Motivation and Engagement as Mediators between Self-Regulation and Academic Success in Online Learning among Chinese University Students

This study examines the direct and mediating relationships among students’ self-regulation, motivation, engagement, and academic success in online learning. Grounded in self-regulated learning theory and engagement frameworks, the proposed structural model posits that self-regulation predicts academic success both directly and indirectly through motivation and engagement. A quantitative cross-sectional design was employed, and data were collected from 1,521 undergraduate students enrolled in online courses at three public universities in Qinghai Province, China. Data were analyzed using Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM). The measurement model demonstrated satisfactory reliability and validity (composite reliability = .915–.953; AVE = .604–.693). Structural results revealed that self-regulation had a significant direct effect on academic success (β = .355, p < .001), engagement significantly predicted academic success (β = .348, p < .001), and motivation also had a positive but smaller effect (β = .099, p < .001). Self-regulation strongly predicted engagement (β = .821, p < .001) and motivation (β = .699, p < .001). Mediation analysis indicated significant indirect effects through engagement (β = .285, p < .001) and motivation (β = .069, p < .001), confirming partial mediation. The model explained 71.6% of the variance in academic success (R² = .716), demonstrating substantial explanatory power. The findings underscore the central role of self-regulation in online academic achievement and highlight engagement as the strongest mediating mechanism linking self-regulation to success. The study contributes to the literature by integrating key learner variables within a unified predictive model and offers practical implications for enhancing online higher education practices.

Self-Regulation; Student Engagement; Motivation; Academic Success

1. Adedoyin, O. B., and Soykan, E. (2020). Covid-19 pandemic and online learning: the challenges and opportunities. Interact. Learn. Environ., 1(13). [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

2. Agarwal, S., & Kaushik, J. S. (2020). Student’s Perception of Online Learning during COVID Pandemic. Indian Journal of Pediatrics, 87(7), 554. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12098-020-03327-7 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

3. Artino, A. R., & Stephens, J. M. (2009). Academic motivation and self-regulation: A comparative analysis of undergraduate and graduate students learning online. Internet and Higher Education, 12(3–4), 146–151. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2009.02.001 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

4. Ashwin, P., & McVitty, D. (2015). The Meanings of Student Engagement: Implications for Policies and Practices. In A. Curaj, L. Matei, R. Pricopie, J. Salmi, & P. Scott (Eds.), IThe European Higher Education Area (pp. 343–360). Springer Open. https://doi.org/10.1097/aia.0b013e31818623cd [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

5. Balan, A. K., Jacintos, A. R., & Montemayor, T. (2020). The Influence of Online Learning towards the Attention Span and Motivation of College Students. School of Social Sciences and Education, (January), 1–48. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

6. Banihashem, S. K., & Aliabadi, K. (2017). Connectivism: Implications for Distance Education. Interdisciplinary Journal of Virtual Learning in Medical Sciences, 8(3). https://doi.org/10.5812/ijvlms.10030 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

7. Basuony, M. A. K., EmadEldeen, R., Farghaly, M., El-Bassiouny, N., & Mohamed, E. K. A. (2020). The factors affecting student satisfaction with online education during the COVID-19 pandemic: an empirical study of an emerging Muslim country. Journal of Islamic Marketing, 12(3), 631–648. https://doi.org/10.1108/JIMA-09-2020-0301 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

8. Bayham, J., & Fenichel, E. P. (2020). Impact of school closures for COVID-19 on the US health-care workforce and net mortality: a modelling study. The Lancet Public Health, 5(5), e271–e278. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2468-2667(20)30082-7 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

9. Broadbent, J., & Poon, W. L. (2015). Self-regulated learning strategies and academic achievement in online higher education learning environments: A systematic review. Internet and Higher Education, 27, 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2015.04.007 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

10. Credé, M., & Kuncel, N. R. (2008). Study habits, skills, and attitudes: The third pillar supporting collegiate academic performance. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 3(6), 425–453. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-6924.2008.00089.x [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

11. Dixson, M. D. (2015). Measuring student engagement in the online course: The Online Student Engagement scale (OSE). Online Learning, 19(4), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.24059/olj.v19i4.561 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

12. Duke, B., Harper, G., & Johnston, M. (2013). Competition in electricity: New markets and new structures. 4 The International HETL Review, Special Is. https://doi.org/10.1016/0007-6813(92)90075-K [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

13. Eom, S. B. (2015). The effects of student motivation and self-regulated learning strategies on students’ perceived e-learning outcomes and satisfaction. Journal of Higher Education Theory and Practice, 15(7), 45–57. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

14. Eom, S. B., & Ashill, N. (2016). The determinants of students’ perceived learning outcomes and satisfaction in university online education: An update. Decision Sciences Journal of Innovative Education, 14(2), 185–215. https://doi.org/10.1111/dsji.12097 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

15. Fredricks, J. A., Blumenfeld, P. C., & Paris, A. H. (2004). School engagement: Potential of the concept, state of the evidence. Review of Educational Research, 74(1), 59–109. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543074001059 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

16. Gherheș, V., Stoian, C. E., Fărcașiu, M. A., & Stanici, M. (2021). E-learning vs. Face-to-face learning: Analyzing students’ preferences and behaviors. Sustainability (Switzerland), 13(8). https://doi.org/10.3390/su13084381 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

17. Hassan, S. U. N., Algahtani, F. D., Zrieq, R., Aldhmadi, B. K., Atta, A., Obeidat, R. M., & Kadri, A. (2021). Academic self-perception and course satisfaction among university students taking virtual classes during the covid-19 pandemic in the kingdom of saudi-arabia (Ksa). Education Sciences, 11(3). https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci11030134 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

18. Hoskins, B. (2011). Demand, growth, and evolution. Journal of Continuing. Higher Education, 59(1), 57–60. https://doi.org/10.1080/07377363.2011.546267 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

19. Jackson, A. D. (2015). The engagement and satisfaction of adult African Americans at historically Black college and universities and adult Hispanic Americans at Hispanic serving institutions. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

20. Johnson, C. (2017). Teaching music online: Changing pedagogical approach when moving to the online environment. London Review of Education, 15(3), 439–456. https://doi.org/10.18546/LRE.15.3.08 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

21. Kauffman, H. (2015). A review of predictive factors of student success in and satisfaction with online learning. Research in Learning Technology, 23, 1–13. https://doi.org/10.3402/rlt.v23.26507 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

22. Kucuk, S., & Richardson, J. C. (2019). A structural equation model of predictors of online learners’ engagement and satisfaction. Online Learning, 23(2), 196–216. https://doi.org/10.24059/olj.v23i2.1455 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

23. Kuh, G. D., Kinzie, J., Cruce, T., Shoup, R., & Gonyea, R. M. (2007). Connecting_the_Dots_Report. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

24. Larose, G. (2010). Student retention at community colleges: Engaging a new generation with technology is key to America’s future. Web Study, Inc. (White Paper). http://www.webstudy.com/download/WebStudy_Whitepaper.pdf [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

25. Lim, C. K., Ab Jalil, H., Ma’rof, A. M., & Saad, W. Z. (2020). Peer learning, self-regulated learning, and learning satisfaction in blended learning. Education and Information Technologies, 25, 3021–3036. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-020-10118-y [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

26. Mello, L. V. (2016). Fostering postgraduate student engagement: online resources supporting self-directed learning in a diverse cohort. Research in Learning Technology, 24. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

27. Meyer, K. A. (2014). Student Engagement in Online Learning: What Works and Why. ASHE Higher Education Report, 40(6), 1–114. https://doi.org/10.1002/aehe.20018 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

28. Moore, M. G. (1989). Editorial: Three types of interaction. American Journal of Distance Education, 3(2), 1–7. https://doi.org/10.1080/08923648909526659 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

29. Paul, J., & Jefferson, F. (2019). A Comparative Analysis of Student Performance in an Online vs. Face-to-Face Environmental Science Course From 2009 to 2016. Frontiers in Computer Science, 1(November). https://doi.org/10.3389/fcomp.2019.00007 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

30. Pellas, N. (2014). The influence of computer self-efficacy, metacognitive self-regulation, and self-esteem on student engagement in online learning. Computers in Human Behavior, 37, 122–135. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2014.04.038 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

31. Pellas, N. (2014). The influence of computer self-efficacy, metacognitive self-regulation and self-esteem on student engagement in online learning programs: Evidence from the virtual world of Second Life. Computers in Human Behavior, 35(March 2014), 157–170. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2014.02.048 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

32. Puzziferro, M. (2008). Online Technologies Self-Efficacy and Self-Regulated Learning as Predictors of Final Grade and Satisfaction in College-Level Online Courses. American Journal of Distance Education, 22(2), 72–89. https://doi.org/10.1080/08923640802039024 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

33. Rahman, M. H., Uddin, M. S., & Dey, A. (2021). Investigating the mediating role of online learning motivation in higher education during COVID-19. Education and Information Technologies, 26, 1–24. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-021-10535-9 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

34. Rajabalee, Y. B., & Santally, M. I. (2021). Learner satisfaction, engagement, and performance in an online module: Implications for institutional e-learning policy. Education and Information Technologies, 26, 2623–2656. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-020-10375-1 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

35. Seaman, J. E., Allen, I. E., & Seaman, J. (2018). G RADE I NCREASE Grade Increase : [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

36. Selvanathan, M., Hussin, N. A. M., & Azazi, N. A. N. (2020). Students learning experiences during COVID-19: Work from home period in Malaysian Higher Learning Institutions. Teaching Public Administration, 1(10). https://doi.org/10.1177/0144739420977900 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

