Creating Cultural Conditions for Collaborative Professional Learning in FE and HE Communities of Practice: A Case Study

Abstract

This research is situated within the Irish tertiary educational space, between higher education (HE) and further education and training (FET). The higher education organisation in which this research is set is the Literacy Development Centre (LDC)—South-East Technological University (SETU), and the further education organisation is the Longford Westmeath Education Training Board (LWETB). This study focuses on the provision of a 30 Credit NFQ Level 6 qualification entitled Certificate in Adult Literacy Studies. Methods include multiple focus groups to capture the differing accounts of experience. The findings of this research present a unique 360-degree view of experiences of the blended delivery of this curriculum programme. Voices reported here include all stakeholders, specifically the people who logistically manage the programme from both the HE and FE perspectives, the lecturers and their students. The research focuses specifically on the opportunities, the positives, the challenges and the lessons learned for all the research participants involved in delivering this programme within this tertiary space. This article concludes with a discussion of the impact of this type of academic delivery upon the students and other respective organisational stakeholders from both the HE and the FE perspectives.

1. Introduction

In the landscape of Irish further and higher education, both sectors have tended to be largely separate in their approach (Iannelli et al., 2016). However, it would be remiss not to look at the opportunities created through enhanced collaboration between HE and FET institutions. This is a strategic priority for several strategy documents including An tSeirbhís Oideachais Leanúnaigh agus Scileanna (SOLAS), which is the State agency that oversees the building of a world-class further education and training (FET) sector in Ireland, and Transforming Learning Strategy 2022–2024 (SOLAS, 2021), which aims to have a cohesive approach to further developing FET-HE links. This is also highlighted in the Department of Further and Higher Education, Research and Innovation’s (DFHERIS) most recent statement of strategy (DFHERIS, 2022). Additionally, the Adult Literacy for Life (ALL) Strategy (2021–2031) SOLAS (2021), introduced a ten-year plan to improve literacy, numeracy and digital skills for adults in Ireland, emphasising accessible learning and coordinated support. A cornerstone of the strategy is the continuous professional development of adult educators (SOLAS, 2021). Globally, UN Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) 4, promoting inclusive and equitable education, is a key theme across the entire education sector.

The Literacy Development Centre (LDC), situated within the South East Technological University of Ireland (SETU), is a national higher education (HE) centre, offering focused programmes for educators and managers in adult literacy and the broader further education and training (FET) sector. Through collaboration with various stakeholders, the LDC has been instrumental in supporting the DFHERIS Strategy and ALL Strategy’s objectives. One such collaboration occurred in 2022, with Longford and Westmeath Education and Training Board (LWETB) in Ireland, where the LDC took part in delivering a pilot programme with a group of FET practitioners who enrolled in the NFQ Level 6, 30 Credits, Certificate in Adult Literacy. For some participants, this marked a return to HE after a long absence, or even their first experience, which brought natural concerns, especially around formal assessments, along with situational and dispositional barriers (Cross, 1981). Additionally, participants had to manage the demands of their teaching roles and personal commitments alongside part-time studies. Despite these challenges, the LDC’s adherence to a philosophy of good adult literacy work (NALA, 2012) led to 13 of the 14 enrolled students successfully completing the Certificate.

This paper aims to offer a comprehensive, 360-degree perspective on the experiences of all stakeholders involved, specifically the people who logistically managed the programme from both the HE and FET viewpoints, the lecturers and their students. The research focuses specifically on the benefits, the challenges and the lessons learned across the three focus areas of this study. It explores the insights of the participants involved in this programme within this tertiary education space. In doing so, it aims to inform future practices and policies within both the HE and FET sectors, ultimately enhancing the educational landscape for adult learners in Ireland.

1.1. FET Practitioners in Ireland: An Overview

FET in Ireland is generally described in terms of what ‘it is not’, i.e., it is not primary, post-primary or HE (Grummell & Murray, 2015). While it is generally considered second-chance education, as in Europe, the primary purpose is to meet the demands of the labour market followed with a focus on reducing social exclusion (Government of Ireland, 2000; OECD, 2010; McGuinness et al., 2014; Shannon, 2019). In Ireland full-time FET programmes, such as Post-Leaving Certificate (PLCs), Vocational Training Opportunities Scheme (VTOS) and Youthreach, are considered labour activation schemes, whereas part-time programmes such as Back to Education Initiative (BTEI), Adult Literacy and Community Education are focused on social inclusion (McGuinness et al., 2014). The range of programmes demonstrates the diversity of practitioner roles (Government of Ireland, 2000). Currently, there are approximately 10,000 staff in FET, including learning practitioners, managers and professional support/administration. The role of learning practitioner refers to a range of roles that directly support learners and constitutes more than 50% of the staff (SOLAS, 2017): tutors, trainers, instructors, teachers, resource personnel. The entry route to teaching in FET varies, where professional experience is as valued as a pedagogic qualification (Grummell & Murray, 2015; NALA, 2020). While this aligns with international practice, (Government of Ireland, 2000; OECD, 2010), it also leads to contestation (J. O’Neill & Fitzsimons, 2020) and duality (Jephcote & Salisbury, 2009; Buckley & Husband, 2020) of identity. Often FET practitioners work in a number of the programmes mentioned above (J. O’Neill & Fitzsimons, 2020). Some of these practitioners hold secondary school teacher qualifications (Grummell & Murray, 2015; J. O’Neill & Fitzsimons, 2020), where those wishing to work in schools recognised by the Department of Education must be registered with the Teaching Council (SOLAS, 2017). While registration for FET is typically based on a teaching qualification, many long-serving practitioners registered based on prior experience (SOLAS, 2017). As a result, some practitioners are members of professional education bodies. Those who have a strong and established professional identity are better able to maintain an agency, which supports their decision-making regarding professional development (Suarez & McGrath, 2022). While a FET Staff Skills Profile conducted in 2015 highlighted the high level of qualification of many practitioners, it did not provide a breakdown by sector or qualification type. It also noted that just under 50% of practitioners work part-time or on a sessional basis which impacts professional development (PD) provision (SOLAS, 2017). This diversity in professional identity and working conditions may be an important consideration in professional learning requirements and preferences where motivation of both learning practitioner and student may vary depending on context (Grummell & Murray, 2015).

