International Journal of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education 2007, Volume 19, Number 3, 263-273 http://www.isetl.org/ijtlhe/ ISSN 1812-9129 Connected Learning in Co-operative Education Jeela Jones University of Ottawa This qualitative research study explored the experiences of students who had attended a co-operative (co-op) education program, with a focus on what makes the experience meaningful to them. Utilizing a basic interpretive research design, students who graduated from a co-op program were interviewed using an open-ended interview protocol. Both male and female students were selected based on graduation date and came from a wide range of program types. Findings for this study were examined through the lens of connected-learning, a learning method that places emphasis on discussion, collaboration, and acceptance for knowledge development. Several themes emerged including experience, relationships, time, fees, and luck. Findings suggest that co-operative education is beneficial, but it is made meaningful by more than securing paid work terms. My interest in co-operative education stems from Conducting this study while holding the dual role my job where I work for a university level co- of researcher and co-op employee presented some operative (co-op) education program. In this role I challenges: I had to carefully bracket what students work closely with co-op students and I am involved “should” do from what they “actually” do as they in program design, development, and delivery, described their experiences to me. Nevertheless, I among other responsibilities. Through my work I believe that my understanding of the co-op context have come to understand that not all learners value made me better able to identify the multifaceted sitting in classrooms and listening to teachers. For elements that make up students’ experiences. Being some, learning happens in an environment that is privy to students’ inner lives has lead me to view active and meaningful to their day-to-day lives. study and work, in the formalized sense, as only part Although it is true that much learning occurs in of the co-operative education experience. Through the school, it is important to consider the other research process I have deepened my understanding of possibilities. students’ experiences within co-operative education My purpose in this basic interpretive qualitative and continue to work reflexively to positively impact research study was to look at these possibilities by my work as an adult educator in the field. exploring the experiences of students who attended a Canadian university co-operative education program, Co-operative Education particularly with regards to what makes the program meaningful to them. In addition, I sought to Co-operative education is a structured educational understand their experiences through the lens of strategy where students alternate between periods of connected learning, a leaning method that places work and periods of study. This integrated and emphasis on discussion, collaboration, and systematic curriculum is achieved through a careful acceptance. To date, research that has focused on the partnership between the educational institution and the benefits and outcomes of co-operative education occupational field with each partner contributing to (Bartkus & Stull, 2004; Kerka, 1999; Saltmarsh, students’ learning (Groenewald, 2004). While 1992) has been primarily quantitative in nature, and criticism exists, the “expanded classroom” (Katula & has focused on traditional co-op programs like Threnhauser, 1999, p. 239) of co-operative education engineering (Blair & Millea, 2004; Coll & is generally perceived as beneficial for students, the Pinyonatthagarn, 2004; Gardner & Motschenbacher, sponsoring educational institution, and the community 1997; Hayward & Hovath, 2000; Nasr, Pennington & as a whole (Braustein & Stull, 2001; Parks, Andres, 2004; Van Gyn, Cutt, Loken & Ricks, 1996). Onwuegbuzie, & Cash, 2001). Indeed, by alternating Consequently, the call for this study is threefold: (a) for blocks of time between the two learning employing a qualitative methodology deepens our environments, students are given the opportunity to understanding of co-op by providing rich, in-depth bring theory into the workplace and applied detail of the experience; (b) ensuring that students knowledge into the classroom, thereby increasing the from a range of programs participate provides a value of their overall educational experience broader view of the co-op context; and (c) examining (Groenewald, 2004). Some of the reported benefits of co-op in terms of connected learning helps to close a co-operative education include increased motivation, gap in the current body of research as no studies look greater career clarity, enhanced employability, as well specifically at co-operative education and connected as vocational maturity (Kerka, 1999). Evidently, learning (Enns, 1993). enabling students to experience the more theoretical Jones Connected Learning 264 world of school in tandem with the more practical Dressler & Keeling, 2004 for a comprehensive listing). world of work has the potential of increasing some of Additionally, some recent research activity has begun to the positive outcomes of education. incorporate a greater emphasis on the co-op experience This type of educational model began in North and what makes it a successful learning method. For America in 1906 with the first co-operative education example, David A. Kolb (1984) and his theory of program at the University of Cincinnati (Grosjean, experiential learning has come into focus, among other 2003; UC History in Brief, 2004). In time, co-op spread leading theorists, to deepen our understanding of what across the United States and Canada incorporating a makes the co-operative education experience unique. range of programs as diverse as engineering, science, Kolb’s work is particularly influential because of how business, and the liberal arts. While expansion he defines learning and how he models the process. To continues at a conservative rate, there is evidence that Kolb, “learning is the process whereby knowledge is co-op programs will continue to increase in scope and created through the transformation of experience” (p. scale across North America and around the world 38). This definition is incorporated into his learning (Sovilla & Varty, 2004): cycle which emphasizes not only the traditional process of reflection, observation, and