This document discusses student placements with heritage groups and other organizations from a university perspective. It addresses why universities emphasize placements, how they design and manage placement programs, and the benefits of placements for both students and host organizations. Specifically, the summary is: Universities want placements to help students develop skills in areas like employability, research, cultural awareness, and social responsibility. They offer a variety of domestic and international placement types and assess placements through modules or programs. Successful placement management involves strategic alignment of tasks, reflective learning, mentor support, and documentation of student work. Host organizations benefit from student contributions like materials creation and intellectual engagement with academic topics, while students gain experience applying their learning.

1. Peter D’Sena
UNIVERSITY STUDENT PLACEMENT
PROGRAMMES WITH HERITAGE GROUPS AND
OTHER ORGANISATIONS.

2. 1. Brief introduction: student placements
1
1 minute
overview
 1. Placements and employability: understanding university
perspectives and priorities
 2. Universities and the practice and management of placements
 3. Exploring the two-way benefits of placements – benefits to the
host

3. In general, what do most universities want from placements for their students?
Typically, they relate to university-wide graduate attributes (these are from UH).
Professionalism,
employability and
enterprise
Learning and
research skills
&
Global
Awareness
Intellectual depth,
breadth and
adaptability
(multiple
perspectives)
Respect for
others (inclusivity,
cultural
awareness)
Social
responsibility
(ethical,
participatory, etc.)

4. How has the university sector decided what skills are worth developing?
Employability has a multitude of external drivers - QAA, NSS, HEFCE, DLHE,
etc.
Hard skills:
A very long list including data analysis,
use of technology, research, etc., etc.
(See QAA Benchmark Statements,
2014.)
Note: both hard and soft skills are better
developed and revisited in a progressive,
spiral curriculum, rather than as one-offs
(Bruner, 1960, 1966).
Soft skills:
NSS question 19: ‘The course has
helped me to present myself with
confidence’
HEFCE ‘the exercise of initiative and
personal responsibility’ (p. 19)

5. 2. Universities and the practice and management of
student placements
Types of heritage and cultural placement
 WHERE. They cast the net wide, from
domestic to European and other
international. This requires financial, language
and mentor support (Al Monger’s Southampton
Solent report for the HEA; UCL’s history
department’s language support). Incidentally,
this can work towards the 2020 Vision of
learning abroad:
http://www.britishcouncil.org/education/ihe/know
ledge-centre/transnational-education/vision-
2020
 DOING WHAT. What’s done in a placement
varies. For example: civic engagement –
doesn’t need to look like a work placement – it
can be part of a project/module (Cardiff
University; Alison Twells, Community
Engagement Project in Year 2 History, Sheffield
Hallam University).

6. 2. Universities and the practice and management of
student placements
 Long-thin: e.g. one day a week.
Short-fat: e.g. 4-8 weeks; integrated
block; employment based; linking study
to workplace; volunteering; enterprise
related (Bielefeld, Germany).
 Non-accredited internship – to assess
or not assess
 Given accreditation by a module or
suite of modules (Staffordshire/UH)
 One-off or part of a progressive system
 Through a broker, e.g. placementuk:
placement-uk.com
 Across disciplines/different types of
students together (cf CollabHub,
Huddersfield)

7. .
Practice and management: Developing and maintaining
placements
1. An integrated strategy – we look to work across
departments and groups within the university.
2. Depending on the number of placements, a good
database, with a partnership management system
similar to those used in Departments of Education, but
not necessarily just for schools – LSBU’s Alternative
Educational Settings.
3. Assessment: constructive alignment. Have
a system which can accommodate the fact that no
two placements offer the same opportunities or
environment for learning and practice. Hence,
strategic or constructive alignment of tasks. (See
Biggs. J.)

8. 4. A connected curriculum (cf UCL). Be
mindful that preparing and supporting students
for placements in professional and other
contexts of necessity involves:
 reflective practice being built into
preparation and learning outcomes;
 structuring in-house modules in
imaginative ways: from single/stand-alone,
to blended, hybrid or within a spiral
curriculum; or with syncretic assessments.
One that works well across professions is
the use of critical incident
theory/analysis to structure reflective
practice.

