The Roles of Teachers and Contextual and Motivational Factors in Young Learners’ Motivation: A Structural Equation Modelling (SEM) Approach

Abstract

Motivation is a key variable in successful learning of English, and it is influenced by many factors. However, little research has examined teachers’ roles in motivating young learners (YLs) to learn English. Therefore, this study investigates how teachers’ roles and contextual and motivational factors predict YLs’ motivation to learn English by assessing whether teachers’ roles impact motivation directly or indirectly. Using a novel teacher perspective, the study incorporates these elements into a Structural Equation Modelling (SEM) framework, highlighting direct and indirect pathways affecting children’s motivation. The study employed a quantitative approach by using a valid and reliable questionnaire, with strong internal consistency (CR ranged between 0.69 and 0.86 and α ranged between 0.70 and 0.86) to collect data from 225 English teachers of fifth graders. SEM was used for data analysis. Teachers weakly influenced YLs’ motivation to learn English (β = 0.281), but strongly impacted classroom contextual and motivational factors (β = 0.839). These factors significantly affected YLs’ motivation (β = 0.614) and mediated the impact of teachers’ roles (β = 0.515). Teachers significantly influenced YLs’ motivation by playing a crucial indirect role in shaping the learning environment that enhances students’ desire to learn when contextual and motivational factors mediate the effect. The findings suggest that schools should provide training programs that help teachers create motivational learning environments, such as providing meaningful tasks to motivate YLs intrinsically and extrinsically. The study adds further evidence to motivation theories, including self-determination theory, and sociocultural perspectives that recognize the role of contextual and interpersonal factors in shaping learners’ motivation.

1. Introduction

Motivation is one of the most influential factors determining the success of learning additional languages, especially for young learners in primary schools. Student motivation in language learning is defined by their eagerness to learn the language, their attitudes toward the learning process, and the intensity of their motivation, which encompasses the continuous effort necessary for learning the language (Gardner, 2010). Learning English at an early age enhances children’s engagement in and attitudes toward learning English (Chen et al., 2022). Among the many factors related to learner motivation, teachers play a central role (Mihaljević Djigunović & Nikolov, 2019; Nikolov, 2017) through their instructional practices, interpersonal behavior, scaffolding strategies, and emotional support. In addition to teacher influence, a variety of contextual and motivational factors, such as extramural English (e.g., Wouters et al., 2024), task formats (e.g., Kormos et al., 2020), and teachers’ motivation (Mihaljević Djigunović & Nikolov, 2019), also influence learners’ willingness and persistence in learning.

Despite the acknowledged importance of these elements, there is still limited empirical research that examines how teachers and contextual and motivational factors interact to influence young learners’ (YLs’) motivation in English language learning settings from the teachers’ perspectives. Most existing studies either focus on the learners or examine individual components of motivation in isolation (e.g., Kanonire et al., 2022; Liao et al., 2023; Tanaka & Kutsuki, 2018; Tseng, 2021; Vidergor, 2021). As a result, there is a need for a more integrated and statistically robust approach to understanding these relationships.

This research seeks to fill the gap by focusing on a teacher-oriented viewpoint and incorporating various elements such as teachers’ roles, contextual influences, and motivation aspects into a unified statistical framework. Using Structural Equation Modelling (SEM), the present study goes beyond earlier inquiries that focused on individual variables of learners, thereby capturing both the direct and indirect pathways influencing YLs’ motivation in actual classroom environments. This cohesive and methodically robust method offers a deeper insight into the development of motivation in elementary English classes.

This study aims to examine how teachers’ roles and contextual and motivational factors predict primary school students’ motivation to learn English. Specifically, it seeks to identify whether teachers’ roles impact students’ motivation directly or whether their influence is mediated through contextual and motivational factors.

This study aimed to answer the following research question:

• What is the effect of teachers’ roles on young learners’ motivation to learn English?
• What is the impact of contextual and motivational factors on young learners’ motivation to learn English?
• To what extent do the teachers’ roles influence contextual and motivational factors in the English language classroom?
• Do contextual and motivational factors mediate the relationship between teachers’ roles and young learners’ motivation?

2. Literature Review

2.1. Teachers’ Roles in Students’ Motivation

Teachers play a key role in the successful learning of English (Mihaljević Djigunović & Nikolov, 2019). Teachers help students acquire knowledge and competence through the learning process. Hennebry-Leung and Xiao (2023) argued that teachers are essential in crafting learners’ language learning journey, impacting their language skills and creating an encouraging and nurturing educational atmosphere. According to Thibadeau (2015), teachers’ roles involve establishing a conducive atmosphere within the learning environment, fostering enjoyable educational experiences, honoring students’ inquiries, preferences, and aversions, and efficiently coordinating their educational opportunities by offering appropriate materials and activities.

