Enhancing Employability Skills of Biology Graduates through an Interdisciplinary Project-Based Service Learning Experience with Engineering and Translation Undergraduate Students

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The manuscript is highly interesting as it addresses a current issue related to higher education. After more than a decade of the Bologna process, Spanish universities have not achieved a generalised change in their teaching models. While there is no doubt that practices have been transformed, it is also true that teaching methodologies continue to be highly traditional and based on a transmissive model. This is because infrastructures have changed, curricular language has changed, the curriculum has changed, but teaching methods have not. There are several hypotheses in this respect related to the necessary pedagogical training of teachers and students, to the high number of students, and also to the lack of pedagogical models that promote change.

The research presented here successfully demonstrates that collaborative, problem-based and applied teaching models are transferable to HE teaching. The proposal highlights the large volume of data used, the longitudinal approach over 3 academic years, the interdisciplinary approach and the changes that the experience has produced.

The authors are congratulated for the approach of the work, for the results obtained in terms of learning and motivation and for the usefulness they can have to promote methodological change in other HEI.

Author Response

Thank you so much for your kind comments and congratulations on our study.

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Thank you for the opportunity to review your manuscript.

Line 55 - SL definition requires expansion.  What is missing from your definition is the element of reciprocity with the community partner and outcomes for each party.  In addition, SL is not mostly utilised by engineering, biology and medicine disciplines, as internationally, it is widely used by multiple disciplines (Lines 60-61).  

The assertions made by the authors (Lines 72 - 78) are factually incorrect and would need to be rewritten.  Project Based Service Learning is a widely used methodology and this needs to be addressed in Lines 84-85.  I recommend the authors read more widely and beyond their discipline regarding Service Learning.

What was the project the students worked on, and who were the community partners?

Lines 91 - 92 are incorrect.  The authors should refer to the literature addressing multi-discipline project-based service learning. 

Is there a reference for "However, it took from 3 to 13 months for graduate students 126 to find their first job (related to their degree) and their first net salary was relatively low 127 due to their lack of experience and employable skills." (Line 126 - 128)?  There are many factors impacting graduate employment. 

The materials and methods section does not adequately describe the methodology, however provides results without adequately describing any methods.  What were the qualitative and quantitative methods specifically?  The authors describe using student assessment tools as part of the data collection. 

Was Ethics approval obtained for this research?

How did the interdisciplinary teams work together?  What was the project the students worked on?  The authors describe the "different activities developed that were common in all subjects", but do not provide information about what the project or activities the students worked on, for whom, and the outcomes for all parties.  While this is described in supplementary material, the article would benefit from a brief description of the project and student engagement with community partners within the article.   

How were the transferable skills captured and measured within the assessment items described?

Recommended Literature: 

I recommend the authors review Furco and Kiely for comprehensive definitions of Service Learning.

Furco, A., Brooks, S. O., Lopez, I., Matthews, P. H., Hirt, L. E., Schultzetenberg, A., & Anderson, B. N. (2023). Service-Learning Quality Assessment Tool (SLQAT). Journal of Higher Education Outreach and Engagement, 27(2).

Hartman, E., Kiely, R. C., Friedrichs, J., & Boettcher, C. (2023). Community-based global learning: The theory and practice of ethical engagement at home and abroad. Taylor & Francis.

Hugg, R., & Wurdinger, S. (2007). A Practical and Progressive Pedagogy for Project Based Service Learning. International Journal of Teaching & Learning in Higher Education, 19(2).

Bielefeldt, A., Paterson, K., & Swan, C. (2009, June). Measuring the impacts of project based service learning. In 2009 Annual Conference & Exposition (pp. 14-873).

Resch, K., & Schrittesser, I. (2023). Using the Service-Learning approach to bridge the gap between theory and practice in teacher education. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 27(10), 111

Comments on the Quality of English Language

Requires minor modification in places.

Author Response

Thank you for the opportunity to review your manuscript.

ANSWER: Your expert and precise comments to improve our manuscript are greatly appreciated. We have carefully considered and incorporated your comments and suggestions (refer to the details below).

1.- Line 55 - SL definition requires expansion.  What is missing from your definition is the element of reciprocity with the community partner and outcomes for each party 

ANSWER: In the paragraph (see lines 58-66 in the revised ms), authors rather than define SL in detail, tried to explain SL as a method in order to let students learn and develop through active participation in thoughtfully organized service, being integrated into and enhancing their academic curriculum of the students in which are enrolled, and more importantly, providing structured time for the students to reflect on the service experience (according to the USA National and Community Service Trust Act of 1993: (23) SERVICE-LEARNING.

