Teachers Voices: A Qualitative Study on Burnout in the Portuguese Educational System
Abstract
:1. Introduction
1.1. Individual Intrinsic Variables
1.2. School Context Attributes
1.3. Classroom and Student Characteristics
1.4. Present Study
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. Participants
2.2. Procedures
2.3. Measures
2.4. Data Analysis
3. Results
3.1. Grid of Categories and Subcategories
3.2. Frequency of Categories and Subcategories
3.3. Organizational Dimension
3.4. Classroom Dimension
4. Discussion
4.1. Burnout Dimensions
4.2. Burnout and Teaching Levels
5. Conclusions
6. Limitations
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Sterling, P. Allostasis: A model of predictive regulation. Physiol. Behav. 2012, 106, 5–15. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Psyhältö, K.; Pietarinen, J.; Salmela-Aro, K. Teacher-working-environment fit as framework for burnout experienced by Finnish teachers. Teach. Teach. Educ. 2011, 27, 1101–1110. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Maslach, C.; Leiter, M.P. It´s time to take action on burnout. Burn. Res. 2015, 2, iv–v. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Pietarinen, J.; Psyhältö, K.; Soini, T.; Salmela-Aro, K. Reducing teacher burnout: A socio-contextual approach. Teach. Teach. Educ. 2013, 35, 62–72. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Skaalvik, E.M.; Skaalvik, S. Does school context matter? Relations with teacher burnout and job satisfaction. Teach. Teach. Educ. 2009, 25, 518–524. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Aronsson, G.; Theorell, T.; Grape, T.; Hammarström, A.; Hogstedt, C.; Marteinsdottir, I.; Skoog, I.; Träskman-Bendz, L.; Hall, C. A systematic review including meta-analysis of work environment and burnout symptoms. BMC Public Health 2017, 17, 264. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Demerouti, E.; Bakker, A.; Nachreiner, F.; Schaufeli, W. The job demands-resources model of burnout. J. Appl. Psychol. 2001, 86, 499–512. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mota, A.I.; Lopes, J.; Oliveira, C. Burnout in Portuguese teachers: A systematic review. Eur. J. Educ. Res. 2021, 10, 693–703. [Google Scholar]
- Fiorilli, C.; Albanese, O.; Gabola, P.; Pepe, A. Teachers’ emotional competence and social support: Assessing the mediating role of teacher burnout. Scand. J. Educ. Res. 2017, 61, 127–138. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Helou, M.E.; Nabhani, M.; Bahous, R. Teachers’ views on causes leading to their burnout. Sch. Leadersh. Manag. 2016, 36, 551–567. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pinto, A.M.; Lima, M.L.; Silva, A.L. Fuentes de estrés, burnout y estratégias de coping en profesores portugueses [Stress sources, burnout and coping among Portuguese teachers]. Rev. Psicol. Trab. Organ. 2005, 21, 125–143. [Google Scholar]
- Arvidsson, I.; Leo, U.; Larsson, A.; Hakansson, C.; Persson, R.; Björk, J. Burnout among school teachers: Quantitative and qualitative results from a follow-up study in southern Sweden. BMC Public Health 2019, 19, 655. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Kangas-Dick, K.; O’Shaughnessy, E. Interventions that promote resilience among teachers: A systematic review of the literature. Int. J. Sch. Educ. Psychol. 2020, 8, 131–146. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Carlotto, M.S.; Palazzo, L.S. Síndrome de burnout e fatores associados: Um estudo epidemiológico com professores [Factors associated with burnout’s syndrome: An epidemiological study of teachers]. Cad. Saude Publica 2006, 22, 117–126. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Lawrence, D.F.; Loi, N.M.; Gudex, B.W. Understanding the relationship between work intensification and burnout in secondary teachers. Teach. Teach. Theory Pract. 2019, 25, 189–199. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Consiglio, C.; Laura, B.; Vecchione, M.; Maslach, C. Self-efficacy, perceptions of context, and burnout: A multilevel study on nurses. Med. Lav. 2014, 105, 255–268. [Google Scholar]
- Day, A.; Leiter, M. The good and the bad of working relationships: Implications for burnout. In Burnout at Work: A Psychological Perspective; Leiter, M., Bakker, A., Maslach, C., Eds.; Psychology Press: London, UK, 2014; pp. 56–79. [Google Scholar]
- Martin, N.K.; Sass, D.A.; Schmitt, T.A. Teacher efficacy in student engagement, instructional management, student stressors, and burnout: A theoretical model using in-class variables to predict teachers’ intent-to-leave. Teach. Teach. Educ. 2012, 28, 546–559. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Carlotto, M.S. Síndrome de burnout: Diferenças segundo níveis de ensino [Burnout syndrome: Differences according to education levels]. Psico 2010, 41, 495–502. [Google Scholar]
- Tatar, M.; Horenczyk, G. Diversity-related burnout among teachers. Teach. Teach. Educ. 2003, 19, 387–408. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rajendran, N.; Watt, H.M.; Richardson, P. Teacher burnout and turnover intent. Aust. Educ. Res. 2020, 47, 477–500. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Aloe, A.; Shisler, S.; Norris, B.; Nickerson, A.; Rinker, T. A multivariate meta-analysis of student misbehaviour and teacher burnout. Educ. Res. Rev. 2014, 12, 30–44. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Shen, B.; McCaughtry, N.; Martin, J.; Garn, A.; Kulik, N.; Fahlman, M. The relationship between teacher burnout and student motivation. Br. J. Educ. Psychol. 2015, 85, 519–532. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Stoeber, J.; Rennert, D. Perfectionism in school teachers: Relations with stress, appraisals, coping styles, and burnout. Anxiety Stress Coping 2008, 21, 37–53. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Gomes, A.R.; Faria, S.; Gonçalves, M. Cognitive appraisal as a mediator in the relationship between stress and burnout. Work Stress 2013, 27, 351–367. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Busetto, L.; Wck, W.; Gumbinger, C. How to use and assess qualitative research methods. Neurol. Res. Pract. 2020, 2, 1–10. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Maxwell, J.A. Using numbers in qualitative research. Qual. Inq. 2010, 16, 1–8. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bardin, L. Análide de Conteúdo [Content Analysis], 3rd ed.; Edições 70: Lisboa, Portugal, 2004. [Google Scholar]
- Fonseca, R.; Silva, P.; Silva, R. Acordo inter-juízes: O caso do coeficiente kappa [The interrater agreement: Kappa’s coefficient]. Laboratório Psicol. 2007, 5, 81–90. [Google Scholar]
- Shernoff, E.; Mehta, T.; Atkins, M.; Torf, R.; Spencer, J. A qualitative study of the sources and impact of stress among urban teachers. School Ment. Health 2011, 3, 59–69. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Droogenbroeck, F.; Spruyt, B.; Vanroelen, C. Burnout among senior teachers: Investigating the role of workload and interpersonal relationships at work. Teach. Teach. Educ. 2014, 43, 99–109. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Leiter, M.P.; Maslach, C. Latent burnout profiles: A new approach to understanding the burnout experience. Burn. Res. 2016, 3, 89–100. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Charoensukmongkol, P.; Moqbel, M.; Gutierrez-Wirsching, S. The role of co-worker and supervisor support on job burnout and job satisfaction. J. Adv. Manag. Res. 2016, 13. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dysvik, A.; Kuvaas, B. Perceived supervisor support climate, perceived investment in employee development climate, and business-unit performance. Hum. Resour. Manag. 2012, 51, 651–664. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Halbesleben, J.; Wheeler, A. To invest or not? The role of co-worker support and trust in daily reciprocal gain spirals of helping behaviour. J. Manag. 2012, 41, 1628–1650. [Google Scholar]
