Integrating Career Development Learning with Work-Integrated Learning: A Multiple Case Study Advancing Education for Sustainable Development

Abstract

Engaging in work-integrated learning (WIL) activities helps students develop critical skills, formulate their professional identities, and refine their career direction. Integrating career development learning (CDL) and WIL throughout a degree is a mechanism for fostering sustainability. This multiple case study explores individual and institutional practices that enable integration of CDL with WIL. Data include interviews with careers and WIL practitioners at seven institutions in three countries. The findings indicate that clear communication via policy guidance, across teams and through information systems, facilitates integration of CDL and WIL in the curriculum. Integrating CDL with WIL can make iterative WIL experiences accessible in contexts where students have lower access to workplace-based WIL. Integrated CDL and WIL can raise awareness and develop sustainability-related skills, such as ethical reasoning, diversity awareness, ability to work in interdisciplinary teams, and complex problem-solving. An example from practice explores how sustainability-focused CDL and WIL can embed the value of iterative WIL experiences while fostering sustainability. This study offers educators insights and models for raising graduate awareness of their capacity and agility to contribute to a more sustainable future.

1. Introduction

Universities face challenges in developing employable graduates (Rowe & Zegwaard, 2017). Integrating sustainability in the curriculum is increasingly recognized as an important component of employability (Alimehmeti et al., 2024) that involves active learning, co-creation, and building relationships (Grau-del-Valle et al., 2025) to develop complex problem-solving, values-based thinking, and strategic thinking skills (Brundiers et al., 2021). Raising awareness about social issues combined with the ability to tackle complex global challenges positions students to explore and iterate their professional identities and employability (Zhang et al., 2023).

Education for sustainable development (ESD) is closely linked to the concept of global citizenship education (GCE) in that they both prepare learners to address complex and interconnected challenges. These terms can be conceptualized distinctly, with ESD addressing the interdependence of environmental, social, and economic systems (UNESCO, 2026a) and GCE focusing on shared humanity, intercultural awareness, and collective responsibility (UNESCO, 2026b). The seventeen United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) bring these distinct concepts together with goals such as zero hunger, clean water and sanitation, and affordable and clean energy (United Nations, 2015) making clear the inter-relatedness of social and environmental impact. In this paper, the term ‘sustainability’ represents education for employability that empowers graduates to consider choices, actions, and leadership that have social and environmental impacts.

Accrediting bodies such as the Association to Advance Collegiate Schools of Business (AACSB) increasingly expect business schools to emphasize societal impact and engagement (Standard 9), highlighting the role they play in shaping responsible business practices through curriculum and engagement (AACSB International, 2026). Education for sustainability engages students in interdisciplinary teams (Sørensen & Stenalt, 2025) to address complex challenges which develop interpersonal competencies and systems thinking (Brundiers et al., 2021). In turn, these learning activities develop transferable skills, such as communication, empathy, critical thinking, adaptability and ethical reasoning, while fostering respect for different cultural perspectives and supporting creativity and inclusive decision-making (Brundiers et al., 2021).

Work-integrated learning (WIL) is an established, transformative pedagogical approach that is widely recognized for its role in enhancing graduate employability and the development of professional skills (Ferns et al., 2025; Jackson & Dean, 2023; Rowe & Zegwaard, 2017). WIL integrates theory and practice through partnerships among universities, students, and employers (Vlachopoulos & Pachni Tsitiridou, 2026) that generate mutual benefits for all stakeholders (Sachs & Clark, 2017). WIL curricula support students to reflect on their experiences and make sense of their learning (Billett, 2011; Smith & Worsfold, 2015). Through WIL, students develop important professional skills, and these effects are strengthened through iterative WIL experiences (Fannon, 2023), but not all students have equitable access to WIL (Mackaway et al., 2024). Some students miss opportunities to reflect on workplace practice and begin developing their professional identity (Jackson, 2017).

When career development learning (CDL) is integrated with WIL, students develop clarity and confidence in their career direction (Reddan & Rauchle, 2017). Intentional scaffolding of sustainability-relevant WIL programs (Witenstein et al., 2025) with explicitly integrated CDL can strengthen students’ ability to articulate how their values align with future career pathways (Ferns et al., 2025), positioning graduates to navigate increasingly complex and uncertain career landscapes with purpose (Monzó-Martínez et al., 2024). Recent literature explores barriers and enablers (Caldicott et al., 2026) for WIL to foster sustainability by deepening civic awareness, agency and commitment to social and environmental responsibility (Pong & Man, 2025; Salter et al., 2021). Limited systematic integration of CDL with WIL in curriculum is a missed opportunity to connect sustainability awareness, increased professional self-efficacy and career planning. This gap raises questions: How do institutions at the forefront of practice integrate CDL and WIL effectively in curriculum? How can integrated CDL and WIL develop confident and career-aware graduates with knowledge and skills associated with sustainability?

