Education 13 00927

education
sciences
Systematic Review
A Systematic Review on Teachers’ Well-Being in the
COVID-19 Era
Eirene Katsarou 1, * , Paraskevi Chatzipanagiotou 2 and Areti-Maria Sougari 3
1 Forestry and Management of the Environment and of Natural Resources, Democritus University of Thrace,
682 00 Orestiada, Greece
2 Distance Education Unit, European University Cyprus, Nicosia 2404, Cyprus; p.chatzipanagiotou@euc.ac.cy
3 School of English, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, 541 24 Thessaloniki, Greece; asougari@enl.auth.gr
* Correspondence: ekatsaro@fmenr.duth.gr
Abstract: The COVID-19 health crisis has wrought substantial challenges on individuals, societies,
and organizations worldwide that have significantly transformed the way people function in their
workplace on a daily basis, resulting in heightened levels of physical, psychological, and social
deprivation. Available empirical evidence in the field of education has explicitly foregrounded
the negative impact of the pandemic on teachers’ well-being (TWB) and mental health as existing
pressures became exacerbated and additional stressors accumulated in the workplace in search of the
requisite TWB remedial interventions to be used in times of crises. As frontline education providers,
teachers were not only called upon to confront difficulties associated with the shift to COVID-19-
induced online modes of instruction supporting students’ academic development and well-being
but also effectively navigate adversity and stress in their own personal and professional lives. Given
that teacher well-being has consistently been reported as a key determinant of quality education and
excellence ensuring the stability of a well-qualified workforce, this study uses a systematic review
approach to investigate educators’ well-being status, identify predictors, and report on the effective
strategies for TWB utilized by educators themselves during the COVID-19 era. Fifty-three empirical
studies published between 2020 and 2023, collected within the PRISMA-statement framework, were
included in the final analysis. Implications for policy and school administrators are also discussed
followed by insights for future research avenues in the area of teacher education and professional
Citation: Katsarou, E.;
development.
Chatzipanagiotou, P.; Sougari, A.-M.
A Systematic Review on Teachers’ Keywords: teacher well-being; teacher education; professional development; COVID-19 health
Well-Being in the COVID-19 Era. pandemic; systematic review
Educ. Sci. 2023, 13, 927. https://
doi.org/10.3390/educsci13090927
Academic Editors: Minsun Shin and

1. Introduction
Sumi Hagiwara
The onset of the COVID-19 pandemic in late December 2019 and the ensuing imposi-
Received: 31 July 2023 tion of stringent health emergency protocols including lockdown enforcement and social
Revised: 27 August 2023
distancing restrictions [1] abruptly disrupted life and triggered a socioeconomic crisis,
Accepted: 6 September 2023
altering societal living conditions [2] and inflicting profound psychological distress on indi-
Published: 12 September 2023
viduals worldwide [3]. The “mental health pandemic” [4], accompanied by sedentariness
and physical inactivity, increased dramatically during the COVID-19 period, trapping the
world in a deadly three-pronged vicious circle of three pandemics [5] with a significant
Copyright: © 2023 by the authors.
detrimental effect on the general population’s well-being [6]. This trend was equally at-
Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. tested extensively in education in a substantial number of empirical studies exclusively
This article is an open access article reporting on students’ achievement [7,8], motivation for learning [9], and physical and
distributed under the terms and mental well-being [10,11], often to the exemption of teachers’ well-being during this time.
conditions of the Creative Commons Yet, emerging research capitalizing on the necessity to ensure quality education as a key
Attribution (CC BY) license (https:// lever for the sustainable development and growth of modern society has recently revisited
creativecommons.org/licenses/by/ the issue of teacher well-being (TWB) in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic to understand
4.0/). and document educators’ experiences within the context of this crisis.
Educ. Sci. 2023, 13, 927. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci13090927 https://www.mdpi.com/journal/education

Educ. Sci. 2023, 13, 927 2 of 28
Preliminary evidence indicates that the pandemic took a severe toll on teachers’ mental
health and well-being [12], many of whom had already exhibited high levels of stress
and emotional exhaustion in the pre-pandemic era [13]. Typically, heavy workloads,
time constraints, and challenges performing various duties that were once perceived as
substantial have been complicated and intensified by the rapid shift to online teaching
with the advent of COVID-19 [14]. Uncertainty about the duration of school closures,
inadequate training in online teaching methodologies [15], limited digital competence
skills [16], and excessive bureaucratic tasks and poor infrastructure [17] led to heightened
levels of stress, anxiety [18], and job ambiguity [19] with potentially adverse effects in the
long term on teachers’ professional performance [13], higher attrition rates [20], and lower
academic achievement in students [21]. Longitudinal investigations indicated an increase
in teacher burnout symptoms [22], engendered by prolonged lockdown conditions. Of
the cases reported, 87% experienced increased mental health and well-being issues [23],
and 53% demonstrated a decrease in self-perceived professional well-being [24]. Still, the
majority of teachers expressly reported the failure of state and school administration to
take the necessary steps to mitigate the negative psychological impact of COVID-19 and
support their overall well-being throughout the pandemic. Given the pivotal role of TWB
in creating a supportive and stimulating learning environment [25,26] and the need to
expand our knowledge with respect to teachers’ psychological functioning by identifying
the determinant factors related to TWB amid the pandemic, this review systematically
synthesizes relevant empirical studies published within the 2020–2023 timeframe that
report on TWB status throughout COVID-19 crisis across primary, secondary, and higher
education levels. To this end, this paper aims to address each of the following questions:
• Research Question #1. How did the COVID-19 pandemic impact overall TWB across
different educational levels?
• Research Question #2. What are the key determinants of TWB in terms of the chal-
lenges faced and leverage actions used by educators to maintain and advance their
sense of well-being during the COVID-19 pandemic period?
• Research Question #3. What are the research design trends used in the examination
of TWB throughout the COVID-19 pandemic period?
This paper is structured along the following six sections: Section 2 provides the theoret-
ical framework for our study focusing on how TWB as a construct has been conceptualized
and operationalized in extant educational research as a valued precondition and indicator
for teaching quality and school effectiveness by ensuring teachers’ optimal functioning
in and commitment to school. Section 3 provides the justification used for our systematic
review with a discussion of the recent literature on TWB, seeking to identify research gaps
that need to be properly addressed. Section 4 describes the research methodology followed
in this study, and the key findings of this review are presented and categorized for each
research question in Section 5. Implications for policymakers and educators at the school
management level related to TWB are outlined in Section 6, where suggestions for future
research in the area are also provided.
2. Teacher Well-Being in the COVID-19 Era

Although research on TWB has tremendously increased in recent years [27,28], it is
imperative to describe the notion of well-being, which is often studied under an array of
different theoretical frameworks and views, in our effort to determine the extent to which
TWB has been affected by the COVID-19 pandemic era.
The relevant interdisciplinary literature is strikingly replete with an abundance of
definitions of well-being. Yet, the term still evades consensual conceptualization as a
function of its multi-dimensional, dynamic, and context-dependent nature [29]. OECD [30]
conceptualizes well-being in terms of material conditions and quality of life which, accord-
ing to the WHO [31] (2021), are the fundamental prerequisites that enable both individuals
and societies to contribute to the world with a sense of meaning and purpose that supports
tracking the equal distribution of resources, general prospering, and sustainability. Well-
Educ. Sci. 2023, 13, 927 3 of 28
being has invariably been identified as a complex, multi-factorial concept linked to overall
life satisfaction, the presence of positive emotions, and the lack of negative feelings [32]
with physical, material, social, emotional, developmental, and activity dimensions [33].
Similarly, Holmes [34] defines well-being as ‘being in a comfortable, happy or healthy state’
that consists of an amalgamation of four distinct types of well-being within an individ-
ual, i.e., physical, emotional, mental, and intellectual well-being, while Gillett-Swan and
Sargeant’s [35] definition describe well-being as ‘a process overtime, or an individual’s
ability to manage inputs that can impact their particular emotional, physical, or cognitive
state in response to a given context’. Within more recent holistic definitional frameworks
that move beyond the domain of individual subjectivity, well-being is perceived as ‘dynam-
ically constructed by its actors through an interplay between their circumstances, locality,
activities and psychological resources, including interpersonal relations’ [36] (p. 118) and
‘a dynamic sense of meaning and life satisfaction emerging from a person’s subjective
personal relationships with the affordances within their social ecologies’ [37] (p. 16). In this
sense, well-being is viewed as a complex dynamic system, diverse and fluid across time,
which fluctuates throughout personal and professional life depending on the interactions
between individuals and their environments [38].
In classical psychological models, well-being has been broadly described as ‘opti-
mal psychological functioning and experience’ [39] (p. 142), which has been empirically
studied from two different perspectives grounded in two different philosophical strands,
i.e., (a) the hedonic or ‘subjective wellbeing’ approach that is associated with happiness,
pleasure, low levels of negative affect, and overall life satisfaction [40,41], determined
by a ‘hedonic balance’ between positive and negative affect [42], and (b) the eudemonic
approach that is based on actions reflecting personal values, virtues, and excellence that
allow the full development of individuals’ potentials, leading to a fulfilled and meaningful
life [43]. To Ryff [44,45], eudemonic well-being denotes psychological well-being that is
correlated with high levels of autonomy, personal development, self-acceptance, purpose
in life, competence or environmental mastery, and sound interpersonal relations, with
each one of these factors exerting different challenges to an individual in the process of
functioning positively [46]. Satisfactory levels of psychological well-being are conditioned
by the existence of happy feelings, contentment in life, and the absence of stress disorder
and depression symptoms [47] and can even serve as a predictor of an individual’s physical
health and age [48]. The inclusion of hedonic and eudemonic elements has inevitably led
to more comprehensive models of well-being [49] grounded on the premise that engage-
ment with activities that enhance personal competencies and optimal functioning directly
impact life satisfaction or positive affect [50]. Seligman’s [51] PERMA extended framework
involving the evaluation of well-being holistically in terms of positive emotion, engage-
ment, relationships, meaning and purpose, and accomplishment, has often been utilized
for rigorous investigation of well-being in school contexts, e.g., [52,53], albeit to a limited
extent, prompting the development of similar frameworks, as evidenced by Noble and
McGrath’s [54] PROSPER model intended for the implementation of positive education.
In addition to its emotional dimension, well-being in the workplace has also been the
subject of intense study in the areas of occupational health and industrial psychology, as
it ensures organizational resilience and sustainability [55] by increasing job satisfaction
and self-efficacy to engaged employees who are willing to invest effort in their work
and persist in the face of difficulties [56]. An overview of related research indicates that
occupational well-being has often been defined and empirically investigated within the
framework of (a) the heuristic job demand–resource (JD-R) model that operationalizes
occupational well-being in relation to specific job stress factors, classified as job demands
and job resources, resting on the assumption that employees’ work engagement is built on
the presence of job-related resources [57] and (b) the effort–reward imbalance (ERI) model
that emphasizes the reward rather than the control structure of work [58]. Following the
JD-R model, professional well-being is treated as a function of a balance between positive
job characteristics in the form of job resources at either the individual or organizational
Educ. Sci. 2023, 13, 927 4 of 28
level, as well as negative ones related to the typical physical, psychological, social, and
organizational aspects of an occupation [59]. Alternatively, within the ERI model, a lack of
reciprocity between effort (extrinsic job demands and an individual’s intrinsic motivation
to meet them) and reward (i.e., salary, esteem reward, career opportunities) may lead to
increased work stress, decreased occupational well-being, and consequently, to health
impairment and absenteeism [60]. Although both models lack explanatory power by
reducing the reality of working organizations to only a handful of variables, they have been
widely used to provide useful insights into teachers’ occupational well-being status across
diverse educational contexts [61], either by assessing the detrimental impact of work-related
stress, emotional exhaustion, and burnout on teachers’ professional well-being, e.g., [62], or
by focusing on institutionalized recovery practices and self-management coping strategies
used by educators to strengthen it [63]. Notably, this line of empirical research significantly
intensified during the COVID-19 pandemic era in an effort to provide more nuanced teacher
well-being profiles in times of crisis using person-oriented approaches [64].
Valued as a crucial element and indicator of teaching quality [65] and student achieve-
ment [66], TWB resurfaced as the focal point of a substantial renewed research interest over
the past decade, motivated by the necessity to enable teachers to become more effective
in their professional roles. In an attempt to eliminate definitional fuzziness surround-
ing well-being in the educational field, the concept has most commonly been associated
with job satisfaction and described in either deficit terms, as a function of lack of stress,
burnout [67], emotional exhaustion, and problems with retention [68], or as an ‘optimal
psychological functioning and experience at work’ [69] that involve ‘the prevalence of
positive emotions and cognitions toward school, persons in school and the school context
over the negative ones’ [70] (p. 3). As an inherently complex construct, TWB has even been
perceived as being intricately intertwined with hedonistic and eudemonic elements of well-
being, denoting pleasurable moments in teaching students and a deeper sense of teaching,
respectively [71], that refers to ‘teachers’ responses to the cognitive, emotional, health and
social conditions pertaining to their work and their profession’ [72] (p. 18). In this sense,
TWB ceases to ‘be considered solely the responsibility of the individual’ [73] (p. 16) and can
succinctly be defined for the purposes of this study as a resulting ‘positive emotional state’
emerging from the subjective way a person interprets and interacts with the immediate
school environment [74] (p. 286). Following the line of pre-pandemic research on TWB
conducted within an ecological systems framework [75], this review study addresses TWB
within the turbulent COVID-19 era and seeks to determine the impact of environmental
interconnectedness at the organizational, societal, and cultural level on TWB [76,77] during
this period. It also considers the practical implications for educators, administrators, and
policymakers alike in their effort to foster and enhance their teaching staff’s well-being
using practical interventions at various educational levels in times of crisis.
3. Rationale for the Current Review

Intensified scientific interest in TWB spurred by the developing popularity of positive
psychology (PP) within the last two decades has inevitably triggered comprehensive sys-
tematic reviews to either elucidate the definitional fuzziness surrounding TWB, e.g., [78,79],
or identify potential predictor variables affecting the well-being of specific groups of teach-
ers serving predominantly at the preschool [80] and early education levels [61]. More
recently, the related literature on TWB spanning the period between 2000 and 2019 was
thoroughly reviewed by Hascher and Weber [81], focusing specifically on the identification
of TWB individual and work-related correlates and predictors, who reported the paucity
and effectiveness of current TWB intervention research in exclusively primary and sec-
ondary educational settings. TWB has also been bibliometrically reviewed by Olaleye and
Olaleye [82] in their effort to map out prevalent research trends in the Finnish academic
research community with respect to the study of teacher and student well-being under
the PERMA theoretical framework. Interestingly, as the COVID-19-initiated emergency
remote teaching mode posed a significant threat to the quality of education, augmenting
Educ. Sci. 2023, 13, 927 5 of 28
difficulties experienced by educators in organizational justice and generating interpersonal

problems, role confusion, work overload, psychosomatic disorders, and burnout [83], TWB
was revisited in a limited number of relevant systematic studies.
One such study was performed by Pyżalski and Poleszak [84], which involved an
overview of key empirical quantitative and qualitative research on teachers’ mental health,
well-being, and occupational stress throughout the period of emergency remote education
within the Polish primary and secondary educational context. Results derived from a total
of 11 empirical studies indicated overall that issues related to teacher mental health and
well-being were underrepresented in research and absent from daily state school practice
during the pandemic. In a related systematic review undertaken by Garcia et al. [85],
teachers’ psychological well-being was investigated during and after the COVID-19 era in
an effort to assess the effectiveness of TWB interventions based on the tenets of positive
psychology. The key review findings underscored a scarcity of research on TWB from a
person-centered approach in times of crisis as opposed to student well-being at all formal
educational levels, calling for a proliferation of professional development initiatives and
interventions to enable teachers to maintain and promote their well-being during a difficult
time. Although both studies are valuable contributions to the growing literature on TWB
in the pandemic years, the generalizability of their findings is limited by their narrow focus
resulting from the selection of a small sample of empirical studies in terms of educational
settings or theoretical frameworks.
To overcome such limitations and expand current knowledge on the topic, this review
aims to systematize available empirical research evidence on overall TWB status throughout
the disruptive times of the COVID-19 era, identify self-management strategies and targeted
interventions used on an individual and school management level to alleviate COVID-19-
induced stressors and optimize educators’ well-being in their workplace, and provide an
overview of current research trends in the area. Resting on the premise that a continuous,
well-functioning, and high-quality education system is imperative for modern societies,
understanding the extent to which the COVID-19 pandemic affected TWB across all levels
of education is vital for educational leaders and policymakers alike to gain valuable insights
into teachers’ experiences of the sudden changes effected by prolonged lockdown periods
and support teachers’ well-being in forthcoming crisis events in the future.
4. Methodology Used in This Review

In order to obtain a thorough understanding of TWB during the COVID-19 pandemic,
this study concentrates on key findings of empirical studies collected using the systematic
literature review technique [86,87], which involves the identification and synthesis of
available research evidence of sufficient quality [88] using systematic and precise methods
to classify, select, and critically analyze multiple research studies or documents [89]. The
review process was conducted in compliance with the Preferred Reporting Items for
Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines [90,91], which adequately
and concisely describe the decision-making processes involved in all phases of a study
regarding identification, screening, eligibility, and inclusion of selected studies as well as
research synthesis procedures. The review process undertaken in this study involved three
stages, according to [92]:
Planning: (a) selection of databases, (b) definition of inclusion and exclusion criteria,
and (c) definition of categories for the analysis.
Review process: (a) journal and study selection, (b) data extraction, and (c) data
synthesis.
Review report: analysis of the results and discussion of the findings in relation to the
initial research questions.
4.1. Search Strategy

Following each of the phases delineated in the PRISMA flow diagram, an extensive
search of the literature was carried out in three scientific databases that were thought to
Educ. Sci. 2023, 13, 927 6 of 28
be compatible with the goals of our systematic review, i.e., Scopus, Google Scholar, and
Science Direct, as they provide easy access to up-to-date empirical research on the topic.
All searches were limited to empirical studies reported in peer-reviewed journals and
published in English on TWB during the COVID-19 era within the two-year spanning
2020–2022 to ensure that all included articles received external feedback. The searches were
conducted using the following search strings: ‘wellbeing’ OR ‘well-being’ AND ‘primary
education,’ OR ‘secondary education’ OR ‘higher education’ AND ‘COVID-19’. Forward
and backward branching search procedures were occasionally applied to the reference in
studies on TWB during the COVID-19 era, which were also followed by manual searches
in major international and open-access journals in the disciplines of teacher education and
educational psychology including Teaching and Teacher Education, Frontiers in Education,
Journal of Teacher Education, European Journal of Teacher Education, Australian Journal of Teacher
Education, British Journal of Educational Psychology, School Psychology, Journal of Educational
Psychology to guarantee the greatest possible scientific quality for all articles selected.
4.2. Selection Criteria and Study Quality Assessment

With respect to the three research questions of this review, the general inclusion,
exclusion, and quality criteria set for study selection were as follows:
4.2.1. Study Inclusion Criteria

a. Published between 2020 and the first quarter of 2023.
b. Written in English.
c. Offered empirical evidence for the evaluation of TWB status across different educa-
tional levels during the COVID-19 period following a well-designed experimental
research method instead of expressing a theoretical stance on the issue.
d. Focused on the identification of key determinants that affected TWB during the
COVID-19 pandemic within the context of primary, secondary, and higher education.
e. Reported the coping strategies used by teachers in their effort to effectively overcome
difficulties caused by the COVID-19 pandemic and sustain their well-being at an
acceptable level.
4.2.2. Study Exclusion Criteria

a. Not about TWB during the COVID-19 years.
b. Not an empirical study based on a well-structured research method.
c. Published in languages other than English.
d. Published as work-in-progress reports or preliminary studies.
e. Unpublished BA, MA, and PhD theses, as they have not undergone a peer-review
process.
f. Did not discuss implications related to TWB enhancement in times of crisis.
Study quality was also assessed from a methodological design perspective, as studies
using qualitative and/or quantitative data analysis are considered to be the most accurate
specimens of empirical research to test a hypothesis [93]. To study TWB in times of COVID-
19 crisis in valid empirical studies, the following criteria were applied in the selection
process that ensured all selected studies used the typical structure of classic empirical work:
a. Well-substantiated research questions in relation to TWB in the COVID-19 period.
b. The research design (quantitative and/or qualitative) and data analysis methods
used for the investigation of TWB in the COVID-19 pandemic in primary, secondary,
and tertiary education.
c. The goal of the studies and their scientific contribution in the area of teacher education
and professional development addressed the TWB concept in empirical terms.
d. A clear theoretical rationale for the study and its implications for practice and research
in TWB in times of crisis.
Educ. Sci. 2023, 13, 927 7 of 28
4.3. Data Collection and Data Analysis

Capitalizing on previous systematic review studies reported on TWB, e.g., [94], the
selected studies that satisfied the inclusion criteria were accordingly categorized based
on available evidence to map out the key conceptual themes in the relevant research.
Identification and classification of emergent and major themes pertinent to the objective of
this review were possible using the inductive thematic analysis approach [95] in terms of
(a) TWB status amidst the COVID-19 era, (b) TWB stressors and coping strategies used by
educators in their effort to mitigate the negative impact of the pandemic on their overall
personal and professional welfare, and (c) research trends used in TWB investigations
during the COVID-19 years. After extensively reading all studies included in our sample,
relevant themes used to answer each of the initial research questions were identified and
further discussed based on the educational level they referred to. Each empirical study
served as the unit of analysis, while the coding scheme emerged inductively and was
continuously refined using interaction with the data. The literature search and selection
process,
Educ. Sci. 2023, 13, x FOR PEER REVIEW
shown in Figure 1 [91], were in line with PRISMA guidelines. After duplicates8 of 29
were removed, abstracts were examined, and full-text articles were read, we identified
53 studies that qualified for this study.
Figure1.1.PRISMA
Figure PRISMAflow
flowdiagram
diagramshowing
showingthe
theselection
selectionof
ofTWB
TWBstudies.
studies.
5. Results and Discussion

5.1. Profile of the Reviewed Studies
As a preliminary step to our in-depth analysis and discussion of key empirical find-
ings in relation to TWB in the COVID-19 era, we first focus on the descriptive statistics of
Educ. Sci. 2023, 13, 927 8 of 28
5. Results and Discussion

5.1. Profile of the Reviewed Studies
As a preliminary step to our in-depth analysis and discussion of key empirical findings
in relation to TWB in the COVID-19 era, we first focus on the descriptive statistics of our
dataset to map and scope the breadth of the evidence base available on the topic within
the timeframe of 2020–2023 set for this review study. A summary of all 53 research papers
selected for this review is provided in Table 1 in terms of the source of publication, research
methodology, sample size, type of TWB, education level, and geographical location of study.
In this light, almost all empirical studies (53) included in our final sample were mainly
derived from peer-reviewed journals published predominantly in the areas of teacher
education, organizational, and school psychology with the exception of one study that
was published in a volume of conference proceedings in the related field of educational
technology and multiculturalism.
Psychological TWB was the subject of intense research in 34 (64%) out of the 53 short-
listed articles, of which 20 studies used a quantitative design based on self-reported survey
online questionnaires, 9 studies followed a qualitative research approach, 3 studies used
mixed methodology, and 2 studies opted for a quasi-experimental research design. Profes-
sional (or occupational) TWB was addressed in 11 studies (21%), with the majority of them
(n = 9) conducted within the quantitative research paradigm, although 2 studies followed a
qualitative approach. Physical and psychological TWB were examined together in six stud-
ies (11%) using quantitative (n = two), qualitative (n = three), and mixed method research
(n = one) design, the latter of which was also used in the investigation of professional and
psychological TWB (2%), as well as all three types of TWB in two respective studies (2%).
With respect to the educational context in which TWB in the COVID-19 era was studied,
in the reviewed studies, primary and secondary education levels were targeted in 19 studies
(36%) followed by settings in primary education in 14 studies (26%), higher education in
8 studies (15%), secondary and English as a foreign language (EFL) education in 4 studies
(8%), respectively, and pre-service education in 2 studies (4%), while only 2 studies (4%)
were conducted with samples from all educational levels, predominantly in the state sector.
Overall, the available empirical research on the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on
TWB was heavily conducted in mainstream state primary and/or secondary education,
as illustrated by 36 (70%) of the reviewed studies, as opposed to higher, pre-service, and
English as a Foreign Language (EFL) education contexts collectively.
Finally, Figure 2 illustrates the geographical distribution of TWB research in the
COVID-19 period, according to which 42 studies in our sample (81%) were conducted
in Europe, the Americas (10 studies), and Asia (13 studies), out of which 20 (38%) were
undertaken in countries of Central and Northern Europe (e.g., the Netherlands, Germany,
Austria, Poland). In contrast, a meager number of just six studies (12%) were reported
within diverse socio-educational contexts in Africa (two studies) and Oceania (five studies),
while the remaining three studies (6%) focused on TWB investigation during the pandemic
era in international schools spread in different locations around the globe.
Europe, the Americas (10 studies), and Asia (13 studies), out of which 20 (38%) were un-
dertaken in countries of Central and Northern Europe (e.g., the Netherlands, Germany,
Austria, Poland). In contrast, a meager number of just six studies (12%) were reported
within diverse socio-educational contexts in Africa (two studies) and Oceania (five stud-
Educ. Sci. 2023, 13, 927 ies), while the remaining three studies (6%) focused on TWB investigation during the9 pan-
of 28
demic era in international schools spread in different locations around the globe.
Figure2.2. Distribution
Figure Distributionof
ofstudies
studiesby
bycontinent.
continent.
5.2. Review Findings
The deleterious consequences caused by the sudden outbreak of the COVID-19 health
pandemic on self-perceived TWB levels in diverse educational settings have been vividly
depicted in the overwhelming majority of the reviewed empirical studies (n = 50) included
in our sample delineating teachers’ lived experiences throughout this critical period. In
an effort to adequately answer each of our research questions based on relevant empirical
research evidence, studies in this group were further divided into three categories with a
distinct focus on the following subthemes: (a) emergent TWB profiling against teachers’
general background and work-related characteristics in times of the global pandemic, (b) the
impact of COVID-19-induced challenges on TWB, and (c) the identification of leverage
factors reported by educators as essential for TWB enhancement during the COVID-19
crisis. To adequately address each one of these issues, our analysis in the following sections
draws on relevant data accessible in thirty-one descriptive studies (58.4%) reporting on
COVID-19 TWB status at different stages of the unfolding pandemic (research question 1),
seventeen studies (32.6%) elaborating on the negative effect of key COVID-19 stressors on
TWB, and twenty-two (42.3%) studies identifying predictor variables conducive to TWB
improvement during the COVID-19 era (research question 2).
5.2.1. Research Question 1: TWB Overall Status during the COVID-19 Pandemic
While TWB has so far been extensively researched for its pedagogical saliency in
relation to teaching effectiveness, academic achievement, and educational governance [96],
stabilizing proper functioning for schools and increasing the commitment of staff members
in the process [81], much remains to be understood about TWB in times of crisis across
different educational levels. To ensure clarity and precision, the discussion of key review
findings in relation to TWB status during COVID-19 is further organized per the educational
setting targeted in the reviewed studies under consideration.
Educ. Sci. 2023, 13, 927 10 of 28
a. Studies in Preschool Education

