7. A Phenomenographic Study

[next chapter] [previous chapter] [contents]

• Categories of Description of Teachers’ Approaches to the Work-based Component of a University Course
• Conclusion

Phenomenography begins from the premise that people think about the world in different ways. Phenomenography attempts to map the range of ways in which people think about a given phenomenon. The main outcome of the analysis is a set of categories that are very precisely constituted, for what is being sought are the most distinctive characteristics of the range of experiences and how these relate one to the other. Therefore, what is mapped is the essential variation in ways of understanding the phenomenon.

The structure is mapped on to two dimensions: one dimension represents what is being focused on in attending to the phenomenon (the referential aspect). The other dimension represents how the focusing is being done (the structural aspect). Typically, the resulting variation represents more and less sophisticated ways of understanding the phenomenon and the mapped outcome space suggests a hierarchy. What emerges are categories of description which, though originating from a contextualised understanding, are decontextualised and can consequently be used in contexts other than the original one. Such an approach is very useful when it comes to comprehending other people’s understanding and encouraging development and change (Marton 1988).

In the analysis undertaken below, we use the interviews of academic staff to look at the qualitative variation in the way they see students learning in the workplace and, in particular, in the way they approach the task of supporting that learning.

Fuller information concerning collection of the interview data from academic staff is reported in Chapter 3. In addition to data from interviews with one staff member from each of the four non-case study courses, data was collected by in depth, semi-structured interviews with twelve academic staff and scheme organisers from the four case study departments. These included the staff member with major responsibility for the work placement component, together with two members of academic staff involved in supervision of students within the workplace. The interviews were based around the questions indicated earlier in this chapter.

Categories of Description of Teachers’ Approaches to the Work-based Component of a University Course

The analysis identified five categories which describe the essential features of the variation in approaches to work-based university education. The focus of the analysis was on how academic staff approached the work-based component of a university course in terms of the aims of the placement, what the placement was expected to achieve, (the referential), and how these achievements were expected to come about, (the structural). The resulting categories are summarised below.

Category A

Students benefit by gaining experience of the world of work. They learn by picking up relevant knowledge.

Category B

In the work environment students pick up skills and knowledge. They make sense of it in terms of theory learned in the classroom.

Category C

Students use classroom theory to tackle workplace tasks. The tasks are taught to them by the employer.

Category D

The employer teaches students how to do work-based tasks. The student reinterprets appropriate classroom theory in the light of this task. The theory may consequently be redefined for the student.

Category E

The student works on specific tasks collaboratively with employer and university supervisor. The student reinterprets theory in the light of the work-based problems and experiences.

The structural relationship between these categories is shown in Table 7.1. It shows the analysis in terms of what is the intention for the placement, (the referential), and how the intentions are achieved, (the structural). The resulting categories are then summarised.

Category A reflects a belief that students will learn by simply being in the workplace. It is anticipated that they will pick up appropriate skills and knowledge because they are in the work environment where professional practice is being demonstrated. An osmosis notion of learning and skills development is apparent.

Category B is similar to Category A in that it is assumed that skills and knowledge will be picked up by being in the right environment. It differs from the latter, however, in that it is suggested that once the skill or knowledge is acquired in a practical manner it is made sense of in terms of theory which has been learned in the classroom.

Category C is similar to Category B in assuming that skills once acquired will be made sense of in terms of theory learned in the classroom. It differs, however, because there is an emphasis on the employer acting as a teacher, showing and instructing what to do, as opposed to the student simply picking up skills.

Category D, like Category C, indicates that the employer teaches the student what to do, but the student then reinterprets the theory learned in the classroom in the light of the practice. It is not just a matter of relating theoretical understanding to a practical situation; rather, the theoretical is transformed because of the practical experience.

Category E, like Category D, emphasises the reinterpretation of theory in terms of the practice experienced in the workplace, but this practice is designed and the experience interpreted collaboratively with employer and university staff.

Table 7.1 Structural Relationship between Categories of Approaches to Work Placements in a University Course

In common with the majority of phenomenographic analyses, the resulting categories of description appear to form an inclusive hierarchy: the lower order categories represent a simple picture of workplace learning occurring in an unproblematic way; the higher level categories assume a more complex situation with effective learning resulting from collaboration between employer and university and the development of appropriate problems to be tackled in a supportive environment.

We will now examine how individuals within the courses fit into the categories.

Table 7.2 Approaches to Work Placements Categorisation of Academic Staff Responses
by Case Study Courses

Youth Work is the only course represented in the less sophisticated A and B categories. The category where most academic staff cluster is Category C. All the Accounting academic staff are here, together with one of the Medical Laboratory Science staff. Category D is represented by responses from Medical Laboratory Science and Youth Work. All the Electrical Engineering staff cluster in Category E, together with one Medical Laboratory Science staff member.

