The Impact of Job Resources and Teaching Self-Efficacy on Rural Teachers' Agency

The Impact of Job Resources and Teaching Self-Efficacy on Rural Teachers' Agency | Research Square window.SnipcartSettings = { analytics: { enabled: false } }; (function() { var accessVector = localStorage.getItem('access_vector') || ''; window.dataLayer = window.dataLayer || []; if (accessVector) { window.dataLayer.push({ user: { profile: { profileInfo: { snid: accessVector } } } }); } })(); (function(w,d,s,l,i){w[l]=w[l]||[];w[l].push({'gtm.start':new Date().getTime(),event:'gtm.js'});var f=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0],j=d.createElement(s),dl=l!='dataLayer'?'&l='+l:'';j.async=true;j.src='https://www.googletagmanager.com/gtm.js?id='+i+dl;f.parentNode.insertBefore(j,f);})(window,document,'script','dataLayer','GTM-K279D39R'); Browse Preprints In Review Journals COVID-19 Preprints AJE Video Bytes Research Tools Research Promotion AJE Professional Editing AJE Rubriq About Preprint Platform In Review Editorial Policies Our Team Advisory Board Help Center Sign In Submit a Preprint Cite Share Download PDF Research Article The Impact of Job Resources and Teaching Self-Efficacy on Rural Teachers' Agency Zongqing Cao, Yingqi Yue, Xuan Xie, Qianfeng Li This is a preprint; it has not been peer reviewed by a journal. https://doi.org/ 10.21203/rs.3.rs-6726336/v1 This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License Status: Under Review Version 1 posted 5 You are reading this latest preprint version Abstract Background The significance of agency in fostering the professional growth and instructional prowess of teachers, particularly those serving in rural regions of mainland China, is undeniable. Confronted with distinct challenges such as scarce resources and isolated work settings, understanding the intricate dynamics influencing teacher agency among rural educators becomes paramount. This research endeavors to delve deeply into how rural teachers' perceived job resources and their intrinsic sense of self-efficacy collectively contribute to shaping their agency. The ultimate goal is to provide valuable insights for policymakers, administrators, and educators, aiming to enhance teacher agency. Methods To fulfill this purpose, a comprehensive survey was administered via an electronic questionnaire platform to a targeted online community of rural teachers. After rigorous data collection, a substantial sample of 625 valid responses was secured for analysis. Employing SPSS 20, a two-tiered analytical strategy was undertaken. Initially, descriptive statistical analyses, encompassing T-tests, ANOVA, and Pearson correlations, were conducted to establish preliminary relationships between variables. Subsequently, Hayes' PROCESS macro Model 4, coupled with bootstrapping methods, was utilized to rigorously test the proposed mediation model, examining the mediating effect of teaching self-efficacy on the relationship between various job resource variables (teaching resources, administrative support, colleague support, and parental support) and teacher agency. Results The study yielded several pivotal findings. Firstly, the average agency level among rural teachers was moderate, scoring 3.53 out of 5, indicating potential for further enhancement. Secondly, teaching resources (β = 0.163), administrative support (β = 0.150), colleague support (β = 0.099), and parental support (β = 0.163) each significantly and positively predict teacher agency. Thirdly, teaching self-efficacy emerges as a strong predictor of teacher agency (β values ranging from 0.785 to 0.822, p < 0.001) after controlling for the respective job resource variables. Lastly, teaching self-efficacy significantly mediates the relationships between teaching resources (indirect effect = 0.269), administrative support (indirect effect = 0.284), colleague support (indirect effect = 0.451), parental support (indirect effect = 0.302) and teacher agency, respectively. These findings underscore the importance of job resources and teaching self-efficacy in fostering teacher agency, with self-efficacy playing a central mediating role. Conclusions Based on these findings, the study underscores the necessity for a holistic approach to promoting rural teachers' agency, addressing both external job resources and internal factors like self-efficacy. It is imperative for policymakers and education administrators to prioritize initiatives aimed at augmenting teaching resources, fostering a supportive work environment, and reinforcing teachers' self-belief and professional competence. However, limitations include potential biases from self-reported data, the cross-sectional design preventing causal inferences, and restricted generalizability due to the specific China' s rural context. Future research should address these limitations through longitudinal designs and broader samples. Teacher agency job resources teaching self-efficacy rural teachers INTRODUCTION Teacher agency refers to the capacity of teachers to actively and purposefully make decisions, take actions, and exert influence within their professional roles, in order to positively impact their teaching practice, student learning outcomes, and the overall educational environment[1,2]. It emphasizes the importance of recognizing and supporting teachers as active agents in the educational process, capable of shaping their professional identities and influencing student outcomes[3]. In the aftermath of the COVID-19 pandemic, the modern educational landscape has become increasingly complex, with diverse student needs, technological advancements, and evolving teaching methods, posing challenges to teacher agency's development. As a result, education departments at all levels and school administrators are highly concerned about teacher agency, prompting scholars to intensify their research on how to enhance teacher agency. While research on teacher agency has predominantly focused on urban and well-resourced school settings, there is a compelling need to shift the spotlight towards rural areas, where unique challenges and opportunities exist for teachers[4]. Rural areas, especially in Mainland China, often face distinct educational challenges, including limited resources, isolation, and disparities in access to professional development opportunities[5]. In these contexts, teachers in rural schools are frequently required to wear multiple hats, taking on diverse roles beyond their primary teaching duties to meet the needs of their students and communities. Given the critical role that teachers play in rural education settings, it is imperative to examine the concept of teacher agency within the context of rural schools. Understanding the unique challenges and opportunities that shape teacher agency in rural settings is essential for developing targeted interventions and support mechanisms that empower rural teachers to thrive in their roles and create positive learning experiences for their students. Understanding the factors and pathways that influence teacher agency is crucial for ensuring high-quality education for all rural learners. One key factor that has gained attention in educational research is the perceived job support that teachers receive in their work environment. This support includes emotional, informational, and instrumental assistance from colleagues, administrators, and the broader school community[6]. Additionally, self-efficacy and teacher agency are closely linked, as self-efficacy plays a significant role in empowering teachers to take control of their professional practice and make meaningful decisions in the classroom[7]. However, few studies have examined how self-efficacy mediates the relationship between job resources and teacher agency, particularly in the context of rural China. This gap is significant because rural teachers in China often face unique challenges, such as limited resources and professional isolation, which may differentially impact their agency compared to their urban counterparts. This study aims to address this gap by investigating how perceived job resources and self-efficacy influence teacher agency in rural China. Specifically, it explores the mediating role of self-efficacy in the relationship between job resources and teacher agency, providing a deeper understanding of the mechanisms that empower rural teachers. By examining these relationships, the research seeks to generate evidence-based insights for developing targeted educational policies and practices that enhance teacher agency, ultimately contributing to improved teaching quality and student outcomes in underserved rural areas of Mainland China. LITERATURE REVIEW Teacher Agency and its predictors The concept of teacher agency refers to the ability of teachers to make decisions and take actions to bring about changes [8]. Teachers are seen as active participants who can adapt to or even challenge policies, rather than passive recipients. This idea has been explored in precious study by Chaaban & Sawalhi[9]. However, previous studies vary in how they define and approach the examination of teacher agency. Teachers were found to enact their professional agency differently across educational contexts and even among teachers within the same contexts[10]. Teacher agency in interpersonal relationships includes abilities such as cooperation, negotiation and knowledge integration[11]. Teacher agency from the perspective of Bourdieu sociology includes curiosity, negotiation, recognition, response, morality, etc. Teacher agency in the context of vocational education reform includes teaching investment, reform investment and identity construction, etc.[12]. Teacher agency focusing on teaching includes active beliefs, active practices and active tendencies [13]. Therefore, the content of teacher agency is often determined by what researchers focus on. Overall, previous scholars sought to understand teacher agency by categorizing it into mainly four types of its manifestations or approaches. Firstly, teacher agency can be characterized as adoption orientation, with teachers following and executing new policies as directed. Secondly, teacher agency may be seen as adaptation orientation, with teachers proactively making adjustments to align with local circumstances[14]. Thirdly, in transformation orientation, teachers are inclined to develop novel teaching strategies or materials. Lastly, resistance in teacher agency is demonstrated when teachers ignore policies or simply go through the motions without true engagement. However, increasingly, researchers are integrating the above four orientations into utilizing external resources and tapping into potential to achieve professional development goals[15]. The present paper will take a generic definition to measure and interpret teacher agency, which is the ability of teachers to make choices and take action in response to changes. These studies examined various factors that influence teachers' ability to exercise their agency, which can be categorized into two main groups: personal and social/relational factors. Specifically, personal factors encompass individual beliefs, values, and emotions[16], while social factors include relationships with colleagues and students, and the mode of agency enactment[17], school culture[18], organizational structure[19]. These multifaceted factors interact dynamically to ultimately determine how teacher agency is manifested and its outcomes. Further analysis reveals that factors at the individual level mainly stem from a psychological perspective, while factors at the social level primarily arise from the relationships with others. Furthermore, based on the organizational support theory, organizations offer support to employees to help them feel supported, thus enhancing their work motivation and performance, leading to a positive impact on the long-term development of both the organization and its employees. In conclusion, this study will select job support and self-efficacy as individual and social-level variables respectively to investigate the mechanisms influencing teacher agency. Job resources and its role Job resources, a central concept in the Job Demands-Resources (JD-R) model [20], refer to the physical, psychological, social, or organizational aspects of a job that help employees achieve their goals, reduce stress, and promote well-being. Specifically, job resources can mitigate the negative effects of job demands, facilitate goal achievement, and stimulate personal growth and development [21]. While the JD-R model has been widely applied in educational settings, some studies have highlighted its limitations. For example, research by Bakker, A. B., & de Vries found that certain job resources, such as excessive administrative support, can inadvertently increase workload and stress, contradicting the model' s assumption that resources are universally beneficial[22]. Additionally, the impact of job resources may vary depending on cultural and contextual factors, suggesting the need for a more nuanced application of the model in diverse educational settings[23]. Therefore, within the Chinese context, whether all job resources facilitate teacher agency remains to be examined. In this study, job resources are categorized into three levels: (1) contextual-level resources (e.g., support from parents), (2) interpersonal-level resources (e.g., support from administrators and colleagues), and (3) organizational-level resources (e.g., teaching materials and infrastructure). These resources may have varying impacts on teacher agency. For example, interpersonal support from colleagues may foster collaboration and innovation, while organizational resources such as teaching materials may directly enhance instructional effectiveness. The present study includes job resources at the contextual level (support from parents), the interpersonal level (support from administration and colleagues), and the organizational level (teaching resources). By examining these distinct types of job resources, this study aims to provide a more detailed and nuanced understanding of how different job resources influence teacher agency. Job resources serve as dual motivators, influencing employees intrinsically and extrinsically. Intrinsic motivators, such as autonomy, competence, and opportunities for growth, fulfill individuals' psychological needs and drive internal satisfaction. Self-efficacy is also an intrinsic psychological state of individuals. Thus, Job resources may positively predict self-efficacy as well. On the other hand, job resources can also act as external motivators. In supportive work environments with resources like feedback and peer support, employees are more likely to succeed in their tasks and reach their professional goals. As previous discussed, teacher agency shows one' s active deal with working challenges, so job resources may positively predict self-efficacy as well. Teaching self-efficacy and its role The concept self-efficacy was introduced by Bandura & Wessels[24]. Self-efficacy develops as individuals interact with their surroundings and become more familiar with their ability to overcome challenging tasks. Self-efficacy can be categorized into two types: general self-efficacy and task-specific self-efficacy. General self-efficacy refers to an individual' s ability to perform across various situations, while task-specific self-efficacy is linked to an individual' s ability to perform in specific situations. In this article, the focus is on teacher agency, which involves studying teachers as the subject within their work context. Therefore, more specifically, the self-efficacy in the present study refers to the belief that teachers hold about their instructional capabilities, namely teaching self-efficacy. Teaching self-efficacy, a key construct in psychology, can play a dual role in research studies. It can serve as an independent variable, influencing behaviors and actions of individuals, such as teachers teaching behaviors[25]. On the other hand, self-efficacy can also be seen as a dependent variable, personal and contextual factors also play a role in the development of teaching self-efficacy[26], such as teaching experience, teaching context, instructional leadership, and distributed leadership impacted self-efficacy[27]. Based on previous research findings that external factors may influence self-efficacy and self-efficacy may in turn affect teacher behaviors, it can be reasonably inferred that teaching self-efficacy likely mediates the relationship between job resources and teacher agency. CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK Drawing on the above-mentioned literature and the research gap presented in the Introduction section, the present study investigates the effect of job resources on teacher agency and explores the role of teaching self-efficacy. This study tests the following hypotheses. Hypothesis 1 Job resources is significantly positively related to teacher agency. Specifically, teaching resources, administrative support, colleague support, parental support are positively related to teacher agency respectively when controlling for other variables. Hypothesis 2 Teaching self-efficacy is significantly positively related to teacher agency. Hypothesis 3 Teaching self-efficacy mediates the relationship between the variables of job resources and teacher agency. Specifically, when other variables are controlled for, teaching self-efficacy plays a mediating role in the relationship between teaching resources, administrative support, colleague support, support from parents and teacher agency. MATERIALS AND METHODS To examine the relationship between job resources and teacher agency, and the role of teaching self-efficacy in this relationship, the researchers utilized the survey method to gather data from rural school teachers as it allows for the efficient collection of a large quantity of data. Participants 650 junior high school teachers from H Province in Central China participated in the survey of questionnaire. After excluding 25 questionnaires that did not answer or had obvious bias, 625 valid questionnaires were obtained, with a 96.15% response rate. Based on recent guidelines for sample size justification [28], a sample size of N = 625 is sufficient to detect a small effect size (d = 0.2) with a significance level of α = 0.05 and statistical power of 1 − β = 0.8. Of the total sample, there are 80 male teachers (12.80%) and 545 female teachers (87.20%); 89 unmarried teachers (14.24%) and 536 married teachers (85.76%); 455 teachers without management positions (69.28%), 88 subject group leaders (14.08%), 87 middle-level managers (13.92%), and 17 principals (2.72%). The sampling ratio of each group is basically consistent with the actual ratio, indicating that the teachers are representative samples. Measures In addition to collecting socio-demographic data and data related to some of the control variables, the questionnaire contained three main sub-scales. Teacher agency. Teacher agency was measured using the Teacher Sense of Agency Scale [29]. This measure consists of 13 items, assessed along a 5-point continuum with anchors at 1 - Extremely challenging, 2 - Partially attainable, 3- Feasible to some extent, 4 - Essentially achievable, and 5 - Fully attainable. Sample items include, “I seek to understand each student's specific learning style and needs and rationalize my lesson plans accordingly.” “I try to use a variety of teaching strategies for the different types of students in my class.” In this study, Cronbach' s α is 0.957. Teaching self-efficacy. Teachers' sense of teaching efficacy was measured by adapting the Teacher Sense of Efficacy Scale (previously called the Ohio State Teacher Efficacy Scale)[30]. This measure consists of 12 items, assessed along a 5-point continuum with anchors at 1 - Nothing, 3 - Very little, 5- Some influence, 7 - Quite a bit, and 9 - A great deal. Teaching self-efficacy includes efficacy for instructional strategies, efficacy for classroom management, efficacy for student engagement etc. Sample items include: “I can provide an alternative explanation or example when students are confused” “I can control disruptive behavior in the classroom.”“ I can motivate students who show low interest in schoolwork.” Cronbach' s α for the overall scale is 0.945. Job resources. Job resources are measured by adapting Teacher Support Scale developed by Tschannen-Moran & Hoy[31]. Participants were asked to rate the quality of the support they had received in five areas: teaching resources, interpersonal support provided by the administration of their school, interpersonal support provided by colleagues, parental support and involvement in their classrooms. This measure consisted of 12 items, assessed along a 5-point continuum with anchors at 1 -Nonexistent, 2 - Poor, 3 - Adequate, 4 - Good, and 5 - Excellent. Sample items include, “The school will provide teachers with the necessary material resources for teaching as much as possible, such as phonetic cards, recorders, etc.” “My colleagues will encourage me when facing teaching pressure.” Cronbach' s α for the four dimensions and the overall scale ranged from 0.873 to 0.936. Data Collection and Analysis With the help of an electronic questionnaire platform, questionnaires were distributed to a rural teacher online community. Teachers were requested to voluntarily finish the questionnaires. After the questionnaire was collected, SPSS. 20 was used for the following two stages of analysis. In the first stage, descriptive statistics analyses, including T-tests, ANOVA, and Pearson correlations, were performed on all predictor, control, and outcome variables. In the second stage the mediation model was tested using Hayes' PROCESS macro Model 4 and bootstrapping approaches[32]. RESULTS Descriptive Statistics and Group Difference Analysis The means, standard deviations, and correlations between all continuous variables are presented in Table 1. It can be seen that the mean teacher agency score is 3.53, which is between 3-Feasible to some extent and 4 - Essentially achievable, ranging from 3.46 to 3.59 from the aspect of 95% confidence interval. All of the significant relationships between the variables are in the expected direction, teaching self-efficacy (r = 0.663, p < 0.001), teaching resources (r = 0.428, p < 0.001), administrative support (r = 0.406, p < 0.001), colleague support(r = 0.434, p < 0.001), and parental support (r = 0.478, p < 0.001) is strongly positively related to teacher agency. Table 1 Means, standard deviations, and bi-variate correlations among key variables (N = 625) M ± SD 1 2 3 4 5 6 1 Teacher agency 3.53 ± 0.83 1 2 Teaching self-efficacy 3.85 ± 0.61 .663 ** 1 3 Teaching resources 3.75 ± 0.79 .428 ** .446 ** 1 4 Administrative support 3.91 ± 0.76 .406 ** .432 ** .767 ** 1 5 Colleague support 4.15 ± 0.64 .434 ** .568 ** .544 ** .614 ** 1 6 Parental support 3.94 ± 0.34 .478 ** .544 ** .578 ** .583 ** .655 ** 1 Note. * Represents P<0.05, * * Represents P<0.01, and * * * Represents P<0.001. Differences in teacher agency among the subgroups are showed in table 2. Although there are certain differences in teacher agency among different subgroups, the differences among are not significantly in terms of statistics. ( p >0.05). Specifically, there is no substantial difference in the scores of teacher agency among subgroups distinguished by gender, marital status, age, educational qualification, title, and position. Additionally, the agency of countryside teachers (M = 3.42) is significantly lower than that of teachers from the outskirts of town (M = 3.50) and peri-urban areas (M = 3.63). Furthermore, the agency of teachers from the outskirts of town is significantly lower than that of teachers from peri-urban areas. These findings suggest that as the distance from the main city increases, teachers' agency tends to decrease. Table 2 Between-group differences in participants' level of teacher agency Description N Mean SD t/F Gender Male 80 3.64 0.90 1.367 Female 545 3.51 0.81 Marital status Unmarried 89 3.49 0.85 0.446 Married 536 3.53 0.82 Age Under 30 156 3.46 0.80 1.274 30-40 254 3.48 0.82 40-50 144 3.62 0.86 Over 50 68 3.59 0.82 Educational qualification Junior college and below 41 3.42 0.87 0.381 Undergraduate 570 3.53 0.82 Graduate 14 3.50 0.94 Title Unidentified 57 3.60 0.92 2.090 Second grade 270 3.44 0.83 Senior 235 3.61 0.79 Advanced 63 3.49 0.82 Position Without management positions 433 3.50 0.83 1.478 Subject group leaders 88 3.58 0.79 Middle-level managers 87 3.65 0.83 Principals 17 3.25 0.94 School location Peri-urban area 277 3.63 0.86 4.391 * Outskirts of town 89 3.50 0.81 Countryside 259 3.42 0.78 Note. * Represents P<0.05, * * Represents P<0.01, and * * * Represents P<0.001. The Mediation Model Before commencing the regression analysis, Harman' s one-factor analysis was conducted to check whether the common method bias was severe[33], because all variables were measured by self-reported scales. EFA of all measures showed that the extracted first component accounted for 38% of the total variance, suggesting that the common method bias was not severe. Regression models are conducted by The PROCESS macro Model 4. After controlling for demographic variables, gender, age, marital status, educational qualification, title, position and school location, the result firstly indicates that teaching resources (β =0.163, p<0.001), administrative support (β =0.150,p<0.001), colleague support ( β = 0.099, p<0.05), parental support (β = 0.163, p<0.001) has a significant positive predictive effect on teacher agency, respectively. Hypothesis 1 is verified. Secondly, teaching resources (β = 0.331, p<0.001), administrative support (β = 0.346, p<0.001), colleague support ( β = 0.533, p<0.001), parental support (β = 0.385, p<0.001) has a significant positive predictive effect on teaching self-efficacy. Additionally, teaching self-efficacy can predict teacher agency significantly when teaching resources, administrative support, colleague support, and administrative support is controlled respectively, and beta value is 0.810 (p<0.001), 0.822 (p<0.001), 0.822 (p<0.001), and 0.785 (p<0.001) accordingly. Hypothesis 2 is verified. Thirdly, the PROCESS macro Model 4 examined the mediation model (see Table 3). A 95% confidence interval was calculated by repeatedly sampling for 5000 times with the help of the Bootstrap method to verify the mediating role of teaching self-efficacy between job resources and teacher agency. According to Aiken et al.[34], if the 95% CIs do not include zero, the indirect effect is considered significant. The results are presented in table 3. It can be seen that teaching self-efficacy mediates significantly between teaching resources (SE = 0.033, Boot 95% CI [.206，.336]), administrative support (SE = 0.034, Boot 95% CI [.221, .354]), colleague support (SE = 0.045, [.369，.547]), parental support (SE = 0.029, [.247，.362]) and teacher agency, the indirect effect are 0.269 , 0.284 , 0.451, 0.302 respectively, and accordingly the effect size ratio is 62.27%, 65.44%, 82.00% and 64.95%. It shows that the different dimensions of job resources can not only directly predict teacher agency, but also indirectly affect teacher agency through teaching efficacy. Hypothesis 3 is verified. Table 3 Mediation Effect Test Table Independent variable Path effect Parameter estimate SE Bias-corrected 95% CI Effect size ratio Teaching resources Total effect .432 .039 [.355，.507] Direct effect .163 .035 [.094，.231] 37.73% Indirect effect .269 .033 [.206，.336] 62.27% Administrative support Total effect .434 .041 [.355，.514] Direct effect .150 .037 [.078，.222] 34.56% Indirect effect .284 .034 [.221，.354] 65.44% Colleague support Total effect .550 .048 [.456，.644] Direct effect .099 .048 [.004，.193] 18.00% Indirect effect .451 .045 [.369，.547] 82.00% Parental support Total effect .465 .036 [.395，.535] Direct effect .163 .036 [.093，.232] 35.05% Indirect effect .302 .029 [.247，.362] 64.95% DISCUSSION AND IMPLICATIONS The present study verified the direct and indirect effects of teaching resources, administrative support, colleague support, parental support on teacher agency, contributing theoretically to the research of teacher agency and giving hints to modern school governance. Based on the main findings in the present article and previous research, the following implications and recommendations can be drawn. Rural teachers ' agency should be promoted urgently. The average score for rural teacher professional development agency is 3.53/5, with an equivalent to 63.25/100, and there's still plenty of room for improvement. Wang et al. found that rural teachers agency is 4.01/6[35], which is equivalent to 60.2/100, and the scores are basically consistent. However, the study by Qi et al. found that urban teachers agency is 6.79/9[36], which is equivalent to 72.38/100, far higher than that of rural teachers. Moreover, it' s found that there was statistically significant differences in teacher agency among rural teachers whose school locations are different. The rural teachers whose school location are further away from the main city have lower agency, which means school location attributes rather than demographic attributes are important factors affecting teacher agency. As discussed above, teacher agency in China' s rural areas urgently needs attention.The problem of unbalanced quality of education between urban and rural areas in China is still prominent, and teachers in urban and rural areas have a large gap in their teaching ability and motivation for development [37]. Rural education in China and the development of its teacher agency are in need of sustained and in-depth attention. Firstly, when learning from the experience of promoting teacher agency in urban areas, the policy makers need to deeply understand the particularity of rural teachers and take more targeted measures instead of completely copying the experience from unban areas. Secondly, the education authority needs to deepen the urban-rural teacher co-development mechanism. With the help of renowned schools, teachers and experts in urban areas and in the way such as urban and rural school alliance, teacher exchanges, research workshops and peer mentoring programs, are involved to build a long-term and stable system to stimulate and promote rural teacher agency. Job resources are to be provided to improve rural teachers' agency. From the regression analysis and mediating model, it' s seen that the variables from the perspective of job resources are positive factors to enhance teacher agency. After controlling for demographic variables, the standardized regression coefficients between teaching resources, administrative support, colleague support, parental support and teacher agency is 0.163 0.150, 0.099 and 0.163 respectively, which indicates every standard deviation increases in the job resources' variable, teacher agency will increase by at least 0.09 standard deviation. Job resources have been widely recognized as the external motivation to stimulate teacher development[38]. Therefore, teaching resources, administrative support, colleague support, parental support should be offered. Firstly, the rural school managers should strengthen the hardware and organizational construction to provide good teaching facilities for teachers. Secondly, rural school management team should build a good interpersonal network of cooperation between managers and teachers so as that any teacher can get help and support when necessary. Teaching self-efficacy is to be enhanced to improve rural teachers' agency. It' s seen that teaching self-efficacy can significantly and positively predict teacher agency (β values ranging from 0.785 to 0.822, p < 0.001) , which is consistent with the study by Salari and Farahian[39]. It also plays a partial mediating role between teaching resources, administrative support, colleague support, parental support and teacher agency, which reveals the internal mechanism in which job resources affect teacher agency. The overall living conditions of rural teachers are generally similar due to the unified economic backwardness, often reflected in the difficulties in material conditions, as well as the lack of social capital, cultural capital, economic capital, and professional capital[40]. Compared to urban teachers, rural teachers tend to have relatively lower teaching self-efficacy. Therefore, to enhance job resources for rural teachers, elevate their social status, the authority should create a social atmosphere that respects rural teachers, and thus strengthen the teaching self-efficacy of rural teachers. Additionally, rural teachers should comprehensively and objectively assess the educational environment they are in and their personal teaching abilities, always striving to improve their teaching skills with a positive attitude, thereby nurturing and enhancing their teaching self-efficacy，as a terminal result of improving teacher agency. As discussed above, policymakers should design targeted strategies for rural contexts, avoiding direct replication of urban models, and deepen urban-rural collaboration through teacher exchanges, mentoring, and joint programs. Schools should enhance infrastructure and build supportive networks between administrators and teachers to ensure adequate resources and assistance. Teachers should actively assess their teaching environments and abilities while continuously improving their skills with a positive attitude. Additionally, society should work to elevate the social status of rural teachers and foster a culture of respect, thereby strengthening their self-efficacy and agency. CONCLUSION Based on the data from mainland China' s rural teacher, the study explores the relationship among job resources variables, teaching self-efficacy and teacher agency. Through descriptive analysis, the agency of rural teachers in mainland China is 3.53/5, with great room for improvement. And from regression analysis and bootstrapping approaches, it' s revealed that firstly job resources including teaching resources, administrative support, colleague support, parental support are positively related to teacher agency respectively when controlling for other variables, secondly that teaching self-efficacy can significantly positively related to teacher agency, and thirdly that teaching self-efficacy plays a partial mediating role between teaching resources, administrative support, support from colleagues, parental support and teacher agency respectively. Therefore, rural teachers' agency should be promoted urgently by taking comprehensive measures from the perspective of job resources and teaching self-efficacy. LIMITATIONS This study has several important limitations that must be acknowledged and addressed. First, the reliance on cross-sectional data is a significant constraint. Since the data were collected at a single time point, the study cannot establish causal inferences between job resources and teacher agency. This design limits our ability to track changes in variables over time or to explore the dynamic mechanisms underlying the relationship between these constructs. As a result, the findings can only provide insights into associations rather than causal effects. Future research should adopt longitudinal designs to better understand the temporal relationships and causal mechanisms between job resources and teacher agency. Second, the geographic scope and representativeness of the sample are restricted. The study focuses exclusively on secondary school teachers in H Province, Central China, which limits the generalizability of the findings to other regions or educational systems. The cultural, policy, and socio-economic contexts of H Province may differ from those of other areas, potentially affecting the applicability of the results. Expanding the sample to include teachers from primary schools, as well as diverse regions or countries, would enhance the external validity of the study and provide a more comprehensive understanding of the dynamics of teacher agency across broader contexts.Additionally, the use of self-reported measures to assess teacher agency introduces potential biases. While self-reporting is a common method in social sciences research, it is subject to limitations such as social desirability bias, recall error, or subjective interpretation. Teachers may overestimate or underestimate their agency based on personal perceptions, external pressures, or other factors, which could affect the accuracy and objectivity of the data. To address this limitation, future research could incorporate alternative data sources, such as observational assessments, peer evaluations, or third-party reports, to triangulate the findings and improve the reliability and validity of the measures. Finally, the study's design may have inherent limitations that affect its conclusions. For instance, the reliance on questionnaire surveys may introduce sample bias, as participation was voluntary and not all teachers may have chosen to engage in the study. This could lead to a non-representative sample, particularly if certain groups of teachers were more inclined to participate than others. Furthermore, the study's measurement tools may not fully capture the complexity of teacher agency, as some variables or dimensions might have been overlooked or inadequately operationalized. Future research could benefit from refining the measurement instruments, adopting mixed-method approaches (e.g., combining quantitative and qualitative data), or exploring additional constructs that might influence teacher agency. Abbreviations JD-R:Job Demands-Resources Declarations Ethics approval and consent to participate This study complies with the Declaration of Helsinki. Ethical approval was obtained from the Ethics Committee at the College of Teacher Education in Southwest University, and informed consent was provided by all participants. Consent for publication Not Applicable. Availability of data and material Not applicable Competing interests The authors declare no competing interests. Funding This research was funded by the Chongqing Association of Higher Education, cggj23011C. Authors' contributions Cao conceived of the study, participated in its design and coordination and drafted the manuscript; Y. Yue participated in the design of the study and performed the statistical analysis and drafted the manuscript; X. Xie and Q. Li conceived of the study, and participated in its design and coordination and helped to draft the manuscript. All authors read and approved the final manuscript. Acknowledgments This work was supported by a project grant from Chongqing Institute of Higher Education (Grant No. cqgj23011C). References Cong-Lem, N. (2021). Teacher agency: A systematic review of international literature. Issues in educational research, 31(3), 718-738. Sancar, R., Atal, D., & Deryakulu, D. (2021). A new framework for teachers' professional development. Teaching and teacher education, 101, 103305. Molla, T., & Nolan, A. (2020). Teacher agency and professional practice. Teachers and teaching, 26(1), 67-87. Shen, X., Wang, G.,& Bi, Y. (2024).A Research on the concept and practice of "Place-based" rural teacher training,1-13[2024-04-03].http://kns.cnki.net/kcms/detail/31.2173.G4.20240403.1531.002.html. Zhao, X., Qin, J., Han, M., & Wang, W. (2019). On the Reform of English Curriculum in Shanxi Urban and Rural Senior Middle Schools in the Perspective of Teachers. Theory and practice of education. 39(29), 49-52. Kristy, S. Cooper, T. K., & Andrew, M. (2016). Reflectiveness, Adaptivity, and Support: How Teacher Agency Promotes Student Engagement. American journal of education, 123 (1), 109-136. Susan, U. Raymond, & Florence Gabriel (2023). An ecological framework for early years teacher self-efficacy development. Teaching and teacher Education, 132 (1), 104252-104252. Molla, T., & Nolan, A. (2020). Teacher agency and professional practice. Teachers and Teaching, 26(1), 67-87. Chaaban, Y., & Sawalhi, R. (2020). The role of agency in the development of a teacher leadership stance among student teachers during the practicum experience. Research in post-compulsory education, 25(2), 171-192. Bao, M., Ren, W., & Wang, D. (2020). Understanding the professional practice of teachers of Chinese as an additional language through the lens of teacher agency. Sustainability, 12(18), 7493. den Brok, P., van Tartwijk, J., & Mainhard, T. (2023). Effective interpersonal relationships: On the association between teacher agency and communion with student outcomes. Effective Teaching Around the World: Theoretical, Empirical, Methodological and Practical Insights, 489-507.. Imants, J., & Van der Wal, M. M. (2020). A model of teacher agency in professional development and school reform. Journal of curriculum studies, 52(1), 1-14. Ruan, X.(2020). Exploring English department teachers' agency of classroom instruction in the context of the curriculum reform. Shandong foreign language teaching, 41 (03): 121-131. Willis, J., McGraw, K., & Graham, L. (2019). Conditions that mediate teacher agency during assessment reform. English teaching: practice & critique, 18(2), 233-248. Sang, G., & Huang, R. (2023). Connotation, Influencing Factor and Promotion Path of Teacher Agency from the perspective of subjectivity. Educational research and experiment, 1, 35-42. Benesch, S. (2018). Emotions as agency: Feeling rules, emotion labor, and English language teachers' decision-making. System, 79, 60-69. Lennert da Silva, A. L., & Mølstad, C. E. (2020). Teacher autonomy and teacher agency: A comparative study in Brazilian and Norwegian lower secondary education. The curriculum journal, 31(1), 115-131. Li, X., & Li, C. (2021). Empirical study on the impact of school culture on the learning of English teachers in universities: the mediating role of teacher agency. Foreign language education, 42 (06), 79-84. Liu, X. (2020). Analysis of the Phenomenon of Teacher Aim High but Accomplish Little: From the Perspective of the Ecological Approach to Teacher Agency. Global education, 11, 92-106. Lesener, T., Gusy, B., & Wolter, C. (2019). The job demands-resources model: A meta-analytic review of longitudinal studies. Work & Stress, 33(1), 76-103. Stan, R., & Vîrgă, D. (2021). Psychological needs matter more than social and organizational resources in explaining organizational commitment. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 62(4), 552-563. Bakker, A. B., & de Vries, J. D. (2021). Job Demands–Resources theory and self-regulation: New explanations and remedies for job burnout. Anxiety, Stress, & Coping, 34(1), 1-21. Glasgow Caledonian University United Kingdom. (2024). Organizational environment and the impact of cultural, social and personal factors on employee job satisfaction and performance. World Journal of Advanced Research and Reviews, 21(01), 2871–2882. Bandura, A., Freeman, W. H., & Lightsey, R. (1999). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. Zee, M., Koomen, H. M., & de Jong, P. F. (2018). How different levels of conceptualization and measurement affect the relationship between teacher self-efficacy and students' academic achievement. Contemporary educational psychology, 55, 189-200. Morris, D. B. (2017). Teaching self-efficacy. In Oxford research encyclopedia of education. Wray, E., Sharma, U., & Subban, P. (2022). Factors influencing teacher self-efficacy for inclusive education: A systematic literature review. Teaching and teacher education, 117, 103800. Bakker, M., Hartgerink, C. H. J., Wicherts, J. M., & van der Maas, H. L. J. (2022).The sample size paradox: How small effects can require large samples. Advances in Methods and Practices in Psychological Science, 5(1), 1–12. Merchie, E., Tuytens, M., Devos, G., & Vanderlinde, R. (2018). Evaluating teachers' professional development initiatives: towards an extended evaluative framework. Research papers in education, 33(2), 143-168. Burgueño, R., Sicilia, A., Medina-Casaubón, J., Alcaraz-Ibañez, M., & Lirola, M. J. (2019). Psychometry of the Teacher's sense of efficacy scale in Spanish Teachers' education. The Journal of Experimental Education, 87(1), 89-100. Van Mieghem, A., Struyf, E., & Verschueren, K. (2022). The relevance of sources of support for teachers' self-efficacy beliefs towards students with special educational needs. European Journal of Special Needs Education, 37(1), 28-42. Abu-Bader, S., & Jones, T. V. (2021). Statistical mediation analysis using the sobel test and hayes SPSS process macro. International Journal of Quantitative and Qualitative Research Methods. Howard, M. C., & Henderson, J. (2023). A review of exploratory factor analysis in tourism and hospitality research: Identifying current practices and avenues for improvement. Journal of Business Research, 154, 113328. Liu, Y., West, S. G., Levy, R., & Aiken, L. S. (2017). Tests of simple slopes in multiple regression models with an interaction: Comparison of four approaches. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 52(4), 445-464. Wang, X., Qi, Y., & Yao, J. (2018). The impact of rural teachers' agency on their professional development initiative: The mediating effect of work engagement. Chinese journal of special education, (11), 92-96. Qi, Y., Wang, X., & Wu, X. (2020) Teachers' professional development initiative and its influencing factors: Based on job characteristics. Chinese journal of clinical psychology, 28 (04): 779-782+778. Wang, D., Wang, J., Li, H., & Li, L. (2017). School context and instructional capacity: A comparative study of professional learning communities in rural and urban schools in China. International journal of educational development, 52, 1-9. Li, Q., Zhang,Q., & Fan, S.(2018). Professional Development of Rural Teachers in China: A Comparison with Singapore, Japan, Korea, and Shanghai using TALIS2013. Primary & secondary schooling abroad, (11), 53-61. Salari M, Farahian M. (2023). EFL teachers' self-efficacy and professional development: the mediating effect of metacognitive awareness. Journal of applied research in higher education, 15(5): 1337-1352. Chen, R. (2022). Twenty years of research on the living conditions and strategies of teachers. Continuing education research, (04): 36-42. Additional Declarations No competing interests reported. Cite Share Download PDF Status: Under Review Version 1 posted Reviewers invited by journal 25 Jul, 2025 Editor assigned by journal 23 Jul, 2025 Editor invited by journal 03 Jul, 2025 Submission checks completed at journal 10 Jun, 2025 First submitted to journal 10 Jun, 2025 You are reading this latest preprint version Research Square lets you share your work early, gain feedback from the community, and start making changes to your manuscript prior to peer review in a journal. As a division of Research Square Company, we’re committed to making research communication faster, fairer, and more useful. We do this by developing innovative software and high quality services for the global research community. Our growing team is made up of researchers and industry professionals working together to solve the most critical problems facing scientific publishing. Also discoverable on Platform About Our Team In Review Editorial Policies Advisory Board Help Center Resources Author Services Accessibility API Access RSS feed Manage Cookie Preferences © Research Square 2026 | ISSN 2693-5015 (online) Privacy Policy Terms of Service Do Not Sell My Personal Information {"props":{"pageProps":{"initialData":{"identity":"rs-6726336","acceptedTermsAndConditions":true,"allowDirectSubmit":false,"archivedVersions":[],"articleType":"Research Article","associatedPublications":[],"authors":[{"id":491738773,"identity":"af03f397-332f-4b07-9e79-816ade33f0f8","order_by":0,"name":"Zongqing Cao","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Southwest University","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Zongqing","middleName":"","lastName":"Cao","suffix":""},{"id":491738774,"identity":"304b7079-67fd-4781-92ed-7788782ae49b","order_by":1,"name":"Yingqi Yue","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Southwest University","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Yingqi","middleName":"","lastName":"Yue","suffix":""},{"id":491738775,"identity":"a6f2593e-b708-447d-b26c-006919441e54","order_by":2,"name":"Xuan Xie","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Hainan Normal University","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Xuan","middleName":"","lastName":"Xie","suffix":""},{"id":491738776,"identity":"e6492842-7328-49f7-ad16-4b96204549e3","order_by":3,"name":"Qianfeng Li","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Hainan Normal University","correspondingAuthor":true,"prefix":"","firstName":"Qianfeng","middleName":"","lastName":"Li","suffix":""}],"badges":[],"createdAt":"2025-05-22 15:23:09","currentVersionCode":1,"declarations":"","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-6726336/v1","doiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-6726336/v1","draftVersion":[],"editorialEvents":[],"editorialNote":"","failedWorkflow":false,"files":[{"id":87854508,"identity":"40477ae6-0a7a-41bd-98e8-d53e1251a41e","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-07-29 16:30:33","extension":"pdf","order_by":0,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"manuscript-pdf","size":808599,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"manuscript.pdf","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-6726336/v1/e826a5b0-782a-410c-9ded-48af63e1004f.pdf"}],"financialInterests":"No competing interests reported.","formattedTitle":"The Impact of Job Resources and Teaching Self-Efficacy on Rural Teachers' Agency","fulltext":[{"header":"INTRODUCTION","content":"\u003cp\u003eTeacher agency refers to the capacity of teachers to actively and purposefully make decisions, take actions, and exert influence within their professional roles, in order to positively impact their teaching practice, student learning outcomes, and the overall educational environment[1,2]. It emphasizes the importance of recognizing and supporting teachers as active agents in the educational process, capable of shaping their professional identities and influencing student outcomes[3]. In the aftermath of the COVID-19 pandemic, the modern educational landscape has become increasingly complex, with diverse student needs, technological advancements, and evolving teaching methods, posing challenges to teacher agency's development. As a result, education departments at all levels and school administrators are highly concerned about teacher agency, prompting scholars to intensify their research on how to enhance teacher agency.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eWhile research on teacher agency has predominantly focused on urban and well-resourced school settings, there is a compelling need to shift the spotlight towards rural areas, where unique challenges and opportunities exist for teachers[4]. Rural areas, especially in Mainland China, often face distinct educational challenges, including limited resources, isolation, and disparities in access to professional development opportunities[5]. In these contexts, teachers in rural schools are frequently required to wear multiple hats, taking on diverse roles beyond their primary teaching duties to meet the needs of their students and communities. Given the critical role that teachers play in rural education settings, it is imperative to examine the concept of teacher agency within the context of rural schools. Understanding the unique challenges and opportunities that shape teacher agency in rural settings is essential for developing targeted interventions and support mechanisms that empower rural teachers to thrive in their roles and create positive learning experiences for their students.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eUnderstanding the factors and pathways that influence teacher agency is crucial for ensuring high-quality education for all rural learners. One key factor that has gained attention in educational research is the perceived job support that teachers receive in their work environment. This support includes emotional, informational, and instrumental assistance from colleagues, administrators, and the broader school community[6]. Additionally, self-efficacy and teacher agency are closely linked, as self-efficacy plays a significant role in empowering teachers to take control of their professional practice and make meaningful decisions in the classroom[7]. However, few studies have examined how self-efficacy mediates the relationship between job resources and teacher agency, particularly in the context of rural China. This gap is significant because rural teachers in China often face unique challenges, such as limited resources and professional isolation, which may differentially impact their agency compared to their urban counterparts.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThis study aims to address this gap by investigating how perceived job resources and self-efficacy influence teacher agency in rural China. Specifically, it explores the mediating role of self-efficacy in the relationship between job resources and teacher agency, providing a deeper understanding of the mechanisms that empower rural teachers. By examining these relationships, the research seeks to generate evidence-based insights for developing targeted educational policies and practices that enhance teacher agency, ultimately contributing to improved teaching quality and student outcomes in underserved rural areas of Mainland China.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"LITERATURE REVIEW","content":"\u003cdiv id=\"Sec3\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003eTeacher Agency and its predictors\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe concept of teacher agency refers to the ability of teachers to make decisions and take actions to bring about changes [8]. Teachers are seen as active participants who can adapt to or even challenge policies, rather than passive recipients. This idea has been explored in precious study by Chaaban \u0026amp; Sawalhi[9].\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eHowever, previous studies vary in how they define and approach the examination of teacher agency. Teachers were found to enact their professional agency differently across educational contexts and even among teachers within the same contexts[10]. Teacher agency in interpersonal relationships includes abilities such as cooperation, negotiation and knowledge integration[11]. Teacher agency from the perspective of Bourdieu sociology includes curiosity, negotiation, recognition, response, morality, etc. Teacher agency in the context of vocational education reform includes teaching investment, reform investment and identity construction, etc.[12]. Teacher agency focusing on teaching includes active beliefs, active practices and active tendencies [13]. Therefore, the content of teacher agency is often determined by what researchers focus on.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eOverall, previous scholars sought to understand teacher agency by categorizing it into mainly four types of its manifestations or approaches. Firstly, teacher agency can be characterized as adoption orientation, with teachers following and executing new policies as directed. Secondly, teacher agency may be seen as adaptation orientation, with teachers proactively making adjustments to align with local circumstances[14]. Thirdly, in transformation orientation, teachers are inclined to develop novel teaching strategies or materials. Lastly, resistance in teacher agency is demonstrated when teachers ignore policies or simply go through the motions without true engagement. However, increasingly, researchers are integrating the above four orientations into utilizing external resources and tapping into potential to achieve professional development goals[15]. The present paper will take a generic definition to measure and interpret teacher agency, which is the ability of teachers to make choices and take action in response to changes.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThese studies examined various factors that influence teachers' ability to exercise their agency, which can be categorized into two main groups: personal and social/relational factors. Specifically, personal factors encompass individual beliefs, values, and emotions[16], while social factors include relationships with colleagues and students, and the mode of agency enactment[17], school culture[18], organizational structure[19]. These multifaceted factors interact dynamically to ultimately determine how teacher agency is manifested and its outcomes. Further analysis reveals that factors at the individual level mainly stem from a psychological perspective, while factors at the social level primarily arise from the relationships with others. Furthermore, based on the organizational support theory, organizations offer support to employees to help them feel supported, thus enhancing their work motivation and performance, leading to a positive impact on the long-term development of both the organization and its employees. In conclusion, this study will select job support and self-efficacy as individual and social-level variables respectively to investigate the mechanisms influencing teacher agency.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\n\u003ch3\u003eJob resources and its role\u003c/h3\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eJob resources, a central concept in the Job Demands-Resources (JD-R) model [20], refer to the physical, psychological, social, or organizational aspects of a job that help employees achieve their goals, reduce stress, and promote well-being. Specifically, job resources can mitigate the negative effects of job demands, facilitate goal achievement, and stimulate personal growth and development [21]. While the JD-R model has been widely applied in educational settings, some studies have highlighted its limitations. For example, research by Bakker, A. B., \u0026amp; de Vries found that certain job resources, such as excessive administrative support, can inadvertently increase workload and stress, contradicting the model' s assumption that resources are universally beneficial[22]. Additionally, the impact of job resources may vary depending on cultural and contextual factors, suggesting the need for a more nuanced application of the model in diverse educational settings[23]. Therefore, within the Chinese context, whether all job resources facilitate teacher agency remains to be examined.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eIn this study, job resources are categorized into three levels: (1) contextual-level resources (e.g., support from parents), (2) interpersonal-level resources (e.g., support from administrators and colleagues), and (3) organizational-level resources (e.g., teaching materials and infrastructure). These resources may have varying impacts on teacher agency. For example, interpersonal support from colleagues may foster collaboration and innovation, while organizational resources such as teaching materials may directly enhance instructional effectiveness. The present study includes job resources at the contextual level (support from parents), the interpersonal level (support from administration and colleagues), and the organizational level (teaching resources). By examining these distinct types of job resources, this study aims to provide a more detailed and nuanced understanding of how different job resources influence teacher agency.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eJob resources serve as dual motivators, influencing employees intrinsically and extrinsically. Intrinsic motivators, such as autonomy, competence, and opportunities for growth, fulfill individuals' psychological needs and drive internal satisfaction. Self-efficacy is also an intrinsic psychological state of individuals. Thus, Job resources may positively predict self-efficacy as well. On the other hand, job resources can also act as external motivators. In supportive work environments with resources like feedback and peer support, employees are more likely to succeed in their tasks and reach their professional goals. As previous discussed, teacher agency shows one' s active deal with working challenges, so job resources may positively predict self-efficacy as well.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ch3\u003eTeaching self-efficacy and its role\u003c/h3\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe concept self-efficacy was introduced by Bandura \u0026amp; Wessels[24]. Self-efficacy develops as individuals interact with their surroundings and become more familiar with their ability to overcome challenging tasks. Self-efficacy can be categorized into two types: general self-efficacy and task-specific self-efficacy. General self-efficacy refers to an individual' s ability to perform across various situations, while task-specific self-efficacy is linked to an individual' s ability to perform in specific situations. In this article, the focus is on teacher agency, which involves studying teachers as the subject within their work context. Therefore, more specifically, the self-efficacy in the present study refers to the belief that teachers hold about their instructional capabilities, namely teaching self-efficacy.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eTeaching self-efficacy, a key construct in psychology, can play a dual role in research studies. It can serve as an independent variable, influencing behaviors and actions of individuals, such as teachers teaching behaviors[25]. On the other hand, self-efficacy can also be seen as a dependent variable, personal and contextual factors also play a role in the development of teaching self-efficacy[26], such as teaching experience, teaching context, instructional leadership, and distributed leadership impacted self-efficacy[27]. Based on previous research findings that external factors may influence self-efficacy and self-efficacy may in turn affect teacher behaviors, it can be reasonably inferred that teaching self-efficacy likely mediates the relationship between job resources and teacher agency.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK","content":"\u003cp\u003eDrawing on the above-mentioned literature and the research gap presented in the Introduction section, the present study investigates the effect of job resources on teacher agency and explores the role of teaching self-efficacy. This study tests the following hypotheses.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eHypothesis 1\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cp\u003eJob resources is significantly positively related to teacher agency. Specifically, teaching resources, administrative support, colleague support, parental support are positively related to teacher agency respectively when controlling for other variables.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eHypothesis 2\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cp\u003eTeaching self-efficacy is significantly positively related to teacher agency.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eHypothesis 3\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cp\u003eTeaching self-efficacy mediates the relationship between the variables of job resources and teacher agency. Specifically, when other variables are controlled for, teaching self-efficacy plays a mediating role in the relationship between teaching resources, administrative support, colleague support, support from parents and teacher agency.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"MATERIALS AND METHODS","content":"\u003cp\u003eTo examine the relationship between job resources and teacher agency, and the role of teaching self-efficacy in this relationship, the researchers utilized the survey method to gather data from rural school teachers as it allows for the efficient collection of a large quantity of data.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cdiv id=\"Sec8\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003eParticipants\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003e650 junior high school teachers from H Province in Central China participated in the survey of questionnaire. After excluding 25 questionnaires that did not answer or had obvious bias, 625 valid questionnaires were obtained, with a 96.15% response rate. Based on recent guidelines for sample size justification [28], a sample size of N\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;625 is sufficient to detect a small effect size (d\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.2) with a significance level of α\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.05 and statistical power of 1\u0026thinsp;\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;β\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.8. Of the total sample, there are 80 male teachers (12.80%) and 545 female teachers (87.20%); 89 unmarried teachers (14.24%) and 536 married teachers (85.76%); 455 teachers without management positions (69.28%), 88 subject group leaders (14.08%), 87 middle-level managers (13.92%), and 17 principals (2.72%). The sampling ratio of each group is basically consistent with the actual ratio, indicating that the teachers are representative samples.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\n\u003ch3\u003eMeasures\u003c/h3\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eIn addition to collecting socio-demographic data and data related to some of the control variables, the questionnaire contained three main sub-scales.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eTeacher agency.\u003c/b\u003e Teacher agency was measured using the Teacher Sense of Agency Scale [29]. This measure consists of 13 items, assessed along a 5-point continuum with anchors at 1 - Extremely challenging, 2 - Partially attainable, 3- Feasible to some extent, 4 - Essentially achievable, and 5 - Fully attainable. Sample items include, \u0026ldquo;I seek to understand each student's specific learning style and needs and rationalize my lesson plans accordingly.\u0026rdquo; \u0026ldquo;I try to use a variety of teaching strategies for the different types of students in my class.\u0026rdquo; In this study, Cronbach' s \u003cem\u003eα\u003c/em\u003e is 0.957.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eTeaching self-efficacy.\u003c/b\u003e Teachers' sense of teaching efficacy was measured by adapting the Teacher Sense of Efficacy Scale (previously called the Ohio State Teacher Efficacy Scale)[30]. This measure consists of 12 items, assessed along a 5-point continuum with anchors at 1 - Nothing, 3 - Very little, 5- Some influence, 7 - Quite a bit, and 9 - A great deal. Teaching self-efficacy includes efficacy for instructional strategies, efficacy for classroom management, efficacy for student engagement etc. Sample items include: \u0026ldquo;I can provide an alternative explanation or example when students are confused\u0026rdquo; \u0026ldquo;I can control disruptive behavior in the classroom.\u0026rdquo;\u0026ldquo; I can motivate students who show low interest in schoolwork.\u0026rdquo; Cronbach' s \u003cem\u003eα\u003c/em\u003e for the overall scale is 0.945.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eJob resources.\u003c/b\u003e Job resources are measured by adapting Teacher Support Scale developed by Tschannen-Moran \u0026amp; Hoy[31]. Participants were asked to rate the quality of the support they had received in five areas: teaching resources, interpersonal support provided by the administration of their school, interpersonal support provided by colleagues, parental support and involvement in their classrooms. This measure consisted of 12 items, assessed along a 5-point continuum with anchors at 1 -Nonexistent, 2 - Poor, 3 - Adequate, 4 - Good, and 5 - Excellent. Sample items include, \u0026ldquo;The school will provide teachers with the necessary material resources for teaching as much as possible, such as phonetic cards, recorders, etc.\u0026rdquo; \u0026ldquo;My colleagues will encourage me when facing teaching pressure.\u0026rdquo; Cronbach' s \u003cem\u003eα\u003c/em\u003e for the four dimensions and the overall scale ranged from 0.873 to 0.936.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ch3\u003eData Collection and Analysis\u003c/h3\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eWith the help of an electronic questionnaire platform, questionnaires were distributed to a rural teacher online community. Teachers were requested to voluntarily finish the questionnaires. After the questionnaire was collected, SPSS. 20 was used for the following two stages of analysis. In the first stage, descriptive statistics analyses, including T-tests, ANOVA, and Pearson correlations, were performed on all predictor, control, and outcome variables. In the second stage the mediation model was tested using Hayes' PROCESS macro Model 4 and bootstrapping approaches[32].\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"RESULTS","content":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eDescriptive Statistics and\u0026nbsp;Group Difference Analysis\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe means, standard deviations, and correlations between all continuous variables are presented in Table 1. It can be seen that the mean teacher agency score is 3.53, which is between 3-Feasible to some extent and 4 - Essentially achievable, ranging from 3.46 to 3.59 from the aspect of 95% confidence interval. All of the significant relationships between the variables are in the expected direction, teaching self-efficacy (r = 0.663, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e \u0026lt; 0.001), teaching resources (r = 0.428, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e \u0026lt; 0.001), administrative support (r = 0.406, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e \u0026lt; 0.001), colleague support(r = 0.434, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e \u0026lt; 0.001), and parental support (r = 0.478, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e \u0026lt; 0.001) \u0026nbsp;is strongly positively related to teacher agency.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eTable 1\u003c/strong\u003e Means, standard deviations, and bi-variate correlations among key variables (N = 625)\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ctable border=\"1\" cellspacing=\"0\" cellpadding=\"0\"\u003e\n \u003ctbody\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 74px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 57px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eM \u0026plusmn; SD\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 41px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 41px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 31px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 31px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e4\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 31px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e5\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 28px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e6\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 74px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1 Teacher agency\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 57px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3.53 \u0026plusmn; 0.83\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 41px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 41px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 31px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 31px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 31px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 28px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 74px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2 Teaching self-efficacy\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 57px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3.85 \u0026plusmn; 0.61\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 41px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.663\u003csup\u003e**\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 41px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 31px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 31px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 31px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 28px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 74px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3 Teaching resources\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 57px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3.75 \u0026plusmn; 0.79\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 41px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.428\u003csup\u003e**\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 41px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.446\u003csup\u003e**\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 31px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 31px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 31px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 28px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 74px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e4 Administrative support\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 57px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3.91 \u0026plusmn; 0.76\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 41px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.406\u003csup\u003e**\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 41px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.432\u003csup\u003e**\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 31px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.767\u003csup\u003e**\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 31px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 31px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 28px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 74px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e5\u0026nbsp;Colleague support\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 57px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e4.15 \u0026plusmn; 0.64\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 41px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.434\u003csup\u003e**\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 41px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.568\u003csup\u003e**\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 31px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.544\u003csup\u003e**\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 31px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.614\u003csup\u003e**\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 31px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 28px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 74px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e6\u0026nbsp;Parental support\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 57px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3.94 \u0026plusmn; 0.34\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 41px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.478\u003csup\u003e**\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 41px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.544\u003csup\u003e**\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 31px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.578\u003csup\u003e**\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 31px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.583\u003csup\u003e**\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 31px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.655\u003csup\u003e**\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 28px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/tbody\u003e\n\u003c/table\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eNote.\u003csup\u003e*\u0026nbsp;\u003c/sup\u003eRepresents P\u0026lt;0.05, \u003csup\u003e* *\u003c/sup\u003e Represents P\u0026lt;0.01, and \u003csup\u003e* * *\u0026nbsp;\u003c/sup\u003eRepresents P\u0026lt;0.001.\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eDifferences in teacher agency among the subgroups are showed in table 2. Although there are certain differences in teacher agency among different subgroups, the differences among are not significantly in terms of statistics. (\u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026gt;0.05). Specifically, there is no substantial difference in the scores of teacher agency among subgroups distinguished by gender, marital status, age, educational qualification, title, and position. Additionally, the agency of countryside teachers (M = 3.42) is significantly lower than that of teachers from the outskirts of town (M = 3.50) and peri-urban areas (M = 3.63). Furthermore, the agency of teachers from the outskirts of town is significantly lower than that of teachers from peri-urban areas. These findings suggest that as the distance from the main city increases, teachers\u0026apos; agency tends to decrease.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eTable 2 Between-group differences in participants\u0026apos; \u0026nbsp;level of teacher agency\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ctable border=\"1\" cellspacing=\"0\" cellpadding=\"0\"\u003e\n \u003ctbody\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 3px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 123px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eDescription\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 46px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eN\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 47px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eMean\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 50px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eSD\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 50px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003et/F\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 3px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd rowspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 38px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eGender\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 85px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eMale\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 46px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e80\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 47px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3.64\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 50px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.90\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd rowspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 50px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.367\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 3px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 85px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eFemale\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 46px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e545\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 47px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3.51\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 50px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.81\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 3px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd rowspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 38px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eMarital status\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 85px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eUnmarried\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 46px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e89\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 47px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3.49\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 50px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.85\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd rowspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 50px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.446\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 3px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 85px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eMarried\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 46px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e536\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 47px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3.53\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 50px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.82\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 3px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd rowspan=\"4\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 38px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eAge\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 85px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eUnder 30\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 46px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e156\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 47px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3.46\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 50px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.80\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd rowspan=\"4\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 50px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.274\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 3px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 85px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e30-40\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 46px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e254\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 47px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3.48\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 50px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.82\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 3px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 85px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e40-50\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 46px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e144\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 47px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3.62\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 50px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.86\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 3px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 85px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eOver 50\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 46px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e68\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 47px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3.59\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 50px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.82\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 3px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd rowspan=\"3\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 38px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eEducational qualification\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 85px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eJunior college and below\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 46px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e41\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 47px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3.42\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 50px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.87\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd rowspan=\"3\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 50px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.381\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 3px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 85px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eUndergraduate\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 46px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e570\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 47px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3.53\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 50px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.82\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 3px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 85px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eGraduate\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 46px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e14\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 47px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3.50\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 50px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.94\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 3px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd rowspan=\"4\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 38px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eTitle\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 85px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eUnidentified\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 46px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e57\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 47px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3.60\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 50px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.92\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd rowspan=\"4\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 50px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2.090\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 3px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 85px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eSecond grade\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 46px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e270\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 47px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3.44\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 50px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.83\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 3px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 85px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eSenior\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 46px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e235\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 47px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3.61\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 50px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.79\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 3px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 85px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eAdvanced\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 46px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e63\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 47px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3.49\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 50px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.82\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 3px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 38px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ePosition\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 85px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eWithout management positions\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 46px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e433\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 47px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3.50\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 50px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.83\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd rowspan=\"4\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 50px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.478\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" rowspan=\"3\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 41px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 85px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eSubject group leaders\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 46px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e88\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 47px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3.58\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 50px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.79\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 85px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eMiddle-level managers\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 46px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e87\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 47px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3.65\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 50px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.83\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 85px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ePrincipals\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 46px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e17\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 47px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3.25\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 50px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.94\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" rowspan=\"3\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 41px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eSchool location\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 85px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ePeri-urban area\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 46px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e277\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 47px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3.63\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 50px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.86\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd rowspan=\"3\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 50px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e4.391\u003csup\u003e*\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 85px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eOutskirts of town\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 46px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e89\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 47px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3.50\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 50px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.81\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 85px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eCountryside\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 46px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e259\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 47px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3.42\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 50px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.78\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/tbody\u003e\n\u003c/table\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eNote.\u003csup\u003e*\u0026nbsp;\u003c/sup\u003eRepresents P\u0026lt;0.05, \u003csup\u003e* *\u003c/sup\u003e Represents P\u0026lt;0.01, and \u003csup\u003e* * *\u0026nbsp;\u003c/sup\u003eRepresents P\u0026lt;0.001.\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ch1\u003eThe Mediation Model\u003c/h1\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eBefore commencing the regression analysis, Harman\u0026apos; s one-factor analysis was conducted to check whether the common method bias was severe[33], because all variables were measured by self-reported scales. EFA of all measures showed that the extracted first component accounted for 38% of the total variance, suggesting that the common method bias was not severe.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRegression models are conducted by The PROCESS macro Model 4. After controlling for demographic variables, gender, age, marital status, educational qualification, title, position and school location, the result firstly indicates that teaching resources (\u0026beta; =0.163, p\u0026lt;0.001), administrative support (\u0026beta; =0.150,p\u0026lt;0.001), colleague support ( \u0026beta; = 0.099, p\u0026lt;0.05), parental support\u0026nbsp;(\u0026beta;\u0026nbsp;= 0.163,\u0026nbsp;p\u0026lt;0.001) has a significant positive predictive effect on teacher agency, respectively. Hypothesis 1\u0026nbsp;is verified.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eSecondly, teaching resources (\u0026beta; = 0.331, p\u0026lt;0.001), administrative support (\u0026beta; = 0.346, p\u0026lt;0.001), colleague support ( \u0026beta; = 0.533, p\u0026lt;0.001), parental support (\u0026beta; = 0.385, p\u0026lt;0.001) has a significant positive predictive effect on teaching self-efficacy. Additionally, teaching self-efficacy \u0026nbsp;can predict teacher agency significantly when teaching resources, administrative support, colleague support, and administrative support is controlled respectively, and beta value is 0.810 (p\u0026lt;0.001), 0.822 (p\u0026lt;0.001), 0.822 (p\u0026lt;0.001), and 0.785 (p\u0026lt;0.001) accordingly. Hypothesis 2 is verified.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThirdly, the PROCESS macro Model 4 examined the mediation model (see Table 3). A 95% confidence interval was calculated by repeatedly sampling for 5000 times with the help of the Bootstrap method to verify the mediating role of teaching self-efficacy between job resources and teacher agency. According to Aiken et al.[34], if the 95% CIs do not include zero, the indirect effect is considered significant. The results are presented in table 3. It can be seen that teaching self-efficacy mediates significantly between teaching resources (SE = 0.033, Boot 95% CI [.206，.336]), administrative support (SE = 0.034, Boot 95% CI [.221, .354]), colleague support (SE = 0.045, [.369，.547]), parental support (SE = 0.029, [.247，.362]) \u0026nbsp;and teacher agency, the indirect effect are 0.269 , 0.284 , 0.451, 0.302 respectively, and accordingly the effect size ratio is 62.27%, 65.44%, 82.00% and 64.95%. It shows that the different dimensions of job resources can not only directly predict teacher agency, but also indirectly affect teacher agency through teaching efficacy. Hypothesis 3 is verified.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eTable 3 Mediation Effect Test Table\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ctable border=\"0\" cellspacing=\"0\" cellpadding=\"0\" width=\"347\"\u003e\n \u003cthead\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 57px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eIndependent variable\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 57px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ePath effect\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 56px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eParameter estimate\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 41px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eSE\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 80px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eBias-corrected 95% CI\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 56px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eEffect size ratio\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/thead\u003e\n \u003ctbody\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd rowspan=\"3\" style=\"width: 57px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eTeaching resources\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 57px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eTotal effect\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 56px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.432\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 41px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.039\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 80px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e[.355，.507]\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 56px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 57px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eDirect effect\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 56px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.163\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 41px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.035\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 80px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e[.094，.231]\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 56px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e37.73%\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 57px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eIndirect effect\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 56px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.269\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 41px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.033\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 80px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e[.206，.336]\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 56px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e62.27%\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd rowspan=\"3\" style=\"width: 57px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eAdministrative support\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 57px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eTotal effect\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 56px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.434\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 41px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.041\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 80px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e[.355，.514]\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 56px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 57px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eDirect effect\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 56px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.150\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 41px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.037\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 80px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e[.078，.222]\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 56px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e34.56%\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 57px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eIndirect effect\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 56px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.284\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 41px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.034\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 80px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e[.221，.354]\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 56px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e65.44%\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd rowspan=\"3\" style=\"width: 57px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eColleague support\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 57px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eTotal effect\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 56px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.550\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 41px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.048\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 80px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e[.456，.644]\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 56px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 57px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eDirect effect\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 56px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.099\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 41px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.048\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 80px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e[.004，.193]\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 56px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e18.00%\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 57px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eIndirect effect\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 56px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.451\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 41px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.045\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 80px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e[.369，.547]\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 56px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e82.00%\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd rowspan=\"3\" style=\"width: 57px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eParental support\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 57px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eTotal effect\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 56px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.465\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 41px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.036\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 80px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e[.395，.535]\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 56px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 57px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eDirect effect\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 56px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.163\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 41px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.036\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 80px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e[.093，.232]\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 56px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e35.05%\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 57px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eIndirect effect\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 56px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.302\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 41px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.029\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 80px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e[.247，.362]\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 56px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e64.95%\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/tbody\u003e\n\u003c/table\u003e"},{"header":"DISCUSSION AND IMPLICATIONS","content":"\u003cp\u003eThe present study verified the direct and indirect effects of teaching resources, administrative support, colleague support, parental support on teacher agency, contributing theoretically to the research of teacher agency and giving hints to modern school governance. Based on the main findings in the present article and previous research, the following implications and recommendations can be drawn.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eRural\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eteachers\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e'\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eagency should be promoted urgently.\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe average score for rural teacher professional development agency is 3.53/5, with an equivalent to 63.25/100, and there's still plenty of room for improvement. Wang et al. found that rural teachers agency is 4.01/6[35], which is equivalent to 60.2/100, and the scores are basically consistent. However, the study by Qi et al. found that urban teachers agency is 6.79/9[36], which is equivalent to 72.38/100, far higher than that of rural teachers. Moreover, it' s found that there was statistically significant differences in teacher agency among rural teachers whose school locations are different. The rural teachers whose school location are further away from the main city have lower agency, which means school location attributes rather than demographic attributes are important factors affecting teacher agency.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAs discussed above, teacher agency in China' s rural areas urgently needs attention.The problem of unbalanced quality of education between urban and rural areas in China is still prominent, and teachers in urban and rural areas have a large gap in their teaching ability and motivation for development [37]. Rural education in China and the development of its teacher agency are in need of sustained and in-depth attention. Firstly, when learning from the experience of promoting teacher agency in urban areas, the policy makers need to deeply understand the particularity of rural teachers and take more targeted measures instead of completely copying the experience from unban areas. Secondly, the education authority needs to deepen the urban-rural teacher co-development mechanism. With the help of renowned schools, teachers and experts in urban areas and in the way such as urban and rural school alliance, teacher exchanges, research workshops and peer mentoring programs, are involved to build a long-term and stable system to stimulate and promote rural teacher agency.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eJob resources\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eare\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eto be provided to improve rural teachers' agency.\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eFrom the regression analysis and mediating model, it' s seen that the variables from the perspective of job resources are positive factors to enhance teacher agency. After controlling for demographic variables, the standardized regression coefficients between teaching resources, administrative support, colleague support, parental support and teacher agency is 0.163 0.150, 0.099 and 0.163 respectively, which indicates every standard deviation increases in the job resources' \u0026nbsp;variable, teacher agency will increase by at least 0.09 standard deviation. Job resources have been widely recognized as the external motivation to stimulate teacher development[38]. Therefore, teaching resources, administrative support, colleague support, parental support should be offered. Firstly, the rural school managers should strengthen the hardware and organizational construction to provide good teaching facilities for teachers. Secondly, rural school management team should build a good interpersonal network of cooperation between managers and teachers so as that any teacher can get help and support when necessary.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eTeaching self-efficacy is to be enhanced to improve rural teachers' \u0026nbsp;agency.\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eIt' s seen that teaching self-efficacy can significantly and positively predict teacher agency (β values ranging from 0.785 to 0.822, p \u0026lt; 0.001) , which is consistent with the study by Salari and Farahian[39]. It also plays a partial mediating role between teaching resources, administrative support, colleague support, parental support and teacher agency, which reveals the internal mechanism in which job resources affect teacher agency. The overall living conditions of rural teachers are generally similar due to the unified economic backwardness, often reflected in the difficulties in material conditions, as well as the lack of social capital, cultural capital, economic capital, and professional capital[40]. Compared to urban teachers, rural teachers tend to have relatively lower teaching self-efficacy. Therefore, to enhance job resources for rural teachers, elevate their social status, the authority should create a social atmosphere that respects rural teachers, and thus strengthen the teaching self-efficacy of rural teachers. Additionally, rural teachers should comprehensively and objectively assess the educational environment they are in and their personal teaching abilities, always striving to improve their teaching skills with a positive attitude, thereby nurturing and enhancing their teaching self-efficacy，as a terminal result of improving teacher agency.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAs discussed above, policymakers should design targeted strategies for rural contexts, avoiding direct replication of urban models, and deepen urban-rural collaboration through teacher exchanges, mentoring, and joint programs. Schools should enhance infrastructure and build supportive networks between administrators and teachers to ensure adequate resources and assistance. Teachers should actively assess their teaching environments and abilities while continuously improving their skills with a positive attitude. Additionally, society should work to elevate the social status of rural teachers and foster a culture of respect, thereby strengthening their self-efficacy and agency.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"CONCLUSION","content":"\u003cp\u003eBased on the data from mainland China' s rural teacher, the study explores the relationship among job resources variables, teaching self-efficacy and teacher agency. Through descriptive analysis, the agency of rural teachers in mainland China is 3.53/5, with great room for improvement. And from regression analysis and bootstrapping approaches, it' s revealed that firstly job resources including teaching resources, administrative support, colleague support, parental support are positively related to teacher agency respectively when controlling for other variables, secondly that teaching self-efficacy can significantly positively related to teacher agency, and thirdly that teaching self-efficacy plays a partial mediating role between teaching resources, administrative support, support from colleagues, parental support and teacher agency respectively. Therefore, rural teachers' agency should be promoted urgently by taking comprehensive measures from the perspective of job resources and teaching self-efficacy.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cdiv id=\"Sec16\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003eLIMITATIONS\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eThis study has several important limitations that must be acknowledged and addressed. First, the reliance on cross-sectional data is a significant constraint. Since the data were collected at a single time point, the study cannot establish causal inferences between job resources and teacher agency. This design limits our ability to track changes in variables over time or to explore the dynamic mechanisms underlying the relationship between these constructs. As a result, the findings can only provide insights into associations rather than causal effects. Future research should adopt longitudinal designs to better understand the temporal relationships and causal mechanisms between job resources and teacher agency. Second, the geographic scope and representativeness of the sample are restricted. The study focuses exclusively on secondary school teachers in H Province, Central China, which limits the generalizability of the findings to other regions or educational systems. The cultural, policy, and socio-economic contexts of H Province may differ from those of other areas, potentially affecting the applicability of the results. Expanding the sample to include teachers from primary schools, as well as diverse regions or countries, would enhance the external validity of the study and provide a more comprehensive understanding of the dynamics of teacher agency across broader contexts.Additionally, the use of self-reported measures to assess teacher agency introduces potential biases. While self-reporting is a common method in social sciences research, it is subject to limitations such as social desirability bias, recall error, or subjective interpretation. Teachers may overestimate or underestimate their agency based on personal perceptions, external pressures, or other factors, which could affect the accuracy and objectivity of the data. To address this limitation, future research could incorporate alternative data sources, such as observational assessments, peer evaluations, or third-party reports, to triangulate the findings and improve the reliability and validity of the measures. Finally, the study's design may have inherent limitations that affect its conclusions. For instance, the reliance on questionnaire surveys may introduce sample bias, as participation was voluntary and not all teachers may have chosen to engage in the study. This could lead to a non-representative sample, particularly if certain groups of teachers were more inclined to participate than others. Furthermore, the study's measurement tools may not fully capture the complexity of teacher agency, as some variables or dimensions might have been overlooked or inadequately operationalized. Future research could benefit from refining the measurement instruments, adopting mixed-method approaches (e.g., combining quantitative and qualitative data), or exploring additional constructs that might influence teacher agency.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e"},{"header":"Abbreviations","content":"\u003cp\u003eJD-R:Job Demands-Resources\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Declarations","content":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eEthics approval and consent to participate\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThis study complies with the Declaration of Helsinki. Ethical approval was obtained from the Ethics Committee at the College of Teacher Education in Southwest University, and informed consent was provided by all participants.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eConsent for publication\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eNot Applicable.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eAvailability of data and material\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eNot applicable\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eCompeting interests\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe authors declare no competing interests.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eFunding\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThis research was funded by the Chongqing Association of Higher Education, cggj23011C.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eAuthors\u0026apos; contributions\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eCao conceived of the study, participated in its design and coordination and drafted the manuscript; Y. Yue \u0026nbsp;participated in the design of the study and performed the statistical analysis and drafted the manuscript; X. Xie and Q. Li conceived of the study, and participated in its design and coordination and helped to draft the manuscript. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eAcknowledgments\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThis work was supported by a project grant from Chongqing Institute of Higher Education (Grant No. cqgj23011C).\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"References","content":"\u003col\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eCong-Lem, N. (2021). Teacher agency: A systematic review of international literature. Issues in educational research, 31(3), 718-738.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eSancar, R., Atal, D., \u0026amp; Deryakulu, D. (2021). A new framework for teachers\u0026apos; professional development. Teaching and teacher education, 101, 103305.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eMolla, T., \u0026amp; Nolan, A. (2020). Teacher agency and professional practice. Teachers and teaching, 26(1), 67-87.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eShen, X., Wang, G.,\u0026amp; Bi, Y. (2024).A Research on the concept and practice of \u0026quot;Place-based\u0026quot; rural teacher training,1-13[2024-04-03].http://kns.cnki.net/kcms/detail/31.2173.G4.20240403.1531.002.html.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eZhao, X., Qin, J., Han, M., \u0026amp; Wang, W. (2019). On the Reform of English Curriculum in Shanxi Urban and Rural Senior Middle Schools in the Perspective of Teachers. Theory and practice of education. 39(29), 49-52.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eKristy, S. Cooper, T. K., \u0026amp; Andrew, M. (2016). Reflectiveness, Adaptivity, and Support: How Teacher Agency Promotes Student Engagement. American journal of education, 123 (1), 109-136.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eSusan, U. Raymond, \u0026amp; Florence Gabriel (2023). An ecological framework for early years teacher self-efficacy development. Teaching and teacher Education, 132 (1), 104252-104252.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eMolla, T., \u0026amp; Nolan, A. (2020). Teacher agency and professional practice. Teachers and Teaching, 26(1), 67-87.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eChaaban, Y., \u0026amp; Sawalhi, R. (2020). The role of agency in the development of a teacher leadership stance among student teachers during the practicum experience. Research in post-compulsory education, 25(2), 171-192.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eBao, M., Ren, W., \u0026amp; Wang, D. (2020). Understanding the professional practice of teachers of Chinese as an additional language through the lens of teacher agency. Sustainability, 12(18), 7493.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eden Brok, P., van Tartwijk, J., \u0026amp; Mainhard, T. (2023). Effective interpersonal relationships: On the association between teacher agency and communion with student outcomes. Effective Teaching Around the World: Theoretical, Empirical, Methodological and Practical Insights, 489-507..\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eImants, J., \u0026amp; Van der Wal, M. M. (2020). A model of teacher agency in professional development and school reform. Journal of curriculum studies, 52(1), 1-14.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eRuan, X.(2020). Exploring English department teachers\u0026apos; agency of classroom instruction in the context of the curriculum reform. Shandong foreign language teaching, 41 (03): 121-131.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eWillis, J., McGraw, K., \u0026amp; Graham, L. (2019). Conditions that mediate teacher agency during assessment reform. English teaching: practice \u0026amp; critique, 18(2), 233-248.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eSang, G., \u0026amp; Huang, R. (2023). Connotation, Influencing Factor and Promotion Path of Teacher Agency from the perspective of subjectivity. Educational research and experiment, 1, 35-42.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eBenesch, S. (2018). Emotions as agency: Feeling rules, emotion labor, and English language teachers\u0026apos; decision-making. System, 79, 60-69.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eLennert da Silva, A. L., \u0026amp; M\u0026oslash;lstad, C. E. (2020). Teacher autonomy and teacher agency: A comparative study in Brazilian and Norwegian lower secondary education. The curriculum journal, 31(1), 115-131.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eLi, X., \u0026amp; Li, C. (2021). Empirical study on the impact of school culture on the learning of English teachers in universities: the mediating role of teacher agency. Foreign language education, 42 (06), 79-84.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eLiu, X. (2020). Analysis of the Phenomenon of Teacher Aim High but Accomplish Little: From the Perspective of the Ecological Approach to Teacher Agency. Global education, 11, 92-106.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eLesener, T., Gusy, B., \u0026amp; Wolter, C. (2019). The job demands-resources model: A meta-analytic review of longitudinal studies. Work \u0026amp; Stress, 33(1), 76-103.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eStan, R., \u0026amp; V\u0026icirc;rgă, D. (2021). Psychological needs matter more than social and organizational resources in explaining organizational commitment. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 62(4), 552-563.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eBakker, A. B., \u0026amp; de Vries, J. D. (2021). Job Demands\u0026ndash;Resources theory and self-regulation: New explanations and remedies for job burnout. Anxiety, Stress, \u0026amp; Coping, 34(1), 1-21.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eGlasgow Caledonian University United Kingdom. (2024). Organizational environment and the impact of cultural, social and personal factors on employee job satisfaction and performance. World Journal of Advanced Research and Reviews, 21(01), 2871\u0026ndash;2882.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eBandura, A., Freeman, W. H., \u0026amp; Lightsey, R. (1999). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eZee, M., Koomen, H. M., \u0026amp; de Jong, P. F. (2018). How different levels of conceptualization and measurement affect the relationship between teacher self-efficacy and students\u0026apos; academic achievement. Contemporary educational psychology, 55, 189-200.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eMorris, D. B. (2017). Teaching self-efficacy. In Oxford research encyclopedia of education.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eWray, E., Sharma, U., \u0026amp; Subban, P. (2022). Factors influencing teacher self-efficacy for inclusive education: A systematic literature review. Teaching and teacher education, 117, 103800.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eBakker, M., Hartgerink, C. H. J., Wicherts, J. M., \u0026amp; van der Maas, H. L. J. (2022).The sample size paradox: How small effects can require large samples. Advances in Methods and Practices in Psychological Science, 5(1), 1\u0026ndash;12.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eMerchie, E., Tuytens, M., Devos, G., \u0026amp; Vanderlinde, R. (2018). Evaluating teachers\u0026apos; professional development initiatives: towards an extended evaluative framework. Research papers in education, 33(2), 143-168.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eBurgue\u0026ntilde;o, R., Sicilia, A., Medina-Casaub\u0026oacute;n, J., Alcaraz-Iba\u0026ntilde;ez, M., \u0026amp; Lirola, M. J. (2019). Psychometry of the Teacher\u0026apos;s sense of efficacy scale in Spanish Teachers\u0026apos; education. The Journal of Experimental Education, 87(1), 89-100.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eVan Mieghem, A., Struyf, E., \u0026amp; Verschueren, K. (2022). The relevance of sources of support for teachers\u0026apos; self-efficacy beliefs towards students with special educational needs. European Journal of Special Needs Education, 37(1), 28-42.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eAbu-Bader, S., \u0026amp; Jones, T. V. (2021). Statistical mediation analysis using the sobel test and hayes SPSS process macro. International Journal of Quantitative and Qualitative Research Methods.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eHoward, M. C., \u0026amp; Henderson, J. (2023). A review of exploratory factor analysis in tourism and hospitality research: Identifying current practices and avenues for improvement. Journal of Business Research, 154, 113328.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eLiu, Y., West, S. G., Levy, R., \u0026amp; Aiken, L. S. (2017). Tests of simple slopes in multiple regression models with an interaction: Comparison of four approaches. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 52(4), 445-464.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eWang, X., Qi, Y., \u0026amp; Yao, J. (2018). The impact of rural teachers\u0026apos; agency on their professional development initiative: The mediating effect of work engagement. Chinese journal of special education, (11), 92-96.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eQi, Y., Wang, X., \u0026amp; Wu, X. (2020) Teachers\u0026apos; professional development initiative and its influencing factors: Based on job characteristics. Chinese journal of clinical psychology, 28 (04): 779-782+778.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eWang, D., Wang, J., Li, H., \u0026amp; Li, L. (2017). School context and instructional capacity: A comparative study of professional learning communities in rural and urban schools in China. International journal of educational development, 52, 1-9.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eLi, Q., Zhang,Q., \u0026amp; Fan, S.(2018). Professional Development of Rural Teachers in China: A Comparison with Singapore, Japan, Korea, and Shanghai using TALIS2013. Primary \u0026amp; secondary schooling abroad, (11), 53-61.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eSalari M, Farahian M. (2023). EFL teachers\u0026apos; self-efficacy and professional development: the mediating effect of metacognitive awareness. Journal of applied research in higher education, 15(5): 1337-1352.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eChen, R. (2022). Twenty years of research on the living conditions and strategies of teachers. Continuing education research, (04): 36-42.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003c/ol\u003e"}],"fulltextSource":"","fullText":"","funders":[],"hasAdminPriorityOnWorkflow":false,"hasManuscriptDocX":true,"hasOptedInToPreprint":true,"hasPassedJournalQc":"","hasAnyPriority":false,"hideJournal":false,"highlight":"","institution":"","isAcceptedByJournal":false,"isAuthorSuppliedPdf":false,"isDeskRejected":"","isHiddenFromSearch":false,"isInQc":false,"isInWorkflow":false,"isPdf":false,"isPdfUpToDate":true,"isWithdrawnOrRetracted":false,"journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"bmc-psychology","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":false,"externalIdentity":"psyo","sideBox":"Learn more about [BMC Psychology](http://bmcpsychology.biomedcentral.com/)","snPcode":"","submissionUrl":"","title":"BMC Psychology","twitterHandle":"BMC_series","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":true,"editorialSystem":"stoa","reportingPortfolio":"BMC Series","inReviewEnabled":true,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":true},"keywords":"Teacher agency, job resources, teaching self-efficacy, rural teachers","lastPublishedDoi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-6726336/v1","lastPublishedDoiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-6726336/v1","license":{"name":"CC BY 4.0","url":"https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/"},"manuscriptAbstract":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eBackground\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe significance of agency in fostering the professional growth and instructional prowess of teachers, particularly those serving in rural regions of mainland China, is undeniable. Confronted with distinct challenges such as scarce resources and isolated work settings, understanding the intricate dynamics influencing teacher agency among rural educators becomes paramount. This research endeavors to delve deeply into how rural teachers' perceived job resources and their intrinsic sense of self-efficacy collectively contribute to shaping their agency. The ultimate goal is to provide valuable insights for policymakers, administrators, and educators, aiming to enhance teacher agency.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eMethods\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eTo fulfill this purpose, a comprehensive survey was administered via an electronic questionnaire platform to a targeted online community of rural teachers. After rigorous data collection, a substantial sample of 625 valid responses was secured for analysis. Employing SPSS 20, a two-tiered analytical strategy was undertaken. Initially, descriptive statistical analyses, encompassing T-tests, ANOVA, and Pearson correlations, were conducted to establish preliminary relationships between variables. Subsequently, Hayes' PROCESS macro Model 4, coupled with bootstrapping methods, was utilized to rigorously test the proposed mediation model, examining the mediating effect of teaching self-efficacy on the relationship between various job resource variables (teaching resources, administrative support, colleague support, and parental support) and teacher agency.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eResults\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe study yielded several pivotal findings. Firstly, the average agency level among rural teachers was moderate, scoring 3.53 out of 5, indicating potential for further enhancement. Secondly, teaching resources (β\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.163), administrative support (β\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.150), colleague support (β\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.099), and parental support (β\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.163) each significantly and positively predict teacher agency. Thirdly, teaching self-efficacy emerges as a strong predictor of teacher agency (β values ranging from 0.785 to 0.822, p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001) after controlling for the respective job resource variables. Lastly, teaching self-efficacy significantly mediates the relationships between teaching resources (indirect effect\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.269), administrative support (indirect effect\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.284), colleague support (indirect effect\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.451), parental support (indirect effect\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.302) and teacher agency, respectively. These findings underscore the importance of job resources and teaching self-efficacy in fostering teacher agency, with self-efficacy playing a central mediating role.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eConclusions\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eBased on these findings, the study underscores the necessity for a holistic approach to promoting rural teachers' agency, addressing both external job resources and internal factors like self-efficacy. It is imperative for policymakers and education administrators to prioritize initiatives aimed at augmenting teaching resources, fostering a supportive work environment, and reinforcing teachers' self-belief and professional competence. However, limitations include potential biases from self-reported data, the cross-sectional design preventing causal inferences, and restricted generalizability due to the specific China' s rural context. Future research should address these limitations through longitudinal designs and broader samples.\u003c/p\u003e","manuscriptTitle":"The Impact of Job Resources and Teaching Self-Efficacy on Rural Teachers' Agency","msid":"","msnumber":"","nonDraftVersions":[{"code":1,"date":"2025-07-29 16:14:28","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-6726336/v1","editorialEvents":[{"type":"communityComments","content":0},{"type":"reviewersInvited","content":"","date":"2025-07-25T06:41:52+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""},{"type":"editorAssigned","content":"","date":"2025-07-23T11:45:41+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""},{"type":"editorInvited","content":"","date":"2025-07-03T04:33:35+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""},{"type":"checksComplete","content":"","date":"2025-06-10T12:22:26+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""},{"type":"submitted","content":"BMC Psychology","date":"2025-06-10T12:19:21+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""}],"status":"published","journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"bmc-psychology","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":false,"externalIdentity":"psyo","sideBox":"Learn more about [BMC Psychology](http://bmcpsychology.biomedcentral.com/)","snPcode":"","submissionUrl":"","title":"BMC Psychology","twitterHandle":"BMC_series","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":true,"editorialSystem":"stoa","reportingPortfolio":"BMC Series","inReviewEnabled":true,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":true}}],"origin":"","ownerIdentity":"582f6f0e-2482-4c71-9363-571a2af32b31","owner":[],"postedDate":"July 29th, 2025","published":true,"recentEditorialEvents":[],"rejectedJournal":[],"revision":"","amendment":"","status":"under-review","subjectAreas":[],"tags":[],"updatedAt":"2025-07-29T16:14:28+00:00","versionOfRecord":[],"versionCreatedAt":"2025-07-29 16:14:28","video":"","vorDoi":"","vorDoiUrl":"","workflowStages":[]},"version":"v1","identity":"rs-6726336","journalConfig":"researchsquare"},"__N_SSP":true},"page":"/article/[identity]/[[...version]]","query":{"redirect":"/article/rs-6726336","identity":"rs-6726336","version":["v1"]},"buildId":"8U1c8b4HqxoKbykW_rLl7","isFallback":false,"isExperimentalCompile":false,"dynamicIds":[84888],"gssp":true,"scriptLoader":[]}