Introduction
As globalization transforms businesses and economic growth, education plays a more significant part, as individuals must be competent and concentrate on a single specialty to qualify for an increasingly capitalist society. Stunkel (1999) argues that even though several countries continue to promote liberal education, which enables learners to decide on their course of study and obtain a "whole education," research has shown that liberal studies in college result in a growing percentage of learners who are unprepared for employment when compared with those who focus on a single specific field. People frequently link liberal education to teaching the whole child or simply promoting contentment for learners (Noddings, 2003). Furthermore, a schooling system that fails to value happiness or allows learners to choose skills unrelated to their expertise is typically associated with an emphasis on a single field of study.
As economies develop, employment expectations shift dramatically, favoring people with specific talents over generic expertise (Frankowska et al., 2015). In today's rapidly changing market, learners who devote themselves to developing knowledge in one field tend to be more equipped to compete for employment and cope with industry-related issues. Kunzman (2005) made the case that while a liberal education can provide learners with extensive knowledge of many different subjects, it often fails to provide the in-depth knowledge needed for learners to thrive in the highly technical professions that control the job market today. The movement from general education to specialization is not simply a pattern, but it is an essential adaptation to the difficulties of today's globalized economy.
Furthermore, the need for specialized skills extends beyond preparing students for immediate employment; it also fosters creativity and progress across diverse fields. Merrifield (2005) stated that specialization allows learners to explore their preferred subjects, leading to the development of technology and other essential disciplines. Although a liberal education presents an extensive academic basis, it might not offer learners the particular abilities and expertise required for producing innovations. Moreover, Baer (2012) emphasized that as industry sectors grow increasingly competitive, the potential for creativity and specialization becomes greater in value. It is important to build a schooling system that promotes in-depth expertise and real-world abilities over a holistic approach toward learning.
In this essay, the writer argues that education should promote student competition rather than merely fulfill a desire for learning. This perspective aligns with what Pring (2004) suggests that educational values can differ between nations, influencing educational discourse and policies. For example, the book notes that education often represents a set of cultural ideals, with particular structures focusing on standardization over more general competencies such as critical thinking and creativity, which are vital in the global market. Additionally, the book criticizes how academic inquiry often fails to address the deeper significance behind learning conditions. As a result, these regulations may not adequately prepare learners for the global marketplace. The author of this essay suggests a more practical approach i.e. schooling should equip students for a rapidly changing labor market, where globalization's effects could make certain professions, such as janitorial work, obsolete due to digitization and technological advancements.
Education for Global Competition
With globalization altering businesses and labor markets, education serves as a significant part of retaining qualified human resources in all countries. It also implies that we need to enhance and adapt educational institutions to the current state of affairs. For instance, developing countries such as China, India, and Korea are adept at developing highly educated individuals at cheaper costs (Tucker, 2007). This enables them to compete with the US economy. However, Levin (2015) explained that in the United States, educational institutions are having difficulty meeting the demands of students who are able to incorporate information from multiple subjects, operate in groups, and adjust to shifting circumstances. Reports such as "Tough Choices or Tough Times" highlight that the United States educational system must guarantee that learners acquire the abilities to succeed in the global marketplace (Tucker, 2007). Companies are searching for people who are knowledgeable in academic fields, have a global perspective, are capable of thinking critically, and overcome challenges. Azizi & Lasonen (2006), in their book, also wrote that modern schooling fails to prepare learners for the needs of today's globalized economy.
Educational systems should prioritize educating learners by combining knowledge gained from various fields to tackle complicated challenges. The focus is increasing students' awareness of global concerns and their capacity to engage in a global context. In this case, Moore (2005) maintains that educational institutions should develop learners to think critically, evaluate information effectively, and differentiate between credible and untrustworthy sources. In addition, Haryani et al. (2021) underscore that school systems aim to equip learners with the capacity to solve problems in innovative ways, especially in collaborative settings. Moreover, it aims to train learners to adjust quickly to changes, collaborate effectively in teams, and flourish in changing environments. An intensive educational strategy develops competitiveness, preparing learners for accomplishment in a constantly changing and interconnected environment.
The educational system's ability to generate students who are not only competent but also flexible and innovative is fundamental for maintaining global competitiveness. As economies develop as a result of technological developments and changing socioeconomic landscapes, schooling must also adapt (Tucker, 2007). Educational institutions that prioritize global competitiveness may foster learners with an attitude of constant learning and growth. Yeravdekar and Tiwari (2014) further elaborate that it involves cultivating adaptability in the face of change, supporting lifelong learning, and reinforcing the value of remaining informed with global developments. This approach prepares students for both job markets and future uncertainty.
Furthermore, Sanchez and Khreis (2020) claimed that global competition pushes an increased value on multifaceted knowledge and the capacity to collaborate across disciplines. As companies and industry sectors demand that employees incorporate knowledge from various fields of study, educational institutions must adapt by encouraging cross-disciplinary learning and collaboration. For instance, Demirel and Coşkun (2010) suggested that educational institutions could incorporate project-based learning, where learners solve real-world issues that require participation from different fields of study, reflecting the complexity within the international jobs market. By focusing on cultivating these qualities, educational systems make students flexible and competent in many professions, allowing them to make significant contributions to both national and international economic growth.
Prioritizing Delayed Gratification over Instant Gratification
Setting priorities for delayed gratification over instant satisfaction entails preferring higher, longer-lasting benefits over immediate but minor benefits. This case is often associated with health, prosperity, and so-called happiness (Y. Cheng et al., 2012). This notion can promote a forward-thinking perspective, encouraging an appreciation for delayed gratification. Additionally, this attitude encourages students to prioritize longer-term advantages over immediate pleasures, increasing their readiness to compromise immediate pleasure in favor of higher eventual rewards. In their study, Michaelson et al. (2013) found that delaying gratification requires confidence in the delivery of future advantages in order to work effectively. Students are less likely to wait for delayed benefits from less trustworthy traits. It implies that trust in society affects decision-making processes.
Conventional views hold that delaying gratification demonstrates excellent discipline. This case leads to improved academic attitudes and academic accomplishment. Duran and Grissmer's (2020) study revealed that children who favored instant gratification exhibited stronger executive function and behavioral regulations, yet this benefit did not persist. It implies that delayed gratification remains essential for long-term achievement. Learners who prioritize studying or completing tasks over instant rewards such as socializing or excitement tend to get better marks and acquire stronger values for work. Setting priorities for delayed gratification in education also assists students with developing abilities such as self-discipline, time management, and target planning, all of which are essential for long-term achievement and happiness in general (Sangsuk & Thipchart, 2023). Finally, by promoting delayed gratification, individuals, particularly learners, may attain more fulfillment, accomplishment, and pleasure in many facets of life, particularly education.
In an educational context, the ability to delay gratification fosters the growth of persistence and adaptability, both essential for overcoming learning difficulties. Learners who develop the ability to delay gratification become better prepared to face challenging tasks and setbacks because they recognize the significance of striving toward higher goals (Cheng & Catling, 2015). As an example, Duckworth et al. (2019) demonstrated that a student who persistently favors learning over instant pleasures like socializing or playing video games has a chance to cultivate an excellent academic basis. This perseverance not only results in higher marks but also promotes a growth mentality, in which the learner sees difficulties as chances for development rather than impediments. Gradually, this mentality can transform into a permanent routine of establishing and attaining higher objectives, which is valuable for professional and personal life.
Delaying rewards is also important in helping kids develop a greater sense of direction and meaning. Romer et al. (2010), in their study on self-control in adolescents, explained that when they understand the importance of long-term advantages over immediate rewards, they begin to recognize the intrinsic value of their work. This change in perspective may result in increased satisfaction and contentment as they realize that their efforts contribute to accomplishments, such as understanding a subject or attaining a career goal. Furthermore, learners who prioritize long-term objectives are more inclined to engage in actions that align with their core beliefs and desires, avoiding distractions from immediate pleasures. This alignment of practices and targets for the future can boost their perception of purpose (Zabenah, 2017). Moreover, it encourages others to seek outstanding performance within their studies and careers with a stronger dedication.
