Reddy, Peter

Senior, Carl

Senior, Rowena

Frontiers in Psychology

English

PubMed

Aston Publications Explorer

OPINION ARTICLEpublished: 20 March 2014doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2014.00238The relationship between student employability andstudent engagement: working toward a more unifiedtheoryCarl Senior1*, Peter Reddy1 and Rowena Senior21 School of Life and Health Sciences, Aston University, Birmingham, UK2 Centre for Learning and Innovation in Professional Practice, Aston University, Birmingham, UK*Correspondence: c.senior@aston.ac.ukEdited and reviewed by:Chris Howard, University of Derby, UKKeywords: engagement, employability, students, university, retentionAs the field of Psychology evolves thereis much interest in understanding howeducational practices can be shaped tofacilitate the recruitment and engagementof students (Halpern and Hakel, 2010).Highlighting the multiplicity of researchapproaches within Psychology is one wayin which to advance the field. Indeed,in her recent article Rees (2013) arguesthat the multiplicity of research topics andmethodologies is especially important tothe discipline and that “promoting andhighlighting this should be considered asa potentially effective recruitment strat-egy” (Rees, 2013 p. 1). Rees argues thatthe tension in Psychology between thetraditional use of scientific method andthe inappropriateness of this approach tomany of the phenomena of interest cre-ate a dialectic that is both an opportu-nity and a threat. A threat in that suchconflict may be off-putting but an oppor-tunity in that methodological pluralismmay be a selling point. Rees goes on tosupport Henriques (2013) in arguing thatattempting to unify Psychology around acommitment to research methodology isflawed and that conceptual unification isnecessary.It is Rees’s argument that highlightingthe unique nature of empirical Psychologyis a necessity for student recruitment thatis the focus of this paper. Rees suggeststhat only by highlighting the unique plu-rality of approaches to our incoming stu-dents can we ensure that they becomeaware of the dialectic that is idiosyn-cratic to the field of Psychology. By fur-ther developing an understanding of thisdialectic it is possible that our studentswill come equipped with a more realis-tic understanding of what are the uniquecontributions that Psychology can make toour everyday lives. It is this latter aspectof the Rees model that has great utilityand the potential for significant impacton the recruitment, engagement, and sub-sequent retention of talented undergrad-uate students. However, such a modelonly describes one mechanism for studentengagement and as such it needs to bedeveloped further before it can contributeto the “unified theory which focuses onproviding a conceptual map of the fullbreadth of psychological enquiry” (Rees,2013 p. 1). In order to do this one mustconsider the unique mindset of the stu-dents themselves as the central and signif-icant component of the model before wecan arrive at such a unified theory.Nearly all UK undergraduate stu-dents are engaged in employment duringtheir studies and consideration of suc-cessful employability post graduation isnow a key motivator for undergraduates(Blackwell et al., 2001; Bridgstock, 2009).In light of this, by understanding the needsand expectations of the undergraduatestudent around employability it is possibleto develop a more ecologically soundapproach to effective student engagement1.The importance of successful entry intothe graduate job market is a significantextrinsic motivator for undergraduate stu-dents (Cassidy and Wright, 2008). Withinthe UK HE sector alone there has been1It is also worth highlighting the utility of thisapproach in regards to the various national keyperformance indicators such the National StudentSurvey in the UK.an almost universal drive to increaseemployability skills training and nearly allof the major national key performanceindicators include ametric on the vibrancyof a graduating cohorts employabilityhealth (Wright et al., 2010). Institutesare readily developing a full range oftraining opportunities that allow studentsto develop the authentic and transfer-able skills that would benefit their entryto the job market e.g., from CV writ-ing advice sessions to entire years of anacademic programme spent in structuredwork placements within industry (Fallowsand Steven, 2000; Cassidy, 2006). Howeverthe constant aspect that is evident acrosssuch diverse innovation is the fact thatall place the individual student firmly atthe center of the learning experience withidiosyncratic and, in some cases, a highlyspecific, learning experience that is shapedby the students themselves (Lantz andReddy, 2010). It is the student that in mostcases identifies the type of training hat theyneed or the location of their placementyear. By placing the student at the centerof this learning process the design of activelearning programmes can benefit greatlyfrom a unique insight