This article was downloaded by: [University of Waterloo]On: 13 November 2014, At: 06:06Publisher: RoutledgeInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registeredoffice: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Teaching in Higher EducationPublication details, including instructions for authors andsubscription information:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/cthe20

Developing the reflective practitioner:placement and the ways ofknowing of business and accountingundergraduatesUrsula Lucasa & Phaik Leng Tana

a Faculty of Business and Law, University of the West of England,Coldharbour Lane, Frenchay, Bristol BS16 1QY, UKPublished online: 31 Mar 2014.

To cite this article: Ursula Lucas & Phaik Leng Tan (2014) Developing the reflective practitioner:placement and the ways of knowing of business and accounting undergraduates, Teaching in HigherEducation, 19:7, 787-798, DOI: 10.1080/13562517.2014.901954

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13562517.2014.901954

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the“Content”) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis,our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as tothe accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinionsand views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors,and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Contentshould not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sourcesof information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims,proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever orhowsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arisingout of the use of the Content.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Anysubstantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing,systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms &Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

Developing the reflective practitioner: placement and the waysof knowing of business and accounting undergraduates

Ursula Lucas and Phaik Leng Tan*

Faculty of Business and Law, University of the West of England, Coldharbour Lane, Frenchay,Bristol BS16 1QY, UK

(Received 17 December 2012; final version received 2 March 2014)

This study aims to identify how students’ epistemological beliefs or ways of knowing(comprising cognitive, intrapersonal and interpersonal aspects) develop during work-based placement. Data comprise 32 semi-structured interviews with 17 business andaccounting students at a UK university. Findings show that the taking of responsibilityis the key stimulus for development: intrapersonally through a changing sense of selfand interpersonally though changing relationships with others. A lack of cognitivedevelopment appears to arise from a student focus on how they participate within theworkplace, rather than on their workplace practice. These findings support the needfor a connective view of the curriculum: strengthening connections between formal(university) learning and informal (placement) learning, and between ‘vertical’ and‘horizontal’ development. In particular, there should be an emphasis on the student’sability to identify relationships between work experience, the knowledge and skillsthat underpin practice, as well as the context of participation.

Keywords: placement; epistemological beliefs; ways of knowing; reflective practi-tioner; business and accounting

Introduction

This paper is concerned with the continuing issue of how to support students in theirdevelopment as reflective practitioners (Schön 1987). In particular, it focuses on the roleof ways of knowing (epistemological beliefs) in this process. Within the UK, andinternationally, work-based placement is a common feature within vocationally baseddegrees. Research has investigated three main aspects of placements. First, a range ofstudies over the last two decades have investigated how placements prepare students for,and makes them more effective in, the workplace after graduation. These studies havetended to focus upon the development and enhancement of students’ skills (Harvey, Moon,and Geall 1997; Bowes and Harvey 1999; Mason et al. 2003; Paisey and Paisey 2010).

Secondly, and more recently, there have been studies that investigate the relationshipbetween placement and subsequent academic performance. There are mixed findings, butthere is a growing body of evidence that suggests that a positive relationship existsbetween placement and students’ academic performance (Gomez, Lush, and Clements2004; Mandilaras 2004; Rawlings, White, and Stephens 2005; Surridge 2009; Mansfield2011). However, although there is now increasing evidence that undertaking a placement

*Corresponding author. Email: Phaik.Tan@uwe.ac.uk

Teaching in Higher Education, 2014Vol. 19, No. 7, 787–798, http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13562517.2014.901954

© 2014 Taylor & Francis

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f W

ater

loo]

at 0

6:06

13

Nov

embe

r 20

14

may enhance students’ academic performance, there is little evidence to suggest why thismight be so.

This leads to the third area of research. Little and Harvey (2006, 2) highlight thepaucity of research that ‘explicitly explores how the placement experience translates intoacademic development’ and ‘much is taken for granted, the observed maturity ofundergraduates returning from a period of work placement is assumed to carry over into amore studious or reflective approach to learning but there is little direct evidence to befound of this in the literature’. In their interview-based study they found that personaldevelopment was a major aspect of the students’ placement experience, involvingincreased confidence, and development of interpersonal and organisational skills.However, Little and Harvey (2006, 61) observed a ‘seeming lack of articulation ofintellectual development’.

