Comprehensive Experiential Learning Centers

1
Comprehensive Experiential Learning Centers

• Maintaining integrity and direction in a changing
  learning environment

2
Higher education practices

• Internships have been part of academic curricula,
  mostly in professionally oriented disciplines,
  instructed by faculty for credit.
• Co-op has been in selected departments, initially
  identified with engineering, later with liberal
  arts. In past 30 years expanded to many
  disciplines.
• Other forms of experiential learning have been
  supported in academic departments

3
Shift in emphasis

• In the late 1980s and early 1990s, USA, Canada,
  Australia and U.K. all produced documents about
  necessary skills for the workforce.
• In the U.S., it was the SCANS report (Secretarys
  Commission on Necessary Skills) from the
  Department of Labor. Fueled by industry spending
  large sums of money to train new hires after
  graduation from universities, especially in soft
  skills. (Secretarys Commission on Advancing
  Necessary Skills. (1990). SCANS report.
  Washington, DC US Department of Labor.)

4
Shift in emphasis

• The White Paper on Higher Education focuses on
  access, learning vs. teaching, and use of
  technology (Edgerton, R. (1997). White paper on
  higher education.  Pew Charitable Trust N.J.)
• Accreditation agencies followed, focusing less on
  structure and more on student learning outcomes
• A variety of experiential learning options were
  created or redesigned to provide external
  measurement for learning outcomes
• Institutional commitment, program delivery,
  reporting structures, definitions, and goals were
  realigned
• Experiential Education begins to become central
  rather than marginalized

5
Effect on existing programs

• Internship coordinators increased in academic
  disciplines to respond to accreditation
  requirements.
• Co-op program staff/faculty started supporting
  internships, sometimes blurring definitions
• Career Services started listing internships (and
  co-op) on websites for access, also blurring
  definitions. Push for one-stop shopping.
• Employers began to use terms interchangeably to
  access students which caused confusion between
  academic applied learning and student work.

6
Defining characteristics/goals

• Experiential Learning - Experience in a major or
  course related real-world environment, for the
  purpose of applying course content and developing
  academic, work, and/or career competencies
  (Academic Affairs focus is provision of
  educational programs)
• Work experience - Work in a real-world
  environment for the purpose of developing work
  and career competencies and preparing for
  full-time work upon graduation (Career
  Development focus is provision of services and
  access)

7
Reporting Structures

• An example is in Service-Learning. In Academic
  Affairs the focus is on applying course content
  in service experiences and competency
  development. In Student Development, it focuses
  on community service.
• In a 2003 survey of 50 of the largest
  universities in the U.S., co-op programs in
  Academic Affairs averaged 300 participants/semeste
  r. Those in Student Development averaged 45 with
  more than one-third at 0.
• We must decide what outcomes we want in order to
  choose the structure that will lead to those
  outcomes.

8
Looking at Outcomes

• Emphasis on learning outcomes increases research
  and reviews of research on learning outcomes and
  educational efficacy of programs
• National research project among 15 co-op programs
  on student learning outcomes (Parks, D.K.
  Onwuegbuzie, A.J., Cash, S.H.,2001)
• Reviews of Research
• On Co-op, 1988-2003 (Dressler, S. Keeling, A.,
  2004)
• On Service-Learning,1993-2000 (Eyler, J., Giles,
  D.E., Stenson, C.M., Gray, C.J., 2001).
• None done on internships across disciplines as of
  yet

9
Similarities and Differences

• Similarities in outcomes but differences in focus
• Both use reflection but differ on issues to be
  reflected upon.
• More than half of the personal competencies are
  developed through both modalities.
• Personal and Academic outcomes are very similar.
• Co-op has more Work and Career outcomes and
  Service-Learning more Social outcomes.
• Program focus, what questions are asked, may
  effect outcomes

10
Academic Similarities

• There may be greater differences between academic
  outcomes in academic Co-op programs vs. those in
  Student Development than there are between
  academic Co-op programs and Service-Learning
  programs.
• Outcome similarities imply that each methodology
  can be informed and strengthened by each other.
  Rather than compete, these experiential learning
  programs can function as collaborative options in
  the curriculum.

11
Forms of Experiential Learning

• Co-op and Internships - centralized and/or
  decentralized
• Clinical practice, practica, undergraduate
  research, independent study - in academic
  departments
• Service-Learning - Education College and/or in
  academic departments, centralized or
  decentralized
• Senior design - Engineering
• Capstone/cornerstone courses - Business
• Study abroad - International Services
• Others

12
Increased Centralization and Mission Changes

• Focus on learning outcomes provide consistency
  between different forms of experiential
  education.
• Previously marginalized methods begin to move
  closer to institutional missions (Carnegie
  Engagement designation)
• This environment provides a means to find
  commonalities based on learning outcomes

13
Increased Centralization and Mission Changes

• Experiential Learning Centers - Co-op,
  Internships, sometimes Service-Learning,
• Collaboration - partner on Internships and
  Service-Learning
• Other partnerships - Faculty Learning Centers,
  International Services (CPT)
• Career Service - Externships, Shadowing, Alumni,
  Development

14
Impact on Experiential Learning Programs

• Benefits
• Drawbacks
• Best Practices
• Other issues

15
Benefits

• Increased coordination/partnership with faculty -
  can focus on faculty reward system and curricular
  needs
• Decreased competition between programs - Both
  employers and students have information and
  support to make appropriate and best choices
• More expansion and less confusion due to
  increased promotion of all forms of experiential
  learning - This also protects program integrity
• Can increase quality across disciplines by
  unifying assessment

16
Drawbacks

• Integrity and definition can be lost if external
  forces remove options
• Resources and effort may be split or diminished
• Those that take the least effort may grow more
  rapidly or take precedence, regardless of level
  of educational benefit if there is lack of
  manpower
• Voice for each program may be diminished
• Skills required may vary between programs so
  hiring can become more difficult if there is
  little differentiation of tasks
• Faculty may divest involvement if they see
  diminished control

17
Best Practices

• Decide on academic and/or student development
  focus - impacts on personnel requirements,
  status, definitions, and outcomes
• Define clear lines of authority for each program
  and with other departments
• Create and implement criteria for quality
• Introduce incentive funding if possible
• Improve faculty reward systems to reflect value

18
Best Practices

• Collaborate with academic deans and faculty to
  garner support and measure learning outcomes
• Report learning outcomes everywhere appropriate
  with the focus of feeding information back into
  curriculum and support the institutional mission
  for academic learning
• Obtain student comments on application of course
  content from reflection assignments and send them
  to appropriate faculty members

19
Questions and Answers

• Your experiences and thoughts?