Psychological Capital and Teacher Well-being: The Mediation Role of Coping with Stress

This study aimed to investigate the mediation role of coping with stress between psychological capital and teacher wellbeing based on positive psychology, conservation resource, and broaden-and-build theories. Participants in this study were 836 teachers from three clustered, ethnically diverse public universities. Our findings showed that, in line with previous studies, the psychological capital (PsyCap), coping with stress (CWS), and teacher well-being (TWB) dimensions showed the best fit in our data. PsyCap was related positively to TWB (total and dimensions), CWS, coping through withdrawal, and negative coping with acceptance and change. The indirect effect of PsyCap on TWB through coping with stress was fully mediated. PsyCap also positively and directly affected TWB and CWS. Coping through acceptance and change were fully mediated by PsyCap and TWB dimensions, while coping through withdrawal was not. PsyCap directly and positively affected coping with stress (acceptance and change) and negatively affected coping through withdrawal. Future theoretical and practical implications are discussed.


Introduction
Teachers and teacher well-being are a central issue in the twenty-first century, impacted by countless negative and positive factors (McCallum et al., 2017). In a meta-analysis study on well-being, an International Education Research Council Project Study (AIS-NSW) found several potential factors such as stress, self-efficacy, motivation, emotional competence, resilience, relationships with others, organisational support, burnout, fatigue, exhaustion, positive school ecology and leadership (McCallum et al., 2017). Studies also found that teachers did not have healthy well-being (Collie et al., 2015;Pillay et al., 2005). Furthermore, the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD, 2011) reported that housing, income and wealth, jobs and earnings, social connections, subjective well-being, environmental quality, health status, education and skills, work and life, and personal security are the well-being indicators.
Scholars previously argued that teacher well-being was primarily examined by focusing on its pathological aspect (Spilt et al., 2011). In recent years, though, the scientific study of positive psychology and well-being has undergone dramatic expansion (Cooke et al., 2016). Its main goal has been to change from adversity to building a flourishing and optimal life (Seligman & Csikszentmihalyi, 2000). Thus, positive psychology plays a crucial role in employees' well-being and fosters a healthy working environment. Understanding well-being among teachers is essential not only for the teachers but also for students, schools, and the nation (Duckworth et al., 2009). For instance, the newly emerging concept in various fields of psychology is positive psychological capital or PsyCap. Researchers and experts increasingly recognise the role and function of PsyCap and believe in its potential to attain optimal flourishing ( Luthans et al., 2006). Indeed, the practical effectiveness of the model in the workplace continues to grow (Görgens-Ekermans & Herbert, 2013).
Many scholars have investigated the relationship between coping with stress and well-being. For example, Folkman (2012Folkman ( , 2013, Park and Adler (2003), and Rabenu et al. (2016) all found a positive relationship between coping with stress and well-being. A significant positive relationship was also found between coping through change and wellbeing; however, no significant correlation was found between well-being and coping through acceptance and withdrawal (Rabenu et al., 2016). Researchers have evidence that coping style can improve physical and psychological health (Park & Adler, 2003).

