THE HELP IS HELPFUL: SOMATOLOGY STUDENTS’ REFLECTIONS OF WORK INTEGRATED LEARNING S.E. Seyama Department of Somatology, University of Johannesburg (SOUTH AFRICA)
[email protected]
Abstract Producing work-ready graduates has become one of the most significant and urgent mandates of South African (SA) higher education institutions (HEIs) due to the global economic outlook characterized by underperformance and due to the apparent unpreparedness of graduates currently being produced for the job market. Since Somatology is an inherently vocational program, the learning modules in which knowledge and skills are acquired, whether during theory lectures and practical sessions, should be complemented with a well-structured authentic learning within work-based contexts. This qualitative paper explores Somatology students’ experiences and perceptions regarding the impact of Work Integrated Learning (WIL) in equipping them with the requisite industry competencies that can render them employable and enable them to add value to their jobs. To this end, a case study was conducted by means of interview focus groups with second and third year Somatology students. Students reported varying positive and negative implementation practices of WIL within the institution (in-house) and within industry. The students’ perception is that in both environments WIL facilitates transferability of learning into work-contexts. In their view, in-industry training is more demanding owing to the stringent requirements to meet employer and client expectations and due to lack of appropriate supervision. These exigencies and challenges of the workplace enable the students to reassess their knowledge and skills; whereas, in-house WIL is more relaxed, providing adequate supervision, with students receiving assistance when necessary. The noted lack of supervision of students’ WIL in industry coupled with the lack of collaborative service-level agreement between the institution and industry led the researcher to question the extent to which the Somatology department at the institution can authenticate students’ WIL contexts. Keywords: Somatology, industry competencies, WIL, supervision.
1
INTRODUCTION
This paper reports on a study conducted with the aim of exploring Somatology students’ perceptions of their experience of Work-Integrated Learning (WIL), with a focus on its effectiveness in equipping them with work-ready competencies. Based on my anecdotal experience as a lecturer within the department, there is inadequate empirical evidence to support the efficacy of WIL. The department through the development of the relevant guidelines, supervision, and assessment solely drives the implementation of the WIL program. Accordingly, the quality assurance of WIL is undertaken only within the institution at the in-house clinic, as the department is not involved in students’ industry placement, supervision, monitoring and assessment. The paper starts by providing the research context of WIL within the departments of Somatology at public higher education institutions (HEIs), focusing on a particular institution. It then clarifies the research methodology and process undertaken, followed by the discussion of findings. Lastly, the paper concludes and outlines the recommendations as informed by the findings and literature.
2
RESEARCH CONTEXT: WORK INTEGRATED LEARNING IN SOMATOLOGY
The Somatology qualification offers a full-time multi-disciplinary education and training in health and skincare that encapsulates the various aspects of the wellness industry. On completion of the program a “Somatologist will have the necessary competencies to apply remedial and holistic soma therapies, technologies and strategies appropriate to a health and skincare orientated environment” (Faculty of Health Sciences, 2013). Since the program is vocationally oriented, its design integrates WIL as one of the modules within a 360-degree National diploma (NDip) qualification (Faculty of Health Sciences, nd rd 2010). The WIL component is registered as Somatology practical training module for 2 and 3 year
Proceedings of EDULEARN13 Conference 1st-3rd July 2013, Barcelona, Spain
2311
ISBN: 978-84-616-3822-2
levels of study and a continuous assessment model is utilized to evaluate students’ competency at the institution’s clinic. Within the context of health and skincare training, WIL has always been an inherent requirement for the completion of the undergraduate qualification of a National Diploma in Somatology as offered by public HEIs (Faculty of Health Sciences, 2013; CPUT, 2011). WIL as implemented at the institution’s wellness clinic replicates a work setting enabling students to work on clients to develop expertise in health and skin-care therapies CPUT (2011). Also the South African Association of Health and Skincare Professionals (SAAHSP), the main professional association in the country, also mandates the integration of WIL in its privately administered programs. nd
