Integrating Classroom and Workplace Learning for a ... · THO04961 "Integrating classroom and workplace learning for a knowledge-based society" ... knowledge-based attributes of post-modern

THO04961 "Integrating classroom and workplace learning for a knowledge-based society"

Integrating Classroom and Workplace Learning_ARE 04 Page 1 of 15

Integrating Classroom and Workplace Learning for a Knowledge-based society

Dr Keith Thomas

Graduate School of Management

La Trobe University, BUNDOORA, VIC 3083

Abstract Jobs are changing and with them, the skills needed for the world. In preparing the student and

worker respectively for the challenges associated with the skills requirement of a knowledge-

based economy, it is clear that both schools and business organisations have important roles

to play. Consequently, it makes sense for give some thought to an integrating framework for

what is essentially a partnership in this emerging knowledge-based learning society. This

paper outlines a strategy to integrate classroom and workplace learning based on a ‘contextual

pedagogical framework’. The framework, based on research in educational and management

literature, emphasizes deep learning founded on a common set of learning and development

strategies.

Page 2



Integrating Classroom and Workplace Learning for a Knowledge-based society

Introduction Because of its pervasive effect through all society, the information technology revolution is

the entry point to considering changes in the educational landscape. The subsequent challenge

for education, both in the classroom and in the workplace, is to adapt to the realities of the

knowledge-based attributes of post-modern society, where success may be measured in terms

of adequate preparation of students (and workers) for the economy that emerged in the last

quarter of the 20th century. This so called knowledge-based economy reflects “two defining

forces: the rise in knowledge intensity1 of economic activities, and the increasing

globalisation of economic affairs” (Houghton and Sheehan 2000: 2). Moreover, as any review

of knowledge-focused literature will suggest, the knowledge economy is more than a lofty

theory, it is fast becoming a reality with an explosion in the application of computing and

computing technologies in all areas of life (Zack 1999).

In preparing the student and worker respectively for the challenges associated with the skills

requirement of a knowledge-based economy, it becomes clear that schools and organisations

both have important roles to play. Consequently, it would also make sense to give some

thought to an integrating framework for what is essentially a partnership in this emerging

learning society. Based on the needs of the emerging knowledge-based economy and

particular school and workplace considerations, this paper proposes a ‘contextual pedagogical

framework’ to integrate classroom and workplace learning. The focus of this paper is on

professional development and educational initiatives emerging from universities and in the

workplace.

The Emerging Knowledge based Environment As the reality of the environment changes, so must education. Not surprisingly, there has been

considerable ferment, particularly in a review of curriculum and assessment frameworks, in

education over the recent history of schooling in Australia, as well as in the United States and

the United Kingdom. The central aim of these efforts has been to ensure students acquire

essential information and skills appropriate to the knowledge society. There is a similar effort

in relation to workplace-based learning, which also involves a considerable cost with U.S.

1 related to the combined influence of information technology and the rapid pace of technological change



corporations employing 100 or more employees reportedly spending an “estimated US$60.7

billion on formal training alone” (Robbins 2001: 481).

Importantly, reflecting different but related pressures to schooling, the workplace training

emphasis is no longer classroom-based activity directed at making employees become more

proficient in certain tasks. Rather, it is increasingly continuous work-based activity necessary

to cope with changing demands in the environment, which has required a shift in focus from

improving technical, interpersonal and problem-solving skills, to a focus on development and

on creating opportunities for continuous employee learning. These workplace-based

initiatives include, for instance, teamwork, empowerment and broader job structures and

design. The focus has also shifted away from the organisation of learning through formal

systems, structures and standardised training programmes to an emphasis on the learning

process and to self-directed and self-managed learning (Sambrook and Stewart 2000).

Reflecting these changes, while the characteristics of school and workplace learning are

considerably different, there are also clear parallels with and lessons for school-based

curricular development.