Relevant evidence derived from preschool education in two studies [97,98] rigorously
outlines the negative impact of COVID-19 on the TWB of early educators in their effort to
procure additional services and educational opportunities for highly vulnerable children
and children of essential workers. In Ah-Kwon et al.’s [97] mixed-method study, White
educators (48%), as opposed to teachers of either Black or Hispanic origin, were the ones
who experienced substantial levels of low psychological well-being in the early months
of the pandemic during the school closure period, demonstrating heightened levels of
personal stress, anxiety, and fear of becoming ill with COVID-19; increased concerns about
other illnesses; intense feelings of social disconnection, depression, and sadness; worries
related to potential financial insecurity, all accompanied by signs of poor physical well-
being with 72% and 63.5% of the teachers reporting weight gain and a lack of physical
activity, respectively. Self-reported professional well-being was found to differ by teaching
modality and racial group with in-person White teachers vs. online teachers exhibiting
significantly lower levels of work commitment and a higher intent to leave, which was
mainly attributed to health concerns (41.50%) and a strong dissatisfaction with their current
teaching assignment and/or additional job demands (16.98%). The results seem to tie in
with the findings from Eadie et al.’s [98] parallel study in Australia, where 86% of the early
educators included in their study reported an equally debilitative effect of the pandemic
on their overall professional well-being and performance. Conversely, high professional
well-being as displayed by senior or more experienced staff was found to be associated with
a lower risk of staff turnover and less conflict in educator–child relationships, suggesting
that, when properly promoted by supportive school organizational structures, it can assist
early childhood educators to meet the demands and expectations of their role and develop
quality practice even in the midst of disruptive times.
b. Studies in Primary and Secondary Education
Identical patterns in empirical evidence highlighting a variance in psychological TWB
levels at different stages of the pandemic also persist in a number of relevant studies
conducted within primary and secondary educational settings around the globe. Online
survey quantitative data available from seven of our reviewed studies provide an overview
of the TWB trajectory while struggling to adapt to a series of pandemic-induced changes
in their workplace. In Parkes et al. [99] study, the well-being of American primary music
teachers was found to be severely impaired at the onset of the pandemic era with 77% of the
participants reporting at least some level of depression, experiencing overall relatively mod-
erate degrees of positive feelings. In tandem with Eadie et al.’s [98] findings, higher levels
of well-being were only noted for seasoned teachers whose prior experience of surviving
other trials may have provided them with resilience to rely on to get through this period
of time. Similarly, declining TWB rates were also reported by 920 primary school teachers
in Sigursteinsdottir and Rafnsdottir’s [100] survey study just before and over a year after
COVID-19 first appeared. The results revealed significantly higher proportions of worse
mental and physical health in 2021 than in 2019, with the ratio rising to 31.1% for all groups
examined except for teachers under 30 and over 60 years of age as well as teachers with less
than a year of teaching experience. Sleep disturbances were the most commonly reported
mental symptom in 50.2% and 55.5% of the cases investigated followed by statistically
increased levels of anxiety, extreme worry, and sadness, as measured in the two time points
of the study, respectively. Incidents of lacking strength, frequent headaches, abdominal
pain, dyspnea, and arrhythmias were the most cited physical symptoms reported by the
study participants, rising from 43.7% in 2019 to 58.0% in 2021. While stress levels were
reportedly significantly higher for female compared with male primary teachers, there
emerged no clear-cut gender patterns for mental and physical health. This finding is in line
with results derived in a series of survey studies conducted within the Malaysian primary,
e.g., [101,102], and Turkish [103] pre-service educational contexts where no statistical differ-
ence in psychological TWB levels by gender emerged. Age, on the other hand, was equally
Educ. Sci. 2023, 13, 927 11 of 28
found to be a key predictor of TWB levels in [104], albeit in a reverse mode, with primary
school teachers between 40 and 49 years of age as a group clearly standing out due to their
resilience and demonstrated capability to sustain their well-being by adopting a happy,
workaholic profile in 54.2%, characterized by relatively high levels of fulfillment of all basic
psychological needs, high job satisfaction, and an autonomy-supportive work climate.
In Alves et al.’s [105] cross-sectional survey study, Portuguese teachers rated their
sense of professional well-being status as being moderately positive due to the increased
instructional demands imposed by the online medium, leading to alarming levels of appre-
hension in relation to their prospective professional future in the post-COVID era. These
findings align with those in Trindade et al.’s [106] study, set within the same cultural con-
text, according to which teaching remote classes was equally described as an exceptionally
challenging and negative experience leading to teacher exhaustion and demotivation to
teach and, in turn, to overall moderate and negative TWB levels. In [104], TWB levels
for participants in the study were found to vary significantly by teaching experience and
gender, as female teachers with a service time of less than 20 years reported high levels of
psychological well-being, decreasing perceptions about teaching difficulties, and increas-
ing positive future professional plans. Similar findings also emerge in two other studies
included in this review, i.e., (i) in [107], where low COVID-19 TWB levels in primarily
psychological terms were most commonly reported by female but highly experienced
(16–24 years) state primary school teachers within the 38–45 age range and (ii) in [108],
where, again, elevated stress and diminished professional TWB levels were experienced
by female and elementary school teachers due to perceived job hindrance demands, par-
ticularly in the form of technostress in contrast to male secondary school teachers. Aged
teachers expressed the lowest levels of job satisfaction overall and rated resorting to social
support provided by colleagues and school management as the most effective remedial job
resource for TWB in challenging COVID-19 times. These findings are further corroborated
by Hilger et al.’s [109] study where, although decreases in job demands were found to cor-
relate with decreases in fatigue and psychosomatic complaints, decreases in job resources
due to lockdown restrictions correlated with decreases in job satisfaction and psychological
well-being, leading to negative perceptions of German teachers’ professional integrity as
valued members of the educational community and human beings.
The use of more person-oriented approaches with latent profile analyses afforded
researchers the opportunity to develop more nuanced profiles of teachers’ occupational
well-being during the COVID-19 pandemic, as evidenced in two related studies conducted
within the Finnish primary education context. TWB patterns reported by the authors
of [110] during the first few months of the COVID-19 crisis were similar to those reported
in prior reviewed studies, with the vast majority of teachers in their study (72.4%) suffering
from occupational stress and emotional exhaustion. Nevertheless, the teachers’ sense
of work engagement remained generally unflagged, exhibiting very high levels of vigor,
dedication, and affection in their interactional style with their students, which is in sharp
contrast to Eadie et al.’s [98] findings in preschool education. A follow-up study conducted
by the same research team [111] at the peak of the COVID-19 pandemic in spring 2021 also
revealed high levels of occupational well-being for 63.2% of the study participants, which
were largely associated with work meaningfulness and commitment and a willingness to
persist and invest more effort to supersede COVID-19 adversities at the school level. While
no adequate explanation is offered by the researchers with respect to the observed elevated
TWB rates in different stages of the pandemic, these findings strikingly run counter to
those reported in (i) [112], where substantially self-reported increased levels of stress (72%)
and burnout (57%) and an inability to strike a good work–family balance impeded online
teaching efficacy required amidst volatile COVID-19 circumstances; (ii) Wong et al.’s [113]
small-scale study with primary English language teachers who explicitly reported on the
insurmountable emotional toll they had experienced due to the swift COVID-19-induced
instructional shift that often resulted in feelings of heightened anxiety, absolute distress, and
despair; and (iii) [114], where 77.2% of Australian teachers’ responses indicated that high
Educ. Sci. 2023, 13, 927 12 of 28
levels of stress and low levels of positive feelings such as joy, positivity, and contentment
in their work during the COVID-19 pandemic negatively impacted their well-being and
self-efficacy. In line with the studies [110,111], self-reported high TWB levels were also
reported in another two parallel studies in our sample, which were primarily associated
with online teaching competency skills and the teacher self-belief system in the virtual
teaching paradigm, illustrating that: (a) satisfactory TWB levels in terms of increased self-
perceived work satisfaction and work-related sense of coherence were positively related to
enhanced online teaching self-efficacy skills [115] and (b) positive teacher self-assessments
(75.25%) with respect to their implementation competency and success with online teaching
and learning were linked to elevated TWB and diminishing levels of emotional exhaustion
and stress overall [116]. Conversely, low TWB levels only moderately affected Malaysian
teachers’ persistence to teach online as compared with the critical role of e-learning system
quality and instructor self-efficacy [117].
Finally, two studies focused on investigating developmental changes in TWB through
the COVID-19 period, deploying quantitative longitudinal [118] and qualitative cross-
sectional research designs [119], respectively, conducted within two utterly different socio-
cultural contexts. In the former case, the evolution of TWB as a complex phenomenon
was analyzed across three different stages in the first wave of the COVID-19 lockdown in
Ukraine, i.e., before, during, and after the event, and studied in relation to teacher work
motivation levels. In line with the bulk of the literature on the topic, the key results revealed
that (i) the first-wave COVID-19 lockdown negatively impacted TWB consistently across all
three phases of the study, as evidenced in secondary teachers’ diminished physical health
and well-being, while (ii) a statistically significant correlation with autonomous teacher
work motivation, as reflected in individual’s desire to work and level of satisfaction and
pleasure achieved upon work completion, foregrounded the salient role of this variable in
fostering TWB in times of crisis. These findings concur with the overall decreased TWB
levels and intense psychological strain experienced by teachers in private secondary schools
within the socio-economically deprived context of semi-urban districts in Uganda after the
onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, as reported by [119] and reflected by negative teacher
identity self-perceptions, a fear of a lack of financial support for subsistence, and an increase
in incidents of domestic violence throughout the 2020 lockdown period. Similarly, 70% of
all teachers in Blaine’s [120] study reported having considered leaving the profession due
to intermittent school closures and uncertainty surrounding the government’s response
and policies on COVID-19. Less than one-third of teachers described feeling happy at
work, while 49% were stressed, 48% were frustrated, 46% were overwhelmed, and 42%
were burned out because of their work. In addition, 61% reported feeling exhausted and
somewhat effective (53%) at their job, only 36% of respondents felt that they belonged
to their school, and less than one-quarter of the respondents felt a strong connection to
their workplace. Still, Karamushka et al.’s [118] findings in relation to TWB fluctuation
throughout the COVID-19 period are contradicted by the longitudinal survey data provided
by over two-thirds of the 8000 UK school teachers in Allen et al.’s [121] study, according to
which although no considerable change was effected on their well-being status between
October 2019 (pre-pandemic) and April 2020 (the height of lockdown), different aspects
may have been impacted in different ways, with teachers feeling at times more energetic
and more loved, but also being less likely to feel useful and optimistic about the future.
These results echo Sulis et al.’s [122] qualitative remarks that TWB should be studied as
a fluid, highly elusive but self-organizing concept whose variance is usually contingent
upon individual perceptions of environmental affordances both prior as well as during the
pandemic.
c. Higher Education
Within the context of higher education, only three relevant studies were identified
with a pattern of findings consistent with the one encountered already. For the 18 Polish
university teachers in Bartkowiak et al.’s [123] small-scale study, teaching online and at
a distance was reported as the primary culprit for the overall reduction in self-reported
Educ. Sci. 2023, 13, 927 13 of 28
psychological well-being; a depressive sense of threat to one’s own health and the life of
relatives; inability to perform job-related and non-personal goals; and life frustration and
difficult to identify and low tolerance to all adversities. Variation in their psychological
well-being was found to be associated with self-reported levels of productivity as online
educators, especially at the height of the epidemic, when inadequacy in digital competencies
negatively impacted their quality of work life and sense of mental well-being. Equally
low emotional well-being levels experienced by academics during the COVID-19 outbreak
associated with a general dissatisfaction with life at a rate of 35.6% were also reported in
Shen and Slater’s [124] study. Subsequent regression analysis identified work-related stress
as a key predictor for negative TWB in 25.8% of the cases, while the use of acceptance-coping
styles was found to be implicitly linked with increased productivity at work, contributing
to TWB enhancement in academic settings in 37.6% of the cases. The sudden transition
to a remote online learning paradigm along with its concomitant social isolation effect
on student–learner interactions and teaching quality using the virtual medium was also
cited in Creely et al.’s [125] collaborative ethnographic study as a key risk factor associated
with well-being concerns by academics with potential employee burnout pending for
the prioritization of academic well-being at a policy level. Similar findings provided by
Lee et al.’s [126] study also underscore the significance of supporting TWB at the school level
to enable educators to maintain their self-efficacy in times of crisis with the implementation
of targeted positive psychological skills interventions to boost higher levels of mental health
and greater life satisfaction [127].
5.2.2. Research Question 2: TWB Stressors and Levers in the COVID-19 Era
Identification of key TWB determinants within the COVID-19 context most commonly
arises as the second major theme in nineteen of our reviewed studies. Following [81], our
discussion of the most cited challenges reported to have a degenerative effect on TWB as
well as key TWB facilitators during the pandemic years is guided by their attribution to
either individual or contextual factors in order to facilitate better comprehension of their
role in TWB development in times of crisis.
a. TWB Stressors during the COVID-19 Era
Relevant empirical findings indicate that steadily plummeting TWB levels across
diverse socio-cultural contexts and educational levels have invariably been associated with
a constellation of hardships experienced by educators in their effort to adjust to the sudden
changing working demands caused by the unprecedented event of the COVID-19 crisis
in their everyday school routine and teaching practice. Such is the case in [128], where a
decline in primary teachers’ TWB rates during the lockdown period was attributed to a vast
array of factors related primarily to educators’ exacerbated concerns over issues such as
the double burden of work and family and the prospect of part-time employment leading
to financial difficulties; exceptionally low levels of emotional stability and resilience engen-
dered while trying to cope effectively with the crisis or distance learning itself; negative
perceptions regarding the shifting demands in their workplace in the face of the pandemic
wave in terms of increased professional challenges; heavy psychological stress; a lack of
experience in competence and self-efficacy when teaching on a remote basis; and a high
workload. These worries and negative predispositions expressed by participants in that
study were further aggravated by a series of abrupt changes in their workplace related
to educators’ inability to deal with challenging students in online learning environments,
insufficient resources, and changes in the teaching profession; a lack of common planning
for schools to navigate through the uncertain COVID-19 circumstances; a lack of social and
professional support from the school management as well as the forced utilization with
new professional tools for administrative and instructional purposes. A further addition to
this list of COVID-19 TWB stressors comes from [129], who highlighted the extent to which
teachers’ negative self-perceptions as devalued professionals, intensified by the restricted
autonomy or flexibility they experienced while teaching within COVID-19 unprecedented
circumstances, severely thwarted them from attaining a high sense of well-being. The same
Educ. Sci. 2023, 13, 927 14 of 28
theme was reiterated by EFL teachers in Pourbahram and Sideghi’s [130] study, whose
degraded professional status as propounded by national media often made them fall prey
to a kind of social comparison process to the detriment of their overall self-esteem and
well-being, which was also found in [131]. In line with [128] above, self-reported high
stress levels for these language teachers were found mainly associated with intensifica-
tion of workload, pronounced difficulties in adapting to novel technological approaches
and responding to curricula and pedagogical needs; a lack of fruitful communication with
colleagues; an inability to manage students’ demotivation; and an absence of career progres-
sion chances with professional development in the midst of the pandemic, undermining
profoundly language teachers’ well-being and inculcating feelings of discontentment and
hatred about their profession.
Further findings of a qualitative nature available in several of our reviewed studies
explicitly elaborate on a set of work-related sources that negatively impacted TWB during
the COVID-19 pandemic. Data derived from focus group discussions with university
staff conducted by [132] in Bangladesh revealed yet again that (i) the availability of and
access to infrastructural and material resources (e.g., limited access to Internet facilities
and technological support, fear of monitoring and flaws while teaching in synchronous
learning sessions, income worries) and (ii) the increased bulk of administrative and teach-
ing workload amidst the insurmountable COVID-19 circumstances seriously impaired
faculty members’ physical and mental health, leading to acute physical discomforts (e.g.,
musculoskeletal, vision problems, and headache) caused by prolonged engagement with
online teaching activities and high psychological pressure experienced when faced with the
prospect of reduced salaries and losing their job following low student enrollment rates. In
Chan et al.’s [133] study conducted in the first few months of COVID-19, intensified levels
of task stress (59%) related to tremendous workload and perceived job ambiguity (over
51%) led to emotional exhaustion and feelings of perplexity for the majority of elementary
school teachers, with debilitating effects for their general well-being and teaching efficacy.
Overall, 39% of the respondents stressed the need for school administrators to alleviate job
demands and minimize role ambiguity in times of crisis by addressing students’ technical
difficulties in online learning at school and district levels; developing regular communica-
tion with parents; managing students’ participation rates; and preparing parents’ readiness
for remote learning to reduce teachers’ extra workload and enhance their job duties clar-
ity. Workload, followed by family health and loss of control over work, was also cited
by the majority of participants in [134] as the most stressful teaching-related experience
within the idiosyncratic COVID-19 circumstances. This was also found in Kim et al.’s [135]
longitudinal study, where self-reported declining TWB levels reported by elementary UK
teaching staff in April and November 2020 were mainly attributable to perceived uncer-
tainty, excessive workload, negative views of the professions, concern for others’ well-being,
health struggles and acting on multiple roles. On a similar note, the physical, emotional,
and financial ‘safety’ of preschool educators in [136] in times of crisis were immensely
impeded by the financial stresses they experienced due to COVID-19-induced working
conditions; the implementation of sanitation protocols, mostly perceived as an additional
burden, to relieve school community’s health anxieties; and the blurry boundaries between
work-home responsibilities coupled by reduced access to familiar support structures at the
school level.
A series of related studies included in our sample delineate the magnitude of the
impact that emergency remote teaching (ERT) had on TWB during the pandemic. Ref. [120]
described the pedagogical changes enforced by the swift transition to online remote educa-
tion as an extremely taxing experience for teachers in primary education, with debilitative
effects on their well-being while trying to redesign curriculum, modify their courses for
online learning, aid students using different platforms, maximize their engagement, and
overcome technological challenges. Virtual sessions were described as particularly demand-
ing and exhausting, engendering feelings of inadequacy in terms of teaching flexibility
and digital competency to respond effectively to the demands of synchronous and asyn-
Educ. Sci. 2023, 13, 927 15 of 28
chronous instruction. A lack of personal engagement with colleagues and disengagement

