Abstract
Work-integrated learning (WIL) facilitates student opportunities to bridge classroom learning with practice and is becoming increasingly popular in higher education internationally. Sociology courses provide an ideal learning space to engage in WIL, allowing for the application of sociological skills and knowledge to a practical setting. Yet, research on
Work-integrated learning (WIL) is a teaching pedagogy and form of “curricular experiential education” that incorporates academic learning with meaningful and quality experiences within a workplace or practical setting (Arney and Krygsman 2022; Co-operative Education and Work-Integrated Learning Canada 2021:1; Zegwaard et al. 2023). WIL has been used as an educational approach in higher education institutions internationally to integrate classroom and workplace learning, allowing students to apply theory to practice and engage in self-reflection and professional practice providing a stronger transition between higher education and work (Jackson 2013, 2015; Jackson and Cook 2023; Johnston and Sator 2021). This educational approach has been found to enhance academic learning outcomes across various disciplines and education levels, foster positive personal and social outcomes and skills, as well as increase the employability potential of students (Ferns, Dawson, and Howitt 2019; Jackson and Cook 2023; Yorio and Ye 2012).
The purpose of this study was to explore sociology students’ perspectives and experiences with WIL opportunities at a Canadian undergraduate institution. Service learning and community-engaged learning WIL types provide the practice and application of sociology that, according to Finkelstein (2010:103), gets sociology back to its “roots” (see also Breese 2011). Applied sociology means doing sociology, using sociology theories, concepts, and methods to address social issues, thereby making sociology courses an ideal learning space for WIL practices (Finkelstein 2010).
Literature Review
Global Interest in WIL and Canadian Context
Arguments have been made that graduates of higher education institutions lack the foundational skills needed to apply their disciplinary skills in the work setting (Ferns et al. 2019; NG 2021; Smith and Worsfold 2014). WIL has therefore become a priority for higher education institutions globally with objectives aimed at enhancing learning outcomes, developing skills, and preparing students to enter the labor market (Aprile, Sladen, and Stellar 2023; Bracken, Patton, and Lindsay 2022; Jackson and Cook 2023; Peters and Milian 2024; Universities Canada 2018). Governments have also implemented policies, objectives, and measures aimed at advancing the implementation and development of WIL practices and opportunities, leading to increasing WIL opportunities in many disciplines and higher education institutions (Arney and Krygsman 2022; Universities Australia 2019).
In Canada, the location of this study, the interest and investment in WIL opportunities for students in higher education by provincial and federal governments have grown in recent years (Anderson 2020; Arney and Krygsman 2022; Ng 2021; Sterling and Pretti 2021; Universities Canada 2018). The Government of Canada (2019) announced an investment in the Business + Higher Education Roundtable to provide more WIL opportunities for students, creating approximately 44,000 WIL opportunities per year. Along with the investment, the Government of Canada (2019) “committed to ensuring, within 10 years, that every young Canadian who wants a work-integrated learning opportunity can get one.” In addition, at the provincial levels, the Government of British Columbia (2019) and the Government of Alberta (2021) announced investments in their provincial higher educational institutions to increase the number of co-op and WIL opportunities. Work-integrated and experiential learning opportunities have become a priority for the Government of Alberta (2021:23), which identified “work-integrated learning” as a “flagship initiative” and “objective” related to the goal of “develop[ing] skills for jobs.” In 2021, the Government of Alberta’s Ministry of Advanced Education introduced a policy naming WIL as one of the performance-based funding metrics, which ties funding to higher education institutions’ ability to meet certain performance targets, and aims to “become the first province in Canada to offer every undergraduate student access to a work-integrated learning opportunity” (2021:23; see also Anderson 2020; Arney and Krygsman 2022).