Teachers do more than share information; they also guide students throughout the process of learning a new language (Sistyawan et al., 2022). Teachers also serve as L2 learner models, facilitators, and motivators (Mihaljević Djigunović & Nikolov, 2019; Pinter, 2017), as well as material designers (Pinter, 2017). Teachers model positive attitudes, behaviors, and second language (L2) use (Pinter, 2017), in addition to providing support and scaffolding learning, by offering temporary support that is gradually removed as teachers help their pupils understand what they find challenging so that they can develop their L2 skills (Cai et al., 2022; Mihaljević Djigunović & Nikolov, 2019; Reiser, 2023). Teachers’ instructional support changes, and it may gradually decrease as their pupils become more proficient and independent.

Mihaljević Djigunović and Nikolov (2019) suggest several ways to motivate YLs to learn a new language. First, teachers motivate YLs primarily through their essential role in designing a positive classroom environment and establishing a strong rapport with students by designing interesting and cognitively challenging activities that maintain YLs’ intrinsic motivation, concentrating on the lively correlation between task quality and student engagement. Second, teachers’ constructive feedback also motivates YLs to learn and practice. Third, teachers’ facilitating cooperative learning experiences encourages peer influence in motivating YLs to learn. Finally, the personal bond that learners establish with their teacher also plays a significant role in boosting motivation.

Motivational strategies are teachers’ instructional interventions to increase student motivation. Language teachers’ motivational practice relates to increasing the level of the learners’ motivation (Guilloteaux & Dörnyei, 2008). There are four dimensions of language teachers’ motivational practice (Guilloteaux & Dörnyei, 2008): (1) designing basic motivational conditions, such as a good relationship between teacher and student, a fun and supportive classroom environment, and grouping students appropriately; (2) fostering initial motivation, such as the learners’ belief of success, enthusiastic perceptions of the English language program; (3) preserving motivation by promoting task-specific enthusiasm, offering successful experiences, sustaining a positive social reputation, and fostering learner independence; (4) promoting positive retrospective self-evaluation such as encouraging adaptive attributions, related to how learners interpret their successes and challenges to maintain motivated, strengthen resilience, and enhance their learning by giving feedback, increasing satisfaction, and offering appropriate grades.

A few studies have been carried out on the role of teachers in young English learner motivation. Hennebry-Leung and Xiao (2023) examined the role of teachers’ practice in shaping motivation and self-efficacy in language learning from the students’ perspective. This study showed that teacher practices that promote positive self-evaluation moderately influence motivation, whereas teacher discourse does not strongly correlate with motivation. This study also exposed that teaching practice significantly predicts ideal L2 self, integrative, and required orientations. The significance and purpose of strategies are crucial. Such practices are linked to orientations like the ideal L2 self and integrative motivation, helping learners connect with the target language community and boost intrinsic motivation. Strategies fostering self-evaluation and classroom interactions predict language confidence. Effective feedback, enhancing self-evaluation, boosts motivation and self-belief, emphasizing the need for adaptive teaching catering to individual needs. Therefore, there is a need to investigate the relationship between teachers’ roles and young learners’ motivation, as well as contextual and motivational factors.

2.2. Contextual and Motivational Factors

Contextual factors, including extramural English and task types, influence students’ motivation. Leona et al. (2021) investigated the connection between 298 10-year-old fourth graders’ exposure to English beyond the classroom and English vocabulary proficiency, and motivation in Dutch primary schools. The findings indicated that experiencing English through engaging media and interactions within the family serves as a positive predictor for young learners’ receptive vocabulary in English. Motivational elements, and in particular linguistic self-confidence, act as intermediaries in the link between external English exposure and vocabulary acquisition. For children receiving formal education, self-confidence entirely mediates this connection, while for those learning English informally, their exposure directly impacts vocabulary acquisition. The overall effect of learning English outside of the classroom via family and media was more significant for informal learners. In contrast, formal learners depend more on their self-assurance in English to convert exposure into vocabulary knowledge. Regular interaction with media and family correlates with enhanced vocabulary, although the influence of reading materials such as books and newspapers was not as strong as that of media and family engagements.

Jensen and Lauridsen (2023) conducted mixed methods studies using a survey and semi-structured interview to investigate 46 Danish teachers’ perceptions of the advantages, challenges, and benefits of extramural English during the initial stages of English instruction (ages 7–11). The results showed that teachers viewed extramural English positively for its potential to enhance vocabulary and motivate English learning. They saw YouTube videos as more beneficial than digital games. Teachers also noted student demotivation due to classroom boredom or feeling behind, linked to high personal expectations for English skills.

