Application of Student-Centered Learning in Improving Teaching English as a Foreign Language Students’ 21st-Century Skills Performance

Abstract

A student-centered learning (SCL) method has been applied to improve Teaching English as a Foreign Language (TEFL) students’ 21st-century skills at the English department of a university. Therefore, this study aimed to investigate the effect of SCL application on TEFL students’ 21st-century skills performance. To achieve this objective, a total of 220 questionnaires were distributed to TEFL students, and ten course designs were obtained from the department. Content analysis on course designs showed that hard skills were more prioritized than soft skills, while character slightly ebbed in learning design. Furthermore, SCL application through Group, Independent, and Online learning methods significantly increased TEFL students’ 21st-century skills. Hard and soft skills were most and slightly associated with cumulative grade point average (CGPA), respectively. These results showed that SCL should be properly applied to deliver course content and improve 21st-century skills performance.

1. Introduction

There is a rising interest across countries regarding 21st-century skills due to higher education quality. Skills comprise personal attributes and values such as soft and hard skills, as well as character, that should be acquired during university education. These skills help students become successful learners and effective professionals, including employers, teachers, and educators [1,2]. In response to this issue, the Indonesian Directorate General of Higher Education requires universities to focus on developing graduates with 21st-century skills. This approach aims to prepare students for a globally competitive workplace and to contribute to the country’s development [3,4].

Integrating soft and hard skills, as well as character, in both physical and online classrooms in the revolution industries 5.0 era is crucial to preparing students for the global job market [1,5]. Therefore, teachers are expected to be creative and innovative in combining face-to-face and online learning models to engage and improve 21st-century skills and achieve learning objectives. Currently, there are numerous AI applications that facilitate online learning and aid in acquiring skills [6].

Indonesian Higher Education has instructed universities to apply the student-centered learning (SCL) method in the learning process. This enables students to practice and develop tacit expertise in major knowledge to develop 21st-century skills [7,8]. The application of SCL also allows the ability to navigate learning, interact with others, and apply IT-supported applications to complete daily tasks. The teacher’s role of facilitating students to be more active and initiating suitable and varied learning strategies helps optimize learning capacity [9,10].

Studies have shown the benefits of the student-centered approach in empowering students to construct course knowledge and skills [11,12,13,14,15]. However, there is limited exploration into the nature of SCL implementation and its specific effects on the development of 21st-century skills. Therefore, this study aimed to address the gap by investigating how teachers at an English education department applied SCL in course design, as well as students’ perception of the implementation of SCL and the impact on their 21st-century skills performance. It also aimed to determine a better instructional design for learning engagement and the effect on 21st-century skills performance. The results were expected to contribute to the areas of instructional learning design, engagement, and measurement of 21st-century skills performance. The results would also provide effective learning methods and strategies to develop soft skills, hard skills, and character.

The current paper is organized into seven sections, as follows: The first section is the introduction that concisely discusses current issues globally and locally related to the field of study, with the purpose of the study presented at the end of the section. The second section presents the theory and the concept of 21st-century skills learning in the Teaching English as a Foreign Language (TEFL) context. The third section presents SCL in developing 21st-century skills, with a detailed explanation provided in the fourth section. The fifth section presents the results, transcending to the sixth section, which presents the discussion and limitations of the study. The last section is the conclusion and recommendations for policymakers at the departmental, faculty, and university levels.

2. 21st-Century Skills Learning in TEFL Context

Based on previous discussion, 21st-century skills, namely soft and hard skills, as well as character, could be developed through effective engagement in learning processes. These skills are essential demands in all fields of the working environment. Therefore, universities are compelled to radically change the orientation of learning objectives and outcomes from specific knowledge and skills to broader 21st-century skills-based outcomes. To achieve this, teachers are expected to design and embed 21st-century skills development in learning design and practice [3].

Improving TEFL students’ 21st-century skills is crucial in the education process of becoming professional teachers capable of facing challenges. This includes the issues of rapid educational digital technology advancement or the complexity of teaching and learning language, both currently and in the future [16,17]. TEFL teachers are expected to improve the effectiveness of language teaching and learning and prepare students for future academic and professional success. Both teachers and students are inevitably required to incorporate dynamic pedagogical issues, as well as teaching and learning from different perspectives in the digital era. Twenty-first-century skills help teachers and students cope with development and challenges. The following section discusses the concept of 21st-century skills, namely soft and hard skills and character, which are embedded in learning and students’ engagement [18].

2.1. Soft Skills

Soft skills are integrated values, including communication, IT, numeracy, learning, problem-solving, and teamwork [1,11,19]. Communication skills not only enable university graduates to deliver ideas as individuals or group members but also enable extraction of information or content by reading and listening from any resources, and deliver information in written and oral form as well. These skills comprise diverse backgrounds to provide appropriate decisions, solutions, and good negotiations [20]. As English is a global language, effective communication skills prepare TEFL students to interact confidently and competently in diverse international contexts. Strong communication skills help students build networks and engage in global opportunities, improving their educational and professional prospects [16].

Information technology skills relate to IT performance, including computers and supportive applications, such as electronic and online dictionaries. TEFL students are expected to acquire digital IT skills since teaching and learning occur online with digital tools and platforms. Teachers are also expected to use educational technology effectively in order to captivate students, as well as access or apply digital resources in both online and face-to-face learning [21,22]. Other skills are essential in online workplaces and learning resources, including e-learning, big data, video creation, social media, and other applications for effective learning [1].