In line with the qualification regulations, students are required to start with WIL from the 2 year of rd studies and complete it in the 3 year (Faculty of Health Sciences, 2010). However, their first exposure to clients is at the Somatology clinic on campus where they are required to work between 8 and 16 hours per week (Somatology Department, 2009). It is also mandatory for students to complete nd rd 600 hours of industry work during the 2 and 3 year as part of the qualification requirements (Somatology Department, 2013). Recently, the South African (SA) Minister of Higher Education and Training (DoHET) also alluded to the industry’s concern that graduates lack the requisite skills to function optimally in work environments. In addition, the SA Council on Higher Education (CHE) (2011) in its new guidelines for WIL, states that university teachers should re-think the purpose and educational role of WIL to ensure its success within a complex and fast-paced economy. Similar sentiments were expressed within the Australian HE system (Precision consultancy in Freudenberg, 2010:43). The inadequacy of work competencies has also been noted with regard to graduates enrolled in programs that incorporate WIL (Bates, 2008:305). This apprehension about the effectiveness of academic programs suggests a disjuncture between the outcomes of academic learning and industry expectations. Spowart (2006) and Zegwaard and Coll (2011:11) also observed that the increasing demand for work-ready graduates is resulting in more universities incorporating WIL in their programs. Considering the context of HE, where primarily facilitation of learning is theoretical and even if practical components are integrated, the environment is controlled and lacks the unexpected dynamism of the workplace. It could be argued that the full mandate of HE with regard to training work-ready graduates cannot be satisfactorily attained unless WIL is part of the program offerings. Therefore, it is imperative for education programs that incorporate WIL to continually reflect on their practices to assist them to assure the employer that graduates are fully competent to immediately add economic value to their work (Kundasami, 2007). In support of meaningful WIL, Van Rooijen (2011:06) argued that to a large extent the success of WIL resides in the businesses’ acknowledgement of their responsibility in partnership with HEIs to develop work-ready graduates and committing to full involvement. This argument is pertinent for this study because the department currently assesses students’ WIL progress continuously at the in-house clinic; whereby the supervisor is always at hand to provide support and feedback to improve performance. For external WIL, however, students are provided with logbooks to record treatments and other relevant duties they perform, as well as the hours they have worked (Department of Somatology Clinic Guidelines, 2012). In most cases students’ logbooks have one comment from the supervisor that reflects students’ overall evaluation of the treatments and related behaviors over the period of their WIL. Billet and Griffin (2011:14) emphasized “the importance of engagements with students that: prepare (i.e. before; for example, briefing), support (i.e. during; for example, sharing, guidance) and assist them to connect the two sets of experiences (i.e. after; for example, focus groups, critical reflective sessions)”. The overarching purpose of WIL is for students to gain work experience while they are still at university. For that reason, any process that attempts to evaluate the effectiveness of WIL should explore students’ voices to fully comprehend the learning processes that transpires. Spowart (2006) in support of determining students’ perspectives argued that in line with WIL’s significant role, it is vital for academics to be aware of students’ views to reduce anxieties associated with WIL experience. Wilson (in Eames & Cates, 2011) states that it is imperative for WIL coordinators to gain an insight of how learning is attained in work placements in order to develop appropriate teaching, learning and assessment strategies.
2312
3
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
A qualitative inquiry methodology was selected to address the research question because its epistemological and ontological assumptions enable a contextual engagement that addresses participants’ worldview as they experience the phenomena and how they interpret it (Creswell, nd rd 2008:53). The case study was conducted amongst 2 and 3 year students who are already undertaking WIL within the institution’s clinic and in industry. The methodology is appropriate as it allows a focus on specific students’ perspectives about WIL noting that “the purpose of case study is not to represent the world, but to represent the case” (Stake 1994: 245). The main data collection instrument was a semi-structured questionnaire separately administered nd rd amongst focus groups of 2 and 3 year students. The questions were constructed to allow students to explicate their experiences of WIL in a manner that would enable the researcher to identify the practices that are adequate and congruent with the professional requirements. In an attempt to encourage more openness and circumvent focus group limitations, students were also requested to anonymously write down their responses (Reddan & Rauchle, 2012:43). To assure data reliability, triangulation was accomplished through self–administered questionnaire completed by the department’s WIL academic coordinator and supervisor. The iterative model as conceptualized by Creswell (2008:244-270) guided the inductive data analysis process. Interviews were transcribed and coded accordingly prior to the extraction of themes as presenting in data. The findings and discussion thereof, are valid reflections of the participants’ reflections on their WIL experiences following on data interpretation and triangulation. Lincoln’s trustworthiness check was utilized to assure credibility and transferability, following on Toma’s (2006) strong argument for an uncompromising demonstration of rigor to ensure authentic interpretation of participant’s experiences and meanings derived from it.
