ‘learning society’. This idea is closely linked to a view where all education is seen in a broader context – i.e. lifelong continuous learning, where individuals must be able to handle knowledge, update it, select what is appropriate for a specific context, learn permanently, and understand what is learned, so that they can adapt it to new, rapidly changing situations. (Villa 2003: 4)

We say that students have developed competence in learning orien-tation when they show that they can use learning strategically and flex-ibly according to the objective pursued, based on recognition of the learning system and awareness of learning itself. The UD considers that these new aims and context call for a special approach that will promote learning orientation in all students.

This approach starts with a constructivist view in which learning is seen as a progressive process of growth, development and adaptation, occurring as a result of the active building that people do in their interac-tions with their surroundings. That is, learning does not arise spontane-ously as the result of growing older or maturing, nor is it passively ab-sorbed from the environment. Instead, two basic and complementary processes are emphasised so that learning can take place – the active and significant construction of knowledge by the person who is learn-ing, and his/her interaction with the environment that fosters and makes it possible. Learning at university is moreover intentional learning.


This is an instrumental competence, since it is basic to the acquisition and development of other competences and learning. However, apart from its overlap with other instrumental skills (types of thinking and



154

methodologies for developing quality strategies and learning), mastery of this competence is also related to attitudes, values and interpersonal competences, fundamentally individual, but also social: self-assurance and maturity, capacity for self-criticism, frustration tolerance, flexibility, adapting to changing situations. Life-long orientation to learning over-laps very well with the competences of self-motivation and adaptability; and, from a more systemic point of view, with the competences of en-terprise (creativity, innovation and enterprising spirit).


It used to be thought that higher education at a university was the final training period before immediate incorporation into the world of work, with guaranteed accreditation as a highly qualified professional. However, today’s context of change, both in society in general and in the workplace in particular, is bringing about a radical change in social struc-tures and community services, with new paradigms that are influencing the change from the industrial era to the era of knowledge.

According to Villa (2003), current social demands on universities re-quire that they not only prepare students adequately, but that they pre-pare them for life as good citizens of democratic societies. The new factors to which higher education must respond (globalisation, the influ-ence of information and computer technologies, knowledge manage-ment, the need to promote and manage diversity, among others) are producing a change in the teaching/learning paradigm, shifting the fo-cus from the centre to students and their learning process.


The predominant teaching model in higher education used to be based on a range of contents contained in a programme of studies, which would shape students’ learning in terms of knowledge. However, the new approach requires significant learning on the part of students, who give meaning to the learning material by internalising it (UD, 2001). The idea is to modify, flexibly and critically, previous mindsets based on the continuous incorporation of new information, which is utilised to comprehend and transform situations.

In the university context, the change in model does not mean that new situations must be created to develop this competence. Instead, ad-



155

vantage must be taken of learning situations where we can focus on how students integrate and balance the active role of the two agents in the process of building knowledge – i.e., the student as the main protagonist, and others with whom students interact in given environments, in this case, in an environment designed specifically so that learning will take place. Lecturers’ facilitation strategies are aimed precisely at encouraging this new awareness, responsibility, interaction and strategic contextualisa-tion in the building and application of knowledge. As is logical, the year the student is in is of maximum importance, since competences are worked on in a progressive manner so that students’ responsibility and autonomy grow continuously throughout the process. Therefore:

— At the first level, the focus is on how students develop a positive, responsible attitude, in incorporating the learning proposed by the lecturer, actively endeavouring to understand and assimilate what is taught.

— At the second level, students are expected to show greater as-surance and initiative so that, in addition to knowing and under-standing the theoretical models of a discipline, they are able to question them and further explore new areas of information and study.

— Finally, at the third level, students’ more advanced knowledge and greater degree of autonomy should enable them to inte-grate different models and theories in a personal, creative syn-thesis adapted to the requirements of the field or profession.

The assessment indicators proposed are guides for working and ob-serving progress in developing this competence in different compo-nents:

— With respect to the learning strategies and techniques employed, the first aim is for students to practice, in a disciplined way, the methods and experiments proposed by the lecturer. Later, they must make a reasoned choice between various procedures pro-posed. Finally, they are expected to be able to independently adopt and adapt learning strategies in each situation.

— Regarding the aim and regulation of the learning process, stu-dents start by accepting the learning objectives proposed, then begin to adapt and reformulate them, and finally achieve self-regulation where they are able to define their own objectives.

— Regarding student attitudes of curiosity and initiative toward learning, initially they should become interested and ask ques-



156

tions to learn more and clarify doubts, later daring to raise intel-ligent points to question and broaden what has been learned, and finally making relevant, significant personal contributions or innovations.

— Students’ orientation to learning should also enable them to pro-gressively broaden their vision and field of study. Initially, this is mostly limited to understanding the fundamentals of a discipline, but later they are able to relate these elements and gain a vision of the whole. Finally, they relate and transfer knowledge and paradigms between disciplines.

— A fundamental component for the developing the competence is being open to change. This means being open to other outlooks different from one’s own, wanting to get to know them, to test them against one’s own ideas in order to question them and to learn. Finally, it means building shared knowledge.

Conveying to students what the assessment indicators are, monitor-ing and assessing their personal and academic progress, showing them their evaluations and talking to them about this, and even the mere fact that lecturers publish and share with students their projects (objectives, strategies and assessment criteria) as clearly as possible, help the student to become aware of their own learning and take responsibility for it. To the extent that lecturers also negotiate this project with their students, there will be a shift in control that will favour the development of mu-tual trust and progressive self-regulation on the part of students. This extends both to learning strategies and to assessment and results. This capacity for reflection, dialogue and regulation can be expressed and encouraged in learning contracts between lecturers and students, both as individuals and as groups.



157

COMPETENCE: LEARNING ORIENTATION

Definition: Strategically and flexibly utilising learning in accord-ance with objectives, based on recognition of how one learns and on awareness of learning per se (relating new information to pre-vious mental schema and utilising the new schema generated).

Mastery of this competence is closely related to: Maturity and self-assurance, capacity for self-criticism, tolerance of frustration, flex-ibility, adapting to changing situations. It involves values such as curiosity, control, order, self-esteem, education, competence, ac-ceptance of one’s own limitations, personal development, investi-gation, etc.

Levels of mastery:

1. Incorporating and showing active attitude toward the learning proposed by experts

2. Understanding and questioning the theoretical models of a dis-cipline and exploring new fields of knowledge

3. Integrating diverse theories or models making a personal, crea-tive synthesis suited to one’s own professional requirements

Indicators:

1. Learning strategies and techniques2. Regulating one’s own goals and learning 3. Attitude of curiosity and initiative4. Vision and field of study5. Openness to change



158

Leve

ls o

f M

aste

ryIn

dic

ato

rsD

escr

ipto

rs

12

34

5

Firs

t le

vel o

f m

aste

ry:

Lear

nin

g w

hat

is

pro

po

sed

by

exp

erts

, sh

ow

ing

ac

tive

will

ing

nes

s to

ass

imila

te it

Putt

ing

into

p

ract

ice

in a

d

isci

plin

ed m

ann

er

the

app

roac

hes

, m

eth

od

s an

d

exp

erie

nce

s p

rop

ose

d b

y th

e le

ctu

rer

Doe

sn’t

kno

w o

r ig

nore

s le

ctur

er’s

prop

osal

s.

Wro

ngly

inte

rpre

ts o

r ap

plie

s le

ctur

er’s

prop

osal

s.

Ade

quat

ely

follo

ws

lect

urer

’s pr

opos

als

in

own

lear

ning

pro

cess

.

Arg

ues

the

appr

opria

tene

ss o

f th

e st

rate

gies

pr

opos

ed f

or t

he

obje

ctiv

e of

lear

ning

.

Giv

es p

riorit

y to

the

le

ctur

er’s

prop

osal

s th

at b

est

suit

the

lear

ning

obj

ectiv

es.

Shar

ing

an

d

assu

min

g t

he

lear

nin

g o

bje

ctiv

es

pro

po

sed

by

the

lect

ure

r

Igno

res

the

lear

ning

ob

ject

ives

pro

pose

d by

the

lect

urer

.

Mis

inte

rpre

ts t

he

lear

ning

obj

ectiv

es.

Iden

tifie

s w

ith t

he

lear

ning

obj

ectiv

es

prop

osed

by

the

lect

urer

.

Prio

ritis

es w

ith g

ood

judg

emen

t th

e le

arni

ng o

bjec

tives

pr

opos

ed b

y th

e le

ctur

er.

Mak

es e

xcel

lent

pe

rson

al c

hang

es t

o le

arni

ng o

bjec

tives

.

Ask

ing

in o

rder

to

le

arn

an

d

end

eavo

uri

ng

to

cl

arif

y d

ou

bts

Info

rmat

ion

rece

ived

ra

ises

no

doub

ts o

r qu

estio

ns in

his

/her

m

ind.

Onl

y as

ks w

hen

calle

d on

by

lect

urer

or

to

solv

e sp

ecifi

c pr

oble

ms.

Rais

es d

oubt

s an

d qu

estio

ns a

bout

in

form

atio

n re

ceiv

ed,

to b

ette

r un

ders

tand

th

e su

bjec

t.

His

/her

dou

bts

and

ques

tions

see

k to

co

mpl

ete

the

info

rmat

ion

rece

ived

in

ord

er t

o le

arn.

Rais

es q

uest

ions

and

/or

dou

bts

that

sho

w

good

que

stio

ning

of

wha

t ha

s be

en

lear

ned.

Un

der

stan

din

g t

he

fun

dam

enta

ls o

f a

dis

cip

line

Repe

ats

with

out

unde

rsta

ndin

g or

with

di

ffic

ulty

, asp

ects

of

the

disc

iplin

e w

orke

d on

. Mak

es m

ista

kes.

Kno

ws

supe

rfic

ially

(id

entif

ies,

reco

gnis

es,

repr

oduc

es) a

spec

ts o

f th

e di

scip

line

wor

ked

on.

Cle

arly

pre

sent

s an

d ex

plai

ns t

he c

onte

nt

stud

ied.

App

lies

cont

ent

lear

ned

to n

ew

situ

atio

ns.

Seek

s re

latio

ns

betw

een

cont

ent

wor

ked

on in

the

di

scip

line

to b

ette

r un

ders

tand

the

su

bjec

t.

Rec

og

nis

ing

th

e im

po

rtan

ce o

f o

ther

s’ m

enta

l sc

hem

a

Alw

ays

sees

thi

ngs

from

ow

n pe

rspe

ctiv

e.

Def

ends

ow

n po

sitio

ns, r

efut

ing

thos

e of

oth

ers.

Show

s lit

tle in

tere

st

in s

harin

g ow

n id

eas

with

oth

ers.

List

ens

with

inte

rest

to

the

idea

s pr

opos

ed

by c

lass

mat

es a

nd b

y th

e le

ctur

er.

Ask

s fo

r th

e pe

rspe

ctiv

es a

nd

opin

ions

of

othe

rs,

conc

erni

ng m

atte

rs

bein

g st

udie

d.

Prom

otes

the

ex

chan

ge a

nd

argu

men

tatio

n of

op

inio

ns, t

o en

rich

and

furt

her

lear

ning

.



159

Leve

ls o

f M

aste

ryIn

dic

ato

rsD

escr

ipto

rs

12

34

5

Seco

nd

leve

l of

mas

tery

:U

nd

erst

and

ing

an

d

qu

esti

on

ing

th

e th

eore

tica

l mo

del

s o

f a

dis

cip

line

and

ex

plo

rin

g n

ew

fiel

ds

of

kno

wle

dg

e

Sele

ctin

g p

roce

du

res

amo

ng

th

ose

p

rop

ose

d b

y th

e le

ctu

rer

Doe

sn’t

ran

k th

e pr

oced

ures

pro

pose

d by

the

lect

urer

in

orde

r of

prio

rity.

Cho

oses

som

e of

the

pr

oced

ures

pro

pose

d by

the

lect

urer

, but

w

ithou

t go

od c

riter

ia.

Use

s th

e m

ost

appr

opria

te p

roce

dure

am

ong

thos

e pr

opos

ed

by th

e le

ctur

er.

Reas

ons

abou

t whe

ther

th

e m

ost a

ppro

pria

te

proc

edur

e su

its th

e le

arni

ng o

bjec

tives

.

Inco

rpor

ates

ow

n pr

oced

ures

sui

ted

to

the

lear

ning

ob

ject

ives

.

Ref

orm

ula

tin

g a

nd

ad

apti

ng

th

e le

arn

ing

ob

ject

ives

p

rop

ose

d b

y th

e le

ctu

rer

Doe

sn’t

thi

nk a

bout

le

arni

ng o

bjec

tives

.Su

perf

icia

lly a

ccep

ts

the

lect

urer

’s ob

ject

ives

, but

cou

ld

have

que

stio

ned

them

.

Refo

rmul

ates

in o

wn

term

s th

e le

arni

ng

obje

ctiv

es p

ropo

sed

by t

he le

ctur

er.

Intr

oduc

es in

nova

tive

chan

ges

rega

rdin

g le

arni

ng o

bjec

tives

.

Not

ewor

thy

for

the

nove

lty a

nd

appr

opria

tene

ss o

f th

e ch

ange

s pr

opos

ed f

or

own

lear

ning

ob

ject

ives

.

Ask

ing

inte

llig

ent

qu

esti

on

s th

at

qu

esti

on

wh

at is

b

ein

g le

arn

ed

Onl

y as

ks

com

preh

ensi

on

ques

tions

.

Ask

s qu

estio

ns t

hat

show

a c

erta

in

ques

tioni

ng o

f w

hat

has

been

lear

ned.

Ask

s qu

estio

ns t

hat

ques

tion

and

expa

nd

wha

t ha

s be

en

lear

ned.

His/

her q

uest

ions

and

co

ntrib

utio

ns c

ause

ot

hers

to q

uest

ion

wha

t has

bee

n le

arne

d.

His/

her q

uest

ions

br

oade

n th

e an

alyt

ical

pe

rspe

ctiv

e of

the

info

rmat

ion

pres

ente

d.

Sho

win

g in

itia

tive

in

the

sear

ch f

or

info

rmat

ion

Doe

sn’t

util

ise

the

min

imum

ref

eren

ces

requ

ired.

Onl

y ut

ilise

s th

e m

inim

um r

efer

ence

s re

quire

d.

Exte

nds

info

rmat

ion

beyo

nd t

he m

inim

um

refe

renc

es r

equi

red.

Look

s up

and

use

s in

form

atio

n fr

om

diff

eren

t so

urce

s.

Has

dev

elop

ed t

he

habi

t of

read

ing

and

findi

ng b

ackg

roun

d do

cum

ents

, usi

ng t

he

info

rmat

ion

appr

opria

tely.

Gai

nin

g a

co

mp

reh

ensi

ve v

iew

o

f th

e d

iffe

ren

t th

eori

es o

r m

eth

od

olo

gie

s o

f a

sub

ject

Stud

ies

the

diff

eren

t pa

rts

of a

sub

ject

w

ithou

t se

eing

the

re

latio

ns a

nd lo

gica

l co

nnec

tions

bet

wee

n th

em.

Sees

par

tial

rela

tions

hips

bet

wee

n di

ffer

ent

aspe

cts

of

the

subj

ect,

but

do

esn’

t m

anag

e to

ga

in a

n ov

eral

l vie

w.

Rela

tes

know

ledg

e ga

ined

fro

m t

he

subj

ect

and

is a

ble

to

see

the

who

le.

Cor

rect

ly e

stim

ates

an

d in

fers

cau

ses,

co

nseq

uenc

es,

impl

icat

ions

, re

latio

nshi

ps.

Is a

ble

to f

orm

ulat

e an

d cr

eate

“m

ini

theo

ries”

bas

ed o

n el

emen

ts.

Cont

rast

ing

one’

s ow

n id

eas

wit

h th

ose

of o

ther

s, u

sing

thi

s as

a le

arni

ng

oppo

rtun

ity

Doe

sn’t

que

stio

n ow

n id

eas.

Doe

sn’t

acc

ept

criti

cism

. Alw

ays

follo

ws

the

sam

e pa

tter

ns a

nd

guid

elin

es.

Acc

epts

crit

icis

m a

nd

corr

ectio

ns f

rom

ot

hers

.

Que

stio

ns o

wn

idea

s an

d gu

idel

ines

, bas

ed

on t

he c

ontr

ibut

ions

of

oth

ers.

Con

tras

ts o

wn

pre-

conc

eive

d id

eas

and

guid

elin

es w

ith t

hose

of

oth

ers,

and

is a

ble

to m

odify

the

m.

Valu

es t

he e

xcha

nge

of id

eas

as a

n op

port

unity

tha

t m

otiv

ates

new

le

arni

ng a

nd p

erso

nal

deve

lopm

ent.



160

Leve

ls o

f M

aste

ryIn

dic

ato

rsD

escr

ipto

rs

12

34

5

Thir

d le

vel o

f m

aste

ry:

Inte

gra

tin

g d

iver

se

theo

ries

or

mo

del

s in

to a

per

son

al,

crea

tive

syn

thes

is

suit

ed t

o o

ne’

s o

wn

p

rofe

ssio

nal

re

qu

irem

ents

Ind

epen

den

tly

adap

tin

g o

ne’

s le

arn

ing

str

ateg

ies

to e

ach

sit

uat

ion

Alw

ays

uses

the

sam

e le

arni

ng s

trat

egie

s.H

as v

ery

little

var

iety

in

lear

ning

str

ateg

ies.

Use

s di

ffer

ent

lear

ning

str

ateg

ies

acco

rdin

g to

eac

h si

tuat

ion.

Reas

ons

wel

l abo

ut

how

to

adap

t ow

n st

rate

gies

to

each

si

tuat

ion.

His/

her l

earn

ing

stra

tegi

es a

re e

xcel

lent

an

d ch

arac

teris

ed b

y th

eir f

lexi

bilit

y,

suita

bilit

y an

d cr

eativ

ity.

Esta

blis

hin

g o

wn

le

arn

ing

ob

ject

ives

Lack

s re

al le

arni

ng

obje

ctiv

es.

Form

ulat

es o

wn

lear

ning

obj

ectiv

es b

y re

peat

ing

the

ones

pr

opos

ed b

y th

e le

ctur

er.

Has

ow

n le

arni

ng

obje

ctiv

es.

Sees

rel

atio

nshi

ps

betw

een

own

lear

ning

obj

ectiv

es

for

diff

eren

t su

bjec

ts.

Inte

grat

es le

arni

ng

obje

ctiv

es f

or t

he

subj

ect

with

his

/her

ov

eral

l edu

catio

n ob

ject

ives

.

Mak

ing

sig

nif

ican

t co

ntr

ibu

tio

ns

or

cert

ain

inn

ova

tio

ns

Doe

sn’t

mak

e pe

rson

al

cont

ribut

ions

, or

they

ar

e no

t si

gnifi

cant

.

Mak

es p

erso

nal

cont

ribut

ions

of

little

im

port

ance

.

Mak

es s

igni

fican

t co

ntrib

utio

ns t

o th

e su

bjec

t in

han

d.

His

/her

con

trib

utio

ns

inte

grat

e di

ffer

ent

know

ledg

e, t

heor

ies

or m

odel

s.

His

/her

con

trib

utio

ns

outs

tand

ing

for

thei

r va

lidity

and

cre

ativ

ity.

Bei

ng

ab

le t

o d

raw

o

n p

arad

igm

s fr

om

o

ther

dis

cip

lines

an

d/o

r fi

eld

s o

f kn

ow

led

ge

clo

se t

o

ow

n

Doe

sn’t

tra

nsfe

r w

hat

has

been

lear

ned

in

one

disc

iplin

e to

ot

her

disc

iplin

es o

r fie

lds

of k

now

ledg

e.

App

lies

with

diff

icul

ty

wha

t ha

s be

en

lear

ned

in o

ne

disc

iplin

e to

oth

er

disc

iplin

es a

nd f

ield

s of

kno

wle

dge.

Is a

ble

to s

ee

rela

tions

hips

bet

wee

n kn

owle

dge

acqu

ired

in d

iffer

ent

disc

iplin

es.

Qui

ckly

and

eas

ily

appl

ies

and

gene

ralis

es

know

ledg

e be

twee

n di

scip

lines

.

Wor

ks s

imul

tane

ousl

y w

ith v

ario

us

para

digm

s of

kn

owle

dge

and

rese

arch

.

Bu

ildin

g s

har

ed

kno

wle

dg

e, le

arn

ing

an

d f

acili

tati

ng

th

e jo

int

con

stru

ctio

n o

f le

arn

ing

Avo

ids

dial

ogue

and

en

coun

ters

for

le

arni

ng. P

refe

rs t

o w

ork

alon

e.

Part

icip

ates

by

cont

ribut

ing

to

dial

ogue

and

sha

red

wor

k.

Act

ivel

y ta

kes

part

in

dial

ogue

to

shar

e pe

rspe

ctiv

es a

nd

reac

h ag

reem

ent.

Seek

s po

ints

of

enco

unte

r an

d pr

omot

es t

he

conv

erge

nce

of

diff

eren

t pe

rspe

ctiv

es

expr

esse

d.

Faci

litat

es t

he jo

int

cons

truc

tion

of n

ew

pers

pect

ives

, ide

as

and

theo

ries,

bas

ed

on t

he in

tegr

atio

n of

al

l con

trib

utio

ns.



161

COMPETENCE: PLANNING

Description

This competence concerns the ability to devise a general plan to ob-tain an objective. Such a plan must be well thought out, detailed and based on a certain logic.

This process helps to minimise or eliminate possible obstacles or risks that might arise when we decide to undertake a task, and it also serves to develop, supervise and direct completion of the task.

Consequently, people plan effectively when they have good reasons for deciding how to undertake a task. That is, when they can indicate beforehand the objectives, priority actions and the procedure for carry-ing out the task, as well as the controls that will ensure fulfilment of the plan. Moreover, the different activities included in the plan must be or-ganised with explicit means and within specific deadlines.

Planning, in short, is a guide that makes it easier to match resources and effort to certain specific ends. This enables us to adapt our decisions to concrete actions, because we have a prior plan whose logic co-ordi-nates activity and enables us to supervise their outcome.

The first level of mastery enables us to see, through students’ per-sonal planning, whether they are able to devise a well-reasoned plan to undertake and accomplish their work.

The capacity for group organisation and team planning constitutes the second level of mastery. At this level, the focus is on seeing whether students are able to plan for themselves and how they contribute to the planning of the group or team to which they belong.

The third level of mastery seeks to measure how well students plan a major project, showcasing their specific knowledge and ability to use it conscientiously to devise a plan for undertaking the project.

The indicators that measure this competence focus on the student’s capacity to organise, how well the student applies good procedures to each task, the logical sense of the plan, the effectiveness and pragma-tism shown in planning, and how well the utilisation of time and re-sources is foreseen.


Closely linked to this competence are the competences of critical thinking, decision-making, time management and project management.



162

This competence helps to enhance motivation and self-confidence, when work is accomplished according to the preconceived plan. It also entails taking responsibility for deciding how to use resources, persons and time, and accepting the decisions that are taken. Finally, it serves to develop a certain orientation toward knowledge.


It is important for each student to learn how to plan his/her own university work. Moreover, this competence helps students to learn how to match effort and means to the ends proposed by the students them-selves. When setting goals, planning can channel desires using a tool that makes it possible to achieve such ends.

As far as the workplace is concerned, a good capacity for planning helps people to do their job effectively. Moreover, it enables them to plan how best to combine work and their personal life.


Students need to be told that their work inside and outside the class-room requires a basic level of planning.

It is also important to employ learning strategies that call for under-taking medium- and long-term tasks, as this will require the devising of appropriate work plans.

Learning strategies based on the undertaking of projects are a good way of taking advantage of this competence. The portfolio strategy is also a good resource for furthering this competence.



163

COMPETENCE: PLANNING

Definition: Deciding effectively the objectives, priorities, meth-ods and controls for work to be done, by organising tasks within deadlines and available means

Mastery of this competence is closely related to: Analytical and critical thinking, decision-making, problem-solving, time manage-ment, project management, rationality, etc.

Levels of mastery:

1. Methodically organising one’s work, resources and time, de-pending on available possibilities and priorities

2. Taking part and getting involved in the organised undertaking of group work, foreseeing the tasks, times and resources needed to achieve desired results

3. Methodically and successfully planning the undertaking of a complex project (for example: Final Project)

Indicators:

1. Organisation 2. Method3. Logic4. Pragmatism5. Results



164

Leve

ls o

f M

aste

ryIn

dic

ato

rsD

escr

ipto

rs

12

34

5

Firs

t le

vel o

f m

aste

ry:

Met

ho

dic

ally

o

rgan

isin

g o

ne’

s w

ork

, res

ou

rces

an

d

tim

e, d

epen

din

g o

n

avai

lab

le

po

ssib

iliti

es a

nd

p

rio

riti

es

Org

anis

ing

ad

equ

ate

pro

cess

es

and

pro

ced

ure

s fo

r o

wn

act

ivit

ies

Ow

n di

sorg

anis

atio

n hi

nder

s pe

rfor

man

ce.

Esta

blis

hes

an o

rder

fo

r ca

rryi

ng o

ut t

asks

.O

rgan

ises

tas

ks

time-

wis

e.D

evis

es e

ffec

tive

wor

k pl

an f

or a

ll ow

n ac

tiviti

es.

Plan

s ac

tiviti

es

effe

ctiv

ely

to m

ake

best

use

of

own

mea

ns a

nd a

vaila

bilit

y.

Des

ign

ing

ho

w t

o

acco

mm

od

ate

pro

cess

es a

nd

p

roce

du

res

to

avai

lab

le m

ean

s,

fore

seei

ng

ho

w

lon

g t

hey

will

last

Impr

ovis

es o

wn

activ

ities

with

out

logi

c.

Enum

erat

es t

he t

asks

to

be

done

, with

out

syst

emat

isin

g th

em.

Util

ises

som

e pl

anni

ng p

roce

dure

s th

at a

re r

ight

for

the

co

ntex

t.

Dyn

amic

ally

and

fle

xibl

y ad

apts

pl

anni

ng m

etho

ds t

o ow

n ac

tiviti

es.

Plan

ning

is o

ne o

f hi

s/he

r us

ual m

etho

ds o

f w

ork.

Is r

easo

nabl

y m

etho

dica

l.

Plan

nin

g w

ith

go

od

cr

iter

ia h

ow

to

ac

com

mo

dat

e av

aila

ble

mea

ns

and

ti

me

to p

rio

riti

es

Doe

s th

ings

ha

phaz

ardl

y, w

ithou

t ta

king

prio

ritie

s in

to

acco

unt.

Sets

poo

r pr

iorit

ies

rega

rdin

g ne

eds

and

activ

ities

.

Sets

app

ropr

iate

pr

iorit

ies

for

unde

rtak

ing

task

s.

Plan

s ow

n ac

tiviti

es

taki

ng in

to a

ccou

nt

poss

ibili

ties,

mea

ns

and

prio

ritie

s.

Act

s in

con

sequ

ence

w

ith o

wn

plan

ning

of

prio

ritie

s.

Bei

ng

aw

are

of

ow

n

mea

ns

and

av

aila

bili

ty f

or

un

der

taki

ng

ac

tivi

ties

Und

erta

kes

activ

ities

w

ithou

t th

inki

ng

abou

t ow

n m

eans

an

d re

quire

men

ts.

Has

diff

icul

ty in

ad

just

ing

mea

ns a

nd

activ

ities

.

Plan

s w

ith m

ind

on

feas

ibili

ty.

Ada

pts

plan

s to

ow

n re

al p

ossi

bilit

ies.

Dem

onst

rate

s th

e fe

asib

ility

of

own

plan

s by

ful

fillin

g th

em.

Plan

nin

g w

ith

ac

hie

vem

ent

in

min

d

Act

s w

ithou

t pl

anni

ng o

r fo

rese

eing

res

ults

.

Org

anis

es o

wn

plan

s w

ithou

t su

perv

isio

n.Re

gula

rly c

heck

s to

se

e w

heth

er a

ctiv

ities

m

atch

ach

ieve

men

ts

fore

seen

.

Fore

sees

how

to

cont

rol p

ossi

ble

devi

atio

ns in

ac

tiviti

es a

nd

achi

evem

ents

.

Iden

tifie

s, e

valu

ates

an

d dr

aws

conc

lusi

ons

from

the

pl

an’s

resu

lts.



165

Leve

ls o

f M

aste

ryIn

dic

ato

rsD

escr

ipto

rs

12

34

5

Seco

nd

leve

l of

mas

tery

:Ta

kin

g p

art

and

g

etti

ng

invo

lved

in

the

org

anis

ed

un

der

taki

ng

of

gro

up

wo

rk,

fore

seei

ng

th

e ta

sks,

tim

es a

nd

re

sou

rces

nee

ded

to

ac

hie

ve d

esir

ed

resu

lts

Taki

ng

par

t in

th

e o

rgan

isat

ion

of

gro

up

pro

cess

es a

nd

p

roce

du

res

Doe

sn’t

get

invo

lved

in

gro

up o

rgan

isat

ion

of t

asks

.

Take

s pa

ssiv

e ro

le in

pl

anni

ng a

ctiv

ities

.Pa

rtic

ipat

es in

or

gani

sing

gro

up

plan

ning

act

iviti

es.

Show

s in

itiat

ive

in

grou

p pl

anni

ng

activ

ities

.

Prom

otes

pla

nnin

g ta

sks

by d

istr

ibut

ing

task

s an

d fu

nctio

ns.

Plan

nin

g g

rou

p

acti

vity

m

eth

od

ical

ly

Not

inte

rest

ed in

co

llabo

ratio

n.Si

mpl

y ab

ides

by

the

deci

sion

s of

the

gr

oup.

Use

s go

od p

lann

ing

met

hods

and

te

chni

ques

for

gro

up

wor

k.

Con

trib

utes

to

grou

p pl

anni

ng w

ith

met

hodi

cal w

ork.

Turn

s th

e m

etho

dica

l pl

anni

ng o

f gr

oup

wor

k in

to a

str

engt

h.

Plan

nin

g t

ask

dis

trib

uti

on

Inte

rrup

ts g

roup

pl

anni

ng, g

ivin

g pr

iorit

y on

ly t

o ow

n in

tere

sts.

Que

stio

ns a

nd

criti

cise

s th

e pl

anni

ng

of g

roup

wor

k w

ithou

t pr

opos

ing

alte

rnat

ives

.

Col

labo

rate

s in

the

di

strib

utio

n of

tas

ks

amon

g gr

oup

mem

bers

.

Ass

umes

sha

red

resp

onsi

bilit

y in

the

di

strib

utio

n of

wor

k.

Mak

es o

f th

e di

strib

utio

n of

tas

ks a

st

reng

th o

f th

e gr

oup.

Plan

nin

g w

ith

cle

ar

awar

enes

s o

f th

e g

rou

p’s

ava

ilab

le

mea

ns

and

tim

es

Not

inte

rest

ed in

the

pl

anni

ng o

f th

e gr

oup’

s re

sour

ces.

Arg

ues

over

the

av

aila

bilit

y of

mea

ns

and

times

, with

out

cont

ribut

ing

solu

tions

.

Ada

pts

own

time

and

reso

urce

s to

the

pl

an o

f th

e gr

oup.

Part

icip

ates

in t

he

plan

ning

of

a st

rate

gy

inco

rpor

atin

g th

e in

tere

sts,

res

ourc

es

and

time

of t

he

grou

p.

Stra

tegi

cally

util

ises

m

eans

and

tim

es o

f th

e gr

oup

as t

he b

asis

fo

r pl

anni

ng.

Plan

nin

g

sup

ervi

sio

n o

f th

e g

rou

p’s

act

ivit

ies

to

ach

ieve

res

ult

s

Con

side

rs g

roup

tas

k su

perv

isio

n as

an

intr

omis

sion

.

Fails

to

com

plet

e ta

sks

plan

ned

colle

ctiv

ely.

Part

icip

ates

in t

he

colle

ctiv

e m

onito

ring

of p

lan

to c

ontr

ol

resu

lts.

Supe

rvis

es p

lann

ing

with

rel

atio

n to

the

ac

hiev

emen

ts o

f th

e gr

oup.

Con

trib

utes

with

co

ntin

uous

m

onito

ring

to

impr

ovem

ent

of t

he

grou

p pl

an.



166

Leve

ls o

f M

aste

ryIn

dic

ato

rsD

escr

ipto

rs

12

34

5

Thir

d le

vel o

f m

aste

ry:

Met

ho

dic

ally

an

d

succ

essf

ully

p

lan

nin

g t

he

un

der

taki

ng

of

a co

mp

lex

pro

ject

(e

.g.:

Fin

al P

roje

ct)

Org

anis

ing

ad

equ

ate

pro

cess

es

and

pro

ced

ure

s fo

r th

e p

roje

ct

Proj

ect

lack

s or

gani

satio

n.O

nly

defin

es t

he

proj

ect

obje

ctiv

es.

Def

ines

the

str

uctu

re

of t

he p

roje

ct w

ith

obje

ctiv

es, t

he

sequ

ence

and

du

ratio

n of

act

iviti

es.

Build

s th

e st

ruct

ure

of t

he p

roje

ct o

n th

e ba

sis

of o

bjec

tives

se

t.

Dev

ises

pro

ject

s w

ith

outs

tand

ing

alig

nmen

t of

pr

ojec

ted

obje

ctiv

es,

mea

ns a

nd s

truc

ture

.

Plan

nin

g

met

ho

dic

ally

Doe

sn’t

use

m

etho

dolo

gica

l cr

iteria

in p

lann

ing

the

proj

ect.

Onl

y pl

ans

the

time

varia

ble.

Dra

ws

up t

he p

lan

with

a m

etho

d ap

prop

riate

to

the

wor

k in

min

d.

The

met

hod

sele

cted

co

rrec

tly in

tegr

ates

th

e m

eans

and

du

ratio

n of

the

pr

ojec

t.

The

proj

ect

brill

iant

ly

inco

rpor

ates

m

etho

ds a

nd

tech

niqu

es t

hat

guar

ante

e it

s ac

com

plis

hmen

t.

Dev

elo

pin

g p

roje

cts

wit

h lo

gic

ap

pro

pri

ate

to t

he

task

s in

han

d

The

proj

ect

lack

s in

tern

al lo

gic.

Gen

erat

es w

ork

plan

s w

ithou

t pr

oper

ar

ticul

atio

n be

twee

n th

eir

part

s.

The

proj

ecte

d w

ork

plan

is lo

gica

l in

the

artic

ulat

ion

of it

s co

nten

ts.

The

proj

ect

is w

ell

argu

ed a

nd

stru

ctur

ed w

ithin

a

logi

cal w

ork

plan

.

The

proj

ect

appr

oach

sh

ows

exce

llent

al

ignm

ent

of t

he

diff

eren

t pa

rts

of t

he

proj

ect.

Plan

nin

g w

ith

cle

ar

awar

enes

s o

f th

e m

ean

s an

d t

imes

av

aila

ble

Plan

s ou

t of

con

text

, w

ithou

t id

entif

ying

m

eans

and

tim

es.

Plan

s w

ithou

t m

anag

ing

to a

djus

t th

e m

eans

and

tim

es

avai

labl

e.

Plan

s w

ith t

he

reso

urce

s an

d tim

es

actu

ally

ava

ilabl

e.

The

proj

ect

suits

ac

tiviti

es t

o m

eans

an

d tim

es a

vaila

ble

for

each

.

The

proj

ect

show

s pe

rfec

t ad

apta

tion

of

each

for

esee

n ac

tivity

to

the

mea

ns a

nd

times

ava

ilabl

e.

Plan

nin

g

sup

ervi

sio

n o

f ac

tivi

ties

to

ach

ieve

re

sult

s

Con

side

rs it

un

nece

ssar

y to

pla

n to

ach

ieve

con

trol

ov

er t

he r

esul

ts o

f ow

n w

ork.

Plan

s w

ithou

t co

nsid

erin

g th

e ob

tent

ion

of re

sults

as

a pl

anni

ng v

aria

ble.

Proj

ect

prov

ides

for

m

onito

ring

activ

ities

an

d re

sults

.

Dev

ises

pro

ject

with

a

flexi

ble,

dyn

amic

or

der

to m

onito

r ac

tiviti

es a

nd r

esul

ts.

Dra

ws

up d

iffer

ent

cont

inge

ncy

plan

s to

co

ntro

l hyp

othe

tical

sc

enar

ios

and

resu

lts.



167

COMPETENCE: COMPUTER SKILLS

Description

This competence is related to information and communication man-agement and is based on the ample technologies to which computers give access. Personal computers provide an infinite array of working tools and environments: graphic design, database management, appli-cations for experimentation, mathematical analysis, leisure time applica-tions, and many others in an ever-growing list.

Computer skills include matters concerned with file management and security, desktop publishing, e-mail, browsing in Internet, spell checkers, preventive security measures, report presentation software, and the use of electronic spreadsheets. These components of the com-petence are progressively distributed throughout the three levels of mas-tery.

The over all aim is to enable people to handle personal computers easily and well, at least with regard to the applications and tasks used most widely in the majority of fields.


The computer skills competence requires adaptability. This is particu-larly essential when one is first interacting with a computer, but it re-mains necessary thereafter since computer tools, applications and envi-ronments are constantly evolving. Today, personal computers are found everywhere in education and at work. All students and professionals find themselves having to adapt to this new factor in the environment, and to whatever the future may bring in this regard.

Furthermore, if students wish to achieve a high level of proficiency as computer users, they will also need to be competent in innovation and learning orientation. To achieve a certain effectiveness and efficiency, it is not sufficient merely to use computers at a very basic or beginning level. Competence in innovation should lead to new ways of using the computer to enhance, or at least facilitate, academic and professional performance.

Writing skills are also involved. Computer users are continually show-ing their degree of competence in written communication, so that good technical proficiency combined with poor communicative capacity re-sults in poor use of this resource.



168


One of the most radical changes to have occurred in recent years in professional and academic life has to do with this competence. Only a few decades ago, computers were practically unknown in the workplace and centres of learning. In a relatively short time, we now find ourselves in the opposite situation. Today it is difficult to find an academic or pro-fessional setting where there are no PCs. Generally speaking, far from being a mere decoration, computers now form the hub of multitudinous procedures carried out in the course of professional and academic work.

When professionals and students first come into contact with per-sonal computers, they spend a great deal of time and effort mastering this tool. However, its use becomes steadily easier with time, so that fi-nally, in endless academic and professional situations, users are able to devote most of their attention and energy to the task itself, and take the computer for granted as a familiar tool.

The fact is that it is becoming harder and harder to be a good stu-dent or professional without a certain proficiency in this competence. A limited ability to use a PC as a working tool can seriously hinder aca-demic or professional performance.


Occasionally there may be courses or modules devoted specifically to learning computer skills. In such cases, activities or situations can be prepared where students must perform routine office tasks which will make it possible to apply the indicators listed below.

However, there will be many more situations where the indicators of this competence will have to be assessed transversally, within the frame-work of other kinds of academic subjects. Most of the indicators can be checked in this type of situation. Any academic task that leads to an outcome such as a report, essay, analysis, etc. will make it possible to check fairly clearly most of the indicators specified. Activities can be called for that involve more or less advanced text processing, the use of Internet and e-mail, the creation of presentations, web pages, spread-sheets, etc.



169

COMPETENCE: COMPUTER SKILLS

Definition: Utilising computer skills or Information and Commu-nication Techniques (ICTs) as tools for expression and communica-tion, for accessing information sources, for data and document filing, for presentation tasks, for learning, research and co-opera-tive work.

Mastery of this competence is closely related to: Planning and or-ganisation, reflective thinking, writing skills, adaptability, innova-tion, etc.

Levels of mastery:

1. Properly managing files, generating documents with a text proc-essor, browsing Internet and using e-mail correctly

2. Editing documents of certain complexity, creating slide presenta-tions and simple web pages

3. Editing complex text documents, even utilising macros, and managing spreadsheets through functions and references

Indicators:

1. File and programme management2. Safeguarding information3. Text editing4. Spreadsheets5. Internet and e-mail6. Presentations



170

Leve

ls o

f M

aste

ryIn

dic

ato

rsD

escr

ipto

rs

12

34

5

Firs

t le

vel o

f m

aste

ry:

Pro

per

ly

man

agin

g

file

s,

gen

erat

ing

d

ocu

men

ts

wit

h a

tex

t p

roce

sso

r, b

row

sin

g

Inte

rnet

an

d

usi

ng

e-m

ail

corr

ectl

y

Co

rrec

tly

man

agin

g

file

s H

as d

iffic

ulty

in

man

agin

g fil

es (l

oses

th

em, a

ccid

enta

lly

chan

ges

exte

nsio

ns,

has

prob

lem

s w

ith

stra

nge

char

acte

rs in

na

mes

, etc

.).

Show

s cl

ear

lack

of

orga

nisa

tion

in

man

agem

ent

of f

iles.

Cor

rect

ly c

reat

es,

mod

ifies

, cop

ies,

ch

ange

s na

me

and

relo

cate

s fil

es.

Cor

rect

ly n

ames

, or

ders

and

cla

ssifi

es

files

.

Not

ewor

thy

for

ease

and

ac

cura

cy in

the

m

anag

emen

t of

file

s an

d di

rect

orie

s.

Co

nfi

gu

rin

g a

nd

p

erso

nal

isin

g t

he

com

pu

ter

des

kto

p

Doe

sn’t

intr

oduc

e an

y ad

apta

tions

or

chan

ges

in d

eskt

op

conf

igur

atio

n.

Cre

ates

unn

eces

sary

, ac

cide

ntal

or

unco

nstr

aine

d di

rect

ac

cess

es.

Cre

ates

dire

ct

acce

sses

for

the

ap

plic

atio

ns t

hat

he/

she

uses

mos

t.

Kee

ps in

goo

d or

der

the

dire

ct a

cces

ses

to

appl

icat

ions

tha

t he

/sh

e us

es m

ost.

Kee

ps d

irect

acc

esse

s cl

ear

and

in g

ood

orde

r, w

ith t

he m

ost

usua

l one

s cl

ose

to h

and

and

othe

rs

at a

sec

ond

leve

l of

acce

ss.

Uti

lisin

g p

age

hea

der

s an

d f

oo

ters

in

do

cum

ents

Doe

sn’t

num

ber

page

s.Pa

ges

are

num

bere

d bu

t w

ithou

t he

ader

s or

fo

oter

s.

Page

s ha

ve h

eade

rs

or f

oote

rs, a

nd a

re

num

bere

d.

Mak

es d

iffer

ent

head

ers

and

foot

ers

for

odd

and

even

pa

ges.

Gen

erat

es t

he c

onte

nt o

f he

ader

s or

foo

ters

usi

ng

cros

s re

fere

nces

or

field

s.

Giv

ing

pro

per

fo

rmat

to

d

ocu

men

ts,

par

agra

ph

s an

d

char

acte

rs

Page

, par

agra

ph a

nd

char

acte

r fo

rmat

s ar

e be

yond

his

/her

co

ntro

l.

Use

s irr

egul

ar o

r in

corr

ect

page

, pa

ragr

aph

and

char

acte

r fo

rmat

s.

Cor

rect

ly a

nd

unifo

rmly

use

s th

e fo

rmat

s of

pag

es,

para

grap

hs a

nd

sour

ces.

App

ropr

iate

ly v

arie

s ut

ilisa

tion

of p

age,

pa

ragr

aph

and

char

acte

r fo

rmat

s (e

.g.,

mar

gins

, in

dent

ing

subs

ectio

ns, q

uote

s in

ital

ics,

list

s, e

tc.).

Out

stan

ding

cla

rity

and

appr

opria

tene

ss o

f pa

ge,

char

acte

r an

d pa

ragr

aph

form

ats.

Rea

din

g a

nd

fili

ng

e-

mai

l mes

sag

esC

an’t

acc

ess

mes

sage

s re

ceiv

ed

som

e tim

e ag

o.

Acc

esse

s pa

st m

essa

ges

that

hav

e ac

cum

ulat

ed

in t

he In

box.

Read

s an

d sa

ves

inco

min

g m

essa

ges

in

mor

e th

an o

ne f

olde

r.

Org

anis

es

corr

espo

nden

ce

fold

ers

wel

l.

Use

s fil

ters

to

auto

mat

ical

ly c

lass

ify

cert

ain

mes

sage

s.

Car

efu

lly

safe

gu

ard

ing

file

sIs

not

con

cern

ed w

ith

mak

ing

back

up

copi

es.

Mak

es o

ccas

iona

l co

pies

of

own

docu

men

ts.

Mak

es r

egul

ar

back

up c

opie

s.M

akes

reg

ular

ba

ckup

cop

ies

in

mor

e th

an o

ne

supp

ort

or lo

catio

n.

Mak

es b

acku

p co

pies

in a

ph

ysic

al lo

catio

n aw

ay

from

the

com

pute

r.



171

Leve

ls o

f M

aste

ryIn

dic

ato

rsD

escr

ipto

rs

12

34

5

Firs

t le

vel o

f m

aste

ry:

Prop

erly

m

anag

ing

files

, ge

nera

ting

docu

men

ts w

ith

a te

xt p

roce

ssor

, br

owsi

ng

Inte

rnet

and

us

ing

e-m

ail

corr

ectly

Uti

lisin

g t

he

Hel

p

too

ls o

f th

e m

ost

u

sual

ap

plic

atio

ns

Doe

sn’t

kno

w h

ow t

o us

e pr

ogra

mm

e H

elp

tool

s w

hen

they

co

uld

be o

f us

e.

Man

ages

to

obta

in o

nly

part

of

the

impo

rtan

t in

form

atio

n av

aila

ble

in

Hel

p to

ols.

Find

s ne

eded

in

form

atio

n in

Hel

p to

ols.

Man

ages

to

reso

lve

prob

lem

s th

anks

to

utili

satio

n of

Hel

p to

ols.

Not

ewor

thy

for

spee

d an

d ea

se w

ith w

hich

fin

ds

help

in p

robl

emat

ic

situ

atio

ns.

Sen

din

g e

-mai

l m

essa

ges

co

rrec

tly

Send

s m

essa

ges

that

ar

e in

com

plet

e or

ha

ve e

vide

nt f

orm

at

or le

gibi

lity

erro

rs.

Send

s m

essa

ges

that

in

frin

ge b

asic

gu

idel

ines

or

etiq

uett

e (t

ext

in c

apita

ls, o

mits

gr

eetin

g, in

com

plet

e si

gnat

ure,

poo

r al

ignm

ent,

etc

.).

Send

s m

essa

ges

in

corr

ect

form

at.

Send

s m

essa

ges

in

prop

er f

orm

at, u

sing

gr

oup

mai

l whe

n ap

prop

riate

.

Send

s m

essa

ges

in p

rope

r fo

rmat

, util

isin

g as

ap

prop

riate

gro

up m

ail

and

avai

labl

e op

tions

(u

rgen

cy, n

ot s

how

ing

cert

ain

para

met

ers

in t

he

mes

sage

, etc

.).

Loo

kin

g u

p

nec

essa

ry

info

rmat

ion

in t

he

Web

Ove

rlook

s cl

ear

oppo

rtun

ities

to

obta

in a

vaila

ble

info

rmat

ion

from

the

W

eb.

Mak

es s

earc

hes

that

ar

e to

o br

oad

or

inco

mpl

ete

(doe

sn’t

us

e go

od c

riter

ia).

Find

s th

e in

form

atio

n th

at h

e/sh

e ne

eds.

Mak

es g

ood,

wel

l-fo

cuse

d se

arch

es.

Not

ewor

thy

for

spee

d an

d ea

se in

for

mul

atin

g se

arch

crit

eria

.



172

Leve

ls o

f M

aste

ryIn

dic

ato

rsD

escr

ipto

rs

12

34

5

Seco

nd

leve

l o

f m

aste

ry:

Edit

ing

d

ocu

men

ts o

f ce

rtai

n

com

ple

xity

, cr

eati

ng

slid

e p

rese

nta

tio

ns

and

sim

ple

w

eb p

ages

Co

rrec

tly

man

agin

g

sect

ion

s in

tex

t p

roce

sso

r

Igno

res

the

exis

tenc

e of

sec

tions

in t

ext

proc

esso

r an

d ho

w

they

can

impr

ove

docu

men

ts.

Util

ises

sec

tions

but

m

akes

mis

take

s in

the

ir co

nfig

urat

ion.

Util

ises

sec

tion

brea

ks

with

out

mak

ing

obvi

ous

mis

take

s.

Cor

rect

ly c

hang

es

page

for

mat

s in

se

ctio

ns (e

.g.,

port

rait

– la

ndsc

ape,

hea

ders

an

d fo

oter

s, e

tc.).

Cor

rect

ly u

ses

sect

ion

brea

ks e

ven

to c

reat

e di

ffer

ent

num

bers

of

colu

mns

on

the

sam

e pa

ge.

Cre

atin

g t

able

sIn

stea

d of

usi

ng t

able

s,

lines

up

item

s th

at

shou

ld b

e se

para

ted

by

tabs

in t

able

s.

Tabl

es h

ave

defe

cts

of

alig

nmen

t, t

ext

styl

es,

etc.

Tabl

es a

re c

orre

ctly

m

ade

(dim

ensi

ons,

ho

rizon

tal a

lignm

ent,

te

xt s

tyle

s).

Cor

rect

ly u

tilise

s ve

rtic

al

alig

nmen

t and

the

horiz

onta

l loc

atio

n of

th

e ta

ble

itsel

f in

a te

xt.

Com

bine

s ce

lls a

nd

sele

ctiv

ely

uses

bor

ders

to

good

eff

ect.

Inse

rtin

g im

ages

Can

’t in

sert

imag

es

whe

n th

e ta

sk c

alls

for

it.

Inse

rts

imag

es w

ith p

oor

alig

nmen

t or

wro

ng

sizi

ng.

Inse

rts

imag

es t

hat

are

wel

l alig

ned

and

size

d fo

r th

e co

ntex

t.

Inse

rts

imag

es

corr

ectly

and

car

eful

ly

utili

ses

imag

e in

sert

ion

by li

nkin

g th

e fil

e.

Cor

rect

ly in

sert

s lin

ked

imag

es a

nd ti

tles

all o

f the

m

utili

sing

the

title

inse

rtio

n fe

atur

e of

text

pro

cess

or.

Spel

l ch

ecke

r an

d

lan

gu

age

sele

ctio

nFo

rget

s to

use

the

sp

ell c

heck

er.

Use

s th

e sp

ell c

heck

er

inco

rrec

tly (e

.g.,

does

n’t

corr

ectly

def

ine

the

lang

uage

, onl

y us

es it

so

met

imes

).

Use

s th

e sp

ell c

heck

er

wel

l, sp

ecify

ing

the

lang

uage

of

the

docu

men

t.

Use

s th

e sp

ell c

heck

er

wel

l, sp

ecify

ing

vario

us la

ngua

ges

in

diff

eren

t st

retc

hes

of

the

docu

men

t.

Use

s th

e sp

ell c

heck

er w

ell,

spec

ifyin

g va

rious

lang

uage

s in

diff

eren

t str

etch

es o

f the

do

cum

ent a

nd p

erso

nalis

ing

dict

iona

ries.

Prev

enti

ng

sec

uri

ty

pro

ble

ms

Forg

ets

to u

pdat

e th

e an

tiviru

s or

to

look

for

sy

stem

upd

ates

.

Occ

asio

nally

upd

ates

the

an

tiviru

s an

d fin

ds

syst

em u

pdat

es.

Regu

larly

upd

ates

the

an

tiviru

s an

d fin

ds

syst

em u

pdat

es.

Regu

larly

upd

ates

the

an

tiviru

s an

d sy

stem

, an

d us

es a

fire

wal

l.

Has

pro

gram

med

ant

iviru

s an

d sy

stem

upd

ates

, and

us

es a

fire

wal

l.

Cre

atin

g s

lides

Can

’t c

reat

e sl

ides

.C

reat

es s

lides

with

form

at

erro

rs (e

xces

sive

or

illeg

ible

text

, in

appr

opria

te c

olou

rs a

nd

tone

s, p

oor a

lignm

ent o

f ob

ject

s, e

tc.).

Cre

ates

slid

es w

ithou

t ev

iden

t fo

rmat

err

ors.

His

/her

slid

es h

ave

good

for

mat

and

in

clud

e dy

nam

ic

elem

ents

.

His

/her

slid

es n

otew

orth

y fo

r si

mpl

icity

, co

mpl

eten

ess,

for

mat

and

us

e of

dyn

amic

ele

men

ts.

Cre

atin

g w

eb p

ages

, b

log

s o

r w

ikis

Can

’t c

reat

e w

eb

page

s or

par

ticip

ate

corr

ectly

in b

logs

or

wik

is.

Cre

ates

web

pag

es o

r pa

rtic

ipat

e in

blo

gs o

r w

ikis

with

cle

ar e

rror

s (in

appr

opria

te o

r irr

egul

ar

form

at, n

on-f

unct

ioni

ng

hype

rlink

s, e

tc.).

Cor

rect

ly c

reat

es

sim

ple

web

pag

es o

r pa

rtic

ipat

e in

blo

gs o

r w

ikis

.

Cre

ates

web

pag

es o

f ce

rtai

n co

mpl

exity

(r

egar

ding

imag

es,

hype

rlink

s, f

orm

ats,

dy

nam

ic o

bjec

ts, e

tc.)

or m

anag

e si

mpl

e bl

ogs

or w

ikis

.

Cre

ates

com

plex

web

pa

ges

that

incl

ude

acce

ss

to d

atab

ases

or

man

age

com

plex

blo

gs o

r w

ikis

.



173

Leve

ls o

f M

aste

ryIn

dic

ato

rsD

escr

ipto

rs

12

34

5

Thir

d le

vel o

f m

aste

ry:

Edit

ing

co

mp

lex

text

d

ocu

men

ts,

even

usi

ng

m

acro

s, a

nd

m

anag

ing

sp

read

shee

ts

thro

ug

h

fun

ctio

ns

and

re

fere

nce

s

Usi

ng t

he s

tyle

s fe

atur

e in

tex

t pr

oces

sor

His

/her

doc

umen

ts

are

irreg

ular

in

form

at b

ecau

se

does

n’t

use

styl

es.

Util

ises

tex

t pr

oces

sor

styl

es c

omm

ittin

g so

me

form

at e

rror

s (e

.g.,

acci

dent

ally

mod

ifyin

g pa

ragr

aph

or c

hara

cter

fo

rmat

s).

Util

ises

pre

defin

ed

styl

es in

tex

t pr

oces

sor

but

is

unab

le t

o ad

apt

them

to

ow

n re

quire

men

ts.

Util

ises

and

ada

pts

text

pro

cess

or s

tyle

s ca

refu

lly a

nd

corr

ectly

.

Not

ewor

thy

for

crea

ting

own

styl

es t

hat

enha

nce

the

clar

ity o

f do

cum

ents

.

Gen

erat

ing

tabl

es o

f co

nten

ts

auto

mat

ical

ly

Igno

res

the

poss

ibili

ty

of u

tilis

ing

tabl

es o

f co

nten

ts.

Mak

es m

ista

kes

in t

he

auto

mat

ic c

reat

ion

of

tabl

es o

f co

nten

ts (l

ack

of u

pdat

ing,

alig

nmen

t er

rors

, ref

eren

ce t

o ite

ms

that

no

long

er

exis

t, e

tc.).

Cor

rect

ly g

ener

ates

ta

bles

of

cont

ents

ba

sed

on t

he u

se o

f tit

le s

tyle

s.

Util

ises

tab

les

of

cont

ents

of

sect

ion

title

s an

d of

var

ious

ty

pes

of it

ems

(fig

ures

, tab

les,

etc

.).

Util

ises

tab

les

of c

onte

nts

and

cros

s re

fere

nces

with

ac

cura

cy a

nd e

ase.

Com

bini

ng t

empl

ates

w

ith li

sts

of r

ecor

dsIg

nore

s th

e ex

iste

nce

of c

ombi

ning

co

rres

pond

ence

dat

a w

hen

this

wou

ld

prov

e us

eful

.

Util

ises

the

too

l of

com

bini

ng

corr

espo

nden

ce d

ata

with

obv

ious

lim

itatio

ns

or e

rror

s.

Cor

rect

ly u

tilis

es t

he

tool

of

com

bini

ng

corr

espo

nden

ce d

ata

to d

istr

ibut

e m

essa

ges

or g

ener

ate

docu

men

t lis

ts.

Cor

rect

ly u

tilis

es t

he

tool

of

com

bini

ng

corr

espo

nden

ce d

ata

appr

opria

tely

filt

erin

g re

cord

s.

