Sudarto M. Abukasim
Hari Sutrisno- Department of Chemistry Education, Faculty of Mathematics and Natural Science, Yogyakarta State University, Yogyakarta, Indonesia
This study examines the interaction between teacher learning character, student learning character, and school climate in influencing students’ cognitive achievement. Data from 1,057 high school students in North Maluku was analyzed using the Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM) approach. This study explores the direct relationship and mediation between variables. The results showed that teacher competence and innovation significantly improved teacher efficacy (R2 = 0.576) and teacher performance (R2 = 0.670) despite its direct influence on students’ low cognitive achievement (R2 = 0.024). In contrast, student character, such as learning style, learning concepts, and academic perseverance, had a more direct and mediating influence on cognitive outcomes, with academic perseverance as the primary mediator. In addition, the school climate moderates the relationship between teacher innovation and cognitive achievement, which shows a selective yet essential role. These findings emphasize the importance of encouraging teacher innovation, increasing student perseverance, and building a supportive school environment to optimize educational outcomes. This study highlights the complexity of the interaction between teaching, learning, and environmental factors and suggests the need for integrated strategies to improve students’ cognitive achievement.
1 Introduction
Students’ cognitive achievement is one of the leading indicators in determining the success of the educational process, which is the ultimate goal of various education systems worldwide. This achievement reflects how students understand, master, and apply knowledge across multiple learning contexts(Alruwais and Zakariah, 2023; T. Zhang et al., 2023). Factors that affect cognitive achievement include internal and external elements of students, including learning ability, motivation, and support from the educational environment (Dadandı and Yazıcı, 2024; Shi and Qu, 2022). Although many studies have explored the influence of individual variables such as motivation and learning strategies on cognitive achievement, there has not been much that has discussed in depth the combination of teacher learning character and student learning character as the primary predictor variable (de Bofarull, 2019; Wagner et al., 2020). To understand how the interaction between these internal and external factors can affect student learning outcomes. In addition, it is essential to explore the role of teachers in creating a learning environment that supports students’ cognitive development.
The role of teachers in supporting students’ cognitive achievement is very significant, primarily through competence, efficacy, performance, and innovation in learning. Teacher competence relates to pedagogic and professional abilities that directly affect how they deliver material to students (Channa et al., 2024; Fauth et al., 2019; Kaiser and König, 2019). Teacher efficacy describes teachers’ confidence in helping students achieve academic success, which has been shown to impact learning outcomes (Floyd, 2023; Husain et al., 2023; Javidanmehr and Anani Sarab, 2019). Teacher performance and innovation are essential in creating a dynamic and engaging learning atmosphere (Shelty et al., 2023). Some studies show that although teachers have good competence and efficacy, their impact on student achievement is inconsistent, primarily if a conducive school climate does not support it. This indicates the need for a more integrated approach to understanding how these factors interact.
Students learning character is essential in determining their academic success, primarily through learning style, conception, and academic persistence(Genith Isaza Domínguez et al., 2025; Sejdiu Shala et al., 2024). The learning style reflects the unique way students process information, which relates to the cognitive and metacognitive strategies used to understand, remember, and apply knowledge. Adaptive learning styles can increase student engagement in learning and lead to better cognitive achievement (Halkiopoulos and Gkintoni, 2024). Additionally, constructive conceptions of learning, such as the understanding that learning is an active and ongoing process, have been shown to encourage students to develop more effective learning strategies (Carpenter et al., 2022; Fixen, 2021). Therefore, a learning approach that follows students’ learning styles is crucial to supporting their success.
The conception of learning is crucial in shaping how students understand and undergo the learning process. Students who believe that learning is a process that involves exploration and reflection tend to be more successful in facing academic challenges (Cai et al., 2021; Lowyck et al., 2004). These beliefs also influence how they use learning resources and face obstacles during the learning process (Dewi et al., 2022; Kandaga et al., 2023). In addition, students with a positive conception of learning are more likely to develop self-confidence and self-efficacy in achieving their academic goals (Cohen and Katz, 2024; Khine and Nielsen, 2022). However, without the support of a conducive learning environment, the positive effects of this conception of learning may not be fully realized, so there is a need for collaboration between teachers, students, and other elements of the school environment (Kaldırım and Tavşanlı, 2018; Shand and Goddard, 2024).
Academic persistence contributes significantly to students’ cognitive achievement, especially in helping them stay motivated to face various challenges (Torgrimson et al., 2021; You, 2018). This persistence reflects the student’s ability to remain focused on their academic goals despite obstacles, such as time pressure or lack of resources(Pinugu and Ouano, 2022; Xavier and Meneses, 2022). Academic persistence positively correlates with deep learning strategies and superior learning outcomes (Cents-Boonstra et al., 2021; Thompson and Lake, 2023; Vettori et al., 2020). The interaction between students’ academic persistence and other factors, such as teacher character and school climate, is still underexplored. To bridge that gap by exploring how academic persistence can be strengthened through collaboration between students, teachers, and a supportive school environment.
The school climate as moderation plays an essential role in creating an environment that supports the relationship between teacher and student character toward cognitive achievement (Shumakova et al., 2023; Teng, 2020). A positive school climate, which includes physical, social, and academic aspects, has been shown to increase student engagement in learning as well as support teacher-teaching effectiveness (Al-Zu’bi et al., 2024; Grazia and Molinari, 2023; Rinchen, 2020). Studies conducted by Wei1 et al. (2024) demonstrate that a supportive environment significantly impacts student motivation, teacher efficacy, and learning outcomes (Cai and Lombaerts, 2024). However, research that integrates school climate as a moderation variable in models involving teacher and student characters is still minimal, thus opening up opportunities to make greater theoretical and practical contributions.
This study aims to compare the teacher’s learning character model with the student’s learning character on cognitive achievement influenced by school climate as a moderation in the research. The use of the PLS-SEM (Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling) approach was chosen because it has the advantage of handling models with many latent variables and indicators, especially in studies that are exploitative and focus on predicting the relationship between variables(Hair and Alamer, 2022; Zeng et al., 2021). Strengthening model predictions are used by PLS-Predict to evaluate the model’s predictive ability to provide in-depth insight into the predictive power of each variable in influencing students’ learning outcomes (Liengaard et al., 2021; Sharma et al., 2023). In addition, this method also makes it possible to analyze the relationship between variables and identify relevant direct, indirect, and moderation influences in understanding the dynamics of educational factors that can affect learning achievement (Caemmerer et al., 2024; Salma et al., 2020).
By focusing on teacher learning characteristics, such as teacher competence, teacher innovation, and teacher efficacy, as well as student learning characteristics, including learning style, academic persistence, and learning conception, this study tries to describe how the interaction between these elements plays a role in influencing students’ cognitive achievement. The proposed model is expected to provide a more holistic understanding of the factors that affect students’ cognitive achievement and enrich existing theories regarding learning and teaching. By analyzing dynamically interacting variables, this study tested that H1: The teacher’s learning character model has a significant influence on students’ cognitive achievement, H2: The student learning character model has a significant influence on students’ cognitive achievement, H3: The student learning character model has a stronger predictive ability on students’ cognitive achievement compared to the teacher’s learning character model.
Students’ cognitive achievement is one of the key indicators in assessing educational success, reflecting the extent to which students can understand, master, and apply knowledge in a variety of learning contexts (Tikhomirova et al., 2020; Tikhomirova et al., 2021). This achievement is influenced by many internal and external factors (He et al., 2021). Teachers’ learning characteristics, including competence and skills in designing and managing learning, greatly influence student achievement (Daniel et al., 2024; Lazo, 2024). In addition, students’ learning characteristics, such as learning style, academic persistence, and learning conception, also contribute significantly to their ability to achieve optimal cognitive outcomes (Gordeeva and Sychev, 2024; Wu et al., 2024). The school climate, which includes the learning environment’s social, emotional, and physical aspects, acts as a moderator that can strengthen or weaken the influence of these characters on students’ academic achievement (Voight et al., 2024). A positive and supportive environment can enhance the relationship between teacher competence and student academic achievement (Konstantinidou and Scherer, 2022).
1.1 Teacher’s learning character
The learning character of a teacher is the attitude, values, and skills an educator possesses in carrying out the learning process (Muzakkir and Razak, 2024; Zhou et al., 2024). There are several components of teacher learning character in the form of attitudes, competencies, and skills (Salamah, 2024). Teachers’ attitudes, especially in the form of teacher self-efficacy, play an essential role in increasing learning effectiveness and student learning outcomes. Studies conducted by Ke and Razali (2024) show that teacher efficacy positively correlates with teacher competence and performance in school. Moreover, Krasniqi and Ismajli (2022) Found that teacher efficacy can moderate the relationship between teacher competence and performance and strengthen teachers’ confidence in managing the classroom and implementing innovative learning strategies.
Teacher competence is a set of knowledge, skills, and attitudes an educator possesses to carry out his duties procedurally and effectively (Moreira et al., 2023). Teacher competence consists of several main components that support activities in the teaching process, namely pedagogic competence, professional competence, social competence, and personality competence (Hakim and Firmansyah, 2024; Tang et al., 2021). These four components are essential to improve the quality of learning and the effectiveness of teachers in educating (Azkiyah and Mukminin, 2023; Creemers and Kyriakides, 2013). Teacher competence has a significant influence on students’ cognitive achievement because it determines the effectiveness of the learning process in the classroom (König et al., 2021; Zheng et al., 2025). Teachers with good competence can design learning that suits student needs, manage classes effectively, and use the right learning tools and evaluation methods to improve student learning outcomes (Divoll and Lastrapes, 2024). School climate as a moderation factor is essential in strengthening the relationship between teacher competence and students’ cognitive achievement (Teng, 2020). A physical environment and an academic environment that supports students’ academic achievements (Edgerton and McKechnie, 2023; Liu et al., 2022). The environment encourages academic engagement, emotional safety, and social support to create optimal conditions for teachers to effectively apply their competencies in the learning process (Li et al., 2022; Shao et al., 2025; Thomas and Nair, 2023; Zhang and Yang, 2021).
Teacher performance is the level of effectiveness of an educator in explaining their duties, including planning, implementing, and evaluating learning, as well as their interaction with students (Bantoc and Yazon, 2023). Optimal teacher performance reflects mastery of learning methods, well-developed classroom management, and the ability to motivate students (Alasmari and Althaqafi, 2024; Sarfraz et al., 2022; Wulandari and Sugiyono, 2021). Teacher performance directly affects student collective achievement, where teachers have high performance that can effectively improve concept understanding, learning motivation, and cognitive achievement (van Dijk et al., 2019; Victoriano et al., 2022). School climate as a moderation factor can strengthen the relationship between teacher performance and student achievement by creating a supportive, safe, and conducive learning environment (Longobardi et al., 2022; Teng, 2020). Studies conducted by Zynuddin et al. (2023) show that a positive school climate, such as more effective teaching, thus increases absorption and cognitive achievement. Therefore, improving teacher performance must be accompanied by efforts to create a good school climate to maximize the positive impact on students’ collective restoration.
Teacher innovation is the ability of an educator to develop and implement learning strategies, methods, and technologies creatively and effectively to improve the quality of learning and student learning outcomes (Yu et al., 2021). Practical teacher innovation is the application of new ideas, practices, or objects in learning designed to improve teaching effectiveness and learning outcomes (Syamsul et al., 2022). Teachers designing learning models and learning media are a substantial dimension in influencing classroom learning success (Akbar et al., 2023; Hajovsky and Chesnut, 2025). The application of teacher innovation can have a positive effect on student learning outcomes because it can increase student involvement, strengthen concept understanding, and create a more interesting and interactive learning experience (Fletcher et al., 2020; Maksimović et al., 2022; Pan and Liu, 2025). School climate as moderation supports or inhibits teachers’ innovation in improving students’ cognitive achievement (Kundu and Roy, 2023; Zhao et al., 2023). Studies conducted by Pan and Liu (2025) show that a collaborative school environment that is open to technology and supports teacher creativity can strengthen the relationship between innovation in learning and students’ academic outcomes. Therefore, schools that create a culture that supports teacher innovation can make teachers more flexible in developing learning methods that positively impact students’ cognitive performance.
1.2 Student learning character
The character of student learning includes various elements that play a role in influencing the way students learn and the academic results achieved (Kang, 2023; Pan and Liu, 2025). The learning character of students is influenced by various intrinsic and extrinsic factors that form cognitive and affective patterns in the learning process (Hajovsky et al., 2023). Conceptually, the learning character includes several main elements, including learning styles, academic persistence, and learning conceptions (Gordeeva and Sychev, 2024; Jebbari et al., 2022; Pinugu and Ouano, 2022). Learning style refers to individual preferences in absorbing, managing, and organizing information that can be categorized into active and accommodating learning styles (Gordeeva and Sychev, 2024). The conception of learning refers to the student’s understanding of the essence of learning, including the teacher’s listening-based approach and problem-solving skills (Liu, 2024). As a determinant factor of student academic success, academic persistence is closely related to student commitment and resilience in facing learning challenges (Gabi and Sharpe, 2021; Năstasă et al., 2022). These three elements interact dynamically and affect students’ learning abilities and achievements. A comprehensive understanding of learning characteristics can be used to develop more effective learning strategies to improve students’ cognitive achievement.
Learning style is an individual’s pattern or tendency to absorb, manage, and apply information in the context of learning (Mozaffari et al., 2020). This concept encompasses a wide range of cognitive, affective, and conative dimensions that make up each student’s unique approach to cognitive achievement (Dadandı and Yazıcı, 2024; Mangaroska et al., 2022; Rieser and Decristan, 2023). Learning styles are categorized based on different models, such as the experiential learning model, which groups individuals into convergent, divergent, assimilative, and accommodating learning styles, and the WARK (visual, auditory, reading, kinesthetic) model, which applies sensory modalities in the learning process (Dantas and Cunha, 2020; Grotek, 2024). Learning styles play an essential role in shaping learning strategy activities applied by students so that they directly impact students’ academic achievements (Dutsinma et al., 2018; Kuttattu et al., 2019; Ma, 2024). Students who understand and apply learning styles that suit their cognitive styles and preferences tend to assimilate information better, improve critical thinking skills, and strengthen memory and problem-solving (Deagon, 2023). Developing learning strategies that are in harmony with the variety of student learning styles is crucial in improving the quality of learning and student collective achievement (Bhat et al., 2021; Magodi et al., 2023). The school climate, which includes social, academic, and emotional aspects in the educational environment, moderates the relationship between learning styles and student collective achievement (Teng, 2020). A supportive environment with the support of teachers, peers, and adequate learning facilities can improve students’ cognitive achievement (Chen et al., 2022; Rijal Abdullah et al., 2024). Education policies that focus on enhancing a positive school climate are crucial in maximizing the impact of learning styles on students’ cognitive achievement outcomes.
The conception of learning is an individual’s understanding and belief about the learning process, including how knowledge is obtained and applied (Murtonen and Lehtinen, 2020; Pinto et al., 2018). Learning can be categorized as a deep understanding or a superficial approach, where the deep approach is more oriented toward understanding the concept as a whole (Biggs et al., 2022). The conception of learning has a significant impact on students’ cognitive achievement. Students with a more in-depth conception of learning tend to use more effective learning strategies, thus contributing to higher academic achievement (Ota et al., 2023; Pinto et al., 2018; Vettori et al., 2020). In contrast, superficial conceptions of learning are often associated with lower academic outcomes because they focus only on memorization without deep understanding (Duan, 2022; Kerrigan and Kwaik, 2024; Thompson and Lake, 2023; Vettori et al., 2020). In addition to the concept of learning, the climate is also a factor that can affect the improvement of cognitive achievement through the conception of learning (Erdem and Kaya, 2024; Zysberg and Schwabsky, 2021). School climate is a moderation effect that can strengthen or weaken the relationship between learning conception and cognitive achievement (Maxwell et al., 2017; Zhang and He, 2025). A supportive school climate, such as physical conditions in the form of facilities and resources as well as academic conditions, can encourage students to develop deep learning perceptions that can have an impact on improving cognitive achievement (Rance et al., 2023; Villarreal Arroyo et al., 2023).
Academic persistence is the persistence and effort students make to achieve their academic goals, especially when facing challenges or difficulties in learning (Chue and Lim, 2024). Academic persistence reflects traits such as resilience to obstacles, motivation, internal and the ability to overcome failure with continuous effort (Putwain et al., 2024; Tang et al., 2019). Academic persistence positively correlates with cognitive achievement (Gordeeva and Sychev, 2024). Students with a high level of persistence tend to be better able to manage commitment, control, and challenge strategies in the face of better learning strategies (Studer et al., 2020; Xu et al., 2024). In addition, academic persistence also affects student engagement in learning, indirectly improving cognitive achievement (Gordeeva and Sychev, 2024; Maamin et al., 2021). The climate plays an important role in strengthening or weakening the impact of academic persistence on students’ cognitive reproduction (Verner-Filion, 2023). A supportive school climate, such as physical and academic conditions, can increase the positive effects of academic persistence on cognitive achievement (López, 2023). On the other hand, a less conducive school climate can hinder the development of academic perseverance and reduce the positive impact on cognitive achievement.
1.3 School climate as moderation
School climate refers to the social, emotional, and physical atmosphere formed within the educational environment, which affects students’ learning experience and development. The school climate includes a social and emotional atmosphere built through interactions between students, teachers, and staff (Kearney et al., 2020; Lewno-Dumdie et al., 2020; Shumakova et al., 2023). A favorable climate, where there is a sense of security and mutual respect, is directly related to academic success and the development of student behavior (Berkowitz and Ben-Artzi, 2024; Daily et al., 2020; Ellis et al., 2022). The school climate is influenced not only by social factors but also by the physical condition of the school environment, such as the quality of facilities and the cleanliness of the classroom (Kearney et al., 2020; Kumar et al., 2024; Martenies et al., 2022). Good physical condition is essential to increase student motivation and create a supportive atmosphere for learning (Fisher and Africa, 2025). Academic conditions affect the quality of education, including teaching management, the way students are encouraged to participate, and the support provided by teachers (González et al., 2021; Mariscal-Camacho et al., 2024). He emphasized that positive interaction between teachers and students is essential in creating an academic climate that supports learning achievement (Pimpalkhute et al., 2023; Poling et al., 2022). The school climate is a combination of healthy relationships between students and teachers as well as an environment that supports students’ social, emotional, and academic development (Kearney et al., 2020; La Salle et al., 2021; Rizzotto and França, 2022; Sethi and Scales, 2020). A healthy school climate contributes to academic outcomes and the development of social and emotional skills that are crucial for students’ futures (Berkowitz and Ben-Artzi, 2024; Daily et al., 2020; Thapa and Cohen, 2023). Overall, school climate encompasses the physical, social, and academic dimensions that are interrelated and essential for creating an optimal environment for student growth and learning.
The school climate includes influencing the learning process and student development, both physically and academically (Capp et al., 2020; Lewno-Dumdie et al., 2020; Moore et al., 2022). Physical conditions in a school’s climate refer to factors such as physical facilities, cleanliness, security, and classroom comfort, all of which have a significant influence on a student’s learning experience (Razali et al., 2024; Sultana et al., 2023; Tharim et al., 2023). School cleanliness and physical order are essential in creating an environment conducive to learning (Rajbhandari-Thapa et al., 2022; Uleanya, 2020). Good facilities with students’ perception of the school as a safe and supportive place, which in turn encourages higher academic engagement (Coyle et al., 2022). Academic conditions include the quality of teaching, the interaction between teachers and students, and the expectations given by the school to students’ academic achievement (Hashim Jabur, 2024; Luo et al., 2025; Ouwehand et al., 2022). A positive academic climate is created when teachers provide meaningful teaching, provide constructive feedback, and encourage active student participation (Fraser, 2023). A healthy relationship between teachers and students is essential in creating a supportive academic climate (Davis and McQuillin, 2023; Wang and Xian, 2024; Zhang, 2025). Students’ social and emotional involvement in learning is key to building confidence and high academic achievement (Guterman and Neuman, 2022). The quality of social interaction in the classroom can reinforce the academic conditions, where students feel valued and encouraged to thrive (García-Moya and García-Moya, 2020). Thus, a good school climate depends on adequate physical facilities and how academic interaction is carried out. The combination of supportive physical conditions and high academic quality creates an all-around atmosphere, significantly improving student learning outcomes.
1.4 Partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM)
Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM) is a statistical technique widely used to test the relationships between complex latent variables, especially in research involving many factors. PLS-SEM is a valuable tool for testing theoretical models involving relationships between variables that are difficult to measure directly, such as education (Hair et al., 2019). This technique allows for the analysis of more straightforward to very complex models with many variables and overcoming the data problem that does not meet the assumptions of normal distribution. PLS-SEM enables the measurement of relationships between variables with greater precision, even in smaller samples and with more diverse data (Gefen et al., 2011). This approach is beneficial for theoretical models that are still developing, allowing flexibility in unearthing new and complex relationships in the field of education(Chin et al., 2003). PLS-SEM in research involves many non-linear cause-and-effect relationships, such as those often found in interactions between teachers, students, and educational outcomes (Sarstedt et al., 2021).
PLS-SEM is relevant in education because it can handle variables that are challenging to measure directly, such as the quality of learning or the school climate. This technique allows researchers to map complex relationships between educational policies, teaching quality, and student learning outcomes (Henseler et al., 2015). PLS-SEM allows for better models for measuring abstract dimensions in education, such as non-cognitive skills that affect students’ academic success (Sarstedt et al., 2021). PLS-SEM provides an advantage in analyzing models with many latent variables, facilitating a better understanding of the variables that interact with each other in the education system (Rigdon et al., 2017). The advantages of PLS-SEM lie in its ability to overcome problems with small sample sizes and data that do not always meet the normal distribution, which is often the case in educational research with limited populations (Urbach and Ahlemann, 2010). PLS-SEM helps researchers to identify strong relationships and relevance between factors that affect educational outcomes, such as the influence of curriculum or the quality of teacher-student relationships on student achievement.
2 Materials and methods
This study used a quantitative design using the Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM) method to analyze the relationship between latent variables and predict the proposed model. The PLS-SEM method was chosen for its ability to handle complex models with many latent variables, including direct influence, mediation, and moderation (Byon and Jang, 2024; Sarstedt and Moisescu, 2024). This method is very suitable for exploratory research that aims to understand the relationship between various factors that interact with each other, namely teacher learning characteristics, student learning character, and school climate moderation on cognitive achievement.