drawing conclusions but Of particular note, in 1994 the American Society of also the more practical processes found only in Engineering Education ranked the establishment of experience. These include taking action, making co-operative education programs and the addition decisions, and involving oneself personally. Naturally, of practical experience to the academic curriculum this thinking is in accordance with co-operative as the second most important event in the past education where students are required to ground their century in engineering and engineering technology. learning in experience. (p. 13) Connected Learning While there remain significant areas for growth, the success of the last 100 years has provided a Although students enrolled in co-operative receptive audience for this unique post-secondary education programs garner many positive results, these learning system. do not come without effort. In order to make the The philosopher John Dewey (1916) is one of the journey learners must draw on multiple resources. One early advocates of programs like co-operative important resource is the relationships that learners education. He wrote passionately about learning that build. Through relationships learners have the occurs through practical hands-on experience, a opportunity to play, converse, listen, and talk (Belenky, learning method that is also known as experiential Clinchy, Goldberger, & Tarule, 1986). They learn to learning. While he discussed experiential learning in trust in their ability to think and, in due course, their broad terms rather than about co-operative education right to be heard. This practice is called connected specifically, he promoted the value of removing the learning. artificial separation between vocation and academia, The term “connected learning,” coined by Belenky calling traditional education into question (Linn, 2004). et al. (1986) in their book titled Women’s Ways of By shifting away from this division towards a more Knowing: The Development of Self, Voice, and Mind, is integrated learning model, he believed students could a learning approach where knowledge is gained by increase their self-development as well as their learning connecting with other people and things. Connected potential (Linn, 2004). Due to his support of non- learning occurs when learners feel as though they safely traditional learning models linking work and school, as belong amongst their fellow students, teachers, family, well as his promotion of the positive outcomes, Dewey friends, colleagues, and community. Using dialogue as continues to influence perceptions of the co-operative a communication method, learners develop their education context today and remains important to authentic “voice” (Belenky, et al, 1986, p. 33) and theoretical discussions on the topic (Giles, 1991; make an effort to emphasize connection over Heinemann & DeFalco, 1990; Heinemann, DeFalco & separation, acceptance over assessment, and Smelkinson, 1992; Korowski, 1991; Linn, 1999; Linn, collaboration over debate (Johnston, 2001). To enter 2004; Prentice, 2001; Saltmarsh, 1992). this sphere of self-development, several elements must Confirming the merit of experiential learning as interlace: learners must engage in relationships and advanced by John Dewey (1916) is the proliferation of relationship building; they must feel emotion and even research focusing on the outcomes and benefits of co- emotional within their relationships; and they must operative education. In particular, studies have perceive the other as a person on the same level with examined co-op programs and their impact on students’ different but equally valuable experiences and personal, work, academic, and career progress perceptions. Additionally, and important to this study, (Braustein & Stull, 2001; Parks, et al., 2001; also see learners must value real-life experience as a tool in Jones Connected Learning 265 building knowledge. With each of these elements in The Canadian University Co-operative Education place, learners have the opportunity to enhance their Programs opened their doors in the early 1980s with personal growth and development and, therefore, gain two programs. These have since expanded to include more than a support system. Consequently, the over 40 programs of study for a total of 3,300 registered learners’ journey occurring within and beyond regular undergraduates, or approximately 10% of the office hours (Linn, 1999) is more then the sum of its university’s total enrollment. Disciplines offering co- parts. op are wide-ranging and include more traditional engineering programs as well as less typical programs Purpose such as history, sociology, and translation. Participants for this research study were selected The purpose of this basic interpretive qualitative through the use of the co-op programs’ main database. research study was to explore the experiences of The most important criteria were that students come students who attended the Canadian University (a from the widest possible range of disciplines and had pseudonym) co-operative (co-op) education program. recently graduated from the co-op programs. Utilizing a basic interpretive design, students from a Recent graduates were an appropriate group to wide range of disciplines including engineering, select from because they were no longer involved in science, and the liberal arts, were interviewed using an any co-op activities but had a current perspective on open-ended interview protocol. The exploration sheds their co-op experiences, and, in all likelihood, had yet light on the meaning of students’ experiences within the to move away from the region. As graduates, it was also co-operative education programs, particularly as they assumed that they were less likely to feel reservations relate to connected learning. The central question about choosing to participate in the study and share studied is “How do co-operative education students their personal thoughts on their experiences. There were make meaning of their experiences within the 279 students who graduated in December 2004 and program?” The research sub-questions include possibly available for participation in this study. 1. How do co-operative education students Data Collection behave as connected learners? 2. What do co-operative education student A purposeful and maximal variation sampling experiences reveal about co-operative strategy as outlined in Creswell (2002) was used to education? determine the first and subsequent set of study participants to be contacted. As a first set, three Method students per degree program were selected for a total of 15 students. The three from each degree - which To explore participant’s experiences within the Co- included administration, arts, engineering, science, and operative Education Programs at Canadian University, social science - were selected based on the following the basic interpretive qualitative research design and criteria: (a) graduated in the previous term from the associated data collection method of interviewing were Canadian University; (b) completed all required co-op employed. With the basic interpretive method, “the work terms; and (c) maintained a local address and researcher is interested in understanding how phone number. To avoid singling out participants, participants make meaning of a situation or individuals from each degree were selected by choosing phenomenon” (Merriam, 2002, p. 6). Through the use every third name on the list. The sampling was of interviews, the researcher can best capture the “lived purposeful in that both genders were represented. experiences” (Creswell, 1998) of the participants. The Based on the response rates from the first group of basic interpretive method also guided the data analysis participants, a second set was selected. Selection for process to focus on gaining an understanding of the the second set followed the same procedure with one data through the voices of the participants. addition: response by degree program. For example, when no participants agreed to participate from Participants and Site administration, three more participants from this degree program were contacted. This ensured that of the five The Canadian University Co-operative Education degree programs, each was represented in the study. Programs are housed within a research-intensive This recruitment process continued until saturation had university with 30,000 full- and part-time students. The been achieved with 18 study participants. Saturation majority of these students are between 19 and 29 years was understood to be “the point where a theme is of age, are 58% female and 42% male, and are mostly developed and detailed and no new information can add from across Canada. to its specification” (Creswell, 2002, p. 273). Jones Connected Learning 266 To gather information, face-to-face interviews - Findings approximately sixty minutes in length or less - were conducted. This method for gathering information has Participant Description shown to be effective in enabling first-hand experience with the participant where unusual, emergent, or The 18 individuals who were interviewed for this confidential topics may be gathered and explored study graduated from Canadian University; each having (Creswell, 2003). The interview procedure followed a participated in the school’s co-operative education pre-determined plan where the study was described, programs as part of the administration, arts, informed consent was explained, and the informed engineering, science, or social sciences programs. consent form was signed. The identity of each There were eleven female students and seven male participant was masked through the use of pseudonyms. students with both genders represented in all but one of Following the basic interpretive design, open-ended the programs; the only exception was the arts programs questions were used. The questions asked participants where only females came forward as participants. See to describe their experience with the co-operative Table 1 for a profile of participants by faculty including education programs and what it means to them. some examples of the various types of work term job Each interview was digitally recorded and later responsibilities. transcribed verbatim. Participants’ transcriptions were The age range of the participants was narrow. returned to them via e-mail in order that they could There were 12 participants who were 24 years old at verify the accuracy of the data collected. Additionally, the time of their interview. Three were 23, one was participants were provided the final report in order that 25, and the remaining two were 26 years old. Once on they could check the data and provide corrections or the job, work responsibilities were wide ranging and clarification. As well as recording the interview, field included tasks such as administration, research, notes were kept capturing any additional information writing, planning, designing, and even staff not presented verbally. These notes included my supervision and project management. thoughts, feelings, and perceptions of the participant The participants completed work terms from a and of the information they provided. wide range of employers primarily within the local region. Some of the main sectors for employment Data Analysis included government, pulp and paper, fuel and chemical, financial, transportation, and information The procedure for data analysis followed the technology. While a few participants remained with description–reduction–interpretation method (Wolff, the same employer for all of their work terms, many 2002). In terms of description, the data was recorded others had a different employer for almost every work and then transcribed. From this point, the interview term. To change employers, students had to enter into data was reviewed, first to gain a general understanding open competition for jobs prior to the work term of the meaning and then more thoroughly to develop period. open codes. This was followed by reduction of the interview data, achieved by using an inductive approach Connected Learning in Co-operative Education to determine themes and patterns within each interview and across interviews (Shank, 2002). Finally, The participants in this study indicated that interpretation occurred by comparing themes and although co-op was challenging, in most cases it was a showcasing how they interrelate (Shank, 2002). worthwhile experience. While for some, co-op simply Meanwhile, the themes and patterns were compared to offered a means to an ends or some small benefit, for the field notes to check between first impressions and many others it provided multiple benefits and positive what became apparent through the transcribed words. experiences. With regards to the meaningfulness of the co-operative education programs, five themes Trustworthiness emerged. These themes are experience, relationships, time, luck, and fees. Trustworthiness, or validity, is the verification that Experience. Gaining work experience is one of the information presented in the report is accurate and the hallmarks of co-operative education and naturally true (Creswell, 2003). Trustworthiness was achieved in emerged as an important factor for each of the study three key ways: (a) careful triangulation between the participants. Many described how co-op removed the interviews, the interview transcriptions, and field notes; “chicken and the egg problem”: you can’t get a job (b) member checking by participants of the interview without experience, but you can’t get experience transcriptions, themes, and descriptions; and (c) rich, without a job. Amanda, a student who had considered thick description of the participants’ experiences in the dropping co-op, explained that “it was a good decision final report. not to quit” because in the end she gained experience Jones Connected Learning 267 Table 1 Profile of Participants by Faculty Average Number of Faculty Example Work Term Job Responsibilities Employers Administration 3.25 Statistics, research, assisting in staff supervision, editing, liaising, system conversion, marketing, project development, writing, policy analysis, office administration Arts 3.25 Research, policy analysis, office administration, logistics, writing, editing, planning, communications analysis and planning Engineering 2.75 Software development, testing, designing, project management, research and development, overseeing trials Science 1. 75 Cataloguing, research, statistics, safety standards compliance and label reviews, product and policy analysis, GIS mapping, report writing Social Science 3.00 Speech writing, translation, logistics, communications strategy, editing, policy analysis that helped her employability. Ruth felt that, because of was pleased that he was able to work in research and the “professional experience” she gained, she is much development, design, and project management because further ahead compared to those who did not choose the range of experience was exactly what he wanted to gain co-op option. As one participant explained, “co-op from co-op. Greg also valued having a range of helps you get past the Catch-22” (Chris) because experiences indicating that he learned different work ultimately, employers want to hire experienced situations required different approaches. Danielle, who workers. worked for a different government agency or And yet, having work experience was only department for each work term, explained that this meaningful to participants to a point. For it to be truly increased her “appreciation” of what government is significant, co-op had to provide real and relevant work trying to achieve. experience in terms of the participant’s field of study Without the opportunity to see multiple angles, and range and depth of experience in relation to the participants expressed that their experience was participant’s career path. Derek, an engineering student, lacking. Melanie, a science student, explained that she expressed the importance of real and relevant work wanted to see the differences between working in an when he explained that fellow students were “jealous” office, working in a lab, and working in the field. As of the experience he was gaining because he was there were no positions available as a field researcher, “actually doing design.” Julie also stated that her she was disappointed that she didn’t have the experience was “exceptional” when she had the opportunity to explore this career possibility. Holly felt opportunity to gain experience in her field. Melanie that because she didn’t have the opportunity to work in and Stephanie both valued contributing to something the private industry, she is less “well-rounded” than she real rather than what might be required in a part-time could have been. Without gaining a wide range of student job. experiences over the course of the various work terms, Without real and relevant work, participants were participants felt that the co-op programs did not fully vocal about how it diminished the value of the co- meet their learning or work goals. operative education programs. When one of Amanda’s Relationships. Developing meaningful work terms did not match her field, only the salary kept relationships stood out as particularly significant to the her motivated. Julie also faced a work term that did not research study participants. Relationships that were provide relevant experience. She tried to keep herself most important were with the staff at the co-op office, busy but felt in the end that she “didn’t do much.” Nigel with fellow students, and with supervisors and co- explained that during one particular work term he workers. The greatest significance was placed on became frustrated when his employer gave him relationships that provided warmth and support, “mindless” work to do because the job requirements did extended beyond regular office hours, involved not match Nigel’s knowledgebase. What stands out is mentoring, as well as some pushing of the student so the emphasis that participants placed on tying their that they moved outside of their comfort zone. In many program of study to their work. cases, meaningfulness came from the personal rather Work terms were also most meaningful when, than the professional aspects of the relationships. As taken as a whole, they offered range and depth of Julie explained, she valued one particular work term experience so that, over the course of the various work because it became her “second home” and her boss terms, participants gained exposure to multiple became her friend. Nigel’s favorite boss was someone perspectives, work environments, and projects. Derek with whom he could relax. Similarly, Amanda Jones Connected Learning 268 developed a friendship with her boss and found she As Holly explained, “I certainly think that the co-op could talk to her about everything. department gave me the confidence after my first The development of friendship relationships with placement to go into a job and to, you know, express employers was not the case for all participants and did myself.” While never easy, the nervousness associated not occur in all work terms. By contrast, some with being pushed into the limelight was traded for participants described completely different experiences greater self-confidence over time. Without a chance to where employers were decidedly uninvolved or prove themselves, study participants expressed oppressive. Ruth