Introduction

Background

Globalization has redefined the conduct of education in the present time. In fact, one of its major effects is the increased competition among education practitioners in the academia in creating and delivering quality education (Chen, 2017; Wang, Gorbunova, Masalimova, Bírová & Sergeeva, 2017). Consequently, HEIs have revisited their education policies and reformulate some outdated teaching pedagogies to cater for the rising educational needs. In other words, globalization phenomena have caused both the governments and educational institutions to intuitively create and innovate ways to enhance the quality of education (Carlsen, 2020; Chiroleu & Marquina, 2017; Ng, 2017).

On a national scale, countries such as the United State of America, Canada, France and the European Nations embarked on education commercialization and internationalization by inviting students from all around the globe and integrating the excellent ones into their educational systems Borkovic, et al., 2020). In recent times, this model is being adopted in the Asian continent as such countries like South Korea, China, Malaysia and even Thailand are not left out of the race. With emphasis on Thailand, the Thai government had over the years adapt international education business model as such attracts foreign education into the country. Besides, the local universities are also opening their gates for international students (Jiani, 2017; Jones & Pimdee, 2017; Nikula & Kivistö, 2018).

Within the past two decades, the government of Thailand had made significant efforts to enhance the quality of education in the country of which the latest review was made in the year 2015; however, education pundits argue that less effect can be felt due to the political instability in the country (Michael, 2018). As such, it is left for the individual universities to develop their own strategies to ensure quality education delivery (Dukhan, 2020).

Insights into academic literature presents that universities engaged in several strategies to deliver quality education. Of these several ways, the attention of this study is to examine the significance effect of teachers’ career perspective in engaging students so that quality education can be achieved (Bostock, 2019; Brunstein & King, 2018; Dicker, Garcia, Kelly & Mulrooney, 2019). The philosophy behind this is that teachers’ career perspective in engaging students is among the current prominent research area in the education industry specifically in the developed economy (Bostock, 2019; Brunstein & King, 2018; Dicker et al., 2019). While literatures from emerging economies are at its infancy stage, a few available examples of which is not limited to (Hallinger, Piyaman & Viseshsiri 2017) suggest education reform specifically in Thailand the context of this investigation.

Insight into the existing literature on education reform to achieve quality education is a complex approach that needs the collaboration of different parties such as the school management, students, teachers, governments and non-academic stakeholders. With this, most of the strategies embarked upon by the Thai government on a national scale yielded less than the expected results (Hallinger, Piyaman & Viseshsiri, 2017; Michael, 2018). Evidence supporting this claim is the performance of Thai students in the ASEAN region is far below the expected line (Sinwongsuwat, Nicoletti & Teng, 2018). So, if the government reform produces little result, then, should individual institution look inwardly, innovate strategies to produce quality education to develop internal strategies that can lead to quality education, the goal of this study is geared towards examining the relationship between teachers’ career perspective on students’ engagement with the moderating effect of several teaching strategies dubbed teaching perspective inventories.

Literature have it that studies examining the relationship between teaching perspective inventory and students’ engagement to determine the quality of education offered through performance and employability has been extensively and thoroughly studied in the western world either among graders (primary school students) or tertiary educations (Collins & Pratt, 2011; Pachler, Kuonath & Frey, 2019; Pratt, 1998; Pratt & Collins, 2000; Sparapani, Connor, Day, Wood, Ingebrand, McLean et al., 2019). While studies from emerging Asian world, specifically, Thailand remains at its infancy stage.

Therefore, the objectives of this study are to examine the following:

a) The relationship between teacher career perception and students’ engagement.

b) The relationship between teaching perspective inventory and students’ engagement.

c) The significant influence of teacher career perception on the quality of education.

d) The effect of teaching perspective inventory on the quality of education.

e) The moderating effect of teaching perspective inventory on the relationship between teacher career perspective and students’ engagement.

f) The relationship between students’ engagement and education quality

g) The mediating effect of students’ engagement on the relationship between teachers’ career perspective and quality education.

h) The mediating effect of students’ engagement on the relationship between teaching perspective inventory and quality education.

Conceptual Arguments

Students Engagements

Educated individuals in the society play a significant role in ensuring sustainable environmental and economic peace and stability, creativity and innovation, reduce gender inequality between men and women, good governance as well as ensure individual and national progress (Aleixo, Leal & Azeiteiro, 2018; Novo-Corti, Badea Tirca & Aceleanu, 2018; Woolman, 2001). Achieving the importance or benefits of education, therefore lies in the ability and capability to ensure the successful implementation of educational systems in which student engagement plays a significant role (Abubakar & Itse, 2017; Ashwin & McVitty, 2015; Robinson, 2013).

Thus, improving students’ engagement has been a top priority of scholars and practitioners ever since the constructs has been linked to students’ educational performance, learning outcomes as well as education quality (Abubakar & Itse, 2017; Robinson, 2013). Over the years, there have been several attempts to improve the engagement of students within and outside the classroom environs by concentrating on students’ accuracy, precision, retention, employability, dropout ratio, (Ashwin & McVitty, 2015; Robinson, 2013; Parsons & Taylor, 2011; Zepke & Leach, 2010).

