In Focus

Executive summary

In 2023, 50,556 registered teachers participated in the Australian Teacher Workforce Survey, the largest survey of teachers in Australia. A little under half (22,509) went on to participate in a new optional wellbeing module. This publication includes analysis of responses to questions from the 2023 Teacher Survey on: work-related stress levels and sources of work-related stress, work-related feelings, burnout, health-related quality of life, job demands and resources, and career intentions.

Job demands and resources

Job resources are the physical, psychological, social and organisational aspects of a job that allow workers to achieve work goals, reduce job demands or encourage personal growth, learning and development (Bakker & Demerouti, 2007). The most prevalent job resources that teachers reported being able to draw on were:

1. I know how to go about getting my job done (90%)
2. I am clear what is expected of me at work (72%)
3. I have some say over the way I get the job done (72%)
4. If the work gets difficult, my co-workers will help me (70%)
5. I get the help and support I need from my co-workers (68%).

Job resources helped to protect from stress, burnout and negative feelings due to work. They tended to co-occur with happiness and enthusiasm for work.

Job demands are the physical, psychological, social and organisational aspects of a job that require a high level of effort or skills (Bakker & Demerouti, 2007). The most prevalent job demands that teachers reported experiencing were:

1. My work is emotionally demanding (86%)
2. I get emotionally involved in my work (82%)
3. Managing students’ behaviour takes a lot of time and effort (80%)
4. I have to neglect some tasks because I have too much to do (71%)
5. I have more diverse needs in my class than I, as one teacher, can single-handedly support (67%).

Job demands were more likely to co-occur with stress, burnout, negative feelings and reduced health-related quality of life.

Feelings due to work

Most teachers reported feeling happy or enthusiastic due to their work sometimes (happy: 37%, enthusiastic: 38%), often (happy: 41%, enthusiastic: 32%) or very often / always (happy: 11%, enthusiastic: 11%). Fewer respondents reported rarely (happy: 9%, enthusiastic: 15%) or very rarely / never feeling happy or enthusiastic due to their work (happy: 2%, enthusiastic: 4%).

Most respondents reported feeling worried or miserable sometimes (worried: 33%, miserable: 31%), often (worried: 29%, miserable: 17%) or very often / always (worried: 15%, miserable: 10%). Fewer respondents reported rarely feeling worried or miserable due to their work (worried: 13%, miserable: 22%) or very rarely / never feeling worried or miserable due to their work (worried: 9%, miserable: 20%). High negative feelings due to work (feeling worried or miserable either ‘often’ or ‘very often or always’) were related to higher levels of work-related stress, but experiencing concurrent positive feelings due to work had a protective effect on stress levels.

Stress and stressors

One-quarter (25%) of teachers reported experiencing lower levels of stress, including those who experienced no stress (7%) or low levels of stress (18%). Less than a third reported experiencing moderate levels of stress (29%), while 23% reported experiencing high levels of stress. Fewer teachers reported very high (16%) or severe levels of stress (7%).

The work-related sources of stress teachers reported experiencing most were:

1. Workload (58%)
2. Dealing with students / parents / community (42%)
3. Time pressure (40%)
4. Administrative duties (40%)
5. Emotional load (32%).

Work-related stress levels and sources of stress varied by teacher groups. For example:

• Teachers over 60 reported ‘technology / equipment’ as a stressor more often than younger age groups
• For casual / relief teachers (CRTs) and those on fixed-term contracts, ‘job security’ was a commonly reported stressor
• Registered teachers working in early childhood settings were less likely to report ‘dealing with students / parents / community’ and ‘workload’ as a source of work-related stress, but more likely to report ‘management of work’ as a stressor compared to teachers working in schools.

Some work-related stressors are infrequently experienced, but when they are, they contribute heavily to teachers’ stress levels. For example, while only 8% of teachers reported experiencing ‘incivility / bullying / harassment’, it was the stressor most associated with higher levels of overall work-related stress.

Teachers’ location

Where teachers work (in metropolitan, inner regional, outer regional or remote / very remote areas) had only a small impact on some measures of their wellbeing, including stress, burnout and feelings due to work. However, teachers in different locations did report markedly different work-related stressors.

Teachers in remote and very remote areas were less likely than those in metropolitan areas to report experiencing the following stressors:

• Administrative duties (35% remote / very remote vs. 47% metropolitan, -12 percentage point difference)
• Time pressure (33% vs. 45%, -12 percentage points)
• Workload (58% vs. 67%, -9 percentage points)
• Dealing with students, parents and the community (38% vs. 46%, -8 percentage points)
• Competing work and home responsibilities (26% vs. 33%, -7 percentage points)
• Work schedule or hours (13% vs. 20%, -7 percentage points).

However, teachers in remote and very remote areas were more likely to experience different stressors, including:

• Social environment (25% remote / very remote vs. 16% metropolitan, +9 percentage points)
• Organisational / workplace change (19% vs. 14%, +5 percentage points)
• Physical aggression, violence (13% vs. 8%, +5 percentage points)
• Unclear job expectations (13% vs. 9%, +4 percentage points)
• Incivility, bullying, harassment (10% vs. 6%, +4 percentage points)
• Work doesn’t match specialisation / experience (11% vs. 7%, +4 percentage points).

Burnout

More than half (56%) of teachers reported experiencing some level of burnout. One-third (34%) reported a low level of burnout (having one or more symptoms of burnout), 12% reported experiencing a medium level of burnout (symptoms won’t go away), and 10% reported high levels of burnout (completely burned out and wondering if they can go on).

