Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-4rdpn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-05T09:34:40.340Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Bridging Science and Practice: Toward a Standard, Evidence-Based Framework of 21st Century Skills

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 July 2015

Rong Su ,
Juliya Golubovich  and
Steven B. Robbins
Rong Su*
Affiliation:
Purdue University
Juliya Golubovich
Affiliation:
Educational Testing Service, Princeton, New Jersey
Steven B. Robbins
Affiliation:
Educational Testing Service, Princeton, New Jersey
*
Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Rong Su, Department of Psychological Sciences, Purdue University, 703 Third Street, West Lafayette, IN 47907. E-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

In the past few years, the term “21st century skills” has gained increasing popularity in educational research and business practice. Neubert, Mainert, Kretzschmar, and Greiff (2015) advocated for the utility of assessing 21st century skills in industrial–organizational psychology (I-O psychology) and its superiority over assessing basic psychological constructs, using application-oriented constructs, or conducting job analysis to determine relevant skills for individual work settings. We argue, however, that the issues identified and discussed in the focal article are rather threefold and that, to integrate 21st century skills into I-O psychology and to bridge organizational science and practice, we need to have (a) a standard framework of clearly defined constructs, (b) innovative assessments, and (c) evidence for validity generalization. We elaborate below.

Type
Commentaries
Information
Industrial and Organizational Psychology , Volume 8 , Issue 2 , June 2015 , pp. 289 - 294
Copyright
Copyright © Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology 2015 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Barrick, M. R., & Mount, M. K. (1991). The Big Five personality dimensions and job performance. Personnel Psychology, 44 (1), 1–26. doi:10.1111/j.1744-6570.1991.tb00688.xGoogle Scholar
Burrus, J., Jackson, T., Xi, N., & Steinberg, J. (2013). Identifying the most important 21st century workforce competencies: An analysis of the Occupational Information Network (O*NET). ETS Research Report Series, 2013 (2), i–55. doi:10.1002/j.2333-8504.2013.tb02328.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Edwards, J. R., & Bagozzi, R. P. (2000). On the nature and direction of the relationship between constructs and measures. Psychological Methods, 5 (2), 155–174. doi:10.1037/1082-989X.5.2.155Google Scholar
Golubovich, J., Su, R., & Robbins, S. B. (in press). Establishing a standards framework and benchmarks for workplace readiness and success: Bridging the education to work divide. In Burrus, J., Mattern, K. D., Naemi, B., & Roberts, R. D. (Eds.), Building better students: Preparation for the workforce. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Griffin, P., McGaw, B., & Care, E. (Eds.). (2012). Assessment and teaching of 21st century skills. New York, NY: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Landis, R. S., Fogli, L., & Goldberg, E. (1998). Future-oriented job analysis: A description of the process and its organizational implications. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 6 (3), 192–197. doi:10.1111/1468-2389.00089Google Scholar
Murphy, K. (2003). Validity generalization: A critical review. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
National Research Council. (2012). Education for life and work: Developing transferable knowledge and skills in the 21st century. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.Google Scholar
Neubert, J. C., Mainert, J., Kretzschmar, A., & Greiff, S. (2015). The assessment of 21st century skills in industrial and organizational psychology: Complex and collaborative problem solving. Industrial and Organizational Psychology: Perspectives on Science and Practice.Google Scholar
Nye, C. D., Su, R., Rounds, J., & Drasgow, F. (2012). Vocational interests and performance: A quantitative summary of over 60 years of research. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 7, 384–403. doi:10.1177/1745691612449021CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ryan, A. M., & Ployhart, R. E. (2014). A century of selection. Annual Review of Psychology, 65, 693–717. doi:10.1146/annurev-psych-010213-115134Google Scholar
Scherbaum, C. A. (2005). Synthetic validity: Past, present, and future. Personnel Psychology, 58 (2), 481–515. doi:10.1111/j.1744-6570.2005.00547.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Van Iddekinge, C. H., Putka, D. J., & Campbell, J. P. (2011). Reconsidering vocational interests for personnel selection: The validity of an interest-based selection test in relation to job knowledge, job performance, and continuance intentions. Journal of Applied Psychology, 96 (1), 13–33. doi:10.1037/a0021193CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed