Learning in vivo

Use case studies to instil interdisciplinary approaches to complex future problems

The engineer of the future, many other professionals and employees in general will be facing more and more complex challenges that would require much wider skills sets and interdisciplinary knowledge applications that integrate “science, technology and social systems” (National Academy of Engineering 2004, cited by Davis and Yadav 2014, 163). It is envisaged that “work environments will be inherently ill structured and complex owing to conflicting goals, unanticipated problems, multiple solution methods, non-technical success standards, and unavoidable constraints”.

Situated learning in “authentic and meaningful contexts”, enabling students to experience to complexities they may be faced with, is easier said than done. During the 20^th century cooperative and work-integrated education went a long way towards placing students in authentic workplace learning environments. However, “anchored instruction” is advocated as the solution for formal education settings.

The goal of anchored instruction is to overcome the inert knowledge problem by creating environments that enable students and teachers to experience the problems and opportunities experts in the field face and tools they use to tackle the problems. Furthermore, anchored instruction models are how experts change their own thinking based on new concepts and theories, rather than looking at new information as facts or mechanical procedures that need to be memorised (Cognition and Technology Group at Vanderbilt [CGTV] cited by Davis and Yadav 2014, 164).

Davis, C. and Yadav, A. 2014. Case studies in engineering, pp. 161 – 180. In A. Johri and B.M. Olds (eds). 2014. Cambridge handbook of engineering education research. New York: Cambridge University Press.

National Academy of Engineering. 2004. The engineer of 2020: Visions of engineering in the new century. Washington, DC: The National Academy Press.

Similarities and differences between case studies and problem-based learning

Davis and Yadav (2014, 163) indicate that Burgess (2004) suggests “that cases could be developed that provide students with authentic experiences of solving real-world problems and promote flexible, adaptive learning needed for the work-place”.

However, apart from pointing out directly below important similarities and differences “between case study learning and problem-based learning”, Davis and Yadav (2014, 163) present a comparison in a table (copied from p. 164):

• Cases “are an account of current/past activity and contain information that reflects the perspectives of a previous problem solver or case author”.
• Problem-based learning “presents real-world problems to students who require new skills or knowledge to solve the problem”. Citing Burgess (2004) Davis and Yadav (2014, 163) indicate that “students need to discover what is required to solve the problem and build a case”.

 

Burgess, K.L. 2004. Is your case a problem? Journal of STEM Education: Innovations and Research, 1/2, 42-44.

Davis, C. and Yadav, A. 2014. Case studies in engineering, pp. 161 – 180. In A. Johri and B.M. Olds (eds). 2014. Cambridge handbook of engineering education research. New York: Cambridge University Press.

Case studies or histories present students with actual projects and problems encountered

Cases, case studies or case histories “are narratives that present real-life scenarios/problems and allow students to experience how professionals address problems encountered in the field” say Davis and Yadav (2014, 161). Stated differently, a case study is a written account of something actually done; a micro-context focussing on a specific subset of a larger domain. Davis and Yadav (2014, 162) mention three major types of cases, namely (a) descriptive or analytical, (b) problem-solving or synthetical, and (c) problem identification. Citing Merseth (1994), cases comprise three main elements convey Davis and Yadav (2014, 161), namely:

1. “they are based on real-life events or realistic situations that allow students to experience problems they are not likely to encounter first-hand;
2. they present both contextual and technical information that is based on careful research and study;
3. [and] they may present no clear-cut solutions to allow students to develop multiple perspectives”.

It therefore follows that cases mimic real-world scenarios, which require students to solve authentic ill-structured problems with complexities, and to experiment within safe confines.

Case studies have a long and effective teaching history, since 1870, in business, law and medicine. The Harvard Business School adopted in 1908 case studies as instructional method. In 1940s an entire science course was offered by means of case studies. Since the 1950s cases have been used in chemical and civil engineering.

Davis, C. and Yadav, A. 2014. Case studies in engineering, pp. 161 – 180. In A. Johri and B.M. Olds (eds). 2014. Cambridge handbook of engineering education research. New York: Cambridge University Press.

Merseth, K.K. 1994. Cases, case methods, and the professional development of educators. Eric Digest. Retrieved 14 July 2014 from http://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED401272

Project based learning (PJBL) as per the SA Council on Higher Education

The CHE’s Good Practice Guide (2011, 4) on WIL advocates the “fostering [of] university learning that is less didactic and more situated, participative, and ‘real world’ oriented”. The integration of theory and practice may occur through a varied range of approaches, such as formal or informal work placements, “action-learning, apprenticeships, cooperative education, experiential learning, inquiry learning, inter-professional learning, practicum placements, problem-based learning, project-based learning, scenario learning, service-learning, team-based learning, virtual or simulated WIL learning, work-based learning, work experience, workplace learning” (emphasis added). An underlying commonality—not restricted to placements—is the alignment of academic and workplace practices for the mutual benefit of students and workplaces.

