Epistemological twerking: using a ‘pop up’ model of Work Based Learning pedagogy to
fuse theory and practice for professional learners in the field of Coaching
Author:
Dilys Leonard
Manchester Business School, University of Manchester.
Abstract
Work Based Learning frameworks and pedagogical models represent a paradigm shift – a
twisting and jerking or ‘twerking’ in the established epistemology of higher level learning. It
is now more widely accepted that ‘useful’ knowledge can legitimately be constructed and coconstructed in the workplace. This can result in greater benefits to the professional learning
and development of staff in the workplace; it allows the general and theoretical to engage with
the local and practical. In this paper, a model of Work Based Learning pedagogy is presented
which can provide an effective approach to the provision of learning and development for
professional learners in the workplace. The model can ‘pop up’ in the space which now exists
at the interface of academic theoretical research and the field of professional practice in work.
A postgraduate Coach Education programme designed and implemented using a model of
Work Based Learning pedagogy is used to illustrate a pragmatic, flexible approach to the
professional learning and development of business and life coaches. In this paper the author
will:
1. Present the author’s work based pedagogical model
2. Argue that this model creates a bridge to connect and fuse the gap between the polarities
of theory and practice
3. Illustrate the above with an example of a work based postgraduate Coach Education
programme.
The implication for practice is that this model helps professionals to create new and useful
knowledge that is grounded in theory and practice. The author’s approach to the research is
exploratory using pragmatic inquiry.
Keywords: Work based learning, pedagogy, Coach Education.
Introduction
In this section the author explores the critique of traditional approaches to pedagogy and from
the research, points to a model of Work Based Learning pedagogy which can provide an
effective approach to the provision of learning and development for professional learners in the
workplace.
The contemporary challenges of the workplace include unregulated institutions, global
markets, uncertainty, technological disruptors, and the pace and volume of change. This
requires skills for leaders and managers that include agile thinking, nimble action, discernment
and professional wisdom in order to make robust and timely decisions. What new approaches
then might best support their learning and development needs? This paper asserts that a space
exists at the interface of theoretical academic research and the field of professional learning.
The author has developed a ‘Pop up’ model of Work Based Learning to fill this space between
Higher Education Institutions (HEI’s) and the workplace.
Butler (1999) summarises
The worlds of education and work have been joined as never before with the
commodification of education and development of education markets to service the
economy. (Butler, 1999, p.137).
Put simply, high skills mean the potential to earn high wages. Brown, Lauder and Ashton
(2008) contest this idea
While the skills of the workforce remain important, they are not the source of decisive
competitive advantage...it is how the capabilities of the workforce are combined with
innovative and productive ways that hold the key. (Brown et al. 2008, p.17).
They suggest that it will only be workers who are ‘given permission to think’ who will flourish.
How then can those of us tasked with designing a way forward in the field of professional
development build the ‘thinking’ capability of employees? One solution is to adapt and change
traditional curriculum design principles and approaches to teaching and learning in order meet
the contemporary needs of professional learners.
Knowledge and the signs of times
Scheffler, cited in McCormick and Paechter (1999) sets out three philosophies of knowledge rationalistic, empiricist and pragmatic. The rationalist tradition is based upon platonic ideals
and is exemplified in Mathematics. In this tradition, knowledge has no reality and is objective,
produced through methods of deduction. In the empiricist tradition, exemplified by the model
of natural sciences - one acquires knowledge through observation, generalization and revising
laws. Reality in this case can therefore change depending on one’s findings and experiences.
The pragmatic view, developed from the empirical view, focuses on experimentation and
problem solving as ways of knowing. Learning from experience is an active process and
combines theoretical and procedural knowledge – knowing ‘that’ and knowing ‘how’. This is
not a new idea but echoes an ancient Greek idea - Aristotle’s idea of ‘phronesis’ – a form of
practical reasoning or practical wisdom.
The majority of accredited higher level professional learning programmes in the UK take place
in Higher Education Institutions. They traditionally see their role as holding access to and
control of an exclusive body of knowledge – ‘the academy’ holding the ‘canons’ of knowledge.
The view that valid knowledge is held within the confines of the academy, and can only be
legitimately created within the boundaries of the academy, has been highly contested for a
number of years (Boud and Garrick, 1999). Privileging knowledge created in the academy
over knowledge created outside academy is a ‘taken for granted’ belief that is now being
challenged. Different types of knowledge are produced outside the academy reflecting the
theme of the knowledge economy. Reich (1992) explains the knowledge economy
…in the new economy - replete with unidentified problems, unknown solutions and
untried means of putting together - mastery of old domains of knowledge isn’t nearly
enough to guarantee a good income…What is much more valuable is the capacity to
effectively and creatively use the knowledge. (Reich, 1992, p.182).
The direction of ‘knowledge flows’ are changing and are no longer one-directional from the
‘research world’ to the ‘real world’ in the workplace. They are multi-directional and knowledge
can now be co-constructed. People are able to build their own knowledge and understanding
from a mix of alternative sources. This is evident in the growth of MOOCs (Massive Open
Online Courses) in distance education and how these have impacted on how HEI’s approach
teaching and facilitation of learning. To summarise, the contexts of higher level learning and
the world of work are converging; the boundaries between the two are blurred and more
permeable than in the past, reflecting the notion of postmodernity. This has resulted in ‘better
connections’ between work and educational institutions resulting in the ‘fusing’ of learning
and work, (Matthews and Candy, 1999). Emerging from this are new forms of knowledge, a
transformation of the nature of work and the latent potential of workplace learning (Stren and
Sommerland cited in Fuller and Unwin (2002), p. 95). This changing lifelong learning
landscape requires new pedagogies to support professional learning and the co-creation of new
and useful knowledge in the workplace.
Fusing the gap between theory and practice.
In this section the author argues that the model of Work Based Learning creates a bridge to
fully connect and fuse the gap between the polarities of theory and practice; it cultivates multidirectional knowledge flows between explicit knowledge of theory within the academy and
implicit knowledge created in the workplace. The implication for practice is that this model
helps professionals to create new and useful knowledge which is grounded in theory and
practice.
The fragmentation of the postmodern era has allowed a space for a ‘pop-up’ pedagogy of praxis
to emerge in the gulf between the academy and the workplace, mirroring the polarities of theory
and practice. The idea of ‘pop up’ comes from establishments which operate outside of
‘normal’ business modes (usually shops or restaurants) which open on a temporary basis in a
temporary location and intended to operate and trade for only a short period of time until they
may become more established. This concurs with Raelin (2008) who sees Work Based
Learning as a phenomenon which can bridge the gap between theory and practice. The ‘Pop
up’ model presupposes a shift in basic premises and assumptions about the legitimacy of where
knowledge is created and the purpose of that knowledge.
In this way, the model of Work
Based Learning attempts to bridge the divide between the knowledge located in higher
education and that in ‘real life’ specifically the workplace, so that both are informed by one
another.
A pedagogical model of Work Based Learning
Over the past 25 years, pedagogies of Work Based Learning have emerged and been developed.
Flexible, modular, generic frameworks which focus on the workplace as the key learning
opportunity for higher level learning and accreditation have been designed and implemented.
It is a distinctive and innovative approach to learning in Higher Education. The value of Work
Based Learning is to improve employees’ thinking and analytical skills to deal with highly
complex problems, to help people adapt to change, and perform more effectively in a shifting
work environment. Building on the work of Major (2002 and 2005), Brodie & Irving (2007)
and through the author’s own practice, the model presented here bridges the divide between
knowledge located in ‘the academy’ and that in ‘real life’, specifically, the workplace.
The author’s model of Work Based Learning can accommodate three distinctive but highly
connected areas of learning - that of decontextualized academic theory, practice in the
workplace and knowledge of self. (Figure 1.)
The key elements are as follows:
1. Decontextualized theory, academic knowledge (knowing what, knowing that…)
2. Knowledge emerging from the workplace grounded in work based practice (useful
knowledge, knowing how).
3. The notion of critical reflection on experience
Figure 1. ‘Pop-up’ model of work based learning
The basis of elements 1 and 2 is from the seminal work by Gibbons, Limoges, Nowotny,
Schwartzman, Scott and Trow (1994), who suggest the way in which knowledge is produced
(Mode 2) is changing alongside traditional modes of knowledge (Mode 1) and different
practices are taking place in Mode 2 in a different context. This idea of different modes of
knowledge is summarised below in Figure 2. Later, Scott (1997) suggested that knowledge
now has wider social distribution:
1. Local knowledge - as opposed to expert or abstract knowledge and
2. A shift in balance from Mode 1 knowledge to Mode 2 knowledge. He suggests that
Mode 2 knowledge is not a new phenomenon but there has been a radical shift
advancing Mode 2 knowledge causing what he terms “epistemological wobbles”. (p.
26)
Learning and the creation of knowledge which is grounded first and foremost in experience
and practice can have significant impact on the understanding, performance and identity of the
professional person at work. This type of experiential learning is powerful in that it can be
transformative (Mezirow, 1991).
Figure 2. Forms of knowledge
By adopting a Work Based Learning pedagogical model as an approach to professional learning
and development,
the author asserts that more ‘useful’
practical and evidence based
knowledge can be co-created at the interface between knowing ‘that’ and knowing ‘how’.
Instead of looking to theoretical knowledge and evidence-based research in the first instance,
the author suggests we first make a more decisive turn to the field of practice.
This
epistemological turn can enable managers and professionals in the workplace to make better
evidence-based decisions and allows solutions to emerge.
With reference to the third element – critical reflection on experience - it is well documented
that the notion of critical reflection on experiential learning in the workplace and elsewhere
can create new and useful professional knowledge and knowledge of self for individuals. It
uses conscious reflection on actual experience (Raelin, 2008).
Learners are encouraged to
critically reflect on their current practice as a means of improving future performance in the
workplace. The model promotes a dialogue between the three key elements and uses the notion
of critical reflection as a tool to excavate the interface between research and practice, in order
to generate knowledge and understanding of ‘what is going on’ in complex and problematic
workplace situations.
The hybridity of this model allows the professional person to engage with theoretical
knowledge from the standpoint of their own practice to inform and illuminate the complex
situations and problems which occur in the workplace on a day to day basis. It uses a learner
centred pedagogical approach. The key learning opportunity is firmly grounded in the learner’s
workplace.
This pedagogical approach is about the facilitation of learning, not just the
transmission of learning.
Using a Work Based Learning model to design and deliver a postgraduate Business
Coach Education programme.
In this section, to illustrate how the model works in practice, the author describes how a
postgraduate Coach Education programme was designed and implemented using a model of
Work Based Learning pedagogy.
Coaching is a learning and development tool which can enhance individual and business
performance. It has become popular in the last 25 years in business, management, health and
education. The landscape of coaching is expansive – in 2012, the International Coach
Federation (ICF) estimated 47,500 professional coaches generating $2 billion US dollars in
annual revenue/income (ICF 2012 Global Coaching Study). Lane (2010, p. 164) describes
coaching as an area which is ‘growing and thriving’ and that there is a widespread sense of the
value of coaching within organisations of diverse types. Coaching can make an impact on the
performance, motivation, productivity and retention of staff in organisations. It is particularly
useful to help staff cope with and come to terms with change and the pace of change in an
organisation.
