930324019

This article was downloaded by:
On: 28 April 2011

Access details: Access Details: Free Access
Publisher Routledge
Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-
41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK
Journal of Education and Work

Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information:
http://www.informaworld.com/smpp/title~content=t713430545
Engineering students' experiences of transition from study to work

Elinor Edvardsson Stiwnea; Tomas Jungerta
a
Department of Behavioural Sciences and Learning, Linköping University, Linköping, Sweden
Online publication date: 29 November 2010
To cite this Article Stiwne, Elinor Edvardsson and Jungert, Tomas(2010) 'Engineering students' experiences of transition
from study to work', Journal of Education and Work, 23: 5, 417 — 437
To link to this Article: DOI: 10.1080/13639080.2010.515967
URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13639080.2010.515967
PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE
Full terms and conditions of use: http://www.informaworld.com/terms-and-conditions-of-access.pdf
This article may be used for research, teaching and private study purposes. Any substantial or
systematic reproduction, re-distribution, re-selling, loan or sub-licensing, systematic supply or
distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden.
The publisher does not give any warranty express or implied or make any representation that the contents
will be complete or accurate or up to date. The accuracy of any instructions, formulae and drug doses
should be independently verified with primary sources. The publisher shall not be liable for any loss,
actions, claims, proceedings, demand or costs or damages whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly
or indirectly in connection with or arising out of the use of this material.
Journal of Education and Work
Vol. 23, No. 5, November 2010, 417–437
Engineering students’ experiences of transition from study to work

Elinor Edvardsson Stiwne and Tomas Jungert*
Department of Behavioural Sciences and Learning, Linköping University, Linköping,

Sweden
(Received 29 April 2009; final version received 14 July 2010)
Taylor and Francis
CJEW_A_515967.sgm
Journal&ofArticle
10.1080/13639080.2010.515967
1363-9080
Original
Taylor
2010
Tomas.jungert@liu.se
TomasJungert
0000002010
00 Francis
Education
(print)/1469-9435
and Work(online)
The focus in this paper is on how students experience their transition from
their education to being employed as engineers in relation to the concept
of employability. Four cohorts of students in a master’s programme in
engineering were monitored annually with a ‘follow-up’ one year after
graduation. Results show that there were differences in the way students
talked about their curricular design, career plans, job search, becoming an
employee and employable, and job satisfaction. Throughout the interviews
Downloaded At: 07:09 28 April 2011
certain turning points were identified, where the students had to make
various decisions. Many students argued that generic skills and cultural
values are best learned in extracurricular activities and in work contexts,
and that doing a thesis project in a firm was the best learning experience.
During this thesis process, students became conscious of their valuable
employability skills, which in the job search process were a good thesis
project, a diploma from the programme, self-efficacy, problem-solving
skills and a broad knowledge base. On the job, the most valuable acquired
key skills were considered to be mathematics and subject-specific
knowledge, problem-solving skills, time management skills, learning
skills, and an ability to manage stress and heavy workloads.
Keywords: employability; engineering; higher education; longitudinal
study; transition
Introduction
In 2007 a Swedish trade union report was published, where the result of a
survey to private and public employers was discussed. The employers were
asked about the anticipated future job market for graduates. From the
responses received they came to the conclusion that key ‘employability’
factors are – from the point of view of presumptive employers – the ability of
an individual to take the initiative, as well as to cooperate with others; the
ability to express oneself orally and in writing; the ability to speak English; the
ability to think analytically; and having some work experience. Of less
*Corresponding author. Email: tomas.jungert@liu.se

ISSN 1363-9080 print/ISSN 1469-9435 online
© 2010 Taylor & Francis
DOI: 10.1080/13639080.2010.515967
http://www.informaworld.com
418 E.E. Stiwne and T. Jungert
importance were factors such as grades, quality of the final thesis, social back-
ground or international experiences. Employers were dissatisfied with the rela-
tionship between the academic world and the workaday world, and with the
lack of leadership training in most programmes of study. Most employers
preferred students with a general education instead of one that was narrow and
specialised. These results from Sweden are in line with other studies, where
the relationship between the demands of employers, the supply of higher
education and the expectations of students has been investigated previously
(e.g. Buchmann 2002; Davies 2000; Teichler 1999, 2000; Yorke 2007). Issues
concerning education and employability highlight the wider issue of the
mission of higher education in a ‘knowledge society’, where the job market is
characterised by rapidly changing working conditions with an increase in
temporary and insecure employment requiring generic and transferable
competences, as well as key competences within a specific field of knowledge.
Within European higher education, one main goal in the Bologna process is to
enhance the employability of students.
The concept of ‘employability’, as seen from the point of view of presump-
tive employers, suggests that an employable person holds knowledge, skills
and characteristics that will make that person useful and valuable in a specific
context. A definition of employability as ‘a set of achievements – skills, under-
standings and personal attributes – that makes graduates more likely to gain
employment and be successful in their chosen occupations, which benefits
themselves, the workforce, the community and the economy’ (Yorke 2007, 8)
focuses on the student, the one to be employed. Several studies indicate that
there is a gap between the knowledge, skills and characteristics a graduate
person is expected to hold and what different stakeholders believe they actu-
ally have (Atkins 2002; Becker 1975; Clarke and Winch 2006; OECD 1998;
Rose 2005; Scott 2003; Smetherham 2006; Teichler 1997, 1999). A basic
assumption in these studies is that it is possible to predict and plan for a
balance between supply and demand of knowledge and competence on a
globalised, competitive knowledge market, and the role of tertiary education
is discussed from such a perspective. Educational and career choices are
assumed to be well-informed, strategic choices made by students. Few system-
atic, longitudinal studies have been made where students were asked to talk
about and reflect on their considerations and decisions at different times
during their education and during their entry into the job market.
Research about students’ perceptions of, and experiences of, the transition
from school to work shows that defining and trying to assess student employ-
ability must be done with caution. Student characteristics may have some
importance, but the question is if these are inherent, stable characteristics as
suggested by Iyengar, Wells, and Schwartz (2006) or if these are contextually
and culturally constructed as suggested by Molgat (2007), Vaatstra and de
Vries (2007), and Ng and Burke (2006). The assumption that employability
can be learned is supported by these cultural, contextual theories of learning
Journal of Education and Work 419
and development. What is emphasised is the importance of the study environ-

