Learning in vivo

DHET Learning Programme Regulations, 2012

The South African government notice, referenced below, conveys the Minister of Higher Education and Training intention to repeal the Learnership Regulations (published in Government Notice R 519 in Government Gazette No 30010 dated 29 June 2007) and makes available Learning Programme Regulations—under the Skills Development Act, 1998 (Act No. 97 of 1998)—for public comment a 30 day period that ended 5 August 2012.

The notice defines a "learning programme agreement" to mean an agreement as intended in the regulations. The notice further specifies and defines, among others, the following:

• Candidacy—meaning “the practical and work experience training that is an occupational qualification as determined by the relevant professional body and follows the completion of an academic qualification required for access to the assessment for the issuing of a professional designation. This learning must lead to the issuing of a designation registered on the NQF” (emphasis added).
• Internship—meaning “the structured work experience component of an occupational qualification registered by the” Quality Council for Trades and Occupations (QCTO) as contemplated in Section 26G of the Skills Development Act.
• Learner—meaning “the learning party to a learning programme agreement, who is enrolled in a registered learning programme that has a curriculum registered with QCTO and includes [the] Iearner contemplated in both section 18( 1) and section 18(2 )of the Act” (emphasis added).
• Learnership—meaning “a learning programme that leads to an occupational qualification or part qualification and includes an apprenticeship and cadetship”
• Placement—meaning “a learner is placed in a workplace to complete part of an internship”
• Structured learning component—includes both “the knowledge and practical curriculum components of an occupational qualification” and the structured work experience component "means the workplace curriculum components of an occupational qualification” (emphasis added).
• Successful completion—meaning that “the Iearner has successfully completed the learning programme and has been declared competent”.
• Termination—means “the cancellation or dissolution of a learning programme agreement before one or more of the components of the learning programme agreement have been successfully completed”.
• Work integrated learning—“means a process that formally integrates a student's academic qualification or part qualification with work experience in participating employer organisations” (emphasis added).

The definitions quoted above are in need of some editing, because the way they are currently stated excludes—probably unintentionally—certain types, for example, the definition of a learner by implication excludes higher education qualifications.[The Directorate: SETA Support and Learnerships of the South African national Department of Higher Education and Training (DHET) advised that the regulations are not finalized yet, the staff are still busy with the consolidation of public comments. As soon as the revised regulations are approved by the Minister, theywill then be publish in a gazette and also on the DHET website.]

Chapter 2 deals with the registration and management of learning programme agreements; chapter 3 with disputes; and chapter 4 with administrative provisions. Annexure A1 (pp. 12-20) reflects the full Learning Programme Agreement (excluding Skills Programmes) and annexure A2 the agreement for skills programmes.

Republic of South Africa. 2012. Department of Higher Education and Training. Government Gazette, Skills Development Act: Regulations: Learning Programme: Draft, (G 35489, General Notice 545), 5 July. Electronically available from http://www.info.gov.za/view/DownloadFileAction?id=169917 and/or http://www.dhet.gov.za/LinkClick.aspx?fileticket=RY4DaZ62eQU%3d&tabid=346&mid=1415

Disorganised and confusing connection of business needs with HE provision

Simon Roodhouse (2010: 26) concludes that “mechanisms to connect business needs with higher education provision are generally disorganised and confusing”. He starts the section of saying that “in higher education, workforce development is often referred to as work-based learning and is increasingly recognised as a field of study” (p. 24). He cites Costley’s (2001) observation that such work-based learning by higher education institutions incorporates “the learning people do, for, in and through work” (emphasis added) and quotes examples of longevity:

• Sandwich courses (academic study interspaced with work experience) and placements (elsewhere called (cooperative and work-integrated education) for longer than a century.
• Structured continuing professional development courses which recognise knowledge gained through work experience.
• Formalised accreditation of prior and experiential learning (APEL) processes.
• Familiarity of learning contracts as instruments in education.

Costley (2001, in Roodhouse 2010: 25) identify synonyms including “work based, work related, placement activities, elective modules, independent study, APEL, reach out, CPD, work based learning”. She further indicates that in most cases work based learning forms part of existing programmes at universities; and that learning outcomes and assessment criteria are embedded in the subject knowledge areas derived from scholarly activities and research.

The lack of sustained engagement of higher education in workforce development is difficult to conceptualise, observes Roodhouse (2010: 25) and highlights his observation with the following University Vocational Awards Council (2002):

We somehow seem to be incapable of learning from experience. Succeeding generations of employers are still marooned in tedious development project steering committees whose proceedings take place in academic jargon. Frustrated academics are still struggling to secure placements and projects with the very companies who are lambasting the quality of their graduates’ work readiness.

Roodhouse (2010: 25) speculates that it could also be “intellectual scepticism amongst the academic community, that employability which is associated with work-based learning is nothing more than a continuous conflict between individuals, market demands and fluctuations”.

Roodhouse, S. 2010. Defining and theorizing university work-based learning (21-27). In S Roodhouse & J Mumford. 2010. Understanding work-based learning. Surrey: Gower.

Three-prong implementation plan: Workplace learning and/or simulations

The point of departure ought to be the institutional Team Approach Framework to Curriculum and Learning Development (TAFCLD). This framework specifies with regard to both Step 1: Academic Review and/or Feasibility Study; and Step 2: Curriculum Planning; that the team involved ought to include occupational field representation. The inclusion of relevant industry; commerce; local, provincial and central government; relevant NGOs; relevant professional and/or vocational bodies; and potential employers is of particular importance should workplace learning be agreed upon as a curriculum requirement. The initial representation serves as spring board for further networking in order to secure sufficient workplace learning hosting partnerships.

Where to start procedures for cooperative and work-integrated education?

At collaboration! CWIE is about cooperative education and about integrating work in education. An educational institution cannot offer CWIE programmes in isolation. Partnerships/collaboration is essential.

Internationally, it is considered essential to work according to unambiguous standard operating procedures (SOPs) to maintain quality. A SOP is a “written procedure prescribed for repetitive use as a practice, in accordance with agreed upon specifications aimed at obtaining a desired outcome”.

Why integrate work experience in a learning programme? The South African Qualifications Authority (SAQA) defines a learning programme as “the sequential learning activities, associated with curriculum implementation, leading to the achievement of a particular qualification or part qualification”. The decision to include work experience in a learning programme is a curriculum decision—where curriculum “refers to all of the teaching and learning opportunities that take place in learning institutions including:

• purpose and values of the learning
• learning outcomes
• content, activities, methods, media
• teaching, learning strategies
• forms of assessment
• evaluation of delivery, moderation”

If workplace experience is considered necessary it is included. But who decided? Stakeholder representation in the decision making is essential for determining fitness of purpose. However, unless the perceived relevant workplace experience can be adequately replicated within the teaching delivery, partnerships with sufficient stakeholder hosts are an undeniable necessity.

The starting point for any qualification therefore is adequate stakeholder representation. If during such stakeholder deliberations about the curriculum of the qualification indicate that inclusion workplace learning is regarded necessary, then shared responsibility and stakeholder partnerships become a condition of the learning programme. This is how cooperative work-integrated education become part of the teaching strategy.

It is further important that the educational institution nurture and expand the stakeholder involvement and establish sufficient partnerships to have sufficient hosting opportunities for the credit-bearing curriculum part work experience.

The nature of the work experience; the learning content thereof; how the learning would be acquired; the methods of accumulation of evidence of such learning; and the assessment thereof forms part of the teaching and learning development that flows from the curriculum decision.

The methods of maintaining communication with stakeholders; the identification of students in need of placement; the facilitation of the selection by organisations as to which student/s will be hosted; the preparation of students for such selection; the placement procedures and contracting with host organisations; the monitoring of the required workplace experience and monitoring of the mentoring of the learning; the monitoring of formative assessment and the summative assessment of accomplishment; would all form part of the SOPs.

Work-integrated Learning Flowchart

The South African Department of Education (DoE) & the Higher Education Quality Committee (HEQC)  imperatives regarding work-integrated learning (WIL) includes:

§  An obligation to place students

§  Structured learning

§  Learning agreements

§  Communication between role players

§  Mentoring system / supervision

§  Monitoring / assessment system

§  Recording system

An institutional flowchart may be illustrated as such:

  

  

A found a more elaborate flowchart, including references to Unisa's WiL Policy, among documents Download Flowchart WIL Model

 

Classic, modern & postmodern internship models

Download Internship models

Learning through work facilitated online

Sara Bosley and David Young (2006: 357) remark that "LtW is designed for people who are in work and wish to study part-time for a full HE award or credit towards one". Their paper considers the two-way, one-to-one online dialogue between student and tutor. They mention the following five-category method of content analysis:

1. Participative - this category consider the number of messages and exchange of statements
2. Social - these are unrelated statements to the formal content, but necessary greetings and include expressions of feelings
3. Interactive - these are chained messages with regard to the contributions of other
4. Cognitive - this category comprise those knowledge related online learning processes such as asking questions, drawing inferences and presenting hypotheses
5. Meta-cognitive - these are skills and knowledge pertaining to the learning process itself

Bosley and Young (356) further present four online tutor roles, namely:

• Pedagogical - this roles involves questioning and feedback or advice
• Managerial - such as the coordination of assignments
• Social - spicing with humour, offering empathy and meta-cognition interactions
• Technical - this role entail user assistance

In addition to these online tutor roles Bosley and Young mention the importance of motivation, the facilitating of group interaction and encouraging online participation. They observe that there are five stages through which an online group need to progress in order to achieve a high-level of learning:

1. central are access and motivation of learners
2. socialisation online
3. information
4. knowledge construction
5. development

Fostering of a culture of enquiry is a important aspect of e-teaching. Little and Whitelock (in Bosley & Young) mention technical, administrative, organisational, supportive, encouraging and community-building roles.

Bosley and Young also highlight two key components of LtW, namely individual leaning contracting (ILC) and work-based projects.

Source

Bosley, S. & Young, D. 2006. Online learning dialogues in learning through work. The Journal of Workplace Learning, 18(6), 355-366