Coaching in the UK is unregulated. The literature calls for more rigorous
accreditation of coaches, adherence to standards and carefully designed coach education to
professionalise coaching (Grant and Cavanagh 2004; Laske, 2006; Gray, 2011). There needs
to be an increase in the body of knowledge around what constitutes effective learning,
continuing professional development and education to serve the growing cohort of professional
coaches (Askew and Carnell, 2011). Coaching has become an increasingly popular learning
and development intervention used in many organisations to deal with change and
performance. There is currently a growing demand from the private and public sector and from
coach training providers to provide flexible Higher Education level coach training and
education. One way to meet this demand has been to adapt and change traditional curriculum
design principles and approaches to teaching and learning in order meet these needs. The
author’s ‘pop up’ model of Work Based Learning pedagogy (as presented above) provides an
approach to the provision of professional Coach Education and training required for learners
to also become competent practitioners.
What is the student experience?
The key learning opportunity is situated in the student’s workplace, area of professional
expertise or practice. A team of tutors negotiate and facilitate learning – a different and
distinctive approach from a traditional mode of Higher Education learning. Coaches studying
on the coaching programmes require a willingness and ability to critically reflect on own
personal and professional experience and learning. As a result most learners find they perform
more effectively at work and often gain promotion. The level of ownership and responsibility
for ‘own learning’ is very high because it is negotiated to meet identified learning needs. Work
based learning encourages learners to recognise their own reservoir of knowledge, skills and
experience.
On a practical note, the flexible design of a work based programme meets the demands of
employers and providers who want to develop coaching capacity and capability with the
benefits of the learning being focused in and on the work context. At the same time they want
an accredited formal University award such as a postgraduate certificate or diploma with the
minimal amount of operational disruption. The author has been Lead Tutor for five years of
a university accredited coach education programme co-delivered in partnership with a private
provider, Barefoot Coaching Ltd based in Derbyshire. The Managing Director is Kim Morgan,
who was voted Coach of the Year 2012 for ‘Coaching at Work’ magazine.
Modules were designed at undergraduate and postgraduate levels - awards are Professional
Certificate and Postgraduate Certificate in Business and Personal Coaching. Coach Education
curricula cover the principles and processes of how people change; motivation, values and
beliefs of coaches and setting realistic goals and targets for change. This involves learning
about the psychology of change. Three 20 credit modules comprise:
1.
Coaching in practice
2.
Underpinning theories of coaching
3.
Coaching for change in organisations.
Traditionally, this would have been approached as predominantly or exclusively classroom
based modules on theory i.e. the ‘knowing that’ model and teaching by transmission of theory.
Assessment would be by prescribed and tightly demarcated ways to demonstrate application,
analysis, synthesis and evaluation of the associated theoretical knowledge.
Instead, the alternative approach using a Work based learning model of pedagogy was adopted.
The conceptual framework for the model does not privilege one type of knowledge over
another, as in traditional modes of higher level learning. The hybridity of this model allows
the trainee coach to turn towards and engage with theoretical knowledge from the standpoint
of their own practice to inform and illuminate the complex situations and problems which occur
in the workplace on a day to day basis.
In the first module, Coaching in Practice, a minimum number of practice coaching hours is
required, real for those already coaching or simulated with volunteers for those new to
coaching. The trainee coaches then critically reflect on their practice, in the light of and
informed by the theory taught in weekend workshops. Broad essay titles were given to the
students for other modules, generic enough to cover most people’s situations. For example, an
assignment on ‘Coaching for change in an organisation’ was applicable to volunteer coaches
in a school setting as well as to City executive coaches in Investment banks and equally to
Modern Matrons in the NHS. The specific focus and plan for the assignment is negotiated,
shaped and agreed between the Work Based learning Tutor and the learner (learning via
facilitation). The tutor ensures standards, level and quality control - the assignment focus must
contain enough substance for the learner to critically reflect and bring in relevant theoretical
perspectives to create new knowledge about their particular area of work before it is ‘signed
off’ by the tutor. Tutors co-delivering the Coach Education programmes with this distinctive
approach need to have:
1. An in depth understanding of work based learning pedagogies for teaching and facilitating
learners in the workplace combined with
2. Wider professional knowledge of particular fields of practice - in this example, the practice
of coaching and coach education.
In 2012, Morgan carried out a small scale practitioner research study as part of a final Master’s
dissertation. It was an evaluation of Barefoot Coaching participants’ personal and professional
learning and development two years after completion of the Coach Education programme.
