Improving the Confidence of Physics Undergraduates in Communication and Teamwork Skills

Abstract

This study assesses the efficacy of the Physics Communication Project (PCP) in bolstering students’ confidence, particularly in teamwork and presentation abilities. The PCP is a group-work exercise for first year students taking Physics 1, the introductory course for all physics degrees at the University of Glasgow. It is designed to encourage and improve team and communication skills. The study delves into the PCP’s influence on student perceptions and experiences by employing χ²-analysis to look for statistically significant differences in quantitative data and the General Inductive Method to identify key themes in qualitative data. Findings reveal that students were initially apprehensive about public speaking. However, there was a significant improvement in students’ confidence levels in teamwork and presentations following participation in the PCP, with qualitative data emphasising the benefits of teamwork enhancements. Additionally, the PCP fosters community among participants, enhancing their academic journey beyond mere skill acquisition. Moreover, the PCP is vital in addressing gender disparities in confidence levels, particularly in presentations. Initially, women displayed notably lower confidence than men, but post-project, their confidence aligned with that of men, indicating substantial growth among female participants.

1. Introduction

Soft skills, or transferrable skills, are those skills which are not specific to a particular discipline; they are independent of and complementary to discipline-specific knowledge. It has long been recognised that such skills including teamwork, communication, and interpersonal skills are highly valued by employers (Brungardt, 2009; Chowdhury et al., 2002; Institute of Physics, 2022; Quality Assurance Agency for Higher Education, 2025). They are often listed as desired graduate attributes by tertiary education providers, with many UK institutions explicitly emphasising the embedding of employability skills within programmes of study. In the context of physics and astronomy in the UK in particular, soft skills are listed alongside subject-specific knowledge in community-agreed standards for tertiary education, appearing in the Quality Assurance Agency for Higher Education (QAA) benchmark statement (Quality Assurance Agency for Higher Education, 2025) and the Institute of Physics (IOP) accredited degree framework (Institute of Physics, 2022).

The IOP framework outlines the fundamental expectations of an academic programme for degree accreditation and covers skills expectations alongside knowledge, stating the following: “Employability comes from knowledge, understanding as well as discipline specific and transferable skills provision. Knowledge alone is insufficient and the accreditation process places skills on an equal footing to that of knowledge attainment.” The transferable skills expectations are contained in Key Expectation 12, and accredited programmes must “provide training in a broad range of transferable skills and their use should be demonstrated throughout the programmes.” The Physics Communication Project (PCP) at the University of Glasgow, in which students work together to produce a poster on some aspect of physics, aimed at a high school audience, is designed to support this. The PCP takes place in level 1 (introductory level), embedding skills training from the very beginning of the programme to supplement and prepare students for opportunities occurring at higher levels. The PCP fulfils a dual role of acting as an icebreaker by getting students to work together in small teams at the start of the programme and building confidence in communication, teamwork, and self-directed learning skills. It is low stakes: the PCP is worth 5% of the final course grade of a two-semester introductory physics course, and assessment is based on a poster prepared by the team and a ten-minute group presentation.

The skills developed in the PCP are explicitly identified in the QAA benchmark statement (Quality Assurance Agency for Higher Education, 2025), to which the IOP accreditation framework refers. Students must acquire these skills irrespective of the academic programme, whether at the bachelor level, integrated master’s, or master’s level:

• “Communicate scientific information, typically through a selection of visualisation, scientific reports and/or presentations, suitable for a variety of audiences” (4.4 of (Quality Assurance Agency for Higher Education, 2025));
• “Assert intellectual independence, including undertaking tasks independently (with appropriate guidance and support), conducting self-directed research and demonstrating critical judgement” (4.5 of (Quality Assurance Agency for Higher Education, 2025));
• “Work collaboratively, including undertaking work in a group or team and/or participating in discussions, showing an appreciation for diversity within the group.” (4.5 of (Quality Assurance Agency for Higher Education, 2025)).

Aside from accreditation requirements, prior research indicates a range of benefits of teamwork in educational settings. Teamwork, particularly when occurring early in an academic programme, can help to forge connections among students, fostering friendships that are beneficial for academic performance and contribute to a supportive learning environment. Alotaibi et al.’s meta-analysis of studies at the school, college, and university level found a positive correlation between friendships within an educational setting and academic outcomes (Alotaibi et al., 2023). Strong social bonds can foster a stronger sense of belonging or identity within a field of study. In physics, in particular, Seyranian et al. (2018) found that students with a stronger sense of identity and belonging flourished more in a course. They further suggested that gender differences in identity and belonging in physics, in particular, may be a contributing factor to the underrepresentation of women in physics, a theme that was explored further by Bottomley et al. (2024).

