Search results

A range of models of employability implicitly or directly identify potential drivers of motivated behaviour related to engaging in employment-related outcomes whilst acknowledging that employability is also about developing life skills. Motivational theorists suggest that tasks engaged for external purposes, e.g. working towards an employment-related goal, are experienced differently than (those same) tasks engaged in for less external reasons, e.g. the desire for knowledge. Whilst there are excellent examples of the use of motivational theory in some models of employability, sometimes the evidence is either outdated, incorrectly interpreted or fails to use the most appropriate motivational theory. The aim of this paper is to bring to attention several prominent motivational theories and some key evidence that seems most pertinent across models of employability.

As this was a non-empirical design, the approach did not fit any research design methodology or structured, systematic or meta-analysis review. The paper outlines a series of arguments by reviewing in detail several theories of motivation and mapping them against current models of employability.

From a theoretical point of perspective, it is suggested that Expectancy Value Theory needs to be considered when creating models of employability. It is also suggested that motivation for employment-related tasks is probably extrinsic, though evidence suggests that forms of extrinsic motivation can also be motivationally adaptive. Several models posit self-efficacy as a driver of motivated behaviour, but the evidence suggests a clear and consistent interactive relationship between subjective task value and self-efficacy, suggesting that self-efficacy is only a useful predictor when value is high.

Whilst the aim of models of employability is to improve our understanding of the predictors of employability behaviours, the practical consequence is the development of appropriate curriculum. Understanding which features of employability create adaptive and maladaptive motivation should help educators create curriculum that produces optimal engagement and performance.

Models of employability are mostly created using bodies of extant evidence. In this paper, we have tried to identify where some of the interpretation of the evidence has been more or less appropriate. We hope that ideas and evidence in this paper will allow theorists, where appropriate, to re-develop their models.

The purpose of this paper is to present research into approaches to employability and entrepreneurship education at two universities: one British (The University of Central Lancashire “UCLan”) and one Chinese (Shanghai Institute of Foreign Trade “SIFT”). It explores the similarities and differences in an approach to employability and entrepreneurship education and illustrates best practice.

A combination of questionnaires, observations and statistical comparisons are taken from a PMI2 exchange project (Second Prime Minister's Initiative for International Education) funded by the British Council.

Fundamentally different philosophies in the two countries lead to different models and approaches. Examples of best practices in employability and entrepreneurship education in a global context are highlighted. Models of employability are discussed and the challenges, opportunities and possibilities of future work are also presented.

The paper will be of value to teachers and researchers forging links between universities in the UK and China, in particular those that wish to support and encourage employability and entrepreneurship within their curricula.

The paper helps to clarify the similarities and differences in approach to employability and entrepreneurship education in the UK and China and offers suggestions for enhancing the success of such collaborations.

There is an increasing awareness that higher education (HE) institutions face significant challenges in managing and supporting students as they transition into university life. If HE institutions struggle to achieve this important aim, this can lead to an increase in student drop-out. This can of course present significant financial implications and challenges and worse still, result in mental health challenges in students. The concept of Mental Toughness (MT) has been shown in a substantial number of investigations, to develop our understanding of why some people might be more vulnerable to these pressures than others. Importantly, it provides both a means of identifying those people and insights about ways they can be best supported. This chapter proposes a well-researched MT framework to facilitate and support universities with these challenges and highlights three key strategies for managing this successfully.

There has been little empirical research conducted in relation to graduate employability and diagnostic tools available in this area are very limited. The purpose of this paper is to introduce and explore the factor structure of a new measure of employability development, the CareerEDGE Employability Development Profile (EDP).

The EDP was completed by 807 undergraduate students, providing data for exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses.

The analyses suggest that the EDP is multidimensional and maps clearly onto the CareerEDGE model of graduate employability.

These findings are discussed and interpreted as offering support for the use of the EDP with students as a developmental tool and as a measurement tool for use in the design, implementation and evaluation of employability interventions or other research purposes.

The provision of a practical employability development tool that is suitable for use with students of any Higher Education institution. The findings also add to the limited literature on graduate employability.

The purpose of this paper is to introduce a straightforward, practical model of employability that will allow the concept to be explained easily and that can be used as a framework for working with students to develop their employability.

The model was developed from existing research into employability issues and the experience of the authors. The various elements of employability included in the model are discussed and their inclusion justified on the basis of existing research.

The model sets out exactly what is meant by employability, in clear and simple terms, and the model suggests directions for interaction between the various elements.

The relationships between and the interaction of the elements within the model remain theoretical. Further research to test the model is planned and will be reported on at a later date.

The model can be used to explain the concept of employability to those new to the subject, and particularly to students and their parents. It will be a useful tool for lecturers, personal tutors, careers advisors and any other practitioners involved in employability activities. It will also be used to develop a measurement tool for employability.

