Cross-sectional study shows perceived teacher fairness enhances engagement and resilience through achievement emotions in EFL students, highlighting the value of supportive learning environments.
As two significant elements in education, resilience and engagement have been at the center of attention in the English as a Foreign Language (EFL) research, as they both influence learners' academic achievement and their psychological growth. Among different factors, teacher fairness has progressively been known as a vital interpersonal element forming students' motivational and emotional performance; however, its effect in foreign language teaching is overlooked. In EFL contexts, where students often experience heightened vulnerability due to linguistic and cultural barriers, the role of fairness becomes even more critical. Besides, considering the facilitative effect of positive emotions in the route of learning in line with Control‐Value Theory (CVT), the present research sought to investigate their mediating effect in the teacher fairness, engagement, and resilience relationship within EFL students in China. A total of 302 students were chosen randomly, and previously validated measures were used for data collection. Self‐Determination Theory (SDT) was utilized to explain the way teacher fairness meets students' primary psychological needs, therefore boosting their resilience and engagement. Structural equation modelling was run, and the results revealed that teacher fairness had significant correlations with both EFL students' engagement and resilience, and it indirectly influenced both concepts through its impact on learners' achievement emotions. The results indicated that teacher fairness played a critical role in developing emotionally supportive learning settings and encouraging students' resilience and engagement. By integrating CVT and SDT, the study provides a more comprehensive justification of how teacher fairness shapes learners' emotional experiences and their academic outcomes in EFL learning.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Li et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: