How Action Research Fixed a Failing Student Work Program
When students aren't getting the hands-on experience they need for their qualifications, something has to change. Jill Cadogan's compelling action research study reveals exactly what happens when a well-intentioned student work program loses its way – and more importantly, how to fix it.
The Business Bureau was designed as a real-world training ground where NVQ Level 1 students could develop essential office skills while providing valuable services to their college community. Yet what started as an innovative learning opportunity gradually became a source of frustration for everyone involved.
Students found themselves stuck doing repetitive tasks, with some never touching certain pieces of equipment they desperately needed to master. The quieter students, particularly those learning English as a second language, were often overlooked while more demanding students monopolized the manager's attention. Meanwhile, teachers grew frustrated with unrealistic timeframes and inconsistent service quality.
This research doesn't just identify problems – it provides a roadmap for transformation. Using Kurt Lewin's systematic action research methodology, Cadogan methodically investigated what was working, what wasn't, and why. Her approach combined student questionnaires with direct observation, creating a comprehensive picture of the bureau's daily operations.
The findings paint a vivid picture of institutional challenges that many educators will recognize. From equipment shortages to communication breakdowns between staff, the study reveals how small operational issues can snowball into significant barriers to student learning. Perhaps most tellingly, it exposes how good intentions and individual effort aren't enough without proper systems and oversight.
What makes this research particularly valuable is its practical focus. Rather than dwelling on theoretical frameworks, Cadogan presents concrete solutions that any educational institution could implement. Her recommendations for tracking student progress, ensuring equitable work distribution, and maintaining quality standards are both sensible and actionable.
The study also highlights broader questions about vocational education that remain relevant today. How do we balance authentic work experience with structured learning outcomes? What systems ensure every student receives equal opportunities to develop their skills? How can educational programs adapt to changing institutional structures while maintaining their core mission?
For educators managing similar programs, this research offers both validation of common challenges and proven strategies for improvement. The detailed methodology and honest reflection on what didn't work make this an invaluable resource for anyone committed to enhancing student learning experiences through systematic inquiry and continuous improvement.