Next Article in Journal
A Bibliometric Study on Mathematics Anxiety in Primary Education
Previous Article in Journal
Integrated STEAM Education for Students’ Creativity Development
Previous Article in Special Issue
Voices from Graduate School and the Workforce: Identified Student Outcomes from Completing a Multi-Semester Undergraduate Research Experience Capstone
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Education Sciences
Volume 14
Issue 7
10.3390/educsci14070677
education-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Sustainable Growth of Transversal Competencies: Exploring the Competence Relationships among University Students

by
Zanda Rubene
1,*,
Girts Dimdins
2 and
Anika Miltuze
2
1
Scientific Institute of Pedagogy, University of Latvia, LV-1586 Riga, Latvia
2
Department of Psychology, University of Latvia, LV-1586 Riga, Latvia
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Educ. Sci. 2024, 14(7), 677; https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci14070677
Submission received: 19 April 2024 / Revised: 7 June 2024 / Accepted: 18 June 2024 / Published: 21 June 2024
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Facing New Challenges for Competencies Acquisition in Higher Education)
Browse Figures
Review Reports Versions Notes

Abstract

:
The development of transversal competencies, in interaction with professional competencies, is essential for individuals to adapt to change and live meaningful and productive lives. The aim of this study was to explore the mutual interaction of six transversal competencies—civic, digital, entrepreneurial, global, innovation, and research, as well as their respective sub-competencies—and propose possible approaches to how this dynamic of interaction can be applied to facilitate the development of transversal competencies. A sample of students (N = 1575) from 21 universities in Latvia completed a self-assessment survey evaluating multiple behavioural indicators for each transversal competence and sub-competence. The results revealed that civic competence was evaluated significantly lower than other competencies, and, for most transversal competencies, sub-competencies associated with active and systematic collaboration and networking received lower evaluations. A network analysis showed that the community involvement sub-competence of the civic competence and the initiative and critical thinking sub-competencies of the innovation competence had the strongest links to the other measured sub-competencies on average. The results suggest that the development of initiative and cooperation-and-collaboration-related and network-building skills are likely to have a systematic positive effect on the development of a wider set of transversal competencies and the professional autonomy of students in the long term.

1. Introduction

Society’s dynamic and continuous development requires education to respond to social and cultural novelties through constant transformation and searching for corresponding solutions to the challenges of this era. The traditional understanding of classic education, which primarily took care of the transfer of knowledge to the next generation, has been replaced by a new one aimed at preparing university graduates for living within society, focusing on the necessity to activate students’ thinking potential, to develop competencies for resolving tasks set by their changing social environment [1].
A UNESCO report on the vision of the development of education by 2050 emphasises that the world has changed a lot due to the COVID-19 pandemic and the global climate crisis, and linkages should therefore be established between what students learn at schools and universities and what currently is happening in the world. In the near future, the main task of education will be to help people manage not only professional but also social challenges. Education should not centre around the rational mind but socially useful or transversal competencies, providing social sustainability and contributing to the common good [2].
Therefore, universities increasingly become a space for the implementation of solidarity and cooperation, where an individual’s initiative, proactive behaviour, and responsibility for the future sustainability of society are encouraged [3,4]. Research into transversal competencies is thus gaining increasing importance, as their development in interaction with professional competencies is necessary for individuals to adapt to change successfully and live meaningful and productive lives [5].
The European Pillar of Social Rights emphasises that encouraging the development of competencies is one of the goals of the European Education Area that would allow the full-scale use of educational and cultural potential as a driving force promoting social justice and active citizenship, encouraging the study of the European identity in its diversity [6]. It also emphasises the set of competencies relevant for a young professional to encourage university graduates’ professional autonomy and help to maintain the current standard of living in society, preserve employment and contribute to social cohesion, taking into account the changing society and labour market requirements.
It is important to develop professional autonomy as a quality attesting to one’s ability to be independent, self-determined, proactive, self-managed in making decisions, flexible, and resilient in performing professional activity [7] during one’s studies at university. Therefore, transversal competencies are viewed as the “cornerstone” of the development of each individual, as they are essential in the application of any knowledge and skills [8] and for prospects of employment after graduation [9].
The origins of the current study have an applied focus and can be traced to the Education Development Guidelines for 2021–2027, formulated by the government of Latvia [10], which call for the development of transversal skills on all educational levels, especially digital and civic engagement skills, as well as skills related to innovation and entrepreneurship. Based on these guidelines and requests from the Ministry of Education and Science of Latvia, and after analysing recent studies regarding students’ transversal competencies, the crucial competencies for university graduates both in the study process and for young professionals and citizens were identified and selected for the present study: civic, digital, entrepreneurial, global, innovation, and research [11]. In order to better estimate the role of higher education in the development of human capital, it was decided to study the interrelationships among the mentioned six competencies, which in other studies had been studied separately. The study of these competencies was particularly important in the Latvian situation, where it is necessary to reduce the gap between the study offer and the professional social agency of university graduates [7], as well as for the promotion of liberal democracy in the post-Soviet space [12].
Analysing the research on the mentioned six competencies, it was concluded that the development of transversal competencies and their measurement is an important issue that can be solved methodologically in the future [13]. The combination of the six competencies selected for this study is not only unique to the socio-economic and political context of Latvia but might be applicable to studying transversal competencies in a number of post-Soviet and post-Communist countries facing similar challenges related to economic development and civic engagement in relatively new democracies.
Digital competence describes a student’s behaviour in using information and communication technologies (ICTs) and digital media for efficient communication, information management, cooperation, and creating and disseminating knowledge within one’s professional and/or study activity [14]. The labour market increasingly expects competencies like the ability to resolve non-standard problem situations by using existing digitalisation possibilities and to develop new innovative solutions [15,16,17]. Digital competence is related to the application of information and communication technology solutions for supporting tasks in the workplace, and like other transversal competencies, it can be transferred among fields [13,18,19].
Innovation competence includes a student’s knowledge, skills, and attitudes needed for creating efficient improvements or innovations useful for people or organisations (a new product or solution, invention, method, device, or idea) and their long-term implementation. Innovation has become the third “mission” of universities alongside education and research [20], as it acts as the promoter of economic prosperity, scientific discoveries, technological inventions, and cultural dynamism, promoting global economic, technological, and social achievements. Students are among the leading social innovation actors in higher education; therefore, it is the task of universities not only to train students for future employment possibilities but also to promote their opportunities to create innovations [21,22,23].
Entrepreneurial ability means the creation, identification, or modification of ideas and opportunities by mobilising and efficiently using the necessary resources to attain goals in action. This transversal competence is applicable to all areas of life, from personal growth and active involvement in society processes to participation in the labour market as an employee or a self-employed person and starting a social or commercial entrepreneurial activity. Entrepreneurial ability is recognised as a key to an individual’s development and fulfilment, active citizenship, social inclusion, and employability in a knowledge-based society [24,25,26].
Global competence describes the skill of assessing local, global, and intercultural issues, understanding and assessing different perspectives and global views, engaging in open and effective interaction with people of various cultural backgrounds, and acting for the benefit of collective prosperity by contributing to sustainable development. Global competence is characterised by the ability to make decisions within the global environment by assessing diverse perspectives and global views and interacting with representatives of various cultures [27,28,29,30].
Civic competence describes a person’s participation in civic and social life and promotion of healthy social and political prosperity and sustainability at the community, national, and global levels. Civic competence is a set of values, knowledge, and skills for effective, active, meaningful, and responsible civic and social engagement, contributing to social and political prosperity and sustainability, democratic mutual communication, and communities’ economic growth [31,32,33,34].
The development of students’ transversal competencies has a specific meaning in post-totalitarian societies, where there is a deficit of ideas and skills vital for democracy, for example, argumentation skills, civic engagement, openness to diversity, etc. [1,35,36,37]. Thus, the development of transversal competencies at universities should also be considered as the development of tools for strengthening the sustainability of society.