The pattern of consistency and variability of approach within the courses is of interest. Where we have evidence of least satisfaction with the course, in Youth Work, there is most variability amongst staff. Where there is most satisfaction, in Electronic Engineering, there appears to be complete consistency of approach. Accounting also appears entirely consistent, though not at such a high level as Electronic Engineering. Medical Laboratory Science reflects some variation, though the variation is at the higher level of the structured outcome space. Staff holding views within this range of variation might still be expected to work together coherently. The variation of approach indicated in Youth Work, however, is of greater concern. It is hard to imagine a course emerging with a consistent and cogent focus where staff appear so varied in their views about what workplace learning is and how it is encouraged.

The descriptions above indicate the key variations between the categories and how representatives of the courses fit into these categories. Below, examples from the interview transcripts further illustrate the categories.

Example 1 Category A

The emphasis in this category is on the students ‘picking up’ appropriate practice because they are in the right environment.

The staff member explains:

It’s important to confront the reality of youth work which can be quite traumatic... We have to prepare young people for that. And there’s nothing much you can do except let them experience it in a slightly sheltered way through placement.

(Lecturer)

This same lecturer indicates that at times it is important to stand back and not intervene.

Students can’t know until they’ve been in the placement what they’re up against. There’s almost a sense in which you sink or swim once you’re out there and maturity has a lot to do with it and life experience, but also attitude. They’ve got to sort it out for themselves to a large extent.

Elsewhere, in the same interview, there is insistence that intervention by the academic supervisor could at times be less than useful.

There’s the developing of a sense of what’s going on and they’ve got to do that for themselves. Sometimes it’s better to let them get on with it and learn through practice, rather than poke your nose in...

Within the documentation associated with this Youth Work placement scheme, there is a stated emphasis on linking theory with practice. There is a major assignment associated with this, but, for this particular supervisor, the assignment was not significant in discussion of the placement. When it was mentioned there was an indication that this was almost apart from the placement.

I don’t bother too much about that, (the related assignment), at this stage because that’s more in the sphere of their school work. The important thing from this placement is that they are in the situation and that they get the experience.

Example 2 Category B

The emphasis here is on the student being in the workplace and picking up the appropriate skills and insights. However, there is also an emphasis on using the theory learned in class to make sense of the experience.

Once again, the only example in this category comes from a Youth Work staff member. Like his colleague above, this staff member emphasises the power of experience.

You really teach different students once they return. They have had a powerful experience and it is this experience which is so important to their development.

He goes on to add that this makes a difference to the way students approach classroom-based work.

Often there’s a feeling before placement that theory subjects are not too relevant, but once they’ve had that experience they usually see how relevant they are.

This supervisor, unlike his colleague above, indicates that the assignment related to the placement is important in helping students make sense of their experience.

This is a degree course and they have to have a sound theoretical base. The theoretical base has to relate to the practice of the youth worker and we try to tie it together in this assignment.

The final comment sums up neatly the approach exemplified in this category; asked what he does to help students learn in the placement, he comments:

You have to let them get on with it. Besides, we don’t have too much time to do much else. We are pretty busy with other teaching demands, but you also need to ensure that they see the relevance of what they do in terms of theory and you can emphasise that through comments on their assignment.

Example 3 Category C

This is the most common category. It is exemplified by the comments of all three of the academic staff from Accounting as well as one of the staff members from Medical Laboratory Science. The approach represented here is one which believes the placement helps the students to learn by providing an opportunity for them to see theory in the light of a practical situation and that this is manipulated or orchestrated by the employer. One member of Accounting sums it up thus:

They go in to learn practice and the workplace supervisor sets up situations where they are get practice, but the whole point is that we expect them not just to practise, but to be thinking about the theory they’ve learned as they practise...

(Medical Laboratory Science lecturer)

In all of the interviews in this category, there is an emphasis on the responsibility of the employer to establish a sound learning opportunity.

The success very much depends on the placement they get. If they get a good one, they will have a good experience and if not, well, there’s less likelihood of success. Some employers take their responsibility seriously and ensure that they are shown what to do and that they get a good range of tasks.

(Accounting lecturer)

‘Taking responsibility seriously’ is clearly seen in terms of putting time in to showing the student what to do and being patient in demanding competent outcomes.

Our students will need a bit of time to pick things up... In the best situations they are given that time and they are given a lot of help until they have settled in.

(Accounting lecturer)

Good work-based supervisors are important because they have patience. They don’t expect perfection immediately. They are willing to show and tell and not get upset when things don’t go to plan.

