Contributing to the evidence-base on competency or mastery-based progression

More evidence is needed about both the efficacy (controlled implementation) and effectiveness (real-world implementation) of competency or mastery-based progression. Research can and should take the form of validation experiments, and implementation studies.

The overarching goal of TLA’s Measurement Agenda is to unify the evidence and implementation cycles so that evidence-based practices are implemented in order to provide each student with an effective, equitable, and engaging education that enables them to reach their full potential.

This strategy contributes to that goal by ensuring that we all better understand competency or mastery-based progression (sometimes called learning progressions). Educators, decision-makers, researchers, and funders all have a role to play in the validation of competency or mastery-based progression in controlled and real-world environments.

Educators and decision-makers should open up their classrooms to enable measurement. Both controlled and “real world” studies must take place in classroom (both digital and in-person) environments. Controlled studies may focus on holding variables like grade level, content area, even educator, constant, but efficacy cannot be studied in a lab (outside of a classroom).

Researchers and funders should focus on specific identified gaps in sector’s evidence base. Researchers also should push for progressively greater clarity about the exact nature of the (competency or mastery-based progression) interventions they are studying. All stakeholders need to be patient: generating rigorous evidence takes time.