INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)

ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XI November 2025

Page 1639

www.rsisinternational.org

A Comparative Study of Student Personality Traits in Higher

Education: Global, Resilient, Innovative, Trustworthy, and Talent

Aini Nazura Paimin

, Siti Aisyah Abd Razak

, Aida Aisyah Moktar Abdullah

, Mustika Nuramalia

Handayani

, Lutfiah Natrah Abbas

Faculty of Technical and Vocational Education Universiti Tun Hussein Onn Malaysia

Faculty of Engineering and Industrial Education, Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia

DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.47772/IJRISS.2025.91100132

Received: 10 November 2025; Accepted: 20 November 2025; Published: 02 December 2025

ABSTRACT

Developing well-rounded, adaptable, and globally competitive graduates remains a strategic priority for higher

education institutions. Beyond disciplinary knowledge, universities are increasingly expected to cultivate

personal attributes that enable students to thrive in a rapidly globalising and competitive world.

This study examined the personality profiles of final-year students enrolled in a technical and vocational

education programme in Malaysia, comparing learners from two academic pathways, Education and

Technology, across six bachelor’s degree programs. Using a survey-comparative design, quantitative data were

gathered from 259 students through a structured instrument measuring the five GRITT dimensions: Global,

Resilient, Innovative, Trustworthy, and Talent. Descriptive statistics and independent samples t-tests were used

to assess the differences between groups. Overall, both cohorts demonstrated moderate levels across all GRITT

traits. Statistically significant differences were identified for the Innovative, Trustworthy, and Talent constructs,

favouring students in the Technology pathway, whereas no significant differences emerged for the Global and

Resilience dimensions. The findings highlight significant variations in personality development across academic

pathways and reinforce the need for intentional strategies to enhance holistic student development, particularly

within vocational education contexts aiming to produce future-ready graduates.

INTRODUCTION

The global education agenda has increasingly recognised the importance of character development through

policy reforms and curriculum transformation. For instance, UNESCO’s Education 2030 framework, aligned

with the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs, 2015), emphasises the need to foster attitudes and values

alongside knowledge and skills. This objective is shaped by complex local and global challenges, including rapid

globalisation, technological advancements, and evolving societal structures. Consequently, educational

outcomes are now directed toward cultivating individuals and communities capable of living and working

professionally, ethically, and collaboratively in diverse and dynamic environments.

In Malaysia, the Malaysian Education Blueprint (PPPM) 2013–2025 represents a comprehensive initiative by

the Ministry of Education aimed at transforming the national education system. The forthcoming PPPM 2026–

2030 continues this trajectory, focusing on the development of holistic, balanced, and globally competitive

human capital, guided by the values and aspirations of Malaysia’s National Educational Philosophy concept. In

response to this national vision, Universiti Tun Hussein Onn Malaysia (UTHM), a technical university, has

introduced the GRITT Module, a specially designed educational framework aimed at cultivating five core

personality traits among students: Global, Resilient, Innovative, Trustworthy, and Talent. The GRITT module is

designed to promote a balanced integration of personal and professional development, ensuring that graduates

possess not only technical competencies but also strong character traits essential for success in a globalised

world. However, implementing this module presents several challenges. One major obstacle is the intense

academic pressure prevalent in Malaysian universities, often driven by high expectations from parents and

educators, as well as the competitive academic environment. Such pressure can lead to increased anxiety,

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)

ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XI November 2025

Page 1640

www.rsisinternational.org

potentially limiting students’ ability to internalise and apply GRITT values.

Another challenge lies in the limited emphasis on nurturing individual talents within existing curricula. Many

programs fail to accommodate the diverse capabilities of students, resulting in disengagement and reduced

motivation. The final year of university is particularly critical as students prepare to enter the workforce.

Research indicates that higher education institutions must actively engage students through experiential learning

opportunities, such as internships, to enhance their readiness for real-world challenges. Moreover, integrating

industry perspectives into academic programs is crucial to ensure that graduates acquire skills relevant to market

demands.

Collaborative initiatives between academia and industry can provide students with early exposure to

professional environments and highlight the importance of soft skills. While technical and employability skills

are often prioritised in Technical and Vocational Education and Training (TVET), personality development

remains underemphasized, despite its critical role in student success. In addition, prior studies suggest that

fostering personality traits can significantly enhance students’ motivation and interest, particularly in technical

fields.

Therefore, this study was conducted to compare the GRITT profiles of final-year students at UTHM across two

distinct academic backgrounds: vocational education (teacher training programs) and technology (industry-

driven programs). While teacher education programs emphasise character and value development, technology

programs focus primarily on the development of technical skills and professional competencies. Thus, it will be

interesting to determine how the GRIT profile of these students differs, if at all. Findings of this study provide

one of the earliest empirical evaluations of the GRITT framework within a Malaysian TVET context, offering

new insights into how distinct academic pathways shape personality traits essential for Industry 4.0

employability.

Theoretical Background

The core values in the GRITT profile (i.e., Global, Resilient, Innovative, Trustworthy, and Talent) not only serve

to improve students’ holistic personal development but can also be viewed from the cognitive, affective, and

conative aspects of behaviours as highlighted in the Theory of Reasoned Action (Fishbein & Ajzen, 1975). The

Cognitive aspect is a knowledge domain and refers to students’ ability to understand and process information.

Meanwhile, the affective domain is related to students' emotions and attitudes, while the conative domain

involves the intention to act and behave in order to achieve learning goals. The ultimate goal of this character

development is for graduates to develop not only a better understanding of themselves but also positive attitudes

and engage in constructive learning behaviour towards achieving specific learning goals.

Global Trait

The importance of a global mindset, as intended in the GRITT profile, is to prepare students for a multiracial

and multicultural society that shares the same values, inspires others with high respect, tolerance, and integrity.

By developing such traits, graduates can serve and function more effectively in a multicultural environment,

contributing positively to society. In understanding the rapidly developing world, fostering a global perspective

in education is important for individuals. According to Mehta et al. (2023), a global profile is needed in education

to foster students' awareness of global challenges, including understanding diverse cultures, global issues,

economic development, and international perspectives. The Malaysian Education Blueprint emphasises the

importance of global competence, aiming to equip students with both academic skills and appropriate soft skills,

such as being able to easily interact and collaborate in a group, maintain good relationships, and be willing to

help and do good to others (Abdullah et al., 2019).

Resilience Trait

Resilience is another core component of the GRITT profile, which aims to foster students' ability to adapt and

thrive in the face of challenges and life obstacles. According to Janssen and Van Atteveldt (2023) and Mosanya

(2021), resilience is crucial for academic success and personal well-being, especially during crises such as the

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)

ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XI November 2025

Page 1641

www.rsisinternational.org

COVID-19 pandemic and the online learning process, where students must pace their own learning direction,

maintain self-discipline and motivation, and avoid procrastination. The absence of a physical classroom creates

challenges such as a less structured learning environment, lack of learning resources and limited communications

(Hanaysha et al., 2023). A study by Abramovskih et al. (2019) demonstrated that resilience can be fostered

through a clear goal direction and inner motivation in addition to external support from faculty, family and friend.

Innovative Trait

Innovation involves the creative thinking and problem-solving skills of students. By engaging in project-based

learning and collaborative tasks, students are empowered to think critically and explore new ideas (Liebenberg

et al., 2016). According to Bouranta and Psomas (2024) and Yang (2020), educational frameworks that promote

creative thinking and problem-solving help students develop the ability to generate new ideas and approaches.

The GRITT module also encourages creative thinking and problem-solving skills, enabling students to develop

innovative solutions to problems and challenges they will face in the real world.

Trustworthy Trait

Trustworthiness in the GRITT profile encompasses individuals who adhere to ethics, dare to uphold the truth,

and are autonomous in their decision-making. Education has highlighted the criticality of developing a good

character or personality among individuals (Yang et al., 2021) by instilling the values of integrity and

accountability in students (Urbancová & Vnoučková, 2015). According to Hogan et al. (2022), individuals with

higher values of trust and ethics are more likely to succeed in collaborative environments by fostering a culture

of respect and cooperation within the group.

Talent Trait

Talent reflects a student's ability to adapt to various situations and their determination to achieve goals and

targets. The development of talent is important in identifying and nurturing individual strengths and interests

among students (Mullakhmetov et al., 2019). By providing appropriate educational experiences and skill support,

these profiles contribute to the holistic growth of students while preparing them for successful careers (Whitfield

et al., 2021).

