View in EDS HTML Full Text PDF Full Text

Time to Reconsider the Strategic Role of System(s) for Monitoring Higher Education Graduates' Careers?

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Title: Time to Reconsider the Strategic Role of System(s) for Monitoring Higher Education Graduates' Careers?
Language: English
Authors: Pavlin, Samo
Source: European Journal of Education. Jun 2019 54(2):261-272.
Availability: Wiley-Blackwell. 350 Main Street, Malden, MA 02148. Tel: 800-835-6770; Tel: 781-388-8598; Fax: 781-388-8232; e-mail: cs-journals@wiley.com; Web site: http://www.wiley.com/WileyCDA
Peer Reviewed: Y
Page Count: 12
Publication Date: 2019
Document Type: Journal Articles
Reports - Research
Education Level: Higher Education
Postsecondary Education
Descriptors: College Graduates, Employment Potential, Higher Education, Careers, Foreign Countries, Data Collection, Information Systems, National Surveys, Guidelines, Economic Factors, Outcomes of Education
Geographic Terms: Europe, Slovenia
DOI: 10.1111/ejed.12313
ISSN: 0141-8211
Abstract: The "employability" paradigm is beginning to be publicly regarded as one of the key developmental paths and "modernisation" principles of higher education institutions. In this context, the article first overviews the existing practices for tracking graduates' early careers in Europe. Next, it identifies and discusses relevant conceptual aspects for designing system(s) for tracking graduates' careers and using the results of graduate studies. This includes understanding and interpreting employability, possible societal tensions surrounding higher education when seeking to support the needs of graduates, employers or initiating new "professional projects", and the development of disciplinary assumptions about career success. Third, based on the results of a national survey among higher education institutions in Slovenia, it explores institutional views related to establishing systems for monitoring graduates' "employability". Understanding higher education institutions' attitudes and capacities towards monitoring the employability of their graduates is important for the success of tracking surveys in terms of their involvement in the collection of data, adapting the research instrument to reflect possible disciplinary particularities and the use of survey results. By combining the institutional perspective with the previously elaborated conceptual framework, the article calls on higher education stakeholders to support the strategic function of career monitoring systems for exploring new professional opportunities of graduates in the context of broader societal and economic developments.
Abstractor: As Provided
Entry Date: 2019
Accession Number: EJ1217051
Database: ERIC
Full text is not displayed to guests.
FullText Links:
  – Type: pdflink
    Url: https://content.ebscohost.com/cds/retrieve?content=AQICAHj0k_4E0hTGH8RJwT4gCJyBsGNe_WN95AvKlDbXJGqwxwGMnkNMBX1vmgKGnXJNj5iaAAAA4zCB4AYJKoZIhvcNAQcGoIHSMIHPAgEAMIHJBgkqhkiG9w0BBwEwHgYJYIZIAWUDBAEuMBEEDFg3svwdgYoXpxVNAAIBEICBm4thMAYNQguS41YRnO0HZv42uiZoojwSkDRN1cllIiMsUjpVh80dQOJG6R9WuvkEvg52NzGTRqzwFvqjHOlvZOG7NFB4hK0sdPHP7fNHsneaYZJjZ5pQ1RwHoiYniabNPXc8OgCEgPNG1yEPqGLxUukL-PJY3ORU0GqaXxSlODvGykN3K9w7WE-nutRkanJ4dxUv2MqKu1UY1hzz
Text:
  Availability: 1
  Value: <anid>AN0136689007;eje01jun.19;2019May30.02:11;v2.2.500</anid> <title id="AN0136689007-1">Time to reconsider the strategic role of system(s) for monitoring higher education graduates' careers? </title> <p>The "employability" paradigm is beginning to be publicly regarded as one of the key developmental paths and "modernisation" principles of higher education institutions. In this context, the article first overviews the existing practices for tracking graduates' early careers in Europe. Next, it identifies and discusses relevant conceptual aspects for designing system(s) for tracking graduates' careers and using the results of graduate studies. This includes understanding and interpreting employability, possible societal tensions surrounding higher education when seeking to support the needs of graduates, employers or initiating new "professional projects", and the development of disciplinary assumptions about career success. Third, based on the results of a national survey among higher education institutions in Slovenia, it explores institutional views related to establishing systems for monitoring graduates' "employability". Understanding higher education institutions' attitudes and capacities towards monitoring the employability of their graduates is important for the success of tracking surveys in terms of their involvement in the collection of data, adapting the research instrument to reflect possible disciplinary particularities and the use of survey results. By combining the institutional perspective with the previously elaborated conceptual framework, the article calls on higher education stakeholders to support the strategic function of career monitoring systems for exploring new professional opportunities of graduates in the context of broader societal and economic developments.</p> <p>Globalisation and technological development strongly determine the speed at which changes occur in the area of professional work. Hence, young graduates in certain professional domains have problems with employment and matching the competencies they have acquired with those in demand. Therefore (higher) education systems in Europe and worldwide confront tensions in how they traditionally do things and the newer, different expectations of students, employers and other social actors. These expectations are accompanied by several other larger processes that have recently characterised higher education systems: massification, a diversity of study programmes, marketisation and the introduction of performance measurements. In the last decades, these have considerably altered the landscape of higher education's systems' policies, missions and values and reflect the notion of "Higher education modernisation"<emph>. </emph>The framework for this can largely be described as the labour market orientation of higher education, which includes "activities" to make higher education graduates more employable.</p> <p>Most current definitions of employability in the higher education context relate to graduates' ability to find and maintain work that is in line with their personal and professional history and future career aspirations. The framework for these contains several dimensions. Those that are most often considered are the relationship between acquired and required competencies and the determinants of this relationship. Two main structural aspects reveal this: (a) the (relative) role of higher education institutions in supporting graduates in their transition to the labour market (supply side); and (b) employment practices (demand side). Although there are great differences in how Western countries have historically organised the institutional arrangements that determine young people's education—transitions to work and how higher education systems have responded to sectoral particularities in terms of the development of competencies, today the higher education "employability" paradigm uniformly guides the policy developments of most EU countries. As the Official Journal of the EU states ([<reflink idref="bib12" id="ref1">12</reflink>], p. 25):Member States should make the necessary investment in all education and training systems in order to improve their effectiveness and efficiency in raising the skill and competences of the workforce, thereby allowing them to better anticipate and meet the rapidly changing needs of dynamic labour markets [...].</p> <p>In the public eye, the labour market orientation of higher education programmes is generally supported by: (a) developing programmes for employers' needs; and (b) designing teaching and learning modes to better develop professional competencies. This includes practically‐oriented learning approaches such as internships, various training courses, mentoring, work‐based practices and problem‐based learning principles. Yet the typical graduate in most EU countries currently has very limited reliable information on which career paths normally follow particular higher education programmes, whilst academics are not sure if more practical‐based ways of teaching and learning truly contribute to better career development. Very few understand the complex transition from education to the labour market. This issue is becoming more salient as many EU Member States are struggling to improve the "employability" performance of their higher education systems. In this context, a recent European Commission initiative ([<reflink idref="bib6" id="ref2">6</reflink>], p. 5) recommends that its members systematically build up knowledge about graduates' early careers and thereby "support improvements in career guidance, programme design, institutional strategy and policy‐making" (ibid.).</p> <p>In this article, we first overview the existing approaches to tracking higher education graduates' early careers in Europe. Second, we revisit the conceptual level and seek to identify which "big" strategic issues higher education stakeholders should consider when designing system(s) to monitor the early careers of higher education graduates. Third, we use the national survey among Slovenian higher education institutions to identify and discuss operational aspects of establishing graduates' careers monitoring and using the resulting data. By combining the institutional perspective with the previously elaborated theoretical framework we discuss who should be in charge of monitoring the "employability" of university graduates and how.</p> <hd id="AN0136689007-2">A BRIEF OVERVIEW OF APPROACHES AND PRACTICES FOR MONITORING GRADUATES' EARLY CAREERS IN EUROP...</hd> <p>Steps to measure graduates' employability to help to adjust study programmes to labour market developments and provide better career guidance have moved into the spotlight at both the EU and national levels. The European Commission's recent Communication ([<reflink idref="bib7" id="ref3">7</reflink>], p. 9) recommended that Member States:[...] improve the availability and quality of information about the activities of graduates [...] by establishing, by 2020, graduate tracking systems that include: the collection of relevant administrative data from education, tax, social security and unemployment databases; the development of longitudinal graduate surveys; and the possibility to link, on an anonymised basis, data from different sources.</p> <p>In addition to various large‐scale surveys in EU and OECD countries such as the Labour Force Survey, the Programme for the International Assessment of Adult Competencies or the European Social Survey that provide very limited information on employability (e.g., unemployment, income and qualification mismatches) and include a relatively small proportion of graduates, one can find various other survey approaches that are specially designed to monitor the skills that are acquired and actually required—a topic that attracts attention in measuring the transition of graduates from education to the labour market. Suleman ([<reflink idref="bib17" id="ref4">17</reflink>]) provides a typology describing different <emph>direct methods</emph> for exploring employability skills, such as surveys on the importance of skills among employers or graduates, job advertisements, conversations with HR managers, researching hiring processes or employers' expectations, as well as <emph>indirect measures</emph> such as employers' perceptions of graduates' skills, the use of the skills acquired and the monetary values attached to certain skills. Allen and Van der Velden ([<reflink idref="bib3" id="ref5">3</reflink>]) presented a similar typology that differentiated between <emph>acquired skills</emph> with the methods' proxy by education, objective measures (assessment, testing) and subjective measures (supervisors' rating, individual self‐assessment and proxy by required skills) and <emph>required skills</emph> with the methods' proxy by occupational analysis, objective measures (job analysis) and subjective measures (employers' survey, supervisors' rating and workers' assessment). More objective approaches provide a better quality assessment, but require more resources and can therefore assess fewer competencies within smaller samples. More subjective approaches (self‐evaluation) are less accurate, but can be applied to a larger number of competencies and a larger population. In this section, we focus on graduate surveys which use subjective approaches to measure skills and other areas related to career success. Following Crosier et al. ([<reflink idref="bib5" id="ref6">5</reflink>]/2015, p. 19), it is believed that "graduate surveys that rely on the self‐assessment of graduates are currently the most accurate tools available for evaluating employability". They are conducted in various ways by many higher education institutions and EU countries, but the information they provide is not used systematically.</p> <p>Only a few international surveys in Europe directly address the issue of higher education graduates' employability in the context of their transition from education to the job market. Among the best known are Careers after Higher Education: a European Research Study (CHEERS) (<ulink href="http://www.qtafi.de/cheers-european-graduate-survey.htm">www.qtafi.de/cheers-european-graduate-survey.htm</ulink>), Research into Employment and Professional FLEXibility (REFLEX) (<ulink href="http://www.reflexproject.org">www.reflexproject.org</ulink>) and Higher Education as a Generator of Strategic Competences (HEGESCO) (<ulink href="http://www.hegesco.org">www.hegesco.org</ulink>). They explored the competencies that were needed by higher education graduates to better prepare them for the world of work and what higher education institutions should do to equip them with these competencies. In the REFLEX and HEGESCO projects, over 45,000 higher education graduates from 19 mainly EU countries completed a questionnaire about their higher education studies and early labour market careers five years after graduation. The key areas of the research were: the needs of the labour market, the match between acquired and required competencies, the characteristics of higher education institutions, the particularities of learning and teaching modes and the quality of both jobs and work organisations. The EC, in cooperation with national ministries, recently initiated the pilot graduate survey EUROGRADUATE (<ulink href="http://www.eurograduate.eu">www.eurograduate.eu</ulink>) that builds on approaches developed earlier.</p> <p>In addition to these EU surveys, individual EU countries have for several years implemented their own national employment and employability measurements in two ways. The <emph>first</emph> is analyses of administrative data that pair various census databases of higher education institutions and government agencies (e.g., student number and social security number). The advantages of this approach include relatively low costs and a high level of representativity. The disadvantage and limitations include legislation on personal data protection and the very limited number of indicators. This explains the tendency to complement the administrative data approach with a <emph>second approach</emph>—graduate tracking surveys which contain larger sets of indicators but are usually more expensive and less representative. Following the EUROGRADUATE feasibility study (Mühleck et al., [<reflink idref="bib11" id="ref7">11</reflink>], p. 34), graduate surveys started to standardise elements and modes of exploitation. Typical elements include inquiries related to <emph>socio‐demographic characteristics</emph> (e.g., ethnicity, family status), <emph>previous education</emph>, <emph>information on higher education</emph> (higher education attainments, practical experience during studies, teaching and learning modes, etc.), <emph>occupation and employment</emph> (e.g., income, job particularities), <emph>competencies </emph>and <emph>skills and values</emph>. Following Mühleck et al. ([<reflink idref="bib11" id="ref8">11</reflink>], p. 30), most approaches use online surveys, followed by a combination of an online and postal approach and track graduates 6 months, 12 months and 5 years after graduation.</p> <p>One can identify several good national practices among EU countries in terms of combining various approaches or levels for tracking graduates.[<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref9">1</reflink>] They are found in Austria, Denmark, France, Hungary or Sweden and include the centralisation of data collection (interrelation of national and institutional data collection), ensuring the complementarity of quantitative and qualitative surveys, attempts to track the same individuals from education to various time points in their early careers, use of data, etc. (Gaebel, Hauschildt, Mühleck, & Smidt, [<reflink idref="bib8" id="ref10">8</reflink>], pp. 9, 10). One of the best‐known consortia for surveying students and graduates is AlmaLaurea (<ulink href="http://www.almalaurea.it">www.almalaurea.it</ulink>) that was established in 1994 at the University of Bologna. Data are collected via two annual surveys: the first at the time of graduation focuses on educational experiences, whilst the second explores the transition from education to the labour market 1, 3 and 5 years after graduation. So far, more than half a million graduates from 71 Italian universities have participated in these surveys. Another reference centre for following graduates' career paths was developed in 2007 at the International Centre for Higher Education Research in Kassel, Germany with the "Study Conditions and Professional Success—The German Tracer Studies Co‐operation Project" (KOAB).[<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref11">2</reflink>] KOAB collects and analyses data on graduates 1.5 and 4 to 5 years after graduation and now includes more than 200,000 graduates from 80 universities.</p> <hd id="AN0136689007-3">CONCEPTUAL AREAS FOR DEVELOPING GRADUATE STUDIES</hd> <p>The plurality of approaches described in the last section is one reason to look at the key issues that higher education stakeholders should consider when developing studies on graduates' employability. Below, we identify three interrelated areas: (a) the variety of approaches to understand employability; (b) tensions between students' personal freedom in choosing a study area and the needs of the labour market; and (c) knowledge of how an early labour market career is determined.</p> <hd id="AN0136689007-4">Various views on "employability" and motives for conducting studies on graduates</hd> <p>The meaning of employability changes depending on the labour market challenges that can be found over time and across countries. In the last few decades, human resource development approaches have shifted from concerns about work conditions to the tacit motives and dimensions of the individual and various aspects of knowledge management. Thijssen, Van der Heijden, and Rocco ([<reflink idref="bib20" id="ref12">20</reflink>]) described how the focus of employability was related to school leavers and underprivileged groups in 1970s, the efficiency of human resources in the 1980s and individuals' career developments in the 1990s. With the economic and social crisis a decade later, it moved to youth unemployment and education‐work mismatches. Haasler ([<reflink idref="bib9" id="ref13">9</reflink>]) described differences between the UK where employability is contextualised as altering social inequalities by helping disadvantaged groups to enter the labour market and Germany where employability measures concentrate on improving the skills match and flexibility following the closure of occupational profiles. Some other more developmental analyses have compared and clustered countries according to labour market entry, the match between one's qualification and current job, mobility out of one's first job and unemployment experience (Allen, Pavlin, & Van der Velden, [<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref14">1</reflink>]; Robert, [<reflink idref="bib16" id="ref15">16</reflink>]).</p> <p>In this context, the employability discourse has pursued three major interrelated themes over the years (Teichler, [<reflink idref="bib18" id="ref16">18</reflink>], pp. 466, 467): first, what is the real number of graduates; second, what function should higher education systems play to support the direct needs of employers and third, how should higher education strike a balance between developing general competencies and the competencies needed for professional tasks. The first theme relates to regulating access to higher education. Here, the question arises concerning the extent to which public finances should be spent on study programmes that do not lead to corresponding jobs, or, for whatever reasons, have too many unemployed graduates a few years after graduation. The second is framed by the debate on the vocational scope of higher education programmes and their practical orientation, including student practices and internships. The third relates to how professional knowledge should relate to the generic competencies (e.g., ability to work under stress, ability to manage one's time, teamwork) that employers expect. These themes indicate the strategic motives for conducting graduate studies and possible tensions between policymakers, academics, graduates and employers.</p> <hd id="AN0136689007-5">Higher education for graduates, employers or new professional projects?</hd> <p>The "modernisation" of higher education in Europe is based on the unstated assumption that students, graduates, employers and higher education employees have the same expectations concerning the future development of higher education. But is this really the case? Teichler and Kehm ([<reflink idref="bib19" id="ref17">19</reflink>], pp. 116, 117) highlighted the distinction between <emph>human capital </emph>and <emph>manpower requirement approaches</emph> that consider the primary functions of (higher) education processes from the perspective of labour market needs and "rates of return" and employment, whilst <emph>social demand approaches</emph> stress individuals' freedom of choice and the creation of their professional career and personal development and that, in this, they have equal opportunities regardless of social background. In general, it is fair to assume that the expectations of higher education vary according to the particular higher education party involved (Pavlin, [<reflink idref="bib13" id="ref18">13</reflink>]): graduates would like to develop competencies for their long‐term career development (if possible in line with personal interests) and employers expect readymade skills, whilst academics struggle to fulfil their role in the traditional way in the context of growing performance expectations.</p> <p>In the debates on employability one encounters the general perception that higher education institutions support graduates to develop the competencies employers require. However, graduates with the fresh knowledge they acquired at universities also shape jobs. This occurs in different ways. First, by developing new emerging occupations and professional sub‐domains. This happens when a higher education institution experiments with the introduction of a new study programme without conducting a detailed analysis of labour market needs, or with the adaptation of existing study programmes. Second, by spontaneous (over) professionalisation of jobs that traditionally did not require a higher education diploma. The third can be described as a new jurisdiction on a particular sector or emerging discipline of a given study programme. Finally, we could also mention various entrepreneurial activities of higher education graduates. In all these cases, the result of such professionalisation dynamics may include: <emph>first</emph>, a new way of doing things, the introduction of new professional standards, or generating changes in social needs or, <emph>second</emph>, the degradation or intellectual decline of graduates for non‐demanding jobs. The main question here is: would higher education institutions actively support a professional project of their study programmes by promoting the skills and standards they produce among employers or society, or would they leave this to graduates and the labour market?</p> <hd id="AN0136689007-6">Assumptions and expectations concerning "employability"</hd> <p>In some professional domains, professional competencies can almost entirely be developed in the work setting and higher education programmes represent only a broader framework for the development of reflective capacities, whilst in other cases higher education programmes have a very narrow vocational scope. The extent to which the competencies acquired by graduates match job requirements is also determined by other factors such as relevant work experience obtained prior to or during their studies, family, social network, international experiences and personal characteristics. There is a large variety of such "employability" frameworks. Some focus on processes in the world of work (Bozionelos et al., [<reflink idref="bib4" id="ref19">4</reflink>]; Hogan, Chamorro‐Premuzic, & Kaiser, [<reflink idref="bib10" id="ref20">10</reflink>]; Pool & Sewell, [<reflink idref="bib15" id="ref21">15</reflink>]), whilst also observing other factors. Examples have been developed on the basis of the HEGESCO and DEHEMS (<ulink href="http://www.dehems-project.eu">www.dehems-project.eu</ulink>) projects and contain large sets of indicators. On the one hand, they include <emph>career success elements </emph>(employment status, skill and qualification matching, autonomy, innovation and satisfaction) and <emph>determinants of this success</emph> (education and work experience, study programme characteristics, institutional characteristics, teaching and learning modes, international experience, study success, job satisfaction, etc.) (Pavlin, [<reflink idref="bib13" id="ref22">13</reflink>], p. 578). Developing disciplinary assumptions on how competencies in particular study programmes are developed and how professional careers are determined pose considerable conceptual and methodological challenges. As Alves and Korhonen ([<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref23">2</reflink>], p. 679) stressed, any model should be related to the context of institutional spheres:the content of study/discipline (occupational specificity); local university profile and status (institutional reputation for employment); the structure of the graduate labour market (segmentation dynamics); and the effects of prevailing regulative socioeconomic factors (the labour market climate).</p> <p>It is fair to presume that higher education institutions should have developed knowledge or at least a well‐elaborated hypothesis concerning how their disciplinary "employability" approach works. They should have developed assumptions as to which occupational groups absorb their graduates and which competencies are called for in the workplace, together with ideas of how professional success is determined. On this basis, they should expect answers from graduate studies with regard to the study programmes to develop in the future, which group of subjects should be given greater attention and how to improve teaching and learning modes. However, there is very scarce evidence on how many academics are involved in these discussions, at which levels of higher education institutions these considerations take place and the resources that are allocated to support the quality of these processes.</p> <hd id="AN0136689007-7">TOWARDS THE CREATION OF NATIONAL SYSTEM(S) FOR TRACKING GRADUATES</hd> <p>While the previous section focused on developing the conceptual aspects of "employability" at a more general level, this section describes institutional views. For this, we used pilot survey results among higher education institutions in Slovenia (Pavlin & Cimprič, [<reflink idref="bib14" id="ref24">14</reflink>]). The survey was conducted in the context of the Ministry of Education's ongoing process of establishing a national system to use graduate tracking as a tool for creating national policies or in the (self‐) evaluation of higher education institutions and quality assurance. The questionnaire was distributed by e‐mail to (all) 102 higher education institutions. The response rate following a standardised reminder was slightly above 40%, with a relatively balanced distribution among study fields. The respondents were mostly managers of higher education institutions (deans, vice deans, etc.). The questionnaire contained four sets of open‐ended questions that asked how higher education institutions saw: the importance of and rationale for monitoring graduates in relation to higher education administrative capacities and disciplinary differences; particularities of graduates' transition from education to the labour market; higher education institutions' views on the centralisation of the system; and other operational and legal particularities. It was based on earlier interviews and workshops involving various national higher education stakeholders within the broader ministerial activity in the same year and on experiences with earlier international projects and a literature review. The design of the survey mainly enabled a typological qualitative analysis and interpretation of the results. However, it could represent a relevant framework for further quantitative national and international analyses.</p> <hd id="AN0136689007-8">Rationale for monitoring higher education graduates' employability</hd> <p>Over the years, the main push in terms of which higher education institutions in Slovenia started monitoring their graduates' transition to the labour market came from the formal accreditation and re‐accreditation administrative requirement of the Slovenian Quality Assurance Agency. In this context, various regular or occasional employability surveys and analyses of census data were conducted by most higher education institutions. Yet there is a wide deviation in conceptual and methodological approaches and in the quality of these surveys and analyses. Hence, the results were hardly comparable across time and/or fields of study. Other activities (also) related to monitoring the employment of graduates were conducted by the National Employment Office, the Slovenian Student Organisation and occasionally by small‐scale surveys in particular study fields. In 2008, data were collected as part of the European HEGESCO survey.</p> <p>In the Ministry of Education survey of higher education institutions (Pavlin & Cimprič, [<reflink idref="bib14" id="ref25">14</reflink>]), no respondent claimed that it was unnecessary to monitor employability. More than one‐third believed that it was very important or necessary to track graduates. However, more than three‐quarters of the respondents claimed that employability represented a substantial challenge for their institution, indicating that they were unable to allocate sufficient resources. The results show that most higher education institutions rely on their own "employability" survey approaches, including alumni, secondary data on employment analyses, or employers' surveys. More than three‐quarters of the respondents stated that the key reason for monitoring employability was the need to respond to the requirements of the labour market by either developing graduates' knowledge and competencies or by modernising their courses or programmes. About one‐third stated that employability tracking was a mechanism for monitoring the success and quality of performance. Others described processes related to mechanisms for the enrolment of new students, professional developments in the sector, cooperation with employers and the development of study practice, lifelong learning and various formal requirements.</p> <hd id="AN0136689007-9">Centralised graduate tracking at the national level?