Theoretical Background and Research Hypotheses
This study's main aim is to ascertain whether positive psychology, specifically PsyCap resources and coping strategies, is essential for university teachers' well-being and for them to flourish and optimise their achievement. The argument derives first from the broaden-and-build theory of positive emotions (BBPE; Fredrickson, 2004) and the conservation of resources (COR) theory (Hobfoll, 1989(Hobfoll, , 2002. We postulate those positive psychological resources, optimisation, and coping strategies are among the best enhancement mechanisms for teachers' well-being. The models also seek to explain that teachers can use positive resources and have positive emotions and coping mechanisms to achieve success in the workplace. The COR theory is one of the best resource-oriented approaches, emphasising the importance of people's motivation to retain, defend, and accumulate resources when threatened with the actual loss of valued resources (Hobfoll, 1989). It predicts that the accumulation of resources results in positive individual outcomes like commitment (Hobfoll, 1989) and the maintenance of well-being and useful, balanced resources (Zhao & You, 2019).
The BBPE theory emphasises that the most vital resources that boost well-being and build positive effects are personal and social capital (Fredrickson, 2004). The BBPE approach is essential for teachers to use personal, positive, and social capital to cope successfully with problems, adapt to difficulties, enjoy a flourishing life, optimal functioning and a higher level of teaching satisfaction, and minimise stress (Fredrickson, 2004). Therefore, the conservation of resources and the broaden-and-build theory were considered appropriate and alternative explanations of PsyCap's functions and outcomes (Avey, Luthans, & Youssef, 2010).
Moreover, the COR theory has been linked to coping with stress and PsyCap. Thus, stress and coping theory provide a practical framework and testing hypotheses about stress coping strategies and their relationship with mental wellbeing (Folkman, 2013) and PsyCap (Rabenu et al., 2016). For instance, the COR theory can be viewed as an essential personal resource that helps attain goals because individuals with many potential resources can cope better with the difficulty they face in the workplace and move towards nurturing and optimising their resources.
Thus, PsyCap and coping strategies will help university teachers to understand and design solutions to the challenges of their work and boost their well-being. Therefore, PsyCap represents the positive agentic resources individuals possess, enabling them to flourish, optimise, and boost their day-to-day activities (Luthans & Youssef-Morgan, 2017). The COR and BBPE models emphasise affective, cognitive and social variables, including self-efficacy, goals, achievement, social resource and resilience. Luthans et al. (2006) depicting the role of PsyCap in teachers' well-being in the workplace.
Secondly, this study's argument derives from the positive psychology theory (Seligman, 2011). For a century, scholars have greatly contributed to the broad recognition of well-being in a wide range of areas, including education, work, relationships, the military, sports, health and life, and have given much prominence to mental disorders in general (Youssef & Luthans, 2015). However, earlier studies overlooked two crucial goals for the flourishing of humans in the field of psychology: (a) helping healthy people to be happier and more fruitful; and (b) realising human potential (Seligman & Csikszentmihalyi, 2000). Also, psychologists are currently trying to shift from a narrative of human weakness to a positive vision of a robust human side and immeasurable potential (Becker & Marecek, 2008). Thus, focused on the practical importance of positive psychology, an emerging teacher well-being model was developed by Collie et al. (2015) derived from three commonly investigated factors: workload stress, student relations, and organisational level stress.
Positive psychology is vital for teachers to cope with negative life events, build a flourishing life, and optimise their tasks. University teachers in developing countries like Ethiopia are characterised by low motivation, lack of professional development, and insufficient resources and facilities. Positive psychology has many potential benefits for individuals, groups and institutions (Gable & Haidt, 2005). The following definition credibly illustrates the positive psychological sources. Positive psychology at the individual level [is] focused on positive personal traits: the capacity for love and wisdom, humanity, courage, aesthetic, forgiveness, interpersonal skills, sensibility, perseverance, originality, and vocation, spirituality, high ability, future mindedness. At the subjective level [it] is about valued personal experiences: in the past (contentment, satisfaction, and well-being), in the present (flow and happiness), and for the future (optimism and hope). At the group level, [it is] focused on the institutions and the civic virtues that move individuals towards better citizenship: nurturance, work ethics, civility, responsibility, altruism, moderation, and tolerance (Linley et al., 2006;Seligman & Csikszentmihalyi, 2000).
Inspired by Martin Seligman, the positive psychology movement has initiated PsyCap as a resource. Luthans et al. (2006) defined PsyCap as an individual's positive condition of development, characterised as (1) having the confidence needed to put in the necessary effort to succeed at challenging tasks (self-efficacy); (2) creating a positive stance regarding achievement now and in the future and thriving now and in the future (optimism); (3) diligence towards goals and, when necessary, finding new ways to succeed (hope); and (4) when beset by issues and adversity, carrying on and bouncing back (resilience).
PsyCap has many advantages in the work environment. For example, it encourages a positive attitude towards work (Avey et al., 2011), improves employees' performance, and is positively associated with positive outcomes and negatively associated with pathology (Peterson et al., 2011).
This research aims to explore the mediator role of coping with stress between PsyCap and teachers' well-being. It also examines the direct effect of stress and coping with stress on teachers' well-being. Furthermore, the study aims to test the psychometric properties of each scale used in the study using confirmatory factor analysis (CFA). The theoretical and conceptual models used in this study explicitly reflect the reality of the nature of teachers' work and the teaching profession; Collie et al.'s (2015) emerging theory briefly addresses teacher well-being. Therefore, it is possible that coping strategies (Rabenu & Yaniv, 2017) fuel teachers' useful positive psychological PsyCap resources of hope, selfefficacy, resilience, and optimism Luthans et al. (2006) to deal with stress and create a flourishing and optimal worklife balance (Seligman, 2011). Consequently, based on the latest scientific literature and the theoretical framework constructed in Figures 1 and 2, this study proposes the following testable hypotheses. Hypothesis 1. There is a positive relationship between PsyCap and coping with stress (CWS) (H1a) and teachers' wellbeing (H1b).
Hypothesis 3: CWS has a direct effect on teachers' well-being.