In the face of the progress made, there are indications that this area of research suffers significant setback which includes ambiguity or lack of tangible definition. Considering this, (Ashwin & McVitty 2015) notes that, in fact, students’ engagement can be solidly defined, however, the concept received poor definition because of scholars’ laziness among leading to less critical view and focus points and definition ambiguity. Conversely, a recent study by (Vytasek, Patzak & Winne 2020) recommends the need to redefine the concept, its observations and quantification. In light of this, students’ engagement in this study is described along three lines, namely emotional, psychological and cognition following studies such as (Pratt 2002).

Despite the ongoing issues surrounding the definition or description of student engagements, factors such as helpful course resources, access to instructor and instructor’s passion for the course taught, peer interaction, problem-centric learning with useful and detailed explanation (Hew, 2016). Besides, attention on students’ engagement has centered on engaging disengaged students while a study by (Parsons & Taylor, 2011) laid the foundation of engaging students who are already engage in a system that is meaningful to the students and useful in the society. Considering this, this research builds upon the work of (Parsons & Taylor, 2011).

Teachers’ Career Perspective on Students’ Engagement and Academic Performance

The teaching career perspective had received not worthy investigation from scholars in a bid to enhance students’ engagement that invariably improves the quality of education delivered. Insights from the available pieces of literature reveal that teachers’ career perspectives can be viewed from several lenses. Some of which is not limited to the interrogative method of teaching, receiving feedback, work engagement, mode of teaching that is, teacher centered vs. students centered learning as well as technology usage in teaching students’ online course and social media usage as supplements’ (Finn, 2020; Glazier, Hamann, Pollock & Wilson, 2019; Gibbs, Hartviksen, Lehtonen & Spruce, 2019; Minghui, Lei, Xiaomeng & Potm?šilc, 2018; O’Donovan, den Outer, Price & Lloyd, 2019).

The ongoing investigations on how teachers’ perceptions pertaining to their career influence or contribute to students’ performance by engaging students in the learning process. This is because engaging students is a complex continuous process (Niittylahti, Annala & Mäkinen, 2019; Timms & Brough, 2013). Among the factors examined by earlier scholars includes teacher communication behavior, academic background, feedback, on the job training and development sense of professionalism, work security, (Heikonen, Pietarinen, Pyhältö, Toom & Soini, 2017; Jungert, Alm & Thornberg, 2014; Mazer, 2013; Nizeyimana, & Osman, 2014). From the numerous factors associated with teachers’ career perspective, five of these factors are examined. These are narrated in the following paragraphs.

The use of feedback has over the years used to enhance teaching career perspectives, and as such, the construct had received undeniable attention from scholars (Cassidy & Ahmad, 2019; Esterhazy, Nerland & Dam?a, 2019; Molloy, Boud & Henderson, 2019; Henderson, Ryan & Phillips, 2019; O’Donovan, den Outer, Price & Lloyd, 2019). According to these authors, feedback plays an undeniably important role in enhancing students’ engagement. However, there are conditions, and strategies to be set so that constructive feedback can be achieved (Henderson et al., 2019; Henderson, Phillips, Ryan, Boud, Dawson, Molloy & Mahoney, 2019).

On the account of (Mazer, 2013), the mode of delivering lectures by students, directly and indirectly, engage students thus, contributing to the quality of education offered in such an institution. With this, (Skinner, Furrer, Marchland & Kindermann, 2008) argues that the lack of engagement from teachers to students impedes the students' engagement in class. Further study by Heikonen, et al., (2017) although investigates the capability and teachers’ experience in engaging students in the class, it is logically deduced that teachers’ inexperience contributes to defect in communication thus, inhibiting social, psychological and emotional engagement as concluded by Chaplain (2017) and Kruglanski, Thompson, Higgins, Atash, Pierro, Shah, et al., (2018).

Similarly, teachers’ job satisfaction had been widely examined by earlier scholars (Mazer, 2013). It was argued that teachers’ emotional job satisfaction is indirectly transmitted to the class during lecture. The studies of (Mottet, Frymier & Beebe 2006) note that teachers’ emotions (implicit messages) influence students' emotional response.

Teaching perspective Inventory and Students’ Engagement

The importance of TPI in not limited to helping individual teachers prepare teaching evaluation, conduct more research on teaching portfolios, teaching perspectives, evaluate teaching methods and create awareness about different teaching approaches as well as teaching philosophy (Collins & Pratt, 2011; Robertson, Fowler & Juve, 2017). Besides, using TPI (Ross, 2019) argues that teachers and education stakeholders can understand, the teaching action, beliefs, and intention and it does assist in collating ideas around education. This is because teaching approaches employed to teach students have a significant specific effect on the dimension of student engagement (Kumar & Tankha, 2020). Hence, the benefits of the intended teaching approach and intended outcome should be taken into consideration. Scholars such as (Collins & Pratt 2011; Pratt, 1998) after conducting thorough research on teachers believed that a good teacher must at least possesses one or more of the five dimensions of teaching perspective that made up of the teaching perspective inventory. These are the transmission; apprenticeship; developmental; nurturing and social reform.

