Pa ge 1 Pa ge 1 American Journal of Multidisciplinary Research and Innovation (AJMRI) Teaching Styles And Students’ Engagement Among Junior High Schools in Claveria Districts, Misamis Oriental Regie G. Quiblat1*, Roie M. Ubayubay1 Volume 4 Issue 2, Year 2025 ISSN: 2158-8155 (Online), 2832-4854 (Print) DOI: https://doi.org/10.54536/ajmri.v4i2.4350 https://journals.e-palli.com/home/index.php/ajmri Article Information ABSTRACT Received: January 08, 2025 Accepted: February 11, 2025 Published: February 22, 2025 This study aimed to determine the effect of teachers’ teaching styles on students’ engagement. Specifically, it aimed to describe the respondents’ characteristics; find the level of the respondents’ perceived teaching style; examine the respondents’ perceived assessment of affective and cognitive engagement; find the significant effect of teaching styles on students’ engagement; and determine the relationship between teaching styles and their characteristics. In this research , a purposive sampling procedure was used to obtain the 300 public junior high school students of Claveria Districts, Misamis Oriental, during the School Year 2023-2024. A combination of patterned and self-constructed questionnaire with descriptive statistics were used, along with a T-test, to test the significant effects of teaching styles on students’ engagement. Pearson Product Moment Correlation (r) was utilized to determine the vital relationship between teaching styles and respondents’ characteristics. The study found that among all teaching styles, expert style obtained the highest mean result and interpreted as very high. The respondents perceived affective and cognitive engagement as very positive. Teaching styles, except delegator, significantly affect students’ engagement. Further, based on students’ perceptions, their parents’ marital status and educational attainment are significantly related to teaching styles. In conclusion, it is essential to identify appropriate teaching styles based on students’ backgrounds. It is recommended to help create a holistic and practical learning environment. Further studies are needed to understand school environments’ influence on teaching styles and students’ engagement. Keywords Students’ Engagement, Teaching Styles INTRODUCTION In the context of education, the effectiveness of teaching styles in influencing student engagement and academic performance. Teachers should gradually introduce leadership roles, providing clear guidelines and support to help students develop confidence in autonomous learning tasks. Fostering preparedness and support for increased responsibility remains a critical concern. As such, this study addresses the pressing issue of identifying and understanding the relationship between teaching styles and student engagement among Junior High School students in the Claveria Districts, Misamis Oriental. This investigation is prompted by the need to enhance teaching practices and optimize students’ learning experiences within the district. Moreover, it is essential to ground this study within the legal framework governing education in the Philippines. The relationship between teachers’ teaching styles and students’ engagement is a significant concern. This study examines teachers’ different teaching styles and how they affect students’ engagement. The study intends to investigate ways to improve teaching methods to improve the quality of education in the municipality. Public school teachers in Claveria Districts must ensure high-quality teaching that meets the needs of diverse students. Teachers want to provide effective instruction, yet differences in teaching styles might result in discrepancies in teaching success. This discrepancy could lead to varying educational experiences for students, impeding their overall academic development. The district risks perpetuating unfairness and limiting educational development without thoroughly understanding how teaching styles impact students’ engagement. One significant gap in existing research is the limited exploration of teaching styles and their impact on student engagement. While studies conducted elsewhere offer valuable insights, a need remains to investigate how teaching styles manifest and operate within the unique socio-cultural and educational landscape. Addressing this gap will provide a more comprehensive understanding of effective teaching practices tailored to the local context. As observed, the classroom environment and availability of resources exert considerable influence on teachers’ selection and implementation of teaching styles. Physical classroom layout, seating arrangements, and instructional materials shape the dynamics of teaching and learning interactions, influencing the feasibility and effectiveness of different instructional approaches (Lei, 2022). More scholars from other disciplines are recognizing the significance and influence of scientific education and the obstacles and possibilities in this area. Individuals reside in a dynamic environment where science constantly evolves, prompting educators to acknowledge that they are not teaching a fixed subject. They must broaden their perspectives to embrace new ideas and concepts that supersede outdated ones. 1 PHINMA Cagayan de Oro City, Philippines * Corresponding author’s e-mail: regiequiblat7@gmail.com Pa ge 2 https://journals.e-palli.com/home/index.php/ajmri Am. J. Multidis. Res. Innov. 4(2) 1-17, 2025 Despite the increasing recognition of the importance of teaching styles in influencing students’ engagement and academic performance, a significant gap exists in the literature regarding their impact within the specific context of the Claveria Districts, Misamis Oriental. While studies conducted elsewhere have provided valuable insights into the relationship between teaching styles and students’ outcomes, the unique socio-cultural and educational landscape necessitates a localized investigation. This gap in research is particularly pressing due to the potential implications for educational practices and policies within the districts. As outlined in Section 3, Article IV of the Code of Professional Ethics for Teachers and School Officials emphasizes the need for educators to expand their cultural awareness, improve their professional skills, and elevate the teaching profession’s reputation. This part emphasizes the teachers’ duty to maintain the highest standards of professional behavior and prioritize their students’ well-being and growth. The relationship between teachers’ teaching styles and student engagement is an essential concern in Claveria Districts’ public schools. LITERATURE REVIEW Respondents’ Characteristics The impact of respondents’ characteristics on teaching styles and students’ engagement in Junior High Schools is crucial to consider a range of characteristics. These characteristics may include teacher-student relationships, motivational factors, and the teaching approaches employed by educators. Motivation and social interactions are identified as critical personal factors influencing attendance. While respondents’ characteristics, such as sex, age, and strand, may differ across individuals, they do not significantly impact the perceived influence of personal factors on attendance. This implies that personal factors, such as motivation and social interactions, are relevant for all students regardless of their demographic profiles (Sabado et al., 2024). Age Age is a significant determinant of learning preferences and outcomes and is influenced by contemporary technologies and social systems (Mori et al., 2023). As individuals progress through different stages of life, their cognitive abilities, interests, and learning styles evolve. Younger students, such as children and adolescents, often thrive in interactive, hands-on learning environments incorporating technology and multimedia elements. These students tend to engage more actively with visual and auditory stimuli, benefiting from teaching styles incorporating videos, interactive activities, and group work. On the other hand, older students, such as adults, may have different learning preferences driven by their accumulated knowledge and life experiences. They may prefer more self-directed learning opportunities, discussions, and real-world applications of concepts. Consequently, teaching styles should be adapted to suit the age group of the students, taking into account their specific learning preferences and needs. Sex Male and female students may have distinct preferences regarding instructional methods (Mori et al., 2023). Understanding these preferences can help educators tailor their teaching approaches to engage better and support students. For male students, incorporating hands-on activities and visual aids, such as diagrams and videos, can enhance their learning experience. Providing collaborative learning and competition opportunities may also resonate well with male students. On the other hand, female students may benefit from instructional methods that focus on verbal explanations and discussions. Creating a supportive and inclusive learning environment that fosters collaboration and personal connections can be particularly effective for female students. Additionally, integrating technology into instruction can appeal to both male and female students, albeit with potential variations in specific preferences. Parent’s Educational Attainment A cross-national analysis by Chinek and Baran (2020) explores the relationship between parental educational attainment and students’ academic engagement across different countries. The study analyzes how parental education influences students’ academic engagement and how this relationship varies in diverse national contexts. By conducting a cross-national analysis, the researchers investigate the impact of parental education on students’ levels of academic engagement, considering the cultural, social, and educational differences between countries. The study provides insights into the importance of parental education in shaping students’ academic engagement and highlights the significance of considering cross-national variations in understanding this relationship. Parents with higher levels of education may better understand effective teaching strategies and may be more likely to adopt supportive and engaging teaching styles at home. This, in turn, can positively impact students’ academic engagement. Conversely, parents with lower levels of education may have limited knowledge of effective teaching methods, which could affect their ability to foster academic engagement in their children. Number of Siblings The study by Feng (2021) suggests a negative correlation between sibling size and children’s educational attainment in Indonesia. To establish causality, the research uses a design that exploits the exogenous sibling size variation caused by family twin births. According to the results of instrumental variable estimation, there is a quantity-quality trade-off at play, where larger sibling size is associated with lower educational outcomes. Specifically, it is found that larger sibling size is negatively correlated with completed years of schooling, educational levels, and the likelihood of school attendance. The study also conducted a subsample analysis and found that the negative effect of sibling size on educational attainment is more pronounced for specific groups. For instance, the negative effect is more significant for Muslim children, children with less educated mothers, and children belonging to earlier birth cohorts. Pa ge 3 https://journals.e-palli.com/home/index.php/ajmri Am. J. Multidis. Res. Innov. 