Introduction

Positive student outcomes in education is an important research area which has received increasing research interest as reflected in issues as academic engagement (^{Chukwuorji, Ituma, & Ugwu, 2018}; ^{Zhou et al., 2019}; ^{Li et al., 2023}). Substantial literature has produced clear and consistent evidence, outlining the positive effect of academic engagement in educational environments in terms of satisfaction with educational experiences, performance, and other achievement related outcomes (^{Ben‑Eliyahu et al., 2018}; ^{Casuso‑Holgado et al., 2013}; ^{Smithikrai et al., 2018}; ^{Steinmayr et al., 2018}; ^{Vizoso et al., 2018}; ^{Xie et al., 2019}; ^{Xu et al., 2023}). As a positive phenomenon (^{Seligman & Csikszentmihalyi, 2000}), positive effects of academic engagement have also been obtained in non‑educational contexts in terms of general self‑esteem (^{Liem & Martin, 2011}) and optimised functioning (^{Phan & Ngu, 2015}).

Existing literature have advanced several conceptualisations of academic engagement, but Schaufeli's theorising describes the construct as reflecting high levels of energy, persistence, and positive effort in activities, high levels of involvement and challenge, and high levels of concentration during students' performance (see ^{Schaufeli et al., 2002a}). In other words, academic engagement encompasses three core facets: absorption, dedication, and vigour. Vigour is the investment of effort, high energy level, resilience, and persistence of the individual in spite of setbacks and difficulties; while dedication refers to inspiration, enthusiasm, significance, challenge, and pride in academic tasks. Absorption represents full concentration and happy involvement in one's studies, whereby time passes quickly and one has difficulties detaching oneself from studies (^{Schaufeli et al., 2002a}, ^2002b; ^{Phan, 2014}). The relevance of Schaufeli's multi‑faceted perspective is the differentiation of academic engagement into aspects that represent different motivational attributes, with demonstrated support for its construct validity, relevance and applicability to classroom learning (See ^{Phan, 2014}). Hence, it provides ample opportunity for the exploration of diverse impacts of psychosocial and situational variables in academic engagement (^{Chukwuorji, Ifeagwazi et al., 2018}).

The question of how school sense of community influences academic engagement remains an important area that is worthy of investigation by researchers. Positive interventions at school can be more effective and purposive, when there is deeper understanding of the association between well‑being and academic outcomes and their influencing factors (^{Grabel, 2017}). The mechanism through which sense of community influences well‑being may explain how and why it is beneficial for engagement in academic work. The current study is aimed at examining the roles of sense of community, meaning in life and subjective wellbeing in academic engagement among male students in the minor seminary.

Sense of community (SoC) has been described as a powerful tool for learning (^{Bickford & Wright, 2018}) and promotion of wellbeing (^{Barbieri & Zani, 2015}). In the educational context, SoC is theorized as a feeling of being connected to the institution in terms of personal fit with other students and the school community, and academic ability (^{Morrow & Ackermann, 2012}; ^{Tough, 2014}). SoC in the classroom creates a culture that builds on students' strengths and heals their hurts so that learning can occur; and the opportunities and structures by which students can help and support one another (^{Hittie, 2000}). The major characteristics that underlie SoC in learning include feelings of similarity of needs, importance of learning, recognition, friendship, connectedness, acceptance, thinking critically, safety, group identity, and absence of confusion (^{Rovai, 2002}). A strong SoC is anchored on the student's feeling of being part of a learning community where the student contributes to a common knowledge pool and where community spirit is enabled through social interactions (^{Rovai et al., 2004}). Thus, it is expected that students will have both sense of learning community and sense of social community (^{Rovai, 2002}).

Evidence of the positive contributions of connectedness, relatedness, belongingness, and integration to student engagement abounds in the literature (e.g., ^{Juvonen et al., 2012}; ^{Tovar, 2013}; ^{Wang & Eccles, 2013}; ^{Wilson et al., 2015}). An insightful demonstration of the linkage of social relationships and participation in the wider educational community to academic engagement is the Duke Social Relationships Project (see ^{Asher & Weeks, 2015}). The most striking finding in the study was that students who were more academically engaged reported having positive wellbeing across multiple domains. Using Latent growth modelling ^{King (2015)} demonstrated that sense of relatedness positively predicted engagement, achievement, and well-being. ^{Chukwuorji, Ifeagwazi et al. (2018)} found that SoC had a significant impact on academic engagement, but the dimensions of academic engagement were not considered by the researchers. It is the consideration of how SoC may be related to the engagement dimensions that may provide a more nuanced understanding of the nature of the process.

Meaning in life is one of the core components of a eudaimonic (functioning well) conceptualization of well‑being (^{Ryan & Deci, 2001}; ^{Ryff, 2018}) and it is crucial to understanding the subjectivity of well‑being (^{Qi & Minami, 2020}). Meaning is defined by ^{Steger (2012)} as a web of connections, understandings, and interpretations that foster the comprehension of experiences and formulation of plans directing one's energies to the achievement of a desired future. Conceptually, the meaning making process is not only concerned with making sense of past events and experiences, but also about future imaginations of the self which often occurs in relation to others (^{Märtsin, 2019}). The experience of meaning in life is a fundamental aspect of an individual's transition into adulthood (^{To & Sung, 2017}), which is also advanced to be an important pathway to well‑being (^{Khumalo et al., 2014}).

^{Steger et al. (2006)} delineated two facets of meaning in life – search for meaning and presence of meaning. Presence of meaning represents an understanding of self and the world and how an individual fits in the broader scheme of affairs as well as having a grasp of one's sense of the purpose one is pursuing (^{Steger, 2009}; ²⁰¹²). Search for meaning makes “people to seek out new opportunities and challenges, fuelling their desire to understand and organise their experiences” (^{Steger et al., 2008}, p. 200), and it is often associated with psychological distress (^{Schulenberg et al., 2014}; ^{Chukwuorji, Abiama et al., 2019}). We focused on presence of meaning because it has been found to be most frequently associated with other well‑being indicators (^{Ashok & Swati, 2015}; ^{García‑Alandete, 2015}; ^{To & Sung, 2017}; ^{Yalcın & Malkoc, 2015}; ^{Zhou et al., 2022}; ^{Kero et al., 2023}), and recent diary studies have shown that relationships between search for meaning and daily well‑being were mediated by presence of meaning in life (e.g., ^{Newman et al., 2018}).

Recent research has shown that sense of purpose or meaning in life was associated with academic engagement (^{Smithikrai et al., 2018}). Meaning in life could play a positive role in students' engagement because the cognitive, motivational goal‑directed, and affective constituents of meaning in life enhance students' abilities and attitudes to invest in their academic activities and engage more fully (^{Garrosa et al., 2017}). Specifically, meaning in life is related to feelings of self‑confidence and control, thereby facilitating adjustment to life changes and is associated with fewer negative affective states (^{Demirbaş‑Çelik, 2018}; ^{Garrosa et al., 2013}; ^{Wong, 2012}; ^{Van den Heuvel et al., 2009}; ^{Yuen & Datu, 2021}). However, there is limited research in this line of work. In general, there is evidence that meaning is life is generally associated with psychological well‑being outcomes, but whether meaning in life and satisfaction with life mediate the relationship between sense of community and academic engagement has been rarely examined.

Subjective wellbeing (SWB) is a broad term for how people feel and think about their lives (^{Diener et al., 2018}; ^{Diener et al., 2002}; ^{Ajaero & De Wet, 2017}) and is associated with hedonic (feeling good) and evaluative (satisfaction with quality of life) conceptualizations of well‑being. Well‑being at school is multifaceted and comprises different attributes, as quality of life, inner satisfaction, internal state of feelings, emotions and motivation, and enriched personal experience (^{Phan et al., 2016}). Advancement of the theoretical phenomenon of SWB at school “may entail the situational placement of SWB within a larger system of change, and its potential associations with noncognitive and cognitive process of learning” (^{Phan et al., 2016}, p. 78). ^{Phan et al.} posits that one way forward is to consider processes and procedures that may facilitate and enhance students' well‑being at school.

Students who experience a positive sense of subjective well‑being may be more likely to engage proactively at school in their studies (^{Belfi et al., 2012}; ^{Buyse et al., 2009}; ^{Phan et al., 2016}). ^{Bowman (2010)} reported that students with higher levels of SWB have an easier time in making the transition to college and, consequently, may be more likely to graduate. This finding supports research documenting an association between positive psychological functioning, personal adjustment and achievement (^{Ryan & Deci, 2000}; ^{Seligman, 2011}). A study on mediation by ^{Phan et al. (2016)} reported that subjective well‑being at school mediated the effects of academic and social self‑efficacy on academic engagement of year 11 Australian boys and girls. However, the domain of conceptualisation was specific to students' engagement in mathematics learning. Their restricted view is understandable given that the self‑efficacy construct needed to be domain‑specific when seeking participants' responses. Similarly, fulfilment of needs was a mediator between sense of community and individual subjective well‑being in a community sample of adults (^{Yetim & Yetim, 2014}). A systematic review of 300 studies showed that students with higher levels of psychological and emotional wellbeing reported higher levels of academic achievement which may be explained as an outcome of being more engaged with their studies (^{Grabel, 2017}).

The Present Study

Although some literature reviewed supports the association of school sense of community with academic engagement, it is necessary to elucidate the underlying mechanism of this relationship. In the current study, mediating roles of both presence of meaning in life and SWB in the link between sense of community and the dimensions of academic engagement are investigated. The previous research separately investigated the direct impacts of the variables in academic engagement. Concurrently examining the possible mediating roles of presence of meaning in life and SWB will advance the state of current knowledge on academic engagement. The inclusion of these mediators may provide information and directions regarding how these positive psychological constructs could be further harnessed and developed as psychosocial and educational interventions to promote students' academic engagement. Based on existing literature and extant theoretical postulations, we expect that: (1) The dimensions of sense of community will be positively associated with the facets of academic engagement and the overall scores of academic engagement. (2) Presence of meaning in life will be positively associated with the facets of academic engagement and the overall scores of academic engagement. (3) SWB will be positively associated with the facets of academic engagement and the overall scores of academic engagement. (4) Presence of meaning in life mediates the relationship between sense of community dimensions and the facets of academic engagement including the overall scores of academic engagement (Figure 1). (5) SWB mediates the relationship between sense of community dimensions and the facets of academic engagement including the overall scores of academic engagement (Figure 1). (6) In addition, SWB is expected to serve as the pathway through which both sense of community dimensions and meaning in life impacts on the facets of academic engagement including the overall scores of academic engagement.

Figure 1 Conceptual model of mediator effects of meaning in life and SWB on SoC and academic engagement relationship 

Method

Results

Table 1 indicated the range of scores, mean and standard deviation for participants' age, sense of community, presence of meaning in life, well‑being, and academic engagement. Correlations in Table 2 indicated that older age was associated with higher social SoC but lower learning SoC.

Table 1 Range of scores, mean and standard deviation for participants' age, sense of community, presence of meaning in life, well‑being and academic engagement 

Note. SOC = Sense of community.

In Table 2, those in higher classes reported higher social SoC but lower learning SoC, lower SWB and lower vigour in academic engagement. Parent's level of education was not associated with any of the study's variables. Social SoC was positively associated with learning SoC, presence of meaning in life and well‑being. Learning SoC and subjective well‑being were positively related to all the study's variables. The correlations coefficient between the facets of academic engagement were all positive.

Table 2 Correlations of socio‑demographic factors, sense of community, presence of meaning in life, well‑being and academic engagement 

Note. ***p < .001; **p < .01; *p < .05; SOC = Sense of community; MIL = Meaning in life.

To control Type I error associated with testing whether the independent variables and the mediators predict the academic engagement and its three dimensions, we applied the Bonferroni correction method. Our comparison time (m) in this study was 6. Hence, the adjusted alpha for our hypotheses testing was p < .008 (that is, .05 / 6).

The direct effect of social SoC on the academic engagement dimensions as well as the academic engagement total score were not significant. The regression coefficients (Bs) were as follows: .04 (vigour), .01 (dedication), .03 (absorption), and .02 (academic engagement total). For learning SoC the Bs for its direct effect on the academic engagement dimensions as well as the academic engagement total score were all significant at p = .009 (vigour), .005 (dedication), .015 (absorption), and .002 (academic engagement total).

Table 3, part C, D, E, and F showed the total effects of social sense of community, presence of MIL and subjective well‑being in the dimensions of academic engagement and the total scores of academic engagement. Participants with presence of meaning reported positive vigour, dedication, and academic engagement total scores, but not absorption.

Table 3 Hayes regression‑based process analyses for predicting academic engagement and its facets by sense of community, presence of meaning in life and subjective wellbeing 

Note. SOC = sense of community; MIL = Meaning in life, AE = academic engagement total scores.

Those with high subjective well‑being also reported being academically engaged in the facets of vigour, dedication and overall academic engagement, but not absorption. In the presence of both presence of MIL and SWB, the predictive strength of the association between learning SoC and the academic engagement factors reduced, but they were still found to be significant. Based on the variances explained the model with the largest R ² was the contribution of learning SoC, presence of MIL and subjective well‑being to overall academic engagement. The weakest model by virtue of its R ² was the prediction of absorption by social SoC, presence of MIL and well‑being.

Bias corrected bootstrapped confidence intervals (CI) for the mediation effects are shown in Table 4. The mediation effects hold where the CI does not have zero. It was found that presence of MIL mediated the effect of social SoC as well as learning SoC on vigour, dedication and overall academic engagement, but such effect was not found for absorption. Subjective well‑being was also a mediator of the path from both social SoC to vigour, dedication, absorption and overall academic engagement. For learning SoC, SWB mediated its effects in vigour, dedication, and overall academic engagement, but not absorption. The double mediation path from social SoC through both presence of MIL and SWB to vigour, dedication, and overall academic engagement were significant. Such double mediation effect was not found for absorption. The double mediation paths were not found to be significant with learning SoC for any of the outcome variables.

Table 4 Completely Standardised Bootstrap Tests of Mediating Effects 

Note. Bold fonts are the significant mediation paths.

Discussion

The present study investigated the associations of sense of community, presence of meaning in life, and subjective well‑being in academic engagement. Specifically, we extended the literature by examining presence of meaning in life and subjective well‑being as concurrent mediators of the association between sense of community and the facets of academic engagement as well as its total score.

First, we hypothesised that the dimensions of SoC would be positively associated with the facets of academic engagement and the sum scores of academic engagement. This hypothesis was partly supported by the results of this study given that learning SoC was significantly associated with the outcome variables, whereas social SoC was not. These findings were important in view of a previous study which reported that although social SoC in the seminary was weak, academic excellence in the seminary environment was relatively high (^{Chukwuorji, Ifeagwazi et al., 2018}). SoC in the learning situation have been observed to be anchored on similarity of needs, importance of learning, recognition, friendship, connectedness, acceptance, thinking critically, safety, group identity, and absence of confusion (^{Rovai, 2002}). These attributes may be more relevant to academic‑related outcomes than an exclusively socially‑oriented SoC. Our study clarifies previous research (e.g., ^{Juvonen et al., 2012}; ^{Tovar, 2013}; ^{Wang & Eccles, 2013}; ^{Wilson et al., 2015}; ^{Yılmaz et al., 2023}) showing that the positive contributions of connectedness, relatedness, belongingness, and integration to student engagement are more effective when they are inclined towards the learning situation.

The second hypothesis, which stated that presence of meaning in life, would be positively associated with the facets of academic engagement and the sum scores of academic engagement was supported for vigour, dedication, and academic engagement total scores; but it was not supported for absorption. Previous research (e.g., ^{Smithikrai et al., 2018}; ^{Yuen & Datu, 2021}) which investigated meaning in life in relation to academic engagement have not explored the possible differences when the dimension of the engagement outcome is considered. Those who have understood themselves and the world may have high energy level, be more enthusiastic in meeting the challenges of pursuing academic tasks, rather than being carried away in the course of their studies.

The third prediction was that SWB would be positively associated with the facets of academic engagement and the sum scores of academic engagement. There was support for this hypothesis for the facets of vigour, dedication, and overall academic engagement, but not absorption. Our finding is consistent with the literature which uphold that students' well‑being may lead to proactive engagement in one's studies (^{Belfi et al., 2012}; ^{Buyse et al., 2009}; ^{Huo, 2022}; ^{Phan et al., 2016}). For a student in the seminary to pursue intellectual accomplishments, he needs to be cognitively and affectively healthy. It is those who are mentally healthy that can effectively carryout any assigned academic task in the school.

The fourth hypothesis was that presence of meaning in life mediates the relationship between SoC dimensions and the facets of academic engagement including the sum scores of academic engagement. Some support was found for this expectation as presence of MIL mediated the effect of social SoC as well as learning SoC on vigour, dedication, and overall academic engagement, but such effect was not found for absorption. An understanding of the mediation of the SoC‑academic engagement link may emanate from the contribution of SoC in making individuals to have feelings of self‑confidence and control in the course of their educational activities.

Our fifth expectation was that subjective well‑being would be a significant mediator of the relationship between SoC dimensions and the facets of academic engagement including the sum scores of academic engagement. This finding is consistent with findings of a similar study which reported that self‑efficacy was a mechanism of influence between social self‑efficacy and academic engagement (^{Phan et al., 2016}). It is reasoned that SoC may make students increase students' striving, personal development, self‑acceptance, autonomy, and positive interpersonal relationships, which in turn imbues them with sense of continued engagement in their academic work.

Lastly, we hypothesised that subjective well‑being would be a pathway through which both sense of community dimensions and meaning in life impacts on the facets of academic engagement including the sum scores of academic engagement (that is, double mediation pathway). Our findings in this regard were varied. Subjective well‑being was a mediator for social and presence of MIL and to vigour, dedication and overall academic engagement, but not for absorption. The double mediation was not obtained for learning SoC.

It is important to understand the study in the context of a seminary as a religious school context. In many western countries, the seminary is a graduate school where people enroll as adults to be educated in theology as they prepare for priestly vocation. In Nigeria, adolescent boys have the option of going to the minor seminary for their secondary (middle and high) school education and they are taught all the subjects that are offered in a conventional secondary school. They write the same general high stakes examinations with students in other schools in their sixth year in the seminary. But in addition to these subjects, students in the minor seminary study additional religious courses and engage in routine religious practices. We view the results of our study in the light of the peculiar demands of the seminary training where students are expected to adhere to strict disciplinary measures and academic standards. To the extent that students in the seminary study the regular subjects as the students in the other regular secondary schools, they may have similar academic engagement. However, there may be variations in engagement when we consider the other religious aspects of their education and training which are mandatory. The seminary may also entail a certain higher level of sense of community than what is obtainable in conventional secondary schools because students in the minor seminary are away from their family for a longer period during the academic term. They live in the dormitories and are only allowed to travel home when there is an important reason to do so or during the holidays at the end of every term. A term usually lasts for about three months. These long periods of community life may confer a unique sense of bonding to the seminarians.

Limitations of the study and suggestions for further study

The first limitation of this study is the cross‑sectional nature of the data collection and the use of self‑report measures, which raises concerns about common‑method variance. There is need for caution in drawing conclusions about causal relations among our variables. We recommend the adoption of longitudinal designs and if possible, experimental procedures that can enable causality to be established in research on academic outcomes. A similar study needs to be conducted in the context of public /secular schools also to establish the possible role that context plays in these results, as no generalization is possible from the current study. The possible mediating role of other eudaimonic, evaluative and hedonic well‑being measures could be explored to deepen the understanding of mediational dynamics. Another limitation of the study is that that participants were only men and seminary students with special characteristics as religiosity and strict disciplinary measures. The results cannot be generalized to other samples of students and female samples.

Conclusion

Our findings imply that both components of the mediational pathway (meaning in life and subjective wellbeing), may independently serve as potential targets for improving academic vigour and dedication in academic work. However, it may be useful to target in particular subjective well‑being, including both the affective (positive emotions) and cognitive (evaluative) components, as a mechanism to enhance academic engagement. This work contributes to the agenda for positive education by highlighting the importance of considering the pathways of relationships in engagement. We hope that the preliminary evidence of direct and indirect effects will stimulate further research that will inform positive actions to improve the wellbeing and learning outcomes of students.