This paper seeks to fill the gap between in‐depth, scholarly and complex articles or books about employability and very simple descriptive articles. It will be of value to anybody with an interest in employability issues.

The purpose of this paper is to discuss how the terms “employability”, “enterprise” and “entrepreneurship” are currently being used, often interchangeably, within higher education, and to propose how to clarify this issue with the terminology.

The approach taken is to discuss the three terms and some of their current conceptualisations and suggest ways to clarify the terminology. Possible methods of operationalising the three concepts within higher education are also suggested.

Employability, enterprise and entrepreneurship are high on the agendas of many higher education institutions. There is a crucial need for agreement on definitions particularly when strategies are being implemented. It is suggested that currently the terminology is often used carelessly and interchangeably, resulting in confusion for HE staff, students and employers.

The paper offers a clear way of defining the concepts and will be of value to anybody with an interest in employability, enterprise or entrepreneurship within higher education.

The purpose of this paper is to obtain a shared understanding of entrepreneurship education and to evaluate the effectiveness of employability and enterprise division in current fashion courses and amongst the students between a British and a Chinese university (UClan and SCAU).

It is a three‐stage action‐oriented PMI2 project (Second Prime Minister's Initiative for International Education) in fashion entrepreneurship, which was funded by the British Council. This paper presents the findings of the first stage of the research project. A combination of literature reviews, participant observation, semi‐structured interviews and focus groups were employed to deliver the results at this stage.

The findings represent similarities and differences between UClan and SCAU related to enterprise entrepreneurship education: identify rationale of evaluating fashion entrepreneurship education; and clarify a shared understanding of entrepreneurship education and the purpose of evaluating the effectiveness.

Due to geographical restrictions and limited resources, smaller‐scale samples were selected to gain a deeper insight into different approaches to fashion enterprise and entrepreneurship education between UClan and SCAU.

This research will be valuable to academics who wish to develop or enhance fashion entrepreneurship education, in particular with regards to forging links between universities in the UK and China.

This paper will increase awareness of fashion entrepreneurship amongst students, graduates and academics.

This research contributes to the current knowledge and best practice of fashion entrepreneurship education.

The purpose of this paper is to investigate the relationship between work placements and employability, through an analysis of the impact of a work placement on students’ self-efficacy.

The basis of this paper is a large-scale work-based learning module at the University of Birmingham, the “Professional Development Module”. Students completed questionnaires both before and after they undertaken their placements and the results from the questionnaires were compared. These results were then combined with the results of semi-structured interviews undertaken with students.

The paper's findings support the view that a work placement has a positive impact on students’ self-efficacy, especially in relation to their confidence in making applications and/or attending interviews, and in articulating their skills and strengths.

While the relatively small sample size means that the paper's conclusions must remain provisional, it highlights the need for careers practitioners to encourage students to engage in critical self-reflection. The paper suggests that it is important for careers practitioners and researchers to engage in more collaborative projects in order for a fully rounded picture of the relationship between placements and employability to emerge. The paper shows that more research is needed into the relative impact of short- and long-term placements.

The paper demonstrates the value of assessing students’ views both before and after their work placements so that these views can be compared directly.

The purpose of this paper is to analyze the relationship between theory and history, or more specifically the role and use of theory in the field of history of education. It will explore the following questions: What is theory, and what is it for? How do historians and, in particular, historians of education construe and use theory? And how do they respond to openly theoretical work? The author poses these questions in light of ongoing discussions in the field of history of education regarding the role, relevance, and utility of theory in historical research, analysis, and narratives.

The explicit use of theory in historical research is not altogether new, tracing an intellectual genealogy since the mid-1800s when disciplinary boundaries among academic fields were not so rigidly defined, developed and regulated. The paper analyzes three books that are geographically located in North America (USA), Australia, Europe (Great Britain) and Asia (India), thereby offering a transnational view of the use of theory in history of education. It also examines how historians of education respond to explicitly theoretical work by analyzing, as a case study, a 2011 special issue in History of Education Quarterly.

First, the paper delineates theory as a multidimensional concept and practice with varying and competing meanings and interpretations. Second, it examines three book-length historical studies of education that employ theoretical frameworks drawing from cultural, feminist poststructuralist and postcolonial approaches. The author’s analysis of these manuscripts reveals that historians of education who explicitly engage with theory pursue their research in reflexive, disruptive and generative modes. Lastly, it utilizes a recent scholarly exchange as a case study of how some historians of education respond to theoretically informed work. It highlights three lenses – reading with insistence, for resistance, and beyond – to understand the responses to the author’s paper on Foucault and poststructuralism.

Setting theory to work has a fundamentally transformative role to play in our thinking, writing and teaching as scholars, educators and students and in the productive re-imagining of history of education.