WIL in Undergraduate Education and Sociology Courses
With the increasing popularity of WIL in higher education institutions, sociology provides an ideal space for this type of learning (Berard and Ravelli 2021). Applied sociology uses sociological theories and methods to create positive social change through active intervention outside traditional academic settings. This generally means using sociology to answer research questions or to help address social problems as defined by specific interest groups. According to Berard and Ravelli (2021), who conducted a study about undergraduate sociology student perspectives related to community-engaged learning, a type of WIL, giving students space to grapple with their privilege and work within their community resulted in a deeper appreciation for structural inequality and disadvantage, as well as allowed students to reconnect with why they fell in love with sociology in the first place. A study conducted by Greenberg, London, and McKay (2020) found that sociology students reported academic and personal growth by having the opportunity to engage in research as part of their curricular experience. Participants stated that the course with the WIL component helped them “see how research can bring a positive impact to communities” (Greenberg et al. 2020:13). Students felt the experience “gave [them] confidence for future endeavors” and fostered relationships with their peers as the project helped students to “connect” and “showed [them] what a group of dedicated students can achieve” (Greenberg et al. 2020:13). Furthermore, Finkelstein (2010) identifies four reasons for incorporating WIL into sociology courses, including that WIL promotes more effective teaching and learning, service learning is grounded in the roots of American sociology and helps produce change-based research, and students desire a sociology they can use to engage the world and to help improve it. Teaching applied sociology better prepares students for a rapidly changing global economy (Finkelstein 2010).
WIL research specific to Canada is rather limited, with data not consistently nationally or regionally representative, and varying greatly in subject and focus (Peters and Milian 2024; Rafiq et al. 2024; Sterling and Pretti 2021). Concerning community-engaged learning more generally, Tarantino (2017:103) states there is a “need for a deeper look at how students are interacting with communities and how that interaction can lead to enhanced learning outcomes.” According to Berard and Ravelli (2021), “the research on community-engaged learning in sociology is limited” (p. 199) and “there is very little evidence showing what individual students say about community-engaged courses” (p. 200; see also Aujla and Hamm 2018). The current study aims to add to the literature examining the impact of WIL in undergraduate sociology courses by surveying undergraduate sociology students on their WIL experiences. This study focuses on the courses and students of one instructor at an undergraduate-focused institution in Alberta, Canada, who incorporates WIL into their undergraduate sociology courses, where students work in teams to complete a project for a community partner. This provides an opportunity for students to apply learned theory to social practice.
The undergraduate sociology courses with integrated WIL components focused on the foundational, theoretical, and systematic understanding of topics such as social inequality, families, education, and qualitative research methods. In class, students are taught about theoretical frameworks to understand and explain structures and mechanisms that shape human behavior and societal outcomes. This knowledge is then applied by students in their WIL opportunity to inform the design of resources, programs, and strategies to address issues identified by their community partners. These projects are designed to be realistic for community partners to implement and carry forward while creating awareness about community issues. Each course included community partners with similar areas of focus to ensure applicability and relevance to students’ learning. For example, community partners for courses on social inequality included organizations with missions to address the root causes of inequalities such as houselessness, hate crimes, anti-oppressive practices, and other local community issues impacting Indigenous, BIPOC, 2SLGBTQ+, and equity-deserving groups. Courses focused on family included organizations with services for parenting, children with disabilities, families in crisis experiencing poverty, addiction, abuse, or divorce/separation, or families caring for aging parents. Courses about the sociology of education included community organizations focused on education, such as rural education, early childhood development, literacy, and equitable access to education.
This study was guided by the central research question: What are students’ perspectives and experiences with WIL opportunities in undergraduate sociology courses? Literature on student voices and their assessment of learning and WIL design is limited. Data on students’ successes, challenges, and experiences with WIL will contribute to addressing the knowledge gap related to how undergraduate students view their experiences and what could be improved upon. Findings may be useful for other undergraduate institutions and courses that want to incorporate WIL opportunities.
Methodology
Participants and Procedures
This study employed a purposeful sampling strategy to recruit undergraduate students enrolled in sociology courses containing a WIL component at a Canadian undergraduate institution. A total of 240 students from seven different courses taught by the same instructor (“author”) throughout the 2021/2022 and 2022/2023 school years were invited to voluntarily participate in the survey (see Table 1). The course instructor led the study, and, therefore, a survey was determined as the most appropriate method for data collection to minimize power dynamics and allow students to remain anonymous and share honestly. A survey was also seen as time-efficient, accessible, and convenient for students. A survey was used to foster the greatest possible response rate while using a realistic and sustainable method of data collection, given the number of students who were invited from seven different courses over two years.
Breakdown of Participants Recruited.
In total, 44 students attempted the survey, however, only 26 students completed at least one question.
