Learning in vivo

WIL bridges the knowledge-to-practice gap

The “gap between what is known from research and what is done in applied practice—is called ‘the science-to-service gap’” say Grassetti et al. (2021: 175); and add that this gap “is further exacerbated by a lack of intentional collaboration between researchers and practitioners”. They assert that “Students will be positioned to make valuable contributions in their future careers if they are trained to think from an implementation science framework, apply data-driven decision-making to practice in the field, and collaborate with community partners.” This notion is deemed equally applicable to work-integrated research higher degrees (WIRHD) focussing on real-world practice-based problems and issues, relevant to workplace settings and similar contexts such as communities.

Service learning (SL), as a form of work-integrated learning, “is a progressive, cooperative pedagogical approach that grounds experience as a primary basis of learning and uses student engagement in community service as a method to develop academic knowledge and skill” say Grassetti et al. (2021: 176). It “may enhance graduate education by challenging students to apply their knowledge to community service where they may further develop practical skills” (p. 175).

“There are many definitions of service-learning” say Machtmes (2009: 156) and various forms or models thereof. One such is “a ‘problem-based service-learning course’ in which students work individually or in teams work with community partners to ‘meet specified community needs’ which ‘provide community situations and problems as service-learning opportunities for students’”. With problem-based service-learning students gain experience by acting as consultants to, for example, a community organization.

The National Service-Learning Clearinghouse, cited by Machtmes (2009: 156), states that all definitions of service-learning have the following components:

Service-learning combines service objectives with learning objectives with the intent that the activity change both the recipient and the provider of the service. This is accomplished by combining service tasks with structured opportunities that link the task to self-reflection, self-discovery, and the acquisition and comprehension of values, skills, and knowledge content.

By acting as consultant to a community, the doctoral candidate could through service-learning undertake research, and in that way bridge the gap between knowledge and real-world realities.

Grassetti, S.N.; Solic, K. & Getz, Z. (2021). Bridging the science-to-service gap: service learning in graduate-level psychology education. Teaching of Psychology, 48(2), 175-181. https://doi.org/10.1177/0098628320971208

Machtmes, K., Johnson, E., Fox, J., Burke, M. S., Harper, J., Arcemont, L., Hebert, L., Tarifa, T., Brooks, R. C., Reynaud, A. L., Deggs, D., Matzke, B., & Aguirre, R. T. (2009). Teaching Qualitative Research Methods through Service-Learning. The Qualitative Report, 14(1), 155-164. https://doi.org/10.46743/2160-3715/2009.1398

Different forms, types or modalities of work-integrated learning (WIL)

The Higher Education Qualifications Sub-Framework (HEQSF) (South African Government, 2014) differentiates five forms work-integrated learning (WIL), and the imbedded WIL template, under section D (p. 8) of the Council on Higher Education (CHE, 2021), Higher Education Quality Committee (HEQC) offline version of the online ‘Application for programme accreditation and qualification registration’, two more:

1. virtual or simulated learning,
2. work-directed theoretical learning (WDTL),
3. problem-based learning (PBL),
4. project-based learning (PjBL),
5. workplace-based learning (WPBL),
6. practicum placements,
7. service-learning, and so on.

The CHE’s Good Practice Guide (2011) advocates four distinct WIL curricular modalities, namely WDTL, PBL, PjBL and WPBL above. The eight definitions below were composed through consultation of several sources.

Practicum (plural practicums) placements	is a course/programme module, or part thereof, that involves involving activities emphasising the practical/clinical application of theory, knowledge and skills of the qualification curriculum; gaining on-the-job/vocation/professional experience; putting into practice; clinical/practical training; actual working in the area/field of study
Problem-based learning (PBL)	is a radical form of teaching which entail that ‘problems’, rather than academic subjects, as organising structure of the curriculum, with the main objective the acquisition of an extensive, integrated knowledge base. Problem-oriented learning is more commonly used and involves the inclusion of real-world scenarios for problem-based activities, assignments, and projects. Ill-structured problems stimulate the generation of multiple hypotheses or potential solutions. Ill-structured problems further allow students to observe, interview, and review records or documents to obtain needed information.
Project-based learning (PjBL)	involves learning through projects. Projects are either ‘real’ projects located in the world of work; or simulated with input from workplaces. Projects generally involve elements of research and supervision by both a university lecturer and workplace supervisor or mentor. PJBL enables the acquisition of an extensive, integrated knowledge base that students can draw on and apply to the analysis and solution of problems.
Service-learning	generally entails voluntary activities directed at specific community needs, applied learning and engaging in reflection to deepen understanding of what is being taught. It could be credit-bearing, if integrated into the curriculum of an academic programme and assessed as such., It may take place with an agency (usually a non-profit or social service group).
Simulated (or virtual) learning	means the learning and teaching technologies used to create artificial learning environments to enhance or replace a student’s actual experience with the world of work through simulations. For example, live projects, case studies, employer talks, role play, mentoring, and e-simulations.
Work-directed theoretical learning (WDTL)	enables the alignment of theoretical understanding with the practical or practice-based components and enabling students to apply such in the workplace. Presentations by workplace and/or professional practice may be used.
Work-integrated learning (WIL)	is used as an umbrella term to describe curricular, pedagogic and assessment practices, across a range of academic disciplines that integrate formal learning and workplace concerns. The International Journal of Work-Integrated Learning (IJWIL) defines WIL as "an educational approach that uses relevant work-based experiences to allow students to integrate theory with the meaningful practice of work as an intentional component of the curriculum. Defining elements of this educational approach require that students engage in authentic and meaningful work-related tasks, and must involve three stakeholders; the student, the university, and the workplace/community." (www.ijwil.org)
Workplace-based learning (WPBL)	happens when students are placed in work environments for the purposes of learning, which provides students with real life work experiences, in order internalise knowledge, skills and competencies, and gain insights through exposure to work by achieving specific outcomes. Both the HEQSF & CHE (2014) specify criteria for work(place)-based learning.

