To review the learnings and impacts of workbased learning in a small to medium enterprise in Brisbane, Australia.

To review the learnings and impacts of work based learning in a small to medium enterprise in Brisbane, Australia.

NEIL W. PEACH

Work Based Learning Programs, University of Southern Queensland, Toowoomba, Australia

And

MALCOLM G. CATHCART

Institute of Work Based Learning, Middlesex University, Perth, Australia

And

SHAYNE D. BAKER OAM

Workplace Training Advisor: Training and Education Institute of Australasia, Charters Towers, Australia

The paper forms part of an ongoing research project which is employing elements of action research to further develop work based learning as a way of delivering higher education services in Australia. This aspect of that larger project comprises  a case study of the impact of work based learning on one  small to medium enterprise (SME) in Brisbane, Australia.  

The research findings indicate that employees were motivated to gain a qualification in concert with undertaking projects that enhance their standing at work. The employer was motivated to retain key personnel and to provide a development opportunity that was mutually beneficial to the business and the staff. The impacts on both staff and the business were strongly beneficial. These beneficial outcomes were achieved because the work environment was found to be conducive to knowledge sharing, development and innovation.   

The study provides a preliminary understanding of the deployment of work based learning as a viable option for human resource development in organisations in Australia. The study builds on the framework of a similar study undertaken in the United Kingdom. Studies of this nature have not been undertaken in Australia and it seeks to test the extent to which the findings  from this more limited individual company, case study reflect or vary from the UK study. The scope of the study is extended to more specifically explore (a) the extent to which the workplace under study is more or less conducive to workplace learning and (b) the extent to which the impacts encountered accord with the five characteristics identified  by Sutton(2005) as providing corporate management with  confidence that training has been a success. Through these extensions, we anticipate being able to provide a high level of ‘relatability’ for those interested in better understanding the impact of work based learning on an individual organisation.

Keywords: work based learning, human resource development, workplace learning, high performance working, organisational capital.  

Introduction

This article emerges from a confluence of three areas of contemporary action and enquiry-

1.   the changing profiles of labour markets in developed countries

2.   the changing nature of work and the characteristics of workplaces that are responding effectively to this change

3.   emerging pathways for delivering higher education services in Australia.

It commences with a general review of each of the three points above and then looks at a particular setting (specifically a small to medium enterprise  (SME) located in Brisbane)  which the authors have been working with, to deliver a pilot study of university level work based learning. It is understood that this is the first trial of work based learning at the bachelor level in Australia.  Data collected during this study is analysed with regard to three key areas of interest, being

·      the impact of work based learning on all those involved

·      the extent to which the workplace under study is conducive or otherwise to learning

·      the success or otherwise of the work based approach to learning from a return on investment perspective.

From the analysis some preliminary conclusions are drawn in regard each of these areas as well as an overarching assessment of the relatability of this pilot study to other SMEs in Australia.

Changing Profiles of Labour Markets

In regard to point 1. above - a simple way of highlighting the change that is occurring to Australia’s labour market is the contrast between an hourglass (with its very slim waist and the wideness of the two opposite ends) and an egg (with a wide waste and narrowing at the opposite ends). Australia’s labour market profile is said to be moving from an egg to an hour glass shaped profile (Winter & Bryson, 1997). The hour glass profile reflects the substantial reduction in middle level jobs and the relative increase in jobs at both the higher and lower ends of the workforce(Hackett, Shutt & Maclachlan 2012). According to modelling developed for Australia’s latest workforce strategy, in 2025 Australia could be 2.8 million short of the number of higher-skilled qualifications that industry will demand (Australian Workforce and Productivity Agency, 2013: 9-10). The report further indicates that Australian governments will need to support the achievement of a minimum annual growth of 3 per cent in tertiary enrolments in order to keep pace with this shift.

There is a reasonable level of doubt that the current approach to higher education service delivery in Australia will achieve the countries desired outcomes in regard to bachelor graduates. For some years now, the Australian Government has been forecasting and incentivising the system, to achieve a significant increase in degree qualified workers (Norton, 2013). From a review of information about enrolments and entry requirements, it appears that the primary strategy being employed by the university sector in Australia (to increase graduands of bachelor awards) is to lower entry standards for school leavers (Bradley et al., 2008; Commonwealth of Australia 2009; Marginson & Considine 2000; Norton 2013; Watson et al., 2013). Further, whilst numbers of learners who are able to gain entry to undergraduate degree programs are uncapped and whilst the national government’s funding scheme does not disadvantage anyone for failure rates, this is most likely to be the continuing strategy of choice for universities.

However, there are some doubts as to the sustainability of this current approach to continue to deliver the longer term expansion in degree qualified workers (Australian Workforce and Productivity Agency 2013; deWeert 2011; Norton 2013; Ulicna et al., 2011). This is because the majority of universities continue to focus on the ‘standard’ degree offering, pitched at school leavers, and because -

·    it seems unlikely entry standards can go any lower

·    budgetary pressures may cause some tightening in financial incentives for both students and universities.

There are important efforts especially by some ‘dual’ sector universities (which provide both vocational education and training (VET) as well as university degrees) to increase opportunities for a broader range of students (not just school leavers) to progress towards their bachelor degrees. However, based on recent research (Moodie et al., 2013; Watson et al., 2013) it is not clear yet if this is likely to have a significant impact on the overall outcome, nationally. There has been a suggestion that more flexible education offerings by new private entrants (and joint ventures) will provide the boost in the ongoing strategy to achieve the labour markets needs (deWeert 2011)). That Australia is dependent primarily on the public university sector to respond to the labour market’s growing demand for professional bachelor’s degree qualified people is currently a significant medium to long term risk. Especially given the absence of any clear strategies to respond and deal with the emergent market place.

Changing Nature of Work

In regard to 2. above - the characteristics and structure of labour markets are changing, in part, because the nature of work is changing. Work is changing because, inter alia, both the objects and means of production are changing and because product life cycles have shortened (Australian Workforce and Productivity Agency 2013; Engestrom 2011). As a result, the labour market now requires more people to have more knowledge skills and it also requires people to change jobs (and to re skill) more often.

Workplace learning is a wide and deep area of academic interest and enquiry (Sawchuk 2011). This is not surprising because (1) learning is ‘continuous and life long’ and ‘occurs in all contexts in which humans have to live and survive’, (Allix, 2011:144) and (2) work ‘....in the form of a job is one of the central aspects of our identity’ (Cairns & Malloch, 2011:6). The issue of human identity and its association with work is an important aspect in Illeris’s model of learning in working life, which has at its core the dialectic between ‘working practice’ and ‘working identity’ (Illeris, 2011:328). Illeris’s model of learning in working life has three main focal points being (1) the individual’s own learning processes, (2) the technical/organisational learning environment and (3) the broader social/cultural learning environment. Illeris contends that learning only occurs when both the acquisition processes (through inner psychological processes) and the interplay processes (through the social interaction between the individual and his or her environment) occur (Illeris, 2004: 434).

It is apparent that contemporary perceptions about human involvement with work (and learning) have moved a long way from the position adopted by the ancient Greeks. Birch and Paul contend that, for the Greeks, work was seen as ‘interfering with the duties of citizens, distracting them from the important pursuits of politics, art, philosophy and what they called leisure’ (in Cairns & Malloch, 2011:72). We seem to be moving much closer to the position put by Barnett that ‘work has to become learning and learning has to become work’ (in Sawchuk, 2011:176). Under these conditions, our understanding of workplace learning becomes of increasing import.No longer is it expected that a person’s original training or qualification will be the primary basis of what they do at work over their working life.

Cairns & Malloch (2011) have identified a number of factors that are contributing to the change in the way in which individuals think about their (work) situation and think about how they need to position themselves for long-term employability. These factors include -

·    The ‘Brazilianisation’ of the world of work in which we will not seek a career for life and nor will we continue to define ourselves by what we do.

·    Rapid changes in job categories, products and services with new ones quickly emerging

·    ‘McDonalisation’, homogenisation, corporatisation and the loss of cultural relevance

·    Two out of three people may be unemployed in the way that we currently understand it and ‘work nomads’ may become more prevalent - seeking small jobs here and there

·    New world order with the emergence of the Tiger economies and the increasing influence of economy, social activity and communication (Cairns & Malloch, 2011:12-15).

As well as these points, is recognised that contemporary organisations seeking to be highly competitive need to foster expanded capacity through organisational capital (Garnett 2009; 2012). Cathcart (2008) has noted that developing firm capability requires different types of learning strategies and these can be achieved in many different ways. Dealtry (2006: 313) suggests that contemporary organisations require ‘new management styles, leadership and thinking’  because much of what individual managers have experienced in their earlier working life is no longer relevant. He suggests that ‘If managers do not have the necessary understanding to change themselves it is very unlikely that they will be able to contribute effectively to the development of organisational effectiveness through more well directed and purposeful job performance’ (Dealtry, 2006: 314).

Pathways for Higher Education in Australia

This leads to the contemporary position that the ‘workplace is a critically important site for learning and for access to learning’ (Evans, Guile & Harris, 2011: 153) and consequently, work based learning is emerging as one of many responses to enhance the learning outcomes for both individuals and their workplace organisations. And this, in turn, leads to a consideration of point 3. above - the emerging pathways for delivering higher education services in Australia. Work based learning is a particular approach which seeks to take advantage of this new setting for work - a setting where often, individual workers are individually and collaboratively working on emergent issues and problems. In this situation, an issue for the management of an organisation is to foster an environment for this work to proceed effectively and to establish a way in which this new knowledge will contribute to the intellectual capital of the organisation. Work based learning is a academically sound and organisationally feasible way of creating this environment and for providing an outcome for the individuals involved and the organisation. For the individuals the outcome is a higher education award (that conforms with the Australian Qualifications Framework) and for the organisation, the project or activity is achieved in a manner that enables the learnings to be shared and understood within the organisation.

Of course, workplaces are diverse in many respects and it follows that they are different in respect to the opportunities that they offer employees for work to ‘become learning’. Fuller and Unwin (2011: 51- 52) have developed a way of thinking about organisational characteristics which categorises them along a continuum- at one end, those organisations that are more supportive (expansive) and at the other end, those organisations that are less supportive of work becoming learning (restrictive). This involves an assessment of two key dimensions of a workplace - (1) work organisation and (2) pedagogical practices. The result of the assessment is to be able to locate a workplace on the ‘expansive – restrictive’ continuum. They say that more expansive learning environments are ones that allow for ‘substantial horizontal cross-boundary activity, dialogues and problem-solving and which generate multi-dimensional, heterogeneous and reflexive forms of expertise’. In contrast, more restrictive environments have little diversity and participation in learning is limited to ‘a narrow range of homogeneous tasks, knowledges and locations’ (Fuller & Unwin, 2011: 51-52).

An appreciation of these differences becomes increasingly important for those individuals (learner/workers) who are seeking to match their learning needs (and their career aspirations) with the opportunities for learning (and progression) at their workplace. As well, for those educators using workplaces as a site for students to achieve formal recognition of their workplace learning, an appreciation of the factors that support (or otherwise), student learning and development is important. Fuller and Unwin’s assessment framework provides a checklist for supporting such assessment and is an illustration of how workplace learning research is relevant and useful to work based learning research and practice.

Picking up on this issue of using workplaces as a site for formal recognition of student learning, Baker (2013: 78) notes that there is:

An increasing recognition that people learn in different situations, through a range of experiences and at a their own pace. Terms such as recognition of prior learning (RPL), on-the-job and off-the-job learning and flexible learning have become key characteristics of vocational education and training and have influenced its delivery.

Work based learning in Australia has tended to be focused on vocational education: a good example is the application of work based apprenticeship training, which is well established in many jurisdictions in Australia. However, it is now apparent that the workplace is the site for much more than just vocational education development. Engestrom (2011: 87-88) notes that in contemporary work settings

traditional modes of learning are not enough. Nobody knows exactly what needs to be learned. The design of the new activity (externalisation) and the acquisition of the knowledge and skills it requires (internalisation) are increasingly intertwined.............Accelerated concept level changes in work and organisations require generalisation and learning that expand the learners’ horizon and practical grasp up to the level of collective activity system.

Engestrom ( 2011: 88) characterises this new type of learning as ‘expansive’ and adds that the need for expansive learning is being compounded because ‘today, the life cycles of entire product, production and business concepts are rapidly becoming shorter’.

Of course, the purpose or objective of the firm is not just to achieve individual learning or development (Fuller & Unwin, 2011). A firm’s objective will be generally directed towards the production of goods and services. However, ‘The increasingly societal nature of work processes’ noted by Engestrom (2004: 87) is being connected with the organisational need for what Fuller & Unwin (2011: 49) describe as High Performance Working (HPW). They say HPW is associated with the need to develop ‘much greater employee involvement, the development of higher levels of skill and knowledge creation, and their capacity to innovate’. It appears therefore that the broad interest in workplace learning is being driven not only by new forms of work organisation (such as HPW), but also by a clear recognition that the workplace is a potential place for all levels (and types) of learning. Further, because of technological developments, as well as marketisation, there is an economic need for countries and regions to increase workforce skills.

