Learning in vivo

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

Preference of students for case studies as experiential learning-based assessments

Melo, Monteza, Colson and Zhang (2022: 15) found that “students have a clear preference for supporting experiential learning-based assessments, such as lab activities and simulations or analysis of case studies, and a strong dislike for assessments that involve supervised and time-constrained assessments (e.g., proctored exams)”. Furthermore, students also value professional presentations and final projects, they indicate. They further say that “most students would prefer assessments that are driving (develop different skills such as creative thinking) and realistic (develop skills transferable to the real world)” (p. 1). They state that “How students perceive assessment methods is critical because it can affect their learning experience and academic achievements”.

Melo, et al. (2022: 12) provide, in Fig 3 below, an intuitive interpretation of their research results. The “results reveal that participating in lab practices and simulations (presented to participants as practical activities that support technical skills rehearsal) and analyzing and discussing case studies (subjects were told that knowledge of the subject, good writing, and coherence are evaluated) were the most and second most desirable options that contribute to student learning”. Professional presentations, involving the use of audio-visual materials to assess knowledge of a topic, shown as the third most important form of assessment. A final project, although it demands more time and effort from students, is considered the fourth-most important form of assessment. The fifth most important is continuous quizzes of open-ended questions.

Melo, et al. (2022: 1) observe that “previous literature has not analyzed, from the student perspective, what methods are preferred for evaluating performance in experiential learning”. They made use of the best-worst scaling approach in two online surveys, involving 218 undergraduate students that were enrolled in experiential learning-based programs during the COVID-19 pandemic. They presented students with a description of several assessment formats and is confident that students understood the options. Table 1 below lists the assessment formats and table 2 the attributes that were identified for the research.

In contrast to rating scales, such as Likert scales, or approve/disapprove questions, Melo, et al. (2022) used the best-worst scaling (BWS) approach to adequately research preferences for various assessments. Unlike conventional approaches, where respondents are required to rank from “most important” to “least important”, BWS requires respondents to make trade-offs among alternatives. BWS further prevents a bias effect, and rankings among best-worst (BW) choices is deemed of lower cognitive difficulty for participants, relative to discrete choice experiments.

Melo, G., Monteza, D., Colson, G., Zhang, Y.Y. (2022). How to assess? Student preferences for methods to assess experiential learning: A best-worst scaling approach. PLoS ONE, 17(10). Electronically accessible from https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0276745.

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

Beyond ‘panic-gogy’ to adoption of innovative WIL pedagogies and practices

The “COVID-19 pandemic has provided a sudden and significant driver for rapid change and adoption of innovative online WIL pedagogies and practices” say Dean and Campbell (2021: 355). They argue for moving beyond the initial ‘panic-gogy’ to quality, innovative, and sustainable non-placement models of WIL. ‘Panic-gogy’ is a tongue-in-cheek term coined for the transitional online pedagogies pursued during the COVID-19 pandemic. Baker (2020: 1) quoted Morris who says “the term being batted about on Twitter … referring to this idea of just grasping at straws, trying to figure out what you could possibly do … suddenly forced to go online and experiencing that kind of panic”. Educators had been seeking pedagogies to bridge the gap, to retain some kind of normality, a pedagogy of resilience, of kindness, very flexible and human-centred.

Dean and Campbell (2021) indicate that the disruptions caused by COVID-19, accelerated many emerging changes with the required rapid move to online and/or distance learning models. The “value of alternative forms of work-integrated learning (WIL), in spaces other than physical workplaces, has been realized“, they observe. After the initial state of ‘panic-gogy’, with rife experimentation, purposeful design of ‘non-placement work-integrated learning’ (NPWIL) now requires attention. Experiences shown that different models and approaches can provide authenticity of work practices.

The ways of working, as well as where work is undertaken, are evolving. “Work is no longer simply completed within the confines of a bounded office and constraints of time periods”, observe Dean and Campbell (2021: 355); with for example, “remote work settings, fluid time constraints and continuous connectivity” becoming common practice. However, there is not consistency across the economy with regard to the changing nature of work. Changes tend to be industry and sector specific, as well as piece-meal, often driven by organisational specific goals.

Dean and Campbell (2021: 357) postulate that “with both the constructs of work and learning evolving rapidly as a consequence of the COVID-19 pandemic it is an inevitability that WIL, which connects these two worlds, also has to transform”. They remark that over the past two decades WIL models have been steadily experiencing innovation and a range of alternative models of WIL have emerged. Furthermore, as result of the changing world of work graduates needed to develop diverse and transferable skills.

Dean and Campbell (2021: 357) mention WIL models such as micro-placements, hackathons, competitions and events; including models beyond workplace-based experiences or requiring extensive time in workplaces, such as engaging students through short, authentic activities; and partnering with, or creating small-to-medium enterprises (SMEs) to develop entrepreneurial skills. They observe that the notion of the building of SMEs spurred the development of start-ups, consultations and incubators. WIL models further are increasingly multi-disciplinary within industry contexts, as well as engaging students from across disciplinary areas through interdisciplinary WIL. The location of WIL is further broadened beyond local contexts, with global mobility. Some WIL models are moving beyond physical constraints, by using technological platforms, online projects, virtual placements and various forms of online simulations.

Challenges such as teaching to large cohorts, resource limitations or scalability, and needing to provide access to all students, emphasise the need for one-to-many WIL models (i.e. replacing the one workplace supervisor or mentor guiding the work of one student or small group of students, “with multiple staff across an organisation working with, guiding and coaching large cohorts of students”), say Dean and Campbell (2021: 357). An increased agile curriculum, which allow for increased variability in student experiences, is required. Hopefully, such shorter, less resource intensive WIL models, would result in increased willingness of industry and also community, to partner with higher education institutions.

