by Tony Wall
2011
European Association for Practitioner Research in Improving Learning
Nijmegen, the Netherlands
(with D Leonard)
Goal(s)/question(s)/problem(s)
Learning through workplace activity and workplace projects, as part of a... more
Goal(s)/question(s)/problem(s)
Learning through workplace activity and workplace projects, as part of a university level qualification, is an increasingly common approach for practitioners to study part-time higher education. In facilitating such ‘learning through work’ approaches, it is appropriate to adopt a learner centred pedagogy which is grounded in that workplace, and which creates ‘situated knowledge’ (Lave and Wenger, 1991). As described by Gibbons et al. (1994), this can create ‘mode 2’ knowledge which is situated, messy, problem-based and trans-disciplinary – rather than ‘mode 1’ knowledge which is academic/theoretical, sequential and organised by disciplinary boundaries. In assessing such ‘learning through work’ approaches, we have identified three recurring practical issues: learners focusing on describing rather than critical reflecting on their work for new insight, learners rejurgitating theory, and/or critically reflecting on practice without reference to mode 1 academic knowledge. As a result, the projects and assessments were considered to hold greater potential for change.
Procedure and/or instruments
This study draws on practice and data from the University of Chester’s Centre for Work Related Studies, one of the largest providers of negotiated, work based university-level learning, globally. In order to develop the facilitation of mode 2, situated knowledge, a pedagogical model was developed and refined over a period of two years – with learners across professional fields and disciplines, across different ‘learning through work’ subject foci including negotiated project learning, stress and stress management, communication skills, coaching practice and skills, academic skills, research skills, and so on. Using a cyclic first person action research methodological approach (see Whitehead and McNiff, 2006), the model was used in group workshop contexts and one-to-one facilitation contexts with professionals studying work based learning degrees at undergraduate and postgraduate levels. Individual feedback was sought after each interaction and learner feedback and grades for assessments were monitored.
What are the findings and interpretations?
The University’s distinctive pedagogical model (reported by Brodie and Irving, 2007) provided a starting point for the investigation. In trying to develop an effective and practical tool to explain and facilitate learning in mode 2 knowledge generation, another model emerged. Three distinctive aspects emerged based on Gibbons et al’s (1994) conception of mode 1 and mode 2 knowledge, in the shape of a triangle: 1. theoretical knowledge (mode 2 academic ideas, principles, theories), 2. critical reflection (questioning for new insight), and 3. the workplace (activity in it, as a location/space focus). During the development period, we have identified that learners place a high value on the model to structure own thinking and to help them articulate and structure the assessments. For them, it clearly distinguishes three important elements to pay attention to. Teaching staff have also found it easier and quicker to explain the mode of learning and assessments.
Why do you consider your submission relevant for practice and/or policy?
Learning through workplace activity and workplace projects deals with situated, mode 2 knowledge which is messy, unstructured and trans-disciplinary. Yet this type of learning is increasing in higher education, working with professionals. This study is therefore relevant for:
• Academic communities who aim to facilitate ‘situated knowledge’ – the above study? demonstrates and provides a model to help enhance learning facilitation practice. It highlights the need to clearly articulate what is required for higher education, and particularly experiential, workplace learning.
• Professional communities wanting to solve problems and develop areas of practice – the above study provides a framework to facilitate learning which is creative and critical for new insights and longer lasting learning.
• Policy communities – it continues to highlight the need for situated approaches to practice development, and the distinctive needs of this way of thinking and researching – it is not simply an extension of traditional research approaches.
How are you going to make your session interactive?
We will make the session interactive by:
• Sharing and demonstrating the Pedagogical Model
• Using and discussing real life examples from practice
• Encouraging group activity around the examples
• Encouraging live questioning and critiquing
• Asking participants to give examples of their own problematic/critical incidents they have experienced at work in the past, worthy of some interrogation, to gain more learning from their experiences, then
• Applying the model to that work incident which has been shared, to see how the model works to create new ‘mode 2’ knowledge which can be used as part of a future personal /professional development action plan
• Encouraging group co-development and inquiry around and of the Pedagogical Model.
Download (.pdf) 
