Colleagues
It is somewhat gratifying to see that the notion of skills is now being
questioned by members of the learning development community. For years, it
seems, any attempt to question the validity of the *concept* of
transferable/ generic/ key skills was met by either anger ('how dare you
...'), attempts at ridicule ('he's made ...'), or silence. But the failure
of the skills agenda to deliver on its promises, and (as Anika points out)
the fact that students are 'turned off', seems to have loosened the spell.
There are still two key dangers. One is that the issue is seen to be one of
terminology. It's not, it's a conceptual and theoretical issue: the very
concept of 'skill' in the way used within the skills agenda is fatally
flawed. The second issue is that the notion of 'attributes' seems to have
crept in as an alternative. This too is a fatally flawed concept.
However, there remains the question of what is to be done? What should
replace the up-till-now dominant notion of skills (and it's illegitimate
offspring, 'attributes')?
Why not look at the practices/ emergent identity approach - aka the
Graduate Identity Approach? See www.graduate-employability.org.uk for more.
ever the optimist
Len
----------------------------------
Dr Leonard Holmes
Director, Management Research Centre
London Metropolitan University
Holloway Road
London N7 8DB
email: [log in to unmask]
tel.: +44 (0)20 7133 3032
websites:
www.re-skill.org.uk
www.graduate-employability.org.uk
www.odysseygroup.org.uk
|