Conspiracies and Competences

Abstract

Universities and other higher education institutions are predominantly organizations that convey knowledge, more than developing competences – these are often the verbally proclaimed but only rarely achieved goals. There can be two reasons for this discrepancy. First, conveying informational as well as subject-specific and specialized knowledge can even today be planned, assessed, and checked much more easily than conveying competences – an approach for teaching, which needs new patterns of thought and actions. Teachers and learners, assistants and assessing staff, and especially actors and planners who are concerned with questions of educational politics therefore form a “conspiracy of assessors,” which has chosen the simpler and seemingly safer approach. This approach, however, seems to be ignorant of future developments. Second, conveying competences needs different forms of learning and teaching than conveying knowledge. The question of the acquisition (interiorization) of rules, assessments, and results of assessments (= values) and norms in the form of the learners’ own emotions and motivations is central. Becoming emotionally labilized is pivotal to this appropriation. Emotional labilization also provides a criterion for assessing the effectiveness of Web 2.0 instruments for developing competences.