THE RELEVANCE OF WORKPLACE LEARNING IN GUIDING STUDENT AND CURRICULUM DEVELOPMENT

1. THE RELEVANCE OF WORKPLACE LEARNING IN GUIDING STUDENT AND CURRICULUM DEVELOPMENT SATN 2011 Annual Conference 27 - 29 November 2011 Dr Joyce Nduna 1 1 1 1

2. Structure of the Presentation Introduction A theoretical framework for workplace learning Researching current practice on workplace learning in a UoT - Methodology - Research findings Institutional attempts to address the shortcomings of current practice and to respond to the HEQF Discussion Conclusion Table 1: Suggestions to improvements on WPL

3. Introduction Increasing calls for graduate employability and associated graduate attributes Terminology Workplace learning - a long established tradition of UoTs Little or no alignment of workplace experience to the learning outcomes of programmes and qualifications (with some notable exceptions) UoTs under scrutiny Lack of funding from the Department of Education, as time spent in the workplace was not regarded as contact time for student learning.

4. Workplace learning should be aligned with academic learning through a logical relationship between the learning outcomes of the programme and qualification and learning outcomes that takes place in the workplace Alignment of workplace learning with academic learning Wilson, Stull and Vinsonhaler, 1996; Ricks, 1996; Schaafsma, 1996; Van Gyn, 1996; Engel-Hills et al., 2010; Winberg et al., 2011. Preparation of students for the workplace Students should be adequately prepared for workplace learning and it should be considered when and how they should engage with workplaces at different HEQF levels in curriculum Engel-Hills et al., 2010; Jacobs 2010; (Franceschini 2009 Teichler 2000; Foster and Stephenson 1998; Garrick and Kirkpatrick 1998; Teichler 1998 Partnerships and collaboration There should be vibrant interaction and collaboration between academia and the world of work Student support Workplace mentoring Communication and use of technology Megginson et al, 2006; Clutterbuck, 2004; Shea, 2002; Hudson, Hudson and Mayne 2010 Ivala and Gachago 2011; Hoehle and Scornavacca 2007; DeSanctis, Wright and Jung 2001; Bostrom 2003; Barnes 2003 There should be quality mentoring in workplaces to ensure that students are supported and not just ‘placed’ Students in worksites should be provided with continuous support through the use of educational technology

5. There should be effective assessment strategies and explicit articulation of learning outcomes and assessment criteria Assessment and accreditation FitzSimons 2000; Onstenk 1998; Noss 1997; Buckingham 1997 Students should be visited and monitored in the workplace and follow-up activities for workplace learning should be set up to provide students with opportunities for reflection Monitoring and evaluation Illeris 2011; Clifford and Thorpe 2007; Brewer and Wyse 1999 The capacity of staff to plan, implement and monitor workplace learning should be assessed and capacity building programmes should be offered A programme workload model that allows lecturers and coordinators to manage workplace learning should be developed Support for staff Killion 1999; Guskey 1998; US Department of Education Professional Development Team 1994 Hull 2006; Calzarossa and Serazzi 1994 There should be adequate allocation of infrastructure, financial and human resources as the logistics of workplace learning are associated with high resourcing levels Resources Rainbird, Fuller and Munro 2004; Boud and Garrick 1999

6. Evaluation research should be a top priority in order to establish a more Integrated or aligned approach between the workplace and higher education and improve the quality of workplace learning Research and Quality Management Wilson 1988; Weaver 1993; Bartkus and Stull 1997; Cates and Jones 1999 Recognition of Prior Learning (RPL) - as the accreditation of work experience within a formal qualification Effective systems and processes for the RPL should be set up in higher education to facilitate career progression and alignment of academic learning with workplace learning Solomon and Boud, 2011; Wihak, 2007; Day, 2002 There should be centralised information management systems that provide a holistic picture of institutional practice on WPL and add value to the function of the HEQC in terms of institutional audits. Information Management Lucey 2005; Nonaka and Takeuchi 1995 The processes and procedures for planning, implementing and monitoring workplace education should be guided by an institutional policy that encourages critical engagement and continuous improvement, rather than ‘compliance’ Policy Formulation Page 2002

7. Researching Current Practice on WPL in a UoT – Research Methodology Document Study A SWOT analysis of the Cooperative Education Unit conducted by the UoT’s Quality Management Directorate in preparation for the 2008 evaluation by the Engineering Council of South Africa (ECSA); Pre-audit report conducted by the Faculty of Engineering in preparation for the 2008 ECSA evaluation; Report on the 2008 ECSA evaluation; Survey on Cooperative education practices conducted by the Southern African Society for Cooperative Education (SASCE) in November, 2008; A report of the 2008 internal quality review cycle providing the scorecard for the coordination of workplace learning as documented by UoT’s Quality Management Directorate. Minutes of meetings Scorecard :Poor – No system/evidence in place Unsatisfactory/Needs improvement – Some system/evidence in place Satisfactory – Meeting some requirements/average evidence Good – System in place/some benchmarking/a lot of evidence in place Excellent – System innovative and used as the benchmark/lots of evidence/clear leadership/best practice

8. Research findings on current practice at an institutional level Findings of the 2008 internal quality review cycle Coordination (e.g. mentoring, communication, monitoring and recording) of workplace learning was a major difficulty The report stated that: ‘There was insufficient monitoring and inadequate assessment conducted’ and that some students were expected to ‘find their own placements or were placed in situations where they did not learn anything relevant to their field of study. It became clear that when offering workplace learning there was a need to ‘revise the quality management process for work-integrated learning and also ensure that students are appropriately placed and supervised’ (HEQC 2011:34).

