Learning in vivo

Career progression of professionals and increasing role of councils

Eight statutory councils and two professional bodies—not established by South African law, participated in producing the Skills for and through SIPs (DHET, 2014: 63-64). Professionals generally follow a protracted development pathway, of 8 to 10 years after matriculation, prior to independent service/practice. Figure 16 (DHET, 2014: 65) below illustrates, in red on the left: schooling (having demonstrated a mathematics and science aptitude); followed by higher education; and workplace candidacy. This is followed by the orange section: assessment (by examination, peer review, or both) for professional registration; and continued professional development (CPD) to acquire and enhance expertise. The professional pipeline is concluded with retirement, in green on the right.

CPD (continued professional development), mentioned above is illustrated in figure 19 (DHET, 2014: 93), form candidacy level through various levels of advancement.

An increased role of statutory councils and professional bodies is advocated in Skills for and through SIPs (DHET, 2014: 96-97). In addition to registering professionals, statutory councils generally ensure continuing professional development of registered professionals. The Council for Higher Education (CHE) further rely on statutory councils and professional bodies to help with accreditation of the qualifications of higher education institutions. The Council for Higher Education (CHE) furthermore recognise Voluntary Associations (VAs), especially in dealing with misconduct; but also to protect public interests with regard to health, safety and responsible use of funds. Most of these efforts (“such as peer reviews, setting exams, carrying out accreditation visits, participating in investigations and hearings”) are done by voluntary experts that are associated with disciplines and sub-disciplines of the respective councils, bodies of VAs. It is recommended that the watchdog role be expanded.

The meaning of the acronymn MBChB during clinical training

A popular joke among medical students according to medical doctor and author Rosamund Kendal; on page 9 of her fictional publication The Karma Suture; is that MBChB stand for messenger boy and carrier of human blood.

The title of her book is in itself most interesting:

• suture means to a sewing together or a joining as by sewing; and in medicine specifically, the joining of the edges of a wound through stitches.
• and karma, the notion of bringing something upon yourself.

A book about a young doctor's trials and tribulations practicing medicine, being over worked, seeking love and intimacy, dealing with complicated matters, and several experiential learning vinettes.

Every workplace a training space versus interns strike back

'Together, Turning Every Workplace into a Training Space' reads the the invitation to the 2013 National Skills Conference. A slogan introduced three months earlier by the South African Minister of Higher Education and Training, Dr Blade Nzimande.

Yet, the November 2013 edition of the Marie Claire (SA) reports on <Download The Interns Strike Back pp 86-87 MarieClaire.co.za November2013> unpaid interners 'striking back' suing companies for not having paid them for internships. The article makes mention of unpaid learnerships, which, according to the SA Governmetn regulations ought not to be. The article further mentions the Intern Magazine, a new puplication by Alec Dudson, to encourage debate around unpaid inernships.

It appears as if there are serious implementation problems regarding the discretionary PIVOTAL funding if the slogan of every workplace a training space cannot materialise.

 

Sustainability as emerging academic field challenges what is taught and how

If higher education graduates are to cope with society’s sustainability-challenges, universities must provide students with interactive, experiential, transformative, and real-world learning to suitably prepare them; say Brundiers, Wiek and Redman (2010). The authors undertook a synthesis of literature on sustainability education (an emerging academic field) with the view of determining how real-world learning can contribute to building key competencies in sustainability. Consensus exists that the capacity-uilding pathways of sustainability education should engage the “head, hands, and heart”.

Sustainability education is concerned with complex non-linear problems with long-term implications; that cut across economic, social, and environmental domains; not just on local but global scales; and involve high degrees of damage potential; and therefore urgency. These often manifest as a conglomerate of problems that require sophisticated “post-normal” solutions and elaborate problem-solving techniques; that challenges basic assumptions; and call for systems-thinking, anticipation, and participatory strategy-building models across established disciplines.

Key competencies in sustainability cannot be acquired by being told about sustainable development. Students need to see and work within a living learning place. They need to experience what a sustainable lifestyle means. Learning must focus on real-world problems, exposing students to corresponding real-world settings. A variety of learning models might be considered, for example project- and/or problem-based learning; service learning; and internships. However, not all real-world learning opportunities are appropriate. Some are more appropriate for extracurricular activities; whereas others do not relate well to the key features of sustainability. Brundiers, Wiek and Redman (2010: 311) present this “overview of key differences among dominant models of real-world learning formats”:

	Project-based learning	Service learning	Internship
Outcomes: what students learn/benefit	Collaborative problem-solving capacity	Education and teaching capacity	Professional working experience; career development
Practices: what students do	Collaborating with partners to develop solution approach	Educating people	Assisting or working on a professional project
Interaction with stakeholder	Two-way knowledge generation (co-production)	One-way knowledge transfer (students to community)	One-way knowledge transfer (employer to student and student to employer)
Integration of theory and practice	Explicit, supervised by faculty and stakeholder	Implicit, not supervised by faculty	Implicit, not supervised by faculty
Impacts on world	Systemic innovation	Support of social innovation and change	Modular innovation

Brundiers, K.; Wiek, A. & Redman C. L. 2010. Real-world learning opportunities in sustainability: from classroom into the real world. International Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education, 11 (4): 308-324.

The journal (IJSHE) is published by Emerald Group Publishing Limited in conjunction with Society of University Leaders for a Sustainable Future (ULSF).

Regulations about Skills Development Funds received and spending

On 1 April 2013 new regulations (RSA 2012) about monies received by Sector Education and Training Authorities (SETAs); mandatory and discretionary grants; proportion of administration costs; discouraging accumulation of surpluses; and related came into effect. Simultaneously the previous grant regulations were repealed, namely Government Notice No R713 in Government Gazette No 27801 of 18 July 2005 and Government Notice No R88 in Government Gazette No 29584 of 2 February 2007.

Of particular importance to higher education programmes that contains work-integrated learning in the curriculum is §6 (pp. 11-13), “allocation of discretionary grants by a SETA”:

• §6(12)—“at least 80% of discretionary grant funding must be allocated to PIVOTAL programmes”, which are defined (p. 5) as an acronym meaning “professional, vocational, technical and academic learning programmes that result in qualifications or part qualifications on the National Qualifications Framework …” [also §3(6)]
• §6(11)—addressing scarce and critical skills through programmes designed to address such, which include work-integrated learning must be the key focus of SETAs. Work-integrated learning is defined (p. 6) as an umbrella term for curricular, pedagogic and assessment practices; integrating formal learning and workplace concerns; culminating in a qualification or part thereof; and may include practicums, professional practice, internships, workplace experience, industry-based learning, cooperative education, service learning, real work learning, placements, experiential learning, and clinical placements
• §6(14)—obtaining the funding above is subject to a legal person completing and submitting a PIVOTAL training plan and report as per annexure 2 (private), sections E & F (pp. 22-23) or (public), sections G & H (pp. 30-31). A legal person [§6(10), p. 12] includes public education and training institutions; an employer or enterprise that falls within the jurisdiction of a SETA, but includes those not required to pay the skills levy; and other such as NGOs [refer to §6(7), p. 12].
• §6(15)—however, employers with less than 50 employees will not have to submit the PIVOTAL training plan and report indicated above, “but will be asked to provide information on participation in PIVOTAL programmes and the impact of these”. SETAs will develop suitable templates for small and micro enterprises.
• Note, however, §7 specifies that the “SETA criteria for grants must be approved by the SETA Accounting Authority before funds are allocated”; and §8 that each SETA is required to prepare and distribute a schedule indicating the dates by which applications for grants must be submitted and the timeframes for disbursements [also §3(7)].
• §6(1-2 & 4-5)—each SETA must develop a Sector Skills Plan (SSP) in accordance to the National Skills Development Strategy and strategic goals; and each SETA must annually approve a Discretionary Grants Policy, developed in accordance to the issued DHET guidelines; which will determine and specify its discretionary grants allocation to meet the sector’s needs through different delivery models and project types that will be deployed.
• §6(3)—each SETA’s Annual Performance Plan (APP) clarifies how discretionary grants are allocated to prioritise skills development of the sector through public education and training institutions.
• §6(9)—the Discretionary Grants Policy of each SETA must “indicate the purpose of the various grants, funding frameworks and projects …”; and give the communication procedures, which must embrace the “principles of transparency, opened, access and fairness” [§6(8)].

The remainder of the regulations deal with (§1) definitions; (§2) specifying the limitations on administrative costs of SETAs; (§3) the compliance of SETA finances and financial management; (§4) the allocation of mandatory grants, and (§5) the payment mandatory grants to levy paying employers; (§9) the payment of services rendered by SETAs; (§10) the repeal of previously published regulations; and (§11) finally the short tile and commencement of the regulations.

Republic of South Africa. 2012. Skills Development Act (97/1998). The Sector Education and Training Authorities (SETAs) grant regulations regarding monies received by a SETA and related matters. Government Gazette Vol. 570; Regulation Gazette No 9867; Government Notice No R990; Gazette No 35940; 3 December 2012. The Government Printing Works.

A process model for internships

Narayanan, Olk and Fukami (2010: 65) identified three (3) sets of the same three (3) actors interacting in a process. There is some similarity with the cooperative education system model, which is based on Lessing's (1985) training-system model. The latter identified four (4) interacting elements in the transformation/processes (middle) phase.

Narayanan, V.K.; Olk, P.M. & Fukami, C.V. 2010. Determinants of Internship Effectiveness: An Exploratory Model. Academy of Management Learning & Education, Vol. 9, No. 1, 61–80.

