Ready or Not? Greek K-12 Teachers’ Psychological Readiness for Bringing the EU into the Classroom

Abstract

This study examines the role of psychological factors on Greek K-12 teachers’ perceptions of the European Union (EU) and their readiness to integrate EU-related content into class-room practice. Grounded in self-determination theory and burnout literature, it focuses on the role of personality traits, psychological needs, self-efficacy, and mental health. A sample of 171 teachers (M_age = 47.67, SD = 8.61) completed validated instruments assessing EU perceptions, Big Five traits, psychological need satisfaction and frustration, well-being, self-efficacy, and symptoms of depression, anxiety, stress, and burnout. Confirmatory factor analysis supported the factorial validity of the instruments, along with proper indices for assessing their internal consistency. Cluster analysis identified three distinct teacher profiles: Skeptically Exhausted, Realistically Cautious, and Optimistically Engaged. These groups differed significantly in burnout, self-efficacy, and openness to EU programs. Teachers with high well-being and self-efficacy demonstrated stronger readiness to adopt EU-related pedagogy, while those experiencing elevated burnout reported low institutional trust and limited involvement. These findings highlight the psychological heterogeneity of the teaching workforce and suggest that differentiated, context-sensitive policy interventions are essential for fostering inclusive readiness for European initiatives. Enhancing teacher well-being and strengthening professional development pathways may serve as strategic entry points for promoting meaningful and sustainable EU integration in school curricula.

1. Introduction

Teachers are at the center of the European Education Area (EEA) which aim to promote the European dimension, cooperation, innovation in education as well as mobility of teachers and students within the European Union (EU) and beyond (Asderaki, 2022). Consequently, the transformation of teacher education within the EU reflects an evolving policy landscape increasingly shaped by processes of Europeanisation (Symeonidis, 2018). Despite national specificities, a shared discourse around the “European teacher” has taken root, promoting competencies such as intercultural awareness, digital fluency, and transnational engagement (Schratz, 2014). In this context, Greece presents a revealing case: while structurally aligned with EU initiatives, systemic, institutional, and cultural barriers still moderate teachers’ readiness to be involved in European frameworks. EU readiness is here conceptualized as teachers’ willingness to participate in EU mobility programs, integrate European content into their pedagogy, and foster awareness of EU issues among students (Özdemir et al., 2024). This willingness is closely tied to what we term pedagogical readiness, that is, teachers’ perceived competence and confidence to translate European objectives into classroom practices (Symeonidis, 2018).

Focusing on Greek K-12 teachers is particularly relevant given the country’s historical and policy trajectory within the EU. Since joining the European Economic Community in 1981, Greece has formally aligned its education system with European expectations, but its centralized administrative structure, widespread reliance on substitute teachers, and inconsistent curricular integration of EU themes continue to impede implementation (Asderaki et al., 2023). This dual condition of formal alignment with the EU framework, but also of concrete institutional and cultural barriers, provides a unique opportunity to examine how readiness for EU initiatives is expressed. Examining the case of K-12 teachers in Greece provides a mechanism for capturing how structural conditions, professional identities, and supranational goals intertwine, thus providing a useful group for the study of the Europeanization of education.

Greece has made measurable advances in digital education. Following the COVID-19 pandemic, major investments—particularly through the Recovery and Resilience Facility and “Digital School II”—have equipped public schools with over 36,000 interactive whiteboards and provided structured training in digital pedagogies for tens of thousands of teachers (European Commission, 2022). Digital readiness has thus improved, but participation in EU education programs such as Erasmus+ still depends on collective decision-making processes within schools, where professional cultures and administrative inertia may impede broader adoption (Asderaki et al., 2023). Comparable evidence from other European contexts confirms that material infrastructure is insufficient if not accompanied by psychological readiness, resilience, and professional support (Deng et al., 2020). This contrast underlines the importance of psychological readiness: systemic opportunities are not automatically transformed into commitment if teachers do not also feel sufficiently competent, motivated and effective to act.

At the same time, a notable gap persists between the availability of systemic opportunities and the degree of readiness to be involved in EU educational frameworks. According to a recent national study, 94.3% of pre-service teachers enrolled in pedagogical departments across Greek universities reported never having attended a dedicated course on the EU during their academic studies, despite a clear interest in such content (Asderaki et al., 2023). This finding underscores a structural deficiency in the initial preparation of future teachers with regard to European normative, institutional and functional literacy. Among in-service teachers, participation in EU programs remains unevenly distributed, often mediated by local school culture and administrative practices. Many teachers still perceive EU policy instruments as externally imposed or misaligned with the specificities of national and school-level contexts (Symeonidis, 2018). Conversely, younger teachers and those with experience in mobility schemes or transnational cooperation tend to demonstrate greater openness to EU readiness and pedagogical innovation (Tsekou et al., 2023). This is consistent with recent work that emphasizes that teachers’ openness, willingness to innovate, and sense of efficacy interact with institutional settings to influence commitment to policy reform (Özdemir et al., 2024).

This study aims to explore the role of psychological constructs, including burnout, well-being, personality traits, and motivation, on Greek K-12 teachers’ perceptions of the EU and their readiness for its educational initiatives. By identifying attitudinal clusters and mapping them to internal psychological profiles, the study contributes to a deeper understanding of how national educational realities intersect with European policy aspirations. Although the present study focuses on psychological dimensions, structural and contextual constraints such as precarious contracts, workload, and governance must also be recognized as shaping factors of teachers’ readiness for EU initiatives (Agyapong et al., 2022).

1.1. Teachers’ Reality in Greece vs. EU Awareness

While continuous training and merit assessment are among the achievements of other European countries, the highly centralized nature of the Greek education system often severely restricts teachers’ training and opportunities for diverse and personalized options for professional development (OECD, 2024). These discrepancies raise the question of whether Greek teachers feel recognized as part of a European area or whether they remain trapped within their national borders and offers.

Teachers’ engagement in transnational education policy depends greatly on national frameworks that enable or limit access to EU and global initiatives. Although the EEA encourages teacher mobility and cross-border cooperation, bureaucratic hurdles and precarious professional status continue to impede progress. In the academic year 2023–2024, more than 40,000 substitute teachers were hired in Greece, constituting a significant proportion of the teaching staff which counts more than 130,000 teachers (Protothema, 2023). A substitute teacher is hired to fill temporary vacancies or to bridge the absence of permanent primary and secondary school teachers. Such a high degree of contractual instability disrupts the continuity of teaching and excludes opportunities to participate in European programs such as Erasmus+ or European Teacher Academies. Even when funding or access is available, temporary staff are unable to plan without long-term contracts, seriously undermining sustainable EU engagement.

In addition, school-level governance often acts as a gatekeeper. Interest in an EU program is a necessary but not sufficient condition; approval by the teachers’ assembly (σύλλογος διδασκόντων) is required, and often risk-averse management or additional administrative burden and workload can limit innovative initiatives even in committed schools (Asderaki et al., 2023). Furthermore, EU projects’ participation assigns merit points for professional development (i.e., Law 4823/2021, 2021, Art 31; Law 3848/2010, 2010, Art 11). Teacher participation is therefore shaped as much by institutional culture as by individual will.

Despite the formal availability of EU programs and tools, meaningful readiness for involvement often hinges on deeper motivational and contextual factors within schools. A significant number of Greek teachers expressed some degree of uncertainty or hesitation towards European initiatives, but only due to limited experience, an unstable institutional culture and the challenge of finding applications in a confusing system (Asderaki et al., 2023; Tsekou et al., 2023). Consequently, without increased incentives, mentoring networks or relaxed accessibility frameworks, interest in European connections may be less pronounced for many schools. These conditions also favor a tiered participation ecology in which only schools that typically cultivate a leadership culture or have prior EU experience will be able to gain long-term experience. Conversely, schools with the above barriers will be increasingly excluded from European connections.

1.2. Teachers’ Burnout and Individual Differences

Job burnout is considered one of the most critical issues among teachers. It has been found that burnout symptoms occur in almost 40% of the teacher population and have several serious consequences (García-Carmona et al., 2019). The World Health Organization (WHO) has recently included it in the international classification of diseases, and its occurrence can lead not only to a decrease in the effectiveness of professionals, but also to depressive symptoms (A. Booth et al., 2017; World Health Organization, 2019). Burnout is defined as a psychological syndrome that reflects a persistent response to chronic emotional and interpersonal stressors in the workplace and includes three symptoms: (1) emotional exhaustion which denotes emotional fatigue or strain (e.g., a teacher in constant conflict with a student and unable to take a break) (Gkamari & Fotopoulou, 2024), (2) depersonalization characterized by detached or cynical attitudes towards individuals or the work itself (e.g., a teacher exhibits disengagement or responds negatively and pessimistically when interacting with students), and (3) personal accomplishment which reflects feelings of professional competence (e.g., a teacher effectively manages student behavior and delivers high-quality lessons) (Maslach et al., 2001; Nousia & Karagiannopoulou, 2017). It remains without doubt a critical factor for teachers’ job accomplishment and well-being. Recent evidence further highlights that burnout can significantly weaken teachers’ readiness to engage in innovation and international collaboration, reinforcing the need to consider well-being as a mediator in EU participation (S. Li, 2023).

1.3. Personality and Teachers’ Burnout

Previous research has indicated that the causes of teacher burnout emerge from three sources: the social system, the organizational environment, and individual factors (Liu et al., 2022). Although these three factors contribute to job burnout among teachers, not all teachers will experience it when confronted with the same social system and organizational environment. As a result, given the same system and environment, individual factors are a key explanation for disparities in teachers’ job burnout, with personality traits playing an important role. Personality traits proposed by McCrae and Costa (2003) are a multidimensional set that includes individuals’ emotions, cognition, and behavior patterns. The five traits are relatively stable characteristics across ages, cultures and years (Costa & McCrae, 1988). A large number of studies have confirmed associations between teacher’s burnout and personality traits (i.e., “Extraversion”, “Agreeableness”, “Conscientiousness”, “Emotional Stability” and “Intellect/Imagination”). In particular, depersonalization has been significantly positively correlated with extraversion and neuroticism and negatively correlated with agreeableness, openness and conscientiousness (W. Hu & Zhao, 2019). It is possible that motivation may play a crucial role in affecting personality characteristics. In fact, Ryan and Deci (2008) argued that basic psychological needs, or motivation, have an important influence on personality development. Furthermore, openness to experience and resilience were associated with teachers’ willingness to adopt innovative practices and collaborate internationally, highlighting the link between personality and policy in the context of EU readiness (Deng et al., 2020).

1.4. Self-Determination Theory

Self-determination theory (SDT) posits that autonomy (volitional, self-endorsed action), competence (belief in achieving desired outcomes), and relatedness (connection to others) are fundamental psychological needs essential for human motivation and well-being (Ryan & Deci, 2008; Vansteenkiste et al., 2020). Research confirms this, indicating that multiple facets of teachers’ professional environments, which correspond with fundamental psychological needs (e.g., autonomy support from school administrators, challenging student behaviors, and close student relationships), also known as need-relevant conditions (Vansteenkiste et al., 2020), either enhance or impede teachers’ psychological well-being (Aloe et al., 2014; Collie et al., 2012; Klassen et al., 2011). Nonetheless, existing evidence indicates that need-relevant conditions affect teachers’ burnout, psychological distress, and both positive and negative affect them by influencing their perceptions of fundamental psychological needs (Desrumaux et al., 2015; Ebersold et al., 2019; Hascher & Waber, 2021). Focusing on teachers’ beliefs of autonomy, competence, and relatedness is essential for comprehending their psychological functioning, self-efficacy and well-being. It is possible that teachers who experience autonomy, competence and connectedness are more open to European programs, international collaborations and teaching practices that emphasize the European context (Aelterman et al., 2016). Teachers who perceive autonomy in their teaching practice are more willing to adopt transnational and innovative pedagogical approaches rather than seeing them as externally driven. Furthermore, when competence is offered, teachers may feel able to participate in EU mobility programs (e.g., eTwinning, Erasmus+) and integrate European policies and practices into their classrooms and daily curriculum. Finally, offering relationships also has an impact beyond the school context by increasing openness to wider collaboration and encouraging the formation of international groups/communities for educational practices. All three basic psychological needs are important not only for teachers’ beliefs, attitudes, and teaching practices, but also for their general well-being (Chen et al., 2015b).

1.5. Well-Being and Mental Health

Well-being and mental health are two crucial factors that can hinder or promote many aspects of education (Vlachopanou & Karagiannopoulou, 2021; Vlachopanou et al., 2023; Milienos et al., 2021). In fact, modern research discusses these concepts in a dual factor model that distinguishes both of them and places them in the center of the education system (Norwich et al., 2022). In this line of thinking, World Health Organization (2019) describes mental health as an aspect of well-being where individuals effectively manage the typical stressors of life, allowing them to work productively and contribute to their community. The teaching profession, covering kindergarten through 12th grade (K-12), is characterized by increased stress and burnout, which negatively impact mental health (Avola et al., 2025). Furthermore, teacher well-being and mental health influence how teachers teach students and also affect teaching quality (Agyapong et al., 2022; Hascher & Waber, 2021). It has been demonstrated that a high level of teacher well-being increases staff commitment and helps schools as organizations to stabilize their functioning (Bellibaş et al., 2024). Conversely, low teacher well-being is perceived as a barrier to school improvement and educational changes, potentially leading to increased teacher attrition rates (Calandri et al., 2025). Teacher well-being is also negatively related with teacher stress and burnout (Burić et al., 2019), and positively with satisfaction and positive emotions (e.g., Bullough & Pinnegar, 2009), and finally, with motivation and commitment (Cameron & Lovett, 2015). Furthermore, it has been considered within the wider context of mental health (Gray et al., 2017). Nonetheless, both constructs share similar influences on both teachers’ quality of teaching and motivation. Importantly, research highlights that strong well-being and mental health resources enhance teachers’ likelihood to embrace innovative, international programs, while those facing high stress and psychological vulnerability are more resistant to readiness for EU involvement (Agyapong et al., 2022).

Taken together, these psychological constructs can be understood as influencing factors of teachers’ readiness for “bringing the EU into the classroom”. In this study, this readiness is specifically defined as teachers’ attitudinal openness and pedagogical willingness to include European content in their teaching, to participate in EU mobility programs, and to promote awareness of EU issues in the classroom (Özdemir et al., 2024). Burnout is expected to undermine willingness to engage in such initiatives, as it reduces energy, motivation, and openness to innovation (García-Carmona et al., 2019; S. Li, 2023). Conversely, self-efficacy and well-being are motivational resources that promote resilience, openness to change, and continued commitment to new educational programs, including but not limited to, EU-based programs (Agyapong et al., 2022; Hascher & Waber, 2021). In addition, personality traits, particularly openness and conscientiousness, have been associated with teachers’ readiness to engage in pedagogical innovation and transnational collaboration (Costa & McCrae, 1988; Deng et al., 2020). Considering the research findings on which this study is based, this study aims to examine how psychological factors differentiate teachers with varying levels of readiness for “bringing the EU into the classroom”.

1.6. Aim of the Study

This study aims to identify distinct groups of K-12 teachers in Greece based on their EU-related attitudes and pedagogical readiness, while also describing their profiles in relation to individual characteristics such as personality traits and burnout. By investigating the interaction between psychological constructs and socio-political perceptions of the EU, this study contributes to a deeper understanding of how these factors may be related to teachers’ professional well-being, vulnerability to burnout, and pedagogical adaptability within the school environment. Adopting a person-oriented approach allows us to identify distinct teacher profiles based on the holistic interplay of their traits, attitudes, and well-being. This approach acknowledges the population’s heterogeneity and moves beyond the limitations (considering also our research design) of a variable-oriented approach, which can only provide a set of population-level correlations that may mask important subgroup differences.

Previous research has shown that the psychological characteristics of teachers strongly influence their commitment to innovation and international collaboration. High levels of burnout reduce motivation and willingness to participate in EU-related programs (García-Carmona et al., 2019; S. Li, 2023), while high self-efficacy and well-being promote openness, resilience, and sustained readiness to participate (Agyapong et al., 2022; Hascher & Waber, 2021). Personality traits, particularly openness to experience and conscientiousness, have also been associated with readiness for pedagogical innovation and transnational collaboration (Costa & McCrae, 1988; Deng et al., 2020). Building on these findings, the present study focuses on how such psychological factors are associated with and contribute to teachers’ cluster membership based on their readiness for “bringing the EU into the classroom”.

To guide this investigation, the following hypotheses were formulated:

H1: 

Distinct clusters of K-12 teachers can be identified based on aspects of their mindsets concerning the EU and their pedagogical and psychological readiness for “bringing the EU into the classroom”.

H2: 

These teacher clusters will differ significantly in psychological variables, including levels of burnout, self-efficacy, and well-being.

H3: 

Groups of K-12 teachers with higher psychological well-being and self-efficacy will demonstrate greater pedagogical and psychological readiness for “bringing the EU into the classroom”.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Participants

A convenience sample of 205 K-12 teachers from across Greece initially participated in the study; however, only 171 responses were considered valid, as the remaining participants were excluded due to a high proportion of missing or unanswered items. Most participants were female (79.5%, N = 136; 20.5% male, N = 35), reflecting approximately the current gender distribution of teachers in Greece (Eurostat, 2025). Participants were aged between 23 and 64 years (M_age = 47.67, SD = 8.61). A total of 89.5% were employed in the public sector, with 57.3% working in primary education and 35.1% in secondary education. Nearly 85% of the teachers reported having more than 11 years of teaching experience. Regarding educational qualifications, the majority held a master’s degree (N = 120, 73.7%), while 9.4% possessed a doctoral degree. Additionally, 80.7% resided in urban areas, 69.6% were married, and 53.8% reported an annual income below €25,000 (with 83.3% earning between €10,000 and €40,000 per year).

2.2. Procedure

Inclusion criteria for participation in the study were: (a) a minimum of one year of professional teaching experience, (b) a current teaching position at either an elementary or secondary school (including both lower and upper public secondary schools), and (c) native-level proficiency in Greek.

Participants were recruited using a non-probability, convenience sampling method (cross-sectional research design). Invitations were sent through various channels, including professional mailing lists for teachers, virtual forums and social media posts targeting K-12 teachers in Greece. In addition, principals and administrative staff of specific schools were contacted to assist them in disseminating the invitation to their respective teaching staff. The invitation message included a summary of the purpose of the study, the inclusion criteria, and a direct hyperlink to the online informed consent form and associated questionnaire.

Data collection began at the beginning of October 2023 and extended over the entire school semester. Teachers who agreed to participate were initially directed to an online consent form. Only those who gave their electronic consent were allowed to proceed with the questionnaire, which was administered via the SurveyMonkey platform. The questionnaire was anonymous: no names, email addresses or IP addresses were requested or stored.

Participation was voluntary and there were no compensation or incentives for participation. The study complied with the ethical principles of the American Psychological Association (APA), and all ethical principles were followed, including informed consent, confidentiality of data, and voluntary participation. Ethical approval was granted by the University of Piraeus Research Ethics Committee (Protocol No. 2025044).

Furthermore, the study complied fully with all applicable national and institutional ethical regulations, including Law 4624/2019 (the Greek implementation of the GDPR), and Regulation (EU) 2016/679 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 April 2016 on the protection of natural persons with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data (Article 26).

2.3. Measures

2.3.1. Demographic Information

Participants were asked to provide demographic information such as gender, age, marital status, educational status, annual income, and area of residence. In addition, we collected information about their professional background, such as the number of years they have been in education and the type of school where they are now employed.

2.3.2. European Engagement and Teaching Readiness Scale (EETRS-62)—Bringing the EU into the Classroom

The European Engagement and Teaching Readiness Scale (EETRS-62)—Bringing the EU into the Classroom is a 62-item self-report measure developed specifically for the purposes of this study. The aim of the EETRS-62 was to assess the attitudes, knowledge and perceived readiness of Greek K-12 teachers to explore EU-related issues in their teaching practice.

The construction of the EETRS-62 was theoretically grounded in Self-Determination Theory (SDT) (Deci & Ryan, 2000; Ryan & Deci, 2008), which emphasizes the role of autonomy, competence, and relatedness in shaping motivation and engagement. Complementary frameworks on teacher self-efficacy (Tschannen-Moran & Hoy, 2001), burnout (Maslach et al., 2001), and educational policy responsiveness (Alexiadou, 2007; Asderaki et al., 2023) informed the conceptual delineation of the scale’s seven subdimensions. These subdimensions were designed to reflect critical psychological and pedagogical constructs relevant to civic identity, institutional trust, and instructional readiness in the context of EU integration.

An initial draft version of the scale comprised 88 items. These were created collaboratively by a team of experts in educational psychology, curriculum design, and EU studies. To determine content validity, a group of five external experts rated each item on a 4-point scale (1 = not relevant to 4 = highly relevant), according to Lynn’s method (Lynn, 1986). Based on these ratings, the Item-Level Content Validity Index (I-CVI) for the items ranged from 0.80 to 1.00, with most items receiving full agreement from the experts. The overall scale-level content validity index (S-CVI/Ave) was 0.94, exceeding the generally accepted benchmark of 0.80 (Polit & Beck, 2006), indicating a strong consensus among the experts regarding content alignment. After refinement, the scale was piloted with 27 in-service Greek teachers to check for clarity, item comprehension, and distributional patterns. Revisions were made based on qualitative feedback and response trends. To evaluate the factorial structure, Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) was conducted using the WLSMV estimator, suitable for ordinal data. The model demonstrated good fit across multiple indices (e.g., CFI, TLI, RMSEA), consistent with accepted criteria (L. T. Hu & Bentler, 1999). Reliability was evaluated using Cronbach’s alpha, ordinal alpha, and Average Variance Extracted (AVE) (Fornell & Larcker, 1981; Zumbo et al., 2007), all of which indicated acceptable internal consistency across subscales. Overall, the scale demonstrated both conceptual coherence and strong psychometric properties.

The questionnaire comprises seven conceptually based subscales, each targeting a specific but interrelated domain.

The first subscale (EUs1), EU Awareness and Citizenship Perceptions, assesses teachers’ views on their role as EU citizens and their awareness of conditions at the personal, national, European, and global levels (e.g., “The interests of Greece are taken seriously in the EU.”). This subscale, consisting of 17 items, is further divided into four sub-subscales: (a) EU citizenship perception (EU1), (b) EU awareness (EU2), (c) Global awareness (EU3), and (d) Personal and national awareness (EU4).

The second subscale (EUs2), Future Outlook on the EU, examines teachers’ expectations about how challenges will evolve across personal, national, European, and global contexts, reflecting optimism or pessimism about the EU’s problem-solving capacity (e.g., “The global energy crisis can be effectively addressed with the support of the EU.”). This subscale, consisting of 11 items, is further divided into three sub-subscales: (a) Outlook on personal and national challenges (EU5), (b) Outlook on EU challenges (EU6), and (c) Outlook on global challenges (EU7).

The third subscale (EUs3), Attitudes and Engagement with the EU, reflects both teachers’ evaluative perceptions of the EU and their intentions to further engage with EU-related knowledge and activities (e.g., “I wish to learn more about how the EU functions.”). This subscale, consisting of 10 items, is further divided into three sub-subscales: (a) Perception of the EU (EU8), (b) Intention for EU knowledge acquisition (EU9), and (c) Intention for further participation in training and teaching activities and EU programs (EU10).

The fourth subscale (EUs4), Institutional Trust in the EU, assesses the extent to which teachers view EU institutions and agencies as legitimate and trustworthy (e.g., “I trust the European Parliament.”). This subscale, consisting of 9 items, is further divided into two sub-subscales: (a) Trust in main EU institutions (EU11), and (b) Trust in EU agencies (EU12).

The fifth subscale (EUs5), Perceived Knowledge of the EU, measures respondents’ self- assessed understanding of the EU’s institutional framework, competences, and citizens’ rights (e.g., “I know what my rights are as an EU citizen.”). This subscale consists of 3 items (being denoted also as EU13, for notational convenience).

The sixth subscale (EUs6), EU Problem-Solving Capacity, captures teachers’ perceptions of the EU’s effectiveness in tackling critical issues such as climate change, migration, human rights, and energy (e.g., “EU action on environmental degradation and climate change is effective.”). This subscale consists of 4 items (being denoted also as EU14, for notational convenience). The final subscale (EUs7), Pedagogical Readiness for Teaching EU Content, assesses teachers’ perceived competence and confidence in integrating EU issues into their practice. It includes items on methodology, curriculum adaptation, and the use of innovative pedagogical approaches such as experiential learning, flipped classroom, and digital tools (e.g., “I know how to use simulation in teaching about the EU.”). The use of experiential methods is also supported by educational theory, which points to the need for active and reflective learning as an appropriate means of promoting civic understanding and critical thinking (Dewey, 1986; Kolb, 2014). Experience-based methods are often used in the form of simulations, project-based learning, or debates, which in turn are particularly relevant in citizenship and EU education as students have to deal with real-world problems (Biesta, 2009; Kong, 2021). To better reflect the diversity of teaching styles, future adaptations of the scale may consider distinguishing between general thematic readiness and preferences for specific pedagogical approaches.

This subscale consists of 8 items (being denoted also as EU15, for notational convenience). In the study’s conceptual framework, subscales 1–6 capture the mindset concerning the EU, while subscale 7 reflects the behavioral dimension of pedagogical readiness to integrate EU-related content into teaching.

Items are rated on a five-point Likert scale ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). Preliminary tests of the instrument with a small sample of Greek teachers showed satisfactory internal consistency across all subscales.

2.3.3. IPIP Big-Five Personality Questionnaire

The International Personality Item Pool (IPIP Big-Five Personality Questionnaire, Goldberg, 1992; Goldberg et al., 2006) is a widely used instrument that measures the characteristics of the big five factors of personality, namely “Extraversion”, “Agreeableness”, “Conscientiousness”, “Emotional Stability” and “Intellect/Imagination”. Participants respond to 50-self-report statements about their personality on a 5-point Likert-type scale, ranging from “very inaccurate” to “very accurate”. Example items were: “Don’t talk a lot.” or “Feel comfortable around people.”. (The CFA verified that the expected five (5)—factor structure was adequately represented in our database; therefore, the factors were examined separately, as this provided both meaningful and theoretical interpretations. Moreover, as shown in

Table A1. Fit indices for Big Five, BPNSNF, FS, GFS, Dass and Burnout scales.

	Big Five	BPNSNF	FS	GFS	Dass	Burnout
CFI	0.930	0.991	0.991	0.993	0.990	0.967
NFI	0.880	0.978	0.988	0.990	0.974	0.954
TLI	0.926	0.990	0.988	0.991	0.989	0.963
GFI	0.920	0.983	0.992	0.991	0.982	0.967
AGFI	0.903	0.974	0.972	0.981	0.972	0.947
RMSEA	0.086	0.064	0.119	0.114	0.060	0.123
p-value	0.000	0.021	0.000	0.000	0.104	0.000
SRMR	0.116	0.071	0.064	0.072	0.080	0.108

and

Table A2. Reliability measures, for each Big Five, BPNSNF, FS, GFS, Dass and Burnout scales subscale.

Scale	Subscale	Alpha	Alpha (Ord.)	Omega1	Omega2	Omega3	AVE
Big Five	Extraversion	0.814	0.860	0.828	0.828	0.775	0.470 *
	Agreeableness	0.827	0.894	0.849	0.849	0.882	0.491
	Conscience	0.766	0.862	0.768	0.768	0.712	0.398
	EmotionalStab	0.821	0.852	0.846	0.846	0.885	0.419
	IntelectImagin	0.776	0.853	0.820	0.820	0.865	0.434 *
BPNSNF	Satisfactionaut	0.822	0.867	0.818	0.818	0.815	0.627 *
	Frustrationaut	0.669	0.698	0.637	0.637	0.595	0.380
	Satisfactionrel	0.810	0.865	0.817	0.817	0.825	0.636 *
	Frustrationrel	0.739	0.828	0.785	0.785	0.816	0.579
	Satisfactioncom	0.848	0.917	0.857	0.857	0.863	0.746
	Frustrationcom	0.763	0.854	0.785	0.785	0.778	0.596
FS	FS	0.887	0.923	0.895	0.895	0.908	0.614
GFS	GFS	0.902	0.941	0.907	0.907	0.923	0.653
Dass	Depression	0.850	0.915	0.856	0.856	0.870	0.628 *
	Anxiety	0.817	0.877	0.805	0.805	0.817	0.524 *
	Stress	0.780	0.857	0.780	0.780	0.774	0.478 *
Burnout	Burn1 (Emotional Burnout)	0.849	0.877	0.854	0.854	0.759	0.535
	Burn2 (Depersonalization)	0.574	0.724	0.621	0.621	0.608	0.393 *
	Burn3 (Accomplishment)	0.874	0.911	0.890	0.890	0.910	0.585

* The Fornell-Larcker Criterion is not met (Fornell & Larcker, 1981).

, all Big Five subscales demonstrated acceptable fit indices and reliability (See Appendix A).

2.3.4. Basic Psychological Need Satisfaction and Frustration Scale (BPNSNF)

The Basic Psychological Need Satisfaction and Frustration Scale (BPNSNF) (Chen et al., 2015a, 2015b) is a 24-item measure that corresponds to the three basic psychological needs identified in Self Determination Theory, that is autonomy, relatedness, and competence. The BPNSNF consists of six subscales, four items each: autonomy satisfaction, autonomy frustration, relatedness satisfaction, relatedness frustration, competence satisfaction and competence frustration. Participants answer on a 5-point Likert scale ranging from 1 “Not true at all” to 5 “Completely true”. Example items for autonomy satisfaction were “I feel I have been doing what really interests me.”, for autonomy frustration “My daily activities feel like a chain of obligations.”, for relatedness satisfaction “I experience a warm feeling with the people I spend time with.”, for relatedness frustration “I feel the relationships I have are just superficial.”, for competence satisfaction “I feel I can successfully complete difficult tasks.” and for competence frustration “I feel like a failure because of the mistakes I make.”. The psychometric properties of this scale are considered in Table A1 and Table A2 (See Appendix A).

2.3.5. Flourishing Scale (FS)

Teachers’ well-being was measured with Flourishing Scale (FS) (Diener et al., 2009). FS is a one-dimensional measure with 8 items on general aspects of positive human functioning (e.g., “People respect me.”). Responses are rated on a 7-point Likert scale from strongly disagree (1) to strongly agree (7). Please refer to Table A1 and Table A2 for assessing the latent structure of the scale (See Appendix A).

2.3.6. Generalized Self-Efficacy Scale

The Generalized Self-efficacy-GSE (Schwarzer & Jerusalem, 1995) is a self-report scale that measures people’s beliefs about their abilities and consists of 10 items rated on a four-point Likert scale (“Νot at all true” to “Εxactly true”). Example item is “It is easy for me to stick to my aims and accomplish my goals”. Please refer to Table A1 and Table A2 for assessing the latent structure of the scale (See Appendix A).

2.3.7. Depression—Anxiety—Stress (Dass-21)

The DASS-21 is a self-reported measure that independently assesses three factors, namely, depression, anxiety, and stress (Lovibond & Lovibond, 1995). Example items are “I felt scared without any good reason” or “I found it difficult to relax.”. Anxiety scale is scored on a 5-point Likert scale ranging from 1 (I do this almost never) to 5 (I do this almost always). Please refer to Table A1 and Table A2 for assessing the latent structure of the scale (See Appendix A).

2.3.8. Maslach Burnout Inventory (MBI-ED Version for Teachers)

The MBI-ED (Maslach & Jackson, 1986) is a self-report instrument developed to assess three factors contributing to teachers’ burnout: emotional exhaustion, depersonalization, and personal accomplishment. It contains 22 statements that individuals rate on a 6-point scale according to frequency of thought, feeling, or action, ranging from 0 (never) to 6 (every day). Sample items are “I feel emotionally exhausted from my work.” or “I get the feeling that I work too hard.”. The CFA verified that the expected three (3)—factor solution, and the subscales of emotional exhaustion, depersonalization, and personal accomplishment, were also examined separately in the present study. Please refer to Table A1 and Table A2 for assessing the latent structure of the scale (See Appendix A).

2.4. Data Analysis

Our data analysis commenced with a preliminary examination of the basic characteristics of the sample, focusing on descriptive statistics and assessment of the latent structure of the instruments used in our study.

This evaluation included CFA and the computation of a set of reliability indices, such as average variance extracted and Cronbach’s alpha. Parameter estimation in CFA was carried out by the weighted least squares method; the fit of the models was assessed by the following indices (e.g., Kline, 2011; Raykov & Marcoulides, 2006): Comparative Fit Index (CFI), Normed Fit Index (NFI), Goodness-of-Fit Index (GFI), Adjusted Goodness-of-Fit Index (AGFI), Tucker-Lewis Index (TLI), Root Mean Square Error Approximation (RMSEA) (providing also the p-value for testing: H0: RMSEA ≤ 0.05 vs. H1: RMSEA > 0.05) and Standardized Root Mean square Residual (SRMR).

We then conducted a cluster analysis to identify the distinct groups of K-12 teachers within our data set based on their responses to EETRS-62. The determination of the optimal number of clusters was based on an analysis of 30 indices provided by the package “NbClust” (Charrad et al., 2014) in R-Project (R Core Team, 2024). The decision to investigate a wide range of clustering indices to determine the optimal (latent) number of clusters is justified primarily by the lack of comprehensive studies on this issue in the existing literature, which results in a rather unclear and inconsistent picture. We also investigated different distance measures (Euclidean, Maximum, Manhattan, Canberra, and Minkowski) and clustering methods (k-means, Ward.D, Ward.D2, single, complete, and average). Ultimately, the Canberra distance (which is a weighted distance emphasizing to proportional large differences) and Ward.D2 methods were selected; they yielded the most statistically significant differences and a reasonable distribution of individuals across clusters; namely, some suggested cluster solutions with very few items in most of clusters (e.g., less than 5 items) were considered not reasonable and hence, rejected. Cluster analysis was performed using the standardized factor scores derived from confirmatory factor analysis using Bartlett’s method, available in “lavPredict” (Rosseel, 2012). The significance of the differences between clusters were assessed using the Kruskal–Wallis test implemented in R-Project via the functions “kruskal.test” and “kruskalmc”, in addition to the Fisher exact test (e.g., Siegel & Castellan, 1988, Chapter 8). Moreover, to understand how personality traits, psychological needs, self-efficacy, mental health, and demographics influenced cluster membership, we used a multinomial regression analysis.

Beyond the previously described procedures, our data analysis also involved screening for outliers and response patterns that could indicate inattentive or careless participation. For instance, we explored cases exhibiting an unusually high number of identical responses across items.

3. Results

3.1. Descriptive Statistics and the Latent Structure of the Scale

Before examining the existing profiles of the individuals, according to their responses to variables assessing their attitude to the EU, it is necessary to study the latent structure of the EETRS-62 (it is important to note that our outlier detection and screening for careless responses did not indicate the need to exclude any additional cases. The average number of missing values per case was 9.45, and these missing values were subsequently imputed using the median values of the respective variables). Guided by the instrument’s proposed factorial structure and its theoretical foundation, we first assess whether a second or third-order factor model is best supported by our data. The first model (second-order) is specified by seven correlated second-order factors (subscales), three of which (EUs5, EUs6, and EUs7) are unidimensional. The second model (third-order) extended this hierarchy by introducing a single, higher-order factor influencing all seven second-order factors. Thus,

Table 1. Fit indices and comparison for the second-order and third-order factor model.

	Third-Order	Second-Order
CFI	0.957	0.967
NFI	0.942	0.952
TLI	0.955	0.965
GFI	0.949	0.958
AGFI	0.939	0.950
RMSEA	0.127 (p < 0.001)	0.111 (p < 0.001)
SRMR	0.115	0.106
Chi-square	6765.9 (df = 1810)	5543.1 (df = 1796) *

* The difference is statistically significant (p < 0.001).

includes the fit indices for each of the two models, along with a test for examining which of them is best supported by the data (Satorra-Bentler scaled chi-square difference test, as provided by “lavaan”; Rosseel, 2012). Most of the indices (for both models) are found in acceptable range of values (AGFI, TLI, NFI, GFI, and CFI are all larger than 0.90), although RMSEA and SRMR seem to be larger than 0.05 (H0: RMSEA ≤ 0.05 is rejected at 0.001 significance level). However, the second-order factor model (consisting of seven correlated second-order factors) seems to fit the data significantly better than the third-order model.

A valuable insight into the latent structure of the EETRS-62 could also be gained by fitting the seven first-order models separately to our data. This procedure is outlined in

Table 2. Fit indices for EU subscales.

	EUs1	EUs2	EUs3	EUs4	EUs5 *	EUs6	EUs7
CFI	0.965	0.987	1.000	1.000	0.997	0.997	0.994
NFI	0.942	0.982	0.997	0.999	0.995	0.997	0.992
TLI	0.958	0.982	1.000	0.999	0.996	0.992	0.992
GFI	0.968	0.986	0.998	0.999	0.997	0.998	0.994
AGFI	0.944	0.967	0.995	0.997	0.981	0.973	0.979
RMSEA	0.090	0.128	0.000	0.059	0.072	0.146	0.121
p-value	<0.001	<0.001	0.997	0.303	0.273	0.035	<0.001
SRMR	0.090	0.073	0.038	0.035	0.033	0.051	0.050

* The fitted model has all loadings equal.

, where each subscale appears to fit the data adequately, as nearly all fit indices fall within acceptable ranges.

Table 3. Reliability measures, for each EU subscale.

Scale	Subscale	Alpha	Alpha (Ord.)	Omega1	Omega2	Omega3	AVE
EUs1	EU1 (6)	0.787	0.831	0.806	0.806	0.807	0.485
	EU2 (2)	0.420	0.481	0.473	0.473	0.473	0.372 *
	EU3 (4)	0.787	0.852	0.814	0.814	0.841	0.623
	EU4 (5)	0.728	0.763	0.752	0.752	0.756	0.429 *
EUs2	EU5 (5)	0.826	0.855	0.844	0.844	0.864	0.573
	EU6 (2)	0.697	0.752	0.695	0.695	0.695	0.627
	EU7 (4)	0.875	0.916	0.897	0.897	0.929	0.772
EUs3	EU8 (4)	0.859	0.889	0.862	0.862	0.865	0.672
	EU9 (3)	0.894	0.950	0.894	0.894	0.892	0.863
	EU10 (3)	0.895	0.949	0.896	0.896	0.898	0.864
EUs4	EU11 (4)	0.954	0.973	0.954	0.954	0.958	0.905
	EU12 (5)	0.922	0.943	0.919	0.919	0.932	0.782
EUs5	EU13 (3)	0.777	0.847	0.792	0.792	0.795	0.656
EUs6	EU14 (4)	0.830	0.863	0.843	0.843	0.853	0.645
EUs7	EU15 (8)	0.910	0.925	0.907	0.907	0.915	0.619

* The Fornell-Larcker Criterion is not met (Fornell & Larcker, 1981).

includes the indices for assessing the reliability of the instrument, i.e., Cronbach’s alpha (and an ordinal version; Zumbo et al., 2007) omega coefficients and average extracted variance (AVE); thus, most of the subscales reveal acceptable psychometric properties (an exception is the EU2, with relatively low values, which, however, is expected (in some extend), due to the small number of items used for this subscale).

Cluster Analysis (EETRS-Based Engagement Profiles)

Based on the standardized factor scores (computed by the confirmatory factor analysis and the Bartlett approach), we conducted a single cluster analysis to examine how many distinct groups of individuals could be identified in our dataset according to their responses on the EETRS-62. The analysis suggested the presence of three clusters, as indicated by the majority rule of the package NbClust, which considers 30 criteria and returns the number most frequently suggested. The mean values of the EETRS factor scores for each cluster are shown in

Table 4. Mean values (standardized factor scores of EU subscales), in each cluster; simultaneous multiple pairwise comparisons, adjusted to 0.05 significance level.

	Cluster 1 (n = 71)	Cluster 2 (n = 69)	Cluster 3 (n = 31)	Cluster 1 vs. 2	Cluster 1 vs. 3	Cluster 2 vs. 3
EU1	−0.550	0.528	−0.265	TRUE		TRUE
EU2	−0.446	0.916	−0.109	TRUE		TRUE
EU3	−1.005	0.671	0.281	TRUE	TRUE
EU4	−0.815	0.674	0.253	TRUE	TRUE
EU5	−0.908	0.810	0.166	TRUE	TRUE	TRUE
EU6	−0.639	0.551	−0.058	TRUE		TRUE
EU7	−1.231	0.504	0.087	TRUE	TRUE	TRUE
EU8	−0.598	0.455	−0.131	TRUE		TRUE
EU9	−0.375	0.230	0.312	TRUE		TRUE
EU10	0.029	0.754	−0.012	TRUE		TRUE
EU11	−0.801	0.964	−0.199	TRUE		TRUE
EU12	−0.535	0.487	−0.172	TRUE		TRUE
EU13	−0.266	0.957	−0.656	TRUE		TRUE
EU14	−0.460	0.333	−0.198	TRUE		TRUE
EU15	−0.130	−0.120	−0.237	TRUE		TRUE

All subscales have a statistically significant difference (at 0.01 significance level), among clusters; TRUE means that the respective pair-wise comparison is significant (using simultaneous multiple pairwise comparisons, adjusted to 0.05 significance level).

, and their structure is illustrated in Figure 1.

The psychological characteristics of the three clusters are summarized in

Table 5. Mean values (standardized factor scores of Big Five, BPNSNF, FS, GFS, Dass and Burnout scales subscales), in each cluster; simultaneous multiple pair-wise comparisons, adjusted to 0.05 significance level.

Scale	Subscale	Cluster 1 (n = 71)	Cluster 2 (n = 69)	Cluster 3 (n = 31)	Cluster 1 vs. 2	Cluster 1 vs. 3	Cluster 2 vs. 3
Big Five	Extraversion *	0.027	0.175	0.157
	Agreeableness *	0.548	0.733	−0.021			TRUE
	Conscience *	0.278	0.771	−0.224			TRUE
	EmotionalStab	0.124	0.127	−0.111
	IntelectImagin *	0.350	0.774	−0.191	TRUE		TRUE
BPNSNF **	Satisfactionaut *	0.316	0.634	−0.046	TRUE
	Frustrationaut	−0.071	−0.296	−0.004
	Satisfactionrel	0.530	0.565	−0.037
	Frustrationrel	−0.593	−0.493	−0.633
	Satisfactioncom *	0.396	1.400	0.120	TRUE		TRUE
	Frustrationcom	−0.748	−0.927	−0.441
FS **	FS	0.332	0.280	0.838
GFS **	GFS *	0.148	0.431	0.179	TRUE
Dass	Depression	−0.338	0.160	−0.635
	Anxiety	−0.357	0.084	−0.228
	Stress	−0.233	0.175	−0.177
Burnout	Burn1 (Emotional Burnout) *	−0.223	0.399	0.152	TRUE	TRUE
	Burn2 (Depersonalization)	0.793	1.366	1.749
	Burn3 (Accomplishment) *	−0.232	−0.413	0.063	TRUE

* The difference among clusters is significant (at 0.05 level); TRUE means that the respective pair-wise comparison is significant (using simultaneous multiple pairwise comparisons, adjusted to 0.05 significance level). ** Satisfactionaut = Satisfaction Autonomy, Frustrationaut = Frustrations Autonomy, Satisfactionrel = Satisfaction Relatedness, Frustrationrel = Frustration Relatedness, Satisfactioncom = Satisfaction Competence, Frustrationcom = Frustration Competence, FS = Flourishing Scale, GFS = Generalized Self-Efficacy Scale.

and illustrated in Figure 2. Specifically, these results display mean differences across the PSY scales for the EETRS-based clusters (the psychometric properties of these scales are reported in Appendix A Table A1 and Table A2 and are acceptable across all cases). For each subscale, we tested whether clusters differed significantly using Kruskal–Wallis tests, followed by simultaneous multiple pairwise comparisons adjusted to the 0.05 significance level.

Cluster 1 (Skeptically Exhausted, n = 71) was characterized by consistently lower scores across most EU subscales. Cluster 2 (Realistically Cautious, n = 69) showed the highest scores across nearly all EU subscales. Cluster 3 (Optimistically Engaged, n = 31) exhibited mixed patterns, with moderate scores on some subscales and relatively higher scores on others.

Additional demographic and contextual characteristics of the clusters are presented in

Table 6. Other clusters’ characteristics.

		Cluster 1 (n = 71)	Cluster 2 (n = 69)	Cluster 3 (n = 31)
Attitude (overall) towards the EU *	1 (very pessimistic)	7.2%	2.9%	0%
	2	27.5%	7.2%	12.9%
	3	43.5%	26.1%	61.3%
	4	20.3%	42.0%	25.8%
	5 (very optimistic)	1.4%	21.7%	0%
Gender	Male	15.5%	20.3%	32.3%
	Female	84.5%	79.7%	67.7%
Experience	<1 year	0%	1.4%	0%
	1–5 years	11.3%	5.8%	16.1%
	6–10 years	2.8%	4.3%	6.5%
	11–15 years	15.5%	5.8%	9.7%
	16–20 years	18.3%	23.2%	35.5%
	>20 years	52.1%	59.4%	32.3%
Education *	Graduate	22.5%	10.1%	12.9%
	MSc	69.0%	59.4%	64.5%
	Phd	8.5%	30.4%	22.6%
Sector (work)	Other	1.4%	2.9%	6.5%
	Public	93.0%	88.4%	83.9%
	Private	5.6%	8.7%	9.7%
School (work) *	Other	1.4%		6.5%
	Primary	62.0%	44.9%	74.2%
	Secondary	28.2%	53.6%	9.7%
	Vocational High School	8.5%	1.4%	9.7%
Age **		47.099	49.319	45.290

* There is a statistically significant association, with clusters. ** There is a statistically significant difference between clusters.

. The mean age differed significantly among clusters, and Fisher’s exact tests revealed significant associations between cluster membership and both level of education and type of school. Individuals’ overall attitudes toward the EU also varied significantly across clusters.

3.2. Multinomial Regression

We employed multinomial regression analysis to examine how personality traits, psychological needs, self-efficacy, mental health, and demographic factors influence cluster membership. The model incorporated the subscales presented in Table 5 along with demographic variables (age, sex, and education).

As shown in

Table 7. Multinomial Logistic Regression Predicting Cluster Membership Based on Personality Traits, Psychological Needs, Self-Efficacy, Mental Health, and Demographic Variables.

	Coef. 2	Coef. 3	Std. Errors 2	Std. Errors 3	Odds 2	Odds 3
Intercept	−0.168	2.001	1.411	1.777	0.846	7.395
Extraversion	0.037	0.590 *	0.296	0.365	1.038	1.804
Agreeableness	0.026	−0.712 *	0.179	0.415	1.026	0.491
Conscience	0.028	−0.593	0.121	0.422	1.028	0.553
EmotionalStab	−0.139	−0.399	0.230	0.406	0.870	0.671
IntelectImagin	−0.004	−0.176	0.091	0.379	0.996	0.839
Satisfactionaut	−0.023	−0.184	0.197	0.428	0.978	0.832
Frustrationaut	0.027	−0.030	0.182	0.351	1.028	0.970
Satisfactionrel	−0.005	−0.456	0.183	0.379	0.995	0.634
Frustrationrel	0.235	−0.084	0.171	0.216	1.265	0.919
Satisfactioncom	0.514 ***	−0.099	0.188	0.287	1.672	0.906
Frustrationcom	0.183	−0.028	0.142	0.185	1.201	0.973
FS	−0.018	0.376 **	0.132	0.179	0.982	1.457
GFS	0.031	0.056	0.119	0.163	1.032	1.057
Depression	0.313	0.039	0.208	0.235	1.367	1.040
Anxiety	−0.202	0.325	0.204	0.295	0.817	1.384
Stress	−0.038	−0.108	0.177	0.229	0.963	0.898
Burn1	0.807 **	0.884 **	0.318	0.388	2.241	2.420
Burn2	0.053	0.095	0.072	0.089	1.054	1.100
Burn3	0.334	0.069	0.212	0.475	1.397	1.071
Age	−0.002	−0.037	0.025	0.033	0.998	0.964
Sex (female)	−0.627	−1.170 *	0.534	0.635	0.534	0.310
Education (Msc)	0.608	−0.621	0.501	0.608	1.836	0.538
Education (Phd)	2.170 **	−0.170	0.857	1.212	8.757	0.843

* p < 0.10, ** p < 0.05, *** p < 0.001.

, where Cluster 1 served as the reference category, several significant predictors emerged. Satisfaction with competence (Satisfaction.com), burnout symptom 1 (Burn1), and PhD-level education demonstrated significant positive effects on the odds of belonging to Cluster 2 relative to Cluster 1. Notably, individuals with PhD qualifications had 8.76 times higher odds of membership in Cluster 2 compared to Cluster 1.

For Cluster 3 membership (again relative to Cluster 1), extraversion, burnout symptom 1 (Burn1), and functional self-efficacy (FS) showed positive effects, while agreeableness and female gender exhibited negative effects on membership odds. The model showed statistically significant improvement over the intercept-only (null) model (p < 0.01), with an AIC value of 372.88. The McFadden’s pseudo R² value of 0.222 suggests a moderate model fit, with prediction accuracy being close to 60% (difficulties exist for separating cluster 1 from 2 or 3).

4. Discussion

This study identified and differentiated three psychologically distinct and structurally situated teacher profiles—Cluster 1: Skeptically Exhausted (n = 71), Cluster 2: Realistically Cautious (n = 69), and Cluster 3: Optimistically Engaged (n = 31)—each embodying unique constellations of affective orientation, psychological functioning, attitudinal stance, toward EU educational frameworks and differing levels of psychological and pedagogical readiness for bringing the EU into the classroom.

The findings provided partial support for the three hypotheses proposed in this research. Cluster typologies emerged with empirical clarity, affirming Hypothesis 1. Hypothesis 2 was partially supported, as clusters differed significantly in selected personality traits, aspects of basic psychological needs, burnout measures, and self-efficacy. Hypothesis 3 was only partly supported: well-being and self-efficacy were strongly associated with psychological readiness, while pedagogical readiness showed weaker differentiation across clusters. The analyses were correlational, not predictive. Notably, measured pedagogical readiness (EU15) was highest in Cluster 2, lowest in Cluster 3, and intermediate in Cluster 1; pairwise differences were clearest for Cluster 2 versus Cluster 3.

Flourishing and self-efficacy emerged as key correlates, while the other components of psychological capital were less central. Thus, readiness for EU initiatives appears to be linked not only to knowledge but also to affective and dispositional resources, a view consistent with recent discussions on transnational educational ambivalence (Traianou, 2023).

The Skeptically Exhausted group, corresponding to what emerged as Cluster 1, a subset of the teachers’ population characterized by lower flourishing and weaker psychological readiness compared with the other clusters. These teachers, more often later in career than Cluster 3, though less so than Cluster 2, working in stagnant bureaucratic systems, and being low paid, show relatively low emotional exhaustion compared with the other clusters, lower flourishing than Cluster 3 and slightly above Cluster 2, and pronounced disengagement from EU narratives. Although this appears to be a “silent withdrawal”, it reflects meaningful disengagement from policy frameworks (Papadeli et al., 2022). This condition aligns closely with Skaalvik and Skaalvik’s (2014) theorization of learned helplessness, wherein persistent institutional inflexibility gradually erodes teachers’ sense of agency. Their psychological readiness was the lowest, while pedagogical readiness was intermediate, suggesting limited confidence and motivation to bring EU content into the classroom, consistent with their depleted psychological capital.

The dispositional traits of this group—relatively higher agreeableness, moderate conscientiousness and openness, and lower emotional stability than Cluster 2—partially align with Martins et al.’s (2024) “neurotic–inhibited” typology. Although employment type was not directly measured, lower flourishing and higher burnout indicate potential experiences of marginality, which may reflect broader structural vulnerabilities in Greek education (e.g., reliance on substitute contracts; Asderaki et al., 2023). This marginality is compounded by their informational disconnection: systemic deficits in multilingual materials and the curricular integration of EU themes contribute to their epistemic exclusion (Asderaki, 2022; Ioannidou, 2007; Savvides, 2006). Their disengagement is therefore not merely informational but also linked to low psychological and pedagogical readiness, shaped by depleted psychological capital—hope, resilience, self-efficacy, and optimism (Luthans et al., 2006). This group reflects the “Burnout” and “Ineffective” profiles identified by Kalamara and Richardson (2022).

The Realistically Cautious group, which aligns with Cluster 2, consists largely of mid-career teachers characterized by emotional stability, functional self-efficacy, and moderate-to-low flourishing (lower than Cluster 1 and much lower than Cluster 3). Neither overtly resistant nor ideologically aligned, this profile is marked by cautious neutrality and evaluative readiness. Their interaction with EU re-forms is shaped less by opposition and more by strategic selectivity—what L. Li and Ruppar (2021) frame as “strategic adaptation”, where participation is filtered through criteria of feasibility, resource adequacy, and contextual relevance.

This group’s personality configuration —higher levels of conscientiousness, agreeableness, and openness than the other clusters—indicates pragmatic optimism and calculated reform readiness to participate. They are willing to engage when institutional coherence and pedagogical clarity are demonstrable but tend to avoid deep ideological commitment. Such positioning resonates with the “Ambivalent Agents” identified by Lombardi et al. (2023) and the context-dependent receptivity of reflective practitioners noted by J. Booth et al. (2021). Although psychologically proximate to the most engaged group, their motivational salience and policy trust are more circumscribed. Their psychological readiness was moderate, and their pedagogical readiness was also at a mid-to-high level—higher than the Skeptically Exhausted and significantly higher than the Optimistically Engaged. With adequate institutional scaffolding, peer mentorship, and localized exemplars, this group may serve as a strategically pivotal segment in the diffusion of EU-aligned pedagogical change.

Finally, the Optimistically Engaged group, corresponding to Cluster 3, displays the highest flourishing but intermediate self-efficacy and the lowest conscientiousness and agreeableness. Composed mainly of experienced teachers, with a substantial shareholding advanced degrees (although PhD qualifications were more common in Cluster 2 than Cluster 3, these individuals demonstrate strong flourishing and some psychological resources, particularly optimism and resilience, though self-efficacy is not the highest across clusters (Luthans et al., 2006). However, regression results and subscale comparisons indicate that their attitudinal (psychological) readiness is uneven and often lower than Cluster 2, and their pedagogical readiness is significantly lower than Cluster 2 and comparable to Cluster 1. Burnout patterns were mixed: they showed the highest depersonalization despite reporting higher flourishing. This suggests that psychological capital does not automatically translate into pedagogical readiness, though it may position this group as potential brokers of reform diffusion if institutional conditions are supportive.

Rather than approaching EU policy as a set of external mandates, this group exhibits what Alexiadou (2007) has termed epistemic brokerage—the ability to translate broad policy frameworks into pedagogical innovations that resonate with local needs. Their interaction with EU initiatives is not only receptive but also co-constructive; they do not merely implement but reshape and contextualize reform ideas. This active stance is bolstered by their high openness and conscientiousness, traits linked to pedagogical creativity and ethical commitment (Komarraju et al., 2011). Burnout patterns were mixed across subscales; they did not consistently report the lowest levels of burnout, though their stronger psychological capital may buffer against emotional strain (Graziano et al., 2024). However, while their psychological readiness was the strongest of all groups, their measured pedagogical readiness was significantly lower than Cluster 2 and comparable to Cluster 1. This suggests that psychological capital does not automatically translate into pedagogical readiness, though it positions this group as potential brokers of reform diffusion.

In terms of identity, these teachers align closely with the profile of transnational pro-fessionals described by Canrinus et al. (2011), who use participation as a means of reinforcing civic agency and redefining professional purpose. Their readiness and actual participation in mobility programs, European school networks, and collaborative policy dialogues, as noted by Asderaki and Sideri (2020), contribute to a dynamic, outward-facing professional ethos. The proximity in psychological profiles between Cluster 2 and Cluster 3 suggests a partial continuum of readiness for EU involvement rather than a categorical divide. Yet the distinction between psychological and pedagogical readiness remains critical: the Optimistically Engaged display the strongest psychological resources, while the Realistically Cautious show comparable or higher pedagogical preparedness in practice.

Taken together, the differentiation among clusters highlights the need for policy frameworks that recognize the psychological diversity of teachers. Readiness for “bringing the EU into the classroom” cannot be premised on information dissemination or procedural compliance alone. It requires a dual focus on psychological readiness (emotional resilience, motivational orientation, professional self-efficacy) and pedagogical readiness (confidence, skills, and curricular integration).

This research has thus uncovered a structural omission in reform initiatives: there are no support structures that address the psychosocial diversity of teachers. The unique contribution of this research lies in its integration of dispositional, psychological, and attitudinal characteristics into an empirically validated typology, which brings to light hidden forms of readiness that challenge the linear assumptions of EU policy. Moreover, it provides a diagnostic conceptual framework that can inform the rethinking of institutionally driven engagement efforts and enriches our normative conceptual toolkit for understanding and reflecting on teacher readiness.

This research has also framed disengagement as a collective outcome of misaligned reform expectations and underdeveloped psychological ecologies, rather than a personal failing or predisposition. By situating both psychological and pedagogical readiness within models of civic and professional participation, the study created new theoretical and practical ways to reconcile supranational agendas with the complex situated realities of teachers’ professional subjectivity.

5. Limitations

The current study has several limitations that should be acknowledged. First, the use of a sample of K-12 teachers from Greece is subject to a selection bias that affects the generalizability of the results. Even though the sample represents the demographic composition of Greek teachers, it is not representative of the cultural differences that may exist in the experiences of teachers in different EU countries. Future research should consider the use of a stratified sample or a random sample, which would increase the external validity of the results of this study.

Secondly, the present study is clearly a cross-sectional study and therefore does not allow conclusions to be drawn about causal relationships between variables. Although significant associations were found between personality traits, psychological needs, burnout, self-efficacy and attitudes/readiness toward the EU, it is not possible to express the direction of the relationship, in other words: Was it the negative perception of the EU—fueled by frustration over salary reductions, hiring freezes, school/class consolidations, and education budget cuts during Greece’s financial crisis—that led to burnout, or did elevated burnout levels shape their view of the EU? These complex relationships should be deciphered through longitudinal or experimental studies and the establishment of causality.

Third, there are important cultural and contextual conditions unique to Greece that may have affected the reported correlations. Given the socio-political and economic difficulties that Greece has experienced over the past decade, it is reasonable to assume that these contextual factors have shaped participants’ views of the EU differently from those of Member States. Although this survey was a meaningful example of teachers’ perceptions of the EU, the results may be limited to the particular context of Greece and may not apply to other countries. The systematic conduct of comparative studies on the current topic will provide a more comprehensive account of the extent of these dynamics in different cultural and geopolitical contexts.

Another limitation of the current study is the fact that it relies on self-report, as it is conceivable that the results were influenced by social desirability effects or cognitive biases in respondents’ reports of their experiences, particularly with regard to reporting stress and burnout related to current innovations. Therefore, in future study, objective measurement, e.g., using administrative records, observational data, or peer ratings, will help to limit the impact of social desirability effects. In addition, the psychometric properties of some of the instruments used could provide a starting point for future improvements. Finally, the study’s innovative focus on perceptions of the EU may have led to the omission of some important strategic aspects that influence teacher burnout and goodwill. Organizational factors such as administrative support, school climate and workload were not included in the models, despite being contemporary concepts with a significant impact on burnout. Broader socioeconomic variables such as local unemployment or access to professional resources were also not considered, limiting the scope of the study. Future research should take a much broader perspective and integrate this into the prevailing context to uncover more determinants of teacher burnout and well-being.

6. Practical Implications

The results outlined in this research provide actionable recommendations applicable to both educational policy and school grafting of teacher well-being, burnout and the three empirically identified teacher profiles—Skeptical Exhausted, Realistically Cautious, Optimistic Engage—which indicate that systemic, one-size-fits-all strategies to foster teacher readiness should be replaced with tailored, evidence-based interventions. As these findings are preliminary, the recommendations below should be seen as policy and practise pointers rather than prescriptive.

In the case of the Skeptical Exhausted cluster, emotional exhaustion along with low self-efficacy means that cognitive overload and a perceived lack of are likely to be the greatest barriers. Interventions need to address these more fundamental stressors before meaningful integration into the curriculum can be expected. For example, Kalamara and Richardson (2022) also identified a corresponding ‘burnout’ profile in a Greek teacher sample and suggested that mental health care, workload reduction and increased responsibilities are required as a prerequisite for policy uptake. Teachers with severe burnout need therapeutic support, not motivational workshops. Another potential strategy could be a phased reintegration strategy where teachers are initially involved in the slow build-up of non-demanding, low-cost EU activities; the use of co-teaching or team-teaching models to reduce isolation and distribute responsibility; and the provision of recovery time, e.g., through sabbatical programs, fewer teaching hours linked to well-being, etc. Partnerships with local health facilities or NGOs could also provide access to counseling and psychological expertise without overburdening school budgets. Limitations here can be funding, stigma around seeking psychological help, and the poor employment status of most teachers which limits their access to ongoing support.

The Realistically Cautious group shows an ambivalent receptiveness based on rational analysis and conditional trust. They are not negative per se, but want valid observations of the relevance and reliability of the EU. Communicative strategies should focus on transparency and pedagogical utility. Miquel et al. (2024) emphasize that peer-learning mechanisms and teacher-driven professional development networks are especially persuasive within this group, helping to demystify EU policies. Concrete examples such as the eTwinning project or Erasmus+ teacher mobility programs could be introduced to foster legitimacy and trust. Other initiatives could include offering pilot micro-projects with minimal paperwork, incorporating EU resources directly into national curricula to enhance perceived contextual fit, and involving Realistically Cautious teachers in policy-making in an advisory capacity so that they feel personally involved. Digital platforms where teachers can report first-hand on EU programs can also help to increase credibility. The main obstacle remains the administrative burden, which risks turning conditional openness into superficial compliance or outright withdrawal.

Optimistically Engaged teachers represent the most potentially viable area, as the strong intrinsic motivation of these teachers and their propensity to overcome emotions represent a natural fit with the explicit agenda of the EU. Meher et al. (2025) describe as emotionally mature teachers these individuals who experience minimal psychological distress and at the same time contribute to professional development and educational leadership. Each of these teachers should be targeted to serve as a local champion, leading student discipline and personal development initiatives, guiding other teachers, and demonstrating best practices to guide EU policy. Further opportunities include appointing project coordinators for EU funding of projects that take place in schools (such as a case study), supporting transnational professional exchange activities, and encouraging them to publish or present their innovations as case studies for other members, and possibly developing blended learning or digital resilience projects in line with current EU priorities. Sustaining this readiness requires structured institutional supports such as dedicated time, reduced workload, and recognition within professional development frameworks. Without these supports, however, even this highly motivated group risks discouragement and fatigue.

Overall, these differentiated strategies align with Pyhältö et al. (2020), who found that teacher burnout risk varies with self- and co-regulation capacities and should be met with profile-specific interventions rather than universal mandates. EU-oriented educational reforms must account for psychological and emotional heterogeneity across the teaching workforce if they are to generate sustainable, grassroots readiness. These insights provide a conceptual basis for profile-sensitive, graduated interventions—clear and straightforward pathways for the Realistically Cautious, empowerment and recognition of value for the Optimistically Engaged, and basic support for well-being for the Skeptically Exhausted. Longitudinal and comparative studies are needed in the future to underpin these intervention approaches and assess their potential for implementation on a large scale.