Employer-university 'partnerships': a key problem for work-based learning programmes?

Abstract

This paper focuses on the development of work-based learning programmes within higher education in the UK. It explores how 'partnership' with employers came to be seen as a central aspect of this new form of provision. However, we suggest that this emphasis on partnership has been problematic. We focus, in particular, on three areas of concern. Firstly, the limited evidence that employers wish to engage in these sorts of relationships with universities. Secondly, the problems arising from the different cultures of the potential partners and, in particular, different understandings of 'learning' and 'knowledge'. Thirdly, the emergence of the quality assurance agenda within higher education, which is reducing the influence of employers in these programmes. We conclude that the emphasis placed on partnership in the policy and practice literature may well be hindering the more widespread development of work-based learning in higher education.

An unfinished experiment: ambiguity and conflict in the implementation of higher skills policy

“…The 'academic drift' referred to by Pratt and Burgess (1974) and Pratt (1997) ' (Ibid.,38). This scepticism about the outcomes of the initiative may be well founded considering the caveats outlined in previous research into employer-university partnerships (Reeve and Gallacher 2005). However, for the Engineering Employers…”

Workforce development, higher education and productive systems

“…In Model C this may well not be the case, as employers are likely to need reassurance that the provision they are procuring is meeting their organisational needs, leading them to challenge academic culture and require greater precision regarding the value of course content and delivery. This could be regarded, by employers, as 'quality assurance', although again definitions of 'quality' in higher education may be quite different from an employer's understanding of quality, just as understandings of knowledge and learning may diverge (Reeve and Gallacher 2005). It is also possible that employers are reassured by the institution's cultural capital or reputation, both in terms of notions of 'quality' and in terms of the approach of employees towards the provision.…”

“…Research and evaluation has indicated the difficulties with bringing together employers and higher education institutions in partnership arrangements to develop the workforce, emphasising differences in culture and conceptions of 'knowledge' and 'learning' (Reeve and Gallacher 2005), the importance of adapting institutional processes and structural capital (Garnett et al 2008), and the challenges of engaging academic staff in activities often seen as peripheral to the core responsibilities of teaching full time students and conducting research (Eyres et al 2008, Kewin et al 2011, Timilin et al 2010. It is suggested that the roles of the institution and partnering employer need to be agreed yet remain distinct (Slotte and Tynjala 2003), although the difficulties of meeting the expectations of all stakeholders may serve to pull partnerships apart (Gustavs and Clegg 2005).…”

Doing it differently

“…Reeve and Gallacher (2007) highlight the tensions that can be experienced when including employers in developed.…”

“…This structure was directly influenced by employers who raised concerns with by Reeve and Gallacher (2007).…”