research skills and online communication in higher education

Information

• Author Services

Initiatives

You are accessing a machine-readable page. In order to be human-readable, please install an RSS reader.

All articles published by MDPI are made immediately available worldwide under an open access license. No special permission is required to reuse all or part of the article published by MDPI, including figures and tables. For articles published under an open access Creative Common CC BY license, any part of the article may be reused without permission provided that the original article is clearly cited. For more information, please refer to https://www.mdpi.com/openaccess .

Feature papers represent the most advanced research with significant potential for high impact in the field. A Feature Paper should be a substantial original Article that involves several techniques or approaches, provides an outlook for future research directions and describes possible research applications.

Feature papers are submitted upon individual invitation or recommendation by the scientific editors and must receive positive feedback from the reviewers.

Editor’s Choice articles are based on recommendations by the scientific editors of MDPI journals from around the world. Editors select a small number of articles recently published in the journal that they believe will be particularly interesting to readers, or important in the respective research area. The aim is to provide a snapshot of some of the most exciting work published in the various research areas of the journal.

Original Submission Date Received: .

• Active Journals
• Find a Journal
• Proceedings Series
• For Authors
• For Reviewers
• For Editors
• For Librarians
• For Publishers
• For Societies
• For Conference Organizers
• Open Access Policy
• Institutional Open Access Program
• Special Issues Guidelines
• Editorial Process
• Research and Publication Ethics
• Article Processing Charges
• Testimonials
• Preprints.org
• SciProfiles
• Encyclopedia

Article Menu

• Subscribe SciFeed
• Google Scholar
• on Google Scholar
• Table of Contents

Find support for a specific problem in the support section of our website.

Please let us know what you think of our products and services.

Visit our dedicated information section to learn more about MDPI.

JSmol Viewer

Modern communication methods in higher education: a post-covid-19 analysis  †.

1. Introduction

1.1. effective modern communication methods and challenges, 1.1.1. challenges (tutors), 1.1.2. challenges (learners), 1.1.3. challenges (administration), 2. materials and methods, 3. discussion and interpretation, 3.1. communication methods adopted during covid-19, 3.1.1. flipped classroom: an effective method, 3.1.2. problem-based learning, 3.1.3. cooperative learning methodology, 3.1.4. 4′quadrant approach, 3.2. assessment methods adopted during covid-19, 3.2.1. assessment and evaluation method, 3.2.2. outcome-based learning, 3.3. comparative analysis of communication methods in higher education, 3.4. adaptation of hybrid learning methods: swot analysis, 3.5. modern communication methods in effective higher education, 4. conclusions, author contributions, institutional review board statement, informed consent statement, data availability statement, acknowledgments, conflicts of interest.

• Pandey, A.; Savita Mishra, B. Learning Pedagogy in Higher Education , 1st ed.; Mittal Publications: New Delhi, India, 2022; pp. 11–32. [ Google Scholar ]
• Benson, A. Using online Learning to meet workforce demand: A case study of stakeholder influence. Q. Rev. Distance Educ. 2002 , 3 , 443–452. [ Google Scholar ]
• Conrad, D. Deep in the hearts of learners: Insights into the nature of the online community. J. Distance Educ. 2002 , 17 , 1–19. [ Google Scholar ]
• Butt, A. Student Views on Using A Flipped Classroom Approach: Evidence From Australia. Bus. Educ. Accredit. 2014 , 6 , 33–43. [ Google Scholar ]
• Yew, E.H.J.; Schmidt, H.G. Evidence for constructive, self-regulatory, and collaborative processes in problem-based learning. Adv. Health Sci. Educ. 2009 , 14 , 251–273. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Kim, K.-J.; Bonk, C.J. The future of online teaching and learning in higher education: The survey says. Educ. Q. 2006 , 4 , 22–30. [ Google Scholar ]
• McBrien, J.L.; Cheng, R.; Jones, P. Virtual spaces: Employing a synchronous online classroom facilitates student engagement in online Learning. Int. Rev. Res. Open Distrib. Learn. 2009 , 10 , 1–17. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Omar, A.; Liu, L.C.; Koong, K.S. From disaster recovery to mobile Learning: A case study. Int. J. Mob. Learn. Organ. 2008 , 2 , 4–7. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Singh, V.; Thurman, A. How many ways can we define Online Learning? A systematic literature review of definitions of Online Learning (1988–2018). Am. J. Distance Educ. 2019 , 33 , 289–306. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Song, L.; Singleton, E.S.; Hill, J.R.; Koh, M.H. Improving online Learning: Student perceptions of useful and challenging characteristics. Internet High. Educ. 2004 , 7 , 59–70. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Larson, S.; Yamamoto, J. Flipping the college spreadsheet skills classroom: Initial empirical results. J. Emerg. Trends Comput. Inf. Sci. 2013 , 4 , 751–758. [ Google Scholar ]
• Gilboy, M.B.; Heinrichs, S.; Pazzaglia, G. Enhancing student engagement using the flipped classroom. J. Nutr. Educ. Behav. 2015 , 47 , 109–114. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Hmelo-Silver, C.E. Problem-based learning: What and how do students learn? Educ. Psychol. Rev. 2004 , 16 , 235–266. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Strobel, J.; van Barneveld, A. When is PBL more effective? A meta-synthesis of meta-analyses comparing PBL to conventional classrooms. Interdiscip. J. Probl.-Based Learn. 2009 , 3 , 4. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Johnson, D.W.; Johnson, R.T. An Educational Psychology Success Story: Social Interdependence Theory and Cooperative Learning. J. Educ. Res. 2009 , 38 , 365–379. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Glatthorn, A.A. Outcome Based Education: Reform and the Curriculum Process. J. Curric. Superv. 1993 , 8 , 354–363. [ Google Scholar ]
• Pilli, O.; Admiraal, W.; Salli, A. MOOCs: Innovation or stagnation? Turk. Online J. Distance Educ. 2018 , 19 , 169–181. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Crouse, T.; Rice, M.; Mellard, D. Learning to serve students with disabilities online: Teachers’ perspectives. J. Online Learn. Res. 2018 , 4 , 123–145. [ Google Scholar ]
• Hampsten, K. Embracing discomfort resisting a return to “the good old days”: A call to communication educators. Forum: Pandemic pedagogy and student learning. Commun. Educ. 2021 , 70 , 208–210. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Wilke, D.; King, E.; Ashmore, M.; Stanley, C. Can clinical skills be taught online? Comparing skill development between online and F2F students using a blinded review. J. Soc. Work. Educ. 2016 , 52 , 484–492. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Akcil, U.; Bastas, M. Examination of university students’ attitudes towards e-learning during the COVID-19 pandemic process and the relationship of digital citizenship. Contemp. Educ. Technol. 2021 , 13 , 291. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Trammell, B.A.; LaForge, C. Common challenges for instructors in large online courses: Strategies to mitigate student and instructor frustration. J. Educ. Online 2017 , 14 , 1–10. [ Google Scholar ]
• Singh, J.; Steele, K.; Singh, L. Combining the Best of Online and Face-to-Face Learning: Hybrid and Blended Learning Approach for COVID-19, Post Vaccine, & Post-Pandemic World. J. Educ. Technol. Systems 2021 , 50 , 140–171. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]

Click here to enlarge figure

Share and Cite

Bharti; Sharma, A.; Pandey, A. Modern Communication Methods in Higher Education: A Post-COVID-19 Analysis. Eng. Proc. 2023 , 59 , 161. https://doi.org/10.3390/engproc2023059161

Bharti, Sharma A, Pandey A. Modern Communication Methods in Higher Education: A Post-COVID-19 Analysis. Engineering Proceedings . 2023; 59(1):161. https://doi.org/10.3390/engproc2023059161

Bharti, Abhishika Sharma, and Anand Pandey. 2023. "Modern Communication Methods in Higher Education: A Post-COVID-19 Analysis" Engineering Proceedings 59, no. 1: 161. https://doi.org/10.3390/engproc2023059161

Article Metrics

Article access statistics, further information, mdpi initiatives, follow mdpi.

Subscribe to receive issue release notifications and newsletters from MDPI journals

Browse Econ Literature

• Working papers
• Software components
• Book chapters
• JEL classification

More features

• Subscribe to new research

RePEc Biblio

Author registration.

• Economics Virtual Seminar Calendar NEW!

Some searches may not work properly. We apologize for the inconvenience.

The Importance Of Online Communication In Higher Education

• Author & abstract
• 1 Citations
• Related works & more

Corrections

(Romanian-American University, Bucharest, Romania)

Suggested Citation

Download full text from publisher.

Follow serials, authors, keywords & more

Public profiles for Economics researchers

Various research rankings in Economics

RePEc Genealogy

Who was a student of whom, using RePEc

Curated articles & papers on economics topics

Upload your paper to be listed on RePEc and IDEAS

New papers by email

Subscribe to new additions to RePEc

EconAcademics

Blog aggregator for economics research

Cases of plagiarism in Economics

About RePEc

Initiative for open bibliographies in Economics

News about RePEc

Questions about IDEAS and RePEc

RePEc volunteers

Participating archives

Publishers indexing in RePEc

Privacy statement

Found an error or omission?

Opportunities to help RePEc

Get papers listed

Have your research listed on RePEc

Open a RePEc archive

Have your institution's/publisher's output listed on RePEc

Get RePEc data

Use data assembled by RePEc

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

• View all journals
• Explore content
• About the journal
• Publish with us
• Sign up for alerts
• Open access
• Published: 09 September 2024

Navigating post-pandemic challenges through institutional research networks and talent management

• Muhammad Zada   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0003-0466-4229 1 , 2 ,
• Imran Saeed 3 ,
• Jawad Khan   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-6673-7617 4 &
• Shagufta Zada 5 , 6  

Humanities and Social Sciences Communications volume  11 , Article number:  1164 ( 2024 ) Cite this article

20 Accesses

Metrics details

• Business and management

Institutions actively seek global talent to foster innovation in the contemporary landscape of scientific research, education, and technological progress. The COVID-19 pandemic underscored the importance of international collaboration as researchers and academicians faced limitations in accessing labs and conducting research experiments. This study uses a research collaboration system to examine the relationship between organizational intellectual capital (Human and structural Capital) and team scientific and technological performance. Further, this study underscores the moderating role of top management support. Using a time-lagged study design, data were collected from 363 participants in academic and research institutions. The results show a positive relationship between organizational intellectual capital (Human and structural Capital) and team scientific and technological performance using a research collaboration system. Moreover, top management support positively moderates the study’s hypothesized relationships. The study’s findings contribute significantly to existing knowledge in this field, with implications for academia, researchers, and government focused on technology transmission, talent management, research creative collaboration, supporting innovation, scientific research, technological progress, and preparing for future challenges.

Similar content being viewed by others

Towards understanding the characteristics of successful and unsuccessful collaborations: a case-based team science study

Remote collaboration fuses fewer breakthrough ideas

Interpersonal relationships drive successful team science: an exemplary case-based study

Introduction.

Global talent management and the talent hunt within research and educational institutions have become extensively discussed topics in international human resource management (HRM) (Al et al., 2022 ). Global talent management is intricately connected to the notion of finding, managing, and facilitating the fetch of research, skills, techniques, and knowledge among team members and progress in education and technology (Kwok, 2022 ; Sommer et al., 2017 ). This topic assumes a greater position when it is looked at through the lens of research, academicians, and educational institutions serving as a means of achieving scientific and technological advancement and performance (Kaliannan et al., 2023 ; Patnaik et al., 2022 ). Effective knowledge management and transfer occur between teams engaged in cross-border research collaborations (Davenport et al., 2002 ; Fasi, 2022 ). Effective team management, global talent recruitment, and the exchange of scientific knowledge across national boundaries face different challenges due to the swift growth of economic and political fanaticism. This is particularly evident in advanced economies that rely heavily on knowledge-based industries (Vaiman et al., 2018 ). Research and educational sectors are encountering significant challenges in effectively hunting and managing international talent, particularly in the aftermath of the COVID-19 pandemic, during which approximately half of the global workforce faced the possibility of job loss (Almeida et al., 2020 ; Radhamani et al., 2021 ). Due to the implementation of lockdown measures by governments, many research intuitions are facing significant issues, and the pandemic has changed the situation; work was stuck, and scientists around the globe are thinking to be prepared for this kind of situation, which is possible through the use scientific research collaboration platforms. These platforms serve as a means to exchange research and knowledge, which is crucial in the talent hunt and management (Haak-Saheem, 2020 ). In the situation above, wherein limitations exist regarding the exchange of research and knowledge within the institutions, it becomes imperative for the top management of institutions to incentivize employees to engage the team in knowledge sharing actively and achieve team-level scientific and technological advancement. It can be achieved by implementing a research collaboration system that facilitates knowledge exchange and contributes to effective talent hunt and management (Haider et al., 2022 ; Xu et al., 2024 ).

A research collaboration network is a tool for scientific and technological advancement and talent management encompassing various processes and practices to facilitate the sharing, integration, translation, and transformation of scientific knowledge (Biondi & Russo, 2022 ). During and after the COVID-19 era characterized by travel restrictions, research networking platforms serve as valuable tools for students and researchers located in variance regions to engage in the exchange of research knowledge and achieve team-level scientific and technological advancement (Yang et al., 2024 ). Enhancing intellectual capital (IC) within the organizations is imperative within this framework (Pellegrini et al., 2022 ; Vătămănescu et al., 2023 ). Intellectual capital (IC) is the intangible assets owned by an organization that has the potential to generate value (Stewart, 1991 ). An organization’s intellectual capital (IC) includes human and structural capital (Marinelli et al., 2022 ). According to Vătămănescu et al. ( 2023 ), the organization can effectively manage the skills and abilities of its team members across different countries by properly utilizing both human and structural capital and establishing a strong research collaboration system with the help of top management support. This capability remains intact even during and after the COVID-19 pandemic. This study emphasizes the importance of talent hunt and management within research and educational institutions in the post-COVID-19 pandemic because of every country’s following implementation of lockdown measures. Our study focuses on the implication of facilitating the exchange of research, knowledge, and techniques among team members during and after this period. The effective way to share research expertise and techniques in such a scenario is through a research collaboration network (O’Dwyer et al., 2023 ).

While previous research has extensively explored talent management in various industries (Al Ariss, Cascio, & Paauwe, 2014 ; Susanto, Sawitri, Ali, & Rony, 2023 ), a noticeable gap exists in the body of knowledge regarding the discussion of global talent acquisition and management within research and academic institutions, particularly within volatile environments and about scientific and technological advancements (Harsch & Festing, 2020 ). The objective of this research is to fill this research gap.1) To investigate the strategies of how research and educational institutions hunt and manage gobble talent. 2)To analyze the impact of human and structural capital and team scientific and technological performance using a research collaboration system. 3) To examine the moderating effect of top management support on the IC to use the research collation network among institution research teams and scientific and technological performance.

In addition, current research contributes significantly to the literature by elucidating the pivotal role of organizational intellectual capital in strengthening scientific and technological performance through research collaborative networks. This study advances our grip on how internal resources drive innovation and research outcomes by empirically demonstrating the positive association between human and structural capital and team-level scientific and technological performance. Furthermore, the current study highlights the moderating effect of top management support, suggesting that management commitment can amplify the benefits of intellectual capital (human and structural capital). These results show a subtle perspective on how organizations can influence their intellectual assets to foster higher levels of productivity and innovation. The study’s theoretical contributions lie in integrating resource-based views and organizational theory with performance metrics, while its practical implications provide actionable insights for institutions aiming to optimize their intellectual resources and management practices. This research also sets the stage for future inquiries into the dynamics of intellectual capital and management support in various collaborative contexts.

Research theories, literature review, and hypotheses development

Research theories.

The focus of the current study pertains to the challenges surrounding talent management within institutions during and after the COVID-19 pandemic(Fernandes et al., 2023 ). Global talent management is intently linked to the objective of enhancing the intellectual capital of the organization (Zada et al., 2023 ). Considering the COVID-19 pandemic, which raised much more attention toward scientific and technological advancement, the academic sector has noticed an observable shift towards utilizing research collaboration platforms to share scientific knowledge effectively and achieve scientific and technological performance. Intellectual capital encompasses five distinct resource categories, as identified by Roos and Roos ( 1997 ), comprising three immaterial and two touchable resources. Intangible resources such as human capital, structural capital, and customer capital are complemented by tangible resources, encompassing monetary and physical assets. Global talent management encompasses human and structural capital management (Felin & Hesterly, 2007 ). The enhancement of talent management capabilities within the institution can be achieved by cultivating institution-specific competencies in both human and structural capital (Al Ariss et al., 2014 ). This concept lines up with the theoretical background of the resource-based view (RBV) theory presented by Barney ( 1991 ). According to this theory, organizations should prioritize examining their core resources to recognize valuable assets, competencies, and capabilities that can contribute to attaining a sustainable competitive advantage (Barney, 1991 ).

During and after the COVID-19 scenario, virtual platforms are utilized by institutions to engage students and staff abroad in research and knowledge exchange, which is part of global talent management. Staff possessing adequate knowledge repositories will likely participate in knowledge exchange activities. Therefore, organizations must improve their internal resources to enhance talent management, as per the fundamental principle of the RBV theory (Barney, 1991 ). Enhancing internal resources entails strengthening an organization’s human capital, which refers to its staff’s scientific research and technical skills and knowledge and structural capital. Strengthening these two resources can facilitate the institution in effectively sharing knowledge through a research collaboration platform, consequently enhancing their global talent management endeavors and contributing to the team’s scientific and technological performance.

In this research, we also utilize institutional theory (Oliver, 1997 ) and Scott ( 2008 ) as a framework to examine the utilization of research collaboration social platforms by faculty of institutions. Our focus is on exchanging research and technical knowledge within the climate of global talent management during and after the COVID-19 epidemic. According to Scott ( 2008 ), “Institutional theory is a widely recognized theoretical framework emphasizing rational myths, isomorphism, and legitimacy (p. 78)”. For electronic data interchange, the theory has been utilized in technology adoption research (Damsgaard, Lyytinen ( 2001 )) and educational institutes (J. et al., 2007 ). In the pandemic situation, institutional theory provides researchers with a framework to analyze the motivations of employees within institutions to engage in teams to achieve team-level scientific and technological performance through a research collaboration system. According to institutional theory, organizations should utilize a research collaboration network to ensure that their staff do not need to compromise their established norms, values, and expectations. During the COVID-19 pandemic, numerous countries implemented limitations on international movement as a preventive measure. Consequently, there has been a growing identification of the potential importance of utilizing an institutional research collaboration platform for facilitating the online exchange of knowledge, skills, research techniques, and global talent management among employees of institutions operating across various countries. The active support of staff by the top management of an institution can play a key role in expediting the implementation of social networks for research collaboration within the institution (Zada et al., 2023 ).

Literature review

An institution’s scientific and technological advancement is contingent upon optimal resource utilization (Muñoz et al., 2022 ). Global talent hunt and management encompasses utilizing information and communication technologies (ICT) to provide a way for the exchange of research knowledge and techniques, thereby enabling the implementation of knowledge-based strategies (Muñoz et al., 2022 ). In a high research-level turbulent environment, it becomes imperative to effectively manage human capital (HUC) to facilitate the appropriate exchange of research knowledge and techniques (Salamzadeh, Tajpour, Hosseini, & Brahmi, 2023 ). Research shows that transferring research knowledge and techniques across national boundaries, exchanging best practices, and cultivating faculty skills are crucial factors in maintaining competitiveness (Farahian, Parhamnia, & Maleki, 2022 ; Shao & Ariss, 2020 ).

It is widely acknowledged in scholarly literature that there is a prevailing belief among individuals that talent possesses movability and that research knowledge and techniques can be readily transferred (Bakhsh et al., 2022 ; Council, 2012 ). However, it is essential to note that the matter is more complex than it may initially appear (Biondi & Russo, 2022 ). The proliferation of political and economic nationalism in developed knowledge-based economies poses a significant risk to exchanging research knowledge and techniques among faculty members in research and educational institutions worldwide (Arocena & Sutz, 2021 ). During and after COVID-19, knowledge transfer can be effectively facilitated by utilizing a research collaboration network platform (Duan & Li, 2023 ; Sulaiman et al., 2022 ). This circumstance is noticeable within the domain of international research and development, wherein academic professionals have the opportunity to utilize research collaboration platforms as a means of disseminating valuable research knowledge and techniques to their counterparts in various nations (Jain et al., 2022 ).

The scientific and technological advancement of institutions linked by intuition research and development level and research and development depend on the intuition’s quality of research, knowledge, and management (Anshari & Hamdan, 2022 ). However, there is a need to enhance the research team’s capacity to learn and transfer research knowledge and techniques effectively. Research suggests that institutional human capital (HUC) is critical in managing existing resources and hunting international talent, particularly after the COVID-19 pandemic (Sigala, Ren, Li, & Dioko, 2023 ). Human capital refers to the combined implicit and crystal clear knowledge of employees within an institution and their techniques and capabilities to effectively apply this knowledge to achieve scientific and technological advancements (Al-Tit et al., 2022 ). According to Baron and Armstrong ( 2007 ) Human capital refers to the abilities, knowledge, techniques, skills, and expertise of individuals, particularly research team members, that are relevant to the current task.

Furthermore, HUC encompasses the scope of individuals who can contribute to this reservoir of research knowledge, techniques, and expertise through individual learning. As the literature shows, the concept of IC encompasses the inclusion of structural capital (STC), which requires fortification through the implementation of a proper global talent acquisition and management system (Pak et al., 2023 ; Phan et al., 2020 ). STC encompasses various mechanisms to enhance an institution’s performance and productivity (Barpanda, 2021 ). STC is extensively acknowledged as an expedited framework for HUC, as discussed by Bontis ( 1998 ) and further explored by Gogan, Duran, and Draghici ( 2015 ). During and after the COVID-19 epidemic, a practical approach to global talent management involves leveraging research collaboration network platforms to facilitate knowledge exchange among research teams (Arslan et al., 2021 ). However, the crucial involvement of top management support is imperative to effectively manage talent by utilizing research collaboration network platforms for knowledge transfer (Zada et al., 2023 ). Nevertheless, the existing body of knowledge needs to adequately explore the topic of talent management about knowledge transfer on research collaboration platforms, particularly in the context of institution-active management support (Tan & Md. Noor, 2013 ).

Conceptual model and research hypothesis

By analyzing pertinent literature and theoretical frameworks, we have identified the factors influencing staff intention in research and academic institutions to utilize research collaboration networks after the COVID-19 pandemic and achieve scientific and technical performance. This study aims to explain the determinants. Additionally, this study has considered the potential influence of top management support as a moderator on the associations between education and research institution staff intention on IC to utilize research collaboration platforms in the post-COVID-19 era and predictors. Through this discourse, we shall generate several hypotheses to serve as the basis for constructing a conceptual model (see Fig. 1 ).

