外文文献翻译大学生就业有关

1、请指导教师用红笔在译文中直接进行批改，并就以下几方面填写评 阅意见，给出综合得分（满分按15分计）。1、专业术语、词汇翻译的准确性；2、翻译材料是否与原文的内容一致；3、翻译材料字数是否符合要求；4、语句是否通顺，是否符合中文表达习惯。指导教师（签名）:年 月 日欧洲教育杂志。2007年第1号42卷教育不匹配能告诉我们技能不匹配？ 一次横越全国分析作者：IM ALLEN & EGBERT DE WEERT弓I ri口 目前有大量的研究文献，其中涉及各方面的毕业生的教育程度和教育 的工作要求之间的不完善匹配。在经济学文献中关于过度教育，过度使用和使 用不足，尤其是在高等教育界在何种程度上提供了毕

2、业生的知识和技能，以符 合就业需求方面，解释了较高的教育和就业之间的关系（见Borghans & De Grip, 2000; Buchel, De Grip & Mertens, 2003 年）。这种匹配被认为是影响 生产力，收入和工作满意度。大部分集中在这项研究工作的工作，一个人的教 育水平，基本假设是，这会带来限制使用技能不匹配的影响。此外，许多研究 也考虑到在工作中的工作是必需的，不同的研究领域的影响O本文试图分析学到的知识在高等教育对应的工作到底有多么需要。中 心问题是什么感知的不匹配意味着必需的和可用的技能之间的比赛。教育不匹 配必然意味着收购及所需技能之间的不匹配？要回答这个问题

3、，这五个国家参 加了 1998年芝华仕研究会研究更多的细节。将特别关注这些国家之间的差异。 不同于对方在本国的劳动力市场和其较高的教育系统结构：西班牙，德 国，荷兰，英国和日本五个国家被选中。有广泛的信仰差异和这些国家的共同 元素。德国和荷兰的匹配被普遍认为是比较接近的国家的例子。在英国和日本, 人们普遍认为是相当松散，间接和雇主往往共通能力提供更大的价值.西班牙 是介于两者之间。这些国家既过剩又不足，教育的发生率也有很大的不同。虽 然令人印象深刻的演变还没有相匹配的高学历人才的供给等量增加供应的熟 练工职位空缺，国家在这方面显示各种不同的模式。在一些国家，如英国和德 国，有研究发现过度教育比

4、未受充分教育更加明显，而在荷兰和西班牙，一些 研究发现相反（具体见国家研究Dolton & Vignoles, 1998; Groot, Maassen & Brink, 2000; Alba-Ramirez, 1993; Alba-Ramirez & Blasquez, 2003; Sloane, 2003）. 理论背景在20世纪60年代初开发的人力资本理论用来解释个人的教育水平和 他们在劳动力市场上的盈利之间的关系。教育发展技能（“人力资本”），使毕 业生在他们的工作中更富有成效，其中的体现就是能获得更高的收益（Becker, 1964;Mincer, 1974）。人力资本理论是基于三个主

5、要命题（Rumberger, 1994）：1正规学校教育的主要作用是开发未来的劳动者的人力资本或知识和技能； 2劳动力市场能有效地把受过教育的工人分配到公司和需要他们的肉位上去； 3劳动者的人力资本提高他们在工作场所的生产力，然后将获得更高的回报。虽然这一理论的研究成果得到了很好的支持，但是也受到批评。一些批 评主要来自强调劳动力市场需求方的学者们。这样的批评它忽略了知识和技能 在高等教育的各类重要的质的差别。尽管理论上承认可应用于各种各样的就业 机会一般技能的差异，然而人的能力和技能有重要的独立的维度，不仅包括认 知领域，也有物理和社会领域（加德纳，1983）。另一种批评是毕业生掌握的 技能

6、水平和那些在工作场所需要掌握的技能之间不匹配的影响。他们认为这会 影响生产力和盈利。超过标准的人力资本模型，作业分配模型与劳动力市场需求方具有非 常明确的相关性，这种模式是由Sattinger在1993年开发的，它是基于在异 构工人分配到不同的工作，在他们的复杂性，有一个分配问题上的主张。被视 为最佳的分配时，最能干的工人被分配到最复杂的匚作和能力不足的工人被分 配到简单的工.作。换句话说，如果你能在合适的地方得到合适的人，你就可以 优化收益，提高生产力和工作满意度等。而在不匹配的情况下，工人或工作的 局限性施加不必要的限制，可以实现生产率。低于他们的教育水平工作的员工 会发现，工作的特点施加