Util

ises

the

too

l of

com

bini

ng

corr

espo

nden

ce d

ata,

pe

rson

alis

ing

mes

sage

s or

fil

es u

sing

con

ditio

nal

clau

ses.

Usi

ng t

ext

proc

esso

r m

acro

sIg

nore

s th

e ex

iste

nce

of m

acro

s in

tex

t pr

oces

sor

whe

n th

ey

wou

ld p

rove

use

ful.

Mak

es m

ista

kes

in t

he

utili

satio

n of

tex

t pr

oces

sor

mac

ros.

Reco

rds

and

exec

utes

te

xt p

roce

ssor

m

acro

s, w

ithou

t m

odify

ing

them

.

Reco

rds

text

pr

oces

sor

mac

ros,

ed

iting

and

m

odify

ing

them

for

ow

n us

e.

Has

a b

atte

ry o

f pe

rson

alis

ed m

acro

s to

sp

eed

up r

epet

itive

, fr

eque

ntly

-use

d ta

sks.

Pers

onal

isin

g te

xt

proc

esso

r m

enus

and

ic

ons

Igno

res

the

poss

ibili

ty

of p

erso

nalis

ing

men

us a

nd ic

ons.

Pers

onal

ises

men

us a

nd

icon

s bu

t in

di

sorg

anis

ed o

r in

effic

ient

man

ner.

Cor

rect

ly p

erso

nalis

es

text

pro

cess

or m

enus

an

d ic

ons.

Cor

rect

ly

pers

onal

ises

tex

t pr

oces

sor

men

us a

nd

icon

s, a

s w

ell a

s ke

yboa

rd c

omm

ands

fo

r th

e fu

nctio

ns t

hat

he/s

he u

ses

mos

t.

Pers

onal

ises

tex

t pr

oces

sor

men

us, i

cons

, ke

yboa

rd c

omm

ands

and

te

mpl

ates

.



174

Leve

ls o

f M

aste

ryIn

dic

ato

rsD

escr

ipto

rs

12

34

5

Third

leve

l of

mas

tery

:Ed

iting

com

plex

te

xt d

ocum

ents

, ev

en u

sing

m

acro

s, a

nd

man

agin

g sp

read

shee

ts

thro

ugh

func

tions

and

re

fere

nces

Con

figur

ing

the

form

at o

f sp

read

shee

ts

His

/her

spr

eads

heet

s ha

ve a

n irr

egul

ar o

r in

corr

ect

look

tha

t gr

eatly

hin

ders

re

adin

g.

Mak

es c

erta

in e

rror

s in

fo

rmat

ting

spre

adsh

eets

.

His

/her

spr

eads

heet

s ha

ve c

orre

ct f

orm

at

(util

isat

ion

of s

ever

al

shee

ts, s

ourc

es,

bord

ers,

cel

l wid

ths

and

heig

hts,

etc

.).

His

/her

spr

eads

heet

s ha

ve c

orre

ct f

orm

at

and

incl

ude

imag

es,

butt

ons

or h

yper

links

.

Not

ewor

thy

for

the

func

tiona

lity,

cor

rect

ion

and

clar

ity o

f hi

s/he

r sp

read

shee

ts.

Usi

ng r

efer

ence

s in

sp

read

shee

tsFo

rget

s to

use

re

fere

nces

in

spre

adsh

eets

eve

n w

hen

nece

ssar

y.

Mak

es m

ista

kes

in t

he

utili

satio

n of

ref

eren

ces

in s

prea

dshe

ets.

Util

ises

ref

eren

ces

with

in a

sin

gle

spre

adsh

eet.

Util

ises

ref

eren

ces

betw

een

diff

eren

t sh

eets

of

the

sam

e bo

ok o

r ut

ilise

s na

mes

.

Con

sults

or

exch

ange

s ex

tern

al d

ata

in

spre

adsh

eets

.

Usi

ng f

unct

ions

in

spre

adsh

eets

Cal

cula

tes

man

ually

or

with

a c

alcu

lato

r ra

ther

tha

n us

ing

spre

adsh

eet

calc

ulat

ion

func

tions

.

Doe

s si

mpl

e ca

lcul

atio

n op

erat

ions

us

ing

mat

hem

atic

al

sym

bols

, w

itho

ut

actu

ally

usi

ng

func

tion

s.

Cor

rect

ly u

tilis

es

sim

ple

func

tions

in

spre

adsh

eets

.

Cor

rect

ly u

tilis

es

func

tions

of

cert

ain

com

plex

ity in

sp

read

shee

ts.

Cor

rect

ly u

tilis

es c

ompl

ex

and

cond

ition

al o

r ne

sted

fu

nctio

ns in

sp

read

shee

ts.



175

COMPETENCE: DATABASE MANAGEMENT

Description

Competence in database management means taking full advantage of the possibilities offered by computer programs to structure, gather and process information, and obtain results. Three roles are usually dis-tinguished in the database field: end users, database managers, and applications programmers. This competence synthesises and ranks, ap-proximately in the sequence in which the roles were listed, some of the most important aspects for each.

— At a first level of mastery, indicators are provided for profiling an end user, who is able to carry out basic operations such as simple designs, sorting or creating sort orders, searches for records, fil-ters, forms and reports.

— At the second level, students are expected to go beyond the user level and design more complex databases, establishing relations between sets of entities, transforming the conceptual schema into a relational model, and in general quickly understanding the keys to a situation or to the client’s requirements; and making sure that the design answers these needs.

— At the third level, the user works with SQL commands, linking them to other applications and normalising database outlines.


In the first place, database management is closely related to basic computer skills. One needs a certain level of basic user competence to begin database management. At the same time, database management is one of the basic uses of PCs.

Secondly, database management is particularly related to analytical and systemic thought. Database design requires good analytical think-ing, with a correct understanding of processes, how one works with series of data, identifying main elements and significant relationships, and also identifying information gaps.

Database management also requires a certain competence in sys-temic thought, to understand the complexity of a situation, its levels, and the interdependency relations between elements, so as to design databases that are comprehensive, stable and free of redundancies.



176


The daily life of any professional or student is always related to databases. Every time someone uses a credit card or library loan serv-ice, checks stock in a warehouse, looks up academic grades, or man-ages lists, they are accessing one of the millions of databases at work today.

At first, or in the most widely used databases, interaction with them is usually at the user level. Normally it is sufficient if we know how to look up information from the bank or library, without having to under-stand in detail how the database works internally.

However, in professional fields where university graduates work, they frequently have intense contact with certain databases. In some cases they may be involved in designing and developing a database used in their organisation. Also, it is often necessary to create, organise and use small-scale databases to manage smaller amounts of more specific data or information that is limited to a single context.

In any case, a certain level of competence in database management adds to users’ proficiency, making them more effective and efficient in their interaction with databases and able to achieve more with less time and effort.


Assessing the first level of proficiency in this competence can be done in various contexts and need not be confined to a specific subject. Any task will suffice where students have to design, create, feed and utilise a simple database. The database management level is essentially that of a basic computer user. Therefore, we can check the indicators in situations where students must exercise this basic level of database user know-how, no matter what the subject.

At the second and third levels of mastery, however, students are ex-pected to show deeper knowledge and greater proficiency in the use of databases, which will possibly require a more specific context. The sec-ond level corresponds to a user that is able to design complex databases, and the third to users that perform SQL operations and normalise data-bases. Accordingly, these require more advanced levels of training similar to diplomas or courses in computer science, although this knowledge is used to undertake work or projects in widely different fields.



177

COMPETENCE: DATABASE MANAGEMENT

Definition: Effectively organising (structuring, gathering, process-ing and obtaining results from) information in a situation or phe-nomenon, and making best use of the possibilities afforded by computer systems for database management.

Mastery of this competence is closely related to: Computer skills, analytical thinking, systemic thought.

Levels: (basic user – advanced user – administrator)

1. Demonstrating basic understanding of databases and correctly using a computer application to create and edit tables, relations between tables, data searches and simple forms and reports

2. Designing complex databases3. Programming in SQL and normalising database design

Indicators:

1. Database design2. Designing and using search, form and report layouts3. Establishing relations between entities4. Using searches, filters and sort orders5. Performing SQL operations.6. Normalising databases



178

Leve

ls o

f M

aste

ryIn

dic

ato

rsD

escr

ipto

rs

12

34

5

Firs

t le

vel o

f m

aste

ry:

Dem

on

stra

tin

g

bas

ic

un

der

stan

din

g o

f d

atab

ases

an

d

corr

ectl

y u

sin

g a

co

mp

ute

r ap

plic

atio

n t

o

crea

te a

nd

ed

it

tab

les,

rel

atio

ns

bet

wee

n t

able

s,

dat

a se

arch

es a

nd

si

mp

le f

orm

s an

d

rep

ort

s

Des

ign

ing

an

d

crea

tin

g s

imp

le

tab

les

Fails

to

use

data

base

s w

here

to

do s

o w

ould

be

clea

rly

adva

ntag

eous

, or

key

field

s m

issi

ng in

a

give

n co

ntex

t.

Mak

es im

port

ant

mis

take

s in

set

ting

up f

ield

s (e

.g.,

omis

sion

s,

reite

ratio

ns, e

tc.)

Sets

up

adeq

uate

an

d ap

prop

riate

fie

lds.

App

ropr

iate

ly

esta

blis

hes

field

s an

d so

me

prop

ertie

s (e

.g.,

pred

eter

min

ed v

alue

, va

lidat

ion

rule

, etc

.)

App

ropr

iate

ly

esta

blis

hes

field

s an

d co

nfig

ures

alm

ost

all

prop

ertie

s.

Esta

blis

hin

g a

p

rim

ary

key

Fails

to

esta

blis

h pr

imar

y ke

ys w

here

ne

cess

ary.

Esta

blis

hes

a pr

imar

y ke

y in

a f

ield

whe

re

repe

ated

val

ues

mus

t la

ter

be u

sed.

Esta

blis

hes

a co

rrec

t pr

imar

y ke

y.Es

tabl

ishe

s a

corr

ect

prim

ary

key

that

is

easy

to

use

and

fairl

y ex

tend

ed.

Esta

blish

es a

sta

ble

and

relia

ble

prim

ary

key

(con

tain

ing

an

auto

mat

ic e

rror

de

tect

ion

mec

hani

sm).

Ord

erin

g, s

earc

hin

g

and

filt

erin

g

reco

rds

Mak

es s

erio

us

mis

take

s or

fai

ls t

o pe

rfor

m b

asic

sor

t,

sear

ch a

nd f

ilter

ing

oper

atio

ns.

Perf

orm

s se

arch

or

filte

ring

oper

atio

ns

with

slig

ht e

rror

s.

Ord

ers,

sea

rche

s an

d fil

ters

cor

rect

ly in

a

tabl

e.

Cor

rect

ly u

tilis

es

sim

ple

sear

ches

to

orde

r, fin

d an

d fil

ter

reco

rds.

Dev

ises

com

plex

se

arch

es to

ord

er, f

ind

and

filte

r rec

ords

(e.g

., in

clud

ing

diff

eren

t ty

pes

of re

latio

ns,

calc

ulat

ed fi

elds

, etc

.)

Des

ign

ing

sim

ple

fo

rms

Des

igns

cle

arly

in

corr

ect

or

inco

mpl

ete

form

s.

Des

igns

for

ms

that

ar

e di

sorg

anis

ed o

r ha

ve s

light

err

ors.

Cre

ates

sim

ple

form

s th

at a

re c

orre

ct a

nd

orde

red

in a

sin

gle

tabl

e.

Cre

ates

form

s th

at a

re

corr

ect a

nd o

rder

ed

and

have

a c

erta

in

degr

ee o

f ela

bora

tion.

Cre

ates

cor

rect

for

ms

inte

grat

ing

info

rmat

ion

from

se

vera

l tab

les.

Des

ign

ing

sim

ple

re

po

rts

Fails

to

desi

gn r

epor

t la

yout

s th

at a

re

nece

ssar

y.

Des

igns

rep

ort

layo

uts

with

err

ors

or

inad

equa

cies

for

the

ta

sk in

han

d.

Cor

rect

ly g

ener

ates

si

mpl

e re

port

sui

ted

to t

he t

ask

in h

and.

Cre

ates

sim

ple,

co

rrec

t re

port

s th

at

mee

t an

d go

bey

ond

requ

irem

ents

, add

ing

sens

ible

info

rmat

ion

not

spec

ifica

lly c

alle

d fo

r in

the

ass

ignm

ent.

Cre

ates

com

plex

, co

rrec

t re

port

s th

at

fully

res

pond

to

spec

ified

and

un

fore

seen

in

form

atio

n re

quire

men

ts.

Esta

blis

hin

g

rela

tio

nsh

ips

bet

wee

n t

able

s

Still

has

sep

arat

e ta

bles

tha

t ne

ed t

o be

link

ed.

Mak

es m

ista

kes

in

esta

blis

hing

rel

atio

ns

betw

een

tabl

es.

Cor

rect

ly e

stab

lishe

s si

mpl

e re

latio

ns

betw

een

two

tabl

es

thro

ugh

prim

ary

keys

.

Cor

rect

ly e

stab

lishe

s re

latio

ns b

etw

een

mor

e th

an t

wo

tabl

es.

Cor

rect

ly e

stab

lishe

s co

mpl

ex r

elat

ions

be

twee

n 5

or m

ore

tabl

es.



179

Leve

ls o

f M

aste

ryIn

dic

ato

rsD

escr

ipto

rs

12

34

5

Seco

nd

leve

l of

mas

tery

:D

esig

nin

g c

om

ple

x d

atab

ases

Form

ula

tin

g t

he

con

cep

tual

sch

ema

of

a d

atab

ase

des

ign

Con

fuse

s in

tern

al

and

exte

rnal

leve

ls in

de

sign

ing

a da

taba

se.

Mak

es s

ome

mis

take

s in

for

mul

atin

g a

conc

eptu

al s

chem

a.

Cor

rect

ly d

evis

es a

si

mpl

e co

ncep

tual

sc

hem

a.

Cor

rect

ly d

evis

es a

co

ncep

tual

sch

ema

of c

erta

in c

ompl

exity

.

Exte

rnal

leve

l and

co

ncep

tual

sch

ema

elem

ents

est

ablis

hed

corr

ectly

, com

plet

ely

and

in d

etai

l.

Esta

blis

hin

g v

ario

us

typ

es o

f re

lati

on

s b

etw

een

set

s o

f en

titi

es

Mak

es m

ista

kes

in

sele

ctin

g th

e ty

pe o

f re

latio

n or

es

tabl

ishi

ng k

eys.

Onl

y us

es t

he m

ost

sim

ple

type

s of

re

latio

n.

Cor

rect

ly u

tilis

es

vario

us t

ypes

of

rela

tions

bet

wee

n se

ts o

f en

titie

s (e

.g.;

one-

to-o

ne, 1

-N,

degr

ee 1

).

App

ropr

iate

ly u

ses

vario

us t

ypes

of

rela

tions

bet

wee

n se

ts o

f en

titie

s,

incl

udin

g so

me

fairl

y co

mpl

ex t

ypes

.

Mak

es c

orre

ct

alte

rnat

ive

prop

osal

s fo

r m

ore

com

plex

ty

pes

of r

elat

ion

(e.g

., N

-M, t

erna

ry)

Tran

sfo

rmin

g

con

cep

tual

sch

ema

into

a r

elat

ion

al

mo

del

Mak

es m

ista

kes

with

se

rious

con

sequ

ence

s in

tra

nsfo

rmin

g a

conc

eptu

al s

chem

a in

to a

rel

atio

nal

mod

el.

Mak

es m

ista

kes

with

sl

ight

con

sequ

ence

s in

tra

nsfo

rmin

g a

conc

eptu

al s

chem

a in

to a

rel

atio

nal

mod

el.

Cor

rect

ly t

rans

form

s a

sim

ple

conc

eptu

al

sche

ma

into

a

rela

tiona

l mod

el.

Cor

rect

ly t

rans

form

s a

com

plex

con

cept

ual

sche

ma

into

a

rela

tiona

l mod

el.

Cor

rect

ly t

rans

form

s co

mpl

ex c

once

ptua

l sc

hem

a in

to a

re

latio

nal m

odel

; and

co

rrec

tly f

orm

ulat

es

the

stro

ng a

nd w

eak

poin

ts o

f th

e sc

hem

a.

Form

ula

tin

g

iden

tity

ru

les

for

exte

rnal

key

s in

cr

eati

ng

rel

atio

nal

m

od

els

Forg

ets

to f

orm

ulat

e ru

les

of in

tegr

ity f

or

exte

rnal

key

s.

Mak

es s

ome

mis

take

s in

for

mul

atin

g ru

les

of in

tegr

ity f

or

exte

rnal

key

s.

Cor

rect

ly f

orm

ulat

es

rule

s of

inte

grity

for

ex

tern

al k

eys.

Prov

ides

tip

s fo

r us

ers

in c

ase

of c

onfli

ct

with

a g

iven

rul

e of

in

tegr

ity.

Form

ulat

es

proc

edur

es t

o he

lp

user

s to

dea

l co

nstr

uctiv

ely

with

se

vera

l pos

sibl

e in

cide

nts

invo

lvin

g in

tegr

ity.

Qu

ickl

y u

nd

erst

and

ing

th

e ke

ys t

o t

he

situ

atio

n

or

to t

he

clie

nt’

s n

eed

s

Ove

rlook

s ke

y as

pect

s of

the

con

text

or

need

s sp

ecifi

ed b

y th

e cl

ient

whe

n de

sign

ing

conc

eptu

al

sche

ma.

Des

igns

con

cept

ual

sche

mat

a th

at

capt

ure

mos

t of

the

ne

eds

spec

ified

by

the

clie

nt o

r co

ntex

t.

Des

igns

con

cept

ual

sche

mat

a th

at

capt

ure

the

need

s sp

ecifi

ed b

y th

e cl

ient

or

con

text

.

Hel

ps t

he c

lient

or

the

pers

on a

naly

sing

the

si

tuat

ion

to f

orm

ulat

e re

quire

men

ts w

ith

bett

er f

ores

ight

, an

ticip

atin

g un

fore

seen

nee

ds.

Mak

es p

rovi

sion

for

ne

eds

not

fore

seen

by

the

clie

nt o

r in

clud

ed in

the

av

aila

ble

desc

riptio

n of

the

situ

atio

n.



180

Leve

ls o

f M

aste

ryIn

dic

ato

rsD

escr

ipto

rs

12

34

5

Thir

d le

vel o

f m

aste

ry:

Pro

gra

mm

ing

in

SQL

and

n

orm

alis

ing

d

atab

ase

des

ign

Perf

orm

ing

u

pd

atin

g a

nd

SQ

L d

ata

sele

ctio

n

op

erat

ion

s

Mak

es m

ista

kes

with

se

rious

con

sequ

ence

s w

hen

perf

orm

ing

upda

ting

and

SQL

data

sel

ectio

n op

erat

ions

.

Mak

es m

ista

kes

with

sl

ight

con

sequ

ence

s w

hen

perf

orm

ing

upda

ting

and

SQL

data

sel

ectio

n op

erat

ions

.

Cor

rect

ly p

erfo

rms

sim

ple

upda

ting

and

SQL

data

sel

ectio

n op

erat

ions

.

Cor

rect

ly p

erfo

rms

fairl

y co

mpl

ex S

QL

oper

atio

ns (e

.g.,

man

y fie

lds,

with

m

ore

than

one

tab

le

invo

lved

).

Cor

rect

ly p

erfo

rms

com

plex

SQ

L op

erat

ions

(e.g

., se

vera

l tab

les

invo

lved

, com

plex

co

nstr

aint

s, lo

ops

of

vario

us le

vels

, etc

.).

Uti

lisin

g s

tan

dar

d

SQL

fun

ctio

ns

(co

lum

n a

nd

sca

le

fun

ctio

ns)

Fails

to

see

clea

r er

rors

in t

he u

se o

f SQ

L co

lum

n an

d sc

ale

func

tions

.

Mak

es o

ne o

r m

ore

mis

take

s in

usi

ng

colu

mn

and

scal

e fu

nctio

ns a

nd

iden

tifie

s th

em.

Cor

rect

ly u

tilis

es

stan

dard

SQ

L fu

nctio

ns f

or s

impl

e da

ta s

elec

tion.

Cor

rect

ly u

tilis

es f

airly

co

mpl

ex s

tand

ard

func

tions

and

es

tabl

ishe

s pr

oced

ures

for

the

sy

stem

atic

val

idat

ion

of t

he f

inal

res

ult.

Mak

es c

ompl

ex d

ata

sele

ctio

ns c

ombi

ning

co

lum

n an

d sc

ale

func

tions

and

es

tabl

ishi

ng

proc

edur

es f

or

syst

emat

ic v

alid

atio

n of

the

fin

al r

esul

t.

Perf

orm

ing

su

bq

uer

ies

on

th

e re

sult

s o

f an

oth

er

sub

qu

ery

Fails

to

perf

orm

su

bque

ries

whe

n th

ey a

re n

eede

d.

Mak

es s

ome

mis

take

s in

per

form

ing

a su

bque

ry.

Cor

rect

ly p

erfo

rms

a si

mpl

e su

bque

ry o

n th

e re

sults

of

anot

her

subq

uery

.

Perf

orm

s va

rious

fa

irly

com

plex

su

bque

ries.

Perf

orm

s va

rious

co

mpl

ex s

ubqu

erie

s.

Esta

blis

hin

g li

nks

b

etw

een

SQ

L an

d

ano

ther

ap

plic

atio

n

(tex

t p

roce

sso

r, sp

read

shee

t,

spec

ific

ap

plic

atio

n,

etc.

)

Reco

nstr

ucts

in

para

llel a

nd

indi

vidu

ally

the

da

taba

ses

in t

wo

unco

nnec

ted

appl

icat

ions

.

Mak

es m

ista

kes

in

esta

blis

hing

link

s be

twee

n SQ

L an

d ot

her

appl

icat

ions

.

Cor

rect

ly e

stab

lishe

s lin

ks b

etw

een

SQL

and

anot

her

appl

icat

ion.

Esta

blis

hes

links

of

cert

ain

com

plex

ity

betw

een

SQL

and

seve

ral a

pplic

atio

ns

(e.g

., te

xt p

roce

ssor

s,

spre

adsh

eets

, spe

cific

ap

plic

atio

ns, e

tc.)

Des

igns

mac

ros

in

othe

r ap

plic

atio

ns t

o m

anag

e lin

ks w

ith

SQL.

No

rmal

isin

g

dat

abas

e sc

hem

aH

is/h

er d

esig

n pr

esen

ts p

robl

ems

(can

’t s

tore

cer

tain

fa

cts,

red

unda

ncie

s,

ambi

guiti

es, e

tc.)

that

cou

ld h

ave

been

av

oide

d th

roug

h no

rmal

isat

ion.

App

lies

norm

alis

atio

n ex

cess

ivel

y,

insu

ffic

ient

ly o

r w

ith

erro

rs.

App

lies

norm

alis

atio

n ap

prop

riate

ly a

nd

corr

ectly

.

App

lies

norm

alis

atio

n ap

prop

riate

ly a

nd

corr

ectly

, exp

lain

ing

the

reas

ons

behi

nd

thes

e de

cisi

ons.

Nor

mal

isat

ion

appl

ied

brill

iant

ly, in

ter

ms

of

qual

ity, c

ompl

exity

, an

d co

nsid

erat

ion

of

the

poin

ts o

f vi

ew o

f th

e pr

ogra

mm

er,

adm

inis

trat

or a

nd

user

of

the

data

base

.



181

COMPETENCE: ORAL COMMUNICATION

Description

We all learned to talk as children and tend to think that we do it well, communicating effectively with others. But not much analysis is needed to dispel this common misconception. Breakdowns in communication are continuous. We think that we are saying what we mean to say and that the other person has understood us, but daily experience shows that both at home and at work, there is often a huge gap between what we were trying to convey and what has been understood.

Proficiency in oral communication means being effective in convey-ing ideas, knowledge and feelings through words, both in conversa-tion and in group activities such as talks before audiences of different sizes.

The lower end of the range is occupied by those few people who al-ways remain quiet, even in situations that require their active participation. The causes of such behaviour must be sought in psychological factors, such as extreme shyness or a total lack of self-confidence. Much more frequent are problems associated with rambling, unclear expression that hinders and even impedes comprehension on the part of others. In such speech there may be a lack of logical structure, contradictions between what is expressed in words and conveyed through body language, or the use of poor examples and other means of support that are inappropriate for what one is trying to say or the characteristics of the audience.

At the top end are the people who have mastered this competence, people who speak clearly and effectively, with well-structured discourse suited to the audience, body language that matches and corroborates what is being said, good tone of voice and means of support, and a gen-eral capacity to communicate effectively what one wishes to convey.

When mastery of this competence is combined with good discourse content and personal charisma, the speaker can have a decisive influ-ence on others’ ways of thinking and acting, and therefore the social consequences of good oral communication skills are potentially very im-portant.


Competence in oral communication is inseparable from the compe-tences of interpersonal communication, because in order to establish



182

positive relations with others it is essential to share ideas, information and feelings.

To master this competence, people need to have sufficient degrees of self-confidence and self-esteem, but these two attributes can be en-hanced precisely through practice in oral communication and perceived results.

The effectiveness of communication depends to a large extent on one’s capacity to think reflectively, and it is fundamental for developing team thinking. It is also a requirement for mastery of the competences of negotiation, teamwork, conflict management and leadership.

Because speech is not effective if it is not suited to the audience, oral communication skills are related to adaptability. And because of the in-fluence that oral communication has on the formation of others’ atti-tudes and behaviours, this skill is related to ethical competence.


Students must communicate with their classmates, particularly when they have to undertake group activities or projects, participate in class either asking questions to clarify doubts or during class discussions. Moreover, students are increasingly being required to present talks on outside work before the rest of the class. How do students perform in such situations?

Not all behave in the same way. Some (generally few in our context) participate easily, expressing their doubts and opinions without appar-ent effort. Most, however, find that speaking in public is a challenge still to be mastered. When called on by lecturers, some students even prefer to remain quiet, accepting the possible negative consequences that this will have on their grade, or answer with monosyllables out of embar-rassment at having to speak up so others can hear them. In the case of talks before the class, their nervousness is visible and sometimes leads to mental blocks and forgetting everything they were going to say in public.

The consequences are negative for themselves, in lowering their grade, and for others who miss out on opinions or points of view that could help them in their thinking and learning. When students speak but do so in a confusing, disorderly or unconvincing way, the results are practically the same. A good part of students’ academic work would improve if they could gain proficiency in oral communication.



183

In professional life, except in cases where people work alone apart from colleagues and third persons (suppliers, clients, etc.), the conse-quences of lack of good communication are reflected in loss of time, effectiveness and, from the individual point of view, opportunities for promotion.


Becoming a good speaker is not easy, but with relatively simple in-structions and through practice to overcome shyness and personal limi-tations, it is possible to help most students to improve substantially their ability to express themselves correctly and to speak before an audience.

Practicing debates, direct questioning, incentives in the form of “ad-ditional points” for participation, and the inclusion of student talks may be sufficient to help a majority to achieve an acceptable degree of profi-ciency in this competence over the course of their university studies.



184

COMPETENCE: ORAL COMMUNICATION

Definition: Expressing clearly and opportunely one’s ideas, knowl-edge and feelings in speech, adapting to the audience and situa-tion to ensure good comprehension and attention

Mastery of this competence is closely related to: Reflective thinking, deliberative thinking, team thinking, self-motivation, interpersonal communication, foreign language proficiency, teamwork, negotia-tion, leadership, self-esteem, self-image, self-confidence, etc.

Levels of mastery:

1. Expressing own ideas in a structured, intelligible way, participat-ing opportunely and significantly in informal, formal and struc-tured conversations and discussions

2. Taking the floor in groups with ease; conveying conviction and assurance, and adapting discourse to suit formal requirements

3. Easily managing to capture and persuade audiences, adapting the means and the message to the situation and the audience.

Indicators:

1. Initiative, opportunity2. Content 3. Self-control4. Structure5. Visual aids6. Fielding questions



185

Leve

ls o

f M

aste

ryIn

dic

ato

rsD

escr

ipto

rs

12

34

5

Firs

t le

vel o

f m

aste

ry:

Exp

ress

ing

ow

n

idea

s in

a

stru

ctu

red

, in

telli

gib

le w

ay,

par

tici

pat

ing

o

pp

ort

un

ely

and

si

gn

ific

antl

y in

in

form

al, f

orm

al

and

str

uct

ure

d

con

vers

atio

ns

and

d

iscu

ssio

ns

Taki

ng

par

t in

sp

eech

sit

uat

ion

s D

oesn

’t s

peak

eve

n w

hen

calle

d on

.Ba

rely

spe

aks

whe

n ca

lled

on.

Spea

ks a

t le

ngth

w

hen

calle

d on

.Sp

eaks

on

own

initi

ativ

e.N

otew

orth

y fo

r ap

prop

riate

co

ntrib

utio

ns m

ade

on o

wn

initi

ativ

e.

Co

nve

yin

g

imp

ort

ant

info

rmat

ion

Expr

esse

s se

lf po

orly

or

con

fuse

dly.

Pres

ents

som

e id

eas.

Expr

esse

s w

ell-

reas

oned

idea

s.C

onve

ys r

easo

ning

an

d/or

val

ues/

attit

udes

.

Not

ewor

thy

for

the

clar

ity in

spe

ech

of

reas

onin

g an

d/or

fe

elin

gs.

Co

ntr

olli

ng

ner

ves

suff

icie

ntl

y to

ex

pre

ss s

elf

in

pu

blic

Can

’t s

peak

due

to

nerv

es; g

ets

bloc

ked.

Spea

ks b

ut is

no

ticea

bly

nerv

ous

and

ill a

t ea

se.

Expr

esse

s se

lf w

ith a

ce

rtai

n tr

anqu

illity

.Ex

pres

ses

self

with

as

sura

nce.

Expr

esse

s se

lf w

ith

ease

and

not

ewor

thy

prof

icie

ncy.

Del

iver

ing

st

ruct

ure

d t

alks

m

eeti

ng

an

y sp

ecif

ied

re

qu

irem

ents

th

at

may

exi

st

His

/her

tal

ks la

ck

inte

lligi

ble

stru

ctur

e.St

ruct

ure

of t

alk

not

effe

ctiv

e or

fai

ls t

o m

eet

stip

ulat

ed

requ

irem

ents

.

Talk

s ar

e st

ruct

ured

, m

eetin

g st

ipul

ated

re

quire

men

ts, i

f an

y.

Link

s id

eas

and

argu

men

ts w

ith e

ase.

Giv

es e

ffec

tive,

w

ell-o

rgan

ised

tal

k.

Usi

ng

vis

ual

aid

s in

g

ivin

g t

alks

Doe

sn’t

use

the

vis

ual

aids

req

uire

d or

re

ason

ably

nec

essa

ry.

The

visu

al a

ids

utili

sed

are

not

appr

opria

te f

or t

he

talk

.

Util

ises

req

uire

d or

re

ason

ably

nec

essa

ry

visu

al a

ids.

Util

isat

ion

of v

isua

l ai

ds h

elps

the

au

dien

ce t

o fo

llow

th

e ta

lk.

Use

s vi

sual

aid

s ef

fect

ivel

y to

em

phas

ise

key

poin

ts

of t

alk.

Fiel

din

g q

ues

tio

ns

Doe

sn’t

kno

w h

ow t

o re

spon

d to

the

qu

estio

ns t

hat

he/s

he

is a

sked

.

Resp

onds

to

the

ques

tions

tha

t he

/she

is

ask

ed w

ithou

t ac

tual

ly a

nsw

erin

g th

em.

Kno

ws

how

to

resp

ond

to t

he

ques

tions

tha

t he

/she

is

ask

ed.

Resp

onds

wel

l to

the

ques

tions

tha

t he

/she

is

ask

ed.

Resp

onds

wel

l and

ea

sily

to

the

ques

tions

tha

t he

/she

is

ask

ed.



186

Leve

ls o

f M

aste

ryIn

dic

ato

rsD

escr

ipto

rs

12

34

5

Seco

nd

leve

l of

mas

tery

:Sp

eaki

ng

bef

ore

g

rou

ps

wit

h e

ase;

co

nve

yin

g

con

vict

iao

n a

nd

as

sura

nce

, an

d

adap

tin

g d

isco

urs

e to

su

it f

orm

al

req

uir

emen

ts

Del

iver

ing

in

tere

stin

g,

con

vin

cin

g t

alks

Doe

sn’t

man

age

to

capt

ure

atte

ntio

n.In

term

itten

tly

man

ages

to

capt

ure

atte

ntio

n.

Man

ages

to

capt

ure

and

mai

ntai

n at

tent

ion.

Is c

onvi

ncin

g.N

otew

orth

y fo

r po

wer

of

conv

ictio

n.

Vo

lun

tari

ly g

ivin

g

op

po

rtu

ne

talk

s in

p

ub

lic

Nev

er v

olun

teer

s to

de

liver

tal

k.Vo

lunt

eers

, but

doe

s so

inop

port

unel

y.M

akes

vol

unta

ry

oppo

rtun

e ta

lks

in

publ

ic.

His

/her

vol

unta

ry

talk

s fo

ster

the

pa

rtic

ipat

ion

of

othe

rs.

His

/her

vol

unta

ry

cont

ribut

ions

inje

ct

adde

d va

lue

at k

ey

mom

ents

in t

he

proc

ess.

Mat

chin

g s

pee

ch

and

bo

dy

lan

gu

age

Body

lang

uage

co

ntra

dict

s an

d di

stra

cts

from

ora

l di

scou

rse.

Spee

ch a

nd b

ody

lang

uage

som

etim

es

cont

radi

ct e

ach

othe

r.

Body

lang

uage

is

appr

opria

te t

o or

al

disc

ours

e.

Mod

ulat

es b

ody

lang

uage

to

emph

asis

e th

e ke

ys t

o hi

s/he

r di

scou

rse.

Body

lang

uage

is

natu

ral a

nd

appr

opria

te f

or t

he

audi

ence

.

His

/her

tal

ks a

re

du

ly p

rep

ared

Talk

not

str

uctu

red.

Talk

not

flu

id.

The

talk

sho

ws

stru

ctur

e an

d rig

our.

The

audi

ence

cle

arly

gr

asps

con

tent

st

ruct

ure.

The

stru

ctur

e an

d ta

lk a

re a

ppro

pria

te

for

the

type

of

audi

ence

.

Hel

pin

g a

ud

ien

ce t

o

follo

w id

eas

thro

ug

h v

isu

al a

ids

Use

s re

quire

d or

re

ason

ably

nec

essa

ry

visu

al a

ids.

Vis

ual a

ids

help

the

au

dien

ce t

o fo

llow

th

e ta

lk.

Key

s to

the

tal

k em

phas

ised

thr

ough

vi

sual

aid

s.

Aud

ienc

e gr

asps

key

s m

ore

easi

ly t

hank

s to

vi

sual

aid

s.

The

visu

al a

ids

used

hel

p th

e au

dien

ce t

o as

sim

ilate

con

tent

.

Res

po

nd

ing

to

q

ues

tio

ns

easi

ly a

nd

w

ell

Onl

y re

spon

ds.

His

/her

ans

wer

s su

ppor

t ta

lk.

Util

ises

que

stio

ns t

o re

spon

d an

d to

de

velo

p th

e ta

lk.

Util

ises

que

stio

ns t

o st

imul

ate

audi

ence

in

tere

st.

His

/her

res

pons

es

gene

rate

new

ob

serv

atio

ns a

nd

ques

tions

.



187

Leve

ls o

f M

aste

ryIn

dic

ato

rsD

escr

ipto

rs

12

34

5

Thir

d le

vel o

f m

as-

tery

:Ea

sily

man

agin

g t

o

cap

ture

an

d

per

suad

e au

die

nce

s,

adap

tin

g t

he

mes

sag

e an

d t

he

mea

ns

emp

loye

d t

o

the

char

acte

rist

ics

of

the

situ

atio

n a

nd

au

die

nce

Infl

uen

cin

g t

he

aud

ien

ce in

an

et

hic

al m

ann

er

Doe

sn’t

influ

ence

the

au

dien

ce. S

how

s du

biou

s et

hics

.

Mak

es im

pact

on

the

audi

ence

at

som

e po

ints

of

his/

her

talk

, w

ithou

t m

anip

ulat

ion.

Get

s th

e au

dien

ce t

o se

e th

ings

in a

noth

er

way

, with

out

man

ipul

atio

n.

Get

s th

e au

dien

ce t

o qu

estio

n th

eir

own

poin

ts o

f vi

ew.

Not

ewor

thy

for

influ

ence

on

othe

rs

actin

g in

an

ethi

cal

man

ner.

Ap

pro

pri

atel

y ill

ust

rati

ng

idea

s w

ith

exa

mp

les,

an

alo

gie

s,

met

aph

ors

an

d

oth

er r

eso

urc

es

Onl

y pr

esen

ts

info

rmat

ion.

Illus

trat

ive

devi

ces

help

to

high

light

ke

ys.

The

audi

ence

un

ders

tand

s co

nten

t th

anks

to

the

inte

grat

ion

of

illus

trat

ive

devi

ces

in

the

talk

.

Inte

grat

ion

of

illus

trat

ive

devi

ces

is

appr

opria

te f

or t

he

cont

ext.

Illus

trat

ive

devi

ces

help

the

aud

ienc

e to

qu

estio

n ow

n id

eas.

Suit

ing

ar

gu

men

tati

on

to

d

iffe

ren

t g

rou

ps

and

/or

pre

-es

tab

lish

ed

situ

atio

ns

Arg

umen

tatio

n is

st

ruct

ured

and

rig

orou

s.

The

audi

ence

cle

arly

gr

asps

the

arg

umen

t.Th

e ar

gum

ent

and

pres

enta

tion

are

cons

iste

nt w

ith t

he

type

of

audi

ence

and

si

tuat

ion

fore

seen

.

Kno

ws

how

to

mod

ify a

rgum

ent

depe

ndin

g on

the

au

dien

ce a

nd t

he r

eal

situ

atio

n.

Ada

pts

argu

men

tatio

n w

ith

crea

tivity

to

real

si

tuat

ions

and

au

dien

ces.

Enco

ura

gin

g

aud

ien

ce

par

tici

pat

ion

an

d

aski

ng

of

con

stru

ctiv

e q

ues

tio

ns

to

pro

mo

te d

ialo

gu

e

Util

ises

que

stio

ns t

o re

spon

d an

d to

de

velo

p th

e pr

esen

tatio

n.

Util

ises

que

stio

ns t

o sp

ark

audi

ence

in

tere

st.

His

/her

res

pons

es

gene

rate

new

ob

serv

atio

ns a

nd

ques

tions

.

Enco

urag

es q

uest

ions

to

elic

it pa

rtic

ipat

ion.

Gen

erat

es d

ialo

gue

with

the

aud

ienc

e.

Ad

apti

ng

th

e fo

rm

of

a m

essa

ge

to

div

erse

sit

uat

ion

s

Form

of

expr

essi

on

does

n’t

take

into

ac

coun

t th

e si

tuat

ion

and

the

audi

ence

.

Form

of

expr

essi

on

part

ially

sui

ted

to t

he

situ

atio

n an

d th

e au

dien

ce.

Suits

way

of

spea

king

to

the

situ

atio

n an

d th

e au

dien

ce.

Not

ewor

thy

for

spon

tane

ity a

nd

adap

tatio

n of

way

of

spea

king

.

Mod

ifies

way

of

spea

king

sp

onta

neou

sly

depe

ndin

g on

au

dien

ce r

espo

nse.



188

COMPETENCE: WRITING SKILLS

Description

“Spoken words are borne away on the wind, written words re-main.”

A piece of writing, whether a simple letter or formal document, con-veys not only its content but also an image of the author. If the text is well organised, clear, grammatically correct and contains examples or graphics, it produces an agreeable impression on the reader. It is read with pleasure and meets the objective of establishing an effective rela-tion between the author and the reader. If it lacks these characteristics, it will be unenjoyable, incite boredom and fail to fulfil its communicative function.

The capacity to convey ideas, information and feelings through writing and graphic support is not innate. It is developed through practice, following instructions or imitating models to which we have access through reading. It requires orderly exposition and clarity in vocabulary, sentence construction and the use of punctuation. Ta-bles, figures or images will complement a text and summarise things that might be too complex or difficult to convey simply through words.

Although the correctness of certain formal aspects of a piece of writ-ing (styles, fonts, margins, etc.) can be achieved with relative ease thanks to everyday text processing programs, good written communication re-quires something more.

The structure of the text, for example, is fundamental for facilitat-ing legibility and comprehension. In long works, clear headings that inform the reader of subsequent content, do not confuse, and appear in an ordered sequence are an essential requirement. The inclusion of clear introductions at the beginning of complex works or sections, as well as conclusions or final summaries that appropriately synthesise the main text enhance comprehension and subsequent recall of the docu-ment.

The right choice of words, avoiding imprecision and ambiguities; conciseness, avoiding useless repetitions and wordy phrasing; and the use of examples or illustrations that clarify the most complicated aspects of the work will improve communication and make reading it more en-joyable. In addition, as noted above, such devices convey a better image of the author to whom we mentally attribute the qualities that we ob-serve in the text.



189


Writing skill is closely related to the competence of interpersonal communication, which is achieved only partially through oral communi-cation skills.

Skill in writing helps to order ideas, and therefore is related to differ-ent ways of thinking. Indeed, some people use writing to organise their ideas, not only to convey them.

Proficiency in this competence facilitates teamwork, conflict man-agement (the writing of agreements in precise terms not subject to inter-pretations can be a useful tool for overcoming conflictive situations) and negotiation.

Competence in writing is related to the systemic competences of organisation, facilitating objectives-based management (where objec-tives must be defined with precision and mean the same to all actors involved), project management and quality orientation.

Moreover, the positive results obtained thanks to proficiency in writ-ing skills reinforces self-esteem.


Writing up summaries and original papers forms part of the method-ology in a high percentage of university subjects. Almost all work done for assessment involves written answers to open questions, which ena-ble students to write their answers in their own style. This means that at least part of the total assessment that professors make is based on writ-ten work done or handed in by students. In many cases, this is the only item assessed.

Students who express themselves unclearly and hand in a wordy, rambling exam paper will give the lecturer the impression that they have not understood the subject sufficiently and will therefore earn a low grade. Their error may lie in their incapacity to convey their knowledge adequately in writing, but the consequence will appear on their aca-demic transcript.

For professional effectiveness, mastery of this competence can be-come even more important than proficiency in oral communication. In the latter, people tend to tolerate with relative ease redundancy and backtracking to fill in gaps, but in written communication such defects prove distracting, require additional effort on the part of the reader and



190

lead to failure to communicate. When a paper or document is aimed at many people, the effect on the author’s or company’s image can have serious consequences.


While it is supposed that students arrive at the university with suffi-cient mastery of spelling and syntax, the truth is that in many cases this assumption is false. Even if it were true, it is not sufficient to ensure good written communication. Students need clear instructions on how to write, including how to organise and present documents. Such basic information must be provided regardless of the type of studies they are enrolled in.

Lecturers should also evaluate written work not only for its content with regard to the subject in hand, but also for the way in which it is presented, giving points for good organisation and presentation, and pointing out errors of whatever type that students make.

Naturally, in order to ensure that students write well, it is very impor-tant that their recommended and assigned reading will serve as a model of good rhetorical strategies and devices.



191

COMPETENCE: WRITING SKILLS

Definition: Relating effectively to other persons through clear written expression of what one thinks and/or feels, using graphic support as necessary

Mastery of this competence is closely related to: Self-esteem, inter-personal communication, quality orientation, etc.

Levels of mastery:

1. Correctly and clearly communicating in short essays what one thinks or feels using appropriate devices

2. Communicating with ease in medium-length essays, structuring the contents of the text and support graphics to facilitate the reader’s understanding and interest

3. Writing long, complex essays convincingly, demonstrating own style in organisation and expression

Indicators:

1. Contents2. Clarity3. Proficiency 4. Suiting style to reader5. Using effective devices



192

Leve

ls o

f M

aste

ryIn

dic

ato

rsD

escr

ipto

rs

12

34

5

Firs

t le

vel o

f m

aste

ry:

Co

rrec

tly

and

cle

arly

co

mm

un

icat

ing

in

sho

rt e

ssay

s w

hat

o

ne

thin

ks o

r fe

els

usi

ng

eff

ecti

ve

dev

ices

Dea

ling

wit

h o

ne

spec

ific

to

pic

, w

ith

ou

t st

rayi

ng

in

to a

no

ther

Mix

es v

ario

us t

opic

s w

ithou

t cl

arify

ing

whi

ch is

the

mai

n on

e.

Leng

then

s es

say

with

un

nece

ssar

y re

petit

ions

or

ram

blin

g.

Focu

ses

on t

opic

w

ithou

t di

gres

sion

s.C

over

s al

l asp

ects

of

the

topi

c ac

cord

ing

to in

stru

ctio

ns.

Dea

ls w

ith t

he t

opic

in

dep

th, b

eyon

d w

hat

was

req

uire

d.

Cle

arly

exp

ress

ing

id

eas,

kn

ow

led

ge

or

feel

ing

s

Use

s co

nfus

ed, h

azy

expr

essi

ons.

Ver

y di

ffic

ult

to f

ollo

w.

Expr

essi

on c

an b

e un

ders

tood

but

the

es

say

is d

isor

gani

sed.

Pres

ents

the

diff

eren

t as

pect

s of

the

top

ic

in lo

gica

l ord

er.

Incl

udes

an

intr

oduc

tion,

de

velo

pmen

t an

d a

conc

lusi

on.

Org

anis

es t

he e

ssay

se

ctio

ns a

nd

para

grap

hs.

Wri

tin

g w

ell

gra

mm

atic

ally

Om

its s

ubje

cts

or

verb

s. U

ses

wro

ng

moo

d, t

ense

or

pers

ons

in v

erbs

.

Mak

es s

pelli

ng

mis

take

s.Th

e es

say

is c

orre

ct a

s fa

r as

spe

lling

and

sy

ntax

are

con

cern

ed.

The

essa

y is

cor

rect

as

far

as s

pelli

ng a

nd

synt

ax a

re c

once

rned

, an

d is

pun

ctua

ted

prop

erly.

Util

ises

pre

posi

tions

an

d co

njun

ctio

ns

wel

l.

Usi

ng

ap

pro

pri

ate

lan

gu

age

for

the

typ

e o

f d

ocu

men

t an

d r

ead

er

Use

s ow

n ab

brev

iatio

ns o

r ja

rgon

.

Use

s th

e te

rmin

olog

y of

the

sub

ject

in

corr

ectly

.

Suits

lang

uage

to

the

type

of

docu

men

t an

d re

ader

.

Cor

rect

ly u

ses

the

prop

er t

echn

ical

te

rmin

olog

y fo

r th

e su

bjec

t.

Use

s sy

nony

ms

to

clar

ify a

mbi

guou

s or

eq

uivo

cal t

erm

s.

Usi

ng

ap

pro

pri

ate

dev

ices

to

fac

ilita

te

read

ing

an

d

com

pre

hen

sio

n o

f th

e es

say

Doe

sn’t

use

ty

pogr

aphi

c de

vice

s (f

ont,

par

agra

ph,

styl

e fo

rmat

s, e

tc.).

Doe

sn’t

num

ber

page

s.

Ove

ruse

s fo

rmat

ting

devi

ces,

hin

derin

g co

mpr

ehen

sion

.

App

ropr

iate

ly u

ses

typo

grap

hic

devi

ces

(fon

t, p

arag

raph

, st

yle

form

ats,

etc

.).

Use

s fo

otno

tes

or

endn

otes

for

re

fere

nces

, co

mm

ents

, etc

.

Cle

arly

iden

tifie

s th

e es

say

and

its k

ey

elem

ents

.



193

Leve

ls o

f M

aste

ryIn

dic

ato

rsD

escr

ipto

rs

12

34

5

Seco

nd

leve

l of

mas

tery

:C

om

mu

nic

atin

g

wit

h e

ase

in

med

ium

-len

gth

es

says

, str

uct

uri

ng

co

nte

nts

an

d

gra

ph

ic m

ater

ial

to f

acili

tate

th

e re

ader

’s

un

der

stan

din

g a

nd

in

tere

st

Rel

atin

g v

ario

us

elem

ents

(fa

cts,

o

pin

ion

s, e

tc.)

to

ar

rive

at

con

clu

sio

ns

Mix

es f

acts

, opi

nion

s,

argu

men

ts a

nd

conc

lusi

ons

with

out

appa

rent

ord

er.

Dra

ws

conc

lusi

ons

not

base

d on

the

po

ints

mad

e in

the

es

say.

Dra

ws

conc

lusi

ons

base

d on

the

poi

nts

mad

e in

the

ess

ay.

Iden

tifie

s po

ssib

le

rese

rvat

ions

co

ncer

ning

co

nclu

sion

s or

gap

s in

info

rmat

ion.

Base

d on

co

nclu

sion

s, s

ees

or

prop

oses

pos

sibl

e re

latio

ns w

ith o

ther

to

pics

or

disc

iplin

es.

Stru

ctu

rin

g e

ssay

to

ai

d c

om

pre

hen

sio

n

Goe

s fr

om o

ne t

opic

to

ano

ther

with

out

usin

g he

adin

gs.

Use

s co

nfus

ing,

am

bigu

ous

or o

verly

lo

ng h

eadi

ngs.

Hea

ding

s ar

e br

ief

and

expl

icit

(iden

tifyi

ng w

ell t

he

follo

win

g co

nten

t).

Take

n to

geth

er, t

he

head

ings

cov

er t

he

full

cont

ent

and

are

mut

ually

exc

lusi

ve.

The

sequ

ence

of

head

ings

fol

low

s an

or

der

that

aid

s co

mpr

ehen

sion

.

Usi

ng

ap

pro

pri

ate

lan

gu

age

to c

on

vey

con

ten

ts

Use

s w

ords

or

expr

essi

ons

with

w

rong

mea

ning

.

Use

s ra

mbl

ing

expr

essi

ons.

Util

ises

wor

ds a

nd

expr

essi

ons

accu

rate

ly w

ith

prec

ise

mea

ning

.

Is c

onci

se. U

ses

clea

r, co

mpr

ehen

sibl

e se

nten

ces

(doe

sn’t

ra

mbl

e).

Is c

onci

se a

nd

illus

trat

es w

ith

exam

ples

poi

nts

that

co

uld

prov

e m

isle

adin

g.

Cap

turi

ng

rea

der

’s

inte

rest

Use

s in

appr

opria

te

styl

e th

at c

ause

s re

ject

ion.

The

essa

y is

bor

ing.

Use

s in

trod

uctio

n or

ot

her

devi

ces

to s

park

in

tere

st.

Way

of

appr

oach

ing

subj

ect

capt

ures

re

ader

’s in

tere

st.

Mai

ntai

ns in

tere

st t

ill

end,

man

agin

g to

su

rpris

e th

e re

ader

.

Incl

ud

ing

tab

les

and

g

rap

hs

suit

ed t

o t

he

con

ten

ts a

nd

rea

der

Doe

sn’t

use

tab

les

or

grap

hics

, onl

y te

xt.

Use

s po

orly

labe

lled,

in

appr

opria

te o

r po

orly

loca

ted

tabl

es

and

grap

hs.

Tabl

es a

nd g

raph

s ar

e ad

equa

te a

nd a

re

corr

ectly

loca

ted.

Tabl

es a

nd g

raph

s ar

e se

lf-ex

plan

ator

y w

ithou

t ne

ed o

f re

adin

g th

e te

xt.

Util

ises

tab

les

and

grap

hs w

ith

adde

d va

lue

that

are

wel

l in

tegr

ated

into

the

te

xt.



194

Leve

ls o

f M

aste

ryIn

dic

ato

rsD

escr

ipto

rs

12

34

5

Thir

d le

vel o

f m

aste

ry:

Wri

tin

g lo

ng

, co

mp

lex

essa

ys

con

vin

cin

gly

, d

emo

nst

rati

ng

o

wn

sty

le in

o

rgan

isat

ion

an

d

exp

ress

ion

Dev

elo

pin

g s

ub

ject

o

rig

inal

ly a

nd

co

mp

lete

ly

Use

s ot

hers

’ pa

ragr

aphs

with

out

citin

g th

e so

urce

(p

lagi

aris

m, «

copy

an

d pa

ste»

) or

is n

ot

com

plet

e.

Is c

ompl

ete,

but

w

ithou

t pe

rson

al

deve

lopm

ent.

Dev

elop

s to

pic

in

own

wor

ds a

nd w

ay:

orig

inal

and

co

mpl

ete.

Dev

elop

men

t of

the

to

pic

inco

rpor

ates

qu

otes

fro

m o

ther

au

thor

s th

at

stre

ngth

en a

rgum

ent.

Dev

elop

men

t of

the

to

pic

inco

rpor

ates

qu

otes

fro

m o

ther

au

thor

s th

at p

ut o

wn

argu

men

t to

the

tes

t.

Uti

lisin

g

nu

mer

atio

ns

that

h

elp

to

rel

ate

dif

fere

nt

par

ts

Fails

to

iden

tify

with

cl

arity

sub

divi

sion

s,

lists

, ann

exes

, etc

.

Use

s di

ffer

ent

type

s of

num

erat

ion

inap

prop

riate

ly.

Inte

rnal

ref

eren

ces

are

clea

r th

anks

to

prop

er u

se o

f nu

mer

atio

ns

(hea

ding

s, li

sts,

an

nexe

s, e

tc.).

Faci

litat

es

com

preh

ensi

on

com

bini

ng

num

erat

ion

and

subh

eadi

ngs.

Indi

cate

s hi

erar

chy

of

para

grap

hs a

lso

usin

g in

dent

ing.

Dem

on

stra

tin

g

ori

gin

alit

y an

d

pro

fici

ency

in u

se o

f la

ng

uag

e

Ove

ruse

s pa

ssiv

e vo

ice

and

impe

rson

al

phra

ses.

Use

s tr

ite e

xpre

ssio

ns

or is

red

unda

nt.

Expr

esse

s se

lf in

ac

tive

voic

e an

d w

ith

own

cons

truc

tions

.

Use

s sy

nony

ms

to

avoi

d re

petit

ion.

Li

vens

the

ess

ay w

ith

good

use

of

vario

us

devi

ces

(que

stio

ns,

excl

amat

ions

, etc

.).

Wri

tin

g e

ssay

s th

at

are

per

tin

ent

for

the

read

er a

nd

o

bje

ctiv

es

Incl

udes

info

rmat

ion,

ex

ampl

es,

digr

essi

ons,

etc

. tha

t ar

e no

t pe

rtin

ent.

The

cont

ents

sui

t to

pic

but

not

the

obje

ctiv

es.

The

cont

ents

are

pe

rtin

ent.

(Doe

sn’t

us

e «p

addi

ng»,

fo

cuse

s on

obj

ectiv

es).

In t

he in

trod

uctio

n,

spec

ifies

the

sco

pe

and

limits

of

the

essa

y.

Each

sec

tion

incl

udes

a

brie

f in

trod

uctio

n an

d a

final

sum

mar

y.

Enh

anci

ng

co

mp

reh

ensi

on

an

d

enjo

ymen

t o

f re

adin

g t

hro

ug

h

use

of

exam

ple

s,

met

aph

ors

, etc

.

Doe

sn’t

use

ex

ampl

es, m

etap

hors

, co

mpa

rison

s, e

tc.

Onl

y de

scrib

es a

nd

argu

es.

Use

s ex

ampl

es o

r m

etap

hors

tha

t ar

e in

appr

opria

te o

r ha

rd

to u

nder

stan

d.

Use

s ex

ampl

es,

met

apho

rs,

com

paris

ons,

etc

. th

at f

acili

tate

co

mpr

ehen

sion

.

Use

s a

styl

istic

dev

ice

that

enh

ance

s po

ints

th

roug

hout

the

ess

ay.

Exam

ple

and

met

apho

rs

inte

rwov

en in

the

st

ruct

ure

of t

he e

ssay

(t

itles

, hea

ding

s, e

tc.).



195

COMPETENCE: FOREIGN LANGUAGE PROFICIENCY

Description

Today it is hardly necessary to emphasise the importance of being able to speak a foreign language. Modern life makes it increasingly obvi-ous that people need to be proficient in several languages to get along in society.

Because of the proliferation of information sources and spread of knowledge, the capacity to communicate in one or more foreign lan-guages is a very important skill. This is all the more so in the case of students pursuing university degrees in Europe.