and difficulty in engaging students online were mainly reported to be associated with
intense feelings of disconnectedness, loneliness, and aggravated levels of anxiety, in view
of the sheer lack of appreciation and proper guidance provided by school management
teams over the challenges of online education, as well as poor governance daily COVID-19
measures that severely impacted TWB to the extent of suicide ideation. Isolation was
also identified by [125] as an intricately intertwined element of online education with
long-term effects on the mental health and well-being of the academic staff and serious
implications for course delivery and research outcomes in post-pandemic higher education.
The theme of insufficient administrative support when shifting to virtual instruction as
an extra source of strain with negative consequences on their professional well-being was
further elaborated on by EFL primary teachers in [113] highlighting the challenges they
were faced with in terms of the amount of support provided to linguistically and digitally
heterogeneous language learner groups in view of the absence of social interaction in e-
learning environments. Instructional constraints and considerable added pressure imposed
upon primary teachers especially when trying to utilize new technology to deliver their
courses in the new learning environment were also found to be associated with diminishing
levels of well-being by [107] in Spain. In a similar vein, [137] illustrated the negative effect
of exceptionally high levels of technostress on educators’ work-related TWB perceptions,
which was found to be mitigated by teachers’ perceived meaningfulness of work but not
by the implementation of technologically oriented professional development seminars [99]
intended to help them cope with the pandemic-imposed instructional demands more
self-assuredly.
b. TWB Levers during the COVID-19 Era
Positive TWB levers were often determined based on teachers’ effective use of their
personal resources and personality traits to overcome stress and augment their well-being
as fully functioning professionals when working within a school environment in constant
flux and turbulence. Empirical testimony to such positive TWB correlates in the COVID-
19 period illustrate the invaluable role of teachers’ resilience and utilization of coping
strategies, maintaining a clear and organized work schedule and the generation of feelings
of professional mastery [128]; teachers’ perceived need to (a) adopt proactive physical TWB
self-care strategies (e.g., yoga, meditation classes) and (b) regain their professional self-
esteem by being recognized for the services they provide in public education in the middle
of the pandemic [98]; teacher confidence as manifest in their ability to manage student
behaviors [138]; obsessive work passion found to be associated with considerable gains in
work engagement, work performance, and affective well-being by eliminating negative
emotions and guilt sentiments for any faults and inadequacies and by moderating the effects
of excessive workload and organizational constraints [139]; increased levels of intrinsic
motivation and positive attitudes toward the teaching profession that impelled teachers to
persist in teaching despite the ERT-associated hardships [130]; personal resource readiness
to innovate and high levels of self-efficacy with digital media found to be associated with
perceived changes in TWB, elevated levels of job satisfaction, and minimum exhaustion
for teachers [108]; a perceived sense of coherence at work and resiliency that positively
predicted TWB acting as mediators between COVID-19 stress and TWB and as valuable
personal resources that enable teachers to flourish in life and nurture their well-being in
times of crisis [140]; and the use of positive coping ‘problem-focused’ (e.g., planning for
the future, developing new technological skills) and ‘emotion-focused’ strategies (e.g.,
personal skills and capacities, connecting with colleagues, family and friends) [131], which
were found to be associated with enhanced TWB, particularly when combined with sound
a psychological state and work characteristics [141]. Indeed, in a study by [134], the
use of effective coping strategies during the COVID-19 pandemic further revealed that
language teachers who tended to opt for active, approach-oriented coping strategies, first
by accepting the situation and then by attempting to deal with it using planning, immediate
action, and reframing, as well as seeking emotional support, were all predictive of high
Educ. Sci. 2023, 13, 927 16 of 28
levels of TWB and health, positive emotions (happiness and growth during trauma),
and resilience.
Work-related psychosocial and organizational aspects related to a sense of safety while
at school and autonomy at work were also identified to be associated with increasing TWB
levels, as exemplified in Billaudeau et al.’s [142] large-scale, cross-cultural quantitative
study, conducted 18 months into the pandemic across France, Belgium, Canada, Morocco,
Gambia, and Mexico. Teachers’ ability to maintain high-quality relationships with school
management and students was reported as a vital element for TWB enhancement efforts
within the pandemic context by most participants residing in industrialized countries of the
Western world, suggesting the need for the use of more ecological approaches toward TWB
impetus on the face of provisional crises. Establishing positive relationships with students
and their families as reflected through signs of personal relatedness, parental recognition,
and gratitude was also emphasized by [128] along with the provision of adequate and
appropriate collegial and leadership support during the crisis, which was also stressed
by [98]. In [135], social support and networking with colleagues, family, and friends
prevailed over increased work autonomy opportunities and the use of coping strategies
in significance, as they minimize social isolation and enhances teachers’ psychological
disposition and mental health. The salient role of social support provided at the institutional
level as a significant moderating factor of TWB that can effectively mitigate the negative
effect of high job demands and control on the psychological well-being of academic staff is
further foregrounded by [143]. This was also reported in Smith and James’ [141] relevant
study, where the provision of work-related social support coupled with high scores of
psychological capital and the use of positive coping strategies were reported by Welsh
schoolteachers as conducive TWB factors leading to low levels of absenteeism and a
balanced work–life co-existence.
Other elements associated with solid school organization reported in relevant studies
to sustain and boost TWB levels within the context of the COVID-19 pandemic were: (i)
the existence of an organized, supportive school environment as a critical job resource and
enabler of TWB that impacts teachers’ fulfillment of basic psychological needs for autonomy,
ensures collaboration with colleagues and accomplishment in pandemic emergency remote
teaching (ERT) by prescribing the principles for effective distance education teaching
practices [104], and promotes teachers’ creative teaching self-efficacy by enhancing their
dispositional joy and general positive affect while reducing general negative affect [144];
(ii) empowering leadership that was found to be associated with lower levels of job stress
and higher levels of job well-being and perceived organizational support [145], enabling
preschool teachers to link their personal goals to organizational goals, motivate and guide
them to better achieve their mission with organizational support, and thus achieve a high
level of well-being; (iii) the allocation of low teacher workloads by the school administration,
which was found to be positively associated with work satisfaction and work-related
coherence, leading to enhanced TWB COVID-19 rates in [115]; (iv) the adoption of school-
based TWB interventions within the COVID-19 era, as documented in three action-oriented
studies in our sample, which were directed at the exploration of TWB improvement using
peer support in digital settings [146], the implementation of in-service professional training
TWB sessions aiming at reducing teachers’ psychological distress [147], and emergent
mindfulness and cognitive reframing TWB approaches with reported increased gains
in teachers’ resilience and psychological well-being in times of crisis [148]. Provision of
training support in ERT-related issues and teachers’ eagerness to seek religious and spiritual
support to regain their well-being by overcoming the numerous pre- and post-pandemic
challenges and difficulties were reported by [149], with self-reported spirituality being only
indirectly associated with TWB enhancement and teachers’ overall mental health in one
study [127].
Educ. Sci. 2023, 13, 927 17 of 28
Table 1. Profile of the reviewed studies.
Research Sample Type of Educational

Authors Source Country
Design (N) Well-Being Level
Professional,
Ah-Kwon et al.
1. Journal Mixed method 1434 psychological, Primary USA
(2022) [97]
and physical
Quantitative
Allen et al. Primary and
2. Journal online survey 8000 Psychological UK
(2020) [121] secondary
(longitudinal)
Alves et al. Quantitative Primary and
3. Journal 1479 Professional Portugal
(2020) [105] online survey secondary
Anderson et al.
4. Journal Mixed method 57 Psychological Primary USA
(2021) [144]
Bartkowiak et al.
5. Journal Qualitative 39 Psychological Higher Poland
(2022) [123]
Billaudeau et al. Quantitative Primary and
6. Journal 6899 Professional International
Billett et al. Quantitative Primary and
7. Journal 534 Psychological Australia
Blaine Physical and Primary and
8. Journal Mixed method 10 Hong Kong
(2022) [120] psychological secondary
Chan et al. Professional and
9. Journal Mixed method 181 Primary USA
(2021) [133] psychological
Creely et al.
10. Journal Qualitative 5 Psychological Higher Australia
(2021) [125]
Eadie et al.
11. Journal Qualitative 15 Professional Primary Australia
(2022) [136]
Eadie et al. Quantitative
12. Journal 232 Professional Primary Australia
(2021) [98] online survey
Egilmez Quantitative
13. Journal 123 Psychological Pre-service Turkey
(2022) [103] survey
Flores et al. Quantitative Primary and
14. Journal 624 Psychological Chile
Froelich et al.
15. Journal Mixed method 74 Psychological Secondary Austria
(2022) [146]
Primary,
Garcia-Alvarez Quasi-
16. Journal 24 Psychological secondary, and Uruguay
et al. (2022) [147] experimental
vocational
Guoyan et al. Quantitative Pakistan and
17. Journal 627 Psychological Higher
(2021) [117] online survey Malaysia
Hascher et al.
18. Journal Qualitative 21 Professional Primary Switzerland
(2021) [128]
Herman et al. Quantitative Primary and
19. Journal 639 Psychological USA
Quantitative Primary,
Hilger et al.
20. Journal online sur- 207 Professional secondary, and Germany
(2021) [109]
vey(longitudinal) special
Kamaruzaman & Quantitative
21. Journal 361 Psychological Primary Malaysia
Surat (2021) [102] online survey
Karamushka Longitudinal
22. Journal 96 Psychological Secondary Ukraine
et al. (2021) [118] quantitative
Kasprzak &
Quantitative Primary and
23. Mudlo-Glagoska Journal 383 Psychological Poland
online survey secondary
(2022) [139]
Kim et al. Longitudinal Primary and
24. Journal 24 Psychological UK
(2022) [135] qualitative secondary
Kotowski et al. Quantitative Psychological Primary and
25. Journal 703 USA
(2022) [112] online survey and physical secondary
Educ. Sci. 2023, 13, 927 18 of 28
Table 1. Cont.

Primary,
Kupers et al. The
26. Journal Mixed method 307 Psychological secondary, and
(2022) [104] Netherlands
vocational
Primary,
Lau et al. Quantitative
27. Journal 366 Psychological secondary, and Hong Kong
special
Lee et al. Quantitative
28. Journal 291 Psychological Pre-service Hong Kong
Leong
29. Journal Qualitative 3 Psychological Higher Malaysia
(2022) [149]
McDonough &
Primary and
30. Lemon Journal Qualitative 137 Psychological Australia
secondary
(2022) [131]
MacIntyre et al. Quantitative Primary and
31. Journal 634 Psychological International
(2020) [134] online survey secondary EFL
Nakijoba et al. Psychological
32. Journal Qualitative 103 Secondary Uganda
(2022) [119] and physical
Nong et al. Quantitative
33. Journal 453 Professional Primary China
Pace et al. Quantitative Primary and
34. Journal 219 Professional Italy
Primary,
Panadero et al. Quantitative
35. Journal 936 Psychological secondary, and Spain
higher
Parkes et al. Quantitative
36. Journal 1325 Psychological Primary USA
Pourbahram &
37. Sideghi Journal Qualitative 10 Psychological Secondary EFL Iran
(2022) [130]
Poysa et al. Quantitative
38. Journal 321 Professional Primary Finland
Poysa et al. Quantitative
39. Journal 279 Professional Primary Finland
Rosli & Bakar Quantitative
40. Journal 274 Psychological Primary Malaysia
Shen & Slater Quantitative Northern
41. Journal 87 Psychological Higher
(2021) [124] online survey Ireland
Sherief &
Quantitative
42. Rehman Journal 421 Psychological Higher Malaysia
online survey
(2022) [143]
Sigursteinsdottir Quantitative
Psychological
43. & Rafnsdottir Journal online sur- 920 Primary Iceland
and physical
(2022) [100] vey(longitudinal)
Smith & James Quantitative
44. Journal 60 Psychological Secondary Wales, UK
Stang-Rabrig Quantitative Primary and
45. Journal 3250 Professional Germany
et al. (2022) [108] online survey secondary
Sulis et al.
46. Journal Qualitative 6 Psychological EFL pre-service International
(2021) [122]
Sultana et al.
47. Journal Qualitative 34 Psychological Higher Bangladesh
(2022) [132]
Conference Primary,
Trindade et al. Quantitative
48. proceed- 595 Psychological secondary, and Portugal
ing higher
Walter & Fox Longitudinal Psychological
49. 49 Primary USA
(2021) [129] Qualitative and physical
Educ. Sci. 2023, 13, 927 19 of 28
Table 1. Cont.

Weibenfels et al. Quantitative Primary and
50. Journal 181 Psychological Germany
Wong et al. Psychological
51. Journal Qualitative 8 Primary ESOL USA
(2022) [113] and physical
Zadok-Gurman Quasi- Primary and
52. Journal 67 Psychological Israel
et al. (2021) [148] experimental secondary
Zewude et al. Quantitative
53. Journal 836 Psychological Higher Ethiopia
(2023) [140] survey
5.2.3. Research Question 3: Research Trends in TWB in the COVID-19 Era

Quantitative data collection methodologies with the administration of self-reported
online survey questionnaires were used in thirty-two of the reviewed studies (60.3%),
which were mainly designed as descriptive, cross-sectional empirical research question-
naires to explore TWB lived experiences and status in the aftermath of the COVID-19
pandemic. A longitudinal design was only utilized in three survey studies based on data
collected at regular intervals within a specific socio-educational setting using electronic
questionnaires administered on a daily [121] and quarterly basis [109], as well as before
and after the pandemic, to measure changes in teachers’ self-rated occupational health
and well-being [100]. Sample sizes range between 8000 and 60 participants. The most
common data analysis procedures used were descriptive statistics, exploratory factor anal-
yses, e.g., [105,143], and latent profile analysis TWB profiling in the pandemic years [126],
correlations, linear regression analyses, e.g., [98], multilevel regression modeling, e.g., [138],
and structural equation analysis, e.g., [117,127], to investigate determinants of TWB, and
analysis of variance (ANOVA) procedures, e.g., [112,115].
The instrumentation utilized for TWB measurement in these studies consisted of
(a) the adaptation of widely established and standardized psychometric scales of well-
being and mental health such as the International Barometer of Education Personnel’s Health and
Wellbeing [142], the World Health Organization Well-being Index [115,134], Ryff’s Psychological
Well-Being Scales [101,102], the PERMA Profiler Questionnaire [99,140], Diener et al.’s (2009)
Psychological Wellbeing Scale [103,139], the modified BBC Subjective Well-being scale (BBC-
SWB) [118], and Positive and Negative Affect Schedule (PANAS) [126] and (b) the compilation
of context-specific well-being instruments, valid for experimentation within a particular
educational context. Instances of such scales are Alves et al.’s [105] Well-being and Health
Perception Scale and Perception Scale of Well-Being with the Professional Situation in Times of
Pandemic, Eadie’s [98] Early Childhood Professional Wellbeing scale, Smith and James’ [141]
Wellbeing Process Questionnaire, and Trindade et al.’s [106] Questionnaire of the Perception of
Well-Being at Work, (c) the use and appropriation of instruments used in prior TWB research
in view of COVID-19 new reality, e.g., [112,115,117,145], (d) the development of new survey
COVID-19-oriented questionnaires in relation to TWB [107,116,143], and (e) the use of
scales that measure TWB indirectly as a function of work-related anxiety [121], depression,
general and specific life satisfaction [124,127], teacher stress and exhaustion [100,108], job
satisfaction [109,137,138], teacher burnout [137], teacher work engagement, and emotional
exhaustion [110,111].
Thirteen studies (25%) used an exclusively qualitative approach that mainly relied
on data derived from (a) in-depth, one-to-one online interviews based on semi-structured
questionnaires (nine studies), (b) focus group discussions [132], (c) collaborative autoethno-
graphic practices [125], and (d) open-ended survey questions [131,136], which were further
subjected to thematic analysis to reveal teachers’ overlapping concerns over their sense of
well-being and experiences during the pandemic. Again, the cross-sectional research design
dominated in this group of studies to the exception of Kim et al.’s [135] longitudinal quali-
tative study, while the sample sizes, often selected based on non-probability techniques,
Educ. Sci. 2023, 13, 927 20 of 28
e.g., [119,129,136], ranged between 103 and 3 participants reflecting the small-scale nature
of these studies. The measurement of TWB was operationalized in only three instances
based on Ryff’s (2008) model [123], the job–resource model of well-being [129], and ecologi-
cal systems theory [131], while in most other cases, it was investigated in an exploratory
fashion using interview protocols aimed to illustrate the pandemic-induced complexity
in teachers’ life experiences and the detrimental effect on their well-being, professional
growth, and development. Grounded theory [113,122] was one of the two frameworks used
for data interpretation purposes in two studies, ‘enabling researchers to make systematic
comparisons and engage the data and emerging theory actively throughout the research
process’ [150] (p. 374). Phenomenology, involving ‘the study of the lifeworld as we immedi-
ately experience it, pre-reflectively’ [151] (p. 614) availed researchers in Creely et al.’s [125]
and Leong’s [149] studies of the opportunity to explicate the ontological features of TWB
experiences within COVID-19 contextual circumstances.
Six studies (12%), although predominantly quantitative in design, also incorporated
qualitative methodologies embodying a mixed-methods approach. The data in these
studies were collected using self-administered survey questionnaires, while qualitative data
were collected from small numbers of selected study participants using semi-structured
interviews or free-response survey questions ensuring data triangulation. Data analysis
involved the use of both statistical methods and qualitative thematic analysis. and sample
sizes ranged between 307 and 57 participants. The study of TWB was theoretically framed
within Ryan and Deci’s self-determination theory [120] and the job–demands resource
model of well-being [104,133] in three studies and was directly or indirectly measured
using established psychological scales [97,104,133,144], TWB questionnaires [146], and
exploratory interview questions [120]. Finally, the quasi-experimental methodology was
used in two interventionist studies (4%) in an effort to determine the success rate of teacher
development training programs on TWB enhancement during the pandemic period.
6. Discussion and Conclusions

TWB has recently emerged as the subject of substantial interdisciplinary research as a
pre-eminent determinant variable of school improvement [96], teaching effectiveness, and
educational governance [152], stabilizing school functioning and increasing staff members’
professional commitment [153]. The present systematic review can be viewed as a useful
addition to the current literature on the topic, as it offers significant insights into TWB in
times of crisis using a synthesis of relevant empirical evidence available in a sample of
53 studies conducted in diverse educational levels across the globe. The key findings of our
review in relation to our three research questions can be summarized as follows:
6.1. Research Question 1: TWB Status during the COVID-19 Era

Teachers’ self-reported accounts explicitly indicated the overall extremely low levels
of psychological, physical, and professional well-being they suffered at various stages of
the COVID-19 pandemic across different educational settings, as manifested in: (i) elevated
levels of personal stress, anxiety, burnout, and fear of becoming ill with COVID-19 [98];
increased feelings of social disconnection, depression, extreme worry, sadness, and gen-
eral dissatisfaction with life [125]; absolute distress and despair in the face of increased
teaching demands imposed [105,106]; financial insecurity [97] and an inability to strike
a good work-family balance coupled with exhaustion and demotivation when teaching
online [113,114,124]; (ii) poor physical well-being associated with a sedentary lifestyle and
a lack of physical activity that led to excessive weight gain, sleep disturbances, lack of
strength, headaches, abdominal pain, dyspnea, and arrhythmias [100]; and (iii) low levels
of work commitment and teaching performance and a pronounced intent to abandon the
teaching profession due to expressed strong dissatisfaction with current teaching load
and/or additional job demands [99]. Self-reported high TWB levels were reported in only
four studies and were mainly associated with an increased sense of work engagement,
work meaningfulness, job commitment [110,111], and persistence to overcome COVID-19
Educ. Sci. 2023, 13, 927 21 of 28
and job productivity in terms of enhanced online teaching self-efficacy skills [116,117].
No noteworthy TWB developmental changes were recorded throughout the prolonged
period of the COVID-19 pandemic [118,119], while findings with respect to TWB vari-
ance by gender and age of the samples included in each study were far from conclusive:
(i) reported physical and psychological TWB levels were not found to significantly vary
overall [101–103], with the exception of two studies where female schoolteachers exhibited
higher levels of psychological well-being, while (ii) senior teachers tended to exhibit greater
resilience and willingness to overcome current teaching difficulties and survive using work
engagement [104], stressing the importance of adequate support provided at the school
management level to boost their professional TWB level [108].
6.2. Research Question 2: TWB Stressors and Levers during the COVID-19 Era
The results identified a wide variety of individual and contextual correlates of TWB as
being responsible for self-perceived negative well-being rates in the pandemic era associ-
ated with: (i) role ambiguity at the school level and low resilience and unwillingness for
personal engagement due to high workload and increased professional challenges [128,133];
intense feelings of disconnectedness and isolation and a sense of professional useless-
ness ([129,130]), and teaching incompetence experienced by teachers when called to tackle
with ERT demands in both technological and pedagogical terms [131] and (ii) work-related
factors related to the risk of reduced income revenue or the prospect of job loss in the private
sector [136]; the double burden of work–family care [134,135]; additional administrative
and ERT teaching overload [132]; and a lack of common strategy and planning for schools,
absence of collegial collaboration [114], appreciation, and support by school administration,
insufficient school resources and unequal access to them, and the unavailability of opportu-
nities for further professional development in the midst of COVID-19 [128]. The key TWB
positive facilitators were (i) teachers’ personality characteristics and self-esteem as fully
qualified professionals [99] capable of surviving the adversities posed by the COVID-19
virus in their everyday school routine by exhibiting obsessive work passion [140], increased
teacher self-confidence [139], readiness to innovate within the novel ERT paradigm [109],
intrinsic work motivation [130], maintaining a well-organized work schedule [128], and
using effective coping and proactive physical self-care TWB strategies [134,142,146]. As-
pects of school organization identified as being conducive to TWB in-crisis maintenance
and enhancement were: the provision of support and encouragement for creative teaching
self-efficacy with training in ERT practices [147]; the appropriate allocation of teacher
workload [116]; a high sense of job satisfaction and work-related coherence and autonomy
at work boosted by empowering leadership [148]; the promotion of high-quality relation-
ships and collaboration with all stakeholders at school community level [135]; and the
implementation of TWB in-service COVID-19 interventions [149–151].
6.3. Research Question 3: Research Trends on TWB during the COVID-19 Era
A quantitative cross-sectional research design based on online survey data was used
in thirty-two of the reviewed empirical studies, profiling TWB throughout the pandemic
years followed by thirteen small-scale, exploratory studies utilizing thematic analysis of
data collected using semi-structured interviews, focus group discussions, and collaborative
auto-ethnography. A mixed research methodology was only used in six studies in our
sample, while two studies utilized the quasi-experimental, pre-posttest methodology. The
selection of research instruments applied for TWB measurement within the COVID-19
context widely varied involving (a) the use of standardized psychometric indices of well-
being and mental health, (b) the development of new COVID-19 TWB surveys and tests,
the adaptation of instruments used in pre-pandemic TWB research, and (c) the use of
implicit TWB scales based on self-reported ratings of teacher stress, anxiety, satisfaction,
and exhaustion in the workplace.
To our knowledge, this is the first systematic research review that explicitly delineates
the debilitative impact of the COVID-19 pandemic crisis on TWB across different educa-
Educ. Sci. 2023, 13, 927 22 of 28
tional settings by addressing determinant variables and positive correlates based primarily
on quantitative large-scale online survey studies. Our review findings broadly concur
with those articulated in Pyżalski and Poleszak’s [84] review with respect to overall lower
self-reported psychological and professional TWB rates that were mainly attributable to
a variety of stressors associated with the new educational reality. TWB levers were also
identified and elaborated, which could serve as a useful scientific basis for the enactment
of appropriate educational policies, strategies, and interventions for the maintenance of
TWB in critical times at both the policymaking as well as at the school administration levels.
Following [3,154] (p. 86), the inclusion of ‘practical strategies that can aid teachers improve
their interpersonal interactions, use of psychological working resources that enhance reflec-
tive teaching practices and improve teaching and learning and fostering teacher autonomy
in decision making through institutional support and a respectful leadership based on
mutual trust’ are deemed to be critical components of TWB improvement initiatives in
tumultuous times.
As with all research, the current study has certain limitations that can be attributed
to (i) the limited number of databases selected for to search the relevant literature, which
may have led to the exclusion of relevant published research on TWB in disciplines other
than the areas of education and psychology, (ii) the chosen language for all research studies
selected in this review was English, which could have equally caused available research
from different cultural backgrounds to be left out, and (iii) manual searches of relevant
international peer-reviewed journals in educational psychology and teacher education
could have inadvertently resulted in either the absolute preclusion or erroneous elimination
of relevant research. Exclusion of research studies based on the above criteria may severely
restrict the generalizability of our findings on TWB globally in the days of COVID-19
by omitting relevant non-English-speaking publications written from an interdisciplinary
perspective. Nevertheless, while the provision of educational services suffered considerably
in the time of COVID, being converted into a particularly onerous task for teachers around
the world, this study also illustrated that such a disruption created the opportunity for
researchers to rethink TWB within challenging circumstances and reinvent high-quality
teacher preparation using ongoing professional development schemes to respond to teacher
well-being needs during the pandemic and beyond [155].
Author Contributions: Conceptualization, A.-M.S.; methodology, E.K.; software, E.K.; validation,