2. Theoretical Background

When studying the development of students’ transversal competencies, it should be taken into account that this is a multi-level and multi-factor process involving the continuous interaction of various factors.
First, this process can be viewed from the angle of Bronfenbrenner’s bioecological system theory [38,39], conceptualising an individual’s development as a continuous and dynamic interaction with their environment via its ecological systems of various levels—the microsystem, mesosystem, exosystem, macrosystem, and chronosystem. Although Bronfenbrenner’s model was initially constructed to understand an individual’s development and functioning within their closest and farthest social–cultural environment, it has been adapted to multiple fields of research and can also be used for obtaining a better understanding of the development of students’ transversal competencies, affecting factors and the interaction of factors on various levels.
For example, in studies regarding the development of digital competence, it has been found that there is an interaction of various factors in its development at the individual, microsystem, exosystem, and macrosystem levels—personal factors (self-confidence in using ICTs, attitudes towards ICTs, prior training on ICTs, and motivation), learning design (online and blended learning), lecturers’ digital competence and external aspects (family support and the COVID-19 pandemic) [19]. In studies regarding entrepreneurial ability, the interaction and synergy of various factors are underlined (e.g., innate entrepreneurial aptitude, sociological conditions, and educational programmes), and the lack of any component limits the individual potential of an entrepreneur [40]. There is also a range of studies about the mutual interaction of various factors in the development of both global competence in the school [41] and university [42] environments and civic competence [43].
Second, the transversal competencies possessed by an individual may be viewed as factors that not only interact with other factors but also affect and network with each other. Hanesová and Theodulides [44] proposed looking at students’ transversal competencies as a system that changes and develops jointly, with several competencies being mutually interlinked and all being linked with the ecosystem of higher education. This idea is also used in the present study through the following research objectives: (1) to find out how students’ six transversal competencies (civic, digital, entrepreneurial, global, innovation, and research and their respective sub-competencies) mutually interact and (2) to propose possible approaches to how this dynamic of interaction can be applied to facilitate transversal competencies’ change and development. In this way, it will be possible to discover which transversal competence elements are more linked to others. This, in turn, will allow us to identify how, by developing one component, we can expect other competencies to grow to promote transversal competencies’ sustainable development. To accomplish these research objectives, we conducted an exploratory cross-sectional survey study to answer two research questions: (1) what are the differences among the self-ratings of six transversal competencies among university students in Latvia, i.e., which competencies and sub-competencies will be rated as more developed, and which will be rated as less developed in the student sample, indicating the perceived areas in need of development, and (2) what are the relationships among the self-ratings of competencies and sub-competencies, and which competencies and sub-competencies have the strongest relationships with most other competencies, indicating the most prospective targets for interventions aimed at the general development of transversal competencies.

3. Materials and Methods

3.1. Participants

The participants were 1575 students from 21 universities in Latvia. The participants equally represented academic study programmes (792 respondents) and professional study programmes (783 respondents). The respondents’ ages ranged from 18 to 73 years, with a mean age of 26.1 (SD = 9.2) and a median age of 22. The gender distribution was 1160 women (73.5%), 402 men (25.5%), and 13 (1%) other.

3.2. Measures

Transversal competencies were measured using a shortened version (the full instrument consisted of 291 originally formulated behavioural indicators measuring sub-competencies and sub-competence facets for the six competencies: digital (5 sub-competencies, 19 facets, and 59 indicators), global (4 sub-competencies, 12 facets, and 38 indicators), civic (4 sub-competencies, 10 facets, and 34 indicators), research (4 sub-competencies, 13 facets, and 52 indicators), innovation (5 sub-competencies, 17 facets, and 62 indicators), and entrepreneurial (3 sub-competencies, 15 facets, and 46 indicators). The shortened version used in this study mostly relied on a single indicator per facet to measure each of the sub-competencies) of a previously developed self-report survey [11]. To measure each competence, the respondents evaluated multiple behavioural indicators in terms of how characteristic these indicators were of the respondent’s typical behaviour on a 7-point Likert scale ranging from 1 (“not characteristic at all”) to 7 (“fully characteristic”). The behavioural indicators for each competence were grouped into sub-competencies (see Table 1 for a full list of sub-competencies and the number of behavioural indicators [survey items] used to measure each competence and sub-competence). In addition, the participants responded to demographic questions about their gender, age, and study field.

3.3. Procedure

The respondents were recruited by specially trained representatives from the participant universities. The data were collected via an online survey administered through the QuestionPro platform. The participant university representatives distributed a link to the survey to students from their respective universities to maximise participation from eight thematic study fields: natural sciences, mathematics, and information technologies; humanities and arts; engineering, production and construction; education; agriculture; services; social sciences, commercial studies, and legal studies; and healthcare and welfare. After receiving the link, the participants completed the survey on their own, anonymously, and without any time limitation. Before starting the survey, the participants read an informed consent form and explicitly indicated their informed consent by opting to continue with the survey. The survey followed the standard procedure for complying with ethical standards at the University of Latvia. Approval from the Ethics Committee for Research in Humanities and Social Sciences was obtained before commencing the study.