PLS-SEM has the main advantages of handling data that is not normally distributed and smaller sample sizes (Hair et al., 2019). In addition, this method focuses more on the predictive aspect than on causality inference, allowing the analysis of complex relationships between latent variables with a prediction-based approach (Avkiran, 2018; Hair and Alamer, 2022; Lin et al., 2020). CB-SEM is superior in testing theory-based causal relationships, but this approach is more suitable if the model is theoretically established (Rigdon et al., 2017). This study used PLS-Predict to evaluate the model’s predictive capabilities (Chin et al., 2020; Sharma et al., 2023). Then, the teacher’s learning character model will be compared with the student learning character model, which is influenced by the school climate and moderates cognitive achievement. Therefore, this approach is appropriate for exploring such interactions.
2.1 Instrument validation and reliability testing
The research instruments used are valid and reliable. Validity and reliability tests are carried out before the principal analysis. Test the validity of the instrument’s content through expert judgment, where 5 (five) experts assess the suitability of the content with the concept being measured. This assessment was analyzed using Aiken’s index, which shows that the item has a high validity category of 96.66%. After going through a minor revision based on the input of experts, the instrument was then empirically tested, and the empirical test data was then cleaned outlier data. Out of 150 empirical test respondents, as many as 15 data (respondents) were eliminated because they had significant univariate outlier values. The Mahalanobis distance analysis showed no multivariate outliers were detected, and the normality test confirmed that the data was distributed normally multivariate. The results of the bivariate correlation test between Mahalanobis distance and Chi-Square showed a very high relationship (r = 0.0994, p < 0.01), which indicated that the data distribution was suitable for further analysis.
At the empirical validity test stage, the analysis showed that 6 out of 26 items of the cognitive achievement variable instrument were declared misfits, so they were not valid for further measurement. While in the other variables, all items met the validity criteria. Reliability tests are performed to ensure internal consistency between items using Cronbach’s Alpha and item-rest correlation. The analysis showed that all items had a high-reliability level above 0.8 for all variables. This indicates that internal consistency is good and can be relied on in subsequent measurements. Furthermore, there are 100 instrument items for all variables in the field test for research data collection (Table 1).
Table 1. Codes for questionnaire items.
2.2 Sample and data collection
The sample of this study consisted of 1,057 high school students from 11 schools in North Maluku Province, Indonesia. Questionnaires are used to collect data using Google Forms, and questionnaire books are distributed. The scale used in assessing the questionnaire items is a Likert scale with an interval from 1 (disagree) to 4 (strongly agree).
2.3 Data analysis
This research was conducted by distributing 80 statement items and 20 cognitive achievement test items to 1,057 samples. To test the validity and reliability of the instrument empirically. The first stage in the analysis of field test data is to carry out a prerequisite test, which includes an outlier test and a normality test. Outlier tests are performed to identify and remove extreme data affecting the analysis results. Nineteen data were eliminated because they were detected as univariate and multivariate outliers. The data remaining after elimination were 1,037 samples and were free of outliers, allowing for further analysis. The normality test analyzed the relationship between the Mahalanobis distance and Chi-Square, which showed multivariate standard distributional data. The results of the bivariate correlation showed a significant value of 0.01 with a correlation coefficient of 0.989, indicating that more than 50% of the data met the standard distribution criteria (Figure 1).
Figure 1. Path coefficient prediction model.
Data analysis using Smartpls4 involves systematic stages to ensure the research model is valid and can be interpreted. The first stage is to determine the research model, where the researcher identifies the latent variables (constructs) and the indicators used to measure them. This step includes the development of a conceptual model that explains the relationship between exogenous and endogenous variables and the type of measurement (reflective or formative). It is also essential to ensure that the relationship between variables follows the underlying theory. Model measurements are carried out to ensure the validity and reliability of the construct for reflective models (Figure 2).
Figure 2. Path coefficient prediction model.
A direct influence structural model was performed to test the relationship between latent constructs. Path coefficients are evaluated using the bootstrapping method and mediation test, and the researcher evaluates whether the mediating variable bridges the relationship between independent and dependent variables. This stage involves testing direct effects and indirect effects. The moderation test aims to assess whether the moderator variable affects the effect between two constructs. Moderation can be quantitative, which changes the strength of the relationship, or qualitative (Table 2). The criteria for structural model compatibility are described in Table 3 as follows:
Table 2. Evaluation of model measurements.
Table 3. Evaluation of structural models.
3 Results
3.1 Teacher learning character model
The validity test in the PLS analysis uses the outer loading size or loading factor. Outer loading measure is a statistical measure used to see how far the indicator reflects the measurement of variables or the extent to which the indicator is valid. The prerequisite outer loading value of > 0.70 is considered significant (Hair et al., 2019), while values between 0.40–0.70 can be regarded as if the contribution is still relevant (Chin, 1998). Table 4 shows that the outer loading value meets the level of validity following the standard (Tables 5–10).
Table 4. Outer loading, composite reliability, and average variance extracted.
Table 5. Direct influence testing.
Table 6. The influence of mediation.
Table 7. Effects of school climate moderation.
Table 8. R-Square Value.
Table 9. PLSPredict analysis data.
Table 10. CVPAT test data.
Construct reliability evaluation is based on two main measures, Cronbach’s Alpha and Composite Reliability (rho_a), which are used to measure the internal consistency of indicators in a construct. According to (Hair et al., 2017), Cronbach’s Alpha and Composite Reliability values greater than 0.70 indicate that the construct has good reliability, i.e., the indicators used to measure the construct support each other and are consistent in conveying information. It is described in the following Table 4.
3.1.1 Evaluation of the structure model (inner model)
3.1.2 Evaluation of predictive abilities
R-square is a measure that describes how much of the proportion of variance of dependent (endogenous) variables can be explained by independent (exogenous) variables in a model. In the analysis using Partial Least Squares-Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM), the R-square value is the leading indicator in assessing the model’s predictive power. The criteria for evaluating the R-square value consist of three main categories: a value of >0.75 or more is considered substantial, a value between 0.50-0.75 is considered moderate, and a value between 0.25-0.50 is considered weak. If the value < 0.25, the model’s capabilities are considered weak (Musyaffi et al., 2022).
The PLSPredict evaluation table shows the results of testing the predictive ability of the PLS-SEM model using Q2 predict, RMSE (Root Mean Square Error), and MAE (Mean Absolute Error). A Q2 predict value greater than 0 on all variables indicates the model has predictive relevance. A positive Q2 prediction confirms the predictive relevance of the model in PLS-SEM (Hair et al., 2017; Liengaard et al., 2021).
CVPAT is designed to compare two theoretically obtained models to determine their ability to simultaneously predict the indicators of all dependent latent variables. The results are evaluated based on the p-value of 0.05. If the p-value < 0.05, the model is significantly better than the random model, indicating strong predictive ability (Rigdon et al., 2017).
3.2 Student learning character model
Outer loading measure is a statistical measure used to see how far the indicator reflects the measurement of variables or the extent to which the indicator is valid. The prerequisite outer loading value of > 0.70 is considered significant (Hair et al., 2019), Cronbach’s Alpha and Composite Reliability values greater than 0.70 (Hair et al., 2017). It is described in the following Table 11.
Table 11. Outer loading, composite reliability, and average variance extracted.
3.2.1 Evaluation of the structure model (inner model)
3.2.2 Evaluate the merits and fit of the model
R-square is a measure that describes how much of the proportion of variance of dependent (endogenous) variables can be explained by independent (exogenous) variables in a model. In the analysis using Partial Least Squares-Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM), the R-square value is the leading indicator in assessing the model’s predictive power. The criteria for evaluating the R-square value consist of three main categories: a value of 0.75 or more is considered substantial, a value between 0.50 and less than 0.75 is considered moderate, and a value between 0.25 and less than 0.50 is considered weak. If the value is less than 0.25, the model’s capabilities are considered weak (Musyaffi et al., 2022).
The PLSPredict evaluation table shows the results of testing the predictive ability of the PLS-SEM model using Q2 predict, RMSE (Root Mean Square Error), and MAE (Mean Absolute Error). A Q2 predict value greater than 0 on all variables indicates that the model has predictive relevance, and a positive Q2 predict confirms the predictive relevance of the model in PLS-SEM (Liengaard et al., 2021; Hair et al., 2017; Shmueli et al., n.d.).
CVPAT is designed to compare two theoretically obtained models to determine their ability to simultaneously predict the indicators of all dependent latent variables. The results are evaluated based on the p-value of < 0.05, and then the model is significantly better than the random model, which indicates strong predictive ability (Rigdon et al., 2017).
4 Discussion
4.1 Teacher learning character model on cognitive performance
The direct influence analysis shows that teacher competence significantly affects teacher efficacy and performance, but the direct influence on students’ cognitive achievement is insignificant. In contrast, teacher innovation significantly improves teacher efficacy and performance but does not directly contribute to student achievement. Teacher efficacy also significantly affects teacher performance but does not directly affect student achievement. These findings support the results of research that show that teacher characteristics, such as competence and innovation, have a more significant impact on the teaching process than direct student learning outcomes (Blömeke et al., 2022; Darling-Hammond et al., 2020). These results are also consistent with research conducted by König et al. (2021), which states that teacher competence increases confidence in learning management and that the direct impact on student learning outcomes is often insignificant. In addition, the direct effect of a teacher’s character on learning outcomes is frequently influenced by mediating factors, such as teacher performance, student involvement, or the learning strategies used (Fackler and Malmberg, 2016; Wang et al., 2022).
School climate as a moderation variable in the relationship between the learning character of teachers and students’ cognitive achievement. The results showed that school climate moderation significantly strengthened the relationship between teacher innovation and student cognitive achievement (p < 0.05). However, most of the other moderation relationships were insignificant, suggesting that the influence of school climate was limited to certain aspects of the teacher’s learning character. Mediation analysis shows that teacher efficacy and performance play an important role in bridging the influence of teacher innovation on students’ cognitive achievement. These findings are consistent with studies that show that a supportive and collaborative school environment can increase the effectiveness of teachers’ innovation and efficacy in the learning process (Konstantinidou and Scherer, 2022; Wang and Degol, 2016). Other research also shows that a positive school climate can create a conducive learning atmosphere, thereby strengthening the effect of teachers’ innovation and creativity on students’ academic achievement (Berkowitz, 2022; Thapa et al., 2013). In addition, collaboration between teachers supported by a healthy school climate can increase collective efficacy and build a more effective learning culture (Collie et al., 2012; Fackler and Malmberg, 2016).
The R-square value showed that the model had moderate predictive abilities on efficacy (57.6%) and teacher performance (67%) but weak on students’ cognitive achievement (2.4%). Evaluation of prediction capabilities via PLSPredict shows positive Q2 predict values for most constructs, indicating the predictive relevance of the model (Hair et al., 2019). The results of the CVPAT show that this model is significantly better than the random model in predicting the indicator of the dependent latent variable with a p < 0.05. This is in line with previous research, which stated that PLS-SEM-based models are suitable for predicting complex relationships in the context of education (Shmueli et al., n.d.). In addition, the PLS-SEM model is often used to indicate relationships between latent variables in studies involving complex data, as this method can handle data imbalances and ensure prediction accuracy (Sarstedt et al., 2021). Other research also shows that PLSPredict provides reliable evaluation metrics, such as Q2 predict, which are relevant in testing the predictive power of models (Memon et al., 2021). PLS-SEM has proven helpful in analyzing the complex relationship between school factors, teacher performance, and student learning outcomes (Ringle et al., 2020). In addition, this approach provides high flexibility in handling models with many latent indicators or variables (Rigdon et al., 2017).