Career intentions

There are ample opportunities for retaining teachers in the profession, as most teachers did not report an intention to leave the teaching profession in the short term. Around one-quarter (26%) of teachers reported an intention to stay in the profession until retirement, while just over a third (35%) reported being unsure about their future career intentions.

Almost two-fifths (39%) reported intending to leave the profession before retirement. Of these, most reported either uncertainty in their intended timeframes for leaving the profession (8%) or longer-term timeframes (within 5–9 years, 10%; within 10+ years, 6%). Those who reported an intention to leave in the longer term may not have a firm plan to leave and may not end up leaving the teaching profession at all. There were some teachers who reported shorter-term intentions to leave the profession (within 1 year, 5%; within 2-4 years 9%), whose intentions are more likely to result in real-life attrition.

Burnout and poor health-related quality of life were associated with intentions to leave the teaching profession before retirement. Work-related stress was not strongly related to career intentions.

Fewer teachers who had a combination of low negative and high positive feelings due to work (19%) intended to leave the teaching profession at some point before retirement than the average (39%). However, more teachers with high negative feelings and low positive feelings due to work (66%) intended to leave the profession.

Burnout was particularly associated with intentions to leave teaching in the short term. That is, when reported levels of burnout were higher, there was a greater likelihood of teachers reporting that they intended to leave teaching in the short term compared to the longer term (10+ years).

Introduction

Teachers are pivotal to the development of Australia’s young people. While it is a highly rewarding and valued profession, teaching is also demanding and has unique challenges. It is crucial that teachers’ wellbeing is safeguarded to ensure the intrinsic rewards of the occupation outweigh its demands. The wellbeing of teachers has been a national topic of conversation in recent years, intensified by the pressures of the COVID-19 pandemic and rapid transitions to remote learning (AITSL, 2022; Billett et al., 2023; Collie, 2023; Dabrowski, 2020). Australia is also facing a critical shortage of teachers, making teacher retention more important than ever (Australian Government Department of Education, 2022). Recognising the importance of teachers’ professional wellbeing, the Australian Government, state and territory governments and the independent and Catholic school sectors have developed a range of policies and programs that aim to support teachers through the National Teacher Workforce Action Plan and state and territory and non-government wellbeing plans, strategies and frameworks. These are described in more detail in Table 1.

In 2023, one-quarter (26%) of teachers reported an intention to stay in the teaching profession until retirement, while a further one-third (35%) were unsure about their intentions and two-fifths (39%) intended to leave at some point before retirement. While reported intentions to leave do not necessarily translate to actual attrition from the workforce,^[1] this finding indicates that the workforce is experiencing some strain, particularly when coupled with the reality of teacher shortages in Australia (Australian Government Department of Education, 2022). However, these statistics compare favourably to those regarding teachers in the USA, where 17% reported that they were somewhat or very likely to leave their profession in the next year (Doan et al., 2024) and in the UK, where in 2023, 16% of teachers intended to leave teaching in the next 2 years (National Education Union, 2023). Meanwhile, in Australia, only 5% of teachers planned to leave within one year, with an additional 9% planning to leave in 2-4 years. Teachers who were considering leaving their profession in the UK reported doing so because the high workloads and low pay were impacting negatively on their mental health (National Education Union, 2023). To avoid similarly high rates of attrition in Australia, it is imperative that a better understanding of the link between teachers’ professional wellbeing and their career intentions is developed.

Teacher retention is vital, as is safeguarding teacher wellbeing. All governments and sectors are working towards these ends (Table 1). At the national level, this includes the National Teacher Workforce Action Plan (Action Plan), which aims to address the issue of teacher workforce shortages. Under Priority Area 5, this includes an action to develop and publish data on teacher wellbeing and career intentions (Action 27), as agreed by all education ministers (Department of Education, 2022). To implement this action, AITSL developed new wellbeing questions for the 2023 Australian Teacher Workforce Survey (Teacher Survey).^[2] One of the key goals of Action 27 is to understand how wellbeing impacts workforce retention. As such, this edition of In Focus examines the relationship between professional wellbeing and career intentions to offer useful insights into opportunities for protecting teacher wellbeing and boosting teacher retention.

Table 1: Examples of teacher wellbeing policies, programs, initiatives and strategies, by jurisdiction / sector

What is professional wellbeing?

Professional wellbeing broadly refers to “how workers are doing” and is impacted by all aspects of work life (Litchfield, 2021). It not only encompasses physical wellbeing but also psychological and social wellbeing, as well as the ways in which work impacts life in general (Litchfield, 2021). This includes workload, support (from both leadership and colleagues), and engagement with work and feelings about the nature of one’s work. In this publication, professional wellbeing specifically refers only to wellbeing due to work.

Supporting teachers’ wellbeing ensures they can focus on what matters most – helping young people learn and thrive. Positive professional wellbeing is linked to teachers feeling more engaged with their job, having greater belief in their teaching abilities, spending more one-on-one time with their students, and making their lessons deeper and more enjoyable for their students (Turner & Theilking, 2021; Viac & Fraser, 2020). When teachers’ professional wellbeing is good, students feel more confident and motivated, are calmer in class, are more engaged with learning and complete more work (Turner & Theilking, 2021; Viac & Fraser, 2020). In addition to teachers feeling happier and more engaged at work, high wellbeing is also associated with teachers being more likely to stay in the workforce (Collie, 2023; Thorpe et al., 2020; Wang & Hall, 2021).

When teachers’ professional wellbeing is low, however, it is linked to worse outcomes for both students and teachers (Viac & Fraser, 2020). Low professional wellbeing can include experiences of burnout. Burnout is a reaction to prolonged exposure to workplace stressors, developing gradually when work is unfulfilling, unrewarding and unpleasant (Iancu et al., 2018; Saloviita & Pakarinen, 2021). It is comprised of three factors: emotional exhaustion (a lack of resources for handling emotional situations), feelings of detachment and cynicism towards one’s job, and professional inefficacy or lack of accomplishment (Iancu et al., 2018; Saloviita & Pakarinen, 2021). Burnout in teachers has been linked to poor physical and mental health, reduced student achievement and adjustment, poor job performance and greater intentions to leave the profession (Madigan & Kim, 2021; Saloviita & Pakarinen, 2021).

This demonstrates how aspects of professional wellbeing are related to retention and are therefore essential for the healthy functioning of the teacher workforce and the school system across Australia.

Wellbeing in the Australian Teacher Workforce Survey

Every registered teacher in Australia is invited to participate in the Teacher Survey, which is distributed each year by teacher regulatory authorities on behalf of the ATWD. The Teacher Survey provides a voice for Australian teachers on their experiences in the profession as well as their career intentions. Since all registered teachers have the opportunity to participate, the Teacher Survey provides the most comprehensive data available on the experiences of the teacher workforce.

In 2023, questions about wellbeing were added to the Teacher Survey for the first time. There were 50,556 responses to the Teacher Survey, with 41,493 completing at least one of the new questions on professional wellbeing in the main section of the Teacher Survey, and 22,509 of those respondents also opted into the additional module containing further wellbeing questions. This resulted in the most comprehensive study of Australian teacher wellbeing to date.

An eleven-member Expert Advisory Group (the Advisory Group) was established to develop the wellbeing measures for the Teacher Survey. Membership was intended to achieve broad and balanced coverage across the education sector and academic expert community, with representation from different states and territories, as well as wellbeing experts and representatives from diverse professional backgrounds. In developing the measures, the Advisory Group determined it was important to use previously validated and established measures where possible, thereby ensuring a robust measurement approach and enabling trends over time to be monitored.

The four professional wellbeing questions integrated into the main Teacher Survey corresponded to questions used in the annual People Matter survey in Victoria (2023).^[3] The wellbeing questions in the main section of the Teacher Survey explored:

• Work-related stress
• Causes of work-related stress^[4]
• How work made teachers feel (miserable, worried, happy, or enthusiastic)
• Work-related burnout.

In addition to the wellbeing questions included in the main Teacher Survey, an optional wellbeing module was included to obtain a broader range of data. Analysis of these questions considered the likelihood^[5] that those who opted to participate may have been experiencing lower levels of wellbeing than those who chose not to complete the module. The questions focused on:

• Health-related quality of life
• Teaching demands and resources
• Personal safety:
  • How safe and unsafe teachers felt at work overall, physically, psychologically, and culturally
  • Things that promoted or challenged safety
• Follow-up sections to deepen understanding of specific stressors:^[6]
  • Incivility, bullying and harassment
  • Physical aggression and violence
  • Racism and discrimination.

All wellbeing questions in the Teacher Survey were related to ‘work’ or the ‘teaching profession’ – except for the health-related quality of life measures, which was more general in nature. A full list of the Teacher Survey items used in the analysis reported in this publication is included in the Technical Appendix.

Defining the measures

Who took part in the survey?

A total of 50,556 teachers across Australia participated in the main part of the Teacher Survey, with 41,493 answering at least one of the wellbeing questions in the main survey and 22,509 completing at least one question in the optional wellbeing module. This was a representative survey, meaning that the results from the survey can be assumed to apply to all teachers across Australia, not just the ones who took the survey.^[9] The survey is representative because it uses weighted data, which corrects for the over- or under-representation of survey responses from different states and territories and the known demographics (age and gender) within the states and territories, as well as the variation in wellbeing responses.

As shown in Table 2, of the teachers who completed the main survey, most were female (77.2%), aged between 30 and 49 years old (48.8%) and lived in metropolitan areas (70.9%).^[10] The largest number of respondents were from New South Wales (31.5%) and Victoria (25.1%). Most teachers were born in Australia (81.7%).

Most respondents to the main section of the Teacher Survey worked as classroom teachers (66.3%), were employed in schools (59.6%), were employed under ongoing contracts (82.5%) and had worked in the teaching profession for between 10 and 19 years (28.0%). For the respondents who went on to complete the optional module with additional wellbeing questions, these characteristics were proportionally similar.

Table 2: Teacher Survey respondent characteristics

Job demands-resources

Job demands are the physical, psychological, social and organisational aspects of a job that require a high level of effort or skills, meaning that they are associated with physical or psychological costs to the worker (Bakker & Demerouti, 2007). They can include a high workload, conflicts with colleagues and an unfavourable physical environment. Job demands are not necessarily negative; some, like a high workload, can be seen as a challenge rather than a stressor. Job demands can become job stressors, though, if the employee is not able to fully recover from the effort required to meet those demands.

Job resources, on the other hand, are the physical, psychological, social and organisational aspects of a job that allow workers to achieve work goals, reduce job demands or encourage personal growth, learning and development (Bakker & Demerouti, 2007). They can include things like supervisor support, being able to learn and employ a variety of different job skills, and getting useful feedback on performance.

Research has demonstrated that both job demands and job resources impact teachers’ wellbeing, which in turn influences their desire to leave their current job (Collie, 2023) or the profession (Skaalvik & Skaalvik, 2018).

In addition to reporting on the results of the Teacher Survey, the well-established job demands-resources model (Bakker & Demerouti, 2017; Lesener et al., 2019) was used to understand the relationship between teachers’ experiences at work and their professional wellbeing.