For university students, foreign language proficiency means the ca-pacity to communicate orally and in writing using one or more non-na-tive languages.

It is true that the students arriving at universities today already have some training in these capacities, but once enrolled, university students must consider the possibility of developing this competence to increase their training in their chosen field of study, thereby furthering their lan-guage skills.

The first level of mastery of this competence consists in the ability to use the foreign language with ease. That is, students must be able to exchange information reliably, read and write without difficulty, includ-ing university texts.

Improving written and oral communication skills in the foreign lan-guage constitutes the second level of mastery. At this level, assessment verifies the level of skill and ease with which students handle daily and academic conversations and texts.

The third level of mastery measures fluency in the use of the foreign language both in social and academic contexts.

The indicators that make it possible to evaluate proficiency in a foreign language assess how well students can exchange informa-tion, understand written and spoken discourse and conversations, produce oral and written discourse, and their proficiency in each situ-ation.


This competence is closely related to oral and written communica-tion skills. It also plays a crucial role in interpersonal communication in



196

international contexts. Moreover, it is the ideal vehicle for developing the competence of diversity and interculturality, in social situations where people from different cultures and language communities live or work together.

Foreign language communication favours the development of soli-darity and interaction with persons from other cultures. It also contrib-utes to self-esteem, self-confidence and the self-fulfilment of people enjoying the capacity to relate to others in a language or languages dif-ferent from their own.


Mastery of one or more foreign languages enables students to broaden their possibilities of learning and social relations. It also provides them with the capacity to undertake a wider range of professional projects.


Students studying foreign languages at the university should utilise these languages not only to perfect them, but also to learn different subjects in a course. By doing so, students will broaden their possibilities for learning and education.

In the first case (i.e., when working on perfecting the language it-self), work should focus on conversation, essay writing and audiovisual aids that will strengthen use of the foreign language according to rele-vant European standards. Another possibility would be to foster group work and interaction in the foreign language in question.

In the second case (i.e. when using the foreign language as a vehicle of communication within a subject in the syllabus), it is important to consider the level of proficiency to be used and how learning of the subject is to be completed – for example, access to information sources and writing of reports or essays.



197

COMPETENCE: FOREIGN LANGUAGE PROFICIENCY

Definition: Understanding and making oneself understood orally and in writing using a language different from one’s own (espe-cially important in the process of European Convergence due to the expansion of international degrees)

Mastery of this competence is closely related to: Oral and written communication, diversity and interculturality, interpersonal com-munication, orientation toward others, solidarity, etc.

Levels of mastery:

1. Communicating correctly orally and in writing in a second lan-guage in daily exchanges and simple texts

2. Fluently writing reasoned essays in another language in texts of certain complexity

3. Maintaining relations of exchange and collaboration in a foreign language in various situations, contexts and fields

Indicators:

1. Exchanging information2. Written comprehension3. Listening.4. Writing5. Mastery of rhetorical devices



198

Leve

ls o

f M

aste

ryIn

dic

ato

rsD

escr

ipto

rs

12

34

5

Firs

t le

vel o

f m

aste

ry:

Co

mm

un

icat

ing

co

rrec

tly

ora

lly

and

in w

riti

ng

in a

se

con

d la

ng

uag

e in

dai

ly e

xch

ang

es

and

sim

ple

tex

ts

Exch

ang

ing

in

form

atio

n a

bo

ut

self

an

d o

ther

s

Is u

nabl

e to

ask

for

an

d gi

ve in

form

atio

n ab

out

self

and

othe

rs.

Has

diff

icul

ty in

as

king

for

and

giv

ing

info

rmat

ion

abou

t se

lf an

d ot

hers

.

Exch

ange

s si

mpl

e in

form

atio

n ab

out

self

and

othe

rs.

Des

crib

es a

spec

ts o

f ow

n pa

st a

nd o

f m

ost

imm

edia

te

requ

irem

ents

.

Expl

ains

with

flu

ency

as

pect

s of

ow

n pa

st

and

mos

t im

med

iate

re

quire

men

ts.

Cle

arly

u

nd

erst

and

ing

tex

tsD

oesn

’t u

nder

stan

d br

ief

and

sim

ple

text

s cl

osel

y re

late

d to

co

ntex

t.

Has

diff

icul

ty in

cl

early

und

erst

andi

ng

brie

f an

d si

mpl

e te

xts

clos

ely

rela

ted

to

cont

ext.

Und

erst

ands

brie

f an

d si

mpl

e te

xts

clos

ely

rela

ted

to

cont

ext.

Easi

ly u

nder

stan

ds

mai

n in

form

atio

n in

sp

eech

and

writ

ing

in

sim

ple

cont

exts

.

Cle

arly

und

erst

ands

m

ain

info

rmat

ion

in b

asic

spe

ech

and

writ

ing

abou

t ac

adem

ic

and

prof

essi

onal

fie

ld.

Un

der

stan

din

g a

nd

u

tilis

ing

co

mm

on

d

aily

exp

ress

ion

s

Doe

sn’t

und

erst

and

com

mon

dai

ly

expr

essi

ons.

Has

diff

icul

ty in

un

ders

tand

ing

com

mon

dai

ly

expr

essi

ons.

Und

erst

ands

co

mm

on d

aily

ex

pres

sion

s.

Und

erst

ands

and

us

es e

very

day

lang

uage

in

conv

ersa

tiona

l co

ntex

ts.

Is a

ble

to u

nder

stan

d an

d m

ake

self

unde

rsto

od in

di

ffer

ent

acad

emic

an

d/or

pro

fess

iona

l co

ntex

ts.

Wri

tin

g s

imp

le t

exts

Is u

nabl

e to

pro

duce

w

ith c

orre

ctio

n si

mpl

e pi

eces

of

writ

ing.

Has

diff

icul

ty in

pr

oduc

ing

with

co

rrec

tion

sim

ple

piec

es o

f w

ritin

g.

Prod

uces

sim

ple

piec

es o

f w

ritin

g.Pr

oduc

es w

ith

corr

ectio

n pi

eces

of

writ

ing

(not

ices

, in

form

al o

r fo

rmal

le

tter

s, e

tc.).

Prod

uce

with

eas

e pi

eces

of

writ

ing

(not

ices

, inf

orm

al o

r fo

rmal

lett

ers,

etc

.).

Uti

lisin

g b

asic

la

ng

uag

e st

ruct

ure

s (p

ho

nic

, g

ram

mat

ical

, lex

ical

an

d w

ritt

en)

Use

s ba

sic

lang

uage

st

ruct

ures

with

se

rious

mis

take

s (p

honi

c, g

ram

mat

ical

, le

xica

l and

writ

ten)

.

Use

s ba

sic

lang

uage

st

ruct

ures

(pho

nic,

gr

amm

atic

al, l

exic

al

and

writ

ten)

in

appr

opria

tely.

Use

s ba

sic

lang

uage

st

ruct

ures

(pho

nic,

gr

amm

atic

al, l

exic

al

and

writ

ten)

ac

cept

ably.

Cor

rect

ly u

ses

lang

uage

str

uctu

res

(pho

nic,

gra

mm

atic

al,

lexi

cal a

nd w

ritte

n)

calle

d fo

r at

thi

s fir

st

leve

l of

mas

tery

.

Out

stan

ding

in

utili

satio

n of

the

la

ngua

ge s

truc

ture

s (p

honi

c,

gram

mat

ical

, lex

ical

an

d w

ritte

n) c

alle

d fo

r at

thi

s fir

st le

vel

of m

aste

ry.



199

Leve

ls o

f M

aste

ryIn

dic

ato

rsD

escr

ipto

rs

12

34

5

Seco

nd

leve

l of

mas

tery

:Fl

uen

tly

wri

tin

g

reas

on

ably

co

mp

lex

essa

ys in

an

oth

er

lan

gu

age

Des

crib

ing

eve

nts

an

d d

esir

es,

just

ifyi

ng

op

inio

ns

or

exp

lain

ing

pla

ns

Is u

nabl

e to

des

crib

e ex

perie

nces

, eve

nts,

de

sire

s, o

r to

just

ify

opin

ions

and

exp

lain

pl

ans.

Has

diff

icul

ty in

de

scrib

ing

expe

rienc

es, e

vent

s,

desi

res

and

in

just

ifyin

g op

inio

ns

and

expl

aini

ng p

lans

.

Des

crib

es

expe

rienc

es, e

vent

s,

desi

res

and

just

ifies

op

inio

ns o

r ex

plai

ns

plan

s.

Has

fac

ility

for

de

scrib

ing

and

reas

onin

g in

eve

ryda

y co

ntex

ts.

Is a

ble

to d

escr

ibe

and

reas

on in

any

co

ntex

t (p

erso

nal,

acad

emic

and

/or

prof

essi

onal

life

).

Un

der

stan

din

g

com

ple

x p

iece

s o

f w

riti

ng

Can

’t u

nder

stan

d w

ritte

n w

orks

of

cert

ain

com

plex

ity.

Und

erst

ands

with

di

ffic

ulty

writ

ten

wor

ks o

f ce

rtai

n co

mpl

exity

.

Und

erst

ands

writ

ten

wor

ks o

f ce

rtai

n co

mpl

exity

.

Has

fac

ility

for

un

ders

tand

ing

com

plex

writ

ten

wor

ks o

n pe

rson

al,

acad

emic

or

prof

essi

onal

top

ics.

Not

ewor

thy

for

com

preh

ensi

on o

f co

mpl

ex w

ritte

n w

orks

on

diff

eren

t to

pics

(per

sona

l, ac

adem

ic a

nd

prof

essi

onal

).

Un

der

stan

din

g

com

ple

x sp

eech

Is u

nabl

e to

un

ders

tand

fai

rly

com

plex

spe

ech.

Und

erst

ands

with

di

ffic

ulty

fai

rly

com

plex

spe

ech.

Und

erst

ands

fai

rly

com

plex

spe

ech.

Has

fac

ility

for

un

ders

tand

ing

com

plex

ora

l di

scou

rse

on

pers

onal

, aca

dem

ic

or p

rofe

ssio

nal t

opic

s.

Not

ewor

thy

for

com

preh

ensi

on o

f co

mpl

ex o

ral

disc

ours

e on

diff

eren

t to

pics

(per

sona

l, ac

adem

ic a

nd

prof

essi

onal

).

Co

mm

un

icat

ing

fl

uen

tly

Can

not

get

by in

no

rmal

situ

atio

ns

(per

sona

l, ac

adem

ic,

prof

essi

onal

).

Has

diff

icul

ty in

co

mm

unic

atin

g w

ith

ease

.

Com

mun

icat

es w

ith

cert

ain

ease

.G

ets

alon

g ea

sily

in

the

inte

ract

ions

of

ordi

nary

life

.

Get

s al

ong

effe

ctiv

ely

(pur

pose

/dis

cour

se/

time)

in a

ll ty

pes

of

inte

ract

ions

.

Co

rrec

tly

wri

tin

g

pie

ces

of

cert

ain

co

mp

lexi

ty

Is u

nabl

e to

pro

duce

co

rrec

tly w

ritte

n w

ork

of c

erta

in

com

plex

ity.

Has

diff

icul

ty in

pr

oduc

ing

corr

ectly

w

ritte

n w

ork

of

cert

ain

com

plex

ity.

Prod

uces

cor

rect

ly

writ

ten

wor

k of

ce

rtai

n co

mpl

exity

.

Has

fac

ility

for

co

rrec

tly p

rodu

cing

co

mpl

ex w

ritte

n w

ork

on p

erso

nal,

acad

emic

and

/or

prof

essi

onal

top

ics.

Out

stan

ding

in t

he

prod

uctio

n of

writ

ten

wor

k of

cer

tain

co

mpl

exity

on

pers

onal

, aca

dem

ic

and/

or p

rofe

ssio

nal

topi

cs.



200

Leve

ls o

f M

aste

ryIn

dic

ato

rsD

escr

ipto

rs

12

34

5

Thir

d le

vel o

f m

aste

ry:

Mai

nta

inin

g

rela

tio

ns

of

exch

ang

e an

d

colla

bo

rati

on

in a

fo

reig

n la

ng

uag

e in

va

rio

us

situ

atio

ns,

co

nte

xts

and

fie

lds

Exch

ang

ing

in

form

atio

n,

reas

on

ing

po

ints

of

view

Use

s la

ngua

ge

inef

fect

ivel

y fo

r so

cial

, aca

dem

ic a

nd

prof

essi

onal

pu

rpos

es.

Has

diff

icul

ty in

usi

ng

the

fore

ign

lang

uage

ef

fect

ivel

y fo

r so

cial

, ac

adem

ic a

nd

prof

essi

onal

pu

rpos

es.

Use

s la

ngua

ge

effe

ctiv

ely

for

soci

al,

acad

emic

and

pr

ofes

sion

al

purp

oses

.

Use

s fo

reig

n la

ngua

ge w

ith e

ase

in a

lmos

t al

l si

tuat

ions

.

Is a

ble

to u

se f

orei

gn

lang

uage

with

eas

e in

all

situ

atio

ns.

Un

der

stan

din

g a

nd

p

rod

uci

ng

co

mp

lex

pie

ces

of

wri

tin

g o

n

ran

ge

of

top

ics

Is u

nabl

e to

pro

duce

an

d cl

early

un

ders

tand

long

, co

mpl

ex t

exts

.

Has

diff

icul

ty c

lear

lyun

ders

tand

ing

and

prod

ucin

g lo

ng,

com

plex

wor

ks.

Fairl

y cl

early

un

ders

tand

s an

d pr

oduc

es lo

ng,

com

plex

pie

ces

of

writ

ing.

Cle

arly

und

erst

ands

an

d pr

oduc

es a

lmos

t al

l typ

es o

f w

ritin

g.

Und

erst

ands

and

pr

oduc

es w

ith t

otal

cl

arity

all

type

s of

w

ritin

g.

Co

mm

un

icat

ing

in

any

circ

um

stan

ces,

su

itin

g la

ng

uag

e re

gis

ter

to c

on

text

Can

’t p

rodu

ce v

arie

d ty

pes

of m

essa

ges

in

diff

eren

t co

mm

unic

ativ

e co

ntex

ts.

Has

diff

icul

ty in

un

ders

tand

ing

and

prod

ucin

g va

ried

type

s of

mes

sage

in

diff

eren

t co

mm

unic

ativ

e co

ntex

ts.

Und

erst

ands

var

ied

type

s of

mes

sage

in

diff

eren

t co

mm

unic

ativ

e co

ntex

ts.

Und

erst

ands

and

pr

oduc

es a

ny t

ype

of

mes

sage

in a

ny

com

mun

icat

ive

cont

ext.

Und

erst

ands

and

pr

oduc

es a

ny t

ype

of

mes

sage

in a

ny

com

mun

icat

ive

cont

ext

Co

mm

un

icat

ing

in a

fo

reig

n la

ng

uag

e,

usi

ng

dif

fere

nt

aid

s an

d s

up

po

rts

Onl

y us

es o

ne t

ype

of

com

mun

icat

ive

aid.

Has

lim

itatio

ns in

us

ing

varie

d su

ppor

ts.

Trie

s to

ada

pt

mes

sage

to

appr

opria

te s

uppo

rt.

Kno

ws

how

to

use

the

best

sup

port

for

th

e m

essa

ge.

Use

s th

e be

st s

uppo

rt

for

the

mes

sage

and

fo

r th

e co

mm

unic

ativ

e co

ntex

t.

Bec

om

ing

su

ffic

ien

tly

pro

fici

ent

to r

elat

e an

d c

olla

bo

rate

fu

lly w

ith

oth

ers

in

the

fore

ign

la

ng

uag

e.

Prod

uces

m

isun

ders

tand

ings

th

at h

inde

r co

mm

unic

atio

n.

Has

lim

ited

abili

ty t

o ex

pres

s se

lf fu

lly.

Kno

ws

how

to

plac

e se

lf in

the

lang

uage

co

ntex

t in

que

stio

n.

Get

s al

ong

wel

l in

the

lang

uage

in a

ny

cont

ext.

Fits

in a

nd

colla

bora

tes

with

out

lang

uage

diff

icul

ties.



201

Chapter 3

Interpersonal Generic Competences

Interpersonal generic competences are different capacities that ena-ble people to interact well with others. They are highly valued by compa-nies and university graduates, who usually rank them among the five most important competences. University professors and lecturers cling to more traditional criteria and still rank other competences ahead of inter-personal skills, perhaps because until now the latter were not worked on at universities. Now, however, these competences are being increasingly introduced and form an important part of the new academic curriculum in the world’s universities.

In our model, they are subdivided into two types: individual and social interpersonal competences. Individual interpersonal competences are self-motivation, a very necessary competence for students in a teaching-learn-ing model based on independent work and autonomy; perseverance and adaptability, which involve positive strategies for overcoming resistance and obstacles, and for dealing with the stress that almost everyone encounters in today’s increasingly fast, competitive, high-pressured environment.

One of the two competences completing this section is diversity and interculturality, which seeks to develop a positive view of the diversity and heterogeneity of cultures, languages, races – in short, of different ways of seeing, feeling and being. Such a view enriches, rather than detracting from our lives, but it is difficult to attain. The other remaining competence is the ethical sense that should underlie students’ personalities and im-pregnate all the actions that they undertake, guiding their personal, social and professional conduct.

Social interpersonal skills comprise four competences. The first two, which are at the heart of human relationships, are interpersonal com-



202

munication and teamwork. Interpersonal communication is an absolute-ly crucial competence for all persons and is a two-way process. Training in this competence seeks to develop in students the capacity to listen (reception) and to know how to communicate (communicative open-ness), skills that are part of the same process. Teamwork is a competence that has been incorporated by all universities as a fundamental strategy for fitting in with any human group, particularly in the workplace. Pro-fessional work increasingly requires the contributions of different spe-cialists who complement each other and work together on the same projects. Being able to fit in and make partial contributions to the group is essential in today’s world.

The other two competences completing this section are conflict management and negotiation. These two interpersonal competences are also very important in any organisation. Conflicts can and do arise in any human group over legitimate interests that individuals or groups may have. Such conflicts should be treated as such and not as personal confrontations, which do not lead anywhere. Acquiring and developing competence for dealing with conflicts is a highly valued skill in today’s world. The final competence in this section is negotiation. In a demo-cratic world, where organisations are more and more participative, peo-ple and organisations must be proficient negotiators. This competence is required in all human fields, from the closest (family life) to social and institutional spheres. Parents must learn to negotiate with their children; workers and management must both learn to negotiate with each other; and, as noted before, the same thing can be said of many fields and spheres of human life.



203

COMPETENCE: SELF-MOTIVATION

Description

Motivation is the mental effort prior to an action to encourage some-one (motivation) or oneself (in this case, self-motivation) to perform it with interest and diligence. To motivate is to dispose someone toward doing something in a certain way.

Therefore, if we have an action to undertake or a job to perform, there is one way to do it – with interest, care, speed and promptness.

Self-motivated people who are aware of their own capacities and limitations have the willingness of spirit to undertake the tasks entrusted to them, endeavouring to develop their capacities and overcome their limitations.

Self-motivated people, in addition to analysing themselves correctly, objectively and realistically, also see their surrounding situations with the same characteristics of objectivity and realism. This enables them to know exactly where they stand. Aware of their resources and difficulties, they address tasks by setting reasonable objectives, suited to their pos-sibilities. Their self-motivation makes them persevere and be constant, even when nobody else encourages them to do so, and they recognise their own successes and failures.

Thanks to this awareness of their own personal traits and self-moti-vation, they are able to devise improvement plans for overcoming their own limitations and developing their personal and professional capaci-ties. They are not discouraged by difficulties. Achievement of these ob-jectives produces feelings of satisfaction because of growth, which they know how to celebrate and share with others.

The competence of self-motivation enables people to go beyond their own limits and consider the team in the first person. So they are able to make a self-analysis of the group, convey their own motivation and enthusiasm and motivate the team with their vision of the future, sharing the achievements and successes of the team, involving others in celebrating them.

Interaction with other competences, interests, attitudes, values

To be a self-motivated person, it is necessary to know oneself well and to have developed self-esteem. Knowing oneself and having self-esteem also involve recognition of others. This awareness of one’s own



204

and others’ true nature, together with a self-motivating spirit, are essen-tial for being able to adapt to surroundings and successfully overcome difficulties, contingencies and frustrations.

Decision-making is important for devising and undertaking plans of personal and professional development, considering both capacities and limitations.

Only with proper perception of one’s own nature and circumstances is it possible to interact maturely with others, and therefore develop so-cial interpersonal competences such as interpersonal communication, teamwork, conflict management and negotiating ability.


During the course of their studies, students encounter difficult learn-ing situations and experiences where they see themselves as different from others due to their different capacities, learning styles and results. To undertake the task of their own learning realistically and efficiently, they need to have the skills that will enable them to realise how things stand and what their personal situation is. They need to be able to set attainable goals and devise realistic plans of action leading to the ac-complishment of these objectives, where they are the ones who decide and encourage themselves to do so, without waiting for or expecting a boost from someone else.

In professional life as well, it is necessary to be realistic about recog-nising the strengths and weaknesses of oneself and the team, and to be able to lay out plans of work and development that are achievable with-in the time available. Achievements attained should be celebrated and shared maturely and serenely. At moments of discouragement and dif-ficulty, or of failure and limitations, we must be able to look ahead and confront such experiences with a positive outlook.

In the specific case of teamwork, recognition of one’s own capacities and limitations, and the capacity to dispose oneself toward achieving agreed objectives is of particular importance, since fewer and fewer tasks are undertaken entirely individually.


The competence of self-motivation can be developed through strate-gies of formative assessment and self-assessment, including the design and monitoring of personal improvement plans.



205

Teaching strategies can also be used that enable students to select the goals they wish to achieve (including assigned contents or activities and outside work – even various levels of extra work). It is then a ques-tion of checking with them the objectives they have set as well as the degree to which they have achieved them, and their attitudes during the process and in view of actual outcomes.



206

COMPETENCE: SELF-MOTIVATION

Definition: Recognising one’s own capacities and limitations, striving to develop and overcome them to concentrate with inter-est and care on the tasks to be performed

Mastery of this competence is closely related to: Adaptability, self-esteem, self-fulfilment, interpersonal communication, collabora-tion, solidarity, etc.

Levels of mastery:

1. Being aware of one’s resources and limitations (personal, situa-tion, etc.), using them to advantage in successfully completing assigned work

2. Developing personal resources to improve one’s performance in action

3. Transmitting own motivation to working team by contaging en-thusiasm and constancy

Indicators:

1. Self-analysis. 2. Objectivity. Realism. 3. Constancy. Perseverance. 4. Forward-looking.5. Celebration of achievements.



207

Leve

ls o

f M

aste

ryIn

dic

ato

rsD

escr

ipto

rs

12

34

5

Firs

t le

vel o

f m

aste

ry:

Bei

ng

aw

are

of

on

es r

eso

urc

es

and

lim

itat

ion

s (p

erso

nal

, sit

uat

ion

, et

c.),

usi

ng

th

em

to a

dva

nta

ge

in s

ucc

essf

ully

co

mp

leti

ng

as

sig

ned

wo

rk

Rec

og

nis

ing

ac

hie

vem

ents

an

d

mis

take

s in

on

e’s

ow

n p

erfo

rman

ce

Fails

to

reco

gnis

e ow

n m

ista

kes.

Has

diff

icul

ty in

re

cogn

isin

g ow

n m

ista

kes.

Nee

ds

som

eone

to

poin

t th

em o

ut.

Reco

gnis

es o

wn

flaw

s an

d ac

hiev

emen

ts.

Reco

gnis

es p

oten

tial

flaw

s an

d tr

ies

to

avoi

d th

em t

hrou

gh

alte

rnat

ive

actio

n.

Not

ewor

thy

for

anal

ysis

of

own

achi

evem

ents

and

m

ista

kes,

dra

win

g co

nclu

sion

s fo

r im

prov

emen

t.

Mak

ing

eva

luat

ion

s co

nsi

sten

t w

ith

av

aila

ble

evi

den

ce

Ow

n ob

serv

atio

ns

abou

t se

lf fa

r re

mov

ed f

rom

ev

iden

ce (o

wn

outp

ut, o

ther

s’

eval

uatio

ns, e

tc.).

Falls

into

ge

nera

lisat

ions

(c

liché

s, s

tere

otyp

es,

etc.

) whe

n ta

lkin

g ab

out

self.

Ow

n ob

serv

atio

ns

abou

t se

lf m

atch

ev

iden

ce.

Reas

ons

and

just

ifies

ob

serv

atio

ns a

bout

se

lf.

Ana

lyse

s se

lf in

de

pth,

dra

win

g co

nclu

sion

s to

de

velo

p ow

n po

tent

ial.

Bei

ng

co

nst

ant

and

p

erse

vera

nt

in w

ork

u

nd

erta

ken

Is n

ot c

onst

ant

and

gets

dis

cour

aged

ea

sily.

Nee

ds s

omeo

ne t

o en

cour

age

him

/her

to

com

plet

e ta

sks.

Pers

ever

es in

w

hate

ver

he/s

he

prop

oses

.

Not

ewor

thy

for

tena

city

and

co

nsta

ncy

in w

ork.

Add

ress

es a

ll ta

sks

with

ent

husi

asm

fro

m

begi

nnin

g to

end

.

Hav

ing

a f

orw

ard

o

utl

oo

k th

at

mo

tiva

tes

acti

on

Doe

sn’t

thi

nk a

bout

ow

n fu

ture

. H

as d

iffic

ulty

in

rela

ting

pres

ent

actio

ns t

o th

e fu

ture

.

Has

a f

orw

ard

outlo

ok t

hat

prov

ides

m

otiv

atio

n.

Vis

ualis

es t

he f

utur

e an

d pl

ans

ahea

d ac

cord

ing

to o

wn

poss

ibili

ties.

Show

s co

nfid

ence

in

the

cons

eque

nces

of

own

actio

ns.

Iden

tify

ing

th

e ri

gh

t ti

me

to c

eleb

rate

ac

hie

vem

ents

Doe

sn’t

con

tem

plat

e th

e po

ssib

ility

of

cele

brat

ing

own

achi

evem

ents

.

Onl

y ce

lebr

ates

ow

n ac

hiev

emen

ts w

hen

prod

ded

by o

ther

s.

Iden

tifie

s po

ssib

le

mom

ents

for

ce

lebr

atin

g ac

hiev

emen

ts.

Thin

ks a

bout

how

to

get

othe

rs t

o ce

lebr

ate

achi

evem

ents

.

Cel

ebra

tes

and

shar

es

own

achi

evem

ents

w

ith o

ther

s.



208

Leve

ls o

f M

aste

ryIn

dic

ato

rsD

escr

ipto

rs

12

34

5

Seco

nd

leve

l of

mas

tery

:D

evel

op

ing

p

erso

nal

res

ou

rces

to

imp

rove

on

e’s

per

form

ance

in

acti

on

An

alys

ing

ow

n

limit

atio

ns

and

p

oss

ibili

ties

fo

r p

erso

nal

an

d

pro

fess

ion

al

dev

elo

pm

ent

Doe

sn’t

sho

w in

tere

st

in a

naly

sing

ow

n lim

itatio

ns a

nd

poss

ibili

ties.

Show

s po

or c

apac

ity

for

self-

criti

cism

.Sh

ows

inte

rest

in

anal

ysin

g ow

n lim

itatio

ns a

nd

poss

ibili

ties

for

pers

onal

and

pr

ofes

sion

al

deve

lopm

ent.

Mak

es g

ood

pers

onal

an

alys

es le

adin

g to

pe

rson

al o

r pr

ofes

sion

al

impr

ovem

ent.

Mak

es v

ery

good

pe

rson

al a

naly

ses

to

impr

ove

pers

onal

ly

and

prof

essi

onal

ly.

Sett

ing

go

als

suit

ed

to o

wn

po

ssib

iliti

es

Show

s lit

tle r

ealis

m

abou

t se

ttin

g go

als

for

self.

Is ir

regu

lar

abou

t re

alis

tical

ly g

augi

ng

own

stre

ngth

s.

Sets

goa

ls m

atch

ing

own

poss

ibili

ties.

Whe

n se

ttin

g go

als

for

impr

ovem

ent,

ta

kes

own

past

ex

perie

nce

spec

ially

in

to a

ccou

nt.

Not

ewor

thy

for

real

ism

and

dar

ing

in

sett

ing

goal

s fo

r pe

rson

al

impr

ovem

ent.

Sho

win

g c

on

stan

cy

in t

he

dev

elo

pm

ent

of

ow

n p

erso

nal

re

sou

rces

to

im

pro

ve

Doe

sn’t

mak

e pl

ans

to d

evel

op s

elf

pers

onal

ly.

Lack

s pe

rsev

eran

ce in

ca

rryi

ng o

ut p

erso

nal

impr

ovem

ent

plan

s.

Show

s co

nsta

ncy

in

appl

ying

pla

ns t

o de

velo

p pe

rson

al

reso

urce

s.

Ove

rcom

es d

iffic

ultie

s en

coun

tere

d w

ithou

t lo

sing

sig

ht o

f pl

ans.

Very

ten

acio

us in

pu

ttin

g in

to p

ract

ice

plan

s of

per

sona

l de

velo

pmen

t.

Dev

elo

pin

g o

wn

p

ote

nti

al w

ith

fo

rwar

d o

utl

oo

k

Lack

s ex

pect

atio

ns

rega

rdin

g ow

n im

prov

emen

t.

Occ

asio

nally

fai

ls t

o se

e w

hat

need

s to

be

done

to

deve

lop

self.

Trus

ts o

wn

pote

ntia

l fo

r de

alin

g w

ith t

he

futu

re.

Mak

es s

elf-

impr

ovem

ent

plan

s fo

r th

e m

ediu

m t

erm

re

gard

ing

pers

onal

an

d pr

ofes

sion

al

deve

lopm

ent.

Has

cle

ar g

oals

and

iti

nera

ry t

o fo

llow

to

beco

me

mor

e ef

fect

ive

and

stay

th

at w

ay.

Rec

og

nis

ing

ow

n

ach

ieve

men

ts a

nd

ce

leb

rati

ng

th

em

spec

ially

Doe

sn’t

exp

ress

sa

tisfa

ctio

n at

ow

n ac

hiev

emen

ts.

Reco

gnis

es a

nd

cele

brat

es o

wn

succ

esse

s on

ly a

t th

e bi

ddin

g of

oth

ers.

Show

s sa

tisfa

ctio

n ov

er o

wn

achi

evem

ents

.

Take

s th

e in

itiat

ive

in

cele

brat

ing

the

achi

evem

ents

at

tain

ed.

Seiz

es t

he o

ccas

ion

to m

otiv

ate

self

and

get

othe

rs

to p

artic

ipat

e in

the

the

suc

cess

of

his/

her

achi

evem

ents

.



209

Leve

ls o

f M

aste

ryIn

dic

ato

rsD

escr

ipto

rs

12

34

5

Thir

d le

vel o

f m

aste

ry:

Tran

smit

tin

g o

wn

m

oti

vati

on

to

w

ork

ing

tea

m b

y co

nta

gin

g

enth

usi

asm

an

d

con

stan

cy

Mak

ing

imp

ort

ant

con

trib

uti

on

s to

te

am’s

sel

f-an

alys

is

Hin

ders

or

avoi

ds

team

sel

f-an

alys

is o

r se

lf-cr

itici

sm.

Doe

sn’t

mak

e re

leva

nt c

ontr

ibut

ions

to

the

sel

f-an

alys

is o

f th

e te

am.

Part

icip

ates

with

re

leva

nt c

ontr

ibut

ions

to

the

sel

f-an

alys

is o

f th

e te

am.

Prom

otes

sel

f-an

alys

is

of t

he t

eam

to

mot

ivat

e gr

oup

wor

k.

Inte

grat

es a

nd

syst

emat

ises

di

ffer

ent

cont

ribu

tion

s to

the

an

alys

is o

f th

e te

am.

Co

mb

inin

g

enth

usi

asm

an

d

real

ism

wh

en

con

veyi

ng

ow

n

mo

tiva

tio

n

Doe

sn’t

sho

w

conf

iden

ce in

the

po

ssib

ilitie

s of

the

te

am.

Is u

nabl

e to

ef

fect

ivel

y co

nvey

ow

n m

otiv

atio

n to

co

nvin

ce o

ther

s.

Com

bine

s en

thus

iasm

and

re

alis

m w

hen

conv

eyin

g ow

n m

otiv

atio

n.

Con

tage

s ow

n m

otiv

atio

n th

anks

to

ener

gy a

nd d

rive.

Inst

ils s

elf-

mot

ivat

ion

in t

he g

roup

.

Bei

ng

co

nst

ant

and

en

thu

sias

tic

wh

en

con

veyi

ng

ow

n

mo

tiva

tio

n a

bo

ut

a su

bje

ct

Und

erm

ines

the

gr

oup’

s m

oral

e an

d m

otiv

atio

n.

Is ir

regu

lar

in

cont

ribut

ions

and

so

met

imes

see

ms

unm

otiv

ated

.

Is c

onst

ant

whe

n co

nvey

ing

own

mot

ivat

ion.

His

/her

exe

mpl

ary

cons

tanc

y he

lps

othe

rs t

o st

ay

mot

ivat

ed.

Prep

ares

tea

m t

o st

ay

mot

ivat

ed o

ver

the

med

ium

ter

m.

Usi

ng

fo

rwar

d

ou

tlo

ok

in

con

veyi

ng

en

thu

sias

m f

or

a su

bje

ct

Doe

sn’t

sho

w

mot

ivat

ion

abou

t th

e te

am’s

forw

ard-

look

ing

proj

ect.

Easi

ly g

ets

disc

oura

ged

over

di

ffic

ultie

s hi

nder

ing

plan

s fo

r th

e fu

ture

.

Enth

usia

stic

ally

co

nvey

s fo

rwar

d ou

tlook

to

the

team

.

His

/her

for

war

d ou

tlook

mot

ivat

es

the

team

to

actio

n.

Hel

ps o

wn

team

to

be t

he o

ne t

o bu

ild

its p

roje

ct o

f fu

ture

.

Tran

smit

tin

g o

wn

en

thu

sias

m w

hen

ce

leb

rati

ng

ac

hie

vem

ents

Is c

old

or in

diff

eren

t to

the

ach

ieve

men

ts

of t

he t

eam

.

Som

etim

es

shar

es t

he

achi

evem

ents

ac

com

plis

hed

by t

he

team

.

Show

s sa

tisfa

ctio

n at

th

e ac

hiev

emen

ts o

f th

e te

am.

Shar

es w

ith t

he t

eam

th

e ac

hiev

emen

ts

acco

mpl

ishe

d.

Invo

lves

eve

ryon

e in

th

e ac

hiev

emen

t of

th

e te

am a

nd in

ow

n ce

lebr

atio

n.



210

COMPETENCE: DIVERSITY AND INTERCULTURALITY

Description

Diversity identifies the cultural differences and inequalities at work in today’s societies the world over. Interculturality refers to communication and interaction between different social groups and cultures.

We live in complex, dynamic, contradictory societies that are inter-related internally and externally. They are made up of different human groups comprising a world built on diverse, dissimilar cultures whose connections with each other are increasingly fluid.

The effects of such connections, in their different manifestations, should enable us to comprehend trans-cultural relations and recognise the importance of each culture. Today it is not sufficient to acknowledge “di-versity”; we need to think about how we can “coexist in diversity”. To do so, we must accept that cultural differences are complementary, and dis-cover, without losing our differences, what we have in common with oth-er cultures. By seeking what is common to all, we will gain in communica-tion and interrelations between persons of different cultures.

The competence of diversity and interculturality must be addressed and developed in terms of the capacity to comprehend and accept cul-tural diversity as something that enriches us personally and collectively. This will enable us to coexist without incurring in distinctions of sex, age, religion, social, political or ethnic condition. But this must be done in a temperate way, without being overly relativistic or taking a Eurocentric view of diversity.

This competence is developed at three levels of proficiency aimed at making students consciously aware of contemporary intercultural reali-ties so that they will act in consequence. To this end, the first level of mastery outlines how we should accept diversity as an exclusively social phenomenon. The idea is to enable students to see cultural differences and inequalities as a product of social behaviour.

The second level traces the process whereby one can reason the causes of cultural and/or social differences and inequalities among hu-man beings. Finally, the third level focuses on how to practice intercul-tural coexistence.

The development of this competence in students is measured by how well they recognise and explain diversity and interculturality, how they internalise their capacity for interrelationships, how well they cease to discriminate persons on the basis of sex, age, religion or origin, and to what extent they try to learn about cultural differences and similarities.



211

In addition to learning the meaning of cultural ethnocentricity, they must also distinguish excesses of cultural relativism.


This competence is closely linked to interpersonal communication, analogical thinking and systemic thought. It is also linked to the compe-tence of communication in a foreign language.

It helps to develop a critical sense of the evolution of social behav-iour and an interest in knowing and understanding the social and cul-tural differences of humanity.

As for attitudes and values, this competence contributes to the de-velopment of social justice, shared values, respect for human dignity and a better comprehension of the social significance of human relations.


Today we can see, through the news media and daily life, the mani-fest effects of transcultural relations. To deal with this phenomenon, we as citizens must develop solid, rigorous criteria to discern the social na-ture of human situations and interactions.

In the workplace as well, there is more and more mingling of people from different cultures, social conditions and ways of life. The situations that generate this coexistence require sound capacitation in order for people to get along.


This competence can be developed through learning strategies that confront students with real or simulated cases of intercultural behaviour. It is important to pay attention to the students’ own background, since today, in everyday situations, we are seeing more and more problems and conflicts arising over transcultural relations.

The most appropriate learning strategies for this competence are: problem-based learning, case studies and the project method. Moreover, it furthers students’ ability to handle sources of information and differ-ent techniques for data processing and interpretation. It is also useful for dealing with simulations or field work.



212

COMPETENCE: DIVERSITY AND INTERCULTURALITY

Definition: Understanding and accepting social and cultural di-versity as something that is personally and collectively enriching, furthering coexistence between people without incurring in dis-crimination of sex (gender), age, religion, social, political, and/or ethnic background.

Mastery of this competence is closely related to: Communication and information. shared values, search for meaning, social justice, responsibility, human dignity, global justice

Levels of mastery:

1. Understanding cultural and social diversity as a human phenom-enon and interacting respectfully with different persons

2. Accepting and understanding cultural and/or social traits as structural, voluntary and reasonable aspects of humanity

3. Showing conviction that awareness of cultural diversity, an es-sential ingredient of human coexistence, generates social cohe-sion and inclusion

Indicators:

1. Accepting diversity2. Interacting3. Personal enrichment4. Non-discrimination5. Cultural enrichment



213

Leve

ls o

f M

aste

ryIn

dic

ato

rsD

escr

ipto

rs

12

34

5

Firs

t le

vel o

f m

aste

ry:

Un

der

stan

din

g

cult

ura

l an

d s

oci

al

div

ersi

ty a

s a

hu

man

p

hen

om

eno

n a

nd

in

tera

ctin

g

resp

ectf

ully

wit

h

dif

fere

nt

per

son

s

Acc

epti

ng

div

ersi

ty

as p

art

of

the

hu

man

co

nd

itio

n

Con

side

rs d

iver

sity

as

a na

tura

l fro

ntie

r.Tr

eats

peo

ple

acco

rdin

g to

the

ir so

cial

or

cultu

ral

back

grou

nd.

Rela

tions

not

lim

ited

by s

ocia

l and

cul

tura

l di

ffer

ence

s.

Esta

blis

hes

rela

tions

w

ithou

t so

cial

or

cultu

ral d

istin

ctio

ns.

Def

ends

inte

ract

ion

betw

een

pers

ons

who

are

diff

eren

t.

Rel

atin

g t

o p

eop

le

wit

ho

ut

dis

tin

ctio

n

of

soci

al a

nd

cu

ltu

ral b

ackg

rou

nd

Man

ifest

s av

ersi

on t

o pe

rson

s of

div

erse

so

cial

or

cultu

ral

back

grou

nd.

Is d

istr

ustf

ul o

f pe

rson

s of

diff

eren

t so

cial

or

cultu

ral

orig

in.

Tend

s to

inte

ract

with

pe

rson

s w

ho a

re

diff

eren

t.

In h

is/h

er r

elat

ions

di

sreg

ards

di

ffer

ence

s.

Like

s pe

ople

for

the

ir pe

rson

al q

ualit

ies.

Uti

lisin

g r

elat

ion

s w

ith

dif

fere

nt

per

son

s fo

r o

wn

d

evel

op

men

t

Doe

sn’t

rel

ate

to

peop

le w

ho a

re

diff

eren

t du

e to

pr

ejud

ice.

Ass

umes

tha

t di

ffer

ence

s de

term

ine

the

scop

e of

hum

an

rela

tions

.

Is in

tere

sted

in

rela

ting

to p

eopl

e w

ho a

re d

iffer

ent.

Prom

otes

inte

ract

ion

betw

een

dive

rse

pers

ons.

Trie

s to

enr

ich

expe

rienc

e th

roug

h re

latio

nshi

ps w

ith

pers

ons

who

are

di

ffer

ent.

No

t d

iscr

imin

atin

g

peo

ple

fo

r re

aso

ns

of

soci

al o

r cu

ltu

ral

dif

fere

nce

Look

s do

wn

on

pers

ons

that

he/

she

cons

ider

s di

ffer

ent.

Dis

coun

ts o

ther

s’

soci

al p

ract

ices

as

asoc

ial.

Resp

ects

the

cul

tura

l or

igin

and

pra

ctic

es

of o

ther

per

sons

.

Reco

gnis

es d

iffer

ent

soci

al q

ualit

ies

in

othe

rs’ s

ocia

l pr

actic

es.

Trie

s to

lear

n th

e re

ason

s be

hind

the

so

cial

cus

tom

s an

d be

havi

ours

of

diff

eren

t pe

rson

s.

Seei

ng

co

exis

ten

ce

as t

he

pro

du

ct o

f in

tera

ctio

ns

bet

wee

n p

eop

le

wh

o a

re d

iffe

ren

t

Und

erst

ands

cul

tura

l di

vers

ity a

s a

just

ifica

tion

for

soci

al

diff

eren

ces.

Con

side

rs o

wn

soci

al

and

cultu

ral v

alue

s as

th

e on

ly v

alid

one

s on

whi

ch t

o ba

se

rela

tions

.

Resp

ectf

ully

in

terp

rets

oth

er s

ocia

l an

d cu

ltura

l val

ues.

Seek

s ba

lanc

e be

twee

n ow

n so

cial

pr

actic

es a

nd t

hose

th

at h

e/sh

e kn

ows

of

othe

r cu

lture

s.

Trie

s to

ass

imila

te a

nd

inte

grat

e in

to o

wn

deve

lopm

ent

expe

rienc

e ga

ined

fr

om r

elat

ions

with

pe

rson

s of

oth

er

cultu

res

and

soci

al

back

grou

nd.



214

Leve

ls o

f M

aste

ryIn

dic

ato

rsD

escr

ipto

rs

12

34

5

Seco

nd

leve

l of

mas

tery

:A

ccep

tin

g a

nd

u

nd

erst

and

ing

cu

ltu

ral a

nd

/or

soci

al t

rait

s as

st

ruct

ura

l, vo

lun

tary

an

d

reas

on

able

asp

ects

o

f h

um

anit

y

An

alys

ing

cu

ltu

ral

and

so

cial

div

ersi

ty

as a

res

ult

of

hu

man

in

tera

ctio

n

Dis

rega

rds

othe

r cu

lture

s as

infe

rior.

Con

side

rs it

use

less

to

est

ablis

h re

latio

ns

with

oth

er c

ultu

res

or

pers

ons

of d

iffer

ent

soci

al o

rigin

.

Thin

ks it

pos

sibl

e to

un

ders

tand

oth

er

cultu

res

and

soci

al

situ

atio

ns.

Kno

ws

how

to

disc

ern

the

cond

ition

s of

life

tha

t ge

nera

te

diff

eren

t pa

tter

ns o

f re

latio

nshi

p.

Is in

tere

sted

in h

ow

to r

econ

cile

diff

eren

t so

cial

cus

tom

s an

d pr

actic

es.

Tryi

ng

to

lear

n t

he

reas

on

s fo

r th

e so

cial

cu

sto

ms

and

b

ehav

iou

rs o

f d

iffe

ren

t p

erso

ns

Belie

ves

that

oth

er

cultu

res

or s

ocia

l si

tuat

ions

are

in

sign

ifica

nt.

Giv

es o

pini

on o

n cu

ltura

l and

soc

ial

dive

rsity

with

out

rigou

r.

Is in

tere

sted

in

lear

ning

and

re

ason

ing

abou

t di

ffer

ent

cultu

res

and

soci

etie

s.

Und

erst

ands

the

fo

rmat

ion

and

deve

lopm

ent

of

diff

eren

t cu

lture

s an

d so

ciet

ies.

Trie

s to

giv

e m

eani

ng

and

hum

an

sign

ifica

nce

to

cultu

ral a

nd s

ocia

l di

vers

ity.

Un

der

stan

din

g

rela

tio

ns

wit

h

per

son

s o

f o

ther

cu

ltu

res

and

so

cial

o

rig

ins

as p

erso

nal

ly

enri

chin

g

Belie

ves

that

cul

tura

l an

d so

cial

div

ersi

ty is

a

thre

at t

o ow

n w

ay

of li

fe.

Perc

eive

s cu

ltura

l and

so

cial

div

ersi

ty a

s an

in

evita

ble

dist

inct

ion.

Ass

ocia

tes

dive

rsity

w

ith t

he id

iosy

ncra

cy

of t

he h

uman

co

nditi

on.

Sees

cul

tura

l and

so

cial

div

ersi

ty a

s a

com

plem

enta

ry

hum

an r

ealit

y.

Sees

inte

rcul

tura

l re

latio

ns a

s an

ope

n pr

oces

s.

Rea

son

ing

th

at

soci

al a

nd

cu

ltu

ral

real

itie

s ar

e cr

eate

d

by

peo

ple

Con

side

rs t

hat

ther

e sh

ould

be

only

one

m

odel

of

cultu

re a

nd

soci

al p

ract

ices

.

Con

side

rs d

iver

sity

as

a m

ere

cata

logu

e of

lif

e st

yles

with

out

valu

e.

Perc

eive

s cu

ltura

l di

vers

ity a

s th

e re

sult

of h

uman

co

exis

tenc

e.

Und

erst

ands

tha

t so

ciet

ies

and

hum

an

rela

tions

are

tr

ansf

orm

able

set

s.

Und

erst

ands

tha

t di

vers

ity is

the

res

ult

of t

he in

tera

ctio

n an

d tr

ansf

orm

atio

n of

hu

man

gro

ups.

Un

der

stan

din

g t

hat

d

iver

sity

is a

n

esse

nti

al t

rait

of

the

hu

man

sp

ecie

s

Belie

ves

that

div

ersi

ty

is t

he r

esul

t of

a

proc

ess

of s

ocia

l “s

elec

tion”

.

Con

side

rs

inte

rcul

tura

l or

inte

rsoc

ial

rela

tions

hips

de

grad

ing.

Sees

div

ersi

ty a

s an

en

richi

ng a

spec

t of

th

e hu

man

con

ditio

n.

Und

erst

ands

tha

t it

is

poss

ible

to

reco

ncile

di

ffer

ent

way

s of

life

.

Con

side

rs t

hat

the

soci

al f

utur

e en

tails

tr

ansc

ultu

ral

rela

tions

.



215

Leve

ls o

f M

aste

ryIn

dic

ato

rsD

escr

ipto

rs

12

34

5

Thir

d le

vel o

f m

aste

ry:

Sho

win

g c

on

vict

ion

th

at a

war

enes

s o

f cu

ltu

ral d

iver

sity

, an

ess

enti

al

ing

red

ien

t o

f h

um

an c

oex

iste

nce

, g

ener

ates

so

cial

co

hes

ion

an

d

incl

usi

on

Un

der

stan

din

g t

hat

h

um

an c

oex

iste

nce

su

pp

ort

s so

cial

an

d/

or

cult

ura

l in

teg

rati

on

Sees

div

ersi

ty a

s a

resu

lt of

sel

ectiv

e so

cial

evo

lutio

n.

Reje

cts

inte

grat

ion

as

a fo

rmul

a fo

r so

cial

in

tera

ctio

n.

Sees

div

ersi

ty a

s a

resu

lt of

hum

an

hist

ory.

Und

erst

ands

tha

t in

tera

ctio

n be

twee

n pe

rson

s ca

n di

min

ish

diff

eren

ces.

Sees

inte

grat

ion

as a

m

eans

of

impr

ovem

ent

soci

al.

Un

der

stan

din

g t

hat

o

wn

so

cial

an

d

cult

ura

l co

nte

xt is

p

art

of

tran

scu

ltu

ral

rela

tio

ns

Den

ies

the

hum

an

valu

e of

oth

er

cultu

res

and

soci

etie

s.

Dis

card

s in

tegr

atio

n an

d cu

ltura

l plu

ralit

y.Se

es o

wn

soci

al a

nd

cultu

ral c

ircum

stan

ces

in c

onso

nanc

e w

ith

the

inte

rcul

tura

l co

ntex

t.

Con

side

rs t

hat

own

cultu

re a

nd s

ocia

l co

ntex

t en

rich

and

are

enric

hed

by

inte

rcul

tura

l rel

atio

ns.

Stan

ds f

or s

ocia

l in

tegr

atio

n an

d in

clus

ion

polic

ies.

Seek

ing

way

s o

f g

ener

atin

g

tran

scu

ltu

ral

rela

tio

ns.

Giv

es p

riorit

y to

ow

n so

cial

pre

cept

s an

d va

lues

as

the

only

fo

rm o

f re

latin

g to

ot

her

cultu

res

or

soci

etie

s.

Rank

s an

d ac

cept

s/re

ject

s ot

her

cultu

res

and

soci

etie

s ac

cord

ing

to a

hi

erar

chy.

Dev

elop

s an

ope

n,

plur

al v

iew

of

inte

rcul

tura

lity.

Sees

hum

an r

elat

ions

in

ter

ms

of e

qual

ity.

Prom

otes

inte

grat

ion

and

tran

scul

tura

lity

as a

way

of

copi

ng

with

div

ersi

ty.

Uti

lisin

g r

elat

ivis

m

in a

tem

per

ed w

ayJu

dges

oth

er c

ultu

res

ethn

ocen

tric

ally

and

ac

ritic

ally.

Onl

y co

nsid

ers

own

soci

al o

r cu

ltura

l or

igin

val

id.

Trie

s to

fin

d po

ints

of

enco

unte

r in

soc

ial

and

cultu

ral

diff

eren

ces.

Trie

s to

res

pect

and

an

d de

man

d re

spec

t fo

r ot

hers

’ cul

ture

s as

w

ell a

s ow

n.

Und

erst

ands

ow

n so

ciet

y an

d cu

lture

in

the

hum

an s

ocia

l co

ntex

t.

Faci

litat

ing

re

lati

on

al c

on

text

s th

at w

ill in

clu

de

per

son

s w

ho

are

d

iffe

ren

t

Ope

nly

man

ifest

s se

greg

atio

nist

and

xe

noph

obic

att

itude

s.

Mar

gina

lises

per

sons

th

at h

e/sh

e co

nsid

ers

diff

eren

t.

Trie

s to

fos

ter

unde

rsta

ndin

g be

twee

n di

ffer

ent

pers

ons.

Use

s di

alog

ue t

o fo

men

t in

tegr

atio

n.A

cts

as a

n in

terc

ultu

ral a

gent

.



216

COMPETENCE: ADAPTABILITY

Description

This competence combines the ability to retain (hang on to) a suffi-cient state of well-being to continue to perform effectively, with the skill of adapting to new circumstances and maintaining a state of equilibrium in the new context when surrounding conditions become adverse.

People develop this competence through a continuous process in which three levels of mastery are distinguished. At the first level, indi-viduals are able to keep up their energy when pressured by time, disa-greements, opposition and other adverse conditions. Moderate frustra-tions are a challenge to be addressed and improve. People at this level are able to keep constant the time and effort they devote to a task, and in addition they know how to set priorities and not get blocked when they have several jobs to do at the same time. People at the next level of competency are able to set themselves higher objectives and stricter deadlines than those demanded from outside. They receive criticism well and analyse it to learn from their own mistakes. They do not give up in the face of frustration, but are motivated to find alternative routes to achieve the same objectives. They not only set themselves deadlines and priorities for completing their work, but also are concerned for its qual-ity. People at the third level take the initiative in requesting criticism in order to improve. They are stimulated by the challenge of difficult or novel situations. They plan and distribute their time well and aim their efforts at what is most important. When they are confronted with vari-ous complex tasks, they design mechanisms that enable them to moni-tor their progress.


Proficiency in endurance and adaptability requires the development of other competences such as self-motivation, which gives people the drive they need to undertake necessary actions, together with a good level of self-awareness. It is also necessary to know how to handle inter-nal states, and to know and control one’s own resources. Moreover, in order to persevere in contexts where there are adverse conditions, peo-ple must be able to express their own emotions properly and understand the emotions of others. This competence is related to other generic skills, particularly the interpersonal ones of interpersonal communication,



217

teamwork and conflict management and negotiation. It is related as well to attitudes and values of self-esteem, self-assurance and self-control, and to respect for others.


In any moment and field of life, there are events that alter our cir-cumstances and place us in contexts where we experience difficulty, ad-versity and time pressures. This generates anxiety, which we will handle well or not depending on the level to which we have developed this competence and our level of maturity.

Student life is full of situations where work and deadlines come to-gether, such as at the ends of semesters or during exam time, when students must be able to set priorities and devise plans to accomplish their objectives despite adversity, without letting other people or tasks distract them. There are also times when unsuccessful (and perhaps un-expected) final assessment results place students under a great deal of pressure and anguish, where they need to overcome frustration and make improvement plans featuring alternative routes to accomplish their objectives.

In professional life, and in any aspect of personal life, there are also moments such as project deadlines and year-ends when various jobs have to be done effectively under time pressure. Moreover, one’s work is occasionally criticised and new versions or re-workings are required by the client or superiors, for which there is little time. In such situations, one’s personal maturity and professionalism make it possible to over-come the difficulty with success, without allowing emotions to hinder self-control.

We all experience difficulty and frustration at some point in our lives. The difference is in how we cope with it and the attitudes that it gener-ates in us – all of which will depend on how well we have developed personal competences.


In exceptional personal situations, keeping a good balance between demands, reliability and flexibility generates an atmosphere that favours personal development and maturity, as well as enhanced adaptability. If



218

students are set clear deadlines, rules, requirements about quality of work and assessment criteria, it will help them to see exactly how they stand. Making them assume commitments (with strategies like keeping a journal for noting down specific analyses and thoughts) is a path to-ward personal development that favours mastery of this competence. The role of the tutor in interpersonal relations can also be an especially important tool in this process.

Development of this competence will be stimulated by proposing tasks for which students have to devise a work plan, and record whether or not they complete their work within the stipulated deadlines. Fulfil-ment of the plan is discussed with the lecturer and presented together with the essay or project.

Various assessment strategies, including formative assessment, peer assessment and auto-assessment, mean that students must face criti-cism, analyse it and identify mistakes and places for improvement. As-sessment should be both quantitative and qualitative and involve reflec-tion on what has been learned. This fosters self-awareness, knowledge of surrounding circumstances and sufficient self-motivation to develop strategies for change and success, including adapting to adversity and difficulties beyond one’s control.



219

COMPETENCE: ADAPTABILITY

Definition: Handling critical psychosocial situations smoothly and effectively, preserving physical and mental equilibrium

Mastery of this competence is closely related to: Self-awareness, capacity for keeping emotions, impulses and unproductive reac-tions under control, comprehension of others’ emotions, self-mo-tivation, appropriate expression of own emotions; including val-ues of self-control, assurance, self-esteem and personal balance, beliefs, etc.

Levels of mastery:

1. Maintaining drive and energy to perform well under pressures of time, disagreement and hardship

2. Effectively meeting objectives under pressures of time, disagree-ment, opposition and adversity

3. Meeting difficult challenges in new and changing situations without drop in high level of effectiveness

Indicators:

1. Adaptation 2. Critical sense.3. Overcoming frustration 4. Controlling time5. Self-management



220

Leve

ls o

f M

aste

ryIn

dic

ato

rsD

escr

ipto

rs

12

34

5

Firs

t le

vel o

f m

aste

ry:

Mai

nta

inin

g d

rive

an

d e

ner

gy

to

per

form

wel

l un

der

p

ress

ure

s o

f ti

me,

d

isag

reem

ent

and

h

ard

ship

Han

din

g in

wo

rk t

o

lect

ure

r w

ith

in

dea

dlin

e d

esp

ite

exte

rnal

dif

ficu

ltie

s

Doe

sn’t

han

d in

as

sign

ed w

ork

on

time.

