This article aims to examine alternative explanations of social disadvantage on the university-to-work transition experiences of science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) students. 'Becoming employable' during the university-to-work transition is reflected in three ways: students' cognition/patterns of thinking (i.e., perceived employability); affect/emotion (i.e., anxiety); and career-related behaviour (i.e., job search and networking). To understand how social disadvantage affects 'becoming employable', we examine three potential explanations: students' social background, type of higher education institution attended and individual financial strain. A cross-sectional survey design targeted at final year students in two UK Higher Education Institutions provided 288 survey responses. Findings show support for an institutional explanation to 'becoming employable'. The study contributes to our understanding of social disadvantage during preparation for labour market entry and the 'employable graduate' identity construction process. Practical recommendations focus on alleviating some of the pressures on socially disadvantaged students.

The recent establishment of the European Higher Education Area and the ongoing monitoring carried out by the Bologna Follow-up Group raises the question: to what extent have the objectives of the Bologna Process been implemented in the varied higher education systems of the 47 signatory states, including the former Soviet Union states? This article concentrates on the extent of the Bologna Process implementation in Russia and Ukraine at the national policy level, focusing on the European Credit Transfer System (ECTS), the dual-cycle degree organisation and the development of quality assurance. Based on official documentation, it appears that by 2009 Ukraine had achieved more than Russia in the implementation of Bologna aims and objectives. The theoretical approach suggested by Heinze and Krill is used to identify the national considerations of Russia and Ukraine relative to the Bologna Process, and Phillips and Ochs' model of policy transfer is employed to analyse the similarities and differences of the Bologna Process implementation in Russia and Ukraine. The findings suggest that while Ukraine may have implemented more of the Bologna Process objectives overall, including ECTS and the degree cycles, Russia has made progress in the diploma supplement, and both countries are at a similar level of quality assurance.

This article explores how a knowledge ecology framework can help us better understand the production of gender knowledge, especially in relation to improving gender equality. Drawing on Law, Ruppert, and Savage, it analyses what knowledge of gender inequality is made visible and actionable in the case of the UK screen sector. We show: (i) that the gender knowledge production for the UK screen sector operated with reductionist understandings of gender and gender inequality, and presented gender inequality as something that needed evidencing rather than changing; and (ii) that gender knowledge was circulated in two relatively distinct circuits, a policy‐ and practice‐facing one focused on workforce statistics and a more heterogeneous and critical academic one. We then discuss which aspects of gender inequality in the UK screen industry remained invisible and thus less actionable. The article concludes with a critical appreciation of how the knowledge ecology framework might help better understand gender knowledge production, in relation to social change in the UK screen sector and beyond.

The relationship between education, skills and labour market outcomes is becoming an increasingly pressing issue in many countries. In the UK, recent changes in education and skills funding structures and the ongoing consequences of the 2008 recession may have affected participation in training. ‘Virtuous’ and ‘vicious’ circles of learning may exist, whereby access to training is associated with social advantage, and training begets more training. We explore workers’ participation in different types of training and how this is associated with wages using the UK Household Longitudinal Study. Our exploratory findings suggest that those working in lower-level occupations may not only be less likely to undertake training in general, but also less likely to have done types of training associated with wage increases (e.g., to meet occupational standards), and more likely to have done training associated with no or negative changes in wages (e.g., health and safety) compared to those working in higher-level occupations. We suggest that further research is needed to unpack the ‘black box’ of training and its impacts upon different groups of people. We discuss the implications of our findings to help break the ‘vicious’ circles.