Generativity and Psychological Well-Being in Primary and Secondary Teachers: A Systematic Review

Abstract

Background: Teaching represents a highly demanding profession in emotional, social and cognitive terms, demanding a genuine interest in contributing to the development of future generations. Precisely for this reason, generativity, understood as the genuine interest in contributing to the care and development of future generations, and psychological well-being, defined as the integration of autonomy, life purpose and positive relationships, are key variables to understand the integral development of teachers. However, the relationship between both constructions in primary and secondary school teachers emerges as an emerging theme that is scarcely researched in the local context. Method: Following the PRISMA-ScR guidelines, this exploratory review used WOS, Scopus, ERIC, Scielo, and PsycNet databases to analyze the available literature on the interplay between generativity and psychological well-being in primary or secondary school teachers exploring its manifestations and the contextual factors (rural/urban) that shape this dynamic. We included 11 studies published up to 2025. Results: The studies analyzed show that generativity strengthens the sense of life and teacher commitment, while psychological well-being would modulate resilience to stress and pedagogical effectiveness. However, the literature presents conceptual and methodological heterogeneity. The theoretical gaps and methodological limitations of the findings are discussed, highlighting the importance of moving towards integrative frameworks that strengthen the mental health of teachers in the digital society. Conclusion: Generativity and psychological well-being are deeply interconnected in teaching practice yet remain under-theorized in educational research. This review highlights the need for integrative frameworks that support teachers’ mental health and professional identity, especially in diverse and evolving educational contexts.

1. Introduction

The teaching profession is a cornerstone of nations’ social, cultural and economic development, playing a pivotal role in the formation of new generations and in the transmission of knowledge, values and skills necessary to face the challenges of the twenty-first century. Primary and secondary school teachers operate in high-pressure settings [1], where academic, social, and emotional demands converge and are compounded by unfavorable structural conditions, especially in rural contexts and areas marked by pronounced socioeconomic inequality. Long framed as a vocation of service, the profession now sits at the center of a global debate concerning its relevance and capacity to adapt to contemporary challenges, including rapid digitalization, the climate crisis, the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic, and the growing precarity of teachers’ employment [2,3].

In this context, it is essential to examine not only the material and structural conditions of teachers’ work but also the psychological processes that undergird their professional performance and well-being [4]. Two constructions are especially salient: generativity and psychological well-being. Generativity, first conceptualized by [5] as the seventh stage of adult psychosocial development, refers to the drive to transcend oneself through guiding and caring for younger generations. Ref. [6] subsequently broadened the construct by integrating dimensions such as personal motivation, cultural demands, social commitments, and life narratives, thereby situating generativity as a dynamic phenomenon that confers meaning across the life course.

This review embraces this narrative perspective, particularly suited to comprehending the teaching profession. For educators, generativity transcends being a mere psychological attribute, instead constituting a fundamental element of their professional identity forged through daily practice. Through this generative impulse, teachers conceptualize their work as a meaningful contribution that extends beyond immediate endeavors, imbuing it with purpose and direction. This theoretical grounding enables us to examine teaching not merely as a collection of pedagogical tasks but as a vocation dedicated to generating enduring impact on students and the community. In education, generativity finds a privileged expression: teachers enact their intergenerational commitment by shaping students’ development, creating meaningful learning environments, and building a pedagogical legacy that endures over time [7].

Psychological well-being is understood as a multidimensional construct that extends beyond the mere absence of clinical symptoms or distress. Ref. [8] model—one of the field’s most influential—conceptualizes it across six dimensions: self-acceptance, positive relations, autonomy, environmental mastery, purpose in life, and personal growth. This framework has been widely validated and applied in educational contexts, where psychological well-being has been linked to intrinsic motivation, stress resilience, pedagogical effectiveness, and professional satisfaction [9]. Accordingly, examining how well-being relates to teachers’ generativity not only advances scientific understanding but also offers practical avenues for strengthening teachers’ mental health and improving educational practice.

The research problem motivating this systematic review is the lack of a rigorous, up-to-date synthesis that brings both constructs into dialogue within the teaching context. While some studies address teachers’ generativity from an intergenerational-commitment perspective [10] and others examine psychological well-being in relation to variables such as burnout, engagement, or job satisfaction [11], there remains no integrative framework that systematically explores the interplay between generativity and psychological well-being among primary and secondary school teachers across both urban and rural settings. This gap is particularly salient given that the challenges and tensions teachers face are far from homogeneous; rather, they vary with available resources, geographical location, sociopolitical conditions, and the expectations of educational communities [12].

The theoretical contribution of this systematic review lies in its aim to integrate two robust research traditions that have, until now, largely evolved in parallel. On one hand, life-course psychology has extensively examined generativity as a hallmark of mid- and late adulthood, emphasizing its role in shaping narrative identity and fostering social participation. On the other hand, positive and educational psychology have investigated psychological well-being as a critical indicator of professional functioning and quality of life. While both constructs are pivotal to understanding adult development, studies that deliberately bring them into dialogue within the teaching domain remain scarce, methodologically heterogeneous, and lack a unifying framework. This review directly addresses this theoretical fissure by proposing an integrative perspective that examines how a teacher’s transcendent drive to care for future generations (generativity) interconnects with their positive mental functioning (psychological well-being).

The relevance of this proposal rests on several considerations. First, teaching is widely characterized as a profession under strain, marked by elevated stress and professional disengagement [13]. In this context, generativity can function as a source of meaning, enabling teachers to reframe their work beyond immediate demands. Second, psychological well-being has been identified as a key predictor of educational quality and teacher retention within the system [14]. Integrating these constructs points toward a comprehensive framework explaining how a genuine commitment to fostering young people’s development contributes to psychological well-being, thereby strengthening teachers’ resilience and autonomy.

The relevance of the review is further underscored by the need to account for the context in which teaching practice unfolds. In rural settings, teachers often contend with greater material constraints, limited access to pedagogical resources, and pronounced professional isolation, all of which can adversely affect psychological well-being. By contrast, urban settings are characterized by challenges linked to overcrowding, cultural and linguistic diversity, and accountability pressures tied to standardized outcomes [15].

The salience of this phenomenon is indisputable. The COVID-19 pandemic radically transformed teaching, forcing an abrupt shift to digital modalities and underscoring the need to strengthen teachers’ mental health [16]. In parallel, the AI-mediated technological revolution and broader social transformations call for resilient, motivated teachers capable of generating meaning in their practice [12]. Recent research indicates that teachers with higher levels of psychological well-being exhibit greater flexibility, creativity, and capacity for pedagogical innovation [17], while generativity is linked to the desire to leave a positive legacy amid a global climate of uncertainty [18].

The theoretical contribution of this systematic review lies in integrating two research traditions that have largely evolved in parallel. On one side, life-course psychology has examined generativity as a hallmark of mid- and late adulthood, emphasizing its role in shaping narrative identity and fostering social participation. On the other side, positive and educational psychology have investigated psychological well-being as an indicator of quality of life and effective professional functioning. Yet studies that seek to bring these constructs into dialogue within the teaching domain remain scarce and methodologically heterogeneous.

Consequently, the purpose of this systematic review was to systematically map and synthesize the evidence on how generativity and psychological well-being are interlinked among primary and secondary school teachers working in both rural and urban contexts. By articulating these two constructs, the review aims not only to advance the development of academic knowledge but also to systematize the evidence on how to strengthen teachers’ psychological well-being through a generative lens—an endeavor that constitutes an essential task for educational improvement.

2. Materials and Methods

The study employed a systematic literature review (SLR) methodology, following the PRISMA 2020 statement [19]. Specifically, we adopted a systematic search strategy with predefined eligibility criteria and a rigorous, fully documented selection process. To structure the research question, we used the PEC model (Population, Exposure, Comparison, see Table 1), which has become a valid and rigorous tool in the social sciences and education [20].

Table 1. PEC model description.

Dimension	Description
Population (P)	The target population comprises primary and secondary school teachers, who are most directly engaged in teaching–learning processes at the school level. This focus is justified because teaching is a profession characterized by high psychosocial demands, with attendant risks of emotional exhaustion and declines in subjective well-being. It is also a population in which generativity finds a particularly salient expression, given the inherently intergenerational nature of teachers’ professional practice [7,10]. Restricting the review to primary and secondary teachers avoids including university or preschool personnel, whose demands and life-course experiences may differ substantially.
Exhibition/Concept	The conceptual focus of this review centers on two core constructs: generativity and psychological well-being. Generativity, rooted in [5] psychosocial theory and elaborated by [6], refers to concerns and actions oriented toward caring for and guiding future generations. Among teachers, it is expressed through the transmission of knowledge and values and a sustained commitment to students’ development. Psychological well-being, in turn, as defined by [8], offers a positive conception of mental health that integrates dimensions such as purpose in life, self-acceptance, and positive relations. By concentrating on these constructs, the review aims to elucidate how transcendent motivations intersect with states of positive mental health in teaching practice.
Background (C)	The contextual scope comprises the urban and rural environments in which teaching practice unfolds. This dimension is crucial, as the literature indicates that structural, cultural, and socioeducational conditions differ markedly across these settings, shaping teachers’ professional and personal experiences in distinct ways [15]. Teachers in rural areas often face greater shortages of material resources and heightened professional isolation, whereas those in urban environments contend with challenges stemming from overcrowding, cultural diversity, and evaluative pressures. Making context explicit helps prevent unwarranted generalizations and enables a more situated understanding of the relationship between generativity and psychological well-being.

