PROJECT 9 FINAL REPORT TO THE SOUTH AFRICAN TECHNOLOGY

NETWORKFunding workplace learning at Universities

of Technology9th June 2014

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: SATN PROJECT 9

A funding framework for WPL at universities of technology in SouthAfrica

1. Introduction1.1 Project aimsThe aim was the development of a funding framework for work-integratedlearning (WIL) at universities of technology in South Africa.

1.2 Delimitation of focusThe focus of this report is delimited to workplace learning (WPL) in engineering (or engineering-type) programmes.

2. Methodology of the report2.1 Methodology for the benchmarking exercise100 universities of technology (or similar institutions) were surveyedinternationally; a meta-analysis of the data obtained from engineeringprogramme websites (as well as follow-up e-mails) was done. This is referred to as the 100 Universities of Technology Survey (100UTS).

2.2 Methodology for the questionnaireA survey instrument was designed (through a process of feedback and inputs), it was piloted at two sites, and further changes were made, before implementation.

2.3 Methodology for the institutional funding reportsInstitutions were requested to submit brief reports on the funding of WIL; data from the reports was compared.

4. FindingsThree sets of findings are reported.

4.1 Findings: benchmarking of WPL funding (nationally and internationally)Findings include: 1) variation in WPL by frequency of provision, type and level of qualification; 2) WPL in diplomas is practice-based, WPL in degrees is both practice- and research-based; 3) there are different types of practice-based and research-based WPL; 4) the

2

frequency of WPL provision level and type is varied; 5) work ‘experience’ (i.e., work without academically assessed relevant programme outcomes) is generally not accredited in programmes; 6) The duration times of WPL varies and is not related to credit value; 7) practice-based WPL has low credit values; research-based WPL has high credit values; 8) there are different ways of funding WPL; 9) practice-based WPL is resource-intensive; and 10) the resources for research-based WPL vary according to project.

4.2 Findings: questionnairesThere is a rich diversity of WPL practices covering a wide variety of WPL types at South African universities of technology; the duration and credit value given to WPL (particularly in National Diplomas) is too high by international benchmarks and should be re-considered in the light of new qualifications. The costs of WIL tended to be under-estimated by questionnaire respondents.

4.3 Findings: institutional WIL reportsThe institutional reports varied in estimated costs per student of WPL(from R3,500 – R10,500). Given that the institutional reports did not include many of the ‘hidden costs’ of WPL the higher estimate is likely to be more accurate.

5. Synthesis of findings from the 100 UTS, WIL questionnaire and institutional WIL reports

While there are many similarities between WPL in South African universities of technology, there a number of practices that cannot bebenchmarked internationally. No ‘dominant’ form of workplace learningemerged from the survey: forms of workplace learning are discipline- or programme-specific. It would thus appear that a generic approach towork placements would not be appropriate, but rather that each programme should benchmark its work placement practices internationally.

6. Towards a funding framework for WPL.

Universities of technology should build on the rich diversity of WPL types, particularly when completing CHE templates; it is also necessary to pay attention to international benchmarks. The ‘hidden costs’ of WPL that were typically not reported on are precisely those elements that are core to high quality WPL provision (e.g., mentoring,

3

supervision, monitoring, assessment and moderation). It is these that are key elements in the funding framework for WPL.

7. Recommendations

General recommendations include the following: 1) qualifications should be benchmarked internationally for the particular programme, level and discipline or field; 2) Notional learning hours for WPL should be less than (±50%) those awarded to ‘academic’ or classroom-based subjects (with the exception of research-based WPL); 3) the type of the work placement (observation-based, practice-based, research-based, service-based, etc.) should also be benchmarked internationally for the particular programme and discipline or field; 4) the duration of the work placement (short placement, site visit, job-shadowing, rotational placement, etc.) should also be benchmarked internationally for the particular programme and discipline or field; 5) the credit value, type and duration of the work placement should bebenchmarked against best practices at the particular level (e.g., certificate, diploma, advanced diploma, degree, etc.) in the discipline or field; 5) there should be a more systematic approach to identifying relevant and significant employers (e.g., through consultation with SAGRA); 7) work placements should be considered as apossible elective in a programme offering a variety of electives (in cases where this might be appropriate); 8) the payment of students should be given special attention in the planning of WPL (particularlyin new qualifications with shorter work-placements where payment mightnot be appropriate) and 9) each programme needs to make a strong case for an appropriate credit value, type and duration of the work placement(s) at particular levels for particular programmes in particular disciplines or fields.

4

TABLE OF CONTENTSSection

Page

1. Introduction 1

1.1 Project aims 1

1.2 Delimitation of focus 1

2. Methodology of the report 2

2.1 Methodology for the benchmarking exercise 2

2.2 Methodology for the questionnaire 2

2.3 Methodology for the institutional funding reports 2

3. Findings 3

3.1 Findings: benchmarking of WIL funding (100 UTS) 3

3.2 Findings: questionnaires 15

3.3 Findings: institutional WIL reports 18

4. Synthesis of findings from the 100 UTS, WIL questionnaire and WIL reports

20

4.1 Comparison: 100 UTS and questionnaire data 21

4.2 100 UTS, questionnaires and institutional reports: WIL activities that require funding

21

5. Towards a funding framework for WIL 22

5.1 Aligning WPL with the HEQSF 22

5.2 Providing detailed descriptions of workplace learning 23

5.3 Suggested resources for a realist approach to curriculum revision and development

26

5.4 The cost of WPL 26

6. Recommendations 30

7. Acknowledgements 31

5

8. References 31

Appendix 1: 100UTS 36

Appendix 2: sample questionnaire 42

6

1. Introduction

1.1 Project aimThe aim of Project 9 was the development of a funding framework for work-integrated learning (WIL) within HEQSF-aligned programmes at universities of technology in South Africa. 1.2 Delimitation of focus

Delimitation 1: workplace learning (WPL)WIL is a very broad descriptor covering considerable curricular, pedagogical and assessment varieties within advanced technical and professional education programmes. The more classroom-based approaches, such as implementing problem-oriented learning, for example, do not generally affect programme funding. The same could be said about most classroom-oriented curricular and pedagogic modalities1. Funding does become a concern when there are workplace-oriented curricular and pedagogic modalities, such as project-based learning and workplace learning (See Figure 1, below).

Classroom-based WIL Workplace-learning

Guest lecturers from profession/industry, lecturer visits to professional practice/industry, problem-based learning, research-based learning, etc.

Site visits, supervised workplacelearning, workplace projects (e.g., service learning), collaborative research partnerships (e.g., for M and D studies), etc.

These modalities do not generally require dedicated or additional funding (although they might need some additional support,

These modalities do generally require dedicated funding.

1 The exception is simulated and virtual learning; simulators for technical programmes (particularly in the medical and health sciences) can be extremely expensive. In engineering, for example, some simulation tools are Open Source,e.g., iVerilog (simulator for Hardware Description Language (HDL) used in VeryLarge System Integration (VLSI) for computer chip design; while others, e.g., MatLab (modelling of digital signal processing routines) and Simulink (modelling and simulating control of systems) entail expensive site licence fees.

1

e.g., transport, accommodation, honoraria.)

Figure 1: Forms of WIL that require dedicated or additional funding

For the reasons explained above, the report was delimited to the funding of WPL.

Delimitation 2: engineering (and engineering-type programmes)Once the benchmarking survey was underway, it began it became evident that most of the technical universities, institutes of technology, universities of technology and polytechnics that were surveyed globally have a focus on engineering programmes, and in some cases they focus on specialist engineering programmes (e.g., mining, marine engineering, etc.) While several such institutions also offer programmes in the health sciences, business, design, the arts and social sciences, engineering programmes tend to be the main focus or the ‘flagship’ programmes of the institutions surveyed. Following fromthis, it was felt that a focus on engineering would offer a logical basis for the benchmarking comparison in that one is comparing apples with apples (engineering programmes with engineering programmes) rather than apples with pears (engineering programmes with business programmes). For this reason, the survey is additionally delimited to the funding of WPL within engineering programmes. The focus on engineering was not adhered to in the questionnaire or institutional reports, thus health science, business or design programmes, were included.

2. Methodology of the report

Three methodological approaches were used for this report: 1) a meta-analysis was used for benchmarking in the 100 UTS, 2) questionnaire data and a statistical analysis of the data was used for the survey ofWIL practices in the South African universities of technology, and 3) a comparative analysis of the institutional reports was made.

2.1 Methodology for the benchmarking exerciseApproximately 100 technical universities, institutes of technology, universities of technology and polytechnics were surveyed globally. The benchmarking excise is thus referred to as the ‘100 UoT survey’ (100 UTS). The 100 UTS includes established and new institutions, urban and rural institutions, and institutions in developed countries and in developing countries. Information on the engineering programmeswas obtained from the institution’s website, from articles and/or

2

reports on the engineering programmes’ WPL activities, and correspondence with the WIL/WPL office, in cases where such an office existed. Outstanding information is indicated by a question mark (‘?’)in the database.

The database captures the following information: country, institution name, the level of engineering programmes offered (i.e., certificate, diploma, degree, Masters, doctorate), the type of WPL offered (e.g., site visits, supervised placements, workplace projects, collaborative research), the type of support and/or resources provided (e.g., pre-placement counselling, placement processes, academic supervision, workplace supervision, external assessment or examination, debriefing processes, and logistical expenses, i.e., whether or not students are paid a salary and how transport and accommodation costs are arranged),and the source of funding (where this information is available).

2.2 Methodology for the questionnaireAn on-line survey instrument was designed through a process of feedback and inputs from the universities (see Appendix 2). The instrument was piloted at two sites, and further changes were made, before implementation. The ‘commercial’ version of ‘Survey Monkey’ (inanticipation of large numbers of respondents) was used to capture the data. All institutional representatives were sent the questionnaire on-line form link. The link remained active for approximately three months, after which it was closed and the data was statistically analysed.

2.3 Methodology for the institutional funding reportsA number of gaps were identified in the questionnaire data and institutions were requested to submit brief reports on the funding of WIL in their institutions. That data from the reports was then systematically compared.

3. Findings

The findings of the three studies (i.e., the 100 UTS, questionnaires and reports) are presented below.

3.1 Findings from the benchmarking survey (100 UTS)

3

Finding 1: frequency of provision by type and level of qualificationThe 100 UTS revealed considerable variation in the nature and level ofprovision in engineering-oriented universities Well established technical universities such as the Technische Universität Muchen in Germany, the Paris Institute of Technology, the University of Technology Sydney, the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, etc. are fully fledged universities, with the authority to confer doctoral degrees. Some universities are on a development trajectory, such as the Dublin Institute of Technology that offers degrees up to Master’s level underits own authority, but offers doctoral degrees in association with theUniversity of Dublin, Trinity College (it is expected to confer its own doctoral degrees soon). In some cases, polytechnics are fully fledged universities (as in Finland), in other cases, they tend to be institutions that operate half-way between FET colleges and universities, such as the polytechnics in India that offer diplomas that provide lateral articulation with university degrees.

In several cases, there are variations within the broad university of technology sector in the same country, and the level of the educational provision is related to the institutional type. For example, in France there are very clear differences between the instituts de technologie grands écoles (that have full university status), the universitiestechnologiques/institutes universitaires de technologie (that have part-university status up to Masters’ level), and the écoles polytechniques (that offer diplomas and undergraduate bachelor’s degrees). This system has been duplicated in many Francophone countries (e.g., Algeria, Canada, Tunisia). A similar variation is found in Germany where the Fachhochschule (established in the 1970s) grant bachelor’s and Master’s degrees. (The Fachhochschule offer a wide variety of programmes; in addition to engineering, they also offer programmes in the social sciences, health sciences, business, design). The German Technische Universität, on the other hand, tends to have a specialist engineering-type focus (with some exceptions). There are 17 technical universitiesin Germany, all of which have full university status; nine Technische Universität are considered to be highly prestigious and have formed theirown technology network, known as TU9. In other countries, such as

4

Australia, these differences in provision are not as clear, and there are universities, not officially designated as university of technology that offer university of technology -type qualifications.

Table 1: Frequency of provision by level of qualificationLevel of qualification

Certificate Diploma Bachelor’s Master’s Doctorate

Frequency* 12 31 85 90 80*Note: most institutions in the 100 UTS offer undergraduate and post-graduate degrees (n = 100)

The level and the purpose of educational provision, that is, whether adiploma or a degree is offered, as well as the nature of the specific discipline or field of engineering, determines the nature of WPL. These differences are shown in Table 1.

Table 2: Some differences in educational provision in the 100 UTSType of provision

Characteristics

Relationship to world of work

Expected outcomes

Purpose

Degrees (B, M, D)

Professional; advanced technical

Indirect; governedby professional councils; collaborate with industry partners.

Graduateness (i.e., professionalism; technicalproblem-solving; research)

Preparation for a profession, knowledge production(e.g, innovation, contribution to development, economy, profession and industry)

Certificates & Diplomas

Vocational Direct relationship to labour markets; advised by industry partners

Employability(i.e., competence and capability)

Training and development for a specific job/a specific sector.

