WORKPLACE FORMATION: HOW SECONDARY SCHOOL … · HOW SECONDARY SCHOOL STUDENTS MANAGE STRUCTURED WORKPLACE LEARNING Pasco John Putrino This thesis is presented for the degree of Doctor

WORKPLACE FORMATION:

HOW SECONDARY SCHOOL STUDENTS MANAGE

STRUCTURED WORKPLACE LEARNING

Pasco John Putrino

This thesis is presented for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy of

The University of Western Australia

Graduate School of Education

2006

ii

Declaration

This thesis is my own work and no part of it has been submitted for a degree at this, or any other, university. Signature _______________________________ Pasco John Putrino Date _______________________________

iii

ABSTRACT

Changes in the international and Australian economies and labour markets during the 1980s and early 1990s substantially reduced employment opportunities for young people, causing higher education participation and increased school retention rates. Schools responded to these pressures and to Government policy with the development of Vocational Education and Training (VET) programs that integrate school-based learning with industry training, resulting in rapid growth in the participation of senior secondary students in such programs in recent years. Structured Workplace Learning (SWL) is an integral part of many such programs. How students manage their learning in these new environments was the focus of this study.

The aim of this study was to develop substantive theory about the ways in which secondary school students in their first year of a VET program undertaking Structured Workplace Learning for the first time, manage their workplace learning. The study began with 28 students but, due to attrition, focused on 23 students in models common to such programs, selected from four schools in one education district in Western Australia. The students selected undertook SWL throughout the year in various workplaces mostly, but not exclusively, within the hospitality industry. The emphasis on how students manage their learning reflects the interpretivist nature of the research. The study followed an interpretivist approach using qualitative methods of data gathering and analysis. Data were gathered using semi-structured interviews at three different stages during the year as the primary source. Data were also gathered through interviews with 12 employers or supervisors and observations of 12 students at the workplace. The data were coded and analysed using grounded theory strategies of open coding, axial coding and selective coding.

The central finding of the study was the theory of ‘Workplace Formation’ that explains the processes students use to manage their workplace learning during the first year of workplacement. ‘Workplace Formation’ is comprised of five categories of processes – preparing, familiarising, committing, adapting, and building. Each category is comprised of two or more processes. While students generally proceed through each category sequentially, there is a degree of overlap between them. This general sequential progression can be disrupted if circumstances change. The extent of ‘Workplace Formation’ may vary from one student to the next. The theory of ‘Workplace Formation’ provides a new perspective on how school students manage their learning in the workplace while still at school and adds to the theoretical literature in this field. Implications of the findings for further research, and for policy and practice are discussed.

iv

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Contents Page

Declaration ii

Abstract iii

Table of Contents iv

List of Acronyms ix

List of Figures x

List of Tables x

Acknowledgements xi

CHAPTER ONE Introduction 1

Aim of the Study 2

Structured Workplace Learning 3

The Development of Vocational Education and Training in Schools

5

Overview of the Research Literature 11

The Research Questions 13

Definition of Terms 14

CHAPTER TWO The Historical Development of Vocational Education and Training in Schools

17

Labour Market Changes and Their Impact on Vocational Education and Training

18

International Trends in Entry-Level Vocational Education and Training Reform

19

Great Britain 20

The United States 22

New Zealand 24

Germany 26

Common Elements in VET Across the Four Countries

28

Training for Employment in Australia From the 1970s to the Early 1990s

30

Vocational Education and Training in Secondary Schools 33

The National Strategy – Shaping Our Future 38

VET in Schools 39

v

Growth in VET in Schools in Western Australia 41

School-Based New Apprenticeships 43

Conclusion 44

CHAPTER THREE Review of Literature 47

Workplace Learning 48

VET Students on Workplacements 53

Novice Workers’ Socialisation Into Organisations 57

Newcomer Experiences and Adjustment in Socialisation 62

Adaptation to the New Setting 63

The Reference Group and Mentors 64

Information Acquisition 67

Conclusion 76

CHAPTER FOUR Research Method and Design 80

Theoretical Framework and Research Questions 82

The Central and Guiding Research Questions 84

The Interview Aide Memoire 86

The Population and Sampling Method 91

The Sample for the Study 95

Data Collection Methods 101

Semi-Structured Interviews 102

Workplace Observations of Student Participants 107

Minimising Bias 108

Analysis of Data 109

Open Coding 110

Axial Coding 110

Selective Coding 111

Trustworthiness of the Theory of Workplace Formation 112

Truthfulness or Credibility 113

Transferability 114

Dependability 115

Parameters of the Study 116

Conclusion 116

CHAPTER FIVE The Students and Their Workplaces 119

The Students and Workplaces in School 1 119

vi




Summary of the Types of Workplaces in the Study 134

Conclusion 136

CHAPTER SIX Major Themes and Issues 139

Intrinsic Factors Impacting on How Students Manage Their Learning at the Workplace

139

Clarity of Focus on a Career or Job 140

Students With a Clear Career Focus 140

Students Exploring Career Options and Gaining Workplace Experience

141

Selection of SWL Placement 142

Managing Competing Demands 143

Extrinsic Factors Impacting on How Students Manage Their Learning at the Workplace

148

Adequacy of Role Models and Mentors 148

Treatment in the Workplace 149

Quality of Work 151

Expectations of Employer or Mentor of the Student 152

Acceptance by Co-Workers 153

Conclusion 156

CHAPTER SEVEN The Theory of Workplace Formation 159

Workplace Formation – The Story Line 160

Workplace Formation – The Main Propositions 163

Propositions Relating to the Overall Theory of Workplace Formation

164

Propositions Relating to the Processes of Workplace Formation

164

The Categories and Processes of Workplace Formation 166

The First Category: Preparing 167

Informing 168

Selecting 171

The Second Category: Familiarising 174

Interacting 175

Clarifying Expectations 181

vii

Understanding Practices 186

Finding a Place 189

The Third Category: Committing 193

Assessing Benefits 194

Defining Role 198

The Fourth Category: Adapting 201

Complying 202

Initiating 208

Enculturation 214

The Fifth Category: Building 219

Modelling 220

Consolidating 226

Transferring 232

Contributing 235

Conclusion 238

CHAPTER EIGHT Remaining Propositions of the Theory of Workplace Formation

241

Propositions Relating to How the Categories and Major Processes Can be Understood Within the Context of the Students’ Day-to-Day Learning at the Workplace

242

Proposition Relating to How the Workplace Impacts on the Workplace Formation Process

243

Exposition of Propositions Through Five Cases 243

Case 1: Jason 244

Category 1: Preparing 245

Category 2: Familiarising 246

Category 3: Committing 248

Category 4: Adapting 251

Category 5: Building 255

Case 2: Emma 258

Case 3: Paul 269

Category 1: Preparing 269

Category 2: Familiarising 270

Category 3: Committing 271

Category 4: Adapting 272

Category 5: Building 273

viii

Summary of Cases 1, 2 and 3 277

Case 4: Jane 280

Case 5: Mary 284

Mary’s First Placement 285

Mary’s Second Placement 288

Proposition Relating to How the Workplace Impacts on the Workplace Formation Process

291

School-Based New Apprenticeships and the Workplace Formation Process

294

Conclusion 298

CHAPTER NINE Conclusion 299

Generalisability of the Research Findings 300

Implications of the Research Findings for the Development of Theory

301

Implications of the Research Findings for the Development of Policy

307

Implications of the Research Findings for Practice 310

Implications for Practice at the System Level 310

Implications for Schools 311

Implications for Employers 314

Conclusion 317

References 319

Appendices 334

Appendix A Aide Memoire for First Student Interview 334

Appendix B Aide Memoire for Second Student Interview 338

Appendix C Aide Memoire for Third Student Interview 340

Appendix D Aide Memoire for Employer Interview 342

Appendix E Workplaces of Students Involved in Study 343

Appendix F Open Coding of Interview Transcript 344

Appendix G Example of Axial Coding Theoretical Memo 345

Appendix H Consent Form and Information - Student and Parents

347

Appendix I Information Sheet for Host Employer 350

ix

LIST OF ACRONYMS

ANTA Australian National Training Authority

ASF Australian Standards Framework

ASTF Australian Student Traineeship Foundation

AVCTS Australian Vocational Certificate Training System

AVTS Australian Vocational Training System

CTE Career and Technical Education

DET Department of Education and Training

FE Further Education

GNVQ General National Vocational Qualification

MAATS Modern Australian Apprenticeship and Traineeship System

MCEETYA Ministerial Council on Employment, Education, Training and Youth

Affairs

NAAS National Apprenticeship Assistance Scheme

NCEA National Certificate of Educational Achievement

NEAT National Employment and Training System

NQF National Qualifications Framework

NTRA National Training Reform Agenda

NVQ National Vocational Qualification

NZQA New Zealand Qualifications Authority

OECD Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development

SBNA School-Based New Apprenticeship

SWL Structured Workplace Learning

SWTP School to Work Transition Program

SYETP Special Youth Employment Training Program

TAFE Technical and Further Education

TEE Tertiary Entrance Examination

TVEI Technical and Vocational Education Initiative

USA United States of America

VET Vocational Education and Training

WSA Wholly School Assessed

x

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 4.1 Aide Memoire for the First Guiding Question 87

Figure 4.2 Part of the Aide Memoire for the Second Guiding Question 89

Figure 4.3 Timeline Showing Periods of SWL and Interviews for Each School

96

Figure 4.4 Selective Coding Theoretical Memo 112

Figure 7.1 The Categories and Processes of Workplace Formation 166

LIST OF TABLES

Table 2.1 School-Based New Apprenticeships in Western Australia 43

Table 4.1 Interrelationship Between School Programs and Structured Workplace Learning

93

Table 4.2 Summary of Students Participating in Study 98

Table 4.3 Ethnicity of Students 99

Table 4.4 Socio-Economic Status of Students 99

Table 4.5 The Interview Schedule for Each Set of Student Interviews 104

xi

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

There are a number of people that I would like to acknowledge who have

made this study possible. Firstly, I would like to acknowledge the students from the

four schools who were the subjects of this study. Their willingness to participate,

give their time and openly discuss their experiences, which enabled me to develop

the theory of Workplace Formation, was very much appreciated, and I sincerely

thank them for this. I am grateful for the contribution they have made in furthering

understanding in this area.

I would also like to acknowledge the host employers and supervisors in the

various workplaces for their participation and valuable contribution to this research.

Their cooperation and support in allowing me access to their workplace and giving

their time was very much appreciated.

I would like to acknowledge the principals of the various schools in the study

for allowing me access to their students. Without their support research of this kind is

not possible, and I thank them for their cooperation.

I also acknowledge the VET coordinators in the various schools for their

great support and assistance in various ways. In particular, their support in gaining

access to students and supervisors during the data gathering phase was much

appreciated.

I would like to very much thank Associate Professor Marnie O’Neill for her

support, guidance, encouragement and constructive advice throughout the study.

Marnie was always available to provide the support needed, regardless of her busy

schedule during the period of this research, which made the work easier than it

otherwise might have been, and I very much appreciate her efforts in this regard.

xii

I would also like to acknowledge and thank Dr Anthea Taylor for her support

and assistance, particularly during the critical design and data gathering and analysis

stages. I greatly appreciated her guidance and constructive advice during this critical

period.

Finally, to my family – my wife, Beth, daughter, Claire, and son, Michael –

thank you so much for your support, understanding and tolerance throughout the

study, which has enabled me to maintain my motivation and enthusiasm through to

the end.

Introduction 1

CHAPTER ONE

INTRODUCTION

Provision of educational experiences to help young people meet the

challenges of the world of work through vocational education and training programs

that integrate school-based learning with industry training is one of the recent major

changes to the educational system in schools. This change resulted from worldwide

changes to labour markets, which had substantially reduced employment opportunity

for young people. In Australia, this contributed to higher education participation and

increased school retention rates through the 1980s. Schools responded to these

pressures with initiatives designed to broaden the post-compulsory curriculum and

accommodate the more diverse student population (Keating, 1995). The resultant

rapid growth in participation in vocational education and training programs,

including workplace learning, which is seen by many as a key component of

Vocational Education and Training (VET), is posing challenges to schools (House of

Representatives Standing Committee on Education and Training, 2004). In view of

this growth and government policies directed towards workplace learning, there is a

need to better understand the workplace as a learning environment for school

students from a learner perspective, in particular, how students manage structured

workplace learning. The study reported in this thesis addresses this need and makes a

contribution to understanding of this process.

This introductory chapter presents an overview of the thesis. Firstly, it

explains the aim of the study. Secondly, a brief overview is presented of the

emergence of VET, both internationally and in Australian schools, and the context

for the study. Thirdly, a brief overview of research into workplace learning and

Introduction 2

related literature is presented. Fourthly, the central research question, the theoretical

framework in which the study is located, and the research methods used are outlined,

and an overview of the structure of the thesis presented.

AIM OF THE STUDY

The aim of this study was to develop theory about how secondary school

students who are in their first year of a VET program and who have undertaken

Structured Workplace Learning (SWL) for the first time ‘manage’ their learning at

the workplace. The study focused on students in their first year of a VET program

because for many students this is the first time they experience the workplace in a

structured way that is aimed at developing work-related skills and knowledge, and

making them ‘work ready.’ This early period of workplace learning presents

particular and unique challenges for students. Students’ perspectives on their

experiences and the ways in which they manage in this early stage was the focus of

the study. Many of the students had some previous workplace experience through

part-time jobs after school. Although the purpose of a part-time job for such students

is primarily to earn money and gain independence (Ashenden, 1990; Robinson,

1999), it can make the transition less abrupt (Greenberger, 1988). Furthermore, the

opportunity to acquire skills through such work can help foster a positive orientation

towards work (Stern, 1997).

There is an increasing amount of research in the area of VET as a whole,

including students’ SWL experiences. Much of it is focused on program delivery and

evaluation or on the perceived benefits of SWL to students with relatively few

studies from a student perspective on their SWL. Such studies give a very limited

Introduction 3

insight into processes that students use in going about their workplace learning. This

research will add to this knowledge as well as provide valuable information on how

well students’ needs are met by such workplace learning programs. This research

provides valuable data on the kinds of workplaces that are conducive to workplace

learning, and the impact that the workplace and the relationships formed there can

have on the workplace learning experience of students. This research contributes to

the socialisation research literature by providing a model, grounded in the

experiences of students, of the processes that such students use in their socialisation

into the workplace.

STRUCTURED WORKPLACE LEARNING

Structured Workplace Learning, as defined by the Department of Education,

Science and Training (DEST) (2005), is a VET in Schools program or course

component situated within a real or simulated workplace, providing supervised

learning activities contributing to an assessment of competency and achievement of

outcomes relevant to the requirements of a particular Training Package or other

Australian Qualification Framework (AQF) VET qualification. Students are given

on-the-job training and mentoring to develop technical and generic employability

skills. These skills are assessed by a Registered Training Organisation (RTO) and the

VET qualifications are recognised nationally by industry and education systems. The

SWL program is currently administered through a national network of Local

Community Partnerships (LCPs) that generally have appropriate local knowledge of

training needs and employment opportunities, and good links with their school,

community, business and industry (DEST, 2005). SWL originated in the Training in

Introduction 4

Retail and Commerce (TRAC) program, a program established in 1989 by the

Dusseldorp Skills Forum to deliver training programs to senior secondary students

that had both workplace learning and school-based learning components. The

workplace learning component required students to spend one day a week at four

different workplacements over a year of school, undertaking a different

workplacement in each term to develop a variety of work-related skills (Figgis,

2006). Employers assessed students against a list of skills specific to the industry.

TRAC began in retailing and commerce but was expanded to other industry areas

such as automotive and hospitality. TRAC programs had a local management

committee of employers, educators and other community representatives; a

coordinator; and a workplace supervisor for each student. The committee’s major

functions were quality control and student selection. This local community support

was a key feature of the program (Smith, 1996). Key features of the TRAC model

were incorporated into the Australian Student Traineeship Foundation (ASTF),

which was established by the 1994 White Paper, Working Nation, to extend training

reforms into schools by supporting local business, education and community

partnerships in facilitating structured workplace learning in school-based vocational

education and training programs (Figgis, 2006). Funded by the Federal government,

the ASTF (later the Enterprise and Career Education Foundation (ECEF)) was also a

seeding agent for a number of VET in schools programs (Frost, 2003).

Introduction 5

THE DEVELOPMENT OF VOCATIONAL EDUCATION AND TRAINING IN

SCHOOLS

World-wide changes in the structure of labour markets, an increasingly

competitive global economy, rapid growth in new technologies and a decline of a

number of industries had resulted in increased global unemployment, a decrease in

unskilled and semi-skilled jobs, and changes in employment conditions. Within this

environment, special measures would be required to integrate unskilled young people

into the labour market (Mitchell, Robertson, & Shorten, 1999). Investment in

education and training and a change in labour market structures emphasising

transferable skills that would enable greater functional flexibility and worker

mobility was seen as a requirement (Mitchell et al., 1999). As a result, governments

world-wide have been establishing labour market programs to develop skills that

would enable workers to shift from declining sectors of industry to new ones, and

providing education and training programs so workers can upgrade their skills and

for secondary school students to develop vocational skills. In this environment,

higher education and school retention rates increased through the 1980s until 1992.

Many industrialised countries have undertaken substantial reform of the secondary

school curriculum, aligning the curriculum with national economic needs, and

facilitating school-to-work transition through workplace learning programs (Mitchell

et al., 1999).

Similar developments occurred in Australia where economic problems and

high unemployment levels led to the introduction of a number of employment and

training programs during the 1970s and 1980s. Some of these aimed to provide

training for unemployed youth. Others, such as the Participation and Equity Program,

Introduction 6

were intended to meet the training needs of post-compulsory youth. The Kirby

(1985) report criticised existing labour market programs and schemes for failing to

develop appropriate links with other areas such as post-secondary education and

income support. Kirby emphasised the provision of programs that combined work,

training and education; close collaboration between governments, employers, trade

unions and educational agencies; and greater flexibility in how people engaged in

paid work (Crittenden, 1996). Kirby also recommended a system of traineeships,

which combined vocational education and training and work in a related occupation

to form an integrated training system, and emphasised the desirability of full-time

education to Year 12. The Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development

(OECD) (1983) supported increased participation of young people in the later years

of schooling or its equivalent, but noted that the curriculum needed to be made more

attractive to them.

Several new programs followed as well as a number of government reports

advocating labour market reforms, skills formation, the development of a labour

force with broad transferable skills, and a competency-based approach focused on

achieving specified standards of skill. These resulted in the National Training

Reform Agenda (NTRA), a comprehensive approach to training aimed at making

vocational education and training more responsive to industry and improving

Australia’s international competitiveness (Hall, 1995), and the subsequent

establishment of the Australian National Training Authority (ANTA) in 1992.

Changes in the international and Australian economies and the labour market

during the 1980s and early 1990s, which led to increased school retention rates,

caused schools to respond by broadening the post-compulsory curriculum to

accommodate the more diverse student population (Keating, 1995). The Finn (1991)

Introduction 7

report, Mayer (1992a, 1992b) report and Carmichael (1992) report were instrumental

in developing Key Competencies related to industry needs and standards, setting

national targets for post-compulsory education and training encompassing schools,

higher education, Technical and Further Education (TAFE) and other training

organisations and attainment levels. They also led to the development of the

Australian Vocational Training System (AVTS) and the establishment of an entry-

level Vocational Education and Training system in schools.

The three national strategies that followed since 1994, Towards a Skilled

Australia (ANTA, 1994), A Bridge to the Future (ANTA, 1998), and Shaping Our

Future (ANTA, 2004), recognised that market pressures were reducing the demand

for unskilled youth and encouraging more to stay on at school. They also recognised

the need for a skilled workforce to increase Australia’s competitiveness and

productivity, and that social and economic influences were leading to the merging of

work and education. The agenda was to fundamentally transform the ways in which

labour market skills were developed, including improving the quality and relevance

of vocational education and training, and increasing opportunities for work-based

learning. Schools were to play a significant role by offering vocational education and

training programs to all students. School-based New Apprenticeships were made

available to secondary school students as part of the strategy to encourage recognised

vocational education and training in schools.

The development of vocational education and training in schools, in

particular, VET in Schools, provided as part of the National Training Framework and

designed to meet national competency standards, which includes both off-the-job and

on-the-job learning through partnerships with employers, resulted in rapid growth in

the participation of senior secondary students in vocational education and training

Introduction 8

programs in recent years (House of Representatives Standing Committee on

Education and Training, 2004). This rapid growth has placed considerable strain on

available resources, particularly with regard to workplace learning (Vinson, 2002).

In 2002, almost 61% of VET students undertook SWL compared to 44% in

2000 (House of Representatives Standing Committee on Education and Training,

2004). In Western Australia, approximately 56% of all VET students undertake

SWL. This indicates that SWL is seen as an important component of VET in the

development of employability skills and in aiding students to make a successful

transition to the workplace. A central feature of the VET agenda, endorsed by ANTA

and the Ministerial Council on Employment, Education, Training and Youth Affairs

(MCEETYA), is the notion that students cannot attain an adequate level of work-

readiness or learn about the realities of the workplace within a classroom. There is

also a belief that young people are more motivated and learn more effectively within

a practical work context (Vinson, 2002). The House of Representatives Standing

Committee on Education and Training (2004) acknowledged the value of SWL “as

an important component in developing workplace skills, and ensuring credibility

with industry of the effectiveness of vocational education in schools” (p. 65). This

value was recognised by Tasmania and New South Wales who mandated a

workplace component for all VET courses. The variety and practical nature of SWL

appeals to students; however, the logistics of organising placements can be

challenging and can present workload issues for some students (House of

Representatives Standing Committee on Education and Training, 2004).

Despite the strength of the Australian economy in recent years that has

included one of the lowest unemployment rates for many years (ABS, 2006) and the

steps taken to engage young people in learning and work through curriculum reform

Introduction 9

and stronger links to training, the proportion of 15 to 19 year olds who are not

engaged in full-time learning or work has not fallen in recent years - 14.4% in 1999

rising to 15.5% in 2004 and dropping slightly to 14.9% in 2005 - and only slightly

declined since the recession of the early 1990s (Dusseldorp Skills Forum, 2005). The

prospects of full-time work and further education for early school leavers have also

changed very little over this time despite the improved economic conditions. In 2003,

for example, 43% of early school leavers and 19% of those who completed

secondary school still experienced a difficult transition into full-time work or

education. In 2004, the figure for early leavers remained at 43% but increased to

23% for school completers. The prospects are worse for Indigenous young people

(Dusseldorp Skills Forum, 2004, 2005).

However, while employment prospects in general have increased, demand for

full-time workers has been lower than the supply, with much of the change in

demand due to the change in composition of output in the economy (Lewis, 2004).

Casual and part-time employment increased substantially over this period, and for

young people the labour market has shifted from unemployment to part-time work.

The proportion of 15 to 19 year olds who are employed part-time and not studying

full-time has almost doubled over the last 20 years – from 4% in 1986 to 7% in 2005

– with a corresponding decline in the proportion who are unemployed. For school

leavers, the increase in part-time employment over this time has been even greater –

from around 6% in 1986 to 16 % in 2005. While the proportion of school leavers

who are unemployed and not in full-time study has fallen since the early 1990s, it has

remained steady at around 9% for the last five years (Dusseldorp Skills Forum,

2005). Furthermore, the proportion of school leavers who are not studying and in

part-time work, unemployed or not in the labour force has increased since 1999

Introduction 10

despite a very strong economy (Dusseldorp Skills Forum, 2005). However, there has

been a significant increase in the take up of trade apprenticeships by teenagers –

from 37% in 2003 to 46% in 2004, an encouraging sign.

Research indicates that higher educational attainment improves one’s ability

to compete in the labour market. In many OECD countries, males aged 25 to 64

years who had not completed upper secondary education experienced an

unemployment rate at least 1.5 times greater than those who had completed upper

secondary education (OECD, 2002). In Australia in 2001, the unemployment rate of

this group was almost double that of secondary school completers (OECD, 2001).

For young adults, the difference is even greater. In 2001, the proportion of

unemployed young adults who had not completed upper secondary education was

16.1% compared with 7.3% for secondary school completers (OECD, 2002).

International comparisons of school-to-work transition indicate that, although the

employment rates for young adults are above the OECD average, teenage

unemployment and early school leaving rates in Australia are higher than the

average, and the employment disadvantage of poorly qualified school leavers is

above the OECD average (OECD, 2003):

Increasing skill demands in Australia and other OECD countries have made qualifications at the upper secondary level of education (or an apprenticeship qualification) a necessary condition for the employability of young people. (OECD, 2003, p. 91)

All State education systems across Australia are now moving to raise the

school leaving age to address this problem. However, as only approximately 30% of

students are university bound, there will be a continuing need to provide education

and training that supports the transition to work. Current moves to integrate VET into

mainstream senior secondary courses, as is currently occurring in Western Australia

(Curriculum Council, 2002), making VET accessible to a greater number of students

Introduction 11

will increase the pressure on structured workplace learning provision, heightening

the need for improved workplace learning processes and a better understanding of

such processes.

There are calls from industry for young people to be work-ready and aware of

industry standards when they enter the workplace (Vinson, 2002), and that future

VET programs in senior secondary schools should be targeted more towards the

development of industry-specific skills in identified skill shortages areas in addition

to areas of student interest (House of Representatives Standing Committee on

Education and Training, 2004). Does ‘work-ready’ also mean that young people need

to think of themselves as ‘workers’ with basic workplace formation? The House of

Representatives Standing Committee on Education and Training (2004) report states

“it is essential that by the time they leave school all students have developed a body

of employability skills and have an understanding of the work environment and of

the various transition and career paths open to them” (p. x). This research is,

therefore, timely in providing valuable knowledge in this area.

OVERVIEW OF THE RESEARCH LITERATURE

While the development of VET programs in schools has resulted in rapid

growth in the participation of senior secondary students in such programs,

development has not always been informed by empirical research, particularly with

regard to SWL. Given the effort involved in establishing these programs, research

has tended to focus at the program level (Phelps, Hernandez-Gantes, Jones, Sanchez,

& Nieri, 1995; Smith & Green, 2001). Some studies have investigated the learning

experiences of apprentices and trainees from a learner perspective (for example,

Introduction 12

Harris & Simons, 1999; Harris, Willis, Simons, & Underwood, 1998; Smith, 1998;

Schofield 1999a, 1999b, 2000; Strickland et al., 2001; Wilson & Engelhard, 1994).

Other studies (Billet, 1994a, 1994b, 1996) identified authentic workplace activities

and guided practice as important in the development of vocational knowledge. Many

of the findings of these studies are likely to have some relevance to this study given

the entry-level nature and focus on learning of apprenticeship and SWL programs.

Some studies (for example, Misko, 1998; Smith & Green, 2001; Teese, Davies and

Ryan, 1997) of structured workplace learning of secondary school students give an

insight into outcomes and benefits derived, but little understanding of the processes

that students use in going about their learning.

The organisational socialisation literature, which tends to focus on the

process of organisational socialisation in general, provides some insight into the

processes used by novice workers. While this literature is extensive, it pertains to

adult newcomers into organisations and it cannot be assumed that the socialisation

process unfolds in the same way for school students undertaking structured

workplace learning and school-based learning simultaneously. This study is,

therefore, important in examining this process and extending the socialisation

literature to this unique context. A detailed review of literature is provided in

Chapters Two and Three. Chapter Two contains an historical overview of the

development and growth of vocational education and training in secondary schools

from an international and a national context, with a particular focus on developments

in Western Australia. Chapter Three presents a review of the research literature

relevant to this study. This draws from the VET literature and from relevant

organisational socialisation literature.

Introduction 13

THE RESEARCH QUESTIONS

This is a qualitative study located within the interpretative paradigm. The

central research question is: How do secondary school students who are in their first

year of a VET program and who have undertaken SWL for the first time ‘manage’

their learning in the workplace? In framing the research in terms of how students

‘manage’ their workplace learning, the study sought to understand social processes

based on Blumer’s (1969) three principles that underpin symbolic interactionism.

These are: (1) People act towards things on the basis of meanings they have for them;

(2) meanings are social products derived from social interaction; and (3) social actors

attach meanings to situations, things, others and themselves through a process of

interpretation. Through this theoretical approach it is possible to arrive at an

understanding of the meanings that students have for SWL and the processes used to

‘manage’ their learning. The central research question was pursued through two

guiding questions: (1) What meanings did students attach to the VET program and

phenomena within it, with a particular focus on workplace learning; and (2) what

strategies did students use as a consequence of having these meanings? A third

question, which emerged from the data analysis and guided the discussion in the final

chapter, was: What are the implications for policy and practice of students’

perspectives in managing their workplace learning? Answers to these questions were

sought through a qualitative study of 28 students drawn from four secondary schools

in one metropolitan education district in Western Australia. Of the 28 students that

began in the study, 23 participated in all data gathering stages throughout the year.

The research methods and design are detailed in Chapter Four.

Introduction 14

Chapter Five presents a brief description of the student participants and the

range of workplaces in which they undertook SWL. Chapter Six discusses major

themes that emerged from the analysis of data from all participants that impacted on

the ways that students managed their workplace learning.

The major outcome from the present study was the development of the

‘substantive theory’ (Glaser & Strauss, 1967) of Workplace Formation. This theory,

which is grounded in the actions and interactions of students at their workplace,

represents the process by which VET students who undertake SWL for the first time

‘manage’ their workplace learning during the first year of the program. Chapters

Seven and Eight present a detailed exposition of the theory of Workplace Formation.

Chapter Nine, the final chapter, discusses its contribution to the theoretical literature

on organisational socialisation and implications of the findings for policy and

practice.

DEFINITION OF TERMS

The following terms are used throughout this thesis, and are defined to

provide clarity for the reader.

Vocational Education and Training

‘Vocational Education and Training’ (VET) is the attainment of knowledge and skills

relevant to employment. It involves the acquisition of competencies, and includes

accredited courses that integrate Units of Competency.

VET in Schools

‘VET in Schools’ programs are programs undertaken by school students as part of

the senior secondary certificate that provide credit towards a nationally recognised

Introduction 15

VET qualification within the Australian Qualifications Framework (MCEETYA,

2000b).

School-based New Apprenticeship

A ‘School-based New Apprenticeship’ (SBNA) is a formal, structured employment

and training arrangement for school students where the student is both a full-time

student and a part-time employee. The arrangement requires a registered Training

Contract and negotiated Training Plan with an employer that involves obtaining a

nationally recognised qualification and which is endorsed by the school; training in

accordance with the Training Plan; the apprentice undertaking paid work for the

employer; and the training is recognised on the senior secondary certificate (ANTA,

2003).

Structured Workplace Learning

‘Structured Workplace Learning’ (SWL) is a VET in Schools program or course

component situated within a real or simulated workplace, providing supervised

learning activities contributing to an assessment of competency and achievement of

outcomes relevant to the requirements of a particular Training Package or other

Australian Qualification Framework (AQF) VET qualification (DEST, 2005).

Training Package

A ‘Training Package’ is an integrated set of nationally endorsed standards, guidelines

and qualifications for training, assessing and recognising people’s skills, developed

by industry to meet the training needs of industry or group of industries. Training

packages consist of core endorsed components of competency standards, assessment

guidelines and qualifications, and optional non-endorsed components of support

materials such as learning strategies, assessment resources and professional

development materials.

Introduction 16

Unit of Competency

A ‘Unit of Competency’ specifies the knowledge and skill, and the application of

that knowledge and skill, to the standard of performance expected in the workplace.

Units of Competency are developed as part of Training Packages, or can be

separately developed for inclusion in accredited courses.

Key Competencies

Generic skills or competencies considered essential for people to participate

effectively in the workforce. They include: collecting, analysing and organising

information; communicating ideas and information; planning and organising

activities; working with others and in teams; using mathematical ideas and

techniques; solving problems; and using technology (Mayer, 1992a, 1992b).

Historical Development of Vocational Education and Training 17

CHAPTER TWO

THE HISTORICAL DEVELOPMENT OF VOCATIONAL EDUCATION

AND TRAINING IN SCHOOLS

A recent major change to the secondary school curriculum in Australia has

been the provision of vocational education and training programs. The 1980s saw a

dramatic change in the nature of government policy and systems responses to

education and training in Australia. Deregulation of the financial markets in 1986

and acceptance of a more competitive global economy heightened the need for new

policy directions for Australian governments. In this new economic climate

Australian policy focused on economic restructuring and greater productivity (Porter,

Lingard, and Knight, 1994). This resulted in the reframing of educational goals

within an economic agenda. New policy refocused educational outcomes to

emphasise national needs and skills development. The re-emergence of competency-

based training and assessment enabled new skills to evolve. These policies led to the

development of a standards framework and an entry-level training system that aimed

to provide high quality education involving general vocational as well as industry

specific competencies for all students.

Participation in VET in Schools programs has increased dramatically in

recent years. Commonwealth and State education and training agencies and non-

government sectors have been working with industry to achieve improved outcomes

in post-compulsory education and training in schools and School-based New

Apprenticeships. The changes have been stimulated not just by injection of

substantial budgets at both the Commonwealth and State level but also by a


willingness of schools, the training sector and industry to work together in

partnership (MCEETYA, 2000b).

This chapter outlines the context of the central research question. It begins

with an historical account of the development of vocational education within an

international context, followed by a discussion of the economic and political

circumstances that brought about these developments in Australia. This is followed

by a discussion of VET in Schools and some relevant issues that are emerging in the

area of vocational education and training in secondary schools in Western Australia.

LABOUR MARKET CHANGES AND THEIR IMPACT ON VOCATIONAL

EDUCATION AND TRAINING

During the second half of the twentieth century, world-wide changes in the

structure of labour markets, rapid growth in new technologies, the decline of a

number of industries that provided mass employment, and an increasingly volatile

global economic environment resulted in substantially higher unemployment, less

unskilled and semi-skilled jobs, and changes in employment conditions including an

increase in part-time jobs (Mitchell et al., 1999). These conditions required workers

to acquire new skills or to repeatedly update skills to continue to be employed.

Gregory (1993) found that in Australia between 1976 and 1990 middle income, non-

managerial, male jobs fell rapidly, and that employment decreased in middle and low

pay occupations. He concluded that unskilled workers had become unemployed not

only because unskilled jobs were disappearing but also because employees from the

disappearing middle were out-competing the unskilled for low pay jobs. In this new


environment unskilled young people faced almost permanent exclusion from the

labour market (Buechtemann & Soloff, 1994).

As a result, governments worldwide experienced increasing pressure to

develop programs that would enable workers to shift from declining sectors of

industry to new areas, facilitate retraining and the upgrading of skills of workers, and

provide education and training programs for low skilled workers and new entrants to

the labour market (Mitchell et al., 1999). Furthermore, to be competitive in this new

global economic environment required a highly skilled and adaptable workforce.

This required an increase in education and training investment as well as a

professional labour market with a stronger emphasis on transferable skills that

allowed greater flexibility and worker mobility (Mitchell et al., 1999).

International Trends in Entry-Level Vocational Education and Training Reform

One consequence of the labour market changes between 1976 and 1990 was

the growth in school retention rates through the 1980s. Links between schools and

industry had become an important issue in the policy debates of industrialised

countries. In countries such as Great Britain, the United States, Australia and New

Zealand, “a crisis of confidence in education itself” (Coombs, 1985, in Kennedy,

1995, p. 71) provided further impetus for change. In Great Britain, for example, it

was argued that “schools should promote enterprise and adaptability and fit young

people for working life in a technological age” (Department of Education and

Science, 1985, in Kennedy, 1995, p. 71). Similar concerns regarding the

effectiveness and standards of schools were expressed in Australia (Dawkins,

1988b). Levin and Rumberger (1989, in Kennedy, 1995) noted the efforts of


industrialised countries throughout the 1980s to re-gain “economic progress and

competitiveness” (p. 74). In this environment, “the skills and qualifications of

workers . . . [were] viewed as critical determinants of effective performance of

enterprises and economies” (OECD, 1989, in Kennedy, 1995, p. 75). Within this

context, the role of education and training was seen as crucial for skill development.

This meant aligning school curricula and higher education programs with the skill

needs of industry, facilitating the school-to-work transition of young people through

cooperation between schools and employers, and the convergence of vocational and

academic education.

To illustrate the international nature of such issues and how various

industrialised countries tackled the issue of skill development resulting from these

global changes, a brief overview of the developments in Great Britain, the United

States, New Zealand and Germany will be provided. These countries were chosen

because the nature of the issues addressed was common to them and to Australia, and

they illustrate various approaches and common elements within these approaches,

which are relevant to developments that have occurred in Australia. This will be

followed by a more detailed discussion of developments in Australia.

Great Britain

In Great Britain, in 1976, the existing school curriculum came under

considerable criticism for failing to prepare students adequately for the world of

work. It was argued that “schools should emphasise the contribution of the economy

to national life and prepare students to take their place in the economy” (Kennedy,

1995, p. 79). Subsequent reform efforts led to the Technical and Vocational

Education Initiative (TVEI) to enable the development and implementation of


practical and relevant school curricula that was controlled by labour market

specialists (Kennedy, 1995); and a variety of business-education links initiatives, key

skills and traineeships. The national curriculum prescribed in 1988 for all schools in

Great Britain reinforced traditional academic areas and measured outcomes in

academic terms (Kennedy, 1995; Hargreaves, 1989). Conflicting pressures resulting

from the A-levels’ resistance to change, the vocationalisation agenda, and pressure to

increase retention rates led to the tripartite system of academic (A-levels), vocational

education (formerly General National Vocational Qualifications - GNVQs) and

vocational qualifications (National Vocational Qualifications – NVQs) (Keating,

Medrich, Volkoff, & Perry, 2002, p. 60). The vocational education programs, which

related to broad industry areas, provided students with a wider choice of subjects,

some work experience but no structured workplace learning. Students with A-levels

in vocational education programs (GNVQs) were able to gain university entrance,

which led to a rapid increase in the number of students entering university in this

way (Keating et al., 2002, p. 60). Despite their vocational orientation, GNVQs have

been criticised for their academic orientation (Keating et al., 2002), and are being

withdrawn (Misko, 2006).

Some students enter the Youth Training or Modern Apprenticeships that

deliver the NVQs. At upper secondary, students can enter various institutions. Some

stay at secondary schools while others enter the Further Education (FE) sector. These

include FE colleges, technology colleges, university colleges, and sixth form

colleges. The FE colleges provide the NVQs and are the main off-the-job providers

for Youth Training and apprenticeships (Keating et al., 2002, p. 61). NVQs are

competency-based, designed for apprenticeship training in companies and within FE

colleges or VET providers.


The apprenticeship system traditionally provided the intermediate level skills

for British industry. The Modern Apprenticeships system was introduced in 1994

following a decline in the number of apprenticeships in the late 1980s and early

1990s. Modern Apprenticeships provide NVQ level 3 or higher in intermediate craft,

supervisory and technical skills, are available through a greater choice of providers,

and enable more flexible agreements with employers (Keating et al., 2002). Although

focused on 16 to 18 year olds, they have been broadened to include Young

Apprenticeships for students aged 14 to 16 years that enables students to spend up to

two days per week in the workplace (Misko, 2006).

Despite these initiatives, questions still remain about the overall performance

of the British training system. Hillage et al. (1998, in Keating et al., 2002) found that

few employers provided for long-term development of their recruits.

The United States

In the United States, the education reform agenda was steered by the 1983

report A Nation at Risk, which criticised the curriculum in schools as being

“homogenised, diluted, and diffused to the point that they no longer have a sense of

purpose” (Bennett, 1988, in Kennedy, 1995, p. 78). The need was seen for students

to be multi-skilled as well as prepared with basic skills in numeracy and literacy,

using technology and able to work in teams. To this end, there has been a strong

emphasis on integrating academic and vocational education aimed at contextualising

curricula (Stone, Kowske, & Alfed, 2004). The 1990 Carl D. Perkins Vocational and

Applied Technology Education Act mandated vocational and academic curricula

integration and provided support for Tech Prep programs, which link secondary

school with post-secondary education (Stern, Bailey, & Merritt, 1996, p. 17). The


1994 School-to-Work Opportunities Act further emphasised curriculum integration,

links to post-secondary education, and called for the addition of work-based learning

(Stern et al., 1996, p. 17). As a result, various training programs now exist fostered

by the growing demands of industry and substantial allocation of funds.

At the secondary level, vocational education or Career and Technical

Education (CTE) is offered in traditional comprehensive high schools and in

vocational schools. In some States, students attend ‘area vocational schools’ for part

of the time to undertake a vocational program as well as their comprehensive school

for the academic program. Some States have full-time vocational high schools that

provide a full vocational and academic program for students (Keating et al., 2002, p.

155). In these schools, students are able to choose from three basic kinds of

offerings: specific labour market preparation, family and consumer sciences

education, and general labour market preparation (Keating et al., 2002, p. 155). In the

other high schools, students are able to take as varied a vocational course as they

wish.

Specific programs or strategies commonly adopted by secondary schools

include:

a) Tech Prep programs that integrate academic and vocational coursework, and link

with post-secondary education.

b) Co-op programs where students coordinate their studies with a job that is related

to their academic or occupational goals. These programs have been recognised as one

of the most effective CTE strategies (Stone et al., 2004, p. 198).

c) Career academies enable students to integrate their academic and vocational

coursework that is focused on a career theme (Elliott, Hanser, & Gilroy, 2002, in

Stone et al., 2004, p. 198).


d) Youth apprenticeships. These typically combine school and work-based learning

in a specific occupation and are designed to articulate into a related post-secondary

program or a registered apprenticeship. In general, the take-up of these programs by

schools has been slow (Stone et al., 2004, p. 199).

CTE programs are now an important part of young people’s schooling with

schools offering CTE, work-based learning, and career development programs. The

focus of these programs continues to be in the senior years (11th and 12th grades).

Schools also have tended to offer more career development activities than either

work-based learning or specific CTE programs (Stone et al., 2004).

New Zealand

In New Zealand, education reform has been strongly influenced by New-

Right ideology for some time. In 1991, the Minister for Education criticised the

curriculum for provided “poor preparation for the competitive world” (Peters, 1995,

p. 62), and argued for a curriculum that was responsive to business and imbued with

a culture of enterprise and competition (Peters, 1995). This followed criticism by the

business community who had wanted a greater say in the school curriculum for many

years. The rise in unemployment throughout the 80s and early 90s led to criticism of

workers for their lack of skills and schools for not adapting to the new economic

environment (Snook, 1995).

However, government policy now fosters school-business partnerships to

bring schools closer to industry. The New Zealand Qualifications Authority (NZQA)

was established, which developed and manages the National Qualifications

Framework (NQF) and promotes the development of a modular curriculum based on

units of learning or unit standards (NZQA, 2001). These units are developed by


industry to meet the needs of industry, and are similar to the National Vocational

Qualifications in the United Kingdom. Unit standards are established at a particular

level of the NQF, and can be grouped to form different qualifications known as

national certificates. There are 10 levels in a qualification with levels reflecting the

content of the qualifications, which range from senior secondary education and basic

trades training to tertiary qualifications. Achievement standards have been developed

for secondary schools at NQF levels 1, 2 and 3, replacing a number of school

subjects previously covered by other certificates. These achievement standards are

derived from national curriculum statements for schools and are generally broader

and leaner than unit standards (NZQA, 2001). Unit standards are portable so that

students can study simultaneously at different institutions towards a qualification, or

start a post-school qualification while at school (Strathdee, 2003, p. 38). An

important principle of the NQF is that it will recognise skills, knowledge and

understanding gained outside of formal education or training (NZQA, 2003).

A number of initiatives have been undertaken with pathways to lifelong

learning and a commitment to increase foundation skills in key areas. The new

National Certificate of Educational Achievement (NCEA), which was designed to

increase standards and retention and the status of vocational subjects, allows flexible

learning pathways with learning assessed against pre-determined standards

(Strathdee, 2003). Some scepticism exists, however, as to the NCEA’s capacity to

achieve all of its aims. Strathdee (2003) argues that the NCEA is unlikely to alter the

structure of schools and provide more appropriate experiences for students with a

poor record of achievement.

Other initiatives include the Modern Apprenticeship Scheme, which provides

structured workplace learning for school leavers with industry involved in brokering


new apprenticeship opportunities. The Gateway Program, which began in 2001,

provides senior school students with structured workplace learning (Strathdee, 2003).

These programs “are designed to improve school-to-work transition by facilitating . .

. links between schools, training providers and employers” (Strathdee, 2003, p. 44).

Germany

In Germany, the vocational education and training system has been

characterised as a ‘high skills society’ (Ertl & Sloane, 2004, p. 1) with the dual

system widely regarded as a successful model of vocational education that provides a

“high standard of occupational skills” (Keating et al., 2002, p. 51). Studies in the

1980s (Daly, Hitchens & Wagner, 1985; Prais, Jarvis & Wagner, 1989; Steedman &

Wagner, 1987, 1989; cited in Stern et al., 1996) found that German firms in certain

manufacturing and service industries were more productive than similar firms in

Britain, and that much of the difference could be explained by the skill level acquired

by German workers in their initial training (Stern et al., 1996, pp. 14-15).

Productivity levels in German industry are relatively high by OECD standards and

skill levels consistent across industries (Keating et al., 2002). In the apprenticeship

system (dual system), young people acquire vocational skills and industrial

experience in various recognised occupations and acquire vocational knowledge that

supports the on-the-job training and academic knowledge by attending a vocational

school for one or two days a week (Misko, 2006; Reuling, 2002). Employer and

union involvement is high with the State setting the guidelines and delegating

responsibility for training to local chambers of industry and commerce who oversee

the VET system and implement training laws and regulations (Ertl & Sloane, 2004).

The overarching aim of the German VET system is embedded in the concept of


vocation which refers to “the individual’s capability to work and act competently in a

vocational environment” (Ertl & Sloane, 2004, p. 4), and ensures that qualifications

and skills acquired are transferable to other contexts and “responsive to the changing

economic and social environments of a whole occupational field” (Ertl & Sloane,

2004, p. 4).

At the end of four years of primary school, students may choose from various

pathways to complete five years (six in some States) of compulsory secondary school

– modern or special schools, secondary schools, grammar schools, and

comprehensive schools (Misko, 2006). These include academic or vocational

streams. Following compulsory general education students may enter vocational

training through an apprenticeship with the duration depending on previous

qualifications and occupation. Through this system, they are able to upgrade skills as

well as progress to higher levels of education (Misko, 2006). They may also enter a

full-time vocational school if they had not attained an apprenticeship or wish to

obtain vocational qualifications to enter a polytechnic or university. Secondary

school certification for apprentices is associated with particular occupations, for

example, motor mechanics or business for modern school graduates (Misko, 2006).

Successful graduation from the various secondary schools enables students to enter

higher education in a university or polytechnic. Students from the academic stream

mostly proceed to the universities. Those from vocational streams generally proceed

to a polytechnic, the Technische Universitat or to the dual system (Reuling, 2002).

While most students move from the technical schools into an apprenticeship, initial

vocational training is more complex due to a variety of institutions that provide off-

the-job training for the dual system, alternative training for those unable to obtain an

apprenticeship, and post-apprenticeship training (Reuling, 2002). These training


programs also have a bridging function between general and vocational pathways

that lead to full certificates. Apprenticeship completion rates are very high,

contributing to the high standard of occupational skills of the German workforce

(Keating et al., 2002). Structured workplace learning and applied learning pathways

have been introduced recently in polytechnics recognising the importance of such

learning in higher education (Misko, 2006).

Common Elements in VET Across the Four Countries

Some common elements are observed across all four countries that have

similarities with developments in Australia, but with varying approaches.

Improving Vocational Skills

Firstly, all have moved to improve vocational skills and provide relevant

industry training for young people in response to globalisation and international

competitiveness with training policies based on similar general principles.

Institutional VET Pathways

Institutional pathways to VET are a key feature in skill provision, and

vocational education and training in secondary schools combined with general

education is gaining prominence. In New Zealand, achievement standards at NQF

levels 1, 2 and 3, which have been derived from national curriculum statements for

secondary schools, can be completed during secondary school. In Germany, this has

been a feature for some time. In Great Britain, the ‘Success for All’ reform was

aimed at improving the quality and diversity of skills provision for 16 to 19-year-

olds, and there have been recent moves to increase participation in VET for this age

group (Misko, 2006). There is also an emphasis on transferable skills and gaining of


higher level skills and upgrading qualifications through continuing education.

Curriculum integration is a particular feature in secondary schools in the USA.

Industry Involvement

The involvement of industry in vocational education and training is also a

common feature. In Great Britain, sector skills councils establish links with

employers and, in collaboration with them, develop priorities and sector targets for

education and training, including apprenticeships. They also develop occupational

standards as industry needs in a particular sector change. In Germany, the various

chambers register trainees, certify trainers, provide advice, and set examinations for

the apprentices, activities that can influence school curriculum (Misko, 2006). In

New Zealand, industry has a significant involvement, particularly through the unit

standards and Modern Apprenticeships scheme.

Apprenticeships

A system of apprenticeships is also a common feature. The German dual

system is a highly standardised and regulated system with a general and vocational

education component taken at a vocational school that complements the in-company

training of three or four days a week. The Modern Apprenticeships and Youth

Apprenticeships in Great Britain enable secondary students to undertake an

apprenticeship while still at school. Similar programs have been established in the

United States and New Zealand. The cooperation and involvement of industry in

these programs is important to their success.

Workplace Learning

Workplace learning is provided primarily through the apprenticeship system

but may also be provided through other programs. In New Zealand, structured

workplace learning is provided through the Modern Apprenticeship Scheme and the


Gateway Program in senior secondary school. Schools in the USA offer structured

workplace learning through CTE programs such as tech prep, coop programs and

Youth Apprenticeships. In Great Britain only work experience is provided at the

secondary level through vocational programs. Youth Training and Youth

Apprenticeships provide a more structured on-the-job learning environment.

Since the 1970s similar developments in labour market programs occurred in

Australia. The development of these programs and their impact on the school system

will now be discussed.

Training for Employment in Australia From the 1970s to the Early 1990s

New economic problems such as rising inflation and demands for higher

wages emerged in Australia during the 1970s and 1980s. A significant consequence

of these problems was high unemployment, particularly youth unemployment, and

increased concern for vocational training. The deterioration of the labour market

during the 1970s increased the focus on vocational education and training. This

resulted in government initiatives to improve workforce skills for greater efficiency,

for workers to develop new skills for new industries, and for skills training for the

unemployed (Mitchell et al., 1999).

Following the 1974 Australian Labour Market Training: Report of the

Committee of Inquiry into Labour Market Training (Cochrane, 1974) several new

labour market programs were introduced. The National Employment and Training

System (NEAT) replaced 14 earlier training programs that targeted specific groups.

Its diverse range of objectives included, among others, skill development and


alleviating unemployment (Mitchell et al., 1999). The National Apprenticeship

Assistance Scheme (NAAS) was a major training initiative. Other schemes such as

the Special Youth Employment Training Program (SYETP) and the School to Work

Transition Program (SWTP) targeted unemployed youth. These programs largely

aimed at improving the quality of labour. However, in the early 1980s, there was also

an emphasis on job creation programs to increase the demand for labour (Mitchell et

al., 1999). A decrease in the number of apprentices in the early 1980s led to the

introduction of the Trade Based Pre-Employment Courses. The Participation and

Equity Program, which targeted 15-19 year olds, was aimed at improving the quality

and range of courses available to less able and unemployed young people, expanding

school-TAFE collaboration, and improving articulation to further training (Mitchell

et al., 1999).

The 1985 Report of the Committee of Inquiry into Labour Market Programs

(Kirby, 1985) had a significant influence on the present VET system. The report was

critical of the existing labour market programs for failing to develop appropriate

links with other areas such as post-secondary education. The report emphasised the

provision of programs that combined work, training and education; close

collaboration between governments, employers and education agencies; and more

flexible employment structures (Crittenden, 1996). Kirby recommended a system of

traineeships, which would combine broad-based vocational education and training

and work in a related occupation to form an integrated training system. The

curriculum would include transferable skills as well as the humanities and social

sciences taught in vocational and academic contexts. Kirby also urged for full-time

participation in Years 11 and 12. Kirby (1985) stated:

Most young people want to learn and believe that education can lead to more desirable jobs. However, many of them consider the school curricula irrelevant


to the social and occupational skills they will need in later life. . . . We believe it is necessary and urgent to obtain further increases in participation in the later years of schooling or its equivalent. If this is to be achieved, schools will have to be made more attractive to many young people. It will require changes in the educational environment, the relevance of courses, the types of instruction, the administration of schools and further consideration of the training and retraining of teachers. (pp. 61-62)

Following the Kirby (1985) report, several new programs were introduced.

These included the Australian Traineeship System, which paid employers and TAFE

providers to offset the costs of providing on-the-job and off-the-job training, and the

Youth Training Program and Adult Training Program.

The National Training Reform Agenda

Various Federal government reports advocating labour market reforms

followed from 1986 to 1988. Of particular significance was Australia Reconstructed

(ACTU/TDC, 1987), which recommended the development of labour market and

training programs, and the establishment of a National Employment and Training

Fund to support skill formation and training (Mitchell et al., 1999). In Skills for

Australia (Dawkins & Holding, 1987), the Federal government articulated the role

that education and training was expected to play in increasing Australia’s

international competitiveness. The report noted that successful economies had “given

high priority to education, skills and competence at work” (Dawkins & Holding,

1987, p. iii). Education and training were seen as important in developing a

workforce with broad-based transferable skills and that could meet the labour market

needs of industry. A Changing Workforce (Dawkins, 1988a) highlighted the need for

broad-based training, multi-skilling, and for a competency-based VET system

focused on achieving specific skill standards (Mitchell et al., 1999). The report

Labour Market Reform: The Industrial Relations Agenda (Willis, 1988) also

emphasised the need for a more broadly skilled, flexible workforce with training at


all levels. Labour market reforms aimed at improving workforce skills and the

subsequent reform of the industrial relations policy to enable more flexible

recognition of skills led to the development of the National Training Reform Agenda

(NTRA). The involvement of industry was a firm policy decision of the NTRA to

ensure that vocational education and training would be responsive to its needs (Hall,

1995).

Vocational Education and Training in Secondary Schools

Concerns about the post-school preparation and skills of early school leavers

continued through the 1980s and the early 1990s (Malley, 1999). These concerns

were heightened by the high unemployment levels for school leavers, which

prompted further policy initiatives (Malley, 1999). Finn (1991) argued that there was

“a related process of convergence between the concepts of work and education” (p.

ix), and that schools needed to “become more concerned with issues of employability

and the provision of broad vocational education” (p. ix) in order to meet the needs of

students, and that “there should be continuing growth in education and training in all

educational sectors and in the workplace” (p. ix). Finn proposed new national targets

for post-compulsory education and training encompassing schools, higher education,

TAFE and other training.

New participation measures were proposed which guaranteed young people a

place in school or TAFE after Year 10 for two years full-time or three years part-

time. This was to include a new entry-level training system, which provided general

vocational and occupation-specific competencies that related to industry needs and

standards. The new measures would integrate with other vocational pathways, and


provide opportunities for as many young people as possible, particularly those with

disabilities and others ‘at risk.’ Finn (1991) also proposed work-related “Key

Competencies” (p. x) that all young people should acquire and the development of a

“standards framework” (p. xi) to describe each Key Competency at a range of levels

to enable appropriate curriculum development.

Mayer (1992a, 1992b) modified the Finn competencies to a more general

skill orientation. According to Mayer (1992b, p. 4), “competence involves both the

ability to perform in a given context and the capacity to transfer knowledge and skills

to new tasks and situations.” Mayer’s (1992b, p. 2) modified competencies included:

collecting, analysing and organising information; communicating ideas and

information; planning and organising activities; working with others and in teams;

using mathematical ideas and techniques; solving problems; and using technology.

Harrold (1994) stated that the focus on employment-related competencies by Finn

(1991) and Mayer (1992b) were “part of the more general attempt to reform

industrial practices towards multi-skilling, occupational flexibility and equal

employment opportunity” (p. 214).

Carmichael (1992) advocated structural reform directed towards industry

standards, arguing that change was needed “to improve our international

competitiveness, to complement changes in work organisation and industrial

relations, and to improve the coverage, quality and equity of vocational certificate

training in Australia” (Carmichael, 1992, p. vii). He also argued that “all [education

and training] pathways should provide for recognition of prior learning, and

articulation and credit transfer to higher levels of competence” (Carmichael, 1992, p.

vii).


Carmichael (1992) proposed an integrated entry-level training system to meet

“the growing convergence of work and learning and of general and vocational

education” (p. v), and addressed vocational education and training for Australian

Standards Framework (ASF) levels 1, 2 and 3. Carmichael (1992) set clear targets for

the Australian Vocational Certificate Training System (AVCTS), including the

training participation of 90 per cent completing Year 12 and attainment targets by the

year 2001. To meet these targets, Carmichael recommended the development of

more vocational options in Years 11 and 12, more extensive use of contextual

learning methods, Senior Colleges to provide mature learning environments for

upper secondary programs, and improved careers education. Closely linked local

networks with schools, colleges and community providers to provide off-the-job

education and training, and ‘on-the-job’ training with local industries were

recommended to provide flexible delivery. The establishment of the Australian

National Training Authority (ANTA) in 1992 paved the way for the development of

a national training system and for implementation of the Australian Vocational

Training System (AVTS). The AVTS and Carmichael’s flexible delivery model has

had a significant impact on labour market training programs, and on today’s VET in

Schools and School-based New Apprenticeship programs (Malley, 1999).

In 1994, the national strategy Towards a Skilled Australia (ANTA, 1994)

provided a clear statement for direction of VET in Australia. It recognised that

market pressures were reducing the demand for unskilled young people, encouraging

them to stay at school, and that the rate of participation in VET was above

expectations (ANTA, 1994). The OECD (1994b) argued that for many students “the

classroom does not present a meaningful context for learning” (p. 81), and that

students should be “provided with opportunities to engage in the real-world tasks that


characterise that particular occupation” (p. 82). The OECD maintained that a VET

system must provide alternative pathways for students, but that it was important that

these pathways were not seen as second best option for students who performed

badly in formal schooling. The government’s Working Nation (Keating, 1994) White

Paper on Employment and Growth contained several initiatives to increase young

people’s participation in VET. The Australian Student Traineeship Foundation

(ASTF) was established to support school-industry programs through a network of

training brokers. School-based traineeships made available to Year 11 and 12

students enabled them to combine their school-based studies with paid work. It was

recognised that although young people’s participation in VET was increasing, many

still saw university education as the only desirable post-school option (ANTA, 1994).

This was reflected in the upper secondary curriculum, which was primarily geared to

prepare students for university entrance (ANTA, 1994). The national strategy

included working with the schools sector to encourage an increase in recognised

VET in schools, and to meet the Working Nation targets.

New Apprenticeships

In August 1996, the Federal Government launched the Modern Australian

Apprenticeship and Traineeship System (MAATS), subsequently called New

Apprenticeships (and known as Australian Apprenticeships from July 2006). New

Apprenticeship programs (including traineeship programs) were made available in a

wide range of industries within a national qualifications framework. They were

intended to expand into areas where training did not exist, particularly in industries

and occupations where there were identified skill shortages, poor training or

projected employment growth (Stromback, 1996). Vocational education and training

was expanded in schools, and School-based New Apprenticeship (SBNA) programs


made available to school students. As a result, secondary school students are able to

undertake a SBNA while at school, giving them a clear and accessible pathway to

employment and further training.

The National Strategy - A Bridge to the Future

The national strategy A Bridge to the Future (ANTA, 1998) recognised

increased international competition due to globalisation, and the importance of

fundamental reforms in all areas of the Australian economy for future prosperity.

New information and communication technologies, changes in work organisation,

the emergence of service and knowledge-based industries as important sources of

employment, social changes, and the continuing need to reduce the level of

unemployment had increased the demand for skills (ANTA, 1998, pp. 1-2).

Enterprises were “becoming increasingly dependent on the skills of their workforce

in order to . . . provide high quality services and products” (ANTA, 1998, p. 2) and

be internationally competitive.

The strategy continued to emphasise fundamental transformation of the ways

in which labour force skills were developed in the workforce. This included

expanding pathways and options for young people, improving the quality and

relevance of VET institutions, and increasing opportunities for work-based learning

through New Apprenticeships. Within this vision, schools would continue to play a

significant role by offering relevant VET programs to all students; and establishing

partnerships with parents, industry, and VET institutions. A range of new training

products, known as Training Packages (ANTA, 1998), was gradually made available

to all training institutions including secondary schools. Training Packages are

developed by industry training advisory bodies, and enable people to develop the


skills and knowledge needed by that industry to the required standards. These

packages also provide a platform for lifelong learning (ANTA, 1998).

The preceding section has provided an historical account of the development

of vocational education and training in schools in Australia. The next section will

address recent and current issues in this field.

The National Strategy - Shaping our Future

The national strategy for VET in Australia from 2004 to 2010, Shaping our

Future (ANTA, 2004), argues the strong need to invest more in skills, and in

increasing labour market participation. Industry continues to be seen as the dominant

driver of VET, with the first objective directed at industry. However, the strategy

emphasises that while VET needs to continue to be responsive to clients’ needs (that

is, industry and other employers) it more clearly recognises that the needs of

individuals and communities must be addressed (Karmel, 2004). Of particular

relevance to schools are strategies (a) to improve the value and image of VET to

clients, the broader community and other education and training sectors; (b) equality

of participation with particular emphasis on disadvantaged groups; and (c) to make

learning pathways seamless by fostering partnerships between schools and other

sectors (ANTA, 2004, pp. 15-17).

Significant funding has been made available by governments to increase the

quality and quantity of nationally recognised VET programs in schools. Students are

able to graduate from secondary school with full or partial VET qualifications as well

as a senior secondary school certificate (ANTA, 2004).


VET in Schools

The various training initiatives through the 1990s led to a significant increase

in the number of secondary school students engaged in vocational education and

training and structured workplace learning. In 1996, an estimated 60,000 secondary

students participated in school-industry VET programs as part of their school

program across Australia. The number more than doubled to an estimated 130,000

secondary students by 1999 (Malley, Keating, Robinson, & Hawke, 2001). By 2002,

over 185,000 students were participating in VET in Schools programs (Teese,

Polesel, Walstab, & Mason, 2003), rising to 202,900 students in 2003 and to 211,885

in 2004, more than a three-fold increase since 1996 and representing almost half of

all upper secondary students in Australian schools (MCEETYA Transition from

School Taskforce, 2004, 2005). These increasing enrolments in VET programs in

schools were triggered by grants from the AVTS in 1993 and 1995 and the ASTF

(Malley, 1999). The ASTF later became the Enterprise and Career Education

Foundation but is now abolished. While some States have maintained specialised

VET schools for some time (for example, agricultural schools), Tasmania was the

first to fully link VET programs into the senior secondary school curriculum (Malley,

1999, p. 39). The 1998 agreement of the Ministerial Council for Employment,

Education, Training and Youth Affairs (MCEETYA) on a definition of VET in

Schools paved the way for State education authorities to recognise VET

qualifications for secondary graduation purposes, thus facilitating the embedding of

VET into school curricula and the growth in VET participation (Malley, 1999). VET

in Schools programs are currently defined as programs undertaken by school students

as part of the senior secondary certificate that provide credit towards a nationally


recognised VET qualification within the Australian Qualifications Framework

(MCEETYA, 2000b).

In Western Australia, all students in VET in Schools programs work towards

completion of one or more Units of Competency from the National Training

Packages. A number of students undertake full certificate courses, some to

Certificate III. Although SWL is no longer a requirement, a substantial number

undertake SWL and incorporate Units of Competency within SWL. In 2003, for

example, 8,422 VET students out of a total of 15,109 (55.7%) undertook SWL

(Department of Education and Training, 2003). The number increased to 9,985

students (54% of all VET in Schools students) in 2004 (MCEETYA Transition from

School Taskforce, 2005). All VET in Schools programs in Western Australia

subscribe to nationally agreed principles and to a definition of VET shared by all the

school sectors (Department of Education and Training, 2006). SWL that incorporates

at least one Unit of Competency qualifies for VET in Schools funding (Department

of Education and Training, 2006).

In Western Australia, there is recognition of the significant role that VET

plays in the transition from school to employment, in the provision of alternative

pathways, and how students “benefit from the practical orientation of VET studies”

(Curriculum Council, 2002, p. 20). Furthermore, there is general acceptance that

increasing access to and the status of VET can significantly increase school retention

rates (Curriculum Council, 2002; Lamb, Walstab, Teese, Vickers, & Rumberger,

2004; Polesel et al., 2005). Lamb et al. (2004) contend that VET programs support

retention by “extending choice of programs in upper secondary school to include

ones with more overt and demonstrable economic benefits and which are also more

accessible and satisfying in learning terms” (p. 50). Recent changes to the senior


secondary school curriculum in Western Australia saw the development of ‘courses

of study’ comprised of a number of semesterised units increasing in complexity and

depth. These changes are designed to “encompass the interests and post-school

aspirations of the full range of post-compulsory students” (Curriculum Council,

2002, p. 50), and provide for “the more complete integration of VET into the whole

post-compulsory schooling program . . . so that a growing clientele can be

accommodated” (Curriculum Council, 2002, p. 21). To this end, VET can be

delivered in various ways (Curriculum Council, 2002, pp. 54-55):

a) VET integrated within a course of study where all the requirements to achieve

relevant Units of Competency and meet Australian Quality Training Framework

(AQTF) standards are built into the course.

b) VET as a complete course of study that includes all content required for selected

competencies in the relevant Training Package.

c) Stand-alone VET. These are comprised of Curriculum Council endorsed unit

equivalents of nominal 55 hours duration developed directly from Training Packages.

SWL may be built into the respective courses of study or unit and contribute to the

Western Australian Certificate of Education (Curriculum Council, 2002).

Growth in VET in Schools in Western Australia

In 1996, 2.8% of all Year 11 and 12 students participated in VET programs in

Western Australian secondary schools. This grew to 19.0% by 1999, to 45.9% in

2002, and to 46% in 2003 (EDWA, 1999; Department of Education and Training,

2002, 2003). Furthermore, there was a 377% increase from 1996 to 2000 in the

number of schools offering VET programs. All senior high schools now offer VET in

Schools programs and almost all schools with Year 11 and Year 12 students provide


vocational education and training programs. The Western Australian government

school targets for VET in Schools outlined in the New Framework for Vocational

Education 2001 to 2004 (MCEETYA, 2000a) were achieved 12 months ahead of the

target date with the numbers reaching a plateau in 2003. As student numbers

increased, a subsequent plateau was expected. However, saturation was expected at

around 70% of the Year 11 and 12 cohort (Department of Education and Training,

2003). Thus, there is potential for expansion if sufficient resources are provided and

opportunities are made available to a broader cohort of students. This rapid growth in

VET in Schools program uptake has placed considerable strain on available

resources, particularly with regard to SWL.

Western Australia no longer mandates on-the-job learning through SWL as

part of the VET in Schools program requirement, unlike Tasmania and New South

Wales (House of Representatives Standing Committee on Education and Training,

2004). However, the National Training Packages are giving increasing prominence to

on-the-job learning. Industry’s continued cooperation in providing SWL

opportunities will be critical, heightening the need for better strategies and industry

partnerships to be developed. This is further complicated as VET in Schools

continues to be made available to students in Years 8 to 10 (MCEETYA, 1999,

2000b). In 2003, there were 109 Year 9 and 1,050 Year 10 students engaged in

approved VET programs (Department of Education and Training, 2003). In 2004,

this grew to 327 students in Years 8 and 9 and to 1,582 Year 10 students

(Department of Education and Training, 2004). A pilot study in 1999 of Year 10, 11

and 12 students undertaking VET in Schools programs in Albany, Western Australia,

recognised the attainment of Year 10 students. The study highlighted the difficulties

of providing workplacements for a large number of students in a country town. To


provide sufficient placements, the industry base was broadened to include various

community-based industries (EDWA, 1999).

School-Based New Apprenticeships

In 1999, some 4000 students were enrolled in School-based New

Apprenticeships (SBNA) across Australia (Malley, 1999). This increased to 12,300

in 2003, up 26% from 2002 and more than three times the number in 1996, and to

12,998 in 2004 (MCEETYA Transition from School Taskforce, 2005). The number

of students that undertake SBNAs in Western Australia (referred to as School-based

Traineeships in Western Australia (ANTA, 2003)) has been small - less than 5% of

all students that undertook VET in Schools programs and SBNAs in 2001

(Department of Education, 2001). This rose to around 6% in 2003 mainly due to a

fivefold increase in Aboriginal SBNAs from 2002 to 2003 (from 120 in 2002 to 643

in 2003), and to around 6.9% in 2004 (Department of Education and Training, 2004).

There has, however, been a steady increase since 1998. This is illustrated in Table

2.1.

Commenced Completed Cancelled/ Expired Active/ Pending

1998 75 37 38 1999 160 74 86 2000 213 101 112 2001 300 167 134 2002 280 142 138 2003 783 420 361 2 2004 985 253 400 333 [Source: DET, 2003, 2004]

Table 2.1: School-Based New Apprenticeships in Western Australia


VET in Schools programs are intended to articulate to or provide the

opportunity for students to undertake a SBNA (MCEETYA, 2000b). In Western

Australia, students are able to commence a SBNA at any time during Year 11 or

Year 12. However, students other than those in VET in Schools programs are also

given access to SBNAs. While the SBNA has many similarities to the VET in

Schools program it nevertheless has significant differences:

• 1 or 2 days of paid work at the workplace,

• from 12 to 24 months depending on the program of the student,

• competency not time-based,

• training agreement needs to be agreed to and signed by all parties (ANTA, 2003).

SBNAs provide students an alternative to traditional senior secondary schooling.

They provide young people the opportunity to gain quality VET qualifications and

undertake paid work while completing their secondary school certificate. Smith and

Wilson (2002) found that students generally undertake SBNAs to gain a qualification

or specific industry experience, tend to be from lower socio-economic status and are

less likely to want to attend university post-school.

CONCLUSION

Global changes to labour markets and the emergence of new technologies and

industries which are increasing the demand for skills to maximise opportunities and

increase international competitiveness is leading to a rapid transformation of the

ways in which labour force skills are developed. The post-school environment of

fewer lifetime jobs; a blurring of the distinction between life and work, and between

university pathways, training pathways and work where people can readily move


from one to the other; and the lack of opportunities in the future for unskilled and

semi-skilled workers has heightened the need for students to develop transferable and

life-long learning skills, including development of employability skills required by

industry. Australia’s national strategy argues the need to continue to invest in skills

development and in increasing labour market participation. Industry’s participation

continues to be seen as a dominant driver of VET to ensure skills are appropriate and

developed to industry standards. The school system is seen as playing a vital role in

this process by expanding options and pathways and creating new opportunities for

school students to participate in VET and structured workplace learning.

The New Framework for Vocational Education and Training in Schools

(MCEETYA, 2000a) acknowledges that for young people to make a successful

transition from school to working life, amongst other things, they “will need to have

mastered the key work and life related competencies” (p. 16). The OECD (1998, in

MCEETYA, 2000a, p. 16) has identified that the “provision of a broad range of

vocational and technical skills, together with general education and personal skills”

is a key element in the successful transition of young people not continuing into

higher education. To enhance transition, a key policy direction is for VET in Schools

programs to be fully integrated into mainstream senior secondary schooling and to

provide greater access to generic skills and competencies by their inclusion in the

curriculum and “emphasised in work based and community based learning”

(MCEETYA, 2000a, p. 24). Programs of study will need to develop these skills in a

flexible way with some cohesion between the school learning program and the

potential post-school destination. The substantial growth of VET in Schools to date

has impacted on most aspects of school life, particularly with regard to the

organisation of structured workplace learning. The logistics of organising


workplacements can be challenging for schools and for students but workplacements

can be beneficial and are important in making the VET experience a success (House

of Representatives Standing Committee on Education and Training, 2004). The

integration of VET into mainstream curriculum and how to meet the needs of the

various stakeholders will provide more challenges.

To improve the value of VET in schools, programs will need to continue to

be responsive to the needs of industry and to meet the needs of a more diverse

student population and provide them with the skills necessary for the competitive

world of the 21st century. Structured workplace learning is an important part of this

process. This research is on the ways in which students in their first year of SWL

manage the learning process at the workplace. A better understanding of this process

should be useful in informing program improvement. This thesis does not challenge

the ideological position that a key function of schooling is to prepare young people

for work or to enhance the transition to the world of work. It focuses on the ways in

which the young participants experience one of the key curriculum elements –

structured workplace learning – and how they make meaning from those experiences.

This focus has informed the discussion of relevant literature in this and the following

chapter, and the theoretical framework underpinning the research.

Review of Literature 47

CHAPTER THREE

REVIEW OF LITERATURE

In this chapter, empirical studies relating to the central research question

(how secondary school students who are in their first year of a VET program and

who undertake SWL for the first time ‘manage’ their learning at the workplace) will

be reviewed. Since the early 1980s, demand for reform in schools and the workplace

in industrialised countries such as Australia, the United States, the United Kingdom,

and New Zealand has raised expectations for students, educators, parents, and

business leaders. Two critical issues driving these reforms are (a) how to best

provide young people with educational experiences to prepare them for life-long

learning, and (b) how to ensure that the future workforce has the expertise and skills

to produce world-class products and services as businesses are affected by rapid

change, new technologies, and global competition (ANTA, 1998, 2004; Stasz, 1995,

in Phelps et al., 1995). In developing these reforms, considerable effort has gone into

establishing new partnerships, developing curricula, and the professional

development of teachers. Hence, the literature reflects an emphasis on research at the

program level. Since students are the primary focus of these reforms, it is important

to understand how they view these programs and how they manage the demands and

expectations placed upon them. Furthermore, students’ experiences and insights are

valuable for improving and refining the reforms.

The number of studies that examine the experiences of young people entering

the workforce has increased over recent years. Australian studies of students

undertaking vocational education and training programs have largely been concerned

with program delivery, particularly for apprenticeships and traineeships, and program


evaluation. These include, for example, studies on User Choice (Noble, Hill, Smith,

& Smith, 1999; Selby Smith, Selby Smith, & Ferrier, 1996). Lamb, Long, and

Malley’s (1998) analysis of national longitudinal surveys of young people over 20

years suggested that the VET system plays an important role in the transition from

school to work for a wide range of young people, particularly the disadvantaged.

Early school leavers, young people from lower socio-economic backgrounds, those

in rural areas and those with disabilities make more use of VET opportunities than

other forms of education to enhance their labour market prospects. However, these

groups continue to be disadvantaged in the labour market, which suggests that VET

can do more to serve their needs (Lamb et al., 1998).

WORKPLACE LEARNING

Workplace learning is a key strategy for improving the skills of Australian

workers, thereby increasing productivity (ANTA, 1998, 2004; Billett, 1998; Hager,

1997). Structured Workplace Learning (SWL) is regarded as central to the

effectiveness of secondary school VET programs (House of Representatives

Standing Committee on Education and Training, 2004). There has been rapid growth

in the participation of senior secondary school students in SWL in recent years.

Through SWL in the workplace, students are given on-the-job training through

supervised learning activities and mentoring to enable them to develop technical and

generic employability skills. It is, therefore, important that workplaces are effective

learning environments for this to occur, and are able to accommodate the needs of

learners, which are likely to vary as learners gain expertise (Cornford & Beven,

1999).


Various studies have investigated the learning experiences of apprentices and

trainees (Harris et al., 1998; Schofield 1999a, 1999b, 2000; Smith, 1998; Wilson &

Engelhard, 1994). Apprenticeships and traineeships, both referred to as New

Apprenticeships, provide apprentices and trainees with employment and the

opportunity to acquire the knowledge, skills and attributes relevant to a particular

occupation as part of an accredited award. The workplace is the primary learning site

and the site where learning and working occur simultaneously. Over the training

period, the apprentice may be exposed to a variety of learning environments that may

aid or hinder the learning process (Strickland et al., 2001). Students on SWL

placements are at the workplace to learn technical and generic skills and knowledge

through a structured learning program that leads to a recognised VET qualification

for a shorter length of time than apprentices, but are not in an employment

relationship. Hence the expectations of employers and apprentices will be different to

those of host employers and students on SWL. However, many of the experiences of

apprentices and trainees are likely to be similar to those of students on SWL

placements given that both involve workplace learning albeit with a greater emphasis

on skill formation for apprentices. Hence, some of the research findings on the

workplace experiences of apprentices and trainees are likely to be relevant to the

workplace experiences of secondary students on SWL placements.

Harris and Simons’ (1999) study of perspectives of apprentices, host

employers and TAFE teachers on the effectiveness of on- and off-job sites as

learning environments found that apprenticeship training was viewed differently by

each group. These differences, partly due to each individual’s personality and

background, resulted in the apprenticeship arrangement being less than effective in

many cases (Harris & Simons, 1999, p. 74). Factors which apprentices believed


reduced the effectiveness of their integrated training from both sites included, among

others, (a) poor teaching at each site; (b) lack of effective communication between

sites; (c) difficulties in reconciling the different expectations at each site; (d) a poor

working relationship with the employer; (e) absence from the workplace for extended

periods; and (f) the constant pressure to be productive and to learn the job at the

same time (Harris and Simons, 1999, pp. 72-73). Harris and Simons contended that

“these factors, to a large extent, reflect the tension between the roles of ‘worker’ and

‘learner’ which the apprentice constantly felt and needed to juggle in order to meet

the expectations of both teachers and employers” (p. 73). Apprentices felt they learnt

more on-site where learning was seen to be real, contextualised and relevant, more

observational and manipulative, more time pressured and improvised, and more

incidental and one-to-one in nature (Harris & Simons, 1999, p. 75). Harris and

Simons (1999) also found that “apprentices very early and readily assimilate the

worksite culture” (p. 77), which “can heavily influence any change in the

apprentices’ perspective” (p. 78).

Strickland et al. (2001) found that apprentices and trainees valued the

workplace as a learning environment, supporting other research (Billett, 1993; Candy

& Matthews, 1998), and that informal learning was “shaped by the work structures,

processes and cultures established in enterprises” (p. 61). Aspects of the workplace

that assisted apprentices in their learning included (a) the quality of instruction, (b)

quality relationships between apprentices and co-workers including being treated as

adults, and (c) work that increases in complexity over time and supports autonomy

(Strickland et al., 2001, p. 62). These highlight the importance of appropriate skills

of mentors and supervisors. A key learning strategy was observing a task being

performed by a more experienced worker while it was simultaneously explained to


them. Boredom due to the lack of challenging tasks often hindered progress. This

was particularly problematic in small enterprises where the work lacked variety or

where the apprentice was prevented from tackling more complex tasks (Strickland et

al., 2001, p. 62). The study supported Harris and Simons’ (1999) research on the

problems of integrating both on-the-job and off-the-job learning. Furthermore,

apprentices found balancing the role of learner and worker a significant issue.

Aspects of learning that apprentices considered important but lacking in some

workplaces were opportunities to consolidate skills, communication with others

about their work, and opportunities to have a say in what they would learn

(Strickland et al., 2001, p. 64).

Some of the findings from these studies are likely to be relevant to students

on SWL as SWL is undertaken in similar types of workplaces and there are

similarities in the workplace experiences of students on SWL with those of

apprentices. An understanding of how students manage their work in such learning

environments is crucial in this process.

Brooker and Butler (1997) found that “the workplace was essentially a place

of production, and learning was very much a secondary consideration” (p. 503). This

resulted in a tension between production and learning. This “production imperative”

(p. 503), Brooker and Butler contended, led to a curriculum driven by work

requirements and “a narrowing of the range of skills and understandings” (p. 503).

The study found that the emphasis on learning decreased when the apprentice

became productive. Guided practice and feedback, identified by apprentices as

important for skill development, was limited. Despite this, apprentices and their

supervisors regarded the workplace as a legitimate learning environment. This

“production imperative” and the associated narrowing of skills and reduction in


guided practice is likely to impact on students on SWL in such workplace

environments.

Other studies support engagement in authentic workplace activities and

guided practice in the workplace as key features of gaining vocational knowledge

and skills (Billett, 1994a, 1994b, 1996). Billett (1994b) found that learning activities

that were “embedded in a culture of practice” (p. 128) were most effective, whereas

“when learning was disembedded from authentic activities and social relations it was

perceived to be markedly less effective” (Billett, 1994b, p. 128). Guidance by expert

mentors and other workers was important in the learning process. According to

Billett (1999), the workplace, everyday work tasks, other workers, and observing and

listening are key sources of apprentices’ learning. Guided learning strategies of

questioning, coaching, analogies, diagrams, and modelling increased learning

through everyday work, even though such strategies were used in different ways

(Billett, 2000). Billett (2001) found that the richness of opportunity for apprentices to

engage in everyday work and the relevance of the activities impacted positively on

the quality of learning.

Unwin and Wellington (2001) found that apprentices were more serious

about their apprenticeship than a part-time job they may have had while at school,

but that this seriousness brought with it new fears about the world of work. They

argue that this is brought about by their peripherality as newcomers (Lave &

Wenger, 1991) to the organisation. Unwin and Wellington (2001) found that

apprentices have to “learn to adapt to and be aware of the cultural nuances present in

the different environments” (p. 65) that they are situated in, and learn how to cross

from one work context to the next (Engestrom, 1996, in Unwin & Wellington, 2001)

as is the case with students on SWL. The study supports Brooker and Butler’s (1997)


findings that because the production imperative is more important than learning, it

can impede the learning process.

Smith and Wilson’s (2002) study of school students involved in School-based

New Apprenticeships (SBNAs) showed that students generally found the SBNA “a

highly positive experience” (p. 51) with success depending to a significant extent on

the student’s intentions. Most undertook the SBNA to get a qualification, to confirm

or reject their career choice, or to gain specific experience in an industry (Smith &

Wilson, 2002, p. 53). In line with other studies (for example, Harris & Simons,

1999), most preferred the practical orientation of the workplace learning, but the

amount of learning varied. Most participants managed to fit in their schoolwork with

the workplace learning, although it was harder to manage than having a part-time

job. Smith and Wilson (2002, p. 53) identified a number of factors such as student

motivation, industry area, a student’s particular mix of school subjects, and the

efficacy of the on- and off-the-job training provided, that affected the total learning

experience of each SBNA. These factors are likely to impact students on SWL

placements who are likely to have similar experiences.

VET Students on Workplacements

While a great deal of the literature on vocational workplacements for

secondary school students is concerned with the diversity of programs involving

workplacements (Smith & Green, 2001), some studies focused on structured

workplacements (Malley, Frigo, & Robinson, 1999; Misko, 1998; Smith, 1996;

Smith & Green, 2001; Spark, 1998; Teese et al., 1997). Polesel, Teese and O’Brien

(2001), for example, compared the structured workplace learning experiences of


VET students in Victoria with the workplace learning experiences of non-VET

students, and found significant benefits were derived through structured

workplacements. Students saw the opportunity for workplace training and helping

them to get a job as significant benefits. Polesel et al. (2004), who examined VET in

Schools students’ views of their SWL as part of the study, reported similar findings.

Both of these studies and others (for example, Polesel & Teese, 2002, 2003) found

that, post-school, these students had higher rates of employment, participation in

apprenticeships or entry to TAFE or other VET provider than their non-VET peers.

Polesel et al’s. (2005, pp. 13-14) study of over 6,000 VET and non-VET students in

New South Wales schools, of which approximately 80% of the VET students

undertook SWL, reported that the vast majority of SWL students found SWL useful

and valuable, that it had built their confidence, and that it helped them to decide what

type of job they did or did not want to do. The links with industry created by such

workplacements were seen as highly beneficial to students. The workplacement in

this study was typically 70 hours as a minimum; however, many students complete

considerably more hours. The benefits to SBNA students in making a successful

transition to the workforce were even greater. Mulraney, Turner, Wyatt, Harris, and

Gibson (2002) examined the role of small enterprise in school students’ SWL. These

studies give an insight into outcomes and benefits derived through SWL programs,

however, a very limited insight into the processes that students use in going about

their learning at the workplace can be derived. For example, school students on

workplacements could be exploited or treated badly and may not be able to develop

adequate support structures over this time (Shilling, 1989, in Smith & Green, 2001,

p. 21). They “may encounter questionable practices” and feel pressure to conform

(Smith & Green, 2001, p. 21). These studies give little insight into how students


manage their learning in such situations. In Smith and Green’s (2001) study, VET

students viewed SWL placements (referred to as vocational placements in that study)

as sites for developing specific skills, supporting similar findings in other studies

(Misko, 1998). Students in SBNAs also viewed their worksites as sites for

developing specific skills, contrasting to some extent the findings of Smith and

Wilson (2002) who reported a broader range of reasons why students undertook a

SBNA. The study found that being shown by a supervisor or co-worker was the most

common method of learning skills, and was seen as the most useful when

accompanied by explanation (p. 89). Observing other workers was also an important

technique. The study also found that student motivation was important, resulting in

students being more proactive in their learning (p. 90).

A key motivational factor appears to be the work itself, which can be exciting

to students (Taylor & Koczberski, 2001a, 2001b). Another is the adult nature of the

work culture. Taylor and Koczberski (2001a) stated that “in this respect, SWL . . .

assisted these youth experience life and relationships in a more adult and responsible

way” (p. 85). Negative statements by students about their SWL experience were

often qualified with a statement like – “but that’s what it is like in the real world and

you gotta get used to it” (p. 86). This, Taylor and Koczberski (2001a) argued,

indicates “a mature approach to the experience of working” (p. 86).

Petherbridge (1997), who has adopted a critical stance on workplace learning,

noted that knowledge of how to integrate into an adult environment was a functional

outcome for students. Students liked being treated as an adult and given

responsibility, which made them model their behaviour on the adults around them.

Petherbridge, however, argued that what occurs on workplacements is “ideological

coding” (Apple, 1982, in Petherbridge, 1997, p. 25). “Isolation, boredom and low


level tasks . . . were attributed simply to the inevitable nature of work” (Petherbridge,

1997, p. 25), and the hierarchical organisation was taken for granted. “Self-selection

and allocation of placements . . . replicated stereotypical gender roles and this was

further heightened by the deployment of pupils on placement” (p. 25). Petherbridge

further noted that familiarisation with the workplace environment was accomplished

in a very short time (two weeks in Petherbridge’s study).

Smith and Green (2001) pointed out that any discussion of school students’

learning in workplaces needs to be set in the context of how workers in general learn

in workplaces. However, as Smith and Harris (2001, in Smith & Green, 2001, p. 23)

noted, students on workplacements are not employees, and it cannot be assumed that

they work or learn in the same way. Smith (2000) suggested that when young people

enter the world of work they have a variety of things to learn, called ‘domains of

learning.’ These domains are: (a) technical skills, (b) generic competencies, (c)

knowledge, (d) learning about the occupation, (e) learning about the organisation, (f)

learning about the industry, (g) job-keeping and political skills, (h) learning about

employee/industrial relations, (i) learning about oneself, and (j) learning about

learning (Smith, 2000, p. 376). Thus, job-related skills and knowledge are only one

element of what needs to be learned. Understanding what is required to be a member

of the occupation, the organisation and the industry in order fit in, be an effective

member and get on in the organisation are key components that also need to be

learned (Smith, 2000). Smith’s (2000) study of full-time workers new to the

workforce found that young people used a variety of learning methods some of

which may apply to students on SWL. These include:

• formal training

• being shown how through formal coaching


• practising authentic activities

• being placed with expert workers

• asking questions

• taking on more responsibility

• observing other workers carry out different tasks

• having a go

• learning from mistakes (Smith, 2000, p. 348)

To gain a greater insight into the beginning experiences of and processes used

by novice workers at the workplace, relevant literature on organisational

socialisation, which has some application to young people entering their first jobs

and to this study, will be reviewed. These studies have tended to focus on the process

of organisational socialisation in general and not specifically on new entrants to the

workforce.

NOVICE WORKERS’ SOCIALISATION INTO ORGANISATIONS

Organisational socialisation is “the process by which an individual acquires

the social knowledge and skills necessary to assume an organisational role” (Van

Maanen & Schein, 1979, p. 211). As such, it involves “adjustment and learning to

meet organisational standards and norms” (Cooper-Thomas & Anderson, 2005, p.

116). The newcomer defines his or her role in the organisation (Fisher, 1986) as he or

she is transformed from ‘outsider’ to an effective member (Feldman, 1981). When

newcomers enter a new job, they generally experience some degree of surprise

(Louis, 1980) or reality shock (Van Maanen, 1976), and, according to Louis (1980),

they must make sense of their new setting. Van Maanen (1976) suggested that entry


into an organisation entails boundary passages across several dimensions. Each

dimension possesses a particular set of characteristics which, when related to a

person’s prior experiences, motivation, values and expectations, determines how the

individual links with the organisation. Van Maanen sees the socialisation process as a

three-stage process. Firstly, the degree to which an individual is prepared for entry

through anticipatory socialisation impacts on how well one adjusts to the

organisational demands. Secondly, entry into the organisation is often associated

with a reality shock. The extent to which the shock affects the outcomes of

socialisation “depends largely upon the extent to which the person has correctly

anticipated the various expectations of the organisation” (Van Maanen, 1976, p. 84).

The process may provide affirmation or may require detachment from former

expectations if the individual’s expectations of the role differ from those of the

organisation. Van Maanen (1976, p. 84) noted that the encounter period was likely to

be difficult as the individual’s learning prior to entry often reinforced and amplified

unrealistic expectations. Environmental, organisational, relevant group, task and

personal variables mediated the impact of the encounter phase (Van Maanen, 1976,

p. 84). During this phase, the organisation may reinforce behaviours or attempt to

extinguish those behaviours considered inappropriate for the role (Porter, 1971, in

Van Maanen, 1976, p. 99).

Thirdly, if the new worker is to continue in the organisation, the individual

must undergo some form of change or adjustment with the degree of change

dependent upon organisational and individual characteristics (Van Maanen, 1976). A

key goal of organisational socialisation is to gain the newcomer’s commitment to the

organisation (Van Maanen, 1976). The longer the period of initiation, the more likely

it is that organisationally desirable outcomes are internalised (Hughes, 1958, in Van


Maanen, 1976, p. 88). This, in turn, is likely to lead to greater commitment (Becker,

1964; Kanter, 1968; cited in Van Maanen, 1976).

The work of Van Maanen (1976) and other studies (Schein, 1968; Van

Maanen & Schein, 1979) have tended to address the adoption of norms, values, goals

and the culture of the organisation. Others (Feldman, 1981, 1976) have addressed the

learning process of newcomers to an organisation. Feldman (1981, 1976) believes

that newcomers to an organisation experience changes through the development of

work skills and abilities, the acquisition of appropriate role behaviours, and

adjustment to the group’s norms and values. He also sees socialisation as a three-

phase process involving (a) anticipatory socialisation, (b) encounter, and (c) change

and acquisition (Feldman, 1981, p. 310). In anticipatory socialisation, a new member

forms expectations and makes decisions about the job before entering the

organisation. The newcomer is involved in processes to gain a realistic picture of the

job and of the organisation, congruence of skills and abilities, and congruence of

needs and values (Feldman, 1981, p. 310). Feldman contended that five processes are

involved at the encounter stage. These are (a) managing conflicts between personal

and work life, (b) managing inter-group role conflicts, (c) defining one’s own role

within the work group, (d) learning new tasks, and (e) establishing new relationships

and learning group norms (Feldman, 1981, p. 310). During this stage some initial

shift in values, skills and attitudes may occur. The change and acquisition stage

involves (a) resolution of role demands, (b) task mastery including gaining self-

confidence and consistent performance, and (c) adjustment to group norms and

values (Feldman, 1981, p. 310). Relatively long-lasting changes take place in this

third phase. Feldman stated that while the encounter stage normally precedes the

change and acquisition stage, “there is some continuity and overlap between stages”


(p. 310). Resolution of role demands involves clarifying and defining one’s role

within the work group; agreeing on the tasks to be performed; and making role

decisions to deal with conflicts between personal life and work life, and inter-group

role conflicts (Feldman, 1981). Congruence of skills, realistic job expectations, and

initial learning influence role definition. Having realistic expectations of the role and

potential sources of conflict can assist in managing conflict situations (Feldman,

1981).

With regard to the development of work skills, an individual’s ability has a

significant effect on initial learning and on job performance (Feldman, 1981). In

adjusting to group norms and values, the work group is particularly important. It can,

for example, be “a source of emotional support . . . solutions for work problems . . . a

normative referent for appropriate types of behaviour” (Feldman, 1981, p. 314), and

“can filter out information that contradicts dominant values” (Feldman, 1981, p.

314). Understanding the group’s norms and values, and gaining the trust of peers are

important in this process.

Feldman’s (1981) model, which integrated three distinct views of

organisational socialisation, also suggested attitudinal and behavioural criteria that

could be used to measure progress in organisational socialisation. He suggested that

to function effectively individuals must (a) conduct their role dependably; (b) remain

with the organisation; and (c) innovate and cooperate spontaneously to achieve

organisational objectives that go beyond role specifications (Feldman, 1981, pp. 314-

315). Affective outcomes included (a) satisfaction with work, (b) internal work

motivation, and (c) commitment to and involvement in work.

Feldman’s 1976 study, where he developed and tested his initial contingency

theory of socialisation, involved interview and questionnaire data from 118 hospital


employees including nurses, nurse’s aides, technologists, tradesmen and accounting

clerks. The study was not longitudinal and did not test the assumptions made about

the order of the socialisation activities. Although proposed as “the most reasonable

contingency model of socialisation” (Feldman, 1976, p. 449), Feldman

acknowledged that alternative models could be proposed and that it was important to

compare this model with others to see which best explained the socialisation process

(Feldman, 1976, p. 449). Feldman pointed out that the model pertained specifically

to the particular setting in which the study was conducted.

Taormina (1997) argued that there is a general misunderstanding of the role

played by ‘stage’ models (Feldman, 1981; Van Maanen, 1976) in organisational

socialisation theory, and argued that although such models have acknowledged the

continuous nature of the socialisation process it has tended to be viewed as composed

of discrete stages. Taormina re-conceptualised organisational socialisation as a

process with four domains. Each domain includes several content areas and each

operates continuously and concurrently with the others. They occur in varying levels

or amounts for each employee, which vary over time. The four domains are: a)

training; b) understanding; c) co-worker support; and d) future prospects (Taormina,

1997, p. 29). Taormina was also critical of previous definitions of organisational

socialisation for not being “sufficiently operational” (Taormina, 1997, p. 29), and re-

defined organisational socialisation as “the process by which a person secures

relevant job skills, acquires a functional level of organisational understanding, attains

supportive social interactions with co-workers, and generally accepts the established

ways of a particular organisation” (Taormina, 1997, p. 29).


Newcomer Experiences and Adjustment in Socialisation

The nature of the specific tasks that a newcomer to an organisation is given

plays a crucial role in the outcomes of the socialisation process (Van Maanen, 1976).

Being given on encounter tasks which are too easy or too difficult can result in

disillusionment (Van Maanen, 1976). Both upset assumptions individuals may have

about themselves (Schein, 1962, 1963, 1968b, cited in Van Maanen, 1976). Taylor &

Koczberski (2001a, 2001b) found the nature of the work in their study to be

motivational for students on SWL. A job that offers, for example, variety and

autonomy, can result in better performance and job satisfaction (Porter and Lawler,

1968, in Van Maanen, 1976). Conversely, repetitive or routine tasks can lead to

boredom, particularly if the task is easily accomplished (Van Maanen, 1976).

Louis (1980) contended that change, contrast and surprise were major

features of a newcomer’s entry experience into new work settings. The more

elements that are different, the more the newcomer has to cope with. The role may

require the newcomer to learn a new set of tasks. The newcomer also acquires a

position in the hierarchy, and within the work group, which may change over time.

However, newcomers are usually in peripheral positions initially, and develop more

central positions over time (Lave & Wenger, 1991; Louis, 1980). School students

making the transition from school to their first full-time job are likely to encounter

more changes than someone who is moving from one job to a similar one.

Newcomers will often carry memories of experiences in old roles into a new role,

which may cause the newcomer to attempt “to incorporate aspects of the old into the

new role or resist the new role” (Louis, 1980, p. 237). This is not likely to be the case


for students on SWL but could be encountered where students have previous

experience through part-time jobs.

Surprise “represents a difference between an individual’s anticipations and

subsequent experiences in the new setting” (Louis, 1980, p. 237), and may be

positive or negative. Surprise could be in relation to the job, the organisation or self,

and can arise from either over-met or under-met expectations (Louis, 1980, p. 237).

Several forms of surprise may arise during the encounter period that one must adapt

to. These are (a) unmet job expectations, (b) unmet expectations about oneself, (c)

difficulties in accurately predicting internal reactions to a new experience, and (d)

cultural assumptions from previous settings brought into the new setting (Louis,

1980, pp. 237-238). According to Louis, surprise is inevitable when a newcomer

enters an unfamiliar organisational setting. At this stage the newcomer is inundated

with unfamiliar cues. This invokes sense making, which assigns meaning to surprise.

In sense making, individuals rely on various sources including past experiences with

similar situations; personal characteristics; information and interpretations from

others in the setting; and the individual’s internalised interpretive schemes (Louis,

1980, p. 241).

Adaptation to the New Setting

The individual’s adaptation to the new setting occurs when the newcomer

becomes an insider. This occurs when newcomers are accepted and given

responsibilities, autonomy, trust, included in informal networks, encouraged to

represent the organisation, and sought out by others for advice and counsel (Louis,

1980). There are alternate views of how socialisation occurs. According to Becker

(1964), organisations remain stable with change being handed down from the top,


and members are socialised by the process of situational adjustment. Becker

contended that as a person moves in and out of a variety of social situations, he or

she learns the requirements of continuing in each situation and of success in it. If the

person “has a strong desire to continue, the ability to assess accurately what is

required, and can deliver the required performance, the individual turns himself into

the kind of person the situation demands” (Becker, 1964, p. 44). Lacey (1977) argued

that adjustment of this sort is only one part of the socialisation process, and that it

does not give the individual enough power over the situation. According to Lacey (p.

72), there are two kinds of situational adjustment – strategic compliance and

internalised adjustment. In strategic compliance, the individual complies with the

definition and constraints of the situation but has reservations about them. In

internalised adjustment, the individual complies with the constraints of the situation

and believes that they are for the best (Lacey, 1977, p. 72). Lacey (1977) also argued

that the individual can achieve change by causing those with formal power to change

their interpretation of what is happening in the situation.

The Reference Group and Mentors

Generally, organisation members are part of a smaller group, which

constitutes a key source of learning (Van Maanen, 1976). A newcomer may not be

taught the particular skills and secrets of the group until he or she is accepted by the

group. Once accepted, however, the group may cushion the impact of the reality

shock experienced during the encounter period. These groups are, in general,

supportive and help the individual interpret the demands of the role (Van Maanen,

1976). According to Van Maanen (1976), newcomers rarely perceive members of

such groups as equals. Stryker (1972) suggested that individuals in the group do not


necessarily have the same perspectives and that newcomers give greater

consideration to the perspectives of certain others, which he calls significant others.

Individuals select significant others from those available and use them as a frame of

reference (Stryker, 1972). The significant other “induces a new member to share the

group’s attitudes and beliefs” (Moore, 1969, in Van Maanen, 1976, p. 92).

Other studies have shown that experienced members of the organisation or

insiders, particularly co-workers and supervisors, are an important means by which

newcomers acquire information and are socialised into the organisation (Louis,

Posner, & Powell, 1983; Morrison, 1993a; Ostroff & Kozlowski, 1992; Settoon &

Adkins, 1997). Social interaction with insiders is seen as important in the

organisational socialisation process (Reichers, 1987). Settoon and Adkins’ (1997)

study further suggests that newcomers also use external sources but to a lesser extent

than insiders, and that initially adjustment can be problematic for those who rely on

external referents. However, insiders become more important sources once positive

relationships with them are established. Liden, Wayne and Sparrowe’s (2000) study,

although not with newcomers, showed that support and guidance received from

relationships formed with one’s immediate superior and co-workers are important

determinants of organisational commitment. This is particularly important in the

modern workplace where the work organisation is team-based and where group

members are empowered with decision-making. In such an environment, co-worker

support and guidance can assist peers to attain higher levels of performance (Liden et

al., 2000, p. 414). Morrison (2002) examined the role of social network ties during

socialisation of first-year accountants at a large global accounting firm. Morrison

(2002, p. 1156) found that newcomers with larger information networks across

various workgroups acquired greater organisational knowledge, whereas newcomers


with denser and stronger information networks acquired greater role clarity and task

mastery. The study also showed the importance of the supervisor in the newcomer

learning the job and the role. Morrison (2002) also found that commitment was

greater when friendship networks spanned across different workgroups, and social

integration was stronger in larger networks. Thus, Morrison (2002) argued that

“newcomers become socialised not only by interacting with insiders . . . but also by

developing certain configurations of relationships with insiders” (p. 1157).

Major, Kozlowski, Chao, and Gardner (1995), who examined the effects of

role development on the link between unmet expectations and socialisation

outcomes, affirmed the important role of the supervisor during socialisation. They

found that developing quality relationships with supervisors and co-workers

mitigated the negative effects of unmet expectations, which helps the newcomer to

adjust. Furthermore, they found that these relationships form early in the

socialisation period rather than later, supporting other research (Liden, Wayne, &

Stilwell, 1993). They noted that research “that does not assess responses until several

months after entry may fail to capture the changes that occur during initial

socialisation processes” (p. 427). Liden et al. (1993) showed that the quality of the

relationship that a newcomer forms with his or her supervisor is established within

the first few weeks of organisational entry (two major universities in their study).

Ashford and Black (1996) showed that newcomers with a greater desire for control

were more proactive in building relationships with their supervisors or bosses,

socialised and networked more with other workers, negotiated job changes and

positively framed the situation. Indeed, building a positive relationship with the boss

or supervisor resulted in higher performance ratings. The study found that these


tactics were related to job satisfaction and job performance with the exception of

feedback seeking, in contrast with other research (Morrison, 1993b).

Information Acquisition

Newcomers have a variety of things to learn in relation to the organisation,

the job, the role, and the work group for successful socialisation into the

organisation. In the initial stages, newcomers concentrate on acquiring information

about the specific tasks to be performed; clarifying and defining their role; and about

the organisational practices, policies, norms and values (Feldman, 1981; Louis, 1980;

Morrison, 1993a; Ostroff & Kozlowski, 1992). To do this, newcomers rely on

various interpersonal and non-interpersonal sources within the organisation (Louis et

al., 1983; Miller & Jablin, 1991; Reichers, 1987; Schein, 1988). Supervisors, co-

workers, and mentors are important interpersonal sources (Ashford & Cummings,

1985; Louis et al., 1983; Morrison, 1993a, 2002; Ostroff & Kozlowski, 1992) that

aid organisational adjustment. Co-workers, in particular, assist newcomers with task

performance (Ostroff & Kozlowski, 1992) and with their social integration

(Morrison, 1993a, 2002). Mentors assist a newcomer’s personal and professional

development and can provide support and advice that aids adjustment (Kram, 1985).

According to Bova (1987), mentors act as teachers “imparting to their protégés a feel

for their job, a knowledge of the skills needed for success, and also guidance

regarding future trends” (p. 124). Mentors create opportunities for their protégés and

facilitate learning of the organisation’s culture (Farren, Gray & Kaye, 1984).

Mentoring may assist individuals to cope better with stress and engender

organisational commitment (Scandura, 1997). Payne and Huffman (2005), who

surveyed over 1300 U.S. Army officers over a two-year period, showed that


mentoring contributed to higher levels of affective and continuance commitment.

The study showed that supervisors as mentors contributed to higher affective

commitment by protégés. Furthermore, career-related support from mentors was

more prevalent than psychosocial support.

Mentors can also act as role models where protégés learn work practices,

attitudes and values held by mentors (Kram, 1985; Scandura, 1997). Lave and

Wenger (1991) argued that newcomers learn through interaction with established

members. Bucher and Stelling (1977) found that newcomers used colleagues

selectively by emulating only those traits which they thought would be beneficial.

Filstad’s (2004) study of 11 newly appointed real estate employees showed that

newcomers use established colleagues as “multiple contingent role models” (p. 402)

or partial models during the socialisation process. Filstad (p. 405) found that

newcomers learn through observing and interacting with role models, and learn

different qualifications from several role models while learning both tacit and

explicit knowledge. In so doing, they create their own attitudes, personal style and

role behaviour. The study found that personal characteristics are affected by the

experience in the first four to six weeks, and suggested a strong link between

personal characteristics and how newcomers use role models. Filstad (2004, p. 403)

pointed out that in terms of a successful outcome, it is not merely a question of how

one uses role models but who one chooses as role models.

While earlier research tended to focus mainly on the outcomes of actions of

organisations on newcomers’ socialisation, more recent research has tended to focus

on newcomer proactivity, in particular, information acquisition, in the socialisation

process (Anderson & Thomas, 1996; Bauer, Morrison, & Callister, 1998; Chan &

Schmitt, 2000; Major & Kozlowski, 1997; Miller & Jablin, 1991; Morrison, 1993a,


1993b; Ostroff & Kozlowski, 1992; Saks & Ashforth, 1997a, 1997b; Wanberg &

Kammeyer-Mueller, 2000). Ostroff and Kozlowski’s (1992) study, which was

conducted over a period of several months with newcomers across a variety of

organisations, found that newcomers relied on various sources to gather information,

and that different sources varied in importance in the learning process. They found

that “newcomers rely primarily on observation of others, followed by supervisors

and co-workers to acquire information” (p. 867) (cf. Brooker & Butler, 1997; Smith

& Green, 2001). They also found that the focus of information acquisition was

primarily on the task and the newcomer’s role in the organisation during the early

period. These were seen as more important during this period than learning about

broader organisational issues. Furthermore, observation and experimentation were

found to be the most useful sources of knowledge. This finding, Ostroff and

Kozlowski (1992, p. 869) pointed out, suggests that learning occurs through

observing and modelling observed behaviour. Supervisors as a source of information

were important for successful socialisation, and, when combined with knowledge of

the job, increased commitment and aided adjustment.

Miller and Jablin (1991) examined newcomers’ information-seeking

behaviours during organisational entry. They argue that this is a critical time for

newcomers to learn their roles, and, therefore, tend to be more proactive in seeking

information at this stage (Miller & Jablin, 1991). In order to reduce uncertainty

newcomers experience at this time, they often seek information from supervisors and

co-workers. Miller and Jablin (1991, p. 101) contended that the way in which

newcomers seek information is likely to be shaped by their level of uncertainty, the

social costs inherent in information seeking, personality and previous experience,

and organisational contextual factors. Miller and Jablin (1991, pp. 103-113) found


that newcomers tend to use seven information seeking tactics that range in overtness

and specificity. These are: (a) overt questions, (b) indirect questions, (c) using third

parties, (d) testing the limits, (e) disguising conversations, (f) observing, and (g)

surveillance. Overt questioning is used when newcomers feel comfortable with

soliciting information directly from sources. It is also used “when there is little

chance of ‘losing face’ or being embarrassed” about asking (Brown & Levinson,

1978, in Miller and Jablin, 1991, p. 103). Indirect questioning is used when

newcomers are uncomfortable in seeking information from sources such as

supervisors and others. This is often in relation to appraisal and relational

information. Third parties, such as co-workers, are also used in such situations or

when primary sources are unavailable. Testing the limits involves creating situations

where sources must respond. This involves both deliberate rule breaking or rule

deviation to determine boundaries or consequences. Disguising conversations

involves “disguising information-seeking attempts as a natural part of conversations”

(Miller & Jablin, 1991, p. 108). According to Miller and Jablin (1991), this tactic

tends to be used in high social cost situations. Newcomers also observe a colleague’s

behaviour in salient situations. This is used to unobtrusively obtain information about

a task or behaviour, which the individual can then replicate if it is perceived to be

beneficial. Newcomers are more likely to use observation with co-workers than with

supervisors. Surveillance is an inconspicuous tactic used mainly with co-workers in

retrospective sense making (Miller & Jablin, 1991).

Miller and Jablin’s (1991) findings are in contrast to other studies (Ashford,

1986; Ashford and Cummings, 1985). Ashford’s (1986) study, where participants

had been with the organisation for an average of over 10 years, showed that as the

uncertainty on goal-related matters increased individuals sought more feedback and


valued it more. However, as expectations and the strategies for goal attainment

became understood, individuals tended to seek less feedback. The study found only

two general information seeking tactics, whereas, as Miller and Jablin (1991) noted,

different tactics may be used at various stages of one’s tenure.

Saks and Ashforth’s (1997b) study, which examined the relationship between

the socialisation tactics of the organisation, newcomers’ information acquisition and

socialisation outcomes, showed that newcomers’ proactivity in acquiring information

(through feedback and observation) is partly a function of what socialisation

strategies the organisation adopts, and that the frequency of information acquisition

influences adjustment. The study further suggested that socialisation tactics that

target social and interpersonal aspects of socialisation, particularly those that provide

the opportunity for social interaction with insiders, are most important for

information acquisition. Wanberg and Kammeyer-Mueller (2000) found that

relationship building by newcomers was important for such outcomes as social

integration, clarifying one’s role, job satisfaction and commitment, which extended

Ashford and Black’s (1996) findings, and that proactive feedback seeking was

related to greater job satisfaction. Again, the study highlights the importance of

social interaction with insiders to achieve these outcomes, supporting other research

(Saks & Ashforth, 1997b; Louis et al., 1983). Wanburg and Kammeyer-Mueller

(2000) also found that personality dimensions of extraversion and openness were

relevant to socialisation outcomes. For example, higher extraversion was associated

with higher feedback seeking and relationship building. This finding may have

particular relevance for the present study where students on SWL may exhibit lower

levels of extraversion due to either their own personality or to external factors such

as an unfamiliar environment where workgroup members are generally older than


themselves. Like other studies in this area, Wanberg and Kammeyer-Mueller’s study

involved newcomers to an organisation rather than people new to the workforce or in

a structured workplace learning situation as is the case in the present study.

Participants included a diverse sample of unemployed adults ranging in age from 20

to 67 years re-employed into a variety of jobs. The findings, therefore, may only

have limited application to the present study. Major and Kozlowski’s (1997) study of

students who were at various stages of a co-operative program at a co-operative

college and who were undertaking a twelve-week career-related internship with a

sponsor organisation found that students with low self-efficacy – belief in one’s own

ability to fulfil work responsibility – were more proactive in seeking job-related

information from organisational insiders and sought it more frequently than those

with high self-efficacy when task interdependence and accessibility to insiders were

high. Major and Kozlowski suggested this may be “to overcome perceived

informational deficits linked to task performance” (p. 24) or to overcome the element

of surprise.

Chan and Schmitt (2000) examined individual changes in proactivity and

adaptation outcomes during organisational entry, using first-year doctoral students.

Data was collected over a four-month period. They found that during this early

period newcomers seek job-related (or technical) information and information about

expectations and their role (referent information) from both co-workers and

supervisors but that they seek less technical information from co-workers over time,

possibly due to the perceived social costs of doing so, and more referent information

from supervisors over time. Chan and Schmitt (2000) also found that relationship

building with co-workers, important for social integration, decreases over time,

suggesting that “newcomers become less concerned with fitting in and more


concerned with performance evaluation” (p. 207) with time; however, social

integration increases as relationships with co-workers continue to develop.

Furthermore, task mastery and role clarity increase as they learn to perform the job

and what is expected of them. Chan and Schmitt (2000) further suggested that

newcomers’ concern for evaluation motivates them to “continually seek referent

information from supervisors as new work situations are encountered” (p. 208).

Adkins (1995) examined the relationship between a newcomer’s previous

work experience and the four major tasks of the socialisation process – task

competence, role clarity, realistic job expectations, and interpersonal relationships –

and socialisation outcomes. Adkins found that perceived task competence was

related to self-rated performance, and role ambiguity and role conflict were related to

job satisfaction and organisational commitment (p. 856). The study revealed,

however, that “previous work experience had little effect on adjustment to the new

organisation” (Adkins, 1995, p. 854). Adkins noted that the study used “a very coarse

measure of previous work experience” (p. 855), and organisational differences

between the setting of the study and other settings may have overshadowed any

similarities in the jobs. As a result, firm conclusions about the effect of previous

work experience on the socialisation outcomes could not be drawn from the study.

Studies have shown that newcomers tend to adjust quickly to their new work

context (Ashforth & Saks, 1996; Bauer & Green, 1998; Chan & Schmitt, 2000; Chen

& Klimoski, 2003; Cooper-Thomas & Anderson, 2002, 2005; Major et al., 1995;

Thomas & Anderson, 1998), even over four-week periods in the early stages

following organisational entry (Chan & Schmitt, 2000; Major et al., 1995). Cooper-

Thomas and Anderson (2002), in their study of new recruits into the British army,

found that significant adjustment occurred over approximately a two-month period, a


finding, according to Cooper-Thomas and Anderson, “not unique to army settings”

(p. 432). The study supported the notion that organisational socialisation tactics

facilitate positive attitudes, job satisfaction and engendered organisational

commitment by providing the appropriate context for newcomers to learn. Cooper-

Thomas and Anderson argued that this provides “support for the utility of a learning

approach in organisational socialisation research” (p. 431). They also pointed out that

while socialisation may occur more rapidly in military settings, further research was

needed to ascertain the “time-frame of socialisation . . . [and] whether the

socialisation process unfolds similarly across different types of newcomer and

organisation” (p. 434).

Ashforth and Saks (1996) found that institutionalised socialisation tactics

(Jones, 1986) resulted in greater role clarity, less role conflict, less anxiety, and

greater job satisfaction and commitment, but encouraged conformity to established

goals and practices rather than innovation and higher performance. Of the six

institutionalised socialisation tactics only collective socialisation provoked changes

in newcomers by encouraging them to internalise and conform to group norms

(Ashforth and Saks, 1996, p. 169). Furthermore, Ashforth and Saks argued that the

stability of socialisation outcomes at four and ten months suggested that adjustment

occurs more rapidly than suggested by other research, and that this “may also reflect

real changes in socialisation dynamics during individuals’ early careers” (p. 172).

The study used participants’ self-reports because “it seems appropriate that

newcomers should assess the adjustment variables since the process of adjustment

pertains to their perceptions, intentions, and responses” (p. 173).

Bauer and Green (1998) found that a newcomer’s manager or supervisor

plays a key role in the socialisation process, in line with other studies (Louis et al.,


1983; Morrison, 1993a; Major et al., 1995). They found that supervisor behaviour in

the early stages of organisational entry has a strong influence on newcomer learning

and adjustment, and that different behaviours of supervisors are associated with

particular socialisation roles. The study found that a task-oriented supervisor or

manager behaviour aided the newcomer in adjusting or accommodating to the task,

and relationship-oriented supervisor behaviour supported relational adjustment.

However, information seeking by newcomers did not influence adjustment and other

outcomes, in contrast to other studies (Morrison, 1993a, 1993b; Ostroff &

Kozlowski, 1992).

Cooper-Thomas and Anderson (2005) in their study of British Army recruits

and a professional services firm in the USA found that learning was central to

organisational socialisation. Learning reduced uncertainty and facilitated sense

making (Louis, 1980), positively impacting on job satisfaction and commitment. The

study confirmed the critical role of co-workers in the socialisation process, which

aided adjustment and positively impacted on job satisfaction. The study also found

that newcomer adjustments occur rapidly during the critical early period, in line with

other studies (Ashforth & Saks, 1996; Chen & Klimoski, 2003; Chan & Schmitt,

2000).

Recent studies have begun to pay attention to how newcomers are socialised

into an organisational team environment. Chen and Klimoski’s (2003) study of the

socialisation of knowledge workers, a rapidly growing sector of the workforce where

workers are likely to experience “frequent transitions within and between

organisations” (p. 592) suggests that work characteristics, social exchanges, and

empowerment (motivational and interpersonal processes) are related to newcomer

and team expectations and explain the impact of these expectations on newcomer


effectiveness (p. 602). Chen (2005) showed that individual and contextual factors

predicted newcomer adaptation in teams. In particular, empowerment motivates

initial performance, which in turn impacts on organisational commitment. Chen and

Klimoski (2003) acknowledge, however, that different types of newcomers may

adjust differently.

CONCLUSION

This literature review has sought to identify research that is relevant to the

structured workplace learning experiences of secondary school VET students. In

order to identify issues and themes relevant to the central research question, literature

on the workplace learning experiences of secondary VET students and apprentices

and trainees, and the organisational socialisation literature considered to have some

relevance to the topic, was reviewed. Much of the literature on structured workplace

learning is related to program delivery and evaluation or on the perceived benefits of

SWL to students with relatively few studies from a student perspective. This

literature is often included as part of the broader topic of VET in Schools since SWL

is part of most VET in Schools programs. Such studies give a very limited insight

into processes that students use in going about their workplace learning. The

literature on apprentices and trainees has some relevance to students on SWL as there

are similarities in the kinds of workplaces and in the experiences of both types of

learners. The ‘production imperative’ observed in various workplaces which tends to

narrow the range of skills developed in such workplaces (Brooker & Butler, 1997) is

likely to impact on students on SWL placements who are there primarily to learn.

The integration of learning from both on- and off-the-job sites, which was


problematic for apprentices and trainees and which they felt responsible for, is likely

to be relevant to students on SWL placements given that SWL is an integral part of

the students’ overall program, and the different models in which SWL is conducted,

which may present management issues for students. The established work structures,

processes and cultures in the workplace are also likely to affect how students go

about their workplace learning. New entrants to the workplace have a variety of

things to learn with fitting in being an important issue for young people (Smith,

2000). As for apprentices and trainees, the support of mentors and supervisors is

likely to be important for students in this study. The findings that observation of

experienced workers at the workplace coupled with explanation and opportunity to

practice and consolidate skills, given work that increases in complexity, being treated

as adults, and developing quality relationships with co-workers and supervisors are

important themes likely to be of particular relevance in this study.

While the organisational socialisation literature is extensive, it is concerned

mainly with newcomers to an organisation. Various findings from this literature

related to the learning process during organisational entry are likely to be relevant to

this study. While socialisation involves learning related to the organisation, task

performance, the role, and the work group, initially newcomers are concerned with

acquiring information about performing the job, clarifying their role, and learning

about the organisation’s norms and values in order for them to know what behaviours

and attitudes are expected. Feldman (1981) and Van Maanen (1976) provide useful

models of the process of organisational socialisation. These models describe distinct

and overlapping stages in the continuous socialisation process.

Surprise (Louis, 1980) and reality shock (Van Maanen, 1976) are likely to be

high for SWL students who are new entrants and who are there to learn a variety of


work-related skills and knowledge. Many have little idea of what it means to be a

‘worker’ and are likely to have unrealistic expectations about the world of work. The

importance of information acquisition in the learning and socialisation processes is

evident throughout this review by the vast amount of literature available in this area

and the more recent emphasis on newcomer proactivity in the process of

socialisation. This literature emphasises the importance of various interpersonal and

non-interpersonal sources of information, particularly supervisors, co-workers and

mentors in facilitating adjustment, learning the various aspects of the job, fitting in,

and engendering commitment. The personal relationships established with the

various members is a key factor in this process. Supervisors and mentors as

information sources and the relationships developed with them and other workers

may be particularly important to students on SWL given the extent and nature of

learning that is needed in this context. The skills and abilities of mentors and

supervisors are, therefore, of particular importance in this case. The literature also

emphasises the main methods that newcomers use in acquiring information and

aiding their organisational adjustment. This involves using role models, observing

others and modelling the behaviour of mentors and other experienced workers, and

using a variety of questioning techniques (Miller & Jablin, 1991). This is in contrast

to other literature that is concerned with what an organisation does to facilitate the

socialisation of newcomers, but suggests that organisational tactics associated with

social and interpersonal aspects are important for newcomer proactivity in acquiring

information (Saks & Ashforth, 1997b). A question of interest for the current research

is whether students on SWL use the same or different processes in going about their

learning. The nature of the tasks given (Van Maanen, 1976) is seen as important in

the socialisation process, which may engender commitment or boredom and


disillusionment. For students on SWL placements, this may result in a positive or

negative workplace experience and, hence, impact on the amount of learning that

occurs.

The literature also suggests that organisational adjustment begins to occur

soon after organisational entry, even over four-week periods (Chan & Schmitt, 2000;

Cooper-Thomas & Anderson, 2002, 2005; Major et al., 1995). This has implications

for the present study as a number of SWL placements occur over a total of four

weeks (others for longer).

Much of the available literature on organisational socialisation is from

international contexts, and mostly quantitative in nature. There is a paucity of

research in this area from Australian contexts and a paucity of studies of such

processes with students on SWL placements. This qualitative study, which is

grounded in the experiences of students on SWL, will provide a different perspective

to a great deal of the literature reviewed.

In the next chapter, the central research question will be explained in detail

together with the research methodology and the theoretical framework underpinning

the methodology to arrive at the central findings of this study, which comprise the

theory of Workplace Formation.

Research Method and Design 80

CHAPTER FOUR

RESEARCH METHOD AND DESIGN

The focus of this study on how secondary school students in their first year of

a VET program and who undertake SWL for the first time ‘manage’ their learning at

the workplace reflects the interpretivist nature of the research. The interpretivist

approach typically seeks to understand processes, relationships, group life and

motivations in small-scale everyday life from an actor’s point of view. In this

context, ‘manage’ refers to how a student deals with the day-to-day work

requirements and expectations encountered in the workplace as well as those that

impact on the student’s workplace learning. This, in turn, implies an emphasis on the

manner in which students interpret different aspects and demands of the workplace

and the meanings they attach to these.

The decision to frame the central research question to this degree of

specificity was brought about by a number of factors. VET in Schools is the

dominant VET program in Western Australia secondary schools, with significant

resource allocation. SWL continues to be a key component of these programs, and

how it impacts on student learning and the ways students manage their learning in

this environment is the central question in the study. For many students this is their

first encounter with the workplace environment. Others have some experience of

different workplaces through part-time jobs at such places as fast-food outlets. The

first year of such VET programs presents students with a particular perspective of the

program and of the workplace. This early perspective of students and how they

manage learning at the workplace is the focus of this study.


Initially, the intention was to examine how students in their first year of a

VET program managed their school and workplace learning during their

workplacement in order to gain a broader perspective on the program as a whole.

However, during the data collection phase and corresponding data analysis, it

became clear that the workplace issues were more salient for students and provided a

thick description for subsequent analysis. The study was consequently focused on the

workplace learning. Data continued to be collected on the school component;

however, only that considered relevant to or impacting on the workplace learning

was used for this study.

Consistent with the focus on students’ perspectives, qualitative methods of

data collection and analysis were used. Data collection occurred between April and

November of 2002. Data were gathered primarily through the use of semi-structured

interviews with students from four government senior secondary schools in one

education district in the Perth metropolitan area. The study began with 28 student

participants from the four schools, however, due to attrition throughout the year, 23

participated in all data gathering phases. The theory that emerged was based on the

in-depth analysis of these 23 students. Three sets of student interviews were

conducted over the 2002 school year. One workplace observation of 12 student

participants for approximately one hour was also conducted. Relevant documents on

expected SWL outcomes, school policy and student information, and policy on VET

in Schools programs and skills assessment by host employers were also examined

and used as background information for the study. Interviews with 12 host employers

or supervisors were conducted, which provided a further means of triangulation of

the data. From the central research question, guiding questions and an aide memoire

(Burgess, 1994) or interview guide were developed for each set of interviews. These


were modified where necessary as the study unfolded. The data were analysed using

grounded theory strategies (Strauss & Corbin, 1990). From this a set of theoretical

propositions was developed about how students who were in their first year of a VET

program and who undertook SWL for the first time managed their learning at the

workplace. This chapter will now outline these various aspects of the methodology of

the study in detail.

THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK AND RESEARCH QUESTIONS

The research was conceptualised within the interpretivist paradigm.

Interpretivism typically seeks to understand processes, relationships, group life and

motivations in small-scale everyday life. Of prime importance are the social

meanings which people attach to the world around them. The paradigm assumes that

all human action is meaningful and hence “has to be interpreted and understood

within the context of social practices” (Usher, 1996, p. 18). Social reality is seen as

being constructed and negotiated by individuals acting according to the perspectives

they confer on the phenomena in their environment (Reid, 1986). Blumer’s (1969)

three sociological premises, underpinning symbolic interactionism, were applied in

this study:

1) People act towards things on the basis of meanings they have for them. Thus,

people do not merely respond to stimuli or act out cultural scripts. They attach their

own meanings to phenomena around them and then act towards each on the basis of

these meanings.

2) Meanings are social products derived through social interaction.


3) Social actors attach meanings to situations, things, others and themselves through

a process of interpretation. “The actor selects, checks, suspends, regroups, and

transforms the meanings in light of the situation in which he is placed and the

direction of his action . . . meanings are used and revised as instruments for the

guidance and formation of action” (Blumer, 1969, p. 5).

Taylor and Bogdan (1998) stated that while “people may act within the

framework of an organisation, culture or group, it is their interpretations and

definitions of the situation that determine action, not their norms, values, roles or

goals” (p. 12). In this study, the researcher sought to understand how students

interpreted their experiences and interactions in the workplace that shaped their

perspectives and guided their subsequent actions. This theoretical approach is

particularly suited to developing an understanding of the strategies that students use

to manage their learning in the workplace. In accordance with Blumer’s first

principle, it was assumed that the meanings students attached to the various

workplace demands and expectations on them determined their actions within the

process of going about their work. Furthermore, these meanings were expected to

vary from student to student and for each student over time. This position informed

data gathering and analysis processes to capture the widest possible range and

variation in the behaviour of all students in the study and to uncover the meanings

that led to their actions. Blumer’s second principle, that meanings are social products

derived through social interaction, implies that the meanings that a person develops

for situations and things around him or her are influenced by the actions of others.

Blumer’s third principle provides the means by which individuals align their

behaviour with others. The person (actor) selects, checks, suspends, regroups, and

transforms the meanings in light of experiences in context to guide and form actions.


The researcher continually probed to gain a deep understanding of how students in

the study interpreted the complex array of events associated with undertaking SWL,

the meanings they attached to their experiences, and their subsequent actions. In

particular, students’ interactions with others (for example, host employer or

supervisor, other employees, mentors), which largely shaped the meanings they had

for things, were explored. The process of progressive re-focusing also informed the

decision to conduct three sets of interviews over the year and to observe the students’

interactions with others in the workplace. Workplace observations were, however,

restricted for various practical reasons such as the unwillingness of employers to

assist often because of busy schedules or cramped work areas. Through the patterns

of actions and interactions between and among the actors (Strauss & Corbin, 1994)

in relation to the student’s learning in the workplace, the interdependency between

the individual and his or her environment, central within this approach, was captured.

The Central and Guiding Research Questions

No attempt was made to develop hypotheses about how students ‘manage’

their learning during workplacement. The study began with a central research

question: How do secondary school students who are in their first year of a

Vocational Education and Training program and who undertake Structured

Workplace Learning for the first time ‘manage’ their learning in the workplace? The

intention was to address this question by developing theory grounded in the actions

and interactions between the students in the study and the various ‘actors’ in the

workplace. A central or ‘core’ category with a high level of abstraction would be

produced to capture the complexity of the actions and interactions that students take


in response to their learning. This central category would include the set of

interrelated, conceptually dense, categories that would collectively represent the

phenomenon under study.

The central research question was pursued through two guiding questions

informed by a synthesis of Blumer’s (1969) work and Blackledge and Hunt’s (1985)

elaboration of its application to micro-interpretive approaches. Adapting Blumer’s

first principle to the present research produced two guiding questions, which were

pursued from the beginning: 1) What meanings did students attach to the VET

program and phenomena within it, with a particular focus being their learning at the

workplace; 2) what strategies did students use as a consequence as these meanings

determine their actions within the process of going about their work in the

workplace?

Blumer’s three principles also informed the decision to conduct three sets of

interviews over the year and to observe the student’s interaction with others in the

workplace. Through this process it was possible to develop an understanding of the

changes in the meanings that may have occurred, and of the interpretive processes

utilised by students to inform the strategies they employed to ‘manage’ their

workplace learning. Progressive analysis of the data led to the emergence of a third

question:

3) What are the implications for policy and practice of students’ perspectives in

managing their workplace learning?

This question guided the discussion presented in Chapter Nine of this thesis.


The Interview Aide Memoire

To understand how students ‘manage’ the learning requirements, demands

and expectations at the workplace, it is important to consider their perspectives,

which is central to an interpretive approach. Blackledge and Hunt (1985) consider

‘meaning,’ ‘interaction,’ and ‘negotiation’ as important assumptions of a micro-

interpretive approach in which perspectives are considered. ‘Meaning’ or

‘perspective’ is derived by individuals first understanding the meanings that they

have for their own behaviour and the behaviour of others. Everyday activity involves

individuals interacting with others as well as with their own behaviour. Interpreting

another’s behaviour through an individual’s perspective is dependent upon what is

already known (Blumer, 1969). Meanings and interpretations or perspectives are not

static, and everyday activity involves a process of continuous negotiation of meaning

or perspective, which over time may change as individuals modify the meanings they

attribute to behaviour (Blackledge & Hunt, 1985). According to Blackledge and Hunt

(1985) ‘meaning’ or ‘perspectives’ includes notions of aims and intentions (so one

can ask what individuals aim to do in particular situations). It also includes the

strategies used to achieve these aims and the resulting actions, attribution of

significance in the situation, and the reasons individuals have for their aims and

intentions, significance and strategies in the particular situation. These represent the

properties of meanings and were used as the basis of the initial aide memoire

(Burgess, 1994) to guide the data collection process.

The initial aide memoire for the first interview with students did not,

however, form a rigid list. New questions were asked as they suggested themselves,

particularly in the early interviews with students. Others that were found not to be

significant or not generating salient data were discarded. Figure 4.1 illustrates how


the first guiding question was translated into a set of questions in the initial aide

memoire to guide the first interview with students. The full aide memoire for this

interview is found in Appendix A.

Guiding Question 1: What are students’ perspectives on the VET program? Aide Memoire:

1 What are their aims and intentions in taking the VET program?

2 What reasons do they have for this?

3 What significance do students attach to the VET program? Interview guide and probes:

1 What are your reasons for enrolling in the program?

2 What are you aiming to get out of the program? - Will it help more than other programs at this school or other schools?

3 What do you intend to do when you leave school?

- What made you decide on that – how did that come about? - Who or what influenced you?

4 What do you think of the program so far?

- What do you like and dislike about it? - What are the best parts? Worst parts? - What are the hard parts? Easy parts?

5 How useful do you think the program is to you? In what ways?

- How do you see the program helping you? - How does it fit with your plans? - How do you see it contributing to your future career? - Which parts do you find useful to you? Which not useful? Why is that? (The workplace? School? Maths? Which subjects?)