7、限制使用他们的技能影响生产率和收入。相反，员工 从事在自己的水平以上的工作，缺乏实现作业的生产潜力所需的技能。分配模型的一个重要假设是可以被定性为具有固定提供不同类别的教 育和就业机会所需的知识和技能水平。换句话说，教育的不匹配意味着技能不 匹配。虽然分配模型本身似乎很有道理，但是这个基本的假设还是受到质疑。 荷兰大学高等专业院校的毕业生的调查数据，阿伦和范德费尔登（2001年） 在实际和必要的教育（教育不匹配）和正式之间的不匹配实际和所需的技能（技 能错配）之间做了区分，并对两种技能错配进行了审议。毕业生被问到（1） 是否为自己在目前的工作中使用知识和技能（技能使用）提供了足够的空间。 （2

8、）他们是否觉得，如果他们有更多的知识和技能（技能赤字）。那么他们在 目前的工作会表现得更好。他们的研究发现只有一个相当薄弱的教育不匹配和 这两种形式的技能不匹配之间的关系。他们的研究结果提供了强有力的支持假 设个体人力资本之间的匹配和工作事项的特点。但是，分配理论的假设相反， 教育不匹配的既不是技能不匹配必耍条件也不是充分条件。荷兰毕业生大量的 工作在自己的水平和/或仍然表示，他们利用他们的知识和技能，在他们研究领 域密切相关的工作中取得了很大成绩。此外，只有一小部分的教育不匹配的工资效应占技能不匹配。这些措施不像教育不匹配对工作的满意度产生了强烈的 负面影响。CHEERS数据这是值得考虑CH

9、EERS的数据是否提供了进一步了解。在U.泰克勒 即将出版的新书CHEERS项目的最后一章中问题的假设，教育和就业类别之 间密切的“匹配”是其专业职责的毕业生准备的一个很好的指标。他声称境外 就业毕业生的传统的专业领域，不能被视为与研究就业和工作无关。他基于这 个发现声称，至少有三分之一的毕业生工作在教育水平较低的位置更合适，本 来报告说，他们利用他们的课程学习期间获得的知识来完成他们的一些工作任 务(泰克勒，即将出版，第277-279页)。集中在参加了 1998年的CHEERS研究五个国家，分别是西班牙，德 国，荷兰，英国和日本，我们将尝试复制阿伦和范德费尔登(2001)的结 果。我们将首先

10、介绍教育和技能不匹配的程度，以及在五个国家两者之间的关 系，然后检查劳动力市场的每小时工资，工作满意度和离职意愿的错配的影响。方法两个主要问题将被进行分析：1教育工作的匹配与使用知识和技能之间的关系。2教育和技能不匹配对工资，工作满意度和对求职的影响。教育工作知识和技能的搭配使用之间的关系将采用几种方法来衡量的程度相匹配。在确定的教育不匹配中，毕业 生被要求指出什么是最合适的水平，当然学习/学位。回答类别：更高，相同的 水平，较低的第三级，低于三级甲等。所有5个国家的大学和非大学高等教育 机构的毕业生派代表出席了会议。工资不匹配，工作满意度及在职搜索的影响有些回归模型将被用测量教育和技能的不匹

11、配之间的因变量的影 响问题。在解释分析中，我们将以下相关的变量：自然对数，每小时的工资， 工作满意度，工作搜索的效果进行评估。在这些分析中，将包含在前面的分析 中的因变量，以解释其效果。相关的控制变量将被考虑在内。结论我们的分析表明，事实上，教育和技能不匹配是相关的，正如人们所 期望,毕业生工作低于自己的水平或自己的领域之外比那些在匹配工作使用更 少的能力。毕业生的匚作水平或高于其各自领域的经验外比那些匹配工作更多 的技能短缺问题。然而，教育的错配，绝不意味着提供所需的知识和技能的工 作分配模型，如权利之间的不匹配。尽管如此，许多毕业生在匹配匚作报告技 能不匹配。此外，有相当比例的教育水平超过

12、了 “毕业生报告高水平的技能使 用和一些技巧短缺。多变量分析显示强劲的工资效应的过度教育。技能不匹配的工资的影 响要弱得多。有趣的是，在德国和英国，技能短缺有积极的工资效应。这似乎 表明，技能短缺并不表明作为一个高功率的工作与其说是一个低于标准杆的工 人。工作满意度是受教育和技能不匹配。换工作的倾向，似乎只有弱相关的任 一种错配。转自艾伦和范德费尔登，谁找到了有力的技能不匹配的影响，这些 变量有所偏离的工作满意度和倾向的分析结果。在五个国家，结果大致相似，但也有一些有趣的差异。教育工作的匹 配，这是值得注意的是最好的高等教育面向劳动力市场(德国和荷兰)在这些 国家，但在这些国家的教育和技能不匹

