Monitoring means to observe and check the progress, or the quality of (something) over a period of time; to keep under systematic review or to maintain regular surveillance over. Monitoring entails a process to periodically collect, analyse and use information, to actively manage progress, maximise the desired outcomes, and minimise the risk of not accomplishing. Monitoring is derived from the Latin monit-, meaning ‘warned’.
Framework means a basic structure underlying a system of rules, values, concepts, criteria, ideas, or beliefs that is used to plan or decide something. A framework is a conceptual structure intended to guide. A monitoring framework indicates how to determine, for example, if specific workplace-based learning (WPBL) or an internship is on course to achieve the specified learning outcomes.
The Council on Higher Education (2011) ‘Good Practice Guide’ denotes (p. 55) under partnerships for workplace-based learning the:
- Role of the academic partner to monitor workplace issues, includes the performance of the workplace supervisor. The lecturers “are responsible for planning issues, and the level and nature of engagement, as well as the implementation issues of monitoring progress, assessing work and programme evaluation.” (p. 60) The lecturer uses “learning plan or learning contract to document negotiated agreements on learning outcomes and processes with students. The university teacher should take prime responsibility for coordinating with workplace supervisors and monitoring students’ workplace activities to ensure that they remain consistent with the intended programme outcomes and assessment criteria.” (p. 63) Workplace-based learning takes place within a relevant workplace context, and may require that lecturers “regularly with them for the purposes of ‘debriefing’, monitoring progress, and dealing with problems.” (p. 64) Such meetings need not be physical, but may take place online.
- Role of the external/professional partner is to monitor the student’s workplace performance
Hansen et al (2022: 74-75) present Schonell and Macklin’s criteria for good practice regarding work-integrated learning (WIL), which is portrayed in Table 1.
Table 1: Work-integrated learning good practice criteria (Table 8, Hansen et al, 2022: 75).
Hansen et al (2022: 76-77) illustrate in Figure 1 the work-integrated learning model and aptly describe “the recommended WIL process starting from initiation, industry engagement, implementation, and evaluation. At the initiation stage, the university must determine the requirements that students should meet in order to carry out the WIL program properly. These requirements are generally in the form of the fulfillment of minimal theoretical and practical subjects. The university must also determine the target industry according to the needs. Furthermore, the university is advised to make a guideline regarding the WIL program so that the procedure becomes clear to all stakeholders. At the industry engagement stage, universities and students should establish good communication with the targeted industry. At this stage, the university and students will provide information regarding the implementation of the WIL program to the industry, including benefits for industry partners and workplace supervisors. Written agreement may be required to create a legal partnership between university and industry partners. Furthermore, briefings or workshops can be conducted as a means of delivering practical information before the WIL program is executed.
At the implementation stage, students must carry out certain preparations, including personal needs, immunizations, and visas (for overseas placements). Student placement is determined based on an agreement between stakeholders on certain considerations such as the availability of accessibility, accommodation, and the achievement of expected learning outcomes. During execution, supervisors and lecturers are actively involved in the process of mentoring and monitoring students. The last stage is evaluation where assessments related to the achievement of learning outcomes by students are carried out. It is recommended that the university to carry out a debriefing meeting to review WIL program implementation and to explore lessons learned for the improvement of future program execution.
In brief, the implementation of WIL programs must consider the following key aspects:
- The designated WIL course must be established. This includes the objective, and a statement about the various aspects of WIL activities (e.g. selection, placement, monitoring, evaluation, etc.)
- Detailed preparation regarding academic and non-academic requirements must be considered. Academic requirements include the fulfilment of grade point averages and required subjects while non-academic requirements include acceptable behavior, confidentiality, ethics, immunization and visas (if placement is abroad).
- The duration of the program must be considered according to the WIL credit course and the time available. A minimum of 9-12 weeks duration is required for a full-time basis program while a longer duration may be required for a part-time basis program.
- WIL program consists of: the three stages of pre-internship, internship and post-internship; involve authentic engagement with partner organizations; be assessed in line with the University’s Assessment policy; comply with relevant government regulations and University policies and instructions.
- The WIL activities may vary in different locations and/or with different cohorts. It can be in form of internships, project-based learning, work-directed learning, etc. and can be offered online and offline, full-time or part-time basis.”
Figure 1: Work-integrated learning model (extract from Figure 3, Hansen et al, 2022: 77).
The aforementioned are deemed significant aspects to take into consideration when developing a monitoring framework for workplace-based learning (WPBL) or internships.
Council on Higher Education (2011). Work-Integrated Learning: Good Practice Guide. HE Monitor No. 12, August 2011. Pretoria: IeCommunications. Electronically accessible from http://cctprojects.co.za/wbeproject/documents/WIL/Higher_Education_Monitor_12.pdf or http://digitalknowledge.cput.ac.za/handle/11189/5205
Hansen, S., Rostiyanti, S.F., Setiawan, A.F., Koesalamwardi, A.B. (2022). Developing a work-integrated learning model adjusting to Construction 4.0 concepts. International Journal of Work-Integrated Learning, 23(1), 65-80. https://www.ijwil.org/files/IJWIL_23_1_65_80.pdf