Accordingly, this study identifies a theoretically and empirically informed frameworkfor investigating the role of placement in supporting the development of the reflectivepractitioner. This ‘ways of knowing’ framework is presented in the next section, followedby an explanation of the objective of the study, its underpinning methodology, theresearch method and design. The final sections set out the findings of the study andconsider the implications and limitations of these findings.

Investigating reflective practice and critical reflection using a‘ways of knowing’ framework

Beliefs about knowledge: ‘ways of knowing’Schön (1987) emphasises that reflective practice involves more than just an instrument-alist approach to problem-solving with its straightforward application of theory andtechniques derived from a body of systematic and scientific knowledge. In the workplace,practitioners are confronted with complex and ill-defined problems in unique situations.Dealing effectively with such problems requires an active, rather than a routine orhabitual, approach. It requires critical reflection (Mezirow 1991) which involves achallenge to fundamental beliefs about the nature and source of knowledge.

A wide range of research has been conducted into the personal epistemologies ofstudents (and teachers) within education (Hofer 2004). We know, from a wide range ofresearch that has been conducted within higher education (mostly in the USA, withrelatively little in the UK), that students vary in their beliefs about knowledge, and thatthis affects the way in which they learn and make judgments (Perry 1970; Belenky et al.1986; Baxter Magolda 1992). These have been referred to as ‘stages of intellectualdevelopment’ (Perry 1970) or more recently, ‘ways of knowing’ (Belenky et al. 1986;Baxter Magolda 1992). This study draws on the work of Baxter Magolda (1992), but isalso informed by an understanding of the broader framework of research into personalepistemologies.

Baxter Magolda (1992) identifies four qualitatively different ways of knowing:absolute, transitional, independent and contextual. An absolute way of knowing assumesthat knowledge exists in an absolute form: it is either right or wrong. Differences inopinion between authorities will be seen as differences, not about the facts, but aboutdetail arising from inappropriate application, misinformation or misunderstanding.All problems are seen as well structured and thus evidence is not needed to reach aconclusion. A transitional way of knowing accepts that knowledge is certain in someareas but uncertain in others. Disagreements between authorities in areas of uncertainty

788 U. Lucas and P.L. Tan

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f W

ater

loo]

at 0

6:06

13

Nov

embe

r 20

14

are considered to arise because all the facts are not yet known. There is an assumptionthat in due course better evidence, techniques or theories will produce accepted facts.

An independent way of knowing represents a key shift to an assumption thatknowledge is mostly uncertain. There is a recognition that authorities are not necessarilythe sole source of knowledge. Thus a student’s opinion may be regarded as valid as thatof an authority and there tends to be an ‘anything goes’ attitude. In this situation the roleof evidence is diminished. A contextual way of knowing also assumes that knowledgeis uncertain. However, the ‘anything goes’ attitude is replaced by a belief that knowledgeis contextual and one assesses knowledge on the basis of evidence in context. Thusknowledge claims can only be understood in relation to the context in which they arise.

‘Ways of knowing’ thus represent the different perspectives from which individualsview the world and draw conclusions about truth, knowledge and authority. They arebound up with self-concept or identity. Baxter Magolda uses the term ‘self-authorship’(Kegan 1994) to describe the ability to reflect on one’s beliefs, organise one’s thoughtsand feelings in the context of, but separate from, the thoughts and feelings of others.‘Self-authorship’ is consistent with Mezirow’s (1991) description of critical reflection astransformative learning and Schön’s (1987) reflective practitioner’s ‘reflection-in-action’.This overarching concept is recognised in the nature of a way of knowing, whichsimultaneously comprises three aspects that are assumed to be mutually constitutive andmutually confirming:

. cognitive (how one makes meaning of knowledge);

. interpersonal (how one views oneself in relation to others);

. intrapersonal (how one perceives one’s sense of identity).

Beliefs about knowledge are associated with the way in which students approach theirlearning (Hofer 2004; Baxter Magolda 1992). Research across a range of disciplinarycontexts shows that students with more independent/contextual ways of knowing alsodescribe deep approaches to learning (Brownlee 2001; Brownlee et al. 2009; Phan 2008).Within the accounting field, Phillips’ (2001) study shows that accounting students’epistemological beliefs are related to study strategies and performance. Lucas and Meyer’s(2005) findings indicate that accounting students who report a belief that knowledge isdiscrete and factual also report a surface approach to learning, whereas those studentswho report a more relativistic and committed way of knowing also report a deep approachto learning.

Of course, the notion of the fully reflective practitioner is more of an aspiration than apractical possibility for undergraduate students. However, one might expect under-graduates to start developing a capacity to critically reflect during their studies. To do sothey must be willing to question habits of making meaning; to critique premises that areso taken-for-granted that they are rarely questioned. In other words, they should movetowards a contextual way of knowing. However, the findings of Baxter Magolda (1992)were disappointing in this respect. Her research, comprising a large-scale interview studywith 101 students across a variety of subject disciplines, was conducted in the USA(within four-year undergraduate courses). Contextual knowing was rarely evident,comprising just 2% of students in the final year. The most prevalent way of knowingwas transitional in the final year (80% of students), rising from 32% and 53% in the firstand second years, respectively and declining from 83% in the third year. The absoluteway of knowing was most prevalent in the first year of college (68% of students)

Teaching in Higher Education 789

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f W

ater

loo]

at 0

6:06

13

Nov

embe

r 20

14

declining over the next three years to 46%, 11% and 2%, respectively. Independentknowing was scarcely evident in the first three years of college and represented just 16%of students in the final year.

A more recent UK study shows a similar pattern. O’Donovan (2010), using BaxterMagolda’s (1992) Measure of Epistemological Reflection with first-year UK business andmanagement undergraduates, achieved a response rate of 45% and 200 analysedresponses. Her findings showed the following student profiles: absolute (45%),transitional (42%), independent (10%) and contextual (2%).

Contexts that may support development in ways of knowing

The findings above would indicate that development in ways of knowing may not bestraightforward or easily achieved. Developing a capacity to critically reflect is a processof self-authorship, involving issues of identity or view of self (Brookfield 1987; Savin-Baden 2000, 87). Indeed, Baxter Magolda’s (1992) findings indicated that a movetowards an independent way of knowing occurred after graduation for most students.However, she identified several changes that were likely to support moves towardsindependent ways of knowing. These include exposure to new environments such asthe workplace, undertaking postgraduate studies or taking part in voluntary activities.Operating in such environments can reinforce self-confidence and self-efficacy. It wouldappear that the post-graduation environments (or co-curricular activities during under-graduate study) might stimulate the interpersonal and intrapersonal development requiredto support a move towards an independent way of knowing. Environmental features thatsupport a growing self-efficacy include: the organisation and evaluation of one’s ownwork, and the need to evaluate multiple perspectives, choose plans of action accordinglyand take independent decisions.

However, there is relatively little evidence to support such assumptions. Zhang andWatkins (2001) found that students who indicated a greater extent of work and leadershipexperiences were more likely to exhibit independent or contextual ways of knowing. Incontrast, the findings of Bauer et al. (2004) showed the influence of epistemologicalbeliefs on workplace learning might be less important than theory suggests. They hadproposed, first, that such beliefs would influence the extent to which students soughtopportunities to profit from workplace learning and, second, that these beliefs wouldinfluence whether a student even envisaged the workplace to be a learning environment.However such relationships were not found. Clearly, this is an area where further researchis needed.

The study

Research objective and context

The objective of this study was to identify how students’ ways of knowing developedduring work-based placement. The study was conducted within the BA (Hons) BusinessStudies (BABS) and the BA (Hons) Accounting and Finance (BAAF) modularprogrammes at a post-1992 UK university. BABS is a general business and managementprogramme with an average of 400 students at each level. BAAF is a specialistaccounting programme with an average of 150 students at each level. Level 1 and Level 2relate to years 1 and 2, respectively. An optional work-based placement is undertaken inyear 3. The selection of this option is required for a BABS, rather than a BA (Hons)

790 U. Lucas and P.L. Tan

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f W

ater

loo]

at 0

6:06

13

Nov

embe

r 20

14

Business Administration (BABA) degree to be awarded. There are no university studiesduring the placement year but students are required to complete a reflective portfolio.This portfolio does not contribute towards the degree classification but satisfactorycompletion is necessary for the BABS, rather than the BABA, degree to be awarded.Level 3 refers to the final year. In the UK, work-based placement (internship) learningrepresents a planned period (usually a minimum of 40 weeks) of workplace learning,where the learning outcomes are an intended part of a programme of study. Consequently,most students are under 21, with mature (work experienced) or international students notwishing to enrol on a degree which includes a placement.