4
LITERATURE REVIEW: WORK INTEGRATED LEARNING
As one safely infers that research in Somatology is still in its infancy stage, there is a dearth of published material, leaving anecdotal evidence as the primary source of evidence. In effect, several studies have been conducted on WIL, but their results are generally not applicable to the context of Somatology. This study is hence benchmarked against a corpus of literature broadly reflecting the principles and implementation challenges and gaps of WIL. As a result of this lack of appropriate frame of reference, the importance of this study resides in its thrust to address the issue of how the concept of WIL can be applied within the Somatology field to enhance students’ work-ready competencies. Higher education (HE) gives students the theoretical grounding of a discipline that informs their relationships to real life situations. Patton and McMahon (in Reddan & Rauchle, 2012:38) posit, “part of HE’s role is to develop capacities that will permit graduates to be proactive and self-directed learners”. In reality, HEIs are inherently not in a position to further develop the application of knowledge and skills required in work environments (Van Rooijen, 2011:07). Thus, industry experience is perceived to be more effective than learning in an educational environment (Senior & Cubbidge, 2010) because it offers real-life experiences of how what is learned in lectures is applicable to work situations. Martin and Hughes (2009:7) agreed, “there is increasing emphasis on work based learning, as it aims to integrate academic study and practical work experience providing a point of difference for graduates that employers value”. However, Freudenberg et al. (2010:43) quoted Precision Consultancy’s observation that there is inadequate comparable empirical evidence that identify specific strategies, which have proved more effective in developing students’ competencies in industry. Coll et al. (2009:8) even commented on the limited insights about the transfer of knowledge from WIL experiences back to the lectures. In providing the guidelines for the WIL, the South African CHE specified that WIL is: The component of a learning program that focuses on the application of learning in an authentic learning work-based context under the supervision and/or mentorship of a person/s representing the workplace. It addresses specific competencies identified for the acquisition of a qualification that make the learner employable and assist in the development of related personal attributes. Workplace/service employees and professional bodies are involved in the assessment of the learning experience, together with University academic employees (CHE HEQC, 2004).
2313
On this basis, CHE acknowledges the value of the collaborative partnership between the institution, students and industry. Furthermore, referring to workplace learning, CHE (2011:24) states, “where it is felt that students would benefit from work-placement in a 3-year qualification, the necessary resources would need to be made available. This would include the selection of workplaces, the provision of workplace mentors, opportunities for ‘debriefing’ and reflecting on learning, etc.” CHE defines WIL as “a philosophy of learning that promotes the concept of enhanced learning based on co-operation between education institutions and industry, commerce and the public sector” (CHE, HEQC, 2004). Kundasami (2009) clarifies that WIL is one type of cooperative education therefore, implying the relevance of a triangular partnership between the student, institution and industry whereby all participants are fully conversant with their roles and responsibilities in terms of all the relevant requirements and benefits (Martin & Hughes, 2009:8; Bates, 2005). Putman (2011) found that successful HEIs had sturdy partnerships with industry, which enables WIL integration into learning experiences. He observed that these relationships were the essence of students’ employability, giving WIL programs credibility and strengthening the institutions’ academic integrity. In addition, academic institutions benefit through enhanced student performance, enrolment and curriculum development (Braunstein & Laken in Coll et al. 2009:5). Eames and Cates (2011:41) clarify that in cooperative education, student learning is accomplished within specific academic and profession environments. Hence, the integration of the two forms the essence of the whole process of learning to fully exploit students’ learning prospects (Martin & Hughes, 2009:71). To aid the integration, “WIL should be a properly planned process at the institutional level that should implement relevant curriculum and pedagogies for student learning” (Eames and Cates, 2011:41). Such learning design should be underpinned by learner-centered cognitive activities that facilitate deep learning (Eames & Cates, 2011:42). According to Martin and Hughes (2009:8), WIL offers students with a chance to holistically synergize lecture-room theoretical knowledge with the real-life practical work experience. Consequently, such an experience places the student in a position to acquire appropriate professional abilities that ease transition from institutional to workplace context (Billet, 2011) and enhance their employability (Reddan & Rauchle, 2012:39). Groenewald (2009:19) and Bates (2005:15-16) suggest that the skills students acquire through WIL are not limited to the