Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

A mismatch remains between the skills employers seek in new hires and the skills applicants possess. This study encompassed an evaluation of the impacts of the Quality Enhancement Program on students’ work readiness competencies, including oral, written, and digital communication skills, at Nunez Community College. The Quality Enhancement Program initiative involved embedding Conover Workplace Readiness^® online training modules into English and communication courses to enhance professional skills. A non-experimental pre-post evaluation was used to investigate whether students’ oral, written, and digital communication skills were improved after participation in the Quality Enhancement Program coursework. Data were analyzed using (a) pre- and post-implementation grades, (b) rubric scores, (c) student survey scores, and (d) faculty survey scores. The evidence showed significant improvement in students’ oral, written, and digital communication skills after participation in Quality Enhancement Program courses, workshops, and modules, resulting in improved employability skills. Whereas students expressed confidence in their improved communication skills, teachers were more cautious about the extent of the gains. Although localized, this study has implications for addressing community college students’ work readiness globally, given worldwide skills gap concerns.

Keywords

soft skills work readiness online soft skill training quality enhancement program community college

Introduction

Labor shortages and unfilled positions are a global phenomenon as economies worldwide struggle to recover and rebuild workforces after the COVID-19 pandemic. Countries such as Australia, Brazil, Canada, Germany, and Japan are experiencing labor shortages across many industries (KPMG, 2023; United Nations News, 2023). For example, Germany’s job vacancy rates have remained at 3.6% since early 2023, with over 1.7 million unfilled jobs (Destatis, 2023; Trading Economics, 2023). In Australia, over 400,000 jobs remain unfilled, with vacancies around 3% (Australian Bureau of Statistics, 2023). While Canada’s unemployment remained at 4.1% in 2023, indicating a persistent tight labor market (Statistics Canada, 2023), Japan reported 1.35 jobs per applicant, reflecting an ongoing labor shortage (Nishioka, 2023).

Although the unemployment rate in the United States remains low at 3.4%, many jobs remain unfilled, leaving employers facing a labor shortage (U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2022, 2023). There are currently over 11 million job openings nationwide (USBLS). For instance, Louisiana has 117,000 unfilled positions (Louisiana Workforce Commission, 2023). In addition, underemployment remains an issue, with 4.9 million Americans classified as part-time for economic reasons, meaning they would prefer full-time work but cannot find it (USBLS). The federal workforce saw a 29% decrease in new hires in 2022 compared to 2021, reflecting spillover from the labor shortage disruption in the private sector (Partnership for Public Service, 2023). Factors like retirements and shifting family care responsibilities stemming from the pandemic contribute to worker scarcity.

The national and state labor shortages have created significant obstacles for small businesses and exacerbated supply chain problems, with many major retailers (e.g., Macy’s), chain restaurants (e.g., Chipotle, McDonald’s, Starbucks), and private businesses reducing their hours of operation. Despite the abundance of job openings in public and private sectors in Louisiana, a mismatch remains between the skill sets that employers seek in new hires and the skills applicants possess (USBLS, 2022).

Employers worldwide call for higher education to prioritize providing students with the work readiness skills to compete in the 21st-century workforce. Recent international surveys identified significant gaps between the skills students gain in college and those necessary to obtain employment (Rakowska & de Juana-Espinosa, 2021; Tagulwa et al., 2023). For example, in Italy, Succi and Canovi (2020) found that only 35% of students self-reported their employability skills matched those sought by employers. Given the international focus on employability (see Idkhan et al., 2021; Ong et al., 2022), examining strategies such as embedded soft skills training in community colleges provides valuable insights that are potentially generalizable across postsecondary education and national contexts.

The question centers around the pivotal role that community colleges traditionally had in preparing students with the skills necessary to perform the essential functions of their positions and whether that mission remains relevant in the current labor market and during the pandemic. During an October 2021 board meeting, Higher Education Commissioner Harrison Keller said that the expectation of educational leadership was that enrollment in community colleges would increase during the pandemic, as they have historically done when unemployment increases during economic recessions, Students seek inexpensive alternatives to upskilling or retooling in their preparation to re-enter the workforce (McGee, 2021). However, there was a significant decrease of 11.58% in student enrollment at community colleges since the pandemic began in 2019 (National Student Clearinghouse Research Center [NSCRC], 2022). Meanwhile, enrollment at public universities increased by 2%, independent university enrollments showed no increase, and health-related institution enrollments increased by 10% (NSCRC, 2022). Although, Nunez Community College, the one outlier among Louisiana community colleges, reported a 3% growth in student enrollment (NSCRC, 2022)

The central argument lies in the value of training in soft skills, employability skills, and work readiness within the community college setting. Oral, written, and digital communication skills are the focus of this article, following Daniel Goleman’s emotional intelligence framework. Terms such as soft skills, reference a specific set of work readiness skills (Lyu & Liu, 2021). The focus on these employability skills is based on the research regarding the skill sets that employers need workers to possess (Cappelli, 2015; National Association of Colleges and Employers, 2021; Rhew et al., 2019), expanding the evidence that solid work readiness skills are positively related to social, career, and vocational outcomes, and the missions of community colleges to ready students for the workplace and to serve their communities. The primary assumption regarding work readiness and community colleges is that students can obtain gainful employment after completing a technical certificate or two-year education at a community college.

In the United States, community colleges are two-year undergraduate institutions providing affordable postsecondary education with a mission to serve their local communities (American Association of Community Colleges [AACC], 2019). They offer vocational certificate programs, associate degrees, and transfer programs permitting students to transfer to four-year colleges. Compared to public and private four-year universities, community college student populations exhibit greater racial, ethnic, and socioeconomic diversity (AACC). Community colleges provide flexible scheduling, affordable tuition, and open enrollment, making them an accessible option for a broad range of non-traditional students, including part-time students, individuals with lower socioeconomic status, returning adults, and first-generation students (AACC).

An increasing focus of research and local, state, and federal policymakers is whether community colleges can provide all of the skills necessary for a worker to upskill or retool, meeting industry demands for fully qualified workers (Cotner et al., 2021; Holzer, 2021; Yamashita & Cummins, 2021). Traditionally, community colleges have played a key role in workforce development, preparing students with job-relevant skills. However, many community colleges use traditional curriculums that do not prepare students with the soft skills required for the 21st-century workplace (Macheridis & Paulsson, 2021). Moreover, accelerating technological changes and ever-changing industry skill demands raise questions about whether community college curricula and offerings have kept pace (Cotner et al., 2021).

Policymakers and researchers began examining community colleges’ capabilities to equip students and current workers with the full range of skill sets and competencies employers expect, especially given the current labor shortages (Holzer, 2021). Some researchers and policymakers argue that community colleges must implement curricular changes to include hard and soft skills required to compete in the 21st-century workforce (Yamashita & Cummins, 2021). Understanding community colleges’ ability to provide specific training aligned to emerging employability gaps has become essential, given their mission to serve local workforce needs.

Nunez Community College, the site of this research, became an independent institution in 1999, honoring local Judge Leander Perez Jr. It serves the workforce and lifelong learning needs of Louisiana’s St. Bernard Parish region. The community college has a mission of providing accessible, affordable workforce training, college transfer pathways, and technical education for its community (Nunez Community College, 2023). The purpose of this study was to conduct a program evaluation of the Quality Enhancement Program (QEP) initiative implemented at Nunez Community College to investigate whether students’ oral, written, and digital communication skill sets were improved after participation in the quality enhancement program coursework, which included embedded online Conover Workplace Readiness^® (CWR^®) modules at Nunez Community College. Specifically, Nunez Community College implemented the Quality QEP to improve students’ professional communication skills (e.g., oral, written, and digital skills), resulting in improved work readiness and employability.

Conceptual Framework

Daniel Goleman’s (1995) two-factor emotional intelligence (EI) model, based on Salovey and Mayer’s four-branch EI model, provides the conceptual framework for this study. Salovey and Mayer’s (1990) early definition of emotional intelligence was “the ability to monitor one’s own and other people’s emotions, to discriminate between different emotions and label them appropriately, and how to use the information to guide thinking and behavior” (p. 107). Goleman expanded that definition, indicating that emotional intelligence is “a person’s ability to manage their feelings so that those feelings are expressed appropriately and effectively” (p. 107). Expressing emotions appropriately and effectively is a part of a person’s oral, written, and digital communication skills (Goleman, 1995). According to Goleman (1995), “emotional intelligence is the largest single predictor of success in the workplace” (p. 2).

Goleman (1995) expanded Salovey and Mayer’s (1990) EI model, incorporating four emotional intelligence constructs, including (a) self-awareness, which is an individual’s ability to comprehend their feelings and the effect they have on other people while employing intuition to guide their decision making, (b) self-management, which is an individual’s ability to self-regulate their mood and impulsivity, making adjustments to environmental circumstances, (c) social awareness, which is an individual’s ability to identify and understand another individual’s feelings while understanding group social interactions and connections, and (d) relationship management, which is a person’s capability to manage interpersonal conflicts while making a positive impact or by influencing other people through positive personal development (Goleman, 1998).

Goleman (1995) challenged the assumptions of skill-based intelligence theories, igniting interest in evidence-based investigation of emotional intelligences. Goleman’s (1998) EI model includes two factors (e.g., social and personal) with three associated competencies (self-awareness, self-regulation, and motivation). Goleman (1998) argued that emotional intelligence competencies were not natural talents; rather they are learned. Therefore, an individual must learn and develop emotional intelligence competencies to achieve excellent performance levels (Goleman, 1998). Further, Goleman (1998) proposed that emotional intelligence ability is pre-determined at birth; however, it could also be taught. Goleman’s (1998) two-factor EI model was designed for use in the work setting to identify competencies of excellent performers. The competency-based emotional intelligence framework of Goleman’s (1998) EI model provides a bridging mechanism to fill the gap between the skill sets employers seek in community college graduates and the graduates’ existing skill sets.

Soft Skills

For over a century, soft skills have been recognized as an essential component of a successful organization (Mann, 1918). Research conducted in 1918 by Mann (1918), a Harvard University professor, indicated that “85% of job success comes from having well-developed soft and people skills, and only 15% of job success comes from technical skills and knowledge (hard skills)” (p. 107). Soft skills are a part of Goleman’s (1998) social and personal factors. Soft skills include the ability to communicate effectively, interact well with others, think critically, maintain a positive attitude, work well in a team, and plan and organize identifying and managing soft skills is correlated with increased employee productivity (Cappelli, 2015). The soft skills literature has identified effective communication, problem-solving, trust, motivation, and enthusiasm as critical soft skills (Ellis et al., 2014; Rasul et al., 2013; Wahl et al., 2012). Further, soft skills are an essential part of an organization’s success (Dana et al., 2011). A worker’s lack of hard and soft skills often negatively affects organizational outcomes (e.g., employee engagement, safety, attendance, and retention. The primary assumption of this study is that soft skill training can improve Nunez College student work readiness levels.

Nunez Community College Quality Enhancement Program

Given the national and state focus on employees’soft skills and work readiness, Nunez Community College launched a quality enhancement program (QEP) in 2016 designed to improve students’ work readiness with a specific focus on student learning, faculty professional development, and assessment regarding professional communication (e.g., oral communication, written communication, digital communication). The QEP involved three initiatives: ongoing workshops led by faculty (e.g., resumes, interview skills), faculty professional development, and the online CWR^® Program. The professional communication coursework involved three sequential communication courses incorporating work skill training from CWR^® Program. The training provided in the online CWR^® Program is based on the premise that emotional competencies can be taught (Goleman, 1998). Each of the soft skill areas included in the modules correlates with Goleman’s (1998) Emotional Intelligence Competencies. Table 1 provides an overview of the correlation between the soft skills in the CWR^® modules and Goleman’s Emotional Intelligence Competencies.

Table 1.

Work Readiness Soft Skills Area Correlation to Goleman’s Emotional Intelligence Competencies.

Work readiness soft skill area	Goleman’s emotional intelligence competencies
Attitude	Self-esteem, interpersonal awareness, empathy, self-management, self-improvement
Communication	Interpersonal awareness, empathy, self-esteem, sales orientation/leadership, assertion
Planning and organizing	Self-management, goal setting, self-efficacy, drive strength/motivation/ achievement drive, time management, decision making, commitment
Critical thinking	Problem solving, decision making
Interpersonal/social skills	Self-esteem, interpersonal awareness, empathy, supportive environment, assertion
Teamwork	Interpersonal awareness, interpersonal assertion, empathy, sales orientation/leadership, supportive environment.
Professionalism	Self-esteem, interpersonal awareness, self-management, self-improvement
Media rules	Decision making, time management

Source. Adapted from “White Paper January 2015 Conover Credential™ Workplace Readiness” by Schmitz (2015), Conover Company. Copyright 2015 by Conover Company, a Division of Oakwood Solutions, LLC. Adapted with permission.

Research Questions

The research questions guiding this study were:

RQ1. How did Nunez Community College students’ mean QEP course grades for the 2020 to 2021 school year before the implementation of the QEP and the 2021 to 2022 school year after implementation of the QEP?

RQ2. What mastery level did students achieve for oral and written communication as measured by rubric scores on general education learning assessments for the 2020 to 2021 school year after participation in the QEP?

RQ3. What are students’ perceptions regarding whether their oral, written, and digital communication skills improved after participation in the QEP-dedicated course and CWR^® modules?

RQ4. What are teachers’ perceptions regarding whether students’ oral, written, and digital communication skills improved after participation in the QEP-dedicated course and CWR^® modules?

Methods

After approval was received from the Nunez Community College Institutional Review Board on June 12, 2022, the de-identified data were received. This study employed a pre-post evaluation design to assess the impacts of the QEP on student outcomes without using a control group. Quantitative data were collected before and after implementation including course grades, rubric-based skills assessments, and Likert-type survey responses. Descriptive and comparative analyses such as t tests and ANOVA were used to evaluate changes in student performance, communication skill levels, and perceptions following the QEP intervention. The non-experimental methods were used to evaluate the program rather than test causal hypotheses. Although not establishing causality, the focus remained on a practical evaluation of the real-world changes linked with the program’s rollout within the Nunez Community College context. The three-step research process included examining and analyzing:

Courses: Spring 2021 QEP and Spring 2022 QEP for differences in students’ mean grades. This pre- posttest step served as the crux of the research. The remaining steps served to expand the discussion of the students’ learning outcomes as well as student and faculty perceptions of improvement following the QEP-dedicated course or CWR^® workshops.

Assessments: Fall 2021 Student Learning Outcomes to describe mastery levels of oral and written communication skills achieved by students after participation in the QEP (the student learning outcomes are reported using a 4-point grading rubric).

Surveys

Spring 2021/Spring 2022 QEP student workshop and training surveys.

Spring 2022 Faculty workshop and training and CWR^® module Satisfaction Survey that included 5-item Likert-type questions and open-ended questions used to explore the perspectives of college students and faculty members regarding whether students’ oral, written, and digital communication skills improved after participation in the QEP-dedicated course or CWR^® workshops.

Population

The targeted population was (a) students enrolled in QEP-dedicated courses and workshops and (b) faculty members who completed a faculty satisfaction survey for the CWR^® modules and the QEP workshops.

Sample

The sample included the de-identified archival data (a) Spring 2021 (n = 473) and Spring 2022 grades for QEP-dedicated courses (n = 355). (b) Student Spring 2021/Spring 2022 QEP workshop and training surveys (n = 56), (c) Spring 2022 Faculty workshop and CWR^® Satisfaction Survey (n = 16), and (d) Spring 2022 General Education Assessment of Student Learning Outcomes (n = 858). Data were obtained from Nunez College’s research department.

Data Collection and Analysis

Prior to any data collection, permission from the Nunez Community College Institutional Review Board was obtained on June 12, 2022. The de-identified archival data (a) Spring 2021 and Spring 2022 Grades for Geaux-dedicated courses. (b) Student Spring 2021/Spring 2022 QEP workshop and training surveys, (c) Spring 2022 Faculty workshop and CWR^® Satisfaction Survey, and (d) the Fall 2021 General Education Assessment Student Learning Outcomes were obtained from the Nunez College research department after Institutional Review Board approval was obtained.

The Spring 2021 and Spring 2022 grades for QEP-dedicated courses were analyzed using an independent-samples t test and descriptive statistics. The Fall 2021 General Education Student Learning Outcomes Assessment outcomes were analyzed using an independent-samples t test and descriptive statistics. The 2021 and 2022 QEP student workshop and training surveys were analyzed using a one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) and descriptive statistics. The Spring 2022 Faculty workshop and CWR^® Satisfaction Survey were analyzed using a one-way ANOVA and descriptive statistics.

Findings

The findings included information from evidenced-based data (e.g., grades, General Education Student Learning Outcomes) and Likert-type survey tools from the student and educator perspectives. The grades provided hard data regarding whether oral, written, and digital communication skills were gained, and the surveys provided documentation regarding student and faculty perceptions about whether those skills were gained. The student learning objectives provided educators’ perspectives regarding whether mastery of oral and written communication was achieved. The literature is clear that students need to feel that they have gained skills to put them into practice in the “real world” setting (Cavanagh et al., 2019; Sabti et al., 2019; Zhang et al., 2022). Therefore, the surveys provided a glimpse into students’ self-efficacy regarding their communication skills.