Teamwork skills have been associated with improved self-esteem, in turn leading to better retention, wellbeing, and later, performance at work (De Prada et al., 2024). Teamwork can also contribute to the development of self-efficacy, the belief in one’s ability to complete a given task (Bandura, 1977), through so-called vicarious experiences: observing others performing a task. Self-efficacy has been shown to be a predictor of a range of positive educational and behavioural outcomes including resilience, persistence, academic performance, and even career choices (for a meta-analysis, see Multon et al., 1991). Team- and project-based work in an introductory physics class was shown, in a study by Espinosa et al. (2019), to have a positive effect on self-efficacy in female students. Yekimov et al. (2021) also suggested there was a positive effect of teamwork within a project-based learning environment. Similarly to our study, Schaller and Hadgraft (2013) demonstrated the use of project-based learning to develop subject-specific, but also teamwork and communication, skills early in a programme of study.

A number of studies explore the effect of the details of team formation on the effectiveness of the team with mixed results. Alexopoulou and Driver (1996) found greater benefits for discussion groups in fours rather than in pairs. Harlow et al. (2016) examined a range of factors, including roughly equal ability versus mixed ability, size of team, gender composition of the team, and found that none of the factors had a significant impact on student learning. Miller et al. (2022) explored instructor-formed versus student-formed groups and found that female students performed better and felt more comfortable speaking up in a two-stage collaborative exam when they were in student-formed groups. Ramirez et al. (2025) found greater stability but less collaboration among student-formed groups in a high school setting.

Few studies have looked specifically at confidence in teamwork and presentation skills: Chowdhury et al. (2002) discuss the importance of building confidence in teamwork, demonstrating that, in high-performing teams, the team performance mitigates the effect of individual self-efficacy on performance and satisfaction, thus establishing the importance of building confidence in being able to work effectively in a team. Bruhin et al. (2024) show, by manipulating participants’ self-belief in their own abilities, that over-confidence can lead to more effort and better team performance overall. However, they considered confidence in the participant’s own ability to do the task rather than in their teamwork skills. Self-efficacy in collaborative work was one of the dimensions considered by Espinosa et al. (2019); a statistically significant improvement was seen for female students in an introductory team-based and project-based physics course but not for male students. One possible reason given for this difference is that the specifics of the course structure of the study, with an emphasis on teamwork and discussion and frequent low-stakes assessment, may benefit female students, in particular, in building self-efficacy.

In this study, we evaluate the effectiveness of a particular intervention at the University of Glasgow, the Physics Communication Project, in building confidence in teamwork and presentation skills for the cohort as a whole and by gender. The main aims of this study, then, were as follows:

• To assess the confidence levels of physics students at the University of Glasgow before and after participating in the PCP.
• To investigate any disparities in confidence levels between men and women before and after the PCP.
• To discover if the PCP has a long-lasting impact on physics students.

These aims would provide a suitable overview of the PCP’s effectiveness at enhancing transferable and professional skills among all students in the School of Physics and Astronomy at the University of Glasgow. They would also help the development of similar schemes in other institutions and disciplines.

2. Methodology

The Physics Communication Project (PCP) is an integral component of the first-year curriculum in the University of Glasgow’s Physics programme. Taking place during the first few weeks of semester one, this annual course aims to develop vital soft and professional skills among students while encouraging camaraderie within the cohort. Structured around collaborative learning, the PCP assembles groups of 4–6 students who are tasked with crafting an informative poster on an aspect of the course curriculum targeted at high school audiences. Students draw a team number at random from a hat to create random groups. An initial training session covers an introduction to the task, training on poster design and teamwork, and a description of how the work will be assessed. Each group selects from three predetermined topics, undertaking two weeks of rigorous research and design before presenting their findings via a poster to an audience of students in their class and members of staff. The presentation is relatively informal, with an audience of two staff markers and around twenty peers. Teams are given autonomy to decide how to divide up the presentation amongst themselves, and during the questions portion, students are asked to comment on their design process, how the team aspect went, as well as on the poster’s topic. Students write a reflective statement at the end of the project, which is required of all students but not formally assessed. In total, the project is worth 5% of the final grade for a two-semester introductory physics course. The work presented here is an evaluation of the effectiveness of the PCP.