6 What changes have you made to the way you do things (or in your personal life)

because of the program? Why was this? - Do you intend to make any changes to how you do things in order to get to

where you want to go? What changes?

7 What do you think is the purpose of VET at high school?

8 Do you think these programs at high school are worthwhile?

9 Has your view of school changed since you started the program?

Figure 4.1: Aide Memoire for the First Guiding Question

The researcher probed extensively in order to draw out the students’ aims and

intentions, their reasons and the significance attached to their aims and intentions.


For example, when students were asked, “what are you aiming to get out of the

program?” they were also asked for their reasons for enrolling in the program. Often

students’ responses to the first question indicated their aims and intentions, which did

not require further probing. Similarly, questions such as “how useful do you think the

program is to you?”, “which parts?”, “what changes have you made to the way you

do things because of the program?”, and “do you think these programs at high school

are worthwhile?” indicated the significance of the program to them. Furthermore,

‘why’ questions were asked during the course of the interview as well as questions

such as “how important is that to you?” or “is that important to you?” when they

suggested themselves as the interview unfolded.

Both guiding questions 1 and 2 guided the first interview. Figure 4.2

illustrates how the second guiding question was translated into a set of questions in

the initial aide memoire to guide the interview. (See Appendix A for the full aide

memoire).

Neither the list nor the order of guide questions was adhered to rigidly for to

do so would not have allowed salient data to be collected. For example, in early

interviews the issue of being treated as a worker or as ‘one of them’ began to emerge.

This prompted the researcher to pursue this line of questions: “Are you treated as a

worker or as a school student?” and “do you see yourself as a worker or a school

student?” Early analysis of these interview data showed that how students were

treated and how they saw themselves at the workplace were important factors in how

they managed their work at the workplace.


Guiding Question 2: What strategies do students use in going about their work in the program?

a) Managing workplace learning Aide Memoire:

1 What is expected of students at the workplace? 2 What did they expect to learn from the workplace and what was the source of

these expectations? 3 How have they managed their work at the workplace?

Interview guide and probes: 1 What do you do at work? Reasons? 2 What did you expect to learn at the workplace? What was the source of these

expectations? 3 Walk me through what you did from the first day and tell me how you handled

things. - Do you find your own placements? How did this placement come about?

4 What problems/tensions/issues did you encounter that you had to deal with? - How important are these to you? Why are they important?

5 How did you deal with these? - What ACTIONS did you take? - What were your reasons for taking this action?

6 Tell me about how the people at work are and the way they do things? - Are they different to people at school? In what way and how do you deal with

that? - In what ways are you influenced by them and how do you handle that?

7 At the workplace, are you treated as a WORKER or as a SCHOOL STUDENT? How do you handle that?

8 Do you see yourself as a WORKER or a SCHOOL STUDENT at the workplace? 9 Do you regard the workplace as a place where you work or a place where you

learn? 10 How do you act or behave or conduct yourself when you are at work? Why?

- Is that different to how you are at school? 11 Did you find it easy or hard to fit in at work? How did you manage that?

- Going to different workplaces – how do you deal with the different expectations? Is it a problem? Do you like it? Why?

12 Are the times that you have to be at work a problem? Does this conflict with other things, if so, how? How do you manage this? - Is the day a good day? - Is one (or 2 for trainees) day each week enough? Why? - How do you make up for work that you miss?

13 What about transport to and from work? Dress standards? Are these problems? How do you manage these?

14 What do you think you are learning at the workplace?

Figure 4.2: Part of the Aide Memoire for the Second Guiding Question

Similarly, when the researcher probed for ways that students combined or

linked their workplace work with their schoolwork during the first interview it was


found that initial questions presented difficulties for students, and they asked for

clarification. However, when asked “what aspects of your schoolwork do you find

useful at your workplace?” and “what aspects of the workplace do you find useful at

school?” it was understood. This appeared to make it easier for some students to

respond when asked how they saw the school and workplace fitting together. With

others, the question was asked in a different way, namely, what they thought of the

program if they did not do SWL.

When students were asked to identify the competing things between their

workplace, school and their personal life examples often had to be given to clarify

the meaning of the question. This also provided a prompt for students. This technique

of providing an example to clarify the question was identified when the initial aide

memoire was trialled. The technique was used as often as necessary, but care was

always taken not to lead the student into a particular response. When asked “what are

the blockages or things that ‘get in the way’ or don’t make it easy?” an example was

given, such as, “you have a part-time job on Thursday nights but have homework to

complete for the next day,” or, “you need help at work but the boss is very busy or

often out.” This often clarified the question. However, there were occasions when a

student would respond to the example given. The researcher then asked for any other

competing things or blockages. Students were then asked how they handled or dealt

with the situation. Initially students were also asked about how much control they

had over their work at school and the workplace. However, most appeared to have

difficulty with this concept, hence, this line of questioning was not pursued directly.

The second guiding question was also supplemented with data from one

observation of 12 student participants at the workplace. The observations focused on

the ways in which the students went about their work, and the ways in which they


related to others in their workplace, which provided a ‘snapshot’ of them in the study

context. The observation enabled some of the interview data to be verified, and

provided a frame of reference to better understand student interview data, students’

meanings for various workplace phenomena and how these were translated into

strategies. The researcher adopted a passive, non-intrusive role occasionally

clarifying aspects of the student’s work with the student or supervisor. Field notes

were taken throughout for use in the subsequent data analysis.

Interviews with 12 host employers or supervisors associated with the four

schools were used to pursue all guiding questions. The purpose of this interview was

to enrich the data and corroborate information from student participants. Only those

employers or supervisors that the VET coordinators agreed could be approached

were invited to participate. The aide memoire for these interviews is found in

Appendix D.

Second and third stage semi-structured in-depth interviews with students

occurred towards the middle and at the end of the year. These interviews sought to

uncover the strategies that students used to manage their learning throughout the year

and any changes in perspectives or strategies that may have occurred. The aide

memoires for these interviews can be found in Appendix B and Appendix C.

THE POPULATION AND SAMPLING METHOD

Participants were drawn from four secondary schools in one metropolitan

education district in Western Australia. This district is large with primary and

secondary schools ranging from middle and higher socio-economic areas to schools

in lower socio-economic and industrialised areas (ABS, 1996). The 13 secondary


schools varied in size from 600 to over 1700 students, and all offered at least one

VET program in a number of industry areas, and an extensive range of Tertiary

Entrance Examinations (TEE) and Wholly School Assessed (WSA) subjects. TEE

subjects are accredited school subjects in Western Australia that have a public

external examination that students take on completion and are used to determine a

Tertiary Entrance Rank (TER) to rank students for entry to university. WSA subjects

contribute to secondary graduation but do not have a public external examination and

do not contribute towards a TER.

To limit variation in kinds of workplaces for practical reasons the study

focused primarily but not exclusively on students undertaking a VET program in the

Hospitality and Tourism industry, a common curriculum offering across secondary

schools and the most popular VET program in Western Australia (EDWA, 2000).

The study population was selected from four different models of program structure,

representing the main models used in schools across all industry areas. This provided

a variety of perspectives and experiences, and, hence, diversity, within the population

under study. The setting was, therefore, representative of the topic under study

(Bogdan & Biklen, 1982). The profiles of the four models in this study are shown in

Table 4.1. The number of students shown is the number that participated in each data

gathering phase throughout the year. Models included discrete programs where the

same group of students undertook the same set program. SWL in each program was

undertaken on (a) either one or two days per week, (b) in one or two week blocks at

different times of the year, or (c) a combination of these. In some schools, SWL and

Units of Competency were part of an integrated program where students selected

subjects from a common subject grid. This model is less flexible because the school-

based work is usually not delivered around SWL and students often have to catch up


on schoolwork missed on the days that they are on workplacement. This can create

management problems for both students and teachers.

Number of Students

Structure of School Program SWL

MODEL 1

School 1 and

School 2

6 8

Six subject discrete program (including SWL), set courses for all students e.g. Career and Industry Awareness, Vocational English. School-based for four days/week. Certificate II plus secondary graduation at end of Year 12.

One week block plus one day per week (same day). (School 1 no one-week block). School and SWL did not overlap.

MODEL 2 School-based Traineeship

(SBNA)

School 1

1

Six subject discrete program (including SWL), set courses. School-based three days/week. Certificate II plus secondary graduation at end of Year 12.

Two days/week paid work. School and work did not overlap.

MODEL 3

School 3

5

Integrated program of seven subjects (including SWL) selected from a range available to all students; therefore, students not in a common core course.

2 x 2 week blocks in Term 2 and Term 4 during examinations period. Overlap with examinations schedule.

MODEL 4

School 4

3

Integrated flexible program of six subjects (including SWL) selected to meet individual needs from range available to all students, with one common course (industry-related) e.g. Food Production or Tourism. School-based program over 5 days.

One day/week. School and SWL overlapped.

Table 4.1: Interrelationship Between School Programs and Structured Workplace Learning


All programs included at least one Unit of Competency within the specific

industry area. Furthermore, the programs in Models 1 and 2 led to Certificate Level 2

upon completion at the end of Year 12.

School Contexts

School 1 differed from that of a traditional secondary school in that it

enrolled only post-compulsory students in Years 11 and 12 from across the

metropolitan area (apart from a Fastrack intake of Year 10 students), had an adult

ethos, allowed part-time work and study to be combined, had approximately one

third mature age students, and offered a variety of VET programs.

School 2 serviced a multi-cultural, mostly non-professional school

community in a lower than average socio-economic area with students from

suburban, semi-rural and industrial areas. The school had a high proportion of

students in non-academic streams. As a result, the school offered a number of VET

programs in different industry areas.

School 3 was a relatively small traditional senior high school that drew

students from lower to higher than average socio-economic areas. At the time of the

study, the school offered VET programs in three industry areas.

School 4 was a large traditional senior high school located in a stable upper

middle class area. The school reflected the diverse cultural nature of the area and had

a bias towards academic programs with a higher proportion of students in TEE

courses than State average. As a result, the school had a relatively small number of

VET programs but embedded units of competency into selected mainstream courses.


The Sample for the Study

Qualitative methods of data gathering and analysis were used throughout the

study to develop a substantive theory inductively derived from the study of the

phenomenon it represented, which was, how secondary school students who are in

their first year of a VET program and who undertake SWL for the first time manage

their learning at the workplace. The theory was “discovered, developed, and

provisionally verified through systematic data collection and analysis of data

pertaining to that phenomenon” (Strauss & Corbin, 1990, p. 23). The study employed

theoretical sampling, a means of “sampling on the basis of concepts that have proven

theoretical relevance to the evolving theory” (Strauss & Corbin, 1990, p. 176). Data

were collected from several cases that had the potential to provide rich data relevant

to the study.

Time constraints related to the school calendar year and periods that students

were on SWL dictated the ways in which data could be collected. Firstly, the study

was restricted to one district in the Perth metropolitan area (a) for ease of access, and

(b) because of the variety of schools available within the district. Secondly, the study

focused primarily on students undertaking a VET program in the Hospitality and

Tourism industry area. However, students undertaking a VET program in other areas

were included in Model 1 from School 1 and Model 3 because of a lack of a

sufficiently diverse sample in the hospitality and tourism stream. In Model 3, only a

small number of students from this program elected to take SWL during the year

because policy changes from 2002 no longer required students to take SWL as part

of a VET in Schools program (Department of Education, 2001).

The time-line for SWL through 2002 is shown in Figure 4.3.


SWL SWL SWL

SWL SWL SWL

SWL SWLSWL SWL

SWL SWL SWL

Feb 02 Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 02

School 4

HO

LID

AYS

HO

LID

AYS

HO

LID

AYS

School 1

School 2

School 3

2nd round interview s Schools 1,

2 & 4

3rd round interview sSchool 4

1st round interview s

Schools 1, 2 & 4

3rd round interview sSchools 1

& 2

School 3 interview s 1st 2nd 3rd 3rd

Figure 4.3: Timeline Showing Periods of SWL and Interviews for Each School

Students from School 2 began SWL with a one-week block in their respective

workplace. The constraints of time meant that student participants needed to be

identified from the outset and that data collection of all participants needed to be

done within a relatively short period of time for each of the three data gathering

phases – early in their placement, towards the middle of the year when students had

completed or nearing completion of the first semester placement, and towards the

end of their placement.

Student Participants

To ensure diversity of participants (LeCompte & Goetz, 1982), 28 students

with no previous SWL experience were included in the study from the four

secondary schools described above representing variation in size, structure and socio-

economic factors. Of these, 23 remained throughout the study and participated in all


three data collection stages. LeCompte and Goetz (1982) contended that qualitative

researchers should seek out and maintain diversity within the population under study.

The diversity that existed among the student participants facilitated the development

of a dense theory about the phenomenon of students managing their learning at the

workplace (Glaser, 1978). Participants who were likely to remain in the program for

the duration of the study were selected. However, some attrition was expected during

the year with some students leaving the program for various reasons such as

accepting employment opportunities.

To ensure diversity within the population under study, students from each of

the above models from the four schools were selected with the assistance of the VET

coordinator or teacher responsible for the program at each school. Two Year 12

students who were in the first year of a VET program other than Hospitality were

included from School 1 to increase the diversity within the sample after two Year 11

participants had left school. As only three students from School 3 that were in the

Hospitality and Tourism program taking SWL agreed to participate in the study,

students from other programs were included to increase diversity.

Table 4.2 summarises the number of students in each model from each

school. It shows the year group, gender, the VET program of participants in the

study, the number of students that participated at each data collection stage, and the

pseudonyms of the 23 students that participated throughout the study.


Model School Year Program Gender Student

Stage 1 Stage 2 Stage 31 1 11 Hosp & Tour F 1 1 1 Terri1 1 11 Hosp & Tour M 5 4 3 Jarrod Paul

Jack1 1 12 IT M 1 1 1 Ben1 1 12 Bus. Stud. F 1 1 1 Jane1 2 11 Hosp & Tour F 6 6 6 Clara Lucy

Lisa Emma Nancy Anna

1 2 11 Hosp & Tour M 2 2 2 Mark Jason(S)

2 1 12 Hospitality (SBNA)

F 1 0 0

2 1 12 Hospitality (SBNA)

M 1 1 1 Karl(S)

3 3 11 Various F 4 4 2 Mary Megan3 3 11 Various M 2 2 2 Peter Alex3 3 12 Comm. Serv. F 1 1 1 Laura4 4 11 Hosp & Tour F 1 1 1 Kate4 4 12 Hosp & Tour F 2 2 2 Erin Kelly

Total 28 26 23

(S) - denotes SBNA student

No. of Students Interviewed

Table 4.2: Summary of Students Participating in Study

Tables 4.3 and 4.4 provide some general background of the 23 students who

fully participated in this study. They summarise the ethnicity and give an indication

of socio-economic status based on the socio-economic index (SEI) for the area in

which students resided. The four socio-economic status categories were based on the

25%, 50% and 75% quantile index value averages for Australia. With regard to

ethnicity, most students were from English speaking backgrounds. A language other

than English was the main language spoken at home for two non-English speaking

background (NESB) students. Two other students categorised as from non-English

speaking backgrounds (NESB) had a NESB parent and English was spoken at home.


There was a broad cross-section of socio-economic status with the majority of

students from Schools 3 and 4 from high-middle or high socio-economic status areas

and the majority from Schools 1 and 2 in the low-middle or low socio-economic

status areas.

Ethnicity

School 1 School 2 School 3 School 4 Total

Anglo-Saxon/Australian 5 6 5 3 19

Non-English Speaking (NESB)

2 2 0 0 4

Table 4.3: Ethnicity of Students

Socio-Economic Status

School 1 School 2 School 3 School 4 Total

Low (SEI 928 or below)

1 0 0 0 1

Low-Middle (SEI 928.1 to 990)

3 6 1 0 10

High-Middle (SEI 990.1 to 1068)

3 2 4 0 9

High (SEI above 1068)

0 0 0 3 3

[SEI derived from SEIFA 2001 (ABS, 2001)]

Table 4.4: Socio-Economic Status of Students

The inclusion of Model 2 – the SBNA or School-based Traineeship - in the

selection of participants for this study requires some explanation. While the number

of students that undertake SBNAs is small compared to other VET programs, SBNAs

are an integral part of VET offerings to students with SBNAs available in various

industry areas (Department of Education and Training, 2003). As this study was

confined to one district in the Perth metropolitan area, the number of available

SBNAs was low. School 1 was identified as the study school as it offered a number


of SBNAs to students in the hospitality industry in Year 12. Furthermore, concurrent

with the workplace requirements of the SBNA, these students were required to

complete SWL as part of their secondary graduation requirements. It was expected

that while most of the students offered SBNAs were from the Year 11 Hospitality

and Tourism VET in Schools program, two or three students were new to the

program and in their first year with no previous SWL experience. The study focused

on these students. Data from these participants were of particular relevance to the

central research question. At the commencement of the data collection period, nine

Year 12 students were undertaking SBNAs in the hospitality industry. Two were in

their first year and agreed to participate in the study; however, one withdrew after the

first round of interviews. One student from School 2 that participated in the study

was also undertaking a SBNA and SWL concurrently.

This purposive sampling provided a richness of data from a variety of

perspectives for investigation from a variety of cases or sites (Taylor & Bogdan,

1998). This procedure ensured that the variety of participants facilitated the

expansion of the developing theory (Bogdan & Biklen, 1982).

Employer Participants

With the assistance of the VET coordinator or teacher responsible for the

program at each school, a number of employers or student supervisors were invited

to participate in an interview with the researcher or to allow a one-hour observation

of the student at the workplace, or both. The study included only those employers or

supervisors that each coordinator agreed could be approached. Twelve employers or

supervisors across all four schools agreed to be interviewed. These employers also

allowed the researcher to observe the student at the workplace if the student was

undertaking SWL at the time. Three employers or supervisors agreed to be


interviewed in relation to a student who had recently completed a placement with

them. The number of employers or supervisors that participated in interviews or

allowed students to be observed was restricted for various reasons, including busy

work schedules, cramped work areas, or too many interruptions by staff who needed

to visit students at the workplace. These interruptions, which were time consuming

for employers, had to be kept to a minimum with priority given to school-based staff.

Coordinators were very conscious at all times of not upsetting host employers for

fear of losing a workplacement for their students if the employer was put off-side.

Appendix E shows the workplaces for the 23 students who participated in all data

gathering stages. It shows the industry area, the type of organisation or enterprise, the

employers or supervisors who participated in the study, and the workplaces where

student observations occurred. More details on the workplaces in this study are given

in Chapter Five.

DATA COLLECTION METHODS

Qualitative methods of data gathering allowed theory to be “discovered,

developed, and provisionally verified through systematic data collection and analysis

of data” (Strauss & Corbin, 1990, p. 23). Data collection and analysis occurred

simultaneously with each phase of analysis guiding subsequent data collection,

within constraints imposed by the school calendars. A sufficient number of cases

were analysed at each stage so as to inform subsequent stages of data collection.

Data were collected primarily through semi-structured in-depth interviews

with students, interviews with 12 employers or supervisors, and through a one-hour


observation of 12 student participants at the workplace. Data were collected during

the 2002 calendar year commencing in April through to November of 2002.

Semi-Structured Interviews

Semi-structured interviews (Merriam, 1988), which enable us to “enter into

the other person’s perspective” (Patton, 1980, p. 196) and access their constructions

of reality (Punch, 1998), were conducted with student participants on three separate

occasions during the 2002 school calendar year. (Refer to Figure 4.3, showing

periods of SWL and interviews for each school during the year). All of the first

round of interviews with students from Schools 1, 2 and 4 were conducted between

April and August. A total of 21 participants were interviewed during this time – 18

were concluded by the end of May, one in June and two in August from School 1

that were selected to participate in second term. Questions at this stage were

concerned with the first guiding question on student perspectives and early strategies

in managing their work. Most first stage interviews were around 45 to 50 minutes,

with some longer. First round interviews with seven students from School 3 were

conducted during their 2-week block workplacement – six in late June, early July and

one in September. Thus, a total of 28 students participated in the first round of

interviews. (See Appendix A for the aide memoire).

The second set of interviews occurred mostly in July and August, with

two in September and one from School 3 in October (see Figure 4.3). For students in

Schools 1, 2 and 4, this coincided with the end of the first semester placement for

some and early in the second semester placement for others. The researcher at this

stage sought to arrive at a greater understanding of the strategies used and the


reasons for this. The questions for this and subsequent interviews were guided by the

analysis of a selected sample of interviews in the previous stage, and those suggested

from an overview of all interview data. The aide memoire for this set of interviews is

shown in Appendix B. Interviews were generally shorter than the first stage. Two

students from School 1 in Model 1 left school during the year after the first round

interviews – one for employment and the other for personal reasons. However, a

second interview was conducted with the student who had left for employment

shortly after leaving school. Two students who were in their first year of a VET

program participated in the first round of interviews for Model 2 – the SBNA.

However, one chose not to participate further.

The third stage interviews were conducted towards the end of students’

placements, between early September and late October for students in Schools 1, 2

and 4, and November for students from School 3. This interview sought to

understand changes in perspectives or strategies that arose either from a different

work context, where participants changed workplaces, or for other reasons. Some

participants changed their workplace at the end of first semester whereas others did

not. Each follow-up interview was aimed at probing for depth and a greater

complexity of meaning. For this reason the aide memoire for this third interview

(shown in Appendix C) contained the same set of questions as the aide memoire for

the second round of interviews because they formed the core of the aide memoire in

order to determine if perspectives or strategies had changed over the course of SWL.

However, some additional questions were included because this was the closing

interview and the questions allowed overall judgements about SWL to be made.

Table 4.5 is a summary of the interview schedule.


Date During 2002 of

Model School Stage 1 Interview

Stage 2 Interview

Stage 3 Interview

1 1 Most April – May; Aug (2)

Mid-June – Aug; Sept (2)

October – November

1 2 April – May Early to Mid-July

October

2 1 April July October

3 3 June – Early July, Sept

August Sept (1), November

4 4 May – June Late July - August

September – October

Table 4.5: The Interview Schedule for Each Set of Student Interviews

The aide memoire (Burgess, 1994) and the interview schedule were modified

as questions suggested themselves or the need arose during each interview. Two

students from School 3 withdrew from the program and did not undertake the second

SWL placement. Interviews were conducted with these students to ascertain their

reasons for withdrawing from the program. (See Table 4.2 for the number

participating at each stage).

Interviewer/Interviewee Relationships

The interviewer/participant interaction in the interview situation is a complex

phenomenon. Both parties bring biases, predispositions, and attitudes that colour the

interaction and, hence, the quality of the data collected. The researcher endeavoured

to establish a rapport with each participant by meeting with them prior to the

interviews in groups and chatting with them about the study, answering questions

and engaging in general conversation. During the interview, the researcher allowed

the conversation to flow when participants were talking about something considered


to be important, and used relevant questions and probes to keep them on track

(Taylor & Bogdan, 1998).

To avoid ethical and interpersonal issues of female school students

interviewed by an adult male researcher on a one-to-one basis, the interviews were

always held in locations where adults were present or visible but private enough so

as not to be heard or inhibit the student from responding. Students were asked where

they preferred to be interviewed, to ensure their comfort zone was protected.

Interviews took place in the school staffroom, open interview room, in the library or

the cafeteria, in an outdoor area where others were walking past, or in the student’s

home where a parent or guardian was close by. Preferred locations were occasionally

noisy, sometimes affecting the quality of the sound recording.

Females were also asked if they would like a friend or a female assistant to be

present during the interview if they felt more comfortable or relaxed. Most did not

appear to be concerned about this, and this aspect was not pursued. However, two

female students from School 2, who were close school friends, requested to be

interviewed together for the second round of interviews and if a friend could also be

interviewed, as a trio. As they felt more comfortable in this way, the interview was

conducted as a group interview. Both students requested to be interviewed together

for the third round of interviews as well. The group interview can provide another

level of data gathering or perspective on the research problem not available through

individual interviews. The group interview has the advantages of being inexpensive,

data rich, flexible, stimulating to respondents, recall aiding, and cumulative and

elaborative over and above individual responses (Fontana & Frey, 1994). However,

the researcher was aware of the group culture that could have interfered with

individual expression, ‘group think’ as a possible outcome, and of dominance by any


one person (Fontana & Frey, 1994). The researcher managed the interactions

between the participants by directing the questions to each student and using probes

at appropriate times, keeping them from interrupting each other, preventing any one

from monopolising the interview but at the same time keeping the conversation

flowing and encouraging input. This method of interviewing made students feel more

relaxed as well as minimising any gender bias that may have been implicit in the

process.

A small number of second and third round interviews were conducted by

telephone. The reason for this was that students were unable to keep to a scheduled

interview time. Two participants were not able to give the interview at the scheduled

time because of work commitments. Consequently, the researcher telephoned until

the students had sufficient time to devote to the interview. This was either at home in

the evenings or at school when they weren’t so busy. In all cases, it appeared to the

researcher that the students wanted to participate but this was countered by a sense

that their schoolwork, job or other commitments were more important to them at the

time than the interview. The telephone interview, which was quicker and easier to

conduct and could quickly and easily be arranged, was preferable in these

circumstances.

Interviews With Employers

Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 12 employers or employees

associated with the four schools who were assigned to supervise the students on

SWL. These interviews lasted approximately 20 to 25 minutes. The aide memoire

used is shown in Appendix D. The purpose of interviewing employers or supervisors

was to enrich student data and corroborate information from student participants,

providing a degree of data triangulation to strengthen its credibility (Patton, 1980).


Hence, the questions asked related directly to the students in this study. Three of the

interviews occurred a few months after students had completed their placement. The

employers agreed to be interviewed because they could fully recall details of the

student’s placement and felt that they could easily respond to questions and provide

relevant data. The others were interviewed while students were still placed with them

and usually after a worksite observation of the student. All but one interview

occurred between August and October, with the other occurring in November. Also,

because more than one student was placed in some workplaces, some supervisors

commented on more than one student.

Workplace Observations of Student Participants

Twelve students were observed in action at the workplace. Opportunities

were limited by constraints of time; the simultaneous block placement of students;

the urban dispersion of worksites; and cooperation and willingness of employers,

school coordinators and the students themselves. One observation of approximately

one hour was conducted at times that were convenient to the employer and the

researcher. This involved the researcher taking on a passive, non-intrusive role at the

workplace, and occasionally clarified a particular aspect of the student’s work with

the student or supervisor. The observations focused on the ways in which the

students went about their work, and the ways in which they related to others in their

workplace, which provided a ‘snapshot’ of them in the study context. The

observations provided a frame of reference to better understand student interview

data through knowing the workplace context, and to better understand and elaborate

on students’ meanings for various workplace phenomena and how these were


translated into strategies. The observations also enabled the researcher to verify some

of the interview data. Field notes were taken throughout for use in the subsequent

data analysis. These included descriptive notes, considered most credible, and

reflective notes of the researcher’s own interpretations (Patton, 1980).

Minimising Bias

The researcher has more than 30 years of combined teaching and

administrative experience in secondary schools and, as such, brought certain biases

to the data collection phase. He had been involved in the development and

implementation of vocational education programs, and had his own opinions and

views as a result of these experiences. However, care was taken to minimise any

possible effects of bias in the following ways. The researcher did not work in any of

the four schools from which participants were drawn for this study. To minimise the

impact of the researcher’s position as Deputy Principal of a senior secondary school,

the assistance of the VET coordinators or teacher responsible was sought in the

selection of student participants. Every effort was made for the researcher to be seen

by participants as a researcher first and not as a school administrator or teacher.

Although almost all participants were aware of the researcher’s position as Deputy

Principal of a secondary school, no attempt was made to conceal this. When student

participants referred to friends that they had at the school that the researcher worked

in, the researcher acknowledged this and responded accordingly, but maintained the

role of researcher in this context.


ANALYSIS OF DATA

The data were analysed using ‘grounded theory’ strategies (Strauss & Corbin,

1990) in order to gain a deep understanding and develop theory that was grounded in

the data collected throughout this study about the ways in which students manage

their workplace learning. This involves an intricate process of reducing the data to

concepts, which are then developed further into categories and related sub-categories

that form the basis of a theory. Data analysis began as the first set of interviews was

conducted. Analysis of these data informed further data collection through modifying

questions at this stage as well as informing the second stage interviews. Throughout

the research process data were compared, contrasted and ordered to establish links

and relationships (LeCompte & Preissle, 1993). Following the final data collection

stage, patterns and regularities were transformed into categories. In this way broad

theoretical formulations of the phenomena began to be established. As the theory

developed it was tested with new data that had been collected, and the theory

modified to fit the new data. This process continued until theoretical saturation

occurred and no further modifications were necessary.

The data were coded and categorised using open coding, axial coding and

selective coding (Strauss & Corbin, 1990). The researcher moved back and forth

between the three types of coding throughout the data analysis phase applying these

procedures flexibly to take account of new data during the formulation of the theory

of Workplace Formation. The three types of coding and how they were used in this

study will now be outlined.


Open Coding

In this study, open coding commenced in 2002 as data from the first stage

interviews were transcribed and continued between interviews as interview data were

progressively transcribed. Each transcript was coded on a line-by-line or sentence-

by-sentence basis so as to identify and name each discrete idea or event. These were

constantly compared so that similar phenomena were given the same name (see

Appendix F). Notes made from observations of students at the workplace and

transcripts of interviews with employers were coded in a similar manner. Throughout

the coding process, the researcher was constantly engaged in asking questions and

making comparisons between the data, concepts and emerging categories, which

gave precision and specificity to the concepts (Strauss & Corbin, 1990). Code notes

and theoretical memos were also used to develop the relationships between concepts

and categories as they emerged from the data (Strauss & Corbin, 1990).

Axial Coding

The second order concepts, which are at a higher level of abstraction than the

first, were determined through axial coding. The open categories were rebuilt into

new forms, examined for logical links, grouped into broader and more logical

categories, and relationships found between them. In this study, the researcher

constantly moved between inductive and deductive analysis to build a dense texture

of relationships between a category and its sub-categories (Strauss & Corbin, 1990).

Hypotheses made about these relationships were then tested by re-examining

previously gathered or analysed data. Code notes and memos were used to represent

the relationships between categories and their sub-categories. (See Appendix G for


an example of Axial Coding Theoretical Memo). Through this coding process, the

other categories, which together comprised the major categories of the theory of

Workplace Formation, were developed to a high degree of specificity.

Selective Coding

The process of integrating the categories developed through open and axial

coding into a theory about how students in their first year of a VET program manage

their workplace learning began during the axial coding phase by developing a brief

“general descriptive overview” (Strauss & Corbin, 1990, p. 119) of what the main

story was about. This descriptive ‘story’ was then conceptualised into the ‘story line’

(Strauss & Corbin, 1990), which represented the emerging theory of Workplace

Formation. This story line is outlined in full in Chapter Seven of this thesis. The

story line was then used by the researcher as the basis for developing the fully

integrated theory about how secondary school students who are in their first year of a

VET program and who undertake SWL for the first time manage their learning at the

workplace. In developing the story line, the researcher moved back and forth

between selective and axial coding examining and re-examining data, making

comparisons and constantly asking questions.

As part of this process, memos of increasing theoretical abstraction were

used. This was aimed at ensuring the integrity of the theoretical framework and to

provide conceptual density and a high degree of specificity for the emerging theory

of Workplace Formation. An example of a theoretical memo written relatively early

in this phase of theory development is provided in Figure 4.4.


By engaging in the above process, the theory of Workplace Formation was

gradually developed by the researcher to a high degree of complexity and conceptual

specificity.

Theoretical Memo – Theory of Workplace Formation Processes and sub-processes of the category ‘Preparing’ The theory of Workplace Formation explains how school students manage their structured workplace learning during the transition from school to the workplace. It involves students making adjustments that enable them to adapt to the workplace environment and develop work-related skills, knowledge and confidence at the workplace. The theory of Workplace Formation is comprised of five distinct categories: (1) Preparing, (2) Familiarising, (3) Committing, (4) Adapting, and (5) Building. Each category is a higher order and more abstract conceptualisation of a number of specific, interrelated processes. ‘Preparing’ is the first of five categories of processes that students engage in the overall process of Workplace Formation. This category comprises processes through which students prepare to enter the workplace. They engage in the process of ‘informing’ through gathering information and learning about the workplace through various means. They plan their workplacement and make decisions on what type of placement they want based on their personal aspirations. They endeavour to ‘select’ a suitable workplace for their workplacement by making enquiries about the placement and gather information from different workplaces. This sometimes can be difficult and students may not obtain a placement in a workplace of choice. The VET coordinator assists students in various ways, and, in difficult cases, a student may be forced to take a placement negotiated by the coordinator.

Figure 4.4: Selective Coding Theoretical Memo

TRUSTWORTHINESS OF THE THEORY OF WORKPLACE FORMATION

The aim of the study was to develop theory about how secondary school

students who are in their first year of a VET program and who undertake SWL for

the first time manage their learning at the workplace during this first year of the

program. The emphasis of the study on how students ‘manage’ their learning reflects


the interpretive nature of research located within the symbolic interactionism

theoretical framework. Interpretivism typically seeks to understand processes,

relationships, group life and motivations in everyday life. One of the assumptions

underlying this type of research is “that reality is holistic, multidimensional, and

ever-changing” (Merriam, 1988, p. 167). In such approaches, the trustworthiness of

the findings can be judged on the study’s truthfulness or credibility, transferability,

and dependability (Lincoln & Guba, 1985).

Truthfulness or Credibility

According to Lincoln and Guba (1985), reality is “a multiple set of mental

constructions . . . made by humans . . . and they are, in the main, accessible to the

humans who make them” (p. 295). Judging the truthfulness of the study relies on the

researcher showing that participants’ multiple constructions have been adequately

represented, and that the researcher’s reconstructions are “credible to the constructors

of the original multiple realities” (p. 296). In this research, it was important to

understand the perspectives of students, to uncover the complexity of their behaviour

in this context, and to understand how this perspective guided their actions and

interactions to manage their workplace learning.

The credibility of the study was enhanced through:

1) Triangulation – the use of multiple sources of data, multiple investigators, or

multiple methods to confirm the emerging findings (Merriam, 1988). In this study,

data were collected primarily from interviews with students as well as from a

significant number of host employers or students’ supervisors, and observation of

students at the workplace.


2) The extended period of data gathering, which occurred over the full year with

three sets of student interviews and student observations.

3) The prolonged engagement of the researcher with participants, which enabled the

researcher to cross-check data gathered from observations and from previous

interviews.

4) Peer examination with colleagues throughout the data gathering and analysis

phases to comment on the findings as they emerged (Lincoln & Guba, 1985).

5) Clarifying researcher biases, assumptions and theoretical orientations from the

outset of the study.

Transferability

Lincoln and Guba (1985) contend that transferability, in a strict sense, is

impossible in qualitative research. However, it is possible for researchers working in

this paradigm to replace the notion of generalisations with working hypotheses that

not only take account of local conditions but also offer the researcher some guidance

in making choices, the results of which can be monitored and evaluated in order to

make better future decisions (Cronbach, 1975). Erikson (1986) uses the notion of

‘concrete universals,’ arrived at by comparing the specific case studied with other

cases studied in equally great detail. Stake (1978) uses the notion of naturalistic

generalisation where the full and thorough knowledge of the particular allows one to

see similarities in new and foreign contexts. Another way of looking at transferability

is to think in terms of reader or user generalisability. Thus, the responsibility for

application of the outcomes to other situations lies with the people in those situations

(Wilson, 1979, in Merriam, 1988).


Strategies used in this study that will enable judgements to be made about the

transferability of findings to other contexts include providing a thick description of

the context and detailed analysis of interview data and observation notes supported

by relevant documents, use of purposive sampling, and the logical and concise

presentation of theoretical propositions supported by relevant examples from the

data. This is “so that anyone else interested in transferability has a base of

information appropriate to the judgement” (Lincoln & Guba, 1985, p. 124).

Dependability

In qualitative research, there are many interpretations and no benchmarks by

which one can take repeated measures and establish reliability in the traditional sense

(Merriam, 1988). Lincoln and Guba (1985) refer to the dependability or consistency

of findings from the data. Rather than demanding that other researchers obtain the

same results, one wishes them to concur that, given the data collected, the findings

are consistent and dependable. The development of an ‘audit trail’ has become an

accepted strategy for demonstrating stability and trackability of data and subsequent

findings (Guba & Lincoln, 1981). Independent judges can authenticate the findings

by following the trail of the researcher. The audit trail developed in this study by the

researcher provides details of how data were collected, how categories were derived,

and how decisions were made throughout the study to enable other researchers to use

the original report as a guide by which to replicate the study (Merriam, 1988). The

triangulation strategy described earlier further strengthens dependability as well as

credibility and trustworthiness of the findings.


PARAMETERS OF THE STUDY

Due to limitations of data gathering placed on this study, as previously

described, the substantive theory that emerged from this research is not inclusive

beyond the defined locations (Stainback & Stainback, 1984; Schwartz & Jacobs,

1979). The aim was to develop theory which takes account of the particular

conditions under which the phenomenon exists, the action-interactions, and the

consequences that are associated with it. The theory, however, may have wider

applicability, and should be tested for its relevance to other students in workplaces in

industry areas beyond those on which this study was based.

CONCLUSION

This chapter has outlined and explained the methodology used in the study

reported in this thesis. The aim of the study was to develop theory about how

secondary school students who are in their first year of a VET program and

undertake SWL for the first time manage their workplace learning throughout the

year. The study was restricted to four secondary schools within one education district

in the Perth metropolitan area. The study employed qualitative methods of data

collection and analysis consistent with the interpretivist view of human behaviour.

‘Grounded theory’ strategies of data analysis were used in systematic coding and

analysis of data to develop the theory of Workplace Formation. Focusing the

research in terms of how students ‘manage’ their workplace learning reflected the

interpretivist nature of the research, which sought to understand students’ workplace

experiences, and how they interacted with others, in going about their learning, from


the students’ own perspectives. The researcher must understand how students

interpret various aspects of the workplace experience, and “clarify what and how

meanings are embodied in the language and actions of social actors” (Schwandt,

1994, p. 118). This focus has informed the theoretical framework underpinning the

research.

As has been stated earlier, the development of generic workplace skills and

competencies is a key element in the successful transition of young people to the

world of work. To enable this, a key policy direction is to fully integrate VET in

Schools programs with mainstream secondary schooling, and to develop these skills

flexibly and with some cohesion between the school program and the world of work.

To date, there has been substantial growth of VET in Schools, including SWL. It is

acknowledged that integration of VET into mainstream curriculum and meeting the

needs of the various stakeholders, including students, will provide more challenges

(House of Representatives Standing Committee on Education and Training, 2004).

Responsiveness to the needs of industry and of more diverse student populations is a

factor in improving the value of VET in schools. Structured workplace learning is an

important part of this process. This research on the ways in which students in their

first year of SWL manage the learning process at the workplace should be useful in

informing program improvement. There is currently a lack of qualitative research on

how students manage their workplace learning. Much of the available literature on

structured workplace learning is at the program level generally about program

delivery and evaluation, and usually part of a broader VET in Schools study. These

studies give very limited insight into processes that students use to manage their

learning. Others are from an organisational or management perspective rather than

the perspectives of young people to whom these programs are directed. Much of the


organisational socialisation literature reviewed in the previous chapter is from

international contexts and quantitative in nature. There has been little interpretive

research on the ways in which students manage the learning process. This research

helps to fill this gap. The design of this study explicitly focuses on student ‘voice’

and the authenticity of student experiences to ground the theory that emerged from

this study. In giving prominence to student voice, this design has similarities to

illuminative evaluation (Parlett & Hamilton, 1976).

A detailed exposition of the theory of Workplace Formation, which

constitutes the findings of this study, is presented in the remaining chapters of this

thesis.

Students and Their Workplaces 119

CHAPTER FIVE

THE STUDENTS AND THEIR WORKPLACES

Before proceeding with a detailed analysis of the categories and processes of

the theory of Workplace Formation it is important to provide a brief description of

the student participants, who are the focus of this study, as well as a description of

the range of workplaces in which students undertook SWL. This provides the reader

with the particular contexts that shaped students’ perspectives and some of the

conditions that prevailed. Much of the information about the students and their

workplaces emerged during the data gathering and analysis phases of the study. To

maintain anonymity, pseudonyms have been used for all participants and workplaces.

THE STUDENTS AND WORKPLACES IN SCHOOL 1

Four students from School 1 were in the Year 11 Hospitality and Tourism

program. They all studied a common course that included Vocational English, Career

and Industry Awareness, Food Production, Aspects of the Tourism Industry,

Catering, Workplace and Health Issues, and SWL. SWL was undertaken each Friday

over the year. Because this school accepted only post-compulsory students, all

students were originally from other schools. Three were attracted to the program

because they had a clear focus on a career in the hospitality industry and expected to

gain significant industry skills as well as a competitive advantage into TAFE or an

apprenticeship. These students maintained their focus throughout the year and one

was successful in gaining an apprenticeship at the end of the year, which had been

his goal throughout. They stayed in the same workplace for SWL throughout the

year. One student, Paul, at one stage almost quit his workplacement because of the


way he felt that he was being treated by his supervisor. Paul was placed, through his

teacher, in a cafeteria in Fremantle because he had not been able to find a placement

of his own. The cafeteria employed a small staff that included the ‘boss,’ his spouse,

and two other workers. Paul did not have a part-time job, and this was his first

experience in the workplace. Paul enjoyed the practical aspects of the program. He

took SWL more seriously than his schoolwork but recognised that he needed to apply

himself more at school. He began to work better later in the year by “not mucking

around in class as much and finding it a lot easier.”

The other two students enjoyed their placement and made good progress.

Jarrod was quite familiar with his workplace, both with the type of work and with the

workers. It was a busy function centre where his ‘uncle,’ a close friend, was a master

chef and where he was expected to learn all aspects of being a chef. The function

centre employed a number of workers that included apprentices and qualified chefs.

Jarrod loved to cook and had a passion for it. He enjoyed the practical aspects of the

school program related to cooking and had no interest in the other aspects, where he

could not see a benefit to his future career. As a consequence, Jarrod concentrated

only on what he was interested in, did the work he needed to do and did no

schoolwork out of school hours. He enjoyed the workplace, and took SWL more

seriously than school.

Jack’s previous school history was poor. His attendance had been poor, and

he often did not complete work. He subsequently completed a ‘Fastrack’ course to

prepare him for Year 11 studies. Jack was motivated by an ambition of one day

running his own restaurant, and was attracted to School 1 because of this. He had

casual jobs in small food outlets before. He left after only one day at his first

workplacement in a cafeteria in Fremantle, a small business with only two other


workers, because the expectations on him were too high. He was subsequently placed

in a bigger workplace that employed around 12 workers and catered for local

residents and a number of organisations, including Meals on Wheels. It was a busy,

structured and well-organised, professional kitchen environment, with staff very

supportive of him. The manager spoke very highly of Jack with regard to his attitude,

application and willingness to learn. The program gave Jack the motivation to attend

school and complete work. He enjoyed the practical aspects of the program where he

saw the relevance to his career, but not the ‘theory’ part of school, which he found

difficult. Although he enjoyed the workplace work he regarded his schoolwork as

more important because “at the end I get my certificate from the school not the

workplace.”

Terri had originally applied to study marine tourism at TAFE but was not

accepted. The program at School 1 was, therefore, a fallback position because she

was still interested in marine tourism at the time. However, during the year she

changed her mind and no longer had a clear career focus. Instead she was “gonna

continue with this and just see.” Terri had been to three different workplaces during

the year and had experienced problems in the first two, which brought about the

change. The first was a cafeteria in Fremantle, where her work consisted mainly of

making rolls, serving and taking orders, cleaning and arranging flowers. Terri then

changed workplaces and worked in the busy kitchen of “a yuppie sort of bar and

café” where they prepared bar meals and “expensive big dishes . . . that had to be

made.” Her third workplace was at a hotel in Fremantle where she worked in the

kitchen as well as waiting on customers. It was very similar to her previous

placement, and she felt comfortable because the people were friendly and it was an


atmosphere that she was familiar with. However, she felt that learning was limited to

“how to do things quickly.”

The other three were Year 12 students. Karl was undertaking a School-based

New Apprenticeship (SBNA) in hospitality, with the workplace component

undertaken each Thursday and Friday. Karl had completed secondary equivalent

overseas but his studies were not recognised in Western Australia. He was not able to

speak English when he arrived in Australia and attended an intensive language centre

before entering mainstream at School 1. His focus was for a career in hospitality and

he intended to progress to TAFE and to a full-time apprenticeship. Karl experienced

difficulties at his first workplace. He was working mainly as a waitperson in a

cafeteria in the city and had expected to be there the entire year but was asked to

leave due to the lack of available work. He then missed a considerable period at the

workplace due to a lack of available workplaces but was eventually placed in a more

supportive workplace for the remainder of the year. This was as a waitperson in a

fairly large and busy upmarket restaurant in Fremantle that employed several staff

ranging from chefs to waitpersons to bartenders.

The other two students were from other programs in the school. One student

was undertaking an Information Technology program, the other a Business Studies

program. Ben had ‘failed’ Year 12 at another school. He knew that he wanted to be a

computer programmer by that stage, and tried to get into TAFE but wasn’t accepted.

He chose the program at School 1 because it was “better than doing nothing,”

particularly as he could graduate and achieve Certificate 2 in Information

Technology. His intentions were to use this as a stepping-stone to TAFE. His first

placement was in the “tech bay” of the small computer department of a large

department store in a suburb of Perth. His work primarily involved repairing


computers where he worked mainly with the head technician. Towards the end of

that placement, he completed a two-week block there. Ben’s second placement was

with a big international software development company that had significantly more

staff including software and mining engineers. He was assigned to the system

administrator. Ben enjoyed the work and was hoping to continue there on a casual

basis.

Jane wasn’t enjoying her Year 11 university oriented course at her previous

school. She was motivated by the business program at School 1 and that it led to

Certificate 3 in Business Marketing at TAFE. The program motivated Jane to apply

herself more diligently to her work, leading to more effective time management,

which she said was the biggest change that she had made. Through her mother, Jane

found a workplacement in the human resources department of a large multi-national

company in Perth, but it wasn’t her preferred area. Jane enjoyed her placement very

much and chose to continue there all year. Her workplace was typical of an office

environment with small offices, partitioned areas, and a large number of personnel.

Jane worked closely with one female worker, who was her primary mentor, but

interacted with a number of others from time to time. The culture was supportive and

friendly. The work was varied, she was quickly accepted and given tasks where she

could apply the skills she had learned at school, and use initiative. She was also

given the freedom to work independently, which she enjoyed.


The eight participants from School 2 were part of the same group of students

undertaking Certificate 1 in Hospitality (Operations). The program was very similar

in structure and organisation to that of School 1. A number of Units of Competency


from relevant training packages were embedded within the overall program. Monday

to Wednesday involved general schoolwork which students generally regarded as

theory. Thursday involved practical cooking all day, and SWL each Friday. The

workload was such that students could conceivably complete all work during class

time, and for many students this was the case. However, most students stated that

they had some homework to complete. Those who were less organised and did not

manage their class time effectively invariably had more to do at home than others.

Most had part-time jobs after school, which competed with schoolwork and social

life. Most participants chose the program because they were motivated by a career in

the hospitality and tourism industry.

Jason had a clear focus on becoming a chef and travelling. He generally

enjoyed his schoolwork and worked hard at it. He was well organised and self-

disciplined, and able to manage competing demands by prioritising and allocating

time effectively. He enjoyed the practical aspects of the course, his workplace work

and those that he considered more relevant to his career. He enjoyed his workplace,

staying at the same place throughout the year. He found his own placement, “a high

class restaurant” in Fremantle that employed a number of staff including chefs,

waitpersons and trainees. Jason was taken on as a trainee chef. The workplace culture

was friendly and supportive. Jason was keen to learn, and was soon offered

additional work on the weekends. The workplace was busy and well organised with

established practices and clearly defined roles for all workers.

Lisa also wanted to become a chef. She wanted to complete Year 12 and go

to TAFE. She generally applied herself in class and regarded her schoolwork as more

important than SWL even though she very much enjoyed her workplacement. She

was generally well organised but found managing competing demands of a casual


job, school work, and her personal life difficult at times. She found her own

placement in a high-class restaurant near Fremantle where she mainly worked in the

kitchen. The restaurant employed around six chefs and although Lisa was under the

supervision of the head chef the others acted as mentors as well and were very

supportive of her. Much of the work included low level tasks and preparation work,

and as she progressed to more complex work she was allowed to cook on her own.

Lucy wanted a career in hotel management, and saw the program as giving

her a “head start” because she would gain Certificate 1 and 2 at school. Lucy found

the program as a whole not very demanding and was able to easily cope with the

workload. To Lucy, her schoolwork was a priority, and she effectively managed

competing demands that included a part-time job. Lucy was at two different

workplaces during the year neither directly related to her intended career of hotel

management. Both were in restaurants, the first in a fairly large seafood restaurant

where she worked both in the kitchen learning food preparation and waiting on the

restaurant floor. The work also involved low level tasks such as clearing tables,

which she did not enjoy. Her second placement was in the busy restaurant of a five-

star hotel where she was primarily learning customer service skills. The atmosphere

was formal and she felt pressured to be “spot on” because of the strong customer

focus culture of the hotel.

Nancy also chose the program because she wanted to become a chef. She had

a heavy part-time job commitment, and, as a consequence, found the workload at

school heavy and had difficulty managing her time effectively. She found little time

to study, and her efforts in class were dependent on her perceptions of and

relationship with the teacher. Nancy did not enjoy her first placement and left after a

brief period. She had been placed in the kitchen of a hotel in Fremantle where she


was doing a variety of tasks, including food preparation and cooking. Nancy was

subsequently placed at the same workplace as Jason, which she enjoyed very much

and hoped to continue there the following year.

Mark also chose the program because he wanted to be a chef. He intended to

go to TAFE after Year 12 and then into an apprenticeship. Mark loved to cook,

which was what he enjoyed most about the program, and valued his SWL. Mark

worked at two different workplaces. His first was in the kitchen of the restaurant in a

popular hotel in Fremantle. The restaurant employed several staff including chefs,

waitpersons, and trainees. Mark’s work mainly involved preparation of food for the

day, and not much cooking, contrary to what he expected. He was, however, very

compliant and did all that was required of him. He found the workplace highly

professional which encouraged him to respond in a professional manner. His second

placement was in the kitchen of a defence forces establishment that catered for a

large number of personnel. The type of work was similar to his previous placement

but in a different context.

Clara chose the program because she loved cooking and the tourism aspects

of the program but had no definite career in mind. She was also motivated by the fact

that she would complete Certificate 1 in Hospitality and intended to go to TAFE the

following year. Clara did not find the work difficult, and was easily able to cope. She

saw school and SWL of equal importance for different reasons. Clara was passionate

about horses and chose to do her workplacement at a riding school. This was a small

family business that employed a very small staff. Clara loved working there. She was

treated like an employee and given a great deal of responsibility. Most Fridays it was

the boss, Clara, and another worker. She was repeatedly asked to work on weekends

and even offered permanent employment at one stage. Although Clara revelled in the


work, it quickly became routine with little challenge and limited skill development.

Furthermore, she saw little connection with her schoolwork and saw it more as an

enjoyable unpaid job that could lead to better things.

Anna’s vocational intentions were to be an international flight attendant, and

chose the program because of the tourism and catering aspects. Anna found the work

overall quite easy and it motivated her to attend school and to apply herself, which

wasn’t the case previously. She endeavoured to complete as much as possible at

school, and compartmentalised schoolwork, workplace learning, part-time job, and

her social life. Anna had two different placements over the year but neither was

directly related to her intended career. The first was at a travel agency in Perth with a

mixture of younger and older adult staff. Although Anna got on well with the

younger girls, she often had very little to do and found the experience boring. Anna’s

second placement was at a kindergarten. However, she didn’t like the type of work

that she was given or how she was treated so she negotiated a change to a primary

school. Here Anna was able to do the kind of work that she found more enjoyable.

The school was typical of primary schools in Perth. This workplace was a tightly

controlled, highly supervised environment governed by rules and regulations and

characterised by set procedures and classroom routines.

Emma did not have a clear career focus but was interested in the hospitality

industry. Her intentions were to study hospitality at TAFE and explore career

options. The program was important to give her a head start into TAFE. Emma’s

social life and part-time job, which she thoroughly enjoyed, competed strongly with

other demands, particularly her schoolwork, brought about by poor organisation.

Emma didn’t enjoy her first placement, which was in a small restaurant in Fremantle

typical of the area. Her second placement, which she enjoyed but offered limited skill


development, was in an even smaller workplace, a cheesecake shop, which operated

as a small family business with a relatively small staff.


Students in School 3 were not a discrete group and were able to select their

program of study from mainstream subjects that best met their needs. SWL was

conducted in two blocks each of two weeks during the school’s examinations period.

This was done because students undertaking VET programs were primarily taking

Wholly School Assessed subjects, which did not involve examinations, and, hence,

they were free during this time. This minimised clashes with work in other subjects,

making management of the school and SWL components much more effective.

Peter was strongly focused on a career as a plant mechanic and had informed

himself well in this field. His intentions were to obtain an apprenticeship in this field

and he negotiated both placements with an international heavy machinery

organisation in this industry. This workplace was a highly structured environment

with expert staff able to mentor young trainees. Safety, standards, and productivity

were important issues in this environment. Peter was placed with the head plant

mechanic in the maintenance workshop of the organisation. Peter’s goal of SWL was

to explore if he was suited to that type of work. His schoolwork, which he found

easy, was a priority and was completed as much as possible in class time. This left

time for a part-time job, which he negotiated to suspend during SWL. He did not

engage in social activities during SWL to ensure that he was not tired for the day

ahead. Peter undertook his first placement in the final two weeks of Term 3 because

he wasn’t able to undertake the SWL at the usual time due to illness. His second


workplacement was done at the end of the year after completing the school

component of the program.

Alex, on the other hand, originally wanted to be a physical education teacher

and commenced Year 11 in a university oriented course. However, he did not apply

himself, and eventually changed to all WSA courses. Alex’s focus subsequently

shifted to finding a trade that he liked. This was his motivation for SWL. His first

placement was with a small boat building company with a small, expert staff. Again,

safety, work standards, timelines, set policies and procedures, and productivity were

important issues in this type of workplace as was the need to work as part of a team.

Alex enjoyed the work and atmosphere at this workplace so much that he decided on

a career in this field and was hoping to obtain an apprenticeship with this company.

Although he wanted to continue his placement there he wanted to explore another

industry, so he chose a small family owned and operated computer business close to

his home for his second placement. This workplace was a more relaxed and flexible

environment but the work was less varied and more routine. Alex was a family friend

who had helped out occasionally so had some familiarity with the workplace prior to

starting the placement. In contrast to his previous placement, he found the work easy

and did not think that he learnt much at that workplace.

Laura was passionate about a career in the community services industry and

saw the program as giving her a head start into the industry as well as an opportunity

to see if it was what she wanted to do. She found the course relevant to her needs and

was committed to doing well. She comfortably managed her schoolwork, part-time

job, and social life, which she saw as an important counter-balance to schoolwork.

Laura’s first placement was in a community services centre for seniors and people

with disabilities, with a significant number of residents at the centre. Nursing and


aged-care being the main activities, the workplace was characterised by health and

safety matters, established procedures and routines, and trained staff. Laura’s second

placement was at a small school for disabled children in the Fremantle area. This was

a specialised and well-resourced school with specially trained staff to provide expert

care and instruction to students. Here Laura worked under supervision with

individual students as well as in a team situation. The workplace was characterised

by duty of care and safety matters (which were of particular importance), routines,

rules and regulations, and teamwork.

Mary initially began the program with an interest in cabinet making, but also

had an interest in architecture. She chose WSA subjects that reflected her career

interests as much as possible. Her aim in SWL was to explore these areas and gain a

better understanding of the job and determine if she was suited to them. However,

she wasn’t able to find a placement in either industry, so she did not gain much from

each experience. Mary enjoyed her schoolwork and managed competing demands of

school, part-time job, social life, and SWL well. Her first placement was in a child-

care centre, which she chose because she wanted to learn more about it. Overall,

Mary enjoyed the work and the experience. Her second placement was in the busy

kitchen of a cafeteria in a local university. This workplace had a number of female

and male staff each with specific roles and under the direction of the executive chef.

This was also a highly structured workplace with set routines, established practices

and controls, and a combination of specialist and casual staff. Mary worked under

close supervision of mentors and had to observe relevant safety requirements.

Megan’s career focus was in hospitality but she was uncertain as to the

particular career. She was, therefore, interested in exploring options and chose

subjects centred around business, and hospitality and tourism. Megan’s first


workplacement was in the restaurant of a popular hotel in Fremantle, the same

workplace as Mark’s first placement. She worked in the kitchen for most of the time

under the guidance of a senior chef as her mentor, and then worked in the restaurant

for the final two days. Megan’s second placement was in a small retail menswear

clothing business with a small staff and the store manager. The type of work centred

around learning customer service skills as well as low level tasks such as running

errands, cleaning, and answering the phone. Hence, the capacity for skill

development in this small business was limited.


VET students from School 4 were also able to select their program of study

from mainstream subjects that best met their needs. Students undertook SWL one

day each week, and missed scheduled lessons for that day, which they were expected

to catch up in their own time. Teachers were expected to support students to make up

missed work. Many VET students had flexible sessions, which they could use for this

purpose. However, the effectiveness of this depended on students’ ability to manage

their time.

Three students who were in their first year of the program were the focus of

the study. Erin, who started the program in Year 12, was interested in a career in the

tourism industry, and intended to study hotel management at TAFE. Her reasons for

taking the program were to gain experience in the industry and to see if she liked it as

a career. Hence, her focus was more career decision making. However, she saw

learning such skills as technical skills and customer service skills as important. Erin

managed her time well, established routines, and used self-directed learning to catch


up on missed work. She completed most of her work in school time, and had no part-

time job. Erin was not able to gain a placement in her preferred area of hotel

management. She was placed in two different travel agencies for SWL. Both were

small businesses, the first being in retail and the second, a wholesaling business.

Each business had a small staff consisting of office manager and travel consultants.

Erin worked within a small team environment under the supervision of one of the

senior staff members. Given the size of the organisation the work was narrow and

focused on customer service and on the development of specific technical and

interpersonal skills, which Erin was progressively exposed to. Although Erin found

the work boring at times she enjoyed the first workplace more than the second where

the work was mostly typing. The experience in both workplaces led her to exclude a

career in the travel industry, which she had considered prior to commencing SWL.

Kelly, who also commenced the program in Year 12, originally wanted to be

a chef. However, she changed her mind during her first workplacement due to the

negative impact of role models and the kind of work it involved. She then viewed the

program as important in gaining “extra TAFE points”1 and for gaining employment.

Kelly was well organised and managed her time well, completing most of the work

during school time. To Kelly, schoolwork was a priority. She undertook two

1 In some TAFE courses where there are more applicants than there are places,

selection criteria are used to rank eligible applicants competing for entry into the course.

Points are allocated up to a maximum for General Academic Merit, Related Academic Merit,

and Other Merit. Some qualifications include other criteria such as interview or folio. Under

Related Academic Merit students can gain points for preferred pathways and preferred

subjects, and under Other Merit they can gain points for SWL and other recognised

workplace experience, paid or unpaid, making them more competitive (TAFEWA, 2006).


placements, the first was in the cafeteria of one of the universities in Perth. She

worked mainly in the kitchen but was also given a waitperson and cleaning role at

different times. The restaurant was a relatively large and busy workplace, which

catered for a large number of students and staff. The restaurant employed a number

of chefs as well as casual workers and waitpersons. At this workplace, Kelly had

several mentors. Although Kelly was assigned to the head chef, she was primarily

supervised by one of the other chefs. Kelly’s second placement was in a ‘high class’

restaurant, which was an integral part of a large establishment that regularly held

large functions. The centre employed a number of staff with several in the restaurant

section from restaurant manager, to chefs, and to waitpersons. Customer service,

high standards, and health and safety issues were considered important at this

workplace. The change to this workplace was to give Kelly experience as a

waitperson, which suited her more.

Kate was a Year 11 student who wanted a career in hotel management. To

Kate, school was important only to gain entry to TAFE. As the year progressed, she

viewed SWL as progressively more important in achieving this goal. Hence,

maximising her chances of gaining TAFE entry and gaining credit towards a TAFE

certificate for work done at school were her priorities. Her course was tailored

towards her intended career. Kate was generally well organised and managed her

time well. She completed most of the work during school time through self-directed

learning and support from teachers and peers. Her efforts, however, varied between

subjects depending on her interest in the subject and what she considered to be more

relevant to her career focus. Kate’s first placement was in the busy restaurant of a

five-star hotel with a large staff. The atmosphere at this workplace was very formal

with a strong customer focus. She did not find the work interesting as it was not


relevant to her career goal. However, she did recognise the benefit of gaining

experience around the hotel. Kate’s second placement was as a waitperson in a

smaller restaurant of a ‘pub’ style hotel in Fremantle. The restaurant section

employed only a small staff and Kate often worked with one or two others as a small

team. Again, the focus was customer service but in a more relaxed environment.

Kate enjoyed this placement more than the first mostly because of the acceptance and

support she received from working in a small team environment. However, skill

development was less diverse in this work setting.

SUMMARY OF THE TYPES OF WORKPLACES IN THE STUDY

The workplaces involved in this study can be grouped into three main types.

1) Large Organisations

The first were large organisations that were characterised by a highly

structured work environment often with well-established work practices, policies and

procedures, and a large number of employees and trained staff who had the capacity

to mentor young trainees and provide adequate support to them. Training and

professional development were a feature of these organisations and included a strong

sense of professional formation for apprentices and trainees. Safety, standards, and

productivity were often important issues in this environment. The capacity to

develop a range of career-related skills, including the ability to work in a team

environment, and appropriate knowledge were also features of these workplaces. The

smaller organisations in the study, such as schools and community service centres,

were also characterised by many of these features. These workplaces were often

tightly controlled, highly supervised environments governed by rules and regulations


and characterised by duty of care and safety issues (which were of particular

importance), routines, and a sense of teamwork.

2) Restaurants and Other Community Services

The second type were community service industry workplaces that mainly

included large to medium-sized restaurants, some as part of a larger establishment

such as a hotel. These were typically staffed with a number of expert staff and other

employees including apprentices. These workplaces were characterised by a strong

customer focus and were often busy, well organised with established practices and

clearly defined roles for all workers. In more ‘upmarket’ restaurants the atmosphere

was more formal which tended to place students under pressure to perform to the

expected standards. These workplaces generally had sufficient expert staff to provide

mentors and support to students, and develop the necessary work-related skills.

Sufficient scope existed for students to develop a range of relevant industry-related

skills and knowledge. However, the workplace culture, which seemed to vary

significantly from one workplace to another, impacted on the capacity of the

organisation to deliver adequate training for students. Even in these organisations,

there existed a degree of tension in trying to balance the learning needs of the student

with the needs of the organisation to be productive. Kelly and Lucy’s workplaces

were examples.

3) Small Business

The third type were small businesses which were often family owned and had

a relatively small number of employees. Many of these workplaces were cafeterias

and travel agencies that provided a service in very specific sectors of the hospitality

and tourism industry. The range of staff in these enterprises was generally narrow

and their expertise limited. Hence, the capacity of these enterprises to provide


adequate supervision, mentoring, and training was limited. In such workplaces, the

focus was primarily on productivity. The owner/operator with only a small staff was

generally busy running and operating the business and a student was often put on as

‘another pair of hands.’ These enterprises often did not have the time, training

expertise or communication skills, and quality or variety of work to provide

appropriate skills training for students. The tasks given to the student were primarily

aimed at meeting the needs of the organisation and getting the job done. Learning

occurred along the way and did not appear to be a priority. Students were frequently

assigned low level tasks such as washing dishes, cleaning or serving customers

without a great deal of instruction. As in the bigger establishments, tension often

existed between student and employer in trying to balance the needs of the student as

a learner with the needs of the organisation. Many such small businesses in the

hospitality industry have a strong vested interest in repeat clientele and hence a

strong customer focus. Furthermore, in these enterprises, word of mouth is often an

important means of promotion. The pressure on the employer to ensure that this

occurred, and hence be profitable, and on the student to ‘get it right’ was often high.

This was evident at the workplaces of Karl, Terri and Paul.

CONCLUSION

This chapter has provided a brief description of the student participants and

of the various workplaces in which students undertook SWL. This provides the

reader with information about the particular context and conditions that shaped

students’ perspectives, and enables a better understanding of how students

interpreted experiences associated with their workplace learning and the actions they


took to manage their learning as a result. The theory of Workplace Formation, the

central finding of this study, emerged from the defined population and the particular

contexts and conditions under which student learning occurred as described in this

study (Stainback & Stainback, 1984). As will be shown in the following chapters,

these conditions had a significant impact on the way in which students managed their

workplace learning. Much of the information about the students and their workplaces

emerged during data gathering, which enabled the researcher to probe or guide the

discussion to pursue information considered relevant to the central research question

and for subsequent analysis. In particular, students’ reasons for undertaking the VET

program and their post-school intentions were important as were various physical

and social characteristics of the particular workplaces in this study (LeCompte &

Goetz, 1982).

Student participants from School 1 and School 2 all undertook the same set

program of study structured by the schools as the most relevant to the specific

industry area. Students from School 3 and School 4 selected courses that best suited

their interests and abilities. It was notable that very few of these students undertook

university entrance subjects as part of the program of study. Some students were

focused on a career in the industry, for example, a chef, some sought confirmation of

their intention, while others were more interested in exploring different career

options. Students also came into the various programs with varying school

backgrounds. Students from School 1 were all from other government and non-

government schools, attending the school to undertake the particular VET program.

