![Policy Context ,[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object]]()
Recomendados
Recomendados
Más contenido relacionado
Destacado
Destacado (15)
Similar a Exploring widening access through partnerships Pete Cannell, Ronald MacIntyre and Joan Thomson (The OU in Scotland)
Similar a Exploring widening access through partnerships Pete Cannell, Ronald MacIntyre and Joan Thomson (The OU in Scotland) (20)
Más de johnroseadams1
Más de johnroseadams1 (20)
Último
Último (20)
Exploring widening access through partnerships Pete Cannell, Ronald MacIntyre and Joan Thomson (The OU in Scotland)
- 1. Exploring widening access through partnerships Joan Thomson, Ronald MacIntyre and Pete Cannell – The Open University in Scotland
- 16. Profile of Case Study The Open University in Scotland Circa 15,000 students 70% in employment The Employer Large engineering firm (global) 2 sites engaged in partnership employs 40,000 people in more than 50 countries. The Union Unite the Union 1.5 m members Largest TU in UK Students 22 OU students on the project currently Blue Collar
Notas del editor
- . We know why the government has invested in skills utilisation, and we can see why the OU (whose mission it is) and the union (for the benefit of its members) is interested, but what can we say about the employer. The structure of the company is one where people work in teams, teams that are responsible for their own productivity, and are moving towards autonomous working. This is very much the Japanese style lean production model, the structure and the promotion of teams, autonomy, and so on is also part of high performance working practices ideas, thinking that has itself informed the skills debate within government. Within teams people can take on different roles, and use the skills they have in different ways, these are called champion roles, while we might not see clear progression routes from one grade to another, roles can and do change depending on the skills of the employee. The company is moving towards this team approach, however, these teams still sit within a fairly hierarchical workplace structure. Within this workplace avenues do exist for people who do not have a B Eng to gain a B Eng. Typically these are people who have come in or gained HNC's and HND's, (mechanical engineers) and then take a B Eng through a locally based HE institution, day release paid for by RR - essentially a contract. Not for the cohort we are working with though. Outwith independent study, their has not been a route towards a B Eng for shop floor staff. Training tends to be workbased, ongoing, non certified, where people are “skilled enough” Union did a survey and id'd training needs, like a lot of life long learning or WP programmes it began with leisure style classes, over time it moved towards HE
- So what are we doing. Lets deal with the partnership and the cohort later … What is different for the OU is that we are going into the workplace and engaging with e students get to study in the workplace. This means that we are more engaged with the workplace than we usually are. Students get support in the workplace from the OU. In addition they also get support from the Union Learning Reps. The ULR often acting as a fixer What does the employer get out of the involvement of the Union and the OU in the workplace, well they get subsidised training for the workforce What is different for the employer is the flexibility, they do not release employees, so they benefit
- This is probably one of the most interesting aspects of the pilot. Post Leitch (2006) HEI's are expected to engage far more with employers, and tailor their offering to the economy, and this marketisation of HE is likely to continue and indeed be re-inforced and extended post Browne. At the OU we have contracts with employers, indeed with have contracts with the employer that features in this case study that follow the usual HEI private sector relationship. However, here we are doing something different, this is a Union and OU initiative that is developing into a 3 way partnership -remember our pillars from earlier. What have we learnt >>>> BRUCE>>>> Students get support from the OU, their employer and the Union. Regular meetings between partners mean that everyone is kept up to date with what is happening with the students, you get wrap around support. We are learning about how the employer works, and in turn the employer is learning about how we work We are building relationships, and those all important personal networks, with the employer and with the union that should lead to us expanding provision within this and other sectors. Yet another peer community.
- Lets explore some study experiences >>> insert once get interviews It is not about the stats, but we can say something about the stats >>>>>
- We are learning about managing relationships, we are learning that employer engagement can be accomplished in different ways. Our core values and our mission centres around widening participation and lifelong learning. Engaging in a partnership with the Union, an organisation with similar values to ourselves allows to access the workplace and engage with employers in a different way. These are students that would not otherwise have had a route to HE, the union did the ground work in terms surveys, and work based leisure provision (supported by the employer), but the wrap around support provided by the OU and the fact that our programmes are always designed around open access mean that the progression from leisure to HE works, we can see this in the retention rates. If we look at WP discourses within this sector the major concerns are around gender and race and ethnicity, class, age, and qaulifications are largely ignored. Yet this cohort are WP students in terms of qaulifications and socio-economic background, and read in terms of WP it is working.