The COVID-19 pandemic induced ‘pivot online’ may, ponder Dean and Campbell (2021), be the catalyst to move towards more inclusive WIL approaches, such as opportunities for students in regional and rural settings; bespoke activities or partnership experiences, and/or scaling WIL through novel, collaborative, virtual platforms. Higher Education institutions “need to enquire into the needs of industry and community and explore how we can work together, think outside-the-box, and design authentic experiences for student cohorts” say Dean and Campbell (2021: 358). “Placements are not the only solution to authentic work practice when work practice itself continues to shift and is enabled by technology, they argue (p. 360).

Dean, B.A. & Campbell, M. (2021). Reshaping work-integrated learning in a post-COVID-19 world of work. International Journal of Work-Integrated Learning, 21(4), 355-364. Electronically accessible from https://www.ijwil.org/files/IJWIL_21_4_355_364.pdf

Baker, K.J. (2020). Panic-gogy: A Conversation With Sean Michael Morris. The National Teaching& Learning Forum, 29(4), 1-3. Electronically accessible from https://doi.org/10.1002/ntlf.30239

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

Doing, problem-solving, interacting, experimenting, and reflecting are significant elements of studio-based learning

The essential elements of studio-based learning entail learning by doing; interacting in a creative and reflective process with other students, lecturers, and external stakeholders; and re-doing with the aim of resolving real-world problems, in an effort to positively contribute to local communities, say Brown, Karle and Kelly (2015: 260-1). Studio-based learning evolved from the socio-cultural constructivism thread of constructivist learning theory. The intent of studio-based learning is to foster learning behaviours towards “discovery, integration, application and sharing of knowledge” (Brown, et al. 2015: 262). The practice of peer reviews, called ‘desk critiques’, facilitates development of problem solving abilities with regard to identification, iterative generation, exploration, assessment, comparison, and selection of best-fit solutions.

The use of studio-based pedagogy is relatively rare at universities, in that it involves smallish student to lecturer ratios, and permanent working spaces. Large registration groups are perceived prohibitive to enacting studio-based pedagogies. However, blended learning practices supported by collaborative technologies may provide the framework for scaling studio-based pedagogy to the pressures for increased provision, say (Brown, et al. 2015: 263). The gold standard key characteristics of studio-based learning, namely small groups, direct interaction, dedicated space, and learning through action, must be retained. The nature of studio-based learning were scaled and accomplished by dividing the students registered into sections and teams in order to enable direct interaction. Google Hangouts, a G+ community, Google Drive, Google Docs, and Blackboard Learn were used to manage the course.

Shraiky and Lamb (2013) report that an exploration of teaching strategies for inter-professional education (IPE) in healthcare, found that studio-based learning (SBL) embodies many features that are integral to effective IPE. Medical and nursing schools are pursuing IPE to facilitate students from two or more professions learn about, from and with each other. It is believed that IPE would transform the way to resolve complex problems through an integrative and more comprehensive approach. Studio-based learning offers a variety of ways to work together and resolve problems.

The studio-based learning notion originated from the École des Beaux-Arts, in Paris (source of image below), in 1648 (Murray, 2016), from the apprentice model, philosophically grounded in the notion that an art ‘master’ would pass artistic abilities and technical skills on. Students were assigned a design problem, which they would work through a rigorous learning-by-doing process. Their final product, known as ‘sketch problem’ was presented to and evaluated by the master.

Studio-based learning since abandoned the master-apprentice model in favour of student-directed frameworks, which emphasize creative problem-solving and experimentation. The lecturer or facilitator would pose either a hypothetical (grounded in likely scenarios) or actual problem as starting point. Students there after undertake in-depth data collection and review relevant literature. Students are encouraged to gather first-hand data through observation and interviews; team-work and sharing of responsibilities emphasised. Active and ongoing feedback is provided through charettes, crits, and pin-ups (Shraiky & Lamb, 2013: 462):

• Charettes are highly interactive workshops that bring stakeholders together to generate ideas to improve the solution. Students may design exercises for participants to try out or react to their proposed solutions, Charettes are fast-paced and dynamic and allow students to hear directly from their key customers.
• Crits (short for critiques) are informal feedback sessions held during each studio meeting. Instructors rotate among the student teams, engage with students about their progress, and offer suggestions, Crits are deeply embedded in the studio culture and provide a casual and non-threatening way for instructors to guide students, offer positive feedback, and catch problems early. External experts and consultants are readily integrated into the crit format and often rotate with instructors
• Crits are integrated with ‘pin-ups’ in which students display their documents and illustrations around the studio. Faculty and students rotate among the pin-ups while each team formally presents drafts of their design solutions.

Formal reviews further take place, which may serve as midterm and formal examinations. Student teams present their completed designs, in a public forum, to a preselected review panel of experts and academics, who identify strengths and areas for improvement. Feedback is typically direct and fast-paced.