Causes of the effectiveness of internships

Surprise is expressed about the apparent absence of clear evidence about the impact of internships, considering the extensive use thereof in higher education generally and business schools in particular. Narayanan—from Drexel University; Olk and Fukami—the University of Denver (2010: 62) found that “literature on internship experiences is largely descriptive and anecdotal”. They summarised 22 published studies between 1984 and 2003 and presented the following major findings in alphabetical order of citations:

• A consistent pattern of adjustment experienced by interns namely expectation, frustration and accommodation.
• Students have to adopt new ways to learn when moving from the university to the workplace, as well as learning new genres.
• An increase in internship programs had been observed (1997), with most programs fairly young; for credit only; occur during junior years; paid rather than unpaid; and require a written project. Many programmes neither have full- or part-time coordinators, nor require on-site visits. The responsibility for identifying internship sites are often share between students and others.
• The experience from internships is related to higher levels of self-concept crystallization. However, experiences are not related to increased occupational information, self-efficacy, decidedness, vocational commitment, or tendency to foreclose. Three characteristics of internships, namely task variety, feedback, and opportunities for dealing with people; linked significantly to self-concept crystallisation and self-efficacy, plus increased occupational information.
• Greater emphasis is placed by students on meaningful experiences to acquire a competitive edge in job market; than on furthering education.
• Academic assignments—seven proposed—can enhance the educational value of business internships.
• Internships increased in popularity because real-world experience enhances the prospects of employability. Within a context of increasing cost of education there is pressure that education would ensure employment.
• The value of internships is perceived to largely provide social and people skills; with limited improved academic skills.
• Learning in the workplace differs from learning in the classroom (academically).
• The socialisation of internship is complex and individualistic; comprising three phases (a) getting in, (b) breaking in, and (c) settling in.
• The perspectives of the three main internship players—namely programme directors/coordinators, industrial supervisors/mentors, and students—differed almost entirely. It is believed that the credibility of internships as learning experience would be enhanced by systemic procedures and standards.
• A notable difference between the perspectives companies and students is that higher ratings are assigned by students.
• Those students that did an internship compared favourably with regard to college performance; jobs offers; and age upon graduation. A racial predisposition, but no gender difference, had been identified.
• In-class exercises to facilitate socialization were reviewed and procedures suggested to facilitate such exercises.
• As result of internship experiences, students changed self-perceptions, preferences, some instrumental values, as well as work-specific needs.
• The use of structured power internship programmes to recruit, track and give a ready supply of the best college-age talent is described.
• Reporting what students like most/least about their internship position.
• Internships considered the most effective approach, according to business students and corporations to college recruitment. Suggestions made how companies can effectively implement internships
• Some support is given for more crystallisation of vocational self-concept and work values; as well as strong support for better employment opportunities. The level of ‘autonomy’ is a moderated outcome variable. In a second study students with internships were rated significantly higher by college recruiters.
• Contains discussion of issues of socialization, acculturation, motivation of student as employees, and the education-workplace relationships.
• The need to align institutional study to what is actually happening in the workplace: expectations need to be agreed upon and clear requirements are necessary.
• The specifics of certain communities of practice are embedded within and therefore not fully teachable.

Narayanan, V.K.; Olk, P.M. & Fukami, C.V. 2010. Determinants of Internship Effectiveness: An Exploratory Model. Academy of Management Learning & Education, Vol. 9, No. 1, 61–80.

A cooperative education system model

In 2010 the Academy of Management Learning & Education (Vol 9, No 1, pp 61-80) published an article by Narayanan, Olk and Fukami that contains an exploratory model portraying a process perspective to internships. The intership model has three actors: the employing firm, the student, and the university. All three actors play a role in an antecedents phase, a processes phase and an outcomes phase.

Two and a half decades ago (1988), as part of a honnours degree in Training Management a submitted a mini-thesis a cooperative education system model.

• Cooperative education is a strategy where students undergo in-service training and gain work experience as integral part of their curriculum. The experience complements and supplements the academic learning to produce employment ready graduates. The experience must be well planned and supervised.
• A system is network of interrelated components which are in continuous interaction in order to achieve a common goal.

I used Lessing's (1985) training-system model as framework and transpose the various cooperative education elements onto it to depict (see below) a cooperative education system model. A worked for a mining house with a central eduction, training & development (ETD) centre that, among others, made use of learner official (nowadays known as learnerships in the South African context) schemes to staff group mines and refineries with competent middle management people.

Lessing's model consisted of input, transformation and output phases, operational within the organisational environment, which forms part of a bigger social, economic and political environment. Lessing placed the learner central in the transformation phase, surrounded by the trainer, the learning content and the learning environment.

In a cooperative education setting the learner is both student and employee (at least while gaining work experience) and is co-responsible for the success of both the academic and the in vivo (real-life or in-service) learning. The 'trainer' comprise a trilogy, namely the university, the work-based learning mentor and the programme coordinator (often the case of industry-based programmes). The learning environment is both the university and the workplace. The learning content comprise both the academic curriculum, as well as the in vivo learning, which often extends beyond the university curriculum to organisational specific learning requirements.

Download 'Download A Co-operative Education System Model - Thesis - Scanned' alternatively the full text is available on request from dr.t.groenewald <at> gmail.com on request.

Post updated 4 January 2013.