Modeling the Effect of Chinese EFL Teachers’ Self-efficacy and Resilience on Their Work Engagement: A Structural Equation Modeling Analysis

Teaching is deemed a taxing enterprise, especially as far as higher education is concerned. As a result, much research attention has been showered upon exploring the correlates of engagement for instructors. To contribute to this research direction, the present researchers carried out this survey to test a model of work engagement in a Chinese higher education context. Teacher self-efficacy and resilience were added as predictors of the hypothesized model. A number of 372 Chinese English as a foreign language (EFL) instructors in higher education contexts were selected through convenience sampling. The measurement models of the latent variables (i.e., self-efficacy, resilience, and work engagement) were confirmed via running Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA). Afterward, Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) was used to test the structural model. The results obtained from the analyses showed that both teacher self-efficacy and resilience could significantly predict EFL teachers’ work engagement, with self-efficacy serving as a stronger predictor than resilience. The outcomes suggest some implications for EFL stakeholders such as teachers, teacher trainers, policy makers, and officials. Plain Language Summary This new article bridges the identified gaps in the literature, and the current research intends to examine the predictability of EFL teachers work engagement level in terms of their self-efficacy beliefs and resilience tendencies. Based on our observation, there is a paucity in the literature examining the causal relationship between teacher self-efficacy and teacher work engagement in HE, and to our knowledge, this is the first study to consider teacher self-efficacy as a potential predictive variable of work engagement of EFL teachers in HE.

As Johnson (2022) indicated, researchers should give more attention to characteristics that make teachers stay at school rather than focusing on what factors make them leave.Recognized as a motivational construct, teacher engagement is defined as ''a positive, fulfilling, work-related state of mind that is characterized by vigor, dedication, and absorption'' (Schaufeli et al., 2002, p. 74).An engaged teacher can be committed to the learning objectives, passionate about teaching, resistant when faced with challenges, vigilant and perceptive about learners' needs, and absorbed in their profession (Buric´& Macuka, 2018;Dong & Xu, 2021;Lyu, 2016;Van Wingerden & Poell, 2019).Given that engaged teachers may contribute to the success of students and schools, it is vital to safeguard teachers' satisfaction and engagement at work (Park & Johnson, 2019).Furthermore, teacher engagement is found to be a key player in understanding and explaining of why teachers leave their work (Eldor & Shoshani, 2017;Hakanen et al., 2006;Minghui et al., 2018;Park & Johnson, 2019).As Klassen and Chiu (2011) suggested, low teacher engagement and work satisfaction can be significant predictors of teachers' intention to leave.Therefore, it is necessary to identify antecedents and consequences of teacher engagement, especially when it comes to English as a foreign language (EFL) contexts.Many teachers, particularly EFL teachers, leave the teaching profession for a variety of reasons, such as lack of resilience (Drew & Sosnowski, 2019), lack of self-efficacy (Dai & Wang, 2023;Fathi, Greenier, & Derakhshan, 2021;Fathi, Nourzadeh, & Saharkhiz, 2021;Guo et al., 2023;Zhi et al., 2023), and burnout (Yong & Yue, 2007;Wu et al., 2023).
Given the positive impacts of self-efficacy and resilience on job performance in teachers' work engagement (Granziera & Perera, 2019;Van Wingerden & Poell, 2019), there has been increased interest among educators and researchers in linking these constructs to important student and teacher outcomes in the realm of education in general and EFL contexts in particular.Research indicates that teachers with higher levels of resilience and self-efficacy are likely to be more engaged at work, resulting in increased organizational outcomes (Li et al., 2013;Skaalvik & Skaalvik, 2014;Wilcox & Lawson, 2018).Notwithstanding the research on self-efficacy and resilience in educational settings and an array of research foci on the role of these constructs in work engagement, little attention has been paid to the effects of self-efficacy and resilience on teacher work engagement in HE, particularly in the Chinese EFL context.Furthermore, to the best of our knowledge, there is no study that attends simultaneously to the associations among EFL teachers' work engagement, self-efficacy, and resilience.To bridge the identified gaps in the literature, the current research intends to examine the predictability of EFL teachers' work engagement level in terms of their self-efficacy beliefs and resilience tendencies.Consequently, the main research question in this research undertaking is whether there are any particular associations among EFL teachers' resilience, self-efficacy, and work engagement in the Chinese HE context.To this end, the subsequent hypotheses were articulated in this research.
