Optimising online transversal skills delivery in STEM doctoral education

ABSTRACT

Transversal skills development is an essential component of doctoral education. The COVID-19 pandemic required the adaptation of five transversal skills modules to online delivery. Instructional design was used to create synchronous and asynchronous teaching to a Virtual Learning Environment. Feedback surveys were used to analyse student perceptions as to whether learning outcomes (LOs) were met and student satisfaction with the online format with a view to optimising future delivery of these modules. Of the 168 students surveyed, 84 (50.0%) responded. Based on 84 responses across five modules, students perceived that 394 (97.0%) of the LOs were met (p < 0.001). Statistically significant advantages to online delivery were found to be convenience, easy visibility of materials, timing of delivery and learning at own pace (p < 0.001). Importantly, 40 (47.6%) students would have struggled to achieve the necessary credits without this online training. 77 (91.7%) students found the online modules very useful or useful for their current research and 78 (92.9%) students reported them as being very useful or useful for their future career. A majority found online delivery more effective for their needs than the face-to-face format. These findings support the effectiveness of online delivery of transversal skills modules in doctoral programmes.

Keywords:

• Postgraduate employability
• transversal skills
• transferrable skills
• doctoral education
• instructional design
• online education
• professional skills

Introduction

The broadening career landscape for postgraduates

The traditional model of a PhD has evolved from an expectation that a doctoral researcher would pursue a career in academia, now doctoral graduates are employed in a wide range of roles across all sectors (QAA 2011). In line with global trends, investment in postgraduate research in Ireland has intensified in recent decades as part of an emphasis on the knowledge economy. The 2016 census showed that 28,759 people had a doctorate level qualification in 2016 representing a sustained increase of 30.9% on the 2011 figure and an increase of 99.5% on the 2006 figure of 14,412 (CSO 2016). Currently, there are approximately 10,000 postgraduate students in Ireland (Frawley et al. 2020). The supply of PhD graduates exceeds the number of academic job vacancies by a ratio of about 10:1, creating new challenges and opportunities for postgraduate students in the job market. Interestingly in the HEA report (Frawley et al. 2020), less than 58% of researchers are working in a field where they needed the specialist knowledge they developed during their PhD highlighting the relevance and importance of maximising professional development opportunities during their research. The OECD highlights the important role of academic institutions in providing transversal skills training programmes to postgraduate students to support them in reflecting on their experiences and knowledge, to broaden their understanding of career options and employability, and fulfil their career potential (OECD 2012).

Necessity of transversal skills for PhD students – national and international context

The development of transversal skills (also referred to as transferrable or professional skills) development is a cornerstone of the PhD process to support the researcher to meet their professional and career aspirations. European and international standards, principles and guidelines supporting transversal skills development in doctoral training programmes are outlined in a range of documents including Salzburg principles (EUA 2005) and the Salzburg II recommendations (EUA 2010). Support for career development for students is reflected in the European Charter for Researchers and Code of Conduct for the Recruitment of Researchers (European Commission 2005) and the UK Concordat to Support the Career Development of Researchers (Vitae 2008). Vitae developed their Researcher Development Framework with the higher education sector and other stakeholders (Vitae 2014). While researchers acquire some of these skills during the doctoral programme, attention has been turning to the benefit of formal training to meet their varying needs in a more structured manner (OECD 2012). The World Economic Forum Future of Jobs Report 2020 (World Economic Forum 2020) cites critical thinking and analysis as well as problem-solving, and skills in self-management such as active learning, resilience, stress tolerance and flexibility. There is a need for graduates and postgraduates to be prepared to undertake jobs in industries which do not yet exist, emphasising the need for learning agility and ability to adapt and upskill (World Economic Forum 2020). Academic competencies have been shown to facilitate deeper learning of career-oriented competencies, making graduates of competency-based programmes competitive candidates in the career marketplace (Cates et al. 2020). There are also direct benefits for industry in having access to top talent from Higher Education Institutions (HEIs) who use competency-based education (CBE), programmes preparing students for real-world success (Helyer 2011). The student with the deep discipline specific knowledge as well as the broader professional training and development skills, has been described as the ‘T shaped graduate’ (MacCraith 2006), enabling the postgraduate to influence and succeed at the highest levels in the workplace (MacCraith 2006; Babatope et al. 2020). The European Science Foundation (ESF 2009) has outlined the transferrable skills they recommend for a postgraduate researcher, namely interpersonal, organisational, communication and enterprise skills as well as cognitive abilities and research competencies. A significant development in the Irish Doctoral Education system is the move towards structured PhD programmes (National Framework for Doctoral Education HEA Irish Research Council 2015). The principle of the structured PhD is that in addition to producing original research, the modern PhD student must also develop ongoing professional competencies and skills relevant to the successful completion of the research project and to broader career development. The credit requirement varies in Ireland, but the majority of HEIs require that doctoral candidates complete a minimum of 30 European Credit Transfer and Accumulation System (ECTS) taught credits during the PhD programme as well as document their educational, training, personal and professional development needs as part of their Research and Professional Development Plan (RPDP). The National Strategy for Higher Education to 2030 (2011) and the National Framework for Doctoral Education (Irish Research Council 2015), provide a set of principles and standards for doctoral education in all sectors in Ireland with an ambition to develop students to the highest level to equip them to become ‘creative, critical and independent individuals who will advance the boundaries of knowledge’. This framework document formally endorses the Irish Universit ies PhD Graduate Skills Statement (2021), six skills and attributes as key educational objectives for all graduates of Irish Doctoral Programmes (Table 1).

