No abstract

No abstract

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to explore the work-based learning (WBL) ethos of a professional studies doctoral program, a higher degree by research program implemented in Australia. Design/methodology/approach This is a preliminary case study of one higher degree by research program and two doctoral candidates participating in the program to explore the ethos and outcomes of the program. Findings The program has sought to develop a different type of higher education ethos, one characterized by an open-door communications policy, a critical friend philosophy, an emphasis on teamwork, pro tem supervision and a new model for doctoral supervision, self-designed work-based projects, self-directed research programs and the development of professional identity. Originality/value The characteristics and contributions of WBL programs at the doctoral level have been well documented in the academic literature, but the unique ethos, if there is one, of such programs has yet to be fully examined. This study goes some of the way to answering the question of whether such programs have a unique ethos and if so what are its features and how might it contribute to student development.

PurposeThe association of work and learning has been well established for many years. However, some of the terms used to describe the various pedagogies related to work and learning have been used interchangeably, with many lacking definitional clarity and scope. These include work-related learning (WRL), work-based learning, workplace learning (WPL) and work-integrated learning (WIL). This agglomerating approach to usage has resulted in pedagogical confusion and what some theorists call a “problematization” for the field, resulting in undermining shared understanding and potential benefit. The purpose of this conceptual paper is an attempt to unpack the meaning and application of some of the key pedagogical terms used in the applied field of work + learning theory and practice.Design/methodology/approachConceptual modelling and qualitative descriptions of each pedagogy.FindingsMany of the work + learning pedagogies do overlap and cohere but attempts to create umbrella terms, which apply to all theories and approaches, are misguided; definitional clarity with the different modes of practice is required for sustainable educational outcomes.Originality/valueA proto-theoretical model, along with a breakdown of distinguishing features of each term as well as their source in the published literature, has been developed to improve clarity and aid the future praxis of educators.

Purpose -The foresight styles assessment (FSA) was regarded as an important empirical measure and dimension of a strategy level leader's dominant and back-up styles of engaging with matters related to anticipating the future. The measure is also associated as a dimension of foresight as a leadership competence. This study seeks to determine the validity and reliability of the revised FSA as proposed by Gary.Design/methodology/approach -A quantitative two-step methodology was adopted as a pilot study preceding the main study in which a web-based survey methodology was used. The sample consisted of 298 strategy level leaders. Data were analysed using advanced statistical analysis techniques including factor analysis and structural equation modelling.Findings -The FSA's four factors; tester, adapter, framer and reactor, were confirmed but did not display uni-dimensionality. Analytical results confirmed the validity and reliability of the measure, and the structural equation model illustrated good model fit. The reactor factor was determined to be a method factor and theoretical concerns could be raised regarding whether the reactor factor describes a foresight style. Future research of a summated three-factor scale (excluding the reactor factor) is suggested and should include strategy-level leaders, especially in more diverse populations, investigating further, the nomological validity and reliability of the scale.Research limitations/implications -Owing to the purposive non-probability sampling technique the sample results are not generalisable. However, the statistical results are rigorous and significant in terms of determining the validity and reliability of the measure. Further research of a summated three-factor (tester, framer, adapter) scale amongst a more diverse population is suggested.Practical implications -While some notable studies have been conducted, futures studies research generally lacks validated and reliable quantitative measures related to the foresight construct. As suggested by Inayatullah, the importance of understanding the value free observations of the empirically observable is required to meaningfully conduct deeper analysis of social issues. The findings of this research has implications in the study of foresight by providing empirical grounds for further exploratory research, and providing rigorous evidence supporting the use of the foresight styles assessment especially as a three-factor summated scale. Use of the scale is not limited to foresight studies, indeed it can and has been applied to broader leadership cognition and strategic management studies yet to be reported.Social implications -Considering that foresight is regarded as an innate human characteristic and the need for social foresight may never have been higher, understanding a basis of measuring the construct may have significant implications in terms of further social science research and social foresight development.Originality/value -In terms of measuring a broader construct of foresight competence, the rigorous val...