Som

etim

es d

oesn

’t

hand

in w

ork

on t

ime

or d

oes

so w

ithou

t ha

ving

fin

ishe

d.

Han

ds in

wor

k on

tim

e.Fi

nish

es w

ork

in t

ime

to r

evis

e an

d de

al

with

con

tinge

ncie

s.

Alw

ays

finis

hes

wor

k ah

ead

of t

ime,

and

so

can

resp

ond

appr

opria

tely,

eve

n in

ex

trem

e si

tuat

ions

.

Rea

ctin

g p

osi

tive

ly

to d

iffe

ren

ces

of

op

inio

n a

nd

cri

tici

sm

by

lect

ure

r o

r o

ther

cl

assm

ates

Can

’t h

andl

e su

gges

tions

fro

m t

he

lect

urer

or

clas

smat

es.

Reac

ts n

egat

ivel

y.

The

opin

ion

of t

he

lect

urer

or

of

clas

smat

es d

ispl

ease

s an

d di

scou

rage

s hi

m/

her.

Acc

epts

crit

icis

ms

from

the

lect

urer

or

clas

smat

es.

Inco

rpor

ates

su

gges

tions

and

cr

itici

sms

from

the

lect

urer

or c

lass

mat

es

into

way

of

proc

eedi

ng, e

valu

atin

g th

em v

ery

posit

ivel

y.

Ask

s fo

r co

mm

ents

an

d cr

itica

l opi

nion

s fr

om t

he le

ctur

er o

r cl

assm

ates

.

Bein

g st

imul

ated

by

mod

erat

e fr

ustr

atio

ns (b

ad

grad

es, r

epet

itio

n of

w

ork,

sea

rch

for

new

m

ater

ial a

nd o

ther

di

ffic

ulti

es),

conf

ront

ing

them

an

d do

ing

bett

er a

s a

resu

lt

Can

’t h

andl

e fr

ustr

atio

n ov

er

mod

erat

e di

ffic

ultie

s.

Som

etim

es g

ets

disc

oura

ged

and

has

diff

icul

ty in

cop

ing

with

mod

erat

e fa

ilure

s.

Reac

ts p

ositi

vely

to

mod

erat

e fr

ustr

atio

ns,

lear

ning

fro

m

mis

take

s.

In c

ases

of

poor

gr

ades

, rep

etiti

on o

f w

ork,

etc

., ta

kes

a pr

oact

ive

attit

ude

and

trie

s to

impr

ove.

Refle

cts

and

grow

s w

ith a

dver

sity

and

le

arns

fro

m m

ista

kes.

Bei

ng

ab

le t

o d

evo

te

con

tin

uo

us

tim

e an

d

effo

rt t

o a

sin

gle

ta

sk

Is v

ery

inco

nsta

nt.

Dev

otes

tim

e an

d ef

fort

to

own

activ

ities

, but

so

met

imes

run

s ou

t of

ste

am.

Is c

onst

ant

and

stea

dy

in o

wn

activ

ity.

Pers

ever

es u

ntil

a po

sitiv

e re

sult

is

reac

hed.

Fini

shes

act

iviti

es w

ith

the

sam

e sp

irit

in

whi

ch h

e/sh

e st

arte

d,

even

aft

er lo

ng t

ime

and

effo

rt.

Han

dlin

g m

any

task

s at

th

e sa

me

tim

e,

sett

ing

pri

ori

ties

, as

sig

nin

g t

ime

to

each

on

e an

d n

ot

get

tin

g b

lock

ed

Nev

er h

as t

ime

for

anyt

hing

. Alw

ays

feel

s un

der

pres

sure

.

Som

etim

es d

oesn

’t

calc

ulat

e w

ell t

he

time

need

ed f

or

cert

ain

wor

k, o

r do

esn’

t ta

ke in

to

acco

unt

its s

ize.

Org

anis

es t

ime

acco

rdin

g to

prio

ritie

s an

d to

ow

n re

al

poss

ibili

ties.

Fore

sees

wha

t can

be

done

with

in ti

me

avai

labl

e, p

rogr

amm

ing

own

activ

ities

acc

ordi

ng

to im

port

ance

and

ur

genc

y.

Org

anis

es t

ime

and

activ

ities

, and

fol

low

s pl

an r

igor

ousl

y an

d fle

xibl

y, u

sing

a

syst

emat

ic m

etho

d.



221

Leve

ls o

f M

aste

ryIn

dic

ato

rsD

escr

ipto

rs

12

34

5

Seco

nd

leve

l of

mas

tery

: Ef

fect

ivel

y m

eeti

ng

o

bje

ctiv

es u

nd

er

pre

ssu

res

of

tim

e,

dis

agre

emen

t,

op

po

siti

on

an

d

adve

rsit

y

Wo

rkin

g a

t a

hig

her

st

and

ard

an

d w

ith

in

a sh

ort

er t

ime

than

d

eman

ded

by

lect

ure

r o

r te

am

Doe

sn’t

usu

ally

fo

llow

gui

delin

es f

or

com

plet

ing

and

hand

ing

in w

ork.

Som

etim

es f

ails

to

mee

t de

adlin

es o

r gu

idel

ines

for

as

sign

ed w

ork.

Doe

s w

hat

need

s to

be

don

e to

com

plet

e w

ork

on t

ime

and

acco

rdin

g to

gu

idel

ines

.

Part

ially

impr

oves

on

the

stan

dard

s pr

opos

ed f

or w

ork

and

task

s.

Mak

es o

vera

ll pr

opos

als

that

impr

ove

the

guid

elin

es a

nd

dead

lines

for

com

plet

ing

wor

k or

ta

sks.

Lear

nin

g f

rom

ow

n

mis

take

s, a

nal

ysin

g

crit

icis

ms

to im

pro

ve

in f

utu

re

Doe

sn’t

acc

ept

own

mis

take

s.Sh

ows

a pa

ssiv

e at

titud

e to

ow

n m

ista

kes,

and

doe

sn’t

le

arn

from

the

m.

Acc

epts

crit

ical

ob

serv

atio

ns m

ade,

le

arni

ng f

rom

ow

n m

ista

kes.

Hab

itual

ly a

sks

for

criti

cal o

pini

ons

on

own

wor

k as

way

of

impr

ovin

g pe

rfor

man

ce.

Crit

ical

ly a

naly

ses

self

and

finds

alte

rnat

ives

to

ove

rcom

e th

e m

ista

kes

dete

cted

by

self

or b

y ot

hers

No

t g

ivin

g in

to

fr

ust

rati

on

, id

enti

fyin

g a

nd

cr

eati

ng

alt

ern

ativ

e w

ays

to a

chie

ve

ob

ject

ives

Get

s ea

sily

di

scou

rage

d,

rem

aini

ng p

assi

ve

and

with

no

actio

n re

spon

se.

Tend

s to

get

di

scou

rage

d by

hea

vy

frus

trat

ions

.

Doe

sn’t

giv

e in

to

frus

trat

ion,

but

see

ks

alte

rnat

ive

way

s to

ac

com

plis

h ob

ject

ives

.

Is s

timul

ated

by

frus

trat

ions

to

impr

ove

usua

l res

ults

.

Gro

ws

whe

n fa

ced

with

diff

icul

ties

and

sees

fru

stra

tions

as

new

cha

lleng

es.

Dis

trib

uti

ng

tim

e w

ell a

nd

org

anis

ing

o

wn

ag

end

a,

wit

ho

ut

lett

ing

p

erso

ns

or

situ

atio

ns

dis

trac

t fr

om

pri

ori

ties

Doe

sn’t

app

ear

to

have

org

anis

ed o

wn

time

and

activ

ities

in

the

leas

t.

Plan

s sp

endi

ng o

f tim

e, b

ut e

asily

alte

rs

plan

if in

terr

upte

d.

Plan

s tim

e ac

cord

ing

to t

he im

port

ance

of

activ

ities

.

Plan

s tim

e ac

cord

ing

to t

he im

port

ance

of

activ

ities

and

m

anag

es

inte

rrup

tions

wel

l.

Prop

oses

mea

sure

s to

av

oid

inte

rrup

tions

. Fo

rese

es h

ow t

o ha

ndle

con

tinge

ncie

s,

whi

le c

onve

ying

a

sens

e of

cal

m a

nd

conf

iden

ce.

Sett

ing

ob

ject

ives

an

d t

imet

able

s fo

r co

mp

leti

ng

wo

rk,

def

inin

g p

rio

riti

es,

con

tro

llin

g w

ork

q

ual

ity

and

p

erfo

rmin

g p

lan

ned

ac

tio

ns

effe

ctiv

ely.

Doe

sn’t

def

ine

way

of

org

anis

ing

wor

k.Fa

ils t

o se

t ob

ject

ives

or

dea

dlin

es, t

o co

mpl

ete

plan

ned

actio

ns, o

r to

mon

itor

and

eval

uate

qua

lity

of o

wn

wor

k.

Sets

obj

ectiv

es a

nd

dead

lines

. Prio

ritis

es

activ

ities

and

m

onito

rs q

ualit

y of

ow

n w

ork.

Mon

itors

ac

com

plis

hmen

t of

ow

n ob

ject

ives

.

Spon

tane

ousl

y su

bjec

ts a

ll w

ork

and

proj

ects

to

proc

ess

of

plan

ning

, exe

cutin

g,

mon

itorin

g an

d im

prov

ing.



222

Leve

ls o

f M

aste

ryIn

dic

ato

rsD

escr

ipto

rs

12

34

5

Thir

d le

vel o

f m

aste

ry:

Mee

tin

g d

iffi

cult

ch

alle

ng

es in

new

an

d c

han

gin

g

situ

atio

ns

wit

ho

ut

a d

rop

in h

igh

leve

l o

f ef

fect

iven

ess

Act

ing

wit

h

dili

gen

ce, q

uic

kly

con

fro

nti

ng

o

bst

acle

s st

and

ing

in

th

e w

ay o

f o

bje

ctiv

es

Is s

low

in r

eact

ing

to

unfo

rese

en o

bsta

cles

an

d th

eref

ore

in

acco

mpl

ishi

ng

obje

ctiv

es (d

eadl

ines

, st

anda

rds,

etc

.).

Has

diff

icul

ty in

re

spon

ding

to

and

over

com

ing

obst

acle

s st

andi

ng in

way

of

obje

ctiv

es.

Is q

uick

in r

espo

ndin

g to

and

ove

rcom

ing

obst

acle

s pe

rcei

ved

to b

e st

andi

ng in

way

of

obj

ectiv

es.

Ana

lyse

s ob

stac

les

and

plan

s ho

w t

o ov

erco

me

them

to

acco

mpl

ish

obje

ctiv

es.

Fore

sees

and

avo

ids

obst

acle

s st

andi

ng in

w

ay o

f qu

ality

and

tim

e ob

ject

ives

pr

opos

ed.

Bei

ng

str

on

g in

th

e fa

ce o

f cr

itic

ism

, an

d s

earc

hin

g f

or

way

s to

use

it t

o

imp

rove

Has

diff

icul

ty in

ha

ndlin

g cr

itici

sm.

Usu

ally

look

s fo

r an

d m

akes

exc

uses

.

Get

s ea

sily

di

scou

rage

d by

cr

itici

sm a

nd is

in

capa

ble

of r

eact

ing.

Resp

onds

cal

mly

to

criti

cism

and

use

s it

to im

prov

e.

Valu

es t

he c

ritic

al

obse

rvat

ions

of

othe

rs a

s an

op

port

unity

for

im

prov

emen

t.

Requ

ests

crit

icis

ms

of

own

perf

orm

ance

fr

om p

eopl

e w

ho c

an

prov

ide

idea

s. F

inds

ne

w w

ays

to

impr

ove.

Bei

ng

sti

mu

late

d b

y d

iffi

cult

or

no

vel

situ

atio

ns,

sta

yin

g

stro

ng

an

d c

on

stan

t an

d d

ealin

g w

ith

th

em a

s a

chal

len

ge

Get

s bl

ocke

d in

di

ffic

ult

or n

ovel

si

tuat

ions

.

Cop

es w

ith d

iffic

ult

or n

ovel

situ

atio

ns,

but

lack

s pe

rsev

eran

ce if

the

y pe

rsis

t.

Is s

timul

ated

by

com

plic

ated

or

nove

l si

tuat

ions

.

Doe

s ve

ry w

ell i

n di

ffic

ult

or c

hang

ing

situ

atio

ns a

nd

does

n’t

get

disc

oura

ged.

Look

s fo

r di

ffic

ult

or

nove

l cha

lleng

es,

conf

ront

ing

them

w

ithou

t bu

ildin

g up

te

nsio

n.

Plan

nin

g a

nd

m

anag

ing

tim

e u

nd

er p

ress

ure

, fo

cusi

ng

on

wh

at is

m

ost

imp

ort

ant

Doe

sn’t

kno

w h

ow t

o ad

min

iste

r tim

e w

ell,

gets

flu

ster

ed a

nd

deal

s w

ith m

atte

rs a

s th

ey c

ome

up.

Som

etim

es s

uccu

mbs

to

pre

ssur

e, s

ettin

g as

ide

som

ethi

ng

impo

rtan

t to

res

olve

w

hat

seem

s ur

gent

.

Man

ages

tim

e ef

fect

ivel

y w

hen

unde

r pr

essu

re.

Stic

ks t

o es

sent

ials

w

hen

unde

r pr

essu

re,

usin

g tim

e ef

ficie

ntly.

K

now

s ho

w t

o sa

y no

w

hen

nece

ssar

y.

Not

ewor

thy

for

effe

ctiv

enes

s un

der

pres

sure

, and

for

ca

lmly

tak

ing

best

ad

vant

age

of t

ime.

Bei

ng

ab

le t

o

han

dle

var

iou

s co

mp

lex

task

s si

mu

ltan

eou

sly,

es

tab

lish

ing

m

ech

anis

ms

for

con

tro

llin

g t

hei

r p

rog

ress

Can

’t h

andl

e an

d re

solv

e m

ore

than

on

e th

ing

at a

tim

e.

Has

diff

icul

ty in

ha

ndlin

g se

vera

l co

mpl

ex t

hing

s at

a

time,

get

s flu

ster

ed

or f

ails

to

mon

itor

prog

ress

.

Han

dles

and

res

olve

s m

ore

than

one

co

mpl

ex t

ask

at a

tim

e, m

onito

ring

thei

r pr

ogre

ss.

Show

s ea

se in

m

anag

ing

vario

us

proj

ects

at

a tim

e,

follo

win

g pr

oced

ures

le

arne

d.

Man

ages

diff

eren

t co

mpl

ex p

roje

cts,

es

tabl

ishi

ng o

wn

mec

hani

sms

to

mon

itor

thei

r pr

ogre

ss.



223

COMPETENCE: ETHICAL SENSE

Description

When people must take action or decisions with ethical implications, their capacity to adapt, to get involved and let themselves be guided by their moral existence is what we call their ethical sense (Cobo, 1993). This ethical sense takes shape in people’s lives through processes of building moral character, and concerns their positive inclination toward the moral good of oneself or of others – that is, toward everything that is good or tends toward the wholesomeness or realisation of the indi-vidual – and perseverance in pursuing that moral goodness (Cobo, 1993). Therefore, we can say that the ethical sense is the ability to think and act according to universal principles based on the value of human beings and oriented toward their full development.

Learning to build an ethical sense takes place primarily within the sphere of people’s daily lives, where they must find reasons for their moral convictions. Education of this sphere of daily living should be geared toward offering students essential frameworks of reference both for building their own personal lives and for their lives as citizens who must get along with others. The ethical sense competence is designed to fulfil certain functions, including: 1) promoting a reflective, critical atti-tude, getting students used to not accepting any ideas, acts or values that have not been carefully analysed and thought about; 2) strengthen-ing their capacity to think logically, using reason as an instrument of dia-logue; 3) learning to think independently, adopting their own stand on issues; 4) integrating into their vision of the whole a diversity of knowl-edge, beliefs and values; and 5) evaluating the normative capacity of ethics as an instrument for transformation and change.

To fulfil these functions, the competence has been organised into three levels: the first is the moral personality and ethical principles. Its objective is to provide foundational ethical knowledge that will enable students to know and assimilate its most basic categories and acquire the main tools for beginning moral reasoning. At this first level, there-fore, students are expected to be able to reflect, reason and make judge-ments about whether or not certain moral behaviours are correct. The second level, ethical values and moral sensibility, focuses primarily on the key factor in the moral life of people: ethical values, attitudes and habits. Students at the third level, the meaning of life and the principles of jus-tice, are aware of the need to let their own lives be guided by ethical principles. Fundamental objectives of this level are the acceptance of



224

commitment and responsibility, enhancement of personal autonomy and freedom of conscience, and the development of sensibility and com-mitment to the underprivileged.

The indicators proposed for assessing students’ level of progress at each of the three levels reflect a training process divided into five stations:

1. Moral adequacy2. Reflectiveness (aimed at values such as authenticity, self-fulfil-

ment, logic, striving for excellence in the development of the most highly valued virtues, etc.)

3. Deliberation (aimed at values such as renouncing one’s own in-terests and convictions, especially if these are erroneous or exag-gerated; the recognition of others’ points of view different from one’s own; willingness to search for truth and agreement, mu-tual comprehension).

4. Virtuous behaviour (aimed at development of co-operative work that fills some need related to getting along, academic work, group life within a university context).

5. Acceptance of rules. Through the use (observance) of rules, rec-ognition of rights and obligations, and through reflective and deliberative thinking on these types of rules. This refers to rules concerned with the organisation and course of university life in all its aspects (academic, living and working together, citizen-ship, etc.) and to rules related to other important practices: re-flective and deliberative thinking, virtuous behaviour, etc.


The ethical sense is or should be present in each and every one of the other competences. It is unquestionably transversal in nature, cutting across all competences. With regard to the ones explained here however, mastery of this competence is most closely related to: analytical thinking, systemic thinking, critical thinking, problem-solving, decision-making, oral and written communication skills, interpersonal communication, di-versity and interculturality, adaptability, and the attitudes of responsibil-ity, autonomy, justice, co-operation, etc.


Having a highly developed sense of ethics is a practical competence willingly nourished in the moral life of individuals as persons, citizens and



225

professionals. It is therefore found in the personal, social and profes-sional spheres of students. Consequently, the competence has been or-ganised to focus not so much on specific knowledge as on enhancing the attitudes, values and competences related to the ethical sense and having the greatest effect on the personal, social and professional di-mensions. Without distinguishing between them for the moment, we would stress as most fundamental those that strengthen values and at-titudes such as autonomy, responsibility, co-operation, mutual respect, integrity, social awareness, etc.

In developing this competence, the student’s future professional ca-reer must be seen as another prime element in his/her life project. The idea is for students to be able to integrate their chosen career into their life project and evaluate the ethical aspects that are helping to shape their own professional identity. However, this normative dimension should be seen within the broader framework of social justice. In any case, it must be recognised that generally speaking, university students already have, thanks to their age and the complex socialisation already received, a basic, stable system of moral options. Nevertheless, much work can be done through this competence to enhance 1) their critical discernment and the hierarchy, systematisation, foundations and scope of their moral schema; and (less often or easily), 2) a change in one of their basic convictions.


Teaching an “ethical sense” is not an easy task. It requires certain general, comprehensive conditions in all the subjects making up a de-gree course, and a classroom atmosphere that are hard to achieve. Therefore, if we want students to adopt a critical, reflective attitude, they must be equipped with criteria and the habit of requiring that theo-ries and facts be based on adequate evidence or need. If students are to learn how to reason, they must have at least a practical knowledge of the main rules of rational argumentation. If they are to learn how to think independently, they must be taught to base what they say or write on evidence and facts. Finally, if ethical training is to help them to achieve an integrated view of reality, they must have a comprehensive vision of the role of different domains of knowledge and beliefs, as well as the systematic organisation of ethics.



226

COMPETENCE: ETHICAL SENSE

Definition: Being positively inclined toward the moral good of oneself or of others (that is, toward everything that is good or tends toward the wholesomeness or realisation of the individual) and perseverance in that moral goodness.

Mastery of this competence is closely related to: analytical thinking, systemic thinking, critical thinking, problem-solving, decision-mak-ing, oral and written communication skills, interpersonal commu-nication, diversity and interculturality, adaptability, responsibility, autonomy, justice, co-operation, etc.

Levels of mastery:

1. Identifying, recognising and applying the moral personality and ethical principles

2. Identifying, recognising and applying ethical values and moral sensibility

3. Identifying, recognising and applying the meaning of the moral life and the principle of justice

Indicators:

1. Moral adequacy2. Reflectiveness (enhancing values such as authenticity, self-fulfil-

ment, logic, striving for excellence in the development of the most highly valued virtues, etc.)

3. Deliberation (enhancing values such as the renunciation of one’s own interests and convictions, especially if these are erroneous or exaggerated; the recognition of others’ points of view differ-ent from one’s own; willingness to search for truth and agree-ment, mutual comprehension)

4. Virtuous behaviour (enhancing development of co-operative work, that fills some need related to getting along, academic work, group life within a university context)

5. Acceptance of rules. Through of the use (observance) of rules, recognition of rights and obligations, and through reflective and deliberative thinking on these types of rules. This refers to rules concerned with the organisation and course of university life in all its details (academic, living and working together, citizenship, etc.) and to rules related to other important practices: reflective and deliberative thinking, virtuous behaviour, etc.



227

Leve

ls o

f M

aste

ryIn

dic

ato

rsD

escr

ipto

rs

12

34

5

Firs

t le

vel o

f m

aste

ry:

Iden

tify

ing

, re

cog

nis

ing

an

d

app

lyin

g t

he

mo

ral

per

son

alit

y an

d

eth

ical

pri

nci

ple

s

Co

nd

uct

go

vern

ed

by

bas

ic k

no

wle

dg

e o

f et

hic

s

Avo

ids

deci

ding

w

heth

er a

n ac

tion/

activ

ity is

mor

ally

rig

ht o

r w

rong

.

Doe

sn’t

que

stio

n th

e re

ason

s fo

r th

e et

hics

be

hind

som

e ba

sic

prin

cipl

es.

Expr

esse

s ve

ry b

asic

m

oral

opi

nion

s w

hen

a pr

inci

ple

is a

pplie

d to

a s

peci

fic s

ituat

ion.

Mak

es e

thic

al

judg

emen

ts –

i.e.

ex

pres

ses

reas

oned

id

eas

base

d on

a s

peci

fic

mor

al g

uide

line

conc

erni

ng w

heth

er

an a

ctio

n/ac

tivity

is

mor

ally

rig

ht o

r w

rong

.

Arg

ues

with

wel

l-re

ason

ed id

eas

invo

lvin

g m

oral

pr

inci

ples

, opi

nion

s or

judg

emen

ts,

lead

ing

to a

mor

al

conc

lusi

on.

Seek

ing

to

aff

irm

o

nes

elf

thro

ug

h

kno

wle

dg

e o

f th

e et

hic

al w

orl

d

Doe

sn’t

app

ear

inte

rest

ed in

the

or

igin

, int

erna

l st

ruct

ure

or

impl

icat

ions

of

basi

c et

hica

l prin

cipl

es.

Has

diff

icul

ty in

st

eerin

g an

d m

otiv

atin

g ow

n be

havi

our

acco

rdin

g to

eth

ical

prin

cipl

es.

Has

vis

ion

of t

he

ethi

cal d

imen

sion

of

hum

an b

eing

s.

Build

s lo

gica

l eth

ical

ar

gum

ents

.Ex

pres

ses

own

idea

of

just

ice

(in

acco

rdan

ce

with

per

cept

ion

and

deve

lopm

ent

of m

oral

aw

aren

ess)

.

Cri

tica

lly a

ccep

tin

g

new

per

spec

tive

s,

even

th

ou

gh

th

ey

cast

do

ub

t o

n o

ne’

s o

wn

Doe

sn’t

add

ress

et

hica

l iss

ues

in a

ll th

eir

com

plex

ity (i

.e.,

does

n’t

take

into

ac

coun

t th

e di

vers

e im

plic

atio

ns,

circ

umst

ance

s an

d co

nseq

uenc

es

invo

lved

).

Onl

y ta

kes

into

co

nsid

erat

ion

own

pers

pect

ive

or t

hat

of t

he p

erso

ns m

ost

dire

ctly

invo

lved

in

the

cou

rse

ofan

act

ion,

ov

erlo

okin

g th

e po

int

of v

iew

of

othe

rs, e

spec

ially

of

thos

e al

so a

ffec

ted

by

the

actio

n (t

hird

pa

rtie

s).

Crit

ical

ly m

aint

ains

st

and

on w

hat

is r

ight

in

a d

iscu

ssio

n, u

sing

re

ason

ed c

riter

ia.

In c

onve

rsat

ions

and

di

scus

sion

s,

unde

rsta

nds

and

is

sens

itive

to

the

requ

irem

ents

and

in

tere

sts

of o

ther

s,

thei

r fe

elin

gs, v

alue

s,

opin

ions

and

rea

sons

.

Dis

cuss

es t

hing

s co

nstr

uctiv

ely:

w

ith t

he s

ince

re

desi

re t

o co

ntrib

ute

to

unde

rsta

ndin

g an

d th

e re

solu

tion

of

prob

lem

s ad

dres

sed,

w

hile

res

pect

ing

and

reco

gnis

ing

the

clai

ms

to v

alid

ity o

f ot

hers

’ opi

nion

s.



228

Leve

ls o

f M

aste

ryIn

dic

ato

rsD

escr

ipto

rs

12

34

5

Firs

t le

vel o

f m

aste

ry:

Iden

tifyi

ng,

reco

gnis

ing

and

appl

ying

the

mor

al

pers

onal

ity a

nd

ethi

cal p

rinci

ples

Usi

ng

ow

n

axio

log

ical

rea

lity

as

sig

n o

f p

erso

nal

ity

and

iden

tity

bef

ore

o

ther

s

Doe

sn’t

per

sona

lly

spec

ify a

ny v

alue

s in

ow

n ha

bitu

al w

ay o

f th

inki

ng, r

eact

ing

or

actin

g.

Men

tions

val

ues

but

with

out

cons

ciou

sly

and

delib

erat

ely

assu

min

g th

em a

s ow

n.

Man

ifest

s ow

n pe

rson

al v

alue

s to

ot

hers

as

part

of

own

pers

onal

iden

tity.

Rank

s in

impo

rtan

ce

or v

ital p

riorit

y re

cogn

ised

per

sona

l va

lues

.

Reco

gnis

es t

he r

ole

of e

thic

al s

ense

in t

he

leve

l of

estim

atio

n of

ow

n pe

rson

al v

alue

s.

Ob

serv

ing

an

d

pu

ttin

g in

to

pra

ctic

e ru

les

esta

blis

hed

by

the

gro

up

to

wh

ich

on

e b

elo

ng

s

Has

diff

icul

ty in

re

spec

ting

all t

he

rule

s se

t in

the

gro

up

of w

hich

he/

she

form

s pa

rt.

Has

diff

icul

ty in

as

sim

ilatin

g th

e ru

les

set

in t

he e

duca

tiona

l co

ntex

t of

whi

ch h

e/sh

e fo

rms

part

.

Part

icip

ates

in t

he

prac

tices

and

ac

tiviti

es o

f th

e gr

oup

or c

onte

xt, a

bidi

ng

by t

heir

rule

s.

Striv

es t

o in

terp

ret

and

mak

e se

nse

of

each

of

the

norm

ativ

e el

emen

ts

in s

peci

fic s

ituat

ions

in

the

edu

catio

nal

cont

ext.

Take

s to

con

scie

nce,

th

roug

h a

proc

ess

of

refle

ctio

n an

d de

liber

atio

n, t

he

norm

ativ

e as

pect

s ac

com

pany

ing

som

e si

tuat

ions

and

the

ir ro

le in

pro

vidi

ng a

m

oral

hor

izon

.



229

Leve

ls o

f M

aste

ryIn

dic

ato

rsD

escr

ipto

rs

12

34

5

Seco

nd

leve

l of

mas

tery

:Id

enti

fyin

g,

reco

gn

isin

g a

nd

ap

ply

ing

eth

ical

va

lues

an

d m

ora

l se

nsi

bili

ty

Kn

ow

ing

ho

w t

o

get

alo

ng

in a

p

lura

l, h

eter

og

eneo

us

gro

up

Und

erva

lues

the

co

ntrib

utio

ns o

f ot

hers

.

Has

diff

icul

ty in

re

cogn

isin

g ot

hers

’ co

ntrib

utio

ns t

o gr

oup.

Crit

ical

ly e

xam

ines

ow

n kn

owle

dge

and

stan

ds, a

nd t

hose

of

othe

rs.

Expl

icitl

y re

cogn

ises

th

e rig

hts

of o

ther

s to

thi

nk a

nd e

valu

ate

inde

pend

ently

and

in

divi

dual

ly, t

o ex

pres

s w

hat

they

th

ink

and

to f

reel

y ac

t in

con

sequ

ence

.

Show

s in

depe

nden

ce

in m

oral

con

vict

ions

, se

lf-co

ntro

l and

cr

itica

l cap

acity

, and

so

is a

ble

to r

espe

ct

and

valu

e ot

hers

w

ithou

t be

ing

dom

inat

ed b

y th

em.

Inco

rpo

rati

ng

th

e et

hic

al s

ense

into

o

ther

are

as a

nd

b

ein

g g

uid

ed b

y it

Lack

s se

lf m

aste

ry

and

cont

rol.

Nee

ds g

reat

er

mod

erat

ion

and/

or

sere

nity

in s

ituat

ions

of

pre

ssur

e, t

ensi

on

or c

onfli

ct.

Reac

ts w

ith p

rude

nce

and/

or m

atur

ity in

di

ffic

ult,

nov

el

situ

atio

ns.

App

lies

and

soun

dly

just

ifies

mor

al

prin

cipl

es t

o sp

ecifi

c si

tuat

ions

.

Add

ress

es p

robl

ems

and

actio

ns w

ith g

ood

sens

e, ta

king

into

ac

coun

t the

ir co

mpl

exity

, int

egra

ting

a cr

itica

l per

spec

tive.

Sho

win

g s

kill

in

dia

log

ue

Doe

sn’t

list

en

atte

ntiv

ely

to w

hat

othe

rs s

ay.

Has

diff

icul

ty in

mak

ing

self

unde

rsto

od w

hen

ther

e ar

e m

any

idea

s an

d pe

ople

who

see

an

d va

lue

real

ity

diff

eren

tly.

Dra

ws

from

ow

n an

d ot

hers

’ opi

nion

s w

hat

unifi

es, w

hat

adds

, w

hat

dist

ingu

ishe

s.

Acc

epts

diff

eren

ces

expl

icitl

y an

d w

ith

good

rea

soni

ng.

Dist

ingu

ishes

bet

wee

n th

e pr

ivat

e (o

bjec

t of

resp

ect a

nd to

lera

nce)

an

d pu

blic

(obj

ect o

f re

spon

sibili

ty a

nd

fairn

ess)

.

Mai

nta

inin

g

con

sist

ency

b

etw

een

wh

at o

ne

thin

ks a

nd

do

es

Lack

s ba

sic

skill

s fo

r de

alin

g w

ell w

ith

prob

lem

s of

mor

al

cons

cien

ce t

hat

coul

d ar

ise.

Doe

sn’t

que

stio

n ow

n ac

tions

crit

ical

ly

(lack

s m

otiv

atio

n, h

as

diff

icul

ty in

acc

eptin

g re

spon

sibi

litie

s).

Reco

gnis

es c

onfli

cts

of c

onsc

ienc

e an

d ha

s ba

sic

skill

s fo

r fin

ding

way

out

.

Reso

lves

con

flict

s pe

rson

ally

tak

ing

resp

onsi

bilit

y fo

r ow

n de

cisi

ons.

Dec

ides

in

depe

nden

tly

betw

een

actio

ns

perc

eive

d as

fea

sibl

e,

taki

ng in

to a

ccou

nt

all t

heir

impl

icat

ions

.

Rec

og

nis

ing

just

ice

as a

mai

n, b

asic

et

hic

al p

rin

cip

le

Rem

ains

obl

ivio

us t

o th

e m

ost

basi

c,

prop

er s

ense

of

the

wor

d ju

stic

e.

Iden

tifie

s w

ith

diff

icul

ty t

he m

ost

basi

c, p

rope

r m

odal

ities

of

just

ice.

Rela

tes

just

ice

to

hum

an r

ight

s,

unde

rsto

od a

s co

ncre

te e

thic

al

oblig

atio

ns a

nd

right

s.

Reco

gnis

es a

nd

attr

ibut

es w

hat

corr

espo

nds

to s

elf

and

othe

rs (w

hen

exer

cisi

ng ju

stic

e in

ci

rcum

stan

ces

whe

re

requ

ired

to d

o so

).

Hab

itual

ly a

cts

with

re

spon

sibi

lity

and

resp

ect,

and

is f

air

in

actio

ns w

ith s

elf

and

othe

rs, a

ssum

ing

resp

onsi

bilit

y fo

r ow

n ac

ts.



230

Leve

ls o

f M

aste

ryIn

dic

ato

rsD

escr

ipto

rs

12

34

5

Thir

d le

vel o

f m

aste

ry:

Iden

tify

ing

, re

cog

nis

ing

an

d

app

lyin

g t

he

mea

nin

g o

f th

e m

ora

l lif

e an

d t

he

pri

nci

ple

of

just

ice

Ap

pro

pri

atel

y h

and

ling

sit

uat

ion

s th

at a

re m

ora

lly

sig

nif

ican

t, c

om

ple

x o

r co

nfl

icti

ve

Avo

ids

addr

essi

ng

mor

al r

equi

rem

ents

of

spe

cific

pra

ctic

e w

ithin

gro

up. (

Har

dly

part

icip

ates

in

agre

ed e

vent

s, h

as

diff

icul

ty in

re

spec

ting

rule

s an

d ag

reem

ents

, and

in

shou

lder

ing

som

e ar

ea o

f re

spon

sibi

lity)

.

Doe

sn’t

get

su

ffic

ient

ly in

volv

ed

in t

he g

roup

or

acce

pt a

spe

cific

rol

e in

und

erta

king

pr

actic

es t

hat

sim

ulat

e re

al o

r hy

poth

etic

al

situ

atio

ns.

Con

trib

utes

and

co

-ope

rate

s at

gro

up

leve

l in

the

reso

lutio

n of

mor

ally

sig

nific

ant,

co

mpl

ex a

nd/o

r co

nflic

tive

situ

atio

ns.

Con

trib

utes

way

s of

re

solv

ing

mor

ally

di

ffic

ult

soci

al o

r pe

rson

al s

ituat

ions

.

Show

s vi

rtuo

us

beha

viou

r (e

xem

plar

y,

exce

llent

) in

unde

rtak

ing

a pr

actic

e th

at is

m

oral

ly s

igni

fican

t,

com

plex

and

/or

conf

lictiv

e.

Kn

ow

ing

an

d

taki

ng

car

e o

f o

nes

elf

(fee

ling

s,

op

inio

ns,

bel

iefs

)

Doe

sn’t

que

stio

n se

lf on

impo

rtan

t m

oral

is

sues

.

Mak

es li

ttle

eff

ort

to

disc

over

ow

n op

inio

n, f

eelin

gs o

r po

sitio

n on

issu

es

unde

r di

scus

sion

.

Ack

now

ledg

es a

nd

expr

esse

s w

hat

he/

she

has

dete

cted

in

self

(op

inio

n,

feel

ings

or

posi

tion

on

issu

es u

nder

di

scus

sion

).

Con

tras

ts a

nd

reaf

firm

s or

qua

lifie

s po

sitio

ns, a

rgum

ents

, re

ason

s or

opi

nion

s w

ith o

ther

s.

Act

s tr

uly

and

cons

iste

ntly

with

the

va

lues

or

virt

ues

that

he

/she

hol

ds m

ost

high

ly.

Usi

ng

dia

log

ue

to

furt

her

fai

rnes

s an

d

com

pre

hen

sio

n

Doe

sn’t

con

trib

ute

argu

men

ts a

nd

reas

ons

to s

uppo

rt

own

view

s on

wha

t is

rig

ht.

Has

diff

icul

ty in

lin

king

ow

n op

inio

ns

with

tho

se o

f ot

hers

w

hen

seek

ing

to

bett

er u

nder

stan

d th

e si

tuat

ion

in h

and.

Reco

gnis

es a

nd

unde

rsta

nds

diff

eren

t op

inio

ns

and

poin

ts o

f vi

ews

on is

sue

in h

and

(cap

acit

y of

list

enin

g to

and

rec

ogni

sing

ot

hers

’ ar

gum

ents

, of

com

pari

ng t

hem

w

ith

own,

of

send

ing

clea

r, co

nstr

ucti

ve

mes

sage

s).

Show

s a

posi

tive

attit

ude

tow

ard

and

eval

uatio

n of

di

alog

ue. M

aint

ains

bo

nds

of a

ffec

tion

and

resp

ect

cond

uciv

e to

pos

itive

at

titud

es t

owar

d co

llabo

ratio

n an

d di

alog

ue.

Reno

unce

s ow

n in

tere

sts

and

conv

ictio

ns, e

spec

ially

if

exag

gera

ted

or

erro

neou

s (r

ecog

nise

s va

lid p

oint

s of

vie

w

of o

ther

s; c

omm

itted

to

the

sea

rch

for

trut

h, f

air

agre

emen

ts

and

bett

er m

utua

l co

mpr

ehen

sion

).



231

Leve

ls o

f M

aste

ryIn

dic

ato

rsD

escr

ipto

rs

12

34

5

Third

leve

l of

mas

tery

:Id

entif

ying

, re

cogn

isin

g an

d ap

plyi

ng t

he m

eani

ng

of t

he m

oral

life

and

th

e pr

inci

ple

of ju

stic

e

Sati

sfyi

ng

, th

rou

gh

co

-op

erat

ive

wo

rk,

nee

ds

linke

d t

o

coex

iste

nce

(in

cl

assr

oo

m,

team

wo

rk, g

rou

p

life)

Show

s lit

tle in

tere

st

in g

ettin

g ot

her

grou

p m

embe

rs t

o pa

rtic

ipat

e in

co

mm

on a

ctiv

ities

.

Inte

rest

ed in

get

ting

othe

r gr

oup

mem

bers

to

par

ticip

ate

in

com

mon

act

iviti

es.

Supp

orts

and

de

fend

s th

e us

eful

ness

and

im

port

ance

of

co-

oper

ativ

e w

ork

as a

po

sitiv

e m

eans

of

furt

herin

g gr

oup

life

in t

he c

lass

room

.

Insi

sts

on t

he

impo

rtan

ce o

f co

-op

erat

ive

wor

k as

a

mea

ns o

f fu

rthe

ring

grou

p re

latio

ns.

Con

vinc

es o

ther

s th

at

wha

t th

ey a

re d

oing

w

ill h

ave

effe

cts

on

clas

sroo

m r

elat

ions

, as

wel

l as

on o

ther

gr

oups

.

Bei

ng

incl

ined

to

war

d g

oo

d, a

se

nse

of

just

ice

and

th

e fe

elin

g o

f d

uty

Show

s in

cons

iste

ncie

s in

way

of

actin

g an

d ex

pres

sing

ow

n et

hica

l val

ues

and

sens

e of

just

ice.

Has

diff

icul

ties

in

mee

ting

oblig

atio

ns

apar

t fr

om p

erso

nal

inte

rest

s.

Act

s fa

irly

rega

rdle

ss

of p

erso

nal i

nter

ests

an

d pr

efer

ence

s:

givi

ng, a

ttrib

utin

g,

reco

gnis

ing

wha

t co

rres

pond

s to

eac

h.

Act

ivel

y st

ands

by

othe

rs, s

harin

g th

eir

need

s, in

itiat

ives

, co

ncer

ns, p

robl

ems.

Acc

epts

gro

up r

ules

an

d ho

w t

hey

are

dist

ribut

ed, a

s a

guar

ante

e of

the

rig

hts

and

oblig

atio

ns

of a

ll its

com

pone

nts.



232

COMPETENCE: INTERPERSONAL COMMUNICATION

Description

Dialogue is the word we use for conversations between one or two people who alternatively express their ideas, thoughts and values. In the course of a conversation, differences of opinion and discussions may arise, but always in the spirit of seeking agreement between the parties. That, at least, is how it should be.

Interpersonal communication means positively interacting with other people through dialogue. That is, they each are empathetic when listen-ing, and express themselves clearly and assertively, without hiding what they really think and feel.

Words are the important part of this communicative act, although how things are said and how they are heard is also essential. Therefore, both the verbal and non-verbal aspects of such interaction must be very much taken into account.

Development of this competence is linked to relationships between people in any context, and, of course, the capacity to interact well be-gins with a good predisposition toward dialogue. For this reason, the first level of proficiency concerns people’s capacity to establish good dia-logue relations with others.

The second level of mastery focuses on what students are able to do with dialogue and understanding – whether they are able to utilise them to generate closer, more fruitful and respectful relations between those involved; and whether they are able to produce collaboration as a prod-uct of interactions between people.

Fostering a constructive communicative context for interaction con-stitutes the third level of mastery, because it seeks to measure how stu-dents pay attention to others, how they incorporate their own ideas into discussion, how they stimulate honesty and sincerity in human interac-tions and how they help to build integrative consensus.

The indicators of this capacity measure knowing how to listen, sin-cerity and honesty, the capacity to encourage constructive dialogue and respectful interaction between people.


This competence is directly involved with oral communication and with communication in a foreign language when people of international



233

origins interact. It also comes into play in teamwork, in conflict manage-ment and negotiation, and leadership.

Moreover, it is a competence that plays an important role in the val-ues involved in personal and social development – that is, self-esteem, motivation and self-confidence are qualities that good intercommunica-tion helps to develop. Furthermore, it develops orientation toward oth-ers and enhances one’s capacity to consider and respect others’ opin-ions.


Universities are ideal settings for interpersonal communication. During their years at university, students can be prepared to develop their capacity to interact with others in different registers. First, in their relations with classmates in daily studies and learning. Second, in their relations with lecturers. Third, in the relationships they form with other university students, some of which may be long-lasting and very influ-ential.

Universities are also of course the settings that prepare students for a career in the professional world. A world where interaction is essential to generate communication between people. Knowledge transfer, rela-tions at work, job motivation and participation are just a few of the situ-ations where interaction with others plays an important role.


This competence can be taught through case studies and problem-solving.

The idea is to generate situations between students that require in-teraction and co-operation between them, either through joint prepara-tion of cases, or through activities that call for interaction between peo-ple and groups.



234

COMPETENCE: INTERPERSONAL COMMUNICATION

Definition: Interacting positively with other persons through empathetic listening and through clear, assertive expression of what one thinks and/or feels, by verbal and non-verbal means

Mastery of this competence is closely related to: orientation to-ward others, support for others, self-esteem, respect, communica-tion/information, competence/confidence, empathy, personal de-velopment, support, etc.

Levels of mastery:

1. Establishing good dialogue with classmates and lecturers, listen-ing and speaking clearly and assertively

2. Using dialogue and understanding to collaborate and generate relations

3. Fostering sincere empathetic communication aimed at construc-tive dialogue

Indicators:

1. Listening2. Assertiveness3. Feed-back4. Atmosphere5. Suitability



235

Leve

ls o

f M

aste

ryIn

dic

ato

rsD

escr

ipto

rs

12

34

5

Firs

t le

vel o

f m

aste

ry:

Esta

blis

hin

g g

oo

d

dia

log

ue

wit

h

clas

smat

es a

nd

le

ctu

rers

, lis

ten

ing

an

d s

pea

kin

g

clea

rly

and

as

sert

ivel

y

List

enin

g a

tten

tive

lyD

oesn

’t li

sten

. Wan

ts

to im

pose

ow

n id

eas

at a

ll co

sts.

Get

s di

stra

cted

and

do

esn’

t ca

ptur

e en

tire

mes

sage

.

List

ens

atte

ntiv

ely

to

othe

rs.

List

ens

clos

ely

to

ensu

re f

ull

com

preh

ensi

on o

f ot

hers

’ ide

as.

Pays

suf

ficie

nt t

ime

and

atte

ntio

n to

ot

hers

to

show

the

y ar

e be

ing

liste

ned

to.

Sayi

ng

wh

at o

ne

thin

ks a

nd

fee

ls o

n

a su

bje

ct

Is e

xtre

mel

y qu

iet,

so

it’s

hard

to

know

w

hat

he/s

he is

th

inki

ng.

Doe

sn’t

tak

e a

stan

d an

d m

essa

ges

are

ambi

guou

s.

Expr

esse

s w

hat

he/

she

thin

ks a

nd f

eels

ab

out

the

subj

ect

in

hand

.

Stat

es w

ith c

larit

y an

d as

sura

nce

wha

t he

/she

thi

nks

and

feel

s.

Is a

sser

tive.

The

oth

er

pers

on a

lway

s kn

ows

wha

t hi

s/he

r po

sitio

n an

d re

actio

ns a

re o

n th

e su

bjec

t in

han

d.

Talk

ing

ab

ou

t th

ing

s in

a w

ay t

hat

d

oes

n’t

pu

t o

ther

s o

n t

he

def

ensi

ve

Is c

onst

antly

ev

alua

ting

and

judg

ing

wha

t ot

hers

sa

y; is

alw

ays

on t

he

defe

nsiv

e.

Spea

ks w

ith e

xces

sive

se

nse

of a

ssur

ance

an

d su

perio

rity.

Avo

ids

mak

ing

valu

e ju

dgem

ents

or

conv

eyin

g se

nse

of

supe

riorit

y w

hen

spea

king

. Doe

s no

t pu

t ot

hers

on

the

defe

nsiv

e.

Whe

n co

mm

unic

atin

g ta

kes

othe

rs in

to a

ccou

nt

and

supp

orts

the

m.

His

/her

co

mm

unic

atio

n ge

nera

tes

an

atm

osph

ere

of

unde

rsta

ndin

g an

d di

alog

ue.

Ask

ing

qu

esti

on

s to

g

ain

a b

ette

r u

nd

erst

and

ing

Doe

sn’t

ask

que

stio

ns

and

sim

ply

assu

mes

th

at h

e/sh

e ha

s un

ders

tood

whe

n ot

hers

spe

ak.

His

/her

que

stio

ns a

re

few

, ino

ppor

tune

or

poor

ly s

truc

ture

d.

Ask

s op

en q

uest

ions

to

und

erst

and

othe

rs’

idea

s an

d po

sitio

ns

bett

er.

His

/her

que

stio

ns a

re

pert

inen

t an

d en

able

th

e sp

eake

r to

en

larg

e on

wha

t he

/sh

e is

try

ing

to

conv

ey.

His

/her

que

stio

ns a

re

inte

llige

nt a

nd

impr

ove

the

atm

osph

ere

or h

elp

the

dial

ogue

to

go

forw

ard.

Exp

ress

ing

sel

f cl

earl

y an

d

accu

rate

ly

His

/her

exp

ress

ion

is

poor

and

unc

lear

.Ex

pres

ses

self

hesi

tant

ly a

nd

with

out

man

agin

g to

co

nvey

idea

s w

ell.

Con

veys

idea

s co

ncis

ely

in f

amili

ar

cont

exts

.

Expr

esse

s id

eas

with

ea

se a

nd f

luen

cy.

Out

stan

ding

for

fa

cilit

y of

exp

ress

ion

and

com

mun

icat

ive

clar

ity.

Dev

elo

pin

g g

oo

d,

con

sist

ent

bo

dy

lan

gu

age

His

/her

bod

y la

ngua

ge is

in

cons

iste

nt w

ith

verb

al m

essa

ge a

nd

not

appr

opria

te f

or

the

com

mun

icat

ive

situ

atio

n.

His

/her

bod

y la

ngua

ge d

oesn

’t

rein

forc

e ve

rbal

m

essa

ge.

With

bod

y an

d ge

stur

es c

onve

ys

info

rmat

ion

that

is

cons

iste

nt w

ith v

erba

l m

essa

ge a

nd w

ith

the

com

mun

icat

ive

situ

atio

n.

His

/her

bod

y la

ngua

ge c

ontr

ibut

es

valu

able

info

rmat

ion

and

enric

hes

verb

al

expr

essi

vene

ss.

His

/her

bod

y la

ngua

ge is

hig

hly

expr

essi

ve, c

onsi

sten

t an

d su

itabl

e,

enha

ncin

g co

mm

unic

ativ

e flo

w.



236

Leve

ls o

f M

aste

ryIn

dic

ato

rsD

escr

ipto

rs

12

34

5

Seco

nd

leve

l of

mas

tery

:U

sin

g d

ialo

gu

e an

d

un

der

stan

din

g t

o

gen

erat

e re

lati

on

s o

f co

llab

ora

tio

n

List

enin

g t

o a

nd

u

nd

erst

and

ing

o

ther

s’ id

eas

even

w

hen

op

po

site

to

o

wn

Doe

sn’t

list

en t

o ot

hers

and

onl

y pa

ys

atte

ntio

n to

wha

t he

/sh

e is

inte

rest

ed in

.

Hin

ders

flo

w o

f co

mm

unic

atio

n to

st

ress

ow

n id

eas.

List

ens

to e

very

one

with

out

criti

cisi

ng o

r ju

dgin

g th

eir

opin

ions

.

Show

s in

tere

st in

ot

hers

’ ide

as a

nd

disc

ours

e.

Show

s co

mpr

ehen

sion

to

war

d al

l opi

nion

s.

Cri

tici

sin

g

con

stru

ctiv

ely;

sa

yin

g c

lear

ly w

hat

o

ne

thin

ks a

nd

fee

ls

wit

ho

ut

trea

din

g o

n

feel

ing

s o

f o

ther

s

Crit

icis

es

dest

ruct

ivel

y.A

lway

s ar

gues

ag

ains

t.Ex

pres

ses

self

with

out

disd

ain

for

othe

rs.

Arg

ues

poin

t of

vie

w

with

out

mak

ing

pers

onal

allu

sion

s.

Stre

sses

the

pos

itive

in

oth

ers

and

reas

ons

abou

t th

e di

ffer

ence

s.

Co

mm

un

icat

ing

sp

on

tan

eou

sly,

cr

eati

ng

an

at

mo

sph

ere

of

equ

alit

y an

d

colla

bo

rati

on

Spea

ks w

ith

supe

riorit

y an

d di

stan

ce. F

ails

to

enga

ge a

udie

nce.

Util

ises

spe

ech

to

dist

ance

sel

f.In

ow

n co

mm

unic

atio

n is

re

laxe

d an

d op

en.

Col

labo

rate

s in

bu

ildin

g a

rela

xed,

co

nstr

uctiv

e at

mos

pher

e.

Gen

erat

es c

onfid

ence

an

d op

enne

ss in

ot

hers

.

Res

pec

tin

g o

ther

s in

co

nte

nt

(wh

at is

sa

id)

and

in f

orm

(h

ow

it is

sai

d)

Inte

ntio

nally

ge

nera

tes

tens

ion

for

own

bene

fit.

Impo

ses

own

idea

s w

ithou

t re

spec

ting

othe

rs.

Use

s re

spec

t as

a

crite

rion

for

unde

rsta

ndin

g an

d di

alog

ue.

Use

s un

ders

tand

ing

and

dial

ogue

to

fom

ent

cons

truc

tive

attit

udes

.

Mak

es p

ositi

ve

eval

uatio

ns a

nd

resp

ects

oth

ers’

op

inio

ns.

Suit

ing

sp

eech

an

d

bo

dy

lan

gu

age

to

the

situ

atio

n a

nd

to

th

e n

eed

s o

f o

ther

s

Reso

rts

to n

on-v

erba

l m

eans

to

inte

rfer

e an

d in

terr

upt.

Doe

sn’t

tak

e in

to

acco

unt

the

cont

ribut

ions

of

othe

rs.

Suits

spe

ech

and

body

lang

uage

to

each

con

vers

atio

n an

d si

tuat

ion.

Pays

att

entio

n an

d tr

ies

to in

tegr

ate

the

cont

ribut

ions

of

othe

rs.

Is v

ery

flexi

ble

in o

wn

com

mun

icat

ion.

A

dapt

s to

all

type

s of

pe

ople

.



237

Leve

ls o

f M

aste

ryIn

dic

ato

rsD

escr

ipto

rs

12

34

5

Thir

d le

vel o

f m

aste

ry:

Fost

erin

g s

ince

re

emp

ath

etic

co

mm

un

icat

ion

ai

med

at

con

stru

ctiv

e d

ialo

gu

e

Bei

ng

rec

epti

ve t

o

oth

ers’

co

mm

un

icat

ive

pro

po

sals

eve

n if

cr

itic

ism

s; L

iste

nin

g

to e

nri

ch d

ialo

gu

e.

Doe

sn’t

tol

erat

e qu

estio

ning

of

his/

her

belie

fs. D

efen

ds t

hem

ve

ry e

mot

iona

lly.

Expr

essl

y m

anife

sts

disi

nter

est

for

diff

erin

g op

inio

ns.

Pays

att

entio

n to

ev

eryo

ne’s

opin

ions

.M

anife

sts

inte

rest

for

di

ffer

ing

opin

ions

.A

ctiv

ely

elic

its c

ritic

al

opin

ions

.

Pro

po

sin

g

sug

ges

tio

ns

for

qu

alit

y co

mm

un

icat

ion

ai

med

at

con

stru

ctiv

e d

ialo

gu

e

Ram

bles

on

with

out

clar

ity o

f id

eas.

Doe

sn’t

inco

rpor

ate

othe

rs’ i

deas

.M

akes

sug

gest

ions

on

how

to

impr

ove

dial

ogue

and

man

age

com

mun

icat

ion

bett

er.

Furt

hers

dia

logu

e by

ob

ject

ivel

y in

corp

orat

ing

othe

rs’

sugg

estio

ns.

Out

stan

ding

for

ab

ility

to

inte

grat

e ow

n an

d ot

hers

’ id

eas.

Cre

atin

g

com

mu

nic

ativ

e co

nte

xts

bas

ed o

n

ho

nes

ty a

nd

si

nce

rity

of

par

tici

pan

ts

Dis

dain

s fr

om t

he

outs

et a

ny w

ho

disa

gree

.

Syst

emat

ical

ly

ques

tions

and

op

pose

s th

e op

inio

ns

of o

ther

s.

Expr

esse

s se

lf w

ith

sinc

erity

and

res

pect

.O

penl

y re

cogn

ises

ow

n do

ubts

and

m

ista

kes.

Stim

ulat

es h

ones

t,

sinc

ere

and

open

co

mm

unic

atio

n on

th

e pa

rt o

f ot

hers

.

Seek

ing

sh

ared

m

ean

ing

an

d

neg

oti

atio

n o

f d

iffe

ren

ces

aris

ing

in

co

mm

un

icat

ion

Focu

ses

espe

cial

ly o

n di

ffer

ence

s.Ju

dges

glo

bally

w

ithou

t de

tect

ing

poin

ts o

f ag

reem

ent.

Firs

t se

eks

poin

ts o

f ag

reem

ent.

Stre

sses

sha

red

poin

ts

and

is w

illin

g to

ced

e to

oth

ers.

Take

s th

e in

itiat

ive

in

gene

ratin

g co

nsen

sus.



238

COMPETENCE: TEAMWORK

Description

People are sociable by nature. The tendency to associate with others to obtain something, or to help to achieve goals that could not other-wise be attained individually is a trait that appears in childhood. It can be said to be genetic, as it is in certain animals that organise their habits and ways of life in groups: bees, ants, prairie dogs, etc.

However, the organisation of regulated activity such as work, stud-ies, healthcare requires that we use this human trait following norms and rules that build on the importance of this natural phenomenon. People come together to play sports, organise parties and events, en-gage in research and discover new aspects of nature, of history, of art; to produce specialised goods and services, to defend themselves, etc.

There are aspects of group structure that determine their effective-ness and so should be taken into account. These include the number of members, proposed objectives, roles and assigned tasks of each member in working toward the common goal, rules to follow, etc. There are also specific group efforts on which will depend the group’s progress (or de-cline) over time, such as decision-making, communication processes, conflict resolution, etc.

Both aspects of group functioning have an effect on the results achieved through group work. Teamwork cannot be improvised, but re-quires prior preparation and care in the details of its processes and struc-ture.