1.2. Professional Learning and Development for FET Practitioners

The FET Professional Learning & Development (PL&D): Statement of Strategy 2020–2024 emphasises that the quality of the FET sector relies on the excellence of its workforce, necessitating ongoing professional learning and development (SOLAS, 2020b). It outlines a hierarchical responsibility structure for PL&D, where FET directors oversee the systems, PL&D coordinators manage the implementation, and individual practitioners are responsible for engagement/participation (SOLAS, 2020b). The strategy aims to create a powerful culture of learning, facilitate access to development and build the confidence of FET practitioners (SOLAS, 2020b). Further, through prioritising critical areas such as literacy, numeracy and digital literacy skills to support FET learners, it aligns with ALL strategy’s Pillar of Expansion, which states, “a key driver of better literacy outcomes lies in building the skills of all of those involved in delivering learning and support” (SOLAS, 2021).

Moreover, the literature reminds us that involving staff in decisions regarding necessary PL&D is fundamental to engagement (Kennedy, 2014; The Teaching Council, 2016). While some significant PL&D responses seem nationally and internationally driven (CEDEFOP, 2022), local needs assessments conducted by a number of ETBs (TETB, 2020; LWETB, 2022; QQI, 2022; WWETB, 2022) are critical. Additionally, the ongoing progression of a Unified Tertiary Education Consultation (DFHERIS, 2022) has suggestions for relevant and appropriate PL&D for staff of HE and FET, whilst also highlighting that off-the-shelf HE provisions do not always meet local needs. This corresponds with the findings, both locally and across Europe, that PL&D offerings do not always meet the needs of those on the ground (Ostinelli & Crescentini, 2024; DFHERIS, 2022; QQI, 2022).

Emphasising collaboration and individualisation, the range of opportunities, promotion of communities of practice and diverse delivery modes align with effective professional learning approaches, significantly enhancing the likelihood of “transforming teaching practices and student learning” (Darling-Hammond et al., 2017).

One such delivery model was this current collaborative delivery of such PL&D between an institute of higher education (LDC) and one of further education and training (LWETB), which afforded an opportunity to conduct this study within the tertiary space in the Irish educational system. This partnership provided a valuable opportunity, in creative ways, to explore professional learning across the HE and FET sectors.

1.3. PL&D Engagement for Adult Learners

PL&D presents both challenges and benefits for adult learners that engage with educational opportunities as part of their professional development. While adult learners, including education practitioners, are often strongly motivated to enhance their skills, they also encounter a range of challenges that can hinder their progress (Bellare et al., 2023). Understanding these challenges is essential for providing learning experiences that support practitioners’ growth while meeting their specific needs. Clancy and Holford (2023) observe that at its best, adult education offers more than enhanced professional skills and employability training; it can foster “intellectual growth, transformation, and change” (Clancy & Holford, 2023). Furthermore, research shows that when practitioners in adult education develop their own professional skills, their learners also benefit and become empowered (Clancy & Holford, 2023).

1.3.1. Balancing Commitments

Adult learners must balance professional and other responsibilities alongside academic studies. Bellare et al. (2023), building on Gopalan (2019), emphasise that adult learners often prioritise their professional roles, which creates conflict between work and academic responsibilities. Educational institutions that adopt a rigid approach to programme delivery raise further structural barriers for students (Boeren et al., 2023), overlapping with these pre-existing situational barriers (Cross, 1981). In contrast, Saar et al. (2014) observe flexible educational programmes can significantly reduce these challenges for adult learners.

One such approach is hybrid learning, which combines in-person and online teaching sessions. Kara et al. (2019) stress the need for an educational environment that enables adult learners to take control of their own learning journey, freely express their ideas, balance their education with their personal lives and highlight the flexibility that the online environment offers. As Flynn et al. (2022) point out, this flexibility, highlighted by adult learners as “convenient”, is especially beneficial for those juggling multiple responsibilities.

However, it must be acknowledged that while this approach often provides more flexibility for adult learners, it is not a panacea that can solve all challenges for adult learners. Time for independent study must still be balanced against other commitments and is often a “limited” and “squeezed” resource (Kahu et al., 2014). Further, Kara et al. (2019) also emphasise that there is “an immense need” to look at the engagement challenges for adult learners, who experience many constraints when it comes to engaging with study, which can lead to significant dropout rates.

1.3.2. Assessment Anxiety

As discussed earlier in this study, practitioners in the adult learning sector have diverse professional and educational backgrounds. While some may hold high-level educational qualifications, Clancy et al. (2023) highlight these are not always a condition of recruitment, and formal qualifications are not systematically linked with high professional skills. For adults, including educators, engaging with formal education after an extended absence or even for the first time, assessments can be a source of significant stress. Assessments are often perceived as a form of judgment rather than as a tool for critically evaluating the learning process (NFETL, 2016). This dispositional barrier Cross (1981), combined with the need of balancing other commitments, can lead to adult learners not completing their studies.

Assessment practices that allow for flexibility around deadlines can reduce some of this anxiety for learners and improve learner retention. Burke (2019) notes that rigid assessment timeframes can limit students’ focus to simply meeting deadlines rather than understanding their subject. One of their recommendations for improving student equity in the HE environment is that practitioners have a flexible approach to assessment dates that is tailored to meet the needs of individual students Burke (2019).

Further, the opportunity to receive formative feedback on draft assessment work can support adult learners to critically evaluate their work before final submission dates (NFETL, 2016). They become “partners in assessment” G. O’Neill (2017), as they can “self-regulate” and experience “assessment as learning” (NFETL, 2016). Encouraging students to submit draft work for formative feedback not only enhances their learning autonomy G. O’Neill (2017) but also boosts their self-efficacy, especially for those overcoming dispositional barriers around the HE learning and assessment process (Neff, 2023).

2. Research Methodology and Methods

An interpretivist paradigm Kuhn (1970) underpins this study with the view that knowledge is subjective and socially constructed, leading to a qualitative approach. It was decided that a focus group would be a useful tool to explore experiences from diverse perspectives, providing opportunities for insights that one-on-one interviews might not facilitate (Denscombe, 2008). Furthermore, these insights are developed in a collaborative manner as participants react and respond to each other’s contributions (Bryman, 2016).

The researchers’ aim to explore the experiences of three different cohorts involved in the pilot delivery of this full 30 Credit NFQ L6 programme within LWETB meant that three different focus groups were required. The three focus groups included participants with these perspectives:

▪

Student perspective.

▪

Lecturer perspective.

▪

Organisational perspective (programme administration and programme lead).

To ensure continuity and consistency across the three focus groups, the following discussion areas were explored in each of the three different focus groups:

▪

Benefits and challenges conducting this learning experience for all stakeholders.

▪

Benefits and challenges in both the face-to-face and online learning experience for lecturers and students.

▪

Organisational implications, if any, of delivering the programme for both stakeholders

▪

Lessons learned, if any.

The following additional two discussion areas were explored in the student focus group only:

▪

Reasons, if applicable, for advancement to the Major Award of the Higher Certificate in Literacy Development for students.

▪

Explore aspects that may have been transformative, both for you as a student and you as a practitioner.

Some considerations regarding the practicalities of focus groups need to be mentioned. It is important for the researcher to avoid the interviewer effect in order to prompt and facilitate the discussion and limit interactions that influence the discussion. Furthermore, it is essential that all participants contribute and that no one dominates. This was addressed using interjections Bryman (2016) such as, “and can anyone else add to this point?” or, “would you like to say something now … (name)?” In this study, the researchers selected a focus group facilitator who had minimum contact with the students to mitigate interviewer bias.

2.1. Data Generation and Analysis

All sessions of the focus groups were recorded, using recording capabilities built into MS Teams. The resultant transcripts were then coded based on Braun and Clarke’s (2006) thematic analysis (Braun & Clarke, 2006).

A member of the LWETB team familiarised themselves with the data. The first cycle of coding had a deductive approach based on the research questions (benefits, challenges and lessons learned). Two members of the SETU team peer-reviewed the initial coding and performed a second cycle of coding. This second cycle moved to a more inductive approach as subthemes naturally within the 360-degree perspective. The students, lecturers and organisational perspectives were mapped. These themes included institutional supports, collaboration and time constraints. Microsoft Word was used for coding, as no coding software was available for collaborative coding at the time of data analysis. However, software with a collaborative licence would enhance future research in this area.

2.2. Ethical Considerations

Following both ethical approval from SETU and the approval from the Director of Further Education and Training—LWETB to conduct this research, consent from all participants was obtained prior to commencement of the data collection. The rights of respect, anonymity, confidentiality and withdrawal were also considered. The data is securely stored in accordance with SETU and LWETB GDPR guidelines.

Consideration was also given to the institutional links among the participants, the researchers, SETU and LWETB. Conflicts of interest were considered due to the hierarchical nature of the relationships among some of the participants. This relationship issue can lead to social desirability, where participants might provide responses that they think the interviewer would prefer to hear (Creswell et al., 2012). As mentioned, this was addressed by the careful selection of the focus group facilitators.

To mitigate against the potential for power dynamics and/or researcher bias, within the LDC, it is important to acknowledge that staff–student relationships are based on equal status. LDC students are themselves practitioners within further education, and a collaborative approach to learning reduces hierarchy and power.

2.3. Sampling Method

Process of Participant Recruitment

As mentioned above, the sample population came from three cohorts: students, lecturers and the programme administration and organisation teams. All participants were invited by email to participate. From the student cohort, ten of the thirteen graduates from the programme volunteered to participate within the focus group for the student perspective. These student participants are all FET practitioners with diverse educational backgrounds who have successfully completed the CALS pilot programme and work in a variety of contexts within FET. There were two lecturers working on the programme, and both agreed to participate. Five participants were involved in the programme administration and organisation, and all participated. In summary, in total, seventeen participants were involved, sixteen females and one male, refer to

Table 1. Research participants in this study.

Identifier	Gender	Role	Age Range
P 1	Female	Student	45–54
P 2	Female	Student	55–64
P 3	Female	Student	55–64
P 4	Female	Student	45–54
P 5	Female	Student	55–64
P 6	Female	Student	55–64
P 7	Female	Student	45–54
P 8	Male	Student	55–64
P 9	Female	Student	45–54
P 10	Female	Student	35–44
P 11	Female	Lecturer	45–54
P 12	Female	Lecturer	55–64
P 13	Female	Organisation representative	45–54
P 14	Female	Organisation representative	45–54
P 15	Female	Organisation representative	45–54
P 16	Female	Organisation representative	45–54
P 17	Female	Organisation representative	45–54

. While every effort was made to invite student participants to contribute to the study, the two remining male student participants did not respond to the invitation. The authors acknowledge that in all three stakeholder contributions, the vast majority of the participants as a collective were female from the employee perspective and from the student perspective.

3. Results

The data collected will be examined under three main categories: benefits, challenges and lessons learned from the various stakeholder groups.

3.1. Benefits

3.1.1. Students’ Perspective

A number of benefits emerged from the focus group, including the support, the mode of delivery and increased professional confidence.

Much professional learning and development was gained through completion of the CALS programme. This programme has given learners the confidence and indeed the taste for engaging in further professional learning opportunities as they arise. One learner cited that now they will be more likely to engage with professional learning opportunities they might have steered away from in the past.

“So, for me, I would have the confidence to study again and I believe SETU did a great job on how they taught us how it was all set up.”

(P3—Student)

Learners spoke about the importance of the supports provided by both SETU and LWETB as highlighted in the following excerpts from the focus group.

“You know, I thought the organisation like the ETB were great. I just I thought the way they cleared our days”.

(P5—Student)

“I was being paid to do this most amazing course where I was learning so much from both the lectures and my peers, and I remember that.”

(P2—Student)

“LWETB bent over backwards they wanted you to do it and they wanted you to complete the programme and receive my certificate!”

(P6—Student)

Workload was a key topic. Learners commended LWETB for their work with its programme co-ordinators to ensure that staff were not timetabled on the days the classes were being held. Without this many learners said they would not have been in a position to complete the programme as they would not feel comfortable if they were required to turn down timetabled classes.

“That was your day for your college, and you could actually relax, and you could soak in everything that was being said to you, and you weren’t stressing about or I’m in class later on or anything like that.”

(P4—Student)

The learners said that the blended approach to the programme worked well, and the combination of online and face-to-face sessions balanced convenience and connection. Face-to-face days helped build rapport, while online learning allowed flexibility. Learners expressed that they liked the way theoretical parts of the module were kept online, whilst the in-person days had the right mix of practical and networking opportunities.

The learners on the programme, despite working for the same organisation, namely LWETB, are spread across different geographical locations, so many did not know each other before completing the programme. One learner who had identified themselves as having a particularly bad previous educational experience commented on how the fact that the first day of the programme was online made it much easier for them to engage with the process.

The group conceded, in retrospect, that one face-to-face day was appropriate, despite saying initially they would have preferred a second in-person day. They conceded that attendance for a second day would have been challenging.

“I don’t know if I would have been able to do another day, even though I would have liked to do another day.”

(P7—Student)

This blend of asynchronous and synchronous online sessions, supplemented by occasional in-person meetings, was found to be ideal. By structuring the programme to include practical, directly applicable content, the learning was meaningful and engaging.

“We’re talking about the relevance to our work everyday work, and for me hearing everybody else how they’re working within the ETB”.

(P1—Student)

In terms of professional and personal growth, there were a few “eureka” moments for the students. One of particular note was around the validation they themselves felt as educators when they realised that their own practice was highly linked to theories of adult learning, citing they “hit the target” but were now confident in their own teaching practices. Undoubtedly, the most significant growth was in their own practice, and all cited that they took something from the programme, which overall improved the experience of the learners on programmes they themselves were delivering.

“I do think you’ve come out of this believing in yourself more and understanding the way everything works more and that your learners have 100 percent benefit more, which in turn helps the organisation for people to be coming in ongoing all the time.”

(P3—Student)

Some learners cited being new to QQI certification, as their previous roles were industry-based. They had gained an understanding of this through the programme. They now have the confidence to change their assignment briefs and use plain English, while still maintaining the integrity of the assessments.

Learners believe LWETB as an organisation has had significant gains. There was an improvement in their practices. They became more mindful of what it is like to be a learner and the stress this brings. This led to a holistic view of learner needs, rather than just focusing on achieving the learning outcomes of the programme. The educators themselves also felt more valued as a member of staff and more part of the organisation.

“I think the practice has definitely improved and so the students have benefited. And in that sense, I think the organisation has benefited for sure.”

(P10—Student)

Building a community was mentioned. Students enjoyed the opportunities to learn both with and from their peers. One participant said they are now colleagues, not just other people who work for the organisation. The group spoke about the camaraderie among the group and the fact they were huge supporters of each other.