The curriculum of a work based learning award is built upon and around the learning agreement, established through a process of resolution between the university, the student and the student’s employer (Garnett, 2000). Learning objectives are established for each student and these are intended to reflect a consensus of the parties. The common ground that reflects this consensus means that the curriculum is not borne out of a particular disciplinary perspective, nor is borne out of a predefined vocational or professional prescription (Portwood 2000; Portwood and Costley 2000). This means that work based learning sits in a rather unique direct relationship between the workplace (and its needs) and the student’s personal and professional aspirations. Therefore, unlike conventional vocational or disciplinary courses/programs, it is not separate to or outside the labour market. It is, to a large degree, embedded in it. Consequently, it is considered that the risks, associated with conventional programs (in that they sit outside the labour market), are much reduced through a work based learning approach.

Work based learning case study 

Within the context of these three areas of ongoing enquiry and development, this article sets out details of a small project (at a company we will refer to as SME Pty Ltd) to implement and learn more about work based learning in Australia. The authors have been involved with the provision and development of work based learning for some years and two of the authors have had an education consultative role with SME Pty Ltd for some years. Over time, as a result of information being provided to SME Pty Ltd by the authors, the firm decided to proceed with placing a cohort of six workers into a university bachelor’s degree program using a work based learning approach. During the period of these students’ enrolment, the authors have worked with the students, the firm and the university to achieve beneficial outcomes for all parties and in so doing, to learn more about the ramifications of the implementation of work based learning in Australia.

The next section sets out, in some detail, the specific issues that are important in understanding the relevance and relatability of this case study. The emphasis of this case study is its relatability to other firms in Australia seeking to better understand the development pathways afforded by work based learning (as a viable development option for its staff) and, in the process, to contribute to the body of knowledge regarding the delivery of work based learning by universities. Work based learning has been demonstrated to be a viable and efficacious approach to tertiary education (as well as vocational training) however, there are important limitations to all education pathways and this research seeks to better understand these, so that work based learning is further developed and implemented to achieve the best results for all involved.

Context And Approach

This study comprises two primary phases. The first phase comprises a two year period during which the implementation of work based learning was considered, designed and implemented in SME Pty Ltd. The second phase comprises a six month period, following immediately after the first phase, during which the students finalised their projects within the organisation and also wrote up their projects to enable each of them to graduate with a Bachelor’s Degree (with Honours). The authors used the second period to operate as a review period and to bring together the learnings from within the project and to connect these learnings with material in the literature.

In particular, the authors interviewed each of the students and the business ‘owner’ of SME Pty Ltd and based these interviews on an approach adopted by the Higher Education Academy in the UK to assess the impact of work based learning. As well, the authors added a component to the interviews to gain a perspective on the participants perceptions about the extent to which their work environment represented a strong or weak application of Fuller and Unwin’s High Performance Working (HPW) (2011). Additionally, it was intended to use the information collected through both phases to assist the authors in making an assessment of the ‘return on investment’ to the business for investing in the work based learning program. The addition of this component reflects the fact that for many small to medium enterprises there are a large number of training and development obligations and options and it is important to be able to demonstrate the value of these learning initiatives. The work done by Sutton( 2006)  to assess the value of corporate learning initiatives is used as a foundation to make this assessment.

The interviews were audio recorded and summarised in writing during the interview process. This material was then reviewed by each of the authors separately and discussions followed that progressively led to the characterisations and assessments contained in this report. These formulations were based on the experience gained over the full period along with the information collected during the interviews. The following sub sections provide background information in relation to (1) the company (2) the staff/students (3) the details of the program of work based learning from which each student graduated and then a little more information in regard to (4) the research and (5) the overarching approach adopted by the authors.

Company

SME Pty Ltd has been in operation for 8 years and employs approximately 70 staff. Approximately 30 staff are located in one location which is a combined office warehouse facility. The other 40 staff are a distributed network of sales representatives across Australia. The company sells hair treatment products to hairdressers. The core products are predominantly manufactured in Brisbane under contract to another company. The company competes with both multinationals and other local suppliers. Sales have grown by some 100% over five years to a level of $18 per annum. The company is seeking to expand into both Asia-Pacific and European markets.

Staff/Students

The company had, for some years, invested in the training and development of its people. This is reflected in the fact that the six student/workers who achieved their bachelor’s degrees through work based learning all had prior training and development experience gained whilst working with SME Pty Ltd. These six people worked in the ‘corporate’ or ‘head office’ element the business (which comprises a total of some 15 people not engaged in sales and warehousing operations). This part of the business comprised ‘office’ staff who were engaged in general management, marketing, HR, finance, logistics, communications and some aspects of IT. The final participants in the program emerged as a result of an informal process that involved the General Manager progressively identifying those staff who had two key characteristics - (a) they were involved in core functions of the business that were undergoing important changes and development and (b) they had demonstrated an interest in further professional development and a capacity for such development.

Program

Both the Managing Director and the General Manager were made aware of the scope for their staff to participate in a work based learning program as a result of information provided by Dr Malcolm Cathcart. Dr Cathcart had been involved with the development and delivery of work based learning to post graduate students at the University of Southern Queensland. Through this involvement, Dr Cathcart became aware of undergraduate programs being offered through work based learning at Middlesex University. After some consideration of the academic and commercial structure of the available programs, the company resolved that the six student would enrol in that University’s Bachelor of Arts (Honours) Professional Practice degree program.

The program is designed around the core elements of work based learning with an initial phase designed to review previous learnings and qualifications and to develop a learning plan that encapsulated an area of subject or disciplinary focus. This initial phase introduces the student to reflective practice and also, assists the students to gain an insight into (and to be able to formulate) the description of their accumulated knowledge. This is also the basis for a submission to enable the recognition of prior learning. The second phase involves preparing for and undertaking problem-based/research-led learning through one or more workplace projects. The third phase involves a structured review and preparation of a final report to cover the outcomes and learnings arising from the work based project/s. The program is unitised in the usual manner of higher education degrees to allow student, employer and university to effectively manage time line, expectations and payments. Full details of the program undertaken are set out at the University’s web site .

Research

Each of the authors have been directly involved with the company and its staff during the whole process - from early considerations of the most appropriate program, through enrolment, engagement, assessment and finalisation of academic awards. This project forms part of an ongoing research project by the authors to further develop work based learning as a way of delivering higher education services in Australia. As such, this aspect of that larger project comprises  a case study to explore the impact of work based learning on one SME in Brisbane, Australia. To our knowledge this is the first time a work based learning approach has been employed to deliver bachelor level awards in an Australian workplace. Our primary objective is therefore to embrace our engagement in the full life cycle of this project  and in so doing, as practitioner researchers,  to focus primarily on the ‘relatability’ of this case. As such we are endeavouring to ensure that valuable information is shared into ‘how’ and ‘why’ this approach may prove beneficial to others.