ment, i.e. cooperative education where the clash between the academic and
work-life cultures norms regarding communication, time management and
task juggling was moderated. During their education the students graduating
from project-based learning environments seemed to attribute more generic
and reflective competences to themselves than graduates from conventional
learning environments. These results indicate that the quality of contents of
majors and of curriculum design were significantly related to the presence of
generic and reflective competences according to the perception of graduates.
Such competences as learning ability, analytic competences, working indepen-
dently and working in a team positively contribute to the development of
competences in the later careers of graduates and are competences that
employers demand (Yorke 2007).
In this paper the focus is on the students’ experiences of their education
and how they have been prepared for the job as an engineer. These data will
be related to the concept of employability. Data from a longitudinal study of
four cohorts of engineering students enrolled in a 4.5-year master’s
programme in applied physics and electrical engineering (henceforth referred
to as the Y-programme) will be used. The four cohorts, starting in 1998, 1999,
2000 and 2002, were monitored annually throughout their entire period of
study of 4.5 years, with a ‘follow-up’ one year after graduation (e.g. Edvards-
son Stiwne 2005, 2006; Jungert 2008, 2009). The Y-programme is a broad
theoretical programme, with a unique combination of applied physics and
electrical engineering, and it was marketed as prestigious and at the interna-
tional front of technical development. After completing two years of basic
studies, the students can choose among different profiles of engineering.
During their final year, a concluding degree project, carried out in a business
or academic context, nationally or internationally, must be completed.
Between 1998 and 2007 the curriculum was redesigned, from having a
focus on theory to a focus on engineering competences by means of the inte-
gration of generic skills and competences into theoretical modules, as well as
in the construction of an open and supporting study environment
(www.cdio.org). The first cohort (1998) was studied within a traditional, theo-
retical programme. In 1999 the study board started the implementation of a
Conceive–Design–Implement–Operate (CDIO) curriculum based on a CDIO
syllabus, an engineering education initiative formally founded by Massachu-
setts Institute of Technology, with engineering projects in their first, third and
fourth year. The 1999 cohort had a project course in their third year, the 2000
cohort had a project course in their third and fourth year, and the 2002 cohort
had a project course in their first, third and fourth year. Results from the study
have shown that the students, across all cohorts and independent of curriculum,
experienced the course work as highly demanding and the workloads as heavy
(e.g. Jungert 2008, 2009). The drop-out rate was about 30%, and many students
took study leaves in order to have a break from studying and regain their
motivation to complete their studies. The third year of the programme was not
only considered as extremely tough but also as a threshold to cross, from the
basic compulsory curriculum to elected, more potential job-related courses.
The state of the job market, by the time of their graduation, impacted the
decisions that students made throughout their study process, as well as the deci-
sions they made when they elected profiles, searched for placements for their
graduate project, their job search and their success in obtaining a full-time job.
Research questions
In this paper the following questions have guided the data analysis:
● What knowledge, skills and competences, achieved during their study

time, did the students find most relevant and instructive in relation to
their experiences of themselves as being employable as engineers?
● When they search for jobs, what knowledge, skills and competences do
potential employers ask for?
● In relation to the demands and career opportunities in their first jobs, do

the students find their education relevant?
● Looking back on their study time and the efforts they put in, how
satisfied are the students with their present job situation, and what are
their plans for the future?
Research about employability and employment

Studies about graduate employability and employment have been made in
order to try and answer questions like ‘What will the job market for graduates
look like in the future? What knowledge, skills and competences will be
demanded? How should educational systems develop to meet these demands?’
(Clarke and Winch 2006; DeWeert 1997; Morley 2001; Teichler 1999; Yorke
2007). In these studies it is often assumed that students have a more or less
clear image of what they want to do when they enrol in a specific programme.
Another way of approaching the issue of graduate employability is in line with
studies undertaken by the Higher Education Academy in the UK, due to
critique from employers who have argued that graduate students have been
poorly prepared for the demands of working life contexts. Yorke (2007) argues
that the relation between higher education and the economy is a key issue and
that the political interest in employability of graduates reflects an acceptance
of human capital theory (Becker 1975). Whereas employers have, by and large,
been satisfied with the disciplinary understanding and skills developed as a
consequence of participation in higher education, they have been less satisfied
with the development of what have been termed ‘generic skills’, such as
communication, team working and time management. With reference to
Harvey et al. (1997), Yorke (2007) argues that employers in the UK tend to
value generic skills more highly than disciplinary-based understanding and
skills, although Brown, Hesketh, and Williams (2002) caution a too narrow
interpretation of the employer responses, in quoting one human resources
manager saying, ‘Academic qualifications are the first ticks in the box and then
we move on. Today we simply take them for granted’ (Brown 2003, 19).
A key question is how ‘employability’ is defined and what it means for
different stakeholders and in different contexts. Yorke (2007) refers to three
different ways of defining the concept:
(1) Employability as demonstrated by graduates actually obtaining a job,

some time after graduation. In this way employability is used as a
performance indicator in higher education institutions (i.e. in Sweden
HSV: LiU; Sister) and the indicator is that students are employed at a
specific time after graduation. Hillage and Pollard (1998, 2) also present
a definition of the concept in line with this, ‘Employability is about a
students’ ability to gain initial employment, maintain employment and
obtain new employment if required’. Definitions like these are rejected
and criticised by Brown, Hesketh, and Williams (2002) for neglecting

the fact that societal and economic conditions impact the chances of an
individual to find and maintain different kinds of employment.
(2) Employability as personal career development of the student, due to
his/her experience of higher education curricular/extracurricular
processes. Experiences in itself are not sufficient for enhanced employ-
ability, but can facilitate for students to learn from their experiences. In
Sweden this definition is implicit in many curricular learning outcomes.
(3) Employability as student characteristics possessed or achieved by the
individual student. In reality, this has to be relevant for a specific job
and/or job situation, and thus employability turns out to be defined as a
multifaceted, context-dependent characteristic of the individual.
From these different ways of defining the concept, Yorke (2007) offers a
tentative, working definition of the employability as a number of achieve-
ments, such as skills and personal attributes, which increases graduates’
opportunities to gain employment and be successful in their chosen occupa-
tions, which benefits themselves, the workforce, the community and the
economy.
Graduate employability and the future job market

Based on this definition, studies of graduate employability can be undertaken
with a focus on social and political aspects of the relevance of further educa-
tion (Brown and Hesketh 2004; Delanty 2001; Mason 2002; McQuaid and
Colin 2005; Tomlinson 2007). Such studies share some common assumptions:
● Traditional ways of thinking about markets, finance, class, education and

career trajectories do not capture the potentialities and risks of an emerg-
ing new kind of graduate job market.
● The general educational level in the population is rising very rapidly,
with increasing competition for the best students, as well as for the best
jobs.
● Mobility and flexibility of markets, organisations, jobs and people
challenge the concept of job security, and highlight the concepts of
employability and flexibility.
● Increasing competition challenges the basic assumptions underlying the
idea of a knowledge society, i.e. the utility of further formal education;
the priority of abstract, analytical knowledge and competence; and the
lack of appreciation for practical, communicative and relational knowl-
edge and competences.
These studies indicate that graduate employability is closely related to

educational and economic policy, but there are also studies indicating a rela-
tionship between graduate employment and students’ life goals and fields of
study. In a longitudinal, comparative study of the relationship between life

goals and fields of study among young European graduates (http://www.uni-
kassel.de/wz1/TSEREGS/publi_e.htm), it was concluded that there were some
patterns identified among students in seven European countries, which were
quite similar, despite cultural and labour market differences. Significant simi-
larities regarding gender, educational and social background and life goals
were strongly related to specific fields of study (Brown and Hesketh 2004).
For example, engineering graduates were predominantly males with high
marks in secondary education and a vocational educational background. They
were not interested in life goals such as social prestige, personal development,
varied social life and home/family life. They were more interested in profes-
sional development through academic inquiry and in making money. In their
study contexts they wanted to develop their own ideas, in challenging and
well-ordered tasks and working in teams.
There are also studies undertaken from a student perspective. Leccardi
(2005) argues that biographical insecurity makes it difficult for young people
to picture themselves in a future job market and how their choices and non-
choices as students can be related to their professional future. Rapid technical
development and a feeling that time moves on too quickly contribute to
students’ perception of not having, and not being able to have, control over
their own lives. Within a longitudinal study of job satisfaction among young
European higher education graduates, Garcia-Aracil et al. (2007) and Mora,
Garcia-Aracil, and Vila (2007) found that the overall effects of educational
determinants on job satisfaction were homogeneous across Europe. A signifi-
cant positive link was found between job satisfaction and experiences of a
well-designed programme, content of courses and practical learning. The
positions the students held four years after graduation were lower than
expected regarding earnings and possibilities for lifelong learning. A
perceived surplus of qualifications and competences was one of the most
relevant causes of job dissatisfaction. A high level of disappointment was
found when graduates could not use their knowledge and competence at
work. On the other hand, being undereducated or having lower competences
than required increased job satisfaction! Young graduates with permanent job
contracts and full-time jobs were the most satisfied, especially those working
for the public sector and in small firms.
Additionally, students’ academic self-efficacy and perceptions of their
capabilities and skills may influence their conception of career aspirations and
motivation for developing these or such skills. For example, earlier research
has found positive links between perceptions of the relevance of skills and
motivation for further learning (Lizzio and Wilson 2004) and between job
satisfaction and occupational self-efficacy (Erwins 2001). Furthermore, self-
efficacy beliefs strongly influence career interests, career aspirations, career-
related activities and career performance (Lent, Hackett, and Brown 1999;
O’Brien et al. 2000), and Pinquart, Juang, and Silbereisen (2003) have found
associations between high academic self-efficacy beliefs and school-to-work

transition.
The relation between educational systems and employment

In discussing higher education policy in relation to changing conditions and
challenges in the world of work, Teichler (1999) argues that higher education
has to accommodate a situation where students are more diverse in their moti-
vations and capabilities as well as in the jobs and positions they will hold after
graduation. Apart from knowledge in a subject area, higher education is also
expected to help students to improve their social and communicative skills, to
inform them about the labour market for graduate jobs, to address the tensions
between academic and professional approaches to problems, and prepare them
for an insecure and flexible job market. If, as many studies indicate, ‘social
competences’ are generic transferable skills demanded by employers, and
learning is taking place in specific social contexts where these skills are
learned, the challenge for higher education is to design high quality courses
and programmes that provide authentic or simulated learning settings, e.g. by
offering workplace awareness that allows students to develop new knowledge
and skills, challenge misconceptions, change attitudes, carry out and practice
performance, and solve problems in contexts close to those in real professional
life (Bennett, Dunne, and Carré 1999). High quality, research-based content is
required, but it is not enough to attract young students. As the boundaries
between work and private life are blurring, so are the goals and values attrib-
uted to work and life. Career choices are not regarded as something separate
from life choices and lifestyles.
Method and data

Qualitative longitudinal studies are gaining interest as they offer possibilities
to better understand interaction processes and career paths (Holland, Thom-
son, and Henderson 2006). This study was not designed as longitudinal from
the start, but emerged to be longitudinal within a restricted context, four
cohorts of engineering students in one study programme. Results have contin-
ually been fed back to the financing body, the study board, and the data have
been used in the reformation of the curriculum.
Throughout the longitudinal study, both questionnaires and interviews
have been used (Edvardsson Stiwne 2006; Jungert 2009). For the purpose of
this paper, we only use interview data. In each cohort 10 students were
selected to be interviewed on a regular basis. In sampling students to be inter-
viewed we used lists of all students registered for their first semester. The
students were listed by class, name, birth registration number and address.
From this list we made a maximum variety sampling (Patton 1990) in order to
get a heterogeneous sample of students. Only the researchers know who the
interviewed students are. The selected students were contacted and informed
of the design of the study and asked if they agreed to be interviewed on a regu-
lar basis, once a year throughout their entire time as students with a follow-up
about one year after graduation. Very few students refused to participate, and
for those who did, we had reserves. For the purpose of this paper, we selected
data from students who were interviewed four to seven times and who fulfilled
their studies in the programme (Table 1). All of them have been interviewed
during their study time, job search and transition period. The listed students
were interviewed five to seven times in cohorts 1998 and 1999 and four to six
times in cohorts 2000 and 2002. In all, the data consist of 112 interviews with
20 students. The interviews were conducted between 1998 and 2007 and
resulted in 975 transcribed pages.
Data from previous interviews were used as a trigger and a point of depar-
ture for subsequent interviews, and the student was asked to reflect on the
study experiences of previous years, when responding. The interviews were
taped and transcribed verbatim and then analysed as text. The students had
Table 1. Interviewed students.

