Chapter 5 From University to Working Life: Graduates’ Workplace Skills in Practice Paivi Tynjali, Virpi Slotte, Juha Nieminen, Kirsti Lonka and Erkki Olkinuora ‘This chapter examines “the products” of university education from the working-life skills point of view. On the basis of the literature review about key skills and competencies in the information society, it first examines the challenges the changing working life poses to university education — especially to expertise needed in symbolic-analytic jobs. Second, it presents findings of an empirical study concerning Finnish university graduates in four different fields: teacher education, general educational sciences, pharmacy and informa- tion technology. The data were collected after 2-10 years from the graduation of the sub- jects. The findings support the descriptions of symbolic~analytic expertise presented in the literature. University graduates describe their jobs as especially requiring social skills. Graduates from computer sciences emphasised the importance of innovative skills more often than graduates from education and pharmacy. Itis suggested that the dual mission of university education to prepare students both for scientific thinking and for working life requires integration of teaching and research, and integration of theory, practice and self- regulative skills Introduction ‘The purpose of this chapter is to examine long-term effects of university education espe- cially in the Finnish context. In Finland, the higher education system is a dual system con- sisting of two parallel sectors: scientific universities and more working-life-oriented polytechnics (which sometimes have also been translated as “universities of applied sci- ences”). Despite this division between scientific and work-related higher education, recent higher education policy has emphasised the need for more close connections with work- ing life for universities as well as for polytechnics. The University Act and Decree were recently amended as follows: “Universities have to take care of their missions (i.e. research and (eaching) in interaction with the surrounding society”. Accordingly, the Governmental Development Plan for Education states that both polytechnics and universities must pay “Higher Education and Working Life - Collaborations, Confrontations and Challenges Copyright © 2006 by Rsevier Lt Al eights of reproduction in any form reserved, ISBN: 0.08.045020-274 Paivi Tyna etal special attention to developing their regional responsiveness through intensified coopera- tion with local business and industries and by facilitating transfer of expertise to working life, Altogether, the interests of working life are strongly present in Finnish higher educa tion policy similar to other countries, as Gary Rhoades and Sheila Slaughter describe in the first part of this book. Tn this chapter, we examine “products” of university education, that is, competencies of the graduates from the working life's point of view. However, we did not ask employers \what skills they want their employees to possess. Instead, we conducted an empirical study conceming graduates in four disciplines of three universities and asked them to describe what skills they really needed in their jobs. We also asked the graduates to evaluate their ‘university studies and learning outcomes in relation to their current job task demands. The following chapter by Marja-Leena Stenstriim analyses the same question from the per- spective of polytechnics graduates. On the basis of these two separate studies it seems that both university and polytechnics graduates find their formal education inadequate as regards to demands of working life. The most important skills needed in the job were learnt by the professionals only at work, We argue that here is a lesson to be leat both for higher education and working life. Universities are challenged to integrate research and teaching and theory and practice, whereas working life should develop workplaces also as environ- ‘ments for lifelong leaming. In the following passages, we first look atthe literature about professional expertise and key competencies needed in today’s society. After this we present findings of our study in which professionals in education, pharmacy and information technology (graduated in computer sciences), assessed their expertise acquired in university education and at work, Competences Needed in the Information Society ‘Today's society is often depicted in terms such asthe information society, knowledge soci ety of network society to describe essential features characterising its current develop rents, The most visible element of this new society is naturally the rapid development of the information and communication technology and the fast inereasing amount of infor- ‘mation. Furthermore, the growing production of knowledge, increasing networking between organisations and individuals, and changes in occupational structures and con- tents of work are typical developments of the information society (Webster, 1995; Castells, 2000; Castells & Himanen, 2002). "The conditions of knowledge production have also changed. New kinds of industrial pro- ‘duction are dependent not only on new information technology but also on new kinds of expertise. Knowledge production has extended from universities to the areas of application. ‘The dichotomy of basic and applied research is fading. Work organisations are not only using and applying knowledge produced in the university but they are also producing, transform= ing and managing knowledge by themselves to create innovations. In other words, many organisations have