A.-M.S., E.K. and P.C.; formal analysis, A.-M.S., E.K. and P.C.; investigation, E.K.; resources, E.K.;
data curation, E.K.; writing—original draft preparation, A.-M.S., E.K. and P.C.; writing—review and
editing, A.-M.S., E.K. and P.C.; visualization, E.K.; supervision, A.-M.S. and P.C.; project administra-
tion, A.-M.S. and P.C.; funding acquisition, E.K. All authors have read and agreed to the published
version of the manuscript.
Funding: This research received no external funding.
Data Availability Statement: No new data were created.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.
References
1. Holmes, E.A.; O’Connor, R.C.; Perry, V.H.; Tracey, I.; Wessely, S.; Arseneault, L.; Ballard, C.; Christensen, H.; Silver, R.C.; Everall, I.
Multidisciplinary research priorities for the COVID-19 pandemic: A call for action for mental health science. Lancet Psychiatry
2020, 7, 547–560. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
2. Brooks, S.K.; Webster, R.K.; Smith, L.E.; Woodland, L.; Wessely, S.; Greenberg, N.; Rubin, G.J. The psychological impact of
quarantine and how to reduce it: Rapid review of the evidence. Lancet 2020, 395, 912–920. [CrossRef]
3. Serafini, G.; Parmigiani, B.; Amerio, A.; Aguglia, A.; Sher, L.; Amore, M. The psychological impact of COVID-19 on the mental
health in the general population. QJM Int. J. Med. 2020, 113, 529–535. [CrossRef]
4. Choi, K.R.; Heilemann, M.V.; Fauer, A.; Mead, M. A second pandemic: Mental health spillover from the novel coronavirus
(COVID-19). J. Am. Psychiatr. Nurses Assoc. 2020, 26, 340–343. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
5. Papaioannou, A.; Schinke, R.; Chang, Y.; Kim, Y.; Duda, J. Physical activity, health and well-being in an imposed social distanced
world. Int. J. Sport Exerc. Physiol. 2020, 18, 414–419. [CrossRef]
Educ. Sci. 2023, 13, 927 23 of 28
6. Pierce, M.; Hope, H.; Ford, T.; Hatch, S.; Hotopf, M.; John, A.; Kontopantelis, E.; Webb, R.; Wessely, S.; McManus, S.; et al. Mental
health before and during the COVID-19 pandemic: A longitudinal probability sample survey of the UK population. Lancet
Psychiatry 2020, 7, 883–892. [CrossRef]
7. Hammerstein, S.; König, C.; Dreisörner, T.; Frey, A. Effects of COVID-19-Related School Closures on Student Achievement-A
Systematic Review. Front. Psychol. 2021, 12, 746289. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
8. Kuhfeld, M.; Soland, J.; Tarasawa, B.; Johnson, A.; Ruzek, E.; Liu, J. Projecting the potential impact of COVID-19school closures
on academic achievement. Educ. Res. 2020, 49, 549–565. [CrossRef]
9. Smith, J.; Guimond, F.A.; Bergeron, J.; St-Amand, J.; Fitzpatrick, C.; Gagnon, M. Changes in students’ achievement motivation in
the context of the COVID-19 pandemic: A function of extraversion/introversion? Educ. Sci. 2021, 11, 30. [CrossRef]
10. O’Sullivan, K.; Clark, S.; McGrane, A.; Rock, N.; Burke, L.; Boyle, N.; Joksimovic, N.; Marshall, K. A qualitative study of child and
adolescent mental health during the COVID-19 pandemic in Ireland. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2021, 18, 1062. [CrossRef]
11. Viner, R.; Russell, S.; Saulle, R.; Croker, H.; Stansfield, C.; Packer, J.; Nicholls, D.; Goddings, A.-L.; Bonell, C.; Hudson, L.;
et al. School Closures During Social Lockdown and Mental Health, Health Behaviors, and Well-being Among Children and
Adolescents During the First COVID-19 Wave: A Systematic Review. JAMA Pediatr. 2022, 176, 400–409. [CrossRef]
12. de Oliveira Silva, D.F.; Cobucci, R.N.; Lima, S.C.; de Andrade, F.B. Prevalence of anxiety, depression, and stress among teachers
during the COVID-19 pandemic: A PRISMA-compliant systematic review. Medicine 2021, 100, e27684. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
13. Bottiani, J.H.; Duran, C.A.K.; Pas, E.T.; Bradshaw, C.P. Teacher stress and burnout in urban middle schools: Associations with job
demands, resources, and effective classroom practices. J. Sch. Psychol. 2019, 77, 36–51. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
14. MacIntyre, P.; Ross, J.; Talbot, K.; Mercer, S.; Gregersen, T.; Banga, C.A. Stressors, personality and wellbeing among language
teachers. System 2019, 82, 26–38. [CrossRef]
15. Archambault, L.; Kennedy, K.; Shelton, C.; Dalal, M.; McAllister, L.; Huyett, S. Incremental progress: Re-examining field
experiences in K-12 online learning contexts in the United States. J. Online Learn. Res. 2016, 2, 303–326. Available online:
https://www.learntechlib.org/primary/p/174116/ (accessed on 5 April 2023).
16. Winter, E.; Costello, A.; O’Brien, M.; Hickey, G. Teachers’ use of technology and the impact of COVID-19. Ir. Educ. Stud. 2021, 40,
235–246. [CrossRef]
17. Espino-Díaz, L.; Fernandez-Caminero, G.; Hernandez-Lloret, C.-M.; Gonzalez-Gonzalez, H.; Alvarez-Castillo, J.-L. Analyzing
the impact of COVID-19 on education professionals. Toward a paradigm shift: ICT and neuroeducation as a binomial of action.
Sustainability 2020, 12, 5646. [CrossRef]
18. Aperribai, L.; Cortabarria, L.; Aguirre, T.; Verche, E.; Borges, A. Teacher’s physical activity and mental health during lockdown
due to the COVID-2019pandemic. Front. Psychol. 2020, 11, 577886. [CrossRef]
19. Carver-Thomas, D.; Leung, M.; Burns, D. California Teachers and COVID-19: How the Pandemic Is Impacting the Teacher Workforce;
Learning Policy Institute: Palo Alto, CA, USA, 2021. Available online: https://learningpolicyinstitute.org/product/california-
covid-19-teacher-workforce (accessed on 7 May 2023).
20. Skaalvik, E.M.; Skaalvik, S. Teacher job satisfaction and motivation to leave the teaching profession: Relations with school context,
feeling of belonging, and emotional exhaustion. Teach. Teach. Educ. 2011, 27, 102–108. [CrossRef]
21. Klusmann, U.; Richter, D.; Lüdtke, O. Teachers’ emotional exhaustion is negatively related to students’ achievement: Evidence
from a large-scale assessment study. J. Educ. Psychol. 2016, 108, 1193–1203. [CrossRef]
22. Sokal, L.J.; Eblie Trudel, L.G.; Babb, J.C. Canadian teachers’ attitudes toward change, efficacy, and burnout during the COVID-19
pandemic. Int. J. Educ. Res. Open 2020, 1, 100016. [CrossRef]
23. NASUWT. COVID-19 Impacts on Teacher Mental Health Exposed. 2020. Available online: https:www.nasuwt.org.uk/article-
listing/covid-impacts-onteacher-mental-health-exposed.html (accessed on 7 May 2023).
24. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). Mental Health Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Teachers and Parents of K-12
Students; Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC): Atlanta, GA, USA, 2021.
25. Greenier, V.; Derakhshan, A.; Fathi, J. Emotion regulation and psychological well-being in teacher work engagement: A case
study of British and Iranian English language teachers. System 2021, 97, 102446. [CrossRef]
26. Dewaele, J.M.; Gkonou, C.; Mercer, S. Do ESL/EFL Teachers’ Emotional Intelligence, Teaching Experience, Proficiency and
Gender Affect Their Classroom Practice? In Emotions in Second Language Teaching; Agudo, J.M., Ed.; Springer: Cham, Switzerland,
2018; pp. 125–141. [CrossRef]
27. Mercer, S.; Gregersen, T. Teacher Wellbeing; Oxford University Press: Oxford, UK, 2020.
28. Mercer, S.; Oberdorfer, P.; Saleem, M. Helping language teachers to thrive: Using positive psychology to promote teachers’
professional well-being. In Positive Psychology Perspectives on Foreign Language Learning and Teaching; Gabryś-Barker, D., Gałajda,
D., Eds.; Springer International Publishing: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2016; pp. 213–229.
29. Dodge, R.; Daly, A.; Huyton, J.; Sanders, L. The challenge of defining wellbeing. Int. J. Wellbeing 2012, 2, 222–235. [CrossRef]
30. OECD. How’s Life? 2015: Measuring Wellbeing; OECD Publishing: Paris, France, 2015. [CrossRef]
31. World Health Organisation. WHO Remains Firmly Committed to the Principles Set Out in the Preamble to the Constitution; World
Health Organisation: Geneva, Switzerland, 2021. Available online: https://www.who.int/about/governance/constitution
(accessed on 31 August 2021).
32. Diener, E.; Oishi, S.; Lucas, R.E. Personality, culture, and subjective well- being: Emotional and cognitive evaluations of life. Annu.
Rev. Psychol. 2003, 4, 403–425. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Educ. Sci. 2023, 13, 927 24 of 28
33. Diener, E.; Suh, E.M.; Lucas, R.E.; Smith, H.L. Subjective well-being: Three decades of progress. Psychol. Bull. 1999, 125, 276–302.
[CrossRef]
34. Holmes, E. Teacher Well-Being: Looking after Yourself and Your Career in the Classroom; Taylor & Francis: Abingdon, UK, 2005.
35. Gillett-Swan, J.K.; Sargeant, J. Wellbeing as a process of accrual: Beyond subjectivity and beyond the moment. Soc. Indic. Res.
2014, 121, 135–148. [CrossRef]
36. La Placa, V.; McNaught, A.; Knight, A. Discourse on wellbeing in research and practice. Int. J. Wellbeing 2013, 3, 116–125.
[CrossRef]
37. Mercer, S. An agenda for well-being in ELT: An ecological perspective. ELT J. 2021, 75, 14–21. [CrossRef]
38. McCallum, F.; Price, D.; Graham, A.; Morrison, A. Teacher Wellbeing: A Review of the Literature; Association of Independent Schools
of NSW: Sydney, NSW, Australia, 2017.
39. Ryan, R.M.; Deci, E.L. On happiness and human potentials: A review of research on hedonic and eudaimonic well-being. Annu.
Rev. Psychol. 2001, 52, 141–166. [CrossRef]
40. Diener, E. Subjective well-being: The science of happiness and a proposal for a national index. Am. Psychol. 2000, 55, 34–43.
[CrossRef]
41. Diener, E.; Scollon, C.; Lucas, R. The evolving concept of subjective wellbeing. Adv. Cell Aging Gerontol. 2003, 15, 187–219.
42. Chaves, G. Wellbeing and Flourishing. In The Palgrave Handbook of Positive Education; Kernand, M.L., Wehmeyer, M.L., Eds.;
Springer Nature: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2021; pp. 273–295. [CrossRef]
43. Huta, V.; Waterman, A. Eudaimonia and Its Distinction from Hedonia: Developing a Classification and Terminology for
Understanding Conceptual and Operational Definitions. J. Happiness Stud. 2013, 15, 1425–1456. [CrossRef]
44. Ryff, C.D. Happiness is everything, or is it? Explorations on the meaning of psychological well-being. J. Personal. Soc. Psychol.
1989, 57, 1069–1081. [CrossRef]
45. Ryff, C.D.; Singer, B. The contours of positive human health. Psychol. Inq. 1998, 9, 1–28. [CrossRef]
46. Ryff, C.D.; Boylan, J.M.; Kirsch, J.A. Eudaimonic and Hedonic Well-Being: An Integrative Perspective with Linkages to Sociodemographic
Factors and Health; Oxford University Press: Oxford, UK, 2021.
47. Ryff, C.D. Psychological Well-Being in Adult Life. Curr. Dir. Psychol. Sci. 1995, 4, 99–104. [CrossRef]
48. Ryff, C.D. Eudaimonic well-being: Highlights from 25 years of inquiry. In Diversity in Harmony—Insights from Psychology:
Proceedings of the 31st International Congress of Psychology; Shigemasu, K., Kuwano, S., Sato, T., Matsuzawa, T., Eds.; John Wiley &
Sons Ltd.: Hoboken, NJ, USA, 2018; pp. 375–395. [CrossRef]
49. Huta, V. The complementary roles of eudaimonia and hedonia and how they can be pursued in practice. In Positive Psychology in
Practice; Joseph, S., Linley, A., Eds.; Wiley: Hoboken, NJ, USA, 2014; pp. 216–246.
50. Waterman, A.S. Reconsidering happiness: A eudaimonist’ s perspective. J. Posit. Psychol. 2008, 3, 234–252. [CrossRef]
51. Seligman, M.E.P. Flourish: A Visionary New Understanding of Happiness and Well-Being; Free Press: New York, NY, USA, 2011.
52. Lovett, N.; Lovett, T. Wellbeing in education: Staff matter. Int. J. Soc. Sci. Humanit. 2016, 6, 107–112. [CrossRef]
53. Kern, M.L.; Waters, L.; Adler, A.; White, M. Assessing employee wellbeing in schools using a multifaceted approach: Associations
with physical health, life satisfaction, and professional thriving. Psychology 2014, 05, 500–513. [CrossRef]
54. Noble, T.; McGrath, H. PROSPER: A new framework for positive education. Psychol. Well-Being Theory Res. Pract. 2015, 5, 1–17.
[CrossRef]
55. Schaufeli, W.B.; Taris, T.W. A critical review of the job demands-resources model: Implications for improving work and health.
In Bridging Occupational, Organizational and Public Health: A Transdisciplinary Approach; Bauer, G.F., Hämmig, O., Eds.; Springer
Science + Business Media: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2014; pp. 43–68.
56. Schaufeli, W.; Salanova, M. Burnout, boredom and engagement at the workplace. In An Introduction to Contemporary Work
Psychology; Peeters, M.C., Jonge, J., Taris, T.W., Eds.; Wiley-Blackwell: Oxford, UK, 2013; pp. 293–320.
57. Bakker, A.B.; Demerouti, E. The job demands-resources model: State of the art. J. Manag. Psychol. 2007, 22, 309–328. [CrossRef]
58. Siegrist, J. Adverse health effects of high-effort/low-reward conditions. J. Occup. Health Psychol. 1996, 1, 27–41. [CrossRef]
59. Bakker, A.B.; Demerouti, E.; Schaufeli, W.B. Dual processes at work in a call center: An application of the job demands-resources
model. Eur. J. Work Organ. Psychol. 2003, 12, 393–417. [CrossRef]
60. Hinz, A.; Zenger, M.; Brähler, E.; Spitzer, S.; Scheuch, K.; Seibt, R. Effort–reward imbalance and mental health problems in 1074
German teachers, compared with those in the general population. Stress Health 2014, 32, 224–230. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
61. Cumming, T. Early childhood educators’ well-being: An updated review of the literature. Early Child. Educ. J. 2017, 45, 583–593.
[CrossRef]
62. Foley, C.; Murphy, M. Burnout in Irish teachers: Investigating the role of individual differences, work environment and coping
factors. Teach. Teach. Educ. 2015, 50, 46–55. [CrossRef]
63. Virtanen, A.; De Bloom, J.; Kinnunen, U. Relationships between Recovery Experiences and Well-Being Among Younger and Older
Teachers. Int. Arch. Occup. Environ. Health 2020, 93, 213–227. [CrossRef]
64. Laursen, B.P.; Hoff, E. Person-Centered and Variable-Centered Approaches to Longitudinal Data. Merrill-Palmer Q. 2006, 52,
65. Duckworth, A.L.; Quinn, P.D.; Seligman, M.E.P. Positive predictors of teacher effectiveness. J. Posit. Psychol. 2009, 4, 540–547.
[CrossRef]
Educ. Sci. 2023, 13, 927 25 of 28
66. Branand, B.; Nakamura, J. The well-being of teachers and professors. In The Wiley Blackwell Handbook of the Psychology of Positivity
and Strengths-Based Approaches at Work; Oades, L.G., Steger, M.F., Delle Fave, A., Passmore, J., Eds.; Wiley Blackwell: Hoboken, NJ,
USA, 2017; pp. 466–490. [CrossRef]
67. Yildirim, K. Testing the main determinants of teachers’ professional well-being by using a mixed method. Teach. Dev. 2015, 19,
59–78. [CrossRef]
68. Lavy, S.; Eshet, R. Spiral effects of teachers’ emotions and emotion regulation strategies: Evidence from a daily diary study. Teach.
Teach. Educ. 2018, 73, 151–161. [CrossRef]
69. Aldrup, K.; Klusmann, U.; Ludtke, O.; Gollner, R.; Trautwein, U. Student misbehavior and teacher well-being: Testing the
mediating role of the teacher- student relationship. Learn. Instr. 2018, 58, 126–136. [CrossRef]
70. Hascher, T. Well-being and learning in school. In Encyclopedia of the Sciences of Learning; Seel, N.M., Ed.; Springer: New York, NY,
USA, 2012; pp. 3453–3456.
71. Bower, J.M.; Carroll, A.-M. Capturing real-time emotional states and triggers for teachers through the teacher wellbeing web-based
application t*: A pilot study. Teach. Teach. Educ. 2017, 65, 183–191. [CrossRef]
72. Viac, C.; Fraser, P. Teachers’ Well-Being: A Framework for Data Collection and Analysis; OECD Publishing: Paris, France, 2020.
Available online: https://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/education/teachers-well-being_c36fc9d3-en (accessed on 15 June 2022).
73. Talbot, K.; Mercer, S. Language teacher well-being. In Research Questions in Language Education and Applied Linguistics; Mohebbi,
H., Coombe, C., Eds.; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2021; pp. 567–572.
74. Aelterman, A.; Engels, N.; Van Petegem, K.; Verhaeghe, J.P. The wellbeing of teachers in Flanders: The importance of a supportive
school culture. Educ. Stud. 2007, 33, 285–297. [CrossRef]
75. Bronfenbrenner, U. The Ecology of Human Development: Experiments by Nature and Design; Harvard University Press: Cambridge,
MA, USA, 1979.
76. Jacobsson, C.; Åkerlund, M.; Graci, E.; Cedstrand, E.; Archer, T. Teacher team effectiveness and teacher’s well-being. Clin. Exp.
Psychol. 2016, 2, 1000130. [CrossRef]
77. Hobson, A.; Maxwell, B. Supporting and inhibiting the well-being of early career secondary school teachers: Extending self-
determination theory. Br. Educ. Res. J. 2016, 43, 168–191. [CrossRef]
78. McCallum, F.; Price, D. (Eds.) Nurturing Wellbeing Development in Education: From Little Things, Big Things Grow; Routledge: New
York, NY, USA, 2015.
79. Acton, R.; Glasgow, P. Teacher wellbeing in neoliberal contexts: A review of the literature. Aust. J. Teach. Educ. 2015, 40, 99–114.
[CrossRef]
80. Hall-Kenyon, K.M.; Bullough, R.V.; MacKay, K.L.; Marshall, E.E. Preschool teacher well-being: A review of the literature. Early
Child. Educ. J. 2014, 42, 153–162. [CrossRef]
81. Hascher, T.; Waber, J. Teacher wellbeing: A systematic review of the research literature from the year 2000–2019. Educ. Res. Rev.
2021, 34, 100411. [CrossRef]
82. Olaleye, S.A.; Olaleye, E.O. The imperative of students and teachers’ well-being in Finnish university: A bibliometric approach.
In ICERI 2022. Proceedings of the 15th International Conference of Education, Research and Innovation. Conference Proceedings, Seville,
Spain, 7–9 November 2022; Chova, L.G., Martínez, A.L., Lees, J., Eds.; IATED: Valencia, Spain, 2022; pp. 953–962. [CrossRef]
83. Prado-Gascó, V.; Gómez-Domínguez, M.T.; Soto-Rubio, A.; Díaz-Rodríguez, L.; Navarro-Mateu, D. Stay at home and teach:
A comparative study of psychosocial risks between Spain and Mexico during the pandemic. Front. Psychol. 2020, 11, 566900.
[CrossRef]
84. Pyżalski, J.; Poleszak, W. Polish Teachers’ Stress, Well-being and Mental Health During COVID-19 Emergency Remote Education—
A Review of the Empirical Data. Lub. Rocz. Pedagog. 2022, 41, 25–40. [CrossRef]
85. García-Álvarez, D.; Soler, M.J.; Achard-Braga, L. Psychological Well-Being in Teachers During and Post-Covid-19: Positive
Psychology Interventions. Front. Psychol. 2021, 12, 769363. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
86. Kitchenham, B.; Brereton, O.P.; Budgen, D.; Turner, M.; Bailey, J.; Linkman, S. Systematic literature reviews in software
engineering–a systematic literature review. Inf. Softw. Technol. 2009, 51, 7–15. [CrossRef]
87. Webster, J.; Watson, R.T. Analyzing the past to prepare for the future: Writing a literature review. MIS Q. 2002, xiii–xxiii.
88. Victor, L. Systematic Reviewing; University of Surrey: Guildford, UK, 2008.
89. Tikito, I.; Souissi, N. Meta-analysis of systematic literature review methods. Int. J. Mod. Educ. Comput. Sci. 2019, 11, 17–25.
[CrossRef]
90. Gough, D.; Oliver, S.; Thomas, J. Introducing systematic reviews. In An Introduction to Systematic Reviews, 2nd ed.; Gough, D.,
Oliver, S., Thomas, J., Eds.; Sage: London, UK, 2017; pp. 1–8.
91. Moher, D.; Liberati, A.; Tetzlaff, J.; Altman, D.G. The PRISMA group. Preferred reporting itemsfor systematic reviews and
meta-analyses: The PRISMA statement. PLoS Med. 2009, 6, 264–269. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
92. Kitchenham, B.A. Guidelines for Performing Systematic Literature Reviews in Software Engineering (Version 2.3); EBSE Technical Report;
Keele University and University of Durham: Staffordshire, UK, 2007.
93. Punch, K. Introduction to Social Research: Quantitative and Qualitative Approaches; Sage: London, UK, 1998.
94. Na’imah, T.; Kasanah, R.; Rahmasari Qurrota Aeni, P.S. Systematic Review on The Factors That Influence Well-Being Among
Teachers. Sains Hum. 2021, 13, 61–66. [CrossRef]
95. Braun, V.; Clarke, V. Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qual. Res. Psychol. 2006, 3, 77–101. [CrossRef]
Educ. Sci. 2023, 13, 927 26 of 28
96. Education Support. Teacher Wellbeing Index; Education Support: London, UK, 2019.
97. Ah-Kwon, K.-A.; Ford, T.G.; Tsotsoros, J.; Randall, K.; Malek-Lasater, A.; Kim, S.G. Challenges in Working Conditions and
Well-Being of Early Childhood Teachers by Teaching Modality during the COVID-19 Pandemic. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health
2022, 19, 4919. [CrossRef]
98. Eadie, P.; Levickis, P.; Murray, L.; Page, J.; Elek, C.; Church, A. Early Childhood Educators’ Wellbeing during the COVID-19
Pandemic. Early Child. Educ. J. 2021, 49, 903–913. [CrossRef]
99. Parkes, K.A.; Russell, J.A.; Bauer, W.I.; Miksza, P. The Well-being and Instructional Experiences of K-12 Music Educators: Starting
a New School Year During a Pandemic. Front. Psychol. 2021, 12, 701189. [CrossRef]
100. Sigursteinsdottir, H.; Rafnsdottir, G.L. The Well-Being of Primary School Teachers duringCOVID-19. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public
Health 2022, 19, 11177. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
101. Rosli, A.M.; Bakar, A.Y.A. The Mental Health State and Psychological Well-Being of School Teachers during COVID-19 Pandemic
in Malaysia. Bisma J. Couns. 2021, 5, 182–195. [CrossRef]
102. Kamaruzaman, M.; Surat, S. Teachers Psychological Well Being during COVID-19 Pandemic. Int. J. Acad. Res. Bus. Soc. Sci. 2021,
11, 655–661. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
103. Egilmez, O.H. COVID-19 Fears and Psychological Well-being of Pre-service Music teachers. Educ. Policy Anal. Strateg. Res. 2022,
17, 88–107. [CrossRef]
104. Kupers, E.; Mouw, J.M.; Fokkens-Bruinsma, M. Teaching in times of COVID-19: A mixed-method study into teachers’ teaching
practices, psychological needs, stress and well-being. Teach. Teach. Educ. 2022, 115, 103724. [CrossRef]
105. Alves, R.; Lopes, T.; Precioso, J. Teachers’ well-being in times of Covid-19 pandemic: Factors that explain professional well-being.
Int. J. Educ. Res. Innov. 2020, 15, 203–217. [CrossRef]
106. Trindade, B.M.M.C.; Pocinho, R.F.S.; Afonso, P.J.M.; Santos, D.F.C.; Silva, P.N.M.; Silveira, P.A.A.L.; Santos, G.A.R. COVID-19 and
the Educational Area: Emotional Management and Well-Being in Teachers. In Proceedings of the Ninth International Conference
on Technological Ecosystems for Enhancing Multiculturality (TEEM’21), Barcelona, Spain, 26–29 October 2021; ACM: New York,
NY, USA, 2021; pp. 647–651. [CrossRef]
107. Panadero, E.; Fraile, J.; Pinedo, L.; Rodríguez-Hernández, C.; Balerdi, E.; Díez, F. Teachers’ Well-Being, Emotions, and Motivation
During Emergency Remote Teaching Due to COVID-19. Front. Psychol. 2022, 13, 826828. [CrossRef]
108. Stang-Rabrig, J.; Bruggerman, T.; Lorenz, R.; McElvany, N. Teachers’ occupational well-being during the COVID-19 pandemic:
The role of resources and demands. Teach. Teach. Educ. 2022, 117, 103803. [CrossRef]
109. Hilger, K.J.E.; Scheibe, S.; Frenzel, A.C.; Keller, M.M. Exceptional Circumstances: Changes in Teachers’ Work Characteristics and
Wellbeing during COVID-19 lockdown. Sch. Psychol. 2021, 36, 516–632. [CrossRef]
110. Pöysä, S.; Pakarinen, E.; Lerkkanen, M.K. Patterns of Teachers’ Occupational Well-Being During the COVID-19 Pandemic:
