Content uploaded by Hong Bui
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Hong Bui on Jul 18, 2019
Content may be subject to copyright.
1
Chapter 1 Higher Education, Innovation and Employability
1. Hong T.M. Bui, School of Management, University of Bath, BA2 7AY, United
Kingdom. Email: H.T.Bui@bath.ac.uk. ORCID: 0000-0001-7895-2106
2. Hoa T.M. Nguyen, School of Education, University of New South Wales.
Email: hoa.nguyen@unsw.edu.au
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3414-1544
Higher Education
Higher education in the world has experienced a tremendous growth with increasingly
marketized and privatized services, in order to meet society’s pressing demand for education
(Mok, 2016). Governments in many countries have considered education as an effective
strategy to enhance international partnerships, public diplomacy, and economic growth. The
‘education as trade’ perspective comes with increased competition, and pressures higher
education institutions (HEIs) to transform and innovate to achieve excellence, so they can
attract and retain high quality students (Hewitt-Dundas & Roper,2018) and produce quality
graduates to meet the growing demands of the work force (Boden & Nedeva, 2010; Mason,
Williams & Cranmer, 2009; Yorke, 2006).
Higher education with its significant expansion and complexity, also faces the
challenge to keep up with societal changes such as internationalization and information
technology progress. Lašáková et al. (2017) in their case study of 10 European universities
concluded that the barriers to innovation in HE are also barriers to social development,
including “lack of transparency, corruption, nepotism, economic instability, rigid control,
distrust and lack of collaboration” (p.70). At the institutional level, the challenges are various
- the impractical curriculum, the outdated curriculum, lack of investment in technology, and
2
poorly-qualified staff, the lack of connection between current teaching and learning practices
and the demands of the labour market, employers’ expectations and students’ needs to name a
few (Lašáková et al., 2017; Saker et al., 2010).
The slowness in adopting emerging new technology also hinders universities’ ability
to compete in the current challenging market. High quality teaching, research, and modern
technology are crucial for universities to become globally recognized to attract both domestic
and international students. A lack of funding and resources is a barrier to technological
progress and updated facilities of HE and creates staff inefficiencies and a lack of social
opportunities for students (Drape et al., 2016). In other words, resources are not keeping
pace with the rapid and large enrolments and fee-paying students in HEIs.
With the substantial increase in costs associated with universities, students and society
expect more and more of their results, being the enhanced probability of vocational success
(Vedder, 2017), or in other words, students’ employability. Generally, employers and policy-
makers expect higher education to increase students’ marketable skills and/or employable
skills (e.g. Asonitou, 2015; Boden & Nedeva, 2010). Graduate employability, in fact, has
become one of the most important factors in university ranking worldwide, and a key means
to attract students. Nevertheless, student employability is being hindered by impractical
curricula among other things, creating a graduate skills gap (Chan & Lin, 2016; Tran, 2018).
However, it is unfair to blame the gaps in skill formation of graduates on HEIs alone.
A body of research shows the lack of linkage between institutions and industry. HEIs
generally are at the crossroads of traditional liberal arts education and industry preparation.
The tension between business and academia remains strong due to conflicting interests,
resulting in a dissatisfaction on both sides of the partnership (Derowet & Villani, 2015).
The massification of higher education, furthermore, has resulted in unemployment,
insecure work, and the slow growth of salary level of graduates (Mok & Jiang, 2018). Recent
3
studies have consistently shown that the competitiveness of the job market due to a large
number of graduates has caused a lot of difficulty for graduates to find jobs that match their
knowledge and skill sets (Mok, 2016). This has resulted in over-qualification, where new
graduates have to take low salary positions that do not require high skill levels, which is
demotivating. Some researchers argue that the enrolments in HEIs now are higher than the
number of good high paying jobs, known as ‘overinvestment’ in higher education (Vedder,
2017). This has the potential to alienate both students and the public. The increasing
demands from the neoliberal government, employers, and students themselves have
positioned graduate employability as an evolving driver of change in higher education
worldwide. ( Cox & King, 2006; Sin & Neave, 2016).This echoes the needs for an innovative
transformation of higher education. The term innovation has been widely discussed in
education as a new trend in implementing radical changes to address a number of concerns.
