Learning in vivo

The relationship between job insecurity, work-related learning, and occupational self-efficacy as mediator

Although work-related learning (WRL) in this context pertains to the learning and development of employees, it is postulated that insecurity of job prospects could possibly impact the WRL of students.

“A potentially important factor that may link job insecurity and work-related learning is occupational self-efficacy” say Van Hootegem, Sverke and De Witte (2022: 230). Literature suggests “that job insecurity negatively affects the way in which individuals perceive themselves … and that self-efficacy plays an important role in the extent to which employees engage in learning behaviour”, they indicate.

Van Hootegem et al (2022: 230) “propose that job insecurity may incite a loss spiral, which travels via occupational self-efficacy to work-related learning”. A spiral can be defined as a consecutive winding or coiling curve, in a continuous and gradually tightening (loss) or widening (gain) around a central point on a flat plane, or about an axis to form a cone. Spirals illustrates the conservation of resources (COR) theory in that ‘initial loss/gain begets future loss/gain’.

Job insecurity is a significant stressor in contemporary working life, with detrimental consequences not only for individuals, but also organisations. The construct ‘job insecurity’ relates to both job continuity (quantitative) and content/characteristics (qualitative) of jobs. During turbulent times a decline in acquisition of knowledge, skills, abilities, and other characteristics (KSAOs) could further endanger an employees’ potential to adapt. The construct ‘learning behaviour’ is conceptualised in two ways, namely process and the outcome. Process pertains to the extent to which employees engage in learning behaviours or activities. Outcome suggests changes in employees’ professional KSAOs and performance of work. Occupational self-efficacy (OSE) is defined as “the competence that a person feels concerning the ability to successfully fulfil the tasks involved in his or her job” (Van Hootegem et al,2022: 232). OSE not only plays a central role in COR theory, but also constitutes an important resource in personal mastery and control over one’s environment.

Van Hootegem, A; Sverke, M; & De Witte, H. (2022). Does occupational self-efficacy mediate the relationships between job insecurity and work-related learning? A latent growth modelling approach. Work and Stress, 36(3), 229–250.

Work-related learning (WRL), defined as learning in and at work

The period of “transition from higher education to work”, in the life of young adults, is significant in that “entrance into a new context brings its own challenges”, say Grosemans, Coertjens, and Kyndt (2020: 20). “Early-career employees are expected to develop new competences and deepen their current competences”, which “can be achieved through work-related learning” (WRL). Literature about “learning relevant to work can be conceptualized in at least two ways”, say Sambrook (2005: 102), namely “learning that occurs at the place of work and learning that is embedded in work processes”—illustrated in Figure 1 below; and therefor “the term work-related learning [WRL] encompasses all forms of learning in and at work”. Other differentiated "learning at work, for work and through work". Grosemans et al. (2020: 20) indicate that work-related learning involves both formal and informal learning activities, as well as both on and off the job learning. “Formal learning activities are those activities that are more strictly organized, often within a fixed and limited time span”, whereas “informal learning activities are typically activities that follow from” carrying out work/assigned tasks. The UK, ‘work-related learning guide’ (DCSF: 6) defines of work-related learning as a “planned activity that uses the context of work to develop knowledge, skills and understanding useful in work, including learning through the experience of work, learning about work and working practices, and learning the skills for work”.

While “work-related learning is demonstrated to be particularly important for graduates embarking on their career, as the entrance to their new job comes along with many challenges that can trigger work-related learning”, “little is known about work-related learning in the case of early-career employees”, say Grosemans et al. (2020: 20), and “the question remains as to how factors in higher education can prepare students for future work-related learning”. Three orientations are perceived as significant “antecedents of work-related learning in the transition from higher education to work”, namely learning-goal orientation, performance-approach orientation, and performance-avoidance orientation observe Grosemans et al. (2020: 20-2). It has been found that students with a high learning-goal orientation are generally focused on developing required competences and performing tasks in order to learn new things; whereas students with a high performance-approach orientation are particularly directed towards demonstrating their competences and/or comparing themselves with other; but that students with a high performance-avoidance orientation endeavour to avoid tasks of which they expect the consequences to be negative. Self-efficacy, i.e., “the ‘belief in one’s own capabilities to organize and execute the courses of action required to produce given attainments’” and “perseverance in taxing situations”, is regarded as “critical to increase preparedness for the transition to work”

Sambrook (2005: 106-7) further indicates that “a key factor supporting work-related learning is the use of information and communication technologies (ICTs)” because “the Internet (web-based) enables the delivery of computer-based training across time and distance”.

DCSF stand for United Kingdom Government, Department for Children, Schools and Families.

Grosemans, I.; Coertjens, L. & Kyndt, E. (2020). Work-related learning in the transition from higher education to work: The role of the development of self-efficacy and achievement goals. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 90(1), 19–42.

Sambrook, S. (2005). Factors influencing the context and process of work-related learning: synthesizing findings from two research projects. Human Resource Development International, 8(1), 101 – 119.

United Kingdom Government, Department for Children, Schools and Families. (2009). The Work-Related Learning Guide (Second Edition). https://dera.ioe.ac.uk/id/eprint/10591/7/Work-related_learning_Redacted.pdf

Workplace learning (WPL) and work-related learning (WRL) are associated with training activities such as continuing professional development (CPD)

Workplace learning (WPL) and work-related learning (WRL) “are more associated with training activities such as continuing professional development (CPD) courses.” Say Gerhardt and Mackenzie-Philps (2018: 409) They remark that “terms are [often] used extensively interchangeably with conflicting conceptualisations” which may results in confusion.

