Individual and Organizational Variables in Job Satisfaction of First- to Ninth-Grade Teachers: A Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses-Guided Scoping Review

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Tables must be associated with themes (to be identified)

Review and revise the eligibility criteria for the recruitment of the paper

Create the themes based on findings and discuss them in detail in the discussion component

Write conclusion separately

Write implications of the study

Write recommendations for all concerned stakeholders

Any future or further studies

 

 

 

Comments on the Quality of English Language

Language editing is needed to upgrade the paper

 

Author Response

Thank you very much for taking the time to review this manuscript. Please find detailed responses below and corresponding revisions/corrections highlighted in the re-uploaded files.

Comments 1: Tables must be associated with themes (to be identified)

Response 1: Sentences have been added to associate the themes with the tables. Page 5; and page 16, last paragraph.

Comments 2: Review and revise the eligibility criteria for the recruitment of the paper

Response 2: The "eligibility criteria" method section has been rewritten and reorganized. First three paragraphs of the "method" section.

Comments 3: Create the themes based on findings and discuss them in detail in the discussion component.

Response 3: We have, accordingly, changed and rewritten all the "discussion" section to emphasize this point.

Comments 4: Write conclusion separately.

Response 4: Agreed and changed accordingly. Section "5. Conclusion" has been added. Page 21.

Comments 5: Write implications of the study

Response 5: Agreed and changed accordingly. Page 21, last paragraph.

Comments 6: Write recommendations for all concerned stakeholders

Response 6: Agreed and changed accordingly. Page 21, last paragraph.

Comments 7: Any future or further studies

Response 7: Agreed and changed accordingly. Page 21, last paragraph.

Comments 8: Language editing is needed to upgrade the paper

Response 8: The entire manuscript text has been carefully revised to improve the overall quality of the writing.

 

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

• While the manuscript provides a frequency analysis of individual and organizational variables, it would benefit from a more explicit discussion of how these variables were weighted in determining their significance. Were any methodological criteria used beyond frequency? Some variables (e.g., self-efficacy and school leadership) are discussed in greater depth than others. Providing more balanced coverage across variables would strengthen the analysis.
• The manuscript acknowledges that teacher job satisfaction may be influenced by sociocultural and institutional contexts, but it does not sufficiently analyze how these contextual factors shape the impact of different variables. If possible, consider including a comparative perspective or discussing variations across different educational systems in more detail.
• The review primarily focuses on quantitative studies. Given the complex and subjective nature of job satisfaction, incorporating insights from qualitative research would enrich the findings and provide a more nuanced understanding. A brief discussion of qualitative themes from the reviewed studies (if available) could enhance the depth of the conclusions.
• The study highlights important research gaps but could extend its practical implications. How can policymakers, school administrators, or teacher educators apply these findings to improve teacher satisfaction? Consider including a more structured section on recommendations for stakeholders in the education sector.
• Additionally, while the manuscript provides a solid foundation, the reference list appears somewhat limited given the extensive body of research available on teacher job satisfaction. Considering the depth and breadth of studies conducted in this area, a more comprehensive bibliography would strengthen the paper’s academic rigor and contextual grounding. I recommend incorporating a wider range of sources, including more recent empirical studies, meta-analyses, and theoretical discussions from diverse educational contexts. Expanding the literature base would not only enhance the manuscript’s credibility but also provide a more holistic perspective on the factors influencing teacher job satisfaction.

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Thank you very much for taking the time to review this manuscript. Please find detailed responses below and corresponding revisions/corrections highlighted in the re-uploaded files.

Comments 1: While the manuscript provides a frequency analysis of individual and organizational variables, it would benefit from a more explicit discussion of how these variables were weighted in determining their significance. Were any methodological criteria used beyond frequency?

Response 1: The analysis of variables was consistently conducted using frequency analysis and discussed in relation to current and specialized literature on the topic.

Comments 2:  Some variables (e.g., self-efficacy and school leadership) are discussed more deeply than others. Providing more balanced coverage across variables would strengthen the analysis.

Response 2: The variables that appeared most frequently at both levels of analysis were discussed in more depth, namely, the three variables with the highest frequency. An introductory paragraph was added to clarify this topic. Page 18, first paragraph of the "discussion" section. 

Comments 3: The manuscript acknowledges that teacher job satisfaction may be influenced by sociocultural and institutional contexts, but it does not sufficiently analyze how these contextual factors shape the impact of different variables. If possible, consider including a comparative perspective or discussing variations across different educational systems in more detail.

Response 3: The sociocultural context was extensively considered based on reviewer' comments. References have been added to expand this discussion. Page 19, second paragraph; Page 20, last paragraph. (Huang et al., 2024 and Xu et al., 2025).

Comments 4: The review primarily focuses on quantitative studies. Given the complex and subjective nature of job satisfaction, incorporating insights from qualitative research would enrich the findings and provide a more nuanced understanding. A brief discussion of qualitative themes from the reviewed studies (if available) could enhance the depth of the conclusions.

Response 4: Agreed and changed accordingly. Page 21, second paragraph.

Comments 5: The study highlights important research gaps but could extend its practical implications. How can policymakers, school administrators, or teacher educators apply these findings to improve teacher satisfaction? Consider including a more structured section on recommendations for stakeholders in the education sector.

Response 5: Agreed and changed accordingly. Page 21, last paragraph.

