1 / 13

Partnership in South Africa

Partnership in South Africa. In their seminal work Boud and Solomon (2001) see Partnership at the core of Work Based Learning (WBL) For them work based learners negotiate tri partite individual learning plans

catori
Télécharger la présentation

Partnership in South Africa

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Partnership in South Africa

  2. In their seminal work Boud and Solomon (2001) see Partnership at the core of Work Based Learning (WBL) For them work based learners negotiate tri partite individual learning plans There is no fixed syllabus, core content or essential disciplinary material in WBL programmes But they acknowledge the role of academic disciplines in WBL Boud and Solomon

  3. Reeve and Gallacher (2002) offer a definition more in tune with GCU practice WBL programmes entail: Partnership Flexibility Relevance and Accreditation Gallacher and Reeve

  4. In their 2002 paper they argue that employers must be involved in the negotiation of the curriculum This may mean tensions between workplace priorities and learning priorities They accept a shift from the primacy of the academic tutor to a more inclusive ‘team based’ approach (accommodating mode 2 knowledge) The model implies the possibility of a happy marriage between employing organisations and HEIs Gallacher and Reeve

  5. Reeve and Gallacher (2005) By 2005, however, the same authors call partnership into question arguing: • There is limited evidence that employers wish to engage in these sorts of relationships with universities. • There are problems arising from the different cultures of the partners and different understandings of ‘learning’ and ‘knowledge’. • The quality assurance agenda is reducing the influence of employers. • The emphasis on partnership is hindering the development of WBL.

  6. We believe these difficulties are overstated The nature of the workplace is important, but cultures can be bridged. This can be done directly or indirectly There are two different types of partnership – a direct relationship with the employing organisation and a relationship with an intermediary organisation Our experience

  7. Current Direct Partnerships with organisations: Clyde Union Pumps/SPX North Ayrshire Council North Lanarkshire Council South Lanarkshire Council Scottish and Southern Energy Transnet Freight Rail/ University of Johannesburg Current Partnerships with intermediaries: Institution of Railway Operators – Organisations include: First Scotrail,IarnrodEireann, London Underground, Network Rail, Virgin CEMP in Partnership – Organisations include Novartis: Current Partnerships

  8. Transnet Freight Rail/ University of Johannesburg • This partnership developed over a number of years though an existing partnership with the Institution of Railway Operators • A partnership deal was signed in RSA in 2011 • It was driven by a university objectives of creating ‘Business Academies’ (partnerships) and internationalisation.

  9. Internationalisation “Internationally networked:  we will deliver excellence, competitiveness, and cultural diversity through new models of international collaborations with key partners in Scotland and around the world” (GCU strategic objective 2012) • The partnership differs from previous partnerships because in addition to the client (TFR) there is an academic partner for delivery (UJ)

  10. Key features of the Partnership • The students are registered as GCU students • There is face to face delivery in RSA supported by GCU Learn (Blackboard) and adobe connect • UJ tutors are given associate lecturer status of GCU • Materials generated by the IRO were customised for RSA purposes

  11. Some pedagogical issues • UJ tutors are also using GCU learn to post materials and for assessment purposes ( Grade Centre) • There were logistical issues in relation to face to face delivery in RSA (distance in particular) • There have been communication issues in assessment – few students speak English as a first language • Legacy of apartheid – low level of general education for black students • Technical issues like version of software available, bandwidth, work based access to internet and firewalls

  12. Some cultural issues • In partnership dealings there is difference in attitude towards issues like start dates (arguably this was a company driven issue) • There is considerable pressure on students to perform • However, both of these examples are not specific to RSA and could be expected to occur in the UK.

  13. The pilot of 150 students has gone well The biggest difficulty has been the impact of language difficulties on the assessment load TFR wish to expand the programme significantly GCU welcomes this but acknowledge it will impact on all of the issues identified and consequently staff time It has demonstrated the power of partnership. Conclusion

More Related