It is clear from their websites, reports and scholarly articles, that the majority of the 100 UTS institutions offer degrees (see Table 1); thus they do not have a direct relationship with labour markets and do

5

not train students for particular industries or workplaces. Whether the UoT is a small, relatively new institution (such as the Brest State Technical university in Belarus with 4,000 students , four engineering faculties, and membership of the Black Sea Economic Cooperation (BSEC) group ), or a large, established institution (such as the Berlin Technische Universität, founded in 1770 with 30,000 students, full university status and a member of TU9), if the institution offersdegrees, it is expected to make a knowledge contribution to regional, national, or international development (in additional to graduating competent, professional engineers).

Finding 2: WPL in diplomas is practice-based; WPL in degrees is both practice- and research-basedIn the same way that there is a variety of levels and types of engineering qualifications in universities of technology internationally, so there is considerable variety in the type of WPL that is provided in different programmes. The provision of workplace learning is generally accepted to have particular benefits for professional education (e.g., Billet, 2009), but WPL within diplomas and degrees has different general characteristics. In the case of diplomas, WPL is more practice-based, while in degree programmes, WPL tends to have both a practice and a research-base. These are not absolute distinctions and WPL, particularly in undergraduate degrees, includes elements of practice and elements of research. Thus WPL can thus be described along two continua, with several possible variations, as in Figure 1 (below).

Finding 3: there are different types of practice-based and research-based WPLBecause of disciplinary and professional differences within engineering (and engineering-type) programmes and fields, different types of WPL have emerged that address different educational requirements. WPL variations are described below:

6

+Research

Bachelor: research projects

with workplace focus

Master’s andDoctoral:

collaborativeresearch with/ forindustry partners

Practice - Practice +

Diploma: short supervised

placement

Diploma: rotational or

extended supervisedwork placements

Research-

Figure 2: WPL learning in diplomas and degrees

Site visits2

Many engineering programmes include site visits as an important, preliminary form of WPL. Site visits can include a formal ‘tour’ of a building site, a factory, a private or state laboratory, etc. Some programmes include many site visits, while others require fewer visits. In civil engineering and architecture it is common to include consecutive visits to a single site, and to base students’ projects onreal projects in progress. Site visits are usually of short duration (a few hours to a day). In the case of complex sites (such as a large building project) a site visits may take several days. Successful site

2 Site visits and observations are often embedded within subject/programme timetables – and vary from year to year – it is therefore not easy to specificdetails on this type of WPL. Site visits and observations thus are not accounted for in the data-base.

7

visits are structured and have identifiable learning outcomes. Site visits are common in both diploma and degree programmes.

Observation of practice3

Many engineering programmes include the observation of professional practice, which is sometimes related to site visits. Typically, observation would happen in initial training (e.g., the first year of an engineering programme) and might include ‘job shadowing’ in which the student follows an engineer in his/her job for a day or a week and/or interviews a member of the profession. Usually the student is expected to focus on a particular aspect of work or a particular engineering process and to write a brief report, which is then assessed. Observation of practice is common in diploma programmes, andin the first year of degree programmes.

Short supervised placementsDifferent institutions, faculties and departments have different traditions and practices with regard to requirement for a practicum, work placement and/or simulations. At Ryerson Polytechnic in Canada, for example, the Faculty of Design is well known for exhibitions, the Faculty of Engineering, Architecture and Science has a work placement programme, and the Faculty of Business uses computer simulations and case studies. Students also take part in student exchanges, field projects, faculty research, professional mentoring and student competitions (Ryerson, 2012). Short work placements are fairly common in diploma programmes, but in the 100 UTS short placements tended to be an optional elective in degree programmes (e.g., the voluntary placements at the Royal Melbourne Institute of Technology (RMIT, 2012); the Industry Affiliates Program (IAP) at Griffiths University (Griffiths, 2012). Flinders University offers optional professional mentoring, as well as practica and internships (also optional electives). Students who apply for work placement need to meet stringent criteria: they must have completed all courses that precede the work placement in the programme of studies (including a work placement preparatory course), and have achieved high marks (Ryerson,

3 As above8

2012; Flinders, 2012). Work and study requirements vary from programmeto programme. All bachelor degrees in Applied Studies at Algonquin, for example, include mandatory supervised work placement as a graduation requirement for the programme (Algonquin, 2012) – although this mandatory WPL is unusual in the 100 UTS.

Rotational supervised practiceRotational supervised practice is common in the medical and health sciences where the academic classroom is located in close proximity toa hospital and students alternate periods of academic study with periods of supervised practice, starting with observations and more basic forms of practice and, over the years, taking on more advanced forms of practice, which is always supervised by a health professional. Rotational work placements are occasionally used in someengineering programmes, but these are usually not as clearly structured as in the health sciences. In the engineering disciplines, rotational placements, in which increasingly complex practice is required, are known as a ‘sandwich’ courses. Loughborough University accommodates optional/elective rotational work placements in its engineering programmes. In 2011, 40% of full-time undergraduates took advantage of sandwich programmes in an elective in their professional bachelor’s degrees (Loughbourgh, 2011).

In the case of students who need to work to support their own studies,there are institutions that allow rotational work placements for this purpose (often known as ‘earn-while-you-learn’ variants). Ryerson Polytechnic in Canada, for example, allows mature diploma students to alternate study and (paid) work semesters, although it should be notedthat the work semesters are not credit-bearing course or subject units. At Algonquin College in Canada, students can similarly choose to alternate study terms with paid 14-week paid work terms (also not for academic credit).

Extended supervised practiceExtended supervised practice (e.g., of a one-year duration) is not common in either diploma or bachelor programmes internationally (although common in South African university of technologies at the

9

National Diploma level). There are a few examples of extended supervised practice of 6 – 12 months in some Australian universities (see Finding 6, below). Sheffield Hallam University has the largest number of students (6,340) enrolled on placement courses in the UK, and achieved this by building strong links with industry, the public sector and employers’ groups (in particular employers’ expectation that new graduates should have some work experience or work-based activities). Sheffield Hallam thus embeds work or professional experience into all undergraduate courses. Depending on the type and nature of the course, the professional experience can take different forms including: 1) long or short industry work placements; 2) completing assessed projects with external companies; 3) delivering professionally run events, exhibitions or services, which can be open to the public; 4) completing case studies, assignments or projects based on real life scenarios; 5) work-based learning that enables people in employment to base projects on workplace issues, thus ensuring their learning is directly relevant to their careers; and 6) using guest speakers from leading organisations to give students the latest insights and guidance into a profession (Sheffield Hallam, 2012).

Workplace projectsWorkplace projects are common in the senior or final year of a four-year professional engineering or other SET degree programme. In maturedepartments and/or research centres undergraduate workplace projects are often linked to ongoing research collaborations with industry partners (see Diagram 3 below). Workplace projects (or research-based WPL) tend to be more common than practice-based WPL in degree programmes; students at the Royal Melbourne Institute of Technology (RMIT), the University of Manchester Institute of Science and Technology (UMIST) – and most of the 100 UTS institutions – engage frequently in short-term project work and industry based research and/or industry projects (RMIT, 2012; UMIST, 2011).

Research collaboration

10

UoTs are important in the education and training of engineers, in applied research, and as partners with business, industry and professions. These purposes are the guiding principles for students, academic staff and researchers in the majority of institutions represented in the 100 UTS. In particular, UoTs pride themselves on their research collaboration with industry partners. For example, the Polytechnique Montréal, founded in 1873, is one of Canada's oldest andleading engineering teaching and research institutions and the largestengineering university in Québec (for the size of its student body andthe scope of its research activities). With over 37,000 students, Polytechnique Montréal has graduated 25% of the current members of thel’Ordre des ingénieurs du Québec. Polytechnique Montréal provides training in 16 engineering specialisms, has 241 professors and more than 6,900 students. It has an annual operating budget of over $200 million, including a $72-million research budget (Polytechnique Montréal, 2012). Many of the established UoTs in the 100 UTS group have similar profiles. In addition to research collaboration, UoTs are associated with regional economic development, promoting projects such as ‘Start-ups und Spin-offs’ (Graz, 2012). In the case of Graz UT, its location in the midst of a strong economic region makes it a focal point for development in the South of Austria.

11

Project Leader

Post-doctoral researcher

Doctoral researc

Post-doctoral researcher

Doctoral researc

Doctoral researc

Master’s researc

Master’s researc

Master’s researc

Master’s researc

Undergraduate researcher

Undergraduate researcher

Undergraduate researcher

Undergraduate researcher

Industry partner

Basic projects

M-level projects

Doctoral

Post-doctoral

Figure 3: a mature engineering department in a UoT

To achieve their (applied) knowledge production purpose, the established UoTs have strong research centres located within or acrossfaculties and departments. These tend to develop into the research ‘pyramid’ as in Figure 3 (above). Departments at the Royal Institute of Technology in Stockholm (KTH), for example, have ‘competence centres’ with organising structures such that shown in Figure 3 (above). Research at KTH's Competence Centres is usually conducted in joint projects with industry, business and professional partners. In KTH the Competence Centres have their own Boards, with representativesfrom trade, business and society (KTH, 2012). This structure makes collaboration with industry (including research-based WPL at the undergraduate level) possible at a range of different levels.

Finding 4: frequency of WPL provision by level and typeThe frequency of the different types of practice-based and research-based WPL are shown in Table 3. It is not always possible to ascertainthe exact nature of WPL from the curriculum and other documents provided on the institutional websites. Table 3 (below) is therefore an approximation, from the information available.

Finding 5: the role of work ‘experience’ The simple provision of work experience might add some value to a students’ general life experience, but is usually not an academic requirement in the 100 UTS surveyed, and is not awarded academic credits. (A student doing financial management, for example, does not need general experience of working as a teller in a bank, as this ‘experience’ will not contribute to the specific outcomes required forcompetent professional practice in financial management.) Table 3: Frequency of WPL provision by level of qualification (in engineering programmes)Level Short

supervised placement

Rotational supervised practice

Extendedsupervised practice

Under-graduate workplace

Post-graduate research collaboration

12

project(s)

CERTIFICATE

9 0 ? 0 n/a

DIPLOMA 23 0 9 ? n/aBACHELOR 18 9 13 80 n/aMASTER’S 0 4 4 n/a 92DOCTORATE

0 0 0 n/a 100

N = 100

The literature does not claim that general work ‘experience’ is entirely without benefit; the benefits of work experience could include developing general self-management skills (such as time keeping), improved personal skills (such as teamwork, communication and presenting skills and orientation to work (e.g., understanding a workplace culture), enhanced job opportunities (in the sense that somestudents secure graduate jobs with their placement employers or through contacts they have made), or in the case of employed students,possible sponsorship from the placement employer for academic study (Sheffield Hallam, 2012). Workplace experience is thus sometimes recommended to support the development of students’ generic competencies. There is a distinct different between workplace experience and workplace learning, and while workplace learning is oftenaccredited within a programme in the form of credit awards, workplace experience is generally not accredited. This is because it is recognised that experience (even in the same field, is usually not at the level required by the qualification. Higher level practice needs to be supervised practice (at least initially), while ‘experience’ is often practice as at lower level, or ‘downward’ application instead ofthe required ‘upward’ application. The following example, from nursing, demonstrates the difficulty of accrediting ‘experience’ as opposed to WPL:

13

WPL is at NQF

Candidate A: Enrolled for B Sc (Nursing) NQF8

Expected position: registered nurse

WPL required as part of qualification: rotational, supervised, clinical practice

Candidate A:

Existing qualificationNQF 4

Currently position: nurse aid

Workplace experience

Figure 4: difficulty of accreditation of workplace ‘experience'

It is clearly not appropriate to accept Candidate A’s workplace experience because, although it might be extensive, is not at the expected level; it is not workplace learning in the way that supervised clinical practice at the higher level is learning; this should not be accredited in the qualification4.

Finding 6: The duration times of WPL varies – and is not related to credit valueOne of the dimensions of WPL is its duration (i.e., from short to longer WPL), as in Figure 5 below. WPL of shorter duration tends to beless than 6 months; longer duration is more than 6 months. The length and time allocated to WPL (unlike academic subjects) is not directly linked to its credit value within an academic subject or programme (see Finding 6).

Shorter duration……………………………………………………………………………………………………...Longer duration

4 Unless of course, Candidate A is working (illegally) as a registered nurse, in which case s/he can go through an RPL process.