</hd> <p>The survey also explored the higher education institutions' views on the planned centralisation of monitoring graduate employability at the national level by the Ministry of Education. The main finding was that most respondents were not against this idea: only two were explicitly opposed to it. The major arguments for tracking graduates' employability nationally were related to the possibility of comparing the achieved employability in terms of learning outcomes among study fields, the labour market and the education–job mismatch and to ensure European, international and regional comparability. As expected, employment perspectives were strongly stressed. One respondent stated: "the Government of the Republic of Slovenia needs to know which occupations offer better 'employability' potential, mainly due to the future financing of higher education. It is very expensive and wasteful to make large investments from the public budget in the study programme of a certain graduate that last several years, and cannot be used by society". Some respondents suggested monitoring employability in combination with census and survey data and proposed that the results be made publicly available. In one respondent's view, this would give a basis for comparisons among higher education institutions, acting as a signal of the quality of study to employers and prospective students. Others proposed that higher education institutions should only have access to data concerning their institutions and detect any major saturation of the labour market. About one‐third of the respondents proposed that surveying the employability of higher education graduates should be a task of the Ministry of Education in cooperation with other bodies of the public administration such as the Employment Office. Several stated that the professional tracking of HE graduates could put a heavy burden on the higher education institution because of limited capacities. About one‐quarter proposed that the monitoring of HE graduates' employability be conducted by the Ministry of Education and higher education institutions, with one respondent stating: "We believe that, due to the particularities of our study programmes, centralisation would not enable relevant information to be acquired. The Ministry would necessarily need to cooperate with our faculty ...". The representative of one of the largest institutions stressed that centralised tracking of employability by combining various databases was acceptable and desirable, but expected that raw anonymised data would be delivered to faculties that would then perform special analyses that were relevant to a particular study field.</p> <hd id="AN0136689007-10">Attention to disciplinary differences</hd> <p>More than half the higher education institution representatives reported that disciplinary differences in study programmes within their institutions were substantial or even very substantial. As described by one respondent: "The differences among study programmes are not a minor issue as the graduates of one programme are employed by the public sector, while on the other side we produce graduates for a sector which is in decline in the Slovenian economy ..."<emph>.</emph> Another stated that "the differences in our institution's study programmes are such that, from the perspective of acquired competencies require separate interpretation ..."<emph>.</emph> From the survey, one can identify four groups of disciplinary particularities: (a) high employability; (b) creativity; (c) mastery in the area of research and development; and (d) professional competencies. One could speculate that these disciplinary particularities in the views of the academics presented the "employability" success outcomes and formed an important base line for strategic opportunity of their higher education institution's development.</p> <p>Second, the respondents also described key particularities that determined the transition of their students to the labour market. One concerned whether a study programme mainly targeted the young or the working population. As one respondent claimed: "Many students, particularly in post‐degree studies or programmes ... already have employment at the time of their enrolment, making it hard to argue about and assess (employment) changes ... employed students, however, are studying in the hope for a promotion within their existing workplace, or a change in job, or to acquire a of senior position"<emph>.</emph> Other aspects that were important for monitoring and understanding employability, as well as for designing study programmes, included: (a) the share of graduates from certain regions that finds employment abroad; (b) professional examination, licensing and further education that may in some cases postpone the transition to a designated "professional" job and result in more temporary jobs; (c) variations in education–job mismatch that hold different connotations in particular study areas; (d) the speed of change in job vacancies; (e) particularities of the interdisciplinarity or "dual" disciplinarity of particular study programmes; (f) self‐employment as the prevailing mode of employment; (g) short‐ or long‐term sectoral crisis; and (h) new emerging sector or field of employment. Other aspects that were less frequently encountered included various work licences during study, special practical skills, family tradition, national or European regulations, etc. It is hard to predict to what extent and in what way the Ministry's initiative alone will be able to be sensitive to these issues in establishing a national employability system.</p> <hd id="AN0136689007-11">The challenges facing graduate employability surveys to ensure the greater professional relev...</hd> <p>Earlier in the article we argued that the architects of institutional and national higher education "employability" monitoring systems should keep in mind the broader policy and societal challenges concerning the relations between higher education and employability. They should reflect on the learner's responsibility for finding a job vis‐à‐vis other agents and determine the relative role of higher education in developing professional competencies and other career success outcomes.</p> <p>The second key issue concerns the scope of strategic changes related to the results of graduate tracking surveys. The Slovenian national survey indicated several aspects of higher education institutions' perception of their graduates' employability that could have an ambiguous link with reality. At least two areas deserve special attention. The first is the polarisation of the perception of key career success outcomes: high employability and readymade skills <emph>versus</emph> speculations on well‐developed general competencies. The second relates to assumptions about student key particularities in their transition from education to the labour market such as professional licensing, further "professional" specialisations, employment in areas (un)related to the field of study, entrepreneurship and self‐employment as the prevailing modes of employment, the sectoral crisis, etc. Even though these aspects are strategically important for framing paths for graduates' competence development, less is known about how realistic it is to expect that all higher education institutions could support them.</p> <p>The third issue is related to the public availability of the results. When it comes to monitoring graduates' early careers, most higher education institutions proposed the centralised tracking of graduates at the national level with the lead role of the Ministry of Education. The survey results allow speculation that institutions which expect high employment rates would like to have publicly available results, whilst others would prefer to keep the results at an aggregate level of disciplines and use the data for internal improvements.</p> <p>These speculations could also foresee the prolongation of the old scenario which anticipates higher education institutions' existing fragmented monitoring of their graduates and not very transparent or publicly available "employability" results. The main goal is to meet the formal requirements imposed by governmental agencies. Such a fragmented system would continue to experience a lack of financial resources, motives, be low in methodological quality and lack the ambition to use the results for developmental purposes. The rationale for continuing this practice would employ terminology related to academic freedom and the national integrity of education. But the course of this scenario may not cease there. Due to increasing policy and public pressures, one could expect the emergence of ad hoc parallel tracking approaches based only on the administrative data without a great deal of conceptualisation that in some cases could be done by journalists or "experts" with limited methodological knowledge. This approach would include only a few indicators such as employment and unemployment some years after graduation without much consideration of other aspects. The result would probably be public rankings of higher education employment systems that could strongly affect enrolment levels in study programmes and have various financial consequences. This could destabilise the higher education system and create winners and losers of the "employability" paradigm. In turn, higher education institutions could polarise or there may even be competition between the higher education systems and alternative learning paths.