Innovation in Higher Education
Innovation is also crucial for higher education institutions to empower their roles and
innovation capabilities (Hamid et al., 2015). “The role of the university goes far beyond the
“engine of innovation” perspective. Universities contribute much more than simply pumping
out commercial technology or generating startup companies…” (Florida et al., 2006, p. 35).
Tierney and Lanford (2016) highlighted four challenges confronting higher education when
thinking about innovation. These are the emergence of the knowledge-intensive economy, the
need to train a creative and innovative workforce, global trends in higher education:
massification vs. world-class aspirations, and decreased funding and resources for higher
education. Christensen and Eyring (2011, p. xxii) argued that universities are at “great risk of
competitive disruption and potentially poised for an innovation-fuelled renaissance”.
Lueddeke (1999) developed a framework called the adaptive-generative development
model that guides change and innovation in higher education. The model comprises six
4
interrelated elements, including needs analysis, R&D, strategy formation and development,
resource support, implementation and dissemination, and evaluation. The model has been
applied in teaching, learning and curriculum innovation (e.g., Furco & Moely, 2012; Harvey
& Kamvounias, 2008; Larkin & Richardson, 2013). There are three functions in higher
education innovation systems, namely education, research, and engagement (Brennan et al.
2014). However, within the scope of this book, we focus on innovation in the function of
education in its relationship with graduate employability. We may possibly explore
innovation in research and engagement in future books.
Regarding innovation in higher education, scholars have mainly discussed
pedagogical innovation and technology-enhanced innovation. For example, Chhokar (2010)
presented a case in India which sought to innovate its curriculum for sustainable development
by embedding philosophy, policy and practice in higher education. Christensen and Eyring
(2011) showed that universities have reengineered themselves by embracing online learning
technology. Online learning is seen to be a classic example of a disruptive technology
(Christensen & Eyring, 2011), introducing a unique and exciting era in higher education in
which the use of multimedia and interactive simulations or games in online learning are
increasing (Kim and Bonk, 2006). Salmon (2005) developed a strategic framework that
blends e-learning and pedagogical innovation. This innovation can personalise individual
learning needs. Salmon (2005, p. 215) concluded that “focusing on e-learning is a key way of
providing for multidisciplinary and interdisciplinary research agendas in the applications of
core and peripheral learning technologies and the associated innovative pedagogy”. Fidalgo-
Blanco, Sein-Echaluce and García-Peñalvo (2014) developed a conceptual framework which
combines epistemological and ontological knowledge spirals to transform individuals’
educational innovation experiences into organisational knowledge. Lytras et al. (2018) stated
that innovative use of ICT tools in higher education can engage students in learning process,
5
empower them as well as enhance their employability. In contrast, Martín, Potočnik and Fras
(2015) looked at innovation in higher education from a behavioural perspective. Their study
showed that previous innovation behaviours as freshmen, current levels of autonomy, and
cognitive demands are all key factors that determine students’ innovation in higher education.
Graduate Employability
Graduate employability has attracted substantial attention from wider society because of
higher fees and stronger competition in the higher education sector (Tomlinson, 2007).
Employability is a complex, and somewhat vague, concept that is difficult to articulate and
define (Andrews & Higson, 2008, Clark, 2018). What constitutes graduate employability is
controversial and varies. However, most of the definitions encompass a certain set of work
ready skills for employment. For example, Yorke and Knight (2006) defined employability
as a set of achievements, including skills, knowledge and personal attributes that make people
more employable and successful in their career, and benefit the workforce and wider society.
These concepts of employability have been developed based on the assumption that there is a
big gap between what has been taught at university and what is required for the work force.
