Educational Review

ISSN: 0013-1911 (Print) 1465-3397 (Online) Journal homepage: https://www.tandfonline.com/loi/cedr20

Teacher job satisfaction: the importance of school

working conditions and teacher characteristics

Anna Toropova, Eva Myrberg & Stefan Johansson

To cite this article: Anna Toropova, Eva Myrberg & Stefan Johansson (2020): Teacher job
satisfaction: the importance of school working conditions and teacher characteristics, Educational
Review, DOI: 10.1080/00131911.2019.1705247

To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/00131911.2019.1705247

© 2020 The Author(s). Published by Informa

UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis
Group.

Published online: 08 Jan 2020.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 3602

View related articles

View Crossmark data

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

https://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=cedr20
EDUCATIONAL REVIEW
https://doi.org/10.1080/00131911.2019.1705247

Teacher job satisfaction: the importance of school working

conditions and teacher characteristics
Anna Toropova , Eva Myrberg and Stefan Johansson
Department of Education and Special Education, University of Gothenburg, Gothenburg, Sweden

ABSTRACT ARTICLE HISTORY

Given that teacher shortage is an international problem, teacher job Received 13 March 2019
satisfaction merits closer attention. Not only is job satisfaction Accepted 28 November 2019
closely related to teacher retention, but it also contributes to the KEYWORDS
well-being of teachers and their students, overall school cohesion Teacher job satisfaction;
and enhanced status of the teaching profession. This study investi- school working conditions;
gates the relations between teacher job satisfaction, school work- teacher retention; teacher
ing conditions and teacher characteristics for eighth grade characteristics; mathematics;
mathematics teachers. The study employs TIMSS 2015 (Trends in TIMSS
International Mathematics and Science Study) data from Sweden.
Confirmatory factor analysis and structural equation modelling are
used as main methods. Results demonstrate a substantial associa-
tion between school working conditions and teacher job satisfac-
tion. More specifically, teacher workload, teacher cooperation and
teacher perceptions of student discipline in school were the factors
most closely related to teacher job satisfaction. As to teacher char-
acteristics, female teachers, teachers with more exposure to profes-
sional development and more efficacious teachers tended to have
higher levels of job satisfaction. In addition, it was found that the
relationship between the extent of teacher cooperation and job
satisfaction was more pronounced for male teachers, while student
discipline was more important for job satisfaction of teachers with
lower self-efficacy beliefs. Implications for policy are further
discussed.

Background
While the role of teachers’ work for student outcomes is widely recognised, the question
whether teachers are content with their working environment is often overlooked (Bascia
& Rottmann, 2011; Liang & Akiba, 2017). Meanwhile, teacher job satisfaction has many
important and far-reaching implications. First, it contributes to teacher well-being as
satisfied teachers are less susceptible to stress and burnout (Kyriacou & Sutcliffe, 1977;
Skaalvik & Skaalvik, 2011). In addition, there is evidence that students of teachers who are
content with their job also feel better (Collie, Shapka, & Perry, 2012; Spilt, Koomen, & Thijs,
2011). Furthermore, satisfied teachers offer higher instructional quality and better learn-
ing support for their students (Klusmann, Kunter, Trautwein, Lüdtke, & Baumert, 2008;
Kunter et al., 2013). Finally, content teachers demonstrate stronger job commitment and

CONTACT Anna Toropova [email protected]

© 2020 The Author(s). Published by Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group.
This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/
by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
2 A. TOROPOVA ET AL.

are less prone to leave the profession (Blömeke, Houang, Hsieh, & Wang, 2017; Klassen &
Chiu, 2011), which is especially crucial in times when teacher turnover is high.
Increasing teacher turnover rates and a subsequent shortage of qualified teachers is a
growing concern internationally (European Commission, 2018; Ingersoll, 2017). Teacher
turnover comprises interrelated notions of teacher migration and attrition, where migra-
tion describes teachers moving to other schools, while attrition pertains to teachers
leaving the profession altogether (Ingersoll, 2001; Rinke, 2008). However, regardless the
type of turnover, there are always negative consequences for a particular school from
which a teacher is departing. Ronfeldt, Loeb, and Wyckoff (2013) suggest a disruptive
impact of turnover beyond compositional changes in teacher quality, especially in lower-
performing schools. Besides affecting student learning and motivation, teacher turnover
negatively affects faculty collegiality and trust and leads to a loss of institutional knowl-
edge, which is critical for supporting student learning. In the end, overall school perfor-
mance is affected (Ingersoll, 2001; Ingersoll & Smith, 2004).

An international perspective on teacher working conditions

International research evidence suggests that a diminishing prestige of the teaching
profession together with dissatisfying working environment is the prevailing reason for
teacher turnover, with salaries being only a minor source of dissatisfaction (Borman &
Dowling, 2008; Ingersoll & Smith, 2004; TemaNord, 2010). Moreover, inadequate working
conditions of a school undermine the status of the profession and make it difficult to
recruit new teachers (Ingersoll, 2001). Yet, even recruiting more teachers may not solve
the turnover problem as long as large numbers of the new teachers will be leaving
schools, discontent with their professional status and working environment (Ingersoll,
2017; Sutcher, Darling-Hammond, & Carver-Thomas, 2016). In addition, as brought for-
ward by Ronfeldt et al. (2013) the recruiting, hiring, and training of new teachers requires
significant financial costs. These costs drain resources that might otherwise be spent on
ameliorating schools’ working environment, which is a crucial step towards retaining
qualified teachers (Borman & Dowling, 2008). Therefore, policy measures to tackle the
teacher crisis are increasingly shifting towards teacher retention efforts (Ingersoll, 2017;
Sibieta, 2018; Sutcher et al., 2016; Worth & De Lazzari, 2017). Such efforts are especially
crucial for teachers of mathematics and sciences, which are at a higher risk of attrition
compared to other groups of teachers (Ingersoll & May, 2012; Sibieta, 2018).
Teacher turnover is not a recent phenomenon, dating back as early as the middle of the
twentieth century (Levin, 1985; Rumberger, 1985), yet having risen dramatically in the past
few decades (Lindqvist, Nordänger, & Carlsson, 2014). This rise is often attributed to the neo-
liberal policies in education, and the introduction of the New Public Management (NPM),
with the focus on standards, a quantified performance, and competition (Ball, 2003). These
affected teachers and their work in many countries in Europe, e.g. England, France and
Scandinavia, as well as New Zealand and the US (Carlgren & Klette, 2008). In the current
study we mainly draw on research from the UK and the US, where the marketisation trends
had the most profound impact on teachers, which is evidenced by an amassing research
literature; and Sweden – the focus of this inquiry. Thus, the themes of the challenged
teacher traditional professional values and identities, the threat to teacher professional
judgement and autonomy, and a tendency towards de-professionalisation of the teaching
 EDUCATIONAL REVIEW 3

profession are recurring in research from the US and the UK (Ball, 2003; Hextall & Mahony,
2000; Zeichner, 2010). Increasing teacher stress and frustration have been linked to a higher
emphasis on teacher performance and accountability, paired with an increased workload in
these countries (Ingersoll, 2017; Perryman, Ball, Maguire, & Braun, 2011; Zeichner, 2014).
Moreover, transformed teacher relationships have also been ascribed to marketisation
trends in education. Thus, the relationships with parents and students were affected,
resulting in a more intense interaction with parents and a stronger student position as a
“customer” (Ball, 2003). Increased competition and ranking requirements impacted schools
as organisations, eroding collegial relations between teachers as well as challenging rela-
tionships with school leadership (Evetts, 2009; Perryman, 2006; Zeichner, 2014).

Teacher working conditions: the Swedish case

While it is a challenging undertaking to compare teacher situations across the national
contexts, it appears that the effects of the neo-liberal policies on the Swedish education
system, and teacher situation in particular, have been akin to those in the United States
and the UK. In fact, as Lundahl (2016) points out, while the effects of the marketisation
trend in education have been similar across the Nordics, in Sweden, its economic, social,
academic and professional impact on schools and teachers was most intense. Indeed, the
changes under the 1990s reform involved a total restructuring of the Swedish school
system, with deregulation, decentralisation and marketisation/customer choice becoming
its key characteristics (Carlgren & Klette, 2008). Competition and external pressure rather
than professional values came to steer teachers’ work. In this regard, Sweden stands out
as being “similarly unique” in relation to its Nordic neighbours, while remaining “uniquely
similar” (Weiner, 2002) with respect to its English-speaking counterparts.
Thus, Sweden has been experiencing a similar unsettling trend of raising rates of
teacher turnover during the past forty years, which has accelerated during the 1980s
and 1990s (Lindqvist & Nordänger, 2016). Consequently, in the next decade the nation will
witness an alarming shortage of certified teachers with about 80,000 school teacher
vacancies to be filled by 2031 (The Swedish National Agency for Education, 2018). Yet,
recruiting new teachers may be a challenging task as only 11% of teachers in Sweden
think that society values the teaching profession (OECD, 2019), which further exacerbates
the problem of teacher retention.
Akin to international trends, marketisation of education and the accompanying new
pubic management elements, introduced in the late 1980s, are also widely cited in the
Swedish context as reasons for teachers’ increased stress, distortion of professional values
and identities, and impaired relations with students, colleagues, school leaders and
parents (Dovemark & Holm, 2017; Lundahl, Arreman, Holm, & Lundström, 2013;
Lundström & Holm, 2011). As attested by Lindqvist et al. (2014), the impact of the 90s
reforms would become apparent in the decades to follow, so results of the studies
conducted at the turn of the 21st century could shed light on the changes in teacher
situation in the context of the neo-liberal policies.
Further illustrating Sweden’s “unique similarity” in the international context are the
analogous calls for policy measures to improve teachers’ working conditions in order to
tackle the issue of teacher turnover in Sweden. These measures include, but are not
limited to strengthening support functions for teachers, reduced administrative work, and
4 A. TOROPOVA ET AL.

widening opportunities for professional development (The Swedish National Agency for
Education, 2018). Yet another similar feature of the Swedish teacher shortage phenom-
enon is that it is more accentuated for mathematics and science teachers (Statistics
Sweden, 2018). This is alarming since student mathematics knowledge is highly correlated
with knowledge in other theoretical domains and highly predictive of student overall
school, post-secondary success and future earnings (Hein, Smerdon, & Sambolt, 2013;
Siegler et al., 2012). In addition, in Sweden, teacher education with a specialisation in
mathematics is a requirement for holding a position as teacher in mathematics above
primary level. It therefore requires substantial time investments from the side of an
individual teacher candidate and considerable costs for society as teacher education is
free of charge.
With these implications in mind, this study aims to acquire a better understanding of
the relationship between school working conditions and teacher job satisfaction for
Swedish eighth grade mathematics teachers. Identifying those working conditions
which promote teacher job satisfaction could inform policy about the aspects of school
working environment needing improvement, thus promoting teacher retention (Kyriacou,
2001). Moreover, different factors may contribute to job satisfaction of teachers differing
in their personal and professional background characteristics, thus requiring a more
nuanced investigation.

What influences teacher job satisfaction?

In this section, we take a closer look at the conceptualisation of teacher job satisfaction, as
well as its predictors described in previous research, such as school working conditions
and teacher characteristics. Even though the focus of the study is on teacher job satisfac-
tion, the literature on closely associated factors, such as teacher turnover and retention,
was also reviewed.
In this study, we use the definition of job satisfaction provided by Evans (1997), who
describes it as “a state of mind determined by the extent to which the individual perceives
her/his job-related needs to be met” (p. 328). In addition, two main components in
teacher job satisfaction are recognised: job comfort and job fulfilment. The former refers
to how satisfactory job conditions and circumstances are to an individual, while the latter
refers to the extent of one’s satisfaction by personal accomplishments within meaningful
aspects of the job (Evans, 1997).

School working conditions

In their review of the school working environment, Bascia and Rottmann (2011) reinstate
the importance of working conditions in schools not only for teacher motivation, effec-
tiveness and job satisfaction but also for student opportunities to learn. Previous research
has recognised some of the most crucial factors, which ensure quality of teachers’ work:
adequate resources, feasible workload, collegial cooperation, opportunities for professional
development, leadership support and decision-making opportunities, to name just a few.
In the international context, Sims (2017, 2018) analysed teacher data in 35 countries
worldwide from Teaching and Learning International Survey (TALIS) 2013 – an interna-
tional study of school learning environments and working conditions. It was found that
 EDUCATIONAL REVIEW 5

student discipline and teacher cooperation were positively related to teacher job satisfac-
tion in all countries.
A considerable amount of research on the role of working conditions for teachers’
career trajectories was conducted in the US. For example, Ingersoll (2001), on the basis of
a nationally representative dataset of over 6,000 US elementary and secondary school
teachers, has found that schools with higher levels of leadership support, better student
discipline, and higher degrees of autonomy and decision-making opportunities had lower
rates of teacher turnover. In their meta-analysis of 63 factors that moderate teacher
attrition in the US, Borman and Dowling (2008) found that schools where teachers were
offered administrative support, mentoring programs at early career stages and opportu-
nities for networking and cooperation, had lower attrition rates when compared to
schools without these features.
Johnson, Kraft, and Papay (2012) investigated the effects of school working conditions
on teacher job satisfaction and career intentions in the US context. The study revealed
that among the employed categories of teacher working conditions, the ones of social
nature were the most important. Thus, the effects of collegial support, principal’s leader-
ship, and school culture of trust and respect were almost double the effect of school
material resources.
On the basis of TALIS 2013 data for England, Sims (2017) identified school leadership,
career advancement opportunities and student discipline as significant correlates of
teacher job satisfaction. Recently, a longitudinal study of school working conditions on
teacher job satisfaction and burnout has been carried out in Finland (Malinen &
Savolainen, 2016). Based on a survey of 642 Finnish middle school teachers, the study
found that teachers who rated teacher collaboration and student behaviour higher at the
beginning of the school year, were more satisfied with their jobs at the end of the school
year. Since most research on teacher job satisfaction is cross-sectional, the above study
makes an important contribution to the field by employing a longitudinal design.

School composition
School composition is an important environmental factor for teacher job satisfaction and
turnover intentions as, paired with teacher knowledge and skills, it shapes the academic
and social climate in the school.
A secondary analysis of TALIS 2013 data provided cross-national evidence that, once
controlled for school working conditions, student body characteristics became insignif-
icant in their relation to job satisfaction (Sims, 2017). Results of the studies on teacher
turnover in the US, however, are somewhat contradictory. Thus, Ingersoll (2001), Borman
and Dowling (2008) demonstrated that schools with higher concentrations of students
from low SES backgrounds, low average student performance and a diverse ethnic
student population had higher odds of teacher attrition. Simon and Johnson, on the
other hand, found that, when student body composition was examined together with
other school working conditions, the effect of the former on job satisfaction was no longer
present (2015). Meanwhile, in England, Sims’s (2017) secondary analysis of TALIS 2013
data showed that student body composition was no longer significant in its relation to job
satisfaction under control for school working environment. Similar results were arrived at
in Norway in the study of 523 senior high school teachers in nine randomly selected
6 A. TOROPOVA ET AL.

Norwegian schools (Skaalvik & Skaalvik, 2016). The study did not find an effect on student
diversity, as measured by teacher perceptions of variation in student needs and abilities,
on teacher turnover intentions (Skaalvik & Skaalvik, 2016).

Teacher characteristics
Studies of job satisfaction and teacher retention usually use teacher personal character-
istics such as age and gender, teacher professional characteristics such as years of
teaching experience, degree level and type, participation in professional development
programs, and teacher motivational beliefs, e.g. self-efficacy.

Personal characteristics
Sims (2018) presented cross-country evidence of teachers’ age being weakly correlated
with job satisfaction, while gender had no effect. Studies on teacher turnover from the US
demonstrate that young teachers depart from schools at higher rates than their middle-
aged colleagues and that women are more likely to leave schools (Borman & Dowling,
2008; Guarino, Santibanez, & Daley, 2006; Ingersoll, 2001; Kukla-Acevedo, 2009). These
results may be mainly attributed to the fact that younger female teachers leave schools
for reasons of family rearing; however, these teachers are also more prone to return to
teaching afterwards (Allen, 2005).
Generally, research on teacher gender and job satisfaction is characterised by a large
degree of inconsistency even within identical national contexts. Thus, one study of
English teachers’ job satisfaction revealed no significant gender differences (Crossman &
Harris, 2006), while in another, women were found to be more satisfied with the teaching
job (Poppleton & Riseborough, 1990). In a similar vein, findings of a number of studies in
the US and Canadian context on the link between job satisfaction and teacher gender are
far from consistent, pointing to higher levels of job satisfaction of either women (Liu &
Ramsey, 2008; Ma & MacMillan, 1999) or men (Klassen & Chiu, 2010; Mertler, 2002). While
such mixed results could be mainly attributed to the different operationalisations of job
satisfaction and other features of study design, the above studies concurred in their
explanation of the resulted gender differences. Thus, differences in job satisfaction in
these studies were mainly attributed to variations in teacher perceptions of working
conditions. For instance, women were found to perceive student behaviour problems
and teaching workload as more stressful, and, consequently, had lower levels of job
satisfaction (e.g. Klassen & Chiu, 2010). With an exception of Poppleton & Riseborough’s
study (1990), which acknowledged complex socio-cultural factors involved in teachers’
perceptions of job satisfaction, the majority of the reviewed studies have disregarded the
complexity of gender as a social construct, which may also vary over space and in time
(Johnson & Repta, 2011). For example, in Sweden, over the past half a century, social
constructions of a teacher position varied greatly, ranging from “distinctly gendered”
(Berge, 2004, p. 29) to gender-neutral ones.