Relationships between study variables: human capital, structural capital, top management support, and team scientific and technological performance. Source: authors’ development.

Human capital and team scientific and technological performance

According to Dess and Picken ( 2000 ), HUC encompasses individuals’ capabilities, knowledge, skills, research techniques, and experience, including staff and supervisors, relevant to the specific task. Human capital also refers to the ability to pay to this reservoir of knowledge, techniques, and expertize through individual learning (Dess & Picken, 2000 ). HUC refers to the combinations of characteristics staff possess, including but not limited to research proficiency, technical aptitude, business acumen, process comprehension, and other similar competencies (Kallmuenzer et al., 2021 ). The HUC is considered an institutional repository of knowledge, as Bontis and Fitz‐enz ( 2002 ) indicated, with its employees serving as representatives. The concept of HUC refers to the combined abilities, research proficiency, and competencies that individuals possess to address and resolve operational challenges within an institutional setting (Barpanda, 2021 ; Yang & Xiangming, 2024 ). The human capital possessed by institutions includes crucial attributes that allow organizations to acquire significant internal resources that are valuable, difficult to replicate, scarce, and cannot be substituted. It aligns with the theoretical framework of the RBV theory, as suggested by Barney ( 1991 ). IC is extensively recognized as a main factor in revitalizing organizational strategy and promoting creativity and innovation. It is crucial to enable organizations to acquire and effectively disseminate knowledge among their employees, contribute to talent management endeavors, and achieve scientific and technological performance (Alrowwad et al., 2020 ; He et al., 2023 ). Human capital is linked to intrinsic aptitude, cognitive capabilities, creative problem-solving, exceptional talent, and the capacity for originality (Bontis & Fitz‐enz, 2002 ). In talent management, there is a focus on enhancing scientific and technological performance and development. According to Shao and Ariss ( 2020 ), HUC is expected to strengthen employee motivation to utilize research collaboration networks for scientific knowledge-sharing endeavors. Based on these arguments, we proposed that.

Hypothesis 1 Human capital (HUC) positively impacts team scientific and technological performance using a research collaboration system.

Structural capital and team scientific and technological Performance

According to Mehralian, Nazari, and Ghasemzadeh ( 2018 ) structural capital (STC) encompasses an organization’s formalized knowledge assets. It consists of the structures and mechanisms employed by the institution to enhance its talent management endeavors. The concept of STC is integrated within the framework of institutions’ programs, laboratory settings, and databases (Cavicchi & Vagnoni, 2017 ). The significance of an organization’s structural capital as an internal tangible asset that bolsters its human capital has been recognized by scholars such as Secundo, Massaro, Dumay, and Bagnoli ( 2018 ), and This concept also lines up with the RBV theory (J. Barney, 1991 ). The strategic assets of an organization encompass its capabilities, organizational culture, patents, and trademarks (Gogan et al., 2015 ).

Furthermore, Birasnav, Mittal, and Dalpati ( 2019 ) Suggested that these strategic assets promote high-level organizational performance, commonly called STC. Literature shows that STC encompasses an organization’s collective expertise and essential knowledge that remains intact even when employees depart (Alrowwad et al., 2020 ; Mehralian et al., 2018 ; Sarwar & Mustafa, 2023 ). The institution’s socialization, training, and development process facilitates the transfer of scientific research knowledge, skills, and expertise to its team (Arocena & Sutz, 2021 ; Marchiori et al., 2022 ). The STC is broadly recognized as having important potential and is a highly productive resource for generating great value. STC motivates its team member to share expertise with their counterparts at subordinate organizations by utilizing an institution’s research collaboration network and achieving team-level scientific and technological performance. This method remains effective even in challenging environments where traditional means of data collection, face-to-face meetings, and travel are not feasible (Secundo et al., 2016 ). In light of the above literature and theory, we propose the following hypothesis.

Hypothesis 2: Structural capital (STC) positively impacts team scientific and technological performance using a research collaboration system.

Top management support as a moderator

If the relationship between two constructs is not constant, the existence of a third construct can potentially affect this relationship by enhancing or diminishing its strength. In certain cases, the impact of a third construct can adjust the trajectory of the relationship between two variables. The variable in question is commonly called the “moderating variable.” According to Zada et al. ( 2023 ), top management support to leaders efficiently encourages team members within institutions to share research scientific knowledge with their counterparts in different countries through international research collaboration systems. Similarly, another study shows that the active endorsement of the top management significantly affects the development of direct associations, thereby influencing the team and organization’s overall performance (Biondi & Russo, 2022 ; Phuong et al., 2024 ). Different studies have confirmed that top management support is crucial in fostering a conducive knowledge-sharing environment by offering necessary resources (Ali et al., 2021 ; Lee et al., 2016 ; Zada et al., 2023 ). During and after the COVID-19 epidemic, numerous nations implemented nonessential travel restrictions and lockdown measures. In the given context, utilizing a research collaboration system would effectively facilitate the exchange of research, skills, and knowledge among staff belonging to various subsidiaries of an institution (Rådberg & Löfsten, 2024 ; Rasheed et al., 2024 ). However, it is common for researchers to exhibit resistance to adopting a novel research technique, often citing various justifications for their reluctance. To address the initial hesitance of employees at subsidiary institutes towards utilizing research collaborative networking within the institute, top management must employ strategies that foster motivation, encouragement, and incentives. These measures help create an atmosphere where team members feel empowered to engage with the new system freely. Institutional theory asserts that top management support is crucial for aligning talent management with institutional norms. Human and structural capital, pivotal within the institutional framework, contributes to an institution’s capacity to attract and retain talent, enhancing legitimacy. Adaptation to scientific and technological advancements is imperative for international institutional competitiveness, as institutional theory dictates (Oliver, 1997 ). Grounded on the above discussion, we have hypothesized.

Hypothesis 3a : Top management support moderates the relationship between human capital (HUC) and team scientific and technological performance. Specifically, this relationship will be stronger for those with higher top management support and weaker for those with lower top management support.

Hypothesis 3b : Top management support moderates the relationship between structural capital (STC) and team scientific and technological performance through the use of research collaboration network platforms. Specifically, this relationship will be stronger for those with higher top management support and weaker for those with lower top management support.

Methods data and sample

Sample and procedures.

To test the proposed model, we collected data from respondents in China’s research and academic sector in three phases to mitigate standard method variance (Podsakoff, MacKenzie, Lee, & Podsakoff, 2003 ). In the first phase (T1-phase), respondents rated human capital, structural capital, and demographic information. After one month, respondents rated the team’s scientific and technological performance in the second phase (T2-phase). Following another one-month interval, respondents were asked to rate top management support in the third phase (T3-phase). In the first phase, after contacting 450 respondents, we received 417 usable questionnaires (92.66%). In the second phase, we received 403 usable questionnaires. In the third phase, we received 363 usable questionnaires (90.07%), constituting our final sample for interpreting the results. The sample comprises 63.4% male and 36.6% female respondents. The age distribution of the final sample was as follows: 25–30 years old (6.6%), 31–35 years old (57%), 36–40 years old (19.8%), and above 40 years old (16.5%). Regarding respondents’ experience, 45.7% had 1–5 years, 39.4% had 6–10 years, 11.3% had 11–15 years, and 3.6% had over 16 years. According to the respondents’ levels of education, 4.1% had completed bachelor’s degrees, 11.6% had earned master’s degrees, 78.8% were doctorate (PhD) scholars, and 5.5% were postdoctoral and above.

Measurement

To measure the variables, the current study adopted a questionnaire from previous literature, and age, gender, education, and experience were used as control variables. A five-point Likert scale was used (1 = strongly disagree to 5 = strongly agree). Human capital (HUC) was measured through an eight-item scale adopted by Kim, Atwater, Patel, and Smither ( 2016 ). The sample item is “The extent to which human capital of research and development department is competitive regarding team performance”. The self-reported scale developed by Nezam, Ataffar, Isfahani, and Shahin ( 2013 ) was adopted to measure structural capital. The scale consists of seven items. The sample scale item is “My organization emphasizes IT investment.” In order to measure top management support, a six-item scale was developed by Singh, Gupta, Busso, and Kamboj ( 2021 ), was adopted, and sample item includes “Sufficient incentives were provided by top management (TM) for achieving scientific and technological performance.” Finlay, the self-reported scale developed by Gonzalez-Mulé, Courtright, DeGeest, Seong, and Hong ( 2016 ) was adopted to gauge team scientific and technological performance and scales items are four. The sample item is “This team achieves its goals.”

Assessment of measurement model

In the process of employing AMOS for analysis, the initial step encompasses an assessment of the model to determine the strength and validity of the study variables. The evaluation of variable reliability conventionally revolves around two key aspects, which are indicator scale reliability and internal reliability. More precisely, indicator reliability is deemed to be recognized when factor loadings exceed the threshold of 0.60. In parallel, internal consistency reliability is substantiated by the attainment of values exceeding 0.70 for both Cronbach’s alpha and composite reliability, aligning with well-established and recognized guidelines (Ringle et al., 2020 ).

To gauge the reliability of construct indicators, we utilized two key metrics which are composite reliability (CR) and average variance extracted (AVE). The CR values for all variables were notably high, exceeding 0.70 and falling within the range of 0.882 to 0.955. This signifies a robust level of reliability for the indicators within each construct. Furthermore, the AVE values, which indicate convergent validity, exceeded the minimum threshold of 0.50, with each construct value varying from 0.608 to 0.653, thus affirming the presence of adequate convergent validity.

In addition to assessing convergent validity, we also examined discriminant validity by scrutinizing the cross-loadings of indicators on the corresponding variables and the squared correlations between constructs and AVE values. Our findings indicated that all measures exhibited notably stronger loadings on their intended constructs, thereby underscoring the measurement model’s discriminant validity.

Discriminant validity was recognized by observing average variance extracted (AVE) values that exceeded the squared correlations between constructs, as indicated in Table 1 . In conjunction with the Composite Reliability (CR) and AVE values, an additional discriminant validity assessment was conducted through a Heterotrait-Monotrait Ratio (HTMT) analysis. This analysis entailed a comparison of inter-construct correlations against a predefined upper threshold of 0.85. The results demonstrated that all HTMT values remained significantly below this threshold, affirming satisfactory discriminant validity for each variable (Henseler et al., 2015 ). Every HTMT value recorded was situated beneath the specified threshold, thereby supplying supplementary confirmation regarding the constructs’ discriminant validity. In summary, the results of the outer model assessment indicate that the variables showcased commendable levels of reliability and validity, with the discriminant validity being suitably and convincingly established.

Moreover, correlation Table 2 shows that human capital is significantly and positively correlated with structural capital ( r  = 0.594**), TMS ( r  = 0.456 **), and STP ( r  = 0.517**). Structural capital is also significantly and positively correlated with TMS ( r  = 0.893**) and STP ( r  = 0.853**). Furthermore, TMS is significantly and positively correlated with STP (0.859**).

Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA)

A comprehensive confirmatory factor analysis was estimated by employing the software AMOS version 24 to validate the distinctiveness of the variables. CFA shows the fitness of the hypothesized four factors model, including human capital, structural capital, top management support, and team scientific and technological performance, as delineated in Table 3 ; the results show that the hypothesized four-factor model shows fit and excellent alternative models. Consequently, The study variables demonstrate validity and reliability, which makes the dimension model appropriate for conducting a structural path analysis, as advocated by Hair, Page, and Brunsveld ( 2019 ).

Hypotheses testing

This study used the bootstrapping approach, which involves 5,000 bootstrap samples to test the proposed study model and assess the significance and strength of the structural correlations. Using this approach, bias-corrected confidence intervals and p-values were generated in accordance with Streukens and Leroi-Werelds ( 2016 ) guidelines. First, we did an analysis that entailed checking the path coefficients and their connected significance. The findings, as shown in Table 4 , validate Hypothesis 1, revealing a positive correlation between HUC and STP ( β  = 0.476, p  < 0.001). Additionally, the finding validates Hypothesis 2, highlighting a positive association between structural capital and STP ( β  = 0.877, p  < 0.001). For the moderation analysis, we utilized confidence intervals that do not encompass zero, per the guidelines that Preacher and Hayes ( 2008 ) recommended.

In our analysis, we found support for Hypothesis 3a, which posited that top management support (TMS) moderates the relationship between human capital (HUC) and team scientific and technological performance (STP). The results in Table 4 showed that the moderating role, more precisely, the interaction between HUC and TMS, was substantial and positive ( β  = −0.131, p  = 0.001). These results suggest that TMS enhances the positive association between HUC and STP, as shown in Fig. 2 . Consequently, we draw the conclusion that our data substantiates hypothesis 3a. Furthermore, Hypothesis 3b posited that TMS moderates the relationship between STC and STP. The results indicate that TMS moderates the association between STC and STP ( β  = −0.141, p  = 0.001, as presented in Table 4 and Fig. 3 ).

The moderating effect of top management support (TMS) on the relationship between human capital (HUC) and team scientific and technological performance (STP). Source: authors’ development.

The moderating effect of top management support (TMS) on the relationship between structural capital (SUC) and team scientific and technological performance (STP). Source: authors’ development.

The current study highlights the importance of research and academic institutions effectively enhancing their scientific and technological capabilities to manage their global talent within an international research collaboration framework and meet future challenges. Additionally, it underscores the need for these institutions to facilitate scientific knowledge exchange among their employees and counterparts in different countries. The enhancement of talent management through the exchange of scientific research knowledge can be most effectively accomplished by utilizing a collaborative research system between educational and research institutions (Shofiyyah et al., 2023 ), particularly in the context of the COVID-19 landscape. This study has confirmed that enhancing the higher education and research institutions’ human capital (HUC) and structural capital (STC) could attract and maintain global talent management and lead to more effective scientific and technological progress. The findings indicate that the utilization of human capital (HUC) has a significant and positive effect on scientific and technological term performance (STP) (Hypothesis 1), which is consistent with previous research (Habert & Huc, 2010 ). This study has additionally demonstrated that the implementation of s tructural capital (STC) has a significant and positive effect on team scientific and technological performance (STP), as indicated by hypothesis 2, which is also supported by the previous studies finding in different ways (Sobaih et al., 2022 ). This study has also shown that top management support moderates the association between human capital (HUC) and team scientific and technological performance hypothesis 3a and the association between structural capital (STC) and team scientific and technological performance hypothesis 3b. These hypotheses have garnered support from previous studies’ findings in different domains (Chatterjee et al., 2022 ). The study’s empirical findings also confirm the substantial moderating influence exerted by top management support on the relationships between HUC and STP described in hypothesis 3a and STC and STP described in hypothesis 3b, as evidenced by the results presented in Table 4 . Additionally, graphical representations are conducted to investigate the impacts on hypotheses 3a and 3b resulting from the application of high-top management support (TMS) and weak TMS.

The effect of high-top management support (TMS) and weak TMS on Hypothesis 3a is depicted in Fig. 2 . The solid line illustrates the effects of robust TMS on Hypothesis 3a, while the dashed line shows the effects of weak TMS on Hypothesis 3a. The graphic description validates that, as human capital (HUC) increases, team scientific and technological performance (STP) is more pronounced when influenced by robust TMS than weak TMS. This is evidenced by the steeper slope of the solid line in comparison to the dashed line. This finding suggests that employees within the research and academic sectors are more likely to utilize research collaboration networks when influenced by HUC and receive strong support from the organization’s top management.

The graph in Fig. 3 shows the impact of solid top management support (TMS) and weak TMS on Hypothesis 3b. The dotted lines continuous on the graph correspond to the effects of robust TMS and weak TMS, respectively. Figure 3 illustrates that, with increasing top management support (TMS), scientific and technological performance (STP) increase is more significant for robust TMS than weak TMS. This is evident from the steeper slope of the continuous line compared to the slope of the dotted line. This finding suggests that employees within universities and institutes are more likely to engage in research collaboration systems when they receive strong support from top management despite enhanced structural support.

Theoretical contribution

The current study makes significant contributions to the existing body of knowledge by exploring the intricate dynamics between organizational intellectual capital and team performance within scientific and technological research, especially during the unprecedented times brought about by the COVID-19 pandemic. Through its detailed examination of human and structural capital, alongside the moderating impact of top management support, the study provides a multi-faceted understanding of how these factors interact to enhance team outcomes.

This research enriches the literature on intellectual capital by providing empirical evidence on the positive association between HUC and STC and team performance. HUC, which includes employees’ skills, knowledge, and expertise, is a critical driver of innovation and productivity (Lenihan et al., 2019 ). The study highlights how a team’s collective intelligence and capabilities can lead to superior scientific and technological outputs. This finding aligns with and extends previous research that underscores the importance of skilled HR in achieving organizational success (Luo et al., 2023 ; Salamzadeh et al., 2023 ). Structural capital, encompassing organizational processes, databases, and intellectual property, contributes significantly to team performance(Ling, 2013 ). The study illustrates how well-established structures and systems facilitate knowledge sharing, streamline research processes, and ultimately boost the efficiency and effectiveness of research teams. This aspect of the findings adds depth to the existing literature by demonstrating the tangible benefits of investing in robust organizational infrastructure to support research activities.

Another essential contribution of this study is integrating a research collaboration network as a facilitating factor. This network, including digital platforms and tools that enable seamless communication and collaboration among researchers, has become increasingly vital in remote work and global collaboration (Mitchell, 2023 ). By examining how these systems leverage HUC and STC to enhance team performance, the study provides a practical understanding of the mechanisms through which technology can facilitate team scientific and technological performance.

One of the most novel contributions of this study is its emphasis on the moderating role of top management support. The findings suggest that when top management actively supports research initiatives, provides required resources, and fosters innovation, the positive effects of human and structural capital on team performance are amplified (Zada et al., 2023 ). This aspect of the study addresses a gap in the literature by highlighting the critical influence of top management on the success of intellectual capital investments. It underscores the importance of managerial involvement and strategic vision in driving research excellence and team scientific and technological performance.

Practical implications

The practical implications of the current study are weightage for organizations aiming to enhance their research and innovation capabilities and boost their scientific and technical progress. Organizations should prioritize recruiting, training, and retaining highly skilled and trained researchers and professionals globally. This can be achieved through targeted hiring practices, offering competitive compensation and retention, providing continuous professional development opportunities, and developing proper research collaboration networks. Organizations can leverage their expertize to drive innovative research and technological advancements by nurturing a global, talented workforce. Investing in robust organizational structures, processes, and systems is critical (Joseph & Gaba, 2020 ). This includes developing comprehensive databases, implementing efficient research processes, securing intellectual property, and strengthening collaborations. These factors support efficient knowledge sharing and streamline research activities, leading to higher productivity and quality research outcomes (Azeem et al., 2021 ). Organizations should ensure that their infrastructure is adaptable and can support remote and collaborative work environments.

The current study emphasizes the importance of digital platforms and tools facilitating research collaboration. Organizations should adopt advanced research collaboration networks that enable seamless communication, data sharing, and talent management. These systems are particularly crucial in a globalized research environment where team members may be geographically dispersed. Investing in such technology can significantly enhance research projects’ productivity in a sustainable way (Susanto et al., 2023 ). Top Management plays a vital role in the success of research initiatives and contributes to scientific and technological performance. Top management should actively support research teams by providing required resources, setting clear strategic directions, and fostering a culture of innovation. This includes allocating budgets for organizational research and development, encouraging cross-border collaboration, recognizing and rewarding research achievements, and enhancing overall performance. Effective Management ensures that the intellectual capital within the organization is fully utilized and aligned with organizational developmental goals (Paoloni et al., 2020 ). Organizations should create a working atmosphere that encourages research, creativity, and innovation. This can be done by establishing innovation labs, promoting interdisciplinary research, recruiting international talents, sharing research scholars, and encouraging the sharing of ideas across different departments globally. A research-oriented culture that supports innovation can inspire researchers to pursue groundbreaking work and contribute to the organization’s competitive edge.

Limitations and future research direction

The research presents numerous theoretical and practical implications; however, it has. The potential limitation of common method bias could impact the findings of this study. This concern arises because the data for the study variables were obtained from a single source and relied on self-report measures (Podsakoff, 2003 ). Therefore, it is recommended that future studies be conducted longitudinally to gain additional insights into organizations’ potential to enhance efficiency. Furthermore, it is essential to note that the sample size for this study was limited to 363 respondents who were deemed usable. These respondents were drawn from only ten research and academic institutions explicitly targeting the education and research sector.

Consequently, this restricted sample size may hinder the generalizability of the findings. Future researchers may employ a larger sample size and implement a more systematic approach to the organization to enhance the comprehensiveness and generalizability of findings in the context of global talent management and scientific and technological advancement. Furthermore, in future investigations, researchers may explore alternative boundary conditions to ascertain whether additional factors could enhance the model’s efficacy.

Numerous academic studies have emphasized the significance of examining talent management outcomes in global human resource management (HRM). The continuous international movement of highly qualified individuals is viewed as a driving force behind the development of new technologies, the dissemination of scientific findings, and the collaboration between institutions worldwide. Every organization strives to build a qualified and well-trained team, and the personnel department of the organization focuses on finding ways to transfer knowledge from experienced workers to new hires. This study uses a research collaboration system to examine the relationship between organizational intellectual capital (Human and structural Capital) and team scientific and technological performance. Further, this study underscores the moderating role of top management support. These findings offer a nuanced perspective on how organizations can leverage their intellectual assets to foster higher productivity and innovation, especially in emergencies.

Data availability

Due to respondents’ privacy concerns, data will not be publicly available. However, it can be made available by contacting the corresponding author at a reasonable request.

