Search

Generative AI (genAI) tools have involved rapid and broad uptake since their wide release in late 2022, including among teachers. We investigated several factors that play a role in teachers’ motivation and engagement to harness genAI in teaching and learning. We examined contextual factors (in-school support to apply genAI, time pressure, disruptive student behavior) as predictors of motivation (genAI self-efficacy and genAI valuing) and, in turn, engagement (i.e., genAI integration in teaching-related work and student learning activities) over the course of one school term. Among 368 Australian primary and secondary school teachers, our findings revealed that genAI support was associated with greater genAI self-efficacy and genAI valuing. Time pressure was also linked with greater genAI valuing, whereas disruptive student behavior was not linked with the genAI motivation or engagement variables. In turn, genAI self-efficacy was linked with greater levels of both types of genAI integration. GenAI valuing was associated with greater genAI integration in teaching-related work only. Our results provide knowledge about factors relevant for supporting genAI and its application among teachers in Australia—and also hold relevance to teachers in other countries.

Since their release in late 2022, generative AI (genAI) tools have led to widespread use, including among teachers. The aim of our study is to examine several factors that may be implicated in teachers' motivation and engagement to harness genAI in teaching and learning. We examined contextual (i.e., autonomy-supportive leadership, autonomy-thwarting leadership), occupational experience (i.e., professional growth striving, change-related stress), and background factors (i.e., gender, age, teaching experience, contract length, class size, school level) as predictors of motivation (i.e., genAI valuing) and, in turn, engagement (i.e., integration in teaching-related work and student learning activities). Among 339 Australian teachers, our findings revealed that perceived autonomy-supportive leadership, professional growth striving, and change-related stress were linked with greater genAI valuing. In turn, genAI valuing was associated with greater genAI integration in both teaching-related work and student learning activities. Perceived autonomy-thwarting leadership was directly linked with greater genAI integration in student learning activities, and professional growth striving was directly associated with greater genAI integration in teaching-related work. Teachers’ gender and school level were also linked with the motivation and engagement factors, and there were several indirect associations as well. Our results pinpoint areas of focus for future research, policy, and practice to support genAI and its application in schools.

Conflation over motivation and engagement has historically impeded research and practice. One reason for this is because definition and measurement have often been too general or diffuse—especially in the case of engagement. Recently conceptual advances aimed at disentangling facets of engagement and motivation have highlighted a need for better psychometric precision—particularly in the case of engagement. To the extent that engagement is inadequately assessed, motivation research involving engagement continues to be hampered. The present study investigates multidimensional effort (a specific facet of engagement) and how it relates to motivation. In particular, we examine the associations between specific positive and negative motivation factors and dimensions of effort, thereby shedding further insight into how different types of motivation interplay with different types of engagement. Drawing on data from a sample of 946 Australian high school students in 59 mathematics classrooms at five schools, this study hypothesized a tripartite model of academic effort in terms of operative, cognitive, and social–emotional dimensions. A novel nine-item self-report Effort Scale measuring each of the three factors was developed and tested for internal and external validity—including its relationship with multidimensional motivation. Multilevel confirmatory factor analyses were conducted to test the factor structure and validity of multidimensional effort. Additionally, doubly-latent multilevel structural equation models were conducted to explore the hypothesized motivation → engagement (effort) process, and the role of student- and classroom-level background attributes as predictors of both motivation and effort. Results supported the hypothesized model of tripartite effort and its distinctiveness from motivation, and showed that key dimensions of motivation predicted effort at student- and classroom-levels. This study provides implications and suggestions for future motivation research and theorizing by (1) establishing evidence for the validity of a novel engagement framework (multidimensional effort), and (2) supporting future measurement and practice in academic engagement juxtaposed with multidimensional motivation—critical for better understanding engagement, and motivation itself.

