Change of address ....

 lydiaarnold.net has moved to http://lydiaarnold.wordpress.com

 10 areas for continued development in supporting work-based learning 

Thumbing the THES  I noticed a further call for HEI's to engage with work-based learning and innovative and creative ways. . Whilst Barnett, Leitch and Longhurst all call for WBL to be embraced for philosophically sound, and by now, well charted reasons, the challenges that underpin the expansion in WBL are rarely explored in gritty detail. The organisational change required to normalise WBL is vast. Whilst some institutions, no doubt, stand out as having superb integrated WBL provision, challenges for the mainstream are deep and wide ranging. 10 fundamental areas for change to support the sustainable development of WBL are: 

1. Pedagogy : From content driven to process driven. 

2. Intellectual property  : From possession to flows

3. Administration : From one size to flexible systems which track learners across bespoke routes to learning  

4. Technology : Systems that embrace access from the workplace, but that remain of high value, media embracing, eclectic hubs of human interaction. 

5. QA : Flexible and robust systems that work across traditional subject or even institutional boundaries. 

6. Collaborations : If learners on their individual journey's are to access courses, expertise and resources that are just right for their needs, cooperation and collaboration is needed between faculties, departments or even whole institutions, perhaps where relationships have been or remain in part competitive). 

7. Belief : If HE is to embrace WBL it needs to be seen to be genuinely valuable (beyond funding). 

8. Assessment : Authenticity for manageability, usefulness and knowledge flows (assessment may be a dialogue between the university and employers). 

9. Language : This is forming, but still terms do not always have shared meaning (which in turn can confuse 1-8).

10. Evaluative frameworks : Before considering if WBL is working, and where it could be improved, measures of success need to be formulated. 

 Types of work based learning : Brief overview 

 1. Negotiated content framed within existing process driven modules

Modules/awards are validated; the outcomes and content focus upon the processes of learning, for example modules may be around action research, action learning, communication, change management and reflection. Individual learners or small cohorts may then customise the programme without need for levels of further validation; this route allows individual and organisational needs and interests to be integrated to a programme.  Where content negotiation is done with individuals rather than employers, this form of WBL is particularly rich in meta-learning.

2. Negotiated content / bespoke provision

Modules are negotiated with learners whereby learning outcomes and content and processes are all determined by the learner or employee and their needs. One negotiated modules need to be validated through due process. The level of negotiation is higher than in 1. Now though, the employer engagement agenda is making this approach much more widespread.  The rise in this level of negotiation is causing universities to seek more efficient, speedy and rigorous routes for scalable systems of validation.

3. Negotiated combinations

Existing modules are selected and combined in particular combinations to serve an individual’s needs.  For some combinations approval may need to be bought for awards to be made, other ‘groupings’ may be pre-approved (for example, as the OU allows module combinations to cross subject domains).  Existing provision may occur through partnership arrangements with providers outside of the traditional HE configuration. Added flexibility here may through the addition of smaller credit courses in to the mix and through the use of APL or APEL.

Demand is clearly leading the drive for creative approaches in provision, this is no surprise in the knowledge economy (Barnett, 2000; Leitch 2006). To support these approaches to learning (not all new, but now needing to be scalable) change is happening, though not ubiquitously across HEI’s or within any given HEI. To support the knowledge revolution there are needing to be changes in structure and processes; changes in attitudes and values (re. the value of different forms of knowledge and ways of learning); changes in technology to support the decentralisation of knowledge; changes in teaching and learning strategies; and changes in the role of the academic. 

 A tension: peer review and patchwork (some of my own learning from treating data collected)

 Whilst peer review is a highly valued process (by students and facilitators alike) there is a danger of a contradiction occurring between this process and the original patchwork vision that the review seeks to serve. Winter’s original view was that peer review should help to refine understanding, that it should enable students to ‘come to know’ and to grow through their apprenticeship in their field, in effect the patch should represent a learning journey and should not claim mastery. It is also well charted that students are mainly highly motivated to develop their assessment products and that assessment is highly valued. The contradiction occurs because students have sometimes, in the experience of the BA LTR facilitation team, seen the perfection of the patch as the greatest priority, sometimes over and above the gains of learning. The mindset that sets the patch as perfection can be evidenced in the community; students post a draft, then a re-draft then more drafts for feedback. Ways in which this is being dealt with in practice include the limitation of facilitator review and the prioritisation of attention to dialogue around issues and concepts. Whilst the online community enables feedback at the convenience of the participants, it also means that feedback can be sought at will, a balance between the influencing forces of assessment and learning, mastery and apprenticeship, needs to be managed.

Challenges and benefits of the patchwork media approach as experienced by learners 

Emerging from recently collected data and the emerging analysis is a portrait of some of the benefits of operating a digital and media rich version of Winter's patchwork text approach. 

Benefits for learners

• The use of media to provide opportunities for seeing events and issues from other perspectives.
• Intrinsic enjoyment from using creative media
• The opportunity to develop technical skills and to become a critical user of technology
• The opportunity to use media native to the work setting
• The opportunity to articulate and develop understandings through considered asynchronous peer review
• The opportunity to share assessment products beyond he peer group (through the world wide web) and thus gain authentic feedback. 
• The opportunity to create assessment products in ways that are natural to an individual learning style.

Challenges for learners

• The need to develop strategies for managing the quantity and quality of review messages.
• Negotiating the use of media which is both creative, authentic to the workplace and helps to develop the learners technology use but that does not distract from the learning content/message. 
• Managing the balance between seeking to perform at a high level for assessment and accepting the apprenticeship mindset inherent to the patchwork process (particularly this means managing the number of times that feedback is sought). 
•  Finding creative solutions to enable the submission of new file types as they emerge.

 Back to research - data collection phase

Today I have published a questionnaire to researchers on the BA Learning Technology Research course to capture their experience of patchwork media, this is to inform some ongoing research that I am undertaking in this area. I always find it useful as a researcher, to fill in questionnaires or participate in other people's research for several reasons. Firstly, it allows me to sit on the other side of the fence and in my own mind to explore the design of the research instrument (was that the best way to ask? would a different form of question have been useful here or there?). Second, with the use of technology in data collection it is  also a good window on the tools of data collection. Third, in answering the questions of others I am able to recall areas of my practice and learning, that perhaps otherwise, may lay forgotten, it is useful to bring to mind ideas which others value for it helps us to realize the value of our experience. Also, the inputs made to other people's research can trigger moments of realisation about areas which I may further develop or research. With all the science and craftmanship of data collection, there is a huge reliance upon the will of other to involve. So I am crossing my fingers and hoping for the best now. 

 Evaluating work based learning

In thinking about how work-based learning should be evaluated, I considered a range of issues …

The evaluation design for WBL is determined by the purpose of the evaluation, is it for marketing, research or to inform the provision of teaching/learning opportunities, or is it to establish a cost-benefit analysis? It may be possible of course to use one data set for multiple purposes, and this may be reflected in the design.

Secondly, it may be seen that there are different agents acting as evaluators. Again this may be determined by the purpose. It may be academics seeking to improve, the employer, seeking value or specific delivery, or it may be an external body, for quality assessment or funded research. An additional evaluator of WBL, may be the learners themselves.

The learner as an evaluator of WBL can be built in to assessment design. For example …

Through the inclusion of reflective writing tasks or stitching in the patchwork approach, the learner is critically evaluating the effect of the learning on themselves, their knowledge base, skills and confidence for example.

Through the inclusion of specific learning activities, learners can critically reflect upon the achievement of standards. For example in asking learners to evaluate themselves against the graduate learning outcomes, they undertake self-evaluation, but in addition critical reflection there upon provides a learning opportunity and thereafter an assessment opportunity (on the academic qualities of the reflection).  In both the routine reflection and the task based reflection the learner is learning to take control of their learning and developing skills in evaluation and planning.

Through the inclusion of learning outcomes “Evaluate the impact of a major project, intervention or change “ the learner is evaluating the impact outside of themselves. They develop skills and knowledge around the assessment of impact. For example they may use theoretical models or evaluative frameworks.

The learner as evaluator is in keeping with the vision of the learner as taking control, engaging in meta learning and developing skills for a complex economy. 

More traditionally, the evaluation of WBL is upon (rather than by) learners and upon the employing organisation. In both instances studies by be momentary, providing a snapshot or they may be longitudinal. In both cases (whether evaluating impact upon learners or organisations) different forms of channels are identifiable. These can be labelled informal practice based evaluation, process driven evaluation or occasional evaluation.

I would tentatively suggest that the reaction time to evaluative feedback varies with each channel, being lower to the informal and higher to the occasional. Though perhaps practitioners need to 'listen harder' to hear the informal. 

In summary, evaluating work based learning requires a set of decisions which are represented below. 

Conceptualising reflection  in the workplace 

Here I have tried to conceptualise an overview of  reflection. Many texts discuss particular reflection models, but it is sometimes difficult to see how these it in to the wider work based learning family. Drawing action inquiry or action research, the big brother of reflection, in to this portrayal would surely make this more complex. For now though, a simple approach ... 

(informed by Tripp, 2003 & Korthagen, 2005)

 Some small actions for the improvement of facilitation

 At the end of another semester Shirley and I were sharing thoughts on our own strengths and weaknesses over the last twelve weeks/two modules. We believe, intuitively and based upon recent experiences, that a number of very small facilitation actions have worked rather well. We deliberately published the activities 'to do list' out of its natural sequence. Previously, the first module was at the top of the list whilst the second one always came down the list. 

-We believed that the second module was always under-prioritised as a result of this sense of it being constantly second in everyone's mind. By simply mixing up the list in this way (so the chronologically second module, appeared first) the sense of importance of the semesters second module is visually elevated. Simple.

- We have always (since the start of the BA LTR) had very motivated high achieving researchers. By a process of self selection (motivated learners returning to study) the calibre of researchers is high to start with. This reflects in the grades achieved. For the same reasons the researchers set themselves very high standards. It is sometimes painful then to watch researchers, who have achieved 'good' grades, reflecting negatively upon thier achievement. By emphasising the value of every grade, through words, tone and resources, I hope that this semester has seen a greater contentment when marks are achieved.

- Linked in with this expectation management  is in an attitudinal shift towards fail grades. Whilst staff will do all that is reasonable and more to enable researchers to pass, sometimes researchers fail to get a pass. By taking a reassuring and positive voice, we hope, enables these researchers to gain confidence by building upon their work, to then go on to pass. Time has taught us that a fail or two along the way is not perhaps as 'big' or damaging as it might feel at the time. This is particularly true in the first semester when there is so much getting to grips to be done with a return to study, it is also true for learners who have a lot going on in their wider lives (as parents, carers, employees or in other roles). As facilitators we have set out to promote  the sentiment that a fail may well mean 'nearly there'. It should not mean the end of the road or should be a source of disproportionate disappointment.

- Previously it has been normal for researchers receiving their grades to react in the learning online community. Often immediate post-result postings contain a statement of mark/grade and a reaction. Sometimes this resulted in high scorers suggesting displeasure, which in turn caused distress to lower scorers. Sometimes it resulted in immediate comments that with time might have been wiser to hold back. This semester, the announcement of marks came with the request that discussion of marks was refrained for 24hours. This cooling of period appears to have, it is tentatively suggested, caused more balanced comments upon the marks. Comment is constructive and supportive; the heat of the moment reaction has perhaps been reserved for the private realm rather than the communal.

- When we were getting the BA LTR course off the ground staff worked very long hours. Our sense of responsibility to researchers was often greater than our responsibility to sustain ourselves! This is not good. In a mutual pledge for different reasons, we decided this term to better manage our working hours. This is not only good for us, but we believe better for the researchers in learning to be self managed. In being clearer about our own availability and not, for example, routinely facilitating in the evenings, a false expectation of 24 hour service is not created and a more sustainable, serviceable course is created. This is essential is the BA LTR model is to be scalable.

 Planning assessment work

 A recurring observation for me when reading undergraduate work is that there is often a lack of planning present. There may well be lots of information, some interesting and valuable comments and some treatment of literature, but I am convinced that by offering more time to the planning process, students would both produce higher quality work and would feel more in control of their learning. 

In the production of each assessment product I would hope that everyone has read the resources thoroughly, considered the meaning of the learning outcome (asking what do I really  need to demonstrate) and the assessment criteria (asking what features does my work need to hit the level that I am aiming for?). Then draw up a list or a table of a chart or some tool to help you map out what the key elements of your assessment activity will be, even before putting pen to paper. Sometimes the planning stage can be lengthy but it helps to provide the building blocks of assignments so that when t pen is put to paper, the focus can be on the standard of writing, cohesiveness and conciseness. Without research it is impossible to tell how much planning and what methods are used, but I suspect planning techniques are under-utilised. 

Presently I am looking at collating some techniques in to an online workshop to encourage this practice. I'd be interested to hear from anyone who has had particular success (or disaster) using certain approaches to planning assessment work. 

 Graduation 

Yesterday - November 26th 2008 - it was a joy to finally get to meet the researchers who I have facilitated for three years, but never actually met, but most of who I felt I knew. It was a very strange feeling being in a room of 'friends' and not knowing which one was which, some of course I recognised from their pictures, or even from pictures of their families which have been shared along the way. Every award was deserved and in chatting to people through the day it seems the hardest challenges were  balancing the work, family and study. Seeing the researchers graduate makes the last three years of my working life feel absolutely purposeful and totally rewarding. And I hope colleagues past, who built the 'machine' of UV,  will feel the same. It was also wonderful to put a lid on my own studies alongside the people who have largely been at the heart of my own research. 

Fabulous !!!!! ! 

I hope current and future cohorts will be suitably inspired :-)

 The benefits of stitching.

Last week I met with colleagues to hear of eclectic approaches to assessment. It was delightful to witness plenty of impassioned discussion and a variety of approaches shared. Patchwork text approaches were considered at length.  It surprised me that there were various levels of emphasis upon the place of the ‘stitching’. From my own use of this approach with learners I perceive there to be three highly significant benefits of stitching together the ‘patches’.

Firstly, in the stitching the learner can capture the learning from the processes that have been undertaken in the patches. Much of the learning that occurs as we make the patches perhaps doesn't get captured in the activities submitted.  In the production of patches there may be a layer of learning in the process of production, for example learning about technology and digital pictures, how an online community can support a task, that your job has more tasks than you originally thought etc. This function is not to become an overspill for things that could have been said – it is NOT a catch-all.

Secondly is the place of stitching in articulating any learning about the process of learning. This is critical. If learners are to be lifelong learners and are to cope and prosper in times of change then they need the skills to be able to see, understand and develop their own learning process, to become expert learners.

Thirdly, stitching is an arena for learners to consolidate and assimilate their learning journey in to their own consciousness. In pausing to reflect, work based learners are able to articulate their own position. They are able to take a birds eye view of the steps taken in making the patches and to consider, alongside their real world selves any resulting changes in attitude, belief or practice for instance.