4.2 Student learning character model on cognitive achievement
The results showed that students’ learning character, which consisted of learning style, learning conception, and academic persistence, had a significant relationship with cognitive achievement directly and through mediation. Learning styles significantly affected cognitive achievement, with p = 0.035, suggesting that the way students process information had a significant impact on their learning outcomes. This is consistent with research showing that more effective learning styles, such as more in-depth information processing, can improve academic achievement (Alhadabi and Karpinski, 2020; Zimmerman, 2011). Although the concept of learning does not directly affect cognitive achievement, it significantly influences academic persistence, with p = 0.000, which becomes an indirect pathway to improve student achievement. Previous research has also confirmed that a better understanding of learning concepts can increase students’ perseverance and motivation in learning (Furrer and Skinner, 2003; Schnitzler et al., 2021). In addition, academic persistence was found to be a key factor that directly and significantly affects cognitive achievement, which supports the findings of the study stating that perseverance in facing academic challenges has a significant influence on student learning outcomes (Duckworth and Quinn, 2009; Yeager et al., 2022).
Academic persistence mediated the relationship between learning conception and cognitive achievement with p = 0.035. Other mediation pathways, from learning through academic perseverance to cognitive achievement, are also significant. These findings support previous research highlighting the importance of academic perseverance as a determining factor in student learning success, especially in the face of academic challenges (Xu et al., 2023; Zepeda et al., 2020). Academic perseverance is essential in increasing students’ perseverance to continue struggling under challenging conditions, contributing to better learning outcomes (Alhadabi and Karpinski, 2020; Duckworth, 2016; Kalia, 2021). This aligns with research showing that commitment is a stronger predictor of academic achievement than other factors, such as talent or intrinsic motivation (Yeager et al., 2022). The influence of school climate moderation in this relationship was largely insignificant, suggesting that internal factors influence students’ learning character more than the external environment. While the school climate can support the learning process, internal factors include confidence and perseverance (Thapa and Cohen, 2023). Research results from Verner-Filion (2023) suggest that the role of school climate is more prominent in improving students’ motivation and learning behavior than directly influencing academic achievement (Tables 12–17).
Table 12. Direct influence.
Table 13. The influence of mediation.
Table 14. Data on the influence of school climate moderation.
Table 15. R-square value.
Table 16. PLSPredict analysis data.
Table 17. CVPAT.
The evaluation of the goodness and compatibility of the model in this study showed varying results related to the ability to predict variables in the PLS-SEM model. The R-square value for the learning style variables (0.415) and academic persistence (0.595) indicates that the model has moderate predictive power. In contrast, the R-square value for students’ cognitive achievement of only 0.026 suggests that other factors not covered by the model may also affect cognitive achievement, such as socio-economic factors or intrinsic motivation (Li et al., 2021). Further evaluation using PLSPredict showed that positive Q2 predict values for learning style and academic persistence (0.413 and 0.489) confirmed the predictive relevance of the model. In contrast, negative Q2 predict values for cognitive achievement (-0.053) showed that the model was less relevant in predicting students’ cognitive achievement variance. These findings are in line with previous research that indicates that the PLS-SEM model is very good at predicting variables related to students’ internal characteristics but is limited in predicting external outcomes such as direct academic achievement (Liengaard et al., 2021; Shmueli et al., n.d.). The results of the CVPAT evaluation also confirmed that this model is significantly better than the random model in predicting latent variables with a p-value of < 0.05, confirming the predictive power of the model (Rigdon et al., 2017). Thus, it has proven effective in describing complex relationships in Education.
4.3 Model comparison
Comparing the findings of the two models, there can be significant differences in how teachers’ and students’ learning characteristics affect cognitive achievement. The first model that tested the learning character of teachers showed that although teacher competence and innovation had a significant effect on teacher efficacy and performance, the direct influence on student achievement was not significant. This supports research that shows that teacher characteristics do influence the teaching process and teacher efficacy more, but their impact on student learning outcomes is often indirect or through mediating factors such as teacher performance and student involvement (Blömeke et al., 2022; Darling-Hammond et al., 2020). On the other hand, the second model that tests students’ learning character shows that learning style, academic persistence, and learning conception have a significant direct or indirect influence on students’ cognitive achievement. More effective learning styles, for example, are directly related to students’ cognitive achievement, while academic persistence is a key factor that significantly affects achievement (Duckworth, 2016; Yeager et al., 2022).
Both models showed moderate predictive power for most constructs, but there were essential differences in their ability to predict students’ cognitive achievement. The first model, which focuses on the teacher’s learning character, showed higher R-square values for teacher efficacy and performance (0.576 and 0.67) but very low for student cognitive achievement (0.024), indicating that although teacher characteristics influence the learning process, other factors outside the model play a more significant role in student learning outcomes. In contrast, the second model that focuses on students’ learning characters showed moderate R-square values for learning style and academic persistence (0.415 and 0.595) but low for cognitive achievement (0.026), which suggests that although students’ internal factors have a significant influence on the learning process, this model cannot fully predict students’ cognitive achievement, likely due to other external variables that are not accommodated. Evaluation using PLSPredict and CVPAT showed that both models had good predictive abilities for latent variables, although they were limited in predicting cognitive achievement directly.
5 Conclusion
This study provides a comprehensive analysis of the factors that affect students’ cognitive achievement by highlighting the role of teachers’ learning characters and students’ learning characters, which are moderated by the school climate. The results show that teacher innovation and efficacy significantly affect teacher performance, but their impact on students’ cognitive achievement is limited. On the contrary, students’ learning characteristics, such as learning style and academic persistence, show a more substantial influence directly or through mediation on students’ cognitive achievement. In particular, academic persistence is an essential mediating variable in connecting learning conceptions and learning styles with academic outcomes.
School climate as a moderation variable has a selective role, significantly strengthening the relationship between teacher innovation and student cognitive achievement, although other moderation effects are largely insignificant. These findings confirm the complexity of the interaction between internal and external factors in the learning process, suggesting that teacher-focused interventions are more effective when supported by a conducive school environment.
Although the study was conducted in several schools with diverse characteristics, the results still have limitations in terms of generalization. The sample only included schools in North Maluku Province, so these findings may not be entirely applicable in areas with different education systems. In addition, the model does not include external factors such as educational policies, curriculum, and socio-economic backgrounds of students that can affect cognitive achievement. The model’s ability to predict cognitive achievement is still limited, so further research with additional variables, such as socio-economic factors and students’ intrinsic motivation, is needed. The PLS-Predict approach used emphasizes predictive rather than inferential aspects, so it has not been able to test causal relationships strongly. In addition, cross-sectional design limits the understanding of the dynamics of variable change. Therefore, further research is recommended to expand the scope of the sample, consider external variables, and explore strategies to improve teacher effectiveness and student engagement. These findings continue contributing to educational theory and practice and emphasize the importance of integrated strategies in creating supportive learning environments.
Data availability statement
The raw data supporting the conclusions of this article will be made available by the authors, without undue reservation.
Ethics statement
Ethical review and approval was not required for the study on human participants in accordance with the local legislation and institutional requirements. Written informed consent from the participants or participants legal guardian/next of kin was not required to participate in this study in accordance with the national legislation and the institutional requirements.
Author contributions
SA: Conceptualization, Data curation, Formal analysis, Funding acquisition, Investigation, Methodology, Project administration, Resources, Software, Supervision, Validation, Visualization, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing. HS: Conceptualization, Supervision, Writing – review & editing. ER: Conceptualization, Supervision, Writing – review & editing.
Funding
The author(s) declare that no financial support was received for the research and/or publication of this article.
Acknowledgments
We would like to express our gratitude to the North Maluku Provincial Education Office and the Principal of the North Maluku Province for giving us permission to research in their area.
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that the research was conducted without any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.
Generative AI statement
The authors declare that no Gen AI was used in the creation of this manuscript.
Publisher’s note
All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.
References
Abdullah, R., Nawi, M. N. M., Salameh, A. A., Deraman, R., and Harun, A. N. (2024). Enhancing collaborative learning in Mobile environments through interactive virtual reality simulations. Int. J. Interact. Mobile Technol. 18, 15–26. doi: 10.3991/ijim.v18i11.49049
Akbar, M. F., Salsabila, R. S., Wahyudi, M. F., Dewi, A. P. M., Gaol, F. L., Matsuo, T., et al. (2023). The impact of the development of learning technology media on the learning process for high school students, 785–796.
Alasmari, N. J., and Althaqafi, A. S. A. (2024). Teachers’ practices of proactive and reactive classroom management strategies and the relationship to their self-efficacy. Lang. Teach. Res. 28, 2158–2189. doi: 10.1177/13621688211046351
Alhadabi, A., and Karpinski, A. C. (2020). Grit, self-efficacy, achievement orientation goals, and academic performance in university students. Int. J. Adolesc. Youth 25, 519–535. doi: 10.1080/02673843.2019.1679202
Alruwais, N., and Zakariah, M. (2023). Evaluating student knowledge assessment using machine learning techniques. Sustain. For. 15:6229. doi: 10.3390/su15076229
Al-Zu’bi, M. A. A., Al-Mseidin, K. I. M., Yaakob, M. F. M., Fauzee, M. S. O., Mahmood, M. H. H., Sohri, N., et al. (2024). The impact of the school educational environment on primary school teachers’ commitment to educational quality. Discov. Sustain. 5:449. doi: 10.1007/s43621-024-00633-4
Avkiran, N. K. (2018). Rise of the partial least squares structural equation modeling: An application in banking, 1–29.
Azkiyah, S. N., and Mukminin, A. (2023). Measuring English teaching quality: what teacher effectiveness research can offer? XLinguae 16, 238–249. doi: 10.18355/XL.2023.16.02.18
Bantoc, A. A., and Yazon, A. D. (2023). Self-efficacy, Core behavioral competence and performance of teachers: a scaffold for proficient and highly proficient teachers. Int. J. Multidiscipl. 4, 4530–4555. doi: 10.11594/ijmaber.04.12.28
Berkowitz, R. (2022). School matters: the contribution of positive school climate to equal educational opportunities among Ethnocultural minority students. Youth Soc. 54, 372–396. doi: 10.1177/0044118X20970235
Berkowitz, R., and Ben-Artzi, E. (2024). The contribution of school climate, socioeconomic status, ethnocultural affiliation, and school level to language arts scores: a multilevel moderated mediation model. J. Sch. Psychol. 104:101281. doi: 10.1016/j.jsp.2024.101281
Bhat, S., D’Souza, R., Suresh, E. S. M., Bhat, S., Raju, R., and Bhat, V. S. (2021). Dynamic classroom strategies to address learning diversity. J. Eng. Educ. Transform. 34:694. doi: 10.16920/jeet/2021/v34i0/157168
Biggs, J., Tang, C., and Kennedy, G. (2022). Teaching for quality learning at university 5e. United States: McGraw-hill education (UK).
Blömeke, S., Jentsch, A., Ross, N., Kaiser, G., and König, J. (2022). Opening up the black box: teacher competence, instructional quality, and students’ learning progress. Learn. Instr. 79:101600. doi: 10.1016/j.learninstruc.2022.101600
Byon, K. K., and Jang, W. (2024). “Partial least squares sem” in Encyclopedia of sport management (Edward Elgar Publishing), 702–704.
