nzace 2010 conference proceedings...

NZACE 2010 Conference Proceedings

Providing a Competitive Advantage

14th – 16th of April, 2010, Palmerston North

Editor Richard K. Coll

(ISBN: 978-0-473-12401-4)

R.K. Coll (Ed.)

Conference Proceedings: New Zealand Association for Cooperative Education

Annual Conference, Palmerston North Island, 14-16 April 2010

(ISBN: 978-0-473-12401-4)

Contents

MATTHEW CAMPBELL 1-6

A Framework for Analysis of Learning in Professional Settings

FRASER BELL, SARAH LEBERMAN 7-11

Cooperative Education in Governance: A Small Business Case Study

KATHRYN HAY 13-15

New Zealand Social Work Field Education: Collaboration in a Competitive Environment

LEVINIA PAKU, MARK LAY, CRAIG ROBB 17-21

Online Tool for Coordinating Work Placements and Facilitating Work Place Learning

SANDRA CLELAND, CATHERINE SNELL-SIDDLE, AARON STEELE 23-26

An Apprenticeship-Based ICT Degree

SUSAN M. MCCURDY, KARSTEN E. ZEGWAARD 27-30

Exploring Interventions to Enhance Faculty Involvement in Cooperative Education

DIANA AYLING 31-34

Is the Village Common in a Cloud? Cooperative Education and Social Networking

DAVID SKELTON 35-37

Yes, But What Can They Do Now? Examining a Range of Degree Papers by Industry Readiness Criteria

R.K. Coll (Ed.)



(ISBN: 978-0-473-12401-4)

R.K. Coll (Ed.) 1



(ISBN: 978-0-473-12401-4)

A framework for analysis of learning in professional settings

MATTHEW CAMPBELL1 Australian Catholic University

INTRODUCTION

Learners in professional practice settings are not passive subjects of socialization processes, but are active and

critical agents in a learning process that incorporates interpretations of experiences. Learners filter the

experiences of the workplace through the lens of their previous experiences constructing new knowledge and

practice. This new knowledge and practice, in this sense used to define the enactment of know-how, are shaped

by social and cultural expectations as well as personal histories and dispositions. Such a conception views the

learning as active in selecting and interpreting experiences in the workplace setting. This paper develops an

argument for a theoretical framework that can be used to analyze the experience of students engaged in

workplace and cooperative education programs. The framework emerges jointly from analysis of literature in

the area and a research project undertaken which examined the learning of early-career police officers.

BACKGROUND

Understanding Learning

Traditional models of learning abstract learners from their normal interactional contexts; they require learners to

assimilate material that the teachers have selected in an artificial environment (Holmes & Meyerhoff, 1999;

Wenger, 1998). The image of the learner is traditionally conceptualized as one of passive reception of knowledge

transferred from the more knowledgeable other. Learning, activity and realities are considered to be

disconnected and separate human experiences. Such learning has value in formal, teacher-centric classroom

environments, which are seen as the source of education and knowledge, with the informal learning of the

workplace conceived of as inferior to the more formalized knowledge structures of academia. Such a view of

learning ignores the complexities of human interactions and fails to consider the social and cultural dimensions

of the learning process.

The alternate is to conceptualize learning as a purely social experience in which knowledge is [co-]constructed

through interactions with others. The learner is understood as being active in the process of knowledge creation

and as Wenger (1998) argues learning is better conceived as the intellectual intersection of understandings of

meaning through experience and activity, practice through participation, belonging to community and shaping

identity within the social world; which he entitles ‘a social theory of learning’. His use of the term ‘intersection’

implies a cross-road of experiences in which the existing dispositions and identities are challenged and extended

by new experiences of belonging and participating, with the subsequent learning being realized in enacted

practice. Furthermore through trajectories of participation, “…individuals develop personal identities that are

shaped by and are formative of their activities in the various communities in which they participate” (Greeno,

1997, p. 7). Changing practice and the process of learning is therefore dependent on the ability of the individual

to participate and interact in the social and cultural environment of the workplace. Learning is governed by the

individual’s capacity to access what is termed the ‘situated curriculum’.

Whilst learning can be conceptualized as a social phenomenon and reliant upon social interactions, it is not

exclusively of the social domain. The process of learning is both individual AND socio-cultural (Kozulin, 2003).

Learning moves through a process of experience and interaction and then internalization of processes and

knowledge for future reproduction and use (Vygotsky, 1978). Billett (1995) asserts that although learning is often

understood from a cognitive or socio-cultural perspective, it is better realized as a conjunction between the two.

Both perspectives understand learning as the manipulation of knowledge against a background of previous

experiences and intellectual resources, though one focuses on internal processes, whilst the other on the

negotiated nature of learning. The development of every function occurs twice; on the interpersonal or social level

and then the intrapersonal or individual level (Greenfield, 1999; Vygotsky, 1978). Billett (2009) extends this

concept to also include the brute facts; that is contributions and mediations of the natural world, such as stages of

development. He asserts that less prominent have been perspectives that explain learning experiences as

relations between the affordances of the experience of social and physical worlds, and how individuals construe

1 Correspondence to Matthew Campbell, email: [email protected]

R.K. Coll (Ed.) 2



(ISBN: 978-0-473-12401-4)

and construct those experiences. Brute facts often mediate how both the social and physical world are

transformed, understood, engaged with, and learned from.

Learning in the Workplace

The understanding of workplace learning as informal and unstructured experiences that are somewhat inferior

to learning that occurs in educational institutions, which are often labeled as formal and planned, is problematic

(Billett, 2002a). Learning in the social settings, such as the workplace, is often considered inferior due to an

apparent lack of qualified teachers, didactic interactions and clear planning of activities. However, learning in

these settings often emerges through the engagement by learners in goal-directed activities (Billett, 1995, 2002a),

where it can be argued that the goals of learning are three fold: (1) the goal of an outcome or product related to

the practice (e.g. a tailor apprentice learning to undertake a task that improves the making of a suit), (2) goals of

the learner to become more engaged and a ‘fuller’ participant in the community of practice, and (3) goals of the

teacher to determine degrees of access to the practice of the workplace and shape the newcomer (Billett, 2002a;

Gherardi, Nicolini, & Odella, 1998; Lave & Wenger, 1991; Wenger, 1998). Although not intentionally stated in a

syllabus the pathways of activities in workplaces are often inherently pedagogical with task sequences that

provide engagement at higher levels of accountability and complexity, and greater access to the capacities

required for work (Lave, 1996). The bases for participation and learning in workplaces are constituted by the

goals, activities and culture of the work practice (Brown, Collins, & Duguid, 1989).

Within a framework of communities of practice there is an inseparable interrelationship between the actors, the

activity and the social world in which it occurs. There is a shift from viewing learning as something that is

subsumed into a process of learning, to that which views learning as an integral aspect of practice. As Lave and

Wenger (1991, p. 35) assert:

… learning is not merely situated in practice – as if it were some independently reifiable process that just happened to be located somewhere;

learning is an integral part of generative social practice in the lived-in world.

In this view the processes, relationships and experiences which contribute to an actors’ sense of belonging

underpin the nature and extent of subsequent learning (Fuller, Hodkinson, Hodkinson & Unwin, 2005). As

argued by Billett (1996) effortful engagement, that is engagement in learning in complex problematic situations,

needs to be conceptualized in terms of individual dispositions, which are often socially co-constructed, and what

is privileged in social practice, there cannot exist an expectation that certain stimuli will result in universal and

predictable outcomes amongst learners. Learning is intimately interwoven within the social practices of a

community and the perceptions and identity of the individual within it (Berger & Luckmann, 1979); it is a

reciprocal, co-constructive process between individuals and social practice (Billett, 2002b). Learning is therefore

not socialization or enculturation into a workplace setting as is implied in Wenger’s (1998) construction of

identity as being formed through the act of belonging to the community, but instead learning is a process that is

constituted through interaction between an individual’s social and cognitive experiences (Billett, 2002b; Fuller et

al., 2005; Valsiner & van der Veer, 2000).

Four Dimensions of Learning

Emerging from the discussion above is the interplay between four dimensions of learning. These dimensions can

de defined as: (1) development of the knowledge of practice, (2) emergence of identity, (3) the individual as

learner, and (4) the social, historical and cultural setting. These present as points of analysis for the learning that

occurs amongst early-career professionals and students engaged in workplace learning experiences, such as

cooperative education programs. These dimensions can be considered as two planes of analysis, being the

identity-knowledge and social-individual planes; each of these planes intersect at the point of the person and

their brute reality. For example knowledge of an expert within policing can be conceptualized with regards their

knowledge of policing practice, that is how they do the job, and knowledge of the community, that is how well

they know and operate within particular cultures. A truly successful newcomer to a community needs to be able

to navigate both aspects of expertise. They are not, though, mutually exclusive.

There is a suggested relationship, by Wenger (Lave & Wenger, 1991; Wenger, 1998) and others, between identity

and the development of expertise and acceptance within communities. Drawing from the work of Wortham

(2004) it can be argued that by demonstrating socially desirable skills through the enacting of culturally valued

practice, for example within policing being effective in the practice of arrest, that the individual is afforded

greater access to the other dimensions of the community. Thus, there is an interaction between knowledge and

R.K. Coll (Ed.) 3



(ISBN: 978-0-473-12401-4)

identity where identity can be understood to be how a person views themself within the community and field of

practice, that is, how they fit within the social structures of the community. Therefore it could be argued that a

successful newcomer has to adapt their identity to the needs of the community and use it to navigate and access

learning experiences that, in turn, enhance their knowledge.

The proposed model, therefore, presents these four dimensions as being interactive and each shaping the

individual at their core. The model is shaped by an axis of interaction between the social and individual,

knowledge and identity. Within each of these four quadrants exists one of these dimensions. “Knowledge of

practice” is a personal internalization of skills sets seen as appropriate to the workplace, hence sits within the

quadrant between knowledge and individual; whilst “knowledge of community culture” is more focused on the

social knowledge of the community. Both are experienced through and captured by, amongst other things,

symbols of practice, rules of the workplace and desired skill sets. The third dimension of “identity in community

culture” relates to a conception of the social identity, that is how the learner sees themselves within the

community, while the fourth dimension of “identity in practice” is how the individual identifies themselves

within enactment. For example, one participant described how they felt more confident and powerful when they

put on the police uniform than without it. These dimensions come to be understood through interactions of

power, notions of belonging and embodiment of practice and identity. The following diagram provides a

graphic of this model showing that these four dimensions come to be realized in the learner at the centre of focus.

FIGURE 1 Four dimensions of learning in the workplace

DISCUSSION

To explore the usefulness of the above framework, the following discussion applies it to the understanding of

learning within early-career police within the New South Wales Police Force. This analysis stems from case

study research undertaken over a three year period as the participants moved from the formal learning

environment of the Police College into the practice field of policing. Presented here is a small sample of analysis

of one case study undertaken. The chosen case study is of a female police officer, Emily2, who at the start of the

2 A pseudonym chosen for confidentiality of the participant.

R.K. Coll (Ed.) 4



(ISBN: 978-0-473-12401-4)

research was 21 years of age. This case was chosen because of the gender and relative young age of the

participant, both factors that presented as being extreme opposites to the dominant police cultures of strong

masculine characteristics (Chan, Devery & Doran, 2003; Reiner, 2000) and respect for experience (Reuss-Ianni,

1984). Therefore, it could be hypothesized; this participant would have to navigate the cultural milieu of policing

far greater than a strong, older male police officer. The methods used for this study involved both interviews

and observations within the workplace, with analysis of data undertaken using an open-coding process of

analysis. The data presented here is drawn from the first interview undertaken in October 2006 and the last

interview in December 2009, this interview data is contextualized through the observations of Emily during a

range of shifts over this three year period and allows for comparison across the timeframe.

Emerging into the practice field of policing is often an unknown and new experience for the beginning officer.

They are both trying to undertake the last stages of their formal study as well as navigate and negotiate the

practice field. In reflecting on her experience as a Probationary Constable, the entry rank that officers have for

the first 12 months of service post-College, Emily spoke about how nervous she felt beginning in the job, a

characteristic that she now sees in the ‘next generation’ that have followed her. As she highlights, it is a

nervousness composed of both anxiety about not looking the fool in completing the job, but also not being sure

how to speak to others and the politics of the station. As a constable, who sometimes works with new officers,

she observes the same occurring with them, as she commented:

…it’s not like they don’t want to speak to you, they get so nervous, I remember being the same. So nervous when you had to speak to people and

stuff …

This is nervousness in being able to both speak with the public, as well as other police. Evident in observations is

an attempt to acquire an understanding of their new identity and location both within the organization and in

their role in the public. The capacity to talk confidently to the public was a personal measure that Emily used to

judge how competent she was becoming as a police officer. The ability for a police officer to ‘take control’ of a

situation and command respect was seen by Emily as crucial elements to what the public desired. However, the

same characteristics did not translate into the way that she spoke and worked with colleagues. There was

evidence for differentiation between how she saw herself within the practice role of policing and within the

community of the station.

As Emily has moved from the dependency position, to at times being the ‘senior on the truck’, she has had to

acquire competence in policing practice. The realization that is made by her over time is that given the

complexities of policing practice this competence is often the acquisition of tools of problem solving as opposed

to absolutes of knowledge; however, this was not always the case. For example, knowledge of the geography of

the local area, including street locations and crime hot spots, as well as the ability to identify high risk offenders

by sight were seen as knowledge sets that needed to be acquired and easily drawn upon. Those police observed

to be better at these skills were often seen as the better officer in general. However, when engaging with the

public, particularly in situations that are not standard, which from observations seems to be most police jobs,

there is a greater reliance upon ‘gut feeling’ and problem solving. This problem solving is evident in

conversations between attending officers about what has occurred and what action should be taken, as well as

contact with the patrolling sergeant, or other senior officers via the phone, or by asking them to attend.

Alternatively, a ‘gut feeling’ response, which took time to develop as Emily became more exposed to the

methods used by the public to convince the police they are innocent, was best described as:

… you know they’ve done something wrong, so you take them back [that is, arrest the person and bring them back to the station] and then when

you get there you ask others and find out what the offence is.

The skill to differentiate between when arresting is acceptable, and when it is not was seen by Emily to be a

crucial element to policing practice. Though when asked further as to how she ‘finds out’ the information

needed to pursue the case further, greater levels of complexity of practice were revealed. These skills were more

akin to research skills than to commonly held perceptions of policing. Emily would often search handbooks and

resources located on the police intranet, or would consult with a range of more experienced police about the

particular case. In both acts she articulated the importance of knowing what was good and bad advice. When

speaking about more experienced police she highlighted that although you get alot of advice from them, you

need to be carefully about which you choose to follow. She would often double-check advice received from one

officer by consulting another. It was apparent through observations that this practice was often referred to as

‘shopping around’, and was disapproved of. However, Emily justified her practice by saying that she needed to

find the advice that fitted best with her way of policing, as she stated “… in this job it is very personal behavioral

R.K. Coll (Ed.) 5



(ISBN: 978-0-473-12401-4)

stuff, so you pick and choose what you like to take from people…”. This quote provides clear support for the

earlier claim of the active learner, as opposed to the passive participant.

A problem solving approach to learning policing practice was not, however, always evident. In the earlier

interview she was concerned about acquiring a set of knowledges for each offence, for example, a knowledge set

for dealing with domestic violence, and another for traffic offences, and that to be a good police officer she would

need to learn them all in detail. Whilst this had some merit, in the later interview she was more aware of the

uniqueness of each situation and therefore the uselessness of a defined set of procedures as opposed to the ability

to locate and interpret information to inform your decision making. This was also evident in the most simplest of

decisions about when to contact the sergeant or not. Therefore there is clear evidence of a changing

understanding of practice and how she sees herself within this field. As she became more aware of the

importance of consultation, problem solving and research, and gained confidence in these skills, she became less

reliant upon supervisors and felt more expert in the practice field, practice started to become routine.

So far, evidence has been presented regards the trajectory of learning within the aspects of knowledge of practice,

identity within practice, and knowledge of community culture. The fourth area of identity in community culture

became the most important aspect for Emily over the research period. Despite originally desiring to acquire

practice skills, it was the perceptions of others within the station and policing more generally, and how Emily

positioned herself in this milieu that she used as the measure of success. Furthermore the development of a

social network of colleagues was important for Emily to deal with the dynamics of policing experiences - though

this was not always a harmonious experience. Emily spoke particularly about the division between detectives

and general duty police and how as colleagues move to become detectives they act “like they don’t have time for

you anymore because they are so busy doing whatever work they’re doing”. Emily saw affiliation with her shift

team, which seems to renew each time there were significant changes of staffing made. She often spoke about

this team in the collective and with ownership, such as “we’ve got good people” and “my people, the majority of

people are lovely.” This positive response was also in contrast with the negative words, such as “crap people,”

used to describe members of other teams. Interestingly when changes were made to teams and some of the “crap

people” were brought into Emily’s team there was evidence of conceding that they may have been misjudged.

There was clear evidence of the need to develop a strong sense of identity within the community as a way of

being accepted, and it was through this acceptance that access to other forms of knowledge occurred.

CONCLUSIONS

From the above discussion there is evidence for the usefulness of the proposed framework for the analysis of

learning experiences of students engaged in the workplace. A successful learner in these settings has an acutely

developed sense of place and purpose and is able to adjust their external image to better access learning needs.

By engaging in processes of self-reflection, one could argue, that these skills would be more highly developed.

The learner’s existing dispositions greatly influence how they perceive experience, which at times may be

contrary to the view held by their colleagues. Therefore, this framework also provides a useful tool to interrogate

and structure pedagogical experiences to better enhance the effectiveness of cooperative education programs; in

particular the focus of mentor relationships in these settings, ensuring that the mentor develops capacities in each

of these four identified areas. The research presented here has focused primarily in the practice context of

policing, therefore there exists opportunities for this research to be extended to other fields, such as teaching and

nursing.

REFERENCES

Berger, P., & Luckmann, T. (1979). The social construction of reality: A treatsie in the sociology of knowledge. Middlesex, England: Penguin.

Billett, S. (1995). Understanding workplace learning: Cognitive and sociocultural perspectives. In D. Boud (Ed.), Current issues and new agendas

in workplace learning (pp. 47-68). South Australia: National Centre for Vocational Education Research (NCVER).

Billett, S. (1996). Situated learning: Bridging sociocultural and cognitive theorising. Learning and Instruction, 6(3), 263-280.

Billett, S. (2002a). Critiquing workplace learning discourses: Participation and continuity at work. Studies in the Education of Adults, 34(1), 56-68.

Billett, S. (2002b). Workplace pedagogic practices: Co-participation and learning. British Journal of Educational Studies, 50(4), 457-481.

Billett, S. (2009). Conceptualising learning experiences: Contributions and mediations of the social, personal and brute. Mind, Culture and

Activity, 16(1), 32-47.

Brown, J., Collins, A., & Duguid, P. (1989). Situated cognition and the culture of learning. Educational Researcher, 18(1), 32-42.

Chan, J., Devery, C., & Doran, S. (2003). Fair cop - Learning the art of policing. Toronto, ON: University of Toronto.

Daniels, H. (2001). Vygotsky and Pedagogy. London: RoutledgeFalmer.

Fuller, A., Hodkinson, H., Hodkinson, P., & Unwin, L. (2005). Learning as peripheral participation in communities of practice: A reassessment of

key concepts in workplace learning. British Educational Research Journal, 31(1), 49-68.

R.K. Coll (Ed.) 6



(ISBN: 978-0-473-12401-4)

Gherardi, S., Nicolini, D., & Odella, F. (1998). Toward a social understanding of how people learn in organisations: The notion of situated

curriculum. Management Learning, 29(3), 273-297.

Greenfield, P. (1999). A theory of the teacher in the learning activities of everyday life. In B. Rogoff & J. Lave (Eds.), Everyday cognition (pp. 117-

138). Cambridge, MA.: Harvard University Press.

Greeno, J. (1997). On claims that answer the wrong questions. Educational Researcher, January/February, 5-17.

Holmes, J., & Meyerhoff, M. (1999). The community of practice: Theories and methodologies in language and gender research. Language in

Society, 28, 173-183.

Kozulin, A. (2003). Psychological tools and mediated learning. In A. Kozulin, B. Gindis, V. Ageyev & S. M. Miller (Eds.), Vygotsky's educational

theory in cultural context (pp. 15-38). New York: Cambridge University Press.

Lave, J. (1996). The practice of learning. In S. Chaiklin & J. Lave (Eds.), Understanding practice: Perspectives on activity and context (pp. 3-32).

Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Reiner, R. (2000). The politics of police. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Reuss-Ianni, E. (1984). Two cultures of policing :Street cops and management cops. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction.

Valsiner, J., & van der Veer, R. (2000). The social mind: The construction of an idea. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of practice: Learning, meaning and identity. New York: Cambridge University Press.

Wortham, S. (2004). The interdepedence of social identification and learning. American Educational Research Journal, 41(3), 715-750.

R.K. Coll (Ed.) 7



(ISBN: 978-0-473-12401-4)

Cooperative education in governance: a small business case study

FRASER BELL,1 SARAH LEBERMAN Massey University

INTRODUCTION

Professional director and governance author Doug Matheson (see Matheson, 2004) suggested in conversation

that there could be merit in developing a formalized process for experiential governance education, perhaps as a

governance internship. More young prospective directors could be encouraged to put themselves forward for

directorships if such a facility was available. However, MBA teaching has tended to focus on the principles of

management, rather than on its practice (Gioia, 2003; Mintzberg, 2004). Traditional MBA models are typically

classroom-based, with a collection of ‘taught’ papers. Many agree that MBA and management education in

general will be improved by the use of real-world experience (Judge, 2005; Mazany & Francis, 1995; Raelin, 1993).

The use of experiential education in MBA programs is limited. Over the past 15 years, some universities have

begun to introduce experiential elements into their programs, but these tend to be isolated cases. When used at

all, experiential learning has tended to utilize ‘surrogate experiences’ including case studies, outdoor activities

(Buller, 1995; Judge, 2005; Mazany & Francis, 1995), simulations and games (Pittaway & Cope, 2007; Romme,

2003; Romme & Putzel, 2003; Ruben, 1999). However, there is a growing trend to introduce some elements of

experiential learning into MBA curricula, as the educational outcomes are likely to be superior to those from

taught classes alone (Leberman & Martin, 2005).

Internships have become a feature of some MBA programs. These are largely ‘not-for-credit’ and can be offered

and arranged through universities, by corporations such as Sony, Toyota, Palo Alto Research Centre, and others,

or by some combination of the two (Georgia State University, 2008; Sony Corporation, 2008; The Anderson

Graduate School of Management, 2008; Toyota Motor Sales USA, 2008). Despite a rigorous search of the

literature, no example of the use of experiential learning in governance could be found.

In 2006 Massey University was presented with a unique opportunity. Two entrepreneurs made two of their

businesses available to the university, principally for educational purposes. The businesses were both SMEs,

trading in the retail automotive sector. These were rolled into a single holding company with two operating

divisions, effectively a start-up. The entrepreneurs’ goal was to provide real business (and in particular,

governance) as well as demonstrating real day-to-day small-business entrepreneurial activity. Further having

been very successful in business, the owners had a desire to contribute back to the community. The University

was interested in understanding the implications for MBA teaching in adopting experiential learning as part of

the course pedagogy and to explore the possibilities for real-world research in a risk-free environment2. Despite

the utility and benefits of experiential learning, its use at tertiary level is not without its challenges. Aside from

resource pressures entailed in such a program, there remains the problem of the sometimes conflicting demands

of the academic and commercial worlds; the dichotomies of learning and profit. This is certainly an issue for

those that administer experiential learning programs, as noted by Lazarus and Oloroso (2004).

CONTEXT AND METHODOLOGY

A six-month pilot program was developed under which MBA students could develop governance experience in

a controlled environment. A shadow board of directors was established comprising four MBA students, two

owners and two representatives of the university. A shadow rather than formal board was chosen as the most

appropriate structure; providing a governance structure without the legal liabilities and requirements of the

latter.

Student directors were recruited from two Auckland-based Executive MBA classes with final selection by

interview with the business owners and university faculty. Two briefing sessions were conducted prior to

commencement of the pilot project during which expectations were discussed, along with the nature and

operations of the business involved. The pilot was monitored by university faculty, along with an honors

student, for whom the pilot formed the basis of a research report using case study methodology. Irrespective of

board performance, a determination needed to be made on the overall success of the project; whether the

1 Correspondence to Fraser Bell, email: [email protected] 2 Free of financial or legal risk to the university or student participants

R.K. Coll (Ed.) 8



(ISBN: 978-0-473-12401-4)

appointment of a board comprised of MBA students provides, on balance, ‘acceptable’ outcomes for the

organization, the owners, the university and the students.

FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION

The pilot had limited effectiveness. The intention was to provide ‘real-world’ experience in governance

education for students. Although the business was real and trading, the governance structure was

‘manufactured’ for the purposes of the pilot, which was in turn created as a result of the opportunity offered to

the university. The SME environment resulted in multi-level conflict including the blurring of governance and

management roles, the speed of entrepreneurial decision-making and student expectations. Students reported

their understanding of governance increased as a result of participation in the pilot through self-directed study of

governance rather than observation of, and participation in, a governance exemplar.

The inexperience of the student board members and reduced understanding of their governance roles and

expectations (Huse, 2000, 2005; Johnson et al., 1996; Pettigrew, 1992) meant that the board created for the

company was atypical in structure, compared to strategically constituted SME or larger corporate boards. This

would almost always be the case with a board created to be a vehicle for learning, and may well be the reality for

many not-for-profit organizations, governed by coalitions of willing volunteers rather than skill-based

appointees.

Throughout the series of board meetings under the pilot, one main theme emerged; the dichotomy between

governance and management functions undertaken by the board. The students found that the role was more

hands-on than they had expected. They had believed that the company was already operational but, although

the operating units were in existence and trading, the holding company was not. The tasks involved in merging

the two operating units into a functioning retail business (essentially start-up functions) fell not only to board

oversight but to board function. An analysis was made of the substantive matters discussed at each board

meeting, classified into either management or governance functions on the basis of the literature3, which showed

that, by and large, the board dealt with more governance-category issues than management. That a board would

deal with some management issues in a SME environment should not have been surprising (Huse, 1994), and

there is an inevitability and acceptability (within reason) of this blurring of boundaries (Gilks, 2007).