14

WP experience

Sitevisit (1)*

Observation of practice(2)

Short placement

(3)

Rotational

supervised practice(4)

Workplace projects

(5)

Extendedsupervised practice(6)

Research collaboration (7)

Figure 5: workplace learning duration (* codes used in the data-base)

Finding 7: practice-based WPL has low credit values; research-based WPL has high credit values There are a number of different qualifications frameworks internationally, and a number of different credit value systems. I have therefore compared credit values of WPL on a percentage of the overall programme, as this gives a clearer indication of the value placed on practice-based and research-based WPL. The Australian Qualifications Framework (NQF) operates on a double system of unit andcredit point values. The Australian NQF requires a minimum of 64 units per undergraduate bachelor’s programme (a subject can comprise more than one unit); each unit comprises a minimum of 12 credit points. Thus the minimum credit points for a bachelor degree is 768 credit points (although most professional engineering bachelor’s degrees often have additional credit requirements). There are examples of extended supervised practice in some Australian universities, but despite the extended nature (6 – 12 months), there are low credit values awarded to such work placements. In addition, the work placements are generally elective programmes or optional ‘enrichment’ programmes, or programmes that enable students to earn while they learn. For example,students in enrolled in the Bachelor of Corporate Systems Management, Bachelor of Games and Interactive Entertainment, or Bachelor of Information Technology at the Queensland University of Technology’s (QUT) faculty of Science and Technology can choose to enrol for eitherone 12-credit point unit for a 5-6 month placement (INS011 CooperativeEducation 1) or for two 12–credit point units for a 10–12 month Placement (INS011 and INS012 Cooperative Education 2). Thus practice-based WPL is awarded a maximum of 24 credits in a programme that requires a minimum of 786 credits. Although of low credit value, such

15

placements include formal assessments and written reports (QUT, 2012).Work placements in Australia (and most other countries offering these)are considered to be prestigious and there criteria and restrictions on student placements. For example, students in the above programmes at QUT must be Australian citizens or permanent residents, have successfully completed a minimum of 144 credit points (i.e., 12 standard units), have achieved high grade point averages, and have completed a minimum of 96 credit points of IT units in the Faculty of Science and Technology, or for Bachelor of Corporate Systems Management at least 120 credit points of core units. There are other Australian institutions, such as the Royal Melbourne Institute of Technology (RMIT) that offer similar elective internships or work placements as a 12- or 24-credit point elective within a 768 credit Bachelor’s programme. As can be seen in Table 4 (below) all these placements have a low overall credit value in the qualification.

In Europe, the ECTS system works somewhat differently. A bachelor’s degree has 180 (academic) ECTS credits. In cases where work placementsor internships are required to complete a programme (or a programme component) these are considered to be part of the students’ learning outcomes and workload and must have an appropriate credit allocation. Practice-based work placements can ‘be recognised by an award of corresponding ECTS credits which are in that case additional to the standard number of 60 ECTS credits for the academic year’ (EC, 2009: 20 [my italics]). In other words, whether at diploma or degree level, practice-based workplace learning is seen as additional to the minimum of 60 (academic) ECTS credits per year of study. Although there is, in theory, no limit to the weighting of practice-based WPL, most EuropeanUoTs that provide practice-based WPL (either as an option or as a required course component), award low credit value, e.g., 10 ECTS within a 180 (academic) ECTS + 10 (WPL) ECTS bachelor of engineering programme (e.g., Chalmers, 2012). At Denmark’s TU a ‘flexible’ Master’s programme is a part-time vocational education with a prescribed period of study of 60 ECTS.The US credit system (min 60 US credits for bachelor of engineering) accredits practice-based WPL within the overall accreditation; again,

16

practice-based WPL is given a low credit (e.g., 6 US credit points within a 180 credit BS (Engineering) (Rensselaer, 2012).

On average, as can be seen in Table 3 (below) practice-based WPL is higher in certificate programmes (average 15%) and diploma programmes (average 10%); and lower in degree programmes (average 5%). South Africa’s 15-30% of total credit awarded to practice-based WPL within diplomas/B Techs (when the diploma is integrated into the B Tech) is high by international standards.

In contrast, research-based WPL project (as well as ‘pure’ research projects) tend to have higher overall credit values in engineering programmes at the bachelor level – and, of course, can comprise the whole qualification in the case of applied Master’s and doctoral research by full thesis. In the case of undergraduate programmes, the WPL research-based project can be tied to an existing research collaboration, or part of what is known at the Denmark University of Technology as ‘the practice classroom’, which is a clearinghouse or meeting space where industry or small businesses can request assistance from the university – and projects are developed with the collaboration of the industry partner, the student and supervising academic staff members.

The different credit values given to practice- and research-based WPL/projects are shown in Table 3:

Table 4: a comparison of credit values in practice-based and research-based WPL across countries (note: table based on information availableon insitutional websites)Credit system

Qualification/ programme

Total credit value of qualification

Credit value ofpractice-based WPL

% value of practice-based WPL

Credit value of research-based WPL

% of research-basedWPL

ECTS Certificate

30* – 60 +10

10/30 – 10/60

33% - 17% - 0%

Diploma 120 + 10 10/130 ±8% - 0%Bachelor’sdegree

180 + 10 10/190 ±5% 20/190 ±10%

Master’s 120 (MSc) - 0% 0% -

17

degree 100%Doctoral degree

180 - 0% 0% - 100%

Australian NQF

Certificate

21 u/g units/252 credits

12/ 252 - 24/252

5% - 10% - 0%

Diploma 42 u/g units/504 credits

12/504 -24/504

5% - 10% - 0%

Bachelor’sdegree

64 units/786 credits

12/786 -24/786

1.5% - 3% Projects 3– 4 units/36 –48 credits

5% - 6%

Master’s degree

Max 12 p/gunits/144 credits+ thesis min 50%)

- - Thesis 50%- 100%

0% - 100%

Doctoral degree

Max 12 p/gunits/144 credits+ thesis (min 50%)

- - Thesis 50%- 100%

0% - 100%

South AfricanNQF

Certificate

120 credits

-

Diploma 240 – 360 credits

120 30%

Bachelor’sdegree

360 – 480 credits

120 30%

Master’s degree

180 credits

- 0% Thesis 50%- 100%

0% - 100%

Doctoral degree

360 credits

- 0% Thesis 100%

0% - 100%

US credit system

Certificate

15 US credits

5/15 credits

30% - 0%

Diploma 30 US credits

5/30 credits

15% - 0%

Bachelor’sdegree

60 US credits

0 – 1.5 credits

0% - 2% 6/60 credits

±10%

Master’s degree

30 US credits

- 0% Thesis min10 credits

0% – 100%

Doctoral degree

120 US credits

- 0% 0% – 100%

*Note: all credit values are minimum values

18

Finding 8: practice-based WPL resourcesFindings emphasise that practice-based WPL is costly for the academic institution. The Algonquin Cooperative Learning Centre, for example, coordinates all the ‘work term’ activities, from assisting students with job applications to support once the student has an actual job offer with an employer. The Department recruits the participation of employers, posts work term opportunities, submits résumés to companiesfor their review and selection and arranges interviews, on or off campus. All work term opportunities are approved by faculties and the Cooperative Learning Centre to ensure that the work assignment meets the established programme guidelines. In addition, departmental representatives make follow-up site visits during the term of placement. Students on work placements are required to attend work preparation classes proceeding the first work term where topics covered include résumé writing skills, interview techniques, work termresponsibilities, and more. Following each work term, students must submit a formal report to the Cooperative Learning Centre. These reports are an integral part of the learning and evaluation process and are used to validate students’ achievement of the learning outcomes.  The faculty advisors mark the work term reports (Algonquin,2012). Similar structures exist at all universities that offer practice-based WPL. At Sheffield Hallam university, placement teams exist to support the whole placement experience. They offer guidance to help students to identify the type of role and organisation that they want to work for. The placement teams also arrange employer presentations to help students to find out more about organisations and the placements on offer. They support students on placements, including allocating students a placement tutor who visits them at their workplaces. International students are assisted with visa applications and extensions (Sheffield Hallam, 2012).

Pre WPL

During WPL Post WPL

Pre-placement

Academicplacemen

Student travel/ accommodati

Studentwork

Academicsupervis

Academic mentor travel/

Workplace supervis

Externalassessment/

19

counselling

t on ion accommodation

ion examination

Figure 6: expenses/resources required for practice-based WPL

Finding 9: Funding for practice-based WPL5

In general, there are no or low state subsidies related to support practice-based WPL (and this is related to its generally low credit values in the academic programme); earmarked state funding (as in the Australian universities), or funding through industry or employer group grants (as tends to be the case in the UK and US) or from student fees, are used to finance practice-based WPL. For short placements, students are generally not paid for their work, while in longer placements, students receive a salary. In some cases, a salary is not paid, but the employer carries some of the students’ expenses. In some cases the workplace pays for the supervision, and in some cases workplace supervisors are paid by the university, or have joint industry/university appointments, as is the case in some European UoTsthat have strong industry linkages. Costs related to assessment (e.g.,external examination) are generally paid by the university.

Table 5: Funding of practice-based WPLFunding sources How funding is used Database

codesState subsidy (usually related to credit value)

Pre-placement counsellorsPlacement staffAcademic WPL supervisor/assessorsWorkplace supervisors/mentors/assessorsExternal assessors/examinersRelated expenses (e.g., travel, accommodation)

€

Earmarked state funding/grants

As above, special projects (e.g., using new technologies, innovative pilot studies)

£

Course fees As above, student-related expenses (e.g., travel, accommodation)

φ

Profession, industry or Workplace ¥

5 This section will be developed as more specific information on the funding is received from correspondence and documents, etc.

20

business support supervisors/mentors/assessorsSpecific workplace sites Students’ salaries $

Finding 10: the funding of research-based WPLWhile there is difficulty in finding adequate funding for practice-based WPL, there are usually considerable funds available for research-based WPL, particularly in mature research environments. There are also ‘start-up’ research funds available from government andindustry funders. This is mainly due to the general recognition of thelong term benefits of research (and applied research in particular) for public health systems, democracy, political stability, lower crimerate, human rights development, environmental sustainability, poverty reduction, etc. (Appiah & McMahon, 2002: 50-67). Each undergraduate research-based project in Australia, for example, is awarded AUS$6,000; while each post graduate WPL research collaboration is awarded AUS$10,000 (Australian Government, 2010). In most of the developed countries there is generous support for collaborative research. The following are the amounts received for research collaboration by the Royal Institute of Technology in Stockholm:

Government grantsSEK 3,941 million in departmental (i.e., staff) research projects SEK 1,054 million undergraduate research projectsSEK 917 million research/doctoral studies

External financing (for u/g and p/g applied/WPL research)SEK 286 million the Swedish Research CouncilSEK 245 million EUSEK 171 million VinnovaSEK 117 million Wallenberg FoundationsSEK 423 million other government agenciesSEK 499 million other external financing including private funds (KTH, 2012).

Figure 7: example of funding for research-based WPL

Limitations of the 100 UTS

21

In a meta-analysis the data is usually cross-checked or verified by a second researcher (or research team). This is best practice and would usually be required if the study were to be published. The 100 UTS data was not verified, due to time constraints and the lack of fundingfor this project (for which no budget was allocated). If SATN makes resources available, it would be good practice for the data-base (See Appendix 1) to be verified and cross-checked by a second researcher orresearch team.

3.2 Findings: WIL questionnairesThere were only 33 respondents to the questionnaire, distributed across universities as follows: DUT 15%, CPUT 40%, CUT 30%, MUT 0%, PoN 0%, TUT 12% and VUT 3%.

The programmes surveyed included:

existing national diplomas (55%) new diplomas granted (i.e., HEQC/DHET approved) (21%) new degrees granted (i.e., HEQC/DHET approved) (9%) new degrees awaiting HEQC/DHET approval (6%) and existing B Tech degrees (6%).

Professional councils60% of the programmes surveyed had professional councils = 60%, 34% ofthe programmes did not have professional councils and 6% of respondents were ‘unsure’ whether their programme had a professional council/body or not. 97% of the programmes included WPL, while only 3% of programmes did not include WPL.

Level of WPLThere was considerable differences in the level at which work placements were made:

3rd year 70%6

2nd year 40% 1st year 20% 4th year 12% After completion of programme but prior to graduation = 21%

6 This adds up to more than 100% as respondents could choose more than 1 option.

22

Duration of WPLThere was also considerable variation in the duration of work placements:

More than 6 months: 42% Less than 6 months: 39% Around 6 months: 15% Not sure: 3%

With reference to the international benchmarking exercise, the duration times of WPL varied - but placements of shorter duration (less than 6 months) were more common than WPL of longer duration (more than 6 months) in the 100 UTS.

Credit value of WPLThere were differences in the percentage credit value of WPL across programmes:

More than 25% (42%) Between 15 – 20% (15%) Between 10 – 15% (15%) Not sure (9%) Other 21% (most above 25%)

On average, practice-based WPL was higher in certificate programmes (average 15%) and diploma programmes (average 10%); and lower in degree programmes (average 5%). South Africa’s 15-30% credit awarded to practice-based WPL within diplomas/B Techs (when the diploma is integrated into the B Tech) is high by international standards. In theinternational benchmarking survey, it was noted that the duration times of WPL were not related to credit value. The length and time allocated to WPL (unlike academic subjects) is not directly linked to its credit value within an academic subject or programme.

