The Soaring Employment Rate of College Graduates is a Show: Author: Feng Ling Date: January 28, 2011
The fabrication and inflation of employment rates are no longer news. Urban speculation suggests that the scope of admissions has not decreased but increased, the talent cultivation model remains unchanged, and issues of low educational quality have not been given due attention. Taking up civil servant positions may create a temporary "prosperous environment" for college graduate employment. Is this the true employment environment for university graduates who obtain their diplomas? Since the birth of the "employment rate" indicator, doubts about fabricated and inflated employment rates have persisted.
Last year, an international academic journal published an article titled "Chinese Research: Publish or Perish," pointing out that Chinese scientific research has reached a critical juncture where reform is necessary to avoid failure. Without a doubt, these practices affect the life values and professional ethics of graduates. A major originally with very poor student employment prospects now boasts a 90% employment rate. Clearly, something is amiss.
It is unfortunate that students must endure being "employed on paper." The current method of employment statistics should be fundamentally changed. In addition to involving the quantity of employment (such as employment rates six months and one year after graduation), it also involves the quality of employment (such as relevance to major, industry placement, and graduate salary conditions). The employment environment published by intermediary agencies should play a role in government educational planning, school teaching reforms, and student educational choices.
University evaluation should shift from administrative evaluation to professional and social evaluation. Other indicators assessing university education quality, such as alumni donation rates, could be introduced. Current employment data, manipulated by various means, destroys the bottom line of education and leads to more profound crises in higher education. Ultimately, universities and educational departments will face survival challenges if they continue down this path.
In the context of widespread public discourse on college graduate employment difficulties, maintaining high employment rates without fabrication would indeed be surprising news. Educational development strategies based on inaccurate employment data may lead to significant errors. Government credibility, school dignity, and teacher respect are all compromised when fabricated data is used to mislead recruitment efforts.
In conclusion, addressing the issue of fabricated employment rates requires fundamental changes in statistical methods. This involves shifting from government department statistics to those conducted and published by social intermediary agencies. Such reforms are crucial for accurate educational planning, professional settings, curriculum design, and talent cultivation models. By implementing these changes, we can ensure that university graduate employment data becomes genuinely useful information, reflecting real-world scenarios and driving meaningful educational reform.