Rethinking integration: Paradoxes as systemic tensions in thesis-based work-integrated learning

Abstract

Work-integrated learning (WIL) is frequently framed as integration of theory and practice through collaboration between higher education and workplace organisations. This article examines practice-based bachelor’s and master’s theses as a demanding form of WIL, where workplace relevance and academic assessment must be coordinated around a shared student project. Drawing on 17 semi-structured interviews with academic staff and workplace representatives in Norwegian higher education in business administration and cultural industries, the study analyses how tensions concerning belonging, learning and organising shape the conditions for collaboration in thesis-based WIL. The findings show that collaboration can be experienced as meaningful and workable even when integration remains partial. Integration unfolds less as full alignment than as translation, coordination and adjustment across different academic and organisational criteria. The study shows that the coupling between higher education and workplace organisations is asymmetrical: academic criteria of validity remain central, while organisational relevance must be translated into academically assessable knowledge. Responsibility for managing these tensions is often shifted to individual actors, particularly students and supervisors. Thesis-based WIL is therefore both productive and vulnerable, as it depends on local coordination, individual commitment and informal solutions. The article contributes by conceptualising thesis-based WIL as a loosely coupled arrangement rather than seamless integration