One of the internal contextual factors concerns task types (Mihaljević Djigunović & Nikolov, 2019; Roothooft et al., 2022). Individual, pair (Azkarai & Kopinska, 2020; García Mayo & Imaz Agirre, 2019; Villarreal & Lázaro-Ibarrola, 2022), and group tasks influence young learners’ motivation. Tasks that are perceived as meaningful and appropriately challenging tend to motivate students more effectively (Mihaljević Djigunović & Nikolov, 2019; Roothooft et al., 2022) because if the task is too difficult, too easy, or boring, it can demotivate YLs (Cameron, 2001; Mihaljević Djigunović & Nikolov, 2019; Nikolov, 2016).

Villarreal and Lázaro-Ibarrola (2022) examined task motivation and the quality of drafts considering functionality, complexity, precision, and language flow measures. The study focused on text outputs from 13 pairs of primary students participating in a CLIL English picture-description writing task. The model group pairs that received written corrective feedback showed moderate gains in complexity and fluency, while the control group pairs improved their accuracy without the need for written corrective feedback. Collaborative efforts kept motivation levels high, which increased after and between tasks, even though the model group experienced a slight dip in motivation once the tasks were completed.

Motivational factors drive students to engage in language learning, including teachers’ and students’ motivation (Guilloteaux & Dörnyei, 2008; Mihaljević Djigunović & Nikolov, 2019). Motivated teachers are generally more effective at motivating their learners (Mihaljević Djigunović & Nikolov, 2019). Teachers’ motivation makes them perform their roles effectively, and it comprises their passion for teaching and professional growth. Positive relationships between teachers and students enhance motivation, such as when students perceive support and appreciation from their teachers, they tend to be motivated to learn (Inostroza et al., 2024).

2.3. Young Learners’ Motivation

Motivation in students is characterized by the willingness to learn the language, attitudes to language learning, and the strength of motivation, which includes the sustained effort required for language acquisition (Gardner, 2010). This study is based on self-determination theory, where motivation has two types: intrinsic and extrinsic motivation (Ryan & Deci, 2020). Intrinsic motivation is when students engage in activities or English learning for personal enjoyment, challenge, or satisfaction rather than external rewards, while extrinsic motivation is when students are driven to engage in activities or English learning to gain external rewards or avoid negative outcomes.

Some factors that influence young learners’ motivation are positive attitudes toward English (Fenyvesi, 2020) and toward feedback (Roothooft et al., 2022), gender differences (Guo et al., 2023), access to educational resources, the design of learning materials (Liao et al., 2023), effective teaching practices (Hennebry-Leung & Xiao, 2023; Inostroza et al., 2024), collaborative learning opportunities (Azkarai & Kopinska, 2020; Villarreal & Lázaro-Ibarrola, 2022), enjoyment learning activities (Inostroza et al., 2024; Tsang & Lee, 2023), like game-based learning (Tsang & Lee, 2023; Vidergor, 2021). Thus, intrinsic motivation characterizes young learners (Carreira, 2011; Guo et al., 2023; Vidergor, 2021), and playful activities such as games and songs increase their intrinsic motivation to learn (Wallace & Leong, 2020).

3. Method

This research adopted a quantitative approach, gathering data via a teacher questionnaire that assessed perceived teacher roles, as well as contextual and motivational factors influencing children’s intrinsic and extrinsic motivation. Structural equation modelling (SEM) was used to explore the relationship between these variables, allowing an investigation of the direct and indirect impacts on young learners’ motivation. This methodology offered a comprehensive understanding of how teachers’ roles, along with contextual and motivational aspects, influence students’ motivation, delivering empirical insights into the nuanced interactions affecting motivation within language learning environments.

3.1. Context of the Study

This research was conducted in Indonesia, where English is taught as a foreign language and is compulsory for students in elementary school from grade three. However, in some schools, they started it in grade one, especially in private schools. English was taught for 70 min every week by teachers who had an English educational background, and others.

3.2. Participants

The research was conducted in Padang, Indonesia, focusing on elementary schools where English is a mandatory foreign language subject. The study included 225 teachers teaching 5th-grade English, with a predominance of female teachers (90.2%) and a minority of male teachers (9.9%). The largest age group among the participants was 30 to 40 years old (45.8%), followed by those aged 22 to 30 (38.6%). Concerning teaching experience, on

Table 1. Description of 100 participants in the study.