Further, the surveys provided an overview of the educators’ perspectives on the effectiveness of the CWR^® modules and workshop training. The findings addressed whether implementing the QEP significantly improved students’ work readiness, specifically oral, written, and digital skills, in the community college setting. The findings for the analyses of the (a) Spring 2021 and Spring 2022 grades for QEP-dedicated courses, (b) Fall 2021 General Education Student Learning Outcomes Assessment outcomes, (c) Spring 2021 and Spring 2022 QEP student workshop and training surveys, and (d) Spring 2022 Faculty workshop and CWR^® Satisfaction Survey are presented in this section.

Spring 2021 and Spring 2022 Grades for QEP-Dedicated Course Findings

Research Question 1 Findings—Spring 2021 and Spring 2022 Grades for QEP-Dedicated Course

To address RQ1, the Spring 2021 and Spring 2022 grades for QEP-dedicated courses were analyzed using an independent-samples t test and descriptive statistics. Data are mean ± SD unless otherwise stated. The sample included 473 participants for the 2020 to 2021 school year and 355 participants for the 2021 to 2022 school year. A review of the descriptive statistics revealed that for the 2020 to 2021 school year, 75% of the students achieved a grade of A, B, or C, and 25% of the students achieved a grade of D or F; and for the 2021 to 2022 school year, 80% of the students achieved a grade of A, B, or C; and 20% of the students achieved a grade of D or F. An independent-samples t test was performed to determine if there was a significant difference in the mean scores for the QEP-dedicated classes after Nunez college students participated in the CWR^® Program modules for the 2020 to 2021 and the 2021 to 2022 school years. There were no outliers in the data, as assessed by inspection of a boxplot; therefore, the mean scores that represented all the available data were the best measure of the differences. Grade scores for the 2019 to 2020 school year and the 2021 to 2022 school year were normally distributed, as assessed by Shapiro-Wilk’s test (p > .05), and there was homogeneity of variances, as assessed by the Levene’s test for equality of variances (p = .198). There was a statistically significant difference in the mean grade score for QEP courses between the 2021 to 2022 school year (95% CI [2.77 ± 1.50]) and the 2020 to 2021 school year (95% CI [2.46 ± 0.133]), t(826) = −3.080, p = .002. There was a significant difference in the mean grades of students enrolled in QEP-dedicated classes after participation in the QEP at Nunez Community College. Figure 1 provides the achieved grade percentages by school year.

Figure 1.

Grade percentages by school year.

Fall 2021 the General Education Assessment Student Learning Outcome Findings

Research Question 2 Findings—Fall 2021 the General Education Learning Assessment Student Outcome Scores

To address RQ2, the Fall 2021 mastery levels of the General Education Assessment Student Learning Outcomes were analyzed using an independent-samples t test and descriptive statistics. The oral and written communication data were used; there were no digital data available. The reading data were not included in this analysis because they were not aligned with the research questions involving the examination of the improvement of students’ oral, written, and digital communication skills. The purpose of the question was to describe mastery levels of the learning outcomes and not a before and after comparison as in RQ1.

The General Education Assessment Student Learning Outcomes are evaluated based on a four-point rubric indicating the degree to which the learning outcomes were achieved. The possible rubric scores for the General Education Assessment Student Learning Outcomes were 1—Benchmark, 2—Milestone, 3—Milestone, and 4—Capstone. Typically, a score of 1 on a four-point rubric means that the student did not meet the learning objective, and there is little evidence they met the learning objective; a score of 2 indicates that the student is close to meeting the learning objective, demonstrating partial mastery of the learning objectives; a score of 3 indicates the student met the learning objective, demonstrating mastery of the learning objective; a score of 4 indicates the student met the learning objective, demonstrating mastery of the learning objective, and they were able to transfer the learning to other situations or settings.

The sample included 858 students enrolled in courses related to Student Learning Outcome 1. The oral and written communication parts of Student Learning Objective Outcome 1 were examined. There were 145 students who were enrolled in courses that addressed the oral communication part of the learning outcome; those courses included SPCH 2150 (n = 50), BIOL 1500 (n = 75), and SOCI 2090 (n = 20). There were 713 students who were enrolled in courses that addressed the written communication part of the learning outcome; those courses included ENG 1000 (n = 130), HIST 1500 (n = 55), HIST 2010 (n = 160), HIST 2100 ( n = 80), BIOL 2210 (n = 64), ECON 2000 (n = 94), and PHSC (n = 30).

General Assessment Student Learning Outcome 1 Results

Data are mean ± SD unless otherwise stated. An independent-samples t test was performed to determine if there was a significant difference in the mean rubric scores for the oral communication classes and the mean rubric scores for the written communication classes for Fall 2021. There were no outliers in the data, as assessed by inspection of a boxplot; therefore, the mean scores that represented all the available data were the best measure of the differences. Rubric scores for the oral communication courses and the written communication courses for Fall 2021 were normally distributed, as assessed by Shapiro-Wilk’s test (p > .05), and there was no homogeneity of variances, as assessed by the Levene’s test for equality of variances (p < .05). A Welch’s t test was used due to unequal sample sizes between the oral (n = 145) and written (n = 713) communication groups (Hae-Young, 2019). There was not a statistically significant difference in the mean rubric scores for the oral communication classes (95% CI [2.84 ± 0.733]) and the mean rubric scores for the written communication classes (95% CI [2.85 ± 2.87]), t(856) = -.310, p = .757 for Fall 2021. There was not a significant difference in the mean rubric scores of 145 students enrolled in the courses related to the oral communication part of Learning Objective 1 and the mean rubric scores for the 713 students enrolled in the courses related to the written communication part of Learning Objective 1.

