Examines how work-integrated learning improves employability in TVET students, indicating factors that enhance benefits.
Purpose This study critically examines how the quality of work-integrated learning (WIL) placements enhances Chinese technical-and-vocational-education (TVET) students' employability and for whom the benefits are greatest, by testing a social-cognitive-career-theory model that links WIL to employability through career self-efficacy (CSE) and career adaptability (CAD) and examines proactive personality (PRO) as a boundary condition. Design/methodology/approach Survey data were collected from 477 final-year students at public TVET colleges in Henan Province. Validated Chinese instruments captured WIL quality (15 items), CSE (8 items), CAD (12 items), PRO (10 items) and self-perceived employability (8 items). PROCESS Model 59 with 5,000 bias-corrected bootstraps estimated a first-stage moderated serial-mediation structure (WIL → CSE →? CAD → employability; PRO × WIL on CSE). Findings Higher-quality WIL significantly increased CSE (b = 0.439, β = 0.437, p < 0.001); stronger CSE raised CAD (b = 0.512, β = 0.592, p < 0.001); and CAD was the principal driver of employability (b = 0.728, β = 0.730, p < 0.001). The serial indirect effect WIL → CSE → CAD → employability was 0.147 (95% CI [0.115, 0.185]) and fully absorbed WIL's direct influence. PRO strengthened the WIL → CSE path (interaction b = 0.197, p < 0.001); the slope rose from 0.182 at low PRO (16th percentile) to 0.685 at high PRO (84th percentile). Originality/value This is the first multi-college Chinese TVET investigation to validate the Placement Quality Measure in Chinese TVET, to model serial mediation via self-efficacy and adaptability, and to uncover proactive personality as a boundary condition, integrating motivational, self-regulatory and dispositional explanations of WIL-driven employability.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Xue et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: