<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><xml><records><record><source-app name="Biblio" version="7.x">Drupal-Biblio</source-app><ref-type>17</ref-type><contributors><authors><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Garry Vanz V. Blancia</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Eddie G. Fetalvero</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Philip R. Baldera</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Merian C. Mani</style></author></authors></contributors><titles><title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">THE MEDIATING EFFECTS OF ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE LITERACY ON THE ASSOCIATION BETWEEN COMPUTATIONAL THINKING SKILLS AND ORGANIZATIONAL AGILITY AMONG SECONDARY SCHOOL TEACHERS</style></title><secondary-title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Problems of Education in the 21st Century</style></secondary-title></titles><keywords><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">AI literacy</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">computational thinking skills</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">mediation analysis</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">organizational agility</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">structural equation modeling</style></keyword></keywords><dates><year><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2024</style></year><pub-dates><date><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">October/2024</style></date></pub-dates></dates><urls><web-urls><url><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">https://oaji.net/articles/2023/457-1728583380.pdf</style></url></web-urls></urls><volume><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">82</style></volume><pages><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Continuous</style></pages><language><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">eng</style></language><abstract><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">These days’ educational landscape forces teachers to adapt to changing demands and embrace innovations. In this study, Artificial Intelligence (AI) literacy was analyzed as how it mediates the association between Computational Thinking Skills (CTS) and Organizational Agility (OA) among secondary teachers. A quantitative causal mediation analysis design was utilized in this study. Standardized AI literacy test, CTS Test, and OA test instruments were utilized to gather pertinent data among 305 respondents. The test instruments were first subjected to confirmatory factor analysis for model fitness. Path and mediation analysis through structural equation modeling revealed that CTS significantly predicts AI literacy, AI Literacy significantly predicts OA, and CTS significantly predicts OA. It was found out that AI literacy partially mediates the relationship between CTS and OA among teachers. This recommends that schools should conduct a comprehensive training program to enhance teachers' CTS and AI proficiency for schools' sustained agility.</style></abstract><issue><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">5</style></issue><work-type><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Original article</style></work-type><section><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">616-629</style></section></record><record><source-app name="Biblio" version="7.x">Drupal-Biblio</source-app><ref-type>17</ref-type><contributors><authors><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Şenol Şen</style></author></authors></contributors><titles><title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">MODELING THE STRUCTURAL RELATIONS AMONG LEARNING STRATEGIES, SELF-EFFICACY BELIEFS, AND EFFORT REGULATION</style></title><secondary-title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Problems of Education in the 21st Century</style></secondary-title></titles><keywords><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">effort regulation</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">high school students</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Learning Strategies</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">self-efficacy beliefs</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">structural equation modeling</style></keyword></keywords><dates><year><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2016</style></year><pub-dates><date><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">June/2016</style></date></pub-dates></dates><urls><web-urls><url><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">http://journals.indexcopernicus.com/abstract.php?icid=1210962</style></url></web-urls></urls><volume><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">71</style></volume><pages><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Discontinuous</style></pages><language><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">eng</style></language><abstract><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">This research examined the relations among students’ learning strategies (elaboration, organization, critical thinking and metacognitive learning strategies), self-efficacy beliefs, and effort regulation. The Motivated Strategies for Learning Questionnaire (MSLQ) was used to measure students’ learning strategies, self-efficacy beliefs, and effort regulation. A total of 227 high school students participated in the research. Confirmatory factor analysis and path analysis were performed to examine the relations among the variables of the research. Results revealed that students’ metacognitive learning strategies and self-efficacy beliefs statistically and significantly predicted their effort regulation. In addition, the students’ self-efficacy beliefs directly affected deep cognitive learning strategies and effort regulation but indirectly affected metacognitive learning strategies. Furthermore, 88.6 % of the variance in effort regulation was explained by metacognitive learning strategies and self-efficacy beliefs. </style></abstract><issue><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">71</style></issue><work-type><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Original article</style></work-type><section><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">62-72</style></section></record></records></xml>