To assess the effectiveness of the PCP in enhancing teamwork and presentation skills, physics students taking part in the project in 2023/24 were surveyed on their confidence levels in using skills before and after the project. Two distinct surveys were developed for first-year physics students: one administered prior to the commencement of the PCP and the other following its completion. The students were given a plain language statement briefing them on the purpose and utilisation of the surveys. Students were allocated ten minutes to complete each survey. A separate online survey was created for all second-, third-, fourth-, and fifth-year students to gather further opinions on the PCP. These students had all taken part in the PCP when they had been in first year. Focus groups were also carried out with all year groups.

The research conducted in this study received ethical approval from the Ethics Board of the College of Science and Engineering (CoSE).

2.1. Data Collection Methods

2.1.1. Pre-Project Survey

The physical survey given to the level 1 students was split into a mix of tick-box questions (using a Likert scale for responses) and free-text questions. This was to allow the students to indicate their views on different aspects of the work involved in the PCP and what they hoped to develop by undertaking the work.

The survey also asked participants to indicate their gender so that comparison between different cohorts could be made. In total, 219 respondents were included in the analysis. Of these, 144 identified as a man, 66 as a woman. Students also had the option to select “Self-described” or “Prefer not to say”. The numbers in these latter groups were too small to use for statistical analysis but are included in the general analysis.

2.1.2. Post-Project Survey

The post-project survey, again delivered in a physical format, explored similar issues to the first so that the PCP could be evaluated, but also so that comparisons could be made between before and after views. The specific questions and statements are provided in Section 3.

The survey again asked participants to indicate their gender. In total, there were 225 respondents, reflecting an increase from the pre-project survey, attributed to latecomers joining the physics programme. Here, 152 identified as a man, 63 as a woman.

2.1.3. Additional Survey for Physics 2, 3, 4, and 5 Students

An online survey was created via Microsoft Forms and distributed across second-, third-, fourth-, and fifth-year physics students via all-year group-wide emails. The primary objective of this survey was to measure the long-term effects of the PCP by gathering data from physics 2–5 students who could offer additional recommendations for enhancing the effectiveness of the PCP and then discuss the key themes in focus groups. The survey garnered responses from 20 second years, 13 third years, 26 fourth years, and 9 fifth years, totalling 68 respondents overall. Data was collected online for these groups, as there was no simple method of delivering hard-copy surveys to these year groups.

2.1.4. Focus Groups

Following the identification of key themes derived from the survey data, focus groups were conducted based on the guidance outlined by Reid (2006). All participating students provided explicit consent and received the same plain language statement as survey respondents to ensure ethical standards were met.

The researcher initiated face-to-face interactions in the lab setting for first-year students, engaging in a 10 min focus group session with eight participants. In contrast, since physics 2–5 students were in labs at differing times of the week, the researcher contacted class representatives from the second to fifth years, inviting them and their peers to attend pre-scheduled focus group discussions. Across years two to five, 27 participants validated survey findings and provided insights into the broader impact of the PCP on students. Additionally, they offered the researcher an opportunity to gain a deeper understanding by posing pertinent questions and to validate key themes found in the data.

2.2. Analytical Methods

2.2.1. Quantitative Analysis

To determine statistically significant disparities in responses pre- and post-PCP and between men’s and women’s responses, Pearson’s χ²-analysis was conducted on the dataset (Chernoff & Lehmann, 1954). This method facilitated the comparison of each group against one another to gauge the degree of statistical divergence in responses. Responses deemed statistically significant exhibited a probability, or ‘p-value’, of <0.05, indicating a less than 5% likelihood that two groups provided congruent answers to a given question. It should be noted that all χ² values presented in this study were calculated based on four degrees of freedom.

Throughout this study, these statistical comparisons were made using the five categories offered in the questions: strongly agree, agree, neutral, disagree, and strongly disagree. For simplicity of presentation, in this paper, the results from the survey are collected into three categories, SA/A (strongly agree/agree), N (neutral), and SD/D (strongly disagree/disagree), with numbers provided as percentages. The statistical analysis was, however, carried out with the full numerical data

2.2.2. Qualitative Analysis

To analyse the qualitative data obtained from survey responses, the General Inductive Method was employed to establish categories and identify key themes (Thomas, 2006). This systematic approach facilitated the grouping of responses into categories, enabling an assessment of the proportion of total respondents who mentioned each category in their survey responses. This also meant that responses with more than one significant comment could be represented in all areas of the data.

3. Results

This section details the main results from the surveys and focus groups. Detailed discussion of the results then follows in Section 4.

