UNIVERSITY VOCATIONAL AWARDS COUNCIL For further information, please contact: University Vocational Awards Council University of Bolton Chadwick Campus Chadwick Street BOLTON BL2 1JW Tel: 01204 903351 Fax: 01204 903354 Incorporating into Higher Education Programmes the Learning People do for, in and through Work Email: [email protected] Website: www.uvac.ac.uk A guide for higher education managers and practitioners Produced by the University Vocational Awards Council Edited by Lyn Brennan and David Hemsworth Sponsored by the LCCI Commercial Education Trust Incorporating into Higher Education Programmes the Learning People do for, in and through Work A guide for higher education managers and practitioners Produced by the University Vocational Awards Council Edited by Lyn Brennan and David Hemsworth Sponsored by the LCCI Commercial Education Trust 2 Incorporating into Higher Education Programmes the Learning People do for, in and through Work Contents Foreword 3 Introduction 4 Chapter 1: Chapter 2: Chapter 3: Chapter 4: Chapter 5: Chapter 6: Chapter 7: Chapter 8: Chapter 9: Employer engagement and work-based learning: the higher education context, by Lyn Brennan 7 What is the higher education work-based learning ‘product’?, by Lyn Brennan 20 Working in partnership: how to work with others to deliver a demand-led approach to workforce development, by Lyn Brennan 43 Designing work-based learning programmes: how to use National Occupational Standards, by David Hemsworth 55 Accrediting prior experiential learning (APEL), by David Hemsworth 61 Negotiated work-based learning in part-time higher education programmes, by Garth Rhodes and Gillian Shiel 69 Recognising work experience in full-time degree programmes, by Liz Rhodes 82 Integrating research and workforce development activities, by Carol Costley 88 Learning, teaching and assessment of work-based learning in higher education, by David Young 96 Chapter 10: How to engage employers, by David Hemsworth 103 Chapter 11: Recruiting and retaining work-based learners, by David Hemsworth 116 © 2007 University Vocational Awards Council ISBN: 978-0-907311-23-2 University of Bolton Incorporating into Higher Education Programmes the Learning People do for, in and through Work 3 Foreword UVAC was formed in 1999 by the higher education sector to champion higher vocational learning for the sector. Our membership now encompasses over 100 institutions delivering vocational higher education and partner organisations who share this common objective. In addition to the advocacy and policy work normally expected of a membership organisation UVAC has, since its formation, been committed to identifying and disseminating good practice and guidance to support members’ development and delivery of high quality vocational provision. In recent years we have published guidance on supporting progression from Apprenticeship to higher education, using National Occupational Standards and maximising the value of APEL. In 2006, with the support of LCCI Commercial Education Trust, we launched ‘Integrating WorkBased learning into Higher Education’. This seminal report was designed to set the agenda for recognising work-based learning in higher education. Building on the success of this report, UVAC and LCCI Commercial Education Trust have collaborated to produce this support manual which has been designed for practitioners engaged in the development and delivery of work based learning programmes. Higher education support and recognition of work-based learning are crucial to the development of UK national competitiveness. Recognising work-based learning will also help widen participation in higher education. I am therefore delighted that LCCI Commercial Education Trust has supported UVAC in producing this publication which I commend to all those involved in the delivery of vocational higher education. Professor Sir David Melville CBE Chair University Vocational Awards Council 4 Incorporating into Higher Education Programmes the Learning People do for, in and through Work Introduction The period from March 2005 has been marked by an increasing emphasis on the involvement of higher education in the learning people do for, in and through work. Throughout this time, higher education policy has focused on the role of higher education in meeting the need for those higher level skills that are predicted to be so crucial for the future economic prosperity of the UK. The publication of the outcomes of the Leitch Review of Skills in December 2006, and of the interim report published the year before, has had the effect of prioritising strategies for moving employers centre stage in the design and delivery of training at all levels. Although the majority of the Leitch Report recommendations relate to skills up to Level 3, the predicted requirement of at least 40 per cent of adults with Level 4 qualifications by 2020 has meant that plans for the future of higher education are now concentrated around developing its capacity to meet these skills targets. The impact of the Leitch Report has been to reinforce the centrality of skills development at all levels of education, which in turn has led to a refocusing and realignment of previous policies. For example, widening participation remains a priority but has been refocused around developing coherent and connected routes from Level 3 through to postgraduate levels for vocational and work-based learners. Similarly, whilst the development of ‘graduateness’ continues to be seen as important, the concept is now more firmly associated with employability and takes account of the varied student body on part-time, short, work-based and professional courses. There is also concern that HE should meet the changing needs of learners who need to combine work and study for lifelong learning and CPD, by reviewing the suitability of its administrative, academic and pastoral resources. This last point recognises that the changing focus of higher education is not just about the needs of employers but is also about the needs of learners for lifelong career and personal development. The economic and social goals of increasing productivity, promoting enterprise and enhancing social equity can only be met through employee development that is more than just a response to short-term needs indicated by individual employers or employers’ organisations. This is good news for practitioners who have been engaged in vocational and work-based learning for many years, and for organisations such as UVAC that after years of feeling that they are operating at the margins of higher education now find themselves to be at its centre. There are dangers too, however; in the current flurry of policy and initiatives, it may be easy to forget that higher education has a long and successful history of supporting the learning people do for, in and through work. The contributors to this volume demonstrate that it is not necessary to start with a blank sheet, as there is already a substantial body of activity in the areas of work-based and vocational learning from which we can learn. UVAC and the LCCI Commercial Education Trust are highly indebted to them for sharing their experience and expertise in order that others may be empowered to take up the challenges that will arise as higher education moves to the heart of the skills agenda. We have been fortunate indeed in having practitioners with such a wealth of experience and expertise to share. In addition to the contributions from authors of individual chapters, UVAC also invited practitioners to share examples of good practice from their own institutions. Over thirty contributions were received and distributed to chapter authors who have used them to illustrate their sections where appropriate. Not everything will have been used, but it is hoped, with the permission, of the authors to put some of this material on the UVAC website. Out thanks go out to everyone who has submitted material for this purpose. Incorporating into Higher Education Programmes the Learning People do for, in and through Work 5 Chapter 1 provides an overview of the current, and constantly evolving, policy context relating to the incorporation of the learning people do for, in and through work into higher education. The pace of change in this area during the spring of 2007 has escalated dramatically, with policy initiatives and developments announced virtually daily. This has created difficulties throughout, but has been a particular problem for this chapter, as it has been necessary to update and amendment sections continually. For example, on the date that the chapter drafts were completed came the announcement that the DfES and DTI would no longer exist and would be replaced by three new Departments. The websites have already changed, which potentially could have meant changing all of the links; fortunately, the previous references do still carry through to the new website pages and it has not been necessary to make fundamental changes. Similarly, at the time of writing it has just been announced that the government’s Leitch Implementation Plan, which is particularly pertinent to this chapter, will be presented on 18 July 2007. It will be just too late to incorporate this, but by the time of publication, the information should be firmly established in the public domain. Chapter 2 describes some of the difficulties posed by attempts to produce typologies of workplace learning. It is necessary to find some way of categorising the learning people do for, in and through work, since the range, scope and nature of the activities are very variable. The chapter provides a four-fold classification: placement opportunities to enhance employability, initial qualifying programmes, foundation degrees, and workforce development programmes. For each type of programme, the chapter describes developments and initiatives that provide support for learners and those supporting them, both in the workplace itself and within HEIs and FECs. Chapters 3 to 11 offer examples from a range of contributors on particular aspects or workbased and work-related learning. We are fortunate in having such a wealth of experience and expertise to draw on and are grateful to the contributors for sharing with us the good practice they have built up over the years. The scope of the contributions varies considerably: some provide an overview of a wide range of activity around designing and delivering work-based and work-related programmes; others focus on specific aspects such as supporting APEL or working with national occupational standards. Chapter 3 focuses on working in partnership with employers, employees and employment representative bodies, and as well as national developments, looks at the significant amount of collaborative work currently being undertaken regionally by Lifelong Learning Networks, the Regional Skills Partnerships, and Regional Pathfinder projects. This section has a strong emphasis on the concept of brokerage between those who require skills development and those who can supply it, and offers some evaluation of the different models currently in use or being piloted. Chapter 4, very much in line with the centrality afforded to skills development in current higher education policy, provides an excellent guide to incorporating National Occupational Standards (NOS) into higher education programmes of study. Authored by David Hemsworth, this Report draws on work undertaken for a previous UVAC publication 1 and demonstrates how NOS in most vocational disciplines can provide appropriate tools to enhance work-based learning, thus ensuring that HE programmes meet employer demand for higher skills. 1 ROODHOUSE, S. and HEMSWORTH, D. (2004) Fit for Purpose: The use of National Occupational Standards in higher education to meet the needs of employment. A generic guide for curriculum designers and deliverers, UVAC. 6 Incorporating into Higher Education Programmes the Learning People do for, in and through Work Chapter 5, also by David Hemsworth, provides a very practical guide to integrating prior experiential learning into higher education programmes of study. He argues that APEL is an underused tool in workforce development and, drawing on a guide published by SEEC 2, discusses how APEL can be made a more integral part of work-based and work-related programmes. Chapter 6 looks at how work-based learning can be negotiated to comprise a complete award through part-time programmes of study. Garth Rhodes and Gillian Shiel draw on their wealth of experience at the University of Northumbria in utilising partnership agreements with organisations and learning contracts with individuals to negotiate and define learning pathways that integrate work-based and academic learning. The authors have been particularly generous in sharing with us their knowledge and understanding of the academic infrastructure that needs to be put in place if institutions are to develop their capacity to support negotiated work-based learning. Chapter 7, authored by Liz Rhodes at the National Council for Work Experience, focuses on good practice in supporting students on work placements or in gaining work experience. She discusses a Code of Practice developed by the NCWE in conjunction with ASET, The Association for Sandwich Education and Training. The Code is designed to ensure that the experience of students undertaking work experience, whether or not it is a structured part of a course, is as worthwhile as possible. Chapter 8 has been prepared by Carol Costley, Head of the Work-based Learning Research Centre at the University of Middlesex. The main focus of this chapter is on how advisers of work based learning (WBL) at all HE levels are able to impart research and development abilities to students on WBL modules and programmes where the module or programme requires them to undertake a work-based project. Chapter 9, authored by David Young from the University of Derby, features issues relating to the learning, teaching and assessment of work-based learning. Not only does this chapter draw on the considerable body of expertise that has been built up at the University of Derby, it also uses examples of the good practice established in a wide range of other HEIs and FECs. Chapter 10, authored by David Hemsworth, addresses the very topical issue of how to successfully engage with employers. It draws particularly on practice in developing and delivering foundation degrees, of which employer engagement is a defining characteristic. In addition to discussing ways in which HEIs and FECs may engage directly with employers, the chapter also provides examples of working with sector organisations, professional bodies, networks and partnerships to engage employers. Chapter 11, authored by David Hemsworth, has a rather different focus in that it looks at how to recruit and retain work-based learners. This chapter specifically looks at the marketing and promotion strategies deployed by HEIs and FECs to successfully engage work-based learners. The chapter is also concerned with how to retain work-based learners through the provision of appropriate support to learners, their supervisors and mentors. 2 JOHNSON, B. and WALSH, A. (2005) SEEC Companion to the QAA Guidelines on the Accreditation of Prior Learning, SEEC. Incorporating into Higher Education Programmes the Learning People do for, in and through Work 1 7 Employer engagement and work-based learning: the higher education context By Lyn Brennan 1. Introduction In the publication, Integrating Work-based Learning into Higher Education: A Good Practice Guide 3 completed in 2005, we noted that the policy agenda for higher education was increasingly driven by three main imperatives: ᔢ to enhance the contribution of higher education to economic competitiveness ᔢ to address changing skills requirements ᔢ to respond to the rise of the knowledge economy. In the two years since the date of publication, the pressure on higher education to implement these policies has escalated considerably. Whereas previously it was noted that higher education policy, particularly in relation to moving forward the skills agenda, had been piecemeal and fragmented; now there is evidence of a more coherent and integrated focus on the contribution that higher education can make to the development of higher level skills, especially those of adults already in the workforce. This shift in emphasis has been stimulated by the recommendations of the Leitch Report, published in December 2006, and the interim report in December 2005. Prior to these publications, the March 2005 White Paper, Getting on in business, getting on at work 4 provided a strong steer towards introducing strategies designed to enhance the skill levels of the workforce. Many of the recommendations of the Leitch Report were made known before final publication; as a result, all of the agencies concerned with higher and further education, plus HEIs and FECs themselves, have been actively engaged for some time in development activities and initiatives in anticipation of the recommendations. Indeed there is strong evidence that all key agencies – the Department for Education and Skills (DfES), the Higher Education Funding Council for England, (HEFCE), the Higher Education Academy (HEA), Universities UK, the Sector Skills Development Agency (SSDA), Sector Skills Councils and Foundation Degree Forward are now actively working together in order to create what is being widely described as a ‘step change’ in building an HE culture capable of delivering the targets set out in the Leitch Report. The focus for this concerted action is built on the concept of ‘employer engagement’ with further and higher education, in order to meet the targets for projected skills requirements at all levels; however, this section will be restricted to what is happening in relation to higher level skills at Level 4 and above. There are other themes, however, including the continuing concern to promote greater social justice through widening participation strategies and enhancing the provision of FE and HE by implementing the recommendations of the Further Education and Training Bill which completed its passage through the Lords in March 2007. 3 Integrating Work-Based Learning into Higher Education: A Guide to Good Practice (2005). A report by the University Vocational Awards Council, carried out by Lyn Brennan, sponsored by the LCCI Commercial Education Trust 4 Skills: Getting on in business, getting on at work, at www.dfes.gov.uk/skillsstrategy/uploads/documents/skills 8 Incorporating into Higher Education Programmes the Learning People do for, in and through Work 2. The Leitch Report, December 2006 Although the main part of the Leitch Report focuses on skills up to Level 3 and the role of further rather than higher education, there is also a strong commitment to extending employer engagement to the level of higher education and to building to building “a critical mass of capability and confidence in the HE sector.” 5 Leitch argues that the global economy, and particularly the global knowledge economy, is changing rapidly, with emerging economies such as India and China growing dramatically and challenging the competitiveness of the UK. The report also points to demographic pressures with an aging population, increasing technological change and global migration flows; of those people who will be in the workforce in 2020, 70% are already aged 20+. Taking into account the downturn from 2010 in the numbers of young people available to enter higher education prior to entering the labour market, it is clear that the pressure on higher education to redirect a significant section of its activities to the education of the adult population that is already in the labour force can only increase. The Leitch Report: aspirations for the economy 6: ᔢ to continue the growth in economic prosperity by realising a net benefit of £30 billion over 30 years from the implementation of the recommendations ᔢ to enhance productivity levels by 15% by 2020 ᔢ to create greater social justice through an employment growth rate of 10% ᔢ to address the implications for skills development created by demographic changes, given that 70% of the workforce of 2020 are already in work ᔢ to address the anticipated 50% increase in the share of highly skilled occupations such as managers and professionals ᔢ to maintain the wage returns of HE at a relatively stable rate whilst addressing a rise in demand for workers with higher level skills. A key message of the Leitch Report is that the pressure to compete in increasingly global contexts means that employers need their workers to engage in continuous skills development in order to improve their productivity. The Report suggests that there is a direct correlation between skills, productivity and education. Unless the UK can build on reforms to schools, colleges and universities and make its skills base one of its strengths, UK businesses will find it increasingly difficult to compete. Whereas hitherto skills have been regarded as a key lever in producing prosperity and fairness, skills are now increasingly regarded as the key lever. The message from all major agencies and organisations is that a radical step-change is needed in the relationship between higher education and employment. 5 Summary of survey undertaken on behalf of the DfES, reported by Marilyn Wedgwood, March 2007, entitled Employer Engagement – Higher Education for the Workforce: Barriers and Facilitators. Available at www.universitiesuk.ac.uk/learningafterLeitch/downloads/DfES%20Report.DOC 6 Derived from plenary presentation given by Freda Tallantyre at Work-Based Learning Futures Conference, University of Derby, Buxton, 19th April 2007 Incorporating into Higher Education Programmes the Learning People do for, in and through Work 9 These policies are not without their detractors: some commentators have suggested that current policies place too much emphasis on skills development, and too heavy a reliance on education as the solution to declining competitiveness. Coffield (2004, p. 284–5) 7 claims that the government sees skills development as leading to improved productivity in a ‘monocausal’ way, rather than as one amongst many other ‘economic, social, historical and cultural influences’. This more critical literature stresses the need to concentrate on other factors affecting productivity and the predicted low-skills crisis. These could include: greater state intervention in financial markets; more investment in research and development; greater involvement in the nature of the employment relationship; industrial policy; labour market regulation; more marketing of the benefits of training; and the alignment of the supply and demand sides of the skills equation.8 There are also concerns about the extent to which higher education should be dominated by a skills agenda, particularly given that there is evidence that there is broad satisfaction expressed by employers and others with the generic attributes of graduateness rather than specific employment related skills. It is feared that the curricula of higher education could come to be dominated by the inclusion of specific technical skills at the expense of the cognitive skills and qualities that employers value. However, although the detail of how the Leitch recommendations will be implemented must await the Comprehensive Spending Review (CSR), now expected to be completed by the autumn of 2007, it is clear that the heart of Government higher (and further) education policy in the coming few years will be to focus on skills development and qualifications as the solution to the projected skills deficits of the UK in comparison with other significant economies. The Leitch Report: headline recommendations for higher education: ᔢ priorities must switch away from schools to focus on strategies to increase adult skills ᔢ funded by a mix of state funding, employer funding and personal funding ᔢ an enhanced role for employers in shaping provision, thus creating a climate of demandled funding ᔢ key targets for higher education: to produce 40% with level 4 qualifications by 2020 (the DFES suggests 45% is more appropriate) ᔢ must be growing acceptance of the new 14–19 diplomas as a means of entry to higher education ᔢ more flexible access to higher education ᔢ more learning in, for, and through work ᔢ a greater emphasis on adult learning. 7 COFFIELD, F. (2004) ‘Evidence-based policy or policy-based evidence? The struggle over new policy for workforce development in England, in RAINBIRD et al., (eds.) (2004) (op. cit.) Cited by Judy Harris in her review of the academic literature on workplace learning, published as Annex A of the CHERI/KPMG report Towards a Strategy for Workplace Learning, published by HEFCE in 2006. 8 Based on the Review of Literature undertaken by Judy Harris for the CHERI/KPMG report, published by HEFCE in 2006, as above. 10 Incorporating into Higher Education Programmes the Learning People do for, in and through Work 3. Employer Engagement: Joint DfES, HEFCE, HEA, SSDA and FdF strategies Through 2006 and into 2007, the commitment to developing strategies for employer engagement has dominated higher and further education policy, resulting in a more integrated approach across several agencies and organisations. All of the main organisations involved with delivering higher education policy have expressed a commitment to working together to achieve the growth targets outlined in Leitch with targets of 5,000, 10,000, and then 20,000 additional work-based learners identified over the first three years. Employer engagement is identified as a priority in grant letters for all HE agencies and there are a number of initiatives already underway. Back in 2005, HEFCE Circular Letter 06/2005 invited bids for funding through the Strategic Development Fund to support employer engagement initiatives. Similar invitations to bid for funding were made by the DfES, including support for a project with UVAC to support in-company programme accreditation and development of postgraduate level qualifications at GlaxoSmithKline. Key aspects of this inter-agency approach are set out below. ᔢ Prioritise employer engagement for all HE agencies in grant letters ᔢ Address Leitch growth targets realistically (5,000, 10,000, 20,000 in first three years), showing increasing commitment to employer engagement with higher education ᔢ Support all HEIs in positioning themselves to contribute to the employer engagement agenda ᔢ Build on the work being undertaken through the Higher Level Skills Pathfinders, Lifelong Learning Networks, Employer Engagement pilots, Regional Skills Partnerships ᔢ Seek around 30 HEIs or partnerships to support the initial growth targets ᔢ Create a national credit transfer framework, to facilitate delivery of bite size and accredited modules, APEL, accreditation of in-company training ᔢ Amend funding (including Train to Gain type mechanisms), quality, PIs, data collection and other national systems to incentivise and reward this work ᔢ 100,000 participants in foundation degrees by 2010, including more HE in FE ᔢ Empower SSCs to approve vocational qualifications (as a condition of funding) ᔢ Develop sector-based qualification and credit frameworks. A number of reports and reviews, commissioned by one or other of the agencies involved, have informed the development of these policies. The main ones are listed below: Incorporating into Higher Education Programmes the Learning People do for, in and through Work 11 Checklist Useful information about higher education policy and employer engagement can be found in: Leitch Report 1. Prosperity for all in the global economy – world class skills, the Leitch Review of Skills, published on 5th December 2006. www.hm-treasury.gov.uk/media/6/4/leitchfinalreport051206.pdf or via links from other websites including DfES and HEFCE. 2. Skills in the UK: the long-term challenge, Interim Report from the Leitch Review of Skills, December 2005 at www.hmtreasury.gov.uk/independent-reviews/leitchreview/review_leitch_index.cfm HEFCE 3. HEFCE Circular Letter 06/2005 (Employer Engagement) at www.hefce.ac.uk/Pubs/Circlets/2006/c106_06/ 4. Brennan J, Little B, Radcliffe N, Towards a strategy for workplace learning HEFCE 2006. CHERI/KPMG Report, available on the web at www.hefce.ac.uk under Publications/R&D reports. 5. Employer Engagement: Engaging Employers with Higher Education, HEFCE strategy to support links between higher education and employers on skills and lifelong learning, November 2006, and Annex B to the above document, the HEFCE Implementation Plan. Both available at www.hefce.ac.uk/learning/employers/strat/Board_strategy_plus_annexes.pdf. 6. HEFCE Strategic Plan 2006–11 at www.hefce.ac.uk/pubs/hefce/2006/06_13 7. HEFCE Circular Letter number 03/2007: Allocation of Additional student numbers in 2008–9 for employer engagement at www.hefce.ac.uk/Pubs/circlets/2007/c103_07/ 8. HEFCE Circular Letter number 04/2007: Allocation of additional student numbers in 2008–9 at www.hefce.ac.uk/Pubs/circlets/2007/c104_07/ DfES 9. White Paper March 2006. Further Education: raising skills, improving life chances at www.dfes.gov.uk/publications/furthereducation/docs/6514-FE20White%20Paper 10. Further Education and Training Bill November 2006, www.dfes.gov.uk/publications/furthereducationandtrainingbill/ 11. Employer Engagement, Higher Education and the Workforce: Barriers and Facilitators. Report by Marilyn Wedgwood of a survey undertaken on behalf of the DfES, March 2007. www.universitiesuk.ac.uk/skills/downloads/mapping.pdf Foundation Degree Forward 12. Details of the FdF Strategic Plan 2006 – 8 can be downloaded from the website on www.fdf.ac.uk/about_fdf/ Universities UK 13. UUK, Skills and Employer Engagement: Policy, Progress and Emerging issues, A ‘mapping document’, prepared by Universities UK for its Skills Task Group, November 2006 at www.universitiesuk.ac.uk/skills/downloads/mapping.pdf 12 Incorporating into Higher Education Programmes the Learning People do for, in and through Work 14. UUK: Information for Members, Leitch Review of Skills: Final Report, 7th December 2006, can be accessed by members through the UUK extranet 15. UUK: Higher Level Learning: Universities and employers working together, November 2006, can be downloaded free through UUK bookstore at http://bookshop.universitiesuk.ac.uk/downloads/higher_level_learning.pdf Higher Education Academy 16. Work-based learning: illuminating the higher education landscape. A report prepared by the Higher Education Academy that describes the current situation of work-based learning in HE at www.heacademy.ac.uk/resources/publications/papersandmonographs Quality Assurance Agency 17. QAA Circular Letter 06/07 (CoP Section 9 Consultation) March 2007, provides a draft of the revised Section 9 of the Code of Practice relating to Work-based and Placement Learning. www.qaa.ac.uk/news/circularLetters/CL0607.asp Other agencies 18. CIHE, UVAC, HEA Briefings and Position Papers through 2006–7 are available on the websites: UVAC Publications can be accessed via www.uvac.ac.uk, CIHE Publications: www.cihe.uk.com/publications.php, HEA resources can be accessed at www.heacademy.ac.uk/resources. Currently, the pace of change relating to skills, work-based learning and employer engagement is so great and the number of organisations involved so large, that it is impossible to report every aspect. Some areas are discussed in other chapters; for example, placements, sandwich courses, foundation degrees and employability are the subjects of Chapter 2. Developments such as Lifelong Learning Networks, Regional Skills Partnerships, the new UK Commission for Employment and Skills (which replaces the Sector Skills Development Agency and the National Employment Panel) are discussed in Chapter 3. In this chapter, it is the key features of strategies for employer engagement that comprise the main focus. 4. HEFCE: An implementation strategy for employer engagement The most comprehensive statement of commitment to employer engagement comes from HEFCE. HEFCE has signalled its intention to support the implementation of the proposed recommendations by incentives rather than initiatives. These incentives link to funding streams and it is therefore literally the case that the majority of HEIs will have little choice but to engage with these agendas at least to some extent. Although the Leitch Report takes a long-term view, there are indications that strategies aimed at building the necessary critical mass of capability and confidence in the HE sector will be implemented quickly and effectively. Already a number of HEIs have sought assistance through the Strategic Development Fund to use third stream funding to create a second mission. These HEIs are building an institutional infrastructure and working to generate the cultural shifts that will be needed if their institutions are to become more business-facing. Current funding priorities by both HEFCE and the DfES suggest that the aim may be to go even further with a view to mainstreaming the higher level skills development of adults in work, and to place it on an equal footing with the more traditional business of HEIs of educating young people and promoting knowledge creation through research. Incorporating into Higher Education Programmes the Learning People do for, in and through Work 13 A number of initiatives and incentives that anticipated the final recommendations of the Leitch Report are already underway, thus ensuring that implementation of the recommendations could be speedy and effective. HEFCE and QAA have begun to create an infrastructure that will be fit for the purpose of enabling HEIs to extend their work-based learning activities. For example, the development of an integrated qualifications framework at all levels of higher and further education is already largely in place, and (albeit more slowly) work is underway to create a national credit framework. The QAA Code of Practice is also currently undergoing review to ensure that it continues to be appropriate to support placement and work-based learning. HEFCE’s Strategic Plan for 2006–11 was updated in April 2007 and now gives even more prominence to employer engagement and the growth of workplace learning. The following extracts indicate the strength of this commitment. Extract: HEFCE updated Strategic Plan for 2006–11 Employer engagement 1. Extensive collaboration between employers and HE learning and teaching already takes place, ranging from work placements that are integral components of some degree courses, to contributions from employers to course and curriculum development. In order to meet the continuing demand from employers for a well-educated and skilled workforce we will take forward initiatives to strengthen these collaborations. We are working with relevant bodies, including the Sector Skills Councils, in seeking to engage employers more closely with HE and to improve the ways in which employers and universities and colleges can work together. 2. We continue with our work to develop employer-led provision, as part of our overall response to the challenges highlighted in the final report of the Leitch Review of Skills. We want to support the sector to build on the capacity that already exists and further develop responsive provision. We want employers to be involved to a much greater extent in the design, delivery and funding of learning and we are working with the sector to implement mechanisms that support this. 3. We will continue to fund growth in student numbers to expand provision of foundation degrees – the two-year HE qualifications designed to give people the intermediate technical and professional skills that are in demand from employers – and to provide more flexible and accessible ways of studying. We are working closely with, for example, Foundation Degree Forward, the national body for foundation degree development, and with the Higher Education Academy and its subject centres, to foster good practice. 4. In supporting the sector’s engagement with employers, we will continue to explore opportunities for greater synergy between our strategic aims for learning and teaching and for enhancing HE’s contribution to the economy and society. This could include a more active role for HEIs, FECs and other regional stakeholders to provide courses and services to business that address local and regional needs. Workplace learning As part of our strategy on employer engagement, we are developing an approach to workplace learning that will contribute directly to both economic success and widening access to HE. We will support universities and colleges to engage at national level, and at regional level through structures such as Regional Skills Partnerships, which bring together different agencies to integrate action on skills, training, business support and labour market services. 14 Incorporating into Higher Education Programmes the Learning People do for, in and through Work In 2005, CHERI and KPMG were jointly commissioned by HEFCE to undertake research into the nature and kind of workplace learning, in order to make recommendations for expanding the role of higher education in this area. The report of the work undertaken contains an excellent review and commentary by Judy Harris of the literature relating to workplace learning. The report directly influenced the publication in November 2006 of the HEFCE strategy for employer engagement, Engaging employers with higher education: HEFCE strategy to support links between higher education and employers on skills and lifelong learning. Priority areas include: ᔢ involvement of HE with the sector skills agenda, regional skills infrastructure and Train to Gain brokerage ᔢ co-funding of HE provision between government and employers ᔢ measures to support greater flexibility in provision ᔢ quality assurance approaches for customised and workplace learning ᔢ supporting increasing employer and workforce needs for continuing professional development at higher levels ᔢ the costs associated with workplace learning ᔢ the contribution of e-learning and technology more widely. Annex B to the document sets out HEFCE’s implementation plan for employer engagement. This plan reflects the aims and objectives of the strategy and outlines proposed actions. It contains five strands, each of which includes sub-themes of quality, funding, infrastructure, and research. This document offers a clear indication of what the Council aims to support and what changes to infrastructure are in progress. Details of how to download the document are given at the end of the extract opposite. Incorporating into Higher Education Programmes the Learning People do for, in and through Work 15 Extract A summary of the proposed activities in each strand is given below. Strand A: Flexible lifelong learning: developing responsive provision to meet employer and employee needs Develop credit and qualification frameworks, and funding methods to promote flexible learning; promote the role of HE in FE; reward excellence in work-based learning; improve access to ICT to support workplace learning; flexible progression routes through Lifelong Learning Networks; promotion of better institutional links with graduate alumni to support CPD; expansion of the HE sector’s capacity to manage intelligence on skills issues (observatory functions). Strand B: Employability: engaging employers in the HE curriculum Review support for sandwich placements; promote joint curriculum development; support joint working between SSCs and HE; promote high quality learning through work placements; support for graduates traditionally disadvantaged in the labour market; develop entrepreneurship skills as part of the HE curriculum; evaluate employer satisfaction with graduate skills and qualities; improve employer understanding of HE. Strand C: Co-funding partnerships: sharing the costs and benefits of HE Test the potential for co-funded provision; develop a funding method which supports co-funded provision. Strand D: Meeting demand for higher level skills: embedding higher education in the skills infrastructure Enhance the contribution of HE to workforce development including through Train to Gain as part of the regional pathfinder projects on higher level skills; develop strategic relationship between Sector Skills Agreements and institutional and regional planning; promote more effective strategic dialogue on HE skills in the regions; enhance signals from employers to students through information, advice and guidance; promote student demand for subjects of high value to employers. Strand E: Work-based learning: valuing learning undertaken in the workplace Consider recommendations from workplace learning research, including development of appropriate quality assurance methods to support innovative and customised learning; staff development in workplaces and in HE; work with partners to raise demand for work-based learning; continued expansion of foundation degrees; support for expansion of accreditation of companies’ in-house training; support for APEL as part of an HE programme. Details of how to download the document and implementation plan can be found on the HEFCE website at www.hefce.ac.uk/learning/employer/strat/. 16 Incorporating into Higher Education Programmes the Learning People do for, in and through Work 5. Funding HEFCE have announced that their policy development and funding of projects to promote employer engagement will in the first stage be used to test various possibilities, for example: ᔢ the development of the workplace as a site of learning (focusing on bringing existing provision, both formal and informal, within an HE framework) ᔢ creating more opportunities for HEIs to increase their share of the CPD currently delivered by private training providers, such as by accrediting employers’ existing in-house training, supplying various services such as accreditation of prior learning (APEL), curriculum design and assessment. This could build on experience to date such as the NVC consortium accreditation of development programmes for GlaxoSmithKline ᔢ support to enable HE to deliver customised and personalised learning as mainstream activity for employers and employees (developing new markets and new provision that is responsive to employer needs) ᔢ support for large public sector employees such as the police force and children’s services, to engage with HE to develop provision which meets their needs for CPD ᔢ building on Lifelong Learning Networks to develop employer engagement ᔢ work with UnionLearn, supporting workplace development, and management and leadership training for employers ᔢ work with JISC and the Higher Education Academy to link the employer engagement strategy to the e-learning strategy to ensure the sector’s ICT capacity is fit for purpose in meeting employers’ and learners’ needs. Although full details of how the government will implement the recommendations of the Leitch Report are not yet available, Circular Letters 03/2007 and 04/2007 provide a signal of intent as to how HEFCE intends to support its agenda for employer engagement in the interim. These letters give notice that HEFCE have a number of existing areas of commitment, which if not supported would put at risk the achievement of key policy objectives. To support these strategies, HEFCE has allocated all Additional Student Numbers (ASNs) for 2008–9 through its Strategic Development Fund (SDF). The indications are that following the CSR, and on completion of HEFCE’s evaluation of funding, employer engagement and work-based learning activities could become as significant as ‘first’ mission funding to some universities. HEFCE are looking to provide support for around thirty HEIs or partnerships to support the initial growth targets outlined in the Leitch Report. The use of the SDF to enable these HEIs to develop the capacity and capability required to support the skills agenda is in line with its commitment to promote activity through incentives rather than initiatives. This means that funding is less tied to ringfenced ‘pots’ specific to particular initiatives and recognises that HEIs themselves are best placed to identify what they need to do to position themselves in relation to this agenda. In these two circular letters, HEFCE’s stated priorities are concerned with: ᔢ Increasing overall levels of participation in higher education ᔢ Increasing the number of enrolments on foundation degrees ᔢ Developing provision that encourages closer engagement between higher education and employers ᔢ Increasing provision in subjects that are strategically important to the economy and society but vulnerable because of relatively low student demand. There is also an expression of continuing support for large-scale strategic projects at institutions that have previously received grants from the SDF. It is clear that bids from institutions that will significantly enhance their ability to respond to employer engagement initiatives will be regarded favourably. Incorporating into Higher Education Programmes the Learning People do for, in and through Work 17 The government’s grant letter to HEFCE in January 2006 tasked the Council with leading a radical change in higher education by incentivising and funding provision which is partly or wholly designed, funded or provided by employers. This includes part-time study, short cycle courses, a curriculum more responsive to change, and a diverse range of providers including a role for further education colleges (FECs) and private provision. The grant letter of January 2007 reinforced this brief by emphasising support for models of HE that make available relevant, flexible and responsive provision that meets the high skill needs of employers and their staff. The letter also emphasises the importance of continued support for the three Higher Level Pathfinders operating in three regions (NW, NE and SW) in order to identify successful models to inform the extension of Train to Gain by building upon the skills brokerage model already implemented for the lower level skills. More details about the three Pathfinder projects are given in Chapter 3. One clear message from HEFCE’s Strategic Plan is that measures to increase co-funding is an important part of the strategy. The intention is that the government will concentrate its funding on addressing basic skills and market failures and promoting social justice. Employers are expected to support the drive towards Level 2 basic skills for all, employers and individuals to invest 50% funding for Level 3 and employers and individuals to pay the bulk of additional funding for Level 4. The proportion of funding for vocational higher education courses currently administered through HEFCE is to be delivered through a similar demand-led mechanism as introduced for Train to Gain. However, HEFCE also insist that exploring co-funding is only one strand of their overall strategy. The Council states that, through funded pilot projects, it will seek to explore and support the feasibility of more fundamental changes in the sector, including better ways to respond to employer and employee needs in order to increase demand for HE provision, and linked to this, developing the workplace as a site of learning to enhance opportunities for flexible lifelong learning. Circular Letter CL04/2007, issued on 28th February 2007, proposes the allocation of 10,000 FTE ASNs, ensuring these deliver at least 5,000 additional FTEs on foundation degree programmes. There are a further 5,000 FTEs earmarked for developments co-funded with employers. The last chance for bids for ASNs for this period is December 2007. Circular Letter CL03/2007 sets out the allocation of ASNs in 2008–9 specifically targeted at employer engagement. In part, this funding is designed to support projects initiated in response to Circular Letter 06/2006, issued in May 2006, which invited proposals for pilot projects to test models of engaging employers in HE learning, and trialling co-funding by employers. At the time of writing, HEFCE is still receiving new bids for funding. There is also continuing funding earmarked for the three regional Higher Level Skills Pathfinder projects that are intended to enable employers to access higher education services alongside the government’s Train to Gain scheme. To support their objectives for employer engagement, HEFCE has allocated a further 5,000 FTEs on a co-funded basis, normally 50%. Any proposals for funding to support employee development for a specific employer will only be supported by HEFCE on a co-funded basis. Institutions engaged in projects during 2006–7 and 2007–8 have reported that in the short term it is difficult to achieve co-funding on a 50% basis and HEFCE have typically funded ASNs at 70–80%. HEFCE has prepared a briefing document for employers 9 setting out the benefits of partnerships between HE, employers and individuals. This is part of a broader strategy to encourage employers to engage with higher education and to provide incentives for co-funding. 9 Engaging employers with higher education: HEFCE’s strategy – what’s in it for employers, available as an annex to HEFCE Employer Engagement Strategy 18 Incorporating into Higher Education Programmes the Learning People do for, in and through Work Priority areas for its support as detailed in the Circular Letter are: ᔢ Work-based learning ᔢ Accreditation of prior experiential learning ᔢ Enhancement and accreditation of employers’ in-house training programmes ᔢ Short courses tailored to employers’ needs ᔢ Flexible provision (at a time and place to suit employers and employees; and credit accumulation and transfer systems) ᔢ e-learning, blended learning ᔢ new types of programme which embed skills that are relevant to employers (for example, HE programmes with NVQ Level 4 embedded) ᔢ programmes designed or delivered in conjunction with employers. A significant consequence of these priorities is that what are commonly referred to as ‘closed’ programmes, designed for and with one particular employer or organisation exclusively for its own employees or staff, are no longer excluded from HEFCE funding streams. A number of universities have already initiated developments using third stream funding through SDF and HEIF to make changes to the infrastructure and culture of their institutions. The Higher Education Academy also provides funding to institutions and organisations to support employer engagement; for example the Change Academy initiative provides funding to help institutions manage the culture change process and to implement graduate employability and employment strategies. It also works with subject areas; details of projects in the built environment and engineering areas can be found respectively at: www.heacademy.ac.uk/projects/detail/employerengagement_cebe_project and www.heacademy.ac.uk/projects/detail/employerengagement_engineering_project. The Academy also supports and publicises the work of the Centres for Excellence in Teaching and Learning (CETLs), a number of which are currently concerned with employability. HEFCE has announced its intention of funding a further round of CETLs from 2008, specifically in the area of employer engagement. Working with the DfES10 and HEFCE and a range of local and national agencies, Foundation Degree Forward is also prioritising employer engagement. Their Strategic Plan 2006–2008 makes it clear that this area is central to future foundation degree developments and has made additional funding available to support institutions in developing effective approaches. Further details of this strategy are given in Chapter 2. 10 On the day before going to print, the government announced that the DfES and DTI were to be replaced by three new organisations. It is too late to change all of the references to take account of these changes, but the website details automatically translate to the new web pages. Incorporating into Higher Education Programmes the Learning People do for, in and through Work 19 6. Quality Assurance and Enhancement It is recognised that taking forward the employer engagement agenda will have implications for current quality assurance arrangements. Details of quality assurance issues and development issues relating to different kinds of programme, such as sandwich courses, foundation degrees, and accreditation of company programmes, are given in Chapters 2 and 3. This chapter is concerned with the broader agenda for the development of quality assurance systems that are supportive of innovative, customised and work-based provision. To this end, QAA with FDF, HEA, JISC and Leadership Foundation have been tasked to develop a QAA Audit method that is responsive to innovative work-based provision whilst maintaining standards. A Task Group has been established with a remit to consider the quality assurance needs of learning in higher education that is supported through employer engagement. The work of the group is intended to facilitate: ᔢ a stronger contribution to employer engagement and to improving the skill levels in the workforce ᔢ flexible demand-led provision to meet the needs of employers and employees ᔢ higher education responsive to the needs of the workplace and workplace learning. The group has representation from HEFCE, QAA, FdF, HEIs and FECs, SSCs and practitioners in the area of work-based learning. The group intends to draw on a wide range of stakeholder views, including learners, employers and practitioners from Lifelong Learning Networks, Higher Level Skills Pathfinders and co-funded employer engagement projects. The Group will also liaise with the QAA review of collaborative audit. It aims to produce a brief report on progress so far in the autumn of 2007 and complete by the summer of 2008. The QAA has been tasked to broaden its Code of Practice for Placement learning (Section 9) to include other forms of workplace learning. A revised draft code has been circulated for consultation. The consultation closed on June 1st 2007 and a final version of the revised section is expected later in the year. The further development of quality enhancement will be taken forward primarily through the Higher Education Academy. There are proposals to work with the Skills for Business network to support employer involvement in assessment and to enhance the capacity of HE staff to support learners on work-based routes and to support APEL. It is also proposed to reward excellence and promote innovation in work-based, work-related and flexible learning through CETLs in vocational areas linked to specific sectors and for the HEA to disseminate good practice. Stronger links will be established between the HEA and SSCs to support joint employer/HE curriculum development at sector level and the HEA will continue its work in relation to enhancing employability and entrepreneurial skills. Finally HEFCE and HEA will work together to identify how best to support work placement learning, PDP and accrediting part-time work. 20 2 Incorporating into Higher Education Programmes the Learning People do for, in and through Work What is the higher education work-based learning ‘product’? By Lyn Brennan 1. What is workplace learning? Learning in, through and for work covers a very broad spectrum of higher education activity, but attempts to produce a comprehensive typology to describe the range of workplace learning remain a challenge, as considerable diversity results from the prioritisation of different variables. One criticism of the Leitch Report is that it is not sufficiently sensitive to variations in employment contexts; when the wide range of programmes and modules in higher education that involve workbased learning are added to the mix, the picture becomes very complex indeed. One thing is clear: there can be no single or simple definition of learning undertaken in, through and for work. Programmes that include at least an element of work-based learning are likely to include one or more of the following: ᔢ learning at work – learning that takes place in the workplace ᔢ learning through work – learning while working ᔢ learning for work – learning how to do new or existing things better ᔢ learning from work – learning from the experience of work. Many programmes in HEIs will incorporate several of these: for example, in the context of sandwich programmes the placement element will provide opportunities for learning at work, frequently through the performance of tasks in the workplace; through the experience of being in work, learners will acquire a range of specific technical skills together with more generic and business-related skills; students will have undertaken learning for work in preparation for their placement through the ‘academic’ modules in the programme, and will come away from the experience with a considerable amount of learning from work. Characteristics of work-based learning Learndirect, for their Learning through Work programme, have identified characteristics of work-based learning as: ᔢ Task-related – Learning frequently arises from the performance of tasks in the workplace ᔢ Performance-based or issue-led – Much work-based learning is associated with tackling problems of production, design or management. Some work-based problems are very complex, involving state-of-the-art techniques at the frontiers of knowledge ᔢ Innovative – New techniques or approaches are constantly being devised to meet new situations, creating many opportunities for learning and providing experience of managing change ᔢ Both strategic and just in time – Many people have to think and operate at both levels: strategic in terms of working towards medium to long term goals; just in time in terms of learning what is necessary for tomorrow ᔢ Autonomously managed and self-regulated – Learning often takes place without direct instruction or formal tuition. Learners are expected to take responsibility for ensuring that they learn from their work activities ᔢ Self-motivated – Many people are motivated to achieve beyond basic expectations ᔢ Team-based – Tackling problems in the workplace requires effective co-operation between people with different roles and expertise, leading to the development of a range of skills and personal qualities as well as a sharing of expertise ᔢ Concerned with enhancing personal performance – Constant updating and upgrading of experience is now a normal part of most people’s work ᔢ Concerned with improving the performance of a business, enterprise or organisation. Incorporating into Higher Education Programmes the Learning People do for, in and through Work 21 2. What is the range and extent of work-based learning activity in higher education? There have been a number of reports and surveys published over the last couple of years that address this question. These include the CHERI/KPMG Report, the survey conducted by Marilyn Wedgwood on behalf of the DfES, the UUK Report Higher Level Learning: Universities and employers working together, and the report on work-based learning conducted on behalf of the Higher Education Academy described below. (For details of how to access these publications, see the checklist of resources in Chapter 1.) Work-based learning: illuminating the higher education landscape A report prepared by the KSA Partnership on behalf of the Higher Education Academy The specific focus of the study is on workforce development, notably the “learning which accredits or extends the workplace skills and abilities of employees.” 11 The authors note that the provision delivered by higher education institutions (including HE in FE) at Level 4 and above that encompasses such learning includes foundation degrees, undergraduate programmes (part-time), taught and research postgraduate programmes (part-time), and short courses. Such provision forms part of higher education’s well-established initial and continuing professional development offer to employers. The report demonstrates that the range and extent of work-based learning provision in HEIs is extensive, although there are marked variations between HEIs in the emphasis given to this area and the extent of their involvement. Some institutions have made this a key feature of their institutional missions, whereas in others it has developed as a by-product of other activity. As in various other surveys, the authors note the difficulties involved in pinning down the extent of workforce development activity. The 2002–03 Higher Education Business and Community Interaction Survey (HEBCIS) conducted by HEFCE shows that HEIs attract almost £130m from non-credit bearing CPD activities – £13m from SMEs (10%), £72m from other (non-SME) commercial business (56%) and the remainder from the public sector. This figure is up 25% on the previous year but still represents a fraction of employers’ total spend on developing staff. Data are extremely difficult for HEIs to gather in this area and the figures above exclude income generated from foundation degrees, and part-time undergraduate and postgraduate provision. The report concludes that the data do not reflect the true extent and breadth of the activity. What is clear is that a number of institutions have started to create an environment that enables them to respond in a timely manner to identified employer needs. The report lists a number of activities that contribute to this agenda, including: ᔢ One stop shops to act as a focal point for employer engagement ᔢ Provision of centralised support to deliver workforce development programmes and/or to facilitate outreach to academic expertise ᔢ Frameworks for accrediting work-based learning and in-house company training and development ᔢ Streamlining of quality assurance and validation processes ᔢ Pedagogical approaches that emphasise a process-driven rather than content-driven curriculum, that is strongly student-centred, based in learners’ current knowledge and experience and grounded in the application of learning in the workplace and involves evidence-based assessment of progress and achievement ᔢ Curricula predominantly derived from the context of application of the learning (i.e. the workplace). 11 The Report can be accessed online at www.heacademy.ac.uk/resources/publications/papersandmonographs 22 Incorporating into Higher Education Programmes the Learning People do for, in and through Work An indication of the wide spectrum of higher level work-based learning activity can be derived from looking at case studies. A number are described in the HEA report and others in the UUK publication Higher Level Learning: universities and employers working together. These case studies demonstrate that not only is the spectrum of work-based activity wide, it is also variable in terms of volume, ranging from a single module of work-based learning through to programmes that are entirely work-based. The purpose of the learning may also vary, for example according to whether it is undertaken primarily for the purpose of gaining employment-related skills prior to entry to employment or for the purpose of workforce development or continuing professional development for those already in work. 3. Typologies of work-based learning In our previous publication we attempted to construct a typology of work-based learning programmes by using the variables of the extent to which work-based learning is a major or minor part of a programme on one axis and on the other, the extent to which the content primarily relates to an existing HEI subject area, and/or may be defined in terms of existing standards, and/or or relates primarily to work roles or organisational objectives. On this basis, we identified three main categories of programme: 1. Employability: programmes designed to enhance employability are generally directed at undergraduate learners and are designed to prepare people for work and lifelong learning. However, feedback from employers suggests that modules with similar aims can be used to support learning in the workplace, particularly for new graduate entrants and can include customised features relating to an individual workplace. 2. Skills development: work-based learning programmes designed to develop specific skills in relation to performance standards; these programmes focus on the development of performance in specific skills and competencies, usually in relation to externally prescribed standards or benchmarks. Originally this type of programme was found in areas preparing undergraduates for specific work roles, and describes sandwich degrees and other programmes that include a substantial placement element, for example in the health and social care and teacher education sectors. Increasingly, programmes developed with particular employers, or through the Sector Skills Councils, and foundation degrees take this form. 3. Knowledge recognition, creation and development in the workplace: in this type of programme, the outcomes of work-based learning are primarily defined either by individual learners or by organisations for the purpose of workforce or professional development. Incorporating into Higher Education Programmes the Learning People do for, in and through Work 23 Work-based learning programmes in HE WBL as major part Graduate Apprenticeships Knowledge Transfer Partnerships Professional Qualifying Programmes e.g. Teaching, Nursing Accredited In-company Programmes Dual Accreditation Programmes Cohort negotiated WBL Programmes Sandwich Degrees Individually Negotiated WBL Programmes Foundation Degrees CPD Short Courses Employability skills, progress files, PDP APEL/AEL/Recognition of Experiential Learning Work Experience ‘taster’ modules Curriculum determined by HEI WBL as minor part Curriculum Prescribed Independent Study WBL modules Curriculum defined by external standards (NOS, Professional Bodies, SSCs) Curriculum determined by workplace goals and objectives Curriculum Negotiated Another approach to developing a typology of work-based learning programmes that can assist curriculum design can be found in the CHERI/KPMG report. The authors note that not all learning relevant to work includes work-based learning elements in the sense of being built into the design of the programme. This comes into the category of learning while at work and from work. The typology is based on a distinction between whether the learner is primarily based in the workplace or is primarily HEI-based and being prepared for work. However, the authors note that the employment status of the learner is but one of many dimensions of workplace learning within higher education programmes. Other dimensions include: ᔢ the focus of the overall programme – ranging from discipline/subject-specific focus through a general or specific vocational focus, to individuals’ personal and professional development linked to wider organisational needs ᔢ the control and content of the curriculum for workplace learning – may be determined by the HEI with employer input, or by a regulatory body with institutional/employer input, or by a combination of the employer, the learner and the institution 24 Incorporating into Higher Education Programmes the Learning People do for, in and through Work ᔢ learning objectives – likely to be a combination of the development of high level generic skills, consolidation and extension of subject knowledge and skills, new understandings of business and practice, plus career tasting and development of specific practitioner skills (depending on the overall programme) ᔢ the nature and status of assessment – ranging from formative to summative, and from implicit to explicit (involving credit points, a separate award by the HEI, units towards an NVQ or a separate award by an external body) ᔢ support for learning – ranges from support by the HEI only, to joint support by the institution and employer, to primarily employer plus other learners. Main types of higher education programmes including workplace learning Stage in life course Type of programme Initial formation A: HE-based programme (at undergraduate or postgraduate level) with workplace learning modules or longer placement (up to one year) in the workplace Initial formation B: HE-based programme (at undergraduate level and post-graduate level) with alternating sequence of taught modules and short periods of practice in relevant occupational settings Learner in the workplace (or in HE) C: HE-based programme (foundation degree). Some integration of taught modules with activities in work settings (real or simulated) Learner in the workplace D: Employment-based programme, negotiated between HE, employer and learner. Focus on learner’s work role and links to HE Comparison of the two typologies demonstrates how the picture varies according to the variables prioritised. In the first, the greater emphasis on the purpose of the work-based element within the programme leads to differentiation between programmes primarily designed to enhance the broader generic employability skills of undergraduates, those designed to engender sector specific skills, often linked to external standards and those primarily designed for the purpose of workforce development. In the second the distinction is made between programmes that have a specific placement element, such as sandwich degrees and those that have a practice element, usually alternating taught modules and short work-based periods. In part this relates to the purpose of the typologies themselves, with the first having a focus on curriculum design and the second on the funding categories of programmes. Both, however, recognise that only the final categories of the respective typologies are primarily concerned with demand-led rather than supply-driven programmes. By merging the two, it is possible to identify a number of different types of work-based or workplace learning elements. 1. Employability through placement: modules, processes and programmes designed to enhance the employability skills of undergraduates; sandwich programmes and similar which include a substantial placement element 2. Qualifying Programmes such as medicine, veterinary medicine, initial teacher education, health and social care programmes which alternate between taught and practice elements Incorporating into Higher Education Programmes the Learning People do for, in and through Work 25 3. Foundation degrees (although the structure of foundation degrees is very variable, according to whether they are full-time or part-time programmes and who they are designed for); some foundation degrees may be more appropriately located in Types 1 or 2 4. Workforce development programmes, usually work-based, often demand-led and negotiated with individuals and/or their employers. The first three types of programme are primarily supply-driven programmes, although foundation degrees especially may be developed with specific employers or will include consultation with employers organisations, such as Sector Skills Councils. A small number of degree programmes also may be closed programmes developed with a specific company or organisation for its own employees. In each type, what is distinctive about these programmes is that that they are concerned with the development and demonstration of competencies, not just knowledge and understanding. Type 1: Employability through placement This type can be subdivided into two categories, with the first being concerned with processes designed to enhance employability in all undergraduate curricula and the second with programmes such as sandwich degrees that involve periods of work placement and are designed to enable students to acquire the necessary skills, both technical and transferable, that are needed in the work sector. Employability across undergraduate curricula The first type is essentially about enhancing the generic employability skills of graduates. Although the employability agenda is primarily directed towards preparing people for employment, employability ‘tools’ can also be employed to support people who need to develop themselves in order to remain in employment, or to engage in lifelong learning and professional development. Employability is therefore closely associated with personal development planning (PDP) and, especially for those not yet in employment, with work experience. A number of institutions have developed generic modules to support the incorporation of work experience elements into undergraduate and postgraduate programmes and/or to support students in personal development planning and action planning, often linked to the development of Progress Files. There are many definitions of employability. A working definition adopted by the Enhancing Student Employability Coordination Team (ESECT) at the Higher Education Academy states that “employability is a set of achievements – skills, understandings and personal attributes – that make graduates more likely to gain employment and be successful in their chosen occupations, which benefits themselves, the workforce, the community and the economy.” Equally, there are many lists of the skills and attributes that employers and graduate recruiters are looking for in graduates. One such list can be found in the Academy sponsored magazine ‘If Only I’d Known: making the most of higher education, a guide for students and parents’. This glossy publication, aimed at the younger entrant to HE, was funded by the DfES and written by Peter Hawkins and Carl Gilleard. It is intended to encourage students to make the most of their university experience, and can be used as the basis for group work with first year students. The Academy sent hard copies free to UK Higher Education Institutions, to Careers Services and Admissions Tutors, and through Higher Education Academy Subject Centres into Departments and through the National Union of Students into Student Unions. The publication appears to be widely used in HEIs and the Academy is currently requesting institutions to provide feedback on how they have used the guide with students. An electronic copy in pdf format can be downloaded from the HEA website. 26 Incorporating into Higher Education Programmes the Learning People do for, in and through Work If only I’d known contains a useful checklist for students of the skills employers are looking for: People skills: Leadership: taking responsibility and getting things done Buzzwords – dynamic and motivated Team working: working well with colleagues and being able to listen Buzzwords – supportive facilitator Interpersonal skills: being good with people from a wide range of backgrounds and being able to get your ideas across easily Buzzwords – professionally self-aware. Self-reliance skills: Self-awareness: being confident about yourself and what you can do Buzzwords – focused, purposeful Resourcefulness: having drive, using your initiative and planning ahead Buzzwords – Proactive, self-starter Networking skills: being good at linking up with other people so you can help each other Buzzwords – relationship-builder, initiator. General skills: Problem-solving: being practical and quick-witted so you get results Results-oriented, creative Commitment: being dependable, trustworthy and putting everything into your work Buzzwords – dedicated, loyal Flexibility: being adaptable and willing to do different kinds of work Buzzwords – multi-disciplinary, multi-skilled. Specialist skills: IT skills: having expert computer skills (you need basic skills for almost every kind of job) Buzzwords – task-oriented Technical skills: having knowledge of real work areas, e.g. journalism, accountancy Buzzwords – professional skills Business understanding: knowing what makes companies tick Buzzwords – entrepreneurial, competitive. In addition to these generic transferable skills the Council for Industry and Higher Education (CIHE) have worked with 12 Subject Centres to tease out from subject benchmarks the range of employability attributes that should be developed during the learning process in their different disciplines – skills that are transferable to a wide range of occupations. This has led to the production of 22 Student Employability Profiles showing how academic learning and employability are connected and are available to order in hard copy only through: www.cihe-uk.com/publications.php. This material is particularly helpful for faculties and departments that aim to integrate PDP into mainstream curriculum areas. The Higher Education Academy has resources that can be accessed directly from the website, including a number of monographs in the Learning and Employability series. All can be downloaded as pdf files at www.heacademy.ac.uk/resources/publications/learningandemployability. Incorporating into Higher Education Programmes the Learning People do for, in and through Work 27 Current titles include: Series 1 1. Employability in higher education: what it is and what it is not – Mantz Yorke 2. Employability: judging and communicating achievements – Peter Knight and Mantz Yorke 3. Embedding employability into the curriculum – Mantz Yorke and Peter Knight 4. Entrepreneurship and higher education: an employability perspective – Neil Moreland 5. Employability and work-based learning – Brenda Little et al 6. Pedagogy for employability – The Pedagogy for Employability Group. Series 2 1. Work-related learning in higher education – Neil Moreland 2. Employability and doctoral research graduates – Janet Metcalfe and Alexandra Gray 3. Employability and part-time students – Brenda Little 4. Ethics and employability – Simon Robinson 5. Career development learning and employability – Tony Watts 6. Embedding employability in the context of widening participation – Rob Jones and Liz Thomas 7. Personal development planning and employability – Rob Ward et al. Main sources of advice and guidance for integrating the development of employability skills into the undergraduate curriculum of HEIs are the Higher Education Academy, the Centre for Recording Achievement, Foundation Degree Forward and the QAA (the latter for Guidelines for Progress Files). The Academy’s Hospitality, Sport and Leisure Network has produced a Resource Guide, Personal Development Planning and Progress Files that can be accessed at www.heacademy.ac.uk/Resources/pdp.pdf. In the guide a number of useful resources and support networks are identified, notably: 1. The Centre for Recording Achievement has a PDP-UK Network Group with online facilities for discussion, a regular newsletter and articles available on the website: www.recordingachievement.org 2. The Academy hosts on its website a Resources Database which can be filtered by project area, one of which is PDP: www.heacademy.ac.uk/867.htm 3. The QAA have produced Guidelines (2001) for progress files, available at www.qaa.ac.uk/academicinfrastructure/progressFiles/guidelines/progfile2001.asp. In QAA’s definition the Progress File has three key elements: a transcript, an individual’s personal record of learning and achievement, and PDP. Processes for delivering PDP have been left to individual HEIs to develop and define 4. Ward, R, and Baume D, Personal development planning: beyond the basics provides a conceptual framework for the productive use of PDP at www.heacademy.ac.uk/embedded_object.asp?id=21679&file 5. A brief article by Elisabeth Dunne, Developing the Curriculum through a Framework for Personal Management Skills is on the Academy website. The framework identifies skill areas central to the promotion of effective learning experiences – management of self, of others, of the task and of information. www.heacademy.ac.uk/resources.asp?process=full_record§ion=generic&id=384 6. Many approaches to PDP and Progress Files aim to improve students learning by developing their learning skills and by encouraging them to take responsibility for their own learning. For this purpose, useful resources include: 28 Incorporating into Higher Education Programmes the Learning People do for, in and through Work ᔢ ‘metalearning’ – enabling students to learn about learning and to assess their own learning in and through multiple contexts and identities. Jackson, N (2004) Developing the concept of metalearning, Innovations in Education and Teaching International 41(4), 391–403. and at www.heacademy.ac.uk/resources.asp?process=full_record§ion=generic&id=334 ᔢ A widely accepted conceptual cycle of learning is offered by Kolb: Kolb, D (1984) Experiential learning: experience as the source of learning and development. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice Hall ᔢ A questionnaire to enable students to understand the process of learning, and identify their preferred style, is in: Honey, P and Mumford, A (1992) The manual of learning styles, Maidenhead: Peter Honey ᔢ www.learning-styles-online.com offers a free test and description of seven learning preferences, indicating how best to use these and develop non-preferred styles ᔢ www.rolisps.com/wmc offers a similar facility ᔢ Reflection on Learning Inventory. http://dir.yahoo.com/education/higher_education/study_skills/ provides access to many study skill sites, most of which offer free guidance, checklists and downloadable handouts on various aspects of study in HE (e.g. listening in lectures, note-taking, time management, stress management and exam revision, etc.) ᔢ Cottrell, S (1999) The Study Skills Handbook. Macmillan Press Ltd ᔢ Cottrell, S (2003) Skills for Success: The Personal Development Planning Handbook, Palgrave Macmillan. T ᔢ An online study skills resource is at www.skills4study.com. The Lifelong Learning Networks are establishing themselves as very useful providers of guidance and information relating to personal development planning and employability. A report12 by the Centre for Recording Achievement published in April 2007 presents the outcomes of a study designed to help LLNs to develop good practice in personalised learning plans. It identifies current practice in the use of such plans in vocational areas aimed at supporting effective learning and progression. It also makes recommendations to HEFCE and to individual LLNs. Dr. Kevin Whitston, Head of Widening Participation at HEFCE has commented that “the Centre for Recording Achievement’s investigation showed that personalised learning planning could be used to support not only the initial engagement of learners, but importantly their re-engagement with learning. Thus, in the use they make of the process of personalised learning planning, Lifelong Learning Networks can contribute to making lifelong learning a reality for significant numbers of people for whom learning was perhaps initially not that attractive a proposition.” All of the LLNs have created Information, Advice and Guidance Networks that are generating both generic and sector specific material. Most have developed or are in the process of developing websites that can be accessed by learners, employers, HEIs, FECs and regional organisations such as the Regional Development Agencies, regional associations of universities and colleges, and the regional arms of Sector Skills Councils. Some websites offer online PDP services to learners and offer staff development activities to those involved in supporting learners. MOVE, the Lifelong Learning Network for the East of England, has an online e-Portfolio that can be used by learners who are currently studying within Schools and Colleges to document their educational and other achievements and encourages learners to document their learning and performance from the workplace, family and community. 12 Personalised learning plans in Lifelong Learning Networks. A Report to HEFCE by the Centre for Recording Achievement, April 2007. The report can be downloaded at www.hefce.ac.uk/pubs/rdreports/2007/rd11_07/ Incorporating into Higher Education Programmes the Learning People do for, in and through Work 29 The MOVE e-Portfolio: extract from the website for learners The MOVE e-Portfolio can help you to reflect on your life experiences and achievements to more effectively plan and develop your future, for example you can use MOVE e-Portfolio to: ᔢ Plan your future learning ᔢ Document your existing knowledge, skills, and abilities ᔢ Track your personal and educational development ᔢ Contact potential employers to help you find a job ᔢ Evaluate your personal performance while studying a course ᔢ Evaluate your personal performance in the workplace. MOVE e-Portfolio includes a toolkit which allows you to: ᔢ Upload and store artifacts (images, documents, film etc) ᔢ Access and view your official learner records (drawn straight from your School, College or University database) ᔢ Build and develop a CV ᔢ Create an interactive showcase (portfolio) for various designated audiences (potential employers, etc) ᔢ Plan your personal and career development ᔢ Reflect on your previous life experience ᔢ View a catalogue of current further and higher education courses offered in the region including those with guaranteed entry and progression opportunities ᔢ Grant and control access to your portfolio. The potential learner benefits include: ᔢ Supporting the transition between learning institutions ᔢ Supporting career progression, employability or further study ᔢ Helping you to present your skills and achievements to others ᔢ Raising your self-awareness and self-esteem ᔢ Helping you become more independent and autonomous ᔢ Supporting the learning process towards learning goals/achievements ᔢ Developing relevant professional attitudes and responsibilities. HEA also has a project concerned with the development of e-pdp and e-portfolios, details of which can be accessed from their website. Funding HEA, FdF, CIHE and HEFCE itself through its Strategic Development Fund all support the development of processes in HEIs that will extend the employability/PDP/Progress File agenda. Quality Assurance The Progress File Implementation Group (representing Universities UK, The Standing Conference of Principals, the Quality Assurance Agency and the Higher Education Academy) set minimum outcomes in its quality guidelines, including: ᔢ Students should participate in PDP in a range of learning contexts at each stage or level of their programme ᔢ HEIs must ensure students are introduced to PDP, its rationale and benefits, including information on extra-curricular opportunities to develop skills and experience (e.g. in course handbooks, module or unit guides, or any other means considered appropriate) ᔢ HEIs must assure themselves that PDP is being implemented effectively. 30 Incorporating into Higher Education Programmes the Learning People do for, in and through Work HE programmes that include a work placement The most familiar types of programme in this category are sandwich degrees in which students undertake a work placement, usually of either a year in one placement or periods of six months in two separate placements. These programmes are also essentially concerned with employability – with ensuring that students go out into the employment market with the necessary skills and competencies to make them work-ready in the work sectors related to the subject areas of their undergraduate study. The CHERI/KPMG study notes that data suggests that undergraduate ‘sandwich’ students comprise about seven per cent of the undergraduate student population; however, there is some evidence of decline in the number of programmes in which a placement is compulsory. Some HEIs report problems associated with identifying suitable placement opportunities and some students report difficulties experienced in relocating to a new area to undertake a placement. As a result, a number of programme areas in which the sandwich placement has traditionally been a compulsory part of the programme, are now moving to a position where it is an optional element. The CHERI/KPMG Report identified a number of reasons given by students for opting out of undertaking a placement: ᔢ difficulties associated with family responsibilities, especially for mature students where the work placement requires relocation; this is particularly a problem for mature students on modern languages programmes who are required to spend periods of study or work abroad ᔢ the perceived costs of extending the total duration of study by one year, which may well now be accentuated by the introduction of variable top-up fees ᔢ some younger students are unwilling to break away from the friendship groups and accommodation arrangements that they have established ᔢ unless the placement is itself a requirement for professional registration or recognition, students may well have to undertake work experience that does ‘count’ after graduation, and are thus unwilling to undertake placements as undergraduates ᔢ similarly if the placement is not assessed for the purpose of gaining undergraduate credit, some students see little point in extending the duration of the programme as it does not make a direct contribution to their final degree classification ᔢ students for whom subject-related work experience is not regarded as having a major influence on their employment prospects, prefer to acquire more generic employability by undertaking part-time paid employment alongside their studies. Although it is not possible to structure work placement experiences to avoid all of these perceived disadvantages, it helps if there is some degree of flexibility built into the placement requirements – for example by enabling students to arrange their own placements provided that the placement can deliver the appropriate skills and experience. HEFCE has indicated its intention to work with Government and employer organisations such as Sector Skills Councils to promote the value of sandwich programmes and other project and work placements with a view to getting commitment from employers to increase the numbers of placements offered. The Council has prepared a briefing document for employers, HEFCE’s Strategy: what’s in it for employers, which is available at their employer engagement strategy website page. The document spells out the changes HEFCE is initiating within the higher education sector to enable it to be more responsive to employers’ needs. It also gives detail of better services that employers can expect, including: Incorporating into Higher Education Programmes the Learning People do for, in and through Work 31 a. Access to HE level provision through the Train to Gain brokerage service for employers in three regions: North East, North West, and South West. Also, three higher level skills pathfinder projects are currently in progress: more information is on the web at www.hefce.ac.uk/learning/employer/path b. Clearer presentation of the costs of HE programmes to help employers source programmes which meet their needs for general business skills and specialist knowledge c. More undergraduate and postgraduate courses that are relevant to employers’ current needs; and more student placements and consultancy which will contribute to higher productivity and business transformation d. More universities and colleges offering opportunities for workforce development, such as through: ᔢ work-based learning ᔢ e-learning ᔢ short courses ᔢ flexible delivery at the workplace ᔢ accreditation of prior learning ᔢ accreditation of experiential learning ᔢ accreditation of companies’ in-house training programmes. To improve services for national employers, HEFCE will work with the Learning and Skills Council (LSC, the funding body for further education) to explore the potential for HE provision to be accessed through the LSC’s National Employer Service. A number of studies, including the CHERI/KPMG Report, have identified the benefits to students of undertaking placements. Many HEIs have produced their own materials identifying benefits in an attempt to encourage students to take up work placements and work experience opportunities. Benefits to students of undertaking work placements There are a number of positive benefits associated with undertaking a work placement as part of an undergraduate programme. ᔢ sandwich placements are associated with positive employment outcomes ᔢ they enable students to find out if a career in this area is what they want, and where there are alternative types of employment, which they may prefer. (Medical students frequently identify the area in which they want to specialise through their experiences of working in different areas of medicine as undergraduates or in their training as junior doctors) ᔢ get to use sophisticated equipment ᔢ get to understand the values of the sector ᔢ develop generic and transferable skills ᔢ organised placement schemes offered by some companies, e.g. GlaxoSmithKline, not only enhance employment prospects with the companies themselves but also elsewhere (the GSK Industrial Placement Scheme has been quality-marked by UVAC) ᔢ appear more knowledgeable at interviews, have real experience to discuss and enhanced opportunities for demonstrating what they can do. 32 Incorporating into Higher Education Programmes the Learning People do for, in and through Work There has been some concern that the introduction of variable top-up fees will have an effect on students’ willingness to undertake programmes that require year-long placements. HEFCE has asked the DfES to include consideration of the impact of work placement in its evaluation of new student support arrangements. It would appear that HEIs are positioning themselves differentially in relation to sandwich programmes, with some wishing to expand them by investing in centralised support structures to support placements and others phasing these courses out. For HEIs, sandwich programmes enable the institutions to identify a network of employers who may offer placement opportunities to students on a range of courses and may also engage in teaching, curriculum development and research activities. Establishment of employer networks can also encourage a wider range of students to apply for and take up placement opportunities, whether or not they are on sandwich programmes. Tutors visiting students on placements have the opportunity to develop good relations with employers, which may lead to joint research and development activities or consultancy activities geared to employer needs. Having regular contact with employers also helps to ensure that the curriculum remains relevant to the sector’s needs and can lead to the development of ‘preferred supplier’ status with a cluster of employers. HEFCE has expressed commitment to working with employers’ organisations, especially Sector Skills Councils, to involve employers in taught course provision in higher education. Two pilot projects have developed processes whereby degree-level programmes are endorsed by the Sector Skills Councils. Skillset (the Sector Skills Council for the audio visual industries) is currently piloting a UK-wide endorsement scheme of degree-level animation courses. The scheme was introduced in spring 2005 in response to the industry’s “concern over the lack of some basic, but crucial, technical and production skills displayed by recent graduates” (SSDA, 2005a). In addition to meeting specific curriculum design criteria, higher education providers running endorsed courses are able to draw on a range of support services (co-ordinated by Skillset) which include work placements for students, work placements for tutors, tutorials and master classes for course leaders, provision of work-generated resources for use in the taught programmes, and mentor support for students. Similarly, e-skills UK has recently launched an endorsement scheme for IT management for business degree-level programmes. This provides kite-marking for specific degree programmes and e-skills UK will (like Skillset) co-ordinate a range of support services geared towards creating enhanced links between industry and higher education learners. Given that the recommendations of the Leitch Report extend the role of SSCs in endorsing vocational programmes, developments such as these are likely to be expanded. A number of Sector Skills Agreements, identifying essential competencies that must be included in higher level skills development programmes, are already in place. Many of these include the incorporation of National Occupational Standards (NOS); guidance relating to the incorporation of NOS into HE programmes is the subject of Chapter 4. Funding The HEFCE/KPMG Report noted that the majority of HEIs considered that HEFCE’s current funding for sandwich placements was adequate. There are currently no proposals of which the author is aware to change significantly the way in which sandwich placements are funded. There are, however, variations between institutions in how they distribute the funding internally; some choose to provide specialist support for work placements and develop modules or courses that support employers in relation to their involvement in assessment and workplace mentoring. However, this tends to be viable only in those institutions where numbers of students on placements are buoyant. Incorporating into Higher Education Programmes the Learning People do for, in and through Work 33 Other types of programmes involving work placements, especially at postgraduate level, have typically been funded through the Higher Education Innovation Fund to cover the ‘up-front’ costs of development and to offset the potential risk involved in developing these programmes. Quality Assurance Section 9 of the QAA Code of Practice relating to placement learning is currently under revision in order to extend the Code to include other forms of workplace learning. Characteristics that the QAA values and expects to find in programmes that include a placement element include: ᔢ good ongoing links with employers ᔢ employer involvement in the organisation and preparation of placements ᔢ significant institutional commitment ᔢ well-organised placements geared to effective experiential learning. Type 2: ‘Qualifying’ Programmes These types of programme are well-established and primarily found in initial teacher training, medicine and health and social care (e.g. nursing, midwifery and allied health professions). As such, they tend to be funded by agencies other than HEFCE, such as the Training and Development Agency for Schools (TDA) and the National Health Service (NHS). Since these programmes are so well established, there is a wealth of experience in managing and delivering them and, since no dramatic changes are proposed, it is not our intention to devote a great deal of space to them here. A defining characteristic of such programmes is that they are professionally controlled, exhibit a high level of employer engagement, and cover the whole spectrum of programmes from initial qualifying education and training, specialist programmes and continuing professional development. There is a high level of interaction between professional bodies, higher education providers and employers and, to some extent, integration of activities and shared personnel. The relationship of higher education and the NHS provides a model. The CHERI/KPMG Report suggests that: “the NHS Agenda for Change and its plans for modernisation of the service are a key driver behind decisions by employers (for example, NHS Trusts and social services departments) to look to higher education in general and workplace learning in particular as a way of meeting continuing professional development requirements within the healthcare services. Universities educate virtually all healthcare professionals; on completion of their professional education and training, these practitioners move into a range of careers in both the NHS and other independent healthcare providers. The link between initial formation/pre-registration education and the subsequent labour market requirements is strong, with many academic programmes culminating in a ‘licence to practise’ in a specific professional role, as well as an academic award… The NHS strategic changes in workforce planning and the development and delivery of patient care have created an environment in which using the workplace as a site for learning (for both potential and existing staff) is fundamental. Thus, in the health service, partnerships between HEIs and employers are the norm.” 34 Incorporating into Higher Education Programmes the Learning People do for, in and through Work The number and types of programmes that involve some kind of ‘licence to practise’ with some form of external regulation have increased over the last decade; many foundation degrees are of this type. The enhanced role accorded to Sector Skills Councils in approving programmes and the requirement for programmes to comply with Sector Skills Agreements are introducing additional layers of complexity in relation to external standards. Many programmes now have to ‘map’ their curriculum against professional standards, SSA requirements, codes of practice, subject benchmark statements, and level and qualification descriptors. Designing the curriculum so as to incorporate alignment with all of these standards requires skilful drafting of learning outcomes for modules to ensure appropriate coverage of this battery of standards. Assessment of students on this type of programme normally requires demonstration of professional competence as well as academic learning outcomes. This places a heavy demand on students, and can lead to duplication, unless the assessment process is carefully designed. Advice from practitioners and assessors suggests that: ᔢ the assessment of the work-based practice elements should relate to the nature of workbased learning itself, by concentrating on reflection on work practices ᔢ it is not knowledge and technical skills alone that should be assessed but reflection on the learning form experience ᔢ assessment should focus on learning arising from action and problem-solving within a work environment ᔢ modes of assessment need to take account of the fact that learning in the workplace is frequently a shared and collective activity. Quality Assurance The validation, assessment and review of programmes developed with employers, regulatory bodies or external agencies need extensive collaboration from the original design stage through to monitoring and review of programmes. This requires all partners and parties involved to be in regular and effective communication with each other. QAA have noted areas of good practice as: active involvement of relevant professionals in curriculum planning, effective use of link lecturers/tutors to support (workplace) mentors and practice facilitators in the delivery and assessment of practice-based learning, and effective collaborations between academic staff and staff in the workplace to provide good student support and to assess students effectively. Some HEIs have established validation and review procedures and assessment boards specifically for the purpose of managing the type of collaborative activity required in programmes of this type. Many have developed Quality Assurance manuals or guidelines, to provide guidance to all parties, which is essential when validation, assessment and review involve local employers, employers’ organisations, practice supervisors, and professional bodies as well as academic staff. Such manuals and guidance materials become even more crucial when all or parts of programmes are delivered through a number of centres including FECs, as it is essential to ensure that there is common practice and common standards in operation. There is considerable variation across institutions in terms of whether or not quality assurance procedures for collaborative and work-based provision are integrated with standard arrangements within institutions. The advantage of integration is that this type of activity is not singled out as being different from other types of programme. The downside may be that members of panels and boards lack understanding and experience of such programmes and may try to impose requirements that are not appropriate. Incorporating into Higher Education Programmes the Learning People do for, in and through Work 35 Type 3: Foundation degrees From their inception foundation degrees have been designed around employment sector requirements and are based in workplace learning. Foundation degree enrolments have been rising steadily year on year and HEFCE has set a target of 100,000 enrolments on foundation degree programmes by 2010. Foundation degrees have acted as a test-bed for employer engagement, as programmes have been designed in collaboration with employers and employers’ organisations and must include elements of work-based learning. In HEFCE’s Employer Engagement Implementation Plan, Foundation Degree Forward, the organisation set up to support the development of foundation degrees, has been asked to prioritise providing support for employer engagement. As a result, FdF is currently requiring all new foundation degree developments to include a business plan, showing that there is sufficient demand from employers for the programme, that employers are involved in curriculum design and that there are appropriate work-based learning opportunities. In its Strategic Plan for 2006–8, FdF has identified a number of proposals for raising the profile of employer engagement in foundation degrees. fdf Employer Engagement Strategy 2006–2008 ᔢ Raising awareness of employers about foundation degree potential for workforce development ᔢ Working in partnership with HEFCE in support of flexible lifelong learning strategies and its broad employer engagement strategy ᔢ Brokering partnerships between employers, colleges and universities ᔢ Researching into the business benefits of Foundation degrees for employers and disseminating case studies of good practice in employer involvement ᔢ Supporting institutions in responding to regional economic strategies and priorities in their development of foundation degrees ᔢ Generating opportunities for accreditation of existing employer training and education programmes ᔢ Supporting institutions in the development of stronger, coherent employer engagement strategies ᔢ Funding the development of sector-led foundation degree frameworks and generic programmes of study ᔢ Supporting the Skills for Business Network regionally and nationally to develop higher education strategies ᔢ Supporting the ‘Train to Gain’ programme both regionally and nationally ᔢ Enabling and supporting partnerships between employers, Sector Skills Councils and Lifelong Learning Networks ᔢ Developing partnerships with employer organisations to promote foundation degrees ᔢ Enhancing potential for co-ordination of regional policies and organisations in support of the higher level skills agenda. As the list above indicates, FdF work in partnership with a number of regional and national partners and organisations in order to take forward the employer engagement agenda. For example, working with SSCs, a number of sector specific foundation degree frameworks have already been developed and others are currently under development. This is important because some foundation degrees have floundered where there turned out to be a lack of real demand from employers, and the foundation degree has not been seen as a vehicle for meeting 36 Incorporating into Higher Education Programmes the Learning People do for, in and through Work employers’ needs. Programmes designed for part-time students already in the workplace, particularly where employers have been involved in the planning and design of programmes have been more successful than programmes for full-time students. The primary reason for this given by higher education providers is the difficulties associated with securing sufficient numbers of appropriate work placements for full-time foundation degree students. A report produced by the Centre for Labour Market Studies, University of Leicester and University of Derby and funded by HEFCE looked at the demand for foundation degrees and employer engagement in the East Midlands.13 The report concluded that whilst it is important to understand the demand that exists for a particular FD programme, it is equally important to look at strategies for creating demand. The research suggested that information about demand is not necessarily being accessed before courses are developed, and stresses the importance of consulting with SSCs, Learning and Skills Councils and other key stakeholders, such as Regional Development Agencies, in order to better identify areas of existing and forecasted skills shortages and potential employer interest in foundation degrees. However, the report also noted that there are areas of demand among employees and learners that will not be identified by employers. This means that potentially successful courses might not be developed if providers rely solely on information about employer demand, especially if employers fear they will lose their investment in training if an employee leaves or is poached. Employees may be keen to develop new skills and qualifications, even though their employers may not immediately see the value of higher education, or may be put off by the need for employees to leave the workplace during normal work hours. The report concludes that demand can be created among both learners and employers through innovative and responsive approaches by providers. One such approach might be to provide accreditation of in-house training or to develop tailored short programmes that can contribute to a foundation degree. As with most types of programme, the extent to which foundation degrees are involved in employer engagement depends on the nature of the work sector. The health and social care and education sectors tend to be characterised by high levels of employer engagement whereas it is lower in hard-to-reach SMEs, especially in sectors where there is little history of involvement in education and training Quality assurance and enhancement Work-based foundation degree programmes have highlighted some of the difficulties in applying quality assurance systems to the special needs of workplace delivery of learning. The overarching frameworks for assuring quality have not always been seen as conducive to developing innovative provision. The HEFCE/QAA commitment to reviewing quality assurance arrangements will certainly take into account the lessons to be learned from the experience of validating and reviewing foundation degree programmes. The QAA’s Learning from… series includes a section on what has been learned from the reviews of foundation degrees. While the many high-quality and imaginative approaches to the design and implementation of a rich variety of work-based learning arrangements are noted, reservations are expressed about the arrangements for establishing, monitoring and assuring the quality of students’ work-based learning experiences. The need to ensure an equitable experience for all students, wherever they are taught, whatever their employment and wherever they gain their work-based learning experiences is considered to need further attention. 13 Demand for foundation degrees and engaging employers in the East Midlands, April 2007. Report to HEFCE by the Centre for Labour Market Studies, University of Leicester, and University of Derby, available at http://fdfdev.oceanworksdevelopment.net/files/FDsinEastMidlands.pdf Incorporating into Higher Education Programmes the Learning People do for, in and through Work 37 Since many foundation degree programmes are delivered in Further Education Colleges, the publication of the Further Education and Training Bill has implications for the validation and quality assurance of foundation degree programmes. Clause 19 of the Bill will enable FE colleges to award their own foundation degrees, removing their dependence on higher education institutions for validation in respect of foundation degrees. Privy Council will grant these degree-awarding powers only to those colleges that satisfy robust and stringent QAA (Quality Assurance Agency) criteria. There has been considerable opposition to some of the proposals from HEIs and UUK resulting in modifications to the proposals. The government has amended the Draft Criteria for foundation degree awarding powers such that colleges will initially be granted FDAP on a time-limited basis, for six years. After this period, the college can apply for the powers to be renewed on an unlimited basis. The government has also advised the Privy Council that during the initial six-year probationary period, FDAP should be granted without the power to franchise provision. It will be open to the Privy Council to ‘upgrade’ the FDAP powers to allow colleges to franchise provision after the initial six year period. It is also proposed that the draft Criteria for foundation degree awarding powers (published on the DfES website) should be amended such that there will be a requirement that applicants for FDAP have no fewer than four consecutive years’ experience of delivering HE programmes at a level equivalent to Level 4 (foundation degree level). Other measures include the requirement that an FE college must consult its students on whether it should seek FDAP and the introduction of a review of the operation of the new regime after four years. In addition, the government has undertaken to bring forward a further amendment during the Commons stages to make it explicit that a pre-requisite for successful application for FDAP will be that the college in question has secured articulation arrangements with at least one university. The government has also published a revised version of the QAA Draft Criteria for Foundation Degree Awarding Powers. These can be found at: http://www.dfes.gov.uk/publications/furthereducationandtrainingbill/docs/ RevisedDraftCriteriaForFoundationDegreeAwardingPowers.pdf. At the time of writing, the Bill is still progressing through the Commons stages and may yet be subject to further amendments. Funding Many foundation degrees are designed and delivered collaboratively, involving one or more HEIs and a number of FECs. Different centres tend to take responsibility for designing and assessing individual modules within the programme. For this reason, it is believed that proposals currently being considered for a credit-based system of funding teaching would allow much more flexible approaches to learning. This could also facilitate employer buy-in through funding discrete elements of foundation degree programmes. Funding issues also arise, particularly for FECs, from the practice of distributing the funding allocation for foundation degrees to HEIs as part of a block grant for institutions to distribute according to their own priorities. Some FECs have suggested that a fairer approach could be to distribute funds directly to FECs involved in delivery rather than via the validating HEI. FdF has development funding available, particularly to support the development of foundation degree frameworks and regional collaborative developments. Funds are also available to support providers in working with employers to identify and stimulate demand for foundation degree programmes. 38 Incorporating into Higher Education Programmes the Learning People do for, in and through Work Type 4: Demand-led employment-based programmes A key recommendation of the Leitch Report is to increase the capacity of higher education to provide demand-led provision that is responsive to employers’ needs for workforce development and the needs of individual employees for personal and professional development and flexible lifelong learning. This has focused attention on existing programmes, procedures and processes that are designed to develop and support customised learning negotiated with employers and employees in which a significant proportion of the learning undertaken takes place in the workplace itself. By reviewing the range of activities currently taking place, lessons can be learned that will support effective expansion of this area of engagement between higher education and employers. This section therefore describes programmes in which the shape, content and level of the programme are negotiated with employers and with individual learners and are designed to meet the needs of learners and the needs of the employing organisation. As such, the primary site of learning is the workplace itself, although programmes may be made up of a blend of specific workplace activities, assessment of the learner’s existing knowledge and skills (through APEL processes), taught modules drawn from existing higher education provision or designed specifically for the programme, and accredited in-house training and development. The components of such programmes vary significantly according to whether the programmes are intended for cohorts of learners or individual employees; in the case of the former it is usually training managers or section heads who take the lead in negotiating the content of the programme with higher education providers, whereas in the latter case, individual learners take responsibility for negotiating their own learning programmes. Such programmes are not identified separately in official data sources so it is difficult to estimate the numbers of students involved in them; what is clear is that this is a growth area and can only increase given the Leitch recommendations and the widespread commitment to extending the amount and range of demand-led provision. There are now a number of HEIs that have positioned themselves to grow this area of activity, often in collaboration with other providers, for example through the Learndirect Learning through Work initiative. In the spring of 2007, the University of Derby and the University of Middlesex, in association with UVAC and Learning through Work, held a conference to bring together practitioners specialising in work-based learning. Papers from the conference will be published by UVAC later in the year. This area of activity can take so many different forms that ‘programme’ may not be the best term to use here. A distinction can be drawn between activities that are primarily designed to recognise and value knowledge and skills that are developed in the workplace, and the development of ‘new’ learning, and activities designed to build on workplace learning. Although distinctions are blurred, it is possible to identify the main types of activity by distinguishing between: ᔢ activities designed to recognise and value knowledge and skills developed in the workplace by means of the accreditation of in-company education and training programmes, or the accreditation of individual learning through work by means of APEL ᔢ modules or units of work-based learning, designed jointly by higher education providers, companies and organisations, and primarily ‘delivered’ in the workplace ᔢ programmes of work-based learning negotiated with companies or organisations leading to a higher education award ᔢ programmes of work-based learning negotiated with individual learners leading to a higher education award. Incorporating into Higher Education Programmes the Learning People do for, in and through Work 39 In practice, the component parts of programmes of work-based learning will include a number of these elements; for example programmes negotiated with individual learners and leading to a higher education award will typically involve credit derived through APEL, may include accredited in-company learning, may include modules already validated and used in an HEI, and ‘personal’ modules or units of ‘new’ learning negotiated and approved specifically for the programme. Accreditation of in-company training In this context, accreditation has a dual meaning in that it refers both to the ‘kite-marking’ of the programme as being of an appropriate quality and standard and to the process of identifying its level and volume of credit. The process of accreditation can take one of two forms, both of which involve a credit-rating process. In the first, sometimes described as ‘credit recognition’, an HEI will work with companies and organisations to establish the level and credit value of an in-house programme or process but will not formally award a Certificate of Credit to participants who successfully complete; instead the providing organisation will issue certificates to participants that carry a statement that the HEI has recognised the programme as being at the specified level and volume of credit. All of the usual requirements for credit bearing units of learning still apply – for example the programme must be assessed and the assessment monitored and moderated by the HEI, but participants are not registered as students of the institution. The value of this to employers is that it indicates the worth of the programme, and supports the transferability of learning across contexts by giving a signal to higher education providers as to the academic value of the learning achieved. Full accreditation on the other hand does involve registration of learners with an HEI in order to receive Certificates of Credit in respect of the learning satisfactorily achieved. Accreditation of in-company programmes can be a difficult business for both HEIs and the companies and organisations with which they are working. Companies and organisations, especially SMEs, are not familiar with the tools of curriculum development and assessment used in higher education, may find the language used difficult to understand and may perceive quality assurance processes as unnecessarily bureaucratic. Most in-company training programmes will have a statement of aims or objectives, but these are often relatively loosely defined, and most do not have formal assessment processes associated with them. One of the first tasks, therefore is for the HEI representatives to work with the providers to identify specific learning outcomes for each unit of learning, to use level descriptors to establish the level of the learning, to put in place appropriate assessment processes and assessment criteria, and to map the modules into the credit and level frameworks used across higher education. The picture becomes more complicated when the training is provided in part or in full by external training providers. Who owns the training programme? Should the trainers be evaluated to ensure that they have appropriate experience and expertise? Should or must they become involved in assessment processes? A further factor may be that the HEI itself does not have specialist expertise in all of the specific sectors in which the company or organisation operates. As part of its Employer Engagement Strategy, HEFCE is committed to promoting the capacity of higher education to accredit in-company training and has signalled its intention to work with both large and small employers. The work undertaken through UVAC, with funding from the DfES, to accredit in-company programmes at GlaxoSmithKline provides an illustration of the benefits and difficulties associated with the accreditation of in-company training. 40 Incorporating into Higher Education Programmes the Learning People do for, in and through Work Example Accreditation of a Continuing Education Programme in Research Chemistry at GlaxoSmithKline The Chemistry function at GSK had scientific training programmes designed for graduate entrants over the first three years of their employment. The company wanted to have the programmes accredited and validated, and to have the potential to contribute to a higher education award. The project was managed through UVAC who appointed consultants with experience of accreditation to undertake the work, which was co-funded by the DfES and GSK. Beginning with the Research Chemistry area it was planned to roll out the programme across other areas within the Chemistry function at GSK. Graduate research chemists at GSK receive extensive training in the areas of synthetic chemistry, medicinal chemistry, informatics, and personal and professional skills development. The programme was well regarded across the industry but hitherto had not been externally benchmarked or independently assessed for cost-effectiveness or quality. The company felt that gaining external recognition of the value of the programme would enable them to maximise their competitive advantage in relation to recruitment, retention and staff development. Initial diagnostic meetings between the consultants and GSK explored: ᔢ how the accreditation service would support business objectives ᔢ perceived benefits to individual learners ᔢ details of the size and nature of the learning programmes proposed for accreditation and of the number and backgrounds of individual learners ᔢ delivery and support arrangements, including the experience of staff who would be involved in delivering and assessing the programme and learning facilities ᔢ additional support that might be required from the higher education sector. Following this meeting it was agreed to develop proposals for accreditation of the existing continuing education programme, to build the accredited learning into a postgraduate certificate award and, ultimately, to use the award as a springboard into work-based M.Phil awards (currently under development). GSK perceived many benefits attached to accreditation of the programme: For graduate employees: provided the tools and confidence to compete for senior positions; increased motivation to continue their scientific training; benefited from external academic input into in-house training; gained a nationally recognised qualification. For GSK UK Chemistry: reassurance of the business benefits of investing in training; motivated and competitive graduate employees; external challenge and benchmark of training; recruitment competitive edge; introduction of assessment provided evidence of the value being gained by participants. For GSK Corporate: pioneered a new approach to investment in employees; readily adaptable for other functions; increased reputation as a preferred employer; set a new standard for higher education in the workplace. Incorporating into Higher Education Programmes the Learning People do for, in and through Work 41 There were inevitably challenges to overcome, however: Quality assurance requirements: Because the validation of the postgraduate certificate programme established GSK as a provider of higher education, the NVC consortium responsible for the validation required the company to undertake an organisational audit to confirm the company’s capacity to offer a programme at this level. The structures, committees, and processes of a large company do not provide ready equivalents to those of HEIs and compiling the necessary evidence for institutional audit proved challenging, but was resolved when the company responded positively to suggestions made by the NVC panel. Assessment: GSK proposed viva voce examinations for a number of the modules as they wished to engender competence in engaging in scientific conversation with other scientists, although this was not the main focus of the assessment. The validation panel of senior scientists, quality assurance and work-based learning experts was concerned to ensure the robustness, fairness and transparency of the process and, in particular, that the assessment methods selected would provide auditable evidence for the external examiners. A combination of written and oral methods was eventually agreed. Language and jargon: both GSK and the consultants had to learn new terms and concepts and ensure they were mutually understood. It can be seen from the example given that the nature and extent of negotiation needed between higher education providers, learners and employers to create an acceptable programme requires a set of skills that ‘traditional’ academics may not possess. At times it seemed to the consultants working on the GSK development that their role was akin to that of a cultural anthropologist, the most important quality required being the ability to understand the culture and working practices of the company or organisation. Similarly neither employers nor employees are likely to be familiar with the culture of higher education, nor with the curriculum development tools, credit frameworks and quality assurance systems that are used. As at GSK, particular difficulties are likely to be experienced in relation to assessment since hitherto neither the workplace learning of individuals nor the outcomes of in-company training programmes have traditionally been assessed, (with the exception of areas such as the NHS). For companies and organisations, grappling with the details of assessment specifications and assessment criteria can be daunting; equally it can be difficult for higher education providers to appreciate how assessment processes can be most appropriately managed in the workplace context. Individual learners, negotiating their own programmes of study have a particularly difficult task since not only must learning outcomes and learning activities be negotiated, they may also be required to propose how their work can be assessed. It is here that the experience and expertise of higher education institutions, in which assessment is a core activity, is most needed. Accreditation of Prior and Experiential Learning (APEL) Traditionally, APEL has been used to enable learners to demonstrate learning that they have already achieved through experience that is equivalent to the learning that would be required on a validated programme of study, thereby achieving ‘advanced standing’ on that programme. However in the context of negotiated work-based programmes of study, APEL has significant potential for developmental purposes at work. The authors of a UVAC publication on APEL14 believe that the true value of APEL resides in its potential for enabling individuals’ knowledge and skills to be made explicit so that they can contribute to the productivity of the organisation. 14 GARNETT, J. PORTWOOD, D.& COSTLEY, C. (2004) Bridging rhetoric and reality: Accreditation of prior experiential learning (APEL) in the UK, Bolton: UVAC. 42 Incorporating into Higher Education Programmes the Learning People do for, in and through Work The authors envisage an approach to APEL in work-based learning contexts that would provide a useful, critical and reflective mechanism that can be used by individuals and organisations as part of a customised and flexible programme of study. Such a model would be able to include a more forward-looking perspective for the learners where previous experience is used as a starting point for new projects and work-related activity. Chapter 5 of this volume is concerned specifically with APEL in the context of work-based learning programmes. Developing programmes of study with employers and individual learners The other main areas of activity in relation to negotiated work-based learning programmes have chapters of their own in this volume. In Chapter 6, Garth Rhodes and Gillian Shiel from Northumbria University present a model of negotiated work-based learning (NWBL) designed to meet the needs of organisations and individuals through part-time higher education (HE) programmes. The approach adopted utilises partnership agreements with organisations and learning contracts with individuals to negotiate and define learning pathways that integrate work-based and academic learning. In Chapter 9, David Young from the University of Derby discusses issues relating to teaching, learning and assessment in work-based learning in which he describes a number of characteristic features that are useful in planning and supporting programmes with and for work-based learners. He also describes what can be learned from his experience of supporting learners on the Learndirect Learning through Work initiative in which the University is a major participant. Conclusions This section indicates clearly the extent of current activity relating to learning in the workplace. Other chapters feature specific examples of work-based learning and its assessment and support. Yet, only the tip of the iceberg is showing here; there are many other areas that could have been included. It is important that HEFCE and other agencies recognise the wealth of experience that HEIs and FECs have in this area and build on it. There is a danger otherwise that, in the rush to implement the recommendations of the Leitch Report, a rash of new initiatives will be introduced which do not draw on the good practice already established. Incorporating into Higher Education Programmes the Learning People do for, in and through Work 3 43 Working in partnership: how to work with others to deliver a demand-led approach to workforce development By Lyn Brennan Working in partnership Many of the chapters in this volume describe what goes on in individual HEIs, working directly with organisations and individuals to provide programmes and services to support workforce development and individual learners in the workplace. However, a key feature of all current strategies designed to increase employer engagement with higher education for the purpose of workforce development is the recommendation that the work should be taken forward through partnerships. It is important therefore that this volume should review initiatives and developments that involve working in partnership not only with employers and employees but also with employment representative bodies, such as trade associations, SSCs, and trade unions in developing and marketing programmes. Similarly, we will look at delivery partnerships, involving HEIs, FECs, LLNs, and a range of work-based learning providers, and will also focus on regional and local partnerships aimed at delivering regional skills agendas. Working in partnership to deliver the skills agenda In order to create the desired ‘step-change’ in the level of employer engagement with higher and further education, there have been a number of initiatives introduced that are designed to foster demand-led provision in which employers are seen to comprise the demand side. At the strategic level, there are partnerships designed to give employers a more direct influence over the nature of skills development and training. Hitherto these groups have mainly been concerned with skills up to Level 3, but post-Leitch there is evidence of a move towards greater involvement with higher level skills. For example, the Skills Alliance, created in 2003, under the joint leadership of the Secretary of State for Education and Skills and the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry, brings together four key government departments (DfES; DTI; HM Treasury; DWP) with employer and union representatives. It links the key delivery agencies, led by the LSC, with the aim of providing a concerted drive to raise skills and to transform both the demand for and supply of skills. Details of its memberships and achievements can be found on the DfES Skills Strategy webpage at: www.dfes.gov.uk/skillsstrategy/. One of the recommendations of the Leitch Report that has already been implemented is the creation of a new body through the merger of the Sector Skills Development Agency and the National Employment Panel. A DfES press release on June 14th 2007 announced that Sir Michael Rake, International Chairman of KPMG and chair designate of BT, would chair the new body, the UK Commission for Employment and Skills. The Commission is expected to become operational from April 2008 and will have a remit to: ᔢ advise Ministers on strategy and policies relating to employment and skills ᔢ assess progress towards achieving national employment and skills ambitions for 2020 ᔢ have responsibility for the performance of Sector Skills Councils, advising Ministers on re-licensing. 