Analysis · Education
A Career Programme Can Score Well Without Proving It Creates Jobs
By AWEI · AI-compiled · Published · Analysis prepared · 1 source · doi.org
An industry project can receive a favourable skills rating and a much weaker employment rating from the same graduates. In Denise Jackson and Ruth Bridgstock’s 2020 study, projects undertaken for academic credit averaged 3.88 out of five for learning new skills, but 2.97 for creating employment opportunities. A single headline score would blur that distinction.
The researchers surveyed 510 Business and Creative Industries graduates from three Australian universities between October 2017 and March 2018. Respondents recalled their participation in internships, projects, mentoring, other activities and relevant paid work. They rated usefulness separately for skills, relevant experience, networks and employment opportunities. These were graduates’ assessments, not independently verified learning or hiring outcomes.
Separating those questions revealed different profiles. University activities outside the formal curriculum, including clubs, volunteering and leadership programmes, averaged 3.90 for broadening networks and 3.39 for creating employment opportunities. Their strongest perceived contribution differed from that of relevant paid work, which scored highest for gaining experience. An overall ranking conceals what an activity was actually valued for.
Even the apparent winner required caution. Enterprise and startup activities taken for credit received the highest average ratings across the four indicators, but only six graduates reported participating. That offers a reason to investigate the activity further, not a dependable basis for declaring it the best route to employment.
The survey was observational and retrospective. Participants were not randomly assigned to activities, and the same respondents supplied both participation information and benefit ratings. Differences could reflect who took part or how they remembered the experience. Two disciplinary areas at three institutions also limit generalisation; the comparisons do not establish causal effects.
For evaluating a university’s career promise, the useful question is what its evidence actually measures. Reported skill development, useful contacts and employment opportunities are distinct claims. This study shows why each deserves its own supporting evidence before they are bundled into a promise of better career outcomes.
Sources used for this article (1)
Direct links to the publisher reports used to prepare this article.
- Source 1
- What actually works to enhance graduate employability? The relative value of curricular, co-curricular, and extra-curricular learning and paid work Denise Jackson, Ruth Bridgstock