4. Results

4.1. Comparison of Competencies and Sub-Competencies across the Sample

Indices were calculated for all competencies and sub-competencies by averaging the items (behavioural indicators) representing the respective competence/sub-competence. The internal consistency coefficients (Cronbach’s alpha) for each competence and sub-competence are displayed in Table 1. The Shapiro–Wilk test of normality was used to check whether the data were normally distributed. Because the distribution for all indices (except for the overall index of digital competence) did not fit a normal distribution, non-parametric methods of analysis were used to examine the differences and relationships among the competencies and sub-competencies.
To answer the first research question, the overall indices for all six competencies were compared across the sample using the Friedman test; Conover’s post hoc tests with Bonferroni correction were used for pairwise comparisons. All the indices (except for the global and innovation competencies, which did not differ significantly from each other) were significantly different (Chi-square = 2161.23, p < 0.001). The global and innovation competencies showed the highest ratings, and the civic competence, by a large margin, had the lowest rating.
Next, the sub-competencies were compared using the same method. The digital competence’s sub-competencies all differed significantly from each other (Chi-square = 1860.41, p < 0.001), except for communication, cooperation, and problem-solving, which did not differ significantly from each other. For the global competence, all sub-competencies differed significantly from each other (Chi-square = 244.00, p < 0.001), except for information management and values and attitudes in an intercultural environment, which did not differ significantly from each other. For the innovation competence, all sub-competencies differed significantly from each other (Chi-square = 274.77, p < 0.001), except for creativity and teamwork, which did not differ significantly from each other. For the research competence, all sub-competencies differed significantly from each other (Chi-square = 899.58, p < 0.001), except for attitude and ethics and conducting research, which did not differ significantly from each other. For civic competence, there was a significant overall difference between the three sub-competencies (Chi-square = 331.95, p < 0.001), but the ratings for community involvement and civic capacity did not differ significantly from each other, whereas the third sub-competence—knowledge and application of the principles of a democratic society—was evaluated significantly higher. Finally, all three sub-competencies of entrepreneurial competence differed significantly from each other (Chi-square = 309.77, p < 0.001).

4.2. Network Analysis of Sub-Competencies

To answer the second research question, we used a network analysis of the sub-competence indicators to estimate and visualise the relationships among all sub-competencies. Network analysis allows the relationships among multiple interrelated variables to be visualised, and it is an especially appropriate method for presenting data where the directionality of causal links among the variables is difficult to establish, as is true in the case of transversal competencies and their sub-competencies. This data analytic approach treats the correlations among constructs as a network where nodes represent variables in a data set, and the edges represent pairwise conditional associations between variables in the data while conditioning on the remaining variables [45].
The network analysis was based on regularised partial correlations with the nonparanormal transformation of variables, using graphical LASSO (least absolute shrinkage and selection operator), with a tuning parameter chosen using the extended Bayesian information criterium (EBIC). The analysis was conducted in the JASP software (0.14.1) Network module, which runs on the R package ‘bootnet’ for calculations and the R package ‘qgraph’ for network visualisation. Bootstrapping with 1000 resamples was used to evaluate the network’s robustness and estimate the stability of the network’s centrality measures.
The network plot is depicted in Figure 1. A visual examination of the network structure reveals that sub-competencies of the same competence cluster together and tend to have stronger links among themselves than with the sub-competencies of other competencies. For some competencies (e.g., entrepreneurial competence), the links among the sub-competencies are of similar strength; for others (e.g., global and digital competence), some links between the sub-competencies are weaker than others, and the bootstrap confidence intervals for those links include zero.
Overall, one can observe predominantly positive associations among most competencies in the network, showing that all transversal competencies positively correlate with each other. There are also some negative edges (dotted lines in Figure 1), but it should be noted that for all except one of these negative edges, the bootstrap confidence intervals for their edge weights included zero. The only robust negative relationship is between the research sub-competence collaboration and communication and the global sub-competence awareness of diversity in local and global communities.
The centrality measures for the calculated network are depicted in Figure 2. Two indicators are of special interest for this analysis. First, one can see that the community involvement sub-competence of civic competence and the initiative and critical thinking sub-competencies of innovation competence have the highest strength. Strength refers to how strongly a given node is directly connected to other nodes in the attitude network, counting both positive and negative associations. These three sub-competencies have the strongest links to the other sub-competencies in the network on average. The community involvement sub-competence, besides strong links to the other two sub-competencies of civic competence, also has robust positive relationships with the intercultural communication and cooperation sub-competence of the global competence, the collaboration and communication sub-competence of the research competence, and the digital content creation sub-competence of the digital competence. The initiative sub-competence, besides having strong relationships with the other sub-competencies of the innovation competence, also has robust positive relationships with the initiative and action orientation and identification, mobilisation, and effective use of internal and external resources sub-competencies of the entrepreneurial competence and the values and attitudes in an intercultural environment sub-competence of the global competence. The critical thinking sub-competence also has robust positive relationships with the other sub-competencies of the innovation competence, except for the networking sub-competence (the bootstrap confidence interval for this edge included zero). Critical thinking also had robust positive relationships with three out of four sub-competencies of the global competence (information management, awareness of diversity in local and global communities, and values and attitudes in an intercultural environment) and the information literacy and data literacy sub-competence of the digital competence.
The other centrality indicator of interest is expected influence. This measure is similar to strength but considers the direction of associations, so if a node has both positive and negative links to other nodes, it leads to lower expected influence, whereas many positive links result in higher expected influence. The highest expected influence can be observed for the initiative sub-competence of the innovation competence, which, as mentioned before, is robustly related to the sub-competencies of the entrepreneurial and global competencies.

5. Discussion and Conclusions

This study aimed to answer two research questions. First, we wanted to examine the differences among the self-ratings of six transversal competencies among university students in Latvia to identify the perceived areas in need of development. The results reveal a general tendency that the sub-competencies associated with active and systematic collaboration and networking were evaluated lower than others. This is true for about four of the six competencies studied, the exceptions being entrepreneurial competence (which does not have a designated sub-competence for cooperation and/or networking) and digital competence, where the communication and cooperation sub-competence includes indicators related to the technical use of digital communication tools. The respondents indicated that they felt unsure about their abilities and skills to actively, systematically, and continuously engage with others in various activities and contexts.
This finding can be explained in two ways. First of all, any transversal competence includes skills, attitudes, values, and dispositions [46], which can be expressed through individual behaviour in different situations and in different contexts. According to the theory of planned behaviour [47], an individual’s attitude and intentions do not always result in behaviour. In our study, it can be seen that the respondents evaluated their knowledge and attitudes higher (e.g., formulate an opinion, respect, generate ideas, plan, search for information, etc.) but did not, to the same extent, self-report their inherent real behaviour, which was represented in the dimensions of cooperation and communication (e.g., become involved, discuss, present, initiate, form a team, etc.). In other words, in civic, global, innovation, and research competencies, dispositions, values, and attitudes are not always reflected in a corresponding behaviour. One likely reason for this discrepancy between knowledge and attitudes on the one hand and behaviour on the other is the lack of the necessary practical skills to turn theoretical understanding into practical action.
This leads to the other explanation—the low indicators of cooperation and communication, in combination with the low self-evaluation of civic competence, show a pattern of a generally underdeveloped set of skills and knowledge necessary for social and civic engagement. Civic competence was by far the lowest-evaluated transversal competence, showing that the respondents were acutely aware of their lack of civic engagement skills. Interestingly, global competence, which is conceptually related to civic competence, was among the highest-evaluated competencies. Such results can be related to globalisation taking place worldwide. A survey conducted by UNICEF in 55 countries of the world concluded that young people more often than older individuals identify themselves as world citizens and feel themselves as belonging to the world community; UNICEF assumes that today’s 15- to 24-year-olds have only ever known a world shaped by globalisation and digital connectivity [48].
Regarding the low civic competence, similar trends were also revealed by the international assessment of pupils’ civic education in 2022, the results of which confirm that a majority of 13–14-year-old teenagers in Latvia are passive from the civic point of view and that some of them are inclined to become involved in illegal protest activities [49]. The above results can be explained by the implications of post-Soviet values and a relatively short experience of democracy in Latvian society, manifested as a lack of trust in democracy as a state administration form and its values [1]. Likewise, the Russian mass media propaganda in Latvia as a border state of the European Union is another important explanation of the youth’s civic passivity [50].
Still, the youth’s civic passivity is not only characteristic of countries of the post-Soviet space—a comparison with preceding study cycles and among IEA ICCS 2022 member states indicates that pupils are generally not active and do not possess much initiative [51]. For example, an analysis of the most recent reforms in the field of democratic citizenship in Nordic countries’ national curricula led to the conclusion that the civic engagement level tends to decrease irrespective of the old democracy traditions in Scandinavia and the relatively good results achieved by pupils in ICCS assessments [52].
Therefore, it is necessary to seriously focus on the role of not only schools but also universities in encouraging the youth’s active involvement to secure the future sustainability of democracy. However, although the youth can be taught about democracy and its values at school and university, it is imperative for educational establishments to cooperate with the broader community and to strengthen civic engagement and values of all the youth, irrespective of their social and economic background [52].
One needs to ask how this overall pattern of low civic engagement may affect the general development of transversal competencies. The second research question of this study dealt with the relationships among the self-ratings of competencies and sub-competencies, with the purpose of identifying the most prospective targets for interventions aimed at the general development of transversal competencies. The network analysis reported above allowed us to establish which sub-competencies were most strongly related to others and thus may be hypothesised as having the strongest potential direct and indirect influence on the development of the whole set of transversal competencies. Two observations are relevant here. First, the sub-competence with the lowest rating of all—community involvement from the civic competence—also has the strongest average connection with other sub-competencies in the network (with the highest strength and the second-highest expected influence). This suggests that the low development of community involvement may have a hampering effect on the development of a number of other sub-competencies, especially those from the global, research, and digital competencies, with which it has the strongest connections (a reverse causality is also possible, though—one can speculate that respondents with lower overall transversal competence development may find it more difficult to become involved in all kinds of communities and social networks). In our research, community involvement was associated with voluntary social activities (e.g., initiating social events, working in non-governmental organisations, expressing an opinion in protests, etc.). Previous studies [53] show that individuals who engage in volunteering have several subjective benefits, including professional and personal development, social and professional contacts, etc. We assume that these benefits will not only motivate individuals to engage in voluntary activities in the future but may also contribute to the development of other transversal competencies.
The second observation is that although the other communication- and collaboration-related sub-competencies with lower ratings are not as strongly connected to other nodes of the competence network on average, each of them still has strong and robust connections to other sub-competencies of the transversal competence to which it belongs, thus exerting a more subtle but still non-trivial potential influence on transversal competencies’ overall development. Taken together, these observations suggest that the development of a broad range of cooperation- and collaboration-related and network-building skills may not only improve the corresponding sub-competencies but may also have a systematic positive effect on the development of a wider set of transversal competencies and the professional autonomy of students in the long term.
Another observation may be made if we consider the sub-competencies with the highest strength and expected influence. One characteristic shared by the three sub-competencies with the highest strength—the community involvement sub-competence of the civic competence and the critical thinking and initiative sub-competencies of the innovation competence, the latter also displaying the highest expected influence—is that they all have robust connections with one or more sub-competencies of the global competence. This pattern suggests that the potential influence of these most central sub-competencies may be exerted through the global competence. This means that developing the community involvement, initiative, and, especially, critical thinking sub-competencies may be expected to lead to the strongest beneficial effects for global competence and, thereby, for other competencies positively related to it. Again, however, the reverse causal link is also possible by higher global competence positively contributing to civic and innovation competence through the corresponding high-centrality sub-competencies. In any case, these results point to the global competence as another potential pathway for the sustainable wide-range and long-term development of the whole set of transversal competencies measured in this study.
Service learning, study abroad, and internships are the civic or community-based learning experiences that universities should pay particular attention to if we want to develop a global and sustainable society focused on diversity. The most robust findings related to the effect of community or civic experience are related to personal or social responsibility results. Research on awareness of and mindsets towards diversity is more often related to study experience abroad rather than any other experience related to society [54].
The results show an overall pattern of weak-to-moderate positive relationships among the sub-competencies measured in this study (with very few mostly weak and non-robust negative relationships observed). Broadly speaking, this pattern suggests that the development of any transversal competence should bring potential benefits for some if not all, other transversal competencies. Such a conclusion is consistent with Bronfenbrenner’s bioecological system model [38,39] about the mutual interaction of several factors and underlines previous findings that students’ transversal competencies are a system that changes and develops jointly [44].
However, the results also point to the most promising directions for potential educational interventions aimed at the development of transversal competencies. Among the several sub-competencies with the highest strength indicator, the initiative sub-competence (from the innovation competence) stands out as having the highest expected influence. This means that by developing initiative, one can expect the highest overall positive effect on other transversal competencies, especially entrepreneurial competence and global competence, without any identifiable potential negative side effects on other competencies’ development. This expected influence would not be large in terms of the effect size but rather non-trivial and likely noticeable in the long term. One can also speculate that there is a broader psychological factor beyond the initiative sub-competence related to the general disposition to be proactive, open-minded, and able to spot and exploit opportunities in broad areas of life, which, in turn, is positively related to multiple behavioural indicators corresponding to many, if not all, transversal competencies within and beyond those covered in this study.
In order to improve students’ initiative in the study process at universities, it is necessary to expand the organisation and offering of various measures for creating social innovations, such as business incubators, hackathons, think tanks, project competitions, community-based and civic engagement in studies, etc., to enable students to be aware of their resources, strengths, and weaknesses, to train their design thinking and problem-solving during their studies. The possibility of solving actual societal issues by reducing inequality will not only encourage the creation of social innovation but also allow students to become aware of their civic rights and obligations for the sustainable development of a democratic society.
In conclusion, the main finding of this study is that all the transversal competencies measured are interconnected. Although the results allowed us to identify some sub-competencies that are more central and thus have more potential influence than others, it is important to pay attention to the development of all transversal competencies, keeping in mind that any improvement in any sub-competence bears the potential to benefit a number of related skills, thus contributing to the overall development of the whole set of a person’s transversal competencies. IEA ICCS 2022 data analysis presents a direct link between students’ civic competence level and their presented attitudes; notably, students with a higher level of knowledge are more open to democratic values, i.e., civic initiative and engagement [49]. Also, a study of university students’ initiative and active engagement and cooperation with the community has led to the conclusion that active and collaborative learning, as well as undergraduate research, has a broadly positive effect on several learning outcomes; for example, critical thinking, a necessity for inquiry and intercultural effectiveness [54]. It is crucial to strengthen civic engagement as early as in the school environment and to continue it at university to minimise challenges and risks over the long term and to encourage critical thinking, initiative, and active involvement in society. Higher education institutions know precious little about students’ capacity to demonstrate their civic abilities in applied contexts, inside and outside the classroom. This is the next frontier for researchers to truly understand the ways in which community-based and civic practices contribute to students’ attainment of essential skills.
There are some limitations to the present research. One is the use of self-ratings for the evaluation of transversal competencies. The accuracy of a self-assessment survey is lower than objective tests of skills and abilities or behavioural observations because the respondents’ answers can be affected by both a limited ability to remember specific examples of their actions, distorted memories of their past actions, and a general tendency to overestimate themselves, their skills and their abilities. Responses can also be affected by social desirability and motivation for positive self-presentation. Another limitation is related to the study’s sampling procedure. Although the surveyed sample was as diverse as possible and maximum effort was put into making the sub-sample from each participant university as random as possible, it should be noted that no common sampling frame was used for the whole population of Latvian students and that the study sample cannot be considered fully representative of this population. As a result, some study fields and programmes may be overrepresented or underrepresented in the sample, where sample gender proportions within study fields and programmes may differ from the respective populations, and participants’ self-selection may also have affected the results. This was a major reason why the analyses presented in this paper did not examine the possible differences between study fields and between genders in transversal competence levels and competence relationships. Such analyses would require a precisely stratified sampling procedure, as well as a larger sample size, to provide the necessary statistical power to detect the multiple study field and gender-related effects and their interactions. A third limitation concerns the contents of the survey instrument. There are situations where the descriptions of the behavioural indicators used in the survey are possibly too general (for example, the specifics of research may differ significantly in different fields) or too simple (for example, descriptions of the behavioural indicators of digital competence when carrying out a competence assessment in the field of ICT). Although a unified competency assessment tool has many advantages (for example, it is easier to compare results between domains and to maintain, update, and improve the instrument), the formulations may not work equally well with respondents from all study fields and study programmes, thereby affecting the results’ reliability.
Future research should explore the possible higher-order factors behind the various competencies and sub-competencies, as well as the relationships between transversal competencies and other individual difference variables that may theoretically contribute to transversal skills and knowledge, such as general intelligence, personality traits, personal values, stable motives, etc. Such research would contribute to the theoretical understanding of the mechanisms behind the emergence and development of transversal competencies and would also have practical applications in the creation of tools for the development of transversal competencies.