Diversity of WPL typesThere was rich diversity of WIL modalities across the programmes surveyed:

Service Learning (60%) Site visits (45%)

23

Cooperative education (42%) Observing professional practice (39%) Internships (36%) Short work placement (27%) Long work placement (27%) Field work (27%) Rotational placements (15%) Clinical practice (12%) Job shadowing (12%)

In the category of ‘other forms of WIL’, the following were included:

Workplace examiners/moderators (79%) PBL (64%) PJBL (60%) Simulated/virtual learning (59%) Guest lecturers from industry (40%) Skills lab (36%) Industry-based research projects (36%) Role play (27%)

Supporting students in WPL

The most common ways of supporting students on work placements were asfollows:

Workplace supervisor (79%) Academic lecturer (60%) Academic mentor( 57%) Workplace mentor (51%) Social media (36%) Debriefing meetings (33%)

Assessment of WPLWith regard to the assessment of WPL, 60% of respondents claimed that both workplace supervisors and academics assessed students, 49% claimed that only academic staff assessed students, while 36% claimed that only workplace supervisors assessed students.Many different kinds of assessment tools were used:

Portfolios (73%)

24

Logs (70%) Presentations (51%) Essays (24%) Practical exam (18%) Written exam (6%)

WPL funding sourcesRespondents were requested to list the sources of WPL funding in theirprogrammes, which were provided as below:

Student fees (55%) Employer (39%) Students (direct costs) (36%) University (15%) DHET (15%) Don’t know (12%) State sector (9%)

WPL costsRespondents were also asked to estimate the WPL costs, as a percentageof the course fees:

Don’t know (27%) 5 – 10% (27%) 10 – 20% (18%) Less than 5% (12%) More than 30% (3%)

Limitations of the questionnaire dataFollowing discussions with the SATN Programme and Qualifications Committee, it was felt that more accurate information on the funding of WIL across the different institutions was required. Concerns were raised about the small sample as well as the reported cost of student placement provided by participants, which many felt was inaccurate. Asone institution reports:

WIL directors indicated that the amount far exceeds the R1,500 to R3,000 per student for placement quoted in the report. Actual costsmust be assigned to the different activities of placing, monitoring and assessment students (CUT Institutional Funding Report).

25

WIL directors were thus requested to provide further information on how WIL is funded in their institutions. The findings are reported on in section 3.3.

3.3 Institutional WIL funding reportsThe institutional reports were not consistent (in that they reported on different items – some on HR costs only, other on transport costs only, etc.) There was no real consistency in terms of the cost/student: the lowest estimate is R3,421.00 (provided by DUT) and the highest is R 10,528.00 (TUT). The other institutions suggest figures between R5,000.00 – R10,000.00 The estimates have left out (ornot clarified) major cost elements – such as staffing in the case of VUT and transport in the case of MUT – which suggests that cost/student figures might be closer to R10,000/student than R5,000/student.

Staffing costsItemized or HR costs, in the form of WIL director and WIL coordinator salaries, or other salaries, were not requested, as it was felt that each institution would be able to work out its own specific staffing costs per placement. However, a general estimate of the overall spend on salaries was requested. Most of the reports received, did include HR costs (except in the case of VUT where only transport costs were given).

Infrastructure and overhead costsA clear idea of the infrastructural (e.g., office space, vehicles dedicated to WIL use) or overhead costs (e.g., venue hire, maintenanceof vehicles, laptops and portable data projectors, workshop expenses, photocopying, telephone, and other consumables ) did not emerge. CPUT estimated these costs at ±R1,960,000.00; while DUT estimated such costs at ±R300,000.00. Again, the variation is extreme and clearly further cost analysis should be done with regard to these costs.

Implementation costsIt was expected that some idea of the cost of planning, implementationand post-implementation of WPL would emerge (e.g., in terms of hours of academic work, or hours of administrative work), but the items above were, in many cases, clearly difficult to cost. There was one attempt to cost the activities in terms of hours/student (see Table 1)

26

below. The estimate (for Engineering Faculties) is ±12.3 hours/student. At an academic salary of R500/hour this would be a costof R6,170.00/student (it is not clear whether Figure 8 includes both academic and administrative hours).W orkload Calculation: Engineering Faculty (6 qualifications)

Length of qualfication 3 YearsTotal Students 1200 StudentsPlacem ents 518 StudentsEm ployers 225Num ber of cohorts 3 Electrical (l/c, h/c, com p syst) M echanical and Civil + Building)

Hours Units Unit Description Total Com m entPreparing the students for placem ent 30 3 Cohorts 90 Part of Engineering skills m odulePlacem ent of students 5 225 Em ployers 1125 Visits to em ployers and student interviewsM onitoring in workplace 4 518 Students 2072 Once per P1, P2 cycle (2 hours per student per cycle)Assessm ent on Cam pus at end of P1 and P2 5 518 Students 2590 2.5 hours per student per cycleDebriefing and adm inistration 1 518 Students 518 1 hr per student

6395

Benchm ark figuresAverage tim e per student 12.34556Span per student 130

Figure 8: estimated hours/student for workplace learning

Costs of work placements There are differences with regard to the cost per student, staffing, transport and general costs. It is clear that transport costs (i.e., visits of academic staff members to students in workplaces for monitoring or assessment purposes) are significant. In one case transport included air travel and accommodation for the purpose of monitoring/assessing students in different parts of the country.

Table 6: Estimation of costs of work placement/student

CPUT CUT DUT MUT TUT VUTGeneral costs

R126,500.00 R 900,000.00 R200,000.00 R 604,893.00 R 38,000.00 n/a

Infrastructure n/a

R1,960,000.00 R 300,000.00 n/a n/a n/a

TransportR

365,000.00 n/a R100,000.00R

120,000.00R

550,000.00

Staffing costs

R7,544,655.0

0R

2,324,000.00R2,000,000.0

0

R12,610,515.0

0R

894,800.00 n/a

TOTALS

R8,036,155.0

0R

5,184,000.00R2,600,000.0

0

R13,215,408.0

0

R1,052,800.0

0R

550,000.00

# of 1300 518 760 1860 100 10027

students± cost/student R 6,181.66 R 10,007.72 R3,421.00 R 7,105.06 R 10,528.00 R 5,500.00Student fees R 3,300.00 n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a

n/a indicates that relevant figures were not available in the reports.

It seems to be easier to estimate or be accurate in terms of the more obvious costs (e.g., staff salaries and transport claims, etc.) The less obvious or ‘hidden costs’ such as supporting students on-line, orthe pre-placement preparatory work, etc. might have been underestimated. The cost estimates seem to suggest that either some best practices in work placements (e.g., assessment of workplaces in terms of meeting criteria for effective workplace learning – especially for ‘knowledge work’ (see Fuller & Unwin, 2010) and experience linked to the academic programme (e.g., Haight, 2012), assessing ‘soft’ and ‘hard’ workplace learning separately (see e.g., Clements & Cord, 2013; Dunn 2013), the inclusion of reflective debriefing, joint academic/workplace assessment (e.g., McNamara, 2013), etc.) might not be included in work placement, or have not been considered/taken into account in the cost estimates. The cost estimates (with the exception of TUT) have not included innovative forms of workplace learning.

PLANNING 1.2 Identification of appropriate employers/sites1.3 Creation/maintenance of employer database1.4 Site visits1.5 Meetings1.6 Curriculum development1.7 Student preparation (CVs, general work-readiness, etc.)1.8 Placement (meetings, telephone calls, etc.)2. IMPLEMENTATION2.1 Student transport2.2 Staff transport/visits2.3 Orientation to workplace

28

2.4 Mentoring2.5 Supervision of work practice2.6 Planning and implementation of workactivities2.7 Reporting2.8 Formative feedback2.9 Monitoring2.10 Assessment: practical, presentations & reports, portfolios, etc.3 POST-IMPLEMENTATION3.1 Debriefing3.2 Reporting3.3 Post-planning (to Implementing of recommendations)3.4 Reporting back to employers

Figure 9: ‘Hidden’ costs in WPL.

Limitations of the institutional report dataThe costs of a funding framework for WIL that emerged from the institutional reports are flawed in that they did not all include the three main categories of, 1) staffing costs, 2) infrastructural costs,and 3) implementation costs (with the sub-categories of planning costs, implementation/operational costs and post-implementation costs).

4. Synthesis of findings from WIL benchmarking and WIL questionnaire

This section synthesizes the most significant findings from 100 UTS and the UoT WIL questionnaire, focusing on the funding of work placements. The survey was not particularly helpful in terms of funding for future HEQSF-aligned programmes as the majority of respondents to the survey on work placements (55%) offered national diplomas – with 67% of the programmes surveyed having a professional council or controlling body, and 97% of respondents including work-place learning (or cooperative education). Most programmes (67%) had 3rd year level work placements for six months or longer. The credit value of these placements was approximately 25% - 30% of the programmeas a whole. The WIL questionnaire did not provide accurate data on thecost of work placements (estimates suggest low to moderate costs of R1,500 – R3,000 per student placement, with over 50% of real costs being carried by student fees).

29

4.1 Comparison: 100 UTS and questionnaire dataIn comparing the questionnaire data with the international benchmarking study with the questionnaire responses it became evident that while there are some similarities, there a number of practices with regard to WPL at South African universities of technology that cannot be benchmarked internationally. Table 7 compares the South African National Diplomas with diplomas offered internationallyTable 7: Comparison: of diploma level work placements in SA UoTs and international equivalents

South African Universities of Technology National Diplomas

Diplomas offered by International universities of technology (or similar institutions)

Time spent in a work placement

6 months – 1 year 1 – 3 months (in many cases this is an optional elective and not required)

When the placements tendto occur

3rd year 3rd year*

Percentage credit value of work placement

25% - 30% 15%

*In ‘sandwich’ (i.e., 2 years academic study, one year work placement, one year study, which is considered a 3-year diploma) or ‘earn-while-you learn’ type programmes (i.e., 1 year academic study, 1 year work placement, 1 year academic study, 1 year work placement, etc.), the placement(s) may be for one or more years; but the credit value is still ±15% of the overall programme credit value.

Rich variety of workplace learning typesAlthough the WIL questionnaire did not provide accurate data on the funding of WIL, there was rich data on WIL, and particularly work place learning practices. No ‘dominant’ form of workplace learning emerged from the survey, and instead a rich variety of practices emerged: short work placements, longer work placements, rotational work placements, more than one work placement in a course of study at different levels, job shadowing, site visits, workplace observations, research-linked work placements, community-based work placements, service learning, etc. Many of these forms of workplace learning are discipline- or programme-specific. It would thus appear that a genericapproach to work placements would not be appropriate, but rather that

30

each programme should benchmark its work placement practices internationally.

4.2 100 UTS, questionnaires and institutional reports: WIL activities that require funding The South African universities of technology have developed a range ofdifferent systems and support mechanisms for work placements. From the100 UTS, the questionnaire data and the institutional reports a generic breakdown of activities at different phases of work placement emerged.

However, the funding framework emerging from the questionnaires and Institutional reports is flawed, not only in that there is incomplete data and a lack of attention to hidden implementation costs, but because the funding provision is for placements that might be too long(by international standards), and neither does the funding provision differentiate across different types of WPL (e.g., rotational WPL, site visits), it does not distinguish between practice-based WPL and research-based WPL and it does not include aspects cited in the literature as leading to quality-provision (e.g., mentoring, support, formative and summative assessment, moderation).

5. Towards a funding framework for WPL

In this section, a number of resources, in addition to the findings ofthe three sub-studies are drawn on to suggest a possible funding framework for WPL in South African universities of technology.

5.1 Aligning WPL with the HEQSFThe following table is extracted from CPUT’s Policy on Experiential and Service Learning7; these guidelines attempt to align the type and credit value of work placements within undergraduate curricula with HEQSF qualifications and the SAQA level descriptors:

Table 8: Level, purpose and characteristics of WPL

Qualification

Purpose of work placement Characteristics of work placement

Higher Certificat

Enable/realise the vocational requirements of the HC which

Should include a work placement, sometimes

7 The above extract is taken from CPUT’s Policy on Experiential and Service Learning, developed by Associate Professor Joyce Nduna.

31

e (Level 5)

should have a ‘strong industry-oriented focus’ (HEQSF 2013: 21)

‘simulated’ (HEQSF 2013: 21).

Advanced Certificate (Level 6)

A more ‘specialised and intensive’ placement is needed toenable the application or integration of the ‘sound knowledge base in a particular field or discipline’; this could include ‘technology transfer’ (HEQSF2013: 23).

Should include a work placement as the qualification is ‘primarily vocational or industry oriented’ (HEQSF2013: 23).

Diploma (240 credits) (Level 6)

The qualification has a vocational orientation; it can only be offered in alignment withprofessional council requirements/ criteria.

The work placement occursafter the qualification is awarded; but only in cases where there is a clear professional designation or occupational role as determined by a professional body’ (HEQSF2013: 24). Arrangements should be made for the supervision and assessment of candidates in post-qualification workplace learning prior to acceptance onto an Advanced Diploma.8

Diploma (360 credits) (Level 6)

The qualification has a vocational orientation that includes ‘professional, vocational, or industry-specific knowledge’ (HEQSF 2013: 24). The qualification should include a work placement to enable the candidate to ‘to apply knowledge and skills in a workplace

A work placement is required, and can count up to a maximum of 120 credits9 (HEQSF, 2013, p.24).