This paper examines how a multiple case study contributes to CDL-WIL integration and WIL-sustainability literature by developing five conceptual themes from 27 interviews. The remainder of the paper reviews relevant literature, describes methods, reports results, and reflects on key findings.

2. Literature Review

Business schools teach responsible management, sustainable development goals, corporate social responsibility (Narong, 2026), and environmental and social governance (Horan & Sayer, 2026), but comprehensive education for sustainability remains at an early stage of development (de la Torre & Young, 2020). Experiential and constructivist pedagogical approaches enable students to link concepts of sustainability and ethical reasoning to real-world business practice (Dziubaniuk & Nyholm, 2021) while cultivating responsible leadership mindsets aligned with sustainability (Cripps & Smith, 2024). Education for sustainability in curricula tends to be guided by frameworks, including the UN Principles for Responsible Management Education (PRME) and the UN SDGs (Narong, 2026; United Nations, 2026). Attempts to map education for sustainable development through curriculum are hampered by definitional fragmentation, uneven faculty engagement (Horan & Sayer, 2026), challenges with assessment, capability development, and integration across disciplines (Godemann et al., 2023). Despite these challenges, business schools increasingly teach sustainability (Horan & Sayer, 2026), but more systematic integration is needed to prepare graduates for complex global challenges (Elsayed et al., 2025).

Work-integrated learning facilitates authentic workplace or community-based experiences (Ferns et al., 2025) and raises sustainability awareness (Tran, 2024). Service learning is a form of WIL that enhances students’ global awareness, empathy, and civic responsibility (Chan et al., 2021), and intercultural competencies (Pong & Man, 2025). Combining WIL with sustainability curricula increases students’ social, environmental, and financial sustainability mindset (Rashed et al., 2025) while fostering interdisciplinary collaboration (Sundman et al., 2025). Engaging service-learning students with the UN SDGs promotes critical thinking, teamwork, and problem-solving abilities (Brand et al., 2025) and raises sustainability awareness (Monzó-Martínez et al., 2024). Across these different studies, cooperative and collaborative approaches embedded within WIL environments enhance systems thinking, critical reflection, and the ability to work across disciplinary and cultural boundaries to address entrenched global challenges (Bassachs et al., 2020).

WIL is an effective strategy for developing graduate employability that aligns academic knowledge and professional identity formation with authentic workplace practice (Ferns et al., 2025; Rowe & Zegwaard, 2017), but CDL is not fully integrated with WIL (Dean et al., 2024). While WIL is embedded in the curriculum by definition (Ferns et al., 2025), careers support has historically been offered as a co-curricular service. WIL develops career competencies and career self-efficacy (Caza et al., 2015), and curricular strategies can extend benefits from workplace-based WIL to other forms of WIL (Jackson & Wilton, 2016). Integrating CDL and WIL intentionally in curriculum fosters realistic career goals (Reddan & Rauchle, 2017), proactive engagement with learning, and embracing diversity. Despite these potential benefits, the boundaries between CDL, WIL and how they interact are poorly understood (Dannenberg et al., 2026). The WIL Curriculum Classification Framework articulates a framework for integrating CDL with progressive non-placement and placement WIL throughout degrees (Dean et al., 2024; Dean et al., 2020).

3. Methods

This study employed a qualitative multiple case study design (Creswell & Poth, 2025) to develop empirical themes. Case study methods were well-suited to explore the practice of work-integrated learning (Lucas, 2018). A multiple case approach facilitated comparison across cases to identify shared patterns and divergences (Creswell & Poth, 2025).

The study consisted of semi-structured interviews with WIL practitioners at seven universities in three countries (three in Australia, one in Canada and three in Thailand). The initial institution in each country was purposively selected (Patton, 2002) based on its reputation for leading practice integrating CDL with WIL in curriculum. Following an approved human research ethics protocol (Macquarie University 17024), one author invited a key contact at each institution to distribute an invitation to relevant colleagues. The effectiveness of this snowball sampling approach was facilitated by approaching personal contacts, offering face-to-face interviews and inherent sampling diversity based on the cross-institutional differences (Kirchherr & Charles, 2018). This process led to 29 semi-structured 45 min interviews. Interviews were audio-recorded, and the automated transcriptions (Microsoft Teams) were cleaned with generative AI (Microsoft Copilot M365, GPT-4o/GPT-5). The resulting rich database of participants’ experiences included insights regarding practices for integrating CDL and WIL in curriculum.

Interview data were deidentified with participants referred to as A01–A16, C01–C05 and T01–T08, based on participant affiliation with an Australian, Canadian or Thai university. One author conducted preliminary analysis with two rounds of coding, involving familiarization with the data, generation of initial codes, and development of themes and subthemes (Creswell & Poth, 2025). Preliminary analysis generated six themes, and this paper focuses on two of these—defining CDL and alignment of CDL and WIL in curriculum—and the ten subthemes that coalesced under them. A second author cross-checked the coding and thematic structure for these themes, recoding where needed to enhance analytic rigor and synthesize subthemes (Miles et al., 2014).

4. Results

The three institutions in Australia include large and very large public universities with urban, suburban, and regional campuses. One is known for teaching quality and widening participation, the second is recognized for industry engagement and practical orientation, while the third is considered an elite, research-led institution. The university in Canada is very large, public, and internationally known for its extensive cooperative education programs. The three universities in Thailand include two mid-sized to large public universities in regional to suburban environments and a third mid-sized private, urban university. The Thai universities are known for government-supported cooperative education that is linked to national development, domestic and global partnerships, and regional cooperative education training clusters.

Between one and seven participants are from each of the seven universities. Participants include 17 academic (six Lecturers and 11 Professors) and ten professional (one Advisor, two Coordinators, five Directors and two Educational Specialists) staff members with two-thirds of participants being female and the remainder male. Eleven participants are in central university roles, ten participants are in faculties, five are in hybrid central-faculty roles, and one is both a teacher and consultant to universities. Participants’ fields of expertise include business, careers, computing, engineering, health, humanities, partnerships, science and WIL. Two participants are excluded from the analysis: one industry partner and one cooperative education student, because a single participant in each category does not enable meaningful comparison or theme development. This leaves 27 interview transcripts in the analysis: 16 Australian-, five Canadian-, and six Thai-affiliated participants. The remainder of this section articulates the interview results.

Five interrelated themes emerge from the data analysis: (1) understanding CDL, WIL and how they interact, (2) the value of integrating CDL and WIL to foster engagement, access and employability, (3) the importance of consistent communication around CDL and WIL, (4) pedagogical approaches to integrating CDL and WIL, and (5) integrating CDL and WIL to develop sustainability awareness. Each theme is explored in the paragraphs below.

First, participants explore their understanding of CDL more than their understanding of WIL (Theme 1). This may be due to well-established definitions of WIL in curriculum (Ferns et al., 2025; Zegwaard et al., 2023), while careers in curriculum and integration with WIL are relatively new (Bridgstock et al., 2019). Broadly, A08 defines career development as “help[ing] an individual understand themselves, help[ing] them understand what the market looks like and what is needed, and giv[ing] them the tools to think about how they bring those two bits together”. C04 comments that “we talk about career[s] in a way that isn’t about résumés, interviews, or cover letters”. More specifically, participants identify self-assessment (A05, A09), goal setting (A05), developing professional identity (A15), building a professional network (A15), and looking after wellbeing (A06) as elements of CDL. Several of these concepts are standard in WIL curricula (Ferns et al., 2025). Dannenberg et al. (2026) represent this tension as a Venn diagram with components of CDL, components of WIL, and the area where they overlap. From interview comments, it appears Australian and Canadian participants have focused more attention on understanding CDL as it relates to WIL than Thai participants. For example, when asked to identify CDL in curriculum, T04 notes that the WIL “preparation course, which I think is similar to this CDL... we provide them with how to do resume writing [and] how to create an electronic portfolio”.

Second, participants note the value of integrating CDL and WIL in curriculum to foster engagement and increase equitable access (Theme 2). For example, A08 points out that “numbers in that co-curricular space had plummeted, obviously, during COVID”, because students have many competing “commitments, the cost of living, [and] they have to work”. In contrast, the level of participation is high when students are required to enroll in preparation courses before a WIL experience (C03, T06). Beyond student numbers, A15 identifies the importance of a “shift where students [are] encouraged to take more responsibility for their own learning and not be a passive recipient... from day one go, ‘Right, this is my degree. This is my career. I want to be actively involved with that’”. A08 articulates an equity-driven rationale for embedding CDL in curriculum, commenting that “from an equity point of view, then everybody should get access to it”. At participating institutions in Australia, students access different types of WIL, ranging from industry-linked projects in classrooms to workplace-based internships. In contrast, at participating Canadian and Thai institutions, most or all (respectively) students complete 1–4 workplace-based WIL experiences (co-op work terms) during their studies. In Australia’s distinct context, engaging students in CDL and WIL from the outset of degrees appears to align with the aim to increase time and opportunities to access high-quality and career path-relevant WIL.

