thesis on job satisfaction of college teachers

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

• View all journals
• My Account Login
• Explore content
• About the journal
• Publish with us
• Sign up for alerts
• Review Article
• Open access
• Published: 24 April 2023

The factors associated with teachers’ job satisfaction and their impacts on students’ achievement: a review (2010–2021)

• Kazi Enamul Hoque 1 ,
• Xingsu Wang 1 ,
• Yang Qi 1 &
• Normarini Norzan 2  

Humanities and Social Sciences Communications volume  10 , Article number:  177 ( 2023 ) Cite this article

14k Accesses

3 Citations

1 Altmetric

Metrics details

The success of any educational organization depends heavily on the effectiveness of its teachers, who are tasked with transferring knowledge, supervising students, and enhancing the standard of instruction. Teachers’ job satisfaction has a significant impact on the lessons they teach since they are directly involved in transferring knowledge to students. In order to determine the effect of teachers’ job satisfaction (TJS) on students’ accomplishments, the researchers sought to analyze the empirical studies conducted over the previous 12 years (SA). To determine the characteristics that link to instructors’ job satisfaction and their effect on students’ achievement, thirty-two empirical studies were examined. The analysis of world-wide empirical research findings shows four types of results: (i) In some countries, teachers’ job satisfaction is low, but students’ achievement is high (Shanghai, China, South Korea, Japan, Singapore) (ii) In some countries, teacher job satisfaction is high, but student achievement is low (Mexico, Malaysia, Chile, Italy). (iii) In some countries, teachers’ job satisfaction is high, and so is student achievement (Finland, Alberta, Canada, Australia). (iv) In some countries, teacher job satisfaction is low, which has a negative impact on student achievement (Bulgaria, Brazil, Russia). In sum, irrespective of countries, highly satisfied teachers give their best to their students’ success, not only by imparting knowledge but also by giving extra attention to ensure the better achievement of each student. The review of this study makes it even more worthwhile to reflect on the need to avoid stereotypical considerations and assessments of any objective presentation of the phenomenon and to reflect more deeply on the need to assess the validity of the relationship study.

Similar content being viewed by others

Influence of motivation on teachers’ job performance

Job satisfaction and self-efficacy of in-service early childhood teachers in the post-COVID-19 pandemic era

Exploring the employment motivation, job satisfaction and dissatisfaction of university English instructors in public institutions: a Chinese case study analysis

Introduction.

Teachers are the main part of the school education system. The factors affecting students’ achievement (SA) should be multifaceted. Among them, teachers are one of the important factors that affect students’ academic performance (Ma, 2012 ). Teacher job satisfaction (TJS) refers to teachers’ satisfaction with their current work, which can be divided into internal satisfaction and external satisfaction (Wang, 2019 ). TJS inquiry and analysis can help managers not only comprehend teachers’ professional attitudes and avoid burnout but also provide some guidance for management decision-making. Improving TJS will assist instructors in maintaining a high level of passion and enthusiasm for their profession for a long time, allowing them to play even better in the lesson and ensuring consistent teaching quality (Zong, 2016 ). Teachers must have proper work satisfaction in order to be fully ready to transmit knowledge and skills important for learners to develop in SA. Teachers have been revered as “nation builders”. More specifically, teachers who teach in colleges and train students into elites and have talents in different disciplines are the key to a nation. Low TJS may lead to lower levels of education (Borah, 2016 ).

Many studies show that TJS has a significant positive correlation with job performance. As an example, Hayati & Caniago ( 2012 ) found that higher job satisfaction is conductive to higher job performance, while Ejimofor’s ( 2015 ) finding shows triadic relationships in which it indicates that TJS improves teaching quality, and teaching quality has the direct effect of improving students’ quality. One of the most important topics in every academic organization is TJS and SA. TJS not only increases productivity but also helps promote a productive teaching and learning environment. Based on this, both school administrators and the government should give more attention to meeting the needs of teachers to improve their motivational level to achieve educational goals so as to improve student academic performance (Ihueze et al., 2018 ). Surprisingly, though some researchers did not find a substantial link between TJS and SA (Ejimofor, 2015 ; Borah, 2016 ), the intuition and popular expectation is that TJS affects SA significantly and directly (Fisher, 2003 ). Moreover, Lopes & Oliveira ( 2020 ), utilizing information from the 2013 Teaching and Learning International Survey, demonstrated that teacher job satisfaction is a vital element of teachers’ and schools’ performance as well as students’ academic and educational attainment (TALIS). They also discovered that aspects of interpersonal relationships are the most effective predictors of job happiness. They advised schools to improve by addressing interpersonal problems, especially in the classroom, where the majority of perceived job satisfaction tends to reside. The findings demonstrated that, (1) among the personal traits of teachers, teacher efficacy had significant effects on job satisfaction (You et al., 2017 ). As the factors affecting teachers’ job satisfaction vary depending on the context of different countries, this review included studies from different regions to give a comprehensive scenario of findings based on different regional factors. The review results have revealed the associated factors of teachers’ job satisfaction and their impacts on student achievement. The findings can be the subject of further exploration. The review study set out to accomplish the following objectives:

Objectives:

to find whether teachers’ job satisfaction (TJS) has an impact on student achievement (SA)

to find the factors that have a positive impact on TJS and SA

to find the factors that influence the effect of TJS on SA and that manifest differently in different countries

Theoretical background

Between 2010 and 2021, the number of studies examining the impact of TJS on SA increased significantly.

Conceptualization of teachers’ job satisfaction

Job satisfaction is one of the important topics in the fields of occupational psychology, organizational behavior, and human resource management to explore employee productivity and organizational effectiveness (Fisher, 2003 ). With the development of humanistic thinking and the concept of lifelong education, this concept has been generally accepted by people, and the academic community has increasingly paid attention to the work-related emotional experiences of different professional or occupational groups such as teachers, nurses, etc.

Generally speaking, TJS refers to a teacher’s overall emotional experience and cognitive expression of their occupation, working conditions, and state. The international community generally believes that, as a variable of emotional attitude, TJS itself not only covers different dimensions but, more importantly, TJS has an important and direct impact on teachers’ enthusiasm and commitment to teaching. Daily work efficiency and effectiveness are also powerful predictors of SA. In addition, from the perspective of organizational commitment, improving TJS is an important way to enhance teachers’ sense of identity and belonging to the school, as well as to improve teachers’ professional attractiveness.

From the perspective of logical inference, according to the important phenomenon of the mentoring effect in the rise of talent chains and talent groups in the history of scientific development, as well as the practical experience that “the greatest happiness of teachers comes from the extraordinary achievements of students,” and even the word “teacher” often used when praising teachers, judging from the phrases such as “famous teachers produce master apprentices” and “peaches and plums fill the world,” in practical work, SA should also be one of the important sources of TJS (Wang & Zhang, 2020 ).

Factors affecting the teachers’ job satisfaction

Different studies have used different elements that have direct, indirect, or even no impacts on the job satisfaction of teachers. In their research on college teachers’ job satisfaction, Shi et al. ( 2011 ) revealed that work treatment, job pressure, leadership behavior, gender, age, etc. have more or less influence on the job satisfaction of college teachers. Existing research usually divides the factors that affect TJS into four levels: individual, school, work, and others. The influencing factors at the individual level can be grouped into objective factors and subjective factors. Among them, objective factors include teachers’ educational background, teaching years (experience), gender, professional title, monthly income and workload, teaching subjects, etc.; subjective factors include occupational preference and work engagement.

The two main influencing variables at the school level are students and management. While the management aspect comprises the institutional culture of the school and student management, the student aspect includes the student’s learning environment. The professional growth environment, work pressure, learning exchange possibilities, etc. are examples of workplace factors. The location of the school (eastern, central, or western) and whether it is located in an urban or rural area are examples of other levels (Beijing Normal University Teachers’ Labor Market Research Group et al., 2021 ).

These elements can be categorized into three groups when considered collectively: the elements of the college professors themselves, the elements of the institutions, and the level of compatibility between individuals and roles. The author’s research focuses on the connection between these three variables and college professors’ job satisfaction (Shi et al., 2011 ).

Professional title, educational background, and job satisfaction are among the factors that teachers can control for themselves, but these variables have very weak correlations and cannot be used as explanatory variables in the regression equation. Age, on the other hand, has a weak correlation with job satisfaction but can be used as a variable to explain job satisfaction. Salary level is the school component that has the greatest impact on TJS. The primary output that teachers receive from the organization is compensation, which is also a key component that teachers demand from the organization. The degree of alignment between instructors’ expectations and their compensation is the most significant element determining TJS in terms of the matching of people to roles.

Student achievement

Defining a student’s grades is not an easy task. The most common metric of achievement is undoubtedly student performance on achievement exams in academic disciplines like reading, language arts, math, science, and history. The quality of schools and teachers, students’ backgrounds and situations, and a host of other variables all have an impact on academic attainment (Cunningham, 2012 ). The researchers looked at academic levels, achievement gaps, graduation and dropout rates, student and school development over time, and student success after high school.

Academic achievement is the ability to complete educational tasks. Such achievements can be general or topic-specific. Academic achievement refers to students’ scores in courses, curriculums, courses, and books that they have studied, expressed in the form of marks, percentages, or any other scale of marks (Borah, 2016 ). It is important to highlight that academic performance encompasses not only students’ achievement in tests and exams, but also their participation in social events, cultural events, entertainment, athletics, and other activities in academic institutions and organizations.

Conceptual framework of the study

How to improve the academic performance of students is a popular topic in the field of education. After all, the purpose of education is to train students to become talents in society. Between 2010 and 2021, scholars from many different countries studied the relationship between TJS and SA. Many scholars’ studies have shown that there is a significant positive correlation between TJS and SA (McWherter, 2012 ; Crawford, 2017 ; Andrew, 2017 ; Iqbal et al., 2016 ). In these studies, the effects of TJS on SA were investigated, suggesting that it is fairly common in the literature to study the relationship between the two as a theme (Ejimofor, 2015 ; Borah, 2016 ).

Specifically, some districts have high SA but lower TJS than average schools. While some districts had high TJS, this did not improve SA. Therefore, it makes sense to understand the findings of these studies as a whole. What’s more, it is necessary to sort out the reasons for this divergence among numerous studies and make comparisons. The following questions serve as a guide for this study’s analysis of the findings in the literature on the effect of TJS on SA.

Does research show that TJS has an impact on SA?

What factors will have positive impact on tjs and sa.

What factors influence the effect of TJS on SA that manifests differently in different countries?

By examining previous research, this work seeks to characterize teacher motivation and assess the evaluation criteria and processes that account for student performance. The research method is systematically summarizing and analyzing based on a literature review, which helps us research and analyze the topic from a dialectical perspective. This study refers to the model of PSALSAR. The process of selecting documents starts with analyzing the topic, searching and classifying relevant documents, screening relevant documents from different sources according to the selection criteria, and finally extracting the most relevant documents for sorting out. Analysis (Bearman et al., 2012 ). The scope of this review also followed four criteria as outlined in the review work of Wayne & Youngs ( 2003 ).

Data sources

The data for this literature review was extracted from three major data sources: Web of Science, Scopus, Google Scholar, and HowNet. The review intended to take into account all recognized and relevant sources reporting on studies that are in English and falls within the duration of the study, which is a 12-year period from 2010 to 2021. The aim of the search is to locate all appropriate literature without expanding the search too much and retrieving a huge number of unrelated results. After applying an analytical inclusion/exclusion criterion to the 721 papers that were found, 32 papers were found to be applicable to the study’s objectives.

Data screening

The databases were searched using the following terms: “career management of teachers,” “teacher job satisfaction,” “student achievement,” and “teacher job satisfaction and student achievement.”

There is much literature on the relationship between TJS and SA, many of which use TJS as a mediator, or TJS is just one of the variables to promote SA. Since the focus of this review was on the impact of TJS on SA, the literature search consisted of two phases to ensure that all relevant literature on the relationship between the two was included. In the first phase, which focused on TJS, the following search terms were used: “teacher job satisfaction”, “teacher work satisfaction” and “teacher satisfaction”, combined with the search term “SA”. In the second stage, the focus is on the effect of TJS on the SA selected from the first stage choices. After screening for keywords and selecting the year interval as 2010–2021, 26 documents were finally extracted for research. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) is an evidence-based framework that clearly defines the bare minimum of items to be included in systematic reviews and meta-analyses (Moher et al., 2009 ).

Inclusion and exclusion criteria

In order to check on the quality and validity of the data obtained, the most recent journals available on the topic were chosen. Also, a high priority was given to reading the findings and extracts of every journal before it was selected for review. Literature analysis adopts the selected research selected by narrative methods so that the author can understand the literature and find the mode by carefully reading and interpreting the research results (De Rijdt et al., 2013 ).

Next, each article is completely reread to determine the important part. Based on the content analysis method, the paragraphs of important information containing the answer to the hypothesis research question are encoded. In this literature review, as mentioned in an earlier section, the PRISMA is applied to the inclusion and exclusion criteria for the review. The table below depicts the details (Table 1 ).

The review results of 32 empirical studies have revealed the following answers to formulated research questions. The answers are organized according to research questions.

From 2010 to 2021, most studies from different countries have shown that TJS has a positive impact on students SA (McWherter, 2012 ; Crawford, 2017 ; Farooqi & Shabbir et al., 2016 ) The morale of teachers is closely related to the academic achievements of students (Sabin, 2015 ). This is because when the teacher is dissatisfied with their work, they will transfer it to students in many ways, including the absence of classes. When this happens, students will suffer, and their academic performance will inevitably be negatively affected.

The research results also show that the more teachers believe that teaching is a valuable occupation, the more satisfied they are (Armstrong, 2009 ), and the better the students’ outcomes. A study in two sub-Saharan African nations examined the degree of teacher satisfaction in Uganda and Nigeria, its causes, and how it affects the quality of instruction and learning (Nkengne et al., 2021 ). According to research, teachers who are satisfied with their jobs are more likely to teach effectively, which should help their pupils learn more in the classroom. In order to make employees play a greater role, the work itself must have satisfactory characteristics. If it is interesting, it has good income and work safety. A teacher with high work satisfaction usually puts more effort into teaching and learning (Ihueze et al., 2018 ). However, whether it is based on the conclusions of existing mainstream theoretical research or on practical experience, low job satisfaction will not only affect teachers’ teaching enthusiasm but also cause teachers to have a teaching attitude problem of “not happy to teach”, as a result, it may even lead to the problem of “poor teaching” ability and ultimately have a negative impact on students’ academic performance; at the same time, it will also have a negative effect on the organizational commitment of in-service teachers and the professional attractiveness of teachers (Wang and Zhang, 2020 ).

The results of several earlier investigations likewise show the opposite. The intuition and general expectations of the work satisfaction of teachers will affect the students’ grades (Fisher, 2003 ). TJS lacks a significant relationship with student grades, which is in line with the findings of Banerjee et al. ( 2017 ). According to their longitudinal study of young children between kindergarten and fifth grade, student reading growth has no association with teacher job satisfaction, but there is a slight but favorable relationship between the two. Although this seems to be a violation, it is consistent with the previous 41 research (Iaffaldano & Muchinsky, 1985 ; Fisher, 2003 ). Studies lack significant relationships between TJS and children’s academic achievements (Ejimofor, 2015 ). The relationship between TJS and SA can be ignored, which is to say that teachers’ job satisfaction has no significant impact on SA (Borah, 2016 ). Despite such findings, most of the scholars agree with the notion that job satisfaction concerning school teachers reflects their strong motivation towards their dedication to students’ performance (Manandhar et al., 2021 ).

TJS has a positive impact on the quality of education; therefore, affecting teacher job satisfaction can affect the quality of education. However, because multiple factors have a significant effect on TJS and SA, not all things that improve TJS also improve academic performance. In many circumstances, the aims of increasing job happiness and enhancing student accomplishment are antagonistic rather than complimentary (Michaelowa, 2002 ).

System control factors and incentive structures, in particular, due to a complete lack of job protection, have been found to have a significant positive impact on teacher performance, although they tend to be strongly opposed by the instructors involved. According to a study (Tsai & Antoniou, 2021 ) conducted in Taiwan with 113 teachers and 2,334 students to examine the relationships between teacher attitudes toward teaching mathematics, teacher self-efficacy, student achievement, and teacher job satisfaction, teacher attitudes toward teaching mathematics, efficacy in the classroom, and student achievement in mathematics could, to some extent, explain variations in teacher job satisfaction. The majority of the variation in teacher job satisfaction, which may translate into improved teacher efficacy and student achievement, was explained by teacher attitudes about teaching mathematics. It suggests that improving the quality of education for children is a complex process for which variables like instructors’ attitudes, their level of self-efficacy, and their pleasure and satisfaction at work may be responsible (Khalid, 2014 ). According to a study by Rutkowski et al. ( 2013 ) on 81 elementary school teachers from a sizable metropolitan school district in the United States, the PD program improved teachers’ pedagogical topic knowledge and subject-matter expertise. The teachers that participated in the professional development program showed a greater level of topic and instructional strategy understanding.

