Reimagining Higher Education: The Promise and Challenges of Competency-Based Learning in the Digital Age

Purpose: Competency-Based Education (CBE) represents a fundamental shift from traditional credit-hour systems, emphasizing mastery of defined skills and knowledge outcomes over time-based seat requirements. Despite growing institutional adoption, a comprehensive synthesis of CBE’s implementation frameworks, outcome evidence, and equity implications in the post-2015 context remains limited. Prior systematic reviews of CBE either predate the digital transformation era, focus on single disciplines, or examine only specific implementation dimensions. This review addresses those gaps by synthesizing the full breadth of CBE evidence published between 2015 and December 2025. Methods: This systematic review adheres to PRISMA 2020 guidelines. Four databases (Google Scholar, ERIC, Scopus, and institutional case-study repositories) were searched using four keyword clusters: “Competency-Based Education,” “Traditional Teaching and Students’ Competencies,” “Credit System and Students’ Achievement Measures,” and “Competency-Based Education and Workforce. After removing 125 duplicates and applying eligibility criteria (2015–December 2025; post-secondary focus), 73 sources were retained: 68 peer-reviewed articles and 5 accredited institutional case-study reports. A six-theme thematic synthesis was conducted following the work by Braun and Clarke; inter-rater reliability was κ = 0.79 on a 20% subsample (n = 15). Results: Six themes emerged: (1) Student-Centered Learning Philosophy, (2) Outcome-Based Assessment, (3) Flexible Pacing and Mastery Standards, (4) Implementation Frameworks, (5) Institutional Case Studies (University of Wisconsin Flexible Option, SNHU College for America, Purdue Global ExcelTrack, Northeastern Align, and Western Governors University), and (6) Challenges and Benefits of CBE. Evidence suggests that CBE is associated with improved adult-learner retention, workforce development alignment, and recognition of prior learning; however, these benefits are methodologically constrained, and equity implications remain structurally plausible but empirically unconfirmed. Resistance within institutions, misalignment with accreditation standards, and resource demands are the primary barriers to implementation. Conclusions: CBE provides a credible alternative to credit-hour systems for post-secondary institutions serving diverse learner populations, supported by a growing but methodologically constrained evidence base in which selection bias cannot be excluded as a contributing explanation for observed outcome advantages. Successful implementation requires phased institutional change, comprehensive faculty development, and proactive engagement with accrediting bodies. Future research should prioritize longitudinal outcome data, equity analyses by learner subgroup, and AI-driven adaptive assessments within CBE frameworks. Equity benefits are structurally plausible by design but remain empirically unconfirmed; no included study provides demographic subgroup data sufficient to verify equitable distribution of outcomes.