Third, participants identify the importance of consistent institutional definitions of CDL and WIL and having these codified in institutional systems (Theme 3). This consistent understanding can be difficult to attain and comes from active cross-team collaboration. A15 points to their university’s commitment to “embed [employability, WIL and CDL] more systematically across” degrees during degree review cycles. A04 refers to getting back to “basic learning design to navigate opportunities for career development learning to happen constructively in the curriculum”. With that foundation, conversations could focus on “offerings that would be relevant for students” (A04), rather than which team is doing what. A10 identifies the challenge of having a “myriad of definitions” before coming to institutional agreement about definitions to embed in the career management system. These comments come from participants affiliated with the initial target university in Australia and indicate the importance of embedding common language in university systems to enable teams across the university to work toward common goals for CDL and WIL. Beyond consistent institutional understanding of CDL and WIL, participants emphasize the importance of using consistent language to make skill development visible for students. A01 notes that “if you don’t call it out, then students don’t know they’re getting this skill or that experience”, while A14 comments that explicit references or “flagging” in assessment information can be “all it takes for students to realize that they can use that [WIL experience] on their CV, in applications, as evidence”. Students need help to identify and “articulate these soft and transferable skills” (A13), which enables them to see and showcase their value. It is worth noting that all quotes related to this theme come from participants at Australian universities. This may suggest an increased need for clear and consistent terminology when CDL complements non-workplace-based forms of WIL that are embedded in units or completed on campus. Clear communication reminds staff and students that CDL and WIL are scaffolded in curriculum to support employability development.

Fourth, different approaches to intentional integration of CDL with WIL in curriculum (Theme 4) surface in interviews. High-quality WIL pedagogy has long focused on the importance of curricular support before, during and after WIL experiences (Campbell & Pretti, 2023; Campbell et al., 2019). Participants refer to building CDL as part of this curricular model. C04 comments “when we think about pedagogy and the career component, we want to make sure career is, where possible, woven through pedagogy, experience, assessment and reflection [PEAR model of WIL curriculum that articulates WIL as a cycle of pedagogical preparation, WIL experience, assessment or evaluation of the experience, and reflection on learning (McRae et al., 2018)], all sections, but for sure, before and after at the least”. This focus on CDL as part of preparing for WIL experiences emerges in multiple interviews (A12, A13, C03, T06) with C01 and A10 noting that access to CDL resources can help students secure WIL opportunities. Knowledge of current workplace practices can inform the design of CDL in pre-WIL curriculum (A13). Similarly, reflection is raised by many participants (A02, A05, A11, C02, C03, C05, T08) as a mechanism for students to strengthen CDL following WIL experiences. For example, C03 identifies “the major reflective report, where students are asked to think intentionally about the impact of their WIL experience on their understanding of the academic program or their career vision. They reflect on skill gaps, skills developed, and so on”. C02 refers to this as clarifying “self-awareness, and then there’s external awareness, and then integration”. Aside from that consistency, participants identify different approaches and challenges for integrating CDL and WIL. A10 notes the value of positioning CDL and WIL in core units, commenting that “our Bachelor of Commerce has eight core units. Three of them are CDL-WIL units, rather than sitting in a major”. Tensions between team styles and a lack of resources become apparent in efforts to scaffold CDL with WIL in curriculum at scale. For example, C04 refers to careers and WIL teams’ different ways of working, while A06 describes a lack of institutional support to build a platform to house career development opportunities for 1500–2000 students. Despite these challenges, participants note the value of integrating CDL with WIL. C01 addresses the value both for students in generalist degrees with many career pathways and for those in professional degrees “where [the career path] does appear clear... how do we shake that a little bit?... it may not be a linear path”. Across countries and institutions, participant comments indicate the value of integrating CDL with WIL to enable students to access WIL opportunities and articulate their emerging career understanding.

