YES, WE CAN: INTERNSHIPS PROVIDING LEVERAGES IN THE

LABOUR MARKET Patrícia Silva

Betina da Silva LopesAna Isabel Melo

Elisabeth BritoDina SeabraMarco Costa

Gonçalo Paiva Dias

1. Some say internships can make a difference

1. For students; employing institutions and Higher Education Institutions (HEI)

2. … but there are some drawbacks…

2. Methodological approach

1. Mixed method: two-stage’ research design:

a) Large scale quantitative analysis

b) Individual interviews and focus groups with involved stakeholders

3. Impact of internships on graduates’ employability

1. Internships and graduate unemployment rates

2. The different features of internships: length and structure and graduate unemployment rates

3. Other intervening variables

4. Some concluding remarks

Yes, we can: internships providing leverages in the labour market

Outline

1. For Higher Education Institutions1. create a positive image of the degree and the HEI (Toncar and Cudmore 2000);

2. advantage in seeking funding for research or other activities (Gault et al. 2010);

3. unique opportunities to align the skills employers consider important and with what is actually taught (Gault et al. 2010).

2. For employing institutions1. risk-free method to evaluate possible future employees (Knemeyer and Murphy 2002);

2. deepen the collaboration between the academic institution and the employer (Pianko

1996).

3. For graduate students 1. opportunity for developing job relevant capabilities (Teichler 2009; Alpert et al. 2009; García-

Aracil and Velden 2007);

2. opportunities of early networking (Alpert et al. 2009; Hergert 2009; Weible 2009);

3. reduce the ‘entry shock’ (Hergert 2009; Paulson and Baker 1999).

i. Theoretical background

1. Some say internships can make a difference

1. Major caveats can be identified in the existing research:

a) evidence on benefits of internships is based on students’ or employers’ expectations and perceptions rather than on the assessment of the impact of internships on early career employment;

b) assessment of internship outcomes has been limited, both regarding the subject areas and the long-term impacts;

c) prior research presents empirical evidence focused on a timeframe preceding Bologna reforms;

d) lack of evidence on the specific characteristics of internships – nature and format.

i. Theoretical background

1. But there are some drawbacks…

1. This research is focused on the Portuguese case

2. Large scale quantitative analysis1. Content analysis of all study programmes approved and published in the

Official Gazette from 2006 until 2009

2. Rate of unemployed graduates looking for a job for more than 12 months

i. Mixed method: two-stage’ research design

2. Methodological approach

Public institution Private institution

Universities 73 76

Polytechnic institutions 261 146

Total 334 222

All study programmes

Mean

Study programmes with internships

Mean

Universities3.55

(4.24)4.49

(5.72)Polytechnic institutions

4.42(4.11)

4.36(4.14)

1. Individual Interviews and focus groups with involved stakeholders

a) 3 semi-structured individual interviews to unit coordinators ;

b) 3 focus groups conducted with coordinators of study programmes; academic internship supervisors; and former and current interns.

2. Aims:a) Assess stakeholders’ motivations; required efforts; and expected

outcomes;

b) Perception of stakeholders regarding the structure of first-cycle degrees (specifically, on the nature and structure of internships), and its relation to graduate employability.

i. Mixed method: two-stage’ research design

2. Methodological approach

3. Impact of internships on graduates’ employability

i. Internships and graduate unemployment rates

Variables Unstandardized coefficients

Degrees with internships (0: no internship; 1: includes at least one internship)

-.070**

Higher education system (0: university; 1: polytechnic institutions)

.049*

Type of institution (0: public; 1: private) .107***Total % of institutional unemployment (logged) .532***Total % of scientific area unemployment (logged) .186**

R .380Adjusted R2 .139

N 1158

It can be estimated that the inclusion of internships in FCDs can reduce unemployment rates in 15 per cent.