Variables	Descriptor	N	Percentage
Gender	Male	22	9.9%
	Female	203	90.2%
Age	22–30	87	38.6%
	30–40	103	45.8%
	41–50	26	11.5%
	50–60	12	5.3%
Number of years teaching children English	1–5	176	78.2%
	6–10	28	12.4%
	11–15	13	5.7%
	15+	8	3.5%
Education background	BA in English Education	135	60%
	BA in Elementary School Teacher Education	62	27.5%
	MA in English Education	6	2.7%
	Others	22	9.8%

, 78.2% had been teaching English to children for 1 to 5 years, while 3.5% had over 15 years of experience. In terms of educational background, 60% possessed a bachelor’s degree in English education, and 27.5% had a bachelor’s degree in elementary school teacher education. Table 1 presents information about the attributes of the participants.

3.3. Instrument

The questionnaire on EFL teachers’ roles in motivating and engaging young learners was developed based on the literature, namely scaffold, effective communicators (Mihaljević Djigunović & Nikolov, 2019), facilitators (Sistyawan et al., 2022), role models (Mihaljević Djigunović & Nikolov, 2019; Pinter, 2017), and teachers’ and students’ motivation (Guilloteaux & Dörnyei, 2008; Mihaljević Djigunović & Nikolov, 2019).

The survey comprised 33 items. They were related to teachers’ roles as role model (4 items), scaffolding (5 items), engagement facilitator (4 items), and effective communicator (3 items). Contextual and motivational factors included extramural English (3 items), task formats (4 items), and teachers’ motivation (5 items), and students’ intrinsic (2 items) and extrinsic (3 items) motivation factors.

The instrument was piloted with 100 English teachers of fifth graders and the results showed that the model fit the data well with fit indices of the teachers’ role (CFI = 0.931, TLI = 0.916, SRMR = 0.058, SRMR = 0.074) and contextual and motivational factors (CFI = 0.937, TLI = 0.923, SRMR = 0.063, SRMR = 0.072). The instrument was valid and reliable with acceptable internal consistency CR ranging between 0.69 and 0.86 (CR > 60), acceptable value of α ranging between 0.70 and 0.86 (α > 0.70) (Tavakol & Dennick, 2011), and good convergent validity (AVE ≥ 0.50) (Fornell & Larcker, 1981).

3.4. Procedures

We obtained ethical approval from the IRB of the Doctoral School of Education, University of Szeged, Hungary, before collecting the data (Number 24/2023). The participants were informed about the study, and they signed the consent form before participating. The questionnaire was distributed online via WhatsApp to English teachers. The data collection process lasted from April to June 2025. As the participation in this study was voluntary, we stopped the data collection when it reached the necessary number for the model.

3.5. Data Analysis

The data were examined utilizing Structural Equation Modeling (SEM), a statistical technique that enables the examination of complex relationships among observed and latent variables. SEM was chosen for its ability to test both direct and indirect effects within a theoretical model, making it particularly suitable for exploring how teachers’ role, contextual, and motivational factors interact to influence young learners’ motivation. Prior to model testing using partial least squares Structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM), we conducted a normality test to better understand the data, assumptions, and prerequisite analysis.

We used the one-sample Kolmogorov–Smirnov test to check the normality of teachers’ role (TR), contextual and motivational factors (CMFs), and young learners’ motivation (YLM) based on 225 observations each. The test compared each variable’s data distribution to a normal distribution and yielded non-significant p-values of 0.121, 0.080, and 0.090 for teachers’ roles, contextual and motivational factors, and young learners’ motivation, respectively (adjusted with Lilliefors correction), all above the alpha level of 0.05. Thus, there’s no evidence to disprove the null hypothesis of normality, indicating the data for teachers’ role, contextual and motivational factors, and young learners’ motivation are approximately normally distributed.

The assumption or requirement that must be met in PLS-SEM analysis indicates there is no issue of multicollinearity in the outer and inner models. Multicollinearity is a problem where there is intercorrelation or strong correlation between indicators. The consequence is that one of the strongly correlated indicators can be dropped or removed (Dash & Paul, 2021; Richter et al., 2023). The results of the outer variance inflation factor (VIF) analysis for each indicator across the three constructs, namely the teachers’ role, contextual and motivational factors, and young learners’ motivation. All VIF scores are under the standard limit of 5.0, indicating that multicollinearity is not an issue in the measurement model. Notably, the indicators for the teachers’ roles (role model = 2.032, scaffolding = 2.339, engagement facilitator = 2.912, effective communicator = 2.662), contextual and motivational factors (extramural English = 1.663, teacher motivation = 2.062, task formats = 1.986), and young learners’ motivation (extrinsic = 2.042, intrinsic = 2.042) all exhibit satisfactory VIF values. These outcomes imply that the indicators are not overly correlated and contribute independently to the underlying latent constructs they represent, enhancing the reliability of the outer model in PLS-SEM analysis.

The inner VIF analysis examines multicollinearity among latent variables in the model. VIF indicates how collinearity affects a variable’s variance. Teacher role’s VIF when predicting contextual and motivational factors is 1.000, showing no multicollinearity. For young learners’ motivation, teachers’ role and contextual and motivational factors have VIFs of 3.371, below the cutoff of 5.0, suggesting multicollinearity is not a significant issue, and predictors are independent enough for reliable estimates.

Then, outer model analysis was conducted to find out item validity, convergent validity, construct reliability, discriminant validity, and the unidimensionality model (UM) (Dash & Paul, 2021; Richter et al., 2023).

Table 2. The outer loading analysis.

	TR	CMF	YLM
RM	0.819	-	-
S	0.863	-	-
EF	0.902	-	-
EC	0.881	-	-
EE	-	0.852	-
TM	-	0.872	-
TF	-	0.853	-
E	-	-	0.921
I	-	-	0.931

presents the outer loading analysis, which shows how strongly each indicator reflects its respective latent construct. All indicators demonstrate high outer loadings, well above the recommended threshold of 0.70, indicating strong reliability and validity. For the teachers’ role construct, the components role model (0.819), scaffolding (0.863), engagement facilitator (0.902), and effective communicator (0.881) load strongly. Contextual and motivational factors are well represented by extramural English (0.852), teacher motivation (0.872), and task formats (0.853). For young learners’ motivation, the extrinsic and intrinsic components have very high loadings of 0.921 and 0.931, respectively. These results confirm that the indicators are appropriate measures of their corresponding constructs.

Table 3. The reliability and validity analysis constructs.

	Composite Reliability (>0.7)	AVE (>0.5)	Cronbach’s Alpha (>0.7)	rho A (>0.7)	CR	UM	CV
TR	0.923	0.751	0.889	0.896	Reliable	Reliable	Valid
CMF	0.894	0.738	0.823	0.828	Reliable	Reliable	Valid
YLM	0.923	0.857	0.833	0.836	Reliable	Reliable	Valid

indicates the reliability and validity analysis of three constructs, namely teachers’ role, contextual motivational factor, and young learners’ motivation. All constructs show strong composite reliability (CR) values above 0.70, indicating internal consistency. The average variance extracted (AVE) for all constructs also exceeds the recommended threshold of 0.50, confirming adequate convergent validity. Furthermore, both Cronbach’s Alpha and rho A values are above 0.70 for all constructs, indicating strong reliability. Therefore, all three constructs meet the criteria for reliability and validity, making them suitable for further analysis in the structural model.

We conducted discriminant validity testing using the Fornell–Larcker criterion, and the results showed the square roots of AVE of teachers’ role = 0.867, contextual motivational factor = 0.859, and young learners’ motivation = 0.926. Based on the Fornell–Larcker criterion, discriminant validity is confirmed when the square root of a construct’s AVE exceeds its correlations with other constructs (Fornell & Larcker, 1981), such as teachers’ role–contextual motivational factor = 0.839; contextual motivational factor–young learners’ motivation = 0.682, indicating that all three constructs are empirically distinct and that discriminant validity is confirmed (See

Table 4. Discriminant validity.

	TR	CMF	YLM
TR	0.867	-	-
CMF	0.839	0.859	-
YLM	0.596	0.682	0.926

).

3.6. Initial Model PLS-SEM

Teachers’ role is the role that teachers play in the young learners’ English learning process, including role models, scaffolding, engagement facilitators, and effective communicators. Contextual and motivational factors are the combination of environmental conditions in the classroom and outside the classroom, such as task formats and extramural English, and internal psychological drivers, such as teachers’ motivation, that shape and influence students’ motivation to learn English. Young learners’ motivation is the combination of internal dispositions, such as interest and enjoyment, and external influences, such as encouragement from teachers or rewards, that drive children’s engagement, effort, and persistence in learning activities, especially in educational settings like language learning.

Teachers impact young learners’ motivation in their various roles (Mihaljević Djigunović & Nikolov, 2019), in addition to contextual and motivational factors such as extramural English activities (Jensen & Lauridsen, 2023; Leona et al., 2021), task formats (Mihaljević Djigunović & Nikolov, 2019; Roothooft et al., 2022), and teachers’ motivational strategies (Guilloteaux & Dörnyei, 2008).