There are several shared features in common between studio-based learning and inter-professional education, such as resolving realistic and complex problems. In both, process and product are important. Both are highly interactive and involves extensive exchange of ideas among students and faculty. Both combines problem-based and practice-based learning, and both observation and simulation learning are naturally evolving components

Brown, S.E., Karle, S.T. & Kelly, B. (2015). An evaluation of applying blended practices to employ studio-based learning in a large-enrollment design thinking course. Contemporary Educational Technology, 6(4), 260-280. Available at: https://doi.org/10.30935/cedtech/6154

Murray, C. (2016). A brief history of the École Des Beaux-Arts, First, there was the Academy. In Culture Trip. Electronically accessed from https://theculturetrip.com/europe/france/paris/articles/a-brief-history-of-the-ecole-des-beaux-arts/

Shraiky, J.R. & Lamb, G. (2013). Studio-based learning in interprofessional education. Journal of Interprofessional Care, 27(6), 461-468. Available at: https://doi.org/10.3109/13561820.2013.816273

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

An institutional-wide approach to work-integrated learning (WIL)

“There is value to undertaking an institutional approach to WIL” state Dean, Yanamandram, Eady, Moroney, O'Donnell, and Glover-Chambers (2020: 5); however, it requires both vision and leadership for WIL initiatives are to be successful, they add. The role of leaders include ensuring “that all key stakeholders embrace or support the vision or direction for development”. At the University of Wollongong (UOW), Australia, the “vision is to ensure that every student has real-world, inquiry-led learning opportunities”. The “aim is to provide every UOW student with the opportunity to engage in a variety of scaffolded, purposefully designed and learner-centred WIL experiences within their degree” (Dean et al. 2020: 5). The UOW (2020) definition, derived through consultation by a steering committee comprising representation, of WIL is:

Work-Integrated Learning (WIL) describes activities that integrate work practices with learning in an academic institution. Through WIL, students undertake authentic, experiential learning relevant to their program of study. WIL may occur in person or remotely, in a physical or simulated workplace, or in the classroom. It includes practicums, placements, internships, service learning, industry projects and experience, workplace simulations and professional activities.

WIL activities at UOW: are purposefully designed; are informed by design principles; draws on industry expertise, where relevant; foster opportunities for reflection and engaged feedback; and shape and support students’ career goals through alignment of activity with career development frameworks.

While the nature, scope and extent of WIL may vary considerably across the institution, WIL is classified into five clusters: Co-curricular WIL, Foundational WIL, Embedded WIL, Applied WIL and Professional WIL.

(Dean et al. 2020) present and explain an institutional framework, the Work-Integrated Learning Curriculum Classification (WILCC) Framework, which makes provision for a range of placement and non-placement WIL, in order to make WIL practices overt university-wide, and serves to develop, map and report WIL. The summary (copied from Dean et al. 2020: 10) WILCC Framework differs from other typologies of WIL. The categorisation is based on the learning practices of students rather than activity-type. It focuses on what the student does by learning through practice, and the classification represents a gradient of increasing authenticity of engagement in performing or doing work practices.

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

Workplace-based learning decision flow chart

In a July 2020 post I proposed a decision-making flowchart with regard to work-integrated learning (WIL). With this post my intention is to urge decision-making in the lights of stated imperatives.

The South African Government (2014), Department of Higher Education and Training, gazetted Higher Education Qualifications Sub-Framework (HEQSF), §35 (p. 17) specifies:

Where the entire WIL component or any part of it takes the form of workplace-based learning, it is the responsibility of institutions that offer programmes requiring credits for such learning to place students into appropriate workplaces. Such workplace-based learning must be appropriately structured, properly supervised and assessed.

While universities are under obligation (in accordance to HEQSF §35) to place students for such workplace-based learning, §34 (p. 17) of the HEQSF however states that work-integrated learning (WIL) “may take various forms including simulated learning, work-directed theoretical learning, problem-based learning, project-based learning and workplace-based learning”; and that “the selection of appropriate forms of work-integrated learning depends on the nature and purpose of the qualification type, programme objectives and outcomes, the NQF level at which the WIL component is pegged, institutional capacity to provide WIL opportunities, and the structures and systems that are in place within professional settings and sites of practice to support student learning”.

Should the university have opted for workplace-based learning, then a number of criteria—specified by the Council on Higher Education (2004a+b, 2014)—are applicable to such work-based learning. Summarised as follow:

• Appropriate system for distributed students
• Equivalent learning experiences across range of contexts
• Learning agreements between students, host organisations, and the university
• Learning objective & outcomes clarified
• Specified roles & responsibilities
• Continuous good working relations
• Effective & regular communication
• Systematic & regular recording about the learning of students
• Progress monitoring
• A mentoring system
• Students gaining knowledge of work practices
• Students helped recognising their strengths & weaknesses

Council on Higher Education (2014). Distance Higher Education Programmes in a Digital Era: Programme Accreditation Criteria, pp. 81 – 107. In Distance Higher Education Programmes in a Digital Era: Good Practice Guide.

Council on Higher Education (2004a). Higher Education Quality Committee. Criteria for Programme Accreditation.

Council on Higher Education (2004b). Higher Education Quality Committee. Criteria for Institutional Audits.

South African Government (2014), Department of Higher Education and Training, Government Notice No 819. Higher Education Qualifications Sub-Framework. Government Gazette No. 38116, 17 October 2014.