Fifth, participants explore how students develop sustainability awareness by engaging in CDL and WIL (Theme 5). For example, students engage with ethical practice, cultural competencies and interdisciplinary teams. In discussing the integration of CDL and WIL, A14 notes that students will enter workplaces where “these digital tools [are] available to them, and [supporting students to learn] how to use those ethically and properly” is imperative. A03 highlights the opportunity to develop international students’ “cultural capital” and expectations for Australian workplaces, including “understanding Aboriginal culture, understanding non-hierarchy, [and] equality for women”. Students who engage in interdisciplinary activities can progress from sitting in siloed discipline groups to “all helping each other... this guy who’s a chemist, you know, helping a physicist” (A05). Institutions and students can raise awareness of, and drive interest in, purposeful work. For example, at the participating Canadian institution, the “Purposeful Work Framework” prompts questions, such as “What impact do you want to make in the world? How do you want to engage? What skills do you have? What values and needs do you have?” as part of integrated CDL and WIL curriculum (C04). On the student side, A13 notes that “where [students] want to go has changed. Eight years ago, everyone wanted to go to a Big Four [large professional services firm]... Now that’s changed. They now want to be in smaller companies where they’re making impact. They care about sustainability”. These comments suggest that through integrated CDL and WIL curriculum, students develop transferable skills, such as communication, empathy, adaptability, cultural respect and ethical reasoning (Brundiers et al., 2021) associated with complex, sustainability-related problem-solving.

5. Discussion

Three key findings emerge from this multiple case study that can inform the integration of CDL with WIL to foster sustainability. First, the findings offer a clearer understanding of conditions that enable integration of CDL and WIL within the curriculum. Second, the context of participating institutions informs the importance of integrating CDL with WIL throughout degrees, particularly where access to workplace-based WIL is relatively low. And third, the findings suggest how institutions can operationalize key insights from interviews to advance education for sustainability.

5.1. Integrating CDL More Explicitly with WIL Curriculum

Many of the observations are not new in the WIL space. The importance of curricular support before, during and after WIL experiences (Campbell et al., 2019; McRae et al., 2018), planning and preparing for WIL activities (Ferns et al., 2025), reflecting on learning, and scaffolding WIL through degrees (Dean et al., 2020) are well-established. The first key insight is into mechanisms that enable CDL to be positioned effectively alongside and integrated with WIL. For example, having consistent and clear institution-wide definitions for CDL and WIL and embedding these definitions in institutional systems enables academic, operational, and leadership staff to name and work toward common goals. Operationalizing associated shifts during regular degree review cycles and scaffolding CDL and WIL in core units can maximize the extent to which CDL and WIL initiatives are perceived as a solution and achieve scale, respectively.

Clear and consistent understanding and communication at an institutional level needs to be mirrored by clear and consistent communication with students. This can involve noting skill development, such as self-assessment, collaborative problem-solving and interdisciplinary teamwork, in learning activities and assessments. It can also involve engaging students in co-creation of learning opportunities. When students have voice in their learning, they become agents of their learning, career direction and skill development (Drewery & Eady, 2026). A mutually reinforcing cycle becomes apparent: students engage with CDL when they see it leading to WIL or employment, and CDL equips them to secure these opportunities. Curricular support offers avenues for students to develop career plans, identify skill gaps, and engage with WIL, increasing benefits from both CDL and WIL.

The second key insight is the importance of integrating CDL with WIL throughout degrees, particularly where access to workplace-based WIL is relatively low. Workplace-based WIL is perceived as the strongest avenue for employability development (Jackson & Dean, 2023), particularly when students have iterative workplace WIL experiences (Fannon, 2023). WIL activities can be successively embedded in degrees (Dean et al., 2020) with increasing proximity to the workplace and authenticity relative to professional practice (Kaider et al., 2017). Data in this study indicate that intentionally designed and scaffolded CDL can increase authenticity and strengthen employability development even when combined with lower proximity forms of WIL. One study participant (A02) affirms the value of simulations, for example, noting “These are things you can’t do in the real world—you can’t stop, time out, talk, and then time the student back in to either continue or rewind and start again”. With intentional design CDL and WIL can be combined to help students progress from lower-authenticity WIL to higher-quality WIL.