Due to its complexity and importance, this competence has been divided into three levels of mastery. The first corresponds to members’ responsibility to carry out tasks, meet deadlines, and give priority to com-mon objectives over their own individual ones.

At a second level of proficiency, people participate and identify more with the effectiveness of the group. They not only participate formally by meeting minimum requirements, but work for harmony and understand-ing among group members, doing everything they can to see that peo-ple learn from and value each other.

Leadership of the group means organising, taking the initiative to motivate others, and having a positive influence on them. These are the features of the third level of proficiency in this competence.

To recognise and evaluate learning and progress at these three lev-els, the following indicators are used: tasks completed, participation, organisation and social value attached to work undertaken with others.



239


Considered by many specialists as a core competence, teamwork involves thinking analytically and systemically, reflectively and critically, administering time and meetings, participating in decision-making and in management of objectives and projects.

It helps to improve interpersonal communication, conflict manage-ment and the exercise of leadership in small groups, but can be extended to more complex situations.

Teamwork is basic for developing values such as respect for human dignity, solidarity, global justice, etc.


Students come to university to pursue a degree course. The degree accrediting these studies is obtained individually, but contrary to what some might think, the social aspect of students’ academic and profes-sional training has a great deal of weight in their overall education.

Students need to relate to lecturers and classmates in order to un-dertake work of various kinds, including study projects and research. Cultural and sports activities form part of their student life and partici-pating in them provides perfect opportunities for exercising the compe-tence of teamwork.

In professional life, competence in teamwork is required in two-thirds of employment offerings for positions of some responsibility. Employers seek people with good capacity for working in teams, for creating and directing teams, etc. In fact, selection processes devote part of their inter-view time to questioning candidates about this subject, or even include group interviews or group dynamics exercises in the selection process in order to observe how candidates perform in a group context.

Tasks that involve working with others, in teams, occur not only within departments (e.g. sales teams, accounting or production teams), but also between departments in multidisciplinary teams created spe-cifically to undertake projects, resolve problems, draw up innovation or improvement proposals, etc.


One of the most popular recent methodologies is one known as “co-operative learning”, where learning objectives are achieved by interac-



240

tion through teamwork activities. Clearly, the different techniques and activities incorporated in this methodology help to develop the compe-tence of teamwork.

However, one should bear in mind that this competence is an at-tribute of each individual, along with his/her professional training and personal maturity. It must therefore be incorporated into the syllabus or course curriculum. It is a competence that must be assessed on the basis of behaviour showing progress in the specified indicators or criteria, in-cluding the techniques decided on for the assessment.

This is a competence where lecturers can use techniques of self- and peer-evaluation to supplement their own assessments. Lecturers can ob-serve certain behaviours within the student group, but during part of the group activity time, it is the students themselves who best know how they and their classmates function as a team.



241

COMPETENCE: TEAMWORK

Definition: Actively joining and participating in the attainment of shared objectives with other persons, departments and organi-sations

Mastery of this competence is closely related to: Good socialisation and interest in interaction. Strong social values conducive to a be-lief in integrity, honesty and competence of others. Capacity for interpersonal communication. Maturity to deal with differences of criteria. Conviction concerning the effectiveness of shared work. Desire and interest to freely share ideas and information. Values of collaboration, solidarity.

Levels of mastery:

1. Actively participating and collaborating in team tasks and pro-moting confidence, cordiality and focus on shared work

2. Contributing to the consolidation and development of the team, fostering communication, balanced distribution of work, good team atmosphere and cohesion

3. Directing groups, ensuring member integration and high-per-formance orientation

Indicators:

1. Work2. Participation3. Organisation4. Cohesion5. Social value of activity



242

Leve

ls o

f M

aste

ryIn

dic

ato

rsD

escr

ipto

rs

12

34

5

Firs

t le

vel o

f m

aste

ry:

Act

ivel

y p

arti

cip

atin

g a

nd

co

llab

ora

tin

g in

te

am t

asks

an

d

pro

mo

tin

g

con

fid

ence

, co

rdia

lity

and

fo

cus

on

sh

ared

wo

rk

Co

mp

leti

ng

as

sig

ned

tas

ks

wit

hin

dea

dlin

e as

g

rou

p m

emb

er

Doe

sn’t

com

plet

e as

sign

ed t

asks

.Pa

rtia

lly c

ompl

etes

as

sign

ed t

asks

or

does

so

with

del

ays.

Repo

rts

befo

re t

he

dead

line

on t

he

outc

ome

of t

he

assi

gned

tas

k.

Qua

lity

of w

ork

on

the

assi

gned

tas

k is

a

note

wor

thy

cont

ribut

ion

to t

he

team

.

In a

dditi

on t

o co

mpl

etin

g as

sign

ed

task

wel

l, hi

s/he

r w

ork

orie

nts

and

faci

litat

es t

hat

of r

est

of t

eam

mem

bers

.

Part

icip

atin

g a

ctiv

ely

in t

eam

mee

tin

gs,

sh

arin

g in

form

atio

n,

kno

wle

dg

e an

d

exp

erie

nce

s

Oft

en a

bsen

t fr

om

grou

p w

ork

and

his/

her

pres

ence

is

irrel

evan

t.

Take

s lit

tle p

art,

m

ostly

at

the

requ

est

of o

ther

s.

In g

ener

al is

act

ive

and

part

icip

ativ

e in

gr

oup

enco

unte

rs.

His

/her

wor

k fo

ster

s pa

rtic

ipat

ion

and

impr

oved

qua

lity

of

team

res

ults

.

His

/her

con

trib

utio

ns

are

fund

amen

tal f

or

the

grou

p pr

oces

s an

d fo

r th

e qu

ality

of

resu

lts.

Co

llab

ora

tin

g in

d

efin

ing

, org

anis

ing

an

d d

istr

ibu

tin

g

gro

up

tas

ks

Man

ifest

s re

sist

ance

to

the

org

anis

atio

n of

w

ork

with

in t

he

team

.

Sim

ply

acce

pts

the

orga

nisa

tion

of w

ork

prop

osed

by

othe

r m

embe

rs o

f th

e te

am.

Part

icip

ates

in t

he

plan

ning

, or

gani

satio

n an

d di

strib

utio

n of

te

amw

ork.

Is o

rgan

ised

and

di

strib

utes

wor

k w

ith

effe

ctiv

enes

s.

Fost

ers

orga

nisa

tion

of w

ork

by t

akin

g be

st a

dvan

tage

of

team

mem

ber

tale

nts

and

know

-how

.

Focu

sin

g o

n a

nd

b

ein

g c

om

mit

ted

to

ag

reem

ent

and

sh

ared

ob

ject

ives

Purs

ues

own

obje

ctiv

es.

Has

diff

icul

ty in

in

tegr

atin

g pe

rson

al

and

team

obj

ectiv

es.

Acc

epts

as

own

the

obje

ctiv

es o

f th

e gr

oup.

Prom

otes

a c

lear

de

finiti

on o

f ob

ject

ives

and

the

gr

oup’

s in

tegr

atio

n ro

und

them

.

Mot

ivat

es a

nd

mar

shal

s gr

oup

roun

d m

ore

dem

andi

ng

obje

ctiv

es. G

roup

s w

here

he/

she

part

icip

ates

no

tew

orth

y fo

r pe

rfor

man

ce a

nd

qual

ity.

Taki

ng

into

acc

ou

nt

the

po

ints

of

view

o

f o

ther

s an

d g

ivin

g

con

stru

ctiv

e fe

edb

ack

Doe

sn’t

list

en t

o cl

assm

ates

and

sy

stem

atic

ally

di

spar

ages

the

m,

wan

ting

to im

pose

ow

n op

inio

ns.

List

ens

little

, ask

s no

qu

estio

ns, d

oes

not

wan

t to

kno

w o

ther

s’

opin

ions

. His

/her

co

ntrib

utio

ns a

re

redu

ndan

t an

d no

t ve

ry s

ugge

stiv

e.

Acc

epts

the

opi

nion

s of

oth

ers

and

know

s ho

w t

o gi

ve o

wn

poin

t of

vie

w

cons

truc

tivel

y.

Prom

otes

co

nstr

uctiv

e di

alog

ue

and

insp

ires

qual

ity

part

icip

atio

n fr

om

othe

r gr

oup

mem

bers

.

Inte

grat

es o

ther

s’

opin

ions

into

a h

ighe

r pe

rspe

ctiv

e,

mai

ntai

ning

at

mos

pher

e of

co

llabo

ratio

n an

d su

ppor

t.



243

Leve

ls o

f M

aste

ryIn

dic

ato

rsD

escr

ipto

rs

12

34

5

Seco

nd

leve

l of

mas

tery

:C

on

trib

uti

ng

to

th

e co

nso

lidat

ion

an

d

dev

elo

pm

ent

of

the

team

, fo

ster

ing

co

mm

un

icat

ion

, b

alan

ced

d

istr

ibu

tio

n o

f w

ork

, go

od

tea

m

atm

osp

her

e an

d

coh

esio

n

Acc

epti

ng

an

d

resp

ecti

ng

gro

up

n

orm

s

Doe

sn’t

acc

ept

or

resp

ect

grou

p no

rms.

Que

stio

ns g

roup

no

rms

to s

uit

them

to

own

inte

rest

s.

Acc

epts

and

res

pect

s gr

oup

norm

s.Pa

rtic

ipat

es in

de

cidi

ng g

roup

no

rms.

Prop

oses

nor

ms

to

impr

ove

the

grou

p’s

func

tioni

ng a

nd

atm

osph

ere.

Hel

ps t

o en

forc

e no

rms

and

rule

s.

Hel

pin

g t

o d

ecid

e an

d a

pp

ly t

he

team

’s w

ork

p

roce

sses

Doe

sn’t

kno

w o

r ap

ply

the

met

hods

an

d pr

oced

ures

ag

reed

by

the

team

.

Has

diff

icul

ty in

un

ders

tand

ing

and

appl

ying

est

ablis

hed

wor

k pr

oces

ses.

App

lies

good

m

etho

ds a

nd

proc

edur

es f

or

effe

ctiv

e un

dert

akin

g of

the

tea

m’s

wor

k.

Part

icip

ates

act

ivel

y in

de

sign

ing

team

’s w

ork

proc

esse

s.

Intr

oduc

es c

hang

es in

pr

oces

ses

to im

prov

e qu

ality

of

team

’s w

ork.

Act

ing

co

nst

ruct

ivel

y to

re

solv

e te

am

con

flic

ts

Prov

okes

con

flict

s in

gr

oup

with

out

cont

ribut

ing

solu

tions

.

Avo

ids

addr

essi

ng

conf

licts

.A

cts

posi

tivel

y to

re

solv

e co

nflic

ts t

hat

aris

e in

gro

up.

Sees

firs

t sy

mpt

oms

of c

onfli

ct a

nd a

cts

quic

kly.

Ow

n ac

tions

pro

vide

co

nstr

uctiv

e w

ays

out

of c

onfli

cts,

bef

ore

they

bec

ome

prol

onge

d or

muc

h w

orse

.

Hel

pin

g t

o b

rin

g

gro

up

to

get

her

th

rou

gh

way

of

com

mu

nic

atin

g a

nd

in

tera

ctin

g

Agg

ress

ivel

y at

tack

s or

que

stio

ns t

eam

’s ca

paci

ty t

o tr

y to

re

ach

an a

gree

men

t.

Is p

assi

ve a

nd

inte

ract

s lit

tle w

ith

othe

r gr

oup

mem

bers

.

Con

veys

cle

arly

and

di

rect

ly o

wn

idea

s an

d op

inio

ns t

o th

e ot

her

team

mem

bers

.

Inte

ract

s po

sitiv

ely

with

oth

er g

roup

m

embe

rs, s

uppo

rtin

g an

d en

cour

agin

g th

em.

Prop

oses

way

s of

ge

ttin

g to

geth

er

apar

t fr

om f

orm

al

mee

tings

to

impr

ove

grou

p co

hesi

on.

Furt

her

ing

th

e so

cial

imp

ort

ance

o

f th

e ac

tivi

ty

un

der

take

n b

y th

e g

rou

p

Den

ies

or q

uest

ions

ut

ility

or

impo

rtan

ce

of t

eam

’s ta

sk.

Is in

tere

sted

in

gett

ing

mem

bers

to

part

icip

ate

in

com

mon

act

iviti

es.

Supp

orts

and

def

ends

ut

ility

and

impo

rtan

ce

of t

eam

’s ta

sk. M

akes

po

sitiv

e ev

alua

tions

.

Insi

sts

on t

he

impo

rtan

ce o

f ea

ch

team

mem

ber’s

wor

k to

the

fin

al c

olle

ctiv

e ou

tcom

e.

Mak

es o

ther

s se

e th

at w

hat

they

are

do

ing

has

repe

rcus

sion

s on

ot

her

grou

ps.



244

Leve

ls o

f M

aste

ryIn

dic

ato

rsD

escr

ipto

rs

12

34

5

Thir

d le

vel o

f m

aste

ry:

Dir

ecti

ng

gro

up

s,

ensu

rin

g m

emb

er

inte

gra

tio

n a

nd

h

igh

-per

form

ance

o

rien

tati

on

Co

llab

ora

tin

g

acti

vely

in p

lan

nin

g

of

team

wo

rk,

dis

trib

uti

on

of

task

s an

d d

ead

lines

Lets

thi

ngs

go; a

cts

with

out

prio

r pl

anni

ng.

Impr

ovis

es p

lann

ing

and

leav

es lo

ose

ends

. Dea

dlin

es a

re

not

real

istic

.

Mak

es c

oncr

ete

prop

osal

s fo

r th

e di

strib

utio

n of

tas

ks

and

esta

blis

hes

reas

onab

le d

eadl

ines

.

Stim

ulat

es o

ther

m

embe

rs’

part

icip

atio

n, c

o-or

dina

ting

thei

r co

ntrib

utio

ns.

Dis

trib

utes

fea

sibl

e ta

sks

to m

embe

rs in

a

co-o

rdin

ated

way

w

ith

clea

r gu

idel

ines

, ev

en

unde

r ti

me

pres

sure

an

d w

ith

dive

rse

mem

bers

.

Dir

ecti

ng

mee

tin

gs

wit

h e

ffec

tive

nes

sIs

una

ble

to c

o-or

dina

te m

eetin

gs,

whi

ch g

et o

ut o

f ha

nd.

Trie

s to

dire

ct

mee

tings

but

ov

erlo

oks

time,

ag

enda

or

resu

lts.

Dire

cts

mee

tings

with

ef

fect

iven

ess

and

mee

ts o

bjec

tives

.

Dire

cts

mee

tings

with

ef

fect

iven

ess,

ac

hiev

ing

bala

nced

pa

rtic

ipat

ion

and

the

invo

lvem

ent

of a

ll pr

esen

t.

Ach

ieve

s ba

lanc

ed

part

icip

atio

n an

d th

e co

mm

itmen

t of

all

mem

bers

of

the

grou

p.

Pro

po

sin

g c

lear

ly-

def

ined

, am

bit

iou

s g

oal

s to

th

e g

rou

p

Doe

sn’t

kno

w o

r is

un

able

to

form

ulat

e w

ith c

larit

y gr

oup

obje

ctiv

es.

Prop

oses

unc

lear

ob

ject

ives

tha

t co

nfus

e th

e gr

oup.

Prop

oses

att

ract

ive

obje

ctiv

es f

or t

he

grou

p de

finin

g th

em

with

cla

rity.

Stim

ulat

es t

eam

de

finin

g at

tain

able

, fo

rwar

d-lo

okin

g go

als.

Stim

ulat

es t

eam

fo

rmul

atin

g ob

ject

ives

tha

t th

ey

acce

pt a

s th

eir

own.

Faci

litat

ing

po

siti

ve

man

agem

ent

of

dif

fere

nce

s,

dis

agre

emen

ts a

nd

co

nfl

icts

ari

sin

g in

te

am

Add

s to

con

flict

by

exag

gera

ting

diff

eren

ces.

Get

s lo

st in

con

flict

an

d do

esn’

t kn

ow

how

to

reco

ncile

or

sett

le t

he d

iffer

ence

s ex

pres

sed

by o

ther

s.

Add

ress

es c

onfli

cts

deal

ing

with

the

co

ntrib

utio

ns a

nd

diff

eren

ces

expr

esse

d by

the

tea

m.

Add

ress

es c

onfli

cts

bala

ncin

g pe

ople

’s co

ntrib

utio

ns a

nd

com

ing

out

of it

wel

l.

Mak

es t

eam

see

tha

t di

ffer

ence

s ar

e en

richi

ng, a

chie

ving

ag

reem

ents

acc

epte

d by

all.

Seei

ng

th

at a

ll m

emb

ers

get

in

volv

ed w

ith

m

anag

emen

t an

d

fun

ctio

nin

g o

f te

am

Doe

sn’t

man

age

indi

vidu

al

com

mitm

ent

fost

erin

g te

am

disc

oura

gem

ent.

Har

dly

achi

eves

bas

ic

com

mitm

ent

need

ed

from

mem

bers

in

orde

r fo

r te

am t

o fu

nctio

n.

Obt

ains

com

mitm

ent

of e

ach

mem

ber

enab

ling

the

grou

p to

fu

nctio

n as

suc

h.

Ach

ieve

s pe

rson

al

and

colle

ctiv

e co

mm

itmen

t of

the

te

am in

all

key

aspe

cts.

Get

s m

embe

rs

invo

lved

and

co

mm

itted

. Mem

bers

ac

cept

oth

ers’

su

gges

tions

as

thei

r ow

n pr

opos

als.



245

COMPETENCE: CONFLICT MANAGEMENT AND NEGOTIATION

Description

The moment that two people meet to do something together, the possibility exists of different opinions arising and of each one defending his/her own as the best or more effective way of carrying out the task. This is where conflicts may arise.

Conflicts, like burns, come in different degrees. First degree burns are slight and heal easily. Third degree burns require intensive treatment, and a delay or failure to treat the burn properly can lead to a critical situ-ation. Something similar can be said about conflicts. Some are slight and common, consisting mainly of differences of interests, and talking them over can usually set them straight.

However, when a conflict is allowed to fester due to delayed or inap-propriate treatment, it can cause a rupture of relations or permanent confrontation, using up energy and resources unproductively and often quite destructively. There is only one treatment, one formula for facing and resolving conflicts – negotiation. This can come in the bland form of dialogue, communication, agreement or consensus, or the strong for-mula may be required, in which case formal negotiations are in order.

If the parties involved recognise their failure, they usually agree to some kind of mediation or arbitration. This may be an armistice that does not resolve the conflict, but instead leaves its treatment and de-finitive resolution until a later, better moment.

Mastery of this competence is analysed at three levels. The first is learning and mastering simple tactics such as listening to the other per-son’s version and finding points in common with one’s own stand, in order to advance from there.

The second, more complex level involves addressing conflictive situ-ations between persons or groups, reflecting and skilfully getting the parties involved to reflect, employing simple strategies to reach agree-ments and constructive reconciliations.

The third level of proficiency in this competence deals with the ca-pacity to handle confrontations with versatility, contributing either con-flict negotiation tactics and strategies, or engaging in mediation and/or arbitration between the parties in conflict.

To assess students’ levels of proficiency in the competence, we can use as progress indicators demonstrated control when something frus-trating happens, or demonstrated understanding of situations with ob-jectivity and impartiality. Assertiveness or skill in expressing one’s own



246

thoughts and feelings with sufficient clarity and without offending, as well as active listening are also criteria for assessing conflict manage-ment competence.

A final indicator for evaluating this competence is the effort to find and propose alternatives in conflictive situations, as well as versatility and facility for getting others to accept them.


As can be seen from the above description, this competence requires good oral and written communication, active listening, assertiveness, giving good feedback, capacity to see things objectively, and to distance oneself emotionally and rationally from the parties in conflict.

Teamwork is impossible if conflicts can’t be managed adequately or if people lack flexibility in presenting their proposals and making them compatible with those of other members of the group. The competence of conflict management also requires flexibility, fairness and respect for rights of others, and, therefore, it is basic to values such as respect for human dignity, creation of a new order, global justice, etc.


As we said in introducing this competence, there is no lack of situa-tions where conflicts arise in ordinary life. A university setting is no dif-ferent, and it is important to take advantage of such situations to further training in a competence that requires much practice. It is not easy to improvise.

Differences with classmates, with lecturers, other academic authori-ties, service personnel (bookshop, cafeteria, porters, etc.), provide occa-sions for practicing conflict management and negotiation techniques, tactics and strategies. Developing this competence in students contrib-utes powerfully to a better classroom atmosphere, because conflicts are addressed naturally and with skill, since this is an important part of inter-personal relations.

In professional life, conflict management is a competence that is generally much in demand. In particular, it is required in sales positions where relations are based on people’s confidence in the good that will come from the product or service offered and the return for the entity



247

which we represent. It is an important competence for executives and management, particularly in the areas of purchasing, labour relations, etc. Indeed, it is one of the specific competences for such positions.


Lecturers will find multiple occasions for practicing this competence if they assign co-operative work to be done in pairs or in groups.

Students’ interest must be focused on identifying an emerging con-flict, the roles and styles of confrontation involved, the phases through which the conflict passes, whether or not it is resolved, etc. Learning this competence is compatible with almost all academic subjects, since the work to be done can give rise to situations where the above behaviours can be practiced.

Especially recommendable for this competence are assessment tech-niques involving student participation through self- and peer-assessment or the evaluation of other classmates.



248

COMPETENCE: CONFLICT MANAGEMENT AND NEGOTIATION

DEFINITION: Seeking to resolve differences that arise between persons and/or groups in any type of organisation

Mastery of this competence is closely related to: Communication, listening, feedback, objectivity, adaptability, flexibility, fairness, respect for own and others’ rights, etc.

Levels of mastery:

1. Expressing own positions and considering those of others, en-deavouring to reach acceptable agreements in situations of con-flict between self and other person or the group

2. Positively and constructively addressing conflict by reflecting on the situation, defending own positions with skill and strategy, and reconciling conflicting points of view

3. Dealing with situations of conflict with versatility, skill and ethi-cal sense, and exercising functions of mediation between per-sons, groups and organisations

Indicators:

1. Coping with frustration2. Comprehension3. Assertiveness4. Capacity for listening5. Search for alternatives



249

Leve

ls o

f M

aste

ryIn

dic

ato

rsD

escr

ipto

rs

12

34

5

Firs

t le

vel o

f m

aste

ry:

Exp

ress

ing

ow

n

po

siti

on

s an

d

con

sid

erin

g t

ho

se

of

oth

ers,

en

dea

vou

rin

g t

o

reac

h a

ccep

tab

le

agre

emen

ts in

si

tuat

ion

s o

f co

nfl

ict

bet

wee

n

self

an

d t

he

oth

er

per

son

or

gro

up

Tole

rati

ng

an

d

acce

pti

ng

vex

atio

ns

that

ari

se in

in

tera

ctio

ns

wit

h

clas

smat

es

Is b

adly

fru

stra

ted

and

vexe

d w

hen

inte

rest

or

posi

tion

colli

des

with

tho

se o

f cl

assm

ates

.

Get

s di

scou

rage

d by

di

scre

panc

ies

and

conf

licts

of

inte

rest

w

ith c

lass

mat

es,

runn

ing

away

fro

m o

r av

oidi

ng s

uch

situ

atio

ns.

Tole

rate

s an

d ac

cept

s ve

xatio

ns t

hat

aris

e in

in

tera

ctio

ns w

ith

clas

smat

es.

Is a

ccep

ting

whe

n cl

assm

ates

exp

ress

di

ffer

ence

s an

d di

scre

panc

ies

with

hi

m/h

er.

Valu

es p

ositi

vely

ex

pres

sion

s of

di

ffer

ence

s be

twee

n cl

assm

ates

, as

an

expr

essi

on o

f th

eir

iden

tity

and

conf

iden

ce in

oth

ers.

Bei

ng

ab

le t

o

anal

yse

and

u

nd

erst

and

co

nfl

icts

, in

clu

din

g a

war

enes

s o

f o

wn

po

siti

on

an

d

resp

on

sib

ility

in s

uch

si

tuat

ion

s

Reac

ts im

puls

ivel

y w

hen

ente

rs in

to

conf

lict

with

cl

assm

ates

.

Has

diff

icul

ty in

re

flect

ing

in

situ

atio

ns o

f co

nflic

t th

at c

ause

him

/her

an

xiet

y.

Refle

cts

on t

he

conf

lict,

try

ing

to

unde

rsta

nd w

hat

is

happ

enin

g in

ord

er t

o co

pe w

ith it

.

Ana

lyse

s th

e ca

uses

of

a c

onfli

ct, t

ryin

g to

un

ders

tand

the

po

sitio

ns o

f cl

assm

ates

in r

elat

ion

to o

wn.

Resp

onsi

bly

acce

pts

own

emot

ions

and

ac

tions

in s

ituat

ions

of

con

flict

, and

an

alys

es t

hose

of

clas

smat

es.

Cal

mly

an

d c

lear

ly

exp

ress

ing

ow

n

po

siti

on

s w

hen

d

iscr

epan

cies

an

d

con

flic

ts a

rise

Whe

n di

scre

panc

ies

and

conf

licts

aris

e,

defe

nds

own

posi

tions

with

ag

gres

sive

ness

.

Has

diff

icul

ty in

ex

pres

sing

ow

n op

inio

ns a

nd

posi

tions

if t

hey

don’

t co

inci

de w

ith t

hose

of

cla

ssm

ates

.

Expr

esse

s ow

n op

inio

ns a

nd in

tere

sts

calm

ly, e

ven

thou

gh

diff

eren

t fr

om t

hose

of

cla

ssm

ates

.

Expr

esse

s ow

n po

sitio

ns w

ith c

larit

y ar

gues

the

m w

hen

disc

repa

ncie

s ar

ise.

Hon

estly

exp

ress

es

own

posi

tions

and

in

tere

sts

to

clas

smat

es, r

emai

ning

op

en t

o di

alog

ue a

nd

the

poss

ibili

ty o

f re

cons

ider

ing

stan

d.

List

enin

g a

nd

co

nsi

der

ing

th

e p

osi

tio

ns

of

oth

ers

in s

itu

atio

ns

of

con

flic

t

Doe

sn’t

list

en, r

efut

es

and

disp

arag

es

clas

smat

es w

hen

not

in a

gree

men

t w

ith

them

.

Has

diff

icul

ty in

lis

teni

ng t

o an

d un

ders

tand

ing

dive

rgen

t po

sitio

ns.

Get

s te

nse

whe

n di

ffer

ence

s ar

e ex

pres

sed.

List

ens

to t

he

opin

ions

and

inte

rest

s of

cla

ssm

ates

, try

ing

to u

nder

stan

d th

em.

Trie

s to

und

erst

and

the

inte

rest

s of

cl

assm

ates

and

tak

es

them

into

co

nsid

erat

ion.

Prom

otes

an

atm

osph

ere

of

resp

ect

and

dial

ogue

w

here

eve

ryon

e ca

n sp

eak

free

ly a

nd b

e lis

tene

d to

.

Seek

ing

acc

epta

ble

al

tern

ativ

es a

nd

so

luti

on

s fo

r co

nfl

icts

, fac

ilita

tin

g

and

ass

um

ing

co

mm

itm

ents

Trie

s to

impo

se o

wn

poin

ts o

f vi

ew.

Doe

sn’t

kno

w h

ow t

o gi

ve in

. Get

s an

gry

if do

esn’

t ge

t ow

n w

ay.

Whe

n di

ffer

ence

s ar

ise,

pre

fers

to

give

in

or

leav

e in

ord

er t

o av

oid

conf

lict.

Aft

er li

sten

ing,

is c

lear

ly

open

to c

onsid

erin

g cl

assm

ates

’ pro

posa

ls

and

to c

once

ding

po

ints

in o

rder

to re

ach

an a

gree

men

t.

Con

trib

utes

act

ivel

y to

dia

logu

e w

ith

prop

osal

s to

ach

ieve

ag

reem

ents

and

co

mm

itmen

ts w

ith

clas

smat

es.

Trie

s to

rec

onci

le a

nd

inte

grat

e di

ffer

ent

post

ures

to

reac

h ag

reem

ents

sa

tisfa

ctor

y to

ev

eryo

ne in

volv

ed.



250

Leve

ls o

f M

aste

ryIn

dic

ato

rsD

escr

ipto

rs

12

34

5

Seco

nd

leve

l of

mas

tery

:Po

siti

vely

an

d

con

stru

ctiv

ely

add

ress

ing

co

nfl

ict

by

refl

ecti

ng

on

si

tuat

ion

, def

end

ing

o

wn

po

siti

on

s w

ith

sk

ill a

nd

str

ateg

y,

and

rec

on

cilin

g

con

flic

tin

g p

oin

ts

of

view

.

Ad

dre

ssin

g

con

flic

ts w

ith

su

ffic

ien

t em

oti

on

al c

on

tro

l to

an

alys

e th

e si

tuat

ion

in

wh

ich

h

e/sh

e is

in

volv

ed.

Reac

ts e

mot

iona

lly t

o co

nflic

t; g

ets

upse

t an

d ca

n’t

stan

d ba

ck

to a

naly

se a

nd

unde

rsta

nd it

.

Has

diff

icul

ty in

co

ntro

lling

anx

iety

in

the

face

of

conf

lict,

co

nfro

ntin

g it

with

st

ress

.

Add

ress

es c

onfli

cts

from

suf

ficie

nt

dist

ance

to

anal

yse

the

situ

atio

n in

whi

ch

he/s

he is

invo

lved

.

Is a

war

e of

ow

n em

otio

ns in

con

flict

si

tuat

ions

and

kee

ps

them

und

er c

ontr

ol.

Und

erst

ands

and

is

awar

e of

ow

n an

d ot

hers

’ em

otio

ns

whe

n ex

perie

ncin

g co

nflic

t.

Fin

din

g t

he

po

siti

ve

and

co

nst

ruct

ive

sid

e o

f a

con

flic

t

Expe

rienc

es c

onfli

ct

as s

omet

hing

ne

gativ

e th

at t

hwar

ts

and

frus

trat

es o

wn

inte

rest

s.

Perc

eive

s co

nflic

t as

a

diff

icul

t/dy

sfun

ctio

nal

proc

ess

jeop

ardi

sing

th

e co

hesi

on a

nd

unity

of

the

grou

p as

it

wor

ks t

owar

d co

mm

on o

bjec

tives

.

Acc

epts

and

ad

dres

ses

conf

lict

as

som

ethi

ng n

atur

al

that

aris

es in

all

rela

tions

hips

.

Con

side

rs t

hat

posi

tive

cons

eque

nces

can

be

deriv

ed f

rom

con

flict

s if

hand

led

appr

opria

tely,

al

thou

gh a

t gr

eat

expe

nse

of

ener

gy.

Valu

es t

he p

ositi

ve,

tran

sfor

min

g po

tent

ial o

f co

nflic

t,

and

wor

ks t

o m

anag

e it

cons

truc

tivel

y.

Sho

win

g

com

pre

hen

sio

n a

nd

co

nsi

der

atio

n

tow

ard

th

e re

qu

irem

ents

, in

tere

sts

and

p

osi

tio

ns

of

oth

ers

Has

diff

icul

ty in

st

andi

ng b

ack

from

ow

n pe

rspe

ctiv

e to

un

ders

tand

tha

t of

ot

hers

.

Trie

s to

imag

ine

self

in o

ther

s’ s

hoes

to

unde

rsta

nd t

heir

poin

ts, b

ut h

as

diff

icul

ty in

di

ffer

entia

ting

them

fro

m o

wn

(oft

en c

onfu

ses

them

).

Prom

otes

an

atm

osph

ere

of

resp

ect

and

dial

ogue

w

here

eve

ryon

e ca

n sp

eak

and

be h

eard

.

Show

s em

path

y in

hi

s/he

r co

mpr

ehen

sion

and

co

nsid

erat

ion

of t

he

posi

tions

of

othe

rs.

Show

s si

ncer

e, f

ull

cons

ider

atio

n fo

r th

e un

derly

ing

need

s an

d re

quire

men

ts o

f ot

hers

.



251

Leve

ls o

f M

aste

ryIn

dic

ato

rsD

escr

ipto

rs

12

34

5

Seco

nd le

vel o

f m

aste

ry:

Posi

tivel

y an

d co

nstr

uctiv

ely

addr

essi

ng c

onfli

ct b

y re

flect

ing

on

situ

atio

n, d

efen

ding

ow

n po

sitio

ns w

ith

skill

and

str

ateg

y, a

nd

reco

ncili

ng c

onfli

ctin

g po

ints

of

view

.

Sho

win

g

asse

rtiv

enes

s an

d

stra

teg

y w

hen

p

rop

osi

ng

an

d

def

end

ing

ow

n

po

siti

on

s

Expr

esse

s ow

n po

sitio

ns w

ith

firm

ness

and

co

nvic

tion,

but

has

di

ffic

ulty

in v

aryi

ng

pers

pect

ive.

Is o

pen

to d

ialo

gue

and

expr

essi

ng o

wn

opin

ions

, but

def

ence

of

ow

n po

sitio

n w

eake

ns w

hen

a co

mpe

titiv

e at

mos

pher

e ar

ises

or

the

proc

ess

take

s an

un

expe

cted

dire

ctio

n.

Expr

esse

s ow

n po

sitio

n an

d in

tere

sts

with

cla

rity

and

hone

sty,

and

kno

ws

how

to

defe

nd t

hem

in

an

atm

osph

ere

of

dial

ogue

.

Kno

ws

how

to

pres

ent

and

defe

nd

own

posi

tions

, pl

anni

ng a

str

ateg

y an

d ad

aptin

g it

to

the

proc

ess

with

fle

xibi

lity.

Ana

lyse

s an

d pl

ans

the

best

str

ateg

ies,

re

spon

ding

qui

ckly

an

d w

ith v

ersa

tility

in

proc

esse

s of

ne

gotia

tion.

Rec

on

cilin

g

dif

feri

ng

po

ints

of

view

in s

earc

h f

or

sati

sfac

tory

al

tern

ativ

es

Show

s lit

tle f

lexi

bilit

y in

var

ying

ow

n pe

rspe

ctiv

e an

d co

nsid

erin

g ne

w

alte

rnat

ives

in a

di

sput

e.

Show

s fle

xibi

lity

and

will

ingn

ess

to c

ede

poin

ts in

ow

n po

sitio

n to

arr

ive

at

com

mitm

ents

be

twee

n th

e pa

rtie

s.

Trie

s to

rec

onci

le a

nd

inte

grat

e di

ffer

ent

post

ures

to

arriv

e at

ag

reem

ents

tha

t sa

tisfy

the

par

ties

invo

lved

.

Is o

pen

and

crea

tive

in g

ener

atin

g po

sitiv

e so

lutio

ns t

o se

ttle

di

sput

es.

Prom

otes

an

atm

osph

ere

whe

re

ever

yone

can

co

ntrib

ute

to b

uild

ing

a co

nsen

sus

and

nego

tiate

d w

ay o

ut

of a

con

flict

.



252

Leve

ls o

f M

aste

ryIn

dic

ato

rsD

escr

ipto

rs

12

34

5

Thir

d le

vel o

f m

aste

ry:

Dea

ling

wit

h

situ

atio

ns

of

con

flic

t w

ith

ve

rsat

ility

, ski

ll an

d

eth

ical

sen

se, a

nd

ex

erci

sin

g f

un

ctio

ns

of

med

iati

on

b

etw

een

per

son

s,

gro

up

s an

d

org

anis

atio

ns

Show

ing

good

em

otio

nal s

elf-

cont

rol

and

com

preh

ensi

on

of o

ther

s’ e

mot

ions

in

stre

ssfu

l and

/or

thre

aten

ing

situ

atio

ns

Lose

s co

ntro

l ove

r em

otio

ns a

nd

beco

mes

def

ensi

ve o

r ag

gres

sive

whe

n co

nflic

t se

en a

s th

reat

enin

g.

Whe

n a

conf

lict

wor

sens

, get

s st

ress

ed a

nd t

ense

, an

d fe

els

own

posi

tion

wea

kene

d.

Und

erst

ands

and

is

awar

e of

ow

n an

d ot

hers

’ em

otio

ns in

ex

perie

ncin

g co

nflic

t.

With

stan

ds t

ensi

on

wel

l in

situ

atio

ns o

f co

nflic

t in

volv

ing

high

de

gree

of

tens

ion

and

thre

at.

In e

ntre

nche

d co

nflic

ts, f

acili

tate

s an

d su

stai

ns

atm

osph

ere

of

dial

ogue

, with

out

atta

ckin

g or

fee

ling

atta

cked

.

App

reci

atin

g th

e po

tent

ial o

f co

nflic

t fo

r dr

ivin

g ch

ange

an

d in

nova

tion

Can

’t r

edire

ct c

onfli

ct

tow

ard

posi

tive

poin

t of

enc

ount

er f

or t

he

pers

ons,

gro

ups

or

orga

nisa

tions

in

volv

ed.

Take

s po

sitiv

e st

and

that

fac

ilita

tes

agre

emen

ts a

nd s

mal

l po

sitiv

e ac

hiev

emen

ts.

Valu

es p

ositi

ve a

nd

tran

sfor

min

g po

tent

ial o

f co

nflic

t,

and

argu

es in

fav

our

of d

ealin

g w

ith it

co

nstr

uctiv

ely.

Mov

es c

onfli

ct t

o po

sitiv

e te

rrai

n w

here

di

alog

ue, n

egot

iatio

n an

d co

mm

itmen

t be

twee

n pa

rtie

s ca

n be

fac

ilita

ted.

Posi

tive

, co

-ope

rati

ve

atti

tude

to

conf

lict;

pr

omot

es

cons

truc

tive

in

tegr

atio

n be

twee

n pa

rtie

s ac

com

plis

hing

cle

ar

impr

ovem

ents

.

Ana

lysi

ng a

nd

unde

rsta

ndin

g co

nflic

t as

a

mec

hani

sm o

f ne

gotia

tion

for

empo

wer

men

t an

d pa

rtic

ipat

ion

Perc

eive

s co

nflic

t of

in

tere

st a

s te

nsio

n an

d dy

sfun

ctio

n,

with

out

capa

city

to

look

fur

ther

into

its

caus

es.

Trie

s to

ana

lyse

and

ad

dres

s co

nflic

t in

st

ruct

ural

ter

ms,

cl

arify

ing

resp

onsi

bilit

ies

and

com

mun

icat

ion

chan

nels

.

Refle

cts

on d

ynam

ics

of p

ower

and

pa

rtic

ipat

ion

in

conf

lict,

inte

grat

ing

this

into

ow

n an

alys

is

and

com

preh

ensi

on.

Gra

sps

and

skilf

ully

an

alys

es t

he

dyna

mic

s of

pow

er

and

part

icip

atio

n in

volv

ed in

the

pr

oces

ses

of c

onfli

ct.

Skilf

ully

man

ages

po

litic

al d

ynam

ics

of

conf

lict,

med

iatin

g to

re

stor

e ba

lanc

e of

po

wer

and

pa

rtic

ipat

ion.

Effic

ient

ly a

naly

sing

th

e af

fect

ive,

co

gniti

ve a

nd

beha

viou

ral p

roce

sses

in

volv

ed in

con

flict

s

Act

s to

o qu

ickl

y lo

okin

g fo

r sh

ortc

uts

to e

nd c

onfli

ct,

with

out

anal

ysin

g th

e di

men

sion

s an

d pr

oces

ses

invo

lved

.

Has

diff

icul

ty

anal

ysin

g an

d un

ders

tand

ing

how

co

nflic

ts d

evel

op,

and

the

affe

ctiv

e an

d co

gniti

ve

dim

ensi

ons

invo

lved

.

Can

ana

lyse

the

di

ffer

ent

phas

es a

nd

sequ

ence

s in

the

bi

rth

and

deve

lopm

ent

of

conf

lict.

Ana

lyse

s co

nflic

t pr

oces

ses

taki

ng in

to

acco

unt

emot

ions

, re

pres

enta

tions

and

be

havi

our

invo

lved

.

Ana

lyse

s an

d un

ders

tand

s in

dep

th

how

the

par

ties

invo

lved

in c

onfli

ct

feel

, thi

nk a

nd a

ct.



253

Leve

ls o

f M

aste

ryIn

dic

ato

rsD

escr

ipto

rs

12

34

5

Third

leve

l of

mas

tery

:D

ealin

g w

ith

situ

atio

ns o

f co

nflic

t w

ith v

ersa

tility

, ski

ll an

d et

hica

l sen

se,

and

exer

cisi

ng

func

tions

of

med

iatio

n be

twee

n pe

rson

s, g

roup

s an

d or

gani

satio

ns

Show

ing

flexi

bilit

y an

d ve

rsat

ility

in

attit

udes

, and

in t

he

stra

tegi

es a

nd t

actic

s em

ploy

ed in

m

anag

ing

conf

lict

Rigi

d an

d la

cks

fore

sigh

t in

att

itude

s an

d st

rate

gies

whe

n de

alin

g w

ith c

onfli

ct

and

the

proc

ess

of

nego

tiatio

n.

Plan

s st

rate

gies

and

ta

ctic

s fo

r de

alin

g w

ith c

onfli

ct, b

ut

show

s lit

tle v

ersa

tility

in

att

itude

s an

d ta

ctic

s du

ring

nego

tiatio

n.

Ana

lyse

s an

d pl

ans

best

str

ateg

ies

for

deal

ing

with

con

flict

, re

spon

ding

with

sp

eed

and

vers

atili

ty

in p

roce

sses

of

nego

tiatio

n.

Show

s gr

eat

skill

and

st

rate

gy in

the

pl

anni

ng a

nd

deve

lopm

ent

of

nego

tiatio

ns.

Co-

oper

ates

, yie

lds,

ad

apts

, avo

ids,

co

mpe

tes,

com

mits

an

d ag

rees

ap

prop

riate

ly in

eac

h co

ntex

t an

d ne

gotia

tion.

Exer

cisi

ng m

edia

tion

in s

ituat

ions

of

conf

lict

betw

een

pers

ons,

gro

ups

and

orga

nisa

tions

Is n

ever

ava

ilabl

e to

in

terv

ene

in p

roce

sses

of

con

flict

and

ne

gotia

tion

unle

ss

dire

ctly

invo

lved

.

Has

diff

icul

ty in

in

term

edia

ting

in

situ

atio

ns o

f co

nflic

t,

beca

use

tend

s to

get

to

o in

volv

ed in

the

m.

Show

s av

aila

bilit

y to

ex

erci

se t

he r

ole

of

med

iato

r an

d is

wel

l ac

cept

ed b

y th

e pa

rtie

s in

volv

ed.

Mai

ntai

ns a

n ap

prop

riate

pos

ition

w

hen

exer

cisi

ng

func

tions

of

med

iatio

n,

faci

litat

ing

agre

emen

ts a

nd

com

mitm

ents

be

twee

n th

e pa

rtie

s.

Is c

hose

n as

med

iato

r in

situ

atio

ns o

f co

nflic

t. K

eeps

par

ties

colla

bora

ting

until

th

ey f

ind

way

out

, as

sum

ing

satis

fact

ory,

la

stin

g co

mm

itmen

ts.



255

Chapter 4

Systemic Generic Competences

These involve abilities and skills related to the comprehension of an overall system or whole. Systemic generic competences call for a combi-nation of imagination, sensibility and skill enabling one to see how the parts are related and interact within the whole.

The systemic competences have been grouped into three categories: organisation, enterprise and leadership.

Under the heading of organisation there are three competences: “objectives-based management”, “management by projects” and “qual-ity orientation”. The first two make reference to two basic tools: manage-ment by objectives, a technique that can be applied to any personal, so-cial or institutional field; and management by projects, a much required competence in universities. Quality orientation is also in great demand in today’s world. It is not enough to do things; we must do them well, seek-ing excellence in everything we undertake. Developing this competence in university life means, first of all, accepting the challenge of trying to do things well, being concerned not only to complete work, but to make sure that it bears the stamp of quality. Quality begins with oneself, with everything that we do, how we do it and apply it. It is the search for excel-lence and continuous improvement.

The second category is enterprise and comprises three competenc-es: creativity, enterprising spirit, and innovation. Creativity means skill in responding originally to the demands of a given context. It means ap-plying knowledge creatively to resolve common situations in a given context or surroundings. Enterprising spirit is a competence that is much in demand today. There is a lack of persons with enterprising traits, who assume risks, believe in themselves and seize the initiative to embark on



256

projects, activities, undertakings that they can promote and move for-ward. Finally, the third competence in this section is innovation. Innova-tion as a personal competence is understood as the capacity to respond satisfactorily to personal, organisational and social needs, modifying processes and results. To develop this competence, one must be favour-ably disposed to thinking in another way, able to see and think things through from different perspectives, and therefore adept at creative thinking.

Finally, the last section of systemic competences is leadership, a heading that includes two basic competences: “achievement orienta-tion” and “leadership” per se. Having an achievement orientation means not losing sight of what we want, clarifying what we expect to achieve, and in short orienting activity toward desired results. The latter are what mark the direction of individual or group behaviour, and achievement takes precedence over everything. This is a clearly systemic competence, and requires a forward, holistic outlook to integrate all elements and align them with desired achievement. This competence is closely associ-ated with profitability, which may be individual or institutional, but may also be geared toward social benefit.

The competence of “leadership” is understood as the capacity to influence others to obtain from them the best that they are able to give and contribute. Leadership is not an easy competence to acquire or de-velop. Some authors consider it a competence that is strongly based in the personality and mostly innate, and therefore not one that everyone can aspire to. Today, however, leadership is considered a competence that can be acquired and above all developed with training, experience and much practice. The good side of the coin is that it can be developed and is not purely innate – i.e., something that you either have or don’t have.



257

COMPETENCE: CREATIVITY

Description

Creativity is one of the prime motors of progress in the history of science and the arts. It is easy to remember the names of researchers, authors, artists, etc. who at one time were able to construct innovative, sometimes ground-breaking, feasible alternatives – that is, people with the power to make a significant contribution to their field.

Occasionally, professional or academic activity is characterised by a constant repetition of activities and procedures. There are people or situ-ations that always repeat the same patterns or simply follow the guide-lines that regulate their framework of action. Occasionally this leads to exhaustion of motivation, to a certain drabness in individuals or the qual-ity of their work. Students, professionals or potential clients can eventu-ally suffer a certain monotony, feel that they are falling behind, not tak-ing advantage of their real capacities or, effectively are missing good opportunities that lie outside the limited, creativity-starved, one-way path they are on.

Other persons, however, even though working in the same sce-narios with the same resources at their disposal, are able to generate innovative and original proposals thanks to their way of focusing on situations, addressing problems, carrying out procedures, undertaking activities, applying techniques, devising strategies etc. In a word, by being creative.

This means having a good degree of flexibility, originality, open-mindedness, method and capacity to structure and produce contribu-tions that are creative. So the competence of creativity is defined here as the capacity to address and respond satisfactorily to situations in new, original ways within a given context.


The competence of creativity is associated with divergent thinking. One needs to be able to get out of the rut of pre-established thinking in order to generate creative proposals. In turn, creative proposals actually trigger divergent thinking in the person who generates a new proposal and also in those who share it, as they have the opportunity to address reality through a new artefact.



258

Also required are a certain spontaneity and capacity for wonder. Creative alternatives are out there. In some cases they have always been there, until someone has released his/her own spontaneity and looked at the world with a certain ingenuity, shedding pre-conceived ideas and being able to feel a sense of wonder at marvels that had come to seem common.

Development of the competence of creativity can be positively or neg-atively conditioned by people’s sense of self-esteem. Low self-esteem in-hibits creation for fear of repeating actions which in the past led to disap-proval by others. Overly high self-esteem can cause us to make creative proposals that are perhaps innovative but not appropriate – that is, pro-posals that do not suit the context or lack effective potential for improve-ment. The right amount of self-esteem is what enables us to exercise crea-tivity without fear of social disapproval, but being sensibly aware of what is innovative, appropriate and enriching, and what is not.


In both academic and professional settings, the competence of crea-tivity brings important benefits. People who exercise their creativity in their studies or at work are probably more motivated and enjoy their work more than people who do not. Dull repetition of a certain way of studying or doing one’s job can stultify, whereas work done creatively can give rise to new proposals that enable the person to grow and seek advancement.

People who are creatively competent are a plus to their surroundings as well. Creativity is an important competitive advantage in new fields and technologies where much remains to be done and built. However, it is even more of a strategic advantage in contexts where everything seems to have been already invented. In such situations, the creative capacity can be crucial, marking the difference between excellence and mediocrity. Consequently, there are many professional sectors where this competence is of prime importance.

In the case of students, the opportunities to exercise creativity pro-vide at least two important advantages. First, such opportunities help to further develop creativity, and secondly, they enable students to strength-en their learning orientation. This gives them more freedom, since they take greater responsibility for and ownership of their learning process, with the advantages that this entails.



259


Offering students opportunities to exercise their creativity is a chal-lenge for lecturers. It means being flexible as to the contexts of aca-demic work and opening up room for choosing and taking decisions when setting guidelines for academic work. The first years in a degree course are less amenable to such openings, and in general it is advisable to lay down more structured guidelines. But in the final years of a degree course, lecturers should offer opportunities for students to construct and generate designs, strategies, reports, techniques, projects, etc. so that they can exercise and evaluate their creative capacity.

The three levels of mastery of this competence correspond to three types of scenario usually found over the span of a degree course. First there are indicators concerning the generation of innovative solutions to known problems and situations. At the second level students are ex-pected to be able to manifest formally their original contributions in di-verse fields. At the third level there are indicators concerned with a more advanced degree of creativity, with original, reliable, flexible, complex, practical solutions.



260

COMPETENCE: CREATIVITY

Definition: Addressing and responding well to situations in new and original ways within a given context

Mastery of this competence is closely related to: Divergent think-ing, Spontaneity, Capacity for marvel and wonder, Self-esteem, etc.

Levels of mastery:

1. Generating and conveying new ideas or generating innovative solutions to known problems or situations

2. Generating original, quality ideas that can be made explicit and defended in known and unknown situations

3. Contributing original, practical, applicable, flexible and complex ideas and solutions, affecting self and own processes, as well as others

Indicators:

1. Fluency, flexibility, capacity to generate solutions (quantity of ideas, ideas that improve results, ideas that span various fields)

2. Originality (innovative ideas, original ideas, ground-breaking ideas)

3. Attitude/outlook (Critical thinking, open mind, “without limits”)4. Method (by analogy or imitation, by association or integration,

spontaneity)5. Capacity to do something with those ideas (express them or

convey them, make them explicit, put them into practice)



261

Leve

ls o

f M

aste

ryIn

dic

ato

rsD

escr

ipto

rs

12

34

5

Firs

t le

vel o

f m

aste

ry:

Gen

erat

ing

an

d

con

veyi

ng

new

id

eas

or

gen

erat

ing

in

no

vati

ve

solu

tio

ns

to k

no

wn

p

rob

lem

s o

r si

tuat

ion

s

Co

ntr

ibu

tin

g

sug

ges

tio

ns

for

the

idea

s, s

itu

atio

ns,

ca

ses

or

pro

ble

ms

po

sed

Nev

er p

ropo

ses

sugg

estio

ns o

r do

esn’

t do

so

inde

pend

ently

.

Con

trib

utes

su

gges

tions

whe

n re

quire

d to

do

so, o

r su

gges

tions

are

lim

ited.

Con

trib

utes

ow

n su

gges

tions

rega

rdin

g pr

oble

ms

or

situ

atio

ns.

Gen

erat

es a

ran

ge o

f id

eas

and/

or s

olut

ions

to

issu

es r

aise

d.

Gen

erat

es a

larg

e qu

antit

y of

al

tern

ativ

e id

eas,

sp

onta

neou

sly

and/

or

befo

re r

equi

red

to d

o so

.

Pro

po

sin

g id

eas

that

are

inn

ova

tive

as

far

as

con

ten

ts,

dev

elo

pm

ent,

etc

. ar

e co

nce

rned

Hes

itate

s to

con

side

r or

pro

pose

inno

vativ

e id

eas.

Prop

oses

idea

s th

at

cont

ain

noth

ing

nove

l.

Prop

oses

inno

vativ

e id

eas.

Sugg

ests

inno

vativ

e im

prov

emen

ts f

or

proc

esse

s in

whi

ch

he/s

he d

irect

ly t

akes

pa

rt.

Out

stan

ding

for

in

nova

tive

cont

ribut

ions

.

Ack

no

wle

dg

ing

d

iffe

ren

t m

ann

ers

of

do

ing

th

ing

s;

bei

ng

no

n-

con

form

ist

Doe

sn’t

que

stio

n ow

n si

tuat

ion

or

circ

umst

ance

s.

Sim

ply

wor

ks

acco

rdin

g to

es

tabl

ishe

d pa

tter

ns.

Que

stio

ns t

hing

s, b

ut

acce

pts

own

situ

atio

n as

unc

hang

eabl

e.

Real

izes

the

re a

re

vario

us w

ays

to d

o th

ings

. Is

som

ewha

t no

n-co

nfor

mis

t.

Que

stio

ns t

he

trad

ition

al w

ays

of

doin

g th

ings

and

trie

s ou

t ne

w w

ays

to

brin

g ab

out

impr

ovem

ents

.

Det

ects

situ

atio

ns

that

can

be

impr

oved

an

d pr

opos

es

inno

vativ

e so

lutio

ns.

Gen

erat

ing

new

id

eas

or

solu

tio

ns

to

situ

atio

ns

or

pro

ble

ms

bas

ed o

n

wh

at is

kn

ow

n

Is u

nabl

e to

ex

trap

olat

e kn

owle

dge

to o

ther

fie

lds.

Is a

ble

to e

xtra

pola

te

own

know

ledg

e, b

ut

this

doe

sn’t

hel

p hi

m/

her

to g

ener

ate

new

id

eas.

Reco

gnis

es v

alua

ble

idea

s or

pra

ctic

al

solu

tions

tha

t ha

ve

wor

ked

in o

ther

co

ntex

ts.

Gen

erat

es n

ew id

eas

on a

nalo

gy w

ith

othe

r si

tuat

ions

or

prob

lem

s ex

perie

nced

pr

evio

usly.

Reco

gnis

es v

alua

ble

idea

s or

pra

ctic

al

solu

tions

tha

t ha

ve

wor

ked

in o

ther

co

ntex

ts, a

nd

adap

ts a

nd d

evel

ops

them

in o

wn

cont

ext.

Tran

smit

tin

g o

r co

nve

yin

g t

o o

ther

s th

e n

ew id

eas

gen

erat

ed

Is u

nabl

e to

exp

ress

ow

n ne

w id

eas.

Expr

esse

s ow

n id

eas

with

diff

icul

ty.

Can

exp

ress

and

co

nvey

ow

n ne

w

idea

s to

oth

ers.

Shar

es o

wn

idea

s an

d m

akes

sel

f un

ders

tood

by

all.

In s

harin

g id

eas,

ge

nera

tes

a cr

eativ

e at

mos

pher

e.



262

Leve

ls o

f M

aste

ryIn

dic

ato

rsD

escr

ipto

rs

12

34

5

Seco

nd

Lev

el

of

pro

fici

ency

:G

ener

atin

g

ori

gin

al, q

ual

ity

idea

s th

at c

an b

e m

ade

exp

licit

an

d

def

end

ed in

kn

ow

n a

nd

u

nkn

ow

n

situ

atio

ns

Co

ntr

ibu

tin

g q

ual

ity

sug

ges

tio

ns

for

pro

ble

ms

or

situ

atio

ns

that

ari

se

Can

’t o

bser

ve a

pr

oble

m f

rom

di

ffer

ent

poin

t of

vi

ew.

Prop

oses

idea

s in

ne

w s

ituat

ions

fro

m

diff

eren

t po

ints

of

view

.

Con

trib

utes

ow

n id

eas

for

prob

lem

s or

si

tuat

ions

fro

m

diff

eren

t an

gles

.

Gen

erat

es o

wn

alte

rnat

ives

for

pr

oble

ms

and/

or

situ

atio

ns f

rom

di

ffer

ent

angl

es.

Gen

erat

es a

larg

e qu

antit

y of

qua

lity

idea

s, t

o ch

oose

the

be

st f

rom

am

ong

them

.

Pro

po

sin

g o

rig

inal

o

r u

nco

nve

nti

on

al

idea

s

Sim

ply

repe

ats

idea

s.Pr

opos

es n

ew id

eas

that

are

not

co

nsid

ered

orig

inal

.

Prop

oses

orig

inal

id

eas.

Prop

oses

orig

inal

id

eas

that

impr

ove

the

proc

esse

s or

gr

oups

of

whi

ch h

e/sh

e fo

rms

part

.

Not

ewor

thy

for

orig

inal

ity o

f hi

s/he

r co

ntrib

utio

ns

and

for

appr

oach

ta

ken

to s

olve

pr

oble

ms.

Bei

ng

op

en-m

ind

ed

abo

ut

new

idea

s an

d p

ersp

ecti

ves

Fails

to

see

othe

r re

aliti

es d

iffer

ent

from

ow

n.

Onl

y m

aint

ains

an

open

min

d in

cer

tain

ar

eas

and

situ

atio

ns.

Kee

ps a

n op

en m

ind

abou

t ne

w id

eas

and

pers

pect

ives

.

Is a

ble

to h

elp

othe

rs

keep

an

open

min

d.G

ener

ates

an

open

at

mos

pher

e w

here

ne

w id

eas

are

ente

rtai

ned

with

out

hesi

tatio

n.

Inte

gra

tin

g

kno

wle

dg

e fr

om

se

vera

l dis

cip

lines

, so

urc

es o

r fi

eld

s to

g

ener

ate

no

vel

idea

s fo

r kn

ow

n

and

un

kno

wn

p

rob

lem

s an

d

situ

atio

ns.

Is u

nabl

e to

inte

grat

e ow

n pr

ior

know

ledg

e to

gen

erat

e ne

w

know

ledg

e or

idea

s.

Inte

grat

es k

now

ledg

e fr

om d

iver

se f

ield

s bu

t w

ithou

t ge

nera

ting

nove

l id

eas.

Gen

erat

es n

ew id

eas

brin

ging

in

know

ledg

e fr

om

seve

ral d

isci

plin

es,

sour

ces

or f

ield

s.

Inte

grat

es k

now

ledg

e an

d id

eas

to g

ener

ate

nove

l thi

nkin

g ap

plic

able

to

new

or

unex

pect

ed

situ

atio

ns.

Inte

grat

ion

of

know

ledg

e ge

nera

tes

idea

s th

at im

prov

e pr

evio

us s

olut

ions

to

know

n pr

oble

ms

or

situ

atio

ns.

Mak

ing

idea

s ex

plic

it t

hro

ug

h

dia

gra

ms,

eq

uat

ion

s, e

tc.

Is u

nabl

e to

org

anis

e ow

n ne

w id

eas.

Has

diff

icul

ty in

ap

prop

riate

ly

stru

ctur

ing

the

new

id

eas

that

he/

she

has

gene

rate

d.

Can

con

vey

nove

l id

eas

form

ally.

Can

mak

e ot

hers

un

ders

tand

his

/her

ne

w id

eas

by

expr

essi

ng t

hem

fo

rmal

ly.

By e

xpre

ssin

g ne

w

idea

s fo

rmal

ly,

prom

pts,

cre

ativ

e co

ntrib

utio

ns f

rom

th

e re

st o

f th

e te

am.



263

Leve

ls o

f M

aste

ryIn

dic

ato

rsD

escr

ipto

rs

12

34

5

Thir

d le

vel o

f m

aste

ry:

Co

ntr

ibu

tin

g

ori

gin

al, p

ract

ical

, ap

plic

able

, fle

xib

le

and

co

mp

lex

idea

s an

d s

olu

tio

ns,

th

at

affe

ct s

elf

and

ow

n

pro

cess

es, a

s w

ell

as o

ther

s

Bei

ng

ab

le t

o

gen

erat

e id

eas

wh

ose

co

nse

qu

ence

s g

o

bey

on

d s

elf

or

ow

n

fiel

d o

f ap

plic

atio

n

Gen

erat

es id

eas

with

ve

ry lo

w im

pact

.G

ener

ates

idea

s th

at

dire

ctly

aff

ect

self

but

do n

ot a

ffec

t or

im

prov

e ot

her

field

s.

Gen

erat

es id

eas

that

ha

ve c

onse

quen

ces

beyo

nd o

wn

pers

on.

The

idea

s th

at h

e/sh

e ge

nera

tes

affe

ct

mor

e th

an o

ne f

ield

of

app

licat

ion,

thu

s im

prov

ing

gene

ral

resu

lts.

Not

ewor

thy

for

intr

oduc

ing

uniq

ue o

r le

adin

g-ed

ge

solu

tions

tha

t im

prov

e va

rious

as

pect

s or

fie

lds

of

actio

n.

Pro

po

sin

g g

rou

nd

-b

reak

ing

idea

s as

fa

r as

co

nte

nts

, d

evel

op

men

t et

c.

are

con

cern

ed

His

/her

idea

s la

ck

sing

ular

ity o

r or

igin

ality

.

His

/her

idea

s ar

e in

nova

tive

but

base

d on

exi

stin

g so

lutio

ns.

Prop

oses

gro

und-

brea

king

idea

s.

App

reci

ates

rad

ical

or

unco

nven

tiona

l ide

as.

Prop

oses

gro

und-

brea

king

idea

s th

at

help

oth

ers

to

ques

tion

the

exis

ting

way

of

doin

g th

ings

.

Ado

pts

nove

l ap

proa

ches

, ge

nera

tes

new

idea

s an

d in

ject

s cr

eativ

ity

into

wha

teve

r he

/she

do

es, i

mpr

ovin

g sy

stem

s, p

roce

dure

s an

d pr

oces

ses.

Gen

erat

ing

new

th

ou

gh

ts w

ith

ou

t re

stri

ctio

ns

Thin

ks w

ithin

es

tabl

ishe

d bo

unds

, du

e to

soc

ial,

cultu

ral,

perc

eptiv

e et

c. li

mita

tions

.

Has

diff

icul

ty in

ad

optin

g di

verg

ent

pers

pect

ives

in t

he

gene

ratio

n of

idea

s.

Kee

ps a

n op

en m

ind

that

doe

sn’t

allo

w

him

/her

to

set

limits

in

gen

erat

ing

new

id

eas

or s

olut

ions

.

Is a

ble

to t

hink

“o

utsi

de t

he b

ox”

in

dive

rse

and

com

plex

fie

lds.

His

/her

diff

eren

t an

gle

on t

hing

s he

lps

to d

evel

op t

he

crea

tive

capa

city

of

the

team

.

Usi

ng

sp

ecif

ic

met

ho

ds

to im

pro

ve

crea

tivi

ty

Doe

sn’t

app

ly a

ny

type

of

met

hod

that

w

ould

enh

ance

ow

n cr

eativ

ity.

Use

s a

sing

le m

etho

d to

gen

erat

e ne

w

idea

s fo

r pr

oble

ms

or

situ

atio

ns t

hat

aris

e.

App

lies

diff

eren

t ap

proa

ches

tha

t en

able

him

/her

to

gene

rate

cre

ativ

e id

eas.

His

/her

pra

ctic

e w

ith

diff

eren

t ap

proa

ches

m

akes

it p

ossi

ble

to

gene

rate

som

e cr

eativ

e id

eas

spon

tane

ousl

y.

Has

dev

elop

ed

suff

icie

nt

com

pete

nce

to

gene

rate

cre

ativ

e id

eas

spon

tane

ousl

y.

Bei

ng

ab

le t

o

elab

ora

te t

he

idea

s g

ener

ated

Is u

nabl

e to

ela

bora

te

the

idea

s th

at h

e/sh

e pr

opos

es. H

is/h

er

idea

s ar

e no

t vi

able

.

Is a

ble

to g

ener

ate

viab

le id

eas,

but

is

unab

le t

o pu

t th

em

into

pra

ctic

e.

Is a

ble

to p

ut in

to

prac

tice

own

idea

s ge

nera

ted.

Freq

uent

ly f

inds

and

ap

plie

s pr

actic

al,

appr

opria

te s

olut

ions

to

unu

sual

pro

blem

s.

Is r

ecog

nise

d as

a

gene

rato

r of

cre

ativ

e,

valu

able

and

ap

plic

able

idea

s th

at

impr

ove

resu

lts.



264

COMPETENCE: ENTERPRISING SPIRIT

Description

Enterprising spirit is the capacity to commit certain resources on one’s own initiative in order to take advantage of an opportunity, assum-ing the risk that this entails. People are said to be enterprising if they forthrightly undertake difficult or risky actions.

At the first level of this competence, people with enterprising spirit are able to address usual situations with initiative. Having a good con-ception of themselves, their level of self-esteem enables them to act with confidence. They weigh risks and opportunities, and then take decisions, considering their own personal interests and the social consequences that may arise from them. In addition, such people are able to foresee the effects of the actions they undertake. If they consider that the situa-tion is highly complex, they seek help in confronting it.

People at the second level of enterprising spirit join with others in taking initiatives. They get other persons or groups to participate in their undertakings, involving them in the assumption of risks but ensuring that everyone sees all these risks as their own. Moreover, they manage to involve others in their vision of the future.

Finally, when they reach a third level of competency, enterprising people are able to undertake complex ambitious projects. They have a forward outlook and take decisions with confidence. They become in-volved in in projects having a social dimension.


Enterprising spirit (together with creativity and innovation) is one of the competences comprising the group known as enterprising capacity.

Mastery of this competence is also related to self-motivation (as one’s own initiative is involved) and to leadership, since people can involve and direct others using their own initiative. It has to do with endurance and adaptability, since changes can spark two opposite attitudes, and that of adaptation requires initiative and motivation to undertake actions in a situation seen as an opportunity and not as a threat. Also important for this competence is a good level of development of the decision-making capacity.

Attitudes and values come into play in the social dimension of enter-prise and when people must analyse and assume others’ risks as if they



265

were their own, or when they must evaluate the consequences of deci-sions made not only by themselves but by others.


To meet learning and work objectives, it is important to develop one’s enterprising spirit. As the years pass and students’ autonomy in-creases together with the complexity of the work they must do, a well-developed enterprising spirit becomes more and more essential.

People who have an enterprising spirit can help drive groups and organisations, facilitating the personal development and capacity for commitment and risk-taking of their members. This is a competence that is and must be well developed in persons who are leaders in their con-texts.


Development of this competence is fostered by adopting teaching strategies that require students to analyse explicitly the opportunities and risks of a situation, and to search for allies in addressing it.

In teamwork tasks, it is useful to state that someone should take on the enterprising role, mobilising the others and ensuring that they be-come involved in the initiative. This will put into practice the attitudes and strategies needed to develop enterprising spirit.

The tools of assessment must focus on the entire process of analysis and decision-making, and not only on the solution adopted.



266

COMPETENCE: ENTERPRISING SPIRIT

Definition: Undertaking projects on own initiative, committing resources to exploit an opportunity, and assuming the risks that this entails

Mastery of this competence is closely related to: Self-motivation, leadership, initiative, creativity, innovation, building a new world

Levels of mastery:

1. Habitually facing reality with initiative, weighing risks and op-portunities and assuming consequences

2. Taking initiatives together with others, sharing with them one’s projects and vision of the future

3. Undertaking ambitious (complex and challenging) projects, in-volving social decisions

Indicators:

1. Initiative2. Assumption of risks3. Vision4. Self-esteem5. Social influence



267

Leve

ls o

f M

aste

ryIn

dic

ato

rsD

escr

ipto

rs

12

34

5

Firs

t le

vel o

f m

aste

ry:

Hab

itu

ally

fac

ing

re

alit

y w

ith

in

itia

tive

, wei

gh

ing

ri

sks

and

o

pp

ort

un

itie

s an

d

assu

min

g

con

seq

uen

ces

Taki

ng

init

iati

ve in

d

aily

sit

uat

ion

s U

sual

ly h

esita

tes

to

take

dec

isio

ns d

aily.

Freq

uent

ly d

epen

ds

on o

ther

s fo

r de

cisi

on-m

akin

g.

Take

s de

cisi

ons

and

only

ask

s fo

r he

lp

whe

n fa

cing

gre

at

com

plex

ity.

Take

s da

y-to

-day

de

cisi

ons

auto

nom

ousl

y.

Has

a g

reat

dea

l of

initi

ativ

e, g

aini

ng

him

/her

wid

e re

cogn

ition

.

Wei

gh

ing

ris

ks a

nd

o

pp

ort

un

itie

s,

taki

ng

dec

isio

ns

in

con

seq

uen

ce

Take

s de

cisi

ons

with

out

thin

king

or

anal

ysin

g th

e ris

ks.

Ana

lyse

s pr

os a

nd

cons

but

avo

ids

taki

ng d

ecis

ions

.

Wei

ghs

the

pros

and

co

ns o

f ris

ks a

nd

oppo

rtun

ities

and

ta

kes

deci

sion

s.

Car

eful

ly w

eigh

s th

e ris

ks in

volv

ed in

co

mpl

ex s

ituat

ions

.

Mak

es e

xcel

lent

ris

k an

alys

is, a

ssum

es

them

and

dec

ides

w

ith lo

gic.

Bei

ng

ab

le t

o

anti

cip

ate

the

effe

cts

of

acti

on

s u

nd

erta

ken

Has

rea

ctiv

e be

havi

our,

with

out

visi

on o

f th

e m

ediu

m

term

.

His

/her

initi

ativ

es a

re

som

etim

es u

nwis

e du

e to

lack

of

visi

on.

Ant

icip

ates

the

co

nseq

uenc

es o

f de

cisi

ons

take

n.

Is a

ble

to a

ntic

ipat

e th

e fu

ture

ove

r th

e m

ediu

m t

erm

.

Sees

with

cla

rity

wha

t th

e lo

ng-t

erm

fut

ure

will

hol

d.

Incl

ud

ing

so

cial

cr

iter

ia in

ow

n

dec

isio

n-m

akin

g

Can

’t s

ee t

he

cons

eque

nces

tha

t ow

n de

cisi

ons

will

ha

ve o

n ot

hers

.

Sees

the

soc

ial

repe

rcus

sion

s of

ow

n in

itiat

ives

, but

giv

es

prio

rity

to o

wn

inte

rest

s.

Take

s de

cisi

ons

cons

ider

ing

both

ow

n pe

rson

al

inte

rest

s an

d so

cial

co

nseq

uenc

es.

Take

s de

cisi

ons

cons

ider

ing

soci

al

cons

eque

nces

, and

gi

ves

them

prio

rity

over

ow

n in

tere

sts.

Giv

es p

riorit

y to

soc

ial

para

met

ers

whe

n in

itiat

ing

and

unde

rtak

ing

proj

ects

.

Hav

ing

en

ou

gh

se

lf-e

stee

m t

o t

ake

init

iati

ves

Is im

mob

ilise

d by

low

se

lf-es

teem

.Le

vel o

f se

lf-es

teem

so

met

imes

mak

es

him

/her

dou

bt o

wn

poss

ibili

ties.

Leve

l of

self-

este

em is

su

ited

to r

ealit

y an

d pe

rmits

him

/her

to

act

with

con

fiden

ce.

Hig

h re

gard

for

sel

f an

d ot

hers

giv

es h

im/

her

posi

tive

visi

on o

f ot

hers

.

Invo

lves

oth

ers

in

own

initi

ativ

es t

hank

s to

hig

h se

lf-es

teem

an

d co

nfid

ence

in

othe

rs.



268

Leve

ls o

f M

aste

ryIn

dic

ato

rsD

escr

ipto

rs

12

34

5

Seco

nd

leve

l of

mas

tery

:Ta

kin

g in

itia

tive

s w

ith

oth

ers,

sh

arin

g w

ith

th

em

ow

n p

roje

cts

and

vi

sio

n o

f th

e fu

ture

Get

tin

g in

div

idu

als

and

/or

gro

up

s to

p

arti

cip

ate

in o

wn

in

itia

tive

s

Doe

sn’t

invo

lve

othe

rs.

Trie

s bu

t fa

ils t

o in

volv

e ot

hers

. H

is/h

er in

itiat

ives

are

us

ually

acc

epte

d by

ot

hers

.

Get

s ot

hers

invo

lved

in

the

initi

ativ

es t

hat

he/s

he t

akes

.

His

/her

initi

ativ

es

spar

k th

e in

tere

st a

nd

com

mitm

ent

of

othe

rs.

Invo

lvin

g o

ther

s in

th

e as

sum

pti

on

of

ow

n a

nd

ou

tsid

e ri

sks

Can

’t g

et o

ther

s to

as

sum

e ris

ks.

Has

diff

icul

ty in

ge

ttin

g ea

ch

clas

smat

e to

ass

ume

the

risks

of

othe

rs.

Get

s ev

eryo

ne t

o se

e th

e ris

ks o

f ot

hers

as

thei

r ow

n.

Get

s ot

hers

to

assu

me

risks

join

tly.

Insp

ires

so m

uch

conf

iden

ce t

hat

othe

rs a

ssum

e ris

ks

with

out

fear

.

Get

tin

g o

ther

s to

sh

are

ow

n v

isio

n o

f fu

ture

in p

roje

cts

un

der

take

n

Doe

sn’t

sho

w in

tere

st

in s

harin

g ow

n vi

sion

w

ith o

ther

s.

Can

’t g

et o

ther

s to

sh

are

own

visi

on o

f fu

ture

.

Get

s ot

hers

invo

lved

in

ow

n vi

sion

of

futu

re.

Cle

arly

out

stan

ding

fo

r vi

sion

of

futu

re.

Enth

uses

oth

ers

with

ow

n vi

sion

of

futu

re,

even

ove

r th

e lo

ng

term

.

Pro

mo

tin

g p

roje

cts

that

ben

efit

th

ose

ar

ou

nd

on

e

Dis

card

s in

itiat

ives

th

at d

o no

t be

nefit

hi

m/h

er p

erso

nally

.

Has

diff

icul

ty in

un

dert

akin

g pr

ojec

ts

that

ben

efit

thos

e ar

ound

him

/her

.

Und

erta

kes

proj

ects

th

at h

ave

posi

tive

effe

cts

on o

ther

s.

Prom

otes

initi

ativ

es

who

se m

ajor

aim

s in

clud

e so

cial

be

nefit

s.

In e

very

pro

ject

is

com

mitt

ed t

o co

nsid

erin

g th

e be

nefit

s it

will

brin

g to

the

com

mun

ity.



269

Leve

ls o

f M

aste

ryIn

dic

ato

rsD

escr

ipto

rs

12

34

5

Thir

d le

vel o

f m

aste

ry:

Un

der

taki

ng

am

bit

iou

s (c

om

ple

x an

d c

hal

len

gin

g)

pro

ject

s, in

volv

ing

so

cial

dec

isio

ns

Und

erta

king

new

am

bitio

us p

roje

cts

Lack

s in

itiat

ive

to

unde

rtak

e pr

ojec

ts o

f ce

rtai

n co

mpl

exity

.

Get

s bl

ocke

d by

co

mpl

ex p

roje

cts,

al

thou

gh in

itiat

es

them

.

Take

s th

e in

itiat

ive

in

unde

rtak

ing

com

plex

pr

ojec

ts.

Und

erta

kes

ambi

tious

pr

ojec

ts.

Not

ewor

thy

for

capa

city

of

initi

ativ

e an

d fo

r th

e en

thus

iasm

with

w

hich

he/

she

unde

rtak

es m

ajor

pr

ojec

ts.

Bein

g co

mm

itted

and

ta

king

the

initi

ativ

e in

co

mpl

ex a

nd

chal

leng

ing

proj

ects

Doe

sn’t

wan

t to

get

in

volv

ed in

maj

or

proj

ects

.

Deg

ree

of

com

mitm

ent

in

com

plex

pro

ject

s fa

lls

whe

n di

ffic

ultie

s ar

ise.

Und

erta

kes

com

plex

pr

ojec

ts w

ith

com

mitm

ent.

Seek

s pr

ojec

ts t

hat

are

chal

leng

ing,

eve

n th

ough

com

plex

.

Ass

umes

lead

ersh

ip

and

carr

ies

out

com

plex

pro

ject

s,

gain

ing

the

supp

ort

and

invo

lvem

ent

of

othe

rs.

Taki

ng in

itiat

ives

th

anks

to

inte

nsel

y cl

ear

visi

on o

f th

e fu

ture

Can

’t s

ee f

ar a

head

.Lo

okin

g ah

ead

to

futu

re c

ause

s hi

m/h

er

to h

esita

te a

nd s

eek

exte

rnal

sup

port

.

Has

vis

ion

of f

utur

e an

d ta

kes

deci

sion

s w

ith c

onfid

ence

.

Take

s ne

w in

itiat

ives

th

anks

to

visi

on o

f fu

ture

.

Has

cle

ar v

isio

n of

fu

ture

ove

r th

e m

ediu

m-

and

long

-te

rm, t

akes

ris

ky

initi

ativ

es a

nd

invo

lves

oth

ers

in t

he

proj

ect.

Bein

g co

mm

itted

to

proj

ects

with

a s

ocia

l di

men

sion

Show

s in

diff

eren

ce t

o pr

ojec

ts o

f a

soci

al

natu

re.

Show

s in

tere

st o

nly

in

form

ulat

ing

and

prop

osin

g so

cial

pr

ojec

ts, b

ut d

oesn

’t

get

suff

icie

ntly

in

volv

ed.

Get

s in

volv

ed in

pr

ojec

ts w

hose

soc

ial

dim

ensi

on is

a

feat

ure,

alth

ough

not

th

e pr

edom

inan

t on

e.

The

soci

al d

imen

sion

of

pro

ject

s m

otiv

ates

hi

m/h

er t

o un

dert

ake

or b

ecom

e co

mm

itted

to

them

.

Prop

oses

and

un

dert

akes

pro

ject

s w

ith a

pre

dom

inan

t so

cial

dim

ensi

on.



270

COMPETENCE: INNOVATION

Description

Innovation is a deliberate action involving the introduction of some-thing new into a system or organisation, modifying its processes (struc-tures, procedures or operations) and bringing about an improvement in outcomes – that is, in the achievement of objectives (Martín and Rivas, 1984; Tejada, 1998; Rivas, 2000).

Accordingly, the competence of innovation develops when people become capable of modifying processes and results in response to per-sonal, organisational or social needs and demands that arise. The ele-ments characterising a process of innovation enable us to identify progress indicators for working on and assessing this competence:

— Intentionality: innovation is not a chance or accidental change, but an intentional, deliberate and systematic one. So a first skill to work on is the capacity to recognise situations needing change and improvement, and the opportunity to bring this about.

— Personal position and attitude toward innovation: the possibility of innovating requires an open mind and willingness on the part of the individual to think differently, to analyse and address situ-ations from other standpoints. Depending on that position, peo-ple adopt more or less active roles with regard to innovation and its implications, reflecting on: how to do things in a better way, who will be affected and how, and why it should be done (the causes and aims of innovation, its methods, agents and people involved).

— Search for new methods: open-mindedness and willingness to do things in a different way, leading to an active search for alter-native courses of action, weighing how well they suit the situa-tion and what the aims of innovation will be.

— Application of novel methods: applying an innovation depends, finally, on one’s willingness to experiment with new processes, testing procedures and resources not used previously, either adapting known methods and solutions to a new situation, or generating new procedures suited to the context of innovation.

— Evaluation of results: another feature of innovation is its orien-tation toward improvement. It is a type of change that adopts a constructive, creative or transforming dimension. Therefore, pro-ducing and promoting innovation also means being able to ana-



271

lyse its results, anticipating expected outcomes, foreseeing risks and benefits, and estimating the profitability of the results ob-tained.


Development of this competence is facilitated by providing knowl-edge and understanding of what innovation is and the processes in-volved in it. This means identifying what constitutes innovation as op-posed to other types of change, knowing and understanding the phases and strategies of is management and development, analysing the condi-tions that foster and restrict its development, and the roles and attitudes of the stakeholders involved.

Mastery of this competence depends fundamentally on the develop-ment of attitudes and procedures that are closely related to other com-petences: first, to those that enable openness to change and creation,– i.e. creativity, learning orientation, achievement orientation and enterprising spirit; secondly, to instrumental and systemic competences that enable innovation to take place according to a planned, systematic process suited to the intervention context, such as problem-solving, de-cision-making, project management and quality orientation; and finally, to other competences that facilitate better consideration of the social and personal context in which innovation is to take place – i.e., innova-tion, teamwork and leadership.


Within the context of permanent change characterising today’s post-industrial, knowledge-based society, innovation has become a central value for the survival and development of organisations. The latter no longer excel on the basis of their past history or customs, but because of their capacity to change and respond quickly and flexibly to the chang-ing demands of external and internal users, looking always to provide quality service. Companies and institutions have innovative potential to the extent that they employ creative, innovative professionals and de-velop processes and structures that harness and incorporate that indi-vidual potential, turning it into corporate capital.



272

Development of this increasingly important value will help students to gain access to the labour market and adapt to their future jobs in a context of these characteristics. Moreover, it will enhance their develop-ment of attitudes such as flexibility, open-mindedness and adaptation to the environment, which they will need to adapt actively and responsibly in a social context that shares these same characteristics.


In the university context we can create or optimise the use of three types of situations that will enable us to work on and assess this compe-tence in students:

— At the first level, students can be asked to deal with problems or situations that must be handled by introducing new procedures, tools or processes into their usual work processes. To this end, they must identify what needs improvement, look for and ana-lyse alternative courses of action, take a well-reasoned decision, apply the new procedure and analyse whether it has meant an improvement in results.

— At the second level students work with real or hypothetical situ-ations, cases or problems where they must analyse and propose a systematic process of innovation. This can refer to any context, but it would be particularly suitable to deal with cases and situa-tions drawn from their own professional field, posed at the level of complexity allowed by students’ subject and year. At this level, what is specific is the systematic nature of the approach to inno-vation – i.e. accurately detecting the improvement needs and op-portunities of the situation, finding and analysing different meth-ods and alternatives, weighing who the possible changes will effect and how, and foreseeing future risks or benefits to adapt or generate the best solution for the situation. Application of the innovation is not required in this approach, so as not to restrict its possibilities of development.

— Finally, a third level of complexity would involve, in addition to justification of the project, application of the innovation pro-jected onto a real context and analysis of the results obtained. This condition limits its possibilities of development outside situa-tions directly linked to professional practice, and can best be car-ried out in practicum and graduate programmes.



273

The assessment indicators proposed provide guidelines for observing progress of this competence in the components of each of the three types of situations. Although lecturers may occasionally be able to ob-serve the course of action, normally assessment will be based on the report that students present as a result of their analysis and project. This will basically be a written report which may be accompanied by an oral defence or talk.

Assessment of the product by the lecturer can be supplemented by students’ self-analysis or self-evaluation, which will help students to con-centrate on the key elements in the process. Analysis and evaluation of work by classmates can also prove especially interesting in the second and third types of situation, in which, since professional situations are addressed, the work of others broadens and strengthens the under-standing and resources generated. While the final grade must logically be given when the work is finished, once all the steps in the process have been completed, lecturers should also make a formative revision at the end of some of these steps to make sure that the project is progressing in the desired direction.



274

COMPETENCE: INNOVATION

Definition: Responding well to personal, organisational and so-cial requirements and demands, modifying or introducing new elements into processes and results

Mastery of this competence is closely related to: Creativity, quality orientation, project management, achievement orientation, en-terprising spirit, problem-solving, decision-making, learning ori-entation, teamwork and leadership

Levels of mastery:

1. Introducing new procedures and actions into one’s own work process to respond better to limitations and problems detected

2. Finding and proposing new methods and solutions (with or without application) in real or hypothetic situations and/or prob-lems

3. Designing and applying innovative processes leading to better results in real situations and/or projects.

Indicators:

1. Intentionality; recognition of situations needing change or im-provement

2. Attitude and position regarding innovation: open-mindedness and disposition to think in new ways

3. Active search for new, applicable methods and processes: open-mindedness and disposition to proceed in new ways.

4. Application of novel methods5. Analysis and evaluation of results



275

Leve

ls o

f M

aste

ryIn

dic

ato

rsD

escr

ipto

rs

12

34

5

Firs

t le

vel o

f m

aste

ry:

Intr

od

uci

ng

new

p

roce

du

res

and

ac

tio

ns

into

on

e’s

ow

n w

ork

pro

cess

to

res

po

nd

bet

ter

to li

mit

atio

ns

and

p

rob

lem

s d

etec

ted

Rec

og

nis

ing

lim

itat

ion

s an

d

wea

k p

oin

ts in

ow

n

wo

rk p

roce

sses

an

d

met

ho

ds

Relu

ctan

t to

ana

lyse

or

adm

it lim

itatio

ns

and

mis

take

s in

ow

n w

ork

proc

esse

s.

Has

diff

icul

ty in

id

entif

ying

the

lim

itatio

ns a

nd

wea

knes

ses

in o

wn

wor

k pr

oces

ses.

Iden

tifie

s th

e lim

itatio

ns a

nd w

eak

poin

ts in

ow

n w

ork

proc

esse

s an

d m

etho

ds.

Acc

urat

ely

dete

cts

the

wea

k po

ints

of

own

wor

king

m

etho

ds a

nd

proc

edur

es.

Easi

ly a

nd a

ccur

atel

y de

tect

s re

quire

men

ts

and

oppo

rtun

itie

s fo

r im

prov

emen

t in

th

e co

urse

of

own

wor

k.

Ref

lect

ing

on

new

w

ays

of

do

ing

th

ing

s

Doe

sn’t

see

m t

o re

flect

on

new

way

s of

doi

ng t

hing

s.

Find

s it

hard

to

ref

lect

or

refle

cts

with

diff

icul

ty o

n ne

w w

ays

of d

oing

th

ings

.

Refle

cts

and

reas

ons

abou

t ho

w t

o do

th

ings

diff

eren

tly.

Is s

timul

ated

by

refle

ctio

n on

how

to

do t

hing

s di

ffer

ently

.

His

/her

ref

lect

ions

st

imul

ate

othe

rs t

o re

flect

on

how

to

do

thin

gs d

iffer

ently

.

Seek

ing

new

p

roce

du

res

and

m

eth

od

s fo

r d

oin

g

thin

gs

Doe

sn’t

see

k di

ffer

ent

proc

edur

es f

or d

oing

th

ings

.

Has

diff

icul

ty in

se

ekin

g an

d fin

ding

al

tern

ativ

e pr

oced

ures

for

doi

ng

thin

gs.

Prop

oses

alte

rnat

ives

fo

r th

e pr

oces

s to

fo

llow

and

the

m

etho

ds t

o be

em

ploy

ed.

Ana

lyse

s al

tern

ativ

e pr

oced

ures

of

actio

n.Va

lues

alte

rnat

ive

proc

edur

es o

f ac

tion.

Exp

erim

enti

ng

wit

h

new

pro

ced

ure

sRe

fuse

s to

app

ly n

ew

proc

edur

es o

r re

sour

ces.

Has

diff

icul

ty in

te

stin

g ne

w

proc

edur

es o

r re

sour

ces.

Trie

s ou

t pr

oced

ures

or

res

ourc

es t

hat

he/

she

hasn

’t u

sed

prev

ious

ly.

App

lies

with

pos

itive

at

titud

e ne

w

proc

edur

es o

r re

sour

ces.

Enth

usia

stic

ally

ex

perim

ents

with

ne

w p

roce

dure

s or

re

sour

ces,

wei

ghin

g th

e im

prov

emen

ts

they

brin

g.

Iden

tify

ing

th

e re

sult

s o

f in

no

vati

on

Doe

sn’t

wei

gh

poss

ible

im

prov

emen

ts

obta

ined

with

new

m

etho

ds o

f w

orki

ng.

Has

diff

icul

ty in

se

eing

the

im

prov

emen

ts

obta

ined

with

the

ne

w m

etho

ds o

f w

orki

ng.

Reco

gnis

es t

he

impr

ovem

ents

ob

tain

ed in

ow

n w

ork

thro

ugh

inno

vatio

n.

Ana

lyse

s th

e im

prov

emen

ts

obta

ined

as

a co

nseq

uenc

e of

in

nova

tion.

Acc

urat

ely

wei

ghs

the

impr

ovem

ents

ac

hiev

ed w

ith t

he

new

met

hods

of

wor

king

.



276

Leve

ls o

f M

aste

ryIn

dic

ato

rsD

escr

ipto

rs

12

34

5

Seco

nd

leve

l of

mas

tery

:Fi

nd

ing

an

d

pro

po

sin

g n

ew

met

ho

ds

and

so

luti

on

s (w

ith

or

wit

ho

ut

app

licat

ion

) in

rea

l o

r h

ypo

thet

ic

situ

atio

ns

and

/or

pro

ble

ms

An

alys

ing

a g

iven

si

tuat

ion

an

d

iden

tify

ing

asp

ects

th

at n

eed

im

pro

vem

ent

Fails

to

iden

tify

(doe

sn’t

kno

w o

r di

stin

guis

h) n

eed

for

impr

ovem

ent

in

cert

ain

situ

atio

ns.

Has

diff

icul

ty in

id

entif

ying

nee

d fo

r im

prov

emen

t in

ce

rtai

n si

tuat

ions

.

Ana

lyse

s a

give

n si

tuat

ion

and

iden

tifie

s as

pect

s ne

edin

g im

prov

emen

t.

Acc

urat

ely

iden

tifie

s th

e ne

ed f

or

impr

ovem

ent

in a

gi

ven

situ

atio

n.

Acc

urat

ely

dete

cts

the

need

and

op

port

uniti

es f

or

impr

ovem

ent

in a

gi

ven

situ

atio

n.

Taki

ng

into

acc

ou

nt

wh

o in

no

vati

on

will

af

fect

an

d h

ow

Doe

sn’t

con

side

r w

ho

will

be

affe

cted

by

the

intr

oduc

tion

of

chan

ges,

or

how

.

Has

diff

icul

ty in

un

ders

tand

ing

who

an

d w

hat

wou

ld b

e af

fect

ed b

y th

e in

trod

uctio

n of

ch

ange

s.

Take

s in

to a

ccou

nt

who

and

wha

t w

ould

be

aff

ecte

d by

the

in

trod

uctio

n of

ch

ange

s.

Ana

lyse

s in

dep

th

who

and

wha

t w

ould

be

aff

ecte

d by

the

in

trod

uctio

n of

ch

ange

s.

Acc

urat

ely

wei

ghs

who

and

wha

t w

ould

be

aff

ecte

d by

the

in

trod

uctio

n of

ch

ange

s.

Fin

din

g n

ew

met

ho

ds

for

do

ing

th

ing

s

Onl

y fin

ds o

ne w

ay

of d

oing

thi

ngs

in

each

situ

atio

n.

Prop

oses

sol

utio

ns

with

out

solid

re

visi

on.

Find

s di

vers

e m

etho

ds a

nd

solu

tions

pre

viou

sly

empl

oyed

.

Ana

lyse

s al

tern

ativ

e m

etho

ds a

nd

solu

tions

app

lied

in

sim

ilar

situ

atio

ns.

Wei

ghs

on g

ood

grou

nds

alte

rnat

ive

cour

ses

of a

ctio

n ap

plic

able

to

the

situ

atio

n.

Pro

po

sin

g

inn

ova

tive

met

ho

ds

and

so

luti

on

s

Has

diff

icul

ty in

ad

aptin

g kn

own

met

hods

and

so

lutio

ns t

o a

situ

atio

n.

Prop

oses

gen

eral

so

lutio

ns w

ithou

t ta

king

into

ac

coun

t th

eir

suita

bilit

y to

the

co

ntex

t.

Prop

oses

new

m

etho

ds a

nd

solu

tions

ada

pted

to

the

situ

atio

n.

App

ropr

iate

ly a

dapt

s m

etho

ds a

nd

solu

tions

to

the

situ

atio

n.

Gen

erat

es n

ew,

appr

opria

te m

etho

ds

and

solu

tions

for

the

si

tuat

ion.

An

alys

ing

ris

ks a

nd

b

enef

its

of

inn

ova

tio

n

Doe

sn’t

for

esee

ev

entu

al r

isks

and

be

nefit

s of

in

nova

tion.

Has

diff

icul

ty in

fo

rese

eing

eve

ntua

l ris

ks a

nd b

enef

its

aris

ing

from

in

nova

tion.

Fore

sees

the

eve

ntua

l ris

ks a

nd b

enef

its

aris

ing

from

in

nova

tion.

Valu

es t

he e

vent

ual

risks

and

ben

efits

ar

isin

g fr

om

inno

vatio

n.

Valu

es e

ach

of

the

poss

ible

ris

ks

and

bene

fits

aris

ing

from

inno

vatio

n,

spec

ifyin

g th

eir

pros

and

co

ns.



277

Leve

ls o

f M

aste

ryIn

dic

ato

rsD

escr

ipto

rs

12

34

5

Thir

d le

vel o

f m

aste

ry:

Des

ign

ing

an

d

app

lyin

g in

no

vati

ve

pro

cess

es le

adin

g

to b

ette

r re

sult

s in

re

al s

itu

atio

ns

and

/o

r p

roje

cts

Iden

tify

ing

nee

d f

or

imp

rove

men

t in

co

mp

lex

situ

atio

ns

and

co

nte

xts

Doe

sn’t

dis

tingu

ish

need

for

im

prov

emen

t in

co

mpl

ex s

ituat

ions

an

d co

ntex

ts.

Has

diff

icul

ty in

id

entif

ying

nee

d fo

r im

prov

emen

t in

co

mpl

ex s

ituat

ions

an

d co

ntex

ts.

Iden

tifie

s ne

ed f

or

impr

ovem

ent

in

com

plex

situ

atio

ns

and

cont

exts

.

Syst

emat

ical

ly a

pplie

s a

met

hod

to id

entif

y ne

ed f

or

impr

ovem

ent

in

com

plex

situ

atio

ns.

Def

ines

on

good

gr

ound

s th

e ne

ed

and

oppo

rtun

ities

for

im

prov

emen

t in

co

mpl

ex s

ituat

ions

an

d co

ntex

ts.

Ref

lect

ing

on

cau

ses

and

aim

s o

f in

no

vati

on

Doe

sn’t

ref

lect

on

the

caus

es a

nd a

ims

of in

nova

tion.

Has

diff

icul

ty in

ju

stify

ing

the

why

s an

d ho

ws

of

intr

oduc

ing

inno

vatio

n.

Ref

lect

s on

the

ca

uses

and

aim

s of

in

nova

tion.

Just

ifies

with

ar

gum

ents

the

cau

ses

and

aim

s of

in

nova

tion.

Just

ifies

con

vinc

ingl

y th

e ca

uses

and

aim

s of

inno

vatio

n.

Fin

din

g n

ew

met

ho

ds

for

do

ing

th

ing

s in

an

oth

er

way

Prop

oses

alte

rnat

ives

w

ithou

t re

fere

nce

to

aim

s.

Has

diff

icul

ty in

as

soci

atin

g th

e di

ffer

ent

alte

rnat

ives

w

ith t

he a

ims

of

inno

vatio

n.

Ass

ocia

tes

the

alte

rnat

ives

pro

pose

d w

ith t

he a

ims

of

inno

vatio

n.

Wei

ghs

the

logi

c of

di

ffer

ent

alte

rnat

ives

ag

ains

t th

e ai

ms

of

inno

vatio

n.

Sele

cts

with

goo

d cr

iteria

the

alte

rnat

ive

that

is m

ost

cons

iste

nt w

ith t

he

aim

s of

inno

vatio

n.

Usi

ng

go

od

m

eth

od

s an

d

solu

tio

ns

for

inn

ova

tio

n

App

lies

know

n so

lutio

ns w

ithou

t co

nsid

erin

g th

eir

suita

bilit

y to

con

text

.

Has

diff

icul

ty in

ad

aptin

g m

etho

ds

and

solu

tions

to

the

cont

ext

of

inno

vatio

n.

App

lies

met

hods

and

so

lutio

ns s

uite

d to

th

e co

ntex

t of

in

nova

tion.

Ada

pts

met

hods

and

so

lutio

ns s

uita

bly

to

the

cont

ext

of

inno

vatio

n.

Gen

erat

es n

ew

proc

edur

es s

uite

d to

th

e co

ntex

t.

An

alys

ing

ris

ks a

nd

b

enef

its

Doe

s no

t co

nsid

er

the

risks

and

ben

efits

of

inno

vatio

n.

Has

diff

icul

ty in

fo

rese

eing

the

ris

ks

and

bene

fits

of

inno

vatio

n.

Fore

sees

eve

ntua

l ris

ks a

nd b

enef

its o

f in

nova

tion.

Syst

emat

ical

ly w

eigh

s th

e ris

ks a

nd b

enef

its

of in

nova

tion.

Acc

urat

ely

wei

ghs

the

risk

s an

d be

nefi

ts o

f in

nova

tion

and

its

impa

ct o

n re

sult

s.

Ob

tain

ing

res

ult

s w

ith

inn

ova

tio

nD

oesn

’t g

et

perc

eptib

le r

esul

ts

with

inno

vatio

n.

Get

s un

impo

rtan

t re

sults

fro

m

inno

vatio

n.

Obt

ains

an

appr

ecia

ble

impr

ovem

ent

in

resu

lts f

rom

in

nova

tion.

Obt

ains

an

impo

rtan

t an

d si

gnifi

cant

im

prov

emen

t in

re

sults

.

Ach

ieve

s ou

tsta

ndin

g im

prov

emen

t in

re

sults

tha

nks

to

inno

vatio

n.



278

COMPETENCE: OBJECTIVES-BASED MANAGEMENT

Description

Objectives-based management, developed originally as a business tool, is now applied to all areas of active life. It involves clearly specifying the targets or objectives to be achieved and the resources needed to at-tain them within a given time frame. The idea, therefore, is to optimise time and effort in attaining established goals. Included is a periodic con-trol system to show the degree of progress made from time to time, making it possible to take corrective measures if deviations are detect-ed.

This tool can be applied to corporate, academic, personal or group activities. The important thing is to define clearly, for all the persons in-volved, the final situation aimed at and the means considered necessary to progress from the starting situation to the target situation specified.

Such clear definition of objectives determines the set of tasks to be performed. Those that form part of the course charted – i.e. those that help to progress toward the stated goals – are the tasks that must be carried out, whereas those that do not contribute to that progress are relegated to a secondary position or even eliminated. So it is not so much a case of “doing things well” as “doing the things that must be done”.

This competence requires, in the first place, being able to establish objectives. Objectives stated in general terms or in terms of wishes and desires, such as to improve, grow, develop, are not useful for objectives-based management. The target situation must be defined clearly and precisely, so that the persons involved in the process will understand without hesitation what it consists of and how to measure whether it has been achieved or not, as well as any discrepancies that might exist at any moment between the true and desired situations.

Once the final objectives have been set, objectives-based manage-ment calls for planning over time the intermediate objectives to be reached and the amount of resources that will be needed in order to progress according to schedule. Naturally, given the pace of change to-day, when it is a question of long-term objectives, the plan, its allocation of resources and even its final objectives may be subject to periodic revi-sions to adapt to any changes that may occur. That is, an intrinsic feature of objectives-based management is flexibility.

In short, it is a tool that involves the efforts and resources of a group or organisation in a common process known by all.



279


First, because it involves planning over time, objectives-based man-agement is directly related to the competence of planning.

It requires a positive, proactive attitude toward reality. Instead of re-acting – i.e. adapting a posteriori to variations in the surrounding cir-cumstances –, objectives-based management calls for anticipation of what we want to see happen (the goals or objectives to be achieved) and, in this regard, creation of the future rather than adaptation to it.

It requires the use of analytical thinking, systemic thought, practical and creative thinking. In group tasks, it calls for team thinking, since consensus of the persons involved is required.

It is also related to other systemic competences such as project man-agement, achievement orientation and leadership; to interpersonal com-petences such as teamwork, adaptability, and negotiations; and to in-strumental competences such as oral and written communication, time management and problem-solving ability.


Students may decide to let time pass and simply do the work consid-ered most urgent at the moment, or they may decide to set their own objectives (prepare themselves to become good professionals, do well in exams, etc.) and chart their own course to attain them. Cramming for exams at the last moment or spending long hours in a mad dash to com-plete a report just before its due date are examples of lack of planning.

If students decide at the beginning of the year what they want their situation to be in June, and set themselves a programme of study and completion of academic work based on that desired goal, they are ap-plying objectives-based management. Their time distribution would be in the form of planned steps toward the desired end-situation. Any ac-tivities or tasks that do not help to advance down the charted path would be allocated less time or would be eliminated.

The same thing applies to group work. Individual and group time time is distributed according to efficiency for the achievement of objec-tives. The first effect of this will be a considerable saving of time and better rate of progress.

In professional life the same thing happens. We devote too much time to “unnecessary” tasks simply because “that is how it has always



280

been done”. Clarifying objectives to be achieved helps us to revise ha-bitual processes and improve them in terms of efficiency.


Setting objectives and knowing how to plan are not innate skills. Students need to learn to do them and this requires instruction and prac-tice.

Lecturers can convey their own planning of the subject (work to be done throughout the year) in terms of explicit objectives to be achieved. They can also ask students to make their own definition of objectives and their own plan to achieve them.

The use of long-term projects as a methodological instrument may help students to apply the concepts of objectives-based management to their own situation.

In work assigned to groups of students, one of the requirements could be for the group to specify in writing the group objectives and how they will organise time to achieve them. This will help to habituate students to working on mastery of this competence.



281

COMPETENCE: OBJECTIVES-BASED MANAGEMENT

Definition: Aiming an academic, business, leisure or personal mission toward the attainment of personal or group objectives, through efficient allocation of time, effort and resources

Mastery of this competence is closely related to: Achievement mo-tivation, making things happen; commitment to results; proac-tiveness, capacity to actively focus on situations, relations and problems; capacity to take risks and decisions; managing and op-timising resources

Levels of mastery:

1. Setting objectives and goals, planning how to achieve them and monitoring degree of progress

2. Efficiently pursuing stated objectives and goals, analysing and addressing difficulties and necessary adjustments

3. Setting challenging objectives and goals, sharing and accom-plishing them with others

Indicators:

1. Setting goals and objectives2. Monitoring progress3. Overcoming difficulties 4. Use of resources



282

Leve

ls o

f M

aste

ryIn

dic

ato

rsD

escr

ipto

rs

12

34

5

Firs

t le

vel o

f m

aste

ry:

Sett

ing

ob

ject

ives

an

d g

oal

s, p

lan

nin

g

ho

w t

o a

chie

ve

them

an

d

mo

nit

ori

ng

deg

ree

of

pro

gre

ss

Esta

blis

hin

g o

wn

sh

ort

- an

d m

ediu

m-

term

go

als

and

o

bje

ctiv

es

Doe

sn’t

def

ine

own

goal

s an

d ob

ject

ives

, or

act

s w

ithou

t re

latio

n to

the

m.

Esta

blis

hes

inap

prop

riate

goa

ls

or is

n’t

com

mitt

ed t

o th

em.

Is a

ble

to s

et o

wn

obje

ctiv

es

appr

opria

tely.

Esta

blis

hes

own

goal

s w

ell a

nd is

co

mm

itted

to

mee

ting

them

.

Has

a w

ell-d

evis

ed

plan

tha

t he

/she

kn

ows

how

to

just

ify,

show

s co

mm

itmen

t an

d is

abl

e to

co

mpl

ete

it.

Res

olv

ing

wit

ho

ut

hel

p b

asic

d

iffi

cult

ies

stan

din

g

in w

ay o

f o

bje

ctiv

es

Get

s bl

ocke

d by

bas

ic

diff

icul

ties.

Nee

ds h

elp

whe

n pl

an r

uns

up a

gain

st

basi

c di

ffic

ultie

s.

Find

s re

sour

ces

to

reso

lve

basi

c di

ffic

ultie

s en

coun

tere

d.

Reso

lves

with

out

help

ba

sic

diff

icul

ties

enco

unte

red

in

fulfi

lling

pla

n.

Prop

oses

goo

d so

lutio

ns f

or

over

com

ing

basi

c di

ffic

ultie

s en

coun

tere

d.

Ad

apti

ng

act

ion

p

lan

an

d r

eso

urc

es

to o

bje

ctiv

es s

et

Act

ion

plan

is

inap

prop

riate

giv

en

the

reso

urce

s av

aila

ble

to m

eet

targ

eted

obj

ectiv

es.

Even

with

cle

ar

obje

ctiv

es, d

oesn

’t

appr

opria

tely

man

age

reso

urce

s av

aila

ble.

Act

ion

plan

is

cons

iste

nt w

ith

obje

ctiv

es a

nd w

ith

reso

urce

s av

aila

ble.

Mak

es e

ffic

ient

use

of

res

ourc

es a

vaila

ble

for

reac

hing

ob

ject

ives

.

Inco

rpor

ates

a f

orm

th

at e

nhan

ces

inte

grat

ion

of

reso

urce

s an

d m

etho

dolo

gy f

or

reac

hing

goa

l.

Dec

idin

g t

asks

to

be

per

form

ed,

dea

dlin

es a

nd

bas

ic

con

tro

ls c

on

cern

ing

g

oal

s an

d o

bje

ctiv

es

Act

ion

plan

doe

sn’t

in

clud

e co

ntro

l in

dica

tors

or

does

n’t

use

them

.

Form

ulat

es c

ontr

ol

indi

cato

rs

inap

prop

riate

ly.

Plan

s th

e us

e of

in

dica

tors

to

mon

itor

com

plia

nce

with

ta

sks

and

dead

lines

.

Mon

itors

tas

ks a

nd

dead

lines

com

plia

nce

usin

g co

ntro

l in

dica

tors

.

Ada

pts

plan

in

acco

rdan

ce w

ith

anal

yses

mad

e.



283

Leve

ls o

f M

aste

ryIn

dic

ato

rsD

escr

ipto

rs

12

34

5

Seco

nd

leve

l of

mas

tery

:Ef

fici

entl

y p

urs

uin

g

stat

ed o

bje

ctiv

es

and

go

als,

an

alys

ing

an

d

add

ress

ing

d

iffi

cult

ies

and

n

eces

sary

ad

just

men

ts

Iden

tify

ing

wit

h

and

co

mm

itti

ng

sel

f to

ob

ject

ives

an

d

go

als

Has

diff

icul

ty in

id

entif

ying

with

ob

ject

ives

; mus

t be

dr

agge

d al

ong.

Iden

tifie

s w

ith t

he

obje

ctiv

es t

hat

othe

rs

prop

ose.

Und

erst

ands

and

id

entif

ies

with

ob

ject

ives

, ask

s ab

out

them

, etc

.

Iden

tifie

s w

ith a

nd is

co

mm

itted

to

obje

ctiv

es.

Is c

omm

itted

to

obje

ctiv

es a

nd m

akes

co

ntrib

utio

ns t

o cl

arify

and

ach

ieve

th

em.

Iden

tify

ing

d

iffi

cult

ies

and

fi

nd

ing

way

s to

o

verc

om

e th

em t

o

ach

ieve

ob

ject

ives

Has

diff

icul

ty in

re

cogn

isin

g di

ffic

ultie

s th

at a

rise.

Reco

gnis

es d

iffic

ultie

s en

coun

tere

d bu

t do

esn’

t kn

ow h

ow t

o re

solv

e th

em.

Find

s w

ays

of

over

com

ing

the

diff

icul

ties

that

he/

she

iden

tifie

s.

Reso

lves

in p

ract

ical

w

ays

the

diff

icul

ties

that

he/

she

iden

tifie

s.

Reso

lves

diff

icul

ties

brill

iant

ly a

nd w

ith

pers

onal

co

ntrib

utio

ns.

Usi

ng

ava

ilab

le

reso

urc

es w

ith

ef

fici

ency

Mak

es p

oor

use

of

reso

urce

s w

ithin

gr

asp.

Util

ises

ava

ilabl

e re

sour

ces,

but

w

ithou

t ac

hiev

ing

obje

ctiv

es.

Ach

ieve

s de

sire

d ob

ject

ives

with

re

sour

ces

avai

labl

e.

Mak

es e

ffic

ient

use

of

res

ourc

es t

o ac

hiev

e ob

ject

ives

.

Opt

imis

es u

se o

f re

sour

ces

in o

wn

wor

k to

ach

ieve

ob

ject

ives

.

Syst

emat

ical

ly

revi

sin

g a

ctio

n p

lan

an

d m

od

ifyi

ng

it a

s n

eed

ed t

o im

pro

ve

it

Lack

s sy

stem

for

re

visi

ng o

wn

plan

s of

ac

tion.

Is in

cons

iste

nt in

re

visi

ng o

wn

plan

s of

ac

tion

acco

rdin

g to

es

tabl

ishe

d co

ntro

l m

easu

res.

Regu

larly

ana

lyse

s an

d ad

just

s ac

tion

plan

, acc

ordi

ng t

o es

tabl

ishe

d co

ntro

l m

easu

res.

Syst

emat

ical

ly

anal

yses

ow

n ac

tion

plan

, pro

vidi

ng

orig

inal

indi

cato

rs

and

met

hods

of

cont

rol.

Car

eful

ly m

onito

rs

plan

, spe

cify

ing

impr

ovem

ents

in

trod

uced

and

do

ing

bett

er t

han

requ

ired

by c

ontr

ol

mea

sure

s.



284

Leve

ls o

f M

aste

ryIn

dic

ato

rsD

escr

ipto

rs

12

34

5

Thir

d le

vel o

f m

aste

ry:

Sett

ing

ch

alle

ng

ing

o

bje

ctiv

es a

nd

g

oal

s, s

har

ing

an

d

acco

mp

lish

ing

th

em

wit

h o

ther

s

Sett

ing

an

d

add

ress

ing

am

bit

iou

s, f

easi

ble

m

ediu

m-

and

lon

g-

term

go

als

and

ch

alle

ng

es

Lack

s so

mew

hat

chal

leng

ing

obje

ctiv

es.

Prop

oses

am

bitio

us

obje

ctiv

es, b

ut w

ith

feas

ibili

ty p

robl

ems

give

n ow

n po

ssib

ilitie

s.

The

obje

ctiv

es t

hat

he/s

he s

ets

are

chal

leng

ing

and

feas

ible

.

Sets

sel

f ch

alle

ngin

g ob

ject

ives

and

in

corp

orat

es a

co

ntin

uous

im

prov

emen

t pr

oces

s.

Sets

cha

lleng

ing

obje

ctiv

es, w

ith s

uch

enth

usia

sm t

hat

it sp

read

s to

oth

ers.

Fore

seei

ng

d

iffi

cult

ies

and

p

rob

lem

s st

and

ing

in

way

of

ob

ject

ives

Get

s ca

ught

up

in

diff

icul

ties

on w

ay t

o ob

ject

ives

due

to

lack

of

for

esig

ht.

Is o

nly

able

to

see

diff

icul

ties

if th

ey a

re

poin

ted

out.

Fore

sees

and

ad

dres

ses

diff

icul

ties

sugg

estin

g so

lutio

ns.

Is n

otab

le f

or

fore

sigh

t in

an

ticip

atin

g pr

oble

ms

and

diff

icul

ties.

Not

ewor

thy

for

antic

ipat

ion

and

crea

tivity

in p

robl

em-

solv

ing

and

over

com

ing

diff

icul

ties,

so

that

th

ey d

on’t

dis

tort

re

sults

.

Taki

ng

ad

van

tag

e o

f o

wn

an

d o

uts

ide

op

po

rtu

nit

ies

and

re

sou

rces

, usi

ng

th

em in

no

vati

vely

an

d c

reat

ivel

y

Doe

sn’t

app

ear

to b

e aw

are

of o

wn

poss

ibili

ties

and

pers

onal

res

ourc

es.

Mis

ses

oppo

rtun

ities

to

use

res

ourc

es t

hat

coul

d be

obt

aine

d fr

om o

ther

sou

rces

.

Reco

gnis

es a

nd u

ses

own

and

outs

ide

reso

urce

s cr

eativ

ely.

Use

s ow

n an

d ou

tsid

e re

sour

ces

crea

tivel

y,

inno

vativ

ely

and

effic

ient

ly.

Is e

xcel

lent

org

anis

ing

reso

urce

s cr

eativ

ely

and

stra

tegi

cally

to

acco

mpl

ish

obje

ctiv

es

prop

osed

.

Taki

ng

dec

isio

ns

acco

rdin

g t

o

esta

blis

hed

co

ntr

ol

mea

sure

s, w

ith

ou

t u

nn

eces

sary

hu

rry

or

del

ay

Doe

sn’t

rea

ct t

o pr

oces

s co

ntro

l in

dica

tors

.

Util

ises

indi

cato

rs t

o de

cide

, but

doe

s so

to

o ea

rly o

r la

te.

Revi

ses

own

proc

esse

s an

d ta

kes

deci

sion

s at

the

rig

ht

mom

ent.

Kee

ps c

lose

wat

ch o

n in

dica

tors

and

if

nece

ssar

y ap

prop

riate

ly r

ectif

ies

ongo

ing

plan

s of

ac

tion.

