Perceived social
support and academic performance in Peruvian high school students: influence of
academic engagement and academic self-efficacy
|
Sergio Dominguez-Lara[1] |
|
|
Sabina N. Valente |
|
|
Abílio A. Lourenço |
|
|
Benigno Peceros-Pinto |
|
|
Maite Díaz-Peñaloza |
|
|
Segundo R. León |
Abstract
Based on ecological systems theory, three main social contexts are
associated with school engagement. In this sense, this study aimed to find out
the impact of perceived social support on academic achievement considering the
mediating role of academic engagement and academic self-efficacy. A total of
623 Peruvian secondary school students (women = 51.364%) and adolescents
between 12 and 17 years old (Mage = 14.255; SDage
= 1.454) participated. Were evaluated with the Multidimensional Scale of Perceived Social Support, the Utrecht Work Engagement Scale – Student,
the Academic Situations Specific
Perceived Self-efficacy, and the academic performance obtained from the institutional data. The
data analysis was carried out under structural regression analysis with the
weighted least square mean and variance adjusted and the parameters were
interpreted under an effect size perspective. Regarding the results, the
perceived social support from parent’s influences on academic self-efficacy
and academic engagement; at the same time, academic self-efficacy influences
academic engagement and academic performance. On the other hand, when the mediating role of academic
self-efficacy and academic engagement were considered, only an indirect and
significant influence of perceived social support from parents on academic
performance was found. In conclusion, the family is a relevant factor to
increase self-efficacy beliefs and optimize academic performance.
Keywords: academic performance; perceived social support; academic self-efficacy;
academic engagement; high school.
1. Introduction
The COVID-19 pandemic hurt learning levels due to the low quality of
distance education (García-Castro et al., 2022), with observed limitations in
the teaching and learning strategies employed (Anaya, 2021). There was a lack
of effective resources to mediate conflicts in the school environment (Albor-Chadid, 2022), resulting in lost learning
opportunities, an increased risk of school dropout (Arellano-Esparza &
Ortiz-Espinoza, 2022), and socio-economic inequalities arising from this
situation (Cabrera et al., 2020; Valente, 2020).
Additionally, the pandemic affected the psychosocial health and well-being of
children and adolescents, two of the most vulnerable groups. It was associated
with an increase in psychosocial factors, such as the loss of healthy habits,
intra-family violence, and the abuse of new technologies (Sánchez, 2021),
including disruptions to sleep patterns, overweight issues, and addictions (Orgilés et al., 2020). The uncertainty generated by the
changes resulting from the pandemic could have affected students' perceptions
of their school environment, family dynamics, beliefs about their abilities,
and engagement with school, negatively impacting academic performance. The association
between these aspects is developed
below.
1.1. Importance of family and friends' social support in
the school stage
From the perspective of ecological systems theory,
three main social contexts are associated with school engagement: family,
peers, and school (Sinclair et al., 2003). Having individuals to trust, with
whom to express emotions, difficulties, and opinions significantly impacts
school adaptation (Suárez-Orozco et al., 2009), making social support (SS)
relevant.
SS
refers to the set of instrumental or expressive provisions, perceived or real,
offered by the community, social networks, and intimate friends in crisis
situations and daily life (Lin, 1986). This is especially crucial during
adolescence, characterized by changes where individuals are exposed to family,
social, and academic circumstances that could lead to health problems
(Navarro-Loli et al., 2019).
In this
sense, the family is a vital emotional axis for the full development of
individuals, with parents and other family members playing a crucial role in
adolescents' academic outcomes and adaptation to school (Simpkins et al., 2019;
Veiga et al., 2015). During the pandemic, positive
bonds between parents and children strengthened, positively impacting
adolescents' mental health (Jones et al., 2021).
Furthermore,
friends at school become increasingly important as young people enter
adolescence (Smetana et al., 2015), a trend enhanced by the constant use of
social networks (Guadarrama-Cárdenas & Mendoza-Ruíz, 2022). Therefore, the peer group could become the
most influential socializing context during adolescence. Although the
perception of family support decreases during this stage (Bokhorst
et al., 2010), it continues to exert a strong influence, collectively impacting
beliefs about adolescent engagement and academic competencies.
1.2. Influence of social support (family and friends)
on academic engagement in adolescents.
Academic engagement (AE) refers to a positive mental
state and satisfaction with studies and is configured around the dimensions of
dedication, which involves enthusiasm and joy in the face of academic
challenges, vigor linked to high levels of energy, and absorption, or the
degree of concentration or immersion in activities (Schaufeli & Salanova, 2007). In other words, it relates to the extent
to which students engage with their learning and actively participate in their
academic activities and achievements (Usán-Supervía
et al., 2018).
Academic engagement is a vital factor in
social-personal development and academic success and is influenced by
contextual aspects such as family or peers (Ansong et
al., 2017; Miranda-Zapata et al., 2018; Miranda-Zapata et al., 2021; Winter et
al., 2020).
Regarding the family, the support provided by
parents strengthens the bond with schools, fostering a climate of warmth and
encouraging decision-making (Pan et al., 2017; Sağkal
& Sönmez, 2021), and holds more significance than peer support (Ansong et al., 2017).
However, it is also possible to observe the
limited involvement of parents in accompanying and reviewing school tasks (Beltrán, 2013), which may increase in poverty contexts (Sucari et al., 2019).
On the other hand, emotional support provided
by peers is also important for school participation, as adolescents with
positive interactions with them are more engaged both behaviorally and
emotionally in school (Steenberghs et al., 2021; Wang
& Eccles, 2013).
1.3. Influence of social support (family
and friends) on academic self-efficacy in adolescents
Academic self-efficacy (ASE) is a set of
judgments that students form about their abilities to plan and make decisions
to achieve expected performance through the self-regulation of their attitudes
during this process (García-Méndez & Rivera-Ledesma, 2021).
In this sense, contexts close to the student
promote their engagement in school, where parents, teachers, and peers provide
suggestions and feedback on what they should think and how they should behave
in social situations, with these praises being fundamental for the development
of self-efficacy beliefs (Skaalvik et al., 2015).
Furthermore, when parents encourage their children more and demonstrate higher
educational expectations, adolescents have greater confidence in their
abilities and improve their academic performance (Izar
de la Fuente et al., 2019; Kağıtçıbaşı, 2017; Kontaş & Özcan, 2022).
Regarding peers, interactions among students
positively contribute to their academic performance because, through forming
friendships, they learn to work as a team and resolve conflicts, as well as
provide support, resources, and information (Kağıtçıbaşı,
2017). Thus, peers play a crucial role in students' lives during basic
education, influencing adjustment and academic performance due to adolescents'
tendency to choose friends with similar levels of performance and engagement,
subsequently conveying a similar achievement expectation that influences
academic performance (Izar de la Fuente et al.,
2019).
1.4. Influence of academic self-efficacy
on academic engagement
There is evidence that academic self-efficacy increases academic engagement (Sağkal & Sönmez, 2021; Usán-Supervía
et al., 2018) because if the student is convinced, they will successfully
complete the task, they will be more involved in it (Dogan, 2015), especially
if they have previously succeeded in similar tasks. Conversely, a student with
low confidence in their potential task success will not invest time or energy
in it (Dogan, 2015). In the recent context of the pandemic, academic
self-efficacy played a key role in addressing its consequences, particularly in
adapting traditional face-to-face teaching to new modalities such as remote or
virtual and hybrid environments.
1.5. Influence of academic engagement on
academic performance
When it comes to predicting academic success and gaining a broader
understanding of the factors involved, academic engagement emerges as a
relevant construct within the growing number of social spaces where reciprocal
relationships and bidirectional practices of trust, support, growth, and
loyalty are established (Olivier et al., 2021). Furthermore, academic
engagement is relevant because it brings together the intrinsic and extrinsic
elements essential for the student to take responsibility and engage in their
academic process to achieve mastery, connect with the educational institution,
and find a purpose associated with their life project (Sarmiento-Martínez, et
al., 2022).
Therefore,
considering that academic performance is contingent on the success of the
teaching-learning process, it is essential to understand the factors that
predict it, and academic engagement is one of them (Liu & Flick, 2019;
Miranda-Zapata et al., 2018; Miranda-Zapata et al., 2021). This indicates that
less initiative to participate in activities will impact learning and
performance (Li et al., 2020).
1.6. Influence of academic self-efficacy on academic performance
Self-efficacy is one of
the most important factors for achieving favorable academic outcomes (Bandura,
1997) and significantly predicts academic performance (Usán-Supervía
& Quílez-Robres, 2021). This is possible because
students with high academic self-efficacy may perceive tasks as challenges and
approach them with their knowledge and skills with a more positive attitude,
increasing motivation for self-regulated task performance. This would unfold
the necessary actions to achieve learning goals, guiding them toward more
active behavior and a higher likelihood of attaining the desired academic
performance (Güngör, 2020).
Therefore, changes
in interest and perceived task difficulty may affect beliefs in academic
self-efficacy and, subsequently, student performance (Nuutila
et al., 2021). Additionally, academic performance and academic self-efficacy
mutually influence each other over time (Ribeiro, et al., 2022; Talsma et al., 2018), making their joint consideration
important.
1.7. Influence of social support on academic performance
in schoolchildren
Students perform better academically when they
perceive support from their environment (Alarcón-Lucuy
& Coca-Lopez, 2022; Martínez et al., 2020; Vasiliki, 2022). Thus, this
family and peer support allows students to better navigate the challenges
presented in the school environment, as it is considered a resource they can
rely on, especially in facing increased stress levels (Estrada & Mamani,
2020; Rodríguez, 2017). It is noteworthy that family support has a greater
influence than peer support (Kağıtçıbaşı, 2017;
Rodríguez et al., 2018), as the family expresses higher achievement
expectations. However, it is essential to emphasize that the influence of
parental involvement in their children's education is influenced by
socio-economic, cultural, and educational aspects of the family context. If a
family considers their children's education important from their perspective
but lacks the necessary conditions to promote learning, it will pose an
obstacle to achieving educational goals (Espitia-Carrascal
& Montes-Rotela, 2021).
Peers have a significant influence on academic
engagement and success (Buhs et al., 2006).
Furthermore, this relationship is even more intense when mediated by academic
self-efficacy (Thijs & Verkuyten, 2008) and
academic engagement (Tomás et al., 2016).
On one hand, by increasing self-efficacy
beliefs, the students will be convinced they will achieve good results through
their efforts and will engage more actively in tasks (Juvonen et al., 2017),
enhancing their learning (Pan et al., 2017). On the other hand, academic
engagement serves as a mediator, enhancing the effects of the student's
personal, social, and school context on academic achievement and satisfaction
with school (Tomás et al., 2016). Conversely, the absence of support will
distance the student from the curriculum, halting learning, creating
dissatisfaction, and fostering beliefs of incompetence that increase the
likelihood of dropping out of school (Pan et al., 2017).
|
|
|
|
Figure
1. Explanatory model of
academic performance. Note: For simplicity, chart items have been removed.
Source: Own elaboration.
1.8. The present study
Academic performance is a current concern due
to its relationship with the increasing academic offerings and the high number
of students enrolled in private educational institutions (Grasso, 2020). As the
number of students in private basic education institutions increases, it
becomes less likely to monitor the learning of all students, making it
challenging to detect cases that require specialized attention. Various
psychosocial factors affect student performance, and these factors should be
considered when assessing academic quality in adolescents before they enter
higher education (García-Martín & Cantón-Mayo,
2019). There is evidence that performance in basic education predicts
performance in university education (Tapasco-Alzate
et al., 2021), leading institutions to do their best to optimize learning
conditions.
It is known that the major determinants of
student academic performance are their perception of self-efficacy and
engagement, both of which are also influenced by the social support (AS) from
family and peers/friends. This creates overlapping spheres of influence between
school, family, and community working together to guide and support student
learning and academic development. Additionally, academic self-efficacy is
directly related to self-regulation processes, as in a highly distracting
environment, it becomes increasingly difficult for students to be successful,
resulting in lower academic performance. This poses a significant social
problem that will impact the quality of young professionals in the future.
In this context, the objective of this study
is to understand the impact of perceived social support on academic performance
in schooled adolescents, considering the mediating role of academic engagement
and self-efficacy. The research hypotheses were:
Hypothesis 1: Family
and friends' social support directly and positively influence academic
engagement.
Hypothesis 2: Family
and friends' social support directly and positively influence academic
self-efficacy.
Hypothesis 3: Academic
self-efficacy directly and positively influences academic engagement.
Hypothesis 4: Academic
engagement directly and positively influences academic performance.
Hypothesis 5: Academic
self-efficacy directly and positively influences academic performance.
Hypothesis 6: Family
and friends' social support, considering the mediating role of academic
engagement and academic self-efficacy, indirectly and positively influence
academic performance.
2.
Methodology
2.1. Design
The study is situated within an explanatory design (Ato
et al., 2013), focused on analyzing an explanatory model using structural
equation modeling.
2.2.
Participants
A total of 623 adolescents participated in the study, with 51.364% being
female, ranging in age from 12 to 17 years (Mean = 14.255; SDage
= 1.454). Of the participants, 61.637% lived with both parents, 18.459% with
only the mother, 2.408% with only the father, and the remaining students had
other family configurations. All participants were enrolled in grades one
through five of secondary education and came from four jointly managed private
schools (State and Church) located in the Constitutional Province of Callao
(central coast of Peru). These schools predominantly cater to students from a
medium-low socioeconomic background.
2.3. Instruments
The Multidimensional Scale of
Perceived Social Support (MSPSS; Zimet et al.,
1988) was employed in its validated version for Peruvian adolescents
(Navarro-Loli et al., 2019). Originally assessing three dimensions of social
support (family, friends, and significant others), it consists of 12 items
scaled in Likert format with seven response alternatives (ranging from strongly disagree [1] to strongly agree [7]). For this study,
only the first two dimensions were considered, showing a good fit (CFI = .994;
RMSEA [90% CI] = .075 [.059, .091]; WRMR = 0.762), and high reliability for
perceived family support (α = .873) and friend support (α = .922).
The six-item version of the Utrecht
Work Engagement Scale – Student (Schaufeli et al., 2002), validated in
Peruvian school students (UWES-6S; Dominguez-Lara et al., 2022), was used. This
version is based on the original nine-item scale (UWES-9S; Schaufeli et al.,
2006). The UWES-6S assesses work engagement unidimensionally
with six items and seven response options (from Never [0] to Always
[6]). In this study, the UWES-6S demonstrated an acceptable fit (CFI = .983;
RMSEA [90% CI] = .149 [.127, .172]; WRMR = 0.987) and high score reliability (α = .898).
The version tailored for Peruvian adolescents (Navarro-Loli &
Dominguez-Lara, 2019) of the Perceived
Self-Efficacy Scale in Academic Situations (EAPESA; Palenzuela,
1983) was utilized. The EAPESA assesses academic self-efficacy unidimensionally with seven items and four response options
(from Never [1] to Always [4]). The fit with the data in
this study was adequate (CFI = .993; RMSEA [90% CI] = .075 [.056, .094]; WRMR =
0.791), and the score reliability was high (α = .897).
Finally, to assess academic performance, the institution's grade records
in three subjects—science and technology, mathematics, and communication—were taken into account. For analytical purposes, academic
performance was treated as a latent variable. In the current study, the score
reliability was deemed acceptable (α = .770).
2.4. Procedure
This report is the result of a
research project approved by the Institutional Ethics Committee of the
Universidad Privada San Juan Bautista (Registration
No. 063-2021-CIEI-UPSJB). Additionally, it was conducted by the Declaration of
Helsinki (2013) and the Code of Ethics of the Colegio de Psicólogos
del Perú (2018).
Subsequently, contact was made with the
participating educational institutions, and parents were approached to obtain
authorization for the assessment of students through an informed consent form
created on Google Forms. The consent form outlined the research objectives, the
confidential treatment of data, and the potential use of the results. The
inclusion criterion for the study was adolescents in grades one to five of
secondary education from private schools. The evaluation took place during
classes, and only those adolescents who agreed after the objectives of the
study were explained participated. The assessment was conducted using a Google
Form.
2.5. Data Analysis
Regarding the analytical section, structural regression (Figure 1) was employed
for testing the research hypotheses. The Weighted Least Squares Mean and
Variance Adjusted (WLSMV) estimation method was used. Model fit was assessed
using the Comparative Fit Index (CFI) (> .90; McDonald & Ho, 2002) and
the Root Mean Square Error of Approximation (RMSEA) (< .08; Browne & Cudeck, 1993). The analysis was conducted using Mplus version 7 (Muthén & Muthén, 1998 - 2015).
After evaluating the individual fit of the instruments and an oblique
model illustrating the association between variables, relationships between
predictor and criterion variables were modeled according to the proposed model
(Figure 1). Direct and indirect effects were analyzed from an effect size
perspective. Concerning direct effects between constructs, effects were
categorized as low if less than .30, moderate between .30 and .50, and high if
greater than .50 (Miranda-Zapata et al., 2018). The explained variance of
criterion variables within the model was quantified similarly to R2:
less than .04 was considered insignificant, between .04 and .25 small, between
.25 and .64 moderate, and greater than .64 large.
As for indirect effects, they were quantified in terms of explained
variance, following the criteria mentioned in the previous paragraph.
3.
Results
3.1. Measurement Model
Evaluation
Preliminarily, the oblique model showed a good fit (CFI = .973; RMSEA
[90% CI] = .060 [.055, .064]; WRMR = 1.182), and significant reliability
coefficients and interfactorial correlations (> .20) were observed among the
constructs (Table 1).
Table 1
Construct reliability and interfactorial correlations
|
ω |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
||
|
1. Social support (family) |
.907 |
1 |
|
|
|||
|
2. Social support (friends) |
.941 |
.347 |
1 |
|
|
||
|
3. Academic engagement |
.916 |
.539 |
.209 |
1 |
|
||
|
4. Academic self-efficacy |
.929 |
.523 |
.236 |
718 |
1 |
||
|
5. Academic performance |
.913 |
.167 |
.051 |
.248 |
.355 |
1 |
|
|
Note: ω: omega coefficient |
|||||||
3.2. Evaluation of Research
Hypotheses
Regarding the overall assessment of the proposed model, it showed
favorable fit indices (CFI = .979; RMSEA [90% CI] = .053 [.048, .058]; WRMR =
1.120). The first hypothesis (Family and friends' social support directly and
positively influences academic engagement) and the second hypothesis (Family
and friends' social support directly and positively influences academic
self-efficacy) receive partial support, as only family support significantly
influences academic engagement and academic self-efficacy at a high level (γ > .50) and a low level (γ < .30), respectively.
On the other hand, the third hypothesis (Academic self-efficacy directly
and positively influences academic engagement) is supported, showing a high
influence (γ > .50), although the fourth hypothesis (Academic engagement
directly and positively influences academic performance) did not receive
favorable evidence. Conversely, the fifth hypothesis (Academic self-efficacy
directly and positively influences academic performance) is supported,
demonstrating a moderate influence (γ > .30).
Regarding explained variance, the model moderately explains the variance
in academic self-efficacy (R2 = .275) and academic engagement (R2
= .554), while the explained variance in academic performance could be
considered low (R2 = .140).
|
|
|
|
Figure 2. Explanatory model of academic
performance
Regarding the sixth hypothesis (Family and friends' social support,
considering the mediating role of academic engagement and academic
self-efficacy, indirectly and positively influences academic performance), the
data suggest partial support, considering that only the dimension related to
family, and in the presence of academic self-efficacy, shows an indirect and
positive influence (Table 2).
Table 2
Factorial parameters of the oblique
three-factor model by age
|
Associations |
Effects |
|
Effects of social support (Family) on academic performance |
|
|
Total indirect effect |
.203 |
|
Specific indirect effect |
|
|
SS (Family) ASE AP |
.209 |
|
SS (Family) ASE AE AP |
-.006 |
|
Effects of social support (Friends) on academic performance |
|
|
Total indirect effect |
.024 |
|
Specific indirect effect |
|
|
SS (Friends) ASE AP |
.024 |
|
Note: SS = Social Support; ASE = Academic Self-Efficacy; ÃP = Academic
Performance; AE = Academic Engagement |
|
4. Discussion
The present research aimed to contribute to a better understanding of the
factors that enhance academic performance in Peruvian students, specifically
perceived social support, academic self-efficacy, and academic engagement.
After presenting the theoretical foundations and assumptions, justifying the
chosen methodological approaches, and disseminating and discussing the
findings, it became possible to systematize the results obtained through a
deeper level of reflection.
There is evidence of the
influence of perceived social support from family and friends on academic
self-efficacy (Izar de la Fuente et al., 2019; Kağıtçıbaşı, 2017; Kontaş & Özcan, 2022) and academic engagement (Miranda-Zapata et
al., 2018; Miranda-Zapata et al., 2021; Winter et al., 2020). However, the
importance of these factors tends to lean towards family support (Ansong et al., 2017). In this regard, the inclusion of
family and friends' social support in the model allowed visualizing that family
support is more relevant both in terms of academic self-efficacy and academic
engagement. Therefore, the existence of family support will enable students to
form and consolidate a set of beliefs about their capabilities to adjust to the
potential challenges of the school environment, thereby increasing their
adaptability, cohesion, and resilience to cope with potential stress levels
(Estrada & Mamani, 2020).
The influence of academic
self-efficacy on academic engagement is well-documented (Sağkal
& Sönmez 2021; Usán-Supervía et al., 2018).
Therefore, beliefs about one's capabilities increase the likelihood of actively
engaging in academic tasks inherent to school life. On the other hand, while
there is previous evidence of the independent influence of academic
self-efficacy and academic engagement on academic performance (Miranda-Zapata
et al., 2021; Sarmiento-Martínez et al., 2022; Usán-Supervía
& Quílez-Robres, 2021), in this study, only
academic self-efficacy showed significant influence. Thus, academic
self-efficacy is crucial as it represents a belief that prevails in the
student's effort, persistence, and use of cognitive and metacognitive
strategies, influencing academic outcomes. Students who successfully complete
school activities and achieve good academic performance experience a sense of
confidence in their abilities, generally fostering renewed engagement in
studying, leading to constant positive feedback. The lack of influence of
academic engagement on academic performance is explained by its strong
bivariate association with academic self-efficacy (> .70). When analyzing
both variables together in the structural model, it gives greater importance to
self-efficacy beliefs.
On the other hand, the
research results are consistent with the influence of perceived social support
on students' academic performance, with academic self-efficacy and academic
engagement as mediating variables (Thijs & Verkuyten,
2008; Tomás et al., 2016). Several studies reveal that students exhibit better
academic performance when they feel supported by social support, specifically,
if this support comes from family members (Alarcón-Lucuy
& Coca-Lopez, 2022; Martínez et al., 2020; Vasiliki, 2022) or peers (Buhs et al., 2006). The results indicate that the most
significant influence on academic performance comes from the family sphere,
with academic self-efficacy as a mediator. In other words, the constant support
from the family shapes and consolidates students' self-efficacy beliefs,
enhancing their academic performance.
Regarding limitations, the
results of this study should be interpreted with caution, considering that the
sample size, while large, does not allow for generalization to other regions
due to a lack of geographical representativeness, needing expansion in future
research. Another limitation is that it is a self-report instrument and is
specifically aimed at a single data collection technique. However, the use of
structural equation modeling represents a methodological strength because it
allows for the simultaneous analysis of variables, given that there are some
bivariate associations (e.g., correlations) with empirical evidence (e.g.,
academic engagement and academic performance) that are not replicated in the
results due to the presence of other variables with greater explanatory
relevance.
The practical implications
of this study are diverse as it contributes to systematizing and
operationalizing an analytical model to understand, in an interrelated and
reflective manner, the dynamics established between the set of personal and
contextual variables of students and their academic performance. Firstly,
institutional and pedagogical management of educational centers needs to
incorporate changes in educational environments and curricular designs to
define policies and operationalize practices focused on the development of
processes that can improve students' academic performance. For example,
developing educational actions to promote parental involvement in the
educational process (Cosso et al., 2022), considering
the diversity of existing family environments (Alarcón-Lucuy
& Coca-Lopez, 2022), and simultaneously increasing students' self-efficacy
strategies to improve their academic performance (Eyni
& Hashemi, 2022).
5. Conclusions
Regarding the overall model,
it is concluded that perceived social support from the family, with academic
self-efficacy as a mediator, positively impacts students' academic performance.
Additionally, more specifically, academic self-efficacy influences academic
engagement and academic performance.
Finally, it is recommended
for future studies to use various methodologies simultaneously to reduce the
impact of a single evaluation method or approach. Likewise, it would be
interesting to employ longitudinal designs and have larger samples, if possible
from both public and private institutions, considering the cultural and social
diversity existing in all regions of Peru, as differences in learning
preferences may be found based on demographic variables. Furthermore, in
addition to academic variables, it would also be necessary to evaluate more
stable aspects, such as personality (Serrano et al., 2022), considering the
importance of some of its dimensions in academic performance (Bergold and Steinmayr, 2018;
Morales-Vives et al., 2020), or emotional intelligence, whose relevance is
emphasized in the post-pandemic context (Dominguez-Lara et al., 2023), as well
as the possibility of massive assessments at the beginning of the school year.
CRediT autorship contribution
statement
SDL, SV, and AAL conceptualized the study. SDL, MDP, SNV, and AAL wrote the initial draft of the manuscript. All authors
critically reviewed the manuscript's progress and made significant
contributions. BPP was responsible for data collection. SDL conducted the data analysis.
The manuscript's content was approved by all authors.
References
Alarcón-Lucuy,
M. C., & Coca-Lopez, I. C. (2022). Influencia
del entorno familiar en el rendimiento escolar de estudiantes de 12 a 15 años
de la Unidad Educativa Ayacucho del distrito de Catavi, Norte Potosí Bolivia. Revista Ciencia y Sociedad, 2(3),
232–242. http://www.cienciaysociedaduatf.com/index.php/ciesocieuatf/article/view/44
Albor-Chadid, L. (2022). Propuesta educativa metodológica aplicada a
través del comics por una construcción de paz. MSC Métodos de Solución de Conflictos, 2(2), 23-38.
https://doi.org/10.29105/msc2.2-18
Anaya, T., Montalvo, J., Calderón, A., & Arizpe, C. (2021). Escuelas
rurales en el Perú: factores que acentúan las brechas digitales en tiempos de
pandemia (COVID-19) y recomendaciones para reducirlas. Educación, 30(58), 11-33. https://doi.org/10.18800/educacion.202101.001
Ansong, D., Okumu, M.,
Bowen, G., Walker, A., & Eisensmith, S. (2017).
The role of parent, classmate, and teacher support in student engagement:
Evidence from Ghana. International Journal of Educational Development,
54, 51–58. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijedudev.2017.03.010
Arellano-Esparza, C. A., & Ortiz-Espinoza, Á. (2022). Educación
media superior en México: abandono escolar y políticas públicas durante la
COVID-19. Íconos. Revista de Ciencias Sociales, 74, 33-52.
https://doi.org/10.17141/iconos.74.2022.5292
Ato, M., López, J. J., & Benavente, A. (2013). Un sistema de
clasificación de los diseños de investigación en psicología. Anales de Psicología,
29(3), 1038-1059. https://doi.org/10.6018/analesps.29.3.178511
Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. W H Freeman/Times Books/ Henry Holt &
Co.
Beltrán, A. (2013). El tiempo de la familia es un recurso escaso: ¿cómo
afecta su distribución en el desempeño escolar? Apuntes, 40(72), 117 – 156. https://doi.org/10.21678/apuntes.72.677
Bergold,
S., & Steinmayr, R. (2018). Personality and
intelligence interact in the prediction of academic achievement. Journal
of Intelligence, 6(2), 27.
https://doi.org/10.3390/jintelligence6020027
Bokhorst,
C., Sumter, S., & Westenberg, P. (2010). Social
support from parents, friends, classmates, and teachers in children and
adolescents aged 9 to 18 years: Who is perceived as most supportive? Social Development, 19(2), 417–426.
http://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9507.2009.00540.x
Browne, M. W., & Cudeck, R. (1993).
Alternative ways of assessing model fit. In K. A. Bollen
& J. S. Long (Eds.), Testing
structural equation models (pp. 445–455). Sage.
Buhs, E., Ladd, G.,
& Herald, S. (2006). Peer exclusion and victimization: Processes that
mediate the relation between peer group rejection and children’s classroom
engagement and achievement. Journal of
Educational Psychology, 98(1), 1 – 13.
https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.98.1.1
Cabrera, L., Pérez, C. N., & Santana, F. (2020). ¿Se incrementa la desigualdad de oportunidades educativas en la
enseñanza primaria con el cierre escolar por el coronavirus? International Journal of Sociology of Education, 9(Special Issue), 27-52. https://doi.org/10.17583/rise.2020.5613.
Colegio
de Psicólogos del Perú (2018). Código
de ética y deontología. https://www.cpsp.pe/documentos/marco_legal/codigo_de_etica_y_deontologia.pdf
Cosso, J., von Suchodoletz, A., & Yoshikawa, H. (2022). Effects
of parental involvement programs on young children’s academic and
social–emotional outcomes: A meta-analysis. Journal
of Family Psychology. Advance online publication.
https://doi.org/10.1037/fam0000992
Declaration of Helsinki (2013). Ethical principles for medical research
involving human subjects. JAMA, 310(20), 2191-2194. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2013.281053
Dogan, U. (2015). Student engagement, academic self-efficacy, and
academic motivation as predictors of academic performance. The Anthropologist, 20(3),
553-561. https://doi.org/10.1080/09720073.2015.11891759
Dominguez-Lara, S., Peceros-Pinto, B., Centeno-Leyva, S., Valente, S.,
Lourenço, A., Quistgaard-Alvarez, A., & Morales-Velásquez, M. (2022). Análisis psicométrico y datos normativos de la UWES en adolescentes
peruanos. Ciencias Psicológicas, 16(2), e–2908. https://doi.org/10.22235/cp.v16i2.2908.
Dominguez-Lara, S., Peceros-Pinto, B., Valente, S. N., Lourenço, A. A.,
& Flores-Cataño, K. R. (2023). Análisis estructural de una versión breve de la
Trait Meta-Mood Scale en adolescentes peruanos. Revista Fuentes, 25(1),
82–100. https://doi.org/10.12795/revistafuentes.2023.22077
Espitia-Carrascal, R. E., & Montes-Rotela, M. (2021). Influencia de la familia
en el proceso educativo de los menores del barrio costa azul de Sincelejo
(Colombia). Investigación &
Desarrollo, 17(1), 84–105. https://rcientificas.uninorte.edu.co/index.php/investigacion/article/view/803
Estrada, E., & Mamani, H. (2020). Funcionamiento familiar y niveles
de logro de aprendizaje de los estudiantes de educación básica. Revista Universitaria
de Hermilio Vardizán, 14(2), 96 – 102. http://revistas.unheval.edu.pe/index.php/riv
Eyni, S., &
Hashemi, Z. (2022). The effectiveness of cognitive-behavioral intervention on
decisional procrastination and academic self-efficacy education the students. Journal of School
Psychology, 11(1), 68-79. https://doi.org/10.22098/jsp.2022.1571
Fondo de las Naciones Unidas para la Infancia (2020). La educación en
América Latina y el Caribe ante el COVID-19. https://www.unicef.org/lac/informes/orientacion-para-la-prevencion-y-elcontrol-del-covid19-en-las-escuelas.
García-Castro, R. A.,
Chura-Quispe, G., Llapa-Medina, M. P., & Arancibia-Baspineiro,
L. (2022). Validación de cuestionario de satisfacción de la enseñanza virtual
para educación secundaria. Revista Fuentes, 24(2),
162–173. https://doi.org/10.12795/revistafuentes.2022.19773
García-Méndez, R., & Rivera-Ledesma, A. (2021). Escala de
autoeficacia en la vida académica: Propiedades psicométricas en estudiantes de
nuevo ingreso al nivel universitario. Revista
Electrónica Educare, 25(2), 1-24. https://doi.org/10.15359/ree.25-2.1
García-Martín, S., & Cantón-Mayo, I. (2019). Uso de tecnologías y
rendimiento académico en estudiantes adolescentes. Comunicar, 27(59).
https://doi.org/10.3916/C59-2019-07
Grasso, P. (2020). Rendimiento académico: un recorrido conceptual que
aproxima a una definición unificada para el ámbito superior. Revista
de Educación, 11(20), 89-104. https://fh.mdp.edu.ar/revistas/index.php/r_educ/article/view/4165
Guadarrama-Cárdenas, M. I., & Mendoza-Ruíz, M. G. (2022). Influencia de las redes
sociales en el rendimiento académico de los estudiantes de nivel medio superior
de la UAEMéx. Diversidad Académica, 2(1),
216-240. https://diversidadacademica.uaemex.mx/article/view/19650/14570
Güngör, A. Y. (2020). The relationship between academic procrastination academic self-efficacy
and academic achievement among undergraduates. Oltu Beşeri
ve Sosyal Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, 1(1), 57-68. https://bit.ly/3a3MzcF
Izar de la Fuente, I.,
Rodríguez, A., & Escalante, N. (2019). Apoyo social percibido e implicación
escolar: correlaciones y variabilidad. European Journal of Child Development, Education and
Psychopathology, 7(1), 23-35. https://doi.org/10.30552/ejpad.v7i1.86
Jones, E., Mitra, A. K., & Bhuiyan, A. R. (2021). Impact of COVID-19 on Mental Health in Adolescents: A Systematic
Review. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public
Health, 18(5), 2470. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph18052470
Juvonen, J., Espinoza, G.,
& Knifsend, C. (2012). The
role of peer relationships in student academic and extracurricular engagement.
In Christenson, S., Reschly, A. & Wylie, C.
(Eds.), Handbook of research on student engagement (pp. 387-401).
Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-2018-7_18
Kağıtçıbaşı,
C. (2017). Family, self, and human development across cultures. Routledge.
Kontaş, H., & Özcan, B. (2022). Explaining Middle School Students’
Mathematical Literacy with Sources of Self-Efficacy, Achievement Expectation
from Family, Peers and Teachers. International
Journal of Education & Literacy Studies, 10(1) 198 - 206. https://doi.org/10.7575/aiac.ijels.v.10n.1p.198
Li, L., Chen, X., & Li, H. (2020). Bullying
victimization, school belonging, academic engagement and achievement in
adolescents in rural China: A serial mediation model. Children and Youth
Services Review, 113. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.childyouth.2020.104946
Lin, N. (1986). Conceptualizing social support. En Lin, N., Dean, A. y Ensel.T.
(Eds.), Social support, life events and
depression (pp. 103-105).
Academic Press
Liu, X., & Flick, R. (2019). The relationship among psychological
need satisfaction, class engagement, and academic performance: Evidence from
China. Journal of Education for Business,
94(6), 408–417. https://doi.org/10.1080/08832323.2018.1541855
Martínez, G. I., Torres, M. J., & Ríos, V. L. (2020). El contexto familiar y su vinculación con el rendimiento académico. IE Revista de Investigación Educativa de la
REDIECH, 11, e657. https://doi.org/10.33010/ie_rie_rediech.v11i0.657
McDonald, R. P., & Ho, M.-H. R. (2002). Principles
and practice in reporting structural equation analyses. Psychological Methods,
7(1), 64–82. https://doi.org10.1037/1082-989X.7.1.64
Miranda-Zapata, E., Lara, L., Navarro, J.-J., Saracostti, M., &
De-Toro, X. (2018). Modelización del efecto del compromiso escolar sobre la
asistencia a clases y el rendimiento escolar. Revista de Psicodidáctica,
23(2), 102-109. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psicod.2018.02.003
Miranda-Zapata, E.,
Lara, L., & Saracostti, M. (2021). Modelización del efecto del compromiso escolar sobre el rendimiento
escolar en cinco países de Iberoamérica. Revista Iberoamericana de
Diagnóstico y Evaluación – e Avaliação Psicológica. 59(2), pp.151-161 https://doi.org/10.21865/RIDEP59.2.12
Morales-Vives, F., Camps-Ribas, E., & Dueñas-Rada, J. M. (2020). Predicting academic achievement in adolescents: The role of maturity, intelligence and
personality. Psicothema, 32(1), 84-91.
https://doi.org/10.7334/psicothema2019.262
Muthén, L. K., & Muthén, B. O.
(1998 - 2015). Mplus User’s guide (7th ed.). Muthén & Muthén.
https://www.statmodel.com/download/usersguide/MplusUserGuideVer_7.pdf
Navarro-Loli, J. S., & Dominguez-Lara, S. (2019). Propiedades
psicométricas de la Escala de Autoeficacia Percibida Específica de Situaciones
Académicas en adolescentes peruanos. Psychology, Society, and Education, 11(1),
53-68. https://doi.org/10.25115/psye.v10i1.1985
Navarro-Loli, J. S., Merino-Soto, C.,
Dominguez-Lara, S., & Lourenço, A. (2019). Estructura interna de la
Multidimensional Scale of Perceived Social Support (MSPSS)
en adolescentes peruanos. Revista Argentina de
Ciencias del Comportamiento, 11(1), 38-47. https://doi.org/10.32348/1852.4206.v11.n1.21532
Nuutila,
K., Tapola, A., Tuominen, H., Molnar, G., & Niemivirta, M. (2021) Mutual relationships between the
levels of and changes in interest, self-efficacy, and perceived difficulty
during task engagement. Learning and
Individual Differences, 92, 102090, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2021.102090
Olivier, E., Galand, B., Morin, A. J., & Hospel, V. (2021).
Need-supportive teaching and student engagement in the
classroom: Comparing the
additive, synergistic, and global
contributions. Learning and Instruction, 71, 101389. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2020.101389
Orgilés
M., Morales A., Delvecchio E., Mazzeschi
C., & Espada J.P. (2020). Immediate psychological effects of the COVID-19
quarantine in youth from Italy and Spain. Frontiers in Psychology, 11, 579038. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.579038
Palenzuela, D. (1983). Construcción y validación de una escala de
autoeficacia percibida específica de situaciones académicas. Análisis y Modificación de Conducta, 9(21),
185-219. https://doi.org/10.33776/amc.v9i21.1649
Pan, J., Zaff, J., & Donlan,
A. (2017). Social support and academic engagement among reconnected youth:
Adverse life experiences as a moderator. Journal of research on
adolescence: The official journal of the Society for Research on Adolescence, 27(4),
890–906. https://doi.org/10.1111/jora.12322
Ribeiro, M. F., Ribeiro, C., & Pereira, P. (2022). Fatores preditores
do desempenho académico: motivação, satisfação e autoeficácia. Gestão e Desenvolvimento, 30, 41-89.
https://doi.org/10.34632/gestaoedesenvolvimento.2022.11319
Rodríguez, A. (2017). Estilos y estrategias de afrontamiento en
adolescentes droga-dependientes de la zona valle de la provincia de Jujuy. Difusiones, 3(3), 111-126. https://revistadifusiones.net/index.php/difusiones/article/view/30
Rodríguez, A., Ramos,
E., Ros, I., & Zuazagoitia, A. (2018). Implicación escolar de estudiantes
de secundaria: La influencia de la resiliencia, el autoconcepto y el apoyo
social percibido. Educación XX1, 21(1),
87-108. https://www.redalyc.org/pdf/706/70653466005.pdf
Sağkal, A. S., & Sönmez, M. T. (2021). The
effects of perceived parental math support on middle school students’ math
engagement: the serial multiple mediation of math self-efficacy and math
enjoyment. European Journal of Psychology of Education. Avance online. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10212-020-00518-w
Sánchez, B. (2021). Impacto psicológico de la COVID-19 en niños y
adolescentes. MEDISAN, 25(1),
123-141.
http://scielo.sld.cu/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1029-30192021000100123&lng=es&tlng=es.
Sarmiento-Martínez, A. M., Moreno-Acero, I. D., & Morón-Castro, C.
(2022). Engagement académico: un elemento clave para el éxito académico. Praxis, 18(1), 1-17. https://doi.org/10.21676/23897856.3695
Schaufeli, W. B., & Salanova, M. (2007). Efficacy
or inefficacy, that’s the question: Burnout and engagement, and their
relationships with efficacy beliefs. Anxiety,
Coping & Stress, 20(2), 177-196. https://doi.org/10.1080/10615800701217878
Schaufeli, W., Bakker, A., & Salanova, M.
(2006). The measurement of work engagement with a short questionnaire: a
cross–national study. Educational and
Psychological Measurement, 66(4), 701-716.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0013164405282471
Serrano, C., Murgui, S. y Andreu, &. (2022).
Improving the prediction and understanding of academic success: The role of
personality facets and academic engagement. Revista de Psicodidáctica, 27(1), 21-28. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psicoe.2021.11.002
Simpkins, S., Liu, Y., Hsieh, T., & Estrella, G. (2019). Supporting Latino high school students’ science motivational beliefs and
engagement: Examining the unique and collective contributions of family,
teachers, and friends. Educational
Psychology, 40(4), 409–429. http://doi.org/10.1080/01443410.2019.1661974
Sinclair, M., Christenson, S., Lehr, C., & Reschly-Anderson,
A. (2003). Facilitating school engagement: Lessons learned from Check &
Connect longitudinal studies. The
California School Psychologist, 8, 29–41. http://doi.org/10.1007/BF03340894
Schaufeli, W. B., Martínez, I. M., Marqués Pinto, A., Salanova, M., & Bakker, A. B. (2002). Burnout and
engagement in university students: A cross-national study. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 33(5), 464–481. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022022102033005003
Skaalvik,
E., Federici, R., & Klassen, R. (2015). Mathematics achievement and
self-efficacy: Relations with motivation for mathematics. International Journal of
Educational Research, 72, 129-136.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijer.2015.06.008
Smetana, J., Robinson, J., & Rote, W. (2015). Socialization
in adolescence. In Grusec, J. y Hastings, P. (Eds.), Handbook of socialization: Theory and
research (pp. 60–84). Guilford Press.
Steenberghs,
N., Lavrijsen, J., Soenens,
B., & Verschueren, K. (2021). Peer effects on
engagement and disengagement: differential contributions from friends, popular
peers, and the entire class. Frontiers in
Psychology, 12, 726815. http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.726815
Suárez-Orozco, C., Pimentel, A., & Martin, M. (2009). The
significance of relations. Academic engagement and achievement among newcomer
immigrant youth. Teacher College Record,
111(3), 712–749. https://doi.org/10.1177/016146810911100308
Sucari, W., Aza, P.,
Anaya, J., & García, J. (2019). Participación
familiar en la educación escolar peruana. Revista Innova Educación, 1(1), 6-18. https://doi.org/10.35622/j.rie.01.001
Talsma, K., Schuz, B., Schwarzer, R., & Norris, K. (2018) I
believe, therefore I achieve (and vice versa): A meta-analytic cross-lagged
panel analysis of self-efficacy and academic performance. Learning and Individual Differences, 61, 136-150. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2017.11.015
Tapasco-Alzate, O. A., Ruiz-Ortega, F. J.,
Osorio-García, D., & Ramírez-Ramírez, D. (2021). El historial académico de secundaria como factor
predictor del rendimiento universitario. Caso de estudio. Revista
Colombiana de Educación, 81,
147-169. https://doi.org/10.17227/rce.num81-7530
Thijs, J., & Verkuyten, M. (2008). Peer
victimization and academic achievement in a multiethnic sample: The role of
perceived academic self-efficacy. Journal
of Educational Psychology, 100, 754–764. http://doi.org/10.1037/a0013155
Tomás, J. M., Gutiérrez, M., & Fernández, I. (2016). Predicción de la satisfacción y el rendimiento escolar: El compromiso
como mediador. Revista Búsqueda,
3(16), 7-19.
https://doi.org/10.21892/01239813.162
Usán, P., & Quílez, A. (2021). Emotional Regulation and Academic
Performance in the Academic Context: The Mediating Role of Self-Efficacy in
Secondary Education Students. International Journal of Environmental
Research and Public Health, 18(11), 5715. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph18115715
Usán-Supervía, P., Salavera-Bordás, C., & Domper-Buil,
E. (2018). ¿Cómo se interrelacionan las variables de
burnout, engagement y autoeficacia académica? Un estudio con adolescentes
escolares. Revista Electrónica Interuniversitaria de Formación del
Profesorado, 21(2), 141–153. https://doi.org/10.6018/reifop.21.2.311361
Valente, S. (2020). Competências socioemocionais na atividade do educador
social: Implicações à inclusão escolar. Revista Ibero-Americana de Estudos em
Educação, 15(esp. 3),
2332-2349. https://doi.org/10.21723/riaee.v15iesp3.14441
Vasiliki, P. (2022). Examining high achievement in mathematics and
science among post-primary students in Ireland: a multilevel binary logistic
regression analysis of PISA data. Large-Scale
Assessments in Education. 10, art14. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40536-022-00131-x
Veiga, F., García, F., Reeve, J., Wentzel, K., & García, Ó. (2015). When adolescents with high self-concept lose their engagement in school.
Revista de Psicodidáctica,
20(2), 305-320.
https://doi.org/10.1387/RevPsicodidact.12671
Wang, M.-T., & Eccles, J. S. (2013). School
context, achievement motivation, and academic engagement: A longitudinal study
of school engagement using a multidimensional perspective. Learning and
Instruction, 28, 12–23. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2013.04.002
Winter, L., Hernández-Torrano, D., McLellan,
R., Almukhambetova, A., & Brown-Hajdukova, E. (2020). A contextually adapted model of
school engagement in Kazakhstan. Current Psychology, 41, 2479–2495. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-020-00758-5
Zimet, G., Dhalem, N., Ziment,
S., & Farley, G. (1988). The Multidimensional Scale
of Perceived Social Support. Journal
of Personality Assessment, 52(1),30
– 41. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327752jpa5201_2