Actividad control

There is a great deal of debate in terms of defining the generic skills required to operate effectively within the workplace. However, before a review of the attributes that underpin this skill set can be undertaken, there needs to be an acknowledgement of the lack of consensus in the terminology that captures the types of skills that this research project needs to consider. These types of skills are also commonly described in terms such as: soft skills; generic skills (Barrie, 2004, 2006, & 2007; Jackling & Watty, 2010; AQF, 2010); graduate attributes (Jones, 2010); behavioural skills (Jackling & Sullivan, 2007); professional skills (de La Harpe, et al. 2000); employability skills (Raybould & Sheedy, 2005; Cox & King, 2006; Mason, et al. 2009; BATEC, 2007 Jackson, 2009); and non-technical skills (Bunney & Therry, 2010). Willcoxon et al.’s descriptor of these multiple terms as “the muddied waters of competencies and attributes” (as cited in Bunney & Therry, 2010, p4) perhaps best sums up the difficulties in reaching a consensus of agreement regarding the most appropriate terminology.

Since the early 1990s, a significant volume of research has been undertaken defining generic skills and the desired graduate attributes. A starting point in defining ‘generic graduate attributes’ in an Australian context, is drawn from the Higher Education Council’s report of 1992 which identified generic graduate attributes as an acceptance of knowledge and abilities of university graduates, beyond disciplinary content knowledge, which are applicable in a range of contexts. These are acquired as a result of completing any undergraduate degree, that represent the core achievements of a university education (HEC, 1992).

According to Bowden & Walsh, (2000) graduate attributes are the qualities, skills and understandings a university community agrees its students should develop during their time with the institution. These attributes include but go beyond the disciplinary expertise or technical knowledge that has traditionally formed the core of most university courses. They are qualities that also prepare graduates as agents of social good in an unknown future.

Harvey, (2001) articulated that the emphasis of employability has shifted from job-market intelligence and job-getting techniques to developing a range of attributes through the learning process. Braun (2004) identified critical thinking as a skill of paramount importance in the development of work-ready graduates. Barrie’s 2006 study described the qualitatively different ways academics understand the concept of graduate attributes. In an attempt to provide a framework upon which to build generic graduate attributes for holistic curriculum development, Barrie identified four distinct understandings of generic skills/attributes in higher education: the precursory, complementary, translation and enabling conceptions (p223). The precursory understanding sees generic skills as inherent attributes to which discipline specific knowledge can be added. The complementary sees them as an accompaniment to the discipline-specific understandings but not part of the discipline. The translation understanding views generic attributes as an ability to translate university learning into other settings. The enabling conception is the most intricate understanding of generic attributes, as natural abilities that lie at the heart of scholarly knowledge, which can both support the development of new knowledge and develop the individual. Barrie’s study pointed to the importance of considering generic attributes as an integral part of disciplinary practice and thus part of the process of learning.

Treleaven & Voola’s study (2008) continued to build upon Barrie’s work and posited that substantial opportunities for practice in developing generic skills is offered when graduate attributes are expressed as learning outcomes and aligned with assessment criteria, and that student relevance is developed when substantial opportunities for practice in developing generic skills is offered. Jackling & Watty’s research (2010) underpinned by legitimacy theory, listed “highly developed generic skills (such as communication skills, problem solving skills and the ability to work effectively in teams” (p172) as those required within the accounting profession in respect of graduate skill requirements. They further argued “there is evidence that the development of generic skills in accounting education…is a non-negotiable improvement in the education offered” (p174).

Evans, Tindale, Cable & Hamil-Mead, (2010) contributed to this literature with an analysis of graduate attribute development through the integration of professional communication skills within a Master of Accounting conversion program developed at Macquarie University. This program is one of the largest postgraduate accounting courses in Australia, with an international enrolment of more than 80 percent reported for the 2008 academic year (p599). Survey results obtained from both academic staff and students that undertook the program determined that the integrative nature of the adoption of professional language skill development throughout the course was considered successful by both cohorts.

Jones’ research (2010) utilised the term attributes, as opposed to skill because the difficulty with the term skill, “suggests clear, definable and measurable outcomes” (p6). Jones (2010) synthesised the issues succinctly: “despite the interest in generic skills and attributes there remains disagreement about how they can best be understood, defined, situated, taught and assessed” (p5). Jones’ research reported the findings of a qualitative study which investigated the relationship between disciplinary culture and an understanding of what constitutes generic attributes. This study found that academics’ conceptualisation of generic attributes is influenced by the culture of the discipline in which they are taught. These researchers argued that this has “profound implications for accounting education as generic attributes must be understood as part of the professional and scholarly practice of accounting and so taught as integral to disciplinary practice” (p5).

Bunney and Therry’s research (2010) defined graduate attribute as key employability skills, which were taken to encompass a “higher level of competency in non-technical skills” (p32). This project involved a review of a Master of Professional Practice, developed and taught at Edith Cowan University, to determine the extent to which employability skills were embedded within the program. The employability skills that were identified were: teamwork and interpersonal skills; oral communication skills; written communication skills and

problem-solving and critical appraisal skills (p36). However, the findings of the research indicated there was no coordinated approach towards embedding such skills across content, assessment and feedback within the context of the course they were reviewing. Phase three of the research project attempted to offer a framework for embedding employability skills in a “coherent and cohesive manner” across the program (p42).

Research by Yong et al. (2011) addressed the delivery of graduate attributes in an Australian postgraduate accounting program when trying to balance the tensions between a higher education institution’s desire for revenue, the need for accreditation requirements for technical knowledge and employer needs for behavioural and higher order cognitive skills. Content analysis of program documents was combined with a student survey to find that program and course outcomes align closely with students’ perceived outcomes but largely ignore the graduate attributes”, required by the profession and more recently, government (p383).