218
International Journal of Learning, Teaching and Educational Research
Vol. 20, No. 2, pp. 218-234, February 2021
https://doi.org/10.26803/ijlter.20.2.12
Students’ Soft Skills, Hard Skills, and Competitiveness (SHC):
A Suggested Model for Indonesian Higher Education
Curriculum
Hadiyanto, Noferdiman, Syamsurizal and Muhaimin
Universitas Jambi, Kota Jambi, Indonesia
https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4697-9544
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9446-6359
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5277-0205
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6269-5931
Ina Krisantia
Universitas Trisakti, Jakarta, Indonesia
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9982-686X
Abstract. This study develops a model for students and graduates of
Soft Skills, Hard Skills, and Competitiveness (SHC) and seeks user
validation after the development process. The development process uses
the Analysis, Design, Development, Implementation, and Evaluation
(ADDIE) model. A quantitative survey using questionnaires and
descriptive quantitative analysis was applied in obtaining user
validation as the study objective. The development results validated the
students' SHC Development model, which has 3 main phases, including
Input, Process and Output. The Input phase comprises course content,
SHC component, and strategy of students’ center approach. The Process
phase consists of blended course design, instruction and students'
engagement, and evaluation. The Output phase comprises soft and hard
skills achievement, as well as students’ competitiveness level. Users
perceived the model’s phases and components as wholly acceptable,
appropriate, and applicable for implementation through curriculum,
teaching, and learning at the university. This study contributes to
graduate preparation for employability skills in the challenging and
complex working environment in revolution industry 4.0.
Keywords: 21st Century Skills; lifelong learning; employability;
entrepreneurship; revolution industry 4.0
1. Introduction
Higher Education in Indonesia is facing unprecedented challenges arising from
the convergent impacts of the Asian Societies Market. Higher education is a
growth engine for triggering a country to meet the current needs and prepare for
©Authors
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0
International License (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0).
219
future challenges. The issue is related to HE curriculum changes and the fresh
graduates’ ability to compete in Asian job market, meet employer’s expectations,
adapt and update their competencies beyond today’s challenges. The fresh
graduates’ competencies should be gained during their university education,
embedded with the curriculum and its implementation.
Graduates’ competencies in the present study were developed based on current
global skills understanding at the workplace, known as the 21st-century skills.
The terms used might differ across countries and disciplines, but the essential
issues remain the same, such as generic, adaptive, key, soft, life, professional,
and interpersonal skills. The researchers, employers, policymakers, and
academicians agree that students should acquire these skills at the university
and apply them at the workplace to meet the global enterprise needs (Rajadurai
et al., 2018; Lippman et al., 2015; Bialik et al., 2015; ILO, 2014).
In line with the studies, the Indonesian Ministry of Science Technology and
Higher Education via DIKTI (2016) launched the Guidance of Higher Education
Curriculum that demanded universities to provide students with more soft skills
than hard skills. Hard skills are acquired and developed through soft skill
practices in the teaching and learning process. According to DIKTI (2020), the
paradigm of Independent Learning and Independent Campus was launched by
the Ministry of Education to provide students with soft and hard skills more
than academic competence. Therefore, students are expected to possess
individual competitiveness in the job market and their future career
development. However, there is no clear guidance in developing graduate's Soft
skills, Hard skills, and Competitiveness (SHC) in Universities unless
incorporated into teaching and learning.
DIKTI (2020), Thomas (2016), Bialik et al. (2015), and Ahlstrom et al. (2014)
suggested that the development of students’ hard and soft skills should be
blended in the teaching and learning process. Learning strategies should
provide the students with SHC, though this is not easy. The problem is how
learning activities enable students to gain soft skills through the teaching and
learning strategy. In solving this problem, a model was developed as a grand
learning concept at an Indonesian University. The model guides the teaching of
subjects that develop students’ soft and hard skills and competitiveness.
However, the defining and the concept were reviewed and found to follow the
global trend of university curriculum and employability skills. This explains
why the concept contributes to anticipating global issues, such as the lack of
graduate employability skills and its combination in the teaching and learning
process. Therefore, this study describes and discusses the process and outcomes
of the model for developing students’ and graduate Soft skills, Hard skills, and
Competitiveness (SHC) at a University in Indonesia.
1.1.
Concept Students SHC Development from Curriculum into Teaching
and Learning Practice
Indonesian Ministry of Education and Culture announced a new paradigm of
Independent Learning and Independent Campus. The paradigm changes the
learning delivery strategy to be more independent and involves some industries
http://ijlter.org/index.php/ijlter
220
as students’ learning field work. Furthermore, the paradigm regenerates the
previous curriculum that emphasis on students acquiring soft and hard skills
through their learning strategy. Indonesia’s higher education curriculum does
not mention specific components of soft and hard skills, and competitiveness.
However, the learning objectives are mentioned as developing students’ hard
skills, soft skills, and competitiveness. The mentioned soft skills include
professionalism, communication, decision-making, problem-solving, critical
thinking, and another similar attribute understood globally (DIKTI, 2020; DIKTI,
2016; DIKTI, 2016). Theoretical analysis was conducted in this study to draw the
students’ SHC Development Model. Related studies and resources showed that
students’ SHC development in universities is conceptualized into the input,
process, and output phases discussed in the following section.
Input Phase
Input phases are connoted with teachers’ preparation to define learning
material, students’ soft and hard skills, and delivery method. Learning material
and content of hard skills should be selected based on students' needs and 5
years latest resources. The delivery method should be selected to allow students
to practice and develop their SHC (Adreeva et al., 2020). SHC is defined at the
beginning based on the program curriculum that could be integrated with
learning material and course design and practiced by students within and
outside the classroom (Hadiyanto, 2020; Caggiano, Loredana & Jerónimo, 2020).
1.1.1.
Student-Centered Learning (SCL) is the most appropriate and popular approach
to engaging students in obtaining qualified graduates. This regards the teaching
and learning approach in developing students' soft and hard skills and
competitiveness. SCL facilitates the students to acquire subject knowledge and
hard and softs skills during the learning process (Hadiyanto et al., 2021; DIKTI,
2016). The SCL approach is dominated by constructivism theories in which
students are allowed to practice individually and in groups. Students think and
solve problems, communicate ideas, use IT, and work with other members of the
class. However, giving students this opportunity does not mean teachers do not
control the students' in-class activities. Instead, the teachers need to develop the
main guidelines of learning activities to achieve the set goals (UPI, 2020; DIKTI,
2016; Bialik, 2015).
The teachers' SCL strategies include blended, inquiry, cooperative, collaborative,
problem-based, and laboratory learning, as well as E-learning Usage. Suitable
learning strategies are selected based on their appropriateness with course topics
and students’ interests. The strategy should encourage students to practice their
soft skills actively and explore and acquire hard skills (Khalil & Elkhider, 2016).
1.1.2. Process Phase
The students’ SHC development should start from the syllabus and learning
scenario by including soft and hard skills and competitiveness. The learning
design, goals, and objectives for students' engagement and activities are process
phase that should be considered for promoting soft and hard skills and
competitiveness (Andreeva et al., 2020; Novikova, 2016; Bialik et al., 2015). A
http://ijlter.org/index.php/ijlter
221
good learning process involves students actively communicating, searching,
using ICT, discussing, working together, self-reflecting, learning from others,
and achieving goals. A course design is part of the learning process essential in
learning and enabling students to practice soft and hard skills. Therefore, the
course design should be flexible, revisable, and reflective during the learning
process. Moreover, it should be exposed to the students at the first lecture
meeting to assess its applicability and make necessary revisions to meet the
students’ needs and avoid possible handicaps. The delivery method could be
planned between the first and second week, and some improvement is made
based on the previous reflection. This explains why the course design comes
during the process and not at the beginning or during education input
(Hadiyanto, 2020).
The SCL learning approach should be conducted through a social process, such
as students' interactions, activities, and engagement. Teachers should encourage
students to participate actively and contribute to their learning activities.
Therefore, the SCL learning methods, such as group projects, field visits, selflearning, exploring, and presentation, are applicable under some strategies
mentioned in the input phase. For instance, allowing students to present their
work is a popular method applied in teaching and learning. It allows students to
share and communicate ideas, learn to attract attention, develop self-confidence
before many people, and other related skills (The Ontario Public Services, 2016;
Marando, 2012)
Students’ soft and hard skills are developed during learning, meaning teachers
should use the strategy to guide the students in the right way. This requires the
teachers’ creativity and critical thinking to design, implement and facilitate the
learning activities based on students’ competencies, knowledge and skill
development. However, Hadiyanto et al. (2017) and Burce & O’Sullivan (2014)
stated that teaching strategies must match the learning goal, and the expected
hard and soft skills. DIKTI (2016), Hadiyanto et al. (2021), and Ahlstrom et al.
(2014) showed that the teachers’ principles that facilitate students to gain
knowledge and skills include:
a. Understanding how students learn
b. Matching the learning and teaching principles
c. Facilitating rather than control learning
d. Motivating and encouraging students to interact in learning actively
e. Assuring the practice of soft skills and acquisition of hard skills.
f. Promoting and expecting student accountability for learning
g. Providing timely, specific feedback on learner progress
h. Individualizing learning experiences based on needs
Students’ SHC is developed during the teaching and learning process. Therefore,
SCL should apply in syllabus, lesson plan, and learning process to construct
student’ SHC. Furthermore, teachers suggested applying teaching and learning
strategies to optimize the gaining of soft and hard skills. Therefore, SHC
students’ SHC self-evaluation and rubrics assessment could be developed based
on theoretical analysis of SHC and academician judgment (Cimatti, 2016).
http://ijlter.org/index.php/ijlter
222
1.1.3. Output Phases
Literature reviews show that Higher Education across countries agrees that
university graduates should develop high soft and hard skills and
competitiveness. The graduate should be ready to work on global and digital
challenges, promote self-expertise and continue learning to improve their
quality, impacting institutional and national competitiveness (Hadiyanto, 2020;
DIKTI, 2020; UPI, 2020). Moreover, the graduate should be attributed soft and
hard skills based on employee recruitment, employers’ interview, Indonesian
curriculum and higher education paradigm. In this case, students’
competitiveness level is the outcome of soft and hard skills.
