Learning in vivo

Students deriving learning opportunities by responding to natural disasters

Universities often struggle to secure sufficient workplace learning opportunities. Disasters, however, may offer suitable learning opportunities. This post presents ‘prompt-based journaling’ as means of facilitation of learning.

“Each year, millions of people around the world are affected by natural disasters” say Buschlen, Warner and Goffnett (2015: 33). Often universities recognise both the service learning and development of responsible citizenship opportunities involved for students, through relief community engagements, to among others, implement theoretical concepts learned. Major events such as tornados, hurricanes, tsunamis, floods, earthquakes, fires, heat waves, droughts, epidemics, pandemics, diseases, and volcanic eruptions; all require substantial humanitarian logistics relief in order to alleviate suffering and reintroduce supply. “Climate change and environmental degradation, political instability, and chronic poverty and inequality are significant drivers of forced displacement” of people, say Wessells and Kostelny (2021: 225). There is an “increased global awareness of the need for mental health and psychosocial support amidst disasters” they state, and draw attention to Hippocrates ‘Do No Harm’ principle issues such as “poor coordination, the monetization of aid, excessive targeting of aid, the imposition of Western modes of psychiatric and medicalized support, too little attention to capacity building and sustainability, and the marginalization of collective self-help and indigenous, cultural and social supports”.

Often large numbers of people are subjected to traumatic events before, during, and after disasters, with result that trauma and post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) become prevalent. Forcibly displaced people furthermore often face myriad social, cultural, and everyday distresses as result of weakened or shattered social support and controls. Apart from lack of basic necessities such as food, health care, or shelter; there are family separation, ongoing insecurity and lack of protection, inability to engage in cultural or religious practices, sexual exploitation and abuse, trafficking, recruitment into armed forces or groups, etc.

Prompt-based journaling could be used as means of facilitating learning. Buschlen, Warner and Goffnett (2015: 40) recommend that journal prompts are written in advance and given in sealed envelopes to participanting students, taped inside the cover of a blank notebook. They made use of three prompts, each in a separate envelope, with specific instructions when to open, namely before travelling to the disaster site; during the relief work while on site; and 30 days after the experience; where after journals are completed and returned. Because of the emotional and reflective nature of the data, participating students may request the return of their journal after transcription.

Buschlen, Warner and Goffnett (2015: 36) point out that the ‘3 Rs’, reality, reflection, and reciprocity are essential design elements of service learning, where students learn “from a situation while meeting other process or stakeholder needs”. A natural disaster (reality) would provoke students to engage, “and their personal reflections can ultimately transform into permanent knowledge and skill”. Transformational learning is derived because “Reflections on the service experience expand knowledge to achieve deeper learning”.

Buschlen, E., Warner, C. & Goffnett, S. (2015). Leadership education and service: Exploring transformational learning following a tornado. Journal of Leadership Education, 14(1), 33-54. https://journalofleadershiped.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/02/14_1_buschlen.pdf

Wessells, M. & Kostelny, K. (2021). Do no harm issues in psychosocial support: Post-tsunami practitioner learning in Sri Lanka. Asian American Journal of Psychology, 12(3), 225–233. https://doi.org/10.1037/aap0000191

Work integrated learning is a bridge for students between academic present and professional future

Work integrated learning (WIL) “is a bridge for the student between the academic present and their professional future”, say Martin, Rees, and Edwards (2011: 7). It “is a structured educational strategy, which aims to merge theoretical knowledge gained in academic studies to workplace experiences”, seeking “to provide graduates with a comprehensive industry skill set desired by potential employers”.

Chilvers, Hay, Maidment, and Tudor (2021: 436) cite Martin et al. (2011) who derived through research, from retrospective feedback and documentation, a template of good WIL practice, comprising six key factors, namely (1) organization set up, (2) student preparation, (3) supervision, (4) competencies, (5) pedagogies, and (6) assessment. Chilvers et al. (2021) explore the alignment of social work field education and work-integrated learning (WIL) pedagogy, and made three improvement contributions with regard to the WIL best practice framework, namely (a) preplacement preparation of both students and the field; (b) professional supervision approaches; and (c) ‘inclusion of service user feedback within student assessment processes’. There is much to be gained from more active dialogue and closer relationship between field education and WIL practices they recommend.

Chilvers et al. (2021: 433) indicate that both “social work education and work-integrated learning share a long history of helping students connect with authentic work-related learning opportunities in the context of engagement and partnership with organizations outside of the educational institution, using onsite mentoring”. Chilvers et al. (2021: 436) use the metaphor of a family tree, with different branches, portraying the origins and lines of theory development, of field education in Social Work, and work-integrated learning (WIL) in several other disciplines. Field education and WIL have clearly developed along different lines of the same family tree, only recently beginning to integrate, they observe. However, there are further several other branches to the tree, such as clinical training in Medicine; internships in Psychology; articles in Law; etc. Knud Illeris (2002) sketch numerous contributors to the learning theoretical field in the form of a triangle, between the three dimensions of content, incentive, and interaction. The three sides respectively represent (a) developmental psychology—this side also depicts institutional learning, (b) activity theory, between cognition and society the learning organisation and practice learning, and (c) socialisation theory illustrated between society and emotion, also reflecting collective learning.

Chilvers et al. (2021: 433) examine the tensions associated with aligning social work and WIL. They explore the pedagogical similarities. They discuss key tools and processes for strengthening the quality of field education in social work pertaining student supervision and assessment. Chilvers et al. (2021: 437) offer the following contributions from field education with regard to WIL:

Preparation of students similar to the requirement set by the Social Workers Registration Board (SWRB)—"the regulatory body, which sets parameters around admission, governance, graduate attributes, staffing, stakeholder collaboration and field education”—that academic institutions must assess the professional suitability of applicants upon enrolment, which is generally repeated prior to each placement. The checks include criminal records, assessment of suitability to work with children and vulnerable adults, character references and health. A portfolio of evidence is accumulated to demonstrate the professional suitability of each graduate. Those students that do not meet the requirements are suitably counselled. In addition to checks, intentional preparation of students prior to placement is deemed an important component to clarify expectations of what might be encountered and to reduce anxiety. This includes clear articulation of the roles and responsibilities, and role playing. Attention is given to matching the fit between student and field educator.

Field educator preparation aims to provide clarity around four domains, namely placement administration; teaching and learning; assessment; and quality (p. 438). Relationships between institutions and field educators are dependent upon reciprocity and understanding of the roles and responsibilities. It is firmly believed that those who facilitate field education require specialist preparation and training

Professional supervision is deemed under-explored and inadequately-theorised in the body of literature pertaining WIL. In contrast, it is regarded a key contributor in social work education where students are supported during placement to engage in knowledge and skill development. Chilvers et al. (2021: 439) indicate that “development occurs through exposure to genuine practice opportunities with service users, by fostering critical reflection, providing feedback, and facilitating a broad range of experiential learning activities in a safe environment”. Students are socialised into a professional group by their field supervisors.

Student assessment with the view of demonstrating to the SWRB (the regulatory body) that core competencies were acquired during field placements. A broad range of forms evidence collection could be considered for WIL, such as direct observation of student practice, team meetings, consultations with agencies, written appraisals, case notes, client assessment reports, email communications, referral letters, and documentation associated with conducting research and policy or procedural development. Other ways of teaching, learning and assessment include “the use of process recordings to provide students with an opportunity for a detailed ‘think aloud’ about a particular interchange with a client or team member” (Chilvers et al. 2021: 441); the writing or presenting of a deconstruction of an event or interaction that happened; and compilation of a digital learning portfolio.