Table 1 Desired skills developed during a PhD (Irish Universities PhD Graduate Skills Statement 2021).

Research skills

Ethics and social understanding skills

Personal effectiveness transferable skills

Team-working and leadership skills

Communication skills

Entrepreneurship and innovation skills

PhD programme context – our teaching what are we doing?

Universities have long implemented strategies within business programmes to grow relevant competencies such as entrepreneurship (Laguna-Sánchez et al. 2020). Supporting postgraduates to gain similar experience and development during their PhD has been the focus of the postgraduate modules in the School of Agriculture and Food Science in University College Dublin (UCD) and to this end, we have been providing transversal skills development for PhD candidates for over 15 years. Seven modules have been designed based on the IUA PhD Skills Document (2021) and shaped by the authors’ conversations with employers of our postgraduates over the years. These modules include Data Analysis, Academic Writing, Research Integrity, Presentation Skills, Leadership and Management Skills, Innovation and Impact, Hot Topics in Agriculture and Food Research and Media Skills and Communication. Traditionally and pre COVID-19, the format of these five ECTS credited modules has been a three-day, face-to-face teaching module with full attendance and assignment mandatory. Teaching varies depending on the specific module but usually included lectures, workshops, group work and guest lectures.

Moving to online delivery

In April 2020, restrictions to on-campus teaching due to the COVID-19 pandemic necessitated the transfer of postgraduate transversal teaching to an online format in a short timeframe. This paper describes the pedagogical models used to adapt delivery of these modules to ensure that postgraduates were supported in attaining these opportunities for professional development. Reporting on the process and success of this fast pivot to online delivery has been reported by many authors from the perspective of topic (Brown and Krzic 2021), pedagogy (Rossi et al. 2021) and teacher experience (Casacchia et al. 2021) but very few have looked at Doctoral Students especially in transversal skill delivery. Our aim in delivering online was not to mimic what is normally done in the face-to-face setting, but to employ synchronous and asynchronous teaching methods including active learning techniques. These were employed to empower students to develop an open mindset, to develop an awareness of their own developmental needs, and apply the higher order thinking described by Anderson et al. (2001) through their taxonomy modified from Bloom. Students were encouraged to use the readings, examples, lectures and class discussions to analyse, evaluate and create content to complete their assignments and reflect on their learning and how it could be applied now and in the future. This method of combining synchronous and asynchronous learning methods has been shown to have a positive effect on student satisfaction with knowledge, skills, attitudes, interaction and in higher education (Osman 2022).

Purpose of this study

We wanted to monitor the quality and effectiveness of this new mode of delivery. Student satisfaction with modules evaluated by a questionnaire post course delivery has been shown to be invaluable in monitoring the perception and success of the online teaching (Secret, Bentley, and Kadolph 2016; Baber 2020; Chien-Yuan, 2021; Osman 2022). To measure student satisfaction with these modules and to determine if the students perceived that Learning Outcomes (LOs) were met, we evaluated five modules which had been moved to online delivery: Statistical Analysis for Research, Data Analysis with RStudio, Scientific Writing and Presenting Skills, Effective Leadership and Management Skills and Media Skills for Scientists. LOs for these modules are summarised in Table 2. Content and LOs were similar as with previous face-to-face delivery but mode of delivery was adapted for the online teaching and learning environment.

Table 2 Learning outcomes (LO) for the modules.

Statistical analysis for research

Use statistics to reduce complex data situations to manageable formats to describe, explain or model them. Derive descriptive statistics for various data types. Perform and critique statistical tests on two sample data. Set up and critically analyse data sets in both a parametric and non-parametric way for two and more samples. Communicate research findings in an effective, clear, concise manner, using the correct terminology using SPSS.

Data analysis with RStudio

Use statistics to reduce complex data situations to manageable formats to describe, explain and model them. Derive descriptive statistics for various data types and manipulate data in RStudio. Perform and critique statistical tests (parametric and non-parametric) on two and more sample data. Use multiple regression with RStudio and other advanced statistical techniques to allow prediction of a score on one variable based on the scores on several other variables. Communicate effectively research findings in a clear concise manner using correct terminology based on output from RStudio.

Scientific writing and presenting skills

Understand what constitutes coherent, structured academic writing. Incorporate drafting and editing practices into the writing process and understand the value of these skills. Present a convincing and valid piece of academic writing. Develop a 3-minute presentation on your research using the guidance for a good scientific presentation. Appreciate the importance of Research Integrity and plan your own training.

