Embedding employability into the university curriculum: Pros and cons of different approaches
In this blog, Lisa Law , Careers Consultant at The Manchester Metropolitan University and member of the AGCAS Integrating Employability Working Party outlines different ways of embedding employability into the curriculum. Share your feedback on which approaches you are using in your service and how they are working for you.
Embedding employability into the academic curriculum is a difficult conundrum where HEIs must reconcile the goal of structural unavoidability with the practical challenges of making this happen.
Career services, with their specialist employability knowledge and central position within the university structure, are positioned to steer this agenda through effective partnerships with academic faculties. However, this is not easy: it can require influencing top level strategies; gaining buy-in at executive and delivery level; managing academic and students’ attitudes towards employability; and practical considerations such as resourcing, timescales and administrative curriculum change processes. ??
This is a crowded arena with differing viewpoints on what constitutes “embedding”, or indeed “integrating”, despite (or possibly because of) around 20 years of thinking and implementation in this area. If the general ambition is for “structural unavoidability” what does this actually look like? On what grounds can we negotiate for this to happen?
Types of embedding
The AGCAS Integrating Employability Working Party have identified six types of embedding which describe how employability can be integrated into the structure of the curriculum. Although the terminology used might differ between institutions and the categories are not exhaustive, we hope that this will provide some clarity and an opportunity to robustly debate the pros and cons of different embedding approaches.
In reality, most universities probably employ a variety of approaches, either by using methods in combination, or by adopting localised approaches at the level of faculty, department or course.??There are entangled pros and cons to each: the paradigm is not so much “good and bad”, but more like shades of grey permeating throughout. Our matrix attempts to cut through this complexity and plot some of the key pros and cons.
Levels of student participation versus structural curriculum change
On the matrix, the indices of engagement versus structural curriculum change indicate the balancing required to guarantee engagement with a high volume of students, against the degree of structural curriculum change needed. Greater change invariably means a greater need for buy-in, negotiation of roles and lengthy administrative processes.
领英推荐
So, is it worth it? The advantage of structural unavoidability is greater engagement across the student population, and crucially the opportunity to work with students who may not participate with extra-curricular offerings. This is important in the context of the cost of living crisis where many students prioritise paid opportunities over extra-curricular development activities, and in relation to widening participation agendas where non-engagement may be a product of students’ backgrounds. ??
Coverage of employability topics versus synthesis with the overall curriculum
The colour coding indicates an inversely proportional relationship between the possibility of covering a wide variety of employability topics and the scope to connect the “employability content” to the rest of the subject curriculum (thus avoiding the siloing of employability).
Ideally, learning and teaching incorporates all that students need to develop their career. There are different perspectives on what students need, however valuable “ingredients” often include consideration of students’ starting points and beliefs; development of self-awareness and reflection; acquisition of experience, skills and attributes; expansion of social and cultural capital; and support to find work and navigate recruitment processes.
Enabling a quality learning experience across these topics can be challenging where there is limited space in the curriculum. However, creating designated space via “core” or “optional” modules can divorce the content from the rest of the curriculum.
Negotiating for change
Reflecting on these types is professionally interesting, but moreover, how can we use this understanding to advocate for change where we think this is needed?
The AGCAS Integrating Employability Working Party will be publishing a toolkit at the start of the academic year which collates information, resources, reports, and case studies to support AGCAS members to campaign for structurally unavoidable integrated employability. We hope that this will be a living resource, enabling AGCAS members to share insight, opinion, and examples to support our collective knowledge.
To begin this conversation, we are keen to hear your thoughts. Do the types of embedding presented here resonate with you and your practice? Which methods (or combination of methods) do you employ at your institution? Are you willing to share examples of your practice and their outcomes?
We welcome your contributions! Please share your comments in the space below, or contact Lisa Law at [email protected] ?
Helping students and graduates develop entrepreneurial mindset | Enterprise Manager at Queen Mary University of London | Founder @Kouamo
1 个月Lindsey Shirah
Experienced educator and employability champion with a passionate for applied practise and the development of future leaders in the sport industry
2 个月Thanks for sharing Dr Stephen Boyd and Lisa for this fascinating insight. I think it's a combination but I think real value of more employability strands in other modules would be helpful.
Departmental Graduate Outcomes Lead - Sociology & Criminology | Lecturer in Quantitative Social Science | PhD researcher | Manchester Metropolitan University
2 个月This was a brilliant read Lisa Law - Dr Simon Massey and I are presenting at the RAISE conference next week and we will be talking about our core employability unit for L6 Sociology and Criminology students. This unit has impacted them as students and most importantly as graduates - access to internships, partner organisations and developed confidence and key employability skills. Look forward to the toolkit!
Empowering Futures, One step at a time
2 个月Employability should firm the spine of any curriculum. I presented at the university of Harbin in China when I worked at university of Wolverhampton about integration of placements in degree programmes which included employability skills modules compulsory in the second year. With students work ready with their placement experience and academic subject understanding they were more able to get graduate roles.
Careers+ Employability and Graduate+
2 个月Lisa Law this was a timely read for me. Working with a group of 34 cross institutional staff over a 9 month period, an Employability Framework has been developed for Birmingham City University. It consists of 6 key themed pillars and has examples of what activities/initiatives would support students to build evidence within these areas. A mapping tool was subsequently developed to help careers staff and academics surface what exists and in what form, what could be enhanced and finally where the gaps are. The list of activities and initiatives under each pillar can then be reviewed to see what can be added in to ensure all 6 pillars are covered across every level of study. We are at the start of this mapping journey but the ultimate aim is to ensure that employability is delivered at scale through the lens of the subject, embedded in the curriculum and where possible linked to assessment - so it truly becomes structurally unavoidable. The sign off through the Learning and Teaching Committee to officially commit to the approach was a critical success factor along with the VC Professor David Mba, FREng PFHEA developing a new institutional strategy 2030 which puts employability and graduate success at its very heart.