become knowledge intensive innovation centres in which collaborative ‘work, networking, and transformative and creative learning have become key concepts in organisational development. And this applies not only to large private sector production industries but also to public sector work places, which are continuously challenged toFrom University to Working Life 75 develop new practices and social innovations in a changing world. Thus, the information society is also @ learning society which has to support continuous development and lifelong learning of its citizens. In their recently published book on networked expertise, Hakkarainen and his col- leagues (Hakkarainen, Palonen, Paavola, & Lehtinen, 2004; see also Paavola, Lipponen, & Hakkarainen, 2004) have used the term innovative knowledge communities to describe dif ferent models of knowledge creation in work communities. Peculiar to innovative knowl edge communities is what Bereiter and Scardamalia (1993) have called progressive problem solving: deliberate pursuit of going beyond and surpassing earlier achievernents In this process, the community members share their knowledge and experiences with each other to develop new ideas. Expertise is not only a property of an individual but rather a collective property (see also Engestrim, 2004). Paradoxically, expertise being collective poses challenges to individuals. Sharing knowledge, working in networks, communicating with professionals from other fields, all these require social interaction and interpersonal skills of individuals. Thus, professional expertise is much more than having a strong domain-specific knowledge base, ‘Some 15 years ago Reich (1991) described three types of work typical to information society: routine production work, person-to-person services and symbolic~analytic work. People educated at the university are most likely to end up in symbolic~analytic jobs. More recently, Castells (2000) has differentiated between four types of workers which can be seen as representing symbolic-analytic professionals: commanders who are in charge of strategic decision making and planning, researchers who take care of innovation in prod= ucts and process, designers who adapt, package and target innovations and integrators, Who manage the relationships between the decision, innovation, design and execution, Common to different kinds of symbolic—analytic experts is that they identify and solve problems by manipulating symbols. They transform information with analytic tools, such ‘as mathematical algorithms, scientific principles, psychological insights, legal arguments, financial gimmicks, and so on. Symbolic analysts may represent variety of jobs and pro- fessions, for example engineers, public relations executives, investment bankers, lawyers, different kinds of consultants, organisation development specialists, strategic planners, system analysts, marketing strategists, writers and editors, designers, publishers, teachers, and so on (Reich, 1991). Characteristic of symbolic~analytic work is teamwork, often fol- lowed or preceded by solitary working periods. Interaction and discussions with col- leagues or clients are essential in order to define the problems and find the solutions. Reich (1991, p. 179) describes the work of the symbol analysts as follows: ‘When not conversing with their teammates, symbolic analysts sit before com- puter terminals — examining words and numbers, moving them, altering them, trying out new words and numbers, formulating and testing hypothe- ses, designing or strategizing, They also spend long hours in meetings or on the telephone, and even longer hours in jet planes and hotels — advising, making presentations, giving briefings, doing deals, Periodically, they issue reports, plans, designs, drafts, memoranda, layouts, renderings, scripts, or projections — which in tum, precipitate more meetings to clarify what has been proposed and to get agreement on how it will be implemented, by76 Paiivi Tynjia et al swhom, and for how much money. Final production is often the easiest part ‘The bulk of time and cost (and, thus real value) comes in conceptualizing the problem, devising a solution, and planning its execution. ‘This description of a symbolic-analytic expert's work illustrates concretely how diverse are the skills experts need in today’s working life. In addition to domain-specific know!- edge, professionals must have many social skills, such as collaboration, communication and team work skills, they need to be able to critically analyse, conceptualise and synthe- sise knowledge and to make conclusions on the basis of ambiguous information. Reich (1991) has stated that there are four special skills that are essential in symbolic-analytic ‘work: abstraction, system thinking, experimentation, and collaboration and team work skills. In addition to these, self-reflection, self-regulation, life-long learning skills and adaptive expertise, that is, ability to work in changing situations, are regarded as important clements in today's life e.g., Bereiter & Scardamalia, 1993; Schon, 1987). ‘At the beginning of the millennium there were several efforts to define ancl assess key competencies internationally. One of the most comprehensive projects was the DeSeCo project (Rychen & Salganik, 2003) which aimed to provide a solid theoretical and concep- ‘ual foundation for the broad range of competences needed to face the challenges of the present and future individuals and nations. In this project, the key competencies forall cit- izens for a successful life and a well-functioning society were depicted with three cate- gories: (1) interacting in socially heterogeneous groups, (2) acting autonomously and () using tools interactively. Al these activites require a reflective approach, critical stance and practical intelligence. All of them involve several sub-competencies. For example, interacting in social heterogeneous groups requires social skills, valuing diversity, coopera tion, managing and resolving conflicts, negotiation skills, and so on. Acting autonomously complements social interaction, and involves individual self-development, and forming and conducting life plans and personal projects. Interactive tool use includes both physical tools such as computers and machines, and socio-cultural tools such as language and literacy, information and knowledge. It requires language skills, using of symbols, critical and reflective use of information, and using information technology interactively. While DeSeCo defines key competencies for all citizens, academically educated profes~ sionals are supposed to possess many other academic skills such as critical and scientific thinking, ability to use, produce and create knowledge, innovativeness, creative learning, integration of theoretical and practical knowledge, oral and written presentation skills, for- cign languages and so on (¢.g., Allan, 1996; Atkins, 1995; On general discussion on quali- fications, see also Commission of the European Communities, 2005; Eraut, 2002; Young, 2002). Altogether, these requirements pose considerable challenges to higher education. ‘Table 5.1 summarises the trends related to working life inthe information society and cor- responding key competencies the education system is expected to produce in graduates. ‘In sum, the development of the information society poses significant challenges to pro- fessional expertise and further to the educational system which is supposed to produce experts for the future society. Along with the changing world the views of expertise have also changed. While the traditional view of expertise emphasised expertise as a terminal state gained through education and work experience, modem working environments require lifelong learning, adaptive expertise and progressive problem solving. Similarly, aFrom University to Working Life 77 Table 5.1: Trends related to the wor qualifications of employees, g life in information society and corresponding, Key skills and qualifications Characteristies of wor the information society ‘The development of information and Computer skills, media literacy, critical thinking communication technology problem-solving skills, adaptive expertise Globalisation Language skills, cultural knowledge, tolerance, ‘ethical atitude, adaptive expertise Continual change, Learning skills, reflectivity, flexibility, complexity and uncertainty adaptability, internal entrepreneurship, boundary crossing skills, ability to handle with pressures ‘and uncertainty, progressive problem solving, adaptive expertise, innovativeness Networking, teamwork, projects Social skills such as oral and written communi cation skills, cooperation skills, representation skills, boundary crossing skills, work process knowledge, adaptive expertise ‘Symbolic-analytic work Abstract thinking, system thinking, knowledge use, experimentation, innovativeness, vision, progressive problem solving, adaptive expertise Person-to-person services Social skills, adaptive expertise Routine production services Loyalty, punctuality, routine expertise view of expertise as an individual competence has been replaced by the view of expertise fas a characteristic of a team or an organisation. Furthermore, hierarchical organisational structures emphasising the expertise as a property of higher levels of the hierarchy have given way to horizontal organisations and collaborative teams which consider expertise as distributed in the community. (Bereiter & Scardamalia, 1993; Engestrom, 2004). How do University Graduates Evaluate Their Education and Workplace Skills? Empirical studies on how relevant university graduates find their education and acquired com- petencies after some time of work experience are rare. One exception is a study by Dunne and her colleagues (Dunne, Benett, & Carré, 2000) in which they examined skill development in hhigher education with surveys and interviews of teachers, students, employers and graduates in their working life, In this study evaluations by graduates ofthe acquisition of generic skills atthe university varied a lot as did the nature of practices in which these skills were used at ‘work. Thus, generic skills are heavily context dependent. The number of interviewees in the study was only 24 and therefore comparisons between the fields were not possible.78° Paivi Tyne et al In our study, we were interested in how university graduates perceive the qualifications ‘and skills needed in their profession and how they see the role of university education in providing those skills. To get answers to these questions, we conducted a survey of 2712 alumni from chree Finnish universities, ‘The target groups were graduates from four study programmes: computer sciences, teacher education, general educational sciences (an edu- cation programme not preparing for profession of teaching) and pharmacy. The response rate was 35 per cent (n = 955). Two-thirds of the respondents had a permanent job position and only I per cent of all respondents were unemployed at the time of the survey. General ‘unemployment rate for university graduates after 4-5 years of graduation was 2 per cent at that time (Suutari, 2003), This indicates that despite the low response rate the data were uite representative atleast as regards to employment. About 70 per cent of the respondents ‘worked in organisations having 100 or less employees. This supports the view presented by Gary Rhoades and Sheila Slaughter in the first chapter of this book that universities do not prepare workforce only for big enterprises but also for small and medium sized work ongan- isations. In the following sections, we describe what kinds of jobs respondents held in dif- ferent fields, what kinds of skills they needed in their jobs, and what did they thought about their university education as regards to qualifications needed in thei job. Work Tasks in Different Fields ‘We asked the respondents to rate the importance of 35 diferent work task in ther job, On the basis of the factor analysis, the tasks were classified into the following categories: (1) ‘management and development tasks, (2) international tasks, (3) collaboration with clients, @) economic tasks, (5) advising and consulting, (6) teamwork tasks, (7) updating domain knowledge and (8) independent tasks. To get a picture of how these tasks are represented in the work of individual professionals we conducted a cluste analysis which allowed us to group the respondents into clusters according to thei tasks. The results ofthe cluster analysis are presented in Figure 5.1. Four different clusters could be identified, These were named as “average level generalists”, “managers and developers”, “human relationship specialists” and “high responsibility symbol analysts” Figure 5.1 shows that common to all four identified clusters of professionals were inde- Pendent tasks, updating domain knowledge, teamwork tasks, collaboration with clients, and advising and consulting. Thus, we can expect that almost al university graduates will need to handle these kinds of tasks (atleast inthe fields of information technology, edu- cation and pharmacy). What differentiates the professional groups from each other are three other types of tasks. The group we called High Responsibility Symbol Analysts are People whose work tasks include all ofthe eight different tasks. In other words, their job description is very diversified. In addition to tasks mentioned above, their job involves ‘managerial and developmental tasks, international tasks and economic responsibilities. This group was the smallest one. OF all respondents, 19 per cent belonged to this cluster The other group, Average Level Generalists had all these tasks as well, but not as much as high responsibility symbol analysts had, About 26 per cent of the respondents belonged to this group. Likewise, 26 per cent of all respondents formed a group of Human Relationship Specialists. They had less managerial tasks, international tasks and economic Tesponsibiliies than the other groups. Instead, their job was characterised by a lotFrom University to Working Life 79 Argel pecan Minaga an Sco 2 Hama laionsippecilins_—a— High resonsbiy bol amy ° ‘Manageme ltr! Cliboatioa Exouomie Advising Teamwork” Upaing Independent Si take withclene tke amd sks domain tks sept counting owe Figure 5.1: Clusters on the basis of job tasks. interaction with clients The last group, Managers and Developers, had alot of managerial and economic tasks but less intemational duties. About 21 per cent ofthe professionals belonged to this group. Figure 5.2 shows how different groups of professionals were represented in different ficlds. Most of graduates from computer sciences worked as Average Level Generalists, that is, in jobs with diverse responsibilities and working methods. About half of those who were graduated from pharmacy and teacher education worked as Human Relationship Specialists where the job is characterised by interaction with other people, that is, with stu- dlents and parents forthe teachers, and with customers forthe pharmacists. Over the quar- ter of those graduated from teacher education described their jobs as managers and developers, This finding suggests that those who work a principals may be overrepre- sented of the subjects graduated from teacher education. On the other hand, the work of teachers nowadays includes 2 lot of curriculum planning and development, acting in coop- erative networks and international activities as well. Thus, over one-fifth of teachers described their job as a diverse combination of tasks of an Average Level Generalist. Of those educationalists who did not have a teacher's qualification 40 per cent worked as Managers and Developers and one-third as Average Level Generalists. Over 10 per cent of these educationalists belonged to the group of High Responsibility Symbol Analysts, Which was bigger proportion than in other fields Altogether, thse findings suggest thatthe descriptions of symbolic-analytic work pre- sented in the literature (eg, Reich, 1991; Castells, 2000) correspond with everyday reality in the life of university graduates, No matter from which field the professionals graduated, their {jobs were characterised by the combination of teamwork and independent work, interaction in different networks, consulting, and keeping abreast of the development of the domain, Skills Needed in Professionals’ Work Above we portrayed what kinds of job tasks were typical for university graduates. In the following section, we describe the skills needed in these tasks, The professionals were80 Paivi Tynjala et al. ” 68 Ti Teacher education [ Baveational sciences CiComputer sciences Hl Pharmacy ‘Average level "Managers snd” Human relationship High ‘eneraists developers specialists esponsibility symbol analysts Figure 5.2: Clusters on the basis of work profiles in different fields, given an open-ended question to describe the most important