“You know like it’s we’re colleagues now and rather than just people who also work in the same organisation and that has changed so it’s created a kind of a fraternity.”

(P1—Student)

From class discussions, they felt they had a glimpse into a colleague’s classroom, and some mentioned gaining insight from this, particularly the newer members of staff on the programme.

“I was picking up a lot of stuff from my colleagues and going oh yeah right that could work from a different angle, but I think it has given me a lot more confidence in my practice and in what I’m doing and it’s also kind of made me look outside for other ideas.”

(P9—Student)

3.1.2. Lecturers’ Perspective

The lecturers noted similar benefits to the students.

One of the first benefits was the fact all the group were very engaged and in a place where they could learn. An essential element of this engagement was the support that the group received from their ETB, as the following quote highlights:

“They came in curious and motivated as well, because they had received the message from their own organisation that this was going to be a developmental programme for them. So I think when the organisation values the learning programme that automatically feeds to the learners who come in in a ready frame and in an open frame to learn.”

(P11—Lecturer)

Participants also noted that the programme organisation and logistics played a part in this, for example, restructuring schedules, provision of lunch and assigning an on-campus location. One of the lecturers commented:

“I felt the whole project was very valued when we went down in person. Things like having tea and coffee there in the morning and the lunch that was organised. People appreciated that and I could see that people really connected and engaged with each other and engaged with me.”

(P12—Lecturer)

A key organisational and programmatic gain from the lecturers’ perspective was having all learners from one organisation. This could be seen as a negative but actually fostered a community of practice, enhancing inter-collegial relationships and organisational integration.

The lecturers were prepared for some potential pre-existing group dynamics that might affect learning. However, they found that this was not an issue, as “people were so eager to learn”. Lecturers expressed that they believe this community of practice will continue to be a resource for LWETB going forward. One lecturer commented:

“I do think that it actually the return to the organisation is enormous because the relationships that they build up and the community of practice that they establish becomes a resource and that’s something that I think you don’t always get.”

(P12—Lecturer)

Lecturers also felt that by accommodating diverse student needs and using a collaborative approach to the delivery enhanced their own teaching practice. Universal Design for Learning (UDL) principles were applied to assessments, making the programme accessible and adaptable.

“I was new enough in SETU and it really made me focus. I had done the training around UDL and I really brought that into those courses. So I just went quite deep with it and I think it just made me look at assessment with another lens.”

(P11—Lecturer)

“I think the work that we did was to really help each other to appreciate different perspectives.”

(P12—Lecturer)

Lecturers also highlighted the flexibility of the blended approach as a major advantage that supported learning relationships. One lecturer said that “the third day was magic because I felt that the trust that had been built up online meant that when people did meet face to face, we very quickly were able to get into more deep conversations”.

(P11—Lecturer)

3.1.3. Organisational Perspective

The organisational perspective focused on different themes than the other two focus groups. However, of note was the passion of the on-site champion for the pilot project.

“OK, well, mine is more of an emotional thing really. It’s not facts and figures. I was waiting 10 years for this to happen and then it happened and everyone rolled in behind it and it was better than I even imagined.”

(P13—Organisation Representative)

Participants achieved significant milestones, including career advancements and promotions, validating the impact of their learning journey and, by default, benefiting the organisation. From this programme alone, LWETB has made significant gains. Many staff progressed on to higher certificate programmes and two to a Postgraduate in Further Education programme. Staff have also been promoted to management roles in the organisation.

“Since then two of those people have actually been promoted in the service and you know partly through that. So that’s good to note.”

(P15—Organisation Representative)

The organisational perspective also focused on the building of relationships between the two organisations.

“I think the big part of it is the relationships. And as you said like I knew I didn’t know you really well, but I had been to LWETB before, so I knew. And I knew your heart was there in it and I knew the passion for the learners. So, I was going to be pushing on this side as well because I knew you and I knew some of the learners.”

(P16—Organisation Representative)

Whilst LWETB had been sending staff on an individual basis to programmes in SETU, this project has made significant progress in developing long-term links and has led to further professional learning opportunities for the students.

3.2. Challenges

3.2.1. Students’ Perspective

A number of challenges were discussed, with time being the biggest challenge. Despite all the supports in place, there was still a significant workload. Students themselves had no solution for this and cited it just as a part of our busy lives.

“Probably the challenge, to be honest, I’d say it’s what many people would say is just time, you know, carving out that time. Everybody is working and busy.”

(P9—Student)

Some students cited themselves as being a challenge. Some students had to try to move on from previous bad experiences in education.

“I still felt that first day that I wasn’t meant to be there. I felt I was like an imposter going in. I really felt that for a long time because I really didn’t enjoy my college experience 30 years ago.”

(P1—Student)

This is something this programme has helped them work on, and the sense of achievement they felt was evident from the focus group.

Technical issues were another challenge. Students experienced added stress, from a microphone not working to poor connectivity.

“And yes, there was hiccups with microphones wouldn’t work, or earphones wouldn’t work whatever it was. But at some stage I think mostly we got around it.”

(P8—Student)

Students felt the supports were underutilised due to lack of awareness or reluctance to seek help. They suggested that more focus could be put in this area, perhaps at programme induction, to encourage students to use the supports available to them from SETU.

“And I don’t think that service was used enough or realised. So, advertise that a bit more from our point of view, which is great.”

(P1—Student)

3.2.2. Lecturers’ Perspective

From the lecturers’ perspectives, challenges were few but well navigated. Not unlike any programme run by the lecturers, it was a challenge to support a group with varied educational levels, and this required careful planning and personalised supports.

“That needed careful planning and consideration and communication between the other lecturer and myself. It was that thing of how to work with a group of people where their experience and exposure to third level is in different places and to make it a positive experience for all of them. But I think in in fairness we got great support from our organisation”.

(P12—Lecturer)

Also, the online elements of the programme required a more structured approach to maintain student engagement, with one lecturer saying,

“I’m a very spontaneous teacher and I like to respond to what’s happening in the room. It’s much more difficult to do that design because you lose people, you know, it has to be very prepared.”

(P12—Lecturer)

Delivery of the programme brought about its own pressures. Travelling to the teaching venue for the face-to-face session was a challenge. It took a lot of time, and there are always set-up concerns when going to a new venue. But this was mitigated by the strong support at the teaching venue.

“What I liked was by the time I did travel, I knew the group well and again there was such support at the centre. I wasn’t worrying about how am I going to get my computer going. I can I print something. All that was taken care of for me.”

(P12—Lecturer)

Lecturers were also aware that the student participants were challenged by the additional workload. Some of the students were also learning their new ETB roles and associated commitments. Lecturers realised a balance was needed to support these workloads.

However, this was well managed by the group themselves, as highlighted by one of the lecturers.

“I’m aware there were diverse learners in the group and we have to be mindful of that. But again, I think the group worked so well together and I think they supported each other. And again, I think that you know the more experienced people were supporting people who were new in.”

(P11—Lecturer)

3.2.3. Organisational Perspective

Again, the organisational perspective focused on different challenges of delivering the pilot programme. One challenge was the staff capacity and commitments, which required significant effort to align. Resourcing was a big challenge. As with any project gaining internal approval, aligning timetables and managing cross-team cooperation required significant advocacy and persistence. Delivering the programme successfully under the “pilot” framework created high stakes for both organisations, adding stress to ensure outcomes met expectations.

Student supports had a key role to play in the success of this collaboration from both organisations’ perspectives. SETU provided supports to enable students to engage fully with the programme, while LWETB supported staff in terms of coordinating schedules, securing resources and managing financial costs. These were demanding for both organisations. Logistics and coordination issues were a challenge, as HE and FE systems are very different. Ensuring accessibility and technical support for online components posed initial challenges, particularly for participants unfamiliar with the learning management system, as SETU use Moodle and LWETB use MS Teams.

3.3. Lessons Learned

Rather than reiterating the benefits already discussed, this section will highlight some keys lessons for future collaborations. These should be considered for future programmes.

• Student supports were available from SETU. Some students suggested these resources were underutilised due to lack of awareness or reluctance to seek help. They suggested that more focus could be put on this area, perhaps at programme induction, to encourage students to use the supports available to them. Participants were offered a study-skills module and an induction to the programme. Perhaps this should have been mandatory and part of onboarding. The introduction of a tech-check session would be beneficial, and optional study skills workshops can better prepare participants.
• The phrase on-site champion was coined for the person who arranged the on-site days, and this role is recommended for successful programme delivery. It made everything on the day run smoothly, and this coordination is an asset to any outreach delivery.
• Shared planning among lecturers ensured consistency and scaffolded learning.
• Having the face-to-face session on day three, in contrast with traditional approaches, meant both the students and lecturers were at ease with each other. This could be integrated into all blended programmes.
• Adequate preparation time is crucial for addressing logistical and technical challenges, ensuring programme readiness for all stakeholders.
• Giving time to developing relationships is another important consideration. The success of the programme hinged on open, collaborative partnerships between stakeholders, emphasising the importance of trust and communication between the organisations.
• The programme required flexibility in overcoming obstacles, such as rescheduling or addressing student needs. Responding to these obstacles proved essential to maintaining momentum and success.
• As progression is an outcome of the pilot programme, Recognition of Prior Learning (RPL) will play a part in the new project and is a high value commodity in terms of acknowledging experience and its current and future value.

4. Discussion

As described above, the three focus group areas provide differing perspectives of this educational programme. This discussion explores these three perspectives further by integrating findings with observations from the existing literature.

As identified by Cross (1981), the participants of the student focus group expressed that for some, participating in the CALS programme marked a return to education after a long absence, or even their first positive experience of HE. Initial feelings of not belonging or concerns about the difficulty of the learning or assessments are consistent with research showing that assessments can often be viewed as a source of stress or judgment rather than a tool for learning (NFETL, 2016). However, despite these challenges, the LDC’s commitment to providing a supportive framework played a role in helping students overcome these barriers. As mentioned, 13 out of the 14 enrolled students completed the CALS Certificate.

The student focus group also highlighted the benefit of the community of practice they formed due to participating in the CALS programme. Although they worked within the same organisation, LWETB, many had not previously known each other or worked together. When listening to their colleagues share aspects of their practice, participants were able to validate their own practice while learning from colleagues. These findings correspond with Darling-Hammond et al. (2017), who highlight that professional learning approaches promoting communities of practice and diverse delivery modes improve professional practice and student outcomes. The participants of this focus group remarked on the transformation of learning and teaching practices by creating this space of shared practice.