Al-Tit AA, Al-Ayed S, Alhammadi A, Hunitie M, Alsarayreh A, Albassam W (2022) The impact of employee development practices on human capital and social capital: the mediating contribution of knowledge management. J Open Innov 8(4):218

Article   Google Scholar  

Al Ariss A, Cascio WF, Paauwe J (2014) Talent management: current theories and future research directions. J World Bus 49(2):173–179

Al Jawali H, Darwish TK, Scullion H, Haak-Saheem W (2022) Talent management in the public sector: empirical evidence from the Emerging Economy of Dubai. Int J Hum Resour Manag 33(11):2256–2284

Ali M, Li Z, Khan S, Shah SJ, Ullah R (2021) Linking humble leadership and project success: the moderating role of top management support with mediation of team-building. Int J Manag Proj Bus 14(3):545–562

Almeida F, Santos JD, Monteiro JA (2020) The challenges and opportunities in the digitalization of companies in a post-COVID-19 World. IEEE Eng Manag Rev 48(3):97–103

Alrowwad AA, Abualoush SH, Masa’deh RE (2020) Innovation and intellectual capital as intermediary variables among transformational leadership, transactional leadership, and organizational performance. J Manag Dev 39(2):196–222

Anshari M, Hamdan M (2022) Understanding knowledge management and upskilling in Fourth Industrial Revolution: transformational shift and SECI model. VINE J Inf Knowl Manag Syst 52(3):373–393

Google Scholar  

Arocena R, Sutz J (2021) Universities and social innovation for global sustainable development as seen from the south. Technol Forecast Soc change 162:120399

Article   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Arslan A, Golgeci I, Khan Z, Al-Tabbaa O, Hurmelinna-Laukkanen P (2021) Adaptive learning in cross-sector collaboration during global emergency: conceptual insights in the context of COVID-19 pandemic. Multinatl Bus Rev 29(1):21–42

Azeem M, Ahmed M, Haider S, Sajjad M (2021) Expanding competitive advantage through organizational culture, knowledge sharing and organizational innovation. Technol Soc 66:101635

Bakhsh K, Hafeez M, Shahzad S, Naureen B, Faisal Farid M (2022) Effectiveness of digital game based learning strategy in higher educational perspectives. J Educ e-Learn Res 9(4):258–268

Barney J (1991) Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage. J Manag 17(1):99–120

Barney JB, Clark DN (2007) Resource-based theory: Creating and sustaining competitive advantage. Oup Oxford

Baron A, Armstrong M (2007) Human capital management: achieving added value through people. Kogan Page Publishers

Barpanda S (2021) Role of human and structural capital on performance through human resource practices in Indian microfinance institutions: a mediated moderation approach. Knowl Process Manag 28(2):165–180

Biondi L, Russo S (2022) Integrating strategic planning and performance management in universities: a multiple case-study analysis. J Manag Gov 26(2):417–448

Birasnav M, Mittal R, Dalpati A (2019) Integrating theories of strategic leadership, social exchange, and structural capital in the context of buyer–supplier relationship: an empirical study. Glob J Flex Syst Manag 20:219–236

Bontis N (1998) Intellectual capital: an exploratory study that develops measures and models. Manag Decis 36(2):63–76

Bontis N, Fitz‐enz J (2002) Intellectual capital ROI: a causal map of human capital antecedents and consequents. J Intellect Cap 3(3):223–247

Cavicchi C, Vagnoni E (2017) Does intellectual capital promote the shift of healthcare organizations towards sustainable development? Evidence from Italy. J Clean Prod 153:275–286

Chatterjee S, Chaudhuri R, Vrontis D (2022) Does remote work flexibility enhance organization performance? Moderating role of organization policy and top management support. J Bus Res 139:1501–1512

Council NR (2012) Education for life and work: developing transferable knowledge and skills in the 21st century. National Academies Press

Davenport S, Carr A, Bibby D (2002) Leveraging talent: spin–off strategy at industrial research. RD Manag 32(3):241–254

Dess GG, Picken JC (2000) Changing roles: Leadership in the 21st century. Organ Dyn 28(3):18–34

Duan W, Li C (2023) Be alert to dangers: collapse and avoidance strategies of platform ecosystems. J Bus Res 162:113869

Farahian M, Parhamnia F, Maleki N (2022) The mediating effect of knowledge sharing in the relationship between factors affecting knowledge sharing and reflective thinking: the case of English literature students during the COVID-19 crisis. Res Pract Technol Enhanc Learn 17(1):1–25

Fasi MA (2022) An overview on patenting trends and technology commercialization practices in the university Technology Transfer Offices in USA and China. World Pat Inf 68:102097

Felin T, Hesterly WS (2007) The knowledge-based view, nested heterogeneity, and new value creation: philosophical considerations on the locus of knowledge. Acad Manag Rev 32(1):195–218

Fernandes C, Veiga PM, Lobo CA, Raposo M (2023) Global talent management during the COVID‐19 pandemic? The Gods must be crazy! Thunderbird Int Bus Rev 65(1):9–19

Gogan LM, Duran DC, Draghici A (2015) Structural capital—a proposed measurement model. Procedia Econ Financ 23:1139–1146

Gonzalez-Mulé E, Courtright SH, DeGeest D, Seong J-Y, Hong D-S (2016) Channeled autonomy: the joint effects of autonomy and feedback on team performance through organizational goal clarity. J Manag 42(7):2018–2033

Haak-Saheem W (2020) Talent management in Covid-19 crisis: how Dubai manages and sustains its global talent pool. Asian Bus Manag 19:298–301

Habert B, Huc C (2010) Building together digital archives for research in social sciences and humanities. Soc Sci Inf 49(3):415–443

Haider SA, Akbar A, Tehseen S, Poulova P, Jaleel F (2022) The impact of responsible leadership on knowledge sharing behavior through the mediating role of person–organization fit and moderating role of higher educational institute culture. J Innov Knowl 7(4):100265

Hair JF, Page M, Brunsveld N (2019) Essentials of business research methods. Routledge

Harsch K, Festing M (2020) Dynamic talent management capabilities and organizational agility—a qualitative exploration. Hum Resour Manag 59(1):43–61

He S, Chen W, Wang K, Luo H, Wang F, Jiang W, Ding H (2023) Region generation and assessment network for occluded person re-identification. IEEE Trans Inf Forensic Secur 19:120–132

Henseler J, Ringle CM, Sarstedt M (2015) A new criterion for assessing discriminant validity in variance-based structural equation modeling. J Acad Mark Sci 43:115–135

Jain N, Thomas A, Gupta V, Ossorio M, Porcheddu D (2022) Stimulating CSR learning collaboration by the mentor universities with digital tools and technologies—an empirical study during the COVID-19 pandemic. Manag Decis 60(10):2824–2848

Joseph J, Gaba V (2020) Organizational structure, information processing, and decision-making: a retrospective and road map for research. Acad Manag Ann 14(1):267–302

Kaliannan M, Darmalinggam D, Dorasamy M, Abraham M (2023) Inclusive talent development as a key talent management approach: a systematic literature review. Hum Resour Manag Rev 33(1):100926

Kallmuenzer A, Baptista R, Kraus S, Ribeiro AS, Cheng C-F, Westhead P (2021) Entrepreneurs’ human capital resources and tourism firm sales growth: a fuzzy-set qualitative comparative analysis. Tour Manag Perspect 38:100801

Kim KY, Atwater L, Patel PC, Smither JW (2016) Multisource feedback, human capital, and the financial performance of organizations. J Appl Psychol 101(11):1569

Kwok L (2022) Labor shortage: a critical reflection and a call for industry-academia collaboration. Int J Contemp Hosp Manag 34(11):3929–3943

Lee J-C, Shiue Y-C, Chen C-Y (2016) Examining the impacts of organizational culture and top management support of knowledge sharing on the success of software process improvement. Comput Hum Behav 54:462–474

Lenihan H, McGuirk H, Murphy KR (2019) Driving innovation: public policy and human capital. Res policy 48(9):103791

Ling Y-H (2013) The influence of intellectual capital on organizational performance—knowledge management as moderator. Asia Pac J Manag 30(3):937–964

Luo J, Zhuo W, Xu B (2023) The bigger, the better? Optimal NGO size of human resources and governance quality of entrepreneurship in circular economy. Manag Decis (ahead-of-print) https://doi.org/10.1108/MD-03-2023-0325

Damsgaard J, Lyytinen K (2001) The role of intermediating institutions in the diffusion of electronic data interchange (EDI): how industry associations intervened in Denmark, Finland, and Hong Kong. Inf Soc 17(3):195–210

Marchiori DM, Rodrigues RG, Popadiuk S, Mainardes EW (2022) The relationship between human capital, information technology capability, innovativeness and organizational performance: an integrated approach. Technol Forecast Soc Change 177:121526

Marinelli L, Bartoloni S, Pascucci F, Gregori GL, Briamonte MF (2022) Genesis of an innovation-based entrepreneurial ecosystem: exploring the role of intellectual capital. J Intellect Cap 24(1):10–34

Mehralian G, Nazari JA, Ghasemzadeh P (2018) The effects of knowledge creation process on organizational performance using the BSC approach: the mediating role of intellectual capital. J Knowl Manag 22(4):802–823

Mitchell A (2023) Collaboration technology affordances from virtual collaboration in the time of COVID-19 and post-pandemic strategies. Inf Technol People 36(5):1982–2008

Muñoz JLR, Ojeda FM, Jurado DLA, Peña PFP, Carranza CPM, Berríos HQ, Vasquez-Pauca MJ (2022) Systematic review of adaptive learning technology for learning in higher education. Eurasia J Educ Res 98(98):221–233

Nezam MHK, Ataffar A, Isfahani AN, Shahin A (2013) The impact of structural capital on new product development performance effectiveness—-the mediating role of new product vision and competitive advantage. Int J Hum Resour Stud 3(4):281

O’Dwyer M, Filieri R, O’Malley L (2023) Establishing successful university–industry collaborations: barriers and enablers deconstructed. J Technol Transf 48(3):900–931

Oliver C (1997) Sustainable competitive advantage: combining institutional and resource‐based views. Strateg Manag J 18(9):697–713

Pak J, Heidarian Ghaleh H, Mehralian G (2023) How does human resource management balance exploration and exploitation? The differential effects of intellectual capital‐enhancing HR practices on ambidexterity and firm innovation. Human Resource Manag https://doi.org/10.1002/hrm.22180

Paoloni M, Coluccia D, Fontana S, Solimene S (2020) Knowledge management, intellectual capital and entrepreneurship: a structured literature review. J Knowl Manag 24(8):1797–1818

Patnaik S, Munjal S, Varma A, Sinha S (2022) Extending the resource-based view through the lens of the institution-based view: a longitudinal case study of an Indian higher educational institution. J Bus Res 147:124–141

Pellegrini L, Aloini D, Latronico L (2022) Open innovation and intellectual capital during emergency: evidence from a case study in telemedicine. Knowl Manag Res Pract 21(4), 765–776

Phan LT, Nguyen TV, Luong QC, Nguyen TV, Nguyen HT, Le HQ, Pham QD (2020) Importation and human-to-human transmission of a novel coronavirus in Vietnam. N Engl J Med 382(9):872–874

Article   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Phuong QN, Le Ngoc M, Dong HT, Thao TLT, Tran T, Cac T (2024) Enhancing employment opportunities for people with disabilities in Vietnam: the role of vocational training and job placement centers. J Chin Hum Resour Manag 15(3):64–75

Podsakoff N (2003) Common method biases in behavioral research: a critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. J Appl Psychol 885(879):10.1037

Podsakoff PM, MacKenzie SB, Lee J-Y, Podsakoff NP (2003) Common method biases in behavioral research: a critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. J Appl Psychol 88(5):879

Preacher KJ, Hayes AF (2008) Asymptotic and resampling strategies for assessing and comparing indirect effects inmultiple mediator models. Behav Res Methods 40(3):879–891

Rådberg KK, Löfsten H (2024) The entrepreneurial university and development of large-scale research infrastructure: Exploring the emerging university function of collaboration and leadership. J Technol Transf 49(1):334–366

Radhamani R, Kumar D, Nizar N, Achuthan K, Nair B, Diwakar S (2021) What virtual laboratory usage tells us about laboratory skill education pre-and post-COVID-19: Focus on usage, behavior, intention and adoption. Educ Inf Technol 26(6):7477–7495

Rasheed MH, Khalid J, Ali A, Rasheed MS, Ali K (2024) Human resource analytics in the era of artificial intelligence: Leveraging knowledge towards organizational success in Pakistan. J Chin Hum Resour Manag 15:3–20

Ringle CM, Sarstedt M, Mitchell R, Gudergan SP (2020) Partial least squares structural equation modeling in HRM research. Int J Hum Resour Manag 31(12):1617–1643

Roos G, Roos J (1997) Measuring your company’s intellectual performance. Long Range Plan 30(3):413–426

Salamzadeh A, Tajpour M, Hosseini E, Brahmi MS (2023) Human capital and the performance of Iranian Digital Startups: the moderating role of knowledge sharing behaviour. Int J Public Sect Perform Manag 12(1-2):171–186

Sarwar A, Mustafa A (2023) Analysing the impact of green intellectual capital on environmental performance: the mediating role of green training and development. Technol Anal Strateg Manag 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1080/09537325.2023.2209205

Scott WR (2008) Institutions and organizations: ideas and interests. Sage

Secundo G, Dumay J, Schiuma G, Passiante G (2016) Managing intellectual capital through a collective intelligence approach: an integrated framework for universities. J Intellect Cap 17(2):298–319

Secundo G, Massaro M, Dumay J, Bagnoli C (2018) Intellectual capital management in the fourth stage of IC research: a critical case study in university settings. J Intellect Cap 19(1):157–177

Shao JJ, Ariss AA (2020) Knowledge transfer between self-initiated expatriates and their organizations: research propositions for managing SIEs. Int Bus Rev 29(1):101634

Shofiyyah NA, Komarudin TS, Hasan MSR (2023) Innovations in Islamic Education Management within the University Context: addressing challenges and exploring future prospects. Nidhomul Haq 8(2):193–209

Sigala M, Ren L, Li Z, Dioko LA (2023) Talent management in hospitality during the COVID-19 pandemic in Macao: a contingency approach. Int J Contemp Hosp Manag 35(8):2773–2792

Singh SK, Gupta S, Busso D, Kamboj S (2021) Top management knowledge value, knowledge sharing practices, open innovation and organizational performance. J Bus Res 128:788–798

Sobaih AEE, Hasanein A, Elshaer IA (2022) Higher education in and after COVID-19: the impact of using social network applications for e-learning on students’ academic performance. Sustainability 14(9):5195

Article   CAS   Google Scholar  

Sommer LP, Heidenreich S, Handrich M (2017) War for talents—how perceived organizational innovativeness affects employer attractiveness. RD Manag 47(2):299–310

Stewart T (1991) Brainpower: how intellectual capital is becoming America’s most valuable. Fortune

Streukens S, Leroi-Werelds S (2016) Bootstrapping and PLS-SEM: A step-by-step guide to get more out of your bootstrap results. Eur Manage J 34(6):618–632

Sulaiman F, Uden L, Eldy EF (2022) Online Learning in Higher Education Institution During COVID-19: A Review and the Way Forward. Paper presented at the International Workshop on Learning Technology for Education Challenges

Susanto P, Sawitri NN, Ali H, Rony ZT (2023) Employee performance and talent management impact increasing construction company productivity. Int J Psychol Health Sci 1(4):144–152

Tan CN-L, Md. Noor S (2013) Knowledge management enablers, knowledge sharing and research collaboration: a study of knowledge management at research universities in Malaysia. Asian J Technol Innov 21(2):251–276

Vaiman V, Sparrow P, Schuler R, Collings DG (2018) Macro talent management: a global perspective on managing talent in developed markets. Routledge

Vătămănescu E-M, Cegarra-Navarro J-G, Martínez-Martínez A, Dincă V-M, Dabija D-C (2023) Revisiting online academic networks within the COVID-19 pandemic–From the intellectual capital of knowledge networks towards institutional knowledge capitalization. J Intellect Cap 24(4):948–973

Wang Y, Lee L-H, Braud T, Hui P (2022) Re-shaping Post-COVID-19 teaching and learning: A blueprint of virtual-physical blended classrooms in the metaverse era. Paper presented at the 2022 IEEE 42nd International Conference on Distributed Computing Systems Workshops (ICDCSW)

Wang Z, Wang N, Liang H (2014) Knowledge sharing, intellectual capital and firm performance. Manag Decis 52(2):230–258

Xu A, Li Y, Donta PK (2024) Marketing decision model and consumer behavior prediction with deep learning. J Organ End Use Comput (JOEUC) 36(1):1–25

Yang G, Xiangming L (2024) Graduate socialization and anxiety: insights via hierarchical regression analysis and beyond. Stud High Educ 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2024.2375563

Zada M, Khan J, Saeed I, Zada S, Jun ZY (2023) Linking public leadership with project management effectiveness: mediating role of goal clarity and moderating role of top management support. Heliyon 9(5)

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

School of Economics and Management, Hanjiang Normal University, Shiyan, 442000, China

Muhammad Zada

Facultad de Administración y Negocios, Universidad Autónoma de Chile, Santiago, 8320000, Chile

School of Law, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, Hubie, China

Imran Saeed

College of Management, Shenzhen University, Shenzhen, China

Department of Business Administration, Faculty of Management Sciences, Ilma University, Karachi, Pakistan

Shagufta Zada

Business School Henan University, Kaifeng, Henan, China

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Contributions

Conceptualization: Muhammad Zada and Imran Saeed. Methodology: Jawad Khan. Software: Shagufta Zada. Data collection: Muhammad Zada, Shagufta Zada and Jawad Khan. Formal analysis: Imran Saeed and Jawad Khan. Resources: Muhammad Zada. Writing original draft preparation: Muhammad Zada and Imran Saeed. Writing review and editing: Jawad Khan, Shagufta Zada. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the paper.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Muhammad Zada .

Ethics declarations

Competing interests.

The authors declare no competing interests.

Ethical approval

The author sought and received ethical approval from the Research Ethical Committee School of Economics and Management at Hanjiang Normal University, China, with approval number 2023REC001, and the study complied with ethical standards.

Informed consent statement

Informed consent was obtained from all subjects involved in the study. All the participants were accessed with the support of the HR Department employed in China’s research and academia sector. Response Participants were provided with comprehensive information regarding the study’s purpose and procedures. Confidentiality and privacy were strictly implemented throughout the research process. Using the time lag data collection approach, we collected from 393 employees employed in China’s research and academic sector.

Additional information

Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License, which permits any non-commercial use, sharing, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if you modified the licensed material. You do not have permission under this licence to share adapted material derived from this article or parts of it. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ .

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Zada, M., Saeed, I., Khan, J. et al. Navigating post-pandemic challenges through institutional research networks and talent management. Humanit Soc Sci Commun 11 , 1164 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-024-03697-9

Download citation

Received : 28 February 2024

Accepted : 30 August 2024

Published : 09 September 2024

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-024-03697-9

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

Quick links

• Explore articles by subject
• Guide to authors
• Editorial policies

Advertisement

Oral Communication Skills in Higher Education: Using a Performance-Based Evaluation Rubric to Assess Communication Skills

• Published: 12 July 2006
• Volume 31 , pages 115–128, ( 2006 )

Cite this article

• Norah E. Dunbar 1 ,
• Catherine F. Brooks 1 &
• Tara Kubicka-Miller 1  

8151 Accesses

98 Citations

Explore all metrics

This study used The Competent Speaker , a rubric developed by the National Communication Association (S. P. Morreale, M. R. Moore, K. P. Taylor, D. Surges-Tatum, & R. Hulbert-Johnson, 1993), to evaluate student performance in general education public speaking courses as a case study of student skills and programmatic assessment. Results indicate that students taking the general education public speaking course are below satisfactory standards on five of the eight competencies defined by the National Communication Association and are above satisfactory standards on two of the eight competencies. Implications for this particular program, other communication departments, and communication across the curriculum in general education are discussed. We also offer suggestions for those in other disciplines or educational settings in the use of performance evaluation rubrics for assessing other student skills/knowledge and for training new teachers.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Subscribe and save.

• Get 10 units per month
• Download Article/Chapter or eBook
• 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
• Cancel anytime

Price includes VAT (Russian Federation)

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Rent this article via DeepDyve

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Teacher-Examiners’ Explicit and Enacted Beliefs About Proficiency Indicators in National Oral Assessments

Developing Instructor Proficiency in Oral Language Assessment

Explore related subjects

• Artificial Intelligence

National Communication Association was previously known as the Speech Communication Association.

Allen, T. H. (2002). Charting a communication pathway: Using assessment to guide curriculum development in a re-vitalized general education plan. Communication Education , 51, 26–39.

Article   Google Scholar  

Borko, H. (1997). New forms of classroom assessment: Implications for staff development. Theory Into Practice , 36, 231–238.

Dannels, D. P. (2001). Time to speak up: A theoretical framework of situated pedagogy and practice for communication across the curriculum. Communication Education , 50, 144–158.

Google Scholar  

Dannels, D. P. (2002). Communication across the curriculum and in the disciplines: Speaking in engineering. Communication Education , 51, 254–268.

Dougan, A. M. (1996). Student assessment by portfolio: One institution's journey. The History Teacher , 29, 171–178.

Erwin, T. D. (1991). Assessing student learning and development . San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Erwin, T. D., & Sebrell, K. W. (2003). Assessment of critical thinking: ETS's tasks in critical thinking. The Journal of General Education , 52, 50–70.

Goldberg, G. L., Roswell, B. S., & Michaels, H. (1996). Can assessment mirror instruction? A look at peer response and revision in a large-scale writing test. Educational Assessment , 3, 287–314.

Hambleton, R. K., & Plake, B. S. (1995). Using an extended Angoff procedure to set standards on complex performance assessments. Applied Measurement in Education , 8, 41–55.

Jones, E. A. (1994). Essential skills in writing, speech and listening, and critical thinking for college graduates: Perspectives of faculty, employers, and policymakers . University Park, PA: National Center for post secondary Teaching, Learning, and Assessment.

Kubicka, T. (2003). Private self-consciousness as a moderator variable . Unpublished Master's Thesis, California State University Long Beach.

Mager, R. F. (1997). Measuring instructional results or got a match? (3rd ed.). Atlanta, GA: The Center for Effective Performance, Inc.

McCroskey, J. C. (1982). Communication competence and performance: A research and pedagogical perspective. Communication Education , 31, 1–7.

Morreale, S. P., Moore, M. R., Taylor, K. P., Surges-Tatum, D., & Hulbert-Johnson, R. (1993). The competent speaker speech evaluation form . Annandale, VA: Speech Communication Association.

Morreale, S. P., Rubin, R. B., & Jones, E. A. (1998). Competencies for college students: Basic skills for persuading, informing, and relating . Retrieved August 18, 2003, from http://www.natcom.org/instruction.

Newburger, C. (1996). SCANS and the “Goals 2000-Educate America Act:” External validation for expanding communication instruction requirements across the undergraduate core curriculum. Journal of the Association for Communication Administration , 1, 70–74.

Office of Institutional Research at California State University, Long Beach. (2005). Institutional research: Students: Demographics. Retrieved August 6, 2005, from http://sas-web.ir.csulb.edu/IRpdfreports/genderw.pdf.

Pomplun, M., Capps, L., & Sundbye, N. (1998). Criteria teachers use to score performance items. Educational Assessment , 5, 95–110.

Rockman, I. F. (2002). Strengthening connections between information literacy, general education, and assessment efforts. Library Trends , 51, 185–198.

Rosenbaum, J. (1994). Assessment: An overview. In W. G. Christ (Ed.), Assessing communication education: A handbook for media, speech, and theater educators (pp. 3–30). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

Rubin, R. B., & Graham, E. E. (1988). Communication correlates of college success: An exploratory investigation. Communication Education , 37, 14–27.

Rubin, R. B., Graham, E. E., & Mignerey, J. T. (1990). A longitudinal study of college students’ communication competence. Communication Education , 39, 1–14.

Rubin, R. B., & Morreale, S. P. (1996). Setting expectations for speech communication and listening. In E. A. Jones (Ed.), Preparing competent college graduates: Setting new and higher expectations for student learning (pp. 19–29). New directions for higher education, Vol. 96. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Rubin, R. B., Welch, S. A., & Buerkel, R. (1995). Performance-based assessment of high school speech instruction. Communication Education , 44, 30–39.

Speech Communication Association. (1993). Criteria for the assessment of oral communication . Annandale, VA: SCA.

Spitzberg, B. H. (1983). Communication competence as knowledge, skill, and impression. Communication Education , 32, 323–329.

Walvoord, B. E., Bardes, B., & Denton, J. (1998). Closing the feedback loop in classroom-based assessment. Assessment Update , 10 (5), [Electronic Version] Retrieved January 30, 2004, from http://www.rwc.uc.edu/phillips/Assessment/AsUpdateSep98.html.

Weimann, J. M., & Backlund, P. (1980). Current theory and research in communicative competence. Review of Educational Research , 50, 185–199.

Download references

Acknowledgment

This research was funded by a California State University Long Beach Assessment Grant received by the first two authors.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Department of Communication Studies, California State University, Long Beach, USA

Norah E. Dunbar, Catherine F. Brooks & Tara Kubicka-Miller

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Norah E. Dunbar .

Additional information

An earlier version of this paper was presented at the 2004 meeting of the Western States Communication Association in Albuquerque, New Mexico.

Norah Dunbar received her Ph.D. in Communication Studies from the University of Arizona and is currently an Associate Professor in the Department of Communication Studies at California State University, Long Beach. Her primary research interests include interpersonal communication, power, deception, and conflict; she is also focused on curriculum development, assessment, and reform. Catherine Brooks is a Ph.D. student in Education at the University of California, Riverside with an emphasis in Curriculum and Instruction. She is also a Lecturer in the Department of Communication Studies at California State University, Long Beach. Her primary research interests include issues of gender and computer-mediated communication in instructional settings. Tara Kubicka-Miller received her Master's degree from the Department of Communication Studies at California State University, Long Beach and is currently an Assistant Professor in the Department of Communication at Santiago Canyon College. Her primary research interests include competitive public speaking, interpersonal and small group communication. The videotaped student speeches used in this research were collected in classrooms as part of Tara Kubicka-Miller's Master's Thesis (Kubicka, 2003).

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Dunbar, N.E., Brooks, C.F. & Kubicka-Miller, T. Oral Communication Skills in Higher Education: Using a Performance-Based Evaluation Rubric to Assess Communication Skills. Innov High Educ 31 , 115–128 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10755-006-9012-x

Download citation

Published : 12 July 2006

Issue Date : August 2006

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/s10755-006-9012-x

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• general education
• evaluation rubrics
• faculty development
• Find a journal
• Publish with us
• Track your research

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

• Advanced Search
• Journal List
• Springer Nature - PMC COVID-19 Collection
• PMC10038701

Online group projects in higher education: persistent challenges and implications for practice

Helen donelan.

School of Computing and Communications, Faculty of Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics, The Open University, Walton Hall, Milton Keynes, MK7 6AA UK

With the rapid adoption of online learning across higher education, there is an urgent need to identify its challenges and ways of addressing them. Online group projects, in particular, present significant issues for educators. This paper presents the findings of a systematic literature review identifying the key challenges of online group projects, together with strategies to address them. From a corpus of 114 recent papers, the 57 most relevant were analysed, to identify themes related to challenges and strategies. Key challenges were: low and uneven participation by students; a lack of clarity and preparation for students; and poor relationships. Strategies for addressing challenges were: careful design of projects, particularly regarding fair assessment; clear guidance and preparation of students; and practical and emotional support throughout, to encourage confidence and engagement. The findings of this review will enable educators to design and facilitate online group projects which students find rewarding and valuable.

Introduction and background

Group work, where students learn by collaborating and working with each other, is an integral, and sometimes compulsory, part of higher education qualifications. There are several reasons for this: collaborating with other students is a valuable way of learning (McConnell, 2005 ); and team-work is high on the employability skills agenda (Winterbotham et al., 2018 ). Employers often express their requirements in terms of skills rather than subject knowledge, and interpersonal and team-working skills rate highly. Employers want staff who can work well with others.

Online group work

Until recently, most group work in higher education was conducted face-to-face. However, particularly since the 2020 pandemic, there has been a mass move towards online learning (Rapanta et al., 2020 ) where students learn through accessing teachers, peers and content via the internet. This often involves online group work, where group activities are negotiated and carried out using communication technologies. Such online groups may vary in size and focus, from small teams of students working together on a specific project to online classes taking part in free-flowing discussions.

Research focussing on students working together online in higher education has been plentiful (e.g. Garrison et al., 2000 ; Hiltz & Goldman, 2005 ; McConnell, 2006 ; Oliveira, 2011 ; Chang & Kang, 2016 ). It has provided valuable insight into the problems faced by students and educators. These problems include low participation by students and low levels of student satisfaction (Brindley et al., 2009 ; Kreijns et al., 2003 ). Some studies have offered solutions or recommendations (e.g. Roberts & McInnerney, 2007 ), typically intending to improve one or more of: student engagement; student perceptions or satisfaction; student performance or skills development. Now that adoption of online education is rapidly increasing, this body of research needs to be brought together systematically, in order to draw clear lessons for educators. Effective approaches to online group work are urgently needed, so that students can acquire skills online that were previously taught and developed on campus.

Online group projects are the focus of this paper – as these can provide authentic contexts where students are developing employability skills through working, learning and producing something together online. Students should learn to work as part of a virtual team, as this has become central to most industries and careers (Bakken, 2018 ). We define an online group project by the characteristics listed below. These characteristics are common to the contexts and activities described in many studies, for example Thomas and MacGregor ( 2005 ), Bergeron and Melrose ( 2006 ), An et al. ( 2008 ), Oliveira et al. ( 2011 ), and Donelan and Kear ( 2018 ):

• Students working in small groups, using online tools as the primary means of communication.
• Groups working to achieve a particular outcome, complete a defined task, or produce something.
• Groups having a defined membership, with all members expected to contribute to the outcome.

Employability skills are at the centre of why online group projects are important in higher education; employability has become a key concern for Higher Education Institutions, as part of a focus on graduate attributes (Wong et al., 2022 ). To fully develop workplace-relevant skills, it is particularly important that tasks set are authentic i.e. provide realistic contexts which align with workplace requirements. Herrington et al. ( 2010 ) say that this means learners should be required to collaborate, reflect, and develop their own approaches to carrying out complex tasks. In addition, both Herrington et al. ( 2010 ) and Lombardi ( 2007 ) highlight the need to ensure that tasks are based on real world tasks that mirror professional practice.

Another key consideration when designing online group projects relates to how students are expected to work together. According to the definition of online group projects above, students have a common goal and are all expected to contribute to the specific outcome or deliverable. But how students get to that outcome can vary greatly. True collaboration takes place when students’ individual tasks are mutually dependent, and therefore need to be constantly negotiated and shared (Oliver et al., 2007 ). Some group projects, however, are more suited to a cooperative style of working, which allows tasks and responsibilities to be divided between group members (Paulus, 2005 ). In this approach students work alongside each other, bringing their separate contributions together later in the project, rather than working together throughout. This may also, in some circumstances or professions, be a more authentic way of carrying out group projects. The different ways in which students work together in online group projects is considered during the analysis later in this paper.

This paper reports a systematic literature review to discover what progress has been made in addressing the challenges of online group projects in higher education. The studies reviewed tend to focus on the evaluation of a project in a specific context, often through soliciting the views of participants. The contexts of these studies differ regarding, for example:

• Cohort demographics (age, educational and occupational backgrounds)
• Collaboration tools used, and methods for working together
• Size and heterogeneity of groups
• Structure of the task set.

This variation in contexts needs to be taken into account when considering the challenges of online group projects, and strategies to address them; we have tried to do this when considering the various studies that we have reviewed. Nevertheless, the wide variety of contexts can make it difficult to draw out generic findings in relation to challenges, strategies and the relations among them.

Because of the proliferation and diversity of research studies in this area, practitioners can find it difficult to identify effective strategies for designing online group projects, and for supporting students through the experience. The purpose of our review is to assist practitioners with these tasks. Based on our review and findings, we have categorised the many challenges which may arise, and linked these challenges to strategies that can be considered in order to address them. This should be particularly useful to educators new to online collaborative learning.

Our dual concern with challenges and strategies is embedded in our research questions:

• What are the main challenges in online group projects?
• What strategies have been proposed for addressing these challenges?

The community of Inquiry framework

One of the main theoretical frameworks that is useful in considering how to design and support online group work is the Community of Inquiry (Garrison et al., 2000 ); we have therefore used this framework to aid our analysis of challenges and strategies. There is a significant body of work, developed over many years, which uses the Community of Inquiry as the basis for analysis of online collaborative learning (see, for example Fe, 2010; Chandler, 2022 ; Yu & Li, 2022 ). The findings of our review, as presented in this paper, are discussed in Sect. " Analysis and discussion " with particular reference to elements of the framework.

As explained by Fiock ( 2020 ), the focus of the Community of Inquiry framework is developing a community of learners through consideration of three main elements: social presence, teaching presence and cognitive presence. Social presence relates to online students feeling that other group members are real people (Gunawardena & Zittle, 1997 ). It is conceptualised by Garrison et al. ( 2000 ) in three categories: emotional (affective) expression; open communication; and group cohesion. All of these are important for online group projects. Teaching presence refers to the design and facilitation of online activities for learning. It is conceptualised as the following three aspects: instructional design and organization; facilitating discourse; and direct instruction. Good design and organisation are key to online projects, and facilitating discourse is also important; depending on the project, direct instruction may be less relevant, as students investigate the project topic for themselves. Cognitive presence refers to students constructing meaning together online. It is conceptualised as four phases: a triggering event; exploration; integration; and resolution. All of these are relevant to progress through an online group project.

Methodological approach

Systematic reviews.

‘Systematic review’ in this paper means ‘research approaches that are a form of secondary level analysis (secondary research) that brings together the findings of primary research to answer a research question’ (Newman & Gough, 2020 ). A systematic approach to reviewing is recommended because of its rigour and comprehensiveness. It provides a sound way to gather evidence, provide a broad analysis, and bring clarity to the challenges that students and educators face.

Our approach identifies the common challenges of online group projects and the lessons that educators have learned about how to address these challenges. We identify good practices and look at how they may apply generally. Through analysis of 57 research studies, we discuss the nuances of the issues identified, and we answer the two research questions.

Because systematic reviews need to be reproduceable and transparent (Gusenbauer & Haddaway, 2019 ), the search process is documented below, including the database and search terms used.

Search strategy

The literature search was performed using the ERIC (Education Resources Information Center) database – the largest database in the world for indexed and full-text education literature and resources ( https://eric.ed.gov/ ). The ERIC database contains more than 250 journals. It was cross-checked to ensure it included journals known to the authors from related projects; it was found to include all such journals.

In the initial search of journal article titles, the following search terms were used, combined as follows:

(‘collaborat*’ OR ‘team’ OR ‘group’) AND (‘online’) AND (‘project’ OR ‘work’)

(The term ‘collaborat*’ was used to ensure that references to, for example, ‘collaboration’ or ‘collaborative’ were picked up.)

The ERIC database was initially searched for matching papers published between 2000 and 2018 (the date was later extended, as described at the end of this section). This produced 73 results. However, some key papers that the authors were aware of were missing. Other search terms were therefore trialled, new searches performed and the results analysed. For example, the term ‘learning’ was considered as an alternative to ‘project’ OR ‘work’; however this introduced a very large number of papers that were irrelevant to a study focussing on online group projects. The following narrower terms were therefore added and comprised the final search terms.

(‘collaborat*’ OR ‘team’ OR ‘group’) AND (‘online’ OR ‘elearning’ OR ‘e-learning’) AND (‘project’ OR ‘work’ OR ‘activit*’).

(The term ‘activit*’ was used to ensure that papers using the terms, ‘activity’ or ‘activities’ were included.)

Using this expanded set of search terms, all 73 of the previously found papers were included, together with the known papers which had been missing before, and several more. This gave a total of 101 papers. Following stages I and II, which are described below, and which were lengthy, two catch-up searches were performed again, to include any new papers that had been published. These catch-up searches ensured that papers over a 20-year period from 2000 to the end of 2020 were included. An additional three papers were identified in the first catch-up run, and a further 10 in the second, bringing the total to 114.

Stage I: abstract review

In the first stage of the research, each of the 114 abstracts was independently reviewed by both authors of this paper, and its relevance judged to be: high (score 1), mid (score 2), or low (score 3). To qualify as ‘high relevance’ (score 1), abstracts had to concern online group projects (as defined within this paper) and had to indicate that challenges with the projects, and/or strategies for designing and implementing projects, were discussed or evaluated. Mid-relevance abstracts (score 2) were less obviously relevant, sometimes because the focus appeared to be on collaborative learning more generally, rather than group projects; however, the contexts seemed sufficiently relevant for further consideration. Low relevance abstracts (score 3) were too far outside of the scope of this research to warrant further scrutiny.

The two numeric scores, one from each author, for each abstract were then added to obtain an overall score. Note that, in this scoring system, a low numeric score indicates high relevance. Those whose overall score was 2, 3 or 4 (meaning at least one researcher felt it was highly relevant, or both felt it was of mid relevance) were retained for full paper analysis. Where scores differed by 2 (one author scored the paper as 1 and the other as 3), the whole paper was read and discussed before a decision was made about its inclusion. The remainder, with scores of 5 or 6 (meaning that both researchers felt they were of low relevance, or one mid and the other low relevance) were excluded from the next stage of analysis.

Stage II: full paper review and initial themes

A total of 61 papers were identified through the abstract review stage described above. However, the authors were unable to find copies of 4 of these, so in total 57 papers were subsequently read (by the first author of this paper). Particularly relevant papers from which key findings emerged were also read by the second author, in order to clarify and strengthen developing themes.

During this stage of the analysis, three summary documents were created. The first document was used to summarise each paper in terms of the aims of the study, context, the approaches to group work described, and any key challenges and strategies identified. The second summary document was used to collate and develop potential themes around challenges. These initial themes were documented using descriptive titles with supporting extracts or notes under each theme and reference to the papers in which these appeared. See Table ​ Table1 1 for an example.

Example of a developing theme around challenges

The third summary document did the same for strategies rather than challenges. These three documents were created in parallel, with summary information from the first being used to inform the challenges and strategies themes being documented in the second and third. The initial groupings of examples of challenges and strategies were used to develop initial themes. These are presented briefly in this paper (see Tables ​ Tables4 4 and ​ and5), 5 ), but full discussion is focussed on the refined themes that emerged in the final stage of analysis, described below.

Initial themes: challenges

Initial themes: strategies

Stage III: final themes

As the review progressed it became clear that many of the initial themes were entangled or closely related and needed refining. Some initial themes, particularly with respect to the challenges, were therefore merged, either because there was significant overlap, or because there was a suitable over-arching theme (see Table ​ Table6 6 in Sect. " Results from Stage III (final themes) on Challenges "). On the other hand, particularly with respect to the strategies, some initial themes were too broad, so more detailed themes were created, for example, where strategies targeted different issues or were focussed on improving specific aspects (see Table ​ Table7 7 in Sect. " Results from Stage III (final themes) on Strategies ").

Initial and final themes on challenges

Initial and final themes on strategies

Discussion in this paper is structured around these refined themes, and examples from the studies are used to illustrate them. It also became apparent that there were important relationships between some of the themes. For example, some challenges sometimes occurred as a consequence of others.

Results from stage I (abstract review)

The 114 abstracts were reviewed and scored on relevance by both authors, as described in Sect. " Stage I: abstract review ". The inter-rater reliability is reported in Table ​ Table2. 2 . This shows the number and proportion of abstracts (out of the total 114) where: the two authors gave the same relevance score (agree); the scores differed by 1 (partially agree); and the scores differed by 2 (disagree).

Inter-rater reliability

The scores from both authors were added to give an overall score. ( Recall that, in this scoring system, a low numeric score indicates high relevance.) Twenty-one abstracts received an overall score of 2, meaning that they were ranked as high relevance by both authors. A further 17 abstracts had an overall score of 3 (were ranked as high relevance by one author and mid relevance by the other) and a further 23 had an overall score of 4 (were ranked as mid-relevance by both authors, or high by one author and low by the other). The remaining 53 abstracts received an overall score of 5 or 6, meaning that they were ranked as low relevance by at least one author. These papers were insufficiently relevant to be analysed further. A summary of the scores allocated to papers is provided in Table ​ Table3. 3 .

Scoring of abstracts

Further analysis of 57 of the top scoring 61 papers was performed in Stage II (4 of the original 61 could not be found). Details of the 61 papers are summarised in the table in the appendix. The table includes the title, first author, date of publication, and the relevance scores allocated in the abstract review process.

Results from stage II (full paper review and initial themes)

Summary notes were made on each paper and initial emergent themes identified that were relevant to the two research questions:

This resulted in 14 initial themes on challenges and 8 on strategies. These are given in Tables ​ Tables4 4 and ​ and5. 5 . The tables also show in which papers examples of these themes occurred (using the listing numbers from the table in the Appendix). In the next section these themes are further refined, in some cases merged into overarching themes or split into subthemes, and discussed in detail, with examples highlighted from the papers.

Results from stage III (final themes) on challenges

In this section, the final themes related to challenges are discussed. Nine final themes on this topic (which addresses the first research question) were identified. Table ​ Table6 6 shows how these 9 final themes relate to the initial 13 themes on challenges. For example, all initial themes that centred on negative feelings, and the reasons for them, were combined under one final theme. The final themes (labelled C1 to C9) are then discussed.

Theme C1: lack of clarity

Examples identified here mostly refer to unclear guidelines for students about: the task and how to carry it out; what role the tutor will take during the group work.

In [59] ‘unclear instructional guidelines’ was identified as an impediment to online group work, and [21] cites ‘unclear objectives’ as one of the primary reasons that project teams fail. A lack of clear expectations about how students should divide the work or allocate roles also causes students problems, as does lack of transparency about how work will be graded [53], especially where group marks (where all students receive the same mark) are used [2]. Lack of explicit advice and guidance can result in other problems, such as: timing issues, due to more time needing to be spent on decision-making (theme C2); how to operate as a group and allocate roles and tasks (themes C2 and C3) [53]; and emotional problems such as worry (theme C7).

Lack of clarity about the role of the tutor (or facilitator) causes problems for students and for tutors. Students are uncertain under what circumstances they can contact a tutor if issues emerge and how this could affect their final marks [94]. For tutors it is difficult to decide when to intervene with individuals or groups [65].

Theme C2: scheduling or time issues

Scheduling or timing issues are a well-documented problem in online group work, with tasks often taking longer than expected [9, 37, 85], and procrastination can be a problem [35, 37, 85, 86].

Although face-to-face group work is also prone to these issues, online groups generally find it harder to resolve logistical issues such as scheduling [84, 107]. Many factors are at play here, depending on the context. Group members may be in different time zones [21, 53, 59, 111] or obliged to work to different schedules [9, 21, 31]. In distance learning contexts, students are often in paid employment or have caring responsibilities. Sometimes students simply work at different rates [21].

Some scheduling issues occur because groups do not establish a proper work plan and are therefore constantly reacting to deadlines [50]. This can be symptomatic of unclear instructions (theme C1) or students’ lack of preparation before the work starts (theme C6), which means they do not develop the necessary skills to schedule activities or account for unanticipated lack of participation by some group members (theme C4). Another factor that can affect timing is the communication technology used; this is discussed in more detail later (theme C5).

Theme C3: unequal division of tasks and roles

Examples here are often due to students’ perceptions of how work is distributed within a group, including the role of leader. A perceived unequal division of the workload often causes bad feelings or negative perceptions of group work (see more in theme C7 later).

In [86], effective groups had a perceived leader and felt that work was evenly distributed, with some members taking on more small tasks and others fewer large tasks. In contrast, low performing groups were characterised by a lack of leadership. Where there was a (self-perceived) leader in these groups, this person felt that tasks were unfairly distributed, and that he or she bore most responsibility.

In [2], tutors who were responsible for supporting students and assessing the work felt, even more strongly than students, that tasks were unevenly distributed. Tutors felt that the more technically competent students did most of the work. In [61] three of the four groups had an inequitable distribution of work because of some members falling short, leaving others to ‘pick up the slack’. This provides a link later with theme C4 (Late or lack of participation).

Generally, a lack of clear roles for group members and a failure to agree a process for making decisions (either via a leader or otherwise) have a detrimental effect on group performance and cohesion [21, 53, 59, 61, 105]. As with the previous theme, this can result either from lack of guidance (theme C1) or from lack of skills in how to work as a group (theme C6). Having self-appointed leaders does not always succeed and is dependent on the group dynamics. For example, in some cases other students see leadership as dictatorship [59, 86]. Many students, not wishing to assume a leadership role, are reluctant to initiate communications and are glad when someone else assumes leadership [53]. In [3] several works are cited claiming that the more conscientious students assume the leadership role.

Theme C4: late or lack of participation

This is one of the most commonly cited difficulties in online group work; accountability is difficult to achieve. Group members often do not know each other; and communication technologies make it easier for students to ‘lurk’ or engage very little.

Absent or non-participating group members (either from the start of a project or disappearing part way through) are mentioned in many studies [2, 31, 35, 40, 59, 76, 84, 86, 94, 107]. This issue can contribute towards low performance in groups [31], unequal division of tasks [61] (theme C3), poor relationships (theme C8) and negative feelings (theme C7) [78, 84].

In [78] the authors provide a summary of the ways non-participating students have been referred to in earlier studies: ‘slackers’ (Payne & Monk-Turner, 2006 ), ‘social loafers’ (Shiue et al., 2010 ), and ‘free riders’ (Roberts & McInnerney, 2007 ). These terms imply’irresponsible students’ [15] who become a burden, doing less than everyone else, but potentially still getting the same marks. However [21], citing Roberts and McInnerney ( 2007 ), gives another reason for students withdrawing: they may feel ignored or that their contributions are not valued. Alternatively, students may not feel confident speaking up, due to dominant members or possible conflict [2]. Non-participation does not always connote irresponsibility.

Theme C5: Ineffective technology and tools

Ineffective communication tools, or the ineffective use of tools, is a common problem in online group work. There are several dimensions to the examples collated from the literature.