Research methodology and method

This study falls into the naturalistic area of enquiry. Research on students’ ways ofknowing takes a constructivist view of learning and is concerned with how students makemeaning of their experience. This implies a certain type of research method: the semi-structured extended interview. The interview should be as open as possible to allow thestudent’s own frame of reference to emerge (Ashworth and Lucas 2000). Interviews wereconducted in the academic years 2005/2006 and 2006/2007 with 11 placement students(eight BABS and three BAAF) at the commencement and in the latter stages of theirwork-based placements. Interviews were also conducted with a further six students whohad undertaken a placement (three BABS and three BAAF) when they resumed theirfinal-year studies. Four of these final-year students were also interviewed towards the endof their final year. In all, 17 students were interviewed, of whom 2 students wereinterviewed only once due to their subsequent withdrawal from the study, resulting in atotal of 32 interviews.

Each interview lasted approximately an hour. A series of main questions were derivedfrom the interview protocol developed by Baxter Magolda (1992, 411f), supported by alist of possible prompts, to provide a shape and focus to the interview. The mainquestions covered the entirety of the students’ experience during placement. Analysisfollowed on from a close reading of the transcripts. First, a frame of reference wasidentified for each student, termed the ‘student profile’ (Ashworth and Lucas 2000),comprising the most salient aspects of the experience. The analysis then moved awayfrom the experience of the individual, to a focus on comparative experiences through thepooling and comparison of quotations. Constant reference back to the student profileensured that the individual’s unique experience was not lost.

Selection of participants

In selecting participants the following factors were taken into account: Level 2 averagemark, gender and type of placement organisation. Prior research on ways of knowingclearly shows that gender may indicate distinctive variation. It was felt prudent to includea range of academic abilities (as evidenced by level 2 average mark) and types ofplacement organisation (on the assumption that this would provide a range of placementexperience). However, no further assumptions were made about possible factors thatmight be related to variation in ways of knowing. In the event, we found that there was noobvious pattern within the findings in relation to the above factors.

Teaching in Higher Education 791

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f W

ater

loo]

at 0

6:06

13

Nov

embe

r 20

14

Table 1 sets out the names of the students, their degree course, the degreeclassification equivalent of their Level 2 achievement and the nature of the placementemployer.

Findings

Introduction

The objective of this study was to identify the way in which students’ ways of knowingdeveloped during work-based placement. In another study with this same group ofstudents, Lucas and Tan (2013) identified the ways of knowing that these studentsbrought to both their placement and final year of study. Their study focused oninvestigating students’ development in the cognitive aspect of a way of knowing.Absolute and transitional ways of knowing were found to be predominant and nodevelopment occurred during the students’ placement or final-year studies. This lack ofdevelopment appeared to be significantly related to issues linked to their academic studywithin university, as follows: (1) an extrinsic motivation for studying for a UK businessor accounting degree and the desire to obtain a ‘good degree’; (2) a strong focus on theorganisation of learning, rather than on what is learnt; and (3) a strong focus on, and anunquestioning attitude to, assessment.

The findings of this study allow a fuller picture of the student placement experience toemerge. Our central finding is that, whilst Lucas and Tan (2013) identified a lack ofdevelopment in cognitive aspects, work-based placement is associated with strongdevelopment in interpersonal and intrapersonal aspects. Placements provide a context inwhich students have to take responsibility for their own learning and performance; a

Table 1. Students participating in the study.

Placement students Degree Level 2 achievement Nature of placement employer

Chloe BABS 1st National financial services companyEmily BABS 2.1 National recruitment agencyHolly BABS 2.2 Outsourced services providerJoanne BABS 2.2 National financial services partnershipJoe BAAF 2.1 National financial services companyPaul BABS 1st National financial services companyRachel BAAF 2.1 Global engineering companyRudy BABS 2.1 Global information systems providerSpencer BABS 2.1 Global financial services partnershipTony BABS 2.2 National hire companyWayne BAAF 2.1 Global engineering companyFinal-year studentsColeen BABS 2.2 National services providerJohn BAAF 2.2 National retail companyKirsty BAAF 3rd Public sectorLeo BAAF 2.1 Outsourced services providerLuke BABS 2.2 National financial services providerRobin BABS 3rd National information services provider

Note: The names, but not genders, of students have been changed to ensure anonymity. Mark bands for UKhonours degree classifications are as follows: 3rd: 40–49; 2.2 (lower second): 50–59; 2.1 (upper second): 60–69;1st (first): 70–100.

792 U. Lucas and P.L. Tan

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f W

ater

loo]

at 0

6:06

13

Nov

embe

r 20

14

context within which students develop interpersonally (through a range of changingrelationships with others) and develop intrapersonally (through a changing sense of self).Each of these three aspects is discussed below.1

Context requiring taking responsibility for one’s learning and performance

When students were asked to identify and discuss their most significant learningexperience while on placement, the majority referred to the need to take responsibility:for their learning and performance. As predicted by Baxter Magolda (1992), this providesa key stimulus for development. As placement employees, they felt that they ‘had todeliver’ and were accountable for their actions. This contrasted with their experience atuniversity, as described by Rachel:

I think at work you can actually see where it’s going, … the outcome will affect something,whereas at uni it’s kind of you just plod along and if you don’t do it then it’s not a realproblem, apart from the assignments.

Emily also highlights this, recognising the wider implications if she does not performwell, and her need to be acknowledged as being competent in her work:

Yes I think it is different because with university you’re doing it for yourself, aren’t you,whereas working here there’s also a lot of other people that you want to please as well.Like I want to do well and keep everybody happy and all that kind of stuff.

Even where students were not expected to assume a high level of responsibility, they felta responsibility to their co-workers, as expressed by Rudy: he did not want to ‘sourrelationships’ with co-workers.

Although Colleen found it quite daunting when dealing with unfamiliar tasks andsituations, she observes that she learnt a significant amount from such experiences:

You’re in an organisation, it’s not like you can do something and you can get out of it, oreverybody else has got proper jobs and so what I had to do was actually contributing tosomeone’s job and it was quite a big pressure, but you had to do it … [ ].

Students also had to take responsibility for learning about their jobs within the placementorganisations and use their initiative, particularly in cases where they were largely left ontheir own. When asked to describe his learning on placement, Tony responded thatlearning occurred through:

(Pause) Trial and error. (Interviewer: Can you give me an example?) The computer systemsthat they use are slightly questionable and they’re a little bit outdated, but I don’t feel thatanyone in the office has got particular time to help me with things … [ ] they’ve said I’veexcelled as a trainee and learn everything quicker than anyone has done before they’ve everseen, so because of that they’ve just left me to my own devices.

In most cases, the students had to strike a balance between asking for help and not beinga constant distraction to co-workers. In addition, students were often expected to take onextra responsibilities when their line managers were away, as in the case of Rachel andJoanne, where they had to use their initiative to deal with any issues which arose. Theexperience of successfully coping with challenging, unfamiliar situations helped students

Teaching in Higher Education 793

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f W

ater

loo]

at 0

6:06

13

Nov

embe

r 20

14

to develop their confidence, enabling some to actively seek increasing responsibilities andleadership roles in the organisation. These included leading the discussion in meetings(Rachel, Leo), being in charge of projects or departments (Rachel, Emily) and seekingpromotion (Kirsty, Tony). However, two students (Rachel and Leo) acknowledgedmaking major mistakes when carrying out their responsibilities or when confronted withunfamiliar situations, but they were able to reflect and learn from these less positiveexperiences.

Context requiring developing interpersonally, through a range ofchanging relationships with others

While on placement, students develop interpersonally through a range of changingrelationships with others. This was a striking aspect of the placement experience. Lookingat the experiences described below it would have been possible to have categorised themas ‘the development of communication skills’. However, what unified all of theseexperiences was the fact that students found themselves undergoing a series of changingrelationships with others. These ‘others’ might be other employees, colleagues, differentlevels of managers and customers/clients.

The majority of students described how they were now coming into contact with awide range of people they had previously not encountered. This is expressed vividlyby Joe:

But the main shock for me was in going through my life so far, you’ve got your parents,you’ve got your friends, you go to school, you’ve got your friends at school, that’s mainlyyour group of friends. Then you go to sixth form, some people don’t go to sixth form, somepeople get jobs and you get … that little bit of a group of friends is a little bit of diversity.Then you go to work and you meet everybody else in the world (laugh), you meet poorpeople, you meet people from all the (social) classes.

This posed issues and challenges for students. A major issue was the need to develop theability to relate to a diverse range of people. For Rudy, this meant working out what tosay to the ‘security guy’ in order to engage him in a conversation. Emily and Wayne, intheir roles, found that they were meeting people they would not usually come across inrelation to ages, generations and nationalities. Wayne described how he had started toread a daily newspaper in order to be able to participate in conversations with colleaguesabout topical issues.

Students described a range of different types of interaction with others. Theseincluded:

. persuasion (involving empathy and assertiveness)

. managing expectations (when one is unable to deliver what was expected/requested, when the customer is in the wrong, when the student is in the wrong)

. reassurance

. appeasement

. pacification

. negotiation

. exchanging opinions

. asking questions without losing face

. obtaining information

794 U. Lucas and P.L. Tan

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f W

ater

loo]

at 0

6:06

13

Nov

embe

r 20

14

. conveying bad news

. representing others

. standing up for oneself

. making presentations (conveying information, opinions and leading discussions)

. liaison.

The students spoke most fluently about these experiences, which had clearly made asignificant impact on them. The nature of the experiences was such that successfully‘coming through’ led to an increase in confidence. This is discussed in the followingsection.

Context which promotes developing intrapersonally through a changing sense of self

The placement provides a context within which students develop intrapersonally througha changing sense of self. First, almost all the students indicated that they developed inconfidence. Although they commonly used the term ‘confidence’ to express their sense ofchange, the development of such confidence was linked to a variety of experiences.Joanne refers to a developing sense of confidence that embraces the ability to accept thatshe may make mistakes. This allows her to act:

I think I take the bull by the horns now, and I sort of dive straight into it, instead ofstanding back and … I’m definitely far more confident than I was at the beginning ….

For Holly the development in her confidence has been profound and she expresses heramazement at her achievements:

I’ve got much more confidence I think as a person. [ ] I think it’s changed me a lot. I don’tknow, not that I didn’t believe in myself, but … when I do look back on the things that I’vedone I can’t (laugh) quite believe that I’ve done that and before when I was at uni I wasthinking ‘God, I don’t know how I’m going to do any sort of work, I don’t have a clue reallywhat the outside world is like’.

Secondly, several students talked about how their ability to prioritise had been developedduring placement. The different features described by the students were:

. an ability to identify personal goals� to set personal wishes on one side (deferred gratification)� a sense of perspective concerning ‘success’ or ‘failure’� learning patience

. knowing one’s capabilities and what can be achieved within a time span

. an ability to adapt to changing work goals/demands

. an ability to say ‘no’ (assertiveness)� managing the expectations of others� dealing with pressure

. accepting ‘failure’ or mistakes.

These comprise a complex set of interacting intrapersonal and interpersonal aspects. Tomanage these successfully is, indeed, to ‘grow up’. The ability to prioritise reinforces agrowing sense of confidence, and leads to others acknowledging one’s right to choose

Teaching in Higher Education 795

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f W

ater

loo]

at 0

6:06

13

Nov

embe

r 20

14

what to do and when to do it. Holly found that not only did she learn to manage herworkload, but her colleagues respected her for this:

I’m much more confident. [ ] …I know when to say no (laugh) as well. [ ] I’ve got my ownwork to do and … I think people respect me for … in a weird kind of a way.

Discussion and conclusions

This study has identified how work-based placements provide a context within whichstudents develop interpersonally through a range of changing relationships with others,and intrapersonally through a changing sense of self. Development in these two aspects oftheir ways of knowing had a powerful impact upon the majority of the students and wasrecognised and valued by their employers. Underpinning this development is theexperience of a sense of responsibility and commitment towards their workplace dutiesand their colleagues in the placement organisation. However, although development ininter- and intrapersonal aspects would appear to bring students to a position whereby theirdeveloping sense of self may support a more enquiring and questioning approach, andthis might be expected to be associated with development in the cognitive aspect of theirway of knowing, the latter did not occur. This supports Little and Harvey’s (2006) findingthat there was little indication that placement students had developed their academicabilities of analysis, critique and synthesis and that there was a lack of acknowledgementof intellectual development.

The placement experience does not appear to support cognitive development. Asdescribed by Lucas and Tan (2013), this may be due to several reasons. First, studentstended to focus on achieving a qualification and did not express any substantial intrinsicinterest in business-related subjects. Second, students found it difficult to recall much oftheir first- and second-year studies; hence this was not readily available for interrogationand reflection during their placement experience. Third, students did not readily reflect ontheir placement experience. Finally, as suggested by the findings of this study, it may bethat placement, as an environment, does not provide the necessary challenges to beliefsabout knowledge. This study found that placement students were not exposed to situationswhere they had to make significant independent decisions, resolve conflicting views orexercise significant individual judgement over a sustained period – situations that arethought to foster cognitive development through the challenging of existing beliefs. Thisis not surprising, as there will be some organisational distance between placementstudents and those who exercise professional judgement. In this study, the students’ mainfocus during their limited placement period appeared to be on learning the work culture intheir respective organisations and being accepted as a competent and responsible memberof that work community. In other words, what the students experienced in full was theworkplace as a site for participatory practice (Billett 2004). However, their focus was onthe nature of their participation rather than on the nature of their practice (or the practiceof others). From the student’s point of view, this seems to be a logical priority and ourapproach to curriculum design should acknowledge this.

At present, placement explicitly seeks to provide an opportunity for students to linktheory and practice (QAA 2007) and to see the application of their degree studies incontext. Hence the lack of development in the cognitive aspect is of central concern. Thechallenge for educators is how to develop this learning experience further so that it can

796 U. Lucas and P.L. Tan

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f W

ater

loo]

at 0

6:06

13

Nov

embe

r 20

14

support a movement towards an independent or contextual way of knowing – a necessaryfoundation for reflective practice. This would appear to demand an emphasis on adifferent way of viewing the undergraduate curriculum, and the role of placement withinthat curriculum. The connective model of work experience expounded by Guile andGriffiths (2001) provides a possible response to this challenge. The model seeks toprovide opportunities for ‘reflexive’ connections to be made between formal (university)and informal (placement) learning, and between ‘vertical’ and ‘horizontal’ development.Vertical development refers to students’ progression in their learning during theiruniversity studies, while horizontal development refers to the ability to identifyrelationships between work experience, its underlying knowledge and skills and itscontext of participation (cultural, social and technological). This would support aconstructivist model of learning (Schön 1987) where it is assumed that ‘knowing’ and‘doing’ interact such that knowledge can inform practice, which in turn generates furtherknowledge, which in turn generates new practice and so support the continuingdevelopment of the reflective practitioner.

AcknowledgementsThe findings in this article derive from a larger project, funded by the Higher Education Academyand the Charitable Trusts of the Institute of Chartered Accountants in England and Wales. Weparticularly acknowledge the contribution of the participating students, who gave freely of theirtime and willingly shared their experiences.

Note1. Quotations from interviews with students will be cited. Bold lettering is used in these quotations

to highlight aspects which are relevant to the analysis. The following conventions have beenused: [ ] indicates that a passage has been removed from the extract; the use of italics indicatesthat the interviewer is quoted; and the students’ names have been replaced with pseudonyms.

ReferencesAshworth, P., and U. Lucas. 2000. “Achieving Empathy and Engagement: A Practical Approach tothe Design, Conduct and Reporting of Phenomenographic Research.” Studies in HigherEducation 25 (3): 295–308. doi:10.1080/713696153.

Bauer, J., D. Festner, H. Gruber, C. Harteis, and H. Heid. 2004. “The Effects of EpistemologicalBeliefs on Workplace Learning.” Journal of Workplace Learning 16 (5): 284–292. doi:10.1108/13665620410545561.

Baxter Magolda, M. B. 1992. Knowing and Reasoning in College: Gender Related Patterns inStudents’ Intellectual Development. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Belenky, M., B. Clinchy, N. Goldberger, and J. Tarule. 1986. Women’s Ways of Knowing: TheDevelopment of the Self. New York: Basic Books.

Billett, S. 2004. “Workplace Participatory Practices: Conceptualising Workplaces as LearningEnvironments.” Journal of Workplace Learning 16 (6): 312–324. doi:10.1108/13665620410550295.

Bowes, L., and L. Harvey. 1999. The Impact of Sandwich Education on the Activities of GraduatesSix Months’ Post-graduation. London: National Centre for Work Experience and the Centre forResearch into Quality.

Brookfield, S. D. 1987. Developing Critical Thinkers. Milton Keynes: Open University Press.Brownlee, J. 2001. “Epistemological Beliefs in Pre-Service Teacher Education Students.” HigherEducation Research & Development 20 (3): 281–291. doi:10.1080/07294360120108377.

Brownlee, J., S. Walker, S. Lennox, B. Exley, and S. Pearce. 2009. “The First Year UniversityExperience: Using Personal Epistemology to Understand Effective Learning and Teaching inHigher Education.” Higher Education 58 (5): 599–618. doi:10.1007/s10734-009-9212-2.

Teaching in Higher Education 797

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f W

ater

loo]

at 0

6:06

13

Nov

embe

r 20

14

Gomez, S. L., D. Lush, and M. Clements. 2004. “Work Placements Enhance the AcademicPerformance of Bioscience Undergraduates.” Journal of Vocational Education & Training 56 (3):373–385. doi:10.1080/13636820400200260.

