This article was downloaded by: [New York University]

On: 08 February 2015, At: 05:00

Publisher: Routledge
Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered
office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Assessment & Evaluation in Higher

Education
Publication details, including instructions for authors and
subscription information:
http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/caeh20

Assessment in work‐based learning:

investigating a pedagogical approach to
enhance student learning
a a
Pandy Brodie & Kate Irving
a
University of Chester , UK
Published online: 28 Nov 2006.

To cite this article: Pandy Brodie & Kate Irving (2007) Assessment in work‐based learning:
investigating a pedagogical approach to enhance student learning, Assessment & Evaluation in
Higher Education, 32:1, 11-19, DOI: 10.1080/02602930600848218

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02602930600848218

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the
“Content”) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis,
our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as to
the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinions
and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors,
and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content
should not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sources
of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims,
proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever
or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or
arising out of the use of the Content.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any
substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing,
systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms &
Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-
and-conditions
 Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education
Vol. 32, No. 1, February 2007, pp. 11–19

Assessment in work-based learning:

investigating a pedagogical approach to
enhance student learning
Pandy Brodie* and Kate Irving
University of Chester, UK
Downloaded by [New York University] at 05:00 08 February 2015

Assessment
10.1080/02602930600848218
CAEH_A_184754.sgm
0260-2938
Original
Taylor
102007
32
c.irving@chester.ac.uk
KateIrving
00000February
and
&Article
Francis
(print)/1469-297X
Francis
& Evaluation
2007
Ltd in Higher
(online)
Education

Work-based learning (WBL) is undertaken in a wide variety of higher education contexts and is
increasingly viewed as a valuable, and increasingly essential, component of both the undergraduate
and postgraduate student learning experience. However, the development of rigorous pedagogies to
underpin WBL and its assessment is still embryonic. This paper presents a case study of how one
medium sized institution, with experience of offering WBL for more than 20 years, has developed
a pedagogical approach for both supporting and assessing WBL. The WBL model examined is
based on the inter-relationship and inter-dependency between understanding learning, critical
reflection and the identification and development of capability within a WBL context. The paper
considers each of the three areas in relation to its individual contribution and most importantly, in
relation to the WBL process, as a means of developing a framework for academic, personal and
capability development within a workplace setting. Critical to this discussion is an analysis of the
contribution of related pedagogic theory and the use of appropriate assessment approaches to
support WBL and to enhance the student learning experience.

Introduction
‘Work-based learning’ (WBL) is a widely-used term in higher education today and
increasingly so, with the emphasis on the sector’s role to support and develop both
local and national economic infrastructures and to develop employability skills for
students (Atkins, 1999). This paper presents a study of assessment for WBL at one
UK higher education institution, where WBL opportunities have been integral to
undergraduate programmes for over 20 years. Staff involved in supporting student
learning in this area have developed a pedagogic model and an associated assessment
process, underpinned by a range of theoretical concepts fundamental to the nature
and understanding of knowledge and learning. The principles of WBL that are

*Corresponding author. Corresponding author. Department of Work Related Studies, University

of Chester, Parkgate Road, Chester CH1 4BJ, UK. Email: p.brodie@chester.ac.uk

ISSN 0260-2938 (print)/ISSN 1469-297X (online)/07/010011–09

© 2007 Taylor & Francis
DOI: 10.1080/02602930600848218
 12 P. Brodie and K. Irving

essential to a critical discussion of pedagogy and assessment in this context are

considered, followed by an exposition of the pedagogical model and its links to
assessment activities.
In order to justify a particular approach to practice, it is important to review the
range of factors that have influenced its development. The comparatively recent
exploration of the workplace as a site of knowledge with its own curriculum
(Major, 2002, 2005) is critical, particularly at a time when higher education needs
to justify and extend its impact on and value to, society. Whilst WBL does present
challenges to some of the more traditional aspects of higher education, as Boud
and Solomon (2001, p. 19) have identified, it also provides useful solutions to the
sector’s predicament of how to move into wider and more diverse arenas of prac-
tice. This particularly applies to designing programmes of study that are intended
Downloaded by [New York University] at 05:00 08 February 2015