Professional characteristics
As important constituents of professional expertise, teacher subject-matter knowledge,
teaching experience and professional development may affect job satisfaction and
thereby the tendency to move between schools or quit the profession altogether. In
 EDUCATIONAL REVIEW 7

the international context, teachers majoring in STEM subjects (science, technology,

engineering and mathematics) were less likely to move between schools, while there
was no association found between teachers’ majors in STEM subjects and job satisfaction
(Sims, 2018). A review of 91 studies of teacher turnover in the US (Allen, 2005) presented
limited evidence as to subject-matter knowledge or teacher certification positively affect-
ing teacher retention, while the studies provided moderate evidence on mathematics and
science teachers being more likely to leave teaching than teachers in other subjects. The
report also presented strong evidence on secondary and high school teachers being more
prone to attrition than elementary teachers (Allen, 2005). In England, recent evidence
suggested higher attrition rates for mathematics, science and language teachers (Worth &
De Lazzari, 2017).
From an international perspective no effects on teacher job satisfaction were found on
the basis of TALIS study results. (Sims, 2018). However, such findings may be attributed to
the fact that these relations do not have a linear pattern. Thus, a meta-analysis of factors
contributing to teacher turnover in the US concludes that teaching experience and
turnover follow a U-shape curve, with novice and veteran teachers being more prone to
depart from the profession compared to their mid-career colleagues (Guarino et al., 2006).
In particular, teacher attrition is more likely during the first 5 years in service (Ingersoll,
2001, 2017).
In turn, in England, teaching experience revealed a curvilinear relationship with job
satisfaction, with mid-career teachers demonstrating lower levels of job satisfaction
(Crossman & Harris, 2006), while in Canada, a curvilinear relationship followed the U-
shaped pattern similar to the one described in the US context (Klassen & Chiu, 2010).
In sum, previous research on effects of teaching experience on teacher job satisfaction
is still contradictory and likely dependent on country-specific features of school systems
as well as labour market conditions for teachers (Kukla-Acevedo, 2009). Moreover, an
accumulating amount of international evidence suggests that the relations between
teaching experience and job satisfaction follow a non-linear pattern. In contrast, research
on the link between teacher participation in professional programs and job satisfaction
offers considerably more consistent results. From an international perspective, a positive
association between teacher professional development and job satisfaction has been
found in both cross-national (Sims, 2018) and single-country studies (Ma & McMillan; Kraft,
Marinell, & Shen-Wei Yee, 2016; Liu & Ramsey, 2008).

Motivational beliefs
Previous research has established an important contribution of teacher motivational
beliefs on job satisfaction and retention plans. Studies have in particular addressed self-
efficacy, which is a central concept within social cognitive theory (Bandura, 1986, 1997). A
core attribute of human agency, self-efficacy beliefs determine how individuals perceive
and handle challenges, and deal with failures (Bandura, 1997). Research on determinants
of teacher job satisfaction has found consistent mitigating effects of teacher self-efficacy
beliefs on stressful school working environment internationally, e.g. in Spain, Norway and
Canada (Betoret, 2009; Collie et al., 2012). Higher levels of teacher self-efficacy beliefs were
also linked to higher job satisfaction and lower turnover intentions (Klassen & Chiu, 2010;
Skaalvik & Skaalvik, 2014). Moreover, Klassen and Chiu (2011) concluded that teacher self-
efficacy moderated the effect of stressful working conditions on teacher occupational
8 A. TOROPOVA ET AL.

commitment. Similarly, Collie et al. (2012) in a study of the relations between teacher
stress, self-efficacy and job satisfaction of Canadian teachers attested that, when stressful
working conditions are coupled with a strong sense of teacher self-efficacy, they are
viewed as challenges possible to overcome, and therefore do not affect job satisfaction
negatively.

Interaction between teacher characteristics in their relation to job satisfaction

A number of studies have explored the interaction between teacher personal character-
istics and professional qualifications. In the US context, Krieg (2006) found that high-
quality 4th-grade female teachers were less likely to leave the profession, while for men,
attrition was not influenced by teacher quality. In their turn, Ingersoll, Merrill, and May
(2014) explored the interaction between teaching experience and teacher qualifications
on a nationally representative sample of the novice teachers in the US to conclude that for
beginning teachers’ retention, the degree and certification mattered little, while training
in pedagogy and teaching methods was critical. Further, Klassen and Chiu (2011) sug-
gested that self-efficacy may interact with teaching experience in its effects on teacher
turnover in Canada. They concluded that teacher self-efficacy levels are low for inexper-
ienced teachers, are at their peak for mid-career teachers, and in decline for teachers in
pre-retirement stage. This interplay provides additional support to the curvilinear shape
of the relationship between experience and teacher turnover presented earlier.
In summary, when it comes to the relations between teacher professional character-
istics, teacher turnover intentions and job satisfaction, results are somewhat inconclusive
for most aspects of teacher qualification, which is probably due to various measures of
teacher quality used in the international literature (Borman & Dowling, 2008). On the
other hand, there is a higher degree of consistency when it comes to the influence of
teacher demographic characteristics, such as age, on job satisfaction and risk for attrition.
Still, the effects of teacher gender are rather mixed; one of the reasons for this may be the
interaction with other professional and personal factors, as well as working environment
aspects specific to a particular grade, domain level and school characteristics. In addition,
gender differences may be studied in the framework of institutionalised gender roles
(Acker, 1995; Johnson & Repta, 2011; Weiner, 2006) in the teaching profession. Finally,
besides an immediate context of the relevant grade-level, subject-matter and school type,
these also need to be situated in a broader context of the national educational system.
Regarding teacher motivational beliefs, in particular teacher self-efficacy, findings have
been rather conclusive, partly due to recent efforts to establish a conceptually unambig-
uous and valid measure of self-efficacy (Zee & Koomen, 2016). Still, considering the
inherent complexity, it is important to address grade and domain specificity when
investigating issues related to teacher job satisfaction (Blömeke et al., 2017).

Teacher job satisfaction in the Swedish context

In Sweden, the role of school working conditions for teacher job satisfaction has not been
given the attention it deserves. There are only a few studies which have addressed the
role of school working conditions for teacher professional well-being. For example,
Jacobsson, Pousette, and Thylefors (2001) analysed predictors of teacher stress among
about 1000 school teachers from 27 schools. In an analysis comprising 12 school factors,
 EDUCATIONAL REVIEW 9

student misbehaviour, work demands and negative feedback from students, colleagues
and the principal, were shown to be the strongest predictors of teacher stress. Allodi and
Fischbein (2012) investigated perceptions of working conditions for more than 700
Swedish junior high school teachers from 32 schools. Results showed that women were
less satisfied with their teaching workload, and that younger teachers perceived having
less professional autonomy than their more experienced colleagues. In addition, the study
found between-school differences in teacher perceptions of working environments,
especially regarding reward and workload satisfaction aspects, suggesting that Swedish
teachers are faced with working conditions of varying quality.
As evident, the attempts to study relations between working environment of the
school and teacher job satisfaction in Sweden are still rather scarce. Moreover, as pointed
out by Rinke (2008), despite the fact that significant interactions have been previously
found between teacher background characteristics and workplace conditions, much
previous research on teacher job satisfaction and retention has tended to treat individual
and contextual characteristics separately. This is also apparent from our brief account of
the Swedish research in the area, where studies have either focused on school working
conditions or teacher characteristics. The study by Allodi and Fischbein (2012) stands out
in this respect, drawing on both individual teacher and contextual school factors when
studying relations to teacher job satisfaction.
Considering the above-mentioned background, the current study aims to investigate
how the following factors are related to teacher job satisfaction:

(a) school working conditions

(b) teacher characteristics.

Method
Data sources and sample
The data in the present study were obtained from the International Association for the
Evaluation of Educational Achievement (IEA) Trends in International Mathematics and
Science Study (TIMSS) 2015. TIMSS is a regularly recurring assessment of fourth- and
eighth-grade students’ mathematics and science achievement conducted on a four-year
cycle. The international design of the TIMSS study is described in the TIMSS 2015 frame-
work (Mullis & Martin, 2013) as well as in the technical report (Martin, Mullis, & Hooper,
2016). In 2015, 46 countries participated in the survey for grade 8. The database holds
information provided by students, their teachers and their principals. In Sweden, 150
schools, 200 teachers and 4090 students in grade 8 participated in the study in 2015 (The
Swedish National Agency for Education, 2016). The current study uses the Swedish data
from grade 8 mathematics teachers.

Variables and measures

Teacher assessment of their satisfaction with the job as well as working conditions most
often cited in the literature (student discipline, leadership support, school resources,
10 A. TOROPOVA ET AL.

teacher cooperation and teacher workload) were retrieved from the international TIMSS
database (Table 1).
The items denoting teacher job satisfaction were recoded so that higher values
correspond to higher levels of job satisfaction. It can be observed that the largest variation
in teacher perceptions of job satisfaction concerned the item ”I am going to continue
teaching as long as I can”, while teachers’ views were most unanimous for the item “I am
enthusiastic about my job”. Cronbach’s alpha for teacher job-satisfaction scale was .87 for
six items.
All of the reliability indices for the items denoting aspects of school working conditions
were good to excellent with .84 for student discipline (five items), .87 for leadership
support (three items), .76 for school resources (five items), .86 for teacher cooperation (six
items), and .71 for teacher workload (five items). Higher scores on these aspects represent
better working conditions.
Teacher self-efficacy items were recoded in order for higher values to denote higher
levels of self-efficacy. Cronbach’s alpha for teacher self-efficacy was .87 for six items. It
can be observed that teachers were rather confident in performing various teaching
tasks, with somewhat lower self-efficacy reported for developing student critical
thinking.
In addition, teacher demographic and professional characteristics, such as gender,
experience, teacher certification, mathematics and mathematics education as a major,
and number of hours of professional development, were used. A standard deviation of
classroom achievement level (ACH_sd) and a classroom mean of the number of books at
home (BOOKS_m) were used as indicators of student achievement heterogeneity/social
composition, respectively. ACH_sd purported to capture the achievement heterogeneity
in the classroom, which is not necessarily higher in classrooms with lower-SES students.
However, given higher levels of achievement heterogeneity, teachers may perceive their
working conditions as more problematic. BOOKS_m aimed to capture school segregation
with respect to student social background. Manifest variables’ correlations are presented
in Table 2.
It can be observed that well-qualified teachers in terms of teacher certification, major in
mathematics and mathematics education, and teaching experience are not clustered in
classes with higher-SES or higher achieving students. Therefore, it may be concluded that
no selection effects are present.