</p> <hd id="AN0136689007-12">Connecting "European" and national employability approaches</hd> <p>Understanding higher education institutions' attitudes and capacities towards monitoring the employability of their graduates is important for the success of tracking surveys in terms of their involvement in the collection of data, adapting the research instrument to detect possible disciplinary particularities, considering the interpretative framework and the use of survey results for developmental purposes. The findings of the Slovenian national survey can be particularly useful for those higher education institutions and EU countries which are still in the earlier process of setting up employability monitoring system(s) and/or considering the relationship between the institutional, national and EU levels. In this context, we can indicate the following conceptual questions relating to future developments. First, will the emerging EU actions offer concrete guidance for the institutional or national adaptation of international survey approaches? How much expert and financial support would be required for this? In the future, will there be cross‐country developments that combine survey and census data and solve the emerging problem of graduates' internationalisation and migration? All this is related to the second issue. How will the emerging European approach motivate countries and higher education institutions to become more strongly involved in learning about graduates' careers nationally and in an EU‐country comparative perspective? Will greater attention be given to the disciplinary perspective and the emerging employment problems in some sectors and countries? Does the lack of resources indicated in the national Slovenian survey really limit the quality and usability of employability surveys, or are there other hidden tensions between more and less "employable" study fields, or even between higher education management and other university structures? The third issue concerns the question of whether the EU survey will differentiate between more and less important "employability" indicators and how countries will consider these consequences to finance their higher education systems on this basis. Fourth, the Slovenian survey results also indicate that the developments across Europe should stimulate various higher education stakeholders to continue the European discussion on some traditional "employability" themes at a time of diverse national developments. It is hard to say who has the capacities to coordinate these activities.</p> <hd id="AN0136689007-13">CONCLUSION: TOWARDS A STRATEGIC FUNCTION?</hd> <p>In this article, we argue that the "employability" paradigm is becoming the key developmental path and a major "modernisation" principle of higher education institutions. The call for this comes through national and international agencies that reflect the changed public expectations of higher education and its stronger orientation towards the labour market. We also argue that higher education graduate studies are becoming the primary tool for achieving this. Yet, the current practices in their implementation and the use of their results for developmental and regulatory purposes leave considerable room for improvement. In some European countries, we experience (un)popular practices where the measuring of graduates' "employability" remains a pragmatic administrative reaction to an external policy requirement, with little ambition to use the employability data for strategic higher education developments.</p> <p>As the article describes, a good system for monitoring graduates' employability at the national level should be able to combine analyses of administrative data and the "employability" surveys (conducted among graduates and employers) and have clear links with previously established conceptual disciplinary frameworks, as well as with a plan for how to interpret and use the data. This would ideally require cooperation between higher education institutions, (supra)national agencies, other higher education stakeholders and experts specialising in the areas of education and employment. A national system should to some extent consider the long‐term vision of societal and economic developments and thus function independently of short‐term political changes. This principle is hard to achieve if employers in a particular sector or country do not see young graduates as their own strategic investment, have no idea of which competencies to expect from them, or lack their own future strategic planning. It remains unclear in what way the implementation of graduate studies can improve these situations.</p> <p>What role can policymakers play in this process? Should they try to regulate access to higher education according to a few employment indicators? Other alternatives exist. The first is to provide sufficient resources to collect, analyse and interpret evidence on graduates' transition from education to the labour market in a way that meets appropriate conceptual and methodological standards. Second, in this process, they should try to facilitate the dialogue between various higher education stakeholders and promote employability monitoring as the key strategic activity for the development of human resources. Third, they should consider expert views about public interpretations of survey results. This includes the question concerning the level to which publicly available data should be aggregated (e.g., level of study programmes, higher education institutions or broader fields of study) and how to explain education–job (mis)matches. Fourth, they should use the results for the development of societal and economic policies that are related to setting professional standards, preventing unethical employment practices and precariousness, and providing support and funding for those areas that do not have a direct market value but prove to be societally relevant in other ways. Finally, they should consider academics as an important party in these developments. The chances that some other actors would take over their professional role are small, but if this happens the range of possible outcomes for higher education would be very wide.</p> <ref id="AN0136689007-14"> <title> Footnotes </title> <blist> <bibl id="bib1" idref="ref9" type="bt">1</bibl> <bibtext> For a recent overview of national graduate studies, see EUROGRADUATE report, particularly pp. 24 and 25 (<ulink href="http://www.eurograduate.eu">www.eurograduate.eu</ulink>).</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib2" idref="ref11" type="bt">2</bibl> <bibtext> Since 2017, the KOAB activities have been conducted by the Institut für angewandte Statistik ISTAT, which is a spin‐off of INCHER (<ulink href="http://www.uni-kassel.de/einrichtungen/en/incher/research/research-area-students-and-graduates/koab-the-german-tracer-studies-co-operation-project.html">www.uni-kassel.de/einrichtungen/en/incher/research/research-area-students-and-graduates/koab-the-german-tracer-studies-co-operation-project.html</ulink>).</bibtext> </blist> </ref> <ref id="AN0136689007-15"> <title> REFERENCES </title> <blist> <bibtext> Allen, J., Pavlin, S., & Van der Velden, R. (Eds.) (2011). Competencies and early labour market careers of higher education graduates in Europe. Ljubljana, Slovenia : Faculty of Social Sciences.