into the develop-ment of a transferable skill-set (Bridges,1993). Moreover, the importance of suchtransferable skills would mean that theself directed nature of such study wouldbe more effective than a more traditionaldidactic delivery (Gureckis and Markant,2012). In other words by allowing studentsthe opportunity to reflect on their ownemployment experiences with other stu-dents they are more motivated to under-stand further the competencies that arewww.frontiersin.org March 2014 | Volume 5 | Article 238 | 1Senior et al. The relationship between student employability and student engagementeffective in work. In light of the aboveit would be prudent to expand the Reesmodel to include the unique experiencethat the student has in the world of workand to design programmes around suchexperiences.When one considers the importanttransferable skillset that the student devel-ops while experiencing an industry place-ment etc programme managers shouldplace such a student centered experienceat the very heart of the learning pro-cess (Reddy and Rochelle, 2008). Thiscould take the form of actual work expe-rience or even the design of assessmentsthat are structured around the applica-tion of psychological theory to real lifework scenarios. This vital aspect of pro-gramme engineering can return great div-idends with ensuring students are readilyrecruited to our programmes and can beachieved with surprisingly little effort in anumber of stages that ensures the incom-ing student is readily engaged within aneffective learning role (Van De Ven, 2007).Does a focus on employability favorvocational degrees? Does this threatenPsychology as a non-vocational degree,and the university tradition which is essen-tially, in the Newman tradition, non-vocational? A response is to argue for“psychological literacy” (see McGovernet al., 2009; Cranney and Dunn, 2011).In essence it suggests that knowledge ofresearch and theory in psychology, andthe full methodological range advocatedby Rees would strengthen this, allowsstudents to detect false argument better,and become better citizens and employ-ees. An emphasis on employability andpsychological literacy is not necessarilyin conflict with traditional values; someinfluential definitions of employabilityemphasize such scholarly attributes:“Employability is not just about get-ting a job. Conversely, just because astudent is on a vocational course doesnot mean that somehow employabilityis automatic. Employability is more thanabout developing attributes, techniquesor experience just to enable a student toget a job, or to progress within a cur-rent career. It is about learning and theemphasis is less on “employ” and moreon “ability.” In essence, the emphasisis on developing critical, reflective abil-ities, with a view to empowering andenhancing the learner.” (Harvey, 2003,cited in Pegg et al., 2012 p. 4 [our bold]).A further dimension can be added. Barnett(2009) suggests that Higher Education hasmoved almost by stealth from a focuson knowledge to a focus on skills andcompetencies. He argues that as we moveinto a world of further and further com-plexity neither knowledge nor skills is asecure foundation. He suggests that weneed in addition to focus on ontology,on our students’ being and becoming.He argues that encounters with disci-plinary knowledge through teaching andcurricula, such as that in Psychology,support the development of epistemicvirtues. A demanding curriculum helpsresilience to form; contrasting perspec-tives help to promote openness; requiringattendance and engagement develops self-discipline; space encourages authenticityand integrity. Teaching that requires stu-dents to engage with each other helps tofoster respect, generosity and preparednessto listen; explicit standards support care-fulness and restraint; encouragement helpsto keep students going forward and to beopen to new experience; enthusiasm givesnew spirit and encourages the will to learn;being required to put forward ones ownviews helps students to find the courage tostake a claim and to own a position; requir-ing students to give of selves and be activehelps to develop the will to engage.So—attracting really good students isabout the fascination of a subject con-cerned with what people, think feel anddo (not to mention dream, strive for, loveand fear). Educating means getting peo-ple to be excellent scholars, and translat-ing this into the skills and competenciesthat employers seek in graduate recruits,helping students to see that psychologicalliteracy and an appreciation of the dialec-tic in psychology and our methodologicalpluralism offers valuable ways of seeingand understanding, and helping studentsto learn from and understand the cen-tral importance of being and becomingthrough study.By designing academic programmesaround the various stages of the learn-ing process described above one can besure that such programmes are not onlyeffective in delivering a relevant curricu-lum but one that attracts, engages andretains enthusiastic and talented studentsto the field. There is no doubt that Rees(2013) should be applauded for initiatingthe crucial debate as to which factors drivestudent engagement. Here it is argued thatemployability training that embeds thestudent work experience within industryshould also be included into this portfo-lio of effective approaches. The redesignof programmes to includes such strate-gies may seem complex yet this is theonly way to ensure that students areconstantly attracted to the degree pro-grammes delivered within universities andthen perhaps more importantly remainengaged.REFERENCESBarnett, R. (2009). Knowing and becoming in thehigher education curriculum. Stud. High. Educ. 34,429–440. doi: 10.1080/03075070902771978Blackwell, A., Bowes, L., Harvey, L., Hesketh, A., andKnight, P. (2001). Transforming work experiencein higher education. Br. Educ. Res. J. 27, 269–285.doi: 10.1080/01411920120048304Bridges, D. (1993). Transferable skills: a philosophi-cal perspective. Stud. High. Educ. 18, 43–51. doi:10.1080/03075079312331382448Bridgstock, R. (2009). The graduate attributes we’veoverlooked: enhancing graduate employabilitythrough career management skills.High. Educ. Res.Dev. 28, 31–44. doi: 10.1080/07294360802444347Cassidy, S. (2006). Developing employability skills:peer assessment in higher education. Educ. Train.48, 508–517. doi: 10.1108/00400910610705890Cassidy, T., and Wright, L. (2008). Graduate employ-ment status and health: a longitudinal analysis ofthe transition from student. Soc. Psychol. Educ. 11,181–191. doi: 10.1007/s11218-007-9043-xCranney, J. and Dunn, D. (eds.). (2011).The Psychologically Literate Citizen. NewYork, NY: Oxford University Press. doi:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199794942.001.0001Fallows, S., and Steven, C. (2000). Building employa-bility skills into the higher education curriculum:a university wide initiative. Educ. Train. 42, 75–83.doi: 10.1108/00400910010331620Gureckis, T., and Markant, D. (2012). Self-directedlearning: a cognitive and computational per-spective. Perspect. Psychol. Sci. 7, 464–481. doi:10.1177/1745691612454304Halpern, D., and Hakel, M. (2010). Applyingthe science of learning to the University andbeyond: teaching the long-term retention andtransfer. Change Mag. High. Learn. 35, 36–41. doi:10.1080/00091380309604109Harvey, L. (2003). Transitions from Higher Educationto Work: A briefing paper prepared by Lee Harvey(Centre for Research and Evaluation, SheffieldHallam University), with advice from ESECT andLTSNGeneric Centre colleagues. Available online at:http://bit.ly/oeCgqWHenriques, G. (2013). Evolving from methodologicalto conceptual unification. Rev. Gen. Psychol. 17,168–173. doi: 10.1037/a0032929Frontiers in Psychology | Educational Psychology March 2014 | Volume 5 | Article 238 | 2Senior et al. The relationship between student employability and student engagementLantz, C., and Reddy, P. (2010). Misconceptions andmore. Psychologist 23, 758–761.McGovern, T., Corey, L., Cranney, J., Dixon, W.,Holmes, J., Kuebli, J., et al. (2009) “Psychologicallyliterate citizens,” in Undergraduate Education inPsychology, ed D. Halpern (Washington, DC:American Psychological Association), 9–27.Pegg, A., Waldock, J., Hendy-Isaac, S., and Lawton, R.(2012). Pedagogy for Employability. New York, NY:Higher Education Academy.Reddy, P., and Rochelle, K. (2008). The psychol-ogy degree in its place. Psychol. Teach. Rev. 14,46–50.Rees, C. (2013). Promoting psychology to stu-dents: embracing the multiplicity of research fociand method. Front. Educ. Psychol. 4:774. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2013.00774Van De Ven, A. (2007). “Engaged scholarship in aprofessional school,” in Engaged Scholarship: AGuide for Organisational and Social Research, edA. Van De Ven (Oxford: Oxford University Press),14–48.Wright, J., Brinkley, I., and Clayton, N. S.(2010). Employability and Skills in the UK:Redefining the Debate. London: The WorkFoundation.Received: 31 January 2014; paper pending published:20 February 2014; accepted: 03 March 2014; publishedonline: 20 March 2014.Citation: Senior C, Reddy P and Senior R (2014) Therelationship between student employability and studentengagement: working toward a more unified theory.Front. Psychol. 5:238. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2014.00238This article was submitted to Educational Psychology, asection of the journal Frontiers in Psychology.Copyright © 2014 Senior, Reddy and Senior. This isan open-access article distributed under the terms of theCreative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). Theuse, distribution or reproduction in other forums is per-mitted, provided the original author(s) or licensor arecredited and that the original publication in this journalis cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice.No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted whichdoes not comply with these terms.www.frontiersin.org March 2014 | Volume 5 | Article 238 | 3

The relationship between student employability and student engagement:working toward a more unified theory

Carl Senior

Peter Reddy

Rowena Senior

Frontiers - Publisher Connector

OPINION ARTICLE
published: 20 March 2014
doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2014.00238
The relationship between student employability and
student engagement: working toward a more unified
theory
Carl Senior1*, Peter Reddy1 and Rowena Senior2
1 School of Life and Health Sciences, Aston University, Birmingham, UK
2 Centre for Learning and Innovation in Professional Practice, Aston University, Birmingham, UK
*Correspondence: c.senior@aston.ac.uk
Edited and reviewed by:
Chris Howard, University of Derby, UK
Keywords: engagement, employability, students, university, retention
As the field of Psychology evolves there
is much interest in understanding how
educational practices can be shaped to
facilitate the recruitment and engagement
of students (Halpern and Hakel, 2010).
Highlighting the multiplicity of research
approaches within Psychology is one way
in which to advance the field. Indeed,
in her recent article Rees (2013) argues
that the multiplicity of research topics and
methodologies is especially important to
the discipline and that “promoting and
highlighting this should be considered as
a potentially effective recruitment strat-
egy” (Rees, 2013 p. 1). Rees argues that
the tension in Psychology between the
traditional use of scientific method and
the inappropriateness of this approach to
many of the phenomena of interest cre-
ate a dialectic that is both an opportu-
nity and a threat. A threat in that such
conflict may be off-putting but an oppor-
tunity in that methodological pluralism
may be a selling point. Rees goes on to
support Henriques (2013) in arguing that
attempting to unify Psychology around a
commitment to research methodology is
flawed and that conceptual unification is
necessary.
It is Rees’s argument that highlighting
the unique nature of empirical Psychology
is a necessity for student recruitment that
is the focus of this paper. Rees suggests
that only by highlighting the unique plu-
rality of approaches to our incoming stu-
dents can we ensure that they become
aware of the dialectic that is idiosyn-
cratic to the field of Psychology. By fur-
ther developing an understanding of this
dialectic it is possible that our students
will come equipped with a more realis-
tic understanding of what are the unique
contributions that Psychology can make to
our everyday lives. It is this latter aspect
of the Rees model that has great utility
and the potential for significant impact
on the recruitment, engagement, and sub-
sequent retention of talented undergrad-
uate students. However, such a model
only describes one mechanism for student
engagement and as such it needs to be
developed further before it can contribute
to the “unified theory which focuses on
providing a conceptual map of the full
breadth of psychological enquiry” (Rees,
2013 p. 1). In order to do this one must
consider the unique mindset of the stu-
dents themselves as the central and signif-
icant component of the model before we
can arrive at such a unified theory.
Nearly all UK undergraduate stu-
dents are engaged in employment during
their studies and consideration of suc-
cessful employability post graduation is
now a key motivator for undergraduates
(Blackwell et al., 2001; Bridgstock, 2009).
In light of this, by understanding the needs
and expectations of the undergraduate
student around employability it is possible
to develop a more ecologically sound
approach to effective student engagement1.
The importance of successful entry into
the graduate job market is a significant
extrinsic motivator for undergraduate stu-
dents (Cassidy and Wright, 2008). Within
the UK HE sector alone there has been
1It is also worth highlighting the utility of this
approach in regards to the various national key
performance indicators such the National Student
Survey in the UK.
an almost universal drive to increase
employability skills training and nearly all
of the major national key performance
indicators include ametric on the vibrancy
of a graduating cohorts employability
health (Wright et al., 2010). Institutes
are readily developing a full range of
training opportunities that allow students
to develop the authentic and transfer-
able skills that would benefit their entry
to the job market e.g., from CV writ-
ing advice sessions to entire years of an
academic programme spent in structured
work placements within industry (Fallows
and Steven, 2000; Cassidy, 2006). However
the constant aspect that is evident across
such diverse innovation is the fact that
all place the individual student firmly at
the center of the learning experience with
idiosyncratic and, in some cases, a highly
specific, learning experience that is shaped
by the students themselves (Lantz and
Reddy, 2010). It is the student that in most
cases identifies the type of training hat they
need or the location of their placement
year. By placing the student at the center
of this learning process the design of active
learning programmes can benefit greatly
from a unique insight into the develop-
ment of a transferable skill-set (Bridges,
1993). Moreover, the importance of such
transferable skills would mean that the
self directed nature of such study would
be more effective than a more traditional
didactic delivery (Gureckis and Markant,
2012). In other words by allowing students
the opportunity to reflect on their own
employment experiences with other stu-
dents they are more motivated to under-
stand further the competencies that are
www.frontiersin.org March 2014 | Volume 5 | Article 238 | 1
Senior et al. The relationship between student employability and student engagement
effective in work. In light of the above
it would be prudent to expand the Rees
model to include the unique experience
that the student has in the world of work
and to design programmes around such
experiences.
When one considers the important
transferable skillset that the student devel-
ops while experiencing an industry place-
ment etc programme managers should
place such a student centered experience
at the very heart of the learning pro-
cess (Reddy and Rochelle, 2008). This
could take the form of actual work expe-
rience or even the design of assessments
that are structured around the applica-
tion of psychological theory to real life
work scenarios. This vital aspect of pro-
gramme engineering can return great div-
idends with ensuring students are readily
recruited to our programmes and can be
achieved with surprisingly little effort in a
number of stages that ensures the incom-
ing student is readily engaged within an
effective learning role (Van De Ven, 2007).
Does a focus on employability favor
vocational degrees? Does this threaten
Psychology as a non-vocational degree,
and the university tradition which is essen-
tially, in the Newman tradition, non-
vocational? A response is to argue for
“psychological literacy” (see McGovern
et al., 2009; Cranney and Dunn, 2011).
In essence it suggests that knowledge of
research and theory in psychology, and
the full methodological range advocated
by Rees would strengthen this, allows
students to detect false argument better,
and become better citizens and employ-
ees. An emphasis on employability and
psychological literacy is not necessarily
in conflict with traditional values; some
influential definitions of employability
emphasize such scholarly attributes:
“Employability is not just about get-
ting a job. Conversely, just because a
student is on a vocational course does
not mean that somehow employability
is automatic. Employability is more than
about developing attributes, techniques
or experience just to enable a student to
get a job, or to progress within a cur-
rent career. It is about learning and the
emphasis is less on “employ” and more
on “ability.” In essence, the emphasis
is on developing critical, reflective abil-
ities, with a view to empowering and
enhancing the learner.” (Harvey, 2003,
cited in Pegg et al., 2012 p. 4 [our bold]).
A further dimension can be added. Barnett
(2009) suggests that Higher Education has
moved almost by stealth from a focus
on knowledge to a focus on skills and
competencies. He argues that as we move
into a world of further and further com-
plexity neither knowledge nor skills is a
secure foundation. He suggests that we
need in addition to focus on ontology,
on our students’ being and becoming.
He argues that encounters with disci-
plinary knowledge through teaching and
curricula, such as that in Psychology,
support the development of epistemic
virtues. A demanding curriculum helps
resilience to form; contrasting perspec-
tives help to promote openness; requiring
attendance and engagement develops self-
discipline; space encourages authenticity
and integrity. Teaching that requires stu-
dents to engage with each other helps to
foster respect, generosity and preparedness
to listen; explicit standards support care-
fulness and restraint; encouragement helps
to keep students going forward and to be
open to new experience; enthusiasm gives
new spirit and encourages the will to learn;
being required to put forward ones own
views helps students to find the courage to
stake a claim and to own a position; requir-
ing students to give of selves and be active
helps to develop the will to engage.
So—attracting really good students is
about the fascination of a subject con-
cerned with what people, think feel and
do (not to mention dream, strive for, love
and fear). Educating means getting peo-
ple to be excellent scholars, and translat-
ing this into the skills and competencies
that employers seek in graduate recruits,
helping students to see that psychological
literacy and an appreciation of the dialec-
tic in psychology and our methodological
pluralism offers valuable ways of seeing
and understanding, and helping students
to learn from and understand the cen-
tral importance of being and becoming
through study.
By designing academic programmes
around the various stages of the learn-
ing process described above one can be
sure that such programmes are not only
effective in delivering a relevant curricu-
lum but one that attracts, engages and
retains enthusiastic and talented students
to the field. There is no doubt that Rees
(2013) should be applauded for initiating
the crucial debate as to which factors drive
student engagement. Here it is argued that
employability training that embeds the
student work experience within industry
