1. Introduction
The wider domain of the psychology of language learning and teaching (PLLT) has established itself as a vibrant and independent area of inquiry, as evidenced by specialized books, edited volumes, journals, and conferences on the topicFootnote 1 (e.g., Dörnyei & Ryan, Reference Dörnyei and Ryan2015; Gregersen & Mercer, Reference Gregersen and Mercer2021; Mercer & Kostoulas, Reference Mercer and Kostoulas2018; Sampson & Pinner, Reference Sampson and Pinner2020; Williams & Mercer, Reference Williams and Mercer2016). The scope of this body of literature has evolved over time from an initial focus on examining aspects of learner psychology through the lens of various theoretical and methodological perspectives to the discussion of themes relating to teachers within diverse social, cultural, and political contexts. This swell of interest is justifiable by the mediating role of psychological variables in shaping the learning and teaching processes in language education (Williams & Mercer, Reference Williams and Mercer2016). However, this line of research has not paid sufficient attention to the psychology of language teacher educators (LTEs),Footnote 2 who constitute one of the key domains in the knowledge base of language teacher education and thus have a major role in guiding and supporting teacher development (Barkhuizen, Reference Barkhuizen2021a; Johnson & Golombek, Reference Johnson and Golombek2020). As Yuan et al. (Reference Yuan, Lee, De Costa, Yang and Liu2022, p. 455) stated, LTEs are embedded in a “complex ecology” which frames their mental lives, identities, and roles in various higher education and non-higher education contexts. Given the importance of LTEs in supporting language teacher development, teaching innovations, and curriculum reforms, we argue that it is imperative to study them as a distinct professional group with their own specific psychologies shaped by unique ecological influences and resources. Our view also concurs with Mercer and Kostoulas (Reference Mercer and Kostoulas2018, p. 334) who postulated that broadening the research agenda to include LTE psychology is vital “as we seek to appreciate the psychological conditions facing all types of teachers across their career trajectories and in a range of settings.” Despite such growing awareness, scholars in applied linguistics have not yet discussed in depth with justifiable grounds why a focus on LTE psychology is warranted and which areas are ripe for research.
The last decade has seen a growing focus on LTEs in applied linguistics and TESOL (e.g., Golombek, Reference Golombek2015; Peercy et al., Reference Peercy, Sharkey, Baecher, Motha and Varghese2019; Yazan et al., Reference Yazan, Penton Herrera and Rashed2023; Yuan & Lee, Reference Yuan and Lee2021), yet they still constitute an underrepresented group whose professional lives and work suffer from a lack of discussion. This relative neglect has led to repeated calls for working towards a better understanding of LTEs’ professionalism (e.g., Barkhuizen, Reference Barkhuizen2021a; Nazari et al., Reference Nazari, Nejadghanbar and Hu2023; Yuan et al., Reference Yuan, Lee, De Costa, Yang and Liu2022). The current paper broadens these calls by highlighting the need for a systematic research program that investigates aspects of LTE psychology (e.g., motivation, agency, well-being) amidst the unique challenges and pressures LTEs need to navigate to meet the demands of their profession. Such an appeal is also in line with the stance of Yuan et al. (Reference Yuan, Lee, De Costa, Yang and Liu2022) who spoke of the need to study LTEs as whole people by taking a holistic view of their lives. It should be noted that “teacher educators” are used as a generic term to describe a heterogeneous group seeking to support the development and learning of pre- and in-service teachers at various settings. This is also the case for the large community of LTEs. Barkhuizen (Reference Barkhuizen2021a, p. 8) stated that it is not viable “to classify the different types of [LTEs] working around the world. There are just too many variables to take into account.” In some contexts, LTEs in and outside higher education may not be positioned as LTEs due to institutional discourses. This ambiguity is further compounded by the fact that some may self-identify as researchers rather than LTEs, even when they teach courses aimed at pre-service language teachers.
To reflect the complexity of this professional group, Barkhuizen listed 14 types of LTEs including in-service LTEs, mentors working with pre-service teachers on practicum, supervisors of student research, and graduate teaching assistants, among others (see pp. 9–14). Informed by discussions regarding the classification of TEs according to their workplaces (e.g., Barkhuizen, Reference Barkhuizen2021a; Liao et al., Reference Liao, Li, Dong and Wang2023; Ping et al., Reference Ping, Schellings and Beijaard2018), and given that space constraints preclude coverage of all the specific types of LTEs, we in this paper frame LTEs as those based in higher education and non-higher education contexts, working with teachers “at various stages of their careers, from pre-service, to novice and early career, to in-service” (Barkhuizen, Reference Barkhuizen2021a, p. 30). The use of the “non” label is not intended to marginalize or devalue the LTEs situated outside of higher education, but rather is used for practical reasons to facilitate clarity in defining the scope of this paper. We are mindful that both groups of LTEs, regardless of their institutional affiliation, offer valuable insights and expertise in enriching the field of language teacher education. While we focus our discussion mainly on LTEs specializing in English due to its global dominance, many of the arguments put forward could also be applicable to TEs of other languages and disciplines. It is also of note that psychology is a field of study which can be looked at through diverse lenses (e.g., cognitive, social, behavioral, humanistic). Drawing on Mercer et al. (Reference Mercer, Ryan and Williams2012, p. 2), we in this paper describe psychology as LTEs’ “mental experiences, processes, thoughts, feelings, motives, and behaviors” shaped by the complex interplay of personal and contextual factors.
The following sections first review the domain-specific aspects in LTEs’ work (e.g., language pedagogy, status of English) and then elaborate on LTEs based in higher education and non-higher education contexts. We then provide two main reasons we believe justify the need for a systematic study of LTE psychology. The first is about empowering LTEs to maintain a positive, reflective state of mind and thrive in their communities as whole people in view of the complexities arising from their professional work. The second has to do with the potential impact of LTEs’ psychology on the quality of their work, as well as on the learning and psychology of the teachers. After presenting these reasons, we map out six crucial research tasks, specifically arguing for the need for studies on the well-being, agency, socio-emotional competence, and identity of LTEs, along with positive psychology-informed interventions and research on the social contagion of LTEs’ psychological states.
2. Domain-specific aspects in LTEs’ professional work
As TEs are the backbones of “the total ecology of teacher education”Footnote 3 (Lunenberg et al., Reference Lunenberg, Korthagen and Swennen2005, p. 588) in terms of generating and circulating ideas about teacher education pedagogies (Wright, Reference Wright, Burns and Richards2009), they take the lead in the professional preparation of teachers by assisting them to build professional identity (K. Smith, Reference Smith2005), achieve self-confidence (Darling-Hammond et al., Reference Darling-Hammond, Chung and Frelow2002), obtain the essential qualifications (Akbari & Dadvand, Reference Akbari and Dadvand2011), and develop expertise on the subject matter content (Johnson, Reference Johnson2015) via formal instruction, training, mentoring, coaching, role modeling, guided reflection, and feedback. However, compared to TEs of other subjects, LTEs face a host of domain-specific conditions which need to be acknowledged. First, the subject-specific attributes of language education require LTEs to have not only the knowledge and proficiency of the language in diverse areas (e.g., grammar, vocabulary, writing), but also a deep understanding of cultural nuances and pragmatic usage in diverse linguistic and sociocultural contexts (Yuan et al., Reference Yuan, Lee, De Costa, Yang and Liu2022). Further complicating the situation, the fast-evolving landscape of language teacher education in response to sociopolitical, economic, cultural, regional, and institutional forces (e.g., policy changes, local educational needs, globalization) creates the need for LTEs to keep up with changes in content and pedagogy (Barkhuizen, Reference Barkhuizen2021a; Yuan & Lee, Reference Yuan and Lee2021). In particular, the growing varieties of English (i.e., Global Englishes) and its increased prominence as a lingua franca brings along a corresponding demand for LTEs to widen their pedagogical and linguistic competencies to better prepare teachers for twenty-first century classrooms (see Al-Issa, Reference Al-Issa2017; S. J. Smith, Reference Smith2016). Notably, the status of English as a lingua franca with its colonial history also requires LTEs to help teachers develop cultural sensitivity and integrate with global networks with the aim of promoting a culturally responsive and equitable approach to language teaching and teacher education (Mambu, Reference Mambu and Zein2018).
Along similar lines, Selvi et al. (Reference Selvi, Yazan and Mahboob2023) stressed the disproportionate impact of English as the most commonly taught language and mentioned center/periphery/imperialism concerns that influence and marginalize the vast majority of language teachers and LTEs. Meanwhile, LTEs grapple with the rise of neo-nationalist agendas which often promote culturally/ideologically biased discourses in teacher education, as well as the increase of corporate practices that bring a market-oriented mindset prioritizing cost cutting and profitability in language teacher education at the expense of promoting its quality (see e.g., Nazari et al., Reference Nazari, Nejadghanbar and Hu2023; Yuan et al., Reference Yuan, Lee, De Costa, Yang and Liu2022). Moreover, LTEs are increasingly confronted with anti-intellectualism, defined as a societal attitude marked by distrust or dismissal of intellectual endeavors, expertise, and critical thinking (Merkley, Reference Merkley2020). This growing trend further marginalizes their work by undermining the recognition of their professional knowledge and contributions to education. There is also growing awareness that LTEs must adapt to the evolving demands of global communication in the digital age, incorporating generative artificial intelligence and online resources to enhance teachers’ understanding of second language acquisition (SLA), together with other important skills and qualities (e.g., intercultural communicative competence, critical digital literacy, critical thinking) (Moorhouse & Kohnke, Reference Moorhouse and Kohnke2024; Yuan et al., Reference Yuan, Lee, De Costa, Yang and Liu2022).
3. Higher education-based LTEs
In addition to the domain-specific aspects above, perhaps the most notable challenge in higher education settings is the need to handle what Nazari et al. (Reference Nazari, Nejadghanbar and Hu2023, p. 3) call “professional multidimensionality,” referring to the myriad roles and responsibilities placed on the shoulders of LTEs despite the lack of support mechanisms to empower them in their endeavors. While university-based LTEs mainly serve to support teachers to better prepare them for the profession,Footnote 4 given their “complex and dynamic profile … with multiple responsibilities” (Yuan et al., Reference Yuan, Lee, De Costa, Yang and Liu2022, p. 461), they often carry out a large variety of additional tasks such as administration, program management, leadership, community service, collaborative partnership, supervision, and curriculum design, among others (Barkhuizen, Reference Barkhuizen2021a; Yuan et al., Reference Yuan, Lee, De Costa, Yang and Liu2022). Many LTEs worldwide often struggle to meet the conflicting demands of these professional tasks with little or no external support. Not surprisingly, as this heavy workload requires them to act like supermen/superwomen having a wide range of competencies and enduring energy (Yuan et al., Reference Yuan, Lee, De Costa, Yang and Liu2022, p. 447), there is growing evidence of the experience of identity tensions, emotional exhaustion, self-efficacy doubts, stress, and anxiety among LTEs (Barkhuizen, Reference Barkhuizen2021b; Lee, Reference Lee2014; Yan et al., Reference Yan, He, Guo and Wang2023; Yuan & Lee, Reference Lee2014).
In the increasingly competitive and corporatized context of higher education, there is also a common belief that LTEs need to become research active not only to strengthen their pedagogical expertise and knowledge of teacher education, but also to extend the scholarly base of the discipline through sharing their research findings with the wider community (e.g., Cochran-Smith, Reference Cochran-Smith2003; Tack & Vanderlinde, Reference Tack and Vanderlinde2014). As Ellis et al. (Reference Ellis, McNicholl and Pendry2012, p. 690) stated, TEs in higher education contexts stand out as a “hybrid category of academic worker requiring both research and professional credibility.” However, there might be exceptions in some cases regarding the research activity of university-based professionals, which may not be required, especially for those holding teaching-focused positions. In general, research productivity of LTEs is closely tied to the institutional performance review and promotion prospects, affected by the pervasive “publish-or-perish” culture and managerial system in many university settings (Yuan, Reference Yuan2020). There is growing awareness that the dual pressure to produce quality research outputs and achieve excellence in other professional responsibilities – especially teaching – can trigger considerable levels of stress and anxiety (Yung, Reference Yung, Yuan and Lee2021), as well as cause burnout and “publish-or-perish” syndrome among LTEs (Yuan & Lee, Reference Lee2014). Also worthy of note, to survive against this “publish-or-perish” ideology, there might be instances where LTEs feel obliged to give precedence to increasing their research engagement at the cost of demonstrating far less dedication to practical teacher education work (Yuan & Lee, Reference Lee2014). Yet relatively little attention has been paid to how LTEs can mitigate or eliminate the adverse effects of tensions and instability in their lives so that they can reach a state of “equilibrium” (Barkhuizen, Reference Barkhuizen2021a, p. 66) to relieve their uneasiness and discomfort and seek ongoing development. As we will detail later in this paper, this lack of interest seems unfortunate as the psychology of LTEs can work in favor or against their goal of supporting the development of teachers, as well as affecting the way they work and engage with others in their surrounding contexts.
4. Non-higher education-based LTEs
Teacher educators outside of higher education remain a particularly under-studied group (Liao et al., Reference Liao, Li, Dong and Wang2023) and this is also true for LTEs since studies to date on LTEs have been primarily conducted with university-based staff. While the types of non-university LTEs are too broad in scope to be addressed in full detail here, it is essential to pay explicit attention to these professionals doing teacher education work, such as mentors working with pre-service teachers on practicum in K–12 schools; freelancing LTEs offering teacher training courses within private institutes; in-service LTEs working for both governmental and private organizations, mainly to disseminate innovation and new products; teacher trainers working in non-academic institutions (e.g., teacher training colleges in many countries across the global South); educators working with nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) to deliver teacher training programs; government authorities offering certification for teachers as part of national education initiatives; itinerant LTEs and departmental leaders who are also teachers, but may be called on to provide mentoring on curriculum implementation initiatives; and teacher trainers working on “alternative route” qualifications such as Cambridge or Trinity qualifications (e.g., CELTA, DELTA). While each of these groups has unique job descriptions, what characterizes their work in common is the need to develop expertise mainly on the practical aspects of teaching. This practical focus makes the work of non-higher education LTEs critical, especially in helping to bridge the theory-practice gap prevailing among many language teachers prepared by teacher education programs within higher education institutes (see Andreasen, Reference Andreasen2023). However, our understanding of non-higher education LTEs is informed by a few studies addressing, for example, CELTA trainers (Gallagher & Geraghty, Reference Gallagher and Geraghty2023; Hasper & Barkhuizen, Reference Hasper and Barkhuizen2023), freelance LTEs (Nazari et al., Reference Nazari, Nejadghanbar and Hu2023, Reference Nazari, Nejadghanbar and Hu2024), and school mentors (Mutlu-Gülbak, Reference Mutlu-Gülbak2023).
Despite the importance of their work, some of the challenges presented above for university-based LTEs also apply to those outside of higher education. For example, CELTA trainers deal with professional heterogeneity as they simultaneously do a range of teaching-related (e.g., delivering courses, providing feedback, evaluating performance) and administrative tasks (keeping records of trainees’ progress, preparing timetables, holding meetings with the CELTA center). Similarly, school mentors who serve as both “teacher of K–12 students” and “teacher of K–12 teachers” (Liao et al., Reference Liao, Li, Dong and Wang2023, p. 2) with little outside support might experience identity tensions due to the challenges of navigating the competing demands of their dual mission. Also worthy of note here is the study by Gümüşok & Seferoğlu (Reference Gümüşok and Seferoğlu2023) who found that in-service LTEs experience significant stress due to a lack of appreciation and resistance of the teachers they train towards innovative teaching ideas. Relatedly, working with freelance LTEs in Iran, Nazari et al. (Reference Nazari, Nejadghanbar and Hu2023) demonstrated how the profit pursuits of institutes eroded the participants’ vision, autonomy, and identity, thus creating emotional tensions (e.g., feelings of stress, discomfort, conflict). In their review of studies on non-higher education-based TEs, Liao et al. (Reference Liao, Li, Dong and Wang2023) found that their professional learning involves multiple categories such as intrinsic qualities (e.g., motivation for/identity of being a TE), pedagogical knowledge (e.g., knowledge of students/teacher education pedagogies), and inquiry skills (e.g., critical/reflective thinking). These domains are also relevant for LTEs (see e.g., Ataş & Daloğlu, Reference Ataş and Daloğlu2024). However, LTEs – especially those outside of higher education – often lack robust training and support mechanisms to excel in their roles and this lack of preparation leaves them ill-equipped and under-resourced to shape their learning and navigate responsibilities (Barkhuizen, Reference Barkhuizen2021a). This argument suggests that LTEs in non-higher education contexts might have troubles in building professional identity and achieving competencies required for language teacher education, thereby undermining their efficacy, motivation, and self-confidence. It is also likely that LTEs in underfunded NGOs, rural schools, or low-income communities would have fewer opportunities to use up-to-date professional development tools and materials compared to their peers in higher education. As such, the needs and challenges of LTEs outside of higher education require particular attention.
5. Why a focus on LTE psychology?
While the ecological conditions in which LTEs work create complexities which might jeopardize their well-being, performance, satisfaction, and motivation, what matters is how they respond to such complexities (Yuan & Yang, Reference Yuan and Yang2022). Insights from earlier work on LTEs suggest that those who display greater resilience capacities (Kostoulas & Lämmerer, Reference Kostoulas, Lämmerer, Mercer and Kostoulas2018), employ emotion regulation strategies (Oxford et al., Reference Oxford, Cohen, Simmons, Mercer and Kostoulas2018), and develop positive self-efficacy beliefs (Banegas & Del Pozo Beamud, Reference Banegas, Del Pozo Beamud, Yuan and Lee2021) are better equipped to flourish and find meaning in their work, as well as to maximize opportunities for teacher learning. As such, if we can obtain an in-depth understanding of LTEs’ inner mental states, we can better capture the breadth of LTEs’ lived experiences in terms of who they are, how they feel, which challenges they face, and what they need in their situated practices, thus being better positioned to support their psychological development to help them survive and thrive in their professional spheres. Such understanding will also inform and facilitate efforts to empower LTEs to maintain a positive state of mind in the face of threatening circumstances and reach their full potential as professionals. In what follows, we discuss the reasons we believe justify the need for the systematic study of LTE psychology.
5.1. The relevance of LTEs’ psychology for their “whole person” development
The complex work of LTEs suggests that we should build a collective awareness of the need to promote LTEs’ capacity building in terms of improving their skills, knowledge, and resources in achieving growth at both personal and professional levels. What adds to such complexity is the multifaceted and fluid nature of LTEs’ expertise. The competencies and skills required of LTEs for quality teacher education are not fixed but evolve in response to the complex demands of preparing teachers for twenty-first century classrooms (Yuan & Yang, Reference Yuan and Yang2022) in light of globalization and digitalization (e.g., critical thinking, digital literacy, global awareness). The literature stresses the need for LTEs to engage in self-guided efforts for their self-improvement to become successful in their work. However, LTEs are often left alone with little guidance to develop and constantly expand their expertise in a wide variety of areas. Such a simplistic approach that positions LTEs as self-made and their learning trajectory as highly self-dependent (MacPhail et al., Reference MacPhail, Ulvik, Guberman, Czerniawski, Oolbekkink-Marchand and Bain2019; Yuan & Lee, Reference Yuan and Lee2021) might pose threats to their well-being, as shown by research which identified the sense of loneliness and perceived lack of institutional support and appreciation as major causes of burnout among TEs in general (e.g., Coyle et al., Reference Coyle, Miller and Rivera Cotto2020; Gillett-Swan & Grant-Smith, Reference Gillett-Swan and Grant-Smith2020).
There is a tendency to overlook the complexity and challenges of being a LTE rather than seeing the whole story at sufficient depth. This lack of attention has led to the neglect of the tensions and trouble left behind by the invisible battle LTEs fight on their own, and thus the academic community currently fails to appreciate and value LTEs “for their entire repertoire” (Yuan et al., Reference Yuan, Lee, De Costa, Yang and Liu2022, p. 460). In their review of studies on LTEs, Yuan et al. (Reference Yuan, Lee, De Costa, Yang and Liu2022) found that the existing landscape embraces a supermen/superwomen discourse that considers LTEs as being equipped not only with a broad set of skills, but also with a strong commitment and never-ending energy to alleviate the challenges they face and satisfy expectations. The authors regarded this taken-for-granted assumption as problematic and argued for the need to replace it with a humanizing orientation to support LTEs as whole people by recognizing their unique strengths, struggles, and needs. Both negative dispositions and desirable qualities form part of what makes up the whole person. As such, whole-person development is an integrated process seeking to promote diverse aspects of human flourishing such as one’s psychological capacity (Jonas & Rosenbaum, Reference Jonas and Rosenbaum2021), thus creating a space where “the opportunity to fulfill” one’s “human and spiritual potential” (Colby & Damon, Reference Colby and Damon1992, p. xii) is offered. In this light, an explicit focus on LTEs’ psychological experiences and profiles can complement arguments over the development of LTEs’ as whole people and can help unveil the hitherto invisible layers of their professional and personal lives. The concept of “whole people development” for LTEs involves, for example, promoting well-being and emotional resilience, facilitating agency and autonomy, creating opportunities for active engagement in socio-emotional learning, providing space to pursue personal aspirations, and encouraging community building and collaboration. Our current knowledge of what can be done to nurture the whole person development of LTEs is scarce. As our psychology determines who we are and how we interact with the world, a systematic study of LTEs’ psychology might be a promising step in the formulation and enactment of transformative initiatives oriented to supporting the development of their mental health and professional practices in the long run.
5.2. The importance of LTEs’ psychology for quality teacher education work
The psychological state of LTEs can prominently influence the quality and impact of their work. The well-being of TEs is decisive in achieving job satisfaction, feeling more energetic, and boosting the quality of instruction, as well as building strong relational bonds with students and supporting their well-being (Kiltz et al., Reference Kiltz, Rinas, Daumiller, Fokkens-Bruinsma and Jansen2020; Kosnik et al., Reference Kosnik, Menna and Dharamshi2022). Those with positive self-efficacy beliefs tend to display stronger resilience against demotivating factors (e.g., economic crisis) and feel increased enthusiasm to work harder (Banegas & Del Pozo Beamud, Reference Banegas, Del Pozo Beamud, Yuan and Lee2021). Sak and Gurbuz (Reference Sak and Gurbuz2024) showed that the friendly attitudes of LTEs such as giving positive feedback and teaching with a smiling face catalyzed feelings of connectedness and acted as a source of positive uplift among pre-service language teachers, thus promoting a less stressful learning experience. The same is also true with respect to motivational orientations. In a study by Sahito and Vaisanen (Reference Sahito and Vaisanen2019), the motivation of TEs was found to be closely related to student motivation and satisfaction. It is of note that TEs entering the profession with a societal-altruistic motivational drive to make a difference in the lives of pre-service teachers were shown to better navigate the demands and pressures of the profession and thus felt a profound sense of well-being at work (Richter et al., Reference Richter, Lazarides and Richter2021). In contrast, those with no motivation to be a TE might face reality shock and have identity tensions due to the demands of the new position (Yuan, Reference Yuan2016), leading to self-efficacy doubts, loss of confidence, and feelings of unease.
