In the context of the dynamic evolution of positive psychology, psychological capital, conceptualized as a positive psychological disposition exhibited by individuals throughout their growth trajectories, encompasses four pivotal dimensions: self-efficacy, hope, resilience, and optimism (Luthans et al., 2006). A plethora of research findings has indicated that students possessing high levels of psychological capital are predisposed to confront academic hurdles with enhanced positivity, demonstrating greater inclination and commitment toward the learning process, and thereby manifesting high levels of learning engagement (Lin, 2020). Research has further suggested that students’ learning engagement is influenced by the environment created by the school, the support offered by teachers, and individuals’ intrinsic factors (Huang & Wang, 2023). Students’ perception of teacher support has been regarded as a critical factor to increase their learning engagement (Ertmer et al., 2012). Apart from these external factors, previous studies have found that students with higher psychological capital intrinsically display more effort and persistence when they engage in learning activities (Suárez et al., 2019). However, the underlying mechanism of both teacher support and psychological capital on students’ learning engagement remains underexplored. Thus, this study’s main contributions lie in highlighting the vital role of perceived teacher support in students’ learning engagement and examining the impact mechanism of psychological capital functioning on both teacher support and learning engagement.

Teacher support plays a significant role in influencing students’ affective, cognitive and social behaviors (Lai, 2015). The efficacy of teacher support manifests itself in the intellectual and social progress of students at school (Katyal & Evers, 2004). Due to the significance of teacher support, studies have approached it from different perspectives. For example, Lai (2015) classified perceived teacher support into three categories: teacher affection support, teacher behavior support, and teacher capacity support. Perceived teacher support has been found to be positively associated with academic self-efficacy (Sakiz et al., 2012), intrinsic motivation (Peng et al., 2022), and learning engagement (Skinner et al., 2008). Research has also reported that guidance and support from teachers drives students’ engagement in language learning (Ertmer et al., 2012), and helps students incorporate learning resources and activities into their learning ecology (Lai et al., 2015). Furthermore, teacher support, as an external factor, may promote engagement through the influence of internal factors (Helgeson & Lopez, 2010).

Learning engagement is considered a multidimensional construct, which primarily centers on learners’ behavior and performance in relation to the affection, effort, concentration, and amount of time they invest in learning, which can be observed and explicitly manifests as emotional, behavioral, and cognitive engagement (Sadoughi & Hejazi, 2021). Given the significant effect of interpersonal interaction on learner engagement, some researchers have highlighted that interaction reflects mutual actions and influence between learners and teachers as well as learners and their peers, which not only involves learners’ attempt to communicate, cooperate, and discuss to solve problems, but also the input of establishing a good relationship with individuals in the learning environment (Hamane, 2014). The degree of learners’ behavioral engagement has been found to be significantly influenced by external factors, especially teacher support, which promotes learners’ academic behaviors (Murray, 2009). Learning engagement has also been found to be strongly associated with learners’ internal factors, such as interests, self-efficacy, and learning motivation. For instance, Rose-Krasnor (2009) identified learning engagement as a prerequisite for emotional engagement, such as inner interest in certain subjects. Although some studies have explored learning engagement in connection with educational issues, there is still little understanding of the potential contributions of both teacher support and psychological capital in affecting students’ learning engagement during second language acquisition (Sadoughi & Hejazi, 2021).

Goldsmith et al. (1997) described psychological capital as the features of personality that psychologists believe contribute to an individual’s productivity, involving perception of self, attitude toward work, ethical orientation, and general outlook on life. Acknowledging the unique and intrinsic mechanism of psychological capital, Luthans et al. (2006) concluded that psychological capital is a positive intrinsic momentum that stimulates personal motivational effects by providing positive conditions and positive resources for personal growth. Thus, many aspects of positive psychological capital are internal, measurable, and developable. Teacher support has been found to be significantly associated with psychological capital, and different dimensions of psychological capital have an impact on learning engagement. Carmona-Halty et al. (2021) posited that students’ psychological capital can be enhanced if they establish high-quality relationships with their teachers (i.e., fulfilling their need for relatedness). Students with high levels of psychological resilience have a greater degree of engagement in their studies, while students with high levels of perceived social support are more hopeful about themselves and more positive about their studies (Snyder et al., 2005). At the same time, optimism can stimulate individuals’ goal motivation, making them more motivated to adopt a positive attitude toward achieving them, and significantly predicting their engagement in learning.

 

Teachers have an authoritative and irreplaceable position within the school system, and students’ perception of teacher support can make them feel warm and appreciated, and thus grateful to their teachers, which demonstrates a positive relationship between teacher support and students’ psychological capital (Chu, 2024). Similarly, Fredricks et al. (2016) found that the interaction between the individual and their environment influences learning engagement. Individual factors include psychological resilience when confronted with adversity, while the external environment encompasses the school climate and home environment that may be reflected in individual factors. Psychological capital as an individual factor can positively impact the level of learning engagement (Lin, 2020). Previous studies have found that teacher support can facilitate students’ psychological adjustment, alleviate their anxiety and loneliness within the campus milieu, and influence their classroom motivation and learning behaviors (Wentzel et al., 2017). Therefore, we investigated whether perceived teacher support influences students’ learning engagement through psychological capital.

This study advanced several hypotheses and constructed the model shown in Figure 1.

Hypothesis 1: Perceived teacher support will predict learning engagement.

Hypothesis 2: Perceived teacher support will predict psychological capital.

Hypothesis 3: Psychological capital will predict learning engagement.

Hypothesis 4: Psychological capital will mediate the relationship between perceived teacher support and learning engagement.

Our sample comprised 416 undergraduate students from eight parallelled classes in a blended English course at a large comprehensive university in China, who voluntarily participated in a face-to-face survey during class, and provided informed consent. After discarding incomplete forms, we retained 398 valid questionnaires from 118 men and 280 women, for an effective rate of response of 95.67%.

Participants completed English versions of the measures. Items were rated on a 6-point Likert scale ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 6 (strongly agree).

 

Perceived teacher support was assessed with 10 items adapted from Lai (2015) and Yang et al. (2022), spanning three dimensions: perceived teacher affection support (three items, e.g., “My teacher encourages us to use websites to learn English”), perceived teacher behavior support (four items, e.g., “My teacher assigns some learning tasks through an online platform”), and perceived teacher capacity support (three items, e.g., “My teacher recommends useful online resources to us”). A confirmatory factor analysis demonstrated a satisfactory model fit, χ²/df = 2.718, comparative fit index (CFI) = .977, Tucker–Lewis index (TLI) = .967, root-mean-square error of approximation (RMSEA) = .073, standardized root-mean-square residual (SRMR) = .056. Cronbach’s alpha and Kaiser–Meyer–Olkin (KMO) values were .94 and .90, respectively, indicating high reliability and acceptable validity.

 

Learning engagement was assessed with eight items revised from Schaufeli et al.’s (2002) Learning Engagement Scale to fit the study context. A sample item is “I am willing to spend time learning English.” Cronbach’s alpha was .95 and KMO was .93, indicating that the scale had good reliability and validity.

 

Psychological capital was assessed using five items from Luthans et al. (2006). A sample item is “I have confidence in learning English.” Cronbach’s alpha was .94 and KMO was .89, indicating good reliability and validity.

This study used SPSS 21.0 and Amos 21.0 for statistical processing.

Descriptive statistics and correlation analysis results are presented in Table 1. There were significant positive correlations between perceived teacher support, learning engagement, and psychological capital.

We examined the fit of the measurement model via a confirmatory factor analysis, calculating the average variance extracted (AVE) and standard error values of parameter estimates as well as the square root of AVE for each construct (Teo, 2009). Table 1 shows that the square root of AVE of each construct was higher than the corresponding correlation for that variable in all cases, suggesting good discriminant validity of the measurement model. Table 2 indicates good convergent validity of the measurement model, since the standardized factor loadings of all items exceeded .70 and AVE exceeded the minimum value of .50.

We established a structural equation model (see Figure 2) and adopted Amos 21.0 to perform a path analysis testing the hypothesized model. The model achieved a good fit to the data, χ²/df = 2.892 (< 3), TLI = .914 (> .90), CFI = .933 (> .90), RMSEA = .069 (< .08), SRMR = .054 (< .06).

As indicated in Table 3, perceived teacher support significantly and positively predicted both learning engagement and psychological capital, thereby supporting Hypotheses 1 and 2. Further, psychological capital significantly and positively predicted learning engagement, thus supporting Hypothesis 3.

As shown in Table 4, psychological capital significantly mediated the relationship between perceived teacher support and learning engagement, indirect effect = .153 (p < .001), 95% confidence interval [0.099, 0.229]; therefore, Hypothesis 4 was supported.

Although students’ learning engagement is a crucial element in the learning process, the joint mechanisms through which both external and internal factors influence this engagement remain underexplored. This study delved into the functional mechanisms of perceived teacher support and psychological capital in relation to learning engagement.

This study found that perceived teacher support was not only significantly and positively correlated with learning engagement, but also indirectly predicted learning engagement through the mediating role of psychological capital, extending the conclusions drawn in previous studies (Lai, 2015; Lamb & Reinders, 2008). Teachers can offer the social support needed by students to complete their learning tasks (Luan et al., 2020). Perceived teacher support promotes healthy psychological and personality development, increased self-efficacy, greater confidence in learning, and more positive emotions (Reschly et al., 2008). Thus, teachers should enhance their awareness of offering necessary support for students, and schools should reinforce the psychological building of college students and improve their psychological capital, while attaching importance to cultural programs.

Research has indicated that all aspects of psychological capital and subjective well-being contribute to learning engagement. Self-efficacy is an important factor in promoting students’ engagement in learning (Huang & Wang, 2023). Individuals with high self-efficacy tend to possess a more positive mindset, thus exhibiting heightened optimism and resilience in both life and learning, frequently accompanied by increased learning engagement. Concurrently, those possessing high psychological capital experience significant positive emotions. As suggested by Luthans et al. (2006), individuals in a positive affective state possess enhanced adaptive capacities and display greater learning engagement. Therefore, educators can enhance students’ learning engagement by facilitating the establishment of learning goals, devising challenging yet achievable tasks, and cultivating a positive classroom environment, thereby fostering the development of students’ psychological capital.

From the perspective of ecological systems theory (Bronfenbrenner, 1994), probing the mediating effect of psychological capital has facilitated unveiling the factors through which perceived teacher support impacts individual psychological capital, and the cognitive mechanisms underlying learning engagement. This study identified that perceived teacher support predicted students’ learning engagement via the mediator of psychological capital. These results support previous research findings that psychological capital serves as a crucial mediating element in the relationship between perceived teacher support and engagement in learning (Chu, 2024), influencing an individual’s conscious control over their thoughts and actions, and indicating that a reduction in psychological capital is a proximal factor leading to psychological negativity (Carmona-Halty et al., 2021). Hence, educators ought to emphasize the caliber and consistency of their supportive actions toward students. Concurrently, attention should be given to fostering students’ psychological capital, for example, bolstering their self-assurance, hope, resilience, and optimism via encouragement and affirmation.

The findings of this study highlight the paramount importance of raising teachers’ awareness of the substantial support they need to give students to enhance their engagement in learning. We call for further research efforts to comprehend the nature of the impact of psychological capital on individuals’ learning engagement.

This study has several limitations. First, the results were drawn from a relatively small sample, which may restrict their generalizability. Future research could involve a larger cohort of students from diverse locations and majors. Second, the use of a cross-sectional design prevents us from drawing conclusions around causality. Thus, future studies are recommended to employ both quantitative and qualitative approaches and conduct longitudinal or experimental studies to improve understanding of the causal relationships between the variables.

Bronfenbrenner, U. (1994). Ecological models of human development. In T. Husen & T. N. Postlethwaite (Eds.), International encyclopedia of education (Vol. 3, 2nd ed., pp. 1643–1647). Elsevier Science.

 

Carmona-Halty, M., Salanova, M., Llorens, S., & Schaufeli, W. B. (2021). Linking positive emotions and academic performance: The mediated role of academic psychological capital and academic engagement. Current Psychology, 40(6), 2938–2947. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-019-00227-8

 

Chu, T. (2024). Teacher and family support, teacher–student relationship, and psychological capital in online learning: A moderated mediation model. Social Behavior and Personality: An international journal, 52(5), Article e13061.  https://doi.org/10.2224/sbp.13061

 

Ertmer, P. A., Ottenbreit-Leftwich, A. T., Sadik, O., Sendurur, E., & Sendurur, P. (2012). Teacher beliefs and technology integration practices: A critical relationship. Computers & Education, 59(2), 423–435. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2012.02.001

 

Fredricks, J. A., Filsecker, M., & Lawson, M. A. (2016). Student engagement, context, and adjustment: Addressing definitional, measurement, and methodological issues. Learning and Instruction, 43, 1–4. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2016.02.002

 

Goldsmith, A. H., Veum, J. R., & Darity, W. (1997). The impact of psychological and human capital on wages. Economic Inquiry, 35(4), 815–829. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1465-7295.1997.tb01966.x

 

Hamane, A. C. (2014). Student engagement in an online course and its impact on student success. Pepperdine University.

 

Helgeson, V. S., & Lopez, L. (2010). Social support and growth following adversity. In J. W. Reich, A. J. Zautra, & J. S. Hall (Eds.), Handbook of adult resilience (pp. 309–330). Guilford Press.

 

Huang, L., & Wang, D. (2023). Teacher support, academic self-efficacy, student engagement, and academic achievement in emergency online learning. Behavioral Sciences, 13(9), Article 704. https://doi.org/10.3390/bs13090704

 

Katyal, K. R., & Evers, C. W. (2004). Teacher leadership and autonomous student learning: Adjusting to the new realities. International Journal of Educational Research, 41(4–5), 367–382. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijer.2005.08.007

 

Lai, C. (2015). Modeling teachers’ influence on learners’ self-directed use of technology for language learning outside the classroom. Computers and Education, 82, 74–83. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2014.11.005

 

Lai, C., Zhu, W. M., & Gong, G. (2015). Understanding the quality of out-of-class English learning. TESOL Quarterly, 49(2), 278–308. https://doi.org/10.1002/tesq.171

 

Lamb, T., & Reinders, H. (2008). Learner and teacher autonomy: Concepts, realities and responses. John Benjamins Publishing Company. https://doi.org/10.1075/aals.1

 

Lin, Y.-T. (2020). The interrelationship among psychological capital, mindful learning, and English learning engagement of university students in Taiwan. Sage Open, 10(1), Article 2158244020901603. https://doi.org/10.1177/2158244020901603

 

Luan, L., Hong, J.-C., Cao, M., Dong, Y., & Hou, X. (2020). Exploring the role of online EFL learners’ perceived social support in their learning engagement: A structural equation model. Interactive Learning Environments, 31(3), 1703–1714. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2020.1855211

 

Luthans, F., Avey, J. B., Avolio, B. J., Norman, S. M., & Combs, G. M. (2006). Psychological capital development: Toward a micro-intervention. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 27(3), 387–393. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.373

 

Murray, C. (2009). Parent and teacher relationships as predictors of school engagement and functioning among low-income urban youth. The Journal of Early Adolescence, 29(3), 376–404. https://doi.org/10.1177/0272431608322940

 

Peng, X., Sun, X., & He, Z. (2022). Influence mechanism of teacher support and parent support on the academic achievement of secondary vocational students. Frontiers in Psychology, 13, Article 863740. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.863740

 

Reschly, A. L., Huebner, E. S., Appleton, J. J., & Antaramian, S. (2008). Engagement as flourishing: The contribution of positive emotions and coping to adolescents’ engagement at school and with learning. Psychology in the Schools, 45(5), 419–431. https://doi.org/10.1002/pits.20306

 

Rose-Krasnor, L. (2009). Future directions in youth involvement research. Social Development, 18(2), 497–509. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9507.2008.00506.x

 

Sadoughi, M., & Hejazi, S. Y. (2021). Teacher support and academic engagement among EFL learners: The role of positive academic emotions. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 70, Article 101060. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stueduc.2021.101060

 

Sakiz, G., Pape, S. J., & Hoy, A. W. (2012). Does perceived teacher affective support matter for middle school students in mathematics classrooms? Journal of School Psychology, 50(2), 235–255. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsp.2011.10.005

 

Schaufeli, W. B., Martínez, I. M., Pinto, A. M., Salanova, M., & Bakker, A. B. (2002). Burnout and engagement in university students: A cross-national study. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 33(5), 464–481. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022022102033005003

 

Skinner, E., Furrer, C., Marchand, G., & Kindermann, T. (2008). Engagement and disaffection in the classroom: Part of a larger motivational dynamic? Journal of Educational Psychology, 100(4), 765–781. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0012840

 

Snyder, C. R., Berg, C., Woodward, J. T., Gum, A., Rand, K. L., Wrobleski, K. K., Brown, J., & Hackman, A. (2005). Hope against the cold: Individual differences in trait hope and acute pain tolerance on the cold pressor task. Journal of Personality, 73(2), 287–312. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6494.2005.00318.x

 

Suárez, N., Regueiro, B., Estévez, I., del Mar Ferradás, M., Guisande, M. A., & Rodríguez, S. (2019). Individual precursors of student homework behavioral engagement: The role of intrinsic motivation, perceived homework utility and homework attitude. Frontiers in Psychology, 10, Article 941. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.00941

 

Teo, T. (2009). Modelling technology acceptance in education: A study of pre-service teachers. Computers & Education, 52(2), 302–312. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2008.08.006

 

Wentzel, K. R., Muenks, K., McNeish, D., & Russell, S. (2017). Peer and teacher supports in relation to motivation and effort: A multi-level study. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 49, 32–45. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2016.11.002

 

Yang, G., Sun, W., & Jiang, R. (2022). Interrelationship amongst university student perceived learning burnout, academic self-efficacy, and teacher emotional support in China’s English online learning context. Frontiers in Psychology, 13, Article 829193. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.829193