requisite profession-specific skills, but they also include relevant employability behaviors such as self-awareness, self-esteem, social skills, and practical knowledge. Reddan and Rauchle (2012:39) also included “communication, teamwork, problem-solving, initiative, and enterprise, planning and organizing, self-management, selfimprovement and technology”. Bates (2005) determined the critical role of supervisors in the process of guiding students to acquire skills that also promote a responsive and responsible professional. This could assure students of the correct choice of the profession and positively impact on their intrinsic motivation and commitment (Bentley & Broons in Cullen, 2007:37). Consequently, graduates enter the job market fully cognizant of employer expectations and are able to pitch their performance at the relevant professional level. The early enhancement of job competencies could have the effect of accelerating their professional status and high job satisfaction (Gault et al. in Cullen, 2007:38). In the same token, Bates (2005) also warns of unrealistic institutions’ work supervisor expectations to oversee students in addition to their normal workload, which could compromise the supervisor’s job performance. For students to successfully attain the WIL outcomes they have to be given an authentic chance to implement what they learned at university under supervision within the work-context (Martin & Hughes, 2009:9). Supervision assists students to develop aptitudes to work independently, allowing the context to direct their solutions to problems, and implement initiatives to improve their work performance (Martin & Hughes (2009:18-19). WIL also helps students to become mature individuals with a sense of responsibility and facilitates a transition from an academic environment to student determining how good they want to be as professionals. Groenewald (2009:77) emphasizes that concomitant to the requisite WIL outcomes; assessment should focus on in-action integration of knowledge and skills in accomplishing tasks.
5
FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION
The findings are presented as emerging themes from student focus group interviews and written feedback, responses from academic coordinator’s and supervisor’s questionnaires.
2314
6
THEME – ENHANCEMENT OF PROFESSIONALISM AND FRONT DESK MANAGERIAL TASKS
Students reported that after working at the institution’s Somatology clinic, their sense of professionalism and ethical conduct has been heightened. It appears that strict supervision, for example, the lecturer deducting marks for late coming and slowness in administering treatments concretized their awareness of the precepts of a disciplined professional such as punctuality, adhering to timelines and treatment protocols. Students also noted that front desk managerial duties carried out at the clinic assisted them to think strategically in relation to time management; treatment bookings; allocation of therapists, products, and machines; and ensure adequate stock levels. Carrying out these duties has enhanced their skills in dealing with queries and difficult clients, preparing them for these duties in industry. The students’ view that this work experience developed their soft skills or interpersonal skills is consistent with Raelin et al.’s (2010:17) postulation that this builds confidence and most importantly results in professionalism and self-reliance.
7
THEME – SUPERVISION
In-House WIL supervision Students described supervision and monitoring at the clinic as adequate, reporting they got help without hesitation, with one stating: “the help is helpful” (student, interview). Espousing similar sentiments, the academic coordinator believes that one of the strengths of the department’s WIL is the monitoring of students. Also suggesting that the current implementation of WIL accomplishes its purpose. In support of student supervision and monitoring, Martin and Hughes (2009:9) emphasized that working with other staff members develops students’ team-work skills and helps them understand its importance within a work environment; also, enabling them to comprehend that skills and behavioral dynamism are essential to holistic professionalism. Based on students’ reflections, it can be inferred that in-house WIL provides a worthy work-context orientation as opposed to concerns raised in Groenewald’s (2009:) study where monitors felt that students were not adequately orientated in-house. Industry WIL Supervision Data also revealed students’ perception about the workplace that: There is a lot more pressure from the clients and the colleagues. The workplace is much different from the clinic. They expect you to know your work and be perfect in doing it. You are being paid to conduct the service. I had to prove myself. There is little support from the colleagues and my theory helped me. From the students’ industry experiences, they are expected to demonstrate proficiency and selfreliance by working independently without supervision. This exposes the dissonance between employers’ and students’ expectations regarding supervision. Findings in Groenewald (2009) revealed that lack of workplace supervision and mentorship demoralized some students. Contrary to students’ perceptions, the academic coordinator felt that once students have successfully completed a specific year of study, they should demonstrate competence of those outcomes within a workplace.