Gerhardt and Mackenzie-Philps (2018: 409) indicate that work integrated learning (WIL) is “a more encompassing term”, meaning including entirely or comprehensively, and differentiate “work-based learning (WBL) is what is learnt by working, by the actual undertaking of work activities”. It “questions the more traditional notion that knowledge is held and transferred by the privileged few through formal situations in pre-determined ways” and “specifically, enables accelerated access through transferable skills, initial professional preparation for the ‘real world’, explicit contextual professional development and the use of problem-based learning” (PBL). In contrast “to workplace learning (WPL) and work-related learning (WRL)”, WBL is furthermore linked “to academic learning and programmes”, they say.

They remark further that “generally, WIL are structured programmes of learning where work skills are practised or experienced in a work-like environment”; and elaborate that “only WBL is attached to an academic programme or course”. They indicate that “WIL will often involve online and blended learning (OBL) modes of delivery” or multimodal learning, because such modes “allows working adults access to learning anywhere at any time”. A positive correlation has been found “a between technology usage and the individual development of skills, knowledge, and productivity, i.e. self-efficacy.” (Gerhardt & Mackenzie-Philps, 2018: 409).

“Online technologies and social media innovations … enable progression as it facilitates access wherever you are”. Furthermore “virtual learning environments (VLEs) or learning management systems” (LMSs) as educational space, enhance learning say Gerhardt and Mackenzie-Philps (2018: 410) because of their popularity “among students as they ‘coordinate many different aspects of your study and can generally be used in flexible ways, when and where you choose’”. The VLE/LMS lend itself to facilitating communication; providing training, teaching material and resources; serving as self-testing and assessment portholes or as mediating tools; and supporting inter/tra-action and collaboration. Social networking sites (SNSs) “can further enhance learning, collaboration and engagement and can include forums, weblogs, social networks, video, images and podcasts”

Gerhardt, T. & Mackenzie-Philps, L. (2018). The challenges and opportunities of ICT in WIL, A case study among priests exploring the correlation and trajectory between effective WIL and ICT pervasiveness. Higher Education, Skills and Work-Based Learning, 8(4), 408-421. DOI 10.1108/HESWBL-07-2017-0045

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

Micro-placements are short periods of individual or teamwork on highly focused projects

Despite the good results yielded by work-integrated learning (WIL), the implementation is often hampered by significant challenges, indicate Mayombe (2022: 310), who “refers to any learning activity or programme which integrates theory with practice to provide trainees with industry experience”. Challenges relate to both (i) design and (ii) resources, as well as (iii) maintaining relationships with relevant stakeholders, who may have expectations, needs and interests different from educational institutions. WIL “refers to an educational and training approach that integrates academic and workplace practices for the joint benefit of students and workplaces”, it “allows the insertion of relevant real-world learning into the design of the curriculum that produces students who are prepared to enter the labour market and meet demands of employers”. Mayombe (2022: 311) emphasises the importance of stakeholders to commitment to play their roles for effectiveness of WIL programmes, stating that “commitment of the stakeholders is a catalytic of allocating appropriate WIL placement which facilitates opportunities for trainees to work in organisations”. Mayombe (2022: 313) indicates that “it is the responsibility of the WIL custodian to maintain relationships with key stakeholders and obtain their commitment”.

“The work-experience component of work-integrated learning [programmes] can be achieved through” different models, “characterised by flexibility in terms of the length, timing and frequency of the practical component” say Mayombe (2022: 312), for example:

• The alternating model of WIL, which comprises students alternating between months of practical work experience at their sponsoring companies, and the theoretical components at their respective learning institutions
• A mixture of alternating and parallel study, consisting of allowing students to complete the academic component (theoretical element) while at the same time work part-time at the sponsoring company. Often model of WIL entail full-time in-service training at the end of the study programme.
• Often students are required to apply to an employer for placement for a specific period, to get the relevant practical experience, sometimes with different employers or industries.

Bracken, Patton & Lindsay (2022: 481) state that work-integrated learning (WIL) is “an umbrella term for a range of approaches and strategies that integrate theory with the practice of work within a purposefully designed curriculum”, but add that the range of underpinning pedagogical approaches caused multiple terms that are often used interchangeably causing confusion, such as “practice-based learning, professional practice, problem-based-learning, experiential learning, workplace learning, and practice-based education”. The diversity of WIL is further demonstrated by a diverse range of strategies and approaches such as fully immersed in-situ work placements, projects, fieldwork, and simulations. There are further emerging innovative WIL approaches such as micro-placements, hackathons, and incubators. Dean & Campbell (2020: 357) refer to these approaches as beyond workplace-based experiences, that “moved away from requiring extensive time in workplaces to engaging students through short, authentic activities”. Green, Seaman & Smith (2022: 528) align these kinds of short-term placements with the definition of micro-placements offered by Kay et al. (2019: 405), namely “short periods in the workplace ranging from two to 10 days where students work individually or in teams on highly focused projects”, indicating that micro-placements occur in a diverse range of sectors.

The Edinburgh Chamber of Commerce issued the following news release on 24 & 29 April 2021 respectively:

Could your Business Support Edinburgh Napier University with a Micro-Placement?

Edinburgh Napier Business School are exploring introducing a 'Micro-Placement' experience for our 3rd & 4th Year Undergraduate BA (Hons) Accounting and Law students and they are interested to hear from companies who might be interested in hosting a student, over the summer period.

This will be short-term optional, extra-curricular career exploration opportunity designed to provide mutual benefit to both student and employer, with students gaining an insight into an industry related to their field of study and employers a chance to meet with ambitious students. As this is a pilot, they are very open to any suggestions that you might have! If you are interested, or would like to find out more please contact Sharon Homan-James, Employer Engagement Partner, Business School on email [email protected]

Mayombe (2022) uses the term micro-placements 27 times, indicating among other (p. 317) that students sign fixed-term contracts with the host companies, for the duration of the micro-placement. For host companies, micro-placements often serve as strategy for human resources development and recruitment of new employees. The number of academic credits for micro-placements vary based on the type and the outcome. Mentoring during and quality of micro-placements are important considerations. Sometimes micro-placements of students in host companies are converted to formal employment upon graduation. Adequate mentorship and supervision enable students “to become ready for future careers and be attractive to the prospective employers” (p. 324).

Bibliography:

Bracken, L., Patton, N. & Lindsay, E. (2022). Compulsory work-integrated learning: A solution for equity propositioning and future proofing. International Journal of Work-Integrated Learning, 23(4), 481-493. https://www.ijwil.org/files/IJWIL_23_4_527_542.pdf

Dean, B.A. & Campbell, M. (2020). Reshaping work-integrated learning in a post-COVID-19 world of work. International Journal of Work-Integrated Learning, 21(4), 356-364. https://www.ijwil.org/files/IJWIL_21_4_355_364.pdf

Edinburgh Napier Business School. (2021). Could your Business Support Edinburgh Napier University with a Micro-Placement? Plus Company Updates. Gale General OneFile, https://go.gale.com/ps/i.do?p=ITOF&u=usa_itw&id=GALE|A659693622&v=2.1&it=r&sid=summon&asid=9270b281

Green, E., Seaman, C.E. & Smith, B. (2022). Exploring localized learning during a short-term health student placement. International Journal of Work-Integrated Learning, 23(4), 527-542. https://www.ijwil.org/files/IJWIL_23_4_527_542.pdf

Iipinge, S.M., Batholmeus, P.N. & Pop. C. (2020). Using simulations to improve skills needed for work-integrated learning before and during COVID-19 in Namibia. International Journal of Work-Integrated Learning, 21(5), 531-543. https://www.ijwil.org/files/IJWIL_21_5_531_543.pdf

Kay, J., Ferns, S., Russell, L., Smith, J. & Winchester-Seeto, T. (2019). The emerging future: Innovative models of work-integrated learning. International Journal of Work-Integrated Learning, 20(4), 401-413. https://www.ijwil.org/files/IJWIL_20_4_401_413.pdf

Mayombe, C. (2022). Partnership with stakeholders as innovative model of work-integrated learning for unemployed youths. Higher Education, Skills and Work-Based Learning, 12 (2), 309-327. https://0-doi-org.oasis.unisa.ac.za/10.1108/HESWBL-03-2021-0065

Zegwaard, K.E., Pretti, T.J. & Rowe, A.D. (2020). Responding to an international crisis: The adaptability of the practice of work-integrated learning. International Journal of Work-Integrated Learning, 21(4), 317-330. https://www.ijwil.org/files/IJWIL_21_4_317_330.pdf

Work-based learning (WBL) is one form of work-integrated learning (WIL)

The South African Higher Education Qualifications Sub-Framework (HEQSF, 2014: §34, p. 17) states that some qualifications incorporate work-integrated learning (WIL) into the curriculum, and that “WIL may take various forms including simulated learning, work-directed theoretical learning, problem-based learning, project-based learning and workplace-based learning”. Similarly, the Council on Higher Education (CHE, 2014: 34) reference regarding curriculum design, development and delivery for distance education in a digital era CHE (2011: 16-21) specify different curricular modalities namely:

• Work-directed theoretical learning.
• Problem-based learning.
• Project-based learning.
• Workplace learning.

Other CHE (2004) publications, such as the ‘Criteria for Institutional Audits’ and the ‘Criteria for Programme Accreditation’ respectively, specified work-based learning; and indicate that ‘experiential learning’ is a term that has historically been used within the former technikon sector for work-based learning.

Gerhardt and Annon (2023: 225) define the meanings of their use of the terms work-based learning (WBL) and work-integrated learning (WIL) as follow:

• Work-Based Learning (WBL): A distinctive pedagogical practice due to the negotiation of learning which follows the needs of the workplace rather than a professional body or subject discipline with learning occurring principally in the workplace and is concerned with the practice of work (Talbot & Lilley, 2014).
• Work-Integrated Learning (WIL): The intersection and engagement of theoretical and practice learning (Cooper et al., 2010, p. xiii), an umbrella term for a model and process of curricular experiential education that formally and intentionally integrates a student’s academic studies within a workplace or practice setting (CEWIL Canada, 2021).

The Canadian body ‘Co-operative Education and Work-Integrated Learning Canada’ (CEWIL Canada) illustrates WIL as follow — take note of the 2nd (**) side note:

The proponents of experiential learning failed to date to make a convincing academic case for work-based learning, say Gerhardt and Annon (2023: 211), and indicate that UNESCO (2014) considers work-based learning as a subset of experience-based learning. The notion of “learning that occurs through undertaking real work, through the production of real goods and services, whether this work is paid or unpaid” is stated, as well as that work-based learning entails “a partnership between universities and employers, delivering learning that meets the needs of the learners and employers, resulting in an accredited qualification”.

Gerhardt and Annon (2023: 220) concludes “that rather than WIL and WBL being incompatible, that WBL, as a different form of WIL, inhabit the space, the tension across disciplines, and in that space, as experts, produce practical knowledge”. They state “that WBL as a different form of WIL, finds meaning and creates meaning in the liminal zones across disciplines” and that one of WBL’s important outcomes is to “produce work-ready professional citizens, through experiential-transformative-experience-based learning (andragogy - person and personnel)”. WBL is a unique pedagogical field, and this uniqueness creates boundaries.

Gerhardt and Annon (2023: 209) raise the question: “Do different pedagogical approaches (modes) justify the conceptual differences?” They comment that “distinction raises questions about power discourses, ‘boundary’ assumptions, and thus impacting professional identity/status”. They (p. 210) indicate that those responsible for work-integrated learning acquire a dual identity, being both an academic and being practical, a pracademic, an insider/outsider having diverse backgrounds and experience, which results in a bricoleur (a French word describing a handyperson who makes use of available tools to complete a task). They elaborate that bricoleur practitioners have a broadened repertoire and a heterogeneous approach, enabling the understand that “the frontier of knowledge work rests in the liminal zones where disciplines collide” (citing Kincheloe & Berry, 2004, p. 80) and the implosion of disciplinarity, or thinking associated with disciplinarity. Those that inhabit the zones of WIL/WBL practitioners “become experts in mastering this space, sharing similar pedagogical approaches, and avoiding the creation of boundaries” (p. 210).

Co-operative Education and Work-Integrated Learning Canada (CEWIL Canada). What is work-integrated learning (WIL)? https://cewilcanada.ca/CEWIL/CEWIL/About-Us/Work-Integrated-Learning.aspx?hkey=ed772be2-00d0-46cd-a5b8-873000a18b41

Council on Higher Education (2014). Distance Higher Education Programmes in a Digital Era: Good Practice Guide. https://www.saide.org.za/documents/CHE_-_Distance_Higher_Education.pdf

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 (2004). Criteria for Institutional Audits. https://www.che.ac.za/publications/criteria/criteria-institutional-audits

Gerhardt, T, & Annon, P. (2023). Towards conceptual clarity: Pedagogical liminality. International Journal of Work-Integrated Learning, 24(2), 209-225. https://www.ijwil.org/files/IJWIL_24_2_209_225.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. https://www.gov.za/sites/default/files/gcis_document/201410/38116gon819.pdf

Significance of the I in WIL

The noun interrelation [in-ter-ri-ley-shuhn] is defined by Dictionary.com as “reciprocal relation”. It means the “state of things being closely connected to each other and maybe affecting each other”, and “the verb interrelate means to be connected in this way or to cause things to become connected in this way”. The adjective reciprocal originates from the Latin reciproc(us), meaning returning, “given or felt by each toward the other”, expressing a mutual relationship, explains Dictionary.com.

The ‘I’ in work-integrated learning (WIL) pertains to integration of workplace experiences into the learning curriculum. 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." (emphasis added to highlight the interrelation). Examples of practice given by IJWIL “include off-campus, workplace immersion activities such as work placements, internships, practicum, service learning, and cooperative education (Co-op), and on-campus activities such as work-related projects/competitions, entrepreneurships, student-led enterprise, etc. WIL is related to, but not the same as, the fields of experiential learning, work-based learning, and vocational education and training.”

The Higher Education Qualifications Sub-Framework (HEQSF) of the Department of Higher Education and Training (South African Government 2014: 17) states that the incorporation of work-integrated learning (WIL) into the curriculum is characteristic of vocational and professionally-oriented qualifications. The HEQSF includes the following higher education qualification descriptors:

• Advanced Certificate programmes (NQF Exit Level 6, p. 28), which typically include a work-integrated learning (WIL) component.
• Diploma programmes (NQF Exit Level 6, p. 29), which typically include an appropriate work-integrated learning (WIL) component; and further states (p. 30): “Candidates who complete the 240-credit Diploma may enter an Advanced Diploma upon successful completion of a work-integrated learning component or a combination of work-integrated learning and coursework equivalent to 120 credits that is approved and accredited by an education provider and/or a professional body and a QC.”
• Master's degree (Professional, NQF Exit Level 9, p. 38): “In some cases, a professional master's degree may be designed in consultation with a professional body or fulfil all or part of the requirements for professional registration or recognition, and may include appropriate forms of work-integrated learning.”

The incorporation of WIL as outlined above requires interrelation and reciprocity. The latter, reflected as the last letter (R) in a mnemonic about the essence of cooperative education, as former Technikon education philosophy: INC-CEL-FAR, standing for IN (industry needs) + CC (continuous consultation) + EL (experiential learning) + FA (faculty abreast) + R (reciprocity) = Cooperative Education.

The HEQSF further, in §34 (p. 17, emphasis added), differentiates 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: 2004 & 2014) provide criteria with regard to work-based learning (WBL). These criteria do not necessary apply to the other forms of WIL than work-based learning.

In §35 (p. 17, emphasis added) of the HEQSF, it is stated 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 adds that “such workplace-based learning must be appropriately structured, properly supervised and assessed”. Note that the institution’s role is not limited to ‘placement’ but extends to structured learning, proper supervision (mentoring), and assessment (both formative and summative), which suggest good interrelation (or reciprocity).

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 recognises that “arrangements for work-based learning will likely be more complex in distance provision due to the more distributed nature of students and the geographic footprint of distance programmes which may even extend beyond national borders” (CHE: 2014, Criterion 15, emphases added), but states that “appropriate arrangements will be needed for placement, mentoring and supervision for a more distributed student body to ensure an equivalent learning experience across a wider range of contexts” and reiterates the “coordination of work-based learning must be done effectively, including adequate infrastructure, effective communication, recording of progress made, monitoring and mentoring”, including 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

In addition to these generic statutory requirements, qualification-specific statutory bodies such as the Engineering Council of South Africa (ECSA), Health Professions Council of South Africa (HPCSA), South African Council for Social Service Professions (SACSSP), South African Nursing Council (SANC), and the South African Veterinary Council (SAVC), and vocational bodies do specify additional criteria.

CHE (Council on Higher Education)

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 (2004). 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 (2004). 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 (2004). Higher Education Quality Committee (HEQC). Criteria for Institutional Audits. https://www.che.ac.za/publications/criteria/criteria-institutional-audits

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

International Journal of Work-Integrated Learning (IJWIL). Home page. Electronically accessible from https://www.ijwil.org/

SETA discretionary grants for PIVOTAL programmes

Pivotal means of ‘vital or critical importance’; but is also used as an acronym meaning professional, vocational, technical, and academic learning programmes resulting in occupational qualifications on the National Qualifications Framework (NQF), more especially for scarce and critical skills.

Seta (plural -tae) in biology are a bristle-like appendages, stalks, hair or bristles, used as sensory organs (e.g. spiders), for locomotion (e.g. earthworms), or adhesion to vertical surfaces (e.g. feet of geckos); but also used as an acronym meaning Sector Education and Training Authority (SETA). List of Sector Education and Training Authorities (SETAs).

Discretionary grants are exactly what is states, funds allocated at sole discretion, not a given, and there are several ‘hoops to jump through to try and implement them’ say SDF Corp. Group (n.d.). The aim of discretionary grants is to encourage stakeholders to contribute towards Skills Development, focussing on scarce and critical skills producing projects within a sector or industry, such as:

• Learnerships
• Work integrated learning (WIL)
• Internships
• Bursaries
• Skills programmes

The discretion rests with the SETA accounting authority concerned, and dependent on the funds available. The relevant SETA’s discretionary grants policy, guidelines, and specific criteria apply. Extensive skills planning and skills audits are undertaken; and participating organisations or businesses are required to ensure that all skills programmes are linked to the industry’s scarce and critical skills. All Skills Development Levy payments must be up-to-date; annual workplace skills plan (WSP) including PIVOTAL and non-PIVOTAL, and previous annual training report (ATR) must be submitted on time; and application must be made by means of the prescribed SETA Discretionary Grant application form during the window of opportunity. After SETA approval, a Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) will be entered, stipulating the amount of the grant given as well as the terms and conditions of such a grant.

The maxim on the South African Department of Higher Education and Training (DHET) webpage reads: ‘Together, Turning Every Workplace into a Training Space”. The Skills Development branch of DHET is concerned with the implementation of both the Skills Development Act and the Skills Development Levy Act. The Skills Levy income—collected in terms of sections 7 (1) and 8 (2) (a) read with 8 (3) (b) of the Skills Development Levies Act—is distributed in accordance to the National Skills Development Strategy to respective Sectoral Education and Training Authorities (SETAs).

The Government Notice, published 3 December 2012 by the Minister of Higher Education and Training—G35940, RG9867, GoN990—contains the new regulations pertaining to mandatory grants payable to levy paying employers, versus the allocation of discretionary PIVOTAL grants. SETAs form an integral part of the framework to develop and improve the skills of the South African workforce. Each SETA produces a sector skills plan. These contribute to the national skills plan, which among others include identified scarce skills.

Each employer with an annual payroll exceeding R500 000 is obliged to contribute 1% of payroll to the skills development fund. Employers are also required to register with the relevant SETA. Each employer is required to annually submit, by a specified date, a workplace skills plan (WSP) with regard to developing the skills of its employees. Each employer is furthermore required to annually submit, by a specified date, an annual training report (ATR). If these are approved by the relevant SETA, then it must allocate the mandatory grant to such a levy paying employer.

SDF Corp. Group is Skills Development Facilitation Corporation Group

Skills Development Facilitation Corporation. (n.d.). Discretionary grants – what are they, and how do I apply? Electronically accessible from; https://sdfcorp.co.za/discretionary-grants-what-are-they-and-how-do-i-apply/

 

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

Construct clarity and validity

A vague notion put forward by a line manager prompted a literature search, which rendered articles captured in this post.

Zongozzi (2021: 151) emphasises the importance of grounding, of clearly articulated theoretical and/or conceptual frameworks, and of construct clarity, as essential components of a good theory; stating that “Theories undergo rigour check and therefore, a theory without clear construct(s) is deemed to lack rigour”. Further citing Tight (2004) who says “theory is frequently used in an overlapping sense with ‘concept, epistemology, model, paradigm or philosophy, as well as methodology’”.

‘Constructs’ are the foundation and the building blocks of theory, says Suddaby (2010: 346) and states that “clear constructs are simply robust categories that distil phenomena into sharp distinctions that are comprehensible to a community of researchers”. A ‘construct’ is a concept that has been deliberately and consciously devised or espoused for a special scientific purpose. Construct clarity comprises four aspects, says Suddaby (2010: 347):

1. Definition — “skillful use of language to persuasively create precise and parsimonious categorical distinctions between concepts”
2. Scope — delineated “conditions or contextual circumstances under which a construct will or will not apply”
3. Relationships — clarity with regard to conceptual distinctions, as well as “semantic relationships to other related constructs”
4. Coherence — the degree of “or logical consistency of the construct in relation to the overall theoretical argument”

Suddaby (2010: 347) indicates that meanings “are notoriously difficult to specify”, because “meanings of words are never fixed or permanent”, and existing constructs are applied to a new empirical context the meaning of terms often changed. However slightly the change, over time and multiple empirical applications, the definition of constructs tend to drift. It is therefore obligatory to qualify meaning. It is important “to strip away the extraneous meaning that has become attached to a construct” (p. 348).

Construct validity, “flows from the ability to crisply and precisely describe theoretical constructs” and pertain to operationalization of empirical questions of and measurement, says Suddaby (2010: 346) who further indicates (p. 354) a tension between the ‘umbrella advocates’ versus the ‘validity police’.

The term umbrella advocates refers to those researchers who argue that constructs should be viewed as large buckets or broad concepts loosely defined because this better captures the inherent complexity and messiness of the empirical world we study. The term validity police refers to those researchers who argue that constructs should be small buckets narrowly defined in order to bring more scientific rigor and validity to the study …

While busy with the review of relevant literature, core concepts and conceptual frameworks emerge, often as ‘ah uh’ moments. The conceptual framework becomes a significant reference point. Berman and Smyth (2015: 127) indicate that it is important to align epistemology, ontology and methodology, as reflected in table 1 below.

Berman and Smyth (2015: 130) explain that “what is to be researched, the ontology, or the reality of the context of the research problem, needs to be clear and bounded in order to establish a solid foundation for shared meaning and conceptual validity”. They elaborate that “the prompts for this [ontological] dimension of research focus on describing the context of the research and the key concepts and relationships between those concepts that exist in that context”. These are ‘connected with the epistemological basis of research’, say Berman and Smyth (2015: 130).

Berman, J., & Smyth, R. (2015). Conceptual frameworks in the doctoral research process: A pedagogical model. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 52(2), 125–136.

Suddaby, R. (2010). Editor’s comments: Construct clarity in theories of management and organization. Academy of Management Review, 35, 346–357.

Zongozzi, J.N. (2021). A concept analysis of theory in South African Open Distance and E-Learning research. Open Learning: The Journal of Open, Distance and e-Learning, 36:2, 149-163, DOI: 10.1080/02680513.2020.1743172

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

The acronym ‘PBL’ represents a significant range of problem based learning practices

“The label ‘PBL’ covers an amazing diversity of educational practices”, say Ryberg and Nørgaard (2013: V); citing Kolmos and Graaff (2003: 657), who observe the use of the acronym “ranging from problem-oriented lectures to completely open experiential learning environments”; as well as Barrows (1986: 485) who states it “addresses different objectives to varying degrees”; and recommends “any PBL method must be analysed in terms of the type of problem used, the teaching learning sequences, the responsibility given to students for learning and the student assessment method used”.

Barrows (1996: 3) summarises the “factors that motivated the need for curricular change”, the introduction of problem-based learning (PBL) in 1969, and developments that followed. Countless “approaches to problem-based learning”, representing a significant “variety of methods”, resulted in a notion with “far less precision than might be assumed” observes Barrows (1996: 5). Scholkmann (2020) reaffirms that “Variations in PBL implementation need to be seen as the norm rather than the exception, since local PBL practice will always diverge from the ‘original model’”. Despite “the many variations of PBL that have evolved”, Barrows (1996: 5-6) argues that “a core model or basic definition with which others can be compared is needed”, and outlines (paraphrased below) the original method developed for the medical school of McMaster University, Faculty of Health Sciences:

• Learning is student-centred, in that students must take responsibility for their own learning, identify what they need to know to better understand and manage the problem on which they are working and determining where they will get that information.
• Learning occurs in small student groups of five to nine students randomly assigned with a tutor for each curricular unit, giving students practice in working intensely and effectively with a variety of different people.
• Teachers/lecturers/tutors are group facilitators or guides, asking students the kinds of questions that they should be asking themselves to better understand and manage the problem. Tutors are not content experts and discouraged from falling back on old teaching reflexes and giving the students direct information and guidance
• Problems form the organizing focus and stimulus for learning, presented as a written case, case vignette, standardized (also called simulated) patient, computer simulation, videotape. The problems represent challenges students would face in practice, and provides the relevance and motivation for learning. The problems give students foci for integrating information from basic sciences and various disciplines.
• Problems are vehicles for the development of clinical problem-solving skills (professional practice) presented in a format similar to the real world. Students are permitted ask the patient questions, carry out physical examinations, and order laboratory tests.
• New information is acquired through self-directed learning, in that students are expected to learn from the bodies of knowledge and accumulated expertise by virtue of their own study and research, just as real practitioners do. Students work together, discussing, comparing, reviewing, and debating what they have learned.

Moust et al. (2005: 668) illustrate (Figure 1 below) the problem-based learning (PBL) process “connected with the various underlying learning principles in each phase of students’ learning”. They remark that “PBL can be seen as an example of a learning environment that fosters active, constructive, contextual, cooperative, and goal-directed learning”, and that research “has shown that implementation of these principles has a positive effect on students’ learning processes”.

Barrows, H. S. (1986). A taxonomy of problem-based learning methods. Medical Education, 20(6), 481–486. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2923.1986.tb01386.x

Barrows, H. S. (1996). Problem-based learning in medicine and beyond. In L. Wilkerson & W. H. Gijselaers (Eds.), New directions for teaching and learning, 68, 3–13. Jossey-Bass. Electronically accessible from https://doi.org/10.1002/tl.37219966804

Kolmos, A., & Graaff, E. D. (2003). Characteristics of Problem-Based Learning. International Journal of Engineering Education, 2003(19), 657–662.

Moust, J. H. C., Berkel, H. J. M. Van., & Schmidt, H. G. (2005). Signs of erosion: Reflections on three decades of problem-based learning at Maastricht University. Higher Education, 50(4), 665–683. Electronically accessible from https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-004-6371-z

Ryberg, T. & Nørgaard, B. (2013). Introducing Problem Based Learning in Higher Education. Journal of Problem Based Learning in Higher Education, 1(1), I-VI. https://journals.aau.dk/index.php/pbl/article/view/274/201

Scholkmann, A. (2020). Why don't we all just do the same? Understanding variation in PBL implementation from the perspective of translation theory. The Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-based Learning, 14 (2), Special Issue: PBLing the unPBLable. Electronically accessible from https://scholarworks.iu.edu/journals/index.php/ijpbl/article/view/28800/35707

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

Evolving work-integrated learning typologies and frameworks

As with most things, work-integrated learning (WIL) has undergone growth and development. Dean, Yanamandram, Eady, Moroney, O'Donnell, and Glover-Chambers (2020: 3) indicate that over the last decade WIL has moved away from the narrow conception of ‘work placements’ to a much broader and widening lens. One typology of WIL entailed 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)—although all these includes an industry partner, project-based learning (PjBL) is not necessary delivered in single block placement and may run concurrently with study modules. 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. These include and extend placement, suggesting that typology of WIL needs to consider both placement and non-placement types of WIL.

Dean et al. (2020: 3) cite Kaider, Hains-Wesson, and Young (2017), who examined “the degree to which assessment or activity inside a unit (subject) is proximal to the workplace or practitioners and is an authentic piece that resembles professional practice” (emphasis added). Kaider et al. (2017: 158) describe the dimensions of their authenticity-proximity framework as follow:

• Authenticity: learning activities and assessments requiring students to work on problems, processes and projects that they may encounter in their professions and produce artefacts reflecting professional practice.
• Proximity: learning experiences that occur in real workplaces and professional contexts; in online or live complex simulated workplace environments; and those that enable students to interact directly with industry practitioners or community members on work related activities.

The authenticity-proximity framework, reflected in Figure 1 (from Kaider et al., 2017: 158), comprise two axes with a nine cell grid, the vertical axis reflects three levels of authenticity of a learning task in relation to real-world practice and the horizontal axis reflects three levels of proximity to the workplace. Kaider et al. (2017: 158) emphasis that assessments that into the low-authenticity or low-proximity categories are not deemed WIL, as these assessments focus primarily on cognitively-based disciplinary knowledge, often taking the form of essays and examinations.

Kaider et al. (2017) further overlaid the authenticity-proximity framework with exemplars of activities that could take place across three stages of university education, reflected in Table 1 (from Kaider et al., 2017: 159)—prospectively offering a horizontally and vertically scaffolded approach. The three stages, or levels, are:

• Introductory WIL: offered in the first year introduces students to the world of work and the beginning of creating their own professional identity to meet their careers aspirations. The direct interaction with employers is limited at this stage though students may observe practitioners and workplaces.
• Year 2 and 3 WIL [Intermediate WIL]: afford students the opportunity to design and develop a range of artefacts that reflect practice in their professions; undertake processes characteristics of workplaces; and engage directly with industry/sector/community personnel. This may include learning in complex, simulated, workplace environments such as studios, moot courts and practice clinics in which students perform all or most of the functions that they would in a real work situation. Students may also be offered opportunities to interact directly with industry and/or community personnel in a client-consultant type relationship that is common in many professions. Additionally, direct interaction may also take the form of feedback from practitioners on student work; panels; and discussion groups, the essence of which students ideally integrate into summative assessments.
• Placements [Advanced WIL] reflect a long tradition of on-the-job learning and vary in length, time offered, paid or unpaid, intensity and orientation.

Although this typology was designed for categorizing and analysing research data, it became evident to Kaider et al. (2017) that it could also serve as a teaching resource for staff, in that it could generate assessment ideas, as provide guidance in mapping progressively developmental assessment tasks across the programme.

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

Remote problem-based learning (PBL) as non-placement WIL

Credit to Dean, Yanamandram, Eady, Moroney, O'Donnell, and Glover-Chambers (2020: 2) for the fictional scenario about a subject coordinator.

Devoted academics endeavour to prepare students for careers beyond graduation. Apart from teaching, they nurture strong relationships with industry and stakeholders in the field. They further maintain professional networks and memberships in order to remain abreast with changes in their fields. They often pursue work-integrated learning (WIL), as pedagogical strategy aimed at enabling students to practise and apply their discipline knowledge and build workplace and employability skills while studying. Modes or types of WIL vary. Some use placement forms of WIL, whereby students undertake sustained time in a workplace with an industry partner. Sometimes these stints of work experience are sandwiched into the curriculum, other times as capstone modules during the final year, designed to integrate and apply theoretical knowledge acquired. Another form is problem-based or focussed learning. An industry partner may attend a class and present students with one or more dilemma their organisation is currently facing. Students then work in teams, conducting empirical research, analysing the problem from multiple perspectives, and develop a proposal recommending the best way to address the problem. Towards the end of the academic term, students go on a field trip to the organisation to ask practitioners questions and test their proposed solutions, in order to ensure feasibility and relevance. Teams thereafter present their revised solutions to a panel comprising industry representatives and academic staff.

The Covid-19 pandemic impacted these and other forms of face-to-face teaching. However, innovative academics adapted and switched to online modes. Industry partners would present by means of Zoom, introducing the problem/s and illustrating the scope by means of videos. Students would work remotely in teams, making use of social media. Sessions with in-company practitioners would be enabled through Zoom/Teams, and similarly final presentations. In this way remote problem-based learning (PBL) as non-placement WIL (NPWIL) is accomplished.

Dean, B.; Yanamandram, V.; Eady, M.J.; Moroney, T.; O'Donnell, N.; and 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.

pro et contra of virtual sub-internships on career perceptions

The value of work-integrated learning (WIL, originally identified as cooperative education) as career choice clarifier or verifier, has been advocated for more than a century. Ooi and Ooi (2020) in this regard indicate that the “SARS-CoV-2 pandemic has left a huge impact on the career perceptions of trainees and medical students globally”. They elaborate stating that sub-internships have been serving as stepping stones to successful residency programme applications, in that international medical graduates (IMGs) were given the opportunity during final year at medical school to learn about specific residency programmes, and to assess if they are a ‘good fit’, prior to applying. The cancellation of sub-internships or clinical rotation of 4^th year medical students, meant a loss of opportunities to build meaningful relationships; to demonstrate personal level of competence; to gain mentorship; and to acquire letters of recommendation. Some hospitals fortunately organised virtual sub-internships, which entail a series of webinars presented by current residents and programme directors to at least provide insight into the nature, ethos, and values of the residency programme, the hospital, and the team members. Ooi and Ooi (2020) highlight several ‘pros and cons’ (pro et contra) pertaining virtual sub-internships.

Pros:

• Multiple virtual participation within a similar time frame to an in-person sub-internship, affording a more informed choice about which residency programme/s to pursue
• Potential networking opportunities
• No prerequisite requirements or physical constraints limiting participation
• Participation is free and access from comfort of own space

Cons:

• Value of virtual inferior to actual, with no opportunity to demonstrate abilities or work towards a recommendation
• Connection building and gaining mentoring are restrained
• Limited success rate with cold emails
• Partisan and impersonal experience

Ooi, R. & Ooi, S.Z.Y. 2020. The role of virtual sub-internships in influencing career perceptions: an international medical graduate perspective. Medical Education Online, 25:1, DOI: 10.1080/10872981.2020.1821463

Scaffolding, with the intent to ensure the quality of work-integrated learning

Scaffolding, in education, refers to an assortment of teaching strategies (or instructional techniques) employed to progressively enable students in the learning process. The term (or notion) ‘scaffolding’ itself, serves as descriptive metaphor of the “successive levels of temporary support that help students reach higher levels of comprehension and skill acquisition” (Glossary of Educational Reform, 2015). Similar to physical scaffolding, supportive teaching strategies are either implemented or removed as circumstances require.

Differentiation, in contrast to scaffolding, refers to adaptations made to accommodate individuals with diverse learning needs, such as students with disabilities. Scaffolding and differentiation, although distinct, have similar teaching goals, namely learning progression, and might be blended together.

The opposite of scaffolding work-integrated learning (WIL) would be to expect students to find their own relevant place of experiential learning; to negotiate their own learning experiences; to seek their own mentoring; and to submit a specified portfolio of evidence; for assessment. Scaffolding with the intent to ensuring the quality of WIL may include:

• The university (or teaching institution) has relevant WIL ‘study’ guides, experiential learning provider (ELP) guidelines, and mentor guidelines in place
  • Students are prepared for (briefed/readiness) their prerequisite WIL through provided 'study' guides
• The university (or teaching institution) having access to sufficient accredited experiential learning providers in order to facilitate to placement of students for prerequisite WIL
• Facilitation of the placement of students, including contracting of the learning, and the appointment of a suitably qualified mentor for each student
  • In the event of students with disabilities, the placements would include reasonable accommodation cognisant of the nature of disability
• Follow-up monitoring of the learning progression of each student, and regular communication with the experiential learning providers concerned
  • Appropriate intervention/s if such is deemed necessary, for example corrective action
• Assessment of each student’s attainment of specified learning outcomes by both the experiential learning provider and academic staff concerned
• Revision of the curriculum of the academic programme, which might include either or both academic subject/s and/or the WIL part/s, when perceived necessary

Scaffolding. 2015. The Glossary of Education Reform for journalists, parents and community members. Electronically accessible from https://www.edglossary.org/scaffolding/

Key component of experiential education is reflection, not activity

Snow, Wardley, Carter and Maher (2019: 80) state that the term experiential education “is often misunderstood or misapplied through reductionist thinking to any learning that involves activity”; on the contrary, it is defined as “a pedagogical approach that encourages collective and personal critical reflection and development”. They engaged in seeking to answer questions about the feasibility of designing online experiential learning opportunities and how this can contribute to deepening professional practice in Nursing, Education, Business and Community Studies. They remark that “The key component of experiential education documented in the literature is action on the part of the student that promotes learning through reflection” (emphasis added). However, experience itself is not necessarily educative, especially when reflection is omitted. Experiential learning comprises, as per Kolb’s cycle of four stages, namely: concrete experience (CE), reflective observation (RO), abstract conceptualization (AC), and active experimentation (AE). Snow, Wardley, Carter and Maher (2019) report that collaborative activities through online synchronous and asynchronous technologies have been found to support the development of competence. They share lived experiences about four undergraduate-level professional programmes that involve experiential learning to varying degrees.

The first scenario pertains to a part-time blended learning programme from Registered Practical Nurse (RPN) to a Bachelor of Science in Nursing (BScN) degree. The RPN to BScN programme comprises theory courses delivered online and clinical (experiential) courses occurring in clinical practice settings. Each clinical module includes an online course site, which houses resources and “serves as an environment where students are required to reflect and think critically on their learning with their clinical instructor and other students”. The reflection principally through writing, with tools such as discussion boards, blogs, and course-specific email. This “blend of clinical learning with carefully designed online writing activities is a powerful combination”. Case studies and problem-based learning activities in the theory modules further serve as a form of experiential learning. The clinical or experiential, on the other hand are “enhanced through online activities and assignments that require critical thinking through reflection”.

The table below summarises the other three scenarios:

Scenario	Reflective Observation	Abstract Conceptualization	Active Experimentation	Concrete Experience
2.    Typical blended learning cycle, teacher education, science	The first lesson of each unit face-to-face, in which the previous experience deconstructed and explored and a new cycle established.	Asynchronous online activities were used to engage with theory related to learning objectives.	Each lesson design was unique to the student and specific community context.	Students did online video presenta-tions of their lessons & received feedback from their classmates.
3.    Typical learning cycle, occupational health & safety	Interactive learning based on content of module	Research paper	Discussion posts, blog entries & case studies	Community-based marketing outreach message
	Simulations and videos posted by professor with questions to address in blogs	Conceptualizing workforce-relevant knowledge related to the group topic	Reflecting, applying knowledge, and evaluating peers	Content presented online; three-tiered monitoring and measurement systems (peers, professor, and community members)
4.    Typical learning cycle, work place-ment courses	Discussion posts and a final reflective essay for each course	Developing a career plan (COMS 2101); information interview (COMS 3101)	Discussion posts, journal summaries, & self/supervisor evaluations	Placements with a community partner (100 hours for COMS 2101, 100 hours for COMS 3101)

It is the experience of the authors that “the practical realities of experiential education in higher education are challenging, and faculty interested in developing experiential learning opportunities for students must negotiate institutional policies, external regulatory bodies, and, at times, even concerns about legitimacy within their departments”.

Snow, K., Wardley, L., Carter, L. & Maher, P. 2019. Lived Experiences of Online and Experiential Learning Programs in Four Undergraduate Professional Programs. Collected Essays on Learning & Teaching: Pedagogical Innovation: Adapting Practice to Evolving Cultures, Section II, Vol. 12, p79-93. DOI: https://doi.org/10.22329/celt.v12i0.5388

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/