In this publication, the model used conceptualises job demands and resources as having an impact on professional wellbeing, including burnout, stress, health-related quality of life and feelings due to work (Figure 1). These, in turn, affect teachers’ career intentions.

Figure 1: The job demands-resources model

Which job resources did teachers experience?

The job resources that teachers reported being able to draw on most (strongly agree or agree) were:

1. I know how to go about getting my job done (90%)
2. I am clear what is expected of me at work (72%)
3. I have some say over the way I get the job done (72%)
4. If the work gets difficult, my co-workers will help me (70%)
5. I get the help and support I need from my co-workers (68%).

A small proportion of teachers (3-12%) reported not having access to each of these five job resources (strongly disagree or disagree), with the remaining teachers impartial (neither agree nor disagree).

Which job demands were affecting teachers the most?

The job demands that teachers reported experiencing most (strongly agree or agree) were:

1. My work is emotionally demanding (86%)
2. I get emotionally involved in my work (82%)
3. Managing students’ behaviour takes a lot of time and effort (80%)
4. I have to neglect some tasks because I have too much to do (71%)
5. I have more diverse needs in my class than I, as one teacher, can single-handedly support (67%).

A small proportion of teachers (5-15%) reported not experiencing each of these five job demands (strongly disagree or disagree), with the remaining teachers impartial (neither agree nor disagree).

How job demands and resources affect professional wellbeing

Analysis of data from the Teacher Survey supports the model in Figure 1 (for more information, see the Technical Appendix). Having greater access to job resources was associated with lower reported levels of stress, burnout and negative feelings due to work. Job resources were also related to higher reported levels of health-related quality of life and positive feelings due to work. Positive and negative feelings had the strongest relationship to job resources. In contrast, experiencing more job demands was related to having greater reported levels of burnout, negative feelings and stress, along with lower reported levels of health-related quality of life.

Positive and negative feelings towards work

People often experience a range of emotions due to their work. Every job involves enjoyable activities, some measure of stress or boredom and often, feelings of satisfaction and accomplishment. These feelings can vary over time and in response to the type of work that an employee is asked to complete. The measure included in this section of the Teacher Survey asked teachers: “Thinking about the past 3 months in your current organisation, how often has your work made you feel happy / enthusiastic / worried / miserable?”.

A high proportion of teachers reported feeling happy (89%) and enthusiastic (81%) due to their work. Respondents reported feeling happy and feeling enthusiastic sometimes (happy: 37%, enthusiastic: 38%), often (happy: 41%, enthusiastic: 32%) or very often or always (happy: 11%, enthusiastic: 11%; Figure 2). Fewer respondents reported rarely feeling happy or enthusiastic due to their work (9%, 15%) or never or very rarely feeling happy or enthusiastic due to their work (happy: 2%, enthusiastic: 4%).

Figure 2: Proportion of teachers reporting how often their work made them feel positive (happy, enthusiastic)

While levels were generally lower than reported levels of feeling happy and enthusiastic, teachers also reported feeling worried (77%) and feeling miserable (58%) due to their work. Respondents reported feeling worried or feeling miserable sometimes (worried: 33%, miserable: 31%), often (worried: 29%, miserable: 17%) or very often or always (worried: 15%, miserable: 10%; Figure 3). Fewer respondents reported rarely feeling worried or miserable due to their work (13%, 22%) or never or very rarely feeling worried or miserable due to their work (worried: 9%, miserable: 20%). Notably, more teachers reported that they felt worried due to work than miserable. This is not necessarily cause for concern, as there is a healthy amount of worry that one can feel due to work. Teachers must navigate challenging situations with students and parents. Some amount of worry about their students may indicate that they are taking these situations seriously and care about the students they teach.

Figure 3: Proportion of teachers reporting how often their work made them feel negative (worried, miserable)^[11]

How feelings due to work affect stress

Negative feelings had a clear relationship to reported stress levels. On a 6-point scale from 0 (nil) to 5 (severe), teachers with high negative feelings due to work reported the highest levels of work-related stress (3.12–3.63), while those with medium levels of negative feelings reported medium levels of stress (2.33–2.39) and those with low negative feelings reported the lowest levels of stress (1.42–1.77; Figure 4).

For teachers reporting high negative feelings, positive feelings had a somewhat protective effect on stress levels. Teachers with high negative feelings reported the highest level of work-related stress when they also had low positive feelings (3.63), a lower level of stress when they had medium positive feelings (3.31), and an even lower level of stress when they had high positive feelings (3.12).

Figure 4: Mean level of stress reported by survey respondents in each feelings category

How job demands and resources drive positive and negative feelings

Statistical modelling examined the relationship between job demands-resources and positive feelings due to work (happy, enthusiastic), as well as job demands-resources and negative feelings due to work (worried, miserable).^[12]

The strongest drivers of positive feelings due to work were:

1. Student behaviour: ease of behavioural management
2. Time pressure: realistic time to undertake tasks
3. Autonomy: choice in decision-making
4. Co-worker support: supportive co-workers when help is needed
5. Manager support: supervisors who value contributions and give credit.

The strongest drivers of negative feelings due to work were:

1. Emotional involvement in work: finding work emotionally demanding
2. Time pressure: unrealistic time to undertake tasks
3. Student behaviour: difficulty with behavioural management
4. Autonomy: lack of choice in decision-making
5. Incompatible demands: conflicting work demands.

Drivers of positive feelings due to work

Student behaviour

When teachers felt they were able to easily manage their classrooms and their students were engaged in their work, they tended to have more positive feelings. Positive feelings were higher, and negative feelings were lower, where respondents did not agree with the statements:

• Managing students’ behaviour takes a lot of time and effort
• Many of my students show little effort at schoolwork.