Figure 1 illustrates the proposed model. The hypotheses tested were as follows:

H1. 

The teachers’ roles have a significant direct effect on young learners’ motivation to learn English.

H2. 

Contextual and motivational factors have a significant direct effect on young learners’ motivation to learn English.

H3. 

The teachers’ roles have a significant positive effect on contextual and motivational factors in the classroom.

H4. 

Contextual and motivational factors mediate the relationship between teachers’ roles and young learners’ motivation.

4. Results

The overall model must meet the Goodness of Fit (GoF) criteria, which can be interpreted as one of the evaluation measures used in the context of PLS-SEM to evaluate how well the proposed model fits the empirical data obtained (Dash & Paul, 2021; Richter et al., 2023). The results of the Goodness of Fit (GoF) analysis for both saturated and estimated models in PLS-SEM showed that the standardized root mean square residual value (SRMR) for both models is 0.070, which is below the recommended threshold of 0.08, indicating a good fit. The Normed Fit Index (NFI) is 0.911, exceeding the minimum criterion of 0.90, suggesting that the model fits the data well relative to a null model. Additionally, the root mean square theta (RMS Theta) value is 0.092, which is below the cut-off of 0.102, further supporting the model fit quality. Since all three fit indices meet acceptable standards, both the saturated and estimated models are considered to have a good overall fit of the model (Foroughi et al., 2023; Richter et al., 2023). Therefore, PLS-SEM was conducted using SmartPLS. The final model can be seen in Figure 2.

Table 5. Descriptive statistics.

	N	Range	Minimum	Maximum	Mean	Std. Deviation	Variance
TR	225	1.9	2.1	4.0	3.331	0.4226	0.179
CMF	225	1.9	2.1	4.0	3.327	0.4339	0.188
YLM	225	2.4	1.6	4.0	3.069	0.5327	0.284
Valid N (listwise)	225

presents the descriptive statistics of the three variables that were assessed with 225 teachers. The mean scores for teachers’ roles (M = 3.33, SD = 0.42) and contextual and motivational factors (M = 3.33, SD = 0.43) were relatively high, signifying a generally positive perception of teachers about their roles and contextual and motivational factors. Conversely, the mean for young learners’ motivation (M = 3.07, SD = 0.53) was somewhat lower, indicating moderate motivation levels among young learners. The ranges (1.9 for teachers’ roles and contextual and motivational factors; 2.4 for young learners’ motivation) and standard deviations suggest moderate variability in responses, with the greatest variation seen in young learners’ motivation. Overall, the findings imply that while the teachers’ roles and contextual factors are viewed positively, student motivation levels are slightly more varied and lower on average.

Table 6. Correlations.

		TR	CMF	YLM
TR	Pearson Correlation	1	0.823 **	0.582 **
	Sig. (2-tailed)		0.000	0.000
	N	225	225	225
CMF	Pearson Correlation	0.823 **	1	0.654 **
	Sig. (2-tailed)	0.000		0.000
	N	225	225	225
YLM	Pearson Correlation	0.582 **	0.654 **	1
	Sig. (2-tailed)	0.000	0.000
	N	225	225	225

**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).

presents the correlations among variables. The Sig. (2-tailed) values between teachers’ roles and contextual and motivational factors (0.000 < 0.05), teachers’ roles and young learners’ motivation (0.000 < 0.05), and contextual and motivational factors and young learners’ motivation (0.000 < 0.05) demonstrate significant correlations among the variables. The computed r value for the correlation between teachers’ roles and contextual and motivational factors is 0.823, which exceeds the r table value of 0.13, confirming the presence of a relationship between these variables. This conclusion is similarly applicable to the other variable pairs.

We conducted an inner model analysis to find out the direct and indirect effects, total effects, and simultaneous effects (Dash & Paul, 2021; Hair, 2014; Richter et al., 2023), as well as to answer the research questions of the study.

Table 7. Direct and indirect effect analysis.

No.	Effect		Path Coefficient	p-Value
1	DE	TR→YLM	0.281	0.029
2	DE	TR→CMF	0.839	0.000
3	DE	CMF→YLM	0.614	0.000
4	ID	TR→CMF→YLM	0.515	0.000

presents the direct and indirect effect analysis.

As for research question 1, the result of this study showed that teachers’ roles have a positive direct influence on young learners’ motivation, with a path coefficient of 0.281, indicating a 28.1% increase in young learners’ motivation for every unit increase in teachers’ roles. Despite being significant, this effect is not notably strong, but the associated p-value being below 0.05 leads to the rejection of H01 and acceptance of Ha1, which claims that the teachers’ roles have a significant direct effect on young learners’ motivation to learn English.

