| Synopsis |
Studies
of work experience have perpetuated the idea that the work contexts
within which work experience takes place are stable, unchanging, transparent
environments in which students can easily learn and develop. The project
has therefore addressed the concept of ‘context’ as the starting
point for considering learning through work experience, arguing that any
analysis of work experience should take account of, first, different types
of context (eg, education and work – whether knowledge ‘rich’ or ‘poor’),
different strategies within contexts and the influence of context on the
process of learning; second, the extent to which students have to learn
how to ‘negotiate’ their learning during work experience; and, third, the
extent to which students must be supported to relate formal and informal
learning, given that knowledge is unevenly distributed in workplaces.
On
the basis of this analysis a typology of five models (described
as traditional, experiential, generic, work process and connective) of
work experience has been developed. The connective model may provide
the basis for a more productive and useful relationship between formal
and informal learning since it addresses how work experience can enable
students to take explicit account of the learning which occurs within and
between the different contexts of education and work. The term 'connectivity'
defines the purpose of the pedagogic approach which would be required in
order to take explicit account of the vertical and horizontal development
of learners.
The
‘connective model’ is further associated with a new, analytical framework
which explicitly provides a ‘situated’ perspective on the relationship
between work experience, innovation and quality.
The
implications of this re-conceptualisation of work experience are evident
in relation to the question of the ‘transfer of learning’. The concept
of transfer has traditionally rested upon the idea that learning simply
consists of acquiring knowledge and skill in one context (a workplace)
and reapplying it in another (another workplace). The main problem with
this conception of skill and transfer is that it neglects the influence
of context, resources and people upon the process of learning. Once workplaces
are viewed as ‘activity systems’, with their own divisions of labour, rules
and procedures, it is possible to replace the notion of ‘transferability’
with the concept of ‘boundary crossing’. This reflects the recognition
that students engage successfully in different tasks and in different contexts
by demonstrating ‘polycontextual skills’ (Griffiths
et al. 2001, pp. 4-6, 53). |