Cohort 1998 Cohort 1999 Cohort 2000 Cohort 2002
Male born 1967 Male born 1977 Male born 1980 Male born 1981
Male born 1978 Male born 1979 Male born 1981 Male born 1981
Male born 1978 Female born 1972 Male born 1982 Male born 1982
Female born 1978 Female born 1980 Female born 1978 Male born 1983
Female born 1978 Female born 1980 Female born 1980 Male born 1983
Female born 1979 Female born 1980 Female born 1982
Female born 1982
access to the emerging project reports and conference papers but not to the
interview transcripts.
In the longitudinal study all interviews have been read through in different
phases of the study. For the purpose of this paper, the interviews with the listed
students (Table 1) were reanalysed with a focus on how they talked about their
studies and study context throughout their study period, and if and how this
was related to their anticipated future employments as engineers. After that
first re-reading, the research questions were worded. The interviews were read
through again and critical turning points were identified, related to the concept
of employability. For each student interviewed, data were organised so that it
was possible to longitudinally follow each student’s expectations, study expe-
riences, job search process and first professional experiences. Although it was
evident to us, as researchers, that their expectations and study experiences
were to different degrees intertwined with the emerging change of the curric-
ulum and their perceptions of the relevance of those experiences to their future
employability, in this paper these curricular aspects were tuned down and in
analysing the interviews, we had a focus on the longitudinal data and changes
over time.
Verbatim extracts are used to indicate how students talked about their
experiences and they are chosen to show the variation and complexity
students’ experience within a specific cultural and temporal context.
Results
The following five areas were highlighted in the analysis of the interviews:
● Plans for the future;

● Course content, curricular design and career plans;
● The job search process: an active search or an ambivalent monitoring of
opportunities;
● Becoming an employee, becoming employable; and
● On the job: job satisfaction – life satisfaction, plans for the future
The students thought and reflected on their studies and future employment
in different ways. Differences between students within cohorts were more
pronounced than the differences between cohorts of students. The most
evident result is that the students’ conceptions, experiences and anticipations
of their future changed over time. There were differences in the way students
talked about these issues during the time they were studying; when they were
looking for jobs and thinking of their future roles as employees; and when
they were employed and working. We identified certain turning points,
critical moments, when the students had to make choices and take various
decisions.
The students were young when they enrolled in the Y-programme. The
average age of the first-year students in our study was 20. In the first cohorts
(1998 and 1999), there were more mature students, who had been working,
studying, doing military services, etc., before enrolling. These students had
some work-life experience and experience of managing their own lives as
adults.
When they chose and enrolled in the Y-programme, very few of the
interviewed students had any idea concerning what an engineer was or what
engineers did. They had no articulated career plans or plans for the future. The
exceptions were the mature students who saw further education as a way out
of manual labour or other unqualified work.
Plans for the future

Most interviewed students had vague ideas or plans for their future when they
enrolled. During the first three years, the students’ lack of career plans was
enacted in different ways. One group of students focused entirely on their
‘here-and-now’ situation. They engaged in activities aimed at confirming their
position as an engineering student, i.e. involved themselves in student union

activities and extracurricular activities:
I am going to spend five years of my life in this programme and I want to have
some fun as well.
These students experienced some difficulties in balancing study, work and

social life. A second group of students were those who primarily wanted a
grade and viewed the Y-programme as one option among others:
I will try one year and if it does not feel right I will do something else.
A third group of students were those who had a specific subject of interest and
were motivated by the reputation of the programme:
I loved mathematics and I wanted the best, the toughest.
After having managed the first two basic years, the career plans, or lack of
same, were enacted in the students’ choice of profile, a situation that was
marked as a turning point in their lives. By this time, the class of origin was
no longer the same entity, due to outs, students who had taken study leaves, as
well as more individual study strategies (Edvardsson Stiwne 2005, 2006;
Jungert 2008, 2009). Among the interviewed students three different strategies
prevailed:
(1) Exit or take some time off studies. Those students who had experienced
an overwhelming workload, and realised that cramming facts was their
way of learning and developing, felt that this was the time to take a
decision of either leaving the programme or taking study leave to think
things over and do something completely different, to leave the study
context for a while. ‘Sometimes I have felt I want to do something else,
I do not know if this is the right thing but I cannot think of anything
else … I have never really known what I want … It is interesting with
maths and technology and I enjoy studying but I have never had the
idea that I shall become a graduate engineer’. Considering this option
is quite painful and also a bit shameful. The feeling of failure lurks in
the background and students feel that they have to justify their choice,
as expressed by another student, ‘I do not think the time has been
wasted, even if I quit, because it will be useful somehow, but I do not
know when, where and how … I have learned to study, it is very much
problem solving and logical thinking and stuff like that you learn …
many graduates choose one profile and end up doing something quite
different’.
(2) To stay on and deepen an interest with no consideration for a future
job or career. ‘I plan to take medical technology as my profile but I do
not exactly know what it means, what kind of jobs it can lead to’.
Another example is a student who said ‘not like “I want to become a
physician and have to become a physician”, instead, I still don’t know
if there is a particular specialisation that I REALLY want to work with.
It doesn’t matter if I work at Volvo or at a small firm, so I don’t have
that kind of a goal that I must study this programme to become this or
that’.
(3) To stay on and make choices that will be considered paths leading to a
job. For some students this was the time to take strategic decisions about
future job and career opportunities, ‘I changed my profile from a quite
theoretical to a more applied with respect to a future job market’.
The experiences of students concerning the content and design of the

courses during the first years were also related to their strategic choices.
Students categorised their courses in terms of how interesting, useful and
applicable they found them (Edvardsson Stiwne and Jungert 2007). These
categories were related to the students’ definition of ‘employability’ as their
path towards obtaining a good and interesting job after graduation.
A useful course was considered to be so in a broad sense, but not
directly applicable in a specific work situation, while an applicable course
was related to real-life situations. An interesting course was considered
instructive because it was associated with fun and interest. Most of the
students considered courses in mathematics to be highly interesting. The
following quote illustrates this, ‘I found it fun to study maths and physics;
it was worth it even if I don’t use it right now. Somewhere, I believe that
the general knowledge you acquire in the programme brings something
valuable that you cannot put your finger on’. Other students emphasised
that mathematics was more important than any practical skill because it had
an impact on the way they were thinking. Not every one of the interviewed
students appreciated mathematics, as in the quote, ‘I believe that we study
so much maths because of a tradition and that engineers traditionally use a
lot of maths. Back then, it was important, to know many analytical tricks to
solve difficult math problems, while today what you do is to use computer
programs’.
The definition of employability we use in this paper (see Yorke 2007) high-
lights the question of what parts of the curriculum that the students believe
contribute to employability, and if these skills are best learned within the
educational context or within the context of work-life, or work-based learning
situations. Many students argued that generic skills and cultural values were
best learned in extracurricular activities and in work contexts, and that doing
a thesis project in a firm was the best learning experience during the whole
period of studies.
The thesis project – becoming an engineer

Even if many students did not have any particular career plans and vague
thoughts about their careers when they chose their profile, they were reminded
about their future as engineers when it was time to start looking for a place-
ment for their graduate thesis/project. This was a crucial decision point
because most students were convinced that a good placement would be a foot
in the door or at least provide contacts that would result in a job after gradua-
tion. In the interviews many students commented that it was during this thesis
process that they became conscious of their overall employability skills, as
well as the lack of these. In finalising their thesis project it also became evident
for them that work-life conditions were quite different from study conditions,
when it comes to autonomy, possibilities to influence their personal work
conditions and time management, as well as the composition of work teams.
‘What was new maybe was that you could work more independently and
decide when you had done something “good enough” to be finished. I was the
one with the answers, no teacher or key’.
In order to increase students’ employability, in line with the goals in the
Bologna process, the students were encouraged to look for thesis projects in
firms and abroad, where traditionally these projects mainly had been carried
out at the university or in the public sector. Two main ways to plan for a
career emerged among the students: (1) to look for a placement for a grade
thesis project at the university or; (2) in a firm. Students who did their
master’s thesis at the university were interested in the pursuit of a career as
researchers. They often found their specialisation courses relevant for their
master’s thesis. The interviewed students rarely considered research or an
academic career as a career option ‘remain here for the rest of my life??!! I
want to experience the real life … it’s like a lot of strange people inhabiting
this place’.
Students who did their master’s thesis at companies were tired of being
students and looked forward to being employed. They did not find their
specialisation courses specifically relevant for their work.
From the surveys we can learn that the proportion of students who carried
out their thesis projects in firms increased between the cohorts 1998 and 2000,
from 59% to 69%. The proportion that did their thesis project abroad increased
between the same cohorts, from 4% to 12%. One explanation for these latter
differences could be that in 1999 an international class, Yi, was launched and
these students spent one semester abroad during their study time, which helped
them to make international contacts.
Students in all cohorts had to take responsibility themselves for arranging
their thesis project, and the students’ experiences were that reorganisations
and cost-cutting put a lot of strain on employees, both in private sector firms
as well as in the public sector, and having to supervise a student just put an
additional burden on employees’ shoulders. However, this view was less
common among students in the later cohorts.
The job search process – to present oneself as an engineer

The motivation to take the step from the study context into working life varied
among students, within as well as between cohorts, due to their individual
goals as well as the job market situation at the time of graduation.
The job search process was considered to be very demanding especially
in the earlier cohorts. They described a situation where they had submitted
between 30 and 50 applications, each of which attracted 100–200 appli-
cants, and at best they had been invited to one job interview. This made
even the most enthusiastic student depressed. But the students also
expressed some ambivalence in engaging in this process, because it meant
that the skills and competences they had acquired as a student would be
evaluated and tested. This was a forceful reminder that they were about to
leave their safe and comfortable life as a student. The future financial and
social insecurity was considered stressful, particularly the difficulty
concerning planning for the future. ‘I have lived in a small but secure world
at the university and it is a bit scary to get out and see if I can live up to
the expectations of my grade’.
For some students the option was to try to get any job, just to get job expe-
rience, while this was not an option for those who had opportunities to choose
to, i.e., continue studying:
If I cannot get a job, I will take more classes, but most of all I want to leave the
campus. It is a feeling of defeat to get a low-qualified job after graduation, so I
will rather continue studying than just getting any job, despite loss of income.
Students who did not have to worry about their financial situation were not as
frenzied in their job search, and they did not hesitate to continue studying
since this was a more secure and familiar way of living:
There are other students from the Y-programme that were not too keen to start
working, who now are studying economics. The reason that they do not want to
start working is that they enjoy studying and that they believe that more credits
will enhance their job prospects.
The skills and competences that the students experienced to be of most

value in the job search process were a good thesis project; a diploma from the
Y-programme, proving that they were able to manage a tough study
programme and to manage a heavy workload; self-confidence, knowing that
they could solve complex problems and that they possessed a broad knowl-
edge base. Above all, the choice of a placement for their grade thesis/project
was considered to be the most crucial turning point for the future. The inter-
viewed students regarded this as an opportunity to get their foot into a
company and build networks for the future. In the 2000/2002 cohorts, all inter-
viewed students except one were eventually employed at the place where they
had done their graduate project.