to address the needs of employees’ higher level learning, such as foundation

degrees. Similarly, the skills and abilities needed on graduation by today’s students
are the same as those of employees already in the workplace, who seek to manage
and adapt to change and the demands of complex employment situations. Addi-
tionally, WBL with the characteristics described here, and as a component of
higher education programmes of study, can be recognized as a valuable way for
students to apply theoretical (propositional) knowledge, enabling learning to be
‘level-related’ in ways that are difficult to achieve in a traditional academic curricu-
lum, where there may be limited opportunities to critique the application of theory
to practice.
However, the approach to WBL discussed here requires students and teachers to
develop, and perhaps change, their conceptual frameworks of knowledge, knowing
and learning. In higher education, epistemological beliefs are grounded within
socially shared subject discipline. As Bauer et al. (2004) have argued, these belief
systems related to the nature of knowledge tend to be a determining factor for
learning. In WBL, the holistic nature of the learning experience (extending consider-
ably beyond discipline boundaries) means that students need to recognize knowledge
presented in unfamiliar ways and to develop the skills of meta-cognition in order to
recognize and learn from the knowledge and experiences encountered.
WBL has a clear set of characteristics at the institution that provides the focus of
this paper. It involves planned learning through work, a significant proportion of
which is negotiated between the student and the employer; informal and unintended
learning are also likely and anticipated consequences of the experience. Learning
outcomes are level-related to the Quality Assurance Agency’s (QAA) Framework for
Higher Education Qualifications (FHEQ) and assessment criteria agreed and
transparent to learners. Assessment of WBL on undergraduate full time programmes
is based on a range of tools (presentation, reflective interview and reflective report/
portfolio) that require students to produce evidence to support their claims for learn-
ing. In the case of students on programmes designed to gain academic credit for their
learning whilst in employment, accreditation of prior experiential learning (APEL)
may form a significant part of the ‘learning repertoire’, with claims for learning
supported by critical reflective accounts.
 Assessment in WBL 13

Before exploring the details of the pedagogical approaches used to enable effective
learning in WBL, it is also worth considering two views of learning that are particularly
relevant. In both instances the focus is on how the learner is learning, rather than how
a facilitator might enable them to learn. Consequently the views have a valid and
important basis in learning theory:
● The ‘constructivist’ view, proposing that learners construct their meaning of expe-
riences depending on the context in which they are; therefore learning is ‘situated’
in a particular context (Wertsch, 1991).
● The recognition of ‘communities of practice’, focusing on how people learn as
members of a socially constructed group (Wenger, 1998).
Both theories are important and recognize the place of the learner within the process.
Downloaded by [New York University] at 05:00 08 February 2015

However, neither dwells on how the facilitator provides and shapes the learning
opportunity—the pedagogy. The learning theory is important; the link between the
theory and consequent pedagogy is, perhaps, moreso.
Neither of these views contradict the approach that is taken at the study institution
to ‘learning’ for WBL students. Rather, a pragmatic view is taken of what the WBL
process is about and therefore what the student needs to be able to know and,
importantly, to do (the action is critical) if they are to engage with it successfully. That
is, WBL for undergraduate students is centred on learning in and through work and
necessarily engages the students with the aspects of learning mentioned, namely, that
they:
● know what learning is (learning implies change) and how to do it most effectively
(the style, approach and fitness for purpose);
● can recognize when they have learnt (description of and reflection about the learn-
ing);
● are able to identify what has been learnt (analysis and evaluation of the learning);
● know what the learning is informed by (its validity: how the learning stands up to
scrutiny against outside evidence);
● recognize what they need to learn (future learning).
This WBL approach is based on learning theory and also makes explicit how learn-
ing theory relates to, and perhaps describes, successful WBL. If this position is
accepted, then, as WBL facilitators, teachers necessarily involve themselves in these
areas, which serve to introduce students to the skills and processes involved in some
or all of those facets of their WBL. This means that teachers are moving from their
position as ‘learning theorists’ to ‘teachers’ with a clear pedagogy. In order to do
this, they need to consider how to make sense of the aspects of learning in pedagogi-
cal terms, that is, how to best handle the processes that will enable students to
engage effectively with those aspects of their learning. The WBL teaching team has
achieved this through considering the areas of experience ‘captured’ here and classi-
fying them as being informed by learning theory: what learning is about; critical
reflection: the process by which we consider our learning; and capability: what we
have learnt to do or now know. These then become the focus of the pedagogical
 14 P. Brodie and K. Irving

approach taken to WBL. As teachers, then, we need to ensure that students will
know:
● what learning is, (learning implies change)—learning theory;
● how to do it best, (the style, approach, fitness for purpose)—learning theory;
● when they have learnt, (description of and reflection about the learning)—critical
reflection;
● what their learning is informed by (its validity; how it stands up to scrutiny against
outside evidence )—critical reflection;
● what they need to learn (future learning)—critical reflection;
● what they have learnt, know more about, become more able at doing (analysis and
evaluation of the learning)—capability.
Downloaded by [New York University] at 05:00 08 February 2015

This presupposes, of course, that students understand and are able to learn; that they
are aware of what behaviours/capabilities are changing; and that they have the tools
of critical reflection to interrogate their learning and their behaviours. The pedagog-
ical position that has developed is that there is both an interdependence and an inter-
relationship between these three components and that all of these need to be
addressed for WBL to be successful. The task for teachers is, therefore, to enable
students to develop and use the knowledge and skills subsumed within these
components and, consequently demonstrate their WBL effectively through the
assessment process. This is demonstrated below, in Figure 1.
This, in turn, prompts the question: ‘If three components of the model are indige-
Figure 1. A model of WBL pedagogy

nous to WBL, do students need to be assessed in all three areas?’

It is argued that if the basic principles of alignment are followed, the answer is ‘Yes’.
The assessment tasks need to require students to apply principles of learning, to iden-
tify where learning has occurred, and to demonstrate how it was achieved. They need
to establish the validity of the conclusions they come to through the analysis of their
experiences and consequent learning, so the tasks will also require them to reflect crit-
ically and effectively.
The design of the assessment activities, outlined earlier in this paper, utilizes the
components of this pedagogical approach to enable students to recognize and
evidence their learning through work. Again, the interpretation of the term ‘assess-
ment’ is carefully considered, with the assessment tasks being an integral aspect of
learning process. As Gibbs (1999) has argued, assessment should ‘generate appropri-
ate student learning activity’ (p. 47). Thus, in the last semester of Level 2, students
from most undergraduate disciplines at this institution undertake a week’s induction
to WBL. This includes activities such as a review of learning theories, auditing a
range of personal and work-related skills and learning how to apply a series of
management models to work-based experiences. At the end of this week, students
undertake an assessed presentation of their proposed learning outcomes for the
following six weeks of work experience. Students are also provided with opportuni-
ties to develop their skills in critical reflection, and using this approach to structure
entries in a ‘learning journal’ kept whilst on placement, and for a reflective interview
assessment and reflective report, submitted after the end of the placement.
 Assessment in WBL 15
Downloaded by [New York University] at 05:00 08 February 2015

Figure 1. A model of WBL pedagogy

The inclusion of critical reflection as a particular focus for the assessment tasks is
important for several reasons. Firstly, it develops students’ ability to apply and
critique knowledge, not only in the workplace, but as a skill for higher level
academic work. As Brocklebank and McGill (1998) recognize, reflection ‘enables
the potential for critical transformation’ (p. 88), therefore extending the value of a
traditional curriculum’s focus on critical thinking. Secondly, and perhaps more
significantly in a WBL context, critical reflection enables students to justify and
validate their claims for learning, by using a variety of evidence sources. It also
enables them to recognize future learning needs: essential for developing a capacity
for lifelong learning.
The approach to assessment described here possesses many of the characteristics
of what Boud has defined as ‘sustainable assessment’, that which ‘meets the needs of
the present and prepares students to meet their own future learning needs’ (Boud,
2000, p. 151).
The assessment strategy provides learners with opportunities to focus on how they
learn and, in requiring them to claim their achievement of learning outcomes through
 16 P. Brodie and K. Irving

reflection and by evaluating feedback from a range of sources, involves them in self-
assessment of their learning goals. The use of a learning journal as an aid to monitor-
ing and evaluating progress towards achieving learning outcomes is an integral aspect
of this process, and affords opportunities for both formative and summative self-
assessment.
Many of these skills are, however, new to students, and it could be argued that to
some extent they are advantaged, or disadvantaged, by the epistemology and
pedagogy of their ‘home’ disciplines. Thus, students studying social science and
health-based degree programmes usually have some awareness and skills in reflec-
tive writing. For scientists and mathematicians these are often unfamiliar learning
strategies. For all students, there is the challenge of accepting the value of learning
through work, often underplayed in a higher education environment that is based on
Downloaded by [New York University] at 05:00 08 February 2015

crediting higher level thinking, rather than ‘doing’, skills. In order to be successful
WBL learners, students need to be able to recognize and measure their own learning
in quite different circumstances; to acknowledge and articulate, for example, how
they have learnt from informal interactions with peers in the workplace, which, as
Boud and Middleton (2003, p. 194) have noted, are ‘predominant ways of learning’
at work.
The assessment tasks associated with the processes outlined in the pedagogic
model sit comfortably with the FHEQ descriptors cited below. For example, WBL
students at Level 2 are usually involved in demonstrating
(i) knowledge and critical understanding of the well-established principles of
their area(s) of study, and of the way in which those principles have devel-
oped;
(ii) ability to apply underlying concepts and principles outside the context in which
they were first studied, including, where appropriate, the application of those
principles in an employment context;
(iii) knowledge of the main methods of enquiry in their subject(s), and ability to
evaluate critically the appropriateness of different approaches to solving prob-
lems in the field of study;
(iv) an understanding of the limits of their knowledge, and how this influences
analyses and interpretations based on that knowledge. (QAA, 2001)
It is suggested that it is this section of first part of each level of the framework
documentation that typically drives the learning and teaching approaches within
higher education, and the associated assessment tasks, so students are engaged, quite
rightly, in assignments demanding them to articulate their knowledge, analyse and
critically reflect, and interpret.
The assessment of capability, the third and arguably most important corner of
the triangle for WBL, is more problematic. Whilst the first part of the framework
descriptors tend to dictate the higher education agenda in terms of ‘academic’
skills, the second part tenuously suggests that students should also be able to
do things, with a veiled reference to capability appearing in Section C of the
section:
 Assessment in WBL 17

Typically, holders of the qualification will be able to:

(a) use a range of established techniques to initiate and undertake critical analysis of
information, and to propose solutions to problems arising from that analysis;
(b) effectively communicate information, arguments, and analysis, in a variety of forms,
to specialist and non-specialist audiences, and deploy key techniques of the discipline
effectively;
(c) undertake further training, develop existing skills, and acquire new competences that
will enable them to assume significant responsibility within organizations.

And in Section D:
… and will have:
(d) qualities and transferable skills necessary for employment requiring the exercise of
personal responsibility and decision-making. (QAA, 2001)
Downloaded by [New York University] at 05:00 08 February 2015

Further exploration of the pedagogic model leads to considering the capability

dimension. WBL overtly and explicitly requires students to be able to do things, and
to demonstrate that capability. Yet the emphasis given to assessment of capability/
ability to do within the FEHQ framework is cursory, to say the least. Students
commonly suggest that, whilst they are good at teaching, are good nurses, are good
coaches, most of their marks within their degree programmes are based on their
ability to articulate that they are good, and why they are good, rather than focusing on
that they are good teachers, nurse, coaches. The weighting within vocational
programmes is such that frequently students are in a position of needing to demon-
strate vocational proficiency in addition to the academic and, in some programmes,
the final degree classification is derived solely from academic assessments rather than
the more desirable contribution from both the academic and the professional
components. This can serve to devalue capability, to distort the validity of
professional/vocational programmes and, in many instances, lead to over assessment
of students.
As indicated earlier, it is argued that capability is central to successful WBL. If this
is the case, and the principle of alignment is followed, capability must, in some shape
or form, be assessed. Certainly employers can, and do, contribute. This brings to the
debate issues of equity, in employer perception of what and how they are assessing,
standardization between employers and across WBL opportunities, and, naturally,
quality assurance of assessment undertaken by those outside of the higher education
institution. If capability is assessed, what evidence can legitimately be used? The
student’s? The employer’s? A higher education observer’s? The weighting within the
overall assessment of the capability being measured needs to be considered, and/or
the student’s written evidence articulating how they are capable used, and an inter-
mediate variable, their ability to write, is therefore introduced into the equation. It
could be argued, perhaps, that this variable compromises the validity and integrity of
the assessment of practical capability.
The WBL team at the study institution remain convinced that, in the interest of
validity, fitness for purpose, and student motivation, capability must be included
within the assessment process. However, a shared understanding of how the
 18 P. Brodie and K. Irving