Caemmerer, J. M., Hennessy, B., and Niileksela, C. R. (2024). Third variables in longitudinal research: application of longitudinal mediation and moderation in school psychology. J. Sch. Psychol. 103:101283. doi: 10.1016/j.jsp.2024.101283
Cai, S., Liu, C., Wang, T., Liu, E., and Liang, J. C. (2021). Effects of learning physics using augmented reality on students’ self-efficacy and conceptions of learning. Br. J. Educ. Technol. 52, 235–251. doi: 10.1111/bjet.13020
Cai, J., and Lombaerts, K. (2024). Self-regulation matters: examining the relationship between classroom learning environments and student motivation through structural equation modeling. Soc. Psychol. Educ. 27, 411–434. doi: 10.1007/s11218-023-09827-6
Capp, G., Astor, R. A., and Gilreath, T. (2020). School staff members in California: how perceptions of school climate are related to perceptions of student risk and well-being. J. Soc. Soc. Work Res. 11, 415–442. doi: 10.1086/710974
Carpenter, S. K., Pan, S. C., and Butler, A. C. (2022). The science of effective learning with spacing and retrieval practice. Nature Reviews Psychol. 1, 496–511. doi: 10.1038/s44159-022-00089-1
Cents-Boonstra, M., Lichtwarck-Aschoff, A., Denessen, E., Aelterman, N., and Haerens, L. (2021). Fostering student engagement with motivating teaching: an observation study of teacher and student behaviours. Res. Pap. Educ. 36, 754–779. doi: 10.1080/02671522.2020.1767184
Channa, W. M., Almulla, M. O., Sahito, Z., Alismail, A. M., Nurlanovna, S. K., and Nisa, N. U. (2024). Professional competencies of English language teachers: a literature review. World J. English Language 15:479. doi: 10.5430/wjel.v15n1p479
Chen, A., Li, W., Chen, L., Wei, J., and Fu, W. (2022). How to implement efficient blended learning: the effects of teacher support and task difficulty. Int. Symp. Educ. Technol. 2022, 234–238. doi: 10.1109/ISET55194.2022.00057
Chin, W. W. (1998). The partial least squares approach to structural equation modeling. JBR, 295, 295–336.
Chin, W., Cheah, J.-H., Liu, Y., Ting, H., Lim, X.-J., and Cham, T. H. (2020). Demystifying the role of causal-predictive modeling using partial least squares structural equation modeling in information systems research. Ind. Manag. Data Syst. 120, 2161–2209. doi: 10.1108/IMDS-10-2019-0529
Chin, W. W., Marcolin, B. L., and Newsted, P. R. (2003). A partial least squares latent variable modeling approach for measuring interaction effects: results from a Monte Carlo simulation study and an electronic-mail emotion/adoption study. Inf. Syst. Res. 14, 189–217. doi: 10.1287/isre.14.2.189.16018
Chue, K. L., and Lim, M. L. (2024). Optimism and perseverance: examining interrelations with test anxiety and academic achievement. Soc. Sci. Human. Open 10:101196. doi: 10.1016/j.ssaho.2024.101196
Cohen, R., and Katz, I. (2024). Students’ academic competence beliefs as an antecedent of perceived teachers’ autonomy support and motivation: a longitudinal model. Curr. Psychol. 43, 34601–34612. doi: 10.1007/s12144-024-06900-x
Collie, R. M., Shapka, J. D., and Perry, N. E. (2012). ). School climate and social-emotional learning: Predicting teacher stress, job satisfaction, and teaching efficacy. J. Educ. Psychol, 104, 1189–1204. doi: 10.1037/a0029356
Coyle, S., Weinreb, K. S., Davila, G., and Cuellar, M. (2022). Relationships matter: the protective role of teacher and peer support in understanding school climate for victimized youth. Child Youth Care Forum 51, 181–203. doi: 10.1007/s10566-021-09620-6
Creemers, B. P. M., Kyriakides, L., and Antoniou, P. (2013). A dynamic approach to school improvement: main features and impact. SLM, 33, 114–132. doi: 10.1080/13632434.2013.773883
Dadandı, İ., and Yazıcı, H. (2024). Cognitive ability or motivation, or both: an integrative path analysis of the interplay between two key factors in academic achievement. Br. Educ. Res. J. 50, 2342–2362. doi: 10.1002/berj.4027
Daily, S. M., Mann, M. J., Lilly, C. L., Dyer, A. M., Smith, M. L., and Kristjansson, A. L. (2020). School climate as an intervention to reduce academic failure and educate the whole child: a longitudinal study. J. Sch. Health 90, 182–193. doi: 10.1111/josh.12863
Daniel, K., Msambwa, M. M., Antony, F., and Wan, X. (2024). Motivate students for better academic achievement: a systematic review of blended innovative teaching and its impact on learning. Comput. Appl. Eng. Educ. 32, 1023–1038. doi: 10.1002/cae.22733
Dantas, L. A., and Cunha, A. (2020). An integrative debate on learning styles and the learning process. Social Sciences Humanities Open 2:100017. doi: 10.1016/j.ssaho.2020.100017
Darling-Hammond, L., Flook, L., Cook-Harvey, C., Barron, B., and Osher, D. (2020). Implications for educational practice of the science of learning and development. Appl. Dev. Sci. 24, 97–140. doi: 10.1080/10888691.2018.1537791
Davis, A. L., and McQuillin, S. D. (2023). Exploring changes in the teacher-child relationship and children’s educational expectations. J. Appl. Dev. Psychol. 87:101564. doi: 10.1016/j.appdev.2023.101564
de Bofarull, I. (2019). Carácter y hábitos para el aprendizaje: definición y proyecto de medición. Revista Española de Pedagogía 77, 47–65. doi: 10.22550/REP77-1-2019-03
Deagon, A. (2023). “Cognitive style and learning strategies in Latin instruction” in When dead tongues speak (New York, NY: Oxford University Press), 27–49.
Dewi, R., Riyadi,, and Siswanto,. (2022). Learning process: Obstacles on statistical content. ed. J. Gruber-Miller 020005.
Divoll, K. A., and Lastrapes, R. E. (2024). “Creating a positive learning environment” in The special Educator’s guide to behavior management. eds. P. Mooney and J. B. Ryan (Routledge), 3–18.
Duan, Y. (2022). Mathematics deep learning teaching based on analytic hierarchy process. Math. Probl. Eng. 2022, 1–10. doi: 10.1155/2022/3070791
Duckworth, A. L., and Quinn, P. D. (2009). Development and validation of the short grit scale (grit-S). J. Pers. Assess. 91, 166–174. doi: 10.1080/00223890802634290
Dutsinma, F. L., Chaising, S., Srimaharaj, W., Chaisricharoen, R., and Temdee, P. (2018). Identifying child learning style by using human physiological response and VARK model. Global Wireless Summit 2018, 304–308. doi: 10.1109/GWS.2018.8686547
Diamantopoulos, A., and Siguaw, J. A. (2006). Formative versus reflective indicators in organizational measure development: A comparison and empirical illustration. Br. J. Manag, 17, 263–282. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-8551.2006.00500.x
Edgerton, E., and McKechnie, J. (2023). The relationship between student’s perceptions of their school environment and academic achievement. Front. Psychol. 13, 1–9. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2022.959259
Ellis, K., Gage, N. A., Kramer, D., Baton, E., and Angelosante, C. (2022). School climate in rural and urban schools and the impact of SWPBIS. Rural Special Education Quarterly 41, 73–83. doi: 10.1177/87568705221098031
Erdem, C., and Kaya, M. (2024). The relationship between school and classroom climate, and academic achievement: a meta-analysis. Sch. Psychol. Int. 45, 380–408. doi: 10.1177/01430343231202923
Fackler, S., and Malmberg, L.-E. (2016). Teachers’ self-efficacy in 14 OECD countries: Teacher, student group, school and leadership effects. Teach. Teach. Educ, 56, 185–195. doi: 10.1016/j.tate.2016.03.002
Fauth, B., Decristan, J., Decker, A.-T., Büttner, G., Hardy, I., Klieme, E., et al. (2019). The effects of teacher competence on student outcomes in elementary science education: the mediating role of teaching quality. Teach. Teach. Educ. 86:102882. doi: 10.1016/j.tate.2019.102882
Fisher, C. A., and Africa, E. (2025). The effect of a physically active academic intervention on the physical fitness and mathematical performance of grade 1 learners in Cape Town, South Africa. Early Childhood Educ. J. 53, 507–515. doi: 10.1007/s10643-023-01610-8
Fixen, M. W. N. (2021). Obstacles overcome: a universal guide to active learning. J. Higher Educ. Theory Practice 21:106–110. doi: 10.33423/jhetp.v21i4.4212
Fletcher, J., Everatt, J., Mackey, J., and Fickel, L. H. (2020). Digital technologies and innovative learning environments in schooling: a New Zealand experience. N. Z. J. Educ. Stud. 55, 91–112. doi: 10.1007/s40841-020-00156-2
Floyd, J. (2023). A comparison of elementary teacher efficacy in Christian and public schools. J. Res. Christ. Educ. 32, 53–64. doi: 10.1080/10656219.2023.2245092
Furrer, C., and Skinner, E. (2003). Sense of relatedness as a factor in children’s academic engagement and performance. J. Educ. Psychol. 95, 148–162. doi: 10.1037/0022-0663.95.1.148
Gabi, J., and Sharpe, S. (2021). Against the odds: an investigation into student persistence in UK higher education. Stud. High. Educ. 46, 198–214. doi: 10.1080/03075079.2019.1626364
García-Moya, I., and García-Moya, I. (2020). “The importance of student-teacher relationships for wellbeing in schools.” in Importance Connectedness Student Teacher Relationships, Palgrave Pivot, 1–25.
Gefen, D., Rigdon, E. E., and Straub, D. (2011). Editor’s comments: an update and extension to SEM guidelines for administrative and social science research. MIS Q., 35:iii–xiv. doi: 10.2307/23044042
Genith Isaza Domínguez, L., Robles-Gómez, A., and Pastor-Vargas, R. (2025). A data-driven approach to engineering instruction: exploring learning styles, study habits, and machine learning. IEEE Access 13, 10978–11002. doi: 10.1109/ACCESS.2025.3528263
González, C., Varela, J., Sánchez, P. A., Venegas, F., and De Tezanos-Pinto, P. (2021). Students’ participation in school and its relationship with antisocial behavior, academic performance and adolescent well-being. Child Indic. Res. 14, 269–282. doi: 10.1007/s12187-020-09761-5
Gordeeva, T. O., and Sychev, O. A. (2024). Persistence and its diagnostics: development of a scale of academic persistence. Psikhologicheskii Zhurnal 45, 113–126. doi: 10.31857/S0205959224050148
Grazia, V., and Molinari, L. (2023). A multidimensional approach to the study of school climate and student engagement. J. Educ. Res. 116, 386–395. doi: 10.1080/00220671.2023.2278771
Grotek, E. (2024). Cykl Kolba w dydaktyce tłumaczeń. Rocznik Przekładoznawczy 18:4–18. doi: 10.12775/RP.2023.006
Guterman, O., and Neuman, A. (2022). Not all paths lead to success: learning strategies and achievement among undergraduate students. J. Furth. High. Educ. 46, 115–127. doi: 10.1080/0309877X.2021.1890701
Hair, J., and Alamer, A. (2022). Partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM) in second language and education research: guidelines using an applied example. Research Methods Applied Linguistics 1:100027. doi: 10.1016/j.rmal.2022.100027
Hair, J., Hollingsworth, C. L., Randolph, A. B., and Chong, A. Y. L. (2017). An updated and expanded assessment of PLS-SEM in information systems research. Ind. Manag. Data Syst. 117, 442–458.