The CHE’s Good Practice Guide (2011, 18) qualifies that “project-based learning (PJBL) involves learning through projects”. These projects could either be ‘real’ or simulated. ‘Real’ projects are undertaken in a workplace and generally involve “elements of research and the supervision by both a university teacher and workplace supervisor or mentor”. Projects “are a means of engaging students in complex, work-related issues, through which they develop and transfer skills and knowledge”. It is important to point out that “projects do not always lend themselves to ‘coverage’ of all outcomes in a curriculum. This means selecting those topics that reflect the most important ideas and concepts in the curriculum and incorporating those topics into projects.”

The application of project-based learning is discussed at the various HEQF levels, namely:

For level 5, the one-year certificate (2011, 23), it is not recommended because “literature recommends that PJBL components be approximately one semester in duration”.

For level 6, the two-year advanced certificate (2011, 24), only short focussed projects.

For level 7, the three-year diploma/Bachelor’s degree (2011, 24), “A focused project, such as a service learning project, would be appropriate at the third year level, provided that there are adequate resources for such a project – in particular a transport budget, time allocation, and formal agreements with community partners and service providers” (emphasis added).

For level 8, the four-year professional Bachelor’s degree (2011, 25), the same condition regarding adequate resources is expressed, however “formal agreements with workplaces, the provision of mentors/coaches” is mentioned. Further stated that “PJBL is recommended in the third and fourth year” because “PJBL can contribute significantly to student learning”, “when the students are more able to learn from complex situations, have near-professional level skills, and are thus able to contribute to problem solving or innovation in a workplace in a meaningful way.”

For level 9, the Master’s degree (2011, 25), the theses are generally of an applied nature, meaning PJBL research “in which an intervention or product is designed, implemented, studied, and evaluated” could be ideal.

For level 10, the Doctoral degree (2011, 25), the same applies as for level 9 but “with particular emphasis on the contribution to knowledge”.

The engagement of students in PJBL teaches such “students complex processes and procedures such as planning, managing and communicating”. However, the CHE’s Good Practice Guide (2011, 36) cautions about the alignment of this pedagogical approach that the accomplishment “requires time for both teachers and students to master the strategies necessary for successful PJBL”. The reason is that “project work involves many different types of projects within the framework of a single subject it can be demanding on staff resources”.

The CHE’s Good Practice Guide (2011, 43) regards project-based learning as ‘high stakes’ assessment, because it often counts proportionately more marks than theoretical modules. Historically students kept “logbooks or build portfolios to show their experience and the skills development”. However, “these paper-based forms of assessment are” considered “inadequate in terms of demonstrating students’ mastery of complex practice”. The CHE’s Good Practice Guide (2011, 43-44) presents an example of video-diaries used rather than paper-based assessment. It further (p. 48) points out that “clarity on the assessment process in project work is probably more important than with traditional programmes because of the demands it makes on academic staff.”

The CHE’s Good Practice Guide (2011, 54-55) point out that project-based learning “has considerable potential for advanced student learning and for solving ‘real life’ problems in workplaces.” However, it also cautions that “there are extensive resources [needed] for initiating, building and maintaining community-based partnerships in the CHE guide on Service-learning in the curriculum (2006)” for enabling students to “assist a community in need, using knowledge and skills gained in their course of study”. Similarly, is the “support of university teachers” necessary to “address a real workplace problems”. The CHE’s Good Practice Guide (2011, 54-55) differentiates the roles of the internal/academic partners and the external/professional partners with regard to project-based learning. The lecturer “takes on the role of a professional consultant”; “usually plays a significant role in addressing the workplace problem or need” and “should model professional conduct”. The “students will take on a professional identity, which is an important aspect of their development as they learn to deal with clients in a professional manner”. The “workplace partners play a major role” in identifying “a particular need or area of work that requires development and, in collaboration with the academic partners, define and shape the work so that there is a match between workplace requirements and the academic programme”.

The academia/lecturers’ role	The workplace professionals role
Assume a professional identity,   and explain issues in professionalism Act as consultants Supervise the students engaged   in the project Ensure that the students meet   regularly with their ‘clients’ Monitor the progress of the   project Assess the final product or   process, in collaboration with the professional partner	Invite students to solve an   authentic workplace problem Provide students with sufficient   orientation to the workplace and the particular problem Arrange adequate time for   students to consult with workplace supervisors or mentors Assist with the assessment of   the final product or process, in collaboration with the academic partner

The CHE’s Good Practice Guide (2011, 61) points out that the management of project-based learning requires “considerable planning, as well as relationship building with workplace partners.” It recommends formalising the partnerships with workplaces by entering into a memorandum of Understanding which clarifies the respective roles and responsibilities of academia, the workplace partners and of students, but also address health and safety issues.

The workplace may be involved with the selection of students, their orientation to the workplace in general as well as to the specific project, etc. It is important that full records are kept, including workplace and contact person details, student lists (which projects they are involved with, contact details, etc.). Data capturing and management of the database of students and workplace would probably be done by administrative staff, but should be overseen by the academic manager or university teacher who has the main responsibility for the project. PJBL involves liaising with workplaces; this might include attending meetings between students and their ‘clients’ (although this could be delegated to tutors or mentors). Students’ progress on their projects should be monitored, regular feedback given, and their work should be formally assessed, usually in collaboration with workplace partners.