4(2) 1-17, 2025 Parents’ Marital Status The study conducted by Lui et al. (2023) structural equation modeling examines the relationship between parents’ marital satisfaction and children’s academic performance. The findings revealed that parents’ marital satisfaction significantly indirectly affected children’s academic performance through two pathways. First, parents’ marital satisfaction indirectly influenced children’s academic performance through several mediators. These mediators included parents’ psychopathological symptoms, children’s internalizing behaviors, and school engagement. In other words, parents’ marital satisfaction impacted these mediators, which influenced children’s academic performance. Second, parents’ marital satisfaction also indirectly affected children’s academic performance through the mediator of parental involvement and school engagement. This suggests that when parents’ marital satisfaction is high, it can positively influence their involvement in their children’s education and their children’s engagement in school, ultimately contributing to better academic performance. Teaching Styles Teaching styles play a pivotal role in determining the effectiveness of instruction and the overall learning experience for students. According to Cardino and Ortega-Dela Cruz (2020), different teaching styles, ranging from traditional to more student-centered approaches, can significantly impact how information is delivered, how students engage with the material, and how much they learn. For example, a teacher who adopts a lecture- based approach may excel at conveying information in a structured manner but struggle to engage students or accommodate diverse learning needs actively. On the other hand, a teacher who embraces a facilitative or inquiry-based teaching style may foster greater student participation, critical thinking, and problem-solving skills, leading to deeper understanding and retention of content. As posited by Languita et al. (2023), styles of teaching and learning are one of the factors that contribute to student learning performance. Expert Teaching Style Knowledgeable and skilled teachers know the subject’s students are interested in learning. Bergil and Erçevik’s (2019) expert teaching style can be seen as an advantage where teachers have accurate and comprehensive knowledge, skills, and information on the scope of targets to be taught to students. This comprehensive knowledge, information, and skills consolidation can benefit experienced students. Formal Authority Teaching Style In a formal authority style, the teacher serves as a manager, enforcing appropriate and strict regulations in the classroom (Sha et al., 2021). Teachers using this teaching style must hold a certain status or standing among the students. Within this framework, educators establish tangible learning scenarios for students by establishing goals, guidelines, standards, and learning principles. Personal Model Teaching Style Teachers with personal model teaching styles set the prototypes for thinking and behaving. In this regard, the teachers constantly supervise, guide, and instruct students by showing them how to do things. In doing so, the teachers motivate students to observe, imitate, or reflect on the methods and approaches they provide (Sim et al., 2022). In addition to helping students build their skills, this hands-on approach helps them feel motivated, confident, and self-sufficient as they learn from their teachers’ modeling and direct instruction. Another benefit of using a personal model teaching approach is a friendly and stimulating learning atmosphere where students feel empowered to study and develop under the direction of a mentor who sets an example. Facilitator Teaching Style Rooted in constructivist and socio-constructivist learning theories, student-centered approaches prioritize cultivating critical thinking skills, metacognitive awareness, and lifelong learning habits through authentic, inquiry-driven learning experiences (Putri & Sari, 2021). By assisting students in goal-setting, self-monitoring, and reflection on their thought processes, facilitator teachers foster metacognitive awareness in their students. Furthermore, the statement’s focus on encouraging lifetime learning habits aligns with the facilitator style, which tries to ingrain students’ curiosity for ongoing learning and development. Delegator Teaching Style Delegator teaching style refers to teachers who emphasize the development of a student’s self-capacity. Students are encouraged to conduct self-learning, such as projects, and teachers act as a source of reference (Sim et al., 2022). Students working on projects autonomously and functioning as members of a group with independent powers are expected in this model. Students who are taught using the Delegator Teaching Style view themselves as capable, independent, and self-sufficient. Because of this, every student can take the initiative and evaluate themselves to become more self-aware. Students’ Engagement Student engagement refers to the degree of involvement, interest, and enthusiasm students demonstrate in their learning experiences (Delfino, 2019). It encompasses active participation in classroom activities, curiosity, and a sense of connection to the subject matter. Effective teaching practices play a crucial role in fostering student engagement by creating learning environments that are stimulating, interactive, and relevant to students’ interests and needs. For example, teachers who incorporate hands-on activities, group discussions, and real-world applications into their lessons often find students more Pa ge 4 https://journals.e-palli.com/home/index.php/ajmri Am. J. Multidis. Res. Innov. 4(2) 1-17, 2025 motivated and engaged in the learning process. Moreover, providing opportunities for student choice and autonomy can further enhance engagement by allowing students to take ownership of their learning and pursue topics that resonate with their interests and passions. According to study of Pascua (2024), instructors can enhance student engagement and learning outcomes by adopting different types of approaches. Affective Engagement Affective engagement represents a malleable dimension of the broader conceptualization of student engagement that is amenable to prevention and intervention efforts (Cook et al., 2020). This engagement component responds to intervention and prevention tactics meant to improve students’ motivation, emotional health, and feelings of community within the classroom. By strongly emphasizing affective engagement, teachers can establish inclusive and encouraging learning environments that support students’ emotional growth and improve their overall engagement and academic performance. Teacher- Student Relationship It has been discovered that positive teacher-student interactions encourage students’ participation and academic success. Students can use teachers as a haven from which they can explore the environment and engage in learning activities, and as a source of support in stressful situations (Engels et al., 2021). Teaching styles prioritizing personal connections and rapport-building, such as the Personal Model and Facilitator styles, may contribute to stronger teacher-student relationships. These styles emphasize empathy, communication, and understanding, fostering a supportive learning environment where students feel valued and respected by their teachers. Consequently, students are more likely to feel emotionally connected to their teachers, leading to higher engagement and motivation in learning. Family Support for Learning The influence of the family on academic performance manifests in various aspects. Zhang et al. (2023) showed that family cultural capital, economic capital, and parental support increase the likelihood of becoming a scientist. Teaching styles prioritizing communication and partnership with families, such as the Personal Model Style, may enhance family involvement in students’ education. When teachers serve as positive role models and establish open lines of communication with families, parents are more likely to feel engaged and supportive of their children’s learning journey. Cognitive Engagement Research demonstrates that students who actively interact with their learning materials learn more than those who only interact with them passively (Barlow et al., 2020). In the classroom, teachers greatly influence their students’ lives. Their role extends beyond simple instruction; it also includes setting the tone and conducting themselves in the classroom. The student’s success does not depend solely on the grades being achieved but on how the grades were achieved, whether students took an interest or it was learned just for the sake of it. Hence, the psychological sense of being with others in a comfortable environment is equally vital in the classroom. Control and Relevance from School Control and Relevance from School can be influenced by teaching styles that empower students and make learning meaningful (Bessa et al., 2021). The facilitator style, for instance, encourages student autonomy and relevance by allowing students to explore topics of interest and participate in decision-making regarding their learning. As a result, students perceive greater control over their education and recognize the relevance of academic tasks to their personal goals and interests. Future Aspiration and Grades The teaching style employed by educators can impact students’ future aspirations and grades (Keerthigha & Singh, 2023). Teachers’ instruction methods greatly impact students’ learning experiences, grades, and goals for the future. Students are more likely to be motivated, actively engaged in learning, and inspired to set greater academic objectives when educators use student-centered and engaging teaching approaches. A helpful and engaging teaching approach can create a good learning atmosphere in the classroom, motivate students to take charge of their education and give them a sense of self-worth and competence. Intrinsic Motivation The choice of teaching style significantly impacts student motivation in the classroom. Research by Zhang et al. (2022) highlights the importance of autonomy, competence, and relatedness in fostering intrinsic motivation among students. Teaching styles that prioritize student autonomy and allow for meaningful choices in learning activities, such as the facilitator style, have promoted greater intrinsic motivation. Statement of the Problem 1. What is the level of the respondents’ perceived teaching style in terms of expert formal authority, personal model, facilitator, and delegator style? 2. How do the respondents perceive affective engagement based on the teacher-student relationship, peer support at school, and family support for learning? 3. How do the respondents perceive cognitive engagement based on control and relevance from school, future aspirations and grades, and intrinsic motivation? 4. Is there a significant effect of the respondents’ perceived teaching styles on students’ engagement? 5. Is there a significant relationship between the respondents’ perceived teaching styles and each of their characteristics? Pa ge 5 https://journals.e-palli.com/home/index.php/ajmri Am. J. Multidis. Res. Innov. 