Misconceptions about Happiness and Competitiveness
Noddings (2003) argued that the educational objective is to teach individuals to think for themselves. Ultimately, it helps the community. Furthermore, he implied that working as a janitor may result in the same or better results as being a banker, considering it has little influence on their choice after graduation. However, Tucker (2007) argued that this viewpoint is insufficient now, particularly in a globalized society where competitiveness is required for individuals to survive. It becomes complicated when linked to the notion of delayed gratification and immediate pleasure in professional satisfaction (Cheng et al., 2012). Competitiveness must be prioritized to prevent businesses from potential financial losses. Particularly, if the school system promotes that it is acceptable to work as a janitor so long as the learner possesses knowledge equivalent to the skills of a banker, another of the educational goals is not fulfilled, that is competition (Stunkel, 1999). Particularly, if the school system promotes that it is acceptable to work as a janitor so long as the learner possesses knowledge equivalent to the skills of a banker, another of the educational goals is not fulfilled, that is competition.
Learners who embrace immediate gratification as an aspect of enjoyment may assume that the level of employment is insignificant as long as they gain equal knowledge. Specifically, immediate happiness does not allow learners to commit themselves to high professional goals. They may enjoy every second of happiness without postponing it (Bembenutty & Karabenick, 2004). This is the opposite of delayed fulfillment, in which learners set higher goals for their ideal jobs rather than settling for a job as a janitor. Both may eventually end up as janitors, but those who embrace delayed gratification will see that their experience is not sufficient to stay in that occupation and that they must compete by enhancing their abilities and adding benefits to the community (Stunkel, 1999). Learners who understand delayed gratification might encounter an immediate reward along with their delayed gratification.
The idea that pleasure is synonymous with immediate satisfaction frequently causes learners to underestimate the significance of competitiveness in obtaining lasting happiness (Romer et al., 2010). While contentment is subjective and differs from person to person, prioritizing instant pleasures may hinder one's capacity for development. Moreover, Sahlberg (2006) elaborated that in an interconnected society with increasingly competitive job markets, learners who seek instant pleasure might not be ready for the obstacles in acquiring and succeeding in their selected professions. Learning environments that encourage an atmosphere of competition may assist students in realizing that genuine happiness typically comes from attaining long-term objectives and overcoming difficulties rather than compromising short-term pleasures.
Furthermore, the notion that all occupations have equal value in the sense of personal satisfaction may hide the fact that different careers provide a variety of potential for growth, impact, and financial security. Sahlberg (2006) argued that although it is essential to appreciate all forms of employment, schooling must further emphasize the necessity of aiming for achievement and competition for positions that match one's abilities and goals. Learners who appreciate the meaning of competition tend to be more inclined to strive for excellence within their selected disciplines rather than accepting what is available (Pyyry & Sirviö, 2024). This determination not only increases their chances of success but also benefits the community and the economy holistically by guaranteeing that qualified persons are employed in positions where they can make an impact.
Strengthening Students’ Competitiveness through Education
Nowadays, the primary goal of education should be to nurture learners with a competitive mindset. Prosperous nations should prioritize contentment as they fulfill their essential economic needs, whereas developing countries need to focus on competitiveness to progress (Chung & Im, 2022). Furthermore, while developing countries must prioritize the well-being of learners, they must also maintain their competitive capacity to compete in the global marketplace. Stryzhak (2021) asserted that developed nations prioritize standards and maintain sophisticated infrastructure. It is reasonable to highlight happiness because it may even maximize citizen productivity. In this case, emerging countries must compete and achieve equality with advanced nations. Regardless of residents' perceptions, we must promote competitiveness. Both developed and developing countries share one common ground, namely competitiveness. Tucker (2007) suggested that prioritizing contentment in underdeveloped countries could enhance citizens' mental health, but it may not be enough to compete with developed nations.
Integrating global perspectives into education emphasizes that learners, whether in developed or developing countries, must learn about diverse cultures, global concerns, and international cooperation to compete globally. International activities, including exchange programs and global projects, allow learners to develop a global attitude and form worldwide connections (Chan et al., 2018). Moreover, Aggarwal and Wu (2022), in their study, emphasized that in a developing country, it is challenging to convey the international perspective, particularly in remote regions. All stakeholders in education, including teachers, must adopt this approach. For example, multilingualism benefits learners because proficiency in various languages offers many possibilities in global commerce, diplomatic efforts, and cooperation (Akujobi, 2019).