Ana

lyse

s an

d ex

plai

ns

poss

ible

dev

iatio

ns

and

draw

s co

nclu

sion

s fo

r im

prov

emen

t.



285

COMPETENCE: PROJECT MANAGEMENT

Description

A project is an effort carried out within a given time to achieve the specific objective of creating a unique product or service, by undertaking a series of tasks and making effective use of resources (TEC of Monter-rey, 2000).

So we say that people have competency in project management when they are able to devise, direct, evaluate and monitor a project ef-fectively. The elements making up a project enable us to identify progress indicators for developing and assessing this competence:

Reality analysis: analysis of the situation and needs that will provide the context and justification for the project.

— Setting objectives: a clear, precise formulation of realistic but am-bitious objectives in accordance with strategically aligned require-ments, crucial for getting team to identify with shared objectives and stimulating them to action.

— Deciding actions and tasks: effective, efficient actions must be planned in order to accomplish objectives and distribute respon-sibilities and tasks among those involved in a balanced way.

— Resources management: foreseeing, allocating and optimising necessary resources necessary (time, costs, materials, etc.) to un-dertake the actions called for.

— Evaluation: planning the mechanisms for monitoring the project and evaluating results (when and how this will be done and by whom); and introducing changes and necessary adjustments to improve the project.

— Risks: risks inherent in the project should also be considered, foreseeing, identifying and anticipating them adequately.


Development of competency in project management requires a com-prehensive approach, relating it to many other instrumental and inter-personal systemic competences. In the first place, with systemic thinking and other competences related to the most technical side of this skill, including decision-making, planning and objectives-based management.



286

It is also related to competences having to do with initiative to transform and improve things, such as: creativity, innovation, enterprising spirit and quality orientation. Finally, because most real and simulated projects are shared undertakings due to their size and scope, development of this competence is associated with the capacity to work and collaborate with others, and calls for interpersonal communication, teamwork, team thinking and leadership.


In the course of professional practice, project-based work is so prev-alent that it is considered a logical teaching option for training students for professional careers. This is particularly so in the case of technical careers, but it can also be used with more or less intensity by lecturers in almost all disciplines (Bará and Valero, 2005). Problem-based learning and its variant, Project-Based Learning or PBL are two of the most suc-cessful new teaching methods to be adopted in higher education in re-cent years.

PBL is used as a strategy to ensure that learning takes place through action. That is, students learn by doing, in the process acquiring an ap-propriate methodology for confronting the problems that are sure to arise in their future professional practice (TEC of Monterrey, 2000). Ac-cording to Bará and Valero (2005), PBL is a teaching strategy in which students, organised in groups, undertake projects in order to integrate knowledge and skills from several areas, develop high-level intellectual skills, promote autonomous learning and working, teamwork and self-evaluation.


In university contexts, we can create or optimise three types of situ-ation that will enable us to work on and assess this competence with students:

— At the first level, students can be assigned work with a project structure to be carried out over the short term on well-delimited topics, with clear guidelines provided by the lecturer. The idea is for students to draw up a project plan, without necessarily carry-ing it out.



287

— At the second level, students are expected to plan projects in col-laboration with others in situations that are barely structured by the lecturer. Here the deadline and scope can be broader, and students should foresee incidents and risks, even though again, the plan need not require execution.

— Finally, students plan and execute projects in contexts not struc-tured by the lecturer, on broader topics and/or with longer deadlines, and even exercise leadership of the project. Here the projects are carried out, and project methodology may be used in the teaching and learning process.

When PBL is strictly applied as a learning strategy, it is also possible to invert the normal sequence of learning. First the problem is presented, learning needs are identified, the necessary information is sought, and finally, we return again to the problem in order to address and solve it (Bará and Valero, 2005).

Whether small or large, projects are built on the basis of a “motivat-ing issue” that ensures that the undertaking will be challenging, prob-lematic, complex (involving various activities and synthesising a great deal of information), connected to reality, with different possible solu-tions, and requiring discussion and decision-making (Bará and Valero, 2005). Later, in following guidelines and instructions, five things should be taken into account according to these same authors: 1) establishing the context, subject matter, objectives, motivating issue, enunciation; 2) defining (two or three) deliverables and assessment criteria: 3) enumer-ating types of activity to undertake; 4) introducing positive interdepend-ence and personal accountability; and 5) outlining a work plan.

For its part, the TEC of Monterrey (2000) attributes the following characteristics to projects: they provide situations where students can learn to resolve problems using relevant knowledge; work focuses on exploring and resolving a practical problem with an unknown solution; interdisciplinary knowledge must be applied; and open solutions must be sought, giving the opportunity to generate new knowledge.

The assessment indicators proposed provide guidelines for observing the progress of competence in the different components, according to the degree of complexity worked on in each situation. The assessment technique employed is fundamentally analysis of the project planned and, as the case may be, undertaken. This is reflected in the project re-port or folder that the students hand in as a result of their work. Basi-cally, it is a written report which may be accompanied by an oral defence or presentation.



288

The complexity of the work involved in a final comprehensive project (no matter how small) requires a formative assessment of at least some partial products or deliverables to ensure that the project is going in the right direction. Student participation in the assessment process, through self- or peer-evaluation, will help them to understand and assume the essential elements of the project.

On the subject of project assessment, Bará and Valero (2005) recom-mend: 1) having the list of assessment criteria (indicators) based on ob-jectives; 2) making regular checks in accordance with the work plan and partial objectives (effective feedback); 3) including in the project self-evaluation of work completed; 4) utilising a project folder (ordered col-lection of project material) as an item for assessment; and 5) utilising peer-evaluation (each group of students regularly revises the results of other groups and evaluates them according to a published criteria sheet).



289

COMPETENCE: PROJECT MANAGEMENT

Definition: Effectively planning, directing, evaluating and mon-itoring a complex project, developing an idea until it is material-ised in a service or product

Mastery of this competence is closely related to: Systemic thinking, Decision-making, Planning, Objectives-based management; Crea-tivity, Innovation, Enterprising spirit and Quality orientation; In-terpersonal communication, Teamwork and Leadership; Attitudes such as Ability to work and collaborate with others

Levels of mastery:

1. Designing work with a short-term project structure, laying down guidelines (planning without execution)

2. Planning projects in collaboration with others in less-structured situations, foreseeing incidents and risks (planning without exe-cution)

3. Planning and executing projects in barely structured contexts, exercising project leadership (supposing execution of the project, for example, utilising project methodology in the teaching and learning process)

Indicators:

1. Situation analysis2. Defining objectives3. Deciding actions and tasks4. Managing resources.5. Evaluation, monitoring changes6. Risks



290

Leve

ls o

f M

aste

ryIn

dic

ato

rsD

escr

ipto

rs

12

34

5

Firs

t le

vel o

f m

aste

ry:

Des

ign

ing

wo

rk

wit

h a

sh

ort

-ter

m

pro

ject

str

uct

ure

, la

yin

g d

ow

n

gu

idel

ines

(p

lan

nin

g w

ith

ou

t ex

ecu

tio

n)

Des

crib

ing

th

e si

tuat

ion

th

at

just

ifie

s th

e n

eed

fo

r th

e p

roje

ct

Doe

sn’t

con

text

ualis

e pr

ojec

t or

pla

n of

ac

tion.

Iden

tifie

s pr

ojec

t to

pic

and

thos

e in

volv

ed, b

ut d

oesn

’t

link

it to

nee

ds.

Just

ifies

pro

ject

al

ludi

ng t

o th

e ne

eds

it w

ould

sat

isfy

.

Prec

isel

y id

entif

ies

need

s or

re

quire

men

ts t

hat

the

proj

ect

addr

esse

s.

Con

trib

utes

evi

denc

e re

gard

ing

the

need

s th

at ju

stify

the

pr

ojec

t.

Esta

blis

hin

g c

lear

o

bje

ctiv

es f

or

the

pro

ject

Form

ulat

es p

roje

ct

obje

ctiv

es in

corr

ectly

or

doe

sn’t

kno

w h

ow

to f

orm

ulat

e th

em.

Form

ulat

es

ambi

guou

s, im

prec

ise

obje

ctiv

es.

Form

ulat

es c

lear

ob

ject

ives

for

the

pr

ojec

t.

The

proj

ect

obje

ctiv

es

are

prec

ise

and

wor

kabl

e.

The

proj

ect

obje

ctiv

es

are

real

istic

and

am

bitio

us.

Plan

nin

g a

ctio

ns

to

acco

mp

lish

o

bje

ctiv

es a

nd

th

e p

erso

ns

resp

on

sib

le

for

sam

e

Enum

erat

es

inte

ntio

ns w

ithou

t sp

ecify

ing

actio

ns o

r th

e pe

rson

s re

spon

sibl

e.

Spec

ifies

act

ions

but

w

ithou

t es

tabl

ishi

ng

pers

ons

resp

onsi

ble

for

each

.

Def

ines

con

cret

e ac

tions

and

spe

cifie

s w

ho w

ill u

nder

take

th

em.

Wei

ghs

the

feas

ibili

ty

of a

ctio

ns b

eing

pl

anne

d.

Esta

blis

hes

exce

llent

se

quen

ce o

f ac

tions

fo

r ac

hiev

ing

obje

ctiv

es.

Fore

seei

ng

an

d

allo

ttin

g n

eces

sary

ti

me

to c

om

ple

te

pla

nn

ed a

ctio

ns

Doe

sn’t

for

esee

tim

e fo

r ea

ch a

ctio

n.Fo

rese

es t

ime

for

each

act

ion

only

in

gene

ral t

erm

s.

Plan

s tim

e fo

r ea

ch

actio

n in

det

ail.

Mak

es p

rovi

sion

for

ad

ditio

nal t

ime

in

case

of

cont

inge

ncie

s.

Fore

sees

mec

hani

sms

for

mon

itorin

g tim

e co

mpl

ianc

e.

Plan

nin

g e

valu

atio

n

of

pro

ject

res

ult

sO

verlo

oks

poss

ibili

ty

of e

valu

atin

g re

sults

.Se

es t

hat

it is

ne

cess

ary

to e

valu

ate

resu

lts w

ithou

t pl

anni

ng h

ow t

o do

so

.

Spec

ifies

, at

leas

t pa

rtia

lly, w

hen

and

how

eva

luat

ion

will

be

mad

e an

d by

w

hom

.

Plan

s sy

stem

atic

ally

w

hen

and

how

ev

alua

tion

will

be

mad

e an

d by

who

m.

Plan

s sy

stem

atic

ally

w

hen

and

how

ev

alua

tion

will

be

mad

e an

d by

who

m,

usin

g te

stab

le

indi

cato

rs.



291

Leve

ls o

f M

aste

ryIn

dic

ato

rsD

escr

ipto

rs

12

34

5

Seco

nd

leve

l of

mas

tery

:Pl

ann

ing

pro

ject

s in

co

llab

ora

tio

n w

ith

o

ther

s in

less

-st

ruct

ure

d

situ

atio

ns,

fo

rese

ein

g in

cid

ents

an

d r

isks

(pla

nn

ing

wit

ho

ut

exec

uti

on

)

Bas

ing

des

crip

tio

n o

f p

roje

ct c

on

text

on

ev

iden

ce a

nd

fac

ts

Allu

des

to n

eed

for

proj

ect

but

does

n’t

give

rea

sone

d ar

gum

ent.

Trie

s to

just

ify n

eed

for

proj

ect

on g

roun

ds

of b

arel

y te

sted

or

reas

oned

opi

nion

s an

d ju

dgem

ents

.

Con

trib

utes

evi

denc

e on

whi

ch t

o ba

se

situ

atio

n an

alys

is t

hat

cont

extu

alis

es a

nd

just

ifies

the

pro

ject

.

Syst

emat

ical

ly

orga

nise

s an

d an

alys

es a

vaila

ble

info

rmat

ion

to

dete

rmin

e co

ntex

t re

quire

men

ts.

Wei

ghs

adeq

uacy

of

avai

labl

e in

form

atio

n an

d m

etho

ds u

sed

in

obta

inin

g it,

fo

rmul

atin

g ow

n co

nclu

sions

on

the

basis

of

thos

e po

ssib

ilitie

s an

d co

nstr

aint

s.

Mak

ing

pro

ject

o

bje

ctiv

es c

on

sist

ent

wit

h n

eed

s d

etec

ted

in

co

nte

xt

Form

ulat

es o

bjec

tives

w

ithou

t al

ludi

ng t

o ne

eds.

Proj

ect

obje

ctiv

es a

re

not

cons

iste

nt w

ith

stat

ed n

eeds

.

Proj

ect

obje

ctiv

es a

re

cons

iste

nt w

ith n

eeds

de

tect

ed in

con

text

an

alys

is.

Proj

ect

obje

ctiv

es a

re

a go

od r

espo

nse

to

need

s de

tect

ed.

Proj

ect

obje

ctiv

es a

re

an o

rigin

al, a

udac

ious

re

spon

se t

o cu

rren

t si

tuat

ion.

Esti

mat

ing

th

e ef

fect

iven

ess

and

ef

fici

ency

of

acti

on

s

Prop

oses

act

ions

tha

t ha

ve e

vide

nt

effe

ctiv

enes

s or

ef

ficie

ncy

prob

lem

s.

Doe

s no

t co

nsid

er t

he

effe

ctiv

enes

s an

d ef

ficie

ncy

of a

ctio

ns.

Spec

ifies

the

fore

seea

ble

effe

ctiv

enes

s an

d ef

ficie

ncy

of th

e ac

tions

pr

opos

ed.

Doe

s go

od jo

b of

pr

iorit

isin

g ac

tions

on

basi

s of

eff

ectiv

enes

s.

Prop

oses

eff

ectiv

e ac

tions

, opt

imis

ing

the

use

of r

esou

rces

.

Mak

ing

use

of

avai

lab

le r

eso

urc

es

Doe

sn’t

spe

cify

wha

t re

sour

ces

will

be

used

.En

umer

ates

reso

urce

s,

but

over

look

s th

ose

avai

labl

e.

Inte

grat

es a

vaila

ble

reso

urce

s in

to p

roje

ct.

Wei

ghs

effic

ienc

y (r

esul

ts/c

osts

) in

the

use

of r

esou

rces

.

Fore

sees

way

s of

usi

ng

reso

urce

s to

max

imis

e ac

hiev

emen

t of

ob

ject

ives

.

Plan

nin

g

mec

han

ism

s fo

r m

on

ito

rin

g

imp

lem

enta

tio

n

Doe

sn’t

men

tion

mec

hani

sms

for

mon

itorin

g im

plem

enta

tion.

Prop

oses

mec

hani

sms

that

are

sca

rcel

y w

orka

ble

or p

ertin

ent

for

mon

itorin

g im

plem

enta

tion.

Part

ially

pla

ns

mec

hani

sms

for

mon

itorin

g pr

ojec

t im

plem

enta

tion.

Syst

emat

ical

ly p

lans

w

hen

and

how

im

plem

enta

tion

mon

itorin

g w

ill b

e ca

rrie

d ou

t an

d by

w

hom

.

Syst

emat

ical

ly p

lans

w

hen

and

how

im

plem

enta

tion

mon

itorin

g w

ill b

e ca

rrie

d ou

t an

d by

w

hom

, usi

ng t

esta

ble

indi

cato

rs.

Iden

tify

ing

po

ssib

le

risk

s in

her

ent

in

pro

ject

Doe

sn’t

con

side

r th

e ex

iste

nce

of r

isks

.Re

cogn

ises

tha

t ris

ks

may

exi

st, b

ut w

ithou

t be

ing

real

istic

.

Iden

tifie

s th

e ris

ks

that

cou

ld a

ffec

t th

e pr

ojec

t.

Iden

tifie

s an

d qu

antif

ies

risks

re

alis

tical

ly. A

ccur

atel

y fo

rese

es t

hem

.

By id

entif

ying

and

qu

antif

ying

risk

s, is

abl

e to

pro

vide

mea

sure

s fo

r co

ntai

ning

or

antic

ipat

ing

them

.



292

Leve

ls o

f M

aste

ryIn

dic

ato

rsD

escr

ipto

rs

12

34

5

Thir

d le

vel o

f m

aste

ry:

Plan

nin

g a

nd

ex

ecu

tin

g p

roje

cts

in b

arel

y st

ruct

ure

d

con

text

s,

exer

cisi

ng

pro

ject

le

ader

ship

(s

up

po

sin

g

exec

uti

on

of

the

pro

ject

, e.g

. u

tilis

atio

n o

f p

roje

ct

met

ho

do

log

y in

th

e te

ach

ing

an

d

lear

nin

g p

roce

ss)

Wei

gh

ing

an

d

ran

kin

g n

eed

s an

d

reso

urc

es in

a r

eal

inte

rven

tio

n

con

text

, pri

ori

tisi

ng

re

qu

irem

ents

id

enti

fied

as

ob

ject

o

f th

e p

roje

ct

Des

crib

es c

onte

xt o

f pr

ojec

t bu

t do

esn’

t w

eigh

info

rmat

ion

prov

ided

.

Ana

lyse

s co

ntex

t w

here

he/

she

is g

oing

to

wor

k, id

entif

ying

its

mai

n re

quire

men

ts

and

reso

urce

s.

Hav

ing

anal

ysed

re

quire

men

ts a

nd

reso

urce

s, p

riorit

ises

th

e ne

eds

to b

e sa

tisfie

d by

the

pr

ojec

t.

Prio

ritis

es n

eeds

ba

sed

on lo

gica

l SW

OT

map

of

inte

rven

tion

cont

ext.

Obj

ect

of p

roje

ct is

to

tal o

r pa

rtia

l so

lutio

n hy

poth

esis

fo

r st

ated

nee

d,

base

d on

prio

ritie

s an

d po

ssib

ilitie

s an

alys

ed.

Invo

lvin

g t

eam

or

org

anis

atio

n in

p

roje

ct o

bje

ctiv

es

Not

mot

ivat

ed t

o ac

tion

due

to

ambi

guity

and

poo

r de

finiti

on o

f ob

ject

ives

.

Proj

ect

obje

ctiv

es a

re

adm

inis

trat

ive

and

cont

ract

ual (

poin

ting

to o

rgan

isat

ion

of

wor

k an

d ta

sks)

.

Proj

ect

obje

ctiv

es

inco

rpor

ate

pers

onal

an

d gr

oup

inte

rest

s ba

sed

on

com

mitm

ent.

The

obje

ctiv

es

enco

urag

e an

d st

imul

ate

team

m

embe

rs t

o ac

tion.

Obj

ectiv

es f

oste

r/pr

omot

e pr

ofes

sion

al

deve

lopm

ent

of t

eam

m

embe

rs a

nd o

f te

am/o

rgan

isat

ion

itsel

f.

Spec

ifyi

ng

lon

g-

term

ob

ject

ives

in

term

s o

f w

ork

able

o

bje

ctiv

es

The

obje

ctiv

es n

ot

stat

ed in

ter

ms

of

diff

eren

t de

gree

s of

ac

com

plis

hmen

t.

Shor

t- a

nd lo

ng-t

erm

ob

ject

ives

di

stin

guis

hed,

but

w

ithou

t go

od li

nkag

e be

twee

n th

em.

The

long

-ter

m

obje

ctiv

es t

rans

late

in

to m

ore

conc

rete

sh

ort-

term

obj

ectiv

es.

Stra

tegi

cally

alig

ns

long

-, m

ediu

m-

and

shor

t-te

rm o

bjec

tives

.

Obj

ectiv

es li

nk s

hort

-te

rm g

oals

to

mor

e lo

ng-t

erm

de

velo

pmen

t of

pe

rson

s, t

eam

or

orga

nisa

tion

(giv

ing

mea

ning

to

actio

n).

Dis

trib

uti

ng

re

spo

nsi

bili

ties

an

d

task

s ac

cord

ing

to

p

ote

nti

al o

f ea

ch

team

mem

ber

Ass

igns

re

spon

sibi

litie

s an

d ta

sks

to p

erso

ns w

ho

clea

rly a

re n

ot

capa

cita

ted

for

them

.

Igno

res

peop

le’s

prof

iles

in d

istr

ibut

ing

resp

onsi

bilit

ies

and

task

s.

Take

s in

to a

ccou

nt

the

prof

ile o

f ea

ch

pers

on b

efor

e as

sign

ing

them

re

spon

sibi

litie

s or

ta

sks.

Fore

sees

how

peo

ple

can

grow

or

lear

n in

th

eir

resp

onsi

bilit

ies

or t

asks

.

Des

igns

he

tero

gene

ous

team

s w

ith c

ompl

emen

tary

po

tent

ial.

Suit

ing

act

ion

s an

d

per

son

s to

inci

den

ts

and

ch

ang

es a

risi

ng

d

uri

ng

exe

cuti

on

of

pro

ject

Doe

sn’t

tak

e in

to

cons

ider

atio

n in

cide

nts

and

chan

ges

that

aris

e du

ring

proj

ect.

Con

side

rs in

cide

nts

and

chan

ges

that

ar

ise,

but

doe

sn’t

ad

apt

the

proj

ect

acco

rdin

gly.

Ada

pts

actio

ns a

nd

pers

ons

to c

hang

es

that

aris

e du

ring

proj

ect.

Ada

pts

actio

ns,

pers

ons,

str

ateg

ies

and

prio

ritie

s ac

cord

ing

to

inci

dent

s th

at a

rise.

Reco

rds

adju

stm

ents

m

ade

in r

espo

nse

to

inci

dent

s.



293

Leve

ls o

f M

aste

ryIn

dic

ato

rsD

escr

ipto

rs

12

34

5

Third

leve

l of

mas

tery

:Pl

anni

ng a

nd

exec

utin

g pr

ojec

ts in

ba

rely

str

uctu

red

cont

exts

, exe

rcis

ing

proj

ect

lead

ersh

ip

(sup

posi

ng e

xecu

tion

of t

he p

roje

ct, e

.g.

utili

satio

n of

pro

ject

m

etho

dolo

gy in

the

te

achi

ng a

nd

lear

ning

pro

cess

)

Mak

ing

su

re t

hat

te

am h

as r

eso

urc

es

at it

s d

isp

osa

l

Doe

sn’t

thi

nk a

bout

pr

ovid

ing

reso

urce

s to

tea

m.

Cal

ls f

or p

rovi

sion

of

reso

urce

s, w

ithou

t se

eing

to

it in

pr

actic

e.

Sees

tha

t re

sour

ces

are

avai

labl

e fo

r th

e te

am.

Che

cks

to m

ake

sure

re

sour

ces

are

adeq

uate

to

task

s.

Mon

itors

how

re

sour

ces

are

bein

g ut

ilise

d.

Mo

nit

ori

ng

im

ple

men

tati

on

of

pro

ject

to

eva

luat

e it

s re

sult

s

Doe

sn’t

mon

itor

impl

emen

tatio

n of

th

e pr

ojec

t.

Mon

itors

im

plem

enta

tion

of

proj

ect,

but

in a

way

th

at d

oesn

’t s

erve

to

eval

uate

res

ults

.

Mon

itors

im

plem

enta

tion

of

the

proj

ect,

ev

alua

ting

resu

lts a

t sa

me

time.

Intr

oduc

es p

ertin

ent

chan

ges

into

pro

ject

as

a r

esul

t of

m

onito

ring

and

eval

uatin

g it.

Cha

nges

intr

oduc

ed

in p

roje

ct a

s a

resu

lt of

mon

itorin

g an

d ev

alua

tion

grea

tly

impr

ove

it.

Mo

nit

ori

ng

m

ater

ialis

atio

n o

f ri

sks

inh

eren

t in

p

roje

ct

Doe

sn’t

kno

w t

he

effe

cts

of r

isk

on

proj

ect.

Kno

ws

the

exis

tenc

e of

cer

tain

ris

ks f

or

the

proj

ect,

but

do

esn’

t re

cord

the

m

whe

n th

ey a

ppea

r.

Mon

itors

m

ater

ialis

atio

n of

ris

ks in

here

nt in

pr

ojec

t.

Mon

itors

m

ater

ialis

atio

n of

ris

ks a

nd in

trod

uces

im

prov

emen

ts in

pr

ojec

t to

hea

d th

em

off.

Mon

itors

m

ater

ialis

atio

n of

ris

ks, s

eein

g th

em a

s op

port

uniti

es t

o im

prov

e pr

ojec

t.



294

COMPETENCE: QUALITY ORIENTATION

Description

Quality orientation is a competence that seeks excellence in all aca-demic, personal and professional activity, orienting it towards results and continuous improvement. It is a competence that focuses on doing things well, seeking constant improvement in every activity, trying to perform it the best way possible.

Quality is a philosophy that has spread to all aspects of personal, in-stitutional and social life. It is a requirement that we all make and wish to see in the performance of professionals, products or services that we acquire. People want the things that they buy or acquire to have quality, to work well and do what they are supposed to do. As for professionals, we want them to perform according to professional norms and stand-ards.

Teaching quality orientation as a competence means developing in students a mode of behaviour that becomes habitual, an ordinary style of working and acting based on the meeting of rules and requirements that denote quality performance. It is a systematic behaviour, acquired in a way such that it becomes a performance style that defines and charac-terises the person.

Competency in quality orientation begins with concern for doing things well, with a positive attitude of trying to do everything as well as possible. This builds up habits of attention to detail, planning activity, checking to see what we are doing and how we are doing it. It means giving importance to the process, to the way in which things happen, to the methods and steps taken, to how they are co-ordinated and control-led.

Quality-oriented people are concerned not only with process, but also with results. We can not speak of quality if our results are not up to standard, if they are not as expected, or, in short, if there is no efficiency or effectiveness in what we have done.

Along the continuum of development of this competence, three lev-els of complexity have been defined:

— Improving daily work— Systematically improving own action— Taking the initiative in group continuous improvement processes

The criteria for assessing progress in this competence are set out in the different indicators for each established level. For this competence



295

there are eleven indicators, ranging from simple individual behaviour to the complex group behaviour that good development of this compe-tence should foster and promote.


Acquiring and developing this competence means making use of different attitudes, values and behaviours associated with a range of knowledge and techniques. Therefore, it is a complex competence that requires a view of activity as a whole within the personal and situational context and environment where the action takes place.

The competence of quality orientation is related to other instrumen-tal and interpersonal competences which are essential for it to work well. Quality orientation is, in principle, a personal way of acting that requires thinking in a certain way. It also requires personal availability, without which the competence would be empty of content, and it re-quires having the knowledge and techniques necessary to ensure that one’s performance is appropriate and efficient.

When people fully identify with quality orientation, this competence is associated with self-fulfilment, because it necessarily means doing things as well as possible, feeling satisfaction with the job well done and getting desired results.


As noted earlier, quality has extended so far into all fields of work and the professions that it is difficult to escape. It has become a general requirement in all areas, particularly in the professional world, where there are agencies that control the quality of professionals and entities that carry out different business, commercial, scientific or any other type of task in the working world.

In academic life, quality is not only desirable, it is absolutely essential. It is the ordinary way of conducting science, which requires great care, attention, observation and control of what is happening. This detailed, analytic way of acting, forming syntheses, controlling and weighing the variables that come into play in all academic work, is what students must identify with. They must apply this mode of action in all their academic work and activities. The search for accuracy begins with the use of prop-



296

er terminology, which is distinct and specific in each academic or scien-tific field, each of which in turn has its own concepts and terms, princi-ples and theories, and its own specific technical and scientific rules and procedures.

Quality orientation begins in students with the acquisition of this terminological language and continues with a way of acting in accord-ance with certain norms and requirements in the use of scientific, biblio-graphic and technical sources. It means acquiring a set of attitudes and values that are shared by the professionals in each field and constitute their code of professional ethics. But to build up this professional behav-iour, it is necessary to begin learning how to perform in daily work, in the simplest activities, to acquire quality habits.

Academic life is constantly involved in assessing students’ work, and therefore the quality with which it has been done – i.e. quality in the work itself, and in the planning, organisation and management of study. Quality in students’ ways of relating to and working with others, quality in their own academic performance, in which they show how well they have have acquired habits, rules and procedures by respecting them and showing competence in their use.

Learning quality in academic life transcends this setting and is the best preparation possible for a career in business or the professions, where it has become a requisite. The work world will require not only quality per-sonal behaviour, but also the capacity for quality and continuous improve-ment when working with or leading teams or groups. Quality involves all members of an organisation, affecting its processes and results.


Quality orientation is a competence that can easily be presented and developed in the academic world and will serve as a first step toward acquiring the necessary habits and techniques that will later be applied in any other work and/or profession.

Developing a good quality orientation in academic life fosters and enhances the development of other competences such as planning work, self-motivation and self-fulfilment, as well as problem-solving and decision-making skills.

In short, quality orientation is a competence that can be applied to all academic activities without exception. Its general and specific assess-ment is relatively easy and serves as a good activity for transferring this competence to other aspects of personal, social and institutional life.



297

COMPETENCE: QUALITY ORIENTATION

Definition: Seeking excellence in academic, personal and pro-fessional activity, focusing on results and continuous improve-ment

Mastery of this competence is closely related to: Analytical think-ing, critical thinking, planning, self-motivation, problem-solving, decision-making, self-fulfilment, etc.

Levels of mastery:

1. Meeting requirements in daily academic work2. Systematically improving personal work3. Systematically revising own performance

Indicators:

1. Being neat and orderly 2. Structuring, organising work 3. Norms for academic work 4. Working and studying in depth 5. Attention to detail 6. Personal involvement 7. Method, constancy, perseverance 8. Integration of fields 9. Results orientation10. Efficiency (good use of resources)11. Service to others



298

Leve

ls o

f M

aste

ryIn

dic

ato

rsD

escr

ipto

rs

12

34

5

Firs

t le

vel o

f m

aste

ry:

Mee

tin

g

req

uir

emen

ts in

d

aily

aca

dem

ic

wo

rk

Pres

enti

ng

wo

rk

that

is n

eat

and

o

rder

ly

Is s

lopp

y an

d ca

rele

ss.

Is c

arel

ess

in

pres

enta

tion

of w

ork.

Pres

ents

wor

k th

at is

ne

at a

nd o

rder

ly.Pr

esen

ts w

ork

that

is

very

nea

t an

d or

derly

.Pr

esen

ts w

ork

that

is

spec

tacu

larly

nea

t an

d or

derly

.

Stru

ctu

rin

g,

org

anis

ing

wo

rk

app

rop

riat

ely

Lack

s st

ruct

ure

in t

he

pres

enta

tion

of w

ork.

Pres

ents

inad

equa

te

stru

ctur

es.

Pres

ents

str

uctu

red,

or

gani

sed

wor

k.St

ruct

ures

wor

k ve

ry

wel

l.O

utst

andi

ng f

or t

he

orig

inal

ity a

nd

appr

opria

tene

ss o

f st

ruct

ure

in w

ork.

Follo

win

g t

he

rule

s g

iven

fo

r ac

adem

ic

wo

rk

Doe

sn’t

tak

e in

to

acco

unt

the

rule

s gi

ven.

Part

ially

fol

low

s ru

les.

Mee

ts b

asic

aca

dem

ic

rule

s.Pr

oper

ly a

bide

s by

all

rule

s.A

bide

s by

all

rule

s an

d pr

opos

es

impr

ovem

ent

of

som

e of

the

m.

Dev

elo

pin

g a

nd

d

elvi

ng

dee

per

into

w

ork

un

der

take

n

Is s

uper

ficia

l in

trea

tmen

t of

top

ics

in

acad

emic

wor

k.

Wor

k is

irre

gula

r in

di

ffer

ent

part

s.D

evel

ops

topi

c w

ell

and

at s

ome

leve

l of

dept

h.

Goe

s ve

ry d

eepl

y in

to

topi

cs in

aca

dem

ic

wor

k.

Dev

elop

s to

pics

wel

l an

d at

eve

r gr

eate

r de

pth.

Sho

win

g in

tere

st

and

att

enti

on

to

d

etai

l

Is v

ery

shod

dy.

Ove

rlook

s im

port

ant

deta

ils.

Pays

att

entio

n to

de

tail

and

aest

hetic

fo

rm in

aca

dem

ic

wor

k.

Pays

met

icul

ous

atte

ntio

n to

det

ail.

Pays

met

icul

ous

atte

ntio

n to

det

ail

look

ing

for

perf

ectio

n in

wor

k.

Sho

win

g p

erso

nal

in

volv

emen

tIs

sup

erfic

ial.

His

/her

wor

k is

not

pe

rson

al.

Wor

k sh

ows

pers

onal

in

volv

emen

t an

d re

flect

ion.

Wor

k sh

ows

pers

onal

in

volv

emen

t an

d de

ep r

efle

ctio

n.

His

/her

wor

k al

way

s ha

s a

pers

onal

sta

mp

of q

ualit

y.



299

Leve

ls o

f M

aste

ryIn

dic

ato

rsD

escr

ipto

rs

12

34

5

Seco

nd

leve

l of

mas

tery

:Sy

stem

atic

ally

im

pro

vin

g

per

son

al w

ork

Bei

ng

met

ho

dic

al in

ap

pro

ach

to

wo

rk

Not

sys

tem

atic

in

appr

oach

to

thin

gs.

Poor

ly o

rgan

ised

in

appr

oach

to

thin

gs.

Met

hodi

cally

ap

proa

ches

thi

ngs

with

a v

iew

to

impr

ovem

ent.

Mai

ntai

ns o

rder

and

lo

gic

in e

very

thin

g he

/she

doe

s.

Out

stan

ding

for

the

pe

rsev

eran

ce a

nd

syst

emat

icity

of

plan

s an

d ac

tions

.

Bal

anci

ng

per

son

al

and

aca

dem

ic li

fe

wit

h q

ual

ity

Can

’t in

tegr

ate

qual

ity in

bot

h pe

rson

al a

nd

acad

emic

life

.

Car

eles

s ab

out

bala

ncin

g qu

ality

in

pers

onal

and

ac

adem

ic li

fe.

Bala

nces

qua

lity

in

pers

onal

and

ac

adem

ic li

fe.

Inte

grat

es w

ith

effe

ctiv

enes

s in

terp

erso

nal a

nd

acad

emic

-pr

ofes

sion

al q

ualit

y.

Out

stan

ding

for

in

tegr

atio

n of

qua

lity

into

inte

rper

sona

l an

d ac

adem

ic-

prof

essi

onal

life

.

Bei

ng

res

ult

s-o

rien

ted

Act

s w

ithou

t th

inki

ng

abou

t re

sults

.U

neve

n re

sults

or

ient

atio

n in

ow

n ac

tivity

.

Focu

ses

on a

chie

ving

go

od r

esul

ts in

ow

n ac

tivity

.

Aim

s fo

r an

d ob

tain

s de

sire

d re

sults

.O

utst

andi

ng r

esul

ts

orie

ntat

ion

and

achi

evem

ents

.

Mak

ing

go

od

, ef

fici

ent

use

of

reso

urc

es

Was

tes

or f

ails

to

mak

e go

od u

se o

f re

sour

ces.

Doe

sn’t

sui

t re

sour

ces

to t

he a

ctiv

ities

tha

t he

/she

wis

hes

to

unde

rtak

e.

Obt

ains

goo

d qu

ality

w

ith a

ppro

pria

te

reso

urce

s.

Opt

imis

es t

he u

se o

f re

sour

ces.

Ach

ieve

s be

st r

esul

ts

thro

ugh

exce

llent

use

of

res

ourc

es.

Payi

ng

att

enti

on

to

o

ther

sLa

cks

inte

rest

in o

ther

pe

ople

and

thi

ngs.

Doe

s th

ings

with

out

thin

king

of

othe

rs.

Take

s ot

hers

into

ac

coun

t in

ow

n ac

tiviti

es.

His

/her

act

iviti

es h

elp

and

supp

ort

othe

rs.

Orie

nts

own

activ

ities

to

war

d a

pers

pect

ive

of s

ocia

l util

ity.



300

Leve

ls o

f M

aste

ryIn

dic

ato

rsD

escr

ipto

rs

12

34

5

Thir

d le

vel o

f m

aste

ry:

Syst

emat

ical

ly

revi

sin

g o

wn

wo

rk

and

act

ion

s

Syst

emat

ical

ly

revi

sin

g o

wn

m

eth

od

olo

gy

Doe

sn’t

rev

ise

own

wor

k an

d ac

tiviti

es.

Lack

s sy

stem

atic

ity in

re

visi

ng w

ork.

Dra

ws

good

co

nclu

sion

s sy

stem

atic

ally

on

wha

t he

/she

has

do

ne w

ell o

r po

orly.

By s

yste

mat

ical

ly

revi

sing

ow

n w

ork

and

actio

ns, f

ortif

ies

stro

ng p

oint

s.

By s

yste

mat

ical

ly

revi

sing

ow

n w

ork

and

actio

ns, r

educ

es

flaw

s an

d in

trod

uces

im

prov

emen

ts.

Bal

anci

ng

in

terp

erso

nal

re

lati

on

s an

d

acad

emic

-p

rofe

ssio

nal

act

ion

; w

ell-

rou

nd

ed

Igno

res

or d

oesn

’t

see

pote

ntia

l im

bala

nce

betw

een

acad

emic

and

pe

rson

al li

fe.

Is in

cons

tant

in w

ay

of r

efle

ctin

g on

ow

n ac

tions

.

Syst

emat

ical

ly r

evis

es

bala

nce

betw

een

inte

rper

sona

l and

ac

adem

ic li

fe.

Revi

sing

and

co

mpe

nsat

ing

for

imba

lanc

es d

etec

ted

in o

wn

actio

ns.

Out

stan

ding

for

re

visi

on a

nd

com

pens

atio

n of

im

bala

nces

det

ecte

d.

Bei

ng

res

ult

s-o

rien

ted

Doe

sn’t

sys

tem

atic

ally

re

vise

ow

n re

sults

.M

akes

def

icie

nt

revi

sion

of

resu

lts.

Syst

emat

ical

ly r

evis

es

own

resu

lts.

Che

cks

own

prog

ress

to

war

d ob

ject

ives

an

d ta

kes

deci

sion

s ad

just

ing

plan

of

actio

n.

Focu

ses

revi

sion

on

aim

ing

for

and

achi

evin

g re

sults

, and

do

es a

chie

ve t

hem

.

Mak

ing

go

od

, ef

fici

ent

use

of

reso

urc

es

Doe

sn’t

rev

ise

use

of

reso

urce

s.Re

visi

on o

f th

e us

e of

re

sour

ces

is d

efic

ient

.Sy

stem

atic

ally

che

cks

for

effic

ient

use

of

reso

urce

s.

Syst

emat

ical

ly r

evis

es

use

of r

esou

rces

and

im

prov

es o

wn

effic

ienc

y.

Out

stan

ding

for

the

re

visi

on a

nd e

ffic

ienc

y ac

hiev

ed in

use

of

reso

urce

s.

Hav

ing

ser

vice

-to

-o

ther

s o

rien

tati

on

Doe

sn’t

che

ck t

o se

e ho

w o

wn

actio

ns

affe

ct o

ther

s.

Doe

sn’t

sho

w s

ound

re

flect

ion

on t

he

soci

al r

eper

cuss

ions

of

ow

n ac

tions

.

Refle

cts

on t

he

cons

eque

nces

of

own

actio

ns a

s a

serv

ice

to

othe

rs.

Car

eful

ly c

heck

s th

e co

nseq

uenc

es o

f ow

n ac

tions

on

othe

rs a

nd

mod

ifies

beh

avio

ur

acco

rdin

gly.

Orie

nts

own

activ

ities

pr

iorit

isin

g se

rvic

e to

ot

hers

.



301

COMPETENCE: ACHIEVEMENT ORIENTATION

Description

Achievement orientation is one of the systemic competences, since a view of an entire process is necessary in order to accomplish desired ends. Indeed, to a certain extent, this competence entails a sense of life in which one strives for achievement in everything – in all the personal, social and professional facets of human endeavour.

Achievement orientation helps to give meaning to what we do when we form a vision of the future, which is what moves and motivates us, marking the road to follow until the desired goal is reached. This is the competence that fosters personal progress and, in general, the progress of groups, organisations and society.

In the development phase of achievement orientation, one must be accustomed to planning, to setting objectives and goals to be reached. Also essential are perseverance in working towards those goals, and certain living habits that help us to achieve what we are aiming for.

Another important aspect of achievement orientation consists in having a certain pragmatic view of things, enabling us not to stray from the path toward achievement. This pragmatic view includes weighing what is important and what is accessory, what is feasible and infeasible, what is realistic and what is idealistic. In short, a practical view that encourages us to take the path toward achieving what we propose. This does not mean renouncing things or searching for the easiest way, but choosing, among one’s highest aspirations, a path that will lead to achievement. Achievement orientation helps us to always have an end in sight, a given purpose for anything we do in any facet of life. Achievement orientation, at least at its highest level, is linked to the desire to improve, where people exert all efforts striving to stand out over others.

Along the continuum of developing this competence, three levels of complexity have been established:

— Orienting daily activities toward the achievement of results— Achieving results in difficult situations— Achieving results whose repercussions go beyond the usual scope

of action




302


Generally speaking, achievement orientation is closely associated with two systemic competences: systemic thinking and forward vision. It shares with systemic thought the need for thinking in a holistic way, tak-ing a comprehensive view of things so that all the elements and features of a process can be taken into account.

With the factor of leadership and future vision, achievement orienta-tion shares a tendential feature. That is, it requires a guideline toward achievement, a utilitarian approach aimed at attaining results, at accom-plishing some pre-established goal.

Achievement orientation is a personal competence that can be shared or developed in groups. It is a competence that can be enhanced in working groups where students share the responsibility and need to develop it. Achievement orientation also has a more social dimension, which is to look for the social utility of activities and actions on the job or in a profession. This is important because it might seem that people who are very achievement-oriented work exclusively for their own per-sonal benefit or interest. However, achievement-oriented people can also have a clear and determining social vision and undertake action to achieve results that will benefit or be useful to society.


Achievement orientation is an essential competence in academic life. All students have the goal of getting their degree, completing their stud-ies successfully. In addition to this general aim, each student must set goals as to the type of academic results they wish to achieve, to be at-tained with more or less effort, and this is a clear manifestation of achievement orientation.

Apart from final academic results, students have many other goals in different facets of their lives, and in all of them they must focus their ef-forts on certain achievements. In all aspects of life one must look ahead to the future, and this means having goals that will help us to reach the future we desire.

At work or in professional life, we are constantly faced with activities where we need to achieve results. This is a constant in working life. Each project, plan or activity is always linked to certain objectives. Highly achievement-oriented persons in the working world show their proac-



303

tive behaviour for achieving results, manifest enthusiasm and are able to stimulate others with their eagerness to achieve.


Achievement orientation is a competence that can be developed and assessed through different academic activities. Students can show their achievement orientation from the moment they start planning their work and studies. It is possible to monitor this process to see how they formulate and delimit expected achievements. This competence can be assessed through individual tutorials and evaluation of a project and re-sults. Training in achievement orientation can be exercised in daily life through ordinary personal and family activities, and in the academic set-ting, through assigned coursework and extracurricular work and activi-ties that students choose voluntarily.

Achievement orientation means enhancing students’ perseverance in their activities through expressly stated goals, objectives and purposes. It means having a strong personal desire to achieve results with maxi-mum performance and punctuality, striving to achieve them by overcom-ing difficulties encountered and endeavouring to reach the most chal-lenging heights.



304

COMPETENCE: ACHIEVEMENT ORIENTATION

Definition: Undertaking actions conducive to achieving new re-sults successfully

Mastery of this competence is closely related to: Systemic thought, forward vision, profitability, progress, planning, sense of life, so-cial utility, etc.

Levels of mastery:

1. Focusing daily activities on the achievement of results2. Achieving results in complex situations3. Achieving results whose repercussions transcend habitual scope

of action

Indicators:

1. Pragmatism, profitability2. Perseverance3. Desire to do things well4. Ambition, competitiveness5. Motivation, satisfaction



305

Leve

ls o

f M

aste

ryIn

dic

ato

rsD

escr

ipto

rs

12

34

5

Firs

t le

vel o

f m

aste

ry:

Focu

sin

g d

aily

ac

tivi

ties

on

th

e ac

hie

vem

ent

of

resu

lts

Bei

ng

pra

ctic

al

abo

ut

init

iati

ves

un

der

take

n

Doe

sn’t

giv

e im

port

ance

to

prof

itabi

lity.

Giv

es li

ttle

im

port

ance

to

the

prac

tical

ity o

f w

hat

he/s

he d

oes.

Beha

viou

r gu

ided

by

a pr

actic

al a

ppro

ach.

Seek

s so

me

kind

of

prof

itabi

lity

in

ever

ythi

ng

unde

rtak

en.

His

/her

pra

gmat

ism

is

cal

cula

ted

and

alw

ays

keep

s an

eye

on

ret

urn

on

inve

stm

ent.

Bei

ng

per

seve

ran

t in

ow

n d

aily

ac

tivi

ties

Show

s in

cons

tanc

y in

ow

n da

ily w

ork.

Has

diff

icul

ty in

fo

cusi

ng o

n th

e w

ork

and

activ

ities

to

be

unde

rtak

en.

Show

s pe

rsev

eran

ce

in w

hate

ver

he/s

he

does

or

unde

rtak

es.

Out

stan

ding

for

co

nsta

ncy

of e

ffor

t in

ev

eryt

hing

he/

she

does

or

unde

rtak

es.

Is n

ot d

ism

ayed

by

obst

acle

s an

d co

nsid

ers

them

a

new

cha

lleng

e.

Stri

vin

g t

o d

eliv

er

wit

h c

are

and

q

ual

ity

Pres

ents

or

does

th

ings

hap

haza

rdly.

Doe

sn’t

pay

att

entio

n to

det

ail o

r to

the

qu

ality

of

resu

lts.

Wor

ks h

ard

to f

inis

h th

ings

nea

tly a

nd

wel

l.

Take

s ca

re t

o de

fine

and

finis

h w

ork

wel

l.O

utst

andi

ng f

or

perf

orm

ance

and

qu

ality

of

wor

k.

Stri

vin

g t

o s

tan

d

ou

t w

ith

hig

h

exp

ecta

tio

ns

of

ach

ieve

men

t

Doe

sn’t

hav

e m

ajor

as

pira

tions

.Sp

irit

of a

mbi

tion

disa

ppea

rs w

hene

ver

he/s

he h

as t

o co

mpe

te w

ith o

ther

s.

Show

s am

bitio

n an

d co

mpe

titiv

e sp

irit

in

proj

ects

.

Enjo

ys c

ompe

ting

with

oth

ers

and

man

ifest

s am

bitio

n to

ac

hiev

e.

Stan

ds o

ut o

ver

othe

rs in

com

petit

ive

spiri

t an

d de

sire

to

achi

eve.

Bei

ng

mo

tiva

ted

by

sett

ing

an

d

ach

ievi

ng

ob

ject

ives

Doe

sn’t

sho

w in

tere

st

in w

hat

he/s

he d

oes.

Show

s lit

tle in

tere

st

in a

chie

ving

res

ults

.Is

mot

ivat

ed b

y ac

hiev

emen

t of

ob

ject

ives

pro

pose

d.

Is s

elf-

mot

ivat

ed a

nd

show

s sa

tisfa

ctio

n at

ac

hiev

ing

wha

t he

/sh

e pr

opos

es.

Mot

ivat

ed b

y ac

hiev

emen

t of

re

sults

and

con

tage

s ot

hers

with

ow

n en

thus

iasm

.



306

Leve

ls o

f M

aste

ryIn

dic

ato

rsD

escr

ipto

rs

12

34

5

Seco

nd

leve

l of

mas

tery

:A

chie

vin

g r

esu

lts

in

com

ple

x si

tuat

ion

s

Bei

ng

pra

gm

atic

in

com

ple

x si

tuat

ion

sG

ets

ratt

led

in

com

plex

situ

atio

ns;

goes

off

on

tang

ents

.

Has

diff

icul

ty in

fin

ding

the

pra

ctic

al

side

of

diff

icul

t si

tuat

ions

.

Show

s pr

agm

atis

m in

si

tuat

ions

of

cert

ain

com

plex

ity.

Show

s pr

actic

al s

ense

m

akin

g it

poss

ible

to

reso

lve

com

plex

si

tuat

ions

.

Out

stan

ding

for

pr

actic

al s

olut

ions

to

diff

icul

t pr

oble

ms.

Mai

nta

inin

g

con

stan

cy in

co

mp

lex

or

dif

ficu

lt

situ

atio

ns

Is in

dole

nt w

hen

face

d by

diff

icul

t,

com

plex

pro

ject

s.

Is in

cons

tant

in

prop

osal

s an

d pr

ojec

ts.

Pers

ever

es w

ith s

pirit

in

the

fac

e of

di

ffic

ultie

s or

com

plex

pr

ojec

ts.

Sees

obs

tacl

es a

nd

diff

icul

ties

as

chal

leng

es, a

nd

over

com

es t

hem

with

sp

irit.

Enjo

ys d

eman

ding

pr

ojec

ts a

nd

unde

rtak

es t

hem

am

bitio

usly.

Des

irin

g t

o d

o

thin

gs

wel

l eve

n in

d

iffi

cult

or

com

ple

x si

tuat

ion

s

Is o

verw

helm

ed b

y di

ffic

ultie

s, a

nd

pres

ents

thi

ngs

haph

azar

dly.

Doe

sn’t

try

har

d en

ough

to

do t

hing

s w

ell w

hen

they

pro

ve

diff

icul

t.

Ende

avou

rs t

o do

ow

n w

ork

wel

l, re

gard

less

of

diff

icul

ties

invo

lved

.

Show

s si

gnifi

cant

si

gns

of w

ishi

ng t

o w

ork

with

qua

lity.

Enjo

ys p

rese

ntin

g w

ell-d

one

wor

k;

seek

s pe

rfec

tion.

Mai

nta

inin

g h

igh

ex

pec

tati

on

s an

d

per

form

ance

in

com

ple

x si

tuat

ion

s

Cho

oses

not

to

deal

w

ith d

iffic

ult

issu

es.

Find

s re

ason

s an

d ex

plan

atio

ns f

or n

ot

tryi

ng h

arde

r th

an

nece

ssar

y.

Ende

avou

rs t

o im

prov

e in

eve

ry

unde

rtak

ing.

Stan

ds o

ut in

ev

eryt

hing

he/

she

does

.

Diff

icul

t, c

ompl

ex

chal

leng

es b

ring

out

his/

her

stre

ngth

s.

Sho

win

g m

oti

vati

on

fo

r re

solv

ing

co

mp

lex

situ

atio

ns

Plag

ued

by s

elf-

doub

t in

situ

atio

ns o

f ce

rtai

n di

ffic

ulty

.

Is e

asily

dis

cour

aged

in

diff

icul

t or

com

plex

si

tuat

ions

.

Whe

n fa

ced

by

com

plex

situ

atio

ns o

r pr

ojec

ts, f

inds

re

ason

s to

for

ge

ahea

d.

Find

s en

ergy

in s

elf

to

feel

mot

ivat

ed a

nd

over

com

e co

mpl

ex

situ

atio

ns.

Alw

ays

finds

rea

sons

to

ove

rcom

e di

ffic

ultie

s, a

nd is

ab

le t

o m

otiv

ate

othe

rs t

o re

solv

e th

em t

oo.



307

Leve

ls o

f M

aste

ryIn

dic

ato

rsD

escr

ipto

rs

12

34

5

Thir

d le

vel o

f m

aste

ry:

Ach

ievi

ng

res

ult

s w

ho

se

rep

ercu

ssio

ns

go

b

eyo

nd

th

e u

sual

sc

op

e o

f ac

tio

n

Sho

win

g

pra

gm

atis

m a

nd

ac

hie

vin

g

pro

fita

bili

ty in

p

rob

lem

atic

si

tuat

ion

s

Ach

ieve

men

ts n

ever

go

bey

ond

the

ordi

nary

.

Has

diff

icul

ty in

m

akin

g ef

fort

s w

orth

whi

le in

un

usua

l situ

atio

ns.

Effo

rts

wor

thw

hile

in

both

ord

inar

y an

d pr

oble

mat

ic

situ

atio

ns.

Opt

imis

es o

wn

effo

rts

so t

hat

they

tr

ansc

end

ordi

nary

co

ntex

ts.

Out

stan

ding

for

the

be

nefit

s ga

ined

fro

m

effo

rts,

rea

chin

g hi

gh

leve

ls o

f ac

hiev

emen

t ou

tsid

e or

dina

ry

cont

exts

.

Sho

win

g

per

seve

ran

ce in

all

resp

on

sib

iliti

es

acce

pte

d

Is la

zy a

bout

re

spon

sibi

litie

s.Sh

ows

cons

tanc

y in

st

rictly

ess

entia

l ha

bitu

al a

ctiv

ities

.

Show

s pe

rsev

eran

ce

beyo

nd o

wn

ordi

nary

ac

tiviti

es.

Is c

onst

ant

and

tena

ciou

s in

all

wor

k an

d ac

tiviti

es, i

n w

hate

ver

field

.

Out

stan

ding

in a

ll ac

tiviti

es in

any

fie

ld,

show

ing

inde

fatig

able

pe

rsis

tenc

e.

Des

irin

g t

o d

o

thin

gs

wel

l, sh

ow

ing

qu

alit

y in

ev

eryt

hin

g

un

der

take

n

Doe

s w

hat

is s

tric

tly

nece

ssar

y w

ithou

t sh

owin

g in

tere

st in

go

ing

furt

her.

Doe

s w

hat

is

oblig

ator

y; d

oesn

’t

show

suf

ficie

nt e

ffor

t in

ext

raor

dina

ry t

asks

.

Show

s qu

ality

wor

k ha

bits

, eve

n in

are

as

that

are

not

m

anda

tory

.

Out

stan

ding

for

job

wel

l don

e in

eve

ry

area

att

empt

ed.

Enjo

ys w

orki

ng h

ard

and

wel

l in

all f

orm

al

and

info

rmal

are

as.

Sho

win

g a

mb

itio

n

and

co

mp

etit

iven

ess

in a

ll d

imen

sio

ns

of

life

Doe

sn’t

sho

w d

esire

fo

r im

prov

emen

t in

se

lf or

oth

ers.

Bare

ly a

chie

ves

obje

ctiv

es in

ord

inar

y co

ntex

ts.

Ach

ieve

s am

bitio

us

goal

s be

yond

dai

ly

wor

k.

Out

does

oth

ers

in

striv

ing

to a

chie

ve

obje

ctiv

es, e

ven

beyo

nd w

hat

is

requ

ired.

Enjo

ys a

chie

ving

am

bitio

us g

oals

in a

ll fie

lds,

incl

udin

g th

ose

outs

ide

ordi

nary

sc

ope

of a

ctio

n.

Sho

win

g m

oti

vati

on

in

ach

ievi

ng

res

ult

s o

f so

cial

imp

ort

ance

Show

s in

diff

eren

ce

tow

ard

the

soci

al

repe

rcus

sion

s of

ow

n ac

tiviti

es.

Has

diff

icul

ty in

fe

elin

g m

otiv

ated

to

go b

eyon

d or

dina

ry

daily

act

ivity

if t

ask

has

soci

al

repe

rcus

sion

s.

Show

s go

od

incl

inat

ion

and

invo

lvem

ent

in

soci

ally

impo

rtan

t ac

tiviti

es a

nd

proj

ects

.

Show

s co

ncer

n fo

r th

e m

eani

ng o

f w

hat

he/s

he d

oes

and

its

soci

al r

eper

cuss

ions

.

Prom

otes

with

in

itiat

ive

and

mot

ivat

ion

proj

ects

ai

med

at

soci

al

impo

rtan

ce.



308

COMPETENCE: LEADERSHIP

Description

Leadership is a systemic competence that requires skill in other areas in order to be exercised effectively. We understand leadership as the ca-pacity to influence individuals and/or groups, anticipating the future and contributing to their personal and professional development. It is a com-plex competence that should be developed in the final years of a degree course. Leadership is the capacity to influence people, bringing out the best in them in order to achieve desired results.

In the above definition, three fundamental traits of leadership are mentioned: capacity to influence, anticipating the future and contribut-ing to the development of others. These traits can be found in many current definitions of leadership drawn from educational and business sources.

The first trait helps to distinguish what is and is not leadership. A leader has the capacity to influence others, to make them feel that his/her opinion, point of view, or consideration matters. If this were not the case, we wouldn’t be speaking of leadership, but instead of authority or management. If people do things because someone above them in a hierarchy orders them to do it, that is not leadership. Leaders have fol-lowers, persons who agree with their ideas and proposals, share them and make them their own.