Numeracy skills relate to using and understanding data, numbers, simple calculations, statistics, and graphs. This also includes the ability of times, working strategy, and job priority management [1,23]. Understanding numeracy helps in designing a balanced and comprehensive curriculum. Therefore, TEFL teachers can incorporate mathematical concepts in language learning, making lessons more engaging and relevant [24].

Learning skills improve self-ability, performance, self-management, self-learning, identifying learning strategies, and self-evaluation for future improvement [11,12,25]. Self-evaluation and the ability to accept feedback are important for teachers’ professional development. This enables teachers to reflect on their practice and make necessary improvements in TEFL. Furthermore, fostering self-directed learning helps them become independent learners, implement resources, and consistently learn outside of the classroom [26,27].

Problem-solving skills enable students to address workplace challenges and learn from this process systematically [28]. Developing TEFL students’ problem-solving skills helps in analyzing existing and anticipating prospective challenges. It also fosters creative and innovative thinking in language learning. Teachers’ skills in managing and resolving conflicts are essential for maintaining a positive and productive classroom [17].

Teamwork includes group discussions, assignments or projects, collaboration, cooperation, and inter-communications with different cultures, races, faiths, and nations [1,11]. Promoting cooperative and collaborative learning activities helps develop teamwork skills. For TEFL students, teamwork skills can be promoted by providing team project activities [29]. Teamwork skills are crucial for prospective teachers to share their experience, work on a project, and conduct classroom action studies.

In summary, soft skills provided to TEFL students when studying can improve teaching and learning effectiveness, create a positive and active learning atmosphere, and contribute to personal and professional growth as teachers. Soft skills are crucial for teachers to find, evaluate, and use information effectively for academic and professional success. Therefore, by possessing these skills, TEFL teachers can adapt teaching methods and materials to suit different learning styles and needs, ensuring students have the opportunity to succeed in language learning.

2.2. Hard Skills

Students need hard skills to use specific expertise and knowledge when studying. These comprise specific knowledge and efficiency practiced through learning activities. Specific knowledge includes theoretical, factual, and actual understanding acquired from a major study course. It refers to how knowledge is applied in practice and a work environment [1,3,19,30]. In the context of TEFL, hard skills include pedagogical knowledge and technical skills related to teaching and learning a foreign language. TEFL teachers are expected to deliver high-quality education, assess progress accurately, manage the classroom effectively, and continuously improve teaching practices.

2.3. Character

Character is an attitude and behavior, including discipline, honesty, responsibility, respect, care, love, courage, confidence, cleanliness, and other human values applied in the learning process and real life [31,32]. In the current study, character components include honesty, appreciation, tolerance, discipline, patience, confidence, and responsibility. Honesty is the ability to admit shortcomings and strengths of friends, arouse confidence, or express honesty with words and actions [31,33]. Appreciation includes attitudes, words, and actions of respect to friends, as well as ideas and contributions in discussions without condescending or blaming [31,34]. Furthermore, tolerance is accepting differences in personality, religion, race, abilities, attitudes, gender, and social status for the purpose of achieving maximum learning objectives [19,31]. Discipline is self-regulation and compliance with regulations, following and attending lectures, and completing assignments on time to achieve the targets and standards set [31,35]. Patience includes maintaining enthusiasm for learning and emotional stability in discussing, completing assignments, and solving learning problems. Self-confidence is students’ ability to present themselves and reduce nervousness, worry, pressure, and tension [31,33]. Meanwhile, responsibility is the ability to complete assignments and carry out roles thoroughly and adequately as group members, leaders, and discussion moderators [31,34].

The characters mentioned are essential for TEFL teachers to forge positive relationships, foster trust, establish a supportive and productive learning environment, manage the classroom fairly, settle disputes, uphold professional relationships, make moral decisions, improve lifelong learning, and promote students’ well-being. In addition, teachers’ efficacy in the lives of students is significantly influenced by character. Therefore, the character of teachers has a significant impact on students’ character-building [31,34,35].

3. SCL in Developing TEFL Students’ 21st-Century Skills

The contemporary student generations facilitate educational institutions to focus on varying needs. Currently, teachers are expected to design courses to be student-centered and interactive. SCL strategy specifically allows students to interact, discuss in groups, and explore. This approach includes less lecturing and more student activities in learning [9,25]. The current study aimed to investigate SCL implementation using three main methods, namely the Group Learning Method (GLM), the Independent Learning Method (ILM), and the Online Learning Method (OLM).

SCL develops 21st-century skills by actively engaging students in the learning process, promoting communication, digital IT literacy, independent learning, numeracy, problem-solving, and teamwork [11,26]. The application of SCL with appropriate learning scenarios not only improves TEFL students’ soft skills but boosts hard skills, particularly English proficiency and pedagogical knowledge, for effective language teaching practice, which are essential for the workplace [18,36,37]. The learning process equips students with character values. For instance, students practice honesty by reporting true resources and confessing their actual capability, appreciating others with great ideas, and showing responsibility in daily tasks [31].

3.1. GLM

GLM enables students to learn in a cooperative and collaborative environment, building their 21st-century skills by interacting, communicating, and supporting each other. This can help develop English proficiency and construct knowledge or skills related to TEFL courses. Group discussions, projects, and presentations are methods of cooperative and collaborative learning strategies applied by the teachers in the current study. During collaborative learning in group projects, students assume different roles to complete projects. For example, students could be divided based on searching for a sub-topic, combining the results, working on the structure of the paper, or presenting the results. Furthermore, students discuss in groups and collaborate to explore a topic, make decisions, and draw conclusions. Cooperative and collaborative learning are mostly applied in GLM [14,29].