Approach

Having been directly involved with the project as practitioner researchers, the authors regularly interacted with the students, the owners and, on occasions, with the customers and suppliers of the company. The authors were learning and developing a fuller appreciation of the approach to undergraduate work based learning having previously only worked with post graduate students in work based learning. Fortunately, each of us had experience with development and training inside organisations and as well, two of us had formal qualifications and experience in vocational training in workplaces. This was useful because it provided us with a degree of confidence and familiarity with the setting in which much of the learning and teaching was to take place. Familiarity with both the MD and GM was also useful at times when there was a degree of ‘uncertainty’ about exactly how to manage changes in focus or priority that inevitably occur in all workplaces over an extended period.

In effect, our experience and background provided us with the scope to support the continued relevance of the program within the workplace. Dick (2002: 166) alludes to the constant battle faced by practitioner/action researchers in the tension between ‘relevance’ and ‘rigour’. Whilst organisations are generally focused on ‘relevance’ - because knowledge for an operating business must have a performative value and therefore deliver an outcome that contributes to their survival - we were also conscious that our capacity to make a contribution to practice ( in relation to the delivery of work based learning) would also require an appropriate element of ‘rigour’. To better support and position our work (and learnings), we decided to undertake a semi structured interview with each of the six students and the Managing Director ( in his role representing the ownership of the business).

We developed an instrument to guide discussion and framed this instrument to enable us (in concert with our long term engagement with these students and their organisation) to be able to better-

·    assess the overall impact of work based learning and compare our results with previous research undertaken in the UK by the HEA (PART ONE OF THE INTERVIEW INSTRUMENT)

·    assess the extent to which SME Pty Ltd was an expansive or restrictive workplace towards High Performance Working (HPW) (PART TWO OF THE INTERVIEW INSTRUMENT)

·    consider the degree to which the individuals and the company thought the program had been effective and efficient as a company training program. (PART THREE OF THE INTERVIEW INSTRUMENT)

Part One of the instrument has a focus on the overall operation of work based learning and provides an added opportunity for some comparative analysis with the previous work based learning study.

Part Two of the instrument is designed to support us in adjudging how ‘restrictive’ or ‘expansive’ the business was and the questions were based directly on the assessment framework developed by Fuller and Unwin (2011). We regard this issue as very important in developing work based learning because what a student can achieve is, to some extent, invariably limited by their working ‘environment’. We believe that work based learning is only appropriate for students who are operating in work settings that support workplace learning (i.e. ‘expansive’ using Fuller and Unwin’s characterisation). For Part Three of the instrument, we resolved that we would use the checklist developed by Sutton (2006) to guide a reflective assessment of the projects success as a training and development exercise for the company.

The next section brings our analysis of these three areas of focus together and provides the foundation for us (in the final section) to be able to draw out some preliminary findings and conclusions. Our focus for this case study is its relatability to Australian firms interested in future implementation of work based learning.

Analysis

The analysis is presented under the following three key areas -(1) Impacts of work based learning (2) Extent of high performance working and (3) Value of learning program.

Impacts of work based learning

Twenty-seven questions provided the starting point for this assessment and these were broken down under six headings. The authors reviewed all responses to each question and developed a consensus assessment of each question. Then a further summary was done to identify the key issue or issues arising from the questions under each heading. The full set of questions and each layer of summarisation is set out in Appendix One. Table One below sets out the six headings and the assessment agreed to for each of these headings.

Table One: Summary of Assessment for Part One of the Interview Instrument

Heading	Summary Assessment
Context	The context is characterised by (1) role stability(2) role and company familiarity and (3) exposure of students to recent professional development.
Motivation	The key motivations seem to be (1) capacity to gain a degree at work (2) company financial and personal support and (3) co worker participation.
Needs	There was limited clarity of what personal level learning needs would be achieved from the program but the company's support seemed to be sufficient for staff to 'give it a go'.
Program of Study	The company's direct relationship with one of the authors (over some years) played a pivotal role in bringing this approach to the company's attention. Then, the selection of a particular university and a particular award program was based on the view that the final choice was essentially a 'perfect fit'.
Benefits and impact	There is a strong view that the program was very successful for the individuals and the company. The participants clearly identified that (1) work based learning saved lots of time and hassle (2) personal and professional learning was achieved to the standard sought and (3) the organisation benefited through both the projects completed during the program and the ongoing increased confidence and capability of all staff involved.
Value for Money	The business owner and the students regarded the whole approach as good value for money.The program would benefit from better 'explanation' early in the implementation.

In considering these summary assessments, there are some points that bear particularly on the relatability of this case. Firstly, the students selected for this program had been with the company for at least 2 years (and some considerably more than this) and each had had recent educational development experience up to at least the Diploma level. To some degree we believe that this sort of background and ‘lead up’ has contributed to the 100% success rate for this cohort. Secondly, the pre existing relationship between the researchers and key company staff contributed to both company and staff being prepared to proceed with the program even though there was limited ‘public’ information about work based learning in Australia and none of those involved (from SME Pty Ltd) had heard about it prior to this project.

Thirdly, based on interaction with the students over more than two years, together with the interview results, the willingness of the participating university to give appropriate recognition for prior learning, in concert with the positive impact of a total work based curriculum were extremely important to creating what the students perceived to be a good chance of being able to complete a bachelor’s degree. The willingness of students to keep going when personal and family pressures, in addition to work demands, may have prompted withdrawal, seemed to be countered not only by the strong connection between the actual ‘study’ and the achievement of a work outcomes but that the ‘goal posts’ were not too far away. Finally, the support of the General Manager and the ‘kudos’ and positive ‘peer pressure’ that arose from the cohort catching up and sharing experiences seemed to operate as an extra ‘safety net’ for keeping people interested in and committed to the program.

From a business owners perspective, there was very good evidence that the quality of the work projects undertaken during the degree program had materially contributed to the operational development and success of the firm. In addition, there was recognition by management that there had been and continued to be a higher level of communication and engagement between the members of the cohort and with the business more generally. From the program’s perspective, there was fairly wide spread recognition that in the absence of a ‘public’ awareness about work based learning, there needed to be better elucidation of what was involved in the program, up front (prior to students starting the program). Access to ‘non academic’, simple case study material, as well as ‘plain english’ explanations of how the program actually delivered learning outcomes (compared to class room delivery and assessment by examination) are areas for further development that would enhance the likelihood of others adopting such an approach.

In looking at the broadly based impact study undertaken  for The Higher Education Academy (HEA)  in the UK (Nixon & The KSA Partnership, 2008),compared with our much smaller survey (involving only one cohort from one workplace), our analysis indicates a considerable degree of consistency but there are some specific variations. Specifically, in regard to ‘motivation’, the SME Pty Ltd students expressed their interest in the program in far more pragmatic terms (e.g. (1) company financial and personal support (2) capacity to gain a degree at work and (3) co worker participation, compared to the HEA sample which appeared to express their motivation predominantly in relation to learning and education terms ( e.g. - validate and formalise experience; develop greater understanding, knowledge and expertise in a particular field). The HEA study noted that employees tended to be the driving force behind the willingness to support the program. Clearly this is only feasible when employees/students are fully apprised of the available opportunities for studying through work based learning. In the Australian context, given the lack of education policy interest in work based learning, the early adoption of this approach is most likely to be stimulated by the employer. It would take much wider university engagement in work based learning for individual student workers to be the primary drivers of work based learning approaches in Australia.

In regard to ‘impacts’, the HEA study notes that ‘the most commonly mentioned benefit was increased confidence, both in their job and outside of work’ (Nixon & The KSA Partnership, 2008: 5-6). This is highly consistent with the impact we observed with all graduates at SME Pty Ltd. As well, the impacts for the owners of SME Pty Ltd appear to be highly consistent with the experience of UK employers. Each study indicates an improvement in current business operations but also, an ongoing increase in the levels of employee self sufficiency and innovation. There was also commonality in relation to both employees and employers identifying the work based learning approach as being value for money in both studies. The next area of analysis covers high performance working which was not covered by the HEA study.

Extent of high performance working

As noted earlier, high performance working is associated with the need to develop ‘much greater employee involvement, the development of higher levels of skill and knowledge creation, and their capacity to innovate’ (Fuller and Unwin, 2011: 49). Based on Fuller and Unwin’s characterisation of workplaces along a ‘restrictive’ - ‘expansive’ continuum, seven questions were developed to assist in gauging the staff and owner’s assessment of the SME Pty Ltd work environment. From this set of questions, the answers to four of the questions showed a very strong workplace orientation towards the ‘expansive’ end of the continuum. These questions, the responses and our analysis are set out in Table Two below. The responses number 1-5 in the middle of Table Two below are based on 1 being for responses that strongly agree with the statement in first column of the table and responses of 5 being that they strongly disagree with that statement.

Table Two: Assessment of Part Two of Interview Instrument {Four Questions Only}

QUESTIONS	a	b	c	d	e	f	g	ASSESSMENT OF RESPONSES
When you are doing a project or your everyday work, it is easy and straightforward to cross team and job boundaries.	1	3	1	1	1	1	1	The work environment is strongly supportive of cross team collaboration
The company has a vision of ‘career progression’.	1	1	3	1	1	1	1	The students believe the company has a clear vision of career progression.
Workforce development used only to tailor individual capability to organisational goals.	4	4	4	3	5	5	5	Strongly recognised that the company was interested in each individual's development .
Workers given discretion to make judgements and contribute to decision making.	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	High level of discretion and decision making for individuals.

These four answers would support an assessment of the SME workplace as being highly supportive of high performance working - in Fuller and Unwin’s terminology, the work environment is ‘expansive’. However, three of the questions would suggest a less decisive conclusion. The three statements, the responses and our analysis are set out in Table Three below. The responses are numbered 1-5 in the middle of Table Three below and the same scoring system as noted above, is employed.

Table Three: Assessment of Part Two of Interview Instrument {Three Questions Only}

QUESTIONS	a	b	c	d	e	f	g	ASSESSMENT OF RESPONSES
Workers seen only as productive unit- fast transition from newcomer/trainee to fully productive worker.	5	1	5	3	1	3	1	A high level of variation in interpreting the emphasis of management between developing individuals in the long run and getting them productive asap.
Managers restricted to controlling workforce and meeting targets.	3	4	3	3	5	2	5	A degree of variation in interpreting the focus of management effort between 'here and now' and 'tomorrow'.
Training limited to immediate job requirements	4	2	4	2	5	2	5	A degree of variation in the focus of job training with three respondents seeing it strongly limited to 'immediate' needs and four respondents seeing it being much broader.

Analysis of these responses indicates that there is substantial variation between the respondents for each question but also, there is evidence of considerable variation in the answers for different questions for the same respondents. For example the last respondent on the right, noted as (g) at the top of the column, fully agreed with the statement about workers being seen purely as a unit of production but strongly disagreed with the subsequent statements about managers and training. Such responses would appear to be contradictory. This apparently contradictory (g) profile of response was reflected in respondent (e) and to a lesser degree, in respondent (b). The other four respondents showed a slightly higher level of consistency across the different questions and two were more inclined to disagree with these three statements.

On reflection, given the high level of consistency in the other four questions (across and between respondents) and given that, with these three questions, there appears to be inconsistency in the way they were interpreted by individual respondents, it could be that our ‘statements’ are not clear enough and also, that they are not sufficiently differentiated from one another. This is clearly an issue for further development by the researchers; however, in regard to this study, the results for these three questions are not clear enough for us to draw any particular conclusions.

Putting these issues to one side, our experience over the full period of this project fully accords with the general notion that the workplace is an expansive one and this is supported by the success of each of the work based projects and also, the success of each student worker, academically. This is further supported by the information gained from Parts One and Three of the interview instrument.

Value of learning program.

In order for work based learning to be successful it is most likely that, not only will it be necessary for student workers to see it as being valuable, but companies (no matter what size) will also need to be convinced about its value to the corporation. Part Three of the interview instrument was designed along the lines of work undertaken by Sutton (2006) to test the value of training and development activities undertaken and or supported by business organisations. His work suggested that there were five items present when corporate training was considered to be a good return on investment. Their assessment was developed in response to the fact that (a) most often corporations do not formally evaluate the return on investment of training initiatives and (b) it was the presence of these five items that actually prompted company decision makers to continue (or otherwise) with certain training programs. The five items on Sutton's  checklist were provided as statements to the interviewees and their responses, numbered 1-5 in the middle of Table Two below are based on on the same scoring scheme as noted above.

