Measuring Teacher Well-Being: A Systematic Review of Measurement Approaches, Theoretical Models, and Research Trends

Teacher well-being has expanded rapidly as a research field, yet conceptual and methodological heterogeneity continues to limit cumulative knowledge. This study examined the intellectual and thematic development of teacher well-being research, how teacher well-being is measured in influential studies, and which theoretical models underpin its conceptualization. We conducted a systematic review complemented by science-mapping analyses of Web of Science and Scopus records published between 2015 and 2026. The full corpus comprised 1113 articles. Historiography, thematic evolution, and trend topics were examined with Bibliometrix. The top citation-impact decile (111 articles, based on annualized citations) was screened for in-depth analysis of measurement and theoretical models, yielding a final high-impact analytical subset of 92 empirical studies and 178 applications of instruments or indicators. The historiographic analysis identified multiple partially parallel intellectual trajectories, while more recent indexed publications showed greater representation of resilience, psychological well-being, retention, and contextual approaches alongside stress, depression, and burnout. Within this 92-study high-impact subset, measurement remained fragmented: 46.6% of applications assessed ill-being, 64.6% used non-teacher-specific measures, and no positive teacher well-being instrument was dominant. Within the same subset, although 82.6% of studies had explicit theoretical grounding, no model accounted for one quarter of the sample; JD-R was most frequent (19.6%), followed by Positive Psychology/PERMA (17.4%). Teacher well-being was primarily modeled as an outcome (63.0%). Teacher well-being research appears more diversified than consolidated. Its advancement depends less on adopting a single theory or instrument than on strengthening alignment between construct definition, theoretical function, and measurement, while promoting clearer measurement standards and context-sensitive psychometric evidence.