Value of simulated clinical training

With regard to simulated work-integrated learning (WIL), Rahm, Wieser, Bauer, Waibel, Meyer, Gerber and Fucentese (2018) report that most studies demonstrate virtual reality based simulator training does result in improvement of technical skills. They tested the efficacy of a standardized, competency based training protocol for arthroscopy—also called arthroscopic or keyhole surgery, which is a minimally invasive surgical examination, and sometimes treatment of damage, of a joint. Clinical training (work-integrated learning in the medical field) of medical residents is both a demanding and time consuming job in teaching hospitals. Arthroscopy skills cannot be acquired by observation and assisting alone. Virtual reality competency based simulator training has been found to be at least of equal value as direct observation, animal and/or cadaver models or videotape learning tools. Although the initial investment of a simulator is high, as is service expenses, the benefit of a potentially 24/7 availability of a training tool is deemed increasingly important because hands-on operation time is getting less for residents.

https://images.app.goo.gl/uYDcizXHbA1HDo5u8

Rahm, S., Wieser, K., Bauer, D.E., Waibel, F.W.A., Meyer, D.C., Gerber, C, & Fucentese, S.F. 2018. Efficacy of standardized training on a virtual reality simulator to advance knee and shoulder arthroscopic motor skills. BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders, 19. Accessed electronically from https://doi.org/10.1186/s12891-018-2072-0

Differentiating the work-integrated learning chameleon

Increasingly, work-integrated learning (WIL) is being incorporated into the curriculum of higher education programmes, in order improve the career readiness of graduates; indicate Wood, Zegwaard and Turnbull (2020). Concomitant with the expansion of WIL, is evident the development of diversity of WIL practices; which in turn resulted in likened to a chameleon.

The COVID-19 pandemic further accelerated the growing diversity of practices, especially with regard to remote virtual workplaces, reality or projects, and simulations of the real or actual practice. Wood, Zegwaard and Turnbull (2020) indicate that some virtual and simulated learning could be controversial, considering the internationally accepted definitions of WIL. The differentiating criterion to meet is the involvement of all three key stakeholders, namely the university (academia), students and industry (the relevant community/field of practice). They (p. 333) define simulated WIL as follow:

an immersive WIL experience in a context created to emulate the functions of a workplace with input by the workplace/community, educational institution, and the student. Without input from an industry/external stakeholder, the learning activity would be a simulation rather than simulated WIL per se.

Some simulations, although deemed valuable learning experiences, therefore cannot be passed off as WIL. The characteristic of industry involvement signifies the original differentiating value of cooperative and work-integrated learning, of more than a century ago.

Wood, Zegwaard and Turnbull (2020: 332) state that “Virtual WIL is understood to be synonymous with remote WIL” in that workplace learning access is from a distance, or remote. During COVID-19 lockdown, ways of working remotely with digital access emerged. The defining feature of remote WIL (p. 333) would be “a WIL experience focused on the student completing authentic, relevant actual tasks for an organization through a remote connection to the workplace/community”, meaning “the student is physically separated from the workplace/community and located elsewhere”, for example a residential environment. This remote access is quite different from a virtual reality, or a digital/virtual workspace, which is why the term ‘remote WIL’ is recommended.

Wood, Zegwaard and Turnbull (2020: 347) propose a model depicting within an external circle which represents the three main stakeholders, different modes—conventional (C), remote (R), and simulated (S)—of WIL, as well as potential combinations: C/R, S/R and C/S. The visual presentation signifies the finding of a meta-analysis undertaken. They found (p. 346) two distinct instances where conventional and remote (C-R) WIL practices were combined, therefore the overlap indicated. However, there are potential combinations of conventional and simulated (C-S), as well as of remote aspects connected with simulations (S-R), indicated by no actual overlap (as yet).

Wood, W.I.; Zegwaard, K.E. & Turnbull, W.F. 2020. Conventional, remote, virtual and simulated work-integrated learning: A meta-analysis of existing practice. International Journal of Work-Integrated Learning, 21(4), 331-354. Electronically accessible from https://www.ijwil.org/files/IJWIL_21_4_331_354.pdf

Be realistic about the feasible scope of online experiential learning

Tony Bates, who has been advocating online experiential learning (and defending the feasibility thereof), in July 2020, while emergency remote learning is prominently utilised, recommends assessment of the limitations, and the implications of failure. Bates admits that during the Covid-19 pandemic it became evident that online learning (on its own) is at times not appropriate. He highlights a number of limitations, such as inequity with regard to access and affordability. Bates states that “Even if students have Internet or wifi access, they need at least 10 Mbps for any form of video, but at 2 Mbps they can handle most text (without heavy graphics) and audio”. He recommends learning design for “the lowest bandwidth of Internet to which most students will have access” and caution that at 2Mbps or less the streaming of videos, graphic rich Powerpoint slides, and making use of Zoom are not feasible. Fastmetrics^TM provides the measured average internet speed per country. Note the legend from bright red, representing 0.5Mbps, through to lime, representing 26.7Mbps. If the majority of students are within the 2Mbps-10 Mbps range then a learning management system (LMS) could be used if restricted to text, audio (e.g. podcasts) and simple graphics. Bates caution further to consider the costs of data for students to be online and says “if it comes to a choice between studying and eating, you are not going to win”. He recommends blended learning initiatives such as the reading of down loadable (or mailed) text, using short videos (maximum of 5-10 minutes), and the breaking of “the learning into small chunks”.

Bates encourages that media usage is carefully considered with regard to “who are your students and what access to technology do they already have?” and reminds that there had been very successful distance education prior to Internet. Radio, the forgotten media, could be used to support text, as could television broadcasts. Mobile learning through apps on mobile phones could be considered, and social media enables students and lecturers to stay connected. Bates wisely states “it is better to reach 90% of students with a slightly less than perfect medium than to reach 50% with a more powerful medium”, and that it is “more likely to meet most students with a combination of media”.

Much as Bates recognises the gut-feel of experienced lecturers, he cautions about resistance based on “fear of having to do something different” and urge that identification of exceptions to what can taught online should be “based on pedagogical effectiveness”. Bates says that “at least some of the activities previously only done in person” “such as lab and studio work, video, simulations, virtual reality, and even remotely operated labs can” indeed be done online or through digital learning enabling the reduction of “time in labs or studios, if not altogether eliminate the need for in-person presence”. He adds that “There is also a growing number of freely accessible open educational resources that can replicate lab and studio work, such as the OER Commons [https://www.oercommons.org/] and the MIT Teaching + Learning Lab [https://tll.mit.edu/]”. Bates admits that “there are still huge gaps in appropriate OER in visual arts, media, science, engineering, technical and vocational subjects, and where OER are available they are often difficult to use (for instance requiring specialised software to run) or of poor teaching quality. To date, most OER are available only in the English language, and much is at the post-secondary level.”

5 July 2009 https://www.tonybates.ca/2009/07/05/can-you-teach-real-engineering-at-a-distance/

1 December 2014 https://www.tonybates.ca/2014/12/01/can-you-do-experiential-learning-online-assessing-design-models-for-experiential-learning/

20 April 2020 https://www.tonybates.ca/2020/04/20/emergency-online-learning-and-inequity-developed-countries/

21 April 2020 https://www.tonybates.ca/2020/04/21/2-emergency-online-learning-and-inequity-developing-countries/

4 July 2020 https://www.tonybates.ca/2020/07/04/what-have-we-learned-from-covid-19-about-the-limitations-of-online-learning/

Proposed decision-making chart with regard to work-integrated learning (WIL)

Much has been published about the range of work-integrated learning (WIL) options with regard to learning design within the South African context. However, many appear to cling to workplace learning (WPL), while complaining that there are not sufficient placement opportunities. [I maintain that while the advisory bodies of programmes at tertiary intuitions are not representative of the occupational field, such institutions cannot naively cling to workplace learning, but are obliged to seek alternative WIL options.] The Council on Higher Education (CHE) further stipulated a number of quality criteria pertaining WPL or work-based learning (WBL), which in turn entail availability of certain resource, matters that needed to have been considered at application stage to offer the qualification.

Project-based learning (PjBL), however, does not offer an easy alternative. Academic cannot merely 'convert' the WPL materials and suggest to students to 'find' their own opportunity/place to complete a project approximating the prerequisite WPL. Proper PjBL requires significant support from the occupational field, probably as much as what WPL would have.

Simulated work experiences (SWEs) are not a simple alternative either. The required virtual materials need to exist, or need to be made (requiring adequate budget). The necessary infrastructure, technology, access, networks and data are further issues that could stand in the way of SWEs.

I've put together a Download Proposed decision-making chart with regard to work-integrated learning (WIL) with the aforementioned in mind:

Virtual experiential learning is feasible

If swimming schools can further mastery through virtual swimming school, instead of letting learners slide back; and if township children can continue with violin lessons amid lockdown using WhatsApp; then surely higher and further education can achieve work-integrated learning virtually.

The COVID-19 pandemic may have grounded flights and put the world into lockdown, and the legendary African safari might be on hold; but inventive conservationists introduced virtual safaris in living rooms through cameras mounted to vehicles. Paid-for private tours by means of Zoom video calls will soon start. A zoo introduced drive-through animal viewing affording families the opportunity to ‘visit’ a zoo while in isolation.

Lockdown abruptly halted traditional workplace-based experiential learning. Solutions are explored for especially students that would have graduated at the end of 2020. As the economy is gradually reignited traditional workplace-based experiential learning might still be hampered. Institutions are recommended to virtually engage the relevant communities of practice and professional or vocational bodies, in order to seek opportunities to virtually ‘exhibit’ relevant graduate attributes, problems experienced and critical cross-field outcomes [CCFOs] that need to be attained. Filming need not be professionally done. Students can virtually engage with the virtual exemplars and through structured online learning gain their prerequisite ‘experience’.

If numerous virtual concerts work, if drive-though strip shows are supported, why would virtual experiential learning not be feasible?

What can electronic experiential learning appropriate from the COVID-19 pandemic?

When governments locked down countries, initiatives blossomed. Athletes, for example, started running virtual marathons in their gardens. On Easter Sunday evening Andrea Bocelli made history by presenting the 'Music for Hope' concert from an empty Milan cathedral, peaking at 2.8 million concurrent viewers. The biggest ever classical live stream in YouTube’s history. There were more than 28 million viewings from across the globe took place in the first 24 hours thereafter.

MyBroadband reported a significant increase in South Africa’s Internet usage since the start of the COVID-19 lockdown, peaking over 1.1Tbps on the evening of 25 March during President Cyril Ramaphosa’s announcement of the lockdown. Traffic across NAPAfrica’s exchange points reached a record 1.04Tbps the day after. Vodacom, one of South Africa's mobile phone network operators reported a jump of 40-percent since a nationwide lockdown. Afrihost recorded a 44% increase in data usage, compared to usage in January and February, with video streaming the biggest contributor. Vox recorded a 50% increase in fibre-to-the-home traffic. Elsewhere, for example in Kenya, Safaricom noted a 70% jump in data usage during COVID-19 lockdown.

Many believe that experiential learning cannot be done online. Bates (2014) contested this, saying “experiential learning is [indeed] like most design models: it is independent of the mode of delivery. What matters is how well it is done.” He advocates that there is indeed a range of teaching design models enabling the embedding of real world contexts into learning, namely problem-based learning, case-based learning, project-based learning, inquiry-based learning, cooperative (work- or community-based) education, and apprenticeships. Beard, Wilson and McCarter (2007) coined the expression E²-learning with regard to the fusion between experiential-electronic learning (EE-Learning) and e-learning.

While bored and livestreaming, at 01h00, Justin LaBoy, a former professional basketball player and a social media personality, got the idea to recreate a virtual club atmosphere on Instagram for his more than 60,000 followers. He and Justin Dior Combs, an entrepreneur, started the ‘Respectfully Justin Show’. As result of lockdown, bars and strip clubs may not operate, and around much of the world many were forced to close nearly overnight. Thousands of bartenders, bottle service girls and dancers have been left with no income. Many organisations resorted to recreating a digital experience to support members. Magic City, a strip club in Atlanta, started offering ‘virtual lap dances’. Tory Lanez, a rapper, began hosting dance nights, called ‘Quarantine Radio’ for his 7.5 million followers. LaBoy says that exotic dancers immediately requested to be guests on his livestream and his followers loved it. He felt he cannot let them dance for free, and pinned a dancer’s Cash App to the top of the feeds, so that followers could send them money. One dancer, Sasha, who has been featured on the pop-up show said “If it wasn’t for Justin … I don’t know what I would have done or how I would have paid my bills or gotten food in my house”.

Most, if not all, production or work processes, operations, and executions could be filmed and streamed. Students need not necessary be physically present to experience what they need exposure to. If a strip dance or lap dance can be done virtually, why not simulated experiential learning? It need not be costly filming.

https://www.classicfm.com/artists/andrea-bocelli/concert-empty-milan-duomo-cathedral-world-record/

https://www.enca.com/business/vodacom-sees-40-jump-data-usage-people-stay-home

https://www.cnbcafrica.com/news/2020/04/14/kenyas-safaricom-sees-70-jump-in-data-usage-during-covid-19-lockdown/

https://mybroadband.co.za/news/fibre/346757-the-76tb-man-south-africas-biggest-bandwidth-hog-during-the-lockdown.html

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/10/style/justin-laboy-instagram-strip-clubs-live.html?algo=bandit-story_desk_filter&fellback=false&imp_id=701449925&imp_id=455391584&action=click&module=editorContent&pgtype=Article&region=CompanionColumn&contentCollection=Trending

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8210749/Virtual-strip-clubs-popping-Instagram-dancers-raking-18-000.html

Bates, T. (2014). Can you do experiential learning online? Assessing design models for experiential learning. Electronically accessible from https://www.tonybates.ca/2014/12/01/can-you-do-experiential-learning-online-assessing-design-models-for-experiential-learning/

Beard, C.; Wilson, J.P. & McCarter, R. (2007). Towards a Theory of e-Learning: Experiential e-Learning. Journal of Hospitality, Leisure, Sport and Tourism Education, 6(2), 3-15. https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/95b4/bf51ed82edf9bb529574d65df250fb595df7.pdf

Online programmes which include work-integrated learning could pose serious pedagogical challenges

An increasing need for the flexibility of fully online study while earning, in order to enhance career trajectories, is prevalent. However, “implementing online learning can pose serious pedagogical challenges particularly when programs contain work-integrated learning (WIL) components”, if not perceived as ‘can’t be done’, say Quinn, Cioffi, Hill, Kor, Longford, Moller and Rathore (2019: 1). Contrary to online learning frequently being perceived as a passive and second class; the practical outcomes are accomplishable.

A wide-dispersion of online students renders it impractical to include a shared physical learning site. Quinn et al. (2019) report, for example, on the creation of an interactive virtual learning environment, in collaboration with construction companies, through significant state funding, portraying the construction of an eight-storey building. This high quality resource is supplemented by “comparatively low-cost environments demonstrating the construction of a residential, industrial, and multi-storey building construction sites”, including “embedded images, explanatory videos and documents which students can interact with” (Quinn et al. 2019). Virtual site visits, “comparable to traditional site visits”, are embedded in online learning materials in order to “motivate students to reflect on and refine their understandings based on the authentic context they are experiencing”.

Quinn et al. (2019) report the benefits construction management, for example, students reap from repeat visits to the same site, namely appreciating “the spatial constraints (e.g. how construction products are related to one another in a particular building site) and temporal constraints (e.g. the dependencies for coordinating subcontractors)” as well as “how these constraints change over the life of the building project”. However, difficulties in aligning the timing of visits to construction sites could result in students developing a piecemeal understanding of the construction worksite. Virtual field trips include, for example, augmented realities; simulations; and learning environments making use of 360-degree images of the construction of a building over time; contribute to a four- dimensional virtual work-integrated learning environment.

Quinn, D.; Cioffi, E.; Hill, S.; Kor, M.; Longford, A.; Moller, R.; & Rathore, P. (2019). Implementing work-integrated learning in online construction management courses. Journal of University Teaching & Learning Practice, 16(1). Available at: https://ro.uow.edu.au/jutlp/vol16/iss1/9

Experiential learning in a distance e-learning context

Knud Illeris (2016: 201), inducted in 2006 to the ‘International Adult and Continuing Education Hall of Fame’ (2018) in the fields of continuing education and adult learning, remarks that ‘workplace learning’ and work-based learning’ taking place directly in the workplace “became popular slogans in the context of vocationally orientated education”. He indicates the paradoxical nature of this popularity in the light of historical trend that the bulk of curriculums were transferred from workplaces to formalised education. Illeris (2016: 202) points out “this has been absolutely clear: more and more schooling and less and less educational training at the workplaces”. Enterprises furthermore want education to be financed by the state. Illeris instead emphasise the need for lifelong learning during work life, with the view of continuously ‘upgrading’ the base qualifications of employees.