8 There are concerns about the lack of provision for workplace learning in the240 credit diploma, particularly with regard to the engineering technician (and mid-level health workers) These concerns need to be taken up with CHE, professional bodies and clarified for curricular revision and development processes.9 Note that this is a maximum credit value for workplace learning; there should not be a ‘one size fits all’ approach, but rather a logical, curriculum-based argument for the type, duration and credit value of the placement.

32

context’ (HEQSF 2013: 24).Advanced Diploma (Level 7)

The purpose of a work placement is the deepening of professionally-oriented practice and the opportunity to develop ‘systematic understanding of current thinking, practice, theory and methodology in an areaof specialisation’ (HEQSF, 2013, p. 26). The Advanced Diploma provides an ‘intensive, focused and applied specialisation which meets the requirements of a specific niche in the labour market’ (HEQSF, 2013, p. 26); it can provide an articulation routebetween general undergraduate qualifications and more career- and industry-focused qualification. As such it offers UoTs a key competitive edge.

An advanced work placement that meets academic and professionalrequirements is required.

Professional Degree (3 year) (Level 7)

The purpose of a work placement in a professional degree is to enable candidates to ‘demonstrateinitiative and responsibility in … a professional context’ (HEQSF,2013, p. 28).

A work placement that includes supervised professional work is required. The credit value of the work placement would be less than in diploma programmes, due to the additional academic requirements.

Professional Degree (4 year) (Level 8)

The four-year professional Bachelor’s degree has a ‘higher volume of learning and a greater cognitive demand’ (HEQSF, 2013, p. 28). It prepares for professional practice, and for Master’s studies.

Both a professional practice placement (as above) and a research-based work placement (e.g., including laboratory work, or a industry-aligned researchproject) are required.

All work placements, across all qualifications, levels, disciplines and fields: should:

be properly curriculated (embedded in curriculum);

33

be at the appropriate HEQSF level with the required credit allocation;

be assessed in accordance with institutions’ assessment policies; link work experience with the learning outcomes of academic

programmes; have a pre-determined time period that follows national and

international best practices; have written agreements (e.g. MOU’s) with partners (institutional

Policy on Partnerships are recommended).

5.2. Providing detailed descriptions of workplace learningThe inclusion of a separate categories on workplace learning in the CHE template (for revisions and for new programmes) offers universities of technology the opportunity to showcase WPL within revised curricula and to explain its conceptual importance in professionally-oriented, career-focussed programmes. It is therefore important that universities of technology provide logical, clear responses, rather than ‘technicist’ or minimalist ‘compliant’ responses to the WIL, and particularly the WPL, requirements. The following suggestions are offered to enhance responses to CHE templates in the hope of developing strong WPL programmes (that could be used in building the funding framework of the workplace learning component of diploma programmes in particular).

Avoiding a technicist approachA number of research studies on the South African higher education institutional audits and programme accreditation processes have appeared in local and international journals (e.g., Mathieson 2012; Quinn & Boughey 2009; Luckett, 2007). In several articles, it is claimed that universities of technology adopt a ‘technicist’ (Boughey 2010a; Boughey 2010b) or ‘technical compliance10’ approach (McKenna & Quinn 2012) towards audits and accreditation processes. The term ‘technicist’ is used to describe approaches that are ‘superficial and … mechanistic’ (McKenna & Quinn 2012, 1040) or ‘reductionist’ (McKenna& Sutherland 2006). The term ‘technicist’ was coined by the Frankfurt school who contrasted ‘technicist’ approaches with critical approaches, which they felt were more able to overcome the limits of positivism, materialism and determinism (Adorno & Horkheimer 2002). 10 While this is a positive term for engineering in technical contexts, it hasnegative connotations in educational contexts, such as curriculum development.

34

Technicism implies an over-emphasis on technical or instrumental techniques or actions, to the detriment of wider human purpose, valuesor communication (Habermas 1984). Persons thinking in technicist ways tend to define human problems in terms of technical solutions, resulting in an undue emphasis on ‘instrumental rationality’ (Habermas1987). In a context of ‘large scale university curriculum change’, Trowler (2010) describe a technicist approach as one that is ‘devoid of explicit theory’ and thus ‘conceptually malnourished’. In university contexts, technicism has also been used as a synonym for the ‘new mangerialism’ (Deem 1998).

Claims in research studies that universities of technology are technicist or adopt and overly ‘surface interpretation’ (McKenna & Quinn, 2012, 1041) to issues of quality enhancement are based on an understanding that technicist approaches to curriculum are not able toaddress the complexities of, for example, curricular review or development. Thus it is important that universities of technology avoid a technicist approach to completing the CHE templates (as well as defensive responses to critique) and rather develop more conceptually-based approaches and rationales for curriculum revision processes (and its work more generally) if they wish to escape marginalisation within the South African higher education system and concomitant exclusion from resources, such as the funding of workplacelearning.

We can understand approaches to curriculum development (and reporting)as located along two axes, the level of conceptualisation, and the level of procedural complexity (see Figure 10 below).

A constructivist approach (sometimes known as a ‘critical’ approach) to curriculum revision is one which foregrounds individual meaning in order to encourage debate and to share different perspectives, understandings and approaches; a constructivist approach might, for example, allow a wide variety of responses to the CHE template and encourage academic staff to express their different understandings of curricula in a wide variety of different ways. Appendices might be attached to the template to accommodate individual preference or for more discipline- or field-specific concerns.

A ‘realist’ approach would emphasise both conceptual meaning and provide clear guidelines for how the template might be completed, based on expert disciplinary and expert curriculum knowledge. Following Basil Bernstein (2000), the curriculum review or development

35

process would comprise 1) ‘selection’ from appropriate knowledge fields and/or fields of practice (which would be expressed in terms ofsubjects or modules and broad exit level outcomes, benchmarked internationally), 2) ‘sequencing’ of subjects in a logical order, 3) ‘pacing’ of subjects (in terms levels of difficulty), and ‘assessment’(in terms of description of assessment tasks, assessment criteria and the allocation of credit values and mark allocation). The CHE templateassumes that such a process has occurred, and requires a logical argument for the curricular revisions or decisions that have been made(as well as requiring additional information that might, for example, be obtained from a situation analysis or consultation with a professional body).

Low procedural

level

High level of conceptualisation

HighlyComplex

procedurallevel

Constructivst/critical

Realist

Pseudo-curricularapproaches

Technicist

Low level of conceptualisation

Figure 10: Approaches to curriculum revision and development

The inclusion of WIL on the CHE template provides the opportunity for universities of technology, in particular, to present a clearly motivated, non-technicist rationale for the design of the WPL component as an integral part of a coherent and logical curriculum. The template requires the provision of ‘details’ and thus a full response is required in order to explain how students will be placed into a workplace, how the workplace learning component will be structured, and how workplace learning will be supervised and assessed. It is recommended that academic staff, particularly those

36

involved in conceptualising WPL within the overall logic of the curriculum, follow a realist approach.

A technicist approach would foreground the procedures, resulting the ‘conceptual malnourishment’ that Trowler (2010) describes; in an extreme form, the procedures might be emphasised to the extent that meaning is lost, as has occurred in some forms of outcomes-based education, where the technical description of the outcome is more important than the knowledge or skill that it is intended to describe.The classic example of an extreme technicist approach is the often-quoted SAQA unit-standard that has 14 assessment criteria for washing your hands (Allais 2011). For Allais, a technicist approach to curriculum is one that is both ‘extremely narrow’ and extremely ‘lengthy’ (Allais 2011, 353). The ‘narrowness’ is represented by low levels of conceptual understanding, while the ‘lengthiness’ is represented by the complexity of the procedures.

A pseudo-curriculum review would entail either the over-simplification(or ‘dumbing-down’) of both conceptual and procedural levels to the extent of meaningless – or the artificial boosting of conceptual and/or procedural levels, leading to similar meaningless confusion.

5.3. Suggested resources for a realist approach to curriculum revisionand developmentThe following resources are available to assist academic staff and curriculum developers for section 8 of the CHE template.

CHE 2011. Work-integrated learning: Good Practice Guide. HE Monitor No. 12, August 2011 [available at www.che.ac.za].

The CHE Guide offers innovative approaches to WPL practice and assessment, drawn from the actual experience of academic staff in South Africa and internationally.

Kagisano special issue on the Aims of Higher Education (2013)

Kagisano’s special issue on the purposes of higher education. The WILRU group has written one of the papers in the special issue on ‘Professional knowledge and the purpose of professional higher education’ (Winberg, Engel-Hills, Jacobs and Garraway 2013). There areother useful articles in the special issue that might assist academic staff and curriculum developers in building logical arguments in response to the CHE requirements.

37

Bitzer, E. and Botha, M. (eds) Curriculum inquiry in South African Higher Education. Stellenbosch: SUNMedia.

Several articles in the above resource would be helpful to academic staff and curriculum developers, in particular the work done by Shay, Oosthuizen, Paxton and van der Merwe in the comprehensive university sector, which has implications for university of technology qualifications.

Masters and Doctoral studies

A number of university of technology staff are doing Masters and doctoral work on WPL in a wide variety of our programmes (e.g., officemanagement and technology, mechatronics, emergency medical care, graphic design, radiography). Professor Chris Winberg (winbergc@cput.ac.za) can be contacted for more information in this regard.

5.4 The cost of WPLThe report has shown that costing WPL is not a simple matter; there are considerable difference in understandings of the role and functionof WPL within different programmes. Table 9 suggests a way of costing the implementation of WPL (usually the ‘hidden’ costs) that would meetmost of the best practice requirements for quality provision.

Way forwardAdditional data would need to be obtained and the activities associated with high-quality WPL provision need to be further developed within each programme, with the assistance of curriculum developers, WIL directors and faculty-based WIL coordinators in order to obtain a clear understanding of the staffing and other costs involved in the implementation of appropriate, high quality work placements in different programmes. These activities should be forward-looking and based on HEQSF-aligned programmes, as there is little point in undertaking this work for the existing National Diplomas that are currently undergoing revision. The cost of each of the proposed activities for new programmes should be calculated, in order to achieve an accurate estimation of the cost of placement per student per programme. Once such accurate information is obtained, academic staff can make decisions about the credit value, type and duration of work placements in new programmes.

38

The SATN board should decide whether they wish to continue with the investigation in order to establish more accurate costs (including a cost/benefit analysis). It might be worthwhile for SATN or the individual universities to appoint a full-time researcher or academic project manager to assist with estimates for the new diplomas and degrees. There does not seem to be much point in collecting more data around qualifications that are being phased out. The principle of Project 9 was to be more forward looking, towards the new qualifications. Having accurate financial estimates will help with decision-making around work placements at different levels of the new qualifications.

39

Table 9: Towards a funding framework for implementation cost of high quality WPLPhases Activities Staffing implications Comments

Academic Staff

Admin/Tech staff

Students

Workplace staff

Planning Identification of appropriate employers/sites

Academic project coordination needed (e.g., for situation analysis, identification of key industries, collaboration with SAGRA, etc.)

Creation/maintenance of employer database

Technical support needed (e.g., data-based constructionand maintenance)

Site visits Staffing and transport costs (e.g., ‘liaison officer’)

Meetings and/orworkshops with academic, technical and workplace staff.

The amount of meetings with workplace partners has Implication for institutional workload models.

Curriculum development

A curriculum, including outcomes, assessment plans andtasks is necessary to fund work placements as ‘subjects’.

Student preparation (CVs, general work-readiness,

This is often done by student counselling services; where e-monitoring is used technical staff would also be involved.

40

etc.)Implementation

Transport to/from work site for duration of placement

Students’ travel to remote sites might need support.

Orientation to workplace

This is usually done by workplace supervisors: H&S issues should be addressed.

Payment/non-payment of students

It has been common practice topay SA students; this needs serious attention in new qualifications with short work-placements.

Mentoring In cases where workplaces do not provide mentors, the academic institution could draw on senior students who have successful undergone workplacements.

Supervision of work practice

Planning and implementation of work activities

Reporting Weekly student reports; portfolio building.

Formative This would normally be done

41

feedback on-the-job by workplace supervisors.

Monitoring Academic staff monitor the placement (e.g., through Skypemeetings, weekly or monthly meetings, etc.)

E-monitoring Emerging practices include theuse of institutional LMS or social media to support and monitor students in WPL.

Assessment: practical, presentations &reports, portfolios, etc.

Joint workplace and academic assessment (e.g., student presentations, demonstrations)

Post-implementation

Debriefing Staff ensure student learning through reflection on practice.

Reporting (on positives and negatives - andrecommendations)

Implementing ofrecommendations

Reporting back to employers

42

6. Recommendations

The following recommendations emerged from the study; the benchmarks are general and there would be differences across the different programmes. A general recommendation is therefore for each programme to benchmark its WPL practices and cost implications internationally (see # 3 below).

1. National Diploma work placements are not in line with international benchmarks; it is recommended that the credit valueof work placement(s) for new programmes and for diplomas undergoing revision to two or three year diplomas, should be benchmarked internationally for the particular programme, level and discipline or field.

2. Notional learning hours for WPL are different from the notional learning hours awarded to ‘academic’ or classroom-based subjects.The duration times of WPL cannot therefore be directly related tocredit value in terms of the SAQA notional hours. The length and time allocated to WPL (unlike other subjects) is not directly linked to its credit value. The exception to this is research-based WPL.

3. The type of the work placement (observation-based, practice-based, research-based, service-based, etc.) should also be benchmarked internationally for the particular programme and discipline or field.

4. The duration of the work placement (short placement, site visit, job-shadowing, rotational placement, etc.) should also be benchmarked internationally for the particular programme and discipline or field.

5. The credit value, type and duration of the work placement should be benchmarked against best practices at the particular level (e.g., certificate, diploma, advanced diploma, degree, etc.) in the discipline or field;

6. While the questionnaire data suggests that professional councils and similar bodies are regularly consulted; there is not a systematic or consistent approach to identifying relevant and significant employers (e.g., through consultation with SAGRA).

43

7. Work placements should be considered as a possible elective in a programme offering a variety of electives (in cases where this might be appropriate).

8. The payment of students should be given special attention in the planning of WPL – particularly in new qualifications with shorterwork-placements (where payment might not be appropriate).

9. Each programme needs to make a strong case for an appropriate credit value, type and duration of the work placement(s) at particular levels for particular programmes in particular disciplines or fields. It is only from such a position that statefunding for work placements can be argued. A ‘generic’ SATN position on work placements is not recommended – and is unlikely to be funded as a case for a work placement cannot be made generically. Each case needs to be argued on a programme basis with reference to international benchmarks and academic standards, and with support from local professional councils and relevant, significant employer groups.

7. Acknowledgements

I would like to acknowledge the assistance and support of the following colleagues in the development of the Funding Framework for WIL within HEQF-aligned programmes at South African UoTs: A/Prof J Nduna (CPUT), A/Prof J Garaway (CPUT), A/Prof P Engel-Hills (CPUT), DrM Wessels (TUT), Dr C Selepe (TUT), Mr H Jacobs (CUT), Mr D Mac (MUT),Mr A Maphosa (VUT) and Ms B Satar (DUT).

8. References

Adorno, T., and Horkheimer, M. 2002. Dialectic of Enlightenment. Standford, CA.: Stanford University Press.

Allais, S. 2011a. The changing faces of the South African National Qualifications Framework, Journal of Education and Work, 24 (3/4): 343–358.

44

Allais, S. 2011b. What are skills? Reflections on policy in South Africa in the light of international debates. Paper presented at the Global Labour University Conference 28-30 September 2011.

Algonquin college 2012. Cooperative education. Available at http://www.algonquincollege.com/coop/ [Accessed 30 April 2012].

Appiah, E. and McMahon, Walter W. 2002. The social outcomes of education and feedback on growth in Africa. Journal of Development Studies, 38: 27–68.

Australian Government/DEEWR 2010. Higher Education Base Funding Review: the value of externalities for Australian Higher Education. Available at http://www.deewr.gov.au/HigherEducation/Policy/BaseReview/Documents/PublicbenefitsofHEreport.pdf [Accessed 1 May 2012].

Baker, D.P. 2009. The educational transformation of work: towards a new synthesis, Journal of Education and Work, 22 (3): 163-191.

Barnett, M. 2006. Vocational knowledge and vocation pedagogy, in M. Young & J. Gamble (Eds.) Knowledge, curriculum and qualifications for South African further education. Pretoria: HSRC Press, 143–157

Beck, J., & Young, M. F. D. 2005. The assault on the professions and the restructuring of academic and professional identities: A Bernsteinian analysis. British Journal of Sociology of Education, 26, 183–197.

Beckers, S.K., Timmermann, A., Müller, M.P., Angstwurm, M. & Walcher, F. (2009). Undergraduate medical education in emergency medical care: a nationwide survey at German medical schools, BMC Emergency Medicine 9 (7), Available online at: http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-227X/9/7 [Accessed 9 Dec 2011].

Bernstein, B. (2000). Pedagogy, symbolic control and identity (revised edition).Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield.

Boughey, C. 2010a. Meta-analysis of teaching and learning in historically disadvantaged universities. Commissioned report for the CHE.

Boughey, C. 2010b Analysing teaching and Learning at the Universities of Technology: A tribute to Terry Volbrecht. A paper presented at the RITAL Conference, Cape Peninsula University of Technology, 8th December 2010. Available at

45

Billet, S. 2009. Realising the educational worth of integrating work-experiences in higher education. Studies in Higher Education, 34 (7): 827-843.

British Columbia Institute of Technology 2012. Centre for workplace education. Available at: http://www.bcit.ca/co-op/faq.shtml [Accessed 30 April 2012].

Chaiklin, S and Lave, J. 1993/2003. Understanding practice: Perspectives on activity and context. Cambridge: CUP.

Council on Higher Education/Directorate Standards Development (CHE) (2011a). Work-integrated learning: good practice guide. HE Monitor No.12, August 2011.

Council on Higher Education/Directorate Standards Development (CHE) (2011b). A Framework for qualification standards in higher education. Consultation document, November 2011.

Crete Technical University 2012. http://en.tuc.gr/386.html

Crow, J., Smith, L., & Keenan, I. 2006. Journeying between the Education and Hospital Zones in a collaborative action research project. Educational Action Research, 14(2), 287-306.

Crozier, G. and Reay, D. 2011. Capital accumulation: working-class students learning how to learn in HE. Teaching in Higher Education 16 (2): 145-155.

Clements, M.D. and Cord, B.A. 2013. Assessment guiding learning: developing graduate qualities in an experiential learning programme, Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 38:1, 114-124.

Deem, R. 1998. ‘New Managerialism’ and higher education: the management of performances and cultures in universities in the United Kingdom. International Studies in Sociology of Education, 8 (1): 47–70.

Dunn, A. 2013. Only fools? Reconsidering the relationship between commitment to the work ethic and educational attainment, Journal of Education and Work, 26:1, 1-20

Engestrom, Y. 1999. Innovative learning in work team: analysing cyclesof knowledge creation in practice, in: Y. Engestrom, R. Miettinen & R.Punamaki (Eds) Perspectives on activity theory. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.

46

European Communities/Directorate of Education and Culture 2009. ECTS Users’ Guide. Available at http://ec.europa.eu/education [Accessed 1 May 2012].

Flinders University 2007. Audit of work-integrated learning programs at Flinders University. Available at: http://www.flinders.edu.au/Teaching_and_Learning_Files/Documents/Practicum%20Audit%20Report%202007.pdf [Accessed 29 April 2012].

Fuller, A. and Unwin, L. 2010. ‘Knowledge Workers’ as the New Apprentices: The Influence of Organisational Autonomy, Goals and Values on the Nurturing of Expertise, Vocations and Learning, 3:203–222.

Gamble, J. 2006. Theory and practice in the vocational curriculum, in:M. Young & J. Gamble (Eds.) Knowledge, curriculum and qualifications for South African Further Education. Pretoria: HSRC Press.

Gibbons, M., Limoges, C., Nowotny, H., Schwartzman, S., Scott, P. and Trow, M. 1994. The new production of knowledge: the dynamics of science and research in contemporary societies. London: Sage Publishers.

Gorz, A. 1976. Technology, technicians and class struggle. In Gorz, A.(Ed.) The division of labour. London: Harvester Press.

Graz University of Technology. 2012. http://portal.tugraz.at/portal/page/portal/TU_Graz

Green, L. W. 2006. Public health asks of systems science: to advance our evidence-based practice, can you help us get more practice-based evidence? American Journal of Public Health, 96, 406-409.

Griffith University. 2012. Work-integrated learning. Available at: http://www.griffith.edu.au/new-students/work-integrated-learning [Accessed 29 April 2012]

Habermas, J. 1984. The theory of communicative action: Vol 1. Lifeworld and system critique of functionalist reason. Boston: Beacon Press.

Habermas, J. 1987. The theory of communicative action: Vol 2. Reason and the rationalisation of society. Boston: Beacon Press.

47

Haight, A. 2012. ‘Hungry for hands-on’: talented, inner-city engineering students, applied learning and employer engagement in a vocational-learning trajectory, Journal of Education and Work, 25:4, 381-402

Hakala, J. 2009. The future of the academic calling? Junior researchers in the entrepreneurial university. Higher Education, 57(2): 173-190.

Kemmis, S. 2005. Knowing practice: searching for saliences. Pedagogy, culture and society, 13 (3): 391-426.

Kezar, A. 2005. Redesigning for collaboration within higher education institutions: An exploration into the developmental process. Research in Higher Education, 46(7): 831-860.

Kungliga Tekniska Hogskola 2012. Competence Centres. Available at: http://www.kth.se/ [Accessed 1 May 2012].

Loughborough University 2011. Facts and figures. Available at: http://www.lboro.ac.uk/admin/ar/planning/docs/FactsandFigures_2011.pdf[Accessed 1 May 2011].

Lave, J. and Wenger, E. 1991. Situated Learning: legitimate peripheral participation.Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Layton, D. 1993. Technology’s challenge to science education: cathedral, quarry or company store? Buckingham/Philadelphia: Open University Press.

Luckett, K. 2007. Methodology matters: methodological possibilities for quality improvement. Perspectives in Education , 25 (3), 1-11.

Mathieson, S. 2012. Disciplinary cultures of teaching and learning as socially situated practice: rethinking the space between social constructivism and epistemological essentialism from the South Africanexperience, Higher Education, 63: 549–564.

Max-Neef, M.A 2005. Foundations of transdisciplinarity. Ecological Economics 53: 5-16.

McKenna, S. & Quinn, L. 2012. Lost in translation: transformation in the first round of institutional audits. South African Journal of Higher Education, 26 (5): 1033–1044.

McNamara, J. 2013. The challenge of assessing professional competence in work integrated learning, Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 38:2, 183-197.

48

Morrow, W. 2003/2009. Epistemic values in curriculum transformation. In Morrow, W. (ed.) Bounds of Democracy: epistemological access in higher education. Pretoria: HSRC Press.

Muller, J. 2009. Forms of knowledge and curriculum coherence, Journal of Education and Work, 22 (3): 205–227.

Neumann, R., Parry, S. and Becher, T. 2002. Teaching and learning in their disciplinary contexts: a conceptual analysis. Studies in Higher Education 27: 405-418.

Nowotny, H., Scott, P. & Gibbons, M. 2001. Re-thinking science. Knowledge and the public in an age of uncertainty. Cambridge: Polity Press.

Olson, J. & Lang, M. 2004. Science and technology and the didactics ofcitizenship. Journal of Curriculum Studies. 36(5) 543-553.

Polytechnique Montreal 2012. Polytechnique-at-a-glace. http://www.polymtl.ca

Quinn, L. and Boughey, C. 2009. A case study of an institutional audit: a social realist account. Quality in Higher Education 15(3): 263--278.

Richardson, B., Dahlgren, M.A. & Higgs, J. 2004. Practice epistemology: implications for education, practice and research. In Higgs, J., Richardson, B. and Dahlgren, M.A. Developing practice knowledge forhealth professionals. Oxford: Butterworth-Heinemann.

Ryan, G., Toohey, S. & Huges, C. 1996. The purpose, value and structure of the practicum in higher education: a literature review. Higher Education, 31: 355-377.

Ryser, L., Halseth, G., & Thien, D. 2009. Strategies and intervening factors influencing student social interaction and experiential learning in an interdisciplinary research team. Research in Higher Education,50(3), 248-267.

Ryerson Polytechnic 2012. Experiential Learning. Available at: http://www.ryerson.ca/experiential/index.html [Accessed 30 April 2012].

Saunders, M. 2006. From ‘organisms’ to ‘boundaries’: the uneven development of theory narratives in education, learning and work connections. Journal of Education and Work, 19 (1): 1-27.

49

Sheffield Hallam University 2012. Work placements. Available at http://www.shu.ac.uk/employability/work-placements.html [Accessed 1 May 2012].

Schön, D. (1983). The reflective practitioner: how professionals think in action. Aldershot: Avebury.

Scribner, S. (1984). Studying working intelligence. In Rogoff, B. & Lave, J. (Eds.) Everyday cognition: its development in social context. Cambridge, MA:Harvard University Press.

Shay, S., Oosthuizen, M., Paxton, P., and van der Merwe, R. 2012. Towards a principled basis for curriculum differentiation: lessons from a comprehensive university. In Bitzer, E. and Botha, M. (eds) Curriculum inquiry in South African Higher Education. Stellenbosch: SUNMedia.

Shore, S. and Janet Groen, J. 2009. After the ink dries: doing collaborative international work in higher education, Studies in Higher Education, 34 (5): 533-546.

Solbrekke, T.D. & Englund, T. 2011. Bringing professional responsibility back in, Studies in Higher Education, 36:7, 847-861.