In a replication and extension of an earlier study, we relied on person-centered analyses to identify teacher (Level 1) and school (Level 2) profiles based on teachers' experiences of job demands (barriers to professional development, disruptive student behavior), job resources (teacher collaboration, input in decision-making), and personal resources (self-efficacy). We examined data from 5,439 teachers working in 364 schools in Australia and 2,216 teachers working in 149 schools in England. Latent profile analysis revealed six teacher profiles: Low-Demand-Flourisher (11%), Mixed-Demand-Flourisher (17%), Job-Resourced-Average (11%), Balanced-Average (14%), Mixed-Resourced-Struggler (11%), and Low-Resourced-Struggler (36%). Two school profiles were identified: an Unsupportive school profile (43%) and a Supportive school profile (57%). Several significant relations between these profiles and teacher/school characteristics and work-related outcomes were also identified at both levels. Although our results generally replicated prior findings, some differences were also observed, possibly as a results of recent changes in policies regarding in teacher support and accountability. Next, we extended prior work using a subsample of the Australian teachers for whom we had matching student data. This second set of results revealed that schools with a greater proportion of low-SES students were more likely to present an Unsupportive school profile. Moreover, the Supportive school profile was associated with higher levels of student-reported instructional support and school-average achievement in reading, mathematics, and science.

The present study investigated the role of adaptability in helping high school students navigate their online learning during a period of COVID-19 that entailed fully or partially remote online learning. Drawing on Job Demands-Resources theory and data from a sample of 1,548 Australian high school students in nine schools, we examined the role of adaptability in predicting students’ online learning self-efficacy in mathematics and their end of year mathematics achievement. It was found that beyond the effects of online learning demands, online and parental learning support, and background attributes, adaptability was significantly associated with higher levels of online learning self-efficacy and with gains in later achievement; online learning self-efficacy was also significantly associated with gains in achievement—and significantly mediated the relationship between adaptability and achievement. These findings confirm the role of adaptability as an important personal resource that can help students in their online learning, including through periods of remote instruction, such as during COVID-19.

To better understand instructional cognitive load, it is important to operationalize and assess it in novel ways that can reveal how different students perceive and experience this load as either challenging or threatening. The present study administered a recently developed instruction assessment tool—the Load Reduction Instruction Scale-Short (LRIS-S)—to N = 2,071 students in 188 high school science classrooms. Multilevel latent profile analysis (LPA) was used to identify student and classroom profiles based on students' reports of instructional cognitive load (load reduction instruction, LRI; using the LRIS-S) and their accompanying psychological challenge orientations (self-efficacy and growth goals), and psychological threat orientations (anxiety and failure avoidance goals). In phase 1 of analyses (investigating students; Level 1), we identified 5 instructional-psychological student profiles that represented different presentations of instructional load, challenge orientation, and threat orientation, ranging from the most maladaptive profile (the Instructionally-Overburdened & Psychologically-Resigned profile) to the most adaptive profile (Instructionally-Optimized & Psychologically-Self-Assured profile). The derived profiles revealed that similar levels of perceived instructional load can be accompanied by different levels of perceived challenge and threat. For example, we identified two profiles that were both instructionally-supported but who varied in their accompanying psychological orientations. Findings also identified profiles where students were dually motivated by both challenge and threat. In turn, these profiles (and their component scores) were validated through their significant associations with persistence, disengagement, and achievement. In phase 2 of analyses (investigating students and classrooms; Levels 1 and 2), we identified 3 instructional-psychological classroom profiles that varied in instructional cognitive load, challenge orientations, and threat orientations: Striving classrooms, Thriving classrooms, and Struggling classrooms. These three classroom profiles (and their component scores) were also validated through their significant associations with classroom-average persistence, disengagement, and achievement—with Struggling classrooms reflecting the most maladaptive outcomes and Thriving classrooms reflecting the most adaptive outcomes. Taken together, findings show that considering instructional cognitive load (and new approaches to empirically assessing it) in the context of students' accompanying psychological orientations can reveal unique insights about students' learning experiences and about important differences between classrooms in terms of the instructional load that is present.

