1) Workplace learning is important for developing students' competencies and preparing them for a changing job market. Factors like interaction intensity, support, and authentic tasks influence effective workplace learning. 2) A study at Maastricht Hotel Management School in the Netherlands examines how workplace learning outside of school enhances student competency development. 3) Literature identifies characteristics of the workplace, student, and educational setting that impact learning. Intense interaction, guidance, feedback, and reflection are especially important for competency growth.

1. WORKING KNOWLEDGE: AN EVIDENCE BASED DESIGN OF WORKPLACE LEARNING AT
MAASTRICHT HOTEL MANAGEMENT SCHOOL IN THE NETHERLANDS
Jos W.M. Maas
Zuyd University, Maastricht Hotel Management School
Maastricht, the Netherlands
e-mail: J.W.M.Maas@hszuyd.nl
Jogien J.M.E.C. Wilms
Zuyd University, Maastricht Hotel Management School
Maastricht, the Netherlands
e-mail: J.Wilms@hszuyd.nl
ABSTRACT
Students are better prepared to anticipate to the changing labour market by gaining authentic
experiences. Through dual learning environments learning at school and workplace learning are integrated.
Determinant factors for effective workplace learning are the intensity and approach of interaction between
student, school and workplace. Nowadays, schools have to provide a more realistic experience in the
professional field for creating lifelong learners. Maastricht Hotel Management School started a pilot study on
the effectiveness of workplace learning outside of school to enhance student’s competency development. The
study is still in an initial phase and in 2011 the outcomes can be measured.
Key Words: workplace learning, competencies, interaction, authentic learning
INTRODUCTION
In a knowledge economy, successfully completing an education nowadays is no longer a guarantee for
job security. Students have to be well prepared to anticipate to the continuous changing demands of the labour
market. Learning does not end at the day of graduation; students should become lifelong learners to be
successful competitors on the market. In the so-called dual learning environments, school learning and
workplace learning are integrated. The main idea of dualization is that learning takes place in a powerful
learning environment where there is a possibility to experience skills in different settings, to make mistakes, to
receive feedback and to reflect upon these experiences. Through a combination of dual learning, practices,
projects and simulations, students can gain authentic experiences and develop professional skills.
The development of these professional skills is an important asset for future success at the workplace.
Nowadays these skills are described in terms of competencies. According to Toolsema (2003), work
competencies can be divided in six different categories: general-social competencies, commercial-social
competencies, management competencies, cognitive competencies, computer competencies, and physical-
technical competencies. These competencies generally are needed for the execution of specific tasks within a
diversity of professions. Apart from the above mentioned work competencies, the characteristics of dual
learning environments also influence learning competencies (Kuijpers, 2003; Toolsema, 2003; Nijhof, 2001)
which are needed for becoming a lifelong learner.
Related to the contemporary demands of the labour market, Illeris (2003) also emphasizes the need for
a new concept of learning where the development and acquisition of a variety of competencies is needed.
According to his theory, students should experience three dimensions of learning related to the development of
their basic knowledge and understanding, the improvement of their professional skills and the further
development of their personal qualities. He classified these three dimensions as the cognitive dimension of
knowledge and skills, the psychodynamic dimension of motivation and emotions, and the social dimension of
communication and cooperation. According to Illeris all of these dimensions have to be embedded in a societal
situated context and the workplace is considered as an ideal context for experiencing all three dimensions.
This paper gives an overview of different researches related to factors that are determinant for effective
workplace learning. The aim of this literature research is to introduce and support the model for workplace
learning at Maastricht Hotel Management School in the Netherlands. The workplace learning model, which has
been implemented since September 2007, already shows a first positive result of its effectiveness.
LITERATURE REVIEW
Over the past years the effectiveness of dual learning in higher professional education has been
researched thoroughly. The workplace is estimated as an efficient and effective environment for the
development of vocation, career and professional identity. According to Collins, Brown and Newman (1989), a

2. model for the design of learning environments consists of four dimensions: the content that has to be learned,
the pedagogical approach, the order of learning activities and the sociology of learning. Their model has been
embedded in a theory on learning by cognitive apprenticeship, based on the development of concepts through
so-called authentic learning activities (Collins, Brown and Newman, 1989).