Overall, 66% of the 858 students enrolled in courses related to the oral and written part of Learning Objective 1 achieved mastery at the Milestone 3 and Capstone 4 levels, indicating they met the learning objective and attained mastery of the learning objective; 27% of the students achieved the Milestone 2 level indicating they were close to meeting the learning objective and demonstrated partial mastery of the learning objective, and 7% of the students were rated at the Benchmark 1 level indicating they did not meet the learning objective. Figure 2 provides the overall rubric score percentages by communication type.

Figure 2.

Overall rubric score percentages by communication type.

QEP 2021 and 2022 Student Workshop and Training Survey Findings

Research Question 3 Findings

To address RQ3, 56 students’ perceptions regarding whether their oral, written, and digital communication skills improved after participation in the QEP-dedicated course and CWR^® modules were analyzed. The students either attended the oral, written, or digital 2021 and 2022 workshops. The digital communication workshops had the most enrollees (n = 35), followed by the written communication workshops (n = 16) and oral communication workshops (n = 5). A total of 14 workshops (e.g., four oral communication workshops, five written communication workshops, and five digital communication workshops) were analyzed.

A five-point Likert scale was used for the seven-item surveys that included the following descriptors: (a) strongly agree, agree, neutral, disagree, and strongly disagree, which were assigned the scores of 5, 4, 3, 2, 1, respectively, or (b) very useful, somewhat useful, neutral, less useful, not useful, which were assigned the scores of 5, 4, 3, 2, 1, or (c) very likely, somewhat likely, neutral, less likely, and not likely, which were assigned scores of 5, 4, 3, 2, 1 for the purposes of this analysis. For example, all the strongly agree, very useful, and very likely Likert-type descriptors were assigned a five score.

The surveys for the students’ oral, written, and digital communication workshops consisted of seven questions. For this study, Question 1a, Question1b, Question 2a, and Question 2b were specifically related to the usefulness of the (a) workshop content, (b) interactive component of the workshop and the likelihood of incorporating what they learned into their (a) time as a student interacting with Nunez faculty and staff and (b) work environment with future employers and colleagues were analyzed.

Data mean ± SD unless otherwise stated. A one-way ANOVA was performed to determine if there were significant differences in the mean Likert-type scores for the oral, written, and digital communication QEP-dedicated workshops and training conducted in 2021 and 2022. There were no outliers in the data, as assessed by inspection of a boxplot. Likert-type scores for the oral, written, and digital communication training and workshops were normally distributed, as assessed by Shapiro-Wilk’s test (p > .05). There was homogeneity of variances, as assessed by the Levene’s test for equality of variances (p = .393). There was not a statistically significant difference in the mean Likert-type scores for the oral (95% CI [4.85 ± 0.02]), written (95% CI [4.74 ± 0.14]), and digital communication (95% CI [4.81 ± 0.61]) workshops and training as determined by the one-way ANOVA, F(2, 216) = .937, p = .393.

Descriptive Statistics Findings

Students who attended the oral, written, and digital workshops indicated whether what they learned at the workshops was useful. Overall, the students found the oral communication workshops (M = 5) the most useful, followed by the written communication (M = 4.75) workshops and digital communication (M = 4.74). The oral, written, and digital workshops were rated very useful or somewhat useful.

Application to School and Classroom Usefulness Findings

The students rated the oral communication workshops’ application to the school and classroom environments the most useful (M = 5), followed by the application of the written communication workshops (M = 4.87) and digital communication workshops (M = 4.66).

All of the oral, digital, and written workshops were rated at very useful or somewhat useful for application to the school and classroom environments.

Application to Current and Future Employment Findings

The students rated the oral communication workshops’ application to current and future employment settings the most useful (M = 5), followed by the digital communication workshops (M = 4.80) and written communication workshops (M = 4.67). The oral, digital, and written workshops were rated very useful or somewhat useful for application to current and future employment settings.

The Spring 2022 Faculty Workshop and CWR^® Satisfaction Surveys Findings

Research Question 4 Findings. To address RQ4, 14 educators completed the Spring 2022 Faculty Workshop and CWR^® 7-item Satisfaction Surveys. Question 1 and Question 2 consisted of eight sub-questions specifically related to the three Oral, Written, and Digital Learning Outcomes. Question 1 and Question 2 included eight sub-questions, including two questions dedicated to Learning Outcome 1.1, four questions related to Learning Outcome 2.1, and two questions related to Learning Outcome 3.1. The data from these 16 sub-questions were analyzed to determine the educators’ perceptions regarding whether implementation of the QEP workshops and CWR^® modules improved students’ oral, written, and digital communication skills.

An independent-samples t test was conducted to compare educators’ perceptions of the improvement in students’ oral, written, and digital communication skills after participation in the QEP workshops and CWR^® modules. Further, comparative descriptive analyses was conducted to examine the mean Likert-type scores for oral, written, and digital communication individually, overall, and by QEP-dedicated workshop and CWR^® modules. Data are mean ± SD unless otherwise stated. A Mann-Whitney U test was conducted to compare educators’ Likert-type scores assessing improvements in student communication skills between those who completed QEP workshops (n = 14) and those who utilized CWR^® modules (n = 14). Distributions of scores for the two groups did not have a normal distribution based on Shapiro-Wilk’s test (p < .05) and visual inspection of boxplots revealed several outliers. Thus, the non-parametric Mann-Whitney U test was utilized rather than an independent samples t test.

Median Likert-type scores were not significantly different between educators who completed QEP workshops (Mdn = 3) and educators who utilized CWR^® modules (Mdn = 3), U = 83, z = 1.13, p = .259. This result suggests that there is insufficient evidence to conclude there is a difference in perceived improvements between the QEP workshops compared to the CWR^® modules based on educator responses.