Many aspects evolved since the beginning of the twentieth century, when cooperative education systems and sandwich education programmes were introduced in Northern America and Europe respectively, and subsequently spread internationally. Among the many changes, there had been an explosion of e-learning, say Arthur and Raine (2016), who indicates two main reasons. First is technological advances associated with the Internet that resulted in substantial affordable educational resources, networked learning, new ways in which knowledge is imparted, etc. The second reason is the importance of knowledge for economic growth. “At a time of budget constraints …” say Arthur and Raine (2016: 144) “… efficiency drives and a continuous emphasis on optimising value-for-money, the contemporary and emerging technologies offer unique opportunities for the education sector.” The emphasis on e-learning and diminishing opportunities for workplace learning as part of the curriculum, prompt the pursuance of simulations and educational alternatives to real-life experience, in order for graduates to gain competence.

Dadze-Arthur and Raine (2016: 146) explain that “e-learning, also referred to as distance learning or online education, can be understood as learning that involves students doing all their classroom activities outside the traditional classroom, at a distance from their school or college, and supported by technology-based tools”. Unisa (2018) states that the university “is the largest open distance learning institution in Africa and the longest standing dedicated distance education university in the world”. It therefor makes sense that Unisa would favour simulations and other electronic facilitated experiential learning to actual placements of students.

Beard, Wilson and McCarter (2007: 4) remark that a limited number of underpinning theories exist with regard to e-learning, which is often “technology-led rather than theory-led”. They coined the expression E²-learning with regard to the fusion between experiential learning and e-learning. According to Baasanjav (2013: 576) the term “refers to the possibility of bringing together everyday experience and communication technologies”. Dadze-Arthur and Raine (2016: 146) simply uses experiential-electronic learning (EE-Learning), qualified as the notion of ‘experiential learning in a distance-learning environment’, which is generally to be understood as a combination of experiential learning and e-learning with the goal to create a strong, interactive learning community.

Bates (2014) responded to a colleague stating that experiential learning cannot be done online that “experiential learning is [indeed] like most design models: it is independent of the mode of delivery. What matters is how well it is done.” Bates points out that there is a range of teaching design models that embed real world contexts into learning, namely problem-based learning, case-based learning, project-based learning, inquiry-based learning, cooperative (work- or community-based) learning, and apprenticeships.

David Kolb’s cyclical theory (1984) is deemed synonymous with experiential learning. He synthesised three earlier models of learning through direct experience, namely the models of Dewey (1938), Lewin (1946) and Piaget (1972). Kolb argues that concrete real-life experiences (CE) provide a reference point for learning. Specific meanings and emotional stimuli in turn serve as material to consider and examine from a variety of perspectives, which entail reflective observation (RO). This in turn result in the looking for patterns, building concepts, testing of theories, and drawing logical conclusions about future implications, a process of abstract conceptualization (AC). People complete the cycle by drawing upon previous insights to solve problems and make decisions, the stage of active experimentation (AE). Kolb (1984) asserts that for learning to be effective in acquiring knowledge or skill, people need to engage fully in four successive stages. Dunlap, Dobrovolny and Young (2008) emphasise that Kolb’s cycle presents itself as scaffold in the design of E²-learning. As result of the transactional distance involved in e-learning, students easily experience real-world projects as frustrating, ineffective, and demoralizing. Kolb's model is therefore promoted as design-mould to provide structure and sequence for students.

In 2011, the South African Council on Higher Education (CHE) published ‘Work-Integrated Learning: Good Practice Guide’ (CHE, 2011), which differentiates several work-integrated learning (WIL) curricular modalities, as alternatives to actual workplace (WPL) or work-based learning (WBL) namely:

• Work-directed theoretical learning (WDTL), which entails theoretical forms of knowledge are introduced and sequenced in ways that meet both academic criteria and are applicable and relevant to the career-specific components
• Problem-based learning (PBL), a pedagogic approach that involves students learning through the structured exploration of a practice-based or research problem
• Project-based learning (PJBL), which brings together intellectual inquiry, real world problems and student engagement in relevant and meaningful work

34 (p. 17) of the South African ‘Higher Education Qualifications Sub-Framework’ (HEQSF, 2014) states that “In the HEQSF, WIL may take various forms including simulated learning [SWE], work-directed theoretical learning [WBTL], problem-based learning [PBL], project-based learning [PJBL] and workplace-based learning [WPL]”. §34 further states that “The selection of appropriate forms of work-integrated learning depends on the nature and purpose of the qualification type programme objectives and outcomes, the NQF level at which the WIL component is pegged, institutional capacity to provide WIL opportunities, and the structures and systems that are in place within professional settings and sites of practice to support student learning.” (acronyms added).

 

References:

Baasanjav, U. (2013). Incorporating the experiential learning cycle into online classes. MERLOT Journal of Online Learning and Teaching, 9(4), 575—589.

Bates, T. (2014). Can you do experiential learning online? Assessing design models for experiential learning Accessible from https://www.tonybates.ca/2014/12/01/can-you-do-experiential-learning-online-assessing-design-models-for-experiential-learning/

Beard, C.; Wilson, J.P. & McCarter, R. (2007). Towards a Theory of e-Learning: Experiential e-Learning. Journal of Hospitality, Leisure, Sport and Tourism Education, 6(2), 3-15. https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/95b4/bf51ed82edf9bb529574d65df250fb595df7.pdf

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

Dadze-Arthur, A. & Raine, J.W. (2016). Experiential Learning and Teaching at a Distance: How Distinctive an Experience? In Developing Public Managers for a Changing World. Published online: 19 Dec 2016; 141-159. Permanent link to this document: https://doi.org/10.1108/S2045-794420160000005008

Dunlap, J; Dobrovolny, J; and Young, D (2008) Preparing e-Learning Designers Using Kolb's Model of Experiential Learning, Innovate: Journal of Online Education: Vol. 4: Iss. 4, Article 3. Available at: http://nsuworks.nova.edu/innovate/vol4/iss4/3

Illeris, K. (2016). Working and learning, chapter 18, 201-216. In Learning, Development and Education, from learning theory to education and practice—the selected works of Knud Illeris. New York: Routledge.