While many of the students in the study had enjoyed school before commencing the

VET program, albeit to varying extents, and achieved varying degrees of success,

some had not enjoyed school and had performed poorly. This experience and


intentions helped to shape each student’s perspective at the beginning. For many of

these students, the VET program and the SWL experience helped to shape a more

positive view of schooling and their post-school intentions. These changes in

perspectives were reflected in the way that they managed their workplace learning.

The range of workplaces, from large organisations, to restaurants, and to smaller

enterprises also provided a rich context for the study. How these kinds of workplaces

impacted on students will emerge in the following chapters.

The next chapter discusses a number of themes or issues that emerged from

analysis of the data that impacted on the way that students managed their learning in

such workplaces.

Major Themes and Issues 139

CHAPTER SIX

MAJOR THEMES AND ISSUES

The aim of this study was to develop theory about how secondary school

students who are in their first year of a VET program and who have undertaken SWL

for the first time ‘manage’ their learning at the workplace. The study focused

primarily but not exclusively on students undertaking a VET program in the

Hospitality and Tourism industry in four secondary schools within the Perth

metropolitan area. Data from all participants were compared to identify common

themes. The patterns that emerged resulted from the analysis of these data. A number

of themes or issues were identified that impacted on the way that students managed

their workplace learning. These were issues that students had to contend with and

manage to varying extents. Some had greater impact on student learning than others.

These themes or issues can be categorised as intrinsic factors or extrinsic factors.

Intrinsic factors are those that largely relate to the students themselves. Extrinsic

factors are those that relate to the workplace environment. This chapter focuses on

these findings.

INTRINSIC FACTORS IMPACTING ON HOW STUDENTS MANAGE THEIR

LEARNING AT THE WORKPLACE

A number of intrinsic factors were identified that impacted on how students

managed their workplace learning. These are: (1) clarity of focus on a career or job;

(2) selection of SWL placement; and (3) managing competing demands. The

following discussion will focus on each of these.


Clarity of Focus on a Career or Job

Clarity of focus on a career or job was identified as a key factor impacting on

the workplace chosen and on how students managed their workplace learning. The

study identified two levels of clarity of focus. These were (a) students who had a

clear focus on a career, and (b) students exploring career options and gaining generic

workplace experience.

Students With a Clear Career Focus

Students with a clear focus on a post-school career in the industry tended to

be more motivated and committed to making the most of their SWL experience.

Their focus was on developing the skills and knowledge needed in that career. A

number of students identified that the reason for enrolling in the VET program was

to pursue a career in that industry, for example, “a chef” (Jason, Jack). Jack wanted

to become a chef and follow his dreams. This clear focus on his career motivated him

to “actually turn up to school.” He found the workplace learning more useful than

the school component because you “got hands on experience” (Jack), but school was

more important than the workplace because “you actually get a grade for it” (Jack).

This was the case with most students. Whilst both school and the workplace were

seen as important, meeting the demands of school was often seen as more important

primarily due to certification by the school even though a lot found the workplace

more useful. Students enrolled in the hospitality and tourism program because they

either wanted to pursue a career in the industry through an apprenticeship direct from

school or by going to TAFE first. Most students from School 1 and School 2 were in

this category.


Students with a clear focus on a career in the industry were also more likely

to enjoy the SWL experience, and have a greater desire to learn and accumulate skills

and knowledge because they saw the relevance to their career goal of what they were

learning and the benefits they would derive:

I work a lot more quickly in the workplace, more efficient. . . . At school I’m not quite as much stuck into it as what I am here because it’s like a hands on thing, it’s like I’m doing what I enjoy . . . I wanna become a chef that travels the world. (Jack)

These students tended to find it easier to adapt or fit in and gain acceptance by other

workers, and adopted the workplace practices and norms more quickly than others.

Some students had a clear focus on a career but used SWL to seek confirmation, “it

gives you a chance to change your mind” (Peter). The evidence from this study

suggests that students of this kind more quickly develop technical skills or

competence and become productive members of the organisation.

Students Exploring Career Options and Gaining Workplace Experience

Others did not have a clear focus on a career in an industry. These students

viewed SWL primarily as exploratory, and as a means to gain generic experience in a

workplace environment:

I always wanted to do it just to find out what I liked cos I want to find a trade . . . that I like. And I thought work experience would get me to see if I can handle the trade, handle the hours I’ve gotta do. . . . See if I could handle the workforce. (Alex)

For some students the SWL experience provided them with a clear career focus, “it’s

showed me what I wanna do now” (Alex). They enjoyed the experience and

demonstrated high commitment with an emphasis on a career in that industry and

attainment of work-related knowledge and skills. Many also saw gaining extra points

for TAFE entry as a prime motivation of the program. For these students, other


factors often played a greater role in their commitment to and the quality of the SWL

experience.

Some students had a clear focus on a career, but were not able to undertake

SWL in their chosen industry area because they were not able to find an appropriate

placement. These students tended to focus on gaining generic experience during that

placement and were mainly motivated by the extra TAFE points earned from SWL.

Selection of SWL Placement

In all schools students were expected to find their own workplacements. This

was part of their preparation for their entry into the workforce. The SWL coordinator

assisted in various ways ranging from as little as approving a placement to actually

placing a student who was not able to find a workplace on his or her own. The

involvement of the student in the selection of a workplace to match a student’s

purpose was found to be important in how committed a student initially was to that

placement. Students who selected their own placement according to their needs

tended to be more committed. As a consequence, they were more likely to want to

learn and to continue in that placement. A placement was also more likely to be

successful if students were placed in workplaces that they enjoyed and were

supportive of them. Jarrod had a “good time” at the workplace that he selected. He

found working there “pretty cool” and accepted an apprenticeship there, which made

him more committed and work harder, particularly during busy times: “I got more

hours than I should have.” The workplace to Jarrod felt “like home” because “I

know where everything is and I know that I just go in there and do something and I

wouldn’t get in trouble for it.” A number of students in the study had difficulty in


finding a suitable workplace and often had to settle for the placement not of their

choosing. Such placements were often in areas that did not match a student’s career

focus.

Managing Competing Demands

Students identified a number of competing demands that impacted to varying

extents on how well they managed SWL. This finding is in line with that noted by

Feldman (1981, 1976). The most common demands that impacted on students’ time

and SWL were a) schoolwork, b) casual part-time job, and c) social life. Family

commitments was also mentioned by some students as being important. SWL was

considered part of school but required very little preparation or planning once a

placement was underway. Students’ ability to manage these demands effectively

impacted to varying extents on how they went about their work at the workplace.

Their ability to set priorities, organise and allocate time to tasks, and establish a

routine was important to successfully manage competing demands. A number of

students indicated that they did not plan ahead but took things as they came. Some

students were sufficiently well organised to allocate time effectively and manage

tasks so as to impact positively on their work at the workplace. This often meant

negotiating casual work times with managers to fit around schoolwork and SWL.

Jason, for example, loved basketball but it conflicted with his workplace work. He

chose to fit basketball around his work as this was more important to him than

basketball. Such students often prioritised and compartmentalised competing

demands. Emma expressed the demands on her in this way:

When I first started in Year 11 these probably collided . . . you think, ok, I’ve got a clear head ready to learn new stuff in Year 11, and you just start getting


into school and they send you out on workplacement . . . all of it just comes at once. You have to remember your stuff for school, you have to remember your stuff for workplacement, and then if you’ve got a social life and a part-time job out of that they all just collide in the middle. (Emma)

School Issues

The nature of the schoolwork that students undertook and the level of

difficulty impacted on how students managed SWL. A common strategy among

students was compartmentalising schoolwork, SWL, and their personal life. Most

would do as much as possible during school time. The nature of the work that most

undertook and the level of difficulty were such that it could be adequately managed

during school time:

When I get up in the morning priority is probably school but school is in my eyes from 9 o’clock in the morning til 3.10, and I don’t continue it after that . . . if I’m working I’ve got my work, otherwise if I haven’t got work I’ve got my social time. But school stops at 3.10 unless I’ve got important homework, otherwise I’ll leave it til when I’m up to it. (Emma)

Another student said: “I just do it in school hours. I don’t do anything out of school

hours unless that’s work experience” (Jarrod). Students would endeavour to

complete all schoolwork before the day of their placement in order to be able to

focus directly on the workplace tasks, making it easier to be ‘part of the team’:

If I’ve done my schoolwork throughout the week I find it a lot easier on Fridays just to fit in because you can forget your schoolwork. If you forget your schoolwork you become a part of their working team much easier and you don’t have to think, oh, you know, I’ve gotta go home and do homework, you’re thinking like a person in their working team. (Emma)

Class time managed work was a key strategy that students used to manage their

schoolwork.

The workload associated with the overall program was another factor

impacting on how students managed their workplace learning. In Schools 1 and 2,

the program structure and organisation by the schools enabled students to easily


compartmentalise school, SWL, and personal and social life. Students did not have a

choice of subjects because the course was presented as a complete program of study

within the industry area. Furthermore, because students in the program were a

discrete group all doing the same course, the school component of the program was

scheduled around the day selected for SWL. In this way students avoided missing

school sessions and having to catch up on work missed, enabling them to more easily

focus on the workplace tasks. Thus, the school organisation of the program supported

the students in managing their work. For example, at School 2 the school-based

component of the program was from Monday to Thursday: “Thursdays we cook all

day, so there’s no really work there” (Emma). SWL was on Friday for all students.

In programs where students were able to select subjects from those available

on the school timetable, as in School 3 and School 4, students avoided taking TEE

subjects or limited the number taken not only because they saw many of these as not

relevant but also because of the workload involved. The school timetable structure

often meant missing lessons on the day of their workplacement which students felt

would be too difficult to make up and they could not afford to miss.

If I was doing my TEE there’s not really that many subjects that are going to help me. . . . If I was doing TEE I might be struggling a little bit more because non-TEE subjects are 99% done in school. So it might be a little bit harder to . . . balance things out. (Kate) If I did TEE I wouldn’t be able to probably manage with working and doing homework and going out and, like, I do netball as well in winter. Cos it’s heaps more homework and you’ve gotta study heaps more than what you have to study in this course. (Lucy)

Casual Job

Many of the students had a casual, part-time job after school hours. While

most were able to manage this to minimise the impact on other demands, it

nevertheless impacted to varying extent on social life, school, and SWL. This


occurred mostly with students who were not as well organised as others in

completing work during class time or where schooling was not as high a priority as

others. In some cases students tended to take on more hours in their casual job

resulting in them having to re-assess priorities and the impact this had on other areas.

Students often negotiated with the employer at their casual workplace for time off or

to swap schedules with others when they had schoolwork to complete or needed

extra time at the workplacement, which they regarded as more important for their

learning. Others were not sufficiently well organised to allocate time effectively to

getting competing tasks done, and, hence, time management was an issue for them:

“My casual job gets in the way a lot . . . I’ve got this homework to do but I can’t do it

tonight cos I’ve got to go to work” (Emma).

Some students assessed the impact of a casual job on their program according

to their priorities:

I want a job. I want money. I used to have a job but . . . when I first got it I used to get so tired . . . but that was really hard to get used to because, you know, then you had to get up at 7 and I caught the bus to school so you had to be ready . . . I don’t think I would work on Thursday nights . . . because of having SWL on a Thursday. (Kate)

Social Life

A number of students indicated that social life was important to them. As one

student put it: “If you haven’t got a social life what have you got. Like, you need

social life, you need time with everyone else otherwise you’re just yourself” (Emma).

Allocating time to socialise with friends or family was important to students and seen

as a priority. To many, the weekends were devoted to social occasions. Others would

use after school times to catch up with friends as a means of relaxation. However,

some students would use the opportunity after school to complete homework to

ensure that there was no overhang for the day of their placement. Most would


endeavour to have a free night the night before their SWL so as not to be tired for the

day’s work ahead. Most students that had a part-time job felt, however, that the job

impacted mostly on their social life, as many would put the job ahead of their social

life.

Other Workplace Issues

Tiredness was a common problem that students encountered early in the

placement because of the longer hours experienced at the workplace, not being used

to the type of work, or being on the go for long periods of time. Tiredness impacted

on social life, homework, or the workplace. Alex found that “work’s really put a

strain on me.” Jason illustrates the impact at the workplace:

Thursday I go to bed, like, about eight thirty nine o’clock . . . just so I’m not tired the next day [R. So, important not to be tired?] Yeh. Cos . . . you’re working with sharp stuff all the time. Easier to concentrate. (Jason)

Sometimes unrealistic demands and lack of support at the workplace placed

students under considerable pressure to perform. This tended to occur at workplaces

where expectations of employers were initially high and students were expected to

perform tasks that they did not feel confident in doing or to work at a faster pace. In

other workplaces this did not appear to be an issue with students receiving good

support and felt that employers had realistic expectations of them.

Students also had to contend with and adjust to the physical working

conditions such as the heat generated in the kitchen environment and working space,

and other factors such as working hours and health and safety issues.


EXTRINSIC FACTORS IMPACTING ON HOW STUDENTS MANAGE THEIR

LEARNING AT THE WORKPLACE

A number of extrinsic factors that related to the workplace environment

impacted on the way that students managed their learning at the workplace. These

factors are: (1) adequacy of role models and mentors; (2) treatment in the workplace;

(3) quality of work; (4) expectations of employer or mentor of the student; and (5)

acceptance by co-workers.

Adequacy of Role Models and Mentors

Adequacy of role models and mentors was also identified as an important

factor impacting on how students managed their learning at the workplace. When a

student entered a workplace a supervisor was normally assigned to each student. The

supervisor’s role was to supervise and mentor (Bova, 1987) the student throughout

the placement. While some students undertook SWL in two different workplaces, a

number remained in the same workplace throughout. In most workplaces, while one

person was primarily responsible for the student, other workers acted as role models

(Kram, 1985) and, to some extent, mentors. This usually occurred in larger

workplaces where students interacted with a number of other workers. This provided

students a variety of role models and enabled students to establish closer

relationships with some workers and not with others. In some cases, workers who

took on the role of mentor became more ‘significant’ than others as they were able to

provide support and friendship, making it easier for students to adjust to the

workplace as well as assisting with tasks and routines: “If something ever happens to


me I can tell her and I can’t exactly go up to a chef . . . he’ll, like, ‘as if I care’ . . . a

girl, she’ll give you advice” (Nancy). Mentors also helped students fit in by helping

them to “[get] to know the other people” (Emma) and relieving “a lot of tension

trying to fit in” by making “the workplace a lot of fun” (Mary).

The support of mentors was identified as a key factor contributing to the

enjoyment of the workplace experience and the extent to which learning took place,

in line with other research (Bova, 1987; Louis et al., 1983; Morrison, 1993a; Ostroff

& Kozlowski, 1992). Students used modelling extensively as a learning strategy and

the support of mentors and role models was a key part of this process. Students often

described supportive mentors as ‘friendly’ and ‘helpful.’ The most common practice

among mentors in the process of instruction and support was to explain to students

what they had to do and show them how a task or procedure needed to be done. They

would then allow the student to undertake the task on their own and offer support if

the student needed it.

Lack of adequate support of mentors tended to have a negative influence on a

student’s experience at the workplace resulting in a lack of enjoyment and very little

learning. In some workplaces supervisors or mentors were rather ‘bossy’ and

unpleasant. Students in this situation often felt unsupported. In some cases, mentors

were able to change their approach, adopted a mentoring role and provided more

support and instruction to students.

Treatment in the Workplace

How students were treated by their mentors and other workers was an

important factor that impacted on how they managed their learning at the workplace.


The quality of the interactions that students had with others at the workplace and the

quality of the relationships that resulted were important to students. As one student

put it, “if you don’t get on then you’re grumpy all day and you don’t really care

about that what you’re doing” (Jason). Strickland et al. (2001) and Borman (1988)

made similar observations for young people entering the workforce. The way that

students were treated impacted on how they perceived their role and on their level of

commitment. Where a student was treated the same as the other workers – as ‘one of

them’ – respected, valued, included in things, given responsibilities and allowed to

work independently, students were generally more committed and motivated to

work. They wanted to learn and often progressed more than others in skill and

knowledge development. They were more willing to accept advice, enjoyed working

and often looked forward to work. In the words of Jason, “cos you go there and you

wanna work, you wanna be with the people.” Students tended to be more cooperative

and accepted low level tasks because others did them and because they understood

that they came with the job.

Most students expected to be treated as adults and workers, and tended to act

more maturely when treated that way. In many instances, students also described

mentors and co-workers as “welcoming,” and largely expected to be treated in that

way: “When you go somewhere you expect … [a] welcoming kind of attitude”

(Kelly). They also expected mentors and co-workers to be understanding when

students made a mistake, which wasn’t always the case. In some workplaces,

however, some co-workers were not welcoming towards students. In these situations,

students often were excluded from conversations and felt marginalised. In others,

bullying or harassment occurred. Commitment to the workplacement in these

circumstances was low. In some instances, students changed their workplace to one


where they were treated in a more welcoming and supportive manner, resulting in a

more positive experience.

Quality of Work

The quality of work that students were given during workplacement impacted

on how they managed their learning. Most students had the expectation that they

would progressively learn and develop a range of work-related skills. They also

expected to gain knowledge and experience of the workforce and of what the job

entailed. Relevancy to their intended goals was a motivating factor for them. The

more career-oriented students had a greater expectation of developing knowledge

and skills related to a career in the industry. As one student who wanted to be a chef

said, “knowledge on and theory about food and stuff so I can learn more about

cooking and why agents act in different ways and stuff like that just so I become a

good chef” (Jarrod).

In a number of workplaces, students were given relevant tasks that

progressively developed skills and time to ‘consolidate’ learning by working on the

same task until they were ready to move on. Alex described this as giving him

“responsibilities” they thought he could handle and “working my way up” because

“they knew I was just new to it.” Work that was interesting and that students saw was

of benefit to them engendered commitment and impacted on their learning. Taylor

and Koczberski (2001a, 2001b) reported similar findings. Some students were given

more responsibility as they progressed and felt more “mature.”

In some workplaces, students were often given work that was low in skill or

unskilled, such as dishwashing, repetitive or of low interest to students, or perceived


by students as work that others did not want. Some students felt exploited (noted also

by Shilling, 1989, in Smith & Green, 2001), others found the experience “boring”

(Anna). Students often lacked commitment, and generally did not progress in skill

development, resulting in a negative experience. Some students sought another

placement. Others focused on the pragmatic outcome of gaining TAFE points by

completing the placement.

This study suggests that the work needs to be relevant to the students’

intended goals and should progressively develop skills and knowledge at a pace that

students are able to manage so that they can build and accumulate a range of work-

related skills and knowledge. This supports the findings of Strickland et al. (2001)

who noted that work that increases in complexity over time and supports autonomy

assists learning, and that the lack of new and challenging tasks hinder progress.

Expectations of Employer or Mentor of the Student

The expectations of employers or mentors also significantly impacted on the

way students managed their workplace learning. All students expected to be taught

and supported in learning work-related skills and knowledge, gaining workplace

experience, and, for many, what the various roles entailed: “I expected to learn a bit

more on using knives and how to prep up . . . [and] what the chef does” (Mark).

Most students expected not only to be learning but also to contribute: “When you’re

there you have to do the work so it feels like you’re working there. But on the other

side you know that you’re only doing it for the experience” (Mark). Some, however,

saw the workplace solely as a place to learn.


Sometimes the expectations of the employer or mentor were different to the

student’s expectations. In some cases, students were given tasks that they did not

expect at that stage, which they felt apprehensive about. In other cases, students felt

that expectations were too high for them. Some felt the employer expected “too

much in too little time” (Jack) or “expect[ed] you to know what you’re doing but you

don’t” (Kelly). In other situations, employers expected very little. The work became

“boring,” often repetitive, and little or no learning occurred: “It was in the same

place, like, doing the same thing each week” (Kelly). Student commitment and

motivation was, therefore, low, and some avoided the workplace: “I took some

Wednesdays off to stay at school cos . . . I’m gonna be doing the same thing when I

go there” (Kelly).

Acceptance by Co-Workers

Acceptance by co-workers impacted on how students managed their learning

at the workplace. From the very beginning of their placement students wanted and

strove to be accepted by co-workers and find a place within the organisation. They

wanted to be respected and accepted as part of the team. Acceptance by the others

impacts on the level of commitment a student makes and on how well the student

adjusts to the workplace. Fitting in is of prime concern to many students when they

first take up a placement. Peter articulates this:

Would I get along with the actual people there. That was my first thing – if you can’t work with them there’s really no point actually being there . . . I’m just giving it my best shot what I can do. (Peter)

For some, moving out of the comfort zone of the school environment and into a

workplace was quite daunting:


The biggest thing I had to handle was getting out of my comfort zone . . . you spend 12 years of your life at school and then you think, oh my gosh, I’ve gotta take a day out of my life and go to work . . . it’s much easier at school. (Emma)

To come as an outsider into a very different environment to what one was used to, to

try to be accepted into a team composed mostly of adults, and to get to know people

and form new relationships with them was of prime concern to most participants.

They also had to get used to practices, the type of work and what was expected of

them, which was also of concern. The entry process was easier for students who had

some familiarity with staff and with the type of work. Fitting in and forming new

relationships did not seem as daunting to them. Others wanted to be themselves but

felt that they had to act differently or be “more professional” (Mark), and some felt

restricted or “limited” (Kate) in what they could do. Most indicated that they had to

act “more mature” because of being around “older people” (Lisa) and, in many

cases, they became more grown up. Some, once they got to know other workers and

were accepted, became more comfortable in the workplace and were able to be

themselves more. However, most accepted that the workplace was a different

environment to school and that they were expected to behave differently and be more

mature.

Those that were accepted quickly into the workplace and were able to form

good working relationships found it easier to find a place within the organisation.

They generally saw themselves more in the role of worker, new apprentice or trainee.

They adapted easily to the workplace environment and more readily accepted the

conditions that came with the job. They more readily conformed to the cultural

norms within that workplace. Others found it more difficult to adapt, establish

positive relationships, and fit in. In these cases students either kept to themselves and

merely complied without a great deal of commitment or interacted only with those


who accepted and were supportive of them. Such students rarely felt part of the team.

In some cases a change in workplace enabled these students to establish new

relationships and find acceptance. Others never felt part of the organisation and were

unable to find a suitable place. They felt marginalised and often subservient to other

workers. In these cases students felt little or no commitment and saw themselves as a

‘school student’ rather than ‘one of them’:

I didn’t like my workplace. The one I’m at now is good but I used to work at [other workplace] and the kindergarten but they just treated me like shit, make me do all the cleaning, didn’t do anything with children at day care, all’s I done there all day is clean and that was really bad. . . . [R. What did you expect that you’d be doing?] . . . Thought I was going to do, like, helping out with the children and that. (Anna)

At her current workplace Anna felt accepted and included as part of the team:

I see myself as a worker cos I do all the good jobs there . . . it’s go in the staffroom at recess and lunch and they all talk to me, it’s like really good cos I’m not left out. (Anna)

Sometimes students were accepted by some workers and not by others. In

these situations students tended to avoid those workers and formed closer

relationships with those that they had things in common and accepted them. Students

wanted to be accepted for themselves, however, and strove to gain acceptance in

various ways. Some changed their behaviour and endeavoured to act more maturely

or adult-like. They strove to do their best and to “impress” their mentor or

supervisor.

Some fitted in so well that not only were they accepted as part of the team,

given various responsibilities, and included in conversations and other social

interactions at work but also established social relationships that continued beyond

the workplace:

Now we’re all, like, really good friends cos I have Tuesdays off and . . . we’ll go play basketball. They’ll normally go play but they’ll call me up and ask if


I wanna go. Or, like, they’ll go to movies . . . and they’ll ask me if I wanna go. (Jason)

They were also valued and felt valued by being able to express their views and

opinions on different issues and at times having their views sought by the others.

Sometimes situations arose where students felt rejected with a change in

personnel or group dynamics. This led to a feeling of isolation or rejection and loss

of commitment. For example, Nancy felt rejected and marginalised when a new

apprentice was put on at her first workplace:

I was going really well. She was gonna offer me an apprenticeship but then I went on a break . . . And then she told me to go like, she didn’t want to see me there again. . . . And, like, this other girl would get all the good jobs. She was the new apprentice that was there. And I got really annoyed at that. . . . When the new apprentice came they kinda changed. (Nancy)

Gaining acceptance by co-workers, including supervisors, and fitting in at the

workplace was an important issue that students had to manage.

CONCLUSION

In this chapter, a number of factors were discussed that impacted on the way

that students managed their workplace learning. These factors were (a) intrinsic to

the students themselves or (b) related to the workplace environment. Some had

greater impact on student learning than others, and had varied impact on each

individual. The intrinsic factors identified depended largely on individual students’

motivations, intentions, organisational and personal management skills, and how

proactive they may have been in seeking out career-related information. However,

particular external factors also played a role. For some students who had a clear

sense of their career intentions, finding a suitable workplace within the time available

was an issue, often because of the shortage of workplaces for SWL. This was, to


some extent, beyond the students’ control but nevertheless impacted on student

motivation and commitment. In managing competing demands, structural factors

beyond the students’ control also played a role. The program structure in Schools 1

and 2 made it easier for students to balance school and workplace demands because

school and SWL did not overlap. In School 4, however, managing the schoolwork

demanded more on the student’s organisational and self-management skills and

motivation, and depended on the support of individual teachers. Students in Schools

3 and 4 had more control over their total workload as opposed to the set curriculum

in Schools 1 and 2. This degree of agency enabled students to be more proactive and

have greater control in managing their learning.

External factors related to the particular workplace environment can impact

on students in different ways. Various studies have highlighted the important role of

mentors, supervisors and co-workers on newcomer adjustment (for example, Bova,

1987; Louis et al., 1983; Morrison, 1993a, 2002); the relationships a newcomer

forms with them (Liden et al., 1993); and how mentors can act as role models (Kram,

1985; Scandura, 1997). Other studies have examined the impact of the learning

environment and of the importance of mentors and supervisors in learning (for

example, Strickland et al., 2001). This study adds to this body of knowledge. The

adequacy of role models and mentors was found to be a key factor contributing to the

enjoyment of the workplace experience and the extent to which learning occurred.

Furthermore, in this context, the treatment of students by supervisors and other

workers and gaining acceptance and fitting in are particularly salient issues for

students. Although students in this context may not be in an employment relationship

but are there to learn, and are generally in peripheral positions to others at the

beginning, they want to be treated equitably and accepted as part of the team or


workgroup, and to be given tasks that progressively develop skills and knowledge.

These factors impacted on the way that students managed their learning and on the

quality of the SWL experience. These findings highlight the importance of the

workplace context in the learning process, the importance of appropriate skills for

mentors and supervisors, and the ways in which organisations or enterprises can

support students in managing their learning. The next chapter will explain what

processes students use to manage these and other aspects of learning in this particular

context.

Theory of Workplace Formation 159

CHAPTER SEVEN

THE THEORY OF WORKPLACE FORMATION

The aim of this study was to develop substantive theory regarding the ways in

which secondary school students who are in their first year of a VET program and

undertake SWL for the first time manage their learning at the workplace. The theory

of Workplace Formation that emerged is grounded in the actions and interactions of

the students who participated in a Structured Workplace Learning program

throughout the year in various workplaces mostly within but not exclusive to the

hospitality industry in Perth, Western Australia. A number of issues that impacted on

the ways that students managed their learning at the workplace were discussed in the

previous chapter. The theory of Workplace Formation will explain how students

within this context manage these and other aspects. The theory was developed to a

point of theoretical saturation (Strauss & Corbin, 1990) whereby no new knowledge

was forthcoming from available data within this context to change either the nature

of the categories formulated or the relationships between them.

The theory of Workplace Formation, which constitutes the central finding of

this study, is presented in detail in this chapter. It provides a detailed exposition of

the processes, concepts and interrelationships within the theory. The chapter is

organised in three sections. Firstly, the theory is presented as a ‘story line’ which

Strauss and Corbin (1990) define as “the conceptualisation of a descriptive story

about the central phenomenon of the study” (p. 119). In the second section, the

theory of Workplace Formation is explained as a series of logically inter-related

propositions. The final section provides an overview of the categories and processes

of Workplace Formation. This is followed by a detailed examination of the


categories, processes and concepts that comprise the theory, supported with

examples from the data. The decision to proceed in this manner was made in the

interests of clarity and depth of presentation.

WORKPLACE FORMATION – THE STORY LINE

The central finding of this study was the development of the theory of

Workplace Formation, which explains how students manage the various aspects of

their work at the workplace. One way to present the theory analytically and with a

high degree of conceptualisation is through a ‘story line’ (Strauss & Corbin, 1990).

The theory of Workplace Formation will now be presented as a ‘story line,’ which is

a concise statement of the relationships between the categories, processes and

concepts that comprise the theory.

The Story Line

When secondary school students who are in their first year of a Vocational

Education and Training program undertake Structured Workplace Learning for the

first time as part of the overall program, they manage the various aspects of their

workplace learning through the process of Workplace Formation. This overarching

process consists of a number of categories of processes. There are five categories of

processes of Workplace Formation: Preparing, Familiarising, Committing, Adapting

and Building.

The first category (Preparing) comprises processes whereby students prepare

for entry to the workplace. They gather information and learn about the workplace

(informing) from school, workplaces and other sources. They plan their


workplacement, and make decisions on the type of placement they want based on

their personal aspirations. They then choose a suitable workplace (selecting) by

assessing which workplace best meets their needs. The student may enlist the support

of the teacher or others in this process. Sometimes students accept the ‘workplace of

last resort’ when they have not been able to find a suitable workplacement and time

is a major constraint.

The second category (Familiarising) comprises processes whereby students

develop an understanding of the various aspects of the workplace environment. They

set out to get to know and relate to others (interacting) and begin to develop working

relationships with particular people in the workplace. They seek to understand and

clarify what is expected of them and, in many cases, what they expect of others

(clarifying expectations). They also get to know practices and procedures, routines,

where things are and what needs to be done (understanding practices). From the

outset they strive to gain acceptance by other workers and to be treated like everyone

else. They endeavour to fit in both socially and in the workplace hierarchy (finding a

place).

The third category (Committing) comprises processes through which students

develop a consistent point of view and decide their level of investment in undertaking

the workplacement. They do this by evaluating and making judgements about the

benefits they can derive from the workplace experience and what valuables they can

gain (assessing benefits), and by clarifying and defining their role (defining role) in

the organisation and the level of acceptance of them by other workers.

The fourth category (Adapting) is the central or ‘core’ phenomenon of

Workplace Formation. This category comprises processes whereby students adapt to

the workplace by making changes or adjustments in response to the demands and


expectations placed on them by the employer or supervisor (complying). They make

adjustments to their personal organisation to accommodate the workplace demands.

As they progress and gain confidence and skills they use initiative, work

independently, make decisions and may suggest improvements or modifications to

existing practices (initiating). Over time, they also begin to take on some of the

values of the organisation (enculturation).

In the final category (Building), students develop skills and knowledge and

begin to develop a sense of identity in the workplace. They progressively build skills

and knowledge by observing, asking questions and copying behaviours and practices

(modelling); they reinforce and accumulate skills and knowledge and develop these

to higher levels of proficiency (consolidating); and they apply and integrate relevant

skills learned at school and other work contexts (transferring). As they become more

confident and competent, they become useful to the organisation (contributing) and

see themselves increasingly as workers.

Students generally proceed through the five categories of Workplace

Formation in a sequential manner. However, the categories tend to overlap and

often more than one process is occurring at the same time. Within each of the

categories recursive cycles can also occur. As well as this general sequential

progression through the categories, students also engage in actions and interactions

that are indicative of the various categories as circumstances change throughout the

period of their placement. The length of time taken to proceed through a particular

category may vary from one student to the next.

The extent of Workplace Formation varies from one student to the next. Those

who generally progress through all categories of processes tend to be students who

have a clear focus on a career in the chosen industry, they have selected a workplace


where the work undertaken has high relevance to their career focus, where the work

progressively develops competence, and where they are accepted and treated by

other workers as equals. These students tend to have a high level of commitment.

Those with low commitment generally do not progress in skill development to any

significant extent.

Students can be categorised into two general categories. In the first category

are those students that have a clear focus on a career in the chosen industry. These

students generally undertake their workplacement in a workplace that has high

relevance to their career focus with a view to develop industry skills or to confirm

their choice. In general, these students tend to have greater commitment and

progress further in skill development than others. In the second category are those

students that do not have a clear career focus. These students view SWL primarily as

exploratory, and as a means to gain generic experience in a workplace environment.

The extent of Workplace Formation for these students depends on the quality of the

workplace experience.

WORKPLACE FORMATION – THE MAIN PROPOSITIONS

In the previous section the theory of Workplace Formation was presented in

the form of a ‘story line.’ The theory can also be presented as a series of coherent

interconnected propositions. The first set of propositions relates to the overall theory

of Workplace Formation, the second set of propositions relates to the categories and

major processes of the theory, the third set of propositions relates to how these

categories and major processes can be understood within the context of the students

day-to-day learning at the workplace, and the fourth relates to how the workplace


impacts on the Workplace Formation process. The first and second sets of

propositions will now be presented in turn. The third and fourth sets will be

presented in the next chapter.

Propositions Relating to the Overall Theory of Workplace Formation

1. Secondary school students in their first year of a VET program who

undertake Structured Workplace Learning for the first time as part of the overall

program manage the various aspects of their workplace learning through the process

of Workplace Formation.

2. In its most general sense, Workplace Formation is the process through which

students make adjustments that enable them to adapt to the workplace environment

and develop work-related skills, knowledge and confidence in an authentic working

environment.

Propositions Relating to the Processes of Workplace Formation

In this section the propositions relating to the processes of Workplace

Formation are detailed. These are followed by a detailed examination of the

categories, processes and concepts that comprise the theory of Workplace Formation.


The Propositions

The following are propositions relating to the processes of Workplace Formation:

1. Workplace Formation is comprised of five categories of processes. These are:

• Preparing: Students gather information about workplaces and choose a

suitable workplacement.

• Familiarising: Students develop an understanding of the various aspects

of the workplace environment, begin to develop working

relationships, and attempt to find a place within the

organisation.

• Committing: Students develop a consistent point of view and decide their

level of investment in undertaking the workplacement.

• Adapting: Students make changes or adjustments to meet employer or

workplace demands.

• Building: Students progressively develop work-related skills and

knowledge leading, over time, to a sense of identity within

the organisation or workplace.

2. Each of the categories of Workplace Formation is comprised of two or more

processes. The category of ‘Preparing’ comprises of the processes of

‘informing’ and ‘selecting.’ The category of ‘Familiarising’ comprises of the

processes of ‘interacting,’ ‘clarifying expectations,’ ‘understanding practices,’

and ‘finding a place.’ The category of ‘Committing’ comprises of the processes

of ‘assessing benefits’ and ‘defining role.’ The core category of ‘Adapting’

comprises of the processes of ‘complying,’ ‘initiating,’ and ‘enculturation.’

The category of ‘Building’ comprises of the processes of ‘modelling,’

‘consolidating,’ ‘transferring,’ and ‘contributing.’


THE CATEGORIES AND PROCESSES OF WORKPLACE FORMATION

Each category is a higher order and more abstract conceptualisation of a

number of specific, interrelated processes. These categories and processes can be

represented diagrammatically as in Figure 7.1.

Category Process Description of Process

Informing Gathering information about the workplace Preparing

Selecting Choosing a suitable workplace

Interacting Getting to know and forming relationships with other workers

Clarifying Expectations

Seeking to understand what is expected of them and their expectations of other workers

Understanding Practices

Getting to know practices, procedures and routines

Familiarising

Finding a Place Trying to fit in socially and in the workplace hierarchy

Assessing Benefits Evaluating and making judgements about what benefits they will derive from the workplacement Committing

Defining Role Clarifying and defining their role at the workplace

Complying Making adjustments in response to workplace demands of employer/supervisor

Initiating Making or suggesting changes or adjustments through own initiative, problem-solving

Adapting

Enculturation Taking on the values of the organisation

Modelling Observing and copying behaviours and practices of other workers

Consolidating Practising and reinforcing skills learned

Transferring Applying and integrating relevant skills learned at school and other work contexts

Building

Contributing Doing productive work in the workplace

Figure 7.1: The Categories and Processes of Workplace Formation


The First Category: Preparing

Before students begin a workplacement there is an expectation by the school

and employers that students undertake some preparation. Students also need to have

a say in the type of workplacement to undertake. This is so that students have some

sense of what the workplacement entails, what they are expected to achieve and, in

general, what employers expect of them. Some preliminary knowledge about the

world of work is also considered desirable. The processes that students use to inform

themselves about these aspects, particularly for students with no previous workplace

experience, are categorised within the theory of Workplace Formation as ‘Preparing.’

All students proceed through this first stage of Workplace Formation but the

extent to which students proceed through each process varies from one student to the

next. Students engage in the processes of ‘Preparing’ most intensely at the beginning

of the year before undertaking a workplacement. Furthermore, students cycle back to

the ‘Preparing’ stage each time that a decision is made to change a workplacement.

Of the 23 students involved for the full duration of this study, 15 changed

workplacements at least once throughout the year, with two students attending three

different workplaces for various reasons. In School 1, four of the seven students

remained in the same workplace throughout the year whereas two had been to three

different workplaces. In School 2, three of the eight remained at the same workplace

whereas the other five changed workplaces in second semester. In Schools 3 and 4,

however, all but one student changed workplaces from first to second semester.

Schools 3 and 4 encouraged students to change workplaces so that they would gain

experience in more than one workplace context whereas in Schools 1 and 2 this was

not a prime concern. In these schools, students changed mainly by request from the


student or because of circumstances such as the lack of work to sustain the

placement.

Within the category of ‘Preparing’ there are two distinct but interrelated

processes: ‘informing’ and ‘selecting.’ Each of these processes will now be outlined.

(1) Informing

‘Informing’ describes the range of strategies that students use to gather

information about specific workplaces or workplaces in general, what to expect and

what is expected of them, and what they are expected to achieve. They use various

sources, such as the school, other workplaces, other students or adults already in the

same industry. However, the school is the main source of information at this stage.

From the School

From the beginning of the school year, students begin to ‘inform’ themselves

by gathering information and learning about workplaces in general through formal

lessons at school. Almost all students in the study took either the Career and Industry

Awareness course or Work Studies as part of their school program. For students in

Schools 1 and 2, Career and Industry Awareness was a compulsory one semester

course, which provided a means of learning particular aspects of the workplace from

the beginning. This included a workplace investigation and assessing the workplace

for personal suitability. Other methods included formal lessons with the VET

coordinator on a weekly basis where students discussed and learned about workplace

issues, expectations of them and of the employers, and expected outcomes. For

example, an information sheet entitled “Role and Responsibility of Students” given

to students from School 2 stated:

Students are expected to make a complete commitment to industry-based learning. They need to take control of their learning, organise experiences


for developing skills and negotiate the assessment of the skills with their employer/trainer. . . . Students will be treated in a similar manner as full-time employees. Unnecessary absenteeism could result in dismissal and loss of potential credits. . . . Students are expected to cooperate and accept duties in an obliging manner as designated by the employer/trainer. Students should be willing to work with the employer/trainer to design a workplace learning program, be eager to learn, listen to instructions and to ask questions if necessary. . . . Students are expected to treat the employer’s business as confidential. . . . Students are expected to dress appropriately when in the workplace. With all work placements there will be a specified uniform and/or standard of dress expected by the employer.

As part of this process students were issued with a Structured Workplace Learning

Student Log Book, which contained information on benefits to students and

employers, responsibilities of students at the workplace, the list of generic skills that

students were expected to achieve with examples of what a student who had achieved

the skill would be able to do, how these would be assessed, and details of the hours

log that students needed to keep.

Other school courses also served to inform students about the workplace.

This was particularly so in Schools 1 and 2 where the entire program was related to

the hospitality and tourism industry. Courses such as Workplace and Health Issues

where occupational health and safety issues were discussed were particularly

relevant. One student stated that “it’s just building up my knowledge before I go out

and . . . choose my . . . first proper career” (Terri).

From the Workplace

Students also ‘informed’ themselves from the actual workplaces. One

strategy was contacting local workplaces involved with the type of work that they

were interested in. Peter, for example, originally wanted to be a car mechanic, so he

“went down to our local mechanic [who] said it’s not worth doing at the moment cos


car mechanics are not needed any more.” Peter then researched the machinery

industry, his area of vocational interest, and investigated “what a plant mechanic

does.” Some also used what they had learned from their part-time job to inform them

about particular aspects of the workplace, for example, health and safety matters,

customer service and dress requirements. Jarrod had helped at his uncle’s workplace

from time to time and gained some knowledge of that workplace: “I’ve actually

worked there before . . . I already knew all the people . . . I just went in there and

just started working.” Another student, who was influenced towards a career in the

hospitality industry, said that her father, because of his work, was “constantly in

restaurants” and “drags me around with him and I just love what I see” (Emma).

Yet another had a fair idea of what the work involved because she had “been to that

restaurant before and I’ve just seen her do it” (Lucy). However, not all students in

the present study used these workplace strategies of informing themselves and

gaining knowledge about the workplace.

Other Sources

Students would also ‘inform’ themselves by speaking with friends or relatives

who had worked in particular workplaces. This included peers who worked in part-

time jobs in various workplaces, including fast food outlets. Although the

information was generally biased, it nevertheless gave students an insight into those

workplaces. For example, Lisa wanted to be a chef. Discussions with her uncle, who

was a chef, informed her that it was hard work and that it “sometimes gets really bad

in the heat” (Lisa).

Some students began the ‘Preparing’ phase much earlier through the process

of career decision-making. They ‘informed’ themselves about different jobs and what

they entailed through various sources, formed an initial view of the job and decided


on a future career. Some were influenced by relatives or friends in a particular career

and gathered information from them.

(2) Selecting

‘Selecting’ is the other major process within the ‘Preparing’ category. It is the

process through which students gather information from different workplaces, assess

the suitability of the workplace to meet their needs, decide on which workplace, and

negotiate their placement. All students from the four schools in the study were

expected to select their own workplacement. The SWL coordinator approved all

placements, and assisted in various ways ranging from as little as approving a

placement the student had selected to actually placing a student who was not able to

find a suitable placement:

They [coordinators] expected to find my own placement . . . they did help me a bit, they told me good places to go, then all they did is confirm it with the company. . . . But mainly it was up to the students. (Peter)

The VET coordinator often had workplace contacts and assisted students who

experienced difficulty in locating a placement, and screened other workplaces that

students suggested to ensure that the workplace was suitable. Students generally

discussed various workplaces at school amongst themselves and with the VET

coordinator, identifying workplaces that were likely to be suitable and that met their

particular needs. For example, a student who had a strong desire to be a chef would

try to identify workplaces that were restaurants and that had a good reputation. A

student interested in tourism would consider, for example, travel agencies or other

organisations centred on the tourism industry. They also endeavoured to identify

workplaces where the staff was friendly and supportive. This was usually based on

the previous experiences of other students, the VET coordinator, or word of mouth.


Asking questions to assess suitability was a common strategy used in the ‘selecting’

process:

Some people that have gone in travel agencies . . . they’ve just been doing filing and stuff, which is pathetic. . . . So I ask questions about what I’d actually be doing cos I don’t wanna get stuck somewhere and be doing boring stuff. (Kate)

Nancy will now be used to illustrate the process of ‘selecting.’ Nancy wanted

to become a chef and had accepted a place at a hotel. However, after a good start the

situation changed. She was “starting to get sick of it . . . because I always got the shit

jobs.” An incident occurred and Nancy was asked to leave. She stopped attending

and negotiated a change to a workplace that she had previously ‘selected’:

I’ve had my eye on Julios for a while. I wanted to go there first . . . but there was already a trainee there. . . . But he [the manager] told me to ring up anyways [sic] and they were going to have a meeting today, see if they can accept another person or not. But he thinks they will accept me cos they saw my resume and . . . they were very impressed. . . . I always wanted to work there because that’s, like, a really good place and the staff look really friendly. . . . I tried at Barkers in Fremantle but they’re not busy, so they fired most of their staff. (Nancy)

Students were able to go to “just whatever place we like.” They avoided clashes with

other students “because we talk about it in class who’s got a workplacement, where,

what hours have you got” (Nancy). When asked what her strategy was if Julios did

not accept her, she said that she would “just try a different place.”

Peter initially wanted to be a car mechanic but was discouraged after

speaking to people in the business. So he ‘informed’ himself about being a plant

mechanic, what the job entailed, and carefully ‘selected’ his workplacement:

I looked up the machinery industry and I saw ‘plant mechanic,’ and I found that a guy that I go flying with on the weekends . . . [is] the managing director of [workplace name], and I spoke to him about it and he says if you want to do work experience I’m happy to set up some work experience for you, so I went there . . . I did a bit of research myself on what plant mechanics do. (Peter)


Some students could not find a placement in their chosen field, for example,

hotel management. In such cases, students often settled for a related placement where

links with the particular job could be made. Kate wanted “to get into hotel

management” but finding a placement in that field proved difficult:

I’m thinking about Workplace2. [Coordinator] said that a guy did it there a couple of years ago and he really enjoyed it. He was just sort of doing what I was doing. The hard thing is though you can only really get into the food side of stuff. . . . So that gets a little bit irritating because I wanna get sort of out of the food bit and into the management side of things. So, that was a bit hard. But then if I get more experience around the hotel then the better off I am. (Kate)

Some students were not able to find a workplacement on their own for

various reasons. Sometimes it was because students were not organised and left the

selection process very late, and available places were taken up by more organised

students or those from other schools. In other cases, there were limited places or

none available in the industry that a student was interested in. In these cases, students

took up a ‘placement of last resort.’ This was often arranged by the VET coordinator:

I was ringing around places. I wanted to get into a hotel but they’d all been booked out til June for people doing it or they didn’t do it. . . . And then I had some that said maybe in a couple of months, but then when I rang them they said no. And then, by then it was too late, and so she [coordinator] had this placement for me. (Erin)

Others were stuck with the only workplace they could find “that would take me

because everywhere else had either been taken or they couldn’t take work experience

students” (Terri). Some used other contacts such as parents who worked in a

particular workplace to obtain a placement:

So it was kind of coming towards the end . . . [coordinator] was pulling out her hair. . . . everybody had been placed. So, mum sort of said, “well, why not?” her boss . . . he’s the manager of human resources there and she’d spoken about it to him . . . the idea was great, and I wasn’t really sure about going there cos it’s not where I originally wanted to go. (Jane)


Students changed workplaces for various reasons. This was encouraged in

Schools 3 and 4. In Schools 1 and 2 the reasons varied from wanting to experience

another workplace to lack of enjoyment or not progressing in skill development or

both.

Where students had a significant role in selecting their placement, the

experience was more likely to be successful, particularly if mentors and other staff

were supportive of them and accepted them into the organisation. Students in this

study considered the process of ‘selecting’ their placement important because it

increased the likelihood of compatibility with the workplace, and gave them a sense

of ownership of the process that resulted in greater acceptance of responsibility for

the placement. This increased the likelihood of making it work.

To summarise this exposition of ‘Preparing,’ it is the category that consists of

the major processes of ‘informing’ and ‘selecting.’ These are distinct but interrelated

processes that students use to prepare for Structured Workplace Learning.

The Second Category: Familiarising

Once students have been placed for SWL, the next stage of the process of

Workplace Formation begins; namely, the process of ‘Familiarising.’ In the first

instance, students make contact with the employer and arrange for an interview. This

is done before commencing the placement, and begins the ‘Familiarising’ process.

The duration of this phase varies from one student to the next and depends on various

factors, which will be outlined in the following exposition. The category of

‘Familiarising’ involves four distinct but interrelated processes: ‘interacting,’


‘clarifying expectations,’ ‘understanding practices,’ and ‘finding a place.’ Each of

these processes will now be outlined.

(1) Interacting

‘Interacting’ is the first major process within the category of ‘Familiarising.’

It is the process through which students communicate with and get to know their

supervisor and other workers at the workplace, relate to them and form working

relationships with them. In some instances, this relationship extends to social

relationships that continue beyond the workplace. It is also the process through

which the socialisation of the student into the workplace mainly occurs, in line with

other research (Feldman, 1981; Morrison, 2002; Reichers, 1987), and, although it is

most intense early in the student’s placement, the process continues throughout the

placement. As new workers arrive that the student needs to work with, the process

starts again. ‘Interacting’ is a developing process for most students from early entry

to developing more established relationships. This process is not always linear or

constant, and can be de-railed by changes in the workplace. In this section, examples

will be presented of early entry behaviours, finding a mentor and losing of a mentor,

positive and negative relationships, and changes to the group.

In the previous chapter, it was stated that the quality of the interactions that

students have with others at the workplace and the quality of the relationships that

result are important to students, and that these impact on how they manage their day-

to-day work. Early entry behaviours will now be illustrated.

When students arrive at the workplace for the first time they are often

unfamiliar with people, practices and procedures, and the environment in general.

They are unsure of themselves, experience uncertainty, and tend to be apprehensive


because they don’t know how people will treat them. In the present study, most

students were ‘eased’ into the workplace. They spent the first day being introduced

to people, and getting to know procedures and where things were:

It felt a bit weird in a way because it’s my first day there, everything’s, like, new, you don’t really know where anything is, you don’t know what the people are going to be like before you walk through that door. You don’t know if they’re actually understanding or not. You don’t know whether they’ll come from your perspective . . . you don’t know anything about them. . . . She [manager] shows me where the locker room was, the staffroom, basically where the pots and pans, the knives and forks . . . and everything goes. And then I went and spoke to my boss . . . he showed me stuff . . . went through things step by step. (Jack) The first day I was just really nervous. . . . I met Steve and Simone . . . I had lots of work to do and I got it all done and I got praise as well . . . I sort of eased into it. (Jane)

Kelly’s workplace mentor said:

When Kelly first came she wasn’t very confident. . . . The first week Kelly came we had big functions like today, she just fitted straight in. She did whatever she was asked but she was very nervous.

Nancy’s workplace supervisor said that when Nancy first started she was “very shy. .

. . She wouldn’t participate in conversation in the kitchen” and that it “took her a

good month to come out of her shell.” They tend to be quietly cooperative in their

interaction with others and focus on picking up as much information as they can

(Feldman, 1981; Louis, 1980; Miller & Jablin, 1991; Morrison, 1993a; Ostroff &

Kozlowski, 1992), and try to make a good impression:

The first time I went there I just made burgers with the lady. . . . But that was scary cos I didn’t know anybody. . . . I just kinda kept quiet . . . kept to myself and talked to her. . . . from school to work I’m a different person cos at work . . . you don’t know’em very well, you just sort of keep to yourself. (Kelly)

Often the first person students meet and begin to develop a relationship with

is their SWL supervisor and mentor. In small enterprises this is likely to be the owner

or manager. In larger enterprises it often is an experienced person that can mentor the

student. Supervisors or mentors become significant others (Stryker, 1972) for


students in the Workplace Formation process. The relationship mentors develop with

students and the support that they give has a significant impact on the students’

workplace experiences. Other workers that students meet and develop a relationship

with can also become significant others and have a positive or negative impact on

students’ experiences. Mentors and other significant persons are the primary means

of support to students at the workplace in developing knowledge and skills,

providing emotional and social support to them, and helping them to get to know

others and adjust to the workplace environment, in line with Kram’s (1985) findings.

Borman (1988) noted the importance of a close, supportive relationship with co-

workers, especially supervisors, in easing young people into the workforce and to job

stability. The findings of this study support Borman’s work and the findings of other

studies (Feldman, 1981; Major et al., 1995; Strickland et al., 2001). The following

illustrates the positive impact of a significant other:

There’s this girl . . . she’s been really helpful towards me, whenever she’s upset I just ask what’s wrong and she tells me and I can tell her anything and she won’t go tell anyone . . . it’s pretty good bond going on between me and her. . . . She’s a really nice person . . . as soon as I got there, like, she taught me everything. So now . . . soon as I come in I do her breakfast prep sometimes. . . . Cos of what she does to me, like, I return the favours. (Nancy)

The first person you kinda meet you get sort of a close relationship with cos it’s, like, first person so you start talking to them. [R. Did that happen?] Yeh, pretty much but cos now I’ve been with a couple of people more than twice sorta got friendships with a lot of them. And they’re all middle-aged as well. . . . It’s a bit scary cos it’s, like, you’re so much older than I am and you know more than I do. (Kelly)

Kelly also highlights the difficulty that some students experienced in establishing

effective relationships with older workers. This was an issue with some students but

not with others:

I was working with older people which you’re not used to working with . . . don’t really know how to communicate with them . . . I was a bit worried about that. . . . That all soon changed cos, once gone into smoko, started talking and they’re all, yeh, pretty cool. (Alex)


Mentors also helped students to fit in with other workers:

I found it hard at first cos I didn’t know anyone . . . but the first person I met . . . introduced me to most people . . . I got to know the other people that work there . . . start conversations with other people that work there and fit in pretty well. (Emma)

Stability of staff was an issue in some workplaces that impacted on students’ ability

to establish a working relationship with others and develop a comfort zone:

The biggest thing that scared me the most was if something went wrong . . . cos I had a pretty good relationship with my teachers and friends, so you feel comfortable going up to them and saying, “look, I just broke your,” or whatever. But to actually have to do that to someone you see once a week, and they change supervisors so I might’ve only had a supervisor for one time in eight weeks. And so, you don’t even get a chance to get used to somebody. . . . I was totally out of my comfort zone. . . . They were really nice, so I got used to that quite quickly and got back into a comfort zone. (Kate)

When a person that the student develops a good relationship with leaves, the student

can lose confidence due to the loss of a supportive significant other:

One of the hard things in the workplace was . . . just work relationships . . . I felt like I was employed, I felt adult, and that was great until one of the people that I got along really, really well with at the workplace ended up leaving . . . that made me feel like a little kid again. (Jane)

In the present study, students encountered both positive and negative

experiences when ‘interacting’ with others at the workplace. How students were

treated and the support they received from significant others had a significant impact

on their experience. Where mentors and others were friendly, supportive and

accepting of students positive relationships developed. Students felt valued and were

more motivated to learn and accept advice (Scandura, 1997), enjoyed working, and,

in many cases, lifted their level of performance:

Everyone’s friendly there and they’re helpful towards you, like, you don’t know how to do something after they told you . . . they tell you again without screaming at you. . . . I’m starting to like it more and more there. . . . At my other work experience I was used to people always nagging at me. . . . I thought this workplace was going to be the same. . . . But slowly, slowly every Friday, and when I went in there for a week I realised that they’re too nice to


do that to anyone. . . . I think he [supervisor] likes my work cos he’s always telling me, “oh, we’ll find a way for you to come back next year”. . . . When I go out to workplacement I never swear, I don’t have a bad attitude. . . . I try very hard not to screw up. . . . When I was having a talk with Aaron he was like, “I really want you to come back next year” . . . and that made me feel like, ok then, I might as well start pushing my weight around here because if I’m gonna be coming back next year I wanna be doing this just as fast as I can. (Nancy)

Nancy’s workplace supervisor was very supportive and accepting of her. He stated:

She befriended me more than anything. . . . I just slowly involved her, we’d make a joke and then I’d turn around and say, “oh, Nancy, ra ra.” You just involve her slowly and then she’ll slowly respond back till she’s comfortable. . . . She’s very positive. . . . She takes it with a lot of seriousness. . . . She knows she’s doing a good job and she’s quite happy to show me. . . . She really wants to come back . . . I think she’s finally got [permission] now. (Supervisor)

In another example:

When I got there the guy says I’m not gonna treat you special, might treat you as a worker. So I was told what to do . . . which is good cos I was really mixing with all the crew, and, by the end of these two weeks I know them all, I feel like as if I’m, like, one of them, which is really good. I like going to work in the morning . . . good atmosphere to go to. (Alex)

Through ‘interacting’ strong social relationships can form between the

student and other workers. These social interactions can sometimes extend beyond

the workplace. This is illustrated with Jason in Chapter Eight.

In some cases, ‘interacting’ had a negative impact on the relationship. This

often resulted in tension or conflict, which led to reluctance to continue with the

placement. In some cases students felt marginalised: “At [2nd workplace] they were

sort of like a tight knit group [R. You found it hard to break in?] Yeh, kept to myself,

did my own thing” (Kelly). Mark, for example, was marginalised at his workplace

because he was perceived by the workgroup to lack enthusiasm for the job. His

workplace supervisor said:

Because the other workers know the industry . . . and are quite keen and passionate about what they do, to have someone . . . that doesn’t show enthusiasm to what we’re doing can actually make you a bit of an outsider, and I think that’s what happened to Mark because any little task was met with the


roll of the eyes or the shoulders would slump. . . . In the end he came here because he had to. (Mark’s Supervisor)

Some instances of bullying occurred that soured relationships and made it difficult

for students to get on with the job. This is illustrated with Paul in Chapter Eight. Erin

had difficulty relating to the director of the travel agency where she was placed. Erin

managed the situation by trying to avoid ‘interacting’ with her as much as possible:

I don’t feel comfortable around her. . . . She speaks Macedonian and so does Lili . . . I don’t understand what they’re talking about. . . . She thought my name was Samantha and I didn’t wanna correct her . . . Katrina calls me my right name . . . she’s kinda picked up on that. . . . One day I asked her . . . if there’s anything I could do for her, she goes “no, no, just go and ask Katrina,” like, she just didn’t want me being there. . . . She has her own little office, I just stay away. . . . I can’t avoid it all the time, I mean, I try. (Erin)

Changes within the work group can also impact on the student’s relationship

with others. For Kate at her first placement, her relationship with group members

appeared to change as the group got larger. She felt marginalised when other

members of the group arrived:

They were taking the time to get to know me which made me sort of respond in a happy way . . . just going into a group knowing nothing about anyone is really bad cos everyone knows everything about them . . . that was really good just going in with one or two people cos you got to know them good. . . . I was sort of worried that perhaps they would ditch me because another person that worked there came in and they actually would talk cos they knew what happened to them on the weekend or whatever. . . . Just sort of being moping around. . . . In the morning it might’ve started off to be two or three and at lunchtime there might be four there and it would change but . . . not everyone’s a bully when you get into a big group, so there were some people that would sort of still talk to you. (Kate)

For some students, ‘interacting’ began prior to the commencement of their

workplacement. Some got to know workers “through family functions” (Jarrod).

Others were “used to talking to them” and “felt comfortable straight away” (Alex)

because they were family friends.

In summary, ‘interacting’ is the process within the category of ‘Familiarising’

through which students communicate and get to know their supervisor and others at


the workplace, relate to them and form working relationships with them. In some

instances, this relationship extends to social relationships with particular people that

continue beyond the workplace. The quality of the interactions that students have

with others at the workplace and the quality of the relationships impact significantly

on the quality of the workplace experience and, hence, how students manage their

day-to-day work. Supervisors and other mentors become significant others for

students. The relationships developed and the support they give students has a

significant impact on the SWL experience. Where mentors and others were friendly,

supportive and accepting of students; students felt valued, were more motivated to

learn, more likely to accept advice, and enjoyed working. Some interactions resulted

in tension or conflict, which led to a reluctance to continue with that placement.

(2) Clarifying Expectations

‘Clarifying expectations,’ the second major process within the ‘Familiarising’

category, is the process through which students seek to understand what is expected

of them and, in many cases, their expectation of others at the workplace. This

includes understanding the limits of what they can and can’t do as they progress in

skill development and gain knowledge about the work they undertake. In the present

study, some students came to the workplace with certain expectations; others did not

know what to expect. Mark, for example, “did not have too much of an idea of what

was expected or what was the general norm in the workplace” (Mark’s Workplace

Supervisor). Furthermore, different students had different expectations of themselves

and of the particular workplace. Erin did not have any particular expectations of her

first workplace:

I really didn’t know what I was going to do . . . so I didn’t really have any expectations. I just thought I’d probably answer phones . . . filing and putting


brochures and stuff. I didn’t know that they had a whole different computer system with all these, like, funny symbols. (Erin)

However, as she progressed she began to understand what was expected of her and

how far her responsibilities extended:

I know what I’m gonna do there when I go there each week, I know what to expect. . . . You’re always going to have difficult customers so you’ve just gotta listen to them. . . . Once they sit down with one of the consultants and tell them, you know, “you’ve stuffed up my ticket,” that’s when they can get a bit aggro. So, I don’t really have to deal with them when they’re that aggro. (Erin)

Erin’s second placement, another travel agency, was similar to her first. The

experience at her first placement increased her confidence in the second workplace

“because I know kind of what to expect.”

In a similar way, Kelly wasn’t really sure what to expect at her first

placement. She soon began to ‘clarify’ what was expected of her and the limits of her

role:

I wasn’t expecting that much. . . . I knew there was going to be stuff like cutting but appropriate . . . manner. . . . I’m not allowed to touch the wine, so, I’m sort of standing there . . . it was so busy but there was nothing for me to do. (Kelly)

This often included a range of tasks within the student’s capabilities as well as

routine low skill level tasks:

She worked a fair bit with [mentor 1], the fastfood, with [mentor 2] with functions . . . she did a bit downstairs with [mentor 3] . . . except for the drink part of things, weren’t allowed to touch alcohol . . . sent her down there for cleaning experience cos it’s not all making things, you’ve gotta clean up. (Kelly’s Workplace Supervisor)

‘Clarifying expectations’ helped students get to know the workplace and to

understand what others expected of them (Louis, 1980). Much of this ‘clarifying’

occurred through conversations with mentors and asking questions (Morrison, 2002;

Ostroff & Kozlowski, 1992). Often, where the mentors’ expectations matched that of

the student, it became easier for the student to gain acceptance:


Chatting with my trainer. Just having . . . everyday conversations with her and realising that . . . they were going to treat me as an adult with the same qualities as they had . . . that’s what made it easier because they did see that in me and that I wasn’t there just to get out of school. (Laura)

Some students had certain expectations prior to entering the workplace, which they

had to ‘clarify’ and change during the placement. Here students experience reality

shock (Van Maanen, 1976) or surprise (Louis, 1980) which, according to Van

Maanen requires ‘unfreezing’ or ‘detaching’ to occur and new expectations in tune

with reality to be formed. For example, Lucy said about her second workplace that

the work was “interesting, it’s different to what I expected.” She then went on to say:

You get to know what the workplace is about and what you have to do so when you go there every Friday . . . you don’t have to bother the other people or what they’re doing. (Lucy)

Most employers or supervisors interviewed did not expect students to

undertake difficult tasks: “I don’t have that pressure on her cos . . . it’s one day a

week, come in, relax, learn what you can” (Nancy’s Workplace Supervisor). Emma’s

supervisor only expected her to “observe” and to “try things.” Some employers or

supervisors expected students to know and be able to do more than what they did.

Others had lower expectations of what a student could do. This often resulted in

tension or conflict and a difficult period at the workplace. Sometimes a student

would leave a workplace as a result of this tension:

My first day there . . . he didn’t expect too much of me. . . . Second time I was there I started . . . making crutons and bacon and egg sandwiches. . . . After that . . . I didn’t go back there because he expected too much of me. . . . He expected more than what I could actually do. . . . When you get dropped into a workplace . . . you don’t know what to do, you don’t know how it’s gonna work out, you don’t know where anything is, you don’t really wanna talk to anyone because you’re scared that someone’s going to go off at you. (Jack) It wasn’t easy . . . I cleared a person’s plate and she goes, “you know you’re not supposed to clear only one person’s when they’ve got, like, menu meal” whatever . . . she goes, “yeh, you clear up both of them when they’re both finished,” and I didn’t know that. [R. So they expected you to know more than


what you did.] Yeh, more than what I actually did. . . . It was just annoying. (Kelly)

However, some students liked the supervisor having higher expectations of them.

This seemed to be motivational and often lifted student performance:

They didn’t work me up to something big, they put me straight onto a big piece of machinery to see what I can do. . . . They said fourth year apprentices have done that. . . . I was actually expecting not to do anything. . . . They’re treating me like an apprentice which I thought, oh, that’s quite good. . . . They’re actually really making me do something which I’m quite happy with. (Peter)

In some instances, ‘clarifying expectations’ was not straight forward and caused

tension. For example, Kate found that “a lot of people actually presumed you were

either stupid or you knew everything.” Her first supervisor “presumed I knew how to

carry stacks of plates.” Kate was “really surprised” at this because she expected the

supervisors to have more knowledge of how to mentor and support students, and

expected this support: “They could’ve just asked, ‘have you ever done anything in

hospitality?’. . . . That actually annoyed me” (Kate).

At other times students had a higher expectation of what they would be doing

at the workplace. This resulted in disappointment when their expectations were not

met and a change of expectations had to be made. Peter did not have a lot of

expectations at his first placement because he did not know what the job was going

to be like. However, he made gradual progress and enjoyed the experience. He was

very much looking forward to the next block at the same workplace, and had

expected to make significant progress:

I progressed slowly but I think when I go back in two weeks I’ll progress much, much quicker and learn a lot more than I did cos I know what to expect now. (Peter)

However, although he made progress in his second placement, he was disappointed

because he had expected more than he was able to achieve:


It’s a bit slower than last time I was there because it was quite quiet, so we just had to do bits of cleaning up small jobs. . . . Wasn’t as much as last time. . . . I did move forward because the jobs I did do they trusted me a bit more. (Peter)

At his first workplace, Mark had expected “to learn a bit more on using knives and

how to prep up, and do a little bit of cooking.” However, he was “not really cooking

much but I’m doing a lot of prep.” Although disappointed he soon ‘clarified’ that the

work he was given to do was important and that he had to “learn everything from

scrap and then get more qualified.” Although he stated that he liked going to “work

experience,” his approach at the workplace did not appear to reflect this. His

workplace supervisor stated:

It progressively got worse because you could see that he didn’t have any enthusiasm for the industry, for what we were doing, and it does at that level . . . he would be doing the same things everyday. . . . You can’t expect too much from a student who’s first time in a kitchen . . . he might be peeling the onions but he could see what other people were doing to the onions. . . perhaps he just thought, oh, I should be turning the onions into something. I guess his perception of what he would be doing was very different to the reality of what it is. (Mark’s Workplace Supervisor)

Other students had expectations that they would be learning work-related

skills and knowledge. However, they were disappointed when their expectations

were not met and, in some instances, felt exploited. Terri felt exploited at her first

workplace where often she would be told what to do, not shown how, and given low

skill jobs, “though really what I want to do is like learn how to do things” (Terri).

Although the process of ‘clarifying expectations’ is most intense early in the

placement, it continues throughout as new situations or tasks are assigned and

students are challenged to achieve higher levels of skills. In the present study, for

example, Alex “had no idea about boat building . . . [and] did not have a clue what

they did” at his workplace. However, he expected to be treated as a worker:

That’s what I want to be treated as . . . cos I want to see what it’s like to be a worker . . . in the workforce. . . . They just issue orders . . . I’ve got a set job


I’ve gotta do. . . . When I’m there they rely on me to get the job done. So I’m just a worker. (Alex)

Jason was also given higher and higher responsibilities as his level of competence

progressed and he was challenged beyond what he had expected. This example is

discussed further in Chapter Eight.

In summary, ‘clarifying expectations’ is the process within the category of

‘Familiarising’ through which students seek to understand what is expected of them

and what they expect of others in the workplace. This includes understanding the

limits of what they can and cannot do as they progress in skill development and gain

knowledge about the work they undertake. This understanding helps to clarify their

role and alleviates uncertainty, which is common amongst students during this time.

(3) Understanding Practices

‘Understanding practices’ is the third major process within the category of

‘Familiarising.’ It is the process through which students get to know workplace

practices and procedures including rules and routines, what is important and what is

not, where things are and what needs to be done. They also need to know the

terminology and workplace jargon to be able to communicate effectively with others.

This is quite challenging for some students, and requires time for the student and

patience and support from mentors. The process is most intense in the early part of

the workplacement. Students quite often are apprehensive at this time because they

don’t know anyone or where anything is, what they have to do and how things

should be done. They want to make a good impression and generally strive “to do

things right” (Mark) from the start: “The first day . . . you don’t know anyone there,

not used to it” (Anna).“You’re frightened you might stuff up” (Mark). In most

workplaces, this process began with a general orientation where students were


introduced to practices and procedures gradually: “The first four weeks [was] just

getting used to my surroundings” (Jane). Jack’s workplace supervisor describes this

process at that workplace:

Everyone gets buddied up at the beginning . . . even if they were an employee they would still be buddied with someone that can show them the facilities, where things go, that sort of stuff. After that they learn and they get on their own more. (Jack’s Workplace Supervisor)

Sometimes students were given low skill level tasks, such as cleaning, and observed

their supervisor and others to develop an understanding of the workplace. Instructing

and explaining practices and procedures by mentors, and observing and clarifying by

students were most intense during this time. The following illustrates this process:

I arrived and . . . the boss . . . got one of the employees to show me how to do everything like make the rolls with all the different cheeses, and showed me how to, like, about the hygiene rules of the house which is I have to wear a cloth on both hands, and just showed me the till and the coffee machine because that’s pretty important to know how to make coffee. And then I just picked it up pretty quickly. So now, like, every week I have just been making rolls for people, to serving people and taking orders, and cleaning and arranging flowers. . . . We’ve sort of got a few procedures that we have to go through now at work. (Terri)

Having an understanding of the workplace practices and procedures made things

easier. In a subsequent interview, this student said: “Work’s becoming easier

because I’ve got more of an understanding of how to do it. I’m getting things done

quicker” (Terri). Nancy’s workplace supervisor said that she was “not losing so

much time cos she knows where everything is now.” Another student spent the first

week observing in order to gain an understanding of the various aspects of the

workplace, then he was given particular tasks as he got to know practices:

Shipbuilding is pretty complicated. . . . For the first week I was just sitting there watching, just taking it all in. . . . Then we were making the plug for about an 86 foot pleasure boat. We have to make frames. . . . Cos I know them all at the start getting the drill, just sit there just working with them drilling all by myself. (Alex)


In workplaces where mentors gauged that a student was able, the student was given

more challenging tasks earlier: “Other apprentices started . . . a couple of weeks

after I did, and they were doing a lot of dishes and cleaning . . . where I was doing a

lot of cooking” (Jason).

In other workplaces the emphasis initially was more on health and safety

matters. Students got to know safe practices. For example, on Peter’s first day he had

to do a test and learn about safety matters:

[I did] a small test . . . [on] health and safety around the actual workplace itself learning all the different things, like, different types of fire extinguishers. . . [He] ran through what I’d be doing . . . explained to me what a plant mechanic does and all different security things they do because, for example, you’re working on a machine you’ve gotta put a tag on the machine – do not operate this machine or anything. (Peter)

Similarly, such issues were important in kitchens and often time was spent ensuring

safe practices were known by students.

Sometimes students experience difficulty in internalising and remembering

all that they are expected to know and do, and require things explained to them more

than once. Others require more time to get to know procedures, where things are, and

so on. During this time, they may ask more questions and require a great deal more

support. This can cause the student stress and sometimes result in conflict between

student and mentor, particularly in small enterprises where there is a small staff, and

the student is expected to also be another pair of hands. The following illustrates this:

It was too much for me at the beginning . . . cos I didn’t know how to do everything. . . . It was a bit difficult to get used to everything. . . . The manager . . . showed me all the stuff. I started at once, and then you can’t do it . . . cos I can’t remember all in once . . . the stuff they have to do. Cos I’m gonna have a year’s time to learn a little bit and he shows me everything in half an hour and then I’m just getting confused and I can’t remember all of it. (Karl)

Some students had an understanding of practices because they had previously

worked on a casual basis at that workplace. Others who worked in similar


establishments on their second placement were able to carry their knowledge into

that workplace. These students had proceeded through the process of ‘understanding

practices’ at a different time and found the entry process easier than others.

Throughout the placement but particularly during this phase of the Workplace

Formation process supervisors, mentors and co-workers were an important source of

information for students, supporting other research (Ashford & Cummings, 1985;

Louis et al., 1983; Miller & Jablin, 1991; Morrison, 1993a; Ostroff & Kozlowski,

1992).

(4) Finding a Place

‘Finding a place’ is the fourth major process within the category of

‘Familiarising.’ It is the process through which students strive to gain acceptance by

their mentors and other employees in the workplace and fit in both socially and

within the workplace hierarchy. Students may be unsure and may feel anxious about

whether they will fit in. Smith (2000) noted that fitting in was a significant issue that

young people faced on entering the workforce. This study supports this observation.

From the outset, students want to make a good impression on their supervisor and

with other workers, and want to be accepted and respected for who they are. In the

present study, a key issue for students in the workplace was fear of rejection.

Students wanted to “impress the boss” and gain acceptance:

To impress the boss, to make them see that you’re not a school student and you’re out there trying to become a young adult and to have people respect you, and I think that’s the thing that students are afraid of . . . the fear of rejection from a workplace, like, because they’re not good enough or they’re not suited to it . . . or the boss might think, oh, what a little wheezer . . . I know that was for me and to have my colleagues like me . . . I think that’s what they strive for . . . it’s to be accepted into the workplace by your work colleagues and be accepted by your boss, and try and become a young adult and not just a teenager. (Laura)


They understand and accept from the outset that the workplace for them is both a

place to work and a place to learn, and that they have responsibilities to the host

employers and the host employers to them.

Students strived to gain acceptance in a variety of ways. Strategies included

cooperating and complying, trying their best, mixing with other workers and joining

in during conversations or ‘light’ moments when they would just be ‘mucking

around.’ For example, Alex tried hard not to make “stuff-ups” because he did not

want to “look bad” with the older people that he worked with and was concerned

about what they thought of him. He sought to learn new skills and knowledge, and

consistently gave his best. He often arrived early or left late and was “keen to

complete additional days.” He always tried to “act properly” because he wanted to

“accept the group as well.” Karl always tried his “best” even though he found it

“difficult to cope with his [boss’] expectations” at his first workplace. Jack also

wanted to be accepted. His workplace supervisor described Jack’s strategy:

In the beginning he wanted to be liked . . . he was sort of making . . . wise cracks because we tend to all talk and that’s our fun while we’re working . . . but everyone’s still concentrating on their main job as they go. At the beginning I think he wanted to be accepted and he was sort of saying some little jokes. It did offend one other volunteer, and then I just . . . explained to him the situation that some people do like to have fun but they do not like it to be taken overboard. (Jack’s Workplace Supervisor)

In some workplaces, students gained the respect of their supervisors and other

workers and were accepted as part of the team within a short period of time. As their

competence increased they were given more and more responsibilities and treated as

one of the workers. In these cases, students felt valued and had a strong sense of

belonging to the organisation, and saw themselves as ‘one of them.’ As a result they

were able to clearly identify their ‘place’ within the organisation. These workplaces

were generally characterised by strong working relationships between students and


mentors, and a supportive environment for students. For some students, the

relationships formed and the acceptance of them were so strong that the employer

mentor barely distinguished between the student being on SWL and an employee.

Clara illustrates this when asked how she was treated at the workplace:

Nice, like, they want me to work there full-time. . . . We all get treated the same. It’s a husband and a wife that run the business, and they live actually on the property . . . we always go up to the house for lunch. . . . [I am] friends with all their kids. . . . [He sees me] as a worker. He doesn’t see a student. . . . I don’t see it as workplacement. (Clara)

Clara’s workplace mentor, the owner, supports this when he said: “[I treat her] as a

worker. I treat all my workers exactly like I treat her. . . . She does everything that I

ask of her and she does it cheerfully.”

Some students were also accepted as part of the social group where

friendships with other workers extended beyond the workplace:

I work with another girl . . . me and her are, like, best friends . . . when I’m with her it’s just like being with my friends at school. . . . Natalie and I we go out riding together . . . I go and stay there on weekends and stuff, and we go out, we go horse riding, shopping, everything. . . . We don’t consider ourselves as work colleagues, more as, like, just friends. (Clara)

This was corroborated by Clara’s workplace mentor when he was asked how she gets

on with other workers: “Good. She’s made friends with two of the other girls . . . they

do other activities other than come here. So, she gets along with people.” When

asked if she fits in well he replied, “yeh.” During an observation of Clara at the

workplace, the researcher observed her interaction with her mentor. They were

joking and talking freely as if on the same level, which clearly indicated strong

acceptance of Clara and confidence in her in the role as worker. Jack initially did not

“fit in with the crowd” because he “didn’t know anyone.” As he got to know

“everyone there” he found that they were “all friendly,” and he “catch[es] up with

them on the weekends.” He was accepted by the other employees and found a place


as ‘one of them.’ Students saw ‘fitting in’ and getting along with other workers as

important for a successful workplacement. Clara saw fitting in and getting on with

people “a big one cos if you don’t like people you work with you wouldn’t wanna be

there” (Clara).

The role of mentors and significant others was important in this process as

was the attitude and willingness of the student to learn and to be part of the team.

These students were generally cooperative, enthusiastic about their work, and made

an effort to fit in. For Jarrod and Jason, their strong focus on a career in the industry

– wanting to become a chef – provided a great deal of the motivation that enabled

them to gain acceptance and ‘find a place.’ Jarrod “made a lot of friends there” and

“just love[d] working there.” He saw himself “as a worker cos I do a lot of work

there,” and because they gave him more responsibility, he “take[s] it seriously

because if I don’t I’m gonna lose their trust.”

Some students, however, struggled to gain acceptance and ‘find a place.’ This

was often a result of the workplace failing to meet the student’s expectations. At

other times, the employer’s expectations were greater than what the student felt

capable of doing. As a result, students tended to lose interest and do as little as

possible. For example, Anna thought that the work at her first workplace, a travel

agency, was “going to be fun,” but found it “really boring. . . . They just get me to

make coffee for them.” While some workers were “nice,” one was “really mean” to

her, made her “do all the dirty work,” and would yell at her to “get up and do

something.” However, Anna would ignore her. As a result, Anna had difficulty

gaining acceptance at this workplace. Mark did not appear to gain acceptance by co-

workers due to his apparent lack of enthusiasm:

The shoulders would slump because he had to do something that he had done before, the rest of the team would get their backs to him, “you’re here, this is


what we do and you’re not interested, why are you here?” . . . To not fit into that teamwork mould with the enthusiasm that everyone else does you very quickly become an outsider. (Mark’s Supervisor)

For some, their ‘place’ seemed to be that of a casual worker or ‘another pair

of hands’ with very little learning. For others, their ‘place’ appeared to change. In

Nancy’s case, at one stage at her first workplace, she appeared to have gained

acceptance because she thought that she was “going really well” and was being

considered for an apprenticeship. However, when another apprentice was put on

Nancy began to be marginalised and given “all the shit things” to do while the

apprentice got “all the good things.”

‘Finding a place’ is a major component within the category of

‘Familiarising.’ It is the process through which students strive to gain the acceptance

of others at the workplace both in a social and organisational sense. They need to

find a place within the organisation that they are comfortable with and where they

can get on with the job of learning, which is the main aim of workplacement. The

focus at this time on learning knowledge and skills and on fitting in and gaining

acceptance supports other research (Feldman, 1977; Feldman & Brett, 1983).

The Third Category: Committing

The third major category of the theory of Workplace Formation is

‘Committing.’ Through the processes that comprise this category, students decide

their level of investment in undertaking the workplacement. They develop a

consistent point of view about the workplace and orient themselves positively or

negatively towards it (Kanter, 1974). They do this by evaluating and making

judgements about what benefits or ‘valuables’ (Geer, 1966) they can derive from the


workplace experience, and by clarifying and defining their role in the organisation

and the level of acceptance of them by other workers. For most students, the

processes that comprise ‘Committing’ start before the commencement of their

placement because it can depend on the students’ intentions in undertaking the

placement and whether they are able to select a placement that matches their

intentions. However, students generally work through the processes of ‘Committing’

most intensely during the ‘Familiarising’ stage and, to a large extent, is contingent on

this stage.

The level of commitment that students develop towards the particular

workplace can vary significantly from student to student. Students’ commitment can

also change throughout the placement as they make judgements on the benefits they

can derive from their continued participation at that workplace. While some students

develop a strong commitment to the workplace, others may develop partial

commitment, and some little or no commitment. Furthermore, the time taken for

students to adopt a particular orientation varies from student to student. For most

students this is quite early in the workplacement. ‘Committing,’ therefore, signifies a

point of decision making for students. It consists of two major processes – ‘assessing

benefits’ and ‘defining role.’

(1) Assessing Benefits

‘Assessing benefits’ is the first major process within the category of

‘Committing.’ Through this process, students evaluate and make judgements about

the benefits or valuables they can derive from the workplace experience. They use

this to frame a consistent point of view and adopt a particular orientation to the

workplace. This, in turn, influences how and the extent to which students adapt to the


workplace environment and develop knowledge and skills. Although this process

occurs throughout the placement, it is most intense during the ‘Familiarising’ stage,

and overlaps with the processes of this category. Students use the process of

‘assessing benefits’ whenever they come across new and challenging situations.

Although, once adopted, there is a tendency to maintain a particular orientation

during the placement, the process of ‘assessing benefits’ may cause a student to alter

his or her orientation, thus changing his or her level of commitment. For example, in

the present study, Terri initially was not learning much at her first workplace because

she was often given low skill level tasks, such as sweeping, and “told what to do and

not shown how to do it.” Her commitment to that workplace was low. However, the

situation later changed; her commitment increased when she started to learn more

and began to enjoy the work. At a subsequent interview she said: “It’s just a lot more

enjoyable. . . . They give me more things to do and . . . ask me what things I wanna

learn instead of just chucking any old job at me” (Terri).

In the present study, the assessment of valuables tended to fall under one of

the following general categories: (a) personal and social, (b) school-related, and (c)

job-related. All students in the study regarded the enjoyment of workplacement as a

valuable. Students tended to display higher levels of commitment in workplaces that

they enjoyed working in. Clara was a good example of this. Her workplace mentor

stated: “She’s really keen . . . she really likes to be here and she always does the

right thing.” If they did not “enjoy” the experience, they often found it difficult to be

motivated or maintain their level of motivation:

I didn’t like the second as well as the first cos it was too high a standard for me, everything had to be done in a certain proper way and I didn’t like it at all. . . . I just didn’t wanna work there. (Kelly)


People being “friendly” was another valuable often mentioned by students as being

important to them. In workplaces where this was a feature students tended to display

higher levels of commitment. The support of mentors and other workers was also

assessed as important as this enabled students to progress further and enjoy the

experience more. This included where mentors and others gave praise and

encouragement to students. It motivated and lifted students to higher levels of

performance:

I look forward to going. . . . the girls are really really nice and they help me out a lot . . . they treat me like one of them and they ask me . . . what I wanna do when I leave school . . . they always give me tips about what to do and what not to do, and not do the mistakes they did. (Lucy) In the fifth week I was there I accidentally chopped up the wrong tomatoes, like, a whole box of them . . . and I was prepared for it if they were gonna yell at me but they go, “nuh, it’s alright, you didn’t know,” so then I felt really confident with myself and everything’s just going alright. (Nancy)

Nancy’s workplace supervisor praised her work and confirmed her motivation and

commitment for the workplace:

She’ll cook crepes and she’s proud at the end of it; and that takes a while to get crepes cooking nice and thin and beautiful . . . She’s proud of it, “look, Aaron, my cake”. . . . She thinks it’s a great crepe and it is. She’ll get in there and get it done - whether it’d be chopping chilli or chopping parsley – all those boring jobs.

On the other hand, where mentors were not friendly or tended to bully

students, tension or conflict resulted. In such cases, students could not see how they

could learn in such a negative environment and tended to have very little

commitment. Students often employed avoidance as a solution:

I did always ask before I did things because it’s safer asking than doing it wrong. When I did ask it was sorta like . . . you should know, they didn’t say it but you could tell they were thinking it . . . make you look stupid . . . I just wanted to get out of there. . . . I used balsamic vinegar. . . and I didn’t know the difference; and then the chef was, like, “why are you using that, grrrr”; so I was scared of him for, like, that day, didn’t wanna go near him. (Kelly)


Workplace relationships were assessed as important to students in developing an

orientation and commitment at the workplace (Borman, 1988; Liden et al., 2000). As

Borman (1988) noted, this was an important determinant of job stability.

Students regarded the type of work or tasks allocated as an important

valuable. Students came from the perspective that they were there primarily to learn

work-related skills and knowledge about the workplace. They often saw this as

gaining ‘work experience.’ For students, such as Jarrod, who were more career-

oriented and intended to gain an apprenticeship within that industry, the type of work

and the progressive development of work-related skills (Strickland et al., 2001) were

very important to them. They liked to be given progressively more challenging work

to develop such skills. They regarded these as important valuables to derive. Their

level of commitment was, therefore, dependent to a large extent on their assessment

of whether they could derive these career-related benefits at that workplace:

I was offered an apprenticeship the other day . . . I might be taking it. . . . This course has helped me get that apprenticeship through work experience. . . . I’m very serious about things. I really wanna learn how to become a chef. . . . I have progressed a lot and I do know a lot of things about cooking now cos I have the mind control of I want to learn. (Jarrod)

Low skill level work, such as cleaning, was not considered a valuable.

Students who were stuck in these roles and often given low skill “boring” jobs

tended to lack motivation and, hence, commitment. They often ‘assessed’ that they

would derive no benefit at that workplace as they were not learning anything. Schein

(1962, 1968b, in Van Maanen, 1976) reported similar findings.

Students also ‘assessed the benefit’ derived from the workplacement towards

gaining TAFE entry. SWL was generally considered a valuable because they would

gain extra points and be more competitive for TAFE.


(2) Defining Role

‘Defining role’ is the other major process within the category of

‘Committing.’ Through this process, students clarify and define their role within the

organisation and the level of responsibility attached to that role, a finding also

reported by Feldman (1981); Fisher (1986); and Graen, Orris, & Johnson (1973).

They also begin to build an image of themselves through the role and what it means

to occupy that role at the workplace and in the industry; that is, they begin to build a

sense of identity within the organisation. They picture themselves in that role or may

project into the role and judge whether they can see themselves fulfilling that role;

that is, judge the extent that the occupational role is compatible with the self. For

example, Lucy and Erin, after working in a travel agency could not see themselves

occupying the role of a ‘travel agent’ because the role conflicted with their self-

concept:

First of all I wanted to be a travel consultant. But then I sort of find that a bit boring. . . . Cos you’re in an office all day, just on the phone all the time . . . and it’s just not me. (Lucy) I know now that I don’t really want to . . . be a travel agent because I just don’t like being in the office all day. (Erin)

This process is similar to that in Feldman’s (1981) model but to a much lesser extent.

Feldman sees role definition an important process in the change and acquisition stage

where long-lasting changes occur but states that overlap between stages occurs. For

students in this study, gathering information and clarifying and ‘defining their role’

supports to some extent Miller and Jablin (1991) who see early entry as a critical

time for newcomers in defining their role and in acquiring information, a time when

students seek from supervisors and co-workers information in a far more deliberate

way than later when they are more comfortable in or adjusted to the role.


Where students were unclear about their role, they tended not to display a

high level of commitment. Furthermore, if students identified their role as having

little value or a role that did not include learning, which in their view was their

primary role, they tended to show very limited commitment. For example, Terri at

her first workplace felt that she was being used in the role of a “free worker”

because “they just give me . . . as much as they can and they can just sort of relax,”

whereas the role she saw herself in and wanted was that of a learner. As a result,

Terri lacked commitment to that workplace: “I have to do what I’m told but deep

down I just really don’t want to do anything” (Terri). Similarly, Laura said that being

treated and respected as a worker where she was “working and learning” was

important to her:

That was very important. I wouldn’t have wanted to be there and it wouldn’t have been as much of a success if I was treated like just do all the crappy jobs and go and clean up that . . . if one of the ladies had spilt a bowl I would go and help her clean it up and if I had spilt something they would come and help clean it up. (Laura)

However, where students identified their role as a learner and where they could

progress their development as well as contribute to the organisational productivity,

commitment tended to be high. In many of these cases students saw themselves as

workers and projected into that role, an image that continued to develop throughout

the placement. While some students saw the workplace primarily as a place to learn,

many saw it as both a place to learn and a place to work:

I see myself as a worker cos I do a lot of work there . . . I went there as a school student, but now I feel like as I’m a worker. . . . I rock up and they say . . . there’s stuff here, so . . . I just get in and do it. . . . They treat me as a worker because I act like a worker. (Jarrod)

When Jarrod was asked how he saw the workplace, he replied:

A place where you learn. Until you’ve hit the master chef it’s really a place where you learn a lot. . . . I see myself as one of them but I do learn a lot from them. (Jarrod)


Mark saw himself in the role of a learner and a worker: “A bit of both because you

know that . . . it’s training in work experience. But you also feel you’ve got a job

there cos you go there a lot” (Mark). Another student defined his role as a trainee

and as a helper to the enterprise:

Cos you’re a trainee and you feel like one . . . you don’t feel like one of the staff, you just feel like somebody who’s there to learn and help out . . . you’re trying to learn and you want to help out . . . I’m working there but I think of myself just like a helper. (Karl)

This student saw his role somewhat differently as conditions changed: “When I’m

real busy then I’m forgetting about this whole student thing, I feel just like . . . I’ve

been working there for years” (Karl). Another student defined her role both as

worker and learner:

I think any place that you go to you’re there to work but also you are there to learn. You’re always learning new things and I think that’s what you’ve gotta figure out if that workplace is a place where you learn as well. . . . I think any work environment – school, job, anything – is a work place plus a learning place. (Laura)

Supervisors generally saw students in the role of learners but most treated

them as workers with lower expectations than other workers because they were still

learning: “She’s obviously a junior so I wouldn’t put her in a position where she had

to be handling too much difficult, you know. . . . She’s only learning” (Clara’s

Workplace Supervisor). Students in SBNAs, for example, Karl, were not only seen in

the role of trainees but also of workers doing productive work. Ben’s second

workplace supervisor treated Ben as worker and learner:

He’s not a worker here . . . he’s here to learn so I’m treating him more as somebody who’s doing the job for me but learning at the same time. If I can I’ll feed him whatever information is relevant at the time or even tangentially or irrelevant as payment for doing the work. (Ben’s Workplace Supervisor)

While this process generally begins early in the placement, it tends to occur

concurrently with ‘assessing benefits,’ and, at times, with other processes within the


process of Workplace Formation. In particular, some students in the study continued

to re-define their role as they progressed and were given more responsibility. Jarrod

went from a work experience student who saw himself as a worker on the bottom

rung of the ladder to an apprentice, a fully accepted member of the organisation.

Jason also began at the bottom but progressed to higher levels. He re-defined his role

as he progressed, and, at one stage, was given a supervisory role. His self-image

changed from a young trainee to “one of them.” Some see themselves in the role of

workers, others as trainees or apprentices. Some see themselves as just casual

workers and others as school students. The roles they see themselves in shape the

orientation they adopt and their level of commitment at the workplace.

The Fourth Category: Adapting

‘Adapting’ is the core category of Workplace Formation. As such, it

represents the central phenomenon around which all other categories are integrated.

It consists of three major processes, namely, ‘complying,’ ‘initiating,’ and

‘enculturation.’ Through these major processes, students ‘adapt’ to the workplace

environment by making adjustments to aspects of their personal organisation and

their workplace conduct or behaviour, and adjust to the working conditions and the

demands and expectations placed on them at the workplace. The term ‘adapt’ was

used by various students at times to describe the process that they went through to

adjust, encapsulating this core category. For example:

In the workplace you need to adapt to change . . . things are always changing. (Jane) I just adapt to whatever is thrown at me. (Erin)


While Becker (1964) proposed the overarching process of situational adjustment

pertinent to the adaptation of new members to an organisation and Lacey (1977) the

processes of strategic compliance, internalised adjustment, and, in some cases,

strategic redefinition, this study proposes that in this workplace learning context,

‘adapting’ occurs through the processes of ‘complying,’ ‘initiating,’ and

‘enculturation.’ These major processes will now be described in turn.

(1) Complying

‘Complying’ is the first major process within the category of ‘Adapting.’ It is

the process whereby students make changes or adjustments in response to the

demands and expectations placed on them by the employer or supervisor at the

workplace. This process begins from the time that students commence their

placement and continues throughout the placement. Therefore, in the initial stages,

the process tends to overlap with processes in the ‘Familiarising’ category and occurs

simultaneously with them. Students ‘comply’ with work standards, health and safety

procedures and with the limits set for them by the supervisor, and with the

instructions given by them. In the early part of the placement students tend to

‘comply’ strictly with this as they generally lack the confidence and skills to do

otherwise. They rely on the support of mentors for learning and adjusting (Bova,

1987; Kram, 1985; Scandura, 1997), and as such tend to be sensitive to how they are

treated by mentors and other workers. They often seek clarification and advice

during this time. Students also tend to modify their behaviour and act in a more

adult-like manner in order to gain acceptance and fit in with other employees in

response to what they believe is the type of conduct expected of them and their

association with the usually older and more mature workers at the workplace.


For most students, ‘complying’ tends to be a voluntary process. That is, they

are willing to ‘comply’ with what the employer or mentor requires of them in the

learning process. However, there is another form of ‘complying’ that can be called

involuntary or reluctant compliance with the employer’s demands and expectations.

This usually occurs when the student is engaged in activities that he or she believes

are not beneficial to him or her. Reluctant compliance has similarities to the notion of

strategic compliance proposed by Lacey (1977).

In general, students in the present study ‘complied’ with instructions given to

them by their supervisors from the commencement of their placement. This often

meant working under the supervision of their supervisors and included undertaking

low skill level tasks such as cleaning and assisting with preparing food. This was

done to ease students into the workplace:

At the beginning we’ll get preparation done . . . like chopping and julienne all the food . . . when it comes to the lunchtime they push me back a bit cos they all gotta start cooking. But I’m fine with that, so I just get on with more preparation, and then sometimes they get me to do big meals to put in take-away containers . . . or if they’re holding a function I’m cooking as well as just chopping. . . . Some times I cook on my own. They just give me a recipe and I just do it whatever they want me to do. . . . I’ll do it as quick as I can so it’s out of the way and so they’d get me to do something else. . . . Sometimes they get me to do messy jobs but it’s fine. (Lisa)

Jack’s workplace supervisor describes how students ‘complied’ with the workplace

demands and workplace practices:

He’s got very set routines about coming in on a Friday because he’s only got one day a week, and he goes straight to [mentor], “what do I need?” [Mentor] gives him a list of what he needs to do, he says “check the menu now” . . . then he’s moving directly from finishing to doing dishes without being asked, so he knows our routine, he knows the eleven o’clock break, he knows to come back on and he’s on with everybody else. That’s how the crew work, no matter . . . whether you’re staff . . . student or anything. . . . He does what he’s told to do, he goes about it and gets it done. . . . [Mentor] gives him directions, he expects them followed. (Jack’s Workplace Supervisor)

Karl’s supervisor also described how he ‘complied’ with the workplace demands:


He comes in at ten o’clock in the morning, he sets up the restaurant exactly the way that I like it, he’s followed everything that I’ve said to the letter . . . and it’s all ready by the time we have to open. (Karl’s Supervisor)

Students ‘complied’ with dress standards, health and safety procedures, and with

other tasks allocated by the supervisor. This included assisting others at times to

broaden their knowledge or sometimes just to give them something to do during

quiet periods. As they became more competent they were given more complex tasks.

Students also ‘complied’ by staying within the limits set by their supervisors.

For example, Kelly was “not allowed” to serve wine at her workplace and was not

sufficiently skilled at that stage to work the till or make coffees, so she ‘complied’

and stayed within the limits set for her: “Down there you have to make coffees which

I’m not too crash hot on so I don’t do that much or work at the till” (Kelly). One of

Kelly’s supervisors (and mentor) stated that “she did whatever she was asked. . . .

Every job aspect in the place she did. She never questioned anything, she just did it”

(Kelly’s 2nd mentor). Kelly’s other supervisor stated: “We really didn’t have any

difficult situations with Kelly except for on the till, she wasn’t quite sure what to do

on the till.” Peter knew and ‘complied’ with his limits, particularly when it came to

safety matters:

I do use my initiative but I’m not allowed to actually do it without being told to actually do that first because it’s safety thing again. . . . They didn’t really get me to do much hard work because there’s all safety issues cos I wasn’t trained up. . . . I’m not allowed to drive the forklift . . . so I can’t really do anything that has to be moved. (Peter)

As students were taught more complex skills, and they understood more what was

expected of them, they strove to ‘comply’ with the work standards set by trying to do

their best:

I’ll do the task that she asks and I try to do them to the best that I can because . . . she’s given me this trust and respect and I thought, you know, should do something to repay that. . . . I just go about doing what she tells me. (Erin)


Students also ‘complied’ with work requirements and adjusted to particular work

conditions. This meant that students often had to overcome tiredness and, in some

cases, get ‘used to’ being on their feet all day, particularly students working in the

kitchen or serving customers. Others needed to adjust to new time frames, and ensure

that they arrived to work on time. They also needed to meet certain deadlines. For

example, Peter started earlier than usual and had to adjust to that:

The first couple of days were tiring just getting used to what I’m doing. It’s only tiring in the morning just waking up. . . . I’m not used to waking up so early. . . . Cos I’m always on my feet there. When I come home and sit down then I really feel when I’m tired cos everything just shuts down and stops but when I’m there I’m just constantly going. . . . So I don’t really feel tired as such. (Peter)

Alex adjusted to the early starts but found it hard to do so:

The hours getting up early in the morning. That was pretty hard. I did it but . . . bit of a challenge for me . . . I haven’t got a very good history of getting up. (Alex)

Kate found ‘complying’ with work deadlines and adjusting to the different time

frames hard:

You sort of couldn’t slack off in the workplace like at school . . . because the work needed to be done. . . . You had to do stuff in time frames . . . that was hard to adapt to as well because you couldn’t slack off . . . between lunch and afternoon tea were sort of a quiet bit. . . . You just had to get used to doing stuff in their time frame. I mean, it’s not like they gave you five minutes to set 50 tables . . . you sort of knew that it was coming . . . you still had to adapt though because you had to do things when they wanted it done. (Kate)

Through this process, students were also able to adjust to other working conditions

such as busy workplaces, confined workspaces or the heat, particularly in a kitchen

environment:

Sometimes the heat of ovens on the night I have to work harder . . . sort of get used to it if you want to become a chef. (Lisa) It’s very hot in the kitchens down there, and it’s a lot cooler when I’m in here, so I’m kind of acclimatised to something hotter when I’m at work. (Paul)


They made me do messy jobs a lot . . . to get used to being in the messy parts . . . I didn’t like getting messy. . . . So it was really hard . . . near the end of the week I wasn’t worried about getting dirty. . . . Sometimes I really get into messy jobs like how I had to clean out, empty this pot . . . it was, like, really hot and it splashed in my face, I didn’t even care . . . messy jobs are fine to me now. (Lisa)

A number of students reported modifying their conduct to be more “mature”

or “adult-like,” and being more responsible. This was often in response to the ways

that the older adult workers behaved and to being treated in an adult manner.

Petherbridge (1997) and Taylor and Koczberski (2001a, 2001b) reported similar

findings. Clara’s supervisor noted that she was “very mature in her attitude,” which

reflected in how she approached her work. Some reported that they had matured or

‘grownup’ over this time:

Here I’m a worker . . . if I had a task that was due two days from now . . . I’d still get it done and use all the time I had whereas at school I’d think . . . why not have a break, I can go home early . . . here I behave like I was being paid to work. (Jane) You’re given a lot more responsibility at the workplace and at school you’re still treated as a student . . . you have to work as part of a team [at the workplace] . . . you have to act more responsible, mature. . . . At the workplace you always have to be professional. (Erin) I act more mature cos I’m there and I’ve gotta get things done on time, can’t be late or anything, so I act more mature towards work. (Lisa)

The adjustment that Alex had to make of getting up early to go to work made him

more responsible:

I was pretty lazy really. Never used to get out of bed. . . . Now I have to get out of bed cos if not I won’t be getting good marks in my workplace learning. It’s just making me more sort of like strict, responsible [and] a lot more mature. (Alex)

Alex went on to say that he acted more responsibly at work than at school:

Work I take seriously . . . you can’t muck around cos there’s lots of dangers involved. You have to act differently, more responsibly. . . . At work you rely on each other . . . you’re working as a team . . . if you don’t like someone you have to put that aside cos you’re a team, you have to get the job done, so you


can’t let your thoughts and point of view and stuff interfere with your work. It’s a lot different to school. (Alex)

Kate also had to be more mature at the workplace due to her association with older

people, and at times felt constrained:

I had to mature a lot cos they were all older . . . I had to really step up a step. . . . In the workplace I’m sort of squished a little bit . . . because you can’t just in the middle of a restaurant start laughing and have a huge conversation with somebody. So I was limited with what I could say and do . . . and that was really strange. (Kate)

Peter also adjusted his conduct and felt that he had matured more through the

workplacement:

I had to mature myself a bit cos they were older than me and they were a bit mature . . . it’s just the way they talk . . . I’m not gonna be like a little child . . . silly talk like you can do at school . . . so I thought if I can impress them and just show them who I really am it could really help. . . . I feel I’ve grown up a little bit, like, I’ve matured and I’ve found out what a real workplace is like . . . at somewhere where you wanna be, have your future career for the rest of your life it tends to make you feel more grown up. (Peter)

Some students were given tasks that they believed were of little or no benefit

to them with little to no learning occurring. These students often felt exploited and

that they were not doing what they were there for. Most understood that they would

be undertaking some low skill level tasks; however, they had an expectation that they

would progressively be given more complex work where they could develop work-

related skills. Being given such low skill tasks where little to no learning occurred

often resulted in students having very little, if any, commitment to the organisation

and engaging in ‘reluctant’ compliance:

They’re really taking advantage of me, like, just making me do everything . . . I’m really there to be shown things. . . . I just act like there’s no problem or just don’t talk for the rest of the day and just sort of get on with my own thing and just do the work so I can go. . . . I really don’t want to go tomorrow but I have to because I’m behind five hours already. So I don’t really have a choice. (Terri)

This process will be further illuminated in Chapter Eight.


In summary, ‘complying’ is a major process within the category of

‘Adapting.’ Through this process students make changes or adjustments in response

to the demands and expectations placed on them at the workplace. They comply with

instructions given to them by their supervisor, including staying within the

boundaries set for them, and with other work requirements, and adjust to the

particular conditions at the workplace. They also tend to modify their conduct and

act more responsibly at the workplace. This is largely due to their perception of the

workplace as a more professional environment than school, and through their

association with adult workers. ‘Complying’ can be either voluntary or involuntary.

(2) Initiating

‘Initiating’ is the next major process within the category of ‘Adapting.’ As

well as ‘complying,’ students also ‘initiate’ changes or adjustments both within and

outside of the workplace in order to adapt to the workplace environment. Through

this process students make changes or adjustments to their personal organisation in

order to accommodate the workplace demands. Furthermore, as they progress and

gain skills and confidence at the workplace they begin to use initiative, become less

dependent on others and are able to work with less supervision. They make decisions

on their own and may suggest improvements or modifications to existing practices.

Adjustment External to the Workplace

In the present study, most students had to make adjustments to their personal

organisation and establish new routines to accommodate their workplacement. This

often meant changes to part-time job schedules where they occurred, for example,

the night before the day of their SWL. This is similar to one of the five processes

during the encounter stage of Feldman’s (1981) stage model of socialisation. Some


students from School 3 who had part-time jobs negotiated with their employer not to

work during the two-week period of their workplacement. SWL was a priority to

them and tiredness was a significant issue to manage: “I do have a part-time job but

I just said to them I can’t work these two weeks. So they’ve rostered me off for that so

. . . I’m not rushing backwards and forwards, [to] go to work” (Peter). Changes were

also made to their social life. Students from School 3, for example, were tired from

being at work all day and would often forgo social activities: “When I’ve been doing

the work experience now friends have been asking me to go out and stuff and I’ve

said no cos I’m tired. . . . Work’s really put a strain on me” (Alex). In Alex’s case,

SWL was a priority over his social life. Adjusting to new time frames and the

different requirements at the workplace often required other changes to a student’s

personal organisation. New routines were established in order to be rested for the

day’s work ahead. Peter had a long way to travel on public transport to his

workplace. An early start meant a change to his sleeping pattern: “I start early

because I have to travel all the way north of the river to go there so I’ve made minor

changes going to bed early, waking up early which is quite hard” (Peter). Many also

had to establish new transport routines to get to their workplace, which, in many

cases, was a significant distance from their home.

Students from School 4 had to establish new routines to manage the work

missed from the day of their workplacement. Unlike students from Schools 1 and 2

who all studied the same courses and did their SWL on the same day, these students

had other subjects scheduled on the day of their SWL. Although teachers were

generally aware that these students would be out on SWL and were expected by the

school and the students to be supportive of them, it was mainly up to the students to

establish routines to make up the work missed. Students mostly used a self-directed


learning strategy to manage this. Students generally liaised with their teachers

regarding the work to be done and then did it in their own time. Students often used

free sessions or “flexis” that most students had scheduled into their timetables and

were a part of the VET students’ program:

I sort of just catch up myself. . . . I’ve asked a few [friends]. . . . I’ve sorta done my own thing where what they do in class on Wednesday I woulda done Tuesday afternoon when I finish early . . . because I’ve got a lot of early finishes so I do my schoolwork then. (Kelly) I’ve told them [teachers] that I’ve got a flexi session Wednesday and Friday . . . but 99% of the work is done in class, so even if you miss a session you’re still able to catch up . . . my teachers all know and so they give me the work before or on Friday . . . my Work Studies teacher I always go and see her . . . cos she knows that I’ve been away. Most times they give out a new task on Thursday and we start work on that. So I just go and see her and she explains it . . . that’s easy. And cooking I don’t have . . . three hours of that’s cooking and one hour of theory, and that’s on Friday. So, if I missed out on anything it would’ve been the cooking, but that’s alright. (Kate)

Teachers would often assist, for example, by giving students assignments or

handouts the day before or the day after. Some would obtain notes or other work

from friends. They would also consult their teachers at other times. Most teachers

were supportive; however, this was not always the case. Some students chose one or

more TEE subjects as part of their overall course of study. The workload for these

subjects was generally higher than most non-TEE subjects and also required students

to sit two to three hour examinations during the year. Sometimes these students

would negotiate with their SWL supervisor to change their schedule when they

needed more time at school for these subjects. For example, Erin negotiated a change

to her SWL schedule to work three days during her school holidays to accommodate

her schoolwork, which to her was a priority at the time. Others missed the occasional

SWL day and spent it on schoolwork, which was seen as a priority at the time.

Students made decisions according to their priorities:


Usually I’m just up to date with it but, like, today I thought, nuh, I’ll come to school so I do get up to date more cos we went on an excursion yesterday . . . and [I] need her help to write it all up . . . I have to put my schooling first cos I need to pass. . . . I’ll just miss out today cos I’m alright with my hours. (Kelly)

Some teachers were very helpful, managing due dates for assignments around

students’ SWL:

Tourism I miss out quite a bit . . . but Miss teacher1 is really good cos you can just go and ask her questions anytime. . . . But she never makes an assignment due on a Thursday or Wednesday cos other kids in the class are out. . . . And I’ve got things going with friends where they take the work for me and I’ll take the work for them. (Kate)

Others were less flexible and would not give work to other students to pass on when

SWL students missed classes: “Some teachers won’t give them the work. Teacher2

won’t give Rebecca the work, she’s like ‘I wanna know who I’ve given it to’” (Kate).

Some classes were judged by students to be less critical than others:

I’m off Thursdays . . . then I just get friends to tell me what they’ve done. . . . But usually Thursdays they’re in the computer room and they just update their daily journal or something. . . . Don’t miss out on much. (Kate)

Adjusting Within the Workplace

Most students in the study were progressively given more complex tasks as

they learned more skills. As they progressed and gained confidence they became less

dependent on others and were able to work with less supervision. This finding of

autonomous work supports Strickland et al. (2001). They also began to use their

initiative more. Some made decisions on their own and others at times suggested

improvements or modifications to existing practices. For example, as Jane became

more skilled she was given more independence and control over her work, and she

adjusted to her increased level of responsibility:

Most of the time I feel like an employee. I got responsibilities for my work and my actions, and things that I do nobody knows. . . . At first they were like, “oh, she’s a student” . . . [now] they’re like, “ok, so we can give you these things you’re doing. She’s able to solve problems and work independently”. .


. . I have set tasks every week and then they just come to me and they’ll say, “oh, can you have this done by this time?”, and then I’ll prioritise what I have to do and try and fit it in. . . . If I get heaps to do I might say, “look, I can’t do this today, am I able to start it and finish it next week?”, and if I’m not then I’ll leave it and do a different one. They’re getting that way that I’m able to have a say in what I can and I cannot do. (Jane)

Kate was given more trust and independence at her second workplacement, and had

to adjust to working more on her own and making her own decisions:

I did the bar and since there’s only two of us one has to be down at the main bar and then the other one’s up on the top floor, you get a set task and you have to do it but there’s not really anyone that you can ask cos they’re doing their own thing and I’m doing my own thing . . . I had to problem solve myself. . . . They give me . . . more responsibility . . . [and] let me go off on my own . . . instead of being in the shadow of one of the workers where they get told to go upstairs and set up for a function . . . just go up and do it by myself . . . definitely feel more confident and comfortable in the work environment . . . so I’m not just stuck in the same area, [I] have a variety of problems to solve now. (Kate)

As students progressed and were allowed to work more independently, they were

able to use their initiative, which gave them the confidence to have a go: “I use my

initiative more. If I just see something I’ll just do it because I have the confidence

now to just be able to just do it and whether it’s wrong or right” (Kate).

Laura was treated as an employee almost from the outset and allowed to work

with little supervision. She adjusted by projecting into the role and began to see

herself as a worker:

Everyone’s equal and they all do the nasty jobs. . . . You’re treated as your own boss. . . . You have to use your own initiative and do all that . . . I saw myself as a worker . . . because I was given the independence and the respect from the other employees and I was allowed to go and do jobs that they were doing but they were given to me to do by myself, I think that’s when I started looking at myself as a worker; and because I had the responsibility of doing other things like showering someone or putting a treatment on them. (Laura)

Peter, for example, contributed to modifications to existing practices as he became

more confident with himself:

I do suggest, “can you do things this way?” cos recently we just had a staff meeting there how things can be improved . . . and I had a couple of inputs . .


. which they are considering . . . [for example] outside we have the big rotor wash. . . . Some of the parts are very heavy. . . . I recommended getting a small little hand crane . . . so you can put it in without busting your back over it, so they’re considering that. I use my initiative more at work. (Peter)

Data from supervisors supported the ‘initiating’ process. Karl’s supervisor,

for example, said that Karl showed initiative and was readily given added

responsibilities:

On Friday, sometimes I have to go to a meeting in the morning and I won’t get there until 10.30 and Karl’s been here since 10 o’clock and he takes on the responsibility of getting everything done and set up for me . . . I can leave him here on his own and he’s fine. . . . [R. Does he use initiative?] Absolutely. If he’s on the bar and somebody walks in and we do all outside . . . he’ll come off the bar and take them down and seat them and take their order and that sort of thing. He uses a lot of initiative. (Karl’s Workplace Supervisor)

Clara’s supervisor allowed her to use her initiative and work unsupervised:

You can leave her unsupervised. . . . She’ll think for herself. . . . After they’ve got a certain amount of knowledge about what they’re doing they can think of the next step. . . . You don’t have to stand there all day and tell other people what to do, they can organise themselves around you. (Clara’s Workplace Supervisor)

At Kelly’s workplace, organising functions was an important task. Kelly was allowed

to “set up a function room” on her own because she was “very well organised” and

“she’d look for details, she’d make sure the cutlery was polished, the glassware was

clean” (Kelly’s Workplace Supervisor).

The extent to which students were involved with the various aspects of this

process largely depended on their motivation and, hence, commitment to that

workplace. In general, students who were committed, encouraged by mentors, and

continued in the same workplace tended to proceed through the processes outlined

above.

Through the process of ‘initiating’ students make changes or adjustments to

their personal organisation to accommodate the workplace demands. As they


progress, they become less dependent on others for support and are able to work with

less supervision. They begin to use initiative, make decisions on their own, and may

suggest improvements or modifications to existing practices.

(3) Enculturation

‘Enculturation’ is the third major process within the category of ‘Adapting.’

As well as ‘complying’ with workplace demands and expectations and ‘initiating’

changes or adjustments to practices and routines, students over time adopt some of

the values and behaviours of the workplace culture inherent in the workplace

practices. Students adopt these values and behaviours through the process of

‘enculturation.’ This supports the findings of Unwin and Wellington (2001) and

Harris and Simons’ (1999) study which found that “apprentices very early and

readily assimilate the worksite culture” (Harris & Simons, 1999, p. 77), which can

influence one’s perspective. The extent to which students adopt these values and

behaviours varies between students but, in general, depends on both the commitment

of the students and the length of time spent at the particular workplace. These values

and behaviours are either implied through the behaviour of other workers or made

explicit to students, and often are due to the influence of mentors (Bova, 1987) and

other workers.

In the present study, from the outset, students began to be ‘enculturated’ by

adopting the particular dress code at their workplace. In the kitchen of a restaurant,

for example, students were required to wear the chef’s uniform, which they accepted

as part of the job: “He’s clean and tidy and he puts his apron on and he puts his chef

hats on when he comes in and . . . he walks into the kitchen with his kitchen stuff on”

(Jack’s Workplace Supervisor). Some workplaces adhered strictly to a particular


dress standard: “I have to dress the same as them, like, black shoes, black pants,

chef’s jacket, hat, hair up, no jewellery, it’s the normal. [R. And you don’t have a

problem with that?] No” (Lisa). Others had a more flexible attitude towards it, which

the students adopted. At Jarrod’s workplace, for example, the accepted practice was

for staff to wear their full uniform only during functions: “Only when I go to a[n]

actual function I will be in my chef uniform or customer service uniform that they’ve

got. But when I get there just rock up in some chef pants and a shirt” (Jarrod). Peter

had to wear the appropriate uniform with the company logo, safety boots and safety

helmet at his workplace in a heavy machinery workshop. In these workplaces

students (and trainees) began to be ‘enculturated’ into safe practices considered

important by that organisation:

You think about safety before you actually do the job, so that all played a part in it so if I had to do something I’d always think about what could possibly happen even if there’s a remote chance of it happening. (Peter) Students in other workplaces adopted other practices considered important in

that workplace. In some workplaces a strong work ethic, high standards, cleanliness,

and responsibility for a worker’s own actions were considered standard practice that

students were expected to adopt:

Here it’s a good working environment . . . we keep it clean . . . it’s not strict cos they give you a job you have to do and when it has to be done by, and you can do it however you want. But you don’t have someone sitting over you. That’s why I like it because you’re your own boss. . . . We’re working for, like, Malaysia, the customs, like, the Government stuff so you have to do the job properly and good, and that’s what you’re getting paid to do; even though I wasn’t getting paid, just I thought like that. (Alex)

Karl, for example, would always try to be “as professional like the others,”

particularly with customers. The researcher observed this aspect of his work during a

workplace observation. He was also dressed in the same black uniform as the other

workers. At his workplace, people often worked through without a break, which was


the accepted norm. Karl adopted these practices, which helped him to develop a

greater sense of ‘belonging’:

[R. Do you have a break?] No. It is a bit hard . . . but most of the people there working don’t have a break . . . the head waitress [sic], she’s sometimes there 12 hours or even more. (Karl)

Jack’s supervisor articulated the work ethic that Jack was expected to abide by at that

workplace:

Our work ethic here is we are fairly closely supervised in an area of our kitchen. All our staff – from the cook – we’re all open to be seen what we’re doing . . . no-one really gets that time to just slouch off because we work on a very fine timeline.

She then went on to say that:

He’s respecting the workplace . . . and he follows all the rules we do with cleanliness and gloves and all that . . . [and that he] likes to have a bit of fun like the rest of us and he’ll go to the same level we go to; he’s sort of led by us. (Jack’s Supervisor)

Ben was at ease with and readily adopted the particular culture of his workplace

(Harris & Simons, 1999): “He relates pretty well, the place is a geek culture

anyway” (Ben’s Workplace Supervisor). The supervisor went on to say that “the

place is . . . horizontalised in structure; [students] tend to act more professional just

because they’re in a place where they can.” This latter point supports Petherbridge

(1997). In other workplaces, such as restaurants, a strong customer focus was an

important work ethic that students were expected to adopt. Karl, for example,

adopted the workplace practice of being friendly with customers and learning to chat

with them:

You have just to adjust . . . if somebody wants to have a chat you just chat with him cos if somebody ask, yeh, what do you have . . . I have a little chat. But if somebody just he walked in and just looked at, you know, the food, the drink whatever, then makes a joke or anything funny then you just, you know. (Karl)


Nancy quickly learned that “customers come first. . . . When they’re in, that’s it, they

need to be fed quick as any” (Nancy’s Workplace Supervisor).

Others would gradually adopt particular aspects of the language workers used

at the workplace. For example, Laura used the term “multis,” a term generally used

at the workplace to describe “the kids in the wheelchairs” that had multiple

disabilities. Peter referred to a short break from work as a “smoko.” Erin used

language that was “a bit more formal.” Megan also adopted the use of “proper

language saying instead of using slang and that, yeh, whatever, mate and all this

stuff, actually using polite manners” (Megan).

Others, however, were selective about what practices they adopted. In these

situations students tended to adopt values or behaviours that did not violate their own

values. Peter stated that “I accept what I want to accept.” Kate was selective in her

use of language and would not compromise her own values:

[It] depends who I’m around. If I’m around someone who swears a lot I’m not gonna start swearing. But if I’m around someone that seems real posh and everything then I’m not gonna sort of pretend I don’t know what they’re talking about. (Kate)

Others adopted the social customs of the workplace by accepting and participating in

social interactions, banter and the like. This meant abiding by the ‘rules of the game’:

[It] was hard to fit in [at first] cos I didn’t know what people were like. But this time it was alright cos I knew what they were like and how to get on their good side, like, have a joke around with them. But overall I thought it was alright cos you just sit and you just listen to how they speak and how they act and all that, you can sort of in a way adapt to it. They’re all blokes there so you can just have a general conversation and all that. [I] did learn one thing, on breaks . . . never talk about work in your breaks. (Peter)

Through ‘enculturation,’ students often developed a greater sense of

belonging to the organisation and of being “one of them.” These students also tended

to see themselves as workers or trainees rather than school students. This has been

illustrated in previous examples - Alex, Clara and Jarrod. Through Workplace


Formation students began to develop a sense of occupational identity. Through

‘enculturation’ students began to develop a sense of occupational identity at that

particular workplace. Jason, for example, developed a sense of what it was to be a

chef at his workplace with it’s particular workplace culture, and Peter what it was to

be a plant mechanic. Jack had a strong sense of being a worker or “one of them” as a

result of ‘enculturation’ over a period of months: “At first I saw myself as a school

student because I didn’t actually fit in with the crowd, I didn’t actually blend in . . . I

see myself more as a worker now” (Jack). In a subsequent interview Jack said, “I

felt accepted there . . . the thing was opening up and talking to people. . . . [I see

myself] as a working man. . . . If you actually feel like you’re one of them then things

get done a lot quicker” (Jack). Peter’s sense of belonging, being part of the

organisation, even over a short period of time – four weeks – was high:

I thought I was going to work, I was up every morning in my work uniform, have my lunch packed and all that. I just felt like as a routine just going there, just getting home late . . . and relaxing. . . . I didn’t realise it was still work experience . . . just there to get the job done . . . you’ve got standards to live up to there. . . . I’ve got the proper uniform on . . . I just really feel that I’m in the same league as them . . . I really feel like I’m actually part of it. (Peter)

The above example also illustrates that students often separated school from the

workplace by focusing attention on the workplace during this time. This strategy was

used to assist them in adapting to the workplace.

Some students, Anna, for example, did not adopt any behaviours of the

workplace culture largely because of their lack of commitment and short time at the

workplace.

In summary, ‘enculturation’ is the process whereby students over time adopt

some of the values and behaviours of the workplace culture inherent in the workplace

practices. The extent to which students adopt these values and behaviours varies


between students but, in general, is a product of the student’s commitment to the

particular workplace, and the length of time spent there. The values and behaviours

are either implied through the behaviour of other workers or made explicit to

students, and often their adoption is due to the influence of mentors and other

workers.

The Fifth Category: Building

The fifth and final category of the theory of Workplace Formation is

‘Building.’ Through the processes that comprise the category of ‘Building’ students

develop work-related skills and knowledge and a greater sense of occupational

identity within the industry. While some of the processes of ‘Building’ begin from

the time that students commence their placement and, therefore, occur concurrently

with other processes of Workplace Formation, ‘Building’ occurs most intensely for

students who have a high commitment to the workplace, are career-focused and are

well supported by workplace mentors. ‘Building,’ therefore, tends to be most

intensive after students have proceeded through the other categories of processes of

Workplace Formation. Because the workplace context (in particular, the treatment of

students, the level of support and type of work given) was found to be a significant

factor in the extent to which students proceeded through the various categories of

Workplace Formation, some students (for example, Anna) did not progress

significantly through the ‘Building’ category at their respective workplaces. In

Anna’s case, it was only when she changed to a different workplace that was more

supportive of her and where she displayed more commitment that she progressed to


any significant extent through this and other categories. This also occurred with other

students in the study.

‘Building’ consists of four major processes, namely, ‘modelling,’

‘consolidating,’ ‘transferring,’ and ‘contributing.’ Each process will now be outlined.

(1) Modelling

‘Modelling’ is the process through which students acquire skills and

knowledge by observing and copying the behaviour, techniques or practices of

others. It is a key process that students use to learn at the workplace. They do this by

observing mentors while they are working or when students are shown a procedure

or technique. This supports the findings of other studies (Billett, 1999, 2000; Smith,

2000; Smith and Green, 2001; & Strickland et al., 2001) that found this as the most

preferred or most common learning strategy. As part of this process students ask

questions to clarify and gain a better understanding of what the job entails and

increase their knowledge of workplace practices. They also listen to explanations and

seek advice when they are unsure of how to go about a task that they are given or

need further clarification on how it should be done.

In the present study, students used ‘modelling’ from the commencement of

the workplacement and continued for its duration. ‘Modelling’ was most intensive

early in the placement and at other times when students were learning new skills and

procedures. ‘Modelling’ was often a planned, deliberate process initiated by either

the student or the mentor. Students would observe a technique or procedure being

demonstrated or performed and it would be explained. Students would then ‘model’

the procedure, and seek clarification or ask to be shown again until they grasped and

internalised it. The following examples illustrate this:


They explain and demonstrate how to do the different parts, like, the way of cutting the leeks. . . . They have a special way of doing each little part, and if you don’t get it the first time they’ll show you again until you actually take grasp and take it in. (Megan)

If it’s really hard I’ll ask for help. . . . Every week I get a new person to work with. Sometimes it’s the same person. . . . It’s quite fun cos you get to know the different person and the different ways they do it as well. When they ask me to make this mixture for spring rolls . . . sometimes they want me to shred the chicken but [I] ask them how thin or thick and they tell me and they show me as well as tell me. . . . If I don’t know how I just go and ask – it’s the only way to do it. (Lisa) You look at them and see what they do, and if something needs doing and they’ve just done it and they’re doing something else you’ll go and do it. And if you’re not sure you’d go . . . and ask them and they would tell you the right way to do it. (Lucy)

Karl’s supervisor said that Karl “sort of learns by watching.” Kelly picked things up

quickly but would seek clarification to ensure it was done right if she experienced

difficulty: “We told her once or we showed her once and she was up to it” (Kelly’s

Supervisor 1). “She didn’t try to do it off the bat either . . . . We have a way that we

do it. If she had any difficulty she’d just ask us how to do it” (Kelly’s Supervisor 2).

Jack was also expected to ‘model’ by watching and clarifying while learning:

“[Mentor] taking him aside and showing him something . . . . [We expect him] to be

asking questions. . . . If he doesn’t think he’s doing it right for [mentor] to look at

him and say, ‘no, you’re not doing it right,’ and explain to him” (Jack’s Supervisor).

Some mentors would allow students to try to figure things out for themselves before

offering assistance. Performance would also be constantly monitored:

They’re shown how to cut the bread, how to butter the bread and how to layer it out and how to wrap it. . . . You would constantly go through this process of how to do it . . . and this would continue to happen until they get it right. . . . [In the beginning] we were prepared to show him a task and . . . work his way through it, certainly keep an observation on what he was doing because in the end we have to use the food product. But he was left to . . . get around it with his own devices and just see how he would go, that way if he was struggling with that then you would step in and offer a guiding hand. . . . You would constantly be having some input to see what level they were at. If they could work it out, if they could follow an instruction from being shown once then,


fine, you’d let them continue on, and then you would constantly give them more and more responsibility. (Mark’s Workplace Supervisor)

As students became more confident at the workplace, some would try to solve

problems that arose by themselves and sought advice only when needed:

I’d do things pretty much my way of how I would do it. I’d fix them my own way then if I couldn’t do it I’d ask him [supervisor] and he would do it and I’d just watch and learn pretty much. (Ben)

Some students would initially ‘model’ techniques on other workers or mentors but

then adapted these to suit themselves:

Normally I look at what they’re doing then just . . . cos you set your own sort of skills, your own way of doing things cos everyone’s different. . . . They’re all about the same way but just little key things like the way you hold something or just the way you do something. You can tell someone’s work. (Alex)

Sometimes ‘modelling’ occurred incidentally through students’ own

awareness, observing others and ‘modelling’ their practice. Kelly, at her workplace,

learned that the customer is “the thing of business, the customer comes first.” She

had learned that by “just been told in general conversation . . . and then when you

think about it – yeh. So you sort of go out a bit of your way to make sure they’re

fine.” Kelly learned such practices not through specific instruction but through

observation of others: “You picked up on it when you got there. You just watched

how things were done and you learned how to do it yourself” (Kelly). When asked if

“picking things up as you went along” was a common practice at her workplace, she

replied: “Yeh.” Kelly went on to say:

At [workplace] there was [sic] a few ladies that were so friendly who were still nice to customers even if the customers were rude. . . . I sort of learned from them that you have to just treat everyone the same. [R. Just through observation, watching them do it or?] Yeh, and just my own common sense. . . . At school you don’t take notice of how people do things . . . but at work you do. (Kelly)


Ben was very observant and often learned by ‘modelling’ things that he picked up

peripherally:

He picks things and the cues up quite quickly. It wasn’t as if I had to sort of go around and say, look, this is a lead programmer and they sort of plug little demigods here and so forth. It’s the sort of thing that he picks up peripherally I guess, I didn’t even have to do anything about that. It’s always good for them to figure out some of the stuff on their own I guess. And he does pick it up pretty well. (Ben’s Workplace 2 Supervisor)

Some students made use of role models (Kram, 1985), but were selective in

what they chose to adopt from them. This finding supports Bucher and Stelling

(1977) and Filstad (2004). ‘Modelling’ the behaviour of influential role models was a

common strategy:

My supervisor pulled me away . . . [for] a chat . . . [he said] when you speak to them [other workers] you only tell them what they [need to] know . . . you don’t go telling me everything about you. That young girl there I only knew her for four days and it felt like I knew her for four years how much she told us . . . all you’ve gotta do is you take in what you need to take in and what you want to know. . . . You probably wouldn’t think [supervisor] goes to church every Sunday and he helps the young kids who are heroin addicts. I found that out the last couple of days. So, there’s a lot of things you don’t need to tell people. That’s what he said to me and how to talk to people and all that, how to get through the job. I thought that was great advice. (Peter)

Nancy, for example, ‘modelled’ her behaviour on the people around her, and so,

acted in a more mature or “grownup” manner: “They’re grownups, so you act like a

grownup, like, mature, really mature as you can get, not like a student. Cos if they

were going to employ you . . . they would want a responsible mature person”

(Nancy). ‘Modelling’ behaviour or conduct and adjusting to what was expected of

them in the workplace was typical of students. Students also looked up to mentors

whom they perceived to be highly skilled and who provided support to them:

“Everyone looks as a bit of a role model cos they’ve all got lots of experience in the

job. I’m keen to look at them all” (Alex). This student saw the experience and skills

these significant others possessed as important characteristics, which he admired. He


looked up to “the experiences that they’ve had, the way they can work the way that

they do. Yeh, their skills” (Alex). Another student viewed not only the experience,

skills, and knowledge the role model possessed but also the perceived success of the

role model in his career:

[Supervisor], he’s a role model cos he’s been a plant mechanic . . . he was constantly pulling me aside giving me new advice on how to do things. . . . He’s just the type of person you can look up to. He’s done his trade, he’s got his ticket, he’s got a lot of knowledge, and he’s made well for himself, he’s done the hard yards. I know quite a few apprentices that look up to him. (Peter)

Some students had other significant persons as role models who were not

necessarily at the same workplace. These included parents, relatives, or their friends

in the industry. These role models can be positive or negative influences on students.

One student said: “My uncle, he’s a master chef . . . I’ve seen him cook before and I

like the way he cooks and I like cooking. It’s pretty cool” (Jarrod). Nancy’s father

used to be a chef and “[ever] since I was a little girl . . . I wanted to become a chef

cos I love cooking” (Nancy). When asked if she thought he had influenced her, she

said: “Yeh, maybe it was.” Emma was positively influenced by her father’s friends:

Things that I’ve heard from people that I know cos dad’s friends are from the hospitality industry and they’ve all got positive comments about it and stuff. So, what I’ve heard I love. (Emma)

Lisa was not deterred by the negativity of her uncle who was a chef and pointed out

the downside of working in the industry, instead maintained her commitment to a

career in the industry:

One of my uncles he’s a chef and he . . . says that it’s hard work and sometimes gets really bad in the heat and that, and I just thought, nuh, I love being with people and I just wanna cook. So, I might as well be a chef. (Lisa)

Other students used the behaviour or practices of others as a source of

negative influence; that is, practices they would not ‘model’ or emulate but avoid.


For example, some workers at Peter’s workplace swore a lot. However, he did not

model this type of language but avoided it instead:

It doesn’t worry me, I can’t change the way they wanna talk or act. I talk and act the way I do which is nothing like that. After a while you probably noticed the young girl that was there, she got a bit carried away I thought and everybody else thought that. I wasn’t gonna be rude or anything there . . . I don’t wanna get a bad reputation, so if I go to apply for a job there, oh, this is the guy that swears a lot. (Peter)

Laura used the practice of the workers at her workplace as a model of what not to do

but rather to operate in the opposite sense:

I looked up to them all but I wouldn’t say they were role models . . . there was one lady that I just thought that she was disgusting the way she treated the kids and I swore to myself I’m never going to end up like that. (Laura)

Some students reject role models for various reasons. A number of students in

the study did not see mentors or other workers at the workplace as role models. Some

students value a sense of independence. Emma expressed her independent attitude

when she said:

I think I’m the type of person where I don’t wanna follow anyone else’s footsteps . . . I wanna make my own decisions. I don’t want a role model. I don’t see anyone as being a role model for me because in my opinion that’s just following somebody else’s career path. . . . I don’t want them to be an influence on my life. (Emma)

Role models available at the workplace may not fit with students’ views of what the

role entails and students cannot see themselves in that role or do not wish to model

particular behaviours of the person. The role models available to Emma were not

compatible with her view of what she wanted to be. She said:

I just don’t like the people that work there. I just don’t like who they are. . . . I don’t wanna be a part of their little groups. I don’t want to socialise with them because . . . they’re people I don’t want to become. (Emma)

There were also occasions when mentors did not offer sufficient support to students

that needed more assistance. This caused tension, a basis for rejection of them as role

models, and often a lack of commitment:


With the till . . . he told me, “have a look how I’m doing it” and then, ok. . . . Cos there’s only one side of it – beverages and cakes. And on the other side you have to turn it where the food is. I asked him, I can’t find whatever, and he said it’s on the other side. Ok, next time I was looking again for something . . . “where do you press to get this receipt out?” He goes, “I already showed it to you twice, you have to learn it, I can’t tell you every time”. . . . Just feels . . . well, just do things and go home . . . what am I here for? (Karl)

These findings support other research (Bandura, 1977; Miller & Jablin, 1991;

Ostroff & Kozlowski, 1992; Smith, 2000). Students relied primarily on supervisors

and co-workers for information and instruction, and on observation of others, asking

questions and then modelling behaviour and techniques to ‘Build’ knowledge and

skills. This suggests a greater reliance on support of supervisors, mentors and co-

workers due to the emphasis on learning in such contexts.

Students build skills and knowledge by ‘modelling’ the behaviour, techniques

or practices of others. ‘Modelling’ is often a planned process initiated by either the

student or the mentor. Students observe mentors while they are working or when a

procedure or technique is demonstrated. Students also seek explanations, clarification

or advice when they are unsure of how to go about a given task. Sometimes

‘modelling’ occurs incidentally through students’ own awareness, observing others

and ‘modelling’ their practice. Some students use role models but tend to be selective

in what they choose to adopt from them. Role models can be a source of positive or

negative influence on students.

(2) Consolidating

The process whereby students reinforce and accumulate work-related skills

and knowledge and progressively develop skills to higher levels of proficiency is

termed ‘consolidating.’ Once students have been taught a new skill or technique,

they need to develop this to a high level of proficiency. This is normally


accomplished by repeatedly performing the technique or procedure. In this way, they

increase their level of understanding and continue to develop skills to a higher level

of proficiency. They gradually and progressively develop skills and knowledge

throughout their placement. They become faster or more adept in the way they work

or perform a task, are more precise in technique and make fewer mistakes. They

accumulate a range of skills and knowledge, which are generally developed in stages,

and increase their overall competence and confidence. Strickland et al. (2001) also

found that the opportunity to practise skills and to progressively develop skills were

important for learning.

In the present study, all students proceeded through the ‘consolidating’ phase

but the extent varied from student to student. In some workplaces students

progressively developed knowledge and work-related skills, including technical

skills and interpersonal skills such as communication and customer service skills. As

students developed these and other skills and their competence increased, they also

increased in confidence. In general, those students who were longer in supportive

placements and were focused on a career in that industry tended to develop greater

competence than others. Jarrod’s progress at his workplace will now be used to

illustrate the process of ‘consolidating.’ Jarrod enjoyed his workplacement and

worked hard at it because he wanted to become a chef. Whenever he was shown a

new cooking technique he practiced it until he “got it right”:

I enjoy cooking a lot. I will cook lots of things until I get it right, and when I get it right after a few times after that I still enjoy cooking. . . . I just take things and do them until they’re done properly so there’s nothing wrong. (Jarrod)

As he became more proficient, his speed in particular techniques increased: “My

fastness is just zupped up in cutting. So, I’m quite fast at cutting up now.” As he

progressed, his range of skills increased:


I have progressed a lot and I do know a lot of things about cooking now. . . . I actually don’t just sit there and peel potatoes, I do cook . . . I make cheesecakes and make all different stuff like Danishes and all different pastries and stuff like that. (Jarrod)

As his knowledge and skills progressed he became more confident in himself, and

even learned ‘tricks of the trade’ from other chefs that he would use:

I’ve learnt the tricks from people, different tricks, and I know the work so if I see something and I’m not sure at least I know that I’ve been shown and I’ve done it so I know it can’t go wrong. (Jarrod)

He found the work easier as he progressed because of his “quickness and efficiency”

and knowing where everything was. By the time of the final interview Jarrod had

accepted an apprenticeship offered to him at his workplace because he was “doing

good.” By that stage he felt that he had made good progress in the range of skills and

proficiency:

I think it’s pretty close to what it should be . . . I’ve been told by all the other chefs that I’m ahead of my league . . . I’ve got a lot more skills than they would expect from me at the moment. (Jarrod)

Nancy’s supervisor articulated the employer perspective, supporting this process:

They’re doing basically what my apprentices [are] doing. The only thing that I haven’t taught them yet because I believe the stage that they’re at is too hard for them to sort of put it all together yet. They need to learn their basics – their knife skills, all that sort of stuff and see all that first. So I haven’t really taught them any of the sauces or soups or stocks or anything like that. They’ll learn all that in their first year of TAFE or whatever . . . and once they’ve got their basic knife skills and they know their basic cuts and they know how it all goes together then when they actually learn that it’ll come together a lot easier for them. (Nancy’s Workplace Supervisor)

He said that Nancy had made substantial progress in her speed: “Definitely speed in

what she does; things that she started doing at the start of the year that she’s doing

now she’s doing double as quick. General tasks she’s doing a lot quicker.”

Jack also made significant progress at the workplace that he was at for the

entire year through ‘consolidating’ the range of skills, his knowledge, and level of

proficiency. As a result, his competence and confidence increased over the year:


We were making . . . jelly and rock melon . . . [and they] got me to make an apple and custard for dessert as well . . . that was a first . . . they’re giving me advice of, like, knife skills and just different safety ways, like, sharpening your knife on the stone and just ways of doing it. . . . They just give you different things just to experiment with and just to get yourself used to using utensils and that. . . . [I] feel more confident and everything, I know where everything is so I’m a lot faster in the workplace as well and things get done more quicker now. (Jack) The jobs that [mentor] gives him he seems to be coping quite well. . . . I’ve left him under [mentor’s] wing because it’s got more skills to do with cooking . . . that would give him more creative type things. . . . With [mentor] he can get a lot more done. (Jack’s Workplace Supervisor)

Clara not only developed work-related skills but also broadened her

knowledge of the industry which she could use for her own benefit:

I’ve got my own horse, I’m getting a new one, so this is sort of for me as well because I’m learning more things and I can learn different things about them . . . what kinds of breeds of horses and stuff. . . . Working in the stables I get a better knowledge of what I can get, what’s available, what I can do and stuff. (Clara)

Her range of skills increased. As she became more proficient she found the work

easier, she was given more independence, and her confidence increased:

Another girl . . . and I we can run the whole place on a Friday, we don’t need to see the boss. He goes to golf. . . . Everything’s just getting easier cos we’re just learning so much more. . . . [R. Are you feeling more confident about things?] Yeh. (Clara)

Her supervisor, the owner, stated that “she improved in her attitude,” she was

“getting more confident everyday,” she was “quite capable,” and that “they learn a

lot by being here.” As a result, he could leave her to work “unsupervised” and that

she would do “everything that I’ve asked her to do.” Clara spent most of the latter

part of the year ‘consolidating’ skills learned rather than acquiring new ones. At the

final interview Clara said:

You’ve always gotta be confident. If you were nervous, you’re a hazard because a horse can pick up nerves. If the horse knows you’re nervous it’s not gonna behave. Just don’t think, you just do it. It’s like second nature, you just go out there, find the horse, grab it, bring it in. The only real time I have been nervous is when there’s been horses fighting, like, big fights and you’ve


gotta go out there and separate them. It’s huge. . . . We’ve lost a few horses this year . . . we’ve found them dead . . . I’ve ridden them before, ok, [but] I have learnt not to become attached. (Clara)

Alex was gradually given more challenging tasks to progressively develop

skills at both workplaces: “It was, like, starting me off small and then giving [me]

bigger and bigger, teaching me slowly cos I learn” (Alex). Regarding his second

placement, Alex said: “Next week’s gonna be harder. They’ll get me to do more

complicated stuff. It’s good . . . didn’t just bang it all on me one shot. Just slowly . . .

giving me harder and harder things to do.” Karl also developed skills progressively

to a higher level of proficiency:

[Supervisor] only expects me actually to learn and do stuff like she tells me . . . then she lets me do something. Like, clearing a table I did two weeks ago, she told me, today . . . the whole day all tables you have to clear. Then, I did this for two weeks and then, ok, that was good but now you have to do it faster. And then she expects to do not at once, must take time, and then in a month’s time or so I have to do it perfectly. (Karl)

Karl’s supervisor confirms this progressive development when she stated: “At the

moment we’re just trying to teach him the basics. . . . He can just go about being a

waiter for now and slowly learn. . . . I just don’t want to push him too hard.”

Some students accumulated a range of skills by being at more than one workplace.

Laura at her first workplace ‘consolidated’ her interpersonal skills:

I’ve met a range of people, like, elderly people with disabilities, people from other countries, and I’ve learnt to get along with them better. . . . Some of the people did annoying little things. You can’t say anything about it because you are on work experience . . . you learn to shut your mouth . . . and just go with the flow and just accept them because that’s what they’re like. (Laura)

At her second workplacement she learned and ‘consolidated’ new skills, which led to

increased self-confidence:

I was always learning but then I’ve gone to the highest I can do because that’s all my experience I can do. [R. Did you extend your skills while you were there?] Definitely. Gave me more confidence. I was very uneasy with some of the multies in the water because it’s a very high risk thing in the pool with them because just one head under the water and they can drown. So, it’s


really brought my skill level up as to do lots of things while keeping a child’s head above the water or always watching out for, you know, there’s five in the pool and you can see them all. (Laura)

In other workplaces, some students did not progress to the same extent.

Sometimes a change in the workplace context did not provide the right conditions for

much progress and consolidation of skills to occur. Erin, for example, made steady

progress in skill development and ‘consolidated’ skills and knowledge at her first

workplace at a retail travel agency:

The first couple of sessions [I] just sat there observing what they did and I answered a few phones. [The supervisor] would sit there when I was typing invoices and tell me what to write. But now I know how to do that. These days . . . she’ll just give me the sheet with the information and I just type it up and print it. And with the Sabre program I can find clients’ details, like, bring up their files on the computer. And I know if she wants a hard copy printed or the itinerary printed I know what to do. (Erin)

In a later interview she said:

I’ve learnt a lot of new skills to do, like, in travel agencies. . . . I’ve become a bit more confident with strangers, customers. . . . I was a bit nervous about going there and dealing with customers and stuff but now it’s a breeze. (Erin)

However, when she changed workplaces to a wholesale travel agency in second

semester, she did not progress to any significant extent. Erin said that the work

involved “just office skills” as opposed to the first workplace where she was dealing

with customers and learning and ‘consolidating’ computer skills:

I just didn’t really do much apart from type. . . . It was the same every week, like, the first place as it went on they gave me more and more responsibilities and I learnt more. But here I just didn’t really learn much . . . [the work was] too easy, it was just typing, it was boring. (Erin)

Other studies (Strickland et al., 2001) noted that the lack of new and challenging

tasks often hindered progress.

In summary, through the process of ‘consolidating’ students reinforce and

accumulate work-related skills and knowledge and progressively develop skills to

higher levels of proficiency.


(3) Transferring

The third major process within the category of ‘Building’ is ‘transferring.’

‘Transferring’ refers to the process whereby students apply relevant skills and

knowledge learned in one context to another context. In the present study, a number

of students mentioned how they were able to apply a range of skills learned at school

to the workplace context. The most common of these were skills directly related to

the workplace, such as knife skills for students working in the kitchen of a restaurant.

A number of such skills were initially learned at school and then developed further or

‘consolidated’ at the workplace. Other students ‘transferred’ learning from the

workplace back to the school context. These students were able to selectively

integrate what they considered were relevant aspects of learning at school and at the

workplace, and, in some cases, with other work contexts such as casual jobs.

Jack, for example, was able to ‘transfer’ relevant skills and integrate learning

between school and his workplace. He saw “cooking” as being relevant because of

his career focus:

That’s the field I’m doing. It’s increasing your mind capability of handling my knives and getting used to other people’s techniques of doing things and comparing them to my own . . . like, today when I cut the coleslaw it’s like I got two out of one . . . when I last cut cabbage you have to core the root out . . . with this what I had to do was shred it up and the core bit just falls out. . . . It’s getting into all different things . . . cooking and Structured Workplace Learning they link. (Jack)

Lisa ‘transferred’ relevant skills from her workplace to school and vice-versa

enhancing her learning within both contexts:

All the skills that I’ve learnt at work experience I always use them at school, and I make sure I do cos I feel more comfortable now that they’ve showed me different things. But it’s still good on Thursdays cos if there’s anything new [teacher] taught me that work experience hasn’t, I just use it at work experience and they’re just, like, thank me. Like, last Friday they showed me how to make bread rolls and I made them and they’re beautiful rolls cos they’re better than what they’ve ever had. (Lisa)


Jane also ‘transferred’ skills between the school and workplace contexts enhancing

learning at both:

The workplace is where we’re able to use the things we’ve been doing at school. However, school we’re able to incorporate the way, like, we had a task . . . I was writing the answers according to the way I was doing it at the workplace . . . [The teacher] was querying saying why would you do it that way . . . and I said, “well, because this is the way they do it in the workplace”. . . . At the workplace I’m able to show everybody else how they do it as well . . . all our tasks are related to the way we work in an office environment. (Jane)

Jane used her computing skills learned at school, for example, and applied them at

her workplace:

I worked a lot with Powerpoint this time around. . . . It was easy to work with cos we use it all the time here [school]. . . . At [my workplace] there’s a women’s network and they needed to get some statistics up, so I did a Powerpoint presentation . . . and then they put it on the intranet. (Jane)

Megan found the ability to be able to apply and extend the skills that she had learned

at school to the workplace satisfying:

I had done . . . stuff at school over the last three or four years, and actually getting in there and learning more and doing the skills I had learned but in more depth was very interesting. (Megan)

She integrated learning from both sites and extended and ‘consolidated’ skills at the

workplace. The work at both contexts

fit in well because you actually learn something and then . . . it’s influenced more in the actual . . . workplace. Like, if you learned how to peel potatoes or something [it’s] enforced and enhanced larger in the actual workplace. (Megan)

Nancy also ‘transferred’ skills learned at school to the workplace:

At school we learn things like how we cut julienne and stuff, then at our workplacement they’ll ask you, “do you know how to do it?” and they’re really happy that you know how cos then you’ll do that quickly and they can just teach us something else. (Nancy)

Nancy felt, however, that she did not ‘transfer’ skills from her part-time job at a fast

food outlet because she saw that workplace as completely “different.” Her


supervisor said, however, that because they tend to “get a fair bit of responsibility

thrown on them in that place” he felt that a “sense of urgency and stuff like that with

customers” had “brushed off on her.” Mary was able to transfer skills learned at the

workplace and integrate them with her learning at school in a specific subject area:

When I was at work experience I’d bring home a little bit of the children in me. . . . Kind of rubbed of on me. Probably the way I interacted with the children and a bit of the knowledge that I learned I’d take that back to Early Childhood. So, it was good. (Mary)

Megan made the point that most skills learned at school can be ‘transferred’ to the

workplace: “Even though I don’t 100 percent like school you need most of the skills

you get from school in the workforce” (Megan).

Others ‘transferred’ particular skills and knowledge between workplacement

and part-time jobs. Laura, for example, ‘transferred’ knowledge and skills to her

part-time job where she could adapt particular skills and knowledge learned at her

workplacement to that context:

I know I’ve got lots of plans of action to take . . . [to] my work at the Rec centre and with some of the kids being in that program I know what they are like at school and what they are like on the holiday program. . . . Now I see the plan of action I can take with the kids. (Laura)

Jack, for example, ‘transferred’ the “judgement of time” that he acquired at his part-

time job to his workplacement:

When I first started there [at part-time job] . . . I got doing tasks like making enchiladas . . . wedges . . . sour cream . . . chicken salads, Caesar salads. Then I had to do fish and chips, that was the hard part cos you had to judge the timing of the fish on how long that’s gonna cook depending on the size of it to the amount of chips . . . on what temperature the fire is. And at all the same time you have to run out and serve food and serve customers. (Jack)

Not all students were able to transfer skills and knowledge from one context

to another. Furthermore, some students did not see a direct link between school and

the workplace unless they were able to transfer skills or knowledge. This depended

on how relevant they saw that their schoolwork was to their work at the workplace.


For example, Clara did not see a connection between what she did at school and her

workplace, which was a horse-riding small business:

They don’t. It [workplace] doesn’t link to anything. Some tasks we’re getting now they say, “now look at your workplacement. Now compare the prices of the menus”. . . . Even for Career and Industry Awareness I did a huge task . . . unions and stuff like this. I’m sitting there thinking, it’s a private business and you don’t get pay rises and you don’t get promoted . . . everyone there [workplace] is the same . . . do the same work . . . get the same money. I don’t see it compares, maybe just Tourism cos what we’re doing now in Tourism is all about Japanese culture and we get a lot of Japanese tourists come out. So, I understand the dos and don’ts with them. (Clara)

These students were not able to make connections between school and workplace.

Others, however, were able to do so.

In summary, through the process of ‘transferring’ students are able to apply

the skills and knowledge learned from one learning context, such as the school, to

another, such as the workplace. A number of skills learned at school would be further

developed at the workplace. Some students ‘transfer’ learning from the workplace

back to the school. In general, these students are able to selectively integrate what

they consider are relevant aspects of learning at school and at the workplace, and, in

some cases, with their part-time jobs.

(4) Contributing

‘Contributing’ is the fourth and final process within the category of

‘Building.’ It is the process through which students ‘give’ to the organisation by

doing useful or productive work, thus ‘contributing’ to its productivity. Generally,

early in the placement students are very dependent upon mentors or supervisors.

They need to ‘familiarise’ themselves with the workplace procedures and practices,

and begin to develop working relationships with others. They are taught new skills,

which are practiced and over time ‘consolidated.’ As they develop work-related


skills and knowledge they adapt and become more comfortable in the workplace and

gain confidence. Many begin to see themselves as workers rather than school

students. They begin to work with less supervision and are able to undertake useful

tasks that ‘contribute’ to the productivity of the organisation. Some are able to

undertake useful tasks early in the placement. Others may be given low skill level

preparation or cleaning at the beginning, and are progressively taught more complex

skills. As they become more skilled, they are given more productive work and feel

valued by the organisation.

In the present study, most students saw the workplace both as a place to learn

and as a place to work. As such, doing useful work for the enterprise was seen as an

outcome of the placement. For example, Megan and Jack saw the workplace both as

a place to work and a place to learn:

You’re actually working though you’re also collecting knowledge as you go. . . . I’m doing jobs just like the rest of the employees are doing. (Megan) Come here to learn as in to make new recipes like coleslaw today. And, seeing this place like a place to work as well because at the same time as what I’m learning I’m actually helping out with the community. (Jack)

Alex not only saw the workplace as a place to learn as well as work but also made

the point that “I won’t learn unless I do work.” He saw immersion in the work as

necessary for learning to occur. Towards the end of his two-week workplacement

Alex felt “just like another person” at that workplace, a “worker.” He was

‘contributing,’ took a pride in his work and got

the job done. . . . I just do the easy jobs that’s in there now drilling, jigsawing, just doing work, not sitting around watching. Feels as if I’m doing something now, I’m actually part of the work that I’m doing, and I’ve put something into it. (Alex)

While this appears to contrast the findings of Brooker and Butler (1997) and others

(Harris & Simons, 1999; Strickland et al., 2001) where the ‘production imperative’


caused tension and reduced the range of skills, it does suggest that working and

learning is the preferred mode in some cases as students tend to see themselves as

part of the team by doing productive work, and that tension can be eliminated if

working and learning are appropriately structured, which supports the findings of

Billett (1994a, 1994b, 1996, 2001).

Ben’s supervisor expected Ben to ‘contribute’ to the workplace and saw

learning as Ben’s ‘payment’ for doing the work: “He’s here to do some work for me

and I’m here to teach him how to do other things he doesn’t yet know.” Mark’s

supervisor made the point that often the work being done, the garlic bread that Mark

made, for example, was “something that we will use down the track in the restaurant

and we will sell to customers,” and it needed to be prepared to the appropriate

standard. Nancy ‘contributed’ by doing such work as “slicing cucumber, lemon

wedges . . . slicing zucchini and eggplant, cleaning mussels . . . cut and score squid,

they get all the breakfast stuff ready . . . a range of stuff” (Nancy’s Workplace

Supervisor).

The length of time that students spent at the particular workplacement as well

as their commitment largely determined the extent to which they could ‘contribute’

and in what way. Students that remained in the same workplace throughout their

placement and were more committed (Clara and Jarrod, for example) were able to

‘contribute’ more than others. They were able to develop higher level skills and

‘contribute’ substantially to the workplace productivity. Clara, as she progressed at

her workplace, was given more and more responsibility and ‘contributed’

significantly to her workplace:

He says that I’m actually quite able . . . to run everything by myself. . . . The boss doesn’t really come down so much, only if we’ve got riders going out. . . . The other girl and I we can do everything else by ourselves, it’s just routine, you don’t even think, you just do it. . . . He offered to pay me . . . I just get


treated like I work there . . . other work experience girls come out, it’s . . . “Clara will show you to do this, Clara will show you how to do that”. . . . I have more responsibility, there’s more things I do now. I answer the phone or take a booking. People come down, yep, cool, sign this form. (Clara)

Clara’s supervisor said:

She knows what to do. . . . If we’ve got an easy day I’ll veg out somewhere so I can leave them to themselves and they can patch gear or patch blankets or fix gear or oil gear or whatever.

In other cases, ‘contributing’ was limiting to assisting with such tasks as preparation

of food, cleaning or serving customers, for instance, in a restaurant context, or

answering phones or filing in other contexts.

CONCLUSION

In this chapter the theory of Workplace Formation was presented through a

detailed exposition of the processes, concepts and interrelationships within the

theory. The theory was initially presented in the form of a story line. Next, the theory

of Workplace Formation, the ‘core category,’ was explained as a set of logically

inter-related propositions. These were (a) propositions relating to the overall theory

of Workplace Formation, and (b) propositions relating to the processes of Workplace

Formation. In the third section a detailed exposition was presented of the categories,

processes and concepts that comprise the theory of Workplace Formation. These

related to the second set of propositions.

The theory of Workplace Formation was grounded in the actions and

interactions of students who participated in their first year of SWL in various

workplaces. It emerged from the students’ workplace experiences, and explains the

processes that students use to manage their workplace learning, from a student


perspective. The theory takes account of the various issues and factors, discussed in

the previous chapter, that impact on how students manage their workplace learning.

The theory of Workplace Formation consists of five categories of processes

which students use at various stages during their workplacement. A number of

factors or issues can impact on the extent and the outcomes of the Workplace

Formation process. The intrinsic factors largely reflect the students’ ability and

willingness to engage with the process – how they go about their learning and what

they do to aid their adjustment to the workplace. The external factors are due largely

to the workplace environment and can either aid or impede the Workplace Formation

process.

Identification of the processes that constitute the theory of Workplace

Formation opens up the possibilities of

a) developing a common language in which students, school staff and

workplace mentors can discuss the processes and strategies involved in

workplace learning;

b) improving preparation for SWL; and

c) developing constructive interventions in SWL by either the school SWL

coordinators or the workplace mentors.

Identification of the factors that impact on the success with which Workplace

Formation occurs opens up the possibilities of interventions or strategies which

maximise positive effects and ameliorate negative effects.

In the next chapter, the third set of propositions, namely, those related to how

these categories and major processes can be understood within the context of the

students’ day-to-day learning at the workplace, and the fourth set that relates to how

the workplace impacts on the Workplace Formation process will be examined. These


will be examined through the presentation of five cases that are representative of

students in the study.

Remaining Propositions 241

CHAPTER EIGHT

REMAINING PROPOSITIONS OF

THE THEORY OF WORKPLACE FORMATION

In the previous chapter, a number of logically interrelated propositions

pertaining to the theory of Workplace Formation were presented. These are (a)

propositions relating to the overall theory of Workplace Formation, and (b)

propositions relating to the processes of Workplace Formation. A detailed exposition

was presented of the categories, processes and concepts that comprise the theory of

Workplace Formation. These related to the second set of propositions. In this

chapter, the third set of propositions, namely, those related to how these categories

and major processes can be understood within the context of the students’ day-to-day

learning at the workplace, and the fourth set that relates to how the workplace

impacts on the Workplace Formation process will be examined through the

presentation of five cases that are representative of students in the study. The chapter

is organised in three parts. Firstly, the propositions to be examined will be presented.

Secondly, the third set of propositions will be examined and illustrated with

reference to three cases by examining the ways in which each of the cases proceeds

through the process of Workplace Formation. Proposition 6 will then be examined in

more detail by making specific reference to two additional cases in the data. The

reader is referred to Figure 7.1 for an overview of the categories and processes

referred to in the following discussion. In the final section, the proposition relating to

how the workplace impacts on the Workplace Formation process is discussed.


PROPOSITIONS RELATING TO HOW THE CATEGORIES AND MAJOR

PROCESSES CAN BE UNDERSTOOD WITHIN THE CONTEXT OF THE

STUDENTS’ DAY-TO-DAY LEARNING AT THE WORKPLACE

1. Students generally proceed through the five categories of Workplace

Formation in a sequential manner. However, because there is a degree of

overlap, more than one category and its related processes can occur

concurrently. Furthermore, within each of the categories there may be

recursive cycles.

2. This generally sequential progression through the categories can be disrupted

if circumstances change throughout the period of the placement, and students

may engage in recursive processes that are indicative of the various

categories.

3. The time taken to proceed through a particular category may vary from one

student to the next.

4. The extent of Workplace Formation varies from one student to the next. It

depends largely on the commitment of the student, the way they are treated,

the level of support provided, and the type of work given. Those who

generally progress through all categories of processes tend to have a clear

focus on a career in the chosen industry; they have selected a workplace

where the work has high relevance to their career focus; where the work

undertaken progressively develops competence; and where they are accepted,

supported, and treated equitably by other workers.

5. Students with low commitment generally do not progress in skill

development to any significant extent.


6. Students can be categorised into two general categories. In the first category

are those students that have a clear focus on a career in the chosen industry.

These students generally undertake their workplacement with a view to

develop relevant industry skills or seek to confirm their career choice. In

general, these students tend to have greater commitment and progress further

in skill development than others. In the second category are those students

that do not have a clear career focus, and view SWL primarily as exploratory

and as a means to gain generic experience in a workplace environment. The

extent of Workplace Formation for these students depends on the quality of

the workplace experience.

PROPOSITION RELATING TO HOW THE WORKPLACE IMPACTS ON THE

WORKPLACE FORMATION PROCESS

7. Workplaces characterised by (a) high levels of support for students, (b)

relevant tasks targeted to progressive skill development, (c) the equitable

treatment of students and other workers, and (d) respect and acceptance of

students by other workers, are more conducive to optimal Workplace

Formation.

EXPOSITION OF PROPOSITIONS THROUGH FIVE CASES

The five cases presented below show how each of the students engaged in the

processes of Workplace Formation and how each of the above propositions is

applicable to the theory of Workplace Formation. Interviews were conducted with


the workplace supervisors of Jason and Emma. These two cases will also illustrate

how these data were used with student data in the triangulation of the findings.

Case 1: Jason

Jason was a Year 11 student at School 2 who was undertaking a SBNA. Jason

can be categorised as a ‘career-focused’ student because he had a clear focus on

becoming a chef. He generally enjoyed his schoolwork and worked hard at it. He was

well organised and self-disciplined, and able to manage competing demands by

prioritising tasks and allocating time effectively. Like many others in the study, he

completed as much of his schoolwork as possible at school through effective time

management and self-discipline. He completed tasks on time while still managing to

socialise with friends. He enjoyed, however, the practical aspects of the course such

as the all day cooking, the workplace work, and those components that he considered

more relevant to his career. Jason’s initial intentions were to leave at the end of Year

11 and get an apprenticeship. However, this had changed by the end of the year.

Jason progressed through the various categories of Workplace Formation

more or less sequentially without interruption. As a result, the discussion that follows

will outline the processes used under each of the categories of processes. However, it

should be kept in mind that categories overlapped and processes from such

categories at times occurred concurrently. These have been illustrated throughout the

discussion.


Category 1: Preparing

Jason began ‘Preparing’ well before he began at his workplace by ‘informing’

himself through different sources over a period of time. He liked to cook and was

often “hanging in the kitchen” observing the work. Jason’s cousin, who was a chef,

was a major influence on him, largely ‘informing’ him about the role, acquiring

expectations of the role through her: “My cousin’s also a chef and she really likes it.

. . . She said it’s really good. Good atmosphere . . . that’s what I want to do. Cos me

and her are similar.” Jason also ‘informed’ himself at school through formal lessons

in Career and Industry Awareness and the practical cooking classes where he

continued to gain knowledge about the role and began to develop technical skills

such as knife skills: “[In] Career and Industry we talked a lot about it [the

workplace].”

Jason was intending to obtain an apprenticeship at the end of Year 11 and so

began seeking a placement in a restaurant (‘selecting’). He was proactive in

‘selecting’ a suitable workplace and secured a placement at a quality restaurant in

Fremantle through his friend who worked there as a chef: “My friend worked there,

and so he got me the job. . . . He’s a pretty good chef there. He’s one of the best in

Fremantle.” As a significant other, his friend was not only a role model for him but

also a source of information about the workplace and the people that worked there,

which resulted in him ‘selecting’ that particular workplace. The workplace was busy,

well organised with established practices and clearly defined roles for all workers.

Although busy there was a strong team spirit and camaraderie amongst workers,

which provided a supportive environment for Jason.

Jason was offered a traineeship there and commenced towards the end of the

previous year while he was in Year 10, and continued at that workplace throughout


Year 11. By the end of Year 11, Jason had decided to continue the program into Year

12, and in ‘Preparing’ for this began ‘informing’ and ‘selecting’ a workplace well

before Year 12 began. At the final interview, Jason said:

I’ve gotta find a new workplacement for next year cos we do it on a Wednesday and Julios isn’t open on a Wednesday until night time and they won’t let me do it then, but I’ll still work there on weekends. . . . I wanna try and get into Kaisar’s restaurant or Burswood. . . . It’s [Kaisar’s restaurant] just a good place, I just like it. We know the lady that owns it and her husband, and she said it’s a really good place, a lot of friendly people, cos she already told me if I wanna go for work experience somewhere I can go there. (Jason)

This example also illustrates how ‘Committed’ Jason had become to his original

workplace in expressing a preference to continue there, and working there on the

weekends. Jason proceeded through the category of ‘Preparing’ by engaging in the

processes of ‘informing’ and ‘selecting.’ He appeared to be well informed about the

role and the kind of workplace that he wanted. He then set about ‘selecting’ the most

appropriate workplace that would enable him to progress towards his goal of being a

chef.

Category 2: Familiarising

Jason engaged with the processes of ‘Familiarising’ almost immediately. He

began ‘interacting’ with the workers even before commencing at the workplace. His

friend, a significant other who was instrumental in him securing the placement,

introduced Jason to the other workers, and he quickly began to develop a working

relationship with them:

He [friend] introduced me to all the people, like, before I started. And so I sort of knew them, so I wasn’t that, like, all scared about it. . . . I knew they were real nice. Laid back. (Jason)

Jason liked the atmosphere there, found the people laid back and easy to get along

with, which he liked (‘assessing benefits’). Jason’s mentor stated during an


interview: “I’m a pretty easy going person.” Jason was quickly accepted into the

organisation by all of the workers, and over time developed a good working

relationship with them. The workers were very supportive of him:

All gotta be friendly. If one person’s a grump then you just don’t get on well with everybody. When I first went there I didn’t really talk to anybody that much cos you didn’t really know what to talk about. But now it’s like somebody will be talking and . . . anybody can just join into the conversation. It’s a lot better. (Jason)

Jason’s supervisors and mentors corroborated Jason’s comments:

It gets pretty monotonous and boring working between those four walls, so you have to be fairly lively in the kitchen and that’s the sort of atmosphere I try to have in the kitchen – fun, happy atmosphere to work in. (Supervisor 2)

When he first started he was a little bit . . . nervous, a little bit quiet. But he’s been with us about six months now and . . . he’s talking a lot more now . . . he’s been working with Aaron [Supervisor 2] and Aaron’s quite a hard person. . . . [Jason] gets along with everybody. Yeh, he’s good. He’s very easy to get along with cos he doesn’t argue, doesn’t talk back. (Supervisor 1)

His supervisor was the manager, but Jason seemed to get on well mostly with the

head chef. Jason felt, however, somewhat nervous around him mainly because of

the head chef’s superior skills, and Jason was always trying to make a good

impression with him:

Head chef’s . . . the one that I get on well mostly with but probably cos he’s higher up I get nervous and that around him. It’s, like, you gotta try and make a good impression all the time with him. . . . Like, there’s these pancakes and crepes that I make there. Every now and then you either get a burnt one or one that sticks. You just get nervous about it, and you just got to try to do the best you can. He doesn’t really worry that bad . . . the worst that he would do is just tell you that’s a crap one and just throw it away. So, it’s really good. (Jason)

Jason began the processes of ‘understanding practices’ and ‘clarifying expectations’

from the very first day. These processes together with the process of ‘interacting’

occurred simultaneously during the ‘Familiarising’ phase:

They showed me and telled [sic] me what to do . . . in the morning the first one that gets there . . . they have to do the washing up, all the tea-towels and that, so it’s always clean for the morning. Then when the chefs get there they


just put out a big plan, you got to check all the preparations and that. They’ll just give me a list and I’ll just go do all that preparation. . . . And by 11.30 we work downstairs doing the lunch menus. . . . We’ve got a daily routine. (Jason)

Jason, for example, clarified what his mentors expected from him and what support

he could expect from them:

When I first started there he [supervisor] goes, “you always gotta try yourself so you can, like, try your better [sic] at it by yourself. But if you can’t do it just come and ask, it’s no problem,” which is really good. (Jason)

He continued to ‘clarify expectations’ and ‘understand practices’ until he was able to

routinely go about the work allocated to him:

When I first went there I didn’t really know anything, I didn’t have a clue how to do it. And then . . . when you move on you get more stuff to do. Like, you don’t forget how to do it or what to do next. I always used to ask, “oh, what do I do now? How do I do this again?” Now it’s real good. Just do it straight away. (Jason)

Furthermore, he engaged in these processes as he was presented with new or more

challenging situations.

Comments from Jason’s workplace mentors supported the above processes:

He’s come a long way . . . he knows where everything is. . . . When he first started . . . we had to pretty much tell him what to do everything but now he’s picked up, he just goes and does things. . . . I’m starting to expect a lot more out of him cos we’ve put a lot of time into him. . . . He’s got to know everyone, he’s starting to come out of his shell more . . . he gets along with everyone. . . . He’s asking a lot more questions. (Supervisor 1)

Category 3: Committing

The above examples also show that Jason was engaged simultaneously in the

process of ‘Committing’ by ‘assessing benefits’ to him by the way in which he was

expected to “try yourself” before he sought support when he said, “which is really

good.” He also felt more ‘Committed’ after ‘assessing’ that “now it’s real good”

that he had ‘clarified expectations’ of him and that he knew what had to be done and

established routines for this (‘understanding practices’). This example illustrates


Proposition 1. Jason, in general, proceeded through these first three categories

sequentially but some processes occurred simultaneously, and the categories of

‘Familiarising’ and ‘Committing’ also overlapped, with processes from both

categories occurring concurrently at times.

Jason’s acceptance by the others enabled him to readily fit in and ‘find a

place’ within the organisation. He had gained the respect of his supervisor and other

workers and was accepted as part of the team. As his competence increased he was

given more responsibility and treated “like one of them,” a worker:

I’m actually not that willing to take on kids his age these days because a lot of them don’t wanna learn, haven’t got the passion whereas Jason has. Yeh, he’s good. . . . [he is treated] as a worker, definitely, as part of our team. Everyone here is, so, yeh, I don’t think of him as a student. (Supervisor 1)

Jason said: “If I have a conversation or anything and we’ve different opinions about

it they’ll ask someone and see what they reckon about it and stuff like that.”

Inclusion in everyday conversation and being given tasks like the others was

acceptance as part of the team and an acknowledgement of his ‘place’ in the

organisation. Jason felt valued, had a strong sense of belonging to the organisation,

and saw himself as one of them. As a result he was able to clearly identify his ‘place’

within the organisation. Jason simultaneously engaged in the process of

‘Committing’ by ‘assessing benefits’ and ‘defining’ his role (Proposition 1). He

became more committed as a result of being accepted as one of them, reassured by

the display of confidence that others had in him, the support given, and the

progressively more challenging work that he was given to do where he was

cumulatively ‘Building’ skills and knowledge:

Makes me feel better. Makes me feel like I wanna go there more. And they’re real confident in me. Like, there’s some stuff that I’m, like, I don’t know if you should be getting me to do this, I haven’t done it yet. And they go, “oh, doesn’t matter,” which is really good. . . . When they bring deliveries in . . .


that I don’t know what it is yet, they’re like, “oh, doesn’t matter,” cos you’ve gotta sign for it. It’s good. (Jason)

Throughout this period, Jason was also ‘defining his role.’ Initially he saw

himself as a trainee (‘defining role’) where he was “doing a lot of cooking” because

they began teaching him straight away. This increased his commitment because he

‘assessed’ this to be in his best interests:

It was good cos then I knew I wasn’t . . . doing bad jobs, [it] was really good stuff. . . . Some of the stuff I can do but some of the stuff I haven’t been taught yet, and so you just feel weird about doing it . . . not confident that much. . . . I just do the best of my ability. . . . They already know how to do everything so . . . you don’t feel as good. (Jason)

As he progressed and built skills and knowledge and was given more responsibility,

he ‘re-defined his role’ and saw himself somewhat differently, as occupying a more

responsible role. In the final interview, Jason said:

Now when people come in and it’s, like, if they want a job and stuff like that you just, “oh, yeh, how are you doing?” cos you’re just one of them now, you just don’t worry about it. (Jason)

Jason was ‘defining his role’ in the organisation and saw himself more and

more as one of them. As a result, he developed more commitment to the organisation

(‘Committing’). Jason developed strong working relationships with his mentors who

were very supportive of him. He was also cooperative, enthusiastic about his work,

and made an effort to fit in. His strong focus on a career in the industry provided a

great deal of the motivation that enabled him to gain acceptance and ‘find a place’:

He really listens . . . you don’t have to tell him twice, he does it. . . . He doesn’t really have balmy’s with anyone. . . . He’s always on time, he’s always clean. . . . He’s really keen to go further and he’s pushing me all the time, “I want an apprenticeship, when can I work.” I’d love to give him one because he’s just a great kid and they’re very rare but just don’t have the hours at the moment for a full-time apprentice. (Supervisor 1)

Jason’s acceptance and place in the organisation was complete when he was offered

a weekend job, which he accepted, when one of the chefs left. Jason’s social


acceptance was such that friendships with other workers extended beyond the

workplace.

Jason’s level of commitment at the workplace was high throughout the year.

This was primarily because of the high level of support that he received, he felt

valued and accepted as one of workers, and he was progressively developing skills

and knowledge. He developed good relationships with other workers, felt a part of

the organisation, and enjoyed being there. Jason ‘assessed’ that he was developing

the skills and knowledge (‘Building’) to become a chef, which was his aim, and he

had a significant role to play at that workplace: “[I am learning] a lot of cutting

styles, . . . the ornaments on the side of your plates and stuff, better presentation,

stuff like that.” Furthermore, Jason ‘assessed’ that he would derive significant

benefits from working at Julios (restaurant) because of the high standards of the

restaurant and its reputation: “[It’s] a high class restaurant, also everybody knows it.

. . . If they give you a good reference then it’s a lot easier to get into other places.”

Category 4: Adapting

Jason began to engage with the processes of ‘Adapting’ from the beginning.

As a consequence, ‘Adapting’ tended to overlap to some extent with ‘Familiarising’

and ‘Committing.’ Jason ‘complied’ with the demands and expectations placed on

him by his supervisor. He ‘complied’ with the instructions given to him, and worked

diligently to meet the work standards, health and safety procedures and with the

limits set for him by his supervisor. In the beginning, Jason began to ‘Adapt’ by

‘complying’ with a set routine of tasks: “When I first got there all I was doing was

dishes and easy stuff so they could, like, know I was doing it.” His routine soon

included other duties such as preparing dishes and salads and assisting with making


lunches in another area of the restaurant. In this way, Jason stayed within the limits

set for him commensurate with his level of skill, and ‘complied’ with what was

required of him and how they went about their work:

On the board there’s Friday morning prep, and so we’ll just do everything from the board. The board will change every now and then, you have to do different sorts of stuff. Otherwise, if there’s nothing to do I’ll just go into the fruit and see if there’s anything to be topped up. . . . If it’s a quiet day we’ll talk while we’re doing our work. Like, when we’re doing preparation upstairs we talk while we’re doing it. But then downstairs in the service you can’t really talk. It’s, like, really rushing. (Jason)

On Fridays it’s generally just upstairs flogging along with his prep and helping the chef when he needs it but on Saturday he was actually making salads and doing things that an apprentice does. (Supervisor 1) [He] finds things hard but we haven’t really given him anything too difficult. . . . He’s pretty confident. . . . We haven’t really had him under the pump yet. We push him a bit, he handles it quite well. You can only push him that age so far, he’s really learning. (Supervisor 1)

He sought clarification and advice, and acted in a more adult-like manner to fit in

with the other workers around him. “When we’re working it’s just straight down and

work, no mucking around. . . . No-one talks” (Jason).

Jason also had to adjust and “get used to” the long working hours, which

made him very tired. He was working from 10.00 am to 6.00 pm and wasn’t used to

“standing on your feet all the time” (Jason). His supervisor commented that Jason

sometimes “slows down a little bit at the end of the day” due to “fatique or not used

to working such long hours on his feet” but that he was “getting there” (Supervisor

1). He soon adjusted and subsequently found it “easy to do,” even when he worked

on the weekends when he would “start at eight and finish at three or . . . four.”

Jason learned fast and soon developed the skills to be able to operate with

less supervision, accept more responsibility, use initiative, and make decisions on his

own (‘initiating’):


They’ll have a chef on there through the day and they have a kitchen hand, and they’ll go down there and they’ll do all the lunch stuff and they’ll just leave me upstairs, and I’ll just start doing my work upstairs. (Jason)

Jason’s supervisor spoke highly of Jason in this regard:

He’s actually a lot better than some of my other guys, like, if something takes longer to cook . . . I have to tell people to start this one first, then you can get another few things on the go at once cos with cooking you’ve only got so much time . . . you’ve gotta do, like, ten things at once, so, he’s very good at that. (Supervisor 1)

As he became more confident, he found the work easier, and he would “just go

straight ahead and do my part instead of just hanging asking, ‘what do I do now?’”

As time went on, he was given more responsibility: “I’m doing a pre-apprenticeship

and now they’re getting me to make half of the food there” (Jason).

Jason also had to adjust to other working conditions such as pressure during

busy times:

[There is] a lot of pressure . . . everything’s gotta be pretty much spot on at work cos it’s such a good class restaurant. . . . You’ve just gotta take it as it comes, you can’t really do anything about it. . . . On a Sunday it just gets flat out . . . just rushing around the kitchen. You get used to it now. (Jason)

Furthermore, because he agreed to accept paid work on weekends, he had to make

adjustments to his social life (‘initiating’): “Working the Saturdays and Sundays I

don’t really have much of a life besides at night-time.” He also had to make

adjustments to his basketball commitments, which he enjoyed, as a result of being at

the workplace on Friday.

Jason commenced the process of ‘enculturation’ by conforming to the dress

standards of the workplace: “I like it. Makes it look more classy when you’re in the

proper uniform.” He was aware of the different uniform and hierarchical order each

represented. His workplace, however, did not stick rigidly to the dress type, and they

could wear any jacket: “Whatever you feel comfortable in cos . . . whatever you feel

comfortable in it’s the easiest way you’ll do it.” His supervisor saw this as important


in fitting into the team: “He comes, he’s got a chef jacket, he puts on the hat, the

apron; as far as he’s concerned he’s a young chef. That’s the way I look at him”

(Supervisor 1). Jason ‘transferred’ (‘Building’) this aspect of his practice to school

where students did not have to wear a hat but he always did because he was “just

used to the uniform at the workplacement” (Jason).

He developed early on a strong sense of the high standards of presentation

considered important at the workplace and strove to achieve the standards expected:

At work, it’s all presentation . . . the food’s gotta look good, it’s gotta taste good. . . . I just do it to the best of my ability. . . . It’s good when you finally finish it and it looks good and tastes good. Then you’re proud of yourself. Makes you want to do it more. (Jason)

Jason adopted the social customs of the workplace by accepting and participating in

social activities and banter and abiding by the rules of the game:

We always tease each other . . . just muck around . . . cos all the chefs there they all like basketball, and so do I. So we always just give each other crap about that. (Jason)

Jason’s mentor, Aaron, who became the head chef after Jason’s first supervisor left,

said that Jason would be “joking around with the boys.” Aaron provided the

conditions that enabled Jason (and also Nancy who was undertaking SWL at this

same workplace) to more easily adopt the social customs:

I had that working relationship . . . they knew how I worked, they knew what I asked them to do. . . . But I still got that authority but I don’t show it in the kitchen. . . . I believe you get a lot more productivity out of your staff if you, yeh, more of a team, a player with them instead of just all do this, do that, do this; if you’re in there doing it. (Aaron – Supervisor 2)

By the end of the year, Jason became well ‘enculturated’ into the workplace culture.

As a result, Jason developed a strong sense of belonging and saw himself as one of

them. This was also observed by his supervisor who stated:

The first few months [he saw himself as] definitely a student, but now he’s got to know everybody, he really fits in, comes in every week, he does his daily jobs and duties. Yeh, definitely a worker. (Supervisor 1)


Jason’s ‘enculturation’ into the workplace enabled his socialisation with other

workers to extend beyond the workplace.

Category 5: Building

Jason had ‘Adapted’ quickly to his workplace and began to engage in the

processes of ‘Building’ simultaneously with processes of ‘Adapting’ (Proposition 1).

For example, Jason was developing skills through ‘modelling’ while ‘complying’

with the requirements of his supervisor:

The pizza chef . . . some of the stuff he does . . . and some of the bar people they used to be chefs too, they’ll get a pizza, you’ll start off with a ball and he’ll spin it around, like, it’ll get bigger, turn into a big circle of pizza. Just looks really good. And I’ll try it and just drop it on the floor. (Jason)

Jason made use of role models in ‘modelling’ his conduct and his aspirations:

I wanna be like them. The head chef’s 25 and he’s already in a four star restaurant. . . . It’s what I’d like to do, not be head chef but probably second in charge . . . you don’t have as much to worry about as just the head chef but you’re up there. . . . They’re not stuck up, they’re really professional about their work. That’s the way I wanna be. (Jason)

Jason’s supervisor stated that he felt that Jason “looks up to Aaron a lot . . . [and]

he’s come along so well cos he’s spent a lot of time with him.”

Jason progressively developed a range of technical skills and to a high level

of proficiency (‘consolidating’):

It gets more harder . . . you start off doing the easy sort of prep cooking, and then you go up to the hard stuff like making tiramisu. When I first started I couldn’t even really cut anything. Just really really slow. And now I can cut really fast, I can cook a lot better. I know a lot of cooking terms. I’ve been doing a lot of work on the weekends now and downstairs cooking . . . been cooking a lot of stuff, getting a lot more hands on experience now; instead of just staying upstairs most of the time I’m down there cooking pretty much everything on the menu, which is really good. (Jason)


Jason’s supervisor confirmed this when he stated:

He does a lot of the same work every week, so he knows it back to front now, it’s very easy for him. We’re trying to find new things for him to learn . . . giving him new challenges. (Supervisor 1)

Furthermore, he was growing in confidence and the work was staged to ensure that it

continued at an appropriate pace:

His confidence has definitely grown. . . . [He] holds back a little bit, he doesn’t really wanna go for it just yet which is good for us; we wanna teach him slowly so that he doesn’t get too confident cos when they get too confident they get a little bit cocky. (Supervisor 1)

Jason also ‘transferred’ relevant technical skills, for example, knife skills,

from school to the workplace which he was able to ‘consolidate’ at the workplace:

“Practicing knife skills and stuff like that, getting faster and cooking on the stove.”

As a result, Jason was able to significantly ‘contribute’ to the workplace

productivity (‘contributing’). Not only was he able to do “everything” and was given

jobs to do without supervision but also he was offered additional work on the

weekends: “I’m definitely getting somewhere because they asked me to do this work

on the weekends.” Regarding his extra weekend work and how Jason saw his role,

Jason’s supervisor, Aaron, commented:

I think they [Jason and Nancy] knew what to expect as a chef and what they have to do to be a chef. . . . Jason obviously is keen to work on weekends and doesn’t mind leaving his social life out of it. (Supervisor 2)

Furthermore, he had been elevated in status and given the responsibility of

supervising and instructing other junior workers and trainees:

I got two kitchen hands under me that I tell what to do. And . . . another four kitchen hands in there I can also tell what to do. . . . If someone doesn’t do something I’ll get in trouble because I’m not teaching them what to do properly. (Jason)

Not only was Jason ‘contributing’ and learning new skills but he was simultaneously

‘re-defining his role,’ increasing his commitment, and developing further his self-


image of the particular role in the organisation (Proposition 1). He was given the

added responsibility to “train up some other guy” because he and another were the

only ones that “knew how to do the breakfast section.” As a result, he saw himself in

a more powerful role, which he liked: “Feels good, like, you’ve got more power.”

Jason also ‘transferred’ learning not only from the school to his workplace

but also back to the school. In this way he was able to integrate learning at both sites:

I’ve learnt a lot more there [workplace] than I have at school in cooking. Some of the stuff I’m even showing everybody else how to do or make it better, so it’s really good. . . . Even the teacher says to cook something and I tell her an easier way to do it, same as the workplace when I do something they just tell me an easier way to do it. (Jason)

Jason’s desire to be a chef was such that his learning also impacted on his personal

life ‘transferring’ skills learned to home: “Someone will be cooking at home then I

know a better, easier way to do it. So I just show them how to do it.”

The above case, as well as illustrating Propositions 1 and 4, also illustrates

the proposition on how the workplace impacts on the Workplace Formation process;

that is, workplaces that provide a high level of support to students; where students

are given tasks that enable them to progressively develop skills; and where students

are respected by other workers, treated equitably and accepted as one of them, are

more conducive to optimal Workplace Formation. Jason’s workplace possessed all of

these features and enabled him to proceed through all categories of Workplace

Formation, which resulted in significant, relevant and meaningful learning to occur.

Furthermore, Jason was integrating all of his learning opportunities across his

life as he came both to “thinking like a chef” and “think of himself as a chef” through

learning in the school and workplace contexts.

The next case will be used to illustrate Propositions 1 and 2. Case 1 and Case

2 together will serve to illustrate Propositions 3, 4, 5 and 6.


Case 2: Emma

Emma was also from School 2 undertaking the same VET program as Jason.

Emma, however, did not have a clear career focus but was interested in some sort of

career in the hospitality industry. Her intentions were to explore career options, get a

“head start” into TAFE and study hospitality. Emma, therefore, belonged in the

second category (Proposition 6), students without a clear career focus, and who view

SWL primarily as exploratory and as a means to gain generic workplace experience.

Emma’s progress through the categories of Workplace Formation is not

sequential to the same extent as Jason, and entails far more recursive learning loops.

This will be demonstrated in the following discussion. Because of this, presentation

of Emma’s case will focus on the processes rather than the categories.

During the ‘Preparing’ phase of Workplace Formation, Emma engaged with

‘informing’ by learning about the workplace in broad terms at school through Career

and Industry Awareness, the practical cooking classes, through discussion with peers

who had been to particular workplaces, through her own experiences at her part-time

job, and through visiting restaurants with her father (a commercial gas fitter), while

he was working. Emma’s tendency to procrastinate, “one of those people who leaves

everything to the last minute,” together with her general lack of confidence in her

ability to interact positively with people whom she did not know, and not having a

clear career goal, although she wanted to explore being a waitperson at the time,

caused her to proceed with ‘selecting’ later than other students. By that stage she had

missed obtaining a placement at her preferred workplaces and, as a consequence, had

to engage the assistance of the coordinator to find a placement:


I didn’t get to pick it because I left it too late to find my workplacement so the places I wanted to go people were already there or they weren’t accepting people, and [workplace 1] the teacher picked it. (Emma)

A placement was negotiated at a café style restaurant (workplace 1) in Fremantle,

typical of such restaurants in the area.

Emma began the ‘Familiarising’ phase by engaging in the processes of

‘interacting,’ ‘clarifying expectations,’ ‘understanding practices,’ and attempting to

‘find a place’ within the organisation. The placement began well and Emma at first

was enjoying it, even though she had some reservations:

I don’t really like being outside people where I’m expected to be put in a spot and get to know people and get to know the job. But . . . I think it’s good that we go every Friday . . . you get to know a lot of people, you get to know the job, the industry. And I’m starting to like it. (Emma)

Emma began ‘assessing benefits’ (‘Committing’) she would derive from the

experience even though she had her reservations about it, which helped her to

establish a particular point of view about the workplace and to decide her level of

investment while she was still working through the ‘Familiarising’ category.

Through the process of ‘interacting’ (‘Familiarising’), Emma began to get to know

co-workers and develop a working relationship with them. She felt that they were

supportive, describing them as “really nice,” and helped her to ‘understand

practices’ and procedures, ‘clarify’ what their expectations were of her, and to adjust.

Although her workplace supervisor mentored her, another significant person also

acted as a mentor and helped her greatly during the ‘Familiarising’ phase. For

example, he ‘clarified’ for Emma what needed to be done and also introduced her to

most people. As a result, she “got to know the other people that work there . . . and

fit in pretty well.” Through the processes of ‘clarifying expectations’ and

‘understanding practices’ Emma proceeded to get


over being stuck in there with not knowing what to do. Cos you’re stuck in there, you don’t know what to do, you don’t know how the people run the place. . . . You’ve gotta really get used to it before you can start doing anything. (Emma)

Emma began ‘clarifying expectations’ from the very beginning of her placement.

Each Friday she would “learn up what I’m expected to do.” She said: “At work

they’ve been working there for a while, they know what’s expected . . . [and] what

has to be done. . . . But with us we’ve got to be told first before we can do it.” For

example, Emma ‘clarified’ how she was expected to act: “When I’m there . . .

customers see me as a worker. . . . So, I’m expected to be a worker.” Emma

experienced some difficulties at first where she had to ‘clarify’ what was expected of

her and her of them:

I don’t think they really realised that I needed to be told what to do within the first week . . . they’d look at me and they’d say, “well, aren’t you going to go and do that?” . . . but I had no idea that that had to be done because I had no idea how they do it or what they do. But now, they can turn around and say, “well, this needs to be done, you can either do it now or later,” and I’ll try and say, “well, I’ll do this first and then I’ll come back to that.” (Emma)

Concurrent with these processes, Emma was engaged in attempting to gain

acceptance and ‘find a place’ within the organisation.

Emma was also engaged in the processes of ‘Committing’ during this time. A

boring one week of “work experience” during Year 10 at a pharmacy where she was

“just standing around all day” had turned Emma off a career in that area and caused

her to have reservations about a longer term placement and what benefits she would

derive (‘assessing benefits’). Would it be more of the same “boring” stuff? “That’s

probably what scared me away from work experience.” However, she enjoyed her

work initially, was happy to attend, and began developing a degree of commitment:

“They’ve actually got me more encouraged to go every week.” Part of this


encouragement was the support that Emma was given and a feeling that she was

learning at this workplace:

If they ask me to do something they’ll ask me if I know how to do it. Or if I’m a bit funny about taking an order . . . they’ll stand next to me and just double check that I’m doing it ok. (Emma)

Emma was comfortable with this process “until I get more used to it and more into

things.”

Emma also initially ‘assessed’ as beneficial the advice from other workers

and on the benefits she could derive from their experiences: “They just talk to me if

I’m having any problems, if I’m ok. . . . You get a lot of people telling you about their

experiences and you can learn from that.” She also ‘defined her role’ more as a

learner because she was there to learn “what each different company does in the

industry,” and saw herself in that role but by the end of each day she would see

herself more “as a worker because everybody else sees me as a worker.”

Emma began ‘Adapting’ to the workplace by ‘complying’ with what was

required of her. She was given a variety of tasks that included clearing and setting

tables, and assisted with food preparation. She was also allocated a number of routine

low skill level tasks such as doing the dishes and polishing cutlery and glasses. As

she gained confidence, Emma was given higher-level duties “serving people,” which

she enjoyed (‘assessing benefits’). In ‘Building’ skills and knowledge, she was

shown how to do difficult tasks, given instructions and closely supervised when

attempting more complex tasks (‘modelling’). As she got to know the work

(‘understanding practices’) and became more competent, she was able to work with

less supervision and was able to use her initiative more: “I can just go and instead of

somebody telling me, “oh, can you do this for me?” I’ll just . . . do it.” Emma had to

adjust to the work schedule and physical working conditions (‘complying’): “I


wasn’t used to standing up six hours at work all day. . . . It was really hard to get

through one week. . . . But now . . . I’m used to the hours.” Emma adjusted her part-

time job schedule (‘initiating’) to avoid it being on the same day as her

workplacement. She ‘initiated’ other adjustments by compartmentalising her

schoolwork, social life and part-time job to ensure that they did not impact on her

SWL each Friday. Emma ‘complied’ with what was expected of her in terms of

conduct but did not join in social interactions with co-workers even though she was

encouraged to do so. However, she selectively began to adopt aspects of the

workplace culture by adopting the same dress standards as the other workers and

portraying a professional image (‘enculturation’).

Concurrent with these processes, Emma also engaged with the category of

‘Familiarising’ by ‘interacting’ with new workers that she met on different

occasions, and ‘Committing’ by ‘assessing benefits’ that she was deriving from the

type of work, treatment of her, and what she was learning.

By the time of the next interview with Emma, which was just before the end

of Term 2, the situation had changed quite dramatically. Emma had lost all

motivation to attend her workplace and had no commitment to it. In fact, she was

looking forward to the end of semester when the placement would end. This change

was observed by her supervisor who, in an interview, said:

[When she] start working [she was] a little bit aggressive [meaning – eager or interested] about to know something. But after a while . . . I got that one it’s not really interesting [sic] again, like, she come in the morning, she’s clean the table blah blah blah, and then after a while, slow, and then she’s skipped something. We always say, “Emma, where are you going, are you alright?” “Yes”. . . . She always thinking something. But we’re always watching. . . . She’s not exciting [meaning – enthusiastic] when she’s here. . . . Lately she always says she can’t work. . . . I’m not sure she’s . . . interested to work in hospitality. (Workplace 1 Supervisor)


This change in circumstances and commitment was brought about by two factors.

Firstly, Emma had an expectation of progressively ‘Building’ skills and knowledge.

She was there to learn. At the beginning of her placement, she was given relatively

simple, low skill level tasks, which she accepted because she had expected to “start

from the bottom.” She said: “When you go and get a job you’ve got to start from the

bottom, and the bottom is doing dishes and cleaning up.” However, rather than

‘consolidating’ learning with progressively more challenging tasks, the opportunity

to develop skills further and develop a range of work-related skills and knowledge,

she continued to be given the same low skill level tasks, and, consequently, little or

no learning was taking place. There was a regular routine that Emma was expected to

follow but did not enjoy:

Usually when she come in the morning we tell her to make sure, like, work the floor, floor staff. . . . Make sure that you check the floor it’s clean, table is clean . . . tables look neat . . . don’t forget also the cutlery sometime that’s really dirty, that’s like a routine in the morning. (Supervisor)

Worse still, Emma felt very much exploited, subordinated and used to do jobs that

the other workers did not want. She did not feel valued but instead felt that she was

being treated poorly:

They just sit there and pick on me. They leave me to run the floor while they sit back and have their little talks, and I really really hate that because I’m not a worker there. They probably think it’s good cos it’s free, we don’t have to pay them. . . . But . . . that really frustrates me. (Emma)

Her expectations to be given more responsibility over time did not match those of her

supervisor, who was concerned with the image of the enterprise by giving her

particular responsibilities. He stated:

Sometimes she not take the order because we just get that’s not right the working experience to take the order, but we always tell her to pass the food or to bring the meal, coffee or whatever. [R. More the serving] Yeh. That’s more responsibility, that’s not only for that person who takes the order but that’s, like, for the company also because the effect for the company when it’s not the right person to take the order, and then people respect it’s more professional to


take the order, especial with the food, especial when it’s a working experience. (Workplace 1 Supervisor)

She did not feel accepted and could not ‘find a place’ in the organisation. She felt

that she no longer fitted in and did not want to be there. She ‘re-defined her role’ and

did not like the role that she saw herself in, felt very much unsupported, and

‘assessed’ that she was deriving no benefit at this workplace:

I think that’s what most of the workers look forward to on Fridays is, oh, we’ve got someone who we can go and get them to do all the stuff for us while we just sit back and have a casual day. . . . If I’m left to just do it by myself I don’t see me learning anything. I just see me being as one of their slaves. (Emma)

Secondly, as she ‘interacted’ and became more familiar with people she began to

reject them as role models and became frustrated with the constant advice that she no

longer sought or wanted to hear but felt that she was constantly barraged with:

The people that work there I don’t want to become. . . . They sit there and give you the careers talk as well. . . . I wanna work, I don’t wanna . . . have to sit there . . . and listen, oh, I stuffed up my life, let’s see if we can make an improvement on yours. (Emma)

However, her supervisor thought that he was assisting her learning, helping her to fit

in and providing sound advice, which she rejected:

All of the staff are really friendly and it’s really welcome especial for working experience because we know that they’re young and they have long term life to know everything because I didn’t want them to waste their time here. . . . We not push them just to wash the dishes. We not teach them behind the bar because they’re not perfect in floor yet. . . . I want her to know more better, sometime I said to her, you’re still young, sometime you not realise that’s really hard life, I want to teach you, I didn’t want you to waste this time. One day you will realise that’s a life same like me before when I was young. (Workplace 1 Supervisor)

As a consequence, she had no commitment to that workplace. Due to these changed

circumstances or conditions, Emma engaged again in actions and interactions

indicative of the various categories of Workplace Formation (Proposition 2).


She made adjustments to her behaviour in response to the changed

circumstances by disengaging and withdrawing, and involuntarily ‘complied’ until

the end of semester when the placement ended:

At school I’m probably one of the loudest people . . . and at workplacment the day just drags on because I can’t do that. . . . You have a list of things [and] you have to do them. . . . I can’t socialise because that way I’m seen as a little socialising school girl. . . . The other day I almost walked out. . . . I haven’t wanted to learn anything because I don’t wanna learn something from some place that I don’t like. (Emma)

Her workplace supervisor said that she was “really quiet” and didn’t “really talk

much,” and that she was reluctant to ask questions: “She’s not attractive person to

ask something . . . what she want to know.” He admitted that sometimes they “forgot

to tell her what she has to do but when you come to learn something if you’re not

sure what you’re doing then it’s better asking before you make a mistake.” He said

that she didn’t use much initiative, she limited her learning to “how to take the

order,” and resorted to doing “just basic stuff.” It appeared to the supervisor that she

liked working “in the kitchen to wash the dishes.” As a result, progress was hindered

and skills remained at the “same level all the time” (Supervisor). She also avoided

attending on a number of occasions: “Her mum always ‘Emma can’t go to work cos

she’s sick or missed the bus,’ that’s not tak[ing] responsibility” (Workplace 1

Supervisor).

Emma’s level of commitment changed over time as a result of changed

circumstances and the constant processes of ‘assessing benefits’ and ‘defining her

role’ that she engaged in concurrently with other processes within the categories of

‘Familiarising,’ ‘Adapting,’ and, to a lesser extent, ‘Building.’ She engaged mainly

with ‘complying’ in the category of ‘Adapting’ and to only a very limited extent with

the processes of ‘initiating’ and ‘enculturation.’ Furthermore, although ‘modelling’

was the main process used in learning the limited number of skills, ‘consolidating’


was also used, as was the process of ‘contributing’ even though she felt exploited

during the process. Emma lacked commitment at that workplace and, as a result, did

not make any substantial progress over that time (Proposition 5).

With the help of the VET coordinator, Emma ‘selected’ another workplace

for second semester. This was a small family-owned business - a cheesecake shop -

that sold direct to the public and also supplied other small businesses. Emma found

the experience there very different from her first workplacement, and she was much

more committed. She enjoyed the work and attended every week: “I love going to it.

. . . I haven’t missed one Friday, and compared to my first workplacement I missed

every Friday possible because . . . I didn’t fit in . . . I didn’t like the type of work . . . I

didn’t like the people” (Emma). Her supervisor stated that she was “very diligent”

and “very enthusiastic; this morning she’s not required to start until 8.30 but she

was here at 8 o’clock.”