37. Shahzad, A., Hassan, R., Aremu, A. Y., Hussain, A., & Lodhi, R. N. (2021). Effects of COVID-19 in E-learning on higher education institution students: the group comparison between male and female. Quality and Quantity, 55(3), 805–826. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11135-020-01028-z [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

38. Sharp, L. A., & Sharp, J. H. (2016). Enhancing Student Success in Online Learning Experiences Through the Use of Self-Regulation Strategies. The Journal of Excellence in College Teaching, 27(2), 57–75. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

39. Siemens, G. (2005). Connectivism :A Learning Theory for the Digital Age. Journal of Instructional Technology and Distance Learning, 2(1), 1–5. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

40. Stark, E. (2019). Examining the role of motivation in online and face-to-face learning contexts. Journal of Educational Technology Systems, 47(3), 355–371. https://doi.org/10.1177/0047239518808052 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

41. Stark, E., Stark, E., Lassiter, A., & Kuemper, A. (2013). Knowledge Management & E-Learning ISSN. Knowledge Management & E-Learning, 5(3), 269–277. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

42. Vonderwell, S., & Zachariah, S. (2005). Factors that influence participation in online learning. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 38(2), 213–230. https://doi.org/10.1080/15391523.2005.10782457 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

43. Wandler, J. B., & Imbriale, W. J. (2017). Promoting undergraduate student self-regulation in online learning environments. Online Learning Journal, 21(2). https://doi.org/10.24059/olj.v21i2.881 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

44. Wang, C.-H., Shannon, D. M., & Ross, M. E. (2013). Students’ characteristics, self-regulated learning, technology self-efficacy, and course outcomes in online learning. Distance Education, 34(3), 302–323. https://doi.org/10.1080/01587919.2013.835779 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

45. Wang, C., Zhao, H., & Zhang, H. (2020). Chinese College Students Have Higher Anxiety in New Semester of Online Learning During COVID-19: A Machine Learning Approach. Frontiers in Psychology, 11(December), 1–9. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.587413 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

46. Wang, G. H., Zhang, Y. T., Zhao, J., Zhang, J., & Jiang, F. (2020). Mitigate the effects of home confinement on children during the COVID-19 outbreak. Journal of Shanghai Jiaotong University (Medical Science), 40(3), 279–281. https://doi.org/10.3969/j.issn.1674-8115.2020.03.001 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

47. Wang, M., & Kang, M. (2006). Cybergogy for engaged learning: A framework for creating learner engagement through information and communication technology. In Engaged Learning with Emerging Technologies (pp. 225–253). Springer Netherlands. https://doi.org/10.1007/1-4020-3669-8_11 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

48. West, R. E. (2018). Foundations of Learning and Instructional Design Technology. In EdTechBooks.org (1st ed.). Brigham Young University. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

49. Xu, J., & Qiu, L. (2021). Self-regulation and study engagement as predictors of behavioral intention to reuse e-learning. Interactive Learning Environments, 29(6), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2019.1695561 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

50. Zhang, S., Shi, R., Yun, L., Li, X., Wang, Y., He, H., & Miao, D. (2015). Self-regulation and Study-Related Health Outcomes: A Structural Equation Model of Regulatory Mode Orientations, Academic Burnout and Engagement Among University Students. Social Indicators Research, 123(2), 585–599. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

51. Zimmerman, B. J. (1989). A social cognitive view of self-regulated academic learning. Journal of Educational Psychology, 81(3), 329–339. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.81.3.329 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

52. Zimmerman, B. J. (1989a). A Social Cognitive View of Self-Regulated Academic Learning. Journal of Educational Psychology, 81(3), 329–339. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.81.3.329 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

53. Zimmerman, B. J. (1989b). Models of Self-Regulated Learning and Academic Achievement BT - Self-Regulated Learning and Academic Achievement: Theory, Research, and Practice (B. J. Zimmerman & D. H. Schunk, Eds.; pp. 1–25). Springer New York. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4612-3618-4_1 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

54. Zimmerman, B. J. (2011). Motivational Sources and Outcomes of Self-Regulated Learning and Performance. In B. Z. Dale H. Schunk (Ed.), Handbook of Self-Regulation of Learning and Performance (1st Editio, 4). Routledge. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

• The Impact of Ownership Structure on Dividend Payout Policy of Listed Plantation Companies in Sri Lanka
• Urban Sustainability in North-East India: A Study through the lens of NER-SDG index
• Performance Assessment of Predictive Forecasting Techniques for Enhancing Hospital Supply Chain Efficiency in Healthcare Logistics
• The Fractured Self in Julian Barnes' Postmodern Fiction: Identity Crisis and Deflation in Metroland and the Sense of an Ending
• Impact of Flood on the Employment, Labour Productivity and Migration of Agricultural Labour in North Bihar