Review
to overviewApproachskills

MarSkills

Future Skills und Hochschulbildung neu denken.

Philipps-Universität Marburg

Structure & Clarity:

Is the approach logically structured and clearly understandable in terms of content?Rating: Fully Met

The MarSkills framework of the University of Marburg presents a clearly structured concept, detailed in chapters 3 and 5. Particularly, the description of the study area and the competence model shows a thoughtful structure with multiple submodules and objectives. However, a systematic visualization of the overall structure and its linkage to curricula is missing, reducing transparency.

Operationalizability:

Can the described skills be concretely observed, enhanced, or developed?Rating: Weakly Developed

Future Skills are theoretically described and linked to general goals, but lack concrete indicators or learning objectives. There are no suggested assessment methods or didactic implementation guidelines. Only implicit references in the competence model provide initial hints.

Contextualization:

Is the societal, cultural, or technological context of the skills made visible?Rating: Fully Met

The framework emphasizes the societal responsibility of universities and their role in transformation. It references major societal challenges like climate change and digitalization. However, it lacks a deeper analysis of how these contexts relate to specific skills.

Value Orientation:

Are ethical principles, responsibility, or personal stance explicitly addressed?Rating: Weakly Developed

Value orientations such as personal development, democratic engagement, and critical thinking are mentioned as goals. However, an explicit ethical framework or systematic reflection on attitudes is missing. The normative framing is more educational-theoretical than ethically grounded.

Societal Relevance:

Does the approach go beyond individual capabilities and address social participation or transformation?Rating: Exemplary

The entire approach is based on a clear positioning of the university as an actor in societal transformation. Integration of civic education, responsibility, and transdisciplinary work is consistently embedded and well-justified throughout the document.

Future Relevance:

Does the approach respond to current and future challenges (e.g., sustainability, digitalization, globalization) and describe a clear relation to the future?Rating: Fully Met

Future-related topics like digitalization, the VUCA world, and societal transformation are mentioned several times. However, systematic analysis of disruptive technologies or global megatrends remains vague.

Educational-Theoretical Reference:

Can the approach be plausibly linked to theories of education, learning, or competence?Rating: Exemplary

The approach is deeply rooted in educational theory, referencing concepts such as education through science, general education per Klafki, and the humanistic ideal. Theoretical foundations are explicitly cited.

Competence Logic:

Is it clear which understanding of competence (e.g., knowledge-skills-attitudes, action, mindset) underlies the approach?Rating: Fully Met

The competence model links Future Skills, educational ideals, and learning objectives. It aligns with established models but remains at a conceptual level, lacking clear differentiation between knowledge, action, and attitude components.

Transparency of Development / Methodological Design:

Is it traceable which (research/development) methods were used to develop the approach (e.g., conceptual, empirical quantitative, qualitative, mixed methods) and who was involved?Rating: Weakly Developed

While editors are named, the model’s development process is not clearly documented. There is no information on participation, evaluation, or iterative development steps.

Implementation Logic / Application Logic / Responsible Actors:

Is it clear who is responsible for putting the approach into practice (e.g., learners, educators, institutions, policymakers)?Rating: Fully Met

The MarSkills component is integrated into the university curriculum and offers ECTS credits. However, information on implementation in departments, responsibilities, or long-term governance structures is missing.

Strategic Objective:

Is it evident which overarching goal (e.g., higher education development, education for sustainable development, innovation, entrepreneurship) the approach serves?Rating: Fully Met

The framework emphasizes goals such as personal development, societal engagement, and Future Skills. However, there are no clear links to institutional strategies, third mission activities, or higher education policy goals.


Direct link to the approach (external)
Show fact sheet
Show future skills
1 Not Evident
Not Implemented
The criterion is absent. There are no discernible approaches or indications of implementation.
2 Weakly Developed
Partially Recognizable
The criterion is partially present but implemented only superficially, unsystematically, or incompletely.
3 Fully Met
Implemented and Integrated
The criterion is comprehensively, consistently, and transparently implemented and functionally integrated into the overall concept.
3* Exemplary
Implemented in a Model Fashion
The criterion is realized to an outstanding degree and serves as an exemplary or model reference for implementation in comparable contexts.

Backgroundinformation reviewcriteria

Privacy settings

You can adjust the settings for the cookies here.

Please select which cookies you would like to accept and confirm by clicking the button. You will then be redirected back to the start page.

Please note that if you check the External media box, data such as your IP address may be transmitted to Google and thus possibly to a third country without a data protection agreement. This happens especially when you watch our videos. You can find more information here: Privacy Policy