Stiwne, E.E. and Jungert, T. 2010. Engineering students’ experiences of transition from study to work. Journal of Education and Work, 23 (5): 417-437.

Stokols, D., Harvey, R., Gress, J., Fuqua, J., & Phillips, K. 2005. In vivo studies of transdisciplinary scientific collaboration: lessons learned and implications for active living research. American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 28(2), 202-213.

Swindale University of Technology 2003. Work-integrated learning: a model for effective learning and engagement. Available at: http://www.lilydale.swinburne.edu.au/crd/documents/LAN_1578.pdf [Accessed 30 April 2012].

Steur, J.M., Jansen, E.P.W.A. & Hofman, W.H.A. 2012. Graduateness: an empirical examination of the formative function of university education. Higher Education, DOI 10.1007/s10734-012-9533-4

Titchen, A. 2000. Professional craft knowledge in patient-centred nursing and the facilitation of its development. Oxford: Ashdale Press.

50

Trowler, P. 2010. Large scale university curriculum change: from practice to theory (and back again). Keynote address, Tomorrow’s Sustainable Universities: Sustainable University - Current Experience,Future Challenges and Opportunities 2 day Conference of Bradford 15-16July 2010.

Wheelahan, L. 2007. How competency-based training locks the working class out of powerful knowledge: a modified Bernsteinian analysis, British Journal of Sociology of Education, 28: 637–651.

Wheelahan, L. 2010. Why knowledge matters in education: a social realist argument. Oxford: Routledge.

Winberg, C. 2012. ‘We’re engaged’: mechanical engineering in the community. In Trowler, P., Bamber, V. and Saunders, M. (Eds.) Reconceptualising Tribes and Territories in Higher Education: Practices in the 21st Century. London: Routledge, p. 142-155.

Winberg, C., Engel-Hills, P., Garraway, J. & Jacobs, C. 2013. Professional knowledge and the purpose of professional higher education. Kagisano 9 (The Aims of Higher Education): 164-191.

Winberg, C., Engel-Hills, P., Rip, A. & Winberg, S. 2014. The ethicsof curriculum development: engineers and technicians in a context of development. Proceedings of the 2014 IEEE International Symposium on Ethics in Engineering, Science, and Technology, Ethics’2014, 23-24 May, 2014 Chicago Marriott O’Hare, Chicago, IL, USA. Available at http://sites.ieee.org/ethics-conference/

Whitchurch, C. 2012. Expanding the parameters of academia. Higher Education, 64: 99–117.

Whitely, R. (1984). The intellectual and social organization of the sciences. Oxford:Clarendon Press.

Young, M. (2009). Education, globalization and the ‘voice of knowledge’. Journal of Education and Work, 22: 193–204.

Young, M. & Muller, J. 2010.Three educational scenarios for the future: lessons from the sociology of knowledge. European Journal of Education, 45 (1, Part 1): 11-27.

University of Canberra 2012. Work-integrated Learning. Available at: http://www.canberra.edu.au/wil/attachments/pdf/wil-brochure.pdf [Accessed 29 April 2012].

51

Young-Pugh, R.G. 2005. Architectural practice and education in South Africa: from local transformation to global participation. Journal of Architectural Education, 58 (3): 33-42.

52

APPENDIX 1

Database: international benchmarking of funding for workplace learning (100 UTS)

Country

Institution Level/type of WPL

Funding Notes

C D B M P U S W E

Argent.

Beunos AiresIT

X X 5 7 X € X X X Engineering; Spanish (foreign students) 1880 u/g; 570 p/g students; no WPL; collaboration 500 companies

Argent.

National TU X X 5 7 7 € X X X Founded 1952; Engineering; 29 campuses across country; technical docta; no WPL; research collaboration

Australia

Canberra U X X 3 7 7 € X £ € SET, Design, Health, Law, Business; WPL as 12 credit ‘open elective’; 12,000 students – earmarked funding

Australia

Flinders U X 3 3 7 7 € X £ € Engineering & general programmes; 18 835 students; WIL/WEI & research projects – earmarked funding

Australia

Griffiths U X X 3 7 7 € X £ € Engineering & general programmes; top 300/5% in world; 50,000 students; WIL electives – earmarked fund

Australia

Queensland UT

X X 3 7 7 € X £ € Engineering & general programmes; 40,000 students; Engineering: 12–credit5–6 month Placement

Australia

RMIT X 3 5 7 7 € X X € Design & Technology, some TAFE courses; ranked in top 100 Engineering Us;74,000 students; WPL in dips

Australia

South Australia U

X 3 5 7 7 € X X € Engineering & general programmes; 36,000 students (offers some ‘associate’ degrees);

Australia

Swinburne UT X 3 5 7 7 € X ¥ € Engineering & general programmes & TAFE courses; diplomas – postdocs; WIL/WPL elective in 3rd yr u/g

Australia

Sydney UT X X 5 7 7 € X ¥ X Engineering & general programmes; focus on research-based work projects;

53

Austria

Graz UT X X 5 7 7 € X ¥ X Engineering Hochshule since 1865, university since 1975; doctorates since1901; 11,000 students; no WPL

Austria

Leoben U X X 5 7 7 € X ¥ X Engineering & genral programmes; hochschule since 1904, doctorates since 1906; 2,700 students; no WPL

Austria

Vienna UT X X 5 7 7 € X ¥ X Engineering Hochshule since 1872, university since 1975; doctorates since1901; 15,000 students; no WPL

Belarus

Brest State TU

X X 5 7 7 € X ¥ X 4,000 students; four engineering faculties + ‘extra mural’ dept offers short courses to industry; no WPL.

Belgium

Erasmus Hogesch

X 3 5 7 X € X £ X General & engineering; ‘academization’ for doctoral degrees; 4,500 students; no WPL; Compostela group

Canada Algonquin college

X 3 3 X X € $ ¥ € U/g college, offers diplomas and degrees, optional cooperative education,18,000 f/t; 36,000 p/t.

Canada British Columbia

3 3 3 X X € $ ¥ € Certificates, diplomas & degrees; 16,600 full-time, 31,600 part-time; Centre for Workplace Education.

Canada Montréal EP X X 5 7 7 € X ¥ X Ėcole Polytechnique; Engineering focus; Has CCE with industry courses; noWPL; 6,900 u/g; 1,800 p/g

Canada U Ontario IT X 3 5 7 7 € X ¥ X General and Engineering; 8,4000 students; Education and clinical placements; no WPL in engineering.

Canada Saskatchewan 3 3 3 X X € X ¥ X SIAST has four campuses (Regina, Saskatoon, Moose Jaw, Prince Albert) links with 700 employer orgs;

Canada Southern Alberta

3 3 3 X X € X ¥ X 71,000 students; 1,000 business and industry partners – WPL; generates $1.6 billion of economic activity

Canada Ryserson Poly

X 3 3 7 7 € $ ¥ € Degrees in 1971; 28,000 student; 2,700 academic staff; Experiential learning/rotational.

China Hong Kong Poly U

X 3 5 7 7 € X ¥ € Founded as government ‘trade school’, gained university status in 1994; awards diplomas & degrees; WPL

54

Czech R

Brno UT (BUT)

X X 5 7 7 € X ¥ X Research-intensive; engineering focus; high tech – no WPL; many collaborations http://www.vutbr.cz/en/

Czech R

Czech TU X X 5 7 7 € X ¥ X Founded in 1707, it is one of the oldest technical universities.

Czech R

Liberec TU X X 5 7 7 € X ¥ X Research-intensive; Engineering (5 faculties) + health (1 faculty); no WPL, many research collaborations

Czech R

Ostrava TU X X 5 7 7 € X ¥ € Engineering (7 faculties); research-intensive industry collaborations; nopractice-based WPL; 22,000 stds.

Denmark

Denmark UT X 3 5 7 7 € X ¥ € Engineering and programmes; WPL ‘flexible Master’s’

Finland

Kemi-Tornio UAS

X 3 5 7 7 € X ¥ € UAS = university of applied sciences (ammattikorkeokoulu); offer full rangeof degrees; industry partners.

Finland

Turku UAS X 3 5 7 7 € X ¥ € UAS = university of applied sciences (ammattikorkeokoulu); offer full rangeof degrees; industry partners.

France Paris IT X X X 7 7 € X ¥ X Grand école (higher education engineering institute) – awards only M & D degrees

France Troyes UT X X 5 7 7 € X ¥ X Université technologique

France Toulouse EP X X 5 7 7 € X ¥ X Ėcole Polytechnique

Germany

Berlin IT X X 5 7 7 € X ¥ X Technische Universität, Founded 1770; 30,000 students; awards doctoral degrees, member of TU9

Germany

Bremen X X 5 7 7 € X ¥ X University of applied sciences; offers all degrees; industry collaborative research, no WPL.

Germany

Dresden UT X X 5 7 7 € X ¥ X Founded 1824, 35,000 students; member of TU9 – largest TU in Germany; 3 out 4 Us in Saxony are TUs

Germany

Niedersächsische

X X 5 7 7 € X ¥ X Technische hochschule (professionally-oriented teaching-focussed; awards B & M), D deg with Hanover U

German Karlsruhe IT X X 5 7 7 € X ¥ X Founded 1825, 18,000 students; member of TU9

55

y

Greece Athens TU X X ? ? ? € X ¥ X Only 2 polytechnics/technical universities in Greece; confer 4-year professional B Degrees.

Greece Crete TU X X 5 7 7 € X ¥ X Est 1977; 5 engineering faculties; 188 academic staff; 2,300 u/g & 563 p/g students; no WPL.

Hungary

Miskolc X X 5 7 7 € X ¥ X World’s first IT (prev Berg-Schola) est. in Austro-Hungarian Empire in 1735 by Chamber of Vienna

Hungary

Budapest UT&E

X X 5 7 7 € X ¥ X Budapest UT & Economics, est. 1782 is one of the world’s oldest.

India Delhi IT X X 5 7 7 € X ¥ X Engineering focus; sponsored research and consultancy; 4-yr B Tech degree, M & D

India N.G. Nagaswame

3 3 X X X € X ¥ € Basic Engineering; Polytechnic; offers 3-yr diploma which provide ‘lateral’ entrance to B-deg at a university.

Iran Amirkabir UT X X 5 7 7 € X ¥ X First UT in Iran – est. 1956; 3,000 students; ‘Iran's mother industrial university’; 15 Engineering depts;

Iran Sharif UT X X 5 7 7 € X ¥ X Est 1966; 8,000 students; engineering focus; all departments offer B.S., M.S. and Ph.D. degree programs

Iraq Iraq UT X 3 3 X X € X ¥ € Est. 1975; specialised engineering (e.g., petroleum engineering); undergraduate; industry linkages

Iraq Basrah TC X 3 3 X X € X ¥ € Basrah Techical College; founded 1995; 5 Engineering faculties; u/g degrees; industry linkages

Ireland

Dublin IT X X 5 7 7 € X ¥ X Previously degs in association with University of Dubin, Trinity College; general + Eng, all levels; no WPL

Ireland

Waterford IT X 3 3 7 7 € X ¥ € Est. as Regional Technical College 1970; awarded Institute of Technologystatus in 1998; 6,000 f/t; 3,000 f/t

Israel Israel UT X X 5 7 7 € X ¥ X Est. 1912; research-intensive; ranked 38 in the world; 13,000 students; ‘technology transfer’ programmes.

56

Italy Milan Poly X X 5 7 7 € X ¥ X Politecnico di Milano; Engineering, architecture & design; 30,000 u/g; 900 PhDs; local contribution, R&D

Italy Torino Poly X X 5 7 7 € X ¥ X Politecnico di Torino; 5,000 students; ‘innovation for business’ – major restructuring in Italy…

Jamaica

Jamaic UT 3 3 3 X X € $ € € Est 1955; general and engineering; Cert – u/g degree; WBL and professional linkages; U & FET linkages

Japan Kyushu IT X 3 3 7 7 € X ¥ € Located on Japan’s ‘Silicon Island’; career-oriented education; innovative courses and excellent teaching

Japan Osaka IT X X 5 7 7 € X ¥ X Research intensive; Engineering & IST focus; industry collaboration for R&D

Japan Toyko IT X X 5 7 7 € X ¥ X Ed for ‘engineering, researchers & entrepreneurs’; 5,000 students – focuson p/g

Jordan Balqa Applied U

X X 3 X X € X ¥ € The only technical university in Jordan; Est. 1999; offers B and associate degrees; 20.000 students

Malaysia

Malaysia IT X 5 5 X X € X ¥ € Engineering at diploma and B level; Commercialisation of research; ‘technopreur’

Mauriti

Mauritius UT X 3 5 7 X € X ¥ € The only technical university in Mauritius; est. 2000; ‘awards’ (i.e., certificates) programme; u/g & M deg

Netherl

Delft TU X X 5 7 7 € X ¥ X Delft hogeschole; research-intensive, awards degrees

Netherl

Eindhoven TU X X 5 7 7 € X ¥ X Research-intensive; awards all degrees.

