OECD Learning Compass 2030

The Learning Compass is introduced as a conceptual learning framework with clearly defined components, those being student agency, core foundations, knowledge, skills, attitudes and values, transformative competencies, and the Anticipation–Action–Reflection (AAR) cycle (pp. 24–27). The table of contents shows that each of these components is then unpacked in a dedicated concept note (pp. 3–4). The main concept note explains how the “points of orientation” work together to guide learners toward well-being in 2030 (pp. 24–27).

The Learning Compass explicitly states that it is a learning framework, not an assessment or curriculum framework, and that it focuses on “what kinds of learning we treasure” rather than what is measured (p. 24). It defines core constructs, such as competency, core foundations, transformative competencies, AAR cycle, and gives illustrative examples and vignettes in the skills, attitudes & values, and AAR concept notes (e.g. pp. 83–87, 99–104, 117–123). However, it does not provide learning outcomes, performance levels, or concrete assessment tools that would allow direct operationalisation in curricula or evaluation systems. The translation into practice is left to countries and school systems.

The project background situates the framework in long-term societal and technological changes and explicitly raises the question of how to prepare students for such futures (pp. 5–7). It traces the historical evolution from industrial-era schooling toward more dynamic and complex learning demands, arguing for system change and curriculum redesign (pp. 8–15). The main concept note then links the compass to the OECD well-being framework and to the SDGs, showing how different dimensions of well-being (jobs, health, environment, civic engagement, etc.) shape the educational destination (pp. 26–27).

Attitudes and values are explicitly defined as a core component of the framework, alongside knowledge and skills, and are described as guiding choices and actions toward individual, societal, and environmental well-being (Attitudes & Values concept note, pp. 99–103). The main concept note and the transformative competencies note emphasise responsibility, respect, sustainability, empathy, and concern for others and the planet as central to “the future we want” (pp. 24–27; 62–63). Taking responsibility, in particular, is framed as a moral capacity involving reflection on personal, ethical, and societal goals (p. 62).

The framework anchors its destination in individual and collective well-being, drawing on the OECD Better Life Index’s 11 dimensions (jobs, income, education, environment, civic engagement, etc.) as the reference for societal outcomes (pp. 26–27). The transformative competencies note explicitly frames learners as co-shapers of society who create new value, reconcile tensions, and take responsibility in order to contribute to sustainable, equitable futures (pp. 59–63). The project background also underlines education’s role in preparing students to tackle societal challenges that “we cannot yet imagine” and to act responsibly in an interconnected world (pp. 5–7).

From the outset, the project asks how to prepare students for jobs that do not yet exist and challenges we cannot yet imagine, in a context of rapid technological and social change (pp. 5–7). The Learning Compass explicitly targets the 2030 horizon and beyond, linking its design to megatrends like AI, big data, globalisation, and demographic shifts (pp. 7–10; 26–27). The transformative competencies and AAR cycle are described as core responses to complexity, uncertainty, and ambiguity (pp. 59–63; 117–121).

The project explicitly builds on the earlier DeSeCo work on key competencies, explaining how the Learning Compass extends that conceptual foundation (p. 15). The concept notes reference a wide range of theoretical traditions, including systems thinking (Senge), liberal education (Nussbaum), and research on competencies and curriculum (Rychen, Young & Muller) (pp. 69–71, 83–87, 99–103). The AAR concept note connects the cycle to constructivist, developmental, and experiential learning theories, citing Piaget, Vygotsky, Bruner, Kolb, and others (pp. 120–121).

The framework defines competency as a holistic concept that includes the mobilisation of knowledge, skills, attitudes, and values to act in coherent and responsible ways in complex situations (pp. 25–26). It distinguishes core foundations (as prerequisites), domain-specific resources (knowledge and skills), and cross-cutting transformative competencies (creating new value, reconciling tensions, taking responsibility) as a higher-order layer (pp. 25–27; 59–63). The AAR cycle is presented as the dynamic process through which competencies are enacted and refined over time (pp. 117–123). Together, this yields a clear, internally consistent competence logic that explains what competencies are, how they are structured, and how they are used.

The background section explains that the framework was designed through iterative, continuous discussions involving national and local governments, academic experts, practitioners, social partners, and students (p. 15). It describes how thematic working groups developed specific concept notes and how the project builds on earlier OECD work such as DeSeCo and Education 2030 position papers (pp. 15–16, 69–71). While it does not provide empirical research protocols (e.g. sampling frames), it offers a transparent account of stakeholders, processes, and intellectual sources.

The main concept note emphasises that the Learning Compass is a learning framework, explicitly stating that it is neither an assessment nor a curriculum framework (p. 24). It points to Phase II of the Education 2030 project, which focuses on curriculum implementation and “teaching for 2030”, but details remain high level (pp. 8–10). The skills, knowledge, and AAR notes include examples and classroom vignettes that illustrate how elements can be embedded in practice (e.g. pp. 83–87, 117–120), yet these serve as illustrations rather than a structured implementation roadmap with defined roles or governance mechanisms.

The framework’s strategic aim is to guide education systems so that learners can achieve individual and collective well-being and contribute to sustainable societies, explicitly linked to the OECD well-being model and the SDGs (pp. 26–27). It is presented as a “common language” to help countries redesign curricula and learning environments for 2030 (pp. 8–10; 24–25). Across the document, the phrase “the future we want” recurs as a concise expression of this strategic orientation (pp. 5–7; 59–63).