Relations to Experiences of Exhaustion, Recovery, and Interactional Styles of Teaching. Front. Educ. 2021, 6, 699785. [CrossRef]
111. Pöysä, S.; Pakarinen, E.; Lerkkanen, M.-K. Profiles of Work Engagement and Work-Related Effort and Reward Among Teachers:
Associations to Occupational Well-Being and Leader–Follower Relationship During the COVID-19 Pandemic. Front. Psychol.
2022, 13, 861300. [CrossRef]
112. Kotowski, S.E.; Davis, K.G.; Barratt, C.L. Teachers feeling the burden of COVID-19: Impact on well-being, stress and burnout.
Work 2022, 71, 407–415. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
113. Wong, C.-Y.; Pompeo-Fargnoli, A.; Harriott, W. Focusing on ESOL teachers’ well-being during COVID-19 and beyond. ELT J.
2022, 76, 1–10. [CrossRef]
114. Billett, P.; Turner, K.; Li, X. Australian teacher stress, well-being, self-efficacy, and safety during the COVID-19 pandemic. Psychol.
Sch. 2021, 60, 1394–1414. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
115. Lau, S.S.S.; Shum, E.N.Y.; Man, J.O.T.; Cheung, E.T.H.; Amoah, P.A.; Leung, A.Y.M.; Okan, O.; Dadaczynski, K. Teachers’
Well-Being and Associated Factors during theCOVID-19 Pandemic: A Cross-Sectional Study in Hong Kong, China. Int. J. Environ.
Res. Public Health 2022, 19, 14661. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
116. Weißenfels, M.; Benick, M.; Perels, F. Teachers’ prerequisites for online teaching and learning: Individual differences and relations
to well-being during the COVID-19 pandemic. Educ. Psychol. 2022, 42, 1283–1300. [CrossRef]
117. Guoyan, S.; Khaskheli, A.; Raza, S.A.; Khan, K.A.; Hakim, F. Teachers’ self-efficacy, mental well-being and continuance com-
mitment of using learning management system during COVID-19 pandemic: A comparative study of Pakistan and Malaysia.
Interact. Learn. Environ. 2021, 1–23. [CrossRef]
118. Karamushka, L.; Kredentser, O.; Tereshchenko, K.; Lazos, G.; Klochko, A. Relationship between Teacher Work Motivation and
Well-being at Different Stages of covid-19 Lockdown. Soc. Welf. Interdiscip. Approach 2021, 11, 19–32. [CrossRef]
119. Nakijoba, R.; Mugabi, R.D.; Ayodeji, A. COVID-19 School Closures in Uganda and their Impact on the Well-being of Teachers in
Private Institutions in Semi-urban District. Adv. J. Soc. Sci. 2022, 10, 52–62. [CrossRef]
120. Blaine, J. Teachers’ Mental Wellbeing during Ongoing School Closures in Hong Kong. Educ. J. 2022, 11, 137–150.
121. Allen, R.; Jerrim, J.; Sims, S. How Did the Early Stages of the COVID-19 Pandemic affect Teacher Wellbeing? CEPEO Working Paper No.
20-15; Centre for Education Policy and Equalizing Opportunities, UCL: London, UK, 2020.
122. Sulis, G.; Mercer, S.; Mairitsch, A.; Babic, S.; Shin, S. Preservice language teacher wellbeing as a complex dynamic system. System
2021, 103, 102642. [CrossRef]
Educ. Sci. 2023, 13, 927 27 of 28
123. Bartkowiak, G.; Krugiełka, A.; Dama, S.; Kostrzewa-Demczuk, P.; Gaweł-Luty, E. Academic Teachers about Their Productivity
and a Sense of Well-Being in the Current COVID-19 Epidemic. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2022, 19, 4970. [CrossRef]
124. Shen, P.; Slater, P. The effect of occupational stress and coping strategies on mental health and emotional wellbeing among
university academic staff during the COVID-19 outbreak. Int. Educ. Stud. 2021, 14, 82–95. [CrossRef]
125. Creely, E.; Laletas, S.; Fernandes, V.; Subban, P.; Southcott, J. University teachers’ well-being during a pandemic: The experiences
of five academics. Res. Pap. Educ. 2021, 37, 1241–1262. [CrossRef]
126. Lee, A.S.Y.; Fung, W.K.; Datu, J.A.D.; Chung, K.K.H. Subjective and psychological well-being profiles among pre-service teachers
in Hong Kong: Associations with teachers’ self-efficacy during the COVID-19 pandemic. Psychol. Rep. 2022; advance online
publication. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
127. Flores, J.; Caqueo-Urízar, A.; Escobar, M.; Irarrázaval, M. Well-Being and Mental Health in Teachers: The Life Impact of COVID-19.
Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2022, 19, 15371. [CrossRef]
128. Hascher, T.; Beltman, S.; Mansfield, C. Swiss Primary Teachers’ Professional Well-Being During School Closure Due to the
COVID-19 Pandemic. Front. Psychol. 2021, 12, 687512. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
129. Walter, H.L.; Fox, H.B. Understanding Teacher Well-being During the COVID-19 Pandemic Over Time: A Qualitative Longitudinal
Study. J. Organ. Psychol. 2021, 21, 36–50.
130. Pourbahram, R.; Sideghi, K. English as a Foreign Language Teachers’ Wellbeing amidst COVID-19 Pandemic. Appl. Res. Engl.
Lang. 2022, 11, 77–98.
131. McDonough, S.; Lemon, N. ‘Stretched very thin’: The impact of COVID-19 on teachers’ work lives and well-being. Teach. Teach.
2022, 1–13. [CrossRef]
132. Sultana, S.; Roshid, M.M.; Haider, M.Z.; Khan, R.; Kabir, M.M.N.; Jahan, A. University Students’ and Teachers’ Wellbeing during
COVID-19 in Bangladesh: A Qualitative Enquiry. Qual. Rep. 2022, 27, 1635–1655. [CrossRef]
133. Chan, M.K.; Sharkey, J.D.; Lawrie, S.I.; Arch, D.A.N.; Nylund-Gibson, K. Elementary School Teacher Wellbeing and Supportive
Measures amid COVID-19: An Exploratory Study. Sch. Psychol. 2021, 36, 533–545. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
134. MacIntyre, P.D.; Gregersen, T.; Mercer, S. Language teachers’ coping strategies during the COVID-19 conversion to online
teaching: Correlations with stress, wellbeing and negative emotions. System 2020, 94, 102352. [CrossRef]
135. Kim, L.S.; Oxley, L.; Asbury, K. ‘My brain feels like a browser with 100 tabs open’: A longitudinal study of teachers’ mental health
and well-being during the COVID-19 pandemic. Br. J. Educ. Psychol. 2022, 92, 299–318. [CrossRef]
136. Eadie, P.; Murray, L.; Levickis, P.; Page, L.; Church, A.; Elek, C. Challenges and supports for educator well-being: Perspectives of
Australian early childhood educators during the COVID-19 pandemic. Teach. Teach. 2022, 28, 568–583. [CrossRef]
137. Pace, F.; Sciotto, G.; Randazzo, N.A.; Macaluso, V. Teachers’ Work-Related Well-Being in Times of COVID-19: The Effects of
Technostress and Online Teaching. Soc. Sci. 2022, 11, 453. [CrossRef]
138. Herman, K.C.; Sebastian, J.; Reinke, W.M.; Huang, F.L. Individual and School Predictors of Teacher Stress, Coping, and Wellness
During the COVID-19 pandemic. Sch. Psychol. 2021, 36, 483–493. [CrossRef]
139. Kasprzak, E.; Mudło-Głagolska, K. Teachers’ Well-Being Forced to Work from Home Due to COVID-19 Pandemic: Work Passion
as a Mediator. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2022, 19, 15095. [CrossRef]
140. Zewude, G.T.; Beyene, S.D.; Taye, B.; Sadouki, F.; Hercz, M. COVID-19 Stress and Teachers’ Well-Being: The Mediating Role of
Sense of Coherence and Resilience. Eur. J. Investig. Health Psychol. Educ. 2023, 13, 1–22. [CrossRef]
141. Smith, A.P.; James, A. The wellbeing of staff in a Welsh Secondary School before and after a COVID-19 lockdown. J. Educ. Soc.
Behav. Sci. 2021, 34, 133–140. [CrossRef]
142. Billaudeau, N.; Alexander, S.; Magnard, L.; Temam, S.; Vercambre, M.-N. What Levers to Promote Teachers’ Wellbeing during the
COVID-19 Pandemic and Beyond: Lessons Learned from a 2021 Online Study in Six Countries. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health
2022, 19, 9151. [CrossRef]
143. Sherief, S.R.; Rehman, S. Factors affecting educators’ psychological well-being among COVID-19 Pandemic: A Quantitative
Approach. J. Int. Bus. Manag. 2022, 5, 1–21.
144. Anderson, R.C.; Bousselot, T.; Katz-Buoincontro, J.; Todd, J. Generating Buoyancy in a Seaof Uncertainty: Teachers Creativity and
Well-Being During the COVID-19Pandemic. Front. Psychol. 2021, 11, 614774. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
145. Nong, L.; Ye, J.-H.; Hong, J.-C. The Impact of Empowering Leadership on Preschool Teachers’ Job Well-Being in the Context of
COVID-19: A Perspective Based on Job Demands-Resources Model. Front. Psychol. 2022, 13, 895664. [CrossRef]
146. Froehlich, D.E.; Morinaj, J.; Guias, D.; Hobusch, U. Newly Qualified Teachers’ Well-Being During the COVID-19 Pandemic:
Testing a Social Support Intervention Through Design-Based Research. Front. Psychol. 2022, 13, 873797. [CrossRef]
147. García-Álvarez, D.; Soler, M.J.; Cobo-Rendón, R.; Hernández-Lalinde, J. Positive Psychology Applied to Education in Practicing
Teachers during the COVID-19 Pandemic: Personal Resources, Well-Being, and Teacher Training. Sustainability 2022, 14, 11728.
[CrossRef]
148. Zadok-Gurman, T.; Jakobovich, R.; Dvash, E.; Zafrani, K.; Rolnik, B.; Ganz, A.B.; Lev-Ari, S. Effect of Inquiry-Based Stress
Reduction (IBSR) Intervention on Well-Being, Resilience and Burnout of Teachers during the COVID-19Pandemic. Int. J. Environ.
Res. Public Health 2021, 18, 3689. [CrossRef]
149. Leong, D.C.P. Factors affecting the Psychological Wellbeing of Educators: A study on Private College Lecturers succeeding
COVID-19 Pandemic. Borneo J. Soc. Sci. Humanit. 2022. [CrossRef]
Educ. Sci. 2023, 13, 927 28 of 28
150. Charmaz, K.; Bryant, A. Grounded Theory. In The Sage Encyclopedia of Qualitative Research Methods; Given, L.M., Ed.; Sage: London,
UK, 2007; Volumes 1–2, pp. 374–376.
151. Adams, C.; Van Manen, M. Phenomenology. In The Sage Encyclopedia of Qualitative Research Methods; Given, L.M., Ed.; Sage:
London, UK, 2007; Volumes 1–2, pp. 614–619.
152. Hascher, T.; Beltman, S.; Mansfield, C. Teacher wellbeing and resilience: Towards an integrative model. Educ. Res. 2021, 63,
153. Cameron, M.; Lovett, S. Sustaining the commitment and realizing the potential of highly promising teachers. Teach. Teach. 2015,
21, 150–163. [CrossRef]
154. Waters, L. Positive education pedagogy: Shifting teacher mindsets, practice, and language to make wellbeing visible in classrooms’.
In The Palgrave Handbook of Positive Education; Kern, M.L., Wehmeyer, M.L., Eds.; Palgrave Macmillan: Cham, Switzerland, 2021;
pp. 137–164.
155. Darling-Hammond, L.; Hyler, M.E. Preparing educators for the time of COVID . . . and beyond. Eur. J. Teach. Educ. 2020, 43,
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual
author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to
people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Education 13 00927

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Education 13 00927

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

education

Academic Editors: Minsun Shin and

Educ. Sci. 2023, 13, 927. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci13090927 https://www.mdpi.com/journal/education

2. Teacher Well-Being in the COVID-19 Era

3. Rationale for the Current Review

difficulties experienced by educators in organizational justice and generating interpersonal

4. Methodology Used in This Review

4.1. Search Strategy

4.2. Selection Criteria and Study Quality Assessment

4.2.1. Study Inclusion Criteria

4.2.2. Study Exclusion Criteria

4.3. Data Collection and Data Analysis

5. Results and Discussion

5. Results and Discussion

a. Studies in Preschool Education

chronous instruction. A lack of personal engagement with colleagues and disengagement

Table 1. Profile of the reviewed studies.

Research Sample Type of Educational

Research Sample Type of Educational

Research Sample Type of Educational

5.2.3. Research Question 3: Research Trends in TWB in the COVID-19 Era

6. Discussion and Conclusions

6.1. Research Question 1: TWB Status during the COVID-19 Era

Author Contributions: Conceptualization, A.-M.S.; methodology, E.K.; software, E.K.; validation,

You might also like