- Gomes, A.R.; Peixoto, A.; Pacheco, R.; Silva, M. Stress ocupacional e alteração do Estatuto da Carreira Docente português [Occupational stress and the change to the Portuguese statute of the teaching career]. Educ. Pesqui. 2012, 38, 357–371. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Crato, N. Curriculum and educational reforms in Portugal: An analysis on why and how students’ knowledge and skills improved. In Audacious Education Purposes; Reimers, F., Ed.; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2020; pp. 209–231. [Google Scholar]
- OECD. TALIS 2018 Results (Volume I). Teachers and School Leaders as Lifelong Learners; OECD Publishing: Paris, France, 2019. [Google Scholar]
- Skaalvik, E.M.; Skaalvik, S. Teacher self-efficacy and teacher burnout: A study of relations. Teach. Teach. Educ. 2010, 26, 1059–1069. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Karasek, R.; Theorell, T. Healthy Work: Stress, Productivity, and the Reconstruction of Working Life; Basic Books: New York, NY, USA, 1990. [Google Scholar]
- Maslach, C.; Schaufeli, W.B.; Leiter, M.P. Job burnout. Annu. Rev. Psychol. 2001, 52, 397–422. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Fernet, C.; Guay, F.; Senécal, C.; Austin, C. Predicting intraindividual changes in teacher burnout: The role of perceived school environment and motivational factors. Teach. Teach. Educ. 2012, 28, 514–525. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hanushek, E.; Kain, E.; Rivkin, S. Why public schools lose teachers. J. Hum. Resour. 2001, 39, 326–354. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Maslach, C.; Leiter, M.P. Understanding the burnout experience: Recent research and its implications for psychiatry. World Psychiatry 2016, 15, 103–111. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- PORDATA. Docentes do Sexo Feminino em % dos Docentes em Exercício nos Ensinos Pré-Escolar, Básico e Secundário: Total e por Nível de Ensino; Fundação Francisco Manuel dos Santos: Lisboa, Portugal, 2020. [Google Scholar]
Category | Definition | Subcategory | Definition |
---|---|---|---|
Personal Identity | Set of individual intrinsic perceptions and attitudes. | Positive management of life roles | Ease of family and social context management, due to the professional role demands. |
Negative management of life roles | Well-managed family and social context hardships, due to the professional role demands. | ||
Coping mechanisms | Resources and/or strategies to face professional context hardships. | ||
Skills | Physical, cognitive and/or emotional limit perception to face the professional context demands. | ||
Professional Identity | Professional self-concept perception and professional circle affinity sense. | Recognition | Value or recognition perception with the teacher’s role, by society and by school peers. |
Lack of Recognition | Depreciation or lack of recognition perception with the teacher’s role, by society and school peers. Including loss of dignity and authority. | ||
Fulfilment | Overall fulfilment with career and professional category, without objectively identifying their source. | ||
Unfulfillment | Overall dissatisfaction with the career and professional category, without identifying its source. | ||
Status loss | References to loss of benefits and career stagnation. Including comparison with other career categories. |
Category | Dimension | Subcategory | Definition |
---|---|---|---|
School System | Portuguese school system properties. | Programs | Perceived imbalance between the school program requirements and the curricular goals, and the time available to teach that which matters. |
Teachers’ workload | Reference to the teachers’ excessive workload and the perceived imbalance between the available time for scholar and not-scholar components. | ||
Students’ workload | Reference to the students’ excessive workload. Includes the free time during school hours cessation. | ||
Overall Bureaucracy | Amount of bureaucracy associated with teaching. Includes perceived worthlessness and fatigue. | ||
Teachers’ evaluation | Reference to external and internal teachers’ evaluation. | ||
School evaluation | Reference to internal and external school evaluations. | ||
Legislation | Negative impact of the continuous legal changes in teaching. Includes the perception of inadequacy of the law to the effective school context. | ||
School context | School context properties where the person is integrated. | Schedule | Dissatisfaction with the timetable structure, which makes it harder to mediate between professional and personal life, and teachers’ mingling. |
Extra activities | Performance in tasks or duties not directly related to content teaching. | ||
School circumstances | Poor physical characteristics of the school space and shortage of human resources. | ||
Specific Bureaucracy | Bureaucracy rise perception specific to that school context. | ||
School atmosphere | Relationship dimension, contributing to the perceived school atmosphere. | Organizational injustice | Injustice perception stemming from hierarchical superior decisions, compared to peers. Including retaliation references. |
Positive relationship with peers | Peer relationship quality perception. | ||
Negative relationship with peers | Degrading or lack of peer relationship perception. | ||
Positive relationship with principals | Relationship between teachers and school principals’ quality perception. | ||
Negative relationship with principals | Perception of degrading or lack of relationships between teachers and school principals. | ||
Limitations | Teacher-perceived limitations on their performance. | Projects | Negative impact of the involvement in school projects. Includes external school image concerns. |
Lack of autonomy | Perception of loss of autonomy in decision making (i.e., grade assignments) and lack of freedom of expression. | ||
Lobbies | Perception of financial school priorities, limiting teachers’ roles and response. |
Category | Definition | Subcategory | Definition |
---|---|---|---|
Classroom | Classroom context exclusive attributes. | Behaviors | Indiscipline and disruptive student behaviors. |
Management | Classroom management and teaching strategies set by teachers. | ||
Teaching content | Perception of content teaching time. | ||
Interruptions | Percentage of time not dedicated to content teaching (i.e., Indiscipline). | ||
Climate | Perception of the classroom climate, characterized by the student-teacher relationships. | ||
Class | Class attributes, including the number of students per class and students’ heterogeneity. | ||
Students | Individual and student’s family attributes. | Family structure | Family structure of the students and their social–economical context. |
Development | Cognitive and intellectual student development perception. | ||
Motivation | Students’ motivation and attention perception. | ||
Parents | Parents’ attributes. | Positive relationship with parents | Teacher–guardian relationship quality. |
Pressure | Parents’ power and pressure on teachers’ and school principals’ perception, and its impact. | ||
Education | Perception inadequate schooling practices and degree of involvement from parents in the student’s school life. | ||
Society | Abstract nature attributes from the individual unique experience. | Values | Perception of loss of values from society, ethic and code of conduct, such as citizenship, solidarity or respect. |
Mission | Perception loss mission from the school and loss of the teaching purpose. Includes perceptions of negative evolutions of the school system (i.e., compared with the past). |
Dimension | Total Sample (n = 26) | 1CBE (n = 4) | 2CBE (n = 5) | 3CBE and SE (n = 17) | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
AbF | AF | AbF | AF | AbF | AF | AbF | AF | |
Personal | 558 | 23.6% | 99 | 22.9% | 85 | 24.7% | 375 | 23.6% |
Organizational | 926 | 39.1% | 145 | 33.6% | 118 | 34.3% | 663 | 41.6% |
Classroom | 884 | 37.3% | 188 | 43.5% | 141 | 41% | 554 | 34.8% |
Category Subcategory | Total Sample (n = 26) | 1CBE (n = 4) | 2CBE (n = 5) | 3CBE and SE (n = 17) | ||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
AbF | AF | RF | AbF | AF | RF | AbF | AF | RF | AbF | AF | RF | |
Personal Identity | ||||||||||||
Positive management of life roles | 10 | 0.4% | 3% | 1 | 0.2% | 2% | 6 | 1.7% | 8% | 2 | 0.1% | 1% |
Negative management of life roles | 91 | 3.8% | 24% | 21 | 4.9% | 34% | 7 | 2% | 10% | 65 | 4.1% | 27% |
Coping Mechanisms | 66 | 2.8% | 17% | 7 | 1.6% | 11% | 15 | 4.4% | 21% | 44 | 2.8% | 18% |
Capabilities | 212 | 9% | 56% | 33 | 7.6% | 53% | 45 | 13.1% | 62% | 134 | 8.4% | 55% |
Sub-total | 379 | 16% | 100% | 62 | 14.4% | 100% | 73 | 21.2% | 100% | 245 | 15.4% | 100% |
Professional Identity | ||||||||||||
Recognition | 3 | 0.1% | 2% | 1 | 0.2% | 3% | 0 | 0% | 0% | 2 | 0.1% | 2% |
Lack of Recognition | 73 | 3.1% | 41% | 20 | 4.6% | 54% | 5 | 1.5% | 42% | 48 | 3% | 37% |
Fulfilment | 17 | 0.7% | 9% | 2 | 0.5% | 5% | 3 | 0.9% | 25% | 12 | 0.8% | 9% |
Dissatisfaction | 34 | 1.4% | 19% | 3 | 0.7% | 8% | 4 | 1.2% | 33% | 27 | 1.7% | 21% |
Loss of Status | 52 | 2.2% | 29% | 11 | 2.5% | 30% | 0 | 0% | 0% | 41 | 2.6% | 32% |
Sub-total | 179 | 7.6% | 100% | 37 | 8.6% | 100% | 12 | 3.5% | 100% | 130 | 8.2% | 100% |
School System | ||||||||||||
Programs | 64 | 2.7% | 17% | 16 | 3.7% | 19% | 10 | 2.9% | 23% | 38 | 2.4% | 15% |
Teachers’ workload | 43 | 1.8% | 11% | 5 | 1.2% | 6% | 5 | 1.5% | 11% | 30 | 1.9% | 12% |
Students’ Workload | 22 | 0.9% | 6% | 9 | 2.1% | 11% | 1 | 0.3% | 2% | 15 | 0.9% | 6% |
Overall Bureaucracy | 93 | 3.9% | 25% | 21 | 4.9% | 25% | 7 | 2% | 16% | 65 | 4.1% | 26% |
Teachers’ Evaluation | 21 | 0.9% | 6% | 4 | 0.9% | 5% | 1 | 0.3% | 2% | 16 | 1% | 6% |
School Evaluation | 23 | 1% | 6% | 3 | 0.7% | 4% | 1 | 0.3% | 2% | 19 | 1.2% | 8% |
Legislation | 108 | 4.6% | 29% | 25 | 5.8% | 30% | 19 | 5.5% | 43% | 64 | 4% | 26% |
Sub-total | 374 | 15.8% | 100% | 83 | 19.2% | 100% | 44 | 12.8% | 100% | 247 | 15.5% | 100% |
School Context | ||||||||||||
Schedule | 50 | 2.1% | 23% | 8 | 1.9% | 32% | 11 | 3.2% | 28% | 31 | 1.9% | 20% |
Extra Activities | 86 | 3.6% | 39% | 7 | 1.6% | 28% | 18 | 5.2% | 46% | 61 | 3.8% | 40% |
School Circumstances | 28 | 1.2% | 13% | 5 | 1.2% | 20% | 2 | 0.6% | 5% | 21 | 1.3% | 14% |
Number of Classes | 17 | 0.7% | 8% | 2 | 0.5% | 8% | 2 | 0.6% | 5% | 14 | 0.9% | 9% |
Specific Bureaucracy | 37 | 1.6% | 17% | 3 | 0.7% | 12% | 6 | 1.7% | 15% | 27 | 1.7% | 18% |
Sub-total | 218 | 9.2% | 100% | 25 | 5.8% | 100% | 39 | 11.3% | 100% | 154 | 9.7% | 100% |
School Atmosphere | ||||||||||||
Organizational Injustice | 50 | 2.1% | 20% | 6 | 1.4% | 23% | 3 | 0.9% | 9% | 41 | 2.6% | 22% |
Positive Relationship with Peers | 20 | 0.8% | 8% | 1 | 0.2% | 4% | 8 | 2.3% | 24% | 11 | 0.7% | 6% |
Negative Relationship with Peers | 94 | 4% | 38% | 11 | 2.5% | 42% | 13 | 3.8% | 39% | 70 | 4.4% | 37% |
Positive Relationship with Principals | 12 | 0.5% | 5% | 2 | 0.5% | 8% | 3 | 0.9% | 9% | 7 | 0.4% | 4% |
Negative Relationship with Principals | 73 | 3.1% | 29% | 6 | 1.4% | 23% | 6 | 1.7% | 18% | 61 | 3.8% | 32% |
Sub-total | 249 | 10.5% | 100% | 26 | 6% | 100% | 33 | 9.6% | 100% | 190 | 11.9% | 100% |
Limitations | ||||||||||||
Projects | 16 | 0.7% | 19% | 6 | 1.4% | 55% | 0 | 0% | 0% | 10 | 0.6% | 14% |
Lack of Autonomy | 50 | 2.1% | 59% | 4 | 0.9% | 36% | 2 | 0.6% | 100% | 44 | 2.8% | 61% |
Lobbies | 19 | 0.8% | 22% | 1 | 0.2% | 9% | 0 | 0% | 0% | 18 | 1.1% | 25% |
Sub-total | 85 | 3.6% | 100% | 11 | 2.5% | 100% | 2 | 0.6% | 100% | 72 | 4.5% | 100% |
Classroom | ||||||||||||
Behaviors | 121 | 5.1% | 28% | 9 | 2.1% | 14% | 37 | 10.8% | 42% | 75 | 4.7% | 26% |
Management | 132 | 5.6% | 30% | 22 | 5.1% | 33% | 25 | 7.3% | 28% | 85 | 5.3% | 30% |
Teaching content | 8 | 0.3% | 2% | 0 | 0% | 0% | 0 | 0% | 0% | 8 | 0.5% | 3% |
Interruptions | 48 | 2% | 11% | 5 | 1.2% | 8% | 5 | 1.5% | 6% | 38 | 2.4% | 13% |
Climate | 77 | 3.3% | 18% | 13 | 3% | 20% | 15 | 4.4% | 17% | 49 | 3.1% | 17% |
Class | 52 | 2.2% | 12% | 17 | 3.9% | 26% | 6 | 1.7% | 7% | 29 | 1.8% | 10% |
Sub-total | 438 | 18.5% | 100% | 66 | 15.3% | 100% | 88 | 25.6% | 100% | 284 | 17.8% | 100% |
Students | ||||||||||||
Family structure | 23 | 1% | 15% | 8 | 1.9% | 18% | 2 | 0.6% | 7% | 13 | 0.8% | 16% |
Development | 57 | 2.4% | 37% | 27 | 6.3% | 61% | 5 | 1.5% | 18% | 25 | 1.6% | 30% |
Motivation | 75 | 3.2% | 48% | 9 | 2.1% | 20% | 21 | 6.1% | 75% | 45 | 2.8% | 54% |
Sub-total | 155 | 6.5% | 100% | 44 | 10.2% | 100% | 28 | 8.1% | 100% | 83 | 5.2% | 100% |
Parents | ||||||||||||
Positive relationship with parents | 38 | 1.6% | 16% | 10 | 2.3% | 16% | 7 | 2% | 30% | 21 | 1.3% | 14% |
Pressure | 77 | 3.3% | 33% | 12 | 2.8% | 19% | 5 | 1.5% | 22% | 59 | 3.7% | 40% |
Education | 119 | 5% | 51% | 41 | 9.5% | 65% | 11 | 3.2% | 48% | 67 | 4.2% | 46% |
Sub-total | 234 | 9.9% | 100% | 63 | 14.6% | 100% | 23 | 6.7% | 100% | 147 | 9.2% | 100% |
Society | ||||||||||||
Values | 12 | 0.5% | 21% | 6 | 1.4% | 40% | 1 | 0.3% | 50% | 6 | 0.4% | 15% |
Mission | 45 | 1.9% | 79% | 9 | 2.1% | 60% | 1 | 0.3% | 50% | 34 | 2.1% | 85% |
Sub-total | 57 | 2.4% | 100% | 15 | 3.5% | 100% | 2 | 0.6% | 100% | 40 | 2.5% | 100% |
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. |
© 2021 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Mota, A.I.; Lopes, J.; Oliveira, C. Teachers Voices: A Qualitative Study on Burnout in the Portuguese Educational System. Educ. Sci. 2021, 11, 392. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci11080392
Mota AI, Lopes J, Oliveira C. Teachers Voices: A Qualitative Study on Burnout in the Portuguese Educational System. Education Sciences. 2021; 11(8):392. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci11080392
Chicago/Turabian StyleMota, Ana Isabel, João Lopes, and Célia Oliveira. 2021. "Teachers Voices: A Qualitative Study on Burnout in the Portuguese Educational System" Education Sciences 11, no. 8: 392. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci11080392
APA StyleMota, A. I., Lopes, J., & Oliveira, C. (2021). Teachers Voices: A Qualitative Study on Burnout in the Portuguese Educational System. Education Sciences, 11(8), 392. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci11080392