Table Four: Assessment of Part Three of Interview Instrument

QUESTION	a	b	c	d	e	f	g	ASSESSMENT
Techniques and skills from the learning programme are seen to be adopted in the workplace	2	1	1	1	1	1	1	This provides strong support for the results of work based learning.
People show signs of new ways of thinking and working	2	2	1	1	1	1	1	Clear benefits to the workplace emerging from the program.
People have become more willing to share knowledge and experience	1	1	2	1	1	2	1	The program has contributed to the values already supported by the business.
It is clear that the organisation and employees are adopting a shared approach to personal development	1	3	2	2	1	1	1	There is a sense of synergy between individual and organisational learning objectives.
Learners have enjoyed their experience in the WBL program: they are enthused by it and recommend it to others	2	1	1	1	1	1	1	The individuals involved clearly feel that they have gained something of personal and professional benefit.

It is clear that the responses were overwhelmingly positive regarding the return on investment for work based learning, for both students and the business. The strong result on this aspect of the interview would also lend further support to the likelihood that the mixed results for three of the questions in Part Two of the Interview instrument were at least confounded by poor instrument design in regard to those questions/issues.

Conclusion

As noted above, the pivotal point in work based learning as a contemporary higher education pathway is the ‘learning agreement’ - it is struck through a consensus building process between three key stakeholders - the individual, the company and the university. The circumstances surrounding this project involving SME Pty Ltd ( located in Brisbane, Australia) and Middlesex University are such that this tripartite relationship was founded on a pre existing relationship between the researchers and the company. This needs to be taken into account in considering the relatability of this case study, as it is apparent that the early adoption of work based learning by SME Pty Ltd was significantly impacted by a relationship of trust that allowed the company to move into ‘new waters’ without fully understanding the full nature of the work based learning approach. Our findings and conclusions are presented using the three parties to a ‘learning agreement’ as the headings- the individual, the company and the university.

Individual

The student workers at SME Pty Ltd had a relatively high level of work stability and were clearly attracted to the practical benefits of a work based degree program. This combined with strong company support and the ongoing kudos and support associated with being part of a cohort, strongly underpinned the results arising from their enrolment into a work based learning bachelor’s degree (with honours). That all students successfully graduated is a very good result but it is not realistic for others to anticipate a ‘perfect’ level of progression.

However, if students have backgrounds that support recognition of prior learning claims and companies are able to offer sound projects that offer student capacity for a good degree of self directed learning, then it is reasonable to expect much higher levels of progression than encountered by conventional classroom style graduate program offered by Australian universities. This is simply because the time frame is compacted and much of the work for the degree is occurring during working hours. As such we believe there is evidence from this study that would suggest that work based learning would be highly effective in developing and growing the number of bachelor degree qualified workers in Australia into the future.

Company

Having people doing jobs that are consistent with that staff members interests and aspirations is important even if they are not studying for their degree; but it is more important if they are. So to is job/role stability at least for a majority of time whilst the degree program is underway. This provides the opportunity for the staff member to ‘get their teeth’ into a project or small number of related projects and to have time to build knowledge and expertise in this field.

Also, the student must be given sufficient responsibility and accountability to lead or at least play an important role in a project that is going to make a difference to the company’s operations. Trivial projects with limited scope and or limited autonomy will not satisfy the learning outcome standards. Work based learning degrees are the same standard as all types of degrees and therefore workplaces must be more towards the ‘expansive’ end of the continuum in relation to high performance working. Our study indicates that ‘expansive’ working environments can use work based learning as a viable training and development pathway for their employees. It also shows that work based learning can deliver tangible immediate benefits to companies (through high quality completed projects) but it can also deliver more committed and engaged employees who are able to make an ongoing contribution to the business.

University

Having student workers ‘supervised’ by an academic who has a strong background in organisational settings (in addition to (but not primarily) academic experience) appears to be critical to building rapport between the workplace, its workers and the academy. This is seen as a significant impediment to a more widespread deployment of work based learning at the bachelor’s level and above in Australia. As well as this, it appears that ‘inside’ support is also very important. In this case, the General Manager participated in the program and was therefore able to ‘lead by example’ but probably more importantly, was able to fully understand the nature of the approach and the obligations it placed on student workers.

Also, in this case, the academic supervisors involved had a pre existing knowledge of the company and this certainly made the ‘start up’ phase easier, under conditions where the company and its employees were uncertain about the nature and approach of work based learning. University delivery of work based learning depends on the university being able to have supervisors and mentors who are at ease in contemporary workplaces, who are able to operate as ‘account mangers’ as well as academic supervisor and who are able to develop strong working relationships with both management and staff in partner organisations.

Further, this study indicates that the capacity to assess and recognise prior learning (be it from formal studies or work) is a very important ingredient to fully engage and motivate potential student workers who have accumulated extensive background and experience in particular disciplines or fields. Our experience indicates that this not only provides validation of the whole thrust of work based learning but it means that for experienced personnel, they are able to see the achievement of a bachelor’s degree within a reasonable period. Contemporary work circumstances are often volatile even when employment (with a particular company) may be stable and compacting degree time frames through RPL and work based projects are likely to be major determinants if work based learning is to operate as an important pathway for upgrading our labour forces qualifications.

This case study has highlighted a number of features in regard to work based learning that are pertinent and relatable to many workplaces in Australia. This study highlights that work based learning can be a highly effective way of increasing the number of bachelor level degree qualified workers operating in Australian workplaces. It also highlights however, that work based learning has particular limits and is unlikely to be suitable for all workplaces. It is anticipated that the provision of good quality information about how it works and how it is different to conventional academic offerings will need to be provided to organisations. It seems most likely that organisations seeking to obtain better quality staff and to build their own organisations capability will be the ones attracted to work based learning. In this regard it is anticipated that it will be organisations more so than individual students or universities that will see the growth and development of work based learning in Australia at the bachelor’s degree level and above.

References

Allix, N., M. (2011). Knowledge and Workplace Learning. In M. Malloch, L. Cairns, K. Evans, & B. N. O’Connor (Eds.), The Sage Handbook of Workplace Learning (132–148). Los Angeles: SAGE.

Australian Workforce and Productivity Agency. (2013). Future Focus: 2013 National Workforce Development Strategy. Commonwealth of Australia. Retrieved from www.awpa.gov.au

Baker, S. (2013). Making the Implicit Explicit: facilitating growth in others to realise effective organisational change (Doctor of Professional Studies by Public Works). Institute of Work Based Learning Middlesex University, Middlesex.

Bradley, D., Noonan, P., Nugent, H., & Scales, B. (2008). Review of Australian Higher Education: Final Report. Canberra: Commonwealth of Australia. Retrieved from http://www.innovation.gov.au/highereducation/ResourcesAndPublications/ReviewOfAustralianHigherEducation/Pages/ReviewOfAustralianHigherEducationReport.aspx

Cairns, L., & Malloch, M. (2011). Theories of Work, Place and Learning: New Directions. In M. Malloch, L. Cairns, K. Evans, & B. N. O’Connor (Eds.), The Sage Handbook of Workplace Learning (3–16). Los Angeles: SAGE.