expressed that she was made to feel boredom and even stress. Lauren and Greg described “stupid” and “little” by one of her colleagues. Kirsten how there were times when they could have been doing explained that one of her bosses was inappropriate from a lot more work. While Lauren sometimes sat the beginning of her work term. This inappropriateness twiddling her thumbs, Greg wondered, “Why am I “escalated to full-out sexual harassment” and resulted doing this?” Melanie laughed when she described how in her leaving her co-op position. Without a doubt, one work term was particularly “horrible” because she whether positive or negative, the relationships had to “beg for work” almost everyday. An oft heard developed by students were significant in regards to the sentiment was participants’ desire to test their skills, meaningfulness of their co-operative education work hard, and make a contribution to the organization experience. and in turn, a contribution to their employability and In keeping with the nature of warm and supportive self-confidence. relationships, participants felt it was meaningful when The value placed on the relationships developed professional relationships became more personal and with employers is also seen in terms of relationships informal and extended beyond the 9 to 5 work day, developed with the co-op office staff. Study participants particularly with regards to their employers. Robert remarked on how important it was when the staff at the stated that because the relationship with one particular co-op office took the time to provide a personal touch. boss stretched beyond regular office hours, he Elizabeth enthusiastically explained how meaningful it considered it “a really good success.” Julie discovered, was that a co-op employee remembered and asked while out on shopping trips with her boss that, as about her family describing this as “very one-on-one, women, they have similar values and interests. Scott not one with a number”. For Ruth, who battled cancer described how he was treated like a son by one of his while a co-op student, the time the co-op employee took employers and was even invited to his boss’s 50th to care, help, and ease her mind was very significant. birthday party. Although these experiences are not Certainly, there is a negative repercussion on the related to the formal aspects of work, they were no less perception of the co-op programs when this meaningful to co-operative education students. personalization seems to be lacking. Kirsten “was very The participants in this study, while valuing close angry towards the co-op office.” When she came personal relationships with their bosses, also found it forward regarding the harassment she had experienced meaningful when their bosses became mentors. Chris during a work term, she felt that she was not treated as described how his employer “took me under his wing” a priority and did not receive the appropriate level of and helped him get a job after graduation. One of protection and security as she would expect. When Patrick’s employers took the time to explain some of Nigel came forward regarding issues with the co-op the unwritten rules and differing perspectives of work. program, he felt that he was “talking to a wall” and, that As such, bosses became more than work supervisors. despite expressing his concerns, “they weren’t going to They explained the practical aspects of their work as change”. Holly felt mislead by the name ‘co-operative well as what is more closely tied with tacit knowledge. education’ because she thought it would mean As might be implied by comments like “he took me “something, like ‘We’re going to work together!’,” but under his wing,” participants valued being shown the that this did not represent her experience. As such, in ropes but, interestingly, they also valued being pushed terms of the role of the co-op office, participants out from under the wing and beyond their comfort zone. believed that it should be more than just administrative. Greg appreciated being given responsibility because it Instead, many believed the fabric of the co-op programs gave him ownership and the opportunity to do should include supporting, advocating, and listening to something that would represent his capabilities. students. Amanda learned that when put to the test she can Other individuals that held meaning for the demonstrate her knowledge and, therefore, trust her participants were the friends they developed while ability to perform under pressure. This is echoed by studying at Canadian University, particularly in the first Meghan when she described how her boss “got me to years prior to enrollment in the co-op programs. By do things I never thought I’d do.” nature of its design, the co-op programs at Canadian By being pushed by their employers, students University alternate between study and work terms and, learned that they have the capability to use their skills. therefore, remove students from the typical academic Jones Connected Learning 269 model. As such, there is a sense of loss with which dysfunctional computer system, and unsupportive co-op some participants struggled. Amanda explained how staff. Robert did not use all of the available co-op she had become attached to her friends and that leaving resources because he found the majority of his work for work terms brought sadness and made her consider terms himself and, therefore, felt he should not have quitting co-op altogether. Derek expressed a similar had to pay the same amount as others. Lauren believes level of emotion when he described how, as a co-op that the primary responsibility of the co-op program is student, he found it “very difficult emotionally” to be available for students and to answer their because he wasn’t with his friends and found himself questions. To Lauren, responsiveness is what her tuition alone in classes. Again, the impact of warm and was supposed to pay for. As can be seen, study supportive relationships, or the lack of, is associated to participants believed that, when paying for the co- participants’ perception of the program’s operative education programs, getting value for their meaningfulness and, consequently, even the desire to dollar required more than just getting hired to a paying remain enrolled. job. Time. Interestingly, the work experiences and the Luck. Gaining a meaningful co-op education relationships that participants developed were both experience is perceived as a matter of luck for co- influenced by