3.2. ILM

Independent learning means improving knowledge, skills, achievements, and individual self-development. Students’ initiative is conducting self-planned learning based on needs and objectives. As a result, students make learning strategies and assess outcomes, developing the individual capacity to explore a topic [14,25]. In the TEFL context, this method is also applicable, as it facilitates students to interact outside of the classroom, personally practice language abilities, explore TEFL pedagogical knowledge, and practice according to a learning mindset.

3.3. OLM

Online learning is a platform where students conduct asynchronous and synchronous activities. The interactions between the subjects in the teaching and learning activities include student–content, student–teacher, and student–student interactions. Subject content is delivered when students post and share information and resources, as well as conduct online presentations, discussions, evaluations, exercises, quizzes, and assignments [38,39]. OLM provides broad opportunities for TEFL students to develop English proficiency, as well as pedagogical online teaching and learning, as part of hard, soft, and character skills. It relies on teachers’ creativity and competencies to design or apply online learning activities for TEFL interestingly, flexibly, and interactively in achieving learning objectives.

In summary, online learning design should allow students to discuss, interact, and work on a project to achieve personal objectives. Teachers’ ability to guide and improve students in active learning is essential. Therefore, teachers’ learning design and implementation competencies are crucial for students to build soft, hard, and character skills. Character is taught through students’ learning activities in a subject. It serves as the content of attitude and behavioral values of learning [3]. While students act based on gifted values and personality, teachers are expected to guide and control students into integrated and natural atmosphere learning.

Based on the preceding discussion, a conceptual framework of SCL was proposed to develop 21st-century skills. Figure 1 presents an approach to designing the course for learning 21st-century skills across the three dimensions of education, namely soft skills, hard skills, and character. Course knowledge or hard skills are delivered through three main methods, namely GLM, ILM, and OLM. Soft and hard skills relate to the use of knowledge and engage in a feedback loop with character practices. Meanwhile, character qualities describe how individuals engage and behave in the world.

4. Method

This study used mixed quantitative and qualitative methods. The quantitative method targeted the English Education department at a university, with 220 randomly selected students from 428 second-, third-, and fourth-years. The number of samples was selected to be representative of the population size [40]. First-year students were excluded on the assumption of not being exposed enough to soft and hard skills and character throughout the learning process.

Based on gender demographics, 148 respondents (67.3%) were females, while 72 (32.7%) were males. Furthermore, 90 (40.9%) had a cumulative grade point average (CGPA) of 3.00 to 3.49, and 130 (59.1%) had 3.50 and above. According to the study year, 64 (29.1%) were second-year, 79 (25.9%) were third-year, and 77 (35.2%) were fourth-year students.

4.1. Quantitative Data Collection and Analysis

Quantitative data were collected using a questionnaire divided into main sections on SCL, soft skills, hard skills, and character. Furthermore, the participants’ responses were measured using a 5-point Likert scale. Reliability analysis using the Cronbach alpha (α) was carried out to determine the reliability coefficients of the instruments. A cronbach alpha coefficient of 0.7 is ideal, but for instruments with fewer than 10 items, a coefficient of 0.6 is acceptable. In this study, an α value of 0.7 and above was assumed acceptable for an instrument, while 0.6 and above was acceptable for each construct and sub-construct [41]. The reliability analysis showed that the constructs of SCL, soft skills, hard skills, and character produced Cronbach alpha (α) > 0.70, confirming excellent consistency, as shown in

Table 1. Reliability of the instrument for SCL application.

Main Components and Sub-Component	Code of Items	Number of Items	Corrected Item-Total Correlation	Cronbach’s Alpha When Item Deleted
GLM	A1–A3	9	0.389–0.540	0.633
ILM	B1–B3	3	0.520–0.568	0.720
OLM	C1–C3	3	0.348–0.498	0.653
SCL	A1–C3	9	-	0.816

.

Regarding validity, the instrument for 21st-century skills had been updated for this study. The constructs of the measurement were identified and applied in previous studies [18,25,28,31]. A corrected item correlation at 0.30 and above is considered good for measuring the intended constructs [41,42]. The corrected-item correlation values > 0.300, as shown in

Table 2. Reliability of the instrument for 21st-century skills.

Main Components and Sub-Components	Code of Items	No. of Items	Corrected Item-Total Correlation	Cronbach’s Alpha When Item Deleted
Communication Skills	A1–A8	8	0.422–0.547	0.785
IT Skills	B1–B6	6	0.330–0.4611	0.657
Numeracy Skills	C1–C6	6	0.348–0.498	0.739
Learning Skills	D1–D11	11	0.421–0.565	0.834
Problem-Solving Skills	E1–E7	7	0.462–0.574	0.784
Teamwork Skills	F1–F8	8	0.325–0.555	0.764
Overall Soft Skills	A1–F8	45	-	0.920
Subject-Specific Knowledge	G1–G5	5	0.425–0.605	0.762
Subject-Specific Skills	G6–G10	5	0.511–0.649	0.779
Overall Hard Skills	G1–G10	10	0.473–0.667	0.864
Honesty	H1–H8	7	0.334–0.472	0.701
Appreciation	I1–17	7	0.375–0.618	0.758
Tolerance	J1–J5	5	0.513–0.647	0.777
Discipline	K1–K8	8	0.389–0.605	0.804
Patience	L1–L8	8	0.439–0.633	0.821
Confidence	M1–M5	5	0.530–0.652	0.787
Responsibility	N1–N7	7	0.407–0.594	0.766
Overall Character	H1–N8	47	-	0.938
21st-Century Skills	A1–N8	102	-	0.961

confirmed convergent validity.