44 Incorporating into Higher Education Programmes the Learning People do for, in and through Work For those directly engaged in employer engagement and work-based learning activity, it is the creation of regional and local delivery partnerships, working with businesses and organisations, that already have had or will have most immediate impact on practice. This section covers a number of recent initiatives at national, regional and local levels, including: ᔢ Train to Gain ᔢ Higher Level Skills Pathfinders ᔢ Regional Skills Partnerships ᔢ Lifelong Learning Networks ᔢ Sector Skills Councils’ endorsement schemes ᔢ Trade Union Learning Representatives and the Union Learning Fund. Train to Gain Train to Gain was introduced as a result of the Government’s 2005 White Paper Skills: getting on in business, getting on at work, with the intention of introducing a demand-led approach to training, based on the identification of employers’ business needs and the provision of customised training in the workplace. Led by the Learning and Skills Councils, the approach was piloted at Level 2, but is now being extended to Level 4 and above. Train to Gain offers employers the services of independent skills brokers who can: ᔢ offer free, independent and impartial advice ᔢ match any training needs identified with training providers ᔢ ensure training is delivered to meet business needs. Brokers are also trained to advise on sources of funding available to support the agreed workforce development activities. The LSC’s national targets for 2006/7 are to engage 33,000 employers of which at least 51% must be ‘Hard to Reach’. It is also assumed that there will be 50,463 Level 2 and 6,807 Basic Skills completions from learners starting on Train to Gain during the year. In January 2007, the LSC provided the following information15 concerning achievements to date: ᔢ Approximately 20,930 employers have been engaged ᔢ 16,930 of these engagements are new employers brought to Train to Gain by Skills Brokers and providers ᔢ 58% of these are Hard to Reach employers ᔢ The National Employer Service has engaged three larger employers this month ᔢ There is an encouraging level of interest from key sectors including Health and Care (22%), Retail & Wholesale (14%), Manufacturing (13%), Business Services (11%) and Construction (9%) ᔢ New employer engagements are behind plan for the year to date but regions are confident targets for the year will be met ᔢ 12,251 employers have learners who started on LSC-funded qualifications since April 2006. 4,889 of these employers were formerly engaged in Employer Training Pilots prior to April 2006. The LSC are able to provide a number of case studies, some from employers who have benefited from Train to Gain, but also examples from Skills Brokers are available. Below are extracts from two of these. 15 Information provided by Sarah Millet, Higher Level Skills Senior Policy Manager, LSC from LSC Train to Gain Period 9 Report for the period April to December 2006. Sarah can be contacted at [email protected] Incorporating into Higher Education Programmes the Learning People do for, in and through Work 45 The Employer: Amesbury Abbey Nursing Home Salisbury-based Amesbury Abbey Nursing Home is a private care home for the elderly with 42 residents and over 90 employees including carers, waitresses, kitchen staff and cleaners. Louise Burgess, Training and Development Manager for the Nursing Home Group, says: “I was put in touch with Train to Gain Skills broker, Phil Newton, who talked me through the training options for our employees and funding streams which were available to us. Many of the carers have now completed level 2 NVQs, which has greatly increased their confidence so they now feel empowered to use their knowledge to raise the standards of care for customers.” Loraine, a long serving member of staff, really benefited from the interaction with Louise as an in-house assessor and says that the quality of the assessor makes a huge difference to the training. Loraine adds: “Training has really helped me to work well with other colleagues and respond to clients needs. It makes you stand back and evaluate how you have been doing things and makes you think. With more qualifications, you are empowered to question and are more sensitive to change.” A few years ago, the nursing home was facing a high turnover of staff but the new funded training from Train to Gain has had a real impact on the retention of staff. Louise adds: “We have introduced an achievement recognition system among the carers. The colour of the trim on their uniforms indicates achievement at various NVQ levels and the assessor award. Clients know the system and take an interest in progression of staff, which has contributed to the overall positive atmosphere at the home.” Phil Newton, Train to Gain Skills Broker, said: “Based on the success of the fully funded training at NVQ level 2 the owner of the home has agreed to make contributions towards the NVQ level 3 for employees. The home now has more than 23 NVQ level 2 or equivalent trained healthcare assistants, a number which continues to grow year on year.” 46 Incorporating into Higher Education Programmes the Learning People do for, in and through Work TCHC Managing Director, Dale Morgan, launched TCHC in 2004. Under Train to Gain, TCHC offer skills and training advice specifically tailored to meet the needs of employers in the retail, manufacturing, engineering, health, care, sports, leisure, automotive and finance sector. The challenge Dale says “Skills Brokers are offering a package of opportunities to employers. To be effective you must be a good listener and be able to understand what employers’ requirements are. You have to understand the sector and environment they are working in and identify areas that will improve their businesses, enable them to become even more competitive and make their staff happy and motivated. With my experience and background I have a really good knowledge across different sectors and I like to think that makes me and my team a bit different.” The solution Dale is convinced that Train to Gain will make a huge difference to employers. “Train to Gain is about independent advice and we are an independent brokerage. It’s a wonderful programme which large numbers of employers will benefit from.” TCHC now employs a team of 14 experienced Skills Brokers. It is very important that Skills Brokers know their sector, the industries they are working with and the problems they face. Although not all reports of the achievements of Train to Gain are so encouraging across all areas and sectors, the Government believes that the programme is a success and is already piloting its extension to higher levels, through the three Regional Pathfinder projects and also through projects individually funded through the Strategic Development Fund. These projects are vital from the point of view of higher education, since many commentators (and critics) believe that the model is not an appropriate one for higher education. At the time of writing, these pilots and projects are still in their infancy but some information is coming through already, especially from the Higher Level Skills Pathfinders. Higher Level Skills Pathfinder Projects In September 2006 HEFCE agreed to fund Higher Level Skills Pathfinders in three regions, the North West, the North East and the South West. HEFCE identified three main objectives for the regional projects: ᔢ to embed HE in employer workforce development and skills strategies regionally, sectorally and nationally ᔢ to embed workforce development and skills in HE providers’ strategies ᔢ to promote greater co-funding of HE provision by employers. A key activity for the Pathfinders is to pilot mechanisms for extending Train to Gain to higher levels. However, HEFCE recognises that this will not be sufficient in itself to deliver the change in culture required on the part of both employers and higher education if the goals of enhancing the higher level skills of learners and employees and encouraging employers to engage more fully with higher education are to be achieved. Incorporating into Higher Education Programmes the Learning People do for, in and through Work 47 In its Prospectus, HEFCE outlined the key project characteristics it would be seeking: 1. We would encourage imaginative approaches to the development of projects but would advise that proposals should be: ᔢ low burden, and should not create additional bureaucratic structures ᔢ sensitive to and inclusive of diverse institutional missions ᔢ supportive of the market. 2. We would expect proposals to include appropriate internal project evaluation methods, including consideration of how the proposals will assess the impact of the project on disadvantaged groups. 3. In addition we would encourage solutions that: are sustainable – although the projects are ‘pathfinders’ and will test different approaches, some of which may not be successful in the longer term, it is important that the projects develop the infrastructure and ‘culture’ to respond effectively to the needs of employers. are needs driven – a primary aspect of the projects will be for regions to undertake a needs analysis – across the whole spectrum of HE interaction with employers to support skills – and to identify what will make a difference in embedding HE in workforce development and skills strategies. involve Further Education Colleges – ensuring that regional Association of Colleges representatives are involved in developing projects as well as colleges themselves. add value – it is likely that institutions such as FE colleges which have been involved in the Train to Gain predecessor, the National Employer Training Programme, will already investing in this area. Projects will need to identify how they build upon existing activity but also how they will make a difference. The successful regional pilots are described on the HEFCE website which can be accessed at www.hefce.ac.uk/learning/employer/path/. North East The initial focus for the North East pathfinder is on the nine regional priority sectors: chemicals and pharmaceuticals; automotive; defence and marine; food and drink; energy; knowledgeintensive business services; tourism and hospitality; commercial creative; and health and social care. The pathfinder has four concurrent strands of work, to: ᔢ establish service-level agreements with key partners and implement a communications strategy ᔢ recruit sector-specific staff to deliver HE brokerage ᔢ create together a staff development programme for existing brokers, for example the Learning and Skills Council (LSC) ᔢ invite applications from HE institutions who wish, to develop HE programmes in partnership with employers. For further information about the North East pathfinder contact Helen Pickering, tel 0191 516 4403 ([email protected]). 48 Incorporating into Higher Education Programmes the Learning People do for, in and through Work North West The North West pathfinder utilises existing regional brokerage structures through Train to Gain and Business Link to broker employers to Higher Level Skills provision. These brokers are supported by HE specialist advisors with a strong knowledge of HE expertise across the region. The advisors act as a liaison point between HE providers and brokers. The pathfinder is producing a database of HE provision for the brokers to use when referring employers to existing provision. The pathfinder is also undertaking training for skills brokers to enable them to develop a full understanding of higher education. The pathfinder will also develop demand-led HE provision, which meets employer needs, identified either through broker activity or by the Sector Skills Councils. For the development of new demand-led provision the North West has four priority sectors. These are advanced engineering and materials, creative and digital industries, business and professional services, and construction. Each of the specialist advisors focuses on one of these priority sectors. For further information about the North West pathfinder contact Celia Brigg, tel 0161 234 8891 ([email protected]) or visit the North West Universities Association website at http://www.nwua.ac.uk/pathfinder. To join the mailing list for the North West pathfinder contact Virginia Mitchell on 0161 234 0431 or [email protected]. South West The South West pathfinder is focusing on three priority sectors: engineering, the creative industries and business improvement. The pathfinder has four themes: ᔢ use a range of intermediaries to stimulate and meet demand from employers for HE provision ᔢ identify and build on best practice in work-based learning in the South West ᔢ develop a ‘shell’ continuing professional development award framework to facilitate flexible and accreditable provision for learners ᔢ develop a funding methodology for work-based learning that will clearly identify areas for employer contribution. For further information about the South West pathfinder contact Shamala Govindasamy ([email protected]) or Daniel Isaac, tel 01392 454100 ([email protected]). Incorporating into Higher Education Programmes the Learning People do for, in and through Work 49 Example The North West Regional Higher Level Skills Pathfinder The NW HLSP is being led by the North West Universities Association (NWUA), as the representative body of the fifteen North West Higher Education Institutions (HEIs), in partnership with the North West Regional Development Agency (NWDA), Government Office North West (GONW), the Association of Colleges (AoC), the Learning and Skills Council (LSC), the Sector Skills Councils (SSCs) and the NW Regional Skills Partnership (RSP). All of the Lifelong Learning networks in the region are closely involved with the project. HEFCE and the LSC have been developing a protocol for joint working between the three Higher Level Skills Pathfinders and the Train to Gain brokerage service nationally. This will be agreed soon and will be available on the NWUA website. NWUA have also been working with the NW Regional LSC team to produce a NW version of this protocol to guide the relationship between the NW Higher Level Skills Pathfinder and specifically the four HE Specialist Advisors and the Train to Gain brokers. This protocol details how the relationship will work between the two projects, including clear outlines of the referral process and follow up and reporting mechanisms. These details will be crucial to the success of integrating HE into the brokerage activity. The piloting of Train to Gain approaches is but one of the areas with which the Pathfinder is engaged. Through the project a number of higher education providers have received funding to develop demand-led HE provision which meets employer needs, identified either through broker activity or by the Sector Skills Councils. Details of projects that have received funding are available on the website. Regional Skills Partnerships Regional Skills Partnerships (RSPs) were introduced following the 2003 Skills White Paper to create partnerships, regionally and locally, between those involved in delivering services relating to adult skills and training, business support, employment and productivity. They are essentially forums whereby businesses and skills organisations work together to meet the skills needs of regional economies. Nine partnerships were established, led by the Regional Development Agencies and each has a website with details of their activities and achievements: East Midlands East of England London North East North West South East South West West Midlands Yorkshire and Humber www.esppartnership.org.uk www.eescp.org.uk/ www.lda.gov.uk/server/show www.skillsnortheast.co.uk www.nwda.co.uk (Click on ‘Skills and Education’) www.seeda.co.uk/Work_in_the_Region/Learning_&_Skills/ Skills_for_Productivity www.southwestskillsstrategy.info/ www.wmskillspartnership.org.uk www.yorkshirefutures.com (Search for ‘Regional Skills Partnership’). More information is also available in the RSP Newsletter, published every month by DfES. This can be accessed on line at the DfES website or to receive individual copies of it, email [email protected]. 50 Incorporating into Higher Education Programmes the Learning People do for, in and through Work Membership of RSPs is decided on a regional basis but all RSPs include membership by the LSC, Jobcentre Plus, the Small Business Service (operating within the previously named DTI and now BERR, the Department for Business, Enterprise and Regulatory Reform), the Skills for Business Network, (made up of 25 Sector Skills Councils), the appropriate regional associations of universities and of colleges and the regional HEFCE consultant. Lifelong Learning Networks are now entering the frame too. The aim for each RSP is to agree with partners what structure will best deliver a better skilled workforce to support the achievement of the Regional Economic Strategy. The objectives outlined for RSPs are: ᔢ put employers’ needs centre stage ᔢ raise ambition in the demand for skills ᔢ motivate and support more learners to re-engage in learning ᔢ make colleges and training providers more responsive to employers’ and learners’ needs ᔢ achieve better working across different agencies engaged in business support and skills development. Details of the partnerships and their regional objectives can be found by accessing the regional websites. From these websites, it is clear that the RSPs particularly involved in brokerage activity are those that have the Regional Pathfinder Projects. Lifelong Learning Networks Lifelong Learning Networks were announced by HEFCE in a Circular Letter in June 2004, with the aim of bringing together a range of HEIs and FECs to promote progression and create new opportunities for vocational learners. To this end they are expected to work with the regional arms of the Sector Skills Councils and the Regional Development Agencies and other relevant stakeholders. So far, 28 LLNs have been established, 26 of which are either regional or subregional, plus two national networks, the National Network for the Arts and VETNET in the area of veterinary sciences. HEFCE states that in order to achieve their overall objectives, LLNs will undertake the following specific activities: ᔢ Curriculum development to facilitate progression: alignment that removes barriers to progression and bridging provision that forms part of the HE offer; and new HE curriculum development involving employers (foundation degrees, work-based learning, e-learning, collaborative modules). ᔢ Information, advice, guidance and learner support systems that allow LLNs to engage, and track, learners in the context of lifelong learning opportunities. ᔢ Production of network-wide progression agreements, underpinned by agreement on credit, that defines clearly the expectations about progression that learners can reasonably hold and makes institutional commitments that these expectations will be met. Progression accords are the device used to offer a guarantee to learners that they will be able to progress from any award offered by one of the partners to any other programme offered within the network that the learner is prepared for and can benefit from. Most regional and sub-regional LLNs currently specialise around particular vocational sectors relating to significant regional employment clusters. However, all are engaged to some extent in more generic skills development, for example management and leadership skills for employees in SMEs. HEFCE’s LLN Update in February 2007 signalled its intention that LLNs should become more focused around the area of employer engagement. The Update indicates how the involvement of the LLNs in the Higher Level Skills Pathfinders might become a more widespread model. Incorporating into Higher Education Programmes the Learning People do for, in and through Work 51 Extract: HEFCE February 2007 LLN Update Employer engagement and Higher Level Skills Pathfinders General information: http://www.hefce.ac.uk/learning/employer/ 1. The funding council is being asked to lead radical changes in HE provision to encourage employer engagement and workplace learning, and to facilitate provision partly or wholly funded by employers. We are addressing this in a number of ways. The employer engagement strategy being led by HEFCE’s learning and teaching team includes higher education ‘Train to Gain’ pilots in three regions (NW, NE and SW), and an invitation to the sector to develop proposals that could increase employer engagement and lead to cofunded programmes. HEFCE also funds projects to enhance the contribution of higher education to the economy and society (third stream as second mission, HEIF, knowledge transfer etc). LLNs are engaging employers in identifying appropriate curriculum and thinking about issues of delivery. Some LLNs also offer brokerage services. We need to work together to ensure coherence through planning and discussion at the local level, at the point of project planning and delivery. 2. We are keen to ensure that different initiatives are ‘joined up’, and acknowledge that some LLNs have highlighted concerns in this area in their monitoring reports. As a result, we are working closely with colleagues across HEFCE to provide clarification and we hope to be issuing more detailed advice as part of a circular letter on employer engagement in spring 2007. 3. The Council is working to ensure that funding for projects complements what is already being developed, and that additional funding produces additional output. All proposals are expected to show how they relate to commitments that institutions share with LLNs (or other partnerships they participate in). In practical terms, this might mean that the LLN delivers certain elements of a more recently funded employer engagement pilot project. Some LLNs have chosen to expand their own work, by submitting further employer engagement proposals themselves. 4. Different initiatives have their own specific focus. The high level objective for LLNs is to change and improve the coherence, clarity and certainty of progression opportunities for vocational learners into and through higher education. This focus on progression is where LLNs’ key tasks and challenges will lie; their engagement with employers will reflect this. We intend to evaluate the relationships between the various initiatives as part of the interim evaluation of LLNs. However, we would be interested in hearing about current experiences, perhaps through feedback to the LLN National Forum. It is clear that HEIs and FECs will be expected to engage in partnership and work collaboratively with a range of national, regional and local organisations to deliver on both the recommendations of the Leitch Report and the government’s continuing concern to widen participation and promote greater social equity. Other links too are growing in importance, particularly with Sector Skills Councils and Trade Union organisations. 52 Incorporating into Higher Education Programmes the Learning People do for, in and through Work Sector Skills Councils and endorsement schemes Sector Skills Councils (SSCs) have become central players in the delivery of the government’s skills strategy. In addition to their existing role nationally and regionally in developing Sector Skills Agreements, they have now been empowered to approve vocational qualifications as a condition of funding. This power underlines the development by some SSCs of kite-marking or endorsement schemes. Although hitherto much of this activity has been concentrated at a level below that of higher education, there are now a number of endorsement schemes operating at degree level, such as the ‘Skillset-approved’ degree-level animation courses. Some SSCs have also produced sectoral frameworks for foundation degrees: for example LANTRA, the SSC for the land-based industries have Foundation Degree Sectoral Frameworks in the areas of Animal Health and Welfare, Environmental Industries and Land Management and Production. When the involvement of Sector Skills Councils with Regional Development Agencies and Regional Skills Partnerships are taken into account, it is apparent that higher education must be prepared to work in close collaboration with SSCs. Such developments are not without their critics; for example there is concern within higher education about the erosion of institutional autonomy in planning and designing courses. However HEIs have a long history of working with the requirements set by professional bodies for recognition of their programmes, and the development of SSC endorsement schemes is not dissimilar. A number of other organisations are also developing endorsement schemes; for example Foundation Degree Forward and UVAC have developed frameworks for endorsement of foundation degrees, prompting concern that the landscape is getting increasingly populated by a range of standards with the possible outcome that there could be duplication with existing Quality Assurance arrangements. Universities UK have identified a number of possible concerns about the development of endorsement schemes, including that: ᔢ the development of endorsement schemes could impose an additional regulatory burden on institutions, by duplicating existing quality assurance arrangements ᔢ SSCs may take a prescriptive approach to accreditation, cutting across institutional autonomy by defining learning outcomes etc. ᔢ such schemes could cut across accreditation already offered by professional bodies in a variety of fields ᔢ SSCs may develop endorsement schemes as a means of raising revenue, adding to the higher education sector’s costs. Trades Unions Another player in the field are the trade unions. The ESRC Centre on Skills, Knowledge and Organisational Performance (SKOPE) was established to examine the links between the acquisition and use of skills and knowledge, product market strategies and performance. In December 2006, in its Issues Papers Series, SKOPE provided a useful overview of the role of trade unions in the learning and skills agenda16. Over recent years, training and learning has become an increasingly important item on the agenda of British trade unions with the development of a range of union learning programmes, the creation of the union learning representative (ULR), and the forging of new ‘learning partnerships’ with employers. The Labour government, committed to developing Britain as a high-skills, knowledge-driven economy, 16 Information provided by Sarah Millet, Higher Level Skills Senior Policy Manager, LSC from LSC Train to Gain Period 9 Report for the period April to December 2006. Sarah can be contacted at [email protected] Incorporating into Higher Education Programmes the Learning People do for, in and through Work 53 has supported these activities through the Union Learning Fund and the provision of statutory backing for ULRs. At the same time, unions have been afforded a new role as ‘stakeholder’ within the vocational education and training system, with unions enjoying formal representation on most of the main institutional bodies, including the Learning and Skills Council (LSC) and the 47 local LSCs, as well as the Sector Skills Councils (SSCs). In sectors where unions have an established presence, they have been involved in the formulation of sector skills agreements and regional skills partnerships. The Trades Union Congress (TUC) is also represented on the national Skills Alliance. Unions are now key players in promoting learning in the workplace, primarily by establishing a group of union lay officials – the union learning representatives (ULRs) – whose role it is to help motivate and support workers in taking up learning opportunities. According to the TUC, around 13,000 ULRs have now been trained. Over 450 union learning projects (covering over 3,000 workplaces) have also received funding through the Union Learning Fund, with more than 67,000 learners able to access courses each year as a result. In some cases, unions have also been able to engage employers in ‘partnerships’ for learning and skills development. The authors suggest that in many respects union involvement in the skills agenda has been a success story, helping many employees to take up learning opportunities in the workplace, thus improving the supply of skills and learning. However they also suggest that the position of the unions has limitations: their involvement is highly dependent on continued funding through the Union Learning Fund, and they have limited opportunity, compared to their counterparts in North European high skill economies, to influence employer demand for and usage of skills. There is an argument that trade unions could have an important part to play in articulating the need to create more jobs at higher skills levels, which in turn could result in greater union engagement with higher level skills development. Brokerage models for demand-led provision The notion of brokerage occurs again and again in the context of bringing together the supply and demand sides of employer engagement. Although it is the proposed roll-out of the Train to Gain model that is perhaps attracting most attention from the higher education sector, most of the initiatives and developments described above involve brokerage to a greater or lesser extent. SEMTA, the SSC for Science, Engineering and Manufacturing Technologies, is piloting a brokerage scheme with SMEs and most if not all of the SSCs are engaged in brokering activity. Hitherto, the focus of their involvement has been at levels below that of higher education, but this pattern is already beginning to change. Similarly, part of the remit of LLNs is to broker relationships between further and higher education providers and learners. Their emphasis hitherto has been with matching learners needs to existing supply-driven rather than demandled provision. However HEFCE has signalled its intention to extend this remit to include a much closer involvement in employer engagement activities (as in the Pathfinder projects). The attraction of such approaches is that they can be used to stimulate demand from employers for higher and further education and may lead to the development of sustained relationships between them. Although there is a lot of discussion at the moment about the need for a change of culture in higher education, it is also recognised that aspects of organisational and business cultures may prevent employers from recognising the relevance of higher education to their needs. Consequently individuals and organisations that can broker effective relationships between the higher education and business sectors are in demand. 54 Incorporating into Higher Education Programmes the Learning People do for, in and through Work Many other organisations are involved in brokerage: the HEFCE-funded Centres for Knowledge Exchange tend to be multi-institutional partnerships on a regional basis, and often focus on specific employment sectors and industries. A key aspect of Centres for Knowledge Exchange is brokerage and brokering relationships. Brokerage can be seen in a specific sense of identifying business needs (be they for education and training, consultancy, or research and development) and matching those needs to a potential supplier. Following the matching process, further negotiation may be needed to ensure that the requirements of both parties are met. Brokerage can also be viewed in a broader sense of brokering relationships between relevant players and stakeholders in a region or sub-region; for example, between higher education knowledge transfer and business development offices and key regional and sub-regional business intermediaries (and their representative bodies). The British Chambers of Commerce are currently taking part in a scheme with FdF to stimulate demand from employers for foundation degrees. UfI’s Learning through Work web-based portal offers a single point of contact for generic advice and guidance about the potential for negotiated workplace learning programmes to meet employers’ and learners’ needs, and provides direct links to potential learning providers. Independent consultants, acting for and with HEIs, UVAC and other organisations, are providing a similar service. The list is almost endless, but success will depend on the quality of the brokerage and whether it is fit for purpose. A number of commentators, particularly staff in HEIs that have a long history of direct involvement with employers, have expressed doubts about whether brokerage, particularly in the model deployed in Train to Gain, is an appropriate model for workforce development at higher levels. Concerns include: ᔢ brokers could intervene to break up existing good relationships that exist between employers and higher education ᔢ the process of matching employers’ needs to providers ‘products’ could extend supplydriven provision at the expense of demand-led development ᔢ traditional Training Needs Analysis will not convey to employers the range of support and provision that higher education can offer ᔢ if employers don’t know what they can have, they will not identify a need for it ᔢ brokers may not know enough about the services that higher education can offer ᔢ brokerage may have too narrow a focus by identifying specific needs rather than broader developmental opportunities. As is evidenced by the account of in-company accreditation and the example of GSK in the previous chapter, the consultant/broker needs to be someone who has a deep and broad understanding of the culture and practices of higher education and has the ability to develop a similar understanding of the culture and practices of businesses and organisations with which they are working. It may be that such people are most likely to be located within HEIs themselves, and it should not be assumed that working indirectly through brokers is necessarily the best approach. Incorporating into Higher Education Programmes the Learning People do for, in and through Work 4 55 Designing work-based learning programmes: How to use National Occupational Standards (NOS) By David Hemsworth 1. Introduction The UK’s National Occupational Standards are one of the most comprehensive systems of competencies in the world. Through Sector Skills Councils employers and government make a significant investment in developing and improving the standards to ensure they meet the needs of employment at all levels. Described by Leeds Metropolitan University as “industry-credible components of learning” 17, National Occupational Standards provide ready-made tools in most vocational disciplines to enhance work-based learning and help ensure that HE programmes meet employer demand for higher skills. Use of National Occupational Standards supports a range of HE priorities, including graduate employability, widening participation and employer engagement. Incorporation of the standards – and where appropriate NVQs – in foundation degree and other vocational programmes is steadily increasing as awareness of the benefits grows. The standards are becoming embedded in the QAA code of practice, guidelines and subject benchmark statements, and they are fundamental to Foundation Degree Sector Frameworks. Checklist 20 reasons for using Occupational Standards18 Incorporating occupational standards into HE programmes has helped institutions to: 1. attract a wider range of learners, including those with vocational skills and qualifications 2. accredit prior experiential learning (APEL) 3. develop learners’ workplace competence and ensure their graduates are ‘work-ready’ 4. improve the quality and effectiveness of work-based learning 5. motivate learners and improve completion rates 6. provide progression to other HE courses and graduates’ continuing professional development 7. meet professional accreditation criteria 8. develop and strengthen links with employers 9. meet the skills needs of learners and employers 10. ensure the curriculum reflects industry practice 11. benchmark provision against national standards 12. incorporate national vocational qualifications within the HE award 13. speed curriculum development by drawing on ready-made and increasingly user-friendly standards, rather than ‘re-invent the wheel’ 14. adopt flexible modes of delivery and assessment 15. deliver more structured vocational learning 16. spread the workload with employers 17. develop partnership-working 18. tap into new funding sources 19. fill gaps in provision 20. balance academic study and practical learning. 17 ROODHOUSE, S. and HEMSWORTH, D. (2004) Fit for Purpose: The use of National Occupational Standards in higher education to meet the needs of employment. A generic guide for curriculum designers and deliverers, UVAC. The author is grateful to UVAC for permission to draw on the guide in this chapter. 18 Ibid, p.64 56 Incorporating into Higher Education Programmes the Learning People do for, in and through Work 2. National Occupational Standards What they are National Occupational Standards (NOS) are developed by Sector Skills Councils (SSCs) and are approved by the regulatory authorities to ensure UK-wide coverage. They are available free of charge from the respective SSCs19 and at the Sector Skills Development Agency’s mini-site dedicated to National Occupational Standards, www.ukstandards.org. As the recognised standards of workplace competence, they underpin the statutory requirements of work in many industries and set the standards of good workplace practice in virtually every sector of the economy. They form the basis of vocational qualifications which recognise that good practice and are increasingly used by professional bodies as benchmarks for professional accreditation and continuing professional development. In essence NOS set out what people in their respective occupations should know and how they need to apply that knowledge to perform their jobs well. The standards focus on specific occupations and cover virtually every industry and area of employment, including manufacturing, service industries and cross-sector occupations such as IT and management. “National Occupational Standards are concerned with what individuals can do, as well as what they know. They are about what people should achieve in the workplace to become effective.” Maximising the Use of National Occupational Standards to Raise Skill Levels: An independent report of the NVQ and NOS Employer Champions Group, 2002 The standards are defined and kept up to date by industry practitioners through their respective SSCs. Starting with the overall purpose of an industry and the key roles within it, a process of analysis breaks down the outcomes into units of competence which collectively make up the National Occupational Standards. Each unit describes what an individual must be able to do and in what work situations they must be able to perform the tasks described. A learning specification then details the knowledge and skills required. Finally the standards deal with assessment – the evidence that must be produced to demonstrate competence, and the rules that ensure the assessment is consistent and fair. “The standards are written in terms that practitioners would recognise as reflecting real industry practice, and that gives them credibility.“ Ravensbourne College of Design and Communication Building blocks of NVQs and SVQs The qualifications most closely associated with National Occupational Standards are National and Scottish Vocational Qualifications (NVQs and SVQs). NOS units are the building blocks of all NVQs/SVQs, which are accredited by the Qualifications and Curriculum Authority (QCA) and the Scottish Qualifications Authority (SQA), UK-wide. There are five levels of NVQ, ranging from Level 1 covering basic work activities to Level 5 for senior management. HE provision can include NVQ achievement, most commonly at Levels 3 and 4. Level 4, for example, is defined as: “Competence which involves the application of knowledge and skills in a broad range of complex, technical or professional work activities performed in a wide variety of contexts and with a substantial degree of personal responsibility and autonomy. Responsibility for the work of others and the allocation of resources is often present.” 19 A list of Sector Skills Councils is available at www.ssda.org.uk. Incorporating into Higher Education Programmes the Learning People do for, in and through Work 57 3. Supporting programme design NOS and NVQs are used in many learning and assessment contexts, including workplaces, further education and, increasingly, HE. In 2002 the National Occupational Standards and NVQ Employer Champions Group reported that National Occupational Standards: ᔢ provide a framework for vocational learning ᔢ help ensure that learning programmes meet employer needs ᔢ enhance the vocational content of curricula ᔢ are a key tool in the development of employer-relevant qualifications and learning programmes.20 National Occupational Standards can be incorporated into HE curricula in a variety of ways, ranging from fully integrated achievement within the HE award of qualifications based on the standards, to the mapping of appropriate standards to academic modules. They provide structure and focus to work-based learning within the curriculum and enable learners to achieve workplace competence while pursuing their HE qualification. Foundation degrees provide good examples of how National Occupational Standards can be incorporated into HE learning outcomes. The examples below provide two contrasting approaches. The first, a foundation degree at Leeds Metropolitan University, is explicit in the application of NOS and students are enabled to become familiar with them. Ravensbourne College of Design and Communication’s foundation degree, on the other hand, incorporates the standards less explicitly. Example Leeds Metropolitan University: Foundation Degree in Health-Related Exercise and Fitness The curriculum covers over 50 National Occupational Standards which are explicitly mapped to the degree modules as far as possible – the course leader stressed that they were not applicable to all modules. Students are introduced to NOS in the HE level 1 Personal Development Module, which also introduces them to key skills and their own academic study skills. An assignment requires them to consider the relevance of key skills and achievement of NOS/NVQs in relation to their own career plans. The module covers 17 NOS at QCA level 3 and 16 at level 4. This accustoms students who have not worked with NOS before to the language and use of the standards. By HE level 2 the students are familiar with the standards. The Applied Management Studies self-study module at this level incorporates four National Occupational Standards – one industry-specific standard and three generic management standards. The unit titles are set out with their reference codes after details of the module’s purpose, learning outcomes and key skills required. A scheme of work then sets out the module’s four topics, each including the relevant National Occupational Standards. Standards in the other modules are more biased towards sports science but they are integrated in the same way. 20 NVQ and NOS Employer Champions Group (2002) Maximising the Use of National Occupational Standards to Raise Skill Levels: An independent (unpublished) report to DfES 58 Incorporating into Higher Education Programmes the Learning People do for, in and through Work Example Ravensbourne College of Design and Communication: Foundation Degree in Creative Sound Design At Ravensbourne the course designer found the Sector Skills Council’s occupational map very useful, as well as the standards themselves. Having defined the overall aim of the course they used the NOS relevant to each area by looking at the knowledge and understanding elements and performance statements and writing the relevant areas of these into the foundation degree course units. They often amalgamate NOS performance statements rather than use them verbatim. The course leader said that the level of detail in NOS can limit a course’s longevity. They need to be able to assess the learning outcomes without being limited to a particular technique, so they have tended to pick out the more generic criteria. The course leader added that his familiarity with the standards through his work with Skillset, the Sector Skills Council, had been a big advantage, making it easy for them to adopt what they needed. 