Integrated Science Education Journal
Integrated Science Education Journal

an Open Access Journal

SINTA

6.1

Impact

GScholar

18

H-Index

Integrated Science Education Journal

an Open Access Journal

Comparative Analysis of Students’ Applying Skills in Science Based on TIMSS 2019: Evidence from Indonesia, Laos, and Cyprus

Janah Janah
Indonesia University of Education ROR
Indonesia
janahhah1@gmail.com
Vongsone Simmavong
National University of Laos ROR
Lao People's Democratic Republic
Sherzad Sherzad
Near East University ROR
Cyprus
Share

  • Purpose of the study: The purpose of this study is to analyze and compare students’ ability to apply scientific concepts for problem-solving based on the TIMSS 2019 cognitive domain of applying in Indonesia, Laos, and Cyprus.

    Methodology: The study employed a quantitative comparative research design using secondary data from the TIMSS 2019 International Database released by the International Association for the Evaluation of Educational Achievement (IEA). Data were obtained from official international reports and analyzed descriptively using comparative statistical techniques to examine differences in the applying domain of science achievement.

    Main Findings: The results show that Indonesia achieved a low level of performance in the applying domain of science, while Laos demonstrated slightly higher but still limited performance. Cyprus achieved a moderate level of applying skills. The findings indicate significant disparities in students’ ability to apply scientific concepts across the three countries, reflecting differences in instructional emphasis and learning orientation.

    Novelty/Originality of this study: This study provides a focused cross-national comparison of the applying cognitive domain in science using TIMSS 2019 data, which is rarely examined explicitly. The findings contribute new insights into how the application of scientific concepts varies across educational contexts and offer empirical evidence to support curriculum and instructional reforms aimed at strengthening problem-solving skills in science education.

  • How to cite

    [1]
    “Comparative Analysis of Students’ Applying Skills in Science Based on TIMSS 2019: Evidence from Indonesia, Laos, and Cyprus”, In. Sci. Ed. J, vol. 7, no. 3, pp. 569–579, May 2026, doi: 10.37251/isej.v7i3.2820.

    More Citation Formats

  • 2
    Abstract views
    1
    Downloads

    Metrics — Badges

    1. [1] A. Asrizal, Y. Yurnetti, and E. A. Usman, “ICT thematic science teaching material with 5e learning cycle model to develop students’ 21st-century skills,” J. Pendidik. IPA Indones., vol. 11, no. 1, pp. 61–72, 2022, doi: 10.15294/jpii.v11i1.33764.
    2. [2] H. A. Tuong, P. S. Nam, N. H. Hau, V. T. B. Tien, Z. Lavicza, and T. Hougton, “Utilising stem-based practices to enhance mathematics teaching in vietnam: Developing students’ real-world problem solving and 21st century skills,” J. Technol. Sci. Educ., vol. 13, no. 1, pp. 73–91, 2023, doi: 10.3926/jotse.1790.
    3. [3] W. Agustina, I. N. S. Degeng, H. Praherdhiono, and S. R. Lestaric, “The effect of blended project-based learning for enhancing student’s scientific literacy skills: An experimental study in university,” Pegem Egit. ve Ogr. Derg., vol. 13, no. 1, pp. 223–233, 2022, doi: 10.47750/pegegog.13.01.24.
    4. [4] F. Fahmi, N. Chalisah, M. Istyadji, Y. Irhasyuarna, and M. Kusasi, “Scientific literacy on the topic of light and optical instruments in the innovation of science teaching materials,” J. Inov. Pendidik. IPA, vol. 8, no. 2, pp. 154–163, 2022, doi: 10.21831/jipi.v8i2.41343.
    5. [5] Y. Wardat, S. Belbase, and H. Tairab, “Mathematics teachers’ perceptions of trends in international mathematics and science study (TIMSS)-related practices in abu dhabi emirate schools,” Sustain., vol. 14, no. 9, pp. 1–26, 2022, doi: 10.3390/su14095436.
    6. [6] T. Nilsen, H. Kaarstein, and A. C. Lehre, “Trend analyses of TIMSS 2015 and 2019: School factors related to declining performance in mathematics,” Large-Scale Assessments Educ., vol. 10, no. 1, pp. 1–19, 2022, doi: 10.1186/s40536-022-00134-8.
    7. [7] A. Bhutoria and N. Aljabri, “Managerial practices and school efficiency: A data envelopment analysis across OECD and MENA countries using TIMSS 2019 data,” Large-Scale Assessments Educ., vol. 10, no. 24, pp. 1–25, 2022, doi: 10.1186/s40536-022-00147-3.
    8. [8] N. Teig, R. Scherer, and R. V. Olsen, “A systematic review of studies investigating science teaching and learning: over two decades of TIMSS and PISA,” Int. J. Sci. Educ., vol. 44, no. 12, pp. 2035–2058, 2022, doi: 10.1080/09500693.2022.2109075.
    9. [9] S. Dinçer, “Bridging the gap in technology integration in education: An examination of science teachers’ competencies and needs,” J. Turkish Sci. Educ., vol. 21, no. 4, pp. 620–634, 2024, doi: 10.36681/TUSED.2024.033.
    10. [10] I. Buabeng and B. Amo-Darko, “Curriculum reforms without foundation: The effects of inadequate preparation in curriculum reforms on Ghanaian teachers and the education system,” Curric. Perspect., vol. 45, no. 2, pp. 133–147, 2025, doi: 10.1007/s41297-025-00309-7.
    11. [11] S. Abdolalipour, H. Namdar-Areshtanab, S. Ghaffarifar, R. Ghaffari, and M. Mirghafourvand, “Exploring the experiences of medical students regarding the factors affecting academic achievement: a qualitative study,” BMC Med. Educ., vol. 24, no. 1, pp. 1–16, 2024, doi: 10.1186/s12909-024-06294-1.
    12. [12] F. S. Altuwaijri and M. A. Ferrario, “Factors affecting Agile adoption: An industry research study of the mobile app sector in Saudi Arabia,” J. Syst. Softw., vol. 190, pp. 1–16, 2022, doi: 10.1016/j.jss.2022.111347.
    13. [13] Y. F. Lay and A. L. Chandrasegaran, “The contribution of teacher preparation on grade 8 students’ science achievement in TIMSS: A comparative study between Malaysia and Singapore,” J. Balt. Sci. Educ., vol. 17, no. 4, pp. 576–589, 2024, doi: 10.33225/jbse/18.17.576.
    14. [14] B. Coşkun and E. Karadağ, “The effect of student and school characteristics on TIMSS 2015 science and mathematics achievement: The case of Türkiye,” J. Pedagog. Res., vol. 7, no. 1, pp. 203–227, 2023, doi: 10.33902/JPR.202318875.
    15. [15] M. Sa’diyah, C. Sa’dijah, and S. Susiswo, “Students’ ability to formulate situation mathematically from context-based mathematics problems,” TEM J., vol. 13, no. 2, pp. 1443–1451, 2024, doi: 10.18421/TEM132-58.