Students were recruited via their student emails by a research assistant who sent the survey information and two reminder emails at the end of each term. A recruitment flyer was also posted on online course pages. The emails and flyer provided information about the study, invited students to participate, and provided the link to the SurveyMonkey online survey. The following strategies were used to mitigate and address potential conflicts and power or trust dynamics between the students and the instructor. First, data was collected with an anonymous online survey conducted through SurveyMonkey and no IP address data or identifying information was collected. Second, recruitment materials and invitations were distributed to all students in all courses each semester simultaneously. Therefore, data collection included several courses and diverse experiences. Third, a research assistant who was not involved in the course nor a student at the institution facilitated and managed the survey, reviewed responses and removed any potentially identifying information. Importantly, with the research assistant managing the survey, the instructor did not have access to the survey responses until after the course was completed and all final grades had been submitted. Fourth, the research assistant was listed as the contact person on the consent and information materials and was available to answer questions or concerns and further explain the research to students. This project received ethics approval from a research ethics committee at the institution where this study took place.
Measures and Analysis
The survey included a total of seven open-text questions about student perspectives and experiences with WIL in undergraduate sociology courses (see Appendix). Questions were asked about the relevance and application of WIL to their sociology learning and undergraduate education, their successes and challenges, and recommendations for improving WIL experiences. The survey included questions from the University’s Careers and Experience Office, which supports the community-engaged components of courses; they recruit students to participate in their own survey about student experiences with community-engaged experiences and projects. Therefore, some of their survey questions were included to avoid over-surveying students on this topic. Questions asked if they had access to one or more WIL opportunities in their undergraduate education, more generally, at which institution and in what faculty or discipline these experiences took place, what were the successes or challenges, and if they believed WIL opportunities were important education tools for undergraduate education and why. Student responses were organized using Lumivero NVivo software. Cycles of qualitative coding involved structural (coding based on questions), eclectic (refining, recording, synthesizing primary codes), and pattern coding (grouping previously identified summaries) (Saldaña 2021). The data was then reorganized multiple times per increasingly specific emerging themes and concepts, ultimately resulting in the themes discussed below. Pseudonyms are used to represent student ideas and were randomly selected for each anonymous survey respondent. Quotations used are representative of the perspectives shared by the participants.
Findings
A total of 26 students responded to the survey. Students believed that WIL opportunities are “important” for undergraduate sociology courses (96 percent) as well as for undergraduate education (92 percent). For example, Sarah felt “that WIL opportunities are important education tools because of the practical experience that they can provide for students, allowing them to apply their classroom knowledge outside of the classroom.” Riley highlighted the importance of WIL, stating that “It is important for undergraduates, once they actually graduate, to feel more at ease with making their next transition, whatever that may be.” However, 72 percent of student respondents indicated that they did not have access to WIL opportunities in one or more of their courses during their undergraduate education, such as Noah noting that “this [was] [their] first course utilizing WIL.” The findings from the survey responses are discussed below, focusing on three themes: (1) the benefits of WIL, (2) challenges experienced by students, and (3) student suggestions for how to improve undergraduate WIL experiences in sociology courses (see Graph 1).
Visual Representation of Key Themes.
Successes and Benefits of WIL
Students highlighted three main benefits from their WIL experiences: (1) They allow students to apply course content beyond the classroom, (2) they create the opportunity to gain and improve skills, and (3) they are valuable, meaningful, and relevant for undergraduate students.
Application of knowledge
WIL allowed students to apply sociology knowledge, concepts, theories, and ideas to practical settings (92 percent). Grace thought it “was a great opportunity to expose us to the real workings of sociology outside the classrooms,” therefore having the ability to see and apply their learning in practice. Moreover, Naya reported that they “Learned to look at the issues at hand from a sociological perspective, which offered a new point of view and helped [them] to conceptualize the issue as no single problem but include many things from different areas of society.” The opportunity to engage with course content enhances students’ learning, broadening their worldview and strengthening their ability to apply sociology concepts and theories, considering diverse perspectives.
Students felt that engaging with community partners to learn about and find solutions for community issues provided them with more motivation to learn and participate. As stated by Noah, WIL experiences “allow students to have a direct impact within their communities and to learn from people doing the work, not just from examples written in a textbook. Work like this is much more motivational, engaging and impactful than traditional coursework.” Combining traditional teaching methods like lectures and discussions with engaged learning projects gave students an outlet to practice what they have learned and apply it within a safe, supported, practical, and relevant space. James expressed,
The project gave students an opportunity to apply the theory of what we learned throughout the class (through the textbook and video lectures) and apply them in a real-life situation. It gave students a sense of what they could be working on throughout their careers, and provided insight into the types of issues sociologists can explore.
WIL opportunities helped “bridge the gap between the classroom and real world” (Rebecca) for students, providing a supported transition space between formal postsecondary education and the workforce. Maria felt that it was a “perfect middle ground between still learning content and course material while also practicing using that knowledge in a really safe way.” Rebecca expanded on this idea:
They help students to be able to apply the skills we learn in school and the information they absorb and actually put it into practice in a real-life setting. This setting can act as a comfort net for a bit because we have the guidance of our professor where we can make mistakes and learn. In the future, in a real-life job, we may not always receive the same type of feedback with the same understanding.
In applying course learning and concepts to work projects and experiences in communities, students reflected on their broadened worldview, increased motivation to engage and learn, better sense of purpose and goals, and they appreciated that these experiences connect their education and skills to practical settings.
Skill development
Students emphasized that their WIL experiences provided an opportunity to gain and “practice” (Anika) valuable skills like teamwork, communication, time management, and conflict resolution that prepare them for employment. Amir said,
I think it gives students a chance to unlock the ability to learn some “practical” in “the real world” skills. It is great to gain knowledge through textbooks and research papers but we all know, that once you leave university it is how you are able to apply that knowledge is what matters. This allows students a chance to develop a whole other skill set.
More specifically, Regan appreciated that they were “able to do a lot of independent research and work which taught [them] lots about time management and working with others.” Students also noted the development and refinement of “partnership skills and conflict resolution abilities” (Rebecca) and “developing communication skills . . . cooperation, and collaboration” (Anika). Naya noted that they “learned how to put together a report which was new to [them] and as well how to write in an academic manner which can be read by anyone and be understood.” Students highlighted transferable and soft skills that were developed and improved within their WIL experiences as important and “necessary to excel after university” (Grace), which strengthened their confidence and ability to apply their learnings in future professional and educational settings.
Valuable, meaningful, and relevant
Lastly, students found their WIL experiences to be relevant to their degrees and future education, their career goals, and their personal development (96 percent). Anika summarized these ideas in the following statement:
I do believe that it is a beneficial practice for undergraduate courses, even beyond sociology, because it reminds students of what they are working towards in their academic careers, and gives them an opportunity to see what kind of work they can do once they graduate.
Julia also shared that “The experience was a relevant, valuable, and effective learning opportunity in that it provided many areas for students to gain skills working and communicating with community partners and being able to provide a catered product to them.” More specifically, students found value in engaging with learning and coursework that serves a purpose and benefits community members (81 percent). James “found it valuable to know that the work we did could actually help a community partner who needed it, and make a difference in the lives of those the organization serves.” The experiences were labeled as meaningful because of the opportunities for students to learn and develop their own experience and skills, such as learning about their personal strengths and abilities, having a supported space to try something new, and gaining insights into their passions and interests (35 percent). As noted by Anika, “It also gives them the opportunity to practice skills that normal lecture-style courses may not teach.” Meaning was also connected to the design and approach of their community experiences and projects where students appreciated the relational, collaborative, and unique nature. Regan said, “It was a tangible opportunity that allowed me to produce meaningful work for a community partner.” Students considered these experiences to be relevant due to the course design, feeling that the work they complete has a purpose and will be used rather than being a “make work” project. As stated by Olivia, WIL “provides the opportunity for the work that the students did to be used at the end of the semester rather than being thrown out.” The time, energy, and commitment put into their coursework and projects are validated and rewarded by the tangible use of the final product by the community organization. This made students feel valued but also that their work would be used and benefit others. Being able to apply the skills and knowledge students have learned to practical contexts diversified their learning experiences, amplifying the relevance of not only their projects but also their course learning and degrees, giving a greater sense of purpose to their work.
Students highlighted the importance of WIL as extending beyond providing a transitional space between postsecondary and employment. They voiced three main benefits of WIL focused on the ability to apply knowledge, gain and practice skills, and the value, meaning, and relevance to their education. There were also two overall challenges related to group work and community partners shared by students.
Challenges with WIL
There were two major challenges expressed by students: the first being challenges associated with group work, discussed by 46 percent of students, and the second being challenges associated with community partners, mentioned by 31 percent of students.
Group work
Group challenges included poor communication (12 percent) as well as unequal contributions and division of responsibilities and unreliable group members (35 percent). This was represented directly by Myra, who stated that “Working in groups was a challenge.” This sentiment was shared by a few other students, including Naya, who said, “I think the only problem was the team members. Some of my team members were not willing to contribute as much or were doing little work.” Students who experienced challenges with their group members’ limited communication and contributions felt more stress, pressure, and anxiety related to fulfilling their tasks, responsibilities, and expectations for the course and the community partners. Myra felt that “having the course be entirely based on group work was very stressful,” further adding that “Students are not always the most cooperative.” Overall, challenges with group work are commonly experienced in education and work settings across various contexts, likely due to individual differences in communication and working styles, and diverse skills, and abilities. Something many students acknowledged in their responses, such as Ethan, who shared that “Challenges were more to do with group dynamics, productively navigating different communication styles and expectations.” This idea was also summarized by Caitlyn, who commented,
I think with any sort of group project, you are going to face challenges regardless of the various fail-safes put in place. People communicate differently and hold different expectations when it comes to quality work. I think ensuring there is a person who can at least attempt to clarify issues that may otherwise be unclear is really the only thing that can be done.
Some students dismissed these challenges because they felt that “these things happen with group work and [were] not sure there is a way to improve the process” (James). While group work can be challenging, working with individuals with different communication styles, strengths, and skills helps equip students for the workforce, where they may need to collaborate with groups and individuals with diverse professional backgrounds, personalities, and roles.
Community partners
Challenges students noted about their community partners were related to communication and expectations. With some community partners, a lack of consistent communication caused frustration for students and impacted their experiences and ability to collaborate, as stated by Anika:
The biggest challenge with the WIL project was maintaining consistent communication with the community partner. There were many times that they did not show up to scheduled virtual meetings or did not respond to emails without constant reminders being sent.
Olivia expands on this point, being understanding of the organization’s priorities and limited resources but still acknowledging the challenge it poses for students to engage in the work effectively. They said, “There was a slight difficulty communicating with our community organization, of course, due to their limited funding and short staffing. This was understandable but a little frustrating.” The nature of working with community organizations is that their time, resources, and priorities are on the community members they serve, requiring students to practice flexibility and adaptability. Communication challenges, while difficult, also serves as a learning experience for students to better understand the importance of being open and adjusting as needed when dynamic and changing situations arise, thereby enhancing their problem-solving and critical thinking skills.
Furthermore, some students felt that there was a mismatch between the community partners and the expectations of the course. Anika expressed the challenge of “trying to balance the expectations of the community partner with what was expected in the course.” Due to the design of WIL within the undergraduate courses, projects need to be realistic and appropriate to be undertaken within one semester. These WIL experiences take place outside of a controlled classroom environment, where the community partner circumstances and needs may fluctuate during the course of the semester. This can be an opportunity to practice skills such as flexibility, patience, agility, adaptability, and communication with stakeholders and partners, which may otherwise not be possible within a course.
Despite experiencing some challenges with group work and community partners, the majority of students emphasized that the benefits of their WIL experiences outweighed the challenges, as stated by Cole,
Beyond the challenges experienced with my WIL project, I feel it was overall a very successful and beneficial program to be a part of and I feel that it was effective in providing an opportunity to work with a real community organization and practice skills needed to join the workforce.
About half of the students felt that the challenges were often minimal and mitigated well by the course designs and instructor management (54 percent). These challenges did not take away from the successes and benefits expressed by students and, in some cases, served as valuable learning opportunities. For the instructor to evaluate and improve their courses, students were also invited to share ideas about how WIL experiences could be improved.
Ways to Improve WIL
While 54 percent of students experienced minimal to no challenges during their course, 38 percent provided recommendations for ways to address challenges and improve WIL experiences. These recommendations are outlined in three broad themes: communication, group design, and individual accountability.
Communication
Students suggested recommendations for improving communication with community partners. Clear communication and expectations for community partners must be ensured prior to their participation. Maria suggested, “That the person who speaks with the community partners is more in-depth about what students can offer, and then creates a more structured plan. Our community partner had never participated in this program before and had no expectations.” Students who experience communication and expectation challenges felt frustrated and stressed, and that more could have been done to address this. For example, Julia felt like their “Community partner was not fully aware/was not prepared to be working with us on this project.” Ensuring early and ongoing communication between the instructor and community partners is important and necessary for students and community partners to gain the most from these partnerships while also being able to adapt as needed.
Group design
Students requested having more choices in which organizations they work with, as well as the students they work with, to help mitigate poor group dynamics and unfair division of work. Emma suggested that an opportunity for students to engage with one another prior to selecting groups could help mitigate unequal student participation, they said, “I think if there was an opportunity for students to meet and get to know each other and pick their own groups and then be randomly assigned an organization could have been better.” Another suggestion was to implement an application process to gain acceptance into the course. As stated by Alex, “I think an application process where you have to do a mini-application to get into this type of class would be good to filter out those who will not put in the work.” Incorporating screening or competitive entry processes would limit the ability for all students to access WIL opportunities, which, as previously mentioned, is becoming a growing expectation. Working as a team with a community partner could offer opportunities to develop interpersonal skills and the ability to collaborate effectively with diverse personalities and communication and work styles. Individuals often do not have the opportunity to choose their colleagues in workplace settings.
Individual accountability
Students suggested that there be more accountability measures implemented to ensure all members are equally contributing and receiving fair credit for their output. In addition, to address the challenges that students experienced related to their group members, students suggested that less attention be placed on group marks and some individual graded components be integrated. This may take the form of more individualized assessments throughout, rather than grades being fully dependent on group work, where some team members may contribute more than others. This idea was expressed by Caitlyn, who said,
The issue I felt heavily influenced by this was that all of the coursework was in a group. Unfortunately, not everyone gives 100% and does not consider that there is a third party involved. It is not given the effort that should be given, which not only influenced them but had a bad reflection on me. This also caused individuals to get the same grade as others who try very hard.
These individual components could create more accountability for students. Grace also communicated that, “Although it would add to the workload, weekly reports might have mitigated lazy and apathetic group members. Better accountability clauses on the contract might have also helped. Setting clearer expectations and deadlines would have helped too.” Suggestions to include some individual marking components and stricter deadlines to support creating more accountability and equal participation among students are summarized by Regan:
One major recommendation I have would be setting stricter deadlines for the students to ensure everyone is equally participating. This would include having some deadlines earlier to ensure that some group members are not getting stuck with all of the work. There has to be a way to individualize the marking a bit more to avoid animosity among group members. Whether that be having individual members handing in what they have done and saying if it is sufficient or not?
Some students felt that marks based on shared work were not fair, given how much effort they put in and that all members did not contribute equally. Students, therefore, requested more individualized assessments as a way to ensure their marks reflect their efforts and quality of work, without benefiting those who did not contribute to the same extent.
In addition to the recommendations to address challenges with WIL, 92 percent of students also voiced the need for more WIL opportunities within undergraduate education, which is a recommendation related to their overall undergraduate experience. This is aligned with the national and international priorities calling for more experiential learning opportunities to be integrated into higher education and become more accessible to students (Aprile et al. 2023; Bracken et al. 2022; Jackson and Cook 2023; Peters and Milian 2024; Universities Canada 2018). Naya thought, “It would be great if it was offered for lower-level sociology classes” an idea shared by Caitlyn, who believed “WIL should be introduced to every 2nd year to allow them to know what that field is like before not having enough time to change their mind,” further stating that they are “in [their] last semester and this was never an opportunity provided to [them] earlier on.” Greater opportunities to engage and apply students’ course learnings in the community would support connections between what they are learning and potential career paths. Students highlighted the importance of these experiences in allowing them to expand their perspectives, learn and experience different contexts, and gain insight into their interests and passions. Noah believed that “Courses should require students to engage in the community in one way or another, or at least fulfill a set number of credits worth of direct community involvement.” Students desire more access to WIL opportunities, viewing them as beneficial to undergraduate sociology students and for students in other disciplines.
Discussion
Surveying students taking undergraduate sociology courses that integrated WIL at an undergraduate-focused institution in Canada provides insights into student perspectives and experiences with WIL. Students shared their thoughts about the importance of having WIL opportunities in undergraduate education to broaden and diversify their education, and personal and professional knowledge and skills. The most noted benefits of WIL by students focused on the application of academic knowledge, the opportunity to gain and improve skills, and the value, meaning, and relevance to students’ education and experience. Some challenges experienced by students were related to group work, such as unreliable group members, unequal distribution of work, different standards for quality of work, as well as related to the community partners, specifically with communication and mismatched expectations. In addition, the instructor included questions asking students how WIL opportunities could be improved and strengthened. Students provided suggestions related to three WIL design components: communication, group selection, and accountability. Students recommended ensuring clear and consistent communication with community partners to ensure their expectations of what the students could accomplish are realistic and aligned with the expectations of the course. They also expressed interest in having more choice and involvement in their group selection and which community partner they work with, as well as implementing accountability measures for work and some opportunities for individual assessments to ensure their grades reflect their work more fairly.
The complexity and need for prolonged engagement between faculty and community partners make WIL a huge undertaking for faculty as it is often under-resourced and under-supported within institutions (Bilgin, Rowe, and Clark 2017; Wheeldon, Whitty, and van der Hoorn 2023). Instructors plan and prepare WIL opportunities for months prior to the beginning of courses and engage in much collaboration and communication with community partners to build and maintain meaningful and trusting relationships to be able to offer WIL opportunities to students.
An important component of facilitating WIL is the instructor’s push for growth and learning how to improve their students’ WIL experiences and ensure these opportunities are effective (Bates 2011). As previously mentioned, a survey question asked if students had recommendations that would improve their WIL experience. Some student suggestions influenced changes to course design. However, in considering whether student suggestions could be implemented, instructors need to gauge whether they are possible, realistic, and if they would benefit the majority of students. For example, the WIL components of the 2021/2022 courses involved random assignment of groups. Following student recommendations to have more choice in the organization they work with, the instructor adjusted the 2022/2023 courses and provided students the opportunity to rank the organizations they prefer to work with.
Due to the complexity in facilitating these courses, however, some feedback is difficult to integrate, such as issues related to communication with community partners. There are also many factors that cannot be controlled when working with community organizations, tasking instructors with the difficult job of attempting to balance what is realistic and possible with creating the most beneficial and enjoyable experience for students. For example, the suggestion to allow students to choose their team members directly was not implemented as it would be too difficult to coordinate and evenly assign students to each community partner, and it could create an environment where students feel excluded. Similarly, students raised challenges with group work, however, it is difficult to find an alternative that would allow the scale and complexity of WIL projects to be provided to students within their course. Students did individually complete assessments and assignments in the course, such as exams based on lecture and textbook materials. Individual assessments based on projects for community partners were not feasible, however. The instructor was aware that students may contribute differently. Therefore, each course included a final peer review component where students were able to individually peer review their group members, and those reviews were taken into consideration in assigning final marks for the group project for community partners.
Governments and institutions have shown a growing interest in and prioritization of WIL and other experiential learning opportunities to address gaps in student employability (Ferns et al. 2019) through investments and monetary incentives for institutions, such as performance-based funding metrics. However, this push to increase WIL opportunities lacks consideration for the extent of time, effort, and resources required by facilitators to provide a meaningful experience (Bilgin, Rowe, and Clark 2024). Resources and support are needed for facilitators in order for them to further develop WIL opportunities and be able to offer them to students while mitigating challenges, without which WIL will become ineffective and unsustainable for faculty (Bilgin et al. 2024; Wheeldon et al. 2023). Further research is needed to provide governments, policymakers, postsecondary institutions, and other stakeholders with concrete and realistic recommendations to sustain and develop more effective WIL opportunities.
This study was based on qualitative student responses, thereby providing a further in-depth understanding of student experiences and opinions regarding WIL, specifically in sociology. However, a limitation is that data was collected at one institution in Canada and is further specific to undergraduate sociology students. Therefore, this sample is not representative of all sociology students or undergraduate students and may not reflect the experience of students in other contexts. Another limitation is the low number of respondents, with 11 percent of students invited completing the survey. There are also potential response biases which the authors attempted to mitigate. First, a research assistant, and not the instructor, hosted the survey and collected responses, and participants completed the survey before their final course grades were posted. Second, the two authors independently analyzed the data to compare findings. Third, the questions were open, and respondents could answer how they chose. A strength is that the survey was distributed to undergraduate sociology students in various sociology courses and levels, allowing for a diverse sub-sample. In addition, considering the diversity of WIL experiences in these various courses, the consistency and saturation of ideas expressed provide strong evidence that the benefits of and interest in WIL opportunities outlined were shared by the majority of students surveyed. Further research utilizing semi-structured interviews and focus groups with students and community partners could provide a more comprehensive and expansive exploration of the effectiveness of WIL, including an expanded exploration of the positives and negatives, as well as insights for improvements.
Benefits noted by students in this study are similar to what is presented currently in the literature, especially as related to skill development, enhancing learning, and employment preparedness (Ferns et al. 2019; Greenberg et al. 2020; Jackson and Cook 2023; Yorio and Ye 2012). A major theme found in student responses was the ability to apply knowledge learned in academic courses in workforce settings. This is an important and relevant reason why undergraduate students should have access to WIL opportunities, as well as a noted benefit felt by students after engaging in the practice of applying their knowledge. The inability to apply knowledge in a workplace setting is a significant skill gap employers have expressed (Ferns et al. 2019). The literature review and findings presented outline the importance and benefits of offering experiential learning opportunities, especially in sociology contexts. Given the broad and interdisciplinary nature of sociology, many students experience uncertainty about their role in the job market, potentially underpinned by difficulty conceptualizing how their sociology knowledge and skills can be applied outside of education. This gap can be filled by integrating and further developing WIL in sociology. WIL provides a connection of how a sociology education applies in work settings, giving students concrete experience that can help them feel more informed and prepared for their future, thereby enhancing employability (Spalter-Roth, Van Vooran, and Senter 2015). It is for these reasons that WIL could play an important role in sociology and other social science disciplines, greatly impacting students’ education and future prospects. Literature on student perspectives and the perceived impacts of WIL in undergraduate education is limited, and there is a need to better understand community-engaged learning and WIL in sociology (Aujla and Hamm 2018; Berard and Ravelli 2021; Tarantino 2017). This paper contributes to the literature on WIL and student perspectives, experiences, and the perceived impacts specifically related to WIL in undergraduate sociology courses in Canada. In addition, in reflecting on findings and student experiences, this paper discusses considerations and limitations associated with the design and implementation of WIL into undergraduate courses.
Conclusion
WIL is a teaching pedagogy that facilitates student opportunities to bridge classroom learning with practice. This educational approach is becoming increasingly popular across university and college campuses internationally, with an emphasis on improving the employability of graduating students. While WIL can be used in a variety of disciplines, sociology provides an ideal learning space to engage in WIL by providing learning through active participation in service experiences, where students can use and apply skills and knowledge to a practical setting. Students benefit from WIL opportunities through personal, professional, and academic growth, such as changed perspectives; the development and use of skills such as critical thinking, group maintenance, and communication; and the internalized responsibility to the community due to deeply rooted connections with community members and reflecting on the value of these experiences. Research on WIL opportunities in Canada, undergraduate, and sociology courses is limited. Therefore, this study explored student perspectives and experiences with community-engaged learning opportunities in undergraduate sociology courses at a Canadian undergraduate institution. Survey findings show that students found WIL experiences to be relevant, valuable, and effective learning opportunities that are beneficial for developing and improving skills related to future employment and academic pursuits. Some challenges experienced by students were difficulties with teamwork and communication with community partners. However, despite these challenges, students consider WIL to be an important opportunity for their undergraduate education, expressing that WIL opportunities should be more widely available. A low response rate and purposeful sampling technique are limitations of this research that prevent findings from being representative. Results are unique to undergraduate sociology students at one institution in Canada, and therefore, findings are not generalizable.
Findings provide further insight into the experiences, benefits, and challenges that some students face when partaking in WIL. More specifically, findings contribute to the limited data available about undergraduate sociology students’ experiences with WIL, as well as the lack of Canadian data on student experiences with WIL. This study included measures aimed at improving WIL experiences, which highlighted further considerations for facilitators of WIL and institutions. Future studies can focus on conducting more in-depth exploration of student perspectives using interview and focus group methodology. Additional directions for research could determine and outline recommendations for WIL stakeholders to better support and develop opportunities. Further research is needed on WIL in sociology and Canadian contexts to better understand and support the workload of WIL facilitators and how faculty, institutions, and community members can work together more effectively to support WIL opportunities.
Footnotes
Appendix
Ethical Considerations
This study was approved by the MacEwan University Research Ethics Board (approval no. 101961) on November 29, 2021.
Funding
The authors received no financial support for the research, authorship, or publication of this article.
Declaration of Conflicting Interests
The authors declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, or publication of this article.