Why Teacher Motivation Isn’t a Fixed Trait (and Why That Matters)

Teacher motivation is often spoken about as if it were a stable personal quality. In schools and professional discourse, teachers may be described as “highly motivated,” “losing motivation,” or “burnt out,” implying something internal and enduring about the individual. While these labels can be convenient, they risk oversimplifying what motivation actually is. Contemporary research in educational psychology suggests that teacher motivation is not fixed at all. Instead, it is dynamic, fluctuating across situations and shaped by the contexts in which teachers work.

Recent work synthesised in a 2025 editorial by Lazarides and Dresel argues that teacher motivation is best understood as a situated, process‑driven phenomenon rather than a stable trait. This perspective challenges long‑standing assumptions in both research and practice and has important implications for how teachers are supported and how psychological interventions are designed.

Motivation shifts across teaching situations

One of the central arguments in this body of research is that teacher motivation varies substantially across lessons, activities, and classroom contexts. A teacher may feel highly engaged and confident when working with one group of pupils, yet experience frustration or disengagement in another context later the same day. These fluctuations are not random. They are shaped by students’ behaviour, perceived engagement, lesson structure, time pressure, and the emotional climate of the classroom.

This situational variability mirrors what motivational psychology has long demonstrated for students: motivation emerges through interaction with specific contexts. Applying this lens to teachers highlights that motivation is something that happens in teaching, not something teachers simply bring with them. When motivation is treated as stable, moment‑to‑moment changes in engagement may be misinterpreted as personal weakness rather than a response to environmental demands.

Motivation works through processes, not labels

Understanding teacher motivation requires moving beyond broad labels towards the psychological processes that connect motivation to teaching behaviour. Motivation influences teaching indirectly, through cognitive, emotional, and behavioural mechanisms such as goal setting, attention, interpretation of classroom events, and emotional regulation. For example, teachers with higher self‑efficacy may approach challenges as manageable, persist when lessons do not go to plan, and experiment with new strategies. Teachers with strong mastery‑oriented goals may focus more on student understanding than performance metrics.

Importantly, different motivational components do not operate in the same way. Self‑efficacy, interest, intrinsic values, and achievement goals each activate distinct pathways to teaching behaviour. This helps explain why two equally “motivated” teachers may teach very differently, and why motivation alone does not guarantee high instructional quality. What matters is how motivation is translated into action in specific situations.

Teacher emotions are central, not peripheral

Teacher emotions are a crucial but often underestimated part of motivation. Enjoyment, frustration, anger, and anxiety arise within specific lessons and directly shape how teachers interact with students, structure classroom activities, and respond to challenges. Research included in this special issue demonstrates that teachers’ lesson‑specific emotions are linked to classroom organisation and emotional support, and that these emotional experiences can change rapidly across teaching contexts.

There is also growing evidence that emotions are socially transmitted in the classroom. Teachers’ emotions can influence students’ emotions and engagement, while students’ responses can feed back into teachers’ emotional experiences. This transactional process means that motivation and emotion are continually co‑constructed, rather than residing solely within the teacher. Recognising this helps shift responsibility away from individuals and towards the relational and systemic nature of teaching.

Motivation varies across tasks and professional roles

Another important insight from this research is that teachers’ motivation differs depending on the tasks they are performing. Studies tracking teachers across the working day show that motivation tends to be highest during direct teaching and lower during administrative or bureaucratic activities. Emotional tone and motivational quality are also shaped by perceived competence and success, with motivation increasing when teachers feel effective in a particular task.

This task‑specific pattern challenges the idea that teachers are simply “motivated” or “demotivated” overall. Instead, motivation is tied to how meaningful, autonomous, and successful a task feels in context. Professional development and workload design, therefore, play a significant role in shaping motivational experiences.

Why this matters for teachers

Reframing motivation as dynamic rather than fixed has important implications for teachers’ self‑understanding. Fluctuating motivation becomes a normal feature of professional life rather than a sign of personal inadequacy. Feeling less engaged in certain lessons or at particular times of the year is not evidence of declining commitment; it is often a signal about working conditions, emotional load, or contextual strain.

This perspective invites greater self‑compassion and reduces the tendency to internalise systemic problems. It also legitimises discussions about workload, classroom dynamics, and emotional labour as central to motivation, rather than peripheral concerns.

Why this matters for psychologists and educational professionals

For psychologists working with teachers and schools, this research encourages a shift away from static assessments of motivation towards process‑focused, context‑sensitive approaches. Rather than asking whether a teacher is motivated, it becomes more useful to ask when, where, and under what conditions motivation is supported or undermined. Interventions can then target specific mechanisms such as self‑efficacy in challenging classes, emotional regulation during high‑stress lessons, or goal structures that align teaching values with practice.

It also underscores the importance of methods that capture real teaching experiences, such as diaries, observational data, and experience sampling. These approaches reveal patterns of change within individuals that are invisible in traditional one‑off questionnaires.

A shift in perspective

Viewing teacher motivation as situated reframes a fundamental question in education. Instead of asking, “What is wrong with this teacher?” we are prompted to ask, “What is happening in this situation, and how is it shaping motivation and behaviour?” This shift opens the door to more ethical, effective, and psychologically informed support for teachers.

Ultimately, recognising that teacher motivation is not fixed but formed in context allows schools and psychologists to focus on creating environments in which motivation can emerge, fluctuate, recover, and be sustained—rather than expecting teachers to carry that burden alone.

References

Lazarides, R., & Dresel, M. (2025). Teacher motivation and teaching quality: Situation‑specific and process‑oriented perspectives. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 95(Suppl. 1), S5–S14. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjep.70024

Bandura, A. (1997). Self‑efficacy: The exercise of control. Freeman.

Butler, R. (2014). What teachers want to achieve and why it matters: An achievement goal approach to teacher motivation. In P. W. Richardson, S. A. Karabenick, & H. M. G. Watt (Eds.), Teacher motivation: Theory and practice (pp. 20–35). Routledge.

Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2002). Handbook of self‑determination research. University of Rochester Press.

Frenzel, A. C., Daniels, L. M., & Burić, I. (2021). Teacher emotions in the classroom and their implications for students. Educational Psychologist, 56(4), 250–264. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2021.1985501

Lazarides, R., Schiefele, U., Daumiller, M., & Dresel, M. (2025). From teacher motivation to teaching behaviour: A systematic review of the mediating processes. Educational Research Review, 48, 100703. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2025.100703

Pekrun, R. (2006). The control‑value theory of achievement emotions: Assumptions, corollaries, and implications for educational research and practice. Educational Psychology Review, 18(4), 315–341. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-006-9029-9

Pekrun, R., & Marsh, H. W. (2022). Research on situated motivation and emotion: Progress and open problems. Learning and Instruction, 81, 101664.

Volet, S. (2001). Understanding learning and motivation in context: A multi‑dimensional and multi‑level cognitive‑situative perspective. In S. E. Volet & S. Järvelä (Eds.), Motivation in learning contexts (pp. 57–82). Elsevier.

Watt, H. M. G., & Richardson, P. W. (2008). Motivation for teaching. Learning and Instruction, 18(5), 405–407. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2008.06.009