Finding the 'sweet spot' for your work based learning project
Finding the 'sweet spot' for your work based learning project
My last post on work based learning discussed the issue of the differences between work based learning and other pathways for students to achieve university awards/degrees. That post raised the argument that it was important to a fuller understanding of work based learning to not only focus on the academic dimensions of work based learning that were different, but to also recognise that differences needed to understood from the perspective of the student and also, from the perspective of the university in regard to 'delivering' work based learning. I undertook to explore the differences of work based learning having regard to these three dimensions - (1) academic (2) student and (3) university.
This post picks up on one of the most critical differences between work based learning and other awards. The difference I am alluding to could be described as the ‘rationale’ or the ‘contribution’ or the ‘knowledge/subject area’ of the work based award. Recently, in a discussion with colleague/student Donnell Davis, she coined the term ‘sweet spot’ to describe the subject of this post. The term sweet spot is intended to describe that place [and time] where divergent elements and forces come together for outstanding results. For a batsperson in cricket the sweet spot is the place and time when the batsperson’s skill, judgement and execution come to a confluence and the ball and bat collide at the ‘sweet spot’ [it is both a place and a time] and the result is an outstanding shot from the batsperson that sends the ball racing to the boundary. You may be asking - what does a cricketer’s sweet spot have to do with work based learning.
A diagram developed by Professor Jonathon Garnett [p.65, 2000] sets out comprehensively, the work based learners ‘sweet spot’. It is reproduced below and I believe that the diagram contains two primary dimensions - one dimension comprises ‘interests’ and the other dimension comprises elements or components of a work based learning award. The interests represented are shown in the central sphere and cover-
My last post on work based learning discussed the issue of the differences between work based learning and other pathways for students to achieve university awards/degrees. That post raised the argument that it was important to a fuller understanding of work based learning to not only focus on the academic dimensions of work based learning that were different, but to also recognise that differences needed to understood from the perspective of the student and also, from the perspective of the university in regard to 'delivering' work based learning. I undertook to explore the differences of work based learning having regard to these three dimensions - (1) academic (2) student and (3) university.
This post picks up on one of the most critical differences between work based learning and other awards. The difference I am alluding to could be described as the ‘rationale’ or the ‘contribution’ or the ‘knowledge/subject area’ of the work based award. Recently, in a discussion with colleague/student Donnell Davis, she coined the term ‘sweet spot’ to describe the subject of this post. The term sweet spot is intended to describe that place [and time] where divergent elements and forces come together for outstanding results. For a batsperson in cricket the sweet spot is the place and time when the batsperson’s skill, judgement and execution come to a confluence and the ball and bat collide at the ‘sweet spot’ [it is both a place and a time] and the result is an outstanding shot from the batsperson that sends the ball racing to the boundary. You may be asking - what does a cricketer’s sweet spot have to do with work based learning.
A diagram developed by Professor Jonathon Garnett [p.65, 2000] sets out comprehensively, the work based learners ‘sweet spot’. It is reproduced below and I believe that the diagram contains two primary dimensions - one dimension comprises ‘interests’ and the other dimension comprises elements or components of a work based learning award. The interests represented are shown in the central sphere and cover-
- Corporate Interests
- Individual Interests
The elements represented are shown as outer spheres and cover-
- learning agreement
- research methods
- projects
- portfolio
- accredited wbl
- accredited taught courses.
It appears to me that the size of the spheres to some extent represents the significance of the issues to the outcome. The large central sphere covering corporate and personal interests sets the pathway for the lesser elements of work based learning - these core interests ‘drive’ or ‘underpin’ the program and the smaller outer circles support this direction. My work with students in both Masters and Doctoral work based learning programs has given me the opportunity to more fully appreciate this territory - this area of the ‘sweet spot’. Because it is at this sweet spot that the success or otherwise of the program is dictated. My work has given me the opportunity to put forward some suggestions for enhancement of this very effective model of work work based learning. My suggestions are as follows.
First, in relation to interests, I believe that there are three significant interests that need to be represented and that each warrants its own circle. These interests are the two already identifided by Prof Garnett plus one more - Professional/Academic Knowledge. It appears to me that a student is seeking to find a point of convergence that enables them, not only to (1)meet corporate objectives and (2) statisfy,at least in part, personal development objectives
but, just as importantly to (3) make a contribution to their community of practice/knowledge area/ profession.
Second, in relation to the secondary elements of the work based learning program, I think there is an additional element that flows directly from the additional interest identified above. This extra element is ‘Benchmarking’ and covers such things as reviewing the established literature, as well as industry and professional bodies of knowledge about ‘best practice’ in the area under investigation and speaking with colleagues about how they have undertaken similar or related projects.
It is apparent that the ground at the convergence of the competing interests for a student of work based learning is thixotropic and that substantial effort energy and intellect is required to find the ‘sweet spot’ that represents the course of action [project] that will deliver sufficient results for the work based learner/researcher to ‘hit a boundary’ [ pass their exam]. In such a setting, it is apparent that the learner -
- is not being directed by one particular interest and must negotiate diligently and carefully to mark out the ‘sweet spot’
- must progressively learn what sits behind each ‘interest’ and become adept at meeting these needs during the course of the project [not just at the beginning]
- will face considerable risks along the way in righting the balance of these interests as they are bound to come out of ‘harmony’ at different points in the project
- will need to learn how to ‘juggle’ competing demands as different interests compel different and sometimes competing effort and action
Under these circumstances the university, in supporting work based learning, needs to
- provide expertise, personal support and knowledge infrastructure for each of the phases of complexity and difficulty encountered by the student
- assist the learner to put in place sufficient ‘support’ in the work place to underwrite the progression of the project/research
- provide particular advice to the student as a practitioner researcher to guide the students understanding of the appropriate [research] methodologies consistent with both academic and professional expectations
The academic starting point for work based learning awards is strikingly different in that, for it to be effective, it must -
- not be directed by the supervisor’s own research interests
- recognise that this is not a ‘gap in the literature’ starting point although, the need to satisfy the level of contribution appropriate to the level of the award is one of the interests that must be served by the project
- clearly recognise that the daily battle between ‘relevance and rigour’ [Dick, 2000] will need to be dealt with by the most appropriate research methods and practice and in many instances will involve a melding of conventional methodologies that are highly contingent on the workplace setting as well as the professional and personal circumstances of the learner/researcher [Lester, 2010]
Summary
The work based learners ‘sweet spot’ is that thixotropic place [in time] where divergent interests are managed to the point where the student/researcher is able to establish a project that will bring results for the individual, their organisation and their profession. This takes focus and guile and a high level of resourcefullness. Work based learning post graduate awards provide the opportunity for considerable satisfaction and achievement but finding the ‘sweet spot’ is not always easy and requires a strong recognition of the differences in undertaking such a program. The differences are not just academic - the differences must be fully understood by the student and the university [through the wbl supervisor] and must be dealt with through all phases of the work based award.
The work based learners ‘sweet spot’ is that thixotropic place [in time] where divergent interests are managed to the point where the student/researcher is able to establish a project that will bring results for the individual, their organisation and their profession. This takes focus and guile and a high level of resourcefullness. Work based learning post graduate awards provide the opportunity for considerable satisfaction and achievement but finding the ‘sweet spot’ is not always easy and requires a strong recognition of the differences in undertaking such a program. The differences are not just academic - the differences must be fully understood by the student and the university [through the wbl supervisor] and must be dealt with through all phases of the work based award.
References
Garnett, J. (2000).
Organisational Culture and the Role of Learning Agreements. In D. Portwood
& C. Costley (Eds.), Work Based
Learning and the University Seda Paper 109 (pp. 58-66). Birmingham: Staff and Educational Develpment Association.
I
Comments
Post a Comment