Morgan (2012) reported that course participants identified aspects about the way the course
was structured, as well as aspects of the learning environment, as important factors in
contributing to the personal and professional impact on them. A picture emerged of the
participants’ appreciation of the mix of theory, practice and self-reflection in the course
structure and the non-didactic, coaching style of facilitation in the learning environment. The
findings highlighted the aspects of the course design and delivery using a model of Work Based
Learning pedagogy which made an impact on learners. Raelin (2008) proposed that
“work based learning can serve as an engine for transforming an organisation to be receptive
to learning” (p.79) and the author agrees, proposing that the ‘pop up’ model of Work Based
Learning pedagogy provides an effective framework for the education and transformative
learning of professional coaches who can act as catalysts for strategic and personal change in
organisations.
Implications for practice
The purpose of presenting the ‘Pop up’ Work Based learning model is to provide a useful
framework and guide for facilitators and learners involved in work based learning programmes
where the key learning opportunity is grounded in the employee’s workplace. It explains how
one might approach the teaching, facilitation and learning involved in a work based learning
programme. It sets out the three key elements which have to be in place to cultivate useful
learning and knowledge from the workplace. The quality of thinking and learning achieved by
both parties depends on the extent to which they are prepared to immerse themselves and
interrogate their work and the balanced focus achieved between each element. By adopting a
‘Pop-up’ Work Based Learning pedagogical model as an approach to professional learning and
development, the author asserts that more ‘useful’ practical and evidence based knowledge
can be co-created
at the interface
between ‘knowing that’ and ‘knowing how’. This
epistemological shift potentially facilitates better evidence-based decisions and solutions to
emerge, illustrated by the professional learning programme designed and delivered for
coaching specialists. Instead of looking to theoretical knowledge and evidence based research
in the first instance, the author suggests we first make a more decisive turn to the field of
practice, that is, the complex problems which beset the practitioner in organisations in 21 st
Century. The role of Work Based Learning tutors may be considered as ‘knowledge brokers’
i.e. those who use their academic expertise to facilitate knowledge production in the workplace
(Hargadon, 2002). The idea of a tutor’s role of ‘knowledge broker’ is different and distinct
from their role in the traditional sense of an academic who is a ‘knowledge provider’. Work
Based Learning facilitators do not consider themselves to be concerned so much with ‘content
delivery’ as with ‘knowledge brokerage’.
This means facilitating the creation of new
knowledge (Mode 2- see Figure 2 above) by employees/learners in the workplace - this
knowledge can in turn inform employee’s actions and decision-making in their workplace.
Work Based Learning tutors may find it useful to describe their identity as ‘knowledge brokers’
concerned with co-creating useful knowledge alongside learners in the work place.
Conclusion
Shifting paradigms, epistemological and ontological perspectives about different types of
knowledge, and how and where they can be created and generated, has provided an opportunity
for Work Based experiential learning frameworks to incubate and develop.
Work Based
Learning frameworks and pedagogical models such as the ‘Pop-up’ model represent a
paradigm shift – a twisting and jerking or ‘twerking’ in the established epistemology of higher
level learning. It is now more widely accepted that useful knowledge can legitimately be
constructed and co-constructed in the workplace. This can result in greater benefits to the
professional learning and development of staff in the workplace; it allows the general and
theoretical to engage with the local and practical. The rapprochement of the academy and the
workplace requires a dynamic work based model of pedagogy to facilitate professional higher
level learning in the workplace. The conceptual framework for the model does not privilege
one type of knowledge over another, as in traditional modes of higher level learning. The
hybridity of this model allows the professional person to turn towards and engage with
theoretical knowledge from the standpoint of their own practice to inform and illuminate the
complex situations and problems which occur in the workplace on a day to day basis.
References
Askew, S. and Carnell, E. (2011). Transformative Coaching: A learning theory for practice,
London: Institute of Education.
Boud, D. and Garrick, J. (1999). Understanding Learning at Work, London: Routledge.
Brodie, P. and Irving, K. (2007). ‘Assessment in work-based learning: investigating a
pedagogical approach to enhance student learning’, Assessment and Evaluation in
Higher
Education,
(32,
No.
1,
February
2007),
pp.11-19.
DOI:
10.1080/02602930600848218 accessed 4/3/13
Brown, P., Lauder, H. and Ashton, D. (2008). Education, Globalisation and the knowledge
economy.
(Available
at
Teaching
and
Learning
Research
Programme:
http://www.tlrp.org)
Butler, E. (1999). Technologising equity: the politics and practices of work –related learning,
in Boud, D. and Garrick, J. (eds.) Understanding Learning at Work, London:
Routledge, pp.132-151.
Fuller, A. and Unwin, L. (2002). Developing pedagogies for the contemporary workplace, in
Evans, K., Hodkinson, P. and Unwin, L. (eds.) Working to Learn: Transforming
Learning in the Workplace, London: Routledge, pp. 95-109.
Gibbons, M., Limoges, C., Nowotny, H., Schwartzman, S., Scott, P. and Trow, M. (1994). The
New Production of Knowledge: The Dynamics of Science and Research in
Contemporary Society. London: Sage.
Grant, A.M and Cavanagh, M.J. (2004). ‘Toward a profession of coaching: Sixty-five years of
progress and challenges for the future’, International Journal of Evidence Based
Coaching and Mentoring, 2(1).
Gray, D.E. (2011). ‘Journeys towards the professionalization of coaching: dilemmas, dialogues
and decisions along the global pathway’, Coaching: An International Journal of
Theory, Research and Practice, 4(1), pp.4-19. doi:10.1080/17521882.2010.550896.
Hargadon, A. B. (2002). ‘Brokering knowledge: Linking learning and Innovation Research’,
Organizational Behavior, 24, pp. 41-85.
International Coach Federation ICF (2012) Global Coaching Study, Executive Summary.
Available at: www.coachfederation.org/coachingstudy2012
Lane, D.A. (2010). ‘Coaching in the UK- an introduction to some key debates’, Coaching: An
International Journal of Theory, Research and Practice, 3(2), pp. 155-166
DOI:10.1080/17521880903102118 accessed 12/1/11.
Laske, O.E. (2006). ‘From Coach Training to Coach Education: teaching Coaching within a
Comprehensively Evidence Based Framework’, International Journal of Evidence
Based Coaching and Mentoring, 4(1), p. 45.
Major, D. (2002). The place and status of knowledge in work based learning, Proceedings of
the work based learning Network of the UACE conference, Nov 2002, UWIC, UK.
Major, D. (2005). Towards a philosophical underpinning for work based learning: the
ontological Perspective, Proceedings of the Researching Work and learning
conference, Sydney, Australia.
Matthews, J.H. and Candy, P.C. (1999). New dimensions in the dynamics of learning and
knowledge, in Boud, D and Garrick, J. (eds.) Understanding Learning at Work.
London: Routledge, pp.47-65.
Mezirow, J. (1991). Transformative dimensions of Adult Learning. San Francisco, CA:
Jossey-Bass.
Morgan, K. (2012). Evaluating the impact of the Barefoot coach training course on
participants’ personal and professional learning and development, two years on: a
small scale practitioner research investigation. MA. University of Chester.
Raelin, J.A. (2008). Work-Based Learning: Bridging Knowledge and Action in the Workplace.
San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Reich, R.B. (1992). The work of nations: Preparing ourselves for 21st Century capitalism.
New York: Vintage Books.
Scheffler, I. (1999). Epistemology and Education, in McCormick, R and Paechter, C. (eds.)
Learning and Knowledge 9, London: Paul Chapman Publishing, pp.1-5.
Scott, P. (1997). The crisis of knowledge and the massification of HE, in Barnett, R. and
Griffin, A. (eds.) The end of knowledge in Higher Education. London: Cassell.