The CHE’s Good Practice Guide (2011, 61) admits that “creating and managing authentic opportunities for projects in a real work context is a time consuming task and opportunities for student work placements might be limited in particular fields.” It therefore state that project-based learning is often simulated “at the university in order to enable students to experience some aspects of the workplace within an educational framework.”

Republic of South Africa. Council on Higher Education (CHE). 2011. Work-Integrated Learning: Good Practice Guide. Higher Education Monitor 12, August 2011. Pretora: IeCommunications. http://cctprojects.co.za/wbeproject/documents/WIL/Higher_Education_Monitor_12.pdf or http://digitalknowledge.cput.ac.za/handle/11189/5205

Winning-trio and circles of relations in work-based learning

A “truly co-operative educational approach” between the engineering educational institution and employer organisations, reflected by the ‘double-headed arrow’ below the triangle in the figure below, is advocated by Nuninger and Châtelet (2011, 91). The profile (depicted inside the triangle) of the professional production systems engineer in France, serves as the core of the training. The curriculum is altered to meet the demands and needs of the industrial partners. However, the quality is monitored by comparing appropriateness, currency and relevance to the professional reality (Nuninger & Châtelet 2011, 90), and audits are periodically undertaken by the Engineer Title Commission of France. 

The knowledge and skill acquisition of the student (apprentice/learner), depicted at the top corner of the triangle in the figure below, is facilitated by both the academic institution (school) tutor and the workplace (company/industry) mentor. This triangle represents the wining-trio, with its three circles of relations (Figure 6 from Nuninger & Châtelet 2011, 93).

The “strong university-industry partnership arises from … [the] decision to establish a board of management (with both industrial and university membership) to oversee the curriculum and because of the shared university/organization mentoring processes” state Nuninger and Châtelet (2011, 88-89). Further benefits derivable are dependent upon the discourse/s and interactions between the university (and higher education as a collective) and the appropriate professional sector argue Nuninger and Châtelet (2011, 93).

Nuninger, W. and Châtelet, J.M. 2011. Work-Integrated Learning for Engineers in Coordination with Industries. In P. Keleher; A. Patil, R.E. Harreveld (eds). 2011. Work-integrated learning in engineering, built environment and technology: diversity of practice in practice (pp. 85-109). Hershey, Pa.: Information Science Reference.

Workplace and work-integrated learning in the expanded, effective and integrated post-school education and training system in South Africa

The notions workplace learning and work-integrated learning; each appears 13 times in the White Paper (2013). Download White Paper - final for web Please note that emphases were added to quotations below.

“Universities should seek to build strong partnerships with employers in order to promote the expansion of workplace training opportunities, especially in those areas where qualifications or professional registration depends on practical workplace experience. These partnerships can benefit from the inclusion of SETAs.” states the executive summary of the White Paper for Post-School Education and Training (2013, xiv). This statement is repeated on page 41 with elaboration that Sector Education and Training Authorities (SETAs) “which can assist in brokering university-employer collaboration as well as providing advice and resources to facilitate work-integrated learning”. 

“Learners exiting universities … are not, in general, finding work easily …” state the same white paper on page 64, because “they are often described by employers as lacking the skills needed” to which the “lack of practical workplace experience” is related. It is then concluded that “workplace learning must be seen as integral part of qualification and programme design”. On page 65 it is stated that “in future, universities should engage with industry stakeholders and SETAs to examine how their programmes could be progressively adjusted to fulfil the role”. 

The executive summary states on page xvi that “Universities, especially comprehensive universities and universities of technology, will be encouraged to expand distance higher education for vocationally orientated diploma programmes”. This is elaborated on at the bottom of page 50 and continued on page 51, stating “In the university sector, distance education is served by Unisa, as well as by North West University, the University of Pretoria, the University of KwaZulu–Natal and a handful of other public and private institutions. However, distance higher education for vocationally oriented diploma programmes at comprehensive universities or universities of technology is not as well-developed as that for the purely academic programmes.”

“Simulated workplace experience can be difficult to recreate in a workshop” is stated on page 9 of the white paper. This statement is preceded by the argument that “in many areas of study, useful practical experience can be obtained in an institutional workshop where learning can be easily controlled in line with a curriculum. However, institutional workshops often cannot afford to keep up with the most recent equipment available.” It is further stated that “… it is always beneficial to augment this with practice in an actual workplace where real-life experiences such as working under pressure, dealing with customers, and working as part of a team may be more easily learned”.

Page xvi of the executive summary observes that “the design of training systems, including curricula, requires close collaboration between education and training providers and employers — especially in those programmes providing vocational training”. On page xii this notion is repeated saying “emphasis will be given to strengthening partnerships with employers, both at the system level and that of individual colleges. Such partnerships will assist the colleges to locate opportunities for work-integrated learning”. It is also said that “employers should also be in a position to advise the college system and individual colleges around issues of curriculum, and experts from industry could teach at colleges …”. It is furthermore stated that “SETAs have an important role to play in promoting and facilitating between colleges and employers”. 

It is pointed out on page 5 that “the new configuration of the Department of Higher Education and Training enables tremendous possibilities for cooperation and mutual support among post-school institutions …” It is further pointed out that “SETAs working more closely with public institutions, especially TVET colleges and universities” and (p. 6) that “SETAs are beginning to help establish partnerships between these educational institutions and employers, especially to facilitate various forms of work-integrated learning.” 

