Early Childhood Educ J (2014) 42:153–162
DOI 10.1007/s10643-013-0595-4
Preschool Teacher Well-Being: A Review of the Literature
Kendra M. Hall-Kenyon • Robert V. Bullough •
Kathryn Lake MacKay • Esther E. Marshall
Published online: 15 May 2013
 Springer Science+Business Media New York 2013
Abstract Much is changing in preschool education.
Current reform primarily emphasizes standardized practice,
academic outcomes, and accountability. Little attention
has been given to how these changes are impacting the
well-being of teachers. The purpose of this review is to
summarize the current literature on preschool teacher well-
being and identify directions for future research. Accord-
ingly, a thorough search of the literature was conducted
and 30 articles attending to issues of preschool teacher
well-being were identified and analyzed. The literature was
found to be deeply fragmented, rather narrow and limited.
One conclusion is that more research is needed that attends
more broadly to preschool teachers’ well-being, including
self-efficacy, life satisfaction, financial stability, emotional
and physical health, and autonomy.
Keywords Preschool
Teacher well-being
Stress

Job satisfaction
Health
Policy reform
Introduction
Current concerns about preschool effectiveness have led to
rapid changes in early childhood education policy and
practice. These changes have focused primarily on the
professionalization of early childhood through increased
education requirements for teachers, standardized instruc-
tional and assessment practices, and improved teacher
compensation (Ackerman 2004; Barnett 2003, 2004; Stipek
2006). Certainly improvements in preschool effectiveness
K. M. Hall-Kenyon (&)
R. V. Bullough

K. L. MacKay
E. E. Marshall
Provo, UT, USA
e-mail: kendra_hall@byu.edu
are necessary and desirable, but as Day and Smethem
(2009) argue, when reform efforts are preoccupied with
teacher, child, and school outcomes they may overlook the
impact of ‘‘teachers’ identities and work lives’’ (p. 145) on
educational improvement.
When examining the current reform efforts in early
childhood, it seems that the focus is often narrow with too
much emphasis on universal standards and accountability
with little to no emphasis given to how teachers are fairing.
There are signs of a ‘‘crisis’’:
Early childhood services are widely presented as fail-
ing to meet the needs of children and families and
therefore the rationale for regulation is legitimated and
a regulatory gaze deemed expedient and necessary. In
this climate early years practitioners increasingly have
to wrestle with demands for accountability, perform-
ativity and standardised approaches to their practice,
all of which mark a pronounced movement towards
centralised control, and prescription, which poses a
potential threat to professional autonomy and morale.
(Osgood 2006, p. 6)
Efforts to improve education for young children should
not only emphasize what teachers do when teaching but
also who they are and how they are affected by the doing.
The purpose of this review is to examine the current lit-
erature on early childhood teacher well-being and identify
future directions for research.
Search Procedures
The current review was guided by three criteria. First, the
search focused primarily on preschool teachers. Early
elementary (K-3) teachers were not included because they
123
154
generally do not confront the same work conditions, low
wages, and/or new and increasing educational requirements
common to preschool teaching. Caregivers (birth-3) were
also not included because they are not generally under the
licensure, policy restrictions, or accountability require-
ments that are now common to preschool. Studies were
included when both caregivers (birth-3) and preschool
teachers (3–5 years) were sampled. Second, all of the
identified articles attended to some aspect of teacher well-
being even if well-being was not a primary focus. Finally,
only data-driven studies in refereed journals were included.
The following key words were used to search ERIC and
GoogleScholar databases: early childhood teacher well-
being; job satisfaction; stress; burnout; teacher quality. The
search was then repeated replacing ‘‘early childhood’’ with
‘‘preschool.’’ Out of the 42 articles found in the first phase
of the search, only 21 met the inclusion criteria. In addition
to the key words search, prominent journals and citations
and early childhood policy websites were searched result-
ing in the location of 9 articles. Thus, a total of 30 articles
were selected for review. The search was not limited to
research conducted in the United States, although only
seven of the studies represented international populations
with studies conducted in Australia (n = 3), New Zealand
(n = 1), Israel (n = 1), Finland (n = 1), and England
(n = 1), the remainder of the studies focused on preschool
teachers in the United States (n = 23).
The authors read the articles and wrote summaries of a
portion of the total (7–8 articles each), noting research
questions, methods used, findings, and conclusions. The
authors then read and discussed all of the summaries,
attending to methodologies, findings, and noting patterns
and themes. It quickly became apparent that the literature is
deeply fragmented. Papers emphasize different elements of
well-being, which are generally only narrowly construed as
a matter of teacher stress or turnover, for example. Rarely
is a broader view of teacher well-being taken and seldom
are wider life issues related to well-being, such as health,
discussed. This conclusion underscores the difficulty of
summarizing the literature while highlighting the need for
additional research. Two sections follow: The first provides
an analysis of the methodologies used in the studies
reviewed while the second discusses themes.
Review of Methodologies
Review of the methodologies employed revealed some sig-
nificant limitations in the ways in which well-being is con-
ceived and measured. The majority of the articles (n = 18)
utilized surveys or questionnaires to measure some facet of
teacher well-being. Eight of the 18 studies also included
classroom or instructional quality observation measures
123
Early Childhood Educ J (2014) 42:153–162
(Greene 1999; Guo et al. 2010; Kontos and Stremmel 1988;
Li-Grining et al. 2010; McGinty et al. 2008; Miller and
Bogatova 2009; Torquati et al. 2007; Zhai et al. 2011) and
three included follow-up interviews (Gable et al. 2007;
Wagner and French 2010; Whitebook and Sakai 2003). A
wide range of surveys or questionnaires were used. Only
three measures of well-being were used or mentioned in
more than one study. The Early Childhood Job Satisfaction
Survey (ECJSS; Jorde-Bloom 1988) was employed in three
studies (Jorde-Bloom 1988; Miller and Bogatova 2009;
Wagner and French 2010), making it the most commonly
used instrument. The Child Care Worker Job Stress Survey
(CCWJSI; Curbow et al. 2000) was used in two studies
(Li-Grining et al. 2010; Zhai et al. 2011) and the question-
naire developed for the National Childcare Staffing Study
(Whitebook et al. 1990) was also used in two studies (Greene
1999; Whitebook and Sakai 2003). Many of the surveys
included Likert-scale items but few included open-ended
questions (e.g., What do you find satisfying or dissatisfy-
ing?). Fifteen of the studies utilized only quantitative anal-
yses, which may give some general information about
teacher well-being but are not useful for capturing the
complexity of teachers’ personal and professional lives.
Eight studies took a more in-depth look at teacher well-
being through use of open-ended questionnaires, focus
groups, and/or teacher interviews (Adair 2011; Bullough
et al. 2012; Kelly and Berthelsen 1995; Kilgallon et al.
2008; Madrid and Dunn-Kenney 2010; Moriarty et al. 2001;
Ryan and Ackerman 2005; Ylitapio-Mantyla et al. 2012).
The studies that sought a deeper examination of teachers’
lives and work were often limited to 2–3 teachers.
Surprisingly, only two studies reported cases (Ackerman
2004; Sumsion 2002) although case studies are likely one of
the better methods for gaining a deeper understanding of
teacher well-being. The remaining two studies included a
‘‘replicated secondary data analysis’’ (Early et al. 2007,
p. 561) and a narrative inquiry (Court et al. 2009).
From reviewing this literature, it is evident that while
these studies (either individually or collectively) attend to
one or more elements of well-being, more research is
needed. Most especially, studies are needed that include
larger numbers of teachers, a wider range of data sources,
and richer examinations of teachers’ lives.
Review of Study Findings
Analysis of all 30 studies resulted in the identification of
central concerns related to preschool teacher well-being—
compensation, education levels, satisfaction, and stress—
with most of the literature focused on the first two topics
(compensation and level of education). In addition to these
common themes, additional topics of interest were
Early Childhood Educ J (2014) 42:153–162 155

mentioned often tangentially (i.e., emotional competence, and old age—is critical, given that employees do not
teachers’ sense of community, health, and pressures asso- earn enough to build large cash reserves. As long as
ciated with emotional change). they feel protected from uncertainty, workers may be
willing to stay in a field with wages that force them to
Teacher Compensation live frugally. (p. 236)
When examining teacher compensation in light of well-
Early childhood teacher pay was one of the two most com-
being it is necessary to consider more than just a teacher’s
monly discussed topics. This is not a surprising finding. Low
hourly wage or salary. In a previous study of Head Start
wages have been a long-standing and serious problem in
teachers, we also found that, while salary does play a
early childhood education affecting teacher turnover and job
significant role in teacher well-being, there may be a
satisfaction, both important factors in well-being. Nearly all
number of other factors at play. For instance, early child-
of the studies concluded that low wages have a negative
hood teachers are often older women who may have been
impact on teachers and the field at large.
forced to enter the workforce because of divorce and other
family challenges and who have modest education but find
Turnover
themselves needing to support their families (sometimes
with several children) on meager wages (Bullough et al.
Because low wages have long have been a concern in early
2012). Whitebook and Sakai’s (2003) use of a composite
childhood education, some states have implemented wage
variable, ‘‘self-sufficiency,’’ which takes into account the
incentive programs, typically connected with pushing higher
teacher’s salary along with other variables such as the
educational attainments for teachers. Two studies addressed
number of people living at home and whether or not there
incentive programs implemented in two different states
are other wage earners in the home is helpful in trying to
(Gable et al. 2007 and Bridges et al. 2011). The results offer a
understand the complex relationship between compensa-
mixed review for these kinds of initiatives. Gable et al.
tion and teacher well-being.
(2007) found that the incentive program did not impact low-
and high-wage teachers, but mid-wage teachers were found
Salary and Satisfaction
to be more likely to stay in teaching as a result of the
incentives. Bridges et al. (2011) also found that wage
Stremmel et al. (1993) surveyed 544 early childhood staff
incentives did not necessarily lead to desired outcomes. In
in order to examine the relationship of job satisfaction
fact, they found that teachers who received greater financial
(which included compensation), communication, age,
incentives were less likely to stay in the field. Instead,
specialized training, and length of employment with emo-
‘‘greater job retention was associated with longer tenure in
tional exhaustion. The results suggest that while salary is
the field and higher job rank, perhaps reflecting a more
an issue, low salary does not appear to have a significant
intense commitment to the field or the absences of labor
impact on emotional exhaustion. Again, low wages alone
market alternatives with similar levels of extrinsic or
do not make the work in early childhood challenging and
intrinsic benefits’’ (p. 1026). Both studies suggest the need
ultimately exhausting, a finding that suggests the need for
for more in-depth, qualitative examinations of factors that
additional research related to wider quality of life issues.
motivate preschool teachers to stay or to leave teaching.
Importantly, in this study satisfaction with work conditions
Undoubtedly, wage incentives, such as those described in
and the work itself predicted lower emotional exhaustion,
these two studies, hold potential but they are not wholly or
an important, although perhaps not a surprising, finding
fully sustaining, and likely never will be sufficient.
given the strong service ethic and commitment of early
Greene (1999) found that while teacher wage is impor-
childhood educators (Bullough et al. 2012). Policies and
tant, pay might not be the primary reason why teachers
reform efforts that emphasize these positive attributes,
choose to stay in or leave preschool teaching. Rather,
rather than only focusing on wages, will likely prove more
Greene found that factors such as a teachers’ educational
satisfying and sustaining to teachers.
specialization, commitment to the teaching profession, and
sense of autonomy were significant predictors of teachers’
Education
decisions to leave. Relatedly, Holochwost et al. (2009)
found that benefits (e.g., health, disability, retirement),
While teacher education levels, like the issue of salary, long
which offer teachers a certain level of security, play a more
have received considerable attention in the literature, con-
significant role in teacher retention than pay.
nections between education levels and well-being have not
This makes intuitive sense: in a low-wage field, been explored. That there ought to be a connection–educa-
security—from high medical bills, disabling injury, tion to competence and competence to teacher well-being—is

123
156
evident (Deci and Ryan 2000; Ryan et al. 2008). Recent state
and federal mandates requiring higher levels of education
attainment for preschool teachers have prompted greater
attention to this issue but not directly to teacher well-being,
nor to the impact of these mandates on well-being. Studies
have focused on teachers’ education levels and classroom
quality (Early et al. 2007; Miller and Bogatova 2009; Ryan
and Ackerman 2005; Torquati et al. 2007), turnover (Bridges
et al. 2011; Gable et al. 2007; Greene 1999; Holochwost et al.
2009; Whitebook and Sakai 2003), and self-efficacy (Chung
et al. 2005; Guo et al. 2010).
Clasroom Quality
There is some evidence to suggest that higher levels of
education lead to higher quality classrooms (Blau 2000;
Burchial et al. 2002; Howes et al. 1992) which is, likely the
basis for many of the recent mandates. However, the evi-
dence is not conclusive (Early et al. 2007; Torquati et al.
2007). There is some evidence to suggest that one’s educa-
tional specialization (e.g., child development associate) does
have some impact (Torquati et al. 2007). In terms of well-
being, it is important to carefully examine the actual
knowledge and experience gained in traditional degree
programs, regardless of specialization and whether or not
that knowledge and experience leads to greater competence.
Despite the mixed evidence, some states have mandated
increasing teachers’ education levels with little to no
attention paid to how these mandates are impacting the
work and lives of teachers. Our search produced only two
studies that evaluated the implementation of such man-
dates, both of which resulted in outcomes that speak
directly to the importance of considering how teachers are
fairing under the mandates. In one study, Miller and
Bogatova (2009) evaluated the T.E.A.C.H. Early Childhood
Project in Pennsylvania, which provided participants with
scholarships so they could attend school (9–15 h per year to
work towards a CDA/Associates degree). The authors fol-
lowed three teacher cohorts across five years. Results suggest
that participating teachers did, in fact, improve their practice.
For example, participants increased the use of appropriate
activities such as, ‘‘participating in dramatic play,’’ ‘‘doing
creative writing,’’ and ‘‘playing with games and puzzles’’
and also decreased the number of inappropriate activities
such as ‘‘handwriting on lines,’’ and ‘‘reciting the alphabet’’
(p. 267). However, these positive findings should be exam-
ined in light of low teacher retention: only 14.9 % of teachers
remained at the end of the fifth year. The authors acknowl-
edged this as a significant problem and examined their data in
an effort to locate some of the reasons for the high attrition
rate. A number of factors emerged distinguishing those who
stayed from those who withdrew from the program:
123
Early Childhood Educ J (2014) 42:153–162
…there were some significant differences with
respect to their: family size (those who withdrew/
dropped had a smaller family); ethnicity (those who
withdrew/dropped were more likely to be African
American or Hispanic); job title (aides, directors, and
assistant directors were more likely to withdraw/
drop); education (those with less education were
more likely to withdraw/drop); and type of provider
(center-based providers were more likely to with-
draw/drop). (p. 273)
Such differences, once again, indicate a need for
researchers to consider the complexity of teachers’ lives
and how that complexity impacts teacher decision making.
In fact, there are numerous factors beyond those found in
this study that influence teachers’ success in pursuing
additional education (e.g., marital status, family finances,
goals and aspirations, commitment, previous schooling
experiences). This finding also underscores the importance
of ensuring that efforts to increase teacher levels of edu-
cation include the kinds of support, beyond external
rewards, that preschool teachers need to succeed. Ignoring
such issues may result in programs that actually hurt
teachers and weaken their commitment to teaching.
The second study involved an evaluation of court
mandated (Abbott v. Burke) reform in New Jersey. The
reform sought to radically improve the quality of care in
early childhood by requiring preschool teachers to receive
a bachelor’s degree with a teaching certificate. Ryan and
Ackerman (2005) looked at improvements in credentials as
a means for determining whether or not the reform
achieved its intended outcome of improving teaching
quality. They found that, ‘‘33 % of the teachers who [were]
enrolled in some kind of teacher preparation program
indicated that they intended to leave once they became
certified’’ (p. 9). Certainly not the outcome that was
intended, as the authors explain,
there is also the paradoxical issue that the very mandate
that is designed to increase the quantity of qualified
teachers in New Jersey’s Abbott preschools may
effectively serve to lessen the number of qualified
preschool teachers in these districts…Moreover, as
many of these teachers are from diverse ethnic back-
grounds there is also the concern that this reported
turnover will impact the diversity of the private and
Head Start program workforce…Therefore, in order
for teachers not to feel shortchanged, efforts must be
made to alleviate any difference in the working con-
ditions and benefits between public schools and private
settings and Head Starts (sic). (p. 11)
Efforts to support teachers as they gain education must
not only focus on getting teachers to the end of degree
Early Childhood Educ J (2014) 42:153–162
programs but on their sense of competence and well-being.
They also must take a long-term view so that teachers will
continue to feel supported and be incentivized to remain in
the field as their competence grows. As noted, such
incentives need to go beyond teacher pay, as evidenced
from the findings in the previous section on teacher com-
pensation, in order to have a significant impact.
Supporting teachers in their efforts to improve classroom
quality should also take teachers’ experience, expertise, and
aspirations into account, rather than just assuming that
quality will automatically improve with additional educa-
tion. In a study of two teachers, Ackerman (2004) conducted
semi-structured interviews to understand, (a) what brought
the teachers into teaching, (b) the teachers’ teaching history
and professional development, and (c) the teachers’ opinions
about their state’s new BA and preschool-grade 3 certifica-
tion requirements. One teacher reported being frustrated
with the new requirements because they did not consider her
expertise or prior experience.
I think they need to look at the individual, and see
how long they’ve been working… if they are doing a
good job, look at that, take that into consideration,
and give them something for working that many
years… but I don’t want to go back because writing is
very hard to me….why do I have to have biology, or
your math or your science when I know I’m not going
to go anywhere else and teach?…that is what keeps
me [from pursuing a higher degree]. (p. 295)
These concerns are likely shared by numerous other
experienced preschool teachers. This teacher had been
working in this setting for many years and was suddenly told
that she was no longer qualified for her job unless she got a
bachelor’s degree, this despite previously being judged
successful. So, while additional education may be beneficial
to this teacher, one can understand her concern that many of
the required courses will feel, to her, as if they do not have
direct bearing on her personal goals or the quality of her work
with children. Plus, having to return to school brings a sig-
nificant time commitment, not to mention added financial
burdens. As a result this teacher, like many others in the field
in similar situations, chose not to go back to school and
instead accepted a limited employment future as inevitable.
Many of the Head Start teachers in a previous study
(Bullough et al. 2012) expressed concerns about meeting
increased educational requirements, particularly those who
had been teaching for many years. In fact, several ‘‘stepped
down’’ from lead teacher positions because they could not
meet (or chose not to meet) the newly mandated educa-
tional requirements, often because of tuition costs. They
made way for younger, far less experienced, and perhaps
less competent, teachers who had bachelor degrees to
assume lead teacher positions. This trend certainly raises
157
some disturbing questions about the impact that simply
mandating increased educational requirements may have
on both classroom quality and teacher well-being.
Turnover
Current mandates are placing additional pressures on pre-
school teachers and creating new challenges related to
recruitment and retention. As such, several articles examined
the impact of increasing education requirements and teacher
retention, which gives some indication of job satisfaction,
and in part, well-being. Results from these studies are mixed.
In a study by Holochwost et al. (2009) the authors adminis-
tered a statewide survey to early childhood teachers and
found that education, along with marital status, age, and
experience, had a significant impact on teachers’ intent to
stay in the field. In contrast, Gable et al. (2007) examined the
impact of a state cash incentive program to increase educa-
tional attainment on teachers’ decisions to leave and found
that turnover rates for teachers with a high school diploma
were not impacted by the incentive program. However, for
teachers with more than a high school diploma, the incentive
program appeared to decrease turnover rates. Results from
other studies suggest that gaining additional schooling might
actually increase turnover (Greene 1999), dissatisfaction
(Stremmel et al. 1993; Whitebook and Sakai 2003), and
emotional exhaustion (Stremmel et al. 1993). Perhaps
increasing teachers’ level of education is not the panacea
policy makers seem to think it is.
This is not to say that encouraging greater formal edu-
cation among preschool teachers is mistaken. Simply
mandating more education, however, when driven by a
deficit model of preschool teachers and their abilities, may
actually increase teacher discontent and ultimately turn-
over. Furthermore, such policies fail to take into consid-
eration the multiple ways in which teachers enter early
childhood, the skills and dispositions that make them
successful in their work with young children, or the impact
that such mandates have on teachers (both personally and
professionally) and their families. Accordingly, researchers
need to not only consider the impact of such mandates on
teachers’ decisions to stay or leave early childhood edu-
cation, but also the personal and professional costs of
meeting them for teachers. We agree with Sumsion (2002),
that, ‘‘there seems a need to focus on the interplay between
personal, relational and contextual influences if we are to
develop a more comprehensive understanding of [teacher]
attrition’’ (p. 882).
Self-efficacy
Two studies examined the impact of level of education on
self-efficacy, an important facet of well-being. Chung et al.
123
158
(2005) found positive correlations between teacher–child
relationships, and level of education, teaching efficacy and
parent-teacher relationships. In contrast, Guo et al. (2010)
found no significant relationship between teachers’ self-
efficacy and level of educational attainment. Additional
studies of early childhood teachers’ self-efficacy are nee-
ded in order to more clearly understand this relationship,
along with the relationship of self-efficacy to other factors,
such as time in teaching. In fact, Guo et al. (2010) found
that teachers with elementary teaching certifications
reported having higher self-efficacy while teachers who
had been working in preschools for longer periods of time
reported lower levels. While these findings do not neces-
sarily make sense intuitively they may shed light on the
factors that impact preschool teacher’s self-efficacy.
Job Satisfaction
Job satisfaction, a common way of getting at teacher well-
being, was another theme that emerged from the literature.
It should be noted that issues of satisfaction are found
throughout the literature, as noted in some studies reported
in the previous sections. In this section, we will describe
studies that primarily focused on job satisfaction alone.
Greene (1999) surveyed preschool teachers in for-profit
settings to explore, ‘‘job satisfaction, intention to leave and,
the quality of teachers’ interactions with children’’ (p.7)
and found that the vast majority were satisfied with their
work. Teachers in this study were,
…on average, likely to consider their work a long term
career, somewhat unlikely to leave their job within the
next 12 months and more likely to take the same job
without hesitation. They were also more likely to report
that their job was just what they expected when they
took it and that it measured up somewhat well to the job
they’d really like to have. (p. 13)
Similarly, Kontos and Stremmel (1988) found that teachers
were largely satisfied with their work and did not intend to
leave. In a study of Head Start teachers we also found a similar
result, with the large majority of the teachers reporting high
levels of satisfaction (Bullough et al. 2012). If these findings
are representative, then it seems that teachers’ overall high
levels of satisfaction with their work—and most especially
their commitment to nurturing young children—are too often
overlooked attributes that should be enhanced and not taken-
for-granted by policy makers. Capitalizing on teachers’ sat-
isfaction, in doing something that they love, something that
matters, rather than focusing on deficits seems wise.
In another study, Jorde-Bloom (1988) examined per-
sonal and organizational factors that influenced preschool
teachers’ job satisfaction. Participants were given the Early
Childhood Job Satisfaction Survey (ECJSS—Jorde-Bloom
123
Early Childhood Educ J (2014) 42:153–162
1988) along with a number of additional survey items that
addressed teachers’ ‘‘commitment to the center,’’ ‘‘con-
gruence between existing and idea conditions’’, ‘‘profes-
sional orientation’’ (e.g., career v. job, participation in
professional organizations) and two open-ended questions
about what was found most satisfying and dissatisfying
about teaching (p.112). Findings suggest that the teachers’
reported job satisfaction is significantly related to, ‘‘level of
commitment to the center and the extent to which current
conditions are congruent with the worker’s ideal’’ (p. 115),
a key to well-being. The author also found surprisingly
small correlations between some personal variables (e.g.,
age, education, experience, salary, and professional edu-
cation) and job satisfaction. These findings speak to the
need for greater depth in studies of teacher job satisfaction.
When these same teachers were asked what they found
satisfying and dissatisfying about teaching, a number of
findings emerged. First, and consistent with views stated
above, teachers reported that the greatest source of satis-
faction was the ‘‘nature of the work itself,’’ but this was also
reported as the greatest source of dissatisfaction. When the
author looked more closely at the data she found that it was
teachers’ ‘‘interactions with children that provided the
strongest source of satisfaction’’ (Jorde-Bloom 1988,
p. 118), a finding replicated by Kontos and Stremmel (1988).
Second, teachers reported co-workers as being a source of
both satisfaction and dissatisfaction, likely a finding that is
common to most, if not all, work settings. Third, low pay and
benefits and few opportunities for promotion were reported
as the strongest sources of frustration. Although, supervisor
relations and working conditions were also reported as
sources of dissatisfaction, these findings highlight the need
for better understanding of teachers’ sources of satisfaction
and dissatisfaction in order to help create, ‘‘quality work
environments that are personally and professionally satis-
fying’’ (p. 120). We agree with Jorde-Bloom: ‘‘Instituting
practices that promote quality of work life is a worthwhile
end in itself’’ (p. 121).
A third study conducted by Wagner and French (2010)
also examined job satisfaction, but in connection with
motivation and teacher change. Findings indicated that,
‘‘the degree to which teachers felt that the children in their
care changed as a result of their efforts served as a pow-
erful motivator to continue their professional growth’’
(p. 167). In addition, the results from this study suggest
that, ‘‘degree of choice, level of challenge, and sense of
community within the work context and the context of the
professional development itself…influences…teachers’
motivation for [the] professional development’’ (p. 167).
Thus, it seems that teachers are motivated by helping
children, choice, challenge, and a sense of community, all
of which are key elements of teacher well-being, the life-
affirming components of the work of teaching.
Early Childhood Educ J (2014) 42:153–162
Teacher Stress
Teacher stress is certainly a significant factor in well-being.
Most of the studies address this issue through the identi-
fication and/or examination of sources of stress. A study by
Kaiser et al. (1993), examined teachers’ well-being as
measured by feelings of happiness and relaxation teachers
experienced as they engaged in common child care tasks
(e.g., naptime, nurturing children, interactions with parents,
lunchtime). The results are not surprising. Teachers
reported that, ‘‘nurturing children and working with parents
were…the most enjoyable and least stressful tasks…Con-
trolling children was…the most stressful and least enjoy-
able task’’ (p. 26). Teachers also reported not liking some
menial tasks like lunch and toileting.
In another study examining sources of stress, Kelly and
Berthelsen (1995) qualitatively analyzed reflective journals
for eight preschool teachers. Several themes emerged which
represent preschool teachers’ experiences with stress: ‘‘time
pressures, children’s needs, non-teaching tasks, maintaining
early childhood philosophy and practice, personal needs,
issues with parents of the children, interpersonal relation-
ships, attitudes and perceptions about early childhood’’
(p. 349). Not surprisingly, nearly all of the teachers reported
stress related to the time demands of teaching, a finding
replicated in more recent studies (Moriarty et al. 2001; Yli-
tapio-Mantyla et al. 2012). Kelly and Berthelsen (1995) also
found that teachers’ feelings of stress were related to the
many non-teaching tasks required of them (e.g., paperwork
and buying materials) and their efforts to practice and
maintain an early childhood philosophy. Interestingly, there
was no talk about external pressures that might threaten their
philosophy, certainly something that is felt by teachers
today. In this regard, Moriarty et al. (2001) surveyed early
childhood teacher perceptions of sources of satisfaction and
stress and found the primary sources were related to ‘‘diffi-
culties or compromises that they believed they were making
in their professional lives’’ (p. 45). There was a disconnect
between teachers’ beliefs about teaching and what was
actually required of them.
In addition to the studies focused on sources of teachers’
stress, two studies examined the relationship between tea-
cher stress and classroom interventions. In the first study,
Li-Grining et al. (2010) examined the impact of teachers’
stress on the classroom environment (e.g., emotional cli-
mate and behavior management). They found that teachers’
stress did not necessarily influence their ability to imple-
ment particular management strategies (Li-Grining et al.
2010). In the second study, Zhai et al. (2011) examined the
impact of a classroom-based intervention program on Head
Start teachers’ job stress and confidence. The primary focus
of the intervention was providing preschool teachers with
training on effective behavior management strategies,
159
although the intervention also included: ‘‘weekly class
visits to coach teachers to implement the new techniques
they learned in the training and to provide stress-reduction
strategies, on site stress-reduction workshops, and one-
on-one mental health services for children who had high
emotional and behavioral problems’’ (p. 444). The results
of the study indicate that teachers who participated in the
intervention reported feeling increased job control and
the perception of improved job resources as measured by
the CCW-JSI (Curbow et al. 2000). However, the teachers
reported decreased confidence with behavior management,
which was the focus of the intervention. The authors sug-
gest that the decrease in confidence may have been related
to a possible increase in teachers’ ‘‘feelings of self-doubt
that were part of their learning process’’ (p. 450). The
authors themselves call for caution in interpreting these
results and suggest that more research is needed to examine
effective interventions that support teachers and reduce
burnout and turnover.
Additional Considerations
In addition to the major themes discussed, a number of other
seemingly significant topics related to teacher well-being
appear in the literature but have received scant attention.
These topics will be briefly discussed here. The first topic is
physical health. McGrath and Huntington 2007 surveyed
early childhood teachers about their health, including their
‘‘status, behaviors and concerns’’ (p. 34). Results revealed
that overall the teachers viewed themselves as healthy,
although they did describe health concerns related to,
‘‘stress, work-related injuries, and the ergonomic aspects of
the respondents’ daily work’’ (p. 35). Teachers’ physical
health is related to well-being, particularly in early childhood
settings where the work can be physically demanding.
The second topic, emotional competence, was addressed
in a study by Madrid and Dunn-Kenney (2010). The pur-
pose of this study was to examine the emotional themes
that preschool teachers describe as part of their experience
of teaching. Data were collected from four teachers using
journals, group discussions, and follow-up interviews.
Results suggest that, ‘‘the everyday emotional lives of
teachers are messy, complex, and intertwined with power
and ideology’’ (p. 398). Furthermore, it appears that, ‘‘the
emotions of stress, worry, and frustration that accompanied
failing to meet institutional and relational standards were
central for these early childhood educators’’ (p. 399).
Results also indicated that teachers felt a great deal of guilt
related to being unable to meet student needs. Ultimately,
much more research is needed in order to understand better
teachers’ complex emotions and ways to make their work
more emotionally supportive.
123
160
The third topic is teacher narratives, their stories of
development. Court, Merav, and Ornan (2009) conducted
in-depth interviews with 10 Israeli preschool teachers in an
effort to understand their ‘‘life stages, decision-making
processes, and underlying motives’’ (p. 209). The narra-
tives provide interesting insights into teacher motivation
and interest in working with young children. Nearly all of
the teachers reported a significant event or key person who
influenced their decision to become a teacher and many of
the teachers’ reasons for choosing to be a preschool teacher
were related to the nature of the work itself, their wanting
to, ‘‘nurture, foster, and be concerned for others’’ (p. 212).
In order to more fully understand preschool teacher well-
being more studies, like this one, that attend to teacher
aspirations are needed. Relatedly, Adair (2011) suggests,
there is a need for greater attention to early childhood
immigrant teachers and their perspectives.
The fourth topic has to do with the efforts of educational
change. Kilgallon et al. (2008) examined factors that con-
tribute to teachers’ ability to deal with mandated educa-
tional change. The results suggest that mentors and positive
relationships with co-workers can help teachers cope more
effectively with change. Some teachers (approximately one
third) indicated that attending professional development on
the prescribed changes proved helpful. As teachers face
ever increasing mandates, it is important to consider how
they might better respond to these changes; however,
consideration should also be given to the frequency and
nature of these mandates and to their impact on teacher
satisfaction and well-being.
The fifth topic is school community, which relates to
issues of the overall work environment. One of the primary
purposes of McGinty et al.’s (2008) study was to examine
preschool teachers’ sense of community. They surveyed 68
preschool teachers and found that overall they had a strong
sense of community. There were some differences across
program types (Head Start, State/Title I) but no differences
based on level of education or experience. Finally, and not
surprisingly, preschool teachers’ sense of community was
related to satisfaction and classroom quality (p. 379).
Additional research is needed to examine teachers’ sense of
community and other work environment issues. It may be
possible that a teachers’ sense of community is a primary
support as they cope with the challenges of increased
scrutiny and accountability often associated with state and
federal mandates.
Conclusion
For this review we have cast a rather wide net to include a
range of topics generally thought to be connected to well-
being. Definitions of well-being vary, generally falling
123
Early Childhood Educ J (2014) 42:153–162
within one of two broad categories: eudaimonic or hedonic.
While both have value in studies of teacher well-being and
find place in positive psychology, most of the studies
reviewed for this article tilt toward the hedonic view. This
view, particularly evident in studies of ‘‘subjective well-
being’’ (Diener and Lucas 2000), argues that well-being
centers primarily on increasing pleasure and decreasing
pain, and tends to emphasize external influences on feel-
ings of well-being rather than on internal sources, including
teacher motivations, aspirations, and desires. In contrast,
the eudaimonic view which is concerned with human
flourishing suggests that, ‘‘well-being…lies in the actual-
ization of human potentials…conveying the belief that
well-being consists of fulfilling or realizing one’s daimon
or true nature’’ (Ryan and Deci 2001, p. 143) and
emphasizes both happiness and meaningfulness. On this
view, well-being is linked to doing what one believes is
worth doing, pointing toward the importance of consis-
tency of beliefs and values with practice (Waterman 1993).
To be sure, issues related to education level, compen-
sation, and sources of stress are important to determining
teacher well-being but clearly well-being includes wider
personal and professional concerns (Day and Gu 2009).
Among these are: life satisfaction and quality of family
life, financial stability, emotional and physical health,
sense of self-efficacy and empowerment, the nature and
quality of work relationships, autonomy, vitality, and goal
attainment. In comparison to the wider teacher well-being
literature, little has been written about preschool teachers
and even less that touches on this wider view of well-being,
a view that we believe is foundational to quality early
childhood education. The work of preschool teachers is,
first and foremost, the work of nurturing and caring for the
very young and it is in this work that teachers find their
greatest satisfaction (Bullough et al. 2012). As MacDonald
and Merrill (2002) remind us, preschool teaching requires
that teachers bring all of themselves to their work, a ‘‘deep
aspect of…self [and in] the form of altruism, empathy
andemotional investment in the well-being of others’’
(pp. 67–68). It seems self-evident that the well-being of
children is tightly linked to the well-being of their teachers;
quality preschool programs require healthy and happy
teachers.
As never before, preschool teachers are under growing
pressure to meet ‘‘ambitious achievement’’ requirements
while also caring as before for the various social and
emotional needs of children (Stipek 2006, p. 453). The
work of preschool teaching is changing, and changing
rapidly while very little attention is being given to the
effects of these changes on teachers or their well-being. A
blanket mandate such as that requiring all preschool
teachers gain bachelor’s degrees may or may not represent
a worthy goal or reflect wise policy. The situation is far too
Early Childhood Educ J (2014) 42:153–162
complex for simple solutions. When policy makers do not
consider the impact a particular initiative or mandate has
on teachers’ personal and professional lives, unintended
consequences often follow for preschool programs and the
children who attend those programs (Miller and Bogatova
2009; Stremmel et al. 1993; Whitebook and Sakai 2003).
Clearly, it is time for researchers to attend to and get
serious about preschool teacher well-being.
Limitations
There are two major limitations associated with the current
review. First, there are a very limited number of data-dri-
ven, peer-reviewed articles written on the topic of pre-
school teacher well-being. As a result, the conclusions
about preschool teacher well-being from this review should
be interpreted carefully as they are based on the small
number of studies written on this topic to date. Second, the
large majority of studies produced in our search were
conducted with U.S. populations. So, although the search
was not limited to U.S. based research and did include
some studies with international populations, a stronger
international perspective would be beneficial. This lack of
international focus underscores the overall paucity of
research in this area.
Future Directions
Nearly every facet of preschool teacher well-being needs
additional research, as the current studies on this topic are
limited in both quantity and scope. As suggested, future
research should focus on a wider view of teacher well-
being in order to support them in their work with young
children. Studies are also needed in order to more fully
understand the relationship between this wider view of
preschool teacher well-being, the eudaimonic, and other
desired outcomes related to instructional quality, teacher/
child interactions, and student performance.
References
Ackerman, D. J. (2004). What do teachers need? Practitioners’
perspectives on early childhood professional development.
Journal of Early Childhood Teacher Education, 24, 291–301.
Adair, J. K. (2011). Confirming chanclas: What early childhood
teacher educators can learn from immigrant preschool teachers.
Journal of Early Childhood Teacher Education, 32, 55–71.
Barnett, W. S. (2003). Low wages = low quality: Solving the real
preschool teacher crisis. Preschool Policy Matters, 3, New
Brunswick, NJ: National Institute for Early Education Research.
Barnett, W. S. (2004). Better teachers, better preschools: Student
achievement linked to teacher qualifications. Preschool Policy
161
Matters, 2, New Brunswick, NJ: National Institute for Early
Education Research.
Blau, D. M. (2000). The production of quality in child-care centers:
Another look. Applied Developmental Science, 4, 136–148.
Bridges, M., Fuller, B., Huang, D. S., & Hamre, B. K. (2011).
Strengthening the early childhood workforce: How wage incen-
tives may boost training and job stability. Early Education and
Development, 22(6), 1009–1029.
Bullough, R. V., Hall-Kenyon, K. M., & MacKay, K. L. (2012). Head
Start teacher well-being: Implications for policy and practice.
Early Childhood Education Journal, 40(6), 323–331.
Burchial, M. R., Cryer, D., Clifford, R. M., & Howes, C. (2002).
Caregiver training and classroom quality in child care centers.
Applied Developmental Science, 6(1), 2–11.
Chung, L., Marvin, C. A., & Churchill, S. L. (2005). Teacher factors
associated with preschool teacher-child relationships: Teaching
efficacy and parent–teacher relationships. Journal of Early
Childhood Teacher Education, 25(2), 131–142.
Court, D., Merav, L., & Ornan, E. (2009). Preschool teachers’
narratives: A window on personal-professional history, values
and beliefs. International Journal of Early Years Education,
17(3), 207–217.
Curbow, B., Spratt, K., Ungaretti, A., McDonnell, K., & Breckler, S.
(2000). Development of the child care worker job stress
inventory. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 15, 515–536.
Day, C., & Gu, Q. (2009). Teacher emotions: Well being and
effectiveness. In P. A. Schutz & M. Zembylas (Eds.), Advances
in teacher emotion research: The impact on teachers’ lives
(pp. 15–31). New York, NY: Springer.
Day, C., & Smethem, L. (2009). The effects of reform: Have teachers
really lost their sense of professionalism? Journal of Educational
Change, 10, 141–157.
Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2000). The ‘what’ and ‘why’ of goal
pursuits: Human needs and the self-determination of behavior.
Psychological Inquiry, 11(4), 227–268.
Diener, E., & Lucas, R. E. (2000). Explaining differences in societal
levels of happiness: Relative standards, need fulfillment, culture,
and evaluation theory. Journal of Happiness Studies, 1, 41–78.
Early, D. M., Maxwell, K. L., Burchinal, M., Bender, R. H., Ebanks, C.,
Henry, G. T., et al. (2007). Teachers’ education, classroom quality,
and young children’s academic skills: Results from seven studies
of preschool programs. Child Development, 78(2), 558–580.
Gable, S., Rothrauff, T. C., Thornburg, K. R., & Mauzy, D. (2007).
Cash incentives and turnover in center-based child care staff.
Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 22, 363–378.
Greene, K. (1999). Job satisfaction, intention to leave, and the quality
of teachers’ interactions with children. The Journal of Early
Education and Family Review, 7(2), 7–18.
Guo, Y., Piasta, S. B., Justice, L. M., & Kaderavek, J. N. (2010).
Relations among preschool teachers’ self-efficacy, classroom
quality and children’s language and literacy gains. Teaching and
Teacher Education, 26, 1094–1103.
Holochwost, S. J., DeMott, K., Buell, M., Yannetta, K., & Amsden,
D. (2009). Retention of staff in the early childhood education
workforce. Child & Youth Care Forum, 38, 227–237.
Howes, C., Whitebook, M., & Phillips, D. (1992). Teacher charac-
teristics and effective teaching in child care: Findings from the
National Child Care Staffing Study. Child & Youth Care Forum,
21(6), 399–414.
Jorde-Bloom, P. (1988). Factors influencing overall job satisfaction
and organizational commitment in early childhood work envi-
ronments. Journal of Research in Childhood Education, 3(2),
107–122.
Kaiser, J., Rogers, C. S., & Kasper, A. (1993). Perceptions of well-
being among child care teachers. Early Child Development and
Care, 87, 15–28.
123
162
Kelly, A. L., & Berthelsen, D. C. (1995). Preschool teachers’
experiences of stress. Teaching and Teacher Education, 11(4),
347–357.
Kilgallon, P., Maloney, C., & Lock, G. (2008). Early childhood
teachers coping with educational change. Australian Journal of
Early Childhood, 33(1), 23–29.
Kontos, S., & Stremmel, A. J. (1988). Caregivers’ perceptions of
working conditions in a child care environment. Early Childhood
Research Quarterly, 3, 77–90.
Li-Grining, C., Raver, C. C., Champion, K., Sardin, L., Metzger, M.,
& Jones, S. M. (2010). Understanding and improving classroom
emotional climate and behavior management in the ‘‘real
world’’: The role of Head Start teachers’ psychosocial stressors.
Early Education and Development, 21(1), 65–94.
MacDonald, C. L., & Merrill, D. A. (2002). ‘‘It shouldn’t have to be a
trade’’: Recognition and redistribution in care work advocacy.
Hypatia, 17(2), 67–83.
Madrid, S., & Dunn-Kenney, M. (2010). Persecutory guilt, surveil-
lance and resistance: The emotional themes of early childhood
educators. Contemporary Issues in Early Childhood, 11(4),
388–401.
McGinty, A. S., Justice, L., & Rimm-Kaufman, S. E. (2008). Sense of
school community for preschool teachers serving at-risk chil-
dren. Early Education and Development, 19(2), 361–384.
McGrath, B. J., & Huntington, A. D. (2007). The health and wellbeing
of adults working in early childhood education. Australian
Journal of Early Childhood, 32(3), 33–38.
Miller, J. A., & Bogatova, T. (2009). Quality improvements in the
early care and education workforce: Outcomes and impact of the
T.E.A.C.H. Early Childhood Project. Evaluation and Program
Planning, 32, 257–277.
Moriarty, V., Edmonds, S., Blatchford, P., & Martin, C. (2001).
Teaching young children: Perceived satisfaction and stress.
Educational Research, 43(1), 33–46.
Osgood, J. (2006). Deconstructing professionalism in early childhood
education: Resisting the regulatory gaze. Contemporary Issues in
Early Childhood, 7(1), 5–14.
Ryan, S., & Ackerman, D. J. (2005). Using pressure and support to
create a qualified workforce. Education Policy Analysis
Archives, 13(23), 1–17.
123
Early Childhood Educ J (2014) 42:153–162
Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2001). On happiness and human
potentials: A review of research on hedonic and eudaimonic
well-being. Annual Review of Psychology, 52, 141–166.
Ryan, R. M., Huta, V., & Deci, E. L. (2008). Living well: A self-
determination theory perspective of eudaimonia. Journal of
Happiness Studies, 9(1), 139–170.
Stipek, D. (2006). No child left behind comes to preschool. The
Elementary School Journal, 106(5), 455–466.
Stremmel, A. J., Benson, M. J., & Powell, D. R. (1993). Commu-
nication, satisfaction, and emotional exhaustion among child
care center staff: Directors, teachers and assistant teachers. Early
Childhood Research Quarterly, 8, 221–233.
Sumsion, J. (2002). Becoming, being and unbecoming an early
childhood educator: A phenomenological case study of teacher
attrition. Teaching and Teacher Education, 18, 869–885.
Torquati, J. C., Raikes, H., & Huddleston-Casas, C. A. (2007).
Teacher education, motivation, compensation, workplace sup-
port and links to quality of center-based child care and teachers’
intention to stay in the early childhood profession. Early
Childhood Research Quarterly, 22, 261–275.
Wagner, B. D., & French, L. (2010). Motivation, work satisfaction
and teacher change among early childhood teachers. Journal of
Research in Childhood Education, 24, 152–171.
Waterman, A. S. (1993). Two conceptions of happiness: Contrasts of
personal expressiveness (eudaimonia) and hedonic enjoyment.
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 64, 678–691.
Whitebook, M., Howes, C., & Phillips, D. (1990). The national child
care staffing study. Final Report: Who cares? Child care
teachers and the quality of care in America. Washington, DC:
Center for the Child Care Workforce.
Whitebook, M., & Sakai, L. (2003). Turnover begets turnover: An
examination of job and occupational instability among child care
center staff. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 18, 273–293.
Ylitapio-Mantyla, O., Uusiautti, S., & Maatta, K. (2012). Critical
viewpoint to early childhood education teachers’ well-being at
work. International Journal of Human Sciences, 9(1), 458–483.
Zhai, F., Raver, C. C., & Li-Grining, C. (2011). Classroom-based
interventions and teachers’ perceived job stressors and confi-
dence: Evidence from a randomized trial in Head Start settings.
Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 26, 442–452.