3.1. Results of the Pre-PCP Survey

The initial survey, carried out before students had begun the PCP exercise, began by asking students to respond to a series of statements using a Likert scale running from strongly disagree to strongly agree. The specific statements are shown in Table 1, where the responses have been collected into three categories: “Strongly Disagree/Disagree”, “Neutral”, and “Strongly Agree/Agree”. The data is presented in percentage form for ease of interpretation, with the category with the highest response shown in bold. A total of 219 students answered these statements.

Table 1. The general student attitudes for Section 1 of the pre-project survey.

Statement	SD/D%	N%	SA/A%
I feel confident working in a team.	6.2	20.5	73.5
I feel confident setting goals and creating a plan with my team.	8.7	20.1	71.2
I feel confident in using contributions from others to create a joint project.	5.0	17.4	77.6
I feel confident in creating a poster to communicate my ideas.	15.1	28.0	56.9
I feel confident in preparing and delivering an oral presentation.	38.1	26.1	35.8
I feel confident answering questions in front of an audience.	39.9	26.6	33.5
I feel confident in using peer or teacher feedback to change my work.	1.4	4.1	98.5
I feel confident in assessing the quality of my own work before it is completed.	4.1	19.6	76.3

Following the Likert-style questions, students were presented with a series of free-text questions. The responses to these were then coded using the General Inductive Method (Thomas, 2006) to reveal the underlying key themes within the data. Table 2 summarises these key themes for the first free-text question: “Are there any aspects of the Physics Communication Project that you are looking forward to?” A total of 220 students responded to this question.

Table 2. Aspects they were looking forward to.

Most Looking Forward to	% of Comments
Meeting new people	49.0
Working with other students	22.1
Working on the poster	16.2
Improving physics knowledge	6.4
Improving presentation skills	3.4

Students where then asked “What skills would you like to improve by participating in the PCP?” The results of this are summarised in Table 3.

Table 3. Skills they hope to improve.

Skills to Improve	% of Comments
Presentation	35.0
Communication	27.7
Teamwork	19.0
Design skills	6.9
Time organisation	3.7
Referencing	2.9
Physics knowledge	2.6
Self-analysis	1.1
Leadership	1.1

3.2. Results of the Post-PCP Survey

Following completion of the PCP exercise, students were given a second survey to complete. This began with a set of Likert scale questions similar to those in the first survey but that were now asking to students to reflect on these same issues after taking part in the PCP. Table 4 presents these results in the same manner as Table 1 did.

Table 4. The general results for Section 1 of the post-project survey, where students ranked their confidence on an attitude scale.

Statement	SD/D%	N%	SA/A%
I feel confident working in a team.	2.6	5.3	92.0
I feel confident in preparing and delivering an oral presentation	2.2	5.8	91.9
I feel confident in using contribution from others to create a joint project.	4.4	5.3	90.2
I feel confident in creating a poster to communicate my ideas.	4.0	16.0	80.0
I feel confident in preparing and delivering an oral presentation.	20.0	24.9	55.1
I feel confident answering questions in front of an audience.	16.0	28.0	56.0
I feel confident in using peer or teacher feedback to change my work.	1.7	6.7	91.6
I feel confident in assessing the quality of my own work before it is completed.	4.0	11.6	84.5

Following the Likert questions, the second survey again asked students to complete free-text questions. They were first asked “What skills do you believe were most improved by taking part in the PCP?” A total of 225 students completed this question, providing 272 comments. These are summarised in Table 5.

Table 5. Responses to “What skills do you believe were most improved by taking part in the PCP?”.

Most Improved Skills	% of Comments
Teamwork	31.6
Communication	23.2
Presentation	17.6
Organisation	7.7
Research	5.9
Design	5.1
Confidence	4.0
Time management	3.3

Students were then asked to indicate what changes they would make to the PCP if they were to run the scheme in the next year. Table 6 outlines the results here. Only 97 comments were provided here, as most students indicated that they were content with how the exercise ran already.

Table 6. What should be changed?

Improvements	% of Comments
Do not limit to three topic choices	23.7
More time to design the poster	15.5
Easier to follow instructions	7.2
More in-depth topics	6.2

3.3. Physics 2–5 Student Survey Results

As well as surveying students taking the PCP as part of their current first year curriculum, students in upper years (2–5) were surveyed to discover if the PCP had any long-term impact on their skills as students and to gather suggestions for potential enhancements to the course. This was an online survey, as it was impractical to distribute hard-copy surveys across this wider audience.

