General education competencies from students’ perspectives: a case study of a sports university in Taiwan

The study addresses how sports university students in Taiwan value general education competencies and how satisfied they are with their institution’s general education programme in cultivating these competencies. Set against broader debates about higher education’s shift toward workforce orientation versus liberal/general education, the paper argues that both can be embraced. The research aims to gauge students’ perceptions of the importance of specified general education competencies and their satisfaction with programme performance, using IPA to provide diagnostic insights for improvement. The context includes Taiwan’s massification of higher education, declining birth rate, and policy emphasis on competencies paralleling global trends.

The paper reviews historical and contemporary perspectives on general/liberal education, from the Harvard Redbook’s aims (thinking, communication, judgment, values) to 21st-century skills frameworks (learning, literacy, life skills). Competency-based education (CBE) is presented as a student-centred, mastery-oriented approach connecting academics and employability, yet criticized for potential vocationalisation and fragmentation of learning. Challenges in assessing general education include behaviourist outcome specifications and a course-based assessment focus rather than holistic programme evaluation. The Taiwan context outlines rapid higher education expansion, cultural antecedents (Confucian six arts), and the 2019 National Curriculum Guidelines emphasizing problem-solving, communication (including media/arts), and social responsibility/collaboration. Prior Taiwanese research explored CBE integration, pedagogy, and assessment, but student perspectives remained underexplored. IPA is introduced as a decision-support tool combining importance and performance, with enhancements using empirical means for axes and a discrepancy diagonal to increase discriminative power.

Design: Quantitative survey with Importance-Performance Analysis (IPA), supplemented by paired-sample t-tests, one-way ANOVAs with Scheffé post hoc tests, and simple linear regression. Setting and programme: A sports university in Taiwan with a general education programme requiring 28 credits across liberal arts/languages, social sciences, and natural sciences; 12 compulsory credits (Chinese, English, computer literacy, Olympic studies) plus at least 4 credits in each area among electives. Participants: N=515 undergraduate students. Gender: 289 male (56.1%), 226 female (43.9%). Year: 332 freshmen (64.5%), 136 sophomores (26.4%), 28 juniors (5.4%), 19 seniors (3.7%). Colleges: Sport Education (n=179, 34.8%), Sports Performance (n=155, 30.1%), Sports Industry (n=181, 35.1%). Sampling used voluntary response via course instructors; proportions mirrored overall enrolments. Data collection: Google Forms, May 31–June 22, 2022. Informed consent obtained; anonymity assured. Instrument: Three sections. (1) Demographics (college, year, gender). (2) Importance ratings for 10 competencies on 5-point Likert scale (1=not very important to 5=very important). (3) Satisfaction with general education performance in fostering the same 10 competencies on 5-point Likert scale (1=very unsatisfied to 5=very satisfied). Competencies (codes C1–C10): communicative ability; critical thinking; awareness of civil responsibility; languages for international mobility; developing an interest in life; ability to access & use information; programming; creativity & sensing beauty in life; integrating skills across disciplines; promoting physical and mental health. Content validity reviewed by two experienced general education administrators/instructors. Reliability: Cronbach’s alpha: importance section = .94; performance/satisfaction section = .97. Analysis: IPA plotted (a) initial axes at midpoints, then (b) revised axes at empirical means plus diagonal indicating zero discrepancy (performance=importance). Paired-sample t-tests assessed performance-importance gaps. One-way ANOVAs compared colleges on importance and satisfaction means with Scheffé post hoc comparisons. Linear regression tested whether perceived importance predicts satisfaction; model and fit statistics reported.

- Descriptive means and gaps: Grand mean importance = 4.22; grand mean performance = 3.92; overall P−I = −0.30. All competencies showed negative differentials; all gaps significant at p<.001 except C7 (programming) which was nonsignificant (t=−1.59, p=.111). Examples: C1 communicative ability (Importance 4.37; Performance 4.00; P−I −0.37), C2 critical thinking (4.34; 3.99; −0.34), C10 physical and mental health (4.35; 3.99; −0.35), C5 interest in life (4.34; 3.96; −0.37). - IPA results: Initial IPA (axes at midpoints) misleadingly placed all items in “keep up the good work.” Revised IPA (axes at empirical means with discrepancy diagonal) placed all competencies above the diagonal (areas to improve). C7 (programming) and C8 (creativity & sensing beauty) were closest to the diagonal (smaller gaps); most others were far above the diagonal, indicating high-priority improvement needs. - Differences by college: Sports Industry College students rated performance below empirical means across competencies and were least satisfied overall. C7 programming: low importance across colleges; still in “areas to improve” for Sports Industry and Sport Education Colleges but “possible waste of resources” for Sports Performance College. C3 civil responsibility: higher importance for Sport Education and Sports Performance than Sports Industry. C4 international mobility languages: less important for Sports Performance than the other two. - ANOVAs: Importance differed by college, F(2,512)=4.018, p<.05; Sports Industry (M=4.10, SD=.645) rated lower than Sport Education (M=4.31, SD=.676). Satisfaction differed by college, F(2,512)=12.480, p<.05; Sports Industry (M=3.67, SD=.837) lower than Sport Education (M=4.05, SD=.798) and Sports Performance (M=4.06, SD=.863). - Regression: Satisfaction = 0.81 + 0.738 × (importance); R^2=0.39; F(1,513)=324.85; β=.738, p<.001. Higher perceived importance predicted higher satisfaction with the general education programme.

Students valued general education competencies broadly, prioritizing communication, physical/mental health, critical thinking, and developing interests in life, while assigning relatively lower importance to programming and creativity/sensing beauty. Despite recognizing importance, students perceived a consistent performance shortfall, signaling a need for programme enhancement. Variations across colleges reflected differing student profiles and needs (e.g., lower language mobility importance for student-athletes; lower civil responsibility and cross-disciplinary integration for Sports Industry students). The findings support tailoring general education and embedding flexibility. Incorporating CBE features (mastery-based progression, self-paced/personalized learning, multiple assessment measures, learning beyond traditional classrooms) could better align with student-athletes’ schedules and promote competency development. Improving clarity among faculty and students about competency definitions, relevance, and pedagogical approaches is essential; professional development can shift teaching toward facilitation of competencies. The positive link between perceived importance and satisfaction suggests that elevating students’ understanding of competencies’ relevance may improve satisfaction alongside programme quality. IPA offers actionable diagnostics but must be interpreted contextually to avoid misinference about low-priority competencies that may still be essential.

The study demonstrates that sports university students in Taiwan recognize the importance of general education competencies but perceive a performance gap in their programme’s delivery. Students’ priorities align with their collegiate identities, and perceived importance significantly predicts satisfaction. The paper recommends blending CBE elements (mastery-based micro-credentials, flexible pacing, multiple assessments, expanded learning venues) and investing in faculty development to enhance competency-focused pedagogy. Institutions should also communicate the relevance of competencies to students’ personal development and well-being. IPA is useful for identifying priorities and comparing subgroups, but results should be interpreted in context. Future research could extend beyond a single institution and integrate qualitative methods to deepen understanding. More broadly, while competencies evolve with societal needs, institutions should avoid overemphasizing narrow skill sets and continue to cultivate humanistic virtues vital to holistic education.

- Convenience sample from a single sports university limits generalizability. - Cross-sectional survey design; absence of qualitative data restricts depth of insight into reasons behind ratings. - Potential response biases from voluntary participation and self-report. - IPA interpretations depend on context; subgroup lifestyles and constraints (e.g., student-athletes’ time) may influence perceptions.