Iranian Student’s Emotion in Government University in Malaysia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Learning situations in modern society are getting increasingly complex and variable, and learners have to take more responsibility for their own learning. The main purpose of this study was to understand Iranian student’s feelings, who studying in selected Government University in Malaysia. The study was carried out through three research questions: 1) How do the Iranian student’s feel about life in Malaysia? 2) How these feelings do affects on Iranian student’s educational progress? 3) What are the factors that contributed to these feeling? Due to the nature of study, a qualitative research method and techniques was used to enable the researcher to understand emotion of Iranian student whose study at one of Government University in Malaysia. Data was gathered from interview with 3 Iranian students via “convenience sampling”. “Constant Comparative” method was used for data analysis. Eight major themes (worry, sad, happy and comfortable, socio-culture factors, economic factors, and good relationship and environment facilities) emerged from this study in relation to Iranian student’s emotion in selected Government University in Malaysia. This study concludes that based on the findings, graduated student organization can designed intervention program base on International students’ views in their social, cultural and economical content.Key word: Student’s emotional, Learning strategy, Malaysia
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".