Author Contributions

Conceptualisation, Z.R., G.D. and A.M.; methodology, G.D. and A.M.; validation, Z.R., G.D. and A.M.; formal analysis, G.D. and A.M.; investigation, Z.R., G.D. and A.M.; resources, Z.R.; data curation, G.D. and A.M.; writing—original draft preparation, Z.R., G.D. and A.M.; writing—review and editing, Z.R., G.D. and A.M.; visualisation, G.D.; supervision, Z.R.; project administration, Z.R; funding acquisition, Z.R. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research was funded by the project “Assessment of the Students’ Competences in Higher Education and their Development Dynamics during Study Period” ESF 8.3.6.2. “Development of Education Quality Monitoring System” 8.3.6.2/17/I/001 (23-12.6/22/2).

Institutional Review Board Statement

The study was approved by the University of Latvia Ethics Committee for Research in Humanities and Social Sciences (approval no. Nr71-46/35, approved on 8 February 2023).

Informed Consent Statement

All the respondents were informed about the use of the research data and read the following statement: “By filling in this questionnaire, you agree that the information provided will be used anonymously in the research. You can stop filling in the form if you feel that you do not wish to answer any of the questions.”

Data Availability Statement

The raw data supporting the conclusions of this article will be made available by the authors on request.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

References

  1. Rubene, Z.; Svece, A. Development of critical thinking in education of Latvia: Situation analysis and optimisation strategy. In Innovations, Technologies and Research in Education: Proceedings of the ATEE Spring Conference 2019; Daniela, L., Ed.; University of Latvia Press: Riga, Latvia, 2019; pp. 405–421. [Google Scholar]
  2. UNESCO. Reimagining Our Futures Together: A New Social Contract for Education. 2021. Available online: https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000379707 (accessed on 29 December 2023).
  3. Council of the European Union. Council Recommendation of 22 May 2018 on Key Competences for Lifelong Learning. 2018. Available online: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=uriserv:OJ.C_.2018.189.01.0001.01.ENG&toc=OJ:C:2018:189:TOC (accessed on 29 December 2023).
  4. Beynaghi, A.; Trencher, G.; Moztarzadeh, F.; Mozafari, M.; Maknoon, R.; Leal Filho, W. Future sustainability scenarios for universities: Moving beyond the United Nations Decade of Education for Sustainable Development. J. Clean. Prod. 2016, 112, 3464–3478. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Whittemor, S. Transversal Competencies Essential for Future Proofing the Workforce; White Paper, Skillalibrary: Civitanova Marche, Italy, 2018. [Google Scholar]
  6. European Pillar of Social Rights—Building a Fairer and More Inclusive European Union. 2017. Available online: https://ec.europa.eu/social/main.jsp?catId=1606&langId=en (accessed on 29 December 2023).
  7. Rubene, Z.; Dimdiņš, Ģ.; Miltuze, A.; Baranova, S.; Medne, D.; Jansone-Ratinika, N.; Āboltiņa, L.; Bernande, M.; Āboliņa, A.; Demitere, M.; et al. Augstākajā Izglītībā Studējošo Kompetenču Novērtējums un to Attīstības Dinamika Studiju Periodā. 1. Kārtas Noslēguma Ziņojums [Evaluation of the Competencies of Students in Higher Education and Their Development Dynamics during the Study Period. Round 1 Final Report]; University of Latvia: Riga, Latvia, 2021. [Google Scholar]
  8. Slišāne, A.; Lāma, G.; Rubene, Z. Self-assessment of the entrepreneurial competence of teacher education students in the remote study process. Sustainability 2021, 13, 6424. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Belchior-Rocha, H.; Casquilho-Martins, I.; Simões, E. Transversal Competencies for Employability: From Higher Education to the Labour Market. Educ. Sci. 2022, 12, 255. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Ministru Kabinets [Cabinet of Ministers]. Par Izglītības Attīstības Pamatnostādnēm 2021–2027. Gadam [On the Education Development Guidelines for 2021–2027]; 2021. Available online: https://likumi.lv/ta/id/324332-par-izglitibas-attistibas-pamatnostadnem-20212027-gadam (accessed on 1 June 2024).
  11. Dimdiņš, Ģ.; Miltuze, A.; Oļesika, A. Development and initial validation of an assessment tool for student transversal competences. Hum. Technol. Qual. Educ. 2022, 449–463. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Pospieszna, P.; Lown, P.; Dietrich, S. Building Active Youth in Post-Soviet Countries through Civic Education Programmes: Evidence from Poland. East Eur. Politics 2023, 39, 321–344. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Sá, M.J.; Serpa, S. Transversal Competences: Their Importance and Learning Processes by Higher Education Students. Educ. Sci. 2018, 8, 126. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Ferrari, A. Digital Competence in Practice: An Analysis of Frameworks; Joint Research Centre Technical Report; Institute for Prospective Technological Studies: Luxembourg, 2012. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Álvarez-Rodríguez, F.J.; Vera, R.A.A. Assessment of Digital Graduation Competences for Programs Degrees in Computing and Information Technology Under the Society 5.0 Paradigm. IEEE Rev. Iberoam. Tecnol. Aprendiz. 2022, 17, 208–214. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Bashir, S. Digital Skills: Frameworks and Programs; World Bank: Washington, DC, USA, 2020; Available online: https://documents1.worldbank.org/curated/en/562351611824219616/pdf/Digital-Skills-Frameworks-and-Programs.pdf (accessed on 1 June 2024).
  17. Vuorikari, R.; Kluzer, S.; Punie, Y. DigComp 2.2: The Digital Competence Framework for Citizens—With New Examples of Knowledge, Skills and Attitudes; EUR 31006 EN, JRC128415; Publications Office of the European Union: Luxembourg, 2022; ISBN 978-92-76-48882-8. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Sarva, E.; Lāma, G.; Oļesika, A.; Daniela, L.; Rubene, Z. Development of Education Field Student Digital Competences—Student and Stakeholders’ Perspective. Sustainability 2023, 15, 9895. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Litiņa, S.; Svētiņa, K.; Miltuze, A. Factors Influencing Digital Competence: A Focus Group Study from the Perspective of the Medical College Students. Hum. Technol. Qual. Educ. 2022, 227–241. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Compagnucci, L.; Spigarelli, F. The Third Mission of the university: A systematic literature review on potentials and constraints. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Chang. 2020, 161, 120284. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Keinänen, M.; Ursin, J.; Nissinen, K. How to measure students’ innovation competences in higher education: Evaluation of an assessment tool in authentic learning environments. Stud. Educ. Eval. 2018, 58, 30–36. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Fernández-Cruz, F.J.; Rodríguez-Legendre, F. The Innovation Competence Profile of Teachers in Higher Education Institutions. Innov. Educ. Teach. Int. 2022, 59, 634–645. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Cuenca, L.; Fernández-Diego, M.; Gordo, M.; Ruiz, L.; Alemany, M.M.; Ortiz, A. Measuring Competencies in Higher Education: The Case of Innovation Competence. In Sustainable Learning in Higher Education: Developing Competencies for the Global Marketplace; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2015; pp. 131–142. [Google Scholar]
