Well-being Practices, Rhythms, and Commitments: Perspectives from Early-Career Teachers in British Columbia, Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
One of the ways to address stress and burnout in the teaching profession is by paying attention to teacher well-being. Seligman (2011) argued that there are five pillars of emotional health: positive emotions, engagement, positive relationships, meaning, and accomplishment, also known as the PERMA theory of well-being. This article details an action-research study that examined what PERMA-related practices, rhythms, and commitments teachers in British Columbia believed were the most influential in contributing to their overall wellness. Eight initial participants, who taught full-time, had at least three years of experience, and generally enjoyed their profession, were recruited from a public school and an independent school in British Columbia, Canada. Initial participants completed a quantitative well-being assessment known as the PERMA-Profiler, to identify a group of three teachers who would be appropriate for participation in the follow-up, qualitative, one-on-one interviews. Content analysis of teacher perspectives revealed an emphasis on the actions related to three key themes: the power of relationships, practicing gratitude through reflection, and intentionality surrounding time investment and allocation. This article concludes with implications for how to help teachers flourish, describing various practices, rhythms, and commitments that are beneficial for educators’ pursuits of emotional wellness.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".