Hair, J. F. Jr. (2020). Next-generation prediction metrics for composite-based PLS-SEM. Ind. Manag. Data Syst. 121, 5–11.
Hair, J. F., Risher, J. J., Sarstedt, M., and Ringle, C. M. (2019). “When to use and how to report the results of PLS-SEM” in European business review. Ed. G. Svensson (Emerald Group Publishing Ltd), 31:2–24.
Hajovsky, D. B., and Chesnut, S. R. (2025). A longitudinal examination of parallel growth and reciprocal changes in teacher–student relationships and academic achievement. School Psychol. 40, 1–12. doi: 10.1037/spq0000583
Hajovsky, D. B., Niileksela, C. R., Olsen, S. C., and Sekula, M. K. (2023). Do cognitive–achievement relations vary by general ability level? J. Intelligence 11:177. doi: 10.3390/jintelligence11090177
Hakim, D. L., and Firmansyah, D. (2024). Students’ pedagogical competency analysis in mathematics education study program. 020068.
Halkiopoulos, C., and Gkintoni, E. (2024). Leveraging AI in E-learning: personalized learning and adaptive assessment through cognitive neuropsychology—a systematic analysis. Electronics 13:3762. doi: 10.3390/electronics13183762
Hashim Jabur, Z. Z. (2024). Inspecting the relationship teacher-student communication with academic adjustment and the academic Progress in the art course of secondary school students in Basrah. Salud Ciencia y Tecnología Serie de Conferencias 3, 1–8. doi: 10.56294/sctconf2024.1163
He, X., Wang, H., Chang, F., Dill, S.-E., Liu, H., Tang, B., et al. (2021). IQ, grit, and academic achievement: evidence from rural China. Int. J. Educ. Dev. 80:102306. doi: 10.1016/j.ijedudev.2020.102306
Henseler, J., Ringle, C. M., and Sarstedt, M. (2015). A new criterion for assessing discriminant validity in variance-based structural equation modeling. J. Acad. Mark. Sci. 43, 115–135. doi: 10.1007/s11747-014-0403-8
Husain, W., Faize, F. A., Urooj, J., and Tariq, R. (2023). Beyond the grades: measuring Teacher’s efficacy for the psychosocial grooming of students. Open Praxis 15, 60–72. doi: 10.55982/openpraxis.15.1.540
Javidanmehr, Z., and Anani Sarab, M. R. (2019). Retrofitting non-diagnostic reading comprehension assessment: application of the G-DINA model to a high stakes reading comprehension test. LAQ 16, 294–311. doi: 10.1080/15434303.2019.1654479
Jebbari, M., Cherradi, B., El Gannour, O., Hamida, S., and Raihani, A. (2022). “Exploration study on learning styles identification and prediction techniques” in 2022 2nd international conference on innovative research in applied science, engineering and technology (IRASET), 1–7.
Kaiser, G., and König, J. (2019). Competence measurement in (mathematics) teacher education and beyond: implications for policy. High Educ. Pol. 32, 597–615. doi: 10.1057/s41307-019-00139-z
Kaldırım, A., and Tavşanlı, Ö. F. (2018). The effect of collaborative learning approach on students’ academic achievement in Turkish courses in Turkey: a Meta-analysis study. TED EĞİTİM VE BİLİM. 43, 125–149. doi: 10.15390/EB.2018.7553
Kalia, V. (2021). “Gritty goal pursuit and perceived chronic stress: exploring implications for academic problems” in Multidisciplinary perspectives on grit. ed. L. Ellardus van Zyl (Cham, Switzerland: Springer International Publishing), 95–113.
Kandaga, T., Rosjanuardi, R., and Juandi, D. (2023). Analysis of cognitive obstacle in geometric transformation course on higher education. 040070.
Kang, W. (2023). Innovative school climate, Teacher’s self-efficacy and implementation of cognitive activation strategies. Pegem J. Educ. Instruct. 13:298–308. doi: 10.47750/pegegog.13.02.16
Ke, Y., and Razali, F. (2024). Teacher enthusiasm as a moderator in the relationship between teacher self-efficacy, teacher competence, and sustainable student learning. J. Ecohuman. 3, 142–158. doi: 10.62754/joe.v3i5.3881
Kearney, C. A., Sanmartín, R., and Gonzálvez, C. (2020). The school climate and academic mindset inventory (SCAMI): confirmatory factor analysis and invariance across demographic groups. Front. Psychol. 11:1–14. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2020.02061
Kerrigan, J., and Kwaik, J. (2024). Investigating the effects of an active learning pedagogies implemented in the active learning classroom. Coll. Teach. 1–10. doi: 10.1080/87567555.2024.2399624
Khine, M. S., and Nielsen, T. (2022). “Current status of research on academic self-efficacy in education” in Academic self-efficacy in education. ed. M. S. Khine and T. Nielsen (Cham, Switzerland: Springer Singapore), 3–8. doi: 10.1007/978-981-16-8240-7_1
König, J., Blömeke, S., Jentsch, A., Schlesinger, L., Née Nehls, C. F., Musekamp, F., et al. (2021). The links between pedagogical competence, instructional quality, and mathematics achievement in the lower secondary classroom. Educ. Stud. Math. 107, 189–212. doi: 10.1007/s10649-020-10021-0
Konstantinidou, E., and Scherer, R. (2022). Teaching with technology: a large-scale, international, and multilevel study of the roles of teacher and school characteristics. Computers and Education 179:104424. doi: 10.1016/j.compedu.2021.104424
Krasniqi, D., and Ismajli, H. (2022). Teacher evaluation feedback and their self-efficacy in classroom management skills. Lnternational Electronic Journal of Elementary Education. 14, 497–506. doi: 10.26822/iejee.2022.275
Kumar, P., Hama, S., Abbass, R. A., Abhijith, K. V., Tiwari, A., Grassie, D., et al. (2024). Environmental quality in sixty primary and secondary school classrooms in London. Journal of Building Engineering 91:109549. doi: 10.1016/j.jobe.2024.109549
Kundu, A., and Roy, D. D. (2023). How do teachers innovate? Role of efficacy for innovation and school climate perception. Psychol. Sch. 60, 4885–4903. doi: 10.1002/pits.22987
Kuttattu, A. S., Gokul, G. S., Prasad, H., Murali, J., and Nair, L. S. (2019). Analysing the learning style of an individual and suggesting field of study using machine learning techniques. Int. Conf. Commun. Electronics Syst. 2019, 1671–1675. doi: 10.1109/ICCES45898.2019.9002051
La Salle, T. P., McCoach, D. B., and Meyers, J. (2021). Examining measurement invariance and perceptions of school climate across gender and race and ethnicity. J. Psychoeduc. Assess. 39, 800–815. doi: 10.1177/07342829211023717
Lazo, K. P. M. (2024). The interaction between teachers’ efficacy and students’ attitudes toward effective learning in state universities and colleges of the Philippines. Int. J. Adv. Appl. Sci. 11, 75–86. doi: 10.21833/ijaas.2024.07.010
Lewno-Dumdie, B. M., Mason, B. A., Hajovsky, D. B., and Villeneuve, E. F. (2020). Student-report measures of school climate: a dimensional review. Sch. Ment. Heal. 12, 1–21. doi: 10.1007/s12310-019-09340-2
Li, C., Huang, J., and Li, B. (2021). The predictive effects of classroom environment and trait emotional intelligence on foreign language enjoyment and anxiety. System 96:1–18. doi: 10.1016/j.system.2020.102393
Li, S., Sheng, Y., and Jing, Y. (2022). How social support impact teachers’ mental health literacy: a chain mediation model. Front. Psychol. 13:1–14. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2022.851332
Liengaard, B. D., Sharma, P. N., Hult, G. T. M., Jensen, M. B., Sarstedt, M., Hair, J. F., et al. (2021). Prediction: coveted, yet forsaken? Introducing a Cross-validated predictive ability test in partial least squares path modeling. Decis. Sci. 52, 362–392. doi: 10.1111/deci.12445
Lin, H., Lee, M., Liang, J., Chang, H., Huang, P., and Tsai, C. (2020). A review of using partial least square structural equation modeling in e-learning research. Br. J. Educ. Technol. 51, 1354–1372. doi: 10.1111/bjet.12890
Liu, T. (2024). Examining the impact of variations in executive functions on students’ problem-solving behaviors. IEEE Access 1–1:185895–185904. doi: 10.1109/ACCESS.2024.3513544
Liu, Y.-B., Hou, X.-Y., and Chen, B.-B. (2022). Links between Chinese vocational school students’ perception of parents’ emotional support and school cooperation climate and their academic performance: the mediating role of school belonging. Front. Psychol. 13:3070–3083. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2022.952001
Longobardi, S., Pagliuca, M. M., and Regoli, A. (2022). School climate and academic performance of Italian students: the role of disciplinary behaviour and parental involvement. Statistical Methods Appl. 31, 1355–1373. doi: 10.1007/s10260-022-00632-7
López, V. (2023). The contributions of school and classroom climate to mathematics test scores: a three-level analysis. Sch. Eff. Sch. Improv. 34, 43–64. doi: 10.1080/09243453.2022.2096645
Lowyck, J., Elen, J., and Clarebout, G. (2004). Instructional conceptions: analysis from an instructional design perspective. Int. J. Educ. Res. 41, 429–444. doi: 10.1016/j.ijer.2005.08.010
Luo, Y., Yu, X., Tang, Y., and Zhang, H. (2025). Teacher–student relationship and academic achievement among adolescents: a moderated mediation model. Psychol. Sch. 62, 1112–1121. doi: 10.1002/pits.23377
Ma, Y. (2024). Learning style approaches in Christian education. Teach. Theol. Relig. 27, 45–52. doi: 10.1111/teth.12663
Maamin, M., Maat, S. M., and Iksan, H. Z. (2021). The influence of student engagement on mathematical achievement among secondary school students. Mathematics 10:41. doi: 10.3390/math10010041
Magodi, A. Y., Daniyan, I. A., Kanakana-Katumba, M. G., and Adeodu, A. O. (2023). “Embracing learner diversity in engineering education: a systematic review” in 2023 5th international conference on management science and industrial engineering, 77–82. doi: 10.1145/3603955.3603969
Maksimović, J., Stošić, L., and Tomczyk, Ł. (2022). Digital didactical resources as innovative multimedia methods in the Work of a modern and reflective teacher, 689–698. doi: 10.1007/978-3-030-80946-1_63
Mangaroska, K., Sharma, K., Gašević, D., and Giannakos, M. (2022). Exploring students’ cognitive and affective states during problem solving through multimodal data: lessons learned from a programming activity. J. Comput. Assist. Learn. 38, 40–59. doi: 10.1111/jcal.12590
Mariscal-Camacho, J., Justo-López, A. C., Aguilar-Salinas, W. E., and De Las Fuentes-Lara, M. (2024). Modelo para evaluar el impacto de un sistema de gestión de calidad en los procesos de enseñanza-aprendizaje en instituciones de educación superior. Un caso de estudio. Formación Universitaria 17, 27–46. doi: 10.4067/s0718-50062024000400027
Martenies, S. E., Schill, J., Klimm, M., Cross, J. E., Oliver, S., and Magzamen, S. (2022). Relationships between social climate and indoor environmental quality and frequently reported health symptoms among teachers and staff in a suburban school district. J. Occup. Environ. Hyg. 19, 478–488. doi: 10.1080/15459624.2022.2089675
Maxwell, S., Reynolds, K. J., Lee, E., Subasic, E., and Bromhead, D. (2017). The impact of school climate and school identification on academic achievement: multilevel modeling with student and teacher data. Front. Psychol. 8:1–13. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2017.02069
Memon, M. A., Ramayah, T., Cheah, J. H., Ting, H., Chuah, F., and Cham, T. H. (2021). PLS-SEM statistical PROGRAMS: a review. J. Appl. Struct. Equat. Model. 5, i–xiv. doi: 10.47263/JASEM.5(1)06
Moore, S. A., Ouellette, R. R., and Connors, E. H. (2022). Structural school characteristics and neighborhood risk factors: associations with student-reported school climate in a large, urban public School District in the United States. Front. Educ. 7. doi: 10.3389/feduc.2022.931474
Moreira, M. A., Arcas, B., Sánchez, T., García, R., Melero, M. J., Cunha, N., et al. (2023). Teachers’ pedagogical competences in higher education: a systematic literature review. J. Univ. Teach. Learn. Pract. 20, 90–123. doi: 10.53761/1.20.01.07
Mozaffari, H. R., Janatolmakan, M., Sharifi, R., Ghandinejad, F., Andayeshgar, B., and Khatony, A. (2020). The relationship between the vark learning styles and academic achievement in dental students. Adv. Med. Educ. Pract. 11, 15–19. doi: 10.2147/AMEP.S235002
Murtonen, M., and Lehtinen, E. (2020). “Adult learners and theories of learning” in Development of adult thinking. (London, UK: Routledge), 97–122.
