Using Grade 4 data from the digitally administered TIMSS 2023 assessment, this study examines whether key instructional and motivational correlates of mathematics performance show similar patterns across education systems by comparing students in the United Arab Emirates (UAE) with students in four other GCC countries (Bahrain, Oman, Qatar, and Saudi Arabia).

Comparing the UAE with other GCC countries is informative because these systems share a broadly common regional policy context yet differ in how schooling is organized and resourced. Participation in TIMSS supports cross-system comparability in both achievement and questionnaire-based constructs (Mullis et al., 2021; von Davier, 2024). GCC countries nevertheless vary in reform trajectories and modernization efforts, which may shape how classroom experiences translate into competence beliefs and performance (World Bank, 2024). They also differ in demographic composition, such as the size and diversity of migrant and expatriate populations, which can influence school contexts and how self-belief measures function across settings. In addition, variation in digitalization and technology integration in schooling provides an important contextual background for interpreting how digital competence beliefs relate to learning outcomes (OECD, 2023). Overall, a UAE–other GCC comparison is both theoretically meaningful and policy-relevant for examining when digital self-efficacy and instructional clarity are more strongly linked to mathematics confidence and achievement.

The study focuses on three policy-relevant constructs available in TIMSS: instructional clarity in mathematics (students’ perceptions of clear and understandable instruction), digital self-efficacy (students’ perceived competence in using digital tools for learning), and confidence in mathematics (students’ competence beliefs). The conceptual framing relies primarily on Social Cognitive Theory (Bandura, 1997), which emphasizes self-efficacy beliefs as key determinants of learning-related behaviors and achievement, and Expectancy–Value Theory (Eccles & Wigfield, 2002), which suggests that competence beliefs (expectancies for success) shape engagement and performance outcomes. In addition, the focus on instructional clarity is consistent with research on effective teaching and teacher clarity as a predictor of student learning (Hattie, 2009).

 A multi-group mediation (path) model is used to test whether confidence in mathematics functions as a mechanism linking instructional clarity and digital self-efficacy to mathematics achievement, and whether the strength of these direct and indirect pathways differs across the UAE and GCC contexts. This mediation logic is aligned with contemporary methodological guidance that emphasizes estimating and testing indirect effects directly in path/SEM frameworks (MacKinnon, 2008; Hayes, 2018). Because cross-system comparisons can mask meaningful contextual differences, the study uses multi-group SEM to estimate group-specific structural relations and formally compare pathways across contexts (Byrne, 2016; Kline, 2016). Gender is included as a covariate predicting both confidence and achievement in each group to account for potential gender-related differences in competence beliefs and performance (Else-Quest et al., 2010).

 Four research questions guide the study: (1) How do digital self-efficacy and instructional clarity in mathematics predict Grade 4 mathematics achievement? (2) To what extent does confidence in mathematics mediate the relationships between digital self-efficacy and achievement, and between instructional clarity and achievement? (3) Do the direct structural relations among digital self-efficacy, instructional clarity, confidence, and achievement differ between the UAE and GCC groups? (4) Do the indirect effects via confidence differ between groups? Corresponding hypotheses specify positive direct effects of digital self-efficacy and instructional clarity on achievement and on confidence, a positive confidence-to-achievement link, and cross-group differences in selected pathways.

 This proposal leverages TIMSS 2023 to test whether instructional and motivational pathways to mathematics achievement generalize across education systems, and to identify where associations differ by context. Findings can inform the interpretation of cross-system comparisons and efforts to strengthen early mathematics learning.

Data come from the Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS) 2023 Grade 4 digitally administered mathematics assessment in the United Arab Emirates (UAE) and four other Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) education systems (Bahrain, Oman, Qatar, and Saudi Arabia (IEA, 2025). The dataset included 60,272 students (UAE = 34,842; other GCC = 25,430); two cases were excluded from the SEM analyses because they had missing data on the exogenous predictor gender (ITSEX), yielding a final sample of 60,270. Measures Mathematics achievement was represented by TIMSS five plausible values (PVs), which provide multiple imputed draws of students’ latent mathematics proficiency for valid population inference under large-scale assessment designs (Mislevy et al., 1992). Analyses were conducted separately for each PV dataset, and estimates were pooled using Rubin’s rules to incorporate within- and between-imputation variability (Rubin, 1987). Non-achievement constructs, including digital self-efficacy, instructional clarity in mathematics, and confidence in mathematics, were TIMSS student questionnaire indices derived from multiple items using TIMSS scaling procedures and used as observed variables in the analysis (Fishbein et al., 2025). Analytic approach Because TIMSS uses a complex, multistage clustered sampling design with unequal selection probabilities, all analyses incorporated the TIMSS full-sample student weight and JK2 replicate weights to obtain design-consistent standard errors (IEA, 2025). Models were estimated in Mplus 8.8 using maximum likelihood with TYPE = COMPLEX and REPSE = JACKKNIFE2 (250 replicates; Muthén & Muthén, 1998–2017). Missing data on questionnaire variables were handled using full information maximum likelihood under a missing-at-random framework (Enders, 2010). A multi-group SEM compared the UAE with other GCC systems. Confidence in mathematics was specified as a mediator linking digital self-efficacy and instructional clarity to achievement, with digital self-efficacy and instructional clarity allowed to covary. Gender was included as a covariate predicting both confidence and achievement in each group. PV-specific results were pooled in R (v4.4.1; R Core Team, 2024) using Rubin-style variance rules proposed by Rubin (1987). Between-group differences in direct and indirect effects were tested using t-based inference after pooling, with Satterthwaite degrees of freedom approximations used for cross-group parameter comparisons (Satterthwaite, 1946).

Across the UAE and other GCC systems, results show a clear instructional–motivational pattern. Mathematics confidence is a strong predictor of Grade 4 mathematics achievement. Instructional clarity in mathematics and digital self-efficacy are also positively related to achievement. These links occur both directly and indirectly through mathematics confidence. Descriptively, UAE students have a higher average mathematics achievement than the GCC group. UAE students also report slightly higher mathematics confidence, digital self-efficacy, and instructional clarity. Bivariate correlations are positive and statistically significant in both groups. Mathematics achievement is most strongly associated with mathematics confidence. The multi-group SEM converged across all plausible-value runs. Model misfit was low (SRMR = 0.022). Several effects differ by context. The digital self-efficacy → achievement path is stronger in the UAE than in the GCC. The predictor-to-confidence paths are also stronger in the UAE. Mediation is present in both groups. However, the indirect effects via confidence are larger in the UAE. Gender patterns are context-sensitive. Gender predicts higher confidence in the UAE but lower confidence in the GCC. This suggests that confidence formation differs across systems, even when the confidence–achievement link is similar. Overall, findings highlight mathematics confidence as a key pathway through which classroom experiences and students’ digital readiness relate to early mathematics achievement across systems. At the same time, the stronger UAE effects suggest that system context may shape how digital self-efficacy and instructional clarity translate into confidence and, in turn, achievement.

Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. Freeman. Byrne, B. M. (2016). Structural equation modeling with AMOS: Basic concepts, applications, and programming (3rd ed.). Routledge. Eccles, J. S., & Wigfield, A. (2002). Motivational beliefs, values, and goals. Annual Review of Psychology, 53, 109–132. Else-Quest, N. M., Hyde, J. S., & Linn, M. C. (2010). Cross-national patterns of gender differences in mathematics: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 136(1), 103–127. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0018053 Enders, C. K. (2010). Applied missing data analysis. Guilford Press. ttps://librarysearch.ed.ac.uk/discovery/fulldisplay?docid=alma992679763502466&context=L&vid=44UOE_INST:44UOE_VU2&lang=en Fishbein, B., Taneva, M., & Kowolik, K. (2025). TIMSS 2023 user guide for the international database. TIMSS & PIRLS International Study Center, Boston College; International Association for the Evaluation of Educational Achievement (IEA). https://timss2023.org/data Hattie, J. (2009). Visible learning: A synthesis of over 800 meta-analyses relating to achievement. Routledge. International Association for the Evaluation of Educational Achievement (IEA). (2025). TIMSS 2023 International Databas. https://www.iea.nl/international-data-tools-iea-studies/timss/timss-2023 Kline, R. B. (2016). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling (4th ed.). Guilford Press. Mislevy, R. J., Beaton, A. E., Kaplan, B., & Sheehan, K. M. (1992). Estimating population characteristics from sparse matrix samples of item responses. Journal of Educational Measurement, 29(2), 133–161. Mullis, I. V. S., Martin, M. O., & von Davier, M. (Eds.). (2021). TIMSS 2023 assessment frameworks. TIMSS & PIRLS International Study Center, Boston College; International Association for the Evaluation of Educational Achievement (IEA). Muthén, L. K., & Muthén, B. O. (1998–2017). Mplus user’s guide (8th ed.). Muthén & Muthén. https://www.statmodel.com/download/usersguide/MplusUserGuideVer_8.pdf Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. (2023). OECD Digital Education Outlook 2023: Towards an effective digital education ecosystem. OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/c74f03de-en R Core Team. (2024). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing. Vienna, Austria. https://www.r-project.org/ Satterthwaite, F. E. (1946). An approximate distribution of estimates of variance components. Biometrics Bulletin, 2(6), 110–114. von Davier, M., Fishbein, B., & Kennedy, A. (Eds.). (2024). TIMSS 2023 Technical Report (Methods and Procedures). TIMSS & PIRLS International Study Center, Boston College. https://timss2023.org/methods/ World Bank. (2024). Gulf Economic Update (Issue 12): Unlocking Prosperity: Transforming Education for Economic Breakthrough in the GCC. World Bank.