Teichler_Research on the Relationships Between Higher Education and the World of Work- Past...

7/28/2019 Teichler_Research on the Relationships Between Higher Education and the World of Work- Past Achievements, Pro…

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/teichlerresearch-on-the-relationships-between-higher-education-and-the-world 1/22

Higher Education 38: 169–190, 1999.

© 1999 Kluwer Academic Publishers. Printed in the Netherlands.169

Research on the relationships between higher education and the

world of work: Past achievements, problems and new challenges

ULRICH TEICHLERCentre for Research on Higher Education and Work, University of Kassel, Germany

Abstract. The review of major research approaches and themes suggests that research on the

relationships between higher education and the world of work has been closely linked during

the recent three to four decades to changing themes of policy and practise. There were some

indicators of research in this area being an agent of subordination of higher education to the

employment system, being quantitative-structurally biased, tending to reproduce the actors’

myths and being stuck in the over-education debate. A closer look, however, reveals that the

range of research approaches is very broad and that a common core of themes and approachesemerged which provides the opportunity of examining controversial hypotheses. It is finally

suggested that research in this area should be based on anticipation of likely changing condi-

tions in the future, e.g. trends towards ‘precarious’ or ‘flexible’ employment, towards a ‘mass’

or ‘abundance’ paradigm, towards a ‘life-long learning society’ and towards an ‘international’

or ‘global’ labour market.

Introduction

Research on the relationships between higher education and the world of

work tends to reflect the public debates in that area. Most of the research

approaches chosen and most of the questions raised seem to mirror to a

certain extent the hopes and concerns expressed by the policy actors and

practitioners involved. One might ask, however, whether research in this area

just reiterates the public debates, or whether there are specific dynamics in

research which limit the scope on the one hand and on the other transcend

it beyond the public debates. How does research approach the currently

dominant issues, and does it draw our attention to newly emerging changes

in the relationships between higher education and work?

The aim of the following analysis is to indicate the ways the mainstream of

the respective research in industrialized societies has addressed the dominant

policy issues regarding the relationships between higher education and the

world of work over the about last three decades. Also, the question will beraised whether research is prepared to observe and address changes in the

relationships between higher education and the world of work which are

visible at the horizon and are likely to occur in the future.



170 ULRICH TEICHLER

The approach of this paper is based on the assumption that social research

will gain both in academic quality and social relevance if the researchers

involved reflect the extent to which they are likely to be driven by the Zeitgeist

of the issues typically addressed. There might be opportunities and dangers

inherent in a close link between the prevailing approaches in the public

debates and the research paradigms.

The following observations are not based on a more or less complete

analysis of available research on the relationships between higher education

and the world of work. However, they can draw from various activities of

summarizing major research trends in the framework of handbooks (Teichler

1988, 1992) and conferences (Teichler 1996a, b, 1998a, 1999a) on the state

of knowledge, of editing books and journal issues on that thematic area

(Brennan, Kogan and Teichler 1995; Higher Education and Employment

1995a, b), of preparing a major comparative survey (Teichler 1997) as well

as of discussing possible futures of the relationships between higher educa-

tion and the world of work and their implications for the respective research(Teichler 1998b).

A major theme of policy and practice

On the one hand, we observe a perennial debate about the extent to which

the institutional fabric of higher education, i.e. the institutions as well as

their departments and programmes, and the substance and processes of

teaching and learning should reflect the future occupational roles and tasks

of graduates. In this context, four dimensions tend to be addressed:

– To what extent should higher education focus on the enhancement of students’ knowledge and possibly on the cultivation of their personality

without or with little explicit regard of their potential future professional

roles and tasks, or to what extent should preparation for the world of

work be targeted for?

– Should higher education intend to lay the foundation for future occupa-

tional tasks, or should it pursue a direct preparatory function?

– Should study prepare students for a wide range of occupations and work

tasks or should it be highly specialized ?

– To what extent should higher education deliver the competences which

seem to be on demand on the part of the employment system, or to what

extent should higher education prepare the students to become activeagents of innovation and change in the world of work?

It is obvious that these questions are not meant to indicate alternatives, but

rather a spectrum of possible options.



HIGHER EDUCATION AND THE WORLD OF WORK 171

On the other hand, we note substantial changes in the debates on the

relationships between higher education and the world of work over the recent

three to four decades. Attention was paid to the consequences of expansion

of higher education, to the dynamics in the occupational structure and the

character of work tasks as well as to changes in the labour market constel-

lation. Across more or less all industrial societies, hope spread in the 1960s

that expansion of higher education might contribute significantly to economic

growth. In the course of the 1960s, the issue of equality of opportunity was

widely discussed, and again, hope was not infrequent that educational expan-

sion might serve both economic growth and the reduction of inequality of

opportunity.

During the 1970s, concern grew as regards growing mismatches between

the moderately increasing demand for qualified labour and the rapidly

growing number of graduates from institutions of higher education. Pessi-

mistic scenarios of “over-education” or “Akademisches Proletariat” fuelled

interest in identifying the problems incurred due to the increasing supplyof highly qualified labour and in finding means of conflict resolution and

improvement, for example measures of increasing the “employability” of

graduates.