  24. Slišāne, A.; Lāma, G.; Rubene, Z. How Is Entrepreneurship as Generic and Professional Competences Diverse? Some Reflections on the Evaluations of University Students’ Generic Competences (Students of Education and Bioeconomics). Front. Educ. 2022, 7, 909968. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. García-González, A.; Ramírez-Montoya, M.S. Social Entrepreneurship Competency in Higher Education: An Analysis Using Mixed Methods. J. Soc. Entrep. 2023, 14, 91–109. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Komarkova, I.; Gagliardi, D.; Conrads, J.; Collado, A. Entrepreneurship Competence: An Overview of Existing Concepts, Policies and Initiatives–Final Report; JRC Research Reports JRC96531; Joint Research Centre: Sevilla, Spain, 2015. [Google Scholar]
  27. Ndubuisi, A.; Marzi, E.; Mohammed, D.; Edun, O.; Asare, P.; Slotta, J. Developing Global Competence in Global Virtual Team Projects: A Qualitative Exploration of Engineering Students’ Experiences. J. Stud. Int. Educ. 2022, 26, 259–278. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Caligiuri, P.; Santo, V.D. Global Competence: What Is It, and Can It Be Developed through Global Assignments? Hum. Resour. Plan. 2001, 24, 3. [Google Scholar]
  29. Majewska, I.A. Teaching Global Competence: Challenges and Opportunities. Coll. Teach. 2023, 71, 112–124. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Mansilla, V.B.; Jackson, A.W. Educating for Global Competence: Preparing Our Students to Engage the World; ASCD: Alexandria, VA, USA, 2022. [Google Scholar]
  31. Barrett, M. Citizenship Competences. Sc. Democr. 2021, 12, 145–160. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Medne, D.; Lastovska, A.; Lāma, G.; Grava, J. The Development of Civic Competence in Higher Education to Support a Sustainable Society: The Case of Latvian Higher Education. Sustainability 2024, 16, 2238. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Brunold, A. Civic Education for Sustainable Development and Its Consequences for German Civic Education Didactics and Curricula of Higher Education. Discourse Commun. Sustain. Educ. 2015, 6, 30–49. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Ribeiro, A.B.; Caetano, A.; Menezes, I. Citizenship Education, Educational Policies and NGOs. Br. Educ. Res. J. 2016, 42, 646–664. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Rubene, Z. Topicality of Critical Thinking in the Post-Soviet Educational Space. Eur. Educ. 2009, 41, 24–40. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Martínez-Clares, P.; González-Morga, N. Teaching Methodologies at University and Their Relationship with the Development of Transversal Competences / Metodologías de Enseñanza en la Universidad y su Relación con el Desarrollo de Competencias Transversales. Cult. Educ. 2018, 30, 233–275. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Zahner, D.; van Damme, D.; Benjamin, R.; Lehrfeld, J. Measuring the Generic Skills of Higher Education Students and Graduates: Implementation of CLA+ International. In Assessing Undergraduate Learning in Psychology: Strategies for Measuring and Improving Student Performance; Nolan, S.A., Hakala, C.M., Landrum, R.E., Eds.; American Psychological Association: Washington, DC, USA, 2020; pp. 132–149. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Bronfenbrenner, U. Developmental ecology through space and time: A future perspective. In Examining Lives in Context: Perspectives on the Ecology of Human Development; Moen, P., Elder, G.H., Luscher, K., Eds.; American Psychological Association: Washington, DC, USA, 1995; pp. 619–647. [Google Scholar]
  39. Bronfenbrenner, U.; Morris, P.A. The Bioecological Model of Human Development. In Handbook of Child Psychology: Theoretical Models of Human Development, 6th ed.; Lerner, R.M., Damon, W., Eds.; John Wiley & Sons, Inc.: Hoboken, NJ, USA, 2006; pp. 793–828. [Google Scholar]
  40. Komarnicka, A. Entrepreneurial Competencies and the Factors Determining the Success of an Entrepreneur in the Market. In Education Excellence and Innovation Management: A 2025 Vision to Sustain Economic Development during Global Challenges, Proceedings of the 35th International Business Information Management Association Conference (IBIMA 2020), Seville, Spain, 1–2 April 2020; Soliman, K.S., Ed.; International Business Information Management Association (IBIMA): King Of Prussia, PA, USA, 2020. [Google Scholar]
  41. Jang, G.; Schwarzenthal, M.; Juang, L.P. Adolescents’ Global Competence: A Latent Profile Analysis and Exploration of Student-, Parent-, and School-Related Predictors of Profile Membership. Int. J. Intercult. Relat. 2023, 92, 101729. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. García-Beltrán, E. Buenas Prácticas en el Desarrollo de la Competencia Global en el Marco del Bachillerato Internacional [Good Practices in Global Competence Development within the International Baccalaureate Framework]. Rev. Carib. Investig. Educ. 2023, 7, 105–127. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. LeCompte, K.; Blevins, B.; Riggers-Piehl, T. Developing civic competence through action civics: A longitudinal look at the data. J. Soc. Stud. Res. 2020, 44, 127–137. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Hanesová, D.; Theodulides, L. Mastering Transversal Competences in a Higher Education Environment: Through Process of Critical Thinking and Reflection; Belianum: Banská Bystrica, Slovakia, 2022. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Borsboom, D.; Deserno, M.K.; Rhemtulla, M.; Epskamp, S.; Fried, E.I.; McNally, R.J.; Robinaugh, D.J.; Perugini, M.; Dalege, J.; Costantini, G.; et al. Network analysis of multivariate data in psychological science. Nat. Rev. Methods Primers 2021, 1, 58. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Myllykoski-Laine, S.; Lahdenperä, J.; Nikander, L.; Postareff, L. Students’ Experiences of the Development of Generic Competences in the Finnish Higher Education Context—The Role of the Teaching-Learning Environment and Approaches to Learning. Eur. J. High. Educ. 2022, 13, 448–467. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Ajzen, I. The Theory of Planned Behavior. Organ. Behav. Hum. Decis. Process. 1991, 50, 179–211. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. UNICEF. The Changing Childhood Project; UNICEF: New York, NY, USA, 2021. [Google Scholar]
  49. Čekse, I.; Kiris, K.; Alksnis, R.; Geske, A.; Kampmane, K. Jaunais Atskaites Punkts Pilsoniskajā Izglītībā Latvijā. Starptautiskā Pilsoniskās Izglītības Pētījuma IEA ICCS 2022 Pirmie Starptautiskie un Latvijas Rezultāti; [A New Reference Point for Civic and Citizenship Education in Latvia. First International and National Results of the IEA International Civic and Citizenship Education Study—IEA ICCS 2022]; LU PPMF Izglītības Pētniecības Institūts: Rīga, Latvia, 2023. [Google Scholar]
  50. Makhashvili, L. The Russian information war and propaganda narratives in the European Union and the EU’s Eastern Partnership countries. Int. J. Soc. Sci. Humanit. 2017, 7, 309–313. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Schulz, W.; Ainley, J.; Fraillon, J.; Losito, B.; Agrusti, G.; Valeria, D.; Friedman, T. Education for Citizenship in Times of Global Challenge. IEA International Civic and Citizenship Education Study 2022 International Report; IEA: Paris, France, 2023. [Google Scholar]
  52. Hoskins, B.; Huang, D.H.; Biseth, D.H. Northern Lights on Civic and Citizenship Education: A Cross-National Comparison of Nordic Data from ICCS, 1st ed.; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2021; Available online: https://link.springer.com/book/10.1007%2F978-3-030-66788-7 (accessed on 1 January 2024).
  53. Handy, F.; Mook, L. Volunteering and Volunteers: Benefit-Cost Analyses. Res. Soc. Work Pract. 2010, 21, 412–420. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Chittum, J.R.; Enke, K.A.; Finley, A.P. The Effects of Community-Based and Civic Engagement in Higher Education: What We Know and Questions That Remain; American Association of Colleges and Universities: Washington, DC, USA, 2022. [Google Scholar]