(Medical Laboratory Science lecturer)

When theory is talked about it is almost as an add-on: something which is laid on top of the practice to give it a professional sheen, or which is imposed for the sake of assignment demands. (In both Medical Laboratory Science and Accounting, assignments were related to the practice).

You see, there is the example of the cost efficiency exercise. It was a good practical exercise, but it also could be seen in terms of the management accounting theory. Sometimes you have to point this out to students because they tend to forget the theory once they get into the workplace... They forget that they are there not just to learn, but to add theory to the experience.

(Accounting lecturer)

One of the Accounting supervisors used the term ‘theory adding’ more than once in his interview.

A number of these students have already had work. They’re not that green but the difference is that now they can ‘theory add’ to their practice and that’s what they are now heading towards: being a professional.

Example 4 Category D

This approach is represented by one staff member from Medical Laboratory Science and one from Youth Work. It emphasises the responsibility of the employer to teach and show the students how to practise, but it is coupled with an assumption that students do not just relate theory to practice, or add it to their understanding of practice; rather, they reinterpret theory in the light of work practice. The following comment makes this clear:

There’s much you can just do and that’s OK, but the real point of the placement is to see the theory differently if you like... You get a situation and what you do actually helps you to reinterpret the stuff you learned in the lab. It helps you to reinterpret it for yourself.

(Medical Laboratory Science lecturer)

... But really, what you’re hoping for is that the student will be aware enough of the situation to enter into debate with the agency about specific practice and its relevance in terms of theory.

(Youth Work lecturer)

The benefits of the practice are to be seen not just in improved competence in the laboratory, but in the demonstration of improved understanding in assignments:

The journals and the workbooks and the guidelines...all that stuff is there to ensure that they do more than just learn how to do it. It’s not a matter of getting technical ability if you like, though obviously that’s important as well. It’s about seeing the work we’ve been doing back in class and in the labs in a new light, and, likewise, about seeing the practice in a new light because some students have had some technical experience in labs.

(Medical Laboratory Science lecturer)

Example 5 Category E

This is the most complex category. It is represented by all of the Electronic Engineering staff and one each of the Medical Laboratory Science staff. The focus is on redefining classroom learned theory in the light of professional practice and subsequently rethinking the practice as a result. This, however, happens as the result of collaborative involvement in establishing the workplace environment and experience. As a result of this collaboration, students are not only assisted to practise, they are encouraged to question the practice of themselves and of those around them.

The structure established in the Electronic Engineering subject appears to support this type of outcome. This is recognised by a couple of the academic staff.

It’s both an extension of their university education and an introduction to the workplace. It’s both of these things and that’s why the structure is as it is: both university and employer have responsibility...

It’s in all our interests that the students don’t just learn to do, but that they learn to question so they can learn to do better.

One member of staff from this course emphasised how it was also a learning experience for the academic staff and for the employer.

It’s usual to see the student as the learner, but in this situation there’s the possibility of us learning from the students because if they have a keen mind and they’re encouraged, then they can often see fault in the way we’ve been habitually working or reasoning. That’s to everybody’s good because we are all kept on our toes and that means we can all move faster.

The single staff member from Medical Laboratory Science in this category emphasised the place of the assignments and set work in providing students with opportunities to develop in appropriate ways.

There’s got to be a lot of background work in these things. We’re getting, I believe, a pretty good collection of aids and materials...they act as guides so they know what to do. These help the student and they help the laboratory and they help us. They’ve been developed over a number of years and we keep changing them. It’s a balance between getting too much direction and giving not enough guidance. We all work together to try to get it right because they’re tools for all of us to learn from.

(Medical Laboratory Science lecturer)

This staff member went on to indicate how students were encouraged to reflect on their own practice and on that of the laboratory and that this was built in to the expectations of the placement.

There’s doing the tasks, but the learning is in thinking about what you’ve done and what you’ve experienced and that’s why we have the journal and why we look for that reflection and questioning in there.

(Medical Laboratory Science lecturer)

Conclusion

In this chapter we have demonstrated an interdependent relationship between the way academic staff think about work placements and what they do to organise and support them. We have also shown clear links between the nature of the work placement, how it is supported and organised, the workplace learning of students and the overall satisfaction of employers.

These results support, but go well beyond, the findings of the previous chapter which linked clear goals and standards and support for workplace learning with the development of generic skills.

These are important findings, for they suggest that what is known about good teaching and learning and curriculum design in the academic environment should be extended and practised (with appropriate modifications) in the work placement environment, (see, for example, Ramsden 1992). Such thinking is presently neither represented in existing literature, nor in the thinking and practice of a large percentage of academic staff.

[back to top]