Benjamin Dreer- Erfurt School of Education, University of Erfurt, Erfurt, Germany
Social cognitive theory posits that observing others’ behavior can influence our thinking, behavior, and learning. The present study examines whether this principle also applies to teacher well-being. It investigates whether student teachers’ well-being is linked to the well-being of in-service teachers they closely observe during field experiences. For that purpose, 222 student teachers were assigned to conduct three classroom observations of three different teachers using a dedicated observation tool that focused on in-service teachers’ positive emotions and positive student interactions. Longitudinal data from 666 classroom observations and student teachers’ well-being data were analyzed. It was hypothesized that the mean scores from all three independent classroom observations are most predictive of student teacher well-being. The results revealed significant associations between seven indicators of student teacher well-being and the observed well-being of in-service teachers. Interestingly, it was not the mean of all three observation scores but only the score of the third and final observation that contributed significantly to student teacher well-being. This brief research report seeks to inspire discourse about the benefits and challenges of observational learning in teachers’ well-being education.
1. Introduction
Teacher well-being is highly relevant for teachers’ work and students’ outcomes (Carroll et al., 2021). According to Viac and Fraser (2020) it can be defined as “teachers’ responses to the cognitive, emotional, health and social conditions pertaining to their work and their profession” (p. 18). The occupational well-being of teaching professionals requires good working conditions and the individual’s active involvement (Toropova et al., 2020; Dreer, 2022). The latter is dependent on knowledge, skills, and self-efficacy beliefs which can develop through training, intervention, and experience (McCallum and Price, 2016). There is widespread scholarly agreement that practical phases during initial teacher education involve experiences relevant to future teachers’ well-being and well-being education (e.g., Price and McCallum, 2015; Cherkowski and Walker, 2018; McCallum, 2020; Dreer, 2021). Because such phases enrich classroom learning by providing authentic experiences and learning opportunities, teacher education programs worldwide mandate field experience in their curricula (Zeichner, 2012). Prospective teachers are expected to develop their competencies by observing lessons and important processes in school. Often, they are supposed to engage in intensive job shadowing and to systematically observe professionals in core areas of teaching before their own teaching trials. Among other forms like problem-based or reflective learning, observational learning plays an important role in teacher education (Chernikova, 2018). In terms of teacher well-being, this could include observing how teachers deal with daily stressors like unforeseen situations, obstacles, and classroom disruptions. Furthermore, observations could target teacher behavior that elicits positive reactions among colleagues and in the classroom and thus supports teacher well-being. Recent studies from personality research indicate that individuals who experience higher rates of happiness exhibit several positive behaviors that can be easily observed by others, even in brief social exchanges. For example, research suggests that happier people tend to smile more, engage in more eye contact, use more positive language, and display open and approachable body language. These behaviors can not only create a positive impression on others, but they can also foster more positive social interactions and relationships (e.g., Gardiner et al., 2022).
Observational learning regarding well-being should therefore follow the basic principles posited by social cognitive theory, holding that skills and behavioral patterns can be acquired by watching others (Bandura, 1977). Research has substantiated that observations have a moderate positive effect on cognitive skill acquisition (Crissman, 2006), while Van Tongeren et al. (2018) reported that powerful models can help bolster prosociality and perceived meaning in life among university students. In teacher education, observational learning was established to contribute effectively to the development of student teachers’ lesson planning and teaching competencies (Chernikova, 2018). Further evidence suggests that observational learning is effective in real-life situations (Gettinger and Stoiber, 2014). In addition, research on teacher self-efficacy indicates that watching in-service teachers at work can help strengthen the beliefs of future teachers in their ability to succeed in mastering certain requirements (e.g., Clark and Newberry, 2019).
Observing the excellence and skills of others can also elicit emotional responses. Algoe and Haidt (2009) distinguished three emotional reactions when witnessing excellent others: (1) elevation (response to moral excellence), (2) gratitude (response to generosity and thoughtfulness), and (3) admiration (response to skill, talent, and achievement). While gratitude and elevation drew people out of themselves and inspired them to do good for others, admiration inspired people to emulate the admired person and work harder on their own development. The authors’ experiments led them to conclude that when watching others, participants experienced strong positive emotions that inspired them to improve themselves, their behavior, and their relationships. Accordingly, research on mentoring showed that mentor well-being and emotional support are connected to student teacher well-being (Hobson et al., 2009; Squires, 2019; Hobson, 2020). In addition, studies conducted in classrooms indicate that emotional contagion makes non-verbal and verbal teacher behavior influence the emotions and behavior of recipients (Mottet and Beebe, 2000; Becker et al., 2014; Houser and Waldbuesser, 2017).
The present study examines whether student teacher well-being is connected to the well-being of the in-service teachers they observe during practical phases. Based on social cognitive theory and prevailing knowledge on observational learning, it is hypothesized that (H1) student teacher well-being is positively linked to the observation of in-service teacher well-being. It was also hypothesized that (H2) when observing multiple teachers, it is the overall experience that is most strongly connected to student teacher well-being. H2 was formulated based on findings of studies investigating the mere exposure effect. It is a central finding of this research that frequently observed behavior is assumed to be familiar and influences personal preference, especially when there is a motivation for social connectedness (e.g., Kwan et al., 2015).
2. Method
2.1. Participants and procedure
To test the hypotheses, an exploratory study gathered data from a 15 week field experience among two subsamples of student teachers from two successive university semesters. The first subsample (summer semester 2022) contains 53 student teachers in their last year of Master of Education studies. This sample contained 43 women (81%) and 10 men (19%). The mean age was 25.5 years (SD = 3.39, Min = 23, Max = 39). Participants included student teachers at both primary (76%) and secondary (24%) levels. The second subsample (winter semester 2022/23) contained 169 student teachers in their last year of Master of Education studies. This subsample included 133 women (79%) and 36 men (21%). The mean age was 27.3 years (SD = 3.29, Min = 23, Max = 42). Participants contained student teachers at both primary (87%) and secondary (13%) levels. Because data were collected as part of student coursework, there were no missing data in both subsamples. Gender and school type ratios were representative of the population of student teachers at the German university where the study was conducted. Moreover, both subsamples did not differ significantly in the well-being related variables, i.e., job satisfaction (MS1 = 3.90, SDS1 = 0.68, MS2 = 3.92,SDS2 = 0.66, t = −0.21, p = 0.83), emotional exhaustion (MS1 = 1.89, SDS1 = 0.67, MS2 = 1.79,SDS2 = 0.62, t = 1.11, p = 0.34), positive emotions (MS1 = 3.69, SDS1 = 0.47, MS2 = 3.59,SDS2 = 0.45, t = 1.24, p = 0.53), engagement (MS1 = 3.78, SDS1 = 0.49, MS2 = 3.88,SDS2 = 0.52, t = 1.34, p = 0.43), relationships (MS1 = 3.88, SDS1 = 0.51, MS2 = 3.79,SDS2 = 0.46, t = 1.84, p = 0.55), meaning (MS1 = 3.69, SDS1 = 0.51, MS2 = 3.70,SDS2 = 0.75, t = 0.99, p = 0.24), and achievement (MS1 = 3.79, SDS1 = 0.46, MS2 = 3.79,SDS2 = 0.42, t = 0.71, p = 0.64). Consequently, the two subsamples were merged into one data set which was then used to conduct the subsequent analyzes.
The observation assignment was part of a dedicated teacher well-being course. It aims to familiarize student teachers with the topic and to encourage them to explore and reflect their well-being during field experiences at schools. The course is divided into three phases. In the first phase, student teachers are provided with knowledge about teacher well-being. This includes concepts, theoretical frameworks and important results of research on the matter. In the second phase, student teachers are encouraged and enabled to observe teacher well-being and potential outcomes of teacher well-being at their schools. Furthermore, they are supported to engage in activities that potentially enhance their well-being within the professional context. In the third phase, student teachers are supported in reflecting their impressions and experiences and to seek ways of integrating their insights into their future professional practice (for more information see Dreer, 2021). As part of their course requirements, student teachers had to conduct three classroom observations with three different teachers at their internship school during the second phase of the course. Each observation was to last for a full school lesson (45 min), and all needed to be completed within 2 weeks but with at least 1 day between each observation. Student teachers received a standardized observation tool and were briefed on using it in classrooms. After all three observations, 222 student teachers submitted their observation protocols for data digitalization: 666 observation protocols from 666 lessons. One week after the observation period, student teachers were asked to complete an online questionnaire assessing seven well-being related variables.
2.2. Measures
Teacher well-being is operationalized by the PERMA model of well-being (Seligman, 2011). It comprises the five dimensions (P) positive emotions, (E) engagement, (R) relationships, (M) meaning, and (A) achievement. To examine the hypotheses, two types of data were collected with regards to the theoretical model (Table 1). First, observational data were recorded by student teachers using the teacher well-being observer1, an observation tool based on the PERMA well-being model to assess in-service teachers’ verbal and non-verbal behavior regarding positive emotions and interactions with students through classroom observation. The tool was provided with a briefing, a standardized rating scale ranging from one (not observed) to five (extensively observed), and rating rules.
Table 1. Overview of applied measures.
Second, student teacher well-being was assessed using a complementary self-report approach featuring seven variables. On one hand, student teacher well-being –based on Seligman’s (2011) PERMA model – was assessed using the German version of the PERMA profiler (Wammerl et al., 2019). Survey scales assessing (P) positive emotions, (E) engagement, (R) relationships, (M) meaning, and (A) achievement were adapted to the teaching profession. On the other hand, student teacher well-being was assessed using Warr’s (1999) concept of workplace well-being and operationalized by assessing teaching satisfaction (Ho and Au, 2006) and emotional exhaustion (Maslach et al., 1996). The items were translated into German, with quality assurance provided by a translation service. Items were assessed on a five-point Likert scale ranging from one (does not apply) to five (applies fully). The internal consistencies of the scales used in this study were adequate (Table 1).
3. Results
Prior to hypothesis testing, scales were tested for internal consistency, while means were computed for all student teacher well-being constructs. Observation scores were computed by summing the individual values from the four observation items of each of the three protocols. Additionally, a mean score was computed over all three observation scores (M = 11.06, SD = 2.32).
The mean observation scores for the three observations (observation 1: M = 10.39, SD = 3.13; observation 2: M = 9.77, SD = 3.26; observation 3: M = 9.74, SD = 3.21) are very similar, with only a slight decrease over time. The results of correlation analyzes (Table 2) revealed that the observation scores from the three separate observations were not significantly linked, indicating that each classroom observation was a separate incident and that observations were not systematically connected to a given observer.
Table 2. Correlations between observed in-service teacher well-being and self-reported student teacher well-being.
As an initial step in testing the two hypotheses, correlation analyzes were conducted (Table 2). The results indicated that the mean of all three observation scores was correlated with positive emotions (r = 0.24, p = 0.002), engagement (r = 0.25, p < 0.001), relationships (r = 0.24, p = 0.002), perceived meaning (r = 0.33, p < 0.001), and achievement (r = 0.31, p < 0.001). However, only the score from the third observation was significantly linked in the manner expected to student teacher well-being. This includes associations between observation three and teacher job satisfaction (r = 0.34, p < 0.001), emotional exhaustion (r = −0.37, p < 0.001), positive emotions (r = 0.35, p < 0.001), engagement (r = 0.41, p < 0.001), relationships (r = 0.27, p = 0.003), perceived meaning (r = 0.39, p < 0.001), and achievement (r = 0.36, p < 0.001). Notably, connections to student teacher well-being were not detected in observer scores from observations one and two.
In a second step, seven separate multiple regression analyzes were fitted to the data, each predicting one of the seven student teacher well-being variables by the three observation scores and the mean of all three. The results again showed that only the third observation was relevant in predicting student teacher well-being. It significantly predicted job satisfaction (β = 0.40, t = 3.28, p < 0.001), emotional exhaustion (β = 0.35, t = −3.08, p < 0.001), positive emotions (β = 0.27, t = 2.41, p = 0.001), engagement (β = 0.41, t = 2.99, p < 0.001), relationships (β = 0.24, t = 2.79, p < 0.002), perceived meaning (β = 0.29, t = 2.42, p < 0.001), and achievement (β = 0.27, t = 2.89, p < 0.001). None of the first, second or overall observation scores were significantly predictive of any student teacher well-being variable.
4. Discussion
The outcomes of the analyzes generally indicate that all of the PERMA domains of student teacher well-being are predicted by observing in-service teachers during school lessons, albeit with small effect sizes. This is congruent with H1, which is derived from social cognitive theory, and the general tenet that watching others can influence a person’s emotion and cognition. The relationships discovered are of plausible direction: if student teachers witness teachers they attribute with higher rates of well-being, they report higher well-being rates across various domains one week after their observations. Conversely, if student teachers witness teachers they attribute with lower rates of well-being, they report lower well-being rates across various domains one week after their observations. This particularly applies to student teacher engagement, which showed the strongest association with observation score. These findings support recent research highlighting that work engagement increases when employees perceive their supervisors as warm, competent, and moral (Orlowski et al., 2020). Notably, the expected connection is only present for student teachers’ third and final observation and was not indicated for the first, second, and overall observations. It appears that only the last of three observations was relevant for student teacher well-being; thus, H2 is not supported. Three possible explanations for this outcome are discussed below.
First and most obviously, the last observation’s prediction of student teacher well-being could result from recency bias, which is the human tendency to assign more weight to the most recent information or experiences. Recency bias has been found in observational learning (Warren and Loes, 2019); it affects university students when for example evaluating courses (Dickey and Pearson, 2005). Speaking against recency bias in the present case is the fact that student teachers documented their observations in writing using rating schemes and were able to review their documents at any time. Previous studies had shown that the documentation of impressions helped avoiding the recency bias (Dickey and Pearson, 2005). In addition, recency bias would not explain why the principles of observational learning and emotional contagion were not present in observations one and two. Significant associations between all three observations and student teacher well-being, which may increase in correlational strength over time, would be a more plausible finding in the event of recency bias.
Another possible explanation is a training effect because the quality of observations is related to the observers and their training for the task (O'Leary, 2020). As the observation assignment was primarily implemented to trigger observational learning, the preparation of student teachers focused on explaining the objectives and correct use of the observation tool. However, it did not include intense training in scientific observation. This could explain why student teachers who are rather inexperienced at systematically observing the well-being of others needed three observation passes to effectively observe and realistically assess well-being among in-service teachers. Inaccurate observations could explain why there were no statistical associations between student teacher well-being and teacher well-being at observations one and two, when social cognitive theory would expect them. To explore the substance of this explanation, student teachers could be prepared using video training sessions to help them to better focus on the crucial aspects of the observation and to compare and evaluate their initial rating decisions.
A third explanation could be an adaptive process in calibrating expectable behavior. Research on role models indicates that witnessing the academic excellence of others stimulates emotional responses and motivates self-improvement, provided that excellence is perceived as attainable (Lockwood and Kunda, 1997, 1999). This insight suggests that student teachers may need to develop a sense of what makes a suitable role model and calibrate the behavioral aspects of teachers they perceive as expectable and attainable. It is possible that during observations one and two, student teachers gathered information about attainable models and used it to calibrate their observation skill, which led to a more refined and impactful impression in the third pass.
Because of the provisional nature of the present study, no definitive interpretation of the results with respect to the unsupported second hypothesis (H2) is yet possible. More research is needed in this regard. The findings in support of the first hypothesis (H1) are useful in pointing out possible directions for future research. In general, they underline the potential of observation assignments to enhance student teachers’ observational learning. This could encourage the development of observation tools and assignments and testing their effectiveness in eliciting specific learning processes and outcomes. In particular, the findings of this study highlight that observational learning might be a promising route in supporting student teacher well-being. In addition to other support measures like dedicated university courses, mentoring, and self-help interventions (e.g., Goodday et al., 2019; Hobson, 2020; Dreer, 2021), methods of observational learning, like targeted classroom observations, should therefore be considered in teacher well-being education. This might be particularly valuable if student teachers are able to observe in-service teachers with high rates of occupational well-being, which emphasizes the importance of choosing a quality school for conducting field experiences. The present study’s preliminary findings indicate that it is worth further investigating this proposition. Such future research could help overcome the limitations of the explorational work presented in this brief research report.
This study was based on data from two separate subsamples of student teachers from two successive university semesters. While group comparisons for the two subsamples showed no significant differences in the well-being related variables, cautious interpretation of the results is warranted, as the two groups might have differed in other relevant aspects not measured in this study. Future research should use larger student teacher samples from different locations, countries, and cultural backgrounds. Furthermore, conclusions about causal relationships cannot be drawn based on this longitudinal research design. The relatively short time lag of one week between data collections might have led to inflated correlations between the data of the last observation and of student teachers’ self-reported well-being. To avoid such shortcomings, future research should implement experiments and make use of research designs with more frequent, strategically spaced measurement intervals (e.g., pre, post, follow-up). The data presented are also not informative about the long-term impact of classroom observations. It could be that emotional contagion means that student teacher well-being benefits from targeted observations only briefly after the observation. On the other hand, student teachers might be durably inspired by their observations of model in-service teachers (admiration) and strive to develop in this regard (self-improvement, learning). To better understand the mechanisms of observational learning in well-being education, investigations into the four key stages of observational learning, i.e., attention, retention, reproduction and motivation (Bandura, 1977) are imperative. In addition to examining and differentiating such aspects, it would also be worth investigating the factors that might help prolong the potentially beneficial effects of such classroom observations.
Data availability statement
The raw data supporting the conclusions of this article will be made available by the authors, without undue reservation.
Ethics statement
Ethical review and approval was not required for the study on human participants in accordance with the local legislation and institutional requirements. The patients/participants provided their written informed consent to participate in this study.
Author contributions
BD is the sole author of this work, including conception, data collection, data analysis, and preparation of the manuscript.
Funding
Open Access of this publication funded by the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (DFG, German Research Foundation) - Projektnummer 512467589.
Conflict of interest
The author declares that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.
Publisher’s note
All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.
Footnotes
1. ^Dreer, B. Observing teacher well-being in the classroom: a feasibility study.
References
Algoe, S. B., and Haidt, J. (2009). Witnessing excellence in action: the ‘other-praising’ emotions of elevation, gratitude, and admiration. J. Posit. Psychol. 4, 105–127. doi: 10.1080/17439760802650519
Becker, E. S., Goetz, T., Morger, V., and Ranellucci, J. (2014). The importance of teachers’ emotions and instructional behavior for their students’ emotions – an experience sampling analysis. Teach. Teach. Educ. 43, 15–26. doi: 10.1016/j.tate.2014.05.002
Carroll, A., York, A., Fynes-Clinton, S., Sanders-O’Connor, E., Flynn, L., Bower, J., et al. (2021). The downstream effects of teacher well-being programs: improvements in teachers' stress, cognition and well-being benefit their students. Front. Psychol. 12:689628. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2021.689628
Cherkowski, S., and Walker, K. D. (2018). Teacher Wellbeing: Noticing, Nurturing, Sustaining, and Flourishing in Schools. Burlington, ON: Word & Deed Publishing.
Chernikova, O. (2018). What Makes Observational Learning in Teacher Education Effective?[dissertation]. Munich: Ludwig-Maximilians Universität.
Clark, S., and Newberry, M. (2019). Are we building preservice teacher self-efficacy? A large-scale study examining teacher education experiences. Asia-Pac. J. Teach. Educ. 47, 32–47. doi: 10.1080/1359866X.2018.1497772
Crissman, J. (2006). The Design and Utilization of Effective Worked Examples: A Meta-Analysis. [Dissertation]. Lincoln: University of Nebraska.
Dickey, D., and Pearson, C. (2005). Recency effect in college student course evaluations. Pract. Assess. Res. Eval. 10:6.
Dreer, B. (2021). Fostering well-being over the radio? An empirical study investigating the effects of an audio podcast-based intervention program on student teachers’ well-being. Int. J. Commun. Well-Being. 4, 603–623. doi: 10.1007/s42413-020-00105-3
Dreer, B. (2022). Teacher well-being: investigating the contributions of school climate and job crafting. Cogent Educ. 9:2044583. doi: 10.1080/2331186X.2022.2044583
Gardiner, G., Sauerberger, K., Lee, D., and Funder, D. (2022). What happy people do: the behavioral correlates of happiness in everyday situations. J. Res. Pers. 99:104236. doi: 10.1016/j.jrp.2022.104236
Gettinger, M., and Stoiber, K. C. (2014). Increasing opportunities to respond to print during storybook reading: effects of evocative print-referencing techniques. Early Child Res. Q. 29, 283–297. doi: 10.1016/j.ecresq.2014.03.001
Goodday, S. M., Rivera, D., Foran, H., King, N., Milanovic, M., Keown-Stoneman, C. D. G., et al. (2019). U-flourish university students well-being and academic success longitudinal study: a study protocol. BMJ Open 9:e029854. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2019-029854
Ho, C.-L., and Au, W.-T. (2006). Teaching satisfaction scale: measuring job satisfaction of teachers. Educ. Psychol. Meas. 66, 172–185. doi: 10.1177/0013164405278573
Hobson, A. J. (2020). “ONSIDE mentoring: a framework for supporting professional learning, development, and well-being” in The Wiley International Handbook of Mentoring: Paradigms, Practices, Programs, and Possibilities. eds. B. J. Irby, J. N. Boswell, L. J. Searby, F. K. Kochan, R. Garza, and N. Abdelrahman (New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons), 521–545. doi: 10.1002/9781119142973.ch32
Hobson, A. J., Ashby, P., Malderez, A., and Tomlinson, P. D. (2009). Mentoring beginning teachers: what we know and what we don’t. Teach. Teach. Educ. 25, 207–216. doi: 10.1016/j.tate.2008.09.001
Houser, M. L., and Waldbuesser, C. (2017). Emotional contagion in the classroom: the impact of teacher satisfaction and confirmation on perceptions of student nonverbal classroom behavior. Coll. Teach. 65, 1–8. doi: 10.1080/87567555.2016.1189390
Kwan, L. Y. Y., Yap, S., and Chiu, C.-Y. (2015). Mere exposure affects perceived descriptive norms: implications for personal preferences and trust. Organ. Behav. Hum. Decis. Process. 129, 48–58. doi: 10.1016/j.obhdp.2014.12.002
Lockwood, P., and Kunda, Z. (1997). Superstars and me: predicting the impact of role models on the self. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 73, 91–103. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.73.1.91
Lockwood, P., and Kunda, Z. (1999). Increasing the salience of one's best selves can undermine inspiration by outstanding role models. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 76, 214–228. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.76.2.214
Maslach, C., Jackson, S. E., and Leiter, M. P. (1996). Maslach Burnout Inventory. Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press.
McCallum, F. (2020). “The changing nature of teachers’ work and its impact on wellbeing” in Critical Perspectives on Teaching, Learning and Leadership: Enhancing Educational Outcomes. eds. M. A. White and F. McCallum (Singapore: Springer Singapore), 17–44. doi: 10.1007/978-981-15-6667-7_2
McCallum, F., and Price, D. (2016). “Teacher wellbeing” in Nurturing Wellbeing Development in Education. eds. F. McCallum and D. Price (London: Routledge), 113–132.
Mottet, T. P., and Beebe, S. A. (2000). Emotional contagion in the classroom: an examination of how teacher and student emotions are related. 86th Annual Meeting of the National Communication Association, Seattle, Washington, United States, November 9–12.
O'Leary, M. (2020). Classroom Observation: A Guide to the Effective Observation of Teaching and Learning (2nd). Routledge. London
Orlowski, M., Bufquin, D., and Nalley, M. E. (2020). The influence of social perceptions on restaurant employee work engagement and extra-role customer service behavior: A moderated mediation model. Cornell Hosp. Q. 62, 261–275. doi: 10.1177/1938965520910119
Price, D., and McCallum, F. (2015). Ecological influences on teachers’ well-being and “fitness”. Asia-Pac. J. Teach. Educ. 43, 195–209. doi: 10.1080/1359866X.2014.932329
Seligman, M. E. P. (2011). Flourish: A Visionary New Understanding Of Happiness and Well-Being. New York, NY: Free Press.
Squires, V. (2019). The well-being of the early career teacher: a review of the literature on the pivotal role of mentoring. Int. J. Mentor. Coach. Educ. 8, 255–267. doi: 10.1108/IJMCE-02-2019-0025
Toropova, A., Myrberg, E., and Johansson, S. (2020). Teacher job satisfaction: the importance of school working conditions and teacher characteristics. Educ. Rev. 73, 71–97. doi: 10.1080/00131911.2019.1705247
Van Tongeren, D. R., Hibbard, R., Edwards, M., Johnson, E., Diepholz, K., Newbound, H., et al. (2018). Heroic helping: the effects of priming superhero images on prosociality. Front. Psychol. 9:2243. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2018.02243
Viac, C., and Fraser, P. (2020). “Teachers well-being: A framework for data collection and analysis” in OECD Education Working Paper No. 213. (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development).
Wammerl, M., Jaunig, J., Mairunteregger, T., and Streit, P. (2019). The German version of the PERMA-profiler: evidence for construct and convergent validity of the PERMA theory of well-being in German speaking countries. J. Well-Being Assess. 3, 75–96. doi: 10.1007/s41543-019-00021-0
Warr, P. (1999). “Well-being and the workplace” in Well-being: The Foundations of Hedonic Psychology. eds. D. Kahneman, E. Diener, and N. Schwarz (New York, NY: Russell Sage Foundation), 392–412.
Warren, D. L., and Loes, C. (2019). Peer observation: an approach to negotiation training. J. High Educ. Theory Pract. 19:2309. doi: 10.33423/jhetp.v19i6.2309
Keywords: teacher well-being, student teacher, field experience, observational learning, recency bias, classroom observation
Citation: Dreer B (2023) Witnessing well-being in action: Observing teacher well-being during field experiences predicts student teacher well-being. Front. Educ. 8:967905. doi: 10.3389/feduc.2023.967905
Edited by:
Stefinee Pinnegar, Brigham Young University, United StatesReviewed by:
Ngar-sze Lau, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, ChinaLaura M. Kennedy, Northern Michigan University, United States
Copyright © 2023 Dreer. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
*Correspondence: Benjamin Dreer, benjamin.dreer@uni-erfurt.de