H 01 .There is not any significant relationship between Chinese EFL teachers'

Teacher Engagement
According to Kahn's (1990) theory of engagement, Bakker (2011) referred to work engagement as engrossment, vigor, and dedication toward organizational objectives.Based on positive psychology, Schaufeli and Bakker (2003) proposed the Utrecht Work Engagement Scale (UWES) that measured the three concepts of work engagement, namely vigor, dedication, and absorption.
Vigor pertains to one's mental and physical resilience in the face of setbacks and challenges while working and his energy and willingness to invest effort in work.
Dedication is recognized as a sense of significance, enthusiasm, and purpose toward organizational objectives and being actively engaged in one's work.Absorption refers to a state of mind in which one is so engrossed in work that time passes by rapidly (Schaufeli et al., 2006).In their study, Klassen et al. (2013) classified the work engagement of teachers into four categories: cognitive engagement relating to a sense of absorption and performance; emotional engagement which pertains to teachers' affective commitment; social engagement with students referring to relationships with students; social engagement with colleagues which relates to the relationship and interaction with peers.It is argued that vigor and dedication are the core dimensions of work engagement (Llorens et al., 2007).As a multidimensional motivational construct, teacher engagement reflects the effort and energy that teachers put into their work (vigor) and the enjoyment they gain from teaching (dedication).As Klassen et al. (2012) maintained in their study, teacher work engagement is a motivational concept denoting teachers' voluntary sharing of his physical, cognitive, and emotional resources during teaching.
Research evidence indicates that teacher work engagement is positively associated with positive outcomes at both individual and organizational aspects, such as job satisfaction, student achievement, student engagement, and teacher well-being (Han and Wang, 2021;Bakker & Bal, 2010;Knowles, 1999;Skaalvik & Skaalvik, 2014, 2018;Wang, Derakhshan, & Zhang, 2021;Wang, Gao, & Xun, 2021).Bakker and Bal (2010) gathered data from 54 Dutch teachers.Their results indicated that teacher work engagement could predict classroom achievement.In another study, Hakanen et al. (2006) concluded that teachers' work engagement predicted their organizational commitment.Teacher engagement has also been found to correlate negatively with adverse outcomes, including intentions of leaving the teaching profession and burnout (Amini Faskhodi & Siyyari, 2018;Eldor & Shoshani, 2017).As Bermejo-Toro et al. (2016) demonstrated in their study, engaged teachers are immune to the disruptive effects of burnout syndrome.Park and Johnson (2019) probed the relationships between job satisfaction, work engagement, and turnover intention.An online questionnaire was administered to 249 teachers in the United States.Employing hierarchical multiple regression analysis, their results demonstrated that job satisfaction and work engagement of teachers were negatively correlated with their turnover intention.
Besides the contributions and consequences of teacher engagement, research on antecedents of this construct is of high importance and still less explored (Buric´& Macuka, 2018;Xiao et al., 2022), especially in EFL contexts.Janik and Rothmann (2016) administered a crosssectional survey to a sample of 502 school instructors.Their results indicated that low emotional exhaustion, high psychological meaningfulness, and availability had positive effects on teacher work engagement.Derakhshan, Dewaele, and Azari Noughabi (2022), Derakhshan et al. (2023) investigated the association between loving pedagogy, teaching for creativity, and work engagement among multinational EFL teachers.Their findings demonstrated that loving pedagogy and teaching for creativity significantly predicted work engagement of teachers.Likewise, Greenier et al. (2021) investigated the role of emotion regulation and psychological well-being as predictors of EFL teachers' work engagement.Utilizing a sequential explanatory mixedmethods approach, the authors stated that emotion regulation and psychological well-being significantly predicted teacher work engagement.Regardless of the mentioned literature, a limited number of studies examine teacher engagement in HE.However, Botham (2018) aimed to examine the factors that may shape the work engagement of university teachers.Data were collected via an online survey and semi-structured interviews.The results demonstrated that intrinsic and extrinsic motivation exert a strong influence on the work engagement of HE teachers.It was also found that extrinsic motivation was a less effective factor compared to intrinsic motivation.Despite the aforementioned studies, there is a relatively small body of literature that directly examines the antecedents of teacher engagement in the domain of HE in general and the EFL context in particular.In addition, no study has ever investigated the precursors of EFL teachers' work engagement in HE.Hence, this study attempted to fill that void by investigating the potential predictive roles of teacher self-efficacy and teacher resilience in the work engagement of EFL teachers in an HE context in China.