Hypothesis 4:
Coping with stress mediates the relationship between PsyCap and teachers' well-being (see Figure 1).

Figure 1. A theoretical model of the relations between PsyCap, coping with stress, and teachers' well-being
European Journal of Educational Research 1231 Hypothesis 5: PsyCap has a direct effect on coping through acceptance (H5a), coping through change (H5b), and withdrawal (H5c).

Measures
This study used standard, psychometrically sound and well-established scales in psychological and educational research areas across various cultural contexts.
The Coping with Stress Questionnaire (CWS-Q) is a ten-item scale developed by coping (Rabenu et al., 2016) to assess teachers' coping strategies, with three sub-scales. The questionnaire is composed of three dimensions, including change (three items), acceptance (three items), and withdrawal (four items). We rated each item on a six-point Likert scale ranging from 1 (very infrequently) to 6 (very frequently), with acceptable reliability (α=0.65). Sample items are, for change, "During stressful situations at work I work to reduce stress"; for accept, "During stressful situations at work I re-evaluate the situation as positive"; and for withdrawal, "During stressful situations at work I feel comfortable looking for another job". The construct was highly reliable and valid (Rabenu et al., 2016). CFA examined the model of the CWS-Q scale with a robust maximum likelihood estimation method. The construct validity of the scale of this study confirmed the goodness of fit of the model: χ2 (24)=104.3, p < 0.001, χ2/df=4.34, GFI=0.973, AGFI=0.950, RFI=0.976, TLI=0.981, CFI=0.988, SRMR=0.058, RMSEA=0.063 (0.051, 0.076) (see Table 2). Moreover, the Cronbach's alpha reliability (α) and composite reliability (CR) indicated that the three the CWS dimensions had excellent reliability: acceptance (α = 0.91; CR = 0.91.); change (α = 0.88; CR = 0.89); and withdrawal (α= 0.95; CR = 0.95) and the total scale reliability was (α = 0.71; CR = 0.92) (see table 3).

Data Analysis
Before starting the data collection process, we received the Institutional Review Board (IRB) approval letter. Participation in this study was voluntary. In the next analysis stage, we addressed multicollinearity by checking the correlation among the values of the construct, which should be greater than 0.90, and the normality of distributions was examined following Kline (2016) and Tabachnick and Fidell (2018) recommendation. After the necessary criteria were met, the data were analysed using IBM SPSS Statistics 23.0 and AMOS 23 version.
In the third step, we conducted the Pearson correlation to check whether PsyCap, CWS and TWB correlated with the hypothesised model's demographic factors considered as the control variable (Edwards, 2008). None of the six demographic variables has a relationship with the PsyCap, CWS, and TWB constructs (see Table 3). As a result, we have no control variable in our study.

