When examining the experience of the global higher education segment, it is possible to observe that in such an education system, alongside theoretical knowledge, the formation of practical skills also holds particular importance. Particularly, based on the model applied in several European countries, students dedicate a certain period of their education, for example, 6 months, to work activities and practical experience. During this period, they work in fields relevant to their specializations and gain experience in a real work environment. This is positively evaluated in terms of enabling young people to enter the labor market more prepared, establish early contact with employers, and shape their future career prospects.
Against the backdrop of existing global challenges and the rapidly changing demands of the labor market, the issue of implementing such a model in our country also comes to the fore. Furthermore, the investigation into the possibilities of implementing the model in our country, as well as bringing this issue up for discussion at the parliamentary level, becomes a subject of public debate as a significant step towards harmonizing education and employment policies.
In a statement to Modern.az, Vasif Qafarov, a member of the Science and Education Committee of the Milli Majlis, noted that when examining the experience of countries worldwide, particularly in European states, we observe that a certain part of the educational process in the higher education system, typically a 6-month period, is dedicated to students' activities in a real work environment.
"This approach, known as the 'dual education model' or 'cooperative education,' creates a direct link between education and the labor market, enabling students to reinforce their theoretical knowledge with practical skills. The experience of Germany, Austria, the Netherlands, and other countries shows that this model significantly increases young people's chances of finding employment after graduation and more effectively meets employers' needs for qualified personnel."
The member of the Milli Majlis pointed out that the implementation of this model is possible in Azerbaijan and can even be considered necessary in the context of current challenges:
"Currently, while industrial and pedagogical internships exist in higher education institutions, in most cases, this process is short-term and formal, with weak systematic and institutional links to the labor market. However, if a longer-term, paid, and state-supported work experience mechanism were created during the education period, students could develop their professional skills, facilitate the adaptation process to future workplaces, and gain work experience while still studying."
V. Qafarov also emphasized that, first and foremost, improving the legal framework is crucial for the implementation of such a model:
"It is necessary to add provisions regulating the dual higher education model to the 'Law on Education' and the Labor Code, to legally define the status of student-interns, and to establish a social insurance mechanism. At the same time, financial and stimulating mechanisms can be applied by the state. For example, tax incentives for employers, subsidizing a certain part of students' salaries, and developing special state programs for strategic and priority specializations can increase the attractiveness of this model."
The deputy stated that another important direction is strengthening institutional cooperation:
"It is important to establish a coordinated activity mechanism between the Ministry of Science and Education, the Ministry of Economy, and entrepreneurial entities, and for career and industry relations centers in universities to operate more actively. It would be more appropriate to begin the implementation of the model not across all specializations at once, but in an initial pilot project format, particularly in the fields of engineering, information technology, agriculture, and industry. Based on the results of the pilot phase, mechanisms can be improved, allowing for broader application."
V. Qafarov also added that this issue can be brought up for extensive discussion at the Milli Majlis level:
"Organizing hearings in the Science and Education Committee, conducting discussions with the participation of experts, rectors, and employers, and preparing legislative initiatives can be among the concrete steps. Youth employment and human capital development are among the priority directions of state policy, and closer integration of education with the economy is one of the key factors that will increase the country's competitiveness in the long-term perspective.
Consequently, the implementation of a 6-month systematic and state-supported practical work phase during higher education is both possible and strategically beneficial in Azerbaijan. The main issue is the establishment of continuous and institutional cooperation between education, the state, and business. With proper planning and phased implementation, this model can make a significant contribution to the professional development of young people, the provision of quality personnel for the labor market, and the sustainable development of the national economy as a whole," the deputy concluded.
However, education researcher Elmin Nuri stated that, in general, we must keep one detail in particular focus regarding this issue:
"There is a '3+1' model applied in some universities around the world. According to this model, a student studies for three years in a classroom environment at the university for any given specialization. Naturally, this approach cannot be applied to all specializations. This model is absolutely not applicable to engineering, technology, and especially medical specializations. In medicine, its application is generally impossible.
However, there are some average statistical specialization profiles where the '3+1' model is used. As the name suggests, three years are dedicated to theoretical knowledge, and one year is solely and exclusively dedicated to practical application in production. The total four-year period is considered the student period.
However, this model is not applied in our country. Yes, there are internships, but during the internship period, the student is still subject to the university, commutes, and the process is not fully integrated into the production environment. Furthermore, certain university-related procedures are handled. Whereas in the model we mentioned, after three years, the student completes the classroom phase and undergoes one year of mandatory industrial experience."
According to the expert, most universities applying this approach build their contemporary development trajectory and strategy on the science-industry-innovation triangle:
"Here, special attention is paid to the science and business connection, this duality, and all programs are directed towards this orientation. The university believes that it is preparing students, and one of the functions of these students is to create value and participate in economic mechanisms in the future. This is an approach that not only views the student purely as a financial dividend but also sees them as an active participant in the economic and innovative system, as a specific human resource.
This is one of the contemporary higher education trends in the world, and there is nothing unusual or negative about it. We simply need to ask ourselves: where do our universities stand today in the science-industry-innovation triangle? How active is their position in this triangle?
If they implement this model, or switch to a six-month model as you mentioned, or generally make any structural changes or not – what will change? We should not rush this matter. The state is taking very important steps, especially in the fields of artificial intelligence and digitalization, and we can say that we are not falling behind in innovations."
E. Nuri believes that the scientific institution itself must be fully prepared for this implementation and proceed in parallel with the process:
"Here, the issue is not resolved by desire alone. It would not be right to form a desire on one side and take a step without considering the other side. Otherwise, we might later face reality and be forced to say that it is not suitable for us. However, it is more appropriate to correctly assess the reality beforehand.
In my opinion, a program should first be developed at the university level. Each specific higher education institution, when defining its strategy, must clearly articulate how it has calculated its development mechanism. It must specify how it will determine the student's place in the production and classroom, theory and practice dimensions. Before considering the implementation of this model, the university itself must ask: how prepared are we for this?" he noted.