Methods of analysis
Many phenomena studied in social science are not readily observable. They are often
complex in nature and a number of indicators may be needed to more fully capture their
multifaceted meaning. Job satisfaction is an example of such a complex construct that
cannot be immediately observed. A latent variable approach has the potential to better
represent the theoretical frame of reference than would be possible with single or few
manifest variables. Thereby, the use of latent variables adds to the measurement’s
construct validity. Additionally, in contrast to manifest variables, latent variables are free
from errors of measurement, since the unique part of the variance is separated from the
unexplained part in the statistical formulation of the variable (Gustafsson, 2009). The
analytical methods used in this study were mainly confirmatory factor analysis and a
 EDUCATIONAL REVIEW 11

Table 1. Descriptive statistics of the study’s variables.

Variable Indicator/Statement N Min Max M SD
Teacher job How often do you feel the following way about being a teacher?-Never-sometimes-often-very
satisfaction often
SAT_prof I am content with my profession as a teacher 195 1 4 3.12 0.74
SAT_teach I am satisfied with being a teacher in this school 194 1 4 3.23 0.70
SAT_enth I am enthusiastic about my job 195 2 4 3.26 0.65
SAT_inspire My work inspires me 195 1 4 3.16 0.71
SAT_proud I am proud of the work I do 195 1 4 3.32 0.70
SAT_cont I am going to continue teaching as long as I can 191 1 4 2.96 0.90
Student Thinking about your current school, indicate the extent to which you agree with the following
discipline statement – Disagree a lot-disagree a little-agree a little-Agree a lot
DISP_behave Students behave in an orderly manner 194 1 4 3.12 0.61
DISP_respect Students are respectful of the teachers 194 1 4 3.07 0.61
DISP_property Students respect school property 194 1 4 2.79 0.60
DISP_rules This school has clear rules about student conduct 194 1 4 3.19 0.73
DISP_enforce This school’s rules are enforced in a fair and 194 1 4 2.94 0.68
consistent manner
Leadership How would you characterise each of the following within our school? – Very low-low-medium-
support high-very high
LEAD_coop Collaboration between school leadership and 193 1 5 2.93 1.02
teachers to plan instruction
LEAD_teach Amount of instructional support provided to 193 1 5 3.12 1.00
teachers by school leadership
LEAD_develop School leadership’s support for teachers’ professional 193 1 5 3.19 0.98
development
School resources In your current school, how severe is each problem? – Serious problem-moderate problem-minor
problem-not a problem
RES_space Teachers do not have adequate workspace 194 1 4 2.77 0.92
RES_material Teachers do not have adequate instructional 193 1 4 2.92 0.86
materials and supplies
RES_maintain The school classrooms need maintenance work 194 1 4 2.91 0.95
RES_tech Teachers do not have adequate technological 194 1 4 2.99 0.90
resources
RES_support Teachers do not have adequate support for using 194 1 4 2.91 0.86
technology
Teacher How often do you have the following types of interactions with other teachers? – Never or almost
cooperation never-sometimes-often-very often
COOP_discuss Discuss how to teach a particular topic 194 1 4 2.86 0.78
COOP_prepare Collaborate in planning and preparing instructional 194 1 4 2.61 0.89
materials
COOP_share Share what I have learned about my teaching 195 1 4 2.96 0.76
experiences
COOP_ideas Work together to try out new ideas 194 1 4 2.42 0.80
COOP_curr Work as a group on implementing the curriculum 193 1 4 2.38 0.85
COOP_ensure Work with teachers from other grades to ensure 195 1 4 2.03 0.92
continuity in learning
Teacher Indicate the extent to which you agree with the following statement – Agree a lot-agree a little-
workload disagree a little-disagree a lot
LOAD_content I have too much material to cover in class 195 1 4 2.38 0.80
LOAD_hours I have too many teaching hours 194 1 4 2.39 0.98
LOAD_prep I need more time to prepare for class 195 1 4 1.96 0.78
LOAD_assist I need more time to assist individual students 195 1 4 1.45 0.63
LOAD_admin I have too many administrative tasks 195 1 4 1.87 0.76
Teacher self- In teaching mathematics to this class, how would you characterise your confidence in doing the
efficacy following? – low-medium-high-very high
TSE_inspire Inspiring students to learn mathematics 192 1 4 3.03 0.73
TSE_interest Adapting my teaching to engage student interest 195 1 4 2.83 0.70
TSE_value Helping students appreciate the value of learning 195 1 4 2.91 0.69
mathematics
TSE_facil Facilitating the understanding of struggling students 194 1 4 2.92 0.70
TSE_relevant Making mathematics relevant to students 195 1 4 2.84 0.66
TSE_critic Develop student ability to think critically 194 1 4 2.77 0.69
(Continued)
12 A. TOROPOVA ET AL.

Table 1. (Continued).
Variable Indicator/Statement N Min Max M SD
ACH_sd Classroom achievement heterogeneity 188 17.41 90.32 59.25 12.16
BOOKS_mean Mean classroom SES composition 191 1 4.80 2.98 0.62
T_GEN Teacher gender 195 96 (m) 99 (f)
T_EXP How many years have you been teaching? 192 1 42 14.70 9.35
T_PROF How many hours of professional development did 192 1 5 3.43 1.41
you have?
T_MATH Mathematics as main area of study 188 136 52
(yes) (no)
T_MATHED Mathematics education as main area of study 189 135 54
(yes) (no)
th
T_CERT Are you certified to teach 8 grade mathematics 189 156 33
(yes) (no)

Table 2. Zero-order correlations of the study’s manifest variables.

Variables Books_m Ach_sd T_Mathed T_Math T_Cert T_Prof T_Exp T_Gen
Books_m 1
Ach_sd −.046 1
T_Mathed .049 −.082 1
T_Math .038 −.105 .060 1
T_Cert .-033 −.101 .240* .195* 1
T_Prof .195* .088 .104 −.033 .059 1
T_Exp .082 .044 .157* .027 .187* .030 1
T_Gen −.046 −.001 .010 −.017 .059 .123 −.003 1
*Significant at .05 level

structural equation modelling. The analyses were conducted on the teacher level.
Analyses were carried out with Mplus 8 software.
Model fit was evaluated using recommended fit indices: The χ2 goodness-of-fit test was
used. Considering that the χ2 is sensitive to sample-size, it was combined with three other
fit indices. RMSEA (Root Mean Square Error of Approximation) takes both the number of
observations and free parameters into account. A RMSEA-value of 0.05 indicates a close fit,
while a value of 0.08 has been suggested as acceptable (Loehlin, 2004). The CFI
(Comparative Fit Index) is a fit index that depends on the average size of the correlations
in the data. CFI should be as close to 1.0 as possible and 0.95 is considered as an
acceptable value. SRMR (The Standardised Root Mean Square Residual), which is a
measure of residuals computed separately for within and between levels, was also used.
The value of SRMR has been suggested to be 0.08 or less for the model to be accepted
(Brown, 2014; Hu & Bentler, 1999).

Procedure
In a first step, latent variables for teacher job satisfaction, aspects of school working
conditions and teacher self-efficacy beliefs were defined in corresponding measurement
models. The second step was to relate teacher job satisfaction to (a) school working
conditions, (b) teacher characteristics. Thus, in a series of structural equation models, the
relations between each of the aspects of school working conditions: student discipline
leadership support, teacher cooperation, school resources, teacher workload, student
classroom social composition, achievement heterogeneity and teacher job satisfaction
 EDUCATIONAL REVIEW 13

were modelled. Finally, a more thorough investigation of the interaction between teacher
characteristics and school working conditions was carried out. Therefore, a series of
interactions were performed between those variables indicating teacher characteristics
and school working conditions, which were significantly related to teacher job satisfaction
in the previous step. In order to visually explore the nature of the potential interactions,
their graphical analyses were additionally performed.

Results
In the following section, latent measurement models of teacher job satisfaction, school
working conditions and teacher self-efficacy are formulated and evaluated, and results of
structural models are presented. As all analyses were carried out on teacher level, student
SES and achievement heterogeneity were aggregated measures (mean of books at home
and the standard deviation of mathematics achievement, respectively) on classroom level.

A latent model of teacher job satisfaction

First, a latent model of the study’s outcome measure, teacher job satisfaction, (JOBSAT)
was formulated (Figure 1). In the SEM models, ellipses or circles denote latent constructs,
and manifest variables are shown in squares or rectangles. The model obtained an
excellent fit to the data. The indicator “My work inspires me” had the highest factor
loading (.82), and others ranged from .57 to .80.
The pairs of items “I am content with my profession as a teacher” and “I am satisfied
with being a teacher in this school” shared substantial commonalities in terms of job
comfort, while the items “I am enthusiastic about my job” and “I am proud of the work I
do” shared substantial commonalities in terms of job fulfilment, as per Evans (1997)
definition. The introduction of corresponding correlated residuals has led to an improved
model fit.

Figure 1. A measurement model of teacher job satisfaction. Model fit: Chi2/df = 13.65/7; CFI = .983;
RMSEA = .071; SRMR = .024.
14 A. TOROPOVA ET AL.

Table 3. Factor loadings of the study’s latent variables.