9. 5. Using the scholarship of teaching and
learning to inform the learning experience. Peer
and individual learning communities, face-to-face,
online or blended, to create learning
groups/communities of practice. (e.g. PGCE
students in different placements collaborate over
part of their assessment).
6. Mentor training/online support and quality
assurance (Wolverhampton) – from ‘what’s in it for
me’ (the reciprocal benefits of working with, as well
as to support students), to ways to support any work
in monitoring, counselling, ‘teaching’ and reporting
on students in meeting academic and professional
objectives. Note, recognition optional for:
 (a) mentoring and training students;
 (b) for reflecting on their practice in supporting

10. 7. Training UH staff/team, including support staff, to
support processes, curriculum design and students;
bureaucracy: Disclosure and barring service matters, if
necessary.
8. The recording of work; institutional caching;
availability for future use. Some HEIs use software
such as Mahara to allow students to build an e-portfolio of
work. There is also portability into systems valued by the
sector, such as HEAR and/or into professional life after
graduation is important. (Southampton Solent).
9. Finally, collective responsibility and proactivity for
procurement. Raising awareness among staff and
stakeholders; notice to students. Communications and
visits to develop partnerships. Partnership events. (All
have parallels to schools recruitment and Alternative
Educational Experiences - LSBU).

11. 3. Benefits to host institution - tangible
Production of, for example:
 specific resources related to a
project/task – e.g. newsletters;
informational materials; reports;
research reports – contributing to an
institution’s work/publications.
 exhibitions and exhibition materials.
 information for social and other
media
 cataloguing and digitising
 public facing work – inc. interviewing
 taught or untaught technical tasks

12. 3. Benefits to host institution – less tangible (picture,
below – who is learning?)
Human and intellectual by-products
 Maintaining direct contacts with academia
through both students and lecturers; giving
time to the next generation of workers – it’s
‘worth doing’
 Keeping abreast of recent academic
developments from students; through
explaining processes to students; this can
be refreshing and energising to your staff
(as well as challenging to those who need
a challenge)
 The benefits of any university training –
either one-offs or from the experience
contributing to your staff’s CPD
 Reciprocity from the University – talks (e.g.
JM)/consultancy/networking

13. Select bibliography
 Balshaw, J. & Twells, A. [2011] Work-related learning in history. HEA.
 Biggs, J.B. [2003] Teaching for quality learning at university. Buckingham: Open University Press/SRHE.
 Biggs. J. [2003] Model of constructive alignment in curriculum development. Available on UH site:
http://www.studynet2.herts.ac.uk/intranet/lti.nsf/0/80C2EDD5AEC1D40980257C2200355AE6/$FILE/constructive%20alignment.pdf
 Booth, A. [2014] History Teaching at its Best. Engelska: Publishing.
 Boyer, E. L. [1990] Scholarship Reconsidered: priorities of the professoriate. Princeton, N. J.: Carnegie Foundation for the
Advancement of Learning.
 Bruner, J. S. [1960]. The Process of education. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.
 Erasmus, available at: http://erasmusintern.org/content/scholarships and http://www.britishcouncil.org/study-work-
create/opportunity/work-volunteer/erasmus-traineeship
 Jones, E. & Brown, S. (Eds.) [2007] Internationalising Higher Education. Oxford: Routledge.
 Pollard, A. [3rd edn. ,2008] Reflective Teaching: effective and evidence-informed professional practice. London: Continuum.
 QAA (2014) Subject benchmark statement History Draft for consultation, available at:
http://www.qaa.ac.uk/en/Publications/Documents/SBS-consultation-history.pdf
 QAA [2014] UK Quality Code for Higher Education: a brief guide. Available: www.qaa.ac.uk/qualitycode
 Race, P. & Pickford, R. [2007] Making Teaching Work. London: Sage Publications.
 Shulman, L. [1999] “Course Anatomy: The Dissection and Analysis of Knowledge Through Teaching” in Hutchings, P. (Ed.),
The Course Portfolio: How Faculty Can Examine their Teaching to Advance Practice and Improve student Learning.
Washington: Stylus Publishers.
 Wiliam, D. [2011] Embedded Formative Assessment. Bloomington: Solution Tree Press.