FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W2109367938> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W2109367938 abstract "The purpose of this paper is to draw together the results of an ongoing research program into workplace learning and the some thinking about the development of human capability. We make the distinction between information, skills and learning. More than that, we suggest that it is the latter that makes the difference but it is often poorly harnessed in the modern workplace. This paper argues that properly conducted workplace learning can provide a confluence for systemic (socio-technical design) and training solutions to complex organisational problems. In fact drawing these two main elements together provides an opportunity for learning, organisationally and on the part of individuals. It is common for managers and trainers to use either a training or a systemic solution to attempt to address a particular problem. The training solution usually results, at best with competency attainment (knowledge and skills), while a systemic solution often has little regard to the essential elements of socio-technical design and creating a learning environment that might make the change enduring. More often than not there is a poor rate of return on training and change initiatives. Perspectives and Theoretical Frameworks Think for a moment of two things you have learned that have made a real difference in your life. Keep them in your mind until the end of the paper. This research program has been supported by three key theoretical constructs: selfdetermined learning; the concept of capability; and socio-technical design. Education has traditionally been seen as a pedagogic relationship between the teacher and the learner. It was always the teacher who decided what the learner needed to know, and indeed, how the knowledge and skills should be taught. In the past thirty years or so there has been quite a revolution in education through research into how people learn, and resulting from that, further work on how teaching could and should be provided. Heutagogy (Hase and Kenyon, 2000) is the study of the processes that enable selfdetermined learning and is concerned with how to harness the learning that occurs as a part of a person’s total experience. Heuatagogy is interested in approaches to learning that are not teacher-centred but person-centred. This idea is not new and draws on humanistic and constructivist themes that can be followed through the philosopher Heider (Emery, 1974), phenomenology (Rogers, 1951), systems thinking (Emery and Trist, 1965), double loop and organisational learning (Argyris & Schon, 1996), androgogy (Knowles, 1984), learner-managed learning (Graves, 1993; Long, 1990), constructivism (Fosnot, 1996) action learning (Kemmis & McTaggart, 1998), Capability (Stephenson, 1994), and work-based learning (Gattegno, 1996; Hase, 1998), for example. Apart from the philosophical reason for looking at how to harness real learning in real situations there is a more pragmatic reason, particularly for post-compulsory education, that has to do with the world in which we currently live. Complexity Theory (Waldrop 1992) tells us that we live in a world where change cannot be predicted and where people and organisations will need to be adaptable (Hase, 2002). It is a world in which: information is readily and easily accessible; where change is so rapid that traditional methods of training and education are totally inadequate; discipline based knowledge is inappropriate to prepare for living in modern communities and workplaces; learning is increasingly aligned with what we do; modern organisational structures require flexible learning practices; and there is a need for immediacy of learning. It is our view that heutagogical approaches to learning will help people to remember how to learn and will better prepare them to manage in an increasingly complex world. The thrust that underscores these approaches is a desire to go beyond the simple acquisition of skills and knowledge as a learning experience. They emphasise a more holistic development in the learner of an independent capability (Stephenson, 1994), the capacity for questioning ones values and assumptions (Argyris & Schon, 1996), and the critical role of the system-environment interface (Emery & Trist,1965). The ability to learn is one component of what has been described as being capable (Hase, Malloch & Cairns, 1998; Stephenson, 1994). In addition to knowing how to learn, the capable person is able to use competencies in novel as well as familiar situations; is creative-able to ‘think outside the box’; has justified confidence in self (self-efficacy); can take appropriate risks; and works well in teams. Thus capable people are more able to respond to the demands of a rapidly changing and ambiguous environment where there is a requirement to do more with less, turn a profit no matter what or be innovative. Application of the capability concept has largely involved the creation of innovative learning experiences that help develop the elements of capability in individuals (Graves, 1993; Stephenson, 1994; and Stephenson & Weil, 1992) in both education settings and in the workplace. More recently, in Australia, we have been interested in not only how work based learning can develop capable people but also how human resource management and development systems may also be designed to enable capability in everyday work (Cairns & Hase, 1996; Hase, 1998). In a study of a number of different Australian organizations Hase, Cairns & Malloch (1998) concluded that to develop capable people and capable organisations, “requires major paradigm shifts in the way in which management, education / training and workplace are conceptualised”. In particular they argue that the capacity to learn is highly significant and along with others believe that “people and organisations need to learn, to construct meaning from identifying and solving problems they face”. The third theoretical construct that has influenced this research has been that of sociotechnical design which concerns the person-work interface. One of the key elements of socio-technical design relevant to this research involves notions of participative democracy and systems thinking (Argyris and Schon, 1996; Emery and Emery, 1996). It is assumed that people will have a better quality of working life and perform better at work if they are deliberately and systematically involved in their future. Our interest has been in changing the culture of a workplace, which has been traditionally hierarchical with clear divides between work groups on the basis of status and work allocation to one of involvement and collaborative decision making. It is this theoretical background that drove this research project that concerns an Australian mining and construction company. The company has, for a long time, recognised the incredible importance of the capability of its workforce in relation to its competitiveness in a global environment. However, it has not always been able to translate this espoused theory into theory in action at the workplace. The rest of this paper reports the process and results of a journey to change this culture and implement some of the principles described above." @default.