As evidence from the studies of (Collins & Pratt 2011; Pratt, 1998) the transmission teaching approach implies a situation where the instructor is expected to master the subject content and present it accurately as possible efficiently and effectively to the students. That is, the teacher is strictly guided by the course curriculum. As such, it is now the duty of the students legitimately to study the course contents as prescribed by the course curriculum.

Likewise, the apprenticeship teaching approach is presented to be an approach whereby the teachers are highly skilled teachers who are best at what they teach. Considering this, they must be able to simplify the task and carry the students along from a simpler task to a more complicated task. From the learners’ point of view, authentic tasks that enhance skills development are required.

Although all the dimensions of TPI might sound interesting because they are all being used to enhance education quality via engaging disengaged students and enhancing the engagement of engaged students (Morgan, Pendergast, Brown & Heck, 2015; Noonan, 2013; Parraga, 2004; Shaari, Yusoff, Ghazali, Osman & Dzahir, 2014). (Yet, Sparapani et al., 2019) noted that it is ideal for teachers to know their teaching approach and students’ needs because the needs are not aligned with the teaching approach, there are tendencies that the learning component may inhibit students’ literacy level. Considering this, the benefits of the five dimensions of TPI are explored in this study.

Ever since the introduction of TPI, it has been widely adopted to evaluate students’ engagement, performance and used in predicting quality of education. Examples of such studies include that of (Pachler, Kuonath & Frey 2019) concluding that employing a transformative teaching style increases students’ trust towards the teacher, thus, enhance their performance.

Pertaining to the developmental perspective, the teaching plan and implementation must be conducted from the lens of the learner. Nurturing requires the students to learn from the heart that is, immersing them, persevering to become a master. The last teaching approach that is, social reform held the notion

That students are taught based on the commonly held ideologies and values within their specialization so that they can transform the whole society (Schindelka, 2019).

The benefits of nurturing teaching perspectives are well empirically backed in the studies of (Das, Nguyen, Nguyen, Nomikoudis & Dung 2019; Voon, Wong, Looi & Chen 2020). On the account of (Voon et al., 2020), nurturing teaching perspective help students discern the critical aspect of the lesson learned while an earlier study by (Das et al., 2019) concludes redesigning course content using nurturing perspective, passive learners becomes an active learner.

On the account of (Burga, Leblanc & Rezania 2017; Weybrecht, 2017), exposing students to an education that creates that the importance of social awareness (social reform) helps the students to be engaged in future in socially responsible attitudes at individual and community level.

Likewise, the study of (Nixon & Williams, 2014) identifies the importance of redesigning the education curriculum towards the apprentice teaching style. From the authors’ examination, they argue that the new teaching approach creates deep awareness in the students and enhance their skills via experiential teaching. Similarly, (Atkinson, 2016) notes that using this approach, the students' conceptual and practical skills are enhanced through training and development that encourage them to implement the skills learned.

In summary, it can be explained that although different teaching approaches yield student engagement that translates to performance and employability, nevertheless, the objective of the teaching approaches must be pre-determined to be able to achieve the desired results. Despite, this study conceptually argues a significant relationship between teaching perspective inventory and quality education via the mediating role of students’ engagement.

Methodology

Measuring Teachers’ Career Perspective

To measure teachers’ career perspective, the construct is described base on five dimensions as reviewed in the literature review section namely teaching feedback, job security, job satisfaction, teachers’ experience, and teachers’ interpersonal communication. These dimensions according to earlier literature constitute significantly to the construct perceived teacher’s career which influences directly or indirectly in engaging students during academic sessions (Finn, 2020; Glazier et al., 2019; Gibbs et al., 2019; Minghui et al., 2018; O’Donovan et al., 2019). Therefore, the items used in this study are adapted from these authors.

Measuring TPI

The items used in measuring TPI in this study were adapted from the study of (Pratt & Collins, 2000). The items measure the five dimensions of teaching perspective inventory namely, nurturing, social reform, apprentice, transformation and developmental. Also, these items revolve around three main properties of teaching namely, intention actions and beliefs. In summary a total (28) items were adapted and used in measuring the five dimensions of TPI in this study.

Measuring Engagement

In this study, students’ engagement is described as students’ wiliness to communicate and participate in class activities as it unfolds (Gedera & Sampath, 2014; Rude, 2015). More so, engagement in this regard is measured using three dimensions namely psychological, social and emotional. The items used in measuring students’ engagement were adapted from the studies of (Gedera & Sampath, 2014; Rude, 2015; Schumacher 2018). In summary, a total number of 18 items covering the three types of engagements were adapted.

Measuring Quality Education

In this study, education quality is measured using the current and future parameters namely students’ current academic performance and the perceived employability. Considering this, the items used in measuring students’ performance are adapted from studies such as (Gillmor, Poggio & Embretson 2015; Hodson, 1984; Walker, Zhang & Surber 2008; Yen, 1993). Overall, six items were adapted to measure students’ performance.

