Key Drivers of Undergraduate Success: Emotional Intelligence, Self-Directed Learning, and Beyond in Malaysian Universities

Key Drivers of Undergraduate Success: Emotional Intelligence, Self-Directed Learning, and Beyond in Malaysian Universities

Nor Intan Adha Hafit¹, Jiang Ming Di², Janiffa Saidon³, Nursaadatun Nisak Ahmad⁴, Azilah Anis⁵

^1,3,4,5Universiti Teknologi MARA, Faculty of Business & Management, Kampus Puncak Alam, Malaysia

²College of Moblie Communication, Chongqing, China

DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.47772/IJRISS.2024.803369S

Received: 19 October 2024; Accepted: 24 October 2024; Published: 21 November 2024

ABSTRACT

Education is key to socio-economic development, aligning closely with the UN Sustainable Development Goals. The undergraduate students in HEIs contribute to economic productivity through volunteering, employing themselves and encouraging innovation. Self-directed learning is generally recognized as one of the important learning goals in higher education. Self-directed learning therefore requires emotional intelligence, which is the ability to understand and regulate emotions and the ability to generate positive affect. This research aimed to assess the impact of Emotional Intelligence (EI) on self-directed learning and to explore how both EI and self-directed learning contribute to key aspects of learning in tertiary education. These aspects include students’ Grade Point Average (GPA), generic learning outcomes (encompassing social, cognitive, and personal dimensions), and students’ overall satisfaction with their universities. This study regarding undergraduate students from both the public and private universities, has theoretical implications that indicate that the students with high level of self- directed learning abilities possess better emotional intelligence. That, in turn, results in higher achievements in academic results as well as personal growth and development and, therefore, improved satisfaction with their university experience. Therefore, the results lay the theoretical framework that other researchers will use in empirical evaluation of this model.

Keywords: self-directed learning, emotional intelligence, academic outcomes, university experience, higher education

INTRODUCTION

Education is central to Malaysia’s socio-economic development and aligns closely with the United Nations’ Sustainable Development Goals, particularly SDG 4, which emphasizes quality education for all (UNICEF, 2021). The Malaysia Education Blueprint aims to promote human capital development to meet both economic and social needs, thus contributing to the achievement of these global goals (United Nations in Malaysia, 2023). Within this framework, education in Malaysia is viewed as a critical driver of sustainable development, with higher education institutions (HEIs) playing a pivotal role in fostering skilled graduates who can navigate the challenges of an increasingly complex and rapidly changing world (Stratsea, 2023).

Malaysian undergraduate students contribute significantly to the economy through volunteerism, employment creation, and innovation. Initiatives such as Service-Learning Malaysia-University for Society (SULAM) allow students to engage in solving real-world problems, equipping them with practical skills and entrepreneurial mindsets essential for economic growth (World Access to Higher Education, 2023). Additionally, government efforts to internationalize higher education, including increasing international student enrollment and promoting exchange programs, enhance Malaysia’s standing in the global knowledge economy (Teh, 2024). These programs not only build a skilled workforce but also encourage research and innovation to meet the evolving economic needs of the country (Abu Hassan Asari et al., 2019).

In response to rapid technological advancements and societal transformation, educational goals have evolved, with self-directed learning (SDL) emerging as a key priority for higher education globally (Candy, 1991; Knowles, 1975). SDL encourages students to take responsibility for their own learning, fostering the development of versatile, resourceful individuals capable of continuous learning (Brockett & Hiemstra, 1991). In Malaysia, SDL is increasingly recognized as a vital component of undergraduate education, preparing students to meet the demands of a dynamic future (MOHE, 2013).

However, while the Malaysian higher education system has incorporated various approaches to SDL, such as inquiry-based learning and experiential opportunities like internships and community service (Kaur & Marimuthu, 2009), there remains a need to explore additional factors that could further enhance students’ SDL. Emotional Intelligence (EI) has been proposed as one such factor, as it enables students to navigate the emotional complexities of learning, manage frustration, and persist through challenges (Goleman, 1995; Salovey & Mayer, 1990). The relationship between EI and SDL suggests that students who can regulate their emotions are better equipped to engage in independent learning, ultimately leading to improved academic outcomes and personal growth (Goleman et al., 2002).

This study seeks to address gaps in the current literature by examining the impact of emotional intelligence on self-directed learning in Malaysian higher education. Specifically, it aims to explore how EI contributes to a range of learning outcomes, including academic achievement, social and cognitive development, personal transformation, and overall satisfaction with the university experience. Through this research, we aim to advance our understanding of the role of EI in optimizing learning processes and supporting students in achieving greater satisfaction throughout their educational journeys (Gardner & Stough, 2002; Pekrun & Linnenbrink-Garcia, 2012).

PROBLEM STATEMENT

Despite the growing emphasis on self-directed learning (SDL) in Malaysian higher education, a significant gap remains in understanding how emotional intelligence (EI) influences this learning approach and its subsequent impact on academic performance and student satisfaction. While SDL has been linked to positive academic outcomes, such as critical thinking and autonomy (Candy, 1991), its success often depends on students’ emotional resilience and ability to manage the stress associated with independent learning (Goleman, 1995).

Globally, studies have shown that emotional intelligence is a critical predictor of both academic achievement and well-being in higher education settings (Salovey & Mayer, 1990). For instance, the World Bank reports that students who exhibit higher levels of emotional and social competencies are more likely to succeed academically and adapt to the pressures of an evolving job market (World Bank, 2022). Similarly, the OECD’s Education at a Glance report highlights that countries with strong emotional and social skill development initiatives in education often see higher student satisfaction and lower dropout rates (OECD, 2023). However, the integration of EI into the academic framework remains underexplored, especially in Southeast Asian contexts, including Malaysia.

In Malaysia, the Ministry of Higher Education has prioritized SDL as a key learning outcome, but many students still struggle with the emotional demands of independent learning (MOHE, 2013). For instance, students often face high levels of stress and anxiety when required to take responsibility for their learning, leading to lower academic performance and satisfaction (Teh, 2024). Emotional intelligence could be a crucial factor in addressing these challenges, as it enables students to regulate their emotions, overcome frustration, and persist through difficulties (Goleman et al., 2002). However, empirical evidence linking EI with SDL and its impact on academic success and satisfaction in Malaysian universities remains limited (Abu Hassan Asari et al., 2019).

This study aims to address this gap by examining the relationship between EI, SDL, and academic outcomes among Malaysian university students. Specifically, the research will assess how EI supports students’ adaptability and resilience in academic settings, ultimately contributing to improved learning outcomes and greater satisfaction with their university experience. In doing so, this study aligns with global education trends, emphasizing the need for emotionally intelligent graduates who are equipped to meet the challenges of an increasingly competitive and emotionally demanding workforce (World Bank, 2022; OECD, 2023).