Students were first asked to respond to two statements on a Likert scale (strongly disagree to strongly agree): “The poster project helped my teamwork skills” and “The poster project helped my presentation skills”. These results are summarised in Table 7 and Table 8, respectively.

Table 7. “The poster project helped my teamwork skills”; 68 total responses.

Year Group	SD/D%	N%	SA/A%
2	15.0	35.0	50.0
3	23.1	30.8	46.1
4	15.3	23.1	61.5
5	22.2	22.2	55.6

Table 8. “The poster project helped my presentation skills”; 68 total responses.

Year Group	SD/D%	N%	SA/A%
2	20.0	15.0	65.0
3	7.7	38.5	53.8
4	34.6	26.9	38.5
5	66.7	33.3	0

The survey participants were then asked “If you could change anything about the PCP to better prepare you for future study, what would you change?” which was a free-text response question. The main themes identified from the 61 responses received are summarised in Table 9.

Table 9. What changes would you make?

Improvements	% of Comments
In person	24.6
Timetabled session to work on the posters	11.5
More in-depth topic choices	9.8
Receive feedback on the poster before submitting a final draft	8.2
Fewer people in a group	6.6
More feedback on the quality of the presentation	4.9
PowerPoint instead of a poster	4.9

3.4. Focus Groups

Focus group interviews were carried out with both first year and more senior students. These explored issues raised by the surveys and are discussed in the next section.

4. Discussion

4.1. Result of the Pre-PCP Survey

The initial Likert questions in the first survey revealed that students predominantly felt confident in working together to create a joint piece of work, using feedback from instructors or peers for revisions, and evaluating the quality of their work before completion. However, as was shown Table 1, a notable lack of confidence surfaced regarding public speaking. Students expressed discomfort with speaking or asking questions in front of an audience, potentially due to limited prior experience in public speaking engagements. Overall, the students appeared confident across all other areas, indicating they felt well-prepared for the work even before the project commenced.

A ${\chi }^2$-analysis was carried out on the data to explore differences between the genders for these statements. Two statements were found to have statistically different responses, which are detailed in Table 10. It was evident that women exhibited lower confidence in their presentation abilities than men despite both genders initially expressing apprehension. Additionally, men demonstrated higher confidence levels in teamwork compared to women, as demonstrated in Table 10.

Table 10. The ${\chi }^2$ analysis of men’s versus women’s responses pre-project.

Statement	Group	SA%	A%	N%	D%	SD%	${\mathit{\chi }}^2$	p
I feel confident working in a team.	Man	21.5	58.3	16.0	2.8	1.4	14.3	<0.01
	Woman	29.5	32.8	29.5	8.2	0
I feel confident in preparing and delivering an oral presentation.	Man	7.6	32.6	28.6	23.6	7.6	18.2	<0.005
	Woman	6.6	11.6	21.6	38.6	21.6

The research indicates a prevalent trend wherein women often harbour lower confidence in their capabilities regardless of their actual performance, which may be on par with or surpass that of men (Marshman et al., 2018). For example, a study by Sneddon et al. (2009) highlighted that women generally lack confidence in practical work in physics. The result found in the data agrees with wider research.

In response to the question “Are there any aspects of the Physics Communication Project that you are looking forward to?” the data in Table 2 indicates that students viewed the project as a valuable avenue to connect with their peers, which is perhaps unsurprising, as this event runs very early in their undergraduate career and, for many, it will be their first chance to get to know classmates. As previously stated, students who establish friendships within their course tend to achieve higher academic success, underscoring the significance of such projects as facilitators for fostering camaraderie among first-year physics students (Alotaibi et al., 2023).

When asked “What skills would you like to improve on through taking part in the PCP?” the findings (as detailed in Table 3), though wide-ranging, did indicate a significant emphasis placed by students on bolstering their presentation skills. This inclination could stem from various factors, including recognising current deficiencies in this area, a proactive approach towards addressing potential challenges in future academic or professional endeavours, or an understanding of the critical role that practical presentation skills play in academic success and career advancement. Moreover, the desire to improve presentation abilities also reflects students’ aspirations for more comprehensive skill development, acknowledging the importance of communication proficiency in various aspects of their academic and professional lives. The students clearly recognise the importance of enhancing their communication and teamwork abilities. This highlights their enthusiasm for collaborative learning experiences and active engagement with peers.

