The Mediating Role of Learning Analytics Engagement in Enhancing Learning Efficacy: A Mixed‑Methods Study in Chinese Private Higher Education

Abstract

Digital transformation in higher education has unlocked new opportunities for data‑driven pedagogical innovation. Nevertheless, how digital teaching practices translate into improved student learning outcomes remains insufficiently understood, especially within China’s private higher‑education sector. This study examines the mediating function of Learning Analytics Engagement (LAE) in the association between the Digital Teaching Model (DTM) and Learning Efficacy (LE) among undergraduate students enrolled at Chinese private universities. Drawing on a sequential explanatory mixed‑methods design, this research combines quantitative survey data from 398 undergraduates at Shandong Xiehe University with qualitative evidence from 18 semi‑structured student interviews. Quantitative results reveal that DTM positively predicts LAE (β=0.487, p<0.001); LAE, in turn, exerts a significant positive influence on LE (β=0.423, p<0.001). LAE partially mediates the DTM‑LE association, with an indirect effect of β=0.206(p<0.001, 95% bias‑corrected confidence interval [0.138, 0.281]). Within this sample, the mediated proportion reached 39.3%, though this effect magnitude may differ across institutional and student subgroups. The structural model accounts for 48.6% of the variance in Learning Efficacy. Qualitative findings unpack the behavioral, cognitive, and emotional dimensions of LAE, highlighting the indispensable roles of instructor scaffolding, self‑regulated learning, and context‑specific constraints in private higher education. Theoretically, this study extends the Technology Acceptance Model by integrating sociocultural and self‑regulation perspectives to unpack technology‑pedagogy‑learner interactions. Practically, it generates context‑aware recommendations for institutional leaders, educators, and policymakers seeking to advance digital learning within resource‑constrained higher‑education contexts.