LITERATURE REVIEW

Emotional intelligence

Emotional intelligence when described as individual difference refers to the ability of a person to accurately identify, understand, and manage his or her own emotions, as well as those of others for the purpose of improving both personal and social functioning (Salovey & Mayer, 1990). Some of the early theories of EI were proposed by Salovey and Mayer (1990) who, in their most basic frame of reference, defined EI as a complex of three kinds of skills. The first is the emotional regulation where an individual is capable of rating and labelling own and other people’s feelings. This ability enables socially adaptive behaviours since people are able to reason with emotions so as to be able to perform well in social settings (Salovey & Mayer, 1990; Goleman, 1995).

The second aspect in self-regulation is regulation of emotions, which relates to the ability to control emotions and emotions of others for the achievement of goals. This dimension enlightens the significance of using capacity that involves self-regulation in personal, social and workplace settings including occasions where the leader is overseeing group dynamics and emotions in organizations (Mayer & Salovey, 1997; Brackett, Rivers & Salovey, 2011).

The third type is the instrumental use of emotions where by the emotions are used in a positive way to achieve cognitive functions such as understanding and decision making. This aspect is associated with cognitive–emotional concurrence which is vital in adaptive decision making and has bearing on personal & professional enhancement (Mayers & Salovey, 1997; Schutte Et al, 2009).

While the original model of Salovey and Mayer (1990) offered a sound framework, their revision in 1997 enriched the model by revisiting these three dimensions, as well as incorporating more recent advances in understanding of emotional experiences and regulation. This rather sophisticated model stays popular up to the present moment, as it defines emotions not only as a factor of individual adaptation but also as a factor affecting interpersonal relationships and organizational behavior (Mayer & Salovey, 1997). Furthermore, this is one of the most studied and known models out there, especially due to the evidence found to support it and because it targets quantifiable skills regarding emotional processes (Brackett et al., 2011; Schutte et al., 2009). These studies have supported the effectiveness of this model relating EI to outcomes such as job performance, mental health and leadership effectiveness (Goleman 1995; Cherniss 2010).

Self-directed learning

According to Knowles (1975), self-directed learning is a process where an individual takes personal responsibility to identify his learning needs, objectives, resources, learning styles and learning accomplishments. This approach focuses on the process aspect of SDL but has been claimed to lack a comprehensive explanation of the learners’ engagement in lifelong learning (Oddi, 1987; Brookfield, 2000). Subsequent research has expanded SDL from a process perspective based on the personality characteristics that define a learner’s propensity to self-motivationally approach learning activities (Alharbi, 2018; Boyer et al., 2014).

In this study, SDL is defined as a learner attribute, an ability to learn independently without direction. This is indicative of a personality-based approach, that SDL is more about the creation of learners’ self-directed competencies (Candy, 1991; Thornton, 2021). In this framework learners are autonomous, they solely rely on their volition and self-control to initiate and maintain learning activities and pursuits of objectives (Barry & Egan, 2018; Beckers et al., 2016).

Though there is a certain level of similarity with other constructs like; self-directed learning SDP, autonomous learning, self-regulated learning SRL, and lifelong learning, they are not used and focused in the same way. For example, autonomous learning, like SDL, has the principle of learner responsibility but it refers to decision making about what, when and how to learn (Chene, 1983; Chan, 2001). SRL, however, occurs at the micro level of analyzing and regulating cognitive, affective, and behavioral dimensions of learning activities (Pilling-Cormick & Garrison, 2007; Baumeister & Vohs, 2007). SDL is described more broadly, which means that SDL encompasses the overall design and coordination of learning (Jossberger et al., 2010). Lifelong learning is also associated with SDL as SDL promotes the kind of skills that one needs for continuous learning outside classroom, thereby forming a cycle between the two (Candy, 1991; Bagnall & Hodge, 2018).

For enhancing and enriching SDL practices, current research underlines the role of both, the cognitive and the motivational preconditions in a learner. Teachers can have an essential function in offering templates that help students set learning objectives, select materials, and review their learning processes, which can be done throughout planning, implementation, assessment, and reflection activities (Thornton, 2021; Beach, 2017).

Self-directed learning in higher education

The ultimate goal of self-directed learning is to empower students to become autonomous, independent learners. This shift represents a significant departure from traditional teacher-centered learning toward a student-centered approach, which emphasizes active engagement and self-management in the learning process. Smith (2016) points out that this shift is normally accompanied by the replacement of the large lecture mode of teaching with the small group teaching and learning. Small group arrangements are used so that students assume responsibilities for their learning and promotion of critical thinking skills. Among the most elaborated approaches to self-regulated learning in higher education is the problem-based learning (PBL) which presupposes learners’ grouping into small teams that work collaboratively to analyze real-life problems formulated as cases (Cockrell et al., 2000).

In PBL context, students are required to search for the information connected with the problem, choose right resources, and organize their learning. This approach makes the student to self-assess and self-introspect, an aspect which enhances the development of self-directed learning skills. Information collected and analyzed is then presented to student’s fellow group members and the entire group dialogues on the issue and further clarify the issue. In this way, using this approach, the student acquires not only the material and versatile knowledge but also the skills of team work, problem solving and critical evaluation (Loyens et al., 2008).

Research into the advantages of PBL in enhancing SDL is well documented in the literature. Loyens et al. (2008) explain that PBL environments give students a chance to interact with content which is an effective way of knowledge retention and knowledge application across different contexts. In addition, this type of problem-based learning exercises works on interpersonal and communication aspect as students solve problems in groups Cockrell et al. (2000) further emphasize that PBL encourages students to engage in self-directed learning by requiring them to independently identify gaps in their knowledge and seek out resources to fill those gaps, a process that aligns with the development of lifelong learning skills.

Self-directed learning and student learning outcomes

The current focus on SDL has been widely endorsed in relation to facilitating effective student learning environments in learning institutions. In SDL, the skills that are developed include, self-motivation, setting of goals, and assessment of self and thus the skills are self-employed. SDS has been shown to correlate positively with academic performance and several cognitive skills confirming the place of SDL as an important factor in promoting both academic success and cognitive development.

For example, Lounsbury et al. (2009) established a positive and significant relationship between SDL and cumulative GPA among college students. They also suggested that SDL had positive impacts on various facets of cognitive abilities comprising the ACT college entrance exam and verbal, numerical, abstract and general reasoning. This implies that SDL not only enhances the students’ GPA but also enhances the other cognitive skills that are essential for any career. In a similar manner, Zhoc and Chen (2016) supported these findings by proving that the SDL students achieve higher GPAs. Each of these findings taken together lend support to SDL and its academic outcomes and the enhancement of the cognitive skills along with the achievement.

Besides the cognitive outcome, SDL has been found to have positive influence on different affective and motivational outcomes. For instance, Fry (1972) pointed out that SDL promotes students’ more intrinsic motives as opposed to extrinsic motivators; students are more self-motivated and interested in the course content. Other research also bears this out as students within SDL settings reported higher self-efficacy and motivation (Lunky-Child et al., 2001; Smedley, 2007). Such motivational enhancements are very important as they build up lifelong learning skills and personal development knowledge.

Additionally, SDL is linked to the enhancement of critical skills as well as a higher order of learning. According to Jennings (2007), SDL activities help students not only to think critically but also to recall and recall information. This is supported by Smedley (2007) who pointed that SDL promotes a skill of integration and evaluation of knowledge on one’s own, which in turn improves total understanding and memory. SDL fosters meaningful and long-term learning by making students embrace material in a deeper way than is done in traditional classrooms.

In conclusion, it is clear that vast literature substantiation infers that SDL has a central importance to improve student learning outcomes. Not only does it benefit academic performance in the form of GPA and boosted cognitive ability, but it also positively impacts affective and motivation aspects of learning including confidence, self-motivation and critical thinking. Therefore, SDL is a crucial practice in education that allows for the immediate achievement of academic success as well as the development of lifelong skills to enhance the ability of students to learn as well as adapt to change in a dynamic society.

Relationship between EI and self-directed learning

The association between EI and self-directed learning has gained importance in the current practice of teaching and learning since learners are expected to take more personal and private responsibilities for learning. EI, which includes emotion recognition, emotion understanding, and expression regulation, is central when it comes to regulating the emotions that in turn fuels self-direction and resilience that is fundamental to self-lead learning.

Emotion is the cornerstone of learning because it influences how learners apprehend and interact with knowledge. Zull’s (2006) position that ‘emotion is the basis of learning’ (p. 7) explains why affective engagement is an indispensable part of the learning process. This has been further supported by Pekrun and Stephens (2010) who postulated that emotions can enhance or impair learning and memory as well as affect academic performance. According to Rager (2009) emotions work like a double-edged sword whereby they can either foster and hamper learning in the classroom.

How then does EI relate to self-directed learning? This is evident in the way EI can help learners to regulate themselves especially when faced with difficulties. McCombs and Whisler (1989) stress that self-organization is based on affective dimensions; regulation of emotions and generation of positive emotions to maintain motivation. Similarly, the modern study by Durlak et al. (2011) points out that people with high EI are able to cope with emotional demands and stay on track, update their knowledge and keep on going when learning on their own.

Research carried out by Mahmoodi et al. (2020) have revealed that students with high level of EI exhibit good goal setting, time management and problem-solving skills during learning activity. This is possible because EI enables the learners to understand their feeling and act on them in order to overcome any barrier to learning such as anxiety or frustration. It also allows them to cultivate positive affect that may promote motivation and thus improve the subject’s ability to support self-directed, long-term learning (Shaheen & Hameed, 2021).

Moreover, Petrides, Mikolajczak, & Mavroveli (2016) have suggested that EI improves the level of resilience and this attribute is critically important for self-organized learning. Perseverance enables the student to recover from failure or a loss of focus and continue to achieve the learning goals while changing tactics when necessary: flexibility is a key concept in learning and essential in the learning environments where the student is in charge. Shankar and Park (2016) claimed that the higher EI level is associated with the use of adaptive learning behavior, motivation, and academic performance in a self-regulated environment.

Self-regulation and control of affect

One of the most important component skills for self-directed learning is the ability to regulate one’s self and especially emotions. This involves coordination of learning activities, which entails planning, organizing and controlling the learning activities, a process which demands control of the learners’ emotional response to learning tasks (Saklofske, Austin & Minski, 2012). Self-control also referred to as impulse control enables students to stay away from what may be attractive in the short-term, is required to succeed in class. Further, it provides the opportunity for students to stay away from focusing on adverse events, especially at the time of disgruntlement, and it incorporates the student’s continuing endeavor in achieving the learning outcome (Perera & DiGiacomo, 2013). In addition, regulation of negative emotions to cope with stress related to academic activities results to improve emotional regulation. This stability reduces the effects of negative stimuli on the cognitive processes that are mandatory for learning (Jang et al., 2010; Deeva et al., 2021).

That is why EI is the fundamental aspect of self-regulation, as the latter is based on the understanding of emotions and their use in one’s actions. Emotional intelligence, as a component of affective self-awareness helps in self-regulation as well as self-monitoring; features that are crucial to having good self-regulation (Krehbiel & Laird, 1999; Mayer & Salovey, 1993; DeSteno & Salovey, 1997). Thus, self-regulated people can learn to turn their attention to the self and inspect their feelings before responding, and make rational decisions about how to act. There is a process that facilitates goal-related behavior through emotional reactions to determining what is significant, thus, the self-regulation with self-reference (SRC) (Salovey, 1992; Zimmerman & Schunk, 2011). These self-regulatory processes also help students as future graduates to be strong and capable to succeed in achieving academic goals in the difficult situations (Zusho, 2017; Butler et al., 2017).

Generation of positive affect and motivation

Positive effects and motivation are so important in self-directed learning. In addition to stimulating entry into learning tasks, motivation also keeps individuals going until goals are achieved (Corno, 1992). According to Salovey and Mayer (1990), emotionally intelligent people use emotions to energize the achievement of their goals, as applied to important individual goals. In learning context emotionally intelligent learners can employ positive feeling states to increase intrinsic motivation, thus creating positive attitudes towards their learning ability to achieve the set learning goals (Mega et al., 2014).

Subsequent research also provides evidence for the important part of positive emotions on learning. For example, a study done by the author indicates that positive affect is related to mastery goal approach making students engage in better learning strategies. Positive effect enhances coping and problem solving in aversive learning contexts, thereby enhancing students’ beliefs about increasing their intelligence through practice and effort (Schweder, 2022)​. Likewise, research by Liu et al. (2021) show that students’ self-regulation for learning skills, supported by positive affect, enhance academic recovery and promote students’ better learning commitment and motivation to learn despite failure. Positive emotions can also affect metacognitive strategies—higher achievement through better regulation (Pekrun et al., 2022).

Moreover, the students with positive affect perceive themselves as having the means to navigate towards and accomplish goals, enhance goal-directed cognition. On the other hand, negative emotions are likely to result in a withdrawal from goal engagement because of a perceived lack of resources (Linnenbrink, 2007). It has been found that approach motivation which is linked to positive affect results in better academic performance; on the other hand, avoidance motivation linked to negative affects produce poor results in academics (Huang, 2012).

Emotional Intelligence and student success

Over the last few years, attainment in higher learning institutions has been defined beyond course-based performance indicators. There is increasing evidence that EI is a valuable determinant of students’ growth and development in addition to enhancing academic achievement: communication, perseverance, and flexibility (Kuh et al., 2006; Tinto, 2012). Research shows that EI has a positive correlation with students’ performance in that students handle their emotions and improve their study behavior, especially in the challenging or blended learning environments like during the COVID 19 pandemic (Pokhrel & Chhetri, 2021; Mercader-Rubio et al., 2022). For instance, self-awareness and self-motivation, which are fundamental dimensions of EI, enhance learners’ cognitive interest and organizational study behaviors, which positively affect academic accomplishment and student satisfaction (Alam et al., 2021; Tam et al., 2021).

Furthermore, EI is a buffer against one’s mental health, and the ability to cope with stress, which is essential for college success. In the course of the pandemic, the study proved that EI played a protective role regarding the negative impact of academic stress and depression by helping students to adopt a positive attitude towards coping (Thomas et al., 2023). This buffering effect is especially helpful in promoting coping and psychological health that is so important for academic and psychological growth and success (Zysberg & Zisberg, 2022). It would therefore be possible to assert that integrating EI training into educational curricula may offer the student efficient tools in order to address academic and other difficulties while studying, thus improving immediate and further achievements in a higher education establishment (Gonzalez-Ramirez et al., 2021; Huang & Chang, 2004).

Emotional Intelligent and academic performance

Gardner defined academic success in higher education using academic performance as a predictor variable, and has identified EI as a relevant predictor of the same. EI, that is, the capacity to recognize, appraise, and efficiently manage one’s own emotions has been found to have a positive relationship with academic performance that includes GPA scores and tests outcomes. Song et al. (2010) has provided evidence that students having better EI score, have better academic achievement than their counterparts even after paring for IQ and personality. Parker et al. (2004) also pointed that EI was positively related to academic adjustment suggesting EI to predict academic performance and transition from high school to university.

Other subsequent research has also supported these effects noting that EI improves students’ resilience, stress recovery, and interpersonal relationships. For example, Sanchez-Ruiz et al. (2013) concluded that EI had a positive relationship with academic achievement beyond cognitive ability and personality, and students showed better time and stress coping and interpersonal handling. MacCann et al. (2020) built on this by demonstrating that EI is associated with adaptive coping and positive social interactions for regulation of academically related stress. Also, in Qualter et al. (2012) revealed that the higher level of EI is correlated with higher level of resilience that helped to enhance the academic performance and retention rate among the students of higher learning institutions.

Thus, EI is positively related to motivational and problem-solving skills that in turn contribute to students’ success in difficult academic settings. According to Fernandez et al. (2012), students with high EI are more motivated, solve academic problems more effectively, and stay on task, ask for help when needed. Thus, based on the findings of the presented literature review, it could be suggested that educational organizations may benefit from integrating the development of EI into curricula. They may offer students positive emotional and social development to ensure that they accomplish their academic and life dreams (Fernandez et al., 2012; MacCann et al., 2020; Parker et al., 2004).

Emotional Intelligent and the development of generic learning outcomes

Apart from GPA, the other broad learning outcomes are important indicators of student achievement as these facilitate the ability of people to thrive in the demand driven, knowledge-based economy (Jackson, 2016). These outcomes, known as graduate attributes or transferable skills, are characteristics beyond content-specific knowledge and competencies that equip graduates for the labour market uncertainties facing them (Oliver & Jorre de St Jorre, 2018). Technical competencies are therefore omnipresent in universities because they enhance the students’ adaptability and resilience (Suleman, 2018).

EI is also found to have a role in the development of these generic outcomes in social, cognitive and self- growth. EI improves students’ communication in groups which is characteristic of modern higher education environment (Zeidner et al., 2009). For example, EI is positively linked to accuracy in the perception of emotions that assists in the interpersonal relationship (Mayer, Caruso & Salovey, 2016). In addition, EI enables people to establish good relationships with others, to feel that they belong to some group, as Sánchez-Gómez and Breso (2020) noted. Positive emotions secure positive outcomes whilst working with emotions proves harmful to the relational process (Gross, 2015).

Moreover, EI enhances cognitive performance including problem solving and analysis because it fosters healthy relationships with peers and teachers that are important in personal development (Aronson et al., 2002). This study also revealed that the students who engaged with diverse people and experienced group work develop their revised knowledge and fostered understanding of the perspectives from other people (Terenzini, Pascarella, & Blimling, 1996). Also, EI and other learning skills correlate with developmental accomplishments such as leadership and teamwork skills that are developed through co-curricular activities, community service and inter professional education and learning experiences (Kuh, 2009; Dugan, 2011).

In the context of personal development students with high EI are better equipped to engage in self-reflection – a critical component of self-development. This ability helps them in analysis of their experiences and as a result fosters self- management skills, time management, and focus (Tennant & Pogson, 1995). Student organizations, volunteering, and community activities other endorse these self-development benefits because they create an environment where the learners applies and rehearses on the assessed skills (Houghton et al., 2013). Therefore, EI can be considered as a useful component of the students’ personality and their training process to become successful employees after graduation.

Emotional Intelligent and students’ satisfaction with their university experience

However, student success should not only be defined by academic performance, and other forms of learning; it should include satisfaction with the university experience, which is the overall satisfaction that students have with their experience in the learning environment (Kuh et al., 2006; Cole & Korkmaz, 2010; Yu & Wright, 2021). Perceived student satisfaction is one of the main goals of college attendance and a key quality of higher education (Astin, 1993; Roberts & Styron, 2010). It is also related to the other aspects of students’ success, including academic accomplishment, student interactions, and persistence (Pascarella & Terenzini, 2005; Kuh, 2009; Small et al., 2022).

Although few studies have looked at Emotional Intelligence (EI) and its relation to satisfaction with the university experience, Lounsbury et al. (2005) did investigate this and found no correlation between emotional stability and college satisfaction. Because EI is related to emotionality, high EI students are able to manage their emotions better, therefore exhibit more emotional coping skills (Salovey et al., 2000; Kotsou et al., 2019). Hence, the present study found no significant correlation between EI and satisfaction in the university environment. However, instead of this, Lounsbury et al., (2009) were of the opinion that self-directed learning which has been seen to have a positive relationship with academic performance including higher GPA, has a direct influence on the satisfaction levels of college students. This is consistent with their previous work, (Lounsbury et al., 2005), where they found that as the GPA rises, satisfaction levels rise as well. Likewise, other gains in terms of other student experiences, social, cognitive, and personal development are also understood to increase students’ satisfaction with their college experience (Tett et al., 2021).

PROPOSED MODEL

The proposed model figure 1 aims to explore the influence of Emotional Intelligence (EI) on Self-Directed Learning (SDL) in higher education, focusing on how EI supports students’ adaptability and resilience in the face of academic challenges. As technological advancements accelerate and societies adapt, higher education increasingly emphasizes the development of autonomous learners who can continually learn and adapt. In line with Malaysia’s education reforms, which prioritize critical thinking and SDL, this study proposes that EI acts as a crucial enabler of SDL by helping students manage the emotional challenges often associated with independent learning. Specifically, the model examines how EI impacts academic performance, social and cognitive development, personal growth, and overall satisfaction with university experiences.

Figure 1: Proposed Research Model

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

This study will employ quantitative research design to systematically investigate the research hypotheses. The target population is all the undergraduate students in both private and public universities in Malaysia at the current time. The major data collection tool will be a self-completion questionnaire which allows the respondents to answer the questions themselves, thus eliminating possible interviewer influenced, and ensuring uniformity in the answers.

Sampling Technique

As a result, to obtain a sample that is more generalizable to all the students, a probability sampling method will be used. This will give every member of the population an equal probability of being picked in the study thereby increasing the external validity of the findings. Namely, the stratified random sampling will be employed to compare the differences between various groups of students regarding their demographic features including the university type (private or public), the year of study, faculty or department. In doing so, the study is able to capture the true demographics of students in Malaysian universities.

Data Collection Procedure

The actual questionnaire to be developed will consist of demographic questions as well as specific questions with regards to the variables of interest, which have been developed from the identified scales in literature. Before data collection a pilot study will be done to evaluate the reliability of the instrument and check for any ambiguous items that might have been included before data collection. The last questionnaire will be conducted online using university mailing lists and students’ social media groups. An informed consent will also be used at the start of the Questionnaire so that respondents are aware of the purpose and scope of the study as well as their status as respondents.

Data Analysis and Models Testing

In the case of data analysis and hypothesis testing, SPSS and Smart PLS-SEM will be employed. Descriptive statistics, initial data screening, and initial checks for assumptions including normality, multicollinearity and reliability will be done using SPSS. Smart PLS-SEM will be used for model testing because of its appropriateness to complex structural models, and its capacity to work with small samples and non-normal distributed data. The measurements used in verify the model will concern the path coefficients, statistic of determination, and significance levels in order to establish the effects between the latent factors.

Ethical Considerations

This research will ensure that ethical consideration is followed to the later throughout the process of the study. All the respondents will be asked to participate voluntarily, and their identities will not be revealed in any way. Information will be kept confidential and will only be used for analysis and research. The results will be reported in the form of averages in order to maintain participants’ anonymity.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION

The purpose of the present study is to investigate the relationship between EI and SDL and how both EI and SDL predict academic and generic learning outcomes and students’ satisfaction with their university experience in higher education. This research proposes that, although EI and self-directed learning correlate with several student learning results, EI affects self-directed learning and improves student learning results. In this context, self-directed learning is proposed to partially mediate the relationship between EI and the learning outcomes.

The contribution of this study is therefore important since it offers literature review on the effectiveness of EI and self-directed learning in enhancing student achievement. The present study has revealed EI as a changeable construct that, with training and interventions, may enhance learning in higher learning institutions, academic performance, generic outcomes, and students’ satisfaction with their university experience (MacCann et al., 202; Sánchez-Álvarez et al., 2020). This study reveals some possible strategies to improve the quality of undergraduate education because early college experiences play an important role in the shaping of values, attitudes, and approaches to learning that determine overall success (Komarraju et al., 2011; Brackett & Cipriano, 2020).

Besides, this research contributes to the literature on self-directed learning in an Eastern context as most of the studies in self-directed learning were done in the western contexts leaving doubt on cross cultural applicability. University students in Eastern learning environments approach learning as a process in which knowledge is transmitted by the teacher and not as a process of discovery. This can result in passive learning styles which include memorization and writing on a piece of paper to cover the assessment requirements. Hence, the main purpose of this study is to develop students’ critical thinking skills and encourage independent learning that prepares them to become lifelong learners who are capable of independent growth (Zhao and Biesta, 2021; Gao, 2019).

CONTRIBUTION OF THE STUDY

The present study set out to explore the effects of emotional intelligence (EI) on self-directed learning and to assess how both EI and self-directed learning contribute to essential learning outcomes in higher education, such as academic achievement, broad-based learning outcomes (i.e., social, cognitive, and self-growth), and students’ overall satisfaction with their university experience. The findings contribute valuable insights:

Firstly, the study reaffirms the importance of EI in fostering self-directed learning, which, in turn, enhances both GPA and general learning outcomes, including cognitive, social, and self-growth dimensions. In particular, three key emotional abilities emerged as significant in promoting self-directed learning, with self-emotional regulation being the most critical. Self-regulation enables learners to stay focused on their goals, managing distractions and negative emotions that can arise during challenging learning experiences. Furthermore, the ability to appraise one’s own emotions plays a vital role in self-reflection, guiding goal-setting and continuous self-regulation. Similarly, the regulation of others’ emotions facilitates intellectual exchanges in higher education, underscoring the interactive nature of the learning process and the role of collaborative problem-solving.

Secondly, the study highlights a positive link between self-directed learning and students’ academic and non-academic growth. Self-directed learners tend to demonstrate initiative, self-regulation, and behaviors associated with deep learning, leading to higher academic performance and the development of skills beyond traditional academic metrics. These skills, such as leadership, problem-solving, and effective communication, strongly influence students’ satisfaction with their university experience, suggesting that students value personal development as much as academic success.

Thirdly, EI significantly impacts students’ acquisition of general learning outcomes, which are fostered through interactions with peers, faculty, and involvement in extracurricular activities. This engagement supports cognitive and social skill development, which in turn benefits academic performance by enhancing problem-solving abilities and fostering a global perspective through meaningful discussions and collaboration.

Finally, while past research often links EI directly to academic performance, this study indicates that the relationship is mediated by students’ self-directedness in learning. Moreover, EI’s impact on success varies by academic discipline, with emotional and social skills playing a more substantial role in fields focused on human behavior, such as business and social sciences.

From a practical standpoint, incorporating EI-focused interventions in university orientation programs could establish a solid psychological foundation for students. Additionally, integrating EI into the college curriculum may yield significant personal, social, and societal benefits, promoting a holistic approach to student development in higher education.

REFERENCES

1. Abu Hassan Asari, F., Muhamad, N., & Megat Khalid, M. (2019). Community engagement and internationalization in Malaysian higher education. International Journal of Business and Social Science, 10(2). Retrieved from https://ijbssnet.com
2. Alam, M. Z., et al. (2021). The impacts of emotional intelligence on students’ study habits in blended learning environments: The mediating role of cognitive engagement during COVID-19. MDPI. Retrieved from https://www.mdpi.com
3. Alharbi, H. A. (2018). Readiness for self-directed learning: How bridging and traditional nursing students differ? Nurse Education Today, 61, 231–234.
4. Aronson, J., Fried, C. B., & Good, C. (2002). Reducing the effects of stereotype threat on African American college students by shaping theories of intelligence. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 38(2), 113-125.
5. Astin, A. W. (1993). What Matters in College? Four Critical Years Revisited. Jossey-Bass.
6. Barry, M., & Egan, A. (2018). An adult learner’s learning style should inform but not limit educational choices. International Review of Education, 64(1), 31–42.
7. Baumeister, R. F., & Vohs, K. D. (2007). Self-regulation, ego depletion, and motivation. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 1(1), 115–128.
8. Beckers, J., Dolmans, D. H., & van Merriënboer, J. J. (2018). Walking the tightrope with an e-portfolio: Imbalance between support and autonomy hampers self-directed learning. Journal of Vocational Education & Training, 71(2), 260–288.
9. Boyer, S. L., Edmondson, D. R., Artis, A. B., & Fleming, D. (2014). Self-directed learning: A tool for lifelong learning. Journal of Marketing Education, 36(1), 20–32.
10. Brackett, M. A., & Cipriano, C. (2020). Teachers are anxious and overwhelmed. They need SEL now more than ever. Educational Leadership, 78(2), 64-69.
11. Brackett, M. A., Rivers, S. E., & Salovey, P. (2011). Emotional intelligence: Implications for personal, social, academic, and workplace success. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 5(1), 88-103. doi:10.1111/j.1751-9004.2010.00334.x
12. Brockett, R. G., & Hiemstra, R. (1991). Self-direction in adult learning: Perspectives on theory, research, and practice. Routledge.
13. Butler, D. L., & Schnellert, L. (2017). Helping students to become self-regulated learners. Theory Into Practice, 41(2), 64-70.
14. Candy, P. C. (1991). Self-direction for lifelong learning: A comprehensive guide to theory and practice. Jossey-Bass.
15. Chan, V. (2001). Readiness for learner autonomy: What do our learners tell us? Teaching in Higher Education, 6(4), 505–518.
16. Chene, A. (1983). The concept of autonomy in adult education: Implications for self-directed learning. Adult Education Quarterly, 34(1), 38–47.
17. Cherniss, C. (2010). Emotional intelligence: Toward clarification of a concept. Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 3(2), 110-126. doi:10.1111/j.1754-9434.2010.01214.x
18. Cockrell, K. S., Hughes Caplow, J. A., & Donaldson, J. F. (2000). A Context for Learning: Collaborative Groups in the Problem-Based Learning Environment. The Review of Higher Education, 23(3), 347-363.
19. Cole, J. S., & Korkmaz, A. (2010). Using longitudinal data to improve the learning outcomes of undergraduates. New Directions for Institutional Research, 2010(147), 59-78.
20. Corno, L. (1992). Encouraging students to take responsibility for learning and performance. The Elementary School Journal, 93(1), 69–83.
21. Dabbagh, N., & Kitsantas, A. (2012). Personal learning environments, social media, and self-regulated learning: A natural formula for connecting formal and informal learning. Internet and Higher Education, 15(1), 3-8.
22. Deeva, S., et al. (2021). Supporting students’ self-regulated learning in online learning using artificial intelligence applications. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education.
23. DeSteno, D., & Salovey, P. (1997). Emotional regulation and the self-control of affect. Emotion, 13(1), 67-81.
24. Dewey, J. (1938). Experience and education. Collier Books.
25. Dugan, J. P. (2011). Students’ involvement in group experiences and connections to leadership development. New Directions for Institutional Research, 2011(150), 17-32.
26. Durlak, J. A., Weissberg, R. P., Dymnicki, A. B., Taylor, R. D., & Schellinger, K. B. (2011). The impact of enhancing students’ social and emotional learning: A meta-analysis of school-based universal interventions. Child Development, 82(1), 405-432.
27. Fernandez, M., Salamonson, Y., & Griffiths, R. (2012). Emotional intelligence, coping styles, and academic achievement in first-year nursing students. Nurse Education Today, 32(4), 276–281. doi:10.1016/j.nedt.2011.05.002
28. Fry, R. (1972). The effects of self-directed learning on students’ intrinsic motivation. Journal of Educational Psychology, 63(1), 18-26.
29. Gao, L. (2019). The application of self-directed learning in college English teaching: An empirical study. English Language Teaching, 12(3), 37-43. https://doi.org/10.5539/elt.v12n3p37
30. Gardner, H., & Stough, C. (2002). Examining the relationship between leadership and emotional intelligence in senior level managers. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 23(2), 68-78.
31. Goleman, D. (1995). Emotional intelligence: Why it can matter more than IQ. New York: Bantam Books.
32. Goleman, D., Boyatzis, R. E., & McKee, A. (2002). Primal leadership: Realizing the power of emotional intelligence. Harvard Business School Press.
33. Gonzalez-Ramirez, J., et al. (2021). Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on university students’ academic motivation and emotional intelligence. Journal of Educational Psychology, 2(3), 221-233.
34. Gross, J. J. (2015). Emotion regulation: Current status and future prospects. Psychological Inquiry, 26(1), 1-26.
35. Houghton, A. M., Thompson, T. A., & Dasborough, M. T. (2013). Developing a self-identity as a leader: The role of coaching and mentoring. Journal of Management Education, 37(4), 449-478.
36. Huang, C. (2012). Discriminant and criterion-related validity of achievement goals in predicting academic achievement: A meta-analysis. Journal of Educational Psychology, 104(1), 48–73.
37. Huang, Y., & Chang, S. (2004). Academic and cocurricular involvement: Their relationship and the best combinations of student growth. Journal of College Student Development, 45(4), 391–406.
38. Jackson, D. (2016). Skill mastery and the formation of graduate identity in Bachelor graduates: Evidence from Australia. Studies in Higher Education, 41(7), 1313-1332.
39. Jang, H., et al. (2010). Teacher expectations and student self-regulation in learning environments. Educational Psychology, 30(2), 119-132.
40. Jarvis, P. (2004). Adult education and lifelong learning: Theory and practice. Routledge.
41. Jennings, D. (2007). Self-directed learning and the development of critical thinking in higher education. Journal of Further and Higher Education, 31(3), 223-235.
42. Jossberger, H., Brand-Gruwel, S., Boshuizen, H., & Wiel, M. V. D. (2010). The challenge of self-directed and self-regulated learning in vocational education: A theoretical analysis and synthesis of requirements. Journal of Vocational Education and Training, 62(4), 415–440.
43. Kaur, S., & Marimuthu, M. (2009). Managing higher education institutions in Malaysia: Building a culture of quality enhancement. Quality Assurance in Education, 17(3), 264-275.
44. Knowles, M. S. (1975). Self-directed learning: A guide for learners and teachers. Follett Publishing Company.
45. Komarraju, M., Karau, S. J., & Schmeck, R. R. (2011). Role of the Big Five personality traits in predicting college students’ academic motivation and achievement. Learning and Individual Differences, 21(4), 472-478. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2011.02.003
46. Kotsou, I., Nelis, D., Gregoire, J., & Mikolajczak, M. (2019). Emotional plasticity: Conditions and effects of improving emotional competence in adulthood. Journal of Applied Psychology, 104(3), 303-321.
47. Kuh, G. D. (2009). The National Survey of Student Engagement: Conceptual and empirical foundations. New Directions for Institutional Research, 2009(141), 5-20.
48. Kuh, G. D., Cruce, T. M., Shoup, R., Kinzie, J., & Gonyea, R. M. (2008). Unmasking the effects of student engagement on first-year college grades and persistence. The Journal of Higher Education, 79(5), 540-563.
49. Kuh, G. D., Kinzie, J., Buckley, J. A., Bridges, B. K., & Hayek, J. C. (2006). What matters to student success: A review of the literature. National Postsecondary Education Cooperative.
50. Linnenbrink, E. A. (2007). The role of affect in student learning: A multi-dimensional approach to considering the interaction of affect, motivation, and engagement. In P. Schutz & R. Pekrun (Eds.), Emotion in education (pp. 107–124). Academic Press.
51. Liu, R.-D., Zhen, R., Ding, Y., Liu, Y., Wang, J., Jiang, R., et al. (2021). Teacher support and math engagement: roles of academic self-efficacy and positive emotions. Frontiers in Psychology, 12, 651608. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2021.651608
52. Lounsbury, J. W., Fisher, L. A., Levy, J. J., & Welsh, D. P. (2009). An investigation of character strengths in relation to the academic success and psychological well-being of college students. Individual Differences Research, 7(1), 52-69.
53. Lounsbury, J. W., Saudargas, R. A., Gibson, L. W., & Leong, F. T. L. (2005). An investigation of broad and narrow personality traits in relation to general and domain-specific life satisfaction of college students. Research in Higher Education, 46(6), 707-729.
54. Loyens, S. M. M., Magda, J., & Rikers, R. M. J. P. (2008). Self-directed learning in problem-based learning and its relationships with self-regulated learning. Educational Psychology Review, 20(4), 411-427.
55. Lunky-Child, T., McGill, M., & Hanks, P. (2001). A study on self-directed learning and its role in academic success. British Journal of Educational Studies, 49(2), 153-167.
56. MacCann, C., Jiang, Y., Brown, L. E. R., Double, K. S., Bucich, M., & Minbashian, A. (2020). Emotional intelligence predicts academic performance: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 146(2), 150–186. doi:10.1037/bul0000219.
57. MacCann, C., Jiang, Y., Brown, L. E. R., Double, K. S., Bucich, M., & Minbashian, A. (2020). Emotional intelligence predicts academic performance: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 146(2), 150-186. https://doi.org/10.1037/bul0000219
58. Mahmoodi, M., Asgari, M., & Mohammadi, E. (2020). Emotional intelligence and self-directed learning: A study on EFL learners’ language achievement. Journal of Language and Education, 6(4), 15-26.
59. Mayer, J. D., & Salovey, P. (1993). Emotional intelligence and emotional regulation. Intelligence, 17(4), 433-442.
60. Mayer, J. D., & Salovey, P. (1997). What is emotional intelligence? In P. Salovey & D. J. Sluyter (Eds.), Emotional development and emotional intelligence: Educational implications (pp. 3-31). New York: Basic Books.
61. Mayer, J. D., Caruso, D. R., & Salovey, P. (2016). The ability model of emotional intelligence: Principles and updates. Emotion Review, 8(4), 290-300.
62. Mega, C., Ronconi, L., & De Beni, R. (2014). What makes a good student? How emotions, self-regulated learning, and motivation contribute to academic achievement. Journal of Educational Psychology, 106(1), 121–131.
63. Mercader-Rubio, I., et al. (2022). Emotional intelligence and student engagement in higher education: Examining mediating roles. Current Psychology, 41(5), 1243-1259. Retrieved from https://link.springer.com
64. Merriam, S. B., Caffarella, R. S., & Baumgartner, L. M. (2007). Learning in adulthood: A comprehensive guide. Jossey-Bass.
65. Ministry of Education Malaysia. (2015). Malaysia Education Blueprint 2015–2025 (Higher Education).
66. OECD. (2023). Education at a Glance 2023: OECD Indicators. OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/eag-2023-en
67. Oliver, B., & Jorre de St Jorre, T. (2018). Graduate attributes for 2020 and beyond: Recommendations for Australian higher education providers. Higher Education Research & Development, 37(4), 821-836.
68. Parker, J. D., Summerfeldt, L. J., Hogan, M. J., & Majeski, S. A. (2004). Emotional intelligence and academic success: Examining the transition from high school to university. Personality and Individual Differences, 36(1), 163–172. doi:10.1016/S0191-8869(03)00076-X
69. Pascarella, E. T., & Terenzini, P. T. (2005). How College Affects Students: A Third Decade of Research. Jossey-Bass.
70. Pekrun, R., & Linnenbrink-Garcia, L. (2012). Academic emotions and student engagement. Springer.
71. Pekrun, R., & Stephens, E. J. (2010). Achievement emotions and academic performance: Longitudinal models of reciprocal effects. Child Development Perspectives, 4(2), 73-78.
72. Pekrun, R., Goetz, T., & Perry, R. P. (2022). Academic Emotions Questionnaire (AEQ): User’s Manual. Munich: University of Munich, Department of Psychology.
73. Perera, H., & DiGiacomo, M. (2013). The impact of emotional intelligence on academic success. Learning and Individual Differences, 25, 146-152.
74. Petrides, K. V., Mikolajczak, M., & Mavroveli, S. (2016). Emotional intelligence: What does it really measure? In Emotional Intelligence in Education (pp. 13-34). Springer.
75. Pilling-Cormick, J., & Garrison, D. R. (2007). Self-directed and self-regulated learning: Conceptual links. Canadian Journal of University Continuing Education, 33(2), 13–34.
76. Pokhrel, S., & Chhetri, R. (2021). A literature review on the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on teaching and learning. Higher Education Studies, 11(3), 89-92.
77. Qualter, P., Whiteley, H. E., Morley, A., & Dudiak, H. (2012). The role of emotional intelligence in the decision to persist with academic studies in higher education. Research in Post-Compulsory Education, 14(3), 219–231. doi:10.1080/13596740903139255
78. Rager, K. B. (2009). Self-Directed Learning and Emotion. New Directions for Adult and Continuing Education, 2009(120), 29-37.
79. Roberts, J., & Styron, R. (2010). Student satisfaction and persistence: Factors vital to student retention. Research in Higher Education Journal, 6, 1-18.
80. Saklofske, D. H., Austin, E. J., & Minski, P. S. (2012). The role of affect regulation in self-directed learning. In R. F. Baumeister & K. D. Vohs (Eds.), Handbook of self-regulation.
81. Salovey, P., & Mayer, J. D. (1990). Emotional intelligence. Imagination, Cognition, and Personality, 9(3), 185-211.
82. Salovey, P., & Mayer, J. D. (1990). Emotional intelligence. Imagination, Cognition, and Personality, 9(3), 185–211.
83. Salovey, P., Mayer, J. D., Caruso, D. R., & Lopes, P. N. (2000). Measuring emotional intelligence as a set of mental abilities with the MSCEIT. In S. J. Lopez & C. R. Snyder (Eds.), The Handbook of Positive Psychology (pp. 320-334). Oxford University Press.
84. Sánchez-Álvarez, N., Extremera, N., & Fernández-Berrocal, P. (2020). The relation between emotional intelligence and subjective well-being: A meta-analytic investigation. Journal of Positive Psychology, 15(5), 588-599. https://doi.org/10.1080/17439760.2020.1725600
85. Sánchez-Gómez, M., & Breso, E. (2020). The mobile emotional intelligence test (MEIT): An ability test to assess emotional intelligence at work. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 17(14), 5013.
86. Sanchez-Ruiz, M. J., Mavroveli, S., & Poullis, J. (2013). Trait emotional intelligence and its links to university performance: An examination. Personality and Individual Differences, 54(5), 658–662. doi:10.1016/j.paid.2012.11.013
87. Schutte, N. S., Malouff, J. M., Hall, L. E., Haggerty, D. J., Cooper, J. T., Golden, C. J., & Dornheim, L. (2009). Development and validation of a measure of emotional intelligence. Personality and Individual Differences, 25(2), 167-177. doi:10.1016/S0191-8869(98)00001-4.
88. Schweder, B. (2022). Examining positive emotions, autonomy support, and learning strategies: Self-directed versus teacher-directed learning environments. Learning Environments Research, 25, 507–522.
89. Shaheen, M., & Hameed, T. (2021). Emotional intelligence and self-regulated learning strategies as predictors of academic success. Journal of Educational Psychology, 15(2), 89-102.
90. Shankar, A., & Park, H. S. (2016). Emotional intelligence and self-regulation in self-directed learning contexts. Educational Psychology Review, 28(3), 341-360.
91. Small, J. R., Samaranayake, L., & Fisher, J. (2022). Student engagement and well-being in higher education: The importance of meaningful connections. Journal of Educational Psychology, 114(4), 687-703.
92. Smedley, A. (2007). The importance of self-directed learning in higher education: A critical analysis. Higher Education Research & Development, 26(2), 181-193.
93. Smith, R. (2016). From Teacher-Centered to Student-Centered Learning: A Paradigm Shift. Educational Research and Reviews, 11(5), 210-218.
94. Song, L. J., Huang, G. H., Peng, K. Z., Law, K. S., Wong, C. S., & Chen, Z. (2010). The differential effects of general mental ability and emotional intelligence on academic performance and social interactions. Intelligence, 38(1), 137–143. doi:10.1016/j.intell.2009.09.003.
95. SpringerLink. (2023). National strategies and innovations in Malaysia’s higher education. Retrieved from https://link.springer.com
96. Stratsea. (2023). Achieving SDG 2030 via Education: Is Malaysia Ready? Retrieved from https://www.stratsea.com
97. Suleman, F. (2018). The employability skills of higher education graduates: Insights into conceptual frameworks and methodological options. Higher Education, 76(2), 263-278.
98. Teh, C. J. (2024, January 13). Malaysia’s vision 2024: Paving the way for higher education excellence. Malay Mail. Retrieved from https://www.malaymail.com
99. Tennant, M., & Pogson, P. (1995). Learning and change in the adult years: A developmental perspective. Jossey-Bass.
100. Terenzini, P. T., Pascarella, E. T., & Blimling, G. S. (1996). Students’ out-of-class experiences and their influence on learning and cognitive development: A literature review. Journal of College Student Development, 37(2), 149-162.
101. Tett, L., Blair, A., & MacDonald, F. (2021). Building social capital in college communities: The role of engagement and integration. Community College Journal of Research and Practice, 45(12), 887-902.
102. Thomas, E., et al. (2023). Emotional intelligence moderates the stress-depression link in college students before and during COVID. Current Psychology, 42(1), 72-83. Retrieved from https://link.springer.com
103. Thornton, S. (2021). Supporting self-directed learning: A framework for teachers. Language Education in Asia, 12(3), 152–174.
104. Tinto, V. (2012). Completing college: Rethinking institutional action. University of Chicago Press.
105. UNICEF. (2021). Education 2030 in Malaysia. Retrieved from https://www.unicef.org/malaysia
106. United Nations in Malaysia, Singapore, and Brunei Darussalam. (2023). UN Country Results Report Malaysia 2023: Supporting Malaysia’s Path to Sustainability and Inclusion in Turbulent Times. Retrieved from https://malaysia.un.org
107. World Access to Higher Education. (2023). Higher Education in Malaysia: National Strategies and Innovative Practices. Retrieved from https://www.worldaccesshe.com
108. World Bank. (2022). World Development Report: Education and Skills for the Future. World Bank Group.
109. Yu, T., & Wright, D. A. (2021). Exploring predictors of student satisfaction in higher education: A study of online and on-campus learners. Higher Education Quarterly, 75(4), 637-652.
110. Zeidner, M., Roberts, R. D., & Matthews, G. (2009). What we know about emotional intelligence: How it affects learning, work, relationships, and our mental health. MIT Press.
111. Zhao, H., & Biesta, G. (2021). Imagining a Confucian approach to education for human flourishing. Educational Philosophy and Theory, 53(6), 582-591. https://doi.org/ 10.1 080 / 00 13 1857.2020.1772027
112. Zhoc, K. C. H., & Chen, G. (2016). Relationship between self-directed learning and academic performance in a Chinese context. Asian Journal of Educational Research, 4(3), 122-132.
113. Zimmerman, B. J., & Schunk, D. H. (2011). Self-regulated learning and academic achievement. Educational Psychology Review, 19(3), 229-238.
114. Zull, J. E. (2006). The Art of Changing the Brain: Enriching the Practice of Teaching by Exploring the Biology of Learning. Stylus Publishing.
115. Zusho, A. (2017). Self-regulated learning and academic performance: The importance of motivational processes. Educational Psychologist, 42(3), 151-163.
116. Zysberg, L., & Zisberg, A. (2022). The role of emotional intelligence in reducing college students’ stress and enhancing psychological well-being. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 37(4), 645-662. Retrieved from https://link.springer.com