The Placement Model
Some of the pros of last Century Placement Models used by institutions are intertwined with this Century's and those are providing a variety of services for the individual to be successfully employed. However, now a days schools are placing more emphasis in providing high demand careers while developing and maintaining relationships between the employer and the prospective employee thus guaranteeing to a permissible degree-do understand this the ever changing job market- a whole variety of highly trained individuals.
What are some of the pros and cons of the 19th Century Placement Model still used by many institutions in today’s 21st century economy?
Hi Maria Rosario,
In what ways does your institution develop soft skills in students as part of career preparation?
Robert Starks Jr.
Hi Sharon,
In what ways has your institution made changes to address the evolution in careers you mention and to adjust the ways students are prepared to enter the 21st century job market? Where is there still opportunity to make further changes?
Robert Starks Jr.
With many career changers entering the workforce, a candidate must stand out in today's market. Education is an integral part of job search, but a candidate should also have excellent soft skills (attitude, passion, interpersonal relations, communication skills). The 19th century model serves as a good foundation, in modern times, there are several variables that potential would look for in candidates. A job candidate in the 19th Century model may get a phone call and interview based on the content of the resume. Nowadays,if candidates are called for a second interview, it meant an "audition" to show the candidate's actual skills in a particular field.
Careers are changing and evolving, therefore, placement models also need to be flexible. Saavy employees refresh their skills in order to remain an attractive hire in a competitive job market. In addition, many students are career chargers through no fault of their own, but due to the economy in conjunction with globalization of the workforce.
Hi Michelle,
I hear you and empathize with your frustration. I commend you for your own perseverance in doing your best to make a difference. I can also tell by virtue of taking initiative to enroll in this course, you care about your own professional development and seek to do your best. Perhaps there will be a time when your talents will be used at another institution that shares your philosophy and implements practices that support quality graduate outcomes throughout the entire student life cycle.
Robert Starks Jr.
I appreciate the feedback, and I had a long discussion (again) with our education team. Since we are a small school (less than 20 staff members), our concerns are always out in the open.
Even before I started here, all of your suggestions were presented to the staff, and backed up with the data you mentioned.
Unfortunately, the bottom line for the Directors at our school is "We need butts in seats, and money to keep the school open". The quality of our student body is not taken into consideration with that statement, and therefore Career Development/Placement is left to salvage what little is left of our successful graduates. Long-time staff members of this school have brilliant ideas to improve the overall model/culture of this school, only to be shot down week after week by the Directors who truly don't find our concerns alarming.
Again, thank you. I hope other institutions don't have to deal with what we do on a daily basis!
Hi Michelle,
Because a top-down approach for change requires those with authority to implement change, my question was if you had ideas on how individuals could be change agents taking a bottom-up approach. In other words, what are action items/steps those without authority can do to influence the process of change for the betterment of the institution. I see some of your practical ideas in your response such as working closely with Admissions, voicing concerns with other departments, and the need to specifically advocate for change with Director-level staff and build influencers. I ask the question not just to you but to any course participant so we can see the ideas people are willing to share. Change isn't easy and definitely requires a team effort. As you know, it may take both persistence and time. I'll share some things I have done in the past in the spirit of sharing:
- Educated Director-level staff in different departments of benefits to specific interventions that would help students improve employability
- Worked with Director of Education to train faculty members at in-services to help build buy-in from faculty and gain advocates for suggested changes after getting them to see benefits
- Trained Admissions staff, joined their team meetings, and developed close relationships with Directors to get everyone to view graduate employability as a result of systems design vs. the "linear" process of Admissions being "front end" and Career Services being the "back end." This mind-shift was, in my experience, the most difficult barrier to break through.
- Presented data (from student surveys, student focus groups, graduate surveys, etc.) to demonstrate need for change in specific areas
Thanks for sharing your thoughts.
Robert Starks Jr.
I'm not quite sure I am understanding your buy-in, top-down/bottom-up scenario, but let me see if I can still follow up :)
Since we are all education-based, everything starts from the Prospective-student/Admissions side. They (admissions) are the first stop for the student, and I (career development) am the last step. I happen to sit in the same room as our Admissions reps and find what they 'sell' to prospective students appalling. Many of the prospectives are not 100% sure they even want to be in this field, or have other aspirations for much more stable jobs, which based on this economy, are readily available. Listening to these calls has made me talk to my direct Manager as well as the Directors of the school, sharing my concern with being able to place these students after graduation, only to be ignored at the very top level. So, top-down hasn't worked, and it so happens, that the 'top' is in direct control of the 'bottom'. Our Admissions reps only take direction from the Directors, so no matter who I voice my concerns to on either end, they are ignored.
IF we were able to screen the students better, like an actual college/university of high-reputation, then we would be able to enroll the caliber of student that would keep our placement numbers up. These 'hypothetically perfect' students, would also increase the reputation of our institution, and create the all-around cultural shift for our institute that I'm hoping for.
A brief example: a prospective student mentioned that they were also thinking of nursing/medical assisting school, but our Admissions Rep actually tried to sell the idea that jobs in that field didn't exist and they should just go to school for what they really want to do ('life is short, follow your passion' etc). Being the person who is placing these students and looking for jobs, there are plenty of jobs in the medical field, and it infuriated me that the Admissions rep would suggest otherwise. Now, if that student was sold on his idea and came to the school, but then after graduation decided that being in the entertainment industry is not stable at all, how would I place them?? Several of those students feel as if they waisted time here, and end up going back to another school for training in a more practical field.
Top-down, bottom-up, I'm trying, but few people are listening at my school. Many of us are frustrated here, and are trying to implement the best practices techniques to better the institute overall, with very little support from the top and bottom.
Hi Michelle,
Great insights and comments! Thank you for sharing! I think your question is valid regarding why institutions would want to consider using the old placement model in today's economy. For institutions to change, we really are talking about a cultural shift that requires buy-in from the top. That's a tall order for anyone, particularly when one may not have the authority to implement change from the top down. In that case, what ideas might you have on how one could champion change from the bottom up?
Robert Starks Jr.
One of the major cons is that the 21st century economy is heavily built on the idea of global competition for jobs. Even during training, students today are told that they need to go above and beyond their classmates in order to succeed. In the 19th century, it was very cut-and-dry: this is what you're learning, this is what you will do for the rest of your life; and it was acceptable. In some strange way, this same concept would have been a 'pro' during that time period, but not in the 21st century.
A pro of the 19th century model being applied today, is that since we now have expanded access to education, more people are able to work under several trades if they wish. The model, based on a stable economy, may in fact help stabilize the current economy by allowing people to find work, regardless of the field. As long as someone is working in one of their fields of training, it stands to benefit the work force.
My question would be: why would we even consider using this model as it stands? As the the economy grows and the workplace changes, placement practices should evolve as well.
Hello Ruth,
The placement model is a linear model that historically has focused on matching graduates to career opportunities with little focus on career development. If I play devil's advocate, one could argue that one-on-one guidance isn't what the Placement model emphasizes because it is missing the "guidance" that arguably has greater need in today's environment. Considering how the labor market is dramatically different today and that the strategies to obtain, maintain and progress in one's career has changed, one could argue that the placement model is actually lacking the one-on-one guidance necessary to help students achieve maximum success. What are your thoughts regarding this counter point?
Robert Starks Jr.
a con would be lack of flexibility, a pro may be continued one on one guidance.
Anna ,
Well put. It's not enough to get them a "job", we should be striving to help them shore up their long term career. Whether this be in finding them their best first step (job) where they will gain more experience and exposure, or assisting them with placement in a company with a significant opportunity for long term growth- your point that we must be helping them think long term is an important on.
Ann Cross
I believe one of the pros is to assist your students – alums in their job search process. If you maintain contact and follow up with them frequently is one of the best ways to harbor and generate a positive relationship with them. I think letting them know you are here to assist them throughout the job search journey and assuring them there is someone to help them with struggles and accomplishments can be very advantageous. One of the biggest aspects you have to start off with is accessing the students – alums assets and skill sets. By knowing their skills and assets will help you in identifying a possible path for them. Also something I recommend to ask each student is - what do they ideally (now ideally, not immediately) want to accomplish, or a position they want to be in. I think a con with the 19th century placement model is the idea of not accessing students and just placing them in a position to get them in a company , or pushing them through. Career Service Advisor must truly understand the job search process of 2013. Today’s social media and technology being used in networking and interviews is very different than seven to eight years ago even and if you do not stay on top you are not ultimately servicing your students to today’s job search market.
Unsure at this time. Would need to do some research on this topic.