At the participating Thai universities, all the students complete a co-op work term (workplace-based WIL) in the final year of their degree. Students are required to complete a co-op unit that integrates CDL before and after their WIL experience. The participating Canadian university offers CDL to help students access co-op work terms. Most students (approximately 75%) complete four work terms to graduate with a co-op degree. Students are highly motivated to engage with the co-op preparation units early in their degrees as a support to secure work terms. Those students who are unsuccessful in securing a first work term can complete a non-workplace-based WIL activity to develop skills with CDL support to increase the likelihood of securing a work term in the next round. The context of the participating Australian universities is quite different. Some disciplines, such as education, engineering and nursing, have workplace-based WIL built into degrees, but most do not. Integrating CDL with non-workplace-based WIL early in degrees can introduce students to the concept of career self-management and the value of applying their discipline in practice. This heightened awareness, skills developed, and ability to articulate their value can help them secure workplace-based WIL. Scaffolding CDL and WIL into classroom-based learning experiences is particularly important for equity-deserving students who may not have the networks or flexibility to undertake workplace-based WIL experiences (Mackaway et al., 2024).

5.2. Examining CDL, WIL and Sustainability in Practice

The third key insight relates to how an institution can scaffold CDL with WIL to teach sustainability. Interview participants identify opportunities to engage students through CDL and WIL curriculum with sustainability-relevant topics, such as ethical practice, cultural competencies, interdisciplinary teams, and purposeful work. These elements contribute to raising awareness of sustainability and developing skills to address complex societal and environmental challenges. While the interview data imply that with strategic and careful planning, CDL and WIL curriculum can be scaffolded to engage students with sustainability, a comprehensive example does not emerge from the interviews. This prompts the authors to reflect on an example from their own curriculum design, teaching, or studying experience (Bilous et al., 2018; Fleming, 2018) that demonstrates how these findings can be applied in practice. The aim is to share one example of combining CDL and WIL scaffolded across a degree to advance sustainability.

In the Bachelor of Commerce (BCom) degree at a large, suburban university in Australia, CDL and classroom-based WIL are integrated to develop sustainability. Sustainability is intentionally scaffolded into a second-year cornerstone and a third-year capstone unit to meet the associated school competency goal. In the cornerstone unit, students complete a simulated internship to practice teamwork and complete a professional-style project (classroom-based WIL). Later, they engage with their classmates in a DEI role play with built-in issues of power imbalance and knowledge gaps designed to help students identify and overcome the biases they bring to working relationships (CDL, sustainability). For the cornerstone final assessment, students work in teams to apply a sustainability lens, such as being ethical in a digital world, to a professional skill they developed through the unit (CDL, sustainability). The interdisciplinary capstone project reinforces sustainability knowledge. Students from different business disciplines form teams, select an SDG, and design a business project to advance that goal (classroom-based WIL, sustainability). Project activities are scaffolded in weekly tutorials addressing DEI, conflict resolution and consulting (CDL), offering structure for teams to develop different elements of their project each week. Students take their disciplinary perspective as they work with their team to address the challenge. To develop interdisciplinary knowledge and skills (sustainability), BCom and Bachelor of Science students pitch their project proposals to each other. Both teams engage in giving and receiving feedback (CDL). This multi-part, interdisciplinary project is designed to develop skills, including communication, collaboration, complex problem-solving, and critical thinking while fostering awareness and knowledge related to sustainability (Karunaratne, 2022). Skills relevant to sustainability are reinforced through assessments that raise sustainability awareness, helping to address a gap in effective interdisciplinary team assessments for sustainability (Sørensen & Stenalt, 2025).

This example demonstrates how an institution can integrate CDL and classroom-based WIL with aims to develop employability and advance sustainability. Coordinated effort, including leadership, planning across units and consistent staff- and student-facing communication, is an essential part of raising the value of iterative classroom-based WIL experiences built into degrees. This series of scaffolded experiences that integrates CDL and WIL may have more value in contexts where students have lower access to workplace-based WIL, such as the Australian institutions included in this study. Where relevant, students benefit from completing CDL and WIL content in complementary units (Reddan & Rauchle, 2017) that include explicit communication about scaffolded development of sustainability knowledge and skills.

6. Conclusions

The findings of this multiple case study contribute to two emerging bodies of academic literature: integration of CDL with WIL in curriculum and the contribution of WIL to fostering engagement with sustainability. The findings indicate that integrating CDL and WIL in curriculum intentionally and with institutional support can advance employability aims, including developing sustainability. The applied case offers examples for scaffolding learning activities and assessments beyond unit boundaries. These contributions are timely given business students’ commitment to building impactful careers (de la Torre & Young, 2020).

Future research can address some of the limitations of this study, such as the lack of data to explore student perspectives, employment context or the impact of these interventions on employability outcomes (Lin-Stephens et al., 2024) and commitment to sustainability.