8
THEME - DEVELOPMENT OF WORK CULTURE AND WORK EFFICIENCY
Students’ perceptions of experiences of working in industry, contrasted with those of the in-house clinic, with one student expressing that “working outside the learning environment is very different from working in the clinic”. They noted that in the work environment there are various techniques for performing treatments and these are easier and quicker. Therefore, it can be inferred that these experiences hone their work efficiency. Students also indicated that working in industry necessitates multitasking, thereby enhancing individual dynamism. From this perspective, the workplace develops a diversity of skills and makes knowledge and skill integration at work evident. These findings are congruent with Bates’ (2005) studies where students in some programs perceived that learning in a work environment could better facilitate the achievement of profession-specific competencies than learning in lecture situations. For students, industry provides them with the on-pulse type of experience, where they have one chance to deliver an effective treatment to the satisfaction of the client (Bates, 2008). The experience of working under pressure develops coping strategies within a demanding environment. As a result,
2315
students’ self-management skills are enhanced thus improving graduates’ lifelong employability (Reddan & Rauchle, 2012:39).
9
THEME: ENHANCED TREATMENTS AND BROADER CLIENTELE EXPOSURE
Students reported that in industry they use more product brands and ranges, exposing them to a variety of new treatments. It is inferred that industry experience extends students’ breadth and depth of knowledge. In addition, varying clientele gives students exposure to different skin and body needs, which provides them with more opportunities to have real-life exposure to what is learned in lectures. The exposure to a wide variety of clientele also enables students to learn to navigate relationships at a broader level, which they could not accomplish in lectures (Spowart, 2006:13). In this respect students reported: “At the salon there is a wide range of products and because manicures and pedicures are the main treatments, I have managed to perfect my paint” (student, interview). Pertaining to in-house WIL, students were critical, noting that there is little variety of treatments, which limits their opportunity to develop expertise in more treatments. One student commented: “the clinic needs to invest in products so that people get to see the results and become loyal customers to the clinic”. The WIL academic coordinator and supervisor also observed this limitation. They believe that one of the ways in which WIL can be strengthened is “adding more product range[s], especially those that are prominent in industry…” (academic coordinator, interview).
10 THEME – NEGATIVE ORGANISATIONAL AND HUMAN RELATIONS In relation to working in industry there is a perception among students that there is to some extent a lack of ethics. Some of the noted examples are, questionable hygiene and sterilization practices, overbooking of clients and loud music. Students were also of the opinion that employers took advantage of them because they worked as hard as the therapists but got paid much less: “when you come from university you are expected to do more and try [sic] to make you feel your qualification is not different”. Older colleagues make you feel inferior and younger ones are more competitive”. Likewise, students in Spoward’s study (2006:13) also experienced animosity, intimidation and disrespect. To mitigate the negative experiences of exploitation, Taylor (in Spowart, 2006:11) suggested that academic coordinators should provide WIL supervision and monitoring guidelines that are agreed upon with employers that promote meaningful work training.
11 THEME – IMPROVED ACADEMIC PERFORMANCE Students reported that working in industry helped them to practice more. One of them asserted: “You go back to what you learned in class, it is reinforced in the clinic”. They also acknowledged that it also improves their understanding of the theory discussed in lectures. Freudenberg et al.’s study (2010:51) supports the notion that students’ interaction with industry “illustrated the relevance of the knowledge and skills they are acquiring in the classroom to their future careers”. Experience has shown that students tended to be pessimistic in earlier stages of the program due to the focus on service modules such as physics, chemistry, etc. because they could not comprehend their professional relevance. Students’ feedback demonstrated the awareness that although in the WIL environment they performed treatments, cognitive shift took place. Their practical implementation required them to reflect on how and why they work from a theoretical perspective. Students also noted that WIL enabled them to integrate theory into the practical aspects of treatments, allowing them to internalize their understanding of theory in the process: The training also assists us academically, specifically in anatomy and physiology as we get to touch and examine the actual body and work on the different structures. So in turn we have to know the theory aspect of anatomy to be able to give a successful treatment (student, interview). This finding is supported by Collin and Tynjala (2003:341) who states “practice makes the theory intelligible”. Blair and Millea (in Freudenberg et al.’s study (2010:51) also reported there is evidence that WIL enhances academic achievement.