skills their job requires, The answers were classified into five categories (adapted from Vir, 1995); (1) production ‘and technical competencies, which included domain-specific professional skills and knowledge, (2) motivational characteristics, which refer to personal qualities such as com- mitment, motivation, goal setting and aspiration, (3) adaptive characteristics, including adaptation to work requirements and pressures, (4) social skills such as communication skills, teamwork skills, negotiation skills, representation skills and other people skills and (5) innovative abilities, which refer to skills needed in development of work tasks and products, including creativity, innovativeness, problem-solving skills, developmental ori- centation and learning skills. In all four fields social skills were rated as the most important qualifications of the job (Figure 5.3). About 40 per cent of graduates in pharmacy, 35 per cent of the teachers, 30 per cent of other educationalists and 27 per cent of graduates in computer sciences mentioned the social skills as most important skills needed in their job. Professionals working in the field of information technology and educationalists without teacher ‘raining emphasised innovativeness as well. In contrast, teachers and pharmacists did not ‘mention innovativeness as often as other professionals. In these fields, the respondents ‘emphasised adaptive characteristics more than respondents in other fields. About one- fourth or one-fifth of the respondents saw the domain-specific production and technical competencies as most important requirements for the job. ‘The findings support the view of the essential role of social skills in professional work (eg, Reich, 1991). In this study, this was almost self-evident for the teachers and phar- ‘macists whose work is typically characterised by interaction with other people. However, people skills were very important also for educationalists without teacher training and for ‘graduates from computer sciences. These professionals work often in projects and devel- ‘opmental tasks which involve communication with clients and cooperative partners. InFrom University to Working Life 81 °° [tr Teacher education Eabcational sciences) Computer wiences_Ml Pharmacy 0 ~ = ® 0 —f a ke L ot Lt production & " motivational "adaptation social skills innovative skills technical silk hills stills Figure 5.3: Skills most needed in different fields these tasks innovativeness was seen even more important than domain-specific skills ‘Teachers did not mention the innovativeness as often as other educationalists. It is possi- ble that teachers do not consider the development of teaching as an innovative activity Altogether, it seems that the descriptions of symbolic-analytic work fit best to graduates from computer sciences. ‘The professionals were also asked where they had learnt the most important skills they need in their job (Figure 5.4). Of all respondents 64 per cent reported having learnt those Skills at work. Only I per cent thought that they had leant them during their university edu- cation and about 10 per cent emphasised both education and work as a source of learning these skills. The findings suggest that leaming at work has a crucial role in professional development of university graduates. On the other hand, they suggest that university educa- tion does not pay much attention tothe development of generic work-life skills, Figure 5.5 presents the answers to the question ofthe role of university education or skill development. ‘The majority of the professionals considered thatthe role of university education was that of 4 provider of theoretical knowledge or domain-specific knowledge, Some 14 per cent reported having leamt at the university skills such as using and critically analysing knowledge. This proportion is surprisingly low given that one ofthe goals of the university education isto develop critical thinking skills and skills of using and producing knowledge. It is worth noting that this question was an open-ended question which may explain the low percentage The graduates were also asked to mention what kind of defects they found in their edu- cation (Figure 5.6). About 42 per cent ofthe respondents mentioned the uselessness of cet- tain coutses ot lack of certain courses. One-fourth of professionals complained about the lack of practice in social skills and customer service and one-fourth criticised university education as outdated in elation to working-life developments. About 17 per cent thought that education was too theoretical. Figure 5.7 shows how satisfied the professionals were in general in their university studies. There were statistically significant differences between the fies (p = 0.000). Graduates from computer sciences and pharmacy were the ‘most satisfied with their education: 63 per cent of the both groups were very satisfied ot ‘quite satisfied. Over half the educationalist without teachers taining very satisfied or quite82 Paivi Tynjate et a. sax work stuiverity combination elsewhere in fceime activites ° 20 “0 0 ‘0 percent Figure 5.4: The answers of respondents to the question of where they had learnt the ‘most important skills needed in their work. Mastery of domain knowledge, theoretical Tnowledge Skil of suing. using, and extcally snalysing knowedge Quulteatons required fora job [CI Civilization, broadmindedness [Lb 0 10 2% 30 40 50 of 70 a0 ‘Sepercent Figure 5.5: The answers of respondents to the question of what skills and knowledge university education has provided them with Uselessnes of certain coures, ack of Lack of practice i social skills and eustomer