Student and Workplace Learning Considerations (and associated Pedagogy) An analysis of literature drawn from nearly two hundred studies of classrooms in Australia

makes clear the practices with the strongest impact on student learning (Cuttance 2002).

These school or teacher influenced practices include classroom management, development of

meta-cognitive and cognitive practices, and student and teacher interactions. Other factors

with a lesser impact on learning include design and informative descriptions including the use

of information and communications technology (ICT). However, while an expectation of

improved learning is the foundation of all reform, what also needs questioning is the theory

that underpins knowledge and the acquisition of this knowledge (Bereiter 2002). To illustrate

with an example from an ICT environment, a focus on functional tasks, such as computer-

based cut-and-paste work, is not teaching the skills that will ensure student futures in the 21st

century. If pedagogy defines “what counts as a valid transmission of knowledge” (Bernstein

1975: 47), a deeper questioning of ‘pedagogy’ to enable understanding by the learner is the

essence of this paper.

Curriculum Framework A review of curriculum frameworks is a good place to look afresh at knowledge acquisition

and so to the connection between how students experience teaching and how they learn. There



are of course many definitions of curriculum and the word can mean different things to

different people. However, there are broadly two different, yet complementary ways of

thinking about curriculum (Grundy 1998). One way, described as the ‘syllabus view’, is to

think about curriculum as an object, constructed elsewhere and given to those for whom it is

intended – a linear transmission based view of knowledge. What is overlooked by this

approach is the totality of the classroom context.

The other way to think of curriculum is as an action, in essence moving away from a static

model to a dynamic and more encompassing model. This perspective of curriculum reflects

the situated nature of learning and emphasises the curriculum as a dynamic interaction of four

components: “teachers, students, subject-matter and milieu” or learning environment (Grundy

1998: 30). The object of the ‘intended’ curriculum is to deliver subject matter so students

gather new skills and knowledge. Grundy’s pedagogical view, illustrated in Figure 1, defines

curriculum “as a result of the teacher and the students interacting in the light of policies and

the syllabus (subject matter), within a social and cultural milieu” (Grundy 1998: 31).

Figure 1: The pedagogical view of curriculum

Subject Matter

Teacher Students

Milieu

In thinking of curriculum this way, the implicit meaning in the dynamic interaction of these

four components it to move beyond subject matter to one of pedagogy, which is expressed in

the relationship between teacher practice and student learning. From this point of view the use

of the term ‘pedagogies’ also allows the likelihood that different strategies might make a

practical difference for different student groups (Lingard, Mills et al. 2000).

A Contextualist Model of Curriculum The four components of the pedagogical view of curriculum provide the basis for the

development of a contextual model of curriculum. The four dimensional framework in Figure

2 enables what is termed the authentic curriculum, that in turn is the outcome of the teaching

process and the student interaction within a social and cultural context. This framework

expands on the earlier functional construction (Figure 1), which did not adequately reflect the



influential role of context, nor did it draw attention to the desired outcome - understanding

based on deep learning. Based on this framework, the intention is to advance the dialogue

supporting educational reform in schools and the workplace couched in terms of deep

learning strategies, while highlighting specific considerations in the learning and teaching

process that can facilitate student understanding. As the illustration suggests, the model is

applicable equally in the either school or workplace context

Figure 2: Contextualist Pedagogical Model of Curriculum

This contextualist pedagogical viewpoint enables a clearer investigation of possible learning

strategies and teaching practice. The contextualist perspective also invites a focus on what is

actually learnt – the actual versus desired outcome in the teaching-learning encounter. This

distinction is based on the understanding that what students learn in school is both more and

less than, and in some cases even a contradiction of official curriculum (Grundy 1998) – a

mismatch often described as the gap between intended and received curriculum. The

viewpoint also supports the examination of the hidden curriculum, a reference to the powerful

lessons provided through the impact of existing institutional structures and organisational

practices. As Foucault explains, in discussing the nature of power relations, culture “can not

be disassociated from activities which permit the exercise of power” (Wilkinson 1998: 31).

