Pros and Cons to Mastery Paths

Introduction

Only one out of the 37 BYU professors I work with use mastery paths in their online courses. This post is my musings on why professors are choosing not to use learning (mastery-specific) paths.

What Are Mastery Paths?

Mastery paths allow instructors to cater to the individual student needs while not sacrificing their desired learning outcomes. This Canvas training video on mastery paths is a little outdated, but still explains the topic well.

Who Uses Mastery Paths and How?

The BYU Online Physical Science 100 professor I work with uses mastery paths because she is serious about her students achieving an essential level of content mastery. But she uses mastery paths differently than how most people use them. Instead of offering students differentiated learning paths based on their scores, she only offers a single path–MASTERY. Students must score above a certain number of points for the condition to kick in and unlock the subsequent quizzes in the path. (I.e., “You will not pass my class unless you can demonstrate a basic understanding of certain concepts!”)

Mastery Path Pros

Mastery paths can potentially challenge learners at different competency levels. This is done in Montessori-like learning environments where learners at many levels learn together. It assesses a learner’s mastery of the content and then assigns them subsequent assignments that will challenge them. This keeps learners in a constant state of Flow; no one feels bored or overly challenged. For example, someone who aces a quiz might get an assignment type higher on Bloom’s Taxonomy than the module-level objectives indicate.
Mastery paths do not assign learners unnecessary practice. Some instructors say, “ALL this content is important,” or “Students MUST be spending a certain amount of time doing coursework each week.” Is it? Do they? But by focusing on competency-based education (CBE), instructors respect learners’ time, and as a result, they trust that what they are asked to engage in is meaningful.
Mastery paths offer struggling students needed resources. In mastery paths, the instructors are more “present” as learning facilitators as they passively guide students to the resources that will help them the most. For example, instructors might include pre-recorded invitations to contact them at the end of remedial assignments (content that A-students wouldn’t see). It’s an automatic way to reach out to students instead of TAs keeping an eye on the gradebook.
Implementing mastery paths is a way to show that instructors care about the growth of individuals. Students clearly see that the instructor has gone the extra mile to ensure that students are “getting” the material. Struggling students feel less alone and encouraged to engage with the remedial materials.

Mastery Path Cons (or Reasons Why We’re Not All Doing It Already)

There’s a personal ability issue. We’ve never learned why or how to do it.
Our teaching philosophy may be more content-centered than learning-centered. For generations, university instructors have been steeped in the culturally-accepted belief that they are the experts, and it is a privilege to study under them. As a result, their approach to learning and assessments is “my way or the highway.” For these instructors, if you earn less than an A, the unspoken assumption is that it results from the students’ lack of intelligence or study. However, learning-centered instructors understand their role as guides but choose to focus more on the individual learners’ paths toward mastery. Both are objective/outcome-focused, but one cares more about how it’s taught and the other about how it is learned.
Mastery path setup can be complicated and time-consuming. The amount of content created may be the same (whether mastery paths are used or not). However, mastery paths require instructors and designers to plan what learning paths look like carefully. (The actual setup in the LMS is pretty straightforward.)
- For a CBE approach, instructors may offer a challenging pre-assessment instead of giving EVERYONE EVERYTHING up front. Those who score well on the pre-assessment (or indicate their predisposition to test well on the summative assessment) may be assigned less reading and practice than those who scored poorly.
- For a learning preferences approach, the pre-assessment may be a single question: “How do you like to be assessed?” Students may choose from a selection of assignments that they feel more comfortable demonstrating competency.
Mastery paths may deprive learners of all potential resources. However, the instructor’s job isn’t to “get through all their material.” It’s to help learners reach pre-defined course outcomes. (Some instructors make a way to provide alternative learning path materials to all students as supplementary material.)

Conclusion

Give learning paths a try. See what it does for your student motivation and competency levels.