To increase learners' competitiveness, educational institutions should prioritize entrepreneurship and creative thinking. These abilities are required for learners to survive and thrive in an increasingly complicated global marketplace (Lefebvre, 2018). By promoting creative thinking and problem-solving, education may provide learners with the resources they have to not just adjust to but also impact the future economy. This approach is particularly important in developing countries, where the capacity to think creatively and generate novel possibilities is indispensable for overcoming financial challenges and attaining long-term growth. Kenworthy and McMullen (2014) also stated that education should incorporate entrepreneurship-promoting activities, such as startup incubators, innovation centers, and industrial partnerships, to offer learners practical knowledge and the confidence to aim for their business objectives.
Schools should focus on developing students' capacity for resilience and flexibility. Both soft skills are essential for success in global competition. Fernández-Díaz et al. (2021) explained that as the world becomes interdependent and businesses expand widely, the capacity to adapt and recover from failures is fundamental. Cultivating these skills in learners not only equips them to tackle the ambiguity of job markets but also allows them to select calculated possibilities and embrace them, which others might miss. Learning through experience, problem-based instruction, and other pedagogical practices that require learners to stand on themselves and negotiate complicated circumstances can promote the resilience needed for long-term achievement in any competitive environment (Kenworthy & McMullen, 2014).
Indonesian and Finnish Education on Competitiveness
To understand better how educational systems may adequately prepare students for the global marketplace, the author examines Indonesian and Finnish contexts. The Indonesian school system promotes challenging assessments and high standards (Sudarman et al., 2016). This aspect may benefit from a dedication to competition rather than enjoyment. Given Indonesia's goal of rapid growth in the age of globalization, enhancing its competitiveness could become crucial in competing with advanced countries. On the other hand, the Finnish educational system substantially promotes student happiness and creative thinking due to its outstanding facilities and resources (Andersson, 2022). Regardless, the Finnish educational system maintains competitive advantages to avoid immobility.
Indonesia's international competitiveness in the higher education service sector is uncertain, but it has potential. The revealed comparative index (RCI) highlights that while Indonesia has a solid status, it has experienced shifts throughout the years (Suryawati & Lizhen, 2019). The system needs to improve stability and performance. The cost of living, employment opportunities, and academic excellence have become significant factors in attracting international learners. The study found that these factors hold significant weight. These components significantly influence the decision of participants to select Indonesia as their study location. This suggests that the system must improve these aspects to increase its competitiveness.
The latest adjustments to the curriculum in Indonesia suggest an adaptation to economic integration. The goal is to provide learners with the abilities they need to succeed in a global setting. Integrating foreign language education, especially English, has been essential for preparing learners to communicate professionally (Pajarwati et al., 2021). The present educational environment promotes challenging assessments and high-performance requirements, potentially leading to a more competitive environment. Academic accomplishment may take precedence over the importance of student mental health. Furthermore, they clarified that Indonesia prioritizes enhancing competitiveness to catch up with developed countries, while simultaneously incorporating student well-being to some extent. This latest curriculum promotes intellectual excellence and personal fulfillment, resulting in competitiveness and competency while considering fulfillment and social engagement.
Meanwhile, Finland has made significant investments in excellent educational facilities. It plays a crucial role in fostering a conducive learning environment. This support system consists of highly qualified teachers, advanced resources, and simple accessibility to materials that improve the quality of education (Andersson, 2022). The Finnish school system values students' happiness. Schools become the nurturing places in which children can grow psychologically. It is critical for an education. The focus on mental health leads to improved academic achievement, as proven by Finland's excellent scores in international assessments such as PISA.
Given its focus on happiness and creativity, Finland acknowledges the significance of maintaining a competitive advantage in the global market. The school system adapts to changing economic conditions and job market demands. The system ensures learners have the skills needed to flourish in an evolving climate. Furthermore, Andersson (2022) emphasized that Finland's effective learning approach stems from its social and institutional structures, which promote collaboration among various groups such as teachers, policymakers, and society at large. This cooperation serves to keep the school system ahead and adaptable to the demands of the community.
Risks of Prioritizing Happiness in Education
While promoting happiness in school can produce a healthy environment, it remains important to note that such a focus may present numerous potential risks. These possible consequences may result in a substantial impact on learners' overall progress and future achievement. To further comprehend the potential drawbacks of valuing contentment in education, consider these three significant results:
Low Academic Performance
The global reforming education effort prioritizes standardized tests emphasizing fundamental abilities. Sahlberg (2006) argued that this approach could hinder students from developing an authentic appreciation of learning and exploration because they may feel obliged to comply with testing norms rather than pursue their passions. This misunderstanding might result in a drop in academic achievement when learners disconnect from their education (Stunkel, 1999). A society that prioritizes pleasure over innovation and taking risks could leave learners unprepared for the challenges of understanding the economy. The absence of possibilities for collaborative learning and problem-solving may restrict the growth of intellectual abilities required for academic achievement.
Learners are becoming more dependent on institutions to meet their psychological demands, perhaps shifting their priority away from conventional academic targets and toward satisfying their emotions (Stunkel, 1999). This norm may establish a culture in which personal happiness prioritizes intellectual accomplishment, potentially decreasing academic achievement. Effective educational systems maintain the balance between the personal domain, interactions with others, and the business environment, which involves technical abilities and knowledge. Sahlberg (2006) implied that stressing happiness over high academic requirements might result in an imbalance that eventually affects learners' preparedness for future educational and employment challenges.
Diminishing resilience and adaptability in students
A strong focus on personal enjoyment may contribute to hyper-individualization, in which learners assume exclusive responsibility for their psychological well-being. This perspective could limit their ability to overcome obstacles, as they might not possess the flexibility to manage challenges in both professional and personal settings (Pyyry & Sirviö, 2024). In an increasingly competitive educational setting, focusing on individual fulfillment lessens the willingness to try new opportunities or accept failures. Their anxiety about not being happy or accomplished can limit their capacity for adaptation. This anxiety leads them to avoid situations that present challenges for learning and development. Prioritizing happiness can cause educational objectives to change from fostering critical thinking and problem-solving skills to solely focusing on gaining a sense of fulfillment (Stunkel, 1999). This shift has the potential to diminish a learner's resilience, as they may not acquire the necessary skills to cope with life's challenges.
Happiness-centric educational approaches often avoid critical feedback to maintain a positive environment. However, constructive feedback is essential for intellectual development. Without understanding how to embrace and react to suggestions, children may fail to adjust their techniques to enhance their abilities, thus reducing their capacity for perseverance in the face of adversity (Pyyry & Sirviö, 2024). If learners prioritize enjoyment over obtaining important skills such as problem-solving and critical thinking, they may find themselves unprepared to deal with the challenges of life and employment. It results in lower flexibility.
Limiting long-term career competitiveness
Zembylas (2020) argued that prioritizing happiness could create an environment where learners prioritize personal fulfillment over the diligent work and dedication necessary to succeed in global labor markets. This perspective may hinder their capacity to succeed in challenging activities that promote individual development and job preparation. However, learners may avoid difficulties and failures if schooling prioritizes happiness. The absence of experience may limit their capacity to acquire the resilience and dedication required to survive in the complicated professional environments (Frawley, 2015). It reduces their ability to compete in the employment market. The pursuit of happiness may lead to an education that does not align with the knowledge and abilities sought by businesses. Consequently, individuals might graduate without sufficient skills or competencies to increase their employment opportunities.
According to a study by Gibbs (2015), if students avoid challenges in school due to a false sense of happiness, they may not learn how to solve real-world problems. The lack of experience may limit their capacity to adjust and prosper in many job circumstances, compromising their future opportunities. Furthermore, Frawley (2015) implied that in a school environment, prioritizing happiness over responsibility and strong expectations might hinder learners from reaching their maximum potential. It may result in a workforce that does not possess the necessary credentials and skills, decreasing fundamental job competitiveness. Prioritizing happiness over long-term career objectives can lead to an immediate interest in schooling. It could lead learners to select easier routes that are incompatible with their professional goals, reducing their competitiveness in the employment market.
Conclusion
Today's educational environment must emphasize the growth of learners so they can compete and better equip them for a changing global market. While fostering happiness is necessary, focusing too much on these factors can hinder academic achievement, resiliency, and possibilities for future employment. Globalization has increased the demand for specialized abilities and flexibility. Thus, it becomes critical for school systems to balance promoting happiness and providing learners with the tools they need to succeed in today's job market. Education may equip students with the tools for fulfillment. They can also contribute to society by fostering delayed gratification, critical thinking, and cross-disciplinary teams. As demonstrated by the comparison of the Indonesian and Finnish systems, there is no universal solution, but both nations underline the value of preserving their competitive edge in school. Consequently, equipping kids with the skills to thrive in today's demanding and interconnected world requires an equitable structure prioritizing competition over happiness.
References
Aggarwal, R., & Wu, Y. (2022). International Business Teaching for Remote Students: Challenges and Adaptations. Journal of Teaching in International Business, 33(1), 1–6. https://doi.org/10.1080/08975930.2022.2114263
Akujobi, O. S. (2019). The power of multilingualism in a globalized economy. IGWEBUIKE: African Journal of Arts and Humanities, 5(1). https://acjol.org/index.php/iaajah/article/view/2384
Andersson, J. O. (2022). Explaining Finnish Economic and Social Success–And Happiness. Studia Europejskie, 26(4), 177–198.
Azizi, N., & Lasonen, J. (2006). Education, training and the economy: Preparing young people for a changing labour market. Institute for Educational Research, University of Jyväskylä. https://jyx.jyu.fi/bitstream/handle/123456789/47614/1/978-951-39-4694-4.pdf
Baer, J. (2012). Domain Specificity and the Limits of Creativity Theory. The Journal of Creative Behavior, 46(1), 16–29. https://doi.org/10.1002/jocb.002
Bembenutty, H., & Karabenick, S. A. (2004). Inherent Association Between Academic Delay of Gratification, Future Time Perspective, and Self-Regulated Learning. Educational Psychology Review, 16(1), 35–57. https://doi.org/10.1023/B:EDPR.0000012344.34008.5c
Chan, K. C., Fung, H.-G., & Yau, J. (2018). Advancing Learning in International Business Related to a Global Mindset: An Introduction. Journal of Teaching in International Business, 29(1), 1–3. https://doi.org/10.1080/08975930.2018.1455878
Cheng, V., & Catling, J. (2015). The role of resilience, delayed gratification and stress in predicting academic performance. Psychology Teaching Review, 21(1), 13–24.
Cheng, Y., Shein, P. P., & Chiou, W. (2012). Escaping the impulse to immediate gratification: The prospect concept promotes a future‐oriented mindset, prompting an inclination towards delayed gratification. British Journal of Psychology, 103(1), 129–141. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-8295.2011.02067.x
Chung, K. H., & Im, T. (2022). Happiness in developing countries: Can government competitiveness substitute for formal institutions? International Review of Administrative Sciences, 88(3), 899–918. https://doi.org/10.1177/00208523211000421
Demirel, M., & Coşkun, Y. D. (2010). Case study on interdisciplinary teaching approach supported by project based learning. The International Journal of Research in Teacher Education, 2(3), 28–53.
Duckworth, A. L., Taxer, J. L., Eskreis-Winkler, L., Galla, B. M., & Gross, J. J. (2019). Self-Control and Academic Achievement. Annual Review of Psychology, 70(1), 373–399. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-psych-010418-103230
Duran, C. A., & Grissmer, D. W. (2020). Choosing immediate over delayed gratification correlates with better school-related outcomes in a sample of children of color from low-income families. Developmental Psychology, 56(6), 1107.
Fernández-Díaz, J. R., Gutiérrez-Ortega, M., Llamas-Salguero, F., & Cantón-Mayo, I. (2021). Creativity and resilience as predictors of career success. Sustainability, 13(8), 4489.
Frankowska, A., Głowacka-Toba, A., Rasińska, R., & Prussak, E. (2015). Students entering the labour market, their hopes, expectations and opportunities in the context of sustainable economic development. Journal of International Studies, 7(3), 209–222.
Frawley, A. (2015). Happiness Research: A Review of Critiques. Sociology Compass, 9(1), 62–77. https://doi.org/10.1111/soc4.12236
Gibbs, P. (2015). Happiness and education: Troubling students for their own contentment. Time & Society, 24(1), 54–70. https://doi.org/10.1177/0961463X14561780
Haryani, E., Coben, W. W., Pleasants, B. A., & Fetters, M. K. (2021). Analysis of teachers’ resources for integrating the skills of creativity and innovation, critical thinking and problem solving, collaboration, and communication in science classrooms. Jurnal Pendidikan IPA Indonesia, 10(1), 92–102.