In fact, only a few variables had a clear positive effect on both goals. One was related to classroom equipment, which had a clear positive effect on teachers’ well-being. By accessing the material support of a supportive and satisfying working environment, teachers are more likely to be more actively involved in their teaching activities, which in turn is an important factor in how this leads to the creation of relevance for students’ teaching practice (Benevene et al., 2020 ). Among the device variables, many variables do not have any significant effect on SA and therefore do not even appear in the regressions. However, the situation is different for students’ teaching materials, which are highly correlated with SA and positively correlated with teacher job satisfaction. Therefore, improving the supply of textbooks is certainly a relevant policy option (Hee et al., 2019 ). In terms of class size, however, it does have a significant impact on teacher work satisfaction (Hee et al., 2019 ). TJS can be improved by reducing class size. Increasing class size is clearly the best answer to high student numbers for both teachers and kids. The disadvantages of double-shifting are so severe that they are applicable to classes of up to 100 pupils. Teacher efficacy has been shown to correlate with the presence of classroom processes and procedures, and the presentation of good classroom processes may contribute to better outcomes for students (Perera et al., 2022 ). At the same time, good teacher efficacy will also enable teachers to provide more effective pedagogical support, resulting in better outcomes for students in teaching and learning.

The commonly held belief that low salaries and large class sizes are the key reasons for low teacher job satisfaction and low SA has no support in this study. This had no discernible impact on SA. As a result of this research, an extraordinarily costly endeavor to enhance teacher compensation does not appear to be a suitable policy option in general.

What factors influence the effect of TJS on SA that manifest differently in different countries?

In their study, Dicke et al. ( 2020 ) found that the working context item was associated with student accomplishment for both teachers and principals; however, only the general and working environment factors of teacher job satisfaction were related to the disciplinary climate observed by students. International Student Evaluation Projects (PISA) and the Teaching and Learning International Survey (TALIS) found that in countries and regions with outstanding academic performance of students, their teachers showed lower work satisfaction (OECD, 2016 ; TALIS, 2013). For example, for two consecutive years in the PISA test, it is hailed by the World Bank as Shanghai, China, which has the highest education system in the world, shows that the teacher’s work satisfaction is significantly lower in the Talis 2013 survey results (Liang et al., 2016 ). In fact, Shanghai is not a special case. PISA (2015) data shows that, as a whole, despite the outstanding performance of students, the work satisfaction and occupational satisfaction of East Asian countries and regions are lower than the international average (Chen, 2017 ). At the same time, in those countries or regions that are less ideal in the PISA test, their teachers’ work satisfaction and occupational satisfaction are often significantly higher than the international average (Wang and Zhang, 2020 ). Data from 1,539 teachers at 306 secondary schools in the two Indian metropolises of New Delhi and Kolkata supported the notion that instructional leadership has indirect effects on teaching and learning and that the social and affective climate of the classroom has direct effects on teacher job satisfaction, which in turn affects student achievement (Dutta & Sahney, 2016 ). De Vries et al. ( 2013 ) conducted a study on teacher professional development (PD) in the context of inquiry-based science education (IBSE). The study aimed to investigate the effects of a long-term PD program on teachers’ knowledge, attitudes, and behavior. A total of 62 primary school teachers from the Netherlands participated in the trial and were randomized to either the PD program or a control group. Surveys, interviews, and classroom observations were used to gauge the teachers’ awareness of, attitudes about, and behavior with regard to IBSE. The outcomes demonstrated that the PD program had a favorable impact on teachers’ attitudes and knowledge to IBSE. IBSE knowledge was higher among the teachers in the PD program group, and they were more enthusiastic about advantages for their pupils.

Australia, Chile, Czech Republic, Germany, Italy, Korea, Portugal, Spain, USA, Brazil, China, Colombia, Dominia, Peru, Arab, Netherlands Combining the survey and test data of TALIS 2013 and PISA 2012, it is found that there are four main correspondences between teachers’ job satisfaction index and students’ test scores in different countries (regions) (OECD, 2016 ; TALIS, 2013). Countries (regions) with better test performance, such as Finland, Canada (Alberta), Australia, the Netherlands, etc. The second is countries (regions) where teachers’ job satisfaction is high but students’ performance is significantly worse, such as Mexico, Malaysia, Chile, Italy, etc.; the third is countries (regions) where teachers’ job satisfaction is significantly lower than the international average level, but students’ test scores are significantly higher than the international average or even among the best, such as Shanghai (China), South Korea, Japan, Singapore, and other East Asian countries and regions; the fourth is countries with low teacher job satisfaction and low student test scores, such as Bulgaria, Brazil, Russia, etc.

There is a clear correlation between cultural differences in different countries (regions) and teachers’ job satisfaction. Firstly, teachers’ job satisfaction in countries (regions) with a high power distance index is generally lower; secondly, individualism is different in different countries (regions), and there is a potential positive correlation between the index and teacher job satisfaction; furthermore, countries with a high long-term orientation index tend to have lower teacher job satisfaction and vice versa; and lastly, countries with a high indulgence index score. In other regions, teachers’ job satisfaction is generally higher (Wang and Zhang, 2020 ).

Combined with the analysis results, it can be determined to a large extent that national (or regional) culture has a potential impact on teachers’ job satisfaction that cannot be ignored, and compared with the usual experience of “good SA, TJS should also be high”. From the perspective of stereotyped thinking, the degree of influence of cultural differences on teachers’ job satisfaction, or at least the degree of correlation between the two, is more obvious and stronger. Therefore, it seems that a more reasonable explanation can be made for the puzzling differences in teacher job satisfaction in different countries (regions) shown by the TALIS 2013 survey data (Sims, 2017 ; Wang and Zhang, 2020 ). In order to highlight areas for development and to wrap up the section, Kravarušić ( 2021 ) can be quoted. He looked at the fundamental components of the structure of factors in the Republic of Serbia. He discovered that the status of society, the immediate social context, the quality of the study program, the professional environment, continuous professional development, pedagogical practice, the personal characteristics of educators, job satisfaction, and private life all influence the level of competence of teachers. As a result, the setting is a key factor in determining how satisfied teachers are with their work, which in turn influences student progress.

Limitations & recommendations

This review summarizes and analyzes the existing literature on teacher job satisfaction and student achievement, which will help improve student performance from the perspective of teachers’ job satisfaction in the future. However, there are still some limitations in the research process, which can be considered in the follow-up research.

First of all, it is about theoretical research. Although the research on teachers’ job satisfaction theory has been refined and divided into three stages for discussion and definition, the influencing factors obtained from the experimental analysis based on this definition have also been proved to be effective. However, this method of definition has not been widely accepted, which does not mean that researchers have not paid enough attention, precisely because job satisfaction theory involves too much content and there is not enough practice to demonstrate that the theory is true and effective. In addition, due to the repetition and contradiction of different types of theories caused by too many related studies, it has seriously affected the research on the classification and influencing factors of teachers’ job satisfaction at different stages. As the working lives of teachers cannot be simply divided into pre-service teachers and in-service teachers, such as teachers before retirement, teachers in private schools, etc., these can be the basis for classification, and the factors that affect teachers’ satisfaction are also different. At this stage, the theoretical knowledge of teachers’ job satisfaction is simply divided into stages, but teaching is a process, and its complexity and variability cannot be explained clearly by existing theories. The research at this stage cannot realize the analysis of teachers in terms of process. Therefore, future research can focus on defining teachers job satisfaction from different aspects through practice and strive to obtain the most accurate factors that affect teacher satisfaction so as to achieve the adjustment of students’ achievement.

Secondly, the articles chosen for this study include a reasonably high proportion of quantitative research, which is the primary method for studying the theory of teacher satisfaction and examining its affecting elements. However, this means that the research method is single, and the research results mainly come from the results of questionnaires and data analysis. The research results on the influencing factors to improve teachers’ job satisfaction promote the development of teachers’ personal professional abilities, and thus students’ achievement have been confirmed. However, some researchers said that relying too much on questionnaires and data made them ignore the complexity of the research content, and the validity of the research results also weakened their in-depth research ideas to a certain extent. In order to gain a deeper understanding of teachers’ job satisfaction, a qualitative investigation should be used to truly understand the source of teachers’ satisfaction and provide more possibilities for research on influencing factors (Fig. 1 ).

An overview of the overall screening procedures as well as the workflow associated with selecting relevant material. At the beginning of the process, a total of 2188 records were discovered from the databases. After eliminating gray literatures, duplicated papers, book and book chapters and conference papers, the number of articles maintained for further title reading and abstract review was decreased to 632. Following this, only 159 papers met the eligibility requirements for additional abstract reading and main body skimming. Out of that, 67 remained to be read in their entirety. During the main body reading, articles 32 without content pertaining either to teachers’ professional development or student achievement were excluded manually. At last, 32 papers met eligibility requirements for SLR study remained.

Concluding remarks

In the past 12 years, most studies from different countries have paid much attention to the effect of teachers’ job satisfaction on student achievement. Most research shows that TJS will have a positive impact on students achievement (McWherter, 2012 ; Crawford, 2017 ; Andrew, 2017 ; Iqbal et al., 2016 ). Although there is still a small subset of studies showing no significant relationship between TJS and SA, the number of these studies is far lower than the number of studies that believe that TJS has a positive effect on SA (Ejimofor, 2015 ; Borah, 2016 ). There are many factors that affect TJS, but only work treatment, work pressure, co-worker relationships, etc. However, research shows that only classroom equipment and classroom size have a positive effect on both. Research shows that it is largely certain that national (or regional) culture has a non-negligible potential impact on teacher job satisfaction. Moreover, compared with the usual experience and stereotyped thinking that “students have good grades, so teachers’ job satisfaction should also be high”, the degree of influence of cultural differences on teachers’ job satisfaction, or at least the degree of correlation between the two, is more obvious and relevant. The review of this study makes it even more worthwhile to reflect on the need to avoid stereotypical considerations and assessments of any objective presentation of the phenomenon and to reflect more deeply on the need to assess the validity of the relationship study. As in the case of measuring teacher job satisfaction, the extent to which cultural differences affect teacher job satisfaction cannot be ignored. This is why it is important for scholars to develop a framework for measuring teachers’ job satisfaction according to cultural contexts and specific social needs and to give more dimensions to reflection and further measurement. Only on this basis can the overall level of teacher satisfaction be improved, thus increasing the overall level of teacher effectiveness and well-being, and better motivating students to engage in teaching and learning activities that lead to better quality learning outcomes.

Data availability

Data sharing is not applicable to this research as no data were generated or analyzed

Andrew K (2017) Teacher job satisfaction and student academic performance at Uganda Certificate of Education in secondary schools in Uganda: a case study of kamwenge district. Doctoral dissertation, Kabale University

Armstrong M (2009) Armstrong’s handbook of management and leadership a guide to managing for results. Kogan

Banerjee N, Stearns E, Moller S, Mickelson RA (2017) Teacher job satisfaction and student achievement: the roles of teacher professional community and teacher collaboration in schools. Am J Educ 123(2):203–241

Article   Google Scholar  

Bearman M, Smith CD, Carbone A, Slade S, S, Baik C, Hughes-Warrington M, Neumann DL (2012) Systematic review methodology in higher education. High Educ Res Dev 31(5):625–640

Benevene P, De Stasio S, Fiorilli C (2020) Editorial: well-being of school teachers in their work environment. Front Psychol 11:1239. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.01239

Article   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Borah A (2016) Impact of teachers’ job satisfaction in academic achievement of the students in higher technical institutions: A study in the Kamrup district of Assam. Clar Int Multidiscip J 8(1):51–55. http://www.journalijdr.com

Chen C (2017) An empirical study on the influencing factors of middle school teachers’ job satisfaction——based on the analysis of the Pisa 2015 Teacher Survey Data [in Chinese]. Teach Educ Res 29(2):9

ADS   Google Scholar  

Crawford JD (2017) Teacher job satisfaction as related to student performance on state-mandated testing. Doctoral dissertation, Lindenwood University

Cunningham J (2012) Student achievement. In: National Conference of State Legislatures. pp. 1–6

Dicke T, Marsh HW, Parker PD, Guo JS, Riley P, Waldeyer J (2020) Job satisfaction of teachers and their principals in relation to climate and student achievement. J Educ Psychol 112(5):1061–1073

Dutta V, Sahney S (2016) School leadership and its impact on student achievement The mediating role of school climate and teacher job satisfaction. Int J Educ Manag 30(6):941–958

Ejimofor AD (2015) Teachers’ job satisfaction, their professional development and the academic achievement of low-income kindergartners. Doctoral dissertation, University of North Carolina at Greensboro

Farooqi R, Shabbir F (2016) Impact of teacher professional development on the teaching and learning of English as a second language. J Educ Pract 7(17):41–50

Google Scholar  

Fisher CD (2003) Why do lay people believe that satisfaction and performance are correlated? possible source of a commonsense theory. J Organ Behav 24:753–777. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.219

Beijing Normal University Teachers’ Labor Market Research Group, Guan CH, Xing CB, Chen CF (2021) Secondary school teachers’ career satisfaction and willingness to move and their influencing factors: experience from China Education Tracking Survey data (ceps) Evidence. Beijing Soc Sci 3:19

Hayati K, Caniago I (2012) Islamic work ethic: the role of intrinsic motivation, job satisfaction, organizational commitment and job performance. Proc Soc Behav Sci 65:272–277. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2012.11.122

Hee OC, Shukor MFA, Ping LL, Kowang TO, Fei GC (2019) Factors influencing teacher job satisfaction in Malaysia. Int J Acad Res Bus Soc Sci 9(1):1166–1174. https://doi.org/10.6007/IJARBSS/v9-i1/5628

Iaffaldano MT, Muchinsky PM (1985) Job satisfaction and job performance: a meta-analysis. Psychol Bull 97(2):251–273. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.97.2.251

Ihueze S, Unachukwu GO, Onyali LC (2018) Motivation and teacher job satisfaction as correlates of students’ academic performance in secondary schools in Anambra state. UNIZIK J Educ Manag Policy 2(1):59–68. https://journals.unizik.edu.ng/index.php/ujoemp/article/view/569

Iqbal A, Aziz F, Farooqi T, Ali S (2016) Relationship between teachers’ job satisfaction and students’ academic performance. Eurasian J Educ Res 16(65):1–35. https://doi.org/10.14689/ejer.2016.65.19

Kravarušić VB (2021) Factors of professional activity of educators in pedagogical practice, international journal of cognitive research in Science. Eng Educ 9(3):385–398

Liang X, Kidwai H, Zhang M, Zhang Y (2016) How Shanghai does it: Insights and lessons from the highest-ranking education system in the world. World Bank Publications

Lopes J, Oliveira C (2020) Teacher and school determinants of teacher job satisfaction: a multilevel analysis. Sch Eff Sch Improv 31(4):641–659

Ma Y (2012) Talking about the influence of teachers on students’ academic performance [in Chinese]. New Curr Teach Res Edn 12:140–141

Manandhar P, Manandhar N, Joshi SK (2021) Job satisfaction among school teachers in Duwakot, Bhaktapur District, Nepal. Int J Occup Safe Health 11(3):165–169

McWherter S (2012) The effects of teacher and student satisfaction on student achievement. Gardner-Webb University

Michaelowa K (2002) Teacher job satisfaction, student achievement, and the cost of primary education in Francophone Sub-Saharan Africa, 188. HWWA Discussion Paper

Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman DG (2009) Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. British Medical Association, Ontario, Canada

Nkengne P, Pieume O, Tsimpo C, Ezeugwu G, Wodon Q (2021) Teacher satisfaction and its determinants: analysis based on data from Nigeria and Uganda. Int Stud Cath Educ 13(2):190–208

OECD F (2016) FDI in figures. Organisation for European Economic Cooperation, Paris

Perera H, Maghsoudlou A, Miller C, McIlveen P, Barber D, Part R, Reyes A (2022) Relations of science teaching self-efficacy with instructional practices, student achievement and support, and teacher job satisfaction. Contemp Educ Psychol 69:102041. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2021.102041

De Rijdt C, Stes A, van der Vleuten C, Dochy F (2013) Influencing variables and moderators of transfer of learning to the workplace within the area of staff development in higher education: a research review. Educ Res Rev 8:48–74. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2012.05.007

Rutkowski D, Rutkowski L, Bélanger J, Knoll S, Weatherby K, Prusinski E (2013) Teaching and Learning International Survey TALIS 2013: conceptual framework. Final. OECD Publishing

Sabin JennyT (2015) Teacher morale, student engagement, and student achievement growth in reading: a correlational study. J Organ Educ Leadersh 1:5, http://digitalcommons.gardner-webb.edu/joel/vol1/iss1/5

Shi J, Peng HC, Huang YF (2011) A survey of influencing factors of teachers’ satisfaction in colleges and universities [in Chinese]. J Zhanjiang Norm Coll 32(1):5

Sims S (2017) TALIS 2013: Working conditions, teacher job satisfaction and retention. Statistical working paper. UK Department for Education. Castle View House East Lane, Runcorn, Cheshire, WA7 2GJ, UK

Sun H, Li H, Lin C (2008) Secondary school teachers’ job satisfaction status and its related factors [in Chinese]. Stud Psychol Behav 6(4):260–265

Tayyar KAl (2014) Job satisfaction and motivation amongst secondary school teachers in Saudi Arabia. PhD Thesis, University of York, Department of Education

Tsai P, Antoniou P (2021) Teacher job satisfaction in Taiwan: making the connections with teacher attitudes, teacher self-efficacy and student achievement. Int J Educ Manag 35(5):1016–1029

De Vries S, Jansen EPWA, Van de Grift WJCM (2013) Profiling teachers’ continuing professional development and the relations with their beliefs about learning and teaching. Teach Teach Educ 33:78–89. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2013.02.006

Wang Y (2019) Research on the relationship between the leadership of primary and secondary school principals and teacher satisfaction [in Chinese]. Shanghai J Educ Eval 8(6):5

MathSciNet   Google Scholar  

Wang Z, Zhang M (2020) International comparison of teachers’ job satisfaction: differences, reasons and countermeasures: an empirical analysis based on TALIS data [in Chinese]. Prim Second School Abroad 1:19

Wayne AJ, Youngs P (2003) Teacher characteristics and student achievement aains: a review. Rev Educ Res 73(1):89–122

You S, Kim AY, Lim SA (2017) Job satisfaction among secondary teachers in Korea: effects of teachers’ sense of efficacy and school culture. Educ Manag Adm Leadersh 45(2):284–297

Zong QZ (2016) Influencing factors and incentives of teachers’ job satisfaction. Mod Bus Trade Ind 37(26):2. https://doi.org/10.19311/j.cnki.1672-3198.2016.26.060

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Faculty of Education, Universiti Malaya, 50603, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia

Kazi Enamul Hoque, Xingsu Wang & Yang Qi

Universiti Pendidikan Sultan Idris, 35900, Tanjung Malim, Perak, Malaysia

Normarini Norzan

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Kazi Enamul Hoque .