Chilvers, D., Hay, K., Maidment, J., & Tudor, R: Contribution of social work field education to WIL. International Journal of Work-Integrated Learning, 2021, 22(4), 433-444. Electronically accessible from https://www.ijwil.org/files/IJWIL_22_4_433_444.pdf

Illeris, K. 2002. The three dimensions of learning. Malabar, Fla: Krieger

Martin, A., Rees, M., & Edwards, M. (2011a). Work integrated learning, a template for good practice: supervisors’ reflections. An Ako Aotearoa publication. Electronically accessible from: https://ako.ac.nz/assets/Knowledge-centre/RHPF-c43-Work-Integrated-Learning/RESEARCH-REPORT-Work-Integrated-Learning-A-Template-for-Good-Practice-Supervisors-Reflections.pdf

A template for good practice of work integrated learning (WIL) in programmes

In a research report Martin, Rees, and Edwards (2011a: 6) present a template of key good practices, for each of the six common areas, of in work integrated learning (WIL), outlined and schematically (2011b: 3) as follow:

1. Organisation set-up

1. Placement requirements and support
2. Placement selection and location
3. Risk management issues

2. Student preparation

1. Pre-requisites and theoretical basis
2. Careers interview skills and CV preparation
3. Readiness for practice

3. Supervision

1. On campus academic supervisor and mentor
2. Work place employer
3. Work place university staff

4. Competencies

1. Self-confidence
2. Communication and people skills
3. Teamwork
4. Professional standards

5. Pedagogies

1. Scenario based learning and project work
2. Theory lectures and labs
3. Oral presentations

6. Assessment

1. Learning contract
2. Reflective journal
3. Final report
4. Industry based competency checks
5. Oral presentations

Martin et al. (2011a: 9) state that “there are specific components, which when melded together, define an optimal WIL activity through the tripartite partnership between the employer, the teacher, and the student”, and if “done well, WIL benefits each stakeholder within the tripartite relationship”.

Martin et al. detail (2011a: 12-18, 2011b: 4-5) several aspects concerning organisational set-up, from precursors that influence what is done; to placement selection and location considerations; industry networks as key feature; and risk management issues. They address placement requirements and support; the importance of “developing and maintaining ongoing good relationships with industry” (p. 17) and network support; support required by students while in the field; resources for supporting workplace supervisors (or mentors); as well as administrative and online support needed.

Student preparation is an important aspect, indicate Martin et al. (2011a: 19-21, 2011b: 6-7). It is of foundational importance to ensure students demonstrate both the theoretical knowledge and skills for successful placement experiences; as well as in some instances scaffolding during early work experience. Guidance with CV preparation, interview skills and techniques, and also provision of career and employment services are of significance. Students should be properly prepared in order to be ready for practice experiences. Student resources should provide students with clear expectations.

Martin et al. (2011a: 22-23, 2011b: 8-9) emphasise the importance of formal supervision (and mentoring) with regard to teaching and learning. The learning goals and expectations must be clarified.

Competencies, say Martin et al. (2011a: 24-27, 2011b: 10-11) “are the qualities or extent to which the students develop the necessary ability or knowledge to do something successfully”. The five mentioned competence areas are discussed.

Martin et al. (2011a: 28-31, 2011b: 12-13) outline a number of pedagogies involved, such as (i) mentoring, which requires close supervision and is both time consuming and resource intensive; (ii) oral presentations providing opportunities to reflect on action; (iii) scenario based learning (SBL), which is “based on the concept of situated cognition, which is the idea that knowledge cannot be fully understood independent of its context” and therefore WIL within specific contexts, situations or social frameworks; (iv) the theory taught through lectures and laboratories should be purposefully aligned to the learning outcomes of the programme, and is distinct from experiential learning; (v) and project work, which “is a particular strength of the WIL approach”.

“Informal formative approaches [of assessment] could include the use of technologies such as emails, blogs or other e-journals. More formal [assessment] approaches are the use of a reflective journal and supervisor/mentor, as part of the overall course assessment plan.” say Martin et al. (2011a: 32-36, 2011b: 14-15) and elaborate on a number. The learning contract not only describes the work activities and project focus prepared by the student and negotiated with the host organisation (where after approved by the academic supervisor), but also the bases for assessment. The reflective journal is not meant to merely capture the tasks performed by the student, but also reflections on all the activities throughout the practicum experience. It ought to include revisiting of feelings, re-evaluation of experiences, linking of theory to practice, and planning of future action. “A common feature of the assessment of WIL is the submission of a final report”, say Martin et al. (2011a: 34), which is often orally presented to a panel. It incorporates all formative reflection and summative outcomes of the overall experience; and is either signed off by the workplace supervisor, or in some cases a formal report required. Monitoring of the experiential learning students undergo and industry based competency checks form part of good practice. Some professionally and statutory accredited programmes require specific competency based assessment.

Martin et al. (2011a: 37, 2011b: 16) conclude with a number of further considerations deemed important for resourcing effective WIL programmes.

Martin, A., Rees, M., & Edwards, M. (2011a). Work integrated learning, a template for good practice: supervisors’ reflections. An Ako Aotearoa publication. Electronically accessible from: https://ako.ac.nz/assets/Knowledge-centre/RHPF-c43-Work-Integrated-Learning/RESEARCH-REPORT-Work-Integrated-Learning-A-Template-for-Good-Practice-Supervisors-Reflections.pdf

Martin, A., Rees, M., & Edwards, M. (2011b). Work integrated learning, a template for good practice. Ako Aotearoa. Electronically accessible from: https://ako.ac.nz/assets/Knowledge-centre/RHPF-c43-Work-Integrated-Learning/RESOURCE-Work-Integrated-Learning-A-Template-for-Good-Practice.pdf (booklet)

A conceptual framework for a self-regulated internship model

Roy and Sykes (2017: 7-13) adapted the Zopiatis & Constanti’s (2012) conceptual framework, image immediately below, into a tabular-format, starting with the planning stage, and extended it for the virtual environment.

Zopiatis & Constanti’s (2012)

The Roy and Sykes (2017) conceptual framework for a self-regulated internship model, comprising four-tables, is summarised in the four quadrant table below.

1. Plan ·         Curriculum design, internship specific learning objectives, learning materials ·         Undertaking of mutual commitment signed ·         Role clarification, clear job description, mentoring/supervision, oversight/coor-dination and on-boarding ·         Host organisation policies and procedures ·         Quality assurance measures, standards and evaluation ·         Pre-internship seminar

2. Engage — The virtual Internship ·         Experience diary, activity logging, recording, reflective journaling and tracking ·         On site orientation, training, supervision ·         Assessment, by means of rubrics, of work and progress ·         Discussions and sharing through LMS ·         Feedback to guide the learning experience and intervention

4. Reflect and Reflect ·         Formal reflection, e.g. e-portfolio ·         Evaluation, rubric submission online by supervisor ·         Self-assessment by students ·         Reflective discussion ·         Building a virtual wall of wisdom ·         Stakeholder survey to improve programme

3. Assimilate ·         Interaction with the learning experience ·         Guidance to students through LMS ·         Connection of theory to practice by LMS ·         Online simulations and role-play opportunities ·         Dedicated discussion boards with guided questions ·         Collaboration, cooperation and communication ·         Review of curriculum by stakeholders

The Roy and Sykes (2017: 10) framework includes a fifth table, namely the “student’s self-regulated component of the hospitality internship learning process”, which among others entail each student’s responsibility to secure one or more opportunities with host organisation for a (paid or unpaid)4 to 6-week internship, by requesting a chance to do a project. This may entail volunteering at a professional association conference; working part-time for free; or some innovative idea. Roy and Sykes (2017) further encourage conducting Internet searches for internships; perusing industry journals; attending career fairs; and establish and maintaining relationships with career services. They urge the demonstration of undeniable work ethic, drive, motivation, initiative, and commitment by students. The self-regulated model, they submit, encourages students to negotiate, build self-confidence, utilise critical thinking and develop personal goal setting. Roy and Sykes (2017) argue that within the virtual (or distance) education environment students are already self-regulated (SRL) or self-directed (SDL). While the theoretical backgrounds of SRL and SDL may differ, it results in the student ultimately being responsible for much of the learning process. With SRL, the task is set by the lecturer, whereas with SDL tasks are initiated by the student. With self-regulated learning within the distance environment, the student would be responsible for finding an organisation at which to conduct the activities, which constitutes the self-direction.

Roy and Sykes (2017) report (p. 2) that in “recent years, the literature is increasingly more focused on online internships and their value to students in different disciplines” and cite several authors. They found that the “general consensus is that learning the ins and outs of an industry virtually, using contemporary internship methods, strengthens the students’ expertise and better prepares them for future workplace environments”. They observe that literature reflects that students gain significant benefits from real-life experience irrespective if “an internship, an externship, community project, or field experience”. It is reported that employers say that the completion of a supervised and evaluated internship, or community-based project, would ensure that college graduates possess the needed knowledge and skills. Connecting students from a virtual academic programme with employer organisations, however, is challenging, which prompted Roy and Sykes (2017) to develop “a self-regulated internship model applicable to an online hospitality curriculum”.

Roy, J. & Sykes, D. 2017. A review of internship opportunities in online learning: building a new conceptual framework for a self-regulated internship in hospitality. International Journal of E‑Learning & Distance Education, 32(1). Electronically accessible from http://www.ijede.ca/index.php/jde/article/view/1027

Zopiatis A. & Constanti, P. 2012. Managing hospitality internship practices: A conceptual framework. Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Education, 24(1), 44-51. Electronically accessible from https://doi.org/10.1080/10963758.2012.10696661

Online enabled workplace degree

Revill et al (2005, 231) published a paper that illustrates distance presents no restriction to collaborative learning and reports on a “learning in the workplace degree based upon an online learning community approach”. “Individualised learning plans, shared electronic portfolios and collaborative reflection on practice” (emphases added) are supplemented with online ‘hotseating’ and the use of workplace advocates. Revill et al (2005, 242) explain ‘hotseating’ as a “special type of discussion with expert witnesses [or specialists], who can be interrogated by” programme participants. Revill et al (2005, 238) state that “workplace advocate is ideally someone within the workplace who is both able to support study and to ensure that the place of work will benefit from the participant’s involvement in the programme”. Revill et al (2005, 231) claim is that the “paper exhibits that it is possible to build an online community for an award-bearing workplace learning degree”, however, they state that “tools and approaches need to be developed to ensure self-directed learning from experience and through reflection can take place in a community of learners”.

Revill et al (2005, 231) point out the “belief that the relationship between those studying for the degree and those offering the degree, is not one of ‘expert’ and ‘student’ exchange, but is aiming to develop a student-centred learning experience where students are valued as” co-practitioners for their contributions.

The underpinning ‘deep learning’ pedagogic principles of the online bachelor’s degree in learning, technology and research, which is directed at participants who have not previously had the opportunity of higher education, include “learning from experience; critical reflection; action enquiry; collaborative discourse in online learning communities; self-directed adult learning” and the use of “learning journals to collect and reflect upon critical incidents at work” (Revill et al 2005, 232, emphases added).

Revill et al (2005, 232) emphasise that “content does not form the basis of this degree” and report on experience “in online communities [that] has proven to be a powerful further stimulus and influence focusing upon collaborative discourse about practice in online communities”. Learning is promoted primarily through brief stimuli that lead into online discussions. Participants are empowered online through the facilitation of construction and structuring to move from specific tasks to the broad. This social action of negotiating meaning, participant choice and self-direction served as basis to plan the degree. The experiences with the first cohort served to establish a pathway for quality assurance requirements. The pathway is in essence a shell of generic modules that is adaptable the meet the contexts, learning needs and job roles of individual participants. The coherence of the curriculum gets negotiated at modular level with the learning facilitator concerned.

Each individual learning plan (ILP) frames the individual participant’s learning requirements for the term, explain Revill et al (2005, 233-4). It is a shared and negotiated web-based document created through a web-based tool. The ‘tool’ caters for individual ‘electronic portfolios’ of learning plans, assignments and commentaries according to the learning outcomes of each participant. Individuals can design their own learning activities, negotiate and modify their learning outcomes to ensure relevance to their own workplace. The intention is to maximise the impact of individual learning on-the-job. Participants further create their own products for assessment purposes, such as “CD-ROMs, web site or slide show presentations, digital films or text-based accounts”.

Revill et al (2005, 234-5) explain the use of the portfolio tool “to capture critical incidents, notes and moments of learning through the use of electronic journals, digital photographs and video clips”. Work-based ‘artefacts’ are meant to represent significant points of learning. Quantity of artefacts and data; such as notes, minutes, plans, methods, interview notes, survey results, observations and other; are encouraged to reflected upon and analyse.

Revill et al (2005, 236) state that “there is a growing body of evidence of the positive personal and professional effects that engaging in action research has on the practitioner”, which is the reason for it being at the heart of the degree. The intent of action research is “to build collaborative enquiries and development in the workplace”. Participants get guidance with the design of their projects, their data collection, analyses and ethics. The final year of the degree revolve around the notion of exhibiting and informing peers and the community of practice about lessons learned. This sharing in turn serves “as a lever of change and a stimulus for more collaborative and negotiated change”.

Reflective writing in the workplace represents the classic double-loop learning state Revill et al (2005, 236). The notion of ‘patchwork writing’ is encouraged, in addition to accumulation of work-based artefacts. Participants are required to document alternative reflective pieces and even encouraged to ”make photo albums, write poetry and design posters illustrating key incidents”, which are often reflected upon by using frameworks suggested in literature.

In addition to the ideal candidates to serve as workplace advocates, Revill et al (2005, 238) explain that the “advocate is not involved with the academic side of the degree work and its assessment but in providing an environment that will maximise” the participant’s learning. The advocate’s role include clarification of joint expectations; negotiation of appropriate learning activities; and enabling the sharing of effective practice, action enquiry and reflective practice. Revill et al (2005, 237) point out that “workplace degrees have a long history of developing mentoring and partnership arrangements”, because of “the importance of a conducive learning environment for work-related learning and emphasises”. It has been found that “more experienced peers offer the best workplace learning support”. Good human capital practices, such as widespread performance management and appraisal systems, imply that it should not be difficult to identify workplace advocates.

Revill, G.; Terrell, I.; Powell, S. and Tindal, I. 2005. Learning in the workplace: a new degree online Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 42, 3, 231–245.

Cornell system for taking notes of real-experience learning

Deriving learning from experiences does not merely happen. A note-taking system devised at the University of Cornell, by an education professor, Walter Pauk, in the 1950s, could remarkably enhance the learning from experiences. A spiral reporter's notepad (or any of choice) works well. Space of 2-3 cm is left at the top to record the date, setting and circumstances. A line is drawn vertically, about a quarter to a third, from the left, leaving about 4-5 cms at the bottom. The column on the right serves as space to take notes of observations, explanations, facts, descriptions, etc. The column on the left use for key words, questions, etc. The space at the bottom is meant for recording a summary after the experience, for example at the end of the day.

Due to the efficiency of this method it is still being advocated; iPad templates exist for easy note taking; as well as pre-formated Cornell notepaper and guides to create a MS Word template; or PDF-format versions to print for use.

The Dr Walter Pauk Cornell system emphasises the five Rs, namely Record, Reduce, Recite, Reflect and Review.

Eight categories of assessing work-integrated learning

Sonia Ferns and Keri Moore (2012) indicate that assessment of fieldwork generally comprise three broad elements, namely (a) actual workplace performance; (b) a record of the experience (diary or journal); and (c) a reflection on the work-based experience. However, they mapped eight categories of assessment in use for assessing student outcomes from fieldwork placements:

• Case Studies research on cases: applying disciplinary knowledge in a professional context, roles, ethics, and responsibilities, systems, processes and lateral and higher order thinking, debates. Can be inter-professional or discipline specific.
• Reflection/portfolio: Reflection of work place experience and collection of evidence.
• Simulation: Institutional based assessment intended to replicate the workplace environment e.g., role play including Objective Structured Clinical Examinations (OSCE), peer and self-assessment.
• Knowledge test: Testing recall of facts such as online quizzes or multiple choice quizzes (MCQ).
• Performance - real-time in situ: Practical assessment of work place performance - detailed understanding of disciplinary systems, roles, ethics, and responsibilities, systems, processes and lateral thinking, proficiency in basic disciplinary skills, communication and core disciplinary knowledge.
• Oral Presentations: oral test - detailed understanding of disciplinary systems, roles, ethics, and responsibilities, systems, processes and lateral thinking.
• Written task: Essays or reports (other than case studies) higher order thinking.
• Industry-based case study: Investigation of actual work place scenarios.

Their research findings include, among others, some interesting graphs about frequencies of use of the above mentioned assessment types; and of graduate attributes assessed.

Ferns, S. & Moore, K. 2012. Assessing student outcomes in fieldwork placements: An overview of current practice. Asia-Pacific Journal of Cooperative Education, 13(4), 207-224.

Log as in shingles cut from wooden logs used for books

Keeping a log book is a common activity in learning from work experience. In many cases it is used as evidence of experience acquired and entries ratified by workplace supervisors. But where does the term log book originate from? I was pleasantly surprised today to stumble over the term among navy terminology: “In the early days of sailing ships, the ship's records were written on shingles cut from logs. These shingles were hinged and opened like a book. The record was called the ‘log book.’ Later on, when paper was readily available and bound into books, the record maintained it name.” Also of interest are terms such as:

• Hunky-Dory
• Long Shot
• Port Holes
• Taken Aback
• Took the Wind Out of His Sails

Reflective practice for collective learning

Raelin (2000: 101) calls "the process of public reflection" reflective practice; it is a community of inquiry and creates a collective identity. He defines reflection as "the practice of periodically stepping back to ponder the meaning to self and others in one's immediate environment about what has transpired. It illuminates what has been experienced by both self and others, providing a basic for future education", he adds.

Raelin (2000: 101-2) emphasises learning dialogues, as element of reflective practice, taking place in the security of trustworthy peers based on the direct experiences of work. Raelin (p. 103) refers to Plato's statement that 'the unexamined life isn't worth living' meaning that others need to be included in the examination of life experiences. It is more than collective naval gazing; it isintorspection midst of practice and in the presence of others.

"Reflective practitioners 'reinvest' in learning by participating in continuing education" and "engage in problem posing as much as problem solving, continually expand[ing] their solution database rather than select the first solution that works, view inconsistencies as opportunities rather than inconveniences, and enjoy reflecting back on their decision making rather than sealing off debate" (Raelin 2000: 105). Four explicit reflective practices that can be used each on its own or combined are presented by Raelin (2000: 115-145):

1. Learning teams

Work-based learning often involves action learning in teams. Co-workers undertake projects together, discuss dilemmas of work actions, as well as "the application or misapplication of concepts and theories to these actions" (p. 115). The learning device is to pose questions to one another.

2. Journaling

But "the journal is arguably the most endemic technique we have to enhance our self-reflection" admits Raelin (p. 124). Yet, he continues, although it is "often used as an introspective tool for personal growth, it can also serve as an aid to bring together the inner and outer parts of our lives. It offers a lens to view experience—be it before, during, or after the event under scrutiny—and it even allows further reflection on the journal entries themselves." The journal is a potent vehicle to collect private data for public learning dialogues and may include any one or more of the following:

• Logs or reports of specific factual experiences.
• Lists of observations or ideas.
• Portraits or descriptions of people or situations.
• Memoirs of personal experiences.
• Catalogues of feelings/perceptions in situations or about people.
• Intimate accounts including personal sentiments, confessions and notes.
• Dialogues recordings.
• Conceptual understandings.
• Commentary of applications of concepts.
• Social histories (stories) of issues unfolding.
• Maps of consciousness to capture the state of mind.
• Guided imagery, meditated frames of reference and/or dreams.
• Altered points of view in different contexts or timeframes.
• Contradictions or dilemmas experiences or observed.
• Inconsistencies noticed
• Surprises experiences.

3. Developmental planning

Developmental planning often linked to career development. It involves the individual interests, needs and expectations, as well as the organisational objectives and resource requirements. It is often an element of the overall organisational performance management strategy.

4. Developmental relationships

Examples of developmental relationships include coaching and mentoring.

Raelin, J.A. 2000. Work-based learning—the new frontier of management development. Upper Saddle River, New Jersey: Prentice Hall.

Analysis of experiential narrative instead of portfolios

It has often been said that it is naive to assume that students would actually learn from an in vivo (real-life) setting what they need to—i.e. what has been specified in the curriculum. It is my experience that students do not necessary experience, despite prior arrangements, what they should from a work placement. This is because of various reasons, among others work pressures. Besides the learning environmental factors, the student's own attitude may also restrict the student's learning.

In vivo learning educators/coordinators/work-integrated learning lecturers have tried many ways to bring about the desired learning of students, for example:

• Conducting on-campus orientation prior to placement of students in the in vivo learning setting (going for experiential/work-integrated learning)
• Providing students with work-integrated learning guidelines, detailing the relevant learning outcomes students must achieve and specifying what evidence of learning is required (this is especially important in the case of distance education institutions), for example, what the portfolio of evidence or work-project report should include
• Providing mentors (the work-place learning supervisors) with guidelines detailing what the students should be exposed to, their roles a learning mentors and what evidence of learning is expected from students
• Monitoring the learning and progress of students during in vivo/work-integrated learning
• Facilitate debriefing (or reflection) of students on return from in vivo/work-integrated learning stints away from campus
• Providing students with log books (to capture their experience and have each entry ratified) or with journals to capture their learning
• Require of students to present their portfolios to a panel that would interrogate their mastery of the specified learning outcomes

What about making use of story-telling and narrative analysis?

The in vivo/work-integrated learning guide would include the learning outcomes to be accomplished and suggested in vivo (real-life) settings.

The guide would further include (a) examples of daily journaling and/or recording of experiences, observations and realisations; (b) some indicators about story telling; and (c) a narrative analysis model—such as Lieblich, Tuval-Mashiach and Zilber (1998)—with basic explanations.

The instruction would be simple:

1. when the student is of opinion that she/he has mastered the specified learning outcomes she/he must write or tell the story about the learning experiences. If told, the student must transcribe the audio recording to text and edit it for readability
2. to do an analysis of her/his own narrative/experience-story (making use of the model in the guide)
3. illustrate/explain/qualify by linking up the analysis of the narrative with the specified learning outcomes to substantiate why she/he is of opinion the outcomes were mastered/accomplished

What do blog readers think? Could such an approach work? If readers think not, why? What are the potential pitfalls?

Feedback from a friend:

"Hi, Thomas.

Taking a rather oblique look at the problem, I'd ask, "What is it about the situation that mitigates against the desired outcome?"  Assuming the student has been given all the essential input (as you've listed) he knows what is wanted of him.   OK.  He's probably in a real-life workplace for the first time; it's and entirely new and perhaps stressful experience.  He's encountering the sort of people, rules, procedures and environment he's never experienced before.  Pressures will be on him to perform a job.   He may be earning a salary for the first time - which will be a distraction.  It will be during what is normally a holiday period, and his friends may be on the beach, or whatever. -- Just some ideas, based on observation of "Vac Students" in the Chemical industry."