Abstract:

Introduction:
In discussions surrounding higher education management, there is a contentious issue regarding the quality of graduates, particularly in their lack of soft or transferable skills (Clarke, 2017; Succi & Canovi, 2020). Recent research has illuminated disparities between the skills demanded by the workplace and those imparted by academic training, leading to employers noting a discrepancy between the competencies of university graduates and their own requirements (Abelha et al., 2020). Many Higher Education institutes offer work placements to students to prepare them for the workplace and improving their employability. Employers frequently play a role in evaluating student performance during industry placements, on the premise that they are the most qualified judges of professional competence (Milne and Caldicott, 2016). Students also engage in self-evaluation to reflect on their performance, contributions, and identify areas for improvement (Marks et.al., 2018). Previous research in this area has demonstrated mixed results, with some studies finding students evaluating themselves higher than employers (McDonough et.al., 2009; Mehrdad et.al., 2012), whereas others found students consistently evaluated themselves lower than supervisors (Jackson, 2019; Nisbet et al., 2022). In early 2020, the sudden disruptor of the Covid-19 pandemic, occurred, prompting many governments worldwide to enforce strict lockdowns. Universities moved to online teaching only and students undertaking industry placements were swiftly moved to working from home (WFH) arrangements. This significantly impacted students’ placement performance, experience of workplace culture and the development of key employability attributes (O’Toole et.al, 2023).

Method:
This study examines Work-Integrated Learning (WIL) placement student self-evaluations before, during and after the Covid-19 Pandemic, from 2019-2023. The study examines student self-evaluations, compared to supervisor evaluations of students in a range of areas, interest and energy, communication skills, critical thinking and problem solving and demonstrating and integrating discipline specific knowledge. The sample includes just under 3,000 paired student and supervisor industry placement evaluations, which were examined in paired-sample t-tests using IBM SPSS.

Results:
The quantitative analysis demonstrates consistency with existing research, where students invariably evaluate themselves lower than supervisors (Jackson, 2019; Nisbet et al., 2022). Interestingly, in 2019, where all industry placements were face-to-face, there were very large statistically significant differences between student and supervisor ratings. Conversely, in 2020, when students were thrust into online placements, both the students and supervisors have provided higher ratings than in 2019, and the difference between the student and supervisor ratings was lower. This was largely replicated in 2021 when placements were online or hybrid. In 2022 and 2023, most placements continued to be hybrid, reflecting the changed nature of work after Covid. In both cohorts, the students and supervisors have rated more highly than in previous years and the gap between student and supervisor ratings decreased on every measure.

Analysis:
The findings support previous studies into student-supervisor industry placement evaluations, and to deepen the discussion, the qualitative evaluation feedback is being analysed with Nvivo to gain insight into the differences in evaluations.

Keywords:

Pandemic Higher Education Quantitative Methods Well-being.