Education generally should be able to train an individual both academically and socially. In order words academic skills and social skills should be the priorities of any University

Yes. Both academic and preparation for employability. But also preparation for a lifetime of learning.

I think both are necessary, because both must transform the human person.

Good discussion Mahmoud Moghavvemi , for specific training companies should train employees. The university should not only train for technical skills, but also a robust academic education that would make the student think, and become critical. In that sense, it should enable the different aspects of a student's personal and professional development. The University needs to be connected to society and propose innovations and changes in curricula that prepare students for the contemporary context. I agree with colleagues Wilmer Lopez , Bill Lucas and Sunday Christian .

The aim of education is to prepare individuals to become a useful member of societies. This is not significant which pathway is chosen. In my opinion job or skills focused training is also a part/form of education..

I think university aim to prepare skills before they work to the industriy. Link and match concept become met point to the student learn come to the real world. So skills industry use to scaffold before students in to the real work.

There are professions that need this type of intervention very clearly.

The pedagogical career is an example.

In this career, professionals can become ill due to ignorance and the absence of specific skills for the job.

The lack of knowledge of adequate methods to interact with the group of children, can generate confusion and discomfort, this situation in a cumulative way, can also be harmful for the students. Specific job skills must be present from the early years of the career.

Academic education is a systematic program involving the acquisition of knowledge in different fields and is an enlightening experience.However, it often focuses on the advancement of theoretical knowledge at the cost of neglecting practical, hand on the job skills. Consequently, with the increasing demand of the modern industries for practical skills, it is necessary for the curriculum designers behind academic education to blend their academic programs with a powerful component of training where theory and practice are both emphasized.

Good question Mahmoud Moghavvemi though I wonder if by job specific skills you mean meta/soft skills (or professional transferable skills)? I would agree with other colleagues on this board that both are needed to varying degrees with future career paths. Of course, new models are evolving all the time and next year will see the graduation of our first cohort of engineering graduate apprentices from the University of Strathclyde. They are all full time employees and the University's work based assessors have mapped their professional transferable skills to UK-SPEC throughout their journey.

Both! what is the benefit of academic contents that will not lead to a job or career? The skills must be embedded within each course across all majors. Employers are looking for well-rounded individuals; they are willing to teach train them for the particular position if they have the skills needed such as problem-solving, ability to work in a team, strong work ethic, communication skills; and analytical...etc. If a doctor cannot communicate to the patient her/his treatment in a professional, clear, and complete way then we have a serious problem.

Firstly thanks for the great question Mahmoud Moghavvemit!

Secondly we must consider that is a question which would take a long debat that would perpass a lot of dimensions and perspectives about what is and should be a desirable society, conception of knowledge and other views that mainly depends on your aspiration for what you expect to construct as society project.

That said, for my answer, I would first say that it depends a lot on which undergraduate course we are talking about, because different areas of knowledge have different responsibilities to society. Another point would be to try to understand what possible concret demands expressed through the social / community context surrounding the campus could be addressed through communication and knowledge development in direct relation to these demands. We cannot dissociate the pursuit for knowledge that goes on inside the academic life from the concret demand that could help out some social problems, that if solved would help to end unnecessary human suffering that happens on our daily basis. We must also remember that the job market might not awnser us what is this concret social demand that I am electing as a criterion to develop how the university should structured your way of work. So that gives us problems! What is the main higher education goal? Is it to make clever workers or struggle to dissolve the society problems? Can it both work together as objectives? Well this kind of questions will lead us to think about how we perceive society and what we work for it become. After that is done, as reflexive moment we should ask ourselves, for who is this society project? Is it going to help the ones that need the most? Is this a task for the university after all? I have some answers to that questions but my main objective with this contribution was to enlight that is not a simple task to answer your questions! I would sugest for deeping on this topic, which its needly on an academic way of thinking, to take a read on curriculum researchers as for example Michael Apple, Henry Giroux, Paulo Freire, Pierre Bourdieu and Michael Young. Thanks again for the question, have a nice week!

They need skills supported by academia and academic skills so they can continue their learning after their higher education. They also need to develop non-technical skills, moral and ethics of their specific field of practice and also generally as an individual and part of the society they are in.

I think that it is important to start with the intended learning outcomes for a course and ensure that students can see explicitly in what sense their academic learning is intended to prepare them for professional practice and more generally, for surviving in a world with mutliple frameworks for problem solving and meeting the needs of others.

University education should be holistic. Knowledge is important as well as skills. The curriculum in the universities needs to be competence based. When students accumulate knowledge, it requires to be put into practice through skills. Universities should partners with industries and different organization in order to prepare graduates who are tailor made according to the needs of any society.

Her ikisi birden sunulabilir, ancak akademik bilgi daha önde olmalıdır.

Perhaps society and students could benefit from university programs designed more like 'medical school.'

I agree with Manar Sabry

Soft Skills (SS) have been namelessly embedded in our academic and job skills courses and curricula without drawing attention for decades. Instructors in all disciplines have required their students to write papers, come to the board, and present group oral and written presentations. Curricula have also had foreign language, mathematics, with an array of SS entrenched. They existed without recognition. SS provided an organizing umbrella and has led to intentionally establish them in courses and curriculum. With the short half-life of course content, SS provides a foundation for life-long learning.

Both. The University should prepare the learners on the real world.

Pozitif bilimlerin yanısıra, sanat ve insani bilimlere de yer verilirse yaratıcı bir insan tipi ortaya çıkar.

University education should operate academic curriculum integrated with job specific skills as a replica of what operates in work places. This is an essential curriculum content philosophy of pen i(academic)n one hand and tool(practical) skills in the other hand,both for human economic empowerment.

To my best observations, Universities provide academic knowledge than specific skills. But, in principle, there shall be a reasonable balance between the two.

A university should offer both. The academic education and skills for job creation are needed.

Universities should have both academic and professional departments and divisions based on corporate employers. The competition of such educational units forms an optimal learning environment.

‏Both

‏The university must provide academics to its students so that they are able to think correctly and use knowledge in the right places as we, one of the university’s most important inputs is training university students to learn different skills.

‏ Because it will be required and necessary educational outcomes for the labor market

‏ Thus, the job market is linked to the skills that students learn in universities.

‏

Because the question starts with "Should...", the answer is "Both". What some universities really do, is a completely different story...

Both of them

Why are the two held as if they are in conflict to each other? Surely the academic skills of critical enquiry, analysis of results and consequences, creating new knowledge etc. are approaches and attitudes that we would want to see our students use in the workplace following graduation. And those professional attitudes of understanding audience, respect, hard work are ones that we would like our students to have. I think the mistake is in considering the academic endeavour and developing job skills as contradicting each other and it would be more useful in seeing the complementary elements of both.

I think it should offer both of them. Students can choose courses that suit them.

Universities could never prepare graduates for the vast range of specific applications of any particular discipline . It is for companies to train their operatives in their chosen methods and systems .

Graduates leave universities with degrees , sometimes general , sometimes more specialised , declaring the holders to be capable of learning/thinking at a higher level - that is all .

When companies want company-specific training they negotiate for courses at commercially-minded educational institutions or train their workers in-house.

Both...but it is always important that job-specific skills are taught with a theoretical underpinning (the theory informing/underpinning the practice) and that the skills are inter-related with how to critically analyse, evaluate, review and reflect; engagement with literature and other research in the field is essential in this. As for specific skills and knowledge relevant to a specific job, this is the responsibility of the employer. However - there are always opportunities for employers/organisations and universities to work in partnerships so nothing is 'set in stone'.

It is necessary to work on developing skills

This has been a question throughout the higher education system in the U.S. for many years. There are two year colleges that prepare students for low-income positions such as tech jobs, labor with administration jobs, and so forth. The problem is that many of these two year colleges are for-profit private and the cost of attending is high and do not train a "well rounded" person. Many from two year private institutions do not take humanities or psychology courses and have problems adjusting to a diverse workplace. Public two year colleges are behind in current training for a student to just step into the job and start working. At four year institutions, the question is are we here to "educate" a citizen to be able to find a job in their own field but if this citizen can no longer do this job or the job is eliminated, can they fulfill a lateral or vertical position in another field? As educators, our task is to produce a citizen of the world not just an American citizen. An educated person should have critical thinking skills, able to foresee job losses, capable of adapting to changing environments, understanding the real world problems and so on. The answer to your question is all education institutions should offer both. But they should also ensure their student has the skills to adapt to a changing world.

There is two kind of high education. University for academics and polytechnic for vocational.

Education.

Polytechnics are high schools that only provide vocational education or vocational training. The vocational education knowledge is more direct. In essence, it will be made experts in that field in accordance with the current jobs needed.

Meanwhile the University provides academic education. Which University graduates have a broader scope in the field of theory.

Lecture material.

For the comparison of the course material that you will get at the Polytechnic, it is 60%: 40%. 60% for practice and 40% for material education. So you can practice almost every day, you know. It's vocational education, so it's natural that the practice is more than theoretical. But the goal is so that you can be professional in that field.

Whereas in universities the comparison of the course materials you will get is inversely proportional, namely 40%: 60%. 40% for practicum and 60% for theory, because the university places more emphasis on understanding the material

Academic education requires students to have a good preparation for a job.It develop skills needed to face challenges in the field

Both academic and skills centered strategies are critical in the labour market. One requires the academic education for critical thinking, planning and management of production process while the specific skills provides hands on experience which is key in giving direction for specific line of production.

Dear All

thank you for sharing your take on this issue. very interesting comments. The job of a university is to educate students on the fundamentals of the field. by the fundamental, I mean all the tools needed for a competent graduate. the job market is very diverse and the university can not prepare the students for specific job demands. As an example graduates of electrical and electronic engineering work in power systems, control systems, electronics, and communication to name a few. A properly "educated" EE graduate should be able to function effectively in any area of EE with a few months of training provided by the company.

University refers to the universe. I mean it should teach both specific skills and general knowledge. So, we need to create a reasonable balance between the two as per the context where the university resides.

Universities should offer the know how on practical theories related to one's major for application in work and for life long/sustainable learning and self-development🙂

Universities must pay attention to the practical skills of students and develop them.

we need to develop a balance between the professional discipline specific competencies, the generic competencies of a graduate and the development of citizenship- together these competencies and qualities should enable them to adapt to the world of work. Yet ultimately it also depends on the work ethic and commitment of the graduate.

I agree with Natalie Ann Gordon , in universities we teach with competencies at various levels and we think about the citizenship that society requires. Training focused solely on practice, leads in some cases to reduce the potential for critical thinking, the principles of the profession must be reinforced, and they can continue to develop their competencies throughout life.

In addition to the theoretical knowledge required by each department, universities should ensure that students acquire the skills they will need after graduation. Raising qualified people, which is the main goal of education, depends on providing individuals with the basic skills they will use in their professional lives and providing sufficient experience opportunity. This will be beneficial not only for students but also for society.

Dear Mahmoud Moghavvemi, It depends on the type of higher education, the specificity of the field of study, the characteristics of the scientific discipline, the scope and importance of the issue of improving practice, the relationship between the development of skills and abilities in relation to knowledge, standards applicable in a given university and higher education system in a given country. Best wishes,

Dariusz Prokopowicz

It should be: The higher is the academic curriculum the more specific is the job biased skill training.

Both! They are important and complement each other.

The education system should be outcome based i.e. have definite objectives and goals for three different types of learners;

1. Accdemicians: Focus on higher learning

2. Job Seekers: Focus on practical job oriented applications and approaches

3. Enterpreneors: Focus on the skills and competency of Enterpreneorship

Hassan Izzeddin Sarsak

Thank you for your comment.

The time available for each degree is limited and the industries are very diverse. not feasible to "educate" and "train" by the universities. training for the industry specific need is best left to that particular industry. a "properly educated" graduate should be able to function well within any industry after receiving some basic training.

https://www.oecd.org/education/the-impact-of-covid-19-on-education-insights-education-at-a-glance-2020.pdf

Universities should continue to blend academic and job-specific skills for their clients because while job-specific skills prepare individuals to fit in specific jobs, academic skills prepare individuals to be adaptable to a variety of works

Our educational system should pay more attention to self-learning skills rather than learning materials. Learning skills by yourself opens up endless avenues