• W2109367938 created "2016-06-24" @default.
• W2109367938 creator A5050861357 @default.
• W2109367938 creator A5053404512 @default.
• W2109367938 date "2002-04-01" @default.
• W2109367938 modified "2023-09-27" @default.
• W2109367938 title "Workplace Learning: What's the Rate of Return?." @default.
• W2109367938 cites W1481003563 @default.
• W2109367938 cites W1500257702 @default.
• W2109367938 cites W1507769851 @default.
• W2109367938 cites W1515224035 @default.
• W2109367938 cites W1517820639 @default.
• W2109367938 cites W1555279274 @default.
• W2109367938 cites W1571960039 @default.
• W2109367938 cites W1985846760 @default.
• W2109367938 cites W1994443154 @default.
• W2109367938 cites W2008318777 @default.
• W2109367938 cites W2124395890 @default.
• W2109367938 cites W2146993030 @default.
• W2109367938 cites W2150656876 @default.
• W2109367938 cites W5377339 @default.
• W2109367938 hasPublicationYear "2002" @default.
• W2109367938 type Work @default.
• W2109367938 sameAs 2109367938 @default.
• W2109367938 citedByCount "2" @default.
• W2109367938 countsByYear W21093679382014 @default.
• W2109367938 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W2109367938 hasAuthorship W2109367938A5050861357 @default.
• W2109367938 hasAuthorship W2109367938A5053404512 @default.
• W2109367938 hasConcept C144133560 @default.
• W2109367938 hasConceptScore W2109367938C144133560 @default.
• W2109367938 hasLocation W21093679381 @default.
• W2109367938 hasOpenAccess W2109367938 @default.
• W2109367938 hasPrimaryLocation W21093679381 @default.
• W2109367938 hasRelatedWork W142139628 @default.
• W2109367938 hasRelatedWork W1518638857 @default.
• W2109367938 hasRelatedWork W2130158749 @default.
• W2109367938 hasRelatedWork W2182600889 @default.
• W2109367938 hasRelatedWork W2188883889 @default.
• W2109367938 hasRelatedWork W2463864577 @default.
• W2109367938 hasRelatedWork W2512198958 @default.
• W2109367938 hasRelatedWork W2587437635 @default.
• W2109367938 hasRelatedWork W259186279 @default.
• W2109367938 hasRelatedWork W267691596 @default.
• W2109367938 hasRelatedWork W2729061096 @default.
• W2109367938 hasRelatedWork W2768883824 @default.
• W2109367938 hasRelatedWork W2770380446 @default.
• W2109367938 hasRelatedWork W2883122605 @default.
• W2109367938 hasRelatedWork W2903238250 @default.
• W2109367938 hasRelatedWork W3017030823 @default.
• W2109367938 hasRelatedWork W657394027 @default.
• W2109367938 hasRelatedWork W2182138230 @default.
• W2109367938 hasRelatedWork W2610390455 @default.
• W2109367938 hasRelatedWork W261581101 @default.
• W2109367938 isParatext "false" @default.
• W2109367938 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W2109367938 magId "2109367938" @default.
• W2109367938 workType "article" @default.