Effective leadership and management skills

Use the module workbook to Identify your current skills and map these to a SWOT analysis to identify opportunities for self-development. Map short- and medium-term goals to meet these objectives in line with your Researcher Professional Development Plan. Explore the range of attributes of good leadership, appreciate the styles of leadership and reflect upon your preferred style and the competencies for leadership that you already have, and those you would like to develop. Investigate the career options that interest you and identify ways in which you plan to research these further.

Media skills for scientists

Communicate your research in a way that is understandable to a non-specialist audience Conduct a radio interview on your research Write a newspaper article on your research Appreciate the role of social media in disseminating your research findings Understand the importance of, and factors to be considered in, Public Engagement activities

Theoretical approaches informing the redesign

The five-stage model of e-moderating described by Salmon (2011) was used to structure the implementation phase: Module Access/Motivation, Online Socialisation, Information Exchange, Knowledge Construction; Development. This model emphasises the role of the module coordinator in creating an online environment which enables online learning and support.

Instructional design

Due to the global pandemic of COVID-19, in April 2020 schools and universities were closed affecting over 1.5 billion learners worldwide (UNESCO 2020) and UCD followed other universities in moving module delivery online. Significant restructuring is necessary to deliver best practice in online delivery (Witze 2020). During the restrictions imposed by the COVID-19 pandemic, five PhD modules were moved to an online delivery to allow students to continue to avail of the credited modules as part of their structured PhD requirement. The ADDIE model of Instructional Design was used as a template to ensure structure and clarity to ensure learning objectives were met (Allen 2006). Five modules were delivered over three trimesters, from June 2020 to June 2021. We used the Virtual Learning Environment (VLE) Brightspace which is used throughout the university and familiar to students. Zoom was used as the platform for lecture delivery and class interaction sessions. Lectures were not recorded to encourage engagement, discussion and contribution, but support materials including suggested reading, Ted talks, podcasts and videos were provided as asynchronous content to allow students to tailor the content to meet their specific needs and circumstances and learn at their own pace (Bao 2020) and to avoid ‘Zoom fatigue’ (Wiederhold 2020).

Analysis

The analysis phase involved identifying the needs of the student by defining the intended LOs. The competencies outlined in the IUA guide (2021) were used as a framework of reference to design the postgraduate modules.

Design

In the design phase, the learning needs of the student were used as a framework to develop the materials and lectures and LOs. Constructive alignment (Biggs and Tang 2007) was used as the basis of module design to ensure content was focused and purposeful for the range of student needs. This also involved reviewing timing of online sessions to maximise student engagement. LOs were based on the competencies identified in the analysis phases as well as feedback received from stakeholders and employers of graduates which had specified the transversal skills required for specific roles. Assignments were designed to meet the learning objectives.

Development

In considering activities that students could work on to achieve the LOs, consideration was given to synchronous and asynchronous learning and student interaction (Moore and Kearsley 1996). A repository of resources was developed including media formats such as slides, blogs, podcasts and videos curated by the module co-ordinator. A variety of teaching methods including the flipped classroom approach (Cheng, Ritzhaupt, and Antonenko 2019) were used for book reviews, and peer feedback of academic writing exercises, to stimulate engagement, confidence with public speaking and peer to peer learning. A module overview was used at each online session to reinforce the need for pre-course, during module and post module work to maximise self-monitoring and autonomous learning. Consideration was given to learner interaction and collaboration to establish a community of learners, creating a sense of connection between learners to replicate the inclusion that students have reported feeling from face-to-face delivery. Guest lectures were arranged with people from within and outside the University setting to give students further insights into relevant areas. Guest speakers included those with expertise within career planning for postgraduates, editors of scientific journals, science journalists and broadcasters, contributors from the Writing Centre and Graduate Studies Office in UCD as well as leaders from organisations outside the university.

Implementation

Good practice for online communication, participation and interaction was emphasised throughout the module delivery.

Evaluation

Evaluation of the modules was achieved using a feedback survey with questions relating to LOs, relevance and satisfaction with the modules. The evaluation allowed us to measure the quality and effectiveness of the learning. The main aim of the survey was to determine if students perceived that the LOs had been met and to identify areas to be improved or amended, and if they had not been met, would face-to-face sessions increase the likelihood of these objectives being met. Evaluation was done after assignments had been submitted and marked and was kept anonymous to get a clear and honest evaluation and ensure that coercion was mitigated against.

Method

Questionnaire

A Google forms questionnaire was developed for each of the five modules. The five groups of students attending each of the modules at different timepoints from June 2020 to July 2021 were surveyed. The questionnaire was purpose-designed by the authors and fine-tuned based on the feedback from piloting and discussions with other lecturers in the University. The questionnaire concentrated on several areas related to learning outcomes, usefulness of online training for current and future role, advantages, and disadvantages of online training in comparison to face-to-face training, along with feedback on aspects of the module that were found to be most useful, need improving and whether the training would be recommended. The questionnaire consisted of a combination of closed-ended questions (‘tick box’ responses with ‘choose one’ options) and ranking/rating questions. Open-ended questions were asked at various points in the questionnaire.

