Innovate Higher Education to Enhance Graduate Employability

Rethinking the Possibilities

Hong Bui, Hoa Nguyen, Doug Cole, Hong T. M. Bui, Hoa T. M. Nguyen, Doug Cole

• Publisher: Routledge
• Year: 2019
• ISBN:
  9780429602696
• Edition: 1
• Topic: Education
• Subtopic: Education General

The worldwide marketization of higher education has resulted in a growing pressure on universities' accountability, particularly in terms of more tangible learning outcomes directly related to paying higher tuition fees. Covering globally diverse perspectives, Innovate Higher Education to Enhance Graduate Employability uses a range of international case studies to help practitioners and researchers review, reflect on and refresh their ability to bridge the gap between university and industry.

A timely response to the need to improve the quality of higher education in order to build work readiness in students, this book:

• 
  
  

• Adds a critical, global dimension to this topical area in higher education as well as society's concerns

• 
  
  

• Provides a number of practice-based case studies on how universities can transform their programmes to enhance graduate employability

• 
  
  

• Acts as a source of practical suggestions for how to improve students' sufficient employability including their skills, knowledge and attitudes

• 
  
  

• Provides insights from theory, practices and policy perspectives.

A crucial read for anyone looking to engage with the global issue of graduate employability, Innovate Higher Education to Enhance Graduate Employability covers both theoretical frameworks and practical models through an exploration of how universities around the world are using innovative techniques to enhance employability.

1

HIGHER EDUCATION, INNOVATION, AND EMPLOYABILITY

Hong T. M. Bui and Hoa T. M. Nguyen

Higher education

Higher education in the world has experienced tremendous growth with increasingly marketized and privatized services in order to meet society’s pressing demand for education (Mok, 2016). Governments in many countries have considered education an effective strategy to enhance international partnerships, public diplomacy, and economic growth. The ‘education as trade’ perspective comes with increased competition and pressures higher education institutions (HEIs) to transform and innovate to achieve excellence so they can attract and retain high-quality students (Hewitt-Dundas & Roper, 2018) and produce quality graduates to meet the growing demands of the work force (Boden & Nedeva, 2010; Mason et al., 2009; Yorke, 2006).

Higher education, with its significant expansion and complexity, also faces the challenge to keep up with societal changes such as internationalization and information technology progress. Lašáková et al. (2017), in their case study of ten European universities, concluded that the barriers to innovation in higher education are also barriers to social development, including “lack of transparency, corruption, nepotism, economic instability, rigid control, distrust and lack of collaboration” (p. 70). At the institutional level, the challenges are various – the impractical curriculum, the outdated curriculum, lack of investment in technology, poorly qualified staff, the lack of connection between current teaching and learning practices and the demands of the labour market, employers’ expectations, and students’ needs to name a few (Jackson, 2013; Lašáková et al., 2017).

The slowness in adopting emerging technology also hinders universities’ ability to compete in the current challenging market. High-quality teaching, research, and modern technology are crucial for universities to become globally recognized to attract both domestic and international students. A lack of funding and resources is a barrier to technological progress and updated facilities of higher education and creates staff inefficiencies and a lack of social opportunities for students (Drape et al., 2016). In other words, resources are not keeping pace with the rapid and large enrolment of fee-paying students in HEIs.

With the substantial increase in costs associated with universities, students and society expect more and more of their results, being the enhanced probability of vocational success (Vedder, 2017) or, in other words, students’ employability. Generally, employers and policy-makers expect higher education to increase students’ marketable skills and/or employable skills (e.g. Asonitou, 2015; Boden & Nedeva, 2010). Graduate employability, in fact, has become one of the most important factors in university rankings worldwide and a key means to attract students. Nevertheless, student employability is being hindered by impractical curricula, among other things, creating a graduate skills gap (Chan & Lin, 2016; Tran, 2018).

However, it is unfair to blame the gaps in skill formation of graduates on HEIs alone. A body of research shows the lack of linkage between institutions and industry. HEIs generally are at the crossroads of traditional liberal arts education and industry preparation. The tension between business and academia remains strong due to conflicting interests, resulting in a dissatisfaction on both sides of the partnership (Derouet & Villani, 2015).

The massification of higher education, furthermore, has resulted in unemployment, insecure work, and the slow growth of salary level of graduates (Mok & Jiang, 2018). Recent studies have consistently shown that the competitiveness of the job market due to a large number of graduates has caused a lot of difficulty for graduates to find jobs that match their knowledge and skill sets (Mok, 2016). This has resulted in over-qualification, where new graduates have to take low salary positions that do not require high skill levels, which is demotivating. Some researchers argue that the enrolments in HEIs now are higher than the number of good, high-paying jobs, known as ‘over-investment’ in higher education (Vedder, 2017). This has the potential to alienate both students and the public. The increasing demands from the neoliberal government, employers, and students themselves have positioned graduate employability as an evolving driver of change in higher education worldwide (Cox & King, 2006; Sin & Neave, 2016). This echoes the need for an innovative transformation of higher education. The term innovation has been widely discussed in education as a new trend in implementing radical changes to address a number of concerns.

Innovation in higher education

Innovation is also crucial for HEIs to empower their roles and innovation capabilities (Hamid et al., 2015). “The role of the university goes far beyond the ‘engine of innovation’ perspective. Universities contribute much more than simply pumping out commercial technology or generating startup companies” (Florida et al., 2006, p. 35). Tierney and Lanford (2016) highlighted four challenges confronting higher education when thinking about innovation. These are the emergence of the knowledge-intensive economy, the need to train a creative and innovative workforce, global trends in higher education (massification vs. world-class aspirations), and decreased funding and resources for higher education. Christensen and Eyring (2011, p. xxii) argued that universities are at “great risk of competitive disruption and potentially poised for an innovation-fuelled renaissance”.

Lueddeke (1999) developed a framework called the adaptive-generative development model that guides change and innovation in higher education. The model comprises six interrelated elements, including needs analysis, research and development, strategy formation and development, resource support, implementation and dissemination, and evaluation. The model has been applied in teaching, learning, and curriculum innovation (e.g. Furco & Moely, 2012; Harvey & Kamvounias, 2008; Larkin & Richardson, 2013). There are three functions in higher education innovation systems, namely, education, research, and engagement (Brennan et al., 2014). However, within the scope of this book, we focus on innovation in the function of education in its relationship with graduate employability. We may possibly explore innovation in research and engagement in future books.

Regarding innovation in higher education, scholars have mainly discussed pedagogical innovation and technology-enhanced innovation. For example, Chhokar (2010) presented a case in India which sought to innovate its curriculum for sustainable development by embedding philosophy, policy, and practice in higher education. Christensen and Eyring (2011) showed that universities have reengineered themselves by embracing online learning technology. Online learning is seen to be a classic example of a disruptive technology (Christensen & Eyring, 2011), introducing a unique and exciting era in higher education in which the use of multimedia and interactive simulations or games in online learning are increasing (Kim & Bonk, 2006). Salmon (2005) developed a strategic framework that blends e-learning and pedagogical innovation. This innovation can personalize individual learning needs. Salmon (2005, p. 215) concluded that “focusing on e-learning is a key way of providing for multidisciplinary and interdisciplinary research agendas in the applications of core and peripheral learning technologies and the associated innovative pedagogy”. Fidalgo-Blanco et al. (2014) developed a conceptual framework which combines epistemological and ontological knowledge spirals to transform individuals’ educational innovation experiences into organizational knowledge. Lytras et al. (2018) stated that innovative use of ICT tools in higher education can engage students in the learning process, empower them, and enhance their employability. In contrast, Martín et al. (2015) looked at innovation in higher education from a behavioural perspective. Their study showed that previous innovation behaviours as freshmen, current levels of autonomy, and cognitive demands are key factors that determine students’ innovation in higher education.

Graduate employability

Graduate employability has attracted substantial attention from wider society because of higher fees and stronger competition in the higher education sector (Tomlinson, 2007). Employability is a complex, and somewhat vague, concept that is difficult to articulate and define (Andrews & Higson, 2008; Clark, 2017). What constitutes graduate employability is controversial and varies. However, most definitions encompass a certain set of work-ready skills for employment. For example, Yorke and Knight (2006) defined employability as a set of achievements including skills, knowledge, and personal attributes that make people more employable and successful in their career, and benefit the workforce and wider society. These concepts of employability have been developed based on the assumption that there is a big gap between what has been taught at university and what is required for the work force.

As a result, universities and scholars have worked hard to enhance graduate employability. Andrews and Higson (2008) argued that to be employable, graduates need both ‘soft’ skills, such as communication skills and team working skills, and ‘hard’ business knowledge, such as qualifications and the ability to apply theoretical and conceptual knowledge to real-life business situations. Alongside soft skills and hard business knowledge, Bridgstock (2009) suggested that graduate employability could be enhanced through developing career development skills. Holmes (2001) highlighted the role of social practices and graduate identity, which are significant for understanding human behaviour in certain social arenas (e.g. certain workplace environments). This leads to suggestions for curriculum improvement intended to help students gain entry into and be successful in graduate employment. Pool and Sewell (2007) developed a practical model of graduate employability called CareerEDGE, in which career development, work and life experience, degree (subject knowledge, understanding, and skills), generic skills, and emotional intelligence are key to employability. However, the issue of employability moves beyond the enhancement of these skills in higher education to the supply and demand of the labour market. Such argument is well embedded in Clarke’s (2017) definition of graduate employability, which encompasses four main interrelated components: human capital, social capital, individual behaviours, and individual attributes. This opens a new agenda in reforms in higher education which focus on the interplay among different factors and equip graduates with more employment opportunities.

The link between higher education innovation and graduate employability

This book is the first attempt to show the link between innovation in higher education and graduate employability in particular. It is designed to serve students, researchers, and practitioners in higher education who are interested in innovation and student employability. It covers internationally diverse perspectives of innovations in higher education which ultimately enhance graduate employability. Each chapter has been developed from current research or/and research-based practice to showcase the best practices in higher education to enhance graduate employability in varied contexts. This book has been organized in order to present a wide range of innovation in higher education in diverse contexts. There are three main sections in this book highlighted in the following overview.

The largest section is about conceptualization related to employability. In Chapter 2, Hong T. M. Bui from the University of Bath (UK) proposes building multidisciplinary programmes that engage industry to enhance graduate employability. She argues that most of the collaboration between universities and industry is based on single disciplines, which provide students a narrow view of the world. This needs to be changed by developing multidisciplinary programmes at universities.

Chapter 3 provides a review of theoretical foundations of entrepreneurship education and recommends a toolbox for knowledge commercialization and engagement with entrepreneurial communities. Maksim Belitski from the University of Reading (UK) argue that if universities commit to entrepreneurial education, it will result in greater engagement with local entrepreneurial communities, co-curriculum educational development, new venture creation, and academic spin-offs.

In Chapter 4, Jill Jameson from the University of Greenwich (UK) suggests that it is critical for universities to develop trust and leadership skills for students to avoid future economic and value crises. These skills can enhance their employability for the ethical business world.

In Chapter 5, Daniela Bariakova from the University of Southampton (UK...

Table of contents

• Cover Page
• Half Title
• Title Page
• Copyright Page
• Table of Contents
• List of Contributors
• 1 Higher Education, Innovation, and Employability
• 2 Building Multidisciplinary Programmes that Engage Industry: A Critical Task for Higher Education to Enhance Graduate Employability
• 3 Entrepreneurship Ecosystems in Higher Education
• 4 Developing Innovative Student Leadership for Enhanced Graduate Employability
• 5 A Systematic Review of Social Innovation in Higher Education Systems as a Driver of Student Employability: The Case of EE Countries
• 6 Facilitating Students’ (Doctoral) Transition to the Workplace: A Critical Review
• 7 Leading Innovation Centres in Higher Education Institutions in Developing Countries: Ensuring Graduate Employability
• 8 Developing Business-Ready Graduates: Teaching Inside Out
• 9 Engagement with Asia via the New Colombo Plan: Impact on Australian Students’ Career Directions and Employability
• 10 Teaching Towards Graduate Attributes: How Much does this Approach Help Australian Graduates with Employability?
• 11 Embedding Entrepreneurial Skills Within Computing
• 12 Entrepreneurship Education and Employability Agenda in Malaysia
• 13 Graduate Employability in Vietnam: An Initial Study on Responding of Policy Makers
• 14 Graduate Employability: Beyond the Skills Agenda
• Index