time. Typically, students enrolled at operative education students. Danielle felt “fortunate” Canadian University alternate between study and work because she had four good quality work terms where terms with each term lasting four months. They she did significantly more than just photocopying. normally change employers, often never returning to Lauren felt “lucky” because she worked with wonderful the same employer. But, when work terms were people. Derek also felt “lucky” but, in his case, because extended beyond the typical format, the work he had the opportunity to complete a longer work term experience and associated relationships were altered. enabling a better quality work experience. Participants Derek completed an eight month work term and indicated that the best experiences do not necessarily explained that the duration allowed him to take on a come from the design and administration of the long-term project making it “a really great experience.” programs or from their own efforts and skills. Lauren noted that having a longer work term gave her “more history with the place” and allowed her to be a Discussion part of the organization rather than “the new person.” Participants indicated that the length of time they To date, the literature on co-operative education worked with one organization impacted the quality of has been primarily focused on discerning the benefits of their work and the quality of their relationships. the learning method. Several studies have found that With a standard four month set-up, many co-operative education provides several positive participants explained that they never had a chance to outcomes for students including personal, career, and become a full employee. For some this was negative, work skills development, as well as increased academic but for others it enabled them to maintain a certain achievement (Blair & Millea, 2004; Braunstein & Stull, “momentum” (Stephanie). Patrick and Greg felt that the 2001; Coll, 2004; Coll & Pinyonatthagarn, four month work term reduced the degree of respect 2004;Gardner & Motschenbacher, 1997; Hayward & they received while on the job. As Patrick described, Horvath, 2000; Metzger, 2004; Nasr et al., 2004; Parks employers “knew that cubicle would be empty three et al., 2001; Sharma, Mannell & Rowe, 1995; and a half months later” so less investment in the Siedenberg, 1994; Van Gyn et al., 1996). My study individual was required. From Greg’s perspective, a supports this research that co-operative education offers four month work term represented only three months many and varied types of benefits to those who because “the work load sort of disappears at the end and participate. Many of the individuals that were they might stop sort of paying attention as much.” By interviewed for this study indicated that, despite the contrast, the advantage of four-month work terms is felt challenges they faced, staying enrolled in co-op was when Meghan and Stephanie described their worthwhile. While some indicated that it provided a experiences. Both illustrated how changing frequently limited number of benefits, many others described how allowed just enough time to learn the job but to not it enabled them to learn skills; build knowledge; become bored. develop contacts; and become more motivated, self- Fees. Emerging from participants’ stories is the confident, and career focused. perception of the role of the co-operative education According to Belenky et al. (1986), knowledge is programs. While participants indicated that getting developed in multiple ways. One way is called hired by employers was important, many expressed that connected learning where the learner seeks to the tuition they paid should include that and more. Scott understand through connecting rather than separating was particularly frustrated that the tuition he paid from others. Using connected learning as a lens to provided him with work unrelated to his field, a examine the findings of this study, I found that my Jones Connected Learning 270 research shows that connected learning is a method of Linked to the notion of subjectivity is the value knowledge development that is used in co-operative placed on relationships that extend beyond the 9 to 5 education. workday. Linn (1999) advanced that when relationships Relationships and relationship building are key extend beyond office hours they have greater meaning. components of connected learning, and these elements My research agrees with this. Participants felt it was emerged as strong themes within this study. In meaningful when the relationships they developed with connected learning, “relationship is the way of co-workers or bosses stretched into personal time and knowing, an opening between self and other that creates involved more personal topics and events. It signified a channel for discovery, an avenue to knowledge” that the work relationships were more than transactional (Brown & Gilligan, 1992, p. 28). For these co-operative and went deeper because of shared values, education students, it was through their relationships personalities, or goals. with employers and co-workers, co-op staff, and fellow Participants in this study valued having the students that they were able to gain a meaningful co-op opportunity to gain real-life experience. In particular, education. The relationships developed by participants they valued work that was real and relevant to their sometimes provided care and support, other times program of study where they could put their skills to the guidance and mentorship, and sometimes a push into a test. Returning to Belenky et al. (1986), the concept of new domain. Relationships were for many participants real-life experience is understood to be an important the measure for co-operative education. If the element in learning. John Dewey (1916) and David A. relationship opportunities encountered by the Kolb (1984) also highlighted the importance of learning participants were unavailable, negative, or oppressive, through experience. The findings in this study support the participant questioned the value and meaning of the this literature. Study participants described that they co-operative education programs. gained significant skills and knowledge from their work What I did not expect to find in my research was terms with some going as far as saying that they learned how time, in general, impacted the meaningfulness of more at work than in school. Many indicated that, co-operative education. When participants spent more because they learned through experience, they not only than one four month work term with an employer, many had a solid resume but, more importantly, the indicated that they developed greater quality work confidence to say, “I can do it.” experiences and greater quality relationships. In addition to learning from experience, the Oftentimes, these were intertwined. As the work participants in this study indicated that they learned relationships developed over time, so too did the level from having a range of experiences. This concurs with of trust. With greater trust, employers felt comfortable the notion of multiplicity as advanced by Belenky et al. giving more customized, challenging, and complex (1986), whereby the learner seeks out contradictions, work assignments. variances, and derivatives. As with multiplicity, the Emotion is another strand of connected learning participants in this study found it meaningful when they that weaves into participants’ experience with the co- were able to experience a range of venues, people, and operative education programs. Emotions that were project. referenced by the participants ranged from very While I anticipated that participants would value negative to very positive with a number indicating that experiential and connected learning, I did not expect it was because of their strong feelings that they had that this would translate into value for dollar. Students decided to participate in this study. Whether it was pay tuition to be a part of the co-operative education anger, frustration, joy, or satisfaction, they wanted to programs, and, to them, they are paying for more than have their emotions heard by the co-op programs in just jobs. Study participants indicated that they are order that the programs might improve. In effect, they paying for an opportunity to learn experientially and to wanted to ask the programs to “stop thinking” and connect with employers, co-workers, and co-op staff. I simply open themselves to students and see their real also did not expect to find that participants viewed issues and concerns (Noddings, 1984, p. 146). learning through co-operative education to be a matter In many cases, the emotions felt by participants of luck. In other words, co-op was not understood to be were in keeping with the notion of subjectivity. In designed with specific learning goals in mind or connected learning, value is placed on being treated as a grounded in educational theory nor as a result of the subject rather than an object. My study agrees with this participant’s own efforts. perspective. A strong sentiment put forward by One surprise was how little participants referenced participants was how meaningful it was to be seen as a the co-op work term report. As part of their academic person with real goals, needs, and issues and not a requirements, participants are required to write a report number that is easily replaced, categorized, or at the end of each four month work term. As a co-op dismissed. employee, I am aware that this causes frustration and so Jones Connected Learning 271 I expected, at the very least, that participants would co-op programs’ office. As study participants make complain. While a few did, many others did not speak meaning of their experiences through relationships and of it at all. by being treated as subjects, it is important to address the ways students are engaged on the job and in the Implications for Practice co-op offices. While the study participants spoke strongly of The results of this study indicate that co-operative learning through experiences and relationships, they education is a learning method that offers many benefits did not indicate that the work term report was a to those who participate. Through co-operative meaningful learning tool. Some questioned its education, learners are able to develop skills, usefulness, while others did not mention it at all. knowledge, and contacts, as well as increase career Consequently, it would be a valuable exercise to clarity, self-confidence, and marketability. The positive examine the work term report as a means for results of co-operative education are felt by participants measuring co-op from an academic standpoint. This in terms of their career as well as their academic lives. measurement could be accomplished by possibly According to this study, co-op is a worthwhile choice redirecting the assignment away from a report and for those attending university. more towards a reflection paper emphasizing the However, there are many areas of co-operative meaningfulness of the co-operative education education that need to be addressed. These include (a) experience from an individual perspective. the quantity of work during work terms, (b) the range of work term choices available, (c) the length of work Conclusion terms, (d) the care and support provided by employers and the co-op programs’ office, and (e) the utility of the As a researcher and as a co-operative (co-op) work term report. education employee, I have come to understand that In terms of quantity of work, many participants learning can occur in any number of places. Certainly, indicated that they could have been pushed harder but, there are opportunities to learn in the classroom, but, oftentimes, there was little work to do. Some for many people, learning comes from hands-on questioned why they had been hired at all because a job experiences gained from programs such as co-op. My really did not exist. Given that study participants purpose in this basic interpretive qualitative research learned by doing and not observing, it would be study was to explore the experiences of students who valuable to address the issue of quantity of work attended a Canadian University co-op program, available during work terms. particularly with regards to what makes the program Study participants found it meaningful to gain a meaningful to them. In addition, I sought to wide range of experiences working in the public and understand their experiences through the lens of private sector, in different cities, and in different roles. connected learning. The participants in this study However, many felt that the opportunity to experience a indicated that, although co-op may be challenging, in wide range of jobs was not available. Some indicated most cases it was a worthwhile choice. The themes that their learning was limited by the fact that they had that emerged from the participants’ stories included only seen “one side of the coin.” It follows that when experience, relationships, time, luck, and fees. The developing jobs for the co-op programs, there needs to results of this study indicate that co-op provides many be consideration for diversity. positive and meaningful experiences, but quantity of The length of time participants worked with one work during work terms, range of work term choices, employer impacted the quality of work and the quality length of work terms, care and support provided by of relationships that were experienced. In many cases, employers and co-op staff, and utility of the work term a longer work term or working relationship translated report need to be carefully considered when designing into a more meaningful learning experience. Because and developing co-op programs that aim to deepen participants indicated that by extending the work students’ learning opportunities. relationships, either through eight month work terms or through part-time work during school, there was an References increase in the quality of their experiences, it is important to address the length of work terms and Bartkus, K., & Stull, W. (2004). Research in working relationships when structuring co-operative cooperative education. In R. Coll & C. Eames education programs. (Eds.), International handbook for cooperative Relationships were very meaningful for the study education (pp. 67-81). Hamilton, New Zealand: participants. And while many had very positive University of Waikato. experiences, many others expressed that they felt Belenky, M. F., Clinchy, B. M., Goldberger, N. R., & ignored, sometimes by employers but more often by the Tarule, J. M. (1986). Women’s ways of knowing: Jones Connected Learning 272 The development of self, voice, and mind. New op. In H. Schuetze & R. Sweet (Eds.), Integrating York: Basic Books. school and workplace learning in Canada: Blair, B., & Millea, M. (2004). Quantifying the benefits Principles and practices of alternation education of cooperative education. Journal of Cooperative and training (pp. 175-196). Montreal, Canada: Education, 38(1), 67-72. McGill-Queen’s University Press. Braunstein, L., & Stull, W. (2001). Employer benefits Hayward, C., & Horvath, P. (2000). The effect of of, and attitudes toward postsecondary cooperative cooperative education on occupational beliefs. education. Journal of Cooperative Education, Journal of Cooperative Education, 35(1), 7-14. 36(1), 7-22. Heinemann, H., DeFalco, A., & Smelkinson, M. Brown, L. M., & Gilligan, C. (1992). Meeting at the (1992). Work-experience enriched learning. crossroads: Women’s psychology and girls’ Journal of Cooperative Education and development. New York: Ballantine. Internships, 28(1), 17-33. Coll, R. (2004). Employer’s views of the Heinemann, H., & DeFalco, A. (1990). Dewey’s internationalization of cooperative education. pragmatism: A philosophical foundation for Journal of Cooperative Education, 38(1), 35-44. cooperative education. Journal of Cooperative Coll, R., & Pinyonatthagarn, D. (2004). Evaluation of a Education and Internships, 27(1), 38-44. work-based learning program in a developing Johnston, T. (2001). Experiences of female students country: Thai students’ views of their co-op completing a full-time aboriginal program by experiences. Journal of Cooperative Education, computer-mediated communication. Ottawa, 37(1), 1-12. Canada: National Library of Canada. Creswell, J. (1998). Qualitative inquiry and research Katula, R., & Threnhauser, E. (1999). Experiential design: Choosing among five traditions. Thousand education in the undergraduate curriculum. Oaks, CA: Sage. Communication Education, 48(3), 238-255. Creswell, J. (2002). Educational research: Planning, Kerka, S. (1999). New directions for cooperative conducting, and evaluating quantitative and education (ERIC Digest No. 209). Columbus, qualitative research. Upper Saddle River, NJ: OH: ERIC Clearinghouse on Adult Career and Merrill Prentice Hall. Vocational Education. (ERIC identifier: Creswell, J. (2003). Research design: Qualitative, ED434245) quantitative, and mixed methods approaches. Kolb, D. (1984). Experiential learning: Experience as Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. the source of learning and development. Dewey, J. (1916). Democracy of education: An Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall. introduction to the philosophy of education. New Korowski, D. (1991). Review of Dewey’s theory of York: The Free Press. experience: Implications for service learning. Dressler, S., & Keeling, A. (2004). Benefits of Journal of Cooperative Education and cooperative education for students. In R. Coll & C. Internships, 27(2), 91-91. Eames (Eds.) International handbook for Linn, P. (1999). Learning that lasts a lifetime. Liberal cooperative education (pp. 217-236). Hamilton, Education, 85(3), 26-34. New Zealand: University of Waikato. Linn, P. (2004). Theories about learning and Enns, C. Z. (1993). Integrating separate and connected development in cooperative education and knowing: The experiential learning model. internships. In P. Linn, A. Howard & E. Millar Teaching of Psychology, 20(1), 7-13. (Eds.), Handbook for research on co-operative Gardner, P., & Motschenbacher, G. (1997). Early work education and internships (pp. 11-28). Mahwah, outcomes of co-op and non-co-op engineers: A NJ: Erlbaum. comparison of expectations, job level, and salary. Merriam, S. (2002). Introduction to qualitative Journal of Cooperative Education, 33(1), 6-24. research. In S. Merriam & Associates. Qualitative Giles, D. (1991). Dewey’s theory of experience: research in practice: Examples for discussion and Implications for service-learning. Journal of analysis (pp. 3-17). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Cooperative Education and Internships, 27(2), 87- Nasr, K., Pennington, J., & Andres, C. (2004). A study 90. of students’ assessment of cooperative education Groenewald, T. (2004). Towards a definition for outcomes. Journal of Cooperative Education, cooperative education. In R. Coll & C. Eames 38(1), 13-21. (Eds.), International handbook for cooperative Noddings, N. (1984). Caring: A feminine approach to education (pp. 17-25). Hamilton, New Zealand: ethics and moral education. Berkeley, CA: University of Waikato. University of California Press. Grosjean, G. (2003). Alternating education and Parks, A., Onwuegbuzie A., & Cash S. (2001). training: Students’ conceptions of learning in co- Development of a measure for predicting learning