Another turning point was when they actually had their graduate project
placement, and many students experienced the step from being a student at the
university to becoming a graduate project student in a company, as bigger than
the step from being a graduate student to becoming an employee. One gradu-
ate said, ‘There was no big difference (to start working there). You had been
there every day from 8 to 5, so it was more like I changed rooms. Sure, I
changed tasks and so, but you knew everybody’s name and that stuff’. After
the thesis project they knew their colleagues and their boss, they knew the
culture of the organisation and they had assignments similar to when they had
done their master’s thesis.
Becoming an employee, becoming employable

The Swedish National Agency for Higher Education (HSV) annually presents
a report regarding graduate employment rates. The study is based on data from
Statistics Sweden (SCB). Their definition of graduate employability is based
on establishment in the job market one year after graduation with a minimum
income of 160,000 Swedish crowns/year (i.e. about 16,000). On average the
degree of establishment varies across subject areas, e.g. 90% (medicine and
health care), 80% (engineering), 50% (arts and sciences), but it also varies
between universities within a given subject area. Data show that students with
a degree from the Y-programme have better job prospects, compared to
graduates from other engineering programmes (J. Kindgren, pers. comm.).
In this longitudinal study the interviewed students had vague ideas about
their future careers as engineers when they enrolled, and they had difficulties
in finding the content and design of the courses meaningful, and therefore
developed different strategies for surviving or achieving their goals. The
meaning of ‘becoming employable’ and ‘employability’ emerged at certain
critical points, after the first two years, when they were making their choices
of profile, and after the third year, when they were doing their grade project.
When doing their grade project they became aware of work-life demands
related to their acquired knowledge, skills and competences.
In the last interview they had experiences of their first engineering jobs,
and they reflected on the relevance and importance of their education and
acquired knowledge, skills and competences in relation to their present job
situation. In general, the students emphasised that the programme was broad
and that the acquired skills and competences were not very deep except in
mathematics and physics.
What they identified as key acquired skills were mathematics and subject-
specific knowledge, problem-solving skills, time management skills, learning
skills, and an ability to manage stress and heavy workloads.
One of the 1998 students gave voice to the experience of many of the inter-
viewed students: ‘working independently, taking your own initiative and
learning all the time’ were considered to be the key qualifications learned in
the Y-programme, as well as the experience of being able to work hard. The
Y-programme had a reputation for being tough and demanding, and in all
cohorts the students commented on heavy workloads and symptoms of study-
related stress. On the other hand, its reputation was also mentioned as being
the core value of the programme, which made the Y-programme stand out
from other programmes. The students claimed that faculty put heavier
demands on Y-students than on students from other programmes. The capacity
to manage a heavy workload was mentioned as a key skill in their present job
situations.
For an overview of the development of the students’ experiences of their
transition from their education to being employed, see Table 2.
Discussion and conclusion

A main result of this study is that the students did not have any clear view of
what they wanted to do when they applied for the study programme (Y).
Throughout their studies, their perception of what being students meant to
them, and in the process, their images of what an engineer does at work, and
what they wanted to do when they graduated changed. The meaning of transi-
tion from study to work became evident at specific decision points, i.e. in the
choice of profile and specialisation and placement for their thesis. For some
students these became strategic choices for future employment or for enhanc-
ing an interest in a specific subject area, without considerations of usefulness
or employability. It should be noted that students’ characteristics, such as
Table 2. A summary of the development that has emerged over time.

Highlighted
area Years 1–3 Years 3–5 At work
Plans for the Vague ideas Enacted in choice of —
future Lack of career profile
plans Exit/time off
Focus on specific Deepen interest
subjects of without
interest and consideration for
extracurricular career
activities Career path choices
Generic best learned
in extracurricular
activities
The thesis Vague ideas Crucial decision point Thesis project at
project Good placement: a university: career as
foot in the door researchers
Similar to work-life Project in a firm: often
conditions; different employment at the firm
from study Thesis project in a firm

conditions best learning experience
The job search — Demanding process Valuable skills: a good
process Ambivalence in thesis project; a diploma,
engaging in the placement of project
process From studies to project
placement a bigger step
than from graduate
student to employee
Becoming an — The meaning of Programme: broad; not
employee, ‘becoming deep
becoming employable’ Key acquired skills:
employable emerged in choices mathematics, problem-
of profile and thesis solving, time
project management, ability to
manage stress and heavy
workloads
acceptance of responsibility for self and others, openness and commitment,

and self-efficacy, proved to be more important than they had expected in the
graduates’ job search process.
Lizzio and Wilson (2004) argue that the perceived relevance to future work
of different types of skills and capabilities is the strongest predictor for student
interest in courses and a prime determinant of the effort they are prepared to
invest in those courses. However, the students in this study had three kinds of
action plans for their future after the first two years in the programme. The
perceived relevance to future work of acquired skills was only highly
important in one of these strategies. However, another finding was that

students often chose study profiles, i.e. courses that students chose in their
fourth year in order to specialise in a specific area, with the intention of deep-
ening an interest with no consideration for a future job or career. Finding a
placement for their graduate project seems to have been an even more crucial
decision point than to choose profile courses. There are two reasons for this:
(1) Most students get their first jobs as engineers where they did their master’s
project, and most students are aware of this when they look for a placement.
Thus, many graduates specialise when they enter working life rather than
while being students in the programme. (2) According to most students the
opportunities to learn generic skills and cultural values are best in extracurric-
ular activities and in work contexts, such as doing a thesis project. For many
students, the trademark of the programme was the ritual aspects of knowledge
(Abrandt Dahlgren et al. 2006) such as the intensity of the studies and the high
workload. When students adapt to study conditions, they are forced to learn
generic skills such as managing heavy workloads. Students want to retain the
trademark of the programme, which may give them a formal legitimacy as a
door opener to the labour market. Students who in this study initially used the
strategy to stay on and deepen an interest with no consideration for a future

job or career as well as students with the strategy to stay on and make choices
that will be considered paths leading to a job will probably focus more on
developing such generic skills, whereas someone whose strategy is to exit or
take some time off studies would try to change his/her focus to other aspects.
This study also showed that students with strong beliefs in both academic
capabilities and in capability to find a job as an engineer influenced their job
satisfaction and opportunities to find appropriate jobs, which is in line with
previous research (Erwins 2001; Pinquart, Juang, and Silbereisen 2003).
However, high academic self-efficacy did not seem to be related to career
aspirations.
Our results show that students graduating from the Y-programme were
quite successful in getting into the job market before 2000, when the
programme has a very strong focus on theory. When the CDIO curriculum was
implemented in 2000, the focus of the programme changed to be more on
engineering competences by means of the integration of generic skills and
competences into theoretical modules. The CDIO curriculum seems to have
changed the students’ strategies and activities in their job search process. It is
not possible to say to what extent this depends on the overall job market, and/
or the overall change in attitudes to their studies that we have noted between
the traditional (1998 and 1999) and CDIO (2000 and 2002) cohorts. Questions
to be asked are as follows:
(1) Job prospects are good for these students, but in spite of that enrolment
rates continue to drop and the dropout rate is quite high. How should
this mismatch be dealt with?
In a study of the relationship between qualification and job satisfaction

among graduates in Europe, Mora, Garcia-Aracil, and Vila (2007) found
that a perceived surplus of qualifications and competences was one of
the most relevant causes of job dissatisfaction. A high level of disap-
pointment was present when graduates could not use their knowledge
and competence at work.
From an educational perspective, one must deal with the issues of
declining enrolment rates as well as high dropout rates from academic
as well as employability perspectives and with considerations of what
the meaning of a grade is for the student.
(2) Is it the image of engineering programmes that must be changed in order
to attract young people today, where work is very much part of a lifestyle,
or is it enough to change the curriculum and pedagogy, or must both
aspects be aligned in the design of the whole study context?
Our study shows that there has been a change in attitude between cohorts,
with the latter cohorts putting more emphasis on what the ‘programme’
can offer them and what options they have, while the earlier cohorts put
more emphasis on their own efforts and capacity to meet the require-
ments of the ‘programme’. Our results also suggest that we pose the
question: Is it the mission of an engineering programme to make students
employable, or is it the responsibility of students to become employable?
Acknowledgements
This project was funded by a grant from the Knut and Alice Wallenberg foundation.
We would like to thank members of the Higher Education Research seminar at
Linköping University, especially Professors Lars-Owe Dahlgren, Madeleine Abrandt
Dahlgren, and Lecturer Ingrid Andersson for their valuable comments and suggestions
about the text. A special thanks to Steven Rosenfield, Concordia University, Montreal,
who edited the language.
Notes on contributors
Elinor Edvardsson Stiwne is an associate professor and a senior lecturer at the Depart-
ment of Behavioural Sciences and Learning at Linkoping University and the Director
of the Centre for Teaching and Learning at the University. She is doing research on
students’ experiences of higher education and on psychological health and job satis-
faction related to education.
Tomas Jungert has a PhD in psychology at the Department of Behavioural Sciences
and Learning at Linköping University. Tomas’ work covers areas in group psychology
and higher education. His thesis focuses on student motivation and self-efficacy in a
longitudinal, comparative study of four cohorts of engineering students.
References
Abrandt Dahlgren, M., H. Hult, L.O. Dahlgren, H. Hård af Segerstad, and K. Johansson.
2006. From senior student to novice worker: Learning trajectories in political
science, psychology and mechanical engineering. Studies in Higher Education 31:

569–86.
Atkins, M. 2002. The oven-ready and self-basting: Taking stock on employability
skills. Teaching in Higher Education 4: 267–80.
Becker, G.S. 1975. Human capital: A theoretical and empirical analysis, with special
reference to education. 2nd ed. New York: Colombia University Press.
Bennett, N., E. Dunne, and C. Carré. 1999. Patterns of core and generic skill provision
in higher education. Higher Education 37: 71–93.
Brown, P. 2003. The opportunity trap: Education and employment in a global
economy. Working Paper Series, Paper 32, School of Social Sciences, Cardiff
University.
Brown P., and A. Hesketh. 2004. The mismanagement of talent: Employability and
jobs in the knowledge economy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Brown, P., A. Hesketh, and S. Williams. 2002. Employability in a knowledge-driven
economy. Notes from the ‘Skills plus’ conference ‘Innovation in education for
employability’, June 13, in Manchester Metropolitan University, P. Knight
(compiler). www.cardiff.ac.uk/schoolsanddivisions/academicschools/socsi/publi-
cations/workingpaperseries/numeric21-30.html.
Buchmann, M. 2002. Labor market entry and beyond. Education + Training 44, nos.
4–5: 217–23.
Clarke, L., and C. Winch. 2006. A European skills framework? – But what are skills?
Anglo-Saxon versus German concepts. Journal of Education and Work 19: 255–69.
Davies, L. 2000. Why kick the ‘L’ out of ‘Learning’? The development of students’
employability skills through part-time working. Education + Training 42: 436–45.
Delanty, G. 2001. Challenging knowledge: The university in the knowledge society.
Buckingham: Open University Press.
DeWeert, E. 1997. Translating employment needs into curriculum strategies. Higher
Education Management 6: 305–20.
Edvardsson Stiwne, E. 2005. The first year as engineering student – The experiences
of four cohorts of engineering students in applied physics and electrical engineer-
ing in Linkoping University. Paper presented at the 1st annual CDIO Conference
at Queen’s University, June 7–8, in Ontario.
Edvardsson Stiwne, E. 2006. Situated conceptions of learning and the reforming of
an engineering programme. World Transactions on Engineering and Technology
Education 5, no. 2: 353–6.
Edvardsson Stiwne, E., and T. Jungert. 2007. Engineering students’ experiences of
the transition from study to work. Paper presented at the 3rd International CDIO
Conference, MIT, June 11–14, in Cambridge, MA.
Erwins, C.J. 2001. The relationship of women’s role strain to social support, role
satisfaction, and self-efficacy. Family Relations 50: 230–8.
Garcia-Aracil, A., D. Gabaldon, J.-G. Mora, and L.E. Vila. 2007. The relationship
between life goals and fields of study among young European graduates. Higher
Education 53: 843–65.
Harvey, L., S. Moon, V. Geall, and R. Bower. 1997. Graduates’ work: Organisation
change and students’ attributes. Birmingham: Centre for Research into Quality.
Hillage, J., and E. Pollard. 1998. Employability: Developing a framework for policy
analysis. London: Department for Education and Employment.
Holland, J., R. Thomson, and S. Henderson. 2006. Qualitative longitudinal research:
A discussion paper. Working Paper No. 21, Families and Social Capital ESRC
Research Group, London South Bank University.
Iyengar, S.S., R.E. Wells, and B. Schwartz. 2006. Doing better but feeling worse.
Psychological Science 17, no. 2: 143–50.
Jungert, T. 2008. A longitudinal study of engineering students’ approaches to their

studies. Higher Education Research and Development 27: 201–14.
Jungert, T. 2009. Self-efficacy, motivation and approaches to studying: A longitudi-
nal study of Y and how engineering students perceive their studies and transition
to work. Doctoral thesis in arts and sciences no. 485, Linköping University,
Linköping.
Leccardi, C. 2005. Facing uncertainty – Temporality and biographies in the new
century. Young 13: 123–46.
Lent, R.W., G. Hackett, and S.D. Brown. 1999. A social cognitive view of school-to-
work transition. Career Development Quarterly 47: 297–311.
Lizzio, A., and K. Wilson. 2004. First-year students’ perceptions of capability.
Studies in Higher Education 29: 109–28.
Mason, G. 2002. High skills utilisation under mass higher education: Graduate
employment in service industries in Britain. Journal of Education and Work 15:
427–56.
McQuaid, R.W., and L. Colin. 2005. The concept of employability. Urban Studies
42: 197–219.
Molgat, M. 2007. Do transitions and social structures matter? How ‘emerging adults’
define themselves as adults. Journal of Youth Studies 10, no. 5: 495–516.
Mora, J.-G., A. Garcia-Aracil, and L.E. Vila. 2007. Job satisfaction among young
European higher education graduates. Higher Education 53: 29–59.
Morley, L. 2001. Producing new workers: Quality, equality and employability in

higher education. Quality in Higher Education 7: 131–8.
Ng, E.S.W., and R.J. Burke. 2006. Next generation at work: Business students’
views, values and job search strategy. Education & Training 48: 478–92.
O’Brien, K.M., S.M. Friedman, L.C. Tipton, and S.G. Linn. 2000. Attachment, sepa-
ration, and women’s vocational development: A longitudinal analysis. Journal of
Counseling Psychology 47: 301–15.
OECD. 1998. Redefining tertiary education. Paris: OECD.
Patton, M.Q. 1990. Qualitative evaluation and research methods. 2nd ed. Newbury
Park, CA: Sage.
Pinquart, M., L.P. Juang, and R.K. Silbereisen. 2003. Self-efficacy and successful
school-to-work transition: A longitudinal study. Journal of Vocational Behavior
63: 329–46.
Rose, M. 2005. Do rising levels of qualifications alter work ethic, work orientation
and organizational commitment for the worse? Evidence from the UK 1985–2000.
Journal of Education and Work 18: 131–64.
Scott, P. 2003. Challenges to academic values and the organization of academic work
in a time of globalization. Higher Education in Europe 28: 295–306.
Smetherham, C. 2006. First among equals? Evidence on the contemporary relation-
ship between educational credentials and the occupational structure. Journal of
Education and Work 19: 29–45.
Teichler, U. 1997. Graduate employment: Challenges for higher education in the
twenty-first century. Higher Education in Europe 22: 25–37.
Teichler, U. 1999. Higher education policy and the world of work: Changing
conditions and challenges. Higher Education Policy 12: 285–312.
Teichler, U. 2000. Research on the relationships between higher education and the
world of work: Past achievements, problems and new challenges. Higher Education
Policy 38: 169–90.
Tomlinson, M. 2007. Graduate employability and student attitudes and orientations
to the labor market. Journal of Education and Work 20: 285–304.
Vaatstra, R., and R. de Vries. 2007. The effect of the learning environment on
competences and training for the workplace according to graduates. Higher
Education 53: 335–57.
Yorke, M. 2007. Employability in higher education: What it is and what it is not.
Higher Education Academy, ESECT Series 1.

930324019

Enviado por

Dados do documento

Descrição original:

Direitos autorais

Formatos disponíveis

Compartilhar este documento

Compartilhar ou incorporar documento

Opções de compartilhamento

Você considera este documento útil?

Este conteúdo é inapropriado?

Direitos autorais:

Formatos disponíveis

930324019

Enviado por

Direitos autorais:

Formatos disponíveis

This article was downloaded by:

On: 28 April 2011

Journal of Education and Work

Engineering students' experiences of transition from study to work

Online publication date: 29 November 2010

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Full terms and conditions of use: http://www.informaworld.com/terms-and-conditions-of-access.pdf

Engineering students’ experiences of transition from study to work

Department of Behavioural Sciences and Learning, Linköping University, Linköping,

*Corresponding author. Email: tomas.jungert@liu.se

and development. What is emphasised is the importance of the study environ-

● What knowledge, skills and competences, achieved during their study

● In relation to the demands and career opportunities in their first jobs, do

Research about employability and employment

(1) Employability as demonstrated by graduates actually obtaining a job,

and criticised by Brown, Hesketh, and Williams (2002) for neglecting

Graduate employability and the future job market

● Traditional ways of thinking about markets, finance, class, education and

These studies indicate that graduate employability is closely related to

study. In a longitudinal, comparative study of the relationship between life

associations between high academic self-efficacy beliefs and school-to-work

The relation between educational systems and employment

Method and data

Table 1. Interviewed students.

● Plans for the future;

Plans for the future

position as an engineering student, i.e. involved themselves in student union

These students experienced some difficulties in balancing study, work and

I loved mathematics and I wanted the best, the toughest.

The experiences of students concerning the content and design of the

The thesis project – becoming an engineer

The job search process – to present oneself as an engineer

The skills and competences that the students experienced to be of most

had done their graduate project.

Becoming an employee, becoming employable

Discussion and conclusion

Table 2. A summary of the development that has emerged over time.

from study Thesis project in a firm

acceptance of responsibility for self and others, openness and commitment,

important in one of these strategies. However, another finding was that

strategy to stay on and deepen an interest with no consideration for a future

In a study of the relationship between qualification and job satisfaction

science, psychology and mechanical engineering. Studies in Higher Education 31:

Jungert, T. 2008. A longitudinal study of engineering students’ approaches to their

Morley, L. 2001. Producing new workers: Quality, equality and employability in

Você também pode gostar