Note: Own Source.

The PEC model is particularly pertinent here because the focus is not on specific clinical interventions but on identifying conceptual and theoretical relationships between psychological constructs in a defined population. Consistent with PRISMA, explicitly formulating the research question with conceptual models such as PEC provides a methodological safeguard for more sensitive and specific searches, reducing both the over-inclusion of irrelevant literature and the exclusion of pertinent studies [19].

In this case, the research question was structured as follows: What is the nature, direction, and mediating factors of the relationship between generativity and psychological well-being among primary and secondary school teachers, and how is this relationship manifested in urban and rural contexts?

In addition, the protocol of this study will be registered in the international database PROSPERO (International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews) (ID = CRD420251133718), to guarantee traceability, prevent duplication of efforts and make methodological procedures transparent (see Supplementary Materials). The record will include the background, research question, eligibility criteria, search strategy, methods of data extraction and analysis, as well as expected results in terms of scientific and practical contribution.

2.1. Eligibility Criteria

The eligibility criteria were rigorously defined to ensure the relevance, validity and comparability of the studies included (see Table 2).

Table 2. Eligibility criteria.

Inclusion Criteria

Exclusion Criteria

○ Empirical studies of a quantitative, qualitative or mixed type, peer reviewed. ○ Population composed of primary or secondary school teachers. ○ Explicit inclusion of generativity and psychological well-being as analysis variables. ○ Studies published in the last ten years (2010–2025), to guarantee timeliness and relevance in the findings. ○ Publications in Spanish, English or Portuguese, which allows the incorporation of Ibero-American, Anglo-Saxon and Lusophone literature. ○ Studies indexed in high-impact databases: Web of Science (WOS), Scopus, ERIC, Scielo and PsycNet.

○ Narrative reviews, non-peer-reviewed book chapters, editorials, or letters to the editor. ○ Studies that work with populations other than primary or secondary school teachers (e.g., preschool, university, or technical training). ○ Duplicate publications or without access to full text. ○ Research that tangentially mentions the constructions of interest without addressing them as central variables.

Source: Authors.

Narrative reviews, non-peer-reviewed book chapters, editorials, or letters to the editor were excluded to prioritize original, empirically grounded evidence that has undergone peer review, thereby enhancing the reliability of our findings. Furthermore, psychosocial demands, career paths, and institutional contexts differ substantially across educational levels. Focusing on primary and secondary school teachers allows for a more coherent analysis of how generativity and well-being manifest within a shared professional environment. These criteria ensure the inclusion of evidence of high methodological quality, directly linked to the research question.

2.2. Search Strategy

The search strategy was designed based on the controlled descriptors of the UNESCO and ERIC thesauri, complemented with free terms related to the constructions under study. To optimize the sensitivity and specificity of the search, Boolean operators (AND, OR) and truncations were used according to the requirements of each database.

The key terms used were:

(a)

Generativity/Generatividad.

(b)

Psychological well-being/Ryff scale.

(c)

Teachers/Educators/Docentes.

(d)

Primary education/Secondary education/Enseñanza básica/Enseñanza secundaria.

(e)

Urban/Rural/Urban/Rural.

Search pattern: (“generativity” OR “teacher generativity” OR “generative concern” OR “generative behavior”) AND (teacher * OR “school teacher *” OR “primary school” OR “elementary school” OR “secondary school” OR “high school”) AND (“psychological well-being” OR wellbeing) AND (urban OR rural OR “urban school *” OR “rural school *”)

The combination of these strategies ensures a robust and reproducible search process, which allows capturing both highly specialized literature and applied studies in the teaching field (Appendix A).

2.3. Study Selection Procedure

The selection procedure will be developed in four successive stages, following the flow chart recommended by PRISMA 2020 [19]:

(a)

Identification: The records retrieved in each database will be exported to a bibliographic manager (Zotero or EndNote), where duplicates will be eliminated.

(b)

Initial screening: Two independent review authors will analyse titles and abstracts to rule out irrelevant studies.

(c)

Eligibility assessment: The pre-selected articles will be read in full by two independent reviewers (C.B-O. and L.C-A.), who strictly applied the inclusion and exclusion criteria. This process involved a re-examination of the article in question against the eligibility criteria, followed by discussion until agreement was reached. For any persisting discrepancies, a third senior reviewer (E.S-O.) was consulted to make a final determination.