Musyaffi, A. M., Khairunnisa, H., and Respati, D. K. (2022). Konsep dasar structural equation model-partial least square (sem-pls) menggunakan smartpls. Jakarta, Indonesia: Pascal Books.
Muzakkir, H. Z., and Razak, R. A. (2024). Teachers’ beliefs towards character education curriculum in primary school: a systematic literature review. Education 52, 1178–1192. doi: 10.1080/03004279.2022.2142478
Năstasă, L. E., Cocoradă, E., Vorovencii, I., and Curtu, A. L. (2022). Academic success, emotional intelligence, well-being and resilience of first-year forestry students. Forests 13:758. doi: 10.3390/f13050758
Ogbeibu, S., Jabbour, C. J. C., Gaskin, J., Senadjki, A., and Hughes, M. (2021). Leveraging STARA competencies and green creativity to boost green organisational innovative evidence: a praxis for sustainable development. Bus. Strateg. Environ. 30, 2421–2440. doi: 10.1002/bse.2754
Ota, E., Manalo, E., and Fernández, N. S. (2023). “The effect of metacognitive use of learning strategies on student test performance” in Metacognition and education: Future trends (London: Taylor & Francis Group), 86–104.
Ouwehand, K. H. R., Xu, K. M., Meeuwisse, M., Severiens, S. E., and Wijnia, L. (2022). Impact of school population composition, workload, and teachers’ utility values on teaching quality: insights from the Dutch TALIS-2018 data. Front. Educ. 7:5795. doi: 10.3389/feduc.2022.815795
Pan, W., and Liu, Z. (2025). The effect of teacher-student collaboration on academic innovation in universities: an exploration from the perspective of collaborative process. Int. J. Innov. Sci. 17, 54–71. doi: 10.1108/IJIS-07-2022-0116
Pimpalkhute, S., Pooley, J., Wilkins, S., Varjas, K., Perkins, C., and Meyers, J. (2023). Educators’ perceptions of the costs and benefits of pursuing positive teacher-student relationships in middle schools. Teach. Teach. Educ. 135:104347. doi: 10.1016/j.tate.2023.104347
Pinto, G., Bigozzi, L., Vettori, G., and Vezzani, C. (2018). The relationship between conceptions of learning and academic outcomes in middle school students according to gender differences. Learn. Cult. Soc. Interact. 16, 45–54. doi: 10.1016/j.lcsi.2017.11.001
Pinugu, J. N. J., and Ouano, J. A. (2022). “School settings and conditions as mediators of academic persistence in engineering and technical Programs” in 2022 IEEE 14th international conference on humanoid, nanotechnology, information technology, communication and control, environment, and management (HNICEM), 1–6.
Poling, D. V., Van Loan, C. L., Garwood, J. D., Zhang, S., and Riddle, D. (2022). Enhancing teacher-student relationship quality: a narrative review of school-based interventions. Educ. Res. Rev. 37:100459. doi: 10.1016/j.edurev.2022.100459
Putwain, D. W., Daumiller, M., Hussain, T., and Pekrun, R. (2024). Revisiting the relation between academic buoyancy and coping: a network analysis. Contemp. Educ. Psychol. 78:102283. doi: 10.1016/j.cedpsych.2024.102283
Rajbhandari-Thapa, J., Metzger, I., Ingels, J., Thapa, K., and Chiang, K. (2022). School climate-related determinants of physical activity among high school girls and boys. In. J. Adolesc. 94, 642–655. doi: 10.1002/jad.12052
Rance, G., Dowell, R. C., and Tomlin, D. (2023). The effect of classroom environment on literacy development. NPJ Sci. Learn. 8:9. doi: 10.1038/s41539-023-00157-y
Razali, A. W., Din, C., Bin, N., Yahya, M. N., and Sulaiman, R. (2024). Conceptual framework of acoustic comfort design enablers for a classroom: a systematic review. J. Build. Eng. 95:110160. doi: 10.1016/j.jobe.2024.110160
Rieser, S., and Decristan, J. (2023). Kognitive Aktivierung in Befragungen von Schülerinnen und Schülern. Zeitschrift Für Pädagogische Psychologie. 37:1–15. doi: 10.1024/1010-0652/a000359
Rigdon, E. E., Sarstedt, M., and Ringle, C. M. (2017). On comparing Results from CB-SEM and PLS-SEM: five perspectives and five recommendations. Marketing ZFP 39, 4–16. doi: 10.15358/0344-1369-2017-3-4
Rinchen, D. (2020). “The relationship between school climate, ent, engagement, & academic achievement in higher secondary school” in The relationship between school climate, student engagement and academic achievement in higher secondary school.
Ringle, C. M., Sarstedt, M., Mitchell, R., and Gudergan, S. P. (2020). Partial least squares structural equation modeling in HRM research. Int. J. Hum. Resour. Manag. 31, 1617–1643. doi: 10.1080/09585192.2017.1416655
Rizzotto, J. S., and França, M. T. A. (2022). Indiscipline: the school climate of Brazilian schools and the impact on student performance. Int. J. Educ. Dev. 94:102657. doi: 10.1016/j.ijedudev.2022.102657
Salamah, S. (2024). Revisiting pedagogical skills: a comprehensive analysis of mathematics teaching competencies among elementary educators. J. Cakrawala Pendidikan 43:367–380. doi: 10.21831/cp.v43i2.69543
Salma, A., Fitria, D., and Syafriandi, S. (2020). Structural equation modelling: the affecting of learning attitude on learning achievement of students. J. Phys. Conf. Ser. 1554:012056. doi: 10.1088/1742-6596/1554/1/012056
Sarfraz, M., Vlăduţ, N.-V., Cioca, L.-I., and Ivascu, L. (2022). Teaching strategies and student academic performance in agriculture studies: the mediating effect of teachers’ self-efficacy. INMATEH Agricul. Eng. 767–780, 767–780. doi: 10.35633/inmateh-68-76
Sarstedt, M., and Moisescu, O.-I. (2024). Quantifying uncertainty in PLS-SEM-based mediation analyses. J. Mark. Anal. 12, 87–96. doi: 10.1057/s41270-023-00231-9
Sarstedt, M., Ringle, C. M., and Hair, J. F. (2021). “Partial least squares structural equation modeling” in Handbook of market research. (Cham, Switzerland: Springer), 587–632.
Schnitzler, K., Holzberger, D., and Seidel, T. (2021). All better than being disengaged: student engagement patterns and their relations to academic self-concept and achievement. Eur. J. Psychol. Educ. 36, 627–652. doi: 10.1007/s10212-020-00500-6v
Sejdiu Shala, D., Thaçi, E., and Shala, A. (2024). Learning styles and motivation: their role in academic performance. J. Educ. Soc. Res. 14:258. doi: 10.36941/jesr-2024-0071
Sethi, J., and Scales, P. C. (2020). Developmental relationships and school success: how teachers, parents, and friends affect educational outcomes and what actions students say matter most. Contemp. Educ. Psychol. 63:101904. doi: 10.1016/j.cedpsych.2020.101904
Shand, R., and Goddard, R. D. (2024). The relationship between teacher collaboration and instructional practices, instructional climate, and social relations. Educ. Policy 38, 250–274. doi: 10.1177/08959048241278290
Shao, Y., Feng, Y., Zhao, X., Liu, G., and Zhang, L. (2025). Teacher support and secondary school students’ learning engagement: a moderated mediation model. Sci. Rep. 15:2974. doi: 10.1038/s41598-025-87366-0
Sharma, P. N., Liengaard, B. D., Hair, J. F., Sarstedt, M., and Ringle, C. M. (2023). Predictive model assessment and selection in composite-based modeling using PLS-SEM: extensions and guidelines for using CVPAT. Eur. J. Mark. 57, 1662–1677. doi: 10.1108/EJM-08-2020-0636
Shelty, S., Sri, S., Debie, K. R. K., Rima, F. L., and Herman, M. Koessoy. (2023). Innovation Work behavior: New model to successful organization.
Shi, Y., and Qu, S. (2022). Analysis of the effect of cognitive ability on academic achievement: moderating role of self-monitoring. Front. Psychol. 13:1–14. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2022.996504
Shmueli, G., Ray, S., Manuel Velasquez Estrada, J., and Chatla, S. B. (n.d.). The elephant in the room: Evaluating the predictive performance of partial least squares (PLS) path models. Available online at: http://ssrn.com/abstract=2659233
Shumakova, N. B., Shcheblanova, E. I., and Sorokova, M. G. (2023). “Classroom climate” — standardization of the Russian version of the modified questionnaire “school climate”. Психология. Журнал Высшей Школы Экономики 20, 231–256. doi: 10.17323/1813-8918-2023-2-231-256
Studer, B., Geniole, S. N., Becker, M. L., Eisenegger, C., and Knecht, S. (2020). Inducing illusory control ensures persistence when rewards fade and when others outperform us. Psychon. Bull. Rev. 27, 809–818. doi: 10.3758/s13423-020-01745-4
Sultana, F., Khan, S. M., Rahman, M., Winch, P. J., Luby, S. P., and Unicomb, L. (2023). Sustaining an elementary school-based hygiene intervention in Bangladesh by forming ‘hygiene committees’: a pilot study. J. Water Sanitation Hygiene Dev. 13, 749–763. doi: 10.2166/washdev.2023.191
Syamsul, G., Abil, M., Syawal, G., and Winsyahputra, Ritonga. "Implementation of L. I. to I. T. C. in P. C. P. for I.-S. T. (2022). Implementation of learning innovations to improve teacher competence in professional certificate Programs for in-service teachers.