The absence of supportive school contexts is a known impediment to good teaching practice

(Sarason 1982; Sirotnik 1986; Sarason 1990). Not surprisingly also, the consensus from

research is that successful school reform lies in restructuring, reculturing and changing

pedagogy (Lee and Smith 1993; Hargreaves, Earl et al. 1996; Fullan 1997; Hill and Russell

1999; Edwards 2000; Ellyard 2000; Lingard, Mills et al. 2000).

A contextualist definition of curriculum allows an understanding of learning strategies and

wider educational reform in a temporal setting. From this perspective, research into processes

in natural settings becomes very relevant (Gronn 2003). Moreover, as Gronn (2003) suggests,

Social & Structural Context Subject Matter

Student Teaching Process

UnderstandiModerating teaching and learning practices: • Intellectual quality • Connectedness • Supportive

classroom • Environment • Recognition of

Moderating student-learning factors • Engagement • Motivation • Approaches to

learning

Deep learning strategies



research in naturalistic settings can transform research, allowing for commonalities of

experience, as well as the differences or unique qualities between individuals, to emerge.

Thus, from either a classroom or a workplace perspective, a contextualist curriculum

emphasis enables the recognition of individual learner characteristics as well as the social and

historical context as important to the individual learner, and to the functioning of the

institution. Moreover, the framework is also very relevant to considering organisational

learning in workplace programs. That said, we can turn our attention to curriculum and

teaching practice, where Ramsden worryingly concludes, based on the available evidence,

that "learning in traditional curriculum is often unsatisfactory" (Ramsden 1992: 35).

The Teaching and Learning Process Arguably, both school-based education (and workplace development) must be student-centred

because ultimately the individual student will be the best judge of what he/she needs. It is

important to understand the imperatives behind this argument. Teachers (in school classrooms

at any rate) become responsible for what students learn as well as how students learn. The

requirement is that learning and education processes produce autonomous individuals who

take responsibility for their own behaviour, and who can critically examine their own society

and the truths it presents to them. In achieving this objective, the connection between how

students experience teaching and how they learn is clear, as it is important. As Ramsden

(1992) observes, teaching and learning are two sides of the same coin and, if we follow

Ramsden’s philosophy, the aim of teaching is “to make student learning possible” (Ramsden

1992: 5). How to make student learning possible may not be such an easy task. It concerns

two key elements: first, how they learn, that is what goes on inside their heads, and second,

creating the ideal environment.

The teaching environment is an important element in the teaching-learning process. In a

different context - technology in education - Laurillard notes that it is the teacher’s task to

construct the conditions of the learners interactions such that their experience enables them to

learn (Laurillard 1994). The obligation for teachers is defined by the belief that self-directed

and active learning is better than receptive and conformist. Similarly, in terms of workplace

practice, Marsick (in Watkins 1991) urges educators to focus on learning as opposed to

training or teaching, particularly as learning can occur despite teaching as much as it does

because of it (Watkins 1991a). The rhetoric then is clear: learner centred, constructivist and

exploratory learning (Watkins 1991b), with techniques such as discovery learning, project-



based learning, independent learning, situated learning, experiential learning, and problem-

based learning. The effect in essence is to make obsolete the traditional teacher’s role of

‘telling’ and replace it with one that ‘facilitates’ learning (Cho and McCormack 1997: 53).

Learning modes include active learning, where the student takes responsibility for how and

what they learn; cooperative learning, where students work in groups to achieve shared goals;

individualised learning, in order to meet diverse needs and individual learning styles; and

interdisciplinary learning that enable wider conceptual understanding (Madison CT

Technology Plan 1996, cited in Cho 1997).

