Adding Value to Open and Distance Learning Programmes …
451
nities to develop non-technical skills and to improve capabilities regarding career
self–management (Jackson et al. 2017). Formulated in this way, the potential of WIL
to contribute to sustainability learning and thus working towards the sustainable
development goals (SDG’s—UN 2015) is clear. An added advantage is that WIL is
geared towards integration across disciplinary boundaries, thereby creating an ideal
milieu for sustainability learning (Wall et al. 2017). Despite this being the situation,
scholarship on this potential role, specifically focussing on WIL in sustainability
learning, appears to be scarce (Ibid.).
1.3 Aim, Methodology and Value of the Chapter
The position taken in this chapter concurs with Wall et al. (2017) that sustainability
learning can be effectively streamlined into certain study programmes with WIL
components. This will help to break down disciplinary fragmentation through a
unified vision during WIL and directly feeds into SDG 4 (quality education). To
support this position, a case study approach is utilised in this chapter to conduct a
qualitative assessment of and to critically reflect on the sustainability learning during
the WIL programme of the University of South Africa (Unisa) at Telperion Nature
Reserve, as part of the National Diploma in Nature Conservation. Special effort is
taken to achieve significant depth of assessment in this chapter, which compensates
for the limitations usually associated with qualitative research strategies. This chapter
links directly to the challenges experienced by Unisa, as an open and distance learning
(ODL) institution, to offer qualifications requiring practical and/or industry exposure
(Swart 2016), but which can be addressed through appropriate forms of experiential
learning such as WIL.
While a previous review of the Unisa WIL programme reflected on a tourist visit
simulation (Wilson and Pretorius 2017), this chapter considers the ten work-place
based excursions presented each year by Unisa, for nature conservation students in
a living labs context at the Telperion Nature Reserve. The living labs paradigm is
relevant due to linkages with the creation of inter-disciplinary spaces in which participants engage with sustainability and other challenges (Callaghan and Herselman
2015). The case study approach followed by this chapter facilitates reflection on this
WIL programme in terms of its value for sustainability learning, thus addressing
the lack of associated scholarly work in this field. Information sources to be used
include relevant literature on WIL, living labs and sustainability, the history and
timeline of WIL at Telperion (as reflected in conference presentations between 2011
and 2016—Wilson and Wilson 2011, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016) and critical reflection
and assessment by the authors.
Following the introduction, a snapshot of some of the relevant literature on the
topic is provided. Thereafter, a review of the ten, week-long WIL excursions offered
per year by Unisa at Telperion is supplied; supplemented with a critical assessment
of the implementation experience within the context of the living labs approach. A
framework of eight criteria for the evaluation of good practice in WIL (Schonell
451
nities to develop non-technical skills and to improve capabilities regarding career
self–management (Jackson et al. 2017). Formulated in this way, the potential of WIL
to contribute to sustainability learning and thus working towards the sustainable
development goals (SDG’s—UN 2015) is clear. An added advantage is that WIL is
geared towards integration across disciplinary boundaries, thereby creating an ideal
milieu for sustainability learning (Wall et al. 2017). Despite this being the situation,
scholarship on this potential role, specifically focussing on WIL in sustainability
learning, appears to be scarce (Ibid.).
1.3 Aim, Methodology and Value of the Chapter
The position taken in this chapter concurs with Wall et al. (2017) that sustainability
learning can be effectively streamlined into certain study programmes with WIL
components. This will help to break down disciplinary fragmentation through a
unified vision during WIL and directly feeds into SDG 4 (quality education). To
support this position, a case study approach is utilised in this chapter to conduct a
qualitative assessment of and to critically reflect on the sustainability learning during
the WIL programme of the University of South Africa (Unisa) at Telperion Nature
Reserve, as part of the National Diploma in Nature Conservation. Special effort is
taken to achieve significant depth of assessment in this chapter, which compensates
for the limitations usually associated with qualitative research strategies. This chapter
links directly to the challenges experienced by Unisa, as an open and distance learning
(ODL) institution, to offer qualifications requiring practical and/or industry exposure
(Swart 2016), but which can be addressed through appropriate forms of experiential
learning such as WIL.
While a previous review of the Unisa WIL programme reflected on a tourist visit
simulation (Wilson and Pretorius 2017), this chapter considers the ten work-place
based excursions presented each year by Unisa, for nature conservation students in
a living labs context at the Telperion Nature Reserve. The living labs paradigm is
relevant due to linkages with the creation of inter-disciplinary spaces in which participants engage with sustainability and other challenges (Callaghan and Herselman
2015). The case study approach followed by this chapter facilitates reflection on this
WIL programme in terms of its value for sustainability learning, thus addressing
the lack of associated scholarly work in this field. Information sources to be used
include relevant literature on WIL, living labs and sustainability, the history and
timeline of WIL at Telperion (as reflected in conference presentations between 2011
and 2016—Wilson and Wilson 2011, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016) and critical reflection
and assessment by the authors.
Following the introduction, a snapshot of some of the relevant literature on the
topic is provided. Thereafter, a review of the ten, week-long WIL excursions offered
per year by Unisa at Telperion is supplied; supplemented with a critical assessment
of the implementation experience within the context of the living labs approach. A
framework of eight criteria for the evaluation of good practice in WIL (Schonell