The primary objective of the questionnaire was to determine if students thought the LOs were met. LOs for the module were listed and students were asked if they felt the LO had been achieved or not. If the students perceived that a LO was not met, a follow-up question asked if face-to-face delivery would have been more likely to meet the objective, and if not, in their opinion how would this LO have been best met? A secondary analysis was to understand the perceived advantages and disadvantages of online delivery, which components of the module would be better delivered face-to-face, and if this online delivery was important in securing the credits necessary for the structured PhD. We wanted to understand how useful the online training module was for their current research, for their future role, and which mode of delivery was more effective for their needs, and if they would recommend the training module to a colleague.

Participant characteristics

All students surveyed were registered at UCD. Students required the module credits as part of their PhD programme. Students were at all levels of their PhD, from first year to final year from either the UCD College of Engineering and Architecture, UCD College of Health and Agricultural Sciences or UCD College of Science. Although modules were delivered through the School of Agriculture and Food Science, content on transversal skills was relevant and applicable to all science subjects with examples mapping to multiple areas of STEM. Modules were chosen by students and were not compulsory. All students had successfully completed the assignment component of the module on which they were surveyed.

Sampling procedures

In accordance with the legal rules laid out in the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) and the Irish Data Protection Act 2018, the survey did not collect identifiable information to ensure that the results from the data were anonymous. The research study received research ethical approval, with exemption from full ethical review approved from the UCD Research Ethics Committee due to the minimum risk level of the research study (Research Ethics Exemption Reference Number: LS-E-20-203-Dowsett Dec. 2020). All 168 students attending the five modules run for Autumn, Spring and Summer Trimesters were surveyed for their feedback on their perceived achievement of the learning objectives and satisfaction with the module. Informed consent was sought and received for each participant. Statistical analyses of responses obtained were performed using RStudio 1.4.1103 for Windows. Descriptive statistics were used to summarise the student responses to questions. Student responses are presented numerically as frequencies and percentages. Binomial tests or chi-squared tests were used to determine the difference in proportions across two or more than two response types, respectively. Multiple comparisons of responses to the same question were controlled for using the Bonferroni correction method. All statistical testing was interpreted using a 5% level of significance.

The primary analysis of the study was to evaluate which LOs were perceived by students to have been met in the online delivery of each module. There were four LOs for the Effective Leadership and Management and five LOs for Data Analysis with RStudio, Media Skills for Scientists, Scientific Writing and Presenting Skills, and Statistical Analysis for Research (Table 3).

Table 3. Number of total LOs assessed across all modules.

Module	No. students	No. LOs	Total LOs
Data Analysis with RStudio	25	5	125
Effective Leadership and Management Skills	14	4	56
Science Writing and Presenting Skills	21	5	105
Statistical Analysis for Research	17	5	85
Media Skills for Scientists	7	5	35
Total	84		406

Results

Based on 168 students surveyed, 84 (50.0%) responded, which maps to less than 7.6% margin of error in results at the 95% level of confidence. Statistically, the proportion of students that responded to the survey was consistent across the five modules (p = 0.081). Data Analysis with RStudio [25 (58.1%) students], Effective Leadership and Management Skills [14 (73.7%) students], Science Writing and Presenting Skills [21 (65.6%) students], Statistical Analysis for Research [17 (29.3%) students] and Media Skills for Scientists [7 (43.8%) students].

Primary analysis

In total across all 84 students, 406 LOs were assessed (Table 3). Students perceived that 394 (97.0%) of the LOs were met with a small minority [12 (3.0%)] not met (p < 0.001, Table 4).

Table 4. Number of total LOs from individual modules which were perceived by students to have been met.

Module	LOs met		Total
	Yes	No
Data Analysis with RStudio	125 (100.0%)	0 (0.0%)	125 (100.0%)
Effective Leadership and Management Skills	51 (91.1%)	5 (8.9%)	56 (100.0%)
Science Writing and Presenting Skills	98 (93.3%)	7 (6.7%)	105 (100.0%)
Statistical Analysis for Research	85 (100.0%)	0 (0.0%)	85 (100.0%)
Media Skills for Scientists	35 (100.0%)	0 (0.0%)	35 (100.0%)
Total	394 (97.0%)	12 (3.0%)	406 (100.0%)

From the 12 instances of students believing that LOs were not met online, 8 (66.7%) students believed that the LOs would have been better met in a face-to-face setting (Table 5). From the four LOs that would not have been better met face-to-face, students made suggestions to how these could have been met which will be addressed in the discussion.

Table 5. Number of total learning outcomes that were not met, did students believe they could have been met with face-to-face delivery?