Cathcart, M. (2008). Organisational learning strategies for developing strategic capability within Australian Franchised Business Units. (DBA).University of Southern Queensland, Toowoomba, Australia. Retrieved from https://eprints.usq.edu.au/6185/

Commonwealth of Australia. (2009). Transforming Australia’s Higher Education System. Commonwealth of Australia.

Dealtry, R. (2006). The corporate university’s role in managing an epoch in learning organisation innovation. Journal of Workplace Learning, 18(5), 313–320.

deWeert, E. (2011). Perspectives on Higher Education and the labour market (Review of international policy developments) (Research Report) (62). Netherlands: Centre for Higher Education Policy Studies.

Engestrom, Y. (2011). Activity Theory and Learning at Work. In M. Malloch, L. Cairns, K. Evans, & B. N. O’Connor (Eds.), The Sage Handbook of Workplace Learning (86–104). Los Angeles: SAGE.

Evans, K., Guile, D., & Harris, J. (2011). Rethinking Work-Based Learning: For Education Professionals and Professionals Who Educate. In M. Malloch, L. Cairns, K. Evans, & B. N. O’Connor (Eds.), The Sage Handbook of Workplace Learning (149–161). Los Angeles: SAGE.

Fuller, A., & Unwin, L. (2011). Workplace Learning and the Organisation. In M. Malloch, L. Cairns, K. Evans, & B. N. O’Connor (Eds.), The Sage Handbook of Workplace Learning (46–59). Los Angeles: SAGE.

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 (58–66). Birmingham: Staff and Educational Development Association.

Garnett, J. (2009). Contributing to the Intellectual Capital of Organisations. In J. Garnett, C. Costley, & B. Workman (Eds.), work based learning Journeys to the Core of Higher Education (226–237). Middlesex: Middlesex University Press.

Garnett, J. (2012). Authentic work-integrated learning. In L. Hunt & D. Chalmers (Eds.), University teaching in focus: a learning-centred approach (164–179). Melbourne: ACER Press.

Hackett, L., Shutt, L., & Maclachlan, N. (2012). The way we’ll work: Labour market trends and preparing for the hourglass (Research Report) (38). University Alliance.

Illeris, K. (2004). A model for learning in working life. Journal of Workplace Learning, 16(8), 431–441.

Illeris, K. (2011). Workplaces and Learning. In M. Malloch, L. Cairns, K. Evans, & B. N. O’Connor (Eds.), The Sage Handbook of Workplace Learning. Los Angeles: SAGE.

Marginson, S., & Considine, M. (2000). The Enterprise University - Power, Governance and Reinvention in Australia. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Retrieved from http://books.google.com.au/books?hl=en&lr=&id=SLljlFVJVOsC&oi=fnd&pg=PR7&dq=+governance+of+australian+universities&ots=9xJACgHXD8&sig=1akdsP2EEVV_LJkhh1oMJ9TlA50#v=onepage&q=governance%20of%20australian%20universities&f=false

Moodie, G., Fredman, N., Bexley, E., & Wheelahan, L. (2013). Vocational Education’s variable links to vocations (Research Report). Adelaide: Commonwealth of Australia.

Nixon, I., & The KSA Partnership. (2008). Work-based learning: Impact Study. York: The Higher Education Academy. Retrieved from www.heacademy.ac.uk

Norton, A. (2013). Mapping Australian higher education, 2013 version. Grattan Institute.

Retrieved from http://grattan.edu.au/static/files/assets/4d439e14/184_2013_mapping_higher_education.pdf

Portwood, D. (2000). An Intellectual Case for Work Based Learning as a Subject. In D. Portwood & C. Costley (Eds.), Work Based Learning and the University: New Perspectives and Practices SEDA Paper 109 (17–22). Birmingham: Staff and Educational Development Association.

Portwood, D., & Costley, C. (Eds.). (2000). Work Based Learning and the University: New Perspectives and Practices SEDA Paper 109. Birmingham: Staff and Educational Development Association.

Sawchuk, P. H. (2011). Researching Workplace Learning: An Overview and Critique. In M. Malloch, L. Cairns, K. Evans, & B. N. O’Connor (Eds.), The Sage Handbook of Workplace Learning (165–180). Los Angeles: SAGE.

Sutton, B. (2006). Adopting a holistic approach to the valuation of learning programmes deployed in corporate environments. (DProf). Middlesex, London. Retrieved from http://eprints.mdx.ac.uk/2667/

Ulicna, D., Coles, M., Makulec, A., Duda, A., Schaepkens, L., Charalambous, S., & Mernagh, E. (2011). Study on the (potential) role of qualifications frameworks in supporting mobility of workers and learners European Commission and Australian Department of Education, Employment and Workplace Relations Joint EU-Australia Study. DEEWR & DG EAC. Retrieved from http://ec.europa.eu/education/library/study/2011/australia_en.pdf

Watson, L., Hagel, P., & Chesters, J. (2013). A half-open door: pathways for VET award holders into Australian universities (Research Report). Adelaide: Commonwealth of Australia.

Winter, I., & Bryson, L. (1997). Social Polarisation in a Suburban Community: An Australian Newtown Revisited. Family Matters, Winter(47), 33–37.

Appendix One

Table Five: List of questions, summary of responses and summary in regard to each of the sections of the questionnaire.