4. Supporting delivery Work-based learning As benchmarks of competence, National Occupational Standards are rooted in the workplace. Work-based learning is therefore a core feature of HE provision incorporating NOS. HEIs have found that working towards NOS/NVQs gives structure and direction to placements, and enhances employer commitment to work-based learning and workforce development. Example Kingston University’s Engineering Graduate Apprenticeship is a ‘thick sandwich’ course, involving a year’s work placement to achieve the level 4 NVQ units. Working towards the NVQ, they say, has made for more structured work experience and greater employer involvement than in sandwich courses without that focus. The relationship is crystallised in a Learning Agreement between the HEI, employer and learner. The placement of two trainees with Britax had been so successful that the employer offered them sponsorship for their final year and a two-year contract with the company. Assessment Assessment against National Occupational Standards takes many forms, from full NVQ assessment and certification to informal exercises. There are excellent examples of incorporating NVQs at levels 3 and 4 in Foundation and Honours Degree programmes, particularly where the NVQ is an essential component of a professional ‘licence to practise’. Example The Diploma in Probation Studies, an intensive 24-month Honours Degree, incorporates NVQ achievement at level 4. Methods of incorporating the NVQ vary across institutions contracted to deliver the Diploma. At the University of Hertfordshire, the NVQ is fully integrated through a credit rating process, completion of the NVQ achieving 120 credits at HE level 2. The University of Wales, Newport requires candidates to complete an NVQ unit and then a reflective journal based on the unit, which is academically assessed. Incorporating into Higher Education Programmes the Learning People do for, in and through Work 59 For many HE programmes, however, the requirements of NVQ assessment, with its internal and external verification procedures, may not be necessary, practicable or financially viable. Many courses adopt a lighter touch, using portfolios to assess work-based learning less formally against the standards, including self-assessed reflective exercises. Using the standards in this way has the added advantage of giving course developers more flexibility by enabling them to ‘pick and mix’ standards to suit their needs without being tied to NVQ requirements. The unitised structure of NOS has significant benefits for credit arrangements, including the accreditation of prior experiential learning (APEL), a subject addressed in Chapter 5. Quality assurance (QA) “The standards provide a national benchmark against which we can test the reliability and validity of vocationally oriented courses. They also provide a useful benchmark and reference point when designing the vocational educational curriculum and appropriate assessments.” Cath Orange, Academic Registrar, Leeds Metropolitan University Although NOS and NVQs, regulated by the Qualifications and Curriculum Authority (QCA), have their roots outside HE, the impact on HEIs’ QA procedures may be minimal. This is particularly the case where the standards are mapped to modules but not separately assessed and accredited as NVQ units. The strong association of NOS with work-based learning and shared delivery with colleges and employers introduces new QA considerations, but, again, these need not be burdensome. QAA provides useful guidance in the foundation degree subject benchmark and in the sections of the Code of Practice covering collaborative provision and placement learning.21 5. Supporting progression A ‘common language’ Because NOS span further and higher education and are increasingly used by professional bodies to support professional accreditation and continuing professional development, they are powerful tools for vocational progression and lifelong learning. By providing a ‘common language’ between providers of learning and the workplace, NOS facilitate dialogue with employers and access to the largely untapped market for workforce development through HE. With skills needs on an ever-upward trajectory and demographics reducing numbers of young entrants to meet the need for high-level skills, the focus is increasingly on upskilling the workforce beyond level 3. There is considerable potential to provide HE opportunities incorporating appropriate NOS to ‘level 3’ employees such as Advanced Apprentices who are familiar with the standards through NVQs and workplace practice. Higher Apprenticeship One way of promoting such progression is through Higher Apprenticeship, a framework pioneered by the IT and engineering sectors through their Sector Skills Councils, e-skills UK and SEMTA. Essentially Higher Apprenticeship applies the modern apprenticeship model to higher education by combining high-level competency development with an HE ‘technical certificate’ such as a foundation degree. Depending on the business need, the framework may involve achieving two level 3 NVQs, a level 3 supplemented by level 4 units, or a full NVQ level 4. 21 Available at www.qaa.ac.uk/academicinfrastructure 60 Incorporating into Higher Education Programmes the Learning People do for, in and through Work Importantly, Higher Apprenticeships are officially recognised and therefore eligible for LSC funding for relevant parts of the programme, depending on the age of the trainees. Example In March 2007 18 engineers at Airbus UK were the first in the UK to complete a Higher Apprenticeship programme. Apart from the Key Skills requirements, all components of the programme are linked to National Occupational Standards – BTEC National Certificate, Institute of Leadership and Management Level 3 certificate, Level 4 NVQ and foundation degree. The programme, delivered by Deeside College in partnership with North East Wales Institute of Higher Education (NEWI) has also gained professional accreditation from the Institution of Engineering and Technology. All the Apprentices progressed to the third year of an Honours Degree in aeronautical engineering. Professional accreditation National Occupational Standards are increasingly being recognised and used by professional bodies as tools for professional accreditation and continuing professional development (CPD). Fast-track routes to professional membership are opening up to those graduating from foundation degrees and other NOS-related programmes. Linking NOS to professional accreditation is perhaps most advanced among professional bodies related to the construction and engineering sectors, notably the British Institute of Architectural Technologists (BIAT), which introduced an NOS-based membership route as early as 1988. A range of construction and engineering professional bodies – BIAT, Chartered Institute of Building, Institution of Civil Engineers, Institute of Highway Incorporated Engineers, Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors, Association of British Engineers and Institute of Clerks of Works – have to varying degrees mapped their membership requirements to the relevant National Occupational Standards. Examples are growing in other HE disciplines where programmes incorporate NOS. They include foundation degrees in exercise and fitness whose graduates qualify for the highest level of membership of the Register of Exercise Professionals; and degrees in veterinary nursing where substantial practice-based learning and the incorporation of NVQs are essential to RCVS accreditation. Incorporating into Higher Education Programmes the Learning People do for, in and through Work 5 61 Accrediting prior experiential learning (APEL) By David Hemsworth 1. Introduction What is APEL? APEL is the Accreditation of Prior Experiential Learning. It is a process by which appropriate experiential and uncertificated learning is given recognition and an academic value. Often the academic value is expressed in terms of academic credit points (a measure of volume) at a particular level (a measure of difficulty) but it can occur outside an academic credit framework for exemption from specific course units. Experiential learning encompasses knowledge, skills and behaviours acquired in a planned or unplanned way through life, especially work. (Garnett et al. 2004) The acronym ‘APEL’ is commonly used to encompass the accreditation of prior certificated and experiential learning, a process which may provide learners with credit, exemptions and ‘advanced standing’ into higher education programmes. In this chapter APEL refers to the granting of academic credit for prior learning which is experiential and not certificated. The distinction is crucial. Prior experiential learning must be rigorously assessed if it is to be awarded credit – and therein lies the challenge. “APEL offers huge benefits to HEIs by opening up opportunities to use their assessment capability to better effect and to play a full part in workforce development at local, regional and national levels.” So wrote Professor Simon Roodhouse, chief executive of the University Vocational Awards Council (UVAC), in 2004 in his foreword to Bridging Rhetoric and Reality: Accreditation of prior experiential learning (APEL) in the UK.22 His premise is that APEL, though long established in the UK, is an under-used tool. Issues tend to centre on practical concerns that the process is complex, bureaucratic and time-consuming. The growth of vocational programmes since 2000 – notably foundation degrees and Personal Development Programmes – attracting learners with substantial workplace experience, has re-energised interest in APEL in recent years. QAA responded with the publication in 2004 of guidelines on the accreditation of prior learning.23 While the QAA states that the guidelines are not a ‘how to do it manual’, they do aim to provide ‘prompts’ to HE providers in their development and refinement of APEL processes. In 2005 SEEC published a useful companion to the guidelines, grouping the QAA principles under five headings:24 22 GARNETT, J, PORTWOOD D and COSTLEY, C (2004) Bridging Rhetoric and Reality: Accreditation of prior experiential learning in the UK (APEL), UVAC, p.3 23 www.qaa.ac.uk/academicinfrastructure/apl/default.asp 24 JOHNSON, B. and WALSH, A. (2005) SEEC Companion to the QAA Guidelines on the Accreditation of Prior Learning, SEEC 62 Incorporating into Higher Education Programmes the Learning People do for, in and through Work Heading QAA APEL Guideline Principles Provision of information 3, 4, 5, 8 and 14 APEL procedures 7, 8, 9, 11 and 15 Institutional regulations and policies 1, 2 and 5 Staff roles and staff development 12 and 13 Monitoring and quality assurance 10 and 16 The following sections summarise the SEEC document, with added illustrative examples.25 2. Provision of information Principle 3 Prior experiential and/or certificated learning that has been accredited by an HE provider should be clearly identified on students’ transcripts. Principle 4 Higher education providers should provide clear and accessible information for applicants, academic staff, examiners and stakeholders about its policies, procedures and practices for the accreditation of prior learning. Principle 6 Information and guidance materials outlining the process(es) for the assessment of claims for the accreditation of prior experiential and/or previously certificated learning should be clear, accurate and easily accessible. Principle 8 The criteria to be used in judging a claim for the accreditation of prior learning should be made explicit to applicants, academic staff, stakeholders and assessors and examiners. Principle 14 Clear guidance should be given to applicants about when a claim for the accreditation of prior learning may be submitted, the timescale for considering the claim and the outcome. Information on APEL takes a number of forms. In common with information regarding taught courses, initially there should be brief publicity material explaining clearly what APEL is, the potential benefits and how to pursue an APEL claim. Details should be given of a specific contact who can best help the applicant take their claim forward. Clear initial information outlining the basic principles underpinning the claims process will help potential applicants gain an accurate view of the process. Institutional consistency in the use of specific terms is extremely important, so a glossary providing definitions of key terms should be provided. Initial information for students may well be in a format that is suitable for a number of public stakeholders, including employers – perhaps enhanced by a commentary which clarifies the process. 25 We are grateful to SEEC for permission to summarise the publication here and to draw on an earlier SEEC report by one of the authors offering models of APEL and quality assurance, JOHNSON, B. (2002) Models of APEL and Quality Assurance, SEEC Incorporating into Higher Education Programmes the Learning People do for, in and through Work 63 Care should be taken not to overload enquirers with too much detail in the early stages of the enquiry. More detailed information concerning the procedures can be given when the applicant makes contact with the APEL Coordinator (or equivalent person). In any information provided, it is important to draw a clear distinction between the process for claiming prior certificated learning (which has already been assessed), and that for prior experiential learning (for which assessment is necessary). A claim for prior experiential learning should have same status as any other assessment undertaken in the institution. Standard procedures for the assessment of work-based learning therefore apply. Institutions may wish to allow students to work on their claims either prior to entry to the course, or during their studies. If applicants do work towards a claim while on programme, the conditions for a successful claim need to be stated clearly, and care needs to be taken that formal taught courses are not taken in areas which may already have been covered by the claim. In addition to student information, there should be institutional documentation. This should include a staff handbook outlining the stages of the APEL processes and detailing the role of those staff directly involved with APEL procedures. It is also helpful to indicate the relationship of any assessment board set up to deal with APEL claims to other committees etc. Information concerning APEL processes should be made available to all staff, including those at partner colleges. Such information should have clear reference points for student enquiries and for staff support. With regard to institutional information on students, where credit is awarded towards an HE qualification, the student’s transcript needs to distinguish between credit earned for courses within the institution and that derived from APEL. Examples of APEL Guides Homerton College Cambridge: School of Health Studies www.health-homerton.ac.uk/courses/booklets/ APEL%20Student%20Information%20Pack.pdf King’s College London: Department of Education and Professional Studies www.kcl.ac.uk/content/1/c6/02/57/47/apelguide0708.pdf Kingston University www.kingston.ac.uk/adc/credit.pdf London Metropolitan University: Registered Teacher Programme 26 www.londonmet.ac.uk/londonmet/library/h33903_3.pdf University of Staffordshire www.staffs.ac.uk/images/apel_pol_student_hbook_ tcm68-12705.pdf University of Wolverhampton: School of Education http://asp2.wlv.ac.uk/celt/place/MA/SEdAPLInfoLeaflet forStudents.pdf. 26 See the example at the end of this chapter 64 Incorporating into Higher Education Programmes the Learning People do for, in and through Work 3. APEL processes Principle 7 Higher education providers should consider the range and form(s) of assessment appropriate to consider claims for the recognition of learning. Principle 8 The criteria to be used in judging a claim for the accreditation of prior learning should be made explicit to applicants, academic staff, stakeholders and assessors and examiners. Principle 9 Applicants should be fully informed of the nature and range of evidence considered appropriate to support a claim to the accreditation of prior learning. Principle 11 The locus of authority and responsibilities for making and verifying decisions about the accreditation of prior learning should be clearly specified. Principle 15 Appropriate arrangements should be in place to support applicants submitting claims for the accreditation of prior learning and to provide feedback on decisions. APEL assessment requirements should be tailored to learners’ specific learning achievements and clarified as part of the advice, guidance and support process. It is important for APEL candidates to recognise that they will need to identify learning that has been successfully achieved and provide evidence of such learning. In order to do this they will need to engage in a reflective process, which will require academic support. Identifying and evidencing learning is a complex educational process that can be enhanced by active academic involvement. Such support can take a number of forms depending on the scale of the claims and the number of students claiming. For groups of students it may be appropriate to develop a short course or a module, whereas for individual students advice could be integrated into support given for personal development planning. Course teams should consider modes of assessment which would be appropriate for the subject/discipline, and the range of acceptable evidence which could be provided. The portfolio is widely used to assess prior experiential learning, but this is by no means the only assessment tool and for smaller volumes of learning (for example, 15 or 30 credits), it may be that other modes of assessment could be more appropriate. As with any other assessment within the institution, feedback on the APEL submission made should be developmental, clear and structured, with advice concerning appropriate amendment if the submission has not met the required standard. It is important that APEL processes dovetail as far as is possible with existing processes in the institution. In shaping procedures the first decision to be made is whether to adopt a centralised APEL system, or whether to develop an institutional process which sets parameters for the devolved operation of APEL processes at Faculty, School or Departmental level. In order to ensure consistency in APEL assessment, institutions may wish to set up APEL boards for cognate groups of subjects. Membership could include both APEL experts and other staff to enable good practice in this area to be disseminated. If each Faculty/Department has an APEL committee it might be helpful to include independent members from elsewhere. Incorporating into Higher Education Programmes the Learning People do for, in and through Work 65 Examples of APEL processes University of Dundee: Faculty of Engineering and Physical Sciences www.dundee.ac.uk/eps/currentstudents/APEL/procedure.doc University of Northampton: School of Education www.northampton.ac.uk/apl/claims.htm Stages in the APEL process Stage 1 Advertising and marketing, recruitment Stage 2 Considering enquiries Stage 3 Dealing with applications from enquirers Stage 4 Briefing, counselling, advising Stage 5 Advising on portfolio preparation Stage 6 Portfolio assessment Stage 7 Decision taking and ratification (Johnson 2002) p.24 4. Institutional regulations and policies Principle 1 Decisions regarding the accreditation of prior learning are a matter of academic judgement. The decision-making process and outcomes should be transparent and demonstrably rigorous and fair. Principle 2 Where limits are imposed on the proportion of learning that can be recognised through the accreditation process, these limits should be explicitly stated. The implications for progression, the award of any interim qualification and the classification or grading of a final qualification should be clear and transparent. Principle 5 The terminology, scope and boundaries used by an HE provider in its policies, procedures and practices for the accreditation of prior learning should be explicitly defined in information and guidance materials. 66 Incorporating into Higher Education Programmes the Learning People do for, in and through Work This group of principles is a valuable recognition that the assessment of prior learning has the same status as the assessment of current learning which takes place within the institution, and, as such, should be governed by the same principles. In developing an APEL policy, institutions usually set a limit on the maximum and minimum credit that can be claimed through APEL. Candidates should be advised of the possible implications for interim awards. For example, if a ceiling is introduced of one third of an award, a student entering Year 2 of an Honours programme would be unable to claim a Diploma of Higher Education should they need to because 120 Level 4 credits (which would be needed for entry to Year 2) would be 50 per cent of the credit required for a Diploma, and would therefore exceed the volume of prior credit allowed. It is important to allow sufficient resource, both in terms of staff time and materials, to support applicants undertaking the APEL process. Charges can be made for parts of the process, and any charging policy should be agreed at the outset. The award of prior credit can also impact on classification. Institutions need to consider whether they are willing to recognise marks awarded by another institution, and whether they feel it is appropriate to grade submissions for APEL or assess only on a pass/fail basis. If the latter, students should be informed of the impact this may have on the classification of their award. Examples of APEL Policies and Regulations University of Westminster www.wmin.ac.uk/pdf/Section%2004%202005.pdf University of Reading www.rdg.ac.uk/Handbooks/Teaching_and_Learning/apel.htm University of Northumbria http://northumbria.ac.uk/static/worddocuments/ fmwk_apl.doc University of Derby www.derby.ac.uk/qed/APL_Regs/APL_Regulations.pdf London Metropolitan University www.londonmet.ac.uk/academic-regulations/apelregulations.cfm 5. Staff roles and staff development Principle 12 All staff associated with the accreditation of prior learning should have their roles clearly and explicitly defined. Full details of all roles and responsibilities should be available to all associated staff and applicants. Principle 13 Appropriate arrangements should be developed for the training and support of all staff associated with the support, guidance and assessment of claims for the accreditation of prior learning. Clear information concerning roles and structures should be provided in institutional documentation and on the website. However, as stated earlier, too much information can confuse applicants, so it is preferable to include reference points for detail which may not be immediately relevant. Incorporating into Higher Education Programmes the Learning People do for, in and through Work 67 Effective functioning of APEL systems depends on clearly defined roles and structures, with clear links to other roles and structures in the institution. There will also be a staff development requirement for those staff who have not been involved with APEL before. This can take the form of staff development workshops, enhanced by the development of an institutional APEL network to provide APEL practitioners with opportunities to discuss issues and share good practice. It is not necessary to offer the same level of staff development for all staff. Some staff need to become ‘expert’ APEL practitioners, others need to understand the principles and processes of APEL, while others simply need to be aware of the APEL system and to have sufficient information to refer enquirers to the appropriate member of staff/department. The scale of staff development needs will vary accordingly (Johnson 2002). 6. Monitoring and quality assurance Principle 10 The assessment of learning derived from experience should be open to internal and external scrutiny and monitoring within institutional quality assurance procedures. Principle 16 Arrangements for the regular monitoring and review of policies and procedures for the accreditation of prior learning should be clearly established. These arrangements should be set within established institutional frameworks for quality assurance, management and enhancement. In order to ensure openness to institutional quality assurance procedures. APEL claims should be reported to an appropriate assessment board. In institutions where there is a two tier assessment board system with module boards and programme boards, it may be that an APEL board acts as a module board and reports to the overall programme board. In this case an External Examiner/Moderator could be appointed to the APEL board in the same way as subject experts are appointed to module boards. As far as possible, structures for APEL should be integrated with other admissions and assessment procedures. Where it is felt desirable to develop a separate APEL structure this should ‘shadow’ structures for mainstream processes as far as possible. This will facilitate reporting lines for these activities,making easier for them to be monitored and for equivalence to be established between APEL activities and other academic practice within the institution. In common with other assessment processes there should be some external involvement in assessment boards for APEL. Feedback on the APEL process should be sought from applicants, so that the quality of the student learning experience in this area can be monitored. Identifying those students who have claimed APEL within institutional information systems will enable the institution to track their progress and thus provide another way of monitoring the effectiveness of the APEL process. 68 Incorporating into Higher Education Programmes the Learning People do for, in and through Work 7. Example: Registered Teachers Programme, London Metropolitan University The Registered Teachers Programme (RTP) at London Metropolitan University is for those working in schools without a degree who want to achieve Qualified Teacher Status whilst continuing to work. The programme has the approval of the Training and Development Agency for Schools and consists of a 120-credit taught element that builds on 240 prior learning credit points derived entirely or in part from the Assessment of Prior Experiential Learning (APEL). The process enables students to place their prior learning experience within the context of the course learning outcomes through the medium of an assessed portfolio. The portfolio includes evidence from work as well as reflective accounts and examples of more traditional academic writing related to their practice. The latter is included as a preparation for the requirements of studying and writing on the taught part of the programme and reflects the key focus of the RTP – the demonstration of critical reflection on professional practice and an understanding of the literature and theory related to practice. A pre-programme element of APEL support is offered to students who, although they will have experience of working with children and in schools, may not have experienced studying at higher education level. This programme of optional workshops, offered throughout the year prior to their starting the taught element, has recently been formalised into two APEL modules. The modules offer greater opportunities to exposure to a wider range of relevant reading background and to develop students’ skills of critical analysis and reflection on their own practice as they prepare their APEL portfolio. Candidates may be awarded up to 15 credits for each 1,500 words submitted in their APEL portfolio. The current costs for APEL are £75 per 15 credits, rising up to a maximum of £300 for the full 240 points. More details are available at www.londonmet.ac.uk/rtp/overview/apel.cfm. Incorporating into Higher Education Programmes the Learning People do for, in and through Work 6 69 Negotiated work-based learning in part-time higher education programmes By Garth Rhodes and Gillian Shiel 1. Introduction In this chapter the authors present a model of negotiated work-based learning (NWBL) designed to meet the needs of organisations and individuals through part-time higher education (HE) programmes. The approach adopted utilises partnership agreements with organisations and learning contracts with individuals to negotiate and define learning pathways which integrate work-based and academic learning. NWBL enables: ᔢ productive reflection on practice, action learning and enquiry to support the acknowledgement and advancement of professional knowledge and practice ᔢ the development of skills and knowledge required by the workplace ᔢ individuals to manage their professional and practice development and can potentially open career opportunities ᔢ employers to respond to policy drivers and address organisational issues. Sobiechowska & Maisch (2006:270) provide a definition of NWBL that echoes the approach utilised and discussed by the authors: “… where students are full-time employees whose programme of study is embedded in the workplace and is designed to meet the learning needs of the employees and the aims of the organisation.” The principles of NWBL are based upon the six key characteristics as described by Boud and Solomon (2001): (i) A partnership between organisation and institution to foster learning (ii) Learners are employed/in a contractual relationship with the external organisation (iii) The programme followed derives from the needs of the workplace and the learner: work is the curriculum (i.e. the vehicle through which the curriculum is critically explored) (iv) Learners engage in a process of recognition of current competencies prior to the negotiation of a programme of study (v) A significant element of the programme is through learning projects undertaken in the workplace (vi) The Institution assesses the learning outcomes against a trans-disciplinary framework of standards and levels. The nature of NWBL moves the focus of responsibility firmly into the hands of the learner. The process provides an opportunity to interpret, analyse and challenge current thinking and practice in order to develop new personal knowledge, understanding and attitudes and thereby improve their own professional practice. Normally, in order to do this they will draw upon, use and develop significant prior work experience and professional knowledge. They need to develop and utilise appropriate learning and enquiry methods along with project management skills. The learner is encouraged to investigate and integrate academic theory and workplace practice and is supported to critically reflect and draw upon appropriate theoretical models and approaches. 70 Incorporating into Higher Education Programmes the Learning People do for, in and through Work Achieving success in NWBL requires: ᔢ a flexible and supportive academic climate and institutional infrastructure ᔢ the creation of a strong partnership with organisations and a strategy for the attainment of shared goals and visions ᔢ learning and teaching strategies which enable individuals to develop as highly motivated, active learners, to be able to work autonomously, to take responsibility for identifying their learning needs and aspirations and for managing the learning process ᔢ evaluation and review to follow the action learning approach supporting the evolution of NWBL activity. This four-stage continuous improvement process provides a model for practitioners wishing to develop NWBL (Figure 1): Figure 1: Four-stage development and implementation process Stage 1 Á OPERATIONAL PLANNING Á STRATEGIC PLANNING Stage 2 Á Stage 4 Stage 3 Á FORMAL EVALUATION & REVIEW IMPLEMENTATION 2. Stage 1: Strategic planning Creating the academic infrastructure Experience has shown that in order for NWBL to be accepted in the HE setting it is imperative that the appropriate conditions be in place. Practitioners involved in developing NWBL need as a first step to monitor the climate and review academic procedures and support systems within their institutions. In making a judgement on the feasibility of embarking upon the development of a NWBL initiative, curriculum developers should consider as to whether the following conditions are in place (Figure 2). 71 Incorporating into Higher Education Programmes the Learning People do for, in and through Work Figure 2: Feasibility proforma Yes No Is the academic institution receptive, responsive and sufficiently visionary? Does the initiative meet with the strategic thinking of the institution? Is there support from senior management? Is funding in place and are there sufficient resources? Is there a champion with an appropriate level of knowledge and understanding within the senior management who will ‘fight the cause’? Is the underlying pedagogical ethos of NWBL understood and supported? Are the benefits of and opportunities for NWBL widely understood? Has employer and learner demand been identified and analysed and an effective business case been made? Are there procedures in place to approve/accredit and quality assure flexible learning programmes? Are support systems and student management systems sufficiently adaptable to deal with flexible arrangements, e.g. non-standard entry arrangements, flexible delivery models and entry/exit points, fee structures etc. If not, is there a willingness to adapt existing systems and arrangements? Are there sufficient expert and enthusiastic practitioners to support the introduction and delivery? If not, what strategies can be used to recruit and develop such people? Have the key practitioners a sufficiently broad repertoire of expert knowledge and skills of work-based learning that incorporate a ‘toolbox’ of WBL learning and teaching competencies, a detailed understanding of relevant institutional policy, politics and procedures, curriculum development, consultancy and project management skills? It is recognised that it is unlikely that all these will be met in any one institution. However, addressing such issues will enable a decision to be taken as to whether there are sufficient conditions in place to make a successful venture possible. Defining the learning partnership Once a decision has been made to develop NWBL, the organisation and institution work to promote the development of a learning partnership culture to deliver, assess and evaluate a NWBL programme of study. Effective partnership-working is an essential ingredient for success. In this model, the proposed programme focuses on the professional and personal development needs of employees to improve professional and interprofessional practice using the workplace as the context of the learning. The programme enables individuals to update knowledge and skills directly relevant to their particular vocational area and critically reflect upon this learning. The following checklist will be helpful in ensuring that the programme adheres to the principles of NWBL: 72 Incorporating into Higher Education Programmes the Learning People do for, in and through Work Figure 3: Checklist for the development of a negotiated work-based learning partnership Yes Does the proposed programme allow learners to: Enable learning in, for and through the workplace through employer/ learner-negotiated learning? Focus on the diverse professional and personal development needs using the workplace as the context for the learning? Critically reflect on learning from the workplace throughout the programme? Negotiate the focus of the work-based study? Be responsible for the management of the negotiated elements of their work-based programme and the recording of this learning through appropriate methods? Have appropriate learning that has already been gained through the experience of work, recognised and accredited? Reflect, plan and review their learning and make clear connections between their programme and the skills and personal development required for the workplace? Does the proposed programme allow organisations to: Work in partnership with the institution to develop a Learning Partnership Agreement which outlines the purpose, content and methodology of the programme, roles and responsibilities of the partners? Provide work-based support to the learner (to be detailed in the Learning Agreement)? Does the proposed programme: Demonstrate academic coherence and progression? Demonstrate how learning and teaching (including learning and teaching technology) are utilised to facilitate work-based learning? Have the necessary WBL expertise and support in place? Have relevant documentation (e.g. operations manuals and handbooks) for academic and support staff, organisations and learners in place? Have coherent monitoring and evaluation strategies adhering to institution review principles in place? Ensure that learning resources are readily accessible to learners and that the necessary support is agreed and put in place ? Have flexible admissions criteria, which recognise non-standard entry and prior learning from experience? Demonstrate appropriate ethical, commercial confidentiality and data protection issues have been taken into consideration? Action Req’d Incorporating into Higher Education Programmes the Learning People do for, in and through Work 73 Partnership roles and responsibilities Each partner has a defined role where the institution provides: ᔢ identified academic lead ᔢ academic support in development, learner profiling, delivery, assessment and quality assurance ᔢ registration and administration of the award ᔢ training of organisation staff as workplace advisors ᔢ access to institution library and learning resources (including on-line learning materials) for students and organisation staff involved in the delivery of the programme ᔢ information for marketing and recruitment. and the organisation provides: ᔢ identified workplace coordinator ᔢ relevant expertise for the development, learner profiling, delivery and assessment ᔢ identification and recruitment of learners ᔢ recruitment of workplace advisors (WPAs) to support learners ᔢ access to relevant in-house resources and training, e.g. IT, library. The partnership should be directed by an Operational Steering Group which: ᔢ provides a forum for discussion and development prior, during and after the programme ᔢ oversees action of personnel ᔢ takes its membership from partners: representatives of management, academic lead, tutors, administration support, WPAs, student representatives, co-options as required, e.g. learning resource personnel ᔢ makes arrangements for recruitment and progression ᔢ integrates the NWBL programme with the work schedule. Partnership agreement Once the detail of the partnership proposal has been agreed in principle then this should be formalised through a Learning Partnership Agreement (Figure 4). The partners should agree an evaluation protocol where evaluation is undertaken jointly and includes feedback from learners and the partners. 74 Incorporating into Higher Education Programmes the Learning People do for, in and through Work Figure 4: Learning Partnership Agreement template Name of organisation Key contact Email Tel. Institution/School/Division Key contacts at institution Email Tel. Title of programme/Name of award Status: Award/Statement of Achievement Proposed academic level Number of credits Proposed end date No. of cohorts proposed No. of learners per cohort Aims of programme Module titles/level/size etc. Delivery arrangements including institution & organisation responsibilities Assessment arrangements including organisation’s responsibility Work-place support for learners Other relevant information Resources available in the workplace Signatures On behalf of the organisation On behalf of the organisation Name Name Title Title Date Date This Agreement should be completed jointly by the external organisation and the institution contact. N.B. This document does not constitute a legally binding document. Incorporating into Higher Education Programmes the Learning People do for, in and through Work 75 3. Stage 2: Operational planning Developing the programme detail In addition to ensuring standard educational programme arrangements are in place, e.g. delivery arrangements, learning and teaching strategy and assessment regulations, curriculum developers should: ᔢ Identify and agree roles and responsibilities of each partner in the programme ᔢ Ensure relevant opportunities for WBL and in particular work-based projects are available ᔢ Ensure key workplace players are supportive and briefed, e.g. line managers, workplace advisers ᔢ When agreeing timetable consider the workplace practices, e.g. shift patterns and periods of high activity. Selecting and preparing personnel The academic tutor In order to be effective the toolkit of pedagogical attributes held by the academic tutor should include the: ᔢ Ability to perform as consultant to grow the relationship ᔢ Ability to quickly gain knowledge of the workplace ᔢ Knowledge of organisational change ᔢ Knowledge and skill in the area of learning and teaching including: ᔢ Learning needs analysis (including use of occupational/organisational standards) ᔢ Negotiating individual learning plans and pathways and level of study ᔢ Learner support and guidance (face to face, on-line, individual, group) ᔢ Assessment for learning (including constructive formative assessment) ᔢ Study skill development ᔢ Motivating learning ᔢ Ability to respond appropriately and creatively to unique situations ᔢ Ability to interpret and work across academic levels and professional boundaries. The workplace adviser The workplace adviser (WPA) plays a key role in the personal and professional development of the work-based learner. They should be recruited because of their knowledge and experience of the workplace and their ability to guide and facilitate work-based learning opportunities and experiences. There are several different aspects to the role, each of which is essential to meet the needs of the learner, e.g. teacher, advocate, gatekeeper, facilitator. It is acknowledged that there is a need for significant staff development. It is recommended that this be through a formal WPA training and development programme. Three such development sessions are recommended: ᔢ Before commencement of the programme – Context-specific preparation to undertake the WPA role and to organise peer support networks ᔢ Midway through programme – Support session to help maintain motivation and address any identified issues, e.g. portfolio development ᔢ Final stage of programme – Assignment preparation to ensure you are able to provide appropriate support in the workplace as learners near portfolio completion stage, e.g. supporting access to appropriate resources. Additional ad hoc arrangements will be required where WPAs have access to support from academic programme staff. Support can be in the form of face to face contact, by telephone or on-line. Guidance material should be provided through an adviser handbook outlining roles and responsibilities, programme details, contact details of relevant academic programme staff and details of access to other relevant resources. 