The Regulations (South African Government, 2018) for WPBL Agreements, lists nine forms of WPBL, requiring selection:

1. Apprenticeship
2. Learnership
3. Internship for the ‘N’ Diploma
4. Candidacy (postgrad for professional)
5. Student internship. Category A (for certificates & diplomas in HEQSF)
6. Student internship: Category B (requirement professional registration)
7. Student internship: Category C (for QCTO qualifications)
8. Student internship (SAQA qualification & vacation work)
9. Graduate internship (got qualification, to gain workplace experience)

Council on Higher Education (2011). Work-Integrated Learning: Good Practice Guide. HE Monitor No. 12, August 2011. Pretoria: IeCommunications. Electronically accessible from https://www.che.ac.za/sites/default/files/publications/Higher_Education_Monitor_12.pdf

Council on Higher Education (2014). Distance Higher Education Programmes in a Digital Era: Programme Accreditation Criteria, pp. 81 – 107. In Distance Higher Education Programmes in a Digital Era: Good Practice Guide. Electronically accessible from https://www.saide.org.za/documents/CHE_-_Distance_Higher_Education.pdf

Council on Higher Education (2021). Higher Education Quality Committee (HEQC) offline version of the online ‘Application for programme accreditation and qualification registration’. https://www.che.ac.za/publications/submissions/heqc-offline-application

South African Government. (2014), Department of Higher Education and Training, Government Notice No 819. Higher Education Qualifications Sub-Framework. Government Gazette No. 38116, 17 October 2014. Electronically accessible from https://www.gov.za/sites/default/files/gcis_document/201410/38116gon819.pdf

South African Government. (2018). Sector Education and Training Authorities (SETAs) workplace based learning programme agreement regulations. Department of Higher Education and Training. Government Gazette No 42037, 16 November 2018. Skills Development Act (Act 97 of 1998). https://www.gov.za/sites/default/files/gcis_document/201811/42037gon1241.pdf

Enhancing graduate employability through work-integrated learning could be a risky business

Extensive research has been done about how work-integrated learning (WIL) could enhance graduate employability, indicate de Zwaan and Grant-Smith (2022: 497). However, despite the apparent benefits it can be “… a risky business for universities’ due to the strategic, financial, legal and reputational risks it presents, particularly in being able to guarantee a sufficient supply of high quality work placements” say de Zwaan and Grant-Smith (2022: 502). Including prerequisite WIL may “result in a significant increase in administrative responsibilities for higher education institutions” they caution. Furthermore, “because students on work placement are not employees and therefore are not subject to many of the statutory protections employers are obliged to provide to employees”.

“Successful work placements depend on a strong tripartite relationship between the student, the WIL workplace, and the university”, which “needs to be based on a common understanding of the learning goals of the placement” and requires “careful management of both student and employer expectations of placements”, remark de Zwaan and Grant-Smith (2022: 502). Furthermore, “close communication between the university and host organization, including an honest appraisal of the placement student’s needs, abilities, and weaknesses, so that the placement program can be built around addressing or managing the impact of these” is needed. “Host employers [further] need to understand universities’ resource limitations … and must be prepared to provide appropriate on-the-job training and supervision if a student is to benefit from the work placement”. For WIL to succeed, “universities must be prepared to take a proactive role in negotiating with employers on their responsibilities as WIL workplaces”, as well as “to review partnerships with employers who have had repeated complaints raised against them”. The aforementioned “can only be achieved via a high level of institutional oversight, particularly in screening the suitability of potential WIL workplaces”. It is also necessary, say de Zwaan and Grant-Smith (2022: 502) to educate “students about their workplace rights and responsibilities prior to placement”, as well as “providing appropriate complaints mechanisms for students to voice concerns regarding their placements without fear of reprisal”.

Different forms of WIL are distinguished. “A useful typology for distinguishing between types of work experience conceptualized along two key dimensions: the degree of participatory discretion and the purpose of the experience” is, for example, reflected in Table 2 (from de Zwaan & Grant-Smith, 2022: 498). Completion of a work placement (also labelled an internship) as part of a degree programme normally counts as credits towards the qualification. Supervised work placements involve application of learned theories at a host workplace, and the development of skills. The duration varies depending on the discipline, and the registration or accreditation requirements of the profession, ranging from a few notional hours up to extended periods. There is furthermore significant diversity regarding how work placements are organized and monitored. In fields such as education, nursing, or health sciences with long traditions of clinical training (or ‘WIL’) and relatively large numbers of students; high levels of institutional oversight (including identification, accreditation of suitability of sites, and entering into agreements) and the matching of students with suitable opportunities, take place. However, many do require that students actively engage (like recruitment practices) in the process of securing a placement where the institution would advertise available placement opportunities and students apply, involving somewhat of a competitive application process. Some institutions, however, require that students take direct responsibility for securing and negotiating their own placements.

Although “unpaid work placements are increasingly being positioned as an employability panacea … recent research has shown that students participating in work placements can experience significant levels of psychological stress, social isolation, study/life imbalance and be exposed to exploitative or unlawful work practices”, state de Zwaan and Grant-Smith (2022: 500). ‘Panacea’, the ancient Greek goddess of healing, originates from panákeia equivalent to panake-, stem of panakḗs ‘all-healing’ (pan- ‘all’ + akḗs ‘a cure’). Unpaid internships, however, do not necessary take into consideration the “potential negative impacts on participants’ social, psychological, and economic wellbeing” say de Zwaan and Grant-Smith (2022: 500). “Financial stress and hardship can also impact students’ emotional and physical health and general wellbeing as students who are struggling financially experience more stress, anxiety, and depression”, they add. Work placements furthermore require significant time commitments from students, as well as significant risks of conflict with regard to the various roles of students.

Diversity in student populations may present several challenges regarding equity in high-quality work placements, “particularly for women, those from lower socio-economic backgrounds, and [also] international students” say de Zwaan and Grant-Smith (2022: 501). Often women are “disadvantaged due to their caring responsibilities”, and “placements during normal working hours can increase childcare costs or require alternative care arrangements to be made”. “When placements are located far from home the transport burden can be greater for women based on their mobilities of care”, as well as possibly safety concerns. “Students who are financially independent of their parents” or relatives; or “relying on paid employment to survive” or taking care of siblings; may incur considerable financial stress. These inequalities “means that students who possess significant financial capital or parental support may be more likely to be able to afford to undertake extended placements or engage in placements away from their local area”, which in turn may further impact post-graduation employment opportunities”. “Cultural differences, language skills and racism” may adversely impact international placements.

Service learning is proposed by de Zwaan and Grant-Smith (2022: 503-4) as a practical alternative to work placements. By providing services to disadvantaged individuals and non-profit organisations while supervised offer important learning opportunities and client interaction. “Service learning is distinguishable from volunteering or pro bono work in that its primary focus is on reciprocity and learning while meeting the needs of a community”.

de Zwaan, L. and Grant-Smith, D. (2022) More than mandatory work placements: The role of work-integrated learning in preparing financial planning graduates for the professional year. International Journal of Work-Integrated Learning, 23(4), 495-508. Electronically accessible from https://www.ijwil.org/files/IJWIL_23_4_495_508.pdf.

Dictionary.com https://www.dictionary.com/browse/panacea

A taxonomy of undergraduate work-integrated learning practices

The constructed taxonomy (Figure 1 below) is derived from examples and suggestions obtained from four stakeholder groups, say Neall, Cooney and Oppert (2022: 518). The taxonomy maps a range of practices in accordance two axes (or principles for effectiveness); namely vertically ‘task authenticity’ (how closely a task resembles professional level challenges) and horizontally ‘proximity to industry’ (how closely the context resembles a professional environment). The mapped practices may “be conducted virtually, practically and on an individual or group level depending on the resources available”. The four main stakeholder groups include (a) psychology graduates, (b) industry leaders, (c) higher education work-integrated learning staff, and (d) psychology accreditation council staff. The aim of the research had been to better support undergraduate psychology students to successfully enter into meaningful employment.

A cohort of Australian psychology graduates were struggling to make successful transitions to field-specific employment. Although there exists a growing demand for mental health/psychological support, there is also a deficit of appropriately trained professionals. These psychology graduates are a unique allied health cohort in that the undergraduate programme includes understanding of human physical and emotional behaviour and cognition. Graduates may enter a wide range of industry sectors, such as promotion of health, marketing, human resources, coaching, policy making, and community services. However, graduates often struggle to gain meaningful employment. Neall, Cooney and Oppert (2022: 509) believe that a “systematic integration of authentic WIL [work-integrated learning] into undergraduate psychology degrees may offset this lack of industry exposure”. They indicate that WIL has proven to develop of a range of professional and personal outcomes, including increased employability and work readiness through theory-to-practice application and professional skill development, among others.

Work-integrated learning (WIL) encapsulates a wide range of practice-based and experiential learning models and modes, such as work-based learning, project-based work, service learning, volunteering, internships, clinical placements, simulations, fieldwork, and practicums. The quality of WIL is dependent on robust industry partnerships, adequate preparation, active and authentic engagement, sound supervision, feedback, debriefing of students in order to improve work readiness in students.

Neall, A.M., Cooney, O. & Oppert, M.L. (2022). Enhancing employment outcomes for psychology graduates: Developing a taxonomy of work-integrated learning. International Journal of Work-Integrated Learning, 23(4), 509-525. Electronically accessible from https://www.ijwil.org/files/IJWIL_23_4_509_525.pdf

Problem-based learning through community engagement

“Service learning and problem-based learning (PBL) are distinct”, yet related and potentially synergistic paradigms say McDonald and Ogden-Barnes (2013: 281) and indicate that:

• The essence of problem-based learning (PBL), as form of work-integrated learning (WIL) entail exposure of students to ‘real world’ or simulated organisational or operational challenges, and the development of solutions thereto
• Service learning is deemed valuable in developing the social conscious of students, and is actively promoted as an educational strategy for developing stronger links between the educational institution and its community

PBL resorts within the constructivist paradigm, and is aimed at developing the abilities of students “to think, collaborate, and synthesise in the pursuit of solutions, applying personal, interpersonal, professional and academic learning and experiences to a ‘real world’ issue” (McDonald and Ogden-Barnes, 2013: 281). However, there is a distinct difference PBL and problem-solving learning, in that the latter is concentrated “on eliciting answers to questions posed specifically in relation to the discipline curriculum” they indicate. Furthermore, PBL “is characterized by flexibility and diversity in the sense that it can be implemented in a variety of ways in and across different subjects and disciplines in diverse contexts” they point out. The ultimate success of PBL as “learning strategy is the identification, design and communication of the problem itself, a factor which has been revealed to be complex and multi-dimensional” (p. 282).

Service learning, as form of experiential learning, which entail students and community members together attending to community issues of concern. These issues provide context for academically rigorous assignments, connecting community experience with specific teaching and learning goals. Service learning (SL) is labelled by many alternatives, such as “community-engagement, community-pedagogy, community-knowledge exchange and community-based learning” (McDonald and Ogden-Barnes, 2013: 283). The essence of SL involves students volunteering and applying time, intellect, skills and abilities, as part of their curriculum, towards community advancement. SL may be subject or discipline specific or integrate multiple disciplines in pursuing an educational institution’s community engagement vision and goals. The implementation of effective SL or community engagement (CE) initiatives entail significant resource implications, and may result in real-world versus academic-world contradictions, caution McDonald and Ogden-Barnes (2013: 283).

McDonald and Ogden-Barnes (2013: 290) present the following recommendations with regard to the PBL-SL/CE interface:

• Consider [the] resource implications early and dedicate a working group to design, market and project manage the event
• Position the event against the institution’s community engagement agenda to demonstrate relevance and build internal rapport
• Secure senior management ownership/buy in
• Create a distinct brand, theme and set of promotional resources for the event that is relevant and appealing to both students and stakeholders
• Discuss and manage stakeholder expectations in relation to the problem or challenge[s] identified
• Encourage inter-disciplinary participation via inter-school promotion
• Actively communicate the benefits of participation to all parties: students, faculty, stakeholders
• Provide in situ support to help overcome any learning hurdles
• Ensure strong dialogue between students and organizations over the duration of the event to ensure that the team’s thinking and ideas remains on track

McDonald, S. & Ogden-Barnes, S. (2013). Problem-based service learning with a heart: Organizational and student expectations and experiences in a postgraduate not-for-profit workshop event. Asia-Pacific Journal of Cooperative Education, 14(4), 281-293. Electronically accessible from https://www.ijwil.org/files/APJCE_14_4_281_293.pdf

A community is required for workplace-based learning (‘it takes a community to offer’)

‘It Takes a Village’ by Jane Cowen-Fletcher (1994) is a colourfully illustrated story that portrays a proverb attributed to West Africa, namely ‘it takes a village to raise a child’.

Yemi's mother asks her to care for her younger brother and the girl is delighted at the prospect of taking on a grown-up task. The three of them set out to the village market [in Benin, West Africa], where Mama will sell mangoes. Yemi soon loses Kokou, but instead of the terrible things she imagines happening to him, the toddler is lovingly cared for by all of the adults he meets-he is fed, given something to drink, played with, and allowed to nap. Yemi discovers that caring neighbours have been watching them both all along.

The proverb ‘it takes a village’ means an entire community of people is needed to interact positively with children for those children to grow up in a safe and healthy environment. The origins of the proverb has been researched, but not pinpointed. It is believed to embody the spirit of several African cultures, for example (Wikipedia):

• In Lunyoro (Bunyoro) there is a proverb that says “Omwana takulila nju emoi,” whose literal translation is “A child does not grow up only in a single home.”
• In Kihaya (Bahaya) there is a saying, “Omwana taba womoi,” which translates as “A child belongs not to one parent or home.”
• Kijita (Wajita) has the proverb, “Omwana ni wa bhone,” meaning regardless of a child's biological parents, its upbringing belongs to the community.
• In Swahili, the proverb “Asiye funzwa na mamae hufunzwa na ulimwengu” means roughly the same: "Whomsoever is not taught by the mother will be taught with the world."

The notion ‘it takes a village’ has subsequently been adopted by several authors, applied to a multitude of scenarios, and other books pubished. The definition of work-integrated learning (WIL) of the Canadian body for Co-operative Education and Work-integrated Learning (CEWIL) cited by Nielsen, Livernoche and Ramji (2022: 139) accurately captures the essence of workplace-based learning (WPBL, as form of WIL). CEWIL defines WIL as “a model and process of curricular experiential education which formally and intentionally integrates a student's academic studies within a workplace or practice setting. WIL experiences include an engaged partnership of at least: an academic institution, a host organization and a student”. The origins of WIL (and cooperative education) emphasised the close collaboration of academic institutions with the relevant community of practice, within the relevant industry that is involved, with regard to the necessary workplace experiences that form part of the curriculum. In addition, workplace mentoring by experienced practitioners, play a significant role in WPBL.