In a similar view, items measuring students’ employability from the view of teachers were adapted from several studies examples of which includes (Blades, Fauth & Gibb 2012; Durrani & Tariq 2012; Heijde & Van Der Heijden 2006; Yusof, Mustapha, Mohamad & Bunian 2012). The rationale behind adapting these items from these sources lies in their reliability and validity which has been confirmed by several earlier scholars.

Population and Sample Size Selection

The samples employed in this study are arguably the entire population of the academic staffs at a university in Thailand. Thus, the samples are selected using a non-probabilistic approach. Overall, 196 questionnaires were distributed to the academic staffs at the place of study and all questionnaires were retrieved after a period of one month.

Normality and Outlier Removal

Although there are arguments that PLS-SEM software is a non-parametric test therefore, conducting a normality test is not important. However, (Sarstedt, Ringle & Hair, 2017; Hair, Risher, Sarstedt & Ringle 2019) believed the non-normality data when bootstrapped has higher chances of producing skewed and peaked distributions. Considering this, there is a strong evidence to examine the data set normality. In this study, the skewness and kurtosis were used in determining the data normality. This is because skewness and kurtosis measure the degree of distortions in data (Jain, 2018).

In determining the normality, the endogenous variable (quality education) was used. Using this, the dimensions of quality education namely students’ performance and employability as it is used in this study. (Table 1)

Table 1 Normality Distribution
Before Removal of Outliers						After Removing Outliers
S.N	Variable	Mean	Median	STD	Skewness	Kurtosis	Mean	Median	STD	Skewness	Kurtosis
1	performance	4.37	4.75	.86	2.57	6.42	3.89	4.03	.058	.86	2.58
2	employability	4.06	4.40	.833	-2.11	4.68	4.25	4.11	.51	-.93	1.84

The data before removing the outlier reveals that the skewness and kurtosis value are beyond the required skewness value of absolute one (±1) and kurtosis value of absolute three (±3) after removing the data points identified as outliers, the skewness and kurtosis values. With this, the authors proceed to data analysis.

Measurement of Construct

All the adapted items in this study were measured using a 5-point Likert scale ranging from 1=Strongly Disagree (SD); 2=Disagree (D); 3=Neutral (N); 4 Agree (A); 5=Strongly Agree (SA).

Data Analysis

To achieve the stated objectives in this study, a PLS-SEM approach was employed. The reason for employing this approach correspond to the rule of thumb proposed by (Lohmöller, 1989; Hair, Ringle & Sarstedt 2012; Reinartz, Haenlein & Henseler, 2009) which says that, PLS can be used if one of the conditions are fulfilled (a) when the investigation scope is broad and flexible; (b) when the investigated structural model is complex having many constructs and indicators. Considering these, the structural model under investigation is a complex model which the relationship needed to be examined concurrently. Besides, the model has one formative construct which support the reason why PLS-SEM should be used (Hair et al., 2019). Hence, PLS-SEM is among the most viable available software to engage in running the structural analysis. Using the PLS-SEM, the measurement and structural model were carefully analyzed and thus, the results are presented in the following paragraphs.

Measurement Model

To achieve the study measurement model, each construct Average Variance Extracted (AVE), Cross Loadings (CL), Cronbach Alpha and Composite Reliability were accessed. (Figure 1)

Discriminant validity: This is a fundamental assessment in PLS-SEM. The objective is to eliminate items with poorer loadings. That is, loadings less than 0.6, however, in some instances, loading of 0.5 can be accepted if the AVE and other conditions are dully fulfilled. Besides, the CL must be greater than 0.7, AVE of 0.5 and above are accepted. Furthermore, in accessing the measurement model, the items intercorrelations must be observed. According to the notion put forward by (Henseler, Ringle & Sarstedt, 2015), the items intercorrelation must not exceed the value of 0.985. With these, the results of the measurement models are presented in the Table 2 below:

As presented in the Table 2, the construct intercorrelation values are below the minimum threshold suggested by (Hensler et al., 2015). Considering this, it is confirmed that the data used in this analysis do not violate items multicollinearity assumptions

Table 2 Items Intercorelations (HTMT)
Column1	App	Cog	Dev.	Emo	IM	IW	JSA	MO	Nur.	Social	Stud. E.	Stud. Per.	Trans.
Dev.	0.772	0.394
Emo	0.258	0.722	0.554
IM	0.596	0.19	0.734	0.447
IW	0.485	0.425	0.423	0.55	0.484
JSA	0.581	0.474	0.738	0.586	0.579	0.871
MO	0.472	0.439	0.511	0.546	0.497	0.723	0.713
Nurture	0.561	0.334	0.599	0.395	0.639	0.545	0.45	0.477
Social	0.188	0.135	0.278	0.332	0.303	0.429	0.339	0.185	0.157
Student Employabilit y	0.321	0.843	0.481	0.847	0.263	0.449	0.501	0.428	0.401	0.145
Student Performance	0.222	0.712	0.422	0.772	0.375	0.445	0.403	0.482	0.331	0.177	0.886
Tra.	0.529	0.303	0.479	0.326	0.349	0.454	0.601	0.575	0.626	0.258	0.227	0.246
Psy.	0.266	0.462	0.411	0.572	0.323	0.209	0.22	0.246	0.398	0.275	0.406	0.406	0.211

Observing Table 3, 4, it is evidence that the measurement model criteria are fulfilled that is, the AVE is greater than 0.5, CR greater than 0.7 and items loading are 0.6 except for some few of 0.5 which have no significant effect on the AVE, CR and HTMT. Fulfilling these conditions, the authors proceed to test the hypotheses.(Figurre 2)

Table 3 Discriminant Validity
Column1	Items	Loadings	C. R	AVE	Discriminant Validity
IM	IM1	0.577	0.871	0.533	YES
	IM2	0.738
	IM3	0.781
	IM4	0.705
	IM5	0.756
	IM6	0.801
IW	IW1	0.532	0.861	0.56	YES
	IW2	0.715
	IW3	0.782
	IW4	0.833
	IW5	0.836
JSA	JSA1	0.810	0.809	0.518	YES
	JSA11	0.740
	JSA12	0.737
	JSA5	0.570
MO	MO1	0.721	0.865	0.52	YES
	MO2	0.576
	MO3	0.662
	MO4	0.762
	MO5	0.792
	MO6	0.768
Social	RS1	0.688	0.849	0.534	YES
	RS2	0.838
	RS3	0.554
	RS4	0.723
	RS5	0.814
Apprentice	SD1	0.746	0.827	0.546	YES
	SD2	0.701
	SD3	0.846
	SD6	0.681
Transmission	SI3	0.532	0.802	0.508	YES
	SI4	0.781
	SI5	0.776
	SI6	0.732
Developing	SD7	0.773	0.838	0.51	YES
	SD9	0.628
	SD10	0.654
	SD11	0.786
	SD12	0.715
Nurture	CFR1	0.704	0.809	0.515	YES
	CFR2	0.685
	CFR6	0.691
	CFR8	0.782
Cognitive	TA1	0.743	0.882	0.601	YES
	TA3	0.663
	TA4	0.840
	TA5	0.830
	TA6	0.786
Psychology	TB13	0.692	0.833	0.557	YES
	TB14	0.826
	TB15	0.793
	TB16	0.663
Emotion	TB1	0.875	0.837	0.561	YES
	TB2	0.666
	TB4	0.699
	TB6	0.663
Student Performance	TC4	0.755	0.832	0.553	YES
	TC5	0.753
	TC6	0.721
	TC7	0.745
Employability	TC8	0.775	0.84	0.513	YES
	TC9	0.728
	TC12	0.699
	TC14	0.676
	TC15	0.699

Table 4 R-Square
Column1	R Square	R Square Adjusted
QE	0.588	0.577

Analysis Findings

Table 5 presents the analysis findings. The model reveals that the variables explained a 58.8% variance that is, r²=0.588.

Table 5 Hypotheses Testing
Relationship	β	STDEV	T Stat	P Values	Decision
TP -> SE	0.395	0.101	3.903	0.000	Supported
TPI -> SE	0.187	0.095	1.971	0.049	Supported
TP -> QE	0.147	0.071	2.06	0.039	Supported
TPI -> QE	-0.048	0.084	0.571	0.568	Not Supported
SE -> QE	0.687	0.051	13.511	0.000	Supported
TPI*TP -> SE	0.225	0.052	4.351	0.000	Supported
TP -> SE -> QE	0.271	0.076	3.587	0.000	Supported
TPI -> SE -> QE	0.128	0.063	2.039	0.042	Supported

The findings present that both teacher career perspective and teaching perspective inventory have significant relationship to students’ engagement among the samples surveyed having TP=(β=0.395, p<0.05) and TPI having (β=0.187, p<0.05). Concerning the direct relationship between teachers’ perspective (TP), Teaching Perspective Inventory (TPI) on Quality Education (QE), the findings reveals that TP has a significant relationship with QE having (β=0.147, p<0.05) while, a negative insignificant relationship between TPI and QE was found having β=-0.048, p>0.05).

Furthermore, this study reveals that a significant relationship exists between students’ engagement (SE) and QE having SE -> QE=(β=0.687, p<0.05). Besides, the result presents a significant moderating effect of teaching perspective inventory on the relationship between Teachers’ perspective and students’ engagement having TPI*TP ->SE (β=0.225, p<0.05).

Pertaining to the mediating effect of SE on the relationship between TP and TPI on QE, the findings show that SE significantly mediate the relationship having TP->SE-> QE (β=0.271, p<0.05) and TPI->SE->QE (β=0.178, p<0.05).

Discussion

The empirical findings in this study conclude a significant relationship between teacher’s career perspective and students’ engagement the finding in this sense tallies with earlier literature such as (Heikonen et al., 2017; Jungert et al., 2014; Mazer, 2013; Nizeyimana, & Osman, 2014) where they conclude a significant relationship between teachers’ career perspective and engaging students. As such, the perception of teachers pertaining to the importance of their job, getting feedback, giving students some level of autonomy, teachers’ self-development, and job satisfaction as measured in this study enhances the students’ social psychological and cognitive engagement in the classroom.

Similarly, teachers’ career perspectives contribute significantly to the education quality in the study context. As empirically observed the five dimensions of teachers’ career perspective used in this study significantly enhance education quality in terms of academic performance and students’ employability. The findings in this regard confirm that of Skinner et al., 2008; Mazer, 2013; Mottet, 2006) noting that teacher career’s perspective influence students’ engagement both in direct and indirect ways that will later translate to quality education. It is established that the teaching perspective inventory among lecturers surveyed at a Thai university significantly influence students’ engagement. The findings in this regard corroborate with conclusions from earlier studies examples of which is not limited to (Burga et al., 2017; Das et al., 2019; Nixon & Williams 2014; Weybrecht, 2017) remarking a significant influence of teaching perspective inventory dimensions to significantly influence students’ engagement.

Similarly, it is established in this study that teachers’ career perspective translates to quality education. This confirms the study of (Das et al., 2019; Voon et al., 2020), where the authors conclude that adopting the right teaching approaches create skills awareness and encourage the students to implements the taught set of skills when needed. With the findings observed in this study, we note that the perspective of teachers’ career influences their relationship with students. This relationship influences the students’ psychological, emotional and social attachment to the course taught. Therefore, a negative relationship between the teacher and the students will translate to negative or low education quality in terms of performance and employability.

From these findings, it is concluded that the dimensions of teachers’ career perspective that are, how the teacher views their self-teaching approach, their previous experience among other factors discussed in this study contributes to students’ engagement (emotional, psychological and social). Similarly, the teaching approaches that are, teaching perspective inventory moderates the relationship to students’ engagement.

As evidence in this study, combining the dimensions of TPI there is a significant relationship TPI and students’ engagement. This implies that the teachers (lecturers) working at a Thai university understands the importance of teaching perspective inventory that is, they were able to identify the needs of the students thus, they apply the befitting teaching strategies to teach their students. By doing this, the study shows that the students are academically engaged. The findings in this regard therefore validate the argument of (Reeve & Cheon 2014; Sparapani et al., 2019) concluding that TPI works well when the teachers can identify their teaching approaches and the students’ needs.

On the contrary, teaching perspective inventory had no significant relationship to quality of education offers at the context of this investigation. This observation in this sense reveals that to achieve quality education, not all teaching approaches can yield the desired result. As such, the needed approaches should be identified and implemented accordingly corresponding to the arguments of and (Reeve & Cheon, 2014; Sparapani et al., 2019).

Comparing the findings on the significant relationship between students’ engagement and insignificant relationship to quality education in terms of performance and employability, this study shows that there is a plausible concern that something is missing in the observed relationship.

Further revelation in this study shows that students’ engagement significantly mediates the relationship between teacher’s career perspective and teaching perspective inventory on the quality of education offered at a Thai university. The findings in this sense expose the importance of engaging students socially, emotionally and psychologically to increase their performance and employability level. The findings thus confirm the revelations from earlier pieces of literature (Collins & Pratt, 2011; Morgan et al., 2015; Noonan, 2013; Parraga, 2004; Robertson et al., 2017; Shaari et al., 2014) where they conclude that determining the effective teaching approaches, student needs, stable teachers’ interpersonal relationship, feedback, and teachers’ experience significantly contributes to social, emotional and psychological engagement among students and thus, directly and indirectly, enhance the quality of education offered.

Implication of Findings, Recommendations and Conclusion

The findings in this study reveal both practical and theoretical importance of students’ engagement in attaining quality education

Practical Implication

Having exposed to the relationship between teacher’s career perspective and teaching inventory on students’ engagement and quality of education, it is therefore important for the authority and management of the institution to be able to portray to their employees (teachers) a positive career perspective in terms of job satisfaction, employment relations among others.

Besides, the importance of identifying and enhancing teachers’ skills is important to ensure quality education is delivered. The last but not the least point is that, engaging students socially, psychologically and emotionally plays a significant role in ensuring the institution ambition to deliver quality education.

Theoretical Implication

Theoretically, this study supports and confirms the findings from earlier literature on the significant importance of teachers’ career perspective, teaching perspective inventory and students’ engagement in delivering quality education.

Recommendations

The authors of this study therefore recommend to the management of the university and other higher education institutions in emerging economy that their teachers are the main drivers of perceived quality education and through them; they can effectively and efficiently compete in the global market. Hence, the teachers needed to be taken care of appropriately. More so, rather than following the education curriculum dogmatically as it is given to them by the education authority in Thailand, it is suggested that the teaching approach should allow the students some level of autonomy so that they can be emotionally, psychologically and socially engaged to the subjects taught. This will overall enhance the quality of education taught in the school.

Despite the revelations observed in this study, the generalizability of the result needed caution because of the data collection approach. It should be recalled that the data used in this study is gathered from a single location using non-probabilistic approach; therefore, the generalizability of these findings to the context of whole Thailand is not advisable. Considering this, the authors suggest future investigations using a larger sample size and a probabilistic sampling method.

Conclusion

The relationship between teachers ‘career perspective and students’ engagement moderated by teaching perspective inventory was examined. Furthermore, the relationship was extended to education quality offered at a university in Thailand. The findings revealed that teachers’ career perspective plays a significant role in enhancing students’ engagement. Additionally, teaching perspective inventory significantly moderates the relationship between teachers’ career perspective and students’ engagement. This implies that the teachers at a Thai university were able to identify the needs of the students. More so, it is observed in this study that students’ academic engagement translates to quality education measured using students’ academic performance and perceived employability.

References

1. Atkinson, G. (2016). Work-Based learning and work-integrated learning: fostering engagement with employers. National Centre for Vocational Education Research Ltd. PO Box 8288, Stational Arcade, Adelaide, SA 5000, Australia.
2. Blades, R., Fauth, B., & Gibb, J. (2012). Measuring employability skills. A rapid review to inform development of tools for project evaluation. London National Children’s Bureau.
3. Borkovic, S., Nicolacopoulos, T., Horey, D., & Fortune, T. (2020). Students positioned as global citizens in Australian and New Zealand universities: A discourse analysis. Higher Education Research & Development, 1–16.
4. Burga, R., Leblanc, J., & Rezania, D. (2017). Analysing the effects of teaching approach on engagement, satisfaction and future time perspective among students in a course on CSR. The International Journal of Management Education, 15(2), 306-317.
5. Carlsen, A. (2020). Ensuring lifelong learning for all in Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan and Uzbekistan: Country evidence and policy recommendations. UNESCO Publishing.
6. Chaplain, R. (2017). Teaching Without Disruption in the Secondary School: A Practical Approach to Managing Pupil Behaviour. Routledge.
7. Chen, Q. (2017). Globalization and transnational academic mobility. Springer.
8. Chiroleu, A., & Marquina, M. (2017). Democratisation or credentialism? Public policies of expansion of higher education in Latin America. Policy Reviews in Higher Education, 1(2), 139-160.
9. Collins, J.B., & Pratt, D.D. (2011). The teaching perspectives inventory at 10 years and 100,000 respondents: Reliability and validity of a teacher self-report inventory. Adult Education Quarterly, 61(4), 358-375.
10. Das, A.K., Nguyen, Q.T., Nguyen, A.T., Nomikoudis, M., & Dung, H.V. (2019). Course redesign to incorporate flipped delivery: A business degree case in Vietnam. Issues in Educational Research, 29(2), 363-383.
11. Dukhan, S. (2020). Value for learning during this time of transformation: The first-year students’ perspective, Higher Education Research & Development, 39:1, 39-52.
12. Durrani, N., & Tariq, V.N. (2012). The role of numeracy skills in graduate employability. Education+ Training.
13. Gedera, P., & Sampath, D. (2014). Mediational engagement in e-learning: An activity theory analysis (Doctoral dissertation, University of Waikato).
14. Gillmor, S.C., Poggio, J., & Embretson, S. (2015). Effects of reducing the cognitive load of mathematics test items on student performance. Numeracy: Advancing Education in Quantitative Literacy, 8(1).
15. Hair, J.F., Ringle, C.M., & Sarstedt, M. (2012). Partial least squares: The better approach to structural equation modeling? Long Range Planning. 45 (5-6): 312-319.
16. Heijde, C.M.V.D., & Van Der Heijden, B.I. (2006). A competence?based and multidimensional operationalization and measurement of employability. Human resource management: Published in Cooperation with the School of Business Administration, The University of Michigan and in alliance with the Society of Human Resources Management, 45(3), 449-476.
17. Heikonen, L., Pietarinen, J., Pyhältö, K., Toom, A., & Soini, T. (2017). Early career teachers’ sense of professional agency in the classroom: Associations with turnover intentions and perceived inadequacy in teacher–student interaction. Asia-Pacific Journal of Teacher Education, 45(3), 250-266.
18. Hodson, D. (1984). The effect of changes in item sequence on student performance in a multiple?choice chemistry test. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 21(5), 489-495.
19. Jain, D. (2018). Skew and Kurtosis: 2 important statistics terms you need to know in data science.
20. Jiani, M. A. (2017). Why and how international students choose Mainland China as a higher education study abroad destination. Higher Education, 74(4), 563-579.
21. Jones, C., & Pimdee, P. (2017). Innovative ideas: Thailand 4.0 and the fourth industrial revolution. Asian International Journal of Social Sciences, 17(1), 4-35.
22. Jungert, T., Alm, F., & Thornberg, R. (2014). Motives for becoming a teacher and their relations to academic engagement and dropout among student teachers. Journal of Education for Teaching, 40(2), 173-185.
23. Skinner, E., Furrer, C., Marchland, G., & Kindermann, T. (2008). Engagement and disaffection in the classroom: Part of a larger motivational dynamic? Journal of Educational Psychology, 100, 765 – 781.
24. Kruglanski, A.W., Thompson, E.P., Higgins, E.T., Atash, M.N., Pierro, A., Shah, J.Y., & Spiegel, S. (2018). To “do the right thing” or to “just do it”: Locomotion and assessment as distinct self-regulatory imperatives. In The Motivated Mind (pp. 299-343). Routledge.
25. Kumar, V.V., & Tankha, G. (2020). Influence of achievement motivation and psychological adjustment on academic achievement: A cross-sectional study of school students. Humanities and Social Sciences Reviews, 8(1), pp. 532-538
26. Lohmöller, J.B. 1989. Latent variable path modeling with partial least squares. Heidelberg: Physica.
27. Mazer, J.P. (2013). Student emotional and cognitive interest as mediators of teacher communication behaviors and student engagement: An examination of direct and interaction effects. Communication Education, 62(3), 253-277.
28. Minghui, L., Lei, H., Xiaomeng, C., & Potm?šilc, M. (2018). Teacher efficacy, work engagement, and social support among Chinese special education school teachers. Frontiers in psychology, 9, 648.
29. Ng, P.T. (2017). Learning from Singapore: The power of paradoxes. Taylor & Francis.
30. Niittylahti, S., Annala, J., & Mäkinen, M. (2019). Student engagement at the beginning of vocational studies.
31. Nikula, P.T., & Kivistö, J. (2018). Hiring education agents for international student recruitment: Perspectives from agency theory. Higher Education Policy, 31(4), 535-557.
32. Nixon, S., & Williams, L. (2014). Increasing student engagement through curriculum redesign: Deconstructing the ‘Apprentice’style of delivery. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 51(1), 26-33.
33. Nizeyimana, G., & Osman, R. (2014). Student teachers' academic backgrounds and beliefs about teaching: Predicting student engagement and performance in a developing country. Education as Change, 18(sup1), S77-S90.
34. Oppermann, E., Brunner, M., & Anders, Y. (2019). The interplay between preschool teachers' science self-efficacy beliefs, their teaching practices, and girls' and boys' early science motivation. Learning and Individual Differences, 70, 86-99.
35. Pachler, D., Kuonath, A., & Frey, D. (2019). How transformational lecturers promote students' engagement, creativity, and task performance: The mediating role of trust in lecturer and self-efficacy. Learning and Individual Differences, 69, 162-172.
36. Pratt, D.D. & Collins, J.B. (2000). The Teaching Perspectives Inventory (TPI). Adult Education Research Conference.
37. Pratt, D.D. (1998). Five perspectives on teaching in adult and higher education. Krieger Publishing Co.
38. Reeve, J., & Cheon, S.H. (2014). An intervention-based program of research on teachers’ motivating styles. Advances in motivation and achievement, 18, 293-339.
39. Reinartz, W.J., Haenlein, M., & Henseler, J. (2009). An empirical comparison of the efficacy of covariance-based and variance-based SEM. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 26(4): 332-344.
40. Robertson, A.C., Fowler, L.C., & Juve, A.M. (2017). Using the teaching perspectives inventory as an introduction to a residents-as-teachers curriculum. The journal of education in perioperative medicine: JEPM, 19(4).
41. Ross, P. (11/06/2019). Teaching Perspectives Inventory. Nursing Education Network.
42. Rude, W.J. (2015). Outdoor adventure education and thriving: The relationship between outdoor orientation and college student well-being. Azusa Pacific University.
43. Schindelka, B. (2019). Teaching Perspectives Inventory (TPI) and reflective teaching. Educatus.
44. Schumacher, S.C. (2018). Measuring adult engagement in online education: Instrument development (Doctoral dissertation, Barry University).
45. Shaari, A.S., Yusoff, N.M., Ghazali, I.M., Osman, R.H., & Dzahir, N.F.M. (2014). The relationship between lecturers’ teaching style and students’ academic engagement. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 118, 10-20.
46. Sparapani, N., Connor, C.M., Day, S., Wood, T., Ingebrand, S., McLean, L., & Phillips, B. (2019). Profiles of foundational learning skills among first graders. Learning and individual differences, 70, 216-227.
47. Timms, C., & Brough, P. (2013). I like being a teacher’: Career satisfaction, the work environment and psychological health. Journal of Educational Administration, 51(6), 768-789.
48. Voon, X.P., Wong, L.H., Looi, C.K., & Chen, W. (2020). Constructivism?informed variation theory lesson designs in enriching and elevating science learning: Case studies of seamless learning design. Journal of Research in Science Teaching.
49. Walker, C.M., Zhang, B., & Surber, J. (2008). Using a multidimensional differential item functioning framework to determine if reading ability affects student performance in mathematics. Applied Measurement in Education, 21(2), 162-181.
50. Wang, S., Gorbunova, N.V., Masalimova, A.R., Bírová, J., & Sergeeva, M.G. (2017). Formation of academic mobility of future foreign language teachers by means of media education technologies. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 14(3), 959-976.
51. Weybrecht, G. (2017). From challenge to opportunity–Management education's crucial role in sustainability and the sustainable development goals–An overview and framework. The International Journal of Management Education, 15(2), 84-92.
52. Yen, W.M. (1993). Scaling performance assessments: Strategies for managing local item dependence. Journal of educational measurement, 30(3), 187-213.
53. Yusof, H.M., Mustapha, R., Mohamad, S.A.M.S., & Bunian, M.S. (2012). Measurement model of employability skills using confirmatory factor analysis. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 56, 348-356.