Quantitative descriptive analysis was conducted to explore the performance level of 21st-century skills. The responses were calculated in a mean score and interpreted in 5 skill levels, as shown in

Table 3. Interpretation of mean scores.

Mean Score	Interpretation
1.00–1.80	Very Low
1.81–2.60	Low
2.61–3.40	Medium
3.41–4.20	High
4.21–5.00	Very High

. The interpretation of 5-Likert scale mean scores could be fairly calculated and interpreted into three or five levels [41]. In this study, five levels of interpretation were applied to the sub-scale, scale, and total mean score of SCL and 21st-century skills as presented in result section.

Simple and multiple regressions were applied at the second analysis stage. Simple regression was used to predict the impact of SCL application on 21st-century skills performance across different CGPA levels. Multiple regressions with the stepwise method were used to identify the predictors from two or more independent variables. The stepwise method selected independent variables significantly associated with the dependent variable and excluded insignificant independent variables from the regression model. All statistical assumptions for simple and multiple regressions were met before presenting the analysis results. Normal probability and scatter plots confirmed that the assumptions were satisfied. Furthermore, the analysis showed that the Variance Inflation Factor (VIF) was 1, and tolerance was greater than 0.1, confirming no collinearity or multicollinearity issues, as well as the significance of the results [42].

4.2. Qualitative Data Collection and Analysis

A qualitative method was used to investigate strategy and methods in teachers’ course design to develop 21st-century skills in the learning process. Ten course designs were conveniently selected to represent teachers’ course designs from the department. Furthermore, qualitative content analysis was used to examine the indicators of soft and hard skills and character in the designs. It focused on understanding, underlying, and categorizing themes into topics and sub-topics of the results [43]. Course designs were analyzed in four aspects, namely description and learning outcome (LO), achievement indicators, learning method, and type of evaluation system and weight. A standard qualitative analysis was conducted as follows: Two study experts read the course design thoroughly and coded independently to extract initial coding and ensure a similar interpretation of data. The experts subsequently read the exact text, conducted the coding independently, and discussed areas of discrepancies with emerging themes compared to the content review. Key terms, phrases, sentences, and direct expressions found under LO, achievement indicators, learning method, and type of evaluation system related to 21st-century skills and components in the four aspects were reduced and classified into most relevant to soft and hard skills and character. Lastly, the individual results were compared and discussed to draw conclusions.

5. Results

5.1. To What Extent Is Teachers’ Course Design Focused on Students’ Soft Skills, Hard Skills, and Character Development?

Table 4. The summary of content analysis on teachers’ course design.

Course Design	Description and LO	Achievement Indicators	Learning Method	Type of Evaluation and Weight (100)	Overall Conclusion
Crs 1.	More Hard Skills, but less Soft Skills and Character	Subj.-specific knowledge Subj.-specific skills Communication Teamwork	Group learning Independent learning Online learning	Quiz and Examination (60) Individual project (20) Group project (20) Individual participation and Character (0)	Emphasizing Hard Skills rather than Soft Skills, but less Character
Crs 2.	A balance between Hard Skills, Soft Skills, and Character	Subj.-specific knowledge Subj.-specific skills Communication Teamwork Learning Problem-solving Responsibility Honesty Appreciation	Group learning Independent learning Online learning	Quiz and Examination (30) Individual project (30) Group project (30) Individual participation and Character (10)	A balance between Hard and Soft Skills, but less Character
Crs3.	More Hard Skills and Soft Skills, but less Character	Subj.-specific knowledge Subj.-specific skills Communication Problem-solving Appreciation Responsibility	Group learning Independent learning Online learning	Quiz and Examination (50) Individual project (30) Group project (20) Individual participation and Character (0)	A balance between Hard and Soft Skills, but less Character
Crs4.	More Hard Skills, but less Soft Skills and Character	Subj.-specific knowledge Subj.-specific skills Communication Teamwork Problem-solving Learning Responsibility Confidence	Group learning Independent Online learning	Quiz and Examination (40) Individual project (30) Group project (30) Individual participation and Character (0)	A balance between Hard and Soft Skills, but less Character
Crs5.	A balance between Hard Skills, Soft Skills, and Character	Subj.-specific knowledge Subj.-specific skills Responsibility Communication Teamwork Confidence Discipline	Group learning Independent learning Online learning	Quiz and Examination (70) Individual project (10) Group project (10) Individual participation and Character (10)	Emphasizing Hard Skills, but Soft Skills and Character were fairly applied
Crs6.	A balance between Hard and Soft Skills, but less Character	Subj.-specific knowledge Subj.-specific skills Communication Numeracy IT Teamwork Problem-solving Learning Tolerance Appreciation	Group learning Independent learning Online learning	Quiz and Examination (60) Individual project (20) Group project (20) Individual participation and Character (0)	Emphasizing Hard Skills rather than Soft Skills but less Character
Crs7.	More on Hard Skills, less on Soft Skills, while Character was not mentioned	Subj.-specific knowledge Subj.-specific skills Communication Problem-solving	Group learning Independent learning Online learning	Quiz and Examination (70) Individual project (15) Group project (15) Individual participation (0)	Emphasizing Hard Skills rather than Soft Skills, but less Character
Crs8.	More on Hard and Soft Skills, but less Character	Subj.-specific knowledge Subj.-specific skills Communication Teamwork Responsibility Discipline Tolerance	Group learning Independent learning Online learning	Quiz and Examination (50) Individual project (20) Group project (20) Individual participation and Character (10)	A balance between Hard Skills, Soft Skills, and Character
Crs9.	More on Hard Skills rather than Soft Skills and Character	Subj.-specific knowledge Subj.-specific skills Communication Problem-solving Appreciation Responsibility	Group learning Independent learning Online learning	Quiz and Examination (50) Individual project (25) Group project (25) Individual participation and Character (0)	A balance between Hard and Soft Skills, but less Character
Crs10.	A balance between Hard and Soft Skills, but less Character	Subj.-specific knowledge Subj.-specific skills Communication Problem-solving Responsibility Honesty Appreciation Confidence	Group learning Independent learning Online learning	Quiz and Examination (30) Individual project (20) Group project (20) Individual participation and Character (20)	A balance between Hard Skills, Soft Skills, and Character

summarizes the content analysis conducted on ten course designs in the English Education department of a University in Indonesia. The four aspects of the course design investigated were description and LO, achievement indicators, learning method, and type and evaluation system. The analysis showed that teachers applied SCL in GLM, ILM, and OLM. Furthermore, content analysis specifically examined students’ soft skills, hard skills, and character development.

Two syllabi (Crs 8 and 10) were designed for students to be active in practicing soft and hard skills. The assessment and evaluation balanced soft skills, hard skills, and character. Moreover, four syllabi (Crs 2, 3, 4, and 9) showed a balance between hard and soft skills, while character was less applied. Hard skills were emphasized more than soft skills in Crs 1, 5, 6, and 7, while character was less and fairly applied. The courses were designed to improve more hard than soft skills, while character received the least attention.

5.2. What Is the Level of SCL Method Applied by Students?

Table 5. Level of SCL learning method.

SCL Learning Method	Mean	Std	Level
A1. Contributing to group discussion	3.90	0.688	High
A2. Participating in a group presentation	3.95	0.613	High
A3. Participating in group projects, including field study	3.81	0.772	High
GLM	3.88	0.529	High
B1. Individual presentation	3.86	0.626	High
B2. Giving questions, suggestions, or comments on projects	3.94	0.558	High
B3. Performing individual projects/fields of study	3.91	0.511	High
ILM	3.90	0.456	High
B1. Posting or sharing information/resources	3.63	0.652	High
B2. Participating in online discussion, both synchronously and asynchronously	3.72	0.632	High
B3. Performing online evaluation, exercises, quizzes, and assignments online	3.68	0.556	High
OLM	3.68	0.476	High
OVERALL SCL Method	3.82	0.402	High

presents the descriptive results of applying SCL methods. The mean score of the SCL Method and its scale were categorized into very low, low, average, high and very high levels (Table 3). Students perceived the overall SCL application as high at 3.82 of 5, while group, independent, and online learning was highly applied at 3.88, 3.90, and 3.68, respectively. The achieved mean score was below the very high level of mean score 4.21 to 5.00, as presented in Table 3. Therefore, teachers were expected to optimize the application of SCL in students’ learning activities to achieve the expected level of 21st-century skills.

5.3. What Is the Level of Students’ 21st-Century Skills Performance?

Table 6. TEFL students’ performance of 21st-century skills.

Main Components and Sub-Components	Mean	Std	Level
Communication Skills	3.47	0.44	High
IT Skills	3.46	0.49	High
Numeracy Skills	3.31	0.53	Medium
Learning Skills	3.47	0.52	High
Problem-Solving Skills	3.42	0.52	High
Teamwork Skills	3.57	0.53	High
Overall Soft Skills	3.46	0.39	High
Subject-Specific Knowledge	3.68	0.50	High
Subject-Specific Skills	3.60	0.53	High
Overall Hard Skills	3.64	0.46	High
Honesty	3.52	0.50	High
Appreciation	3.67	0.51	High
Tolerance	3.80	0.55	High
Discipline	3.84	0.54	High
Patience	3.70	0.56	High
Confidence	3.77	0.58	High
Responsibility	3.78	0.52	High
Overall Character	3.72	0.41	High
21st-Century Skills	3.60	0.36	High

shows high TEFL students’ soft skills performance at 3.46, hard skills at 3.64, character at 3.72, and overall 21st-century skills at 3.60. The performance of all soft skill sub-components was high, with the exception of numeracy skills, which was at a medium level. Components of hard skills and character were also high. However, the level of performance of 21st-century skills was below expectations, as the target was to achieve a minimum mean score of 4.20, confirming a very high level.

5.4. Does the Application of SCL Increase Students’ 21st-Century Performance?

Simple regression was conducted to predict the effect of SCL application on 21st-century skills. This regression was significant under the F-test (

Table 7. Variants of SCL application toward students’ 21st-century skills performance.

Model		Sum of Squares	df	Mean Square	F	Sig.
1	Regression	20.375	1	20.375	488.785	0.000
	Residual	9.087	218	0.042
	Total	29.462	219

Dependent variable: 21st-century skills. Predictor: (constant): SCL application.

), and the coefficient was significantly different from zero under t-tests (

Table 8. Multiple regression of 21st-century skills toward students’ CGPA.

Predictor	B	Std. Error	Beta	t	Sig.	R2	Contribution	Collinearity Statistics
								Tolerance	VIF
Constant	0.732	0.132		5.548	0.000
21st-Century Skills	0.758	0.034	0.832	22.108	0.000	0.69	69%	1.000	1.000

R = 0.832. R² = 0.692. Adjusted R² = 0.690. Constant = 0.732. Standard error = 0.132. The regression equation with 2 predictors was Y = 0.732 + 0.832X + 0.132. Y = Students’ CGPA. X = 21st-century skills.

). The statistical values showed a positive significant effect of SCL application on 21st-century skills by 69% (R² = 0.69) or 0.832 units (β = 0.832). The β value means that when SCL application increases by 1 unit, 21st-century skills increase by 0.832. In other words, the higher the SCL application, the higher the skills performance (Table 7 and Table 8). The application of SCL also increased performance.