76 Incorporating into Higher Education Programmes the Learning People do for, in and through Work 4. Stage 3: Implementation Identifying individual learning pathways and negotiating individual learning contracts are key aspects of effective implementation. The approach to NWBL is akin to a small-scale investigation and development model that draws upon action research methodology. In order to effectively learn from the WBL process, learners must acquire or enhance skills of enquiry in order to engage with practice, theory and context, to make sense of the reality of their workplace environment and to develop new learning. Promoting relevancy is an effective strategy to promote enthusiasm for learning. Reason and Bradbury (2001:1) define action research as “a participatory, democratic process concerned with developing practical knowledge in the pursuit of worthwhile human purposes, grounded in a participatory world view. It seeks to reconnect action and reflection, theory and practice in participation with others, in pursuit of practical solutions to issues of pressing concern to people.” Building upon Raelin (2000), Gray (2001:316) acknowledges the value of action research within WBL programmes but suggests that in WBL the process goes beyond Reason and Bradbury’s (ibid.) definition. He defines WBL as: “arising from action and problem-solving within a working environment, and thus is centred on live projects and challenges to individuals and organisations… using research methodologies as part of WBL can significantly improve the problem-solving capacities of employees as well as increasing their academic skills.” Following induction to the WBL programme a methodology is utilised where critical reflection and enquiry are integrated through a cyclic process. The programme follows a six-stage learning approach to productive reflection (The six-stage learning process and the key roles and responsibilities of the learner, WPA and tutor are defined in Figure 5). Onyx (2001) suggests that, whilst critical reflection is an accepted and fundamental concept within higher education there is a difficulty in getting employers to accept this approach. However it has been the authors’ experience that, as the demand for a knowledge economy grows, employers with whom they work are placing a high priority on reflection as a learning mechanism to enable their staff to become more effective and productive. Incorporating into Higher Education Programmes the Learning People do for, in and through Work 77 Figure 5: Six-stage learning process Stage Learner HE Tutor Workplace Advisor 1 Exploration Explores and analyses: ᔢ their organisation ᔢ their current practice ᔢ organisational and professional requirements in order to identify a suitable individual learning pathway which is intended to result in a positive outcome for their own and their organisation’s development. Reflects upon personal and professional development ᔢ Provides the learner with appropriate guidance regarding APEL, APL ᔢ Identifies level of study ᔢ Inducts the learner into the NWBL programme ᔢ Ensures learner is aware of available support; face-to-face, on-line and through handbooks ᔢ Introduces reflection as a concept ᔢ Helps the learner to explore their existing skills and knowledge ᔢ Establishes a partnership based on mutual trust, honesty and respect 2 Proposal ᔢ Engages in a process of negotiation with their employer and academic tutor regarding the focus and extent of their individual learning programme matched against organisational, institution and individual requirements ᔢ Incorporates reflection into their individual learning programme ᔢ Provides guidance regarding learning outcome selection ᔢ Promotes a learning environment conducive to collaborative learning ᔢ Develops and facilitates suitable learning activities to meet learner development needs ᔢ Provides formative feedback on proposed learning programme ᔢ Encourages reflection through proposal stage ᔢ Assists with planning how learning outcomes might be achieved 3 Enquiry ᔢ Develops and employs appropriate practical, methodologically and ethically sound enquiry skills and techniques ᔢ Reflects upon activity for formative assessment ᔢ Develops and facilitates suitable learning activities ᔢ Ensures approaches to enquiry employed conform to appropriate ethical guidelines and policy ᔢ Provides formative feedback on reflective practice ᔢ Facilitates opportunities which enable the learner to develop the knowledge and/or skills required to achieve their identified outcomes 78 Incorporating into Higher Education Programmes the Learning People do for, in and through Work Stage Learner HE Tutor Workplace Advisor 4 Project Planning ᔢ Develops a detailed plan for implementation of their individual negotiated learning pathways ᔢ Reflects upon proposed plan and may review following formative feedback for tutor and co-learners ᔢ Develops and facilitates suitable learning activities ᔢ Provides guidance regarding project development ᔢ Encourages collaborative learning ᔢ Provides formative feedback on proposal to support reflection ᔢ Assists with planning. In some cases, learners will have ready access to appropriate learning opportunities in their own work area. In others, they may need to negotiate additional experience to enable achievement of learning outcomes 5 Implementation ᔢ Implements and manages their individual learning pathways within an agreed timescale ᔢ Reflects upon process ᔢ Develops and facilitates suitable learning activities to enable reflection and discussion of implementation process ᔢ Provides ongoing support to maintain motivation and focus ᔢ Helps the learner to transfer their learning into the work situation ᔢ Builds on existing effective working relationships ᔢ Helps the learner to arrange for practical experiences ᔢ Facilitates opportunities which enable the learner to develop the knowledge and or skills 6 Presentation and Evaluation ᔢ Present and evaluate learning resulting from engagement in learning pathways, drawing upon appropriate concepts, models and theories. Recommendations for their own professional development and that of their organisation are made, thereby continuing the reflective cycle ᔢ Develops and facilitates suitable learning activities to enable reflection and discussion of process ᔢ Provides feedback from presentation and tutorial support ᔢ Assesses submitted work and provides summative feedback ᔢ Helps the learner to reflect on their experiences through structured discussion ᔢ Gives feedback on the learner’s achievement ᔢ Helps the learner to review their performance Enabling action learning and critical reflection A learning contract negotiated between individual learners their workplace adviser and academic tutor, in which an individual learning programme is identified, provides a framework for the learner to identify their learning needs and opportunities within the workplace (Figure 6). The learning pathway and the specific aims and learning outcomes arising from it will be unique to individual learners. Once learners have agreed their programme they will require support identified as appropriate to their development. To ensure a successful outcome it is essential that appropriate support is provided by the WPAs and academic tutors at the different stages of the reflective learning process (Figure 5). Incorporating into Higher Education Programmes the Learning People do for, in and through Work Figure 6: Learning Contract template The Learning Contract, although a formal agreement stating the agreed responsibilities and undertakings of the people taking part, is not just a ‘form to fill in’. This template sets out important components of the contract which should be considered in planning the learning pathway. Discussing the details with interested parties such as work associates, workplace adviser and tutor can be helpful. Personal details Name: Address: Contact details Telephone: Home: work: E-mail: Occupational details Organisation: Work role: Line Manager Title of programme/award Modules to be taken Title and level Programme aims and outcomes Personal programme details A review of current development Aspirations for the programme What needs to be considered and what actions need to be taken Review of personal and professional development (a) Current professional/work role (b) Personal skills and relevant experience Personal aims and outcomes Identification of skills and knowledge for development Perceived benefits: personal, professional and organisational Considerations and actions Module selection and timing Who will be involved: role and function Identify potential resources required Signed Agreement The following parties have agreed to the content of the Learning contract. Student date Employer/Line Manager (Where relevant) date Tutor date 79 80 Incorporating into Higher Education Programmes the Learning People do for, in and through Work Brookfield (1995) suggests that through the process of critical reflection, learners should be encouraged to see that the values and norms of the workplace are social and cultural constructs which can be challenged through: ᔢ Reflecting upon past and current prevailing social, political, cultural, or professional ways of acting ᔢ Interpreting, analysing and challenging current thinking and practice ᔢ Developing new knowledge, understanding and attitudes ᔢ Improving own professional practice. This idea of challenging accepted norms fits with Mezirow’s (1990) perspective transformation approach, where critical reflection is seen as a key tool in enabling learners to re-evaluate their situations. Boud (2001:55) develops this idea of using critical reflection to challenge accepted workplace norms: “Critical reflection is important… because it is only through deeper critique that work situations can be improved, workplaces transformed and productivity significantly enhanced. It is about noticing and questioning the taken-for granted assumptions that one holds and that are held by others. While it can be a discomforting process, it is necessary in all situations that do not involve perpetuating the status quo.” In order to make critical reflection a positive experience, a structure or framework for engagement is necessary. Given that reflection can be an unsettling experience for the learner, this framework needs to be an adaptable and supportive mechanism which guides them through their reflective journey and which incorporates and explains clearly the rules of engagement. This should not only include the usual guidance on process, support, learning and teaching assessment but also set clear boundaries on issues related to ethics and confidentiality. It is important that learners are encouraged to create the space for reflection within complex working lives. Spending time ensuring that learners understand the concept of reflection and are able to engage in a reflective process is essential. Boud (2006:20) suggests that “productive reflection connects work and learning and operates in the space between the two.” It is the learning that occurs in this connecting space that is the most powerful. 5. Stage 4: Evaluation and review Standard HE quality assurance processes measure: ᔢ student experience ᔢ learning gained ᔢ learning & teaching methodology ᔢ assessment ᔢ student support ᔢ learning resources ᔢ progression. Incorporating into Higher Education Programmes the Learning People do for, in and through Work 81 In addition, it is essential that evaluation and review should specifically address the learning partnership agreement. To be successful evaluation and review have to be iterative throughout the four-stage process, thereby ensuring that good practice is captured and emerging issues addressed. However, it is crucial that summative evaluation of the programme is undertaken by the partners to meet organisational requirements to identify impact on the learners, the organisation, the institution and the partnership, and to inform future activity. Individual learners will undertake their own evaluation and review as part of their productive reflection. This provides learners with the opportunity to plan for their ongoing personal and professional development. Individual contributions will inform the substantive evaluation. This form of evaluation and review also provides excellent opportunities for shared dissemination and publication between individual learners and partner organisations. Garth Rhodes and Gillian Shiel are from Northumbria University. References BOUD, D., CRESSEY, P. & DOCHERTY, P. (eds) (2006) Productive Reflection at Work, (London, Routledge) BOUD, D. SOLOMON, N. (eds) (2001) Work-based Learning. A New Higher Education? (Oxford, OUP) BROOKFIELD, S. (1995) Becoming a Critically Reflective Teacher. (San Francisco, Jossey-Bass) GRAY, D. (2001) Work-based learning, Action Learning and the Virtual Paradigm, Journal of Further & Higher Education Vol25, No3, p.316 MEZIROW, J. (1990) Fostering critical reflection in adulthood: a guide to transformative and emancipatory learning (San Francisco, Jossey-Bass) ONYX, J. (2001) Implementing Work-based Learning for the First Time in: BOUD, D. SOLOMON, N. (eds)), Work-based Learning. A New Higher Education? (Oxford, OUP) RAELIN, J. A. (2000) Work-Based Learning: The New Frontier of Management Development, (Englewood Cliffs, Prentice Hall) REASON, P. & BRADBURY, H. (2001) The Handbook of Action Research, (London, Sage) SOBIECHOWSKA, P. & MAISCH, M. (2006), Work-based learning: in search of an effective model, Journal of Educational Action Research, Vol 14 No 2, pp.267–86. 82 7 Incorporating into Higher Education Programmes the Learning People do for, in and through Work Recognising work experience in full-time degree programmes by Liz Rhodes 1. Introduction This section sets out the value of good quality work experience against a background of debates concerning the employability of graduates and the need for a skilled workforce. It also sets out a Code of Good Practice for all forms of work experience/placements, which should help those organising opportunities for the first time and highlights the importance of the transition from ‘learning to earning’. 2. Background Over the last few years, the issue of work experience for undergraduates has been gathering momentum. Employers have regularly complained – and indeed, continue to do so – about graduates having little understanding of the world of work on leaving university. Back in 1997, in response to this, one of the main recommendations in the Dearing Report 27 into the future of higher education, was that all students should undertake some form of work experience before they graduated. As a result many universities set up student employment services to assist students in finding experiences in the work place, while many university career services have become involved in ‘employability’ issues by developing links with many more employers and putting on work experience fairs alongside their careers fairs. Much energy is being spent by government and its agencies on the need to upskill the workforce in order to be able to compete successfully on an international stage. The argument is that the UK needs to have a better educated and highly skilled workforce, otherwise it will start to lose its competitiveness and economic position in a global economy. Numerous reports point to the need for closer education/employer liaison so that students at any level of education are better prepared for the ‘world of work’ and have an understanding of the ‘employability’ skills required to enter the workforce. One of the major ways of gaining that understanding is to undertake a period of work experience or placement. There have also been many reports in recent years that have continued to highlight the benefits of work experience and in the ‘Summary of Consultation Responses and Emerging Issues’ from the Lambert Review 28, which looked at how HE and employers could work more closely together, reference was made to: “work experience was universally regarded as an important way of developing employability skills and business awareness.” A good degree no longer guarantees students a job – competition is getting fiercer and graduates need to demonstrate to prospective employers that they have that bit extra to offer them – that they have done something that shows they have begun to develop a range of employability skills which will help them to stand out from the crowd. 27 The National Committee of Inquiry into Higher Education (NCIHE) (1997) Higher Education in the Learning Society, HMSO, London 28 Lambert Review of Business-University Collaboration 2003 Incorporating into Higher Education Programmes the Learning People do for, in and through Work 83 This was confirmed by a report from KPMG 29 in 2005, which highlighted the fact that mid-sized employers prefer to employ ‘entry level’ candidates – those who have just left school, college or university – with relevant work experience. It is also now the case that employers are increasingly looking to recruit their fresh intake of graduates from those they have had on their placement/internship programmes. It is a cost effective way of recruiting and enables both employers and students to ‘try before you buy’. This trend was confirmed in the autumn of 2006 when two National Work Placement Fairs were held, one in London, the other in Birmingham. Over 40 employers exhibited at each of them and both were attended by over 2,000 students, all looking for work experience opportunities. 3. A definition of quality work experience Work experience is the temporary employment (placement) of a student, usually within the employer’s organisation and within a framework of learning, review and evaluation. Placement objectives need to ensure maximum learning and business benefit takes place. Work experience offers the potential to provide learning opportunities and skills development that may not usually be available within HEIs. 4. Suggested good practice So how does one ensure that students get a worthwhile work experience opportunity, whether it is part of their course, or whether they do it during holiday periods? In many ways in taking on students, employers should treat them no differently to that of recruiting new employees. Thus the basic framework for any period of work experience should cover the following: ᔢ Be well prepared and committed ᔢ Ensure that the objectives of the placement/work experience period are clearly articulated and defined ᔢ Agree the monitoring of objectives and achievements ᔢ Ensure that mechanisms are in place to provide appropriate and timely feedback ᔢ Review and evaluate the outcomes of the placement in terms of learning and business benefit. In conjunction with ASET, The Association for Sandwich Education and Training, NCWE has drawn up a Code of Practice which sets out this framework in more detail. 5. Aims of the code To: ᔢ Encourage good management and good learning practice by all parties ᔢ Protect the interests of applicants by setting out standards of good practice that encourage the development of effective communication between HEIs and employers ᔢ Ensure that the interests of all stakeholders are represented and that rights and responsibilities are transparent and articulated ᔢ Ensure that both employers and students are aware of information regarding current employment law and H&S requirements ᔢ Facilitate the achievement of quality work experience by setting out good administrative practice when handling requests for information. 29 KPMG Middle Market Survey, Sept. 2005 84 Incorporating into Higher Education Programmes the Learning People do for, in and through Work The experience of practitioners, students and employers suggests that good practice in work experience may include all or some of the following features: ᔢ The student is supported by the HEI in identifying and recognising potential learning outcomes, including subject related skills and employability skills development as appropriate ᔢ Learning outcomes are set and agreed by the HEI, employer and student within an agreed structure or framework ᔢ Supervision is by an employer, supervisor or mentor who understands the intended learning outcomes, placement objectives and benefits for both sides ᔢ Regular two-way feedback from all parties is sought and given ᔢ Where possible, academic supervision and visits take place at an agreed frequency to monitor student progress ᔢ There is a formal agreed outcome, usually written, which evaluates the placement and placement learning ᔢ This evaluation, which may be in the form of a report, is assessed as part of the student’s programme of study where appropriate ᔢ Learning, personal development and achievements are articulated and recorded by the student to support the requirements of Progress Files and Personal Development Planning ᔢ Guidance is provided to integrate this learning into longer term career planning ᔢ An assessment is made of skills development and achievements realised ᔢ Recognition, credit or a certificate is awarded. Employers need, therefore, to know what constitutes good practice on their side: ᔢ Business and learning objectives are set and agreed by both the student and their workbased learning supervisor/tutor ᔢ A job description is drawn up and, where appropriate, a contract of employment is given ᔢ Induction is given into the organisation and the job ᔢ A work-based learning supervisor, or an employer who understands the objectives, benefits and learning outcomes of the work experience, gives supervision ᔢ Students are properly trained and prepared for any tasks or activities they may have to undertake in the workplace, as part of the placement ᔢ Relevant legislation is adhered to, e.g. health and safety at work, employer’s liability insurance and equal opportunities legislation. Opportunities for training are given where appropriate ᔢ Where appropriate, students who contribute to the profitability or objectives of the organisation are paid a proper wage for their work ᔢ Regular feedback is given to both student and the HEI ᔢ Access to a visit from the HEI to the workplace is made possible ᔢ An appraisal is given during and at the end of the placement by the supervisor ᔢ An assessment is made of achievements and key skills development, with guidance where necessary from the HEI. It is the view of NCWE that the transition from any level of education into the world of work is something that needs to be better managed in order to ensure students’ expectations of getting an appropriate job are met. A report by the think-tank DEMOS 30 in 2006 highlighted the growing gulf between students expectations of employers and employers expectations of graduates. A period of work experience, of whatever kind, can help to address these issues if properly thought through as set out above. The benefits to both sides can then be as follows: 30 GILLINSON, S., and O’LEARY, D., Working Progress, How to reconnect young people and organisations, DEMOS 2006 Incorporating into Higher Education Programmes the Learning People do for, in and through Work 85 6. Benefits for students Work experience, in itself, offers the opportunity to: ᔢ Investigate an area of possible career interest ᔢ Try out a potential work environment ᔢ Try out theoretical learning in a practical context ᔢ Identify aptitudes and potential for growth ᔢ Develop a range of skills for employability, including personal and interpersonal skills ᔢ Find out whether they are suited to working in a large or small organisation ᔢ Find out whether they prefer to work in the commercial, public or not-for-profit sector ᔢ Find out whether they may want to start their own business ᔢ Develop a better understanding of the world of work generally. 7. Benefits for employers ᔢ Enables them to recruit graduates with a proven track record ᔢ Entrants are productive earlier ᔢ Placement is seen as an extended interview. While many students do undertake some form of work experience while at college or university, not all are fortunate enough to obtain a quality experience. Many do part-time work, while others do voluntary work, both of which can be counted as ‘work experience’ since they are in ‘the world of work’ and if properly advised, can begin to gain the ‘employability’ skills required to get their first graduate job. It is worth remembering, however, that students can also develop work-related skills during their time in higher education whatever degree they may be studying. This has been demonstrated by work undertaken to produce a range of ‘Student Employability’ Profiles 31, to enable employers to understand the skills and attributes students develop while studying their specific subject. 8. Benefits students take back from their work experience/ placement into their final year In recent years much more emphasis has been placed on the learning that students do while undertaking any form of work experience or placement, since it has been recognised that they need to reflect on what they have achieved and so be able to articulate their achievements. Little research has been done into this area, but in 2006 the HE Academy commissioned a study 32 by Professor Lee Harvey and Brenda Little. The overall aims of the Study were to: ᔢ Investigate students’ perceptions of learning from placements ᔢ Explore how values and ethical positions were developed on placement ᔢ Investigate the extent to which students try to transfer an build on such learning in subsequent stages of the taught curriculum. 31 FORBES, P., and KUBLER, B., Degrees of Skills Student Employability Profiles, A Guide for Employers, Council for Industry and Higher Education (CIHE) September 2006 32 HARVEY, L. and LITTLE, B., Learning Through Work Placements and Beyond, Higher Education Academy, July 2006 86 Incorporating into Higher Education Programmes the Learning People do for, in and through Work One of their conclusions was that: “Personal development is clearly a major element of the placement experience. In interviews, students were well-able to articulate their sense of increased confidence, and development of interpersonal skills, and their sense of now being better organised and having good time-management skills. Many also recognised they had developed their capacities to manage projects, in the sense of planning and managing their own and others’ inputs to particular tasks over a period of time. Their increased levels of confidence seem to derive from a blend of different experiences: through having sought and taken on responsibility for specific tasks and projects within their job, and acquitting themselves well; through a realisation that their communication skills had developed to a level where they felt comfortable communicating with people of different ages, interests and levels within and outside the organisation; through a more informed sense of how generic skills can be applied to a variety of working situations.” In addition students approach to learning changed in a positive way: “Notwithstanding the seeming lack of articulation of intellectual development, the overwhelming majority of students perceived positive changes in their approaches to study, as a result of the placement experiences. Such changes related both to issues of confidence and motivation to study generally, and to a sense of more active engagement with learning tasks. This included a better personal sense of the subject matter, or of a wider reading around a topic, or a greater readiness to question and critique taught material. In this way, students were now more likely to ‘own’ the learning rather than ‘just’ accept it.” To quote one of the students they interviewed: “Other thing I noticed in my final year, that I am really taking a completely different approach to learning now. I am challenging everything here because I now have the experience almost all the research I have done now, I have quite active mind and quite aware of everything. While I was on placement, I was always thinking about what it means, what it means for my degree”. It appears, therefore, that the study’s conclusions confirm that learning does occur while students are on placement, which not only benefits their personal development, but also their final year of study. Incorporating into Higher Education Programmes the Learning People do for, in and through Work 87 9. The value of work experience: setting standards The transition from ‘learning to earning’ is becoming an important part of a student’s time at university and will become increasingly so with the advent of higher fees and students’ expectations of getting a good graduate job as a result. To take this transition more seriously and positively, NCWE believes it is time to set standards for work experience and has developed a model for a Quality Mark to be awarded to employers who offer good quality work experience opportunities. Linking employers with all levels of education has become part of government policy: NCWE believes that this Quality Mark makes a practical contribution to this issue and enables employers, in conjunction with higher education, to demonstrate their commitment to playing their part in the development of a capable workforce. The criteria for achieving the Quality Mark are based on eight main elements and the employer must show that they comply with rigorous codes of practice, as outlined above, within each of the following elements: ᔢ Commitment ᔢ Recruitment ᔢ Induction ᔢ Learning and Development ᔢ Assessment ᔢ Resources and support ᔢ Partnerships ᔢ Programme evaluation and monitoring. 10. Conclusion It has become clear that a period of work experience, of whatever kind, is increasingly important to help students get their first graduate job. Many large employers have introduced sophisticated placement programmes that enable them to recruit their graduate intake more effectively. They see these programmes as an investment in their future workforce and as a result they have become competitive. Students need to be made aware that any form of work experience is appropriate, so far as employers are concerned, and should be encouraged to take part in whatever is available, whether as part of their course or outside of it. Liz Rhodes MBE is Director of the National Council For Work Experience. UVAC is grateful for NCWE’s support in producing this chapter. For further information on NCWE’s activities, go to www.work-experience.org. 88 8 Incorporating into Higher Education Programmes the Learning People do for, in and through Work Integrating research and workforce development activities by Carol Costley 1. Introduction The workforce needs scholarly understanding of how to undertake rigorous and effective research, in order to be successful developers and to be able to interpret the research and development findings of others. This is because an understanding of enquiry methods, data evaluation and linking research outcomes to recommended strategies are considered to be essential features of an educated individual in a knowledge-based economy. The main focus of this chapter is on how advisers of work based learning (WBL) at all HE levels are able to impart research and development abilities to students on WBL modules and programmes where the module or programme requires them to undertake a work-based project. The research of WBL students is related to the research of academics in higher education whose research interests are in workforce development. These academics are defined broadly as in two categories. The first are practising educators and experienced researchers from higher education who are usually linked to a prestigious and established research centre. These researchers have contributed greatly to issues of policy, trends and key perspectives in the area of work and learning (see for example Boud and Solomon 2001, Brennan 2005, Evans et al 2006). The second category are course advisers and curriculum designers of workforce development modules and programmes who are often ‘new researchers’ and undertake their research as a direct result of issues that arise from their teaching (see for example Portwood and Costley 2000, special editions of AEHE, 2007, JWPL, 2007, and JRPCE, 2007). There is a great deal of overlap between these two categories of researchers and the policy driven larger scale research of the first group is helpful and informative to the ‘course adviser’ category whilst the latter’s case study and curriculum development knowledge is informing to the first category of academic researchers. The research of academics in the whole area of workforce development, which forms the major part of the academic area of WBL, is linked and relevant to the research and development activities of work-based learners. Some of the broad issues concerning academic’s research in WBL concern theorising the field to underpin WBL practices, developing and evaluating practice. Some of the areas most often researched are accreditation and assessment, professional doctorates, eLearning, reflective practice, organisational learning, and issues concerning epistemology. A short questionnaire was sent out by email to 15 WBL academic staff in one university, requesting information about how their own research might link with their teaching and this included the teaching of work-based research and development approaches to professional project work. The comments of the advisers are drawn upon throughout the chapter. Conventionally, the research of academics relates to their teaching and in the case of research degrees the student is usually supervised by a specialist in the same topic, subject and discipline. This may not be the case for workforce development purposes as: Work-based projects require knowledge of enquiry generally, but also more specialised aspects, for example methodological approaches of development and systemic change, information and knowledge management strategies, knowledge of and strategies for accessing expertise in organisations, knowledge of ethical issues and other boundaries (social, commercial, political, etc) which may confront learners. (Boud and Costley 2007) Incorporating into Higher Education Programmes the Learning People do for, in and through Work 89 A higher education that retains its intellectual challenge whilst preparing students for a world of change is one where an important part of critical thinking is the ability to research and develop and this is central to the abilities of people in a range of occupations and levels. Research is important in WBL modules and programmes because research is a learning technology that can be used to improve the performance and outcomes for the learner-researchers themselves, their organisations and their professional fields. It can also develop the individual personally and professionally and provide a social and sustainable investment in a work-based project if these factors are included as features of the research. The university-educated person is therefore expected not only to have explicit task-related skills, knowledge and competences but the ability to function in novel, surprising and unpredictable circumstances. S/he should, in such circumstances, be able to collect, analyse, critique and evaluate data in order to act effectively and coherently. Learning for, in and through higher level work (from HE certificate level (NQF level 4) to HE doctoral level (NQF level 8)) involves knowing about how work-based knowledge is produced (Boud, 2001). The intellectual endeavours of the student researching work-based projects at undergraduate and postgraduate levels can be revealed in actionable outcomes that are to be delivered to benefit a hosting company or professional community. These kinds of ‘worker as researcher’ activities can take place as part of a single work-based module that may, for example, be a module undertaken whilst on placement as part of a foundation or bachelor’s degree programme. At the other end of the spectrum, research and development for professional practice activities are now increasingly found in many Professional Doctorates and some PhDs. The work-based research and development project in these circumstances has replaced the thesis (Boud and Tennant 2006, Stephenson et al 2006). The greater emphasis that higher education qualifications now put on the immediate practical skills required to better prepare students for and in work has been endorsed by HM Treasury (2002), the Quality Assurance Agency (QAA, 2004) and the UK Research Councils (RCUK, 2006). The learner at all HE levels is expected to acquire capabilities that can be applied, in the context of future or current employment. The shift is evident in the criteria used by the QAA’s qualifications descriptors33 which provide points of reference for higher level awards. 2. Postgraduate research A new generation of Professional Doctorates (PDs) that have a clear focus on practice-based professional knowledge open up new areas of inquiry (Bourner et al 2000) and suggest that more control of content and methodology is referred to the candidate within a generic framework of standards, regulations and support offered by the university. Maxwell (2003) demonstrates how PDs have developed to become more involved with professional knowledge and how one curriculum model in Australia places the more applied knowledge termed as ‘mode two’ knowledge by Gibbons et al (1994,) at the centre of learning. 33 Qualification descriptors are intended to articulate the achievements and wider abilities which candidates at each given level should be able to demonstrate. 90 Incorporating into Higher Education Programmes the Learning People do for, in and through Work The UK Quality Assurance Agency now expect people at doctoral level to attain the following doctoral level qualification descriptor: … conceptualise, design and implement projects for the generation of significant new knowledge and/or understanding [and they] … will have the qualities needed for employment requiring the ability to make informed judgments on complex issues in specialist fields, and innovation in tackling and solving problems. (QAA 2001) The expectation here is that postgraduate learning requires more than the conventional research expertise. It requires self-direction in learning and acting autonomously in a situation that is likely to involve complexity. At doctoral level the expectation is that judgement is likely to be “informed” whist the term “sound” is used for Master’s level. Similarly, “innovation” in problem-solving is required for doctoral level whist the term “creative” is used at Master’s level. Overall research degrees have changed from an expectation of being just about research into more theoretical, subject discipline knowledge to more tightly contextualised and social knowledge (Nowotny et al 2001) that is developed and generated in a context of application. Lester (2004) has drawn attention to the importance of combining research activity with development activity and in relation to doctorate learning he points out that while the prevailing academic conception of doctoralness is rooted primarily in research, the chief concern of professional people undertaking work-based practitioner doctorates is more usually with creating development and change than with research as an end in itself. This wider brief for research degrees points to a different conception of doctoral work based on the use of highlevel thinking and action to make a significant contribution to practice; for the candidate, the added value of this kind of doctorate is likely to reside in the development and confirmation of the candidate as an author of significant professional ideas and practical developments. The distinctions universities make between research degrees and taught degrees may no longer be helpful and has significant implications for universities, particularly in developing practices and systems to support high-level work that is neither generated nor used in an academic context. Work-based research and development projects are most usefully supported by the university in supervisory-style support for research and development but are usually structured through modular taught elements. 3. Undergraduate enquiry Research is becoming an increasingly important part of undergraduate project work (Boud and Costley, 2007). It is sometimes defined at undergraduate level as ‘enquiry’ and has also changed to include a more investigative approach to knowledge where problem-solving and understanding of statistical and other evidence are important capabilities. The QAA’s honours degree level qualification descriptor includes development of: … analytical techniques and problem-solving skills that can be applied in many types of employment. The graduate will be able to evaluate evidence, arguments and assumptions, to reach sound judgments, and to communicate effectively … [and] should have the qualities needed for employment in situations requiring the exercise of personal responsibility, and decision-making in complex and unpredictable circumstances. (QAA 2001) Evaluation and approaches to problem-solving require effective vocational performance personal responsibility and decision-making. At honours level “analytic techniques” are added to problem-solving. Incorporating into Higher Education Programmes the Learning People do for, in and through Work 91 Postgraduate and undergraduate research abilities have to some extent converged, i.e. they now both focus more on developing the workforce towards using research (or enquiry) in workbased project activities. These behaviours set goals for higher education which transcend any vocational/academic divide or location of educational experience, e.g. classroom, workplace, and position knowledge about research and development with subject knowledge and workbased knowledge as pillars of an educated person. 4. The role of the adviser in supporting research/enquiry These changed expectations for higher level learning necessarily require a change in the expertise needed by advisers to progress work-based learners’ research and development capabilities. Researching and understanding knowledge about learning for, in and through work requires academics/researchers to address the social context of learning, the sociohistorical construction of work situations and to acknowledge the huge differences between disparate work practices and situations (DeFillippi, 2001). Added to this broader knowledge of the ‘work’ context of the learner, advisers need a full understanding of the structure of the programme or module within which the research and development project is located. In this way HE can play a role in understanding and supporting research and development activities in the social sphere, emanating outside the university. Part of this role is to reconcile professional and more development-oriented activities with the research expertise and critical understanding that is unique to higher education. One adviser stated: “I see eLearning as a link between research and teaching. As we develop our online learning models and appropriate support tools, we can improve our pedagogical designs and practice.” Advisers need to recognise the richness of work as a source of expertise and learning. Learners can often more easily identify with situational purposes and knowledge requirements rather than subject discipline types of knowledge through gaining insider knowledge. Here advisers may need to give students the opportunity to fully think through the practical implications of their research interventions that take place in their own work situations within a familiar context with work colleagues. Older learners are often rooted in their particular context and have been primarily concerned with advanced professional practice for many years. Learners therefore acquire knowledge and understanding that the adviser does not have and the adviser has to work with this unknown body of work-based knowledge whist supporting the learner in the development of research skills and research awareness. For many advisers this requires a pedagogical understanding that relates not only to the teaching of adults but also to the acknowledgement of candidates’ advanced expertise and position. An adviser stated: “Research into the role of the insider researcher has identified issues in relation to project advisers and how to support students through WBL projects” Understanding and knowledge in an epistemology of practice where knowledge is created and used rather than codified is already understood by professional people at work in their CPD and other reflexive activities. A facilitative ability for the adviser is often to formalise this high level thinking using knowledge of practitioner-led research (Costley and Armsby 2006) and how it inextricably connects to development and change, the generation of new knowledge for practice and new practices. These activities require research knowledge that specialises in methodological approaches of development and systemic change rather than those used in discipline-based knowledge. Advisers have to steer candidates into producing a project that involves high-level judgments and decision-making that influences change in complex real-life 92 Incorporating into Higher Education Programmes the Learning People do for, in and through Work situations and can refine or impact on the candidate’s organisation or professional area. An adviser pointed out that: “I feel that there is a potential gap in the literature for a publication that explores, through worked examples how a variety of research methods are used in a WBL context, that are able to examine the complexity of knowledge of the workplace.” Complexity is inbuilt to this field and, for example, involves recognising the importance of knowing where and by whom work-based problems can be addressed, their positionality and location. Work-based learners often have a positionality within a work context that can enable them to implement a project and obtain insider knowledge about project requirements. In the case of postgraduate learners, they are likely to be mid-senior professionals who are in a position to influence and affect change within an organisation, professional area or community. The subject discipline knowledge of the work-based learners may already be established, particularly those at postgraduate level who may consider themselves as having technical expertise in their particular area. They are also likely to be familiar with the particular paradigm that is associated with their field and know how to access disciplinary knowledge they do not have, for example new knowledge being developed in their own field or knowledge they may need in related fields. It may be appropriate, to appoint a second adviser/tutor who is appointed as part of the supervisory team during a work-based module or at the project stage of a whole award who is able to offer support regarding subject knowledge, if needed, as well as having knowledge of the professional area. Regarding knowledge and research an adviser stated that: “It seems to me that most HE models of research such as that of Griffiths (ibid) are based on a discipline model that is outdated and inappropriate for work-based learners. It is an old idea of knowledge generation that may have clear value in the sense of a traditional notion of the university but seems to me to fail the needs of the current knowledge economy where such distinctions perpetuate a system for its own sake.” Advisers working and supporting the learners in various capacities can work alongside the learners, rather than acting as teacher or instructor, to help them develop themselves, resulting in them approaching their work more critically and with an added rigour towards their research and development activities. Advisers who are also assessors of research and development in WBL should have an understanding of academic requirements in terms of the level of criticality and advanced research and development practice that is required at given levels. Advisers need to be able to acknowledge the potential influence the project will have or has had in a particular professional area and the personal and professional development that has been undertaken by the learner. The extent to which the project’s influence is gauged by academic institutions remains an area for debate and further research by academics. Personal and professional development is usually undertaken through reflection on learning and again this is another source of ongoing research. The two key areas of high level academic and professional knowledge and ability can be reflected in the level descriptors and assessment criteria that act as the benchmark against which assessors must reach their decisions. An adviser’s comment was that: “In terms of using others’ research, I have valued using a reflective cycle to aid students’ development of reflective capabilities and reflective writing.” Incorporating into Higher Education Programmes the Learning People do for, in and through Work 93 Advisers should be aware of the criticisms concerning practitioner-led research and ensure the work-based learners have a critical approach to their research and development activities, (Murray and Lawrence 2000). Zembylas (2006) points to a Foucauldian analysis whereby the act of studying, reflecting upon and researching the views of others within work communities brings worker/learners to the point where they have to take responsibility for themselves, ordering and controlling themselves in the process, leading to a situation that has been described as a powerful means for ‘self-surveillance’. 