Comparative Descriptive Statistics Findings for the First and Second Survey Responses

Educators were asked in the first question of the 2022 Satisfaction Survey if attending or viewing recorded QEP workshops improved students’ oral, written, and digital communication skills. There were eight sub-questions related to this first question. Educators were asked in the second question of the 2022 Satisfaction Survey how much the use of the CWR^® modules in their class improved oral, written, and digital communication. There were also eight sub-questions related to this second question. The possible responses to both questions were a great deal, some, neutral, very little, and not at all, which were assigned the scores of 5, 4, 3, 2, and 1, respectively, for this analysis.

Overall, educators felt that students improved their oral communication skills the most for both the QEP workshops (M = 3.15) and the CWR^® modules (3.21). For the QEP-dedicated workshops, educators felt students improved their oral communication skills (M = 3.15) the most, followed by their written communication skills (M = 2.94) and digital communication skills (M = 2.94). For the CWR^® modules, educators felt that students improved their oral communication skills the most (M = 3.21), followed by their digital communication skills (M = 2.80) and written communication skills (M = 2.57).

QEP Training and Workshop and CWR^® Module Frequency Distribution of Likert-Type Scores

The responses to both survey questions were assigned scores as follows for analysis purposes 5—great deal, 4—some, 3—neutral, 2—very little, and 1—not at all. Both the QEP training and workshop and the CWR^® module samples reflected a normal distribution of the Likert-type scores. The Likert-type scores for QEP training and Workshops were more normally distributed than the Likert-type scores for the CWR^® modules. The QEP training and workshops Likert-type scores represented a perfect normal distribution. Although the CWR^® module reflected a normal distribution statistically as determined by the Shapiro-Wilk’s test (p > .05), the scores were clustered around the median.

Educators felt that students attending or viewing the QEP-dedicated training and workshops improved their oral, written, and digital communication skills: Some (22%) or a Great deal (5.5%); however, the majority of the responses (72.5%) were rated Neutral (45%), Very Little (22%), and Not at all (5.5%). Educators felt that participation in the CWR^® modules improved students’ oral, digital, and written communication skills a Great deal (0%) or Some (23%); however, the majority of educator responses (77%) were rated Neutral (54%), Very Little (3%), and Not at all (20%). Overall, whereas 27.5% of educators felt the QEP training and workshops improved students’ oral, written, and digital communication skills somewhat or a great deal, most (72.5%) were neutral or responded very little/not at all. Moreover, for the CWR^® modules, 23% of educators perceived some improvement, but the majority (77%) were neutral or responded very little/not at all regarding students’ oral, written, and digital skills after participation in the CWR^® modules. Table 2 provides an overview of the QEP-dedicated training and workshops and CWR^® modules score percentages.

Table 2.

QEP-Dedicated Training and Workshops and CWR^® Modules Score Percentages.

	5—Great deal (%)	4—Some (%)	3—Neutral (%)	2—Very little (%)	1—Not at all (%)
QEP-dedicated training and workshops	5.50	22.00	45.00	22.00	5.50
CWR^® modules	0	23.00	54.00	3.00	20.00

Summary of Findings

An evidenced-based, multi-perspective, analytical approach was used to investigate whether students’ oral, written, and digital skill sets improved after participation in the QEP coursework, which included embedded CWR^® modules at Nunez Community College. For RQ1, data were analyzed using the pre- and post-grades for the Spring 2021 and Spring 2022 QEP-dedicated courses. The remaining RQs served to expand the discussion of the students’ mastery of learning outcomes as well as student and faculty perceptions of improvement following the QEP-dedicated course or CWR^® workshops (RQ2: Rubric scores from the Fall 2021 General Education Student Learning Outcomes, RQ3: Likert-type scores from the Spring 2021 and Spring 2022 QEP student workshop and training surveys, RQ4: Likert-type scores from the Spring 2022 faculty workshop and CWR^® module satisfaction survey). The grades and mastery level rubric scores measured students’ achievement. In contrast, the Likert-type scores from the student training and workshop surveys provided their perspectives about whether they had attained oral, written, and digital communication skills and whether they would use them in the classroom or current and future employment situations, and the Likert-type scores from the faculty satisfaction survey provided educators’ perspectives about whether students had attained oral, written, and digital communication skills.

We presented the findings from QEP-dedicated class grades, student and teacher workshop surveys, and learning outcome assessments regarding whether participation in the QEP and the CWR^® modules improved students’ work readiness in the community college setting. Findings showed significant improvement in students’ oral, written, and digital communication skills after implementing the QEP at Nunez Community College. The students felt they could use the oral, written, and digital skills gained in QEP-dedicated QEP workshops and training in the classroom and current and future employment settings. Overall, whereas 27.5% of educators felt the QEP training and workshops improved students’ oral, written, and digital communication skills somewhat or greatly, most (72.5%) were neutral or responded very little/not at all. Moreover, for the CWR^® modules, 23% of educators perceived some improvement, but the majority (77%) were neutral or responded very little/not at all regarding students’ oral, written, and digital skills after participation in the modules.

Educators felt that students still struggled to show professionalism in their written communication. Further, educators felt the strengths of the QEP were that it was implemented across the curriculum with various topics and expert presenters. However, educators felt that there was a need to improve student attendance at QEP workshops; attendance should be mandatory, various workshop times and dates should be offered, and students who do not perform well should repeat the courses or the CWR^® modules.

Student comments indicated that they felt many parts of the QEP-dedicated oral, written, and digital workshop were important, stressing the ability to communicate effectively in a professional manner, learning how to interact with others appropriately, and learning how to research and cite sources appropriately, using proper grammar. The students felt the least essential parts of the QEP-dedicated oral, written, and digital communication workshops included some of the technical difficulties they had that prevented them from being able to hear and see a few of the online workshops. Some of the social media apps reviewed in the workshops were not important to the students.

There was a gap between students’ and educators’ perceptions about students’ mastery of oral, written, and digital communication skills after participation in the QEP-dedicated courses and CWR^® modules. However, the evidence (e.g., grades, mastery of learning outcomes) showed significant improvement in students’ oral, written, and digital communication skills after participation in QEP courses, workshops, and CWR^® modules, resulting in improved employability skills.

Implications for Educational Practice in Community Colleges and Future Directions

The Southern Association of Colleges and Schools Commission on Colleges (SACSCC) is responsible for accreditation for higher education in Louisiana and nine other southern states (SACSCC, 2018). Since 2004, the SACSCC has required colleges to develop a quality enhancement plan with a five-year implementation plan, identifying a specific area of improvement to improve student academic outcomes (SACSCC, 2018). Therefore, Nunez Community College implemented the QEP with a focus on improving students’ professional communication skills (e.g., oral skills, written skills, digital skills), resulting in an improvement in their work readiness and employability. The goal of this study was to investigate whether students’ oral, written, and digital skill sets were improved after participation in the QEP coursework, which included embedded online CWR^® modules at Nunez Community College.

Nunez Community College designed an evidence-based, multi-perspective approach to examine whether students’ oral, written, and digital communication skill sets were improved. The 2020 to 2021 school year was the first year the QEP was implemented. Assessment from grades and mastery levels provided hard evidence that the Nunez Community College students improved their professional communication skills (e.g., oral, written, digital). Student feedback indicated that they found their newly acquired communication skills useful in the classroom and for future employment. There was a marked gap between educators’ perceptions of students’ attainment of professional communication skills and the evidence from grades, learning objective outcomes, and student feedback.

Based on the findings, recommendations for future higher education practice would be to address students’ soft skill deficits by embedding online soft skills programs such as CWR^® modules into the curriculum. However, the modules should be aligned with institutional learning and course objectives rather than implementing them as stand-alone interventions. Moreover, obtaining faculty buy-in through training and information sessions is essential, equipping instructors with the tools to integrate the modules successfully into their courses. Providing incentives or requirements for module completion could improve student engagement. Implementation plans should include a robust evaluation plan, assessing the impact of the modules on students’ work readiness skills and identifying areas for improvement.

This study has implications for higher education institutions considering implementing QEPs. Specifically, the findings showed that soft skills or work readiness could be improved through the use of an online work readiness program, such as CWR^® modules, which have been successfully utilized with numerous populations and settings, including high school students, workplace settings, and higher education (Conover, 2015); however, embedding the modules into the coursework is a unique and innovative concept. Recommendations for future higher education practice would be to address students’ soft skill deficits by embedding online soft skill programs such as CWR^® modules into the curriculum.

Footnotes

Acknowledgements

Thank you to Nunez Community College and Conover Company for their assistance

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Ethical Approval

This article does not contain any studies with human or animal participants. This study was approved by The Nunez Community College Institutional Review Board Committee. (Exempt: use for educational research based on existing data provided by the College) on June 16, 2022.

ORCID iD

Donna Mowery Rice

Data Availability Statement

Data sharing not applicable to this article as no datasets were generated or analyzed during the current study.

References

American Association of Community Colleges (AACC). (2019). Community college enrollment crisis? Historical trends in community college enrollment. https://www.aacc.nche.edu/programs/workforce-economic-development/

Australian Bureau of Statistics. (2023). Job vacancies, Australia, August 2023. https://www.abs.gov.au/statistics/labour/jobs/job-vacancies-australia/latest-release#key-statistics

Cavanagh

T. M.

Leeds

Peters

J. M.

(2019). Increasing oral communication self-efficacy improves oral communication and general academic performance. Business and Professional Communication Quarterly, 82(4), 440–457. https://doi.org/10.1177/2329490619853242

Cappelli

P. H.

(2015). Skill gaps, skill shortages, and skill mismatches: Evidence and arguments for the United States. Industrial & Labor Relations Review, 68(2), 251–290. https://doi.org/10.1177/0019793914564961

Conover. (2015). Conover workplace readiness credential. Oakwood Solutions.

Cotner

Bragg

Cheng

Costelloe

Freeman

Goold

Heiser

Lemire

Miller

D.G.

Porowski

Van Noy

Yadav

(2021). Designing and delivering career pathways at community colleges: A practice guide for educators (WWC 2021007). National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance (NCEE), Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education. https://whatworks.ed.gov

Dana

Hancock

Phillips

(2011). A research proposal to evaluate the merits of writing across the curriculum. American Journal of Business Education, 4, 15–20. http://journals.cluteonline.com/index.php/AJBE/article/view/4220

Destatis. (2023). Unemployment and vacancies reach new record highs in 2022. https://www.destatis.de/EN/Themes/Labour/Labour-Market/Unemployment/_node.html

Ellis

Kisling

Hackworth

(2014). Teaching soft skills employers need. Community College Journal of Research & Practice, 38, 433–453. https://doi.org/10.1080/10668926.2011.567143

10.

Goleman

(1995). Emotional intelligence: Why it can matter more than IQ. Bantam Books.

11.

Goleman

(1998). Working with emotional intelligence. Bantam Books.

12.

Hae-Young

(2019). Statistical notes for clinical researchers: The independent samples t-test. Restorative Dentistry & Endodontics, 44(3), e26. https://doi.org/10.5395/rde.2019.44.e26

13.

Holzer

(2021). Building labor market skills among disadvantaged U.S. workers: Four-year colleges degrees and alternatives. In David

Kim

Y.-S.

Lee

S.-H.

(Eds.). Human capital policy (pp. 193–210). Edward Elgard. https://doi.org/10.4337/9781800377806.00019

14.

Idkhan

A. M.

Syam

Hasim

A. H.

(2021). The employability skills of engineering students’: Assessment at the university. International Journal of Instruction, 14(4), 119–134. https://doi.org/10.29333/iji.2021.1448a

15.

KPMG. (2023). The post-pandemic labor market. https://home.kpmg/xx/en/blogs/home/posts/2023/01/the-post-pandemic-labor-market.html

16.

Louisiana Workforce Commission. (2023). December jobs report & labor force update. https://www.bls.gov/news.release/pdf/empsit.pdf

17.

Lyu

Liu

(2021). Soft skills, hard skills: What matters most? Evidence from job postings. Applied Energy, 200(15), 117507. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apeenergy.2021.117307

18.

Macheridis

Paulsson

(2021). Tracing accountability in higher education. Research in Education, 110(1), 78–97. https://doi.org/10.1177/0034523721993143

19.

Mann

C. R.

(1918). A study of engineering education. Carnegie Foundation.

20.

McGee

(2021, October 22). Enrollment at Texas’ public universities inches ahead of community colleges for the first time since 1990s. The Texas Tribune. https://www.kwtx.com/2021/10/22/enrollment-texas-public-universities-inches-ahead-community-colleges-first-time-since-1990s/

21.

National Association of Colleges and Employers. (2021). Job outlook: 2021. https://www.naceweb.org/store/2020/job-outlook-2021/

22.

Nishioka

(2023). Severe labor shortage puts upward pressure on wages in Japan. Japan Research Institute, 6(3), 1–8. https://www.jri.co.jp/en/MediaLibrary/file/english/periodical/jrirj/2023/01/nishioka.pdf

23.

Nunez Community College. (2023). History and academic growth. https://catalog.nunez.edu/history-academic-growth/

24.

Ong

T. W.

Ting

Raslie

Marzuki

Chuah

Jerome

(2022). University students’ communication and employability skills: Mismatch perspectives of students, lecturers, and employers in Sarawak, Malaysia. Journal of Linguistics, Literature, & Culture, 4(2), 94–104. https://doi.org/10.12928/notion.v4i2.6003

25.

Partnership for Public Service. (2023). Tracking federal hiring in 2022. https://ourpublicservice.org/performance-measures/fed-figures/

26.

Rakowska

de Juana-Espinosa

(2021). Ready for the future? Employability skills and competencies in the twenty-first century: The view of international experts. Human Systems Management, 40(5), 669–684. https://doi.org/10.3233/HSM-201118

27.

Rasul

Rauf

Mansor

(2013). Employability skills indicator as perceived by manufacturing employees. Asian Social Science, 9, 42–46. https://doi.org/10.5539/ass.v9n8p42

28.

Rhew

N. D.

Black

J. A.

Keels

J. K.

(2019). Are we teaching what employers want? Identifying and remedying gaps between employer needs, accreditor prescriptions, and undergraduate curricular priorities. Industry and Higher Education, 33(6), 362–369. https://doi.org/10.1177/0950422219874703

29.

Sabti

A. A.

Rashid

S. M.

Nimehchisalem

Darmi

(2019). The impact of writing anxiety: Writing achievement motivation and writing self-efficacy on writing performance: A correlational study of Iraqi tertiary EFL learners. SAGE Open 9(4), 215824401989428. https://doi.org/10.1177/2158244019894289

30.

Salovey

Mayer

J. D.

(1990). Emotional intelligence. Imagination, Cognition and Personality, 9(3), 185–211. https://doi.org/10.2190%2FDUGG-P24E-52WK-6CDG

31.

Schmitz

(2015). Conover credential™ workplace readiness [White paper]. Conover Company. https://www.conovercompany.com/downloads/readiness_research.pdf

32.

Southern Association of Colleges and Schools Commission on Colleges (SACSCC). (2018). Accreditation actions and public disclosure statements. http://www.sacscoc.org/june2018actionsanddisclosurestatments.asp

33.

Statistics Canada. (2023). Labour force survey, January 2023. https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/daily-quotidien/230210/dq230210a-eng.htm

34.

Succi

Canovi

(2020). Soft skills to enhance graduate employability: Comparing students and employers’ perceptions. Studies in Higher Education, 45(9), 1834–1847. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2019.1585420

35.

Tagulwa

E. A.

Owino

Muwonge

Kaahwa

M. G.

(2023). Students’ and employers’ perceptions of employability skills in Uganda. International Journal of Multidisciplinary: Applied Business & Education Research, 4(6), 2038–2044. https://doi.org/10.11594/ijmaber.04.06.28

36.

Trading Economics. (2023). Germany job vacancy rate. https://tradingeconomics.com/germany/job-vacancy-rate-eurostat-data.html#:~:text=Germany%20%2D%20Job%20vacancy%20rate%20was,EUROSTAT%20on%20October%20of%202023

37.

United Nations News. (2023). World economic situation and prospects: October 2023 Briefing, no. 176. https://www.un.org/development/desa/dpad/wp-content/uploads/sites/45/MB176.pdf

38.

U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. (2022). Job openings and labor turnover summary. https://www.bls.gov/news.release/jolts.nr0.htm

39.

U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. (2023). Job openings and labor turnover summary. https://www.bls.gov/news.release/jolts.nr0.htm

40.

Wahl

Kaufmann

Eckkrammer

Mense

Gollner

Himmler

Rogner

Baierl

Slobodian

(2012). Soft skills in practice and in education: An evaluation. American Journal of Business Education, 5, 225–232. https://doi.org/10.19030/ajbe.v5i2.6826

41.

Yamashita

Cummins

(2021). Jobs at risk of automation in the USA: Implications for community college. Community College Journal of Research and Practice, 46(5), 374–377. https://doilorg/10.1080/10668926.2021.187682

42.

Zhang

Lin

Liu