On the basis of a review by Blokhuis (2006) the process of workplace learning is influenced by
different factors, namely, the characteristics of the workplace itself, the characteristics of the student and the
characteristics of the educational setting (Figure 1). By defining the variables that define these characteristics it
appears that workplace learning is a diverse, influential, individual and social developmental process. It
manifests itself by participation in work processes and the aim is to understand, manage and influence work
situations.
characteristics workplace
• participation • task information
• support • availability
• communication • variation
• task autonomy
• task vagueness
• workload
characteristics student
• motive workplace
• motivation learning characteristics educational setting
• previous knowledge • relevance • preparation
• experience • order • consistency
• belief in own strengths • assessment
• locus of control
• accuracy
• fear
• learning style
Figure 1 Selected variables influencing workplace learning (Blokhuis, 2006).
To be able to design a theoretical framework for effective workplace learning, Blokhuis combined the
selected variables with a contemporary theory on learning from Illeris (2002). According to Illeris all learning
includes two essentially different types of processes, namely an external interaction process between the student
and his or her social, cultural and material environment, and an internal interaction process of acquisition and
elaboration in which new impulses are connected with the results of prior learning. Illeris states that the
influence of the characteristics of the educational setting on both the external and internal interaction process is
very limited; it might only have an indirect effect on both processes.
Blokhuis came up with a new model which shows that the characteristics of both workplace and
student are essential for the interaction process (figure 2). In line with the theory of Illeris, the characteristics of
the educational setting have not been integrated in this model.

3. Workplace:
• participation Working process
• support
• communication
• availability
• variation
cognitive psycho-
• task autonomy
structures dynamic
• task information Interaction:
patterns
• task vagueness • perception
• workload • transmission
• experience competencies
• imitation
Student: • activity assimilative and
• motive • participation accommodative
• motivation adaptation
• previous
knowledge
• experience
• belief in own
strengths
• locus of control
• accuracy
• fear
• learning style
Figure 2 Theoretical framework for effective workplace learning (Blokhuis, 2006).
The model also shows that the process of interaction, which is crucial for acquiring and developing
professional skills, consists of six different but interrelated categories that influence the learning process of the
student. These categories are perception, transmission, experience, imitation, activity and participation. Through
interaction the learning goals can be accomplished and the development of psychological structures and patterns
will also be achieved. The result of this learning process is the acquisition of competencies needed to handle the
core tasks at the workplace effectively. To complement the learning cycle, the competences in their turn form
the input for the process of interaction.
To create an effective learning environment for students at the workplace, the main focus should be on
optimizing the learning situation and not on the restructuring of working processes and production concepts
within companies. A good preparation on learning by working and a critical reflection should be the main points
of interest for students to reach their learning goals. Different researches show that companies have difficulties
in providing a balance between learning and working (Ellström, 2002). This problem seems hard to tackle.
Although the companies are expected to invest in the learning potentials at the workplace the possibilities to do
this seem very small. The focus of their priorities is often business related (IOOV, 2005).
A first step in solving this problem is to give companies a good insight in the most effective way for
students to learn at the workplace. Blokhuis (2003) made an analysis of the different types of competencies that
have to be developed in relation to situations at the workplace that influence this development. A list of six
competencies and how the workplace can have an influence on their development has been defined.
1. Social competencies:
One of the characteristics of the learning environment that appears to have an influence on the development of
social competencies is the amount of collaboration and fine tuning between the company and the educational
institution. A rather paradoxical and remarkable conclusion is that an increase in collaboration and fine tuning
has a negative effect on the development of social competencies. Also the instruction process has an influence
on this competency development. When students have the possibility to learn and work through self-exploration,
social competencies are better developed.