Kenworthy, T. P., & McMullen, W. E. (2014). From philosophy of science to theory testing: Generating practical knowledge in entrepreneurship. In Handbook of research methods and applications in entrepreneurship and small business (pp. 20–55). Edward Elgar Publishing. https://www.elgaronline.com/downloadpdf/edcoll/9780857935045/9780857935045.00009.pdf
Kunzman, R. (2005). Educating for More (and Less) Than Intelligent Belief or Unbelief: A Critique of Noddings’s Vision of Religion in Public Schools. Philosophy of Education Yearbook.
Lefebvre, Q. (2018). Inspiring entrepreneurship through creative thinking. KnE Social Sciences, 131–137.
Levin, H. M. (2015). The Importance of Adaptability for the 21st Century. Society, 52(2), 136–141. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12115-015-9874-6
Merrifield, J. (2005). Specialization in a competitive education industry: Areas and impacts. Cato J., 25, 317.
Michaelson, L., De la Vega, A., Chatham, C. H., & Munakata, Y. (2013). Delaying gratification depends on social trust. Frontiers in Psychology, 4, 355.
Moore, P. (2005). An analysis of information literacy education worldwide. School Libraries Worldwide, 11(2), 1–23.
Noddings, N. (2003). Happiness and Education. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511499920
Pajarwati, D., Mardiah, H., Harahap, R. P., Siagian, R. O., & Ihsan, M. T. (2021). Curriculum reform in Indonesia: English education toward the global competitiveness. ETDC: Indonesian Journal of Research and Educational Review, 1(1), 28–36.
Pring, R. (2004). Philosophy of Educational Research. Bloomsbury Publishing Plc. http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/kutu/detail.action?docID=564292
Pyyry, N., & Sirviö, H. (2024). Landscape of competition: Education, economisation and young people’s wellbeing. Environment and Planning A: Economy and Space, 56(2), 491–507. https://doi.org/10.1177/0308518X231197303
Romer, D., Duckworth, A. L., Sznitman, S., & Park, S. (2010). Can Adolescents Learn Self-control? Delay of Gratification in the Development of Control over Risk Taking. Prevention Science, 11(3), 319–330. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11121-010-0171-8
Sahlberg, P. (2006). Education Reform for Raising Economic Competitiveness. Journal of Educational Change, 7(4), 259–287. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10833-005-4884-6
Sanchez, K. A., & Khreis, H. (2020). Chapter twenty—The role of cross-disciplinary education, training, and workforce development at the intersection of transportation and health. In M. J. Nieuwenhuijsen & H. Khreis (Eds.), Advances in Transportation and Health (pp. 423–450). Elsevier. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-819136-1.00020-6
Sangsuk, N., & Thipchart, T. (2023). Discipline Strategies: Parent’s Experiences for Early Childhood Development in North Eastern, Thailand. Jurnal Keperawatan Soedirman, 18(1), 8–17.
Stryzhak, O. (2021). The connection between economic freedom, education, and happiness. Ukrainian Journal of Educational Studies and Information Technology, 9(3), 58–69.
Stunkel, K. R. (1999). Quality in liberal education and illusions of the academy. Liberal Education, 85(4), 54.
Sudarman, E., Sawitri, N. N., & Budiono, G. L. (2016). Development of education in Indonesia an effort to strengthening innovation systems and international competitiveness. Vector European, 3, 14–20.
Suryawati, S., & Lizhen, C. (2019). International Competitiveness of Indonesia’s Higher Education Services Trade. International Journal of Economics, Business and Accounting Research (IJEBAR), 3(04). https://jurnal.stie-aas.ac.id/index.php/IJEBAR/article/view/758
Tucker, M. (2007). Charting a New Course for Schools. https://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/document?repid=rep1&type=pdf&doi=40688649c076a779a8ad1f0b1c933746fda9e939
Yeravdekar, V. R., & Tiwari, G. (2014). Internationalization of higher education and its impact on enhancing corporate competitiveness and comparative skill formation. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 157, 203–209.
Zabenah, R. (2017). Purpose-driven education: Social entrepreneurship as a pedagogical tool for student success [PhD Thesis, Creighton University]. https://search.proquest.com/openview/0b75c08ffbbe219d15c5bc9664b42878/1?pq-origsite=gscholar&cbl=18750
Zembylas, M. (2020). (Un)happiness and social justice education: Ethical, political and pedagogic lessons. Ethics and Education, 15(1), 18–32. https://doi.org/10.1080/17449642.2019.1697058
No comments:
Post a Comment