During the 1980s, the relationships between higher education and employ-

ment were not so high on the agenda anymore. Faith in employment forecasts

and corresponding educational planning had eroded, and warnings of pending

catastrophes due to the expansion of higher education had lost momentum as

well. More emphasis was placed in the 1980s on the diversity of the relation-

ships between higher education and career according to institutions of higher

education, fields of study and programmes as well as students’ individual

options and strategies.The renewed debates into the relationships between higher education and

the world of work in the 1990s cannot be characterized by a single major

focus. On the one hand, they seem to repeat the topics of the late 1970s and

1980s: concern about the “employability” of graduates rose in many industri-

alized countries along an increase in the overall unemployment quotas. Also,

continued emphasis is placed on the diversification of higher education as

well as on the options and responsibilities of the individual institutions of

higher education and of the invidual students. On the other hand, as will be

discussed below, there are various indications for paradigmatic changes in

the perception of the relationships between higher education and the world of

work.



172 ULRICH TEICHLER

Research priorities and ideologies

An agent of subordination of higher education to the employment system?

Research on the relationships between higher education and the world of work often meets with suspicion, because it is assumed to have strong norma-

tive biases. Notably, research often seems to reinforce the immediate societal

functions of higher education rather than the pursuit of knowledge for its own

sake, to emphasize extrinsive motives of students and graduates, and to focus

on the extent to which higher education is closely geared, as far as structures,

curricula, knowledge bases etc. are concerned, to employment and work.

This critique is by no means unfounded, because many authors start off

with a strong – overt or hidden – normative position. Fortunately, however,

mixed realities, as a rule, find their ways of becoming visible in the research

findings – may it be due to the deliberately chosen research approaches aimed

at provided room for alternative normative options or may it be due to thecomplexity of the findings not in tune with the initial assumptions. Thus,

the research findings, as a rule, are a valuable source of information for all

actors considering the educational functions of education irrespective of their

views, as long as they reflect the possible biases of the respective research

approaches and do not merely yield to them.

A quantitative-structural bias?

In looking at available research on the relationships between higher education

and the world of work, we obviously can classify it according to the major

themes as well as according to the prime modes of information collection andutilization. The most frequent themes are:

(1) demand of the employment system,

(2) graduate employment and career,

(3) job tasks and performance,

(4) the transition from higher education to employment, and

(5) the impact of higher education.

The most frequent approaches of data gathering and utilization are:

(A) utilization of statistics,

(B) student and graduate surveys,

(C) employers’ and other actors’ surveys,

(D) in-depth analyses (job analysis, curricular analysis, competence andperformance tests, etc.).

The themes and data bases can be presented as a matrix (see Figure 1). We

note analyses, for example of the demands of the employment system which




Approaches of data gathering and utilization

Themes Statistics Student and Employers’ In-depth analysis

graduate and other (of curricula, job

surveys actors’ surveys performance, etc.)

Demand of the employment system X (x) x –

Graduate employment and career X X X (x)

Job tasks and performance – (x) (x) X

The transition from higher education X X (x) –

to employment

The impact of higher education (x) X – X

X = approaches frequently employed

(x) = approaches occasionally employed

– = approaches seldom or not employed

Figure 1. Widely spread themes and approaches of data gathering and utilization in research

on the relationships between higher education and the world of work.

– aim at establishing changes in the demand through statistical time series

and possibly their extrapolation to the future regarding the level and type

of education of employed persons in various occupational and economic

sector categories (1A),

– asking graduates to state problems in coping with job assignments and

their retrospective assessment of study provisions (1B),

– surveying employers’ expectations of the graduates’ competences (1C),

– analyzing graduate job tasks and performances and inferring from them

needs for curricular change (1D).

We can establish a similar range of research approaches as regards the other

themes as well.

Altogether, we note larger numbers of studies based on available education

and employment statistics or on written questionnaires than studies based

on interviews, tests, observations, etc. Various factors contribute to this state

of affairs which can be viewed as a quantitative-structural bias of research.

Economists who are strongly represented among researchers addressing the

relationships between higher education and employment are often social-

ized to confine themselves to “objective” measures of employment and work

and on the utilization of available statistics. Also, the strong interest among

key actors in getting quantitatively representative information encourages the

utilization of those methods of data gathering and utilization which provideinformation on large numbers of persons with relatively limited costs.

The preference for statistics and large-scale surveys altogether is likely to

provide valuable research results for quantitative-structural decisions, e.g. for



174 ULRICH TEICHLER

the allocation of resources to different types of higher education institutions

or field of studies, and for students’ individual choices of institutions and

fields (cf. the summary in OECD 1993). However, they often provide only

moderately relevant findings, as far as the character of the job assignments

and the utility of study for job performance are concerned.

Again, we note in fact frequent cases of biased interpretations of

quantitative-structural information in respect to the links between the

substance of study programmes and the competences of graduates on the

one hand and on the other the job requirements. An increase of the propor-

tion of graduates in jobs traditionally not held by graduates or in jobs

not remunerated in a privileged manner was often interpreted as indicat-

ing “over-education” or “under-utilization”, thus taking for granted that the

requirements in jobs traditionally not held by graduates had not changed

substantially. But, again, quantitative-structural approaches were not neces-

sarily bound to such a conservative fallacy. Rather, many graduate surveys

indicate that a substantial proportion of graduation employed in occupationsand positions which do not signal an appropriate employment at first glance

actually perceive a substantial utilization on the job of the competences

acquired in the course of study (see Suda 1981; Teichler 1988).

Reproduction of the actors’ myths?