should also be included into this portfo-
lio of effective approaches. The redesign
of programmes to includes such strate-
gies may seem complex yet this is the
only way to ensure that students are
constantly attracted to the degree pro-
grammes delivered within universities and
then perhaps more importantly remain
engaged.
REFERENCES
Barnett, R. (2009). Knowing and becoming in the
higher education curriculum. Stud. High. Educ. 34,
429–440. doi: 10.1080/03075070902771978
Blackwell, A., Bowes, L., Harvey, L., Hesketh, A., and
Knight, P. (2001). Transforming work experience
in higher education. Br. Educ. Res. J. 27, 269–285.
doi: 10.1080/01411920120048304
Bridges, D. (1993). Transferable skills: a philosophi-
cal perspective. Stud. High. Educ. 18, 43–51. doi:
10.1080/03075079312331382448
Bridgstock, R. (2009). The graduate attributes we’ve
overlooked: enhancing graduate employability
through career management skills.High. Educ. Res.
Dev. 28, 31–44. doi: 10.1080/07294360802444347
Cassidy, S. (2006). Developing employability skills:
peer assessment in higher education. Educ. Train.
48, 508–517. doi: 10.1108/00400910610705890
Cassidy, T., and Wright, L. (2008). Graduate employ-
ment status and health: a longitudinal analysis of
the transition from student. Soc. Psychol. Educ. 11,
181–191. doi: 10.1007/s11218-007-9043-x
Cranney, J. and Dunn, D. (eds.). (2011).
The Psychologically Literate Citizen. New
York, NY: Oxford University Press. doi:
10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199794942.001.0001
Fallows, S., and Steven, C. (2000). Building employa-
bility skills into the higher education curriculum:
a university wide initiative. Educ. Train. 42, 75–83.
doi: 10.1108/00400910010331620
Gureckis, T., and Markant, D. (2012). Self-directed
learning: a cognitive and computational per-
spective. Perspect. Psychol. Sci. 7, 464–481. doi:
10.1177/1745691612454304
Halpern, D., and Hakel, M. (2010). Applying
the science of learning to the University and
beyond: teaching the long-term retention and
transfer. Change Mag. High. Learn. 35, 36–41. doi:
10.1080/00091380309604109
Harvey, L. (2003). Transitions from Higher Education
to Work: A briefing paper prepared by Lee Harvey
(Centre for Research and Evaluation, Sheffield
Hallam University), with advice from ESECT and
LTSNGeneric Centre colleagues. Available online at:
http://bit.ly/oeCgqW
Henriques, G. (2013). Evolving from methodological
to conceptual unification. Rev. Gen. Psychol. 17,
168–173. doi: 10.1037/a0032929
Frontiers in Psychology | Educational Psychology March 2014 | Volume 5 | Article 238 | 2
Senior et al. The relationship between student employability and student engagement
Lantz, C., and Reddy, P. (2010). Misconceptions and
more. Psychologist 23, 758–761.
McGovern, T., Corey, L., Cranney, J., Dixon, W.,
Holmes, J., Kuebli, J., et al. (2009) “Psychologically
literate citizens,” in Undergraduate Education in
Psychology, ed D. Halpern (Washington, DC:
American Psychological Association), 9–27.
Pegg, A., Waldock, J., Hendy-Isaac, S., and Lawton, R.
(2012). Pedagogy for Employability. New York, NY:
Higher Education Academy.
Reddy, P., and Rochelle, K. (2008). The psychol-
ogy degree in its place. Psychol. Teach. Rev. 14,
46–50.
Rees, C. (2013). Promoting psychology to stu-
dents: embracing the multiplicity of research foci
and method. Front. Educ. Psychol. 4:774. doi:
10.3389/fpsyg.2013.00774
Van De Ven, A. (2007). “Engaged scholarship in a
professional school,” in Engaged Scholarship: A
Guide for Organisational and Social Research, ed
A. Van De Ven (Oxford: Oxford University Press),
14–48.
Wright, J., Brinkley, I., and Clayton, N. S.
(2010). Employability and Skills in the UK:
Redefining the Debate. London: The Work
Foundation.
Received: 31 January 2014; paper pending published:
20 February 2014; accepted: 03 March 2014; published
online: 20 March 2014.
Citation: Senior C, Reddy P and Senior R (2014) The
relationship between student employability and student
engagement: working toward a more unified theory.
Front. Psychol. 5:238. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2014.00238
This article was submitted to Educational Psychology, a
section of the journal Frontiers in Psychology.
Copyright © 2014 Senior, Reddy and Senior. This is
an open-access article distributed under the terms of the
Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The
use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is per-
mitted, provided the original author(s) or licensor are
credited and that the original publication in this journal
is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice.
No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which
does not comply with these terms.
www.frontiersin.org March 2014 | Volume 5 | Article 238 | 3


The relationship between student employability and student engagement: working toward a more unified theory

https://publications.aston.ac.uk/id/eprint/22321/1/Relationship_between_student_employability_and_student_engagement.pdf

The relationship between student employability and student engagement:working toward a more unified theory

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

Aston Publications Explorer

Frontiers - Publisher Connector

Frontiers - Publisher Connector