Planning Learning Activities

  • Franziska TredeEmail author
  • Lina Markauskaite
  • Celina McEwen
  • Susie Macfarlane
Part of the Understanding Teaching-Learning Practice book series (UTLP)


Planning learning activities prepares students to make the most of workplace learning (WPL). Planning can have the greatest impact on learning because it occurs ahead of time to help students focus on what they would like to achieve, what to expect and how to engage in the workplace (Stirling, Kerr, Banwell, MacPherson, and Heron, 2016). Planning learning activities to harness the affordances of mobile technology in and for WPL requires a collaborative approach that involves academic staff, students and workplace educators. With this chapter, we discuss learning design principles that can help educators and learners decide what can productively be designed ahead of time. We provide a set of activities for educators and students to help them plan for the kinds of opportunities students will have and challenges they will face using mobile technology for WPL. We also suggest approaches to planning these activities that will strengthen students’ critical digital literacy, ‘epistemic fluency’, professional agency and capacity for lifelong learning.


  1. Attwell, G. (2010). Work-based mobile learning environments: Contributing to a socio-cultural ecology of mobile learning. International Journal of Mobile and Blended Learning (IJMBL), 2(4), 19–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Beetham, H., & Sharpe, R. (2013). Rethinking pedagogy for a digital age: Designing for 21st century learning. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  3. Billett, S. (2002). Toward a workplace pedagogy. Adult Education Quarterly, 53(1), 27–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Billett, S. (2009). Realising the educational worth of integrating work experiences in higher education. Studies in Higher Education, 34(7), 827–843.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Billett, S. (2010). Learning through practice: Models, traditions, orientations and approaches. Dordrecht: Springer.Google Scholar
  6. Billett, S. (2011). Subjectivity, self and personal agency in learning through and for work. In M. Mallock, L. Cairns, K. Evans, & B.N. O'Connor (Eds.), The SAGE Handbook on Workplace Learning (pp. 60–72). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  7. Bovill, C., & Bulley, C. J. (2011). A model of active student participation in curriculum design: Exploring desirability and possibility. In C. Rust (Ed.), Improving student learning: Global theories and local practices: Institutional, disciplinary and cultural variations (pp. 176–188). Oxford: The Oxford Centre for Staff and Educational Development.Google Scholar
  8. Cameron, C. (2017). The strategic and legal risks of work-integrated learning: An enterprise risk management perspective. Asia-Pacific Journal of Cooperative Education, 18(3), 243–256.Google Scholar
  9. Dall’Alba, Gloria (2018). Evaluative judgement for learning to be in a digital world. In D. Boud, R. Ajjawi, P. Dawson, & J. Tai (Eds.), Developing evaluative judgement in higher education: assessment for knowing and producing quality work (pp. 18–27). Abingdon, Oxon, United Kingdom: RoutledgeGoogle Scholar
  10. Dimitriadis, Y., & Goodyear, P. (2013). Forward-oriented design for learning: Illustrating the approach. Research in Learning Technology, 21. [online].
  11. Ellström, P.-E. (1997). The many meanings of occupational competence and qualification. Journal of European Industrial Training, 21(6/7): 266–274. Scholar
  12. Fuller, R., & Joynes, V. (2015). Should mobile learning be compulsory for preparing students for learning in the workplace? British Journal of Educational Technology, 46(1), 153–158.Google Scholar
  13. Goodyear, P. (2005). Educational design and networked learning: Patterns, pattern languages and design practice. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 21(1), 82–101.Google Scholar
  14. Goodyear, P., & Dimitriadis, Y. (2013). In media res: Reframing design for learning. Research in Learning Technology, 21. [online].
  15. Goodyear, P., & Ellis, R. (2017). Students’ interpretations of learning tasks: Implications for educational design. In Proceedings ASCILITE Conference, Singapore (pp. 339–346).Google Scholar
  16. Hardyman, W., Bullock, A., Brown, A., Carter-Ingram, S., & Stacey, M. (2013). Mobile technology supporting trainee doctors’ workplace learning and patient care: an evaluation. BMC Medical Education, 13(1), 6.Google Scholar
  17. Howe, A., Smajdor, A., & Stöckl, A. (2012). Towards an understanding of resilience and its relevance to medical training. Medical education, 46(4), 349–356.Google Scholar
  18. Hsu, Y. C., & Ching, Y. H. (2015). A review of models and frameworks for designing mobile learning experiences and environments. Canadian Journal of Learning & Technology, 41(3).Google Scholar
  19. Kalantzis, M., & Cope, B. (2005). Learning by design. Common Ground.Google Scholar
  20. Katz, J. E., & Aakhus, M. (2002). Conclusion: Making meaning of mobiles—A theory of Apparatgeist. In J. E. Katz & M. Aakhus (Eds.), Perpetual contact—Mobile communications, private talk, public performance. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  21. Koehler, M. J., & Mishra, P. (2005). What happens when teachers design educational technology? The development of technological pedagogical content knowledge. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 32(2), 131–152.Google Scholar
  22. Kukulska-Hulme, A., & Traxler, J. (2007). Designing for mobile and wireless learning. In H. Beetham & R. Sharpe (Eds.), Rethinking pedagogy for a digital age: Designing and delivering e-learning (pp. 180–192). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  23. Littlejohn, A., Beetham, H., & McGill, L. (2012). Learning at the digital frontier: A review of digital literacies in theory and practice. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 28(6), 547–556.Google Scholar
  24. Markauskaite, L., & Goodyear, P. (2017). Epistemic fluency and professional education: Innovation, knowledgeable action and actionable knowledge. Dordrecht: Springer.Google Scholar
  25. Mayer, R. E., Moreno, R., Boire, M., & Vagge, S. (1999). Maximizing constructivist learning from multimedia communications by minimizing cognitive load. Journal of Educational Psychology, 91(4), 638–643.Google Scholar
  26. Oakes, L., Townley, B., & Cooper, D. (1998). Business Planning as pedagogy: Language and control in a changing institutional field. Administrative Science Quarterly, 43, 257–292.Google Scholar
  27. Richards, J., Sweet, L. P., & Billett, S. (2013). Preparing medical students as agentic learners through enhancing student engagement in clinical education. Asia-Pacific Journal of Cooperative Education, 14(4), 251–263.Google Scholar
  28. Stirling, A., Kerr, G., Banwell, J., MacPherson, E., & Heron, A. (2016). A practical guide for Work-integrated learning: effective practices to enhance the educational quality of structured work experiences offered through colleges and universities, Higher Education Quality Council of Ontario. Retrieved December 17, 2018, from
  29. Traxler, J. (2007). Defining, discussing, and evaluating mobile learning: The moving finger writes and having writ…. International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 8(2).Google Scholar
  30. Trede, F. & McEwen, C. (2012). Developing a critical professional identity: Engaging self in practice. In J. Higgs, R. Barnett, S. Billett, M. Hutchings, & F. Trede (Eds.), Practice-based education: Perspectives and strategies (pp. 27–40). Rotterdam, The Netherlands: Sense.Google Scholar
  31. Trede, F., & McEwen, C. (2016). Carving out the territory for educating the deliberate professional. In F. Trede & C. McEwen (Eds.), Educating the deliberate professional (pp. 15–28). Dordrecht: Springer.Google Scholar
  32. Walker, M. (2005). Higher education pedagogies: A capabilities approach. Maidenhead, UK: Open University Press.Google Scholar
  33. Watts, A. G. (2006). Career development learning and employability. Heslington York: The Higher Education Academy.Google Scholar
  34. Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of practice: Learning, meaning, and identity. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Franziska Trede
    • 1
    Email author
  • Lina Markauskaite
    • 2
  • Celina McEwen
    • 1
  • Susie Macfarlane
    • 3
  1. 1.University of Technology SydneyUltimoAustralia
  2. 2.The University of SydneySydneyAustralia
  3. 3.Deakin UniversityBurwood, MelbourneAustralia

Personalised recommendations