Some scholars (e.g., Mercer, Reference Mercer2018; Mercer & Kostoulas, Reference Mercer and Kostoulas2018) borrowed the term contagion (Carolan, Reference Carolan2014; Radel et al., Reference Radel, Sarrazin, Legrain and Wild2010) from educational psychology to explain the two-way linkage between teacher and learner psychologies in SLA, which means the affective states of one party can be highly infectious for the other. This line of reasoning is also applicable to the domain of teacher educator–teacher relationship. There are some grounds which seem to justify the validity of this proposal. In their study on the influencing factors of LTE motivation, Banegas & Del Pozo Beamud (Reference Banegas, Del Pozo Beamud, Yuan and Lee2021) showed that constructive relations between LTEs and pre-service teachers set the ground for mutual exchange of positive energy among these parties via “motivational synergy” (Pinner, Reference Pinner2019) where one’s (de)motivation directly influences the other. Along similar lines, Kiltz et al. (Reference Kiltz, Rinas, Daumiller, Fokkens-Bruinsma and Jansen2020) reported evidence of a reciprocal link between TE well-being and student well-being. They showed that active student participation and positive attitudes enhanced the well-being of TEs, which in turn motivated them to create an engaging classroom atmosphere that boosted student well-being. Relatedly, while high stress in TEs lowered student well-being, tension with students emerged as a negative contributor to the well-being of TEs.
Given the socio-emotional nature of teacher education (Johnson & Golombek, Reference Johnson and Golombek2020), one key aspect of LTEs’ expertise involves establishing a supportive atmosphere conducive to facilitating teacher development (British Council, 2017; Yuan et al., Reference Yuan, Lee, De Costa, Yang and Liu2022). When faced with difficulties in their teaching due to, for example, the heavy workload (Kumazawa, Reference Kumazawa2013), language speaking anxiety (Horwitz, Reference Horwitz1996), and self-efficacy doubts (Brown et al., Reference Brown, Lee and Collins2015), (pre-service) language teachers often embark on a search for external support and resources in resolving motivational and emotional tensions (Golombek & Johnson, Reference Golombek and Johnson2004; Sak, Reference Sak2022). Such adversities, which might cause attrition and burnout in the long run if not properly managed, call for LTEs to adapt themselves to the affective needs of teachers (Al-Issa, Reference Al-Issa2017; Barkhuizen, Reference Barkhuizen2021a; Johnson & Golombek, Reference Johnson and Golombek2020) such as promoting their well-being (Sulis et al., Reference Sulis, Mercer, Mairitsch, Babic and Shin2021; Yuan, Reference Yuan2019), providing them with skills and strategies on how to counteract negative feelings (Yuan & Hu, Reference Yuan and Hu2018), and monitoring their engagement to sustain motivation (British Council, 2017). Given that LTEs are left with little guidance on how they can take care of themselves in the process of teacher education work (Barkhuizen, Reference Barkhuizen2021a), LTEs who fail to display a positive frame of mind and mental strength themselves will likely face obstacles in promoting students’ affective development. This further proves the criticality of exploring LTE psychology to maximize quality in teacher education.
6. What is currently known of LTE psychology?
In relation to the psychology of LTEs, a sizable volume of studies already exist that provide insights into two key areas: cognition and identity (see Yuan et al., Reference Yuan, Lee, De Costa, Yang and Liu2022 for a fuller review). Central to cognition research is an attempt to capture what people know, believe, and think in relation to their work (Borg, Reference Borg2006). Notably, our understanding of the cognition of LTEs mostly comes from studies situated in higher education contexts while there are only a few exploring that of non-higher education-based counterparts, such as CELTA trainers’ views of the differences between face-to-face and online tutoring practices (Hasper & Barkhuizen, Reference Hasper and Barkhuizen2023) and of the first language use in classrooms (Gallagher & Geraghty, Reference Gallagher and Geraghty2023), as well as their attitudes towards technology (Constantinides, Reference Constantinides2011). Collectively, previous work illuminated the mental processes that underlie LTEs’ work and showed how LTEs’ cognition is shaped by complex networks of reasoning, thinking, decision-making, and abilities. Evidence also points to the situated and evolving nature of LTEs’ cognition. In addition to the factors that mediate cognitive growth (e.g., Zhu et al., Reference Zhu, Liu, Yang and Newton2023), the scholarship documented the beliefs LTEs hold in relation to their roles and competence (O’Dwyer & Atlı, Reference O’Dwyer and Atli2015; Yan et al., Reference Yan, He, Guo and Wang2023), modelling practice (Yuan, Reference Yuan2019), teaching of culture (Byrd et al., Reference Byrd, Hlas, Watzke and Valencia2011), and teachers’ language proficiency (Zein, Reference Zein2017). Besides, while some sought to unpack the interaction between LTEs’ cognition and their pedagogy (Golombek, Reference Golombek2015) as well as the impact of previous and ongoing professional experiences in transforming cognition (E. R. Yuan, Reference Yuan2017), some others looked at what makes LTEs’ expertise, including the understanding of language, students, context, reflexivity, and ELT theories (e.g., Banegas, Reference Banegas2022; Liu, Reference Liu2013; Moradkhani et al., Reference Moradkhani, Akbari, Samar and Kiany2013).
A second area that has become a focus of much interest and concerns LTEs’ identity is describing the complex process of being and becoming a LTE (Trent, Reference Trent2024). This line of research is almost exclusively focused on higher education-based LTEs with only two exceptions: Zhang and Yuan (Reference Yuan2019) exploring the perceived identities of teaching-research officers (jiaoyanyuan) in China and Nazari et al. (Reference Nazari, Nejadghanbar and Hu2024) examining the identity formation of freelance LTEs in Iran. Research showed that LTEs have distinct features in their identity work, despite some similarities with TEs in other disciplines due to the shared commitment of supporting teacher development. For instance, LTEs’ identities are strongly affected by the status of English and its pedagogy (Yazan, Reference Yazan2019). Evidence also showed that the “clash” of competing roles and identities might cause disruptions and anxiety when LTEs try to balance their personal goals, desires, and skill sets (e.g., Gandana & Parr, Reference Gandana and Parr2013; Tan, Reference Tan2021; Tezgiden‐Cakcak & Ataş, Reference Tezgiden‐Cakcak and Ataş2024; Yuan, Reference Yuan2020). Such troubles then create space for identity re(negotiation) and transformation (Barkhuizen, Reference Barkhuizen2021a; Green & Pappa, Reference Green and Pappa2021; Song & Nejadghanbar, Reference Song and Nejadghanbar2024; Yazan, Reference Yazan2019) through encouraging LTEs to activate agency in navigating emergent challenges. Overall, this line of scholarship unveiled the dynamics of LTEs’ identity construction, as well as showing the mediating factors (e.g., beliefs, agency) and sources of conflicts (e.g., institutional demands, power structures).
There are a handful of studies examining some other areas of LTE psychology such as emotion labor (Cinaglia et al., Reference Cinaglia, Montgomery and Coss2024; Nazari et al., Reference Nazari, Nejadghanbar and Hu2023; Song, Reference Song2022), emotion regulation (Thumvichit, Reference Thumvichit2025), well-being (Mercer et al., Reference Mercer, Murillo-Miranda and Smid2025; Rakıcıoğlu-Söylemez, Reference Rakıcıoğlu-Söylemez2024; Sak, Reference Sak2025), resilience (Kostoulas & Lämmerer, Reference Kostoulas, Lämmerer, Mercer and Kostoulas2018), agency (Banegas & Gerlach, Reference Banegas and Gerlach2021; Green & Pappa, Reference Green and Pappa2021), and motivation (Banegas & Del Pozo Beamud, Reference Banegas, Del Pozo Beamud, Yuan and Lee2021; Giurastante, Reference Giurastante2024). Overall, despite this growing momentum, the research landscape of LTE psychology is still limited in terms of the scope, depth, and breadth of the work accumulated thus far, highlighting the need for systematic efforts to expand this avenue of research.
7. The way forward: A research agenda
The considerations outlined thus far suggest that it is vital to invest further efforts in resolving how LTEs can be empowered to sustain a robust mental state for navigating obstacles within and beyond their communities. Additionally, it is important to help them agentically and responsively shape their psychologies in ways that benefit both themselves and their surroundings. Before providing specific research themes, we would like to note that there are multiple issues ripe for further discussion. Our understanding of the constructs which began to receive attention but have not been closely examined, such as agency, motivation, and resilience, is informed by a few preliminary studies mentioned earlier. There is also a virtual absence of studies on topics such as self-efficacy, self-regulation, mindsets, autonomy, boredom, and enjoyment. While space limitations do not allow us to provide specific guidance, examining facets of these constructs will help move the field forward. The current dynamic-ecological phase of research in language education (Bronfenbrenner, Reference Bronfenbrenner1979; Larsen-Freeman & Cameron, Reference Freeman and Cameron2008) favors a context-sensitive view of learner/teacher psychology (e.g., Sampson & Pinner, Reference Sampson and Pinner2020), emphasizing the multifaceted nature of psychological phenomena shaped by person-environment interactions. Studies adopting complexity and ecological perspectives can thus help offer a more in-depth, holistic, and situated understanding of LTEs’ lives. Such knowledge will in turn enable a more nuanced, sophisticated, and ecologically informed account of LTEs’ psychology, ultimately informing theory and practice at the broader level.
In what follows, we narrow down the research agenda to those themes we believe most urgent and critical in the field.Footnote 5 While the first five tasks apply both to higher education-based LTEs and their non-higher education counterparts, the final one is intended for the latter. We specifically argue for the need to (1) explore the nature and influencing factors of LTEs’ well-being, (2) examine the agency enactment of LTEs, (3) examine the development of LTEs’ socio-emotional competence, (4) conduct positive psychology (PP)-informed intervention studies to examine the effectiveness of such interventions in promoting positive qualities among LTEs, (5) explore the mediating factors and consequences of the social contagion of LTEs’ psychological states, and (6) explore the identity development of non-higher education-based LTEs. The line of research recommended here is mainly grounded in a post-positivist theoretical stance (e.g., Crotty, Reference Crotty1998), providing a flexible framework that allows researchers to use multiple methods aligned with the nature of their research questions.
Research Task 1: Explore the nature and influencing factors of LTEs’ well-being
Among the psychological constructs, examining the nature and influencing factors of well-being among LTEs is particularly important. This is not only because “well-being … is the basis for flourishing” (Dewaele et al., Reference Dewaele, Chen, Padilla and Lake2019, p. 2) as a key positive psychology (PP) construct but also the capacity to sustain well-being is regarded as a central component of LTEs’ emotional expertise (Yuan & Yang, Reference Yuan and Yang2022) in order to navigate the inherent complexities of their profession. Mercer and Gregersen (Reference Mercer and Gregersen2023) proposed that we must develop a thorough understanding of the well-being of all stakeholders in the language education field, including LTEs. However, there is little discussion of what promotes or hinders LTEs’ well-being, as well as the strategies they enact to manage their stress. With these in mind, an explicit focus on aspects of LTEs’ well-being across different contexts is essential to find ways to help them achieve optimal professional functioning (Sak, Reference Sak2025). It must be noted that well-being is not just a personal but a more complex phenomenon sensitive to ecological (context-related) influences and undergoes dynamic fluctuations over macro and micro timescales (Sulis et al., Reference Sulis, Mercer, Mairitsch, Babic and Shin2021), as well as arising from the balance of stressors and uplifts (Jin et al., Reference Jin, Mercer, Babic and Mairitsch2021). This not only suggests that well-being might be experienced in unique ways in various contexts in response to contextual influences, but also that having more challenges than resources puts one’s well-being at risk (Dodge et al., Reference Dodge, Daly, Huyton and Sanders2012). Accordingly, attempts to examine the well-being of LTEs as a research task could take different forms and could be guided by diverse theoretical orientations, as exemplified below.
In one version of this task, combining the dynamic view of well-being with an ecological lens (e.g., Sak & Gurbuz, Reference Sak and Gurbuz2024), researchers might look at whether and how the experiences of well-being among LTEs show variations across different career stages (early, middle, late career) and institutions (university/school), and what positive or negative factors lead to such variations. Such work would be vital as LTEs in different phases of their career trajectories who serve in various types of institutions might face specific circumstances that could shape their well-being in unique ways (see e.g., Barkhuizen, Reference Barkhuizen2021a; Yuan, Reference Yuan2019). To carry out such a task, comparative case studies gathering in-depth qualitative data (e.g., interviews, reflections, observations) from a small sample of purposely selected participants (5–6) from different countries and in different career phases and workplaces can provide richly detailed insights into the role of individual, institutional, relational, national, and global influences in shaping the experiences of well-being (for similar study designs, see Babic et al., Reference Babic, Mercer, Mairitsch, Gruber and Hempkin2022; Hofstadler et al., Reference Hofstadler, Babic, Lämmerer, Mercer and Oberdorfer2021). As the work of LTEs is often characterized by multiple duties, also worth considering is the analysis of how the perceived pros and cons of a particular professional role (e.g., mentoring, administration, research, teaching, supervision) affects the well-being trajectories of LTEs. Moreover, this field can benefit from qualitative studies using the job demands‐resources (JD‐R) model of well-being (Bakker & Demerouti, Reference Bakker and Demerouti2007) as a framework. Such studies could scrutinize the use of personal, social, organizational, and psychological resources by LTEs to protect and sustain their well-being in the face of the physiological and psychological costs (e.g., work overload, burnout, exhaustion, fatigue) of their work. Additionally, it would be valuable to examine the factors that mediate this process. Overall, such inquiries with a qualitative orientation would advance our understanding of the lived experiences of well-being among LTEs. Yet in case the aim is to reveal general tendencies among and across large populations of LTEs in relation to their well-being, quantitatively oriented researchers looking for focused surveys might benefit from using the 23-item PERMA-Profiler (Butler & Kern, Reference Butler and Kern2016) with representative samples of LTEs worldwide.
Research Task 2: Explore the agency enactment of LTEs
Another key direction we believe needs close attention is the exercise of agency among LTEs. In educational psychology, agency is recognized as central to motivation, identity, and autonomy (Williams & Mercer, Reference Williams and Mercer2016). Similar to the case for well-being, developing an agentive mentality is an essential part of LTEs’ expertise (Yuan & Yang, Reference Yuan and Yang2022), functioning as a transformational tool to support their ongoing professional learning and help them tackle difficulties and problems in their situated communities (Barkhuizen, Reference Barkhuizen2021a; Yuan, Reference Yuan2020). While there is growing recognition that social, political, institutional, and pedagogical challenges constitute a natural part of LTEs’ professional lives (Yuan et al., Reference Yuan, Lee, De Costa, Yang and Liu2022), what matters is, as Yuan and Yang (Reference Yuan and Yang2022) put it, how LTEs respond to the conditions in which they work, thus suggesting that LTEs must develop the capacity to act purposefully to shape their lives in a constructive manner. The authors further argued that such responsive actions are essential to create space for themselves to become more resilient in the professional domain. As such, as a construct referring to “people’s ability to make choices, take control, self-regulate, and thereby pursue their goals” (Duff, Reference Duff, Mackey and Gass2012, p. 417), the exercise of self-agency plays a key role in guiding the actions and developmental trajectories of LTEs. Yet our current understanding is limited regarding how much agency LTEs have over their professional lives (Banegas & Gerlach, Reference Banegas and Gerlach2021).
We can take several paths to move this domain forward. Recent discussions on agency highlight the importance of taking an ecological view, which posits that agency is not just a personal trait, but it results from the interplay of individual abilities, the use of available resources, and environmental conditions (Biesta et al., Reference Biesta, Priestley and Robins2015). Informed by this theoretical lens, and given the transformative power of agency in bringing about positive changes in individuals and their surroundings (Haapasaari & Kerosuo, Reference Haapasaari and Kerosuo2015), future research will be highly welcome that explores the affordances and constraints that influence LTEs’ agency – for example, in a) creating further learning opportunities for themselves or for their communities (e.g., teachers they work with); b) challenging existing/top-down policies; c) questioning assumptions/educational reforms; or d) experimenting with new ideas/innovations in their professional communities. Worth noting here is the study by Banegas and Gerlach (Reference Banegas and Gerlach2021) who provided a duoethnographic account of the agentic efforts they displayed in promoting inclusive practices in language teacher education. We encourage the pursuit of such practitioner inquiries among LTEs – both individual (Song, Reference Song2022) and collective (Yazan et al., Reference Yazan, Penton Herrera and Rashed2023) – with the goal of making explicit their own agentic practices in their situated work contexts through critical self-reflexivity. For example, given that the dual role of school mentors in working with K–12 students and K–12 teachers might create role conflict (i.e., facing the incompatible demands or expectations associated with the roles they serve), and that publish-or-perish culture faced by higher education-based LTEs might result in an inevitable tension between research and teaching, how these groups of LTEs engage in efforts to cope with such tensions is an intriguing question that could be addressed.
Barkhuizen (Reference Barkhuizen2021a) noted that “[i]n a world where social justice and well-being are becoming more embedded in institutional policies and professional practices” … it would be worthwhile to examine “how do [LTEs] ensure that they take care of themselves?” (pp. 69–70). Guided by this call, the field can benefit from research that thoroughly examines the ways LTEs exercise agency to nurture and protect their well-being by drawing on the perceived affordances in their contexts. In a recent study, Sulis et al. (Reference Sulis, Mairitsch, Babic, Mercer and Resnik2024) investigated the processes by which language teachers take agentive actions for their well-being using in-depth interview data from 30 teachers in different career phases who work in public/private schools in Austria. Research of a similar design could be conducted with samples of LTEs across various contexts asking the following interview questions: “What are the major sources of stress in your personal/professional life and how do they affect your work? What role does self-care play in your stress management? Can you share an example of a time when you felt stressed and how you managed it? What specific self-care practices do you engage in and why do you choose those actions?” and so on. In addition, studies embracing a case study approach (single or multiple case) might utilize stories or narratives of LTEs to longitudinally track how they navigate the tensions arising from their professional work and what personal and contextual factors contribute to their agency enactment. Alternatively, future research with a similar design taking a dynamic perspective might look at the changes in LTEs sense of agency and agentic practices over time across career stages, institutions, and professional roles. The pursuit of these research directions might shed further light on how agency manifests LTEs’ work and what mediates their capacity in this regard.
Research Task 3: Examine the development of LTEs’ socio-emotional competence
A further area of research in need of attention is the socio-emotional competence of LTEs on the grounds that the work LTEs do involves communication with a range of stakeholders (e.g., managers, policymakers) and therefore is highly interpersonal in nature (Yuan & Mak, Reference Yuan and Mak2016), and that tensions, conflicts, and crises LTEs experience often make their professional lives emotionally laden (Nazari et al., Reference Nazari, Nejadghanbar and Hu2023). This argument clearly highlights the need for LTEs to develop socio-emotional competence (SEC), referring to “a related set of skills including recognizing and managing our emotions, developing caring and concern for others, establishing positive relationships, making responsible decisions, and handling challenging situations constructively and ethically” (Zhou & Ee, Reference Zhou and Ee2012, p. 28). Despite the key role of social interactions and emotions in shaping LTEs’ daily work (Yuan et al., Reference Yuan, Lee, De Costa, Yang and Liu2022), it is surprising how little has been said regarding the importance of equipping LTEs with socio-emotional competence via training programs (Gkonou & Mercer, Reference Gkonou and Mercer2017), as well as with techniques for the regulation of emotions, though prior research has shown the close link of LTEs’ cognition and identities with their emotions (Golombek, Reference Golombek2015). An understanding of how SEC can facilitate or hinder LTEs’ decision-making, learning, and engagement with others and what SEC-related competencies they use to elicit desired outcomes could shine further light on the socio-emotional aspects of LTEs’ practices. As a key predictor of life satisfaction and mental health, SEC facilitates self-optimization and those socio-emotionally competent not only become better equipped in achieving success in personal and professional activities, but also develop increased capacity for coping with challenges in life, thus experiencing lower stress and higher self-efficacy (Hăhăianu & Manasia, Reference Hăhăianu and Manasia2014). However, our understanding of the socio-emotional development of LTEs remains scarce. Research tasks below could be small steps towards addressing this gap.
Guided by Gkonou and Mercer’s (Reference Gkonou and Mercer2017) large-scale project with language teachers, future research might use a sequential explanatory mixed-methods design (Creswell, Reference Creswell2009) to investigate: 1) To what degree are LTEs with varying personal/professional profiles socio-emotionally competent? 2) Is there a link between LTEs’ SEC and their demographic characteristics based on age, gender, educational level, and geographical area? 3) What are the beliefs and practices of LTEs with high and low levels of SEC? To carry out this task, the first step will be to administer the “Social-Emotional Competence Questionnaire” (Zhou & Ee, Reference Zhou and Ee2012) online to a large cohort of LTEs worldwide so as to capture the nature and levels of participants’ SEC. This quantitative phase will not only shed some light on the factors mediating the levels of SEC in LTEs, but also inform the second qualitative phase by helping to purposely identify those who score high and low on SEC. Based on data from individual or focus-group interviews, the qualitative phase would look at the beliefs and practices of high/low scoring LTEs (e.g., 3–4 LTEs for each category) within and beyond their communities. The interview questions might probe into LTEs’ understanding of what it means to be socio-emotionally competent and how they view themselves in relation to SEC; the key qualities they believe define SEC among LTEs; their stress management techniques, and so on. Sample interview questions might include: How do you define SEC in the context of your work? In what ways do you think SEC shapes your daily practices? Can you share instances where your socio-emotional skills affected the way you interacted with others, managed emotions, or resolved conflicts? As another possible path, ethnographic case studies involving prolonged non-participant observation of a single LTE or a group of LTEs in their natural settings, such as classrooms, can afford a wider picture of how SEC manifests in LTEs’ professional practices. Particularly for those situated in school settings, an ethnographic lens can extend the existing knowledge about how they learn to cognitively juggle language teaching and teacher education and foster SEC in the face of diverse demands and obstacles. Regarding the development of SEC, exploratory qualitative inquiries which would longitudinally examine the personal, professional, and contextual influences (e.g., personal values, social interactions, challenges faced, institutional culture, support mechanisms) can help unveil the complex mechanism in LTEs’ situated work environments.
We must note that SEC is not monolithic but a multifaceted construct associated with a range of characteristics such as motivation, resilience, empathy, and self-regulation (Devis-Rozental, Reference Devis-Rozental2023). As such, it would also be viable to design SEC-oriented research tasks around particular constructs. It would be helpful, for example, to examine in what ways self-efficacy beliefs (positive/negative), or mindsets LTEs hold in relation to their socio-emotional skills affect their professional engagement. Besides, given the lack of focus on the socio-emotional dynamics of LTE-teacher interactions in TESOL, qualitative research with single- or multiple-case design or ethnographic studies might address a) the role that empathy, mutual respect, and trust play in building quality LTE-teacher relationships, b) the contribution of LTEs’ empathetic behaviors to teachers’ socio-emotional growth, c) barriers in sustaining a productive LTE-teacher relationship, and d) the socio-emotional impact of power issues involved in these relationships. This line of research can be further extended with a focus on mindfulness since LTEs are expected to model certain mindful qualities (e.g., kindness, positive thinking, sense of curiosity, tolerance) to support teacher development. Yet there is no discussion of how mindfulness emerges through their ongoing professional work and how the cultivation of mindful awareness and thinking (re)shapes their situated practices.
Research Task 4: Conduct positive psychology (PP)-informed intervention studies to examine the effectiveness of such interventions in promoting positive qualities among LTEs
Language teacher educators are now facing a changing educational landscape where digital transformation (e.g., virtual/augmented realities) and the incorporation of global perspectives and twenty-first century skills into teacher preparation (e.g., global citizenship, intercultural competence) have become the norm. We also live in an “uneven world” (Pennycook, Reference Pennycook2022) characterized by inequalities, injustices, and uncertainties as well as political and socio-economic crises that bring consequences for LTEs’ psychological states. In many ways, what is needed is to empower LTEs to thrive in the face of the new realities and demands of their work, which resonates well with the key tenets of positive psychology (PP) (MacIntyre et al., Reference MacIntyre, Gregersen and Mercer2019; Seligman & Csikszentmihalyi, Reference Seligman and Csikszentmihalyi2000) as a field examining human strengths and virtues (Seligman, Reference Seligman2011). Positive psychology has recently promoted a focus on the facilitating role of positive psychological experiences in language learning and teaching endeavors. With its aim to develop skills and competencies that can help people maintain a better life, PP can offer a useful roadmap for facilitating the development of positive psychological qualities among LTEs. There is little doubt that characteristics such as resilience, perseverance, hope, well-being, and optimism (Oxford, Reference Oxford, MacIntyre, Gregersen and Mercer2016) can help empower LTEs to manage the challenges they face, implying the vitality of supporting LTEs via focused interventions to develop such qualities. Pedagogical PP interventions in language education were found to bring about positive changes in students’ motivation and learning outcomes (Alrabai, Reference Alrabai2022), as well as reducing classroom anxiety (Y. Jin et al., Reference Jin, Dewaele and MacIntyre2021). Informed by such evidence, it seems worthwhile to undertake intervention studies designed around the principles of PP and oriented to the practical needs of LTEs, which can prove useful in enhancing their functioning by, for example, reducing experiences of negative emotions and promoting positive ones.
This task can be carried out in different ways. Researchers, for example, might conduct an experimental study with a sequential explanatory design (Creswell, Reference Creswell2009) to examine the role of an instructional program in enhancing the well-being of LTEs based on both quantitative and quantitative data. The program would be designed around the PERMA model of well-being (Seligman, Reference Seligman2011) and would incorporate a series of sessions, each of which would be oriented to introducing exercises and strategies to promote one of the five elements of the PERMA among LTEs. Namely, each session will respectively seek to promote 1) positive emotions, 2) engagement in professional activities, 3) interpersonal relationships, 4) sense of meaning in work, and 5) feelings of achievement. Such research would require working with a group of LTEs which would be equally divided into one intervention and comparison group randomly. For groups to be similar, their gender, age, and years of experience could be considered based on stratified random sampling. Members of the control group would not receive any treatment, thus serving as a neutral benchmark for assessing the potential effectiveness of the program applied to the intervention group. The intervention group would be pretested on the 23-item PERMA-Profiler (Butler & Kern, Reference Butler and Kern2016) to obtain their current PERMA scores before the application. Once the intervention is over, they would then be posttested on the same measure to see the impact of the program in leading to changes in their perceived well-being levels. Within this design, additional qualitative data could be used to better explain the quantitative results. To illustrate, members of the intervention group could be asked to write reflective entries after each session in order to capture their lived experiences (e.g., their expectations and the things that brought them positive feelings during the sessions). Besides, interviews with volunteers can help obtain their overall evaluation of the relevance, usefulness, and pros/cons of the program. Alternatively, intervention studies of a similar kind can involve self-compassion and optimism cultivation exercises (Shapira & Mongrain, Reference Shapira and Mongrain2010) to reduce depressive symptoms among LTEs. As Ouweneel et al. (Reference Ouweneel, Le Blanc and Schaufeli2013) did, it might also be an option to assess the effectiveness of an online self-enhancement program in promoting positive emotions, engagement, and self-efficacy in the workplace.
While space limitations preclude inclusion of further exemplification and detail, we would like to emphasize that PP-informed intervention studies of similar kind to be conducted with LTEs could be particularly centered around the cultivation of qualities relating to the “character strengths” (e.g., curiosity, gratitude, hope) and “virtues” (e.g., courage, temperance) (see Peterson & Seligman, Reference Peterson and Seligman2004) in PP. One important long-term goal of these intervention studies would be to generate insights into how the scope of training programs, workshops, and courses run for LTEs’ professional development could be expanded to integrate the principles of PP with the aim of cultivating positive feelings and behaviors to make LTEs better equipped to flourish in their lives. We would like to note, though, that unlike teachers and learners (the usual sample for PP-informed intervention research), LTEs are rarely trained before or during their roles, which makes intervention opportunities more challenging. As such, PP-informed interventions targeting LTEs might be integrated into training programs and professional development frameworks to ensure both their relevance and accessibility.
Research Task 5: Explore the mediating factors and consequences of the social contagion of LTEs’ psychological states
A further research task we would like to map out concerns the social contagion of the psychological states of LTEs, which is intriguing and holds significant practical implications. Social contagion is a phenomenon which describes the transmission of attitudes, thoughts, feelings, behaviors, values, or beliefs from one to others via social networks without conscious awareness (Riggio & Riggio, Reference Riggio, Riggio, Friedman and Markey2023). Evidence suggests that the processes underlying incidences of contagion are not straightforward but sensitive to context-bound influences, mediated by a range of factors such as the prestige of a person, interaction density, personality traits (e.g., openness), social/cultural norms, degree of intimacy, and self-efficacy (see Burgess et al., Reference Burgess, Riddell, Fancourt and Murayama2018; Riggio & Riggio, Reference Riggio, Riggio, Friedman and Markey2023). This further suggests that the dynamics contributing to social contagion are complex and diverse. Accordingly, one key avenue of research is to examine the internal/external forces that facilitate or hinder the contagion of LTEs’ psychological states across different types of contexts and relationships, which would prove useful to illustrate what determines the spread of their psychological states within and across communities. For example, it would be worthwhile to probe into what causes more or less contagion to occur in interactions between LTEs and teachers. Such research might ask: What contributes to lower/higher degrees of social contagion – if any – in these interactions? How do teachers perceive the impact of LTEs’ empathy, motivation, enjoyment, compassion, and stress on themselves? How do different forms of interactions (e.g., face-to-face/online; formal/informal) that take place in diverse settings (inside/outside of instructional settings; practicum schools; lectures) influence the level of contagion? Since such questions entail a focus on lived experiences, researchers might consider exploratory multiple-case studies with purposely selected LTEs and teachers who have frequent contact with each other. In-depth interviews and/or reflective journals might help generate rich data by asking the participants, for example, to share instances of interactions they believe were impactful. Exploratory studies could also be conducted with other stakeholders focusing on a particular construct, such as looking at how research/teaching/supervision/administration motivation of LTEs might impact that of others in the workplace and what mediates such processes.
What is equally important is to explore the consequences of the contagion of LTEs’ psychological states, which will help obtain a firmer grasp of potential implications. This line of research should thus incorporate a focus on how LTEs’ psychologies are co-constructed and reconstructed through their engagement within and across communities. In particular, studies aimed at examining how the psychologies of (pre-service) teachers and school-based LTEs (re)shape and change one another can prove useful in extending the preliminary insights pointing to such a reciprocal link (see Banegas & Del Pozo Beamud, Reference Banegas, Del Pozo Beamud, Yuan and Lee2021). Since boundary crossingFootnote 6 is an essential aspect of being a TE (Yuan & Yang, Reference Yuan and Yang2020), it would be valuable to explore LTEs’ situated practices with a focus on how they adjust their psychological states and meet the psychological needs of other stakeholders at the intersection of diverse communities. To this end, taking a metacognitive perspective and via in-depth inquiries based on an ethnographic approach (Kubanyiova, Reference Kubanyiova2015), researchers might draw on data from ethnographic field notes and interviews to examine what actions LTEs take to shape others’ psychological states for effective teacher education. Moreover, to illustrate how LTEs work with teachers in a psychologically conducive manner that positively impacts their development, we can utilize longitudinal ethnographic projects or exploratory case studies situated in both university-based and non-university-based pedagogy classrooms. Overall, a series of questions merit in-depth exploration: How do LTEs empowered through a PP perspective find ways to facilitate similar experiences for others in diverse communities? What are the cognitive and socio-emotional outcomes of the contagion of LTEs’ psychological states?
Research Task 6: Examine the identity development of non-higher education-based LTEs
As noted earlier, the wide variety of LTEs that exist in non-higher education contexts is the key complexity in researching this area and these professionals significantly differ in terms of the ecologies in which they operate. For example, freelance LTEs, school mentors, or in-service LTEs working for NGOs all have different job descriptions and deal with context-specific particularities (see e.g., Hasper & Barkhuizen, Reference Hasper and Barkhuizen2023; Nazari et al., Reference Nazari, Nejadghanbar and Hu2023, Reference Nazari, Nejadghanbar and Hu2024). This suggests that compared to higher education, the ecology of non-higher education contexts is much more varied (e.g., CELTA centers, K–12 schools, NGOs, private institutes) and is characterized by context-specific structures and practices, thereby likely to shape the processes of identity development in unique ways. Non-higher education-based LTEs encounter distinct ecological factors impacting their professional roles, such as limited resources and diverse student populations. These factors, coupled with specific job descriptions and contextual practices, might contribute to the development of their professional identities in ways that differ from those situated in formal higher education institutions. By focusing on the identity of LTEs outside of higher education, we can provide insights into the specific dynamics shaping their sense of self, pedagogical approaches, and motivations. Understanding these dynamics is crucial for informing tailored support strategies that acknowledge and respond to the distinct needs and challenges faced by these educators. However, whereas the identity of higher education-based LTEs has been receiving growing attention (see Section 6), such research is almost nonexistent among non-higher education counterparts (for exceptions, see Nazari et al., Reference Nazari, Nejadghanbar and Hu2024; Zhang & Yuan, Reference Yuan2019). As such, we devote our final task specifically to exploring aspects of identity among non-higher education-based LTEs, which will help advance our understanding of how LTEs outside of higher education perceive their roles and how they experience and navigate the complex process of being and becoming a LTE.
Informed by the broader literature on LTEs, researchers might address a variety of questions from an ecological perspective: In what ways do school mentors, CELTA trainers, or freelance LTEs (among others) construct their identities and how do their identities evolve over time in interaction with their context and against the evolving landscape of language education? (Yuan, Reference Yuan2020). Taking into account past experiences and imagined future selves, what identity dilemmas/ tensions do they experience and negotiate? (Barkhuizen, Reference Barkhuizen2021b). Of particular importance is the adoption of a process-oriented perspective to examine, for example, how they “become aware of, monitor, and expand their identity” (Banegas & Gerlach, Reference Banegas and Gerlach2021, p. 3) through their professional practices and interactions. Since the identities of LTEs involve “struggle and harmony” (Barkhuizen, Reference Barkhuizen2021a, p. 69), it would also be worthwhile to examine how their sense of self is (re)shaped by the interplay of contextual challenges and self-care practices. Alternatively, taking a relational perspective might offer valuable insights. To illustrate, given that school mentors closely work with university supervisors in practicum, it might prove useful to probe how school mentors form and negotiate their identities through these partnerships? As in Yuan (Reference Yuan2019), researchers might also take a comparative lens to investigate how non-higher education-based LTEs’ identities are perceived by diverse stakeholder groups such as students, teachers, parents, and school leaders. Overall, narrative case studies (Barkhuizen, Reference Barkhuizen2021b) involving single or multiple participants and having an exploratory orientation as well as practitioner inquiries such as self-study (Yazan et al., Reference Yazan, Penton Herrera and Rashed2023) with a strong transformative orientation hold potential for fulfilling these purposes.
8. Concluding remarks
The need for a more in-depth understanding of TEs has continuously been voiced over the past decade in both mainstream education and TESOL (e.g., Goodwin et al., Reference Goodwin, Smith, Souto-Manning, Cheruvu, Tan, Reed and Taveras2014; Johnson, Reference Johnson2015; Johnson & Golombek, Reference Johnson and Golombek2020). Yet how such work shapes and is shaped by their psychological states has not gained much attention. In this paper, we have problematized the lack of scholarship investigating LTE psychology and argued for the need to enrich the empirical landscape of this promising area of inquiry by taking the stance that the psychology of LTEs can work in favor or against their goal of helping their students thrive, as well as influencing the way they work and interact with others in their surrounding contexts. We have also emphasized the need to empower LTEs to work agentically to shape their psychologies in ways that profit both themselves and their communities. The rationale for our argument in support of a greater focus on LTE psychology is twofold. First, such knowledge will help unpack further layers of who LTEs are, how they feel, what they need, and experience in their communities, thus informing efforts to enable LTEs to maintain a healthy mental state and flourish as whole people both within and beyond their professional spheres. Second, the psychology of LTEs is crucial in defining the quality and effectiveness of their work.
The knowledge base accumulated thus far in the field of LTEs’ psychology has sown the seeds of what would hopefully become a vibrant and well-documented area of study. The progress achieved in the last decade offers some grounds for optimism regarding the future. We hope the research tasks proposed here can open up new lines of discussion and generate initiatives that will accelerate efforts in obtaining a better understanding of the diverse aspects and implications of LTEs’ psychology. If we want to capture LTEs’ professional lives and work in greater depth and breadth, a closer look at their psychology is the way forward. A systematic study of this field will put us in a better position to support the development of LTEs in ways that produce the best possible and sustainable outcomes not only for themselves but also for their communities.
Mehmet Sak is a lecturer in the Department of Foreign Language Education at TED University. His research focuses on the psychology of language learners, teachers, and teacher educators. His publications have appeared in various journals such as TESOL Quarterly, Language Teaching Research, System, ReCALL, and International Journal of Applied Linguistics.
Rui Yuan is an Associate Professor at the Faculty of Education of the University of Macau. His research focuses on second language teacher education and English-medium instruction in higher education. His publications have appeared in a number of international journals such as TESOL Quarterly and Teaching and Teacher Education.
Open access
