Does university prepare students for employment? Alignment between graduate attributes, accreditation requirements and industry employability criteria

Introduction

Universities globally are progressively shifting their core business from knowledge transfer towards a more practical and employment-focused curricula that prepares students for professional careers and employment (Martin, Milne-Home, Barrett, Spalding, & Jones, 2000; Moore & Morton, 2015). University Graduate Attributes are designed to reflect student outcomes in regards to 21st century skills and capabilities keeping in mind the profession and the professional standards of the industry. Graduate attributes should reflect both the requirements of the accreditation standards and the industry needs. These attributes include both academic and generic skills required for participation/work in a particular profession. It is clear that students need a variety of skills to be prepared for the unpredictable and ever changing nature of the workplace.

Gaps have been identified in Europe with graduates from 13 countries expressing dissatisfaction with their tertiary education training (Fernandez, Lopez-Miguens, & Lampon, 2014). More than 40,000 students from the United Kingdom, France, Italy and Spain are reported to lack the required job skills and the skills they have acquired at university are believed to be of limited practical workplace use (ANECA, 2007). Furthermore, Spanish employers stated that university training offered poor resemblance to industry requirements. The employers gave a rating of 5.5 out of 10 for the quality of university graduates’ training when commencing work (Fernandez et al., 2014). Similarly, Jackson (2012) analysed the concerns of US, UK and Australian employers in relation to graduates’ skill-gaps, reporting deficiencies within the graduates’ skill-sets by identifying unmet industry requirements such as team working and communication.

Whilst curricula and graduate attributes are often developed with industry involvement that endeavours to address the gap between previous academic goals and industry needs (Gill, 2018), the research findings above suggest that the gaps still exist. The present investigation will focus on analysing the alignment between graduate attributes of three university courses, graduate attributes articulated by the accreditation bodies and the industry requirements reflected in online employment advertising. The underpinning orientation of this research is to determine whether the existing gaps are the result of the assignment of graduate attributes by universities and accrediting bodies that have goals different to those of employers. 

Literature review

The Australian Federal Government announced the creation of the Tertiary Education Quality Standards Authority (TEQSA) in 2009 to audit tertiary education institutions against five sets of standards, including standards for graduate learning outcomes (Kelder & Jones, 2015). These general or threshold standards reflect minimal requirements and quality expectations for Australian tertiary education institutions (TEQSA, 2015). In addition to the national standards, universities formulate a series of graduate attributes for each of their courses. In addition to this, universities seek feedback about their courses, from industry advisory groups and accrediting bodies, through course monitoring and benchmarking, to ensure that essential knowledge is relevant and current and addresses changes in industry standards. 

Australian universities have adopted a series of generic skills as a component of their graduate attributes. These are lists of ‘attributes, or competencies’ that graduates should acquire in completing their courses (Oliver, 2011; Jorre de St Jorre & Oliver, 2018). In a good practice report commissioned by the Learning and Teaching Council (Oliver, 2011) an examination of Australian university websites revealed consistency in the categorization of graduate attributes. The categories included: written and oral communication, critical and analytical thinking, problem-solving, information literacy, learning and working independently /collaboratively, ethical and inclusive engagement with communities, cultures and nations. Graduate attributes include both the knowledge (conceptual knowledge) and know-how (procedural knowledge) as they are deemed equally important in the process of learning (Hart, Bowden, & Watters, 1999). Employers value basic skills such as literacy and numeracy but also others such as teamwork, relationship building and problem solving. In addition, while academic writing skills are highly desired by university courses, some industry and employers indicated that academic writing skills do not appear to be a priority (Hart et al., 1999). 

Accreditation of allied health courses is an essential requirement that ensures educational effectiveness, quality assurance and ongoing enhancement in tertiary education levels that is maintained through annual course monitoring (McAllister & Nagarajan, 2015). This process is a structured method for universities to demonstrate accountability for the quality of their courses. This accountability extends to students, other universities, professional bodies, employer groups, the public and government by setting the minimal standards to uphold the integrity of the profession. Accreditation requires programs to demonstrate attainment of objectives related to the preparation of students for employment, and to include reasonable quality assurance standards in term of competencies (McAllister & Nagarajan, 2015). Traditional models of accreditation are compliance-driven and require documentation as evidence of the professional attributes of graduates. Accreditation bodies then audit universities collecting additional evidence and cross-reference data from multiple sources such as academics, students, clinical supervisors and employers (McAllister & Nagarajan, 2015).