The “National Skills Accord, signed in July 2011 by all partners in the National Economic Development and Labour Council (NEDLAC)” is mentioned on page 8. The signatories is said to have agreed to, among others, promote access to training opportunities in workplaces. On page 9 it is stated that the “combination of both theoretical knowledge and practical experience is important, indeed essential”; as well as that “practical experience builds applied knowledge and develops self-confidence in someone’s ability to act effectively”. 

It is deduced on page 9 that “training systems, including curricula, need to be designed around close cooperation between employers and education and training providers”. Teaching hospitals, as well developed models, are recommended. The important role of SETAs is stated in that “SETAs have a crucial role to play in facilitating such workplace learning partnerships between employers and educational institutions”. 

Page 16 elaborates that “it is essential that they [colleges] develop and maintain close relationships with employers in their areas of study”, because “close partnerships between colleges and employers will assist the colleges to locate opportunities for work-integrated learning and help them to place students”. Another benefit is that “colleges may also be in a position to benefit from donations of equipment from particular employers”. The role of SETAs is again mentioned, namely that “SETAs should play a role in forging relationships between colleges and employers, using not only their contacts but also their resources to incentivise employers to take on students for workplace learning opportunities. Partnerships between colleges and SETAs will be facilitated by the establishment of offices representing the SETAs in each college. These offices should represent all the SETAs in that college, and work to promote and facilitate the relationship between the college and individual SETAs in the interests of both. Some SETA offices, representing clusters of SETAs, have already been established in colleges”. 

About workplace learning it is stated on page 64 that often “work placements are unstructured and do not contribute to the outcomes of the qualification; rather, they take the form of compulsory work experience.” However, is said “the possibility exists for the colleges and the SETAs to work together to restructure such programmes as learnerships or apprenticeships, or for the work placement to become a more structured internship.”

Apart from “increasing access to workplaces for students in vocational and higher education, in the form of various of types of work-integrated learning” on page 65; it is remarked that “also essential is improving and updating the industry knowledge of educators by providing appropriate work-exposure opportunities for TVET [Technical and vocational education and training] lecturers”.

In the conclusion (p. 75) it is stated that “this White Paper sees a key role for employers in the integration of education and training. This will include a very significant expansion of work-integrated learning and workplace-based learning”. About SETAs, is stated that “the White Paper also envisages a strategic shift in the role of the SETAs in skills planning and in supporting the provision of education and training”. 

Republic of South Africa. 2013. Government Gazette No 37229. Department of Higher Education and Training. Notice No 11. 15 January 2014. White paper for post-school education and training — building an expanded, effective and integrated post-school system. Pretoria. Electronically available from http://www.che.ac.za/sites/default/files/publications/White%20Paper%20-%20final%20for%20web.pdf / http://www.gov.za/documents/download.php?f=207591

White Paper approved by cabinet 20 November 2013 and released 16 January 2014 by Dr BE Nzimande, Minister of Higher Education and Training.

• http://mg.co.za/article/2014-01-16-blade-launches-dhets-white-paper-to-meet-needs-of-the-neets/
• http://www.che.ac.za/media_and_publications/legislation/white-paper-post-school-education-and-training
• http://www.politicsweb.co.za/politicsweb/view/politicsweb/en/page71654?oid=515605&sn=Detail&pid=71616
• http://www.iol.co.za/business/features/white-paper-prioritises-artisan-training-at-colleges-1.1633531
• http://www.bdlive.co.za/national/education/2014/01/16/post-school-education-policy-could-not-have-come-at-better-time
• http://www.iol.co.za/news/south-africa/kwazulu-natal/varsity-push-for-african-languages-1.1633918#.Ut2DHJoaKvE

Work-based mobile learning

“On-the-job training has been the educational ‘delivery’ [method of] choice over many years”, however, work-based mobile learning appears to be gaining interest as “one of the most important means of providing knowledge, skills and competencies” in the workplace observe Auer, Edwards and Zutin (2011: 219). His shift is due to increased wireless networks and mobile technology developments.

Apprenticeships represent a rudimentary form of work-based education. Modelled on the mediaeval guilds, the artisan personally tutored those wishing to learn the craft. They learned through “observation, imitation, practice and feedback” (p. 220). The increased pace of progress; greater volumes and complexity of learning required; and obsolescence of jobs resulted in more frequent career changes and the need to acquire entire new knowledge and skills.

Whereas traditionally work-based training consisted of formal education followed by organisational specific orientation and training; life-long learning became a necessity. Both individuals and organisations are more and more required to adapt—often quickly—to evolving situations in order to retain relevance in the marketplace.

Work-based mobile learning emerged as means to enable people to continue to function optimally. Unfortunately mature workers may oppose these developments due to fear for the unknown. To overcome this potential ‘fossilisation’ learning should be stimulating and enjoyable in order to become a habit of continuous growth and development. Furthermore, certain learning cannot be acquired in the confines of the workplace. This is where mobile learning allow for workers to learn and experience situations not commonly available in the workplace.

