Introduction

Work placement in vocational education is often too short and incidental to gain appropriate knowledge, competence and skills in the workplace (Billet, 2002; Leney & Green, 2005). Although this also applies to pre-vocational secondary education (vmbo) in the Netherlands, students generally find work placement  a valuable experience. In contrast with that, much school stuff is not meaningful to them. It can be argued that learning in both school and work placement may be enhanced, if students connect what they learn in general and vocational school subjects with what they learn in the workplace.

Although, literature on the dichotomy of learning in the workplace and in school is abundant, much of it deals with this issue from a general perspective, i.e., addressing the question of ‘how’ learning can be connected without taking into account ‘what’ has to be learned (and connected). Addressing the ‘what’ and the ‘how’ question simultaneously, may offer new insights into the problems related to the connection of learning in school and in the workplace, and thus provide guidelines for educational improvement.     

For this reason, our design research project addresses the issue of learning about animal reproduction in the school subjects  ‘biology’ and  ‘animal husbandry and care’, and specific trainee posts.

This paper reports on the research-informed design and field test of a learning and supervising strategy which aims at  connecting learning about animal reproduction in school and work placement.  We seek to answer the following research question:

 What are the characteristics of a learning and supervising strategy of use in work placement in pre-vocational secondary education that effectively enables trainees to connect what is learned about animal reproduction in school and in the workplace?

 Conceptual framework

The strategy should address pedagogic problems of work placement identified in a previous study (Mazereeuw et al., forthcoming). An in-depth analysis of these problems was based on a theoretical framework which drew upon activity-theory (e.g. Engeström, 1999; Griffiths & Guile, 2003; Van Oers, 1998). The analysis of learning problems during work placement from this theoretical perspective resulted in characterizing the intended learning process followed by the formulation of four implication for a learning and supervising strategy (Mazereeuw et al., forthcoming).

× It should be clear that animal reproduction is the means to reach an outcome of the workplace. (e.g. producing milk in a cattle farm and producing stallions in a stud farm);

× A trainee post should enable students to engage in actions that correspond with what ultimately counts in the workplace and which require knowledge of reproduction;

× The sequence of actions performed by trainees should aim at shifting their perspective towards what ultimately counts in the workplace, providing a sense of direction and a need to know;

× Supervision in the workplace should support trainees in reflective actions. This should include reflection on prior experiences (including school), reflection in and on actions in the workplace, reflection on meanings of vocabulary words used in different practices (workplaces and school). 

Billet, S. (2002). Critiquing wokplace learning discourses: Participation and continuity at work. Studies in the education of adults, 34(1), 56-67 Engeström, Y. (1999). Expansive visibilization of work: An activity-theoretical perspective. Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW), 8(1), 63-93. Griffiths, T., & Guile, D. (2003). A connective model of learning: the implications for work process knowledge. European educational research journal, 2(1), 56-73. Leney, T. & Green, A. (2005) Achieving the Lisbon goal: the contribution of vocational education and training. European Journal of Education, 40 (3), 261 – 278. Mazereeuw, M., Waarlo, A.J., & Boersma, K. T. (forthcoming). Connecting school and work placement: learning about animal reproduction. Paper presented at the ECER-conference, Vienna. Sept. 2009 Van Oers, B. (1998). From context to contextualizing. Learning and Instruction, 8(6), 473-488.