assessment of capability and competence might be incorporated into a level-related

academic framework is needed, together with the development of assessment crite-
ria. This latter issue has been explored in some detail by Poikela (2004) who identi-
fies the interdependency of processes involved in assessing learning and knowledge
in a professional context. This, it is argued, needs to extend beyond the recognition
of capability to undertake a task, to enable recognition of the quality of the actions.
This is already being undertaken within a work-based undergraduate and postgrad-
uate degree programme at this institution, where the level of critical reflection on
performance is used in the assessment process. However, this has yet to be devel-
oped into an assessment of professional capability itself. Lastly, a more general issue
of assessment of capability, is that of the weighting of the assessment, whether
within the context of a module or a programme of study.
Downloaded by [New York University] at 05:00 08 February 2015

Students at the study institution are aware of these issues (they frequently suggest
that the employer’s contribution to assessment should be more than the current 10%)
and have, in both in formal and informal evaluations of their WBL experience,
identified the limited way in which capability can be credited. Developing a process
for this, that meets learner, employer and higher education framework requirements,
is a current assessment challenge for the programme team, and also provides a demand-
ing and valuable focus for further research in this innovative area of higher education.
The authors would welcome further contributions to this debate, and to the issues of
pedagogical design and their relationship to assessment that are raised in this paper.

Notes on contributors
Pandy Brodie is the Deputy Head of the Department of Work Related Studies at the
University of Chester, academic director for undergraduate work-based learning
and programme leader for the work-based and integrative studies programme.
Additionally, she is the University’s Accreditation Officer and works extensively
with external colleagues on the development of work-based learning approaches
for higher education programmes delivered in the workplace.
Kate Irving is Senior Academic Development Adviser for the Learning and Teaching
Institute at the University of Chester, where she has responsibility for the devel-
opment of CPD opportunities for colleagues working in all areas of academic
practice and in pedagogical research.

References
Atkins, M. J. (1999) Oven ready and self-basting: taking stock of employability skills, Teaching in
Higher Education, 4, 267–280.
Bauer, J., Festner, D., Gruber, H., Harteis, C. & Heid, H. (2004) The effects of epistemological
beliefs on workplace learning, The Journal of Workplace Learning, 16(5), 284–292.
Boud, D (2000) Sustainable assessment: rethinking assessment for the learning society, Studies in
Continuing Education, 22(2), 151–167.
Boud, D. & Solomon, N. (2001) Repositioning universities and work, in: D. Boud & N. Solomon
(Eds) Work-based learning—a new higher education? (Buckingham, Open University Press), 19.
 Assessment in WBL 19

Boud, D. & Middleton, H. (2003) Learning from others at work: communities of practice and
informal learning, The Journal of Workplace Learning, 15(5), 194–202.
Brocklebank, A. & McGill, I. (1998) Facilitating reflective learning in higher education, (Buckingham,
Open University Press), 88.
Gibbs, G. (1999) Using assessment strategically to change the way students learn, in: S. Brown &
A. Glasner (Eds) Assessment matters in higher education (Buckingham, Open University Press),
47.
Major, D. (2002) The place and status of knowledge in work-based learning, in: Conference
proceedings Work-Based Learning Network of the Universities Association for Continuing Education,
November 2002 (Cardiff, University of Wales Institute Cardiff).
Major, D (2005) Learning through work-based learning, in: P. Hartley, A. Woods & M. Pill (Eds)
Enhancing teaching in higher education: new approaches for improving student learning (London,
Routledge).
Poikela, E. (2004) Developing criteria for knowing and learning at work: towards context-based
Downloaded by [New York University] at 05:00 08 February 2015

assessment, The Journal of Work Place Learning, 16(5), 267–274.

Quality Assurance Agency for Higher Eduation (2001) The framework for higher education
qualifications in England, Wales and Northern Ireland. Available online at: www.qaa.ac.uk/
academicinfrastructure/FHEQ/default.asp (accessed 2 April 2006).
Wenger, E (1998) Communities of Practice: learning, meaning and identity (Cambridge, Cambridge
University Press), 72.
Wertsch, J. V. (1991) Voices of the mind: a sociocultural approach to mediate action, (Cambridge, MA,
Harvard University Press).