Auer, M.E.; Edwards, A. & Zutin, D.G. 2011. Online laboratories in interactive learning environments, pp. 219-248. In N. Pachler; C. Pimmer & J. Seipold (eds). 2011. Work-Based Mobile Learning— Concepts and Cases. Oxford: Peter Lang.

WIL “is not as intuitive as it may seem”

The 12 points below originates from a summary and explanation by Annie Murphy Paul about a recent report on the science of training. She points out that there are right ways and wrong ways (myths) regarding how to design, deliver, and implement training. I adapted the 12 points to work-integrated learning (WIL):

1. It’s what happens before and after WIL that matters. Universities should clearly communicate to students what the WIL is about and how it relates to curriculum of the qualification and the day one competencies expected from graduates.
2. The WIL guidelines should clearly specify what a student need-to-be master versus learning where and how to find information rather than be expected to retain all information in memory.
3. WIL would be more effective when it’s presented as an opportunity of which the benefits to students are emphasised.
4. Decay of skills acquired during WIL may be reduced by giving students subsequent opportunities to practice the skills and/or refresher orientation upon employment.
5. Workplace mentors could increase the motivation of students by making clear the link between what is being taught during WIL and how it will be used in the careers of students.
6. The best WIL occurs through the practice in the workplace and feedback by workplace mentors — the effectiveness of WIL can be increase by making the process more active and engaging for students.
7. Mentors should be made aware that unstructured practice by students without clear objectives; without relevant stimulation; and without appropriate feedback can teach students wrong lessons. Students “will get the most out of practice when they are provided with constructive and timely feedback that identifies what they may be doing wrong and how to fix it”.
8. Superficial exposure during WIL leads to poor retention and poor transfer; whereas deep learning promotes retention and transfer.
9. There is value—both strategically and emotionally—in teaching students to cope with errors made. Workplace mentors should guide students to correct mistakes made which will help students to understand the task in greater depth and will help them deal with errors on the job.
10. Technology and contemporary gadgetry would not necessary improve WIL. However, if implemented appropriately it may add to the effectiveness of WIL.
11. Left to their own devices, students “may not be knowledgeable or motivated enough to make wise decisions about how and what to learn”, sound guidance is important.
12. The “psychological fidelity—how accurately it evokes the feelings and the responses the worker will have on the job” of simulations is more important than physical fidelity a student will encounter as worker on the job.

Paul, A.M. 2012. Learning on the job: myth vs science (How do we really learn to do our jobs?). A post published 2 July 2012 on Wray Herbert's blog We're only Human.

Salas, E.; Tannenbaum, S.I.; Kraiger, K. & Smith-Jentsch, K.A. 2012. The Science of Training and Development in Organizations: What Matters in Practice. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 13(2) 74–101.

Instructional design for simulation

Literally, instructional design means “a set of events that facilitate learning” (instructional) and “a creative model” (design)—it includes a number of systematic processes to plan and create situations and/or events that would enhance the learning of individuals. Underlying instructional design are learning theory paradigms, based on various schools of thought, for example behaviourist—representing those believing that learning results in changed behaviour; cognitive—the proponents who believe adding of new concepts and ideas result in learning; and constructivist—those that believe that “learners construct knowledge for themselves” (Sidhu, 2010: 12-14).

There are hundreds of instructional design models. However, Reigeluth (1999, cited by Sidhu, 2010: 14) indicates that four major characteristics are common to instructional design, namely:

• “Design orientation,
• Identification of methods of instruction and situations,
• Methods of instruction that can be broken into more detail components methods, and
• Choice of Probalistic Methods”

Design theory is important because it renders “a vision of instruction early in the design process”—an ends of “how learners would be different as result of” the learning. The ultimate user plays a significant role, advocates Banathy (1991, cited by Sidhu, 2010: 14) who calls for a “much greater use of the notion of user-design”. Theory further provides guidance to instructional design at three levels according to Reigeluth (1999, cited by Sidhu, 2010: 14 and emphasis added):

• “Methods that best facilitate learning under different situations,
• Learning tool features that best allow an array of alternative methods to be made available to learners, [and]
• Systems features that best allow an instructional design team to design quality learning tools.”

Sidhu (2010: 14-15) prefers the ADDIE Model of design: Analysis, Design, Development, Implementation and Evaluation.

Sidhu, M.S. 2010. Technology-assisted problem solving for engineering education: interactive multimedia applications. Hershey: Engineering Science Reference.

Employability depends on standing relative in hierarchy of jobseekers

Is Simon Roodhouse (2010: 25) remark cynical when he observes that a job-seeker’s understanding of the discipline or subject—which is a primary aim of university education—has little relevance to employability? What has relevance, however—citing Brown, Hesketh and Williams (2003), is on fulfilling the requirements of the specific job and “how one stands relative to others within a hierarchy of job seekers”. The latter in the current post-Apartheid South African context is further influenced by organisational corrective strategies with regard to the racial and gender mix of employees within departments.

Roodhouse (2010: 25) does add that higher education’s success in developing and delivering entry-to-work programmes is not doubted, neither higher education’s ability to qualifying people for work at higher levels doubted.

Roodhouse, S. 2010. Defining and theorizing university work-based learning (pp 21-27). In S Roodhouse & J Mumford. 2010. Understanding work-based learning. Surrey: Gower.

Brown, P.; Hesketh, A. & Williams, S. 2003. Employability in a Knowledge Driven Economy. Journal of Education and Work, 16(2), pp 107-126.

Disorganised and confusing connection of business needs with HE provision

Simon Roodhouse (2010: 26) concludes that “mechanisms to connect business needs with higher education provision are generally disorganised and confusing”. He starts the section of saying that “in higher education, workforce development is often referred to as work-based learning and is increasingly recognised as a field of study” (p. 24). He cites Costley’s (2001) observation that such work-based learning by higher education institutions incorporates “the learning people do, for, in and through work” (emphasis added) and quotes examples of longevity:

• Sandwich courses (academic study interspaced with work experience) and placements (elsewhere called (cooperative and work-integrated education) for longer than a century.
• Structured continuing professional development courses which recognise knowledge gained through work experience.
• Formalised accreditation of prior and experiential learning (APEL) processes.
• Familiarity of learning contracts as instruments in education.

Costley (2001, in Roodhouse 2010: 25) identify synonyms including “work based, work related, placement activities, elective modules, independent study, APEL, reach out, CPD, work based learning”. She further indicates that in most cases work based learning forms part of existing programmes at universities; and that learning outcomes and assessment criteria are embedded in the subject knowledge areas derived from scholarly activities and research.

The lack of sustained engagement of higher education in workforce development is difficult to conceptualise, observes Roodhouse (2010: 25) and highlights his observation with the following University Vocational Awards Council (2002):

We somehow seem to be incapable of learning from experience. Succeeding generations of employers are still marooned in tedious development project steering committees whose proceedings take place in academic jargon. Frustrated academics are still struggling to secure placements and projects with the very companies who are lambasting the quality of their graduates’ work readiness.

Roodhouse (2010: 25) speculates that it could also be “intellectual scepticism amongst the academic community, that employability which is associated with work-based learning is nothing more than a continuous conflict between individuals, market demands and fluctuations”.

Roodhouse, S. 2010. Defining and theorizing university work-based learning (21-27). In S Roodhouse & J Mumford. 2010. Understanding work-based learning. Surrey: Gower.

Flexibility value of work-based learning

Simon Roodhouse (2010: 26) indicates that “there is an increased interest in workplace learning” and “that those in work are increasingly undertaking work-based learning qualifications” for a number of good reasons:

• People can see a direct relevance between their studies and their role in the workplace’
• Those studying can obtain support from employers.
• Work-based programmes enable individuals to structure their studies around their individual interests and professional development.
• Those studying may negotiate the focus of study, context, timescales and their assessment.
• Such programmes allow for flexible fitting into working and personal lives.
• Studying towards an accredited qualification adds to commitment to professional roles held.
• Seeking career progression and increased earning through programmes.

Roodhouse (2010: 26-27) cites Durrant, Rhodes and Young (2009) that indicate the value of work-based learning for employers, namely:

• Employees execute real work projects resulting in direct benefits for the employer.
• Employees are motivated and focus more specifically on the challenges of the organisation.
• Employees engaged in work-based learning programmes are intimately engaged in organisational processes.
• Tangible and visible investment in the development of employees results in increased loyalty.
• Improved employee retention; advancement potential as result of enhanced capabilities and becoming a sought-after employer.
• Enabling employees on their path of self-actualisation and achieving their full potential.
• Employers can partner with a university in developing programmes that support both the professional development of employees as well as organisation improvement.
• The organisational culture can be changed through work-based learning programmes and projects.
• It is a means towards achieving organisational business plans.
• The university has a stake in employee development.

Roodhouse, S. 2010. Defining and theorizing university work-based learning (21-27). In S Roodhouse & J Mumford. 2010. Understanding work-based learning. Surrey: Gower.

Reflection by word association

Reflection comes naturally for some, but other struggle to become reflective. Chapter 12 of A Student Guide to Clinical Legal Education and Pro Bono contains an activity which would enhance reflectivity. Kerrigan and Murray (2011) suggest thinking about different terms for each letter of the word REFLECTION and give some examples. My suggestion would be to apply some of the ‘synonyms’.

R	reviewing, reasoning, rethinking, recapturing, reconstructing, reactions, responses, refining, realising, rigorous, retrospective
E	experience, emotions, experimenting, externalising, evolving
F	feelings, focus, forward moving
L	lifelong learning, linking (ideas or experiences), limitless
E	external issues, ethics, exploring, evaluation, engagement, explanations
C	critique, conscious, concepts, changes, context, curiosity, conclusions, cyclical, consequences, consideration, challenge, cognitive
T	thinking, trying out new ideas, taking stock, transforming, testing
I	ideas, improving, insight, inquiry, interpretation, interaction, integration, implications, identifying, interrogation
O	observing, objective, open mind
N	new experiences, new ideas, noticing

Kerrigan, K & Murray, V. (eds) 2011. A Student Guide to Clinical Legal Education and Pro Bono. Hampshire: Palgrave Macmillan

Composing a simulation

Professor Margaret E. Gredler, at the Department of Educational Psychology of the University of South Carolina since 1973, obtained her PhD in Instructional Design Research. She published substantially in the field, among others the 1992 & 1994 editions of Designing and evaluating games and simulations.

