|
Stan Lester
Developments |
||||||
|
|
|||||||
Menu
|
Work-based
learning at higher education level It is now fairly
well-accepted that learning that takes place at, through and in response to
work can, if it meets the relevant criteria, be recognised towards academic
awards at any level. I have been
involved in work-based learning developments at university level since the
late 1990s, from approaches driven by individual contexts and aspirations
such as negotiated work-based programmes and practitioner doctorates through
to more curriculum-driven models such as Degree Apprenticeships. ‘Work-based’ or
‘Work-integrated’? Work-based learning
(WBL) has been described as “all and any learning that is situated in the workplace
or arises directly out of workplace concerns” (Lester and Costley 2010). Only a small proportion of this is related
to higher education, but programmes can be created around WBL whether it is
learning ‘in the flow of work’ or more planned learning in response to work
concerns. Work-integrated
learning (WIL) can be described as “approaches and strategies that integrate
theory with the practice of work within a purposefully defined curriculum”
(Patrick et al 2008). WIL
therefore starts with a predefined programme and generally uses work
placements, internships or an on-and-off-job training programme so that the
content is partly learned in the workplace.
Integrated
programmes such as Degree Apprenticeships have features of both WIL and WBL,
but I argue in this paper that they need to be
conceptualised slightly differently as integrated professional development,
or perhaps ‘learning-integrated work’. Degree Apprenticeships and integrated professional
programmes Degree
Apprenticeships (DAs) were officially introduced in the UK in 2015, although
some pre-existing programmes followed similar principles. The basic premise of a DA is that it
involves studying for a bachelor’s or master’s degree alongside full-time
employment, typically in a training post.
There is growing recognition that the most effective approaches
involve close integration of academic and practical learning and make effective
use of digital media rather than using the ‘parallel but disconnected’ format
familiar from day- and block-release courses.
The most popular DAs are currently management, engineering,
information and communications technology, nursing and policing. DAs and other higher-level apprenticeships
are also are forming minority entry routes in many other professions
including accountancy, law, surveying, medicine and architecture. I have worked on
several projects concerned with Degree Apprenticeships including leading a
review for QAA of work-integrated degrees, the Edge Foundation funded study
into sustaining degree apprenticeships, reviews led by Middlesex University,
and with UVAC to extend the government-funded Apprenticeship Workforce
Development Programme into higher education. ► Assessment
issues in integrated professional development, UVAC (2024) ► Beyond Degree Apprenticeships: conceptualising
integrated professional development, UVAC (2024) ► Sustainable Degree Apprenticeships (report
for the Edge Foundation by Stan Lester and Darryll Bravenboer, 2020) ► “Creating conditions for sustainable Degree Apprenticeships
in England”, Higher
Education, Skills and Work-based Learning (2020) ► “Degree apprenticeships are far from fake”,
opinion piece in People Management (2020) ► Work-integrated
degrees: context, engagement, practice and quality
(report for QAA 2016) ► “Towards an integrated approach to professional competence
and academic qualification”
(Bravenboer & Lester), Education
+ Training (2016). Negotiated work-based learning Negotiated
work-based learning involves individuals or groups working with university
tutors to design a programme around their existing experience, current work
and future aims. Programmes can draw
on existing or newly-designed university courses (including digital and peer
learning modules), make use of activities such as action learning, coaching
and mentoring, or be based on individual learning from or connected to work
activities; many include a mix of different kinds of activity. Negotiated programmes can vary from a small
piece of work that leads to an undergraduate certificate through to master’s
degrees and doctorates. Work-based
learning can pose a challenge to traditional university structures and ways
of working; as I argued over 20 years
ago in a short article (below) it requires a realisation or partnership
approach to working rather than the more usual concern with delivery. The intensive nature of this kind of
provision has tended to mean that universities have focused most strongly on
groups of learners from single employers or professions rather than fully
individually-negotiated programmes.
Individual programmes have fallen off in recent years and learners
have often been directed towards Degree Apprenticeships; the introduction of
lifelong learning loans may help revive this innovative and effective form of
higher education. In 1998-2001 I
worked on the Ufi-Learndirect Learning through Work programme which
provided a set of principles, a web-based gateway, and an extensive range of
learning resources for people in work to apply to, and negotiate programmes
with, several participating universities from across the UK. More recently I have worked on several
projects with Middlesex University to research and contribute to aspects of
work-based learning, including the use of learning agreements, work-based
projects and the use of mobile devices for workplace learning. ► “Reconsidering negotiated work-based learning in the digital
age”, summary conference
paper (2022). ► “A qualification system fit for adults? Revisiting some
ideas from the University for Industry”, Higher Education,
Skills and Work-based Learning (2015) ► “Work-based learning at higher education level” (Lester & Costley), Studies in
Higher Education (2010) ► “Negotiated work-based learning: from delivery to
realisation,” Capability (2002). Practitioner doctorates The principles of
negotiated work-based learning were extended to doctoral level in the late
1990s, and several universities now offer what can be termed work-based or
practitioner doctorates (often designated DProf). Work-based doctorates differ from
conventional PhDs in that they focus on high-level practical issues facing
the doctoral candidate rather than on research problems in an academic
discipline, and they can emphasise development and change as much as
research. They also differ from
conventional professional doctorates in not being limited to a specific
field, and (typically) not including a taught component other than in
relation to research and development.
Candidates are often already experts in their fields and are looking
to develop and communicate innovative practical solutions rather than
necessarily contribute to a body of research;
if the PhD is characterised by making an original contribution to
knowledge, the DProf can be described as making an original contribution to
practice. In turn this has
implications for the relationship between candidates and academics, as the
latter need to act more as advisors and mentors than as expert supervisors. I completed my own
DProf, in professional accreditation, at Middlesex University in 2002. Since then I have worked on the development
of the DProf at Middlesex, principally with Professor Carol
Costley, and contributed to the theory of and research on practitioner
doctorates through several papers, short studies and conference
presentations. ► “Practice as Research: developing the workplace project”, book chapter (2016) ► “Work-based doctorates: professional extension at the
highest levels” (Costley
& Lester), Studies in Higher Education (2012) ► “Creating original knowledge in and for the workplace”, Studies in Continuing Education
(2012) ► “Conceptualising the practitioner doctorate", Studies in Higher Education
(2004). ©
Stan Lester 2023 |
||||||
