In recent years, the term Work-Integrated Learning (WIL) has gained significant traction in educational circles, including whether it should be recognized as a new discipline or not. Arguing for the recognition of a new discipline requires a strategic approach emphasizing the discipline’s distinctiveness, relevance, and potential contributions to academia, and society.
It requires one to prove the discipline’s uniqueness with clear boundaries and interdisciplinary gaps the new discipline can help meet. The argument needs to highlight emerging needs and practical impact, citing scholarly work, case studies and pilot programs while engaging in discourse, workshops, and conferences.
Further, proposing curriculum developments such as creating new courses focused solely on the practical, theoretical and relationships within the new discipline. Identify potential funding and resourcing to support growth and sustainability via a distinct focus and methodology while justifying its position and why, is also key (Abbott, 2001) to being recognized as a new discipline.
We believe WIL is a new discipline because at its core it bridges the gap between theoretical learning and practical application while encompassing a variety of educational activities integrating academic studies with practical workplace experiences. These activities include internships, co-operative education, fieldwork, practicums, clinical placements and industry projects. WIL’s goal is to purposely provide students with real-world experience to complement, augment and/or integrate their academic learning, enhancing their skills, knowledge, and employability. From a pedagogical standpoint, WIL can represent an innovative teaching method designed to enhance student engagement and learning outcomes.
By incorporating real-world experiences into the curriculum, WIL allows students to apply theoretical concepts in practical settings, thereby deepening their understanding and fostering critical thinking skills. This approach aligns with experiential learning theories positing knowledge is constructed through experience and reflection. Further, a key benefit of WIL is its ability to create meaningful connections between the classroom and the workplace. Students not only gain hands-on experience but develop essential skills such as communication, teamwork, and problem-solving. Furthermore, WIL helps students build professional networks and gain insights into their chosen career paths, making them more employable in a competitive job market.
But is it really a new discipline?
On one side of the debate, the first and second named authors of this piece have advocated for WIL to be viewed as its own discipline, arguing it encompasses a distinct body of knowledge, skills, and practices going beyond traditional pedagogical methods. This advocation has led to the third and fourth named authors to explore through a community of practice whether this is a legitimate argument and if so, to what purpose. The key outcome was the development of a joint argument via this article to position WIL as a new discipline that has been operating for some time, and via a theoretical framework.
Thus, we argue – the first step is for WIL to be viewed as a discipline, requiring formalization of its theoretical foundations, methodologies, and best practices. Second, this perspective highlights the need for specialized training and research expertise associated with integrating work and learning. Third, it would then require the acknowledgement and support of dedicated degrees, courses, research agendas, and academic programs aimed at developing expertise in this area as both a professional and learning domain. This leads to the creation of standardized frameworks and benchmarks for assessing the quality and effectiveness of WIL programs, globally. Finally, formalizing WIL as a discipline and specialized pedagogy would elevate its status within academia, attracting more resources and attention to its development.
Perhaps, these are some of the reasons why it is not being recognized as a discipline because it would mean a shifting of resources and acknowledgement. However, by embracing both perspectives that WIL is a new discipline via a key pedagogical approach that includes a strong research and community of practice would allow for a more holistic understanding of WIL’s role in education as a profession, learning and teaching domain, and research area.
We believe that by positioning WIL in this way, it would acknowledge the value of integrating work experiences into the curriculum while also recognizing the need for specialized higher education staff with the knowledge and expertise to optimize these experiences. This dual approach via the establishment of a new discipline could drive innovation in teaching and learning, ultimately benefiting students, educators, and employers.
Essentially, WIL is a dynamic and evolving field of research, practice, and pedagogy, offering significant benefits to students and institutions alike. Whether viewed as a pedagogical approach or as a discipline or both, WIL plays a crucial role in preparing students for the complexities of the modern workforce but it is not always resourced nor acknowledged as a specialized educational area of expertise.
Our ongoing exploration into the recognition of Work-Integrated Learning (WIL) as a discipline has led us to advocate for the hiring, support, and adequate resourcing of WIL experts. This is essential to acknowledge its multifaceted nature and the importance of continued research and dialogue to fully understand its impact on education and society. WIL is a specialized field within learning and teaching, requiring proper recognition, rewards, and resources, including formal acknowledgment as a discipline.
References
Abbott, A. (2001).Chaos of disciplines. University of Chicago Press.
Billett, S. (2009). Realising the educational worth of integrating work experiences in higher education. Studies in Higher Education 34(7): 827-843.
Campbell, M., Russell, L., Thomson, K., Tunny, R., Smith, L., and McAllister, L. (2021). The Construction and Testing of a Framework to Assure the Institutional Quality of Work-Integrated Learning. International Journal of Work-Integrated Learning 22(4): 505-519.
Cooper, L., Orwell, J and Bowden, M. (2010). Work integrated learning a guide to effective practice. New York, NY, Routledge.
Eames, C., and C. Cates (2011). Theories of learning in cooperative and work-integrated education. International handbook for cooperative and work-integrated education: International perspectives of theory, research, and practice. R. K. Coll and K. Zegwaard. Lowell, MA, World Association for Cooperative Education: 41–52.
Kolb, A. and D. Kolb (2005). Learning styles and learning spaces: Enhancing experiential learning in higher education. Academy of Management Learning & Education 4(2): 193–212.
Martin, A. J., and M. Rees (2019). Student Insights: Developing T-Shaped Professionals through Work-Integrated Learning. International Journal of Work-Integrated Learning 20(4): 365-374.
Zegwaard, K. E. and T. J. Pretti (2023). The Routledge International Handbook of Work-integrated Learning, Taylor & Francis.
Rachael Hains-Wesson is Professor in Education and Associate Dean, Learning and Teaching, School of Global, Urban and Social Studies, the Royal Melbourne Institute of Technology and has received two PhDs the traditional way (Ph.D.t; Ph.D.t.).
Patricia Lucas is a senior lecturer specializing in work-integrated learning in the School of Sport and Recreation at Auckland University of Technology and received a PhD the traditional way (Ph.D.t.).
Dino Willox is Director, Student Enrichment and Success, The University of Queensland
Anna Richards is Senior Manager, Enrichment and Employability, The University of Queensland