QUESTIONS	SUMMARY OF RESPONSES	SUMMARY IN REGARD TO WHOLE SECTION
	(A) CONTEXT
What is your current role? Is this the same role you had when you began the programme of study? If no, what was your role at the time?	All respondents were in their role for the duration of the program	The context is characterised by (1) role stability(2) role and company familiarity and (3) exposure of students to recent professional development.
How long have/had you been in your role when you began the programme of study?	All respondents had been in their role for at least one year prior to starting the program and most had been in that role for more than four years. Therefore they knew their job and knew what its primary requirements were.
How long have you worked for your current organisation? (Please clarify whether it is the same organisation as when they began their programme of study)	All respondents had worked for the company for at least two years and most had been with the company for four or more years.
What previous roles/jobs have you had prior to the one when you began the programme of study?	Previous roles were mostly similar to the ones being undertaken.
What qualifications do you have (e.g. undergraduate degree)? And, what was the highest level of qualification you had when you began the programme of study	All respondents had tertiary qualifications at least to Diploma level- one had a Bachelor's degree and two had a Masters qualification. (One of the Master qualified respondents was the owner.)
Have you undertaken any other professional development? If yes, what specifically? If no, why not?	Most had been exposed in recent years to other forms of professional development.
QUESTIONS	SUMMARY OF RESPONSES	SUMMARY IN REGARD TO WHOLE SECTION
	(B) MOTIVATION
What motivated you to undertake the programme of study? (Please explore the extent to which their motivation was self-generated or was more to do with their employer)	Motivations included - company support; coworker participation and opportunity for obtaining a degree in the workplace.	The key motivations seem to be (1) company financial and personal support (2) capacity to gain a degree at work and (3) co worker participation.
Did you have a sense of a career and career path when you began the programme of study? If yes, what were your career aspirations? And, have these changed since?	Whilst students indicated a 'career orientation' some mentioned that the program assisted them in defining their preferences more clearly.
QUESTIONS	SUMMARY OF RESPONSES	SUMMARY IN REGARD TO WHOLE SECTION
	(C) NEEDS
Prior to beginning the programme of study were you clear about what you hoped to get out of the learning and development? If yes, what were your expectations?	There was an overwhelming lack of clarity about what students hoped to get out of the program - this appeared to be particularly fuelled by the 'novel' nature of the program being pursued - viz. work based learning.	There was limited clarity of what personal level learning needs would be achieved from the program but the company's support seemed to be sufficient for staff to 'give it a go'.
Was there any formal/informal process (supported by your employer) to help you to identify what you hoped to get out of the programme of study?	Yes - the company provided the opportunity for individual and group discussion about the program.
QUESTIONS	SUMMARY OF RESPONSES	SUMMARY IN REGARD TO WHOLE SECTION
	(D) PROGRAM OF STUDY
Why did you choose this particular programme of study?	The primary reasons for students to choose this program revolved around - company support;work based nature of the learning;recognition of prior learning.	The company's direct relationship with one of the authors (over some years) played a pivotal role in bringing this approach to the company's attention. Then, the selection of a particular university and a particular award program was based on the view that the final choice was essentially a 'perfect fit'.
How did you hear about this particular programme of study?	It was only direct information through the workplace that alerted both students and employer to the program.
Why did you choose the particular HE provider?	The company's direct relationship with the provider.
Did you consider other options? If so, what other options were considered? So why was this option selected?	Virtually no alternatives were considered as there was a strong perception that this was the 'perfect fit'
Did your employer support you in undertaking the programme of study? If so, in what ways? If not, why do you think this was the case? And, what support would you have benefited from?	All respondents considered the company to be supportive of the whole approach. This support included - financial support, allocation of some time for some program activities and overall support for the 'cohort' to meet and discuss issues/developments.
QUESTIONS	SUMMARY OF RESPONSES	SUMMARY IN REGARD TO WHOLE SECTION
	(E) BENEFITS AND IMPACT
To what extent did the programme of study meet your expectations and needs? And, in what ways?	All students achieved their awards. The students noted the work based nature of the program gave them more time to focus on the their study/projects with limited time 'wasted' in getting to and from a university.	There is a strong view that the program was very successful for the individuals and the company. The participants clearly identified that (1) work based learning saved lots of time and hassle (2) personal and professional learning was achieved to the standard sought and (3) the organisation benefited through both the projects completed during the program and the ongoing increased confidence and capability of all staff involved.
Did you benefit personally from the learning and development? If so, in what ways? If not, had you expected to benefit? And, why	All participants were clear in recognising the benefits to them personally. The specific benefits included - discipline gained from meeting deadlines;project management;increased recognition in the company;sense of achievement; scope for mentoring others, reflective practice and written communication.
Did you benefit professionally from the learning and development? If so, in what ways? If not, had you expected to benefit? And, why do you think this was the case? (Please provide evidence to support your answers)	Professional benefits included a number of those recognised under 'personal' benefits above. Several respondents noted increased confidence and the increased willingness of individuals to contribute to the companies activities.
Has your organisation benefited from you undertaking study at a higher level? If so, in what ways? How do you think? If not, why do you think this has been the case? (Please provide evidence to support your answers)	Organisation benefits identified include - time and effort put into company projects used as part of students gaining their awards. Enhanced work/team collaboration. Student knowledge of new methodologies for dealing with issues and problems.
Has anything changed as a result? If so, what has changed as a result and what has been the impact? (Please provide evidence to support your answer)	Nearly all respondents noted a 'stepping up' of students to take on more responsibility and to deliver a higher level of service to the company.
Is there anything else that had a significant impact on your performance at work?	Students identified improved work performance in relation to - capacity to delegate and share; standard of written reports;communication between the company and the company's sales reps;stock management.
QUESTIONS	SUMMARY OF RESPONSES	SUMMARY IN REGARD TO WHOLE SECTION
	(F) VALUE FOR MONEY
What was the financial cost of the programme of study? And, who paid and in what proportions?	On average it cost $10k for each student to achieve their Bachelor's degree.	The business owner and the students regarded the whole approach as good value for money.The program would benefit from better 'explanation' early in the implementation.
Was it good use of your time? If so, why? If not, why do you think this was the case?	All students thought that the work based learning approach was a very good use of time for both students and the workplace.
Do you think your employer thought it was good use of your time/value for money?	Students anticipated that the business owners would have thought it was an effective use of time.
Are you considering further study at any level in the future? If so, what are you considering?	Most students are open to the potential of future study.
Would you consider or are you currently undertaking further higher level study? If so, what?	Most students are open to the potential of future study. However, no one is committed to a particular path at this stage.
Is there anything else you would like to add?	Students identified a need for greater 'clarity' at the beginning of the program to support student engagement. Also, 'cohort' involvement seemed to be generally positive.

Author Details:

Corresponding Author:

Dr Neil Peach

Neil is an educational adviser who has been working in the field of work based learning since finishing in his role as the Chief Operating Officer at the University of Southern Queensland some five years ago. Neil has successfully supervised students at the Masters and Doctoral levels in work based learning during this time. Contact: neil.peach@gmail.com

Author:

Dr Malcolm Cathcart

Malcolm has had some twenty-five years experience in educational consultancy and in the delivery of quality training to organisations both within the corporate and government sectors in Australia. Malcolm's educational consultancy to his clients has focused on linking the training programs to accredited courses at all levels of tertiary education.

Author:

Dr Shayne Baker OAM

Shayne brings a strong background in adult education with senior management experience from the vocational, general education and more recently as an educator in the higher education sector. A great deal of Shayne's work involved managing change agendas through embracing the concepts of work based learning and he is actively involved in writing and publishing vocational education material, providing advice at a national & international  level in the field of education and training and promoting the concepts of work based learning to post graduate students.