Education 14 00677 g001
Figure 1. Network of all sub-competencies of students’ transversal competencies measured in the study. The edges represent regularised partial correlations; a thicker and darker edge indicates a stronger relationship, while a dashed edge indicates a negative relationship. Sub-competencies of digital competence are marked in blue: 1. information literacy and data literacy; 2. communication and cooperation; 3. digital content creation; 4. security; and 5. problem-solving. Sub-competencies of global competence are marked in green: 6. information management; 7. awareness of diversity in local and global communities; 8. intercultural communication and cooperation; and 9. values and attitudes in an intercultural environment. Sub-competencies of innovation competence are marked in red: 10. creativity; 11. critical thinking; 12. initiative; 13. teamwork; and 14. networking. Sub-competencies of civic competence are marked in purple: 15. knowledge and application of the principles of a democratic society; 16. community involvement; and 17. civic capacity. Sub-competencies of research competence are marked in yellow: 18. attitude and ethics; 19. conceptualisation of knowledge/research planning; 20. conducting research; and 21. collaboration and communication. Sub-competencies of entrepreneurial competence are marked in orange: 22. problem-solving skills and creativity; 23. identification, mobilisation, and effective use of internal and external resources; and 24. initiative and action orientation.
Figure 1. Network of all sub-competencies of students’ transversal competencies measured in the study. The edges represent regularised partial correlations; a thicker and darker edge indicates a stronger relationship, while a dashed edge indicates a negative relationship. Sub-competencies of digital competence are marked in blue: 1. information literacy and data literacy; 2. communication and cooperation; 3. digital content creation; 4. security; and 5. problem-solving. Sub-competencies of global competence are marked in green: 6. information management; 7. awareness of diversity in local and global communities; 8. intercultural communication and cooperation; and 9. values and attitudes in an intercultural environment. Sub-competencies of innovation competence are marked in red: 10. creativity; 11. critical thinking; 12. initiative; 13. teamwork; and 14. networking. Sub-competencies of civic competence are marked in purple: 15. knowledge and application of the principles of a democratic society; 16. community involvement; and 17. civic capacity. Sub-competencies of research competence are marked in yellow: 18. attitude and ethics; 19. conceptualisation of knowledge/research planning; 20. conducting research; and 21. collaboration and communication. Sub-competencies of entrepreneurial competence are marked in orange: 22. problem-solving skills and creativity; 23. identification, mobilisation, and effective use of internal and external resources; and 24. initiative and action orientation.
Education 14 00677 g001
Education 14 00677 g002
Figure 2. Centrality measures for the network of all sub-competencies of students’ transversal competencies measured in the study. Betweenness measures the number of shortest paths between other nodes that a given node lies on; closeness represents the inverse of the sum of shortest path lengths between a given node and all other nodes in the network; strength is the sum of the absolute edge values connected to a given node; and expected influence is the sum of all edges extending from a given node where the sign of each edge is maintained. Numbers represent standard deviations from the network mean.
Figure 2. Centrality measures for the network of all sub-competencies of students’ transversal competencies measured in the study. Betweenness measures the number of shortest paths between other nodes that a given node lies on; closeness represents the inverse of the sum of shortest path lengths between a given node and all other nodes in the network; strength is the sum of the absolute edge values connected to a given node; and expected influence is the sum of all edges extending from a given node where the sign of each edge is maintained. Numbers represent standard deviations from the network mean.
Education 14 00677 g002
Table 1. Descriptive statistics for indicators of students’ transversal competencies and sub-competencies (N = 1575).
Table 1. Descriptive statistics for indicators of students’ transversal competencies and sub-competencies (N = 1575).
Number of ItemsMSDMedianWAlpha
Digital competence594.430.924.400.9980.94
Information literacy and data literacy (Dig_inflit)124.940.934.920.995 ***0.80
Communication and cooperation (Dig_comm)174.721.074.770.994 ***0.89
Digital content creation (Dig_cont)103.611.233.600.992 ***0.84
Security (Dig_sec)134.191.134.150.994 ***0.87
Problem-solving (Dig_prob)74.691.354.710.980 ***0.91
Global competence124.641.154.650.990 ***0.90
Information management (Glo_info)24.731.425.000.966 ***0.77
Awareness of diversity in local and global communities (Glo_awar)44.821.275.000.978 ***0.79
Intercultural communication and cooperation (Glo_comm)34.361.364.330.981 ***0.70
Values and attitudes in an intercultural environment (Glo_val)34.641.424.670.970 ***0.77
Innovation competence174.681.294.710.983 ***0.96
Creativity (Inn_creat)44.771.414.750.970 ***0.91
Critical thinking (Inn_crit)44.901.335.000.968 ***0.90
Initiative (Inn_init)54.621.404.600.975 ***0.91
Teamwork (Inn_team)24.751.525.000.955 ***0.86
Networking (Inn_netw)24.391.584.500.967 ***0.76
Research competence134.241.404.270.984 ***0.95
Attitude and ethics (Res_attit)34.421.624.670.963 ***0.91
Conceptualisation of knowledge/ research planning (Res_concept)34.631.494.670.963 ***0.87
Conducting research (Res_conduct)44.391.534.500.970 ***0.90
Collaboration and communication (Res_collab)33.541.693.670.957 ***0.87
Civic competence82.811.452.500.930 ***0.91
Knowledge and application of the principles of a democratic society (Civ_know)33.121.563.000.950 ***0.82
Community involvement (Civ_comm)32.631.492.330.904 ***0.79
Civic capacity (Civ_capac)22.671.732.000.862 ***0.84
Entrepreneurial competence154.081.464.070.982 ***0.96
Problem-solving skills and creativity (Ent_probl)53.751.644.000.968 ***0.92
Identification, mobilisation, and effective use of internal and external resources (Ent_resourc)54.211.494.200.980 ***0.87
Initiative and action orientation (Ent_iniat)54.281.564.400.968 ***0.92
Note: *** p < 0.001. Abbreviations in parentheses refer to how each sub-competence is denoted in the network analysis reported below in Figure 1 and Figure 2.
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Rubene, Z.; Dimdins, G.; Miltuze, A. Sustainable Growth of Transversal Competencies: Exploring the Competence Relationships among University Students. Educ. Sci. 2024, 14, 677. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci14070677

AMA Style

Rubene Z, Dimdins G, Miltuze A. Sustainable Growth of Transversal Competencies: Exploring the Competence Relationships among University Students. Education Sciences. 2024; 14(7):677. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci14070677

Chicago/Turabian Style

Rubene, Zanda, Girts Dimdins, and Anika Miltuze. 2024. "Sustainable Growth of Transversal Competencies: Exploring the Competence Relationships among University Students" Education Sciences 14, no. 7: 677. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci14070677

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop