Competent uses of competence: on the difference between a value-judgment and empirical assessability

This article considers the concept of Competence as applied to educational theory and policy, and illuminates the possibility of significant variations in meaning. Referring to Wittgenstein’s distinctions between transitive and intransitive uses of notions and Holland’s description of mastery, the a...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Birgit Schaffar
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Taylor & Francis Group 2021-05-01
Series:Nordic Journal of Studies in Educational Policy
Subjects:
Online Access:http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/20020317.2021.1958993
id doaj-a0e7d61b359c4819b38fc1eecc73822c
record_format Article
spelling doaj-a0e7d61b359c4819b38fc1eecc73822c2021-10-04T13:57:01ZengTaylor & Francis GroupNordic Journal of Studies in Educational Policy2002-03172021-05-0172556410.1080/20020317.2021.19589931958993Competent uses of competence: on the difference between a value-judgment and empirical assessabilityBirgit Schaffar0Helsinki UniversityThis article considers the concept of Competence as applied to educational theory and policy, and illuminates the possibility of significant variations in meaning. Referring to Wittgenstein’s distinctions between transitive and intransitive uses of notions and Holland’s description of mastery, the article argues in favour of two senses in which someone can be described as being competent: i) as expressive of a value judgment; and ii) as pointing to a person’s (formal) qualifications. While the latter opens a path towards different forms of measurements of competence, being competent as a value judgment eludes any such treatment. Making this distinction, it is argued that competence is a less illuminative theoretical term than, for example, the pair of concepts Bildung versus Ausbildung ((self-)subjectivation vs training), that has been used in the Continental tradition in order to describe a similar distinction. With examples from educational contexts, the article demonstrates that the moment educational theory is using one word for two meanings, this central distinction in education is either concealed or forgotten. Focusing on competence purely as an empirically assessable notion risks playing into the hands of instrumentalising education.http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/20020317.2021.1958993competenceassessabilityvalue-judgmentknowledge capitalismbildung
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Birgit Schaffar
spellingShingle Birgit Schaffar
Competent uses of competence: on the difference between a value-judgment and empirical assessability
Nordic Journal of Studies in Educational Policy
competence
assessability
value-judgment
knowledge capitalism
bildung
author_facet Birgit Schaffar
author_sort Birgit Schaffar
title Competent uses of competence: on the difference between a value-judgment and empirical assessability
title_short Competent uses of competence: on the difference between a value-judgment and empirical assessability
title_full Competent uses of competence: on the difference between a value-judgment and empirical assessability
title_fullStr Competent uses of competence: on the difference between a value-judgment and empirical assessability
title_full_unstemmed Competent uses of competence: on the difference between a value-judgment and empirical assessability
title_sort competent uses of competence: on the difference between a value-judgment and empirical assessability
publisher Taylor & Francis Group
series Nordic Journal of Studies in Educational Policy
issn 2002-0317
publishDate 2021-05-01
description This article considers the concept of Competence as applied to educational theory and policy, and illuminates the possibility of significant variations in meaning. Referring to Wittgenstein’s distinctions between transitive and intransitive uses of notions and Holland’s description of mastery, the article argues in favour of two senses in which someone can be described as being competent: i) as expressive of a value judgment; and ii) as pointing to a person’s (formal) qualifications. While the latter opens a path towards different forms of measurements of competence, being competent as a value judgment eludes any such treatment. Making this distinction, it is argued that competence is a less illuminative theoretical term than, for example, the pair of concepts Bildung versus Ausbildung ((self-)subjectivation vs training), that has been used in the Continental tradition in order to describe a similar distinction. With examples from educational contexts, the article demonstrates that the moment educational theory is using one word for two meanings, this central distinction in education is either concealed or forgotten. Focusing on competence purely as an empirically assessable notion risks playing into the hands of instrumentalising education.
topic competence
assessability
value-judgment
knowledge capitalism
bildung
url http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/20020317.2021.1958993
work_keys_str_mv AT birgitschaffar competentusesofcompetenceonthedifferencebetweenavaluejudgmentandempiricalassessability
_version_ 1716843986082070528