Measuring SHAPE Graduate Outcomes: Policy Briefing

About this briefing

This briefing is part of the British Academy’s Understanding SHAPE Graduates toolkit.

The toolkit presents newly commissioned research examining a wide range of data about SHAPE (Social Sciences, Humanities and Arts for People and the Economy) graduates, updating key statistics from the Academy’s landmark quantitative report Qualified for the Future (2020), as well as exploring new questions related to the COVID-19 pandemic and the cost-of-living crisis.

The data underpinning this research is available to explore as an interactive dashboard on the British Academy website, alongside a key findings highlighting our main takeaways.

This work is part of the British Academy’s SHAPE Observatory, home of the evidence base through which the Academy monitors and communicates the health of the SHAPE disciplines.

Summary

SHAPE graduates develop vital knowledge and skills that support sectors across the UK economy. SHAPE skills, including amongst others analysis, critical thinking, communication and adaptability, are in high demand in the modern workplace.

SHAPE graduates are well-prepared to engage with the challenges facing the world, from climate change to the rise of AI, challenges that demand the knowledge and skills of SHAPE graduates alongside their Science, Technology, Engineering and Maths (STEM) counterparts.

Yet, SHAPE disciplines continue to face a persistent challenge around perceptions of ‘value’.

They play a critical role in the UK’s service-based economy, underpinning our social and cultural infrastructure and contributing significantly to public services: especially education, which is the most common sector of employment for SHAPE graduates.

But these activities, which should be central to our concepts of value, are often absent from mainstream debate.

In the UK, the impact of higher education on individuals, the economy and society is assessed through a series of qualitative and quantitative data – such as graduate earnings, progression to further study, and satisfaction rates.

On these measures, SHAPE graduates perform well in aggregate: for example, 87% of SHAPE graduates were in employment in 2023, compared to 88% of STEM graduates.3 Such data provide important evidence for our understanding of the role and use of higher education.

But graduate outcomes data are, first and foremost, a short-term measure of our economy. They capture a snapshot at graduation and in the 15 months that follow. They do not, on their own, measure the inherent value of a degree taken. To be fully understood, data must be interpreted within their wider political and economic context.

To assist this, Understanding SHAPE Graduates is a toolkit which illustrates where and how SHAPE graduates contribute to the UK economy and society. The toolkit consists of an interactive data dashboard, a series of ‘key findings’ drawn from the data, and this briefing on the measurement of graduate outcomes.

This briefing provides essential context for interpreting the data in the Understanding SHAPE Graduates toolkit. It explores the complex political landscape surrounding debates on graduate outcomes and highlights the limitations in current datasets.

These contexts are crucial for meaningful interpretation of both our analysis and for broader discussions about the value of higher education.

This briefing is designed to help users better understand why policymakers are interested in graduate outcomes, why outcomes are commonly conceptualised in the way they are and to illuminate the limitations of existing tools.

First, we explore why graduate outcomes data is a lens through which society evaluates returns to higher education, for both individuals and the public.

The briefing then explores four policy challenges:

• How the policy landscape affects perceptions of graduate outcomes
• Challenges with common measures of graduate outcomes
• The datasets and their limitations
• How these issues impact our understanding of SHAPE graduates’ career trajectories

By addressing these policy challenges, this briefing provides important context for any assessment of graduate outcomes data – including our own. An awareness of these broader considerations is vital when evaluating graduate success, regardless of discipline.

Finally, as well as assessing the current landscape, and what might be seen as the conventional approaches to measuring graduate outcomes, this briefing also makes the case that there is a need for alternative tools to better capture the full spectrum of graduate impact, including non-economic measures.