In another post I captured the four questions Jones (1995 & 1997) recommends for designing a simulation. A synthesis of chapters 4 to 10 (Gredler 1992: 53 – 140) produced the following composition elements:

• Establish a framework/blueprint — instructional designers cannot simply present a curriculum issue, assign roles, and different perspectives; the simulation must be designed systematically in order that participants can interpret data rationally and devise strategies to resolve the issue at hand.
• The opening scene sets the stage for the simulation — it should be brief; and describe the issue in concrete but neutral terms.
• Nature/climate of the crisis or problem — the term ‘crisis’ originate from Greek krinen, which means to separate; to judge — the simulation is essentially a potential turning or branching point which participants are required to address.
• Designate the roles of participants in the simulation.
• Post simulation debriefing and reflection

Gredler, M. 1992. Designing and evaluating games and simulations, a process approach. London: Kogan Page.

The design of simulations

Literature on simulation design reveals numerous step-by-step designs, report Jones (1995: 60), often in the form of a sequential flow diagram, for example:

Jones (1995) finds such a sequential process restricting, because creating a simulation is not about a series of tasks. Instead designing simulations involve imagination, values, and consistency he says. Jones (1995: 61 & 1997: 121) recommends four basic questions for design:

1. What is the problem? — issue, situation (or what is the event about? — general picture)
2. Who are the participants? — roles, identities, powers
3. What do they have to do? — job, decision-making, function
4. What do they do it with? — documents, materials, instructions, existing knowledge

Jones cautions that these four questions should not be seen as steps; but rather a conscious underlying methodology. The questions should not be answered explicitly either—Jones (1995: 61) points out that all well designed simulations contain implicit answers to the four questions.

Jones, K. 1995. Simulations, a handbook for teachers and trainers. 3^rd edition. London: Kogan Page.

Jones, K. 1997. Games & simulations made easy. London: Kogan Page.

Simulations for Education; Virtual Worlds and Games

In seeking literature about simulations I find many mentioning games in the same breath, as well as simulation-games. Clark Aldrich (2009) observes that many practitioners have been struck by the paradox of sensing an overlap between virtual worlds, games, and simulations; yet knowing that they are not synonymous. He offers a succinct depiction:

The three often look similar, yet the differences are profound says Aldrich (2009):

• Games are fun, engaging activities usually used purely for entertainment, but they may also allow people to gain exposure to a particular set of tools, motions, or ideas.
• Simulations use rigorously structured scenarios carefully designed to develop specific competencies that can be directly transferred into the real world.
• Virtual worlds are multiplayer (and often massively multiplayer), three-dimensional, persistent social environments with easy-to-access building capabilities. They share with games and simulations the three-dimensional environment, but they do not have the focus on a particular goal, such as advancing to the next level or successfully navigating the scenario.

Aldrich, C. 2009. Virtual Worlds, Simulations, and Games for Education: A Unifying View. Innovate—a former official journal of online education of the Nova Southeastern University's Fischler School of Education and Human Services (FSEHS), Volume 5, Issue 5 (penultimate), June/July 2009. Retrieved electronically 23 October 2011 from: http://innovateonline.info/pdf/vol5_issue5/Virtual_Worlds,_Simulations,_and_Games_for_Education-__A_Unifying_View.pdf

 

Virtual simulations to replicate tabletop exercises

Offering “online students the same realistic training experience traditionally provided by an in-person tabletop exercise” say Anne M. Hewitt, Susan Spencer, Danielle Mirliss, and Riad Twal (2009). They caution, however, that technology access and student support must be addressed prior to the successful implementation of virtual world simulations.

A tabletop exercise is a simulated scenario designed to test the response capability, for example an emergency evacuation or health-threatening pandemic. Tabletop exercises are used extensively “to practice response to and recovery from a wide range of incidents” where participants need coordinate in real time to formulate comprehensive response strategies of multiple agencies.

Hewitt, Spencer, Mirliss, and Twal (2009) established a number of goals for their virtual version of the tabletop, namely:

• offer a real world activity for students,
• permit synchronous collaboration among students on campus and from various geographical locations,
• apply basic course concepts in a problem-based learning format, and
• introduce complex systems in a systematic way.

With the goals in mind, they explored available alternatives for virtual simulations and found many readily available emergency preparedness training platforms. However, several either did not allow for customisation or required technical capabilities exceeding institutional capacity. Hewitt, Spencer, Mirliss, and Twal (2009) determined that Play2Train was the most promising option to conduct training in Second Life. John Lester, academic program manager at Linden Labs, states that "Second Life gives both students and faculty a new medium for exploring things like distance learning, experiential learning, simulation, and scientific visualization in a fundamentally collaborative environment"

Hewitt, AM; Spencer, S; Mirliss, D & Twal, R. 2009. Preparing Graduate Students for Virtual World Simulations: Exploring the Potential of an Emerging Technology. Innovate—a former official journal of online education of the Nova Southeastern University's Fischler School of Education and Human Services (FSEHS), Volume 5 (final), Issue 6, August/September 2009. Retrieved electronically 23 Oct 2011 from: http://innovateonline.info/pdf/vol5_issue6/Preparing_Graduate_Students_for_Virtual_World_Simulations-__Exploring_the_Potential_of_an_Emerging_Technology.pdf