Netherl

Enschede TU X X 5 7 7 € X ¥ X General and engineering; entrepreneurial focus; impact on Eastern Netherlands through coll. research

New Z Auckland UT X 3 5 7 7 € X ¥ € The only NZ polytechnic to have full university status; career focus and applied research collaborations.

New Z Waikato IT X 3 5 X X € $ ¥ € Grants diplomas and degrees

57

New Z Wellington Poly

X 3 5 X X € $ ¥ € Grants diplomas and degrees

Namibia

Namibia Poly 3 6 6 X X € $ € € Est 1994; certificate – M degrees; member of SATN – similar to SA UoTs.

Nigeria

Federal UT Akure

? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? Est. 1981; General, focus engineering & agriculture;

Nigeria

Kwara State Poly

X 5 X X X ? ? ? ? Est 1971; General and engineering programmes (diplomas); ‘Build, Operate and Transfer’ (BOT)

Pakistan

Pakistan I EAS

X X 5 7 7 € X ¥ X Engineering and Applied Sciences; focus on atomic energy; all degrees; no WPL

Philippin

Cebu ITU X X 5 7 X € X ¥ X The premier engineering university in the Philippines; awards B & M degrees; not WPL

Poland Śláska Politechnik

X X 5 7 X € X ¥ X Est. 1946; offers B & M with engineering/technology focus; applied research; 14 Eng faculties, 30,000 stds

Portugal

Lisbon Poly X X 3 6 X € X ¥ X Professionally-oriented, practical focus, teaching-intensive, awards B and M degrees

Russia Bauman Moscow

X X 5 7 7 € X ¥ X Bauman Moscow State Technical University, est.1830 as an Emperor's Vocational School; 18,000 sts; p/g

Russia St Petersburg Poly

X X 5 7 7 € X ¥ X Est. 1899; ‘innovation university’; research intensive; industry collaborative research.

Singapor

Singapore Poly

X 3 X X X € $ ¥ € Offers 3-year diploma in engineering fields, provides lateral access to university B deg.

Sri Lanka

Sri Lanka IIT

3 3 5 7 7 € $ ¥ X Institute of Information Technology; certificate – M programmes; softwaredevelopment/consultancy

Slovakia

Slovak UT X X 5 7 7 € X ¥ X Bratislava; 7 Engineering faculties, top 500 U;

S. CUT 3 6 6 7 7 € $ € € Offers diplomas, B Tech, M Tech, D Tech; co-operative education

58

Africa

S. Africa

CPUT 3 6 6 7 7 € $ € € Offers diplomas, B Tech, M Tech, D Tech; co-operative education

S. Africa

DUT 3 6 6 7 7 € $ € € Offers diplomas, B Tech, M Tech, D Tech; co-operative education

S. Africa

MUT 3 6 6 7 7 € $ € € Offers diplomas, B Tech, M Tech, D Tech; co-operative education

S. Africa

TUT 3 6 6 7 7 € $ € € Offers diplomas, B Tech, M Tech, D Tech; co-operative education

S. Africa

VUT 3 6 6 7 7 € $ € € Offers diplomas, B Tech, M Tech, D Tech; co-operative education

Sweden Chalmers UT X 3 5 7 7 € X ¥ X Chalmers awards all degrees; 10,000 students; industry research partnerships; sustainability research.

Sweden Royal IT X X 5 7 7 € X ¥ X Stockholm: Kungliga Tekniska Hogskola; 16,000 students; 4,500 academic staff; research-intensive.

Switzerl

ETH Zurich X X 5 7 7 € X ¥ X Est 1855; 17,000 students; SET focus; research intensive; many industry partnerships.

Thailand

Pathumwan IT ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? Est. 1932; Engineering and Education; full university status in 1999.

Turkey Istanbul TU X X 5 7 7 € X ¥ X Istanbul Technical University (ITU) est. 1773 during Ottoman Empire,; 21,000 students; ranked 108th

Turkey İzmir IT (IYTE)

X X 5 7 7 € X ¥ X Est. 1992; engineering specialism from Yildiz University; Faculties of Science, Engineering and Architecture

UK LoughboroughU

X 3 3 7 7 € $ ¥ € Previously Loughborough UT (only user of designation ‘UT ‘in UK); 16,000students; research-intensive

UK Sheffield Hallam

X 3 3 7 7 € $ ¥ € General and engineering; strong focus on employability; has work placement office.

59

UK UMIST X X 5 7 7 € ¥ ¥ X University of Manchester Institute of Science & Technology; 40,000 students Est. Owens College 1851.

US Georgia Tech X X 5 7 7 € ¥ ¥ X Engineering and general; research-intensive; 20,000 students; no practice-based WPL

US MIT X X 5 7 7 φ ¥ ¥ X Private HE, there is no external examination at MIT, industry collaboration/industry funded research.

US Rensselaer Poly

X X 5 7 7 φ X ¥ X General and engineering degrees; short courses to industry/working professionals; 5,500 u/g & 1,000 p/g

US Rochester IT X X 5 7 7 φ X ¥ X Est. 1825; ‘Comprehensive’ university; work/study opportunities; 14,225 u/g and 2,980 p/g students.

Venezuel

Manipal IT X 3 5 7 7 φ $ ¥ X Est 1975; private institutos de technologia; has placement office and ‘practiceschool’ for industry problems

Vietnam

Hanoi U of S&T

X X 5 7 7 € ¥ ¥ € General and engineering; 35,000 u/g; 2,000 p/g – has trained 80,000 engineers; 400 industry research pjs

Zambia Zambia IT ? ? ? ? X ? ? ? ? Aka ‘Copperbelt University’; Est 1987;

Zimbabw

Harare IT X 3 3 X X € € € € Est. 1988 as VET centre, full university in 2005. 268 students all u/g – engineering focus;

Zimbabw

National U of ST

? ? ? ? X ? ? ? ? Est 1982; undergraduate focus?

60

9/9/1 [SURVEY PREVIEW MODE] SATN Funding Work-integrated Leaming questionnaire

www.surveymonkey.com/s.aspx?PREVIEW_MODE=DO_NOT_USE_THIS_UNK_FOR_COu.ECTION&s

SATN Funding Work-integrated Learning questionnaire

0 This question requires an answer.

*1. Name of institutionv

2. Name of faculty and department or unit

0 This question requires an answer.

*3. Name of programme/qualification

0 This question requires an answer.

*4. What is the current status of the programme/qualification?Degree programme with DHET & HEQC approval

Degree programme awaiting DHET and/or HEQC approval Diploma

programme with DHET & HEQC approval

Diploma programme awaiting DHET and/or HEQC approval

Existing National Diploma programme

Existing B Tech programme Other

(please specify)

0 This question requires an answer.

*5. Does the field of practice for which the programme qualifies the

9/9/1 [SURVEY PREVIEW MODE] SATN Funding Work-integrated Leaming questionnaire

...

candidate have aprofessional council or controlling body?

Yes No

www.surveymonkey.com/s.aspx?PREVIEW_MODE=DO_NOT_USE_THIS_UNK_FOR_COu.ECTION&s

9/9/1 [SURVEY PREVIEW MODE] SATN Funding Work-integrated Leaming questionnaire

Not sure

If yes, please provide the name of the council or body

0 This question requires an answer.

*6. Does the programme include workplace learning (or a cooperative

educationplacement)?

Yes

No

Not sure

0 This question requires an answer.

*7. At which level does the workplace learning component occur?During the first year During the

second year During the third

year During the fourth year

After completion of the programme (but before graduation)

Not sure

Other (please explain)

0 This question requires an answer.

*8. What is the duration of time that students spend in the workplace?Less than 6 months 6 months

More than 6 months Not sure

Other (please specify time)

0 This question requires an answer.

...

9/9/1 [SURVEY PREVIEW MODE] SATN Funding Work-integrated Leaming questionnaire

*9. Relative to the programme as a whole, what percentage is the

workplace learning

www.surveymonkey.com/s.aspx?PREVIEW_MODE=DO_NOT_USE_THIS_UNK_FOR_COu.ECTION&s

9/9/1 [SURVEY PREVIEW MODE] SATN Funding Work-integrated Leaming questionnaire

(or cooperative education) component?

Less than 10% Between 1O - 15%

Between 15 - 20%

More than 25% Not sure

If you know the exact %, please pro\1de this:

0This question requires an answer.

*1O. Is the workplace learning component required by one or more of the

following?(you can select more than one response)Professional Council

Professional Body Ad'l.4sory

Committee Academic Department

Institutional Policy

Not sure

Other (please specify)

0This question requires an answer.

*11.What forms of workplace learning does your programme include?

Please selectas many options as required from the following list::Cooperative education Short

work placement Long work

placement Clinical practice

Field work Site \

1sits

Job-shadowing

...

9/9/1 [SURVEY PREVIEW MODE] SATN Funding Work-integrated Leaming questionnaire

Rotational placements (i.e., more than 1 clinical or work

placement) Obser\1ng of professional practice

www.surveymonkey.com/s.aspx?PREVIEW_MODE=DO_NOT_USE_THIS_UNK_FOR_COu.ECTION&s

9/9/1 [SURVEY PREVIEW MODE] SATN Funding Work-integrated Leaming questionnaire

Internship Ser'Jice--

leaming

Other (please specify)

0 This question requires an answer.

*12.What kind of support is provided for students undergoing

workplace learning?Please select as many responses as required:

Workplace mentor Workplace

super'Jisor

Regular visits by academic lecturer

Regular 'debriefing' meetings Academic

mentor

Academic mentoring 'lia Skype

Academic mentoring 'lia website or Leaming Management System (LMS)

Academic mentoring 'lia social media (e.g., Facebook)

Peer support (e.g., 'lia social media)

Other (please specify)

0This question requires an answer.

*13. How is the workplace learning component assessed? Please select as

manyoptions as relevant to your programme:Workplace super'Jisor/mentor assesses practice

Academic lecturer/mentor assesses practice

Both workplace super'Jisors/mentors and academics assess practice

Students keep logs of their acti'lities for assessment

...

9/9/1 [SURVEY PREVIEW MODE] SATN Funding Work-integrated Leaming questionnaire

Students dewlop portfolios for assessment

Students dewlap &-portfolios for assessment Student

make presentations for assessment

Students undergo practical examination (e.g., OSCE)

Students write essays for assessment

Student write exam

www.surveymonkey.com/s.aspx?PREVIEW_MODE=DO_NOT_USE_THIS_UNK_FOR_COu.ECTION&s

9/9/1 [SURVEY PREVIEW MODE] SATN Funding Work-integrated Leaming questionnaire

Other (please specify)

0 This question requires an answer.

*14. How is the workplace learning component funded? (you can select

more thanone response)

DHET subsidy Student

fees

Students carry own costs (separate from fees)

Employer University

Professional Council/Body

State sector (e.g., state hospital, state

laboratory) Clinical grant

Don't know

Other (please specify)

0 This question requires an answer.

*15. Please estimate the percentage contribution for workplace

learning from thefollowing funders of your programme:More than 70% Between 50 - 70% Between 20-50% Less than

20% DHET Subsidy

Student fees Students

themselws Employer

University

Professional

Council/Body

...

9/9/1 [SURVEY PREVIEW MODE] SATN Funding Work-integrated Leaming questionnaire

State Sector (e.g.,State hospital, state

laboratory)

Clinical grant

www.surveymonkey.com/s.aspx?PREVIEW_MODE=DO_NOT_USE_THIS_UNK_FOR_COu.ECTION&s

9/9/1 [SURVEY PREVIEW MODE] SATN Funding Work-integrated Leaming questionnaire

Other (please explain funding arrangements)

0This question requires an answer.

*16.What do you estimate to be the cost per student work placement

in yourprogramme?

No/minimal costs

Some costs (e.g., RSOO - R1,000 per student)

Moderate costs (e.g., R1,500 - R3,000)

High costs (e.g., more than R4,000)

Don't know

Other (please specify)

0 This question requires an answer.

*17. What percentage of the total course expense do you estimate theworkplace learning component to be?Less than 5%

Between 5 - 10%

Between 10 - 20%

Between 20 - 30%

More than 30% Don't know

If you know the exact %, please pro\4ide this:

0 This question requires an answer.

*18. Does the programme include forms of work-integrated learning

other than workplace learning, cooperative education or service

learning? Please select as

...

9/9/1 [SURVEY PREVIEW MODE] SATN Funding Work-integrated Leaming questionnaire

many as required from the following list: Problem-based/problem-oriented leaming

Project-based learning

Simulated learning (using simulation software)

...

9/9/1 [SURVEY PREVIEW MODE] SATN Funding Work-integrated Leaming questionnaire

Role play

Skills laboratory

Virtual workplace learning (&-learning programme)

Research projects in collaboration with professional/industry

partners Guest lecturers from profession/industry

External examiners from profession/industry

External moderators from profession/industry

Other (please specify)

19. Are there any special funding arrangements for fonns of work-integrated learning (other than workplacements or cooperative

education)? Please explain:

20. Do you have any comments on how work-integrated in your

programme is, or should be, funded?

Cone

Powered by SurveyMonkeyCheck out our sarrple surveys and create your own now !