Why the Future of Assessment is Competency-Based

The following is a condensed version of my article titled "From Compliance to Competency."

For over a decade, the industrial-age model of schooling has prioritized compliance over competency and "seat time" over mastery. As I argue, maintaining these outdated systems is tantamount to instructional malpractice. We owe students a model that reflects how learning actually happens: nonlinearly, personally, and at varying paces.

The shift toward Standards-Based Assessment (SBA) and Competency-Based Education (CBE) isn't a trend; it's a necessary reckoning. To move from philosophy to district-wide practice, educators need a robust digital infrastructure. This is where Edsby Destinations comes in.

The Case for Change: Beyond the "B-Minus"

Traditional grading is fundamentally broken. A single letter grade often blends academic achievement with behavioral compliance, homework completion, and participation. This "number" obscures more than it reveals.

• SBA asks: Has the student demonstrated proficiency against specific standards?
• CBE ensures: Students advance upon mastery, not based on the calendar.

In a competency-based model, an early failure doesn't define a student’s final grade. Instead, the most recent, consistent demonstration of understanding counts. This culture builds resilient learners who chase mastery rather than points.

Empowering Student Agency

When students see exactly where they stand against defined outcomes, they can set goals and self-assess. Research shows that self-regulation increases significantly when students engage with clear success criteria. Outcomes-based reporting gives students a clear destination and the freedom to chart their own course toward it via portfolios, projects, and authentic artifacts, something my co-author and I emphasize in Personalize.

The Scaling Challenge: Why Infrastructure Matters

Many districts understand the "why" of CBE but struggle with the "how." Transitioning a large system to outcomes-based assessment generates a massive volume of data, including visual artifacts, self-assessments, and longitudinal observations, that traditional Gradebooks simply cannot handle.

Edsby Destinations was purpose-built to solve this complexity at scale. Unlike generic LMS tools that are retrofitted for standards, Edsby is engineered for the specific workflows of K-12 organizations.

Key Features of Edsby Destinations

• Visual Evidence of Learning: Capture photos, videos, and work products tagged directly to learning outcomes.
• Student-Centric Dashboards: Students receive a graphical overview of their journey, showing where they are and where they need to go in real-time.
• Co-Created Success Criteria: Teachers and students can collaborate on what "success" looks like, promoting ownership.
• Accessibility for All: Mobile apps with QR code logins remove barriers for younger learners, making "visible learning" possible in early elementary grades.
• District-Level Transparency: Dashboards provide administrators with a bird’s-eye view of progress across the entire system while allowing for "drill-down" views into individual student growth.

Engaging the Whole Community

Assessment is the primary touchpoint between schools and families. Edsby Destinations shifts the dinner-table conversation from "What grade did you get?" to "What did you learn?" By providing parents with real-time visibility into authentic work products rather than a static PDF report card, schools can build a true home-school partnership.

Leading the Transformation

Technology should serve pedagogy, not the other way around. The shift to standards-based assessment is a leadership challenge that requires a strategic mindset and the right tools. With Edsby Destinations, the vision of a competency-based future becomes an operational reality, honoring each student's individual path to mastery.

Be sure to read my full-length article titled "From Compliance to Competency."

The Unwavering Power of Self-Efficacy in Education

In our pursuit of improving student learning, we often focus on curriculum, technology, and pedagogy. While these are all critical components, we sometimes overlook one of the most powerful drivers of success in our schools: self-efficacy. It is that unwavering belief in our own ability to make a difference, to overcome challenges, and to ultimately impact student achievement. This is not just a feel-good concept; it is a research-backed imperative for every teacher and leader who is serious about creating a thriving learning culture. You can listen to more about this on my podcast Unpacking the Backpack. 

Self-efficacy, as defined by Albert Bandura, is the belief in one's capabilities to organize and execute the courses of action required to produce given attainments. For educators, this translates to a deep-seated confidence in their ability to positively influence student outcomes. Research has consistently shown a strong correlation between teacher self-efficacy and student achievement. Teachers with a high sense of efficacy are more likely to try new instructional strategies, persist in the face of setbacks, and create a positive and engaging classroom environment (Jerrim & Tars, 2025).

But where does this powerful belief come from? It is not something we are born with; it is cultivated through experience, observation, and feedback. This is where the role of leadership becomes paramount. School leaders who actively develop a culture of trust, collaboration, and support can significantly impact teacher self-efficacy. When teachers feel that their leaders believe in them, they are more likely to believe in themselves. This is not just about providing resources; it is about creating a school climate where teachers feel empowered to take risks, to innovate, and to grow professionally (Liu & Hallinger, 2018).

Transformational leadership, in particular, has been shown to have a profound impact on teacher self-efficacy and, in turn, on their innovative behavior in the classroom (Zainal & Matore, 2021). When leaders inspire a shared vision, provide individualized support, and intellectually stimulate their staff, they create the conditions for self-efficacy to flourish. This is not about top-down mandates; it is about a collaborative partnership where leaders and teachers work together to achieve common goals. The research is clear: leadership behaviors have a statistically significant relationship with teachers' efficacy (Winn et al., 2021).

The concept of self-efficacy extends beyond the classroom to the leaders themselves. Leaders with a strong sense of self-efficacy are more likely to be effective in their roles, to inspire confidence in their staff, and to create a positive school culture (Paglis, 2010). They are the pedagogical leaders who are not afraid to roll up their sleeves, to be visible in classrooms, and to model the very behaviors they expect from their teachers. They understand that their own belief in their ability to lead is contagious and sets the tone for the entire school community.

So, how can we cultivate this essential quality in ourselves and in others? It starts with a commitment to continuous learning and professional growth. It involves seeking out opportunities to collaborate with colleagues, to observe best practices, and to receive constructive feedback. It means celebrating successes, learning from failures, and always maintaining a growth mindset. As leaders, it means creating a culture where it is safe to be vulnerable, to ask for help, and to take on new challenges. Below are some reflective questions to consider:

1. How does my personal belief in my ability to influence student outcomes change the way I respond to instructional challenges or setbacks? 
2. What specific actions am I taking to foster a culture of trust and collaboration that empowers my colleagues to take risks in their teaching? 
3. In what ways am I modeling a commitment to continuous professional growth and vulnerability to show others that learning is a lifelong process? 
4. How do our current professional learning and feedback structures prioritize the celebration of success and the mastery of new skills to increase our shared sense of capability? 

In the end, self-efficacy is the bedrock of effective teaching and leadership. It is the quiet confidence that allows us to navigate the complexities of our profession with grace and determination. It is the unwavering belief that we can, and will, make a difference in the lives of our students. Let us all commit to nurturing this powerful force within ourselves and within our schools. Our students deserve nothing less.

Jerrim, J., & Tars, E. (2025). Teacher self-efficacy, instructional practice, and student outcomes: Evidence from the TALIS Video Study. American Educational Research Journal, 62(2). 

Liu, S., & Hallinger, P. (2018 ). Principal instructional leadership, teacher self-efficacy, and teacher professional learning in China: Testing a mediated-effects model. Educational Administration Quarterly, 54(4), 501–528. 

Paglis, L. L. (2010 ). Leadership self-efficacy: Research findings and practical applications. Journal of Management Development, 29(9), 771–782. 

Winn, C. S., Cothern, T. L., Lastrapes, R., & Orange, A. (2021 ). Teacher self-efficacy and principal leadership behaviors. ICPEL Education Leadership Review, 22(1), 17–26.

Zainal, M. A., & Matore, M. E. E. M. (2021). The influence of teachers' self-efficacy and school leaders' transformational leadership practices on teachers' innovative behaviour. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 18(12), 6423. 

The Role of Human Interaction in Deep Learning

Do you like “shiny” things as much as I do? If so, don’t fret, as it is human nature.  We often find ourselves captivated by the latest digital tools, such as AI-driven platforms and virtual environments. While these innovations offer incredible potential to scale resources, they frequently miss the most critical component of the educational experience: the human element. Real learning, specifically the kind that supports disruptive thinking and deep cognitive engagement, does not happen in a vacuum of screens and algorithms. It happens through connection.

To truly transform student outcomes, we must shift our focus back to the power of human interaction. Deep learning is not a passive act of consumption; it is an active, social process. When we prioritize human-centered learning experiences, particularly through high-dosage, in-person tutoring, we move beyond simple content delivery and toward a model that prioritizes the whole child.

The Science of Connection and Cognitive Engagement

The importance of human interaction is grounded in more than just sentiment; it is backed by decades of rigorous research. Learning is fundamentally a social endeavor. When students interact with a mentor or tutor in person, they are not just receiving information. They are participating in a feedback loop that stimulates higher-order thinking.

Research has consistently shown that human interaction is the primary driver of academic growth. For instance, Nickow, Hull, and Ritter (2020) conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of experimental evidence, concluding that tutoring programs consistently yield large positive effects on student learning outcomes across various subjects and grade levels. Their findings emphasize that the structured, personal nature of tutoring is significantly more effective than many other classroom-based interventions.

This effectiveness is rooted in the way humans engage cognitively. According to the ICAP framework, interactive learning, which occurs when students engage in dialogue and collaborative problem-solving with another person, leads to the highest levels of knowledge acquisition. Chi and Wylie (2014) argue that interactive activities are superior to constructive, active, or passive ones because they require students to co-construct knowledge through social mediation. In a virtual-only model, this social mediation is often diluted, resulting in lower cognitive depth.

In-Person vs. Virtual: The Need for Human-Centered Models

While virtual models provided a necessary bridge during the pandemic, the data now clearly shows a preference for the depth that in-person interaction provides. The difference lies in the nuance of communication: the ability of a tutor to read body language, sense frustration before it becomes a barrier, and pivot strategies in real-time. This level of responsiveness is difficult to replicate in a purely digital space.

Disruptive thinking requires a safe environment where students feel seen and supported, something I strongly emphasize in my book Personalize. High-impact, human-centered tutoring creates a space where "failure" is reframed as a necessary step toward mastery. This is particularly vital for students who have fallen behind. Guryan et al. (2023) demonstrated that intensive, in-person tutoring for adolescents can lead to substantial gains in academic performance. This proves that even for older students, the "human touch" can close gaps that traditional instruction struggles to reach.

When we integrate people, curriculum, and technology correctly, the results are transformative. The goal is not to abandon technology but to use it as a scaffold for human interaction. For example, using a proprietary, standards-aligned digital curriculum enables precise data tracking, but the true magic happens when a trained tutor sits beside a student to navigate it together. This hybrid approach, which puts pedagogy and people first and technology second, is what drives sustainable growth.

Evidence-Based Success: A Closer Look

The efficacy of this approach is reflected in recent performance data. During the 2024–2025 school year, students utilizing integrated in-person tutoring models from HeyTutor saw a 160% increase in those testing at or above grade level in Math and a 162% increase in ELA from the beginning to the end of their programs. The impact on English Learners was equally profound, with a 95% increase in Math and a 92% increase in ELA proficiency. 

These results align with the broader consensus on evidence-based reform. Slavin (2018) notes that for educational interventions to be truly effective and scalable, they must be grounded in proven methods that emphasize personalized, small-group instruction. This focus on evidence is why programs that prioritize in-person, small-group interventions such as HeyTutor have been recognized with honors like Stanford University’s National Student Support Accelerator Badge and the 2025 Tech and Learning Awards in Primary and Secondary Education.

A compelling example of this in action can be seen in the SUHSD Case Study, which highlights how the value of in-person learning provides insights that go far beyond what a dashboard can report. It is about the shift in student confidence and the ability to think critically and disruptively about the world around them.

Moving Forward: Prioritizing the Human Element

As we look toward the future of education, we must ensure that our "innovations" do not inadvertently isolate our students. The best solution for deeper student engagement and academic growth remains the intentional connection between a dedicated human being and a learner. By emphasizing in-person, small-group tutoring, we provide students with the social-emotional support and cognitive challenge they need to thrive.

We have the tools, the research, and the data. Now, we must have the leadership to prioritize the human connection in every classroom and every learning session. To see how these principles are being put into practice to drive record-breaking student growth, I encourage you to check out HeyTutor and join the movement toward human-centered educational excellence.

Chi, M. T. H., & Wylie, R. (2014). The ICAP framework: Linking cognitive engagement to active learning outcomes. Educational Psychologist, 49(4), 219-243.

Guryan, J., Ludwig, J., Bhatt, M. P., Cook, P. J., Davis, J. M. V., Dodge, K., Farkas, G., Fryer, R. G., Jr., Mayer, S. E., Pollack, H. A., & Steinberg, L. (2023). Not too late: Improving academic outcomes among adolescents. American Economic Review, 113(3), 738-765.

Nickow, A., Hull, A. F., & Ritter, G. W. (2020). The effects of tutoring on education outcomes: A systematic review and meta-analysis of the experimental evidence. Journal of Research on Educational Effectiveness, 13(3), 397-451.

Slavin, R. E. (2018). Evidence-based reform in education. European Journal of Education, 53(3), 301-312.

Stop Fixing, Start Developing: A Roadmap for High-Impact Coaching

Coaching has been in my blood since my teaching days.  When I got my first position, I was recruited into a freshman football role by one of my former coaches on the varsity staff.  While I was worried about the impact on me as a first-year teacher, those concerns never materialized.  A year later, I took on two additional positions: head varsity ice hockey coach and freshman lacrosse coach.  For me, I wanted to impact as many students as possible both in and out of the classroom. Little did I know that these experiences would profoundly shape me as I built my coaching consultancy many years later.  

In my work with schools across the globe, I have consistently seen that the most significant driver of student outcomes is not a new piece of technology or a trendy curriculum; it is the quality of teaching and leadership. However, effective practices do not happen in a vacuum. It requires a culture of support that moves beyond the traditional, often superficial, evaluative process. To truly move the needle on student learning, we must shift to a coaching culture.

In the latest episode of my podcast, Unpacking the Backpack, I explored the L.E.A.D model designed to guide the growth of effective coaching. By focusing on four specific pillars, we can empower educators to reach new heights of professional excellence.

The Foundation: Listening with Intent

Effective coaching is built on a foundation of trust. Without it, even the most brilliant pedagogical advice will go unheeded. This trust is earned through the practice of listening with intent. Many leaders fall into the trap of "fixing" a teacher's problems before fully understanding the classroom context.

True listening involves a deep engagement with the educator’s perspective. Research supports the necessity of this relational approach. For example, a study by Knight and van Nieuwerburgh (2012) finds that the success of instructional coaching largely depends on the quality of the relationship and the coach's ability to facilitate self-directed learning through empathetic listening. When we listen first, we validate the educator’s experience and create a safe space for the vulnerability that growth requires.

Building the Muscles: Developing Capacity

Once trust is established, the focus shifts to building capacity. In education, we often mistake doing what we are told for actual growth. Capacity, however, is the internal ability to make high-level decisions independently. The goal of coaching is to provide the scaffolding necessary for teachers and administrators to become their own best observers.

This process must be job-embedded and continuous. According to Kraft, Blazar, and Hogan (2018), the impact of coaching is significantly greater than that of traditional professional development because it provides sustained, individualized support directly applicable to the teacher's unique classroom environment. By investing in a shared vision, mission and set of goals, we help educators see not just where they are, but who they can become as practitioners.

The Mirror: Empowering Through Evidence

If capacity building is the "how" of growth, evidence is the "what." We must move away from feedback based on subjective opinions and move toward feedback grounded in objective data. This is where we truly empower our staff. When we use evidence, we are not making a judgment; we are providing a mirror.

Using artifacts such as student work samples, engagement data, or video reflections allows for a more rigorous analysis of practice. Desimone and Pak (2017) emphasize that instructional coaching is most effective when it is content-focused and supported by active learning through the examination of evidence. When an educator can see the direct correlation between their actions and student outcomes, they are more likely to take ownership of the necessary changes. It shifts the conversation from "Am I a good teacher? Am I an effective administrator?" to "Is this strategy working for my students? Is this benefiting my staff?"

The Compass: Aligning Actions

The final component involves ensuring that all moves are aligned with the school’s vision and goals. We have all seen the "initiative fatigue" that occurs when educators feel pulled in multiple directions. A coach serves as an alignment specialist, ensuring that daily practices are coherent and research-based. Alignment creates synergy that drives exponential growth. When the entire district or building is pulling in the same direction, leadership and teaching become more focused and sustainable. We must continually ask whether our coaching cycles directly serve our mission to improve students' lives.

Coaching is the engine of professional growth. By listening with intent, developing capacity, empowering through evidence, and aligning actions, we create a system that supports everyone in being their best. It is about human connection, belief in potential, and a relentless commitment to collective improvement.

Want to learn more about Aspire Change EDU’s L.E.A.D coaching model and how the process can support leaders and educators in your district, school, or organization? Reach out today to set up a complimentary thirty (30) minute Zoom meeting. 

Desimone, L. M., & Pak, K. (2017). Instructional coaching as high-quality professional development. Theory Into Practice, 56(1), 3–12. 

Knight, J., & van Nieuwerburgh, C. (2012). Instructional coaching: A partnership approach to improving instruction. Educational Management Administration & Leadership, 40(1), 100–120. 

Kraft, M. A., Blazar, D., & Hogan, D. (2018). The effect of teacher coaching on instruction and achievement: A meta-analysis of the causal evidence. Review of Educational Research, 88(4), 547–588.