Support for board operations was an ongoing issue for the student participants. This seemed to be an issue of

resource allocation; there was no final agreement within the university as to where such resource could/would be

drawn from and how it would be paid for. The entrepreneur owners also had concerns; they were used to a

faster pace of decision-making than either the students or university faculty were used to. There was unanimous

agreement amongst the three parties that that the board was not effective in its operation. Comments on board

effectiveness ranged from “not very”, to “fairly ineffective” to “utterly ineffectual”. Despite this, and despite the

concerns raised about process and structure, there was consensus amongst the students that their understanding

of governance had been enhanced through their involvement with the project. This was felt by the students to be

either an outcome of the experience itself, or the extra research they had conducted.

Transfer of learning takes place when the lessons learned from an experience are applied to a new situation. The

nature of this pilot meant that the students had no immediate opportunity to apply the learning in new

governance situations, at least of corporate governance. Whether the mere understanding the differences between

governance and management functions is a sufficient outcome of the pilot is arguable. Certainly that which

enhances the practice of management (executive MBA students are largely practicing managers), through greater

understanding is beneficial (Gosling & Mintzberg, 2006).

As an optional program, there was no formal academic requirement or output from the pilot program, although

one of the four students did elect to use the experience as the basis for their MBA Applied Research Report

paper. This was the only concrete example of formalized reflective work on the pilot. Some of the students

wondered whether the pilot had been a learning experience in governance. By their own admission it was, with

three of the four agreeing that the experience was an improvement over classroom based teaching. The fourth

felt that there was no educational framework, but was “100% satisfied” with the experience.

3 Classifications complied from: (Conger et al., 2001; Farrar, 2004; Hilmer, 1998; Leblanc, 2007; Matheson, 2004; Zahra & Pearce, 1989)

R.K. Coll (Ed.) 9



(ISBN: 978-0-473-12401-4)

CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS

This pilot ended inconclusively. Two of the underlying questions for the project were; was this experiential

learning and was it focused on governance? It is useful to compare the pilot with the conditions necessary for

experiential learning to take place. Kolb and Kolb (2005) and Boud et al (1985) both describe loops of experience,

reflection and transfer into new contexts; transfer of learning. It is recommended that ample work takes place

before any experiential learning program, to ensure that expectations of process and outcome are clear to all

participants (Stoltz, 1995). This phase also allows for greater preparation of the participants, enhancing the

assimilation of their prior and new knowledge to maximize the insights gained from the experience (Corbett,

2005).

Support by the organization directing the learning throughout each phase of the experience is also important

(Leberman et al., 2006), particularly the thorough preparation of students prior to the experience (McRae &

Baldwin, 2004). A process for the formal debriefing of an experiential instance can support the individual’s

‘observation and reflection’, reinforcing the learning and facilitating the transfer of that learning into a new, or

indeed the next, situation (Gosling & Mintzberg, 2006; Millholland, 1995). It is therefore possible to build upon

Kolb et al’s (1984) model of an experiential learning cycle to make it more valuable in directing experiential

learning projects. Adding concepts from Stoltz (1995), and Leberman et al (2006), Kolb’s model can be reshaped

to incorporate these elements, nesting the learning cycle in a support structure of preparation, follow-up, and

organizational support, as shown in Figure 1.

FIGURE 1 Adaption of Kolb’s experiential learning cycle (adapted from Kolb et al., 1991)

Institutions and corporate partners in experiential learning can find themselves in conflict over the sometimes

divergent needs of the academic components the program and commercial needs of the enterprise (Lazarus &

Oloroso, 2004). A thorough preparatory phase, briefing not only students but also academic administrators and

program partners, could be expected to improve the level of understanding and expectations of each party in a

program, reinforced by an appropriate support structure.

An alternative experiential learning model for governance education is therefore proposed; that of sitting on an

existing board as an observer or participant observer. Rather than groups of students forming the majority of a

board, an improved structure would see individual students allocated to a series of extant boards of directors.

This would not preclude the use of SMEs as vehicles for such learning, as the students would then be one of a

number of board members; exposed to a greater range experiences and insights from the board table.

An improved internship model is that demonstrated by a new Massey University paper, successfully piloted in

semester two, 2009. Expanded as a double semester paper in its 2010 offering, the undergraduate internship

serves partly as a capstone integrative experience for senior students. This sets a framework for a range of

experiential learning projects, each featuring triangulated preparation by the students, academics and businesses

R.K. Coll (Ed.) 10



(ISBN: 978-0-473-12401-4)

involved, and supported by program administrators cognizant of the challenges of bringing together the needs of

students, academia and enterprise into a coherent whole, and a triangulated debrief.

The expectations of each party are clarified in the pre-work phase, including seminars on reflective practice on

which the program academic outcomes are based. All students meet 3-4 times each semester and during the

experiential phase will spend 180 working with an organization on a pre-defined project. A range of

organizations would be suitable for such projects, perhaps excluding only publicly listed companies due to their

stricter disclosure requirements. Not-for-profit organizations would seem to present ideal opportunities; they

are often themselves starved of human and other resources. Rather than the traditional ‘old boys’ network’, the

availability of risk-free governance learning opportunities could attract groups under-represented on typical

boards today; women, younger executives and minority ethnic groups.

Given that experiential education has demonstrated utility in fields as critical to the human body as nursing and

surgery, then the case must be made for the corporate body as well. Students, and other new directors, may offer

new and exciting perspectives to traditionally structured boards; addressing imbalances of representation,

opinion and context. Whether this proves practical remains to be seen, but this research provides insights into

governance and experiential education, as well as suggesting a way forward.

REFERENCES

Boud, D., Keogh, R. & Walker, D. (1985). Reflection, turning experience into learning. London: - Kogan-Page.

Buller, P.F., McEvoy, G.M. & Cragun, J.R. (1995). A model for developing student skills and assessing MBA program outcomes through outdoor

training. Journal of Management Education, 19(1), 35-53.

Conger, J.A., Lawler, E.E. & Finegold, D. (2001). Corporate boards: Strategies for adding value at the top. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Corbett, A.C. (2005). Experiential learning within the process of opportunity identification and exploitation. Entrepreneurship Theory and

Practice, 29(4), 473-491.

Farrar, J.H. (2004). Corporate governance: Theories, principles and practice (2nd ed.). South Melbourne, VIC.: Oxford University Press.

Georgia State University. (2008). Global partners MBA program internship program. Retrieved 22 December, 2008, from

http://robinson.gsu.edu/gpmba/internship/index.html

Gilks, J. (2007). Governance of SMEs: Is there a corporate challenge? Boardroom: The Journal of the Institute of Directors, March, 1-2.

Gioia, D.A. (2003). Teaching teachers to teach corporate governance differently. Journal of Management and Governance, 7(3), 255-262.

Gosling, J., & Mintzberg, H. (2006). Management education as if both matter. Management Learning, 37(4), 419-428.

Hilmer, F.G. (1998). Strictly boardroom : improving governance to enhance company performance (2nd ed.). Melbourne: Information Australia.

Huse, M. (1994). Board-management relations in small firms: The paradox of simultaneous independence and interdependence. Small Business

Economics, 6(1), 55-72.

Huse, M. (2000). Boards of directors in SMEs: A review and research agenda. Entrepreneurship & Regional Development, 12(4), 271-290.

Huse, M. (2005). Accountability and creating accountability: A framework for exploring behavioural perspectives of corporate Governance.

British Journal of Management, 16, 65-79.

Johnson, J.L., Daily, C.M. & Ellstrand, A.E. (1996). Boards of directors: A review and research agenda. Journal of Management, 22(3), 409-438.

Judge, W. (2005). Adventures in creating an outdoor leadership challenge course for an EMBA program. Journal of Management Education, 29(2),

284-300.

Kolb, A.Y., & Kolb, D.A. (2005). Learning styles and learning spaces: Enhancing experiential learning in higher education. Academy of

Management Learning & Education, 4(2), 193-212.

Kolb, D.A. (1984). Experiential learning : Experience as the source of learning and development. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

Kolb, D.A., Rubin, I.M. & Osland, J. (1991). Organizational behavior: An experiential approach (5th ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Lazarus, F.C., & Oloroso, H.C. (2004). Administering cooperative education programs. In R.K. Coll & C. Eames (Eds.), International handbook for

cooperative education (pp. 179-188). Boston: World Association for Cooperative Education.

Leberman, S.I., & Martin, A.J. (2005). Applying dramaturgy to management course design. Journal of Management Education, 29(2), 319-332.

Leberman, S.I., McDonald, L. & Doyle, S. (2006). The transfer of learning: Participants' perspectives of adult education and training. Aldershot,

UK: Gower.

Leblanc, R., Lockhart, J. & Groves, S.L. (2007). What is wrong with corporate governance? Unpublished work. York University.

Matheson, D. (2004). The complete guide to good governance in organizations and companies. Auckland, NZ: Profile Books.

Mazany, P., & Francis, S. (1995). Evaluating the effectiveness of an outdoor workshop for team building in an MBA programme. Journal of

Management Development, 14(3), 50.

McRae, N., & Baldwin, J. (2004). Cooperative education in business and finance. In R.K. Coll & C. Eames (Eds.), International handbook for

cooperative education (pp. 131-140.). Boston: World Association for Cooperative Education.

Millholland, R.B. (1995). Experiential training: Spanning a decade. In C.C., Roland, R.J. Wagner, R.J. & R,J, Weigand (Ed.), Do it…and understand!

The bottom line on corporate experiential learning (pp. 54-58). Dubuque, IA: Kendall-Hunt.

Mintzberg, H. (2004). Managers, not MBAs: A hard look at the soft practice of managing and management development. San Francisco: Berrett-

Koehler.

Pettigrew, A.M. (1992). On studying managerial elites. Strategic Management Journal, 13, 163-182.

Pittaway, L., & Cope, J. (2007). Simulating entrepreneurial learning: Integrating experiential and collaborative approaches to learning.

Management Learning, 38(2), 211-233.

Raelin, J.A. (1993). Theory and practice: Their roles, relationship. Business Horizons, 36(3), 85.

Romme, A.G.L. (2003). Learning outcomes of microworlds for management education. Management Learning, 34(1), 51-61.

Romme, A.G.L., & Putzel, R. (2003). Designing management education: Practice what you teach. Simulation & Gaming, 34(4), 512-530.

Ruben. (1999). Simulation, games, and experience-based learning: The quest for a new paradigm for teaching and. Simulation & Gaming, 30(4),

498-505.

Sony Corporation. (2008). Internship. Retrieved 22 December, 2008, from http://sony.net/SonyInfo/careers/student/internship.html

R.K. Coll (Ed.) 11



(ISBN: 978-0-473-12401-4)

Stoltz, P. (1995). Developing leaders experientially. In C.C., Roland, R.J. Wagner, R.J. & R,J, Weigand (Ed.), Do it…and understand! The bottom

line on corporate experiential learning (pp. 12-22). Dubuque, IA: Kendall-Hunt.

The Anderson Graduate School of Management. (2008). MBA academic internship project. Retrieved 22 December, 2008, from

http://agsm.ucr.edu/services_resources/internships.html

Toyota Motor Sales USA. (2008). Master of business administration summer internship. Retrieved 22 December, 2008, from

http://www.toyota.com/html/talentlink/hr/graduate/mbasi.html

Zahra, S.A., & Pearce, J.A. (1989). Boards of directors and corporate financial performance: A review and integrative model. Journal of

Management, 15(2), 291-334.

R.K. Coll (Ed.) 12



(ISBN: 978-0-473-12401-4)

R.K. Coll (Ed.) 13



(ISBN: 978-0-473-12401-4)

New Zealand social work field education: collaboration in a competitive environment

KATHRYN HAY1 Massey University

INTRODUCTION

Operating in a largely self-interested, independent and competitive manner; the tertiary or higher education

sector in New Zealand has, until very recently significantly limited opportunities for cross-institutional

collaboration (Holland & Ramaley, 2008). Tertiary education providers have traditionally sought to maintain

institutional independence and have competed in both research and teaching terrains. Competition for students

has also isolated institutions from one another and restricted attempts at collaboration. Recent government

policy on student enrolments may, however, decrease the emphasis on competition and therefore increase the

possibility of cross-institutional collaboration. In 2006, in an attempt to work collaboratively across tertiary

institutions a social work fieldwork coordinators2 group was established. This paper briefly outlines the

development and purpose of the group and discusses the factors that facilitate or constrain its collaborative

potential. Although the group is specific to social work field education, the lessons learned from the group’s

brief history may be applied across disciplines.

BACKGROUND

During the 2006 Practical Experience in Professional Education Conference - a group of social work fieldwork

coordinators employed at universities and polytechnics throughout New Zealand, gathered for an informal

discussion on their teaching area. It became apparent that in spite of their institutional contexts there were

strong similarities in the issues and challenges they faced in regards to their work. These challenges included

competition for student placements; the perceived marginalization of fieldwork within academic programs;

funding challenges; and isolation in their role as fieldwork coordinators. Although these issues were

acknowledged there was a general consensus that it may be beneficial to take a more collaborative approach

cross-institutionally. Subsequently, the School of Sociology, Social Policy & Social Work (now the School of

Health & Social Services) approached the Aotearoa New Zealand Association of Social Work Educators

(ANZSWE, now the Council of Social Work Educators Aotearoa New Zealand or CSWEANZ), and tabled a

Terms of Reference for the establishment of a Field Education Subcommittee (herein, the Subcommittee). The

proposed Subcommittee was ratified in 2007, with the membership comprising fieldwork coordinators from

CSWEANZ institutions (currently 16 schools of social work in universities, polytechnics and institutes).

The purpose of the Subcommittee is to “provide a forum for networking, research and the discussion and

development of social work field education practices and processes in Aotearoa New Zealand. To support the

advancement of social work field education and raise its profile in tertiary institutions and the social service

sector. To recognize the political nature of field education and advocate for its position in the education sector”

(Terms of Reference, 2007, p. 1). 3

Since its inception the Subcommittee has communicated by email and during three face to face meetings,

however attempts to meet more regularly have been thwarted primarily by institutional funding and workload

constraints. On several occasions Subcommittee members have questioned the potential for, and limitations of

collaboration that may be possible within the group. In order to explore these issues further a questionnaire was

distributed to sub-committee members in December 2009; a summary of two aspects of the results are briefly

discussed below4.

1 Correspondence to Kathryn Hay, email: [email protected] 2 The generic term ‘fieldwork coordinator’ will be used in this paper to refer to the academic staff member from the tertiary institution. In most

social work programmes in New Zealand the fieldwork coordinator is responsible for one or more of the following tasks: organising placements,

teaching, administration, visiting students on placement, trouble shooting, training agency staff, assessing the student work and liaising with

agencies. 3 The Terms of Reference for the ANZSWE Field Education Sub-Committee are available from the author upon request. 4 Questionnaires were sent to 15 members. Seven members completed and returned the questionnaire. An additional member had recently

resigned and did not wish to participate in the evaluation. The full results of the evaluation as it pertains to being a community of practice will be

published elsewhere.

R.K. Coll (Ed.) 14



(ISBN: 978-0-473-12401-4)

THE POTENTIAL FOR COLLABORATION

Participants had a range of involvement in the Subcommittee, from no active participation, to responding to the

email discussions and attending the face to face meetings. The face-to-face meetings were perceived to be most

beneficial:

Face-to-face meetings provide excellent opportunities to learn and discuss information that may not develop in an email discussion.

Very helpful to identify current issues and to get an overview of fieldwork education in Aotearoa; to exchange challenges and ideas; to take

issues to ANZSWE forum for further attention and to network.

Relationship building in the Subcommittee is challenging due to the changing membership, however, a core

group provides stability within the group. Welcoming new members by email and a bi-monthly newsletter also

aims to encourage connections between members. While these initiatives are undertaken by the chairperson, all

members are regularly invited to initiate discussions or disseminate information through the email network. The

potential for collaboration within the Subcommittee was seen to be increasing “as relationships and goodwill

develops”. As another participant noted,

With any collaboration the issue of trust and getting to know each other is a vital precursor to genuine collaboration.

Being a Subcommittee within a broader configuration is seen to be especially useful in regard to raising the

profile of field education, and to have another forum in which to take particular concerns. CSWEANZ, the

umbrella body, includes heads of programs, professors of social work or other senior staff, many of whom has

strong and direct links to influential decision-makers such as government ministers, the Social Work Registration

Board, the social work professional body as well as within their own schools and institutions. The Subcommittee

has provided considerable information and knowledge to CSWEANZ, which has been utilized in their lobbying

and advocacy work.

Two specific collaborative innovations have stemmed directly from the Subcommittee. First, a discussion forum

for the Subcommittee was set up in the Ako Aotearoa website. This was partly in response to the disjointed

nature of some of the email communication. Having one thread of discussion was perceived to be more

straightforward and potentially more useful. Unfortunately the uptake for the forum has been very low and is

currently inactive. Possible reasons for this include limited time available to fieldwork coordinators, especially

those that are new to their role and uncertainty as to how to access and participate. Clear guidelines addressing

the latter has been sent to members, however, this appears to have had little effect to date.

Secondly, the development of a written resource for field educators5 and students has been supported by the

Subcommittee. Funding for the project was granted by Ako Aotearoa to one Subcommittee member in 2009. The

Subcommittee has been involved in project mentoring and editing of the resource. The resource will be trialed by

members in 2010 before it is finalized and made available on the Ako Aotearoa site.

CONSTRAINTS ON COLLABORATION

Constraints on collaboration within the Subcommittee mainly relate to time/workload and financial constraints;

changing personnel and institutional policies. Given the applied nature of fieldwork papers the coordinators

have significant workloads. Organizing and managing student placements is time consuming and is not

confined to discrete time periods as for other academic papers. There is therefore limited time and energy to

invest in an external Subcommittee. Some institutions have not given permission or financial support to

fieldwork coordinators wishing to attend face-to-face meetings, thus limiting the extent of their involvement. In

addition, there seems to be a high turnover of fieldwork staff, who are frequently employed on a part-time,

contractual basis. This raises issues in terms of continuity and long-term involvement, both within the institution

and in the Subcommittee. That said, there is a core group within the Subcommittee who have been working

within the fieldwork domain for over 10 years and these members provide institutional knowledge and

constancy.

Concerns as to the protection of intellectual property of programs or institutions has also limited collaboration

with some study materials being copyrighted or rendered inaccessible. However, within the Subcommittee a

broad range of ideas and resources have been discussed and made available, on the understanding that an

individual institution is acknowledged if ideas or materials are used by another program.

5 The term ‘field educators’ refers to the social workers who supervise and work closely with the students in the placement agency. Depending

on institutional terminology they are usually a qualified, experienced social worker.

R.K. Coll (Ed.) 15



(ISBN: 978-0-473-12401-4)

Competition for placements is identified as another key factor limiting collaboration.

I think it’s important we don’t “poach” placements and communicate about who is doing what, where.

… as long as schools are not trying to compete for students.

Within the Subcommittee there have been discussions about this issue and there is now an informal agreement to

notify other fieldwork coordinators if a student is being placed in an agency within someone else’s ‘territory’.

Some institutions incorporate a distance learning component and therefore students may reside and have student

placements in the proximity of another tertiary education provider. As individual relationships have

strengthened within the Subcommittee there appears, anecdotally at least, to be an increase in communication in

regards to this issue.

Discussion as to standardizing aspects of social work field education across New Zealand has also occurred

within the Subcommittee. Developing nationalized learning objectives for field education and standards of

assessment has been mooted (Hay & O’Donoghue, 2009). To date minimal debate and consensus has occurred in

regards to this recommendation. As one fieldwork coordinator commented on what might limit collaboration

across institutions:

Different standards in each institution … different assessment approaches - we learn from each other but we often like our own approach.

CONCLUSIONS

The evolution of the fieldwork Subcommittee is still in its infancy and although there have been some examples

of positive relationship building and collaborative endeavors there is considerable work ahead before its full

potential is realized. In particular, institutional support is essential if it is to continue, let alone, achieve its full

purpose. This has implications in terms of workload and financial contribution as fieldwork coordinators may

endeavor to have their active participation in the Subcommittee included in their assigned tasks and seek

additional funding to attend the face-to-face meetings. Several fieldwork coordinators have expressed interest in

having biannual meetings to enable greater traction in discussions and decision-making. The current

chairperson of the Subcommittee does not receive work-loaded time for her role, although she is supported by

her institution to attend meetings in her work hours, and have any travel expenses compensated.

Protection of institutional knowledge, intellectual property and issues of time and resources impinge on the

potential positive outcomes of the cross-institutional Subcommittee. While the placing of students in social

service agencies can be a competitive process there are many benefits to collaborating with staff in other

institutions in similar roles. These include resource and information sharing, developing joint training or

placement opportunities, collaborative research, support, and a focus on improving the wider profession.

The aspiration of the Subcommittee to raise the profile of field education and advocate for its position in the

education sector has received little attention. In part, this has been sidelined due to the necessity of building

relationships and establishing the foundation of the work of the Subcommittee especially by developing an

understanding of how each institution’s field education program operates. Now that this initial work has been

largely completed there may be greater impetus by the group to become more proactive in addressing the

political advocacy objective.

Although there remains competition for social work placements across institutions the fieldwork sub-committee

has endeavored to work in a collaborative manner. Clearly there are many challenges to be faced, however, there

is considerable support and goodwill by fieldwork coordinators for the ongoing development of the

Subcommittee and its work. Overall, there is sentiment within the Subcommittee that while constraints on

collaboration do exist, the potential for collaborative work and the ensuing positive outcomes outweigh these

limitations. The innovation of the Subcommittee provides a model of emerging collaboration cross-

institutionally that may have relevance for other applied professional disciplines.

REFERENCES

Hay, K., & O’Donoghue, K. (2009). Assessing social work field education: Towards standardising fieldwork assessment in New Zealand. Social

Work Education, 28(1), 42-53.

Holland, B., & Ramaley, J.A. (2008). Creating a supportive environment for community-university engagement: Conceptual frameworks. Higher

Education Research and Development, 31, 42-52.

R.K. Coll (Ed.) 16



(ISBN: 978-0-473-12401-4)

R.K. Coll (Ed.) 17



(ISBN: 978-0-473-12401-4)

Online tool for coordinating work placements and facilitating work place learning

LEVINIA PAKU,1 MARK LAY, CRAIG ROBB University of Waikato

INTRODUCTION

At the University of Waikato, the Cooperative Education Unit is responsible for organizing work placements for

Bachelor of Engineering students in biochemical, electronics, materials and process, and software engineering,

and Bachelor of Science and Technology students in biology, chemistry, earth science, computer science and

physics. About 180 students go on placement from November to February or longer each year.

The Cooperative Education Unit assists in student pre-placement preparation such as CV writing, interview

technique and career aims. The Unit determines student interests, personality and ability through pre-placement

interviews. The Unit also maintains contact with over 600 employers, many of whom employ students each year.

The majority of these are based in the Waikato, Auckland, and Bay of Plenty regions. As jobs become available,

suitable students are identified and targeted for particular jobs. During the placements, students and employers

are visited to ascertain what kind of work the students are doing, how they are performing, and what they have

learnt about themselves in terms of ability, personal development, and soft and technical skills. After the

placement, employers are asked to assess student performance, and students are required to submit a 30-40 page

work placement report, which is assessed by academics in related fields to the student’s work. A consequence of

this hands-on approach to work placements is that the majority of placements are very successful, with many

employers keen to employ the students full-time.

However, placement coordination is very time intensive. Keeping track of students, placements, employers and

assessment requires good databases, management systems and processes, and excellent communication with all

stakeholders (Yuen & Duo, 1989). Hard-copies of student details and records in folders, and email and Excel™

databases are used to keep track of what is happening in terms of placement coordination. Separate spreadsheet

files are currently used for student and employer information, and employer histories. But, this has limitations

as to who can access data, maintenance, and searching and formatting data to suit various uses. Typically

communication is through email, but with changes in student communication practices with the advent of

various social networking sites means that students often do not check email regularly. Placements that become

available can be filled within a couple of days to a week. The coordinators often have to contact the students by

cell phone to ensure they check their emails. Also, sometimes students suitable for particular placements are

missed or not considered by the placement coordinators. Students also occasionally complain that they are not

kept up-to-date as to what jobs are available. Sometimes students are overly dependent on the coordinator to

find them a job (Lay & Paku 2007a), which is not ideal as an important student life skill is being able to find jobs

for themselves.

Work placements are regarded as educational tools to supplement or complement university learning.

Therefore, students are asked to set learning objectives, keep a record of the work they are doing, and discuss

how they have met their objectives. The reflection and review forms a major part of the placement report and is

worth 20% of their placement grade. From previous research, it was found that students typically perform badly

in this kind of reflective practice, do not like it and would avoid it if at all possible (Lay, Paku & Swan, 2008;

Paku & Lay, 2008). Anecdotally, reflective practice is not well supported by academics. Methods to improve

reflective practice can involve writing a journal and developing an evidence portfolio (Eames, 2006; Knight,

Hakel & Gromko, 2006; Tillema, 2001).

Internationally, co-operative education practices frequently use e-portfolios and websites to assist student

learning and run and manage co-op programs. Websites range in functionality from merely providing

information to providing interactive tools for students and employers (Lay & Paku, 2007b). Therefore, and with

the above considerations, the authors have developed a web-based database to assist in placement coordination

and student reflective practice.

There were several options for building the website: Using pre-existing websites and adapting them to the Unit's

needs; use the University of Waikato's Moodle™ website; or custom build a website that specifically served the

Unit's needs.

1 Correspondence to Levinia Paku, email: [email protected]

R.K. Coll (Ed.) 18



(ISBN: 978-0-473-12401-4)

FIGURE 1 Student details page

R.K. Coll (Ed.) 19



(ISBN: 978-0-473-12401-4)

Pre-existing websites can be unsatisfactory in that they never entirely meet the developer's needs, use proprietary

software, and off-the-shelf solutions are very expensive. Moodle is used as a teaching tool for distributing

lecture material, communicating with students in specific courses, and for collecting assignments for assessment.

Moodle, however, had no customizable database tools that could be adapted for the Unit's needs, and the site

itself could not be adapted for the Unit. A custom built website database was the best solution.

The online database developed is a dynamic website that uses PHP for the coding through an Apache webserver

and MySQL for the database and queries. The database integrates employer, company and job details, and

student information. The database was developed by Craig Robb, who was doing his work placements with the

Cooperative Education Unit for his degree in software engineering.

UNIQUE FEATURES/ISSUE:

Students can log on to the website, update their details, interests and CV (Figure 1). They can access the jobs

page which shows the most recent jobs available. There is a job search page which filters available jobs according

to students listed interests, or according to categories such as company, region and interests (Figure 2). Students

can then click on a hyperlink that will take them to a page specific for the job and read the description and details

such as company and location. If they choose to apply for the job, they can type in why they are interested and

click on the apply button. When students have applied for jobs, they can visit a page which shows which jobs

they have applied for and the current job status, i.e. open, interviewing, or position filled.

Job, employer and company details are entered by the coordinators after correspondence with potential

employers. This ensures that the jobs are vetted by the coordinators prior to being entered on the database.

FIGURE 2 Student job search page

R.K. Coll (Ed.) 20



(ISBN: 978-0-473-12401-4)

Coordinators can see the list of students that have applied for each job, and then either choose to initially vet the

list based on what they know about the students, or submit all the CV to the employer. Students are then

updated as to whether or not they have been successful in obtaining an interview or job. Placement coordinators

can also choose to make particular students apply for jobs, particularly if the coordinator has met with the

student in person or talked to the student over the telephone.

Because the student, employer, and job information is integrated, coordinators can pull up employer histories

and produce lists for organizing assessment and placement visits. Previously lists were manually generated and

care had to be taken to ensure student or employer details were not omitted.

Students also have a page for their online journal, where they can set learning objectives, state why they chose

those objectives and keep a personal blog as to how they are going with each objective (Figure 3). Once they

have achieved an objective, they can note the date when the objective was achieved and assess how well they

achieved the objective. Once the placement is complete, the database can compile the journal into a word

document that the students can use for writing the reflection and review section of their work placement report.

The blog is confidential, so the placement coordinator cannot see it, but the coordinator can see the objectives the

students have set themselves and when the blogs for each objective have been updated. The coordinators can

then choose to prompt the student to update the blog.

FIGURE 3

Student online journal

As website hacking is prevalent, the website has two logons. The first is through the University of Waikato web-

server which can grant student access to various parts of the website, and uses the student username and

password that the student generally uses for computer access and Internet use. The second is through the web-

page itself which uses the student email and a separate password. The password for the webpage has an eight

character randomly generated “salt” added to the beginning and end of the password. Salting passwords is a

common practice used to complicate website attacks where the hacker is using a list of common passwords plus

random characters that have been pre-encrypted. Each additional character in the “salt” doubles the storage

space and computation required to generate the list. The “salt” is generated when the student first registers for

the website and is stored in the database. The password and “salt” is combined and encrypted using MD5

(Message digest algorithm 5), a commonly used cryptographic method, and stored in the database. Each user is

granted a clearance level by the coordinator, which is stored in the database and determines what pages are

available to the student. When the user logs on, the website will store a “cookie” on the student’s web-browser,

which is a string of text and numbers used to identify the browser. A record of the cookie is stored in the

database and is used for authentication each time the user visits any page on the website. Clearance levels are

R.K. Coll (Ed.) 21



(ISBN: 978-0-473-12401-4)

not stored in the cookie to prevent students from hacking the cookie to gain access to administrative levels of the

website. Once the student logs out or the student session expires, the cookie record is deleted from the database.

DISCUSSION

Switching to a custom built online database for placement coordination will have the following advantages:

• Database integration, allowing student and employer histories to be easily produced, instead of being

manually generated. This will prevent errors in records that can occur when multiple databases are

used, due to some of the databases not being kept up-to-date. This will allow placement coordinators to

transfer the tasks of organizing employer and academic assessment of students to a

secretary/administrator because all the data is in one place and readily accessible. This will also allow

better coordination between placement coordinators, for example if one coordinator is on leave;

• Reduction in paperwork and emailing involved in placement coordination, making organizing

placements more efficient. This would give placement coordinators more time for developing

relationships with employers and students;

• Increased transparency with students being able to see what jobs are available and being able to choose

what jobs they would like to apply for. This will also increase student involvement in the placement

process, which has previously been driven by the placement coordinator. Because the student is more

involved in the process, they might have greater ownership of the placement resulting in increased

performance on placement; and

• Easy modification of the website to suit the Unit's needs. Once the website has been tested on students

and coordinators, the website and database can be changed or improved according to need. This is not

possible with proprietary software.

CONCLUSIONS & IMPLICATIONS

The website will be trialed in 2010 on a cohort of engineering students. Student feedback will be obtained and

used to develop the website further. With an online system, this will be the starting point for developing a more

advanced system for educational purposes as well.

REFERENCES

Eames, C. (2006, April). Sociocultural portfolios as a tool for enhancing student learning in cooperative education. Paper presented at the annual

conference of the New Zealand Association for Cooperative Education, Queenstown.

Knight, W.E., Hakel, M.D., & Gromko, M. (2006, May). The relationship between electronic portfolio participation and student success, Online

Submission, Paper presented at the annual forum of the Association for Institutional Research. Chicago, IL.

Lay, M., & Paku, L. (2007a). Improving co-op placement processes with technology. In R.K. Coll (Ed.), Proceedings of the 10th Annual NZACE

Conference (pp. 73-75). Rotorua, New Zealand.

Lay, M., & Paku, L. (2007b). Investigating students preferred communication means. In R.K. Coll (Ed.), Proceedings of the 10th Annual NZACE

Conference (pp. 77-85). Rotorua, New Zealand.

Lay, M.C., Paku, L., & Swan, J.E. (2008). Work placement reports: Student perceptions. In L. Mann, A. Thompson & P. Howard (Eds.),

Proceedings of the 19 Annual Conference for the Australasian Association for Engineering Education. CQUniversity Australia, Yeppoon,

Queensland, Australia.

Paku, L., & Lay. M. (2008). Reflection and review: Confessions of placement students. In R.K. Coll & K Hoskyn (Eds.), Proceedings of the 11th

Annual NZACE Conference (pp. 42-44). New Plymouth, New Zealand.

Tillema, H.H. (2001). Portfolios as developmental assessment tools. International Journal of Training and Development, 5(5), 126-135.

Yuen, S.C.-Y., & Duo, J.-F. (1989). Developing a management system for cooperative education. Paper presented at the annual convention of the

American Vocational Association. Orlando, FL.

R.K. Coll (Ed.) 22



(ISBN: 978-0-473-12401-4)

R.K. Coll (Ed.) 23



(ISBN: 978-0-473-12401-4)

An apprenticeship-based ICT degree

SANDRA CLELAND, CATHERINE SNELL-SIDDLE, AARON STEELE1 UCOL New Zealand

INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND

A plumber has around eight years training in the US, and that’s to fix my toilet. Yet, how much training do you have to do to be allowed to build

software for a plane carrying hundreds of people? (Marson, 2005, p. 1)

A number of New Zealand tertiary institutes offer ICT related bachelor degrees that include an industry based

capstone project or work experience type component in the final stages of the qualification (Auckland University

of Technology [AUT], 2010; Eastern Institute of Technology [EIT], 2010; Otago Polytechnic, 2010; UCOL, 2010;

Weltec, 2010). This cooperative educational component specifically aims to prepare students for a career in the

ICT industry by providing them with real world experience and industry connections. The School of Business &

Computing at UCOL currently offers a Bachelor of Information & Communications Technology (BICT) degree

(UCOL, 2010). This is a three year program with students being required to undertake a 45 credit (approximately

one semester) capstone project in their final year of study. This type of structure is common to many New

Zealand ICT degrees. The inustry project is the pinnacle of New Zealand ICT degrees, and is regarded as an

essential component of the program by staff, students and industry stakeholders. Building on the known

benefits of industry engagement, this paper explores the following question: Could cooperative education start

earlier on in New Zealand ICT degrees? This paper will proceed by proposing an apprenticeship-based ICT

degree built around UCOL’s existing BICT qualification.

UCOL BACHELOR OF INFORMATION & COMMUNICATIONS TECHNOLOGY DEGREE

The Bachelor of Information & Communications Technology (BICT) degree is a three-year, six-semester program.

Student workload normally consists of four 15 credit papers each semester. This translates to 120 credits per year

for three years (levels 5, 6 and 7 respectively), totaling 360 credits for the entire degree. In the final semester of

the degree, instead of taking four 15 credit papers, students are required to complete one 15 credit paper and a 45

credit capstone project. Figure 1 provides a graphical representation of the BICT degree structure. Based on this

structure, an apprenticeship based ICT degree structure is proposed as an alternative mode of delivery for the

BICT degree.

PROPOSAL FOR AN APPRENTICESHIP-BASED ICT DEGREE

The apprenticeship based ICT degree will maintain the same eight papers for the first year of the program. The

second year will consist of two semesters involving a single 15 credit paper per semester and a 45 credit industry

placement component. Semester one of the third year will be made up of a 45 credit industry placement

component and completion of I301 Professional Practice, a paper where current BICT students prepare for their

capstone project and entry into the workforce. The final semester will consist of the 45 credit capstone project

and a single 15 credit optional level 7 paper. It is expected that the capstone project will be sponsored by the

student’s placement organization from Semester I. Figure 2 provides a graphical representation of the proposed

apprenticeship based ICT degree.

It is considered vital to deliver the first year of the apprenticeship-based ICT degree in the same mode as the

current BICT degree. It is essential to provide students with foundation ICT skills before engaging with

industry. In order to be eligible for a placement position, students will be required to successfully complete all

eight first year papers. The apprenticeship pathway will not have open entry; students would be selected and

offered placement positions based on their first year results. It is perceived as a critical success factor of the

apprenticeship based ICT degree that the participants are high caliber students. Consequently, a student

selection process will be developed in order to match student skill sets to placement organization requirements.

The goal being to optimize student success and maintain positive relationships with placement organizations.

Finally, keeping the first year in the same delivery mode as the current BICT degree provides students with the

flexibility of continuing with the traditional BICT pathway if they so choose, or if they become ineligible for a

placement position.

1 Correspondence to Aaron Steele, email: [email protected]

R.K. Coll (Ed.) 24



(ISBN: 978-0-473-12401-4)

Due to the significant role that placement organizations will play in the educational experience of each student, a

contract of expectations will be required for each placement position. This contract will be negotiated on a case

by case basis to ensure an ongoing commitment from both the placement organization and the student.

Placement students will be required to complete an on-campus 15 credit BICT paper during each semester of

their second and third years. The anticipated timetable would require students to be on campus one day a week

and on placement for the remaining four. In their second year students will complete I202 - IT Project

Management, a compulsory paper which provides students with a foundation in project management, and an

option level six paper. In year three, students will complete I301- Professional Practice, where capstone projects

are sourced and students prepare for entry into the workforce. The final year three paper will be selected from

optional level seven on campus offerings. In addition to building each student’s skill set, an underlying goal of

the single 15 credit papers is to maintain an academic relationship with each student during their time on

placement. It is hoped that placement students will utilize their weekly campus days to work on assessments

and touch base with academic staff.

Each placement paper will have an academic staff member who will function as the supervisor and assessor for

the placement students. The assessment structure for the three placement papers (P201, P202 and P301) will

adhere to a common format. Each paper will involve three assessable components. The first will be a reflective

journal kept throughout the semester’s placement. The second will be a portfolio of work which will showcase

the skills learnt and other work based achievements that have occurred during the semester. The final assessable

component will be a presentation delivered by students at the end of each semester reviewing and summarizing

their placement experience. It is expected that each semester’s presentations will be delivered to the rest of the

student body in order to provide current BICT students with some industry insight. The assessable components

of the three placement papers have been specifically selected in order to encourage a reflective learning

experience during each semester’s placement, a technique shown to be beneficial in cooperative educational

environments (Boyd & Fales, 1983).

Due to the shared first year and integration with the traditional BICT degree the apprenticeship based ICT

degree will be framed as a specific endorsement of the BICT degree. This will remove the need for an entirely

separate curriculum and will also help present the apprenticeship pathway on par with the existing on campus

pathway.

CONCLUSIONS

The initial exploration into the idea of an apprenticeship based ICT degree indicates that the proposed program

could become a viable course of study if integrated as a specific endorsement of an existing ICT degree. The

fundamental ICT skills students will be provided with prior to undertaking work placement, along with the on

campus engagement in each of their second and third year semesters, ensures an academically sound graduate as

well as a work ready professional. Although, the program would rely significantly on the caliber of student, the

effectiveness of reflective assessments, and the long term commitment of the host industry organizations, it is felt

sufficient measures could be established in order to ensure a successful cooperative learning experience.

Research will be undertaken to identify the likely industry placement organizations and their level of interest.

REFERENCES

Auckland University of Technology. (2010). Bachelor of Communication and Information Sciences Overview. Retrieved February 9, 2010, from

AUT: http://www.aut.ac.nz/study-at-aut/study-areas/computing--mathematical-sciences/qualifications/undergraduate-degrees/bachelor-of-

computer-and-information-sciences---overview

Boyd, E.M., & Fales, W.A. (1983). Reflective Learning: Key to Learning from Experience. Journal of Humanistic Psychology, 99-117.

Eastern Institute of Technology. (2010). Bachelor of Computing Systems Programme Overview. Retrieved February 9, 2010, from EIT:

http://www.eit.ac.nz/study_programmes/bachelor_of_computing_systems_bcs.aspx

Marson, I. (2005). C++ creator calls for programming apprenticeships. Retrieved February 10, 2010, from builderau:

http://www.builderau.com.au/news/soa/C-creator-calls-for-programming-apprenticeships/0,339028227,339186182,00.htm

Otago Polytechnic. (2010). BIT Information Sheet. Retrieved February 9, 2010, from Otago Polytechnic:

http://www.otagopolytechnic.ac.nz/images/information%20sheets/ICT%20IN.pdf

UCOL. (2010). BICT Fact Sheet. Retrieved February 9, 2010, from UCOL:

http://www.ucol.ac.nz/Lists/Programmes/Attachments/13/BachICT_WEB.pdf

Weltec. (2010). Information Technology Programme Guide. Retrieved February 9, 2010, from Weltec:

http://www.weltec.ac.nz/Portals/0/IT%20Programme%20Guide%2009%20March.pdf

R.K. Coll (Ed.) 25



(ISBN: 978-0-473-12401-4)

FIGURE 1 Bachelor of Information & Communications Technology degree structure (UCOL, 2010)

R.K. Coll (Ed.) 26



(ISBN: 978-0-473-12401-4)

FIGURE 2 Proposed apprenticeship-based ICT degree structure

R.K. Coll (Ed.) 27



(ISBN: 978-0-473-12401-4)

Exploring interventions to enhance faculty involvement in cooperative education

SUSAN M. MCCURDY,1 KARSTEN E. ZEGWAARD University of Waikato

BACKGROUND

It is well recognized that co-op is reliant on three main stakeholders; employers, students and faculty/educational

institutions. Dressler and Keeling (2004) present a comprehensive list of literature exploring the benefits of co-op

to students, while other works have explored the benefits for employer (e.g., Braunstein, 1999; van Gyn, Cutt,

Loken, & Ricks, 1997; Young, 1997;). However, the value of co-operative education to educational institutions

(see overview given by Weisz & Chapman, 2004), often does not report if faculty themselves saw these benefits.

Furthermore, little information is available in the literature that furthers understanding on what faculty members

perceive as the value of cooperative education to either themselves or their institutions, and the little information

available is mostly limited to anecdotal observations during the process of co-op program development.

The insights that are available in the literature indicates that international faculty are concerned that their

contributions to co-op programs are not well recognized by their own institutions (by way of workload

recognitions, salary, promotions) and co-op being an area not attractive enough to explore as a career

(Heinemann et al., 1988). In addition, Matson and Matson (1995) report that faculty felt they lacked knowledge

about cooperative education, and McNutt (1989) and Trigwell and Reid (1998) argued that this could contribute

towards the lack of acceptance by faculty of co-op as a legitimate learning method. Unlike many universities in

North America and Canada, New Zealand and Australia do not have a long history of cooperative education,

nor is there a cohort of supervisors who have training and experience in supervising work placement students

(Jancauskas, Atchison, Murphy, & Rose, 2000). Some of the problems identified in the literature include: faculty

who are poorly prepared for supervisory roles, lacking in supervisory skills and who are poorly oriented to an

external organization (industry and research institutes) (Buttery, Richter, & Filho, 2005; Jancauskas, Atchison,

Murphy, & Rose, 2000).

Our research over recent years has looked at the perceptions of cooperative education held by science and

engineering faculty at the University of Waikato, Hamilton, New Zealand. Sections of the research have been

presented and published over this time (McCurdy & Zegwaard, 2009) and in this work we wish to focus on some

issues that were identified as requiring further research and could be addressed using interventions.

ISSUES

Earlier research ( McCurdy & Zegwaard, 2008; McCurdy, Zegwaard, & Dalgety, 2005) indentified areas of

interest based on: a) asynchronous responses (same question asked differently gave widely varying responses),

b) personal knowledge and experience in the co-op area diverges greatly from faculty responses, and c) areas

indentified in other research that would benefit from further investigation.

Some examples identified were; faculty perceived that involvement with co-op enhanced links and promoted

interaction with outside institutions but it was not perceived as flowing on to individual faculty by way of

enhancing access to external funding or joint research (McCurdy, Zegwaard, Paku & Coll, 2004). Most faculty

did not see their interactions with placement students as opportunities to identify potential graduate students,

nor did they perceive co-op students as being better prepared for graduate studies, despite agreeing that co-op

students learned useful skills for graduate study, developed better writing skills and placements were

considered beneficial for graduate students. Earlier results show that faculty perceive that involvement with co-

op placements had little influence on university taught courses and that co-op students did not participate more

in tutorials, understand their taught courses better, nor were their grades different from other students even after

placements (McCurdy & Zegwaard, 2008; McCurdy, Zegwaard, & Dalgety, 2005; McCurdy, Zegwaard, & Lay,

2007).

1 Correspondence to Susan McCurdy, email: s.mccurdy @waikato.ac.nz

R.K. Coll (Ed.) 28



(ISBN: 978-0-473-12401-4)

In this work the focus is on identifying the key issues and exploring the literature around them. Seven key areas

have been identified

• Lack of basic knowledge about program;

• Lack of recognition of faculty involvement with co-op;

• Influence on faculty careers;

• Giving co-op experiences academic legitimacy to faculty;

• Assessment;

• Linking what students learn on placement to academic courses; and

• Influence of co-op on academic teaching.

DISCUSSION

Lack of Basic Knowledge About Program

It was apparent in our research that there is also a lack of basic knowledge (program structure, purpose of co-op,

education theory) within Waikato faculty and it is proposed that professional development (PD) modules be

instituted as a compulsory part of induction for new faculty, in addition to ongoing PD modules for established

staff. Matson and Matson (1995) also identified a lack of basic knowledge among faculty involved with

cooperative education; there was poor understanding of how the co-op program functioned, what it is supposed

to achieve, and the faculty role within the program.

Lack of Recognition of Faculty Involvement With Co-op

Currently in New Zealand tertiary institutions faculty have to be ‘research active’ to maintain their academic

positions and maintain or enhance the position of the institution for government funding. Faculty face conflicts

between pure research, applied research, teaching, student supervision, and maintaining their own professional

development (Buttery, Richter, & Filho, 2005; Dunkin, 1990). Workload models at Waikato go some way towards

recognizing the value of various tasks and responsibilities (including supervision of co-op students), but perhaps

re-visiting the allocation for involvement with co-op may be required. Informal recognition may contribute

toward raising the profile of faculty input to placement student supervision. It is proposed that a

“SUPERsupervisors Award” be established that recognizes basic criteria of good supervision (Chickering &

Gamson, 1987; Kuh, Laird, & Umbach, 2004).

Influence on Faculty Careers

In the current political climate there is increasing pressure for tertiary institutions to produce graduates with

identifiable attributes and graduates who are ‘work ready’ (Bridgstock, 2009; Green, Hammer, & Star, 2009).

Tertiary institutions are under pressure to become more commercial, self-funding and develop an entrepreneurial

culture (Buttery, Richter & Filho, 2005). Increased interactions with external organizations have been identified by

faculty as a potential benefit from the placement program. It is hoped that steps can be taken to enhance the

interactions between Waikato faculty and the employers who take on co-op students will lead to greater

communication between employers and faculty which may generate joint research activities and access external

sources of funding and skill sets.

The current system of funding for universities in New Zealand, Performance Based Research Funding (PBRF) has

resulted in strategic hiring and varying emphasis on teaching and research emphasis for individual faculty

members. Perhaps this variable model could be translated into a novel workload model for co-op where faculty

who have a special interest in student education and building research from undergraduate level would

participate to greater extent than some others who do not share the same interest. The danger in this situation is

that a perceived division and a lessening of ‘community’ are created between faculty (Resnick, Pontecorvo &

Saljo, 1997).

Giving Co-op Experiences Academic Legitimacy to Faculty

The drive for identifiable graduate skill acquisition and increased input from employers and postgraduate

supervisors has lead to better identification and recognition of skills (Bridgstock, 2009; Crebert, Bates, Bell,

Patrick, & Cragnolini, 2004). Notable among the desirable skills are ‘soft skills’ such as communication, team

work. Increased awareness of the value of ‘soft skills’ has enhanced their validity and acceptance by faculty.

Chickering and Gamson (1987) set out some principles of good practice for undergraduate supervision. Among

these is the understanding of pedagogical practice, and our research suggests that the lack of educational theory

as a basis for teaching and supervision is recognized by some of the Waikato faculty. Buttery, Richter and Filho

R.K. Coll (Ed.) 29



(ISBN: 978-0-473-12401-4)

(2005) mention the implementation of compulsory professional development modules to educate faculty in this

area as this lends credibility to teaching practice.

Assessment

Assessment has long been a difficult area in which to achieve widespread accord (Hodges & Ayling, 2007;

Rainsbury, Hodges, Sutherland, & Barrow, 1998). The issue is exacerbated in co-op because students learn much

that is difficult to quantify, measure and grade (Barbeau, 1980; Boud, 1990; Coll, Taylor & Grainger, 2002). It is

beyond the scope of this paper to investigate this issue in depth, but what may be considered is the division of

skill sets and separate assessment. One of the difficulties that science and engineering faculty have is

‘measuring’ skills like teamwork and initiative, therefore, it may be better to have science and engineering faculty

focus on technical skill assessment by way of reports, and other faculty with a different knowledge base assess

the non-technical skills by way of portfolios and other evidentiary means.

Linking What Students Learn on Placement to Academic Courses

Research on cooperative education clearly shows that deeper learning is experienced when students form links

between their academic learning and their practical experiences (Billett, 2008; Contomanolis, 2005; Trigwell &

Reid, 1998). The difficulty arises in determining how to facilitate those links. At Waikato, the role is mostly

undertaken by the placement coordinators, but perhaps greater benefit would be gained if faculty were more

involved. As yet how this might be instituted and encouraged is yet to be decided but may develop into faculty

having to undertake site visits, or post-placement de-brief interviews so that the learning links become

embedded.

Influence of Co-op on Academic Teaching

There is a groundswell of research looking at tertiary teaching the methods used, pedagogical basis etc

(Chickering & Gamson, 1987; Kuh, Laird & Umbach, 2004; Laird, Shoup, Kuhm & Schwarz, 2008). Of particular

interest to the co-op community is the use of active teaching methods to stimulate and inspire students, generate

deeper learning as students actively participate in their learning (Trigwell & Reid, 1998). One way in which

lectures can be enriched and students included more is by incorporating placement examples in the teaching

(Contomanolis, 2005). This reciprocal ‘learning cycle’ enables faculty to include some real life examples to

inspire students (Parilla & Hesser, 1998), and also novel, cutting edge research from other institutions and

industry researchers. Faculty responses in interviews for this research indicated a reluctance to incorporate

placement examples, with exceptions among engineering faculty and science faculty who were already deeply

involved in co-op. Incorporating the idea of placement examples to illustrate teaching could be incorporated into

teaching development modules for faculty professional development.

IMPLICATIONS

Tertiary educators are expected to teach and also contribute to a research community in addition to other

academic responsibilities. Because tertiary educators often have no training in teaching and lack pedagogy, these

factors may affect teaching style, presentation and content. The development and implementation of professional

development modules and tutorials for faculty may go some way to addressing this issue. Once the modules

have been trialed and assessed they may be useful to other tertiary institutions facing similar issues. Proposals for

other interactions will encourage greater participation with other co-op partners and foster links, joint research

and funding opportunities to enhance individual faculty member’s as well as those of the university as a whole.

Flow-on from this type of activity should encourage greater interaction with co-op programs, where student

experiences are embedded in teaching and faculty involvement is regarded as a privileged activity.

REFERENCES

Barbeau, J.E. (1980). Draw the thing as you see it: The faculty’s role in program evaluation. Journal of Cooperative Education, 16, 85-90.

Billett, S. (2008). Cooperative education: supporting and guiding ongoing development. Journal of cooperative education and internships, 41(2),

37-44.

Boud, D. (1990). Assessment and the promotion of academic values. Studies in Higher Education, 15(1), 101-111.

Braunstein, L.A. (1999). Employer benefits of, and attitudes toward postsecondary cooperative education. Journal of Cooperative Education,

36(1), 7-22.

Bridgstock, R. (2009). The graduate attributes we've overlooked: Enhancing graduate employability through career management skills. Higher

Education Research & Development, 28 (1), 31-44.

Buttery, E.A., Richter, E.M., & Filho, W.L. (2005). An overview of the elements that influence efficiency in postgraduate supervisory practice

arrangements. International Journal of Educational Management, 19(1), 7-26.

Chickering, A.W., & Gamson, Z.F. (1987). Seven principles for good practice in undergraduate education. AAHE Bulletin, 39(7), 3-7.

R.K. Coll (Ed.) 30



(ISBN: 978-0-473-12401-4)

Coll, R.K., Taylor, N., & Grainger, S. (2002). Assessment of work based learning: Some lessons from the teaching profession. Asia-Pacific Journal

of Cooperative Education, 3(2), 5-12.

Contomanolis, E. (2005). Integrating cooperative education based student learning in the college classroom: A study of engineering faculty

attitudes and activities. Journal of Cooperative Education and Internships, 39(1), 11-23.

Crebert, G., Bates, M., Bell, B., Patrick, C.-J., & Cragnolini, V. (2004). Developing generic skills at university, during work placement and in

employment: graduate perceptions. Higher Education Research & Development, 23(2), 147-165.