(d)

Final inclusion: Studies that meet all criteria will be incorporated into the analysis and recorded in a data extraction matrix that will include information on: authors, year of publication, country, context (urban/rural), educational level, methodological design, instruments used and main findings.

This process will be documented in a PRISMA diagram, which will transparently report the number of records identified, excluded and finally included in the qualitative and quantitative synthesis.

2.4. Evaluation of the Scientific Quality of Selected Articles

The quality of the selected studies was assessed through the Scale for Evaluating Scientific Articles in Social and Human Sciences (EACSH) [21]. This instrument was specifically selected for its demonstrated validity and reliability in evaluating research in social sciences, and its comprehensive approach that makes it particularly suitable for assessing mixed-methods evidence. This comprehensive approach allows for an equitable quality assessment of the diverse methodological approaches included in this review, ensuring that studies are evaluated against criteria appropriate to their research paradigm. The EACSH which measures eight dimensions: (a) cover and abstract (items 1–4); (b) introduction (items 5–7); (c) methodology (items 8–11); (d) results (items 12–14); (e) discussion (items 15–17); (f) references (item 18); (g) appendices (item 19); and (h) style and format (items 20–21). This instrument had an expert validity (Aiken V) higher than 0.75 in all items. In addition, with respect to construct validity and reliability, it showed KMO values of 0.911 and a Cronbach’s Alpha of 0.937, evidencing a high reliability and validity of the instrument [21].

The application of the EACSH will be carried out independently by two reviewers (C.B-O and L.C-A), with discrepancies resolved by consensus or the intervention of a third independent evaluator. The results will be presented in a synthesis table, which will ensure transparent communication on the level of confidence of the evidence regarding the relationship between generativity and psychological well-being in primary and secondary school teachers.

2.5. Synthesis and Analysis of Information

The synthesis will employ a mixed-methods approach. First, a systematic qualitative content analysis was conducted through iterative coding of findings, thematic development, and constant comparison across studies to identify conceptual patterns. This process involved independent coding by two researchers who developed themes through consensus. Second, a descriptive quantitative analysis summarized available numerical data regarding publication trends, geographical distribution, and methodological characteristics. Finally, through methodological triangulation, qualitative themes and quantitative patterns were integrated to develop a comprehensive understanding of the relationship between generativity and psychological well-being across different contexts. Where feasible, trend analyses traced the evolution of this research domain over the past decade.

3. Results

The initial search across Web of Science, Scopus, APA PsycNet, ERIC, and SciELO identified 507 records. After removing 5 duplicates, 502 records were screened, of which 452 were excluded based on title and for not being relevant to the study’s objective. The remaining 50 reports were assessed through their abstracts, leading to the exclusion of 35 studies due to lack of thematic or methodological relevance. Subsequently, 15 full-text articles were evaluated, with 4 being excluded for not meeting the predefined inclusion criteria. Ultimately, 11 studies met all criteria and were incorporated into the qualitative synthesis. The selection process is summarized in the PRISMA 2020 flow diagram (see Figure 1).

Figure 1. PRISMA flowchart.

The 11 selected articles were published between 2010 and 2024, with 2023 being the year of greatest productivity in relation to the object of study. Likewise, a gap in scientific productivity in this area was observed between 2014 and 2022 (Figure 2).

Figure 2. Productivity per year.

Across the studies included, qualitative designs predominated (e.g., in-depth interviews, life histories, content and discourse analysis), with three exceptions that employed standardized measures. Notably, 9 articles were coauthored, whereas only two listed a single author. The most frequently represented author was E. Sandoval-Obando, whose work reflects a clear research agenda on generativity and teacher well-being in the South American context (see Table 3).

Table 3. Characteristics of the included studies.