    16. [16] F. Constantinou, “Assessing students’ application skills through contextualized tasks: Toward a more comprehensive framework for embedding test questions in context,” Pract. Assessment, Res. Eval., vol. 29, no. 10, pp. 1–19, 2024, doi: 10.7275/pare.2103.
    17. [17] M. Ozkan, K. Cek, and S. Z. Eyupoglu, “Sustainable development and customer satisfaction and loyalty in north cyprus: The mediating effect of customer identification,” Sustain., vol. 14, no. 9, pp. 1–13, 2022, doi: 10.3390/su14095196.
    18. [18] M. B. Saydam, A. Ozturen, and C. Kilic, “Cultural heritage tourism in North Cyprus: Findings from in-depth interviews with experts,” Worldw. Hosp. Tour. Themes, vol. 14, no. 4, pp. 349–364, Jul. 2022, doi: 10.1108/WHATT-03-2022-0035.
    19. [19] Y. Wardat, S. Belbase, H. Tairab, R. A. Takriti, M. Efstratopoulou, and H. Dodeen, “The influence of student factors on students’ achievement in the trends in international mathematics and science study in abu dhabi emirate schools,” Front. Psychol., vol. 12, no. 424, pp. 1–23, 2022, doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1168032.
    20. [20] J. Faddar and C. C. Kjeldsen, “Perspectives on educational effectiveness in science and mathematics: The role of non-cognitive measures in TIMSS. Introduction to a special issue,” Stud. Educ. Eval., vol. 75, p. 101218, Dec. 2022, doi: 10.1016/j.stueduc.2022.101218.
    21. [21] A. Duggan, A. Karakolidis, A. Clerkin, L. Gilleece, and R. Perkins, “Trends in educational inequalities in Ireland’s primary schools: an analysis based on TIMSS data (2011–2019),” Large-Scale Assessments Educ., vol. 11, no. 1, pp. 1–21, 2023, doi: 10.1186/s40536-023-00188-2.
    22. [22] I. V. S. Mullis and M. O. Martin, “IEA’s TIMSS and PIRLS: Measuring long-term trends in student achievement,” 2022, pp. 1–20. doi: 10.1007/978-3-030-38298-8_15-1.
    23. [23] H. W. Ker, Y. H. Lee, and S. M. Ho, “The impact of work environment and teacher attributes on teacher job satisfaction,” Educ. Process Int. J., vol. 11, no. 1, pp. 28–39, 2022, doi: 10.22521/edupij.2022.111.3.
    24. [24] L. Yuan, “EFL teacher-student interaction, teacher immediacy, and Students’ academic engagement in the Chinese higher learning context,” Acta Psychol. (Amst)., vol. 244, no. November, pp. 1–10, 2024, doi: 10.1016/j.actpsy.2024.104185.
    25. [25] Z. N. Khlaif et al., “University teachers’ views on the adoption and integration of generative ai tools for student assessment in higher education,” Educ. Sci., vol. 14, no. 10, pp. 1–24, 2024, doi: 10.3390/educsci14101090.
    26. [26] S. Aravantinos, K. Lavidas, I. Voulgari, S. Papadakis, T. Karalis, and V. Komis, “Educational approaches with aι in primary school settings: A systematic review of the literature available in scopus,” Educ. Sci., vol. 14, no. 7, pp. 1–27, 2024, doi: 10.3390/educsci14070744.
    27. [27] L. Zhao, B. Zhao, and C. Li, “Alignment analysis of teaching–learning-assessment within the classroom: How teachers implement project-based learning under the curriculum standards,” Discip. Interdiscip. Sci. Educ. Res., vol. 5, no. 1, pp. 1–23, 2023, doi: 10.1186/s43031-023-00078-1.
    28. [28] M. Assalihee, N. Bakoh, Y. Boonsuk, and J. Songmuang, “Transforming islamic education through lesson study (LS): A Classroom-based approach to professional development in Southern Thailand,” Educ. Sci., vol. 14, no. 9, pp. 1–23, 2024, doi: 10.3390/educsci14091029.
    29. [29] A. S. Bulut and Z. T. Şener, “Analysis of secondary school mathematics curriculum learning outcomes by TIMSS-2019 cognitive domain skills,” Türk Akad. Yayınlar Derg., vol. 7, no. 1, pp. 303–328, 2023, doi: 10.29329/tayjournal.2023.537.14.
    30. [30] A. Balfaqeeh, N. Mansour, and S. Forawi, “Factors influencing students’ achievements in the content and cognitive domains in TIMSS 4th grade science and mathematics in the United Arab Emirates,” Educ. Sci., vol. 12, no. 9, pp. 1–22, 2022, doi: 10.3390/educsci12090618.
    31. [31] L. Amalia, M. Makmuri, and L. El Hakim, “Learning design: To improve mathematical problem-solving skills using a contextual approach,” JIIP - J. Ilm. Ilmu Pendidik., vol. 7, no. 3, pp. 2353–2366, 2024, doi: 10.54371/jiip.v7i3.3455.
    32. [32] S. C. Kong and Y. Yang, “A human-centered learning and teaching framework using generative artificial intelligence for self-regulated learning development through domain knowledge learning in K-12 settings,” IEEE Trans. Learn. Technol., vol. 17, pp. 1588–1599, 2024, doi: 10.1109/TLT.2024.3392830.
    33. [33] R. Haridza and L. Ding, “Enhancing students’ reasoning skills by asking students to provide evidence-based explanations in science classrooms: findings from TIMSS 2019,” Int. J. Sci. Educ., vol. 47, no. 17, pp. 2302–2327, Nov. 2025, doi: 10.1080/09500693.2024.2385067.
    34. [34] J. Marôco, H. Harju-Lukkainnen, and J. Rautopuro, “Worldwide predictors of science literacy in lower-secondary students: a TIMSS 2019 analysis,” Int. J. Sci. Educ., vol. 48, no. 4, pp. 580–598, 2024, doi: 10.1080/09500693.2024.2394239.
    35. [35] P. Pongsophon, “Multilevel analysis of factors that determine the science achievement of fourth-grade students in TIMSS 2019,” Sci. Educ. Int., vol. 34, no. 2, pp. 86–95, 2023.
    36. [36] L. Appels, S. De Maeyer, and P. Van Petegem, “‘Re-thinking equity: The need for a multidimensional approach in evaluating educational equity through TIMSS data,’” Large-Scale Assessments Educ., vol. 12, no. 1, pp. 1–23, 2024, doi: 10.1186/s40536-024-00227-6.
    37. [37] A. L. Tan, Y. S. Ong, Y. S. Ng, and J. H. J. Tan, “STEM problem solving: Inquiry, concepts, and teasoning,” Sci. Educ., vol. 32, no. 2, pp. 381–397, 2023, doi: 10.1007/s11191-021-00310-2.
    38. [38] V. D. Arthamena, M. Ayubi, S. Atun, and S. E. Putri, “Effectiveness of a problem-based learning model integrated with socio-scientific issues to improve science process skills of high school students,” JKPK (Jurnal Kim. dan Pendidik. Kim., vol. 10, no. 1, pp. 203–219, 2025, doi: 10.20961/jkpk.v10i1.97608.
    39. [39] A. A. Rafiq, M. B. Triyono, and I. W. Djatmiko, “The integration of inquiry and problem-based learning and its impact on increasing the vocational student involvement,” Int. J. Instr., vol. 16, no. 1, pp. 659–684, 2023, doi: 10.29333/iji.2023.16137a.
    40. [40] L. Shengqiang, S. Srikhao’s, and A. Nankhantee, “Combining inquiry-based learning and collaborative learning: A new model for improving students’ teamwork and problem-solving skills,” J. Educ. Educ. Dev., vol. 12, no. 1, pp. 13–38, 2025, doi: 10.22555/joeed.v12i1.1296.
    41. [41] S. Sujatmika, M. Masykuri, B. A. Prayitno, and S. Sutarno, “Fostering critical thinking in science education: Exploring effective pedagogical models,” International Journal of Advanced and Applied Sciences, vol. 11, no. 7, pp. 149-159, doi: 10.21833/ijaas.2024.07.016.
    42. [42] A. Arda, S. Supriyatman, and A. Afadil, “A review of students’ critical thinking skills in science learning in Indonesia,” J. Pendidik. MIPA, vol. 25, no. 4, pp. 1787–1798, 2024, doi: 10.23960/jpmipa/v25i4.pp1787-1798.
    43. [43] D. Sapriyadin, S. Sutopo, and H. Wisodo, “Influence of inquiry learning on concept mastery ability and physics problem solving ability of students on work and energy material,” J. Penelit. Pendidik. IPA, vol. 9, no. 2, pp. 734–744, 2023, doi: 10.29303/jppipa.v9i2.3253.
    44. [44] G. Roorda, S. de Vries, and A. E. Smale-Jacobse, “Using lesson study to help mathematics teachers enhance students’ problem-solving skills with teaching through problem solving,” Front. Educ., vol. 9, pp. 1–17, 2024, doi: 10.3389/feduc.2024.1331674.
    45. [45] N. W. Septia, I. Indrawati, J. Juriana, and R. Rudini, “An analysis of students’ difficulties in reading comprehension,” EEdJ English Educ. J., vol. 2, no. 1, pp. 11–22, 2022, doi: 10.32923/eedj.v2i1.2519.
    46. [46] L. Kanniainen, C. Kiili, A. Tolvanen, J. Utriainen, M. Aro, D. J. Leu, and P. H. Leppänen, “Online research and comprehension performance profiles among sixth-grade students, including those with reading difficulties and/or attention and executive function difficulties,” Read. Res. Q., vol. 57, no. 4, pp. 1213–1235, 2022, doi: 10.1002/rrq.463.
    47. [47] M. A. Moreira, B. R. Arcas, T. G. Sánchez, R. B. García, and M. J. R. Melero, “Teachers’ pedagogical competences in higher education: A systematic literature review,” J. Univ. Teach. Learn. Pract., vol. 20, no. 1, pp. 90–123, 2023, doi: 10.53761/1.20.01.07.
    48. [48] S. Ranta, J. Kangas, H. Harju-Luukkainen, T. Ukkonen-Mikkola, M. Neitola, J. Kinos, N. Sajaniemi, and A. Kuusisto, “Teachers’ pedagogical competence in finnish early childhood education—A narrative literature review,” Educ. Sci., vol. 13, no. 8, pp. 1–15, 2023, doi: 10.3390/educsci13080791.
    49. [49] L. Rohach, N. Petiy, O. Shovak, and N. Shtefaniuk, “Student-сentered learning and teacher-centered learning in EFL context,” Сучасні дослідження з іноземної філології, vol. 26, no. 2, pp. 382–393, 2024, doi: 10.32782/2617-3921.2024.26.382-393.
    50. [50] J. Busa and S. J. Chung, “The effects of teacher-centered and student-centered approaches in TOEIC reading instruction,” Educ. Sci., vol. 14, no. 2, pp. 1–13, 2024, doi: 10.3390/educsci14020181.
    51. [51] E. Damianidou, “Obligatory professional training for in-service teachers: Worthy time or a waste of time?,” Eur. J. Teach. Educ., vol. 47, no. 1, pp. 23–40, Jan. 2024, doi: 10.1080/02619768.2021.1961734.
    52. [52] J. Schäfer, T. Reuter, J. Karbach, and M. Leuchter, “Domain-specific knowledge and domain-general abilities in children’s science problem-solving,” Br. J. Educ. Psychol., vol. 94, no. 2, pp. 346–366, 2024, doi: 10.1111/bjep.12649.
    53. [53] F. Arianto and M. Hanif, “Evaluating metacognitive strategies and self-regulated learning to predict primary school students’ self-efficacy and problem-solving skills in science learning,” J. Pedagog. Res., vol. 8, no. 3, pp. 301–319, 2024, doi: 10.33902/JPR.202428575.
    54. [54] A. I. Hamzani, T. V. Widyastuti, N. Khasanah, and M. H. M. Rusli, “Legal research method: Theoretical and implementative review,” Int. J. Membr. Sci. Technol., vol. 10, no. 2, pp. 3610–3619, 2023, doi: 10.15379/ijmst.v10i2.3191.
    55. [55] M. Nazarizadeh, A. Khorasani, G. Shams, and A. Ebrahimi, “Managerial factors influencing the empowerment of student teachers: Developing and validating a model based on a mixed-methods approach (qualitative–qualitative–quantitative),” Assess. Pract. Educ. Sci., vol. 3, no. 4, pp. 1–17, 2025, doi: 10.61838/japes.128.
    56. [56] M. Pietsch, B. Aydin, and S. Gümüş, “Putting the instructional leadership–student achievement relation in context: A meta-analytical big data study across cultures and time,” Educ. Eval. Policy Anal., vol. 47, no. 1, pp. 29–64, Mar. 2025, doi: 10.3102/01623737231197434.
    57. [57] Y. Zhu and G. Kaiser, “Impacts of classroom teaching practices on students’ mathematics learning interest, mathematics self-efficacy and mathematics test achievements: A secondary analysis of Shanghai data from the international video study Global Teaching InSights,” ZDM - Math. Educ., vol. 54, no. 3, pp. 581–593, 2022, doi: 10.1007/s11858-022-01343-9.
    58. [58] N. Lestari, P., and S. Suyanto, “A systematic literature review about local wisdom and sustainability: Contribution and recommendation to science education,” Eurasia J. Math. Sci. Technol. Educ., vol. 20, no. 2, pp. 1–19, 2024, doi: 10.29333/ejmste/14152.
    59. [59] A. Peršić and T. Straza, “Implementing the UNESCO recommendation on open science for an equitable and just transition to open science,” Sch. Commun. Ana, vol. 84, no. 10, pp. 377–381, 2023.
    60. [60] S. M. Maiteh and E. Szeréna Zoltán, “Descriptive comparative analysis of post-disaster settlements,” Int. J. Disaster Risk Reduct., vol. 95, pp. 1–15, 2023, doi: 10.1016/j.ijdrr.2023.103879.
    61. [61] S. Huh, “Are ChatGPT’s knowledge and interpretation ability comparable to those of medical students in Korea for taking a parasitology examination?: A descriptive study,” J. Educ. Eval. Health Prof., vol. 20, pp. 1–5, 2023, doi: 10.3352/jeehp.2023.20.1.
    62. [62] M. Javaid, A. Haleem, R. P. Singh, S. Khan, and I. H. Khan, “Unlocking the opportunities through ChatGPT tool towards ameliorating the education system,” BenchCouncil Trans. Benchmarks, Stand. Eval., vol. 3, no. 2, pp. 1–12, 2023, doi: 10.1016/j.tbench.2023.100115.
    63. [63] G. Gusrianto, O. Ouarniki, Z. Zakarya, T. W. Mahfuzh, A. Ali, and B. R. Simbolon, “Innovation of madrasa teacher teaching: Transformation of teacher teaching creativity through performance and motivation engagement in teaching and learning,” J. Instr. Islam. Relig. Educ., vol. 1, no. 2, pp. 71–86, 2025, doi: 10.63826/jiire.v1i2.8.
    64. [64] S. Nur’ariyani, J. Jumyati, Y. Yuliyanti, L. Nulhakim, and S. M. Leksono, “Scientific approach to learning science in elementary schools,” J. Penelit. Pendidik. IPA, vol. 9, no. 8, pp. 6659–6666, 2023, doi: 10.29303/jppipa.v9i8.3680.
    65. [65] E. Kastriti, M. Kalogiannakis, S. Psycharis, and D. Vavougios, “The teaching of natural sciences in kindergarten based on the principles of STEM and STEAM approach,” Adv. Mob. Learn. Educ. Res., vol. 2, no. 1, pp. 268–277, 2022, doi: 10.25082/amler.2022.01.011.
    66. [66] P. Peng, W. Wang, M. J. Filderman, W. Zhang, and L. Lin, “The active ingredient in reading comprehension strategy intervention for struggling readers: A bayesian network meta-analysis,” Rev. Educ. Res., vol. 94, no. 2, pp. 228–267, 2024, doi: 10.3102/00346543231171345.
    67. [67] A. Z. Macalalag, A. Kaufmann, B. Van Meter, A. Ricketts, E. Liao, and G. Ialacci, “Socioscientific issues: Promoting science teachers’ pedagogy on social justice,” Discip. Interdiscip. Sci. Educ. Res., vol. 6, no. 1, pp. 1–16, 2024, doi: 10.1186/s43031-024-00118-4.
    68. [68] D. L. Morris, “Rethinking Science Education Practices: Shifting from Investigation-Centric to Comprehensive Inquiry-Based Instruction,” Educ. Sci., vol. 15, no. 1, pp. 1–18, 2025, doi: 10.3390/educsci15010073.
    69. [69] F. I. L. Pinar, A. A. E. Panergayo, R. R. Sagcal, D. P. Acut, L. S. Roleda, and M. S. Prudente, “Fostering scientific creativity in science education through scientific problem-solving approaches and STEM contexts: A meta-analysis,” Discip. Interdiscip. Sci. Educ. Res., vol. 7, no. 1, pp. 1–17, 2025, doi: 10.1186/s43031-025-00137-9.
    70. [70] Y. Song and M. Cutumisu, “Using machine learning to predict student science achievement based on science curriculum type in TIMSS 2019,” Int. J. Sci. Educ., vol. 47, no. 9, pp. 1105–1149, Jun. 2025, doi: 10.1080/09500693.2024.2359099.
    71. [71] J. R. Alvarado and R. P. Galigao, “Assessing the effectiveness of curriculum implementation across global educational systems,” Int. J. Humanit. Soc. Sci., vol. 3, no. 4, pp. 263–272, 2024.
    72. [72] T. K. Respati, “Implementing authentic assessment for assessing higher order thinking skill (HOTS) in curriculum 2013,” Leks. J. Pendidik. Bahasa, Sastra, dan Budaya, vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 32–37, Apr. 2023, doi: 10.59632/leksikon.v1i1.104.
    73. [73] K. H. Safitri, E. Sofiyah, S. Kusmana, and J. Jaja, “Authentic assessment based on higher order thinking skills in improving student literacy,” Br. J. Teach. Educ. Pedagog., vol. 3, no. 3, pp. 172–181, 2024, doi: 10.32996/bjtep.2024.3.3.14.
    74. [74] X. Zhao and D. Wang, “Unpacking the antecedents of boredom and its impact on university learners’ engagement in languages other than english: A qualitative study in the distance online learning context,” Int. J. Appl. Linguist. (United Kingdom), vol. 35, no. 3, pp. 1121–1133, 2025, doi: 10.1111/ijal.12680.
    75. [75] R. Schimmelpfennig, C. Elbæk, P. Mitkidis, A. Singh, and Q. Roberson, “The ‘WEIRDEST’ organizations in the world? Assessing the lack of sample diversity in organizational research,” J. Manage., vol. 51, no. 6, pp. 2460–2487, 2025, doi: 10.1177/01492063241305577.

Categories