2. Participation competencies
As with the social competencies, here also the amount of collaboration between the company and the
educational institution is determinant for the development of participation competencies. It is also remarkable
that the pre-definition of tasks related to the learning and working process has a positive effect on the
development of participation competencies. Students identify that both the instruction process and the practice

4. have an influence on the development of these competencies. Students who can work in a self-exploring way
and who are allowed to be active from the beginning on, show a better development of their participation
competencies.
3. Cognitive competencies
If the student experiences transparency through a set of specific final goals at the beginning of the training
period, the cognitive competencies appear to develop in a more efficient way. Students also have a better
cognitive development if they have the challenge of accomplishing more difficult tasks. Besides this, the
experience of “learning and working on the job” has a positive effect on cognitive competency development.
4. Physical competencies
Students that learn and work in a team display a better development of their physical competencies. Furthermore,
if the responsibility for the outcome of the learning process is shared between the company, the educational
institution and the student it seems that students improve their physical competencies. A contradictory
conclusion is that if the student during his training deals with all the professional skills related to the career, this
has a negative effect on the development of this competency.
5. Learning competencies
No circumstances within the learning environment have an influence on the development of learning
competencies.
6. Career competencies
Career competencies improve chances to enter the labour market (Kuijpers, 2003). Students seem to better
develop this competency if the process of learning and working is not only defined by the content and if the
process of instruction is done through modelling. Also, the fewer students have to switch between workplaces,
the better they develop their career competencies.
As a result it can be stated that students better develop their competencies if from the beginning on they
can also do more difficult tasks in teams while being guided by predefined tasks and final goals and if not all the
characteristics of the specific career are presented. Furthermore it is important that the educational institution,
the company and the student share the responsibility for the outcomes while at the same time the collaboration
and fine tuning between the educational institution and the company is reduced to a minimum. Finally, it is
important that the professional skills that students develop are not strictly guided by learning contents but more
by the actual processes they experience and the best way of instruction is through modelling. Besides the above
mentioned factors at the workplace that have an influence on competency development, it appears that also the
division of the amount of time students spent at school and at the workplace has an effect on this development.
Students develop better social and cognitive competencies if they have a traineeship of at least six months. For
companies, this overview of the influence of workplace learning on the development of the competencies is a
useful tool to define how and whether the competencies can be developed.
A research of Blokhuis (2006) on evidence-based design of workplace learning shows that one of the
bottlenecks is that there is not enough interaction between the student and the supervisor. Due to a lack of time
and incompetent coaching there is often not enough focus on feedback, self-reflection and self-guidance. As
mentioned before, in a perfect setting, learning should include both external and internal interaction. The
external interaction takes place between the student and the social, cultural and material environment. The
internal learning is the psychological process of acquisition and elaboration in which new impulses are
connected with the results of prior learning. Both types of interaction are crucial and the direct input for
effective learning. The skills of the supervisors and the tools they use are an important asset for the effectiveness
of workplace learning.
Earlier research by Blokhuis (2003) shows that the quality of competency development is strongly related
to the facilities at the workplace and the intervention methods that the supervisors use. Blokhuis (2003) comes
up with the following set of empirically proven factors that enhance effective workplace learning:
1. Participation should focus on the execution of realistic and meaningful tasks that give the perfect context
for the competencies that have to be acquired;
2. Interaction should focus on the verbal expression of thinking and handling processes through collaboration
with colleagues;
3. Variation should focus on embedding models, strategies, procedures and definitions and the use of
competencies in different settings;
4. Complexity should focus on the gradual development of mental models and cognitive strategies necessary
for fully completing all work related tasks;
5. Support should enhance and increase independence when completing tasks through supervision that is
focused on cognitive and corrective feedback;
6. Preparation should focus on the creation of a clear image of the tasks through modelling examples;

5. 7. Evaluation should focus on the definition of the necessary learning competencies;
8. Consistency should focus on the creation of common expectation patterns so the input of all parties will be
based on the same perspective.
These factors also show the importance of interaction as an internal and external process. Interaction
provides direct input for learning and the supervisors play a crucial role in this process. For this reason the
supervisors that interact on a regular basis with students are considered as an interesting group when it comes to
fully benefiting the possibilities of interaction. For improving the acquisition of competencies by students, the
supervisors should have the opportunity to be well prepared and be equipped with the necessary tools to
optimize the learning process of their students.