As a result, universities and scholars have worked hard to enhance graduate
employability. Andrews and Higson (2008) argued that to be employable, graduates need
both ‘soft’ skills, such as communication skills and team working skills, and ‘hard’ business
knowledge, such as qualifications and the ability to apply theoretical and conceptual
knowledge to real life business situations. Alongside soft skills and hard business knowledge,
Bridgstock (2009) suggested that graduate employability could be enhanced through
developing career development skills. Holmer (2001) highlighted the role of social practices
and graduate identity that are significant for understanding human behaviour in certain social
arenas (e.g., certain workplace environments). This leads to suggestions for curriculum
improvement intended to help students gain entry into and be successful in graduate
6
employment. Pool and Sewell (2007) developed a practical model of graduate employability
called CareerEDGE, in which career development, work and life experience, degree (subject
knowledge, understanding and skills), generic skills and emotional intelligence are key to
employability. However, the issue of employability moves beyond the enhancement of these
skills in higher education to the supply and demand of the labour market. Such argument is
well embedded in Clarke (2017)’s definition of graduate employability which encompasses
four main inter-related components: human capital, social capital, individual behaviours and
individual attributes. This opens a new agenda in reforms in higher education which focus on
the interplay among different factors which equips graduates with more employment
opportunities
The Link between Higher Education Innovation and Graduate Employability
This book is the first attempt to show the link between innovation in higher education with
graduate employability in particular. It is designed to serve students, researchers and
practitioners in higher education who are interested in innovation and student employability.
It covers internationally diverse perspectives of innovations in higher education which
ultimately enhance graduate employability. Each chapter has been developed from current
research or /and research-based practice to showcase the best practices in higher education to
enhance graduate employability in varied contexts. This book has been organised in order to
present a wide range of innovation in higher education in diverse contexts. There are three
main sections in this book highlighted in the following overview.
The largest section is about conceptualisation related to employability. In chapter 2,
Hong T.M. Bui from the University of Bath (UK) proposes building multidisciplinary
programmes that engage industry to enhance graduate employability. She argues that most of
the collaboration between universities and industry are based on single disciplines, which
7
provide students a narrow view of the world. This needs to be changed by developing
multidisciplinary programmes at universities.
Chapter 3 provides a review of theoretical foundations of entrepreneurship education
and recommends a toolbox for knowledge commercialization and engagement with
entrepreneurial communities. Maksim Belitski and Keith Heron from the University of
Reading (UK) argue that if universities commit to entrepreneurial education, it will result in
greater engagement with local entrepreneurial communities, co-curriculum educational
development, new venture creation and academic spin-offs.
In chapter 4, Jill Jameson from the University of Greenwich (UK) suggests that it is
critical for universities to develop trust and leadership skills for students to avoid future
economic and value crises. These skills can enhance their employability for the ethical
business world.
In chapter 5, Daniela Bariakova from the University of Southampton (UK) conducts a
systematic review on social innovation in higher education systems within the European
Economic Area (EEA). The findings show a deficit of empirical studies on social innovation
in higher education. She argues that EEA’s higher education needs to pay more attention to
social innovation, which consequently will improve graduate employment.
Chapter 6 is another review study by Arvind Upadhyay (University of Brighton, UK),
Vikas Kumar (University of West England, UK) and Jose Arturo Garza-Reyes (University of
Derby, UK) on facilitating doctoral students’ transition to the workplace through doctoral
research positions and the role played by their PhD supervisors. They highlight the role of
universities in assisting successful transition of doctoral students to the workplace.
In chapter 7, Val Quimno (University of Southeastern Philippines) and Dennis
Alonzo (University of New South Wales, Australia) review and evaluate research trends,
focuses, and regional priorities in leading innovation centres in higher education institutions
8
in the context of developing countries. As a result, they develop a framework for establishing
and leading innovation centres that ensure graduate employability by enhancing student
leadership and entrepreneurial skills.
The second section of the book contains practices and case studies on what
universities have done to enhance graduate employability. Chapter 8 presents findings from a
tested framework called Teaching Inside Out (TIO) which enables students to work in a
volatile, uncertain, complex and ambiguous environment (VUCA). Christine Rivers and
Justin O'Brien from the University of Surrey (UK) provide guidance on how to implement
TIO at module, programme and curriculum level.
Chapter 9 by Ly Tran (Deakin University, Australia), Glen Stafford (University of
Adelaide, Australia), Thao Thi Phuong Vu (Monash University, Australia), and Mark Rahimi
(Deakin University, Australia) shows evidence of enhanced student employability. This is the
outcome of the Australian government’s New Colombo Plan (NCP) in 2014. This programme
engaged students in international experience in Asian countries, such as China, Hong Kong,
Malaysia, Indonesia, Japan, Thailand and India. It has helped develop students’ international
outlook, experiential learning, networking and cross-cultural understandings.
In chapter 10, Thanh Pham and Eisuke Saito from Monash University (Australia)
show evidence that the Australian government, accreditation bodies, universities, academics
and industries have pushed mutual collaborations to develop attributes that are believed to
help graduates with employability. Their findings show that graduate attributes selected by
universities and academics, to a large extent, match the employability skills required by
employers, but the quality is not as high as employers expect.
In line with the Scottish government’s ambition to become a ‘world-leading
entrepreneurial and innovative nation’, chapter 11 presents a case study of an
entrepreneurship module taught to final-year undergraduate computing students. Mark Zarb
9
(Robert Gordon University, UK), Chevonne Brady (University of Dundee, UK) and Roger
McDermott (Robert Gordon University, UK) discuss the design and implementation of such
module and its impact on students’ employability.
The third section of the book is about policy implications for employability. In
chapter 12, Jane Chang (University of Westminster, UK) and Ainurul Rosli (Brunel
University, UK) explore entrepreneurship education and the employability agenda in
Malaysia, with its missionary top-down approach towards supporting entrepreneurship
education. They propose a synergistic learning platform to practice entrepreneurship to help
integrate university-level curriculum with national programmes to support the employability
agenda.
Chapter 13 presents a case study of Vietnamese policies on the employability of
university graduates by Ly Pham (Ly Pham Consulting, LLC). She discusses the impacts of
these policies on admission, curriculum design, teaching methodologies, outcome assessment
and learning environment, all of which affect graduate employability in Vietnam.
Chapter 14 looks at a broader landscape of higher education worldwide to show the
differences between developed and developing contexts. Thi Tuyet Tran (RMIT University,
Australia) suggests that universities should not only help their students to develop their
human capital, but also draw student awareness to the outside societal and labour market
conditions and find the way to enhance their human capital, social capital and cultural capital.
10
References
Andrews, A. & Higson, H. (2008). Graduate employability, ‘soft skills’ versus ‘hard’
business knowledge: A European study. Higher Education in Europe, 33(4), 411-422.
Asonitou, S. (2015). Employability Skills in Higher Education and the Case of Greece.
Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 175(2015), 283-290.
Australian Government. (2016). National Strategy for International Education 2025.
Retrieved from
https://nsie.education.gov.au/sites/nsie/files/docs/national_strategy_for_international_
education_2025.pdf
Boden, R., & Nedeva, M. (2010). Employing discourse: universities and graduate
‘employability’. Journal of Education Policy, 25(1), 37-54.
Brennan, J., Broek, S., Durazzi, N., Kamphuis, B., Ranga, M. & Ryan, S. (2014). Study on
innovation in higher education: final report. European Commission Directorate for
Education and Training Study on Innovation in Higher Education, Publications
Office of the European Union, Luxembourg. ISBN 9789279350818.
Bridgstock R. (2009). The graduate attributes we’ve overlooked: enhancing graduate
employability through career management skills. Higher Education Research &
Development, 28(1), 31-44.
Cox, S., & King, D. (2006). Skill sets: An approach to embed employability in course design.
Education and Training, 48(4), 262-274.
Chan, S.J. & Lin, J.W. (2016). Aiming for better employment: a holistic analysis from
admission to labour market. Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management, 38
(3), 282-296.
11
Chhokar, K. B. (2010). Higher education and curriculum innovation for sustainable
development in India. International Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education,
11(2), 141-152.
Christensen, C. M. & Eyring, H. J. (2011). The Innovative University: Changing the DNA of
Higher Education from the Inside Out. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Clarke, M. (2017). Rethinking graduate employability: the role of capital, individual
attributes and context. Studies in Higher Education, 43(11), 1923-1937.
Derouet, J.L. & Villani, M. (2015). ESSEC Business School case study report. For EU
Lifelong Learning Programme, project no. 539628-LLP-1-2013-1-NL-ERASMUS-
EIGF. Governance and adaptation to innovative modes of higher education provision
(GAIHE). Unpublished GAIHE project report.
Drape, T. A., Rudd, R., Lopez, M., & Radford, D. (2016). Challenges and Solutions to Higher
Education Institutions in Africa. International Journal of Education, 8(1), 43-58.
Fidalgo-Blanco, Á., Sein-Echaluce, M. L., & García-Peñalvo, F. J. (2014). Knowledge spirals
in higher education teaching innovation. International Journal of Knowledge
Management, 10(4), 16-37.
Florida, R., Gates, G., Knudsen, B., & Stolarick, K. (2006). The university and the creative
economy.
http://creativeclass.com/rfcgdb/articles/University_andthe_Creative_Economy.pdf
accessed on 22/11/2018.
Furco, A. & Moely, B. E. (2012). Using learning communities to build faculty support for
pedagogical innovation: A multi-campus study. The Journal of Higher Education,
83(1), 128-153.
Hamid, M. R. A., Abdullah, M., Mustafa, Z., Abidin, N. B. b. Z., & Ahmad, H. (2015).
Conceptual framework of innovation excellence model for higher education
12
institutions. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 174(2015), 2846-2848.
Harvey, A. & Kamvounias, P. (2008). Bridging the implementation gap: a teacher‐as‐learner
approach to teaching and learning policy. Higher Education Research &
Development, 27(1), 31-41.
Hewitt-Dundas, N., & Roper, S. (2018). Innovation in UK higher education: A panel data
analysis of undergraduate degree programmes. Research Policy, 47(1), 121-138.
Holmes, L. (2001). Reconsidering graduate employability: The 'graduate identity' approach.
Quality in Higher Education, 7(2), 111-119.
Kim, K-J. & Bonk, C. J. (2006). The future of online teaching and learning in higher
education. Educause Quarterly, 4, 22-30.
Larkin, H. & Richardson, B. (2013). Creating high challenge/high support academic
environments through constructive alignment: student outcomes. Teaching in Higher
Education, 18(2), 192-204.
Lašáková, A., Bajzíková, Ľ., & Dedze, I. (2017). Barriers and drivers of innovation in higher
education: Case study-based evidence across ten European universities. International
Journal of Educational Development, 55(2017), 69-79.
Lueddeke, G. R. (1999). Toward a constructivist framework for guiding change and
innovation in higher education. The Journal of Higher Education, 70(3), 235-260.
Lytras, M. D., Papadopoulou, P., Marouli. C. & Misseyanni, A. (2018). Higher education
out-of-the-box: Technology-driven learning innovation in higher education. Engaged
Scholarship and Civic Responsibility in Higher Education, DOI: 10.4018/978-1-5225-
3649-9.ch004.
Mason, G., Williams, G., & Cranmer, S. (2009). Employability skills initiatives in higher
education: what effects do they have on graduate labour market outcomes? Education
Economics, 17(1), 1-30.
13
Martín, P., Potočnik, K. & Fras, A. B. (2015). Determinants of students’ innovation in higher
education. Studies in Higher Education, 42(7), 1229-1243.
Mok, K. H., & Jiang, J. (2018). Massification of higher education and challenges for graduate
employment and social mobility: East Asian experiences and sociological reflections.
International Journal of Educational Development, 63(2018), 44-51.
Mok, K.H. (2016). Massification of higher education, graduate employment and social
mobility in the Greater China Region. British Journal of Sociology of Education, 37
(1), 51–71.
Pool, L. D. & Sewell, P. (2007). The key to employability: developing a practical model of
graduate employability. Education + Training, 49(4), 277-289.
Salmon, G. (2005) Flying not flapping: a strategic framework for e-learning and pedagogical
innovation in higher education institutions, ALT-J, Research in Learning Technology,
13(3), 201-218.
Sin, C., & Neave, G. (2016). Employability deconstructed: Perceptions of Bologna
stakeholders. Studies in Higher Education, 41(8), 1447-1462.
Tierney, W. G. and Lanford, M. (2016). Conceptualizing innovation in higher education. In
M. B. Paulsen (ed.), Higher Education: Handbook of Theory and Research, pp. 1-40.
Switzerland: Springer International Publishing.
Tomlinson, M. (2007). Graduate employability and student attitudes and orientations to the
labour market. Journal of Education and Work, 20(4), 285-304.
Tran, L. H. N. (2018). Game of blames: Higher education stakeholders’ perceptions of causes
of Vietnamese graduates’ skills gap. International Journal of Educational
Development, 62(2018), 303-312.
Vedder, R. (2017). Seven challenges facing Higher Education. Retrieved from
https://www.forbes.com/sites/ccap/2017/08/29/seven-challenges-facing-higher-