9. In most cases there was little or no evidence of a direct link between workplace experience and outcomes of the learning programme and qualification Alignment of workplace learning with academic learning ECSA Evaluation Report, 2008 Work preparedness programmes are not credit-bearing and not scheduled in the timetable. In some programmes there was no preparatory stage to introduce students to the industry background in order to enable them to relate their academic studies to the actual work situation Preparation of students for the workplace SWOT Analysis ECSA Evaluation Report, 2008 Partnerships and collaboration In some instances there was little or no proof of collaboration with industry. Some learning took place in a ‘training’ laboratory/environment at neighbouring educational institutions ECSA Evaluation Report, 2008 Student support Workplace mentoring Communication and use of technology ECSA Evaluation Report, 2008 Most of the mentors/evaluators did not have proof of competency to carry out assessment and were not registered. The broad guidelines used did not specify levels of cognitive challenge or complexity required in programmes. There was no evidence that students in the workplace and practitioners in higher education used educational technology to communicate, record and monitor progress

10. Pre-audit Report of the Engineering Faculty ECSA Evaluation Report, 2008) SWOT Analysis of Cooperative Education In some cases there was no evidence of students being assessed by an industry mentor or supervisor. Assessment was left entirely to the Cooperative education practitioners. Assessment and credit awarded were not appropriate to the type and complexity of learning in some programmes The moderation of assessment was lacking Assessment and accreditation Some students were not visited and monitored and in some cases records on visits and monitoring of students were not kept for review purposes In some cases students were encouraged to place themselves. This practice was found to be problematic as the suitability of workplaces needed to be verified before placements, and justified with follow-up visits Monitoring and evaluation Pre-audit Report; 2008 ECSA Evaluation Report SWOT Analysis There was no evidence that the capacity of staff to deliver on WIL processes had been assessed and that attempts to develop capacity building programmes and enabling workload models for them were planned or implemented. SWOT Analysis Support for staff SWOT Analysis Although there was a substantial number of coordinators and placement officers in place, workplace learning did not receive state subsidy (with some exceptions, mainly in the health sciences); as a result several academic departments are considering doing away with workplace learning as they plan new HEQF-aligned programmes. Resources

11. There was little or no evidence of a system to receive feedback from industry and use it to add value to academic departments in order to inform the curriculum . In some programmes, feedback from students and industry was not collated or summarised. Pre-audit Report of the Engineering Faculty compiled in preparation for the 2008 ECSA evaluation Research and Quality Management There was no evidence that career progression and integration of academic learning with workplace learning were facilitated through systems and processes for the Recognition of Prior Learning. Recognition of Prior Learning (RPL) - as the accreditation of work experience within a formal qualification SWOT Analysis Information Management There were no centralized information management systems that provided a holistic picture of institutional practice on workplace learning. In 2008 it was reported that the management of information on WIL was neither consistent nor centralised. Pre-audit Report Although the processes and procedures for planning, implementing and monitoring workplace learning are guided by an institutional policy on Cooperative Education, there is no WIL policy that is inclusive of other modalities of WIL (e.g. project-based learning) to assist students to complete their qualifications when workplace opportunities are not available. Policy Formulation Minutes of meetings

12. Institutional attempts to address the shortcomings of current practice and to respond to the HEQF Drafting of a discussion document with the research findings and an action plan to improve the current practices on workplace learning in 2009; Use of the discussion document in 2010 as a basis for Institutional workshops/discussions around: - conceptual clarity on how learning happens in a work environment and how workplace learning is aligned to academic knowledge; - the HEQF re-curriculation process and the implementation of other modalities of WIL; and - WIL policy formulation Workshops that provided opportunities for some academic departments to share how they have piloted project-based learning as part of the experiential learning programme towards the end of 2011

13. Discussion From these institutional interventions, it is evident that workplace learning, as is currently practised, presents the following two main challenges: Firstly, when viewing workplace learning as a separate experiential component, it is unlikely to be funded by the Department of Higher Education and Training (DHET). Secondly, when treating workplace learning as an integral part of teaching, learning and assessment strategies for an academic programme, it implies that this component should be conceptualised as ‘learning’ rather than ‘work’ and that the number of credits should be determined during the programme conceptualisation phase. It is expected that the DHET will be willing to fund workplace learning if it is coherent and well conceptualised.

14. Discussion Questions raised during institutional discussions If workplace learning is conceptualised as a credit-bearing element of a professional curriculum, will it be appropriately funded by the DHET? Can workplace learning (credit-bearing but not funded by DHET) be an optional component of a professional curriculum? How do we curriculate workplace learning as an optional component in the curriculum? How will UoT programmes then differ from those of traditional universities, especially if these universities also implement project-based learning, problem-based learning and work-directed theoretical learning as components of their curricula? Should we not be looking more critically at the pros and cons of the current experiential learning component in relation to availability of placements, economic climate, and institutional cost of offering workplace learning? If the credits of the learning outcomes to be achieved are entered as experiential learning in the HEQF template does the institution have the resources to support this? How will this be funded by the institution? Do we have all the facts on the table to make an informed decision?

15. Conclusion Workplace learning within academic programmes in UoTs currently faces challenges that require urgent attention Such challenges could be addressed through a collaborative curriculum development process that requires commitment from all relevant stakeholders. Partnerships could make it possible for external stakeholders to monitor and assess the impact of workplace learning on student development There is a need for a clear national strategy for WIL in UoTs to enable workplace learning to make a meaningful contribution to both student and curriculum development. This paper confirms previous work on workplace learning documented in various publications by authors who conceive, define and present workplace learning ‘as a curriculum model that links work and academics, and that is based on sound learning theory’ (Wilson, Stull and Vinsonhaler 1996: 158). ‘Cooperative education is an educational programme that is not simply concerned with employment’ (Cates and Jones, 1996: 66).

21. Questions? Thank You….