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Alves, G. M., & Korhonen, V. (2016). Transitions and trajectories from higher education to work and back – A comparison between Finnish and Portuguese graduates. European Educational Research Journal, 15, 676 – 695. https://doi.org/10.1177/1474904116661200</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib3" idref="ref5" type="bt">3</bibl> <bibtext> Allen, J., & Van der Velden, R. (2005). The role of self‐assessment in measuring skills (REFLEX Working Paper 2). The Netherlands : Research Centre for Education and the Labour Market. Maastricht University. Retrieved from https://roa.sbe.maastrichtuniversity.nl/roanew/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/REFLEX_Workingpaper02_Role_of_Self_Assessment_of_Skills_28april2005.pdf</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib4" idref="ref19" type="bt">4</bibl> <bibtext> Bozionelos, N., Kostopoulos, K., Van der Heijden, B., Rousseau, M. D., Bozionelos, G., Hoyland, T., & Van der Heijde, C. (2016). Employability and job performance as links in the relationship between mentoring receipt and career success: A study in SMEs. Group & Organization Management, 41, 135 – 171. https://doi.org/10.1177/1059601115617086</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib5" idref="ref6" type="bt">5</bibl> <bibtext> Crosier, D., Horvath, A., Kerpanova, V., Kocanova, D., & Riihelainen, J. (2014 /2015). Modernisation of higher education in Europe: Access, retention and employability. Brussels, Belgium : European Commission, EURYDICE Education, Audiovisual and Culture Executive Agency, 2015. Retrieved from https://eacea.ec.europa.eu/education/eurydice/documents/thematic_reports/180EN.pdf</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib6" idref="ref2" type="bt">6</bibl> <bibtext> European Commission. (2017a). Communication from The Commission To The European Parliament, The Council, The European Economic And Social Committee and the Committee Of The Regions on a renewed EU agenda for higher education {SWD(2017) 164 final}, COM(2017) 247 final. Brussels, Belgium : Author. Retrieved from https://ec.europa.eu/education/sites/education/files/he-com-2017-247_en.pdf</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib7" idref="ref3" type="bt">7</bibl> <bibtext> European Commission. (2017b). Proposal for a Council Recommendation on tracking graduates. COM(2017) 249 final, 2017/0100 (NLE), Brussels, Belgium : Author. Retrieved from https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:52017DC0249&from=EN</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib8" idref="ref10" type="bt">8</bibl> <bibtext> Gaebel, M., Hauschildt, K., Mühleck, K., & Smidt, H. (2012). Tracking learners' and graduates' progression paths – TRACKIT. Brussels, Belgium : European University Association. Retrieved from <ulink href="http://www.eua.be/Libraries/publications-homepage-list/EUA%5fTrackit%5fweb.pdf?sfvrsn=2">www.eua.be/Libraries/publications-homepage-list/EUA%5fTrackit%5fweb.pdf?sfvrsn=2</ulink></bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib9" idref="ref13" type="bt">9</bibl> <bibtext> Haasler, S. R. (2013). Employability skills and the notion of 'self'. International Journal of Training and Development, 17, 233 – 243. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijtd.12012</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Hogan, R., Chamorro‐Premuzic, T., & Kaiser, R. B. (2013). Employability and career success: Bridging the gap between theory and reality. Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 6, 3 – 16. https://doi.org/10.1111/iops.12001</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Mühleck, K., Grabher, A., Hauschildt, K., Litofcenko, J., Mishra, S., Ryska, R., & Zelenka, M. (2016). Testing the feasibility of a European graduate study. Final report of the EUROGRADUATE feasibility study. German Center for Higher Education Research and Science Studies. Retrieved from <ulink href="http://www.eurograduate.eu/download%5ffiles/eurograduate%5ffeasibility%5freport.pdf">www.eurograduate.eu/download%5ffiles/eurograduate%5ffeasibility%5freport.pdf</ulink></bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Official Journal of the EU. (2015). Joint Report of the Council and the Commission on the implementation of the strategic framework for European cooperation in education and training (ET 2020) New priorities for European cooperation in education and training (2015/C 417/04). Retrieved from https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:52015XG1215(02)&from=EN</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Pavlin, S. (2014). The role of higher education in supporting graduates' early labour market careers. International Journal of Manpower, 35, 576 – 590. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJM-05-2013-0105</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Pavlin, S., & Cimprič, P. (2016). Pogled visokošolskih institucij na vzpostavitev Nacionalnega sistema za spremljanje zaposljivosti. In S. Pavlin (Ed.), Vzpostavitev nacionalnega sistema spremljanja zaposljivosti visokošolskih diplomantov. Ljubljana, Slovenia : Univerza v Ljubljani, Fakulteta za družbene vede. Retrieved from <ulink href="http://www.mizs.gov.si/fileadmin/mizs.gov.si/pageuploads/Visoko%5fsolstvo/Statistika%5fin%5fanalize/StudijaIzvedljivosti%5fporocilo.pdf">www.mizs.gov.si/fileadmin/mizs.gov.si/pageuploads/Visoko%5fsolstvo/Statistika%5fin%5fanalize/StudijaIzvedljivosti%5fporocilo.pdf</ulink></bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Pool, L. D., & Sewell, P. (2007). The key to employability: Developing a practical model of graduate employability. Education + Training, 49, 277 – 289. https://doi.org/10.1108/00400910710754435</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Robert, P. (2011). Country patterns of labour market entry and early career. In J. Allen, S. Pavlin, & R. Van der Velden (Eds.), Competencies and early labour market careers of higher education graduates in Europe. Ljubljana, Slovenia : University of Ljubljana, Faculty of Social Sciences.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Suleman, F. (2018). The employability skills of higher education graduates: Insights into conceptual frameworks and methodological options. Higher Education, 76, 263 – 278. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-017-02070 Retrieved from <ulink href="http://www.researchgate.net/publication/305884691%5fEmployability%5fSkills%5fof%5fHigher%5fEducation%5fGraduates%5fLittle%5fConsensus%5fon%5fa%5fMuch-discussed%5fSubject">www.researchgate.net/publication/305884691%5fEmployability%5fSkills%5fof%5fHigher%5fEducation%5fGraduates%5fLittle%5fConsensus%5fon%5fa%5fMuch-discussed%5fSubject</ulink></bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Teichler, U. (2015). Changing perspectives: The professional relevance of higher education on the way towards the highly‐educated society. European Journal of Education, 50, 461 – 477. https://doi.org/10.1111/ejed.12146</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Teichler, U., & Kehm, M. B. (1995). Towards a new understanding of the relationships between higher education and employment. European Journal of Education, 30, 115 – 132. https://doi.org/10.2307/1503524</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Thijssen, J., Van der Heijden, B. I. J. M., & Rocco, T. S. (2008). Towards the employability‐link model: Current employment transition to future employment perspectives. Human Resource Development Review, 7, 165 – 183. https://doi.org/10.1177/1534484308314955</bibtext> </blist> </ref> <aug> <p>By Samo Pavlin</p> <p>Reported by Author</p> </aug> <nolink nlid="nl1" bibid="bib12" firstref="ref1"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl2" bibid="bib17" firstref="ref4"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl3" bibid="bib11" firstref="ref7"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl4" bibid="bib20" firstref="ref12"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl5" bibid="bib16" firstref="ref15"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl6" bibid="bib18" firstref="ref16"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl7" bibid="bib19" firstref="ref17"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl8" bibid="bib13" firstref="ref18"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl9" bibid="bib10" firstref="ref20"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl10" bibid="bib15" firstref="ref21"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl11" bibid="bib14" firstref="ref24"></nolink>
Header DbId: eric
DbLabel: ERIC
An: EJ1217051
AccessLevel: 3
PubType: Academic Journal
PubTypeId: academicJournal
PreciseRelevancyScore: 0
IllustrationInfo
Items – Name: Title
  Label: Title
  Group: Ti
  Data: Time to Reconsider the Strategic Role of System(s) for Monitoring Higher Education Graduates' Careers?