In response to research question 2, this result indicated that contextual and motivational factors have a positive direct influence on young learners’ motivation, with a path coefficient of 0.614, signifying a 61.4% increase in young learners’ motivation per unit increase in contextual and motivational factors. The statistical significance of this effect is validated by the p-value being below 0.05, resulting in the rejection of H02 and acceptance of Ha2 that contextual and motivational factors have a significant direct effect on young learners’ motivation to learn English.

As far as research question 3 is concerned, the study revealed that teachers’ roles exert a positive direct influence on contextual and motivational factors, as evidenced by a path coefficient of 0.839. This implies that a one-unit increase in teachers’ roles results in an 83.9% augmentation in contextual and motivational factors. The significance of this effect is underscored by a p-value smaller than the conventional threshold of 0.05, leading to the rejection of H03 and acceptance of Ha3, that the teachers’ roles have a significant positive effect on contextual and motivational factors in the classroom.

Finally, findings on research question 4 showed that teachers’ roles have a positive indirect impact on young learners’ motivation via contextual and motivational factors, which serve as an intervening variable, quantified at 0.515. This suggests that an increment of one unit in teachers’ roles results in an indirect enhancement of young learners’ motivation through contextual and motivational factors by 51.5%. This effect is deemed significant, as the corresponding p-value is less than the established significance threshold of 0.05, leading to the rejection of H04 and the acceptance of Ha4 that contextual and motivational factors mediate the relationship between teachers’ roles and young learners’ motivation.

The overall influence of teachers’ roles on young learners’ motivation was quantified as 0.796. This suggests that a one-unit increment in teachers’ roles results in an enhancement of young learners’ motivation by a total of 79.6%, either directly or indirectly via contextual and motivational factors as mediating variables. This effect is both positive and statistically significant, as evidenced by the p-value for the influence (see

Table 8. Total effect analysis.

No.	Effect	Path Coefficient	Total Effect	p-Value
1	TR→CMF→YLM	0.515	0.796	0.000
2	TR→YLM	0.281

).

Table 9. Simultaneous effects (R²).

	R2	R2 Adjusted
CMF	0.703	0.702
YLM	0.467	0.463

shows that the simultaneous effect of contextual and motivational factor is influenced by the teachers’ roles variable by 70.2%, classified as high, with a positive and significant p-value under 0.05, young learners’ motivation is influenced by (teachers’ roles, contextual and motivational factors) by 46.3%, classified as medium, and also has a positive and significant p-value under 0.05.

We also quantified the influence of predictor variables on endogenous constructs in the model (Wong-Ken, 2013). Teachers’ roles have a small to medium significant effect of 2.371 on contextual and motivational factors, while young learners’ motivation at 0.210 had a small effect. Contextual and motivational factors’ effect on young learners’ motivation is 0.104, a small effect. Teachers’ roles have the strongest impact, especially on contextual and motivational factors (See

Table 10. The effect size (F²).

No.	Path	F2
1	TR→CMF	2.371
2	TR→YLM	0.210
3	CMF→YLM	0.104

).

Table 11. Correlation among variables.

	TR	CMF	YLM
TR	1.000	0.699	0.596
CMF	0.699	1.000	0.682
YLM	0.596	0.682	1.000

demonstrates the correlations among the three principal variables. The results reveal positive and moderately strong correlations across all pairs of variables. Teachers’ roles exhibit a moderate correlation with contextual and motivational factors and young learners’ motivation, implying that an enhancement in teachers’ support and involvement correlates with improvements in both contextual and motivational factors and learners’ motivation. Additionally, contextual and motivational factors demonstrate a moderate to strong correlation with young learners’ motivation, suggesting that teachers’ support and involvement are linked to increased student motivation. These results corroborate the structural model’s hypothesis of interconnected constructs.

5. Discussion

Regarding research question 1, this study revealed that the roles of teachers significantly influenced young learners’ motivation to learn English, although the effect was weak. This outcome is in line with the points that were discussed as key variables in previous publications. These included, for example, teachers’ roles as efficient users of scaffolding and communication strategies (Mihaljević Djigunović & Nikolov, 2019), facilitators of children’s learning (Sistyawan et al., 2022), and serving as role models (Mihaljević Djigunović & Nikolov, 2019; Pinter, 2017). Thus, the present study supports the overall claims that teachers play vital roles in initiating and maintaining YLs’ motivation during the process of learning English (Mihaljević Djigunović & Nikolov, 2019). The positive and direct impact is significant in the model.