Workplace Competence – From Novice to Expert With student-centered learning considerations in mind, we can turn our attention to workplace

competence, where the intent for educational process is the development of skills and

attributes suitable for the emerging environment. One might ask what does it take to become a

military officer, or for that matter, a plumber …or a physicist? The essential difference in

skills is in moving from novice to expert. The path is essentially linear, based on specific

areas of skills and knowledge and, within a certain context, related to automatization of

interrelated skills (Quinn 1991; Sternberg 1995). Automatization creates room for attention to

contextual aspects of situations in which skills apply. Importantly, as Simon (1991)

highlights, there is a time dependent element to expertise. No one becomes a world-class

expert in any professional domain in less than ten years of full-time dedicated learning

(Simon 1991). There also appears to be no skipping of stages along this novice to expert path.

Conversely, the progression from novice to expert can also create disadvantage if it does not

automatically involve relearning (Argyris & Schon, 1978). In a world of change, there is the

obvious need to be able to rethink, re-examine and reformulate what has been previously

learned. This type of learning calls for meta-level learning through reflection (Cowan 1995;

Sternberg 1995) and for learning about learning or meta-cognition (Argyris 1976; Swieringa

and Wierdsma 1992). Ovre time, any learning that does not incorporate meta-level learning

will inevitably begin to ingrain experience rather than promote learning from experience, with

obvious detriment in face of changing times.

Overall, the discussion of learning and workplace competence is indicative of the need for

frameworks of learning and development that are more expansive, such as ones suggested by

Kolb (1984) and more recently Senge (1995). Typically, most studies that examine individual



and organisational learning stem from one of two perspectives: the tendency to employ a

microscopic or only telescopic view. Each view, similar to a camera with zoom or wide-angle

lens, comes at a cost because each presents a different and incomplete story (Cowan 1995).

To understand the realities of a situation requires attention to multiple levels of analysis, an

and/both perspective as opposed to an either/or one (Wheatley 1994). Unfortunately, a

dichotomous choice - either micro or macro perspective - frequently underlies the

epistemological foundations that support the process of learning. The tendency, as Cowan

(1995) suggests, can lead to biased judgements (citing Shepherd, 1993) and to myopic

thinking (citing Wheatley, 1992). Consequently, alternate, more integrative conceptions are

necessary to broaden the focus of study (Cowan 1995). To illustrate, the learning organisation

is a concept associated with the speed of technological, economic and social changes. The

essence is that it is no longer adequate for organisations to react to change; they must

anticipate them. It is not sufficient for organisations to maintain the present position rather it

is a question of being at the forefront of developments. This places a premium on the ability

of the organisation to undertake continuous change. This ability cannot be bought; it must be

learned (Swieringa and Wierdsma 1992).

Nonetheless, in moving individuals along the novice-expert continuum, the dominant

development approach in management education is based on the scientific principles of the

rationalist research tradition (Marsick 1988; Watkins 1991a). While, there are different

rationalist approaches,2 common to each approach is their regard of competence as attribute-

based phenomena usually organised into categories such as knowledge, skills and attributes

(KSA) (Boyatzis 1982; Kolb 1984; Sandberg 2000). Using these descriptions of competence,

the logic is organisations can set up systematic training and development activity that improve

worker competence and increase organisational effectiveness. Cowan (1995), describes this

approach as a convergent path. That is, progress from novice to expert tends to ingrain

patterns of experience from earlier stages, increasing speed and accuracy of performance,

while "converging on a smaller range of potential responses" (Cowan 1995: 232).

Clearly, the rationalist approach has made a strong contribution to understanding competence

at work. But, it is also widely criticised as being too narrow and oversimplified, and not

reflecting the emerging complexities of job competence (Sandberg 2000). In summary, the

2 Worker oriented, work oriented and the more comprehensive multi-method oriented approach



approach suggests an objective knowable work that is external to workers, and consequently

this approach describes work activity as independent of the workers. An alternative way to

understand competence at work is through interpretative research. Mezirow's theory of

learning, based on the critical social science of Habermas, simultaneously accounts for the

need to develop job skills and the fact that learning is intertwined with learning about the

organisation and the self (Marsick 1988). Applying Mezirow's concepts, learning is more than

instrumental - learning to do a job better; it is also dialogic - taking place in work settings,

and it is self-reflective - directed at personal change with an emphasis on critical reflection of

the individual as a member of a larger social unit (Marsick 1988). The three forms of learning

cannot be separated in any given situation.