Personal academic agency--the thoughts, actions, and emotions that impact individual functioning at school--is central for academic success. On average, students from low socio-economic status (low-SES) backgrounds report lower levels of personal academic agency than their more advantaged peers, but there are also many who achieve academic success. Identifying different personal academic agency profiles among students from low-SES backgrounds may assist in targeting efforts to boost these factors within that population--and to identify students who are faring well, as well as those who might require additional support. This study examined five factors of personal academic agency (perceived competence, school belonging, perseverance, academic buoyancy, and conduct problems) among 20,125 secondary school students from low-SES backgrounds at 421 Australian schools. We identified profiles of students that vary in patterns of personal academic agency, and examined teaching support predictors and achievement differences associated with profile membership. Latent profile analysis revealed five student profiles: Vulnerable (9% of sample), Resigned (27%), Precarious (28%), Average (32%), and Flourishing (14%) profiles. Students' perceptions of teaching support predicted membership in more adaptive profiles (i.e., Average and Flourishing profiles)--with the most consistent teaching support predictors being emotional support, classroom management, and instructional relevance. In addition, the Flourishing profile displayed the highest achievement.

Personal best (PB) goal setting refers to the pursuit of individual improvement through striving to outperform a previous best level of performance or effort. Although promising evidence has been building, numerous empirical questions remain to be answered, including how PB goal setting may operate alongside various contextual predictors of academic functioning. Applying the Academic Demands-Resources (AD-R) framework, the present study examined how academic resources and demands (conceptualized by way of teachers' interpersonal styles: autonomy-supportive and psychologically-controlling/thwarting teaching) and personal resources (PB goal setting) are associated with parent reports of students' behavioral engagement (homework behavior). The study comprised 414 Australian secondary school students. Results of structural equation modeling revealed that PB goal setting significantly predicted positive homework behavior and also moderated the association between psychologically-controlling teaching practices and homework behavior, such that PB goal setting was associated with positive homework behavior under conditions of high demands. The present work highlights the potentially unique contribution of PB goal setting in facilitating students' adaptive engagement and demonstrates the utility of the AD-R framework for better understanding students' engagement in the academic context.

The purpose of this multi-study article was to investigate the roles of adaptability and social support in predicting a variety of psychological outcomes. Data were collected from Year 12 college students (N = 73; Study 1), university students (N = 102; Study 2), and non-studying members of the general public (N = 141; Study 3). Findings showed that, beyond variance attributable to social support, adaptability made a significant independent contribution to psychological wellbeing (life satisfaction, psychological wellbeing, flourishing, and general affect) and psychological distress across all studies. Beyond the effects of adaptability, social support was found to make a significant independent contribution to most wellbeing outcomes (but not psychological distress in university students). In a multi-group analysis comparing predictors of psychological wellbeing in university students and non-studying adults, where the same outcome measures were used (Study 4; N = 243), it was found that adaptability played a stronger role (relative to social support) for university students, whereas social support played a stronger role for non-studying adults. Finally, (contrary to expectations) there was no evidence of an interaction between adaptability and social support predicting psychological outcomes—adaptability and social support operated as independent main effects. These findings demonstrate the importance of adaptability and social support in uniquely predicting psychological wellbeing in different sample groups. It is argued here that these two factors, should be given greater consideration in discussions of psychological wellbeing, and are relevant to psychological wellbeing at different major developmental life stages.

The role of two leadership factors (autonomy-supportive and autonomy-thwarting leadership) and one personal resource (workplace buoyancy) were examined as predictors of three teacher outcomes: somatic burden, stress related to change, and emotional exhaustion. Data were collected from 325 Australian teachers in May, 2020 during the first wave of COVID-19. During this time, many Australian children were being taught remotely from home, while other students were attending schools in-person. Findings showed that autonomy-supportive leadership was associated with greater buoyancy and, in turn, lower somatic burden, stress related to change, and emotional exhaustion (while controlling for covariates, including COVID-19 work situation). Autonomy-thwarting leadership was positively associated with emotional exhaustion. In addition, autonomy-supportive leadership was indirectly associated with the outcomes. The findings provide understanding of factors that may be harnessed to support teachers during subsequent waves of COVID-19 and other future disruptions to schooling that may occur.