Said this, the authors appreciate the comment of the reviewer focusing on the reciprocity with the community partner and outcomes for each party, but we did not include those data because:

1.- Neither of the authors was an expert in SL (before the experience initiated in 2015), thus the huge effort made by the authors to implement this methodology with more than 372 students of three different disciplines, was carried out by focusing on “apply academic knowledge and critical thinking skills to address genuine community needs” (definition of SL in Pamela and James Toole 1994), rather than on the community outcomes.

2.- This study using PBSL was the first carried out in our faculty, university, and even more, to the best of our knowledge is one of the first in the world applied to biology high education grades (as stated in line 73-76), and as you recommended we should read more widely and beyond regarding Service Learning.

In this sense, is fully true that authors focus “only” on the student outcomes (apply academic knowledge and critical thinking skills) rather than on the community partners, but:

• we have included a new paragraph (see lines 133-140) and a table with some projects carried out by the students to further explain how students have addressed the “service experience” and applied the curriculum content in community practice.
• We acknowledge the referee's recommendation that we should have conducted a more extensive review, beyond our disciplinary boundaries, regarding the Service Learning methodology to better consider the partner community's perspective. Nonetheless, we maintain our confidence that the presented results adequately showcase the students' application of academic knowledge and critical thinking skills in addressing authentic community needs. In this regard, we are satisfied with the PBSL experience undertaken.
• Following your suggestion we are now planning to analyze the partners' opinions in the future.

In addition, SL is not mostly utilized by engineering, biology, and medicine disciplines, as internationally, it is widely used by multiple disciplines (Lines 60-61). 

ANSWER: Thank you for your comment. We have rewritten this paragraph according to your suggestion (please see lines 73-76).

2.- The assertions made by the authors (Lines 72 - 78) are factually incorrect and would need to be rewritten.  Project Based Service Learning is a widely used methodology and this needs to be addressed in Lines 84-85.  I recommend the authors read more widely and beyond their discipline regarding Service Learning.

ANSWER: we do not fully understand this comment. In that paragraph (line 86 in the newly reviewed manuscript), the authors did not indicate or suggest that SL is not widely used (see new paragraph lines 73-76).

We stated that SL in engineering is becoming more “popular”, but is not so common or popular in the Grades of Biology in higher education. We have checked the papers published in Grade of Biology and compared with any other field are very limited and even scarce. Thus the facts indicate that the use of SL in the grades of biology is still uncommon.

Please, if you need further explanation about this issue, let us know in what sense “the assertions are factually incorrect”. Could you be more explicit?

3.- What was the project the students worked on, and who were the community partners?

ANSWER: A new paragraph has been added giving examples of the projects the students have been involved in (lines 133-140).

4.- Lines 91 - 92 are incorrect.  The authors should refer to the literature addressing multi-discipline project-based service learning. 

ANSWER: To avoid misinterpretation, the sentence “To the best of our knowledge no PBSL methodology applied to an interdisciplinary, like this, at higher education has been published” was deleted.

5.- Is there a reference for "However, it took from 3 to 13 months for graduate students 126 to find their first job (related to their degree) and their first net salary was relatively low 127 due to their lack of experience and employable skills." (Line 126 - 128)?  There are many factors impacting graduate employment. 

ANSWER: Reference 37 was added (see line 154) and new text was added to include the source of this information (see line 155)

6.- The materials and methods section does not adequately describe the methodology, however provides results without adequately describing any methods.  What were the qualitative and quantitative methods specifically?  The authors describe using student assessment tools as part of the data collection. 

ANSWER: Thank you for your insightful comment. A new paragraph describing both qualitative and quantitative methods was added (see lines 207-215)

7.- Was Ethics approval obtained for this research?

ANSWER: Thank you again for this key comment. Now, a new paragraph describing the Institutional Review Board Statement was added (see lines 535-540)

8.- How did the interdisciplinary teams work together?  What was the project the students worked on?  The authors describe the "different activities developed that were common in all subjects", but do not provide information about what the project or activities the students worked on, for whom, and the outcomes for all parties.  While this is described in supplementary material, the article would benefit from a brief description of the project and student engagement with community partners within the article.   

ANSWER: A new paragraph has been added giving examples of the projects the students have been involved in (lines 133-140).

9.- How were the transferable skills captured and measured within the assessment items described?

ANSWER: A new paragraph has been added giving information about the assessment tools and how the students´ proficiency was evaluated (lines 233-240).