This document presents a synthesis of the Seminar - Workshop, coordinated by Dr. Leonard Mertens, on "Analysis of Labor Competencies and Curricular Development", held on September 30, 1998.
This activity is part of the actions that the Directorate of Technical Assistance for Employment and Labor Training is carrying out, with the aim of identifying and analyzing different methodologies for the analysis of Labor Competencies and Curricular Development. Likewise, it is part of the technical assistance actions that support the development of the Pilot Experiences project for the Certification of Labor Skills (Working Subgroup 10 of MERCOSUR).
On this occasion, the expert presented and coordinated an exercise in the application of the AMOD method (Un Model) for the construction of a Curriculum, based on Labor Competencies.
The event had the active participation of specialists and technicians linked to the training area, from both Companies and Training Institutions, as well as the Public Sector, with whom an exercise of the aforementioned method was carried out.
This document presents, on the one hand, some theoretical-methodological background of the AMOD method, as well as its scope. On the other hand, the steps required for its implementation are described.
Theoretical-methodological background of the AMOD.
Both the AMOD method and others (for example, SCID, Systematic Development of a Curriculum) are complementary methods of DACUM (English acronym for Curriculum Development). The latter was created in Canada and developed in the United States, at the University of Ohio, in the decade of the sixties, and is based on the following assumptions:
- Expert workers describe their work better than anyone else, To define a function, the tasks that comprise it must be described in detail, For the proper execution of tasks, it is necessary to understand the knowledge, skills, instruments and attitudes that allow outstanding performance.
These assumptions find theoretical support in the behavioral and functionalist perspectives. (1)
The DACUM is a participatory method that allows, fundamentally, to identify the tasks and functions that a worker must be able to perform in order to achieve successful performance.
Among the strengths of the method, the following can be noted:
- It generates interaction and synergy in the group, It makes it possible to build group consensus, It allows the construction of a route or sequence of actions, useful for the design of the training, It is quick to apply and inexpensive, It promotes the participation and commitment of the actors (supervisor and worker).
Regarding its limitations, it can be indicated that:
- It does not allow to establish a relationship between behavioral and attitudinal aspects, It does not build performance criteria, It does not allow the development of training and evaluation strategies.
Bearing these limitations in mind, two complementary methods of the previous one are used - the SCID and the AMOD - that allow defining criteria and performance evidence, in order to evaluate the person and guide them in the learning process.
The SCID method promotes - based on the DACUM statements - a fine analysis of the tasks.
The information collected allows establishing parameters under which the worker must demonstrate their performance: compliance with safety standards, attitudes and behaviors that lead to outstanding performance, possible errors, machines, tools and materials used.
Likewise, with this information, the didactic guides are built on which the worker relies on to meet the expected performance standards.
The self-assessment is carried out through a questionnaire, and the instructor / supervisor's assessment includes:
-A global evaluation with a score of 1 to 4
-An evaluation of the critical points in the sequence of the threads, applying the yes / no.
It should be noted that the evaluation criteria in both methods differ: in the SCID the performance criteria are described based on measurable indicators, while in the AMOD the reference is only subjective.
The AMOD method starts from the same assumptions as the DACUM, although it differs from it since, like the SCID, «… it seeks to establish a direct relationship between the elements of the curriculum and the sequence of training and evaluation of the learning process…» Its main characteristics being the speed and ease of application.
In addition, it is characterized by placing special emphasis on the relationship between self-assessment and the instructor / supervisor's assessment.
Exercise of the AMOD method.
Panel Shaping (2)
Workers with proven experience and some of their supervisors participate in the discussion panel. The experience is guided by a facilitator who has the help of a collaborator, who writes the statements corresponding to the competences evoked by the experts, and preferably with another person who records the critical points that arise throughout the exercise.
In addition, other people participate as observers (training instructors, designers of teaching guides).
The construction of a Map of Labor Competencies with the AMOD method, supposes the execution of the following stages.
First stage: Brainstorming.
Once the panel of experts has been constituted, the first stage consists of promoting discussion among the participants regarding the identification of critical competencies or skills that the examined work profile should possess.
As the facilitator guides the panelists' discussion, the collaborator records the competences evoked by the experts on cards, which should preferably be translated into statements that correspond to the format: Verb + Object + Condition.
In order to help visualize what is produced by the panel, the cards are placed on a wall, with no other criteria than their order of appearance.
According to the statements made, the facilitator will guide the debate towards topics that have not appeared or that present a certain degree of difficulty in explaining them. The guiding questions of the debate will be aimed at inquiring about the "problems" and "difficulties" considered to be most significant for the profile addressed.
In this sense, it is convenient for the other collaborator to record the difficulties, which will serve as information for the subsequent phases.
Once all the statements corresponding to the identification of the critical competencies have been completed, a review of what was produced is carried out in order to achieve the consensus of the panelists.
The results corresponding to this first stage are presented below, produced by the panel during the exercise of the method in the Seminar - Workshop. (3)
See Table Nº1: Identification of key competences. Role: training manager
Identification of key competences. Role: training manager
Second stage: First grouping of the statements.
After the whirlwind of ideas, a first grouping of the statements is made, deleting those cards whose contents overlap or are not distinctive enough.
Below are the results of this stage, produced by the panel during the exercise of the method in the Seminar - Workshop.
See Table Nº2: Identification of key competences. Role: training manager. Stage II 1st Order
Identification of key competences. Role: training manager
See Table Nº3: Identification of key competences. Role: training manager. Stage II 1st Order (continued)
Identification of key competences. Role: training manager.
See Table Nº4: Identification of key competences. Role: training manager. Stage II 1st Order (continued)
Identification of key competences. Role: training manager
Third stage: Identification of the main areas of competence.
This stage consists of the identification -by the panel- of sufficiently general areas of competence to be able to regroup the skills or subcompetencies identified and ordered in the previous steps.
Once these areas have been agreed upon by the panel, the cards with the statements associated with the category will be placed under each title -in column form-, having as a criterion a top-down ordering. This directionality will indicate a path that goes from the simplest skills to the most complex. This process will be repeated as many times as general areas have been identified.
At the same time, this process will allow a second "debugging" of those cards, whose statements do not turn out to be distinctive enough.
The final product of this stage will be a representation that allows you to quickly visualize the different levels of complexity, both within an area and between different areas of competence.
Next, the results produced by the panel during the exercise of the method are presented, corresponding to this third stage.
See Table Nº 5: Identification of Key Competences. Training Management. Stage III: Areas of Competence.
Identification of Key Competences. Training Management
Fourth stage: Construction of the Training Curriculum
Once the different columns of the skills or subcompetencies required to achieve the general competencies (or areas of competences) have been established, a final reordering is carried out, comparing all the statements and grouping them into training modules. For this, the following criteria will be taken into account: what does it start with, what it continues with, and what does the training end with.
What is sought in this phase is to build groups or families of subcompetencies belonging to the different general areas, in such a way as to be able to establish a hierarchical order, which can go from the simplest to the most complex or from the practical to the theoretical. as deemed appropriate by the panel of experts.
The command to carry out the grouping of subcompetencies into training modules operates with the following restriction criteria: only one subcompetence can be selected, if the one preceding it in the column has been previously selected.
The final product will be a series of modules that will group subcompetencies, belonging to different areas, of similar complexity levels, as represented in the visualization box that is presented below.
Also, the results produced by the panel during the exercise of the method, corresponding to this fourth stage, are presented.
See Table Nº 6: Curricular Design. Training Management
Curricular design. Training Management
See Table Nº7: Design Curriculum for training
Curriculum design for training
See Table Nº8: Design Curriculum for training. Continuation
Curriculum design for training.
Fifth stage: evaluation and self-evaluation process.
After the AMOD map has been built, the self-assessment is developed, applying a scale that varies between 3 and 6 levels:
| 0: cannot develop competence. |
| 1: can develop competence, but under constant supervision. |
| 2: You can develop the competence, but with eventual assistance. |
| 3: You can develop the competence without supervision. |
| 4: can develop the competition without supervision, with a good level of quality. |
| 5: can develop competence with quality and speed, showing initiative and adaptability in the face of unforeseen situations. |
| 6: can develop competence with quality and speed, showing initiative, adaptability and being able to lead others in the development of work |
The AMOD map is given to the workers, who qualify themselves with the aforementioned scale.
Each worker then compares his qualification with that of the supervisor, and from there, training actions begin.
Every time the operator feels that he has improved or achieved an achievement, he proceeds to requalify himself and confirms it with the supervisor.
Each time it has completed the learning of a subcompetence, the expert committee - made up of workers, supervisors and representatives of the human resources area - who, on the other hand, are the same people who made up the discussion panel, evaluates it to starting from the observation of the performance and validating the learning, granting a certificate of the acquired competences.
1. Although the latter, according to Dr. Mertens, focuses work in terms of results and not processes.
2. The exercise carried out during the seminar - workshop was aimed at the construction of a Training Curriculum for a Training Manager. To carry it out, a panel of five (5) experts was selected and formed -with some of the participants. The rest participated as observers.
3. It should be noted that in all stages of the exercise, the completion of the exercise was prioritized -for reasons of time- rather than carrying out a detailed analysis of the critical competencies. Therefore, the results of this exercise should be considered as a first approximation in the construction of a curriculum for a Training Manager.
Download the original file