13、配之间的关系是最弱的。此外，工资过 度教育的影响也相对较弱，在德国和荷兰。另一个显着的区别是，其他三个国 家相比，受教育的工人，在德国和日本出现技能短缺的程度高得惊人。最后， 转业倾向是强烈依赖于教育和技能不匹配，无论是在德国和英国，在西班牙和 荷兰，还是日本的教育不匹配。参考文献【1】ALBA-RAMIRE乙A. (1993)西班牙劳动力市场不匹配：过度教 育？人力资源杂志27, pp. 259-278.2 ALBA-RAMIREZ, A. & BLAZQUEZ, M. (2003)工作匹配，在西 班牙的过度教育和劳动力的流动性,pp. 65-93.3 ALLEN, J. & VAN DER

14、 VELDEN, R. (2001)技能过时，终身学 习和劳动市场的参与。发表在SOLE/EALE的旧金山会议，pp.434452.4贝克尔，GS (1964)人力资本：理论与实证分析，特别参考教 育(纽约，NBER)European Journal of Education, VbL 42, No. 1, 2007What Do Educational Mismatches Tell Us About Skill Mismatches? A Cross-country AnalysisIM ALLEN & EGBERT DE WEERTIntroductionTliere is a subs

15、tantial reseaicli literature which deals widi various aspects of imperfect matching between graduates5 educational attainment and the educational requirements of jobs. In the economic literature on over-education, over-utilisation and underutilisation more especially, the relationship between higher

16、 education and employment is interpreted in terms of the extent to which the higher education sector provides graduates with the knowledge and skills to match employment needs (see Borghans & De Grip, 2000; Biichel, De Grip & Mertens,2003). This match is believed to affect productivity, earnings, an

17、d work satisfaction. Most of this research concentrated on the effects of working in a job that does not match ones level of education, the underlying assumption being that this imposes a limitation on the use of skills. In addition, many studies also take into account the effects of working in a jo

18、b for which a different field of study is required.This article seeks to analyse how far the knowledge acquired in higher education corresponds to that required on the job. The central issue is what a perceived mismatch means in terms of the match between required and available skills. Do educationa

19、l mismatches necessarily imply mismatches between acquired and inquired skills? To answer this question, five countries that participated in the 1998 CHEERS study will be examined in more detail. Particular attention will be paid to the differences between these countries.Five countries were selecte

20、d which differed from each other in terms of both the structure of their national labour markets and of their higher education systems: Spain, Germany, the Netherlands, the UK and Japan. There are widespread beliefs about differences and common elements in these countries. Germany and the Netherland

21、s are examples of countries where the match is generally believed to be rather close. In the UK and Japan, it is generally thought to be rather loose and indirect and employers tend to give greater value to generic skills. Spain is somewhere in between. These countries also differ considerably in th

22、e incidence of both over- and under-education. Although the impressive evolution of the supply of highly educated people has not been matched by an equal increase in the supply of skilled vacancies, countries show a varied pattern in this respect. In countries such as the UK and Germany, studies hav

23、e found overeducation to be more pronounced than undereducation, while in the Netherlands and Spain, some studies have found the opposite (see for country-specific studies Dolton & Vignoles, 1998; Groot, Maassen & Brink. 2000; Alba-Ramirez, 1993; Alba-Ramirez & Blasquez, 2003; See also the overview

24、by Sloane, 2003).Theoretical BackgroundThe human capital theory was developed in the early 1960s to explain the relationship between individuals5 level of schooling and their earnings in the labour market. Education develops skills (human capitaF) that make graduates more productive in their jobs an

25、d this is reflected in higher earnings (Becker, 1964;Mincer, 1974). The human capital theory is based on three main propositions(Rumberger, 1994):1 the priniary role of fornial schooling is to develop die liuinan capital, or the knowledge and skills, of future workers;2 the labour market efficiently

26、 allocates educated workers to firms and jobs where they are required;3 the human capital of workers increases their productivity in the workplace which is then rewarded with higher earnings.Although this theory has been well supported by the results of research, it has been criticised. Some of the

27、main criticisms have come from scholars who emphasise the demand side of the labour market. One such criticism is that it ignores important qualitative differences in the types of knowledge and skills produced in higher education. Although the theory acknowledges differences in general skills that c

28、an be applied to a wide variety of jobs, there are important independent dimensions to human abilities and skills that cover not only the cognitive area, but also the physical and social areas (Gardner, 1983). Another criticism is the effects of mismatches between graduates5 acquired skills levels a

29、nd those that arc required in the workplace. They arc thought to have adverse effects on both productivity and earnings.More than the standard human capital model, the job assignment model is very explicit about the relevance of the demand side of the labour market. This model as developed by Sattin

30、ger (1993) is based on the proposition that there is an allocation problem in assigning heterogeneous workers to jobs that differ in their complexity. The allocation is regarded as optimal when the most competent workers are assigned to the most complex job and the less competent workers are assigne

31、d to simpler jobs. In other words, if you can get the right person in the right place, you will optimise earnings, productivity gains, job satisfaction, etc. In the case of a mismatch, the limitations of the worker or the job impose an unnecessary restriction on the productivity that can be achieved

32、. Employees working below their educational level will find that the characteristics of the job impose a limitation to the use of their skills and therefore to productivity and earnings. Conversely, employees working in a job above their level will lack some of the skills needed to realise the produ

33、ctive potential of the job.An important assumption of the assignment model is that different categories of education and jobs can be characterised as having fixed levels of available and required knowledge and skills. In other words, educational mismatches imply skill mismatches. Although the assign

34、ment model in itself seems highly plausible, this basic assumption can be questioned. Using data from a survey of graduates from Dutch universities and higher professional institutions, Allen and Van der Velden(2001) made a distinction between a formal mismatch between actual and required education

35、(educational mismatch) and between actual and required skills (skill mismatch). Two kinds of skill mismatch were considered. Graduates were asked (1) whether their current job offered sufficient scope to use their knowledge and skills (skill use), and (2) whether they felt that they would perform be

36、tter in their current job if they had additional knowledge and skills (skill deficit). Their study revealed only a rather weak relationship between educational iiiisnialuhes and lliese Iwo forms of skills inisinalchcji. Tlieir results provide strong support for the assumption that the match between

37、individual human capital and the characteristics of the job matters. Contrary to the assumptions of the assignment theory, however, educational mismatches are neither a necessary nor a sufficient condition for skill mismatches. It appeared that a high number of Dutch graduates who were working in jo

38、bs that were not closely related to their level and/or field of study nonetheless stated that they made great use of their knowledge and skills in their work. Furthermore, only a small proportion of the wage effects of educational mismatches was accounted for by skill mismatches. These had a strong

39、negative impact on job satisfaction, unlike educational mismatches.CHEERS DataIt is worth considering whether the CHEERS data provide further insight. In his concluding chapter of the forthcoming book on the CHEERS project, U. Teichler questions the assumption that a close match between education an

40、d employment categories is a good indicator of graduatespreparation for their professional tasks.He goes on to claim that employment outside graduates traditional professional areas cannot be taken as an indication that study is irrelevant for employment and work. He bases this claim on the finding

41、that at least a third of the graduates working in a position for which a lower level of education would have been more appropriate reported that they made use of some of the knowledge they acquired during their course of study in their work assignments (Teichler, forthcoming, pp. 277-279).Concentrat

42、ing on five countries that participated in the 1998 CHEERS study, namely Spain, Germany, the Netherlands, the UK and Japan, we will attempt to replicate the results of Allen and Van der Velden (2001). We will first describe the extent of educational and skill mismatches and the relationship between

43、the two in the five countries and then examine the labour market effects of mismatches in terms of hourly wages, job satisfaction and the intention to quit.MethodTwo major issues will be analysed:(1) The relationship between the education-job match on the one hand and the use of knowledge and skills

44、 on the other;(2) The effects of educational and skill mismatches on wage, job satisfaction and on-the-job search.Relationship between the Education-Job Match and Use of Knowledge and SkillsSeveral methods will be employed to measure the extent of matching. In detennining educational mismatches, gra

45、duates were asked to indicate what was the most appropriate level of course of study/degree. Answer categories were: higher, same level, lower tertiary level, and below tertiary level. Graduates from universities and non-university HE institutions were represented in all five countries.Effects of Mi

46、smatches on Wage, Job Satisfaction and On-the-job SearchSome regression models will be used to measure die effects uf educational and skill mismatches on the dependent variables. In the explanatory analysis, we will assess the effects on the following dependent variables: natural logarithm of hourly

47、 wage, job satisfaction, and on-the-job search. In each of these analyses, the dependent variable of the previous analysis will be included in order to account for their effect. Relevant control variables will be taken into account.ConclusionOur analyses indicate that educational and skill mismatche

48、s are indeed related, as one would expect. Graduates working below their level and/or outside their own field use fewer competences than those in matching5 jobs. Graduates working above their level or outside their field experience more skill shortages than those in matching jobs. However, education

49、al mismatches by no means imply mismatches between available and required knowledge and skills, as claimed by the job assignment model. Many graduates in matching jobs nonetheless report skill mismatches. Furthermore, a substantial proportion of ovcrcducatcd, graduates report high levels of skill us

50、e and few skill shortages.The multivariate analyses revealed strong wage effects of over-education. The wage effects of skill mismatches were much weaker; Interestingly, in Germany and the UK, there were positive wage effects of skill shortages. This seems to indicate that skill shortages do not indicate so much a below-par worker as a high-powered job. Job satisfaction was influenced by both educational and skill mismatches. The prope