Ethics declarations

Competing interests.

The authors declare no competing interests.

Ethical approval

This manuscript does not contain any studies with human participants performed by any of the authors

Informed consent

Since there were no human subjects involved in this review study, no consent was required.

Additional information

Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons license and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ .

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Hoque, K.E., Wang, X., Qi, Y. et al. The factors associated with teachers’ job satisfaction and their impacts on students’ achievement: a review (2010–2021). Humanit Soc Sci Commun 10 , 177 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-023-01645-7

Download citation

Received : 23 August 2022

Accepted : 27 March 2023

Published : 24 April 2023

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-023-01645-7

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

This article is cited by

Determinants of job satisfaction among faculty members of a veterinary university in india: an empirical study.

• Rachna Singh
• Gautam Singh
• Anika Malik

Current Psychology (2024)

Quick links

• Explore articles by subject
• Guide to authors
• Editorial policies

Satisfied and High Performing? A Meta-Analysis and Systematic Review of the Correlates of Teachers’ Job Satisfaction

• META-ANALYSIS
• Open access
• Published: 07 December 2023
• Volume 35 , article number  114 , ( 2023 )

Cite this article

You have full access to this open access article

• Gyde Wartenberg   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-5586-4565 1 ,
• Karen Aldrup 1 ,
• Simon Grund 2 &
• Uta Klusmann 1  

3658 Accesses

11 Altmetric

Explore all metrics

Job satisfaction has long been discussed as an important factor determining individual behavior at work. To what extent this relationship is also evident in the teaching profession is especially relevant given the manifold job tasks and tremendous responsibility teachers bear for the development of their students. From a theoretical perspective, teachers’ job satisfaction should be negatively related to turnover intentions and absenteeism, and positively to high-quality teacher-student interactions (i.e., emotional support, classroom management, and instructional support), enhanced student motivation, and achievement. This research synthesis provides a comprehensive overview of the relationship between teachers’ job satisfaction and these variables. A systematic literature search yielded 105 records. Random-effects meta-analyses supported the theoretically postulated relationships between teachers’ job satisfaction and their turnover intentions, absenteeism, teacher-student interactions, and students’ outcomes. Effects were significant not only for teachers’ self-reports of their professional performance, but also for external reports. On the basis of the research synthesis, we discuss theoretical, conceptual, and methodological considerations that inform future research and prospective intervention approaches.

Similar content being viewed by others

The use of cronbach’s alpha when developing and reporting research instruments in science education.

Theories of Motivation in Education: an Integrative Framework

Understanding procrastination: A case of a study skills course

Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.

Introduction

Job satisfaction represents a key indicator of occupational well-being and has gained widespread interest in both research and practice as an important factor for predicting occupational behavior (Judge et al., 2001 ; Spector, 2022 ; Weiss, 2002 ; Wright et al., 2007 ). Across different occupational groups, job satisfaction is positively associated with general productivity, more satisfied recipients, a higher commitment to the job, and enhanced engagement (Judge et al., 2001 ; Meyer et al., 2002 ; Whitman et al., 2010 ).

The question of whether teachers’ job satisfaction is, as in other occupational groups, crucial for their professional performance seems particularly important given the great responsibility teachers bear for the cognitive-motivational development of their students (Hamre & Pianta, 2001 ; Matteucci et al., 2017 ; Tymms et al., 2018 ). At the same time, the teaching profession belongs to a professional group that faces high dropout rates, especially among those entering the profession (den Brok et al., 2017 ; Ingersoll, 2001 ), increasing teacher shortage worldwide (OECD, 2005 ; UNESCO Institute for Statistics, 2016 ), generally low occupational well-being (Iriarte Redín & Erro-Garcés, 2020 ), and frequent incapacity to work due to mental and physical illness in the teaching profession (Seibt et al., 2009 ). Therefore, the urgent question arises as to which psychological characteristics might play a role in these phenomena. Studies across different occupational groups that show associations with reduced turnover intentions, attrition rates, and increased mental and physical health suggest that job satisfaction could be an answer to this question (Baker, 2004 ; Faragher et al., 2013 ; Wright et al., 2007 ). However, it is not self-evident that those results transfer to the teaching profession. Above all, general studies do not allow any conclusions about whether there are certain aspects of the teaching profession for which job satisfaction is particularly relevant.

Against this background, it seems particularly important to investigate the job satisfaction–performance link for the teaching profession and systematically review previous findings. Previous meta-analyses that refer specifically to the teaching profession suggest that job satisfaction might also be important for teachers and link it to general outcomes such as turnover intentions (Li & Yao, 2022 ; Madigan & Kim, 2021 ). In addition to general performance indicators (e.g., turnover intentions and absenteeism), examining clearly defined job requirements specific to the teaching profession, such as the quality of teacher-student interactions and students’ cognitive and motivational development, allows for a more differentiated insight into the specific areas of teachers’ work that benefit more or less from job satisfaction. Accordingly, the present meta-analysis aims to address this research gap and to summarize the various studies investigating the relationship between job satisfaction and specific performance outcomes in the teaching profession in addition to more general outcomes.

The Concept of Job Satisfaction

The concept of job satisfaction has been the subject of research for decades. It can be defined as an attitude towards the job resulting from a cognitive evaluation of specific job aspects (Spector, 2022 ; Weiss, 2002 ). In this sense, job satisfaction indicates what people think about their job (Spector, 2022 ), whether they perceive their needs to be satisfied at work (Dinham & Scott, 1998 ), and whether they experience a balance between rewards received and energy invested (Scarpello & Campell, 1983 ). As a cognitive evaluation of the work, job satisfaction is one of the domain-specific aspects of subjective well-being, which is divided into cognitive and affective experiences (Diener et al., 1999 ). Likewise, Weiss ( 2002 ) clearly distinguished the cognitive evaluation of job aspects from the emotional experiences and argued that both job satisfaction and affect are reciprocally related but distinct constructs (Ellsworth & Scherer, 2003 ; Judge & Ilies, 2004 ).

In addition to the global evaluation of one’s own work, job satisfaction can be operationalized by satisfaction with specific aspects of one’s work (Spector, 2022 ). Different frameworks emphasize various facets, of which the following four have often been identified empirically (Lester, 1987 ; Spector, 2022 ): nature of work (e.g., satisfaction with work content and work itself), general context factors (e.g., satisfaction with leadership, supervision, and autonomy), rewards (e.g., satisfaction with recognition, pay, and promotion), and social aspects of the job (e.g., satisfaction with colleagues and cooperation).With regard to the teaching profession, initial evidence also points to the multidimensionality of job satisfaction, with the factors “nature of work” and “context” emerging most clearly (Dicke et al., 2019 ). The different satisfaction facets correlate moderately with each other as well as with global measures of job satisfaction (Highhouse & Becker, 1993 ; Spector, 2022 ). Accordingly, it is reasonable to consider both global job satisfaction and specific facets separately because they are not congruent (Bowling & Hammond, 2008 ; Spector, 2022 ).

Whether general or facet-specific, job satisfaction is not only discussed in the context of individuals’ mental and physical health (Benevene et al., 2018 ; Faragher et al., 2013 ; Simone et al., 2016 ), but also as an important predictor of general performance and success in the workplace (Diener, 2012 ; Judge et al., 2001 ).

Job Satisfaction and Professional Performance: Theoretical Considerations

Theoretical ideas describe different psychological processes through which job satisfaction could be related to individual behavior at work. These processes are summarized in the affective-events theory (Weiss & Cropanzano, 1996 ), which distinguishes two pathways explaining the link between job satisfaction and professional performance, one involving cognition-driven behavior and the other mediated through affect-driven behavior (Weiss, 2002 ). The assumption underlying cognition-driven behavior postulates that attitudes, such as job satisfaction, determine behavioral tendencies, which result in behavioral consequences such as approach or avoidance behaviors (Ajzen, 1991 ). For instance, job satisfaction likely leads to the desire to maintain the positively evaluated situation in contrast to thoughts about leaving the job or frequent absenteeism (Siegrist, 2002 ; Weiss, 2002 ). This experience facilitates more autonomous forms of motivation and enhances the ability to direct, regulate, and energize individual behavior (Kumari et al., 2021 ), likely resulting in higher engagement and further investment of individual resources.

In addition to the cognitive pathway, job satisfaction can also influence behavior mediated by affective experiences (Weiss, 2002 ; Weiss & Cropanzano, 1996 ). This assumes that job satisfaction is associated with positive affective experiences (Ellsworth & Scherer, 2003 ; Judge & Ilies, 2004 ; Weiss, 2002 ; Wright et al., 2007 ). Positive affect, in turn, potentially increases an individual’s thought-action repertoire and strengthens personal resources (Fredrickson, 2001 ; Fredrickson & Branigan, 2005 ; Scherer & Moors, 2019 ). As a result, basic cognitive processes, such as problem solving or executive functioning, are enhanced, which, in turn, translates into individual behavior and professional performance (Eysenck & Calvo, 1992 ; Forjan et al., 2020 ).

Empirical research suggests that job satisfaction is associated with a variety of behaviors in the professional context, linking it to general productivity and performance at work, lower turnover intentions, and higher work attendance across different occupational groups, because general job satisfaction not only enhances prosocial behaviors, work engagement, and commitment to the job, but is also associated with reduced health problems and negatively related to somatic symptoms, such as sleeping problems, headaches, and tachycardia (Benevene et al., 2018 ; Simone et al., 2016 ; Tett & Meyer, 1993 ; Whitman et al., 2010 ). For this reason, satisfied teachers should be less likely to think about leaving their job. Likewise, these teachers should be less likely to be absent, not only because job satisfaction is associated with reduced health problems, but also because satisfied teachers are less likely to stay home with minimal health complaints. Against this background, the question of how strong the relationship between job satisfaction and professional performance is in the teaching profession and for which aspects of teachers’ professional performance it is most decisive seems particularly compelling.

Job Satisfaction and Professional Performance in the Teaching Profession

The following explains what we mean by professional performance and what aspects can be distinguished in the various job tasks of teachers.

Defining Teachers’ Professional Performance

In general, turnover intentions and absenteeism represent relevant indicators of professional performance across occupational groups. After all, a cognitive withdrawal from work and frequent sick-leaves impede successful performance of job tasks. In the teaching profession, the most important job tasks include creating effective learning environments through supportive teacher-student interactions, increasing student motivation, and facilitating successful student learning (Bardach & Klassen, 2020 ; Kim et al., 2019 ; Zee & Koomen, 2016 ).

Various conceptual approaches describe emotional support, classroom management, and instructional support as key dimensions of teacher-student interactions (Hamre et al., 2013 ; Kunter & Voss, 2013 ; Praetorius et al., 2018 ). Emotional support indicates the generation of a supportive learning environment by the teachers that acknowledges students’ academic, social, and emotional needs (Strati et al., 2017 ). By contrast, effective classroom management is needed to maximize instructional learning time through the proactive management of classroom disruptions and the establishment of behavioral rules and routines (Clunies-Ross et al., 2008 ). Lastly, instructional support describes the facilitation of student interest, motivation, and higher-order thinking through a variety of teaching strategies (Pianta et al., 2012 ; Scherer et al., 2016 ). Empirical research suggests that these three dimensions are central for both students’ motivation and achievement, which can be defined as follows (Allen et al., 2013 ; Bosman et al., 2018 ; Downer et al., 2010 ; Jennings & Greenberg, 2009 ).

Student motivation is described as the central force that drives specific actions, decisions, and intensity of behavior. Self-determination theory (Ryan & Deci, 2017 ) and expectancy-value theory (Wigfield & Eccles, 2000 ) are among the most influential psychological theories on motivation and help define this comprehensive construct. According to these theories, the experience of autonomy (e.g., self-efficacy) and competence (e.g., self-concept) are central determinants of students’ expectancy to successfully accomplish a task and, consequently, of students’ behavioral engagement in learning activities. Furthermore, the value students attach to their tasks, whether they perform them out of inherent interest and enjoyment (i.e., autonomous motivation) or for external incentives and to avoid punishment (i.e., controlled motivation), is seen as a relevant part of students’ motivation (Ryan & Deci, 2020 ; Wigfield & Eccles, 2000 ). Intrinsic motivation is related to learning goals, promotes academic engagement, and manifests itself in interest, all of which reflect motivational constructs (Howard et al., 2021 ; Spinath & Steinmayr, 2012 ). Therefore, we considered all of these variables as indicators of students’ motivation in our meta-analysis.

S tudent achievement is closely related to students’ motivation (Howard et al., 2021 ) and indicates the extent to which instructional strategies and learning activities have been successful in enhancing students’ knowledge, understanding, and skills. Students’ achievement is often assessed by grades, test scores, or general teacher appraisals.

Linking Teachers’ Job Satisfaction to Their Professional Performance

Arguably, job satisfaction is also positively related to the effective completion of the various job tasks in the teaching profession, as has been suggested for general performance measures in different occupational groups (Meyer et al., 2002 ; Tett & Meyer, 1993 ; Whitman et al., 2010 ). The prosocial classroom model (Jennings & Greenberg, 2009 ) provides a teaching-specific rationale and suggests that teachers’ well-being determines the quality of teacher-student interactions, which, in turn, are perceived by their students and thus affect students’ motivation and achievement.

Accordingly, job satisfaction should result in more effective teacher-student interactions. Satisfied teachers are thought to invest more resources (e.g., time and effort) in both lesson planning and implementation (Granziera & Perera, 2019 ; Siegrist, 2002 ) and are more effective at problem solving and managing unexpected situations due to an enhanced thought-action repertoire (Burić & Moè, 2020 ; Forjan et al., 2020 ; Fredrickson & Branigan, 2005 ). Cognitive capacities are not used on negative thoughts such as turnover intentions. This should, on the one hand, be apparent in more effective classroom management. On the other hand, enhanced cognitive processes should enable teachers to create cognitively activating and engaging lessons and to respond to student questions more flexibly. Likewise, the positive affect associated with job satisfaction facilitates social interactions (Forgas, 2002 ; Frenzel et al., 2021 ). Hence, teachers might have more cognitive and emotional resources available to show empathy, care, and sensitivity for students’ needs (Isen, 2001 ; Nezlek et al., 2001 ). Additionally, satisfied teachers show more enthusiasm while teaching (Burić & Moè, 2020 ), which is, on the one hand, positively associated with emotional support, classroom management, and instructional support (Kunter et al., 2008 ; Lazarides et al., 2021 ) and, on the other hand, likely facilitates students’ motivation and achievement through both students’ experience of autonomy and competence (Allen et al., 2013 ; Moè & Katz, 2020 ; Ruzek et al., 2016 ) and emotional contagion (Frenzel et al., 2021 ; Hatfield et al., 1993 ). Lastly, teachers’ job satisfaction likely impacts students’ learning through reduced absenteeism (Miller et al., 2008 ).

Complementing the assumptions outlined above, established theoretical models suggest that the constructs under consideration are reciprocally related (Frenzel et al., 2021 ; Jennings & Greenberg, 2009 ; Judge et al., 2001 ). Accordingly, teachers who experience success in accomplishing work tasks as indicated by both students’ motivation and achievement and positive teacher-student interactions in class are more likely to be satisfied with their work (Jennings & Greenberg, 2009 ; Judge et al., 2001 ). For instance, it might be easier to provide effective teaching with motivated and high-performing students, which, in turn, could foster teachers’ job satisfaction (Frenzel et al., 2021 ; Jennings & Greenberg, 2009 ).

The Role of Specific Facets of Job Satisfaction in Teacher Performance

As outlined above, job satisfaction can be classified into four overarching dimensions (Spector, 2022 ), that is, nature of work (e.g., satisfaction with teaching, student accomplishment, student behavior, and working with students), social aspects (e.g., collegial support, supervision, communication, and cooperation), general context factors (e.g., satisfaction with school management, operating procedures, school environment, amount of administrative work, autonomy, and professional development), and rewards (e.g., pay, fringe benefits, contingents rewards, and promotion). The distinction between different facets of job satisfaction is important with regard to the assumption that they might be differentially associated with teachers’ professional performance. For instance, in evaluating their professional situation, teachers might place particular emphasis on one specific facet of the job, which, in turn, might particularly influence their professional performance.

Central reasons why teachers choose their profession include the variety of social interactions (e.g., with students, colleagues, and parents) and the responsibility for the social-emotional development of students in addition to the mission of teaching and knowledge transfer (Watt et al., 2012 ). This is also reflected in teachers’ professional goals because establishing positive teacher-student relationships and contributing to student learning seem increasingly important in this profession (Butler, 2012 ). Hence, aspects regarding the nature of work (e.g., teacher-student relationship, interactions, and students’ learning achievements) may play a major role in teachers’ evaluation of their job. The resulting satisfaction with teaching-related aspects, in turn, might be particularly relevant for their professional performance.

The Present Review

Job satisfaction is an important aspect of teachers’ occupational well-being. Additionally, job satisfaction could be an important factor in reducing teacher attrition and absenteeism, promoting high-quality teacher-student interactions and thus obtaining positive student development. Thus, teachers’ job satisfaction might not only be critical for the individual’s health and well-being (Simone et al., 2016 ), but also for student development (Jennings & Greenberg, 2009 ). The present research synthesis is the first to provide a comprehensive overview of prior research on the relationship between teachers’ job satisfaction and professional performance, both generally, in terms of turnover intentions and absenteeism, and profession-specific, with regard to the quality of teacher-student interactions and students’ motivation and achievement. By considering this broad set of variables, we go beyond previous research syntheses that were either based on a more general conceptualization of well-being (i.e., several well-being indicators combined into one variable) and did not allow for a differentiated investigation of job satisfaction and its facets, or considered only general outcomes such as turnover intentions (Bardach et al., 2022 ; Madigan & Kim, 2021 ; Maricuțoiu et al., 2023 ).

In addition to summarizing what we can learn from prior research, our goal was to uncover areas with insufficient evidence and discuss where more research is needed to obtain a more nuanced understanding of the potentially complex relationship between teachers’ job satisfaction and their performance and to approach the question of which specific facets of teachers’ job satisfaction are especially important for teachers’ performance. Having a reliable basis from which to draw general conclusions is particularly important for different stakeholders in the teaching profession to assess the importance of promoting teachers’ job satisfaction.

The heuristic working model (Fig.  1 ), which is based on the theoretical assumptions outlined above, summarizes the hypothesized relationships between teachers’ job satisfaction and turnover intentions, absenteeism, quality of teacher-student interactions, and students’ educational development. Accordingly, we expected teachers’ job satisfaction to correlate negatively with their turnover intentions and absenteeism while assuming a positive relationship with the quality of teacher-student interactions because general job satisfaction should enhance teachers occupational commitment, engagement, and the investment of individual resources (Granziera & Perera, 2019 ; Siegrist, 2002 ), as well as expand the thought-action repertoire (Burić & Moè, 2020 ; Forjan et al., 2020 ; Fredrickson & Branigan, 2005 ).

Heuristic working model

Ultimately, teachers’ job satisfaction likely relates to students’ academic development through high-quality teacher-student interactions (Allen et al., 2013 ; Jennings & Greenberg, 2009 ), the transfer of positive affect in class (Hatfield et al., 1993 ), and less teacher absenteeism. However, as students’ motivation and achievement are more distal to teachers’ well-being, less pronounced relationships are expected for these variables (Bardach & Klassen, 2021 ).

Second, we also hypothesized stronger effects for satisfaction with the nature of work compared to other facets of job satisfaction (i.e., context factors, rewards, and relationship with colleagues) because interacting with students and contributing to students’ development represent important reasons for teachers’ career choices and professional goals (Butler, 2012 ; Watt et al., 2012 ).

Third, we examined study and sample characteristics that could explain the expected variability of effect sizes between studies. Because the use of self-reported questionnaires alone carries the risk of inflated observed correlations due to common method bias (Podsakoff et al., 2012 ), we examined whether significant correlations could also be found for other sources of reports. For instance, teachers’ current affectivity might influence both their recall of experiences, such as their general satisfaction experienced during the last school year, and the recall of information on the outcome, such as the number of days absent, or the occurrence of negative teacher-student interactions (Tourangeau, 2000 ). Accordingly, teachers’ self-reports are likely to lead to an overestimation of the relationships as they are based on shared variance rather than on true relationships. We further controlled for teachers’ gender, years of teaching experience, and grade level taught. Empirical evidence suggests that these sample characteristics account for different experiences of job satisfaction and influence the development of the observed performance outcomes (Ettekal & Shi, 2020 ; Scherrer & Preckel, 2019 ; Toropova et al., 2021 ).

Lastly, we also reviewed longitudinal studies to verify whether effects are evident across different time spans and to provide an insight into the stability of job satisfaction and its reciprocity with professional performance. Longitudinal studies are thought to be a more appropriate approach to the question of causality than cross-sectional studies. However, smaller effect sizes are expected; on the one hand, because of the time interval between the assessment of the constructs under consideration and, on the other hand, because of controlling for the baseline levels of the criterion to predict changes in the criterion. This likely reduces the size of the relationship because a lot of variance can already be explained by the stability of the construct (e.g., predicting students’ end-of-year grade with teachers’ job satisfaction at the beginning of the school year while controlling for students’ baseline achievement).

Literature Search

We conducted a systematic literature search in November 2020 and updated the search in December 2022 (Fig.  2 ). We initially searched the databases PsycINFO, Web of Science, and OpenGrey to identify both published and unpublished work on teachers’ job satisfaction. For the literature search conducted in PsycINFO, we combined the thesaurus search terms for teacher with the thesaurus terms for job satisfaction leaving the outcomes of interest out in the first step to obtain a comprehensive literature review and avoid studies that only incidentally reported the association between teachers’ job satisfaction and their professional performance from not appearing in our literature search. This search had 692 results. Subsequently, we confined the search in Web of Science by including the outcome variables of interest using a combination of related terms with the following constructs: job satisfaction, absenteeism, turnover intentions, teacher-student interactions, emotional support, classroom management, instructional support, students’ achievement, and students’ motivation. This resulted in 279 additional records after removing duplicates. We conducted an additional search in OpenGrey to search specifically for unpublished work, theses, and dissertations. This revealed three additional records. The detailed search terms and strategies that we implemented in the different databases are listed in the Online Supplement (Table S1 ). Among other aspects, we searched titles, abstracts, and keywords for the specified terms.

PRISMA flow diagram for the literature search process

In addition to the database searches we reviewed the reference lists of the identified studies as well as previous meta-analyses that investigated similar relationships for relevant titles (Bardach et al., 2022 ; Madigan & Kim, 2021 ; Maricuțoiu et al., 2023 ). We also searched the titles citing the identified studies. In total, the backward search, citation search, and review of previous meta-analyses identified 163 new records.

Inclusion Criteria

With the support of three student research assistants, the first and second authors screened titles and abstracts of the records identified by the aforementioned search strategies. All coders successfully completed training based on the coding manual prior to the prescreening. We included studies for the subsequent full-text coding, that (1) assessed teachers’ job satisfaction, (2) reported on turnover intentions, absenteeism, teacher-student interactions, or students’ motivation and achievement, (3) investigated a sample of teachers currently teaching at pre-, elementary, or secondary schools, (4) reported quantitative data, and (5) were written in a language with a Latin alphabet. We implemented these inclusion criteria rather liberally and considered studies for full-text coding where it was not apparent from the title and abstract whether they would fulfill the criteria to minimize the risk of erroneously excluding relevant studies. Nevertheless, 813 studies that did not meet these criteria were excluded based on the screening of title and abstracts, as illustrated in the PRISMA flow diagram (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses; Page et al., 2021 ) in Fig.  2 . We applied the following refined inclusion and exclusion criteria in the subsequent full-text coding.

Criteria Regarding Teachers’ Job Satisfaction

We included both studies measuring job satisfaction across a variety of established instruments (e.g., Job Satisfaction Scale, Warr et al., 1979 ; Teacher Job Satisfaction Questionnaire, Lester, 1987 ) and studies using self-designed items (e.g., “Overall, how satisfied are you with teaching as a job?”). Studies measuring general positive affect (e.g., “When I’m at work, I feel pretty happy.”) or career optimism (e.g., “I get excited when I think about my teaching career.”) were excluded from the analysis. Studies were also excluded if they operationalized job satisfaction with one item that asked only about teachers’ career decisions (e.g., “Would you choose teaching again?”) because this item is conceptually close to intention to stay. Likewise, scales confounding job satisfaction with other aspects, such as self-efficacy, turnover intentions, or job characteristics, were excluded (e.g., Mogilevsky, 2019 ).

Criteria Regarding Teachers’ Occupational Performance

We included studies that assessed teachers’ professional performance via teachers’ self-reports as well as via student ratings, classroom observations, principal reports, and school records.

With regard to teacher-student interactions, we excluded studies using scales that asked teachers to appraise their own abilities, such as scales on teachers’ self-efficacy or teachers’ educational beliefs and attitudes (e.g., Vidić & Miljković, 2019 ) because the mindset about one’s own abilities does not necessarily translate into actual behavior. In contrast, we considered both scales that captured teachers’ interaction behavior (e.g., being sensitive for students’ individual problems, anticipating student misbehavior, and providing cognitively challenging tasks) and scales that depict student behaviors as an indicator of the quality of teacher-student interactions (e.g., approaching the teacher with questions or individual problems, and frequency of disruptive or off-task behavior).

Additionally, we included a category for general teacher-student interactions to include scales combining different aspects and thus impeding a clear assignment to the categories of emotional support, classroom management, or instructional support.

Because we focused on turnover intentions, we did not consider studies that investigated actual turnover (e.g., Cha & Cohen-Vogel, 2011 ). On the one hand, we decided to target cognitive withdrawal in contrast to behavioral withdrawal because of the paucity of studies that did not only investigate post-hoc assessments of teachers who had already left the teaching profession. On the other hand, turnover intentions are discussed as the most likely valid predictor of actual turnover (Ajzen, 1991 ; Wong & Cheng, 2020 ).

Generally, we excluded studies that measured the dependent variable at the school level (e.g., Dicke et al., 2019 ). Such measures preclude an unambiguous assignment of the outcome to the specific teacher. Studies reporting on students’ misbehavior in class were included in the analysis because the presence or absence of students’ behavioral problems in class can be categorized as an indicator of classroom management (Pianta et al., 2012 ).

Criteria Regarding Teacher Sample

Because we were interested in teachers currently teaching at general pre-, elementary, middle, or high schools, we excluded studies that surveyed preservice, special education, university, or college teachers. Those contexts are not readily comparable to general school contexts (Bettini et al., 2019 ) and could thus reduce the comparability of the samples. Similarly, samples of principals and administrative school staff were excluded from the meta-analyses because these professional groups are less involved in interactions with students. However, if a mixed sample comprised more than 50% general preschool, elementary, middle school, or high school teachers, studies were included in the analysis.

Criteria Regarding Effect Sizes

We included studies that reported either correlation coefficients or other statistics that can be converted to correlation coefficients, such as statistics for mean differences (Thalheimer & Cook, 2002 ). We also considered longitudinal studies or intervention studies. Of the longitudinal studies, we only included cross-sectional effect sizes in the meta-analyses and additionally reviewed longitudinal effect sizes systematically. For intervention studies, we only drew on effect sizes from the baseline measurement or the control group to exclude the possibility of biased correlations based on intervention effects. Studies that did not report the bivariate correlation coefficients and, for example, only reported results from multiple regression analyses or from structural equation models were excluded from the meta-analyses because these analyses control for a variety of covariates that differ between studies, which can change the interpretation of effect sizes. In these cases, we contacted the authors of the respective studies to ask for the correlation coefficients. Of the 58 authors contacted via email for this purpose, 15 provided the requested coefficients. Still, 43 studies had to be excluded because the requested correlation coefficients could not be obtained.

A total of 105 studies were included in the research synthesis based on the more refined criteria, thus excluding a further 203 records after full-text coding. Figure  2 provides a detailed overview of the reasons for why studies were excluded.

For the meta-analyses, three additional studies were excluded because they only reported longitudinal effect sizes. One additional study was excluded because it only measured on specific job satisfaction facet (i.e., pay satisfaction), which is too specific to indicate general job satisfaction. However, these studies were considered in the systematic review of longitudinal and facet-specific research.

Agreement between coders on deciding whether to include or exclude a study after full-text coding was κ = 0.82, based on double coding of 92 studies (30% of total studies coded). Any discrepancies in the decisions about inclusion or exclusion were resolved through discussion. An overview and references of included studies are available in the Online Supplement (Tables S2 and S3 ).

The first and second authors independently conducted the aforementioned full-text coding of primary studies. We retrieved central study characteristics (i.e., authors, publication year, publication type, journal, design, and response rate), sample characteristics (i.e., sample size, country, percentage of female teachers, mean age, mean teaching experience, subject taught, grade level taught, student composition, and mean class size), and information on the investigated variables (i.e., type of construct, instrument used, number of items, response scale, rater perspective [i.e., self-reports vs. other], mean, standard deviation, and reliability). For a detailed overview of the definition and operationalization of constructs considered as correlates of teachers’ job satisfaction, see Table S4 in the Online Supplement. Additionally, the following information was coded for the effect size: type of effect size (e.g., correlation, and mean difference), level of significance, information on whether manifest or latent effect sizes were retrieved, and source of the effect size (i.e., reported in article, requested from authors, and calculated based on primary data).

Regarding the classification of the dependent variables into the associated coding category (i.e., turnover intentions, absenteeism, emotional support, classroom management, instructional support, general interaction, student motivation, and student achievement), the agreement between coders was κ = 0.92 based on the double coding of 35% of the included studies ( k  = 35). To verify the reliability of the coding process, either the first or second author or a trained student research assistant double-coded studies depending on who had conducted the preliminary coding. Any discrepancies in coding decisions were resolved through discussion. The data are available open access at PsychArchives ( https://doi.org/10.23668/psycharchives.13691 ).

Data Processing

We were interested in the relationship between teachers’ job satisfaction and professional performance. For most effect sizes included, we directly extracted and coded the respective correlation coefficients. Only two studies reported mean differences (Lambert et al., 2012 ; Patrick, 2007 ), which we converted to correlation coefficients (Borenstein et al., 2009a ; Thalheimer & Cook, 2002 ). Afterwards, we recoded effect sizes for the sake of interpretability so that positive correlations indicated that higher job satisfaction was associated with higher professional performance. Although most studies reported manifest effect sizes, six studies reported latent correlations. In order to increase the comparability of effect sizes, we estimated the uncorrected correlation for these studies following the formula of Hunter and Schmidt ( 2004 , p. 96). Furthermore, we considered dependencies that emerged in the data of the primary studies before meta-analytic aggregation of effect sizes. Including multiple effect sizes based on the same sample might bias standard errors and distort the overall results of a meta-analysis (Borenstein et al., 2009b ; Hunter & Schmidt, 2004 ). Three types of dependencies existed in primary studies: dependent effect sizes due to multiple subsamples reporting on one association, dependent effect sizes due to the application of multiple subscales and dependent effects due to the use of self-reports and other reports of the observed constructs within one sample. We did the following to deal with these dependencies. First, when studies included multiple reports of the same relationship based on dependent subsamples, we considered only the effect size from the largest subsample. Second, if articles reported more than one effect size for each association because they used multiple subscales for the same construct, we calculated the correlation for the corresponding composite score, following the recommendations of Hunter and Schmidt ( 2004 , pp. 435–439). This approach not simply averages effect sizes within studies but makes it possible to correctly estimate composite effect sizes based on the number of different subscales, the covariance of constructs from different subscales, and the dependent effect sizes. Third, because we were interested in potential differences in the effect sizes that were due to the rater perspective, we did not aggregate self-reports and other reports. This concerned one study (Stahl Lerang et al., 2021 ). Although the error in the aggregated effect sizes is reasonably small if the number of effect sizes that are based on the same sample is minor compared to the total number of effect sizes included in the synthesis (Hunter & Schmidt, 2004 ), we applied robust variance estimation to address the dependencies in sampling errors within this study (Hedges et al., 2010 ).