The two items were moderately positively correlated (r=.341). A correlation between two items in this context means that the items are related to each other. The stronger the correlation, the more related they are to each other.

Time pressure

When respondents felt they had plenty of time to complete their tasks, positive feelings were generally higher. Positive feelings were higher, and negative feelings were lower, where respondents did not agree with the statements:

• I have unrealistic time pressures
• I have to neglect some tasks because I have too much to do.

The two items were moderately positively correlated (r=.479).

Autonomy

When respondents felt they had control over what they did at work, positive feelings were higher. Positive feelings were higher, and negative feelings were lower, where respondents agreed with the statements:

• I have a choice in deciding what I do at work
• I have some say over the way I get the job done.

The two items were moderately positively correlated (r=.532).

Co-worker support

When respondents were in a positive work environment and felt they could rely on their co-workers to help both practically and emotionally when needed, positive feelings were higher. Positive feelings were higher if respondents agreed with the statements:

• If the work gets difficult, my co-workers will help me
• I get the help and support I need from my co-workers.

The two items were moderately positively correlated (r=.650).

Manager support

Feeling supported by management, and feeling valued at work, made respondents feel happier and more enthusiastic. Positive feelings were higher where respondents agreed with the statements:

• I feel that my supervisor values my contributions to this school / early learning centre / pre-school
• My supervisor gives me sufficient credit for my hard work.

The two items were strongly positively correlated (r=.734).

Drivers of negative feelings due to work

Emotional involvement in work

When respondents were very emotionally involved in their work, they were more likely to feel worried or miserable. Negative feelings were higher where respondents agreed with the statements:

• My work is emotionally demanding
• I get emotionally involved in my work.

The two items were weakly positively correlated (r=.294).

Incompatible demands

When respondents felt they were being pulled in two directions at once and did not have the time to complete what was being asked of them, they were more likely to feel worried or miserable at work. Negative feelings were higher where respondents agreed with the statements:

• Different teams at work demand things from me that are difficult to do at the same time
• I receive incompatible requests from two or more people.

The two items were moderately positively correlated (r=.508).

Work-related stress

Experiencing some stress at work is not only normal but can be motivating, lead to higher output and, ultimately, be satisfying (Teasdale, 2006). However, there is a point beyond which stress becomes negative, causing reduced efficiency, performance and job satisfaction (Teasdale, 2006).

One-quarter (25%) of teachers reported experiencing lower levels of stress, including those who experienced no stress (7%) and those who experienced low levels of stress (18%; Figure 5). The most common level of stress teachers reported was moderate levels (29%), less than one-quarter reported high levels of stress (23%), and fewer teachers experienced very high levels of stress (16%) or severe levels of stress (7%).

Figure 5: Proportion of teachers reporting different levels of stress

Stress levels varied across different respondent characteristics. Older teachers were less likely to report experiencing very high or severe levels of stress than younger teachers. Reported stress levels also varied by position in school. Casual / relief teachers (CRTs) of all ages and classroom teachers aged over 60 were less likely to report very high or severe stress levels than leaders and younger teachers (Figure 6).

Figure 6: Proportion of teachers reporting very high or severe stress, by position in school and age

Sources of work-related stress

The work-related stressors teachers reported experiencing the most were:

1. Workload (58%)
2. Dealing with students / parents / community (42%)
3. Time pressure (40%)
4. Administrative duties (40%)
5. Emotional load (32%).

These stressors reflect commonly-cited issues among the teacher workforce in Australia. For example, workload and time pressures have been recognised as a common source of concern among Australian teachers (Heffernan et al., 2019), while high levels of administrative work have also been identified as a notable source of teachers’ stress (Carroll et al., 2022).

The stressors that teachers were the least likely to report experiencing were:

1. Incivility, bullying, harassment (8%)
2. Content, variety or difficulty of work (6%)
3. Physical environment (5%)
4. Racism, discrimination (2%)
5. Additional work is given to me because of my identity (e.g., race, gender, sexuality, etc.; 1%).

How stressors drive stress levels

Although the top 5 work-related stressors were most frequently reported by teachers, they were not necessarily associated with the greatest differences in stress levels. A multiple regression analysis indicated that some stressors increased teachers’ stress levels to a larger degree than others (Figure 7).

Across all respondents, the stressors with the strongest relationship to overall stress were:

1. Incivility, bullying and harassment
2. Workload
3. Physical aggression / violence
4. Emotional load
5. Social environment.

Figure 7: Strength of relationships between stressors and stress level

Note. The regression coefficient (β) indicates the strength of the association between the stressor and stress level. These values show the relative impact of each stressor on stress levels. The error bars in Figure 7 denote the 95% confidence interval (CI) for each coefficient. Larger error bars (i.e., a wider confidence interval) occur when a stressor has a smaller sample size – that is, experienced by a smaller number of respondents (Hazra, 2017).

Stressors by group

As overall stress levels vary across different groups of teachers, and since each stressor has a different relationship to overall levels of work-related stress, it is useful to analyse how stressors may vary across groups.

Age

Younger teachers reported higher proportions of both ‘workload’ and ‘emotional load’ as causes of stress relative to older teachers. Teachers aged under 29 were also more likely to report ‘job security’ and ‘required / expected to work from school’ as stressors (Figure 8).

The proportion of teachers citing ‘competing work / home responsibilities’ as a stressor increased for those aged 30–39 and peaked among those aged 40–49. This may reflect a greater proportion of teachers transitioning into middle and senior leadership roles, as highlighted in National Trends: Teacher Workforce. This could also reflect teachers in these age groups being more likely to have younger children at home, resulting in a greater level of home responsibilities that compete with work.

‘Technology / equipment’ and ‘organisational / workplace change’ were cited more often as stressors by older teachers, which may reflect ongoing technological and organisational advancements in the classroom.

Teachers aged 69 and over were less likely to report stressors overall. However, these teachers also reported slightly higher proportions of ‘incivility, bullying and harassment’ and ‘work doesn’t match specialisation / experience’ relative to other age groups.

Figure 8: Work-related stressors, by age group

Position in school

There were large variations in work-related stressors across teacher positions (Figure 9). Across leadership roles, senior leaders reported higher proportions of ‘dealing with students / parents / community’ and ‘emotional load’ as stressors compared to other positions. This may reflect a higher degree of stressful interactions with students, parents and the wider community that is experienced in senior leadership roles (Mahfouz, 2020).

Middle leaders were moderately more likely to report ‘administrative duties’ as a cause of stress relative to classroom teachers, which may be due to middle leaders facing a greater degree of administrative duties and time pressure in their role (Lipscombe et al., 2023).

‘Physical aggression and violence’ and ‘incivility, bullying and harassment’ were not commonly experienced across respondents. However, teachers on leave, senior leaders and CRTs aged 40–59 were more likely to report ‘physical aggression and violence’ as a stressor. Similarly, more teachers on leave and CRTs aged over 60 reported ‘incivility, bullying and harassment’ as a stressor.

In general, CRTs reported stressors in lower proportions than those in other positions. However, among CRTs aged under 60, ‘job security’ was more likely to be reported as a stressor relative to other groups. Additionally, CRTs were more likely to report higher proportions of ‘work doesn’t match specialisation’ and ‘technology / equipment’ as causes of stress. CRTs may be more likely to report ‘work doesn’t match specialisation’ due to the nature of casual contracts, where teachers may have a limited ability to choose subject preferences (Shah et al., 2020).

Registered teachers working in early childhood settings were less likely to report ‘dealing with students / parents / community’ than other teacher groups. They were more likely to report ‘management of work’ and somewhat less likely to report ‘workload’ as sources of stress compared to teachers working in schools.

Figure 9: Work-related stressors, by position in school

Contractual arrangement

Across contractual arrangement types, a much higher proportion of teachers on fixed-term contracts selected ‘job security’ as a stressor compared to those on ongoing contracts (Figure 10). This pattern was even more noticeable for those on shorter-term contracts (1 year or less).

Workload was frequently reported as a stressor for all groups irrespective of contractual arrangement, though it was more heavily reported for those in ongoing employment than those on fixed-term contracts. Similarly, teachers employed on an ongoing basis were somewhat more likely to report ‘time pressure’ and ‘administrative duties’ relative to teachers on fixed-term contracts.

Figure 10: Work-related stressors, by contractual arrangement type

Overall work-related stress level

There were notable differences in causes of stress by overall stress levels (Figure 11). Those who reported experiencing severe stress were more likely to select ‘social environment’, ‘physical aggression, violence’ and ‘incivility, bullying, harassment’ than respondents reporting lower levels of stress. For those experiencing severe stress, ‘competing work / home responsibilities’ and ‘time pressure’ were not chosen as often as those reporting very high, high or moderate stress.

Figure 11: Work-related stressors, by overall stress

Burnout

Teacher Survey respondents were asked to rate their level of burnout. Almost half of all respondents (44%) reported feeling no burnout (10%) or feeling occasional stress, but not burnout (34%; Figure 12). More than half of respondents (56%) reported experiencing some level of burnout. One-third (34%) reported a low level of burnout, characterised by experiencing one or more symptoms of burnout such as physical and emotional exhaustion. A medium level of burnout was experienced by 12% of respondents, characterised by persistent symptoms of burnout and frustration at work.

One-tenth (10%) of respondents reported experiencing high levels of burnout, characterised by feeling completely burned out. Respondents with high burnout may feel like they need to make a change or need to seek some form of help.

Figure 12: Proportion of respondents experiencing burnout

Wellbeing in regional and remote schools

Professional wellbeing can be influenced by a variety of both individual and contextual factors, like school size and location. School size can vary by several factors, including sector and geolocation. Schools in regional and remote areas tend to have fewer teachers and fewer enrolled students (AITSL, 2023). Examining Teacher Survey results by geolocation enables a better understanding of how differences in regional contexts may be related to differences in the workforce experiences of teachers, including professional wellbeing and job demands.

Teachers working in regional and remote schools tended to report broadly similar levels of professional wellbeing to their colleagues in major cities, with a few notable differences.

On a scale from 0 (no stress) to 5 (severe stress) there were only slight differences with regards to location in levels of stress, with teachers in major cities recording a mean score of 2.71 and those working in regional and remote areas having scores from 2.66 to 2.68, which corresponds to a moderate amount of stress (Table 3). The same was true of burnout, with teachers in major cities reporting a mean score of 2.89 and those working in regional and remote areas having scores from 2.85 to 2.88 on a scale from 1 (no burnout) to 5 (high burnout). These scores correspond to teachers feeling stressed or having a low level of burnout.

Table 3: Stress and burnout, by remoteness

Similarly, there were only marginal differences in teachers’ feelings due to work (Table 4). The biggest difference was in feelings of happiness, with teachers in remote / very remote areas reporting a mean happiness score of 3.54 and teachers in major cities recording a mean score of 3.48, on a scale from 1 (never or very rarely) to 5 (very often or always).

Table 4: Feelings due to work, by remoteness

There were some notable differences in the stressors that teachers in regional and remote areas reported experiencing when compared to those living in major cities (Table 5).

Teachers in remote and very remote areas were less likely to report the following issues as stressors than those living in metropolitan areas:

• Administrative duties (35% vs. 47%, -12 percentage point difference)
• Time pressure (33% vs. 45%, -12 percentage points)
• Workload (58% vs. 67%, -9 percentage points)
• Dealing with students, parents and the community (38% vs. 46%, -8 percentage points)
• Competing work and home responsibilities (26% vs. 33%, -7 percentage points)
• Work schedule or hours (13% vs. 20%, -7 percentage points).

However, teachers in remote and very remote areas were more likely to experience different stressors, including:

• Social environment (25% vs. 16%, +9 percentage points)
• Organisational / workplace change (19% vs. 14%, +5 percentage points)
• Physical aggression, violence (13% vs. 8%, +5 percentage points)
• Unclear job expectations (13% vs. 9%, +4 percentage points)
• Incivility, bullying, harassment (10% vs. 6%, +4 percentage points)
• Work doesn’t match specialisation / experience (11% vs. 7%, +4 percentage points).

Table 5: Stressors, by remoteness

There were no notable differences in respondents’ career intentions across regional and remote areas and major cities (Figure 13). The proportion of the teacher workforce who reported that they intended to stay in the profession was consistent across all remoteness levels, ranging from 23% to 24%.

The proportion of the teacher workforce who reported intending to leave the profession ranged between 39% and 41% across remoteness areas, with those in remote and very remote areas marginally less likely to report intending to leave relative to those in major cities.

There were also some small differences in the proportion of teachers who reported that they were uncertain about their intentions to remain in the profession, ranging from 34% to 37% across remoteness levels. Those in inner regional and remote / very remote areas were fractionally more likely to report having uncertain intentions (37%) than those in outer regional areas (34%).

Figure 13: Career intentions, by remoteness

Professional wellbeing and career intentions

Career intentions

Around one-quarter (26%) of teachers reported an intention to stay in the profession until retirement, while just over a third (35%) reported being unsure about their future career intentions. Almost two-fifths (39%) reported intending to leave the profession before retirement (Figure 14).

Those who reported intending to leave before retirement were asked about their intended timeframes (within 1 year, 2–4 years, 5–9 years, 10+ years, or ‘unsure when’). Most of these respondents (24%) reported an intention to leave within 5–9 years (10%), within 10+ years (6%) or were unsure when they intended to leave (8%). Those who reported an intention to leave in the longer term, especially more than 10 years into the future, may not have a firm plan to leave and may not end up leaving the teaching profession at all.

In contrast, fewer respondents reported an intention to leave within a shorter timeframe (14%) including those who reported an intention to leave within 1 year (5%) or within 2–4 years (9%). This is notable because previous ATWD reporting has shown that the proportion of teachers who intend to leave the profession in the immediate future – particularly within one year or less – is generally aligned with annual teacher registration discontinuation rates (AITSL, 2024). This suggests that short-term intentions to leave may involve a greater degree of certainty while longer-term timeframes may involve a greater degree of uncertainty.

Figure 14: Career intentions, teacher workforce

Note. Due to rounding, figures do not add to 100%.

Taken together, these results indicate that most teachers (86%) were either:

• Unsure about their overall intentions to remain in the profession (35%)
• Intended to remain in the profession until retirement (26%)
• Intended to leave before retirement but within a longer timeframe (5–9 years, 10+ years; 16%)
• Intended to leave before retirement but were unsure about when (8%).

This suggests there are ample opportunities for retaining most teachers in the profession.

The findings also suggest avenues on which to focus retention strategies. For example, of those teachers who intended to leave the profession, the most prevalent reasons for wanting to leave were:

• Heavy workload (75%)
• To achieve a better work-life balance (69%)
• Finding teaching too stressful or teaching impacting their wellbeing or mental health (68%)
• Administrative workload (63%)
• Insufficient pay (52%)
• Heavy demands of professional regulation (e.g., professional learning, practice etc.; 50%).

These factors align with the stressors and job demands reported above. Addressing them may help to retain teachers whose timeframes to leave the profession are in the longer term, or those teachers who are unsure of their broader intentions.

How teachers’ wellbeing affects their career intentions

How positive and negative feelings affect career intentions

The relationship between positive and negative feelings and teachers’ intentions to leave the profession was examined. This analysis included teachers who reported they intended to leave the profession (over any time period), including those who were unsure of their time period.

As noted above, the proportion of all teachers who reported intending to leave the teaching profession at some stage was 39%. Where teachers reported having both high positive feelings and low negative feelings because of their work, this proportion dropped to 19%. However, where teachers had a combination of low positive feelings and high negative feelings, the proportion increased to 66%, suggesting a clear interaction between teachers’ feelings due to their work and their career intentions.

How stressors affect career intentions

Overall stress and some individual work-related stressors had a statistically significant, but weak relationship to intentions to leave (more information is available in the Technical Appendix). These stressors, listed in order from the strongest to the weakest relationship, included:

• Overall stress
• Ability to choose how work is done
• Additional identity-based work
• Required / expected to work from school
• Emotional load
• Work schedule / hours
• Workload
• Physical aggression / violence
• Administrative duties.

These results indicate a weak relationship between individual stressors and teachers’ intentions to leave their profession before retirement. However, the strongest relationship was between teachers’ overall level of stress and career intentions, meaning that individual stressors likely impact stress, which in turn increases teachers’ intentions to leave their profession.

How burnout, health-related quality of life and stress affect career intentions

In addition to understanding teachers’ career intentions, analysis was undertaken of the impact teachers’ reported wellbeing had on intentions to stay or leave the teaching profession. When teachers experienced higher levels of burnout, poor health-related quality of life and stress, they were more likely to intend to leave the profession before retirement (see the Technical Appendix for more details).

This relationship was strongest for burnout as indicated by the following findings:

• For each one-step increase along the burnout scale (five-point scale from nil to high), teachers were 2.26 times more likely to intend to leave the profession than those who indicated that they had no symptoms of burnout
• For each 1 standard deviation worsening of health-related quality of life, the odds that a teacher intended to leave the profession were 2.20 times higher
• For each additional step along the stress scale (six-point scale from nil to severe), the odds that a teacher intended to leave the profession were 1.56 times higher than those who indicated that they had no stress.

Teacher wellbeing has a direct impact on reported career intentions, particularly in the case of burnout and poor health-related quality of life. Therefore, improvements in professional wellbeing and supports that help prevent teachers from reaching higher levels of burnout may improve the retention of teachers in the profession.

How teachers’ wellbeing drives their intended time to leave the profession

Analysis of the factors that drive shorter-term intentions to leave the profession before retirement indicated that as work-related burnout increased, so did the likelihood of teachers reporting shorter timeframes for intending to leave the profession (see the Technical Appendix for more details).

For each increase in level of burnout, teachers were:

• 2.90 times more likely to intend to leave the profession in 1 year than in 10+ years
• 1.96 times more likely to intend to leave the profession in 2–4 years than in 10+ years
• 1.48 times more likely to intend to leave the profession in 5 years than in 10+ years.

Poor health-related quality of life and stress were not significant predictors of intentions to leave the profession within shorter timeframes.

Conclusion

Safeguarding teachers’ professional wellbeing is crucial. Teachers play a critical role in shaping Australia’s future, and their mental and emotional health directly impacts their ability to deliver quality education to its young people. Ensuring that teachers have the support and resources they need to maintain their professional wellbeing is essential for fostering a positive, effective learning environment and promoting the overall health of the educational community.

This publication presents the responses of teachers to questions about their wellbeing that were included in the 2023 Australian Teacher Workforce Survey. Analysis has been presented on the ways in which sources of work-related stress vary by certain characteristics such as age and position, as well as how different components of teachers’ professional wellbeing, such as stress, burnout and health-related quality of life, are related to reported career intentions.

The analysis presented here showed that job resources can help to improve work-related stress, burnout and negative feelings, while also boosting positive feelings. Job demands can have the opposite effect, increasing work-related stress, burnout and negative feelings, and reducing health-related quality of life.

Most teachers reported that their work made them feel happy and / or enthusiastic. These positive feelings had a protective effect on the relationship between negative feelings (feeling miserable or worried) and increased stress. Even where respondents did report that work made them feel worried or miserable, they were less likely to be stressed if work also made them feel good. Positive feelings due to work were also linked to increased intentions to remain in the teaching profession until retirement, while negative feelings had the opposite association. Finding ways to increase teachers’ positive feelings due to their work appear to be as important as reducing negative feelings. In particular, improving access to job resources for teachers may play an important role in achieving this, as they were associated with increased positive feelings due to work.

The reported work-related stress levels of different teacher groups varied, as did the sources of work-related stress. The findings presented highlight the importance of reducing teachers’ workloads and time pressures by reducing any unnecessary duties and making the social and physical environment of the workplace as safe and positive as possible. While some teachers reported stressors relating to the emotional demands of work, particularly teachers aged under 40, older teachers may need additional support to navigate technology requirements in the classroom and change in the workplace.

Work-related burnout and health-related quality of life were associated with respondents’ intentions to leave the profession. Burnout had the strongest relationship to intentions to leave teaching before retirement and was particularly associated with intentions to leave in the short term, which has the strongest relationship to actual rates of attrition. Targeted initiatives to identify those at risk of burnout may help to retain those teachers most likely to report short-term intentions to leave the profession.

These findings suggest insights for consideration by employers and policymakers:

• A continued focus on increasing access to job resources, such as teachers’ sense of autonomy at work, and a reduction in job demands, like unrealistic time pressures and challenging student behaviour, may help protect professional wellbeing. This might involve reducing administrative burden and producing resources for teachers to better manage student behaviour
• A continued focus on reducing the impact of work-related stressors on teachers or reducing the stressors themselves, such as high workloads and the emotional load of work, which could similarly protect teachers’ professional wellbeing. This could look like reducing teachers’ administrative load and creating resources to help teachers with the emotional demands of the job
• Targeted interventions aimed at reducing work-related stressors for specific groups, as teachers’ reported experiences of stressors varied by age, position and contract type
• Prevention of teacher burnout by reducing prolonged exposure to job demands and work-related stressors, which may safeguard professional wellbeing and increase retention.

These insights aim to help employers, policymakers and individuals maintain the positive professional wellbeing reported by most teachers. The findings presented here might inform existing wellbeing policies and programs as well as those developed in the future. These findings also support the focus of initiatives in the National Teacher Workforce Action Plan to reduce teacher workload, which should contribute to improved teacher wellbeing (Department of Education, 2022). All state and territory education departments, as well as the independent and Catholic sectors, also have a range of policies and programs in place to reduce or better manage teacher workload and support teacher wellbeing (Department of Education, 2022).

It is important to note that this publication focused on the effects of work-related factors on teacher wellbeing only. There are many additional personal, social and cultural impacts on an individual’s wellbeing that may be beyond the control of employers. While individuals are responsible for their own wellbeing, employers also play a crucial role in creating a supportive workplace environment and providing supports and resources to promote overall health and satisfaction for their employees. Understanding the professional wellbeing of teachers is key to developing evidence-informed initiatives aimed at supporting them to thrive and remain in the profession, continuing the valuable work of educating Australia’s young people.