Student disci- Leadership Teacher coop- Teacher Teacher
pline Support School resources eration Workload self-efficacy
Latent variable (STUDISP) (LEADSUP) (SCHRES) (TCOOP) (TLOAD) (TSE)
Item and Disp_behave Lead_coop Res_room Coop_teach Load_content TSE_inspire
loading* .76 (.041) .81 (.038) .54 (.067) .82 (.031) .35 (.074) .78 (.034)
Disp_respect Lead_teach Res_material Coop_plan Load_hours TSE_interest
.85 (.038) .98 (.030) .75 (.062) .78 (.038) .71 (.051) .79 (.036)
Disp_property Lead_develop Res_renov Coop_share Load_prep TSE_value
.79 (.039) .72 (.043) .54 (.064) .74 (.038) .87 (.043) .72 (.040)
Disp_rules Res_tech Coop_test Load_assist TSE_facil
.50 (.068) .69 (.057) .49 (.062) .58 (.059) .64 (.058)
Disp_enforce Res_support Coop_implem Load_admin TSE_relev
.65 (.064) .55 (.075) .82 (.031) .42 (.072) .75 (.039)
Coop_ensure TSE_critic
.64 (.046) .65 (.055)
Residual Disp_rules Res_tech with
covariance with Res_support
Disp_enforce .37 (.094)
.16 (.040)
Chi2/df 7.43/4 0/0 6.26/4 14.66/9 3.34/5 18.32/9
CFI .990 1.00 .988 .988 1.00 .978
RMSEA .065 .00 .053 .056 .00 .073
SRMR .021 .00 .027 .027 .022 .031
*All loadings are significant unless otherwise stated.

Further, the latent models of school working conditions and teacher self-efficacy were
formulated, their fit and factor loadings presented in Table 3.
The measurement models of student discipline and school resources obtained a good
fit after the introduction of correlated residuals. For the model of student discipline,
residuals were correlated between the items “Disp_rules” and “Disp_enforce”, which likely
share a substantial commonality regarding the compliance with school rules. For the
model of school resources, items “Res_tech” and “Res_support” most certainly have a
common substantive ground with regard to schools’ reinforcing the use of technology.

Which factors are related to teacher job satisfaction?

The research questions were addressed by means of structural equation modelling in a
series of models where the relations of school working conditions, teacher characteristics
and teacher job satisfaction were explored.

Relations between school working conditions and teacher job satisfaction

First, we modelled the relations between each of the aspects of school working condi-
tions: student discipline (STUDISP), leadership support (LEADSUP), teacher cooperation
(TCOOP), school resources (SCHRES), teacher workload (TLOAD), student classroom social
composition (BOOKS_m), achievement heterogeneity (ACH_sd) and teacher job satisfac-
tion (JOBSAT), and one by one (see Table 4).
All of the models’ fit were from satisfactory to excellent, except for the model of
leadership support, whose fit was poor in terms of RMSEA (Wang & Wang, 2012); thus
leading to its exclusion from further modelling. Besides, the regression coefficients of the
relations between student characteristics BOOKS_m and ACH_SD and JOBSAT were non-
significant, therefore the corresponding variables were dropped in further analysis.
 EDUCATIONAL REVIEW 15

Table 4. Relations between school working conditions and job satisfaction.

Outcome Predictor Model 1 Model 2 Model 3 Model 4 Model 5 Model 6 Model 7
JOBSAT
STUDISP .32*
(.096)
LEADSUP .39*
(.077)
SCHRES .34* (.087)
TCOOP .35* (.078)
TLOAD .23* (.088)
BOOKS_m -.015 (.071)
ACH_sd .089 (.073)
MODEL FIT
Chi2/df 77.2/40 65.3/24 62.2/40 61.5/51 75.5/41 20.44/12 22.38/12
RMSEA .069 .094 .053 .040 .066 .061 .069
CFI .958 .942 .968 .982 .952 .980 .974
SRMR .076 .070 .053 .054 .062 .030 .035
*Significant at .05 level

It can be observed that all other aspects of working conditions were significantly
related to teacher job satisfaction. TCOOP, SCHRES and STUDISP had a moderate relation
with JOBSAT of .35, .34 and .32, respectively, while TLOAD had a somewhat weaker yet
positive relation to JOBSAT at .23.
We then entered the different aspects of working conditions in the model simulta-
neously to examine their joint impact on teacher job satisfaction. As the link between
SCHRES and JOBSAT became insignificant, it was removed to arrive at the final model of
teacher working conditions and job satisfaction (See Figure 2).
All of the three remaining aspects of school working conditions remained moderately
related to teacher job satisfaction. Teacher cooperation had the strongest relation to job
satisfaction (.30), followed by student discipline (.25) and workload (.20). It should be
noted that teacher cooperation was correlated with student discipline at .19.

Relations between teacher background characteristics and job satisfaction

In this step, the relations between teacher background characteristics and job satisfac-
tion were addressed. In the following structural models, job satisfaction was related to
teacher gender (T_GEN), teaching experience (T_EXP), teacher certification in mathe-
matics (T_CERT), teacher majoring in mathematics (T_MATH), mathematics education
(T_MATHED), hours devoted to professional development (T_PROF) and teacher self-
efficacy (TSE). Teacher characteristics were entered in the model one by one (see
Table 5).
Results demonstrated that, teacher gender, the amount of professional development
and teacher self-efficacy beliefs were related to job satisfaction. The association with
teacher gender was .18, meaning that women reported somewhat higher levels of job
satisfaction than their male colleagues. The amount of professional development was
positively related to job satisfaction at .28, meaning that teachers with longer exposure to
professional development tended to be more satisfied with the job. Finally, higher levels
of teacher self-efficacy beliefs were related to higher levels of job satisfaction at .42, thus
indicating that more efficacious teachers were also more satisfied with their job. Other
teacher characteristics without statistically significant relations to job satisfaction were
removed from subsequent modelling (see Figure 3).
16 A. TOROPOVA ET AL.

Figure 2. Relations between school working conditions and teacher job satisfaction with
standardised estimates significant at .05 level. Model fit: Chi2/df = 271.05/200; CFI = .957;
RMSEA = .043; SRMR = .074.

Table 5. Relations between teacher characteristics and job satisfaction.

Outcome Predictor Model 1 Model 2 Model 3 Model 4 Model 5 Model 6 Model 7
JOBSAT
T_GEN .18* (.074)
T_EXP .15 (.081)
T_CERT -.03 (.071)
T_MATH .06 (.077)
T_MATHED -.05 (.079)
T_PROF .28* (.084)
TSE .42* (.076)
MODEL FIT
Chi2/df 16.1/12 21.8/12 14.6/12 19.0/12 20.7/12 22.5/12 84.5/51
RMSEA .042 .065 .034 .056 .062 .068 .058
CFI .991 .977 .993 .983 .979 .976 .965
SRMR .023 .031 .024 .028 .032 .033 .055
*Significant at .05 level

So far, the present investigation supports that teacher job satisfaction is significantly
related to a few of the tested predictors. Teacher cooperation, a feasible workload and
student discipline all were positively associated with teacher job satisfaction. The amount
of exposure to professional development influenced job satisfaction in a positive way. In
addition, women had in general higher levels of job satisfaction. Perhaps more interest-
ingly, teachers with higher levels of self-efficacy beliefs were more satisfied with their job.
 EDUCATIONAL REVIEW 17

Figure 3. Relations between teacher characteristics and teacher job satisfaction with standardised
estimates significant at .05 level. Model fit: Chi2/df = 142.46/111; CFI = .970; RMSEA = .038;
SRMR = .047.

Given the results of this study up to this point, as well considering findings from previous
research, it would be reasonable to assume that school working conditions may be
perceived differently by teachers with different characteristics, i.e. gender, the extent of
professional development and self-efficacy beliefs. This was tested in the following step.

Exploring the moderating roles of teacher characteristics

First, an interaction between the above teacher characteristics was tested, but no sig-
nificant interaction was estimated. In the next steps, a series of interactions were per-
formed between the variables indicating teacher characteristics (teacher gender, the
amount of professional development, self-efficacy beliefs) and the variables indicating
teacher working conditions (student discipline, teacher cooperation, teacher workload).
The estimated models can be specified as is depicted in Equation (1).
JOBSAT ¼ b1 WorkCond þ b2 Teach Char þ b3 WorkCond Teach Char þ e: (1)
Models 1–3 (see Table 6) investigated the interactions between teacher characteristics
and the three working conditions. In Model 1, the interaction between the amount of
professional development and the three aspects of school working conditions was
examined. The amount of professional development did not reveal any significant inter-
actions with the aspects of school working conditions.
In Model 2, the interaction between teacher self-efficacy and school working condi-
tions was investigated. Results showed that TSE interacted significantly with STUDISP at
−.17, while there was no significant interaction with TCOOP or TLOAD. In interpreting the
marginal effects of Model 2, the coefficient of STUDISP captures the effect of STUDISP on
18 A. TOROPOVA ET AL.