Another theme identified from this focus group was the challenge of managing their teaching loads and personal commitments alongside part-time studies, again consistent with the broader literature on adult learner barriers (Bellare et al., 2023; Boeren et al., 2023). The members of the focus group acknowledged the role of their employer, LWETB, in supporting their participation. Managers ensured that they were not timetabled to teach on the days the CALS programme was delivered. While this may appear straightforward, in reality, it required significant coordination from several managers throughout the academic year, as the students, as professional practitioners, had full teaching loads across different discipline areas. Importantly, this ensured that even when the CALS programme was not being delivered, the students were not timetabled to teach on this day for the semester. This provided students with valuable time for learning, reflection, assessment preparation and peer collaboration within their newly formed community of practice. Being supported by their organisation reminds us that involving staff in decisions regarding necessary PL&D is fundamental to engagement (Kennedy, 2014; The Teaching Council, 2016). While some significant PL&D responses seem nationally and internationally driven (Government of Ireland, 2022; CEDEFOP, 2022), this response meets local needs, which is critical to engagement.

While professional development occurs within the FET sector, LWETB are to be commended on the value they place in their practitioners in facilitating such an orchestrated, large-scale educational professional development experience for their staff. This commitment to professional development has already paid dividends to the staff and their learners within LWETB, who benefit from enhanced practice as a result.

Members of the focus group expressed that while they would have liked to engage in professional development themselves, they could not see an opportunity to do so, as discussed in the literature (Suarez & McGrath, 2022), and still conduct their role as practitioners. Others said that until the opportunity created by LWETB to engage with LDC to deliver the CALS programme, they did not consider themselves worthy of such an opportunity.

The wide variety of programmes available within the FET sector in Ireland highlights the diverse roles of practitioners McGuinness et al. (2014), making the professional training of these practitioners a continued priority for the sector (Government of Ireland, 2000).

We know from the findings of Grummell and Murray (2015) that working conditions can be an important consideration in both the professional learning requirements and the motivation of practitioners to engage in such learning. This current study reports similar findings from the student focus group where the participants expressed the value LWETB placed on them as tutors to facilitate the training offered within the CALS programme. An additional factor discussed within the same focus group alluded to the programme delivery in a blended format, where the face-to-face element was scheduled in a convenient geographical location from their place of work. From the programme administration and programme lead perspective focus group, a commitment from management within LWETB was expressed. This was in line with the findings of Grummell and Murray (2015), where an organisational commitment to the professional development of their staff facilitates learning. For example, timetabling of teaching responsibilities and professional learning did not overlap.

The FET Professional Learning & Development (PL&D): Statement of Strategy 2020–2024 emphasises that the quality of the FET sector relies on the excellence of its workforce, necessitating ongoing professional learning and development (SOLAS, 2020a). Within this current study it was expressed within the programme administration and programme lead perspective focus group that with the success of the CALS programme, the plan was to reschedule another such programme for a different group. It was expressed within the same focus group that due to the success of the current programme in terms of engagement, retention, progression and professional advancement opportunities from its current graduates, the uptake by staff wishing to avail of professional development opportunities to a subsequent programme would be much greater.

With the ongoing progression of a Unified Tertiary Education Consultation (DFHERIS, 2022), it was acknowledged that off-the-shelf HE provisions do not always meet local needs, a factor expressed by the programme administration and programme lead perspective focus group. The objective of the CALS training programme was to upskill their staff in the realm of adult literacy, in line with the FET Strategy 2020–2024 (SOLAS, 2020b). While the LDC offers these programmes as part of their suite of programme offerings from NFQ L6-9, the bespoke location and blend of delivery met the needs of the LWETB staff. This blend of days one, two and four online and day three face to face was acknowledged by both the programme administration and programme lead perspective focus group and the student focus group as being the preferred balance of delivery.

However, it is important to recognise that funding for PL&D under the current funding model is subject to budgetary constraints (CMETB, 2019), which was an output from the programme administration and programme lead perspective focus group. This bespoke nature of programme delivery and alignment of LWETB staff timetabling to attend is costly to LWETB, where an increase in budgetary allowance would have been beneficial. However, the success of the programme and subsequent impact on learners within LWETB, the upskilled staff and shared community of practice is testament to the investment.

A summary found in

Table 2. Focus group summary on the benefits, challenges and lessons learned within their participation in the CALS programme.