Accreditation has often focused on educational inputs and resources, but in recent times there has been a shift in this focus with an increased emphasis being placed on student learning outcomes, attainment of competencies and 21st century skills (Camacho & Cayetano, 2012). This shift in emphasis is linked to changes such as enhanced curricular coherence (Health Workforce Australia, 2011), more efficient preparation of the health workforce, and enhanced public accountability for investments in health professional education (AHPRA, 2013; Health Workforce Australia, 2011). The graduate attributes created by universities and graduate attributes created by the accreditation bodies are most likely to align given the regulatory nature of the latter. However, the challenge is to identify the alignment between these two sets of attributes and the demands of the industry. 

One of the important aspects of tertiary education is to endeavour to provide students with learning outcomes to gain access to a complex and global job market (Harrison & Grant, 2016). These learning outcomes should consider industry demands and standards to facilitate transition to employment. While accreditation standards are essential to accredited courses, other ‘must-have’ essential skills must also inform the structure of courses, learning and assessments methods in an ongoing communication between universities and industry groups (Camacho & Cayetano, 2012; Messum, Wilkes, Peters, & Jackson, 2016). Many terms are used to describe practical and ‘work-ready’ skills, including generic skills, essential skills, soft skills, key competencies, transferable skills, enterprise skills and 21st century skills. These skills and attributes are required to enable employees to effectively participate in the workforce (Cranmer, 2006; Messum et al., 2016). The frameworks that include these skills are also broader than just those relevant to employment and may include attributes that can be described as life skills or graduate attributes (Bridgstock, 2009). 

Caballero, Walker and Fuller-Tyszkiewicz (2011,) defined work readiness as the extent to which graduates are perceived to possess the attitudes and attributes that make them prepared or ready for success in the work environment (p. 42). Yorke (2004) defined employability as a series of attributes that make graduates more likely to secure and maintain employment in their chosen occupations. Yorke (22004), and Shivoro, Shalyefu and Kadhila, (2018) further believe that these skills and attributes should be incorporated into the tertiary education curriculum. Fernandez, Lopez-Miguens and Lampon (2014) emphasised the importance of universities as links between the training received and the demands of the business world. Smith and Bath (2006) stated that these outcomes typically include a combination of qualities such as: critical thinking, intellectual curiosity, problem-solving, logical and independent thought, communication and information management skills, intellectual rigour, creativity and imagination, ethical practice, integrity and tolerance.

Desirable graduate attributes across the Australian university sector are predominantly consistent with accreditation requirements and industry needs (Hajkowicz et al., 2016). Although there is consistency in the desired graduate attributes across institutions, accreditation bodies and industry, the degree of alignment between the three sectors is pivotal for graduates to attain employment and warrants further investigation. Hart and colleagues (1999), stated that: 

…only when there are explicit links between university – and professionally defined graduate competencies, students learning objectives, learning opportunities and assessment strategies will there be confidence in the quality of the programme as a preparation for professional practice (p. 307). 

The present investigation aimed to ascertain the degree of alignment between the graduate attributes of courses at an Australian university, graduate attributes from accreditation bodies and the industry requirements reflected in online employment advertising. Job advertisements reflect the skills and personal attributes that are sought by employers and provide a platform for understanding employers’ needs (Arcodia & Barker, 2008).Two questions underpinned this research: 

1. Does university prepare students for employment? 
2. Do graduate attributes, accreditation requirements and industry employability criteria align?

Methodology

Data collection

Graduate attributes were obtained from the Course Approval and Management System. Course learning outcomes were also available, but for the purpose of this paper were not included in the analysis. The following graduate attributes are common to all courses offered by the university in question: 

1. Adaptable and capable 21st century citizens who can communicate effectively, work collaboratively, think critically and solve complex problems. 
2. Confident, creative lifelong learners who can use their understanding of themselves and others to achieve their goals in work and learning. 
3. Responsible and ethical citizens who use their intercultural understanding to contribute to their local and global communities. 

Relevant accreditation requirements were sourced from the respective bodies. The Australian Psychology Accreditation Council is an independent quality and standards organisation, appointed as an external accreditation entity for the Psychology Profession in Australia (Burton, Westen, & Kowalski, 2015). Data was sourced from the Rules for Accreditation and Accreditation Standards for Psychology Courses (APAC, 2010). The Australian Nursing and Midwifery Accreditation Council (ANMAC) is the accrediting authority for nursing and midwifery programs of study (Ralph, Birks, & Chapman, 2015). Data was sourced from the Registered Nurse Accreditation Standards (ANMAC, 2012). Finally, the Australian Institute for Teaching and School Leadership (AITSL) is the organisation for maintaining the accreditation standards in relation to education (Temperley, 2011). Data was sourced from the Guidelines for the accreditation of initial teacher education programs in Australia (AITSL, 2016). 

A search of advertised job positions for the three discipline fields was conducted using the popular job-search engine (SEEK) to ascertain employability criteria. SEEK is considered one of the most used job-search engines in Australia (Australian Business Report, 2017). The specific keyword and classification search criteria for each profession are provided below in Table 1. To remove any potential researcher bias, the first three jobs the SEEK search produced were selected, except when; advertisements provided too little information about the job to glean useful information; advertisements were for senior positions not suitable to entry-level university graduates; advertisements were for jobs that had very specific roles within one of the professions; or if the three selected advertisements were repetitious.

Study design and analysis

Analysis was conducted to explore the degree of alignment between graduate attributes, accreditation requirements and industry employability criteria in nursing, psychology and education courses. Thematic analysis techniques were deemed as the most appropriate in order to identify themes and patterns within the data from different sources (Braun & Clarke, 2006). Following a combined theoretical and inductive approach, the themes were identified and aligned from different data sources (Braun & Clarke, 2006). Document analyses yielded data—excerpts, quotations, or entire passages—that were then organised into major themes, categories, and case examples through content analysis (Bowen, 2009). A systematic review of the documents focussed on identifying the common themes between the sources of data aiming to align key words/concepts (Bowen, 2009; Braun & Clarke, 2006). Following Bowen’s recommendation for qualitative research the researchers determined the authenticity and usefulness of the sources, taking into account the original purpose of each document, the context in which it was produced, and the intended audience. 

Results

The tables below are designed to explore the alignment between graduate attributes, industry accreditation standards and online industry job advertisements across the three disciplines. Blank table cells indicate no alignment between one or more of the data sources. 

A systematic content review indicated that the three course specific graduate attributes (CSGA) capture the six graduate attributes (GA) required for accreditation in the psychology course. The second part of this GA is well and clearly aligned to CSGA 1 (b). The GA3 refers to critical thinking and this is aligned with CSGA 1 (a). However, the second and third qualifiers for the GA appear vague and there is no clear alignment with the CSGAs. GAs four and five are also well aligned to CSGA3 and CSGA1(c) respectively. Finally, the alignment of GA 6 appears to be less defined as the language contained in the qualifiers is not always reflected within the CSGAs.

Table 3 demonstrates an alignment as Standard 1 contains requirements relating to the course provider and Standard 2 is captured in CSGA1. There is definitely alignment between standards 4 and 8 and the CSGAs. Standards 5, 7 and 9 refer to pre-admission requirements and resources for the course and quality improvement/risk management respectively. However, CSGA3 does not appear to be explicitly related to industry requirements for the Bachelor of Midwifery/Bachelor of Nursing. The Bachelor of Midwifery/Bachelor of Nursing graduate attributes, accreditation standards and industry requirements were substantially aligned in relation to practical skills. These skills included: problem solving, critical thinking, written and oral communication, working collaboratively and independently, leadership and decision making amongst others. 

Table 4 shows results for education. There was a substantial level of alignment between CSGA1 and CSGA2 and the content of advertisements when compared to CSGA3, which appears poorly aligned (see table 4). The industry requires the applicants to be caring, considerate, and compassionate with a commitment to equal opportunity and work safety, indicating alignment to CSGA3 and standard 4 (table 4). There are elements of CSGA3 relating to multiculturalism, inclusion and diversity that are not explicitly mentioned in the job advertisements

Discussion

The present investigation explored alignment between the course specific graduate attributes of an Australian university, the graduate attributes required by accreditation bodies in three disciplines and the industry requirements reflected in online employment advertising for those disciplines. The key and novel findings of the present investigation were: 

1. Greater alignment between university graduate attributes and accreditation requirements in comparison to industry employability criteria from job advertisements. 
2. Employers sought and prioritised graduates who possess practical competencies and 21st century skills such as problem solving and communication, with little to no mention of cultural understandings and attitudes towards inclusion and diversity.

In order to ascertain whether universities prepare students for the workforce it is necessary to discuss the degree of alignment between what universities offer and what is required to obtain employment (Camacho & Cayetano, 2012; Fernandez, Lopez-Miguens, & Lampon, 2014; Harrison & Grant, 2016, Messum et al., 2016). Results indicated that there is substantial alignment which would satisfy the traditional employability definitions (Caballero et al., 2011; Gill, 2018). The results coincide with Bath, Smith, Stein and Swann, (2004) as the alignment was present in relation to critical and logical thinking, intellectual curiosity, problem solving, communication and creativity skills, ethical practice, integrity and tolerance. This alignment also concurs with other studies (Oliver, 2011; Oliver, 2015; Jorre de St Jorre, & Oliver, 2018) in regards to the previously mentioned skills. However, there is limited alignment in relation to inclusive engagement with communities, cultures and nations (Oliver, 2015). Universities have included cultural understanding and inclusion and diversity in their graduate and course specific attributes as demonstrated in the tables above. Industry values these attributes as they have strategic policies regarding culture, inclusion and diversity but they are not always able to demonstrate how these policies would work on the ground (Pless & Maak, 2004). This may explain why specific reference to these attributes is missing in the job advertisements. In relation to the psychology course, the first identifiable misalignment refers to understanding the role of culture, values and dispositions (see Table 2). 

Universities and accreditation bodies place high importance on cultural, social and environmental issues (Oliver 2015), whilst industry does not according to the online employability criteria analysed in this study. Course accreditation processes appear to be more stringent when crossreferencing current university standards and less successful at auditing rapidly evolving industry needs and subsequently relaying these to the university sector to ensure graduates are employable in the 21st century (McAllister & Nagarjan, 2015). Accrediting bodies and universities must acknowledge that technological advances and data analytics are impacting and shaping the jobs of the future and orient graduate attributes accordingly (e.g. develop technological literacies).The new version of the Australian Psychology Accreditation Council Standards effective from 01/01/2019 appear to be written from a more pragmatic perspective instead of a philosophical or academic approach. The focus of the new standards appears to be around the practice placements in what represents a shift towards a closer connection to the practice of professional psychology in the workforce. Indeed, some of the previous language appears to be vague, including words such myths, pseudoscience and fallacies of humankind. The results from the present investigation concur with those of Arcodia and Barker (2008) and Bath, Smith, Stein and Swann, (2004), who identified key skills sought by employers of nurses and allied health workers such as: organisation, people and problem solving skills. These results differ from Oliver (2015) as the industry requirements for nursing do not include diversity and cultural demands for graduates. The majority of Australian universities listed culture awareness and diversity within their graduate attributes (Oliver, 2015). This was the case for this university and the nursing accreditation body (ANMAC) in the current study. Similarly to the psychology course, cultural awareness does not appear to be explicitly related to industry requirements. In addition, the graduate attributes had a significant focus in making a contribution to a more equitable and sustainable world. This focus was not present in the industry job requirements. 

The industry requirements articulated in job advertisements appear to focus on knowledge and content for all three disciplines. Like both the psychology and midwife/nursing courses, the industry requirements for education appeared to be focused around knowledge and content reflected in skill sets (Hart et al., 1999). Employers desired candidates with excellent communication, planning and organisational skills. These skills and attributes are consistent with previous literature (Cranmer, 2006; Messum et al., 2016) outlining industry demands for employees to be effective in the workforce. Educational institutions also sought graduates who were passionate, compassionate, engaging, adaptive and reflective. The aforementioned personal attributes were only partially mentioned within the graduate attributes and accreditation standards for education (AITSL). In contrast, both attributes and standards described in detail cultural awareness, values, beliefs and diversity yet were not explicitly stated within job advertisements. 

The divergent levels of alignment between pragmatic knowledge and ethical themes may be due to the former relating to industry related skills and competencies as opposed to the latter which refer to attitudes, values and beliefs that are rarely mentioned within job advertisements, but may be a part of broader workplace culture documents. In the 21st century there is a possibility that employers within a market-driven environment prioritise employees who possess productivity-related attributes above ethical and cultural awareness, because of a lack of recognition of the relationship between workplace culture and productivity. Another possible rationale for why industry employment criteria did not align with graduate attributes or accreditation standards when referring to cultural beliefs, values and dispositions may be that employers implicitly or inherently expect potential job candidates to possess certain values and attributes as university trained professionals, and thereby do not list them within online advertisements. 

Industry needs to clearly articulate their requirements to enable universities to design their curricula and convey these expectations explicitly to students in an attempt to address the skills gaps (Jackson, 2009). In order for this to occur it would require clearer communication between industry and Universities to address the attributes that are key to the specific industry. It is evident that the Universities curricula does address the industry knowledge and skill requirements in most cases, but what is missing is the explicit reference to the attributes of cultural awareness, values, beliefs and diversity. Industry has policies to suggest these are important and so must ensure that these attributes are communicated to Universities and students alike.

Universities have CSGA and GA as they are not only developing industry ready graduates but also graduates who are completing courses that are not industry specific. Universities are a place of learning about content knowledge, and the process of learning itself and would be compromised if they only developed key competencies for industry specific means. Each University has an obligation to the students they teach to develop attributes that would serve them in this current climate. 

Strengths and limitations

Conducting a systematic thematic analysis by collating and comparing data from three different sources (university, accreditation bodies and industry advertisements) identified clear patterns between the sources (i.e. alignment or misalignment). Consistent findings across multiple disciplines validates the stringent methodology of this study.

A small sample of advertisements were utilised from one recruitment platform (SEEK) which is a limitation of this study that may have biased the findings. This research present an early understanding of the alignment between universities accrediting bodies and industry requirements. While this study did not explore the course learning outcomes or individual unit learning outcomes which may have provided further insight into the degree of alignment between the three sectors it has provided an insight into the differences between three sources.

Practical applications and future directions

The findings of this study may inform the development of future graduate attributes that better reflect preparedness for the workforce.

Further research will benefit from interviewing industry leaders in order to obtain a richer understanding of their expectations in relation to prospective employees. Given the findings of the present study, further investigation of the degree of alignment between the three sectors and other discipline courses is warranted. In addition, the alignment between course learning outcomes and Australian government guidelines such Job Outlook (https://joboutlook.gov.au/) should also be considered and explored. 

Conclusion

Thematic analysis identified clear alignment between an Australian university’s graduate attributes and the accreditation bodies standards for psychology, nursing and education. This may come as no surprise as these standards drive course design, course content and further the development of graduate attributes within each course. The differences in specific criteria and language may be explained by an understanding of graduate attributes as wider reaching statements that include an alignment with the values of the universities and the cohorts they serve. Job searches across the three disciplines indicated that employers are seeking and prioritising graduates who possess practical competencies and 21st century skills such as problem solving and communication with little mention of cultural understandings and attitudes. The findings of this study may inform the development of future graduate attributes that better reflect preparedness for the workforce. Alternatively, they may inform workplaces about the increasing need for entry-level positions to require an understanding of, and capacity to work within, an increasingly diverse society

References

1. ANECA (2007). 2007). Proyecto Réflex. Informe Ejecutivo. El profesional flexible en la sociedad de lconocimiento. http://www.aneca.es/var/media/151847/Informeejecutivoaneca_jornadasreflexv20.pdf
2. Australian Business Report (2017). The top ten Australian websites for jobs (25/01/2017). http://www.australianbusinessreport.com.au/
3. Australian Government Tertiary Education Quality and Standards Agency (TEQSA). (2016). TEQSA Annual Report 2015-2016. Australian Government Tertiary Education Quality and Standards Agency. Australian Government Tertiary Education Quality and Standards Agency. https://www.teqsa.gov.au/for-providers/resources/teqsa-annual-report-2015-16
4. Australian Institute for Teaching and School Leadership (2016). Guidelines for the accreditation of initial teacher education programs in Australia. Melbourne: AITSL. Available from:
   https://www.aitsl.edu.au/docs/default-source/initial-teacher-education-resources/guidancefor-the-accreditation-of-initial-teacher-education-in-australia.pdf
5. Australian Nursing and Midwifery Accreditation Council (2012). Registered Nurse Accreditation Standards. Available from:
   https://www.anmac.org.au/sites/default/files/documents/ANMAC_RN_Accreditation_Standards_2012.pdf
6. Australian Psychology Accreditation Council (2010). Rules for Accreditation and Accreditation Standards for Psychology Courses. Melbourne: Australia. Available from:
   https://www.psychologycouncil.org.au/sites/default/files/public/Standards_Rules_2010_Jun_APAC_Accreditation_for%20_Psychology_Courses_v10.pdf
7. Arcodia, C., & Barker, T. (2002). A review of web-based job advertisements for Australian event management positions. Journal of Human Resources in Hospitality & Tourism, 1(4), 1–18,
   https://doi.org/10.1300/J171v01n04_01
8. Bath, D., Smith, C., Stein, S., & Swann, R. (2004). Beyond mapping and embedding graduate attributes: bringing together quality assurance and action learning to create a validated and living curriculum. Higher Education Research & Development, 23(3), 313–328.
9. Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa 
10. Bridgstock, R. (2009). The graduate attributes we’ve overlooked: Enhancing graduate employability through career management skills. Higher Education Research & Development, 28(1), 31–44. https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360802444347
11. Bowen, G. A. (2009). Document analysis as a qualitative research method. Qualitative Research Journal, 9(2), 27-40, https://doi.org/10.3316/QRJ0902027
12. Burton, L., Westen, D., & Kowalski, R. (2016). Psychology, 4th Australian and New Zealand Edition. NZ: John Wiley & Sons.
13. Cranmer, S. (2006). Enhancing graduate employability: Best intentions and mixed outcomes. Studies in Higher Education, 31(2), 169–184. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075070600572041 
14. Fernández, G., López-Miguens, M. J., & Lampón, J. F. (2014). Spanish universities and their Involvement with the employability of graduates. Revista Española de Investigaciones Sociologicas, (146), 23–45, https://doi.org/10.5477/cis/reis.146.23
15. Caballero, C., Walker, A., & Fuller-Tyszkiewicz, M. (2011). The Work Readiness Scale (WRS): Developing a measure to assess work readiness in college graduates. Journal of Teaching
    1. and Learning for Graduate Employability, 2(2), 41–54,
    2. https://doi.org/10.21153/jtlge2011vol2no1art552
16. Gill, R. (2018). Building employability skills for higher education students: An Australian example. Journal of Teaching and Learning for Graduate Employability, 9(1), 84–92. Available from: https://doi.org/10.21153/jtlge2018vol9no1art739 
17. Hajkowicz, S., Reeson, A., Rudd, L., Bratanova, A., Hodgers, L., Mason, C., & Boughen, N. (2016). Tomorrow’s digitally enabled workforce: Megatrends and scenarios for jobs and employment in Australia over the coming twenty years. Brisbane: CSIRO. Available from: https://doi.org/10.4225/08/58557df808f71
18. Harrison, S., & Grant, C. (2016). Chasing a moving target: Perceptions of work readiness and graduate capabilities in music higher research degree students. British Journal of Music Education, 33(2), 205–218