Technical problems, for example problems downloading other group members’ work, were identified in [31, 35, 59]. Students may lack ability or confidence with the tools provided and can lose the opportunity to develop technical skills if more confident students take over [15]. Providing tools with limited functionality, to create a simpler experience, may have an adverse effect on more capable students, resulting in feelings of frustration [2] (theme C7).

The types of communication supported by the tools also need to be considered. Online forums allow students to participate in discussions irrespective of time and availability, whilst providing a permanent record of interactions that students and tutors can use to keep track of group progress. However, forums can introduce a significant lag between posts [78], with the potential to cause delay to the work (theme C2). Keeping track of messages can also be time-consuming and difficult [37, 61, 85, 86].

With synchronous approaches, students’ conflicting schedules may lead to the exclusion of some group members [53]. Problems associated with relying solely on text-based modes of communication have been highlighted in some studies [29, 59]; for example, misunderstandings due to the lack of social or emotional cues, and feelings of isolation.

Theme C6: lack of preparation in group working skills

Several of the problems already discussed (see themes C2 and C3) can occur when students are inadequately prepared in the skills needed for group work.

In [21], a lack of essential group work skills is identified as a main problem. Symptoms of a lack of preparation in these skills were: absence of clearly defined roles, inadequate planning and scheduling, and an inability to deal with absent members or conflicts.

Several studies highlight particularly important attitudes and skills; if individual students lack these, it can impair group work. For example: a sense of individual accountability and consensus building [59]; giving and taking criticism [61, 63]; defining goals and constructively commenting on decisions [50]; conflict resolution and management, and negotiation [83, 76, 78] are all seen as key to successful group work.

Theme C7: negative feelings

Although some students realize the benefits of group work [35], negative feelings are extremely common.

Feelings can range from apathy, which seems linked with poor motivation and attitude [21, 53, 61], to outright hostility (Roberts & McInnerney, 2007 ), especially if students are inadequately prepared (theme C6). Whereas some online students appreciate the opportunity to work collaboratively, others feel it contravenes their decision to study online as it reduces their flexibility about when to study [37]. The use of group marks is a particular cause for grievance, especially when based on prior experiences of shared group marks that students felt were unfair [39, 76, 94]. Studies mention negative emotions such as fear [61], anxiety [2, 50, 76, 94], frustration [61, 64, 94] and stress [53]. These can be caused by: students being left to self-select groups [76]; conflict [94] or dominant personalities [2] (see theme C8 below); a lack of trust between group members [50]; and irresponsible group members [53].

Theme C8: weak or poor group relationships

Weak or poor relationships between group members can inhibit successful group work, and lead to negative perceptions (theme C7). Many of the papers reviewed cite relationship issues, both to identify them as a problem and to suggest reasons for them.

Weak relationships can be caused by students having insufficient time or opportunity for relationship building. This can be a problem with the design of the project or preparation of students (themes C1 or C6), as group formation (Tuckman, 1965 ) may take more time online. A lack of social presence [35, 36, 86, 97] and difficulties in building trust online [61] can affect group relationships. A group that does not build strong relationships, or a cohesive teamwork ethic, from the beginning can suffer from other challenges as a result.

Poor relationships can also emerge, or initially good relationships deteriorate, if other problems occur, such as personality clashes and disagreements [2, 86, 94]. This may happen at particularly challenging stages of the project. [83] identified that conflicts tend to arise three quarters of the way through a project, where results are expected but may not yet be delivered. Strong relationships help in resolving conflicts but weak relationships, leading to unresolved conflicts, can mean that members disengage from the project [83].

Theme C9: failure to achieve closure

Finally, as group work comes to an end, in what Tuckman and Jensen ( 1977 ) refer to as the ‘adjourning’ stage, challenges or problems may remain unaddressed and can continue to affect students after the group work has finished. This can produce extended unsettled or negative feelings [76, 94] (theme C7), and can lead to knock-on effects the next time students encounter group work, whether in an academic setting or otherwise.

Results from stage III (final themes) on strategies

In this section, the final themes related to strategies are discussed. Ten final themes on this topic (which addresses the second research question) were identified. Table ​ Table7 7 shows how these 10 final themes (labelled S1 to S10) relate to the initial 8 themes on strategies. The final themes are then discussed individually.

It became apparent during Stage II that two of the initial themes (Group project design; and Teaching and preparation) encompassed several more focussed themes. This resulted in these two themes being split into four (themes S1 to S4). In addition, elements from two other initial themes: (Group organisation; and Role of the tutor) were closely entangled; these were reorganised and separated out into two new themes (themes S6 and S7). Other initial themes were refined as evidence was gathered from the papers.

Theme S1: preparing students and clarifying tasks

A fundamental strategy for all educators designing and facilitating online group projects should be to prepare students, as a lack of preparation was found to be a cause of many of the challenges identified earlier. This includes being transparent about what is expected of students, such as giving examples of levels of contribution that are acceptable [76], and how they will achieve their goals. Some of the advice on how to provide clear guidance and prepare students prior to embarking on group work (thereby addressing themes C1 and C6) is summarised below.

The first step is convincing students of the value of group work [84]. Guidance material should be clear about the skills being developed and why they matter. Several studies emphasize the importance of guidance on all aspects of group work. In [65] the authors say this should include: the goal(s) of the project; essential tasks; participant roles; realistic timescales; keeping written records of meetings; and problem resolution procedures. Purpose, time frames, technology and assessment are mentioned in [85], and [84] emphasizes the need for succinct instructions on how to operate in an online environment.

In some approaches reviewed in this study, students are explicitly taught about the group work process, models for group work, and the roles that members can play—including the pros and cons of having a leader [1, 21, 59, 61, 76, 97, 105]. Negative feelings around group work (theme C7) could be improved through guidance materials clarifying supportive behaviours (e.g. showing empathy, clarification) and non-supportive behaviours (e.g. monopolizing discussions, defensive responses) [61]. In [21] training in team building and cohesion skills is specifically mentioned, and some studies discuss the importance of preparing groups for conflict resolution [21, 76].

Activities can be designed to prepare students and act as ice breakers – including opportunities for introductions, self-presentation and getting to know others [21, 85, 107, 108, 111]. Activities can include the development of ground rules [59, 61]. [76] advocates getting students to share strategies that they found helpful or unhelpful in previous group work.

The role of the tutor should be clearly stated for the benefit of both students and tutors. Tutor involvement may change during the project (see themes S6 and S7) but students should know: how to contact the tutor (both individually and as a group); whether the tutor will be observing interactions; and when students should ask for intervention and the process for initiating this [50, 61, 76, 78, 94].

Theme S2: designing group projects for increased student motivation

Motivating students to engage with group work can be difficult. Explaining the value of group work (as mentioned in theme S1) is one approach [84], highlighting the importance of group work skills for future careers, and for life more generally [35]. Studies found that a key to motivating students is ensuring tasks are based on authentic real-world problems, mirroring what professionals do, and building skills relevant to the workplace [2, 9, 20, 78, 113].

In [2] and [107] a motivating factor, and a way of promoting positive feelings (addressing theme C7), was enabling students to develop a product (e.g. a website) that they could be proud of. If students could show their final product to other groups, they were motivated to produce something very good [2]. Awarding marks or credit for individual contributions is also suggested for increasing student motivation [76, 85]. (This is discussed in more detail under theme S4.)

Theme S3: designing group projects for cooperative or collaborative work

It is important to consider how students are expected to work together. Should they work individually on subtasks, and then combine their work at the end, i.e. work cooperatively? Or should they work together on a product through constant interactions, i.e. work collaboratively? Although groups working cooperatively can function extremely effectively, collaboration skills are often what employers want and what designers of group projects wish to develop [15, 61, 78].

In [40], two online projects, each with several groups, were investigated. Despite differences in design of the two projects, the conclusion was that ‘if a group could find a way to split work, that is what it did’. Students like cooperative working as they are less dependent on others [109]; it potentially makes mark allocation less contentious, through individual marks, which may motivate students [53] (see theme S4 next).

In [15] a balance of collaborative and cooperative tasks is suggested, with collaborative tasks to encourage dialogue and group knowledge construction, and cooperative tasks allowing students to do some of the work separately. In [40] advice is given for designing group projects that are collaborative rather than cooperative. This includes creating ‘positive interdependence’ between tasks, to ensure each group member’s efforts are required to complete the overall tasks, and providing clear instructions on what collaboration should look like.

There are claims that cooperative working means less creativity and cohesion [15] and that ‘true training in group work’ comes from collaboration (Paulus, 2005 in [21]). However, cooperative working may alleviate difficulties such as unequal division of work (addressing theme C3) and time delays (addressing theme C2) caused by waiting for others to complete interdependent tasks. There is a balance to consider. Creating tasks which require positive interdependence, where students can only succeed if the group succeeds, encourages collaboration [59]. However, this may disaffect students and make them sceptical of group work (exacerbating theme C7).

Theme S4: designing assessment to encourage participation

One approach to assessing group work is to use group marks, where each member receives the same mark regardless of how much they contributed. This has already been shown to make many students sceptical about group work (theme C7). As discussed under theme C4, late or lack of participation by some group members is a primary challenge for groups. A way to increase participation is to foster individual accountability [59], most obviously through assessment and assigning marks.

Individualising marks recognises individual contributions [76, 113] and highlights uneven participation [65], especially if based on each member’s commitment, responsibility, and activity. Peer evaluation is one method that can be adopted, where group members rate each other, based on commitment to the project [53, 59]. However, care is needed with this approach as it may not always be done fairly and accurately [78]. Combining tutor, peer and possibly self-assessment can also be considered [50, 59]. Although individualising marks may be more burdensome for the tutor, some studies have shown that tutors nevertheless strive for fairness and the ‘best’ approach rather than taking the easiest [2, 39].

Theme S5: selecting tools and technology

The right selection of online tools for enabling online group projects is key; ineffective tools were shown to cause scheduling issues (theme C2) and negative feelings (theme C7). Tools should be easy to use, appropriate for the tasks, and should facilitate collaboration [53]; furthermore, a good combination of tools can encourage variation in the types of interaction [34, 86, 109]. Learning to use new tools was reported as motivational for some students [2, 34].

Much discussion has centred on the relative merits of synchronous and asynchronous technologies. In terms of synchronous technologies, Instant Messaging (IM) is most noticeably used and evaluated in the papers reviewed. In [95] it was found useful for task support and information exchange, and in [68] for coordinating joint decisions, and for making links between academic discussion, knowledge construction and task coordination. Opinions differ on whether IM is a good tool for social interactions and support. Task support rather than social support was observed in [95], but groups engaging in conversation via IM had a higher level of participation. In [68] social interactions using IM were observed. In general IM was found to be useful for moving things along [50, 68] although this depended on the context and whether different time zones were involved.

For asynchronous communication, forums were the most popular choice. Although forums usefully make participation visible [65], it was pointed out in [94] that forums hosted on a virtual learning environment and visible to tutors can make students wary about what they say. They do not want to appear less knowledgeable than their peers – in case they receive a lesser mark. For effective interaction, [61] suggests encouraging communication outside of the institution’s learning environment; [108] and [111] mention that students used social media.

Whereas earlier studies focus on forums, from around 2013 more mention is made of Web 2.0 tools such as wikis, blogs, website development tools [2, 27, 34], and collaborative spaces such as Google Docs [40, 53, 107]. These are designed for shared authoring, and can avoid duplication of work or keeping track of separate files [53]. In the context of asynchronous tools use, mobile phones and applications were suggested for reducing delays in responding [53] although surprisingly little is said in any of the papers about using mobile devices to facilitate online group work.

Although a few relatively recent papers mention the use of video or voice communications [e.g. 108, 109, 111], most of the methods of communication and tools discussed are text-based. Guidance (theme S1) is needed to prepare students for communicating in this way: for example, using an informal writing style, using appropriate abbreviations and expressing thoughts concisely [35].

Theme S6: careful group formation

This theme concerns how students are allocated to groups. What size groups should be used? Should group members have similar or mixed abilities? Are there cultural aspects to consider or different times that could cause scheduling problems (theme C2)? Is the tutor responsible for forming groups? These are all elements that can affect how well a group connects and performs.

Generally, studies agree that groups of fewer than five work best and are easier to manage [6, 12, 29, 53, 85]. However, if groups are too small, drop out or failure of a member to participate can have an impact on the rest of the group. Therefore, sometimes groups are chosen to have between five and eight students [2, 12]. Students generally feel more comfortable in smaller groups where they can get to know each other, feel they are better understood, and see their individual contributions recognised [6]. This helps promote more positive feelings and better group relationships (addressing themes C7 and C8). In [12] smaller groups performed better on convergent tasks (tasks that ‘converge towards a single goal’), whereas larger groups performed better on divergent tasks (where more than one outcome is possible and involving greater discussion).

Where composition of groups is discussed, diverse groups seem to be favoured. In [6] students preferred diverse groups because of the multiple views and insights. In [86] it is suggested that personality type scales can be used to form heterogenous groups. Avoiding minorities in a group is suggested in [77], as having minorities can promote negative feelings (theme C7); and [21] suggests that a distribution of skills, methods and work ethics within a group can promote interaction and broader investigations. In [28] it was found that in international group projects, students from the same culture tended to interact more with each other and that cross cultural or international collaboration needs more facilitation – so the role of the tutor may be more significant [111].

Letting students form their own groups can be stressful for them [76], so ideally the tutor should form the groups. This is not always easy in online settings if tutors do not know the students, their abilities, or levels of commitment. [76] found that students greatly appreciated ‘thoughtful composition’ (p.73) of groups. As discussed in theme S1, the design and scheduling of a group project should allow tutors to get to know students before allocating them to groups, and allow students within a group to get to know each other (addressing theme C8).

Theme S7: advising on group organisation and roles

Following formation, groups proceed to organise themselves, which is the focus of this theme. The early stages of a group project, the ‘forming’ stage (Tuckman, 1965 ) where students are getting to know each other, can involve allocating roles and tasks to group members. The importance of clearly explaining group roles, and how to operate as a group, prior to starting have already been highlighted in theme S1; there are ways of continuing to reinforce these concepts. Creating activities that help students understand and assign group roles is useful [49], to avoid problems related to division of tasks and roles (theme C3). The tutor’s role can include articulating expectations of students [76, 94], initiating networking opportunities and posting introductions [94] to help groups form trust and respect [1] and build stronger group relationships (addressing theme C8).

Creating activities that enable groups to establish a set of ‘ground rules’ or a ‘team agreement’ is a recommended approach [6, 15, 61]. Periodically reviewing these rules or agreements is important, as they can easily be forgotten as group work intensifies [61]. In terms of roles, whilst all groups are different, a common characteristic of successful groups is having a leader – particularly if this role can be agreed by the whole group and possibly distributed between several members [53, 105].

Finally, we return to the role of the tutor during the group work. Opinions differ on the level of tutor involvement once group work is underway. Although early involvement in the construction of groups and in support and facilitation [50] helps build trust [1], subsequently the tutor needs to step back to some degree. Their role becomes one described in [50] as ‘critical observer’. Tutors then need to: ‘monitor groups’ progress’ [78, 75]; ‘provide feedback on level of interactivity’ [83]; ‘ensure teams are functioning effectively’ [21]; and ‘give encouragement, making it clear when a student’s contribution was particularly astute or helpful’ [20].

In [76] and [109], students were reassured to know their tutors were present which may help alleviate negative feelings building up (theme C8). This is similar to findings in [94], where students wanted to know that tutors could give individual support and were available if needed; private email exchanges between student and tutor were suggested as a way of reassuring students. Several studies state that tutors should intervene where problems arise, such as by: prompting non-participating members [61, 76] or those participating insufficiently [78]; generally supporting groups that have difficulties [50, 21]; and pointing out when ground rules are not being observed [61].

Theme S8: managing and supporting group relationships

The two preceding themes focussed on the practicalities of forming and organising groups. Another key consideration, as we have seen in the challenges, is the emotional side of group work. Practicalities and emotional aspects cannot be completely separated, as effective group work often stems from good relationships between group members. Conversely, groups can break down because of poor or weak relationships (theme C8).

Establishing trust within groups is key [61, 76, 77]. Posting introductions and biographies helps, so it is worthwhile providing opportunities and activities for this [61]. The development of identity within a group, and self-representation, can create belonging, and help students to develop supportive relationships [1, 66]. As pointed out in [77], there is rarely time to develop deep interpersonal relationships. However, students do not always need deep relationships to build the necessary trust.

Reliability, dependability, and work ethic have been cited as the most important group member.qualities [1, 49]. If members demonstrate these traits early, and show they care about the task in hand, it can go a long way to help students feel connected to, and safe within, a group [77].

Fear, stress and worry are common negative emotions associated with group work. Preparing students and removing unnecessary uncertainties helps counteract these, as does ensuring that interventions – such as tutor involvement – can happen if needed [61] (theme C8). Conflict within groups is sometimes unavoidable. As shown in the previous section, personality clashes and disagreements can jeopardise group relationships and performance. But ensuring that students learn strategies for managing conflicts can help – and in some cases make a group stronger once it has emerged from a dispute [83]. In [78] is it suggested that absent members could be dealt with through conflict management within a group, instead of students taking on more work to make up for absentees, with issues being escalated to the tutor as a last resort (addressing theme C8).

Theme S9: mentoring and peer support

Besides tutor support, other strategies for supporting students were raised by some studies. Providing a dedicated forum was suggested in [35], and described in other studies, as a way to offer support via tutors and other students. Although a forum cannot replace the one-to-one support of a tutor, peer support can provide advice from a different perspective. Other studies suggest that online group projects allow students to develop skills as online leaders or forum moderators [97]; providing training and practice in these skills can be part of a group project [85].

Two studies focus on the use of ‘between-group collaboration’ and the mentoring of less effective groups by more effective ones [63, 64]. The studies found that between-group mentoring and reviewing was perceived favourably by students, and the performance of less effective groups improved through learning from others’ strengths and weaknesses. Enabling less effective groups to see other groups’ strategies made the projects more authentic, and motivated students to work harder and produce better work.

Theme S10: sharing, reflection and closure

Strategies identified here are concerned with how group projects are ended. As discussed in theme C9, if problems are left unaddressed, negative feelings can persist [76, 94] (theme C7) and affect students’ approaches to online group work in the future.

Students need opportunities to debrief and attain closure [94] and should be encouraged to reflect on what went well or badly [79], (addressing theme C9). Sharing with others what has been learned is considered helpful [94]. Sharing final products, where appropriate, has also been identified as a positive post-project activity. It celebrates groups’ achievements and encourages pride in their work [2, 94]. Including elements of self-reflection in a project can help students to evaluate the benefits and challenges of the experience, understand their own strengths and identify areas to improve [78].

Analysis and discussion

In this section we discuss the themes related to challenges and strategies, together with the relationships among them. We return to relevant literature identified earlier in the paper, in particular to the Community of Inquiry model (Garrison et al., 2000 ), as many of the elements of this model align well with the findings of our review.

Our detailed analysis of papers relevant to our research questions revealed nine themes relating to the challenges of online group projects. By further consideration of the detailed findings presented in Sect. " Results from Stage III (final themes) on Challenges ", including the links presented there between the various challenge themes, we identified some possible causative relationships between the challenges. This revealed that five challenges can tentatively be described as ‘primary’ because examples were found where they can lead to, or at least exacerbate, the other four. The primary challenge themes are: lack of clarity (C1); lack of participation (C4); ineffective technologies (C5); lack of preparation (C6); and failure to achieve closure (C9) (see Fig.  1 ). These primary challenges can contribute to secondary challenges: time issues (C2); unequal division of tasks (C3); negative feelings (C7); and poor relationships (C8). Figure  1 shows the various potential relationships among the challenge themes.

A summary of themes on challenges and the relationships between them

We return to the Community of Inquiry framework (Garrison et al., 2000 ) to consider, first, the primary challenges and why they so frequently occur. The ‘instructional design and organization’, aspect of teaching presence is particularly relevant. This is because the primary challenges arise if there is not a clear enough structure and narrative for students about what the tasks and goals are, and how students should work to achieve these goals. Lack of a clear design for group projects may result in some students failing to engage at all, and others struggling their way through.

The secondary challenges are more associated with the social presence aspect of the Community of Inquiry model: emotional (affective) expression; open communication; and group cohesion. In fact, a lack of social presence was identified in several studies to be the cause of poor group relationships (C8) and non-participation (C4); it results in students ‘holding back’, in order to avoid misunderstandings or conflict. Other examples were highlighted from the corpus of papers that showed how negative feelings were often associated with poor relationships and the breakdown of cohesive group working.

Strategies to address the challenges

Regarding strategies to address the above challenges, two main types of theme emerged: strategies related to designing group projects and preparing students; and strategies related to group relationships and support. The first of these more directly address the primary challenges, whilst the second type more directly address the secondary challenges.

Firstly, we consider ‘Designing group projects and preparing students’ (see Fig.  2 ). These strategies are focussed on practicalities and educators’ initial design choices prior to students starting a group project–what students will be required to do, how they will do it, how the project will be assessed, and the guidance students will be given. These aspects directly influence how well-prepared students are as they embark on a project. Strategies in this first category were about: preparing students (S1), designing for motivation (S2), cooperative/collaborative work (S3), assessment for participation (S4), and selecting technologies (S5). As shown in Fig.  2 , many of these strategies address the primary challenges identified by this review (and therefore also the secondary challenges).

Strategies related to practical choices and preparing students

All of these strategies relate to the ‘instructional design and organization’ element of teaching presence within the Community of Inquiry framework (Garrison et al., 2000 ). It is important to design online group projects so that tasks are clear, and students are well prepared. As summarised by Fiock ( 2020 ), activities should be well organised, easy for students to navigate, and reviewed for clarity and consistency. Authentic tasks, that match what professionals do in practice (Herrington et al, 2010 ; Lombardi, 2007 ), have been shown in this review to motivate students. Designing tasks so that students can work cooperatively (Paulus, 2005 ), dividing tasks between them for at least some of the project, is helpful for scheduling. It also enables a more individual marking scheme to be used, which in turn may encourage participation and reduce negative feelings towards the project.

An important aspect of designing online group projects is selecting collaboration tools. This review identified that discussion forums are still a common choice, often supported by other channels, including synchronous means of communicating. With the sudden move to online learning in 2020–2021 due to the Covid-19 pandemic (Rapanta et al., 2020 ) and increasing use of videoconferencing tools such as Zoom, Google hangouts and Microsoft Teams, the situation could change very rapidly.

We now move on to consider the second type of strategies identified (see Fig.  3 ) – ‘Group relationships and support’. These strategies are concerned with student support throughout the group work: ensuring groups keep on schedule, supporting them as they organise themselves, and helping them build and maintain strong working relationships. The strategies in this category are focused at the group level: group formation (S6), organisation (S7) and relationships (S8), peer support (S9) and reflection (S10).