4(2) 1-17, 2025 MATERIALS AND METHODS Research Design The study utilized a descriptive correlational research design, which is appropriate for investigating the relationships between variables without any manipulation. This approach examined the degree and type of connections between the teaching styles of teachers and the engagement levels of Junior High School Students in Claveria Districts, Misamis Oriental, during the School Year 2023-2024. Employing a descriptive correlational research design was deemed appropriate for this study as it facilitated the exploration of connections between variables without alterations, yielding significant insights into the nature and degree of relationships among teaching styles, student engagement, and demographic aspects. As noted by Lemboye (2019), descriptive correlational research is effective for analyzing patterns, trends, and correlations within datasets. Sampling Technique The study used Slovin’s with a 5% margin of error and a population of 1200 to get the desired number of respondents. Then, purposive sampling was utilized to identify and select the respondents in each district or school based on the population. Purposive sampling was chosen as the sampling method for this study because it can target demographic traits or characteristics pertinent to the study’s goals. In this case, the objective was to select Junior High School Students in Grades 9 to 10 who were enrolled in any schools within Claveria Districts, Misamis Oriental. Research Instrument In this research, a mix of structured and self-developed questionnaires was employed to collect pertinent data from the participants. This aimed to assess the different teaching styles and the degree of engagement among Junior High Students in Claveria Districts, Misamis Oriental, for the School Year 2023-2024. To evaluate teaching styles, the variables in the questionnaire were based on the work of Loveta et al. (2020) titled “Students’ Expectations toward Teacher’s Teaching Styles and Contribution to Student’s English Performance,” while the indicators were created by the researcher. Furthermore, the variables in the student engagement questionnaire were derived from the study by Appleton et al. (2006) named “Measuring Cognitive and Psychological Engagement: Validation of the Student Engagement Instrument,” with the indicators also constructed by the researcher. The questionnaire consisted of three sections. Part I asked about the respondents’ age, gender, educational attainment of parents, number of siblings, and parents’ marital status. In contrast, Part II evaluated the levels of teaching styles including expert, formal authority, personal model, facilitator, and delegator styles, with ratings ranging from 4 (At all Times) to 3 (Most of the Time), 2 (Sometimes), and 1 (Never). Similarly, Part III measured students’ engagement by looking at affective factors (teacher- student relationships, peer support at school, and family support) and cognitive elements (control and relevance of schoolwork, future aspirations and goals, and intrinsic motivation), rated on a scale of 4 (Strongly Agree), 3 (Agree), 2 (Disagree), and 1 (Strongly Disagree). RESULTS AND DISCUSSION Problem 1. What is the Level of the Respondents’ Perceived Teaching Styles in Terms of Expert, Formal Authority, Personal Model, Facilitator, and Delegator Style? Table 1: Distribution of the Respondents’ Level of Perceived Teaching Styles Variables Mean SD Interpretation Expert 3.52 0.66 Very High Formal Authority 3.45 0.69 Very High Personal Model 3.50 0.68 Very High Facilitator 3.46 0.70 Very High Delegator 3.41 0.71 Very High Overall 3.47 0.69 Very High Legend: 3.26-4.00 At all Times /Very High 2.51-3.25 Most of the Time/High 1.76 – 2.50 Sometime /Low 1.00-1.75 Never/Very Low Table 1 shows the summary distribution of the respondents’ assessment of the teachers’ teaching style with an overall mean of 3.47 (SD=0.69), interpreted as Very High. This indicates that students generally view their teachers’ teaching methods as highly effective and supportive. The implication is that students perceive their teachers as adept at delivering lessons that enhance their comprehension of the subject matter and cultivate a positive, encouraging learning atmosphere. Such a favorable view of teachers suggests that educators are successfully fostering a supportive and engaging educational environment that contributes to student achievement. It suggests that effective teaching styles typically involve clear communication, engaging lesson designs, and the capability to make complex ideas understandable and relatable. Supportive teaching encompasses the creation of an environment where students feel appreciated, respected, and motivated to engage actively in their educational experience. According to research by Monacis et al. (2024), academic training Pa ge 6 https://journals.e-palli.com/home/index.php/ajmri Am. J. Multidis. Res. Innov. 4(2) 1-17, 2025 rather than years of experience serves as a significant predictor for the differences in teachers’ perceptions of teaching styles. The expert style variable obtained the highest mean score of 3.52 (SD=0.66), interpreted as Very High. This suggests that students highly regard and often experience the expert teaching approach, which entails teachers displaying considerable knowledge and expertise in their subjects, providing clear explanations, and offering in- depth insights into the material. As noted, students tend to value instructors who possess a deep understanding of their subject, as this lends credibility and confidence in the classroom. It implies that educators who demonstrate competence and authority in their fields are perceived as reliable sources of information, helping students gain a thorough and comprehensive understanding of complex topics. Students value this expertise, as it promotes a deeper comprehension of the content and builds trust in the information presented (Zacarian & Silverstone, 2020). When educators showcase their subject-matter expertise, it affirms the material and enhances confidence in the teaching methods employed. Additionally, teachers can effectively clarify and reinforce learning goals by addressing students’ questions and misconceptions appropriately. On the contrary, the variable on delegator style obtained the lowest mean of 3.41 (SD=0.71), interpreted as Very High. This indicates that although the delegator style is not experienced as frequently as the others, it remains highly appreciated by students when they see it in practice. This suggests that the delegator teaching style prioritizes student autonomy and responsibility, with teachers serving as facilitators instead of direct instructors, allowing learners to take control of their educational journey. Such an approach can cultivate crucial skills like independent learning, problem-solving, and critical thinking. There may be several reasons for the lesser familiarity with the delegator instructional style. One observed factor is the common emphasis in many educational environments on teacher-centered classes and direct instruction, which may limit the opportunities for educators to adopt a facilitative role. When students are compelled to take on a greater responsibility for their learning, they might face uncertainty or hesitation, as they are accustomed to more traditional, teacher-directed teaching methods. This suggests that employing the delegator style necessitates higher degrees of independence, self-regulation, and active engagement from students, which could pose challenges for those used to more structured, directive teaching strategies. Research conducted by Cornelius- White (2020) supports the advantages of the delegator style, indicating that student-centered approaches, which provide learners with greater control over their academic activities, can enhance engagement and motivation. Problem 2. How do the Respondents Perceive Affective Engagement Based on the Teacher- Student Relationship, Peer Support at School, and Family Support for Learning? Table 2: Distribution of the Respondents Perceived Affective Engagement Variables Mean SD Interpretation Teacher-Student Relationship 3.43 0.58 Very Positive Peer Support at School 3.44 0.62 Very Positive Family Support for Learning 3.40 0.63 Very Positive Overall 3.44 0.61 Very Positive Legend: 3.26-4.00 Strongly Agree /Very Positive 2.51-3.25 Agree /Positive 1.76 – 2.50 Disagree /Negative 1.00-1.75 Strongly Disagree/Very Negative Table 2 shows the summary of the student’s engagement in terms of affective with an overall mean of 3.44 (SD=0.61) interpreted as Very Positive. This indicates that students generally hold a positive view regarding their affective engagement, suggesting they feel emotionally connected and invested in their learning experiences. This perception typically reflects students’ enthusiasm, interest, and enjoyment in actively participating in classroom activities, discussions, and academic tasks. As observed within the context of Claveria districts, the impact of affective engagement on students’ overall motivation and academic performance is an important aspect to consider. It suggests that students are more likely to display elevated levels of intrinsic motivation, determination, and a constructive attitude towards challenges when they experience emotional engagement in their learning. Because of their increased motivation to work diligently and strive for academic excellence, students who are emotionally engaged in their learning are more inclined to achieve academic success. Affective engagement includes students’ emotional reactions to learning, encompassing their motivation, curiosity, and sense of belonging within the educational setting (Bond et al. 2020). The variable, peer support at school, obtained the highest mean score of 3.44 (SD=0.62), interpreted as Very Positive. This signifies that students perceive a significant level of peer support in their school environment. It implies that students recognize a positive and encouraging social atmosphere among their peers. This perception typically illustrates students’ experiences of feeling accepted, valued, and supported by their classmates. This indicates that students who receive assistance from their peers are more likely to collaborate, Pa ge 7 https://journals.e-palli.com/home/index.php/ajmri Am. J. Multidis. Res. Innov. 