Tang, X., Wang, M.-T., Guo, J., and Salmela-Aro, K. (2019). Building grit: the longitudinal pathways between mindset, commitment, grit, and academic outcomes. J. Youth Adolesc. 48, 850–863. doi: 10.1007/s10964-019-00998-0
Tang, S. Y. F., Wong, A. K. Y., Li, D. D. Y., and Cheng, M. M. H. (2021). Re-conceptualising professional competence development of student teachers in initial teacher education. Res. Pap. Educ. 36, 152–175. doi: 10.1080/02671522.2019.1633563
Teng, Y. (2020). The relationship between school climate and students’ mathematics achievement gaps in Shanghai China: evidence from PISA 2012. Asia Pacific J. Educ. 40, 356–372. doi: 10.1080/02188791.2019.1682516
Thapa, A., and Cohen, J. (2023). “School climate improvement: a data-driven strategy that supports individual and organizational health” in Handbook of resilience in children. (Cham, Switzerland: Springer International Publishing), 539–548.
Thapa, A., Cohen, J., Guffey, S., and Higgins-D’Alessandro, A. (2013). A review of school climate research. In. Rev. Educ. Res. 83:357–385. doi: 10.3102/0034654313483907
Tharim, A. H. A., Azmi, N. A., Ismail, N., Wahi, N., Yasin, M. N., and Dahlan, F. M. (2023). Assessment of student’s satisfaction and perceived performance towards thermal comfort in academic building of MRSM parit:040013. doi: 10.1063/5.0168048
Thomas, J., and Nair, M. (2023). Investigating teacher influence on student engagement in high schools. Aust. Educ. Res. 50, 661–681. doi: 10.1007/s13384-022-00511-w
Thompson, A. R., and Lake, L. P. O. (2023). Relationship between learning approach, Bloom’s taxonomy, and student performance in an undergraduate human anatomy course. Adv. Health Sci. Educ. 28, 1115–1130. doi: 10.1007/s10459-023-10208-z
Tikhomirova, T. N., Malykh, A. S., Lysenkova, I. A., and Malykh, S. B. (2021). Cross-cultural analysis of models of the relationship between the cognitive abilities and academic achievement in primary school education. Psychol. Russia 14, 94–110. doi: 10.11621/pir.2021.0407
Tikhomirova, T., Malykh, A., and Malykh, S. (2020). Predicting academic achievement with cognitive abilities: Cross-sectional study across school education. Behav. Sci. 10:158. doi: 10.3390/bs10100158
Torgrimson, S. J., Tan, P. Z., and Grammer, J. K. (2021). Associations among response inhibition, motivational beliefs, and task persistence in early elementary school. J. Exp. Child Psychol. 208:105141. doi: 10.1016/j.jecp.2021.105141
Uleanya, C. (2020). Influence of cleanliness on learners learning capabilities and academic performances: a south African perspective. Univ. J. Educ. Res. 8, 5934–5942. doi: 10.13189/ujer.2020.082228
Urbach, N., and Ahlemann, F. (2010). Structural equation modeling in information systems research using partial least squares. J. Inform. Technol. Theory Appl. 11:2.
van Dijk, W., Gage, N. A., and Grasley-Boy, N. (2019). The relation between classroom management and mathematics achievement: a multilevel structural equation model. Psychol. Sch. 56, 1173–1186. doi: 10.1002/pits.22254
Verner-Filion, J. (2023). Perceived school climate and school grades in secondary school students: the mediating effect of self-determined motivation. Contemp. Educ. Psychol. 74:1–8. doi: 10.1016/j.cedpsych.2023.102202
Vettori, G., Vezzani, C., Bigozzi, L., and Pinto, G. (2020). Upper secondary school students’ conceptions of learning, learning strategies, and academic achievement. J. Educ. Res. 113, 475–485. doi: 10.1080/00220671.2020.1861583
Victoriano, J. J., Villaruz, R. T., and Alimen, R. A. (2022). Teaching situation and instructors’ key-competencies at the College of Maritime Education (CME): evaluation of the marine engineering students. TransNav Int J. Marine Navigation Safety Sea Transport. 16, 241–250. doi: 10.12716/1001.16.02.06
Villarreal Arroyo, Y. P., Peñabaena-Niebles, R., and Berdugo Correa, C. (2023). Influence of environmental conditions on students’ learning processes: a systematic review. Build. Environ. 231:110051. doi: 10.1016/j.buildenv.2023.110051
Voight, A., Giraldo-García, R., Fogarty, L., Sanders, S., Golden, A. R., Linick, M., et al. (2024). Directional links between students’ perceptions of school climate and academic performance in urban schools. J. Res. Educ. Effect. 17, 211–225. doi: 10.1080/19345747.2023.2189895
Wagner, L., Holenstein, M., Wepf, H., and Ruch, W. (2020). Character strengths are related to students’ achievement, flow experiences, and enjoyment in teacher-centered learning, individual, and group Work beyond cognitive ability. Front. Psychol. 11:1324. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2020.01324
Wang, M.-T., and Degol, J. L. (2016). School climate: a review of the construct, measurement, and impact on student outcomes. Educ. Psychol. Rev. 28, 315–352. doi: 10.1007/s10648-015-9319-1
Wang, Y., and Xian, X. (2024). The teacher–student relationship and student burnout: mediating effect of supportive school climate. Soc. Behav. Personal. Int. J. 52, 1–8. doi: 10.2224/sbp.13079
Wang, J., Zhang, X., and Zhang, L. J. (2022). Effects of teacher engagement on students’ achievement in an online English as a foreign language classroom: the mediating role of autonomous motivation and positive emotions. Front. Psychol. 13, 2127–2162. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2022.950652
Wei1, Y., Leong, S., and Daud, N. N. B. M. (2024). Teacher self-efficacy, student motivation, and student academic achievement: a case study of music teachers and students in Chinese higher education institutions. Pak. J. Life Soc. Sci. 22, 4138–4151. doi: 10.57239/PJLSS-2024-22.2.00306
Wu, X., Liu, H., Xiao, L., and Yao, M. (2024). Reciprocal relationship between learning interest and learning persistence: roles of strategies for self-regulated learning behaviors and academic performance. J. Youth Adolesc. 53, 2080–2096. doi: 10.1007/s10964-024-01994-9
Wulandari, R., and Sugiyono, N. A. (2021). How to create an effective school exploration strategies of an effective school in managing teachers. Int. J. Manag. Educ. 15:416. doi: 10.1504/IJMIE.2021.117587
Xavier, M., and Meneses, J. (2022). Persistence and time challenges in an open online university: a case study of the experiences of first-year learners. Int. J. Educ. Technol. High. Educ. 19:31. doi: 10.1186/s41239-022-00338-6
Xu, K. M., Cunha-Harvey, A. R., King, R. B., de Koning, B. B., Paas, F., Baars, M., et al. (2023). A cross-cultural investigation on perseverance, self-regulated learning, motivation, and achievement. Compare 53, 361–379. doi: 10.1080/03057925.2021.1922270
Xu, J., Wu, A., Filip, C., Patel, Z., Bernstein, S. R., Tanveer, R., et al. (2024). Active recall strategies associated with academic achievement in young adults: a systematic review. J. Affect. Disord. 354, 191–198. doi: 10.1016/j.jad.2024.03.010
Yeager, D. S., Bryan, C. J., Gross, J. J., Murray, J. S., Cobb, D. K., Santos, P. H. F., et al. (2022). A synergistic mindsets intervention protects adolescents from stress. Nature 607, 512–520. doi: 10.1038/s41586-022-04907-7
You, J. W. (2018). Testing the three-way interaction effect of academic stress, academic self-efficacy, and task value on persistence in learning among Korean college students. High. Educ. 76, 921–935. doi: 10.1007/s10734-018-0255-0
Yu, H., Zhang, J., and Zou, R. (2021). A motivational mechanism framework for teachers’ online informal learning and innovation during the COVID-19 pandemic. Front. Psychol. 12:1–10. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2021.601200
Zeng, N., Liu, Y., Gong, P., Hertogh, M., and König, M. (2021). Do right PLS and do PLS right: a critical review of the application of PLS-SEM in construction management research. Front. Eng. Manag. 8, 356–369. doi: 10.1007/s42524-021-0153-5
Zepeda, C. D., Martin, R. S., and Butler, A. C. (2020). Motivational strategies to engage learners in desirable difficulties. J. Appl. Res. Mem. Cogn. 9, 468–474. doi: 10.1007/s10648-020-09525-2
Zhang, Q. (2025). The role of EFL teacher immediacy and teacher-student rapport in boosting motivation to learn and academic mindsets in online education. Learn. Motiv. 89:102092. doi: 10.1016/j.lmot.2024.102092
Zhang, K., and He, W.-J. (2025). Teachers’ growth mindset, perceived school climate, and perceived parental autonomy support moderate the relationship between students’ growth mindset and academic achievement. J. Intelligence 13:8. doi: 10.3390/jintelligence13010008
Zhang, T., Mao, H., Liu, H., Liu, Y., Yu, M., Wu, W., et al. (2023). Parallel prediction method of knowledge proficiency based on Bloom’s cognitive theory. Mathematics 11:5002. doi: 10.3390/math11245002
Zhang, A., and Yang, Y. (2021). Toward the association between EFL/ESL teachers’ Work engagement and their students’ academic engagement. Front. Psychol. 12:1–4. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2021.739827
Zhao, K., Chen, N., Liu, G., Lun, Z., and Wang, X. (2023). School climate and left-behind children’s achievement motivation: the mediating role of learning adaptability and the moderating role of teacher support. Front. Psychol. 14:1–13. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1040214
Zheng, Z., Liu, W., and Wang, Y. (2025). The association between teacher competence and college students’ academic achievement: the mediating role of college students’ mental health. Asia Pac. Educ. Res. 34, 381–394. doi: 10.1007/s40299-024-00861-2
Zhou, Q., Guan, E., Yan, Y., Cui, G., and Wang, S. (2024). “Practices of teaching competency development” in Handbook of teaching competency development in higher education (Springer Nature Singapore), 127–154. doi: 10.1007/978-981-99-6273-0_5
Zimmerman, B. J. (2011). “Motivational sources and outcomes of self-regulated learning and performance: graduate center of city university of New York” in Handbook of self-regulation of learning and performance. (Taylor & Francis Online: Routledge), 63–78.
Zynuddin, S. N., Kenayathulla, H. B., and Sumintono, B. (2023). The relationship between school climate and students’ non-cognitive skills: a systematic literature review. Heliyon 9:e14773. doi: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e14773
Keywords: teacher character, student character, cognitive performance, school climate, PLSPredick
Citation: Abukasim SM, Sutrisno H and Rohaeti E (2025) Comparison of cognitive achievement model: teacher learning character and student learning character with school climate moderation, PLSPredick approach. Front. Educ. 10:1570760. doi: 10.3389/feduc.2025.1570760
Edited by:
Chi Zhou, Central China Normal University, ChinaReviewed by:
Anuphum Kumyoung, Loei Rajabhat University, ThailandVika Nurul Mufidah, Universitas Nahdlatul Ulama Indonesia, Indonesia
Copyright © 2025 Abukasim, Sutrisno and Rohaeti. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
*Correspondence: Sudarto M. Abukasim, c3VkYXJ0b2FidWthc2ltMjFAZ21haWwuY29t