Strategies related to group relationships and support

As shown in Fig.  3 , these strategies directly address the secondary ‘challenge’ themes (with the exception of C9) – particularly around counteracting negative feelings and poor relationships.

Returning to the Community of Inquiry framework, all three aspects of social presence (emotional expression; open communication; and group cohesion) need to be supported here. The ‘facilitating discourse’ element of teaching presence is particularly important for achieving this, as the tutor provides ongoing support for students’ online interactions. Although the tutor should not be overly present in online discussions, they should be available for both individual and group support, and able to provide encouragement and feedback at intervals, or intervene if problems arise.

Linking challenges and strategies

The analysis presented in this paper identifies: links among challenges (Fig.  1 ); and links between strategies and challenges (Figs.  2 and ​ and3). 3 ). All the strategies contribute to addressing several challenges; and most of the challenges can be addressed by several strategies. For example, challenge C8 (weak or poor group relationships) is addressed by four strategies: S6 (group formation), S7 (group organisation), S8 (group relationships) and S9 (peer support). Addressing the challenge of weak or poor group relationships may therefore require actions related to all these strategy themes. Negative feelings (C7) are addressed, directly or indirectly, by all the strategies; this highlights the importance of considering all the strategies identified in this review. If an educator is aware of a particular challenge in their own context, the analysis presented in this paper should enable them to identify strategies to address it.

Finally, we offer comments about limitations of this review, and possible future work. During the reviewing process it became apparent that a number of the strategies identified, though proposed and implemented by educators, had not been formally evaluated. This means that, even though they are advocated and used by practitioners, the research evidence for their efficacy may not be present. We therefore propose such evaluation as necessary future research. This could be achieved, for example, by surveying/interviewing students and tutors about specific strategies used, and gaining their views on whether these were of value.

In the context of a rapid global adoption of online learning, this paper has drawn together the experiences and findings of educators who have implemented online group projects. Based on a systematic literature review, the paper has thematically analysed the challenges posed by online group projects, and the strategies which have been proposed to address these challenges. The resulting nine ‘challenge’ themes and ten ‘strategy’ themes were presented and discussed, together with the relationships between them.

In summary, there is a need for educators to focus on two key strategic areas for addressing the challenges of online group projects:

• Careful design of all aspects of the project, together with thorough initial guidance and preparation for students
• Support for group relationships throughout the project.

We hope that this paper will help educators, particularly those new to online learning, to design and facilitate online group projects which students will find engaging, enjoyable and rewarding.

Biographies

is Senior Lecturer in the School of Computing and Communications at the UK Open University. She has many years’ experience of distance education, as a practitioner and researcher. Her research interests include: online collaborative learning; the role of emotions in online learning; and women in technology. She is Senior Fellow of the UK’s Higher Education Academy, and Associate Editor for the International Journal of Gender, Science and Technology.

is Professor of Online Education in the School of Computing and Communications at the UK Open University. She is an experienced online educator, and her research interests include: online learning; online collaboration; and quality in e-learning. She is Senior Fellow of the UK’s Higher Education Academy, and is the author of Online and Social Networking Communities: a best practice guide for educators , published by Routledge.

See Table ​ analysis8 8

The 61 papers identified for detailed analysis

* Unable to access paper therefore not included in analysis

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Contributor Information

Helen Donelan, Email: [email protected] .

Karen Kear, Email: [email protected] .

• Alden J. Assessment of individual student performance in online team projects. Online Learning. 2011; 15 (3):5. doi: 10.24059/olj.v15i3.193. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• An H, Kim S. The benefits and limitations of online group work in a teacher education program. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education. 2009; 17 (2):2465–2472. [ Google Scholar ]
• An H, Kim S, Kim B. Teacher perspectives on online collaborative learning: factors perceived as facilitating and impeding successful online group work. Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education. 2008; 8 (1):65–83. [ Google Scholar ]
• Andreasen LB, Nielsen JL. Dimensions of problem based learning: Dialogue and online collaboration in projects. Journal of Problem Based Learning in Higher Education. 2013; 1 (1):20. [ Google Scholar ]
• Aouine A, Mahdaoui L. Integration of examination strategies in e-learning platform for assessment of collaborative activities. International Journal of Information and Communication Technology Education. 2020; 16 (1):30–49. doi: 10.4018/IJICTE.2020010103. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Aouine A, Mahdaoui L, Moccozet L. A workflow-based solution to support the assessment of collaborative activities in e-learning. The International Journal of Information and Learning Technology. 2019; 36 (2):124–156. doi: 10.1108/IJILT-01-2018-0004. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Bakir N, Humpherys S, Dana K. Students’ perceptions of challenges and solutions to face-to-face and online group work. Information Systems Education Journal. 2020; 18 (5):75–88. [ Google Scholar ]
• Bakken, R. (2018). Challenges to managing virtual teams and how to overcome them. Harvard division of continuing education. Blog post available at https://www.extension.harvard.edu/professional-development/blog/challenges-managing-virtual-teams-and-how-overcome-them Accessed 23/7/2020.
• Bergeron K, Melrose S. Online graduate study health care learners’ perceptions of group work and helpful instructional behaviors. Journal of Educational Technology. 2006; 3 (1):71–77. [ Google Scholar ]
• Brindley JE, Walti C, Blaschke LM. Creating effective collaborative learning groups in an online environment. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning. 2009 doi: 10.19173/irrodl.v10i3.675. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Brown LA, Eastham NP, Ku H-Y. A performance evaluation of the collaborative efforts in an online group research project. Performance Improvement Quarterly. 2008; 19 (3):121–140. doi: 10.1111/j.1937-8327.2006.tb00381.x. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Cameron BA, Morgan K, Williams KC, Kostelecky KL. Group projects: student perceptions of the relationship between social tasks and a sense of community in online group work. American Journal of Distance Education. 2009; 23 (1):20–33. doi: 10.1080/08923640802664466. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Chandler K. Adapting voice-centred relational method to understand students’ experiences of synchronous online tuition. International Journal of Research & Method in Education. 2022 doi: 10.1080/1743727X.2022.2120980. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Chang B. Active knowledge sharing in online group work. New Horizons in Adult Education & Human Resource Development. 2018; 30 (3):41–59. doi: 10.1002/nha3.20222. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Chang B, Kang H. Challenges facing group work online. Distance Education. 2016; 37 (1):73–88. doi: 10.1080/01587919.2016.1154781. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Cheng EWL. Students working online for group projects: A test of an extended theory of planned behaviour model. Educational Psychology. 2017; 37 (9):1044–1056. doi: 10.1080/01443410.2016.1150424. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Choi H, Kang M. Applying an activity system to online collaborative group work analysis: Online group work analysis. British Journal of Educational Technology. 2010; 41 (5):776–795. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-8535.2009.00978.x. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Delaney D, Kummer T-F, Singh K. Evaluating the impact of online discussion boards on student engagement with group work: Evaluating impact of online discussion boards. British Journal of Educational Technology. 2019; 50 (2):902–920. doi: 10.1111/bjet.12614. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Donelan H, Kear K. Creating and collaborating: students’ and tutors’ perceptions of an online group project. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning. 2018 doi: 10.19173/irrodl.v19i2.3124. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Ekblaw R. Effective use of group projects in online learning. Contemporary Issues in Education Research. 2016; 9 (3):8. [ Google Scholar ]
• Fiock H. Designing a community of inquiry in online courses. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning. 2020; 21 (1):135–153. doi: 10.19173/irrodl.v20i5.3985. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Fisher M, Tucker D, Silverberg D. Quality issues of group work and leadership emergence in e-learning: Case study. Journal of Educational Technology Systems. 2005; 33 (4):367–384. doi: 10.2190/5V4H-V8DN-TBCM-UN0L. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Flannery KA, Malita M. An Interdisciplinary team project: psychology and computer science students create online cognitive tasks. College Teaching. 2014; 62 (4):143–149. doi: 10.1080/87567555.2014.956040. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Garrison DR, Anderson T, Archer W. Critical Inquiry in a Text-Based Environment: Computer Conferencing in Higher Education. The Internet and Higher Education. 2000; 2 (2–3):87–105. [ Google Scholar ]
• Gunawardena C, Zittle F. Social presence as a predictor of satisfaction within a computer-mediated conferencing environment. American Journal of Distance Education. 1997; 11 (3):8–26. doi: 10.1080/08923649709526970. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Gusenbauer M, Haddaway NR. Which academic search systems are suitable for systematic reviews or meta-analyses? Evaluating retrieval qualities of Google Scholar, PubMed, and 26 other resources. Research Synthesis methods. 2019 doi: 10.1002/jrsm.1378. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Haresnape J. Student perceptions of an assessed, online, collaborative activity. Practitioner Research in Higher Education. 2015; 9 (1):18–37. [ Google Scholar ]
• Hathorn LG, Ingram AL. Online collaboration: Making It Work. Educational Technology. 2002; 42 (1):33–40. [ Google Scholar ]
• Herrington J, Reeves TC, Oliver R. A guide to authentic elearning. Routledge; 2010. [ Google Scholar ]
• Hiltz SR, Goldman R, editors. (2005) Learning Together Online: Research on Asynchronous Learning Networks. Erlbaum; 2005. [ Google Scholar ]
• Hou H-T, Wu S-Y. Analyzing the social knowledge construction behavioral patterns of an online synchronous collaborative discussion instructional activity using an instant messaging tool: A case study. Computers & Education. 2011; 57 (2):1459–1468. doi: 10.1016/j.compedu.2011.02.012. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Hrastinski S. The relationship between adopting a synchronous medium and participation in online group work: An explorative study. Interactive Learning Environments. 2006; 14 (2):137–152. doi: 10.1080/10494820600800240. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Hur JW, Shen YW, Cho M-H. Impact of intercultural online collaboration project for pre-service teachers. Technology, Pedagogy and Education. 2020; 29 (1):1–17. doi: 10.1080/1475939X.2020.1716841. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Hurst GA. Online group work with a large cohort: challenges and new benefits. Journal of Chemical Education. 2020; 97 :2706–2710. doi: 10.1021/acs.jchemed.0c00750. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Jahng N, Nielsen WS, Chan EKH. Collaborative learning in an online course: a comparison of communication patterns in small and whole group activities. Journal of Distance Education. 2010; 24 (2):39–58. [ Google Scholar ]
• Ke F. Examining online teaching, cognitive, and social presence for adult students. Computers & Education. 2010; 55 (2010):808–820. doi: 10.1016/j.compedu.2010.03.013. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Kear K, Donelan H, Williams J. Using wikis for online group projects: Student and tutor perspectives. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning. 2014 doi: 10.19173/irrodl.v15i4.1753. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Kleinsasser R, Hong Y-C. Online group work design: processes, complexities, and intricacies. TechTrends. 2016; 60 (6):569–576. doi: 10.1007/s11528-016-0088-6. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Kreijns K, Kirschner PA, Jochems W. Identifying the pitfalls for social interaction in computer-supported collaborative learning environments: A review of the research. Computers in Human Behavior. 2003; 19 (3):335–353. doi: 10.1016/S0747-5632(02)00057-2. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Kritzer J, Bogan J. Favorability of strategies to facilitate online group work. Journal of Educators Online. 2020; 17 (2):2. [ Google Scholar ]
• Kumi-Yeboah A, Yuan G, Dogbey J. Online collaborative learning activities: The perceptions of culturally diverse graduate students. Online Learning Journal. 2017; 21 (4):5–28. [ Google Scholar ]
• Lee SJ, Ngampornchai A, Trail-Constant T, Abril A, Srinivasan S. Does a case-based online group project increase students' satisfaction with interaction in online courses? Active Learning in Higher Education. 2016; 17 (3):249–260. doi: 10.1177/1469787416654800. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Lin C-L, Hou H-T, Tsai C-C. Analyzing the social knowledge construction and online searching behavior of high school learners during a collaborative problem solving learning activity: A multi-dimensional behavioral pattern analysis. The Asia-Pacific Education Researcher. 2016; 25 (5–6):893–906. doi: 10.1007/s40299-016-0317-y. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Lombardi, M. M. (2007). Authentic learning for the 21st century: An overview. Educause LearningInitiative. Retrieved from: https://library.educause.edu/resources/2007/1/authentic-learning-for-the-21st-century-an-overview
• Lou Y. Learning to solve complex problems through between-group collaboration in project-based online courses. Distance Education. 2004; 25 (1):49–66. doi: 10.1080/0158791042000212459. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Lou Y, Kim MacGregor S. Enhancing project-based learning through online between-group collaboration. Educational Research and Evaluation. 2004; 10 (4–6):419–440. doi: 10.1080/13803610512331383509. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Lowes, S. (2014.). How much ‘group’ is there in online group work. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks. 18(1)
• Mallet DG. Asynchronous online collaboration as a flexible learning activity and an authentic assessment method in an undergraduate mathematics course. EURASIA Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education. 2008; 4 (2):1. doi: 10.12973/ejmste/75314. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Mandernach BJ, Donnelli E, Dailey A. Student-centered collaborative learning in the online classroom: perceptions of virtual group projects. Journal on School Educational Technology. 2007; 3 (2):31–37. [ Google Scholar ]
• McConnell D. Examining the dynamics of networked e-learning groups and communities. Studies in Higher Education. 2005; 30 (1):25–42. doi: 10.1080/0307507052000307777. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• McConnell D. E-learning Groups and Communities. Open University Press; 2006. [ Google Scholar ]
• Melrose S, Bergeron K. Instructor immediacy strategies to facilitate group work in online graduate study. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology. 2007 doi: 10.14742/ajet.1277. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Morgan K, Cameron BA, Williams KC. Student perceptions of social task development in online group project work. The Quarterly Review of Distance Education. 2009; 10 (3):285–294. [ Google Scholar ]
• Morgan K, Williams KC, Cameron BA, Wade CE. Faculty perceptions of online group work. The Quarterly Review of Distance Education. 2014; 15 (4):37–41. [ Google Scholar ]
• Newman M, Gough D. Systematic reviews in educational research: methodology, perspectives and application. In: Zawacki-Richter O, Kerres M, Bedenlier S, Bond M, Buntins K, editors. Systematic reviews in educational research. Wiesbaden: Springer VS; 2020. [ Google Scholar ]
• Oliveira I, Tinoca L, Pereira A. Online group work patterns: How to promote a successful collaboration. Computers & Education. 2011; 57 (1):1348–1357. doi: 10.1016/j.compedu.2011.01.017. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Oliver R, Herrington A, Herrington J, Reeves TC. Representing authentic learning designs supporting the development of online communities of learners. Journal of Learning Design. 2007; 2 (2):1–21. doi: 10.5204/jld.v2i2.36. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Olson J, Kalinski R. Making student online teams work. The Quarterly Review of Distance Education. 2017; 18 (4):1–22. [ Google Scholar ]
• Papanikolaou K, Boubouka M. Promoting collaboration in a project-based e-learning context. Journal of Research on Technology in Education. 2010; 43 (2):135–155. doi: 10.1080/15391523.2010.10782566. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Paulus TM. Collaborative and cooperative approaches to online group work: The impact of task type. Distance Education. 2005; 26 (1):111–125. doi: 10.1080/01587910500081343. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Payne BK, Monk-Turner E. Students' perceptions of group projects: The role of race, age, and slacking. College Student Journal. 2006; 40 :132–139. [ Google Scholar ]
• Rapanta C, Botturi L, Goodyear P, Guàrdia L, Koole M. Online university teaching during and after the Covid-19 crisis: refocusing teacher presence and learning activity. Postdigital Science and Education. 2020 doi: 10.1007/s42438-020-00155-yAccessed24/7/2020. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Remesal A, Colomina R. Social presence and online collaborative small group work: A socioconstructivist account. Computers & Education. 2013; 60 (1):357–367. doi: 10.1016/j.compedu.2012.07.009. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Rezaei A. Features of successful group work in online and physical courses. The Journal of Effective Teaching. 2017; 17 (3):5–22. [ Google Scholar ]
• Roberts T, McInnerney J. Seven problems of online group learning (and Their Solutions) Educational Technology and Society. 2007; 10 (4):257–268. [ Google Scholar ]
• Robinson K. The interrelationship of emotion and cognition when students undertake collaborative group work online: An interdisciplinary approach. Computers & Education. 2013; 62 :298–307. doi: 10.1016/j.compedu.2012.11.003. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Rockinson-Szapkiw A, Wendt J. Technologies that assist in online group work: A comparison of synchronous and asynchronous computer mediated communication technologies on students' learning and community. Journal of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia. 2015; 24 (3):263–279. [ Google Scholar ]
• Scherling SE. Designing and fostering effective online group projects. Adult Learning. 2011; 22 (2):13–18. doi: 10.1177/104515951102200202. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Shiue Y, Chiu C, Chang C. Exploring and mitigating social loafing in online communities. Computers in Human Behavior. 2010; 26 (4):768–777. doi: 10.1016/j.chb.2010.01.014. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Smallwood AMK, Brunner BR. Engaged learning through online collaborative public relations projects across universities. Journalism & Mass Communication Educator. 2017; 72 (4):442–460. doi: 10.1177/1077695816686440. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Smith GG, Sorensen C, Gump A, Heindel AJ, Caris M, Martinez CD. Overcoming student resistance to group work: Online versus face-to-face. The Internet and Higher Education. 2011; 14 (2):121–128. doi: 10.1016/j.iheduc.2010.09.005. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Stepanyan K, Mather R, Dalrymple R. Culture, role and group work: A social network analysis perspective on an online collaborative course: SNA perspective on an online collaborative course. British Journal of Educational Technology. 2014; 45 (4):676–693. doi: 10.1111/bjet.12076. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Suzuki, C., Ishida, K., Yoshihara, S., Schultheis, K., & Riedhammer, B. (2014). A quantitative and qualitative evaluation of student participants’ contribution to carrying out an online international collaborative project on education. Proceedings of the 2014 EUROCALL Conference , Groningen, The Netherlands, 345–351. 10.14705/rpnet.2014.000243
• Tan Y, Molinari C. Being mindful may not make you a team player: does meditation help or hurt online group work? Journal of Educators Online. 2017 doi: 10.9743/jeo.2017.14.2.4. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Thomas WR, MacGregor SK. Online project-based learning: how collaborative strategies and problem solving processes impact performance. Journal of Interactive Learning Research. 2005; 16 (1):83–107. [ Google Scholar ]
• Tuckman BW. Developmental sequence in small groups. Psychological Bulletin. 1965; 63 (6):384–399. doi: 10.1037/h0022100. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Tuckman BW, Jensen MC. Stages of small group development revisited. Group and Organizational Studies. 1977; 2 :419–427. doi: 10.1177/105960117700200404. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Wade CE, Cameron BA, Morgan K. Key components of online group projects. The Quarterly Review of Distance Education. 2016; 17 (1):33–41. [ Google Scholar ]
• Wade CE, Cameron BA, Morgan K, Williams KC. Are interpersonal relationships necessary for developing trust in online group projects? Distance Education. 2011; 32 (3):383–396. doi: 10.1080/01587919.2011.610288. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Williams KC, Morgan K, Cameron BA. How do students define their roles and responsibilities in online learning group projects? Distance Education. 2011; 32 (1):49–62. doi: 10.1080/01587919.2011.565498. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Winterbotham et al (2018) Department for Education Employer Skills Survey Report 2017. https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/746493/ESS_2017_UK_Report_Controlled_v06.00.pdf
• Wong B, Chiu Y, Copsey-Blake M, Nikolopoulou M. A mapping of graduate attributes: What can we expect from UK university students? Higher Education Research & Development. 2022; 41 (4):1340–1355. doi: 10.1080/07294360.2021.1882405. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Yilmaz R, Yilmaz GK. Vertical versus shared e-leadership approach in online project-based learning: A comparison of self-regulated learning skills, motivation and group collaboration processes. Journal of Computing in Higher Education. 2020; 32 :628–654. doi: 10.1007/s12528-020-09250-2. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Yu C-P, Kuo F-Y. Investigating the development of work-oriented groups in an e-learning environment. Educational Technology & Society. 2012; 15 (3):164–176. [ Google Scholar ]
• Yu Z, Li M. A bibliometric analysis of community of Inquiry in online learning contexts over twenty-five years. Education and Information Technologies. 2022 doi: 10.1007/s10639-022-11081-w. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Zhang K, Peng SW, Hung J. Online collaborative learning in a project-based learning environment in Taiwan: A case study on undergraduate students’ perspectives. Educational Media International. 2009; 46 (2):123–135. doi: 10.1080/09523980902933425. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Zhu Y, Gareis E, Bazzoni JO, Rolland D. A collaborative online project between New Zealand and New York. Business Communication Quarterly. 2005; 68 (1):81–96. doi: 10.1177/1080569904273715. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]

Centering Social Justice in Counselor Education: How Student Perspectives Can Help

Volume 14 - Issue 2

Sapna B. Chopra, Rebekah Smart, Yuying Tsong, Olga L. Mejía, Eric W. Price

This mixed methods program evaluation study was designed to assist faculty in better understanding students’ multicultural and social justice training experiences, with the goal of improving program curriculum and instruction. It also offers a model for counselor educators to assess student experiences and to make changes that center social justice. A total of 139 first-semester students and advanced practicum students responded to an online survey. The Consensual Qualitative Research-Modified (CQR-M) method was used to analyze brief written narratives. The Multicultural Counseling Competence and Training Survey (MCCTS) and the Advocacy Competencies Self-Assessment Survey (ACSA) were used to triangulate the qualitative data. Qualitative findings revealed student growth in awareness, knowledge, skills, and action, particularly for advanced students, with many students reporting a desire for more social justice instruction. Some students of color reported microaggressions and concerns that training centers White students. Quantitative analyses generally supported the qualitative findings and showed advanced students reporting higher multicultural and advocacy competencies compared to beginning students. Implications for counselor education are discussed.

Keywords : social justice, program evaluation, training, multicultural counseling, counselor education

In the midst of the COVID-19 pandemic and the long-standing inequities it brought to light, many universities began examining the ways that injustice unfolds within their institutions (Mull, 2020). Arredondo et al. (2020) noted that counseling and counselor education continue to uphold white supremacy and center the experiences of White people within theories, training, and research. White supremacy culture promotes Whiteness as the norm and standard, intersects with and reinforces other forms of oppression, and shows up in institutions in both overt and covert ways, such as emphasis on individualism, avoidance of conflict, and prioritizing White comfort (Okun, 2021). Arredondo et al. (2020) called for counselor educators to engage in social justice advocacy and to unpack covert White supremacy in training programs. The present study investigated the multicultural and social justice training experiences of students in a Western United States counseling program so that counseling faculty can be empowered to uncover biases and better integrate social justice in the curriculum.

Counselor education programs are products of the larger sociopolitical environment and dominant patriarchal, cis-heteronormative, Eurocentric culture that often fails to “challenge the hegemonic views that marginalize groups of people” which “perpetuate deficit-based ideologies” (Goodman et al., 2015, p. 148). For example, the focus on the individual in traditional counseling theories can reinforce oppression by failing to address the role of systemic oppression in a client’s distress (Singh et al., 2020). Counseling theory textbooks usually provide an ancillary section at the end of each chapter focusing on multicultural issues (Cross & Reinhardt, 2017). White supremacy culture is so ubiquitous that it is typically invisible to those immersed within it (DiAngelo, 2018). It is not surprising then that counseling is often viewed as a White, middle-class endeavor, and BIPOC (Black, Indigenous, and People of Color) clients frequently perceive that they should leave their cultural identities and experiences outside the counseling session (Turner, 2018). Counselor educators have been encouraged to reflect on how Eurocentric curricula and pedagogy may marginalize students and seek liberatory teaching practices that promote critical consciousness (Sharma & Hipolito-Delgado, 2021).

Students’ Perceptions of Their Growth, Learning Process, and Critiques of Their Training      Studies of mostly White graduate students show gains in expanding awareness of their own biases and privilege, knowledge about other cultures and experiences of oppression, as well as the importance of empowering and advocating for clients (Beer et al., 2012; Collins et al., 2015; Sanabria & DeLorenzi, 2019; Singh et al., 2010). Others indicated the benefits of integrating feminist principles in treatment (Hoover & Morrow, 2016; Singh et al., 2010). Consciousness-raising and self-reflection were key parts of multicultural and social justice learning (Collins et al., 2015; Hoover & Morrow, 2016), and could be emotionally challenging. Indeed, Goodman et al. (2018) identified a theme of internal grappling reflecting students’ experiences of intellectual and emotional struggle; others noted students’ experiences of overwhelm and isolation (Singh et al., 2010), as well as resistance, such as withdrawing or dismissing information that challenged their existing belief system (Seward, 2019). Researchers have also documented student complaints about their social justice training; for example, that social justice is not well integrated or that there was inadequate coverage of skills and action (Collins et al., 2015). Kozan and Blustein (2018) found that even among programs that espouse social justice, there was a lack of training in macro level advocacy skills. Barriers to engaging in advocacy included: lack of time (Field et al., 2019; Singh et al., 2010), emotional exhaustion stemming from observations of the harms caused by systemic inequities (Sanabria & DeLorenzi, 2019), and ill-informed supervisors (Sanabria & DeLorenzi, 2019).

The studies reviewed thus relied on samples of mainly White, cisgender, heterosexual women. Some noted that education on social justice is often centered on helping White students expand their awareness (Haskins & Singh, 2015). In one study focused on challenges faced by students of color, participants expressed frustration with the lack of diversity among their professors, classmates, and curriculum (Seward, 2019). Participants also experienced marginalization and disconnection when professors and students made offensive or culturally uninformed comments and when course content focused on teaching students with privileged identities. Students from marginalized communities also face isolation in academic settings and sometimes question the multicultural competence of their professors (Haskins & Singh, 2015), which in turn contributes to the underrepresentation of students of color in counseling and psychology (Arney et al., 2019).

The Present Study

Counselor educators must critically examine their curriculum, course materials, and overall learning climate for students (Haskins & Singh, 2015). Listening to students’ experiences and perceptions of their training offers faculty an opportunity to model cultural humility, gain useful feedback, and make necessary changes. Given the increased recognition of racial trauma and societal inequities, it is critical that counseling programs engage with students of diverse backgrounds as they seek to shift their pedagogy. Historically, academic institutions have responded to student demands with performative action rather than meaningful change (Zetzer, 2021). This mixed methods study is part of a larger process of counseling faculty working to invite student feedback and question internalized assumptions and biases in order to implement real change. The goal of program evaluation is to investigate strengths and weaknesses in order to improve the program (Royse et al., 2010). According to the 2024 Council for Accreditation of Counseling and Related Educational Programs (CACREP) standards, program evaluation is essential to assess and improve the program (CACREP, 2023). Thus, the purpose of this program evaluation study was to understand students’ self-assessment and experiences with the counseling program’s curriculum in the area of multicultural and social justice advocacy, with the overarching goal of program curriculum and instruction improvement. This article offers counselor educators a model of how to assess program effectiveness in multicultural and social justice teaching and practical suggestions based on the findings. The research questions were: What are beginning and advanced students’ self-perceptions regarding their multicultural and social justice advocacy competencies? What are beginning and advanced students’ perceptions of the multicultural and social justice advocacy competencies training they are receiving in their program?

We employed a mixed method, embedded design in which the quantitative data offered a supportive and secondary role to the qualitative results (Creswell et al., 2003). Qualitative and mixed methods research designs are particularly useful in program evaluation (Royse et al., 2010). Mixed method approaches also offer value in research that centers social justice advocacy, as the integration of diverse methodological techniques within a single study fosters the understanding of multiple perspectives and facilitates a deeper comprehension of intricate issues (Ponterotto et al., 2013). We used an online survey to collect written narratives (qualitative) and survey data (quantitative) from two counseling courses: a beginning counseling course in the first semester (beginning students), and an advanced practicum course, taken by those who had completed at least part of their year-long practicum (advanced students).

Participants      Participants were counseling students enrolled in a CACREP-accredited program at a large West Coast public university in the United States that is both a federally designated Hispanic-serving institution and an Asian American and Native American Pacific Islander–serving institution. Responses were collected from two courses, which included 94 beginning students (84% response rate) and 62 advanced students (71% response rate). Twelve percent of the advanced practicum students also completed the survey when they were first-semester (beginning) students. The mean age of the 139 participants was 27.7 ( SD = 7.11), ranging from 20 to 58 years. Racial identifications were 40.3% White, 33.1% Latinx, 14.4% Asian, 7.2% Biracial or Multiracial, 2.9% Black, 0.7% Middle Eastern, 0.7% American Indian/Alaska Native, and 0.7% Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander. The majority identified as women (82.0%), followed by 14.4% as men, and 2.9% as nonbinary/queer. Students self-identified as heterosexual (71.2%), bisexual (11.5%), lesbian/gay (6.5%), queer (4.3%), pansexual (1.4%), and about 1% each as asexual, heteroflexible, and unsure. About 19.4% of students were enrolled in a bilingual/bicultural (Spanish/Latinx) emphasis within the program.

Procedure      After receiving university IRB approval, graduate students enrolled in the first-semester beginning counseling course (fall 2018 and 2019) or the advanced practicum course (summer 2019 and 2020) were asked to complete an online survey through Qualtrics with both quantitative measures and open-ended questions as part of their preparation for class discussion. Students were informed that this homework would not be graded and was not intended to “test” their knowledge but rather would serve as an opportunity to reflect on their experience of the program’s multicultural and social justice training. Students were also given the option to participate in the current study by giving permission for their answers to be used. Those who consented were asked to continue to complete the demographic questionnaire. In accordance with the American Counseling Association Code of Ethics (2014), students were informed that there would be no repercussions for not participating. A faculty member outside the counseling program managed the collection of and access to the raw data in order to protect the identities of the students and ensure that their participation or lack of participation in the study could not affect their grade for the course or standing in the program. All students, regardless of participation status, were given the option to enter an opportunity drawing for a small cash prize ($20 for data collection in 2018 and 2019, $25 for 2020) through a separate link not connected to their survey responses.

Data Collection      We collected brief written qualitative data and responses to two quantitative measures from both beginning and advanced students.

Qualitative Data      The faculty developed open-ended questions that would elicit student feedback on their multicultural and social justice training. Prior to beginning the counseling program, first-semester students were asked two questions about their experiences and impressions: How would you describe your knowledge about and interest in multiculturalism/diversity and social justice from a personal and/or academic perspective? and How would you describe your initial impressions or experience of the focus on multicultural and social justice in the program so far? They were also asked, if it was relevant, to include their experience in the Latinx counseling emphasis program component. Advanced students, who were seeing clients, were asked the same questions and also asked to: Consider/describe how this experience of multiculturalism and social justice in the program may impact you personally and professionally (particularly in work with clients) in the future.

Quantitative Data      Two instruments were selected to quantitatively assess students’ perceptions of their own multicultural and advocacy competencies. The Multicultural Counseling Competence and Training Survey (MCCTS; Holcomb-McCoy & Myers, 1999) is designed to assess counselors’ perceptions of their multicultural competence and the effectiveness of their training. The survey contains 32 statements for which participants answer on a 4-point Likert scale ( not competent , somewhat competent , competent , extremely competent ). Sample items include: “I can discuss family therapy from a cultural/ethnic perspective” and “I am able to discuss how my culture has influenced the way I think.” The reliability coefficients for each of the five components of the MCCTS ranged from .66 to .92: Multicultural Knowledge (.92), Multicultural Awareness (.92), Definitions of Terms (.79), Knowledge of Racial Identity Development Theories (.66), and Multicultural Skills (.91; Holcomb-McCoy & Myers, 1999). In this study, the Cronbach’s alpha coefficients ranged from .75 to .96.

The Advocacy Competencies Self-Assessment Survey (ACSA; Ratts & Ford, 2010) assesses for competency and effectiveness across six domains: (a) client/student empowerment, (b) community collaboration, (c) public information, (d) client/student advocacy, (e) systems advocacy, and (f) social/political advocacy. It contains 30 statements that ask participants to respond with “almost always,” “sometimes,” or “almost never.” Sample questions include “I help clients identify external barriers that affect their development” and “I lobby legislators and policy makers to create social change.” Although Ratts and Ford (2010) did not provide psychometrics of the original ACSA, it was validated with mental health counselors (Bvunzawabaya, 2012), suggesting an adequate internal consistency for the overall measure, but not the specific domains. In this study, the Cronbach’s alpha coefficients ranged from .69 to.79 for the six domains, and .94 for the overall scale. For the purposes of this study, we were not interested in specific domains and used the overall scale to assess students’ overall social justice/advocacy competencies.

Data Analysis Qualitative Data Analysis      To analyze the qualitative data, we used Consensual Qualitative Research-Modified (CQR-M; Spangler et al., 2012), which was based on Hill et al.’s (2005) CQR but modified for larger numbers of participants with briefer responses. In contrast to the in-depth analysis of a small number of interviews, CQR-M was ideal for our data, which consisted of brief written responses from 139 participants. CQR-M involves a consensus process rather than interrater reliability among judges, who discuss and code the narratives, and relies on a bottom-up approach, in which categories (i.e., themes) are derived directly from the data rather than using a pre-existing thematic structure. Frequencies (i.e., how many participants were represented in each category) are then calculated. We analyzed the beginning and advanced students’ responses separately, as the questions were adjusted for their time spent in the program.

After immersing themselves in the data, the first two authors, Sapna B. Chopra and Rebekah Smart, met to outline a preliminary coding structure, then met repeatedly to revise the coding into more abstract categories and subcategories. The computer program NVivo was used to organize the coding process and determine frequencies. After all data were coded, the fifth author, Eric W. Price, served as auditor and provided feedback on the overall coding structure. Both the consensus process and use of an auditor are helpful in countering biases and preconceptions. Brief quantitative data, as used in this study, can be used effectively as a means of triangulation (Spangler et al., 2012).

Quantitative Data Analysis      To examine for significant differences in the self-perceptions of multicultural competencies and advocacy competencies between White and BIPOC students as well as between beginning and advanced students, a two-way (2×2) ANOVA was conducted with the overall MCCT as the criterion variable and student levels (beginning, advanced) and race (White, BIPOC) as the two independent variables. In addition, two (5×2) multivariate analyses of variances (MANOVAs) were conducted with the five factors of multicultural competencies (knowledge, awareness, definition of terms, racial identity, and skills) as criterion variables and with student levels (beginning, advanced) and student races (White, BIPOC) as independent variables in each analysis. Data for beginning and advanced students were analyzed separately to assess whether time in the counseling program helped to expand their interest and commitment to social justice.

Research Team      We were intentional in examining our own social identities and potential biases throughout the research process. Chopra is a second-generation South Asian American, heterosexual, cisgender woman. Smart is a White European American, heterosexual, cisgender woman. Yuying Tsong identifies as a genderqueer first-generation Taiwanese and Chinese American immigrant. Olga L. Mejía is an Indigenous-identified Mexican immigrant, bisexual, cisgender woman. Price is a White, gay, cisgender male. All have experience as counselor educators and in qualitative research methods, and all have been actively engaged in decolonizing their syllabi and incorporating multicultural and social justice into their pedagogy.

The research process was guided by the overarching question: What are beginning and advanced counseling students’ perceptions of their multicultural and social justice competencies and training and how can their feedback be used to improve their counselor education program? We explore the qualitative findings first, as the primary data for the study, followed by the quantitative data.

Qualitative Findings for Beginning Counseling Students      Two higher-order categories emerged from the beginning students’ narratives: developing competencies and learning process so far.

Developing Competencies      Students’ descriptions of the competencies they were developing included themes of awareness, knowledge, and skills and action. Some students entered the program with an already heightened awareness, while others were making new discoveries. Awareness included subthemes of humility (24.5%), awareness of own privilege (6.4%), and awareness of bias (3.2%). “There’s a lot to learn” was a typical sentiment, particularly from White students. One White female student wrote: “I definitely need more and I believe that open discussions, even hard ones would be some of the best ways to go about this.” A large group expressed knowledge of oppression and systemic inequities (33%); a smaller group referenced intersectionality ( 3.2%). Within skills and action, some students expressed specific intentions in allyship (11.7%); a number of students expressed commitment to social action but felt unsure how to engage in social justice (11.7%).

Learning Process So Far      Central themes in this category were support for growth, concerns in training, and internal challenges. Some students felt excited and supported, while some were cautiously optimistic or concerned. Support for growth was a strong theme that reflected excited and enthusiastic to learn (22.3%); appreciation for the Latinx emphasis (18.1%); and receiving support from professors and program (17.0%). For example, one Mexican student in the Latinx emphasis who noted that mental health was rarely discussed in her family shared: “For me to see that there is a program that teaches students how to communicate to individuals who are unsure of what counseling is about, gave me a sense of happiness and relief.”

A few students were adopting a wait-and-see attitude and expressed some concerns about their training. Although the percentage for these subthemes is low, they provide an important experience that we want to amplify. This theme had multiple subthemes. The subtheme concerns from students of color included centering White students (3.2%), microaggressions (3.2%), and lack of representation (1.1%). A student who identified as a Mexican immigrant shared experiences of microaggressions, including classmates using a hurtful derogatory phrase referring to immigrants with no comment from the professor until the student raised the issue. Concerns in training also included the subtheme concerns with how material is presented in classes (7.0%). For some, the concern related to the potential for harm in classes in which White and BIPOC students were encouraged to process issues of privilege and oppression. For example, one Asian Pacific Islander student wrote that although they appreciated the emphasis on social justice, “Time always runs out and I believe it’s careless and dangerous to cut off these types of conversations in a rushed manner.” A small minority seemed to suggest a backlash to the emphasis on social justice, stating that the content was presented in ways that were too “politically correct,” “biased,” or “repetitive.”

      Multiple subthemes emerged from the theme of internal challenges . Both BIPOC and White students shared feeling afraid to speak up (5.3%). BIPOC students expressed struggling with confidence or wanting to avoid conflict, while White students’ fear of speaking up was also connected to discomfort and uncertainty as a White person (2.1%). A small minority of White students did not express explicit discomfort but seemed to engage in a color-blind strategy, as indicated in the theme of people are people (2.1%): “I find people are people, regardless of any differences, and love hearing the good and bad about everybody’s experiences.” Some students of color expressed limited knowledge about cultures other than one’s own (4.3%). For example, an Asian American student stated that they had gravitated to “those who were most similar to me” growing up. Lastly, a few students shared feeling overwhelmed and exhausted (3.2%).

Qualitative Findings for Advanced Counseling Students      Four higher-order themes emerged: competencies in process, multiculturalism and diversity in the program, social justice in the program, and the learning process.

Competencies in Process      Similar to beginning students, advanced students described growing self-awareness, knowledge and awareness of others, skills, and action. Their disclosures often related to clinical work, now that they had been seeing clients. Self-awareness included strong subthemes of: humility and desire to keep learning (25.8%); increased open-mindedness, acceptance of others, and compassion (22.6%); awareness of personal privilege and oppression (17.7%); awareness of personal bias and value systems (17.7%); and awareness of personal cultural identity (14.5%). One Mexican American student wrote: “I have also gained an increased awareness of how my prejudices can impact my work with clients and learned about how to check-in with myself.”

     Knowledge and awareness of others had subthemes of privilege and oppression (19.4%) and increased knowledge of culture (14.5%), with awareness of the potential impact on clients. The advanced students also had more to say about skills, which included subthemes of diversity considerations in conceptualization (29%), and in treatment (12.9%), and cultural conversations in the therapy room (21%). One White student wrote: “I have been able to have difficult conversations that once were unheard of. I have also been able to bring culture, ethnicity, and oppression into the room so that my clients can feel understood and safe.” Within the theme of action , 52% wrote about their commitment to social justice and intention to advocate . Although this strongest subtheme suggested action was still more aspirational than currently enacted, a smaller group also wrote about the experiences that they have already had with client advocacy (12.9%), community and/or political action (12.9%), and unspecified action (11.3%).

Multiculturalism and Diversity in the Program      Many students (44%) indicated that they appreciated that multicultural issues were integrated or addressed well within the program. However, with more time spent in the program, 26% felt that there was more nuance, depth, or scope needed. Some wanted more attention to specific issues, such as disability, gender identity, and religion/spirituality. One Asian American student wrote that the focus had been “basic and surface-level,” adding “I feel like it has also generally catered to the protection of White feelings and voices, which is inherently complicit in the system of White supremacy, especially in higher ed.” Others (9.7%) said more training in clinical application was needed.

Social Justice in the Program      Students expressed a variety of opinions. The largest number (29%) were satisfied that social justice issues were well integrated into the program. Although more students were satisfied than not, many (24%) noted that social justice is addressed but not demonstrated . Similarly, 24% noted minimal attention, specifically that social justice was not addressed much beyond the one course focused on culture, and 24% noted a desire for more opportunities within the program to engage in advocacy. Some suggested requiring social justice work rather than leaving it as an optional activity. Others (13%), mostly from 2020, noted the relevance of current events and sociopolitical climate. One White student shared about a presentation on Black Lives Matter: “This project opened my eyes to my limited knowledge of systemic oppression in the U.S. and impacted me in ways that I will NEVER be the same.” A small number of students (3%) reported that there was no need or room for more training in social justice. One White student wrote that they felt “frustrated” and that the social justice “agenda is so in my face all the time,” adding “sometimes I feel like I am being trained to be an advocate and an activist, which is/are a different job.”

The Learning Process      Three central themes emerged : enrichment experienced, challenges, and suggestions for change . Many students were appreciative of their experience. A strong subtheme within enrichment experienced was professors’ encouragement and modeling (24%). Others commented on how much came from learning from peers (21%). Some shared feeling personally empowered (14.5%). For example, a student who identified as coming from an Asian culture wrote about the hesitancy to be an activist, stating, “There is an underlying belief that our voices will not really ever be heard which is strongly tied to systemic oppression and racism throughout history. Consequently, I appreciate this challenge to grow more in social justice issues.” Others shared ways that the program prompted them to engage in social justice outside the classroom (11.3%). For example, one student wrote: “This program gave me the knowledge and education I needed to make sure that when I did speak out I wasn’t just talking to talk. I would actually have facts, stats, evidence-based research to back up my argument.” A number of students noted the unique benefits of the Latinx program (9.7%). One Mexican American student reflected that they had learned about diversity within Latinx cultures, and that, “As a result, I feel more confident in being able to serve clients from various Latinx cultures or at least know where to obtain relevant information when needed.” Many students expressed a sense of belonging (8.1%).

     Challenges. Nearly 10% wrote about struggling to make time [for social justice] and 6.5% noted the emotional impact. For example, one White student wrote: “It was a rude and brutal awakening, to say the least. It was riddled with emotion and heartache but was worth the process.” A few had conflicted or mixed feelings (8.1%) — they felt appreciative but wanted more . A few noted possible harm to marginalized students (6.5%). One Asian American student wrote that faculty should be “calling out microaggressions . . . otherwise, their stance on social justice feels more performative and about protecting their own liability rather than caring for their students of color.” A smaller number (4.8%) struggled with peers and colleagues who seemed uninformed.

     Suggestions for Change. Students offered suggestions for improvement, with a strong theme to develop more diverse representation (16.1%), including more representation in faculty, students, case examples, and class discussions. Some comments were specifically about needed attention to Black experiences; one concerned teaching about resiliencies and strengths in the face of oppression. Almost 15% suggested making changes to courses or curriculum . One White student wrote: “If it were me running the program (lol) I would . . . remove the culture class and have all those topics embedded into the fabric of each class because culture and diversity are in all those topics.” A few suggested that faculty require social justice assignments (8.1%), adding that many students will not act unless required. A few also suggested that the program provide more education of White students (8.1%).

Quantitative Findings Quantitative analyses were conducted to provide triangulation for the qualitative findings and a different view of the data, including possible differences between BIPOC and White students and beginning and advanced students. Table 1 includes descriptive statistics providing an overview of beginning and advanced students’ self-perception of their multicultural and social justice competencies.

Table 1 Descriptive Statistics of Competencies

To examine if there were discernable differences between the beginning and advanced students’ perceptions of their competencies, and if there were differences between White and BIPOC students, a two-way (2×2) ANOVA was conducted with the overall MCCT as the criterion variable and student levels (beginning, advanced) and race (White, BIPOC) as the two independent variables. Results indicated that although there were no interaction effects between race and student levels, there were significant differences in overall multicultural competencies between beginning and advanced students, F (1, 152) = 30.54, p < .001, indicating that advanced practicum students reported significantly higher overall multicultural competencies than beginning students. There were no statistically significant differences between White and BIPOC students in their overall multicultural competencies. Two (5×2) MANOVAs were conducted with the five factors of multicultural competencies as criterion variables (knowledge, awareness, definition of terms, racial identity, and skills). Student levels (beginning, advanced) and student race (White, BIPOC) were independent variables. Results indicated that there were significant differences between beginning and advanced students in at least one of the multicultural competencies components, Wilks’ Lambda = .72, F (5, 150) = 11.97, p < .001. More specifically, follow-up univariate ANOVAs indicated that advanced students reported significantly higher multicultural competencies in their knowledge, F (1, 154) = 43.74, p < .001, µ 2 = .22; awareness, F (1, 154) = 6.20, p = .014, µ 2 = .04; and racial identity, F (1, 154) = 43.17, p < .001, µ 2 = .21. However, there were no significant differences in definitions of terms or skills. Even though there were no significant differences between White and BIPOC students in their overall multicultural competencies, the results of the 5×2 MANOVA indicated that there were significant differences in at least one of the components, Wilks’ Lambda = .87, F (5, 150) = 4.49, p = .001. Follow-up univariate ANOVAs indicated that White students reported higher multicultural competencies in racial identity than BIPOC students in this study, F (1, 154) = 4.51, p = .035, µ 2 = .03. There were no differences in the other areas.

A two-way (2×2) ANOVA was conducted with the overall ACSA as the criterion variable and student levels (beginning, advanced) and race (White, BIPOC) as the two independent variables. Results indicated that while there were no interaction effects between race and student levels, there were significant differences in overall advocacy competencies between beginning and advanced students, F (1, 152) = 10.78, p = .001, indicating that advanced students reported significantly higher overall advocacy competencies ( M = 76.68) than beginning students ( M = 63.02). There were no statistically significant differences between White and BIPOC students in their overall advocacy competencies.

This study was designed to examine students’ experiences of their multicultural and social justice training as an aspect of program evaluation, specifically to assist faculty in improving curriculum and instruction with regard to multicultural and advocacy competencies; the study also offers a unique contribution to existing literature by including a more racially diverse (60% BIPOC) sample. Students reported growth in the core areas of multicultural and social justice competency as outlined by Ratts et al. (2016): awareness, knowledge, skills, and action. Consistent with Field et al.’s (2019) findings, students reported more growth in awareness and knowledge than in social justice action, with some differences as students moved through the program. Although beginning students identified personal biases, the theme of self-awareness was more complex for them later in the program. This suggests that a longer time spent in the program contributed to personal growth; although this seems expected, these outcomes have not necessarily been examined before and confirm that the programs’ increasing effort on multiculturalism and social justice are showing gains. The advanced students wrote about clinical application as well and made overt statements of their commitment to social justice. The quantitative results supported these qualitative findings, with advanced students reporting higher multicultural competencies in knowledge, awareness, and racial identity and higher overall advocacy competencies compared to beginning students. With one exception, there were no significant differences between White and BIPOC students in their self-assessment of multicultural or advocacy competencies. Across racial groups, students expressed humility and desire to learn more.

Although students expressed mixed opinions about their experience of the multicultural and social justice training, a greater number of advanced students reported that they thought multicultural (44%) and social justice issues (30%) were well integrated into the program compared to the number of students with critiques. Students reported that support from faculty and peers facilitated their growth and learning, consistent with previous research (e.g., Beer et al., 2012; Keum & Miller, 2020). Some students noted a sense of belonging, particularly those in the Latinx emphasis.

Similar to other researchers, we found that many students wanted social justice issues to be integrated across the curriculum rather than into one course (Beer et al., 2012; Collins et al., 2015); they also wanted more focus on skills and action (Collins et al., 2015; Kozan & Blustein, 2018). Students’ scores on the ACSA advocacy competencies scale reflect this gap in training as well. Though fewer students offered critiques of their training, these responses are important to amplify because some of these concerns are rarely solicited or acknowledged. For example, BIPOC students echoed the challenges faced by students in Seward’s (2019) study, including lack of representation in their faculty, classmates, and curriculum as well as feelings of marginalization when microaggressions in the classroom went unchecked and when instruction centered the needs of White students. Additionally, a few advanced students from 2020, during a time of significant racial-sociopolitical uprising in the United States, expressed concern that class discussions potentially caused harm to students from marginalized communities. Though more students expressed a desire for greater in-depth training, a small minority of mostly White students indicated that they did not want more social justice training and would rather focus solely on traditional counseling skills. These different student perspectives point to the challenges of teaching social justice amidst diverse political and ideological backgrounds and the need to increase community and collaboration.

Listening to Student Feedback and Implications for Decolonizing Program Curriculum      This study’s findings support the benefits of listening to students’ voices related to multicultural and social justice to inform counselor educators on program strengths and areas for growth. Although student feedback was not the sole impetus for making program changes, accessing this more detailed response was helpful in refining our purpose and direction, as well as highlighting weaknesses. Perhaps more important was the faculty’s willingness to engage in this self-reflective process and to take necessary actions. Rather than waiting for exit interview feedback from graduating students, counselor educators can conduct ongoing program evaluations through anonymous online surveys as well as town hall meetings that invite students to share their process of learning, perceptions of the cultural climate, and experiences of microaggressions. We have a growing understanding that during such evaluations great care needs to be taken for building safety, so as not to retraumatize students from marginalized communities. Based on the results and a series of Zoom town hall meetings, we have implemented changes, such as more consistent integration of social justice across the curriculum; training and day-long retreats focused on increasing faculty competence; faculty participation in Academics for Black Survival and Wellness, an intensive training led by Dr. Della Mosely and Pearis Bellamy; accountability support groups in social justice work; and decolonizing syllabi and class content (e.g., including BIPOC voices and non–APA-style writing assignments). Faculty have also made significant modifications to course materials. For example, beginning students complete weekly modules that include readings and exercises from The Racial Healing Handbook (Singh, 2019), and students study Liberation Psychology during the first week of theories class so they can consider ways to decolonize more traditional models throughout the semester. These strategies have been helpful in preparing students for more difficult conversations surrounding anti-racism in more advanced courses throughout the program. Forming faculty accountability partners or small groups is helpful so that faculty can support each other as a part of their ongoing development in addressing internalized White supremacy and avoiding harm to students.

Student feedback also called attention to the need for self-care, which our program continues to explore. Consistent with previous research (Collins et al., 2015; L. A. Goodman et al., 2018; Hoover & Morrow, 2016; Singh et al., 2010), students reported that their multicultural and social justice learning was often accompanied by moments of overwhelm, hopelessness, and despair. Without tools to manage these emotions, some students may retreat into defensiveness and withdrawal (Seward, 2019), and some may experience activist burnout (Gorski, 2019). Sustainability is necessary for effective social change efforts (Toporek & Ahluwalia, 2021). Counseling programs can offer resources and guidance for students to practice self-care with counselor educators modeling self-care behavior. For example, the Psychology of Radical Healing Collective (Chen et al., 2019) offered strategies to practice radical self-care, including making space for one’s own healing, finding joy and a sense of belonging, and engaging in advocacy at the local community level. Mindfulness practices can be integrated into social justice education to help students and counselor educators manage difficult emotions, increase their ability to be present, and strengthen compassion and curiosity (Berila, 2016). In addition to individual self-care practices, counselor educators can advocate for community care by tending to the community’s needs and drawing on collective experience and wisdom (Gorski, 2019).

The findings point to the need for counselor educators to better address Whiteness and White supremacy, as well as to center the experiences of students from marginalized communities. Counselor educators may be able to mobilize and direct White students’ feelings of guilt into racial consciousness and action by helping them explore Whiteness, White privilege, and what it means to them while allowing and confronting feelings that arise (Grzanka et al., 2019). It may be helpful for educators to read and assign books on White fragility and ways to address it (DiAngelo, 2018; Helms, 2020; Saad, 2020), so that they can assist White students in managing these emotions. It is important that educators explicitly name and recognize White supremacy as it shows up in counseling theory and practice, and to include a shift from the primary focus on the individual to understanding and dismantling oppressive systems. Counselor educators must also attend to the ways in which they center the comfort of White students over the needs of BIPOC students, so that they do not perpetuate harm and trauma (Galán et al., 2021). Although students with privileged identities may learn powerful lessons about oppression from their classmates, it is important that such learning does not occur at the expense of students with marginalized identities. Offering spaces for White students, especially those who are new to conversations about race and racism, to process their feelings may be helpful to avoid harm to BIPOC students who have experienced racial trauma. Similarly, BIPOC students may benefit from spaces in which they can talk freely and support each other as they unpack their own experiences of microaggressions and trauma (Galán et al., 2021).

Based on the finding that support from faculty was important in facilitating student growth and learning, counselor educators may benefit from implementing strategies informed by relational pedagogy and relational–cultural theory (Dorn-Medeiros et al., 2020). Relational pedagogy centers the relationship between teachers and students and posits that all learning takes place in relationships. Relational–cultural theory emphasizes mutual empathy and empowerment and is rooted in feminist multicultural principles. Practices grounded in these approaches include professors’ use of self-disclosure to model openness, vulnerability, and self-reflection; and their work to reduce power imbalances and invite student feedback at multiple points in time through anonymous surveys and one-on-one meetings. Counselor educators can uplift students as the experts of their experience (Sharma & Hipolito-Delgado, 2021).

Limitations and Future Research      The results of this study must be considered in light of a number of limitations. The use of the online survey meant that we were not able to follow up with students for further discussion or clarification of their responses. Adding focus groups or interviews to this methodology would likely provide a more thorough picture. In spite of assurances to the contrary, some students may have been hesitant to be honest out of concern that their own professors would be reading their feedback. It is possible that different themes would have emerged if all students had participated. In addition, 12% of the advanced students had participated as beginning students and therefore were previously exposed to the survey materials. Although this could have impacted their later responses, we suspect that given the nearly 2-year time lapse this may not have been meaningful. Nevertheless, future research and program evaluation would be strengthened with longitudinal analyses. Lastly, the reliability for the ACSA was relatively low, so conclusions are tentative; however, the results support the qualitative data. Despite these limitations, this study offers a model for assessing students’ learning and experiences with the goal of program improvement. The process of counselor educators humbling themselves and inviting and integrating student feedback is an important step in decolonizing counselor education and better serving students and the clients and communities that they will serve.

Conflict of Interest and Funding Disclosure The authors reported no conflict of interest or funding contributions for the development of this manuscript.

American Counseling Association. (2014). ACA code of ethics. https://www.counseling.org/docs/default-source/default-document-library/ethics/2014-aca-code-of-ethics.pdf?sfvrsn=55ab73d0_1

Arney, E. N., Lee, S. Y., Printz, D. M. B., Stewart, C. E., & Shuttleworth, S. P. (2019). Strategies for increased racial diversity and inclusion in graduate psychology programs. In M. T. Williams, D. C. Rosen, & J. W. Kanter (Eds.), Eliminating race-based mental health disparities: Promoting equity and culturally responsive care across settings (pp. 227–242). Context Press.

Arredondo, P., D’Andrea, M., & Lee, C. (2020). Unmasking White supremacy and racism in the counseling profession. Counseling Today . https://ctarchive.counseling.org/2020/09/unmasking-white-supremacy-and-racism-in-the-counseling-profession

Beer, A. M., Spanierman, L. B., Greene, J. C., & Todd, N. R. (2012). Counseling psychology trainees’ perceptions of training and commitments to social justice. Journal of Counseling Psychology , 59 (1), 120–133. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0026325

Berila, B. (2016). Integrating mindfulness into anti-oppression pedagogy: Social justice in higher education . Routledge.

Bvunzawabaya, B. (2012). Social justice counseling: Establishing psychometric properties for the Advocacy Competencies Self-Assessment Survey (Doctoral dissertation, Auburn University). https://etd.auburn.edu/handle/10415/3369

Chen, G. A., Neville, H. A., Lewis, J. A., Adames, H. Y., Chavez-Dueñas, N. Y., Mosley, D. V., & French, B. H. (2019). Radical self-care in the face of mounting racial stress: Cultivating hope through acts of affirmation. Psychology Today . https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/healing-through-social-justice/201911/radical-self-care-in-the-face-mounting-racial-stress

Collins, S., Arthur, N., Brown, C., & Kennedy, B. (2015). Student perspectives: Graduate education facilitation of multicultural counseling and social justice competency. Training and Education in Professional Psychology , 9 (2), 153–160. https://doi.org/10.1037/tep0000070

Council for the Accreditation of Counseling and Related Educational Programs. (2023). 2024 CACREP standards. https://www.cacrep.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/06/2024-Standards-Combined-Version-6.27.23.pdf

Creswell, J. W., Plano Clark, V. L., Gutmann, M. L., & Hanson, W. E. (2003). Advanced mixed methods research designs. In A. Tashakkori & C. Teddlie (Eds.), SAGE handbook of mixed methods in social and behavioral research (1st ed.; pp. 209–240). SAGE.

Cross, W. E., Jr., & Reinhardt, J. S. (2017). Whiteness and serendipity . The Counseling Psychologist , 45 (5), 697–705. https://doi.org/10.1177/0011000017719551

DiAngelo, R. (2018). White fragility: Why it’s so hard for White people to talk about racism . Beacon Press.

Dorn-Medeiros, C. M., Christensen, J. K., Lértora, I. M., & Croffie, A. L. (2020). Relational strategies for teaching multicultural courses in counselor education. Journal of Multicultural Counseling and Development , 48 (3), 149–160. https://doi.org/10.1002/jmcd.12174

Field, T. A., Ghoston, M. R., Grimes, T. O., Sturm, D. C., Kaur, M., Aninditya, A., & Toomey, M. (2019). Trainee counselor development of social justice counseling competencies. Journal for Social Action in Counseling and Psychology , 11 (1), 33–50. https://doi.org/10.33043/JSACP.11.1.33-50

Galán, C. A., Bekele, B., Boness, C., Bowdring, M., Call, C., Hails, K., McPhee, J., Mendes, S. H., Moses, J., Northrup, J., Rupert, P., Savell, S., Sequeira, S., Tervo-Clemmens, B., Tung, I., Vanwoerden, S., Womack, S., & Yilmaz, B. (2021). Editorial: A call to action for an antiracist clinical science.  Journal of Clinical Child and Adolescent Psychology ,  50 (1), 12–57. https://doi.org/10.1080/15374416.2020.1860066

Goodman, L. A., Wilson, J. M., Helms, J. E., Greenstein, N., & Medzhitova, J. (2018). Becoming an advocate: Processes and outcomes of a relationship-centered advocacy training model. The Counseling Psychologist, 46 (2), 122–153. https://doi.org/10.1177/0011000018757168

Goodman, R. D., Williams, J. M., Chung, R. C.-Y., Talleyrand, R. M., Douglass, A. M., McMahon, H. G., & Bemak, F. (2015). Decolonizing traditional pedagogies and practices in counseling and psychology education: A move towards social justice and action. In R. D. Goodman & P. C. Gorski (Eds.), Decolonizing “multicultural” counseling through social justice (pp. 147–164). Springer.

Gorski, P. C. (2019). Fighting racism, battling burnout: Causes of activist burnout in US racial justice activists. Ethnic and Racial Studies , 42 (5), 667–687. https://doi.org/10.1080/01419870.2018.1439981

Grzanka, P. R., Gonzalez, K. A., & Spanierman, L. B. (2019). White supremacy and counseling psychology: A critical–conceptual framework. The Counseling Psychologist , 47 (4), 478–529. https://doi.org/10.1177/0011000019880843

Haskins, N. H., & Singh, A. (2015). Critical race theory and counselor education pedagogy: Creating equitable training. Counselor Education and Supervision , 54 (4), 288–301. https://doi.org/10.1002/ceas.12027

Helms, J. E. (2020). A race is a nice thing to have: A guide to being a White person or understanding the White persons in your life (3rd ed.). Cognella.

Hill, C. E., Knox, S., Thompson, B. J., Williams, E. N., Hess, S. A., & Ladany, N. (2005). Consensual qualitative research: An update.  Journal of Counseling Psychology , 52(2), 196–205. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0167.52.2.196

Holcomb-McCoy, C. C., & Myers, J. E. (1999). Multicultural competence and counselor training: A national survey. Journal of Counseling & Development , 77 (3), 294–302. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.1556-6676.1999.tb02452.x

Hoover, S. M., & Morrow, S. L. (2016). A qualitative study of feminist multicultural trainees’ social justice development. Journal of Counseling & Development , 94 (3), 306–318. https://doi.org/10.1002/jcad.12087

Keum, B. T., & Miller, M. J. (2020). Social justice interdependence among students in counseling psychology training programs: Group actor-partner interdependence model of social justice attitudes, training program norms, advocacy intentions, and peer relationships. Journal of Counseling Psychology , 67 (2), 141–155. https://doi.org/10.1037/cou0000390

Kozan, S., & Blustein, D. L. (2018). Implementing social change: A qualitative analysis of counseling psychologists’ engagement in advocacy. The Counseling Psychologist , 46 (2), 154–189. https://doi.org/10.1177/0011000018756882

Mull, R. C. (2020). Colleges are in for a racial reckoning. The Chronicle of Higher Education . https://www.chronicle.com/article/colleges-are-in-for-a-racial-reckoning

Okun, T. (2021). White supremacy culture – Still here. https://drive.google.com/file/d/1XR_7M_9qa64zZ00_JyFVTAjmjVU-uSz8/view

Ponterotto, J. G., Mathew, J. T., & Raughley, B. (2013). The value of mixed methods designs to social justice research in counseling and psychology. Journal for Social Action in Counseling and Psychology , 5 (2), 42–68. https://doi.org/10.33043/JSACP.5.2.42-68

Ratts, M. J., & Ford, A. (2010). Advocacy Competencies Self-Assessment (ACSA) Survey©: A tool for measuring advocacy competence. In M. J. Ratts, R. L. Toporek, & J. A. Lewis (Eds.), ACA advocacy competencies: A social justice framework for counselors (pp. 21–26). American Counseling Association.

Ratts, M. J., Singh, A. A., Nassar-McMillan, S., Butler, S. K., & McCullough, J. R. (2016). Multicultural and social justice counseling competencies: Guidelines for the counseling profession. Journal of Multicultural Counseling and Development , 44 (1), 28–48. https://doi.org/10.1002/jmcd.12035

Royse, D., Thyer, B. A., & Padgett, D. K. (2010). Program evaluation: An introduction (5th ed.). Cengage.

Saad, L. F. (2020). Me and White supremacy: Combat racism, change the world, and become a good ancestor . Sourcebooks.

Sanabria, S., & DeLorenzi, L. (2019). Social justice pre-practicum: Enhancing social justice identity through experiential learning. Journal for Social Action in Counseling and Psychology , 11 (2), 35–53. https://doi.org/10.33043/JSACP.11.2.35-53

Seward, D. X. (2019). Multicultural training resistances: Critical incidents for students of color. Counselor Education and Supervision , 58 (1), 33–48. https://doi.org/10.1002/ceas.12122

Sharma, J., & Hipolito-Delgado, C. P. (2021). Promoting anti-racism and critical consciousness through a critical counseling theories course. Teaching and Supervision in Counseling , 3(2), 15–25. https://doi.org/10.7290/tsc030203

Singh, A. A. (2019).  The racial healing handbook: Practical activities to help you challenge privilege, confront systemic racism, and engage in collective healing.  New Harbinger.

Singh, A. A., Appling, B., & Trepal, H. (2020). Using the multicultural and social justice counseling competencies to decolonize counseling practice: The important roles of theory, power, and action. Journal of Counseling & Development , 98 (3), 261–271. https://doi.org/10.1002/jcad.12321

Singh, A. A., Hofsess, C. D., Boyer, E. M., Kwong, A., Lau, A. S. M., McLain, M., & Haggins, K. L. (2010). Social justice and counseling psychology: Listening to the voices of doctoral trainees. The Counseling Psychologist , 38 (6), 766–795. https://doi.org/10.1177/0011000010362559

Spangler, P. T., Liu, J., & Hill, C. E. (2012). Consensual qualitative research for simple qualitative data: An introduction to CQR-M. In C. E. Hill (Ed.), Consensual qualitative research: A practical resource for investigating social science phenomena (pp. 269–283). American Psychological Association.

Toporek, R. L., & Ahluwalia, M. K. (2021). Taking action: Creating social change through strength, solidarity, strategy, and sustainability. Cognella Press.

Turner, D. (2018). “You shall not replace us!” White supremacy, psychotherapy and decolonisation. Journal of Critical Psychology, Counselling and Psychotherapy , 18 (1), 1–12. https://cris.brighton.ac.uk/ws/portalfiles/portal/495044/JCPCP+18-1+-+Turner+article.pdf

Zetzer, H. A. (2021). Decolonizing the curriculum in health service psychology. Association of Psychology Training Clinics Bulletin: Practicum Education & Training , 20–22. https://aptc.org/images/File/newsletter/APTC_Bulletin_PET_2021_Spring%20FINAL.pdf

Sapna B. Chopra , PhD, is an associate professor at California State University, Fullerton. Rebekah Smart, PhD, is a professor at California State University, Fullerton. Yuying Tsong , PhD, is a professor and Associate Vice President for Student Academic Support at California State University, Fullerton. Olga L. Mejía, PhD, is a licensed psychologist and an associate professor at California State University, Fullerton. Eric W. Price, PhD, is an associate professor at California State University, Fullerton. Correspondence may be addressed to Sapna B. Chopra, Department of Human Services, California State University, Fullerton, P.O. Box 6868, Fullerton, CA 92834-6868, [email protected].

Recent Publications

• Examination of the Bystander Intervention Model Among Middle School Students: A Preliminary Study September 13, 2024
• Centering Social Justice in Counselor Education: How Student Perspectives Can Help September 13, 2024
• 2024 Dissertation Excellence Awards August 8, 2024
• Career Counselors Addressing Social Determinants of Mental Health in Rural Communities May 22, 2024

Mapping Employable Skills in Higher Education Curriculum Using LLMs

• September 2024
• In book: Technology Enhanced Learning for Inclusive and Equitable Quality Education (pp.18-32)

• This person is not on ResearchGate, or hasn't claimed this research yet.

Discover the world's research

• 25+ million members
• 160+ million publication pages
• 2.3+ billion citations

No full-text available

To read the full-text of this research, you can request a copy directly from the authors.

• Guanliang Chen

• George Siemens

• Interchange

• Arts Humanit High Educ

• Jennifer Clark

• Erik Nielsen

• Jingfeng Yang

• P NATL ACAD SCI USA
• Fabrizio Gilardi
• Meysam Alizadeh
• Haewoon Kwak

• Douwe Kiela

• Shane Dawson
• Harry Hubball

• James Kaupp
• Brain Frank
• Robert Brennan
• Christopher Watts
• K Christopher Watts

• J Vocat Educ Train

• R. S. Sutton

• Joy Goodfellow
• Michael W. Berry

• Elizabeth R. Jessup
• EDUC PSYCHOL MEAS
• Jacob Cohen

• Recruit researchers
• Join for free
• Login Email Tip: Most researchers use their institutional email address as their ResearchGate login Password Forgot password? Keep me logged in Log in or Continue with Google Welcome back! Please log in. Email · Hint Tip: Most researchers use their institutional email address as their ResearchGate login Password Forgot password? Keep me logged in Log in or Continue with Google No account? Sign up