METHODOLOGY

The study employs a survey research design, utilizing a questionnaire to collect quantitative data for descriptive

and comparative analyses. The rationale for using the survey design is that it improves the dependability and

accuracy of the findings by minimizing subjectivity and bias using standard procedures and measurable

measurements. As a result, research findings are more reliable because they can be replicated and verified by

independent researchers (Creswell & Creswell, 2018).

Population and Sample

This study involved 259 final-year undergraduate students from a technical university in Malaysia (UTHM),

selected from the 2024/2025 academic cohort (the first batch of GRITT initiative implementation at UTHM).

The samples were composing of 68.7 percents male and 31.3 percents female students who enrolled in six

Bachelor’s degree programs: General Machining, Building Construction, Catering, Welding and Metal

Fabrication, Electrical and Electronics, and, Refrigeration and Air Conditioning. These programs are offered

under two broader academic pathways: the Bachelor of Vocational Education (N = 86) and the Bachelor of

Technology (N = 173). The distribution of sample size for each program is as shown in Table 1. The personality

traits of graduates of these programs are expected to be different based on skills and outcome orientations.

Education programs (B.Edu) is highly emphasized on the development of soft skills (e.g., communication skills

and emotional intelligence) whereas Technology programs (B.Tech) emphasized hard technical skills. A

convenience sampling strategy was adopted to recruit participants, ensuring that eligible students from both

pathways had the opportunity to participate. The sample size is considered adequate to enable comparative

analysis between the two groups (Hair et. al, 2018).

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)

ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XI November 2025

Page 1642

www.rsisinternational.org

Table 1 Number of final-year students based on the field of study, B.Edu and B.Tech Students

Field of study

B.Edu

B.Tech

Total

Machining Operation

Building Construction

Catering/Food Technology

Welding and Metal Fabrication

Electrical and Electronics

Refrigeration and Air Conditioning

Total

173

259

Research Instrument

The instrument chosen and used by the researcher is a structured questionnaire. This is because, according

Osman et al. (2017), the use of questionnaires as a data collection tool is a precise method for obtaining the

necessary data and information. The researcher converted the questionnaire into an online Google Forms form

as a platform for data collection. The structure of the questionnaire was adapted and constructed based on

previous studies conducted by Paimin and Alias (2013). Each construct from the GRITT instrument was drawn

from the cognitive (thinking and strategy), affective (attitude and emotion), and conative (intention) aspects of

behaviour. Modifications were made to adapt to the study's background and the student’s situation, aiming to

achieve the study's objectives. The questionnaire comprises six sections, each reflecting the GRITT framework.

The distribution of items across the constructs is as follows: Global – 20 items, Resilience – 20 items, Innovative

– 19 items, Trustworthy – 15 items, and Talent – 11 items. A five-point Likert scale was used, ranging from 1

(Strongly Disagree) to 5 (Strongly Agree). To assess the reliability of the instrument, Cronbach’s alpha

coefficients were calculated using responses from 30 final-year students from the previous cohort. The

Cronbach’s alpha values obtained for each construct were: Global (α = 0.85), Resilience (α = 0.90), Innovative

(α = 0.92), Trustworthy (α = 0.84), and Talent (α = 0.94). All values exceed the 0.80 threshold, indicating strong

internal consistency across the GRITT constructs. (DeVellis, 2004).

Analysis Data

Descriptive statistics were performed to summarize the data and obtained information about the characteristics

of a data set including the average score (mean) and assess the score variability (standard deviation) (Pallant,

2020). Meanwhile, inferential analysis was applied to observe the relationship or difference between two or more

groups in a population (Kothari, 2004). In this study, inferential analysis was used to compare the mean GRITT

(Global, Resilience, Innovative, Trustworthy, & Talent) profile of the final-year students. The data findings were

analyzed using the independent sample t-test. According to Pallant (2020), a significance level (alpha) of 0.05

is commonly adopted in social science research. The p-value is used to determine whether observed differences

between groups are statistically significant. When the p-value is less than 0.05, the result is considered

statistically significant. Conversely, if the p-value is greater than 0.05, the difference is not statistically

significant, and the null hypothesis is retained (Ostertagová et al., 2014).

RESULT AND DISCUSSION

The findings indicate that the students' overall assessments on the Global, Resilience, Innovative, Trustworthy,

and Talent profiles are at a moderate level, as shown in Table 2.

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)

ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XI November 2025

Page 1643

www.rsisinternational.org

Table 2 Descriptive analysis for Global, Resilience, Innovative, Trustworthy, and Talent Profile of Students.

Part

Profiles

Mean (M)

Standard Deviation (SD)

Level

Global profile

3.16

0.41

Moderate

Resilience profile

3.17

0.40

Moderate

Innovative profile

3.28

0.44

Moderate

Trustworthy profile

3.19

0.44

Moderate

Talent profile

3.35

0.62

Moderate

Note: N=259, Level: Weak = 1.00 – 1.99, Low = 2.00 – 2.99, Moderate = 3.00 –3.99, High = 4.00 – 5.00

There are two items that show interpretation at a low level and are below the average mean score, namely Item

G2 (I like to speak in public) and Item G4 (I like to start conversations with people I don't know) for Global traits

with mean score 2.99 (S.D.=0.81) and 2.97 (S.D.=0.87) respectively. The traits reflect low communication skills

which provide a sign that speaking proficiency of Malaysian students remains a challenge even though learning

process highly emphasise on comprehensive communication training especially for the teacher training program

(education program). According to Ostertagová et al. (2014), activities involving pair or group work can help

reduce speaking anxiety and improve communication skills whereas students who do not have a strong

motivation and desire to speak in front of people or talk to others may feel unmotivated to learn, which can lead

to anxiety. Therefore, a more interactive and collaborative learning approach can help students feel more

comfortable and confident in speaking in front of others.

There are also three Resilience items that score below the average mean score, namely the statement for Item R1

(I prefer to be a leader rather than a follower), Item R3 (I like to act as a leader in group activities) and Item R7

(I like to make important decisions alone without expecting help from others) with score mean M

=2.94

(S.D.=0.81), M

=2.95 (S.D.=0.83) and, M

=2.97 (S.D=0.82) respectively. These items represent leadership

traits which indicate that nurturing leadership characters among students should be made a priority if universities

are serious about shaping a generation that can serve as role models for others. Leadership is a critical trait of

resilience particularly in times of uncertainty where leaders should stay focused and remain calm to make well-

reasoned decisions, both of which a sign of a stable and high emotional intelligence (Yan & Nie, 2025). Overall,

the results indicate that the GRITT profile scores for both groups fall within a moderate range across the five

constructs

A comparative analysis between the two fields of study (education and technology programs) revealed another

interesting finding, as shown in Table 3.

Table 3 Mean Differences in GRITT Dimensions between B. Edu and B. Tech Students

Study Field

Profile

Mean (M)

Standard

Dev. (SD)

t-value (Sig)

B. Edu

Global

3.14

0.42

-1.13 (0.26)

B.Tech

3.20

0.39

B. Edu

Resilience

3.13

0.39

-2.40 (0.02)

B.Tech

3.26

0.42

B. Edu

Innovative

3.21

0.41

-3.36 (0.00)

B.Tech

3.41

0.47

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)

ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XI November 2025

Page 1644

www.rsisinternational.org

B. Edu

Trustworthy

3.13

0.44

-3.15 (0.00)

B.Tech

3.31

0.43

B. Edu

Talent

3.20

0.55

-5.33 (0.00)

B.Tech

3.64

0.66

Note: NB

Edu

=173, N

BTech

=86 ; p<0.05 (two-tailed)

An independent samples t-test revealed no significant difference in the Global profile between B.Edu and

B.Tech students, t(181.46) = −1.13, p = .26. However, significant differences were found for Resilience,

Innovative, Trustworthy, and Talent profiles (p < .05). Negative t-values indicate higher mean scores for the

final year B.Tech compared to B.Edu across all profiles. The strongest difference between study fields appears

in the Talent profile, with a t(145.26) = −5.33, p<0.05. B.Tech students undergo 1-year industrial attachment

(work-based learning) in industry while B.Edu students undergo a 4-months teaching practicum in

secondary school and 2-months industrial attachment in industry. The longer time spent in industry might

influence the higher GRITT levels among B.Tech students and significant character development by exposing

the students to real-world work scenario.

The level of Global profile among final-year students did not show a significant difference based on B.Edu. and

B.Tech programs. This finding implies that the type of academic program (education vs. technology) does not

meaningfully influence students’ Global profile and exposure to global perspectives may be embedded across

curricula in both programs. According to Hannan et al. (2020), strong social support can improve students'

emotional well-being while encouraging them to take social responsibility for their peers. Students who have

positive social relationships with their friends tend to show more attention and support, which facilitates an

effective learning process. This is expected to enable students to develop strong cognitive abilities and even

enhance their global value in communication skills.

The Resilience profile of final-year students demonstrated that almost all items were scored at a moderate level.

The level of resilience among final-year students shows a significant difference between the B. Edu and

B.Tech programs, with a t(159.04) = −2.40, p<0.05. According to Luo et al. (2022) and Mat and Maat (2020),

students who are involved in activities that interest them and give them meaning are more likely to exhibit a

resilient attitude, as well as commitment, in their efforts to complete their study program. The desire to achieve

goals also affects the level of students’ resilience. Students with clear and meaningful goals also tend to take

necessary risks to achieve them. They are also more than willing to face difficulties and continue to strive despite

any obstacles. Emotions and motivation also play a crucial role in shaping an individual's leadership style.

According to Barasa et al. (2018), students who have strong social support from peers and mentors tend to be

more courageous in taking risks and persevering in their efforts. Additionally, students with a solid understanding

of resilience and leadership concepts tend to be more willing to face challenges and risks. Studies show that

students who have a growth mindset are believed to have the abilities and intelligence (Jia Chzin & Surat, 2021)

and are more likely to face challenges and take risks (Minh & Long, 2023).

The study's results identified the Innovative profile of final-year students at UTHM, showing that almost all

items scored at a moderate level. Final-year B.Tech students showed a higher level of Innovative profile than

B.Edu students, with t(150.81) = −3.36, p < 0.05. Problem-solving skills require students to take the initiative

and strive to find solutions. Nuraida (2017) outlined that creative teaching techniques can improve students'

ability to solve problems creatively, which shows that active involvement in the learning process is important.

This indicates that students need to be encouraged to take the initiative and strive in the problem-solving

process, which is a crucial element in their Innovative profile. From the lens of cognitivism, students who lack

good problem-solving skills may face difficulties in analysing and understanding the problems they encounter.

According to Septiana and Ibrahim (2020), students are often unable to identify the steps needed to solve

problems, causing them to take longer to find solutions. In addition, Ismail. et al. (2020) emphasised that the

application of critical and problem-solving skills in the higher education curriculum is important for developing

students who can adapt to changes and challenges. Students who have a positive attitude and high motivation

are more likely to think creatively and find innovative solutions to the problems they face. Furthermore, Abdul

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)

ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XI November 2025

Page 1645

www.rsisinternational.org

Hamid and Ismail (2020) stated that student involvement in teamwork activities can improve their creative

thinking skills, which in turn helps in the problem-solving process. In TVET, the integration of complex

conceptual understanding and technical skills has been shown to foster critical thinking and analytical skills that

are essential for effective communication in professional settings (Sulaiman et al., 2024).

Final-year B.Tech students demonstrated higher Trustworthiness levels than those from B.Ed programs, with a

t(173.31) = −3.15; p < 0.05. The means analysis demonstrated that almost all items showed moderate levels.

Yulia Budiarti et al. (2015) stated that individuals with low self-confidence tend to experience poor mental

health and integrity issues. Research has shown that students with integrity issues have higher motivation to

learn and interact positively with their peers (Zainuddin & Mydin Kutty, 2022). In addition, Md. Dazali and

Awang (2017) study suggested that self-confidence has a significant and positive relationship with academic

achievement. When students lack confidence in their abilities, they may be hesitant to take risks in decision-

making, as well as struggle to make ethical decisions. Therefore, students must develop self-confidence and

autonomy (Trustworthiness) in making decisions to maintain psychological well-being in the learning process.

Students who feel less autonomous may not dare to take the initiative in situations that require ethical

decisions. On the other hand, students who dare to report problems and speak the truth show initiative and

responsibility in their actions. According to Rahmi (2019), self-efficacy in decision-making is important for

building individual confidence in facing challenging situations. Furthermore, when students do not feel they

have the right (autonomy) to make decisions, they may rely on others to determine their actions, thus reducing

their sense of responsibility for the decisions made.

CONCLUSION

This study revealed that final-year students exhibited moderate development across all five GRITT dimensions,

suggesting that character formation is present but not yet optimal within the current academic ecosystem.

Significant differences identified in the Innovative, Trustworthy, and Talent constructs indicate that extended

industrial exposure in the Technology programs contributes meaningfully to higher levels of workplace-

relevant traits, including problem-solving autonomy, ethical decision-making, and adaptability. Meanwhile, the

absence of differences in Global and Resilience traits suggests that these attributes may be shaped more by shared

institutional culture, peer interaction, and general learning climate rather than pathway-specific training.

As one of the first empirical studies examining the implementation of the GRITT framework in a Malaysian

TVET university, the findings contribute important early evidence for evaluating and refining character-based

competency development. The results highlight the need to strengthen GRITT attributes through intentional

curriculum design, structured industry partnerships, reflective learning strategies, and co-curricular programs

that emphasise communication, leadership, and global engagement. Future research should expand across

multiple institutions, incorporate longitudinal approaches, and integrate qualitative perspectives to better

understand how GRITT traits evolve over time and across learning environments.

ACKNOWLEDGMENT

The authors would like to express their sincere appreciation to the Ministry of Higher Education Malaysia

(MOHE) for the financial support provided through the Fundamental Research Grant Scheme (FRGS), Project

Code: K422. This support has been instrumental in facilitating the research activities and publication of this

paper.

REFERENCES

1. Abdul Hamid, R., & Ismail, M. D. (2020). Involvement Of University Students In Developing Creative

Thinking Skills Through Teamwork Activities (University Students’ Involvement in Developing

Creative Thinking Skills through Teamwork Activities). International Journal of Management Studies,

27. https://doi.org/10.32890/IJMS.27.2.2020.9460

2. Abdullah, Z., Hoque, K. E., Ramlan, N. H., & Shafee, S. (2019). Designing the Structural Model of

TVET Lecturers’ Professionalism and Generic Skills Based on an Empirical Study in Malaysia. SAGE

Open, 9(3). https://doi.org/10.1177/2158244019861456

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)

ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XI November 2025

Page 1646

www.rsisinternational.org

3. Abramovskih, N. V., Kazayeva, E. A., Grigoryan, E. N., & Taktueva, Y. G. (2019). Experience Of

Creating Innovative and Developmental Environment In Masters’ Professional Training. 18–25.

https://doi.org/10.15405/EPSBS.2019.07.3

4. Barasa, E., Mbau, R., & Gilson, L. (2018). What Is Resilience and How Can It Be Nurtured? A

Systematic Review of Empirical Literature on Organizational Resilience. International Journal of Health

Policy and Management, 7(6), 491. https://doi.org/10.15171/IJHPM.2018.06

5. Bouranta, N., & Psomas, E. (2024). Education al innovation practices in primary and secondary schools

during the COVID-19 pandemic. International Journal of Education al Management, 38(2), 355–373.

https://doi.org/10.1108/IJEM-02-2023-0075

6. Creswell, J. W. & Creswell, J.D. (2018). Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed

Methods Approaches, 4(11), 485–485.

7. DeVellis, R. F. (2004). Inter-Rater Reliability. Encyclopedia of Social Measurement, Three-Volume Set,

2, V2-317-V2-322. https://doi.org/10.1016/B0-12-369398-5/00095-5

8. Fishbein, A., & Ajzen, I. (1975). Belief, attitude, intention and behaviour: An introduction to theory and

research. Addison Wesley.

9. Hair, J.F., Black, W.C., Babin, B.J. & Anderson, R.E. (2018). Multivariate Data Analysis. 8th Edition,

Cengage.

10. Hanaysha, J. R., Shriedeh, F. B., & In’airat, M. (2023). Impact of classroom environment, teacher

competency, information and communication technology resources, and university facilities on student

engagement and academic performance. International Journal of Information Management Data Insights,

3(2), 100188. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JJIMEI.2023.100188

11. Hannan, N., Lokman, B., Ismail, Z., Manusia, J. P., Keluarga, P., & Manusia, F. E. (2020). Depression

and the Intensity of Social Support with Life Satisfaction in Students Universiti di Malaysia. Malaysian

Journal of Social Sciences and Humanities, 5(6), 322765.

12. Hogan, K. F. E., Fowler Conor, J. A., Barnes, D., Ludwig, A. K., & Cristiano, D. J. (2022). New

multimedia resources for ecological resilience Education in New multimedia resources for ecological

resilience Education in modern university classrooms modern university classrooms.

https://doi.org/10.1002/ecs2.4245

13. Janssen, T. W. P., & Van Atteveldt, N. (2023). Coping styles mediate the relation between mindset and

academic resilience in adolescents during the COVID-19 pandemic: a randomized controlled trial.

Scientific Reports, 13(1). https://doi.org/10.1038/S41598-023-33392-9

14. Jia Chzin, D. T., & Surat, S. (2021). Sorotan Literatur Bersistematik : Faktor-Faktor Mempengaruhi

Pencapaian Akademik Pelajar. Malaysian Journal of Social Sciences and Humanities (MJSSH), 6(12),

137–157. https://doi.org/10.47405/MJSSH.V6I12.1210

15. Kothari, C.R. (2004) Research Methodology Methods and Techniques. 2nd Edition, New Age

International Publishers, New Delhi. - References - Scientific Research Publishing. (n.d.). Retrieved

October 28, 2025, from https://www.scirp.org/reference/ReferencesPapers?ReferenceID=1285422

16. Liebenberg, L., Theron, L., Sanders, J., Munford, R., van Rensburg, A., Rothmann, S., & Ungar, M.

(2016). Bolstering resilience through teacher-student interaction: Lessons for school psychologists.

School Psychology International, 37(2), 140–154. https://doi.org/10.1177/0143034315614689

17. Luo, D., Song, Y., Cai, X., Li, R., Bai, Y., Chen, B., & Liu, Y. (2022). Nurse managers’ burnout and

organizational support: The serial mediating role of leadership and resilience. Journal of Nursing

Management, 30(8), 4251–4261. https://doi.org/10.1111/JONM.13852

18. Mat, N. B., & Maat, S. M. (2020). Faktor dan Implikasi Daya Tahan dalam Pembelajaran Matematik :

Sorotan Literatur Bersistematik. Malaysian Journal of Social Sciences and Humanities, 5(12), 516890.

https://doi.org/10.47405/MJSSH.V5I12.576

19. Mcleod, S., Ng, A., Furness, K., & Belski, R. (2024). Nutrition students’ employability skills: need for a

graduate employability framework. Proceedings of the Nutrition Society, 83(OCE1), 104.

https://doi.org/10.1017/S0029665124001228

20. Md. Dazali, N. S., & Awang, I. (2017). Levels of Self-Confidence Among Bachelor of Education

Students, at Universiti Utara Malaysia. EDUCATUM Journal of Social Sciences, 3(1), 30–40.

https://doi.org/10.37134/EJOSS.VOL3.1.4.2017

21. Mehta, N., Fernandes, C., Llerena, C., Weine, S., & Bosland, M. C. (2023). Developing a global medicine

student pre- and post-travel curriculum. BMC Medical Education , 23(1), 1–7.

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)

ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XI November 2025

Page 1647

www.rsisinternational.org

22. https://doi.org/10.1186/S12909-023-04606-5/FIGURES/1

23. Minh, H. T. P., & Long, N. N. (2023). Adaptive resilience in a post-pandemic era: A case of Vietnamese

organizations. Problems and Perspectives in Management, 21(3), 219–229.

https://doi.org/10.21511/PPM.21(3).2023.17

24. Mosanya, M. (2021). Buffering Academic Stress during the COVID-19 Pandemic Related Social

Isolation: Grit and Growth Mindset as Protective Factors against the Impact of Loneliness. International

Journal of Applied Positive Psychology, 6(2), 159–174.

25. Mullakhmetov, K. S., Mullakhmetov, K. S., Aminova, R. M., & Filimonchuk, I. I. (2019). Administrative

Innovations as Necessary Condition of Competitiveness in Schools. Journal of Education al and Social

Research, 9(4), 21. https://www.richtmann.org/journal/index.php/jesr/article/view/10527

26. Nuraida. (2017). The Effect Of Creative Teaching Technique to Creative Problem-Solving. Journal of

Education in Muslim Society, 4(1), 53–62.

27. Osman, W. N., Amminudin, N. S., & Nawi, M. N. M. (2017). A Case Study of Worker Safety and Health

Management on Construction Sites: A Contractor's Perspective. Journal of Advanced Research in

Business and Management Studies, 7(1), 51–59.

28. Ostertagová, E., Ostertag, O., & Kováč, J. (2014). Methodology and Application of the Kruskal-Wallis

Test. Applied Mechanics and Materials, 611, 115–120.

https://doi.org/10.4028/www.scientific.net/amm.611.115

29. Paimin, A. N., & Alias, M. Factors affecting study performance of engineering undergraduates: Case

studies of Malaysia and Australia. Proceeding of Research in Engineering Education Symposium (2013).

30. Palczyńska, M., & Świst, K. (2018). Personality, cognitive skills and life outcomes: evidence from the

Polish follow-up study to PIAAC. Large-Scale Assessments in Education , 6(1), 1–23.

https://doi.org/10.1186/S40536-018-0056-Z/TABLES/13

31. Pallant, J. (2020). SPSS Survival Manual : A step by step guide to data analysis using IBM SPSS.

https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003117452

32. PPPM. (2015). Malaysia Education Blueprint 2015-2025 (Higher Education ) Ministry of Education

Malaysia.

33. Rahmi, F. (2019). Self-Efficacy in Making Career Decisions for Students. Insight: Jurnal Ilmiah

Psikologi, 21(1), 12.

34. https://doi.org/10.26486/Psikologi.V21I1.756

35. SDG. (2015). The 17 Sustainable Development Goals. United Nations. https://sdgs.un.org/goals

36. SDG Report. (2013). UN Global Sustainable Development Report 2013 Annotated Outline.

37. Septiana, S., & Ibrahim, M. (2020). The Ability of Student’S Problem Solving at Senior High School

Grade X based on Problem Based Learning. Berkala Ilmiah Pendidikan Biologi (BioEdu), 10(1), 221–

228.

38. Sulaiman, N. L., Asmadi, N. A. S., Salleh, K. M., & Hussein, M. H. (2024). Developing Understanding

of Critical Thinking Definitions, Concepts and Characteristics in TVET Higher Education . Journal of

Ecohumanism, 3(7), 5146–5156. https://doi.org/10.62754/JOE.V3I7.4622

39. Urbancová, H., & Vnoučková, L. (2015). Application Of Talent And Knowledge Management In The

Czech And Slovak Republics: First Empirical Approaches. Economic Annals, 60(205), 105–138.

40. Whitfield, K., Arya, V., Austin, Z., Bajis, D., Bradley, C., Clark, B., Exintaris, B., Galbraith, K., Saffouh,

M., Hajj, E., Hall, K., Hughes, L., Kirsa, S., Langran, C., Mantzourani, E., Wilby, K. J., & Willis, S.

(2021). Developing a Global Community of Practice for Pharmacy Workforce Resilience—Meet GRiT.

Pharmacy 2021, Vol. 9, Page 110, 9(2), 110. https://doi.org/10.3390/pharmacy9020110

41. Yang, L. H., Liu, B., & Liu, J. (2021). Research and Development Talents Training in China

Universities—Based on the Consideration of Education Management Cost Planning. Sustainability

2021, Vol. 13, Page 9583, 13(17), 9583. https://doi.org/10.3390/SU13179583

42. Yang, Y. (2020). Exploration and Practice of Maker Education Mode in Innovation and

Entrepreneurship Education . Frontiers in Psychology, 11, 542521.

https://doi.org/10.3389/FPSYG.2020.01626/BIBTEX

43. Yulia Budiarti, L., Akbar, S. N., & Rachmah, D. N. (2015). Analysis of Self-Confidence and

Psychological Well-Being of Traders in the Land Traditional Market and Lok Baintan Floating Market

in Sungai Tabuk Martapura. Sosio Konsepsia, 4(2). https://doi.org/10.33007/SKA.V4I2.117

44. Zainuddin, N. F. B., & Mydin Kutty, F. (2022). The Relationship of Self-Motivation and Social Support

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)

ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XI November 2025

Page 1648

www.rsisinternational.org

to the Psychological Well-Being of University Students. Malaysian Journal of Social Sciences and

Humanities (MJSSH), 7(2), e001308. https://doi.org/10.47405/MJSSH.V7I2.1308

45. Yan Q. & Nie, T. (2025). Imitating and following: The impact of resilient leadership on employee

workplace adversarial growth, Acta Psychologica, Vol. 258. Pages 105842