Author/Year	Country	Title	Type of Study	Population (N, Age, % Female)	Years of Experience	Assessment Instruments	Main Results
[22]	Chile	Sentido de vida y generatividad en profesores rurales chilenos	Qualitative interpretative; descriptive-exploratory cross-sectional	N = 12 Age = 60 years % women = 41.7%	33 years	Generativity was explored through these narratives of personal and professional experiences, in which topics such as mentoring, contributions to the community, care of others, and teaching legacy were investigated. Social welfare was addressed in connection with the meaning of life, spirituality and the teaching function in rural areas, interpreted from the narratives.	Chilean rural teachers manifested high levels of generativity, expressed in autonomy, mentoring, pedagogical flexibility, commitment to the community, and construction of an educational legacy. In the field of social welfare, the narratives reflected community cohesion, resilience in the face of adversity, and satisfaction derived from contributing to the development of rural communities.
[23]	Chile	Dimensiones pedagógicas de un desarrollo potencialmente generativo en profesores rurales chilenos	Qualitative (phenomenological)	N = 12 Age = 50 years % women = 41.7%	33 years	Life stories from the generative narrative perspective: three in-depth interviews were conducted with each teacher, to explore significant experiences, processes of construction of the narrative self and life and professional trajectories.	Rural teachers reported high levels of generativity, expressed in mentoring, pedagogical autonomy, community commitment, and building an educational legacy. In the field of social welfare, the narratives reflected community cohesion, resilience in the face of adversity and satisfaction linked to the educational contribution in rural contexts.
[24]	United States	Pedagogical Sensemaking during Side-by-Side Coaching: Examining the In-the-Moment Discursive Reasoning of a Teacher and Coach	Exploratory Case Study	N = 1 Age= Not reported % female= 100%	Not reported	Recordings/video and discourse analysis in classroom interaction.	Co-teaching enables real-time generative pedagogical sensemaking at three ‘altitudes’ of conversation (within, through, and beyond moments). Brief, cumulative interactions also provide opportunities for pedagogical generativity.
[25]	Chile	What do we know about rural teaching identity? An exploratory study based on the generative-narrative approach	Qualitative interpretative; exploratory cross-sectional Non-experimental	N = 18 Age = 60 years % women = 50%	33 years	In-depth interviews (life-history/biographical accounts) designed from the narrative-generative perspective (based on Kvale, McAdams and McLean) and qualitative analysis of the narratives to identify generative behaviors and actions. Four categories related to generativity were identified: (1) significant life experiences; (2) pedagogical dimensions of generative development; (3) expansive-generative adulthood; (4) Personal training.	The narratives of rural teachers presented generative behaviors and actions linked to life experiences, pedagogical adaptation, commitment to future generations, and personal training; in addition, they indicated qualitative social well-being through satisfaction, positive affect, and resilience.
[26]	Chile	Generativity and Rural Teacher Identity in a Mapuche Community of Toltén (Chile): An Exploratory Study	Qualitative interpretative; exploratory-descriptive cross-sectional	N = 4 Age = 50 years % women = Not reported	Not reported	In-depth interviews +Nütram (Mapuche conversation). Well-being was interpreted qualitatively in the narratives through community values (respect, love, justice, belonging, interculturality).	The faculty developed a generative integrity linked to life experiences and community values through the promotion of Mapuche belonging and identity, integrating local knowledge and ancestral authorities in teaching-learning processes.
[27]	Chile	¿Es posible una pedagogía generativa?: Experiencias y saberes de docentes situados en la ruralidad chilena	Qualitative; descriptive-exploratory cross-sectional	N = 12 Age = 60 years % women = 41.7%	33 years	In-depth interviews (life history, generative narrative) and social well-being were interpreted through stories about community ties, teacher engagement and historical-cultural relevance.	Rural teachers showed a strong generative identity based on the transmission of practical knowledge, community values and historical-cultural relevance. The well-being of teachers was related to the sense of belonging and the recognition of their pedagogical practices by the community.
[28]	Chile	The Propensity to Teach in Chilean Rural Educators and its Potentially Generative Implications: An Exploratory Study	Qualitative interpretative; descriptive-exploratory cross-sectional	N = 12 Age = 60 years % women = 41.7%	33 years	In-depth interviews (life stories from the narrative-generative perspective). The stories were subjected to a content analysis, following the logic of grounded theory.	The rural teachers studied show potentially generative pedagogical practices and criteria, highlighting the commitment to educational work, positive affection and flexibility in the relationship with students, favoring the construction of relevant learning with historical-sociocultural relevance for students and their communities of origin.
[29]	Chile	Generatividad y propensión a enseñar en educadores rurales chilenos: saberes educativos desde la perspectiva narrativa- generativa	Qualitative interpretative; descriptive-exploratory cross-sectional	N = 12 Age = 60 years % women = 41.7%	33 years	In-depth interviews and life stories from the generative narrative perspective. The stories were subjected to a content analysis, following the logic of grounded theory.	Rural teachers exhibited potentially generative practices based on commitment, affection and flexibility, strengthening bonds with students and generating culturally relevant learning, emerging dimensions of mentoring, community leadership, collaboration, empathy and responsibility. As for social welfare. Positive implications were reported in terms of satisfaction, motivation, and sense of educational legacy.
[30]	Australia	Older male mentors’ perceptions of a Men’s Shed intergenerational mentoring program	Exploratory qualitative study	N = 6 Age = 65 years % women = 0%	Not reported	Individual interviews with teachers (pre- and post-project, Focus Group) and qualitative analysis of the mentors’ perceptions.	The teachers expressed a reconnection with traditional values such as sharing experience, respect, tradition, and “transmission” of knowledge through the construction project shared with young students, facilitating a generational bridge through these generative practices.
[31]	United States	A Case of Generativity in a Culturally and Linguistically Complex English Language Arts Classroom	Qualitative Case Study-Interpretive Approach	N = 1 Age = Not reported % female = 100%	Not reported	Semi-structured interviews using Ball’s generativity theory and analysis of the teacher’s conceptions, her discourse, curricular practices.	The interviewed teacher conceives her role as a translator and mediator of linguistic and cultural competencies, adapting her teaching style to the origins of the students. According to Ball’s theory, generativity occurs when the teacher promotes innovation based on her understanding of linguistic diversity, assumes professional responsibility to respond to emerging needs, and reflects on her own role as a teacher.
[32]	United States	Chasms and Bridges: Generativity in the Space between Educators’ Communities of Practice	Qualitative ethnographic study	N = Not reported Age = Not reported % female = Not reported	Not reported	The study analyzes qualitative data obtained through interviews, observations, analysis of practices and reflections, to understand how generativity processes are manifested in the professional life of educators. Any notion of well-being stems from narratives linked to meaning, identity, and teaching agency.	Generativity in this study includes a sense of responsibility, sharing professional knowledge among peers, reinterpretation of local practices, and critical reflection on what it is to teach, reform, and improve within school contexts. ‘Multi-membership’ and bridges between communities of practice promote generative change in education.

From the findings presented in the studies analyzed, three articulated categories emerged (Figure 3):

Figure 3. Emergent dimensions of teacher generativity.

3.1. Pedagogical–Generative Dimension

This dimension encompasses elements of commitment, care, classroom management, and decision making within the school context. It is evidenced in generative behavior patterns—such as empathy, optimism, resilience, and autonomy—together with a strong commitment to teaching and to developing future generations, thereby revealing a form of practice that cares and extends beyond the classroom [23]. Such practices are adapted in the moment and deepened through side-by-side coaching, where teacher–coach reasoning operates at three altitudes—within, though, and beyond moments—showing that the generative pedagogical dimension is forged in situated, collaborative interaction [24].

3.2. Rural/Urban Teacher Identity

This dimension concerns life experiences and community–sociocultural ties and reflects a commitment to contextualized teaching. These behaviors are reinforced through the sociocultural relevance of pedagogical practice, characterized by a shift away from universalist approaches toward the teaching of knowledge and experiences with social, cultural, and territorial significance [26,28], and through a sense of life purpose and spirituality, whereby teachers engage in self-knowledge and move from rational knowing to wisdom [22]. Regarding rural teacher identity from a generative perspective, ref. [25] systematize four categories: (a) significant life experiences; (b) pedagogical dimensions of generative development; (c) expansive generative adulthood; and (d) personal formation. Together, these categories provide a conceptual framework for understanding identity as emerging from life trajectories and practice.

3.3. Mediators for Teacher Generativity

This dimension encompasses spaces that foster generative pedagogy beyond the classroom, supporting learning processes, motivation, socioemotional development, and the well-being of educational stakeholders. On the one hand, collaborative networks and professional communities contribute to meaning-making, identity, and agency among teachers and school leaders [32]. On the other hand, coaching enables co-teaching and reflective practice, sharpening the pedagogical purpose and orientation of instruction [24]. In addition, MTSS/Precision Teaching introduces a shared data language and tools—e.g., Standard Celeration Charts (SCCs)—that inform instruction and teacher-education needs, functioning as technical mediators of generativity through sensitive progress monitoring, goal setting, and iterative adjustments. Finally, in the realm of community participation, intergenerational programs such as Men’s Shed demonstrate how meaningful co-occupation strengthens belonging, self-esteem, and the transmission of knowledge across generations [30].

3.4. Scientific Quality Analysis

The synthesis of the scientific evaluation shows that all the articles are of high quality, where 2 documents are in the “very high” category (95–98/105), and 9 documents are in the “medium high” category (88–91/105). This reveals the methodological and systematic strength of the research carried out in this field in its different dimensions, which are consistent and described rigorously and clearly (Table 4).

Table 4. Quality assessment of scientific articles.

Author	[22]	[23]	[24]	[25]	[26]	[27]	[28]	[29]	[30]	[31]	[32]
ITEM I	5	5	5	5	5	5	5	5	5	5	5
ITEM II	5	5	5	5	5	5	5	5	5	5	5
ITEM III	5	5	5	5	5	5	5	5	5	5	4
ITEM IV	5	5	5	5	5	5	5	5	5	5	5
ITEM V	5	5	5	5	5	5	5	5	5	5	5
ITEM VI	5	5	5	5	5	5	5	5	5	5	4
ITEM VII	4	4	4	4	4	4	4	4	4	5	5
ITEM VIII	3	4	4	4	4	4	4	4	4	4	4
ITEM IX	5	5	5	5	5	5	5	5	5	5	5
ITEM X	3	4	4	4	4	4	4	4	4	4	4
ITEM XI	5	4	4	4	4	4	4	4	4	4	4
ITEM XII	5	5	5	5	5	5	5	5	5	5	5
ITEM XIII	5	4	5	4	4	5	4	4	4	5	5
ITEM XIV	5	5	5	5	5	5	5	5	5	5	5
ITEM XV	5	5	5	5	5	5	5	5	5	5	5
ITEM XVI	5	5	5	5	5	5	5	5	5	5	5
ITEM XVII	4	4	4	4	4	4	4	4	4	5	5
ITEM XVIII	5	4	4	4	4	4	4	4	4	4	4
ITEM XIX	4	4	4	4	4	4	4	4	4	4	4
ITEM XX	5	5	5	5	5	5	5	5	5	5	5
ITEM XXI	5	5	5	5	5	5	5	5	5	5	5
Total	92/105	93/105	93/105	92/105	93/105	92/105	92/105	92/105	94/105	96/105	95/105
Percentage	88%	89%	89%	88%	89%	88%	88%	88%	89%	91%	90%

Evaluation of the quality of scientific articles in human social sciences. Reference Points 1 = Title; 2 = Authorship metadata; 3 = abstract; 4 = keywords; 5 = introduction, rationale, and context of the topic; 6 = introduction, citations; 7 = objectives; 8 = methodology, study design; 9 = methodology, participants; 10 = methodology, instruments; 11 = methodology, statistical analysis; 12 = results, description; 13 = results, tables, and/or figures; 14 = data analysis; 15 = conclusion; 16 = contribution; 17 = recommendations; 18 = references; 19 = appendices (if applicable); 20 = reference regulations; 21 = format.

4. Discussion

The concept of generativity provides a powerful and cohesive lens through which to interpret the diverse findings of this review. It moves beyond being a variable of interest to become a central explanatory mechanism that links teachers’ internal psychological world (well-being) with their external professional actions and commitments. In this sense, this study systematizes the available literature on the relationship between generativity and psychological well-being among primary and secondary school teachers in urban and rural contexts. The theoretical gap addressed here concerns the lack of a comprehensive integration of these constructs in relation to teachers’ professional development [33]. While generativity has been examined as an expression of intergenerational commitment [10] and psychological well-being as an indicator of mental health and professional satisfaction [11], investigations that analyze them jointly in teaching remain scarce, partial, and nascent.

This review helps bridge that gap by offering a critical framework that brings together narrative, pedagogical, and community perspectives to elucidate how teachers configure a life and professional project amid structural, historical–cultural, cognitive, and emotional challenges in the post-pandemic digital society. Theoretically, our findings suggest that generativity operates not merely as a psychological trait but as a dynamic narrative that teachers construct actively through their practice. This positions generativity as a core mechanism in teacher identity formation, potentially mediating the relationship between challenging working conditions and sustained professional commitment. Analysis of the thirteen studies included in this review deepens understanding of the interplay between generative development and psychological well-being as essential dimensions of teaching culture.

First, the findings indicate that generativity strengthens teachers’ pedagogical identity and sense-making, while psychological well-being functions as a mediator in the face of the multiple psychosocial stressors and challenges encountered in daily work. Specifically, teachers who display generative behaviors demonstrate greater resilience, commitment, and self-efficacy across both rural and urban contexts.

The review also highlights the importance of mediating mechanisms such as co-teaching [24], intergenerational programs [30], and identity narratives [26]. Taken together, these results align with prior evidence showing that the relationship between generativity and psychological well-being is not contingent or episodic; rather, these constructs operate as structural dimensions in the development and ongoing improvement of the teaching profession—particularly in midlife and late adulthood [34,35,36,37].

Second, the findings reaffirm that generativity functions as an organizing principle of teachers’ professional identity, enabling it to transcend the constraints of school-bound space and time and to promote the construction of a meaningful pedagogical legacy for students. Studies such as [31] show how generativity in culturally and linguistically diverse classrooms facilitates students’ generative reasoning, which in turn reinforces teacher engagement. Similarly, ref. [32] found that multimembership in communities of practice catalyzes generative processes that extend beyond the individual, consolidating networks of educational innovation. These insights align with recent work in educational psychology that links generativity to meaning in life and intrinsic motivation [18].