Guile, D., and T. Griffiths. 2001. “Learning through Work Experience.” Journal of Education andWork 14 (1): 113–131. doi:10.1080/13639080020028738.

Harvey, L. M., S. Moon, and V. Geall. 1997. Graduates’ Work: Organisation Change and Students’Attributes. Birmingham: Centre for Research into Quality and the Association of GraduateRecruiters.

Hofer, B. K. 2004. “Introduction: Paradigmatic Approaches to Personal Epistemology.” Educa-tional Psychologist 39 (1): 1–4. doi:10.1207/s15326985ep3901_1.

Kegan, R. 1994. In Over Our Heads: The Mental Demands of Modern Life. Cambridge, MA:Harvard University Press.

Little, B., and L. Harvey. 2006. Learning through Work Placements and Beyond. Sheffield: Centrefor Research and Evaluation, Sheffield Hallam University and Centre for Higher EducationResearch and Information, Open University.

Lucas, U., and J. H. F. Meyer. 2005. “Towards a Mapping of the Student World: The Identificationof Variation in Students’ Conceptions of, and Motivations to Learn, Accounting.” The BritishAccounting Review 37 (2): 177–204. doi:10.1016/j.bar.2004.10.002.

Lucas, U., and P. L. Tan. 2013. “Developing a Capacity to Engage in Critical Reflection: Students’‘ways of knowing’ within an Undergraduate Business and Accounting Programme.” Studies inHigher Education 38 (2): 104–123. doi:10.1080/03075079.2011.569706.

Mandilaras, A. 2004. “Industrial Placement and Degree Performance: Evidence from a BritishHigher Institution.” International Review of Economics Education 3 (1): 39–51.

Mansfield, R. 2011. “The Effect of Placement Experience upon Final-Year Results for SurveyingDegree Programmes.” Studies in Higher Education 36 (8): 939–952. doi:10.1080/03075079.2010.486073.

Mason, G., G. Williams, P. Cranton, and D. Guile. 2003. How Much Does Higher EducationEnhance the Employability of Graduates? London: HEFCE.

Mezirow, J. 1991. Transformative Dimensions of Adult Learning. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.O’Donovan, B. 2010. “Filling a Pail or Lighting a Fire? The Intellectual Development ofManagement Undergraduates.” The International Journal of Management Education 9 (1): 1–10.doi:10.3794/ijme.91.284.

Paisey, C., and N. J. Paisey. 2010. “Developing Skills via Work Placements in Accounting: Studentand Employer Views.” Accounting Forum 34 (2): 89–108. doi:10.1016/j.accfor.2009.06.001.

Perry, W. G. 1970. Forms of Intellectual and Ethical Development in the College Years. New York:Holt, Rinehart and Wilson.

Phan, H. P. 2008. “Predicting Change in Epistemological Beliefs, Reflective Thinking and LearningStyles: A Longitudinal Study.” British Journal of Educational Psychology 78 (1): 75–93.doi:10.1348/000709907X204354.

Phillips, F. 2001. “A Research Note on Accounting Students’ Epistemological Beliefs, StudyStrategies, and Unstructured Problem-Solving Performance.” Issues in Accounting Education 16(1): 21–39. doi:10.2308/iace.2001.16.1.21.

QAA (Quality Assurance Agency for Higher Education). 2007. General and Business Manage-ment: Subject Benchmark Statement. Gloucester: Quality Assurance Agency.

Rawlings, P., P. White, and R. Stephens. 2005. “Practice-Based Learning in Information Systems:the Advantages for Students.” Journal of Information Systems Education 16 (4): 455–463.

Savin-Baden, M. 2000. Problem-Based Learning in Higher Education: Untold Stories. Bucking-ham: Open University Press.

Schön, D. 1987. Educating the Reflective Practitioner. San Francisco, CA: Jossey Bass.Surridge, I. 2009. “Accounting and Finance Degrees: Is the Academic Performance of PlacementStudents Better? Accounting Education: An International Journal 18 (4/5): 471–485. doi:10.1080/09639280802008498.

Zhang, L. I., and D. Watkins. 2001. “Cognitive Development and Student Approaches to Learning:An Investigation of Perry’s Theory with Chinese and U.S. University Students.” HigherEducation 41 (3): 239–261. doi:10.1023/A:1004151226395.

798 U. Lucas and P.L. Tan

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f W

ater

loo]

at 0

6:06

13

Nov

embe

r 20

14