Significance levels: *** p.0.001; ** p.0.01; * p.0.05

3. Impact of internships on graduates’ employability

ii. The different features of internships: length and structure and graduate unemployment rates

VariablesPolytechnic institutions

Nature of internships (0: optional; 1: mandatory) -.141**Internship format (0: thick courses; 1: thin courses) -.202***Type of institution (0: public; 1: private) .131***Total % of institutional unemployment (logged) .498***Total % of scientific area unemployment (logged) .508***

R .435Adjusted R2 .177

N 407

1. Expanding and diversifying internship (thin courses) activities can reduce the graduate unemployment rate in 37 per cent;

2. Mandatory internships seem to be capable of reducing the unemployment rate in 28 per cent.

Significance levels: *** p.0.001; ** p.0.01; * p.0.05

• Thin courses tend to be positively perceived. However, these are more demanding:

It would be possible to extend the length of internships. But this would probably imply the suppression of other curricular units … and this may be problematic (…) because this would mean more internship supervisors … and not every teacher likes to work outside his/her office (…) Besides that it would mean less lectures (…) and, well … it is important to assure their teaching time

I am an apologist of thin sandwich courses. But (...) there are some ... complex issues, because (...) we have already several logistic problems that are very difficult to solve … [also] because of the lack of institutional structures that help to contact the companies

3. Impact of internships on graduates’ employability

ii. The different features of internships: length and structure and graduate unemployment rates

From the interviews other variables related to internships’ design and graduate employability emerged:

a) Selection of interns by employing institutions vs. selection of employing institutions by interns;

b) Assessment strategies of interns: a (non) shared responsibility.

iii. Other intervening variables

3. Impact of internships on graduates’ employability

a) Selecting Interns vs. Selecting Internships

•Considering the place where students undertake their internship two different approaches could be identified. In some HEI the selection was made by the companies in others the student had the opportunity to propose the employing institution:

3. Impact of internships on graduates’ employability

iii. Other intervening variables – selection of interns

“Students have to understand that their choices have consequences … choosing implies responsibilities. If he/she wants to do an internship in that particular company it is assumed that he/she knows what he/she wants and what he/she will do and learn.”

Future Research: Which selection process stimulates more the pro-active attitudes of students and therefore their employability?Do undergraduates have sufficient maturity to balance the pro and cons of doing his/her internship in a particular company?

b) Evaluation of interns

a) Mismatch of agendas between the HEI and Employing Institutions and its interference in the evaluation procedures:

“Sometimes, companies’ assessment of students’ performance is extremely positive, or extremely negative, which is not related to students’ work. For instance, some company supervisors grant the highest grades because they do not have enough time to ‘move around’ with the interns. Good grades are an excuse and a justification … that is why the assessment by the academic supervisor and the company supervisor has different weights”

3. Impact of internships on graduates’ employability

iii. Other intervening variables – evaluation of interns

b) Evaluation of internsb) While academics tend to be well aware of the competences and abilities

to be evaluated, non-academic supervisors have to struggle with a lack of understanding of these evaluation rules:

“We find individuals that are quite distant from this academic reality, from the grading system and so … and then some complex situations emerge. For instance, some wanted to give a grade of 16 [out of 20] values … but according to the university criteria it would never be more than 15 … so we have to adjust this classification. This is complicate.”

Future research: To what extent do the adopted assessment strategies promote or hinder the collaborative relationship between HEIs and employing institutions? Could interns’ assessment be used as a tool to get universities and employers closer?

3. Impact of internships on graduates’ employability

iii. Other intervening variables – evaluation of interns

• Internships can be considered as important routes to early career employment ;

• Expanding and undertaking several internships can significantly enhance the possibilities of being selected for a job;

• Mandatory internships require a close and (often) long-lasting relationship with employing institutions and tend to signal HEIs’ commitment towards labour market demands;

• Careful planning and human resource managing is required in order to extract the pedagogical and institutional benefits from internships.

• Further investigation is needed in order to identify internship design strategies that contribute most for graduates employability (skills) and therefore graduates employment (product).

4. Concluding remarks

Yes, we can: internships providing leverages in the labour market

Research reported in this article was financed by the Project “Impact of internships on graduates’ employability”, funded

through the National Strategic Reference Framework (NSRF) and co-financed by the European Social Fund (ESF).