A substantial proportion of research on the relationships between higher

education and the world of work relies on the actors’ perception of this rela-

tionship. For example, heads of personnel offices or supervisors in companies

are requested to state the competences expected to perform successfully on

the job (cf. Buttgereit 1984; Roizen and Jepson 1985; Harvey, Moon and

Geall 1997). Graduates are asked to point out the extent to which they can

utilize their competences on the job.

Valuable as the actors’ perceptions are in supplementing and correcting the

purely “objective” information on educational levels, fields of study, type of

institution of higher education, status of employment, economic sector, occu-

pational category, position in the employing organization etc., they obviously

do not provide a more or less valid information base on the substantive link

between study achievements and work performance. The available literature

makes us aware of a multitude of biases.

For example, employers tend to focus on short-term demand . Also, they

are often inclined to underestimate the educational level of competences they

actually like to recruit, and they often depict primarily shortages of compe-tences felt rather than the complete range of competences required. Further,

they tend to point out strongly the need for those competences which keep

them busy to measure in the recruitment process, i.e. personality traits and




social skills. Finally, they often put undue emphasis on those competences

which are needed in many positions, thus being inclined to overestimate the

role social skills and personality play and to underestimate the cognitive

skills and the knowledge basis for specific fields which the institutions of

higher education might provide and also might measure and indicate through

credentials.

Graduates are likely to notice the impact of study more clearly if they

utilize specific knowledge acquired than if it gradually has sharpened their

intellectual reasoning in the course of study. They often blame higher educa-

tion not having been sufficiently helpful for their concrete professional

problem-solving even if higher education was not able in principle to take

over these tasks. Finally, they often state a close link between higher educa-

tion and employment, if they enter high-status careers even if the substantive

relationship between the competences acquired in the course of study and the

work tasks is by no means close for other observers.

Finally, both employers and graduates might be influenced by the specificnational and professional cultures in assessing the relationships between

study and the work. Similarly, the Zeitgeist of a certain era might shape

certain expectations and observations across countries.

In fact, we note that many surveys of job requirements based on surveys

on employers’ expectations merely intend to serve a sounding board of

the employers’ views, thus uncritically reproducing their biases and limited

scopes. We also observe frequently a reproduction of the dominant percep-

tions of appropriate or inappropriate employment in the respective countries

in graduate surveys. For example, I noted that surveys undertaken in the

various European countries in the 1980s varied in stating quotas of inappro-

priate employment between less than five percent and more than 40 percent,whereby the differences seemed to reflect the researchers’ definitions or the

dominant national perceptions more strongly than real differences according

to a comparable measure (Teichler 1988).

However, many studies on the relationships between higher education and

the world of work employ a multitude of questions, address various actors and

draw from a variety of sources in order to counterbalance the weaknesses of

specific approaches. These are the key sources which make us not only aware

of the kind of biases named above, but also often allow for a more valid view

of the reality.

Stuck in the “over-education” concern?

The more higher education gets under pressure to demonstrate its utility to

society and its efficiency, the more feedbacks such as those with the help

of graduate surveys are considered to be valuable tools. Alumni surveys



176 ULRICH TEICHLER

are already widely spread in the U.S. for a long period. The number of

countries increases where major representative accounts of graduates’ early

whereabouts are available. Detailed handbooks have been published recently

for those who wish to undertake graduate surveys, whereby the authors had

surveys in developing countries in mind (Schomburg 1995; Lamoure 1996).

It is not easy to establish the quantity of graduate surveys conducted, the

dominant approaches chosen and the major results elicited. For the results of

a substantial proportion of surveys undertaken by individual institutions of

higher education or departments are not documented in a way which draws

the attention of those interested in the state of research on this theme in

general. In Germany, for example, a study aiming at providing a synthesis

of the results of graduate surveys took not only into account published

graduate surveys but also asked all institutions of higher education to provide

reports on graduate surveys conducted irrespective of the ways the results

were disseminated. On that basis, the authors could analyse findings of about

200 graduate surveys undertaken in Germany in about 10 years (Burkhardt,Schomburg und Teichler 1999).

There are large-scale graduate surveys conducted annually in a few coun-

tries which collect information only on a few structural surveys. For example,

the Japanese Ministry of Education collects information annually of the

whereabouts of recent graduates at the beginning of the subsequent year,

whereby information is made available with the help of the individual higher

education institutions on the gender of the graduates, their field of study,

the degree level, the type of institution of higher education, the individual

institution of higher education, the employment status of the graduate (e.g.

employed, unemployed, further study, etc.), the economic sector and the

occupational category (Monbusho 1998). Similar surveys are regularly under-taken in the UK about six months after graduation and in a few additional

countries.

In various other countries, major graduate surveys are conducted regularly

or occasionally which are nationally representative for all graduates or for

graduates of certain regions or major groups of field of study. They tend

to analyse the relationships between higher education and employment in a

substantially more differentiated way than the above named annual studies.

This is true, for example, for Norway (cf. Aamodt and Arnesen 1995) and

France (cf. Martinelli and Vergnies 1995).

Finally, there is a multitude of surveys on graduates of individual disci-

plines across institutions of higher education, of individual institutions or a

small group of institutions, of individual or a small group of departments.They might comprise a few questions only similarly to the above named

national annual surveys, they might address similar themes as the second




group of surveys named above, or they might raise questions which are of

specific interest for the specific field or institution.

In analyzing a broad range of graduate surveys conducted in Europe in

the about recent two decades in Europe for the purpose of preparing a joint

graduate survey in 1999 of graduates three years after graduation in eleven

European countries and Japan (Teichler 1997), we came to the conclusion that

most surveys share a common set of major criteria of employment “success”.