Comments 6: Additionally, while the manuscript provides a solid foundation, the reference list appears somewhat limited given the extensive body of research available on teacher job satisfaction. Considering the depth and breadth of studies conducted in this area, a more comprehensive bibliography would strengthen the paper's academic rigor and contextual grounding. I recommend incorporating a wider range of sources, including more recent empirical studies, meta-analyses, and theoretical discussions from diverse educational contexts.

Response 6: The manuscript presents an extensive list of references with very current studies. However, based on the reviewer's suggestion, more recent empirical studies and meta-analysis from the years 2023, 2024 and 2025 were added to the discussion (Huang et al., 2024; Wartenberg et al., 2023; Xu et al., 2025).

Additional clarification: It is also important to clarify that the text of the manuscript has been carefully revised to improve the overall quality of the writing.

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Your manuscript represents a valuable contribution to the better understanding of teacher job satisfaction at the elementary and middle school levels. The PRISMA-guided methodology is a rigorous process and, in your study, well-implemented, resulting in a comprehensive analysis of the relevant variables. Your focus specifically on first through ninth-grade teachers certainly addresses a gap in the literature, and your findings regarding the prominence of demographic variables at the individual level and principal-related factors at the organizational level are particularly insightful.

I suggest strengthening your discussion of the methodological limitations of both your review and the studies analyzed. For example, consider more explicitly addressing how the predominance of quantitative studies utilizing questionnaires limits our understanding of teacher job satisfaction. You might also expand on the potential interactions between individual and organizational variables, as these likely operate in complex, mutually influential ways rather than as separate domains. The manuscript would benefit from adding more specific recommendations for practice and policy based on your findings. Additionally, while you note cross-cultural differences as important, you could further develop this theme by discussing how specific variables might manifest differently across educational systems and cultural contexts - I have found this in my own research on teacher job satisfaction in Asian contexts. Finally, some sections would benefit from language editing to improve clarity and flow, particularly in the discussion of your results. Addressing these suggestions would further enhance what is already a valuable contribution to the study of teacher job satisfaction.

Comments on the Quality of English Language

The manuscript is generally well-written and understandable, though there are areas where improvements would enhance clarity and readability. The overall structure follows academic conventions appropriately, but some sentences are overly complex/long or contain minor grammatical issues that impact the manuscript's readability. On the flip side, there are many too-short paragraphs with only 2 sentences, which interrupts the flow of the discussion section (it seems very fragmented). I think the discussion section requires the most effort to improve the writing. I suggest that you identify the main themes in your discussion and contain your writing within the themes to make your findings more robust and comprehensive. You really need a true introductory paragraph that introduces the discussion themes as well as a comprehensive concluding paragraph that summarizes the discussion themes Throughout the paper, there are instances where more precise word choices would strengthen the communication of key points. The discussion section, in particular, would benefit from more concise expression of ideas and the addition of clearer transitions between concepts. Consider reviewing for consistency in terminology and tense usage. I'd also recommend the addition of introductory and concluding paragraphs for your literature review and methodology sections to assist your readers. While these issues do not significantly impede understanding of the research, addressing them would make the manuscript more accessible to readers and enhance its professional presentation. I also recommend a careful review and editing of the text with attention to sentence structure, word choice, and punctuation to elevate the overall quality of the writing. I recommend that you reduce the spacing of the text within Tables 1 and 2 in your results section to single-spacing to improve readability.

Author Response

Thank you very much for taking the time to review this manuscript. Please find detailed responses below and corresponding revisions/corrections highlighted in the re-uploaded files.

Comments 1: Consider more explicitly addressing how the predominance of quantitative studies utilizing questionnaires limits our understanding of teacher job satisfaction.

Response 1: Agreed and revised accordingly. Page 21, second paragraph.

Comments 2: You might also expand on the potential interactions between individual and organizational variables, as these likely operate in complex, mutually influential ways rather than as separate domains.

Response 2: Agreed and revised accordingly. Page 21, third paragraph.

Comments 3: The manuscript would benefit from adding more specific recommendations for practice and policy based on your findings.

Comments 3: The manuscript would benefit from adding more specific recommendations for practice and policy based on your findings.

Response 3: Agreed and revised accordingly. Page 21, last paragraph.

Comments 4: Additionally, while you note cross-cultural differences as important, you could further develop this theme by discussing how specific variables might manifest differently across educational systems and cultural contexts.

Response 4: The sociocultural context was extensively considered based on reviewer' comments. Two references have been added to expand this discussion. Page 19, second paragraph; page 20, last paragraph (Huang et al., 2024 and Xu et al., 2025).

Comments 5: There are many too-short paragraphs with only 2 sentences, which interrupts the flow of the discussion section (it seems very fragmented).

Response 5: All paragraphs have been revised accordingly.

Comments 6: You really need a true introductory paragraph that introduces the discussion themes as well as a comprehensive concluding paragraph that summarizes the discussion themes.

Response 6: Agreed and changed accordingly. Introductory paragraph added: first paragraph of the "discussion" section (page 18). Concluding paragraph added: last paragraph of the manuscript.

Comments 7: I recommend that you reduce the spacing of the text within Tables 1 and 2 in your results section to single-spacing to improve readability.

Response 7: Agreed and changed accordingly.

Comments 8: I also recommend a careful review and editing of the text with attention to sentence structure, word choice, and punctuation to elevate the overall quality of the writing.

Response 8: The entire manuscript text has been carefully revised to improve the overall quality of the writing.