Overall, the pre-project survey results revealed a marked gender discrepancy in confidence levels, with women exhibiting lower confidence in presentation skills than men despite initial apprehension expressed by both genders. This observation aligns with broader research indicating that women often harbour lower confidence levels despite comparable performance to men (Sneddon et al., 2009; Marshman et al., 2018). Furthermore, qualitative analysis using the General Inductive Method illuminates students’ aspirations and objectives within the PCP, emphasising their eagerness to enhance presentation skills and foster connections with peers. This underscores the project’s significance as a platform for skill development and social integration, echoing the importance of camaraderie in academic success. The strong emphasis on improving presentation skills suggests that students recognise its pivotal role in academic and professional advancement, underscoring the proactive approach toward skill development.

4.2. Result of the Post-PCP Survey

The post-project survey results detailed in Table 4 revealed a significant increase in students’ confidence levels in various aspects of teamwork, highlighting a key success of the PCP. This encompassed their ability to collaborate with peers, devise plans, and integrate contributions from others to create joint projects. Moreover, most students demonstrated high confidence in evaluating the quality of their work before its completion and employing feedback from teachers and peers for improvement.

Regarding presentation skills, the survey data displayed a diverse distribution across the Likert scale, indicating that confidence levels varied among students. This suggests that there is an influence of various personal factors on students’ confidence levels when presenting their posters and responding to audience inquiries. Despite this, the data depicted in Table 4 revealed a prevailing sense of confidence among students in their ability to effectively use presentation skills.

The analysis of post-project data revealed a notable improvement in confidence levels related to teamwork and presentation skills. Of particular note, whilst there was a significant difference in the confidence of male and female students in relation to working in a team and presenting (as shown in Table 2), in the post-PCP data, there was no longer any significant difference between these groups, suggesting the PCP had successfully “levelled the playing field” in these areas. This observed increase in confidence among women had been noted in previous informal evaluations of the course conducted in 2021–2022 and 2022–2023, reaffirming the PCP’s efficacy as a platform for bolstering women’s confidence. This is in agreement with the previous literature showing an increase in self-efficacy for female students in a team- and project-based introductory physics course (Espinosa et al., 2019).

When reflecting on which skills students felt had been improved by tackling the PCP, students indicated that they perceived their teamwork abilities as the most enhanced aspect of their participation in the PCP. This sentiment is likely attributed to the extensive collaborative efforts required to present group posters. Additionally, communication and presentation skills emerged among the top-mentioned areas of improvement, indicating a notable boost in students’ confidence levels in these domains.

When asked for suggestions for changes to the scheme, a recurring suggestion was to expand the topic choices beyond the current limitation of three options. This desire for increased flexibility in selecting poster topics suggests an avenue for enhancement in future project iterations. The initial restriction on topic choice stemmed from past experiences, where students gravitated towards similar topics, leading to repetition during presentation sessions. To address this, a proposed solution could involve allowing students to choose their topics with a contingency plan, such as a coin toss, in case of overlap.

The improvements highlighted in Table 6 served as pivotal reference points during the deliberations within the first-year physics focus groups, which are discussed below.

Overall, the post-project analysis revealed significant enhancements in confidence levels, particularly in teamwork and presentation skills. Notably, the gender disparity observed in confidence levels between men and women became statistically insignificant post-project, indicating significant growth among female participants. This increase in confidence among women aligns with previous evaluations of the course, reaffirming the PCP’s effectiveness in increasing women’s confidence. Additionally, qualitative analysis unveiled that students perceived significant improvements in teamwork, communication, and presentation skills due to participating in the PCP. Teamwork emerged as the most enhanced skill, likely due to the collaborative efforts required for group poster presentations. Moreover, the students expressed a desire for change, such as expanding topic choices for posters and providing more time for poster design, indicating areas for improvement in future iterations of the project. Based on these findings, recommendations for improving the PCP for future cohorts could be identified.

4.3. Comparing Before Versus After Responses

The Likert data from pre-project and post-project surveys were analysed against one another to determine if the project had been statistically significantly effective at enhancing skills, such as teamwork and presentation ability. ${\chi }^2$ analysis was performed on the before versus after data to determine any statistically significant differences. Table 11 details the statements where statistically significant results were found.

Table 11. Before versus after.