5. Discussion Research is becoming more a part of the undergraduate curriculum and in the postgraduate curriculum the nature of research is becoming more applied, Mode-2 knowledge because research is no longer mainly the domain of scientists. A shift from Mode-1 science to Mode-2 knowledge production (Nowotny et al, 2003) is increasingly becoming accepted by the rise of a more contextualised ‘science’ where both scientific and social functions are being acknowledged by universities. The field of work-based learning has become successful in being able to address such highly contextualised knowledge within situated practices in its approaches to teaching and learning, and research activities. The field of work-based learning has found that forming knowledge interests, alliances and regimes that define new kinds of knowledge outside the university (Bleiklie and Byrkjeflot 2002) has led to a trans-disciplinary approach to knowledge that is generated and used in practice. It also draws upon disciplinary knowledge as an empirical or methodological source. A key concern for WBL students regarding knowledge and research is usually their understanding of research methodology that needs to be introduced to prepare them for research and development projects. The positionality of the worker is important because the action involved in development requires the agency of the researcher. Knowledge in practice is constituted in the reflexive processes of the practitioner, the discursive and material processes of the particular context and the socio-political setting. This knowledge does not fit easily into disciplines but it is increasingly acknowledged as valuable in work settings and academia. New epistemologies have emerged from this kind of work; for example, many universities have explored trans-disciplinarity through designing innovative and successful programmes that include work-based research projects. The research of the HE academics in this area however can be problematic because although interdisciplinarity has now been embraced by the research councils and by many research centres in universities, trans-disciplinarity has not been widely accepted and remains problematic for researchers who have to categorise their research in particular ways. In most cases there have been problems in gaining funding and recognition for research. 6. Conclusion Workers need to learn how to develop their work-based activities, improving and developing what they do and the way it is done. The research and development activities of work-based learners seek to both investigate situations and develop them. The growing number of higher education students who undertake research projects in their work context need to be guided in their approach to real-time, real-world projects. 94 Incorporating into Higher Education Programmes the Learning People do for, in and through Work Although it is difficult to state in absolute terms the extent to which the research of WBL academics relates to the research of work-based learners, the examples given on how advisers used research in their teaching practices provides a general idea that the linkage of academics’ research and their teaching forms part of the complex dynamics of the work-based learning process. Notwithstanding this, there is also clear evidence that there are still gaps in the effectiveness of linking teaching practice to research in work-based learning which is the subject of ongoing research. Carol Costley is from Middlesex University. References AEHE (2007) ‘Work-based learning: assessment and evaluation in higher education’, Special Edition Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 32. 1 BLEIKLIE, I. and BYRKJEFLOT, H. (2002) Changing Knowledge Regimes: Universities in a new research environment, Higher Education 44 pp 519–532 BRENNAN, L (2005) Integrating Work Based Learning into Higher Education: A guide to good practice. London: UVAC BOUD, D. (2001). Knowledge at work: issues of learning. In Boud, D. & Solomon, N. Work-Based Learning: A New Higher Education? Buckingham: SRHE and Open University Press, 34–43 BOUD, D. and COSTLEY, C. (2007) ‘From project supervision to advising: new conceptions of the practice’ Innovations in Education and Teaching International 44.2 pp 119–130 BOUD, D. and SOLOMON, N. (Eds.) (2001) Work-based Learning: A New Higher Education? SRHE and Open University Press, Buckingham BOUD, D. and TENNANT, M. (2006). ‘Putting doctoral education to work: challenges to academic practice’, Higher Education Research and Development, 25. 3 pp 293–306 BOURNER, T., BOWDEN, R. and LAING, S. (2000) ‘Practitioner-centred research’ in Bourner, T., Katz, T. and Watson, D. (Eds.), New Directions in Professional Higher Education, SRHE and Open University Press, Buckingham COSTLEY, C. and ARMSBY, P. (2007) ‘Methodologies for undergraduates doing practitioner investigations at work’ Journal of Workplace Learning 19. 3 pp 131–145 DEFILLIPPI, R.J. (2001) ‘Introduction: Project-based Learning, Reflective Practices and Learning Outcomes’ Management Learning 32.1 pp 5–10 EVANS, K., HODKINSON, P., Rainbird, H. and Unwin, L. (2006) Improving workplace learning. London, Routledge 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 Incorporating into Higher Education Programmes the Learning People do for, in and through Work 95 GRIFFITHS, R. (2004) Knowledge production and the research-teaching nexus: the case of the built environment disciplines as cited in Jenkins, A & Healey, M (2005) Institutional strategies to link teaching and research. York: Higher Education Academy HM Treasury (2002) SET for Success: the supply of people with science, technology, engineering and mathematic skills. London: HM Treasury. Available from: http://www.hmtreasury.gov.uk/documents/enterprise_and_productivity/research_and_enterprise /ent_res_roberts.cfm. (accessed 11th July 2006) JRPCE (2007) ‘The Worker as researcher’ special edition of The Journal of Research in Postcompulsory Education JWPL (2006) ‘The worker as researcher’ Journal of Workplace Learning Special Edition, 19.3 LESTER, S. (2004) Conceptualising the practitioner doctorate, Studies in Higher Education 29. 6 pp 757–770 MAXWELL, T. (2003) ‘From First to Second Generation Professional Doctorate’ Studies in Higher Education 28. 3 pp 279–291 MURRAY, L. and LAWRENCE B. (2000) The Basis of Critique of Practitioner-Based Enquiry, in L. Murray and B. Lawrence (eds) Practitioner-Based Enquiry; principles for postgraduate research London: Falmer Press NOWOTNY, H., SCOTT, P. and GIBBONS, M. (2001) Re-thinking Science: knowledge and the public in an age of uncertainty, Cambridge, Polity Press NOWOTNY, H., SCOTT, P. and GIBBONS, M. (2003) ‘Mode 2’ Revisited; the New Production of Knowledge’, Minerva, 41. pp 179–194 PORTWOOD, D. and COSTLEY, C. Eds. (2000) Work Based Learning and the University: New Perspectives and Practices Birmingham: SEDA Publications QAA (2001) Frameworks for Higher Education Qualifications, Quality Assurance Agency http://www.qaa.ac.uk/academicinfrastructure/FHEQ/EWNI/default.asp (accessed 7th June 2007) QAA (2004) Code of practice for the assurance of academic quality and standards in higher education, Section 1: Postgraduate research programmes. Quality Assurance Agency for Higher Education Bristol: QAA. http://www.qaa.ac.uk/academicinfrastructure/codeofpractice/ section1/postgrad2004.pdf. (accessed 7th June 2007) RCUK (2006) UK strategy for science and innovation http://www.rcuk.ac.uk/aboutrcs/stratsci/default.htm (accessed 1st May 2007) STEPHENSON J., MALLOCH, M., and CAIRNS, L. (2006) ‘Managing their own programme: a case study of the first graduates of a new kind of doctorate in professional practice’ Studies in Continuing Education 28. 1 pp 17–32 ZEMBYLAS, M. (2006) Work-based learning, power and subjectivity: creating space for a Foucauldian research ethic, Journal of Education a Work, 19. 3, pp 291–303. 96 9 Incorporating into Higher Education Programmes the Learning People do for, in and through Work Learning, teaching and assessment of work-based learning in higher education by David Young This chapter does not attempt to provide a definitive answer to all the issues of learning, teaching and assessing work-based learning. Rather, it seeks to suggest a number of characteristic features which might be useful in planning. There is a short section on the tutor’s repertoire in supporting work-based learning, together with some comments from learners who have been involved. This is followed by a consideration of useful supporting tools and resources. A final section presents some brief selected examples of a variety of approaches to workbased learning from across the HE sector. A. Characteristics of learning, teaching and assessment of work-based learning in higher education 1. Recognisable as higher education The most important thing about work-based learning in higher education is that it must be clearly recognisable as higher education. Credit and awards gained for work-based learning must represent the same levels of rigour and intellectual challenge as those in more traditional areas. In the UK this means, like all other programmes, being clearly and demonstrably located within the QAA Framework for Higher Education Qualifications (FHEQ). 2. Flexible The next most important thing is flexibility and for me, flexibility is the key. It is important though, at the beginning, to stress that this flexibility does not amount to licence. Rather it should offer freedom within the parameters of the award being sought (certificate, diploma, first degree, etc.) for learners and their companies to shape and make a qualification of personal and professional relevance, based on a curriculum of work and accessed in a way which is personally and professionally appropriate. Mapping the work-based curriculum against the FHEQ’s Level Descriptors – essentially the output statements for HE awards at various levels – is particularly useful in reconciling flexibility with clearly identified higher education standards. 3. Learner managed and learner driven, rather than “delivered” The term "delivery” is very common when discussing the higher education curriculum. However, the term, when applied to learning, has always seemed to me to be conceptually inappropriate, somehow envisaging learning as a commodity to be parcelled up by the provider and presented to the learner – delivered if you like – as a neat and self-contained package which is not changed or transformed in transit! Rather than offering only pre-determined packages, the work-based curriculum seeks to involve learners in determining what they learn. Further it recognises what learners bring to the process and enables them to build upon this, giving academic credit where appropriate through recognition and accreditation of prior learning. Incorporating into Higher Education Programmes the Learning People do for, in and through Work 97 4. Negotiated and bespoke – learning, not training The actual work-based curriculum and the extent to which it is bespoke or negotiated by the learner is another key dimension. A work-based solution might involve negotiation between an individual learner, tutor(s) and probably employers to achieve constructive alignment of learning, teaching and assessment, including “just in time”, distributed, blended and e-learning approaches available at point and pace of need. 5. Blended learning, not just a blend of delivery mechanisms The facilitation of work-based learning needs to include the provision of multiple opportunities in terms of time, style and place of enabling learners on work-based higher education programmes to do the following things: ᔢ to access and use learning materials ᔢ to seek tutorial advice and support ᔢ to contact and engage in academic and professional discussion with other learners. Additional elements of the blend can involve learners and their organisations in negotiating, not just pedagogical aspects of work-based learning, but also its purpose and content, its precise intended learning outcomes and how their achievement will be demonstrated. 6. Combining academic and theoretical knowledge with work-based skills Programmes of learning which recognise the trans-disciplinary nature of work are of substantial benefit to employers and learners alike. A discussion of the content of the higher education curriculum for work-based learning and the question of what counts as higher learning in the learning people do at work is beyond the scope of this chapter. An examination of the tensions between seeing the work-based learning as the transmission of a body of knowledge and notions of a constructivist curriculum in which learners make their own meanings within this knowledge would be out of place here, as would discussion of the whole issue of what counts as legitimate knowledge within a higher education programme. However, what is clear is that the overarching organising principle should be the appropriate combination of knowledge and skills, the academic and professional contextualisation of them, together with reflection on and evaluation of their application within the workplace setting. 7. Assessment fit for academic and professional purposes Work-based learning needs a variety of forms of assessment which relate to the workplace and to sectoral and/or professional requirements but which are clearly identifiable as higher education. For example, as well as written assignments and cumulative portfolios, assessment practices can usefully include artefacts and reports produced within and for the workplace, together with presentations, work-based projects requiring independent planning and research and perhaps direct observation of the learner in work-based situations, in both individual and team-based activities. To summarise, assessment components should include articulation of subject/disciplinary knowledge or personal learning, together with contextual reference and citation, and reflection and evaluation of the application of the learning in the workplace. Assessment also needs to recognise what the work-based learner brings to the programme through APEL. The APEL process helps learners to articulate learning which had previously been unrecognised and perhaps unseen. Essentially, APEL involves learners analysing and critiquing their work-based and/or professional knowledge and locating it within indicators of achievement at appropriate academic level, using higher education reporting conventions. 98 Incorporating into Higher Education Programmes the Learning People do for, in and through Work B. Tutors and learners 1. Tutor Repertoire Young and Stephenson (2007) found that students engaged in work-based learning can be helped online by sensitive tutors to articulate, take responsibility for and pursue their own work-based HE programmes. The tone of tutorial discourse is critical. Support is effective when it is informal and friendly, yet definitive and authoritative without being over-prescriptive. It needs to balance friendliness and a degree of informality with clear and precise guidance. This guidance should be facilitative rather than directing and the tutor needs to be prepared to move in directions proposed by the learner, while maintaining a focus on the academic parameters within which the study is taking place. In order to help work-based learners maintain momentum and motivation, tutors need: ᔢ confidence to support generic skills like academic writing, referencing, research and PDP ᔢ a willingness to work outside their subject comfort zone ᔢ detailed knowledge of credit systems and academic regulations. 2. Learner responses A provider-driven, supply-side model would be inappropriate for work-based learning in higher education. A flexible approach in which the learner has some control over both the content and the process of learning has more chance of success, as indicated by the following opinions from learners who have studied for a higher education qualification in such a way: ᔢ … you can do it (the programme) as quickly or as slowly as you want to do it. So it really is in tune with, you know, coping with other things in your life. ᔢ … you can actually tailor it to exactly what you want, and that’s what I enjoyed. ᔢ The top three benefits, I think individuality, I think the fact that it is work based and it’s flexible to the individual’s needs outside the work environment. ᔢ When I’ve approached the university, if I’ve needed to change my schedule slightly, due to priorities here (at work) or personal reasons, they’ve been very flexible in helping with that as well. ᔢ And once I’d got into that process (of negotiating the programme on-line) you know, it became much clearer. But it was initially just the use of a website and the fact that (tutor) knew what he was doing. And there is so much to look at, but once you get used to it and work your way around it, it’s second nature. ᔢ You can develop a programme around your needs and I’ve even changed part of the programme because my job’s changed. Experience of working with such learners makes clear how much they value the opportunity, within the qualification being sought, to design personally, with tutorial support, the shape, content and pace of their programme to fit personal and work place contingencies. For those working in small and medium sized organisations, where the option of leaving work to participate in external activities tends to be limited, there is an additional practical benefit. Incorporating into Higher Education Programmes the Learning People do for, in and through Work 99 C. Tools and resources to support work-based learning in HE A sizeable proportion – perhaps the majority – of work-based learners, although admittedly not all of them, will be undertaking their studies part-time, while in work. It is these students who have most need of flexible approaches and it is they – and their workplaces – which can benefit most from the opportunities offered by a blended and flexible approach within which learners are enabled to access the following: ᔢ An on-line Managed Learning Environment (MLE) to provide shape, direction and support for the whole programme. The concept is of an on-line, interactive course handbook to inform learners what they need to know about their programme, its study and assessment requirements, but also allow them to modify and customise the course to meet particular requirements. Additionally useful is a direct electronic communications link to tutors within which tutorial discourse can be logged and recorded ᔢ Linear on-line courses, components or modules either subject-based or generic (for example, Orientation to Higher Education study or Research Methods in the Workplace) ᔢ Readily accessible exemplars and granular learning objects (perhaps on-line) on generic topics such as critical thinking, time and task management, developing an argument assignment and report-writing which can be accessed by learners as required to support and enrich their work-based study ᔢ Classroom-based courses or modules, with either conventional weekly sessions or block presentations ᔢ Tutorially supported electronic materials ᔢ Work or company-focused projects. Such a variety of learning opportunities helps to ensure that the work-based learner’s experience is not all lectures, or all on-line resources, but a stimulating individual blend of them all. The stress should be on the blend – not its exact proportions, which is something that should be at least partly directed by the learner, but on not becoming over-reliant on a single pedagogical strategy, and especially not looking to a complete e-learning approach to solve problems of time and distance for students who, for whatever reason, are remote from a campus. The problems of a pedagogical approach which relies monolithically on electronic means are mentioned by Coomey & Stephenson (2001), who report very high attrition rates among those studying exclusively through e-learning. They found that most examples of e-learning described in the research literature were within a pedagogical culture in which the instructor determined both the content and the process in which learning was expected to take place – not something which sits easily with the pedagogical approaches to work-based learning discussed here. 100 Incorporating into Higher Education Programmes the Learning People do for, in and through Work D. Some approaches to work-based learning in HE These very brief case studies show approaches to work-based learning from a range of institutions. They are interesting as examples of the range of ways in which tutors in HEIs have approached work-based dimensions within higher education. 1. Tony Bryan, [email protected], Principal Lecturer in the Faculty of the Built Environment at UWE, has developed Learning in Context. This approach presents bite-sized learning packages to students in employment in the construction and housing sector with specific gaps in their knowledge and skills. The learning materials are presented as on-line ‘topics’, each representing one day’s learning. The materials incorporate work-related activities to encourage students to relate their learning directly to their everyday work experience by validating and deepening their understanding. Opportunities for tutor feedback are built into each topic. Initially 100 topics were developed as a series of on-line CPD opportunities that could be taken with or without assessment by employees working in construction and housing. Those opting for assessment earn academic credit towards a university award. 2. Neil Murray, [email protected], Lecturer in Work-based Learning in ICT at The Open University, has developed, within the Open University Fd in ICT, Earning While Learning, which focuses on teaching, learning and assessment of WBL through flexible distance learning. The Fd in ICT can be presented and assessed entirely at a distance using a mix of text, audio-visual, online resources and collaborative tools supported by experienced Open University tutors and work-based facilitators. The learning outcomes associated with the work-based components of the programme are clearly focused on the personal and professional development of the individual student/ employee and the value that they can add within their own organisational context. This allows students/employees and employers a great deal of flexibility to negotiate when and where study should take place – taking into account the specific needs and circumstances of both the individual and the organisation. Making the change from “delivering” components of Fds at specific locations and times to more flexible and student/employer-led provision requires some investment – but should pay major dividends for all stakeholders in terms of market attractiveness, flexibility, relevance and employability. The model could, in principle, be adapted to all other disciplines. 3. Tracey White, [email protected], has been centrally involved in building a short award for the private sector company, Mines Rescue (Certificate of Achievement: 30 credits at level 4) within the Learning Through Work Scheme (LTW) at the University of Derby. This is an example of bespoke provision which addresses the “bite-size” dimension on which significant current attention is focused within the post-Leitch agenda. The company employs some 120 people from a mining background. It engages in rescue, training and research and has a developing health and safety portfolio. Mines Rescue approached the university having identified its own areas for company development. Incorporating into Higher Education Programmes the Learning People do for, in and through Work 101 The company was fully engaged with LTW in designing all aspects of a programme to support its efforts to grow and become more competitive. Although the programme is small in terms of the amount of credit involved, the beneficial effects to the company were immediate and significant in terms of organisational communication and sharing of good practice. 4. Another bespoke programme, this time for a Postgraduate Certificate in Managing E-Learning was developed for Ufi/Learndirect through the Derby LTW Scheme, [email protected]. Jointly designed by Learndirect and the university for managers in Learndirect Learning Centres, the 60-credit programme initially engaged learners in critical analysis of their organisational role. This was followed by a work-based project chosen from priority areas identified by the employer and finally a position paper presented to senior managers within the organisation, setting out development issues for staff supporting e-learners on Learndirect courses and programmes. After a one-day launch and induction conference, learners located throughout the country were individually supported on-line through UfI/Learndirect’s Learning Through Work MLE. This enabled learners to engage at their own pace and the dialogue facility on the site stimulated very rich tutorial discourse, despite participants’ geographical remoteness. 5. A sector-specific programme is the Regulation of Care Award (RoCa, Scotland) at Anglia Ruskin University developed with the Care Commission and the Scottish Social Services Council. John Brady, [email protected], is the contact for this vocational award for health and care inspectors in employment by the Care Commission. A blended learning award using locally based tutors with 50 students per year and joint management with the employer, it aims to promote independent and informed decision-making. 6. A subject based example comes from Vivien Martin, [email protected], of the Brighton Business School, University of Brighton. A simulated court environment is run in the university with a bench of real magistrates operating the proceedings as in a real court. This provides a shared learning environment for law, journalism, media and police students. Police students set up case files adapted from real cases. Law students introduce the cases and take prosecution and defence roles, calling police students as witnesses, who give evidence using their own real notes from the workplace situation. The last event ran for two days and included 85 students acting in their professional roles, which are now widening to include journalism and media students. 7. An example of Work-Based Learning Days relating to Reflective Practice and PDP in Health and Social Care are a feature of programmes at UWE presented by Eric Broussine, [email protected]. 102 Incorporating into Higher Education Programmes the Learning People do for, in and through Work Work-Based Learning Days focus on personal and professional growth for students, with skilled facilitation leading students to appreciate the complexities of nursing practice, realise the value of the art and science of nursing and to enhance their skills of critical thinking. An effective model is the facilitation of reflective groups and the exploration of critical incident technique or the action learning group. 8. Carol Jarvis, Principal Lecturer, Widening Participation/Teaching and Learning at the University of Northampton, [email protected], reports on Personal/Academic Development and Work-based Action Learning within the School of Health through the Northampton Unified Personal and Academic Development (NUPAD) Scheme. Work-based/Action Learning continues to be a strength within the School and portfolios have been commended by the External Examiner. NUPAD material is available on-line and students on vocational courses, who already demonstrate critical reflection within their portfolios of evidence, are sign-posted to the NUPAD template by module and course leaders. 9. Jo Donachie, [email protected], Senior Lecturer and Skill Support tutor, Learning Support Unit, Buckingham Chilterns University College, has developed a range of Learning Support Materials for Work-based Learners. Accessible resources support skills like critical thinking, time and task management, developing an argument and essay-writing and report-writing, while online work books on similar topics support e-learners. 10. Dave Clarke, [email protected], Principal Lecturer at Thames Valley University, offers a number of examples of WBL approaches from TVU Programmes. ᔢ Development of a guide for mentors whose staff are engaged in foundation degree studies ᔢ Design and integration of Negotiated Work-Based Learning (NWBL) modules at levels 4, 5, 6 and 7 ᔢ Offering NWBL modules as options in part-time honours degrees ᔢ Offering NBWL modules as stand-alone credit-capturing vehicles for individual or corporate learning programmes ᔢ A credit-bearing staff development module (Facilitating Work Based Learning) is offered. David Young, [email protected], is from the University of Derby. References COOMEY, M., & STEPHENSON, J. (2001) “Online learning: it is all about dialogue, involvement, support and control-according to research”, Chapter 4 in STEPHENSON, J. (Ed), Teaching and Learning Online: Pedagogies for New Technologies, London, Kogan Page YOUNG, D.A. & STEPHENSON, J. (2007) “The use of an interactive learning environment to support learning through work leading to full university qualifications”, Chicago, American Educational Research Association Annual Convention Incorporating into Higher Education Programmes the Learning People do for, in and through Work 103 10 How to engage employers by David Hemsworth 1. Introduction Earlier chapters have identified a growing demand for HE-accredited workforce development and the opportunity for HEIs to engage with employers to meet their workforce needs. Some HE providers have relatively well-developed employer links in this regard. Mixed economy colleges, for example, have developed HE progression routes by building on their long associations with employers in delivering Apprenticeships and other vocational FE provision. Foundation degrees – particularly part-time courses aimed at employees, with high levels of delivery in the workplace – have boosted HE links with employers in recent years, often through HE/FE collaboration. For many HEIs, however, engagement with employers to develop workforce skills remains a relatively new, and often difficult, ‘third stream’ activity. It is a challenging area of work involving a shift away from the traditional relationship between institution and student to a tripartite relationship between provider, employer and learner/employee, where the employer is as much the customer as the individual. Pioneering institutions and employers have pointed the way, providing a body of good practice that has informed the guidance offered in this chapter. It draws particularly on practice in developing and delivering foundation degrees, of which employer engagement is a defining characteristic 34. The author is particularly grateful to SkillsActive for permission to use material in its employer engagement guide co-written by the author to support the Foundation Degree Sector Framework for the Active Leisure and Learning Sector 35. This chapter does not cover marketing and promotion of HE to employers because that topic is included in chapter 11 on recruiting and retaining work-based learners. 2. Rationale for engaging employers Benefits to HE providers For those institutions rising to the challenge, the benefits of engaging effectively with employers are considerable. Above all, it provides access to a large potential market for higher education – development of the UK workforce – at a time when traditional enrolments have peaked or are under threat. If you, your team or your managers need more persuading, here is a fuller list. 34 HEFCE (2000) Foundation Degree Prospectus, pp. 7–8, reinforced in subsequent official documents, including DfES (2004) Foundation Degree Taskforce Report to Ministers; QAA (2005) Learning from reviews of Foundation Degrees in England carried out in 2004–05; Foundation Degree Forward (2006) Guidance for the Development of Foundation Degree Frameworks. 35 GITTUS, B. and HEMSWORTH, D. (2006) Engaging Employers in Foundation Degrees: A guide for universities and colleges developing and delivering foundation degrees in the Active Leisure and Learning Sector, SkillsActive 104 Incorporating into Higher Education Programmes the Learning People do for, in and through Work Checklist 20 reasons to engage with employers 1. Access to additional resources, including employer expertise and facilities 2. Enables employers to influence programmes so that they meet the needs of employment 3. Enhances existing employer links 4. Taps into the growing market for higher workforce development 5. Fuels the development of new programmes and funding streams 6. Facilities the incorporation of industry standards into the curriculum 7. Facilitates the integration of academic and practical learning 8. Generates high quality, structured work-based learning opportunities and workplace support for learners 9. Enables HE to understand better and meet the skills needs of the sector 10. Keeps staff up to date and provides development opportunities 11. Generates ideas and encourages innovation 12. Enhances the institution’s reputation among learners, employers, peers and other stakeholders 13. Provides opportunities to develop related employer services such as training needs analysis 14. Facilitates progression and helps build vocational pathways 15. Enhances the employability of graduates 16. Encourages non-traditional applicants, many with valuable experience to share 17. Helps to meet widening participation targets 18. Builds links nationally with Sector Skills Councils, professional and trade bodies 19. Encourages networking regionally with Regional Skills Partnerships, Lifelong Learning Networks, RDAs, LSCs, Chambers of Commerce etc. 20. Employer engagement is a HEFCE priority 36. Benefits to employers The key generic selling points for employers identified in research in 2006 for SkillsActive’s Foundation Degree Sector Framework probably resonate across all sectors. They were: Selling point ᔢ ᔢ ᔢ ᔢ ᔢ ᔢ ᔢ Improved quality of applicants More practical and less theory-based education Better trained workforce with more professional skills Involvement in the development and delivery of programmes Development of job specific skills Development of transferable skills Pathway to professional body membership. SkillsActive (2006) Foundation Degree Sector Framework Promotional messages for employers are considered in Chapter 11. 36 HEFCE (2005) Strategic Plan, 2006–11 105 Incorporating into Higher Education Programmes the Learning People do for, in and through Work 3. Planning employer engagement Rationale Given the fundamental role of employers in foundation degrees and the burgeoning demand for employer involvement in other further and higher education programmes, it is important that such links are planned and co-ordinated as far as possible. Ad hoc approaches from different parts of the same institution or consortium will frustrate employers. Planning will help institutions to make best use of scarce resources by identifying priorities, allocating roles, avoiding duplication of effort, setting appropriate targets, tracking and communicating progress, measuring success and making informed improvements to the programme. Planning cycle Approaches to employer engagement will vary in emphasis but key elements of a planning cycle are offered below. Á REVIEW Employer input to programme evaluation DELIVERY Learning agreement, employer involvement through mentoring, in assessment, etc PLANNING CYCLE Á Á NETWORKING Employers, trade/ professional/sector organisations, partners, learning partnerships etc Á Á RESEARCH Labour Market Information (LMI), sector skills intelligence, employer databases and contacts, guidance etc EMPLOYER PARTNERSHIPS Agreement, action plan, resources Á DEVELOPMENT Employer input to programme specification, admissions procedures, delivery planning (esp. work-based learning), validation Á PROMOTION Key messages to employers, methods used It is important for planning to be flexible and responsive to issues that will inevitably arise. HE providers need to be sensitive to the extent employers want to be involved: an over-zealous approach can be counter-productive. The plan may be informed by input from employers, employer organisations and professional bodies at local, regional and national levels – and internationally if appropriate. This can be gathered through desk research, conferences, networking and meetings. Examples of key organisations at each level are: ᔢ Local – Local LSCs, Lifelong Learning Networks (LLNs) Chambers of Commerce, local employers ᔢ Regional – Regional Development Agencies (RDAs), regional skills partnerships, regional SSC and FdF offices, larger employers ᔢ National – SSCs, professional bodies, trade bodies, awarding bodies, national employers ᔢ International – multi-national employers and international sector bodies. Again, the extent of such input will vary from one institution and course to another. 106 Incorporating into Higher Education Programmes the Learning People do for, in and through Work Co-ordinating employer links An important benefit of planning employer engagement is the opportunity it provides to set out the respective responsibilities within the institution and across learning partnerships. This should enable expertise and sector intelligence to be shared, avoid duplication, ensure the partners are working to their respective strengths and provide a concerted, coherent approach to employer engagement. One institution may assume the lead responsibility for employer engagement, but it often requires the active contribution of all partners to ‘sell’ what is still a new concept for many employers. Sharing intelligence and employer contacts may be an issue between HE providers – particularly private providers – that compete for students on other courses. Trust between partners may take time to develop, despite funding and quality measures that reward collaboration. It is an issue that benefits from the skills of an experienced, senior-level chair. A planned approach to employer engagement also has important benefits in opening up communication channels across the partnership. These are both formal ‘reporting’ communications and the informal dialogue and information-sharing that are a hallmark of true partnership-working. Individuals will link with employers at different levels and functions. Planning should help to define the respective roles within institutions, both between senior HE managers, teaching staff and centralised business development units, and between curriculum areas that may be targeting the same employers about different courses. Example In an institution as large and vocationally-active as Newcastle College, it is important to coordinate contacts with employers that are made at different levels and in different parts of the organisation, including the college’s School of Employer Engagement. A central database of employer contacts has been created to pool information and facilitate communication across the college on employer links. Resources This raises the issue of resources. Although many institutions have central marketing teams and units working with employers, much employer engagement is dependent on the industry and initiative of course leaders. Some institutions and partnerships have successfully drawn down funds from the European Social Fund and the Learning and Skills Council to support this work or the delivery of parts of the course that help to make it attractive to employers. Example Gateshead College secured funding from the local LSC to support the delivery of an NVQ level 4 within a foundation degree ‘Higher Apprenticeship’ in ICT Support. The New Technology Institute initially funded the tuition fee that would otherwise have been charged to employers. The college felt this was an important incentive to offer employers pioneering the programme because of the work involved in establishing it. Incorporating into Higher Education Programmes the Learning People do for, in and through Work 107 4. Identifying and addressing employers’ skills needs Researching skills needs Labour market research points to a growing demand for technical, professional and management skills: numbers of managers, professionals, associate professionals and technicians in the UK have doubled in the last 25 years and continue to grow. By 2012 these high-skill occupations are forecast to make up 45 per cent of the workforce .37 Many sectors report skills gaps and shortages in these areas .38 More ‘drilling down’ can be done through other published labour market information and skills surveys. These include the Regional Economic Strategies produced by every Regional Development Agency, and skills reports produced by the national and local Learning and Skills Councils. Where particular sectors are local LSC priorities for workforce development, detailed local analysis of those sectors may be available. This background intelligence will inform institutions’ own research of the employer market, which can take many forms. Formal research can be undertaken through employer surveys, consultation events and analysis of the skills needs of individual employers. Informal soundings can be taken through networking and other employer contacts. Foundation Degree Sector Frameworks Having identified the knowledge and skills a foundation degree might address, HE providers and partnerships need to work with employers to develop an appropriate programme specification. For those developing foundation degrees, the Foundation Degree Sector Frameworks 39 developed by a range of Sector Skills Councils take much of the initial spadework out of this process by providing a structured menu of knowledge, skills and related standards that curriculum developers can select from, adapt or supplement to meet their particular needs. Employers are likely to find the mapping of relevant National Occupational Standards particularly useful. 5. Engaging employers through champions Business champions Employers committed to higher education can be engaged as HE champions among their peers. They might be members of university and college governing bodies, learning partnerships, industry forums, SSCs or other bodies which involve networking at senior levels in the business community and the public sector. Employer championing can take many forms, including: ᔢ networks, formal and informal, of business leaders, managers and practitioners ᔢ presentations at employer events ᔢ endorsing statements to support promotional materials and press releases ᔢ media interviews and articles in business journals ᔢ hosting promotional events. 37 WILSON R., HOMENIDOU K., DICKERSON, A. (2004) Working Futures: National Report 2003–04, Institute for Employment Research/SSDA 38 SSCs are the principal source of sector skills intelligence – see www.ssda.org.uk/ssda/default.aspx?page=16 for contact details. The annual National Employer Skills Survey (NESS) provides a comprehensive overview, available at http://research.lsc.gov.uk 39 Available at www.fdf.ac.uk/page18.html 108 Incorporating into Higher Education Programmes the Learning People do for, in and through Work HE providers need to be proactive in recruiting employer champions, briefing them as appropriate and in following up contacts made. Such champions can play a vital role in influencing decision-makers in the business community. Institutional champions In addition to university and college leaders, a range of managers within institutions may be active champions of employer engagement. Their work in this area may be aided by an industry background or business consultancy. Such champions include senior staff with particular responsibility for developing employer links and others such as heads of school and business development unit managers. Like the employer champions, the networking of institutions’ leaders and senior managers should aim to secure top-level ‘buy-in’ among the senior echelons of industry and the public sector. As discussed earlier, it is important for such activity to be co-ordinated, so that staff are alerted to relevant employer contacts and developments. Learner champions Individual learners can champion HE to employers in two ways. Applicants can ‘sell’ the concept to their employer themselves, or provide an opening for the HE provider to engage with the employer on their behalf. This might lead to a wider discussion of the employer’s skills needs. Successful learners can champion HE by showcasing their work and the benefits to the employer. This might be in the form of a case study or presentations at events attended by employers. Example Mark Hopwood, community football co-ordinator at Queens Park Rangers, launched the Moving the Goalposts initiative as the final-year assignment of his Foundation Degree in Sport and Leisure Management at Buckinghamshire Chilterns University College. Film of the launch event was widely publicised and used by the university college to illustrate that foundation degrees develop employees through real assignments that provide a valuable service to the employer. 