4(2) 1-17, 2025 work as a team, and exchange learning experiences. When classmates support and motivate each other, they cultivate a network that fosters academic development, enhances problem-solving skills, and nurtures healthy peer relationships. In such a collaborative environment, students’ motivation, engagement, and sense of responsibility for both their own and their peers’ learning can be heightened. According to Feng (2022), healthy peer relationships characterized by mutual support, teamwork, and emotional backing improve school engagement and promote positive socio-emotional outcomes for students. On the contrary, the variable, family support for learning, obtained the lowest mean of 3.40 (SD=0.63), interpreted as Very Positive. Despite this being the lowest average in this survey context, it suggests that students generally feel they receive strong support from their families concerning their educational endeavors. This indicates that the lower average score might be influenced by individual differences in perceptions of family support, variations in family dynamics, or differing expectations about the levels of assistance. As noted, the overall viewpoint remains one of significant family encouragement and participation in students’ educational paths. The research indicates that a strong family support system that involves students in their academic activities can greatly improve their success and overall well-being. Barger et al. (2021) state that parental support, which includes homework assistance, motivation, and access to educational resources, has a positive effect on students’ academic drive and achievement. Problem 3. How Do the Respondents Perceive Cognitive Engagement Based on Control and Relevance from School, Future Aspirations and Grades, and Intrinsic Motivation? Table 3: Distribution of the Respondents Perceived Cognitive Engagement Variables Mean SD Interpretation Control and Relevance from School 3.45 0.59 Very Positive Future Aspirations and Grades 3.49 0.59 Very Positive Intrinsic Motivation 3.43 0.60 Very Positive Overall 3.46 0.59 Very Positive Legend: 3.26-4.00 Strongly Agree /Very Positive 2.51-3.25 Agree /Positive 1.76 – 2.50 Disagree /Negative 1.00-1.75 Strongly Disagree/Very Negative Table 3 shows the summary of the student’s engagement in terms of cognitive with an overall mean of 3.46 (SD=0.59), interpreted as Very Positive. This means robust cognitive engagement among the student respondents, suggesting a high level of mental involvement and active participation in academic activities. This further means that a crucial aspect to consider is the influence of cognitive engagement on students’ learning outcomes and academic success. As observed, when students are cognitively engaged, they actively process information, form connections, and apply critical thinking skills to academic tasks. It implies that this intense mental involvement results in improved comprehension, retention, and application of knowledge, which in turn improves academic performance and achievement. Moreover, cognitive engagement encourages students’ intellectual growth, creativity, and curiosity. By actively participating in academic activities, students are more likely to ask questions, seek new perspectives, and explore complex ideas and concepts. Moreover, robust cognitive engagement is associated with positive learning outcomes such as improved academic performance and deeper conceptual understanding (Quynh et al., 2021). Students with solid cognitive engagement are likelier to demonstrate higher retention levels, problem-solving ability, and information-processing skills. They approach learning proactively, actively seeking to connect new knowledge with prior experiences and applying it to real- world contexts. The variable future aspirations and grades obtained the highest mean score of 3.49 (SD=0.59), interpreted as Very Positive. This means that students place significant importance on their future goals and academic achievements, indicating that students view their education as a critical pathway to achieving personal and professional aspirations. This further means that participants generally hold a favorable view regarding the relationship between their future aspirations and expected academic performance. This implies that students who aspire to achieve specific future objectives tend to believe that these aspirations favorably influence their academic success. As observed, students are motivated by their future goals and see a strong connection between their academic performance and their ability to achieve them. Students who prioritize future goals and academic achievements will likely exhibit determination, perseverance, and goal-oriented behavior (Rabenn, 2023). They understand the value of acquiring knowledge, developing skills, and earning credentials to support their career aspirations and long-term success. On the contrary, the variable, intrinsic motivation, obtained the lowest mean of 3.43 (SD=0.60), interpretd as Very Positive. Despite having the lowest mean result, the students still agree strongly with statements related to intrinsic motivation. This further means that this variability could reflect differences in individual preferences, interests, or experiences that influence their engagement with learning tasks. Numerous factors can impact the range in students’ judgments of intrinsic motivation, which is the lowest level among the assertions. It implies Pa ge 8 https://journals.e-palli.com/home/index.php/ajmri Am. J. Multidis. Res. Innov. 4(2) 1-17, 2025 that the complexity of intrinsic motivation itself may be one explanation for this. Problem 4. Is There a Significant Effect of the Perceived Teaching Styles on Students’ Engagement? Table 4: Regression Analysis on the Effect of Respondents’ Perceived Teaching Styles on Student Engagement Teaching Styles Affective Cognitive Overall T-value T-value T-value P-value P-value P-value Expert 2.77 3.45 3.11 .000* .000* .000* S S S Formal Authority 2.65 2.26 2.455 .001* .001* .001* S S S Personal Model 3.13 2.11 2.62 .000* .001* .001* S S S Facilitator 2.12 3.65 2.885 .021* .000* .010* S S S Delegator .254 3.64 1.947 .109 .000* 0.054 NS S NS Legend: *Significant at p<0.05 alpha level, S – Significant, NS – Not Significant Table 4 summarizes the impact of various teaching styles on students’ engagement in both emotional and cognitive aspects. The findings indicate that the expert, formal authority, personal model, and facilitator teaching approaches significantly influence both affective and cognitive engagement, evidenced by t-values and probability values below the 0.05 alpha level, leading to the rejection of the null hypothesis. According to students’ viewpoints, this suggests that the teaching styles employed by their educators play a crucial role in influencing their emotional and cognitive involvement in the learning process. This indicates that through these teaching styles, students perceive that their teachers positively enhance their overall engagement and learning outcomes. It has been observed that a flexible teaching strategy that integrates various methods can notably enhance students’ participation in the learning experience, as it caters to their individual learning preferences. This underscores that recognizing the influence of teaching styles on student engagement can inform educators’ instructional methods. Employing a combination of these styles can improve both the emotional and cognitive aspects of student learning, resulting in more effective teaching techniques (Ning & Ban, 2022). The expert style significantly affects students’ engagement in both affective and cognitive. Based on students’ perception, this means that when teachers demonstrate their competence, students see them as important sources of information and abilities that improve their educational experience. This further means that students are more inclined to interact with the content when teachers share their in-depth knowledge and professional perspectives because they see the genuineness and practical application of what they are studying. As observed, students react favorably to knowledgeable teachers who can impart complex ideas, real-world examples, and thorough explanations. Since students trust their teachers’ expertise and knowledge, the expert approach increases their confidence in their educational path. Knowing they receive instruction from someone with significant subject-matter expertise helps students better understand the material. It motivates them to achieve more academic success (Liu et al., 2023). On formal authority style, a significant effect was observed in both affective and cognitive engagement. Based on students’ perception, this means that students perceive this structured teaching approach as beneficial to their emotional connection with learning and intellectual development. This further means that the formal authority style teachers use to establish clear expectations and boundaries fosters a learning atmosphere where students feel safe enough to participate fully while upholding high academic standards. As observed, students perceive this structured teaching approach as beneficial to their emotional connection with learning and intellectual development. It implies that students believe clear classroom procedures and academic standards are crucial for their intellectual development and emotional bond with learning. Thus, teachers should uphold these aspects while creating a positive learning atmosphere. As Pa ge 9 https://journals.e-palli.com/home/index.php/ajmri Am. J. Multidis. Res. Innov. 4(2) 1-17, 2025 Nantschev et al. (2020) posited, implementing structured teaching approaches creates an environment where students feel emotionally secure and intellectually challenged. Personal model teaching style also significantly affects students’ engagement in both affective and cognitive. Based on students’ perception, students respond favorably to teachers who exhibit and model desired behaviors, skills, and thought processes in their teaching approach, according to their judgment of the personal model teaching style’s significant effects on affective and cognitive engagement. This further means that when teachers lead by example and show students how to think and behave by direct observation and emulation, students feel more emotionally attached to their learning affective engagement while simultaneously acquiring deeper comprehension and critical thinking skills on their cognitive engagement. As observed, students see how teachers who model desired actions and thought processes regularly make learning more accessible and authentic, which helps them understand and internalize complex concepts. It implies that teachers should prioritize replicating real-world applications and thought processes in their instruction because students view this as crucial to their intellectual growth and emotional bond with learning. Personal modeling in teaching enhances engagement and authenticity by allowing educators to share their experiences and problem-solving strategies, fostering emotional and intellectual resonance with students (Stemasov et al., 2021). The facilitator’s teaching style significantly affects students’ engagement in both affective and cognitive. This means that students respond favorably to teachers who lead their learning through questions, discuss possibilities with them, and promote independent learning. This further means that this teaching style fosters an atmosphere in which students are encouraged to take charge of their education while still getting the help and direction they require from their teachers. As observed, students notice that they feel more at ease asking questions, taking chances, and exploring ideas during their learning process when teachers take on the role of facilitator. This implies that since students see this student-centered assistance as helpful for their intellectual and emotional growth, teachers should use more facilitative techniques in their instruction. An engaging learning environment that encourages both affective and cognitive growth is created when teachers provide opportunities for independent inquiry while offering the proper support (Schröder et al., 2020). The results indicate that since this strategy seems wildly successful in encouraging thorough student engagement, professional development programs should concentrate on assisting teachers in acquiring facilitation abilities that balance student autonomy and pertinent assistance. On the other hand, the delegator style does not show a significant effect on affective engagement. However, it is significant on cognitive engagement, resulting in an overall effect of no significant effect. Based on students’ perception, the delegator style does not affect their emotions and enthusiasm for the subject because they have unique personal interests. However, it effectively enhances cognitive engagement, showing students are thinking actively and making sense of the teaching- learning process. This further means that no significant effects on affective engagement suggest a possible limitation of the approach, wherein students may not develop high emotional investment or interest in the material. As observed, the significant effect noted on cognitive engagement speaks to the effectiveness of the delegator style in enhancing critical thinking, problem- solving, and a deeper understanding of the subject matter. Although this style emphasizes the cognitive aspects of learning more than emotional involvement, it implies that the delegator style is not a one-size-fits-all approach. Teachers need to consider students’ needs and adapt their teaching methods, both affective and cognitive. Problem 5. Is There a Significant Relationship between the Respondent’s Perceived Teaching Style and Their Characteristics? Table 5: Result of the Test on the Significant Relationship between Respondents’ Perceived Teaching Styles and each of their Characteristics Respondents’ Characteristics Teaching Styles Overall Expert Formal Authority Personal Model Facilitator Delegator R-value R-value R-value R-value R-value R-value p-value p-value p-value p-value p-value p-value Age 0.043 0.021 0.010 0.005 0.039 0.006 0.460 0.721 0.869 0.933 0.504 0.911 NS NS NS NS NS NS Sex 0.122 0.032 0.056 0.072 0.051 0.055 0.034 0.587 0.337 0.214 0.379 0.339 S NS NS NS NS NS Parents’ Educational Attainment 0.335 0.825 0.519 0.367 0.523 0.240 0.482 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 S S S S S S Pa ge 10 https://journals.e-palli.com/home/index.php/ajmri Am. J. Multidis. Res. Innov. 4(2) 1-17, 2025 Table 5 presents a correlation analysis focusing on the p-values to examine the relationship between the respondent’s perceived teaching styles and their characteristics. The overall results show that parents’ educational attainment and marital status show a significant relationship across all teaching. Based on the student’s perception, their parent’s marital status and educational attainment are essential to their involvement in the educational process. This further means that despite 50 percent of the data indicating that parents’ educational attainment was only at the high school level, they still perceived that their parent’s educational attainment and marital status contributed to the positive perception of their teachers’ teaching styles. As observed, even with a relatively lower level of parental education, students perceive a strong influence of their parents’ marital status and educational attainment on their perceptions of their teachers’ teaching styles. This highlights the importance of parents’ support, regardless of their educational background, in shaping students’ perceptions and experiences in the classroom. It implies that their parents’ achievement shapes students perceived personal experiences in education but does not mean that the higher their parents’ education level, the higher their perception of their teacher’s teaching style or vice versa. Additionally, students perceived that their parents’ marital status plays a crucial role in shaping the environment in which they learn and how teachers convey information to engage them. Educators and policymakers should consider these findings when developing teaching methodologies and family involvement strategies. Parents’ educational attainment shows a significant relationship across all teaching styles. Based on the students’ perception, this means that their parents’ education contributes to their perception of their teachers’ teaching styles. This further means that despite the secondary education level, where the majority of the data was still gathered, they manifested that their parents’ educational background had significance on their perception of their teacher’s teaching style. As observed, even with a relatively lower level of parental education, they perceive a strong influence of their parents’ educational attainment on their perceptions of their teachers’ teaching styles. This highlights the importance of parental involvement and support, regardless of their educational background, in shaping students’ perceptions and experiences in the classroom. The students’ appreciation of their teachers’ teaching styles and parental support can contribute to improved academic performance and a positive learning environment. It implies that the link between parental involvement and effective teaching styles is further reinforced by the fact that regardless of the parent’s educational attainment level, it still sets an excellent example for the students. As noticed, students perceived the teaching styles by appreciating them, which improves academic accomplishments and provides resources supporting academic success. In conclusion, parents’ educational attainment often reflects broader societal values and educational expectations. These norms can influence students’ perceptions of teaching styles, regardless of their level of education. For instance, families prioritizing academic success and valuing teachers are likely to have children who view teaching styles differently than those from families where education is less valued. Parent-formal education plays a critical role in influencing the development of children’s school-readiness skills. It serves as a protective factor for children’s development (Davis-Kean et al., 2020), affecting teaching styles in the classroom. Furthermore, the parents’ marital status is significantly related to all teaching styles. Based on the students’ perceptions, their parents’ marital status affects their perceptions and how they interact with their teachers’ teaching styles, communication techniques, instructional approaches, and classroom management. This further means that students viewed family dynamics as significant in their interaction with their educators’ beliefs and values, which affects their learning experiences and academic outcomes. As observed, there is a perceived connection between their parent’s marital status and their interactions with their teachers. It implies that these factors benefit students, including the stability of the home environment, the strength of the parental relationships, and the presence of supportive role models that positively affect their perceptions of the teaching styles employed in the classroom. Similarly, the study by De (2020) showed that the reading scores of the children living in intact families with two parents were statistically significantly higher than their peers living with single parents and other guardians after taking demographics including age, gender, race/ethnicity, language, socioeconomic status, and location of schools into account. Ultimately, the noteworthy associations found between parents’ marital status and educators’ pedagogical techniques underscore the significance of acknowledging and comprehending the influence of family dynamics on the methods teachers employ where students positively perceive them. Sex shows a significant relationship with the expert. Number of Siblings 0.061 0.021 0.122 0.092 0.058 0.1 0.294 0.711 0.035 0.112 0.314 0.085 NS NS S NS NS NS Parents’ Marital Status 0.398 0.413 0.623 0.368 0.652 0.450 0.000 0.001 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.001 S S S S S S Legend: *Significant at p<0.05 alpha level, S – Significant, NS – Not Significant Pa ge 11 https://journals.e-palli.com/home/index.php/ajmri Am. J. Multidis. Res. Innov. 4(2) 1-17, 2025 However, it does not show a significant relationship with the other teaching styles (formal authority, personal model, facilitator, and delegator) with an R-value and p-value less than 0.05 alpha level. This led to the overall interpretation to accept the null hypothesis. This means that students’ reactions to the authoritative and information-focused expert style may differ depending on their gender. This further means that this association did not hold for the other teaching styles of formal authority, personal model, facilitator, and delegator, suggesting that engagement with the expert style may be mainly influenced by gender. As observed, those four teaching styles appear to be equally beneficial for both boys and girls, according to the research. This implies that when it comes to student participation, students do not appear to favor one gender over another. This emphasizes the value of individual diversity and the necessity for students to consider a range of elements in their perception of teachers’ teaching styles. It is imperative that the subtleties of gender dynamics be considered in educational contexts and that more studies be done to improve our understanding of how gender interacts with teaching approaches to affect student involvement (Anwar, 2022). The number of siblings shows a significant relationship only with the personal model style. For the other teaching styles, the p-values are above the significance threshold, indicating no significant correlation with an R-value and p-value less than 0.05 alpha level. This led to the overall interpretation to accept the null hypothesis. Based on the students’ perceptions, the number of siblings in their family influences how they perceive their teachers’ personal model teaching style. They have larger families that provide more exposure to diverse interactions with their teachers. However, there is no significant correlation between siblings and other teaching styles, suggesting that the influence of family size on student perceptions might be specific to certain teaching approaches. It implies that students from more prominent families likely experience a more diverse and dynamic social environment, where they learn to navigate different personalities, perspectives, and leadership styles. As observed, this exposure can influence their expectations of teachers and how they interpret personal model teaching approaches. The study by Ribeiro et al. (2021) investigates how students’ learning strategies and academic performance are affected by family educational practices. It suggests that these methods strengthen the value of education and promote cognitive growth. Collaboration between families, schools, and educators fosters improved learning methodologies, accountability, and responsibility. This integrates extracurricular activities with academic responsibilities to prepare pupils for future problems. On the other hand, the Age results indicate no significant relationship with any teaching style, including expert, formal authority, personal model, facilitator, and delegator, with an R-value and probability value less than 0.05 alpha level, which led to the overall interpretation to accept the null hypothesis. This means a student’s age does not significantly impact their interaction with those educational methods. This further means that a variety of student ages, from younger to older, can benefit from these teaching methods. As observed, the effectiveness of different teaching styles is not significantly dependent on the age of the students. This finding has important implications for educators, as it indicates that these teaching methods can be applied across various age groups, potentially leading to positive learning outcomes for students of various ages. This implies that age does not influence the study participants’ preferences for specific teaching modalities. Tsai et al. (2021) posited that factors like self-efficacy and critical thinking abilities may indirectly impact instructional strategies, impacting students’ experiences and possibly their learning capacity. CONCLUSION The following conclusions are at this moment drawn from the study: The study found that expert teaching style, peer support at school, and future aspirations and grades contribute to a more engaging and successful learning experience for students.Further, in classrooms with teachers who are knowledgeable and experienced, students flourish, and learning becomes more interesting and significant. Peer support increases motivation and a sense of belonging, which in turn improves emotional engagement. Students exhibit higher levels of intellectual engagement when they link their academic objectives with their future aspirations and grades. REFERENCES Agad, A. P. (2021). Differentiated instruction approach on the academic performance in values education among Grade 9 learners. Unpublished manuscript. Ahmad, N. A., Abd Rauf, M. F., Mohd Zaid, N. N., Zainal, A., Tengku Shahdan, T. S., & Abdul Razak, F. H. (2022). Effectiveness of instructional strategies designed for older adults in learning digital technologies: A systematic literature review. SN Computer Science, 3(2), 130. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42979-022-01016-0 Ahmed, S., Khan Farooqi, M. T., & Iqbal, A. (2021). A Study of Teachers’ Teaching Styles and Students’ Performance. Ilkogretim Online, 20(2). Ahmed, T. (2023). I thought about solutions: How students’ narratives of relational conflict, grit, and agency predict academic performance within community college. Community College Review, 51(4), 487–508. Ahn, I., Chiu, M. M., & Patrick, H. (2021). Connecting teacher and student motivation: Student-perceived teachers need supportive practices, and students need satisfaction. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 64, 101950. Alley, K. M. (2019). Fostering middle school students’ autonomy to support motivation and engagement. Middle School Journal, 50(3), 5–14. https://doi.org/10 .1080/00940771.2019.1603801 Pa ge 12 https://journals.e-palli.com/home/index.php/ajmri Am. J. Multidis. Res. Innov. 4(2) 1-17, 2025 Alkhudiry, R. (2022). The contribution of Vygotsky’s sociocultural theory in mediating L2 knowledge co- construction. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 12(10), 2117–2123. https://doi.org/10.17507/ tpls.1210.19 Al-khresheh, M. H., Mohamed, A. M., & Asif, M. (2022). Teachers’ perspectives towards online professional development programs during the period of COVID-19 pandemic in the Saudi EFL context. FWU Journal of Social Sciences. Almahasees, Z., Mohsen, K., & Amin, M. O. (2021). Faculties and students’ perceptions of online learning during COVID-19. Frontiers in Education, 6. https:// doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2021.638470 Almawaali, S., & Noronh, H. (2020). Parental involvement in children’s education: A proof of concept study at elementary schools. Journal of Student Research. Retrieved from https://tinyurl.com/3npkycfk Amirian, S., Ghaniabadi, S., Heydarnejad, T., & Abbasi, S. (2022). The contribution of critical thinking and self-efficacy beliefs to teaching style preferences in higher education. Journal of Applied Research in Higher Education. Anwar, K., Asari, S., Husniah, R., & Asmara, C. H. (2021). Students’ perceptions of collaborative team teaching and student achievement motivation. International Journal of Instruction, 14(2), 431–446. Alonge, H. O., & Osagiobare, E. O. (2020). Single-parent teachers’ work-life balance and job productivity in Edo State public senior secondary schools. Education Quarterly Reviews. Arif, N. F., Noni, N., & Korompot, C. A. (2024). Exploring EFL Teachers’ Teaching Styles at a Junior Secondary School. ARRUS Journal of Social Sciences and Humanities, 4(3), 373-382 Appleton, J. J., Christenson, S. L., Kim, D., & Reschly, A. L. (2006). Measuring cognitive and psychological engagement: Validation of the Student Engagement Instrument. Journal of School Psychology, 44(5), 427–445. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsp.2006.04.00m2 Ateş, A. (2021). The Relationship Between Parental Involvement in Education and Academic Achievement: A Meta-analysis Study. Pegem Journal of Education and Instruction, 11(3), 50–66. Atobatele, F. A., Kpodo, P. C., & Eke, I. O. (2024). Faculty engagement in international student success: A review of best practices and strategies. International Journal of Applied Research in Social Sciences, 6(3), 440–459. Aymerich, M., Cladellas, R., Castelló, A., Casas, F., & Cunill, M. (2021). The evolution of life satisfaction throughout childhood and adolescence: Differences in young people’s evaluations according to age and gender. Child Indicators Research, 14(6), 2347–2369. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12187-021-09846-9 Azad, M., & Semiyari, S. (2020). Effects of parents’ education and academic involvement on ESP learners’ self-regulation and language achievement: A structural equation modeling analysis. Research in English Language Pedagogy, 8(1), 43–70. Retrieved from https://tinyurl.com/4tv8a497 Bannykh, G., Kostina, S., & Zaitseva, E. (2019). Children from a large family and barriers to their education: Case-study. INTED 2019 Proceedings, 2327–2334. https://doi.org/10.21125/Inted.2019.0644 Barger, M., Kim, E., Kuncel, N., & Pomerantz, E. (2021). The relation between parents’ involvement in children’s schooling and children’s adjustment: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin. Bartosuk, K., Deal, J., & Yerhot, M. (2019). Parents and college students’ perceptions of support and family environment. Emerging Adulthood. Bailey, E. G., Greenall, R. F., Baek, D. M., Morris, C., Nelson, N., Quirante, T. M., Rice, N. S., Rose, S., & Williams, K. R. (2020). Female in-class participation and performance increase with more female peers and/or a female instructor in life sciences courses. CBE—Life Sciences Education, 19(3), ar19. https://doi. org/10.1187/cbe.19-12-0266 Bean, J. C., & Melzer, D. (2021). Engaging ideas: The professor’s guide to integrating writing, critical thinking, and active learning in the classroom. John Wiley & Sons. Benlahcene, A., Yilmaz, A., & Awang-Hashi, R. (2021). Basic psychological needs satisfaction and student engagement: The importance of novelty satisfaction. Journal of Applied Research in Higher Education. Bessa, C., Hastie, P., Rosado, A., & Mesquita, I. (2021). Sport Education and traditional teaching: Influence on students’ empowerment and self-confidence in high school physical education classes. Sustainability, 13(2), 578. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13020578 Bond, M., Bedenlier, S., Buntins, K., Kerres, M., & Zawacki-Richter, O. (2020). Facilitating student engagement in higher education through educational technology: A narrative systematic review in the field of education. Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 20(2), 315–368. Bouhlila, D. S., & Hentati, I. (2022). An attempt to explain the gender gap reversal in academic achievement in Arab countries. Gulf Education and Social Policy Review (GESPR). Bru, E., Virtanen, T., Kjetilstad, V., & Niemiec, C. P. (2021). Gender differences in the strength of association between perceived support from teachers and student engagement. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research. Canonigo, A. (2024). Teacher positioning, student engagement, and mathematics identity development in online mathematics classrooms. American Journal of Distance Education. Carlson, R., Hock, R., & Weist, M. (2019). Relational factors influencing parents’ engagement in special education for high school youth with emotional/ behavioral problems. Cardino, J. M., & Ortega-Dela Cruz, R. A. (2020). Understanding of learning styles and teaching strategies towards improving the teaching and Pa ge 13 https://journals.e-palli.com/home/index.php/ajmri Am. J. Multidis. Res. Innov. 4(2) 1-17, 2025 learning of mathematics. LUMAT International Journal on Math Science and Technology Education, 8(1). https:// doi.org/10.31129/lumat.8.1.1348 Census of Population (2020). Region X (Northern Mindanao). Total population by province, city, municipality, and barangay. Philippine Statistics Authority. Retrieved July 8, 2021. Cherry, K. (2023, May 3). Intrinsic motivation: How internal rewards drive behavior. Verywell Mind. Chew, S., & Cerbin, W. (2021). The cognitive challenges of effective teaching. The Journal of Economic Education. Chinek, B., & Baran, I. (2020). The role of parental education in shaping students’ academic engagement: A cross-national analysis. Journal of Education and Learning, 9(4), 252-261. https://doi.org/10.5539/jel. v9n4p252 Clements, A., & Kamau, C. (2020). Understanding students’ motivation towards proactive career behaviors through goal-setting theory and the job demands-resources model. Studies in Higher Education. Cornelius-White, J. (2020). Learner-centered teacher- student relationships are effective: A meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research. Cook, C. R., Thayer, A. J., Fiat, A., & Sullivan, M. (2020). Interventions to enhance affective engagement. In A. L. Reschly, A. J. Pohl, & S. L. Christenson (Eds.), Student engagement: Effective academic, behavioral, cognitive, and affective interventions at school (pp. 203– 237). Springer Nature Switzerland AG. https://doi. org/10.1007/978-3-030-37285-9_12 Craig, L., & Kuykendall, L. (2020). Fostering an inclusive classroom environment with evidence-based approaches. Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 13(4), 482–486. https://doi.org/10.1017/iop.2020.85 Dash, N. R., Guraya, S. Y., Al Bataineh, M. T., Abdalla, M. E., Yusoff, M. S. B., Al-Qahtani, M. F., … Mukhtar, W. N. O. (2020). Preferred teaching styles of medical faculty: An international multi-center study. BMC Medical Education, 20(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/ s12909-020-02358-0 Darling-Hammond, K., & Darling-Hammond, L. (2022). The civil rights road to deeper learning: Five essentials for equity. Teachers College Press. Davis-Kean, P., Tighe, L., & Waters, N. (2020). The role of parent educational attainment in parenting and children’s development. https://doi.org/10.31234/ osf.io/ndmxb De, S. N. (2020). Connections between parental marital status, parental involvement, and literacy achievement of kindergarten children (Doctoral dissertation). St. John’s University. https://scholar.stjohns.edu/ theses_dissertations?utm_source=scholar.stjohns. edu%2Ftheses_disser ta t ions%2F111&utm_ medium=PDF&utm_campaign=PDFCoverPages Dela Rosa, R., & Vargas, D. (2021). Teachers’ productivity and teaching styles. SSRN. https://ssrn.com/ abstract=3816610 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ ssrn.3816610 Delfino, A. P. (2019). Student engagement and academic performance. ERIC. https://files.eric.ed.gov/ fulltext/EJ1222588.pdf Díez-Palomar, J., Chan, M. C. E., Clarke, D., & Padrós, M. (2021). How does dialogical talk promote student learning during small group work? An exploratory study. Learning, Culture, and Social Interaction, 30, 100540. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lcsi.2021.100540 Double, K., McGrane, J., & Hopfenbeck, T. (2020). The impact of peer assessment on academic performance: A meta-analysis of control group studies. Educational Psychology Review. Engels, M. C., Spilt, J., Denies, K., & Verschueren, K. (2021). The role of effective teacher-student relationships in adolescents’ school engagement and achievement trajectories. Learning and Instruction. Elsevier. Feng, N. (2020). The effect of sibling size on children’s educational attainment: Evidence from Indonesia. SAGE Open, 10(2). https://doi. org/10.1177/2096531120921703 Fernández-Batanero, J., Román-Graván, P., Reyes- Rebollo, M., & Montenegro-Rueda, M. (2021). Impact of educational technology on teacher stress and anxiety: A literature review. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 18(2), 548. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph18020548 Gana, M., Rad, D., & Stoian, C. D. (2023). Family functioning, parental attachment, and students’ academic success. Journal of Infrastructure Policy and Development, 8(1), 2565. https://doi.org/10.24294/ jipd.v8i1.2565 Geier, M. T. (2021). Students’ expectations and satisfaction: The mediating role of excellent teacher behaviors. Teaching of Psychology, 48(1), 9–17. Grasha, A. F., & Hruska-Riechmann, S. (2020). Teaching style survey. Retrieved from http://longleaf.net/ teachingstyle.html. Guay, F. (2021). Applying self-determination theory to education: Regulations types, psychological needs, and autonomy supporting behaviors. Canadian Journal of School Psychology. Harrington, C., & Thomas, M. (2023). Designing a motivational syllabus: Creating a learning path for student engagement. Hartono, F. P., Umamah, N., Sumarno, & Puji, R. P. N. (2019, August). The level of student engagement based on gender and grade on history subject of senior high school students in Jember Regency. International Journal of Scientific & Technology Research, 8(8), 21. https://doi.org/2277-8616 Havik, T., & Westergard, E. (2020). Do teachers matter? Students’ perceptions of classroom interactions and student engagement. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research. Heflin, H., & Macaluso, S. (2021). Student initiative empowers engagement for learning online. Online Learning, 25(3), 230–248. https://doi.org/10.24059/ olj.v25i3.2414 Pa ge 14 https://journals.e-palli.com/home/index.php/ajmri Am. J. Multidis. Res. Innov. 4(2) 1-17, 2025 Hidalgo, G. I., Sánchez-Carracedo, F., & Romero-Portillo, D. (2021). COVID-19 emergency remote teaching opinions and academic performance of undergraduate students: Analysis of 4 students’ profiles. A case study. Mathematics, 9(17), 2147. https://doi.org/10.3390/ math9172147 Howard, J. L., Bureau, J., Guay, F., Chong, J. X. Y., & Ryan, R. M. (2021). Student motivation and associated outcomes: A meta-analysis from self-determination theory. Perspectives on Psychological Science: A Journal of the Association for Psychological Science, 16(6), 1300–1323. https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691620966789 Huang, C., Tu, Y., He, T., Han, Z., & Wu, X. (2023). Longitudinal exploration of online learning burnout: The role of social support and cognitive engagement. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 1–28. Irons, A., & Elkington, S. (2021). Enhancing learning through formative assessment and feedback. Routledge. Jacob, F., John, S., & Gwany, D. M. (2020). Teachers’ pedagogical content knowledge and students’ academic achievement: A theoretical overview. Journal of Global Research in Education and Social Science, 14(2), 14–44. Jeffreys, C. (2022). Exploring technology integration at a public middle school: A descriptive research study on integration perceptions, factors, and barriers (Ed.D. Dissertation). University of South Carolina. ProQuest LLC. Jeynes, W. (2019). Eliminating the achievement gap. Rowman & Littlefield. Joshi, A., & Bhaskar, P. (2022). A qualitative study on critical traits of teachers for effective teaching in higher education institutions. International Journal of Learning and Change, 14(4), 390–408. Kaur, D. (2024). Influence of number of siblings on their academic achievement (M.A. Thesis). Lovely Professional University. Retrieved from https://tinyurl. com/5yy8v55t Keerthigha, C., & Singh, S. (2023). The effect of teaching style and academic motivation on student evaluation of teaching: Insights from social cognition. Frontiers in Psychology, 13. https://doi.org/10.3389/ fpsyg.2022.1107375 Koszalka, T. A., Pavlov, Y., & Wu, Y. (2021). The informed use of pre-work activities in collaborative asynchronous online discussions: Exploring idea exchange, content focus, and deep learning. Computers & Education, 161, 104067. Kubacka, K., & D’Addio, A. C. (2020). Targeting teacher education and professional development for inclusion. Journal of International Cooperation in Education, 22(2/3), 89–106. Lan, X., & Mastrotheodoros, S. (2022). Teacher autonomy support and internalizing problems of adolescents from divorced and intact families: Moderation by personality typologies. Child Psychiatry and Human Development, 55, 182–194. Languita, J. M. S., Ligtas, J. B., Baron, D. C., & Diquito, T. J. A. (2023). Preferred style of teaching and learning by college students in the new normal. American Journal of Multidisciplinary Research and Innovation, 2(1), 74–82. https://doi.org/10.54536/ajmri.v2i1.1209 Larsen, I. B. (2022). Fostering an entrepreneurial mindset: A typology for aligning instructional strategies with three dominant entrepreneurial mindset conceptualizations. Industry and Higher Education, 36(3), 236–251. https:// doi.org/10.1177/09504222211038212 Le, A. V., Bui, T. D., Tran, M. N., Phung, T., & Vu, V. L. (2023). Gender gap in mathematics achievement: Vietnamese students in American mathematics competitions. Issues in Educational Research, 33(1), 137– 154. Lei, C. (2022). Managing motivation and information processing of students in a learning analytics course during emergency remote teaching. In 2022 IEEE International Conference on Teaching, Assessment, and Learning for Engineering (TALE). https://doi. org/10.1109/tale54877.2022.00086 Lemboye, O. T. (2019). Correlational analysis of the relationship among mastery experience, self-efficacy, and project success. Walden University. https:// scholarworks.waldenu.edu/cgi/viewcontent. cgi?article=8307&context=dissertations Li, X., & Chang, Y. C. (2023). A study on teachers’ creativity development in Shaanxi universities in China in the context of demographic variables. Educational Research and Reviews, 18(3), 23–34. Li, X., Duan, S., & Liu, H. (2022). Unveiling the predictive effect of students’ perceived EFL teacher support on academic achievement: The mediating role of academic buoyancy. Sustainability, 15(13), 10205. https://doi.org/10.3390/su151310205 Li, L., & Wang, X. (2020). Technostress inhibitors and creators and their impacts on university teachers’ work performance in higher education. Cognition, Technology & Work, 23(2), 315–330. https://doi.org/10.1007/ s10111-020-00625-0 Lin, S., & Muenks, K. (2023). Family context of mindset matters: Students’ perceptions of parent and sibling math mindsets predict their math motivation, behavior, and affect. Applied Developmental Science, 28(3), 247–274. https://doi.org/10.1080/10888691. 2023.2177163 Liner, T. (2023, July 16). The power of relevance: Connecting subject matter to student lives. Teachers Collaborative @ TeachTasticIEP. Liu, H., Li, C., Wu, Q., & Lee, Y. J. (2023). Visual instruction tuning. In Neural Information Processing Systems (ArXiv, Vol. abs/2304.08485). Liu, M., Zhang, T., Tang, N., Zhou, F., & Tian, Y. (2022). The effect of educational expectations on children’s cognition and depression. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 19(21), 14070. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph192114070 Liu, Y., Hau, K. T., Liu, H., Wu, J., Wang, X., & Zheng, X. (2020). Multiplicative effect of intrinsic and extrinsic motivation on academic performance: A longitudinal Pa ge 15 https://journals.e-palli.com/home/index.php/ajmri Am. J. Multidis. Res. Innov. 4(2) 1-17, 2025 study of Chinese students. Journal of Personality, 88(3), 584–595. Loveta, G., Loeneto, B. A., & Vianty, M. (2020). Students’ expectations toward teacher’s teaching style and contribution to students’ English performance. Journal of English Education, 7(2). https://journal.uniku.ac.id/ index.php/ERJEE Lui, M., Lau, G. K., & Tam, V. C. (2020). Parents’ impact on children’s school performance: Marital satisfaction, parental involvement, and mental health. Journal of Child and Family Studies, 29, 1548–1560. https://doi. org/10.1007/s10826-019-01655-7 Madar, A. R., Sumarwati, S., Hamid, H., Amiruddin, M. H., & Ibrahim, A. C. (2020). Teaching style among science teachers in secondary schools. International Journal of Instruction, 13(1), 197-212. Meece, J. (2023). The role of motivation in self-regulated learning. In Self-regulation of learning and performance. Merry, J., Bobbitt-Zeher, D., & Downey, D. (2020). Number of siblings in childhood, social outcomes in adulthood. Journal of Family Issues, 41(2), 212–234. https://doi.org/10.1177/0192513x19873356 Monacis, D., Latino, F., d’Arando, C., Bibba, M., Annoscia, S., Pascali, G., Sannicandro, I., & Colella, D. (2024). Analysis of self-perceived use of a spectrum of teaching styles in Italian physical education teachers. Frontiers in Sports and Active Living, 6, 1397511. https:// doi.org/10.3389/fspor.2024.1397511 Mori, G., Bactindon, E., Dublado, K., Garcia, J., & Gimo, J. (2023). Online teaching styles, age, sex, and degree program: A correlational-descriptive study. Journal of Educational Research, 20(4), 101-115. Nalova, E., & Etomes, S. (2019). The effect of age on pupils’ academic achievement: A comparative analysis on private and public primary school children in Fako Division, South West Region of Cameroon. European Journal of Education Studies, 6(7). https://tinyurl. com/2vraw6m2 Nantschev, R., Feuerstein, E., González, R. T., Alonso, I., Hackl, W., Petridis, K., Triantafyllou, E., & Ammenwerth, E. (2020). Teaching approaches and educational technologies in teaching mathematics in higher education. Education Sciences, 10(4), 111. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci10040111 Nind, M., Curtin, A., & Hall, K. (2020). Research methods for pedagogy. Bloomsbury Publishing. Njega, S. W., Njoka, J. N., & Ndung’u, C. W. (2019). Relationship between psychosocial dynamics and academic performance of secondary school students: A comparative study between Murang’a and Kirinyaga counties, Kenya. Journal of Arts and Humanities, 8(9), 42–52. https://doi.org/10.18533/journal.v8i9.1729 Nguyen, K. A., Borrego, M., Finelli, C. J., DeMonbrun, M., Crockett, C., Tharayil, S., ... & Rosenberg, R. (2021). Instructor strategies to aid implementation of active learning: A systematic literature review. International Journal of STEM Education, 8, 1–18. Osabwa, W. (2022, February). I am coming to terms with COVID-19 reality in Africa’s higher education context: Challenges, insights, and prospects. Frontiers in Education, 7, Article 643162. Frontiers Media SA. Ostafiński, W. (2022). The influence of family and religion on youth decisions in higher education: English literature review. Edukacja• Terapia• Opieka, 4, 79–94. Pascua Jr., D. P. (2024). Pedagogical strategies for effective purposive communication instruction in large classes. Journal of Tertiary Education and Learning, 2(2), 40–42. https://doi.org/10.54536/jtel.v2i2.3853 Pill, S., SueSee, B., & Davies, M. (2023). The spectrum of teaching styles and models-based practice for physical education. European Physical Education Review, 30, 142– 155. Pinquart, M., & Ebeling, M. (2020). Parental educational expectations and academic achievement in children and adolescents—a meta-analysis. Educational Psychology Review, 32(4), 961–992. Pipkins, J. C. (2021). Proactive advising and its impact on Black students: A qualitative study. Pryor-Ramirez, J. (2023). Inclusive teaching: Strategies for promoting equity in the college classroom. Journal of Public Affairs Education, 30(1), 168–170. https://doi.or g/10.1080/15236803.2023.2213459 Putri, N. R., & Sari, F. M. (2021). Investigating English teaching strategies to reduce online teaching obstacles in secondary school. Journal of English Language Teaching and Learning, 2(1), 23–31. https://doi.org/10.33365/ jeltl.v2i1.780 Qingli, L. (2021). The effect of scaffolded model-based instruction on word problem-solving performance of English learners with learning difficulties in mathematics. [Ph.D. dissertation, Purdue University]. ProQuest LLC. Quynh, N. H., Hoai, N. T., & Thu, N. (2021). The roles of student engagement motivations in learning and managing. International Journal for Innovation Education and Research, 9(4), 223–234. https://doi. org/10.31686/ijier.vol9.iss4.3043 Rabenn, M. E. (2023). Understanding how North Dakota teachers’ knowledge, beliefs, and confidence are constructed in an asynchronous literacy professional development course. [Ph.D. dissertation, The University of North Dakota]. ProQuest LLC. Radić, N. (2021). COVID-19 emergency teaching: From CULP to remote CULP. In The world universities’ response to COVID-19: Remote online language teaching (pp. 337– 351). https://doi.org/10.14705/rpnet.2021.52.1282 Reeve, J., & Cheon, S. (2021). Autonomy-supportive teaching: Its malleability, benefits, and potential to improve educational practice. Educational Psychologist. Republic Act No. 7836. (n.d.). Code of Ethics for Professional Teachers, Section 3, Article IV. Ribeiro, L., Cunha, R., Silva, M., Carvalho, M., & Vital, M. (2021). Parental involvement during pandemic times: Challenges and opportunities. Educational Science. Romano, L., Angelini, G., Consiglio, P., & Fiorilli, C. (2021). Academic resilience and engagement in high Pa ge 16 https://journals.e-palli.com/home/index.php/ajmri Am. J. Multidis. Res. Innov. 4(2) 1-17, 2025 school students: The mediating role of perceived teacher emotional support. Ruhiat, & Agus Suradika. (2022). Correlation between parent’s educational background and student English achievement: In the first-year students of SMA Muhammadiyah Sawangan. Faculty of Education, University of Muhammadiyah Jakarta, Indonesia. Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2020). Intrinsic and extrinsic motivation from a self-determination theory perspective: Definitions, theory, practices, and future directions. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 61, 101860. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. cedpsych.2020.101860 Sabado, J. E., Llantada, A. J., Llantada, R., Gayacan, Z. J., Palarca, S. M., Buduan, K. M., Bernardino, M., Pale, D. F., Bacena, J. L., Gutierrez, M. R., Secretario, L. M., Belingon, A. L.-Y., & Bautista, C. J. (2024). Unraveling perceived factors affecting the school attendance of senior high school students in Bintawan National High School. Psychology and Education: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 18(2), 111-122. Schröder, J., Behrendt, P., Nick, S., & Briken, P. (2020). [Background and psychological impact of organized and ritual child sexual abuse: Reports to the Independent Inquiry into Child Sexual Abuse in Germany]. Fortschritte der Neurologie-Psychiatrie, 88(6), 374-378. Sarwanto, Fajari, L. E., & Chumdari. (2021). Open- ended questions to assess critical-thinking skills in Indonesian elementary school. International Journal of Instruction. Shah, M. A. u. H., Ahmad, S., & Khalid, M. N. (2021). Teachers’ preferred teaching styles and students’ learning performance. Global & Educational Studies Review, VI(II), 205-212. https://doi.org/10.31703/ gesr.2021(VI-II).20 Shen, Q. (2022). Developing teacher leadership in educational technology: A systematic literature review. BCP Social Sciences & Humanities, 19, 717–723. https://doi.org/10.54691/bcpssh.v19i.1872 Šimunović, M., & Babarović, T. (2020). The role of parents’ beliefs in students’ motivation, achievement, and choices in the STEM domain: A review and directions for future research. Social Psychology of Education, 23(3), 701-719. Stemasov, E., Rukzio, E., & Gugenheimer, J. (2021). The road to ubiquitous personal fabrication: Modeling- free instead of increasingly simple. IEEE Pervasive Computing, 20, 19-27. Stobaugh, R., Mittelberg, J., & Huang, X. (2020). Examining K–12 students’ perceptions of student- teacher effectiveness. Teacher Development. Strauß, S., & Rummel, N. (2020). Promoting interaction in online distance education: Designing, implementing and supporting collaborative learning. Information and Learning Sciences, 121(5/6), 251-260. Suman, C. (2023). Cultivating a growth-oriented mindset in educational settings. Zenodo. https://doi. org/10.5281/zenodo.8154509 Szabo, Z. K., Körtesi, P., Guncaga, J., Szabo, D., & Neag, R. (2020). Examples of problem-solving strategies in mathematics education support the sustainability of 21st-century skills. Sustainability, 12(23), 10113. Szymkowiak, A., Melović, B., Dabić, M., Jeganathan, K., & Kundi, G. S. (2021, March). Information technology and Gen Z: The role of teachers, the internet, and technology in the education of young people. Technology in Society, 65, 101565. https://doi. org/10.1016/j.techsoc.2021.101565 Tang, H., Hite, S. J., Hite, J. M., Boren, D. M., & Randall, E. V. (2021). Challenges and achievements in student learning experiences in a business school’s at-home internationalization programs in China. Journal of International Education in Business, 14(2), 259-296. Theobald, M. (2021). Self-regulated learning training programs enhance university students’ academic performance, self-regulated learning strategies, and motivation: A meta-analysis. Contemporary Educational Psychology. Thorn-Miller, B., Camarda, A., Mercier, M., Burkhardt, J. M., Morisseu, T., Bourgeois-Bougrine, S., & Lubart, T. (2023). Creativity, critical thinking, communication, and collaboration: Assessment, certification, and promotion of 21st century skills for the future of work and education. Journal of Intelligence, 11. Torricelli, C., & Pellati, E. (2023). Social bonds and the “social premium.” Journal of Economics and Finance, 47(3), 600–619. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12197- 023-09620-3 Vanderburg, R., Central Queensland University, T., P., & Central Queensland University. (2021). How constructivist theories of development can be used to re-conceptualise NAPLAN as an opportunity to develop student resilience. Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 46(9), 1–21. https://doi.org/10.14221/ ajte.2021v46n9.1 Vu, N. N., Hung, B. P., Van, N., & Lien, N. (2022). Theoretical and instructional aspects of using multimedia resources in language education: A cognitive view. Multimedia Technologies in the Internet of Things Environment, Volume 2, 165-194. Vygotsky, L. S. (2024). Thinking and speech (PDF). Marxist. org. Wafubwa, R. N. (2020). The role of formative assessment in improving students’ motivation, engagement, and achievement: A systematic literature review. International Journal of Assessment and Evaluation, 28(1), 17-31. Wangchuk, K., & Dendup, T. (2023). School principals’ perceptions on the conducive learning environment and their current practices: An exploratory study at Trashigang District, Bhutan. Asia Social Issues, 16(5), e258491. https://doi.org/10.48048/asi.2023.258491 Watson, E., Viana, T., & Zhang, S. (2023). Augmented behavioral annotation tools, with application to multimodal datasets and models: A systematic review. AI, 4(1), 128–171. Pa ge 17 https://journals.e-palli.com/home/index.php/ajmri Am. J. Multidis. Res. Innov. 4(2) 1-17, 2025 Weiss, D., & Perry, E. (2020). Implications of generational and age meta-stereotypes for older adults at work: The role of agency, stereotype threat, and job search self- efficacy. Work, Aging & Retirement, 6, 15–27. https:// doi.org/10.1093/workar/waz010 Wentzel, K., Jablansky, S., & Scalise, N. (2021). Peer social acceptance and academic achievement: A meta- analytic study. Journal of Educational Psychology. Winter, E., Costello, A., O’Brien, M., & Hickey, G. (2021). Teachers’ use of technology and the impact of Covid-19. Irish Educational Studies, 40(2), 235–246. https://doi.org/10.1080/03323315.2021.1916559 Wrigley-Asante, C., Ackah, C., & Frimpong, L. (2023). Gender differences in academic performance of Science Technology Engineering and Mathematics (STEM) students at the University of Ghana. SN Soc Sci, 3(1), 12. Retrieved from https://tinyurl. com/3wpt22c9 Yatim, S. S. K. M., Saleh, S., Zulnaidi, H., Yew, W. T., & Yatim, S. A. M. (2022). Effects of brain-based teaching approach integrated with GeoGebra (B-Geo module) on students’ conceptual understanding. International Journal of Instruction. Yilmaz Bodur, Z., & Aktan, S. (2021). A research on the relationship between parental attitudes, students’ academic motivation, and personal responsibility. International Journal on Social and Education Sciences (IJonSES), 3(4), 636-655. https://doi.org/10.46328/ ijonses.187 Yu, Z. (2021, April 2). The effects of gender, educational level, and personality on online learning outcomes during the COVID-19 pandemic. Zacarian, D., & Silverstone, M. (2020). Teaching to empower: Taking action to foster student agency, self-confidence, and collaboration. ASCD. Zachary, L. J., & Fain, L. Z. (2022). The mentor’s guide: Facilitating effective learning relationships. Ziegler, E., Hill, J., Lieske, B., Klein, J., von dem, O., & Kofahl, C. (2022). Empowerment in cancer patients: Does peer support make a difference? A systematic review. Psycho-Oncology, 31, 683-704. Zhang, L., & Ma, Y. (2023). A study of the impact of project-based learning on student learning effects: A meta-analysis study. Frontiers in Psychology, 14, 1202728. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1202728 Zhang, X., Noels, K., & Sugita-McEown, M. (2022). The importance of an autonomy-supportive workplace and engaged students for language teachers’ self- determination and engagement. Journal for the Psychology of Language Learning, 4(1), 1–25. https://doi. org/10.52598/jpll/4/1/7 Zheng, F. (2022). Fostering students’ well-being: The mediating role of teacher interpersonal behavior and student-teacher relationships. Frontiers in Psychology, 12, 796728.