Dressler, S., & Keeling, A.E. (Eds.). (2004). Benefits of cooperative education for students. . Boston, MA: World Association for Cooperative

Education.

Dunkin, M.J. (1990). The induction of academic staff to a university: processes and products. Higher Education, 20, 47-66.

Green, W., Hammer, S., & Star, C. (2009). Facing up to the challenge: why is it so hard to develop graduate attributes? Higher Education Research

& Development, 28(1), 17-29.

Heinemann, H.N., Enright, J., Johnson, P.E., Murtaugh, K., Reed, V.G., Robinson, V., & Wilson, J.W. (1988). Cooperative Education and the

Academy. Journal of Cooperative Education, 24, 109 - 119.

Hodges, D., & Ayling, D. (2007, June). A portfolio model of assessment in a business cooperative education programme: An interpretivist

approach. Paper presented at the 15th World Conference on Cooperative Education. Singapore.

Jancauskas, E., Atchison, M., Murphy, G., & Rose, P. (2000, June). Unleashing the potential of work-integrated learning through professionally

trained academic and industry supervisors. Paper presented at the 10th World Conference on Cooperative Education, Washington, DC.

Kuh, G.D., Laird, T.F.N., & Umbach, P.D. (2004). Aligning faculty activities & student behavior: Realizing the promise of greater expectations.

Liberal Education, 90(4), 24-32.

Laird, N.F., Shoup, R., Kuhm, G., & Schwarz, M. (2008). The effects of discipline on deep approaches to student learning and college outcomes.

Research in Higher Education, 49, 469-494.

Matson, L.C., & Matson, R. (1995). Changing times in higher education: An empirical look at cooperative education and liberal arts faculty.

Journal of Cooperative Education, 31(1), 13-24.

McCurdy, S.M., & Zegwaard, K.E. (2008, April 23-24). Assessment of cooperative education placements: A faculty view. Paper presented at the

11th Annual NZACE Conference. New Plymouth, New Zealand.

McCurdy, S.M., & Zegwaard, K.E. (2009). Faculty voices: What faculty think about work integrated learning. Journal of Cooperative Education &

Internships, 43, 36-53.

McCurdy, S.M., Zegwaard, K.E., & Dalgety, J. (2005, June). The impact of students perceptions of the labour market on enrolling in postgraduate

study. Paper presented at the World Association of Cooperative Education, Boston, MA.

McCurdy, S.M., Zegwaard, K.E., & Lay, M.C. (2007, April 19-20). Academic voices Part II: what are faculty saying about cooperative education?

Paper presented at the 10th Annual NZACE Conference. Developing work-integrated learning in cooperative education and internship

programmes, Rotorua.

McCurdy, S.M., Zegwaard, K.E., Paku, L.K., & Coll, R.K. (2004, April). Science and technology faculty perceptions of the value of science and

engineering work placements for graduate study and careers. Paper presented at the Asia Pacific Association on Cooperative Education

Conference, Auckland, New Zealand.

McNutt, D.E. (1989). Faculty in Cooperative Education Equals Excellence in Cooperative Education. Journal of Cooperative Education, 25(1), 23-

29.

Parilla, P.F., & Hesser, G.W. (1998). Internships and the sociological perspective: Applying principles of experiential learning. Teaching Sociology,

26, 310-329.

Rainsbury, E., Hodges, D., Sutherland, J., & Barrow, M. (1998). Academic, employer and student collaborative assessment in a work-based

cooperative education course. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 23(3), 313-324.

Resnick, L.B., Pontecorvo, C., & Saljo, R. (1997). Discourse, tools and reasoning. In L.B. Resnick, R. Saljo, C. Pontecorvo & B. Burge (Eds.),

Discourse, tools and reasoning: essays on situated cognition (pp. 1-22). Pittsburg, KS: Springer.

Trigwell, K., & Reid, A. (1998). Introduction: Work-based learning and the students' perspective. Higher Education Research & Development,

17(2), 141-154.

van Gyn, G., Cutt, J., Loken, M., & Ricks, F. (1997). Investigating the educational benefits of cooperative education: A longitudinal study. Journal

of Cooperative Education, 32(2), 70-85.

Weisz, M., & Chapman, R. (2004). Benefits of cooperative education for educational institutions. In R.K. Coll & C. Eames (Eds.), International

Handbook for Cooperative Education (pp. 247-258). Boston, MA: World Association for Cooperative Education.

Young, J. (1997). Comparative international study of cooperative education employers: The value of employing co-op students. Paper presented

at the 10th World Conference on Co-operative Education, South Africa.

R.K. Coll (Ed.) 31



(ISBN: 978-0-473-12401-4)

Is the village common in a cloud? Cooperative education and social networking

DIANA AYLING1 Unitec

INTRODUCTION

Throughout time humans have always liked to interact and share with one another. Web 2.0 is only a digital

extension of that desire. Web 2.0 communities are for us today what tribal or village communities used to be for

our ancestors. They represent a place where we can make new connections, share details of our lives with them,

and discuss topics that matter to us (Why we should care about Web 2.0, Blonde2.0, 2009).

ISSUE

I liked being able to tailor my learning to the specific weaknesses that I identified by going through the course. I loved the flexibility of the course

and found the online discussion forums very useful. All up it has been my favorite subject of my whole degree. McNamara (2009, p. 239.)

This quote, from a law student who had recently completed their first cooperative education course, encapsulates

the great strengths of cooperative education, tailoring, flexibility, and participation opportunities. Students enjoy

and learn more in courses where their individual learning needs are met, and there is room for them to explore

and grow. Learners appreciate sound mechanisms and processes which allow them to participate and

collaborate. These are key features of cooperative education programs. Cooperative education courses are

complex in terms of content, participation and variability of context. As new technologies are developed and

become accepted in education there are opportunities to use new online applications to support educational

programs. It is possible that the participative and collaborative nature of the new applications can resolve some

of the content, participation and variability challenges of cooperative education courses. Could social networking

services and community sites, such as Ning and Social Go, enhance students, staff and hosts experiences in the

cooperative education?

BACKGROUND

Managing cooperative education courses is not easy. Balancing the expectations and demands of staff, students

and hosts is often an exhausting task for course managers. Complexity and variability are increased as students

are off campus, host organisations need to be attracted, engaged, and retained and staff are performing key

support roles. Everyone requires information, documentation and methods of communicating. It is essential that

information is correct and accessible. Inquiries and concerns need to be dealt with speedily. Hosts have often

complained that support and communication from the academic institution could be improved. (McDermot, K.,

2008) Generally, the course manager has been the hub in the wheel and all communication and documentation

passes through them into various online applications. However, this approach has often left course managers

overworked and undervalued.

The course manager has generally created the content and responded queries and questions from individuals.

Traditional methods of communicating with students, staff and hosts has been by email, websites, and student

learning management systems (LMS). These online tools are usually linked to each other to create a web of

interactions and sources of information. The student engages with the course through the course manager and

the online content. Students on the course may contribute to the LMS but hosts and staff rarely engage.

Students, staff and hosts communicate by email, phone and face to face. This method of working has created a

complex set of interactions for each student, staff member and host organization. The number of interactions

becomes even greater as the numbers of students engaged in cooperative education placements increases. Recent

research has revealed that the time taken by course managers to meet the course demands is high.

Administration of the course is a key activity for course directors. Taylor, (2003) reports up to 72% of the

director's time is spent on administration tasks. Clearly, the high demands on the course coordinators time make

it difficult for them to concentrate on other competing academic commitments. If there is a possibility of "online

economies" (Kollock, 1999) course managers are likely to be the main beneficiaries.

What are the advantages of an online learning community for students, academics and hosts? It appears to the

author that participation in a community of practice, opportunity to learn, network, create a professional profile,

share, link together, celebrate and share are benefits that can be derived from an online learning community. The

1 Correspondence to Diana Ayling, email: [email protected]

R.K. Coll (Ed.) 32



(ISBN: 978-0-473-12401-4)

greatest advantage may be the "learning portfolio" nature of the service. The portfolio is the creation of an

ongoing repository of artifacts, engagements and interactions which demonstrate the nature of the program and

how it has been successful for a large number of students, staff and hosts over time.

DISCUSSION

The Marshall McLuhan's ‘global village’ has become a metaphor for the world wide web. The traditional

meeting place of the ‘village common’ are now chatrooms, Facebook and Twitter. Physical distance is no

problem and new communities and connections are forming where interests, passions and concerns are shared.

In recent times, Wenger, White and Smith (2009) trained educators to create online "communities of practice" and

encourage educators to become ‘technology stewards’ rather than transmitters of content. Everything that could

take place on the village common, can now be carried out online with Web 2.0, using social networking services.

Childnet International (2007) define social networking services "...as Internet- or mobile-device-based social

spaces designed to facilitate communication, collaboration and content sharing across networks of contacts."

While engaging in these social networking services students will:

• Communicate with existing networks, make and develop friendships/contacts;

• Represent themselves online, create and develop an online presence;

• View content/find information;

• Create and customize profiles;

• Author and upload content;

• Add and share content;

• Post messages – public & private; and

• Collaborate with other people

According to Budd, A. (2005) Web 2.0 is a state of mind, where there is a service not a product and new

technologies are used to create a richer user experience. The key concept is that the web is changing from a

document delivery system to an application platform and in this process it is easier for people to participate and

collaborate. O'Connell, (2009) suggests that flexibility and personalization are at the core of our re-purposing of

education. If students think about the Internet as a virtual locker, backpack and notebook, then we must create

flexible learning environments which support the use of multiple resource tools, including Web 2.0.

The key challenge in cooperative education courses is to make available and accessible the multiple resources

tools for students, hosts and staff. This is often a large group. Traditionally, this group has been considered a

loose community. Now the community can be connected by Web 2.0, they may be a better functioning and

committed community of practice. According to Etienne Wenger (1998), three elements are crucial in

distinguishing a community of practice from other groups and communities:

The Domain. A community of practice is something more than a club of friends or a network of connections between people: ”It

has an identity defined by a shared domain of interest. Membership therefore implies a commitment to the domain, and

therefore a shared competence that distinguishes members from other people” (Wenger, 1998. p. 45). In cooperative education

communities shared competence is found in the study and practice of the discipline.

The Community. In pursuing their interest in their domain, members engage in joint activities and discussions, help each other,

and share information. They build relationships that enable them to learn from each other. Learning is the key component of

the cooperative education experience. Students, staff and hosts are all open to new learning opportunities while participating in

cooperative education.

The Practice. Members of a community of practice are practitioners. They develop a shared repertoire of resources: experiences,

stories, tools, ways of addressing recurring problems—in short a shared practice. This takes time and sustained interaction.

Cooperative education is strongly focused on the student practice of their discipline within the workplace.

A cooperative education course is a community of practice. There is a discernible network of connections

between students, academics and hosts. They have relationships built on student learning. There is evidence that

hosts and academics also learn while participating in the community. All members of the community are

practices in a particular field. They share commonality in their interests and passion for their work. Their

community is widespread and may be located across the globe. It would appear such a community of practice

could be enhanced by the addition of social networking services. There are some subtle distinctions between a

community and an online community. Misanchuk and Anderson, (2001, p. 1) define an online community as, "a

group of people who are brought together to share and generate knowledge in a mutually supportive and

reciprocal manner." Online communities are very similar to traditional communities. However, they are driven

R.K. Coll (Ed.) 33



(ISBN: 978-0-473-12401-4)

by individual members who desire to share experiences, knowledge and ideas. It is how they are using and

adapting to the technology that makes them unique. Wenger (2009) explains that wide adoption of community-

oriented technology is due to the fact that it expands the available infrastructure for something fundamental to

our humanity: social interaction. White (2009) explains that technology is designed for groups but experienced by

the individual and that users are creative and the success of a social networking service will depend on fostering

that creativity.

Students, academics and staff will not necessarily move easily into an online community of practice hosted by a

social networking service. Reynard (2009) identifies the key challenges in using social networking services in

education environments. She explained that research by Hayman (2009) identified the greatest challenge to

online communities is student willingness to ‘present’ ideas publicly. Students were reluctant to share their

ideas open and they believed they were of no value to the wider community. Reynard (2009) identifies the key

challenge for an educator is to ensure students have the confidence, learner autonomy and collaborative learning

skills to participate in any learning community. Academics and hosts will need to have the same skill sets as

students to fully participate in the community of practice. The course manager’s role is to identify and foster the

key skills for participation and collaboration in the online community of practice. Blogger, Marcia Connor (2008)

suggests that social networking services all involve social skills developed through collaboration and

networking. These skills include traditional literacy, research, technical skills, and critical analysis. The goal of

the teachers is to encourage and develop skills, knowledge, ethical frameworks and self confidence to participate

in contemporary society, which includes communities of practice. It is the responsibility of the course manager

to ensure an online community of practice is “dynamic, rich and reflective” of the students, academics and hosts

participating in it.

