糖心原创

Home⇛Journal of Interdisciplinary Perspectives⇛vol. 3 no. 3 (2025)

Structural Equation Model of Students' Interest, Motivation, Self-Efficacy, Persistence, and Perceived Teaching Quality in Mathematics

Keith A. Madrilejos

Discipline: Education

 

Abstract:

Understanding the psychological variables of learning mathematics at the high school level is important to designing effective teaching strategies that improve their active engagement and academic achievement in mathematics. This study validated the assumptions of the Self-Determination Theory and Social Cognitive Theory in the context of mathematics classroom learning. This research aims to fill the gap in the literature by confirming a structural equation model based on two combined theories, incorporating the latent variables of self-efficacy, persistence, interest, motivation to learn mathematics, and the perceived teaching quality, areas that have already been explored in previous studies. Data were gathered from 325 selected public high school students (junior and senior high school) using a multivariate-correlational research design. Results revealed that self-efficacy strongly influences motivation (β=0.823, p<0.001) and weakly influences persistence (β=0.267, p=0.003), while perceived teaching quality significantly impacts interest (β=0.769, p<0.001) and self-efficacy (β=0.328, p<0.001). Additionally, student interest enhanced self- efficacy moderately (β=0.471, p<0.001), further reinforcing its critical role in fostering confidence. Motivation to learn mathematics was found to be strongly associated with students' persistence (β=0.557, p<0.001). These findings led to developing a valid and reliable structural equation model characterized by strong psychometric properties and excellent model fit indices. The results profoundly emphasize the interplay of psychological and instructional factors in promoting engagement, motivation, and resilience among high school mathematics learners, offering valuable insights for enhancing teaching strategies and educational policies. High school students should cultivate self-efficacy and motivation in mathematics through self- reflection and goal-setting. Teachers are encouraged to adopt interactive, real-world strategies that enhance interest and confidence, while school leaders should focus on professional development to sustain student engagement. Future research can explore digital tools, gamification, and advanced statistical modeling to investigate non-cognitive factors shaping mathematics learning.



References:

  1. Ariff, S. S. M., Kumar, S. V., Azizi, M. N. B., & Hilmi, F. (2022). Relationship between self-efficacy and academic motivation among university and college students enrolled in Kuala Lumpur during Movement Control Period (MCO). Journal of Positive School Psychology, 6(3), 3362–3374.
  2. Bandala, M. (2023). Factors affecting students’ academic performance in mathematics: Basis for development of guidance intervention program. International Journal of Advance Research and Innovative Ideas in Education, 9(4).
  3. Branzuela, N., Namoco, S., Duero, J., & Walag, A. M. (2023). Descriptive analysis of the National Achievement Test performance of primary and secondary school students in Misamis Oriental, Philippines. Sci.Int.Lahore., 35(6), 809-813.
  4. Byrne, B. M. (2016). Structural equation modeling with AMOS: Basic concepts, applications, and programming (3rd ed.). New York, United States: Routledge.
  5. Calmorin, L. P., & Calmorin, M. A. (2007). Research methods and thesis writing. Rex Bookstore. Philippines,
  6. Casinillo, L. F. (2019). Factors affecting the failure rate in mathematics: The case of Visayas State University (VSU). Review of Socio-Economic Research and Development Studies, 3(1), 1-18.
  7. Cherewick, M., Hipp, E., Njau, P., & Dahl, R. E. (2023). Growth mindset, persistence, and self-efficacy in early adolescents: Associations with depression, anxiety, and externalizing behaviors. Global Public Health, 18(1).
  8. Cherry, K. (n.d.). Cognitive development: Stages and theories. Positive Psychology. Retrieved from:
  9. Çiftçi, 艦., & Karada臒, E. (2016). Developing a mathematics education quality scale. Africa Education Review, 13(3-4), 211-234.
  10. Civelek, M.E. (2018). Essentials of Structural Equation Modeling. University of Nebraska – Lincoln, United States: Zea E-Books.
  11. Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (1985). Intrinsic motivation and self-determination in human behavior. Springer Science & Business Media.
  12. Detrina, D. (2016). The correlation between self-efficacy and motivation learning with mathematics learning outcomes students class XI IPS SMA Negeri 5 Batam academic year 2013/2014. Jurnal Mercumatika: Jurnal Penelitian Matematika dan Pendidikan Matematika, 1(1).
  13. Dullas, A. R. (2018). The development of academic self-efficacy scale for Filipino junior high school students. Frontiers in Education, 3.
  14. Engel, K., Moosbrugger, H., and Muller H. (2003). Evaluating the Fit of Structural Equation Models: Tests of Significance and Descriptive Goodness Fit Measures. MRP-Online. 8, 23-74.
  15. Fan, Y., Chen, J., Shirkey, G., John, R., Wu, S. R., Park, H., & Shao, C. (2016). Applications of structural equation modeling (SEM) in ecological studies: An updated review. Ecological Processes, 5(19).
  16. Firdaus, Ismail Kailani, Md. Nor Bin Bakar, Bakry. (2015). Developing Critical Thinking Skills of Students in Mathematics Learning. Journal of Education and Learning. 9(3), 226-236.
  17. Fornell, C., & Larcker, D.F. (1981). Evaluating Structural Equation Models with Unobserved variables and Measurement error. JMR. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(1), 39.
  18. Great Minds. (n.d.). High-leverage teaching practices that positively impact student learning. Retrieved from
  19. Gurnon, L. (2020). What you need to understand about Generation Z students. Retrieved from
  20. Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., & Anderson, R. E. (2009). Multivariate data analysis (7th ed.). New York, United States: Pearson Education.
  21. Hair, J. F. Jr., Matthews, L., Matthews, R., & Sarstedt, M. (2017). PLS-SEM or CB-SEM: Updated guidelines on which method to use. International Journal of Multivariate Data Analysis, 1(2), 107.
  22. Halper, L. R., & Vancouver, J. B. (2016). Self-efficacy’s influence on persistence on a physical task: Moderating effect of performance feedback ambiguity. Psychology of Sport and Exercise, 22, 170–177.
  23. Hu, L. T., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 6(1), 1-55.
  24. Kamayubonye, E., & Mutarutinya, V. (2023). Investigating the effects of teachers’ quality on students’ performance in mathematics in Kamonyi District, Rwanda. Rwandan Journal of Education, 6(2), 198.
  25. Kenny, D., Kaniskan, B., & McCoach, D. B. (2014). The performance of RMSEA in models with small degrees of freedom. Sociological Methods & Research, 44(3), 486–507.
  26. Kline, R. B. (2016). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling (4th ed.). New York, United States: A Division of Guilford Publications, Inc, Guilford Press.
  27. Kock, N. (2020). WarpPLS User Manual: Version 7.0. Laredo, TX: ScriptWarp Systems. Retrieved from
  28. LaMorte, W. W. (2022). The Social Cognitive Theory. Retrieved from
  29. Leon, J., Medina-Garrido, E., & Núñez, J. L. (2017). Teaching Quality in Math Class: The Development of a Scale and the Analysis of Its Relationship with Engagement and Achievement. Frontiers in Psychology, 8, 895.