This study defines Soft Skills, Hard Skills, and Competitiveness (SHC) as a
blended ability to achieve an objective (Hadiyanto et al., 2017; Andreeva et al.,
2020; Novikova, 2016). Universities help students to develop soft and hard skills,
which determine their competitiveness. Soft Skills are essential in the global
work market and are practiced in learning activities. Also, they are practiced at
workplaces through communication, IT, numeracy, learning, problem-solving
skills, and working with others. Soft skills are developed during the learning
process within or outside the campus and at the workplace. The practice of soft
skills generates and develops students' hard skills in their disciplines
(Hadiyanto, 2017, Khalil & Elkhider, 2016, UNJA, 2014).
Communication Skills involve expressing and exchanging ideas using feelings of
thought and verbal and non-verbal media, including speech and written text
(Khalil & Elkhider, 2016).
IT Skills are one’s ability to use digital technology of computers, integrated
devices, and necessary applications for working. These applications include
Microsoft Office, Internet Browser, E-mail, Messenger, Online Meeting, Digital
File Manager, and Network (Hadiyanto et al., 2021; Burce & O’sullivan, 2014).
Numeracy Skills are the ability to use basic mathematic calculation, interpreting
graphical information, timing, prioritizing tasks, and sequencing of job or
activities (Balcar, Šimek & Filipová, 2018; Hadiyanto et al., 2017). Learning Skills
are the ability to use strategies, evaluate the self-learning strategy, seek
weaknesses, and develop better learning output. This includes gaining general
and detailed information, knowledge, and skills to achieve the goal of learning
(Hadiyanto et al., 2017; Alberta Education. 2011; Jones, 2009).
Problem-solving skills involve the ability to systematically tackle problems to
develop an appropriate solution (Lippman et al., 2015; Ahlstrom et al., 2014).
Team-work skills are the capacity to interact effectively with other people
individually and in groups. This includes understanding and responding to a
client’s needs and working effectively as a team member to achieve a goal
(Luara et al., 2016; Ahlstrom et al., 2014; ILO, 2014). Hard Skills are the ability to
apply and generate specific knowledge and skills in real context and work.
Students acquire hard skills to practice their softs skills, such as presentation,
discussion, and using applications for working out assignments and group
projects (Ahlstrom et al., 2014, Marando, 2012 and Chan, Goh & Priest, 2015).
http://ijlter.org/index.php/ijlter
223
Competitiveness is the eagerness and the effort to consistently apply, maintain,
improve and promote soft and hard skills in work, tasks and learning. It is
categorized into lifelong learning, entrepreneurship, and employability.
Competitiveness was assumed to be affected by soft and hard skills (Balcar et al.,
2018; Kumar, 2017; UNJA, 2020; Novikova, 2016). Entrepreneurship is the ability
to apply soft and hard skills in creating, promoting, proposing, building,
exploring, seeking, and offering business opportunities and services based on
expertise (UNJA, 2020; DIKTI, 2020; Balcar et al., 2018; Liventsova,
Rumyantsevaa & Syriamkina, 2016). Lifelong learning is the eagerness and
willingness to learn beyond what someone knows currently. Furthermore,
lifelong learning involves developing beyond current capacity to meet future
challenges using multi-resource and comparing resources, friends, environment,
and ICT (Hadiyanto et al., 2017; DIKTI, 2016; Bialik et al., 2015).
Employability is the ability to apply specific skills, subject knowledge, and
standard quality of a graduate. It comprises certain competencies to adapt and
meet the changing needs of employers and customers and the ability to be selfemployed (DIKTI, 2020: UPI 2020; Liventsova et al., 2016: Bialik et al. 2015).
2. Research Methodology
The model of Students SHC was developed through research and development.
The development phases and steps were adapted from the ADDIE model by
Branch and Robert Maribe (2009), Richey and Klein (2007), and Dick, Carey and
Carey (2001). The main development phases applied included Analysis,
Designing, Developing, Implementing, Evaluation, and Revision. Mixed-mode
Quantitative and Qualitative methods were applied in some parts of the model
development process. The instruments used were literature reviews,
questionnaires, interviews, SHC assessment rubrics, FGD Protocol, and
documentaries. The study used 3 groups of participants, including stakeholders,
lecturers, and students.
2.1. The Phase of Model Development
The first phase is the analysis of previous research and publication, HE
curriculum, Vision and Mission, and strategic plan of the University of Jambi
(Unja, 2020). Also, there was a survey on students’ needs, current literature
review, stakeholders’ system recruitment, and interview. The second phase
involved designing, which included categorizing and defining SHC
components. Moreover, there were designing phases and features of students'
SHC development in the learning process and strategy. The third phase
involved developing a student's SHC Development model, which comprises
Input, Process, and Output. Furthermore, the phase involved the expert, users,
and try-out validations. The fourth phase involved the implementation in 4
faculties, while the last phase was evaluation and revision.
2.2. Participants of the Study
There were 26 lecturers that participated in the study, representing Economics
and Business, Teacher Training and Education, Animal Husbandry, Science
Technology, and Humanities Faculty. A total of 773 students across the faculties
http://ijlter.org/index.php/ijlter
224
were involved, with 513 as questionnaire respondents, while 250 participated in
experimental research. Furthermore, 5 people representing stakeholders
participated in FGD.
2.3. Validator of the Development Process
This study used 3 external and 4 internal expert validators to assess and
contribute to the model’s improvement. In particular, 2 external validators were
from Universitas Brawijaya, with expertise in curriculum, teaching, and learning
Science at University. One external validator was from Universitas Negeri
Yogyakarta, having expertise in the higher education curriculum. Moreover, the
4 internal validators were from various disciplines, one was a professor and
expert in R & D. Of the other 3 validators, the first was an expert in chemistry
education, the second in psychology education, while the third had expertise in
agriculture learning at the university. Qualitative reviews were addressed by all
validators related to contents, design of the model, components, and phases of
students' SHC Development.
2.4. Sampling for User Validation
User validation was conducted in the last phase of the study after revision.
Stratified random sampling was used to select the samples among the
Universities’ teaching staff. It involved distributing the questionnaires to 5
faculties, including Economics and Business, Teachers Training and Education,
Agriculture, Animal Husbandry, and Science Technology. Each faculty was
provided with 50 questionnaires, resulting in a total of 250 questionnaires. Out
of this total, 216 questionnaires were returned. The survey aimed at evaluating
user acceptance, appropriateness and applicability of the model. This included
phases and components of students’ soft and hard skills, as well as
competitiveness development.
2.5. Method and Instrumentation
A quantitative method was applied in investigating user validation. The
instrument was developed and justified through a qualitative approach,
literature review analysis, workshop among the research team, and piloted to 20
teachers. Reliability was measured by a consistency test. Pallant (2011) and Hair
et al. (2009) suggested that Cronbach alpha coefficient (α) .60 for a construct
comprises a maximum of 10 items, while coefficient .70 means the construct
consists of more than 10 items. The consistency test resulted in α above .60 for
components with a maximum of 10 items, and α above .70 for components with
more than 10 items. Acceptance of Model Arrangement in General comprising 5
items yielded α .605, appropriateness of SHC component α .804, the applicability
of SHC component α .743, appropriateness of phases SHC development α .819
and applicability of phases SHC development α .780.
2.6. Data Analysis of User Validation
Descriptive analysis was applied in which the mean and standard deviation
values were used to report the findings. The interpretation of the means score
was as follow;
1.00 – 1.80 = Strongly Unacceptable, Inappropriate (SI), or Inapplicable (SIP)
http://ijlter.org/index.php/ijlter
225
1.81 – 2.60 = Unacceptable, Inappropriate, or Inapplicable
2.61 – 3.40 = Fair
3.41 – 4.20 = Acceptable, Appropriate, or Applicable
4.20 – 5.00 = Strong Acceptable, Appropriate (SA), or Applicable (SAP)
3. The Study Results
3.1. Result of Model of Students SHC Development
The students' SHC Development model at a University should be started and
integrated with the curriculum, course design, syllabus, lesson plan, as well as
offline and online learning. Students SHC is developed in blended learning
activities in every course of a program. This model was justified by global
literature studies and is divided into Input, Process, and Output phases.
3.1.1. Input
The Input phase involves planning and preparation before implementing
students’ SHC Development Model into the teaching and learning process. In
this phase, teachers should search hand-outs, materials, and resources for course
content and consider components of soft and hard skills to be integrated into the
syllabus and course design. Additionally, the delivery method and strategies
should be defined to match the materials, hand-outs, and expected SHC
outcomes.
3.1.2. Process
The process phase is an implementation of students' SHC Development through
the teaching and learning process. The syllabus and lessons plan unit was
developed in this phase. The SHC components, delivery method and strategy,
and teachers’ guidelines should be clearly stated in the syllabus and lesson plan.
Moreover, teachers need to act the lesson plan during class activities. Students
are facilitated and guided to actively acquire soft and hard skills by interacting,
discussing, exploring, and using multi-resources based on the lesson plan. Also,
teachers must observe students' practice of soft and hard skills.
3.1.3. Output
The output phase involves assessing the students’ achievement based on SHC
standards. Students are expected to gain certain SHC levels through teaching
and learning within a semester. Students’ self-evaluation questionnaire and SHC
rubric assessment (Hadiyanto et al., 2017) are used to measure the level of SHC.
Theoretically, high students’ soft and hard skills increase their competitiveness
(Setiawan et al., 2020)
http://ijlter.org/index.php/ijlter
226
Figure 1: Model of Students’ SHC Development at A University in Indonesia (DIKTI,
2020; UNJA, 2020; UPI, 2020; Hadiyanto et al., 2017; Lippman et al., 2015; DIKTI, 2016;
Bialik et al., 2015)
3.2. Result of A survey of User Validation of the Model
The results show that the overall arrangement of SHC Model development is
acceptable. Furthermore, teachers perceived that the model's arrangement into
Input, Process, Output, and Layout indicated by arrows and lines is strongly
acceptable. The other 3 elements were Arrangement of Part of Input, Process,
and Output perceived as acceptable. Moreover, teachers, components under
input, process and output, and Implementation flexibility were rated as
acceptable. These findings implied that students SHC model development is
acceptable by teachers, as shown in Table 2:
Table 2: Overall Model Arrangement in General
A. Acceptance of Model
Arrangement in General
1. Arrangement of Model; Input,
Process, and Output
2. Arrangement of Part of Input,
Process, and Output
3. Layout, indicating arrow and lines
4. Arrangement of components
under input, process and output.
5. Flexibility for Implementation
Overall
Min.
Max.
Mean
S.td
Level
3,00
5,00
4,21
,695
SA
3,00
5,00
4,13
,542
Acceptable
3,00
5,00
4,23
,59
SA
3,00
5,00
4,06
,570
Acceptable
3,00
3,20
5,00
5,00
3,97
4,12
,483
,353
Acceptable
Acceptable
Respondents rated the overall component under SHC as appropriate. Also, soft
skills and competitiveness of SHC components were rated as appropriate. Both
mean scores were close to strongly appropriate, while the hard skills component
was rated as strongly appropriate. Based on specific components of soft skills,
http://ijlter.org/index.php/ijlter
227
communication, IT, working with others was rated as strongly appropriate.
Numeracy, problem-solving, and working with others were rated as
appropriate. Specific knowledge as one of the hard skills components was rated
as strongly appropriate, while specific skills were rated as appropriate, with a
mean score of 4.17, which was very close to strongly appropriate. The 2 specific
competitiveness components, entrepreneurship, and employability were rated as
appropriate, while lifelong learning was rated as strongly appropriate, as shown
in Table 3:
Table 3: Appropriateness of SHC Component
B. Appropriateness of SHC Component
a. Soft Skills
1. Communication
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
Numeracy
IT
Problem Solving
Learning How to learn
Working with others
Overall
b. Hard Skills
1. Specific knowledge
2. Specific skills
Overall
c. Competitiveness
1. Entrepreneurship
2. Employability
3. Lifelong Learning
Overall
SHC Component Appropriateness
Min.
Max.
Mean
S.td
Level
3,00
5,00
4,24
,537
SA
3,00
3,00
3,00
3,00
3,00
3,33
5,00
5,00
5,00
5,00
5,00
5,00
4,05
4,35
4,07
4,08
4,22
4,17
,524
,547
,440
,428
,458
,339
Appropriate
SA
Appropriate
Appropriate
SA
Appropriate
3,00
3,00
3,10
5,00
5,00
5,00
4,27
4,17
4,22
,520
,480
,439
SA
Appropriate
SA
3,00
5,00
3,77
,512
Appropriate
3,00
3,00
3,05
3,64
5,00
5,00
5,00
4,91
4,13
4,21
4,04
4,14
,454
,490
,363
,283
Appropriate
SA
SA
SA
3.3. Applicability of SHC Component
Respondents rated the overall applicability of components under SHC as
applicable. Overall Hard skills were rated as strongly applicable, while Soft
skills and competitiveness were rated as applicable. All mean scores of the
components were close to strongly applicable or at the top of the applicable
mean. Based on specific components of soft skills, IT was rated as strongly
applicable, while communication and working with others were rated as
strongly appropriate. Numeracy, problem-solving, and working with others
were rated as applicable. As one of the hard skills components, specific
knowledge was rated as strongly applicable, while specific skills were rated as
applicable. All specific components of competitiveness, entrepreneurship,
employability, and lifelong learning were rated as applicable.
http://ijlter.org/index.php/ijlter
228
Table 4: Applicability of SHC Component
C.
a.
1.
2.
3.
Applicability of SHC Component
Soft Skills
Communication
Numeracy
IT
Min.
Max.
Mean
S.td
Level
3,00
3,00
3,00
5,00
5,00
5,00
4,13
3,94
4,26
,508
,453
,516
Applicable
Applicable
SAP
4. Problem Solving
5. Learning How to learn
6. Working with others
Overall
b. Hard Skills
1. Specific knowledge
3,00
3,00
3,00
3,33
5,00
5,00
5,00
5,00
3,97
4,00
4,17
4,08
,426
,406
,462
,312
Applicable
Applicable
Applicable
Applicable
3,00
5,00
4,25
,477
SAP
2. Specific skills
Overall
c. Competitiveness
1. Entrepreneurship
2. Employability
3. Lifelong Learning
3,00
3,00
5,00
5,00
4,17
4,21
,442
,400
Applicable
SAP
3,00
3,00
3,00
5,00
5,00
5,00
3,71
4,11
4,18
,507
,452
,468
Applicable
Applicable
Applicable
3,33
3,55
5,00
4,82
4,00
4,08
,330
,247
Applicable
Applicable
Overall
SHC Component Applicability
Respondents rated the overall appropriateness of SHC development phases at
university as appropriate. Also, the Input, Process, and Output phases were
rated as appropriate. Respondents rated the course content and resources of
Input phases as strongly appropriate, while the SHC and learning approach
components were appropriate. Concerning the Process phase, the course design
was claimed as strongly appropriate, while students’ engagement and
evaluation were rated as appropriate. Respondents rated the elements of the
Output phase, competence achievement, and graduate competitiveness as
appropriate. The 2 specific components of competitiveness, entrepreneurship,
and employability were rated as appropriate, while lifelong learning was
strongly appropriate.
Table 5: Appropriateness of SHC Phases Development
D. Appropriateness of SHC phases
Development
a. Input
1. Course Content Resources
2. Component of SHC
3. Learning Approach
Overall
b. Process
1. Course design
2. Students’ engagement
http://ijlter.org/index.php/ijlter
Min.
Max.
Mean
S.td
Level
4,00
3,00
3,00
3,33
5,00
5,00
5,00
5,00
4,27
4,14
4,13
4,18
,448
,461
,393
,329
SA
Appropriate
Appropriate
Appropriate
3,00
3,00
5,00
5,00
4,23
4,10
,444
,464
SA
Appropriate
229
3. Evaluation
Overall
c. Output
1. Competencies Achievement
3,00
3,00
5,00
5,00
3,94
4,09
,557
,387
Appropriate
Appropriate
3,00
5,00
3,97
,426
Appropriate
2. Graduate Competitiveness level
Overall
Overall Phases Appropriateness.
3,00
3,00
3,38
5,00
5,00
5,00
4,07
4,02
4,11
,376
,328
,298
Appropriate
Appropriate
Appropriate
Respondents rated the phases of students' SHC development as applicable. The
Input, Process and Output phases were rated as applicable. Furthermore,
respondent rated the course content resources, component of SHC and learning
approach as applicable. Based on the Process phase, course design was strongly
applicable, while students’ engagement and evaluation were rated as applicable.
The elements of Output phases, competencies achievement, and graduate
competitiveness level were applicable.
Table 6: Applicability of SHC phases development
E. Applicability of phases SHC
development
a. Input
1. Course Content Resources
2. Component of SHC
3. Learning Approach
Overall
Min.
Max.
Mean
S.td
Level
3,00
3,00
3,00
3,00
5,00
5,00
5,00
5,00
4,19
4,14
4,09
4,14
,461
,461
,348
,305
Applicable
Applicable
Applicable
Applicable
Process
Course design
Students’ engagement
Evaluation
Overall
c. Output
3,00
3,00
3,00
3,00
5,00
5,00
5,00
5,00
4,21
4,08
3,93
4,08
,433
,448
,548
,369
SA
Applicable
Applicable
Applicable
Applicable
1. Competencies Achievement
2. Graduate Competitiveness level
Overall
Overall Phases Applicability
3,00
3,00
3,00
3,13
5,00
5,00
5,00
4,88
3,96
4,04
4,00
4,08
,436
,333
,305
,275
Applicable
Applicable
Applicable
Applicable
b.
1.
2.
3.
4. Discussion
Teachers, stakeholders, students, policymakers were involved in developing the
R and D model of Students SHC Development at the university. Cimatti (2016)
stated that the university suggested seeking match definitions, model methods,
tools, and the soft and hard skills applicable for learning practice. This way
would enable the graduate to achieve high employability performance. The
students’ SHC Development model is conducted in 3 phases, including Input,
Process, and Output, and is validated as either internal or external. Internal
validation confirms the components and phases of students SHC Development
model, while external validation evaluates the impact of the model’s products
http://ijlter.org/index.php/ijlter
230
use. The users’ validation method was excellent in receiving feedback on how
the model fits their course (Richey and Klein, 2007).
Teachers accepted the model of students' SHC development in the Input,
Process, and Output phases and its layout. Also, they understood the position
and the arrangement of the model and accepted the placement and arrow
between elements of Input, Process, and Output. Md-Ali, Shaffie & Yusof (2016)
showed that teachers understood and accepted the integration of soft and hard
skills in teaching and learning to allow students to develop employability skills.
Teachers perceived that the inclusion of SHC components overall was
appropriate. The soft skills and competitiveness of SHC components were
appropriate. Both mean scores were close to strongly appropriate, while the
hard skills component was strongly appropriate. The 2 specific components of
competitiveness, entrepreneurship, and employability were rated as
appropriate, while lifelong learning was strongly appropriate. These findings
implied that components and sub-component of SHC fit their courses and meet
today's challenge in higher education. According to Liventsova et al. (2016),
universities worldwide should develop soft skills and competitiveness.
Therefore, teachers should be provided with a teaching and learning model that
develops students’ soft and hard skills to nurture their competitiveness.
Respondents confirmed that the SHC model phases are applicable in teaching
their courses. Overall hard skills were rated as strongly applicable, while soft
skills and competitiveness were applicable. All mean scores of the sub-skills of
SHC were close to strongly applicable or at the top of the applicable, mean score.
The phases, SHC, and their components are relevant for implementation in the
teaching and learning of all courses at the university. These findings support
Caggiano et al. (2020) that HE teachers perceive softs skills as relevant for
integration with course skills in implementing curriculum design in Finland,
Italy, and beyond. Furthermore, while Andreeva et al. (2019) showed that the
students’ soft and hard skills application in learning develops their
competitiveness.
The students' SHC development model fits with teachers’ competence in any
field and subject and applicable for the classroom, outdoors, and laboratory
learning. According to Patcsil et al. (2017), teaching and learning softs and hard
skills should fit the current needs and teachers’ competence.
This study guides Higher Education teachers to develop their curriculum
design, generate high-quality learning facilities, and assess the students' SHC
development activities (Caggiano et al., 2020). Universities should enhance or
include the SHC development components in curriculum planning and revision.
Curriculum and learning design should be enhanced to improve students’ soft
and hard skills and increase their competitiveness. Furthermore, according to
Novikova (2016), teachers should be facilitated to improve their professional
skills. This is because they play a key role in taking creative solutions to enrich
the learning process with expressive means and modern educational techniques.
http://ijlter.org/index.php/ijlter
231
The research contributes to the theoretical and practical side of the students and
graduates with 21st-century skills. Practically, the research contributes to
universities because this model was conducted through extensive library
research related to 21st-century skills development in the University context.
The model focused on the vision, mission, and curriculum of the present
university and faculty. This aimed to improve graduates' quality to provide
them with the skills needed to compete globally and contribute to the nation
(Rajadurai et al., 2018; ILO, 2014). Moreover, the results of R & D provide
answers to academician questions on how to integrate 21st-century skills into
the learning design and process. Therefore, universities interested in this model
could adapt and integrated it into their situation. This is because the model was
developed based on global trends and issues and could be used as guidance or
resource.
The model’s theory and conceptual framework provide university teachers with
choices on the appropriate content delivery method to enable students to
achieve learning goals and acquire 21st-century skills (UPI; 2020; Md-Ali et al.,
2016). Also, the results show educators that students and graduates with 21stcentury skills are developed through a course teaching and learning that impacts
their specific knowledge.
This research adds more theoretical value to the available literature on the
concept and model of 21st-century skills and other related definitions. It gives
more information on the theory and innovative concept of 21st-century skills
implementation in university curriculum and faculty. Furthermore, the research
is relevant for revolution industry 4.0 and 5.0 (DIKTI, 2020; Md-Ali, 2016;
Cimatti, 2016). Initial implementation should be conducted through some
research by a programmer on improving the management and evaluation of the
model implementation. Also, classroom action research should evaluate how
teachers create, select and apply a learning technique to develop students' SHC.
Experimental research should ascertain the model’s effectiveness and improve
the students’ SHC based on this study’s definition.
These findings were forwarded to the policymakers of this university. Only a
few universities worldwide provide extracurricular training to equip students
with SHC. Implementing the university-level model to the teaching and learning
process would reduce the number of unskilled graduates. Furthermore, it allows
students to acquire SHC acquisition, and graduates contribute to faster
development at their workplace (Setiwan et al., 2020; Patacsil & Tablatin, 2017).
Therefore, this research suggests to university policymakers to implement and
improve students’ SHC development strategies.
5. Conclusion
This study developed a model of students’ SHC development through teaching
and learning process at a University. The results showed that the students’ SHC
Development model in teaching and learning has 3 main phases, including
Input, Process, and Output. The users’ validation results proved that the model
http://ijlter.org/index.php/ijlter
232
is acceptable, appropriate and applicable for integration and implementation in
curriculum and students learning process. Moreover, the model is expected to
meet global issues and challenge, and answer questions regarding the low
awareness of policy maker at universities on the needs of graduates’ SHC
capabilities.
Teachers need to reinterpret the SHC development model for possible
implementation in their course. This is because the model could become very
large when teachers implement it as a whole. For instance, teachers should select
the best learning strategy from those stated in the model that fits their course
and develops soft skills. Additionally, they need to select the soft skills
components that could be implemented and assessed in their course. Other uses
of the model could not be adopted in other universities due to certain
challenges. Therefore, university curriculum, national orientation, and existing
issues in their countries should be considered, and preliminary analysis is
conducted. Furthermore, the model could be adjusted and applied in other
universities by carefully analyzing the national and university curriculum and
literature reviews of current issues and global challenges. A further qualitative
and quantitative study should be conducted on the model’s innovation, as well
as the strategies and effectiveness of its implementation.
Acknowledgement
The study was funded by RISPRO LPDP PRJ 13/LPDP/2018, Ministry of
Finance Indonesia.
6. References
Ahlstrom, A. W., Yohalem, N., David, Ji, P., Hillaker, P., & David, P. (2014). From Soft
Skills to Hard Data: Measuring Youth Program Outcomes. New York, USA: William
T. Grant Foundation.
Andreeva, Е., Khrisanova, Е., Gunina, Е., & Vishnevskaya, М. (2020). Psychological and
Pedagogical Support for the Formation of Students’ Competitiveness in the
Educational and Professional Space of the University. International Scientific and
Practical Conference on Education, Health and Human Wellbeing Advances in Social
Science,
Education
and
Humanities
Research,
396,
50–54.
https://doi.org/10.2991/iceder-19.2020.11
Balcar, J., Šimek, M., & Filipová, L., (2018). Soft Skills of Czech Graduates, Review of
Economic
Perspectives.
De
Gruyter,
Warsaw,
18(1),
45-60,
http://dx.doi.org/10.2478/revecp-2018-0003
Bialik, M., Bogan, M., Fadel, C., & Horyathova, M. (2015). Character Education for the 21st
Century: What Should Students Learn? Center for Curriculum Redesign. Boston,
USA: Center for Curriculum Redesign.
Branch, R. M. (2009). Instructional Design: The ADDIE Approach. USA: Springer.
Burce, A., & O’sullivan, N. (2014, September 22-23). Teaching and Learning in
Competency-Based Education [Conference paper]. The Fifth International
Conference on e-Learning (eLearning-2014). Belgrade, Serbia: Innovative Together
Ltd.
Caggiano, K. S., Loredana P., & Jerónimo G., (2020). Towards Identifying the Soft Skills
Needed in Curricula: Finnish and Italian Students' Self-Evaluations Indicate
Differences between Groups Valeria. Sustainability, 12(4031), 1-10
http://doi.org/10.3390/su12104031.
http://ijlter.org/index.php/ijlter
233
Chan, J., Goh, J., & Priest, K. (2015). Soft skills, hard challenges: Understanding the nature of
China's skills gap. Londong, UK: British Council.
Cimatti, B. (2016). Definition, Development, Assessment of Soft Skills and Their Role for
The Quality of Organizations and Enterprises. International Journal for Quality
Research, 10(1), 97–130. http://doi.org/10.18421/IJQR10.01-05
Dick, W., Carey, L., & Carey, J. O. (2001). The systematic design of instruction (5th ed.).
New York, USA: Addison-Wesley Educational Publishers.
DIKTI. (2016). Panduan Penyusuanan Kurrikulum Pendidikan. Jakarta, Indonesia: DIKTI.
DIKTI. (2020). Guide Book of Independent learning – Independence of Campus.
http://dikti.kemdikbud.go.id/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/Buku-PanduanMerdeka-Belajar-Kampus-Merdeka-2020.
Hadiyanto, Mukminin, A., Failasofah. Arif, N., Fajaryani, N., & Habibi, A. (2017). In
Search of Quality Student Teachers in a Digital Era: Reframing the Practices of
Soft Skills in Teacher Education. TOJET: The Turkish Online Journal of Educational
Technology, 16(3), 71-78.
Hadiyanto. (2020, September 30 - October 01). Constructing A Prototype of Developing
Students' 21st Century Skills; Soft Skills, Hard Skills, and Competitiveness at a
University
in
Indonesia.
ICEMS
2019,
Jakarta,
Indonesia.
http://doi.org/10.4108/eai.30-9-2019.2291171
Hadiyanto, Failasofah, Armiwati, Abrar, M., & Thabran, Y. (2021). Students’ Practices of
21st Century Skills between Conventional learning and Blended Learning.
Journal of University Teaching & Learning Practice, 18(3), 7-19.
Hadiyanto, Noferdiman, Moehamin, & Yuliusman. (2017). Assessing Students And
Graduates Soft Skills, Hard Skills And Competitiveness. International Journal of
Social Sciences, 3(2), 1885-1906.
ILO. (2014). Survey of ASEAN employers on skills and competitiveness. Emerging Markets
Consulting. Bankok, Thailand: ILO.
Khalil, M., & Elkhider, I. A. (2016). Applying learning theories and instructional design
models for effective instruction. Advances in physiology education, 40(2), 147-56.
http://doi.org/10.1152/advan.00138.2015
Lippman, L. H, Ryberg, R., Carney, R., Moore, K. A. (2015). Child Trend:. Workforce
Connections: Key "Soft Skills" That Foster Youth Workforce Success: Toward A
Consensus
Across
Fields.
https://www.usaid.gov/sites/default/files/documents/1865/KeySoftSkills.pd
f.
Liventsova, E., Rumyantsevaa, T., & Syriamkina, E. (2016). Development of Social and
Entrepreneurial Skills of Students of Engineering and Technical Specialties In
The Modern University. Proceeding MATEC Web of Conferences (Vol. 7, pp. 19). http://doi.org/10.1051/matecconf/201679010
Marando, A. (2012). Balancing Project Management Hard Skill and Soft Skills.
Massachusetts, USA: Braindeis University.
Md-Ali, R., Shaffie, F., & Yusof, M. F. (2016). Understandings and Conceptions of Soft
Skills for Educators in Public Universities. Future Academy: The European
Proceedings of Social & Behavioural Sciences, 694–701.
Novikova, N. (2016). Competitiveness of Students in the Culture Sphere in the Modern
Educational
Space.
SHS
Web
of
Conferences,
9,
1–4.
http://doi.org/10.1051/shsconf/20162902031
Patacsil, F. F., & Tablatin, C. L. S. (2017). Exploring the Importance of Soft and Hard
Skills as Perceived by It Internship Students and Industry: A Gap Analysis.
Journal
of
Technology
and
Science
Education,
7(3),
347-368.
https://doi.org/10.3926/jotse.271
http://ijlter.org/index.php/ijlter
234
Rajadurai, J., Sapuan, N. M., Daud, S., Salina, D., & Abidin, N (2018). The Marketability
of Technical Graduates from Higher Educational Institutions (HEIs) Offering
Technical and Vocational Education and Training (TVET): A Case from
Malaysia.
Asia-Pacific
Edu
Res.
27(137),
535–543.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s40299-018-0372-7
Setiawan, T. W., Qonita, A. B., Asna, Arna, A., Khaidir, M., Wahab. A., Rifa, M. J.,
Rozikan, M., Mufid, A., Fahmi, K., Purwanto, A., & Muhaini. A. (2020). Effect of
Hard Skills, Soft Skills, Organizational Learning and Innovation Capability on
Islamic University Lecturers' Performance. Sys Rev Pharm, 11(7), 556-569.
The Ontario Public Services. (2016). Towards Defining 21st Century Competencies for
Ontario. Ontario, Canada: Ontario Public Service.
Universitas Indonesia-UPI. (2020). Panduan Implementasi Merdeka Belajar - Kampus
Merdeka Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia. Bandung, Indonesia: Universitas
Pendidikan
Indonesia.
http://cs.upi.edu/v2/assets/docs/Panduan_MBKM_UPI.pdf.
Universitas Jambi-UNJA. (2020).
Strategic Plan of University of Jambi.
https://lppm.unja.ac.id/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/RENSTRA-UNJASMART-2.pdf
http://ijlter.org/index.php/ijlter