The Higher Education Qualifications Sub-Framework (HEQSF) of the Department of Higher Education and Training (South African Government, 2014), which indicates that the incorporation of work-integrated learning (WIL) into the curriculum is characteristic of vocational and professionally-oriented qualifications. The HEQSF, §35 (p. 17, emphases added) states that where the WIL component “takes the form of workplace-based learning, it is the responsibility of institutions that offer programmes requiring credits for such learning to place students into appropriate workplaces” and add that “such workplace-based learning must be appropriately structured, properly supervised and assessed”.

However, work-integrated learning need not necessary involve actual work. The HEQSF differentiates, in §34 (p. 17), various forms of work-integrated learning (WIL), namely:

• simulated learning [also known as simulated work experiences (SWEs)]
• work-directed theoretical learning [WDTL]
• problem-based learning [PBL]
• project-based learning [PjBL]
• workplace-based learning [WPBL] — Three Council on Higher Education publications (CHE: 2004a, 2004b & 2014) provide criteria with regard to work-based learning (WBL)

The South African Council on Higher Education, as independent statutory body and Quality Council for Higher Education (CHE: n.d.), published (CHE: 2011) a ‘Good Practice Guide’ towards work-integrated learning which deliberated the various modes mentioned above. The CHE (2014, Criterion 15, emphases added) recognises that ‘it takes a village’, by stating that “appropriate arrangements will be needed for placement, mentoring and supervision” and reiterates the “coordination of work-based learning must be done effectively, including adequate infrastructure, effective communication, recording of progress made, monitoring and mentoring”, plus the following:

• Learning agreements or contracts implemented through which the student, the higher education institution, the employer (workplace-based learning provider) and mentor negotiate, approve, adhere to agreed roles and responsibilities, and assess the objectives and outcomes of the learning process
• Regular and effective communication taking place and good working relations are maintained between the institution, students, mentors and employers involved
• System (both at the institution and at the place of workplace-based learning in operation to regularly and systematically monitor and record the progress of each student’s learning experience
• Mentoring system that enables each student to recognise his/her strengths and weaknesses, to develop existing and new abilities, and to gain knowledge of work practices

Nielsen et al. (2022: 139-140) indicate “a range of WIL programs: co-operative education (co-op), internships, entrepreneurships, apprenticeships, service learning, applied research projects, mandatory professional practicum/clinical placement, field placement, and work experience”; and add that “strategic WIL placements in partnership with Indigenous groups also offer opportunities for capacity-building, cultural revitalization, and community development”.

CHE (Council on Higher Education)

Cowen-Fletcher, J. (1994). It Takes a Village. Scholastic Press. [Information about accessible from https://janecowen-fletcher.com/it-takes-a-village]

Council on Higher Education (n.d.) Legislative and policy mandate. Electronically accessible from https://www.che.ac.za/about-us/legislative-and-policy-mandate

Council on Higher Education (2004a). Higher Education Quality Committee. Criteria for Programme Accreditation. Electronically accessible from https://firebasestorage.googleapis.com/v0/b/che2020-c5efd.appspot.com/o/website%2Fyxqlkgy7gwo1.pdf?alt=media&token=c1ea5d6e-2e05-463d-9f2b-bbf92d4b402b

Council on Higher Education (2004b). Higher Education Quality Committee. Criteria for Institutional Audits. Electronically accessible from https://firebasestorage.googleapis.com/v0/b/che2020-c5efd.appspot.com/o/website%2Fjh3xgy9ub11.pdf?alt=media&token=aa1b8117-5414-4e70-a363-50dc924a7d42

Council on Higher Education (2011). Work-Integrated Learning: Good Practice Guide. HE Monitor No. 12, August 2011. Pretoria: IeCommunications. Electronically accessible from https://www.che.ac.za/sites/default/files/publications/Higher_Education_Monitor_12.pdf

Council on Higher Education (2014). Distance Higher Education Programmes in a Digital Era: Programme Accreditation Criteria, pp. 81 – 107. In Distance Higher Education Programmes in a Digital Era: Good Practice Guide. Electronically accessible from https://www.saide.org.za/documents/CHE_-_Distance_Higher_Education.pdf

Nielsen, J., Livernoche, R. & Ramji, K. (2022). The Indigenous Work-integrated Learning Resource Hub: A needs-based approach to addressing barriers and opportunities for Indigenous students. International Journal of Work-Integrated Learning, 23(2), 139-152. Electronically accessible from https://www.ijwil.org/files/IJWIL_23_2_139_152.pdf

South African Government (2014), Department of Higher Education and Training, Government Notice No 819. Higher Education Qualifications Sub-Framework. Government Gazette No. 38116, 17 October 2014. Electronically accessible from https://www.gov.za/sites/default/files/gcis_document/201410/38116gon819.pdf

Wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/It_takes_a_village

Part of an active disaster management team as learning experience

Because competence in coping with natural and fabricated disasters is of increasing importance, disaster management became an integral part of the curriculum of, for example, nursing education. Often “first responders in the most acute phases of disaster to the long-term aftermath addressing loss, grief and posttraumatic stress disorders” include nurses, say Sickora et al. (2020: 30). Apart from “disaster preparedness theory and frameworks for intervention”, it is deemed essential to provide clinical “experiential learning opportunities”, which “often includes simulation experiences that range from mass casualty to active shooter”. Although less common, for students to become part of an active disaster management team, has been experienced as invaluable with remarks such as “I felt like a real nurse” and “This is the best experience I have had since I decided to become a nurse”. In this regard Strimel (2014) remark that natural disasters happen at the intersection between humans and nature, and having to face a current real-life issue, students are challenged with the issues at hand.

Disaster relief intervention, as experiential learning opportunity, is deemed to serve a dual purpose, namely (a) “meeting the needs of a community in real-time crisis”, and (b) providing “students with boots-on-the-ground disaster relief experiences”, say Sickora et al. (2020: 31). Similar to Buschlen, Warner and Goffnett (2015: 40), Sickora et al. (2020: 31) emphasise preparation of students before, and debriefing after their disaster intervention. Many students made requests to return, because of deeply affirming experiences, share Sickora et al. (2020).

Sickora et al. (2020: 32) caution that “organization is crucial throughout an effective disaster relief intervention and that initial logistics are challenging and time consuming”, as well as that all stakeholders need to be identified, and resources secured. “Coordination and collaboration with indigenous health care providers and other resources, such as charities and nongovernment organizations” are essential. Long-range preplanning is important, as is effective administration to “ensure proper tracking of disaster relief execution, patient medications, nurse and staff log-ins and log-outs, and patient contact information are also key factors in the effort”. “Keeping a cool head and rolling with the punches” while rendering disaster relief is vital. Practicalities, such as, translators make a significant difference. On-site, fellow relief “workers, such as those providing assistance in construction, debris removal, or road repair, are also in need of care for a variety of maladies, ranging from heat exhaustion to insect bites and wound care”, which suggest a need for multi-disciplinary collaboration.

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

Sickora, C., Salt, R.J., Page, T.S., Lee, W., Cantu, A.G., Lee, M., Schwab, K.W., Martinez, M.L., Byrd, D. (2020). Evolution of experiential learning opportunities for nursing students after natural disaster. Journal of Nursing Education, 59(1), 30-33. Electronically accessible from https://doi.org/10.3928/01484834-20191223-07.

Strimel, G. (2014). Authentic education by providing a situation for student-selected problem-based learning. Technology and Engineering Teacher, 73 (7), 8-18. Abstract accessible from https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1049199

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

What competences; which experiences; and feasibility?

For teaching and learning, the central—“constituting something from which other related things proceed or upon which they depend”—issue, is the expected/stated outcomes (such as knowledge, skills, and attitudes), and/or competencies.

Once the expected outcomes and/or competencies are known, careful consideration must be given to which learning experiences are most likely to accomplish those; and the feasibility of providing such.

Certain learning is best acquired (or accomplished) through contextual experience/s, application, and reflection. A number of conditions are of significance pertaining contextual experiences, such as:

• The degree of authenticity (or genuineness) for learning that is provided
• The degree of fidelity (or proximity) with regard to reality
• The extent of interactivity (and immersivity) made feasible

The extent to which the occupational-field/the profession/the community-of-practice/vocational representatives were involved in determining the learning outcomes; and in particular the expression of willingness to support the teaching, by providing real-life learning opportunities, is a major deciding factor. Without adequate support, and the provision of access to contextual learning experiences, the options are reduced; and workplace-learning placements become a substantial challenge.

Workplace/clinical-field/professional/vocational realities, however, do not always permit actual exposure. This could be due to for example security/confidentiality/safety/sensitivity. In such circumstances, the realities could be simulated in a variety of ways in order to provide alternative experiences with the objective of achieving the stated learning outcomes.

The aforesaid highlight some of the teaching-design considerations, however, there are many other issues to consider, and a range of options and possibilities. Some of the potential modes of teaching include:

• Work-integrated/workplace/work-based learning, clinical training/professional practice/placement
• Project- and problem-based learning, work-based project, and live projects
• Case-based learning, case studies, case methods, life course/experience, and story telling
• Studio-based learning, studio-work, studios, and problem solving
• Service learning, community engagement, and role plays
• Virtual learning environments, virtual reality, and a range of potential simulations
• Non-placement work-integrated learning
• Work-directed theoretical learning, and projects

Placement and non-placement work-integrated learning (NPWIL)

Through this blogpost I attempt to provide some guidance regarding the scope of placement and non-placement forms of work-integrated learning (WIL).

Work-integrated learning (WIL) is generally associated with placements, whereby students spend periods of time in the workplace. However, in recent years, many innovations–without placement time–with regard to integrating work practices into teaching and learning occurred. There has been “evidence to suggest universities were exploring and experimenting with new ways” and an uptake of non-placement WIL activities, “to include a range of simulated, virtual, authentic and industry-based activities” say Dean, Eady and Yanamandram (2020: 1-2). The global Coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic escalated experiments, which were further leveraged through technological platforms, and described by some as a learning revolution. It most certainly served as impetus for questioning the dominant modes of WIL, and extending interest into alternative WIL models. Examples of non-placement WIL (NPWIL) “may include (but not limited to) authentic industry projects, simulations, field work, creative studio work, digitally enabled or virtual WIL and other NPWIL experiences”.

Whereas my employer opted about a decade ago to use experiential learning as umbrella term, differentiating WIL and simulated work experiences (SWEs), others broadened the range of WIL to include forms of non-placement. Dean, Yanamandram, Eady, Moroney, O'Donnell, and Glover-Chambers (2020) indicate that over the last decade WIL has moved away from the narrow conception of ‘work placements’ to a much broader and widening lens. An earlier typology of WIL entails three models, namely professional programmes, service learning and cooperative education; where students reside in different ‘workplaces’. Another typology delineates different types of WIL experiences, based on ‘on-site’ activities, namely systematic training (e.g., apprenticeships); the structured work experience (e.g., field experience, mandatory professional practice, co-op and internships); and institutional partnerships (e.g., applied projects, service learning). Dean, et al. (2020) indicate that boundaries with regard to WIL are often unclear because of complexities of multiple variables and understandings. They convey five innovative models that are growing, given the advancements in technology, globalisation and creativity, including micro-placements, online projects or placements, competitions such as hackathons, incubators or start-ups and consulting.

Dean, Yanamandram et al. (2020) caution against the use of WIL ‘type’ nomenclature for categorisation, because of variations in terminology, yet relatively similar definitions. They support the notion of classification based on the defining features of WIL rather than specific modes or models of WIL. Dean, Yanamandram et al. (2020) cite a typology by Kaider, Hains-Wesson and Young (2017: 158), comprising a two dimensional grid, namely authenticity vertically and proximity horizontally, depicted in my blogpost ‘Evolving work-integrated learning typologies and frameworks’.

The authenticity axis portrays the learning activity, and the assessment thereof, with regard to the extend students work on problems, processes and projects that they may encounter in the future workplace, and to what extend artefacts that students need to produce would reflect the practice. The proximity axis represents the degree of closeness of learning experiences to real workplaces or practice contexts, and the degree of direct interaction with industry practitioners or community members on work related activities. Kaider et al. (2017) overlaid their grid with exemplars of activities that could take place across three different stages of university education. However Dean, Yanamandram et al. (2020) find this problematic and present both the Universities Australia typology based on the delivery of WIL activities, and the University of Wollongong, Australia, university-wide approach of a WIL Curriculum Classification (WILCC) Framework. Informed by all these, I propose a three-dimensional-kind of typology (or framework), based on Kaider et al. (2017: 159) authenticity-proximity axes, but overlaid by my three broad categories I propose, namely: (a) foundational, (b) applied, and (c) comprehensive, depicted in the diagram below.

Kaider et al. (2017) do not include a grouping for both low-authenticity and low-proximity, because they do not regard such means of teaching and learning as WIL.

Foundational WIL as ‘category’

The four groupings serve as examples of credit-bearing WIL which require of students to observe, explore, analyse or reflect on the application of theory in practice. Activities should be purposefully designed to provide for career development learning, developing of identities, and to guide the learning and reflection of students about the discipline, concepts, skills, ethics and aptitudes. Foundational relates to groundwork or laying the basis for future practice.

Applied WIL as ‘category’

These three groupings also serve as examples of credit-bearing WIL which generally require of students, or provide students opportunities to practise, while also critically reflect while directly engaging in work practices. Applied WIL activities compliment theoretical learning and should be purposefully designed with practical purpose in mind, involving engagement with the actual phenomena.