– Name: Language
  Label: Language
  Group: Lang
  Data: English
– Name: Author
  Label: Authors
  Group: Au
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Pavlin%2C+Samo%22">Pavlin, Samo</searchLink>
– Name: TitleSource
  Label: Source
  Group: Src
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="SO" term="%22European+Journal+of+Education%22"><i>European Journal of Education</i></searchLink>. Jun 2019 54(2):261-272.
– Name: Avail
  Label: Availability
  Group: Avail
  Data: Wiley-Blackwell. 350 Main Street, Malden, MA 02148. Tel: 800-835-6770; Tel: 781-388-8598; Fax: 781-388-8232; e-mail: cs-journals@wiley.com; Web site: http://www.wiley.com/WileyCDA
– Name: PeerReviewed
  Label: Peer Reviewed
  Group: SrcInfo
  Data: Y
– Name: Pages
  Label: Page Count
  Group: Src
  Data: 12
– Name: DatePubCY
  Label: Publication Date
  Group: Date
  Data: 2019
– Name: TypeDocument
  Label: Document Type
  Group: TypDoc
  Data: Journal Articles<br />Reports - Research
– Name: Audience
  Label: Education Level
  Group: Audnce
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="EL" term="%22Higher+Education%22">Higher Education</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="EL" term="%22Postsecondary+Education%22">Postsecondary Education</searchLink>
– Name: Subject
  Label: Descriptors
  Group: Su
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22College+Graduates%22">College Graduates</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Employment+Potential%22">Employment Potential</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Higher+Education%22">Higher Education</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Careers%22">Careers</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Foreign+Countries%22">Foreign Countries</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Data+Collection%22">Data Collection</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Information+Systems%22">Information Systems</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22National+Surveys%22">National Surveys</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Guidelines%22">Guidelines</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Economic+Factors%22">Economic Factors</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Outcomes+of+Education%22">Outcomes of Education</searchLink>
– Name: Subject
  Label: Geographic Terms
  Group: Su
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Europe%22">Europe</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Slovenia%22">Slovenia</searchLink>
– Name: DOI
  Label: DOI
  Group: ID
  Data: 10.1111/ejed.12313
– Name: ISSN
  Label: ISSN
  Group: ISSN
  Data: 0141-8211
– Name: Abstract
  Label: Abstract
  Group: Ab
  Data: The "employability" paradigm is beginning to be publicly regarded as one of the key developmental paths and "modernisation" principles of higher education institutions. In this context, the article first overviews the existing practices for tracking graduates' early careers in Europe. Next, it identifies and discusses relevant conceptual aspects for designing system(s) for tracking graduates' careers and using the results of graduate studies. This includes understanding and interpreting employability, possible societal tensions surrounding higher education when seeking to support the needs of graduates, employers or initiating new "professional projects", and the development of disciplinary assumptions about career success. Third, based on the results of a national survey among higher education institutions in Slovenia, it explores institutional views related to establishing systems for monitoring graduates' "employability". Understanding higher education institutions' attitudes and capacities towards monitoring the employability of their graduates is important for the success of tracking surveys in terms of their involvement in the collection of data, adapting the research instrument to reflect possible disciplinary particularities and the use of survey results. By combining the institutional perspective with the previously elaborated conceptual framework, the article calls on higher education stakeholders to support the strategic function of career monitoring systems for exploring new professional opportunities of graduates in the context of broader societal and economic developments.
– Name: AbstractInfo
  Label: Abstractor
  Group: Ab
  Data: As Provided
– Name: DateEntry
  Label: Entry Date
  Group: Date
  Data: 2019
– Name: AN
  Label: Accession Number
  Group: ID
  Data: EJ1217051
PLink https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=eric&AN=EJ1217051
RecordInfo BibRecord:
  BibEntity:
    Identifiers:
      – Type: doi
        Value: 10.1111/ejed.12313
    Languages:
      – Text: English
    PhysicalDescription:
      Pagination:
        PageCount: 12
        StartPage: 261
    Subjects:
      – SubjectFull: College Graduates
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Employment Potential
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Higher Education
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Careers
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Foreign Countries
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Data Collection
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Information Systems
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: National Surveys
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Guidelines
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Economic Factors
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Outcomes of Education
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Europe
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Slovenia
        Type: general
    Titles:
      – TitleFull: Time to Reconsider the Strategic Role of System(s) for Monitoring Higher Education Graduates' Careers?
        Type: main
  BibRelationships:
    HasContributorRelationships:
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Pavlin, Samo
    IsPartOfRelationships:
      – BibEntity:
          Dates:
            – D: 01
              M: 06
              Type: published
              Y: 2019
          Identifiers:
            – Type: issn-print
              Value: 0141-8211
          Numbering:
            – Type: volume
              Value: 54
            – Type: issue
              Value: 2
          Titles:
            – TitleFull: European Journal of Education
              Type: main
ResultId 1