The essential difference of an interpretative approach to the (dominant) rationalistic approach

is in the view that work and worker are not separate entities and competence is constituted as

the meaning that work takes on for the worker. Sandberg (2000) cites a range of studies in

different areas such as artificial intelligence (Dreyfus and Dreyfus, 1986), education (Schon,

1983), nursing (Benner, 1984) and ethnographic studies (Atkinson, 1988; Brown & Duguid,

1991; and Tyre & Von Hippel, 1997), which reveal that attributes used to accomplish work

are not context-free. Rather, they are situational or context-dependent. Emphasising this

situational nature of knowledge, studies by Brown and Duguid (1991) conclude that the way

people work "usually differs fundamentally from the way organisations describe that work in

manuals, training programs organisational charts and job descriptions" (1991:40). Schon

(1983) made a similar point in education when criticising universities and other institutions

that educate professional workers. In terms of workplace related educational development,

what this suggests is that the way people experience work is more fundamental to their

competence than the attributes (competencies) themselves.

By highlighting the context-dependence of attributes, an interpretative perspective provides a

richer picture of what constitutes competence. The tacit dimension of competence, for

example, is an important insight that emerged from the interpretive perspective (Polany, 1967;

Sandberg, 2000). Tacit knowledge, or information not explicitly stated but useful to know in

order to thrive in an environment (Sternberg 1995), is often overlooked when attributes are

viewed as context-free. Contrasting experts and novices within a domain, Sternberg notes

experts typically have greater amounts of existing knowledge and this knowledge is better

organised into complex schema (Sternberg 1995: 346). What this means in terms of



competent work performance is that while theoretical knowledge is a useful thing it is only

part of the approach. Experts, because of their experience, also have a set of virtually

automatic procedures and heuristics (or mental models) that novice's lack. This kind of

experientially based knowledge is an important influence on, for example, leadership

performance (Mumford, Zaccaro et al. 2000). It also requires a greater appreciation for long-

term patterns of development and improvement over immediate performance, which can often

be missing from societies that emphasise short term interests (Hofstede 1980; Cowan 1995).

Another insight emerging from the interpretive perspective is the realisation that while adults

can have considerable prior knowledge that can aid learning, this knowledge if dated or

inaccurate, may hinder actual learning. Differences in experiences (including cultural, gender,

ethnic and racial differences) need to be bridged by providing anchoring events, realistic

problems, cases or other situations that become a common reference point. These anchoring

points may or may not have a single correct solution. Instructional materials should reflect the

diversity. Moreover, the desire to be self-directed learners is a unique feature of adult learning

and there are certain strategies that can enhance this attribute. They include the use of

contracts where the learner diagnoses needs, plans activities, selects resources and evaluates

progress, the clear specification of what is to be learned, and also a clear specification of what

is expected from learners. Finally, a democratic atmosphere that encourages participation in

decisions, goals and self-evaluation, as well as activities that support socialisation and

communication are other ways to strengthen environments for self-directed learning.

Equally, educators must not always accept adult definitions of needs as the operational

criterion in the development of curriculum, design of programs, or evaluation (Brookfield in

Watkins 1991). The task, Watkins says for a teacher of adults is to help them “realise that

bodies of knowledge, accepted truths, commonly held values and customary behaviours

comprising their worlds are contextual and culturally constructed” (Watkins 1991a: 68).

Another consideration is the possible negative response to attempts to make adults critically

reflective. To manage the situation, it is suggested that teachers must recognise adult

education is a collaborative, transactional encounter in which objectives, methods and

evaluation are negotiated by all concerned. The need overall, is to respect the learner’s

individuality, “encourage genuine questioning and a critical outlook, and not enforce a party

line” (Watkins 1991a: 70).



Understanding: Deep and Surface Learning Learning is a vital ingredient for understanding, and we also know from studies of expertise

that “deep knowledge of the task and of the relevant tools is a crucial element” in successful

problem-solving (Bereiter 2002: 351). Overall, the quality of thought that goes into design,

processes and decisions is of more interest than the simple ability to think (Bereiter 2002),

and so it becomes apparent that the first concern should be the kind of thinking that leads to

deep knowledge. There are two different student approaches to learning (Ramsden 1992;

Chalmers and Fuller 1996). One approach, described as deep learning is represented by a

“qualitative change in a person’s view or reality” (Ramsden 1992: 4). Implicit in this

description of learning (for understanding) is the capacity by the student to perform at

progressively higher levels. The approach is a constructivist rather than information centred

one, placing the learner's efforts to understand at the core (Wiske 1998).

A focus on learning for understanding favours incremental learning and casts teachers in the

role of facilitators or coaches. The approach requires reflective engagement in the

performance, clear and informative feedback, on-going assessment, and challenge in order

that the learners are required to extend themselves (Wiske 1998). Learning for understanding

is not concerned with being able to repeat quantities of information on demand, other than in

the context of foundational knowledge. This approach towards memorisation of information is

a characteristic of the naïve learner and is more typical of the second approach called surface

learning. This approach is concerned with immediate task achievement and consequent

performance is typically replication within given situations (Chalmers and Fuller 1996).

Notably, surface learning is generally associated with anxiety, fear of failure and low self-

esteem (Entwistle 1982).

Assuming the alternate, deep learning approach is valued, it requires every teaching action to

be judged by one criterion only – the effect it has towards the desired learning outcome. This

outcome or performance requirement can be skill based such as constructing a spreadsheet,

cognitive based such as building a table (knowledge) that supports problem solving and meta-

cognition, or affective based such as attitudes to risk, organisational values and motivation.

The developmental change is change intended to last and the requisite learning is

characterised by the ability to apply and relate knowledge in different ways, rather than

replication. Obviously, as learning is dependent on the student’s approach, the imperative to

understand the influence of the educational or workplace context, which is created in a large



part through student’s experience of the curriculum, teaching methods and assessment

procedures, is once again to the fore. To illustrate, students adapt to the perceived

requirements as they “try to please their teacher’ and do what they think “will bring rewards

in the systems they work in” (Ramsden 1992: 62).

Table 1: The approach to learning

APPROACH TO LEARNING

Surface Deep

Teacher-centered Student-centered

Transmission of knowledge Self-directed learning

Low self-efficacy High self-efficacy

Peer pressure/alienated Social interaction

Extrinsic Intrinsic

Low level thinking Higher cognitive strategies

Intention to complete tasks Intention to understand Integrating knowledge

Closing Remarks The impetus to this paper is the challenge presented to both classroom and workplace based

education, to adapt to the realities of the knowledge-based attributes of a post-modern

(learning) society. If success were defined in terms of adequacy in preparation of students

(and workers) for this emerging economy, it arguably would make sense to give some thought

to an integrating framework for what is in essence an unrealised partnership between schools

and business organisations in meeting the needs of the emerging learning society. The aim

then in this paper was to draw on insights into learning strategies and teaching practices as the

basis for a more expansive learning and development framework both in schools and in the

workplace. Unquestionably, while school and workplace learning are considerably different,

there are also clear parallels in terms of preparing individual learners, teaching practices and

in addressing the practicalities of curriculum development. To this end, a contextualist

pedagogical curriculum model is proposed as a mechanism to facilitate the uptake of

evidence-informed knowledge at both levels.