Based on the previously mentioned researches, and based on the experience of the supervisors themselves,
they can best operate by having an instrument that guides them in the realization of high-quality interaction for
the students so the development of competencies can be optimized. Such an instrument that has been designed
by Blokhuis (2006) is based on the interaction between supervisor and student at the workplace. The instrument
has to activate, support and perpetuate learning processes, meaning that it has to create a learning environment,
which forms part of the daily working processes (Lowyck and Terwel, 2003). Such an environment should
consist of an appropriate combination of challenge and guidance, empowerment and support, self-guidance and
structure (Reigeluth, 1999).
The design specifications for the instrument have been derived from the theoretical framework for effective
workplace learning (Blokhuis, 2006). The specifications have been translated into guidelines for interaction. To
maintain a structured and transparent instrument, four phases have been defined, each with a specific focus and
with the possibility of harmonizing self-guidance and instruction. The phases that have been selected are
orientation, preparation, execution and assessment (table 1). Every phase has a specific set of guidelines that are
related to monitoring, controlling and diagnosing the learning process. By going through these different steps,
all the elements of the complete learning cycle will be dealt with.
Steps for guidance Number of
guidelines
Phase 1: Task orientation
1. Select, together with the student, a task that he/she wants to improve. 5
2. Discuss, together with the student, the task that he/she wants to improve. 9
3. Define, together with the student and based on the task, what he/she already 6
knows and can do.
4. Discuss, together with the student, how he/she wants to learn the task. 3
Phase 2: Preparation for task execution
5. Prepare, together with the student, the execution of the task. 7
6. Make sure that everything necessary for completing the task is present. 5
Phase 3: Monitoring task execution and assessment
7. Monitor the execution of the task. 7
8. Immediately after completion give feedback on the task execution to the student. 8
9. Define, together with the student, any necessary next steps that should be taken. 6
Phase 4: Further development
10. Ask the student to execute the task at least two more times. 6
Table 1. Instrument for interaction at the workplace (Blokhuis, 2006)
Blokhuis also states that there are several other factors that can improve the interaction between
students and supervisors. The experience in supervision, the work experience, the age and the preparation for the
arrival of the student are all factors that have an impact on this interaction. The findings show that the students
supervised by younger supervisors had a better development of competencies than students of older, more
experienced supervisors. A possible explanation can be that supervisors with less experience might reflect more
on their way of interacting with the student to make it more effective. Besides this younger supervisors have
recently finished their studies which might give them a better idea of how to interact with students as they have
recent experience with workplace learning themselves and up-to–date knowledge on the subject area. This
makes the social, emotional and cognitive distance between student and supervisor smaller. In terms of

6. Vygotsky (1978) the supervisor and the student are in the zone of proximal development which means that a
higher level of potential development can be reached through problem solving in collaboration with more
capable peers. The younger supervisor can act as a ‘peer’ for the student. The older supervisors probably have
more concentrated experience what might have a negative effect on their disposition and skills to learn and to
apply new knowledge. Another finding is that the control was better in well prepared supervisors.
METHOD
At Maastricht Hotel Management School (MHMS) in the Netherlands, since the start of the program,
which dates from 1950, the bachelor program is designed with a combination of both learning at school and
workplace learning. Since 1995, students also learn through problem based learning, simulations, projects and
real-life operations. The program is set up in such a way that workplace learning is both present within the
school establishments as outside the school. The program offers workplace learning within its own college hotel
which in 2008 is being restructured to operate as a fully functioning real-life hotel with all the corresponding
departments. The hotel is integrated as a learning facility within different modules of the program. Besides the
workplace learning experience during the traineeships in the third and fourth year, MHMS has started a pilot
study in 2006 on the effectiveness of workplace learning outside of school during the first year of study. The
goal of this pilot is to provide an even more realistic experience in the professional field. Collaboration has
started with fifteen acknowledged 3 to 5 star hotels which operate as learning institutions for the students. The
combination of a theoretical framework set up by the school and experienced by the students aims at creating
lifelong learners that are well prepared for the labour market. This is done through problem based learning
together with realistic workplace learning, both inside and outside of school.
RESULTS
Based on positive evaluations of the pilot project on workplace learning in 2006, MHMS has decided
to fully implement the new model of workplace learning in the first year of study in 2007. In module 1 and 4
(table 2) a substantial part of the students will experience workplace learning outside of school. Students that
will follow the modules inside school will have their experience in the college hotel. Within both module 1 and
4 over a period of 8 weeks, students will experience twice a week, the real life practice at the workplace based
on common practice.
Year Module (each module equals 10 weeks)
1st year 1. Hotel Entrée 2. Hotel Basic 3. Hotel International 4. Hotel Food and
Management Beverage
2nd year 5. Hotel Personnel 6. Hotel Operations 7a. Hotel 7b. 8. Hotel Operational
and Organisation Facility Hotel Management
Management Tourism
3rd year Practical Traineeship 9. Hotel Minors 10. Hotel Management
4th year Management Traineeship 11. Final (group)Projects
Table 2 Four-year Bachelor program in Hospitality Management, Zuyd University 2007-2008
Module 1 (Hotel Entrée) will be used as an example to illustrate this type of workplace learning. For the
module Hotel Entrée the relevant professions are: Floor Supervisor, Head Houseperson, Reservations
Supervisor, Laundry Manager, Night Manager and Desk Manager. The final goal is not that the student learns
the operational skills related to these professions but the idea is that the student becomes familiarised with the
specific tasks related to the profession. The philosophy behind this is that future managers have to experience
what they will be managing. In this module, besides learning in a real life setting (workplace learning), learning
also takes place in the following settings:
1. Learning at school; at MHMS different types of learning are presented, such as lectures, self-study, team
work in problem-based learning and case studies.
2. Skills training for reception related tasks, booking software etc.
3. Acting according to the so-called SOP’s (Standards Of Performances)
During the four year bachelor program students also learn how to plan their future. From the first module on
they start designing their personal development plan (PDP). This tool gives them the opportunity to influence
the direction of their future career. The design of this personal element of their study is not an easy task for first
year students as they are not used to define learning goals for their personal development. Workplace learning is
an important asset for creating their PDP.
In the week before starting the module there is a meeting where students get an introduction on
“learning at the workplace outside of school”. The students are told that they can apply for one or more learning
places. To offer the students a good guidance in their choice op learning place(s), the school provides company

7. profiles. Students that show interest in this type of learning write an application letter and officially apply for the
position with their CV and recommendation letters. The module coordination selects the applications that will
be send to the company. For each function in a company only three students are selected for the application
process. The company invites the three students for a “job” interview and informs students and school on their
final choice.
As seen in the literature review, to accomplish effective workplace learning the supervision has to be
based on high-quality interaction. To realize this, MHMS has found companies that are willing to provide a rich
and challenging learning environment and invest in the student’s learning potentials. This means that MHMS
has selected companies that are willing to provide a balance between learning and working. The selected
companies have assigned supervisors to support and perpetuate the learning processes of students. The
supervisors have to create an interactive learning environment by using the instrument for “interaction at the
workplace” as designed by Blokhuis (2006). As mentioned before, such an environment should consist of an
appropriate combination of challenge and guidance, empowerment and support, self-guidance and structure. The
selected companies provide an environment where the student works in different settings and in different teams.
Students also have the possibility to learn and work through self-exploration by giving them more and more
responsibilities over time. On a regular basis, the supervisor and school evaluate the student’s competency
development.
CONCLUSION
At Maastricht Hotel Management School the structure of offering workplace learning both inside and
outside of school gives the opportunity to make the educational process highly related to reality. Two times a
week students that are placed outside of school work together with students that are placed at the college hotel in
a problem based learning (PBL) setting. During these PBL sessions they discuss the module related theory and
exchange their knowledge and experiences. This enables a maximum interaction between students functioning
in a real life setting and students working at the college hotel.
After the first year of implementing this structure already some conclusions can be drawn to further
improve the process. The information for learning companies on planning, supervision and student expectations
should be improved as supervisors often are not acquainted with the method. The reason for this is that the
school’s contact persons of the different companies are often managers and they are not the ones that operate as
supervisors for the students. Furthermore, the company has to communicate internally about their motivation to
engage in this project and give the necessary background information on the method to their staff. Another
conclusion that can be drawn is that not all learning companies are appropriate for every module. For example 5
star hotels give students less opportunities to experience guest contact at the front office, an asset that is very
necessary during the module Hotel Entrée. These prestigious companies are more suitable for the module 4,
Hotel Food and Beverage. Not all students have the suitable characteristics for workplace learning outside of
school. The school’s approach and execution of workplace learning often differs from that of real-life workplace
settings. Also students have to realize that learning outside of school can only take place when the companies
have a work placement offer. Sometimes the working hours as agreed with the company do not match the
regular hours of the school schedule. The student has to be aware of these differences as it is important for his
choice of company. Finally it can be concluded that the effectiveness of the interaction during PBL sessions can
be optimized by creating supervisory meetings as they would take place in real life settings. This way the
theoretical frameworks and problems can be integrated.
In 2011 the first group of students that experienced workplace learning outside of school will be active on
the labour market for one year. This will be the first moment when the effectiveness of this project can be
measured. A comparison can be made between the competency acquisition of the different settings, either inside
or outside of school.
REFERENCES
Blokhuis, F.T.J. (2006). Evidence-based design of workplace learning. Enschede: University of Twente.
Blokhuis, F.T.J. and Nijhuis, W.J. (2006). Effecten van een evidence-based design voor werkplekleren. In:
Pedagogische Studiën vol. 83, nr. 5, pp. 354-365.
Blokhuis, F.T.L. (2003). Factors influencing the effectiveness of learning at the workplace. Paper presented at
an international workshop ‘Learning potential of the workplace’. Enschede: University of Twente.
Collins, A., Brown, J. S. & Newman, S. E. (1989). Cognitive apprenticeship: Teaching the crafts of reading,
writing, and mathematics. In L. B. Resnick (Ed.), Knowing, learning, and instruction: Essays in honor
of Robert Glaser. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Ellström, P. E. (2002). Time and the logic of learning.
Lifelong Learning in Europe, 2, 86-93.

8. Ellström, P. E. (2002). Time and the logic of learning. Lifelong Learning in Europe, 2, 86-93.
Illeris, K. (2003) The three dimensions of Learning. Aarhus: Roskilde University.
IOOV. (2005). Eindrapport onderzoek naar de periode van werkend leren bij de politieacademie: Ministerie van
Binnenlandse Zaken en Koninkrijksrelaties.
Kuijpers, M.A.C.T. (2003). Loopbaanontwikkeling: onderzoek naar ‘competenties’. Dissertatie, Twente
University Press, Enschede.
Lowyck, J. and Terwel, J. (2003). Ontwerpen van leeromgevingen. In N. Verloop and J. Lowyck (Red.),
Onderwijskunde: Een kennisbasis voor professionals (pp. 284-329). Groningen/Houten: Wolters-
Noordhoff.
Nijhof, W. J. (2001). Naar competentiegericht beroepsonderwijs? In M. Mulder, R. Wesselink, H. Biemans, L.
Nieuwenhuis and R. Poell (Eds.), Competentiegericht beroepsonderwijs. Gediplomeerd, maar ook
bekwaam? Houten: Wolters-Noordhoff BV.
Reigeluth, C. M. (1999). What is instructional-design theory and how is it changing? In C. M. Reigeluth (Ed.),
Instructional-design theories and models: A new paradigm of instructional theory. Mahwah, New
Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, publishers.
Toolsema, B. (2003). Werken met competenties: Naar een instrument voor de identificatie van competentie.
Enschede: PrintPartners Ipskamp.
Vygotsky, L.S. (1978). Mind and society: The development of higher mental processes. Cambridge, MA:
Harvard University Press.