	Comments from All Stakeholder Focus Groups
Benefits conducting this learning experience	“You know, I thought the organisation like the ETB were great. I thought the way they cleared our days was great”. (P5—Student) “I was being paid to do this most amazing course where I was learning so much from both the lectures and my peers, and I remember that.” (P2—Student) “LWETB bent over backwards they wanted you to do it and they wanted you to complete the programme and receive my certificate!” (P6—Student) “We’re talking about the relevance to our everyday work, and for me hearing everybody else how they’re working within the ETB”. (P1—Student) “That was your day for your college, and you could actually relax, and you could soak in everything that was being said to you, and you weren’t stressing about or I’m in class later on or anything like that.” (P4—Student) “I think the practice has definitely improved and so the students have benefited. And in that sense, I think the organisation has benefited for sure.” (P10—Student) “I do think you’ve come out of this believing in yourself more and understanding the way everything works more and that your learners have 100 percent benefited more, which in turn helps the organisation for people to be coming in ongoing all the time.” (P3—Student) “you know like it’s we’re colleagues now and rather than just people who also work in the same organisation and that has changed so it’s created a kind of a fraternity.” (P1—Student) “I was picking up a lot of stuff from my colleagues and going oh yeah right that could work from a different angle, but I think it has given me a lot more confidence in my practice and in what I’m doing and it’s also kind of made me look outside for other ideas.” (P9—Student) “They came in curious and motivated as well, because they had received the message from their own organisation that this was going to be a developmental programme for them. So I think when the organisation values the learning programme that automatically feeds to the learners who come in in a ready frame and in an open frame to learn.” (P11—Lecturer) “I felt the whole project was very valued when we went down in person. Things like having tea and coffee there in the morning and the lunch that was organised. People appreciated that and I could see that people really connected and engaged with each other and engaged with me.” (P12—Lecturer) “I do think that it actually the return to the organisation is enormous because the relationships that they build up and the community of practice that they establish becomes a resource and that’s something that I think you don’t always get.” (P12—Lecturer) “I was new enough in SETU and it really made me focus. I had done the training around UDL and I really brought that into those courses. So I just went quite deep with it and I think it just made me look at assessment with another lens.” (P11—Lecturer) “I think the work that we did was to really help each other to appreciate different perspectives.” (P12—Lecturer) “the third day was magic because I felt that the trust that had been built up online meant that when people did meet face to face, we very quickly were able to get into more deep conversations”. (P11—Lecturer) “OK, well, mine is more of an emotional thing really. It’s not facts and figures. I was waiting 10 years for this to happen and then it happened and everyone rolled in behind it and it was better than I even imagined.” (P13—Organisation Representative) “Since then two of those people have actually been promoted in the service and you know partly through that. So that’s good to note.” (P15—Organisation Representative) “ I think the big part of it is the relationships. And as you said like I knew I didn’t know you really well, but I had been to LWETB before, so I knew. And I knew your heart was there in it and I knew the passion for the learners. So, I was going to be pushing on this side as well because I knew you and I knew some of the learners.” (P16—Organisation Representative)
Challenges conducting this learning experience	“Probably the challenge, to be honest, I’d say it’s what many people would say is just time, you know, carving out that time. Everybody is working and busy.” (P9—Student) “I still felt that first day that I wasn’t meant to be there. I felt I was like an imposter going in. I really felt that for a long time because I really didn’t enjoy my college experience 30 years ago.” (P1—Student) “And yes, there was hiccups with microphones wouldn’t work, or earphones wouldn’t work whatever it was. But at some stage I think mostly we got around it.” (P8—Student) “That needed careful planning and consideration and communication between the other lecturer and myself. It was that thing of how to work with a group of people where their experience and exposure to third level is in different places and to make it a positive experience for all of them. But I think in in fairness we got great support from our organisation”. (P12—Lecturer) “I’m a very spontaneous teacher and I like to respond to what’s happening in the room. It’s much more difficult to do that design because you lose people, you know, it has to be very prepared.” (P12—Lecturer) “What I liked was by the time I did travel, I knew the group well and again there was such support at the centre. I wasn’t worrying about how am I going to get my computer going. I can I print something. All that was taken care of for me.” (P12—Lecturer) “I’m aware there were diverse learners in the group and we have to be mindful of that. But again, I think the group worked so well together and I think they supported each other. And again, I think that you know the more experienced people were supporting people who were new in.” (P11—Lecturer)
Lessons learned, if any	“For me, I would have the confidence to study again and I believe SETU did a great job on how they taught us how it was all set up.” (P3—Student) For context for the final quote, students expressed they felt the learning supports were under utilised due to lack of awareness or their own reluctance to seek help. They suggested perhaps at learner induction to the programme that more focus could be put in this area to encourage learners to use the supports available to them from SETU. “And I don’t think that service was used enough or realised, so advertise that a bit more from our point of view, which is great.” (P1—Student)

below, captures the feedback of all three focus groups on their respective experiences of conducting the programme and the benefits, challenges and lessons learned for future programmes delivered in this way.

5. Conclusions

In conclusion, data from the focus groups conducted as part of this research demonstrate the overwhelming benefits of delivering this pilot programme in such a collaborative way. Data also suggest that a key to the success of the project was embedded within the relationships and culture of collaboration underpinning the ethos of the project. An additional successful outcome from this collaborative and creative mode of learning was the relationships that resulted, specifically, the relationship the student had with themselves as learners, with their peers on the programme, with the lecturers, with their own organisation and SETU. A further factor influencing the success of the pilot is reflected in the relationships which presided at an organisational level within the programme administration and the programme lead’s perspective in facilitating the delivery of this programme. Data also indicate that the ‘can do’ attitude of all the stakeholders also contributed to the project’s success.

Going forward, the team plan to explore how this attitude might lead to more successful collaborations within the tertiary education space.

As previously indicated, the authors acknowledge that in all three stakeholder contributions, the vast majority of the participants as a collective were female from the employee perspective and from the student perspective. While this was the position for this current study, in the case of future studies, the authors will endeavour to conduct studies in subject areas where gender balance may be more achievable to gain a broader perspective.