International Adult and Continuing Education Hall of Fame. (2018). About the Hall of Fame (https://www.halloffame.outreach.ou.edu/about.html), 2006 Hall of Fame Inductees (https://www.halloffame.outreach.ou.edu/by_year/HOF_2006.html), and Knud Illeris (https://www.halloffame.outreach.ou.edu/2006/illeris.html).

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 http://www.gov.za/sites/www.gov.za/files/38116_gon819.pdf and/or http://www.che.ac.za/sites/default/files/publications/CHE%20-%20Higher%20Education%20Qualification%20Framework%20-%20EDITED%20171013.pdf

Practice-based education as means to preparing graduates for occupational practice

The publication ‘Practice-based education — Perspectives and Strategies’ presents and deals with “PBE as a notion and an approach to education that is grounded in the preparation of graduates for occupational practice” states Higgs (2012: 3).

Trede and McEwen (2012: 27) use practice-based education (PBE) as umbrella term for a set of educational work-integrated practices, which share a situated and contextualised approach to professional education at universities. They observe that PBE is located in a contemporary space of regulated national standards and competency frameworks that are emphasising technical skills and knowledge. There is a preoccupation with graduates being work-ready, what they can do, and with procedures—in order to ‘hit the ground running’ when employed. Trede and McEwen (2012: 28) argue that PBE should provide a holistic perspective of professional practice, as being socially-situated and contextualised. Professional identity formation is an equally important aspect of PBE.

Higgs (2012: 6, 8-9) presents (Table 1.2 Download Higgs_J_pp8-9) a range of dimensions of teaching and learning activities (or standards) involved in achieving learning outcomes, namely:

• Curriculum design (qualified as the planned content, learning activities and assessment)
  • Standard 23—Staff in workplace learning placements ensure a relevant balance between student learning and client services
• Curriculum review (specified as continuous quality improvement)
• Risk management of the curriculum
• Actual PBE teaching and learning activities
  • Standard 29—Distance students have learning activities to develop practice skills, cultural capabilities, interactive skills, professional identity, etc.
• Inclusion of work-integrated learning (WIL) or workplace learning (WPL) activities
  • Standard 31—Provide WPL activities to gain real-world and/or simulated experiences to develop sound decision making in practice
  • Standard 32—Provide WIL strategies (e.g. simulations, e-learning, visits by industry partners and clients) to bring the practice work into the classroom (E-learning is of particular value to distance students.)

Higgs (2012: 6, 10-11) presents (Table 1.3 Download Higgs_J_pp10-11) the infrastructure and resources necessary for good PBE, namely:

• Staffing (including numbers and expertise)
• Staff support and development systems
• Student support systems
  • Standard 39—Systems and schemes are in place to support students and their participation in learning opportunities (e.g. WPL placements)
• On-campus workplace learning environments
  • Standard 40—To enable students to gain relevant work experience either to complement real-world experience or, when real workplace learning is not feasible, the school/faculty provides alternative learning opportunities, e.g. via simulated learning and workplaces or university clinics/farms, etc.
  • These strategies provide for:
    • developing practice skills & knowledge of the occupation
    • developing professional identity
    • learning to work in practice communities
    • developing relevant interaction and social capabilities
    • developing professional decision-making and self-appraisal skills
  • Standard 41—Resources create an up-to-date practice-relevant setting that enables student to experience their practice world, e.g.
    • real/simulated clients
    • practice workloads
    • real/simulated interactions with practice communities, clients and local communities
• Learning resources

Higgs, J. 2012. Practice-based education — the practice-education-context-quality nexus, 3-12. In Higgs, J. et al. (Eds.). Practice-based education — Perspectives and Strategies. Rotterdam: Sense Publishers.

Trede, F. & McEwen, C. 2012. Developing a critical professional identity — engaging self in practice, 27-40. In Higgs, J. et al. (Eds.). Practice-based education — Perspectives and Strategies. Rotterdam: Sense Publishers.

Higgs, J., Barnett, R., Billett, S., Hutchings, M. & Trede, F. 2012. Practice-based education — Perspectives and Strategies. Rotterdam: Sense Publishers.

Scenario-based or simulated elearning

Potential benefits (and some caution) concerning simulated scenarios through elearning include:

Motivational value for students/participants	The opportunity it offers students to become fully engaged in real-life issues
Increased learning retention	Taking a fraction of the time of on-the-job training / hands-on experiential learning
Risk exclusion, yet realism	Excellent teaching choice in areas which are dangerous or where real-life engagement is not feasible
Readily available	Flexibility with regard to accessibility
Could be most cost effective	But, upfront costs may be daunting

Source: Benefits of scenario-based learning by Desiging Digitally Inc.

The June 2014 talk topic of the Weill Cornell Medical College CPD series, also highlights several benefits involved in simulation-based teaching. However, the article cautions that simulations can be expensive and resource intensive, suggesting a need for evidence to support the use of this learning modality and to sustain access to funding. The article presents the Kern’s six-step approach to curriculum design for simulations, as well theoretical underpinnings of experiential and mastery learning.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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