service (Contents outdated in relation working i ‘developments ‘Too much theory oi 2 OS ‘epercent Figure 5.6: Defects of university education according to the respondents,From University to Working Life 83 7. Bs Teacher education El Bastion siences al : EX Compatersciences Il Pharmacy sof Yar satisfied or Some what susie Nota al sated quit sisied Figure 5.7: The satisfaction of respondents with their university education in general, satisfied, while 42 per cent ofthe teachers betonged to this group. Correspondingly, 4 per cent of the pharmacists, S per cent of the graduates from the computer sciences and 10 per cent of the teachers and other educationalists reported that they were not at all satisfied ‘with their education Conclusions ‘Our empirical data indicates that descriptions about symbolic-analytic work (e.g., Reich, 1991; Castells, 2000) in general are valid portraits of work activities of the university grade uates. Domain specific and symbolic-analytic use of knowledge and problem solving, con- tinual updating of knowledge, combination of independent work and team work, and collaboration with clients are typical features of work in all fields examined here. However, the field differed from each other in work profiles. Most of the graduates in computers ences were classified as average level generalists whose work involves diverse tasks and ‘equies, accordingly, diverse skills ranging from innovative skills to social skills. In contrast, almost half the graduates in teacher education and pharmacy worked as human relationship specialists — as expected. In these groups, the respondents did not see innovative skills as ‘being as important as the graduates in computer sciences. The reason may be that in these fields the term “innovativeness” is connected with technological development rather than ‘with social innovations. On the other hand, this may be related to the previous finding that the rate, quality and success in knowledge creation, mediation and use is lowest in education 4s compared to other fields (OECD, 2000). In theit work, teachers seem to rely more on per- sonal experience rather than on scientific knowledge, and for this reason they may tend to favour familiar work practices instead of using scientific knowledge to develop new ones. ‘Our findings suggest that technical jobs have become more and more social, and vice versa, jobs traditionally characterised by social interaction require nowadays more and ‘more technical skills, Both computer skills and social skills are needed in practically in all84 Paivi Tynjata et at Jobs where university graduates will place themselves, The professionals seemed tobe very satisfied with their computer skills and general mastery of knowledge that university had provided them with, However, many of the graduates thought that they did not have enough. practice in social skills and in interaction with clients in their university studies. Most of the professionals reported that they had only learnt at work the most important skills they need in their job. This raises a challenge for university education. Its important to develop uni- versity pedagogy in a way that makes it possible to integrate studying domain-specific ‘knowledge with learning genetic skills. Thus, today's university education is facing a two- fold challenge: On the other hand, the core of university education is scientific substance knowledge. Universities are not vocational schools — they are schools of theoretical under- standing, development of critical minds and higher order thinking. On the other hand, uni- versities prepare people for key positions of the society, and people working in these Positions cannot retire to ivory towers. Instead, they are supposed to play an active role in Society. The question is how universities can combine their double mission to work at the same time as critical eyes of the world and as generators of actors for the world. We sug- {zest that the answer lies on two integrative processes: first, on the integration of research and teaching and, second, on the integration of theory and practice. The integration of research and teaching is intemal business of the universities, while the integration of theory ‘and practice requires not only internal processes but also interaction and collaboration with the surrounding society. Paradoxically, generic skills are heavily content specific and they are impossible to apply without domain-specific knowledge (Beven & Duggan, 1995; Dunne et al, 2000). Therefore, itis important that work-based learning and work-related learning (see e.g., Boud & Solomon, 2001) are included in university study programmes, ‘This requires close cooperation between universities and workplaces, and for workplaces development as leaming environments (see e.g, Billet, 2004; Fuller & Unwin, 2004), Incorporating work-based learning to university education requires the development of pedagogical models, which take into account both the situated nature of learning and ‘genetic knowledge on the development of expertise. In Figure 5.8, we present such a ‘model, It is based on accounts of the components of expert knowledge (Bereiter & ‘Scardamatia, 1993; Bereiter, 2002; Eraut, 1994, 2004). Briefly, professional expertise can be described as consisting of three basic elements which are tightly integrated with each other: theoretical knowledge, practical knowledge and self-regulative knowledge, (Theoretical and practical knowledge belong to the category of professional knowledge, and self-regulative knowledge to the category of personal knowledge in the typology of knowledge that Cathrine Le Maistre and Anthony Paré present later on in this volume.) ‘Theoretical knowledge and practical knowledge at the top of Figure 5.8 represent intrinsi- cally very different types of knowledge. Theoretical knowledge is universal, formal and explicit in nature. It can be easily explicated, for example in books and lectures. In con- trast, practical knowledge that we gain through practical experiences concerns particular cases — itis not universal as theoretical knowledge is, Practical knowledge (often referred t0.as procedural knowledge or simply as skills) is often not so easy to explicate; it is rather intuitive, implicit or tact in nature. The arrows between the boxes of theoretical and prac- tical knowledge in Figure 5.8 illustrate the significance of interaction and integration of these different types of knowledge. For example, Leinhardt, McCarthy, Young, and Merriman (1995) have emphasised that professional education should involve, on the oneFrom University to Working Life 85 THEORETICAL KNOWLEDGE] "forming -PRRCTICAL KNOWLEDGE + universal, formal and explicit, — + splinting Canceptaising Mediating tools writing: aati tasks, journals + group discussions “tutoring, mentoring, coaching + ¥ Formal Taformal xper= book knowledge” | knowledge Rook knowledge” | robiem solving Figure 5.8: Integrative components of the development of expertise in university education, hhand, the transformation of theoretical knowledge into a form where it becomes available for use in particular cases, and, on the other hand, the explication and conceptualisation of tacit knowledge derived from work experience. In other words, theories should be consid- ered in the light of practical experiences and practical experiences in the light of theories. While traditional education has treated them separately (¢g., theoretical courses and pra tice periods have been carried out separately without any connection), modem pedagogi cal thinking emphasises the unity of theory and practice (see e.g., Guile & Griffiths, 2001; Griffiths & Guile, 2003; Tynjati, Valimaa, & Sarja, 2003), Besides theoretical and practical knowledge, the third constituent of expertise is self- regulative knowledge, including metacognitive and reflective skills (e.g, Bereiter & Scardamalia, 1993; Bereiter, 2002). Linking the development of self-egulation with theory and practice is shown at the centre of Figure 5.8. In the process of integrating theory and practice mediating tools are needed. All activities that enable the students to make tacit Imowledge explicit or analyse theoretical knowledge and practical experience are potential mediating tools. These include, for instance, discussions with a tutor, mentor or a small group, or such writing assignments as analytic tasks, portfolios and self-assessment tasks, Or during their apprenticeship students may write a learning journal to reflect on their work and learning. These kind of activities allow students to develop their self-regulatory knowledge {in a context provided by the knowledge and problem domain oftheir future profession. According to the noted Canadian researchers of expertise Bereiter and Scardamalia (1993), itis through problem solving that formal knowledge acquired in education is transformed into86 Paivi Tynjata et at an expert's flexible informal knowledge, The process of integrating theory, practice and self ‘egulaton can be seen asa problem-solving process where students simultaneously need to solve practical problems and related conceptual problems, that is, problems of understanding ‘This is illustrated a the bottom end of Figure 5.8, Formal knowledge is turned into skills when it us used to solve practical problems and into informal knowledge when it is used to solve Problems of understanding (Bereiter & Scardamalia, 1993, p. 66). Accordingly, instead of ta. ditional forms of delivering knowledge, problem-solving tasks should form the core of eda. cation of experts. Already during university studying, itis possible to develop gener skills in harmony with subject-matter learning. For example, problem-based and project-based learn. ing environments provide possiblities for integrating factual learning with reasoning. collab orative leaming and self-regulatory skills (e.g, Evenson & Hmelo, 2000), We claim that itis not economical to teach academic contents separately from these other important skills Practical examples of how this kind of model of integrating the key elements of expertise «development in the cooperation with working life are presented in Part III of this book In sum, our empirical findings suggest that still in the knowledge society university educ cation seems fo protect quite well from unemployment. Also, the findings indicate that the Wwork of graduates can be described in terms of symbotic-analytic tasks involving knowledge transformation and creation and requiring not only skills of knowledge use but also diverse social skills, experimentation, innovativeness and life long learning skills. Thus, we ean con. clude that general skills play an essential part in jobs ofthe professionals. Ths challenges uni- versity education to integrate learning of domain knowledge with practice of general skills and {o increase cooperation with working life. Staff development programmes for university teachers should pay attention tothe ways how substantiate knowledge can be integrated with the development of generic skills in the university teaching, how work experience can be con, nected to theoretical studies and how students can be supervised, coached and facilitated din ing their practical periods in order to develop integrated expert knowledge. Recently, elated to the European Bologna process and restructuring of higher educa- tion, university faculties and departments have been revising their curricula all over Europe. In this process, the aims for each degree have been discussed and redefined. At the fame time, universities have been very active in developing university pedagogy. In the future, itis important to examine whether these developments have an impact on graduates evaluations of their learning outcomes in the long term, that is, from the work-life skills point of view. Thus. in a few years a new study om this matter is needed, Acknowledgement ‘This study was funded by the Academy of Finland (project number 53814). References Allan, J. (1996) Leaming outcomes in higher education. Studies in Higher Education, 21, 93-108, ‘Atkins, M. (1995). What should we be atsssing? In: P. Knight (Ed), Assessment for learning ix higher education (pp. 25-33). London: Kogan Page,From University 10 Working Life 87 Bereter, C. (2002), Education and mind in the knowledge age. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Berciter,C., & Scardamalia, M. (1993). Surpassing ourselves: An inguiry into the nature of expert: ise, Chicago: Open Cour. Beven, F., & Dugzan, L. (1995). A conceptuaisation of generic skills and context — Dependent knowledge and a methodology for examining practice. In: J. Stevenson (Ed), Learning in the workplace: Tourism and hospialiy. Centre for Skill Research and Development, Oriffith University, Australis Billet, 8. (2004). Learning through work: Workplace participatory activites. In: H. Rainbird, A. Fuller, & A. Munro (Eds), Workplace learning in context (pp. 109-125). London: Routledge Boud, D.. & Solomon, N. (Eds). 2001). Work-based leaming. A new higher education? Buckingham; SRHE and Open University Press Castells, M. (2000). The rise ofthe nerwork society 2nd ed). Oxford: Blackwell Castells, M., && Himanen, P. (2002), The information society and the welfare state. The Finnish ‘model. Oxford: University Press, (Commission of the European Communities. (2005). Towards a European qualifications framework or lifelong learning. Commission staff working document, Brussels 8.7 2005, Dunne, E. Benet, N., & Carré C, (2000), Skill development in higher education and employment, In: F. Coffield (Ed), Differing visions of a learning society. Research findings. (Vol. 1, pp. 105-137) Bristol: Policy Press. Engestrim, Y. (2004). The new generation of expertise, Seven theses, In: H. Rainbird, A. Fuller, & ‘A. Munro (Eds). Workplace learning in context (pp. 145-165). London: Routledge. Eraut, M. (1994), Developing professional knowledge and competence. London: Falmer Press, Eraut, M. (2002). The interaction between qualifications and work-based learning. In: K. Evans, P Hodkinson, & L. Unwin (Eds), Working to learn. Transforming learning in the workplace (pp. 63-78), London: Kogan Page. Eraut, M, (2004). Transfer of knowledge between education and workplace settings. In 4H, Rainbinl, A. Fuller, & A. Munro (Eds), Workplace learning in context (pp. 201-221), London: Routledge. Evenson, D. H., & Helo, C. E, (Eds). (2000). Problem-based learning. a research perspective on earning interactions. Mahwab, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, FFullet, A.. & Unwin, L. (2004). Expansive learning environments: Integrating organizational and personal development. In: H. Rainbird, A. Fuller, & A. Munro (Eds), Workplace learning in on: test (pp. 126-144). London: Routledge. Guiffhs, T. & Guile, D. (2003), connective model of laring: The implications for work process knowledge. European Educational Research Journal, 2(1), 36-73 Guile, D. & Griffiths, R. (2001), Learning through work experience, Joumal of Education and Work, 14(1), 113-131 Hoakkarainen, K., Palonen, T, Paavola S, & Lehtinen, E, (2004). Communities of networked expert- tse, Professional and educational perspectives, Amsterdam: Elsevier. Leinhardt, G., MoCanlhy, Y. K., & Merriman, J. (1995) Integrating professional knowledge: The theory of practice and practice of theory. Learning and Instruction, 5, 401-408, OECD (2000). Knowledge management in te learning society. Education and skills. Pasis; OECD. Paavola, S. Lipponen L. & Hakkarainen, K. (2004). Models of innovative knowledge communities and three metaphors of leaming. Review of Educational Research, 74(4), 557-576. Reich, R. (1991). The work of nations. New York: Vintage Books Rychen, D. S., & Salganik, L. H. (Eds). (2003). Key competencies for success life and well- imnetoning society. Cambridge, MA: Hogrefe & Huber Shin, D. A. (1987). Educating reflective practitioner, San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.88 Paivi Tnjalit etal ‘Suutari, M. (2003). Korkeakoulutettujen tydeldinurien alluwuodet, LASER projeksin leppura- port: (The frst years of higher education graduates working life careers]. Helsinki: Akava, ‘Tynjal, P., Vilimaa, J. d& Sara, A. (2003). Pedagogical perspectives on the relationships between higher education and working life. Higher Education, 46, 147-166, \Vaarilé, R. (1995). Ammattikoulutus ja kvalfikauiot. {Vocational education and qualifications) Rovaniemi: Lapin yliopisto. Webster, F. (1995). Theories ofthe information society. London: Routledge. ‘Young, M. 2002). Contrasting approaches to the role of qualifications inthe promotion of lifelong learning. In: K. Evans, P. Hodkinson, & L. Unwin (Eds), Working o learn. Transforming learn ing in the workplace (pp. 44-62). London: Kogan Page.ADVANCES IN LEARNING AND INSTRUCTION SERIES Higher Education and Working Life Collaborations, Confrontations and Challenges j Tynjald, Jussi Valimaa and Gillian Boulton-Lewis