Teachers’ healthy and effective functioning at work is impacted by the demands they face and the resources they can access. In this study, person-centered analysis was adopted to identify distinct teacher profiles of demands and resources. We investigated teachers’ experiences of two job demands (barriers to professional development and disruptive student behavior), two job resources (teacher collaboration and input in decision-making), and one personal resource (self-efficacy for teaching). Using data from the Teaching and Learning International Survey (TALIS) 2013, the study involved 6,411 teachers from 369 schools in Australia and 2,400 teachers from 154 schools in England. In phase one, latent profile analysis revealed five teacher profiles that were similar across the two countries: the Low-Demand-Flourisher (12%), Mixed-Demand-Flourisher (17%), Job-Resourced-Average (34%), Balanced-Average (15%), and Struggler (21%). The profiles were differently associated with two background characteristics (teacher gender and teaching experience) and two work-related well-being outcomes (job satisfaction and occupational commitment). In phase two, we extended our analysis to the school-level to identify school profiles based on the relative prevalence of the five teacher profiles within a school. Indeed, a yield of large scale datasets such as TALIS is that there are sufficient units at the school-level to enable institutional insights, beyond insights garnered at the individual teacher-level. Two school profiles that were similar in both countries were revealed: the Unsupportive school profile (58%) and the Supportive school profile (42%). The Supportive school profile was associated with higher school-average teacher job satisfaction and occupational commitment than the Unsupportive school profile. Taken together, the findings yield knowledge about salient teacher and school profiles, and provide guidance for possible interventions at the teacher- and school level.

This investigation examined the role of students' social-emotional need satisfaction in relation to academic engagement and social-emotional skills. Among a sample of 501 secondary school students (and their parents/carers), several need satisfaction variables were examined: perceived social-emotional autonomy, perceived social competence, perceived emotional competence, perceived relatedness with students, and perceived relatedness with teachers. The hypothesised outcomes were student-reported behavioural disaffection, and parent reports of students' homework practices, expressive skill, and perspective-taking skill. Results demonstrated that perceived social competence was associated with lower behavioural disaffection. Perceived emotional competence was associated with more positive homework practices, greater expressive skill, and greater perspective-taking skill. Perceived relatedness with teachers was associated with lower behavioural disaffection and more positive homework practices. Findings have implications for supporting students' positive adjustment in school and beyond.

This study involved examining the psychometric properties of the Tripartite Occupational Well-Being Scale (TOWBS) among a sample of 502 Australian teachers. The TOWBS (12 items) comprises three factors of subjective vitality, behavioral engagement, and professional growth. The TOWBS -- Short (3 items) assesses a broad factor of occupational well-being. Results confirmed the reliability, factor structure, and longitudinal measurement invariance of the scale scores for both scales. In addition, the two forms of the scale functioned similarly across different teacher characteristics, and the well-being factors were demonstrated to be associated with four external correlates in plausible ways (workplace buoyancy, psychological detachment, somatic burden, emotional exhaustion). Combined, findings offer support for the scale as an assessment of teacher well-being. Implications for research and practice are discussed.

We investigated academic buoyancy - and its predictors and outcomes - among female students attending all-girls and coeducational schools. We examined data from 1,254 female students. Structural equation modeling revealed that students' perceptions of three instructional climate factors (teacher-student relationships, useful content, engaging content) were positively associated with their learning strategies (elaboration, memorization, control) and achievement and, in turn, academic buoyancy (assessed one year later) in similar ways across the two school types. In turn, learning strategies, achievement, and academic buoyancy were associated with academic, well-being, and occupational outcomes assessed up to age 22 in different ways. Together, the findings provide understanding about academic buoyancy among girls, provide guidance for how teachers can support buoyancy and other personal attributes among girls, and yield knowledge about the longer-term outcomes of academic buoyancy.

Many countries around the world are facing issues related to low levels of teacher wellbeing. In Australia, for example, there is a severe teacher shortage, resulting in many understaffed schools. Although this shortage is due to a confluence of factors, part of the cause stems from the fact that the support provided to teachers in recent years has not kept pace with the increasing professional demands. Supporting teacher well-being is a worthy and critical aim in itself, but it also has a larger benefit because teacher well-being has ramifications for instruction and student well-being. Teacher and student functioning are inherently intertwined, so efforts to promote well-being among each party are likely to have carryover effects to the other. The author and their colleagues have conducted several recent studies looking at teacher and student well-being in Australia, with a particular focus on factors that predict greater well-being. Together, these studies suggest that working conditions and aspects of school environments affect teachers' well-being, as well as their likelihood of leaving their schools or the teaching workforce altogether. Importantly, teachers' working conditions and well-being also have implications for student achievement.