19. Hart, G., Bowden, J., & Watters, J. (1999). Graduate capabilities: A framework for assessing course quality. Higher Education in Europe, 24(2), 301–308. Available from:
    https://doi.org/10.1080/0379772990240219 
20. Jackson, D. (2012). Testing a model of undergraduate competence in employability skills and its implications for stakeholders. Journal of Education and Work 27(2), 1–23. DOI:10.1080/13639080.2012.718750
21. Jorre de St Jorre, T., & Oliver, B. (2018). Want students to engage? Contextualise graduate learning outcomes and assess for employability. Higher Education Research & Development, 37(1), 44–5. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2017.1339183
22. Kaminski, K., Switzer, J., & Gloeckner, G. (2009). Workforce readiness: A study of university students’ fluency with information technology. Computers & Education, 53(2), 228–233.
23. Kelder, J-A., & Jones, S. M. (2015). The Science Learning and Teaching Academic Standards Project: A discipline community’s response to regulatory change in Australian higher education. In T. Thomas, E. Levin, P. Dawson, K. Fraser & R. Hadgraft (Eds.), Learning for life and work in a complex world, 38 (pp. 256-266). HERDSA: Melbourne, Australia, 6 – 9 July 2015.
24. Kivunja, C. (2014).Do you want your students to be job-ready with 21st Century skills? Change pedagogies: A pedagogical paradigm shift from Vygotskyian social constructivism to critical thinking, problem solving and Siemens’ digital connectivism. International Journal of Higher Education, 3 (3), 81–91. doi:10.5430/ijhe.v3n3p81
25. McAllister, L, & Nagarajan, S. V. (2015). Accreditation requirements in allied health education: Strengths, weaknesses and missed opportunities. Journal of Teaching and Learning for Graduate Employability, 6(1), 2–24. Available from:
    https://doi.org/10.21153/jtlge2015vol6no1art570
26. Martin, A. J., Milne-Home, J., Barrett, J., Spalding, E., & Jones, G. (2000). Graduate satisfaction with university and perceived employment preparation. Journal of Education & Work, 13(2), 199–213. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1080/713676986 
27. Messum, D., Wilkes, L., Peters, C., & Jackson, D. (2017). Senior managers’ and recent graduates’ perceptions of employability skills for health services management. Asia-Pacific Journal of Cooperative Education, 18(2), 115–128. 
28. Moore, T., & Morton, J. (2017). The myth of job readiness? Written communication, employability, and the ‘skills gap’ in higher education, Studies in Higher Education, 42(3), 591–609. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2015.1067602
29. Oliver, B. (2011). Assuring graduate capabilities: Good Practice Report. Sydney: Australian Learning and Teaching Council. Available from: http://www.altc.edu.au/resource-assuringgraduate-outcomes-curtin-2011
30. Oliver, B. (2015). Assuring graduate capabilities: Evidencing levels of achievement for graduate employability. Sydney: Office for Learning and Teaching. Available from: http://www.assuringgraduatecapabilities.com/uploads/4/5/0/5/45053363/oliver_report_2015.p
31. Pless, N., & Maak, T. (2004). Building an inclusive diversity culture: Principles, processes and practice. Journal of Business Ethics, 54(2), 129–147.
32. Ralph, N., Birks, M., & Chapman, Y. (2015). The accreditation of nursing education in Australia. Collegian (Royal College of Nursing, Australia), 22(1), 3–7.
33. Shivoro, R. S., Shalyefu, R. K., & Kadhila, N. (2018). Perspectives on graduate employability attributes for management sciences graduates. South African Journal of Higher Education, 32(1), 216–232.
34. Timperley, H (2011). A background paper to inform the development of a national professional development framework for teachers and school leaders. Melbourne, Victoria: Australian Institute for Teaching and School Leadership. Available from:
    https://enable.eq.edu.au/Supportandresources/Formsanddocuments/Documents/background
35. Yorke, M. (2004). Employability in the undergraduate curriculum: Some student perspectives. European Journal of Education, 39, 409–427. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1465-3435.2004.00194.x 

---

This article is governed by: