In a July 2020 post I proposed a decision-making flowchart with regard to work-integrated learning (WIL). With this post my intention is to urge decision-making in the lights of stated imperatives.
The South African Government (2014), Department of Higher Education and Training, gazetted Higher Education Qualifications Sub-Framework (HEQSF), §35 (p. 17) specifies:
Where the entire WIL component or any part of it takes the form of workplace-based learning, it is the responsibility of institutions that offer programmes requiring credits for such learning to place students into appropriate workplaces. Such workplace-based learning must be appropriately structured, properly supervised and assessed.
While universities are under obligation (in accordance to HEQSF §35) to place students for such workplace-based learning, §34 (p. 17) of the HEQSF however states that work-integrated learning (WIL) “may take various forms including simulated learning, work-directed theoretical learning, problem-based learning, project-based learning and workplace-based learning”; and that “the selection of appropriate forms of work-integrated learning depends on the nature and purpose of the qualification type, programme objectives and outcomes, the NQF level at which the WIL component is pegged, institutional capacity to provide WIL opportunities, and the structures and systems that are in place within professional settings and sites of practice to support student learning”.
Should the university have opted for workplace-based learning, then a number of criteria—specified by the Council on Higher Education (2004a+b, 2014)—are applicable to such work-based learning. Summarised as follow:
- Appropriate system for distributed students
- Equivalent learning experiences across range of contexts
- Learning agreements between students, host organisations, and the university
- Learning objective & outcomes clarified
- Specified roles & responsibilities
- Continuous good working relations
- Effective & regular communication
- Systematic & regular recording about the learning of students
- Progress monitoring
- A mentoring system
- Students gaining knowledge of work practices
- Students helped recognising their strengths & weaknesses
Council on Higher Education (2014). Distance Higher Education Programmes in a Digital Era: Programme Accreditation Criteria, pp. 81 – 107. In Distance Higher Education Programmes in a Digital Era: Good Practice Guide.
Council on Higher Education (2004a). Higher Education Quality Committee. Criteria for Programme Accreditation.
Council on Higher Education (2004b). Higher Education Quality Committee. Criteria for Institutional Audits.
South African Government (2014), Department of Higher Education and Training, Government Notice No 819. Higher Education Qualifications Sub-Framework. Government Gazette No. 38116, 17 October 2014.
Comments