SCL was designed to engage students actively in the learning process, and in this context of study, it was implemented through the combination of GLM, ILM, and OLM. Students tended to frequently practice elements and indicators of 21st-century skills, such as communication, IT usage, and teamwork, by optimizing SCL implementation in the learning process.

5.5. What Are the Contribution Values of GLM, ILM, and OLM to Students’ 21st-Century Skills Performance?

The statistical values showed a positive significant effect of GLM (p < 0.05), ILM (p < 0.05), and OLM (p < 0.05) on 21st-century skills.

Table 9. Variants of GLM, ILM, and OLM across 21st-century skills.

Model		Sum of Squares	df	Mean Square	F	Sig.
1	Regression	1.743	1	1.743	69.253	0.000 a
	Residual	5.134	204	0.025
	Total	6.877	205
2	Regression	1.940	2	0.970	39.881	0.000 b
	Residual	4.937	203	0.024
	Total	6.877	205
3	Regression	20.459	3	6.820	163.621	0.000 c
	Residual	9.003	216	0.042
	Total	29.462	219

The significance level at 0.01. Dependent variable: 21st-century skills. ^a. Predictor: (Constant), GLM. ^b. Predictors: (Constant), GLM and ILM. ^c. Predictors: (Constant), GLM, ILM, and OLM.

shows that GLM contributed to skills performance by 51% (R² = 0.510), β = 0.373, ILM by 13% (R² = 0.644), β = 0.361, and OLM by 5% (R² = 0.694), β = 0.271. The β value means that when the GLM increases by one unit, skills increase by 0.373. A one-unit increase in ILM increased skills by 0.361. Similarly, a one-unit increase in OLM increased skills by 0.371 (Table 9 and

Table 10. Multiple regression of GLM, ILM, and OLM across students’ 21st-century skills.

Predictor	B	Std. Error	Beta	t	Sig.	R2	Contribution	Collinearity Statistics
								Tolerance	VIF
Constant	0.725	0.134		5.423	0.000
GLM	0.258	0.033	0.373	7.754	0.000	0.510	51%	0.612	1.63
ILM	0.291	0.039	0.361	7.503	0.000	0.644	13%	0.609	1.64
OLM	0.209	0.035	0.271	5.993	0.000	0.694	5%	0.692	1.44

R = 0.714 (a), 0.802 (b), 0.833 (c). R² = 0.510 (a), 0.644 (b), 0.694 (c). Adjusted R² = 0.508 (a), 0.6449 (b), 0.690 (c). Constant = 0.725. Standard error = 0.134. The regression equation with 3 predictors was Y = 0.725 + 0.510X1 + 0.644X2 + 0.694X3 + 0.134. Y = Student’s 21st-century skills performance. X1 = GLM. X2 = ILM. X3 = OLM.

). The analysis showed that the percentage and β value contribution of GLM were the highest among the three methods. In other words, GLM contributed the most to skills, despite ILM and OLM contributing significantly in smaller portions. The results were scientifically reasonable, as group learning helped students to collaborate, learn, share ideas, articulate thoughts, listen to others, delegate tasks, and achieve group objectives and agreement, reflecting 21st-century skills, namely communication, learning, teamwork, and problem-solving.

5.6. Is There a Contribution of Students’ 21st-Century Skills Performance to CGPA?

Simple regression was conducted to predict the effect of 21st-century skills on CGPA. The result of regression was significant below the F-test (

Table 11. Variants of students’ 21st-century skills across CGPA.

Model		Sum of Squares	df	Mean Square	F	Sig.
1	Regression	2.778	1	2.778	144.264	0.000
	Residual	4.198	218	0.019
	Total	6.977	219

Dependent variable: CGPA. Predictors: (constant), 21st-century skills.

), and the coefficients were significantly different from zero under the t-tests (

Table 12. Simple regression of students’ 21st-century skills toward CGPA.

Predictor	B	Std. Error	Beta	t	Sig.	R2	Contribution	Collinearity Statistics
								Tolerance	VIF
Constant	2.391	0.093		25.618	0.000
21st-Century Skills	0.307	0.026	0.631	12.011	0.000	0.398	39%	1.000	1.000

R = 0.631. R² = 0.398. Adjusted R² = 0.395. Constant = 2.391. Standard error = 0.093. The regression equation with 2 predictors was Y = 2.391 + 0.631X1 + 0.093. Y = Students’ CGPA. X1 = 21st-century skills.

). The results showed skills performance significantly contributed to CGPA. Furthermore, the statistical values showed a significant effect of 21st-century skills (p < 0.05) on CGPA by 39% (R² = 0.398, β = 0.631). The β value means that when performance improves by one unit, CGPA increases by 0.631 units. Therefore, CGPA was not mainly acquired from skills performance.

5.7. What Is the Most Associated Variable, among Soft Skills, Hard Skills, and Character, toward CGPA?

Multiple regression was conducted to examine the most associated variable among soft skills, hard skills, and character toward CGPA. The results showed that hard skills were the most associated variable toward CGPA; however, soft skills and character had minimal contribution. Therefore, learning evaluation placed more emphasis on acquiring hard skills than soft skills and character.

Table 13. Variants of soft skills, hard skills, and character across graduates’ CGPA.