As for research question 2, the results showed that the contextual variables included in the model, extramural English, task types, and teachers’ motivation, had a strong and significant influence on young learners’ motivation, and this impact was direct in the model. These outcomes are also aligned with previous research. More specifically, findings add new evidence to claims made by previous studies (Jensen & Lauridsen, 2023; Leona et al., 2021) on how children’s motivation is impacted by extramural English. Moreover, outcomes underpin previous findings on the impact of task types (Mihaljević Djigunović & Nikolov, 2019; Roothooft et al., 2022), and teachers’ motivational strategies (Guilloteaux & Dörnyei, 2008; Mihaljević Djigunović & Nikolov, 2019). In this study, teachers who used various tasks matching children’s needs and preferences in the form of individual, pair, and group tasks managed to increase their learners’ motivation. This finding supports the principles outlined by multiple authors on teaching YLs additional languages. If teachers use familiar and age-appropriate tasks tuned to the level of learners, they will like and enjoy doing the tasks (Mihaljević Djigunović & Nikolov, 2019), and thus, enhance YLs’ motivation.

Related to research question 3, the roles of teachers significantly and strongly influenced contextual and motivational factors in their English language classrooms. For example, the teachers’ roles as an engagement facilitator concern using role play and other intrinsically motivating tasks and task formats in their English classes. Such pedagogical choices impact how motivated teachers are to learn new ideas about teaching English to children and to improve and innovate their own teaching practice. Another example concerns teachers’ roles in scaffolding their pupils’ learning by providing encouraging oral feedback, which influences contextual factors, namely, teachers’ motivational strategies related to extramural English, when teachers encourage students to share what they pick up in English beyond their classes. An additional example is the use of certain interactive task formats that encourage learners to give each other feedback about their performances. This also influenced the motivational factor, namely, teacher’ motivation to improve their English proficiency. The overall finding that teachers’ various roles have a significant, direct, positive impact on contextual and motivational factors in the classroom offers further evidence in support of claims concerning the key roles teachers play in the teaching and learning process (Cameron, 2001; Nikolov, 2016, 2017; Pinter, 2017).

Regarding research question 4, we found that contextual and motivational factors mediated the relationship between teachers’ roles and young learners’ motivation. The effect was significant and strong. This point underpins the claim made by Mihaljević Djigunović and Nikolov (2019) that motivated learners motivate teachers; in other words, the impact is bidirectional, despite the fact that this positive relationship is often overlooked. According to their framework, teachers influence young learners’ motivation in multiple ways (Mihaljević Djigunović & Nikolov, 2019), and YLs’ motivated learning behavior and experiences also impact how motivated teachers are to improve their practice, relying on what children know and enjoy.

6. Conclusions and Implications

In this study, we proposed and tested a model. It revealed that the roles of teachers significantly influenced their pupils’ motivation to learn English, although the effect was weak (0.281). However, they had a strong and direct impact on contextual and motivational factors (0.839) concerning the English language classroom, whereas contextual and motivational factors had a strong and significant influence on young learners’ motivation (0.614). They mediated the relationship between teachers’ roles and children’s motivation (0.515). These findings document that teachers’ impact on students’ motivation is significant, and it is mediated by contextual and motivational factors. Although the direct effect is not strong, teachers play a vital indirect role by shaping the motivational environment that supports children’s desire to learn.

This study has some implications. For practice, the results suggest that schools should invest in training programs that help teachers create motivational learning environments, emphasizing indirect strategies such as providing meaningful tasks and fostering positive classroom climates. For teacher education, the findings highlight the importance of the range of roles teachers play as facilitators of engagement rather than solely transmitters of knowledge. Integrating effective motivational strategies, like varied task types and formats, emotional support in the form of encouraging feedback into daily teaching practices, can contribute to motivating young learners to learn English both intrinsically and extrinsically. For theory building, the findings add further evidence to models of motivation such as self-determination theory and sociocultural perspectives that recognize how contextual and interpersonal factors shape learners’ motivation. The model demonstrates that teachers’ influence operates through mediating variables, contributing to a more nuanced understanding of motivational processes in young language learners.

7. Limitations and Further Research

This study is not without limitations. First, the findings are limited to Indonesian teachers of English working with fifth graders. Future research should involve teachers from different grades and broaden the setting to other contexts to enhance the generalizability of the results. Second, the research design was cross-sectional; therefore, this study did not track how teachers’ perceptions of their roles and contextual and motivational factors changed over time. Further investigations should use a longitudinal design to investigate changes in the teaching learning process. Finally, we used data from a single survey. Future studies should triangulate multiple types and sources of data by using interviews and classroom observations and integrate students’ perceptions to get a fuller picture.