Irrespective of differences in detail, five major criteria tend to be employed:

– a smooth transition to employment , e.g. short periods and limited effort

for job search, short intervalls between graduation and employment,

no or short periods of occasional employment in the search for regular

employment,

– a low unemployment ratio,

– a low ratio of non-regular or precarious employment (e.g. occasional

employment, part-time employment, short-term employment or spurious

self-employment),

– success of graduates in vertical terms, e.g. high return for educational

investment, a substantial imcome advantage compared to non-graduates

or a high ratio of graduates adequately employed,

– success of graduates in horizontal terms, e.g. a close linkage between

field of study and occupation as well as job assignments or a high degree

of utilization of knowledge on the job which has been acquired in the

course of study.

In some respects, we note that such a set of criteria of employment success

is deeply embedded in the Zeitgeist of the 1970s and 1980s. It is shaped

more strongly by the concern about “employability” and “inappropriate

employment” than, for example, by the belief that “under-education” was awide-spread phenomenon and thus exploring deficiencies of competences as

compared to job requirements.

However, research focussing on the above named set of criteria is in the

position to absorb a multitude of hypotheses competing with the mainstream

interpretations. It serves almost equally well hypotheses underscoring the

productive function of higher education as those emphasizing the selection

and status-distribution functions, those believing in a threat of over-education

and those considering expansion of higher education as useful for economy

and society, etc.



178 ULRICH TEICHLER

The diversity of research approaches and the common core of issues

The range of research approaches

The overview on major research themes and priorities might have created the

impression that research on higher education and the world of work is an

area of relatively homogenous approaches. This is by no means true. We note

contributions from various disciplines as well as interest in a broad range of

issues.

Research on higher education and the world of work can benefit from the

concepts, field knowledge and preferred methods of a broad range of disci-

plines. It seems obvious, though, that economists succeeded in putting their

footprint most visibly on research in this area by formulating persistent and

– both academically and practically – relevant paradigms, among them most

visible the manpower requirements approach and the human capital approach

(cf. Psacharopoulus 1987; Carnoy 1994).Sociology, the discipline second most frequently active in this domain,

might pursue more open to complex approaches and might be more open

interdisciplinary approaches, but it did not succeed in providing similarly

visible explanations. The economist Solmon (1973) claimed in a review of

that research literature that sociologists largely ask the same questions as do

economists and only substitute the dependent variable “income” by “status”.

This is certainly a simplification, because sociology addresses more often the

conflicting objectives among the higher education community, the employers,

governments and the students and their implications for the world of work.

Yet this statement indicates that the specific approaches of sociology in this

domain are less pronounced.

Both, economics and sociology are prone of missing a balance between

the status-distributive and the qualifying function of higher education vis-à-

vis the world of work. They focus on the former and infer from it on the latter.

Altogether, we note that a scarcity of research on the substance of learning,

competences, work tasks and job performance reinforces biased overall inter-

pretations of the relationships between higher education and the world of

work. Research on vocational education and its links to the world of work,

understandably, is more advanced in this respect (cf. Arnold and Lipsmeier

1996; Tessaring 1998).

Other disciplines did not succeed to counterbalance the limits of the two

dominating disciplines addressing the relationships between higher education

and the world of work. For example, there is an abundance of psycholog-ical research examining the impact of those personality traits on study and

subsequent career which are the least open ones to intervention on the part

of higher education. Thus, their relevance for higher education policy and




practice might be challenged. And research on curricula, measurement of

competences and the utilization of knowledge on the jobs tends to be the

thinner the higher the intellectual level of knowledge acquisition and utiliza-

tion analysed. Yet, research on curricula, teaching and learning, students and

staff as well as on higher education policy and management contributes to

the knowledge on the relationships between higher education and the world

of work to a more significant extent than often observed (cf. Boys et al.

1988; Brennan and Kogan 1993; de Weert 1994; Brennan, Kogan and Teichler

1995).

We also could observe a spread of specific themes of research which

cannot be subsumed easily to the list of major themes and priorities named

above. For example, three issues got momentum in the 1980s in many

industrialized countries. First, as already noted, more attention was paid to

the diversity of higher education. Rather than looking on the relationships

between “educational attainment” in general and career, efforts were made

to establish the impact of minute differences according to fields of study,degree level, individual institution of higher education as well as individual

dimensions of study conditions and provisions.

Second, a growing concern about gender inequality had a substantial

impact on research. One tried to establish differences in the relationships

between higher education and employment according to gender minutely,

whereas differences according to socio-economic background were not

anymore addressed to the extent it was customary in the 1960s and 1970s.

Third, the persistent unemployment in many countries triggered off a

debate about a “crisis of a work society”, according to which gainful employ-

ment was viewed to be on a decline to such an extent that it was bound to

loose its centrality both for the self-understanding and the self-esteem of the individuals as well as for the allocation of resources. In this context, it

was assumed that the educational expansion served to a substantial extent the

“custodial function”, i.e. keeping superfluous supply of labour off the labour

market.

The common core of themes and issues

A search for a common core among the varied concepts and research

approaches seems to be indicative in a thematic area in which large-scale

surveys are on the agenda. For the substantial costs and efforts incurred in

large-scale research and its relevance for varied actors call for options which

do not serve merely individual theoretical options, methodological “hobbyhorses” or individual groups of actors interested in the findings.

The need to seek for a common core of themes was considered essential in

the project “Higher Education and Graduate Employment in Europe” which



180 ULRICH TEICHLER

is undertaken between 1998 and 2000 in nine European countries with the

help of funds of the Targeted Socio-Economic Research Programme (TSER)

of the European Commission and in two additional European countries and in

Japan with the help of national research support. Apart from the above named

cause, two additional pragmatic factors came into play. First, the study aimed

to be a pilot for a future regular graduate survey – an aim which obviously

cannot be achieved without accepting compromises among the varied concep-

tual frameworks. Second, a team of qualified and experienced experts from

a large number of European countries, as required in the framework of the

TSER, could not have been established, if one had insisted from the outset

on a higher degree of homogeneity of paradigmatic and methodological

preferences.

Two further observations reinforced such a realistic and integrative

research approach. Third, the theoretical preoccupations vary between coun-

tries (cf. the references to different national approaches in Fulton, Gordon and

Williams 1982; Teichler 1988). For example, a stronger emphasis of researchon general cognitive and socio-communicative skills is likely in countries in

which views prevail in the public that higher education should rather train the

mind than educate specialists, whereas links between the acquisition and utili-

zation of specialized knowledge are more likely to be addressed in research in

those countries in which higher education is widely expected to train gradu-

ates for specific professional sectors. The extent to which the relationships

between higher education and the world of work really differ in accordance

to the varied nationally prevailing philosophies can be only measured if the

comparative study is not dominated by the single approach, but is suitable to

examine simultaneously the weight the various philosophies actually have.

Fourth, a close look reveals that, though theories in this area differsubstantially in conceptual basis and their normative underpinnings, they

agree to a large extent as regards the variables to be taken into consider-

ation for testing these theories. For example, it was not difficult within in the

TSER project to agree on the above stated list of the most common criteria of

“employment success”.

The major difficulty in agreeing on a common core was not any dissensus

as regards the major criteria, but rather in keeping the size of the ques-

tionnaire in bound, because the complexity of factors considered relevant

for explaining the prevailing relationships between higher education and the

world of work seems to have grown in the recent past.

– As already noted, a multitude of dimensions of study provisions and conditions is considered as important in explaining the impact of higher

education. Moreover, the graduates’ socio-economic backbround as

well as their biography prior to study has to be taken into considera-



182 ULRICH TEICHLER

Between the “match” and the “mismatch”. In most countries we note rela-

tively clear concepts about what a good job is for a graduate from higher

education, and also we can establish which fates of graduates are viewed

jointly by all the contrasting voices as a clear “mismatch” or otherwise a

clear failure on the labour market, e.g. taking over a skilled manual labour or

unskilled job or being long-term unemployed.

The controversy remaining refers to employment and work situations and

positions in-between. We note divergent terms and ratings, for example, as

far as short-term contracts, involuntary part-time employment, spurious self-

employment, middle-level occupations, somewhat appropriately employed or

some use of knowledge acquired in the course of study are concerned. As

already noted, objective “criteria” of occupational statistics and employment

conditions do not suffice, because the terminology suits to define the clear

“match” and the clear “mismatch”, but not the zone in-between, and the

“subjective” ratings by the graduates themselves are vulnerable to biases.

Obviously, research has to improve in this area. Would more in-depthknowledge and conceptual stringency help narrowing the gap of hitherto

divergent findings? And if the diversity of views remained: could each

of them be defined more clearly? In the research approaches being most

conscious to this issue, often a wide set of criteria was analyzed in order

to show the variety of definitions and realities. These surveys suggest that

the proportion of graduates employed in a way which neither can be called

“clearly appropriate” nor “clearly inappropriate” is larger than the proportion

of graduates who are “clearly inappropriately employed”. In most cases,

the authors refrain from labelling the intermediate zone, but rather prefer to

describe discrepancies of status, satisfaction, utilization of knowledge etc.

according to varied criteria.

The dynamics of demand and supply. Most experts agree that the labour

market for higher education graduates in most industrial countries has been

predominantly supply-driven. No matter what definition we take of the

demand – the statements made in the framework of macro-planning and

forecasting or the sum of employers’ job offers –, supply tended to surpass

the demand, and eventually more graduates were employed on jobs allowing

them to believe that they use at least a considerable proportion of their

knowledge on the job.

We note divergent explanations of this phenomenon, notably:

– There is more demand than planners and employers suggest.

– The oversupply is absorbed without major consequences as regardsthe work tasks (“screening”, declining expectations on the part of the

graduates, etc.).




– The graduates utilize their surplus-competences and pro-actively change

the work assignments and the organization of work.

Beyond, it is largely assumed that various buffers emerged. For example,

the prolongation of study and increased choice of advanced study might bephenomena of a “custodial function” of higher education. Increasing length

of the transition period from higher education to work and growing part-time

employments might serve as well to reduce such gap.

Research remained poor in identifying the relative weight of the various

modes of adaptation. A detailed analysis could be considered as a relevant

feedback for higher education.

The education, training and socialization function. In principle we can

differentiate three educational tasks of higher education.

– the educational function: to stimulate the cognitive, intellectual and

systematic abilities and to convey knowledge which is conceived as

broad, general, or the core of cultural and civilization competences;

– the training function: to foster knowledge and competences targetedly

provided in order to prepare students for future professional practice in

related areas of specialization;

– the sozialization function: to shape the values, attitudes, social behaviour

and the communication skills relevant for action in socio-communicative

contexts.

Concepts vary between countries and over time as regards content and

processes of teaching and learning most likely fostering the respective func-

tions. There is a similar variety of views as regards the relevance of these

functions. One might argue that we note three concurrent trends:

– As a quantitative-structural match between areas of knowledge acquis-ition and areas of work can be less easily achieved nowadays than in

the past, professional training is less frequently emphasised in some

countries recently.

– Concepts such as “key qualifications” became popular underscoring

a close interrelationship between general cognitive competences and

values as well as socio-communicative competences.

– There seems to be a general trend of appreciating excellence in all

three directions. A coherent emphasis on a single major thrust is loosing

ground.

In the past, research in this domain often reproduced the beliefs or even

misunderstandings and the mis- and des-information of various groups of actors. There is a need to improve methods in order to get more accurate and

valid information.



184 ULRICH TEICHLER

The measurement of the impact of higher education on employment and work.

Research designs, quantitative methods and computer capacity has improved

significantly over the last three decades, and in this framework, knowl-

edge on the impact of various elements of higher education on subsequent

employment and work has improved dramatically as well. Most of the

findings challenge old stereotypes rather than indicate major points of inter-

vention in higher education. For example, highly reputed universities often

ensure not more “value added” than average institutions, and the impact

of single components of the study provisions and conditions on subsequent

employment and work tends to be marginal.

Multivariate analyses of the impact of study were frequently undertaken

in the U.S. (cf. the overview in Pascarella and Terenzini 1991). But they are

still rare in Europe and other parts of the world.

The diversity of objectives, values and activities. In the past, relatively simple

research designs had reinforced simple causal attributions. Single elementsof higher education, for example the profile or the reputation of a certain

institution, the attitudes of the academic staff, the major modes of teaching

and learning, etc. seemed to be very influential, as far as their graduates’

employment and work are concerned. The more complex analyses on the

impact of higher education become, the more the traditional mechanistic

views are challenged about social causalities.

Future research has to take into consideration a broader range of factors.

Among others, it is likely to make actors aware that students themselves have

more impact on the results of study than most prior studies on the impact of

higher education suggested. Also it is likely to make aware that the period of

transition is shaped by specific dynamics rather than by merely optimizing a“match” between competences and job requirements.

The male versus female notions of graduate employment and work. Most

research on the relationships between higher education and the world of work

addressing gender as one of various socio-biographic variables tends to note

declining differences in output measures (i.e. number of graduates and their

competences) as well as declining differences according to gender in career

start in almost all industrial societies. Also, available research suggests that

professional disadvantages for higher education-trained women are marked

from the moment onwards when they start taking care for children.

In contrast, research focussing on gender issues, while not neglecting

the trends of declining differences in some respect, point out differences inappreciation of social environment, different understanding of career goals,

working styles etc. which might call for a more relativistic approach for




example as regards the measures of professional success. It is still an open

question what kind of changes research on the relationships between higher

education and the world of work needs in order to analyse the role gender

plays in this context in an unbiased way.

Recent and future changes as a challenge for research

The need to be aware of changing conditions

The conceptual framework of research which is closely linked to the problem

awareness of policy and practice might actually be preoccupied with issues

which had been the focus of the recent past. Since thorough research takes

a while, results are often eventually only available at a time when the issues

addressed are no more on the agenda of public debate.

It is difficult to identify the challenges newly emerging and expected futurechanges pose for research on the relationships between higher education and

the world of work. Our fantasy might be too restrained: some experts claim

that nothing is more conservative than futurology, because it often does not do

more than extrapolating already visible trends. Or we might be too futuristic,

i.e. underestimating the inertia of the system. But even if we refrain from

speculating about completely new scenarios, we can point out four directions

of change relevant for the relationships between higher education and the

world of work which often were addressed in recent years both by researchers

and practitioners:

– the trends from regular employment towards increased precarious or

flexible employment,

– from an elite and scarcity paradigm towards a mass and abundanceparadigm,

– from a pre-career education society towards a life-long learning society,

– from a national training and labour market towards a global or interna-

tional scene.

Most of these scenarios were not initially put on the agenda by higher educa-

tion researchers. It might be a weakness of higher education research that it

often is not a key actor in identifying and formulating the respective possible

future features of society (see Scott 1999). Yet, higher education has to be

sensitive to views emerging in various academic and policy arenas in order to

reinforce the innovative capacity of higher education.



186 ULRICH TEICHLER

Towards precarious or flexible employment

There are many indications that a growing number of graduates cannot

expect anymore to transfer within a short period of time from higher educa-tion towards “regular” full-time indeterminate employment. More and more

graduates are expected to become petit entrepreneurs finding multiple niches

where they can sell their competences on part-time, short-term, multiple-

contract, semi-entrepreneural etc. basis. Some findings presented in this

debate actually only indicate that the period of job research and initial trial-

and-error employment has become more protracted, whereas others suggest

that the change occurring is more fundamental and is more and more affecting

all stages of the occupational life.

The occurring changes meet with controversial value judgements among

experts. While some consider it as a loss of job security and a weakening

of the employees’ bargaining position, others hail the gain of flexibility and

opportunities. Obviously, this is not merely a matter of controversy amongexperts. We might expect that in the near future the spreading phenomenon

of a “boundaryless career” (Arthur and Rousseau 1996) will be viewed by

some graduates as an involuntary loss and by others as voluntary, since any

high risk divides the views (see Kivinen and Ahola 1999).

Towards a mass and abundance paradigm

Most of the explanations of the changing graduate employment and work

seem to be based on the belief that graduates are employed and alloted to

work tasks according to the traditional scarcity paradigm: employers try to

find the scarce talents, allocate the bulk of complex tasks and responsibilities

to few positions, and provide substantial privileges to the chosen talented few.

In the process of higher education expansion, this view was not redressed, but

only supplemented: one tried to establish the semi-demanding whereabouts

of the too many.

But there are indicators that the logic will be turned upside down in

the future: when rich supply of high competences is understood as being

endemic, the rationales of the utilization of knowledge might change. We

currently talk about decentralization of responsibilities not just because we

suddenly note that the past models of decisions were far from perfect, but

also because the view is spreading that there is a broad pool of potentials to

which responsibilities can be successfully distributed.What are the implications of this change for the character of graduate jobs

and the relationships between higher education and employment at a time

when, according to OECD statistics (OECD/CERI 1998), enrolment in some




kind of tertiary education has surpassed 50 percent of the age on average and

seems to be rise further?

– Will the majority of graduate jobs be middle-level jobs traditionally not

held by graduates and thus require a rethinking of the job-preparatory

function of higher education in general?

– Will return to investment in education loose its role of being a key

incentive, as for example the recent OECD study on the first years of

tertiary education suggests (OECD 1988)?

– Or will terms such as “higher education” loose their relevance in a

process of increasing diversity giving way to new strata of educational

attainment ?

The most popular future scenario in academic circles is that of the knowledge

society (cf. Gibbons et al. 1994). It sounds as if the universities might regain

what they felt threatened to loose in the wake of massification of higher

education: to become a key agency in society serving one of its most relevant

components. Some experts warn that the opposite might be true. The morethe acquisition and utilization of systematic knowledge expands the more

vulnerable or even superfluous might be an agency specialized in preserving,

producing and disseminating knowledge. Even if the university survives, it

might loose its character distinct from other institutions and programmes

(e.g. Scott 1999). However, concepts of a knowledge society often remain

vague, as far as implications for graduates are concerned. In the context of

our considerations, the “knowledge society” might be viewed as just another

term for the above named phenomenon of abundance of competences.

Towards a life-long learning society

Since about three decades, scenarios of life-long learning are on the agenda.

In the 1990s, the belief in a substantial growth of the role continuing educa-

tion will play was backed more strongly than ever before, as for example the

respective publications by UNESCO (Delors et al. 1996), OECD (1997) and

the European Commission (1996) suggest. Higher education is posed three

major questions:

− Regarding the role higher education will play for continuing profes-

sional education: Will it slice out the piece of the cake most congenial

to its past functions, will it continue to build up a sector of continuing

professional education which is more or less segmented from initial

higher education programmes, or will the rationales of continuing

professional education, in turn, begin to shape the teaching and learningmodes of pre-career education?

− Regarding changes of pre-career education: Will the idea of “recurrent

education” be revived, according to which pre-career education will be



188 ULRICH TEICHLER

shortened, will focus on providing the fundamentals and will loose its

status-distributive function?

− Regarding the role of teaching and learning: If we do not move

towards a life-long education society, but rather towards a life-longlearning society, will there be a de-institutionalization of knowledge

transmission?

Towards an international or global labour market

Universities in industrial societies tended to harbour cosmopolitan values

and universalistic approaches, but they took for granted that their graduates

ought to be shaped to serve the national employment systems. In recent

years, however, the views have changed: awareness grows of the fact that

students have to be prepared for an internationalizing and globalizing world

(see various contributions in Scott 1998).Experts claim a growing need for

– comparative understanding,

– lingua franca and possibly other foreign language learning,

– borderless knowledge acquisition.

And we note that international student mobility became the most visible

feature of internationalization of higher education. Therefore, the question

often is raised, whether study in a foreign country might become essential for

graduates in order to be prepared for the internationalizing labour market.

One might argue, however, that the increase of mobility merely is an early

step of internationalization for the few. As a next step, internationalization

for the majority of students would require curricular reforms relevant for thenon-mobile students as well. Thus internationalization at the periphery of the

systems would be substituted by internationalization of the core of higher

education through strengthening the international dimension of the substance

of learning.

The value of future scenarios

We might find out in the future that we have overlooked some directions of

change when trying to identify emerging demands. This, however, should not

discourage our efforts to identify likely changes. For research on the relation-

ships between higher education and the world of work is both theoreticallymore enriched and practically more relevant if it tries to analyse the relation-

ships between higher education and the world of work in the light of various

future scenarios.




References

Aamodt, P.O. and Arnesen, C.A. (1995). ‘The relationship between expansion in higher

education and the labour market in Norway’, European Journal of Education 30(1), 65–76.

Arnold, R. and Lipsmeier, A. (eds.) (1995). Handbuch der Berufsbildung. Opladen: Leske and

Budrich.

Arthur, M. and Rousseau, D.M. (eds.) (1996). The Boundaryless Career: A New Employment

Principle for a New Organizational Era. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Boys, C.J. et al. (1988). Higher Education and the Preparation for Work . London: Jessica

Kingsley Publishers.

Brennan, J. and Kogan, M. (1993). ‘Higher education and the world of work’, Higher

Education in Europe 18(2), 2–23.

Brennan, J., Kogan, M. and Teichler, U. (eds.) (1995). Higher Education and Work . London

and Bristol, PA: Jessica Kingsley Publishers.