  30. Luo, Z., Dang, Y., & Xu, W. (2019). Academic interest scale for adolescents: Development, validation, and measurement invariance with Chinese students. Frontiers in Psychology, 10, 2301
  31. Magno, F. (2021). Factor Analysis. Proceedings of 15-Day Capacity Building on Data Analysis, STAR Training Center, Philippines
  32. Mananghaya, A. K. (2020). It’s Not Complicated: Analysis of Data from A Single, Two, or More Populations. University of the Philippines Los Baños, Institute of Statistics. Retrieved from
  33. Mattan S., Ben-Shachar, Dominique, M., Daniel, L., Indrajeet, P., Brenton, W., Remi, T., & Wagonner, P. (n.d.). Interpret of CFA / SEM Indices of Goodness of Fit. effect size. Retrieved from:
  34. Meti, H., Hamdiyanti, M., Ivta, R., Laelasari, L., & Subroto, T. (2024). Systematic literature review: Mathematical literacy skills in terms of mathematics learning motivation. IJCER (International Journal of Chemistry Education Research. 8(2),1-9.
  35. Nazareth-Tanaid, M. & Osic, M. A. (2023). Influence of Academic and Emotional Self-Efficacy on Students Mathematics Motivation in the New Normal Learning. Psychology and Education: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 15(9), 874-885.
  36. Nickerson, C. (2024). Social cognitive theory. Retrieved from:
  37. Nurkarim, A., Qonita, W., & Monterroza, D. (2023). The students’ mathematics motivation scale: A measure of intrinsic, extrinsic, and perceptions of mathematics. International Journal on Teaching and Learning Mathematics, 6(1), 42-51.
  38. Nuutila, K., Tapola, A., Tuominen, H., Kupiainen, S., Pásztor, A., & Niemivirta, M. (2020). Reciprocal predictions between interest, self-efficacy, and performance during a task. Frontiers in Education, 5(36), 1-13.
  39. Oamen, T. E. (2024). Competing confirmatory factor analysis models in management research: Bifactor modeling of the employee work assessment tool. Management Dynamics in the Knowledge Economy Journal, 12(2), 101-115.
  40. Resnick, B., & Boltz, M. (2019). Optimizing function and physical activity in hospitalized older adults to prevent functional decline and falls. Clinics in Geriatric Medicine, 35(2), 237-251.
  41. Rusczyk, R. (n.d.). Why it’s so important to learn a problem-solving approach to mathematics. Retrieved from
  42. Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. American Psychologist, 55(1), 68-78.
  43. Sakirudeen, A. O., & Sanni, K. B. (2017). Study habits and academic performance of secondary school students in mathematics: A case study of selected secondary schools in Uyo Local Education Council. Research in Pedagogy, 7(2), 283-297.
  44. Schweder, S., & Raufelder, D. (2022). Students’ interest and self-efficacy and the impact of changing learning environments. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 70(3), 1-43.
  45. Selden, A., & Selden, J. (2013). Persistence and Self-Efficacy in Proving. Retrieved from
  46. Shamim, A. (2021). Composite reliability, convergent validity, and discriminant validity in AMOS (Video 3). Retrieved from:
  47. Sudiyatno, Wu, M., Budiman, A., Purwantoro, D., Mahfud, T., & Siswanto, I. (2019). The effect of instructional quality on vocational students’ academic achievement and career optimism. International Journal of Innovation, Creativity and Change, 7(10). 244-260.
  48. Syafril, S., Aini, N. R., Netriwati, Pahrudin, A., Yaumas, N. E., & Engkizar. (2019). Spirit of Mathematics Critical Thinking Skills (CTS). Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1467, Proceedings of Young Scholar Symposium on Science Education and Environment Lampung, Indonesia. Retrieved from
  49. Tambunan, H., Sinaga, B., & Widada, W. (2021). Analysis of teacher performance to build student interest and motivation towards mathematics achievement. International Journal of Evaluation and Research in Education, 10(1), 42-47.
  50. Velez, A. J., & Abuzo, E. (2024). Mathematics self-efficacy and motivation as predictors of problem-solving skills of students. Twist, 19, 417-430.
  51. Vollmeyer, R., & Rheinberg, F. (2000). Does motivation affect performance via persistence? Learning and Instruction, 10(4), 293-309.
  52. Yambot, J.L. (2020). Are We Correlated? University of the Philippines Los Baños, Institute of Statistics. Retrieved from
  53. Young, J. C. (2003). Problem solving reviewer in algebra. Luminaire Printing and Publishing Corp. Paranaque, Philippines.
  54. Zhu, Y., & Kaiser, G. (2022). Impacts of classroom teaching practices on students’ mathematics learning interest, mathematics self-efficacy and mathematics test achievements: A secondary analysis of Shanghai data from the international video study Global Teaching Insights ZDM Mathematics Education, 54(3), 581–593.  

Tools


Copyright © 2026  糖心原创 Exclusively distributed by