Teacher Self-Efficacy
Efficacy pertains to one's required expertise and competencies to attain expected or desired outcomes (Bandura, 1977).Rooted in social cognitive theory (Bandura, 1977) and locus of control theory (Rotter, 1966), self-efficacy is defined by Bandura (1986) as ''people's judgments of their capabilities to organize and execute courses of action required to attain designated types of performances'' (p.391).Consistent with social cognition theory, teachers' efficacy is labeled as their decision about their capabilities to cause preferred consequences of learner participation, even among students who might be unenthusiastic (Tschannen-Moran & Hoy, 2007).Selfefficacy is a positive self-evaluation concept reflecting the capability of an individual to control the environment and exert influence upon it effectively (Schunk & Pajares, 2002;Schwarzer & Warner, 2013;Seifalian & Derakhshan, 2018).Characterized as a multidimensional and domain-specific concept (Skaalvik & Skaalvik, 2007), self-efficacy is a belief one holds about what he can do and how well he can do it (Zimmerman & Cleary, 2006).Extending this construct into the teaching profession, teacher self-efficacy is concerned with teachers' judgment of their abilities to create desired outcomes of students' engagement and academic performance (Skaalvik & Skaalvik, 2007;Tschannen-Moran & Hoy, 2001).Milner and Hoy (2003) noted that teachers' effort in the teaching process, their persistence in classrooms and the aspirations they set can be profoundly influenced by teacher self-efficacy.Put another way, a teacher with higher levels of self-efficacy is inclined to be engaged in more demanding activities, invest more effort, demonstrate resilience in the face of challenges, and maintain committed to the teaching objectives (Cerit, 2013;Chesnut & Burley, 2015;Fathi et al., 2020;L. Huang et al., 2020;Wilcox & Lawson, 2018).Teacher selfefficacy could be measured by four sources of information theorized by Bandura (1977); namely, enactive mastery experiences, vicarious experience, verbal persuasion, and physiological reactions.Relating to successful authentic teaching practices (Bautista, 2011), enactive mastery experiences are regarded as the most crucial source of self-efficacy for teachers (Tschannen-Moran et al., 1998).Despite the significance of these sources, teachers' self-efficacy can also be shaped by other factors such as teaching environment, interaction with students, students' behavior, and demographical structures (Aldridge & Fraser, 2016;Andersen et al., 2004;Bing et al., 2022;Ross et al., 1996).As Bandura (1977) proposed, self-efficacy has two dimensions: personal efficacy referring to one's belief about his abilities, and outcome expectancy referring to one's belief that his actions will bring about optimal outcomes.Consequently, it can be argued that teachers who not only believe in their competencies but also in their desirable teaching outcomes are more likely to be committed to and engaged in their work (Bautista, 2011;Buric´& Macuka, 2018;Fathi et al., 2022;Liang et al., 2022;Pan, 2014).Tschannen-Moran and Hoy (2001) introduced three facets of instructor self-efficacy: efficacy in classroom management; relating to teachers' belief regarding their abilities to establish discipline and manage the classroom, efficacy in student engagement; referring to teachers' perception of their competence in engaging students in classroom tasks, efficacy in instructional strategies; pertaining to teachers believing in their capabilities to employ effective teaching strategies to meet successful learning outcomes.
Teacher self-efficacy can not only have positive effects on teachers' well-being (i.e., engagement and satisfaction) (Fathi & Derakhshan, 2019;S. Huang et al., 2019;Zheng et al., 2019) but can also impact students' academic performance and adjustment (Shahzad & Naureen, 2017;Zee & Koomen, 2016); hence, investigating teacher self-efficacy can be conducive to the development of both teachers and learners.Zee and Koomen (2016) conducted a study to examine the influences of teacher self-efficacy on the quality of learning processes, learners' academic adjustment, and teachers' psychological well-being.Their results revealed that teacher selfefficacy positively correlated with students' academic adjustment, classroom quality, and teachers' well-being.Additionally, teacher self-efficacy was negatively associated with teacher burnout and positively related with their job satisfaction and commitment.Using multiple group confirmatory factor analysis, Avanzi et al. (2013) indicated that teacher self-efficacy was positively associated with teacher job satisfaction and negatively associated with their burnout.In a similar vein, Sarıc xam and Sakız (2014) concluded that teacher self-efficacy was negatively associated with teacher burnout.Love et al. (2020) explored the associations between teacher selfefficacy with stress, teacher engagement, and student outcomes.Collecting data from a sample of 44 special education teachers, the results demonstrated that teacher self-efficacy was strongly and positively associated with teacher work engagement and student outcomes, and negatively related to teacher stress.In another study, Federici and Skaalvik (2012) demonstrated that teacher self-efficacy was positively related to job satisfaction and negatively related to emotional exhaustion.Conducting SEM analyses, Skaalvik and Skaalvik (2019) found that teachers' sense of self-efficacy positively correlated with teacher work engagement.In the same vein, Skaalvik and Skaalvik (2014) reported that higher teacher selfefficacy predicted greater teacher engagement.Utilizing a longitudinal design, Simbula et al. (2011) conducted a study on a sample of 104 Italian teachers to examine the potential correlation between job resources, self-efficacy and work engagement.Results of SEM analysis demonstrated that teachers' self-efficacy had a positive predictive role on teacher work engagement.In a similar attempt, Sokmen and Kilic (2019) conducted a quantitative research design to explore the association between teachers' self-efficacy, autonomy, job satisfaction, teacher engagement, and burnout.Their results indicated that teaching self-efficacy had a predictive role in teacher engagement, job satisfaction, and autonomy.In addition, it was found that teacher self-efficacy negatively predicted burnout.Recently, teacher self-efficacy and work engagement have received some limited attention from EFL researchers.For instance, Fathi, Greenier, and Derakhshan (2021) and Fathi, Nourzadeh, and Saharkhiz (2021) collected data from a sample of 238 Iranian EFL teachers to examine self-efficacy, burnout, and emotion regulation.The findings revealed that the self-efficacy of teachers was positively associated with teacher emotion regulation and negatively correlated with teacher burnout.Han and Wang (2021) examined the relationships among EFL teachers' self-efficacy and work engagement in the context of China.The results demonstrated that teacher self-efficacy positively correlated with their work engagement.In a similar study focusing on the impact of self-efficacy on the work engagement experience of a group of Iranian EFL teachers, Fathi, Greenier, and Derakhshan (2021), Fathi, Nourzadeh, and Saharkhiz (2021) concluded that teacher self-efficacy was a significant predictor of work engagement.Notwithstanding the aforementioned studies a paucity exists in the literature examining the causal relationship between teacher self-efficacy and teacher work engagement in HE, and to our knowledge, this is the first study to consider teacher self-efficacy as a potential predictive variable of work engagement of EFL teachers in HE.

Teacher Resilience
Scholars have conceptualized resiliency as a process developed by individuals while interacting with the external environment (e.g., Sammons et al., 2007).For instance, Sammons et al. (2007) noted that resiliency is ''a dynamic construct subject to influence by environmental, work-specific and personal contexts'' (p.694).From a social perspective, resilience is composed of two components working in parallel: being exposed to hardships and the ability to adapt to hardships in a constructive manner (Johnston-Wilder & Lee, 2010).Commonly viewed as a multidimensional concept (Pooley & Cohen, 2010), resilience is the capacity of individuals to adapt when experiencing adversity and risk (Luthans, 2002) positively.It is evident that teaching is a stressful and challenging profession which can eventually lead to teacher attrition (Buchanan et al., 2013); however, some teachers remain committed to and engaged in their work despite the setbacks and obstacles in the workplace due to various reasons.One such particular reason is resilience which enables teachers to be persistent in the face of adversities and difficulties (Gu & Day, 2007).Conceptualized as the interaction between teachers' personal and environmental factors (Tait, 2008), teacher resilience pertains to instructors' positive coping and adaptation in the face of adverse teaching experiences (Ainsworth & Oldfield, 2019;Wang, Derakhshan, & Azari Noughabi, 2022;Wang, Derakhshan, & Rahimpour, 2022;Y. Wang, 2021).Resilient teachers are equipped with the capacity to thrive when facing stress and setbacks (Drew & Sosnowski, 2019), draw satisfaction from work (Day & Gu, 2013), regulate their emotions (Tait, 2008), control any situation (Dworkin, 2009), teach effectively (Bobek, 2002;Yin et al., 2020), and remain committed to the teaching profession (Xun et al., 2021).In their study, Gu and Day (2007) identified three protective factors which exert impacts on resilience: the personal; referring to the support from families and friends, the situated; denoting teachers' school life including the support from peers and their relationship with learners, and the professional; referring to teacherrelated attitudes and beliefs (i.e., self-efficacy, reflection, inner drive), as well as external factors such as educational policies.This means that every teacher has his/her own particular beliefs, abilities, competencies and strategies that enable him/her to cope and adapt to adversities in teaching.Consequently, a number of studies have suggested an association between teacher resilience and their self-efficacy in educational psychology (e.g., Daniilidou et al., 2020;Derakhshan, Dewaele, & Azari Noughabi, 2022;Sammons et al., 2007;Yada et al., 2021), particularly in the EFL context (Fathi & Saeedian, 2020;H. Liu & Chu, 2022).Yada et al. (2021) examined the relationship between Finnish teachers' self-efficacy and their resilience.Conducting survey of a sample of 105 preservice teachers, it was indicated that self-efficacy of teachers had a strong impact on their resilience in the face of challenges.
Given the fact that resilience may contribute to teacher well-being (Mu et al., 2017;Xie & Derakhshan, 2021), and prevent burnout and intention to quit among teachers (Arnup & Bowles, 2016;F. Liu et al., 2021), it is argued that resilience has a primitive role in teachers' professional life.F. Liu et al. (2021) carried out a study on 449 Chinese teachers to explore the associations among instructors' resilience, job burnout, and turnover intention.The findings revealed that teacher resilience had a substantial negative predictive impact on burnout and turnover intention.Collecting data through a cross-sectional survey, Richards et al. (2016) investigated the effect of teacher resilience on role stressors and burnout among teachers.Employing SEM analysis, it was found that teacher resilience could reduce role stress and burnout.Adopting a crosssectional survey design, Ugwu and Amazue (2014) investigated the association between teacher resilience and teacher work engagement.Their findings demonstrated that teacher resilience significantly predicted the work engagement of teachers.Recently, the association between resilience and teacher engagement has been subject to few EFL researchers.For example, Xie (2021) employed a sequential mixed-methods design to probe the predictive role of emotion regulation and resilience of EFL teachers in predicting their work engagement.Data were collected from 314 Chinese EFL teachers via online questionnaires and semistructured interviews.The results demonstrated that the resilience of EFL teachers significantly and favorably predicted teacher work engagement.Despite the aforementioned literature, empirical evidence on the relationship between teacher resilience and teacher work engagement is still fairly limited, notably in the context of EFL.Furthermore, the current study is innovative in that we evaluate for the very first time how EFL teachers' resilience, self-efficacy, and work engagement in higher education are dynamically and reciprocally related to each other.Put differently, we aimed to investigate the potential effective roles of teacher self-efficacy and teacher resilience in predicting the work engagement of EFL teachers in HE in China.

Participants
To accomplish the objective of this non-experimental study, 397 male and female Chinese teachers were selected based on the convenience sampling method.These participants were English university professors selected through convenience sampling from various Chinese cities and provinces.Indeed, they were from different universities and colleges across 30 cities of 12 provinces and 2 municipalities.
Sampling.Among the participants, only 372 Chinese English instructors who had completed the questionnaire were selected as the participants.They comprised male (N = 143) and female (N = 229) instructors teaching English at various institutions, schools, and universities.Teachers' ages fell between 21 and 48 years (M = 25.35,SD = 6.82).The average teaching experience of the participants was also 9.82 (SD = 3.51).About 45% of teachers had Bachelor's degrees while 37% had Master's degrees and the rest about 18% had Doctoral degrees.The participants all mentioned that they had attended teacher training courses previously.

Instruments
Teacher Self-Efficacy Scale.Teachers' sense of efficacy was measured using the Teachers' Sense of Efficacy Scale (TSES) designed by Tschannen-Moran and Hoy (2001).This questionnaire includes 24 self-report items that evaluates instructors' attitudes regarding their competencies in employing appropriate instructional strategies, student engagement, as well as classroom management.The items are evaluated on a 5-point Likert scale from 1 (nothing) to 5 (a great deal).It should be noted that its reliability is 0.87 in the current study.
Resilience Scale.Teachers' levels of resilience were measured using the CD-RISC scale developed by Campbell-Sills et al. (2009) which includes 10 self-report statements.The original version of this questionnaire (constituting 25 items) was designed by Connor and Davidson (2003) which is considered a multi-faceted scale for measuring resilience.We used the short-version form in this study in which every statement is evaluated on a Likerttype scale from 0 (not true at all) and four (true nearly all the time).The internal consistency and validity indices of CD-RISC have been previously approved (e.g., Campbell-Sills et al., 2009).It is worth mentioning that the reliability of this questionnaire in this study is 0.92.Work Engagement Scale.We measured the work engagement of EFL teachers using the scale designed by Schaufeli et al. (2002) was used.This self-report scale includes 17 items that evaluate three facets of Vigor (VI) (six items), Dedication (DE) (five items), and Absorption (AB) (six items).The statements are evaluated on a 7point Likert scale, from 0 (never) to 6 (always).The psychometric properties of this scale have been verified in the literature (e.g., Derakhshan, Dewaele, & Azari Noughabi, 2022).It should be noted that the reliability of this scale in this study is 0.89.

Procedure
The data collection began in Spring of 2022 with the distribution of the online format of the questionnaires.At the outset, participants were informed about the purpose of the study and importantly, they were assured that their data would be only used for research purposes under the anonymous premise.The online survey was constructed by inserting the items of the questionnaires into Google Docs application.The link of the survey was sent to the emails of those university instructors who volunteered to participate in this study.Some university professors cooperated with the researchers by kindly asking their colleagues who were English instructors to participate in this study.However, the teachers were notified that their participation is voluntary and the collected data would remain confidential.The link of the survey included some introductory information for the respondents explaining how to respond to the items of the survey.

Data Analysis and Results
SPSS and AMOS programs were used for the data analysis.As the first step, confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) was used to ensure the construct validity of the questionnaires.For this purpose, the measurement models were tested.Then, Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) was performed to examine the structural relationships among the latent constructs.Before embarking on the analyses, an initial data screening was run to check the outliers, missing values, and normal distribution of the data.An expectation-maximization algorithm was used for addressing the missing data (Kline, 2011).The outliers including both univariate and multivariate ones were examined via standard scores and Mahalanobis D 2 , respectively.After these data screening, a total number of 366 individuals were considered valid cases for further statistical investigations.
We performed CFAs to examine the measurement models for the three latent variables and we used the goodness-of-fit indices to confirm the validity of measurement models (Kline, 2011).The indices included Chi-square divided by degree of freedom (x 2 /df), Comparative Fit Index (CFI), Tucker-Lewis Index (TLI), and Root Mean Square Error of Approximation (RMSEA).According to Kline (2011), we considered a model to be fit if x 2 /df \ 3, CFI and TLI .0.90, and RMSEA \ 0.08.Since the measurement models did not show the adequacy of the models to the data, some modifications/revisions were made to the models.These revisions included eliminating some items with less factor loadings: three items from the self-efficacy scale, two items from the resilience scale, and two items from the work engagement scale.The revised models showed a good fit to the data (see Table 1).Also, the reliability coefficients were calculated and it was found that all the computed coefficient values were high, confirming the reliability coefficients of the used scales (see Table 1).In the next step, the descriptive statistics and correlation coefficients of the variables were computed (see Table 2).The hypothesized model assuming the associations among the constructs was examined employing the AMOS, with the maximum likelihood procedure and variance-covariance matrices as the input.The outcomes revealed that the path coefficients were all significant (p \ .05)and the fit indices were also acceptable.In other words, SEM findings substantiated all the associations in the structural model (see Figure 1).

Discussion
The current research aimed to test a model of work engagement in which the predictive roles of teacher resilience and teacher self-efficacy were investigated among EFL teachers.A number of significant findings were obtained from SEM results.First, we found that teacher self-efficacy was a significant predictor of teacher engagement.This finding can be justified in light of Bandura's (1977) Social Learning Theory suggesting that higher levels of self-efficacy reduce stress and increase engagement.This result aligns with the findings of studies demonstrating that there is a significantly strong association between teacher self-efficacy and teacher work engagement (e.g., Love et al., 2020;Perera, Granziera, & McIlveen, 2018;Skaalvik & Skaalvik, 2014, 2019).A possible explanation for this finding can be that teachers who believe in their capacities to perform particular job-related tasks often experience more engagement in their teaching work.In other words, teachers are more inclined to be engaged in tasks that are in accordance with their beliefs regarding their abilities in teaching (Bao et al., 2021).Furthermore, the predictability of teaching engagement through teacher self-efficacy justifies the study of Simbula et al. (2011) and Sokmen and Kilic (2019) who underscored the significance of teacher self-efficacy in predicting work engagement of teachers.Following Bandura's (1977) theory of self-efficacy indicating that self-efficacy beliefs specify how contextual factors and impediments are viewed, we argue that instructors with greater efficacy perceptions might be more engaged and content with the teaching work (Buric´& Macuka, 2018).This finding can also underpin the social cognitive career theory (SCCT) (Lent et al., 2002) by which it can be affirmed that teacher engagement and self-efficacy are mutually correlated (Granziera & Perera, 2019;Simbula et al., 2011).Second, based on the SEM results, we figured out that teacher resilience positively predicted teacher engagement.Fredrickson (2001) presented work engagement as an important construct in the context of the PP.He adopted a constructivist approach, maintaining that the connection between people and their working conditions can be a deciding factor.Moreover, this theory also takes on a cognitive perspective that is related to general empathy, putting it in a cognitive perspective (Dewaele & Li, 2020).This finding converges with previous empirical evidence for links between teachers' resilience and work engagement (e.g., Ugwu & Amazue, 2014;Van der Schoor, 2015;Van Wingerden & Poell, 2019;Wilcox & Lawson, 2018); this finding highlights the significant role of teacher resilience for the development of their work engagement.The studies conducted have already sought to examine the relationship between resilience and the individual's capability of coping with job stress, the overwhelming pressures of multiple tasks, and organizational changes.These consequences provided evidence that the higher the level of resiliency, the greater the individual's devotion to his/her job and institution (Petree et al., 2012;Zwack et al., 2011).A potential reason for this result could be in light of the fact that teachers who can cope with teaching-related adversities often draw satisfaction from their work (McCarthy et al., 2010;Skaalvik & Skaalvik, 2015), which in turn, may result in their engagement in the teaching profession (Demir Polat & _ Iskender, 2018).These results support the empirical research of Xie (2021) regarding the predictive role of teacher resilience in teacher work engagement.As mentioned earlier, resilient teachers have the capability to regulate their emotions (Tait, 2008), and as Greenier et al. (2021) maintained, the emotion regulation of teachers can positively predict teacher work engagement.Therefore, we argue that teacher engagement can be predicted by teacher resilience through emotion regulation.The predictability of work engagement of teachers through resilience aligns with Fathi and Saeedian's (2020) study in which it was demonstrated that the resilience of EFL teachers can play a central role in predicting their work engagement.Furthermore, personal resources, namely resilience and the capacity to influence the environment can positively affect work engagement (Van Wingerden et al., 2017).Following Tait's (2008) theorization of resilience, it can be discussed that resilience can reduce teachers' frustration and dissatisfaction, which eventually may help teachers be more committed and engaged in their work (Okeke & Mtyuda, 2017;Park & Johnson, 2019).Given that burnout is the opposite of engagement (Maslach et al., 2001), these findings support those of Daniilidou et al. (2020) and Richards et al. (2016), who concluded that teacher resilience negatively predicted teacher burnout, as resilience makes teachers immune to the disruptive effects of burnout (Howard & Johnson, 2004).
Third, the results of the SEM confirmed our third hypothesis according to which teachers' self-efficacy had a positive role in predicting teacher engagement.Teachers with higher self-efficacy are more likely to persist in the face of academic challenges and cope with setbacks (Tschannen-Moran & Hoy, 2001), simply put, teachers with high levels of efficacy are often equipped with resilience and are better able to handle adverse conditions that can lead to more engagement (Peixoto et al., 2018;Taylor & Reyes, 2012).Teachers who are involved will be more eager and devoted to their profession, which could bring about learning development and progress.The more engrossed they are in the process of their teaching, the more possible to involve their learners.A relationship between teacher self-efficacy and their involvement is strengthened by Ventura et al. (2015).This is in agreement with the work engagement model, suggesting that a factor such as self-efficacy is noteworthy in augmenting engagement (Bakker & Demerouti, 2008).Furthermore, this finding accords with Bandura's (1977) theory indicating that the selfefficacy of teachers is linked with their efforts in teaching and their participation in the face of challenges and difficulties.Therefore, we argue that teacher engagement can be predicted by teachers' sense of self-efficacy.

Conclusions
To widen the research scope on work engagement, especially in the EFL context of China, the current research aimed to explore the role of self-efficacy and resilience as predictors of EFL teachers' work engagement through adopting a quantitative design.The findings of correlational and SEM analyses gave rise to the following theme: work engagement of EFL teachers is predicted significantly and positively by their self-efficacy.Moreover, regarding the findings of thematic analysis, it can be demonstrated that teacher resilience is a significant antecedent of EFL teachers' work engagement.The results of this study lend credibility to the importance of being resilient on the part of educators.More specifically, resilient educators can effectively manage difficult practices, decreasing adverse influences.The improvement of educators' resilience entails creating opportunities for professional growth, as well as the provision of resources, creating effective peer connections, mutual decision-making, and providing opportunities.Likewise, based on the findings of this study, the enhancement of instructors' work engagement can be realized by improving self-efficacy.These findings show that teaching organizations need to emphasize the enhancement of selfefficacy abilities among Chinese teachers as it can foster effective teacher behaviors, such as engagement while promoting their resilience.

Implications, Future Directions, and Limitations
The present study is the very first attempt to probe the simultaneous relationships among the constructs of teacher resilience, teacher self-efficacy, and work engagement of EFL teachers in a HE context.Hence, the findings of this study are illuminating and significant for EFL development researchers and teacher trainers, as investigating the precursors of teacher engagement can be conducive to promoting the psychological well-being of teachers, their positive functioning, and teaching attitudes (Salanova & Schaufeli, 2008).Furthermore, teacher educators and policymakers are recommended to encourage language schools and institutes to improve teachers' self-efficacy and their resilience competencies by supporting teachers and establishing an amicable atmosphere and sense of community among instructors, administrators, and principals.If so, these organizational supports can promote EFL teachers' job satisfaction and work engagement.Taken together, the results of the current study will, both theoretically and pedagogically, contribute to some ambiguity about the nature of EFL teachers' work engagement and its relationships with resilience and self-efficacy in the context of HE, as done in no other study, and requires further attention by the policymakers and officials.The research endeavors undertaken by researchers have tried to develop training programs aimed at enhancing resilience as a completely unique topic.They have also sought to determine whether these programs have managed to achieve the stated outcomes, namely, increasing the effectiveness of teachers working as divining forces in the academic system.These programs and training modules can improve teachers' resilience.Irrespective of the nuances in the educational environment, a resilient person possesses positive emotions, a high level of self-confidence, as well as optimism, which enable him/her to work efficiently.Indeed, resilience level can predict constructive emotions, decreasing stress and providing employees with more opportunities to focus on their work (Philippe et al., 2009).
Despite the contributions of this research, the findings have some limitations.The data were gathered through only quantitative questionnaires.Next researchers should use qualitative research methods to enhance the credibility of the findings.Bigger samples of the teacher not just from universities and not just from the Chinese context can be recruited to add to the generalizability of the findings.Other teacher variables can be added to such structural models so that the researchers can cast more light on the potential predictors of teachers' work engagement.Additionally, the present investigation aimed to examine self-efficacy and resilience as predictors of work engagement, while prospective studies can consider other emotional variables (e.g., self-esteem, self-respect, enthusiasm) to find out if they can predict work engagement.

Table 1 .
Measurement Model of the Latent Constructs.

Table 2 .
Descriptive Statistics and Correlations.