1. YES, WE CAN: INTERNSHIPS PROVIDING LEVERAGES IN THE LABOUR MARKET Patrícia Silva Betina da Silva Lopes Ana Isabel Melo Elisabeth Brito Dina Seabra Marco Costa Gonçalo Paiva Dias

2. 1.Some say internships can make a difference 1. For students; employing institutions and Higher Education Institutions (HEI) 2. … but there are some drawbacks… 2.Methodological approach 1. Mixed method: two-stage’ research design: a) Large scale quantitative analysis b) Individual interviews and focus groups with involved stakeholders 3.Impact of internships on graduates’ employability 1. Internships and graduate unemployment rates 2. The different features of internships: length and structure and graduate unemployment rates 3. Other intervening variables 4.Some concluding remarks Yes, we can: internships providing leverages in the labour market Outline

3. 1.For Higher Education Institutions 1. create a positive image of the degree and the HEI (Toncar and Cudmore 2000); 2. advantage in seeking funding for research or other activities (Gault et al. 2010); 3. unique opportunities to align the skills employers consider important and with what is actually taught (Gault et al. 2010). 2.For employing institutions 1. risk-free method to evaluate possible future employees (Knemeyer and Murphy 2002); 2. deepen the collaboration between the academic institution and the employer (Pianko 1996 ). 3.For graduate students 1. opportunity for developing job relevant capabilities (Teichler 2009; Alpert et al. 2009; García-Aracil and Velden 2007); 2. opportunities of early networking (Alpert et al. 2009; Hergert 2009; Weible 2009); 3. reduce the ‘entry shock’ (Hergert 2009; Paulson and Baker 1999). i. Theoretical background 1. Some say internships can make a difference

4. 1.Major caveats can be identified in the existing research: a) evidence on benefits of internships is based on students’ or employers’ expectations and perceptions rather than on the assessment of the impact of internships on early career employment; b) assessment of internship outcomes has been limited, both regarding the subject areas and the long-term impacts; c) prior research presents empirical evidence focused on a timeframe preceding Bologna reforms; d) lack of evidence on the specific characteristics of internships – nature and format. i. Theoretical background 1. But there are some drawbacks…

5. 1.This research is focused on the Portuguese case 2.Large scale quantitative analysis 1. Content analysis of all study programmes approved and published in the Official Gazette from 2006 until 2009 2. Rate of unemployed graduates looking for a job for more than 12 months i. Mixed method: two-stage’ research design 2. Methodological approach Public institutionPrivate institution Universities7376 Polytechnic institutions261146 Total334222 All study programmes Mean Study programmes with internships Mean Universities 3.55 (4.24) 4.49 (5.72) Polytechnic institutions 4.42 (4.11) 4.36 (4.14)

6. 1.Individual Interviews and focus groups with involved stakeholders a) 3 semi-structured individual interviews to unit coordinators ; b) 3 focus groups conducted with coordinators of study programmes; academic internship supervisors; and former and current interns. 2.Aims: a) Assess stakeholders’ motivations; required efforts; and expected outcomes; b) Perception of stakeholders regarding the structure of first-cycle degrees (specifically, on the nature and structure of internships), and its relation to graduate employability. i. Mixed method: two-stage’ research design 2. Methodological approach

7. 3. Impact of internships on graduates’ employability i. Internships and graduate unemployment rates Variables Unstandardized coefficients Degrees with internships (0: no internship; 1: includes at least one internship) -.070** Higher education system (0: university; 1: polytechnic institutions).049* Type of institution (0: public; 1: private).107*** Total % of institutional unemployment (logged).532*** Total % of scientific area unemployment (logged).186** R.380 Adjusted R 2.139 N 1158 It can be estimated that the inclusion of internships in FCDs can reduce unemployment rates in 15 per cent. Significance levels: *** p.0.001; ** p.0.01; * p.0.05

8. 3. Impact of internships on graduates’ employability ii. The different features of internships: length and structure and graduate unemployment rates Variables Polytechnic institutions Nature of internships (0: optional; 1: mandatory)-.141** Internship format (0: thick courses; 1: thin courses)-.202*** Type of institution (0: public; 1: private).131*** Total % of institutional unemployment (logged).498*** Total % of scientific area unemployment (logged).508*** R.435 Adjusted R 2.177 N407 1.Expanding and diversifying internship (thin courses) activities can reduce the graduate unemployment rate in 37 per cent; 2.Mandatory internships seem to be capable of reducing the unemployment rate in 28 per cent. Significance levels: *** p.0.001; ** p.0.01; * p.0.05

9. Thin courses tend to be positively perceived. However, these are more demanding: It would be possible to extend the length of internships. But this would probably imply the suppression of other curricular units … and this may be problematic (…) because this would mean more internship supervisors … and not every teacher likes to work outside his/her office (…) Besides that it would mean less lectures (…) and, well … it is important to assure their teaching time I am an apologist of thin sandwich courses. But (...) there are some... complex issues, because (...) we have already several logistic problems that are very difficult to solve … [also] because of the lack of institutional structures that help to contact the companies 3. Impact of internships on graduates’ employability ii. The different features of internships: length and structure and graduate unemployment rates

10. From the interviews other variables related to internships’ design and graduate employability emerged: a) Selection of interns by employing institutions vs. selection of employing institutions by interns; b) Assessment strategies of interns: a (non) shared responsibility. iii. Other intervening variables 3. Impact of internships on graduates’ employability

11. a) Selecting Interns vs. Selecting Internships Considering the place where students undertake their internship two different approaches could be identified. In some HEI the selection was made by the companies in others the student had the opportunity to propose the employing institution: 3. Impact of internships on graduates’ employability iii. Other intervening variables – selection of interns “Students have to understand that their choices have consequences … choosing implies responsibilities. If he/she wants to do an internship in that particular company it is assumed that he/she knows what he/she wants and what he/she will do and learn.” Future Research: Which selection process stimulates more the pro-active attitudes of students and therefore their employability? Do undergraduates have sufficient maturity to balance the pro and cons of doing his/her internship in a particular company?

12. b) Evaluation of interns a) Mismatch of agendas between the HEI and Employing Institutions and its interference in the evaluation procedures: “Sometimes, companies’ assessment of students’ performance is extremely positive, or extremely negative, which is not related to students’ work. For instance, some company supervisors grant the highest grades because they do not have enough time to ‘move around’ with the interns. Good grades are an excuse and a justification … that is why the assessment by the academic supervisor and the company supervisor has different weights” 3. Impact of internships on graduates’ employability iii. Other intervening variables – evaluation of interns

13. b) Evaluation of interns b) While academics tend to be well aware of the competences and abilities to be evaluated, non-academic supervisors have to struggle with a lack of understanding of these evaluation rules: “We find individuals that are quite distant from this academic reality, from the grading system and so … and then some complex situations emerge. For instance, some wanted to give a grade of 16 [out of 20] values … but according to the university criteria it would never be more than 15 … so we have to adjust this classification. This is complicate.” Future research: To what extent do the adopted assessment strategies promote or hinder the collaborative relationship between HEIs and employing institutions? Could interns’ assessment be used as a tool to get universities and employers closer? 3. Impact of internships on graduates’ employability iii. Other intervening variables – evaluation of interns

14. Internships can be considered as important routes to early career employment ; Expanding and undertaking several internships can significantly enhance the possibilities of being selected for a job; Mandatory internships require a close and (often) long-lasting relationship with employing institutions and tend to signal HEIs’ commitment towards labour market demands; Careful planning and human resource managing is required in order to extract the pedagogical and institutional benefits from internships. Further investigation is needed in order to identify internship design strategies that contribute most for graduates employability (skills) and therefore graduates employment (product). 4. Concluding remarks Yes, we can: internships providing leverages in the labour market

15. Research reported in this article was financed by the Project “Impact of internships on graduates’ employability”, funded through the National Strategic Reference Framework (NSRF) and co-financed by the European Social Fund (ESF).