2316
12 THEME - EFFECT OF WIL ON MOTIVATION In-industry motivation Students noted that the monetary rewards motivate them. Furthermore, getting complementary hours to be able to complete their WIL requirements also contributed to their motivation. In some instances where students have been in WIL for some time, they reported they had acquired enough experience to assist and mentor new staff. This experience had implications for intrinsic motivation as facilitated by the achievement of self-efficacy. Similarly, in Harvey et al.’s study (in Freudenberg et al. 2010:45) students participating in valuable output-driven WIL program were able to construct insights on pertinent professional success traits resulting in higher self-esteem.
13 CONCLUSION The results of this study have shown that students support the use of WIL and acknowledge the contribution and value of WIL in assisting them to be work-ready graduates. The findings pertaining to students’ reflections on WIL’s contribution to their ability to be work-ready revealed distinct experiences and perceptions from in-house clinic and industry. However, after due consideration such differences show that in-house and external WIL complement each other, suggesting the retention of the current practice. But concerns pertaining to inadequate supervision, poor industry ethics and abuse of students demonstrate the need for institutional leadership to develop the long overdue meaningful WIL stakeholder collaborative partnerships. The study also revealed paucity of the understanding about students’ workplace conduciveness to achieving its mandate and the knowledge of what students are really learning to genuinely inform curriculum, pedagogies and instruction.
14 RESEARCH LIMITATIONS The study primarily focused on students, who are one part of the three-part WIL collaborative partnership and to some extent on the department’s practices. Based on the nature of responses pertaining to industry experiences, it is imperative that further research be conducted to get the industry’s perspectives on their engagements with students in a WIL program to widen an understanding of WIL practices outside the university.
15 RECOMMENDATIONS EMERGING FROM THE STUDY Following on the findings it is apparent that the triangular collaborative partnership, which is the essence of WIL is not in place. For that reason, the department should enter into service-level agreements with industry employers to provide structured student placements and management thereof. For a meaningful collaboration that achieves WIL’s purposes, the department should develop WIL guidelines that: clarify the purpose of WIL and the role of the institution, employers and students; outline profession-specific competencies that student are expected to acquire during WIL; specify professionalism and ethics standards that students are expected to attain and implement; elucidate the need for work-based supervision and feedback and institutional monitoring and assessment in work placements; and advice on student remuneration.
REFERENCES [1]
Bates, L. (2005). Building a bridge between university and employment: Work-integrated learning. From: http://210.8.42.131/documents/explore/ResearchPublications/ResearchBriefs/2005/200508.pdf (Accessed 26 November 2012).
[2]
Bates, M. (2008). Work-integrated curricula in university programs. Higher Education Research and Development, 27(4): 305-317.
[3]
Billet, S. (2009). Realizing the educational worth of integrating work experiences in higher education. Studies in Higher Education, 34(7): 827-843.
[4]
Cape Peninsula University of Technology (CPUT) News, 2011).
[5]
Council on Higher Education, (2004). Higher Education Qualification Council. Pretoria; CHE.
2317
[6]
Council on Higher Education, (2011). Work Integrated Learning. Pretoria: CHE.
[7]
Coll, R., Eames, C., Paku, L., Ayling, M., Hodges, D., Ram, S., Bhat, R., Fleming, J., Ferkins, L., Wiersma, C., & Martin, A. (2009). An exploration of the pedagogies employed to integrate knowledge in work-integrated learning in New Zealand higher education institutions. Teaching & Learning Research Initiative Wellington. From: http://www.tlri.org.nz/sites/default/files/projects/9263-Finalreport.pdf (Accessed October 2012).
[8]
Coll, R. & Zegwaard, K.E. (2006). Perceptions of desirable graduate competencies for science and technology new graduates. Research in Science & Technological Education, 24(1): 29-58.
[9]
Collin, R. K. & Tynjala, P. (2003). Integrating Theory and practice? Employees’ and students’ experiences of learning at work. Journal of Workplace Learning, 15(7/8): 338-344.
[10]
Creswell, J.W. (2008). Educational Research: Planning, Conducting and Evaluating Quantitative and Qualitative Research. Upper saddle River, New Jersey: Pearson Prentice Hall.
[11]
Cullen, M. (2007). The role of cooperative education in developing environmental science skills. Asia-Pacific Journal of Cooperative Education, 2007, 8(1): 37-52.
[12]
Department of Somatology Rules and Regulations, (2009). University of Johannesburg
[13]
Department of Somatology Rules and Regulations, (2013). University of Johannesburg
[14]
Department of Somatology Clinic Guidelines, (2012). University of Johannesburg
[15]
Eames, C. & Cates, C. (2011). Theories of Learning in Cooperative and Work-Integrated Education. In Coll, R. K. & Zegwaard (eds.). International Handbook for Cooperative and Worknd Integrated Education (2 ed.pp. 41 – 52). ©2011 World Association for Cooperative Education Inc.
[16]
Faculty of Health Sciences Rules and Regulations (2010). University of Johannesburg (UJ).
[17]
Faculty of Health Sciences Rules and Regulations (2013). University of Johannesburg (UJ).
[18]
Freudenberg, B., Brimble, M., & Vyvyan, V. (2010). The Penny Drops: Can Work Integrated Learning Improve Students’ Learning. E-Journal of Business Education & Scholarship of Teaching, 4(1), 42-61. From http://www.ejbest.org (Accessed 26 November 2012).
[19]
Groenewald, T. (2009). Lessons derived from a work‐integrated learning monitoring pilot at a distance higher education institution. Asia Pacific Journal of Cooperative Education, 10(2): 75‐98.
[20]
Kundasami, V. (2007). The assessment of work-integrated learning (WIL) at a University of Technology, Master's Dissertation, Degree, MEd. Department of curriculum studies, University of Pretoria.
[21]
Martin, A. & Hughes, H. (2009). How to Make the Most of Work Integrated Learning:
[22]
Martin in J Orrell, L Cooper, & R Jones (2005), Making the Practicum Visible, Paper written for the HERDSA conference, 1999, p 1. From: www.flinders.edu.au (Accessed on 6 January 2013).
[23]
Maidment, J. (2003). ‘Problems experienced by students on field placement: Using research findings to inform curriculum design and content’. Australian Social Work, 56(1): 50-60.
[24]
Putman, P. (2011). Fenn at 40: How Recent Findings Are Changing Approach to Granting for Work-Integrated Learning. Journal of Cooperative Education and Internships, 45(2): 5-7.
[25]
Raelin, J., Bailey, M., Hamann, J., Pendleton, L., Raelin, J. D., Reisberg, R., Whitman, D., (2011). The Effect of Cooperative Education on Change in Self-Efficacy among Undergraduate Students: Introducing Work Self-Efficacy. Journal of Cooperative Education and Internships, 45(2): 17-35.
[26]
Reddan, G. & Rauchle, M. (2012). Student perceptions of the value of career development learning to a work-integrated learning course exercise science. Australian Journal of Career Development, 21(1): 38-48.
[27]
Sattler, P. & Peters, J. (2012). Work-Integrated Learning and Postsecondary Graduates: The Perspective of Ontario Employers. Toronto: Higher Education Quality Council of Ontario.
2318
[28]
Senior, C. & Cubbidge, R. (2010). Enhancing employability in the “ME generation|”. Education and Training, 52 (6/7): 445-449.
[29]
Simina, V. & Hamel, M. (2005). CASLA through a social constructivist perspective: WebQuest in project-driven language learning. ReCALL, 17(2), 217-228. Cambridge University Press.
[30]
Spowart, J. (2006). Hotel School Students’ Views of their Preparation for Work-integrated Learning: An Exploratory Study. Asia-Pacific Journal of Cooperative Education, 2006, 7(2): 1015.
[31]
Stake, R. (1994). Case studies. In Norman Denzin & Yvonna Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research, pp. 236-247. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
[32]
Toma, J. (2006). Approaching Rigor in Applied Qualitative Research. The SAGE Handbook for Research in Education. SAGE Publications.
[33]
Van Rooijen, M. (2011). Transforming 21st Century Corporate-University Engagement: From Work-Integrated Learning (WIL) to Learning-Integrated Work (LIW), Journal of Cooperative Education and Internships, 45(1): 5-10.
[34]
Walker, R., Cooke, M., McAllister, M. (2008). A Neophyte’s Journey through Qualitative Analysis Using Morse’s Cognitive Processes of Analysis. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 7(1): 81-93.
[35]
Zegwaard, K. & Coll, R. (2011). Exploring some current issues for Cooperative Education. Journal of Cooperative Education and Internships, 45(1): 8-16.
2319