Following the preparation of effect sizes, we conducted univariate meta-analyses for each performance outcome for which at least five primary studies were available (Higgins et al., 2009 ). We specified random-effects models because of the expected variability of effect sizes between studies. We applied the Hunter-Schmidt estimator for heterogeneity in all analyses with untransformed correlation coefficients using the R package metafor (Field, 2001 ; Viechtbauer, 2010 ). Additionally, we conducted psychometric meta-analyses with artifact distributions using the R package psychmeta to account for the impact of measurement error on the effect sizes (Dahlke & Wiernik, 2021 ; see also Hunter & Schmidt, 2004 ).

We systematically reviewed studies that assessed individual job satisfaction facets to explore the question of whether different facets of job satisfaction are especially closely associated with specific performance outcomes in the teaching profession. Due to the paucity of studies that measured job satisfaction on a facet-specific basis, we only calculated univariate meta-analyses for the association between different job satisfaction facets (i.e., satisfaction with nature of work, relationships with colleagues, and context factors) and turnover intentions ( k  ≥ 5).

The total amount of heterogeneity was estimated based on τ 2 , which represents an absolute measure of heterogeneity between studies (Borenstein et al., 2017 ). We also computed the Q -test for heterogeneity and the relative proportion of variance in the effect sizes that can be attributed to between-study differences with the I 2 statistic (Borenstein et al., 2017 ). We ran meta-regression models using the R package metafor (Field, 2001 ; Viechtbauer, 2010 ) to examine potential moderators possibly explaining heterogeneity in effect sizes between studies. The following study and sample characteristics were considered in the meta-regression models: publication year, type of publication, teachers’ gender, years of teaching experience, grade level (i.e., elementary, secondary, and mixed), and the rater perspective (i.e., self-reports or other). Continuous moderators were entered directly into meta-regression models while categorical moderators were dummy-coded for these analyses. We considered moderators in separate meta-regression models and did not include them simultaneously because the number of studies with complete information on all moderators would be too small for the analysis. In addition to meta-regression models, we conducted subgroup analyses to further explore the differences between teacher self-reports and external reports for teacher-student interactions.

To consider the possibility of biased estimates of the average effect size (Carter et al., 2019 ), we investigated potential publication bias visually using funnel plots and statistically by conducting Egger’s regression tests and computing precision-adjusted effects sizes (Egger et al., 1997 ).

Except for considering measurement error (through psychometric meta-analyses) and publication bias, we did not assess any other risk of bias, such as the risk of bias in the studies included with standardized risk-of-bias tools. Risk of bias is undoubtedly an important issue (Higgins et al., 2019 ). While approaches to the assessment of risk of bias are well established in meta-analyses of randomized and nonrandomized trials (Sterne et al., 2019 ), there are currently no clear recommendations on how to assess risk of bias in correlational studies. Therefore, we decided to reveal potential sources of risk of bias with the help of meta-regression analyses and to investigate whether effect sizes differed as a function of the study and sample characteristics. With the exception of the risk-of-bias assessment, the research synthesis adhered to the PRISMA checklist (Page et al., 2021 ).

Study and Sample Characteristics

Although we specifically searched for unpublished work, the vast majority of the 101 studies included in the meta-analyses represented published journal articles ( k  = 78). However, 23 studies were either un- or informally published, including two master theses, one book chapter and 20 dissertations. Studies were published between 1973 and 2022 ( Md.  = 2015). Most studies were conducted in the United States ( k  = 39), followed by Norway ( k  = 7) and Canada ( k  = 7). Six studies were conducted in China, four in Germany and Spain respectively, and three studies each in Belgium, Ghana, Israel, New Zealand, and Spain.

Overall, the 101 studies included in the meta-analysis were based on a total sample size of 323,035 teachers, varying from 14 to 154,959 teachers per sample. However, excluding two studies with an extremely large sample size of 104,358 and 154,959 teachers (Bellibaş et al., 2020 ; Blömeke et al., 2021 ) left a total sample size of 63,718, ranging between 14 and 4,208 teachers per study. The percentage of female teachers ranged between 13.3% and 100.0% with an average of 70% female teachers per sample. The overall mean teaching experience was 11.75 years ( SD  = 5.28), with a minimum of less than one year and a maximum of more than 22 years of teaching experience. The data set contained 14 studies conducted in primary schools, 33 studies with secondary school teachers, and 47 studies based on mixed grade levels.

Most of the studies measured general job satisfaction. Only 15 studies considered different facets of job satisfaction. Moreover, most studies used self-designed items to measure job satisfaction, with 17 studies using single-item scales (e.g., “Overall, how satisfied are you with teaching as a job?”). The validated instruments that were used most frequently included the Job Satisfaction Scale ( k  = 4; Warr et al., 1979 ), the Job Diagnostic Survey ( k  = 4; Hackman & Oldham, 1975 ), the Teacher Job Satisfaction Questionnaire ( k  = 3; Lester, 1987 ), and the Teacher Job Satisfaction Scale ( k  = 3; Skaalvik & Skaalvik, 2011 ).

Overall Effects

We examined the relationship between teachers’ job satisfaction and professional performance separately for each outcome of interest (Table 1 ). Forest plots are provided in the Online Supplement (Figs. 1 – 8 ). While 61 studies reported on teachers’ turnover intentions, only 14 studies investigated the relationship with absenteeism. Regarding teacher-student interactions, most studies considered instructional support ( k  = 14), general teacher-student interactions ( k  = 14), and classroom management ( k  = 13), while only seven studies assessed emotional support. Associations with students’ achievement ( k  = 8) and motivation ( k  = 6) were also rarely studied.

As hypothesized, results indicated a significant negative association of teachers’ job satisfaction with both turnover intentions ( r  =  − 0.46, CI r  = [–0.52, –0.40]) and absenteeism ( r  =  − 0.18, CI r  = [–0.25, –0.10]). These results suggest that teachers who are generally satisfied with their job are, on average, less likely to consider changing their job and absent less frequently, according to both their self-reports and school records.

Overall, the relationships between teacher job satisfaction and teacher-student interactions were small but positive, with a correlation of r  = 0.14, CI r  = [0.08, 0.20] for emotional support, r  = 0.18, CI r  = [0.10, 0.25] for classroom management, r  = 0.10, CI r  = [0.05, 0.15] for instructional support, and r  = 0.28, CI r  = [0.21, 0.35] for general teacher-student interaction. Accordingly, teachers who are satisfied with their job seem more effective in establishing caring, structured, and cognitively activating learning environments, as measured by teacher self-report, student ratings, classroom observations, and principal evaluation.

The findings regarding the relationship between teachers’ job satisfaction and students’ motivation also indicated a positive relationship between the two ( r  = 0.29, CI r  = [0.18, 0.40]). Accordingly, teachers who are generally satisfied with their job perceive their students as more motivated. Students of satisfied teachers also experienced greater satisfaction of their basic psychological needs and reported being engaged in school more actively. Similarly, a positive relationship also emerged for students’ achievement ( r  = 0.10, CI r  = [0.02, 0.17]), indicating that students taught by satisfied teachers were more successful in achieving their learning goals in terms of school grades, test scores, and general teacher evaluation.

In general, the psychometric meta-analyses substantively confirmed the results described above. Overall, correlations corrected for measurement error tended to be somewhat larger, but similar in size, with negative relationships between teachers job satisfaction and turnover intentions ( r adj  =  − 0.59, CI radj  = [− 0.65, − 0.54]), absenteeism ( r adj  =  − 0.21, CI radj  = [− 0.27, − 0.14]), and positive relationships with emotional support ( r adj  = 0.18, CI radj  = [0.08, 0.29]), classroom management (r adj  = 0.22, CI radj  = [0.15, 0.29]), instructional support ( r adj  = 0.14, CI radj  = [0.12, 0.17]), general interactions ( r adj  = 0.33, CI radj  = [0.30, 0.36]), students’ motivation ( r adj  = 0.37, CI radj  = [0.20, 0.54]), and students’ achievement ( r adj  = 0.12, CI radj  = [0.01, 0.23]).

Relations between Specific Facets of Job Satisfaction and Professional Performance

A total of 14 studies examined specific facets of teachers’ job satisfaction. Overall, the number of studies that considered facet-specific relationships was usually too low to conduct meta-analyses ( k  < 5). The only exception to this was the association between different job satisfaction facets (i.e., satisfaction with nature of work, relationships with colleagues, and context factors) and turnover intentions (Table 2 ). An overview of the relationship between specific job satisfaction facets and the remaining performance outcomes is provided in the Online Supplement (Table S5 ).

For the job satisfaction facets nature of work ( k  = 7, r  =  − 0.34, CI = [− 0.53, − 0.15]), relationship with colleagues ( k  = 6, r  =  − 0.32, CI = [− 0.53, − 0.12]), and context factors ( k  = 5, r  =  − 0.36, CI = [− 0.41, − 0.31]), the meta-analytic relationships with turnover intentions were moderate and comparable in size. Similar patterns of results emerged for satisfaction with pay and benefits. Regarding the remaining performance outcomes, a few isolated relationships were only reported for satisfaction with colleagues and context factors, providing very little empirical evidence to identify patterns of results.

Heterogeneity and Moderating Effects

There was substantial heterogeneity in effect sizes between studies (Table 1 ), except for the relationship between teachers’ job satisfaction and emotional support. The few studies that examined emotional support were quite similar with regard to the conceptualization, which might explain the small heterogeneity between studies. The greatest total amount of variability among the true effects was observed for turnover intentions (τ 2  = 0.023) and students’ motivation (τ 2  = 0.012). For most relationships, a moderate to large proportion of the total variability ( I 2  = 46.06 – 96.19) could be attributed to the true variance of effect sizes between studies (Higgins & Thompson, 2002 ). Against this background, we investigated study and sample characteristics that might explain heterogeneity (Table 3 ). Generally, the meta-regression results should be interpreted with caution as some analyses were based on a very small number of effect sizes.

Study Characteristics

Results from meta-regression analyses revealed a significant increase in effect size over time for the relationship between job satisfaction and general teacher-student interactions (β = 0.01, p  < 0.001) and a significant decrease in effect size over time for the relationship between job satisfaction and turnover intentions, suggesting publication year as a significant moderator. Additionally, stronger effect sizes were found in meta-regression analyses for published (vs. unpublished) studies for associations between teachers’ job satisfaction and both instructional support (β = 0.18, p  = 0.005) and general teacher-student interactions (β = 0.09, p  = 0.001).

From a methodological perspective, we investigated whether effect sizes varied as a function of the rater perspective (teacher self-reports vs. external reports). The rater perspective was a significant moderator of the relationships between teachers’ job satisfaction and absenteeism, general teacher-student interactions (β = 0.16, p  < 0.001), and students’ motivation (β = 0.24, p  < 0.001). Effect sizes were significantly larger when absenteeism was estimated based on school records ( k  = 2, r  =  − 0.37, CI r  = [− 0.47, − 0.26]) as compared to teachers’ retrospective self-reports ( k  = 12, r  =  − 0.17, CI r  = [− 0.22, − 0.13]). For general teacher-student interaction, the effect sizes were significantly larger when they were based on self-reports ( k  = 7, r  = 0.25, CI r  = [0.21, 0.29]) as compared with reports by students or external observers ( k  = 7, r  = 0.14, CI r  = [0.08, 0.19]). The same was true for students’ motivation, where the effect sizes were also larger for teachers’ self-reports ( k  = 2, r  = 0.35, CI r  = [0.29, 0.41]) than for reports by others ( k  = 6, r  = 0.12, CI r other  = [0.04, 0.19]). However, in either case, the correlations were positive and statistically significant regardless of how they were assessed. Detailed results of subgroup analyses and the separate effect sizes for self-reports and external reports can be found in Figures S10 – S13 in the Online Supplement.

Sample Characteristics

Results suggested that the relationships between teachers’ job satisfaction and both instructional support ( Q M  = 14.68, p  = 0.001) and general teacher-student interactions ( Q M  = 50.94, p  < 0.001) varied depending on the grade level taught. The relationships with general teacher-student interactions were weaker in primary school samples (β =  − 0.37, p  < 0.001) compared to mixed samples. Larger effect sizes emerged in secondary school samples (β = 0.09, p  = 0.001) compared to mixed samples for instructional support, while smaller effect sizes were found in secondary school samples (β = 0.09, p  = 0.001) compared to mixed samples for general teacher-student interactions. A closer look revealed that studies based on mixed grade levels relied solely on teacher self-reports, as well as studies conducted in secondary schools assessing instructional support. In contrast, barely any study conducted in primary schools used teacher self-reports, instead using classroom observations, student reports, or principal ratings. Additionally, the meta-regression results revealed that the size of the correlation between job satisfaction and general teacher-student interactions varied as a function of the proportion of female teachers in the sample; a smaller correlation was found for samples with a higher proportion of female teachers (β =  − 0.01, p  < 0.001). However, the proportion of female teachers was higher in primary schools compared to secondary schools or mixed samples. As a result, studies with a higher proportion of female teachers were also more likely to apply more objective measures (i.e., classroom observations, student reports, and principal ratings) for the quality of general teacher-student interactions. Finally, teaching experience emerged as a significant moderator for the relationships with turnover intentions (β = 0.01, p  = 0.047), general teacher-student interactions (β = 0.01, p  = 0.035), and students’ motivation (β =  − 0.01, p  = 0.025).

Relations between Teachers’ Job Satisfaction and Professional Performance over Time

The literature search identified 16 longitudinal studies of which nine reported longitudinal effect sizes for the relationship between job satisfaction and performance among teachers, including eight studies that implemented two measurement points with a mean time interval of 349.62 days ( SD  = 209.61, range = 152–730) and one study that involved three measurement points with a time interval of 152 days. All studies reported longitudinal correlations or regression coefficients between job satisfaction at the prior measurement point and the corresponding performance outcome at the subsequent measurement point without controlling for the baseline level of the performance outcome. In summary, these longitudinal correlations, though smaller, appear to confirm the effects found for turnover intentions and students’ motivation but not for absenteeism, quality of teacher-student interactions, and students’ achievement (a more detailed overview is depicted in Table S6 in the Online Supplement). These simple longitudinal correlations can be taken as a first approximation of the longitudinal nature of the relationship and provide insights into whether effects are evident across different time spans. However, longitudinal correlations obtained without controlling for prior levels of the outcome variable cannot be used to meaningfully estimate direct effects of job satisfaction. Likewise, primary studies did not provide any insights into reciprocal relationships.

Publication Bias

First, graphical exploration of funnel plots (Fig.  3 ) suggested the possibility of publication bias for some relationships, as the plots did not appear to be fully symmetrical (Sterne et al., 2005 ), with a lack of small studies with small effects that trended toward zero. Results of Egger’s regression tests for funnel plot asymmetry (Table 4 ) confirmed this impression, yielding significant results for instructional support (β = 2.34, p  < 0.001), general teacher-student interactions (β =  − 1.69, p  = 0.008), and students’ motivation (β =  − 9.08, p  < 0.001). Other than that, there was no evidence of publication bias. Precision-adjusted effect size estimates are reported in Table 4 , which were comparable or even larger than the estimates from the meta-analyses. Though Egger’s regression tests do not provide a strong indication of publication bias, results regarding the three doubtful relationships should be interpreted with caution especially as the publication status explained variability in effect sizes for instructional support and general teacher-student interactions.

Funnel plots for job satisfaction and professional outcomes

Despite the great relevance of job satisfaction that is evident across different occupational groups (Judge et al., 2001 ; Spector, 2022 ), job satisfaction receives little attention in teacher-specific theoretical models explaining teachers’ professional performance. This research synthesis is the first to integrate the empirical evidence on the link between job satisfaction and professional performance for teaching-specific performance outcomes that also considers different facets of teachers’ job satisfaction and includes longitudinal evidence.

The Job Satisfaction–Performance Link in the Teaching Profession — Main Findings and Avenues for Future Research

Overall, the findings from our research synthesis verified the theoretically postulated association between job satisfaction and professional performance, which has been demonstrated across different occupation groups, also for teaching-specific performance outcomes (Judge et al., 2001 ; Li & Yao, 2022 ; Madigan & Kim, 2021 ; Meyer et al., 2002 ; Tett & Meyer, 1993 ; Whitman et al., 2010 ). More specifically, results suggest that satisfied teachers report lower turnover intentions and are less likely to be absent. In turn, satisfied teachers seem more effective in establishing positive teacher-student interactions and caring, structured, and activating learning environments, as perceived by teachers and others (i.e., students, principals, and external observers). Likewise, students of satisfied teachers are more likely to show higher motivation and achievement. However, the association between teachers’ job satisfaction and students’ achievement was small. This can be attributed to several reasons. First, achievement is the most distal outcome in the hypothesized process (Bardach & Klassen, 2021 ). Therefore, smaller effect sizes are expected. Second, the effect on achievement tends to be smaller for subjects other than math (Authors, 2022; Nye et al., 2004 ). Yet, different subjects were combined in the analyses. In summary, most of the observed correlations are rather small in size and only partly moderate.

Does Job Satisfaction Represent a Relevant Psychological Characteristic?

One main research objective is to identify relevant psychological characteristics that are related to teachers’ professional performance, especially to the quality of teacher-student interactions and students’ academic development. Compared to other disciplines, the role of job satisfaction in determining job performance seems less salient in educational psychology, where established theories primarily saw cognitive abilities and knowledge or stable personality traits as central (for an overview of these traditions see Kunter et al., 2013 ).

The correlations found in our research synthesis are comparable in size to effects found in meta-analyses that examined other psychological characteristics in the context of teachers’ professional performance, which further emphasizes that job satisfaction seems to play a significant role alongside other characteristics. Significant associations were also found in meta-analyses for teachers’ personality (Kim et al., 2019 ), professional knowledge (D’Agostino & Powers, 2009 ), and self-efficacy (Kim & Seo, 2018 ; Klassen & Tze, 2014 ; Zee & Koomen, 2016 ). These syntheses found comparable effect sizes for the general evaluation of teaching, teacher-student interactions, and classroom processes, but somewhat smaller effect sizes for students’ achievement compared to results from our meta-analyses. In contrast, teachers’ cognitive (e.g., intelligence and basic skills) and verbal abilities seemed unrelated to the quality of teacher-student interactions and students’ educational outcomes (Aloe & Becker, 2009 ; Bardach & Klassen, 2020 ). Although comparable effect sizes were obtained for different psychological characteristics, previous research did not investigate the relative importance of job satisfaction in the context of other characteristics. To further address the question of whether job satisfaction has an effect beyond other psychological characteristics, future research should consider various characteristics simultaneously (Caprara et al., 2006 ; Pekrun, 2021 ; Wright & Bonett, 2007 ).

The longitudinal studies included in our research synthesis provide preliminary insights into the longitudinal nature of the relationship between teachers’ job satisfaction and subsequent professional performance and suggest that effects are evident across different time spans. Future research should implement longitudinal or experimental studies more frequently to further investigate the nature of the link between job satisfaction and professional performance in the teaching profession. For this purpose, longitudinal studies should capture both job satisfaction and performance outcomes at multiple time points and control for baseline levels of the considered constructs (for an illustration of such a design see Benita et al., 2018 ; Dicke et al., 2015 ). A longitudinal observation over one school year would be ideal with regard to teacher-student interactions and students’ characteristics. It is more difficult to interpret the results, for instance, if teachers change the classes they teach after one school year. In contrast, a longer time period would be appropriate for longitudinal studies targeting turnover because teachers might not immediately consider changing their profession if they do not experience their work to be satisfying in the short term (as, e.g., in Voss et al., 2023 ). Intervention studies implementing a randomized controlled design would make it possible to investigate whether enhancing teachers’ job satisfaction also leads to improved teacher-student interactions or enhanced educational outcomes for students (for examples of studies investigating other teaching characteristics see Dicke et al., 2015 ; Jennings et al., 2013 ).

Despite the open questions, the correlations found in our meta-analyses, while small to moderate, are both comparable in size to effects of other psychological characteristics and evident across different time spans suggesting that job satisfaction represents a relevant characteristic.

Under Which Conditions is the Job Satisfaction–Performance Link Most Pronounced?

Previous research provides limited information on whether the partially small effect sizes found in our meta-analyses might be larger for certain subgroups. Identifying sample characteristics under which the relationship between teachers’ job satisfaction and their performance is particularly close is especially important to further understand theoretical mechanisms underlying the association and to identify who benefits most from the association (Gill, 2021 ). Meta-regression analyses suggested no differences in effect size depending on teacher sample characteristics because all differences seemed attributable to a specific methodological moderator, namely, the rater perspective, which emerged as an important source of possible bias in primary studies. Smaller correlations also remained significant for external reports of teachers’ instructional support and general teacher-student interactions, emphasizing the relevance of these results. For instance, drawing on teacher self-reports to measure both job satisfaction and indicators of professional performance has the risk of obtaining effect sizes that are too large due to common method bias (Podsakoff et al., 2012 ). Teachers who are generally satisfied with their job might be more likely to recall positive events when asked about their turnover intentions, absences, classroom interactions, or experiences with students (Tourangeau, 2000 ). Accordingly, valid conclusions about the relationships can only be derived if teachers’ professional performance is either assessed through more objective measures (e.g., school records, actual turnover, or standardized tests) or reported through other sources (e.g., students, colleagues, classroom observations, or principals). This allows an assessment of the extent to which job satisfaction elicits changes in teachers’ professional behavior also perceived by others, as evident in our findings. Therefore, future studies are encouraged to combine teachers’ self-reports with other perspectives more frequently.

Although results from meta-regression analyses suggest that effect sizes are robust across different samples and that the satisfaction of all teachers, regardless of their demographic characteristics should be addressed equally, further psychological characteristics remain of particular interest. Investigating the interplay between job satisfaction and other psychological characteristics, such as self-efficacy, personality, professional competence, or other well-being characteristics, would provide insights into the relative importance of job satisfaction for teachers’ professional performance and investigate whether different psychological characteristics have an additive, buffering, or conflicting effect. Although the effect sizes found in our meta-analyses are partially small, job satisfaction might still be relevant because it interacts with other characteristics (e.g., positive affectivity). For instance, future studies should target the questions of whether teachers might be satisfied despite experiencing high demands and exhaustion and whether job satisfaction can counteract the negative effects of burnout for teachers’ professional performance (e.g., studies investigating the interaction between different psychological characteristics of teachers; see Braun et al., 2022 ; Seiz et al., 2015 ).

Lastly, the question remains as to which students can benefit most from the association. In particular, the class composition (e.g., class size and number of students with learning disabilities or social-emotional demands) and students’ background variables (e.g., socio-economic status, migration, and ethnicity) seem relevant characteristics determining the size of the relationship because the teacher generally plays a more important role in the development of students with less favorable manifestations of these variables (Hamre & Pianta, 2005 ; Klusmann et al., 2016 ). Arguably, whether teachers are more or less satisfied and highly effective in creating a positive learning environment and providing individualized support makes a critical difference, particularly for the development of students at risk of failing school (Sirin, 2005 ). Unfortunately, we were unable to include these student characteristics in the meta-regression analyses due to insufficient data. Future studies should therefore consider additional moderators (e.g., student characteristics) to further explore the question of for whom and under which conditions the job satisfaction–performance link is most pronounced.

Are Specific Job Satisfaction Facets Especially Important?

Interacting with students and contributing to students’ learning and development are important reasons why teachers choose the profession and largely determine teachers’ professional goals. Therefore, these aspects might be particularly crucial for teachers’ evaluation of their job (i.e., their job satisfaction) and, in turn, for their professional performance. Only few studies measured job satisfaction regarding different facets of the job considering the theoretically postulated multidimensionality of the construct. While differentiating between facets may not be as important in demonstrating an effect of job satisfaction because teachers think of the aspect of their job most important to them when they report on their overall job satisfaction, using multidimensional instruments assessing satisfaction with specific aspects of the teaching profession would provide a better understanding of the differential effects that satisfaction with specific facets may have on similar outcomes. This research synthesis offers a first insight into this question: Contrary to our expectations, no differential findings emerged for specific facets of teachers’ job satisfaction. Satisfaction with different aspects of the job (i.e., nature of work, relationships with colleagues, and context factors) seem equally important, at least in relation to turnover intentions. Due to the small number of studies investigating absenteeism, the quality of teacher-student interactions, and students’ outcomes in the context of specific job satisfaction facets, no meaningful conclusions about differential effects can be drawn for these outcomes.

Consequently, future research should measure job satisfaction as a multidimensional construct to allow a more differentiated view on which job satisfaction facets (i.e., which characteristics of the teaching profession) are most significant for the association with teachers’ professional performance (Dicke et al., 2019 ). This would not only facilitate a more targeted approach to promoting teachers’ satisfaction but it would also open up the debate about whether raising teacher salaries is a useful means to keep teachers in the profession or improve teaching.

Limitations

The present research synthesis offers a comprehensive summary of previous studies on teachers’ job satisfaction and reviews relevant evidence on the job satisfaction–performance link for the teaching profession. However, our research synthesis is not without limitations that must be considered when interpreting these results.

First, we cannot rule out the possibility that unpublished papers, which we could not find via our literature search, would reveal a different pattern of results. We attempted to mitigate the influence of publication bias by specifically searching for unpublished work (i.e., Open Grey), considering theses, dissertations, and book chapters. However, a visual investigation of the funnel plots and results of Egger’s regression tests for funnel plot asymmetry indicated a possible influence of publication bias for instructional support, general teacher-student interactions, and students’ motivation (Sterne et al., 2005 ). Additionally, stronger effect sizes were found in meta-regression analyses for published (vs. unpublished) studies for these associations. Although precision-adjusted effect sizes tended to be comparable in size, future work could attempt to further address the limitations of publication bias by requesting unpublished analyses from authors in the respective field of research.

Second, one major challenge of job satisfaction research is the conceptualization of the construct, both theoretically and empirically. A considerable number of studies included in the meta-analyses used single-item measures and or self-constructed scales, although job satisfaction is a long-studied construct for which various validated instruments exist. This makes it difficult to assess the validity and comparability of constructs across studies, although single-item measures are moderately correlated with established satisfaction scales (Wanous et al., 1997 ). Several studies claiming to measure job satisfaction had to be excluded from the meta-analyses because related but distinct constructs such as enthusiasm, stress, career choice, or a description of job characteristics were merged into the scale (e.g., Johnson et al., 2012 ).

Third, the operationalization methods for the performance outcomes used in the studies included in our meta-analyses differed not only in the rater perspective and type of measure but also in the underlying conceptualization, which entails the risk of limited comparability between studies and potential bias. Turnover intentions were mostly operationalized as cognitive withdrawal from work, although some studies asked about the intention to remain in the profession (reverse coded). Due to the small number of studies assessing actual turnover, we were unable to include turnover as an outcome. However, having more studies prospectively examining actual turnover behavior would be interesting (e.g., Cha & Cohen-Vogel, 2011 ; Grissom, 2011 ). Like turnover intentions, the vast majority of studies measured absenteeism by retrospective teachers’ self-reports, differing greatly in the time period queried and the categorization of response scales. In contrast, some studies determined the number of days absent by surveying school records. The use of these more objective measures would be desirable for future research. With regard to the quality of teacher-student interactions, studies included in the meta-analyses considered both teacher practices and student behavior as indicators of classroom management. Due to the small number of studies, it was not possible to further differentiate between students’ outcomes. For this reason, different motivational constructs were included to determine the effect size for students’ motivation (i.e., engagement, basic need satisfaction, and self-concept). Likewise, students’ achievement was summarized across different subjects (i.e., reading and math), although the subject might account for variability in effect sizes (Klusmann et al., 2022 ; Nye et al., 2004 ). Consequently, it is not certain if all studies synthesized measured the same underlying construct. This is also illustrated by the remaining heterogeneity that could not be explained by the considered moderators. Although it would be desirable for future meta-analyses to focus on more comparable effect sizes, our research synthesis provides preliminary evidence for the relationship between teachers’ job satisfaction and a variety of teacher-specific performance outcomes.

Fourth, no causal inferences can be made based on findings from our meta-analyses because we focused on cross-sectional effect sizes for reasons of comparability. Established theoretical models suggest that job satisfaction is likely part of a complex system with bidirectional relationships to performance indicators (Frenzel et al., 2021 ; Jennings & Greenberg, 2009 ; Judge et al., 2001 ). For example, when teachers have a sense of accomplishment in completing their tasks, it likely increases their job satisfaction (Burić & Moè, 2020 ; Judge et al., 2001 ). This idea is also discussed in the literature, which suggests that positive interactions with students, highly motivated students who actively participate in class, and high student achievement may enhance teachers’ well-being (Ruiter et al., 2020 ; Spilt et al., 2011 ). Unfortunately, there is no empirical evidence providing insights into the reciprocity of the relationships. Additionally, shared third variables (e.g., school leadership and teachers’ self-efficacy) influencing both teachers’ job satisfaction and instructional quality (Bellibaş et al., 2020 ; Caprara et al., 2006 ) could underly the correlative pattern of results. As previously addressed, the task of future research is to further investigate the issue of causality or reciprocity through longitudinal or experimental designs that consider possible third-party variables.

Finally, in addition to the univariate associations established in the present research synthesis, a model-based meta-analysis (e.g., metaSEM) represents a promising approach to further investigate the psychological processes through which teachers’ professional well-being affects their performance in establishing effective learning environments and fostering student social-motivational and cognitive development (Becker & Aloe, 2019 ). This approach makes it possible to fit mediation models on a pool of correlation matrices (Cheung, 2020 ). However, due to the paucity of suitable primary studies, we were not able to test the theoretically hypothesized mediation process between teachers’ job satisfaction, teacher-student interactions, and students’ outcomes meta-analytically (Jennings & Greenberg, 2009 ).

Nonetheless, our research synthesis represents a comprehensive overview of research on the relationship between job satisfaction and both general and teaching-specific professional performance, including a large proportion of studies not directly interested in the relationship. This makes our research synthesis particularly valuable because it provides an overview of studies from different lines of research not readily found in a basic literature search, thus offering initial insights into the nature of the relationship and the basis for theoretical, conceptual, and methodological considerations informing future research and practice.

Practical Considerations

In light of the importance that teachers’ job satisfaction appears to have for their professional performance, it might be promising to further develop and establish interventions that aim to promote teachers’ job satisfaction. Given the effects on the diverse aspects of their professional performance found in our meta-analyses, job satisfaction seems an important characteristic of teachers’ professional well-being, especially for the central tasks of teaching: creating effective learning environments and supporting students in their cognitive and motivational development. Interventions that aim to improve teachers’ working conditions appear promising, as satisfaction results from cognitive evaluation of these aspects (Spector, 2022 ; Weiss, 2002 ). Current research suggests that the school environment (e.g., principal leadership, cooperation with colleagues, school climate, and students’ composition) plays a particularly important role in teachers’ job satisfaction (Cansoy, 2018 ; Toropova et al., 2021 ). For instance, a reduction of teachers’ workload, that is, reducing working hours and focusing on time spent teaching, slightly increased teachers’ job satisfaction (Butt et al., 2005 ). At the same time, collaboration with and support from colleagues could also reduce the workload. This might be achieved by targeting school leadership and school climate (Berger et al., 2022 ).

Individual perceptions also play a relevant role in the evaluation of the context (van Droogenbroeck et al., 2021 ). Hence, intervention approaches should not only target the school level but also consider factors on the individual level. These approaches represent promising alternatives especially when the context can be changed only to a limited extent, first by providing cognitive strategies to reappraise situational factors, and second by strengthening individual resources to better cope with maladaptive working conditions and meet job demands. For instance, interventions that help teachers develop or strengthen important competencies and beliefs, such as social-emotional competencies, self-efficacy, or strategies to reduce stress experiences, appear promising with regard to job satisfaction, life satisfaction, and general well-being (Ashley et al., 2013 ; Oliveira et al., 2021 ; Zee & Koomen, 2016 ).

However, when planning and implementing individual interventions, it is still important to take school-level variables into account: Intervention approaches targeting the individual experience can only be effective in environments that support the practice and implementation of newly learned competencies, strategies, or skills (Walton & Yeager, 2020 ). Consequently, optimal intervention to promote teachers’ job satisfaction should strengthen resources at the school level (e.g., leadership, workload, student composition, cooperation with colleagues, school climate, and sense of belonging), and at the individual level, targeting, for example, self-efficacy or social-emotional competencies (Herman et al., 2020 ).

This research synthesis offers a comprehensive summary of the empirical evidence on the relationship between job satisfaction and professional performance in the teaching profession, which has long been proposed both theoretically and empirically across different occupational groups (Diener, 2012 ; Judge et al., 2001 ; Weiss & Cropanzano, 1996 ; Whitman et al., 2010 ). Meta-analytic findings emphasize the relevance of teachers’ job satisfaction for their professional performance both generally, in terms of turnover intentions and absenteeism, and profession-specific, with regard to the quality of teacher-student interactions and students’ motivation and achievement, yielding significant effects for both teachers’ self-reports and external evaluations.

Data Availability

The data will be available upon publication open access at PsychArchives ( https://doi.org/10.23668/psycharchives.13691 ).

Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50 (2), 179–211. https://doi.org/10.1016/0749-5978(91)90020-T

Article   Google Scholar  

Allen, J., Gregory, A., Mikami, A., Lun, J., Hamre, B. K., & Pianta, R. (2013). Observations of effective teacher-student interactions in secondary school classrooms: predicting student achievement with the classroom assessment scoring system—secondary. School Psychology Review, 42 (1), 76–98. https://doi.org/10.1080/02796015.2013.12087492

Aloe, A. M., & Becker, B. J. (2009). Teacher verbal ability and school outcomes. Educational Researcher, 38 (8), 612–624. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X09353939

Ashley, L., O’Connor, D. B., & Jones, F. (2013). A randomized trial of written emotional disclosure interventions in school teachers: Controlling for positive expectancies and effects on health and job satisfaction. Psychology, Health & Medicine, 18 (5), 588–600. https://doi.org/10.1080/13548506.2012.756536

Baker, W. K. (2004). Antecedents and consequences of job satisfaction: Testing a comprehensive model using integrated methodology. Journal of Applied Business Research (JABR), 20 (3). https://doi.org/10.19030/jabr.v20i3.2212

Bardach, L., & Klassen, R. M. (2020). Smart teachers, successful students? A systematic review of the literature on teachers’ cognitive abilities and teacher effectiveness. Educational Research Review, 30 , 100312. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2020.100312

Bardach, L., & Klassen, R. M. (2021). Teacher motivation and student outcomes: Searching for the signal. Educational Psychologist, 56 (4), 283–297. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2021.1991799

Bardach, L., Klassen, R. M., & Perry, N. E. (2022). Teachers’ psychological characteristics: Do they matter for teacher effectiveness, teachers’ well-being, retention, and interpersonal relations? An integrative review. Educational Psychology Review, 34 (1), 259–300. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-021-09614-9

Becker, B. J., & Aloe, A. M. (2019). Model based meta-analysis and related approaches. In H. M. Cooper, L. V. Hedges, & J. C. Valentine (Eds.), The handbook of research synthesis and meta-analysis (3rd ed., pp. 339–364). Russell Sage Foundation.

Chapter   Google Scholar  

Bellibaş, M. Ş, Gümüş, S., & Liu, Y. (2020). Does school leadership matter for teachers’ classroom practice? The influence of instructional leadership and distributed leadership on instructional quality. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 32 (3), 387–412. https://doi.org/10.1080/09243453.2020.1858119

Benevene, P., Ittan, M. M., & Cortini, M. (2018). Self-esteem and happiness as predictors of school teachers’ health: The mediating role of job satisfaction. Frontiers in Psychology, 9 , 933. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.00933

Benita, M., Butler, R., & Shibaz, L. (2018). Outcomes and antecedents of teacher depersonalization: The role of intrinsic orientation for teaching. Journal of Educational Psychology. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1037/edu0000328

Berger, E., Reupert, A., Campbell, T. C. H., Morris, Z., Hammer, M., Diamond, Z., Hine, R., Patrick, P., & Fathers, C. (2022). A systematic review of evidence-based wellbeing initiatives for schoolteachers and early childhood educators. Educational Psychology Review, 34 (4), 2919–2969. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-022-09690-5

Bettini, E., Wang, J., Cumming, M., Kimerling, J., & Schutz, S. (2019). Special educators’ experiences of roles and responsibilities in self-contained classes for students with emotional/behavioral disorders. Remedial and Special Education, 40 (3), 177–191. https://doi.org/10.1177/0741932518762470

Blömeke, S., Nilsen, T., & Scherer, R. (2021). School innovativeness is associated with enhanced teacher collaboration, innovative classroom practices, and job satisfaction. Journal of Educational Psychology, 113 (8), 1645–1667. https://doi.org/10.1037/edu0000668

Borenstein, M., Hedges, L. V., Higgins, J. P. T., & Rothstein, H. R. (2009a). Converting among effect sizes. In M. Borenstein, L. V. Hedges, J. P. T. Higgins, & H. R. Rothstein (Eds.), Introduction to meta-analysis (pp. 45–49). John Wiley & Sons.

Borenstein, M., Hedges, L. V., Higgins, J. P. T., & Rothstein, H. R. (2009b). Multiple outcomes or time-points within a study. In M. Borenstein, L. V. Hedges, J. P. T. Higgins, & H. R. Rothstein (Eds.), Introduction to meta-analysis (pp. 225–238). John Wiley & Sons.

Borenstein, M., Higgins, J. P. T., Hedges, L. V., & Rothstein, H. R. (2017). Basics of meta-analysis: I2 is not an absolute measure of heterogeneity. Research Synthesis Methods, 8 (1), 5–18. https://doi.org/10.1002/jrsm.1230

Bosman, R. J., Roorda, D. L., van der Veen, I., & Koomen, H. M. Y. (2018). Teacher-student relationship quality from kindergarten to sixth grade and students’ school adjustment: A person-centered approach. Journal of School Psychology, 68 , 177–194. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsp.2018.03.006

Bowling, N. A., & Hammond, G. D. (2008). A meta-analytic examination of the construct validity of the Michigan organizational assessment questionnaire job satisfaction subscale. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 73 (1), 63–77. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2008.01.004

Braun, S. S., Kaihoi, C. A., McDaniel, H. L., & Bradshaw, C. P. (2022). Profiles of teachers’ occupational health: Associations with classroom management practices, gender, and race. Teaching and Teacher Education, 118 , 103819. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2022.103819

Burić, I., & Moè, A. (2020). What makes teachers enthusiastic: The interplay of positive affect, self-efficacy and job satisfaction. Teaching and Teacher Education, 89 , 103008. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2019.103008

Butler, R. (2012). Striving to connect: Extending an achievement goal approach to teacher motivation to include relational goals for teaching. Journal of Educational Psychology, 104 (3), 726–742. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0028613

Butt, G., Lance, A., Fielding, A., Gunter, H., Rayner, S., & Thomas, H. (2005). Teacher job satisfaction: Lessons from the TSW pathfinder project. School Leadership & Management, 25 (5), 455–471. https://doi.org/10.1080/13634230500340807

Cansoy, R. (2018). The relationship between school principals’ leadership behaviours and teachers’ job satisfaction: A systematic review. International Education Studies, 12 (1), 37. https://doi.org/10.5539/ies.v12n1p37

Caprara, G. V., Barbaranelli, C., Steca, P., & Malone, P. S. (2006). Teachers’ self-efficacy beliefs as determinants of job satisfaction and students’ academic achievement: A study at the school level. Journal of School Psychology, 44 (6), 473–490. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsp.2006.09.001

Carter, E. C., Schönbrodt, F. D., Gervais, W. M., & Hilgard, J. (2019). Correcting for bias in psychology: A comparison of meta-analytic methods. Advances in Methods and Practices in Psychological Science, 2 (2), 115–144. https://doi.org/10.1177/2515245919847196

Cha, S.-H., & Cohen-Vogel, L. (2011). Why they quit: A focused look at teachers who leave for other occupations. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 22 (4), 371–392. https://doi.org/10.1080/09243453.2011.587437

Cheung, M. W.‑L (2020). Synthesizing indirect effects in mediation models with meta-analytic methods . Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/df6jp

Clunies‐Ross, P., Little, E., & Kienhuis, M. (2008). Self‐reported and actual use of proactive and reactive classroom management strategies and their relationship with teacher stress and student behaviour. Educational Psychology , 28 (6). https://doi.org/10.1080/0144341

D’Agostino, J. V., & Powers, S. J. (2009). Predicting teacher performance with test scores and grade point average: A meta-analysis. American Educational Research Journal, 46 (1), 146–182. https://doi.org/10.3102/0002831208323280

Dahlke, J. A., & Wiernik, B. M. (2021). Psychometric meta-analysis toolkit . Retrieved October 14th, 2022, from https://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/psychmeta/psychmeta.pdf

de Ruiter, J. A., Poorthuis, A. M. G., Aldrup, K., & Koomen, H. M. Y. (2020). Teachers’ emotional experiences in response to daily events with individual students varying in perceived past disruptive behavior. Journal of School Psychology, 82 , 85–102. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsp.2020.08.005

de Simone, S., Cicotto, G., & Lampis, J. (2016). Occupational stress, job satisfaction and physical health in teachers. European Review of Applied Psychology, 66 (2), 65–77. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erap.2016.03.002

den Brok, P., Wubbels, T., & van Tartwijk, J. (2017). Exploring beginning teachers’ attrition in the Netherlands. Teachers and Teaching, 23 (8), 881–895. https://doi.org/10.1080/13540602.2017.1360859

Dicke, T., Parker, P. D., Holzberger, D., Kunina-Habenicht, O., Kunter, M., & Leutner, D. (2015). Beginning teachers’ efficacy and emotional exhaustion: Latent changes, reciprocity, and the influence of professional knowledge. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 41 , 62–72. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2014.11.003

Dicke, T., Marsh, H. W., Parker, P. D., Guo, J., Riley, P., & Waldeyer, J. (2019). Job satisfaction of teachers and their principals in relation to climate and student achievement. Journal of Educational Psychology. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1037/edu0000409

Diener, E., Suh, E. M., Lucas, R. E., & Smith, H. L. (1999). Subjective well-being: Three decades of progress. Psychological Bulletin, 125 (2), 276–302.

Diener, E. (2012). New findings and future directions for subjective well-being research. American Psychologist , 590–597. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.69.5.851

Dinham, S., & Scott, C. (1998). A three domain model of teacher and school executive career satisfaction. Journal of Educational Administration, 36 (4), 362–378.

Downer, J., Sabol, T. J., & Hamre, B. K. (2010). Teacher-child interactions in the classroom: Toward a theory of within- and cross-domain links to children’s developmental outcomes. Early Education and Development, 21 (5), 699–723. https://doi.org/10.1080/10409289.2010.497453

Egger, M., Davey Smith, G., Schneider, M., & Minder, C. (1997). Bias in meta-analysis detected by a simple, graphical test. BMJ (Clinical Research Ed), 315 (7109), 629–634. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.315.7109.629

Ellsworth, P. C., & Scherer, K. R. (2003). Appraisal processes in emotion. In R. J. Davidson, K. R. Scherer, & H. H. Goldsmith (Eds.), Handbook of affective science (pp. 572–595). Oxford University Press.

Google Scholar  

Ettekal, I., & Shi, Q. (2020). Developmental trajectories of teacher-student relationships and longitudinal associations with children’s conduct problems from Grades 1 to 12. Journal of School Psychology, 82 , 17–35. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsp.2020.07.004

Eysenck, M. W., & Calvo, M. G. (1992). Anxiety and performance: The processing efficiency theory. Cognition & Emotion, 6 (6), 409–434. https://doi.org/10.1080/02699939208409696

Faragher, E. B., Cass, M., & Cooper, C. L. (2013). The relationship between job satisfaction and health: A meta-analysis. In C. L. Cooper (Ed.), From stress to wellbeing (Vol. 1, pp. 254–271). Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137310651_12

Field, A. P. (2001). Meta-analysis of correlation coefficients: A Monte Carlo comparison of fixed- and random-effects methods. Psychological Methods, 6 (2), 161–180. https://doi.org/10.1037//1082-989X.6.2.161

Forgas, J. P. (2002). Feeling and doing: Affective influences on interpersonal behavior. Psychological Inquiry, 13 (1), 1–28. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327965PLI1301_01

Forjan, D. N., Tuckey, M. R., & Li, Y. (2020). Problem solving and affect as mechanisms linking daily mindfulness to task performance and job satisfaction. Stress and Health: Journal of the International Society for the Investigation of Stress, 36 (3), 338–349. https://doi.org/10.1002/smi.2931

Fredrickson, B. L. (2001). The role of positive emotions in positive psychology: The broaden-and-build theory of positive emotions. American Psychologist, 56 (3), 218–226. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.56.3.218

Fredrickson, B. L., & Branigan, C. (2005). Positive emotions broaden the scope of attention and thought-action repertoires. Cognition & Emotion, 19 (3), 313–332. https://doi.org/10.1080/02699930441000238

Frenzel, A. C., Daniels, L., & Burić, I. (2021). Teacher emotions in the classroom and their implications for students. Educational Psychologist, 56 (4), 250–264. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2021.1985501

Gill, M. G. (2021). Teachers’ social-emotional characteristics and student outcomes: A commentary. Educational Psychologist, 56 (4), 323–332. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2021.1991357

Granziera, H., & Perera, H. N. (2019). Relations among teachers’ self-efficacy beliefs, engagement, and work satisfaction: A social cognitive view. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 58 , 75–84. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2019.02.003

Grissom, J. A. (2011). Can good principals keep teachers in disadvantaged schools? Linking principal effectiveness to teacher satisfaction and turnover in hard-to-staff environments. Teachers College Record, 113 (11), 2552–2585. https://doi.org/10.1177/016146811111301102

Hackman, J. R., & Oldham, G. R. (1975). Development of the job diagnostic survey. Journal of Applied Psychology, 60 (2), 159–170. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0076546

Hamre, B. K., & Pianta, R. C. (2001). Early teacher-child relationships and the trajectory of children’s school outcomes through eighth grade. Child Development, 72 (2), 625–638. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8624.00301

Hamre, B. K., Pianta, R. C., Downer, J. T., DeCoster, J., Mashburn, A. J., Jones, S. M., Brown, J. L., Cappella, E., Atkins, M., Rivers, S. R., & Hamagami, A. (2013). Teaching through interactions: Testing a developmental framework of teacher effectiveness in over 4,000 classrooms. The Elementary School Journal, 113 (4), 461–487.

Hamre, B. K., & Pianta, R. C [R. C.] (2005). Can instructional and emotional support in the first-grade classroom make a difference for children at risk of school failure? Child Development , 76 (5), 949–967.

Hatfield, E., Cacioppo, J. T., & Rapson, R. L. (1993). Emotional Contagion. Cambridge University Press, 22 (3), 96–99.

Hedges, L. V., Tipton, E., & Johnson, M. C. (2010). Robust variance estimation in meta-regression with dependent effect size estimates. Research Synthesis Methods, 1 (1), 39–65. https://doi.org/10.1002/jrsm.5

Herman, K. C., Reinke, W. M., & Eddy, C. L. (2020). Advances in understanding and intervening in teacher stress and coping: The coping-competence-context theory. Journal of School Psychology, 78 , 69–74. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsp.2020.01.001

Higgins, J. P. T., & Thompson, S. G. (2002). Quantifying heterogeneity in a meta-analysis. Statistics in Medicine, 21 , 1539–1558. https://doi.org/10.1002/sim.1186

Higgins, J. P. T., Chandler, J., Cumpston, M., Li, T., Page, M. J., & Welch, V. A. (Eds.). (2019). Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions (2nd ed.). John Wiley & Sons.

Higgins, J. P. T., Thompson, S. G., & Spiegelhalter, D. J. (2009). A re-evaluation of random-effects meta-analysis. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society. Series A, (Statistics in Society) , 172 (1), 137–159. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-985X.2008.00552.x

Highhouse, S., & Becker, A. S. (1993). Facet measures and global job satisfaction. Journal of Business and Psychology, 8 (1), 117–127. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02230397

Howard, J. L., Bureau, J. S., Guay, F., Chong, J. X. Y., & Ryan, R. M. (2021). Student motivation and associated outcomes: A meta-analysis from self-determination theory. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 16 (6), 1300–1323. https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691620966789

Hunter, J. E., & Schmidt, F. L. (2004). Methods of meta-analysis: Correcting error and bias in research findings (2nd ed.). SAGE Publications.

Book   Google Scholar  

Ingersoll, R. M. (2001). Teacher turnover and teacher shortages: An organizational analysis. American Educational Research Journal, 38 (3), 499–534. https://doi.org/10.3102/00028312038003499

Iriarte Redín, C., & Erro-Garcés, A. (2020). Stress in teaching professionals across Europe. International Journal of Educational Research, 103 , 101623. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijer.2020.101623

Isen, A. M. (2001). An influence of positive affect on decision making in complex situations: Theoretical issues with practical implications. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 11 (2), 75–85. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327663JCP1102_01

Jennings, P. A., & Greenberg, M. T. (2009). The prosocial classroom: Teacher social and emotional competence in relation to student and classroom outcomes. Review of Educational Research, 79 (1), 491–525. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654308325693

Jennings, P. A., Frank, J. L., Snowberg, K. E., Coccia, M. A., & Greenberg, M. T. (2013). Improving classroom learning environments by Cultivating Awareness and Resilience in Education (CARE): Results of a randomized controlled trial. School Psychology Quarterly: The Official Journal of the Division of School Psychology, American Psychological Association, 28 (4), 374–390. https://doi.org/10.1037/spq0000035

Johnson, S. M., Kraft, M. A., & Papay, J. P. (2012). How context matters in high-need schools: The effects of teachers’ working conditions on their professional satisfaction and their students’ achievement. Teachers College Record, 114 (10), 1–39. https://doi.org/10.1177/016146811211401004

Judge, T. A., & Ilies, R. (2004). Affect and job satisfaction: A study of their relationship at work and at home. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89 (4), 661–673. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.89.4.661

Judge, T. A., Thoresen, C. J., Bono, J. E., & Patton, G. K. (2001). The job satisfaction-job performance relationship: A qualitative and quantitative review. Psychological Bulletin, 127 (3), 376–407. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.127.3.376

Kim, K. R., & Seo, E. H. (2018). The relationship between teacher efficacy and students’ academic achievement: A meta-analysis. Social Behavior and Personality: An International Journal, 46 (4), 529–540. https://doi.org/10.2224/sbp.6554

Kim, L. E., Jörg, V., & Klassen, R. M. (2019). A meta-analysis of the effects of teacher personality on teacher effectiveness and burnout. Educational Psychology Review, 31 (1), 163–195. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-018-9458-2

Klassen, R. M., & Tze, V. M. (2014). Teachers’ self-efficacy, personality, and teaching effectiveness: A meta-analysis. Educational Research Review, 12 (4), 59–76. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2014.06.001

Klusmann, U., Richter, D., & Lüdtke, O. (2016). Teachers’ emotional exhaustion is negatively related to students’ achievement: Evidence from a large-scale assessment study. Journal of Educational Psychology, 108 (8), 1193–1203. https://doi.org/10.1037/edu0000125

Klusmann, U., Aldrup, K., Roloff, J., Lüdtke, O., & Hamre, B. K. (2022). Does instructional quality mediate the link between teachers’ emotional exhaustion and student outcomes? A large-scale study using teacher and student reports. Journal of Educational Psychology, 114 (6), 1442–1460. https://doi.org/10.1037/edu0000703

Kumari, K., Barkat Ali, S., un Nisa Khan, N., & Abbas, J. (2021). Examining the role of motivation and reward in employees’ job performance through mediating effect of job satisfaction: an empirical evidence. International Journal of Organizational Leadership, 10 (4), 401–420.

Kunter, M., Klusmann, U., Baumert, J., Richter, D., Voss, T., & Hachfeld, A. (2013). Professional competence of teachers: Effects on instructional quality and student development. Journal of Educational Psychology, 105 (3), 805–820. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0032583

Kunter, M., & Voss, T. (2013). The model of instructional quality in COACTIV: A multicriteria analysis. In M. Kunter, J. Baumert, W. Blum, U. Klusmann, S. Krauss, & M. Neubrand (Eds.), Cognitive activation in the mathematics classroom and professional competence of teachers: Results from the COACTIV project (pp. 97–124). Springer.

Kunter, M., Tsai, Y.-M., Klusmann, U., Brunner, M., Krauss, S., & Baumert, J. (2008). Students’ and mathematics teachers’ perceptions of teacher enthusiasm and instruction. Learning and Instruction, 18 (5), 468–482. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2008.06.008

Lambert, R. G., McCarthy, C. J., McCarthy, C., Crowe, E., & Fisher, M. (2012). Assessment of teachers demands and resources: Relationship to stress, classroom structural characteristics, job satisfaction, and turnover. In C. J. McCarthy, R. G. Lambert, & A. Ullrich (Eds.), International perspectives on teacher stress (pp. 155–174). Information Age Publishing.

Lazarides, R., Fauth, B., Gaspard, H., & Göllner, R. (2021). Teacher self-efficacy and enthusiasm: Relations to changes in student-perceived teaching quality at the beginning of secondary education. Learning and Instruction, 73 , 101435. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2020.101435

Lester, P. E. (1987). Development and factor analysis of the teacher job satisfaction questionnaire (TJSQ). Educational and Psychological Measurement, 47 (1), 223–233. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013164487471031

Li, R., & Yao, M. (2022). What promotes teachers’ turnover intention? Evidence from a meta-analysis. Educational Research Review, 37 , 100477. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2022.100477

Madigan, D. J., & Kim, L. E. (2021). Towards an understanding of teacher attrition: A meta-analysis of burnout, job satisfaction, and teachers’ intentions to quit. Teaching and Teacher Education, 105 (2), 103425. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2021.103425

Maricuțoiu, L. P., Pap, Z., Ștefancu, E., Mladenovici, V., Valache, D. G., Popescu, B. D., Ilie, M., & Vîrgă, D. (2023). Is teachers’ well-being associated with students’ school experience? A meta-analysis of cross-sectional evidence. Educational Psychology Review , 35 (1). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-023-09721-9

Matteucci, M. C., Guglielmi, D., & Lauermann, F. (2017). Teachers’ sense of responsibility for educational outcomes and its associations with teachers’ instructional approaches and professional wellbeing. Social Psychology of Education, 20 (2), 275–298. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11218-017-9369-y

Meyer, J. P., Stanley, D. J., Herscovitch, L., & Topolnytsky, L. (2002). Affective, continuance, and normative commitment to the organization: A meta-analysis of antecedents, correlates, and consequences. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 61 (1), 20–52. https://doi.org/10.1006/jvbe.2001.1842

Miller, R. T., Murnane, R. J., & Willett, J. B. (2008). Do teacher absences impact student achievement? Longitudinal evidence from one urban school district. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 30 (2), 181–200. https://doi.org/10.3102/0162373708318019

Moè, A., & Katz, I. (2020). Self-compassionate teachers are more autonomy supportive and structuring whereas self-derogating teachers are more controlling and chaotic: The mediating role of need satisfaction and burnout. Teaching and Teacher Education , 96 (3). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2020.103173

Mogilevsky, K. B. (2019). Does the inclusion of social studies content positively impact elementary teacher job satisfaction and retention rates [Dissertation]. American College of Education.

Nezlek, J. B., Feist, G. J., Wilson, F., & Plesko, R. M. (2001). Day-to-day variability in empathy as a function of daily events and mood. Journal of Research in Personality, 35 (4), 401–423. https://doi.org/10.1006/jrpe.2001.2332

Nye, B., Konstantopoulos, S., Hedges, L. V. (2004). How large are teacher effects? Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 26 (3), 237–257. https://doi.org/10.3102/01623737026003237

OECD. (2005). Teachers matter: Attracting, developing and retaining effective teachers organisation for economic co-operation and development . Retrieved May 31st, 2022, https://www.oecd.org/education/school/34990905.pdf .

Oliveira, S., Roberto, M. S., Pereira, N. S., Marques-Pinto, A., & Veiga-Simão, A. M. (2021). Impacts of social and emotional learning interventions for teachers on teachers’ outcomes: A systematic review with meta-analysis. Frontiers in Psychology, 12 , 677217. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.677217

Page, M., McKenzie, J. E., Bossuyt, P. M., Boutron, I., Hoffmann, T. C., Mulrow, C. D., Shamseer, L., Tetzlaff, J. M., …, & Moher, D. (2021). The PRISMA 2020 statement: An updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ , 372 (n71). https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.n71

Patrick, A. S. (2007). Examination of teacher workplace satisfaction and student achievement [Dissertation]. Georgia Southern University.

Pekrun, R. (2021). Teachers need more than knowledge: Why motivation, emotion, and self-regulation are indispensable. Educational Psychologist, 56 (4), 312–322. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2021.1991356

Pianta, R. C., Hamre, B. K [Bridget K.], & Mintz, S. (2012). Classroom assessment scoring system: Secondary Manual . Paul H Brookes Publishing.

Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., & Podsakoff, N. P. (2012). Sources of method bias in social science research and recommendations on how to control it. Annual Review of Psychology, 63 , 539–569. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-psych-120710-100452

Praetorius, A.-K., Klieme, E., Herbert, B., & Pinger, P. (2018). Generic dimensions of teaching quality: The German framework of Three Basic Dimensions. ZDM Mathematics Education, 50 (3), 407–426. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-018-0918-4

Ruzek, E. A., Hafen, C. A., Allen, J. P., Gregory, A., Mikami, A. Y., & Pianta, R. C. (2016). How teacher emotional support motivates students: The mediating roles of perceived peer relatedness, autonomy support, and competence. Learning and Instruction, 42 , 95–103. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2016.01.004

Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2017). Self-determination theory: Basic psychological needs in motivation, development, and wellness . Guilford Publications.

Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2020). Intrinsic and extrinsic motivation from a self-determination theory perspective: Definitions, theory, practices, and future directions. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 61 (3), 101860. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2020.101860

Scarpello, V., & Campell, J. P. (1983). Job Satisfaction: Are all the parts there? Personnel Psychology, 36 (3), 577–600. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-6570.1983.tb02236.x

Scherer, K. R., & Moors, A. (2019). The emotion process: Event appraisal and component differentiation. Annual Review of Psychology, 70 , 719–745. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-psych-122216-011854

Scherer, R., Nilsen, T., & Jansen, M. (2016). Evaluating individual students’ perceptions of instructional quality: An investigation of their factor structure, measurement invariance, and relations to educational outcomes. Frontiers in Psychology, 7 , 110. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2016.00110

Scherrer, V., & Preckel, F. (2019). Development of motivational variables and self-esteem during the school career: A meta-analysis of longitudinal studies. Review of Educational Research, 89 (2), 211–258. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654318819127

Seibt, R., Spitzer, S., Blank, M., & Scheuch, K. (2009). Predictors of work ability in occupations with psychological stress. Journal of Public Health, 17 (1), 9–18. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10389-008-0194-9

Seiz, J., Voss, T., & Kunter, M. (2015). When knowing is not enough - the relevance of teachers’ cognitive and emotional resources for classroom management. Frontline Learning Research, 3 (1), 55–77. https://doi.org/10.14786/flr.v3i1.141

Siegrist, J. (2002). Effort-reward imbalance at work and health. In P. L. Perrewe & D. C. Ganster (Eds.), Historical and current perspectives on stress and health (2nd ed., pp. 261–291). Emerald Group Publishing Limited.

Sirin, S. R. (2005). Socioeconomic status and academic achievement: A meta-analytic review of research. Review of Educational Research, 75 (3), 417–453. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543075003417

Skaalvik, E. M., & Skaalvik, S. (2011). Teacher job satisfaction and motivation to leave the teaching profession: Relations with school context, feeling of belonging, and emotional exhaustion. Teaching and Teacher Education, 27 (6), 1029–1038. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2011.04.001

Spector, P. E. (2022). Job satisfaction: From assessment to intervention. Routledge . https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003250616

Spilt, J. L., Koomen, H. M. Y., & Thijs, J. T. (2011). Teacher wellbeing: The importance of teacher-student relationships. Educational Psychology Review, 23 (4), 457–477. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-011-9170-y

Spinath, B., & Steinmayr, R. (2012). The roles of competence beliefs and goal orientations for change in intrinsic motivation. Journal of Educational Psychology, 104 (4), 1135–1148. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0028115

Stahl Lerang, M., Ertesvåg, S. K., & Virtanen, T. (2021). Patterns of teachers’ instructional support quality and the association with job satisfaction and collegial collaboration. Educational Psychology, 41 (10), 1300–1318.

Sterne, J. A., Becker, B. J., & Egger, M. (2005). The funnel plot. In H. R. Rothstein, A. J. Sutton, & M. Borenstein (Eds.), Publication bias in meta-analysis: Prevention, assessment and adjustments (pp. 75–98). John Wiley & Sons.

Sterne, J., Savović, J., Page, M. J., Elbers, R. G., Blencowe, N. S., Boutron, I., Cates, C. J., Cheng, H.-Y., Corbett, M. S., Eldridge, S. M., Hernán, M. A., Hopewell, S., Hróbjartsson, A., Junqueira, D. R., Jüni, P., Kirkham, J. J., Lasserson, T., Li, T., McAleenan, A., ... & Higgins, J. (2019). RoB 2: a revised tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials. BMJ . https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.l4898

Strati, A. D., Schmidt, J. A., & Maier, K. S. (2017). Perceived challenge, teacher support, and teacher obstruction as predictors of student engagement. Journal of Educational Psychology, 109 (1), 131–147. https://doi.org/10.1037/edu0000108

Tett, R. P., & Meyer, J. P. (1993). Job satisfaction, organizational commitment, turnover intention, and turnover: Path analysis based on meta-analytic findings. Personnel Psychology, 46 , 259–293. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-6570.1993.tb00874.x

Thalheimer, W., & Cook, S. (2002). How to calculate effect sizes from published research: A simplified methodology . Retrieved March 9th, 2021, from http://coshima.davidrjfikis.com/EPRS8530/Effect_Sizes_pdf4.pdf

Toropova, A., Myrberg, E., & Johansson, S. (2021). Teacher job satisfaction: The importance of school working conditions and teacher characteristics. Educational Review, 73 (1), 71–97. https://doi.org/10.1080/00131911.2019.1705247

Tourangeau, R. (2000). Remembering what happened: Memory errors and survey reports. In A. A. Stone, J. S. Turkkan, C. A. Bachrach, J. B. Jobe, H. S. Kurtzman, & V. S. Cain (Eds.), The science of self-report: Implications for research and practice (1st ed., pp. 29–48). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Tymms, P., Merrell, C., & Bailey, K. (2018). The long-term impact of effective teaching. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 29 (2), 242–261. https://doi.org/10.1080/09243453.2017.1404478

UNESCO Institute for Statistics. (2016). The world needs almost 69 million new teachers to reach the 2030 education goals (No. 39) . Retrieved May 31st, 2022, from http://uis.unesco.org/en/files/fs39-world-needs-almost-69-million-new-teachers-reach-2030-education-goals-2016-en-pdf

van Droogenbroeck, F., Spruyt, B., Quittre, V., & Lafontaine, D. (2021). Does the school context really matter for teacher burnout? Review of existing multilevel teacher burnout research and results from the teaching and learning international survey 2018 in the Flemish- and French-speaking communities of Belgium. Educational Researcher, 50 (5), 290–305. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X21992361

Vidić, T., & Miljković, D. (2019). Povezanost pristupa poučavanju s percipiranom samoefikasnosti, zadovoljstvom poslom i životom te emocijama učitelja u osnovnoj školi. Psihologijske Teme, 28 (2), 291–312. https://doi.org/10.31820/pt.28.2.4

Viechtbauer, W. (2010). Conducting meta-analyses in R with the metafor Package (Version 2.4-0). Journal of Statistical Software, 36 (3), 1–48. https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v036.i03

Voss, T., Klusmann, U., Bönke, N., Richter, D., & Kunter, M. (2023). Teachers’ emotional exhaustion and teaching enthusiasm before versus during the COVID-19 pandemic. Zeitschrift Für Psychologie, 213 (2), 103–114. https://doi.org/10.1027/2151-2604/a000520

Walton, G. M., & Yeager, D. S. (2020). Seed and soil: Psychological affordances in contexts help to explain where wise interventions succeed or fail. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 29 (3), 219–226. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963721420904453

Wanous, J. P., Reichers, A. E., & Hudy, M. J. (1997). Overall job satisfaction: How good are single-item measures? The Journal of Applied Psychology, 82 (2), 247–252. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.82.2.247

Warr, P., Cook, J., & Wall, T. (1979). Scales for the measurement of some work attitudes and aspects of psychological well-being. Journal of Occupational Psychology, 52 (2), 129–148. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-8325.1979.tb00448.x

Watt, H. M., Richardson, P. W., Klusmann, U., Kunter, M., Beyer, B., Trautwein, U., & Baumert, J. (2012). Motivations for choosing teaching as a career: An international comparison using the FIT-Choice scale. Teaching and Teacher Education, 28 (6), 791–805. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2012.03.003

Weiss, H. M. (2002). Deconstructing job satisfaction. Human Resource Management Review, 12 (2), 173–194. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1053-4822(02)00045-1

Weiss, H. M., & Cropanzano, R. (1996). Affective events theory: A theoretical discussion of the structure, cause and consequences of affective experiences at work. Research in Organizational Behavior, 18 , 1–74.

Whitman, D. S., van Rooy, D., & L., & Viswesvaran, C. (2010). Satisfaction, citizenship behaviors, and performance in work units: A meta-analysis of collective construct relations. Personnel Psychology, 63 (1), 41–81. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-6570.2009.01162.x

Wigfield, A., & Eccles, J. S. (2000). Expectancy-value theory of achievement motivation. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 25 (1), 68–81. https://doi.org/10.1006/ceps.1999.1015

Wong, K. F. E., & Cheng, C. (2020). The turnover intention-behaviour link: A culture-moderated meta-analysis. Journal of Management Studies, 57 (6), 1174–1216. https://doi.org/10.1111/joms.12520

Wright, T. A., & Bonett, D. G. (2007). Job satisfaction and psychological well-being as nonadditive predictors of workplace turnover. Journal of Management, 33 (2), 141–160. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206306297582

Wright, T. A., Cropanzano, R., & Bonett, D. G. (2007). The moderating role of employee positive well being on the relation between job satisfaction and job performance. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 12 (2), 93–104. https://doi.org/10.1037/1076-8998.12.2.93

Zee, M., & Koomen, H. M. Y. (2016). Teacher self-efficacy and its effects on classroom processes, student academic adjustment, and teacher well-being. Review of Educational Research, 86 (4), 981–1015. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654315626801

Download references

Open Access funding enabled and organized by Projekt DEAL.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Department of Educational Research and Educational Psychology, IPN – Leibniz Institute for Science and Mathematics Education, Kiel, Germany

Gyde Wartenberg, Karen Aldrup & Uta Klusmann

Department of Quantitative Measures, University of Hamburg, Hamburg, Germany

Simon Grund

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Gyde Wartenberg .

Additional information

Publisher's note.

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary Information

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary file1 (PDF 752 KB)

Rights and permissions.

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ .

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Wartenberg, G., Aldrup, K., Grund, S. et al. Satisfied and High Performing? A Meta-Analysis and Systematic Review of the Correlates of Teachers’ Job Satisfaction. Educ Psychol Rev 35 , 114 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-023-09831-4

Download citation

Accepted : 14 November 2023

Published : 07 December 2023

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-023-09831-4

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Teachers’ job satisfaction
• Teacher retention
• Teacher-student interaction
• Student outcomes
• Meta-analysis
• Find a journal
• Publish with us
• Track your research