It is essential to unlock the key motivations for students, academics and hosts to participate in an online

community. Understanding why people participate online provides useful clues for the design and facilitation of

the social networking service. Kollock (1999) believed there were three main motives which supported online

collaboration. He identified these as; Anticipated reciprocity (an expected exchange of information and ideas),

increased recognition (acknowledgment of expertise or contribution) and sense of efficacy (supporting their

community). In addition, Noff (2008) added his own list including; Connections within the Community (friends

help other friends), Emotional Safety (a sense of belonging within a community), Common emotional connection

(community is based on a common emotion), Altruism (the joy of helping others). Social networking may

enhance student learning experiences in cooperative education. The possibilities on a functioning online

community of practice which supports a cooperative education course appear boundless and exciting. However,

before embarking on the creation of Ning and Social Go, course managers would be wise to consider the

comments of Reynard, Hayman and Connor. Students, staff and hosts will need to be prepared for ‘publication’

of their ideas. They will need guidance, perhaps resources and guidelines, as to what is and what is not

acceptable. There will need to be models and examples to follow. All will need confidence, autonomy and

collaborative learning skills. These skills will need to be acquired prior to or in the early stages participation in

the online community. Staff and hosts will need to be prepared for participation in the online community. The

course manager will need to plan a platform that is dynamic and responsive to the community. It will need to be

rich in content, participation, ideas, and experiences. Finally, the online community will need to provide

reflective space that can be managed to allow private/public reflections.

CONCLUSIONS

Cooperative education course managers can no longer ignore Web 2.0. The flexibility of social media creates a

unique opportunity for managers to establish effective communities of practice to support student learning.

However, there are some identified skills that staff, students and hosts will need to fully participate in the

community. Any social networking service selected to form an online community should be designed to address

these concerns. Once operating, the social networking application should be evaluated to explore the

perceptions of users. A project similar to Groenwald's (2009) or McNamara's (2009) should be undertaken to

assess the value of the pilot social networking media. It is through research into student, staff and host

experiences and perceptions that the cooperative education community will be able to assess whether social

R.K. Coll (Ed.) 34



(ISBN: 978-0-473-12401-4)

networking application enhances teaching and learning or merely adds to the existing tools. The research should

provide valuable insights to cooperative education course managers who are considering developing their own

social network sites and identify whether there are competitive advantages in creating collaborative and

participative learning environments for internal and external participants.

IMPLICATIONS

The results of research into social networking use in cooperative education courses will provide valuable insights

for course managers. The research should identify tools, resources, processes and interactions which support

student learning and the functioning of the wider community of practice in cooperative education.

REFERENCES

Blonde2.0 (2007). Why we should care about Web 2.0? Message posted to Blonde2.0 blog. Retrieved 10 March, 2010 from

http://www.blonde2dot0.com/blog/2007/06/14/why-we-should-care-about-web-20/

Budd, A. (2005). What is Web 2.0? A presentation posted to AndyBudd.Com. Retrieved 10 March, 2010 from,

http://www.andybudd.com/presentations/dcontruct05/

Childnet International (2007). Young people and social networking services, Childnet International Research Report reported on Digizen.com.

Retrieved 10 March, 2010 from, http://www.digizen.org/socialnetworking/

Connor, M., (2009). The new media skills. Message posted to Fast Company.Com. Retrieved 10 March, 2010 from,

http://www.fastcompany.com/blog/marcia-conner/learn-all-levels/new-media-skills

Groenewald, T. (2009). Lessons derived from a work integrated learning monitoring pilot at a distance higher education institution Asia-Pacific

Journal of Cooperative Education, (2009), 10(2), 75-98.

Hayman, A., (2009). TCC 2009: Using social networking tools to build learning communities: A case study of the Punahou Technology Lab School

Ning. Blog posted to Z(e)n Learning. Retrieved 10 March, 2010 from, http://aprilhayman.wordpress.com/2009/04/15/tcc-2009-using-social-

%20networking-tools-to-build-learning-communities-a-case-study-of-the-punahou-technology-lab-%20school-ning/

Kollock, P. (1999). The economies of online cooperation: Gifts and public good in cyberspace. In M.A. Smith & P. Kollock (Eds.) Communities in

cyberspace, (pp. 220-242) New York: Routledge.

McDermot, K. (2008). Addressing the weak link: Enhancing support for the sponsors of student placements in cooperative education. Asia-Pacific

Journal of Cooperative Education, (2008), 9(2), 91-111.

McNamara, J. (2009) Internships: Effective work integrated learning for law students. Asia-Pacific Journal of Cooperative Education, (2009),

10(3), 229-240.

Misanchuk, M., & Anderson, T. (2001). Building community in an online learning environment: communication, cooperation and collaboration.

Proceedings from the Sixth Annual Mid South Instructional Technology Conference, Tennessee, TN: Mid-Tennessee State University.

Retrieved 10 March, 2010 from, http://frank.mtsu.edu/~itconf/proceed01/19.html

Noff, A. (2008). Why people participate in online communities. Message posted to The Next Web.Com. Retrieved 10 March, 2010 from,

http://thenextweb.com/2008/05/24/why-people-participate-in-online-communities/

O'Connell, J., (2006) Learning Agenda Web 2.0 style. Blog posted to Hey Jude: Learning in an online world. Retrieved 10 March, 2010 from,

http://heyjude.wordpress.com/2006/09/30/learning-agenda-web-20-style/

Reynard, R., (2009, July 22, 2009). Beyond social networking: Building toward learning communities. Blog posted to Campus Technology.

Retrieved 10 March, 2010 from, http://campustechnology.com/articles/2009/07/22/beyond-social-networking-building-toward-learning-

communities.aspx

Wenger, E., (1998). Communities of practice: Learning, meaning and identity. New York: Cambridge University Press.

Wenger, E., White, N. & Smith, J.D. (2009). Digital habitats: Stewarding technology for communities. Portland, OR: CPsquare

White, N. (2009). Technology stewardship and unexpected uses. Blog post to Digital Habitats: Stewarding technology for communities. Retrieved

10 March, 2010 from, http://technologyforcommunities.com/2009/04/technology-stewardship-and-unexpected-uses/

R.K. Coll (Ed.) 35



(ISBN: 978-0-473-12401-4)

Yes, but what can they do now? Examining a range of degree papers by industry

readiness criteria

DAVID SKELTON1 Eastern Institute of Technology

INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND

The main focus for the Eastern Institute of Technology (EIT) Bachelor of Computing Systems (BCS) cooperative

experience has been the capstone industry project or internship. Many other applied degree programmes share a

similar focus for student preparation for industry. This paper introduces an ongoing research project which is

investigating a range of courses/papers across all levels of a particular applied degree (BCS) for their contribution

towards preparing the student for industry readiness. It was thought that such an examination may lead to a

sharpening of information technology (IT) skills and knowledge by students and better preparation towards the

capstone industry project/internship and then onwards into fulltime employment. This investigation is running

concurrently with a faculty review of the BCS degree which is also interested in the currency of topics within

each course along with the relevancy of course names. As commentators in recruitment are reiterating: “for most

employers, quality and experience is a must and rather than hiring at 60 to 70 per cent capability which has been

the norm in the past, they want to employ candidates with proven experience who can literally walk into the role

and hit the ground running” (Ross, 2010).

ISSUES

One of the underlying issues addressed in this paper is the value of some academic activity particularly in pre-

requisite papers which are traditionally used as preparation for more industry-relevant and focussed subjects.

For example, a first year Hardware Basics course is presently a pre-requisite for the second year Hardware

Technology course. It may be possible to move some of the theory component of the Hardware Basics to

Hardware Technology then recreate the Hardware Basics course renamed as Desktop Analysis/Support with

more practical skills taught in that first year course. As this example illustrates, some foundational and theory-

based papers may have the potential to be changed to become more practical, and directly relevant to industry

skills required by graduates whilst still meeting preparatory requirements.

An emerging group of students are deliberately avoiding many of the technical, development and more

challenging (technically) courses within the BCS degree, choosing the more academic and theory courses, then

meeting the capstone industry IT project with less to offer in terms of building an IT project for a client. There

may of course be opportunities for these students in an internship role with more business soft skills being called

for. However, one would hope that a certain level of practical technical skills should be able to be demonstrated

by all students graduating with an IT degree (Lee, Trauth & Farwell, 1995).

Another issue lies around the potential wastage of time and early semester weeks while students traditionally

write an initial essay/assignment for most courses within an applied degree. If every traditional written first

assignment could be converted to a more practical evidence-based assessment then potentially 40 or more

courses could be enhanced within a 3 year degree time-span in terms of student industry readiness. Given the

small amount of time that institutes or universities have to work with their students, the tradition of spending an

entire first year covering foundational courses within an applied degree may need to be re-examined.

Foundational pre-requisite courses may be able to be integrated into second-year courses and into re-packaged

first year courses which then contain more industry relevance and interest which will also have the advantage of

being more appealing to students.

FINDINGS

This research project seeks to undertake a review of a range of papers/courses at levels 5, 6 and 7 and evaluate

each in terms of student, lecturer and industry effectiveness for entry-level IT/business employment. The papers

are also evaluated for effectiveness in terms of preparation for the capstone industry project/internship. Without

this entire degree focus some students may approach the completion of a degree and the industry cooperative

experience with limited immediate skills. Although an entire degree can be evaluated in terms of its efficacy in

1 Correspondence to David Skelton, email: [email protected]

R.K. Coll (Ed.) 36



(ISBN: 978-0-473-12401-4)

preparing graduates for industry work, it is thought that it would also be useful to place each individual

paper/unit within the degree under the spotlight for practical effectiveness. However, this single-focus is

problematic as most academics attempt to mix theory and practice not necessarily believing that their students

could perform adequately in an industry implementation of the students work in a particular paper.

One comment from a lecturer teaching project management reinforces this viewpoint: “we try to balance theory

and practical so that students get to think about concepts – or at least be aware of them – as well as learn how to

actually plan a project. The assignment (40% of grade) is to plan a project (they are given a case study). This

doesn’t make them work-ready as a project manager, because that requires lots of real-world experience, but for

most students it does give them the technical skills to plan a project – whether they’d do it well, and have a

feasible plan, depends on their own maturity, business nous and experience in the industry they’re working in”.

So from this comment we can see that the lecturer does not actually expect students to be completely work-ready

in the field of project management after successful completion of the 2nd year course. This work readiness of IT

graduates is a particular issue in this field as emerging technologies have the potential to render curriculum

irrelevant in a short period of time (Mackrell, 2009).

Pedagogic and androgogic advice in teaching approaches such as problem-based learning (PBL), case-based

learning (CBL), team-based learning (TBL) as well as the work-integrated learning (WIL) typically used in

industry project or internships provide good alternatives for assessment for all papers within an applied degree

thus influencing all subjects within a course/programme towards a greater work readiness achieved by the

students. As students involved in case-based learning and team-based learning are experiencing a simulated

participation of the messiness and real-world nature of work (& life) they are more likely to be fully prepared

citizens and workers (Richards & Gorman, 2004).

CONCLUSIONS

Initially, it appears that some papers would benefit from minor changes even if only to the assessment artefacts,

e.g. changing a traditional written essay/assignment to a case study based scenario evaluated with real industry

systems. After the review, it is hoped that each paper/course is able to ‘stand-alone’ in terms of enabling and

skilling the student in at least one small area of IT rather than existing only as a foundation for another later more

relevant paper. Year 1 theory and foundational papers may be recreated with additional practical elements while

some theory components spread across three years of subject majors/minors. Whilst a holistic degree viewpoint

with the WIL or industry project experience as the centrepiece is the traditional pathway for successful

preparation of students according to most universities, this subject by subject examination and reinvigoration

may yield an overall improved programme for students. This bears some similarity to the total quality

management (TQM) philosophy of achieving major enhancements through the accumulation of many micro-

improvements.

IMPLICATIONS

Hopefully, the initial findings will be generalisable for a range of different applied degree programs and lead to

entire programs better preparing students with marketable skills from year one of their studies. Students are

becoming less tolerant of learning material that cannot be proven to be directly relevant to their industry

readiness (SAS, 2010). Where foundational papers are essential then clear explanations need to be made to

students for the necessity of these papers (e.g. maths or data), or the foundational content is filtered within

several papers.

Some criticism of this cooperative oriented ‘spring-cleaning’ of programs may be expected from advocates of

holistic education, however this debate may still be helpful if each paper on a program is either successfully

defended or changed for greater industry relevance. A matrix model will be constructed allowing each subject on

an applied degree programme to be evaluated on various relevancy and industry criteria. This model may be

usable for a range of applied degree programmes allowing institutes to examine and potentially revitalise their

programmes without requiring a full academic board submission or NZQA change process.

R.K. Coll (Ed.) 37



(ISBN: 978-0-473-12401-4)

REFERENCES

Lee, D., Trauth, E., & Farwell, D. (1995). Critical skills and knowledge requirements of IS professionals: A joint academic/industry investigation.

MIS Quarterly, September, 313-340.

Mackrell, D. (2009). The work readiness of master of information systems international students at an Australian University: A pilot study. Issues

in Informing Science and Information Technology, 6, 179-191.

Richards, L., & Gorman, M.E. (2004). Using case studies to teach engineering design and ethics. Proceedings of the 2004 American Society for

Engineering Education Annual Conference. Retrieved 10 March, 2010, from citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.128.8157

Ross, K. (2010). If you’re not fast you will, literally, be last. Retrieved 9 March, 2010, from

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/employment/news/article.cfm?c_id=11&objectid=10630859&pnum=0

SAS (2010). Education Brief. Retrieved 1 March, 2010, from http://ec.europa.eu/education/higher-education/doc/business/sas_en.pd

nzace 2010 conference proceedings...

Documents