RESFIA+D: A real-life assessment report

During the assessment, only general competences (RESFIA) were assessed, so no specialist disciplinary competences, as shown in the figure above.

The participant group consisted of: 4 students; 4 lecturers; 1 programme manager; 3 representatives from working field, one of whom recently graduated from this programme in this college. They deliberated and decided In consensus on the scores and on the explanations given below.

The assessment was led by a chairperson, the report was made by a note-taker, both members of the college's sustainability innovation team.

In the days following the assessment, the conclusions were turned into a concrete improvement plan, which was implemented in the following year.

The scores, e.g. 4 → 5 → 6, indicate: Reality → Education Goals → Education Ambition.

R: Responsibility

R1: Create a stakeholder analysis based on the consequence scope and the consequence period
4 → 5 → 6
Students practice this mainly in the practical parts of the training; the levels build up step by step. At level 3, the principles are mentioned; see: taxonomy of training. At all levels, up to 6, this competence is practiced within the program, but by no means everyone picks it up. This must be improved.

R2: Take personal responsibility
6 → 5 → 6
This is emphatically an attitude, focused on taking professional responsibility. Looking “from the inside out” is a process, which does not end after graduation. But basis and willingness must be present.

R3: Be held personally accountable with respect to society: transparency
4 → 5 → 6
Regarding transparency, perhaps we as a team need to become more transparent ourselves, and from there train students in it.

E: Emotional intelligence

E1: Recognise and respect their own values and those of other people and cultures
4 → 3 → 6
Beginning cultural skills are imparted, but are not explicitly in the curriculum. It's mostly implicit in the internship, so it's hands-on learning. It is there.

E2: Distinguish between facts, assumptions and opinions
5 → 6 → 6
The focus is not on distinction, but it is about dealing with differences between facts and opinions. Being able to question facts. Level 6 does not connect directly, but from the postmodern view and the three worlds, level 6 does come into play. From this idea, the Level 6 learning objective has been assigned to the current course.

E3: Cooperate on an interdisciplinary and transdisciplinary basis
4 → 4 → 6
Ambition 6 is in preparation. The training can still gain here, by connecting to future expectations. There is awareness within the program of the importance of working with “others” and with stakeholders, but the elaboration needs to improve. It is quite difficult for many students to sincerely cooperate with lay people, they then expect too much from them.

S: System orientation

S1: Think from systems, flexibly zooming in and out on issues, i.e. thinking analytically and holistically in turn
3 → 5 → 5
Being able to think holistically is difficult within this profession. There is tension due to limited discretionary space. But this really needs to get to level 5. We have wanted that for some time, but we don't make it yet.

S2: Recognise flaws in the fabric and sources of vigour in systems, having the ability to use the sources of vigour
3 → 4 → 6
The Triple P in level 4 in our education is mainly focused on people and partly profit, no planet; and that is fine, because of our professional field. The SWOT analysis could be more in-depth, especially on the level of profit: e.g. CSR. In the curriculum: regarding people it is level 4, as in the training objectives, but regarding profit it is level 3. The ambition is still 6, because of future development and changes in organizations such as decentralization.

S3: Think and act integrated and circular
4 → 5 → 5
Ambition is still 5, not 6, despite current developments and future. This requirement is otherwise too high and is needed for the professional only later, not yet immediately after the program.

F: Future orientation

F1: Think on different time scales, flexibly zooming in and out on short and long term approaches
4 → 5 → 5
Long-term thinking is important for our graduates: both as a partner of management in existing organizations, and in the role of independent entrepreneur.

F2: Recognise and utilise non-linear processes
4 → 4 → 5
Our students work with people, and people are not linear. From that starting point, they must be able to plan for their practical work, taking into account developments, such as new technical resources but also budget cuts. Quality is striving for continuous improvement, we give that to the students, but it can be improved.

F3: Think and act innovatively, creatively, out of the box
2 → 4 → 5
Awareness of the actual meaning of providing services among students should be strongly promoted. That component now scores far too low at 2, is in the program goals 4, but the stated ambition within this assessment is level 5. This requires explicit attention in curriculum development.

I: personal Involvement

I1: Consistently involve sustainable development in their own work as a professional: sustainable attitude
5 → 5 → 6
Social sustainability means for our professions: Establish, maintain, coach social infrastructure/support so that people can function without assistance. There is a tilt in policy: our professionals must be able to engage in open debate through contemporary media: blogs, Facebook, tweets, etc., as well as providing publications in-house.

I2: Passionately work towards dreams and ideals
5 → 5 → 7
Provide more space for students to actually realize their passion. Teacher quality and program content are decisive here. Only with passion and inspiration will our graduates sustain this work for years.

I3: Employ their own conscience as the ultimate yardstick
5 → 5 → 6
Adherence to ethical standards: integral attention within education, in connection with difficult choices in the context of limited resources, increasing (political) pressure.

A: Action skills

A1: Weigh up the unweighable and make decisions
5 → 5 → 6
In every situation there are conflicts of interest, therefore this is a very necessary competence, which the graduate student must really have. Include into curriculum quality tools as used in practice.

A2: Deal with uncertainties
4 → 5 → 6
Graduate social workers should be able to show “operational certainty” in complex situations, that gives confidence. Precaution should be the starting point.

A3: Act when the time is right, not going against the current: action without action
5 → 5 → 6
This is a permanent development point, should actually be a 7 in terms of ambition. Resistances are always present in processes. Therefore, recognizing and handling resistances within processes should be more prominent, both at client and organizational level.