6. Engaging employers through sector organisations, professional bodies, networks and partnerships Sector Skills Councils (SSCs) As the government-licensed skills bodies representing their sectors UK-wide, SSCs are the voice of employers on skills and productivity. SSCs are employer-led and must be able to demonstrate a critical mass of employer support to gain and keep their licences. While they cannot claim to engage with every employer in their sectors, their employer contacts and networks are extensive. SSCs can help HEIs to understand employers’ needs and facilitate engagement in a variety of ways. We have already mentioned SSCs’ Foundation Degree Sector Frameworks. Some SSCs are developing endorsement schemes linked to the frameworks. Achievement of these quality marks will signal to employers that courses are fit for purpose in meeting the needs of the sector. Incorporating into Higher Education Programmes the Learning People do for, in and through Work 109 SSCs’ websites 40 provide a range of other relevant information, including skills reports, National Occupational Standards, qualifications and Apprenticeships. More direct involvement with SSCs is likely to be available through events, both those that provide networking opportunities with employers and events with a specifically HE focus. Involvement with SSC committees and working groups can give an HE provider an intimate understanding of current employer skills needs and issues. Example Leeds Metropolitan University’s close links with SkillsActive have helped them to develop and promote their Foundation Degree in Health-Related Exercise and Fitness to employers. Two of the university’s staff were members of the employer-led SkillsActive standards committee that developed the national occupational standards mapped to the degree. SkillsActive has supported the faculty at events promoting the foundation degree to the sector and in developing the foundation degree as a work-based progression route for Apprentices. At regional level further access to SSCs’ expertise and advice can be gained through the SSCs’ network of regional officers. On the PR side institutions can offer news of relevant HE developments for inclusion in SSC newsletters to employers, or offer case study material for its website. Professional bodies HE programme links to professional membership and accreditation – particularly those providing a ‘licence to practise’ – provide a clear signal to employers and students alike that courses meet the needs of employment. Professional bodies are powerful stakeholders in many vocational HE disciplines and key to securing employer support for HE programmes. They can also help raise the profile of new programmes through their member newsletters and journals. Example The Institute of Sport and Recreation Management (ISRM) Certificate in Sport and Recreation is embedded within Loughborough College’s Foundation Degree in Leisure Management. The management pathway of the college’s Foundation Degree in Sports Performance, meanwhile, incorporates the Institute of Leisure and Amenity Management (ILAM) certificate. A growing number of foundation degrees in the exercise and fitness industry provide entry to the Register of Exercise Professionals at the highest level. Networks These embrace a variety of groups, including: ᔢ local sector associations ᔢ learning networks such as local Learning and Skills Councils, Regional Skills Partnerships supported by Regional Development Agencies and Lifelong Learning Networks supported by HEFCE ᔢ employer networks such as Chambers of Commerce ᔢ professional associations ᔢ informal networking in a variety of settings. 40 A list of SSC contact details is available at www.ssda.org.uk/ssda/default.aspx?page=16 110 Incorporating into Higher Education Programmes the Learning People do for, in and through Work Many employer contacts can be made and strengthened through networking, which provides a head-start and helps reduce the prospect of approaching employers ‘cold’. Networking with employers can take place at many levels within an institution and across institutions within partnerships, so it is important for brief reports of contacts to be shared promptly through internal communications channels. Partnerships A variety of learning partnerships exist in regions and local areas in which HEIs can participate.41 The principles of partnership and collaboration are central to the concept of foundation degrees, not least because of the requirement to engage employers in the development of the qualification. Institutions should aim to engage more than the ‘usual suspects’, and, as far as possible, to achieve a balance of industry interests and size of employer. An initial impetus might be provided by an awareness-raising event for employers, followed up by invitations to support the group, perhaps through membership of an industry forum. Further education colleges often bring a wealth of employer links and expertise to foundation degree partnerships. Long track records in Apprenticeship, NVQs and other vocational provision have embedded many colleges in employer networks and local workforce development. FE students themselves can provide a fertile recruiting ground for vocational HE. “For a while we didn’t realise what good links our college partner had with employers, and the potential for progression from their courses to the foundation degree.” South Bank University 7. Engaging employers as partners in course development “A lot of institutions start from the wrong end, devising a foundation degree and then find some supportive employers. You’ve got to start with the need and then develop a course to meet that need. It’s about listening and responding, rather than dictating the provision on a take-it-or-leave-it basis.” Manchester College of Arts and Technology (MANCAT) Clearly it is important to have employer input to the development of HE programmes which are intended to meet employer needs and which are crucially dependent on employer support. Employers represented on steering groups will take a leading role in ensuring the design of the programme is fit for purpose. Such involvement should help to reinforce the commitment of employers to the programme and encourage their further involvement in delivering the qualification. Wider employer consultation may include a consultation event, a web-based consultation, or individual meetings with employers. The consultation should consider the mode of delivery as well as content. A key issue for employers is the time required to release employees for study. Example Buckinghamshire Chilterns University College’s part-time Foundation Degree in Sport and Leisure Management was made as flexible as possible to enable employers and their employees to participate. Attendance is required one day a fortnight, with an ‘open door’ for students to attend at other times to suit their work and family commitments. This flexibility has enabled students to participate from well outside the area as the reputation of the course has grown. 41 A list of learning partnerships in England is available at www.lifelonglearning.co.uk/llp/llp00.htm Incorporating into Higher Education Programmes the Learning People do for, in and through Work 111 Restricting input to those employers on the steering group may give one dominant partner or small group of employers undue influence, with the risk of skewing the design in favour of special interests. A balance may need to be struck between specific employer demands and the broader requirements of validation. “We are responsive to employer views but you have to be careful. Employers can take a blinkered view. The university has to find the middle ground.” University of Bolton HE providers need to guide employers on the development and validation process and be mindful of jargon that may be commonplace in HE but baffling to employers. A significant employer contribution to the process may be to couch the course documentation in language that can be readily understood in the workplace. Employers need to be briefed on QAA and other essential reference documentation but overwhelming them with regulations, codes of practice, guidelines and administrative detail will be counter-productive. While it may not be possible to summarise essential information on the proverbial ‘one side of A4’, background papers should be crisp and concise. For foundation degree development, the relevant Sector Framework is likely to be an indispensable aid. Developed by the employer-led SSCs, the frameworks typically provide curriculum templates with indicative content that give a head-start to planning while leaving room for manoeuvre. The streamlined approach to programme approval suggested in Foundation Degree Forward’s validation handbook may provide a useful structure for employer input, as it distils the process down to four essential documents: 1. Overview outlining market analysis and demand for the foundation degree proposed 2. Programme Specification, incorporating: – relevant industry standards – essential competency awards – work-based learning (and how it links to academic learning) – Accreditation of Prior Experiential Learning (APEL) – support for employees – links to professional accreditation – personal development planning – progression opportunities. 3. Student Handbook 4. Guide for employers. Progress can be tested against questions (below) relevant to employer involvement, extracted from Foundation Degree Forward’s validation handbook. 112 Incorporating into Higher Education Programmes the Learning People do for, in and through Work Checklist Questions that are particularly relevant to employers involved in the development of foundation degrees: ᔢ Has the design of the curriculum taken account of National Occupational Standards where they exist and/or has the curriculum drawn upon the relevant Sector Skills Council foundation degree framework? ᔢ How does the provision relate to any relevant professional body requirements and/or systems of accreditation? ᔢ Is there a balance and integration of employment-related skills and broad-based academic study and content? ᔢ Is work-based learning embedded in the programme of learning? ᔢ Are the arrangements for the management and supervision of workplace learning systematic and clear? ᔢ Are there systems in place for the continuous briefing of employers? ᔢ Do the learning outcomes demonstrate the integration of work-based learning and the academic programme of study? ᔢ Are there learning agreements in place to define the specific outcomes intended for the workplace learning, the responsibilities of employers, students, mentors and academic tutors? ᔢ Where employers are contributing to the delivery of the programme, how are these contributions designed and integrated? ᔢ Are employers involved in the assessment of students? Source: Extracts from National Validation Service Handbook, Foundation Degree Forward 2005 8. Engaging employers as partners in delivery Roles and responsibilities Discussions and briefing events with employers and learners at an early stage will help to ensure that respective roles and responsibilities of the three partners are clear at the outset. This should be underpinned by a written undertaking, often in the form of a Learning Agreement, signed at the start of the programme and subject to regular review. The employer role particularly concerns the work-based dimension of the programme. This may constitute 50 per cent or more of a programme with highly committed employers. In addition to meeting the relevant health, safety and other workplace regulations, employer responsibilities covered in the Agreement are likely to focus particularly on providing: ᔢ appropriate workplace induction of the student, including communication of the student’s role within the organisation ᔢ appropriate learning opportunities in the workplace for the student, with access to appropriate people, information and facilities ᔢ appropriate supervision and monitoring of the student through a dedicated workplace mentor or facilitator ᔢ regular feedback to the student and appraisal of performance ᔢ liaison with HE tutors and access as necessary for tutors and assessors. Incorporating into Higher Education Programmes the Learning People do for, in and through Work 113 The HE provider’s part of the Learning Agreement may include the support the university or college will provide to enable the employer to fulfil its role. This might be: ᔢ induction into the provision and management of work-based learning ᔢ mentor training ᔢ briefing on assessment procedures. Where the employer is involved in assessing a student’s work, this and the HE provider’s role in supporting it will also be included in the Agreement. Example Extract from Buckinghamshire Chilterns University College’s Learning Agreement The employer will: ᔢ Be aware of the particular nature of the course which the student is following and communicate this information to all staff who will be associated with the learning of the student during work time ᔢ Identify and allocate a workplace mentor responsible for the student for the length of the course ᔢ Ensure that the student is able to attend University or to study on the allocated day as per programme and ensure that any reasonable additional study time is available as required ᔢ Support the student with his/her work based learning and to allow him/her reasonable access to areas of the organisation’s activity or information to fulfil his/her work based learning, studies and assessment commitments ᔢ Endeavour to provide as wide a range of experience as possible in support of their studies ᔢ Facilitate the use of a PC if necessary ᔢ Allow the course leader to visit the student if required to discuss aspects of his/her work-based learning. Work-based assignments HE modules, especially when mapped to relevant National Occupational Standards 42, can be closely related to workplace practice. The potential for aligning assignments to business objectives provides a significant incentive for employers to be closely involved in the design and delivery of work-based projects. Employers have an important responsibility to ensure that students are provided with a range of experience to support their studies, and access to the organisation’s human and material resources at levels commensurate with their assignments. In return, students’ work-based projects, particularly the extended projects that typically round off the final year, can provide a valuable consultancy service to the employer. Examples The assignments of two Britax trainees doing an Engineering Graduate Apprenticeship at Kingston University resulted in a design component patent that brought significant benefits to the company. The work-based project of an employee doing a Hairdressing and Salon Management at the University of Derby provided a greatly improved appraisal process for her employer, Stephen Miller Salons. 42 See chapter 4. 114 Incorporating into Higher Education Programmes the Learning People do for, in and through Work Workplace mentors Workplace mentors have a pivotal role in facilitating the successful delivery of work-based HE. The key elements of their role are to: ᔢ agree a workplace learning programme with the student ᔢ ensure that students’ learning programme is recognised in the organisation and appropriate time and support provided ᔢ act as the main point of contact between the employer and the HE/FE institution ᔢ provide both academic and pastoral support to the student in the workplace ᔢ facilitate and monitor the work-based projects, ensuring that the learning in the modules is effectively applied in the workplace to the benefit of the employer as well as the student. Mentoring provision requires careful consideration and collaboration between employer and provider to ensure that workplace mentors are equipped with the skills and experience to facilitate student learning and development HE providers should ensure that mentor training is available to enable employers to provide this crucial support. Example At Loughborough College workplace mentors are trained in line with the college’s Mentor Training and Development Programme and are allocated a mentor of their own from the full-time college staff. Involvement in work-based assessment Mentors or other designated employees may also be engaged in assessing some elements of the work-based learning, particularly in formative assessment that can facilitate the link between academic knowledge and its application in the workplace. Such assessment can take many forms, including: ᔢ case studies ᔢ presentations ᔢ reports and project work ᔢ observation of practical work ᔢ personal development plans ᔢ evidence portfolios. Employer involvement in assessment is often best phased in over time, particularly with a new course that will take time to ‘bed down’. Quality – and therefore appropriate training in assessment for potential work-based assessors – is paramount. Many HEIs carry out all assessment themselves, partly because employers may not wish to be involved to that extent. Employers taking on this role usually do so by mentors ‘doubling’ as assessors. With appropriate training and quality assurance measures in place, this both helps to spread the delivery workload and strengthen employer engagement in the HE programme. Participation in assessment may include assisting with accrediting the prior experiential learning (APEL) 43 of employees without traditional entry qualifications. Employers may be able to help candidates to provide evidence of their knowledge and skills for presentation at APEL interviews, usually in the form of portfolios. 43 See chapter 5. Incorporating into Higher Education Programmes the Learning People do for, in and through Work 115 Employer involvement in on-campus delivery Employer involvement in delivery need not be limited to work-based learning. They can be invited to contribute in other ways, such as through presentations and participation in seminars. Example An idea successfully put into practice at Buckinghamshire Chilterns University College has been a sport and leisure industry forum organised by the students, where employers from different parts of the sector are invited to participate in one of their university sessions. 9. Engaging employers in HE achievement and review Graduation events present an excellent opportunity for HE providers to cement relationships with participating employers and generate ‘repeat business’. They also provide a showcase for promoting HE programmes to new employers. Such events provide excellent promotional material through press releases, articles and case studies aimed at employers. Participating employers will probably need little prompting to publicise their employees’ achievements through the various media, with a view to enhancing their reputation among customers, potential employees and other stakeholders, as well as trumpeting the achievements of the individuals concerned. Employers should be encouraged to celebrate their employees’ achievements within their organisations through events, newsletters and other internal communications. Key messages could include the enhanced skills and career prospects of the graduates within the business, and the opportunity to progress to further learning and advancement within the organisation. Programme review provides a further opportunity to keep employers engaged. Although formal review will normally take place annually, feedback should be continually gathered from employers informally via mentors and review meetings. As far as possible this feedback should demonstrably influence future provision, so that employers can see that their views are being taken into account by HE providers. This will provide evidence to employers and others such as QAA that vocational provision is responding to the needs of industry. Example Annual employer forums provided valuable feedback on the early years of South Bank University’s Foundation Degree in Sport and Exercise Science course. This helped to identify and address the ‘teething’ problems of the first cohort. 116 Incorporating into Higher Education Programmes the Learning People do for, in and through Work 11 Recruiting and retaining work-based learners by David Hemsworth 1. Introduction Unlike most HE programmes which are aimed at individuals, HE work-based learning programmes serve a dual market – individuals and employers. Employers are key to the whole process, both as customers of workforce development provision and as partners in course development and delivery. (Chapter 10 examines employer engagement in depth. This chapter focuses specifically on marketing and promotion aspects.) The learners themselves are typically very different in profile to the traditional full-time UCAS entrant from school or college with a brace of A Levels. Recruitment to these programmes, and measures to maximise retention of these students, therefore need to address both of these a-typical target audiences and the challenges they present. There are three key points for HE providers seeking to recruit and retain work-based learners: 1. Higher education programmes delivered through work-based learning, such as many foundation degrees, are still relatively little known among employers and staff. HE providers therefore need to be highly proactive in promoting higher work-based learning opportunities to stimulate demand 2. Institutions wishing to tap into the potentially large market for workforce development cannot rely on traditional recruitment methods. They need to understand and address their target audiences by adopting the sales and marketing techniques of business 3. Equally, institutions cannot rely on traditional methods of support to help work-based learners to stay on-programme. Work-based learners have different – and often more demanding – support requirements to traditional students. These must be understood and addressed effectively to maximise retention rates. “We are a business, selling a product. To lock ourselves away in our institutions and expect people to come to us just doesn’t work. We need to go out and be part of the commercial world.” Buckinghamshire Chilterns University College Incorporating into Higher Education Programmes the Learning People do for, in and through Work 117 2. The target audiences Learners Potential work-based learners on HE programmes fall into two broad categories: ᔢ Employees identified by their employer as suitable for or needing development beyond level 3 to meet a need for higher level workforce skills ᔢ Individuals seeking to advance their current career or develop new career opportunities through HE by continuing to earn while they learn. By definition work-based learners are people with work experience and workplace skills. They may be mature employees with workplace competences that may not be reflected in qualifications. Much of their learning will have been acquired through practical learning such as Apprenticeship. Their skills are likely to be at level 3 overall, though they may not have been accredited, and in some areas they may fall below or surpass the typical HE entry threshold. Employers Target employers are likely to be those: ᔢ with an increasing need for skills at graduate level and beyond that is not being met through graduate or post-graduate recruitment ᔢ wishing to ‘grow their own graduates’ by raising the skills of their workforce through work-based learning. A prerequisite in every case will be that the employers are able to provide, or have the potential to provide, the necessary work-based learning opportunities and support for work-based learning at this level. 3. Marketing and promotion Providing an appropriate offer Provision must satisfy the needs of both work-based learners and their employers, in both content and mode of delivery. A earlier chapter examines how employers can be engaged as partners in HE curriculum development.44 The views of their employees should also be sought as part of that process to ensure that programmes meet their aspirations as well as the needs of employers. Appropriate delivery methods are a particularly important consideration with employees, whose learning needs to fit with work and family responsibilities. Part-time modes are the norm with work-based learners, with a mix of delivery methods including, increasingly, e-learning. Key messages Activities to promote higher education opportunities should be based on consistent ‘messages’ which make the business case to employers and the personal and career development case to learners. Generic messages are offered below. These – and any others identified through consultation and testing with employers and learners – need to be prioritised and tailored to address the needs of the ‘target audience’ of each course. The more customised the messages, the more likely they are to make an impact. 44 See chapter 10. 118 Incorporating into Higher Education Programmes the Learning People do for, in and through Work Checklist Key messages for employers and work-based learners identified by the University Vocational Awards Council in promoting work-based HE courses: Work-based learners ᔢ You can do it – you do not have to have A Levels ᔢ Apprenticeship, vocational qualifications and even just work experience can get you on to an HE course ᔢ Current experience and qualifications may provide credit towards a degree ᔢ No student debt – continue to learn and earn ᔢ Emphasis on practical learning ᔢ Tailored to your needs ᔢ Support at college and in the workplace ᔢ Personal development – more confident and skilled ᔢ Career development – better prospects and earnings ᔢ Hard work but worth it ᔢ Nationally recognised, portable qualification ᔢ Springboard to further achievement – higher qualifications, professional accreditation. Employers: ᔢ Flexible, tailored to your needs ᔢ Motivated, highly skilled employees ᔢ Better qualified workforce ᔢ Higher staff retention ᔢ Meets skills shortages ᔢ Fuels business growth ᔢ Little time off the job ᔢ Projects directly related to your business ᔢ You are closely involved in delivery ᔢ Mentor and assessment support ᔢ Good value compared to private sector training ᔢ Direct links to further qualifications and CPD. Source: From Apprenticeship to Higher Education, UVAC 2005 Course details should be written with employees in mind, conveying key messages appropriate to this audience. It is particularly important to identify Apprenticeship, NVQs and other workbased qualifications learners in the entry requirements. These are obvious points, but many prospectuses fall short on these fundamentals. Too often, work-based learners are presented as an after-thought, relegated to the bottom of a list of entry criteria with “Applicants with relevant vocational experience will be considered on their merits…” or similar uninspiring statement. For foundation degrees, information and promotional materials might draw on information on Foundation Degree Forward’s website at www.foundationdegree.org.uk, which includes bespoke promotional material for employers. The DfES mini-site, www.foundationdegree.org.uk, contains sections for both employers and students, although not all of the latter is appropriate for work-based learners. Sector-specific information on foundation degrees can be found on Sector Skills Councils’ websites 45, especially through the growing number of Foundation Degree Sector Frameworks developed by SSCs.46 45 List available at www.ssda.org.uk/ssda/default.aspx?page=16 46 List available at www.fdf.ac.uk/page18.html Incorporating into Higher Education Programmes the Learning People do for, in and through Work 119 Being proactive Only exceptionally, until demand for higher work-based learning has grown, will HE providers have the luxury of employers ‘coming to them’. Work-based learners may be unaware of the opportunities that exist, or lack confidence in their ability to learn at this level. Institutions therefore need to be proactive in stimulating demand among work-based learners and employers. Awareness-raising events for employers can be very effective, provided they are vigorously followed up. Institutions that successfully build client relationships with employers have cited having enthusiastic staff with industry experience as an important factor. Those that are building on existing good links with employers and training providers have a head start. Colleges with their own Apprenticeship units and links to managing agents are particularly well placed to raise awareness of progression opportunities among both Apprentices and their employers. Providers that are members of active partnerships and networks which bring together HEIs, FECs, employers and the relevant agencies have a further advantage. Collective marketing and promotion through, for example, Lifelong Learning Networks, Regional Skills Partnerships or foundation degree consortia may be far more effective than the resources a single institution can provide. Example More than 50 employers and apprentices attended an event at Leeds United Football Club to promote Leeds Metropolitan University’s Foundation Degree in Health-related Exercise and Fitness. The event was followed up with a dinner for employers. A proactive approach adopted with larger, often public sector employers by some institutions is to carry out a training needs analysis of an employer’s middle and senior management to identify skills gaps and shortfalls that could be addressed through foundation degrees or other HE programmes. This might be led by a central business development unit or by individual schools, and may be a formal or informal exercise. Such an exercise often builds on a well-established relationship with an employer. Using the media Targeted advertising, PR, flyers and other media can be very effective tools in drawing the attention of employers and employees to the benefits of HE. Advertising, though expensive, provides total control over where, when and what messages are conveyed. Achieving free editorial coverage through press releases, on the other hand, involves ceding control to journalists, but such coverage can carry more weight than bought space. Feature articles, again at relatively little cost compared to advertising but often requiring a long lead-time, provide the opportunity to explain in depth the features and benefits of foundation degrees and other work-based courses. 120 Incorporating into Higher Education Programmes the Learning People do for, in and through Work Case studies Case studies, well-written and focused, are invaluable promotional material for employer briefings and media packs. Bodies such as SSCs and Foundation Degree Forward are keen to gather such material to make available on their websites. Case studies can be readily converted into feature articles for trade journals, provide the basis for a more general ‘picture story’ or used to support other publications. Once in the public domain, especially on the web, a good case study can rapidly raise the profile of course and have a long shelf-life. Example Leeds Metropolitan University have produced a leaflet aimed at Advanced Apprentices to promote their Foundation Degree in Health-Related Exercise and Fitness. Are you a Sport Apprentice… What Next? sets out the course’s benefits and features, and cites an example of an Advanced Apprentice who is already on the course. 4. Applications and admissions Applicants with such diverse backgrounds as work-based learners are usually called for interview. However, the close involvement of employers in a programme where candidates have been selected, rather than simply putting themselves forward, may obviate the need for this. Equally, as institutions become more familiar with candidates’ vocational qualifications and experience, they may choose to interview more selectively. Explanation of what the course entails is particularly important with these ‘non-traditional’ applicants, both to ensure they understand the commitment involved and to provide reassurance that work-based learners can succeed in higher education. Gauging an applicant’s desire and motivation to undertake the programme is another vital function of the interview. Incorporating into Higher Education Programmes the Learning People do for, in and through Work 121 Diagnostic tests may be used, often as part of standard admissions procedures. Applicants may be admitted subject to completing a programme of pre-course learning. This may be a course to fill a gap identified through the interview or diagnostic, or a bridging course required of all candidates. Example Before joining the University of Derby College Buxton Hairdressing and Salon Management foundation degree programme, students complete an e-learning module. The university is examining diagnostic approaches that would identify any additional learning the students may need when they start. The accreditation of prior experiential learning (APEL) is an important tool to offer work-based learners. By recognising previously unaccredited achievement and providing exemption from parts of modules, APEL has an important role in attracting and retaining work-based learners.47 5. Tailoring delivery to work-based learners Delivery modes Programmes for work-based learners are usually delivered part-time. The work-based element will vary considerably from course to course, as will attendance on campus. Employer pressure to minimise time ‘off the job’ is a common issue and the subject of frequent dialogue with employers. Institutions should be flexible as far as possible. The issue highlights the importance of learning agreements (discussed further below) setting out the responsibilities of each partner, including the employer’s responsibility for allowing time off for study. Work-based learners may be timetabled together with other students for some or all of their sessions on-campus. One college cited ‘in-filling’ as a significant success factor in delivering the programme by ensuring its viability, maximising the use of existing resources and enabling the programme to be launched more quickly than might otherwise have been possible. For the learners there are benefits to mixing with students on related programmes or modes of study, providing their different needs are accommodated. For example work-based learners, may have a much more focused, work-centred view of their learning than younger students. “We have tried very hard to make it work-based learning in concept. It is not a re-badged HNC but an attempt to deliver in the workplace and provide real progression.” Manchester College of Arts and Technology Learning in the workplace As seen in chapter 10, HE modules can be closely related to workplace practice. Employers have an important responsibility to ensure that students are provided with a range of experience to support their studies. In return, students’ work-based projects can provide a valuable consultancy service to the employer. “We are keen to develop the work-based assignments with the [foundation degree] students and enable them to work with people in the organisation on these modules. They should be able to fly though the course because of the sort of work they will be exposed to here.” Aerosystems International 47 APEL is the subject of chapter 5. 122 Incorporating into Higher Education Programmes the Learning People do for, in and through Work Distance learning Delivery through distance learning holds obvious attractions and drawbacks. Where e-learning is the principal mode of delivery, the quality of the e-learning modules is critical (as is learner support, the subject of the next section). In many institutions Virtual Learning Environments (VLEs) are playing an increasingly important role in supporting delivery. VLEs are particularly useful in supporting the learning of work-based students who spend much of their time off-campus. Residentials can be very effective in complementing e-learning and other modes of delivery. Although commonly associated with summer schools on campus, residentials can be more ambitious and include travel abroad to international centres of excellence. Learning agreements Delivery can be underpinned by a learning agreement signed at the outset by the student, employer and course leader. The agreement, in setting out their respective responsibilities, makes a transparent commitment to the programme’s success from all sides. It is useful in setting the ground rules for the work-based programme, and in raising the profile of the programme in the workplace. UVAC and fdf offer model learning agreements in their guidance publications.48 6. Learner support The needs of work-based learners Students entering higher education through the work-based route have support needs that are likely to be different in many respects to those of traditional full-time students. Their work commitments raise issues of work/study balance, and many have family responsibilities that create additional pressures. Their learning backgrounds may well leave shortfalls in study skills; the rigours of academic writing can be particularly challenging for this group, whose confidence at work may not carry over into the unfamiliar world of higher education. The limited time they are able to spend on campus produces additional pressure and demands for quick access to support when problems arise. Distance learning poses particular challenges concerning access to tutorial support. Dedicated workplace support is also critical to the success of these programmes. It is important therefore to anticipate these needs and make provision for them. 48 See ANDERSON, A. and HEMSWORTH, D. (2005) From Apprenticeship to Higher Education, UVAC, available at www.uvac.ac.uk/0401.html and Foundation Degree Forward (2006) Guidance for the Development of Foundation Degree Frameworks, available at www.fdf.ac.uk/home/information_for_universities_and_colleges/sector_skills_councils Incorporating into Higher Education Programmes the Learning People do for, in and through Work 123 Providing study support The need for ‘academic’ support can be addressed at the planning stage and built in to the design of HE programmes aimed at work-based learners. We have seen that bridging provision, including study skills, can be integral to the curriculum of a foundation degree through personal and professional development modules. Access to study support materials and self-study tutorials on the intranet also help to minimise the issues work-based students may experience. A clear, tailored and sympathetic course information pack provided to students at the outset and signposting the services available to them will further help to smooth their transition to higher education. “They struggled with the first module in terms of the structure they needed and the rigour to deliver an assignment. It is important to prepare people from an FE background so they don’t get disillusioned with it.” Stephen Miller Salons Tutorial support Access to personal support is essential. A traditional system of tutorial support designed for full-time students may not be adequate, given the different needs of work-based learners. Colleges with a track record of delivering to FE work-based learners such as Apprentices tend to lead the way in supporting work-based higher learning. The quality and accessibility of this support are recognised as critical to the successful retention of non-traditional students. The course leader or development manager may choose to take on a very pastoral role with the first cohorts to ensure that issues arising are addressed at an early stage and lessons learned for future development. As work-based learning provision develops, another solution is to provide a dedicated learning support officer to complement the support of personal and course tutors. A support officer can provide, above all, the accessibility that work-based learners need. The role can be wideranging, referring students on to appropriate services for non-academic issues, while providing direct support on study issues such as time management, writing and academic referencing. The approach takes some of the tutorial pressure off academic staff and has been shown to be highly valued by work-based students and effective in increasing retention. Cost, however, is a significant factor and the role needs to be underpinned by high quality support materials to which the officer can refer the students or use himself in group and one-to-one sessions. Example Leeds Metropolitan University’s Foundation Degree Teaching and Learning Support Officer in the Carnegie Faculty is the students’ first ‘port of call’ when they have an issue and do not know how to obtain the right information or advice. For non-academic matters the support officer’s role is to refer learners to the increasingly well-developed support services within the university. Study support is provided in several ways, including a 12-week support programme delivered in timetabled tutorial sessions. Academic writing is the biggest area of support needed by work-based learners. Many lack confidence initially with IT, and most have no previous experience of using academic journals and databases. Students are encouraged to use the university’s Skills for Learning portal by distributing it free on a CD ROM. Feedback and retention since the appointment of the support officer have been “phenomenal”. 124 Incorporating into Higher Education Programmes the Learning People do for, in and through Work The role of mentors Workplace mentors also have a critical role in supporting the students’ learning at work. They need to ensure that students’ learning status is recognised in the organisation and that the learning in the HE modules is effectively applied in the workplace. They help to facilitate and monitor the work-based projects, and ensure they are providing a useful service to the employer. They should also ensure the student is allowed sufficient time to attend college, and liaise with the college on progress and issues. It is important that workplace mentors are provided with appropriate training to perform the role. In the short term, until a programme is established and mentors are identified and trained, the course leader or other designated member of staff may need to take on a mentoring role. Some institutions have a permanent college-based mentor to support workplace liaison. Where employers have an active role in assessment, assessors will often ‘double’ as mentors. Example Stephen Miller took on the role of facilitator within his chain of salons for the distance learning Foundation Degree in Hairdressing and Salon Management. With a background in HE, he was able to give his employees crucial support at this stage to help them adjust to the requirements of the programme. Through fortnightly meetings and informal contacts in-between, he helped them to structure their learning and understand the rigour needed to deliver assignments at this level, as well as providing motivational support. As a result, their study skills over six months increased “a hundred fold,” and the level of support they needed diminished considerably. Supporting distance learning Courses delivered largely by distance learning pose particular challenges in supporting learners. However the experience of the Open University, among others, shows that these are not insurmountable. Much rides on the quality of the learning materials and clarity of the tasks and projects. Tutors must be accessible by email and telephone. Online discussions can be facilitated. Residentials provide valuable opportunities for students and tutors to meet and for issues to be discussed face to face. Remote delivery places a particular responsibility on workplace mentors (who may be called ‘facilitators’ to reflect their wider role in distance learning programmes). As with other programmes, the course leader or development manager may need to be very active in providing support to both learners and mentors in the early stage of the programme. With a distance learning programme this can only be a temporary measure, pending the establishment of sustainable support arrangements. These might be partnership arrangements with a network of colleges to provide local support for the programme. Another solution used successfully in one sector is to develop a nationwide team of trained telephone mentors. Example To support the Foundation Degree in Professional Golf, the Professional Golfers’ Association has a team of telephone mentors to support its widely dispersed students. The mentors contact the students every six weeks to check on progress, helping them as necessary over the phone, arranging meetings or seminars or referring to other places they can go for help. Most of the telephone mentors have done the programme themselves and all have received mentor training from the PGA. UNIVERSITY VOCATIONAL AWARDS COUNCIL For further information, please contact: University Vocational Awards Council University of Bolton Chadwick Campus Chadwick Street BOLTON BL2 1JW Tel: 01204 903351 Fax: 01204 903354 Incorporating into Higher Education Programmes the Learning People do for, in and through Work Email: [email protected] Website: www.uvac.ac.uk A guide for higher education managers and practitioners Produced by the University Vocational Awards Council Edited by Lyn Brennan and David Hemsworth Sponsored by the LCCI Commercial Education Trust
© Copyright 2024