An important premise underlying WBL is that it can provide more "authentic" learning experiences for students than school learning.[4] Since work is an authentic activity by definition, WBL should give students the opportunity to engage in real work, to apply skills learned in school, or to learn new skills in an authentic setting. WBL differs from regular work experience because it links work to the school curriculum. Designing WBL to complement or build upon school learning is not an easy task. Work experiences, however authentic they may be, may or may not provide an effective means for students to learn or apply technical, social, or other skills or knowledge intended by program designers (Berryman, 1992). Authentic work is not necessarily meaningful, engaging, or challenging--it may be repetitious, boring, and require little skill. It may also be that tasks which appear peripheral to "purposeful" work may be deeply informing about the vocation or may be useful for other tasks.[5] Without some deeper understanding of work and learning at work, it seems difficult for program designers to determine whether a WBL site can provide relevant learning experiences or how such experiences are linked to schooling.
Since the outcomes of WBL rest on the quality of the learning experiences provided to students, it makes sense to develop a way to understand workplaces as learning environments. Toward that end, we view WBL from a sociocultural perspective. The sociocultural perspective argues that the social setting in which cognitive activity takes place is an integral part of that activity, not just the surrounding context for it (Lave, 1991; Resnick, 1991; Rogoff & Charajay, 1995; Vygotsky, 1978). The context of the social setting can include other actors, the task at hand, the organization of the work, the organization's training policies and practices, and so on. The knowledge, attitudes, or abilities needed for a particular job are shaped by the particular working context, and can only be understood from the perspective of individuals in the social setting (Hart-Landsberg, Braunger, Reder, & Cross, 1992; Martin & Beach, 1992; Scribner, 1984, 1988).
To understand the characteristics and outcomes of WBL, the sociocultural perspective suggests attention be paid to the tasks and activities students engage in as they are related to the social context. By examining tasks and context we can shed light on the two questions of interest in this study: What are the characteristics of WBL environments? What do students learn in them?
What characteristics of work and working might be important for promoting teaching and learning at work? To characterize workplaces as learning environments, we draw on different, somewhat overlapping literatures that examine learning in non-school settings--experiential learning, workplace learning, and organizational learning.
Models of experiential learning view experience as the source of learning and development and pursue a way to examine and strengthen the critical linkages among education, work, and personal development. The workplace is seen as a learning environment that can enhance and supplement formal education and can foster personal development through meaningful work and career-development opportunities (Kolb, 1984).
Moore (1980, 1981) presents a useful framework for analyzing the social organization of education in non-classroom environments, based on a series of empirical studies of an experience-based high school program. In particular, his approach helps define the social means by which tasks are accomplished and the process by which participants in the social setting organize interactions to make learning possible. The process of education is set in motion when a student or worker is integrated into task activities.
Moore's analytic approach begins by defining phases of a task: (1) how the task is established for the student; (2) how the task is accomplished (or not) by the student; and (3) how the student's performance on the task is monitored or processed. He also defines two broad dimensions of tasks: (1) logical-technical features and (2) pragmatic features. Logical-technical features delineate the demands of the task in its more or less ideal form--for example, What skills, information, knowledge, procedures, and resources are needed to perform the task adequately? Pragmatic features refer to relations between tasks themselves and their specific social relations--for example, How central is the task to the effective operations of the organization? What social prestige or status is attached to the performance of the task? and What is presumed about the readiness of the person performing the task?
By looking at social means by which tasks are established, accomplished, and processed, the interactions that constitute education are revealed. That is, tasks and social means can also be considered in terms of pedagogical strategies--whether or not they are made explicitly for educational reasons. Moore (1981) discovered that the social means can vary considerably by situation. Settings differ, for example, in whether resources needed to accomplish a task are readily available to students or not. Moore also found that teaching at work "rests not so much on the rational assessment of the learner's needs by the supervisor as on a host of extrapedagogical factors embedded in the broader institutional context" (1981). This means that learning in a WBL environment can be highly variable.
Studies of work from the sociocultural perspective highlight the importance of the community of practice to learning (Stasz, Ramsey, Eden, Melamid, & Kaganoff, 1996). Lave and Wenger (1991) define community of practice as a set of relations among persons, activity, and world over time, and in relation with other communities of practice. Examples are the culture of a particular science research laboratory or a particular construction office. Through the process of "legitimate peripheral participation," learners participate in communities of practice--as newcomers master knowledge and skill requirements, they move toward full participation in the sociocultural practices of a community. This conception provides a way to think about WBL in two important respects: (1) the role of the students as learners and (2) the difference between the "teaching curriculum" and the "learning curriculum."[6]
Because of their special role as learners in the workplace, students may be viewed as peripheral members of a community of practice who will never reach full participation in the way that Lave and Wenger (1991) describe. The extent of a student's acceptance as a new community member or as an outsider may be important for understanding the learning opportunities open to him or her.
The teaching curriculum--defined by the organization or the community of practice--structures the learning environment by initiating specific learning opportunities or by defining what the newcomer is supposed to know. The teaching curriculum is often goal directed--it is organized to teach specific knowledge, skills, or practices. The learning curriculum, however, consists of "situated opportunities for the improvisational development of new practice" (Lave & Wenger, 1991, p. 97) or the learning resources available from the perspective of the learner. A student may be formally assigned to a mentor (teaching curriculum), for example, but may feel more comfortable asking questions of a coworker (learning curriculum).
The literature on learning and training in organizations also suggests several themes to examine. First, the organization's philosophy toward training and its existing training practices may affect the social context of work-based learning for students. If an organization views teaching or mentoring others, for example, as important and necessary, then adult workers may be more inclined to help student learners. If the organization views any time off-task as a threat to productivity, then employees may treat students as a nuisance.[7]
Organizations that place a high priority on training may define their teaching curriculum through specific strategies or practices to enhance learning at work. For example, "just-in-time" learning--acquiring skill or knowledge at the time and place where it is needed, instead of at a different time and in a different place--is one strategy for meeting high-performance goals (Stern, 1994). Organizations accomplish training goals in several ways, including quality meetings, job rotation, mentoring, cross-training, fostering groups or networks, classroom instruction, formal and informal on-the-job training (OJT), job aids, post-mortems, or problem-solving meetings. A firm's existing strategies and practices may also influence the nature of the learning environment and students' opportunities to learn.
In sum, this literature suggests, first, that learning environments should be conceptualized at different levels--as tasks that students engage in, as a role they play within a particular community of practice, and as a purpose they serve within larger work organization.
Second, the literature points to several aspects of the learning environment that the study needs to address; study design and data collection are presented later in the chapter:
What do students learn in work-based learning? WBL can accomplish different learning goals for students, depending on the program's philosophy and purpose and on the types of WBL experiences provided. Job shadowing or observation activities, for example, are sufficient if the learning goal is career exploration. However, if the learning goals include developing technical knowledge, social skills, or broader understanding of work, then more intensive worklike experiences, such as performing routine or complex tasks, are required. The literature identifies several kinds of skills and knowledge associated with more intensive WBL experiences that are of interest in this study, as follows[8]:
WBL should provide opportunities to learn high-level technical skills on the job. Beginning work tasks might begin with more basic skills that can be learned in a relatively short time and which serve as building blocks for acquiring high-level skills. Technical competence should include mastering procedures; understanding fundamental principles and concepts underlying procedures; building a capacity for analytical judgment; and, in many occupational areas, obtaining computer literacy. Technical competence also includes learning how to learn, in addition to performing work tasks. Ideally, students should come to understand that specific work skills comprise a foundation for continuous learning, not an end point (Hamilton & Hamilton, 1997).
WBL should also help students acquire "generic" workplace skills--skills and competencies that are required for most jobs, yet are distinct from technical knowledge (Secretary's Commission on Achieving Necessary Skills [SCANS], 1991). Three important types of generic skills include (1) problem solving, (2) communications, and (3) teamwork (Stasz, McArthur, Lewis, & Ramsey, 1990; Stasz, Ramsey, Eden, DaVanzo, Farris, & Lewis, 1993; Stasz et al., 1996). Each of these skills may have different characteristics, depending on the work context. Thus, it is important for students to be able to learn and use these skills as required in different work situations (Stasz et al., 1996). Generally, WBL provides an excellent opportunity to do so.
Discussions of skill needs in the changing workplace predict a shift in decisionmaking and problem solving from the supervisory level to the shop floor, where workers must cope on the spot with a growing number of unpredictable problems (Berryman & Bailey, 1992). Knowledge and skill are useful to the extent that workers can apply them to real problems and situations they face at work. While problem solving in school is typically well-defined--as in solving mathematics problems, for example--problems at work tend to be ill-defined, often unrecognized as problems, and have many possible solutions and solution methods (Lave, 1991). Students should be able to apply their technical knowledge to solving problems as they arise.
Many discussions of new skill requirements in the workforce mention teamwork as a necessary skill. Since teamwork is not a skill per se, but a description of how work is organized, whether a student has the opportunity to learn teamwork skills will depend on the organization of work. Work can be independent, requiring little teamwork, or interdependent. Teams can be organized in different ways--some are autonomous and work independently of supervision, while others require individual members to perform specific skills and not overstep their bounds (Stasz et al., 1996).
Communication skills are also widely cited as among the most important skills needed by today's workers (National Center on Educational Quality of the Workforce [NCEQW], 1995). Research suggests that the mode, style, audience, and purposes of communication differ significantly across jobs (Stasz et al., 1996). Students may find ample opportunity to develop some communication skills in their job, but not others. For example, the job might provide opportunities for students to deal with customers, but not make use of or improve their writing skills.
Many studies suggest that employers are relatively satisfied with technical skills of prospective employees, but see a need for improving their attitudes or dispositions toward work. However, it is not always clear what they mean. Some employers may seek workers who have initiative, whereas others might want workers who follow orders. Unfortunately, the theoretical and research literature does not provide a clear way to define these "non-cognitive" skills, which have been referred to as dispositions, attitudes, motivations, and volition, to name a few (see Stasz et al., 1996, for a review). However defined, the literature suggests that these non-cognitive factors can affect performance at work, and that social context plays a role in shaping them.
In our previous research, we referred to these non-cognitive factors as dispositions--"habits of mind" or individuals' tendencies to put their capabilities into action (Stasz et al., 1996). Dispositions are thought to influence how individuals deal with various situations, and are essential for performance. Ability is wasted unless a person has an inclination to use it (Perkins, Jay, & Tishman, 1993). In the workplace, the dispositions associated with success on the job are often defined by a community of practice or depend on the nature of the work such as tasks assigned and quality standards. Thus, the social context of WBL environments can determine the dispositions required and the kinds of lessons about work-related dispositions that students will learn.
Other researchers use different terminology to discuss similar non-cognitive factors that can be developed in WBL. For example, Hamilton and Hamilton (1997) define personal competence as self-confidence, initiative, motivation, commitment to continuous improvement, and career planing. They define social competence as acquiring a broader understanding of the organization such as its structure, relations between departments, roles and responsibilities of employees, and relations with customers. Their definition also includes teamwork and communications, discussed here as generic skills, and rules, norms, professional ethics, and other aspects of the social organization of the workplace.
While WBL has been traditionally associated with vocational education leading to a specific occupation, recent definitions incorporate broader purposes for WBL. One of these is to instill broad understanding of an occupation or industry in addition to learning specific skills. This approach is meant to reduce the chance that students' skills will become obsolete. Breadth is a quality of technical learning in a specific occupation, but also denotes introducing youth to the larger context in which they do their work.
Breadth can be accomplished in several ways. The school curriculum can teach "all aspects" of an industry, defined as including the following eight areas: planning; management; finance; technical and production skills; technology; labor issues; community issues; and health, safety, and environmental issues (Jacobs, 1995). In the workplace, students can learn about different aspects through work experiences. Breadth may be accomplished through job rotation, a practice often adopted by businesses for their own workforces. It can also be done by giving students special projects to accomplish at work or by including them in established firm-wide activities and events (e.g., company picnics, newsletters, and informational meetings) (Hamilton & Hamilton, 1997).
An important rationale for school-supervised work experiences like WBL, in addition to the opportunities available through regular youth jobs, is the need to link school and work. Creating an explicit link between the two is expected to enhance both learning and motivation. It can promote academic learning by providing opportunities to apply academic knowledge to real work problems. Research suggests that applied learning is more robust and promotes deeper understanding of academic concepts (Collins et al., 1989; Newmann & Wehlage, 1995). WBL may also help motivate students to apply themselves in school as they come to understand that school-based learning is useful or necessary to accomplish work tasks. Similarly, WBL can help inform students about the kinds of educational requirements needed to pursue a career in a particular field or industry, and thereby motivate them to choose a course of study that will help them along a particular career path.
Creating links between school and work requires coordination. The degree of coordination between school-based learning and WBL can be assessed by considering the presence or absence of several desirable features, including a written training agreement, a written training plan, supervision of students' work placement by teachers or program staff, release time for teachers to visit students on site, placement by teachers or program coordinators, and class grade depending on the achievement of work objectives (Stern, 1991).
In sum, the literature on WBL suggests that it can provide students an opportunity to learn a wide variety of skills and to develop important dispositions or attitudes toward work. In addition, by creating links between work and school, WBL can enhance skill development by providing opportunities to apply academic knowledge learned in school. In this study, we examined student opportunities to learn all the skill areas discussed above. We also examined links between school and work that could potentially promote learning in either setting.
To study WBL, we employed a multi-site, replicated case study design where similar sets of criteria were used to select participating programs and individuals within them, and in which common data gathering procedures were used across sites. This approach is suited to the present investigation because we are examining and interpreting ongoing processes in real-world contexts, where the processes to be studied (work, learning) are not sharply separable from the context and where the variables of interest are likely to outnumber the units of study (Yin, 1994).
The conceptual approach, derived from various research, suggests a multilevel analysis of work-based learning that takes at least three perspectives into account--(1) the individual student, (2) the communities of practice, and (3) the broader organizational setting. To gain different perspectives on the questions of interest, the research employed several data gathering procedures, including interviews with key actors, a student survey, observations of WBL, and document collection.
The analysis reported here draws primarily from interviews and observation and from selected survey data. Additional findings from the student survey are reported elsewhere (Stasz & Brewer, in press). Next, we provide a detailed description of our research and analysis methods. Table 2.1 illustrates the data sources related to variables of interest.
| Individual Interview | Student Survey | Task Interview | Observation |
Documentation | |
| Learning
Environment
|
|||||
| x
|
x
|
x
|
x
|
x
| |
Practice |
x |
x |
x |
x |
|
| x
|
x
|
x
|
x
| ||
| Skills
|
x
|
x
|
x
|
x
| |
| Connections
to School
|
x |
x |
x |
We sought programs that incorporated WBL and were willing to cooperate with the research demands of the study (interviewing students and adults associated with the program, including employers and worksite mentors; observing and interacting with students on the job). For the purposes of this study, we defined WBL to include any program for high school youth that incorporated structured work experience, paid or unpaid, in worksites outside of school or in school-based enterprises. Because WBL comes in many forms, we aimed to select a variety of programs that differ on key dimensions: the purpose of the program, the amount of WBL provided, and whether or not students were paid. Due to budgetary constraints associated with fieldwork, we looked for eligible programs in Los Angeles County.
We identified candidate programs through professional contacts with local school districts and education-employer partnerships and through previous research. The selection process involved several steps, including a telephone interview and meetings with program staff to negotiate study approval and to identify WBL sites that might cooperate with the research.
The final study sample for this report included three programs and four worksites, as shown in Table 2.2.[9] The section entitled, "Overview of Programs and Work Experiences," describes programs and WBL placements in more detail.
| Program
|
Worksite(s)
|
Position
|
| Transportation
Career Academy (TCAP)
|
Engineering
firms
|
Assistant
office engineer/ document control person (Student 1) No regular position (Student 2) |
| Medical
Magnet High School (MMHS)
|
University
research laboratory
|
Lab
assistant/clerical assistant
|
| School-Based
Enterprise (SBE) |
School-based
enterprise
|
Student-owner
|
At programs where students completed WBL in a non-school setting, the project team consulted with staff to identify an appropriate worksite. We asked programs to identify their "best" examples of WBL--sites where students were exposed to "high-quality" learning opportunities, as defined by each program's own goals and expectations. We also sought both male and female students. The study team held additional meetings at nominated WBL sites to negotiate conduct of the observational portion of the study. We also met with students at the selected worksites to explain the nature of the study. Active parental consent was obtained for each student's participation.
Fieldworkers conducted each site observation over the course of about six days. The goal of the observation was to come to understand the students' WBL experience, with particular attention to the social and organizational context for the work itself (e.g., community of practice and the organizational context), the important and frequent tasks that students do (e.g., how tasks are established, how tasks are accomplished, what is accomplished, what skills are required, what is monitored, how monitoring takes place, what is processed, and a description of the range of tasks), and the connections between the school context and WBL (e.g., school policies and WBL placement policies).
Observations were scheduled to capture three aspects of work common to all jobs: (1) the start-up period, (2) everyday routines, and (3) everyday relations with others. We employed Spradley's (1980) framework for understanding social settings as a guide for questions, observations, and fieldnotes. The social setting framework includes the following dimensions: space, actors, acts, activities, events, objects, goals, time, and feelings.
Since jobs are socially organized and physically situated in different ways, we developed study plans that fit particular situations. Since Transportation Career Academy Program (TCAP) students worked in small offices, one researcher conducted all the necessary fieldwork for each in about six days. One fieldworker also completed both observations at the university research laboratory, but these took several weeks. The fieldwork for this program had to be spread out to accommodate the way student work was integrated into the lab's research schedule. Observation was also spread out for the School-Based Enterprise (SBE), in order to accommodate different kinds of scheduled activities at different locations such as grocery store demonstrations, weekly staff meetings, garden days, and off-campus meetings with business consultants. Two fieldworkers conducted observations at the SBE; one of them performed the interviews.
We conducted two types of semistructured, formal interviews. An interview with each program's coordinator covered general characteristics of the program (e.g., goals and objectives, students served, school program, connections between work and school) and features of the WBL portion of the program (e.g., employer recruitment, number and type of employers involved, types of jobs, characteristics of mentors, monitoring procedures). Mentor interviews included questions about the mentor's training and background, roles and responsibilities as a mentor, training and learning at the firm and for the WBL student, skills required for types of jobs the students held, and connections to the school. Students were asked questions similar to the mentor questions, plus questions about their background and school program. The number and type of interviews varied according to the structure of the program. Each interview lasted from one to two hours. In all, we conducted interviews as follows: TCAP--program coordinator, two students, and three mentors; Medical Magnet High School (MMHS)--two coordinators (at school and worksite), two students, and one mentor; SBE--two coordinators, one student, and one mentor. At all sites, additional informal discussions with students during the course of the observations supplemented the information sought through interview questions.
The second type of semistructured formal interview focused on a critical work task, which was chosen by the observer and worksite mentor. These interviews took about one hour and asked specific questions about the task, following Moore's (1981) framework. Interviews with mentors emphasized the main steps and details for accomplishing the task and its logical-technical and pragmatic features. Student interviews also focused on the main steps and details about how the task is established and accomplished as well as how feedback is given.
During the observations and interviews, the fieldworkers gathered various artifacts that offer additional evidence of teaching and learning at work. These included syllabi or learning objectives for WBL activities, job aids, reference materials, and procedures used by students to perform tasks, forms used for monitoring or documenting student performance, mentor training guidelines, and program policies.
Following procedures developed in our earlier research (Stasz et al., 1990, 1993, 1996), the analytic phase of the field study involved an iterative process of indexing observational data, domain analysis, and the generation of themes. We developed an initial set of index categories that corresponded with our main variables of interest. We modified that initial list by adding categories that emerged at different sites.
Two fieldworkers coded interviews and observation notes. To achieve reliability in coding, fieldworkers indexed several sets of notes and interviews, then compared results, clarified definitions, and identified any missing categories.
The study team compiled separate case study reports for each site, then compared results and identified themes and issues across sites. Survey data and preliminary findings from each program were sent to program coordinators for their review and information.
Authenticity has been defined in various ways. Newmann, Secada, and Wehlage (1995) define authentic achievement as construction of knowledge through the use of disciplined inquiry that has some meaning or value beyond school. Similarly, Collins, Brown, and Newman (1989) define an authentic learning environment as one that enables students to apply knowledge in useful ways. Authenticity can also be thought about in terms of the target setting for the knowledge to be constructed--in this case, the workplace.
[5] For example, hairdressing apprentices can learn the importance of cleanliness and customer service through their "tea and tidy" activities. We thank Stephen Billett for this point and for this example.
[6] In education, similar distinctions are made between the "intended" curriculum (articulated by officials at the system or national level), the "implemented" curriculum (as interpreted by teachers in individual classrooms), and the "attained" curriculum (as evidenced by student achievement and attitudes) (Burstein et al., 1995).
[7] Moore's (1981) discussion of an organization's structural features or its "ethos and ideology" is similar to the notions of community of practice and organizational learning discussed here.
[8] We discuss skills and attitudes in separate categories to understand how they vary among WBL experiences. In practice, of course, these components work in concert.
[9] Since programs and individuals participated under conditions of anonymity, we use pseudonyms throughout this report.