The differentiation between ‘Work-as-Done’ and ‘Work-as-Imagined’ originated in the aeronautical world to describe the disparity between the operation of systems as they are conceived and designed, and how they function in practice. However, this concept is equally relevant in the educational field. In education, there often exists a significant gap between how educators and administrators envision the teaching-learning process will be carried out, and the everyday reality in classrooms. This discrepancy can impact the effectiveness of teaching, the implementation of new technologies and educational methods, and ultimately, the success of students and educators.
Work-as-Imagined in Education
Work-as-Imagined in Education refers to how educators, administrators, and educational policy designers ideally visualize all components of the teaching and learning process and school life. This includes meticulously designed curriculums, innovative teaching methods, and the integration of advanced educational technologies. For instance, a classroom program might be designed with the expectation that students will actively participate in group projects, discussions, and research-based activities. Additionally, educators might envision that integrating digital tools and online platforms will significantly enrich the learning process. This looks great on paper.
However, this simplified vision often fails to account for the diversity of students’ learning needs and styles, as well as the practical challenges teachers face in the classroom. For example, the effectiveness of digital tools depends on access to technology and the technological training of both students and teachers. Similarly, implementing group projects can be challenging due to differences in students’ collaboration and communication skills. This idealism often leads to a discrepancy between what is expected in theory and what is feasible in practice.
Work-as-Done in Education
Work-as-Done in Education is what actually happens in classrooms and schools. Unlike Work-as-Imagined, Work-as-Done is influenced by factors such as the classroom environment, individual student characteristics, available resources, regulations, unforeseen events, and other practical limitations. For example, while a curriculum may emphasize student-centered teaching and collaborative learning, the reality in the classroom might be that teachers resort to more traditional, directive teaching methods due to time constraints, large student groups, or personal pedagogical limitations.
In reality, educators often must and need to adapt or modify their teaching methods to accommodate a variety of learning styles and needs. For instance, a teacher might need to simplify a group project or use more traditional methods of instruction to ensure all students are engaged and learning effectively. Moreover, issues like lack of technology access or insufficient training can make the integration of digital tools less effective than expected. This gap between Work-as-Imagined and Work-as-Done can significantly impact the effectiveness of the educational process.
Challenges in Bridging the Gap
The gap between these two types of work realities in education presents several significant challenges. One major issue is the frustration of both educators and students when expectations are not met. As John Dewey, a prominent philosopher and educator, said:
This highlights the importance of constantly adapting our educational strategies to classroom realities.
A clear example is when educators face student resistance towards new teaching methods that are theoretically more effective. Furthermore, the implementation of technology in the classroom is often hindered by limitations such as inadequate training for teachers and students, and the inadequacy of technological resources in many educational centers.
Another challenge is educator burnout due to the constant need to adapt to a rapidly changing environment and unrealistic expectations. This gap can also lead to inaccurate assessments of student and teacher performance, as evaluation methods may not adequately reflect the actual classroom conditions.
Overcoming the Gap
To bridge the gap between Work-as-Imagined and Work-as-Done in education, realistic planning and a flexible, continuously adaptive mindset are crucial. As Paulo Freire noted:
This means that educators must be prepared to modify their approaches and strategies in response to the changing needs and circumstances of the classroom.
An effective strategy is implementing constant feedback cycles and self-assessment, where educators receive input from both students and other education professionals. This allows for timely adjustments in teaching methods and assessment strategies. Furthermore, ongoing training and professional development are essential for educators to be equipped with the skills and knowledge necessary to handle the diversity and challenges of the modern classroom. By focusing on adaptability, continuous feedback, and professional development, educators can move closer to a balance between the idealized and the practical, thus enhancing the educational experience for themselves and their students.
References
- Shorrock, S. (2016). Work as imagined and work as done: Mind the gap. O’Reilly Media.
- Hollnagel, E. (2015). Why is work-as-imagined different from work-as-done? En R. L. Wears, E. Hollnagel, & J. Braithwaite (Eds.), Resilient Health Care: The resilience of everyday clinical work (Vol. 2, pp. 249-264). Ashgate.
- Braithwaite, J., Wears, R. L., & Hollnagel, E. (Eds.). (2016). Resilient Health Care: Reconciling Work-as-Imagined and Work-as-Done. CRC Press.
- Hollnagel, E. (2015). Why is work-as-imagined different from work-as-done? En W. B. R. Vincent & E. Hollnagel (Eds.), Safety in healthcare: Connecting work as imagined and work as done (pp. 15-22). CRC Press.