At present, taking into consideration the economic situation and the aspects related to the social life, the students need permanent guarantees that the standards of their diplomas are acknowledged by the future employees at a national and international level, and the employees need guarantees that they may choose from well trained future employees. Among the important elements of quality assurance, the feedback of the employers or potential employers – respectively of the business market, represents a strategic element of a competitive and efficient quality assurance system of any university.practical training, lifelong learning, higher education, tutors

Rusu Corina

Vlad Miranda Petronella

English

Research Papers in Economics

693 
 
STUDY ON THE PERCEPTION OF THE EMPLOYEES RELATED TO THE 
TRAINING OF FUTURE GRADUATES 
Rusu Corina 
“Dimitrie Cantemir” Christian University Bucharest 
Faculty of Economic Sciences of Cluj-Napoca, 
Vlad Miranda-Petronella 
“Dimitrie Cantemir” Christian University Bucharest 
Faculty of Economic Sciences of Cluj-Napoca, 
 
At present, taking into consideration the economic situation and the aspects related to the social life, 
the students need permanent guarantees that the standards of their diplomas are acknowledged by the 
future employees at a national and international level, and the employees need guarantees that they 
may choose from well trained future employees. Among the important elements of quality assurance, 
the feedback of the employers or potential employers – respectively of the business market, represents a 
strategic element of a competitive and efficient quality assurance system of any university.  
 
Keywords: practical training, lifelong learning, higher education, tutors. 
 
JEL Classification Code: M 20 
 
Higher  education  is  a  service  offered  to  society,  which  has  a  very  strong  impact  on  the  personal 
development of individuals, as “it offers them the chance of being more freestanding, to have increased 
social  mobility,  professional  and  international  mobility,  increased  incomes  and  increased 
empowerment”
503. 
The permanent increase of the population who has access to this service (at least at the level of year 
2008)  has  created  higher  expectations,  increased  demands  of  the  beneficiaries  of  these  services. 
Although several young people do not succeed in making the necessary effort to graduate, the profit 
brought by this kind of education is clear and unanimously recognized in the Romanian society, so that 
we may uphold that all Romanian competitive universities are engaged in lifelong learning. 
At present, taking into consideration the economic situation and the aspects related to the social life, the 
students need permanent guarantees that the standards of their diplomas are acknowledged by the future 
employees  at  a national  and  international  level, and  the  employees  need  guarantees that they  may 
choose from well trained future employees. 
There is a common belief, presented in the Standards and Guides for Quality Assurance
504, that the 
formal policies and procedures, prepared by the Romanian Agency for Quality Assurance in Higher 
Education (ARACIS) together with the Ministry of Education and the management of universities, offer 
a framework where each higher education institution may develop and monitor the efficiency of its own 
system of quality assurance, and thus, the superior quality of the educational services offered. By the 
development  and  implementation  of  its  own  strategies,  policies  and  quality  procedures,  the  higher 
education institution engages explicitly to promote quality in all its activities.  
Among  the  important  elements  of  quality  assurance,  the  feedback  of  the  employers  or  potential 
employers – respectively of the business market, represents a strategic element of a competitive and 
efficient quality assurance system of any university.  
                                                       
503 POPESCU Sorin, Constatin Brătianu coord., Gabriela Atanasiu, Costache Rusu, Constantin Oprean, Adrian 
Curaj,   tefan  Buzărnescu,  Ioan  Pânzaru,  Ghidul  calită ii  în  învă ămîntul  superior,  Editura  Universită ii  din 
Bucure ti, 2004, pag.7. 
504 www.aracis.ro  694 
 
In this context, according to Law no. 258/ 2007
505 on the practical training of pupils and students, Order 
no.  3955  /  2008  on  the  approval  of  the  general  organization  framework  of  the  practical  training 
strategies of the bachelor and master degree programs, of the Ministry of Education, Research and 
Youth,  and  the  Regulation
506  on  the  professional  training  of  the  students  of  “Dimitrie  Cantemir” 
Christian University, Bucharest, the Faculty of Economic Sciences of Cluj – Napoca has made a study 
on the perception of the employers related to the training of the students. This study is a preliminary test 
of the questionnaire which the faculty wants to use in the future in all its collaborations with the 
practice partners. 
Based  on  an  evaluation  questionnaire  for  the  interns,  prepared  at  the  faculty,  the  tutors  (persons 
appointed by the practical training partner, who assure the observance of the training conditions and the 
knowledge of professional abilities planned for the period of the practical training), and the members of 
the department that prepares the practical training were asked to complete these questionnaires. We 
have interpreted the answers in this paper.  
We have to mention that the staff of our training partners for 2009  – 2010 academic year, for the 
students of the Economy of Commerce, Tourism and Services are persons from the sales and marketing 
departments of various companies, performing commercial activities, in Cluj – Napoca: 
 
No. 
Practical 
training 
partner 
Department 
Number of 
employees in the 
department 
Number of 
interns 
Number of 
processed 
questionnaires 
  Company  1  Sales department  5  3  15 
Marketing department   3  2  6 
  Company 2  Sales department  4  4  16 
Marketing department   1  1  1 
  Company 3  Sales department  3  3  9 
  Company 4  Sales department  4  4  16 
Total    20  17  63 
 
The questionnaire includes several questions. The respondent has evaluated each intern practicing in his 
department,  using  an  evaluation  scale  from  1  to  5,  where  5  means  “very  well”  and  1  means 
“insufficient”. 
Respondents’ answers related to the evaluation indicators of the interns 
  
Evaluation Indicators 
Number of answers 
Total  Very 
well 
(5) 
Well 
(4)  Indifferent(3)  Sufficient 
(2) 
Insufficient 
(1) 
Work quality  
- understanding   9  29  4  18  3  63 
-  speed  and  amount  of  work 
performed  11  27  9  9  7  63 
- achievement of the tasks given  17  19  5  12  10  63 
Reasoning  
- capacity to make logic and viable 
decisions  20  25  5  9  4  63 
- capacity to act independently or to  21  24  6  9  4  63 
                                                       
505 www.edu.ro 
506 www.ucdc.ro  695 
 
ask for help 
Creativity 
-  capacity  to  suggest  viable 
alternatives  7  16  9  25  6  63 
- capacity to apply efficiently their 
knowledge and abilities  10  18  28  5  2   
Problem solving 
-  capacity  to  identify,  analyze  and 
solve the problems   18  21  5  12  7  63 
-  capacity to analyze the impact of 
decisions before performing them  9  14  6  28  6  63 
Planning and organization abilities 
- capacity to prioritize  6  17  8  26  6  63 
-  capacity  to  observe  the  planned 
program  21  25  6  10  1  63 
-  capacity  to  manage  time  in  an 
efficient manner  9  14  6  28  6  63 
Communication and interpersonal abilities  
- capacity to express correctly and 
concise, both orally and in writing  5  19  6  29  4  63 
- capacity to be a good listener  11  19  5  26  2  63 
- capacity to interact tactfully when 
he  has  contact  with  internal  and 
external staff 
12  18  10  21  2  63 
- capacity to adapt to the team work, 
to collaborate to the achievement of 
the tasks 
12  17  6  28  0  63 
- punctuality  21  19  5  11  7  63 
- capacity to evaluate critically his 
own activity and to be impartial  15  20  8  13  6  63 
-  capacity  to  maintain 
confidentiality and to be trustworthy   27  19  6  10  1  63 
Professional curiosity and wish to 
learn  19  21  5  11  7  63 
Ability  to  use  the  logistics 
(computer, telephone, etc.)  26  21  5  9  3  63 
  
   696 
 
Respondents’ evaluation 
  Evaluation indicators  Average 
score 
  Work quality 
1  - understanding  3,36 
2  - speed and amount of work performed  3,41 
3  - achievement of the tasks given  3,33 
  Reasoning 
4  - capacity to make logic and viable decisions  3,76 
5  - capacity to act independently or to ask for help  3,82 
  Creativity 
6  - capacity to suggest viable alternatives  2,89 
7  - capacity to apply efficiently the knowledge and abilities  3,46 
  Problem solving 
8  - capacity to identify, analyze and solve the problems   3,49 
9  -  capacity to analyze the impact of decisions before performing them  2,87 
  Planning and organization abilities 
10  - capacity to prioritize   2,86 
11  - capacity to observe the planned program   3,87 
12  - capacity to manage time in an efficient manner  2,87 
  Communication and interpersonal abilities 
13  - capacity to express correctly and concise, both orally and in writing  2,87 
14  - capacity to be a good listener  3,17 
15  - capacity to interact tactfully when he has contact with internal and external 
staff 
3,27 
16  - capacity to adapt to the team work, to collaborate to the achievement of the 
tasks 
3,21 
17  - punctuality  3,57 
18  - capacity to evaluate critically his own activity and to be impartial  3,35 
19  - capacity to maintain confidentiality and to be trustworthy  3,97 
20  Professional curiosity and wish to learn  3,54 
21  Ability to use the logistics (computer, telephone, etc.)  3,96 
  
If we make a graph of the results obtained, respectively the average value of the marks, taking into 
consideration  that  the  maximum  mark  that  may  be  obtained  for  each  indicator  is  5,  we  have  the 
following information: 697 
 
3,87
3,96
3,54
3,97
3,35
3,57 3,21
3,27
3,17
2,87 2,87 2,86 2,87
3,49
3,46
2,89
3,82
3,76
3,33
3,41
3,36
0
1
2
3
4
5
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21
Average score
 
 
– the lowest average score is for the “capacity to prioritize” – 2,86 (when 41,26% of the 
respondents gave the mark “satisfactory” for this indicator). If this result is correlated with the very low 
score  of  the  indicator  “capacity  to  manage  time  in  an  efficient  manner”  –  2,86,  we  have  an 
unfavorable image of the element “Organization and planning activities”; namely, the future graduates 
have problems with organizing activities. The majority of these students are not capable to identify the 
priorities and manage their time to fulfill their tasks.  We may ask the question if this result is a signal 
related to the way the students are “fed” with theoretical elements, without having enough time to 
practice; or if there is a deficiency in the relationship with the practical training tutor, who cannot send 
the adequate information to the student. We think that both situations may be improved if in the future 
we lay stress on teaching strategies focusing on the student, on creating learning methods focusing on 
the student and if we renounce partly to the classical teaching method, which concentrates especially on 
giving information. 
– we think that the low result obtained for the indicator “capacity to express correctly and 
concise, both orally and in writing” – 2,87 is the unfavorable effect of the examination methods, as we 
know that in the higher education system, the written examination is the most used examination form. 
As if it weren’t bad enough this way, we have gone further and generalized the level of the bachelor 
programs, and the students have multiple choice forms to complete for their exams.  If for the written 
exams, where the students have to present the exam subjects, we have the possibility to see at least how 
they think, how they express in writing, at present, using the multiple choice tests and eliminating 
almost totally the oral examination, based on the hours spent by the students in front of the computer – 
we have “stolen” from them this minimum possibility to express themselves! We ask ourselves if this is 
a strong signal that the examination methods should be re-thought for the benefit of the student, by 
choosing methods focusing on the student, as we have already mentioned: case studies and role  – 
playing games during the seminars, respectively oral examination or based on projects for semester 
examinations. Is this the result of the pressure made by universities that register many students, without 
being able to offer them the necessary conditions for a quality education service? 
- as related to the result obtained for the indicator “capacity to maintain the confidentiality and 
to be trustworthy” – 3,97, we think that this is the result of the confidentiality conventions that the 
interns have signed with some practical training partners, by which they have undertaken to observe the 
confidentiality of commercial information they would find during their practical training; 698 
 
– it is important to notice the results obtained for the indicators “capacity to act independently 
and to ask for help”, respectively “capacity to observe the planned program”, which make us see better 
the employment possibilities of the future graduates. 
We think that this is a present-day subject. The partnership between universities and business 
environment is only the beginning, because as we try to understand each element that may connect the 
university and business environments, we find more and more questions that we have to answer as 
quickly as possible. 
Analyzing the first information, we think that the persons in charge with the practical training of the 
students,  together  with  the  practical  training  partners,  permanently  involving  the  students  and  all 
academic staff, have to be responsible for these practical trainings and analyze the following aspects:  
- alternatives of the teaching strategies focusing on involving the students in the teaching 
process, in order to offer them the possibility to improve their communication abilities, both 
in writing and especially the oral communication; 
- involvement of the Student Career Orientation and Counseling  Centre, which operates at 
each university and / or faculty and which should concentrate its whole activity according to 
the needs identified as a result of these studies, and at the same time to be a collaborator of 
the faculty in its relation with the business environment;  
- re-thinking of the examination forms and change of the written examinations with other 
forms of examinations as projects, test based on oral examinations; 
- organization of round table discussions where the representatives of the universities should 
discuss the best practices in the field of these strategic partnerships between the universities 
and the business environment; 
- organization of periodic meetings with the representatives of the business environment to 
identify the contradictions between the training of the future graduates and the requirements 
of the employers, as related to their training for their profession;  
- determination of performance indicators for the students’ professional activity, correlated to 
the results  of these  permanent studies  of  the  employers’  perception, in order  to  obtain a 
quality educational service.  
We think that within the context of the present reform of the Romanian education, the attention of the 
Romanian  universities  for  the  practical  research  activity,  respectively  for  the  students’  practical 
training, both at the bachelor and master degree programs (or maybe especially at these levels) should 
represent an important part of the process for the adaptation of the institutional evaluation procedures to 
the European standards for higher education. 
 
References 
1.  MILITARU  Cezar,  Sisteme  de  management  ale  calită ii  în  universită ile  române ti,  Editura 
PRINTECH, Bucure ti, 2009. 
2. POPESCU Sorin, Constatin Brătianu coord., Gabriela Atanasiu, Costache Rusu, Constantin Oprean, 
Adrian  Curaj,   tefan  Buzărnescu,  Ioan  Pânzaru,  Ghidul  calită ii  în  învă ămîntul  superior,  Editura 
Universită ii din Bucure ti, 2004. 
3. *** Barometrul calită ii - 2009, http://www.aracis.ro/latest/single/view/comunicat-de-presa-5/22/ 
4.  www.aracis.ro,  Metodologia  de  evaluare  externă,  standardele,  standardele  de  referin ă   i  lista 
indicatorilor de performan ă a Agen iei Române de Asigurare a Calită ii în Învă ământul Superior 
5. www.edu.ro, http://www.edu.ro/index.php/legaldocs/c485/?where=summary%20le%202 
6. www.ucdc.ro, http://www.ucdc.ro/regulamente.html. 
 
   

calită ii -

Constatin Brătianu coord., Gabriela Atanasiu, Costache Rusu, Constantin Oprean, Adrian Curaj, tefan Buzărnescu, Ioan Pânzaru, Ghidul calită ii în învă ămîntul superior, Editura Universită ii din Bucure ti,

de evaluare externă, standardele, standardele de referin ă i lista indicatorilor de performan ă a Agen iei Române de Asigurare a Calită ii în Învă ământul Superior

Sisteme de management ale calită ii în universită ile române ti, Editura PRINTECH, Bucure ti,

STUDY ON THE PERCEPTION OF THE EMPLOYEES RELATED TO THE TRAINING OF FUTURE GRADUATES

http://anale.steconomiceuoradea.ro/volume/2010/n1/108.pdf

STUDY ON THE PERCEPTION OF THE EMPLOYEES RELATED TO THE TRAINING OF FUTURE GRADUATES

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

Research Papers in Economics