Comprehensive WIL as ‘category’

This category includes examples of large scope or extensive coverage generally of substantial credit-bearing WIL. However, in some cases internships may involve postgraduate work under supervision with the aim of professional registration. Such WIL should be purposefully designed to provide students opportunities to practise and reflect on actual work with supervisory guidance and feedback. University staff generally provide briefing/debriefing, reflection and support sessions, monitoring and assessment. Students may further be required to participate in activities to share, reflect on and integrate their learning experiences. Comprehensive WIL displays both high levels of authenticity, and high levels of proximity to future work practice.

References

Dean, B., Eady, M.J. and Yanamandram, V. 2020. Editorial: Advancing Non-placement Work-integrated Learning Across the Degree. Journal of University Teaching & Learning Practice, 17(4), Available at: https://ro.uow.edu.au/jutlp/vol17/iss4/1

Dean, B., Yanamandram, V., Eady, M.J., Moroney, T., O'Donnell, N., & Glover-Chambers, T. 2020. An institutional framework for scaffolding work-integrated learning across a degree. Journal of University Teaching & Learning Practice, 17(4). Available at: https://ro.uow.edu.au/jutlp/vol17/iss4/6

Kaider, F., Hains-Wesson, R., & Young, K. 2017. Typology of authentic WIL activities and assessment, Asia-Pacific Journal of Cooperative Education, 18(2), 153-165. Available at: https://www.ijwil.org/files/APJCE_18_2_153_165.pdf

What does quality work-integrated learning entail?

A webpage of the International Journal of Work-Integrated Learning (IJWIL) states that although there are similarities, “there is no agreed-upon single definition of work-integrated learning (WIL)” and therefore opted for a broad definition, namely:

an educational approach that uses relevant work-based experiences to allow students to integrate theory with the meaningful practice of work as an intentional component of the curriculum

The International Journal of Work-Integrated Learning (IJWIL) webpage provides the following examples of practices:

work placements, work-terms, internships, practicum, cooperative education (Co-op), fieldwork, work-related projects/competitions, service learning, entrepreneurships, student-led enterprise, applied projects, simulations (including virtual WIL)

The webpage further states that “WIL shares similarities in aims and underpinning theories of learning to the fields of experiential learning, work-based learning, and vocational education and training, however, each of these fields have enough differences to be seen as separate fields” (emphasis of concepts added). The webpage elaborates that it “invites submissions of manuscripts discussing research where students may not be 'placed' within a workplace but, for example, where students undertake a project that is campus-based but for an outside partner (e.g., work-related projects, competitions, entrepreneurships, community projects, virtual WIL, etc).”

At the University of Cincinnati, where cooperative education has been practiced since 1906, it is understood that “WIL is a complex learning framework rooted in constructivism where the learner learns through experiences and through critical reflection on those experiences”; and quality with regard to WIL is defined (emphases added) as:

• Intentional (experiences are structured with trained educators as facilitators)
• Learner-centered and holistic (concerned with learning and growth of the student as a whole)
• Collaborative with the learner’s community or communities (contextualized to include real-world complexities, situated within real world contexts)
• Dependent on the inclusion of rigorous preflexive, reflexive, and reflective pedagogic strategies

The notion ‘preflection’ entails “the act of reflecting on something before it has happened”, which reminds me of the good teaching practice of briefing viewers prior to screening a film/video in order to focus the attention of viewers on the learning points. ‘Preflection’ is a deemed a strategy; a tool designed to enhance and enrich the reflection process; a reflective session prior to the experience.

Reflexive practice is where students consider the implications from what they have learnt as it may apply to the wider context they are within; whereas reflective practice is where students reflect on what they have learnt and what it means to them personally. The contrast can be illustrated as follow:

The aforementioned is in contrast to the South African Council on Higher Education (CHE) quality criterium 15 for work-based learning as contained in https://www.psychsoma.co.za/learning_in_vivo/2020/07/proposed-decision-making-chart-with-regard-to-work-integrated-learning-wil.html

A comprehensive framework for assuring the quality of work-integrated learning

Much emphasis is placed on the notion of ‘quality’, on quality assurance measures and initiatives, and on improvement plans (or frameworks), state McRae, Pretti and Church (2019: 1-2). Quality could be described as a desired end-state, a striving for excellence.

There are a number of frameworks of quality standards deemed relevant:

• Smith’s (2012) framework for evaluation of the work-integrated learning (WIL) curriculum proposes six measures of specific domains, namely authenticity, integrated learning support, alignment, supervisor access, and induction (or preparation processes)
• The Council on Higher Education (2014) criteria for the coordination of work-based learning programmes presented by distance higher education institutions.
• The McRae, Pretti and Church (2019) triple-A star (AAA★) framework below, comprising five main sections, namely (1) the foundation, concepts, terminology and five stakeholder groups (students, host organisations/employers, the educators, academic institutions, and governments—in each of the stakeholder groups there are potentially “advocates”, which are bodies representing the interests of and/or supporting the group); (2) the participation aims of each of the stakeholders; (3) the actions by each of the stakeholders that is critical for quality; (4) the expected achievements (or outcomes, impacts, measures, and key performance indicators) for each of the stakeholders; and (5) finally a synthesis of four sections, as well as an outline of a continuous improvement process.

Figure: Triple-A star (AAA★) framework (McRae, Pretti & Church, 2019: 1)

Whereas the Council on Higher Education (2014) reiterates the 2004 accreditation criteria; Smith (2012: 250) presents a new evaluation framework which structurally and conceptually divides the WIL curriculum into six domains or constructs:

1. Authenticity
2. Alignment of teaching and learning activities with integrative learning objectives (Align-TLA)
3. Alignment of assessment with integrative learning objectives (Align-Asst)
4. Integrated Learning Support (across the two university and workplace sites) (ILS)
5. Supervisor Access (Sup. Access)
6. Induction and Preparation Processes (IPP)

The Council on Higher Education (2014) furthermore persists with the use of the term work-based learning (and the coordination thereof), whereas Smith (2012: 250) asserts that authenticity “is at the heart of all workplace-situated learning”. Smith (2012: 247) asserts that work-integrated learning (WIL) entails students spending time “in professional, work or other practice settings relevant to their degrees of study and to their occupational futures”; but points out that “WIL is not the same as work experience or work-based learning, neither of which require students to specifically learn, apply or integrate canonical disciplinary knowledge”. Both physical authenticity (providing students with real work environments) and cognitive authenticity (where students personally engage in, encounter, and participate in meaningful and relevant learning within the specified disciplinary framework) of curricula are deemed important. The authenticity is assessed with regard to what extent the environment would expose students to the real work settings and to which students can observe, interact and respond to that particular context. Projects should be meaningful and consequential. Freestone, Williams, Thompson and Trembath (2007) illustrate the application of a variant of the Course Experience Questionnaire (CEQ), namely the Work Experience Questionnaire (WEQ), as measure of the workplace learning experiences of students. The WEQ had been designed to explore the perceptions of students about their learning environment. The WEQ requires students to respond on a conventional five-point scale, ranging from strong disagreement (1), through to strong agreement/concurrence (5), with the intermediate points not labelled. The dimensions of ‘clear goals’ and ‘support for learning’ have been found to correlate highly with student learning. The WEQ questionnaire consisting of 33 items (questions), with items bundled into scales, namely:

• Clear Goals Scale (3 items)
• Support for Learning Scale (5 items)
• Generic Skills Scale (5 items)
• Menial Tasks Scale (3 items)
• Overall Satisfaction (1 item)
• Ungrouped individual questions (7 items)
• Additional Generic Skills (9 items).

Conceptually, there is a substantial difference between what is deemed quality. Whereas the Council on Higher Education (2014) focusses on various elements of coordination; Smith (2012) focusses on what constitutes good teaching and learning. He (p. 248) argues that WIL “focuses attention on the integration of discipline learning and workplace practice or application”. Smith (2012: 251) advances the “notion of the constructive alignment of learning objectives with teaching and learning activities (TLAs) and assessments”. He alludes to the fact that during WIL placements students are not at their host universities, but at workplaces, and therefore urges curriculum design deliberately integrated support services in the delivery, in order to improve the individual learning by alleviating stress. This up with the management of pedagogical aspects through induction and preparing students, both pedagogically and practically. Smith (2012: 252) recognises that such present an extra burden on academics, which is compounded by the need for maintaining contact “between the academic convenor (or appropriate others – e.g. tutors) and students in situ” (notion of supervisor access).

McRae, Pretti and Church (2019: 7) assert that “WIL is a collaborative endeavour and the perspectives of multiple stakeholders need to be incorporated to ensure the quality of WIL outcomes” and elaborate that “each of these stakeholders has a connection to quality WIL as described by the key aspects identified by P.E.A.R.”:

• P for pedagogy — the curriculum needs to be designed “to allow students and host organizations to make the most of the experience and students need to engage with the curriculum”
• E for experience — “educators need to verify that the opportunity aligns with the educational goals of the course/program, host organizations need to provide opportunities for meaningful and substantial contributions, and WIL students need to fully engage with the host organization to make the experience valuable for both themselves and the organization”
• A for assessment — “designed by the educator with input from the student and host organization”
• R for reflection — the educator must provide prompts “to facilitate reflection on the experience for the student and the host organization ensuring maximum learning gains from the experience”

McRae, Pretti and Church (2019: 4-5) cites the Canadian national association for Co-operative and Work-Integrated Learning (CEWIL) definition of work-integrated learning (WIL), namely “a model and process of curricular experiential education which formally and intentionally integrates a student’s academic studies within a workplace or practice setting. WIL experiences include an engaged partnership of at least: an academic institution, a host organization, and a student. WIL can occur at the course or program level and includes the development of learning outcomes related to employability, personal agency, and life-long learning”. They further differentiate nine different models or forms of curricular WIL that exist in many post-secondary institutional contexts, namely:

• Apprenticeship
• Co-operative Education (co-op alternating and co-op internship models)
• Internship
• Entrepreneurship
• Service Learning
• Applied Research Projects
• Mandatory Professional Practicum/Clinical Placement
• Field Placement
• Work Experience

McRae, Pretti and Church (2019: 17) conclude that a quality framework for work-integrated learning is a critical, because each stakeholder has finite resources that they can be directed towards WIL, and each need to be intentional in how to allocate available resources. Many stakeholders support the positive outcomes of WIL in higher education as well as expansion, however, the outcomes are not guaranteed. Quality must remain in focus. McRae, Pretti and Church (2019: 17) suggest that through articulating the aims; accomplishing the actions; assessing the achievements of the primary stakeholders; and by using the acquired information it is possible to set a continuous improvement process in motion through quality can be assured.

References

Council on Higher Education. 2014. Distance Higher Education Programmes in a Digital Era: Programme Accreditation Criteria (pp 81-107), in Distance Higher Education Programmes in a Digital Era: Good Practice Guide — Criterion 15, p. 104. Electronically accessible from http://www.che.ac.za/sites/default/files/publications/CHE%20-%20Distance%20Higher%20Education.pdf

Freestone, R., Williams, P., Thompson, S. & Trembath, K. 2007. A quantitative approach to assessment of work-based learning outcomes: an urban planning application. Higher Education Research & Development, 26(4), December, 347–361. Electronically accessible from https://tandfonline.com/toc/cher20/26/4?nav=tocList

McRae, N.T., Pretti, J. & Church, D. 2019. Work-Integrated Learning Quality Framework. University of Waterloo, Waterloo Centre for the Advancement of Co-operative Education (WatCACE), Electronically accessible from https://uwaterloo.ca/centre-advancement-co-operative-education/research-publications/wil-quality-framework

Smith, C. 2012. Evaluating the quality of work-integrated learning curricula: a comprehensive framework. Higher Education Research & Development, 31(2), 247–262. Electronically accessible from https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/07294360.2011.558072

Learning of a different kind occurs when opportunity to apply

Bringing life to learning, a report about experiential learning at Ontario universities, states in the Introduction (Council of Ontario Universities, 2014: 12 - Download Council_Ontario_Universities_EL_Report_p12) that when there is no exam to study for, no essay to write, a different kind of learning occurs. An experiential learning opportunity is where curiosity gets tested in the real world, where knowledge and skills that have been learned are applied to a real life project.

The report further addresses experiential learning issues pertaining to:

• When students of work-integrated learning programs land dream jobs (pp. 13-14)  Download Council_Ontario_Universities_EL_Report_p13 &  Download Council_Ontario_Universities_EL_Report_p14
  
• Cultivation of business leadership (pp. 15-16)  Download Council_Ontario_Universities_EL_Report_p15 &  Download Council_Ontario_Universities_EL_Report_p16
• Innovations in technology (p. 17)  Download Council_Ontario_Universities_EL_Report_p17
• Hearing from students and graduates (p. 19)  Download Council_Ontario_Universities_EL_Report_p19 &  Download Council_Ontario_Universities_EL_Report_p20
• Students shaping communities (pp. 21-22) Download Council_Ontario_Universities_EL_Report_p21 &  Download Council_Ontario_Universities_EL_Report_p22
• What students and graduates are saying (p. 23)  Download Council_Ontario_Universities_EL_Report_p23
• Bridging of borders (p. 24)  Download Council_Ontario_Universities_EL_Report_p24
• Students facilitating healthy living (pp. 25-26)  Download Council_Ontario_Universities_EL_Report_p25 &  Download Council_Ontario_Universities_EL_Report_p26
• Students enriching communities with the arts (p. 27)  Download Council_Ontario_Universities_EL_Report_p27
• Universities adding value through experiential learning (p.29)  Download Council_Ontario_Universities_EL_Report_p29

Council of Ontario Universities. 2014. Bringing life to learning, at Ontario universities — Experiential Learning Report. Toronto: Council of Ontario Universities. Electronically accessible from: http://www.cou.on.ca/publications/reports/pdfs/march262014---experiential-learning-report?utm_content=buffer89cdc&utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter.com&utm_campaign=buffer

Community engagement grounded in three interrelated elements

 

Swan, Paterson and Bielefeldt (2014, 362) provide a broad definition for community engagement (CE), namely:

CE in engineering education is a form of active, experiential learning where students, instructors, and the community partners work collaboratively on projects that benefit a real community need and provide a rich learning experience for all participants. The CE must be properly planned, implemented, and assessed with expected outcomes, educational and others, in mind. Critical reflection is part of this assessment effort.

This definition serves as umbrella making provision for several kinds of service-based learning activities. However, three interrelated elements are highlighted, namely:

1. The efforts performed must be authentic; could be single or multi-disciplinary; but require conection of service and learning.
2. The service, grounded in the needs of a community, must be appropriately developed by jointly by stakeholders, and intentional. The service deepens the learning and sustains the partnership.
3. The primary goal of the service is learning, but is enhanced by the service. The learning need both to be planned, in accordance to the educational objectives, and to be assessed accordingly. Structured, critical relfection deepens the learning.

Swan, Paterson and Bielefeldt (2014, 366) summarise the outcomes and benefits of community engagement Download Service_learning_benefits

Swan, C.; Paterson, K. and Bielefeldt, A.R. 2014. Community engagement in engineering education as a way to increase inclusiveness, 357-372. In A. Johri and B.M. Olds. 2014. Cambridge handbook of engineering education research. New York: Cambridge Press.

A typology and continuum of service and learning

The term service-learning dates back to 1964 to distinguish community service programmes at Oak Ridge Associated Universities explain Swan, Paterson and Bielefeldt (2014, 358). Over the two decades ending 2003, no fewer than 200 different definitions of service learning were published.

Sigmon, cited by Swan, Paterson and Bielefeldt (2014, 360), produced a typology comprising four quadrants varying the emphasis of either or both service and learning:

Furco, also cited by Swan, Paterson and Bielefeldt (2014, 360), felt it necessary to differentiate various forms or modes, such as volunteerism and community service versus field education and internships. He produced a two-dimensional continuum, namely with the focus varying from service to learning; and the beneficiary varying from the recipient of service-learning to the provider thereof.

Swan, C.; Paterson, K. and Bielefeldt, A.R. 2014. Community engagement in engineering education as a way to increase inclusiveness, 357-372. In A. Johri and B.M. Olds. 2014. Cambridge handbook of engineering education research. New York: Cambridge Press.

 

Learning through service (LTS)

The term 'learning through service' (LTS) has been added to the lexicon of ways to describe pedagogical methods which infuse academic learning with service rendering say Swan, Paterson and Bielefeldt (2014, 357).

In their view, the overarching 'umbrella' term' community engagement' (CE) includes a variety of educational models, for example service-learning, community service-learning, problem-based learning and project-based learning.

Swan, C.; Paterson, K. and Bielefeldt, A.R. 2014. Community engagement in engineering education as a way to increase inclusiveness, 357-372. In A. Johri and B.M. Olds. 2014. Cambridge handbook of engineering education research. New York: Cambridge Press.

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

What are experiences that combine work experiences with formal education called?

This question is posed and a range of 11 alternative names outlined, as well as six types of delivery programmes, by Gardener and Barkus (2014).

The range of alternative names developed include:

1. Work-integrated learning (WIL)
2. Work-based learning
3. Cooperative and work-integrated education (CWIE)
4. Vocational education and training
5. Career and technical education (CTE)
6. Work placement
7. Project-based learning
8. Experiential education
9. Experiential learning
10. Professional development
11. Community/civic engagement

Range of programmes designed to deliver work-education experiences:

1. Cooperative education
2. Internships
3. Externships
4. Apprenticeships
5. Practicum
6. Service learning

Strange that clinical training is not mentioned?

Gardner, P. & Bartkus, K.R. 2014. What's in a name? A reference guide to work-education experiences. Asia-Pacific Journal of Cooperative Education, 15(1), 37-54.

Work-integrated learning often NOT adequately engaged

Work-integrated learning is not seen as community engagement, a senior and influential colleague asserts. During the past two decades a new form of scholarship has been emerging, publishes Barker (2004, 123), namely the scholarship of engagement that entails the “broadening and deepening the public aspects of academic scholarship …[meaning] scholars are finding creative ways to communicate to public audiences, work for the public good, and, most important, generate knowledge with public participation”. Barker cites Ernest Boyer (1990) who argues that scholarship of engagement, among others, “incorporate reciprocal practices of civic engagement into the production of knowledge” (124).

Barker (2004, 125-6) remarks that “service-learning and experiential learning are two well-known practices that incorporate civic involvement”. However, scholarship of engagement goes much further. Barker (2004, 127) observes that “engaged scholars typically make a conscious effort to stress the pedagogical value of collaborating with publics instead of providing information
to or services for publics”.

Conway (2006, 134) reports that the title of the 2005 Outreach Scholarship Conference has been “Transformation through Engagement”, which conveys the notion of making a difference. Engaged scholarship is about “sharing knowledge, conveying skills, and helping others solve problems”. The role of higher education includes “the integration and application of knowledge in service to society”. Engaged scholars “work shoulder-to-shoulder with citizens to put knowledge to work in the community and integrate new ideas and technologies into practical systems”.

Conway (2006, 135) makes the point that “cooperation is not collaboration”. Scholarship of engagement is not about extending university resources; or the taking of science (or science-based
answers); to address community or public problems. Instead, it is about truly collaborative efforts, as equals, recognising that problems solving requires the blending of experiential and scientific knowledge. It is about practising participatory and action research; not dreaming up projects and then persuading a community to participate.

Conway (2006, 134) shares the example of the Oregon coastal commercial fishing industry that comprises many strong, family enterprises (a fishing community of place, but also a community of specific interest). University-based research and technologies have been extended to help address complex natural, societal, and political challenges experienced. Through a co-learner mode,
instead of academic expert, scientific knowledge contributed to solving environmental challenges.

Good work-integrated learning practice, where the workplace of individual students are carefully considered and contracting between university, organisation and student could well be examplary of scholarly engagement in community.

 

Barker, D. 2004. The scholarship of engagement: a taxonomy of five emerging practices. Journal of Higher Education Outreach and Engagement, Volume 9, Number 2, 123-137.

Conway, F.D.L. 2006. Sharing knowledge, power, and respect: keys in bringing communities together to improve science, practice, and relationships. Journal of Higher Education Outreach and Engagement, Volume 11, Number 1, 133-143.

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).