Advertisement

Integration of Learning in Educational Institutions and Workplaces: An Australian Case Study

  • Sarojni ChoyEmail author
Chapter
Part of the Technical and Vocational Education and Training: Issues, Concerns and Prospects book series (TVET, volume 29)

Abstract

How comprehensively learners make connections between what is taught in educational institutions and in the workplace has significance for developing competencies as productive workers. However, connectivity of learning in the two sites has been problematic for some time (Akkerman SF, Bakker A, Vocat Learn, 5:153–173, 2012; Fuller and Unwin 2011). Sappa and Aprea (Vocat Learn, 7(3):263–287, 2014) contend that shared conceptions of connectivity by key stakeholders such as learners (students/apprentices/workers), teachers, managers, supervisors, trainers and training coordinators lead to better outcomes for work-integrated learning.

This chapter reports on the findings from an Australian case study on how vocational education and training (VET) students, teachers and managers/coordinators conceptualise connectivity between what is learnt in educational institutions and workplaces. The study focused on two main questions: (i) How do key actors in the Australian VET system (VET students, teachers, trainers and managers/coordinators of training) conceptualise vocational learning and teaching across VET institutions and workplaces? (ii) What are the implications of their conceptions for connectivity of the VET curriculum? Participants engaged in semi-structured interviews. Their responses were analysed using the phenomenographic method (Marton F, Booth S, Learning and awareness. Lawrence Erlbaum, Hillsdale, 1997; Åkerlind GS, Phenomenographic methods: A case illustration. In Bowden JA, Green P (eds) Doing phenomenography (pp. 103–127). RMIT University Press, Melbourne, 2005a, High Educ Res Develop, 24(4):321–334; Paakkari L, Tynjälä P, Kannas L, Stud High Educ, 35(8):905–920). The study found four dominant conceptions of connectivity with structural and referential variations.

Keywords

Phenomenography Vocational education Workplace learning Integrated learning Learning in context Integration of experiences 

Notes

Acknowledgement

This work was supported by Griffith Institute of Educational Research, Griffith University, Australia, and Swiss Research Foundation, SNF, Switzerland [IZK0Z1_160410/1]. The contributions by Dr. Viviana Sappa from the Swiss Research Foundation to the research project are duly acknowledged.

References

  1. Aarkrog, V. (2005). Learning in the workplace and the significance of school-based education: A study of learning in a Danish vocational education and training programme. International Journal of Lifelong Education, 24(2), 137–147.  https://doi.org/10.1080/02601370500056268.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Achtenhagen, F., & Grubb, N. W. (2001). Vocational and occupational education: Pedagogical complexity, institutional diversity. In V. Richardson (Ed.), Handbook of research on teaching (pp. 604–639). Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association.Google Scholar
  3. Åkerlind, G. S. (2005a). Phenomenographic methods: A case illustration. In J. A. Bowden & P. Green (Eds.), Doing phenomenography (pp. 103–127). Melbourne: RMIT University Press.Google Scholar
  4. Åkerlind, G. S. (2005b). Variation and commonality in phenomenographic research methods. Higher Education Research and Development, 24(4), 321–334.  https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2011.642845.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Akkerman, S. F., & Bakker, A. (2012). Crossing boundaries between school and work during apprenticeships. Vocations and Learning, 5, 153–173.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s12186-011-9073-6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Baartman, L. K. J., & Bruijn, E. (2011). Integrating knowledge, skills and attitudes: Conceptualising learning processes towards vocational competence. Educational Research Review, 6, 125–134.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bailey, T. R., Hughes, K. L., et al. (2004). Working knowledge: Work-based learning and educational reform. New York: Routledge Falmer.Google Scholar
  8. Billett, S. (2001). Learning throughout working life: Activities and interdependencies. Studies in Continuing Education, 23(1), 19–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Billett, S. (2006). Constituting the workplace curriculum. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 38(1), 31–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Billett, S. (2009). Realising the educational worth of integrating work experiences in higher education. Studies in Higher Education, 34(7), 827–843.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Billett, S. (2011). Curriculum and pedagogic bases for effectively integrating practice-based experiences. Sydney: Australian Learning and Teaching Council.Google Scholar
  12. Billett, S. (2014). Integrating learning experiences across tertiary education and practice settings: A sociopersonal account. Educational Research Review, 12, 1–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Billett, S., & Choy, S. (2012). Emerging perspectives of and challenges for workplace learning. In J. Higgs, R. Barnett, S. Billett, M. Hutchings, & F. Trede (Eds.), Practice-based education: Perspectives and strategies (pp. 145–160). Rotterdam: Sense Publishing.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Billett, S., & Choy, S. (2014). Integrating professional learning experiences across university and practice settings. In S. Billett, C. Harteis, & H. Gruber (Eds.), International handbook of research in professional and practice-based learning (pp. 485–512). Dordrecht: Springer.Google Scholar
  15. Choy, S., & Sappa, V. (2016). Australian stakeholders’ conceptions of connecting vocational learning at TAFE and workplaces. International Journal of Training Research, 14(2), 88–103.  https://doi.org/10.1080/14480220.2016.1200237.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Clara, M., & Barbera, E. (2013). Three problems with the connectivist conception of learning. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 30, 197–206.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Claxton, G. (2000). The anatomy of intuition. In T. Atkinson & G. Claxton (Eds.), The intuitive practitioner. ON the value of not always knowing what one is doing (pp. 32–52). Buckingham: Open University Press.Google Scholar
  18. Collin, K. (2002). Development engineers’ conceptions of learning at work. Studies in Continuing Education, 24(2), 133–152.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Collin, K., & Tynjälä, P. (2003). Integrating theory and practice? Employees’ and students’ experiences of learning at work. Journal of Workplace Learning, 15(7/8), 338–344.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Ellstrom, P. (2001). Integrating learning and work: Problems and prospects. Human Resource Development Quarterly, Winter, 12(4), 421–435.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Eraut, M. (2004). Transfer of learning between education and workplace settings. In A. F. Rainbird & H. Munro (Eds.), Workplace learning in context (pp. 201–221). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  22. Eraut, M. (2008). Using research into how professional learn at work for enhancing placement learning. WACE/ACEN Asia Pacific Conference E- Proceedings (pp. 148–154).Google Scholar
  23. Fuller, A., & Unwin, L. (2003). Learning as apprentices in the contemporary UK workplace: Creating and managing expansive and restrictive participation. Journal of Education and Work, 16, 407–426.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Fuller, A., & Unwin, L. (2011). Apprenticeship as an evolving model of learning. Journal of Vocational Education and Training, 63(3), 261–266.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Griffith, T., & Guile, D. (2003). A connective model of learning: The implications for work process knowledge. European Educational Research Journal, 2, 56–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Harris, R., Willis, P., Simons, M., & Collins, E. (2001). The relative contributions of institutional and workplace learning environments: An analysis of apprenticeships training. Journal of Education and Training, 53(2), 263–278.Google Scholar
  27. Karmel, B., & Knight, B. (2011). Overview of the Australian apprenticeship and traineeship system. Adelaide: National Centre of Vocational Education Research.Google Scholar
  28. Kira, M. (2010). Routine-generating and regenerative workplace learning. Vocations and Learning, 3(1), 71–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Marton, F., & Booth, S. (1997). Learning and awareness. Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  30. Miller, P. (2003). Workplace learning by action learning: a practical example. Journal of Workplace Learning, 15(1), 14–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Nickolaus, R., Knoll, B., & Gschwendtner, T. (2007). Innovations in vocational education and difficulties in their empirical substantiation. European Journal of Vocational Training, 40, 22–37.Google Scholar
  32. Paakkari, L., Tynjälä, P., & Kannas, L. (2011). Student teachers’ ways of experiencing the teaching of health education. Studies in Higher Education, 35(8), 905–920.  https://doi.org/10.1080/03075070903383229.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Print, M. (1993). Curriculum development and design (2nd ed.). Sydney: Allen & Unwin.Google Scholar
  34. Sappa, V., & Aprea, C. (2014). Conceptions of connectivity: How Swiss teachers, trainers and apprentices perceive vocational learning and teaching across different learning sites. Vocations and Learning, 7(3), 263–287.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Schaap, H., Baartman, L., & de Bruijn, E. (2012). Students’ learning processes during school-based learning and workplace learning in vocational education: A review. Vocations and Learning, 5, 99–117.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s12186-011-9069-2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Svensson, L., Ellstrom, P., & Åberg, C. (2004). Integration formal and informal learning at work. The Journal of Workplace Learning, 16(8), 479–491.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Swanwick, S., & Morris, C. (2010). Shifting conceptions of learning in the workplace. Medical Education, 44, 538–539.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of Education and Professional StudiesGriffith UniversityBrisbaneAustralia

Personalised recommendations