Table 6. The moderation effects of teacher characteristics on the relations

between school working conditions and teacher job satisfaction.
Predictor Model 1 Model 2 Model 3
STUDISP .47 (.22)* 0.15 (.081) .14 (.109)
TCOOP .29 (.27) 0.22 (.075)* .41 (.103)*
TLOAD .01 (.26) 0.28 (.074)* .22 (.101)*
T_Prof .15 (.082)
TSE 0.37 (.080)*
T_Gen .19 (.065)*
T_Prof x STUDISP −.10 (.080)
T_Prof x TCOOP −.02 (.094)
T_Prof x TLOAD .08 (.089)
TSE x STUDISP −.17 (.071)*
TSE x TCOOP .03 (.068)
TSE x TLOAD .02 (.063)
T_Gen x STUDISP .01 (.076)
T_Gen x TCOOP −.16 (.072)*
T_Gen x TLOAD .05 (.067)
*Significant at p < .05

JOBSAT when TSE is zero. As the effect of student discipline on job satisfaction varies on
the values of the continuous (latent) variable TSE, a more comprehensible way to provide
a substantively meaningful description of the effect may be a graphical illustration of the
differentiated effects.
Therefore, in order to describe the effect of student discipline on job satisfaction as a
function of teacher self-efficacy beliefs, we plotted the effect in Mplus by illustrating the
influence of STUDISP on JOBSAT for different TSE values. As may be seen in Figure 4, the
low TSE and high TSE expressions correspond to TSE values of −1 SD and +1 SD. The plot
thus shows the effect of STUDISP on JOBSAT at 1 SD below and 1 SD above the mean of
TSE, and 95% confidence bands are also given (see Figure 4).
It can be observed that for TSE values 1 SD above the mean, the effect of student
discipline on job satisfaction remains relatively stable. Thus, job satisfaction for teachers
with high efficacy beliefs tends not to be much influenced by student discipline. However,
for teacher self-efficacy levels 1 SD below the mean, the relationship between student
discipline and job satisfaction tends to be positive. Thus, for teachers with lower levels of
self-efficacy, perceptions of better student discipline lead to higher levels of job satisfaction,
while perceptions of discipline problems are associated with lower levels of job satisfaction.
Finally, in Model 3 the interaction between teacher gender and the three aspects of
school working conditions was examined. Results showed a significant interaction of −.16
between T_Gen and TCOOP, while there were no significant interactions found between
STUDISP and TLOAD. A graphical representation the interaction between T_Gen and
TCOOP sheds light on the marginal effects. The graph is presented in Figure 5.
As presented in the graph, job satisfaction of male teachers is to a greater extent
influenced by teacher cooperation. The steepness of the slope for men points to the
fact that male teachers working in schools characterised by higher levels of coopera-
tion, tend to be much more satisfied with their job than male teachers in other
schools. Women, who generally had higher levels of job satisfaction, also had higher
levels of job-satisfaction when experiencing higher levels of teacher cooperation, but
not at the same magnitude as men. Results of the interaction analyses are summarised
in Table 6.
 EDUCATIONAL REVIEW 19

Figure 4. Moderating effect of teacher self-efficacy on the relationship between student discipline and
teacher job satisfaction.

Figure 5. Moderating effect of teacher gender on the relationship between teacher cooperation and
teacher job satisfaction.
20 A. TOROPOVA ET AL.

Discussion
This study aimed to investigate the relations between teacher job satisfaction, school
working conditions and teacher characteristics. It also examined interactions between the
above factors in their relation to teacher job satisfaction.

School working conditions

When analysed simultaneously, three aspects of the working environment were signifi-
cantly related to teacher job satisfaction – student discipline, teacher cooperation and
teacher workload. School material resources became insignificant when considered along
with other working conditions. This is in line with previous research (e.g. Johnson et al.,
2012), which shows that working conditions of a social nature are more important to
teachers than material ones. This certainly should not be interpreted as unimportance of
well-maintained school premises, sufficient workspace, teaching and learning materials,
but only as these factors having less weight compared to relations with students and
colleagues.
Teacher perceptions of their workload had a direct significant association with teacher
job satisfaction, yet was uncorrelated with other aspects of working conditions or with
teacher characteristics. These findings are consistent with the results from Skaalvik and
Skaalvik (2016), who found that an excessive workload was directly significantly related to
emotional exhaustion and motivation to quit teaching, yet was not related to teacher self-
efficacy beliefs. A concern with Swedish teachers’ excessive workload was already voiced
in previous studies (e.g. Allodi & Fischbein, 2012). Results of our study reiterate the
importance of a feasible workload for teachers’ job satisfaction.
Teacher cooperation and student discipline also turned out as important for teacher
perceptions of job satisfaction, a result well corroborated by previous research (Borman &
Dowling, 2008; Ingersoll, 2017; Sims, 2017). Besides, in our study these factors were
correlated, which can be attributed to the fact that both are a reflection of the school
social climate, characterised by mutually supportive relationships between students and
teachers.
Finally, school composition was not related to teacher job satisfaction. This is consis-
tent with a number of studies where either the absence of an effect of student composi-
tion on teacher job satisfaction, or its disappearance after controlling for other aspects of
school environment has been reported (Simon & Johnson, 2015; Sims, 2018).
In regard to those aspects of working conditions, which demonstrated links with
teacher job satisfaction in this study, it is important to keep potential reciprocity in
mind. A number of longitudinal studies have found bi-directional relations between
school working conditions and teacher well-being (Hakanen, Bakker, & Schaufeli, 2006;
Salanova, Bakker, & Llorens, 2006; Simbula, Guglielmi, & Schaufeli, 2011). For example,
Simbula et al. (2011), in a longitudinal study of Italian secondary school teachers found
that, not only were job resources related to work engagement, but also the more engaged
employees were more prone to resource mobilisation, such as cooperation with collea-
gues. In a similar vein, teachers with higher levels of job satisfaction in the current study
may perceive student discipline and workload as being at adequate levels by mobilising
the necessary resources in order to tackle these job demands.
 EDUCATIONAL REVIEW 21

Teacher characteristics
Among the teacher characteristics examined, teacher gender, the amount of participation
in professional development and teacher self-efficacy beliefs had a significant positive
association with teacher job satisfaction. Teacher certification to teach mathematics may
not have revealed any association with teacher job satisfaction due to the lack of varia-
tion, as 82% of Swedish teachers reported having certification to teach mathematics. The
same reason might hold true for teachers’ major, as most teachers majored in either
mathematics or mathematics education. As for teaching experience, it may not have
revealed any link with job satisfaction due to the non-linear relationship between the two.
The amount of participation in professional development was positively related to
teacher perceptions of job satisfaction. This result, in line with a number of previous
findings, stresses the role of professional development not only for enhancing instruc-
tional quality but also as a factor promoting teacher retention through raising teacher
satisfaction with the job (Ingersoll et al., 2014; Kraft et al., 2016). These relations, however,
may also be reciprocal as teachers who feel more content with the job might be more
inclined to participate in professional development programs (see, e.g. Nir & Bogler, 2008).
Teacher self-efficacy beliefs revealed a moderate positive relationship with teacher job
satisfaction. These results are in line with social cognitive theory, which ascribes self-
efficacy a leading role in driving one’s behaviour by setting endeavouring goals and
exerting extra efforts towards achieving them. Here, too, a two-way link may be equally
valid, as positive affective dispositions may breed higher assessments of one’s own
capabilities (Bandura, 1986, 1997).
Women were in our study more satisfied with their job compared to their male
colleagues. Previous research has not established consistent links between teacher gen-
der and job satisfaction, and has rarely viewed gender as a complex socially constructed
phenomenon particular to certain cultural and temporal contexts. Thus, on one hand,
gender differences in our study can be viewed in the global context of the impact of
marketisation trends in education. This impact comprised the de-professionalisation of
the teaching profession and its further feminisation (Weiner, 2006). Hence, that women in
our study are more satisfied with the teaching job may be explained by the fact that they
are more accepting of their “traditional” roles of caring, nurturing and educating (Acker,
1995), while men might feel less suited for this role and thus less content. Further, teacher
salary levels, a lack of career advancement, and occupational prestige of the profession,
assumed to be sufficient for the “feminized” occupation, could be another source of
dissatisfaction for men in teaching (Berge, 2004; Drudy, Martin, O’Flynn, & Woods, 2005).
On the other hand, in interpretation of this study’s results one needs to consider that they
refer to Swedish, eighth-grade mathematics teachers. Viewing the results from this
narrower contextual perspective reveals other important nuances. First, with gender
equality being a highly prioritised social sphere in Sweden, the attractiveness of the
teaching profession in terms of work–life balance may be equally appreciated by men
(Weiner, 2006). Next, mathematics has always been viewed as a “masculine” domain, and
the proportion of men both within this domain and at the secondary school level has
been relatively high in Sweden, as compared to social sciences and lower educational
levels (Weiner, 2006). The above factors challenge the seemingly obvious reasons behind
higher levels of women’s satisfaction with the teaching job in the Swedish context.
22 A. TOROPOVA ET AL.

Therefore, the influence of the global tendencies on the local contexts might have
important implications for both men’s and women’s perceptions of their roles as teachers.
To further complicate matters, the above factors may also considerably vary in impor-
tance at different life and/or career stages of both women and men (Hodkinson & Sparks,
1997). Therefore, drawing far-reaching conclusions on the reasons for varying perceptions
of job satisfaction for women and men should be avoided. It is apparent that a deeper
investigation of gender differences in teacher job satisfaction is warranted in prospective
studies (Berge, 2004; Klassen & Chiu, 2010).

The importance of different teacher perceptions of working conditions for job

satisfaction
In the present study, teacher gender was found to interact with teacher cooperation
levels. Thus, higher levels of teacher cooperation carried more weight for male teachers’
job satisfaction. This finding is in line with the results of Ma and MacMillan’s study (1999),
who found that job satisfaction of male teachers was much more dependent on the
school’s organisational culture, as compared to female teachers. Moreover, our results
point to a difference in job satisfaction among male teachers, as the ones working in
schools with higher levels of teacher cooperation are much more satisfied than their
colleagues in less cooperative school environments. According to the notion of gendered
organisational dynamics (Acker, 1995), a certain behaviour might be expected from men
or women in terms of interaction with colleagues. Thus, it may be assumed that women
have a natural ability to cooperate with others, while men are expected to work in a more
competitive manner. Results of our study challenge this assumption, suggesting that
collegial cooperation is nevertheless important for the job satisfaction of male teachers –
an issue certainly meriting a deeper investigation. Moreover, Darling-Hammond, Hyler,
and Gardner (2017) described the conceptualisation of ongoing professional learning as
being part of a collective effort, rather than only an individual undertaking, as the next
emerging horizon for teacher learning. Certainly, more focus on such professional devel-
opment may increase the attractiveness of the teaching profession overall.
Further, teacher self-efficacy beliefs were found to moderate the effects of student
discipline on job satisfaction. This corroborates the findings by Collie et al., 2012) regard-
ing the differing impact of working conditions for teachers with varying levels of self-
efficacy beliefs. Results of this study suggest that teachers with higher self-efficacy levels
did not perceive student discipline as an obstacle to their job satisfaction. In contrast, for
less efficacious teachers, the perception of student discipline in school was critical.
However, the two-way relationship may be considered possible as successful experiences
of improving student behaviour may enhance teacher self-efficacy beliefs, thus sustaining
their satisfaction with the job.

Conclusions
This study aimed to investigate the relations between school working conditions and
teacher characteristics on job satisfaction of eighth-grade mathematics teachers in
Sweden. Among aspects of school working conditions, teacher workload, teacher coop-
eration and student discipline were most important for teacher job satisfaction. Female
 EDUCATIONAL REVIEW 23

teachers, teachers with more experience of professional development and more effica-
cious teachers tended to have higher levels of job satisfaction. In addition, teacher
cooperation carried much more importance for male teachers’ job satisfaction, while
teacher perceptions of student discipline in school were crucial for job satisfaction of
the least efficacious teachers.

Limitations and further research

This study suffers from several limitations. First, despite the fact that TIMSS questionnaire
included quite a few aspects of the school working environment, some of those included
in the vast body of literature in the field could not be considered. Moreover, as this study
employed data from the eighth grade mathematics teachers in Sweden, the generalisa-
bility of the results may be limited to this particular group of teachers. Second, the
interplay between school environmental factors and various teacher characteristics is
complex, and the internal structure of the relationships need to be explored in greater
detail. As some relations may be reciprocal, prospective studies should pay a closer
attention to directionality. Third, a cross-sectional design of the TIMSS study may not
allow for causal inferences. Therefore, a trend analysis of teacher job satisfaction, which
would include a longitudinal component at the country level, is warranted. Finally, as a
number of countries are facing large teacher shortages for many decades ahead, com-
parative research on factors promoting teacher retention is highly relevant.

Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.

Funding
This work was supported by the Vetenskapsrådet [2013-2207].

ORCID
Anna Toropova http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7677-0958
Eva Myrberg http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2795-2605
Stefan Johansson http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2051-7248

References
Acker, S. (1995). Chapter 3: Gender and teachers’ work. Review of Research in Education, 21(1), 99–
162.
Allen, M. B. (2005). Eight questions on teacher recruitment and retention: What does the research say?
Denver, CO: Education Commission of the States (NJ3).
Allodi, M. W., & Fischbein, S. (2012). Teachers’ perceptions of their work environment in Swedish
junior high schools. Research in Comparative and International Education, 7(3), 376–393.
Ball, S. (2003). The teacher’s soul and the terrors of performativity. Journal of Education Policy, 18/2,
215–228.
24 A. TOROPOVA ET AL.

Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social-cognitive theory. Englewood
Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York, NY: W.H. Freeman.
Bascia, N., & Rottmann, C. (2011). What’s so important about teachers’ working conditions? The fatal
flaw in North American educational reform. Journal of Education Policy, 26(6), 787–802.
Berge, B. (2004). Whatever happened to the male teacher? Gendered discourses and progressive
education in Sweden 1945–2000. History of Education Review, 33(2), 15–29.
Betoret, F. D. (2009). Self-efficacy, school resources, job stressors and burnout among Spanish
primary and secondary school teachers: A structural equation approach. Educational
Psychology, 29(1), 45–68.
Blömeke, S., Houang, R., Hsieh, F. J., & Wang, T. Y. (2017). Effects of job motives, teacher knowledge
and school context on beginning teachers’ commitment to stay in the profession: A longitudinal
study in Germany, Taiwan and the United States. In G. K. LeTendre & M. Akiba (Eds.), International
handbook of teacher quality and policy (pp. 374–387). London: Routledge.
Borman, G. D., & Dowling, N. M. (2008). Teacher attrition and retention: A meta-analytic and
narrative review of the research. Review of Educational Research, 78(3), 367–409.
Brown, T. A. (2014). Confirmatory factor analysis for applied research. New York: Guilford Publications.
Carlgren, I., & Klette, K. (2008). Reconstructions of Nordic teachers: Reform policies and teachers’
work during the 1990s. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 52(2), 117–133.
Collie, R. J., Shapka, J. D., & Perry, N. E. (2012). School climate and social–emotional learning:
Predicting teacher stress, job satisfaction, and teaching efficacy. Journal of Educational
Psychology, 104(4), 1189.
Crossman, A., & Harris, P. (2006). Job satisfaction of secondary school teachers. Educational
Management Administration & Leadership, 34(1), 29–46.
Darling-Hammond, L., Hyler, M. E., Gardner, M. (2017). Effective teacher professional development.
Palo Alto, CA: Learning Policy Institute.
Dovemark, M., & Holm, A.-S. (2017). The performative culture in Swedish schools and how teachers
cope with it. In K. Borgnakke, M. Dovemark, & S. M. da Silva (Eds.), The postmodern professional.
Contemporary learning practices, dilemmas and perspectives (pp. 33–52). London: Tufnell press.
Drudy, S., Martin, M., O’Flynn, J., & Woods, M. (2005). Men and the classroom: Gender imbalances in
teaching. London: Routledge.
European Commission/EACEA/Eurydice. (2018). Teaching careers in Europe: Access, progression and
support. Eurydice Report. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union.
Evans, L. (1997). Addressing problems of conceptualization and construct validity in researching
teachers’ job satisfaction. Educational Research, 39(3), 319–331.
Evetts, J. (2009). New professionalism and new public management: Changes, continuities and
consequences. Comparative Sociology, 8(2), 247–266.
Guarino, C. M., Santibanez, L., & Daley, G. A. (2006). Teacher recruitment and retention: A review of
the recent empirical literature. Review of Educational Research, 76(2), 173–208.
Gustafsson, J.-E. (2009). Strukturell Ekvationsmodellering [Structural Equation Modeling]. In G.
Djurfeldt & M. Barmark Eds., Statistisk verktygslåda 2 Multivariat analys (pp. 269–321). Lund,
Sweden: Studentlitteratur.
Hakanen, J. J., Bakker, A. B., & Schaufeli, W. B. (2006). Burnout and work engagement among
teachers. Journal of School Psychology, 43(6), 495–513.
Hein, V., Smerdon, B., & Sambolt, M. (2013). Predictors of postsecondary success. Washington, DC:
College and Career Readiness and Success Center.
Hextall, I., & Mahony, P. (2000). Reconstructing teaching. London: Routledge.
Hodkinson, P., & Sparkes, A. C. (1997). Careership: A sociological theory of career decision making.
British Journal of Sociology of Education, 18(1), 29–44. doi:10.1080/0142569970180102
Hu, L., & Bentler, P. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis:
Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modelling, 6, 1–55.
Ingersoll, R. (2017). Misdiagnosing America’s teacher quality problem. In G. K. LeTendre & M. Akiba
(Eds.), International handbook of teacher quality and policy (pp. 79–96). London: Routledge.
 EDUCATIONAL REVIEW 25

Ingersoll, R., Merrill, L., & May, H. (2014). What are the effects of teacher education and preparation on
beginning teacher attrition? (Research Report [#RR-82]). Philadelphia: Consortium for Policy
Research in Education, University of Pennsylvania.
Ingersoll, R. M. (2001). Teacher turnover and teacher shortages: An organizational analysis. American
Educational Research Journal, 38(3), 499–534.
Ingersoll, R. M., & May, H. (2012). The magnitude, destinations, and determinants of mathematics
and science teacher turnover. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 34(4), 435–464.
doi:10.3102/0162373712454326
Ingersoll, R. M., & Smith, T. M. (2004). The wrong solution to the teacher shortage. Educational
Leadership, 60(8), 30–33.
Jacobsson, C., Pousette, A., & Thylefors, I. (2001). Managing stress and feelings of mastery among
Swedish comprehensive school teachers. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 45(1), 37–
53.
Johnson, J. L., & Repta, R. (2011). Sex and gender. In J. L. Oliffe & L. Greaves (Eds.), Designing and
conducting gender, sex, and health research (pp. 17–37). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
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.
Klassen, R. M., & Chiu, M. M. (2010). Effects on teachers’ self-efficacy and job satisfaction: Teacher
gender, years of experience, and job stress. Journal of Educational Psychology, 102(3), 741.
Klassen, R. M., & Chiu, M. M. (2011). The occupational commitment and intention to quit of
practicing and pre-service teachers: Influence of self-efficacy, job stress, and teaching context.
Contemporary Educational Psychology, 36(2), 114–129.
Klusmann, U., Kunter, M., Trautwein, U., Lüdtke, O., & Baumert, J. (2008). Teachers’ occupational well-
being and quality of instruction: The important role of self-regulatory patterns. Journal of
Educational Psychology, 100(3), 702.
Kraft, M. A., Marinell, W. H., & Shen-Wei Yee, D. (2016). School organizational contexts, teacher
turnover, and student achievement: Evidence from panel data. American Educational Research
Journal, 53(5), 1411–1449.
Krieg, J. M. (2006). Teacher quality and attrition. Economics of Education Review, 25(1), 13–27.
Kukla-Acevedo, S. (2009). Leavers, movers, and stayers: The role of workplace conditions in teacher
mobility decisions. The Journal of Educational Research, 102(6), 443–452.
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.
Kyriacou, C. (2001). Teacher stress: Directions for future research. Educational Review, 53(1), 27–35.
Kyriacou, C., & Sutcliffe, J. (1977). Teacher stress: A review. Educational Review, 29(4), 299–306.
doi:10.1080/0013191770290407
Levin, H. M. (1985). Solving the shortage of mathematics and science teachers. Educational
Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 7(4), 371–382.
Liang, G., & Akiba, M. (2017). Teachers’ working conditions: A cross-national analysis using the OECD
TALIS and PISA data. In G. K. LeTendre & M. Akiba (Eds.), International handbook of teacher quality
and policy (pp. 388–402). London: Routledge.
Lindqvist, P., & Nordänger, U. K. (2016). Already elsewhere–A study of (skilled) teachers’ choice to
leave teaching. Teaching and Teacher Education, 54, 88–97.
Lindqvist, P., Nordänger, U. K., & Carlsson, R. (2014). Teacher attrition the first five years–A multi-
faceted image. Teaching and Teacher Education, 40, 94–103.
Liu, X. S., & Ramsey, J. (2008). Teachers’ job satisfaction: Analyses of the teacher follow-up survey in
the United States for 2000–2001. Teaching and Teacher Education, 24(5), 1173–1184.
Loehlin, J. C. (2004). Latent variable models: An introduction to factor, path, and structural equation
analysis. Mahwah, NJ: L. Erlbaum Associates.
Lundahl, L. (2016). Equality, inclusion and marketization of Nordic education: Introductory notes.
Research in Comparative and International Education, 11(1), 3–12.
26 A. TOROPOVA ET AL.

Lundahl, L., Arreman, I., Holm, A., & Lundström, U. (2013). Educational marketization the Swedish
way. Education Inquiry, 4(3), 497–517. doi:10.3402/edui.v4i3.22620
Lundström, U., & Holm, A.-M. (2011). Market Competition in upper secondary education: Perceived
effects on teachers’ work. Policy Futures in Education, 9/2, 2011.
Ma, X., & MacMillan, R. B. (1999). Influences of workplace conditions on teachers’ job satisfaction. The
Journal of Educational Research, 93(1), 39–47.
Malinen, O. P., & Savolainen, H. (2016). The effect of perceived school climate and teacher efficacy in
behaviour management on job satisfaction and burnout: A longitudinal study. Teaching and
Teacher Education, 60, 144–152.
Martin, M. O., Mullis, I. V. S., & Hooper, M., (Eds.). (2016). Methods and procedures in TIMSS 2015.
Boston College: TIMSS & PIRLS International Study Center. Retrieved from http://timssandpirls.bc.
edu/publications/timss/2015-methods.html
Mertler, C. (2002). Job satisfaction and perception of motivation among middle and high school
teachers. American Secondary Education, 31(1), 43–53.
Mullis, I. V. S., & Martin, M. O., (Eds.). (2013). TIMSS 2015 assessment frameworks. Boston College:
TIMSS & PIRLS International Study Center. Retrieved from http://timssandpirls.bc.edu/timss2015/
frameworks.html
Nir, A. E., & Bogler, R. (2008). The antecedents of teacher satisfaction with professional development
programs. Teaching and Teacher Education, 24(2), 377–386.
OECD. (2019). Sweden country note. Key findings from TALIS 2018 survey.
Perryman, J. (2006). Panoptic performativity and school inspection regimes: Disciplinary mechan-
isms and life under special measures. Journal of Education Policy, 21(2), 147–161. doi:10.1080/
02680930500500138
Perryman, J., Ball, S., Maguire, M., & Braun, A. (2011). Life in the pressure cooker – school league
tables and English and mathematics teachers’ responses to accountability in a results-driven era.
British Journal of Educational Studies, 59(2), 179–195.
Poppleton, P., & Riseborough, G. (1990). A profession in transition: Educational policy and secondary
school teaching in England in the 1980s. Comparative Education, 26(2–3), 211–226.
Rinke, C. R. (2008). Understanding teachers’ careers: Linking professional life to professional path.
Educational Research Review, 3(1), 1–13.
Ronfeldt, M., Loeb, S., & Wyckoff, J. (2013). How teacher turnover harms student achievement.
American Educational Research Journal, 50(1), 4–36.
Rumberger, R. (1985). The shortage of mathematics and science teachers: A review of the evidence.
Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 7(4), 355–369.
Salanova, M., Bakker, A. B., & Llorens, S. (2006). Flow at work: Evidence for an upward spiral of
personal and organizational resources*. Journal of Happiness Studies, 7(1), 1–22.
Sibieta, L. (2018). The teacher labour market in England: Shortages, subject expertise and incentives.
London: Education Policy Institute.
Siegler, R. S., Duncan, G. J., Davis-Kean, P. E., Duckworth, K., Claessens, A., Engel, M., . . . Chen, M.
(2012). Early predictors of high school mathematics achievement. Psychological Science, 23(7),
691–697.
Simbula, S., Guglielmi, D., & Schaufeli, W. B. (2011). A three-wave study of job resources, self-efficacy,
and work engagement among Italian schoolteachers. European Journal of Work and
Organizational Psychology, 20(3), 285–304.
Simon, N. S., & Johnson, S. M. (2015). Teacher turnover in high-poverty schools: What we know and
can do. Teachers College Record, 117(3), 1–36.
Sims, S. (2017). TALIS 2013: Working conditions, teacher job satisfaction and retention (Department for
Education Statistical Working Paper). London: Department of Education.
Sims, S. (2018). Essays on the recruitment and retention of teachers (Doctoral dissertation). University
College London.
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.
 EDUCATIONAL REVIEW 27

Skaalvik, E. M., & Skaalvik, S. (2014). Teacher self-efficacy and perceived autonomy: Relations with
teacher engagement, job satisfaction, and emotional exhaustion. Psychological Reports, 114(1),
68–77.
Skaalvik, E. M., & Skaalvik, S. (2016). Teacher stress and teacher self-efficacy as predictors of
engagement, emotional exhaustion, and motivation to leave the teaching profession. Creative
Education, 7(13), 1785.
Spilt, J. L., Koomen, H. M., & Thijs, J. T. (2011). Teacher wellbeing: The importance of teacher–student
relationships. Educational Psychology Review, 23(4), 457–477.
Statistics Sweden. (2018). Labour market tendency survey. Retrived from https://www.scb.se/en/
finding-statistics/statistics-by-subject-area/education-and-research/analysis-trends-and-fore
casts-in-education-and-the-labour-market/labour-market-tendency-survey/pong/publications/
labour-market-tendency-survey-2018/
Sutcher, L., Darling-Hammond, L., & Carver-Thomas, D. (2016). A coming crisis in teaching? Teacher
supply, demand, and shortages in the U.S. Palo Alto, CA: Learning Policy Institute.
Tema Nord. (2010). Rekruteringsproblematikken på de nordiske laereruddannelser. 2010:533
[Recruitment problems in Nordic teacher education programs]. Köbenhamn: Nordisk Ministerråd.
The Swedish National Agency for Education [Skolverket]. (2016). TIMSS 2015. Svenska grundskolee-
levers kunskaper i matematik och naturvetenskap i ett internationellt perspektiv [TIMSS 2015.
Swedish students’ achievement in mathematics and natural sciences from the international
perspective]. Stockholm: Skolverket.
The Swedish National Agency for Education [Skolverket]. (2018). Kartläggning av hur huvudmän
hanterar bristen på behöriga lärare och förskollärare [Mapping principals’ measures to handle the
lack of competent teachers and preschool teachers]. Stockholm: Skolverket.
Wang, J., & Wang, X. (2012). Structural equation modeling: Applications using Mplus. Hoboken,
NJ: John Wiley & Sons.
Weiner, G. (2002). Uniquely similar or similarly unique? Education and development of teachers in
Europe. Teaching Education, 13(3), 273–288.
Weiner, G. (2006). The nation strikes back: Recent influences on teacher education in Europe.
Hitotsubashi Journal of Social Studies, 38(1), 79–88.
Worth, J., & De Lazzari, G. (2017). Teacher retention and turnover research. Research update 1: Teacher
retention by subject. Slough: NFER.
Zee, M., & Koomen, H. M. (2016). Teacher self-efficacy and its effects on classroom processes, student
academic adjustment, and teacher well-being: A synthesis of 40 years of research. Review of
Educational Research, 86(4), 981–1015.
Zeichner, K. (2010). Competition, economic rationalization, increased surveillance, and attacks on
diversity: Neo-liberalism and the transformation of teacher education in the US. Teaching and
Teacher Education, 26(8), 1544–1552.
Zeichner, K. (2014). The struggle for the soul of teaching and teacher education in the USA. Journal
of Education for Teaching, 40(5), 551–568.