Emma once again engaged in the processes of ‘Familiarising,’ and through

‘interacting’ began to develop positive working relationships with the small number

of workers there. During a workplace observation, the researcher observed the

positive relationship that Emma had developed with her supervisor and a female

mentor by the friendly interactions observed and the relaxed, comfortable and

confident manner in which she went about her work. She got to know procedures and

practices (‘understanding practices’), ‘clarified’ what was expected of her, what tasks

she was allowed to do and those she could not do; that is, her limitations, how they

went about their work, what was important at the workplace and what was not, and

established routines. Her supervisor said:

Jake is making big batches of cakes, which is an expensive job, so, she’s not asked to do anything like that. Sam’s decorating a lot of cakes . . . [it’s] quite experienced work . . . it takes a long time to build up, so, she’s not expected to do anything highly skilled like that. (Workplace 2 Supervisor)


We don’t expect a lot from work experience people, they’re mainly here to observe, and if they want to try things we let them. (Workplace 2 Supervisor)

Given the nature of the workplace and the employer’s expectations, the range of

experiences was limited: “I practically learned everything that I’m allowed to do

within the first week. It’s pretty much the same all the time.” Nevertheless, Emma

‘assessed’ that she derived more benefits at this workplace than the previous

workplace:

Where I am now it’s not something I wanna do as a career but I don’t mind doing workplacement, it’s still interesting and it’s still fun. . . . Waitressing [sic], that’s something I wanted to do as a career and now I’m not going anywhere near it because from my first workplacement it’s just turned me right away from it. . . . Instead of running after people I’d prefer to be doing things for people. . . . So it’s helped me a bit changing from two different types of work. (Emma)

She found the people more supportive and friendly, and she was treated as a worker.

She gained acceptance and soon ‘found a place’ within the organisation: “I like the

people, I like the work . . . they treat me as a worker not as a student, I fit in really

well, so I go every time.”

Although the range of skills was limited within this workplace, Emma

‘complied’ with what was required of her and soon adjusted to the routines and the

working conditions, which she found relatively easy to do. She dressed appropriately

to ‘comply’ with health and safety and employer expectations, particularly when

learning the skills and assisting with cake decorating, and stayed within the limits of

her expertise. This included serving customers, which she was allowed to do but

sought assistance, as expected, when she lacked the necessary product knowledge to

complete the task. She was able to ‘comply’ with, and, hence, adjust to, the

expectations of accepting the responsibilities as a worker. Her part-time job made the

adjustment easier than it otherwise might have been:


It’s the same thing everyday . . . the same routines, it’s easy. . . . Being treated as a person that works there hasn’t really shocked [me] because I have a part-time job, and there I’m treated as a worker. . . . You’re in a different environment, so you’ve gotta adjust. (Emma)

She was able to ‘transfer’ the skills learned at her part-time job and ‘consolidate’

them at this workplace. Her supervisor said: “She does have a part-time job and so

she’s used to serving people, so we found her very quick in that area. . . . The fact

that she already works I think you can see it in the way she responds.”

Emma soon began to use initiative and work with little supervision: “If the

decorator is doing rosettes on a cake she’ll . . . get the cherry bucket and start

putting cherries on it; nothing big but just the fact that she will do it without having

to be told” (Supervisor). As she gradually developed more skills, she was given more

responsibility. She developed skills through ‘modelling’ by asking questions and

observing and assisting co-workers, in particular, one of the female workers that she

worked closely with. She ‘consolidated’ skills and knowledge mostly through

assisting others with routines and procedures that she was shown. She often took the

initiative and served customers where she used and ‘consolidated’ her interpersonal

skills. In this way she ‘contributed’ to the organisation’s productivity. Her supervisor

praised her skills in this area and the initiative she showed in solving problems as

they arose (‘initiating’). For example:

She was serving this morning and selling quite a few carrot cakes, and I went out and served and a person wanted a carrot cake and there weren’t any left, and it’s part of the girls’ job to replace cakes, let someone know, and I said to Emma “we’re out of carrot,” and [she said], “no, there’s some out the back.” She’d put some out the back, we had a few away in the chiller and she’d taken the initiative to get them out, so I was able to come out here, get one and serve the customer. So, she is showing initiative. (Supervisor) From the first day she came she showed so much initiative that my husband offered her a part-time job. I could see her easily fitting in here. (Supervisor)


Emma had become well ‘Adapted’ to that workplace environment and had

progressively ‘Built’ skills and knowledge through ‘modelling’ and ‘consolidating’:

“[A] couple of our girls that come in Emma is better than them” (Supervisor).

The case of Emma clearly illustrates Propositions 1 and 2, and together with

the case of Jason, illustrates the remaining propositions. The next case will further

illustrate all of the above propositions.

Case 3: Paul

Paul can be categorised as a ‘career-focused’ VET student because, like,

Jason, Paul had a clear focus on wanting to be a chef. He saw the VET program as

“an actual course dedicated to what you’re doing” that gave him a “head start,”

showing him what he had to do and still “doing schooling.”

Category 1: Preparing

Paul proceeded through ‘Preparing’ by ‘informing’ himself mainly through

the school program. This was primarily through the Career and Industry Awareness

course. However, other subjects such as Catering and Workplace and Health Issues,

where Paul learned about workplace health and safety issues and workplace

practices, were useful sources. These were reinforced in the practical all day cooking

classes, which also served to ‘inform’ him further for the workplace providing him

with a range of technical skills and knowledge. Gathering information from the VET

coordinator through formal lessons and on an individual basis about particular

workplaces as well as from other students were other sources of information.


Due to Paul’s clear career focus, he wanted to ‘select’ a workplace where he

could learn as much as he could and develop relevant skills that would give him a

competitive advantage into an apprenticeship. Like all others in the program, he was

expected to ‘select’ his own workplace. However, Paul wasn’t sufficiently proactive

and had to enlist the support of the VET coordinator to find a suitable placement:

We had to get workplacements by week five of Term 1. . . . Most of the people got them . . . and it came down to a few people who hadn’t got ours. The teachers had a few things on file, so she went through that. . . . She said apparently the chef there [identified workplace] he’s pretty good. So I thought, yeh, I’d like to go there because most of the chefs are really grumpy. So I chose this one, and the chef was really good. (Paul)

The workplace chosen was a small cafeteria-style restaurant in Fremantle that

employed a relatively small staff with the owner being one of the chefs. A small

number of other staff, including the owner’s spouse, was also employed to undertake

the various roles necessary for the enterprise to operate efficiently. Paul was taken on

as another worker under the supervision of the owner.

Category 2: Familiarising

Paul began ‘Familiarising’ himself with the workplace environment from the

beginning. Through ‘interacting’ he began to develop a good working relationship

with the boss, his mentor. He simultaneously began to ‘clarify’ what was expected of

him and to get to know procedures and practices, where things were located and how

they went about the work (‘understanding practices’). By the time of the next

interview, Paul felt “a lot better at the workplace cos I know it better, I know what to

do.” Paul had expected that he would be “washing dishes all day,” which was what

he did on the first day and felt at ease with that. Although he lacked the confidence to

tackle more complex tasks initially, he responded positively when encouraged to

learn and undertake more complex tasks. His initial lack of confidence seemed to be


primarily due to a concern that if he “stuffed up, knowing the reputation of mostly

chefs being pretty mean . . . he’d probably go off at me.” So he adopted the attitude

initially to “keep to what I’m doing and make sure I do it right.” However, the boss

expected more of him and taught him to undertake more complex tasks:

Sometimes my boss’ expectations go a bit high[er] than what I know. He’ll ask me to do something and then he’ll go, “oh, you don’t know how to do it,” and then he’ll teach me. (Paul)

Paul also, for example, ‘clarified’ how he was expected to dress and act when

serving customers.

Paul was diligent and was soon accepted by his co-workers. In fact, after a

while he was given more responsibility and more hours, and “getting paid . . . to

work there.” He felt that he easily fitted in because he had “known the people for a

while now, and so I get along with everyone there.” Paul had ‘found a place’ within

that enterprise.

Category 3: Committing

Paul had ‘assessed the benefits’ he would derive at that workplace. He

enjoyed working, he was treated “like one of the guys at work,” and because he was

“learning so much.” He ‘transferred’ learning between school and the workplace,

which he ‘assessed’ as being of benefit to him:

You learn something that you do at school and you take it to work and you learn something . . . from work and take it back to school. So, they’re . . . helping each other out, learning things on both sides and bringing them back and using them . . . they’re both benefiting each other. (Paul)

He ‘defined his role’ as a “trainee” and saw himself in that role because the boss

called him “his trainee . . . and says, ‘this is my mate trainee guy.’” Paul liked the

fact that he was “given a name in the workplace, not just the guy that sits up the back


and does dishes.” As a result, Paul’s level of commitment by that stage was high,

which encouraged him to be more enthusiastic about his work:

It makes you act . . . a bit more enthusiastic about everything that you’ve actually got a place, it’s like actually a place for everyone and they’ve got a job and they do it. If anyone comes in and asks and they say, “yeh, you talk with this person . . . it’s their job.” (Paul)

Category 4: Adapting

Paul began ‘Adapting’ by firstly ‘complying’ with his boss’ instructions and

established routines for this with the tasks that he was allocated and taught to do. He

began with cleaning such as “washing dishes,” preparing food, and later began to

cook, which he enjoyed. Through the process of ‘complying,’ he ‘Adapted’ to the

physical conditions of the workplace such as the hot kitchen environment as well as

the somewhat cramped workspace and slippery floors. He also ‘complied’ with, and,

hence, ‘Adapted’ to, the new time frames and coping with the longer hours that he

had been used to at school: “Friday I just got a full day at work . . . from nine to six.

That gets really tiring . . . cos I have to do cleanup. . . . It gets pretty greasy, hard.”

He ‘complied’ and modified his conduct with what was expected of him and fit in

with the others:

I’m more mature at work cos I’m around older people. I have to do what they do so I don’t look . . . stupid. . . . You’re dealing with a different person every day. So, you always try and make a good impression. . . . [At work] you’re a lot more friendlier because you have to be. (Paul)

He also began to selectively adopt the cultural norms of the workplace, including

appropriate dress that he was expected to wear for the role he was undertaking and

the professional image that he was expected to portray (‘enculturation’). He began to

develop a sense of professionalism and the customer focus to fit in with how things

were done at that workplace.


As he progressed he worked unsupervised and used initiative to solve

problems that arose (‘initiating’). On one occasion, for example, he had worked out a

better way of filling the mayonnaise bottles “to make things easier,” which pleased

the boss. Paul’s relationship with his girlfriend was important to him and a priority in

his life. He made adjustments to his personal life to accommodate his new role at the

workplace, but at times caused conflict when trying to manage these competing

demands:

I wanna see her . . . probably five days a week. I can’t always do it cos my boss will call to work. . . . Some days she would have the day off school . . . so I can spend the day with her but then I get called in and so that . . . spoils your day. (Paul)

He managed by compartmentalising school, the workplace and his personal life

ensuring that schoolwork was done during school hours only (‘initiating’).

Category 5: Building

He progressively ‘Built’ skills and knowledge by ‘modelling’ and

‘consolidating’ what he had learned. He was learning a variety of skills including

“how to cook different things,” social skills, interpersonal skills such as “dealing

with customers,” and a range of technical skills. During this period, he found the

boss very supportive, teaching Paul “a different thing every time I get there,” and

informing him of any changes that occurred during the time that he was away:

I got faster in the way I do stuff. . . . It’s a lot harder when you first start. . . . My boss was really easy on me at first and then he started to toughen up and said that I was actually capable of doing stuff. (Paul)

However, the boss seemed to expect more of Paul, and began to “pressure” Paul into

“going past the point of what I can do, and try to keep going,” which Paul did not

like. This was the start of cracks appearing in a previously good relationship. He was

‘transferring’ skills and knowledge between school and the workplace as well as to


home where he cooked every Thursday evening. In ‘Building’ skills and knowledge,

he ‘contributed’ to the workplace productivity evidenced by the fact that he was

given additional paid employment as he became useful to the organisation.

To this point, Workplace Formation seemed to be developing more or less

sequentially. However, due to a change in conditions, the sequential nature of the

Workplace Formation process was interrupted. Paul engaged in recursive processes

within Workplace Formation to manage these changed conditions. From this point,

the discussion will focus on the processes of Workplace Formation.

The relationship with the boss and some of the other workers subsequently

became somewhat strained, which caused Paul to ‘re-assess the benefits’ derived at

that workplace. This, in turn, brought about a change in his level of investment

(‘Committing’) and how he approached his work. A change in circumstances or

conditions at the workplace made Paul engage in processes indicative of other

categories regardless of what stage of Workplace Formation Paul was at and

impacted on how he progressed through the Workplace Formation process

(Proposition 2). Paul did not like the way that he was being treated quite often by the

boss (‘assessing benefits’), and often felt pressured or bullied. Although Paul did not

have set hours, other than the Friday workplacement, the boss expected Paul to show

greater commitment and be available to work whenever he was needed. Paul, on the

other hand, felt that it was his choice as to whether he would work or not. Also,

money was sometimes an issue for Paul who had to use public transport to get to

work. This lack of clarity became an issue. Furthermore, Paul did not like being

pressured into doing something that he did not want to do. At the second interview,

in August, he said:

You do something a little wrong and your bosses will growl at you. . . . [R. Were there times when you felt tension?] Yeh, definitely. Sometimes, yeh, I


feel he’s ready to . . . give me it. . . . Sometimes he will pressure me at work and he’ll tell me, “come in to work tomorrow”, I say, “no, I can’t”, he’ll say, “nuh, come to work” . . . he’ll pressure me into it and I don’t wanna be pressured like that. So I stand my ground, and then I’ll come into work the next day and he’ll have a go at me. . . . He tries to tell me I have to come in to work. Like, I don’t have a set roster or . . . set hours . . . he tells me when I have to work and if it’s alright with me I’ll say, “yeh” . . . cos I have to get my own way in there, I always don’t have money to go into work. . . . [R. What sort of relationship do you tend to have?] With my boss right now not that good. With his wife at the moment not that good. . . . [With] the two other girls that work there I’m assuming it’s pretty good from the way that they talk to me and stuff, but it just could be an act. (Paul)

As a result, Paul’s confidence dropped, his commitment significantly reduced, and

his approach had changed from an enthusiastic worker to ‘involuntary compliance’:

There was a stage where I was real confident, and then when this came along it kinda lowers it. . . . Then something good happens and goes back up again. . . . Kinda goes up and down. . . . A boss can give you the crap and unless you quit you have to put up with it . . . I was pretty close to quitting on Tuesday . . . when he gives me crap at work. I’m not one to put up with his stuff if he thinks he’s all big tough and macho, I would say, “nuh, you can’t give me this, it’s bullying”. . . . I’ll see what happens on Friday . . . see how he reacts, and . . . if it’s no good, I’ll get all my papers signed so I get everything done and I’ll quit work. (Paul)

The relationship subsequently became much more positive again primarily

due to a different approach by the employer towards Paul. This subsequent change in

conditions – the change in the boss’ attitude and approach towards Paul – caused

Paul to once again engage in processes indicative of other categories, in this case,

‘Familiarising,’ ‘Committing,’ ‘Adapting’ and ‘Building,’ regardless of what stage of

Workplace Formation Paul was at, in order to ‘manage’ these changed circumstances

(Proposition 2). In the final interview, Paul said:

He eased up on me heaps cos he said, “any time you want to go on holidays let me know what days you won’t be here and order some more people in to do your work and when you get back you can start again”. . . . I feel comfortable working with him now more than I did before. But . . . there’s always something gonna be there that we did have a blue one time. . . . [R. How is his manner towards you now?] It’s a lot better . . . he always says, “oh, great, thanks very much for doing that work . . . your cooking was really good today.” (Paul)


The boss seemed to be more understanding, and adopted a mentoring role with Paul

rather than being the authoritative boss who put his own needs first with, from Paul’s

perspective, little apparent regard for those of Paul. Paul’s confidence lifted and he

was again interested in learning more skills. After all, he still wanted to be a chef.

Through ‘modelling’ Paul learned the skills needed to cook, which encouraged the

boss to mentor Paul and enable him to ‘Build’ competence:

He knows that I’ve been watching him make the meals and he knows that I know how to make them. . . . I said to him, I’m doing the work here on Friday free for you so . . . teach me some skills. He said, “yeh, sure.” He started me up with cooking, so I learn quite a bit. (Paul)

He began to ‘consolidate’ skills and knowledge increasing his range of skills and

increasing in confidence. He ‘contributed’ more to the organisation by cooking more

at work, and was given more responsibility, occasionally being left on his own: “I’m

doing a lot more cooking now at work, he’s confident in me knowing all the dishes

now so he can leave me for a bit and let me do the dishes.” He also ‘transferred’

learning to home and cooked more at home as well as ‘transferred’ learning back to

school from the workplace:

It’s made me heaps more confident in cooking. I’m doing lots of cooking at home now, I’m cooking three nights a week at home and . . . three days a week at work. . . . Getting really used to it. . . . I’m learning heaps . . . how it all runs . . . different dishes, the way I have to set it up, presentation. . . . I do heaps of stuff different when I cook at school now. . . . I teach girls in my class, my mate, different stuff that I know then they teach them stuff that they learnt. (Paul)

As a result, Paul ‘re-defined his role’ and began to see himself in a more professional

role, ‘Building’ confidence and his self-image in the role that he aspired to. This

increased his commitment to the workplace as he could see the benefits that he could

now derive (‘assessing benefits’). He felt accepted (‘finding a place’), ‘re-defined his

role,’ and was prepared to accept more responsibility and ‘contribute’ more to the

organisation:


I kind of see myself as more of a chef than a kitchen hand cos I’m cooking a lot more. When [the boss] has to go upstairs and make phone calls and stuff I’m basically the one in charge in the kitchen, so I’m the chef in the kitchen at that time. (Paul)

As Paul’s skills and confidence grew and he continued to ‘Adapt’ to the workplace,

he continued to use initiative, anticipated problems, and planned ahead to resolve any

problems that he could foresee (‘initiating’). The support that Paul subsequently

received encouraged him to do “as best that I can . . . put the heart into the food”

and even try to “make it look better than the boss.”

The situation had improved significantly during the latter part of the year and

Paul had continued to make good progress; however, he had higher aspirations and

was intending to move to a “bigger kitchen” the following year, which he ‘assessed’

would be more beneficial for him: “He might be taking me on board as an

apprentice. But I’m not sure if I wanna do it there. I probably want a bigger

kitchen.” A significant outcome for Paul was the confirmation of his career focus

and the awareness that he had out-grown his current workplace and that he was now

ready to move to a bigger workplace and continue to ‘Build’ skills and knowledge in

his chosen career.

Summary of Cases 1, 2 and 3

The above cases illustrate all of the propositions stated at the beginning of

this chapter. Firstly, all three students proceeded through the five categories of

Workplace Formation. It was shown that there was a general overlapping of

categories, and that some processes within categories often occurred concurrently. In

Emma’s case, recursive cycles of the Workplace Formation process were

demonstrated as she changed her workplace. This was Proposition 1.


Emma and Paul also engaged in actions and interactions indicative of the

various categories as conditions or circumstances changed (Proposition 2). Emma’s

level of commitment changed during her first workplacement after ‘assessing’ that

how she was being treated and the type of work that she was doing was not

benefiting her to any significant extent. This, in turn, impacted on the processes of

‘Adapting’ and ‘Building.’ Paul’s case showed how a change in the way he was

treated by his mentor, the support provided, and the quality of the work he was given

impacted on his level of commitment and the rate at which he progressed through the

Workplace Formation process. When treated poorly, not supported, and given tasks

where little or no learning occurred Paul ‘assessed’ that he derived very few benefits

and lacked commitment. This resulted in him ‘involuntarily complying’ and making

little progress. When the situation changed for the better, Paul ‘assessed’ that the

better relationship with his boss, the renewed support and mentoring he received and

the quality of the work that he was given where he was ‘Building’ skills and

knowledge were beneficial to him. This increased his motivation and commitment.

He once again was motivated to learn and engaged in other processes of ‘Adapting’

and ‘Building’ to make substantial progress at that workplace.

The time taken for Jason, Emma and Paul to proceed through the various

categories was observed to be different and depended on the particular workplace

conditions (Proposition 3).

The extent of ‘Workplace Formation’ varied across the three cases. Jason had

progressed through all categories and developed skills and knowledge to a greater

extent than Emma or Paul (Proposition 4). Jason had a clear focus on a career; he

selected a workplace where the work was highly relevant to his career focus; he

progressively developed competence; and was accepted, supported and treated


equitably by his co-workers. Emma’s commitment had changed dramatically at her

first workplace, and, as a result, she did not progress in skill development. She used

‘involuntary compliance’ and avoidance strategies to see the workplacement out

(Proposition 5). In her second placement, Emma was able to make some progress and

develop a limited range of skills commensurate with the nature of the workplace and

the length of time that she was able to attend. Paul’s progress at his workplace varied

over the year, and, although he proceeded through all categories, in general, he did

not progress to the same extent as Jason in terms of skill and knowledge

development. This was primarily due to the following. Firstly, Paul’s workplace

offered him a more limited range of skills than Jason’s workplace. Secondly, from

the beginning, there was a difference in the nature of the work that each was given to

do, and Jason was progressively given more and more responsibility. Thirdly, Jason

enjoyed equitable treatment and support from the beginning, whereas this was not the

case with Paul. Jason also appeared to have adopted more of the workplace culture

over the time and even socialised with some of the workers beyond the workplace.

This was not evident with Paul. Jason also progressed further along the workplace

hierarchy, having been given responsibility to supervise other junior workers at one

stage.

Jason and Paul are examples of students who can be categorised as having a

clear career focus. The intentions of both were to develop relevant industry skills and

knowledge at the workplace. Emma is a student in the second category – those

without a clear career focus who viewed SWL primarily as exploratory and as a

means to gain generic experience in the workplace. Emma’s progress through the

process of Workplace Formation was very much dependent on the quality of the

workplaces in which she was placed (Proposition 6).


The following examples will further illustrate Proposition 6. In particular,

they will illustrate the variation that can exist in the progress made by students at

various workplaces. However, a detailed exposition of each category of processes

will not be given as this has been done in the previous three cases. Instead, sufficient

details only will be presented to illustrate the extent of Workplace Formation at each

workplace. Furthermore, in the case of Jane, several references have already been

made in Chapter Seven to illustrate various Workplace Formation processes.

Case 4: Jane

Jane was a Year 12 VET student from School 1 who was interested in

marketing as a career. She had not been successful in her Year 11 studies at her

previous school, where she had been undertaking a university oriented program, and

enrolled in the business program at School 1 with the aim of progressing to

Certificate 3 in Business Marketing at TAFE, and then proceed to university. During

the ‘Preparing’ phase of Workplace Formation, Jane had difficulty locating a

workplacement involved in marketing. As time was moving on and Jane needed a

placement, she ‘selected’ a placement in the human resources department of a multi-

national company in Perth with the assistance of her mother who worked there. Jane

initially had reservations about the placement; it was not where she had intended to

take a placement because it was not in her intended career area. However, she

enjoyed working there and, as a result, ‘selected’ it to continue her workplacement

there in second semester. Although Jane had a clear focus on a career, she was not

able to obtain a placement in her chosen field and, therefore, was prepared to explore

other fields. Jane can, therefore, be categorised in the second category as one who


did not have a clear career focus and viewed SWL primarily as exploratory and as a

means to gain generic workplace experience.

Jane proceeded through ‘Familiarising’ by engaging with all processes within

this category. Through ‘interacting,’ she developed a good working relationship with

her supervisor - her mentor - and others that she ‘interacted’ with. All the workers

there were “very friendly” and supportive of her. Jane got to know routines and

practices (‘understanding practices’) and ‘clarified expectations’ of her and what she

could expect from them. Jane, for example, had expected to be treated as a “junior

office all-rounder” doing such things as photocopying and coffees and the like.

However, she soon began to be treated “like a peer,” which she ‘assessed’ as being

“fantastic.” Jane was a diligent person and worked hard to make a good impression

and gain acceptance. Not only did she begin assisting her supervisor with all of her

work but Jane also soon began to show others how to use equipment such as the fax

machine and computer programs that she had learned at school. She found her co-

workers supportive and accepting of her as a peer. Some even thought that she was

actually a new employee. Jane, therefore, soon ‘found a place’ as a peer in the

organisation and felt very much like a worker there. Jane’s commitment was high

because of the role that she saw herself in because she enjoyed working there, and

‘assessed the benefits’ that she derived from working there as being positive because

she was “always learning new things”:

If they got me to do the photocopying and the fax all the time I wouldn’t enjoy it and I wouldn’t want to be there . . . and my work level would probably drop. . . . But now I have my lunch in the office, I want to be there doing work. (Jane)

Jane began to quickly ‘Adapt’ to the workplace environment. She ‘complied’ with

what was expected of her, adjusted her conduct to act more maturely by behaving

“like an employee,” fitted in with the other workers, and ensured that she did not do


anything inappropriate. She was soon given more responsibility, independence and

control over her work, and was able to use much more initiative in her everyday

tasks (‘initiating’). In this way she projected into the role of worker and adjusted to

working unsupervised:

The past two weeks I have been very busy . . . people I’ve been working with have kind of sussed out what I’m capable of doing . . . so I’ve gotten a lot more responsibility, like, projects to myself . . . getting feedback but not having to report after every step . . . I’m trusted that I can complete it on my own . . . that was good . . . I work at my own pace. (Jane)

When things were a little quiet, she even used her initiative and sought out work:

“I’ve been going around and finding my work, which has been good, people sort of

commend you for showing initiative.” In this way she was ‘Building’ by extending

her range of skills and knowledge (‘consolidating’): “I’ve been going down to

different areas, I’ve done a bit of work at legal, at reception and going to . . . public

relations.” She made personal organisation adjustments (‘initiating’) to her social

and personal life by ensuring, for example, that she went to bed early so that she was

rested for her workplace work.

Jane worked at that workplace for a considerable period of time. She was

there from early in Term 1 through to the end of the school year. This included the

first two weeks of Term 4 full-time and another two-week block earlier in the year.

Over this time, Jane adopted some of the cultural norms of the organisation

(‘enculturation’). For example, Jane dressed accordingly to fit in, and adopted the

same work ethic as the role models around her and values considered important to

the organisation:

Here it’s a much more casual feel than if I was at school. . . . It’s not the company’s laid back . . . they’re a bit more flexible . . . one of their main goals is diversity, so trying to accommodate . . . hundreds of people with different personalities, the way they do things they have to be flexible otherwise you’re gonna have heads clashing. (Jane)


Throughout the placement, Jane gradually ‘Built’ a range of skills and

knowledge through ‘modelling’ and ‘consolidating’ as well as ‘transferring’ learning

between school and the workplace. As these developed, and she gained more

‘Familiarity’ with and ‘Adapted’ to the workplace, she gained in confidence not only

in ‘interacting’ with co-workers but also to tackle more complex tasks. She also

significantly ‘contributed’ to the organisation, particularly over the block placements

where she was able to continuously work on a task and take it to completion, by

being accepted and trusted to work on her own:

I’ve got my own box where people just stick in tasks . . . they don’t come up and sort of say, “is it ok if you do this?” They know that I’m reliable, that I’m able to do things and do them well, so they just leave work for me to do. (Jane)

In deciding her level of commitment, Jane ‘assessed’ “networking” as a

positive outcome (‘assessing benefits’), and she had become aware of “what’s ahead

when you go to the workplace” whereas if she had “gone somewhere else . . . it

[would] probably be totally different.” She further ‘assessed’ that the workplace was

“fantastic, they treat their workers really well, you’ve got all the networks that you

can join, [and] a lot of support.”

As well as learning a variety of office skills and practices, an important

outcome for Jane from her workplace experience was that it broadened her

perspective. At one stage, she felt that it was “not just marketing anymore.”

However, by the end of the year she still intended to pursue marketing. The

experience re-affirmed her career interest in marketing but had broadened her

perspective and interest in working for a large organisation: “The work in here has

opened my eyes. I still wanna do marketing but . . . I wouldn’t mind doing marketing

for a big company like this.”


Although Jane did not undertake SWL in an area of direct relevance to her

career focus, and, hence, was categorised as exploratory, given the length of time at

the workplace, the commitment she developed, the support she received, and the way

she was accepted and treated, she had made substantial progress in all categories of

Workplace Formation. The actions and interactions of Jane at the workplace had

shaped or formed her perspective of what it was to be in the role of a worker at that

workplace. Although she did not progress towards her career goal to the same extent

as Jason, who developed skills and knowledge more relevant to his intended career

goal, Jane did gain a range of specific and generic work-related skills.

The next example will show the significant variation that exists in the extent

to which Workplace Formation occurs. An example will be presented where

Workplace Formation occurred only to a limited extent.

Case 5: Mary

Mary was a Year 11 VET student at School 3. In this school, VET students

selected their program of study from mainstream subjects that best met their needs.

SWL was conducted in two blocks each of two weeks during the school’s

examinations period. The school encouraged students to undertake their

workplacement in different workplaces in each block in order to develop the

specified generic skills in more than one workplace and provide a broader workplace

experience. Mary did not have a clear career focus. She expressed a desire for cabinet

making as well as for architecture because she loved to “build and design things

[and was] always fixing things.” She chose subjects including Technical Graphics

and Art and Design so as to enhance her “drawing skills . . . maths . . . [and]


creativity.” Mary fits into the exploratory category because she wanted to gain more

knowledge of the career that she wanted, and gain a better understanding of “what

the workplace can be like . . . [and] the type of people” that are out there.

Mary’s First Placement

Mary’s first placement was in a childcare centre. In the ‘Preparing’ phase,

Mary had intended to ‘select’ a placement in cabinet making to explore that

occupation further. However, she had to ‘select’ an alternative because she “couldn’t

find anyone to take me at a cabinet making firm.” As a result, she “chose a childcare

centre” in a southern suburb because she had been to a childcare centre for work

experience and wanted to “learn a little bit more.”

Mary quickly began to ‘Familiarise’ herself with the workplace environment,

and found that her previous work experience in a childcare centre assisted her to

‘Familiarise,’ ‘Adapt,’ and ‘Build’ on previous learning. For example, Mary

‘transferred’ her knowledge of dealing and interacting with children that she had

“learnt before to help her again interact with the children.” This enabled her to

‘consolidate’ these skills and ‘Build’ workplace competence. By the end of the first

day she had learned what needed to be done and what was expected of her

(‘clarifying expectations’), and within a few days got to know particular routines and

practices (‘understanding practices’):

I expected that I could get a lot more knowledge and I thought I would be treated like a student at work experience . . . my expectations were a bit higher when I actually got there and started to know the staff. I learned a lot on the first day. The program came to me quite quickly. I was told by [my supervisor] that they just don’t stand up all the time, they sit down with the children and interact with them. They play with them and ask them what they’re doing and what they’re building and how they came about to deciding what to build. (Mary)


She found the workplace well organised and activities well planned:

You had to mark on the wall so we could know what we were going to be doing and what we were going to be having for the children to do so it gave us enough time to get everything ready for the children while they were sleeping or outside playing, and clean up. (Mary)

Mary found that the work was not difficult and easily managed the workload: “I

expected most of what I had done and learnt. That was pretty much it.” Given the

short time of her placement, her supervisor gave her tasks that were manageable

while at the same time enabling her to ‘consolidate’ the organisational and

interpersonal skills that she was shown and taught (‘modelling’) by her supervisor

and other mentors, and through observing (‘modelling’) others:

Some of it was a bit easier, but there was nothing too difficult. If I needed help I would ask for it. . . . I don’t think she gave me something too difficult for me because probably I wasn’t up to that stage yet. . . . The things she gave me were efficient enough to give me better knowledge. (Mary) I pick up what they do . . . I do what they do maybe twist it around a little bit. (Mary)

Mary also ‘transferred’ relevant learning from her workplace back to school and

integrated this with her school learning.

The small staff was very friendly and supportive of her, and through

‘interacting’ gradually developed a good working relationship over this short period:

The staff there made it fun for me to learn. They are all very nice people, great to work with. They’re easy to interact, easy to talk to. . . . They were always willing to answer questions that I had and give me advice if I needed it. . . . They were always giving me compliments. (Mary)

One staff member who didn’t like the boss because she didn’t know “how to work

with the children” caused tension for Mary over the two-week period. Mary dealt

with this by avoiding the issue entirely.

Mary began ‘Adapting’ by ‘complying’ with what was expected of her,

willingly accepting the role and responsibilities assigned to her by her supervisor and


immersing herself in the role that she saw herself in. She modified her conduct to act

in a more adult-like way and fit in with the other workers. For example, she had to

use “calm words” and be “a bit more strict” with herself. She easily ‘Adapted’ to

the working conditions and ‘assessed’ them as being “quite good.” She ‘initiated’

some minor adjustments to her personal organisation. For example, she adjusted her

hours at her part-time job to accommodate her SWL hours. Usually she managed to

complete most of her schoolwork in class. However, a number of assignments

needed to be completed, so she ‘initiated’ a change to her homework schedule to

enable her to complete these prior to her workplacement.

Mary had developed a degree of commitment to the workplace because she

‘assessed’ that although this was not her preferred workplace, she nevertheless

enjoyed being there, received good support, and was learning valuable skills and

knowledge that she could use elsewhere (‘assessing benefits’). She had gained

acceptance by the other workers and was treated as one of them for the entire two-

week period. As a result, she had ‘found a place’ early and felt comfortable with that.

Although she had very limited responsibilities given the nature of the workplace

where duty of care was high and professional training a requirement, she saw herself

as one of them - a worker - because she was treated as such, included as part of the

team, and given work that she saw was valuable that they all did (‘defining role’).

Her self-image was further enhanced by the children not distinguishing between her

and the other “carers” and seeing her in the role of carer also. As a result, she liked

the role that she saw herself in, which led to greater commitment.

I was treated as a worker. I was one of them for the two weeks. . . . I felt like a worker there. Being treated like one made me feel like I was part of the system. With the children coming up to me for help I felt like a worker as well cos I have to work with the children . . . throughout the day. (Mary)


The role that she played at the workplace and the type of work that she was

immersed in enabled her to ‘contribute’ to the organisation, which further enhanced

her commitment and feeling of being a part of the system.

Although the short time frame of the placement and the nature of the work

restricted the range of skills learned, Mary engaged with most of the processes of

Workplace Formation. She enjoyed her workplacement largely because of the

supportive environment and the way that she was treated.

Mary’s Second Placement

For her second two-week placement in Term 4, Mary again tried to obtain a

placement in a cabinet making firm without success. Mary engaged the assistance of

her mother, who worked in the cafeteria of a university, and ‘selected’ a placement

there because hospitality was “a second option.” The cafeteria was a busy workplace

that serviced a large university campus. It employed a number of staff in various

capacities. Mary worked in the busy kitchen assisting other workers, who, along with

the executive chef, acted as her mentors. Mary had met some of the workers before

(‘interacting’) through her mother, and as a result had started to get to know them.

She also had an idea of what the work involved and had expected to be working with

the executive chef, initially helping with food preparation and then moving to more

complex tasks such as “making gourmet things.” Instead, she soon ‘clarified’ during

the ‘Familiarising’ phase that she was working mainly with three other workers at

different times and “making salads and sandwiches . . . peeling onions and carrots

and chop potatoes. So it was quite different to what I had in mind” (‘clarifying

expectations’). She soon learned that the work that she was undertaking over the two

weeks was fairly routine but an important part of the overall workplace practices, and


got to know routines and procedures, which continued for the first few days

(‘understanding practices’). In the second week, she was given other tasks such as

assisting with preparation and presentation of food and cleaning in the cafeteria. The

level of skill development was, therefore, low and restricted. However, Mary

‘assessed’ the work was beneficial for her and that she had “learnt quite a few

things.” By the end of the two weeks, she had learned, for example, how to make a

variety of salads and sandwiches, and to prepare food for functions that were on

regularly. Mary’s ‘interaction’ with and support received from the executive chef

was ‘assessed’ by her as an important reason why she had remained motivated and,

hence, shown some commitment to the workplace.

The capacity to use initiative was limited in this environment given the strict

hygiene and health and safety standards as well as the limited time available to

develop sufficient skills to work independently (‘initiating’). However, there were

occasions when Mary was able to work relatively unsupervised. Even so, Mary

strove to gain acceptance, and was accepted by the other workers and made to feel

comfortable. As such, she ‘found a place’ within the workplace hierarchy. Again, at

this workplace, she was treated like a worker, she felt like a worker, and projected

herself into the role of apprentice chef (‘defining role’):

Actually I feel like a worker . . . like an apprentice chef or something . . . even though I haven’t got rank as chef. When I was making a potato salad there today I had no one else around me, everyone else is doing their own thing, I’m just chopping up these potatoes, cooking these onions and chopping up gherkins . . . and no one else was around to show me or make sure I didn’t do anything wrong . . . I just felt like a worker. (Mary)

Mary proceeded to ‘Adapt’ to the workplace mainly through the process of

‘complying.’ This was because of the limited capacity for her to ‘initiate’ actions and

the limited time to be influenced by the particular workplace culture

(‘enculturation’). However, Mary enjoyed the executive chef’s light-heartedness and


engaged in social banter that went on from time to time. In fact, Mary ‘assessed’ and

attributed to these social interactions an importance in assisting her to ‘Adapt’ to the

particular workplace by breaking the ice and making her feel more comfortable in a

somewhat tense situation and fitting in:

It took a lot of tension off trying to fit in . . . because all the workers would just muck around . . . and we’d all follow along and just do the same thing . . . like, tell the jokes to each other . . . it made the workplace a lot of fun. (Mary)

Mary ‘modelled’ her conduct on others around her and modified her behaviour to act

“more mature” because she was working with adults. Furthermore, she couldn’t be

“too much of my sarcastic self” because she did not want to offend people and was

concerned that they “wouldn’t have given me much respect,” which she wanted, and

because it was important to her to be accepted by the others and be seen to be part of

the team. Mary also modified her behaviour, focused on and took more care in her

work because of the safety issues involved with the kind of work that she was doing.

For example, using the meat slicer and knives, and being around the gas stoves and

hot oil, she had to contain her usual boisterousness, and, as a result, felt that over the

two weeks she had “grown up.” Hygiene and health and safety were important

issues that required particular attention.

Again, in this workplace, Mary proceeded through the category of ‘Building,’

and ‘Built’ most skills through ‘modelling’ and then repeatedly carrying out the task

to ‘consolidate’ learning: “They show you everything before you do it. With the

sandwiches, I’m learning pretty quickly how to make them.” She found the staff very

supportive and was encouraged to ask questions:

They’re really nice people to work with. . . . If you did something wrong they wouldn’t bitch at you, they’d be supportive, and just say, “no, it’s alright, it’s just so you know next time”. . . . I didn’t feel like there was something wrong with asking. (Mary)


Mary also ‘contributed’ to some extent by assisting with a variety of tasks mainly

related to food preparation and cleaning, albeit routine and low level but important

work that other workers were also involved in doing. Mary did not appear to

‘transfer’ learning to any significant extent because she could not see any connection

between her schooling and her workplace. The lack of a direct link between her

schoolwork and the workplace resulted in Mary viewing the two places as separate,

compartmentalising her learning at both places.

PROPOSITION RELATING TO HOW THE WORKPLACE IMPACTS ON THE

WORKPLACE FORMATION PROCESS

The above cases also illustrate Proposition 7, which relates to how the

workplace impacts on the Workplace Formation process. In this study, certain

workplace conditions were seen as enabling the Workplace Formation process. The

support of mentors and other significant persons was an important factor.

Workplaces (a) where students were encouraged to ask questions, (b) which accepted

that students would make mistakes and provided assistance when this occurred, (c)

which provided ample instruction and information, and (d) where mentors took the

time to explain things carefully to students and allowed them to undertake supervised

learning tasks as opposed to those workplaces where students felt exploited or used,

were more conducive to Workplace Formation. These workplaces also gave students

more responsibility as they gained proficiency, which often served to increase

students’ confidence and encouraged greater commitment. The workplaces of Jason

and Jane were two such workplaces. At Emma’s first workplace, on the other hand,

after an initial ‘Familiarisation’ period, she felt unsupported and exploited. She felt


picked on and saw herself as “one of their slaves.” Emma saw working in a

supportive team as more conducive to her learning: “It should be all working at once

as a team, and that way I learn more. But if I’m left to just do it by myself I don’t see

me learning anything.” Emma expressed the desire to be treated equitably and not to

be given work that others do not want or to make life easier for themselves.

Jason, on the other hand, was treated like one of the workers from the

beginning, and was progressively given more responsibility commensurate with his

level of skill. As a result, he felt that he was treated equitably and quickly saw

himself as one of them. Equitable treatment by co-workers and mentors is seen as

conducive to optimal Workplace Formation.

Workplaces that give students tasks that are relevant and staged progressively

to develop skills and knowledge are conducive to Workplace Formation. Generally,

students in the study were initially given low skill level tasks, and, to some extent,

students expected to ‘start at the bottom.’ However, the expectation was that they

would progressively be given more complex work and the opportunity to learn and

develop more skills. Jason, for example, was given relevant work from the beginning

and began progressively developing skills and knowledge quickly: “I was doing a lot

of cooking, they were teaching me straight away. . . . I wasn’t . . . doing, like, bad

jobs.” Jason continued to progressively develop skills and knowledge to a high level

of proficiency as a result of the support he received and the relevant and increasing

level of complexity and variety of work tasks that he was given. In workplaces where

work tasks did not progressively develop skills, very little learning occurred, and

students had low commitment or desire to continue. Hence, Workplace Formation

was limited. In Emma’s first workplace, for example, she did not feel that she was

learning and did not like being there: “I just despise where I am at the moment. . . .


The other day I almost walked out” (Emma). Anna found the people at her first

workplace at a travel agency unsupportive and the work boring:

I thought I was gonna do a lot of things with brochures but all I’ve done with them is . . . chuck all the old ones out and put the new ones in and that. It’s really boring. . . . I thought I was going to be answering phones a lot but they only get me to answer phones when they’re busy. (Anna)

Such workplaces are not conducive to optimal Workplace Formation.

The study also showed that workplaces where students are accepted and

respected by co-workers are also conducive to optimal Workplace Formation. Being

accepted and gaining the respect of co-workers is important to students, and they

strive to achieve this from the beginning. Acceptance as one of them and finding a

place within the organisation engenders commitment, a desire to continue, and to

strive to learn. Jason, Jarrod and Jane were accepted quickly at their workplaces and

soon ‘found a place’ within the organisation. Paul, even though for a period of time

he felt exploited and unsupported, also felt accepted at his workplace, particularly in

the latter part of the year. This encouraged commitment that enabled them to

progress in their development. Anna and Emma were examples where they did not

appear to have gained acceptance at their respective initial workplacements. As a

consequence, their commitment was low. In such workplaces, students tend to feel

marginalised or outsiders. They tend to keep to themselves and are reluctant to join

in conversations or interact with co-workers:

At workplacement you’re lucky if you can pull a conversation out of me. . . . I used to really really enjoy it but now it’s just come to the point where I’m glad the next Friday is the last day there. (Emma)

Anna interacted with two girls who were “really young,” however, an older worker

was a “real bitch” who would get Anna to “do all the dirty work.” As a result, Anna

was bored, did not feel accepted or respected, and most of the time would “sit there

and do nothing. That’s what I normally do when I’m there.”


SCHOOL-BASED NEW APPRENTICESHIPS AND THE WORKPLACE

FORMATION PROCESS

Two students that participated throughout the study were undertaking a

School-based New Apprenticeship (SBNA). These students were not only

undertaking on-the-job training with SWL concurrent with this as part of their

secondary graduation requirements but were also in the role of part-time workers as a

condition of the SBNA. This deserves some discussion in order to illuminate how the

Workplace Formation process unfolded for these students. Although the number of

students involved is too small to draw firm conclusions, observations can be made

which may suggest areas for further research. Both students can be categorised as

‘career-focused’ and both progressed through all stages of Workplace Formation.

One student, however, Jason, progressed further in skill and knowledge

development. This was primarily because of the workplace conditions that each

experienced throughout the Workplace Formation process. Jason’s focus on

becoming a chef together with the support he received, how he was treated, the kind

of work and responsibilities that he was given, and the progressive development of

his skills and knowledge provided the conditions conducive to optimal Workplace

Formation that optimised learning as illustrated in Case 1.

The workplace experiences of the other student, Karl, were less conducive

earlier in the year. At Karl’s first workplace, his ‘boss’ had what Karl felt were too

high expectations of him and he had difficulty coping with the various workplace

demands:

It’s hard to cope with all the stuff at once. . . . The boss he wants everything to be done like he is doing, and he wants all the stuff done in exactly the same


time like he would do … that’s difficult. I’m trying to be actually more careful not to do anything wrong, and then he goes, “you need too much time.” (Karl)

He felt the pressure of getting it right in an environment where (a) the emphasis was

on work output (Brooker & Butler, 1997), (b) there was a perceived lack of support

and of progressive development opportunities, and (c) there was little time to

consolidate skills learned. He was subsequently laid off at the beginning of the

second school term due to the lack of available work. However, the group training

company was not able to find another host employer until near the end of that term,

which was at an upmarket restaurant, where he stayed for the remainder of the year.

At this workplace, Karl was able to progress through the various categories of

Workplace Formation as conditions were more conducive to Workplace Formation –

greater support, work staged to progressively develop skills, acceptance of Karl, and

equitable treatment. Furthermore, the expectations by the supervisor were realistic,

and Karl could work longer to make up for missed time earlier in the year. Co-

workers were friendly and supportive, and the workplace had a “much better

atmosphere” than his previous workplace:

They’re all friendly . . . everybody I came across was trying to help me . . . if it’s Nikki, if it’s [supervisor] or if they’re not there anybody of the waitresses [sic] or even the chefs. . . . Even the chef who I don’t have to do cos I’m mostly on the floor . . . if I have to ask for something . . . he tries to explain to me and help me. Nobody goes, I don’t have time, ask somebody else. . . . In the first workplace it was the biggest problem. (Karl)

His supervisor confirms this supportive environment when she stated:

We’re a really friendly team. . . . Everybody that works here is fairly keen to teach him . . . the guy on the bar will teach him how to make coffees, one of the waitresses [sic] will teach him how to carry plates, someone else will teach him how to put an order into the till, that sort of thing. It’s not just one person training him on everything. (Supervisor)

Karl was accepted and treated equitably:


He’s treated as a worker. . . . We sort of joke around with him the same way that we would everybody else. . . . He’s treated just like everybody else. . . . He gets a lot more help than everybody else . . . but that’s because he hasn’t done a lot of the things that we need him to do. . . . Karl is the equivalent of a kitchen apprentice but he’s a floor apprentice . . . they’re here to learn, they’re still getting paid, they still have to carry out a job, and it’s a learn as you go type situation. (Supervisor)

Karl saw his treatment by the supervisor as “somebody who’s there and has to

learn” and saw co-workers “more like colleagues.” The work was staged for Karl to

progressively develop skills at a comfortable pace so as not to “scare” him: “We’re

just getting him very very used to the basics. . . . I just want him to comfortably learn

things” (Supervisor).

Karl ‘assessed’ that he could derive significant benefits at this workplace: “I

expect to know all the basic stuff you need to work as a personal bar attendant,” and,

if working at another workplace he would “know what to do” and not have to “work

the whole time under supervision.” Furthermore, at his previous workplace he was

doing “night shift” whereas this workplace was “much better working” because it

was during the day. As a result, he was “very enthusiastic . . . [and] eager to learn”

(Supervisor), and more ‘Committed.’ Karl began to ‘Adapt’ to the workplace

environment, and was ‘Building’ skills and knowledge and ‘contributing’ to the

workplace more and more as his competence and confidence increased. For example,

during observation of Karl at his workplace, the researcher observed Karl carrying

three plates at once – one of the technical skills of the job – but Karl felt that he was

still “having problems with three” and needed further ‘consolidating.’ He was also

observed waiting on different groups in a confident manner. Karl also stated that he

“had very little confidence in the beginning” but had now “learned how better to

deal with it.” His supervisor made the following comments at a subsequent

interview:


His work has certainly progressed. He couldn’t carry three plates when he got here, he couldn’t make coffee . . . he didn’t know how to show people through to a table. He didn’t know how to take an order, any of that sort of thing, how to pour spirits, how to open wine; there are a lot of things he’d had a go at but wasn’t doing properly that he can do now. . . . He’s growing more confident. (Supervisor)

Comparing the two students in the SBNAs with other VET students in this

study, there was little apparent difference between the SBNAs and VET students that

were categorised as ‘career-focused.’ Both types of students saw the workplace as a

place to work and to learn, and both aimed for optimal Workplace Formation.

However, the additional hours at the workplace and the paid work for the SBNAs, as

opposed to unpaid SWL for the non-SBNA students, made the ‘work’ component

and the ‘contributing’ process of Workplace Formation more apparent and more

important to the employer as noted by Karl’s supervisor. For both types of students,

additional paid work at the particular workplace, whether it was a condition of the

SBNA or not, aided the Workplace Formation process and provided the opportunity

for ‘Building’ more skills and knowledge. Jason recognised that he was undertaking

what he called a “pre-apprenticeship” but saw the workplace as a “workplacement”

during school hours as he used this term in reference to the workplace during the

interviews, and that he needed to find “a new workplacement” for the following

year. However, he saw the additional weekend work as paid work where he worked

and continued to learn. The distinction between SWL and the SBNA contractual

arrangement did not seem to be as important to Jason as his performance and role,

and how he was accepted and seen by others at the workplace. These were also

important to Karl who recognised that he was a “trainee,” and at times felt like one,

but saw himself as a “worker” or “helper” during busy times.

Throughout the year Karl progressed through the various stages of Workplace

Formation; however, the process was disrupted and recursive loops occurred as a


result of changing workplaces and conditions. This process was similar to that of

other students undertaking SWL.

CONCLUSION

In this chapter, the six propositions relating to how the categories and major

processes of the theory of Workplace Formation can be understood within the

context of the students’ day-to-day learning at the workplace and the proposition

relating to how the workplace impacts on the Workplace Formation process were

discussed and illustrated through the presentation of five cases from the data. This

procedure allowed propositions that had been generated from the data gathered

across the total sample of participants to be tested against the individual cases.

Testing the propositions in this way demonstrates the robustness of the propositions

formulated in the theory of Workplace Formation and lends greater credibility to the

claims about the implications for theory, policy and practice to be discussed in the

next chapter.

Conclusion 299

CHAPTER NINE

CONCLUSION

The demand for reform in schools and the workplace in industrialised

countries such as Australia since the 1980s has raised expectations for students,

educators, parents and business leaders. This has led to the provision of vocational

education and training programs in schools that integrate school-based learning with

industry training. In Australia, the rapid increase in the take up of such programs by

young people provided a significant challenge to schools that had broadened the

post-compulsory curriculum to cater for the more diverse student population

(Keating, 1995). In developing these reforms, considerable effort was required in

establishing partnerships, developing curricula, and in the professional development

of teachers. Hence, the literature has tended to focus at the program level.

Workplace learning, a component of such programs, is a key strategy for

improving workforce skills and, hence, as a means of increasing productivity

(ANTA, 1998, 2004; Billet, 1998; Hager, 1997). SWL is regarded as central to the

effectiveness of VET in Schools programs (House of Representatives Standing

Committee on Education and Training, 2004). Given the rapid growth in the

participation of secondary school students in SWL in recent years and the Federal

government policies supporting its establishment, there is a need to better understand

how students undertaking SWL manage their learning in and adjust to the workplace

environment. A substantial body of literature on organisational socialisation exists.

These studies have tended to focus on the socialisation process of newcomers to

organisations in general rather than new workforce entrants. This study focused on

young people undertaking structured learning at the workplace while still at school,

Conclusion 300

and how they manage their workplace learning in these circumstances. The study

reported in this thesis adds to this body of knowledge by providing a model,

grounded in the experiences of the students, of the processes that such students use in

managing their learning and adjusting to the workplace environment.

This final chapter of the thesis is organised in four sections. Firstly, the

generalisability of the research findings is discussed. Secondly, the research findings

are discussed in terms of their implications for other bodies of theoretical literature.

In the third section, implications for the development of policy are outlined. In the

final section, implications of the findings for practice are presented.

Recommendations of areas for future research are made throughout the chapter.

GENERALISABILITY OF THE RESEARCH FINDINGS

The theory of Workplace Formation has been demonstrated to be robust for

students in the context of this study who were mainly, but not exclusively, from the

hospitality and tourism industry area. The theory may have generalisability for

secondary school students engaged in SWL in hospitality and tourism, as theoretical

saturation was reached within the purposive sample from the study sites.

However, using Lincoln and Guba’s (1985) notion of ‘transferability,’ the

theory can be transferable to situations that give rise to the specific sets of actions

and interactions that pertain to SWL, the phenomenon that is the focus of this study.

Provision of a thick description allows readers to make an informed judgement about

transferability (Lincoln & Guba, 1985). The theory of Workplace Formation,

presented in this study, was conceptually dense and carefully presented with a thick

description of the context, a detailed analysis of the data, use of purposive sampling,

Conclusion 301

and the logical and concise presentation of theoretical propositions supported by

relevant examples from the data. Cross-checking of data with participants over the

school year, peer examination throughout the data gathering and analysis phases, and

triangulation techniques enhanced the credibility of the findings. The ‘audit trail’

(Guba & Lincoln, 1981) developed in this study that provides details of how data

were collected, how categories were derived, and how decisions were made should

enable others to authenticate the findings, further establish credibility, and assess

whether or not the findings are transferable to other contexts. The theory may also

have reader or user generalisability. This involves leaving the extent to which the

findings apply to other situations up to the people in those situations (Wilson, 1979,

in Merriam, 1988). The study may ring true as others read it, and may have pervasive

applicability and relevance to other settings where conditions are similar (Merriam,

1988; Strauss & Corbin, 1994).

IMPLICATIONS OF THE RESEARCH FINDINGS FOR THE DEVELOPMENT

OF THEORY

The theory of Workplace Formation, which was the major finding to emerge

from the study reported in this thesis, may have implications for the further

development of theory in the general area of vocational education and training and in

the area of the organisational socialisation of young people as newcomers to an

organisation or enterprise. Strauss and Corbin (1994) contend that theory which is

grounded in the actions and interactions of people within substantive areas of study

should not only contribute to the knowledge of the respective discipline or field but

also “have at least some practical applications, that can be of service to wider

Conclusion 302

audiences” (p. 281). Vaughan (1992) advocates ‘theory elaboration,’ which consists

of taking off from extant theories and developing them further. Glaser and Strauss

(1967) state:

Since substantive theory is grounded in research on one particular substantive area … it might be taken to apply only to that specific area. A theory at such a conceptual level, however, may have important general implications and relevance, and become almost automatically a springboard or stepping stone to the development of a grounded formal [or as is more usually said, “general”] theory. (p. 79)

The theory of Workplace Formation may encourage others to explore further the

structured workplace learning process or other stages of the transition of young

people from school to the workplace, and may provide a ‘stepping stone’ for further

development of the theory or for development of theory in related areas of the

phenomenon discussed in this thesis.

Theory testing carried out on a number of dimensions could strengthen the

theory of Workplace Formation and broaden its applicability. For example:

• Diversity of workplace contexts and industries. The theory of Workplace

Formation was developed predominantly in the hospitality-based industry.

VET in Schools programs are offered in a range of other industries such as

business and clerical, building and construction, automotive, computing,

community services, health and education, engineering and mining, sport and

recreation, and primary industries (Department of Education and Training,

2003). Research within such industries may provide both elaboration of the

theory to other industries and specification to their needs.

• Other age groups. Testing the theory with older and younger students may

refine its applicability to age-related needs and stages; for example, Year 10

students, where the uptake of VET is increasing (Department of Education

and Training, 2003), may need more explicit support.

Conclusion 303

• Differentiation across programs or other models of SWL. School-based New

Apprenticeships and apprenticeships through other Registered Training

Organisations may produce variations on the theory of Workplace Formation

driven by the level of interaction between campus-based learning and

workplace learning. Although an increasing amount of research is available

on apprentices, including trainees, very little is directly related to how

students manage their workplace learning. Research could also be undertaken

with VET students in their second year. The theory could then be extended or

modified to fit these new situations.

• Studies in other Australian and international contexts would broaden its

applicability.

Although school students undertaking school and structured workplace

learning simultaneously, who are the subjects of the study presented in this thesis, are

in a unique situation with particular issues to contend with, links can be made with

how young people beginning full-time work manage during their early working life.

In this respect, the theory presented in this thesis has relevance to the organisational

socialisation literature. This research makes a significant contribution to the

theoretical literature on organisational socialisation by furthering understanding of

the processes that school students use, from their perspective, in managing their entry

into the workforce for the first time in structured learning situations while still at

school.

There are extra layers of complexity for school students learning in

workplaces (Smith & Green, 2001). Students on SWL are not employees, and it

cannot be assumed that they work or learn in the same way (Smith and Harris, 2001,

in Smith & Green, 2001, p. 23). Their expectations are different; they are there to

Conclusion 304

learn, not to be exploited as free labour. They may also learn in different ways to

adults (Wilkinson, 1989; Sigelman & Shaffer, 1991; cited in Smith & Green, 2001,

p. 23). It is likely that students on SWL placements have a variety of things to learn

and contend with (Smith, 2000), more than an adult changing jobs would perhaps

need to learn and manage. One issue suggested by this research is leaving the

security and ‘comfort’ of the school environment and the friendships formed over the

years, an important issue to some students, and the need to gain acceptance and

establish another ‘comfort zone’ in an adult environment.

While earlier organisational socialisation research tended to focus primarily

on the outcomes of actions of the organisation on a newcomer’s socialisation, more

recent research has tended to focus on newcomer proactivity in the socialisation

process (for example, Anderson & Thomas, 1996; Bauer et al., 1998; Chan &

Schmitt, 2000; Major & Kozlowski, 1997; Miller & Jablin, 1991; Morrison, 1993a,

1993b; Ostroff & Kozlowski, 1992; Saks & Ashforth, 1997a, 1997b; Wanberg &

Kammeyer-Mueller, 2000). This study contributes to understanding of socialisation

processes from the perspective of the newcomer to the organisation or enterprise.

The theory of Workplace Formation that emerged in this study, and which is

grounded in the experiences of the students, explains the processes used by students

entering a new workplace environment during this particular time in their lives. Like

the contingency theory of Feldman (1976, 1981), it focuses on the learning process

of newcomers in the particular set of circumstances outlined within this study. The

students that proceeded through the five categories of Workplace Formation

experienced changes in the development of work skills, the acquisition of appropriate

role behaviours, and adjustment to the workgroup’s norms and values. The theory

presented in this thesis provides general support for Feldman’s integrated model,

Conclusion 305

which relates to adults new to an organisation. While Feldman and others (Van

Maanen, 1976) propose a three-stage socialisation process – anticipatory

socialisation, encounter, and change and acquisition – the model presented here

proposes five stages of categories – Preparing, Familiarising, Committing, Adapting,

and Building – and captures and highlights the salient processes that are important to

students in this unique learning context, particularly those students with little or no

experience of the workplace through casual part-time jobs. Like Feldman’s model,

Workplace Formation is a stage model with continuity and overlap between stages.

Furthermore, Workplace Formation provides an alternative to Feldman’s model,

which, as Feldman pointed out, pertained specifically to the particular setting in

which the study was conducted, as is the case with the model presented in this study.

Caution needs to be exercised in comparing this model too closely with Feldman’s

model, which used adults in full-time employment for a much longer relative period

than the students in the current study. In Feldman’s study, 40% of the sample had

been employed less than one year, and 60% more than one year. In the present study,

5 of the 23 students were in the workplace for as little as four weeks; others for

considerably longer – one day each week over most of the school year, and some

even longer. Hence, the model presented here reflects processes over a relatively

shorter period than other studies, and in a particular context.

The study also highlights that for many students uncertainty is high on

entering the workplace environment. This is due mainly to their lack of knowledge,

experience and skills, and almost total lack of familiarity with the new environment.

They experience role shock (Van Maanen, 1976) and surprise, and need to

understand and make sense of their new setting (Louis, 1980). The strong support of

the workgroup and of suitable mentors is important for young people in these

Conclusion 306

circumstances to assist them in a variety of ways including building relationships

with others, building self-confidence, and learning about the workplace, which

supports other research (for example, Ashford & Black, 1996; Ashford &

Cummings, 1985; Borman, 1988; Morrison, 1993a, 2002; Ostroff & Kozlowski,

1992; Strickland et al., 2001; Wanberg & Kammeyer-Mueller, 2000). The findings of

this study show that the nature and quality of the relationship between the student

and supervisor or mentor tend to be established early (Liden et al., 1993; Major et al.,

1995), and that this relationship tends to have a significant impact on the individual’s

socialisation, which supports previous research (for example, Graen et al., 1973;

Major et al., 1995; Morrison, 1993a, 2002).

The study supports other research that suggests that adjustment begins to

occur sooner rather than later (Ashforth & Saks, 1996; Bauer & Green, 1998; Chan

& Schmitt, 2000; Cooper-Thomas & Anderson, 2002, 2005; Major et al., 1995;

Thomas & Anderson, 1998). Some students who undertook SWL for a total of four

weeks over the year began adapting and building skills over this time. This suggests

that the process of adjustment, a key component of the theory of Workplace

Formation, commences very early but appears to be dependent on an environment

conducive to the Workplace Formation process.

The study also contributes to understanding of socialisation processes by

extending research into a different type of newcomer to the world of work and

examining how socialisation unfolds in the early stages for young people in these

circumstances. It also contributes to an understanding of how young people begin the

process of forming an occupational identity in these early stages of their professional

formation, which, according to Berger and Luckman (1966), is formed by social

Conclusion 307

processes. Such “social processes involved in both the formation and the

maintenance of identity are determined by the social structure” (p. 194).

This study contributes to the Vocational Education and Training literature by

furthering our understanding of the requirements to make the workplace an effective

learning environment for young people and accommodate their learning needs, which

may vary as they progress and become more skilled (Cornford & Beven, 1999). In

particular, the study furthers our understanding of the issues and problems that

school students encounter at the workplace, how they manage the learning process,

and the kinds of workplaces that are conducive to student learning.

IMPLICATIONS OF THE RESEARCH FINDINGS FOR THE DEVELOPMENT

OF POLICY

The findings of the study reported in this thesis, which are grounded in the

actions and interactions of the students who undertook Structured Workplace

Learning, can be “relevant and possibly influential either to the ‘understanding’ of

policy makers or to their direct action” (Strauss & Corbin, 1994, p. 281). They

should contribute to policy makers’ understanding of how students manage their

learning at the workplace, and lead to policy initiatives that better facilitate this

process for students. Much of the policy that has informed developments in the area

of vocational education and training, particularly in secondary schools, has resulted

from increasing pressure on governments to institute labour market programs to cope

with changes in the labour market and to adjust to an increasingly competitive global

economic environment. A significant consequence of these changes for schools has

been an increased role in initial skills provision for young people. This meant

Conclusion 308

aligning school curricula with the skill needs of industry, facilitating the school-to-

work transition of young people through the provision of workplace learning

opportunities in cooperation with employers, and the convergence of vocational and

academic education (Mitchell et al., 1999). In Australia, much of the policy direction

has been due to the cooperative efforts of governments and industry, driven by

industry to meet the needs of industry. Structured workplace learning has been a key

component of this policy framework (MCEETYA, 2000a).

Concern has been expressed, however, at Australia’s mixed record in

assisting young people in their transition to social and economic independence

(Dusseldorp Skills Forum, 2003). Increasing skill demands have made upper

secondary education qualifications or an apprenticeship qualification necessary for

the employability of young people (OECD, 2003). A more coherent and integrated

response at the national level is needed together with policies aimed at improving

full-time entry-level work opportunities and combinations of training and work

(Dusseldorp Skills Forum, 2003). Within the current policy framework, there is

recognition for the need to increase the quality of, and opportunities for, SWL as an

integral component of VET in Schools programs. This research highlights the

benefits to students, and ultimately to industry, of a quality workplacement in

building skills, knowledge, and confidence as students progress through the various

stages of Workplace Formation. Policies directed at continued improvement in the

quality of SWL, and increasing student access to SWL and encouraging more

students to undertake SWL are required. This could include better system level

coordination and fostering of partnerships between schools and employers for SWL

placements, greater incentives for employers to take on students and to identify and

train staff to mentor students, and provision of professional development and

Conclusion 309

assistance to employers to structure authentic learning programs that develop skills

and knowledge in students in a coherent and progressive way.

This research shows that the quality of the workplace has a significant impact

on the Workplace Formation of students, and that the capacity of many small

enterprises to take on students is limited and questionable. Many of these enterprises

provide a service in very specific sectors of the hospitality and tourism industry. In

such workplaces, the focus is primarily on productivity. These enterprises often did

not have the time, training expertise or communication skills, and quality or variety

of work to provide appropriate skills training for students. The range of staff is

generally narrow and their expertise limited. Hence, the capacity of these enterprises

to provide adequate supervision, mentoring, and training is limited. Other studies

with apprentices report similar findings (Cornford & Beven, 1999; Harris & Simons,

1999; Strickland et al., 2001). Furthermore, the motives of some are also a concern

as there is a danger that small enterprises may take on a student more for self interest,

‘as another pair of hands,’ rather than for the longer term skill needs of industry. In

these situations, training is limited to the needs of the enterprise to engage the student

in immediate productive work. Often in these situations the student makes little

progress, feels exploited, and little learning occurs. There is some evidence to

suggest that contextualised learning and the integration of on- and off-the-job

training in VET are desirable for all students (Harris et al., 1998; OECD, 1994a), and

that workplace learning enhances general learning by providing an appropriate

context (House of Representatives Standing Committee on Education and Training,

2004). Evidence suggests that ‘novices’ learn “more effectively and with greater

pleasure – in context and through concrete applications calling for inductive

reasoning” (OECD, 1994a, p. 17). According to the evidence of this study,

Conclusion 310

achievement of such positive outcomes is strongly linked to workplace conditions

that are conducive to learning; these factors are discussed later in this chapter. Policy

initiatives aimed at identifying organisations or enterprises with the ability to host

quality authentic workplace learning programs for students and assisting employers

to structure such programs should be a priority.