Statement	Group	SD%	D%	N%	A%	SA%	${\mathit{\chi }}^2$	p
I feel confident working in a team.	Before	1.0	4.4	20.0	50.7	23.9	18.1	<0.005
	After	1.9	0.5	4.6	50.7	42.3
I feel confident setting goals and creating a plan with my team.	Before	0.5	7.8	19.0	60.0	12.7	31.9	<0.001
	After	1.4	0.9	5.1	49.1	43.5
I feel confident in using contributions from others to create a joint project.	Before	0.4	5.4	17.1	55.6	21.5	16.6	<0.005
	After	1.4	3.3	5.1	45.6	44.6
I feel confident in creating a poster to communication my ideas.	Before	2.9	11.3	28.4	38.3	19.1	13.4	<0.01
	After	1.4	2.8	16.3	46.5	44.6
I feel confident in preparing and delivering an oral presentation.	Before	11.3	26.0	27.9	25.0	9.8	10.5	<0.05
	After	6.1	13.5	25.1	37.2	18.1
I feel confident answering questions in front of an audience.	Before	11.8	27.9	26.5	26.5	7.8	20.3	<0.001
	After	5.6	10.2	28.4	31.2	24.6
I feel confident in assessing the quality of my own work before it is completed.	Before	0	3.9	20.0	54.6	21.5	7.7	<0.05
	After	0.9	3.3	9.8	51.6	34.4

Results outlined in Table 9 reveal a significant enhancement in students’ confidence across various domains, including teamwork, goal setting within team dynamics, and addressing audience questions. Notably, most areas assessed for confidence growth demonstrated improvement, once again reflecting the effectiveness of the project in bolstering students’ self-assurance. However, the data does reveal a deficiency in students’ confidence regarding the self-assessment of their work quality before completion. This highlights a potential need for providing students with more examples demonstrating the expected standard of poster quality, facilitating a clearer understanding of expectations.

4.4. Physics 2–5 Student Survey Results

The findings presented in Table 7 indicated a prevailing consensus among students, with the majority expressing agreement or strong agreement that the PCP significantly contributed to enhancing their teamwork skills. This positive response agrees with the views of the level 1 students.

Similarly, the results detailed in Table 8 indicated that a significant proportion of students perceived having improved presentation skills because of the PCP. However, it is noteworthy that fifth-year students did not share this sentiment, primarily due to the disruption caused by the COVID-19 pandemic, which precluded their opportunity to present. Additionally, the virtual presentation format adopted by third- and fourth-year students may have influenced the perceived impact, explaining why second-year students who had in-person presentations reported the most substantial improvement.

When it came to changes that senior students would make to the PCP (Table 9), it becomes evident that the predominant request from respondents pertained to in-person interactions, a demand primarily influenced by the course’s transition to an online format during the COVID-19 pandemic. The second most prevalent suggestion was for an additional session dedicated to refining poster work, a need that had been addressed in the current academic year (2023–2024) through the provision of such sessions. This was not highlighted as a problem for the current cohort, indicating that the implemented suggestion had been successful. This also intersects with the desire for feedback on poster drafts before final submission, as this year’s additional session was strategically designed as a feedback opportunity. Furthermore, there was a recurring call for more comprehensive feedback on the presentation quality, suggesting a potential recommendation to course administrators for future improvements.

4.5. Focus Groups

4.5.1. First-Year Focus Group

The focus group comprised eight first-year physics students and was conducted three weeks after the PCP concluded, allowing adequate time for thorough data analysis so that key themes could be identified and validated by focus group attendees. The key themes identified from the discussion are detailed below.

Enhanced teamwork skills: Participants unanimously acknowledged a noticeable improvement in their teamwork abilities following their engagement in the project. They expressed appreciation for the randomised group assignments, emphasising that the diverse strengths among team members were effectively leveraged to achieve common goals. Students also found the PCP to be a valuable avenue for networking and forging friendships within their academic cohort.

More confident presenting: Students echoed the data analysis findings, affirming that the project significantly bolstered their confidence in public speaking. They found the experience of presenting in front of their peers rewarding, particularly in the supportive and informal classroom atmosphere. Several students mentioned feeling more prepared and less apprehensive for future presentations in university as a result.

Support in conflict resolution: Despite the observed enhancement in teamwork skills, participants disclosed their challenges in managing interpersonal conflicts within their teams. A recurring issue highlighted was absenteeism during the poster creation phase, followed by individuals showing up unprepared on presentation day. This underscores the potential necessity for faculty members to intervene and address such issues proactively. It is recommended that instructors address potential scenarios like these during the initial session of the PCP, providing students with guidance on conflict resolution strategies.

4.5.2. Physics 2, 3, 4, and 5 Focus Groups

Conducting four separate focus groups representing different academic years provided valuable insights into the evolution of the PCP over time. This comprehensive approach allowed the researcher to assess the progression of the PCP, particularly with insights from the fifth years who experienced the project’s inception.

Facilitation of lasting connections: All focus group participants universally acknowledged the enduring impact of the PCP, noting its pivotal role in fostering enduring friendships that persisted throughout their academic journey.

Sustained enhancement in presentation skills: With the exception of the fifth-year cohort affected by the COVID-19 pandemic, physics 2–5 focus groups consistently highlighted the project’s positive influence on their presentation abilities. Many attributed their gradual acclimation to university-level presentations to the PCP’s collaborative format, underscoring its role in fostering confidence over time.

Support in conflict resolution: Across all focus groups, participants recounted intra-team conflicts that posed challenges for effective collaboration. Similarly to observations from first-year students, absenteeism emerged as a recurring issue impacting group performance. The prevalence of this concern underscores the imperative for targeted interventions to address conflict resolution strategies within PCP teams, as evidenced by its recurrence across multiple cohorts.

4.6. Overall Discussion

The PCP has proven to be a highly effective tool in enhancing students’ confidence across critical domains, notably, teamwork and presentation skills. Qualitative insights emphasised the project’s impact, with students consistently identifying improvements in teamwork as the most pronounced benefit, followed closely by gains in communication and presentation abilities. Moreover, the PCP nurtured a sense of community and interconnectedness among participants, enriching their academic journey beyond mere skill acquisition.

Notably, the PCP addressed gender discrepancies in confidence levels, particularly in presentation skills, with a marked reduction in disparities following programme participation. This outcome reinforces broader research indicating persistent confidence gaps between genders, highlighting the PCP’s role in levelling the playing field and empowering all participants, especially women.

Feedback from students suggested potential enhancements to the PCP, such as providing a more comprehensive range of more in-depth topic choices and more time to design the poster. Additionally, addressing conflict resolution strategies within PCP teams emerged as a recurring theme via focus groups, suggesting the importance of proactive interventions to promote effective teamwork.

Continued evaluation and adaptation are essential for sustaining the PCP’s effectiveness and relevance. By heeding student feedback and evolving educational dynamics, the PCP can remain a cornerstone of transferable skills development and social integration within the physics curriculum. Staff interventions targeting conflict resolution can further optimise the project’s impact, ensuring a supportive and conducive learning environment.

The findings suggest that the PCP effectively enhances students’ confidence and skills, while encouraging connections and addressing challenges inherent in collaborative group work. As an evolving initiative, the PCP holds promise as a catalyst for holistic development and academic success, with ongoing refinement poised to unlock even more significant benefits in the future.

4.7. Limitations

The study presented here considers a particular intervention for physics students at the University of Glasgow in the UK. The evaluation focussed on the implementation in the 2023/24 academic year and also included focus groups with students in higher levels in 2023/24 who had completed the project in previous years. The results were in line with informal evaluations carried out in previous years, but further study is needed to demonstrate whether the improvement in confidence and gender differences noted are reproducible effects in the same context in future academic years. Gender differences in self-efficacy, identity, and belonging in physics have previously been noted, and we expect that the intervention may have similar results if used in introductory physics courses in other tertiary institutions within the UK and beyond, but we did not explore this. Given that the timing of the project is quite early in the programme, and the fact that the class includes both students in physics programmes and students whose main degree programme is in a different subject, a similarly designed intervention may have similar results in other subjects, but we do not have enough information to comment conclusively on this.

5. Conclusions

Physics students at the University of Glasgow demonstrated increased confidence in teamwork, presentation, and communication skills because of the PCP, indicating its success. However, there was no notable enhancement in students’ ability to self-assess the quality of their work, suggesting a need for more precise guidance on exemplary projects.

This study revealed a gender disparity in confidence regarding teamwork and presentation skills before the PCP, with women exhibiting lower confidence than men. Nevertheless, post-PCP, this gender discrepancy vanished, indicating significant growth in confidence among women to the extent that the disparity no longer exists. This result aligns with evaluations of the project from the previous two years, corroborating the positive impact of the PCP on gender-related confidence disparities.

Furthermore, the PCP yields long-lasting benefits for University of Glasgow physics students. Participants reported enhanced teamwork skills and emphasised the project’s role in encouraging enduring friendships. Additionally, the PCP positively impacted students’ presentation confidence, easing their transition into university-level presentations and reducing apprehension for future endeavours. However, some students recalled challenges with difficult teammates, suggesting the need for initial guidance on conflict resolution to support students encountering such situations.

In summary, the PCP has proven to be highly effective in enhancing physics students’ confidence using transferable and professional skills.