?
Каковы ключевые индикаторы универсальных компетенций и как они соотносятся с ожидаемыми результатами высшего образования?
Universal competencies are becoming one of the main tools for standardizing the assessment of educational outcomes and one of the most expected characteristics of employees in the professional environment. The concept of universal competencies is of particular interest in the context of students entering the labor market, when the achieved educational outcomes during education collide with employers’ requirements. The authors consider universal competencies and their indicators from the perspective of possible discrepancies between expected learning outcomes at the higher education level and labor market demands. The two main objectives of this study are to identify the most commonly encountered indicators in widely used models of universal competencies and to compare them with the list of universal competencies specified in the Federal State Educational Standard of Higher Education 3++ as one of the key regulatory documents. The study analyzes 18 widely used theoretical models of universal competencies, which are used in academic and business environments, and which establish criteria for assessing human capital and human potential. During the analysis, 12 key indicators were identified based on their frequency of occurrence in the analyzed competency models. These indicators presumably reflect the most common expectations of employers regarding the behavior of candidates and employees in various professional fields and at different levels of positions, and represent a basic set of managerial characteristics that are associated with the success of activities not only in managerial positions, but also in organizing any educational or work projects. When comparing the list of identified indicators, the authors found that only five of them have similar indicators to those listed in the Federal State Educational Standard of Higher Education 3++. The remaining seven either have indicators partially similar in meaning or do not have any similar counterparts at all. The discrepancy discovered by the authors, as well as the lack of a common accepted definition of universal competencies, may be one of the factors explaining the gap between labor market demands and higher education offers. The novelty of this study lies in the fact that the authors delve into the level of specific indicators, whereas previous research has mostly been conducted at the level of competencies. As one of the prospects for further research, the authors envision the development of a competency model consisting of the indicators identified by the analysis and a measurement tool that would cover a wide range of labor market requirements for graduates and candidates.