Vol.:(0123456789) Social Psychology of Education (2025) 28:56 https://doi.org/10.1007/s11218-024-10010-8 REVIEW ARTICLE Resilience as a professional competence: a new way towards healthy teachers? Judith Baatz1  · Maria Wirzberger1 Received: 31 October 2023 / Accepted: 10 December 2024 © The Author(s) 2025 Abstract Considering teachers’ poor state of health, we conducted a literature review to inves- tigate, whether resilience, as a professional competence, has a health-promoting effect on teachers. Re-directing the seemingly inevitable trajectory from stress to ill- ness towards health, the effects should be reflected in the improvement of teachers’ negative strain ratios. Hence, our review investigated the effect of resilience and spe- cific resilience resources regarding teachers’ risk of burnout, stress perception and coping, general well-being, attrition rates, and effectiveness. Our results indicate that resilience supports teachers’ health, by consistently showing a positive impact on the investigated aspects. Furthermore, our catalog of identified resilience resources supports the concept of teacher-specific resilience. As effective programs for pro- moting teachers’ resilience are lacking, this informs new intervention approaches to promote teachers’ health. Keywords Teachers’ health · Teacher resilience · Teachers’ protective factors · Teacher burnout · Mental health 1 Introduction In the public eye, being a teacher is often associated with a carefree life: Once teach- ers have created a basis of working materials for their subjects, they work only part- time, people assume. Furthermore, due to school vacations, teachers should have much more free time compared to other employees. However, when taking a closer look at this profession, a different picture emerges, challenging persistent clichés. Regardless of the country and type of school, teach- ers consistently describe their jobs as exceedingly demanding (Boldrini et al., 2019; Burić et  al., 2019; Hernandez et  al., 2022; Kärner et  al., 2016; McCarthy, 2019; * Maria Wirzberger maria.wirzberger@iris.uni-stuttgart.de 1 Department of Teaching and Learning with Intelligent Systems, University of Stuttgart, Geschwister-Scholl-Str. 24D, 70174 Stuttgart, Germany http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1244-590X http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3072-2875 http://crossmark.crossref.org/dialog/?doi=10.1007/s11218-024-10010-8&domain=pdf J. Baatz, M. Wirzberger 56 Page 2 of 34 Richards et  al., 2016; Sappa et  al., 2019; Schaarschmidt, 2005; Siu et  al., 2014). Numerous empirical evidence on teacher’ stress reflects this condition. Teachers are among the risk population for mental illness, every second teacher leaves the profes- sion prematurely due to mental or psychosomatic problems (Schaarschmidt, 2005; Scheuch et al., 2015; Weiß & Kiel, 2013). Internationally, teachers record high prev- alence rates of burnout or single burnout symptoms, such as emotional exhaustion, and depression (Görich, 2019; Hernandez et al., 2022; Lo, 2014; Salmela-Aro et al., 2019; Sappa et al., 2019; Schaarschmidt, 2005; Scheuch et al., 2015). The term burnout, introduced by psychologist Herbert Freudenberger in 1974, refers to depressive symptomatology triggered by excessive occupational stress, occurring particularly frequently in social professions  (Freudenberger, 1974). The term was further extended in 1986 by the development of the “Maslach Burnout Inventory” (MBI; Maslach et al., 1986). According to the MBI, a burnout syndrome is characterized by (a) emotional exhaustion, (b) depersonalization, and (c) subjec- tively reduced lack of performance. If not recognized early, a burnout syndrome often leads to further physical and psychological secondary diseases such as depres- sion, anxiety, or substance abuse (Helmreich & Lieb, 2015). Particularly when com- pared to other occupational groups, teachers stand out negatively due to their poor state of health. The Potsdam Teacher Study (Schaarschmidt, 2005) compares occu- pational groups and indicates that none of the investigated professions, exposed to similar stress levels by constant social contacts, show similarly negative strain ratios (Kieschke & Schaarschmidt, 2008; Schaarschmidt, 2005). Moreover, relative to other occupational groups, teachers exhibit a lower work-life balance, which corre- lates significantly with an increased experience of stress (Kärner et al., 2016). Stress is defined by external working conditions affecting an individual, which make it dif- ficult or even impossible to fulfill the work assignment. Usually, an individual can- not influence these challenges and pressures (Westman, 2001). By contrast, strain defines the subjective evaluation of perceived stress, which affects personal reaction patterns at the physical and psychological level (Westman, 2001). Especially within the first years of teaching, referred to as “survival phase” (Klus- mann et  al., 2012, p.  276), the perceived stress level is increased. This so-called “reality shock” (Leroux et al., 2016, p. 808) manifests itself in a significant increase in emotional exhaustion, a leading symptom of burnout (Klusmann et  al., 2012). This trend of psychologically strained teachers is already apparent in pre-service teachers at universities (Brandl-Bredenbeck et al., 2013; Mašková et al., 2022). As a result, many teachers decide against the profession after a short time, due to their struggle with burnout and depression (Tait, 2008). Against the background of these findings, scholars refer to teaching as a diagnosis, rather than a profession (Schaar- schmidt, 2005). However, the consequences of this development do not only affect the individual level but have far-reaching political and economic impacts. Internationally, the pro- fession records attrition rates of up to 50% within the first years of teaching (Arnup & Bowles, 2016; Helms-Lorenz et al., 2013; Leroux et al., 2016; Tait, 2008). This will eventually lead to an acute long-term shortage of teachers (Schelvis et  al., 2014). In addition, it is important to consider teachers’ premature retirement, which most frequently happens in the case of mental or psychosomatic disorders (Scheuch Resilience as a professional competence: a new way towards… Page 3 of 34 56 et al., 2015; Weiß & Kiel, 2013). Subsequently, this entails high macrosocial costs due to teachers’ excessive use of the healthcare system. Especially in welfare states, such as Germany, those costs are high as the state pays for teachers’ treatments. In addition to sick teachers, however, students suffer from a permanently impaired quality of schools by strained teachers. Without healthy, efficient teachers, an edu- cational system can no longer guarantee quality education, which causes permanent economic damage (Vesely et al., 2013; Weiß & Kiel, 2013). But what occupational stress factors result in strained teachers? There have been numerous studies investigating potential stress factors in the teaching profession (e.g., Burić et al., 2019; Cheung et al., 2011; Kunz-Heim et al., 2019; Pretsch et al., 2012; Richards et al., 2016; Tait, 2008; Weiß & Kiel, 2013; Wesselborg et al., 2014), resulting in a consistent picture. Frequently listed aspects comprise (1) dealing with challenging students due to classroom disruptions, (2) low societal recognition, (3) lack of cooperation within the teaching staff, leading to isolation, conflicts, and even bullying, (4) lack of support by school leaders, resulting in a tense school atmos- phere, (5) lack of separation between work and private life, (6) high noise level, (7) heavy workload, (8) inefficient organizational structures with high bureaucracy, lack of equipment, and unbalanced distribution of work, (9) overly large classes, (10) lack of decision-making capacities, (11) expectations of situationally independent emotion regulation as well as (12) limited promotion prospects. So far, solutions at a structural level are lacking. On the contrary, health-promot- ing measures are often seen as teachers’ personal responsibility, i.e., to equip them- selves with the appropriate resources to maintain their health (Vesely et al., 2013). The problem, however, is that stress factors responsible for this negative strain are inherent in the system and beyond individual teachers’ control (Gu & Day, 2013; Schelvis et  al., 2014). Thereby, existing evidence shows that early and mid-career teachers report higher levels of resilience compared to late career teachers (Gu & Day, 2013), supporting the conclusion that, without capacities and support for build- ing and sustaining resilience, teachers’ vulnerability towards occupation-specific stress factors increases over time. Addressing system-inherent conditions requires far-reaching reforms of the school system in general; hence, it is unlikely that they will change abruptly but in a more subtle, gradual manner over a longer time period. In the meantime, while simultaneously working towards structural changes, we need to address teachers themselves and enable them to cope with stress factors specific to their profession without suffering. In the light of these circumstances, we pro- pose resilience as a professional competence for teachers to be a solution-oriented approach. We assume that resilience can change the seemingly unavoidable trajec- tory between stress factors and suffering of teachers, eventually leading to healthy teachers. But why can resilience effectively promote teachers’ health? 1.1 Theoretical background The term resilience results from the Latin resilire and means “to bounce back.” Originally taken from the realm of physics, it describes particularly hard-wearing materials returning to their original shape after deformation (Helmreich & Lieb, J. Baatz, M. Wirzberger 56 Page 4 of 34 2015). Applied to humans, it refers to people’s ability to deal with adverse cir- cumstances without suffering lasting damage (Wustmann, 2009). So far, there is no uniform definition of the term. In this paper, we follow Baker et  al., (2021) and define resilience as a personal skill to cope with crises by drawing on per- sonal and social resources, ultimately resulting in personal growth. Resilience research emerged from the field of developmental psychology and has been systematically pursued in the United States since the 1970s. The main subjects of investigation were children, who developed positively despite being exposed to risk factors (Fröhlich-Gildhoff & Rönnau-Böse, 2019). The rise of resilience research can also be attributed to a paradigm shift from pathogenesis to salutogenesis (Antonovsky & Franke, 1997; Fröhlich-Gildhoff & Rönnau-Böse, 2019), focusing on resources that sustain health instead of factors leading to dis- ease. At the same time, the Ottawa Charter of the World Health Organization (WHO), adopted in 1986, introduced an expanded concept of health (Fröhlich- Gildhoff & Rönnau-Böse, 2019). It defines health as an ideal state of complete physical, mental, and social well-being, not merely by the absence of disease and infirmity (Callahan, 1973). According to this definition, we use the terms well- being and health synonymously. As the WHO’s health definition is related to the resilience construct, we adopt it as the definition of health in this paper. The Kauai Study (Werner, 1997), a longitudinal study conducted by the Amer- ican developmental psychologist Emmy Werner on the Hawaiian island of Kauai, is considered a ground-breaking milestone in resilience research. The author observed a birth cohort over 40 years, with particular focus on children belonging to a high-risk group due to poverty, neglect, or abuse. Confirming prior expecta- tions, two-thirds of the children showed learning and behavioral deficits, how- ever, one-third of the children developed positively despite all challenges. In