Recent studies have reported that teacher victimization is related to adverse outcomes, e.g., lower job satisfaction and reduced school connectedness (McMahon et al, 2020), which might eventually affect school climate (Yang et al, 2022), student achievements and teachers' life satisfaction (Moon, Kim, & McCluskey, 2023). The links between different forms of teacher victimization by students, their parents and school staff, and teacher’s life satisfaction are still under-researched. However, the relationship between victimization and overall life satisfaction is complex, with data showing mixed results (Hanson, 2010). School violence has an indirect effect on life satisfaction through school satisfaction for those who have experienced victimization (Varela, 2018). Teacher victimization is highly correlated with emotional distress, and factors such as gender, a student-oriented approach, and incident characteristics predict the extent of this distress (Moon et al, 2015). While teacher victimization is linked to heightened stress associated with teaching, some evidence does not support a specific link between the fear of victimization and teacher stress (Dworkin, 1988). On the whole, victimization has a negative relation with life satisfaction and a positive relation with emotional difficulties, with hope and school connectedness identified as potential mediators (Liu et al, 2020). In some research, teacher victimization has been associated with the stress faced by teachers (Reddy et al, 2013). High stress levels were positively linked to negative affect, but self-control and organizational social support were identified as factors that can contribute to life satisfaction among teachers (Hamama et al, 2013). Understanding and addressing the antecedents of teachers' life satisfaction, especially, teacher victimization by students, their parents, and school staff, can provide insights into preventing victimization culture at school to create a more supportive work environment for teachers, ultimately enhancing their overall life satisfaction and, subsequently, positively impacting on students’ achievements and wellbeing. Therefore, this study aimed to reveal the role of teacher victimization by school staff, followed by teacher victimization by students and their parents, for teachers’ life satisfaction. It was hypothesized that (H1) teacher victimization by students and their parents is negatively related to teacher life satisfaction; (H2) teacher victimization by school staff (teachers and administrators) is negatively related to teacher life satisfaction; (H3) teacher victimization by school staff is related to teacher victimization by students and their parents; (H4) teacher victimization by students and their parents mediates the link between teacher victimization by school staff and teacher life satisfaction.  

This study used a test design utilizing a heterogeneous convenient sample of 1146 individuals working in educational institutions as teachers in various Lithuanian cities. This study's data was taken from a more extensive study on Lithuanian teachers’ victimization experiences and wellbeing. To reveal teacher victimization (TV) by students, their parents, and school staff, and the links with teachers’ life satisfaction, this study used several previously validated instruments: the translated Lithuanian version of the Satisfaction with Life Scale (SWLS) (Diener et al, 1985) and the translated Lithuanian version of the Multidimensional Teacher Victimization Scale (Yang, 2019). The original items of both instruments were translated into Lithuanian and back-translated. To assess teacher victimization by students’ parents and school staff, we applied some additional questions constructed by the authors of this study. In the results section, we included Cronbach's alpha and McDonald’s ω values and model fit indices for the confirmatory factor analyses (CFAs) of the instruments used in this study. SPSS v.26.0, AMOS v.26.0, and JASP v.18 software were applied to analyze the data. JASP software was applied for Confirmatory Factor Analyses (CFAs), AMOS was applied for structural equation modeling (SEM) (Byrne, 2013), and SPSS was applied for the rest of the analyses (Venkataswamy, 2019). In SEM, model fit was evaluated based on the CFI (Comparative Fit Index), the normed fit index (NFI), the Tucker–Lewis’s coefficient (TLI), SRMR (Standardized Root Mean Square Residual), RMSEA (Root Mean Square Error of Approximation), and the χ2 was presented for descriptive purposes (Bagozzi and; Yi, 2012). The values higher than 0.90 for CFI and TLI, and values lower than 0.08 for RMSEA and SRMR, are considered indicative of a good fit, and p-values lower than 0.05 are considered to be statistically significant (Kline, 2016).

This study highlights a critical issue in the educational sector in Lithuania – the widespread victimization of teachers by various parties within the school environment and its significant negative associations with teachers' life satisfaction. A significant portion of teachers in Lithuania experience victimization in various forms. The findings demonstrated that 38.5% of teachers have been bullied by school staff, and a slightly lower percentage (33.9%) have faced verbal victimization from students' parents. The most prevalent form of victimization is by students, affecting 65.8% of teachers, with verbal and social victimization being the most common. The findings revealed a clear and significant negative correlation between different forms of teacher victimization and life satisfaction. The stronger the victimization, particularly in forms like bullying by staff and verbal victimization by students, the lower the teachers' life satisfaction. The study indicates that bullying by staff is not only detrimental in its own right but also relates positively to other forms of victimization, such as verbal victimization by parents and multidimensional victimization by students. This interrelation suggests a complex and pervasive problem within the school environment where different forms of victimization are interconnected. The study confirmed that teacher victimization, especially by school staff, followed by victimization by students and their parents, significantly relates to teachers' life satisfaction. Moreover, teacher victimization by students and their parents mediates the relationship between teacher victimization by school staff and teacher life satisfaction. This implies that the negative impact of staff victimization on life satisfaction can be exacerbated by additional victimization from students and parents. These findings call for urgent attention and action from educational policymakers and school administrators to address and mitigate teacher victimization, thereby improving the overall well-being of educators.

Bagozzi, R.P.; Yi, Y. Specification, Evaluation, and Interpretation of Structural Equation Models. J Acad Mark Sci 2012, 40, 8–34, doi:10.1007/s11747-011-0278-x. Byrne, B.M. Structural Equation Modeling With AMOS; 2013; ISBN 9781138797031. Diener, E.; Emmons, R.A.; Larsem, R.J.; Griffin, S. The Satisfaction With Life Scale. J Pers Assess 1985, 49, 71–75, doi:10.1207/s15327752jpa4901_13. Dworkin, A.G.; Haney, C.A.; Telschow, R.L. Fear, Victimization, and Stress among Urban Public School Teachers. J Organ Behav 1988, 9, doi:10.1002/job.4030090207. Hamama, L.; Ronen, T.; Shachar, K.; Rosenbaum, M. Links Between Stress, Positive and Negative Affect, and Life Satisfaction Among Teachers in Special Education Schools. J Happiness Stud 2013, 14, doi:10.1007/s10902-012-9352-4. Hanson, R.F.; Sawyer, G.K.; Begle, A.M.; Hubel, G.S. The Impact of Crime Victimization on Quality of Life. J Trauma Stress 2010, 23, doi:10.1002/jts.20508. Kline, R.B. Principles and Practices of Structural Equation Modelling 4th Edition; 2016; ISBN 9781609182304. Liu, Y.; Carney, J.L. V.; Kim, H.; Hazler, R.J.; Guo, X. Victimization and Students’ Psychological Well-Being: The Mediating Roles of Hope and School Connectedness. Child Youth Serv Rev 2020, 108, doi:10.1016/j.childyouth.2019.104674. McMahon, S.D.; Peist, E.; Davis, J.O.; McConnell, E.; Reaves, S.; Reddy, L.A.; Anderman, E.M.; Espelage, D.L. Addressing Violence against Teachers: A Social-Ecological Analysis of Teachers’ Perspectives. Psychol Sch 2020, 57, doi:10.1002/pits.22382. Moon, B.; Kim, J.; McCluskey, J. Teacher Victimization Patterns Establishing a Group-Based Trajectory Approach to Assessing Predictors of Connectedness to School, Job Satisfaction, and Depression. Vict Offender 2023, 18, doi:10.1080/15564886.2021.2014007. Moon, B.; Morash, M.; McCluskey, J. Student Violence Directed Against Teachers: Victimized Teachers’ Reports to School Officials and Satisfaction With School Responses. J Interpers Violence 2021, 36, doi:10.1177/0886260519825883. Reddy, L.A.; Espelage, D.; McMahon, S.D.; Anderman, E.M.; Lane, K.L.; Brown, V.E.; Reynolds, C.R.; Jones, A.; Kanrich, J. Violence Against Teachers: Case Studies from the APA Task Force. Int J Sch Educ Psychol 2013, 1, doi:10.1080/21683603.2013.837019. Varela, J.J.; Zimmerman, M.A.; Ryan, A.M.; Stoddard, S.A.; Heinze, J.E.; Alfaro, J. Life Satisfaction, School Satisfaction, and School Violence: A Mediation Analysis for Chilean Adolescent Victims and Perpetrators. Child Indic Res 2018, 11, doi:10.1007/s12187-016-9442-7. Venkataswamy Reddy, M. Statistical Methods in Psychiatry Research and SPSS; 2019; Yang, C.; Chan, M. ki; Nickerson, A.B.; Jenkins, L.; Xie, J.S.; Fredrick, S.S. Teacher Victimization and Teachers’ Subjective Well-Being: Does School Climate Matter? Aggress Behav 2022, 48, doi:10.1002/ab.22030. Yang, C.; Fredrick, S.S.; Nickerson, A.B.; Jenkins, L.N. Supplemental Material for Initial Development and Validation of the Multidimensional Teacher Victimization Scale. School Psychology 2019, 34, 244–252, doi:10.1037/spq0000307.supp.