Most eWIL research (15 of 22 reviewed studies) examines technology used backstage to support WIL processes rather than to deliver WIL¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · review r2 · q2
Currency · newest study 2017 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q2 i? Of the 22 articles included in the systematic review, the majority (15) focus on technology used in the support or backstage processes of WIL, such as information management. → Schuster 2017

Evidence¶

Schuster 2017¶

Schuster, Lisa & Glavas, Charmaine (2017). Exploring the dimensions of electronic work integrated learning (eWIL). Educational Research Review, 21, pp. 55-66. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2017.04.001

q2 · i? · review · r2

Systematic review of 22 included publications; the results section reports the distribution of studies across the typology, with the majority addressing support functions such as information management, e.g. web-based portals and intranet placement platforms.

"Of the 22 articles included in this review, the majority (15) focus on the use of technology backstage or in the support processes of WIL, such as information management (Table 1, see “technology-supported” and “technology-facilitated”)."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Key challenges for eWIL include securing partner organizations, lack of support systems, software quality, staff training and equity of access — related
• Technology can remove geographical barriers and allow rural and external students to engage in WIL activities — related
• Only 3 of 22 reviewed studies examine technology-blended delivery of WIL, and 4 examine fully technology-based WIL — related
• Technologies are used to assess student performance during WIL, commonly via online reflective journals and e-portfolios — related