The emerging economy and associated changed environment are some of the reasons for the

emergence of concepts such as lifelong learning, openness to learning and learning how to

learn in workplace learning (Argyris 1992; Senge 1995; Bennis and Goldsmith 1997). The

common implication for both schools and workplace programs is to emphasise the learning



process and to focus on making individuals more independent and so able to cope with the

demands of the situation. In this on-going process, there is a place for both formal education

and training as well as for more informal approaches, such as problem-solving meetings and

other learning opportunities. However, must be clearly understood is that a contextualist

framework will ensure pedagogical practices that emphasise individual student needs.

Penultimately, if the quality of student (or workplace) learning in terms of performance is

dependent on the learning approach - deep or surface, then it is imperative to understand the

influence of the educational or workplace context. This context is created in a large part

through student’s experience of the curriculum, teaching methods and assessment procedures,

and the potential divergence between intention and perception in relation to the educational

environment is important because it influences possible learning outcomes. This is not to

dismiss sound and objective reasons for attention to content, but to draw attention to

appropriate teaching (and assessment) methods. The point is to recognise the impact of

context and of related student perceptions and to ensure the environment is congruent with the

widest aims of the program (Ramsden 1992). Flowing from this observation, in terms of

enabling learning, is the evident value of understanding of the workplace context through

naturalistic research. This research is most relevant to identifying norms, structural practices

and other contextual factors that might either act as barriers or perhaps act as bridges to

facilitate the uptake of knowledge.

In closing, in a knowledge-intensive environment, learning is an important capability and one

that arguably is solidly linked to the creation of economic value and competitive advantage at

individual and collective levels. Thus, how schools and workplaces respectively integrate

learning and development will be crucial. The contextualist pedagogical curriculum offers a

useful framework to shape learning and development and so the potential for deep learning

and consequent understanding. This issue and the related other questions need to be addressed

both at school level as well as in the workplace.

Bibliography:

Argyris, C. (1976). Theories of Action that Inhibit Individual Learning, Experience and Learning: Reflection at Work Melbourne, Deakin University

Argyris, C. (1992). On Organisational Learning, Blackwell Publishers



Bennis, W. and J. Goldsmith (1997) Learning to Lead: A Workbook on Becoming a Leader London, Nicholas Brealey Publishing

Bereiter, C. (2002). Education and Mind in the Knowledge Age. Mahwah, N.J., Lawrence Erlbaum Associates

Bernstein, B. (1975). 'On the Classification and Framing of Educational Knowledge', Knowledge and Control: New Directions for the Sociology of Education. M. F. D. Young. London, Collier-Macmillan

Boyatzis, R. E. (1982). The Competent Manager: A Model for Effective Performance, New York, Wiley

Chalmers, D. and R. Fuller (1996), Teaching for Learning at University. London, Kogan Page

Cho, G. and C. McCormack, Eds. (1997), Action Learning in Practice: Lessons and Experiences, UC, 1997, Canberra, University of Canberra

Cowan, D. (1995). "Rhythms of Learning: Patterns that Bridge Individuals and Organisations." Journal of Management Inquiry 4(3): 222-246

Edwards, D. J. (2000), The research and realities of teaching and learning in the middle years of schooling. Middle Years of Schooling Conference: collaboration for success, Melbourne

Ellyard, D. P. (2000), Preparing for a thrival in a plantist future: Redesigning and restructuring the education system. Leadership Conference for Principals and Early Years Coordinators, Melbourne, Department of Education

Entwistle, N. (1982). Understanding student learning, London, C Helm

Fullan, M. (1997), The challenge of school change, Hawker Brownlow

Gronn, P. (2003). The New Work of Educational Leaders, London, Sage Publications

Grundy, S. (1998), The Curriculum and Teaching, Understanding Teaching (2nd Edition), E. Hatton, Marrickville, NSW, Harcourt Brace: 27-37

Hargreaves, A., L. Earl, et al. (1996). Schooling for change: reinventing education for early adolescents. London, The Falmer Press

Hill, P. W. and V. J. Russell (1999), Systemic, whole-school reform of the middle years of schooling, National Middle Years of Schooling Conference, Melbourne, University of Melbourne

