1. education

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: uvac@uvac.ac.uk
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&section=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&section=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 Sarah.Millett@lsc.gov.uk
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
(h.pickering@unis4ne.ac.uk).
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
(cbrigg@nwua.ac.uk) 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 vmitchell@nwua.ac.uk.
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
(shamala.govindasamy@herda-sw.ac.uk) or Daniel Isaac, tel 01392 454100
(daniel.isaac@herda-sw.ac.uk).
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 sue.howson@dfes.gsi.gov.uk.
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 Sarah.Millett@lsc.gov.uk
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, tony.bryan@uwe.ac.uk, 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, c.n.murray@open.ac.uk, 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, t.white@derby.ac.uk, 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, d.a.young@derby.ac.uk.
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, j.e.brady@anglia.ac.uk, 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, vivien.martin1@btinternet.com, 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,
Eric.broussine@uwe.ac.uk.
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, Carol.Jarvis@northampton.ac.uk, 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, jdonac01@bcuc.ac.uk, 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, Dave.Clarke@tvu.ac.uk, 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, d.a.young@derby.ac.uk, 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: uvac@uvac.ac.uk
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