Module	Would LOs have been better met face-to-face		Total
	Yes	No
Effective Leadership and Management Skills	4 (80.0%)	1 (20.0%)	5 (100.0%)
Science Writing and Presenting Skills	4 (57.1%)	3 (42.9%)	7 (100.0%)
Total	8 (66.7%)	4 (33.3%)	12 (100.0%)

Secondary analysis

The advantages and disadvantages of online delivery identified by students that responded to the question is summarised in Tables 6 and 7. Advantages were identified as convenience [83 (100.0%) students, p < 0.001], easy visibility of slides [76 (92.7%) students, p < 0.001], delivered over time to facilitate application of learning [76 (90.5%) students, p < 0.001], learning at own pace [67 (80.7%) students, p < 0.001] and easy to ask questions [61 (73.5%) students, p < 0.001]. Students also differed significantly in their response to questions relating to cost [58 (67.7%) students, p = 0.002] while students did not differ significantly in response to interactions with facilitator/speakers/module coordinator [46 (52.1%) students, p = 1.000].

Table 6. Reported advantages of online delivery (Binomial tests controlled for multiple comparisons using Bonferroni’s correction method).

Advantages of the online delivery	Response		Number of responses
	No	Yes
Convenience*	0 (0.0%)	83 (100.0%)	83 (100.0%)
Easy visibility of slides*	6 (7.3%)	76 (92.7%)	82 (100.0%)
Delivered over time to facilitate application of learning*	8 (9.5%)	76 (90.5%)	84 (100.0%)
Learning at own pace*	16 (19.3%)	67 (80.7%)	83 (100.0%)
Easy to ask questions*	22 (26.5%)	61 (73.5%)	83 (100.0%)
Cost*	24 (29.3%)	58 (70.7%)	82 (100.0%)
Interactions with facilitator/speakers/module coordinator	36 (43.9%)	46 (56.1%)	82 (100.0%)

*Statistically significant p < 0.05.

Table 7. Reported advantages of face-to-face delivery (Binomial tests controlled for multiple comparisons using Bonferroni’s correction method).

Aspects of the module that would be better delivered face-to-face	Response		Number of responses
	No	Yes
Conversations with other attendees*	10 (12.3%)	71 (87.7%)	81 (100.0%)
Interactions with facilitator/speakers/module coordinator*	15 (18.1%)	68 (81.9%)	83 (100.0%)
Easier to ask questions	37 (45.7%)	44 (54.3%)	81 (100.0%)
Immersive 3-day experience	49 (61.3%)	31 (38.8%)	80 (100.0%)

*Statistically significant p < 0.05.

The aspects of the module that would be better delivered face-to-face, according to the responses, are summarised in Table 7. Conversations with other attendees [71 (87.7%) students, p < 0.001] and interactions with facilitator/speakers/module coordinator [68 (81.9%) students, p < 0.001] would have been better face-to-face. While students did not differ significantly in their responses to easier to ask questions [44 (54.3%) students, p = 1.000] and immersive 3-day experience [31 (38.8%) students, p = 0.227].

Finally, the facilitation of the modules online enabled students to receive required credits for their PhD – i.e. 40 (47.6%) students would have been under pressure get the necessary credits required as part of the structured PhD if this training had not been delivered online (Table 8).

Table 8. Without this training being delivered online, would you have been under pressure to get the necessary credits required as part of a structured PhD?

Module	Under pressure to get the necessary credits required for the structured PhD			Number of students
	Yes	No	Not applicable
Data Analysis with RStudio	8 (32.0%)	16 (64.0%)	1 (4.0%)	25 (100.0%)
Effective Leadership and Management Skills	9 (64.3%)	3 (21.4%)	2 (14.3%)	14 (100.0%)
Science Writing and Presenting Skills	11 (52.4%)	9 (42.9%)	1 (4.8%)	21 (100.0%)
Statistical Analysis for Research	10 (58.8%)	6 (35.3%)	1 (5.9%)	17 (100.0%)
Media Skills for Scientists	2 (28.6%)	5 (71.4%)	0 (0.0%)	7 (100.0%)
Total	40 (47.6%)	39 (46.4%)	5 (6.0%)	84 (100.0%)

Additional analysis

Most students found the online modules very useful [46 (54.8%)] or useful [31 (36.9%)] for their current research (p < 0.001, Table 9) and very useful [44 (52.4%)] or useful [34 (40.5%)] for their future career (p < 0.001, Table 10). Most students [57 (67.9%), p < 0.001] said they would be very likely to recommend the online training to colleagues (Table 11). A significant proportion of those surveyed [57 (68.7%), p < 0.001] found the online delivery of the modules more effective for their needs than face-to-face delivery (Table 12).

Table 9. How useful was the online training module for your current research?

Module	How useful was the online training module for current research?					Total
	Very useful	Useful	Neutral	Not useful	Not at all useful
Data Analysis with RStudio	14 (56.0%)	8 (32.0%)	3 (12.0%)	0 (0.0%)	0 (0.0%)	25 (100.0%)
Effective Leadership and Management Skills	5 (35.7%)	7 (50.0%)	1 (7.1%)	1 (7.1%)	0 (0.0%)	14 (100.0%)
Science Writing and Presenting Skills	10 (47.6%)	10 (47.6%)	1 (4.8%)	0 (0.0%)	0 (0.0%)	21 (100.0%)
Statistical Analysis for Research	13 (76.5%)	3 (17.6%)	1 (5.9%)	0 (0.0%)	0 (0.0%)	17 (100.0%)
Media Skills for Scientists	4 (57.1%)	3 (42.9%)	0 (0.0%)	0 (0.0%)	0 (0.0%)	7 (100.0%)
Total	46 (54.8%)	31 (36.9%)	6 (7.1%)	1 (1.2%)	0 (0.0%)	84 (100.0%)

Table 10. How useful was the online training module for your future career?

Module	How useful was the online training module for future career?					Total
	Very useful	Useful	Neutral	Not useful	Not at all useful
Data Analysis with RStudio	13 (52.0%)	9 (36.0%)	3 (12.0%)	0 (0.0%)	0 (0.0%)	25 (100.0%)
Effective Leadership and Management Skills	4 (28.6%)	9 (64.3%)	0 (0.0%)	1 (7.1%)	0 (0.0%)	14 (100.0%)
Science Writing and Presenting Skills	11 (52.4%)	9 (42.9%)	1 (4.8%)	0 (0.0%)	0 (0.0%)	21 (100.0%)
Statistical Analysis for Research	12 (70.6%)	5 (29.4%)	0 (0.0%)	0 (0.0%)	0 (0.0%)	17 (100.0%)
Media Skills for Scientists	4 (57.1%)	2 (28.6%)	1 (14.3%)	0 (0.0%)	0 (0.0%)	7 (100.0%)
Total	44 (52.4%)	34 (40.5%)	5 (6.0%)	1 (1.2%)	0 (0.0%)	84 (100.0%)

Table 11. How likely would you recommend this online training module to a colleague?

Module	How likely would you recommend this online training module to a colleague?					Total
	Very likely	Likely	Neutral	Not likely	Not at all likely
Data Analysis with RStudio	15 (60.0%)	7 (28.0%)	2 (8.0%)	1 (4.0%)	0 (0.0%)	25 (100.0%)
Effective Leadership and Management Skills	8 (57.1%)	5 (35.7%)	1 (7.1%)	0 (0.0%)	0 (0.0%)	14 (100.0%)
Science Writing and Presenting Skills	14 (66.7%)	3 (14.3%)	3 (14.3%)	1 (4.8%)	0 (0.0%)	21 (100.0%)
Statistical Analysis for Research	15 (88.2%)	2 (11.8%)	0 (0.0%)	0 (0.0%)	0 (0.0%)	17 (100.0%)
Media Skills for Scientists	5 (71.4%)	1 (14.3%)	1 (14.3%)	0 (0.0%)	0 (0.0%)	7 (100.0%)
Total	57 (67.9%)	18 (21.4%)	7 (8.3%)	2 (2.4%)	0 (0.0%)	84 (100.0%)

Table 12. Effectiveness of online delivery compared to face-to-face delivery.

Module	More effective for needs			Total
	Online	Face-to-face	Other - Combination
Data Analysis with RStudio	21 (84.0%)	3 (12.0%)	1 (4.0%)	25 (100.0%)
Effective Leadership and Management Skills	9 (64.3%)	4 (28.6%)	1 (7.1%)	14 (100.0%)
Science Writing and Presenting Skills	12 (57.1%)	9 (42.9%)	0 (0.0%)	21 (100.0%)
Statistical Analysis for Research	14 (87.5%)	2 (12.5%)	0 (0.0%)	16 (100.0%)
Media Skills for Scientists	1 (14.3%)	5 (71.4%)	1 (14.3%)	7 (100.0%)
Total	57 (68.7%)	23 (27.7%)	3 (3.6%)	83 (100.0%)

Discussion

It is well established that transversal skills training is an essential component to doctoral education to widen the professional identity of PhD students and opportunities for employment in the months after completion of their PhD (Hancock and Walsh 2016). Feedback from employers in agriculture and food supports the opinion that subject knowledge alone does not provide sufficient capability to function effectively in a given role. Transversal skills in self-efficacy, communication, emotional intelligence, working in teams, data analysis and organisational skills have a significant impact on success in the workplace (Allan and Rowsell 2017).

Transversal skills development in now incorporated into many doctoral programmes although the level of delivery varies by country and sector (OECD 2012). We have been providing transferrable skills training in the School of Agriculture and Food Science at UCD for over 15 years, but up to now this training has been delivered face-to-face on the university campus. The COVID-19 pandemic necessitated the transfer of this teaching to an online format in a short period of time. As far back as 2002 Jones and Fitzgibbon reported the advantages of online for delivery of skills training in a university setting. We wanted to measure student satisfaction with online teaching and assess if this mode of delivery should continue to be offered when there was no longer a need for social distancing.

We wanted to investigate if students perceived that the LOs for the individual modules were achieved and to understand student satisfaction and feedback for online delivery. Over the period June 2020 to June 2021, we delivered five unique modules to 168 postgraduate students across three Colleges. Surveys were sent to each student cohort of the five modules with a response rate of 50.0% (84 students). Our primary analysis examined if LOs were achieved in the opinion of the students, by online delivery. Across all 84 students there were 406 LOs were assessed. From these LOs 394 [(97.0%), p < 0.001] vast majority of LOs were perceived as met by the students. From the 12 instances of LOs not met online, 8 (66.7%) LOs would have been better met face-to-face according to the students surveyed.

A secondary analysis was to understand the perceived advantages and disadvantages of online delivery. All respondents cited convenience as being an advantage of online delivery with a significant majority finding visibility of materials easier. This was specified as especially useful for both data analysis modules where other students could share their screen so that the class could benefit from the learnings. The staggered delivery facilitating the application of learning was also favoured by many respondents. With timing planned over several weeks, students had time to think and reflect in between teaching sessions (Zohar and Ben David 2009) supporting students in identifying more effective learning strategies and more informed choices (Pintrich 2002). 67 (80.7%) students found the online delivery brought the advantage of them learning at their own pace and they found it was easy to ask questions and interact with the lecturer. These findings support evidence from other research suggesting significant benefits associated with this rapid digitalisation of education (Strielkowski 2020; Cesco et al. 2021) which will likely remain after restrictions are eased and on campus teaching can return. According to the students, aspects of the modules that would be better delivered face-to-face include conversations with other attendees [71 (87.7%) students, p < 0.001] and interactions with facilitator/speakers/module coordinator [68 (81.9%) students, p < 0.001] and while [44 (54.3%)] students thought it was easier to ask questions face-to-face and 31 (38.8%) students thought the immersive 3-day experience would be of benefit, neither were found to be statistically significant. Individual comments supported the benefits of face-to-face delivery for certain areas. Interestingly these related to the Science Writing and Presenting Skills module and the Effective Leadership and Management Skills module both of which involve more discussion and group activities. Students commented that some of the more sensitive topics like having difficult conversations or managing others would be strengthened with a face-to-face session and consideration will be given to including these comments in the next iteration of both programmes.

The availability of the modules online enabled students to receive credits as part of the structured PhD programme within the University. 40 (47.6%) students would have been under pressure to obtain the necessary credits required as part of the structured PhD if this training had not been delivered online. Advantages and disadvantages of credit weighting associated with transversal skills development is discussed in the OECD report (OECD 2012). The perceived advantage of accreditation is bringing credibility and visibility to professional development within education programmes, where disadvantages could be seen as being a ‘tick box’ exercise rather than a recognising the importance within doctoral education programmes. Our experience has been that the structured PhD programme means that time is allocated to the doctoral student doing further modules which they otherwise may not get the permission from their supervisor for completing although there is evidence that supervisors are becoming more positive as the impact and value of training is better understood (Walsh et al. 2010).

77 (91.7%) of students found the online modules very useful or useful for their current research and 78 (92.9%) students found them either very useful or useful for their future role or career. A range of transferrable skills modules mean that a researcher can select to upskill on the specific needs relevant to their preferred career. The authors’ experience is that often students do not recognise, or struggle to put into words the professional skills they have developed during their research such as project management, time management, negotiation, managing challenging situations, problem solving and networking. The EUA (2009) emphasises the importance of students valuing and communicating these skills to the potential employer.

Most students [57 (67.9%), p < 0.001] said they would be very likely to recommend the online training to colleagues. These results support findings from others that doctoral students value these training opportunities and the training modules give them good feedback (Walsh et al. 2010; Gilbert et al. 2004). A significant proportion of those surveyed [57 (68.7%), p < 0.001] found the online delivery of the modules more effective for their needs than face-to-face delivery. This finding will influence our decision to continue to deliver postgraduate development programmes online for the coming academic year.

The experience and findings of the two data analysis modules were that the translation to online delivery was more straightforward, and the teaching followed structures that the students were more familiar with. We found that it is important to inform learners of what is expected from them and make it clear that there is a significant self-directed component of the course. Statistics teaching has been shown to be effective online by implementing the Seven Principles of Good Practice described by Chickering and Gamson (1987) and Bangert (2004). This importance was highlighted by the commitment of both instructor and student to make the teaching effective and the sessions to run smoothly. Several students referred to the homework, assignments, feedback and ability to ask questions at any point during the sessions as being the reasons the module was so successful in meeting their needs. Some wanted more time for the completion of exams, and this has now been included in future iterations. The instructor was available to provide supportive and corrective feedback in efforts to reduce learners’ frustrations.

Within the Effective Leadership and Management Skills module individual comments highlighted the value of understanding different leadership styles, having the opportunity for self-reflection, and exploring different potential career options. Giving doctoral students the ability to grow their communication skills and use of professional networks has been shown to build on build Human Capital and career opportunity (Germain-Alamartine et al. 2020; De Janasz and Forret 2008). Guest speaker sessions were identified as highlights to the modules. The session on career options and the guest lecture from career services in the university received special mention from several students. The benefits of career planning during the PhD leads to significant gains in career awareness and readiness. The types of initiatives within postgraduate education with a focus on career planning skills have been shown to be an effective way to prepare PhDs for their transition from university to careers (Layton et al. 2020) and is an integral part of the Effective Leadership and Management Skills module. The Know, See, Plan, Do model which we used with the Workbook developed to support the online component has been shown as a useful model to support leadership development and aligns with the metacognitive approach in supporting them to plan, monitor and evaluate their learning (Martin and Allen 2016).

A supportive environment between teacher and students has been shown to be key in ensuring quality and success of modules within PhD programmes (Martínez-Flisser et al. 2020). Several students gave positive feedback about the teaching relationship and learning community: ‘very clear and helpful’, ‘incredibly clear teacher’, ‘openminded and friendly coordinators’, ‘interactive and safe environment’, ‘put me at ease’ and ‘helped build my confidence’. The disadvantages of online delivery were seen as lack of contact with other attendees [71 (87.7%), p < 0.001] as well as reduced interactions with facilitator/speakers/module coordinator [68 (81.9%), p < 0.001]. Online communities have been identified as being especially important in the new paradigm of online delivery, student engagement is even more important to support learning in this new digital environment but remains a significant challenge. Simple routines of connecting, having video cameras on, asking questions, and signposting the objectives and content of the session can help. Extra sessions were offered to support during the module. During the Science Writing and Presenting Skills module some students struggled with procrastination and motivation and so an online protected writing session was set up where each week there was a Zoom class they could join where they would have the company of others to motivate them to write.

It is known that online teaching impacts on disadvantaged students the hardest (Nordmann et al. 2020). This emphasises the importance of building asynchronous content into online programmes so that students can learn at their own pace and consideration can be given to students’ individual circumstances including time zones and access to adequate technology, although this form of asynchronous online training relies on students having the skills of self-motivation and self-monitoring (Wiederhold 2020). A significant barrier to online education is the functioning broadband network infrastructure (Doyumğaç, Tanhan, and Kiymaz 2021). Adequate broadband network and infrastructure as well as suitable hardware devices and access to necessary software where required has been problematic in some instances and needs to be considered for when delivery of training is online to ensure equity of experience.

The benefit of face-to-face interaction must be balanced by the ability of students to be present on campus for these sessions. A significant number of students attending our online modules, although registered with the university for their PhD, are not based on campus and the logistics of attending in person poses a challenge. Increasingly some international students are based outside of the country and so these modules pose the only opportunity for them to be able to attend and learn the spectrum of skill development while accruing the number of credits they require as part of the Structured PhD Programme which is a mandatory component of the PhD and which without these modules being available online 47.6% of students would have struggled to obtain.

The specific range of skills required in different roles varies by sector. The broad range of specialities of the students attending our modules coupled with the diverse range of opportunities for employment available within government, non-profit and private sector mean that students need to apply metacognitive approaches in identifying and maximising the learnings from the transversal skills module that they attend. We plan to build on metacognitive strategies of teaching, learning and reflecting for students in future modules. Evidence from this study demonstrates the effectiveness and preference for online delivery of this training for postgraduate students. Student satisfaction with online delivery of postgraduate training has shown similar satisfaction with content, presentation, trainer and relevance as with face-to-face training, but there was a small effect in favour of in-person training in professional benefit and room for active participation (Soll, Fuchs, and Mehl 2021). The effectiveness, benefits and opportunities of online teaching compared to the face-to-face equivalent is challenging to validate (Adedoyin and Soykan 2020).

Students who prefer or require the flexibility of on-line instruction must be willing to invest the time necessary to complete the activities and assignments and implement self-directed learning to get the greatest benefit these modules have to offer. Metacognition can support a third level student in understanding the applicability of their knowledge into other settings, transferrable/transversal skills, and that understanding the role of metacognition in this process will not only help to support employability, but also lifelong learning of the graduate (Scharff et al. 2017).

With the changing career landscape, doctoral students now face pressure to deliver on the research objectives, thesis and publications, while also building their professional competencies which align with their preferred career. By designing and delivering online transversal skills training that not only meets the LOs, but does so in a way which optimises metacognition, we can create an environment where students can plan and execute their developmental needs effectively and efficiently to serve their needs and best prepare them for making a significant contribution to society.

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to acknowledge and thank the reviewers of Irish Educational Studies for their detailed comments and constructive suggestions.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Additional information

Notes on contributors

Julie Dowsett

Julie Dowsett, RD MSc is a Executive Coach with Professional Diplomas in both Entrepreneurial Education and University Teaching and Learning. In her role in Executive Education at the School of Agriculture and Food Science in UCD she is module coordinator for a suite of PhD transferrable skills modules and Programme Director for Professional Development Programmes designed for postgraduates and industry.

Seán Lacey

Seán Lacey, BSc, PhD, MBA is the Research Integrity & Compliance Officer in Munster Technological University (MTU). Previous to this role, Seán was a Senior Lecturer in the Department of Mathematics (MTU, Cork Campuses). Research interests include the role of statistical analysis in real-world data analysis issues with a special interest in promoting good practice in research ethics, research integrity and open research.