The teaching profession, characterised by high emotional demands, is often associated with significant stress (Skaalvik & Skaalvik, 2020) making the teaching profession one of the professions that are more inclined to burnout (Garrick et al., 2014; Maslach et al., 2001). Teacher shortages and increased levels of teachers’ stress and burnout have been a recent challenge in Europe. Across the European Union countries, over 50% of teachers report high levels of stress (OECD, 2020). Slovenia is one of the top five countries where teachers who reported experiencing stress at work a lot are more likely to want to leave teaching in the next five years (OECD, 2020). On the opposite, teachers that report higher levels of job satisfaction report the intentions to stay at their job (OECD, 2020). Nevertheless, teacher’s wellbeing is not only important for them but also affects their teaching styles (Aelterman et al., 2019; Katz & Moe, 2024) and overall supports positive student development (Aldrup et al., 2022). In addressing the societal need for recruitment and retention of high-quality teachers, understanding the mechanisms of teachers’ well-being, their job satisfaction and their burnout levels, is crucial.

Our study aimed to (a) thoroughly examine the pathways to positive teacher development by identifying internal and external assets leading to teachers’ job satisfaction and burnout in addition to recognising the relational nature of teaching profession with analysing Positive Teacher Development Model fit across teachers’ career stages. Positive Teacher Development Model (Kozina & Pivec, 2026) understands the mechanisms of teachers’ burnout and job satisfaction as a result of an interplay of multiple levels of individual ↔ context relationships, internal and external assets, being supported by teachers’ relationships with students, colleagues, and school leaders. The model as such recognizes collaborative and relational nature of teaching by placing the quality of teachers’ relationships with students, colleagues, and school leaders at its core. The model is grounded in the Socio-Ecological Model (Bronfenbrenner& Morris, 2007), Relational Developmental Systems Theory (Overton, 2015), and Self-Determination Theory (Ryan & Deci, 2000). The model has been empirically tested (Kozina & Pivec, 2026), but not yet empirically validated across teachers’ career stages.

Teachers’ careers have been traditionally considered to consist of two parts: preservice, which refers to the initial teacher education (universities or colleges), and in-service (from entry and exit from the profession). The pre-service period is a period of acquiring knowledge, competencies, and skills needed for the teaching profession in the process of professional identity formation. The in-service period is further characterised by different stages. Huberman (1995), based on extensive qualitative research, divides career stages into five stages: survival and discovery (1–3 years of work experience), stabilization (4–6 years of teaching experience), experimentation/diversification or stock-taking/interrogations (teachers with 7–18 years of work experience), conservatism or clarity (teachers with 19–30 years of work experience). The final stage is disengagement (teachers with more than 30 years of work experience). There are challenges associated with increased stress and burnout in each stage therefore in is important to analyse predictors of teachers’ positive development in different career stages. In the study we will test the fit of the Positive Teacher Development Model across different career groups on a sample of Slovene in-service teachers. 

The study is a part of a research project, named Positive Teacher Development Model - An interplay of the Individual (Motivational, Emotional, and Cognitive) and Contextual (School and System level) Assets during the School Year, which aimed to examine individual and contextual factors that may contribute to job satisfaction and teacher retention and may reduce burnout. The study uses a Slovene in-service teacher’s sample (n = 1191; 86.6% females; Mage = 42.49; SD = 9.42) with 0 to 39 years of teaching experience (M = 15.25; SD = 9.98). In-service teachers were teaching either basic education (n = 864; 92.5% females; M = 41.66; SD = 8.81) or upper-secondary education (n = 306; 69.9% females; M = 44.84; SD = 10.34). The test of the model will be evaluated using the following instruments: (1) Difficulties in Emotion Regulation Scale (Bjureberg et al., 2016); (2) Teacher motivation and perceptions (OECD, 2018); (3) Teacher self-efficacy (Schwarzer & Hallum, 2008); (4) Work stressors (Skaalvik & Skaalvik, 2017); (5) Value consonance (Skaalvik & Skaalvik, 2011); (6) System conditions; (7) Student-teacher relationship scale (Aldrup et al., 2018); (8) Teacher collaboration (OECD, 2017); (9) Ethical leadership at work (Kalshoven et al., 2011); (10) Shirom-Melamed Burnout Questionnaire (Melamed et al., 1992); (11) Job Satisfaction Scale (OECD, 2018). The data analyses will consist of missing values analyses, a series of confirmatory factor analyses for all measured constructs and finally, multi-group structural equation modelling. Structural equation modelling is a statistical methodology that takes a confirmatory approach to the analysis. The hypothesized model is statistically tested to determine the extent to which it is consistent with the data, which is referred to as the goodness of fit. If the goodness of fit is adequate, it supports the plausibility of the relations between the variables. In order to assess the model fit, we used well-established indices such as CFI, TLI, RMSEA, SRMR as well as the chi-square test statistics. As the data is nested (teachers teaching at the same schools) ICCs are going to be calculated. In case of ICC larger than .05 corrected standard errors and chi-square tests with the sandwich estimator will be used.

Our study addresses contemporary structural problems of the teaching profession by providing an evidence-based views based on positive development perspective on the possible contributors to teachers' burnout and job satisfaction. This approach’s added value is, in addition to its positive perspective, its recognition of the interconnectedness of various systems within the educational context and acknowledgement of the importance of teachers' perceptions and experiences of support on different levels connected to their positive development. Additionally, the study investigates whether predictors of teachers’ job satisfaction and burnout vary across teachers’ carer stages. This study provides valuable insights into the positive teacher’s development across different career stages of teachers, offering important contribution to disentangling the dynamics of teacher well-being throughout their careers.

Aelterman, N., Vansteenkiste, M., Haerens, L., Soenens, B., Fontaine, J. R., & Reeve, J. (2019). Toward an integrative and fine-grained insight in motivating and demotivating teaching styles: The merits of a circumplex approach. Journal of Educational Psychology, 111(3), 497–521. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/edu0000293 Aldrup, K., Carstensen, B., & Klusmann, U. (2022). Is Empathy the Key to Effective Teaching? A Systematic Review of Its Association with Teacher-Student Interactions and Student Outcomes. Educational Psychology Review, 34, 1177–1216. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-021-09649-y Aldrup, K., Klusmann, U., Lüdtke, O., Göllner, R., & Trautwein, U. (2018). Student misbehavior and teacher well-being: Testing the mediating role of the teacher-student relationship. Learning and Instruction, 58, 126–136. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2018.05.006 Bjureberg, J., Ljótsson, B., Tull, M. T., Hedman, E., Sahlin, H., Lundh, L. G., Bjärehed, J., DiLillo, D., Messman–Moore, T., Hellner Gumpert, C., & Gratz, K. L. (2016). Development and validation of a brief version of the difficulties in emotion regulation scale: the DERS–16. Journal of Psychopathology and Behavioral Assessment, 38, 284–296. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10862-015-9514-x Bronfenbrenner, U., & Morris, P. A. (2007). The bioecological model of human development. In W. Damon & R. M. Lerner (Eds.), Handbook of child psychology: Vol. 1. Theoretical models of human development (6th ed., pp. 793–828). John Wiley & Sons. Huberman, M. (1995). Networks that alter teaching: conceptualizations, exchanges and experiments. Teachers and Teaching, 1(2), 193–211. https://doi.org/10.1080/1354060950010204 Garrick, A., Winwood, P. C., Mak, A. S., Cathcart, S., Bakker, A. B., & Lushington, K. (2014). Prevalence and organisational factors of psychological injury among Australian school teachers. The Australasian Journal of Organisational Psychology, 7, e5. https://doi.org/10.1017/orp.2014.5 Kalshoven, K., Den Hartog, D. N., & De Hoogh, A. H. B. (2011). Ethical leadership at work questionnaire (ELW): Development and validation of a multidimensional measure. The Leadership Quarterly, 22(1), 51–69. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2010.12.007 Katz, I., & Moe, A. (2024). Exploring teachers’ psychological needs, motivating styles, emotion regulation and self-compassion: A comparative study before and during the COVID-19 lockdown. Teaching and Teacher Education, 148, 104706. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2024.104706 Kozina, A., & Pivec, T. (2926, in review). Positive Teacher Development Model: Pathways to Teachers Job Satisfaction and Burnout. Teaching and Teacher Education. Maslach, C., Schaufeli, W. B., & Leiter, M. P. (2001). Job burnout. Annual Review of Psychology, 52, 397–422. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.52.1.397 Melamed, S., Kushnir, T., & Shirom, A. (1992). Burnout and risk factors for cardiovascular diseases. Behavioral Medicine,18(2), 53–60.https://doi.org/10.1080/08964289.1992.9935172 ...