The values of skewness and kurtosis lie between [-2] and [+2]
; this is acceptable to prove the normal distribution of the data (Ryu, 2011). As a result, this study's skewness values lie between -0.110 and 1.46, and kurtosis scores ranged from -0.10 to 1.9. These values suggest that all constructs showed relatively normal distribution (see Table 3).
The cut-off values of acceptable fitness of indices of the structural equation modelling are χ2=insignificant, χ2/df ≤5; AGFI ≥0.90; GFI, RFI, TLI and CFI ≥0.90 and SRMR and RMSEA ≤0.80; these were considered as criteria of this research (Kline, 2016;Tabachnick & Fidell, 2018). However, in the large data sample, the chi-square is very sensitive and will have the probability to be significant and do not affect the model fitness (Hair et al., 2019). Before conducting the structural equation modelling (SEM), we tested the scales' using the CFA analysis as recommended by Hair et al. (2019). After checking the CFA results, we examined the measurement and the structural model, or the proposed mediation model, using the bootstrapping method (see Table 2). The structural model draws upon theory, prior literature, and the research objectives to differentiate which predictor variables explain each criterion variable. In contrast, the measurement model measures all variables together to represent the theory (Hair et al., 2019).
Finally, the hypothesised model described in Figures 1 and 2 were examined using the maximum likelihood method (ML), a standardised estimate-based SEM. The main reasons for using SEM in this study are: (1) this study is testing the relationships among latent constructs using various methods (Lei & Wu, 2007); (2) it is recommended to confirm the factor structure of a psychological instrument (Tomarken & Waller, 2005); (3) our proposed model is a complex one which examines direct and indirect (mediated) effects, structural factor models (CFA), and other complex relationships among variables (Lei & Wu, 2007); (4) this study uses bootstrapping for the proposed mediation model for inferences about indirect effects; and (5) it helps when discussing the theoretical and practical implications of the study.

The issue of Common Method Biases
The common method Biases comprises potential influences in social science studies, especially in the paper-and-pencil instrument, including the content, the response format, the general instructions of the items, and why the subject is taking the test (Podsakoff et al., 2003). Therefore, in this study to overcome such problems, the following measures were done: (a) the content or face validity of each item evaluated by experts in the field before administering the instrument; (b) Informed consent was obtained from all participants and their identity coded anonymously; (c) some items were reversely scored; (d) the predictor and the criterion variables were taken from different sources and cultural contexts; (e) for the issue of measurement error, the factor variance was computed. Following the Harman single factor test guidelines, the common method bias was performed (Podsakoff et al., 2003(Podsakoff et al., , 2012. Hence, there are no significant common method biases in this study since the computed variance (28.52%) is below the threshold of 50%. Model 1-A: PsyCap on teachers' workload well-being, organisational well-being, and student interaction well-being mediated by coping through acceptance.
Model 2-C: PsyCap on teachers' workload well-being, organisational well-being, and student interaction well-being mediated by coping through change.
Model 3-W: PsyCap on teachers' workload well-being, organisational well-being, and student interaction well-being mediated by coping through withdrawal. Model 4-All: PsyCap on teachers' workload well-being, organisational well-being, and student interaction well-being mediated by coping through acceptance, change, and withdrawal. Table 2 shows the constructs' internal consistency, descriptive statistics (means and standard deviations), the normality of distribution using kurtosis and skewness, and correlations of all main constructs. Supporting Hypothesis 1, the findings of this study confirmed a significant positive correlation between PsyCap and organisational well-being (r=0.126, p<0.01), student interaction well-being (r=0.267, p<0.01) and total teacher well-being (r=0.167, p<0.01). However, no significant correlations were found between PsyCap and workload well-being. A significant positive relationship is found between PsyCap and coping through acceptance (r=0.266; p<0.01), coping through change (r=-0.272; p<0.01) and total coping with stress (r=-0.300; p<0.01), but not coping through withdrawal (r=-0.016; p>0.05).
Finally, coping through acceptance had a positive and significant correlation with coping through change (r=0.607, p<0.01) and was negatively correlated with withdrawal (r=-0.333, p<0.01). The correlation of coping through change with withdrawal was also negative and significant (r=-0.270, p<0.01).

Mediation Analysis
The study examined the mediating role of coping with stress as a link between PsyCap and teacher's well-being (see Tables 4 and 5). The direct effect model (PsyCap) is compared to another direct and indirect model (with mediators).
The best structural equation model requires specifying the relationships, examining causations, and developing the models (structural and measurement models) recommended by Hair et al. (2019). For instance, the fit between the two models in the mediation analysis is essential and is examined in this study. Comparing the direct and indirect effect model (Figure 1) with the dimensional construct's direct and indirect effect model ( Figure 2) showed a good fit. To measure the precision of prediction obtained with the structured model, we examined the proportion of variance explained by the predictor variables (i.e., R 2 ).
As displayed in Table 4, PsyCap explains 18.4 per cent of the variance of teacher well-being, and the variance of coping with stress was 12.5 per cent. The model accounts for 58.4 per cent of the variance of student interaction well-being, 11.3 per cent of organisational well-being, and 4.3 per cent of workload well-being. The predictor variables' direct and indirect effects on the criterion variables were analysed and presented (see Figures 2 and 3 Furthermore, the indirect effect of PsyCap (see Figure 3) on teachers' well-being mediated through coping with stress was positive and significant (β=0.051, 95% bootstrap CI [0.010, 0.100], p<0.05). The measurement model and the structural model of this meditation was tested. As a result, the structural model of this mediation indicates a good model fit (see Table 2): χ2 (616) Variables  M  SD  Sk  Ku  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18 (Hair et al., 2019;Kline, 2016;Tabachnick & Fidell, 2018).

Discussion
The main aim of the present study was to test the mediation role of coping with stress using PsyCap as a predictor variable and teacher well-being as a criterion variable based on positive psychology theory, COR theory, and a broadenand-build approach. Before testing the mediation model, we performed the validity and reliability of the instruments, followed by the mediation models (testing the measurement and structural) models. The main findings of this study are discussed below.
As hypothesised, the structural model in this study tested the direct and indirect (mediated) effects of PsyCap and coping with stress on teacher well-being (see Figure 1) and examined the direct and indirect effects of PsyCap on the dimensions of teacher well-being mediated by coping through acceptance, change and withdrawal (see Figure 2). We found a significant and positive relationship between PsyCap and organisational well-being, student interaction wellbeing, total teacher well-being, and a positive correlation with coping through acceptance, coping through change, and total coping with stress (supporting H1). However, PsyCap has no significant correlations with workload well-being and coping through withdrawal. Studies demonstrate a substantial and significant positive relationship between PsyCap and well-being (Rabenu et al., 2016) and negatively associated with negative outcomes (Avey, Luthans, Smith, et al, 2010).
In this study, coping through acceptance positively correlates with student interaction well-being and teacher wellbeing, but it has no significant correlation with workload and organisational well-being. A significant and positive correlation was found between coping through change and organisational well-being, student interaction well-being and teacher well-being, but not workload well-being. Surprisingly, coping through withdrawal positively correlates with student interaction well-being and total teacher well-being. A positive correlation was found between coping with stress and workload, organisational, student interaction well-being and teacher well-being. In contrast, Rabenu et al. (2016) did not find coping through acceptance and coping through withdrawal significantly correlated with well-being and coping through change only positively correlated with well-being. These differences between the current study and the previous findings may be due to cultural differences, strategies used to handle stressors in the working life, and other context-based variables. These results are consistent with the studies by Rabenu et al. (2016) and Rabenu and Yaniv (2017).
Coping with stress significantly mediates between PsyCap and teachers' well-being (see Figure 3), supporting H4. Supporting H2a, PsyCap has a positive and significant direct effect on CWS. PsyCap also has a significant and positive direct effect on teachers' well-being, supporting H2b. The direct effect of CWS (H3) also significant and positively affects teachers' well-being. Several findings support our results. For example, coping with stress mediates the relationship between PsyCap and employees' well-being (Rabenu et al., 2016). The study design is based on positive psychology theory (Seligman, 2011), conservation (Hobfoll, 1989), and the broaden-and-build theory (Fredrickson, 2004) and is of paramount significance to university teachers.
The broaden-and-build theory suggests that positive emotions increase people's attention and thinking, and healthy longevity fuels psychological resilience, builds significant personal resources, triggers and fosters well-being, and seeds human flourishing. Positive psychology is also focused on helping healthy people be happier and more productive and actualising human potential. The COR theory also shows the potential of resources to help individuals attain goals, better cope with difficulty they face in the workplace, and move towards nurturing and optimising their resources.
The analysis model assumed that the PsyCap capacities of optimism, self-efficacy, resilience and hope would function as potential resources for coping with stress since coping evolves from resources that precede and influence coping (Rabenu et al., 2016). Literature has also found that PsyCap's positive role and function can attain optimal functioning in the workplace (Luthans et al. , 2006).

Figure 3. Mediation model of the relations between PsyCap, CWS and TWB
According to Rabenu et al. (2016), psychological resources may boost the individual to adapt their lives, manage things more positively, and expect positive workplace outcomes. Total PsyCap has a potential impact on employee's well-being and performance greater than each sub-dimension. For instance, a study conducted by Luthans et al. (2005) found that PsyCap as a possible resource leads individuals to be more confident, resulting in higher performance; to be more motivated to perform challenging tasks; to generate solutions, and to choose the best alternative pathways when facing challenges. Li (2018) also argued that teachers' PsyCap is a vital ingredient in the positive relationship between teaching, organisation, and relations with students. Rabenu et al. (2016) argued that psychological resources are highly associated with greater stress resistance and better employee well-being and performance. In line with this, Ding et al. (2015) noted the mediating role of coping with stress between PsyCap resources and burnout among Chinese nurses.
As shown in Figure 4, coping through acceptance, change and withdrawal together play a significant mediating role between PsyCap and workload well-being, organisational well-being and student interaction well-being. PsyCap also has a significant and positive direct effect on coping through acceptance (supporting H5a) and coping through change (supporting H5b), whereas it has a negative and significant direct effect on coping through withdrawal (supporting H5c). PsyCap also shows a significant and positive direct effect on workload well-being, organisational well-being, and student interaction well-being. The above findings confirm the stated hypothesis H6a-c.
The existing literature indicated that coping played a mediating role between individual resources and outcomes variables. For instance, Luthans et al. (2006) and Youssef and Luthans (2015) argued that self-efficacy, hope, resilience and optimism (PsyCap) significantly and positively predict well-being and are related to desirable outcomes in the workplace. Bryden et al. (2015) studied the mediating role of coping with stress between adverse life events and psychological well-being. Surprisingly, coping through acceptance (H7a-c) has a negative and significant direct effect on organisational wellbeing and student interaction well-being, but not on workload well-being. Coping through change (H7d-f) also directly and negatively affects workload well-being and student interaction well-being. However, it has no significant direct effect on organisational well-being. Coping through withdrawal (H7g-i) positively and significantly affects workload well-being, organisational well-being, and student interaction well-being. This finding is contrary to Rabenu et al. (2016). The indirect effect of PsyCap (H8) through coping with acceptance, change and withdrawal are significant for workload well-being, organisational well-being and student interaction well-being. The model has acceptable and confirmed structural and measurement validity ( Hair et al., 2019;Kline, 2016;Tabachnick & Fidell, 2018).
Coping with acceptance (H9a-c) and coping with change (H10a-c) significantly mediate PsyCap and workload wellbeing, organisational well-being, and student interaction well-being. However, coping through withdrawal has no indirect effect on workload well-being (H11a), organisational well-being (H11b) and student interaction well-being (H11c). The structural model and measurement model of the three coping strategies' (coping through acceptance, change and withdrawal) have an acceptable model fit. Hair et al. (2019) and Kline (2016) recommended for a structural model fit to test the mediated effects that GFI, AGFI, RFI, TLI and CFI ≥0.90, and χ2/df value ≤5, whereas values ≥0.95 and less than 3, respectively, should be a good model fit. Similarly, Rabenu et al. (2016) found that coping through change and acceptance mediated the relationship between PsyCap and well-being. Coping with stress also contributes to physical and psychological health (Park & Adler, 2003).
The differences observed in this study and the previous literature may be cultural and institutional. In Ethiopia, university teachers have no opportunity to foster their well-being and cope with the problems they face in their daily lives. According to the World Bank report (2017), teachers suffer from aimless meetings and invest their energy and resources in routine tasks rather than professional issues.

Conclusion
This study explored the mediating role of coping with stress between PsyCap and teachers' well-being and the direct effect of PsyCap and coping with stress on teachers' well-being using the SEM bootstrap method. Furthermore, we examined the mediating roles of coping with acceptance, change, and withdrawal between PsyCap and teachers' wellbeing and the direct and indirect effects on the dimensions of teacher well-being. Examining the potential role of PsyCap and CWS to foster teachers' well-being is novel research. To the authors' knowledge, there are no findings in the Ethiopian or African context, particularly for university teachers, leading to a knowledge gap. Before assessing the mediation model, this study established the measurement model's validity and reliability to all primary constructs to ensure the psychometric properties. The normality distribution, bivariate correlation, Cronbach's alpha, and construct validities of the TWBS, the PCQ-12, and the CWS-Q scales were examined with good psychometric properties.
The results show that teachers' well-being positively influenced by PsyCap and the core coping with stress strategies would enhance and use as a resource to flourish their work-life and establish the best relationship with their students and institutions. Therefore, education sectors and other stakeholders could potentially use this study as a guide to promote and flourish teachers' well-being.

Recommendation
The present study is relevant for today's higher education teachers and applicable in educational psychology to conduct a study on positive PsyCap and its association with teachers' well-being and coping with stress by establishing an integrated, fresh and novel model following the positive PsyCap of Luthans et al. (2006), conservation resource theory (Hobfoll, 1989(Hobfoll, , 2002, the emerging theory of teacher well-being (Collie et al., 2015), and the coping with stress and appraisal theory of Lazarus and Folkman (1984).
This study also confirmed PsyCap is a potential resource to help individuals combat the effects of stress using coping, fostering their inner strength, and nurturing their well-being. Fredrickson's (2004) broaden-and-build theory underlined that the form and function of a subset of positive emotions, including interest, joy, contentment, and love, are potent for coping with stress. PsyCap has a determinant role as a resource to cope with stress and enhance teachers' well-being.
Furthermore, the present study should offer a practical intervention in the well-being of university teachers using positive psychology theory (Seligman, 2011), COR theory (Hobfoll, 1989(Hobfoll, , 2002, and a broaden-and-build approach (Fredrickson, 2004). The results have some implications for the effectiveness of university managers. For example, Li (2018) pointed out that university leaders or managers can enhance teachers' well-being by increasing their meaning in life, and PsyCap. Oades et al. (2011) also suggested that research into positive education needs to be advanced into tertiary education because applied, positive, education-based interventions play a vital role in a positive university environment.
Finally, we thank the previous scientific studies that laid the foundation and paid more attention to organisational settings, mainly in the United States (Luthans et al., 2006) and in the West (e.g. Djourova et al., 2018). However, few scientific studies have been conducted from positive psychology perspectives related to teachers' well-being at work (Collie, 2014;Collie et al., 2015). Therefore, we recommend further research on teacher well-being and coping with stress as a mediator by applying positive psychological resources because both are critical for teachers and students.

Limitations
The use of SEM allowed the examination of an advanced theoretical model as hypothesised in our study. However, there are some limitations that future research should consider.
The first is related to methodological issues: self-report and mono-method bias often threaten the validity of a study in an organisational setting and pose a report bias problem (Donaldson & Grant-vallone, 2002). Therefore, future research should consider quantitative and qualitative data collection systems to get rich and in-depth information.
The second limitation is that teachers' working life is affected by demographic factors, especially in developing countries compared with the developed world (Abebe & Woldehanna, 2013). This research did not address this important issue. There might be a strong association between teacher well-being and demographic factors; hence this area should be incorporated in the future.
The third limitation is that the research findings reported in this article emerged from the data sample of only university teachers. The research did not address elementary and high school teachers. Research findings indicate that elementary and high school teachers experience problems and difficulties in their work-life (Crosby, 2015). Therefore, future studies should focus on three levels of education-elementary, high school, and university-across various cultures, using positive psychology to enhance teachers' well-being.
Despite these drawbacks, this research has offered practitioners and researchers a manageable, time-saving, and better psychometric properties scale and a mediation model with an advanced methodological approach to measure teachers' working life, seeking to realise the role played by PsyCap and develop positive intervention strategies to enable teachers' well-being to flourish.

Authorship Contribution Statement:
Zewude: Data collection and acquisition, interpretation, concept and design, drafting manuscript, statistical analysis, securing funding, critical revision of the manuscript. Hercz: Contributed concept and design, critical revision of the manuscript, technical or material support, supervision, and final approval.

Data Availability Statement
The datasets generated during and/or analysed during the current study are available from the corresponding author, and willing to share them to the journal.

Ethical Approval
All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were per the ethical standards of the institutional and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration.

Informed Consent
Informed consent was obtained from all participants included in the study.

Conflict of Interest
The author(s) declare no potential conflicts of interest concerning this original research, authorship, and publication of this article.