Hofstede, G. (1980). "Motivation, Leadership and Organisation: Do American Theories Apply Abroad?" Organisational Dynamics, Summer

Houghton, J. and P. Sheehan (2000), A Primer on the Knowledge Economy, Melbourne, Centre for Strategic Economic Studies: 1-25

Kelly, C. (2001). David Kolb, The Theory of Experiential Learning and ESL, The Internet TESL Journal. 2001

Kolb, D. A. (1984), Experiential Learning: Experience as the Source of Learning and Development. Englewood Cliffs, NJ, Prentice-Hall

Laurillard, D. (1994). "Multimedia and the changing experience of the learner." APITITE Conference 94 Proceedings (Asia Pacific Information Technology in Training and Education): Brisbane, Australia, 28 June - 2 July 1: 19-24

Lee, V. E. and J. B. Smith (1993), "Effects of school restructuring on the achievement and engagement of middle-grade students." Sociology of Education 66(July): 164-187

Lingard, B., M. Mills, et al. (2000). "Teachers, school reform and social justice: Challenging research and practice." The Australian Educational Researcher 27(No 3): 99-111

Lingard, B., M. Mills, et al. (2000). "Teachers, School Reform and Social Justice: Challenging Research and Practice." The Australian Educational Researcher 27(3): 99-113



Marsick, V. J. (1988). "Learning in the Workplace: The case for reflectivity and critical reflectivity," Adult Education Quarterly 38(4): 187-98

Mumford, M., S. Zaccaro, et al. (2000), "Leadership Skills for a Changing World: Solving Complex Social Problems," Leadership Quarterly

Quinn, R. (1991). Beyond Rational Management, Jossey-Bass

Ramsden, P. (1992). Learning to Teach in Higher Education, London, Routledge

Robbins, S. (2001). Organisational Behaviour, Upper Saddle River, New Jersey, Prentice Hall

Sambrook, S. and S. Stewart (2000), "Factors influencing learning in European learning oriented organisations: issues for management." Journal of European Industrial Training 24(2/3/4)

Sandberg, J. (2000). "Understanding human competence at work: An interpretative approach," Academy of Management Journal 43(1): 9-25

Sarason, S. B. (1982). The culture of the school and the problem of change, Boston, Allyn & Bacon

Sarason, S. B. (1990). The predictable failure of school reform: can we change course before it's too late? San Francisco, Jossey-Bass

Senge, P. (1995). The Fifth Discipline: The Art and Practice of a Learning Organisation, Sydney, Random House

Simon, H. (1991). "Bounded rationality and organisational learning," Organisational Science 1: 125-134

Sirotnik, K. (1986). Critical perspectives on the organisation and improvement of schooling, Boston, Kluwer

Sternberg, R. J. (1995). In Search of the Human Mind, Fort Worth, USA, Harcourt Brace & Company

Swieringa, J. and A. Wierdsma (1992), Becoming a Learning Organisation. Amsterdam, Addison-Wesley Publishers Ltd

Watkins, K. (1991a). Facilitating Learning in the Workplace, Deakin University

Watkins, P. (1991b). Knowledge and Control in the Flexible Workplace. Geelong, Deakin University

Wheatley, M. (1994), Leadership and the New Science, San Francisco, CA, Berret-Koehler Publishers Inc

Wilkinson, S. (1998). Naval Instruction: A Comparative Research Study, Faculty of Education, Geelong, Deakin University: 384

Wiske, M. S., Ed. (1998). Teaching for Understanding, San Francisco, Jossey-Bass

Zack, M. (1999), Introduction, Knowledge and Strategy, M. Zack, Woburn, MA, Butterworth-Heinemann: vii-xii

Documents

Integrating Classroom and Workplace Learning for a ... · THO04961 "Integrating classroom and workplace learning for a knowledge-based society" ... knowledge-based attributes of post-modern