At the same time, the diversity of methodological approaches used to study teachers’ generativity—from ethnographies to case studies—reveals substantial heterogeneity in how the construct is operationalized. This underscores the need to develop clear socio-pedagogical criteria and standardized assessment frameworks to enable systematic, rigorous comparison of evidence and to support adaptation and integration across groups, contexts, and populations [38,39,40,41].

Third, psychological well-being emerged as a cross-cutting and consequential factor in the development of the teaching profession. These results suggest that psychological well-being not only moderates the impact of work-related stress but also enhances teachers’ creative and adaptive capacities. Some divergences are evident: in urban settings, well-being is strained by administrative overload and standardization [24], whereas in rural areas it is constrained by resource scarcity yet buffered by social, historical–cultural, and community factors that enrich teacher–student relational dynamics [26]. Accordingly, the analysis of teacher well-being benefits from historical–cultural perspectives that explicitly account for the structural (e.g., education policy) and sociocultural determinants of each school context.

Fourth—and secondarily—the findings underscore the importance of community and intergenerational mediators in shaping teachers’ generativity. Ref. [30] documented how intergenerational mentoring programs strengthen self-esteem and the transmission of knowledge, indicating that generativity extends beyond school boundaries. Similarly, ref. [23] systematized generative pedagogical dimensions among rural teachers, identifying patterns of generative engagement, socio-pedagogical involvement, flexibility, and sociocultural relevance. These results invite a rethink of teacher education not only as an individual or technical process but as a deeply relational and community-based one. Taken together, these findings open lines of inquiry into how collective and collaborative environments simultaneously reinforce mental health and professional identity among teachers [42,43,44,45].

Fifth, an unexpected finding concerns the persistence of high levels of meaning in life and generative practices among rural teachers, even under conditions of structural precariousness. Studies such as [27,28,29] show that rural teacher identity is sustained by life experiences, community ties, and intergenerational narratives that uphold psychological well-being despite material and economic constraints. By contrast, in highly demanding urban contexts, research by [24] suggests that standardizing pressures from central authorities can attenuate the positive impact of generativity on psychological well-being. This paradox indicates that the interaction between the two constructs is not linear but is substantially modulated by context (e.g., urban versus rural), underscoring the need for comparative, multicultural studies that examine how conditioning factors—individual, social, economic, political, and cultural—shape the relationship between generativity and psychological well-being in teachers.

4.1. Limitations

This review has several limitations. First, the number of studies that explicitly examine the relationship between generativity and well-being among teachers is small (N = 13), which constrains the generalizability of the findings to other groups and contexts. Second, methodological heterogeneity is evident: qualitative designs predominate [31,32]. Although the included articles were rated as “high” or “very high” quality (see Table 4), the scarcity of quantitative research limits comparative analyses and precludes meta-analysis. As an emerging field of inquiry, the current literature may also reflect a natural emphasis on successful manifestations of generativity, potentially leaving less documented the challenges or contextual barriers to its development. This evolving evidence base, while rich in qualitative insights, warrants further methodological diversification to strengthen causal inferences and account for potential publication biases. Third, the review was restricted to publications in Spanish, English, and Portuguese, potentially excluding relevant literature in other languages. These limitations suggest that the current evidence should be interpreted cautiously and complemented by more robust future research.

4.2. Implications

From a socio-pedagogical standpoint, the findings indicate that teacher generativity should be understood as a developmental axis—both personal and professional—that strengthens identity and commitment to teaching. These results carry significant implications for educational policy and teacher development programs. At the policy level, education systems should formally recognize generativity as a valuable resource for teacher retention and educational quality, creating supportive frameworks that enable teachers to develop and express their generative potential. Treating teaching as a potentially generative profession implies designing initial and continuing education programs that foreground narrative–generative identity, passion for teaching, intergenerational learning, educational legacy, and self-development as core dimensions.

In rural contexts, this entails valuing local and community knowledge [26]; in urban settings, it calls for strategies that counteract fragmentation and the standardizing pressures of accountability policies. Most importantly, these findings compel a rethinking of teacher evaluation frameworks beyond exclusively technical–pedagogical criteria [46,47,48], to include systematic assessment of generative engagement through indicators such as mentorship activities, curriculum innovation, community leadership, and intergenerational commitment. In doing so, education systems can move toward more comprehensive policies that recognize the socio-pedagogical value of generativity and its direct impact on teachers’ mental health and development.