The second trait is anticipation of the future. This means that leaders need a very important leadership quality, which is capacity of vision. Vi-sion enables people to stay ahead of events; it enables them to see what is going to happen over a more or less lengthy period of time. This pow-er of vision is what makes it possible to orient or guide people and groups toward forward-looking goals and objectives. What mobilises people is the future, and this is why we say that so and so, or such and such an organisation has/doesn’t have a future.

The third characteristic is the leader’s contribution to personal and professional development, to the well-being of others. Leaders must be proactive and willing to serve others. They present ideas and projects not for their own benefit but fundamentally for the common good, for oth-ers to benefit by. Therefore, leadership is the capacity to get the best out of people and try to create the right conditions so that this can hap-pen.

Today much emphasis is placed on leadership with a view to service (service to clients, service to company or organisation, and service to



309

employees). This type of leadership means working with a spirit and set of values that stress the importance of contributing something valua-ble. Leaders understand that their own merit lies in their capacity to generate something meaningful in others, rather than providing some-thing significant to themselves, beyond the satisfaction of their own ego.

When we think of leadership, we generally remember outstanding leaders like Gandhi, Churchill, Kennedy, Martin Luther King, etc., and therefore tend to think of leadership as a quality found in very few peo-ple. However, around all of us, in any group of students, in any organisa-tion, there are leaders. Some are waiting in the wings and appear only when the right opportunity or circumstances arise.

Leadership is a competence and as such it can be acquired, devel-oped and polished. This does not mean that there are not certain basic personal qualities that are innate and facilitate the process. However, all people can learn and practice leadership skills in the assurance that they can improve this quality, even though they may never actually become leaders. All students should develop their competency in leadership, as it is so important and relevant to so many jobs.

Along the continuum of development of this competence, three lev-els of complexity have been established:

— Taking initiatives and knowing how to convey them to others— Conveying confidence and moving others to action— Exercising influence in own surroundings so that desired objec-

tives are achieved



Exercising leadership brings into play many mechanisms that are closely associated with other competences. For example, leaders draw on different types of thinking, such as the systemic thought necessary to show a vision of the future; instrumental and interpersonal competences such as interpersonal communication, decision-making, teamwork.

Leadership requires the development of certain attitudes and values such as confidence in others, support and solidarity, an ethical sense that guides all behaviour, a contagious enterprising spirit, an achievement orientation that stimulates all the members of the team.



310

True leaders convey their sense of confidence in others, in their own strengths, in their belief that even challenging goals and objectives can be achieved. This is necessary to inject drive into a group, to marshal the sufficient and necessary energy to forge ahead toward results. People aren’t willing to put their effort into something in which they don’t be-lieve or which they think cannot be attained.

Leaders share ideas and values and show their personal influence so that everyone contributes wholeheartedly to achieve desired results.


In the academic field, situations are frequently proposed where lead-ership is required to gain the support and contributions of all members of a team or group for a proposal or initiatives.

Both in academic and professional life, leadership is a very necessary, highly valued competence. Indeed, in surveys of companies and institu-tions, leadership is always ranked among the top ten competences.

To be sure, acquiring and developing the competence of leadership calls for a comprehensive, holistic vision of things, where technical chal-lenges are combined with good interpersonal skills, two aspects that are ordinarily found in the working world.

By exercising leadership, many students change their attitudes and understand how difficult it is to bring together different interests and points of view. They begin to appreciate the need to exchange ideas and arrive at a consensus in order to turn these ideas into shared undertak-ings. And this means evolving as people and gaining personal and group maturity.

On many occasions, the essential difference in certain positions of responsibility lies in knowing how to exercise leadership suited to the situation and to the objectives set.


Leadership is a competence that can be very aptly developed through assigned group or teamwork, or simply in all ordinary group activities undertaken inside and outside the classroom.

Due to its complexity and the other competences required for its full development, leadership should be taught during the final undergradu-ate years and during master’s courses.



311

Leadership training in the academic world is not only possible, but necessary and essential, since in the professional world leadership skills are what make the difference between two good professionals.

Leadership training helps students to assume personal and group responsibilities which would otherwise be difficult to promote and evalu-ate.



312

COMPETENCE: LEADERSHIP

Definition: Influencing people and/or groups, anticipating the future and contributing to their personal and professional devel-opment

Mastery of this competence is closely related to: Systemic thought, planning, self-motivation, interpersonal communication, decision-making, teamwork, objectives-based management, innovation, enterprising spirit, achievement orientation, self-fulfilment, confi-dence, support, human dignity, etc.

Levels of mastery:

1. Taking initiatives and communicating them with conviction and integrity, stimulating others

2. Conveying confidence and moving others to action3. Exercising influence in own surroundings to achieve desired ob-

jectives

Indicators:

1. Effective communication.2. Personal consistency 3. Delegation. Empowerment 4. Promoting creativity5. Recognition6. Self-confidence



313

Leve

ls o

f M

aste

ryIn

dic

ato

rsD

escr

ipto

rs

12

34

5

Firs

t le

vel o

f m

aste

ry:

Taki

ng

init

iati

ves

and

co

mm

un

icat

ing

th

em w

ith

co

nvi

ctio

n a

nd

in

teg

rity

, st

imu

lati

ng

oth

ers

Co

mm

un

icat

ing

in

itia

tive

s cl

earl

yA

void

ing

or

forg

ettin

g to

co

mm

unic

ate

own

prop

osal

s.

Has

diff

icul

ty in

m

akin

g pr

opos

als

unde

rsto

od.

Com

mun

icat

es

initi

ativ

es w

ith c

larit

y.

Is c

onvi

ncin

g w

hen

conv

eyin

g in

itiat

ives

.En

thus

iase

s ot

hers

w

ith o

wn

initi

ativ

es.

Mai

nta

inin

g

con

sist

ency

b

etw

een

wh

at o

ne

says

an

d d

oes

Evid

ent

inco

nsis

tenc

ies

betw

een

wha

t he

/she

sa

ys a

nd d

oes.

Som

etim

es is

in

cons

iste

nt. (

Show

s so

me

inco

nsis

tenc

ies)

.

Goo

d co

nsis

tenc

y be

twee

n w

hat

he/s

he

says

and

doe

s.

Mai

ntai

ns c

onsi

sten

cy

in c

ritic

al s

ituat

ions

or

whe

n un

der

pres

sure

.

Con

duct

is a

mod

el

of c

onsi

sten

cy a

nd

inte

grity

.

Del

egat

ing

, d

istr

ibu

tin

g w

ork

in

bal

ance

d w

ay

Doe

s ev

eryt

hing

w

ithou

t de

lega

ting

part

of

the

wor

k to

ot

hers

.

Isn’

t go

od a

t di

strib

utin

g ta

sks.

Is g

ood

at d

istr

ibut

ing

wor

k w

ell.

Dis

trib

utes

wor

k ac

cord

ing

to c

apac

ity

of e

ach

team

m

embe

r.

Dis

trib

utes

wor

k co

nvey

ing

conf

iden

ce.

Stim

ula

tin

g o

ther

s to

th

ink,

pro

mo

tin

g

crea

tivi

ty

Isn’

t co

ncer

ned

with

w

hat

othe

rs t

hink

.Is

n’t

muc

h in

tere

sted

in

get

ting

othe

rs t

o co

ntrib

ute

new

idea

s.

Enco

urag

es o

ther

s to

th

ink

for

them

selv

es.

Stim

ulat

es g

ener

atio

n of

idea

s an

d su

gges

tions

thr

ough

di

vers

e pr

oced

ures

.

Than

ks t

o in

fluen

ce

on c

lass

mat

es, t

hey

are

crea

tive

and

impr

ove

the

qual

ity

of w

hat

they

do.

Ap

pro

pri

atel

y ex

pre

ssin

g

reco

gn

itio

n f

or

thin

gs

wel

l do

ne

Fails

to

reco

gnis

e ot

hers

’ ach

ieve

men

ts.

Has

diff

icul

ty in

re

cogn

isin

g th

e m

erits

and

co

ntrib

utio

ns o

f ot

hers

.

App

ropr

iate

ly

expr

esse

s re

cogn

ition

fo

r th

ings

wel

l don

e.

Thro

ugh

reco

gniti

on,

stim

ulat

es s

atis

fact

ion

of g

roup

mem

bers

at

the

wor

k th

ey’v

e do

ne.

With

rec

ogni

tion

fost

ers

the

initi

ativ

e of

oth

ers.



314

Leve

ls o

f M

aste

ryIn

dic

ato

rsD

escr

ipto

rs

12

34

5

Seco

nd

leve

l of

mas

tery

:C

on

veyi

ng

co

nfi

den

ce a

nd

m

ovi

ng

oth

ers

to

acti

on

Cle

arly

co

nve

yin

g

tho

ug

hts

an

d

mo

vin

g o

ther

s to

ac

tio

n

Spea

ks b

ut d

oesn

’t

spar

k in

tere

st.

Aw

aken

s a

cert

ain

inte

rest

, but

with

out

mov

ing

to a

ctio

n.

Con

veys

tho

ught

s w

ith c

larit

y, m

ovin

g ot

hers

to

actio

n.

Gen

erat

es im

port

ant

cont

ribut

ions

bas

ed

on o

wn

initi

al

prop

osal

s.

Trig

gers

goo

d co

mm

unic

atio

n w

hich

spa

rks

the

initi

ativ

e of

oth

ers.

His

/her

co

nsi

sten

cy

gai

ns

sup

po

rt o

f o

ther

s

Inco

nsis

tenc

ies

gene

rate

lack

of

conf

iden

ce.

Lack

of

cons

iste

ncy

mak

es p

eopl

e he

sita

te.

Gai

ns s

uppo

rt o

f ot

hers

thr

ough

co

nsis

tenc

y.

Gen

erat

es c

onfid

ence

an

d m

oves

oth

ers

to

actio

n th

roug

h co

nsis

tenc

y.

Gen

erat

es

invo

lvem

ent

and

com

mitm

ent

in

othe

rs t

hrou

gh

cons

iste

ncy.

Shar

ing

re

spo

nsi

bili

ties

to

m

oti

vate

oth

ers

Dis

trib

utes

tas

ks

mec

hani

cally

(with

out

payi

ng a

tten

tion

to

peop

le’s

capa

citie

s).

Fails

to

invo

lve

peop

le

whe

n di

strib

utin

g ta

sks.

Del

egat

es

resp

onsi

bilit

ies

to

mot

ivat

e ot

hers

.

Del

egat

es

resp

onsi

bilit

ies

to

spar

k in

itiat

ive

in

othe

rs.

Del

egat

es

resp

onsi

bilit

ies

to

enha

nce

the

capa

citie

s of

eac

h gr

oup

mem

ber.

Stim

ula

tin

g o

ther

s to

pro

du

ce id

eas

for

imp

rove

men

t

Doe

sn’t

stim

ulat

e ot

hers

to

cont

ribut

e.Th

e co

ntrib

utio

ns

elic

ited

don’

t le

ad t

o ac

tion

or

impr

ovem

ent.

Stim

ulat

es o

ther

s ac

hiev

ing

good

idea

s th

at im

prov

e ac

tion.

Ach

ieve

s hi

gh le

vel o

f in

itiat

ive

in e

ach

pers

on.

Obt

ains

an

atm

osph

ere

of f

ertil

e id

eas

and

cont

ribut

ions

tha

t si

gnifi

cant

ly e

nric

h w

ork.

Mo

vin

g o

ther

s to

ac

tio

n t

hro

ug

h

reco

gn

itio

n o

f m

erit

Expr

esse

s re

cogn

ition

ar

bitr

arily

or

irreg

ular

ly.

His

/her

for

m o

f re

cogn

ition

doe

sn’t

ha

ve a

mot

ivat

ing

effe

ct.

His

/her

rec

ogni

tion

of

actio

ns m

oves

oth

ers

to a

ctio

n.

Cre

ates

an

atm

osph

ere

of

mut

ual r

ecog

nitio

n th

at g

ener

ates

co

hesi

on a

mon

g th

e m

embe

rs o

f th

e gr

oup.

His

/her

rec

ogni

tion

cont

ribut

es t

o a

feel

ing

of

iden

tific

atio

n an

d be

long

ing

to t

he g

roup

, ac

hiev

ing

com

mitm

ent

to

com

mon

obj

ectiv

es.



315

Leve

ls o

f M

aste

ryIn

dic

ato

rsD

escr

ipto

rs

12

34

5

Thir

d le

vel o

f m

aste

ry:

Exer

cisi

ng

infl

uen

ce

in o

wn

su

rro

un

din

gs

to

ach

ieve

des

ired

o

bje

ctiv

es

Co

mm

un

icat

ing

d

ecis

ion

s w

ith

co

nvi

ctio

n t

o

ach

ieve

gro

up

o

bje

ctiv

es

Avo

ids

com

mun

icat

ing

grou

p ob

ject

ives

.

Fails

to

com

mun

icat

e gr

oup

obje

ctiv

es w

ith

conv

ictio

n.

Com

mun

icat

es

deci

sion

s w

ith

conv

ictio

n to

arr

ive

at

grou

p ob

ject

ives

.

Kee

ps g

roup

in

form

ed o

f al

l ste

ps

take

n an

d th

eir

effe

ct

on g

roup

obj

ectiv

es.

Is a

ble

to e

nthu

se

grou

p in

the

pur

suit

of c

omm

on

obje

ctiv

es.

Dem

and

ing

th

e sa

me

thin

g f

rom

se

lf a

s fr

om

oth

ers

to a

chie

ve

ob

ject

ives

Rem

ains

alo

of f

rom

gr

oup

obje

ctiv

es.

Requ

ires

othe

rs t

o m

eet

obje

ctiv

es,

with

out

gett

ing

pers

onal

ly in

volv

ed.

Dem

ands

the

sam

e th

ing

from

sel

f as

fr

om o

ther

s to

ac

hiev

e ob

ject

ives

.

Prom

otes

in t

he

grou

p a

leve

l of

mut

ual,

shar

ed

exig

ency

.

Cre

ates

gro

up

awar

enes

s an

d ge

nera

tes

self-

disc

iplin

e in

or

ient

atio

n to

war

d co

mm

on o

bjec

tives

.

Del

egat

ing

in o

rder

to

ach

ieve

tar

get

ed

ob

ject

ives

Doe

sn’t

del

egat

e to

ar

rive

at c

omm

on

obje

ctiv

es.

Dis

trib

utes

tas

ks, b

ut

with

out

rela

ting

them

to

com

mon

ob

ject

ives

.

Del

egat

es in

ord

er t

o ac

hiev

e pr

opos

ed

obje

ctiv

es.

Not

onl

y de

lega

tes,

bu

t em

pow

ers

othe

rs

to t

ake

initi

ativ

es t

o ar

rive

at c

omm

on

obje

ctiv

es.

Con

veys

ent

husi

asm

so

tha

t ot

hers

will

m

ake

outs

tand

ing

cont

ribut

ions

tow

ard

grou

p ob

ject

ives

.

Mak

ing

oth

ers

thin

k o

f at

tain

ing

am

bit

iou

s o

bje

ctiv

es

Ove

rlook

s co

ntrib

utio

ns o

f gr

oup

mem

bers

.

Cou

nts

on o

ther

s to

at

tain

obj

ectiv

es, b

ut

does

n’t

stim

ulat

e th

em t

o pr

oduc

e id

eas.

Stim

ulat

es o

ther

s to

th

ink

abou

t ac

hiev

ing

ambi

tious

obj

ectiv

es.

Syst

emat

ical

ly

stim

ulat

es o

ther

s to

co

ntrib

ute

idea

s an

d in

itiat

ives

.

His

/her

col

labo

rato

rs

are

conf

iden

t th

at t

hey

can

and

shou

ld d

evel

op

new

idea

s to

co

ntrib

ute

to

atta

inm

ent

of g

roup

ob

ject

ives

.

Rec

og

nis

ing

th

e co

ntr

ibu

tio

ns

of

oth

ers

in a

ttai

nin

g

ob

ject

ives

Take

s ot

hers

’ co

ntrib

utio

ns f

or

gran

ted,

with

out

poin

ting

out

the

spec

ific

mer

it of

eac

h.

Trie

s bu

t do

esn’

t m

anag

e to

invo

lve

othe

rs in

the

spi

rit o

f at

tain

ing

obje

ctiv

es.

Reco

gnis

es t

he

cont

ribut

ions

of

othe

rs in

the

at

tain

men

t of

ob

ject

ives

.

Gen

erat

es a

n at

mos

pher

e of

ho

nest

, ope

n m

utua

l re

cogn

ition

am

ong

grou

p m

embe

rs.

Indi

vidu

ally

stim

ulat

es

each

col

labo

rato

r to

pu

rsue

and

iden

tify

with

com

mon

ob

ject

ives

.



317

Final considerations

We have concluded a period of reflection and study. The results can be seen in this volume, which is designed to provide professors in higher education with ideas on generic competences.

In order to arrive at the adjustment called for in the Bologna Declara-tion on European convergence, two points of support are offered: the credits system that is to be used in “measuring” learning, and compe-tences. These are closely related instruments and together will enable higher education to respond to the needs of society. With regard to competences, the diagram in figure 4 outlines the process to follow in choosing the ones that should be worked on in each degree course.

Competences map

Competences profile

Employability demandsin society

Academic Profesional Profile

Specificcompetences

Genericcompetences

Legislation University strategiesand objectives

Figure 4Origin of competences



318

Responding to demand and employability, in accordance with minis-terial guidelines and pursuing the strategy of each university or group of universities, academic and professional profiles must be drawn up for each degree course to be offered. From these profiles, the university or universities must deduce the specific and generic competences that are to distinguish all professionals trained there. The resulting competences profile must then be distributed by year and by subject or module over the length of the degree course. This distribution constitutes the compe-tences map of each degree.

In drawing up their competences profiles and maps, universities must decide the generic competences that will distinguish the professionals graduating from their classrooms. At first, no more than ten or twelve competences should be chosen, so as not to overburden the curriculum with “new” contents and to keep them from becoming competences on paper only, with no real place in the academic curriculum.

Figure 5 shows the structure underlying the conception of matrices or tables devised for each of the competences described in this volume as the point of departure for addressing each one of them.

First level ofproficiency

Indicators

Descriptors

Indicators

Definitions

Development of generic competences

Descriptors

Indicators

Descriptors

Second level ofproficiency

Third level ofproficiency

Implications

Figure 5Competence assessment structure

This diagram can also be used to organise the assessment of specific competences, if a detailed development of modules or subjects is de-sired.



319

As part of the comprehensive training of citizens and professionals demanded today by society, generic competences constitute a novelty for lecturers, who now must consider them as part of what their teach-ing load. Incorporating them into the teaching-learning process means planning how to develop the competences in question in students, how to nourish them in tutorials and finally, how to assess them. This is one of the reasons why the authors of this study have devoted two and a half years to the work of organising and writing these pages. Introducing generic competences into the academic curriculum is undoubtedly one of the factors that will contribute to the success of the changes pro-posed by European universities.

Provisionality of the tool

The assessment system presented in this work may seem artificial and even just an appendix to something that should be worked on more naturally as part of the specific competences of each subject. With time, however, the incorporation of generic competences into higher educa-tion will surely have occurred in a way that will make their presence, in-tentional development and assessment seem natural and something that has always been there.

Nevertheless, experience with them is now just beginning. Since the path is largely new, we will need support and aid to help in training both lecturers and students in new approaches to teaching and learning.

Clearly, the innovative teaching required to accomplish the objec-tives of the declaration of Bologna (1999) and the creation of the Euro-pean Higher Education Area is both a need and an opportunity to pro-pose alternative ways of evaluating the progress of students’ learning. The main educational proposal arising from this analysis is that we must start with what is known, transfer it and gear the process toward au-tonomous, permanent, independent learning, toward students taking responsibility as the prime stakeholders in the process. This means a change in the role of lecturers, in their approach to teaching and their view of learning. In short, it means a change in mentality, regarding the implicit theory underlying their teaching practice. It is one of the most promising modern lines for renovating teaching and one that will favour university learning.

So training in competences means a change in mentality. It means working hard and co-operatively to learn, acquiring an education that reaches into our daily lives. It involves progressing from a concept of



320

credits based on the work of teachers to a view of credits based on the effort and work of students, going from a syllabus based on contents to a syllabus based on competences. Designing and developing a compe-tence-based curriculum involves being aware of how teaching must now veer sharply toward learning outcomes, based on student evidence. Working on competences means focusing teaching on students’ learn-ing. Lecturers therefore become facilitators of this process.

Learning is thought of as a way of knowing, understanding, manag-ing and demonstrating each professional action. Universities are there-fore institutions where the creation, transmission and management of knowledge are combined. They are centres where people are taught to think and where they learn how to learn. Moreover, they are endowed with new assessment systems consistent with the new planning and development of the curriculum (Hernández et al., 2005).

As for students, their role is to become more involved and dedicated to their own learning, which must now be less dependent and more autonomous, as they progress from their first to last years in the univer-sity, in a context where it is no longer a question of guessing the right answer, but of knowing how one arrives at that answer.

Many job profiles for positions of responsibility in diverse fields, in-cluding hospitals, schools and companies, are formulated in terms of explicitly generic competences (it being taken for granted that university graduates have the necessary specific competences). Selection interviews devote most of their time to verifying whether candidates possess these generic competences. Universities must guarantee the professional com-petence of graduates and facilitate their employability or usefulness to society. The educational system as a whole must guarantee the integral education of citizens, achieving at least a satisfactory level as far as em-ployability is concerned.

There are lecturers who argue that generic competences have al-ways been valued. This is true. However, it may have been done some-what selectively and subjectively, on the basis of students’ interest, class attendance, neatness of work, willingness to co-operate with the lec-turer, etc.

The system presented in this volume seeks to make the assessment process more comprehensive and objective by specifying criteria for eval-uating levels of development of each competence. By using them, lec-turers can systematically monitor this progress and conduct specific indi-vidual and/or group tutorials.

Clearly and as noted by others, some of the concepts dealt with here, including “competence”, mean different things to different peo-



321

ple, depending on whether one adopts a functional, behavioural or con-structivist approach. In this volume we have tried to incorporate the most positive contributions of each approach, arriving at an accepted definition that facilitates communication in such a new area as that of competences. Allowing for future improvements, we trust that the con-sensus in the present work will make it possible to move forward.

The same thing can be said of the definition offered for each of the generic competences. Much care has been taken to express them in terms of competence, rather than mere capacity, knowledge, ability, skill, attitudes or values. We consider that in addition to evidence of their development, integration of the different elements involved is funda-mental.

So we are setting off on a path that has not been taken before. To do so, we have taken advantage of experiences in different fields, trying to incorporate them with common practical sense. After all, this is how new paths are always forged. On publication of this volume, a period will begin of experimentation and improvement of this instrument. Over the medium term, with the contribution of professional educators who will help with their suggestions, we expect to have a powerful tool. It should be said that the matrices of some of the competences have al-ready been used by University of Deusto lecturers to test their validity and worth. However, we cannot yet speak of wide, systematic experi-ence.

Working with this competence assessment tool also requires a pro-found change in learning processes, through the incorporation of alter-native methodologies designed to ensure student participation and ac-ceptance of responsibility for their learning. It is crucial to see that assessment is meaningful if it helps students to learn and if they feel in-volved in the process. Assessment must be planned transversally when planning teaching modality and methods, as well as the specific work and activities expected of students. It must be integrated in them, so that it will be consistent with expected learning outcomes and the proc-ess followed to these ends (De Miguel, M. 2006).

Flexible assessment

One contribution of particular importance is the progressive partici-pation of students in their own assessment. Referring to a different group, Ashford (1989) noted the need to develop the capacity to ob-serve and consistently evaluate oneself, comparing one’s conclusions



322

with those of others (teachers, classmates). After all, there is a social sense to most, if not all, of our professional actions.

Self-evaluation is a very important way of enhancing personal and professional development. It brings into play key factors for maturity, such as self-criticism, self-knowledge and self-regard, objectivity about oneself, and suitability. Regularly having to make a self-assessment means questioning one’s own motives for attitudes and behaviours.

The assessment tables presented here offer the possibility of making a self-assessment based on the matrices provided directly or through questionnaires derived from them; or (as at the UD), they can be used to computerise different assessment modalities – i.e. self-assessment, peer-assessment and assessment by the lecturer.

Speaking in terms of competences, there are some aspects, beyond the purely conceptual, about which information cannot be gathered or that cannot be observed directly by the lecturer. In the new paradigm, students also learn outside the classroom, working with their classmates, and gain practice outside the walls of the university.

So other sources must be called on, including students themselves, and information from others such as classmates, lecturers, practicum tu-tors etc. (Villa and Poblete, 2006). For the education of students, having the opinion of others is important because it will help to correct the bias of subjectivity and to reach realistic conclusions, which in turn will help students to develop behaviours better suited to situations (Cardona and García-Lombardía, 2005).

Logically speaking, if the main movement in the convergence proc-ess is the paradigm shift from teacher-centred learning to student-cen-tered learning, and assessment is infused into learning, then assessment processes must become more flexible concerning:

— strategies — techniques to be used,— persons involved— time frames

Therefore, student accompaniment is fundamental at the individual and group level, making sure that immediate feedback is given on the evaluation made of their progress. So assessment is no longer a value judgement, a grade, but instead becomes an indicator, a sort of ther-mometer telling us the state of health of students’ learning at all times, and is of prime interest to the students themselves. The value judgement



323

that they receive at the end (their grade) will be in tune with the work that they know they have done.

Importance of tutorials

Effective assessment requires giving new importance to tutorial work, well beyond traditional tutorials. Coaching is a new function that can emphasise the work of the lecturer, who assumes a more symmetri-cal role with that of students than in traditional teaching.

As tutors, lecturers plan their work (teaching) and “help” students to plan their work (learning). They help students to find, in their own expe-rience or background, meaning in the subject matter being taught. They get students to reflect on the knowledge and intentionality of the com-petences to be developed within a module or subject. They provide re-sources for students to incorporate along with others that they find else-where. They orient the meaning of the knowledge and background being acquired by students, so that they can generate their own knowl-edge and convictions. They facilitate the creation of a team “culture” in the classroom, where people share interests, knowledge, thoughts, ex-periences. They participate in moderating discussion and debates. They monitor and support students’ learning processes, and finally they assess and guide this process.

Without work in this regard, competences will most likely never be developed or evaluated, and if this is the case, no progress will be made toward convergence as required in creating a European Higher Educa-tion Area.

With the publication of this volume, the group working on compe-tence-based learning now opens its doors to the entire university com-munity. By placing this instrument at the community’s disposal, we wish to foster exchanges that will help to further the convergence process in which we are all engaged.



325

Bibliography

ACM, IEEE COMPUTER SOCIETY. (2004). “The Joint Task Force on Computing Cur-ricula”. Software Engineering 2004 Curriculum Guidelines for Undergraduate Degree Programs In Software Engineering. http://sites.computer.org/ccse/

ALLEN, J., RAMAEKERS, G. and VAN DER VELDEN, R. (2005). “Measuring com-petencies of higher education graduates”. New Directions for Institutional Research. Vol. 126, 49.

ALVERNO COLLEGE FACULTY. (1985). Student Assessment as learning at Alver-no College. Alverno College Institute.

ALVERNO COLLEGE FACULTY. (2000). Self Assessment at Alverno College. Al-verno College Institute.

ALVERNO COLLEGE FACULTY. (2005). Ability-Based Learning Outcomes. Teach-ing and Assessement at Alverno College. Alverno College Institute.

ARMENGOL, C. (2003). “Instrumentos para detectar el potencial innovador de un centro de formación”. J. GAIRÍN and C. ARMENGOL (Coords.), Estrate-gias de Formación para el Cambio Organizacional. Barcelona: CISSPRAXIS.

ASHFORD, S.J. (1989). “Self assessments in organizations: a literature review and integrative model”, CUMMINGS, Ll. and STAW, B.M. (Eds.), Research in Organizational Behaviour, vol. 11, pp. 133-174, Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.

BAARTMAN, L.K.J., BASTIAENS, T.J., KIRSCHNER, P.A. and VAN DER VLEUTEN, CEES P.M. (2007). “Teachers’ opinions on quality criteria for competency assessment programs”. Teaching and Teacher Education, 23(6), 857-867.

BARÁ, J. and VALERO, M. (2005). Aprendizaje Basado en Proyectos. Taller de Formación. Barcelona: Universitat Politécnica de Catalunya.

BARNETT, R. (2001). Los límites de la competencia. El conocimiento, la edu-cación superior y la sociedad. Barcelona: Gedisa.

BARTRAM, D. and ROE, R. (2005). “Definition and assessment of competences in the context of the European Diploma in Psychology”. European Psycholo-gist, 10, 93-102.



326

BEDOYERE, Q. (1993). Cómo resolver problemas en equipo. Un nuevo enfoque para quienes deben lograr resultados a través de otros. Barcelona: Gránica.

BERMAN, J. and RITCHIE, L. (2006). “Competencies of undergraduate business students”. Journal of Education for Business, 81(4).

BERLIN DECLARATION. (2003). <http://www.uco.es/organizacion/eees/docu-mentos/normas-documentos/doc-basica/ComunicadodeBerlin2003.pdf>

BIGGS. (2006). Calidad del aprendizaje universitario. Madrid: Narcea.BERRUEZO, J. (2003). “La Formación por competencias”. J. GAIRÍN and C. AR-

MENGOL (Coords.), Estrategias de Formación para el Cambio Organizacio-nal. Barcelona: CISSPRAXIS. Bilbao: III Symposium Iberoamericano de docen-cia universitaria.

BLAKE, R.R., MOUTON, J.S. and ALLEN, R.L. (1996). El trabajo en equipo. Qué es y cómo se hace. Bilbao: Deusto.

BOLÍVAR, A. and PEREYRA, M.A. (2006). “El Proyecto DeSeCo sobre la defini-ción y selección de competencias clave. Introducción a la edición española”, RYCHEN, D.S. and SALGANIK, L. (Comp.), Las competencias clave para el bienestar personal, social y económico. Málaga: Ediciones Aljibe.

BOLOGNA DECLARATION. (1999). <http://www.aneca.es/modal_eval/docs/de-claracion_bolonia.pdf>

BOYATZIS, R.E. (2002). “El desarrollo de competencias sin valores es como el sexo sin amor”. Revista de Psicología del Trabajo y de las Organizaciones, 18, 2-3, 247-258.

BRANDSFORD, J. and STEIN, B. (1987). Solución ideal de problemas. Barcelona: Labor.

BRICALL, J.M. (2000). Universidad 2 mil. Madrid: CRUE.BRODEUR, D.R. (2002). “Using Portfolios for Exit Assessment in Engineering

Programs”. 32nd ASEE/IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference, Boston, MA.BROMLEY, A.P., BORAN, J.R. and MYDDELTON, W.A. (2007). “Investigating the

baseline skills of research students using a competency-based self-assessment method”. Active Learning in Higher Education, 8 (2), 117.

BROOKFIELD, S. (1987). Developing Critical Thinkers: Challenging Adults to Ex-plore Alternative Ways of Thinking and Acting. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

BROWN, S. and GLASNER. (2003). Evaluar en la Universidad. Problemas y nue-vos enfoques. Madrid: Narcea.

BURÓN, J. (1993). Enseñar a aprender. Introducción a la metacognición. Bilbao: Mensajero.

CABRA, F. (2007). La Evaluación de los estudiantes en la educación superior. Bogotá: Facultad de Educación, Pontificia Universidad Javeriana.

CARDONA, P. and GARCÍA-LOMBARDÍA, P. (2005). Cómo desarrollar las compe-tencias de liderazgo. Pamplona: IESE.

CAREER SPACE. (2001). Curriculum Development Guidelines, New ICT curricu-la for the 21st century: designing tomorrow’s education. URL:_http://www.career-space.org.

CARRASCO, V. (2006). La experiencia de la UA en la adaptación al EEES. Progra-ma de redes de investigación docente. Madrid: UNED.



327

CENTER OF INTERCULTURAL COMPETENCE. ¿Qué es la competencia intercultu-ral? <http://cicb.net/Espanol/espanol.php>

CHANG, R. and KEHOE, K.R. (1996). Reuniones eficaces. Guía práctica para lograr reuniones más breves y productivas. Barcelona: Gránica.

CHANG, R. and KELLY, P. (1996). Resolución de problemas. Barcelona: Gránica.COBO, J.M. (1993). Educación ética para un mundo en cambio y una sociedad

plural. Madrid: Endymion. COLÁS, P., JIMÉNEZ, R. and VILLACIERVOS, P. (2005). “Portafolios y desarrollo

de competencias profesionales en el marco del Espacio Europeo de la Educa-ción Superior“. Revista de Ciencias de la Educación n. 204, octubre-diciem-bre, p. 519-538. Madrid.

COLL, C., BOLEA, E., COLOMINA, R., DE GISPERT, L., MAYORDOMO, M., ONRU-BIA, J., ROCHERA, M.J. and SEGUÉS, T. (1992). “Interacció, influencia educativa i formes dórganització de láctivitat conjunta”. Temps dÉducació, 7, 11-87.

COMUNICADO DE LA CONFERENCIA DE MINISTROS EUROPEOS DE ENSEÑAN-ZA SUPERIOR. (2005). <http://www.crue.org/espaeuro/lastdocs/ESIB%20Declaration.pdf>

CONSEJO DE EUROPA. (2001). Marco Común Europeo de Referencia para las Lenguas. Adaptación española a Common European Framework of Referen-tes for Languages: Learning, Teaching, Assessment. Strasburgo: Consejo de Europa. http://cvc.cervantes.es/obref/marco.

CORBALÁN, F. and GAIRIN, J.M. (1986). Problemas a mí. Madrid: Edinumen.COROMINAS, E. (2001). “Competencias genéricas en la formación universita-

ria“. Revista de educación n. 325, mayo-agosto, p. 299-321. Madrid.CORVALÁN, O., DONOSO, S. and ROCK, J.A. (2006). Nuevas tendencias Curri-

culares de la Educación Superior en Europa y los Estados Unidos. Talca: Uni-versidad de Talca.

CORTÁZAR, R. (2006). “Estrategia para impulsar el trabajo personal del estu-diante”. Comunicación presentada en II Jornada Universitaria de Innovación y Calidad - Buenas Prácticas Académicas. Bilbao: Universidad de Deusto.

CUBERO, R. and LUQUE, A. (2001). “Desarrollo, educación y educación escolar: la teoría sociocultural del desarrollo y del aprendizaje”. C. COLL, J. PALACIOS and A. MARCHESI, Desarrollo psicológico y educación. Psicología de la edu-cación escolar. Madrid: Alianza.

DE MIGUEL, M. (Coord.). (2006). Metodología de enseñanza y aprendizaje para el desarrollo de competencias. Orientaciones para el profesorado universita-rio ante el Espacio Europeo de Educación Superior. Madrid: Alianza edito-rial.

DEL RINCÓN, B. (Coord.). (2006). Primer intercambio de experiencias ECTS. Cuenca: Universidad de Castilla-La Mancha.

DELAMARE, F. and WINTERTON, J. (2005). “What is competence?“. Human Resource Development International, 8, 27-46.

DELORS, J. (1996). “The Treasure Within”. UNESCO. Comisión Internacional para la Educación del siglo XXI. <http://www.unesco.org/delors/ltoknow.htm>.



328

DONNELLY, A.M. (2005). “Let me show you my portfolio!: Demonstrating com-petence through peer interviews“. Action in Teacher Education, 27(3), 55.

ECHEVERRIA, J. (2003). Ciencia y valores. Barcelona: Ediciones Destino.ESCOTET, M.A. (1996). Universidad y Devenir. Buenos Aires: Lugar Editorial.ESCUDERO, J.M. et al. (2007). El diseño de las titulaciones y las competencias

profesionales. Murcia: Facultad de Educación.ESCUDERO, J.M. (2007b). “Claves para la adaptación del personal docente a

las nuevas metodologías del EEES“. La evaluación del profesorado dentro de los sistemas de garantía de calidad de las instituciones universitarias. Universidad de Burgos y ANECA. http://www.aneca.es/servicios/serv_agenda_historico07_burgos.asp

FALLOWS, S. and STEVEN, C. (2000). “The skills agenda“. S. FALLOWS and C. STEVEN, Integrating key skills in higher education; employability, transfer-able skills and learning for life. London: Kogan, pp. 8-9.

FALLOWS, S. and STEVEN, CH. (2000). Integrating Key Skills in higher educa-tion. Buenos Aires: Kogan Page.

FULLAN, M. (2001). The new Meaning of Educational Change. Teachers College Press. Columbia University.

GALLOWAY, D. (1998). Mejora continua de procesos. Barcelona: Gestión 2000.GARCÍA, A. (2004). “El desarrollo de las asignaturas en el nuevo marco de la

convergencia europea. Una experiencia en el Departamento de Pedagogía de la Universidad de Deusto”. LÓPEZ, J., SÁNCHEZ, M. and MURILLO, P., Cambiar con la sociedad, cambiar la sociedad. Sevilla: Secretariado de Publi-caciones, Universidad de Sevilla.

GARCÍA, A. (2005). “La evaluación de las asignaturas desde las competencias”. Vicerrectorado de Innovación y Calidad e Instituto de Ciencias de la Educa-ción de la Universidad de Deusto (Coords.), I Jornadas Universitarias de Inno-vación y Calidad: Buenas Prácticas Pedagógicas en la Docencia Universitaria. Bilbao: Universidad de Deusto.

GARCÍA, A. (2006). “Aprendizaje Cooperativo y desarrollo de competencias en la asignatura de Innovación y Educación”. B. GIRALDO, J. DOMINGO and J. ARMENGOL, Sexta Jornada sobre Aprendizaje Cooperativo. Barcelona: GAM – GIAC, ICE Universitat Politécnica de Catalunya.

GARCÍA, M. (1988). El trabajo en equipo. México: Addison-Wesley Iberoameri-cana.

GARDNER, H. (2003). “How Education changes: Considerations of History, Sci-ence and Values“. <http://www.pz.harvard.edu/Pis/HG_HowEducation-Changes.pdf>.

GIL, E. (1999). La pedagogía de los jesuitas, ayer y hoy. Madrid: CONEDSI. Uni-versidad Pontificia de Comillas.

GONZÁLEZ, J. and WAGENAAR, R. (Coods.). (2003). Tuning Educational Struc-tures in Europe. Informe Final Fase Uno. Bilbao: Universidad de Deusto.

GRANDE, F.X. (2003). “Coaching para el desarrollo de competencias”. J. GAIRÍN and C. ARMENGOL (Coords.), Estrategias de Formación para el Cambio Or-ganizacional. Barcelona: CISSPRAXIS.



329

GRAZ DECLARATION. (2003). <http://www.ub.es/ub/europa/documents2/3_Do-cuments_del_mon/01_DOCM_Declaracio_Graz.pdf>

GULLICKSON, A.R. (2007). Estándares para la evaluación de los aprendizajes de los estudiantes. Bilbao: Mensajero.

HEFCE. (2001). Higher Education and Graduate Employment in Europe. Bristol, England.

HERNÁNDEZ, F., MARTÍNEZ, P., ROSARIO, P., RUBIO, M. (2005). Aprendizaje, competencias y rendimiento en Educación Superior. Madrid: La Muralla.

IBÁÑEZ, A. (2002). Actitudes emprendedoras de los estudiantes universitarios. Medición y propuestas de actuación. Bilbao: Mensajero – ICE Universidad de Deusto.

INSTITUTO TECNOLÓGICO DE MONTERREY. (2000). Las Técnicas Didácticas en el TEC de Monterrey. Monterrey: TEC.

KATZENBACH, J.R. and SMITH, D.K. (1996): Sabiduría de los equipos. Madrid: Díaz de Santos.

KIRST, W. and DICKMAYER, U. (1978). Desarrolle su creatividad. Bilbao: Men-sajero.

KOLB, D. (1976). The Learning Style Inventory: Technical manual. Boston: Mcber and Company.

KOLVENBACH, P.H. (2000).The Service of Faith and the promotion of Justice in American Jesuit Higher Education. Santa Clara: Santa Clara University.

LEVY-LEBOYER, C. (1997). Gestión de las competencias: cómo analizarlas, cómo evaluarlas, cómo desarrollarlas. Barcelona: Gestión 2000.

LEVY-LEBOYER, C. (2000). Feed-back de 360º. Barcelona: Gestión 2000.LOACKER, G. and ROGERS, G. (2005). Assessment at Alverno College. Student,

Program, Institutional. Alverno College Institute.LUSTING, M.W. and KOESTER, J. (2003). Intercultural competence. Boston: Allyn

& Bacon. MARÍN, R. and RIVAS, M. (1984). Sistematización e innovación educativa. Ma-

drid: UNED.MARTÍNEZ, J. (2005). “La formación del profesorado y el discurso de las compe-

tencias“. Revista Interuniversitaria de Formación del Profesorado, 18(3) 127-144.

MEC. (2006). Directrices para la elaboración de títulos universitarios de grado y máster. Madrid: Documento de trabajo, Secretaría de Estado de Universida-des e Investigación.

MECD. (2002). Marco común europeo de referencia para las lenguas: aprendi-zaje, enseñanza y evolución. Madrid: Secretaría General Técnica.

MENTOWSKI, M. (2000). Learning that Lasts. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publish-ers.

MOLES, A. and CAUDE, R. (1977). Creatividad y Métodos de Innovación. Bar-celona: CIAC.

MONEREO, C. and CASTELLÓ, M. (1979). Las estrategias de aprendizaje. Cómo incorporarlas a la práctica educativa. Barcelona: Edebé.

MORIN, E. (2000). La mente bien ordenada. Barcelona: Seix Barral.



330

MORIN, E. (1995). Introducción al pensamiento complejo. Barcelona: Editorial Gedisa,

MUNRO-FAURE, L. and MUNRO-FAURE, M. (1996). La calidad total en acción. Barcelona: Folio.

POBLETE, M. (2003). “Aportaciones a la teoría de los grupos desde la psicología de las organizaciones. Hacia un modelo explicativo de la grupalidad“. Con-greso Internacional de Humanismo para el siglo XXI. Bilbao.

POBLETE, M. (2004). “Las competencias, un enfoque paradigmático de la Ges-tión de los RR.HH”. II Simposium de Psicología Organizacional. Monterrey, Méjico.

POBLETE, M. (2005). “El Portafolio del Estudiante. Utilización del Portafolios como herramienta de aprendizaje y como estrategia alternativa de evalua-ción”. VIC e ICE de la UD (Coords.), I Jornadas Universitarias de Innovación y Calidad: Buenas Prácticas Pedagógicas en la Docencia Universitaria. Bilbao: Universidad de Deusto.

POBLETE, M. (2005). “Estimación de Créditos según ECTS. Aproximación des-de un enfoque tradicional del tiempo de enseñanza / Aprendizaje al nuevo sistema de transferencia y acumulación impulsado en la declaración de Bo-logna”. VIC e ICE de la UD (Coords.), I Jornadas Universitarias de Innovación y Calidad: Buenas Prácticas Pedagógicas en la Docencia Universitaria. Bilbao: Universidad de Deusto.

POBLETE, M. (2006). “¿Grupos homogéneos o heterogéneos para trabajar en el aula? Una reflexión sobre la diversidad”. VII Jornada de Aprendizaje Coope-rativo. Barcelona.

POBLETE, M. (2006). “Las competencias, instrumento para un cambio de para-digma”. X Simposio de la SEIEM, Huesca.

POBLETE, M. (2007). “Evaluación de competencias en la educación superior. Preguntas clave que sobre evaluación de competencias se hacen los profeso-res. Tentativas de respuesta”. VIC e ICE de la Universidad de Deusto (Coords.), III Jornadas Universitarias de Innovación y Calidad: Buenas Prácticas Pedagó-gicas en la Docencia Universitaria. Bilbao: Universidad de Deusto.

POBLETE, M. (2008).”El aprendizaje basado en competencias. Claves docentes”. IV Congreso Internacional: la renovación de metodologías docentes centra-das en el nuevo proceso de aprendizaje del estudiante. Valladolid: UEMC.

POBLETE, M. and GARCÍA, A. (2004). “Análisis y Evaluación del Trabajo en Equi-po del alumnado universitario. Propuesta de un modelo de Evaluación de Desarrollo del Equipo”. III Symposium Iberoamericano de docencia univer-sitaria. Bilbao.

POBLETE, M., GARCÍA, A. et al. (2007). Desarrollo de competencias y créditos transferibles. Experiencia multidisciplinar en el contexto universitario. Bilbao: Mensajero.

POLYA, G. (1965). Mathematical discovery. On understanding, learning and tea-ching problem solving. N.Y.: Wiley.

PRAHALAD, C.K. and HAMEL, G. (1990). “The core competence of the corpo-ration“. Harvard Business Review.



331

PRAGUE DECLARATION. (2001). <http://www.ugr.es/~fbd/ects/Nuevacarpeta/declaracionpraga.pdf>

PUIG, J.M. (2003). Prácticas morales. Una aproximación a la educación moral. Barcelona: Paidós.

PULGAR, J.L. (2005). Evaluación del aprendizaje en educación no formal. Ma-drid: Narcea.

RANDOLH, W.A. and POSTNER, B.Z. (1991). Las diez reglas de oro para trabajar en equipo. Cómo conseguir que se hagan las cosas. Barcelona: Grijalbo.

RIAL, A. (2006). Diseño curricular por competencias. El reto de la evaluación. http://www.udg.edu/Portals/49/Docencia%202010/Antonio_Rial.pdf

RIMOLDI, H.J. (1984). “Solución de problemas. Teoría, metodología y experi-mentación“. Revista de Psicología General y Aplicada, 39, 75-96.

RIORDAN and ROTH. (2005). Disciplines as Foramenworks for Student Learning. Sterling. Virginia: Stylus.

RIVAS, M. (2000). Innovación Educativa. Teoría, procesos y estrategias. Madrid: Síntesis.

ROBERSON, M.T., CARNES, L.W. and VICE, J.P. (2002). “Defi ning and measuring student competencies: A content validation approach for business program outcome assessment“. Delta Pi Epsilon Journal, 44 (1), 13.

ROBLEY, W., WHITTLE, S. and MURDOCH-EATON, D. (2005)(a). “Mapping generic skills curricula: A recommended methodology“. Journal of further and Higher Education, 29 (3), 221.

ROBLEY, W., WHITTLE, S. and MURDOCH-EATON, D. (2005)(b). “Mapping generic skills curricula: Outcomes and discussion“. Journal of further & Higher Education, 29 (4), 321.

RODRÍGUEZ, I. (Ed.). (2008). El nuevo perfil del profesor universitario en el EEES: claves para la renovación metodológica. Valladolid: UEMC.

ROGOFF, B. (1993). Aprendices del pensamiento. El desarrollo cognitivo en el contexto social. Barcelona: Paidós.

ROGOFF, B. (1997). “Los tres planos de la actividad sociocultural: apropiación participativa, participación guiada y aprendizaje”. J. WERTSCH et al. (Coords.). La mente sociocultural. Aproximaciones teóricas y aplicadas. Madrid: Funda-ción Infancia y Aprendizaje.

ROMERO, S. (2006). “Evaluación por pares en las prácticas de Arquitectura de Computadores”. II Jornadas Universitarias de Innovación y Calidad: Buenas Prácticas Académicas. Bilbao: Universidad de Deusto.

ROMERO, S., ANGULO, J.M.ª and ANGULO, I. (2006). “La Microbótica como estrategia de enseñanza-aprendizaje y evaluación del uso de microcontrola-dores”. VII Congreso de Tecnologías Aplicadas a la Enseñanza de la Electró-nica. TAEE’06, UPM. Madrid.

ROMO, M. (1997). Psicología de la creatividad. Barcelona: Paidós.ROS, A. (Coord.). (2004). Interculturalitat. Bases antropològiques, socials i poli-

tiques. Barcelona. RUÉ, J. (2003). “Instrumento de auto evaluación de la dinámica cooperativa

delos grupos de trabajo”. J. GAIRÍN and C. ARMENGOL (Coords.), Estrate-gias de Formación para el Cambio Organizacional. Barcelona: CISSPRAXIS.



332

RUGIERO, A.M., APIP, A. and HIRMAS, A. (2006). Evaluación del Aprendizaje Autoconstruido. Santiago de Chile: UCH.

RYCHEN, D.S. and SALGANIK, L.H. (eds.). (2001). Defining and Selecting Key Competencies. Hogrefe & Huber. Götingen, Germany.

RYCHEN, D.S. and SALGANIK, L. (comp.). (2006). Las competencias clave para el bienestar personal, social y económico. Málaga: Ediciones Aljibe.

SANTOS, J. (2001). El desarrollo de un modelo de gestión por competencias basado en directrices sectoriales. Boletín de Estudios Económicos, 22 (I), 35-62.

SEMEIJN, J. et al. (2005). Competence indicators in academic education and early labour market success of graduates in health sciences. Maastricht: Re-search Centre for Education and the Labour Market.

SIMONS, P.R.J. (2000). “Escuelas que aprenden y profesores que aprenden”. A. VILLA (Coord.), Liderazgo y Organizaciones que aprenden. Bilbao: Mensaje-ro – ICE, Universidad de Deusto.

SLUIJSMANS, D.M.A. (2002). Student involvement in assessment: The training of peer assessment skills. ICO. Interuniversity Centre for Educational Re-search. Holand.

SMOLKA, A., DE GOES, EC. and PINO, A. (1997). “La constitución del sujeto: una cuestión persistente”. J. WERTSCH, P. DEL RÍO and A. ÁLVAREZ (Coords.), La mente sociocultural. Madrid: Fundación Infancia y Aprendizaje.

STERNBERG, R.J. and SPEAR-SWERLING, L. (1999). Enseñar a pensar. Madrid: Santillana.

STERNBERG, R.J. (1987). “Razonamiento, solución de problemas e inteligencia”. Inteligencia humana. Cognición, personalidad e inteligencia. Buenos Aires: Paidós.

STUFFLEBEAM, D. (1996). “El papel de la evaluación en la mejora escolar. El gran cuadro”. A. VILLA (Coord.), Dirección participativa y Evaluación de centros. Bilbao: ICE de la Universidad de Deusto.

TARDIF, J. (1999). L’enseignement de l’histoire face aux défis des technologies de l’information et de la communication. Strasbourg: Éditions du Conseil de l’Europe.

TARDIF, J. (1999). Le transfert des apprentissages. Montréal: Les Éditions Logiques.

TARDIF, J. (2006). L’évaluation des compétences. Documenter le parcours de développement. Montréal: Chenelière Éducation.

TJOSVOLD, D. (1993). El conflicto positivo en la organización. USA: Addison-Wesley.

TOBÓN, S., RIAL, A., GARCÍA, J.A., CARRETERO, M.A. (2006). Competencias, calidad, y educación superior. Bogotá: Magisterio.

UNESCO. (1998). Declaración Mundial sobre la educación Superior en el siglo XXI: Visión y Acción. htpp://www.unesco.org

UNIVERSIDAD DE DEUSTO. (1992). Desarrollo del Proyecto Universitario Deusto. Bilbao: UD.

UNIVERSIDAD DE DEUSTO. (2001). Marco Pedagógico UD. Bilbao: UD.



333

UNIVERSIDAD DE DEUSTO. (2006). Normas y Orientaciones para la elaboración de programas y guías de aprendizaje. Bilbao: UD.

VALCARCEL, M. (2003). “La preparación del profesorado universitario español para la convergencia europea en educación superior”. Programa de estu-dios y análisis destinado a la mejora de la calidad de la enseñanza superior y de la actividad del profesorado universitario, Proyecto EA 2003-0040. Córdoba.

VARGAS, F., CASANOVA, F. and MONTANARO, L. (2001) “El enfoque de com-petencia laboral”. Manual de formación. Montevideo: CINTERFOR.

VARIOS AUTORES. (2000). Curso de Diploma de Especialización en Docencia Universitaria. Curso 2000-2001. Bilbao: ICE, Universidad de Deusto.

VILAR, S. (1997). La nueva racionalidad. Comprender la complejidad con méto-dos transdisciplinarios. Barcelona: Kairós.

VILLA, A. (Coord.). (2004). Liderazgo y Organizaciones que aprenden. Bilbao: Mensajero.

VILLA, A. (Coord.). (2005). Libro Blanco. Título de grado de Pedagogía y Educa-ción Social. Madrid. ANECA.

VILLA, A. (2008). (Coord.). Innovación y cambio en las organizaciones educati-vas. Bilbao: ICE de la Universidad de Deusto.

VILLA, A. (2008). “La Excelencia docente”. Revista de Educación, número ex-traordinario, 177-212.

VILLA, A. and AUZMENDI, E. (2003). “Las competencias universitarias en el marco de la Unión Europea”. Seminario Internacional: Orientaciones Pe-dagógicas para la convergencia europea de educación superior. Bilbao: UD.

VILLA, A. and BEZANILLA, M.ªJ. (2002). El desarrollo de las competencias en la formación universitaria. Unpublished document. Bilbao: Universidad de Deusto.

VILLA, A. and POBLETE, M. (2006).”Practicum y Evaluación de Competencias”. Profesorado. Revista de Currículum y Formación del Profesorado, Universi-dad de Granada.

VILLA, A. and VILLA, O. (2007). “El aprendizaje basado en competencias y el desarrollo de la dimensión social en las universidades”. Educar 40,15-48.

VILLAR, L.M. (2006). Competencias para la Formación de Evaluadores. Málaga: Aljibe.

VYGOSTKY, L.S. (1979). El desarrollo de los procesos psicológicos superiores. Barcelona: Crítica.

VYGOSTKY, L.S. (1981). “The genesis of higher mental functions”. J.W. WERTSCH (Coord.), The concept of activity in soviet psychology. Armonk, N.Y.: M.E. Sharpe.

WECKWERTH, E. (1990). Problem solving and Decision Making. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota.

WESTON, A. (1994). Las claves de la argumentación. Barcelona: Ariel. WHIDDETT, S. and HOLLYFORDE, S. (2003). The competencies handbook. Lon-

don: CIPD.



334

ZABALZA, M.A. (2006). Guía Para la planificación didáctica de la docencia uni-versitaria en el marco EEES. Santiago: Universidad de Santiago de Compos-tela.

ZABALZA, M.A. (2008). “El trabajo por competencias en la enseñanza universi-taria”. RODRÍGUEZ, I. (Ed.), El nuevo perfil del profesor universitario en el EEES: claves para la renovación metodológica. Valladolid: UEMC.

ZINGHEIM, P.K., LEDFORD, G.E. Jr., SCHUSTER, J.R. (1996). “Competencies and Competency Models: Does One Size Fit All?“. ACA Journal, pp. 56-65.



Dr. Aurelio Villa Sánchez obtained his PhD in Education Sciences (Pontifical University of Salamanca, Spain) in 1983, and was Director of the Institute of Education Sciences for 10 years: Since 2000, he has been Deputy Vice-Chancellor for Innovation and Quality at the Deusto University (Spain) where he is also Professor of Research Methods at the Faculty of Philosophy and Education Sciences.Dr. Villa is the author and editor of several publications and a member of the editorial board of various education journals. He is Chief Scholar and Co-ordinator of the INNOVA research team, currently involved in the research project: «Innovation, Organisational Development and Service Assessment in Educational Institutions».

Dr. Manuel Poblete Ruiz holds a BA and PhD in Psychology (from the Complutense and Barcelona Universities, Spain respectively) and graduated in Education from the Pablo Montesinos School of Madrid (Spain). He currently lectures on Psychology (Labour and Organisational Psychology) at Deusto University (Spain) where he is a member of the University Teaching Innovation team, under the Deputy Vice-Chancellor for Innovation and Quality. In the last 10 years, Dr. Ruiz has co-ordinated and participated in several research projects on the development of higher education competences. He has co-authored various books on the subject, several articles in management journals and presented numerous papers at national and international conferences. A

ure

lio V

illa

Sán

chez

an

d M

anu

el P

ob

lete

Ru

iz (

Eds.

) Aurelio Villa Sánchez & Manuel Poblete Ruiz (Eds.)

Competence-based learningA proposal for the assessment of generic competences

One of the core themes of the Tuning Project is the issue of generic competences as a requirement for inclusion in the syllabus design update. This book contains a set of 35 generic competences defi ned and divided into 3 levels with indicators for their assessment. This will save you time and effort when selecting those which best suit each degree programme, adapting them to the context to attain the expected academic and professional profi le.

Co

mp

eten

ce-b

ased

le

arn

ing

University Press

Deusto

Cub01 Tuning Competence (21).indd 1Cub01 Tuning Competence (21).indd 1 12/5/09 12:49:2512/5/09 12:49:25

Competence-based learning - A proposal for the - Tucahea

Documents

Transcript of Competence-based learning - A proposal for the - Tucahea