IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/oxecpp/v53y2001i3p385-405.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Assessing Skills for Work: Two Perspectives

Author

Listed:
  • Stasz, Cathleen

Abstract

Changes in the nature of work have created demands for new skills and education and training policies to enhance skill development. To successfully accomplish the latter, policymakers must first define and measure skills, then understand how they contribute to economic performance. This paper contrasts two theoretical perspectives for skills measurement: the economic perspective that dominates the policy discussion about skills, and the sociocultural perspective. The paper explores the basic assumptions about skills from each perspective and considers how each addresses different issues concerning skill requirements. It argues that the sociocultural perspective has some advantages over the dominant paradigm. Copyright 2001 by Oxford University Press.

Suggested Citation

  • Stasz, Cathleen, 2001. "Assessing Skills for Work: Two Perspectives," Oxford Economic Papers, Oxford University Press, vol. 53(3), pages 385-405, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:oup:oxecpp:v:53:y:2001:i:3:p:385-405
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    To our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
    1. Check below whether another version of this item is available online.
    2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
    3. Perform a search for a similarly titled item that would be available.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:oup:oxecpp:v:53:y:2001:i:3:p:385-405. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/oep .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.