the light of these findings, the term resilient was used for the first time to classify the observed patterns (Helmreich & Lieb, 2015). After discovering this empirical phenomenon, the literature initially assumed that resilience was an innate quality these children possessed. However, the results of the longitudinal study show that resilience rests on various resources, as those children had specific personal and social resources, such as a close bond with at least one caregiver or a high level of social competence, mitigating the adverse developmental conditions (Helmreich & Lieb, 2015). These resources were expanded in resilience research and often summarized in risk and protective factors, influencing the development of an individual in either positive or negative directions (Fröhlich-Gildhoff & Rönnau-Böse, 2019). Based on numerous studies that focus on children and adolescents, these factors show a great deal of congruence across cultures. The most common risk factors in this context include, for instance, disharmony at home or criminal activity in the immediate environment (Fröhlich-Gildhoff & Rönnau-Böse, 2019). However, not all risk factors automatically lead to impaired health but depend on other factors to unfold their harming potential, such as the duration of the stress. By contrast, protective factors only exert influence when stress factors occur, by mitigating the negative impacts of the risk factors (Fröhlich-Gildhoff & Rönnau-Böse, 2019). Resilience as a professional competence: a new way towards… Page 5 of 34 56 Similar to risk factors, the mere presence of individual protective factors does not guarantee healthy development. The literature groups these factors into per- sonal factors and social/environmental, factors. For instance, individual character- istics or coping strategies are considered to be personal protective factors. The most common examples of these factors are cognitive competence (Fröhlich-Gildhoff & Rönnau-Böse, 2019) or positive character traits, such as optimism and positive emo- tions (Fröhlich-Gildhoff & Rönnau-Böse, 2019; Helmreich & Lieb, 2015). Social/ environmental protective factors are located within the individual’s social environ- ment. Among the most common social/environmental protective factors is social support, manifested by the presence of at least one close caregiver outside of the family (Fröhlich-Gildhoff & Rönnau-Böse, 2019; Helmreich & Lieb, 2015; Thun- Hohenstein et al., 2020; Wustmann, 2009). In addition to personal and social/environmental protective factors, Fröhlich- Gildhoff & Rönnau-Böse, (2019) have identified six resilience factors in their model. While genuine personal resources can be genetically predisposed, these six factors comprise a learnable type of personal protective factors. Self-efficacy is among the most frequently identified resilience factors, representing an individual’s confidence to be able to sufficiently achieve their goals (Fröhlich-Gildhoff & Rönnau-Böse, 2019; Helmreich & Lieb, 2015). Related dynamics can even exert mitigating effects in critical times, as shown by Soncini and colleagues (2021) related to impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic on teachers’ well-being. Other resilience factors include adaptive coping behavior, i.e., flexible coping according to the situation (Fröhlich- Gildhoff & Rönnau-Böse, 2019), problem-solving ability, self-control in terms of emotion regulation, self-perception, and social competence, defined by demonstrat- ing situationally appropriate behaviors (Fröhlich-Gildhoff & Rönnau-Böse, 2019). Focusing on teachers, we use the term stress factors instead of the term risk factors, which is strongly associated with child and adolescent development in resilience research. As protective factors include attitudes, coping strategies, and personality traits, we summarize these under the term of resilience resources. Despite attempts to create a process model explaining how these resources exert influence, no com- prehensive explanatory model of resilience exists to date (Görich, 2019; Helmreich & Lieb, 2015). In recent years, resilience research developed an interdisciplinary focus, aiming to create a multi-level model of resilience. According to the state of the art, resilience is influenced by neurobiological, psychological, and social resources. In twin pairs, for instance, studies have shown that individual resilience is only to 50% determined by environmental factors, while another 50% are genetically predisposed (Görich, 2019; Helmreich & Lieb, 2015; Rutter, 2012). Moreover, findings in neurobiology related to cognitive plasticity support the assumption that resilience forms a compe- tence that can be learned, refined, and sustained by training. Our brain can engage in lasting changes by frequently using specific brain structures, which, for instance, relate to applied coping strategies. As a result, the brain forms new networks (Thun- Hohenstein et al., 2020). Considering that some resources only unfold their effects in specific contexts, the literature nowadays identifies resilience as a dynamic pro- cess with a situational character (Fröhlich-Gildhoff & Rönnau-Böse, 2019; Liu et al., 2022). Furthermore, resilience represents a multidimensional construct, which J. Baatz, M. Wirzberger 56 Page 6 of 34 manifests itself differently in different domains of life (Görich, 2019; Helmreich & Lieb, 2015; Rutter, 2012; Wustmann, 2009). In summary, resilience has the following effects, albeit so far mainly investigated in the context of children and adolescents: • A positive development, despite existing risks • Prevention of suffering or other known consequences, despite considerable stress • Sustained effectiveness, despite extreme stress • An adaptive recovery after traumatic events (Görich, 2019; Helmreich & Lieb, 2015; Thun-Hohenstein et al., 2020) Building on these findings, resilience is critically defined by two factors: (a) pres- ence of increased risk in the form of strain, stress, or threat and (b) successful cop- ing with this risk (Helmreich & Lieb, 2015). Resilience can therefore be compared to a vaccine, as protective resources get only effective in the presence of stress fac- tors but otherwise remain hidden (Helmreich & Lieb, 2015). Consequently, resil- ience can be conceptualized as simultaneously being a skill, process, and outcome (Mansfield et al., 2016), hence, we subsequently focus on resilience as an individual skill that can be acquired and honed by teachers. 1.2 Goals and focus Building on the aforementioned evidence, resilience can help teachers cope with stress factors referred to as chronic risk (Görich, 2019), thereby helping teachers to overcome the risk of illness. This coping should manifest by decreased nega- tive strain ratios. As a result, resilient teachers should display a lower burnout risk, remain effective despite the stress, show lower resignation rates, and sustained health. Since resilience refers to improved coping that mitigates the negative mental strain, resilience represents already a controversially discussed teacher recruitment criterion (Mansfield et al., 2016; Price et al., 2012). Nonetheless, both the concept of resilience and how it can be promoted for teachers are still not well defined. Pre- vious studies have investigated the effects of resilience on isolated strain aspects. However, there has been no comprehensive study investigating resilience as a solu- tion-oriented approach to promote teacher’s health on an international and across- school-type scale. As resilience research has mainly focused on children, the iden- tified resources mainly refer to this age group (Fröhlich-Gildhoff & Rönnau-Böse, 2019; Meadows et al., 2015; Wustmann, 2009). Hence, those resources can be used as a comparative reference but cannot be congruently transferred to the professional context of teachers, leaving the necessity to identify specific resilience resources for this target group. To fill in these gaps, we conduct a systematic literature review to verify potential health-promoting effects of teachers’ resilience and subsequent positive influences on the seemingly inevitable trajectory from stress to illness. We assume that the skill to effectively engage available resilience resources compensates for the negative effect of stress factors on teachers’ state of health. In doing so, we will approach the Resilience as a professional competence: a new way towards… Page 7 of 34 56 question to what extent teachers’ health can be promoted by building and sustaining this skill. To approach our research question and thus, generating an occupation- specific understanding of how resilience can promote teachers’ health, this paper pursues several goals: • Provide an overview of the current state of relevant research on the impact of resilience on teachers’ health on a comprehensive level (internationally and across school types) • Building on these findings, identify occupation-related resources that can pro- mote teachers’ health • Derive recommendations for establishing effective intervention approaches to build resilience in this target group First, we describe the methodological approach of this work. We then show the effect of resilience on various aspects of teachers’ strain. To this end, we summarize findings regarding the risk of burnout, stress perception and coping, general well- being, attrition rates, and effectiveness. Furthermore, we present a catalog of teach- ers’ resilience resources. Finally, we discuss ways to build resilience by promoting the identified resources. In doing so, we evaluate existing interventions with regards to strengths and weaknesses. Additionally, we derive concrete recommendations for systematically promoting resilience among teachers at a structural level. Overall, our findings indicate that resilience has a positive impact on teachers’ health. However, there is a lack of clear guidelines to develop context-specific intervention programs for systematically promoting resilience among teachers. 2 Methods For a first overview, we did a rough literature search on Google Scholar, where we only considered the title and abstract of a publication in the selection process. In addition, we gave slight preference to recent publications. Afterward, we performed a systematic literature search using the subsequently outlined databases. The chosen keywords were congruent with those used on Google Scholar (in both English and German): “teachers’ health,” “resilience,” “teachers” + “resilience,” “teachers’ health” + “resilience,” “teachers” + “psychologi- cal stress,” “resilient teachers,” “resilience” + “stressors for teachers.” • ERIC (Education Resource Information Center), a database for educational research and information, which is sponsored by the U.S. Institute of Education Sciences. From the database entries, we only considered peer-reviewed journal articles. • PsycINFO, a psychological database produced by the American Psychological Association (APA) providing access to journal articles as well as books, book chapters, and dissertations; only peer-reviewed literature was considered. • PsycARTICLES, an online catalog with access to full-text, peer-reviewed articles published by the APA and allied organizations in the field of psychology. J. Baatz, M. Wirzberger 56 Page 8 of 34 • Fachportal-Pädagogik, a German web portal operated by the Information Center for Education of the German Institute for International Educational Research / Leibniz Institute for Educational Research and Information, containing informa- tion on educational science, educational research, and didactics in the German- speaking world. It provides access to a literature database, open-access articles, and research data. • Pedocs, a German online repository for educational science and educational research literature, providing entries related to open-access articles. • JSTOR, a digital library for all disciplines, access to full-text, peer-reviewed jour- nal articles, reviews, and book chapters. We selected the following disciplines for literature review on JSTOR: Education, Psychology, Health Science, and Health Policy. Furthermore, we limited our search in this database to entries related to peer-reviewed journal articles. The search was undertaken in May 2020. Similar to the first overview litera- ture search, we considered the title and abstract for selecting the publications. Furthermore, we gave slight preference to more recent research. As an additional search strategy, we reviewed the bibliographies of selected publications to extract additional titles. Consequently, a total of 142 publications were subject of a spe- cific review applying a set of defined inclusion and exclusion criteria listed in Table 1. After removing duplicates, we selected a total of 72 publications as the data basis for this paper. These titles include 47 journal articles, seven monographs, 17 book chapters, and one research report. Of this sample, we used 34 studies for answering our research question in the main body of the paper. They are listed in an overview table in Table 2, which provides more detailed information about the conducted studies. The remaining 38 titles provided supporting information for the theoretical background in the introduction and for reflecting on existing inter- vention programs in the discussion. Table 1 Inclusion and exclusion criteria Inclusion criteria Exclusion criteria English or German Language Not in English or German Full text available No full text available Published 2005–2020; Exception: literature used as a theory base e.g., the salutogenesis paradigm (Antonovsky & Franke, 1997) Published before 2005 Peer-reviewed articles, book chapters or other sources with equivalent quality check e.g., a scientific proof- reading process Articles, book chapters or other sources without peer-review or equivalent quality check Thematic relevance: psychological, pedagogical, or health science context; school context: focus on pre- service and in-service teachers No thematic relevance: physical context; school context: focus not on pre-service and in- service teachers e.g., students Resilience as a professional competence: a new way towards… Page 9 of 34 56 Ta bl e 2 O ve rv ie w o f a ll stu di es in cl ud ed in th e m ai n bo dy “ he al th p ro m ot io n th ro ug h re si lie nc e” N o St ud y (Y ea r) Sa m pl e N O bj ec t o f i nv es tig at io n 1 A rn up & B ow le s, (2 01 6) 16 0 el em en ta ry a nd se co nd ar y te ac he rs (A U ) Re si lie nc e an d te ac he rs ’ i nt en tio n to le av e th e pr of es si on 2 B ol dr in i e t a l., (2 01 9) 37 v oc at io na l t ea ch er s ( C H ) Id en tifi ca tio n of re si lie nc e re so ur ce s f or e ffe ct iv e co pi ng w ith str es s f ac to rs a m on g vo ca tio na l t ea ch er s 3 B ra nd l-B re de nb ec k et  a l. (2 01 3) 88 2 pr e- se rv ic e te ac he rs (D E) 47 3 st an da rd sa m pl e (D E) St at us o f p re -s er vi ce te ac he rs ’ h ea lth ; i de nt ifi ca tio n of re so ur ce s fo r e ffe ct iv e co pi ng w ith st re ss fa ct or s 4 B ro us ke li et  a l., (2 01 8) 20 1 se co nd ar y te ac he rs (G R ) Re si lie nc e an d oc cu pa tio na l w el l-b ei ng 5 B ur ic e t a l., (2 01 9) 94 1 te ac he rs (H R ) Re ci pr oc al re la tio ns hi ps b et w ee n re si lie nc e, b ur no ut , p sy ch o- pa th ol og ic al sy m pt om s, an d ne ga tiv e stu de nt -r el at ed e m ot io ns at tw o po in ts in ti m e 6 C ar ste ns en e t a l., (2 01 9) 13 7 pr e- se rv ic e te ac he rs in th e ex pe rim en ta l g ro up (D E) 38 p re -s er vi ce te ac he rs in th e co nt ro l g ro up (D E) Ev al ua tio n of a tr ai ni ng fo r t he p ro m ot io n of so ci al - e m ot io na l co m pe te nc e of p re -s er vi ce te ac he rs ; e ffe ct s o n w el l-b ei ng 7 C as tro e t a l., (2 01 0) 15 n ov ic e in -s er vi ce te ac he rs in h ig h- ne ed s a re as (U S) Id en tifi ca tio n of re si lie nc e str at eg ie s o f n ov ic e in -s er vi ce te ac h- er s, eff ec tiv el y co pi ng w ith st re ss fa ct or s 8 C he un g et  a l. (2 01 1) 26 4 te ac he rs (C N ) Eff ec t o f p sy ch ol og ic al c ap ita l o n th e bu rn ou t s ym pt om d ep er - so na liz at io n an d jo b sa tis fa ct io n 9 G ör ic h, (2 01 9) 59 p re -s er vi ce te ac he rs (e le m en ta ry sc ho ol ) i n th e ex pe rim en ta l gr ou p (D E) 35 p re -s er vi ce te ac he rs (e le m en ta ry sc ho ol ) i n th e co nt ro l g ro up (D E) Ev al ua tio n of R ef ue L re ga rd in g th e re du ct io n of b ur no ut sy m p- to m s 10 G u an d D ay , ( 20 07 ) 3 te ac he rs (G B ) Re si lie nc e re so ur ce s a nd e ffe ct iv en es s, id en tifi ca tio n re si lie nt te ac he rs ’ r es ou rc es b as ed o n qu al ita tiv e in te rv ie w d at a fro m th e “V ar ia tio ns in T ea ch er ’s W or k, L iv es , a nd E ffe ct iv en es s” (V IT A E; D ay e t a l., 2 00 6) 11 H ed de ric h, (2 01 6) 10 sp ec ia l e du ca tio n te ac he rs (D E) Id en tifi ca tio n of st re ss fa ct or s a nd st ra te gi es /re so ur ce s t o eff ec - tiv el y m an ag e th e str es se s o f t ea ch er s i n sp ec ia l e du ca tio n 12 H el m s- Lo re nz e t a l., (2 01 3) 19 2 no vi ce in -s er vi ce se co nd ar y te ac he rs in th e ex pe rim en ta l gr ou p (N L) 1 45 n ov ic e in -s er vi ce se co nd ar y te ac he rs in th e co nt ro l g ro up (N L) Te ac he r a ttr iti on ; e va lu at io n of a su pp or tiv e pr og ra m (i nd uc tio n ar ra ng em en t) fo r n ov ic e in -s er vi ce te ac he rs J. Baatz, M. Wirzberger 56 Page 10 of 34 Ta bl e 2 (c on tin ue d) N o St ud y (Y ea r) Sa m pl e N O bj ec t o f i nv es tig at io n 13 K la ss en e t a l. (2 01 0) 21 0 te ac he rs (C A ) 13 7 te ac he rs (U S) 15 3 te ac he rs (K R ) Eff ec ts o f c ol le ct iv e effi ca cy o n str es s p er ce pt io n an d jo b sa tis fa c- tio n 14 K lu sm an n et  a l., (2 01 2) 55 1 in -s er vi ce te ac he rs in th e in du ct io n pr og ra m (D E) Pe rs on al ity tr ai ts , p re vi ou s e du ca tio na l e xp er ie nc es a nd p ro fe s- si on al c om pe te nc e re ga rd in g em ot io na l e xh au sti on a nd jo b sa tis fa ct io n 15 K un z- H ei m e t a l., (2 01 9) 71 te ac he rs in th e ex pe rim en ta l g ro up (D E) 58 te ac he rs in th e co nt ro l g ro up (D E) H ea lth e ffe ct s o f a n in te rv en tio n pr og ra m to in cr ea se se lf- effi ca cy in d ea lin g w ith c la ss ro om d is ru pt io ns in o rd er to re du ce n eg a- tiv e str ai n 16 Le ro ux e t a l., (2 01 6) 15 in -s er vi ce e le m en ta ry te ac he rs in th e in du ct io n pr og ra m (C A ) 15 in -s er vi ce P E te ac he rs in th e in du ct io n pr og ra m (C A ) C om pa ris on o f r is k an d pr ot ec tiv e fa ct or s o f i n- se rv ic e PE a nd el em en ta ry te ac he rs in th e in du ct io n pr og ra m ; p ro te ct iv e fa ct or s as re so ur ce s f or e ffe ct iv e co pi ng w ith st re ss 17 Lo , ( 20 14 ) 14 6 te ac he rs w or ki ng w ith st ud en ts w ith e m ot io na l b eh av io ra l ch al le ng es (C N ) St re ss p er ce pt io n, b ur no ut sy m pt om s, re si lie nc e 18 M an sfi el d et  a l., (2 01 2) 20 0 pr e- se rv ic e an d no vi ce in -s er vi ce te ac he rs (A U ) Id en tifi ca tio n of re so ur ce s o f r es ili en t t ea ch er s ( su cc es sf ul c op in g w ith st re ss w ith ou t d am ag e to h ea lth ) b as ed o n a su rv ey o f p re - se rv ic e an d no vi ce in -s er vi ce te ac he rs 19 N gu i & L ai , ( 20 17 ) 20 0 no vi ce in -s er vi ce te ac he rs (M Y ) Te ac he r-s pe ci fic se lf- effi ca cy a s a m od er at or v ar ia bl e be tw ee n str es s p er ce pt io n an d re si lie nc e 20 Pa pa tra ia no u et  a l., (2 01 8) 28 p re -s er vi ce a nd n ov ic e in -s er vi ce te ac he rs in re m ot e te ac hi ng en vi ro nm en t ( A U ) Id en tifi ca tio n of re si lie nc e re so ur ce s o f t ea ch er s i n re m ot e te ac h- in g; c op in g w ith st re ss fa ct or s w ith ou t h ar m in g he al th 21 Po st et  a l., (2 02 0) 4 el em en ta ry te ac he rs (U S) Eff ec ts o f a n in te rv en tio n to im pr ov e te ac he r-s tu de nt re la tio ns 22 Pr et sc h et  a l., (2 01 2) 17 0 te ac he rs (D E) 13 8 no n- te ac hi ng e m pl oy ee s ( D E) C om pa ris on b et w ee n re si lie nc e an d ne ur ot ic is m re ga rd in g th e pr ed ic tiv e po w er o f w el l-b ei ng 23 R ic ha rd s e t a l., (2 01 4) 20 7 te ac he r/c oa ch es (U S) 20 6 no n- co ac hi ng te ac he rs (U S) D iff er en ce s i n ro le st re ss , b ur no ut sy m pt om s, re si lie nc e 24 R ic ha rd s e t a l., (2 01 6) 17 4 el em en ta ry te ac he rs (U S) 24 1 se co nd ar y te ac he rs (U S) Im pa ct o f r es ili en ce o n ro le st re ss a nd b ur no ut sy m pt om s Resilience as a professional competence: a new way towards… Page 11 of 34 56 Ta bl e 2 (c on tin ue d) N o St ud y (Y ea r) Sa m pl e N O bj ec t o f i nv es tig at io n 25 Sa pp a et  a l., (2 01 9) 2, 16 3 vo ca tio na l t ea ch er s ( C H ) C lu ste r a na ly si s o f t ea ch er s’ h ea lth : r es ili en ce re so ur ce s a nd w el l-b ei ng 26 Sc ha ar sc hm id t, (2 00 5) 20 ,0 00 te ac he rs (D E) 8, 00 0 no n- te ac hi ng e m pl oy ee s w ith c om pa ra bl e str es s f ac to rs W or k- re la te d be ha vi ou r a nd e xp er ie nc e pa tte rn s 27 Sc hm itz a nd V or ec k, (2 00 8) 24 0 pr in ci pa ls (D E) Ex pe ct at io ns o f t he sc ho ol b oa rd to w ar ds te ac he rs a nd it s i m pa ct on th e so ci al c lim at e in th e te ac hi ng st aff 28 Sc hw er dt fe ge r e t a l., (2 00 8) 44 e le m en ta ry /s ec on da ry te ac he rs in th e ex pe rim en ta l g ro up (D E) 14 e le m en ta ry /s ec on da ry te ac he rs in th e co nt ro l g ro up (D E) Se lf- effi ca cy a s t ea ch er s’ h ea lth -p ro te ct in g re so ur ce ; s el f- effi ca cy an d bu rn ou t s ym pt om s S tu dy 1 : C ar di ac a ct iv at io n an d se lf- effi ca cy S tu dy 2 : C or tis ol m or ni ng re sp on se a nd se lf- effi ca cy 29 Sh ar p an d Je nn in gs , ( 20 16 ) 6 el em en ta ry te ac he rs (U S) 2 se co nd ar y te ac he rs (U S) Ev al ua tio n of C A R E w ith re ga rd to c op in g w ith st re ss 30 Si u et  a l., (2 01 4) 48 e le m en ta ry te ac he rs (C N ) Ev al ua tio n: p ro gr am b as ed o n th e po si tiv e ps yc ho lo gy a pp ro ac h to re du ce b ur no ut sy m pt om s a nd in cr ea se w el l-b ei ng 31 Ta it, (2 00 8) 4 no vi ce in -s er vi ce te ac he rs (C A ) Id en tifi ca tio n of re so ur ce s o f r es ili en t, no vi ce in -s er vi ce te ac he rs ; M ai nt ai ni ng e ffe ct iv en es s d es pi te st re ss 32 W ei ß an d K ie l, (2 01 3) – St re ss fa ct or s a nd re so ur ce s o f h ea lth y te ac he rs ; l ist in g re so ur ce s of st ab le te ac he rs (e ffe ct iv e co pi ng w ith st re ss w ith ou t h ar m to he al th , m ai nt ai ni ng e ffe ct iv en es s) 33 W es se lb or g et  a l., (2 01 4) 19 te ac he rs (D E) Re qu ire m en ts a nd re so ur ce s o f t ea ch er s; ty pe fo rm at io n ac co rd - in g to st at e of h ea lth 34 Y u et  a l., (2 01 5) 37 8 te ac he rs (C N ) Eff ec t o f s el f- effi ca cy o n str es s p er ce pt io n an d bu rn ou t s ym pt om s C ou nt ry c od e ac co rd in g to IS O -3 16 6 A LP H A -2 A U , A us tra lia ; C A , C an ad a; C H , S w itz er la nd ; C N , C hi na ; D E, G er m an y; G B , G re at B rit ai n; G R , G re ec e; H R , C ro at ia ; K R , S ou th K or ea ; M Y, M al ay si a; N L, N et he rla nd s; U S, U ni te d St at es J. Baatz, M. Wirzberger 56 Page 12 of 34 3 Results The current state of evidence acknowledges various occupation-related stress fac- tors for teachers (e.g., Burić et  al., 2019; Cheung et  al., 2011; Kunz-Heim et  al., 2019; Pretsch et  al., 2012; Richards et  al., 2016; Tait, 2008; Weiß & Kiel, 2013; Wesselborg et  al., 2014), notably dealing with challenging students, overly large classes, high noise levels, heavy workload, inefficient organizational structures, unreasonable expectations regarding emotion regulation, limited promotion pros- pects, low societal recognition, and deficiencies in key factors such as cooperation with colleagues, support by school leaders, decision-making capacities, or separa- tion between work and private life. Focusing on potential solutions, we subsequently summarize research emphasizing the need for individual resilience to mitigate resulting strain and related negative health consequences. To systematically pave the way for potential mechanisms of action, we discuss specific personal and social/ environmental resilience resources that have been linked to promoting health in the teaching profession. As Table  2 summarizes, our conclusions extend to the inter- national level, spanning samples from Australia, Canada, Switzerland, China, Ger- many, Great Britain, Greece, Croatia, South Korea, Malaysia, the Netherlands, and the United States. Furthermore, the included studies involve different school types, ranging from elementary and secondary schools to vocational and special needs education. Reported findings also shed light on teaching professionals across dif- ferent career stages, incorporating pre-service teachers, novice in-service teachers, more experienced in-service teachers, and principals. 3.1 Resilience and burnout Research indicates that resilient teachers can cope with occupational stress and consequently, sustain their health. A potential explanation results from the positive effect of resilience and underlying personal resources in burnout prevention. Resil- ient teachers, for instance, exhibit significantly fewer burnout symptoms (Burić et al., 2019; Richards et al., 2014, 2016). Furthermore, resilience significantly mit- igates the negative effects of existing burnout symptoms (Lo, 2014). In line with prior work, this effect shows up as well in an intervention program targeting pre- service teachers (Görich, 2019). Resilience leads to additional health-promoting effects: Burić et  al., (2019) indicate that teachers with high resilience experience significantly lower levels of psychopathological symptoms and negative emotions. Their findings also highlight the dynamic nature of resilience, as positive effects of resilience were only evident when all variables were assessed simultaneously (Burić et al., 2019). Evidence gathered in the field of positive psychology, which includes resilience studies, has reported similar effects. Siu et  al., (2014) examined the effectiveness of an intervention program designed to reduce burnout and increase well-being. Results indicate substantially reduced burnout symptoms among teachers follow- ing the intervention, although the results did not reach statistical significance (Siu et al., 2014). Likewise, Cheung et al., (2011) report positive effects of psychological Resilience as a professional competence: a new way towards… Page 13 of 34 56 capital, incorporating resilience, efficiency, optimism, and hope. Results of their study investigating 264 Chinese teachers show significant positive effects of psycho- logical capital on reducing depersonalization (Cheung et al., 2011). Beyond positive effects of resilience in general on teachers’ health, we also iden- tified underlying personal resilience resources that take effect. These resources can empower teachers to cope with occupational stress factors, reduce individual burn- out symptoms, and thus effectively prevent manifestation of a burnout syndrome. Klusmann et al., (2012) assessed individual differences in strain levels of in-service teachers in the induction program. They investigated the effects of personality traits collected by the “Neo-Five-Factor Inventory” (NEO-FFI; Borkenau & Ostendorf, 1991), prior professional educational experience, and professional competence on emotional exhaustion and job satisfaction. The study found less emotional exhaus- tion, a leading symptom of burnout, due to classroom management competence and prior professional educational experience. Moreover, significantly lower levels of emotional exhaustion relate to high levels of conscientiousness (Klusmann et  al., 2012). In addition, self-efficacy (Schwerdtfeger et al., 2008; Yu et al., 2015), rational coping behavior, and positive thinking strategies (Lo, 2014) could prevent burnout among teachers. 3.2 Resilience and stress perception/ coping The health-promoting effect of resilience is further evident in alleviating perceived stress levels as well as enhanced stress coping. According to the transactional model of stress by Lazarus (Lazarus & Folkman, 1984), stress results from an imbalance between external or internal demands and the adaptive capacity of an individual. Building on this definition, stress is a subjective experience, which first depends on the assessment of the stressor as dangerous or harmless (primary appraisal). In a second step, the perceived level of stress depends on the availability of resources to cope with the stressor (secondary appraisal). Stress arises if the individual consid- ers the stressor dangerous and the available coping resources insufficient (McCarthy, 2019). Referring to coping with stress, the model differentiates between problem- oriented and emotion-oriented approaches. In problem-oriented coping, individuals make an effort to solve the problem, whereas in emotion-oriented coping, they focus on regulating negative emotions. Finally, the situation is re-appraised, and the indi- vidual adapts (McCarthy, 2019). The literature assumes that health can be positively influenced by training par- ticular personal resilience resources and thus, achieving stress resistance (Helmreich & Lieb, 2015). Indeed, existing evidence (e.g., Ngui & Lay, 2017; Richards et al., 2016) supports this claim, showing that resilient teachers report significantly lower levels of stress perception. Moreover, resilience significantly moderates negative effects of stress perception (Lo, 2014). Likewise, the “Cultivating Awareness and Resilience in Education” intervention program (CARE; Sharp & Jennings, 2016) reveals a similar effect pattern. CARE was designed to equip teachers with resources and strategies to cope with stress factors of their profession. Evidence shows that CARE strengthened participants re-appraisal and self-regulation, which are J. Baatz, M. Wirzberger 56 Page 14 of 34 particularly important during the secondary appraisal phase of Lazarus’s model of stress (McCarthy, 2019). In the light of these findings, the authors consider CARE a promising intervention that supports teachers in coping with stress (Sharp & Jen- nings, 2016). In addition, we were able to identify personal resilience resources that benefit handling the occupational environments of teachers. While resources of rational coping behavior and strategies of positive thinking have already proven value to pre- vent burnout symptoms, they also constitute effective mechanisms related to cop- ing with stress (Lo, 2014). Studies further demonstrated that especially domain-spe- cific self-efficacy related to classroom management skills functions as a resilience resource by significantly reducing stress perception (Ngui & Lay, 2017; Yu et al., 2015). However, findings by Klassen et al., (2010) illustrate that this effect depends on the cultural background. Their results on teachers’ collective self-efficacy indi- cate different effects on stress perception across countries: While positive correla- tions show up among South Korean teachers, no significant correlations result for American and Canadian teachers (Klassen et al., 2010). In addition to the outlined personal resources, positive social connections in teachers’ occupational environments exert a positive influence on stress perception (Beltman et al., 2011; Post et al., 2020). Evaluation results related to the interven- tion program by Post et al. (2020) indicate that after successfully improving teacher- student relations in a high-needs school, teachers showed reduced levels of stress perception. As the program’s intention was to improve student support, but not to promote teachers’ health, these findings are particularly noteworthy. The positive impact of relationships as a social resource can also be explained within the transac- tional model of stress (Lazarus & Folkman, 1984). On the one hand, social support already influences primary appraisal, as stress factors might be perceived as less threatening (McCarthy, 2019). On the other hand, it can unfold its positive effect during secondary appraisal, as relationships point out potential coping resources or provide direct support in the coping process (McCarthy, 2019). 3.3 Resilience and well‑being In addition to the already described benefits of resilience and individual resilience resources on teachers’ health, resilience results in a significant increase of well- being (Brouskeli et al., 2018; Sappa et al., 2019; Schaarschmidt, 2005). Compared to other professions, resilience is a strong predictor of well-being in the occupational context of teachers (Pretsch et al., 2012). The study of Siu et al. (2014) reflects similar positive findings and indicates an increase in well-being among teachers at least at the descriptive level. Additionally, teachers could learn specific recovery strategies with the help the reported training (Siu et al., 2014). Another study, which builds on evidence from positive psychol- ogy, reported a significant positive correlation between psychological capital and teachers’ job satisfaction (Cheung et al., 2011). Social support also repeatedly proves to benefit teachers’ health (Beltman et al., 2011; Sappa et  al., 2019; Schaarschmidt, 2005). On a related note, survey results Resilience as a professional competence: a new way towards… Page 15 of 34 56 by Schmitz and Voreck (2008) indicate that guiding principles of institutional lead- ership effectively  influence the social climate among the teaching staff. A school board strongly following educational principles rather than administrative rules fos- ters significantly more harmonious relationships within the teaching staff. This can positively impact the well-being of individual teachers (Schmitz & Voreck, 2008). In addition, the resource of self-efficacy promotes health in terms of physical well-being. The findings of Schwerdtfeger and colleagues (2008) emphasize a pro- tective role of self-efficacy in teachers. More precisely, they report a significantly increased heart rate and significantly decreased heart rate variability among teach- ers with higher self-efficacy. Furthermore, this group exhibits a significantly weak- ened morning cortisol level and experience significantly fewer cardiac complaints (Schwerdtfeger et  al., 2008). Evaluation results of an intervention program target- ing domain-specific self-efficacy for effectively handling classroom disruptions report similar patterns  by demonstrating positive impacts related to significantly reduced strain (Kunz-Heim et al., 2019). The authors further emphasize the plastic- ity of specific personal resilience resources: Participants in the intervention group continuously show positive effects on health even six months after the intervention (Kunz-Heim et  al., 2019). Moreover, a positive correlation with well-being is not only evident in individual self-efficacy but likewise collective self-efficacy (Klassen et al., 2010). Additionally, we could identify further personal resilience resources with a posi- tive impact on teachers’ well-being. For instance, prior professional educational experiences, as well as classroom management skills, show potential to promote health in in-service teachers in the induction program (Klusmann et al., 2012). For pre-service teachers, social-emotional competence results in a significant increase in well-being (Carstensen et al., 2019). To identify resources of resilient teachers, numerous studies assigned teachers to healthy and strained profiles and compared their resources based on this distinction. These studies repeatedly found that teach- ers associated with healthy profiles exhibited high classroom or lesson management skills (Sappa et al., 2019; Wesselborg et al., 2014). To explain the health-promoting effect of this resource, Wesselborg et al. (2014) state that high classroom and lesson management skills result in longer phases of self-directed work of students, allow- ing teachers to take a break from more demanding periods of direct instruction or supervision. Moreover, a sense of vocation (Sappa et al., 2019), open problem-solv- ing, the ability to distance oneself from the daily work routine, inner balance, and communicative competence form personal resilience resources of healthy teachers (Schaarschmidt, 2005). 3.4 Resilience and teacher attrition In addition to the direct health-promoting effects of resilience, empirical findings also support its indirect health-promoting influence by preventing high attrition rates (Papatraianou et al., 2018). Against the backdrop of teachers’ high attrition rates in Australia, Arnup and  Bowles (2016) examined the relationship between teachers’ resilience and their intention to leave the teaching profession. Results indicate that J. Baatz, M. Wirzberger 56 Page 16 of 34 teachers reporting high intentions to leave the profession showed significantly lower resilience, compared to teachers reporting lower dropout intentions. Three resilience resources were identified as a potential cause for this pattern: (a) personal strength, which the authors define as the presence of self-efficacy, optimism, and goal ori- entation, (b) social competence, and (c) strong family cohesion (Arnup & Bowles, 2016). Helms-Lorenz and colleagues  (2013) reported similar effects of social support as a resilience resource when examining the impacts of an induction program for in-service teachers. Their findings indicate that after one year, teachers in the group receiving social support left the profession at a significantly lower rate, compared to teachers not participating in the support program (Helms-Lorenz et al., 2013). Considering these findings, it is apparent that fostering individual underlying resilience resources strengthens resilience overall and positively impacts early career teachers’ dropout rates (Doney, 2013). 3.5 Resilience and sustained effectiveness Broad evidence emphasizes resilient teachers’ ability to sustain their effectiveness in teaching by coping with stress factors (Boldrini et al., 2019; Gu & Day, 2007; Mans- field et al., 2016; Tait, 2008). According to Gu and Day (2007), we define teacher effectiveness as sustained professional commitment, despite existing stress factors, which is also reflected in students’ achievements. Thereby, resilient teachers show a higher initiative in coping with stress (Castro et al., 2010) and perceive their work as less demanding (Salmela-Aro et al., 2019). Numerous studies shed light on resources of resilient teachers, who continue to perform effectively without suffering health damage due to successfully coping with occupational stress factors (e.g., Brandl-Bredenbeck et al., 2013; Leroux et al., 2016; Weiß & Kiel, 2013). Building on the existing research landscape, we iden- tified individual resilience resources across a variety of teaching contexts, which contribute to effective coping with occupational stress. Table  3 summarizes these personal and social/environmental factors, being are a mixture of personal attitudes, coping strategies, trait characteristics, social support, and structural means related to administrative resources or versatile activities. Despite the high congruency across different school systems and contexts, some of the resources have particular signifi- cance in specific teaching settings. For instance, social support in the form of team teaching holds particular benefits for special education teachers (Hedderich, 2016), whereas for vocational teachers, particular health promoting effects arise from diver- sifying their professional role through the variation between school and extracurric- ular activities (Boldrini et al., 2019). These school-type-specific resources can also be considered in the realm of promoting teachers’ resilience to benefit their health. 3.6 Interim conclusion on resilience resources of teachers Taken together, this section shows the positive impact of resilience on teachers’ health, as we consistently found positive effects of resilience in general or underlying Resilience as a professional competence: a new way towards… Page 17 of 34 56 Ta bl e 3 O ve rv ie w o f t he fi nd in gs o n re si lie nc e an d eff ec tiv en es s St ud y (Y ea r) O bj ec t o f i nv es tig at io n Id en tifi ed re so ur ce s B ol dr in i e t a l., (2 01 9) Id en tifi ca tio n of re si lie nc e re so ur ce s f or e ffe ct iv e co pi ng w ith str es s f ac to rs a m on g vo ca tio na l t ea ch er s N = 33 v oc at io na l t ea ch er s ( C H ) En vi ro nm en ta l r es ou rc es e .g ., so ci al a nd a dm in ist ra tiv e su pp or t, pr of es si on al d iv er si fic at io n Te ac hi ng sk ill s e .g ., fle xi bi lit y Re la tio ns hi p sk ill s e .g ., cl as sr oo m m an ag em en t Pr of es si on al id en tit y re so ur ce s e .g ., se ns e of v oc at io n, a bi lit y to se lf- re fle ct G en er al p er so na l r es ou rc es e .g ., se lfc ar e B ra nd l-B re de nb ec k et  a l., (2 01 3) St at us o f p re -s er vi ce te ac he rs ’ h ea lth ; i de nt ifi ca tio n of re so ur ce s fo r e ffe ct iv e co pi ng w ith st re ss N = 88 2 pr e- se rv ic e te ac he rs (D E) So ci al su pp or t N = 47 3 st an da rd sa m pl e (D E) Se lf- effi ca cy (e sp ec ia lly fo r m al e stu de nt te ac he rs ) C as tro e t a l., (2 01 0) Id en tifi ca tio n of re si lie nc e str at eg ie s o f n ov ic e in -s er vi ce te ac he rs eff ec tiv el y co pi ng w ith st re ss N = 15 te ac he rs in h ig h- ne ed a re as (U S) So ci al su pp or t i n te rm s o f a c op in g str at eg y: a sk in g fo r h el p, d ea l- in g w ith d iffi cu lt re la tio ns hi ps Se lf- ca re Pr ob le m so lv in g sk ill s i n te rm s o f a c op in g str at eg y, e .g ., tri al a nd er ro r G u & D ay (2 00 7) In sp ec tin g th e re la tio ns hi p be tw ee n re si lie nc e re so ur ce s a nd e ffe c- tiv en es s b as ed o n qu al ita tiv e in te rv ie w d at a fro m “ Va ria tio ns in Te ac he rs ’ W or k, L iv es , a nd E ffe ct iv en es s” (V IT A E; D ay e t a l., 20 06 ) N = 3 re si lie nt te ac he rs So ci al su pp or t Se lf- effi ca cy Se ns e of v oc at io n H ed de ric h, (2 01 6) Id en tifi ca tio n of st re ss fa ct or s a nd st ra te gi es /re so ur ce s t o eff ec - tiv el y m an ag e th e str es s f ac to rs o f t ea ch er s i n sp ec ia l e du ca tio n N = 10 sp ec ia l e du ca tio n te ac he rs (D E) So ci al su pp or t ( pa rti cu la rly th ro ug h te am te ac hi ng : j oi nt te ac hi ng by tw o te ac he rs ) J. Baatz, M. Wirzberger 56 Page 18 of 34 Ta bl e 3 (c on tin ue d) St ud y (Y ea r) O bj ec t o f i nv es tig at io n Id en tifi ed re so ur ce s Le ro ux e t a l., (2 01 6) C om pa ris on o f r is k an d pr ot ec tiv e fa ct or s o f p re -s er vi ce P E an d el em en ta ry te ac he rs ; p ro te ct iv e fa ct or s a s r es ou rc es fo r e ffe ct iv e co pi ng w ith st re ss N = 15 p re -s er vi ce e le m en ta ry te ac he rs (C A ) So ci al su pp or t N = 15 p re -s er vi ce P E te ac he rs (C A ) Se lf- effi ca cy (o nl y fo r e le m en ta ry te ac he rs ) Fl ex ib ili ty a nd o pe nn es s So ci al c om pe te nc e (e sp ec ia lly fo r P E te ac he rs ) Se ns e of v oc at io n (e sp ec ia lly fo r e le m en ta ry te ac he rs ) A dm in ist ra tiv e su pp or t O pt im is m (e sp ec ia lly fo r e le m en ta ry te ac he rs ) Pr of es si on al in te re st Te ac hi ng e xp er ie nc e M ot iv at io n (e sp ec ia lly fo r e le m en ta ry te ac he rs ) H um or (e sp ec ia lly fo r e le m en ta ry te ac he rs ) Resilience as a professional competence: a new way towards… Page 19 of 34 56 Ta bl e 3 (c on tin ue d) St ud y (Y ea r) O bj ec t o f i nv es tig at io n Id en tifi ed re so ur ce s M an sfi el d et  a l., (2 01 2) Id en tif yi ng re si lie nt te ac he rs ’ r es ou rc es (s uc ce ss fu l c op in g w ith str es s w ith ou t h ar m in g he al th ) b as ed o n a su rv ey o f g ra du at in g an d ea rly c ar ee r t ea ch er s N = 20 0 pr e- se rv ic e an d no vi ce in -s er vi ce te ac he rs (A U ) So ci al su pp or t/r el at io ns hi ps : B ei ng a bl e to d ea l w ith d iffi cu lt Re la tio ns hi ps Se lf- effi ca cy Fl ex ib ili ty So ci al C on sc io us ly ta ki ng re ge ne ra tio n tim e (s el fc ar e) Em ot io n re gu la tio n O pt im is m Pr ob le m so lv in g sk ill s Pr of es si on al in te re st Te ac hi ng e xp er ie nc e M ot iv at io n Eff ec tiv e co pi ng w ith st re ss (r at io na l c op in g) Ti m e m an ag em en t Re al ist ic g oa ls a nd e xp ec ta tio ns H um or J. Baatz, M. Wirzberger 56 Page 20 of 34 Ta bl e 3 (c on tin ue d) St ud y (Y ea r) O bj ec t o f i nv es tig at io n Id en tifi ed re so ur ce s Pa pa tra ia no u et  a l., (2 01 8) Id en tifi ca tio n of re si lie nc e re so ur ce s o f t ea ch er s i n re m ot e te ac h- in g; c op in g w ith st re ss fa ct or s w ith ou t h ar m in g he al th N = 28 p re -s er vi ce a nd n ov ic e in -s er vi ce te ac he rs in re m ot e te ac h- in g en vi ro nm en t ( A U ) So ci al su pp or t/r el at io ns hi ps (n ot o nl y stu de nt –t ea ch er re la tio ns b ut al so b et w ee n te ac he rs a nd th e pl ac e: fa ci lit at es c ul tu ra l u nd er - st an di ng o f i nd ig en ou s s tu de nt s) Fl ex ib ili ty So ci al c om pe te nc e Se ns e of v oc at io n (p ar tic ul ar ly re ga rd in g th e pl ac e) Ta it, (2 00 8) Id en tifi ca tio n of re so ur ce s o f r es ili en t, no vi ce in -s er vi ce te ac he rs ; su st ai ni ng e ffe ct iv en es s d es pi te st re ss N = 4 n ov ic e in -s er vi ce te ac he rs (C A ) Se lf- effi ca cy So ci al c om pe te nc e Se lf- ca re W ei ß an d K ie l, (2 01 3) St re ss fa ct or s a nd re so ur ce s o f h ea lth y te ac he rs ; l ist in g re so ur ce s of st ab le te ac he rs (e ffe ct iv e co pi ng w ith st re ss w ith ou t d am ag - in g he al th ; s us ta in in g eff ec tiv en es s) Se lf- effi ca cy Fl ex ib ili ty Eff ec tiv e co pi ng w ith st re ss Ti m e m an ag em en t Re al ist ic g oa ls a nd e xp ec ta tio ns G ra tit ud e D ist an ci ng a bi lit y C ou nt ry c od e ac co rd in g to IS O -3 16 6 A LP H A -2 A U , A us tra lia ; D E, G er m an y; C H , S w itz er la nd ; C A , C an ad a; U S, U ni te d St at es Resilience as a professional competence: a new way towards… Page 21 of 34 56 individual resilience resources on potential negative impacts of the previously out- lined occupational stress factors. In conclusion, we identified a set of individual resilience resources that hold potential to benefit teachers’ health. These resources are summarized in Figs. 1, 2, 3, with bars reflecting the frequency of resources iden- tified across the reviewed literature. Building on existing classifications in resil- ience research, we divided the emerging resources into personal resources as well as social/environmental resources. We thereby distinguish personal trait resources from learnable personal resources, referred to as resilience factors (Fröhlich-Gildhoff & Rönnau-Böse, 2019). As evident from Fig. 1, an optimistic attitude and a strong sense of vocation as core values are among teachers’ most important personal resilience resources and highly benefit their health. Optimism has proven to be a protective factor for chil- dren and adolescents as well (Fröhlich-Gildhoff & Rönnau-Böse, 2019; Helmreich & Lieb, 2015). Additionally, character traits such as conscientiousness and inner balance constitute important health-promoting resilience resources. Regarding teachers’ resilience factors, we identified numerous resources, which are shown in Fig. 2. As with children and adolescents, self-efficacy is the most fre- quently reported resilience resource for teachers. More specifically, we also found domain-specific self-efficacy concerning classroom management skills and the effective handling of classroom disruptions to effectively promote teachers’ health. Although some resilience factors overlap with those identified by existing resilience research, Fig. 2 clearly indicates that teacher-specific resilience exists. For instance, teaching experience, classroom management, and flexibility (often necessary during lessons) are considered of particular relevance for teachers. In addition, some more Fig. 1 Teachers’ personal resources, listed by frequency J. Baatz, M. Wirzberger 56 Page 22 of 34 Fig. 2 Teachers’ resilience factors, listed by frequency Fig. 3 Teachers’ social/environmental resources, listed by frequency Resilience as a professional competence: a new way towards… Page 23 of 34 56 general resilience resources are at first glance less closely related to the profession, such as realistic goal setting and orientation, effective stress management by rational coping behavior, or emotion regulation (helpful when dealing with challenging stu- dents, parents or colleagues). Compared to personal resources and the resilience factors, we could only identify three social/environmental resources, shown in Fig. 3. Most frequently, social sup- port from colleagues, school leaders, the school board, and existing relationships were identified to be important social resources of teachers. Social support/rela- tionships also comprise well-established resources in resilience research (Fröhlich- Gildhoff & Rönnau-Böse, 2019; Helmreich & Lieb, 2015; Thun-Hohenstein et al., 2020). Moreover, job-specific characteristics belong to teachers’ environmental resources, e.g., administrative support with teaching media access. Our findings emphasize the existence of teacher resilience, comprising a set of occupation-specific resources as illustrated by most of the identified resources. The contextual nature of resources is also evident in their ultimate counterpart, being the previously outlined teacher stress factors. For instance, self-efficacy concerning classroom management or genuine classroom management skills form the counter- part to stress emerging from dealing with challenging students. The ability to dis- tance oneself from everyday work life constitutes the counterpart to a lack of separa- tion between work and private life. Against this background, it becomes evident that particular occupation-specific resources must be included in intervention programs to effectively promote resilience among teachers. 4 Discussion In the light of teachers’ precarious state of health, this paper investigated resilience as a potential approach to promote teachers’ health. We conducted a systematic liter- ature review to inspect the health-promoting effect of resilience in the occupational context of teachers more closely. Thereby, we investigated mitigating effects of resil- ience, captured by specific resilience resources, on various strain factors. Results support the health-promoting impacts of resilience and consistently show positive effects on the strain aspects under investigation. Across nations, school types, and subject combinations, resilient teachers report lower burnout symptoms and per- ceived stress levels as well as more effective coping mechanisms. Furthermore, resilient teachers exhibit a higher sense of well-being, have a lower intention of leav- ing the profession, and remain effective in their teaching despite occupational stress. In addition, we identified occupation-related resilience resources that promote teachers’ health. By listing the identified resources in a catalog, we have illustrated that a teacher-specific notion of resilience exists. This relates to the fact that a large proportion of discovered resources are structural in nature as they are inherent to teachers’ occupational environment, in addition to some resources overlapping with existing evidence from resilience research. Teachers’ occupation-specific resilience is also reflected in resources that mirror reported sources of stress. Building on these findings, we argue that investing in interventions to build and sustain teachers’ resilience constitutes a crucial effort to promote teachers’ health J. Baatz, M. Wirzberger 56 Page 24 of 34 in the long run. It alters the seemingly unavoidable trajectory from stress to nega- tive strain consequences towards the direction of health. Obviously, resilient teach- ers can cope with occupational stress by leveraging specific resilience resources. As these resources mitigate negative consequences of stress factors, teachers can sustain their health. Consequently, when fostering resilience as means of promoting teach- ers’ health, it is essential to start with implementing occupation-specific resources highlighted in this paper. 4.1 Practical implications But how can teachers’ specific resilience resources be fostered to trigger a health- promoting effect of resilience? When specifically promoting resilience, we need to consider that according to relevant neurobiological findings only 50% of resilience can be learned (Görich, 2019; Thun-Hohenstein et al., 2020). However, the major- ity of teachers’ resources belongs to learnable resilience factors within the scope of influence, hence, we assume a high learnability of resilience in teachers. Prior to the beginning of their in-school careers, pre-service teachers are already experienc- ing significant strain. Therefore, resilience should be promoted as early as possible, ideally in pre-service teacher education at universities. Along these lines, the out- lined resource catalog developed provides an evidence-based foundation to promote teachers’ resilience and thus, eliciting health-promoting effects. By now, specific resilience-building programs for teachers are scarce, as the majority of interventions in the school context focus on students rather than teachers (Mansfield et al., 2016; Meadows et al., 2015; Ott et al., 2017; Richards et al., 2016). In addition, available programs exert different levels of effectiveness with regards to resilience building. An existing program for building resilience is the online learning module “Build- ing Resilience in Teacher Education” (BRiTE; Mansfield et al., 2016). The goal of BRiTE is to build resilience in pre-service teachers based on five modules. The acro- nym also presents the individual modules of the program: • Building Resilience: theoretical introduction of resilience, highlighting its impor- tance for the teaching profession • Relationships: how to maintain supportive networks, building relationships • Wellbeing: personal well-being, work-life balance, maintaining motivation • Taking Initiative: problem-solving strategies, effective communication, profes- sional development • Emotions: developing optimism, strengthening emotional awareness, managing emotions Evaluation results reflect a positive effect of BRiTE, indicated by high levels of perceived usefulness and an increased general understanding of resilience. However, the program could not fulfill its initial goal, as no results were recorded regarding actual increase in resilience (Mansfield et al., 2016). A German intervention program aimed at promoting resilience among pre-ser- vice teachers (RefueL; Görich, 2019) also builds on the modular BRiTE approach. Resilience as a professional competence: a new way towards… Page 25 of 34 56 The individual elements of ReFueL are listed in Fig. 4. A first evaluation was con- ducted as part of a block seminar at the University of Osnabrueck. Characteristi- cally, the majority of elements in this intervention are not interactive, but rather at the level of mere knowledge transfer. Although evaluation results show health- promoting effects and high learning gains, RefueL could not substantially build resilience. Thus, even though a significant increase in self-efficacy as an individual resilience resource resulted, the overall increase in resilience did not reach statistical significance (Görich, 2019). Overall, the low effectiveness of existing programs to promote resilience might be explained by their format. Even though BRiTE (Mansfield et  al., 2016) and REfueL (Görich, 2019) aim at promoting resources to build resilience, the resources addressed in these programs are mainly general resources derived from traditional resilience research. While they have proven beneficial regarding the development of children and adolescents, they require occupation-specific adaptation to be effec- tive. Consequently, in resilience promoting programs for (pre-service) teachers, it is important to promote teacher-specific resilience resources, such as self-efficacy in dealing with classroom disruptions or classroom management skills. In particular, REfueL promoted few teacher-specific resources, which could explain the absence of significant results. Additionally, a school’s working conditions, leadership style, institutional culture, and in-staff relationships have been demonstrated to serve as a considerable source of negative emotions if unfavorable dynamics exist (Gu & Day, 2013; Schelvis et al., 2014). By contrast, they have likewise proven to nurture capacities for resilience in case they possess a supportive character (Beltman et al., 2011; Post et  al., 2020). Hence, any intervention dedicated to promoting teacher- specific resilience should foster strategies to mitigate negative emotions by emotion regulation techniques (Mansfield et al., 2012) and strengthen positive emotions by fostering qualities such as optimism and humor (Fröhlich-Gildhoff & Rönnau-Böse, Fig. 4 Modules and submodules of the RefueL program based on Görich, (2019) J. Baatz, M. Wirzberger 56 Page 26 of 34 2019; Helmreich & Lieb, 2015). While both BRiTE (Mansfield et  al., 2016) and RefueL (Görich, 2019) include modules to address emotional dimensions, the scope of included topics is still limited. Consequently, this focus should be extended and embedded in a more systematical way in emerging interventions. Moreover, Görich, (2019) discusses the mere focus on teaching declarative knowledge as additional limitation. According to Anderson, (1983), declarative knowledge describes the knowledge of certain facts. As resilience rests on resources such as self-awareness, coping strategies, and attitudes, employing a mainly theoretical focus is not suffi- cient. By contrast, procedural knowledge is needed, defined as highly automated action knowledge in specific situations (Anderson, 1983). Therefore, interactive for- mats such as workshops might be more beneficial for building resilience. Support- ing evidence arises from positive evaluation results of interactive formats involv- ing supervision or developmental coaching. For instance, significant positive effects on resilience building were observed among teachers who participated in leader- ship development coaching (Grant et  al., 2010). In addition to goal achievement, embedded coaching sessions promoted personal strengths, including the resilience resources of self-efficacy and self-regulation (Grant et  al., 2010). Furthermore, the setting of a university seminar to foster resilience might not be the most ade- quate choice, particularly given the pressure emerging from being graded. Whereas resilience should be built as early as possible to preserve teachers’ state of health, it should also be done within an appropriate setting that triggers coping strategies while leveraging mechanisms of social support, for instance, within a community of practice (Gu & Day, 2013; Johnson et al., 2014). As resilience, like a vaccine, only emerges under high stress levels, such conditions must be trained during resilience building. Taken together, we can conclude that despite the acute need for action, the press- ing issue of promoting teachers’ health has not been adequately addressed so far. This is reflected in limited offers for specific resilience promotion among (pre-ser- vice) teachers. In addition, the majority of interventions are not comprehensive pre- vention methods for health promotion. The BRiTE model (Mansfield et al., 2016) with its broader intervention focus constitutes an exception, which is also widely accessible due to its online format (e.g., Beltman et al., 2018). This raises the need for further research on resilience promotion programs, focusing on the development, implementation, and evaluation of targeted interventions. Nevertheless, it is crucial to note that systematic resilience promotion to support teachers’ health alleviates the symptoms but not the actual causes of negative stress (Fox & Walter, 2022; Gu & Day, 2013; Schelvis et  al., 2014). Due to the current architecture of the school system, however, without nudging far-reaching structural changes, targeting indi- vidual symptoms is the most promising immediate route we can take. Nonetheless, to sustainably promote teachers’ resilience, we need to employ additional structural measures that aim at changing critical system-inherent sources of stress (Fox & Wal- ter, 2022; Gu & Day, 2013; Limon et  al., 2021). Hence, we conclude this article by deriving recommendations to promote resilience among teachers at a structural level. Tying in with the plastic nature of resilience described across relevant lit- erature (e.g., Beltman et  al., 2011; Gu & Day, 2013), we emphasize structural, Resilience as a professional competence: a new way towards… Page 27 of 34 56 comprehensive resilience promotion through specific training of teachers’ resilience factors (see Fig. 2). Implementing interventions in the form of mandatory interactive workshops across all career stages ensures that all (pre-service) teachers could be reached and experience related benefits adapted to their respective needs. For in-ser- vice teachers, such offers could take the form of mandatory training programs, which would be structurally integrated into their working lives. To avoid additional time demands, in-service teachers should be released from teaching obligations while attending the training. For pre-service teachers at universities, mandatory course offers as part of their regular curriculum would be suitable. In general, interactive workshop settings provide more adequate formats for a joint discursive exploration of teacher-specific resources. In this context, creating realistic stress scenarios for analyzing and practicing resilience resources is crucial, as resilience only emerges when stress levels are high. Activating available resources needs to be practiced hands-on to allow (pre-service) teachers to gain self-efficacy in handling classroom disruptions, effective stress management, classroom management skills, abilities in realistic goal setting and awareness for self-care. Hence, online tools incorporating simulations and game-based elements could increase participants motivation (Wout- ers & van Oostendorp, 2017) and effectively enhance coping strategies and resource building to deal with common stress situations. Additional training to specifically alter negative coping patterns is also considered helpful to specific resilience building, as teachers show significantly more negative coping patterns compared to other occupational groups (Kieschke & Schaarschmidt, 2008; Schaarschmidt, 2005). Considering occupation inherent stress-inducing dynamics, i.e., opposing behavior of students in puberty and the unpredictable and highly individualized speed of learning processes, teachers benefit from building a reflective attitude as learnable skill. A default mode of reflective distance is particu- larly helpful in dealing with and analyzing personally challenging situations such as verbal attacks by students (Schelvis et al., 2014). Building resilience in teachers could further be supported by earlier and longer internship phases in teacher educa- tion and training as well as close mentorship guiding the transition and induction phase (Johnson et al., 2014). In combination with the previously mentioned work- shop offers during teacher education at universities, resources acquired could be proactively applied, consolidated, and subsequently reflected upon in a joint frame- work, thereby mitigating stressful dynamics related to the “reality shock” (Leroux et al., 2016, p. 808). Moreover, a broad availability of related training offers raises awareness for the importance of health-promoting resources, for instance, social support from colleagues, consequently highlighting opportunities to alter previously immanent sources of stress. In addition to measures promoting resilience resources in individual teachers, we propose structural measures to activate social/environmental resilience resources at the organizational level, which have been shown to even mitigate effects of the COVID-19 pandemic (Fox & Walter, 2022). Thereby, it is possible to ensure that teachers’ health can benefit from health-promoting measures in the long term. Resil- ience at an organizational level is characterized by abilities to (1) anticipate long- term changes and prepare for them, (2) flexibly monitor challenging situations, be aware of early warning signs across individual, team, and organizational levels, (3) J. Baatz, M. Wirzberger 56 Page 28 of 34 respond to occupation-specific challenges (e.g., verbal aggression by students or parents) and reflect on the effectiveness of balancing coping mechanisms, and (4) learn from experience and understand how adaptation can happen more effectively (Schelvis et  al., 2014). At the international level, the Global Alliance for Disaster Risk Reduction & Resilience in the Education Sector proposed a comprehensive school safety framework (GADRRRES, 2022), which incorporates resilience build- ing and maintenance in education as a core goal. The framework builds on a policy-/ system-induced culture of safety and resilience and proposes a risk-informed assess- ment and planning strategy at system level. It further emphasizes the importance of teacher training and staff development, stakeholder participation and physical, envi- ronmental and social levers. With tools like dashboards for resilience monitoring, as proposed by the Euro- pean Commission’s Joint Research Centre (JRC; 2020), school leaders find concre- ate measures to increase and sustain organizational resilience. More precisely, in shared responsibility with involved stakeholder groups, in particular, teachers and administrators (Limon et al., 2021), they could implement approaches that first iden- tify and subsequently monitor particular risk factors and related coping strategies for the respective school setting. However, a crucial prerequisite consists in foster- ing and maintaining a climate of collaboration, responsibility and reflective growth, which entails to provide opportunities for exchange and support among colleagues, give recognition for individual efforts and achievements, and support professional growth among teachers (Fox & Walter, 2022). It has further been demonstrated that setting good examples for self-care by school leaders benefits individual teachers’ resilience (Klap et al., 2021). The related shift in organizational culture essentially depends on the commitment to facilitate a climate of mutual respect, which benefits from a transparent informa- tion flow and communication as well as contextually sensitive leadership practices (Gu & Day, 2013). In order to establish an open discussion culture at school level, e.g., regular town hall meetings could be a beneficial instrument (Schelvis et  al., 2014). Consistency of professional values and leadership practices, interactions, structures and strategies with school values and visions is of essence to establish and sustain nurturing relationships within the school community (Gu & Day, 2013). Against such background, it is possible to create a joint community of practice that offers the opportunity to learn from failures, crises and challenges in a reflective way (Johnson et  al., 2014). Involving external stakeholders such as parents can highly benefit the development of school cultures of mutual respect between teachers and students (Schelvis et  al., 2014), subsequently resulting in reduced emotional and mental exhaustion for teachers, e.g., due to reduced frequency of facing impertinent students. Moreover, actions should be taken to build and maintain structural and physi- cal characteristics of resilient schools, thereby paving the way for long-term indi- vidual and societal advances. Overly large classes benefit from reducing class sizes, which decreases teachers’ workload and frees resources for more effective individ- ual student support (Gu & Day, 2007). Permanent sensory overload emerging from high noise presence in classrooms could be reduced by appropriate sound isola- tion. Prevalent teacher workload in addition to direct classroom activities could be Resilience as a professional competence: a new way towards… Page 29 of 34 56 mitigated by providing administrative support, e.g., with implementing new tools for technology-enhanced teaching settings, thereby sustaining lessons learned dur- ing the COVID-19 pandemic (Fox & Walter, 2022), and by defining clear roles and responsibilities for any structural tasks beyond teaching (Gu & Day, 2013). Related to instructional responsibilities, teachers highly benefit from flexibility in teaching formats instead of being forced into a “one-size-fits-most approach” (Fox & Walter, 2022, p. 8). Establishing offices for teachers fosters a separation between work and private life, which is one of the most frequent sources of stress for teachers. It can further limit teachers’ workload and support a healthy work-life balance, as the school building is closed at the end of the working day, impeding late and weekend work. Enhanced visibility of teachers’ actual scope of presence at schools would further enhance the public recognition of teachers’ complex and demanding occupational characteristics (Johnson et  al., 2014) and alter common stereotypes attributing teachers an easy working life: Unlike employees in other professions, teachers do not finish work until the evening. Receiving an office to work on tasks such as lesson planning, exam correction, or professional development by knowledge acquisition without frequent disturbances further contributes to acknowledging the importance of the conducted work. Tying in with the already outlined benefits of collegial sup- port, open discussion cultures, and reflective exchange to handle occupation-specific challenges, maintaining staffrooms essentially provides the physical means to imple- ment, nurture, and sustain such opportunities (Schelvis et al., 2014). 4.2 Future directions and conclusions With this paper, we provide an overview of the current state of research on health- promoting effects of resilience while considering specific aspects of occupational strain in teachers. We further derive resilience resources and contribute to address- ing teacher resilience as an occupation-specific construct. Building on this evidence, we can establish needs-based prevention and intervention approaches for promot- ing teachers’ health. Tackling teachers’ resilience resources directly, we provide a base not only for further research, but also for the development of intervention programs by educational policymakers. Furthermore, this paper holds high informa- tional value for (prospective) teachers and school administrators due to highlighting teacher-specific resources and recommending concrete actions to promote teachers’ health. In addition to the outlined benefits for teaching, science, and practice, this work might extend into a meta-analysis to derive statistical evidence on the pos- tulated effect-pattern. Furthermore, a structural equation model to explain how the identified resources exert influence could be a promising approach for a customi- zation of resilience promotion across professions. Moreover, reviewing literature in additional languages could generate a larger pool of findings. Taken together, teacher resilience should be understood as a multi-faceted and dynamic construct, which needs to be nurtured in the occupational environment by both school-level support and individual professional development (Gu & Day, 2013). Our findings emphasize the urgency to protect our teachers’ health, as healthy J. Baatz, M. Wirzberger 56 Page 30 of 34 teachers strengthen the educational prospects of the upcoming generations. Thereby, resilient teachers not only minimize the subsequent economic costs but also improve the quality of schools that benefits our students. With our work, we aim at paving the way to build and improve resilience promoting initiatives and notably emphasize the future responsibility of educational policy: Turning teachers’ occupation back into a profession rather than a diagnosis (Schaarschmidt, 2005). Acknowledgements The authors thank Valerie Holzwarth and Jule Kembitzky for supporting the litera- ture search as part of the revision process. We further thank the anonymous reviewers for their helpful recommendations on improving the quality and scope of the manuscript. Funding Open Access funding enabled and organized by Projekt DEAL. Declarations Conflicts of interest The authors have no conflict of interest to disclose. Declaration of generative AI and AI‑assisted technologies in the writing process During the preparation of this work the authors used DeepL to assist with language translation and improve the quality of language in the manuscript. After using this tool, the authors reviewed and edited the content as needed and take full responsibility for the content of the published article. Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permis- sion directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/ licenses/by/4.0/. References Studies used to derive the core results of the review, which are summarized in both Table 2 and Table 3, are marked with an asterisk (*). Anderson, J. R. (1983). The architecture of cognition. Harvard University Press. Antonovsky, A., & Franke, A. (1997). Salutogenese: Zur Entmystifizierung der Gesundheit [Salutogen- esis: Demystifying Health]. DGVT. *Arnup, J., & Bowles, T. (2016). Should I stay or should I go? Resilience as a protective factor for teach- ers’ intention to leave the teaching profession. Australian Journal of Education, 60(3), 229–244. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1177/ 00049 44116 667620 Baker, F. R., Baker, K. L., & Burrell, J. (2021). Introducing the skills-based model of personal resilience: Drawing on content and process factors to build resilience in the workplace. Journal of Occupa- tional and Organizational Psychology, 94(2), 458–481. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1111/ joop. 12340 Beltman, S., Mansfield, C.F., Weatherby‐Fell, N., Wosnitza, M., & Broadley, T., (2018). Using online modules to build capacity for teacher resilience. In M. Wosnitza, F. Peixoto, S. Beltman, & C. F. Mansfield (eds.). Resilience in education: Concepts, contexts and connections (pp. 237–253). Springer International Publishing. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1007/ 978-3- 319- 76690-4 Beltman, S., Mansfield, C., & Price, A. (2011). Thriving not just surviving: A review of research on teacher resilience. Educational Research Review, 6(3), 185–207. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1016/j. edurev. 2011. 09. 001 http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ https://doi.org/10.1177/0004944116667620 https://doi.org/10.1111/joop.12340 https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-76690-4 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2011.09.001 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2011.09.001 Resilience as a professional competence: a new way towards… Page 31 of 34 56 *Boldrini, E., Sappa, V., & Aprea, C. (2019). Which difficulties and resources do vocational teachers perceive? An exploratory study setting the stage for investigating teachers’ resilience in Switzerland. Teachers and Teaching, 25(1), 125–141. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1080/ 13540 602. 2018. 15200 86 Borkenau, P., & Ostendorf, F. (1991). Ein Fragebogen zur Erfassung fünf robuster Persönlichkeitsfak- toren [A questionnaire for assessing five robust personality factors]. Diagnostica, 37(1), 29–41. *Brandl-Bredenbeck, H. P., Kämpfe, A., & Köster, C. (2013). Gesundheit von Lehramtsstudierenden– Ausgewählte Ergebnisse einer empirischen Untersuchung an der Universität Paderborn [Pre-service teachers’ health - Selected results of an empirical study at the University of Paderborn]. In M. A. Marchwacka (Ed.), Gesundheitsförderung im Setting Schule (pp. 329–345). Springer VS. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1007/ 978-3- 658- 00528-3_ 19 *Brouskeli, V., Kaltsi, V., & Loumakou, M. (2018). Resilience and occupational well-being of secondary education teachers in Greece. Issues in Educational Research, 28(1), 43–60. *Burić, I., Slišković, A., & Penezić, Z. (2019). Understanding teacher well-being: A cross-lagged anal- ysis of burnout, negative student-related emotions, psychopathological symptoms, and resilience. Educational Psychology, 39(9), 1136–1155. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1080/ 01443 410. 2019. 15779 52 Callahan, D. (1973). The WHO Definition of “Health.” The Hastings Center Studies, 1(3), 77–87. https:// doi. org/ 10. 2307/ 35274 67 *Carstensen, B., Köller, M., & Klusmann, U. (2019). Förderung sozial-emotionaler Kompetenz von angehenden Lehrkräften: Konzeption und Evaluation eines Trainingsprogramms [Improving pre- service teachers’ social-emotional competence: Development and evaluation of a training program]. Zeitschrift Für Entwicklungspsychologie und Pädagogische Psychologie, 51(1), 1–15. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1026/ 0049- 8637/ a0002 05 *Castro, A. J., Kelly, J., & Shih, M. (2010). Resilience strategies for new teachers in high-needs areas. Teaching and Teacher Education, 26(3), 622–629. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1016/j. tate. 2009. 09. 010 *Cheung, F., Tang, C. S., & Tang, S. (2011). Psychological capital as a moderator between emotional labor, burnout, and job satisfaction among school teachers in China. International Journal of Stress Management, 18(4), 348–371. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1037/ a0025 787 Day, C. W., Stobart, G., Sammons, P., Kingston, A., Gu, Q., Smees, R., & Mujtaba, T. (2006). Variations in teachers’ work, lives and effectiveness. Final report for the VITAE Project, DfES. Doney, P. A. (2013). Fostering resilience: A necessary skill for teacher retention. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 24(4), 645–664. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1007/ s10972- 012- 9324-x Fox, H. & Walter, H. (2022). More than strength from within: Cultivating teacher resilience during COVID-19. Current Issues in Education, 23(1). https:// doi. org/ 10. 14507/ cie. vol23 iss1. 1978 Freudenberger, H. J. (1974). Staff burn-out. Social Issues, 30(1), 159–165. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1111/j. 1540- 4560. 1974. tb007 06.x Fröhlich-Gildhoff, K., & Rönnau-Böse, M. (2019). Resilienz [resilience] (5th ed.) Ernst Reinhardt. Gadrrres (2022). Comprehensive school safety framework 2022–2030 for child rights and resilience in the education sector. Global Alliance for Risk Reduction & Resilience in the Education Sector. Retrieved from https:// gadrr res. net/ compr ehens ive- school- safety- frame work at September 6, 2024. *Görich, K. (2019). Fit fürs Klassenzimmer: Konzeption und Evaluation eines Resilienzförderungspro- gramms für Lehramtsstudierende [Classroom ready: Design and evaluation of a resilience promo- tion program for pre-service teachers]. Julius Klinkhardt. https:// doi. org/ 10. 25656/ 01: 18259 Grant, A. M., Green, L. S., & Rynsaardt, J. (2010). Developmental coaching for high school teachers: Executive coaching goes to school. Consulting Psychology Journal: Practice and Research, 62(3), 151–168. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1037/ a0019 212 *Gu, Q., & Day, C. (2007). Teachers resilience: A necessary condition for effectiveness. Teaching and Teacher Education, 23(8), 1302–1316. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1016/j. tate. 2006. 06. 006 Gu, Q., & Day, C. (2013). Challenges to teacher resilience: Conditions count. British Educational Research Journal, 39(1), 22–44. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1080/ 01411 926. 2011. 623152 *Hedderich, I. (2016). Lehrergesundheit im Kontext schulischer Inklusion: Kenntnisstand und Ergebnisse einer explorativen Studie und Perspektiven [Teachers’ health in the context of special education: State of knowledge, results, and perspectives of an exploratory study]. Prävention und Gesundheits- förderung, 11(1), 34–39. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1007/ s11553- 015- 0524-z Helmreich, I., & Lieb, K. (2015). Resilienz–Schutzmechanismen gegen Burnout und Depression [Resil- ience–Protective mechanisms against burnout and depression]. InFo Neurologie & Psychiatrie, 17(2), 52–62. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1007/ s15005- 015- 1133-2 https://doi.org/10.1080/13540602.2018.1520086 https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-00528-3_19 https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-00528-3_19 https://doi.org/10.1080/01443410.2019.1577952 https://doi.org/10.2307/3527467 https://doi.org/10.2307/3527467 https://doi.org/10.1026/0049-8637/a000205 https://doi.org/10.1026/0049-8637/a000205 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2009.09.010 https://doi.org/10.1037/a0025787 https://doi.org/10.1007/s10972-012-9324-x https://doi.org/10.14507/cie.vol23iss1.1978 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4560.1974.tb00706.x https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4560.1974.tb00706.x https://gadrrres.net/comprehensive-school-safety-framework https://doi.org/10.25656/01:18259 https://doi.org/10.1037/a0019212 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2006.06.006 https://doi.org/10.1080/01411926.2011.623152 https://doi.org/10.1007/s11553-015-0524-z https://doi.org/10.1007/s15005-015-1133-2 J. Baatz, M. Wirzberger 56 Page 32 of 34 *Helms-Lorenz, M., Slof, B., & van de Grift, W. (2013). First year effects of induction arrangements on beginning teachers’ psychological processes. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 28(4), 1265–1287. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1007/ s10212- 012- 0165-y Hernandez, E., Aceves, A., & Peikoff, N. (2022). The mental health of educators: Gaps, needs, and solutions. In S. Deb, & B. A. Gerrard (eds.) Handbook of Health and Well-Being (pp. 565–604). Springer. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1007/ 978- 981- 16- 8263-6_ 25 Johnson, B., Down, B., Le Cornu, R., Peters, J., Sullivan, A., Pearce, J., & Hunter, J. (2014). Promoting early career teacher resilience: A framework for understanding and acting. Teachers and Teaching, 20(5), 530–546. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1080/ 13540 602. 2014. 937957 Joint Research Centre (2020). Prototype dashboard for monitoring the social and