Buttgereit, M. (1984). ‘Certificates and recruitment’, in Avakov, R. et al. (eds.), Higher Educa-

tion and the USSR and the Federal Republic of Germany . Paris: UNESCO, International

Institute for Educational Planning, pp. 217–230.Carnoy, M. (ed.) (1994). Economics of Education: Research and Studies. Oxford: Pergamon

Press.

Delors, J. et al. (1996). Learning: the Treasure Within. Paris: UNESCO Press.

De Weert, E. (1994). ‘Translating employment needs into curriculum strategies’, Higher

Education Management 6(3), 305–320.

European Commission (1996). Teaching and Learning – Towards the Learning Society.

Luxembourg: Office for Official Publications of the European Communities.

Fulton, O., Gordon, A. and Williams, G. (1982). Higher Education and Manpower Planning:

A Comparative Study of Planned and Market Economies. Geneva: International Labour

Office.

Gibbons, M. et al. (1994). The New Production of Knowledge: The Dynamics of Science and

Research in Contemporary Societies. London: Sage Publishers.

Harvey, L., Moon, S. and Geall, V. (1997). Graduates’ Work: Organisational Change of

Students’ Attributes. Birmingham: University of Central England, Centre for Researchinto Quality.

Higher Education and Employment (1995a, b). European Journal of Education 30(1 and 2).

Kivinen, O. and Ahola, S. (1999). ‘Higher education as human risk capital’, Higher Education

38(4).

Lamoure, J. (1996). Follow-up and Tracer Studies. Paris: UNESCO, International Institute for

Educational Planning.

Martinelli, D. and Vergnies, J.F. (1995). ‘L’insertion professionelle des diplômés de

l’enseignement supérieur se dégrade’, Céreq bref , 107.

Moscati, R. and Pugliese, E. (1995). ‘Higher education and the labour market in Italy:

Continuities and changes’, in Brennan, J., Kogan, M. and Teichler, U. (eds.), Higher

Education and Work . London and Bristol, PA: Jessica Kingsley Publishers, pp. 118–135.

Monbushô (1998). Monbu tôkei yoran: Heisei 10 nenban. Tokyo.

OECD (1993). From Higher Education to Employment: Synthesis Report . Paris.

OECD (1998). Redefining Tertiary Education. Paris.

OECD/CERI (1998). Education at a Glance: OECD Indicators. Paris: OECD.

Pascarella, E.T. and Terenzini, P.T. (1991). How College Affects Students. San Francisco, CA:

Jossey-Bass Publishers.



190 ULRICH TEICHLER

Psacharopoulus, G. (ed.) (1987). Economics and Education: Research and Studies. Oxford:

Pergamon Press.

Roizen, J. and Jepson, M. (1985). Degrees for Jobs: Employer Expectations for Higher

Education. Guilford: SRHE and NFER/Nelson.

Schomburg; H. (1995). Standard Instrument for Graduate and Employer Surveys. Eschborn:Deutsche Gesellschaft für Technische Zusammenarbeit (Education Report 68).

Scott, P. (ed.) (1998). The Globalization of Higher Education. Buckingham: SRHE and Open

University Press.

Scott, P. (1999). ‘Higher education research in the light of a dialogue between policy makers

and practitioners’, in Teichler, U. and Sadlak, J. (eds.), Higher Education Research and

Its Relationships to Policy and Practice. Oxford: Pergamon/IAU Press (in press).

Solmon, L.C. (1973). Schooling and Subsequent Success. Iowa City, Iowa: American College

Testing Program (ACT Research Report 57).

Suda, Z. (1981). Occupational Satisfaction of Graduates under Conditions of ‘Overqualifica-

tion’. Maastricht: European Centre for Work and Society.

Teichler, U. (1988). ‘Higher education and work in Europe’, in Smart, J.C. (ed.), Higher

Education: Handbook of Theory and Research, Vol. 4. New York: Agathon Press,

pp. 109–182.

Teichler, U. (1992). ‘Occupational structures and higher education’, in Clark, B.R. and Neave,

Guy R. (eds.), The Encyclopedia of Higher Education. Oxford: Pergamon Press, pp. 975–

992.

Teichler, U. (1996a). ‘Higher education and employment – twenty-five years of changing

debates and realities’, Higher Education Management 9(3), 25–37.

Teichler, U. (1997). Higher Education and Graduate Employment in Europe: TSER Research

Proposal 1997 . Kassel: Wissenschaftliches Zentrum für Berufs- und Hochschulforschung,

mimeo.

Teichler, U. (1998a). Graduate Employment and Work in Selected European Countries.

Vienna: Bundesministerium für Wissenschaft und Verkehr, mimeo.

Teichler, U. (1998b). Thematic Debate: The Requirements of the World of Work . Paris:

UNESCO (ED-98/CONF.202/CLD.17), mimeo.

Teichler, U. (1999a). The Contribution of Education and Training to the Employability of

Youth: Changing Concerns, Debates and Measures, Paper Presented to the Conference‘Preparing Youth for the 21st Century: The Policy Lessons from the Post Two Decades’.

Paris: OECD, mimeo.

Teichler, U. (1999b). ‘Internationalisation as a challenge for higher education in Europe’,

Tertiary Education and Management 5(1), 1–18.

Tessaring, M. (1998). Training for a Changing Society. Thessaloniki: European Centre for the

Development of Vocational Training.

Teichler_Research on the Relationships Between Higher Education and the World of Work- Past...

Documents

Transcript of Teichler_Research on the Relationships Between Higher Education and the World of Work- Past...