Definitions and essential attributes of games and simulations

Louise Sauvé; Lise Renaud and David Kaufman (2010) found little agreement among theoreticians and researchers about the meanings for the concepts of game and simulation. They tried to remedy this methodological shortcoming by carrying out systematic literature reviewing in order to establish definitions and articulate the essential attributes of games and simulations. Literature reviewed suggest that learning through games result in acquisition of new knowledge; “the development of intellectual skills (e.g., abstraction, anticipation, strategic thinking, problem resolution, lateral thinking, spatial representation, hand-eye coordination), and [the] development of behaviour and attitudes” (p. 5).

An essential attribute is a characteristic or specific property without which the concept in question can no longer be recognised as such. The six critical attributes of educational games are:

• player(s) — a game cannot work without at least one player making decisions while assuming a role
• fictitious (contrived) situation of conflict, competition or cooperation
• rules as set of conditions describing the relations between players and the environment — rules describe procedures; provide control and specify closure
• predetermined goal(s)
• artificial character — “If the constraints of reality [are] applied, the activity would become a simulation game rather than a game” (p. 5)
• educational character — from an implicit learning-centred purpose to need learn explicitly identified

Sauvé, Renaud and Kaufman (2010) group simulations into two broad categories, namely (a) simulations in the sciences and engineering used to experiment and test hypotheses; and (b) training simulations that offer environments simplifying reality and allow learning without the risks of specific “live” situations. The five attributes of educational simulations are:

• a model of reality defined as a system — the reality described represents one or several aspects of a complex real system; a model is a simplified mental image
• dynamic —the essential elements of reality are copied allowing the participant to control this reality; to study it at own pace and convenience
• simplification introduces a degree of abstraction needed to understand the functions and tasks of a system
• having validity, is faithful and accurate — “Fidelity” is a two-dimensional degree of similarity of the operational situation which is simulated, measured in terms of (a) physical characteristics—for example visual, spatial, kinesthetic; and (b) functional characteristics—for example the informational, stimulus and response options (the simpler the model, the bigger the risk of falsifying what it intend simulating)
• having educational value — varied realistic examples imitate the real-world

The seven attributes of educational simulation-games or of “serious games” (as alternative term) are:

• a model of a real or fictitious system
• simplified
• dynamic
• players of varying numbers
• in competition or cooperation
• rules
• an educational character

Sauvé, Renaud and Kaufman (2010: 17) summarise the essential attributes as follow, pointing out that a game is not a simulation; a simulation is distinguished from a game by a model; and a simulation-game is a ‘serious game’:

GAME	SIMULATION	SIMULATION-GAME
Artificial character	Reality defined as a system	Reality defined as a system
	Model Simplified Dynamic Faithful, accurate and valid	Model Simplified Dynamic
Player(s) Conflict (competition) Rules Predetermined goal (to win)		Player(s) Conflict (competition) Rules Predetermined goal (to win)

Sauvé, L; Renaud, L & Kaufman, D. 2010. Games, Simulations, and Simulation Games for Learning, pp 1-26. In D Kaufman & L Sauvé (Eds) 2010. Educational game play and simulation environments case studies and lessons learned. Hershey, PA: IGI Global.

Four domains & eight dimensions map the WIL landscape

Based on the diversity of interests addressed in 28 ALTC funded projects a review framework or matrix (p. 1) has been generated to contextualising the projects. The scope is described more fully in the literature review (pp. 5-15) of the Good practice report: work-integrated learning. A populated WIL review scoping matrix is included in the report as Appendix A (p. 81).

Domains Dimensions	Leadership & management	Education	Partnerships	Context
Purposes
Curriculum
Pedagogy
Legalities & ethics
Infrastructure
Quality assurance
Student matters
Staff matters

Orrell, J. 2011. Good practice report: work-integrated learning. Australian Learning and Teaching Council (ALTC). Department of Education, Employment and Workplace Relations (DEEWR). 

Journal of Cooperative Education and Internships now open access

JCEI access for individuals is now open to the public at no charge! Vol 45 Issue 01 has just been published:

Topic	Page
International centre of social science education and research in The Hague, The Netherlands.	5
Development of Learning Outcomes Assessment Methods for Co-operative Education Programs	11
Where’s WIL? Including work-integrated learning in descriptions of what it is that academics do	34
Comparative Curriculum Analysis of Mechanical Engineering Technology Programs at Purdue University and the National Taipei University of Technology	45
Mentoring Latinos in STEM: Transforming Struggling Co-op Students into Savvy Professionals	53
Developing an Online Learning Community for Engineering, Cooperative-Education Students: A Design-Based Research Study	67
Professionalising Accounting Education – The WIL Experience	80
Responding to Rapid Change in Higher Education: Enabling University Departments Responsible for Work Related Programs Through Boundary Spanning	94

JCEI is offered through EBSCO's library subscription for institutions. Request your university library to purchase subscription.