Better provision should also be made for those career-focused students

identified in this research that will enable them to undertake longer, more continuous

and relevant SWL at the earliest opportunity that could fast-track them into

apprenticeships or further training.

Continued Federal funding is required to support the development of more

collaborative partnerships between schools, industry, and community groups that will

enable a strong and effective delivery of VET and SWL.

IMPLICATIONS OF THE RESEARCH FINDINGS FOR PRACTICE

Implications for Practice at the System Level

The research also found that schools sometimes struggle to place students in

suitable workplaces and, consequently, students may be placed in whatever

workplace is available, which does not necessarily match the student’s needs or

interests. Some students, while endeavouring to find their own placements, often

have very little knowledge of the workplace they may be forced to accept as a result

of the lack of available workplaces. This problem will be exacerbated as VET is

more completely integrated into the whole senior secondary school curriculum in

order to accommodate a more diverse range of students, as is currently occurring in

Conclusion 311

Western Australia (Curriculum Council, 2002), and more students access SWL. A

more coordinated approach to locating suitable workplaces and fostering better

partnerships between schools and industry is needed to avoid this situation.

The research also found that workplaces vary in the quality of the learning

experiences they can provide for students. In many workplaces, an inherent tension

exists between meeting the needs of the enterprise and the learning needs of the

student. This finding was also evident in other studies (Brooker & Butler, 1997;

Strickland et al., 2001). In this research, this was particularly evident in small

enterprises. Students need to be strongly supported by both the school and the

workplace for the learning experiences to be most effective. Both the school and the

workplace require more system level support for this to occur. Workplaces, in

particular, need to be supported in adopting an appropriate balance between the

needs of the enterprise and the needs of the learner, and in identifying and facilitating

learning experiences and fostering relationships that will progressively develop skills

and knowledge. Such enterprises may need to be provided with quality information

and resources, and supported to enable them to build a learning culture that serves to

meet the needs of the learner as well as of the enterprise. This includes the provision

of professional development and incentives for employers to develop the mentoring

skills of experienced workers or supervisors to enable them to be effective mentors.

Implications for Schools

An understanding by school personnel of the way in which students manage

their workplace learning will enable the school to structure and coordinate the SWL

program more effectively. For example, understanding that students undergo

Conclusion 312

‘Preparing’ for the workplace through the processes of ‘informing’ and ‘selecting’

may result in them devoting more time and effort to these processes so that students

are better ‘informed’ about the workplace prior to taking up a placement and have

greater involvement in ‘selecting’ their workplace. This would enable them to have

more ownership of the process and be able to obtain a better match with student

needs, given the impact that the right workplace can have on learning and Workplace

Formation. This highlights the importance of ‘Preparing’ for the workplace in the

management process. The findings also indicate the importance of ‘Familiarising’

and ‘Committing’ in the overall process of Workplace Formation, and how important

it is for students to be strongly supported at the workplace and at the school, to

develop good relationships with supervisors and co-workers, and to be accepted and

respected at the workplace. SWL coordinators should develop closer working

relationships or partnerships with workplace mentors and with students to support

students through these processes and help foster the conditions that are conducive for

optimal Workplace Formation.

Schools should identify as soon as possible those students who have a clear

career focus in a chosen industry, assist them to locate a suitable workplacement, and

provide a structure that will enable them to be placed in a longer and more

continuous placement with the opportunity to be fast-tracked into an apprenticeship

or further training. The findings indicate that these students progress further in skill

development than others, look to continuously develop expertise, and aim to select

workplaces that can facilitate this process.

Schools need to monitor more closely the types of workplaces in which

students are placed, particularly for those students with no clear career focus or who

have difficulty in locating a suitable workplace. The experience of students in these

Conclusion 313

situations can be negative, particularly in workplaces where the opportunity for skill

development is limited. If the kind of work quickly becomes routine, then student

learning is limited. Relationships may be difficult to form and students may feel

marginalised. If students become bored with the work they may feel exploited in

some situations, and feel that their opportunities to learn are limited. Schools should

develop better partnerships with employers so that they are better able to monitor and

assess the workplace environments to avoid these situations, and more appropriately

place students.

The findings of this study showed that the way in which SWL was configured

within the various VET models had a minimal impact on Workplace Formation.

Models where SWL and the school component did not overlap supported Workplace

Formation, as students were more easily able to manage learning in both

environments. However, models where SWL and the school component overlapped

required students to ‘initiate’ organisational adjustments to manage the workplace

learning and the schoolwork. Although the school and teachers provided some

support in the process, students were mainly responsible to make up work missed on

the day of SWL. It can be more difficult for students to manage both learning

environments, particularly where students may decide to miss SWL to attend an

important school lesson or an examination. This places added pressure on students.

Furthermore, the classroom organisation may be disrupted as more and more

students are absent from classes on SWL. Greater consideration needs to be given to

manage this situation more effectively. Block placement of SWL enables continuity

of workplace tasks, which to some extent supports Workplace Formation. On the

other hand, the one or two days per week model allows a longer, more continuous

period of SWL throughout the year, and may aid the more regular ‘transferring,’ and,

Conclusion 314

hence, integration of learning from both contexts. Discrete models, such as Models 1

and 2, are flexible, enabling SWL to be structured in block, regular weekly days or a

mix of both to meet particular needs without the school and workplace learning

overlapping.

The findings suggest that school workload, particularly homework, is a major

consideration in the decision to undertake SWL. Several students indicated that

workload issues for university entrance courses, as well as their perceived relevance

to future educational opportunity had influenced their selection of school subjects.

Conversely, it can be inferred that students who selected predominantly university

oriented courses would resist undertaking SWL if the time away from school was

likely to impact adversely on success in studies relevant to their university

aspirations. This will have implications for students who might benefit from SWL,

but whose main focus was on undertaking a university bound program of study.

Implications for Employers

This research has identified particular characteristics of workplaces that are

conducive to Workplace Formation. These are (a) a high level of support for

students, (b) relevant tasks that are targeted to progressive skills development, (c) the

equitable treatment of students and other workers, and, (d) respect for and acceptance

of students by the work group. In such workplaces, people are friendly and

welcoming, students are able to develop good working relationships, and are well

supported by strong mentoring and by the work group. Tasks assigned are targeted to

progressively develop skills, and students are given ample opportunity to practice

Conclusion 315

and consolidate skills, they are given increasing responsibility and opportunity to use

initiative as they progress, and are accepted and treated as part of the team.

These features appear to be an integral part of the culture and work practices

of some workplaces. These kinds of workplaces provide the necessary conditions for

optimum Workplace Formation to occur. They provide opportunity for the

‘Familiarising’ phase where students are able to develop good working relationships

through ‘interacting,’ easily ‘clarify expectations’ and ‘understand practices,’ and

‘find a place’ within the organisation. Students can clearly ‘define their role’ in the

organisation or workgroup and begin to develop an image of themselves in that role.

They ‘assess the benefits’ they can derive and determine their level of commitment,

which is often high. They quickly begin to ‘Adapt’ by ‘complying’ and ‘initiating,’

and to ‘Build’ skills and knowledge. As they progress in skills and knowledge

development, they increase in confidence, use more and more initiative, begin to take

on the particular organisational values and group norms (‘enculturation’),

‘contribute’ to the productivity of the organisation, and ‘transfer’ knowledge and

skills to other contexts.

The research showed that these features tended to be more evident in the

larger organisations or enterprises where training and professional development were

features and a strong sense of professional formation for apprentices and trainees

existed. These organisations were also usually highly structured with well-

established work practices and trained staff who could mentor apprentices and

students and provide adequate support to them. However, these characteristics were

not confined solely to the larger organisations. The type of culture and the work

practices were more critical than size. In some enterprises, for example, large to

medium-sized restaurants, the workplace culture, which varied significantly from one

Conclusion 316

workplace to another, impacted on the capacity of the organisation to deliver

adequate training for students.

Therefore, such enterprises should endeavour to develop a workplace culture

that adopts these characteristics and supports the Workplace Formation process.

Support and professional development from external sources may be required to

enable this process. However, as illustrated in this research, it is possible to effect

significant change by focusing on more effective work practices and in paying more

attention to the learning needs of students. All too often in many workplaces there

exists a degree of tension in trying to balance the learning needs of the student or

trainee with the needs of the organisation to be productive. But if the learning needs

of students are to be effectively addressed, then this balance needs to be found.

Many enterprises need to adopt more of a learning culture at the workplace

for the effective provision of industry training in an authentic learning environment.

This will require workplaces to adopt the above characteristics, structure more

appropriate work schedules to aid learning, and identify people to train and mentor

young people at the workplace and provide them with significant professional

development to develop appropriate mentoring and training skills. As these processes

entail significant costs to the enterprise, incentives should be provided by

governments to encourage this. Furthermore, an understanding by employers or

workplace personnel who mentor and train students of the processes that students use

in the process of Workplace Formation should enable workplace trainers to structure

more effective Workplace Formation strategies. Establishing more effective

partnerships with schools that enable mutual support is also encouraged.

Conclusion 317

CONCLUSION

The theory of Workplace Formation has emerged as the central finding of the

study presented in this thesis. This study provides a detailed description and

explanation of the ways in which secondary school students who are in their first

year of a VET program and who undertake SWL for the first time manage their

learning at the workplace. While readers of this study may find it useful and perhaps

transferable to other similar contexts, the theory of Workplace Formation is

transferable to situations that give rise to the specific sets of actions and interactions

that pertain to SWL, the phenomenon that is the focus of this study.

In this chapter, the implications of this research for the development of

theory, for the development of policy, and for practice were discussed. Suggestions

for further research were also made. This research makes a significant contribution to

the theoretical literature on the socialisation of young people into an organisation in

this particular context. There is a paucity of research in this area from Australian

contexts and a paucity of studies of these processes with students on SWL

placements. This qualitative study provides a student perspective on such processes

and a different perspective to a great deal of the literature in this field.

Much of the available literature on SWL has to date focused more on

program delivery and evaluation, often part of a broader VET in Schools study, and a

great deal from an organisational perspective. This study explicitly focused on giving

prominence to student ‘voice’ as the theory of Workplace Formation emerged from

the authentic experiences of students in their respective workplaces. In so doing, it

encapsulated what sense they made of their experiences, how they interacted with

others and what actions they took as a result. In this regard, this study is an important

Conclusion 318

contribution to understanding in this field. Understanding the experiences of

students, who are the ones most affected by SWL, is crucial if outcomes of such

programs are to be improved.

The development of VET programs in schools, which includes both off-the-

job and on-the-job learning, has resulted in rapid growth in the participation of senior

secondary students in these programs in recent years. This rapid growth has placed

considerable strain on available resources, particularly with regard to workplace

learning. Government policies continue to promote skill development and increased

labour market participation in order to increase Australia’s international

competitiveness, and for young people to develop key work and life related

competencies in order to make a successful transition from school to the workforce.

SWL is seen as an important part of this process. The theory of Workplace

Formation furthers understanding of processes in this area.

This chapter has discussed the implications of the findings of this research for

various stakeholders, and how this can lead to program improvement. Given the

importance of SWL in assisting students to make a successful transition from school

to work and limited knowledge of the processes involved, this study is an important

and timely contribution in this area.

References 319

REFERENCES

ABS (Australian Bureau of Statistics) (1996). Census of population and housing:

Selected family and labour force characteristics for statistical local areas. Canberra: Commonwealth of Australia.

ABS (Australian Bureau of Statistics) (2001). Census of population and housing –

socio-economic indexes for areas, 2039.0. Canberra: Commonwealth of Australia.

ABS (Australian Bureau of Statistics) (2006). Labour force. Canberra:

Commonwealth of Australia. ACTU/TDC (1987). Australia reconstructed: A report by the mission members to the

ACTU and the TDC. Canberra: AGPS. Adkins, C. L. (1995). Previous work experience and organisational socialisation: A

longitudinal examination. Academy of Management Journal, 38(3), 839-862. Anderson, N., & Thomas, H. D. C. (1996). Work group socialisation. In M. A. West

(Ed.), Handbook of work groups (pp. 423-450). Chichester: Wiley. ANTA (Australian National Training Authority) (1994). Towards a skilled Australia:

A national strategy for vocational education and training. Brisbane: ANTA. ANTA (Australian National Training Authority) (1998). A bridge to the future:

Australia’s national strategy for vocational education and training 1998-2003. Brisbane: ANTA.

ANTA (Australian National Training Authority) (2003). National guidelines for

school-based new apprenticeships. Brisbane: ANTA. ANTA (Australian National Training Authority) (2004). Shaping our future:

Australia’s national strategy for vocational education and training 2004-2010. Brisbane: ANTA.

Ashenden, D. (1990). The student-workers. Report for the Department of

Employment, Education and Training. Canberra: AGPS. Ashford, S. J. (1986). The role of feedback seeking in individual adaptation: A

resource perspective. Academy of Management Journal, 29(3), 465-487. Ashford, S. J., & Black, J. S. (1996). Proactivity during organisational entry: The

role of desire for control. Journal of Applied Psychology, 81(2), 199-214. Ashford, S. J., & Cummings, L. L. (1985). Proactive feedback seeking: The

instrumental use of the information environment. Journal of Occupational Psychology, 58, 67-79.

References 320

Ashforth, B. E., & Saks, A. M. (1996). Socialisation tactics: Longitudinal effects on

newcomer adjustment. Academy of Management Journal, 39, 149-178. Bandura, A. (1977). Social learning theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall. Bauer, T. N., & Green, S. G. (1998). Testing the combined effects of newcomer

information seeking and manager behaviour on socialisation. Journal of Applied Psychology, 83(1), 72-83.

Bauer, T. N., Morrison, E. W., & Callister, R. R. (1998). Organisational

socialisation: A review and directions for future research. In G. R. Ferris & K. M. Rowlands (Eds.), Research in personnel and human resource management, 16, (pp. 149-214). Stamford, CT: JAI Press.

Becker, H. S. (1964). Personal change in adult life. Sociometry, 27(1), 40-53. Berger, P., & Luckman, T. (1966). The social construction of reality: A treatise in

the sociology of knowledge. New York: Anchor Books. Billett, S. (1993). Learning is working when working is learning: A guide to learning

in the workplace. Brisbane: Griffith University, Centre for Skill Formation Research and Development.

Billett, S. (1994a). Authenticity in workplace learning settings. In J. C. Stevenson

(Ed.), Cognition at work: The development of vocational expertise (pp. 36-75). Adelaide, SA: NCVER.

Billett, S. (1994b). Situated learning – a workplace experience. Australian Journal of

Adult and Community Education, 34(2), 112-30. Billett, S. (1996). Towards a model of workplace learning: The learning curriculum.

Studies in Continuing Education, 18(1), 43-58. Billett, S. (1998). Guided learning in the workplace: Five enterprises. Conference

Papers: Vocational knowledge and institutions – changing relations, 2, 12-23. Billett, S. (1999). Guided learning in the workplace. In D. Boud and J. Garrick

(Eds.), Understanding learning at work (pp. 151-164). London: Routledge. Billett, S. (2000). Guided learning at work. Journal of Workplace Learning, 12(7),

272-284. Billett, S. (2001). Learning through work: Workplace affordances and individual

engagement. Journal of Workplace Learning, 13(5/6), 209-215. Blackledge, D. A., & Hunt, B. D. (1985). Sociological interpretations of education.

London: C. Helm.

References 321

Blumer, H. (1969). Symbolic interaction: Perspectives and methods. Englewood-Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

Bogdan, R. C., & Biklen, S. K. (1982). Qualitative research for education: An

introduction to theory and methods. Boston: Allyn and Bacon. Borman, K. M. (1988). The process of becoming a worker. In J. T. Mortimer & K.

M. Borman (Eds.), Work experience and psychological development through the lifespan (pp. 51-75). Boulder, Colorado: Westview Press.

Bova, B. (1987). Mentoring as a learning experience. In V. J. Marsick (Ed.),

Learning in the workplace (pp. 119-133). London: Croom Helm. Brooker, R., & Butler, J. (1997). The learning context within the workplace: As

perceived by apprentices and their workplace trainers. Journal of Vocational Education and Training, 49(4), 487-510.

Bucher, R. & Stelling, J. G. (1977). Becoming professional. Beverley Hills, CA:

Sage. Buechtemann, C. F., & Soloff, D. J. (1994). Education, training and the economy:

Report on an international conference on human capital investments and economic performance. Industrial Relations Journal, 25(3), 234-246.

Burgess, R. G. (1994). Field methods in the study of education. New York: Falmer

Press. Candy, P. & Matthews, J. (1998). Fusing learning and work: Changing conceptions

of workplace learning. In D. Boud (Ed.), Current issues and new agendas in workplace learning (pp. 9-30). Adelaide, SA: NCVER.

Carmichael, L. (Chair). (1992). The Australian vocational certificate training system.

Canberra: National Board of Employment, Education and Training, March. Chan, D., & Schmitt, N. (2000). Interindividual differences in intraindividual

changes in proactivity during organisational entry: A latent growth modelling approach to understanding newcomer adaptation. Journal of Applied Psychology, 85(2), 190-210.

Chen, G. (2005). Newcomer adaptation in teams: Multilevel antecedents and

outcomes. Academy of Management Journal, 48(1), 101-116. Chen, G., & Klimoski, R. J. (2003). The impact of expectations on newcomer

performance in teams as mediated by work characteristics, social exchanges, and empowerment. Academy of Management Journal, 46(5), 591-607.

Cochrane, D. (1974). Australian labour market training: Report of the committee of

inquiry into labour market training. Canberra: Australian Department of Labour, AGPS.

References 322

Cooper-Thomas, H., & Anderson, N. (2002). Newcomer adjustment: The relationship between organisational socialisation tactics, information acquisition and attitudes. Journal of Occupational and Organisational Psychology, 75, 423-437.

Cooper-Thomas, H. D., & Anderson, N. (2005). Organisational socialisation: A field

study into socialisation success and rate. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 13(2), 116-128.

Cornford, I. R., & Beven, F. A. (1999). Workplace learning: Differential learning

needs of novices and more experienced workers. Australian and New Zealand Journal of Vocational Education Research, 7(2), 25-54.

Crittenden, B. (1996). The argument over liberal and vocational education in the

senior secondary years. Education Research and Perspectives, 23(1), 93-109. Cronbach, L. J. (1975). Beyond the two disciplines of scientific psychology. The

American Psychologist, 30, 116-127. Curriculum Council (2002). Our youth, our future: Post-compulsory education

review. Perth, WA: Curriculum Council of Western Australia. Dawkins, J. S. (1988a). A changing workforce. Canberra: AGPS. Dawkins, J. S. (1988b). Strengthening Australia’s schools. Canberra: AGPS. Dawkins, J. S., & Holding, A. C. (1987). Skills for Australia. Canberra: AGPS. Department of Education (2001). Review of enterprise and vocational education and

training in schools 2001. Perth, WA: Author. Department of Education and Training (2002). Review of vocational education and

training in schools December 2002. Perth, WA: Author. Department of Education and Training (2003). Review of vocational education and

training in schools 2003. Perth, WA: Author. Department of Education and Training (2004). VET for school students 2004

Western Australian statistics. Perth, WA: Author. Department of Education and Training (2006). Vocational education and training

(VET) for school students principles and funding guidelines 2006. Perth, WA: Author.

DEST (Department of Education, Science and Training) (2005). Guidelines for the

structured workplace learning (SWL) programme. Canberra: DEST. Dusseldorp Skills Forum (DSF) (2003). How young people are faring: Key

indicators 2003. Glebe, NSW: Dusseldorp Skills Forum.

References 323

Dusseldorp Skills Forum (DSF) (2004). How young people are faring: Key indicators 2004. Glebe, NSW: Dusseldorp Skills Forum.

Dusseldorp Skills Forum (DSF) (2005). How young people are faring 2005. Glebe,

NSW: Dusseldorp Skills Forum. EDWA (Education Department of Western Australia) (1999). Review of vocational

education and training in schools 1999. Perth, WA: Author. EDWA (Education Department of Western Australia) (2000). Review of vocational

education and training in schools 2000. Perth, WA: Author. Erickson, F. (1986). Qualitative methods in research on teaching. In M. C. Wittrock

(Ed.), Handbook of research on teaching (3rd ed.) (pp. 119-161). New York: Macmillan.

Ertl, H & Sloane, P. (2004). The German training system and the world of work: The

transfer potential of the lernfeldkonzept. Retrieved January 2006 from www.bwpat.de/7eu/ertl_sloane_de_bwpat7.pdf

Farren, C., Gray, J., & Kaye, B. (1984). Mentoring: A boom to career development.

Personnel, 19-24. Feldman, D. (1976). A contingency theory of socialisation. Administrative Science

Quarterly, 21(3), 433-452. Feldman, D. C. (1977). The role of initiation activities in socialisation. Human

Relations, 30, 977-990. Feldman, D. C. (1981). The multiple socialisation of organisation members.

Academy of Management Review, 6(000002), 309-318. Feldman, D. C. (1989). Socialisation, resocialisation, and training: Reframing the

research agenda. In I. Goldstein (ed.), Training and development in organisations (pp. 376-416). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Feldman, D. C., & Brett, J. M. (1983). Coping with new jobs: A comparative study

of new hires and job changers. Academy of Management Journal, 26(000002), 258-272.

Figgis, J. (2006). Looking back at TRAC. Glebe, NSW: Dusseldorp Skills Forum. Filstad, C. (2004). How newcomers use role models in organisational socialisation.

Journal of Workplace Learning, 16(7/8), 396 – 500. Finn, B. (Chair). (1991). Young people’s participation in post-compulsory education

and training. Canberra: AGPS.

http://www.bwpat.de/7eu/ertl_sloane_de_bwpat7.pdf

References 324

Fisher, C. D. (1986). Organisational socialisation: An integrative review. In K. M. Rowland & G. R. Ferris (Eds.), Research in personnel and human resources management, 4, (pp. 101-145). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.

Fontana, A., & Frey, J. H. (1994). Interviewing : The art of science. In N. K. Denzin,

& Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (pp. 361-376). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Frost, M. (2003). End of an era. Australian Careers Service, 12(3), 1. Geer, B. (1966). Occupational commitment and the teaching profession. The School

Review, 74(1), 31-47. Glaser, B. (1978). Theoretical sensitivity. California: Sociology Press. Glaser, B., & Strauss, A. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for

qualitative research. Chicago: Aldine Publishing Co. Graen, G. B., Orris, J. B., & Johnson, T. W. (1973). Role assimilation processes in a

complex organisation. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 3, 395-420. Greenberger, E. (1988). Working in teenage America. In J. T. Mortimer & K. M.

Borman (Eds.), Work experience and psychological development through the lifespan (pp. 21-50). Boulder, Colorado: Westview Press.

Gregory, R. G. (1993). Aspects of Australian and US living standards: The

disappearing decades 1970-1990. The Economic Record, 69(204), 61-76. Guba, E. G., & Lincoln, Y. S. (1981). Effective evaluation. San Francisco : Jossey-

Bass. Hager, P. (1997). Review of research: Learning in the workplace. Leabrook, SA:

NCVER. Hall, W. (1995). The national training reform agenda. The Australian Economic

Review, 2, 87-93. Hargreaves, A. (1989). Curriculum and assessment reform. Milton Keynes: Open

University Press. Harris, R., & Simons, M. (1999). Views through three windows: A study of the

purposes and usefulness of on- and off-job training. Australian and New Zealand Journal of Vocational Education Research, 7(2), 55-80.

Harris, R., Willis, P., Simons, M., & Underwood, F. (1998). Learning the job:

Juggling the messages in on- and off-the-job training. Adelaide, SA: NCVER. Harrold, R. (1994). From process to product: Changing directions in public education

policy. In F. Crowther, B. Caldwell, J. Chapman, G. Lakomske, & D. Ogilvie

References 325

(Eds.), The workplace in education: Australian perspectives (pp. 208-217). Sydney: Edward Arnold Australia.

House of Representatives Standing Committee on Education and Training (2004).

Learning to work: Report on the inquiry into vocational education in schools. Canberra: Commonwealth of Australia.

Jones, G. R. (1986). Socialisation tactics, self-efficacy, and newcomers’ adjustments

to organisations. Academy of Management Journal, 29(2), 262-279. Kanter, R. M. (1974). Commitment and social organisation. In D. Field (Ed.), Social

psychology for sociologists (pp. 126-146). London: Nelson. Karmel, T. (2004). Current directions in Australia’s vocational education and

training system. Paper presented to the International Vocational Education Conference, Tianjin, China, October. Leabrook, SA: NCVER.

Keating, J. (1995). Australian training reform: Implications for schools. Carlton,

VIC: Curriculum Corporation. Keating, J., Medrich, E., Volkoff, V., & Perry, J. (2002). Comparative study of

vocational education and training systems: National vocational education and training systems across three regions under pressure of change. Leabrook, SA: NCVER.

Keating, P. J. (1994). Working nation: The white paper on employment and growth.

Canberra: AGPS. Kennedy, K. J. (1995). An analysis of the policy contexts of recent curriculum

reform efforts in Australia, Great Britain and the United States. In D. S. G. Carter and M. H. O’Neill (Eds.), International perspectives on educational reform and policy implementation (pp. 71-85). London: The Falmer Press.

Kirby, P. E. F. (Chair) (1985). Report of committee of inquiry into labour market

programs. Canberra: AGPS. Kram, K. E. (1985). Mentoring at work: Developmental relationships in

organisational life. Glenview, Illinois: Scott, Foresman and Company. Lacey, C. (1977). The socialisation of teachers. London: Methuen and Co. Ltd. Lamb, S., Long, M., & Malley, J. (1998). Access and equity in vocational education

and training: Results from longitudinal surveys of Australian youth. Melbourne, VIC: ACER.

Lamb, S., Walstab, A., Teese, R., Vickers, M., & Rumberger, R. (2004). Staying on

at school: Improving student retention in Australia. Report for the Queensland Department of Education and the Arts. Brisbane: Department of Education and the Arts.

References 326

Lave, J. & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

LeCompte, M., & Goetz, J. (1982). Problems of reliability and validity in

ethnographic research. Review of Educational Research, 52(1), 31-60. LeCompte, M. D., & Preissle, J. (1993). Ethnography and qualitative design in

educational research. New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich. Lewis, P. (2004). The Australian labour market and unemployment in 2004. Paper

presented to the H R Nicholls Society XXVth Conference, Melbourne, 6-8th August 2004. Perth, WA: University of Western Australia.

Liden, R. C., Wayne, S. J., & Sparrowe, R. T. (2000). An examination of the

mediating role of psychological empowerment on the relations between the job, interpersonal relationships, and work outcomes. Journal of Applied Psychology, 83(3), 407-416.

Liden, R. C., Wayne, S. J., & Stilwell, D. (1993). A longitudinal study on the early

development of leader-member exchanges. Journal of Applied Psychology, 78(4), 662-674.

Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage

Publications. Louis, M. (1980). Surprise and sense making: What newcomers experience in

entering unfamiliar organisational settings. Administrative Science Quarterly, 25(2), 226-251.

Louis, M. R., Posner, B. Z., & Powell, G. N. (1983). The availability and helpfulness

of socialisation practices. Personnel Psychology, 36, 857-866. Major, D. A., & Kozlowski, S W. J. (1997). Newcomer information seeking:

Individual and contextual influences. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 5(1), 16-28.

Major, D. A., Kozlowski, S. W. J., Chao, G. T., & Gardner, P. D. (1995). A

longitudinal investigation of newcomer expectations, early socialisation outcomes, and the moderating effects of role development factors. Journal of Applied Psychology, 80(3), 418-431.

Malley, J. (1999). Youth transition and VET in schools. Vocal: Australian Journal of

Vocational Education and Training in Schools. 2(1), 38-41. Malley, J., Frigo, T., & Robinson, L. (1999). Case studies of Australian school-

industry programs. Sydney: ASTF. Malley, J., Keating, J., Robinson, L., & Hawke, G. (2001). The quest for a working

blueprint: Vocational education and training in Australian secondary schools. Leabrook, SA: NCVER.

References 327

Mayer, E. (Chair). (1992a). Employment-related key competencies: A proposal for

consultation. Melbourne: The Australian Education Council and Ministers for Vocational Education, Employment and Training.

Mayer, E. (Chair). (1992b). Putting general education to work: The key

competencies report. Melbourne: The Australian Education Council and Ministers for Vocational Education, Employment and Training.

MCEETYA (1999). Partnerships for growth: Report of the MCEETYA Taskforce on

Vocational Education and Training (VET), April. Canberra: MCEETYA. MCEETYA (2000a). New framework for vocational education 2001 to 2004.

Canberra: MCEETYA. MCEETYA (2000b). New pathways for learning: Report of the MCEETYA

Taskforce on Vocational Education and Training (VET) in Schools, March. Canberra: MCEETYA.

MCEETYA Transition from School Taskforce (2004). National data on

participation in VET in schools programs and school-based new apprenticeships for the 2003 school year. Canberra: MCEETYA.

MCEETYA Transition from School Taskforce (2005). National data on

participation in VET in schools programs and school-based new apprenticeships for the 2004 school year. Canberra: MCEETYA.

Merriam S. B. (1988). Case study research in education: A qualitative approach.

San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Miller, V. D., & Jablin, F. M. (1991). Information seeking during organisational

entry: Influences, tactics, and a model of the process. Academy of Management Review, 16(1), 92-120.

Misko, J. (1998). School students in workplaces: What are the benefits? Adelaide,

SA: NCVER. Misko, J. (2006). Vocational education and training in Australia, the United

Kingdom and Germany. Adelaide, SA: NCVER. Mitchell, R., Robertson, I., & Shorten, A. (1999). Law and policy in vocational

education and training: A contemporary survey. Leabrook, SA: NCVER. Morrison, E. W. (1993a). Longitudinal study of the effects of information seeking on

newcomer socialisation. Journal of Applied Psychology, 78(2), 173-183. Morrison, E. W. (1993b). Newcomer information seeking: Exploring types, modes,

sources, and outcomes. Academy of Management Journal, 36(3), 557-589.

References 328

Morrison, E. W. (2002). Newcomers’ relationships: The role of social network ties during socialisation. Academy of Management Journal, 46(6), 1149-1161.

Mulraney, J., Turner, P., Wyatt, F., Harris, R., & Gibson, T. (2002). The role of small

enterprise in school students’ workplace learning. Leabrook, SA: NCVER. Noble, C., Hill, D., Smith, E., & Smith, A. (1999). Policy issues in the

implementation of User Choice in the Australian training market. Journal of Vocational Education and Training, 51(1), 5-23.

NZQA (New Zealand Qualifications Authority) (2001). Unit standards and

achievement standards – what’s the difference? QA news, Issue 38, June. Retrieved April 4, 2005, from http://www.nzqa.govt.nz/publications/newsletters/qanews/june-2001/story1.html.

NZQA (New Zealand Qualifications Authority) (2003). Prior learning for learners.

Wellington, NZ: Author. OECD (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development) (1983).

Education and work: The views of the young. Paris: OECD. OECD (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development) (1994a).

Apprenticeship: Which way forward? Paris: OECD. OECD (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development) (1994b).

Vocational education and training for youth: Towards coherent policy and practice. Paris: OECD.

OECD (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development) (2001).

Education at a glance. Paris: OECD. OECD (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development) (2002).

Education at a glance. Paris: OECD. OECD (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development) (2003).

Economic survey Australia. Paris: OECD. Ostroff, C., & Kozlowski, S. W. J. (1992). Organisational socialisation as a learning

process: The role of information acquisition. Personnel Psychology, 45, 849-874.

Parlett, M., & Hamilton, D. (1976). Evaluation as illumination. In D. Tawney (Ed.),

Curriculum Evaluation Today: Trends and implications (pp. 83-101). (Schools Council Research Studies). London: MacMillan Education.

Patton, M. Q. (1980). Qualitative evaluation methods. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

http://www.nzqa.govt.nz/publications/newsletters/qanews/june-2001/story1.html

http://www.nzqa.govt.nz/publications/newsletters/qanews/june-2001/story1.html

References 329

Payne, S. C., & Huffman, A. H. (2005). A longitudinal examination of the influence of mentoring on organisational commitment and turnover. Academy of Management Journal, 48(1), 158-168.

Peters, M. (1995). Educational reform and the politics of the curriculum in New

Zealand. In D. S. G. Carter and M. H. O’Neill (Eds.), International perspectives on educational reform and policy implementation (pp. 52-68). London: The Falmer Press.

Petherbridge, J. (1997). Work experience: Making an impression. Educational

Review, 49(1), 21-27. Phelps, L. A., Hernandez-Gantes, V. M., Jones, J., Sanchez, D., & Nieri, A. H.

(1995). Students’ indicators of quality in emerging school-to-work programs. Journal of Vocational Education Research, 20(2), 75-101.

Polesel, J., Helme, S., Davies, M., Teese, R., Nicholas, T., & Vickers, M. (2004).

VET in Schools: A post-compulsory education perspective. Adelaide, SA: NCVER.

Polesel, J., & Teese, R. (2002). Transitions from the VET in Schools program: The

2000 Year 12 cohort. Melbourne: Department of Education and Training. Polesel, J., & Teese, R. (2003). Transitions from the VET in Schools program: The

2001 Year 12 cohort. Melbourne: Department of Education and Training. Polesel, J., Teese, R., Lamb, S., Helme, S., Nicholas, T., & Clarke, K. (2005).

Destination and satisfaction survey of 2004 HSC VET students in New South Wales: Final report. Sydney: NSW Department of Education and Training.

Polesel, J., Teese, R., & O’Brien, K. (2001). Transitions from the VET in Schools

program: The 2000 year 12 cohort. Melbourne: Department of Education and Training.

Porter, P., Lingard, B., & Knight, J. (1994). Changing administration and

administering change: An analysis of the state of Australian education. In F. Crowther, B. Caldwell, J. Chapman, G. Lakomske, & D. Ogilvie (Eds.), The workplace in education: Australian perspectives (pp. 218-228). Sydney: Edward Arnold Australia.

Punch, K. F. (1998). Introduction to social research: Quantitative and qualitative

approaches. London: Sage. Reichers, A. E. (1987). An interactionist perspective on newcomer socialisation

rates. Academy of Management Review, 12(2), 278-287. Reid, I. (1986). The sociology of school and education. London: Fontana Press.

References 330

Reuling, J. (2002). Pathways for youth in Germany. In G. Burke & J. Reuling (eds.), Vocational training and life-long learning in Australia and Germany (pp. 189-202). Leabrook, SA: NCVER.

Robinson, L. (1999). The effects of part-time work on school students. Longitudinal

Surveys of Australian Youth, Research Report no. 9. Melbourne: ACER. Saks, A. M., & Ashforth, B. E. (1997a). Organisational socialisation: Making sense

of the past and present as a prologue for the future. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 51, 234-279.

Saks, A. M., & Ashforth, B. E. (1997b). Socialisation tactics and newcomer

information acquisition. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 5(1), 48-61.

Scandura, T. A. (1997). Mentoring and organisational justice: An empirical

investigation. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 51(1), 58-69. Schein, E. H. (1968). Organisational socialisation and the profession of management.

Industrial Management Review, 9(1), 1-16. Schein, E. H. (1971). The individual, the organisation, and the career: A conceptual

scheme. Journal of Applied Behavioural Science, 7(4), 401-426. Schein, E. H. (1988). Organisational socialisation and the profession of management.

Sloan Management Review, 30(1), 53-65. Schofield, K. (1999a). Independent investigation into the quality of training in

Queensland’s traineeship system. Report prepared for the Department of Employment, Training and Industrial Relations, Brisbane.

Schofield, K. (1999b). A risky business: Review of the quality of Tasmania’s

traineeship system. Retrieved 20 November 2004 from www.ovet.tas.gov.au/pub_res.

Schofield, K. (2000). Delivering quality: Report of the independent review of the

quality of training in Victoria’s apprenticeship and traineeship system. Melbourne: Department of Education, Employment and Training.

Schwandt, T. A. (1994). Constructivist, interpretivist approaches to human inquiry.

In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (pp. 118-135). Thousand Oaks, Cal: Sage Publications.

Schwartz, H., & Jacobs, J. (1979). Qualitative sociology: A method to the madness.

New York: The Free Press. Selby Smith, J., Selby Smith, C., & Ferrier, F. (1996). Key policy issues in the

implementation of User Choice. Centre for the Economics of Education and Training, Melbourne: Monash University.

http://www.ovet.tas.gov.au/pub_res

References 331

Settoon, R. P., & Adkins, C. L. (1997). Newcomer socialisation: The role of supervisors, co-workers, friends and family members. Journal of Business and Psychology, 11(4), 507-516.

Smith, A. (1998). Training and development in Australia. Sydney: Butterworths. Smith, E. (1996). Following country TRACs: a study of a school-work program in

rural towns. Rural Society, 6(1), 14-23. Retrieved June 2006 from www.csu.edu.au/research/crsr/ruralsoc/v6n1p14.htm.

Smith, E. (2000). Young people’s learning about work in their first year of full-time

work. Unpublished PhD thesis, University of Technology, Sydney. Smith, E., & Green, A. (2001). School students’ learning from their paid and unpaid

work. Adelaide, SA: NCVER. Smith, E., & Wilson, L. (2002). Learning and training in school-based new

apprenticeships. Adelaide, SA: NCVER. Snook, I. (1995). Re-forming the curriculum in New Zealand. In D. S. G. Carter and

M. H. O’Neill (Eds.), International perspectives on educational reform and policy implementation (pp. 158-168). London: The Falmer Press.

Spark, C. (1998). Vocational education and training in senior secondary schools.

Sydney: Vocational Education and Assessment Centre. Stainback, S., & Stainback, W. (1984). Methodological considerations in qualitative

research. Journal of the Association for Persons With Severe Handicaps, 9(4), 296-303.

Stake, R. E. (1978). The case study method in social inquiry. Educational

Researcher, 7, 5-8. Stern, D. (1997). Learning and earning: The value of working for urban students.

ERIC Digest no. 128. Stern, D., Bailey, T. & Merritt, D. (1996). School-to-work policy insights from

recent international developments. Berkeley, CA: National Center for Research in Vocational Education.

Stone, J. R., Kowske, B. J., & Alfeld, C. (2004). Career and technical education in

the late 1990s: A descriptive study. Journal of Vocational Education Research, 29(3), 195-223.

Strathdee, R. (2003). The ‘third way’ and vocational education and training in New

Zealand. Journal of Educational Enquiry, 4(1), 31-48. Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1990). Basics of qualitative research: Grounded theory

procedures and techniques. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

References 332

Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1994). Grounded theory methodology: An overview. In N. K. Denzin, & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (pp. 273-285). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Strickland, A., Simons, M., Harris, R., Robertson, I., Harford, M., & Edwards, A.

(2001). Evaluating on- and off-the-job approaches to learning and assessment in apprenticeships and traineeships. Adelaide, SA: NCVER.

Stromback, T. (1996). The modern Australian apprenticeship and traineeship system

(MAATS): A critical review and implications for stakeholders. Discussion paper 96/7. Perth, WA: Centre for Labour Market Research, Curtin University of Technology.

Stryker, S. (1972). Symbolic interaction as an approach to family research. In J. G.

Manis & B. N. Meltzer (Eds.), Symbolic interaction: A reader in social psychology (pp. 435-447). Boston: Allyn and Bacon.

TAFEWA (2006). Entrance requirements and selection criteria – school leavers.

Perth, WA: TAFEWA. Accessed from www.tafe.wa.gov.au Taormina, R. J. (1997). Organisational socialisation: A multidomain, continuous

process model. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 5(1), 29-47. Taylor, S. J., & Bogdan, R. (1998). Introduction to qualitative research methods: A

guidebook and resource (3rd ed.). New York: John Wiley & Sons. Taylor, A., & Koczberski, G. (2001a). Family of trades 2000: Building &

Construction Industry schools program. Evaluation report for the Building & Construction Industry Training Fund. Perth, WA.

Taylor, A., & Koczberski, G. (2001b). They give you a chance: An evaluation of the

family of trades VET in schools programme. CIE Monograph Series, 3. Perth, WA: Chalkface Press.

Teese, R., Davies, M., & Ryan, C. (1997). Workplacement experience: The student

perspective. Educational Outcomes Research Unit, Melbourne: University of Melbourne.

Teese, R., Polesel, J., Walstab, A., & Mason, K. (2003). Young people’s

participation in VET: Patterns and outcomes. Brisbane: ANTA. Thomas, H. D. C., & Anderson, N. (1998). Changes in newcomers’ psychological

contracts during organisational socialisation: A study of recruits entering the British Army. Journal of Organisational Behavior, 19, 745-767.

Unwin, L., & Wellington, J. (2001). Young people’s perspectives on education,

training and employment. London: Kogan Page.

References 333

Usher, R. (1996). A critique of the neglected epistemological assumptions of educational research. In D. Scott and R. Usher (Eds.), Understanding educational research (pp. 9-32). London: Routledge.

Van Maanen, J. (1976). Breaking in: Socialisation to work. In R. Dubin (Ed.),

Handbook of work, organisation and society, (pp. 67-130). Chicago: Rand McNally.

Van Maanen, J., & Schein, E. H. (1979). Towards a theory of organisational

socialisation. In B. M. Staw (Ed.), Research in organisational behavior, 1, (pp. 209-264). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.

Vaughan, D. (1992). Theory elaboration: The heuristics of case analysis. In H.

Becker, & C. Ragin (Eds.), What is a case? (pp. 173-202). New York: Cambridge University Press.

Vinson, T. (Chair) (2002). Inquiry into the provision of public education in New

South Wales. Third Report, September. NSW: NSW Public Education Inquiry. Wanberg, C. R., & Kammeyer-Mueller, J. D. (2000). Predictors and outcomes of

proactivity in the socialisation process. Journal of Applied Psychology, 85(3), 373-385.

Willis, R. (1988). Labour market reform: The industrial relations agenda. 1988-

1989 Budget related paper no. 9. Canberra: AGPS. Wilson, B., & Engelhard, M. (1994). Young people in full-time work: Issues affecting

apprentices. Youth Research Centre, Melbourne: University of Melbourne.

Appendices 334

APPENDIX A

AIDE MEMOIRE FOR FIRST STUDENT INTERVIEW Guiding Question 1: What are students’ perspectives on the VET program? Aide Memoire:

1 What are their aims and intentions in taking the VET program?

2 What reasons do they have for this?

3 What significance do students attach to the VET program? Interview guide and probes:

1 What are your reasons for enrolling in the program?

2 What are you aiming to get out of the program? - Will it help more than other programs at this school or other schools?

3 What do you intend to do when you leave school?

- What made you decide on that – how did that come about? - Who or what influenced you?

4 What do you think of the program so far?

- What do you like and dislike about it? - What are the best parts? Worst parts? - What are the hard parts? Easy parts?

5 How useful do you think the program is to you? In what ways?

- How do you see the program helping you? - How does it fit with your plans? - How do you see it contributing to your future career? - Which parts do you find useful to you? Which not useful? Why is that?

(The workplace? School? Maths? Which subjects?)

6 What changes have you made to the way you do things (or in your personal life) because of the program? Why was this?

- Do you intend to make any changes to how you do things in order to get to where you want to go? What changes?

7 What do you think is the purpose of VET at high school?

8 Do you think these programs at high school are worthwhile?

9 Has your view of school changed since you started the program?

Appendices 335

Guiding Question 2: What strategies do students use in going about their work in the program?

a) Managing workplace learning: Aide Memoire:

1 What is expected of students at the workplace? 2 What did they expect to learn from the workplace and what was the source of these expectations? 3 How have they managed their work at the workplace?

Interview guide and probes: 1 What do you do at work? Reasons? 2 What did you expect to learn at the workplace? What was the source of these

expectations? 3 Walk me through what you did from the first day and tell me how you

handled things. - Do you find your own placements? How did this placement come about?

4 What problems/tensions/issues did you encounter that you had to deal with?

- How important are these to you? Why are they important?

5 How did you deal with these? - What ACTIONS did you take? - What were your reasons for taking this action?

6 Tell me about how the people at work are and the way they do things? - Are they different to people at school? In what way and how do you deal

with that? - In what ways are you influenced by them and how do you handle that?

7 At the workplace, are you treated as a WORKER or as a SCHOOL STUDENT? How do you handle that?

8 Do you see yourself as a WORKER or a SCHOOL STUDENT at the

workplace? 9 Do you regard the workplace as a place where you WORK or a place where

you LEARN? Explain. 10 How do you act or behave or conduct yourself when you are at work? Why?

- Is that different to how you are at school?

11 Did you find it easy or hard to fit in at work? How did you manage that? - Going to different workplaces – how do you deal with the different

expectations? Is it a problem? Do you like it? Why?

Appendices 336

12 Are the times that you have to be at work a problem? Does this conflict with

other things, if so, how? How do you manage this? - Is the day a good day? - Is one (or 2 for trainees) day each week enough? Why? - How do you make up for work that you miss?

13 What about transport to and from work? Dress standards? Are these problems? How do you manage these? 14 What do you think you are learning at the workplace?

b) Managing schoolwork:

Aide Memoire: 1 What have you been doing at school? 2 What problems did you encounter or issues that you had to contend with? 3 How did you deal with these problems or issues?

- What actions did you take? - What were your reasons for this action? - How important are these issues to you?

4 Which do you see as more important in your learning – schoolwork or the

workplace? Why?

c) Integrating school and workplace learning:

Aide Memoire: 1 What aspects of your schoolwork do you find useful at your workplace? 2 What aspects of your workplace do you find useful at school? 3 What do you find is different at school and the workplace? - Are people different? - Do you get treated differently at school and the workplace?

4 How do you deal with that? What actions do you take? 5 Do you see any connection between SWL and your schoolwork? How well

do they fit? 6 How does the one day (SWL) each week fit with your schoolwork? Any problems?

Appendices 337

d) Managing competing factors: Aide Memoire: 1 What do you see as the competing things (factors) between your workplace,

your schoolwork and your personal life? 2 What are the ‘blockages’ – things that get in the way, don’t make it easy? (e.g.

part-time job? need help at work but the boss is very busy?) How important is each of these to you?

3 How do you handle or deal with these? 4 How do you fit in your schoolwork and SWL? Additional guiding questions: 1 Planning - do you plan ahead for things at school or work? - do you do much preparation for school or work? 2 Do you do things without being told at the workplace? 3 Do you look forward to going to work? School? Why? 4 Do you take your work seriously at your workplace? At school?

----------------------------------------

Appendices 338

APPENDIX B

AIDE MEMIORE FOR SECOND STUDENT INTERVIEW Interview Guide

1 Tell me about your daily schedule – at school and the workplace, how and when you do things and why, how you allocate your time to tasks, the decisions you had to make about this organisation?

2 Have any of these strategies or your organisation changed during the year? 3 What competing factors or things at school, your workplace and your

personal life do you have to deal with at this stage of the program? How do you deal with these – what actions do you take?

(eg. School – class work, homework, relationships with teachers, relationships with other students, after-school demands, etc.

Workplace – employer’s demands and expectations, relationships with mentor and others, quality of work, etc.

Personal lives – family demands, relationships within family, relationship with friends, social life demands, sporting commitments, etc.

e.g. Have part-time job on Thursday but have homework to complete; need help at work but boss is very busy or often unavailable.)

How important is each of these to you? Why? 4 What planning do you make in your day-to-day work? 5 What problems/tensions/issues did you encounter that you had to deal with

- at school? - at the workplace? 6 How did you deal with these? What actions did you take? What were your

reasons for taking this action? 7 What other aspects of school or the workplace do you find hard? How did they come about? How do you deal with these? Are these different to what you experienced earlier in the year? 8 Do you feel any different now about the workplace to when you first

started? Why? What is different? What is the same? Do you do anything different now than before? Why? 9 Do you behave the same or differently at school and at the workplace?

Why? What do you do the same and what do you do differently? Has this changed during the year?

Appendices 339

10 At the workplace, are you treated as a WORKER or a SCHOOL STUDENT? How do you handle that?

11 Do you see yourself as a WORKER or SCHOOL STUDENT at the

workplace? 12 Do you see any of the people you work with as role models? 13 Did you find it EASY or HARD to fit in at work? How did you manage

that? 14 Which is more important to you now – SCHOOL or the WORKPLACE

work? 15 Have your reasons for doing this program changed as a result of your

experiences so far? In what ways? 16 How important is the program now to your future career?

----------------------------------------

Appendices 340

APPENDIX C

AIDE MEMIORE FOR THIRD STUDENT INTERVIEW Interview Guide

1 Tell me about your daily schedule – at school and the workplace, how and when you do things and why, how you allocate your time to tasks, the decisions you had to make about this organisation?

2 Have any of these strategies or your organisation changed during the year? 3 What competing factors or things at school, your workplace and your

personal life do you have to deal with at this stage of the program? How do you deal with these – what actions do you take?

(eg. School – class work, homework, relationships with teachers, relationships with other students, after-school demands, etc.

Workplace – employer’s demands and expectations, relationships with mentor and others, quality of work, etc.

Personal lives – family demands, relationships within family, relationship with friends, social life demands, sporting commitments, etc.

e.g. Have part-time job on Thursday but have homework to complete; need help at work but boss is very busy or often unavailable.)

How important is each of these to you? Why? 4 What planning do you make in your day-to-day work? 5 What problems/tensions/issues did you encounter that you had to deal with

- at school? - at the workplace? 6 How did you deal with these? What actions did you take? What were your

reasons for taking this action? 7 What other aspects of school or the workplace do you find hard? How did they come about? How do you deal with these? Are these different to what you experienced earlier in the year? 8 Do you feel any different now about the workplace to when you first

started? Why? What is different? What is the same? Do you do anything different now than before? Why? 9 Do you behave the same or differently at school and at the workplace?

Why? What do you do the same and what do you do differently? Has this changed during the year?

Appendices 341

10 At the workplace, are you treated as a WORKER or a SCHOOL STUDENT? How do you handle that?

11 Do you see yourself as a WORKER or SCHOOL STUDENT at the

workplace? 12 Do you see any of the people you work with as role models? 13 Did you find it EASY or HARD to fit in at work? How did you manage

that? 14 Which is more important to you now – SCHOOL or the WORKPLACE

work? 15 Do you think you are ready to enter the workforce now? Why? 16 What do you think were the biggest things that you had to deal with during

the year at the workplace? 17 Have your reasons for doing this program changed as a result of your

experiences so far? In what ways? 18 What advice would you give someone who had not done SWL about how

he/she should go about things or how to deal with issues that come up? 19 How important is the program now to your future career? 20 Where do you see yourself this time next year? 21 What are your priorities at the moment? What are the important things to

you at the moment? 22 What are your plans for the rest of this year?

----------------------------------------

Appendices 342

APPENDIX D

AIDE MEMOIRE FOR EMPLOYER INTERVIEW

Interview Guide and Probes

1 How does name go about his/her work? - Is he keen or enthusiastic? - Shows interest? - Diligent?

2 How does he/she get on with other workers? 3 Does he/she fit in? 4 How is he/she handling the work?

- Is he/she coping? - Does he/she find it EASY or HARD? - Is he a quick learner? - Accepts advice? - Uses initiative? - Is organised? - Shows evidence of planning or thinking ahead?

5 How does he/she deal with DIFFICULT situations/issues? 6 Is he/she responsible? Do you give him/her much responsibility? 7 Do you treat him/her as a WORKER or a SCHOOL STUDENT? 8 What are your expectations of him/her? 9 Has he/she CHANGED or PROGRESSED much since he/she first started

here in how he/she goes about his/her work? 10 What do you see as his/her STRENGTHS?

----------------------------------------

Appendices 343

APPENDIX E

WORKPLACES OF STUDENTS INVOLVED IN STUDY Student SWL Industry Area Type of Organisation

or Enterprise Employer Interview

Observation of Student

Peter Automotive Automotive No Yes Jane Business & Clerical Energy resources No Yes Laura 1st) Community Service,

Health & Education Community service

centre No No

2nd) Community Service, Health & Education

School for disabled children

Yes Yes

Ben 1st) Computing Computer retail No No 2nd) Computing IT Services Yes Yes Alex 1st) Engineering Boat building No No 2nd) Computing Computer retail No No Anna 1st) Hosp. & Tourism Travel agency No No 2nd) Community Service,

Health & Education Primary school No No

Mary 1st) Community Service, Health & Education

Child Care centre No No

2nd) Hosp. & Tourism University cafeteria No Yes Emma 1st) Hosp. & Tourism Restaurant Yes No 2nd) Food processing Food processing Yes Yes Megan 1st) Hosp. & Tourism Hotel restaurant No No 2nd) Textiles, Clothing,

Footware & Furnish.Clothing retail No No

Clara Hosp. & Tourism Leisure Yes Yes Erin 1st) Hosp. & Tourism Travel agency No No 2nd) Hosp. & Tourism Travel agency No No Jack Hosp. & Tourism Restaurant Yes Yes Jarrod Hosp. & Tourism Function centre No No Jason Hosp. & Tourism Restaurant Yes Yes Karl 1st) Hosp. & Tourism Cafeteria No No 2nd) Hosp. & Tourism Restaurant Yes Yes Kate 1st) Hosp. & Tourism Hotel restaurant No No 2nd) Hosp. & Tourism Hotel restaurant No No Kelly 1st) Hosp. & Tourism University restaurant Yes (2) No 2nd) Hosp. & Tourism Hotel restaurant No No Lisa Hosp. & Tourism Restaurant No No Lucy 1st) Hosp. & Tourism Restaurant No No 2nd) Hosp. & Tourism Hotel restaurant No Yes Mark 1st) Hosp. & Tourism Hotel restaurant Yes No 2nd) Hosp. & Tourism Armed forces kitchen No No Nancy 1st) Hosp. & Tourism Hotel restaurant No No 2nd) Hosp. & Tourism Restaurant Yes Yes Paul Hosp. & Tourism Cafeteria No No Terri 1st) Hosp. & Tourism Cafeteria No No 2nd) Hosp. & Tourism Cafeteria No No 3rd) Hosp. & Tourism Hotel restaurant No No

Appendices 344

APPENDIX F

OPEN CODING OF INTERVIEW TRANSCRIPT

First Interview with Emma 17 April 2002 – p. 11

Interview Transcript Coding

R Well, pretty much in the first week was the worst because they didn’t really .. like .. the people there are only probably a couple of years older than me, they’re only, like, their early twenties. And, because they’ve worked there they know what has to be done. But I haven’t worked there and I don’t think they really realised, sort of realised that I needed to be told what to do within the first week cos I don’t know what needs to be done cos I’ve never been there before in my life. But, they’d stand there and they’d look at me and they’d say ‘well, aren’t you going to go and do that?’ And it’s like, but I had no idea that that had to be done because I had no idea how they do it or what they do. But now it’s, they can turn around and say ‘well, this needs to be done, you can either do it now or later,’ and I’ll try and say ‘well, I’ll do this first and then I’ll come back to that.’

Assessing Relationship with peers Understanding practices – job knowledge; Lack of understanding practices; Need of direction – information Timeframe; Lack of understanding practices; Conflicting expectations; Surprise; clarifying expectations; Lack of understanding practices; Understanding practices and expectations; Making decisions

Appendices 345

APPENDIX G

EXAMPLE OF AXIAL CODING THEORETICAL MEMO

Theoretical Memo. Category: Familiarising Comes off code note CN05, CN07 Causal Condition Phenomenon Entering a structured workplace Familiarising for the first time Properties of workplace Specific Dimensions of Familiarising Type of work extent – none Size of enterprise duration – continuous Workplace culture trajectory – early in placement Employee treatment previous experience – none Physical conditions uncertainty – high

knowledge of practices – low to none Context for Familiarising Under conditions where a student is placed in a new or unfamiliar workplace for the first time, has had no previous exposure to a structured workplace environment, does not know people or what people are like, does not know what to expect and what is expected of him or her, uncertainty is high for student – unsure how co-workers will react to student, how he/she will be treated, whether he/she will be accepted or rejected, whether he/she will fit in or not, does not know procedures and practices, where things are, what needs to be done, how people go about things, in the early stages of the workplacement – from the first day and attendance at the workplace is ongoing; Action/Interaction Strategies Normally assigned to a supervisor/mentor. Student gathers information through observing what others do, work-shadows other workers or supervisor, listens to information and/or advice given, asks questions and clarifies expectations. Students may read written material or policy/procedural documents. Takes on assigned tasks. In general, starts with low-level tasks. Hence, sets about to understand practices, routines and procedures.

Appendices 346

Begins to interact with supervisor and then with other workers, attempts to develop a relationship with supervisor and others – interacting. This process continues for some time. Student sets out to gain acceptance usually by striving to please, make a good impression, not ‘muck up’, hence, ‘find a place’ in the organisation. Intervening Conditions Treatment by boss or supervisor – conflict with boss or supervisor, friendly, supportive boss or supervisor. Treatment by co-workers – conflict with other workers, support from other workers. Influence of significant others. Age difference with peers. Type of work tasks given. Physical working conditions – open or cramped, hot/stuffy or comfortable, etc. Consequences Through gathering information (observing and shadowing others, asking questions and interacting) student clarifies expectations of him/her by supervisor and other workers; student also clarifies his/her understanding of the job and tasks needed to perform – clarifying expectations. Student gets to know where equipment and materials are located, begins to develop an understanding of practices, procedures and routines which continue to develop over time – understanding practices. With some students this occurs quite quickly; others may take longer. How student is treated will determine the kind of relationships developed and commitment to the organisation by the student. If treated well – supported and accepted by other workers and supervisor – student can develop good working relationships with other workers which may extend to friendships, even beyond the work environment. If treated poorly, this results in low commitment to the organisation. Also, the type of work tasks given influence commitment to the organisation, how well student adapts to the work environment and whether student continues with the placement. Continuous low level tasks where student feels exploited will result in little to no commitment; whereas work where student progressively learns and builds skills and knowledge result in high commitment, enjoyment of work, greater competence and confidence within oneself. In these situations, student finds it easier to ‘find a place’ within the workplace.

Appendices 347

APPENDIX H

CONSENT FORM AND INFORMATION (STUDENT AND PARENTS)

(Parents provided with similar Information Sheet)

Graduate School of Education 35 Stirling Highway Crawley, Western Australia 6009 Telephone +61 8 9380 2388 Facsimile +61 8 9380 1052 Email [email protected]

12 February 2002 Dear Student Mr Putrino is undertaking research for the degree of Doctor of Education at The University of Western Australia. His research is a study of how secondary school students in their first year of a Vocational Education and Training (VET) program ‘manage’ or deal with the day to day learning at school and the workplace during the time that they are on workplacement. Mr Putrino’s research is important because it will provide important knowledge about the VET program from the student’s perspective. How students view these programs and how they manage their work within them will be valuable knowledge for schools and other stakeholders for improving these programs. Students undertaking the Hospitality and Tourism VET program in a number of secondary schools in one education district will be asked to participate in this study. To participate, you will be asked to take part in interviews that are approximately one hour long on three separate occasions during the year. The interviews will be audio taped for subsequent analysis. The study may also involve a short period of observation by Mr Putrino when you are at the workplace. He may also interview your employer. The identity of participants will not be revealed and responses to questions and other data collected will be treated with complete confidentiality. The name of the school will not be used in reports of this research including Mr Putrino’s doctoral thesis. Participation in this study will not affect your assessment in any part of the VET program.

mailto:[email protected]

Appendices 348

You may withdraw from the study at any time without prejudice and you do not have to give any reasons for deciding to withdraw. If that is the case, any data from your participation will be destroyed unless you agree otherwise. Your participation in this study does not prejudice any right to compensation, which you may have under statute or common law. If you have any questions about the study or the procedures at any time, please feel free to ask them. Mr Putrino can be contacted on 94337200 or at home on 94473528. If you would like to be involved in this study, please sign the consent form attached, then ask your parents to give their permission by also signing the form. Yours sincerely __________________________ _________________________ Dr Marnie O’Neill Dr Anthea Taylor Supervisor Supervisor Graduate School of Education Graduate School of Education Phone 9380 2392 Phone 9380 2398 email: [email protected] email: [email protected] The Human Research Ethics Committee at the University of Western Australia requires that all participants are informed that, if they have any complaints regarding the manner in which a research project is conducted, it may be given to the researcher or, alternatively to the Secretary, Human Research Ethics Committee, Registrar’s Office, University of Western Australia, 35 Stirling Highway, Crawley, WA 6009 (telephone 9380 3703). All study participants will be provided with a copy of the consent form for their personal records.


Appendices 349


Consent to Participate in Research

Research Title: A study of how secondary school students in their first year of a Vocational Education and Training program manage their learning during workplacement In order to participate in this study, this Consent Form must be signed by both the student and a parent/guardian. I _________________________ have read the information regarding the above research and any questions I have asked have been answered to my satisfaction. I agree to participate in this research by Mr Putrino, realising that I may withdraw at any time without reason and without prejudice. I understand that all information provided is treated as strictly confidential and will not be released by the researcher unless required by law. I agree that research data gathered for this study may be published provided my name or other identifying information is not used. _________________________________ __________________________ Participant’s signature Date I _________________________ have read the information regarding the above research and any questions I have asked have been answered to my satisfaction. I give my permission for my son/daughter ___________________________________ to participate in this research by Mr Putrino, realising that I may withdraw my son/daughter from the study at any time without reason and without prejudice. I understand that all information provided is treated as strictly confidential and will not be released by the researcher unless required by law. I agree that research data gathered for this study may be published provided my son/daughter’s name or other identifying information is not used. _________________________________ __________________________ Parent/Guardian signature Date Dr Marnie O’Neill/Dr Anthea Taylor, Supervisor, Graduate School of Education. Phone 9380 2392 / 9380 2398. email: [email protected] / [email protected] Mr Putrino. Phone 94337200 or 94473528. email: [email protected] The Human Research Ethics Committee at the University of Western Australia requires that all participants are informed that, if they have any complaint regarding the manner, in which a research project is conducted, it may be given to the researcher or, alternatively to the Secretary, Human Research Ethics Committee, Registrar’s Office, University of Western Australia, 35 Stirling Highway, Crawley, WA 6009 (telephone number 9380-3703). All study participants will be provided with a copy of the Information Sheet and Consent Form for their personal records.


Appendices 350

APPENDIX I

INFORMATION SHEET FOR HOST EMPLOYER

(Consent Form was included with this Information Sheet)


12 February 2002 Dear Employer Mr Putrino is undertaking research for the degree of Doctor of Education at The University of Western Australia. His research is a study of how secondary school students in their first year of a Vocational Education and Training (VET) program ‘manage’ or deal with the day to day learning at school and the workplace during the time that they are on workplacement. Mr Putrino’s research is important because it will provide useful knowledge about the VET program from the student’s perspective. How students view these programs and how they manage their work within them will be valuable knowledge for schools and other stakeholders for improving these programs. Students undertaking the Hospitality and Tourism VET program in a number of secondary schools in one education district will be asked to participate in this study. Students will be asked to take part in interviews of approximately one hour long on three separate occasions during the year. The interviews will be audio taped for subsequent analysis. The study may also involve a short period of observation by Mr Putrino when the student is at the workplace. He may also wish to interview the student’s SWL supervisor. The purpose of this is to help verify and enrich the data collected from students. The identity of participants will not be revealed and responses to questions and other data collected will be treated with complete confidentiality. The name of the school or the workplace will not be used in reports of this research including Mr Putrino’s doctoral thesis. Participation in this research will not affect the student’s assessment in any part of the VET or school program.


Appendices 351

If you participate, you may withdraw from the study at any time without prejudice without giving any reasons for deciding to withdraw. If that is the case, any data from your participation will be destroyed unless you agree otherwise. Your participation in this study does not prejudice any right to compensation, which you may have under statute or common law. If you have any questions about the study or the procedures at any time, please feel free to ask them. Mr Putrino can be contacted on 94337200 or at home on 94473528. If you agree to be involved in this study, please sign the consent form attached. Yours sincerely ___________________________ __________________________ Dr Marnie O’Neill Dr Anthea Taylor Supervisor Supervisor Graduate School of Education Graduate School of Education Phone 9380 2392 Phone 9380 2398 email: [email protected] email: [email protected] The Human Research Ethics Committee at the University of Western Australia requires that all participants are informed that, if they have any complaints regarding the manner in which a research project is conducted, it may be given to the researcher or, alternatively to the Secretary, Human Research Ethics Committee, Registrar’s Office, University of Western Australia, 35 Stirling Highway, Crawley, WA 6009 (telephone number 9380 3703). All study participants will be provided with a copy of the Information Sheet and Consent Form for their personal records.



Documents

WORKPLACE FORMATION: HOW SECONDARY SCHOOL … · HOW SECONDARY SCHOOL STUDENTS MANAGE STRUCTURED WORKPLACE LEARNING Pasco John Putrino This thesis is presented for the degree of Doctor