Model		Sum of Squares	df	Mean Square	F	Sig.
1	Regression	2.530	1	2.530	124.012	0.000 a
	Residual	4.447	218	0.020
	Total	6.977	219
2	Regression	2.906	2	1.453	77.451	0.000 b
	Residual	4.071	217	0.019
	Total	6.977	219
3	Regression	3.007	3	1.002	54.530	0.000 c
	Residual	3.970	216	0.018
	Total	6.977	219

The significance level at 0.01. Dependent variable: CGPA. ^a. Predictor: (constant), hard skills. ^b. Predictors; (constant), hard skills and soft skills. ^c. Predictors: (constant), hard skills, soft skills and character.

showed a significant effect of hard skills (p < 0.05) on CGPA and soft skills (p < 0.05), while character did not affect CGPA.

Table 14. Multiple regression of soft skills, hard skills, and character across graduates’ CGPA.

Predictor	B	Std. Error	Beta	t	Sig.	R2	Contribution	Collinearity Statistics
								Tolerance	VIF
Constant	2.394	0.091		26.342	0.000
Hard Skills	0.120	0.028	0.323	4.297	0.000	0.360	36%	0.467	2.143
Soft Skills	0.116	0.035	0.254	3.296	0.001	0.411	5.0%	0.442	2.260
Character	0.070	0.030	0.166	2.342	0.020	0.423	1.2%	0.527	1.897

R = 0.602 (a), 0.645 (b), 0.656 (c). R² = 0.363 (a), 0.417 (b), 0.431 (c). Adjusted R² = 0.360 (a), 0.411 (b), 0.423 (c). Constant = 2.471. Standard error = 0.030. The regression equation with 3 predictors was Y = 2.471 + 0.360X1 + 0.411X2 + 0.423X3 + 0.230. Y = Graduates’ CGPA. X1 = Hard skills. X2 = Soft skills. X3 = Character.

shows that hard skills contributed to graduates’ CGPA by 36% (R² = 0.360, β = 0.323), soft skills by 5% (R² = 0.411, β = 0.254), and character by 1.2% (R² = 0.423, β = 0.166. The β value means that when hard skills increase by one unit, CGPA increases by 0.360. A one-unit increase in soft skills increased CGPA by 0.323. Also, a one-unit increase in character increased CGPA by 0.166.

6. Discussion

Course design analysis showed that the three SCL methods applied by teachers included GLM, ILM, and OLM. Students perceived the application of the overall SCL method when studying as high. Furthermore, GLM, ILM and OLM were highly applied. The course design had four components, namely description and LO, achievement indicators, learning method, and type and evaluation system. These components emphasized hard skills more than soft skills and character, particularly in the course description and evaluation system. While teachers attempted to integrate soft, hard, and character skills into the course designs, the implementation was not consistently applied across all parts or processes of learning. Moreover, the assessment system remained exam-oriented rather than focused on the process of acquiring knowledge and skills [44].

Course design analysis showed that the selected features of the soft and hard skills and character were included in the course description, objective, and achievement indicators. However, hard skills were emphasized more than soft skills and character. A course is ideally designed to maximize engagement and practice of soft and hard skills and character. Instructional practice should ensure these skills occur during learning activities. Therefore, the teaching and learning process is expected to produce students with a higher capacity of skills and character [11,14,25]. Particularly, evaluating group and individual projects and individual participation is more crucial in improving 21st-century skills than simply assessing knowledge through quizzes and examinations [25,45].

Students perceived the implementation of GLM, ILM, and OLM to be at a high level. All elements of these methods were rated high, with none reaching a very high level. More explicit SCL, particularly in the context of GLM, ILM, and OLM in teachers’ course design and its implementation, could have resulted in higher 21st-century skills performance. Facilitating students’ participation, contribution, and activeness in practicing SCL, specifically through these three learning modes, is crucial for improving 21st-century skills [8,11,13].

The Indonesian Ministry of Education stated that university undergraduate programs should develop soft and hard skills, as well as character [3]. In the current study, TEFL students’ skills and character were rated high instead of very high. Components of soft skills, including communication, IT, learning, problem-solving, and teamwork, performed at a high level, while numeracy was at a medium level. The hard skills components of specific subjects and technical knowledge also performed at a high level. No component of soft and hard skills achieved a very high performance. Therefore, graduates should be prepared to perform highly in soft and hard skills in the workplace, aiming for a mean score of 4.21. Teachers are expected to maximize engagement in learning by applying SCL. Description and LO, achievement indicators, learning method, and type and evaluation system should be designed to engage students in learning activities [15].

Students performed highly in the character components, including honesty, appreciation, tolerance, discipline, patience, confidence, and responsibility. Therefore, character should be prioritized during the learning process. The teacher’s role is to monitor and guide students to apply appropriate character values during the learning process. Character is not only practiced in conventional classes but also through online learning [31]. Teachers could control responsibility, honesty, discipline, and appreciation through online learning activities by ensuring that students submit assignments or participate in group discussions and live presentations. For instance, when students submit assignments, teachers could set the feature of ‘due date and lock after due date’ to train discipline. Teachers could also facilitate and control students to adhere to academic ethics during learning activities [12,46].

Regression analysis showed that SCL methods improved 21st-century skills. GLM was the most contributive factor in improving these skills, followed by ILM and OLM. The combined use of GLM, ILM, and OLM contributed to better performance. Students could obtain excellent performance of 21st-century skills at a mean of 4.20 and above when SCL is applied optimally in the learning process. Therefore, there is a need to facilitate students to obtain maximal skills by applying GLM, ILM, and OLM combined with other learning methods. Various learning activities could help develop 21st-century skills, such as group projects, simulations, discussions, and field surveys [1,15]. These activities could help in developing soft skills, hard skills, and character.

Regression analysis also showed that 21st-century skills were assessed as part of scores and their contribution to CGPA. Syllabi analysis showed that examination contributed most to students’ evaluation and CGPA. Further analysis showed that hard skills dominantly contributed to CGPA, soft skills had an insignificant contribution, and character contributed the least. Therefore, course evaluation was not based on skills performance but on academic knowledge achievement. According to the Indonesian Directorate General of Higher Education, course designs, activities, and evaluation systems with a maximal emphasis on character and soft skills produce competitive graduates [3].

In line with the concept of SCL, students should be given more opportunities to interact, communicate, and discuss to acquire knowledge and skills [12,15]. The current study showed that SCL implementation engaged students to develop personal skills. Students’ 21st-century skills performance within components of soft skills, namely communication, IT, numeracy, learning, problem-solving, and teamwork, was much better when integrated with SCL. Students could also build and improve specific knowledge and skills of a subject through various learning activities. The objective of learning is achieved when students are able to interpret and apply knowledge and skills.

In summary, developing students’ learning provided opportunities to practice 21st-century skills. Delivering and assessing course content knowledge and skills through learning activities and project assignments could improve the quality of skills. Furthermore, teachers need to reflect on and improve pedagogical competency in applying SCL methods. This would facilitate learning activities, assignments, and examination projects, optimizing students’ development of skills.

Policymakers at the university level need to evaluate the curriculum implementation at the grassroots level regarding soft skills, hard skills, and character values. These skills can be integrated into bachelor programs and learning inputs, processes, or outcomes. Further studies are recommended to investigate effective learning strategies, design, and evaluation systems that foster 21st-century skills. It is also crucial to use an experimental design that implements SCL to improve these skills.

7. Contribution of the Study

This study contributed to the theoretical and practical side of SCL. For practical contribution, it provided new information, which increased the advantage of teachers creating SCL learning strategies. Teachers were expected to apply SCL in more creative ways to develop students’ hard skills (course knowledge, soft skills, and character values). The study also helped teachers make choices on the appropriate content delivery method to enable students to acquire better hard skills and subject knowledge. On the other hand, students were expected to practice soft skills and character. The results acknowledged educators, as different methods of learning improved performance in various ways and the practice of 21st-century skills. For instance, GLM helped improve overall skills, specifically facilitating students to practice soft skills, hard skills, and character in learning activities. Teachers’ innovation and creativity in combining GLM, ILM, and OLM is an essential factor for the successful implementation of SCL, significantly impacting LO.

This study added significant value to previous literature on SCL application in different contexts of education. The practice of 21st-century skills during learning processes is an advantage in SCL usage. However, achieving optimal LO, particularly the highest level of performance, is dependent on effectively implementing SCL in the course design and learning process. The study also contributed to the concept of course design by showing how its characteristics could successfully deliver content knowledge and foster 21st-century skills through education.

In the past, SCL contributed to the field of teaching and learning, and this study provided further insights into the theory and innovative concepts of its implementation. Furthermore, this study showed that SCL not only improves course knowledge and skills but also the ability to use IT applications, work collectively, solve problems, discover better learning methods, or share information and resources. Therefore, SCL methods enabled students to practice and develop 21st-century skills through various learning activities. A hypothesis can be drawn from this notion: the use of SCL by more faculty teachers ensures an improvement in course knowledge, as well as soft skills and character. However, to advance the study of SCL, further experimental studies, evaluation of multiple classes and course-based learning, and testing of variables are crucial. Mixed qualitative and quantitative methods are essential to ascertain the effectiveness of SCL and ways to improve skills based on the current study framework.

This study recommends that universities implement a curriculum policy, integrate 21st-century skills in course design, and use SCL as the main delivery method. The successful application of SCL in all courses could reduce the number of unskilled graduates. Following up application of SCL, universities can develop skills assessments to certify students’ 21st-century skills. This provides the advantage of skills acquisition while in school and gaining certification by graduation, as spending more funds to acquire skills after graduation is unnecessary. Furthermore, universities recommended that teachers should be trained to creatively and effectively apply SCL in the classroom.

8. Limitations

This study was conducted on students from an English Department at a university. Therefore, the results could not be generalized to a larger population of university students due to differences in learning models. SCL methods were limited to group, independent, and online learning. Based on lesson plan analysis and students’ perceptions, the three learning activities were applied by teachers during the learning process. Furthermore, the results were mainly based on surveys, and the performance of 21st-century skills was assessed by a self-evaluation questionnaire. The results might not present performance similar to experimental and test evaluations. The robust and accurate results produced by experimental design and test evaluation were significantly supported by previous studies and theories. While the definition and the concept of 21st-century skills might not be the same across fields and countries, a global agreement was discussed regarding the components and indicators of 21st-century skills applied in this study.

9. Conclusions

In conclusion, this study aimed to investigate the effect of SCL application on TEFL students’ 21st-century skills performance. Teachers applied SCL in three learning methods, including group, independent, and online learning activities. However, their application should be more optimized to be creative and innovative because being less optimal could reduce performance. This showed appropriate SCL methods would increase performance. The courses should also be designed to develop skills. In this case, CGPA could be developed by assessing soft and hard skills, as well as character. The English department was expected to explicitly state and embed these skills in the curriculum into all course design aspects, including descriptive and objective, learning method and strategy, evaluation, and scoring system. This would equip TEFL graduates with 21st-century skills relevant to self-development and accessing the global job market. Therefore, universities should prioritize developing these skills as a requirement for completing a degree program. Standard instrumentation for measuring pre-graduate skills should also be developed. In addition, this study is expected to contribute to the issues surrounding the development of 21st-century skills in universities.