Within the framework of the vocational qualification structure in Dutch secondary vocational education, the development of student competencies takes a central position. This focus on students’ competence development can be seen in the Vocational Education and Training (VET) systems in many other countries inside and outside Europe (Mulder et al., 2007). Competencies can be described as integrated knowledge, skill and attitudinal aspects needed to perform adequately in specific professional situations (Biemans et al., 2009). This definition stressing the integrative nature of competencies characterises a comprehensive approach towards competence-based vocational education (Delamare Le Deist & Winterton, 2005). In this respect, the comprehensive competence-based education (CCBE) approach is fundamentally different from instrumental approaches (e.g., McClelland 1976), in which competencies are specified in detailed lists of fragmented and assessable behavioural elements related to job performance (Biemans et al., 2004).

In CCBE, students should be able to optimally develop their own competencies, not only for handling professional core problems (vocational expertise or ‘knowing in practice’ – cf. Billett, 2001), but also for their personal development, which is an important prerequisite for further education, employability, citizenship, and lifelong learning (Wesselink et al., 2010). In this regard, in Dutch VET, the 25 so-called SHL competencies are leading: these concern competencies like “Following instructions and procedures”, “Planning and organising” and “Co-operating and deliberating” (Khaled et al., 2011).

A valid and reliable assessment of these competencies is crucial for education (Braun et al., 2012). According to Wolf (1995, 1), ‘competence-based assessment is a form of assessment that is derived from the specification of a set of outcomes; that so clearly states both the outcomes – general and specific – that assessors, students and interested third parties can all make reasonably objective judgements with respect to student achievement or non-achievement of these outcomes; and that certifies student progress on the basis of demonstrated achievement of these outcomes’. Since traditional assessment methods are ill-suited to a competence-based curriculum, new instruments have to be developed that meet criteria for competence-based assessments (Biemans et al., 2004; 2009).

In VET, student competencies are frequently assessed by the students themselves: questionnaires on self-rated competencies have increasingly been employed. However, self-ratings are often criticised for their lack of validity (Braun et al., 2012). Therefore, in addition to the self-assessment by students of their own competencies, it is common practice in VET that students’ competencies are assessed by their coaches as well (and, in some cases, by their fellow-students) as part of a 360̊ feedback assessment procedure. This raises the issue to what extent the assessments of the students’ competencies by the students themselves and the assessments by their coaches are related. In other words, do the students themselves rate their own competencies at the same level as their coaches do? Thus, this study aimed to answer the following concrete research questions: 1) To what extent do the assessments of competencies by students and by their coaches correlate?; and 2) Do the assessments by the students themselves match with the assessments by their coaches?

Biemans, H., Nieuwenhuis, L., Poell, R., Mulder, M. & Wesselink, R. (2004). Competence-based VET in the Netherlands: background and pitfalls. Journal of Vocational Education and Training, 56 (4), 523-538. Biemans, H., Wesselink, R., Gulikers, J., Schaafsma, S., Verstegen, J. & Mulder, M. (2009). Towards competence-based VET: dealing with the pitfalls. Journal of Vocational Education and Training, 61 (3), 267-286. Billett, S. (2001). Knowing in practice: re-conceptualising vocational expertise. Learning and Instruction, 11, 431-452. Bouffard, T. & Narciss, S. (2011). Benefits and risks of positive biases in self-evaluation of academic competence: Introduction. International Journal of Educational Research, 50 (4), 205-208. Braun, E., Woodley, A., Richardson, J.T.E. & Leidner, B. (2012). Self-rated competences questionnaires from a design perspective. Educational Research Review, 7 (1), 1-18. Delamare Le Deist, F. & Winterton, J. (2005). What is competence? Human Resource Development International, 8 (1), 27-46. Khaled, A., Gulikers, J., Oonk, C., Biemans, H. & Lans, T. (2011). Competentie Ontwikkeling Meter [Competence Development Test]. Wageningen: Wageningen University. Kwam, V.S.Y., John, O.P., Robins, R.W. & Kuang, L.L. (2008). Conceptualizing and assessing self-enhancement bias: A componential approach. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 94, 1062-1077. McClelland, D. (1976). A Guide to Job Competency Assessment. Boston, MA: McBer. Mulder, M., Weigel, T. & Collins, K. (2007). The concept of competence in the development of vocational education and training in selected EU member states. A critical analysis. Journal of Vocational Education and Training, 59 (1), 67-88. Wesselink, R., Dekker-Groen, A. M., Biemans, H. J. A. & Mulder, M. (2010). Using an instrument to analyse competence-based study programs; experiences of teachers in Dutch vocational education and training. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 42 (6), 813-829. Wolf, A. (1995). Competence-based assessment (assessing assessment). Buckingham, UK: Open University Press.